Please Baptize My Dying Atheist Son
Abram Brummett, PhD, HEC-C, and Tate Shepherd, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, MI
This talk reports on a clinical ethics consultation that began with the following case.
A 23-year-old patient sustained a severe traumatic brain injury from a motor vehicle accident and was unconscious in the ICU. The patient had elevated intracranial pressure, and was at high risk of brainstem herniation, and was not expected to survive long. The patient’s mother approaches the attending physician with a request to consult spiritual services to come baptize the patient. The mother stated, “My son and I are very close, and I know he is an atheist and has refused baptism in the past, but we always held out hope that he would eventually come around. If he dies in this hospital, this may be our only chance to save his soul. In my tradition, we believe someone can be baptized even if they are unable to give their agreement. Please, we know he does not have long.” The physician consulted the ethics service and spiritual care for guidance about how to handle this unusual request.
This talk presents opposing arguments for how the clinical ethicist should respond in this case. The argument against baptism (written by theists), relies upon the notion of “dignitary harm” and casuistic reasoning with other similar cases. The argument for baptism (written by atheists), relies upon the notion that substituted judgment arguments can sometimes trump known wishes, arguing that the current baptism is critically different from the opportunities for baptism the patient has refused in the past.
A 23-year-old patient sustained a severe traumatic brain injury from a motor vehicle accident and was unconscious in the ICU. The patient had elevated intracranial pressure, and was at high risk of brainstem herniation, and was not expected to survive long. The patient’s mother approaches the attending physician with a request to consult spiritual services to come baptize the patient. The mother stated, “My son and I are very close, and I know he is an atheist and has refused baptism in the past, but we always held out hope that he would eventually come around. If he dies in this hospital, this may be our only chance to save his soul. In my tradition, we believe someone can be baptized even if they are unable to give their agreement. Please, we know he does not have long.” The physician consulted the ethics service and spiritual care for guidance about how to handle this unusual request.
This talk presents opposing arguments for how the clinical ethicist should respond in this case. The argument against baptism (written by theists), relies upon the notion of “dignitary harm” and casuistic reasoning with other similar cases. The argument for baptism (written by atheists), relies upon the notion that substituted judgment arguments can sometimes trump known wishes, arguing that the current baptism is critically different from the opportunities for baptism the patient has refused in the past.