Questions that make you think

[hlmr]

Date: 2/28/2006 6:24:06 PM
Author: MINE!!

Date: 2/28/2006 5:46:13 PM
Author: fire&ice
Interesting discussion and relavent to a story all over the news locally. Briefly:


Boy (4) goes to park with mother. Park has two resident orphaned bears (a town institution!). Unknown how he ended up inside one of two fences, boy goes over fence & approaches the bears behind their 10' chain link fence. Boy has an apple or apple smell on his hands. Boy sticks his hand through the chain link fence to pet or feed bears. One of the two Bears punctured hand of boy - not an attack or in an agressive manner. Mother takes boy to doctor. Doctor has to report to the health officals about the bite.


Since it is unknown which bear 'bit', either both bears must be euthanized to determine rabies (unknown gestation in bears so can't be quarantined, etc) or child must undergo the rabies regimen (not as big of a deal as it once was). What would you, the mother, choose?

Unfortunate situation.. very unfortunate.. but my child is much more important... For everything.. hands down... period

Of course your child is more important...so is mine.....but why do the bears have to die? Why can't your child take the rabies test? The child being bitten was already due to human error so why not take responsibility and have the child tested?

If the bear attacked and bit the boy then that's a different story altogether.

 

[hlmr]

Date: 2/28/2006 6:02:37 PM
Author: XChick03
Next question and possibly the last

You''re in the same situation as Question #3 but with one of your parents (the one you''re closest to) instead of you best friend. Now what would your choice be?

I couldn''t choose either. Sorry.

Heather

 

[XChick03]

I guess I found the ultimate dillemma.

I can''t answer it either. Just thinking about it makes me sick. I love my mother, brother and fiance more than anything in the world. And if I had to choose on the last question, I would have to choose my fiance, even though he''s the love of my life. My mother has a baby to care for and I couldn''t let Ethan grow up without knowing how absolutely wonderful she is. I''m not sure I could live with my decision though.

I guess my conclusion from all this would have to be that for most people love trumps conscience in any situation.

 

[JDgirl]

The fourth question pretty much outlines my BIGGEST fears in this whole world. My mom and my BF are the two closest people in this world to me. I don''t think I could live without either of them. Or, I should say, I wouldn''t WANT to live without either one of them. There is a blood bond that makes me want to choose my mom to live, but there is logic that says she''s had a more full life already that my BF has. What an incredibly hellish question. I''d rather die than make that choice.

 

[Mara]

Hmm #4 is a doozy...I would venture to say that neither of them would want me to choose one over the other...they''d probably volunteer themselves so that I wouldn''t have to choose.

Its so hard to imagine but I almost have to say I''d choose to save my Mom. She birthed me, raised me, loved me since the beginning. Though you could argue that she''s led a full life, had kids, seen them grow up whereas Greg is only just starting his life with me. So I think she''d probably choose herself so that I wouldn''t have to. But on the other hand...ew I can''t even speculate anymore. Gosh what a gross scenario!!

 

[LAJennifer]

Morals and conscience aside, I think you have to consider biology as a reason for people''s choices when choosing siblings and significant others. The biological urge to "survive" is probably the strongest natural "urge" concerning all species in the animal kingdom. And by " to survive", I mean to pass along our own genetics. Our siblings have similar genetics to ourselves, so our urge to save them over strangers would ensure survival of our family genes (just as the girl was referring to her brother as 100% blood, over her half sister and step sister - her brother''s genetics are most like her own, so she chooses him over her other siblings). We all want our own genes to "survive" whether we are aware of it or not. The same goes for significant others - they are mates of choice, which help us to pass on our own genetics. I also read a study that concluded, more often than not, people choose marriage partners with similar genetics to their own - to pass on their own genes as unaltered as possible. Of course this isn''t always the case, but certainly accounts for all those couples that look alike.

I would choose my sibling.
I would choose my cats.
I would choose my SO.

 

[larussel03]

Date: 2/28/2006 8:37:19 PM
Author: hlmr

Date: 2/28/2006 6:24:06 PM
Author: MINE!!

