Could you Leave Your Child behind to Save the Other 2?

a reply to: ArtemisE

It's if you would be strong enough to save 2 at the cost of one.

Then, no. I would not be strong enough.

As it is, with my two adult children, I keep the phone on the headboard every night, worried. From the time I first became pregnant - I've worried.

It's terrifying to let your kids out into the world, no matter how much training and guidance you've given them - and since before they were born, and afterwards, I've wondered how/if I could handle it if something happened to one of them (or both).

I would rather die. Like I said - life for the survivors of such a horrible scenario would be unbearable.
I think, truly, I would go totally insane - and then what good am I to the other two? How would they respond to my insanity?

When I was pregnant with my first, and in Lamaze classes, the instructor asked if there were questions. I said, "I'm worried about whether my baby is okay or not...does that go away?" She looked me straight in the eyes and said: "No."

And she was right.

I'd make them draw straws, shortest straw gets kicked into the Volcano, then I grab the other 2 and run like hell.
But if we don't even have time to draw straws, then I'm kicking all 3 them into the volcano and running like hell. I've got 2 more at home anyways.

originally posted by: ArtemisE

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Rainbowresidue

That was my solution, too!
Star!!

Obviously the OP is not a mother.

Actually it's because I'm a father of an amazing 11 year old girl that I came up with this. I can imagine how insanely hard the decision would be. The question is, could you make that decision. You can't forget the other 2 die if you can't. So it's not an issue of self sacrifice...... All of us would give our life for our child's. It's if you would be strong enough to save 2 at the cost of one.

I'd be strong enough to stick with all three until the bitter end. If you run at the cost of one of your children's lives, you're a coward. No questions asked.

originally posted by: Bone75
I'd make them draw straws, shortest straw gets kicked into the Volcano, then I grab the other 2 and run like hell.
But if we don't even have time to draw straws, then I'm kicking all 3 them into the volcano and running like hell. I've got 2 more at home anyways.

Spoken like some one used to dealing with 5 kids!!!! I laughter out loud. Well played!

originally posted by: AfterInfinity

originally posted by: ArtemisE

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Rainbowresidue

That was my solution, too!
Star!!

Obviously the OP is not a mother.

Actually it's because I'm a father of an amazing 11 year old girl that I came up with this. I can imagine how insanely hard the decision would be. The question is, could you make that decision. You can't forget the other 2 die if you can't. So it's not an issue of self sacrifice...... All of us would give our life for our child's. It's if you would be strong enough to save 2 at the cost of one.

I'd be strong enough to stick with all three until the bitter end. If you run at the cost of one of your children's lives, you're a coward. No questions asked.

Idk... I'm not attacking your response. It's an impossible situation. But I think your a coward if your so afraid to face life afterward that you sacrifice your other two children.

Hold one of them wrapped in each of your arms, wrap the third ones hands around your neck use the third ones hands to hold your hand, there by locking all three of them in place. Run like hell and get all three of them out.

a reply to: DonVoigt

There you go! It seems to be the modus operandus of those of us who are problem solvers with children.

a reply to: ArtemisE

But I think your a coward if your so afraid to face life afterward that you sacrifice your other two children.

Even if YOU are strong enough to face life afterward, what about the other two??

No - it's a dreadful situation, and I would not put ANY of them in the position to have to deal with the miserable aftermath.

Have you seen "Legends of the Fall"? Or, while we're at it and as it's been mentioned, "Sophie's Choice"?

You are right, though, there are people in other parts of the world that have to make these decisions every day. It's a blessing and a privilege to live in a time and place where that situation is not presented to me. I grieve for the families of lost children - whether young or adult children makes no difference - and honestly, I don't think I'd have the strength to deal with it.

It seems most people do not understand the premise and their emotions are overwhelming their ability for abstract thinking.

The question is a variation of a philosophical question posed in many classes.

One such variation is there are three people tied up on one set of tracks with a train coming at them that will definitely kill them you are in a position where you can switch the train to another set of tracks which will undoubtedly save them the problem is if you do switch the tracks for the train there is one person tied up on those tracks.

Do you switch the tracks that will kill one person, but save three or do nothing and allow the three people to die?

There is no answer excepted that will save them all the only answers acceptable are switch the tracks or don't. One death or three. Any other answer would give you a failing grade in the class.


The OP is asking a similar question to where three lives including yours is saved or none. Any other answer outside the confines of the scenario you have failed the exercise.


My answer would be run with two as heartbreaking as it would be. A better scenario would have been using a car going off a bridge into a river or another scenario that was told by a mother during a tsunami in Japan years ago where she could only save so many of her children.


