Shut Up And Listen 216

The Value Of A Life

Last night, I was watching Law & Order: Trial By Jury with my family and we kept seeing promotions for an upcoming episode of W-Five, a Canadian "magazine" news show ala Dateline or 60 Minutes. The upcoming episode was said to be about conjoined twins from somewhere in Africa who were brought to Canada and separated. They're just little babies and very cute and all of that, but all those ads made me think was "Couldn't that time, effort and money be used better within Canada?"

Now, I only use this example as a lead-in. I don't want to suggest that what was done wasn't right or was improper somehow. I want to look at the larger idea of so-called humanitarian aid in this manner and whether or not it is the right thing to do or just a superficial act that's meant to garner publicity and make us feel good about ourselves. It's a delicate nature discussing something like this, and I want to make it clear I am discussing it entirely within the intellectual realm, and not trying to attack anyone who has been involved in things like this.

That said, really, can't this time, effort and money be better spent? This is an issue I've thought a lot about. It's also one that stretches just beyond medical acts of humanitarian aid like this, but other kinds. I mean, why are we sending food to children halfway across the world when there are kids halfway across town who don't have enough to eat? Why are we always so willing to help people far away and not people close by? And why is it that I feel slightly bad just by even asking these questions?

It brings up the question of what makes one person's suffering more important than another's? Does it matter who you help just so long as you help someone? Those are tough issues to deal with and I really don't have an answer. I just look at how things are done and wonder why we do them that way. Why is separating conjoined twins from somewhere in Africa more worthy of a doctor's time and effort than performing surgery on someone on a waiting list? I really don't want to attack anyone, but I think it's important that we ask why exactly. Maybe it is just ego and wanting to feel like we're special, and even if that's why, is that necessarily a horrible thing?

One thing I've thought about a bit is Bono and why does he dedicate so much time and effort to eliminating Third World debt, and not, say, eliminating poverty in Ireland? Is it because one issue is bigger than the other, and could help more people? Is it because one issue is more high profile? Is one just more interesting? Why?

Or how about, why do I often see more celebrities on TV game shows playing for various animal shelters rather than homeless shelters? Why are people so quick to help an injured animal, but wary about helping another human being in pain?

In my international relations class this year, when talking about humanitarian aid and peacekeeping, we touch on Rwanda, and how the US was content to help out when there were no US soldiers dead, but when some got killed, they couldn't pull out fast enough, and everyone looks upon that with disgust. But, is it really wrong? People would ask what makes a US life so important, but why didn't anyone ask why a US soldier should be made to die for a Rwandan? Why is it shameful to place a higher value on one, but not the other? Hell, what is the value of a human life?

Fuck it . . . I'm sorry. All I've got are questions this week and very few answers. I started out with the best of intentions and wanted to discuss the issue, but as I got to writing, I realised I don't know any of this stuff. I don't think anyone does, but I do think we should stop and question this sort of thing from time to time. But then again, what do I know?