Date: 2/28/2006 5:46:13 PM
Author: fire&ice
Interesting discussion and relavent to a story all over the news locally. Briefly:


Boy (4) goes to park with mother. Park has two resident orphaned bears (a town institution!). Unknown how he ended up inside one of two fences, boy goes over fence & approaches the bears behind their 10'' chain link fence. Boy has an apple or apple smell on his hands. Boy sticks his hand through the chain link fence to pet or feed bears. One of the two Bears punctured hand of boy - not an attack or in an agressive manner. Mother takes boy to doctor. Doctor has to report to the health officals about the bite.


Since it is unknown which bear ''bit'', either both bears must be euthanized to determine rabies (unknown gestation in bears so can''t be quarantined, etc) or child must undergo the rabies regimen (not as big of a deal as it once was). What would you, the mother, choose?

Unfortunate situation.. very unfortunate.. but my child is much more important... For everything.. hands down... period

Of course your child is more important...so is mine.....but why do the bears have to die? Why can''t your child take the rabies test? The child being bitten was already due to human error so why not take responsibility and have the child tested?

If the bear attacked and bit the boy then that''s a different story altogether.

as far as the bear story, I would say, child gets rabies treatment--a few pricks for boy but no one dies. I love animals enough to say if it''s something that the bears may not have, but curable, then let the child have the treatment (as long as it doesnt cause any problems down the road)

 

[widget]

Jennifer....interesting point.

I''m not sure that "morals or conscience" would play any part in the choices we would make in the above scenarios. We''d probably be reduced to some sort of primal state and make choices that would best serve our personal sense of survival.

I''d like to think that I''d choose to save a stranger before I''d save my dog...but now I''m not so sure...

widget

 

[larussel03]

Date: 2/28/2006 9:06:16 PM
Author: LAJennifer
Morals and conscience aside, I think you have to consider biology as a reason for people''s choices when choosing siblings and significant others. The biological urge to ''survive'' is probably the strongest natural ''urge'' concerning all species in the animal kingdom. And by '' to survive'', I mean to pass along our own genetics. Our siblings have similar genetics to ourselves, so our urge to save them over strangers would ensure survival of our family genes (just as the girl was referring to her brother as 100% blood, over her half sister and step sister - her brother''s genetics are most like her own, so she chooses him over her other siblings). We all want our own genes to ''survive'' whether we are aware of it or not. The same goes for significant others - they are mates of choice, which help us to pass on our own genetics. I also read a study that concluded, more often than not, people choose marriage partners with similar genetics to their own - to pass on their own genes as unaltered as possible. Of course this isn''t always the case, but certainly accounts for all those couples that look alike.

I would choose my sibling.
I would choose my cats.
I would choose my SO.

I heard that this is why men would prefer to marry plainer women than gorgeous women...b/c more of their traits would pass on...I''m not sure if that''s true but I do know I would clock FI one good if he ever said I was plain and he was happy to pass on his genes!!!

 

[Mara]

Date: 2/28/2006 10:15:01 PM
Author: *~Sweetpea~*

Date: 2/28/2006 9:06:16 PM
Author: LAJennifer
Morals and conscience aside, I think you have to consider biology as a reason for people''s choices when choosing siblings and significant others. The biological urge to ''survive'' is probably the strongest natural ''urge'' concerning all species in the animal kingdom. And by '' to survive'', I mean to pass along our own genetics. Our siblings have similar genetics to ourselves, so our urge to save them over strangers would ensure survival of our family genes (just as the girl was referring to her brother as 100% blood, over her half sister and step sister - her brother''s genetics are most like her own, so she chooses him over her other siblings). We all want our own genes to ''survive'' whether we are aware of it or not. The same goes for significant others - they are mates of choice, which help us to pass on our own genetics. I also read a study that concluded, more often than not, people choose marriage partners with similar genetics to their own - to pass on their own genes as unaltered as possible. Of course this isn''t always the case, but certainly accounts for all those couples that look alike.

I would choose my sibling.
I would choose my cats.
I would choose my SO.

I heard that this is why men would prefer to marry plainer women than gorgeous women...b/c more of their traits would pass on...I''m not sure if that''s true but I do know I would clock FI one good if he ever said I was plain and he was happy to pass on his genes!!!

