If people are willing to pay for the cost of those artificial substitutes—then I would have no problem with it. If there are sufficient people wanting to adopt, too.
There is still a step between “being fine with it” and “advocating for”—that’s turning a “could” into a “should” and you have not given any evidence why this should become a “should”
Right now I’d still not see a benefit for advocating for a child to be placed onto this kind of life-support if the parents do not want it. If the adoptive parents do, then no problems.
The issue with what FAWS is proposing is that “brain activity” is vague int he extreme. Ants have brain activity...
If people are willing to pay for the cost of those artificial substitutes—then I would have no problem with it. If there are sufficient people wanting to adopt, too.
There is still a step between “being fine with it” and “advocating for”—that’s turning a “could” into a “should” and you have not given any evidence why this should become a “should”
Right now I’d still not see a benefit for advocating for a child to be placed onto this kind of life-support if the parents do not want it. If the adoptive parents do, then no problems.
The issue with what FAWS is proposing is that “brain activity” is vague int he extreme. Ants have brain activity...