Research Paper on:
2000 Case of Conjoined Twins and Legal Alternatives

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
courts allowed the girls known by pseudonyms Jodie and Mary to be separated (Kaveny, 2001). Mary died. Of course, that was fully expected and becomes obvious when examining the  facts of the case. It appears at first glance unethical, but the dilemma was one that even Solomon would have difficulty with. Still, in exploring this legal and moral dilemma,  many questions crop up. The case is above all a legal problem. Although the law is sometimes not conducive to moral outcomes, in some cases it is all anyone has  to protect their rights as individuals. In this case, the dilemma is that the individuals were actually not technically individuals. The details of the case explains the dilemma.  Yet, despite the incredible emotional and moral challenges the case presents, there is the law always looking down on these children and the parents who contested the decision from the  start. Finally, there are specific laws such as the paramountcy principle of the Childrens Act of 1989 and the Human Rights Act of 1998. How do these play a role  in rendering the judges decision just? Was the decision just under the law? Many questions loom large over this disturbing case. II. Facts of the Case  The case in question was presented to Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Brooke and Lord Justice Robert Walker which concerns a set of conjoined twins and morality  as it enters a decision as to what to do. The case involves siamese twins Jodie and Mary who each have their own brain, heart, lungs and arms and legs  ("In the supreme," 2000). The twins, who were born on August 8, 2000, were joined at the lower abdomen, and while they could be successfully separated, such an operation would