Greg keeps saying he is afraid that our kid will be basically a mini version of my Mother, aka how I am and how my other sister is...''he is like your mom''s genes are so strong they will probably overpower mine, I better start beefing them up!''

I know I sure ain''t plain and I think our kids will be an interesting blend!! If we do have any that is.

 

[MINE!!]

Date: 2/28/2006 10:11:08 PM
Author: *~Sweetpea~*

Date: 2/28/2006 8:37:19 PM

Author: hlmr

Date: 2/28/2006 6:24:06 PM

Author: MINE!!

Date: 2/28/2006 5:46:13 PM

Author: fire&ice

Interesting discussion and relavent to a story all over the news locally. Briefly:



Boy (4) goes to park with mother. Park has two resident orphaned bears (a town institution!). Unknown how he ended up inside one of two fences, boy goes over fence & approaches the bears behind their 10'' chain link fence. Boy has an apple or apple smell on his hands. Boy sticks his hand through the chain link fence to pet or feed bears. One of the two Bears punctured hand of boy - not an attack or in an agressive manner. Mother takes boy to doctor. Doctor has to report to the health officals about the bite.



Since it is unknown which bear ''bit'', either both bears must be euthanized to determine rabies (unknown gestation in bears so can''t be quarantined, etc) or child must undergo the rabies regimen (not as big of a deal as it once was). What would you, the mother, choose?

Unfortunate situation.. very unfortunate.. but my child is much more important... For everything.. hands down... period

Of course your child is more important...so is mine.....but why do the bears have to die? Why can''t your child take the rabies test? The child being bitten was already due to human error so why not take responsibility and have the child tested?


If the bear attacked and bit the boy then that''s a different story altogether.

as far as the bear story, I would say, child gets rabies treatment--a few pricks for boy but no one dies. I love animals enough to say if it''s something that the bears may not have, but curable, then let the child have the treatment (as long as it doesnt cause any problems down the road)

Well... if the bear lives or dies is not our choice. That was not what was presented. it was whether or not our we would report the incident if it meant that the state had to kill the bear.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/28/2006 3:43:14 PM
Author: XChick03
Okay, two more questions to go, and this is probably the most difficult. Though, I''ve learned from the last few that I need to be more specific, so this one comes with a full scenario.


Imagine you, your significant other, and your absolute best friend have all been kidnapped. The deranged kidnapper has the three of you all tied up, then pulls out a gun and turns to you, he asks you to choose which one you''d rather die. Whoever you choose will be shot and killed on the spot and if you don''t choose one of the two, he''ll kill you all. Who would you choose?


Sorry, its so depressing. It makes me sad just thinking about it.

But now I have to offer a choice that combines both morals and emotions in both options.

myself but it would never get to that point because no one will lay a hand on my wifey2b when im around while I have breath in my body so id allready be dead and would have done my best to do the most damage possible to the kidnappers.
there would have been the only 2 there cuz my wifey2b is my absolute best friend.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/28/2006 4:32:38 PM
Author: fire&ice


Also, I wonder how many people who answered they would save their dog lost a human person close to you?

Iv lost a lot of people close to me, and mine tiger is better than all but a handfull of people on this earth :}

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/28/2006 5:46:13 PM
Author: fire&ice
Interesting discussion and relavent to a story all over the news locally. Briefly:


Boy (4) goes to park with mother. Park has two resident orphaned bears (a town institution!). Unknown how he ended up inside one of two fences, boy goes over fence & approaches the bears behind their 10'' chain link fence. Boy has an apple or apple smell on his hands. Boy sticks his hand through the chain link fence to pet or feed bears. One of the two Bears punctured hand of boy - not an attack or in an agressive manner. Mother takes boy to doctor. Doctor has to report to the health officals about the bite.


Since it is unknown which bear ''bit'', either both bears must be euthanized to determine rabies (unknown gestation in bears so can''t be quarantined, etc) or child must undergo the rabies regimen (not as big of a deal as it once was). What would you, the mother, choose?

