• absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    That is an interesting point, as you say infants cannot consent to implants. Which does raise ethical questions.

    But you are, I think, still looking from a 2024 perspective, where none of the technologies are even remotely available.

    If you can consider it from the 2424 perspective, the treatment is non-invasive, permanent, safe and effective. It has been the standard for 100 years. Star Trek medical tech is magical to us because it is simply a story, but consider if it were real, what argument could you make to withhold the treatment?

    I would see this as similar to the anti-vax arguments; withholding vaccines from a child who then goes on to catch a life altering disease, is a form of abuse. The kid cannot make its own judgements or medical decisions, but it sure can catch polio.