Anyway the scenario doesn't really matter what matters is the choice you make between the two options (and only those two options) and why.

For me I would save two children so they could live. Life is better than death regardless of how I will be seen or if my children hated me they would still be able to go on living. I would except the pain and nightmares that would definitly follow.

If anyone is interested there is a movie that recently hit dvd called after the dark that explains such scenarios far better than I.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Believe it or not, I did not read your post until after you responded to me, I only read the op and then responded, when you responded to me, I went back started reading and found your post Loved it, hahahaha.

a reply to: Grimpachi

It says in the op if you can think of a better example than mine, feel free.

a reply to: DonVoigt

What he meant was if you can think of a better example of the question. Not a better example where you can save everyone.

This is a philosophical question with real world applications posed in classes across the globe. They have many such examples of the question but it is always an impossible scenario. One of the purposes is to train or find those suited to be leaders as whether it be leading a nation or leading an Army the individual in charge of making the decisions will be faced with many such as the one in the OP except they will have hundred or thousands of lives in their hands.

A person that cannot make the sensible choice or is unable to make the choice would not be suited as a leader.

a reply to: Grimpachi

A person that cannot make the sensible choice or is unable to make the choice would not be suited as a leader.

I'd rather die with my family than live to lead someone else's. I don't give a rat's furry hindquarters if that's "sensible". That's how I roll. And I'd rather die than live while knowing that I deliberately walked away when my child needed me the most.

After much thought I have arrived at two decision:
1st: All of us would survive. There is no need to leave any behind because I believe to be reading this as a riddle. So here goes the answer to your riddle.

I am standing on the edge of said volcano with 3 children, it is about to erupt. None of the children can run so I pick up the 2 I can see and carry all 3 down with me!
I am pregnant! We all survive and end up on the Morning news, 5 months later I give birth to a daughter that I name after said stupid volcano.

2nd: I am standing on the edge of said volcano with 3 children, it is about to erupt. None of the children can run so I pick up 2 and leave your sorry hinny because you made me think so hard!


a reply to: ArtemisE

a reply to: Grimpachi

Ok if that is what the op meant, that is what the op should have said. It was left open to interpretation, and I interpreted it my way. I am very strong and could easily carry three children.

Captain Kirk found a way to beat the kobiashi Maru, I found a way to save all the children.

I would grab all three of them and get the heck off that rock. There is no "you can only" when it comes to saving your children. You save them all or die trying. There is no way that you are going to make a calculated decision under those circumstances.

There is no way that the OP is a parent if he or she could think of something so terrifying. There are thousands of impossible situations as a parent, it is not something you spend time thinking about or you would go crazy.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
I would grab all three of them and get the heck off that rock. There is no "you can only" when it comes to saving your children. You save them all or die trying. There is no way that you are going to make a calculated decision under those circumstances.

There is no way that the OP is a parent if he or she could think of something so terrifying. There are thousands of impossible situations as a parent, it is not something you spend time thinking about or you would go crazy.

This is EXACTLY what I've been trying to say. This entire discussion feels so pointless, like when your buddy just randomly asks what you would do given an impossible situation where your only option is to die as slowly and painfully as possible. What's the point? Getting your rocks off thinking about how a human being can suffer the most? Here's an idea - grab your kid, hug them close, read them a story, and let them fall asleep in your arms. Stop worrying about ways you might be forced to choose between them in a life or death situation. It does no one any good and raises alarm bells in my head, personally. Thank you and good night.

It would be all or none... I could not leave a child to die alone and afraid.

a reply to: ArtemisE

I love these twisted scenarios created to question our human natures of love and survival. Only one way to find out...fiiiight. If it came to point of being able to leave one behind in order to outrun the volcano id just go the full 9 yards and leave all three which will save me a load of energy and wont have to run as hard.

But then again im not a cruel sadistic scumbag who hasnt had the greatest joy of feeling the love a parent can have for their children. Therefore id just cuddle them in and enjoy the last minutes of my life taking their worries. No place one would rather die but in the arms of those they love most.

Is there not an option to use you as a surf board thing and we will surf the lava on your back.
Which side would you rather down into the lava, your face or your arse, prob wouldnt make a difference because the #e will come out of both sides. hehe. only fun n games.

originally posted by: DonVoigt
a reply to: Grimpachi

It says in the op if you can think of a better example than mine, feel free.

Meaning. If you can think of a more solid senerio where you can't figure out a way to carry all 3... Not figure out a way to fit all 3 kids on your body. Lol