Boy should get the shots for being an idiot and the mom shoud get put in stocks in the town square with a sign saying bad parent over her head and a bucket of rotton tomatos nearby :}

 

[larussel03]

Date: 2/28/2006 10:36:20 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/28/2006 4:32:38 PM
Author: fire&ice


Also, I wonder how many people who answered they would save their dog lost a human person close to you?

Iv lost a lot of people close to me, and mine tiger is better than all but a handfull of people on this earth :}

I just recently lost someone close to me, and I know she''d do the same! She was a huge animal enthusiast, as am I. Plus, animals such as dogs rely on thier people so much, and I''d feel so guilty about leaving my dog, who trusted me behind, rather than a complete stranger

 

[Kaleigh]

Date: 2/28/2006 10:36:20 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 2/28/2006 4:32:38 PM
Author: fire&ice


Also, I wonder how many people who answered they would save their dog lost a human person close to you?

Iv lost a lot of people close to me, and mine tiger is better than all but a handfull of people on this earth :}

Yeah I hear you Storm. I unfortunately have had to deal with many deaths in my family. Losing my brother was the hardest, but have also lost many close friends as well. I went to a funeral today as a matter of fact. So I can relate to your response.

 

[hlmr]

Date: 2/28/2006 10:19:57 PM
Author: MINE!!

Date: 2/28/2006 10:11:08 PM
Author: *~Sweetpea~*

Date: 2/28/2006 8:37:19 PM

Author: hlmr

Date: 2/28/2006 6:24:06 PM

Author: MINE!!

Date: 2/28/2006 5:46:13 PM

Author: fire&ice

Interesting discussion and relavent to a story all over the news locally. Briefly:



Boy (4) goes to park with mother. Park has two resident orphaned bears (a town institution!). Unknown how he ended up inside one of two fences, boy goes over fence & approaches the bears behind their 10' chain link fence. Boy has an apple or apple smell on his hands. Boy sticks his hand through the chain link fence to pet or feed bears. One of the two Bears punctured hand of boy - not an attack or in an agressive manner. Mother takes boy to doctor. Doctor has to report to the health officals about the bite.



Since it is unknown which bear 'bit', either both bears must be euthanized to determine rabies (unknown gestation in bears so can't be quarantined, etc) or child must undergo the rabies regimen (not as big of a deal as it once was). What would you, the mother, choose?

Unfortunate situation.. very unfortunate.. but my child is much more important... For everything.. hands down... period

Of course your child is more important...so is mine.....but why do the bears have to die? Why can't your child take the rabies test? The child being bitten was already due to human error so why not take responsibility and have the child tested?


If the bear attacked and bit the boy then that's a different story altogether.

as far as the bear story, I would say, child gets rabies treatment--a few pricks for boy but no one dies. I love animals enough to say if it's something that the bears may not have, but curable, then let the child have the treatment (as long as it doesnt cause any problems down the road)

Well... if the bear lives or dies is not our choice. That was not what was presented. it was whether or not our we would report the incident if it meant that the state had to kill the bear.

No, that's not what was asked.

Please reread.

 

[SoonIHope]

a) Sibling

b) my cat. I just can''t stand the thought of her being so helpless and alone--she counts on us to take care of her. I''m sure I would be haunted with guilt the rest of my life (just like with all these other questions!!) but I really do have a very strong maternal instinct with her; I just couldn''t let her die.

c) my fiance.

d) probably my fiance...because my parents are older and have had good long lives, and I would
want my (future) children to have a father....definitely the hardest question though. Now that I''m really picturing my mom I''m starting to reconsider...but I think she would want me to choose my fiance too probably....

 

[Jensia]

On that last question I think I would just have them shoot us all. I would not choose my husband or my mother, but if I said I choose not to choose, then we all end up in the same place at the same time. Then it is the killers choice to kill us .
Actualy it always was, but thats what I would do.

On the pet one, a stranger any day, though I love my pets likes babies, human life has to go first.

I forgot the other questions, watching tv at the same time,lol

Jensia

 

[XChick03]

Date: 2/28/2006 9:06:16 PM
Author: LAJennifer
Morals and conscience aside, I think you have to consider biology as a reason for people''s choices when choosing siblings and significant others. The biological urge to ''survive'' is probably the strongest natural ''urge'' concerning all species in the animal kingdom. And by '' to survive'', I mean to pass along our own genetics. Our siblings have similar genetics to ourselves, so our urge to save them over strangers would ensure survival of our family genes (just as the girl was referring to her brother as 100% blood, over her half sister and step sister - her brother''s genetics are most like her own, so she chooses him over her other siblings). We all want our own genes to ''survive'' whether we are aware of it or not. The same goes for significant others - they are mates of choice, which help us to pass on our own genetics. I also read a study that concluded, more often than not, people choose marriage partners with similar genetics to their own - to pass on their own genes as unaltered as possible. Of course this isn''t always the case, but certainly accounts for all those couples that look alike.


I would choose my sibling.

I would choose my cats.

I would choose my SO.

I would agree that its not only a matter or emotion vs. conscience/morals, but also instincts play a major role.

As far as similar genetics, my FI and I have a lot in common personality wise, but not much physically, though we both have dark hair, blue & green eyes, thin and not so thin, cute little nose to my big nose

. Our mothers are also a lot alike personality wise, but complete opposites physically. And if you really go back to genetic codes and where it starts, we have completely different ancestry. Mine is composed of roughly 75% Irish and 25% Italian. His is more like 70% German, 10% French and 20% English. Definitely something to think about, though.

 

[msdarlinjoy]

Kidnappers always play the "control freak" game.

They make you agonizingly pick one, but don''t ya''ll know ... Kidnapper has plans to kill you and whomever was left ... Just because the kidnapper can!

I don''t hate many things ... but I hate these kind of ?''s!

I know my mom would say to save myself and hubby, we still have kids to raise, also my mom wouldn''t want to live if the kidnapper decided to kill me and left her etc... Stuff like this makes me cry!

I think I am going to go vomit now!

 

[monarch64]

Date: 2/28/2006 10:30:06 AM
Author:XChick03
Hello everyone.

I need your help with a paper for my psychology class. We have to try and find a unique way to right about morals and conscience and how they affect us. So, I''m doing a poll and then wil write my paper based on the results. I''m only going to keep track of the answers, everything else will be anonymous.

Question #1: If you were in a burning building and you could either save one sibling or five strangers, what would you do? Keep in mind, with either choice, you and whoever you choose to save will be able to get out safely.

Question #2: If you could only choose to save one stranger or your beloved pet, who would you choose?

Question #3: Imagine you, your significant other, and your absolute best friend have all been kidnapped. The deranged kidnapper has the three of you all tied up, then pulls out a gun and turns to you, he asks you to choose which one you''d rather die. Whoever you choose will be shot and killed on the spot and if you don''t choose one of the two, he''ll kill you all. Who would you choose?

Question #4: You''re in the same situation as before, but with a parent (the one you''re closest to) instead of your best friend. Now what would you do?

Sorry I haven''t kept up with your post!

My answers:
1. sibling
2. pet
3. best friend
4. husband

 

[bookworm21]

Q1: I would save my sibling. Call me a pessimist, but I don't know those strangers and what if they turned out to be a band of crooks that just happened to be robbing that building? I grew up with my sister, so definitely my sis, hands down.

Q2: I don't have a pet, so my answer would have to be the stranger.

Q3: I'd tell him to kill me and let the two of them go. This is a toughie. Am I bad if I say that I would choose my SO to live? Factors in this decision is that I don't really have anyone I call my absolute best friend, except for my BF.

Q4: I don't even know how to approach answering this one. Um...my SO to live again? I don't want to get into explaining why I would choose him, but there are many factors that play into it. Am I a bad person?

 

[platinumrock]

uilding is burning, I''d call 911 first. If everyone in that building had the ability to run out, I''d be running out with them. But they are injured or unconscious, I''d choose a sibling. This is a no-brainer. My family means everything to me. By the time we both get out safely, the fire department should be there, so they can come back for the rest.

2) Same as before. But if my dog and the stranger are injured or unconscious, I would carry my dog out. Another no-brainer. He''s my baby...I would die if something happened to him.

3) My husband would be dead before he lets me and my best friend get tied up and kidnapped. While he''s trying to snatch the kidnapper''s weapon away, I''m already jumping on his ass and biting his neck. After we remove the weapon, I will tell my best friend to snap out of it and call 911. Once she''s free, she can help hold the kidnapper down while we beat him until he''s paralyzed. The police will arrest him and EMS will take us to the hospital (this is a fight for our lives, expect injuries). Three people against one armed person? It''s worth the fight. Who says I have to choose?

4) Again, my husband would be dead before he lets me and my mom get tied up and kidnapped. It would be the same response as before, except I would tell my mom to run away and call 911. Once my mom is safe and we remove the weapon, we continue to kick the kidnapper''s ass until he''s paralyzed. Yes, it will be risky. But I choose to preserve my own life and my loved ones...even if I have to die trying. I can live with the loss of strangers (because I don''t know them), but I cannot be responsbible for the loss of a loved one. Sorry, not gonna happen.


Cool questions, XChick!!! It would suck to be in these situations, and I hope no one will ever have to make any of these choices. But if crap happens, at least I''ll know what to do: KICK SOME SERIOUS ASS!!!

Good luck with your paper, and let us know how it turns out!

PS: I would not trust anything that comes out of a kidnapper''s mouth. If he''s crazy enough to try and kidnap three people, he is crazy enough to kill all of them anyways. If anyone survives, the police will be notified. He can''t have that now, can he?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 2/28/2006 6:02:37 PM
Author: XChick03
Next question and possibly the last


You''re in the same situation as Question #3 but with one of your parents (the one you''re closest to) instead of you best friend. Now what would your choice be?

Both my parents have passed away so thats a no brainer

 

[XChick03]

Date: 3/1/2006 4:28:59 AM
Author: platinumrock
1) If the building is burning, I''d call 911 first. If everyone in that building had the ability to run out, I''d be running out with them. But they are injured or unconscious, I''d choose a sibling. This is a no-brainer. My family means everything to me. By the time we both get out safely, the fire department should be there, so they can come back for the rest.


2) Same as before. But if my dog and the stranger are injured or unconscious, I would carry my dog out. Another no-brainer. He''s my baby...I would die if something happened to him.


3) My husband would be dead before he lets me and my best friend get tied up and kidnapped. While he''s trying to snatch the kidnapper''s weapon away, I''m already jumping on his ass and biting his neck. After we remove the weapon, I will tell my best friend to snap out of it and call 911. Once she''s free, she can help hold the kidnapper down while we beat him until he''s paralyzed. The police will arrest him and EMS will take us to the hospital (this is a fight for our lives, expect injuries). Three people against one armed person? It''s worth the fight. Who says I have to choose?


4) Again, my husband would be dead before he lets me and my mom get tied up and kidnapped. It would be the same response as before, except I would tell my mom to run away and call 911. Once my mom is safe and we remove the weapon, we continue to kick the kidnapper''s ass until he''s paralyzed. Yes, it will be risky. But I choose to preserve my own life and my loved ones...even if I have to die trying. I can live with the loss of strangers (because I don''t know them), but I cannot be responsbible for the loss of a loved one. Sorry, not gonna happen.



Cool questions, XChick!!! It would suck to be in these situations, and I hope no one will ever have to make any of these choices. But if crap happens, at least I''ll know what to do: KICK SOME SERIOUS ASS!!!

Good luck with your paper, and let us know how it turns out!




PS: I would not trust anything that comes out of a kidnapper''s mouth. If he''s crazy enough to try and kidnap three people, he is crazy enough to kill all of them anyways. If anyone survives, the police will be notified. He can''t have that now, can he?

Well, yeah but for all intents and purposes I''m trying to keep the "what if" factors to a minimum. And I''d probably be more likely to try some stupid heroics than my FI.

 

[XChick03]

Okay, since Jennifer brought up an excellent point about human''s basic survival instincts, I am going to do two more last questions.

Question #5: Same situation as before, but only your SO and you. Do you choose yourself or him/her?

Question #6</u<: Now its you and a stranger, who do you choose?

 

[fortheloveofdiamonds]

Question #1: If you were in a burning building and you could either save one sibling or five strangers, what would you do? Keep in mind, with either choice, you and whoever you choose to save will be able to get out safely.

One sibling.
Question #2: If you could only choose to save one stranger or your beloved pet, who would you choose?

beloved pet
Question #3: Imagine you, your significant other, and your absolute best friend have all been kidnapped. The deranged kidnapper has the three of you all tied up, then pulls out a gun and turns to you, he asks you to choose which one you''d rather die. Whoever you choose will be shot and killed on the spot and if you don''t choose one of the two, he''ll kill you all. Who would you choose?

myself
Question #4: You''re in the same situation as before, but with a parent (the one you''re closest to) instead of your best friend. Now what would you do?

myself
Question #5: Same situation as before, but only your SO and you. Do you choose yourself or him/her?

myself

 

[Caribou]

Date: 2/28/2006 10:11:08 PM
Author: *~Sweetpea~*

as far as the bear story, I would say, child gets rabies treatment--a few pricks for boy but no one dies. I love animals enough to say if it''s something that the bears may not have, but curable, then let the child have the treatment (as long as it doesnt cause any problems down the road)

I totally agree. I want to change my story, if my child is bitten by a wild animal because my child put his hand where it didn''t belong, than he or she would have to suffer the consequnces of rabie shots.

I love animals and it pisses me off to no end when I hear about stories of human beings going into their world/home (aka., wilderness) and being attack by a bear or a cougar or whatever, and the animal doing the attacking is killed. WHY?!?!?!? People who choose to do things where there''s a risk of animals attacking should take that procaution and realize that it''s a possible consequence.

Anyone see that Grizzly Man documentary, the one about the freak that decided to go live with the bears?? Then one day a couple bears maul him and his girlfriend to death. HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLO!?!?!??! The two bears that did it where killed.

Now, although I do not feel bad for that guy I do have some empathy for his family and friends. It was pretty selfish of him to do something so careless and not have any concern about what could happen to him and how it would affect his family. However, I really do not think anyone should be surprised at the outcome and those bears should NOT have been killed.

Anywho, to answer Question #4 and #5...I would choose myself, I couldn''t decided between my mom and my SO and if I had to choose between my SO and me, I would also choose me.

 

[larussel03]

Date: 2/28/2006 10:19:57 PM
Author: MINE!!

Date: 2/28/2006 10:11:08 PM
Author: *~Sweetpea~*

Date: 2/28/2006 8:37:19 PM

Author: hlmr

Date: 2/28/2006 6:24:06 PM

Author: MINE!!

Date: 2/28/2006 5:46:13 PM

Author: fire&ice

Interesting discussion and relavent to a story all over the news locally. Briefly:



Boy (4) goes to park with mother. Park has two resident orphaned bears (a town institution!). Unknown how he ended up inside one of two fences, boy goes over fence & approaches the bears behind their 10' chain link fence. Boy has an apple or apple smell on his hands. Boy sticks his hand through the chain link fence to pet or feed bears. One of the two Bears punctured hand of boy - not an attack or in an agressive manner. Mother takes boy to doctor. Doctor has to report to the health officals about the bite.



Since it is unknown which bear 'bit', either both bears must be euthanized to determine rabies (unknown gestation in bears so can't be quarantined, etc) or child must undergo the rabies regimen (not as big of a deal as it once was). What would you, the mother, choose?

Unfortunate situation.. very unfortunate.. but my child is much more important... For everything.. hands down... period

Of course your child is more important...so is mine.....but why do the bears have to die? Why can't your child take the rabies test? The child being bitten was already due to human error so why not take responsibility and have the child tested?


If the bear attacked and bit the boy then that's a different story altogether.

as far as the bear story, I would say, child gets rabies treatment--a few pricks for boy but no one dies. I love animals enough to say if it's something that the bears may not have, but curable, then let the child have the treatment (as long as it doesnt cause any problems down the road)

Well... if the bear lives or dies is not our choice. That was not what was presented. it was whether or not our we would report the incident if it meant that the state had to kill the bear.

can you get treatment without the dr reporting it? If not then I'd most definately get the child treatment and if the dr reported it I'd feel awful, but it's better than waiting to see if the child developed rabies...I'd hate to see the bears die, esp if neither had rabies but if the only way to get treatment is to have the dr. report it then I guess that's what would have to happen...