Did Franklin do the right thing in "Believers"?

[The_One]

Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

This is a big moral debate - but I was watching the episode on DVD the other day, it's always been one of my favourite 'off-arc' episodes, and it got me thinking. Did he do the correct thing in saving the boy's life?

I honestly can't think of the right answer. I mean, he was probably in the most difficult situation a doctor could ever face. I can't remember who it was who said that 'the right thing isn't always the best thing' - and that couldn't be more true in this situation.

What do you think?

 

[A_M_Swallow]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

There is no correct solution to a moral dilemma. Both actions are right and both actions are wrong - possibly using different criteria.

There may have been a way to drill through the blockage, possibly using nano-machines. However that would have destroyed the story.

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

I love the episode. It was one of the first ones that really made me understand that "this is not your father's SF show" - because that ending would never have happened on any of the Treks - or most mainstream medical shows. (Amusing, therefore, that it was written by Trek alumnus David ("The Trouble with Tribbles") Gerrold, who wrote the S1 writer's guide for ST:TNG and also worked on DS9.)

The point of the episode, of course, is that everybody's right, according to his or her own beliefs, and therefore everybody's wrong according to someone else's. The only one in the show we can be sure did exactly the right thing is Sinclair - he stood up for the rights of the parents because no one else would, and to do otherwise would make a mockery of Babylon 5's mission.

During the original usenet debate on this show JMS, an atheist, made a key point: "Can you prove that the kid's soul didn't leak out? If not, then you're back to arguing about beliefs. And in this situation do the Humans have the right to impose their beliefs (which not even all Humans share) not only on the parents, but on the kid, who also believes his soul will escape?"

On Trek the parents would ultimately have been brought around to see the superior wisdom of the Federation and abandon their primative superstitions. (On Trek only aliens ever seemed to have religious beliefs, and they were generally treated as silly superstitions which our heroes have to cure them of. The sole exception was the Bajorans in DS9, but we all know that that show was influenced by another series, especially in its later seasons.)

The doctor probably would have operated without the parents' permission, but with the full support of the captain, and the parents would have surrendered their beliefs in the tag. I love the fact that they killed the kid. It meant the episode was really about something, and that Franklin's actions had consequences. David Gerrold was happy, too. He kept wondering if he were going too far, but JMS told him he was writing the script that was right for B5. (No coincidence that Gerrold had recently adopted a boy named "Sean". It really let him emotionally identify with the parents, and informed his writing. JMS has said that this was one of the reasons he asked Gerrold to write this particular script from a brief description of the story.)

Regards,

Joe

 

[Kribu]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

IMHO, Franklin did the right thing - for himself, anyway. I don't think he could have lived on with an easier conscience if he hadn't at least tried to save the boy - even if it meant going against the parents' will.

Besides, I suppose that he may have figured he had nothing to lose - without operating, the boy would have died anyway, so from his point of view the surgery was at least giving the kid a chance.

'Believers' is not among my favourite episodes but I do appreciate the story a lot.

 

[hypatia]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

Believers is one of those episodes I should have seen before seasons 2 and 3, but I didn't. Yes, it is a shocker. As well as the other medically intense ep. with the race that cannot address its disease because it is seen as afflicting only the morally weak.

Yes, it's what makes B5 so special, and what I miss most about tv now that it's over.

By the way, you horrid people: I finally broke down and ordered a DVD player, B5 season 1, and the Gathering. I hope the Gathering isn't part of B5 season 1. /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif I'll have to return it if it is. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

So I'm broke, but soon I'll be happy. /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

 

[Shaal Mayan]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

Even though Believers is not one of my favorites .I have seen the ep many times now and have never come with a correct answer and in the end .I am not sure there is one .JMS created a series that could have thought provoking episodes and in the end not have a clear answer as to who was right the commander,parents,the doc? This in all the eps of Trek I have seen WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED.

 

[Jomar]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

The first time I saw this episode I was really stunned. As others have said, there was nothing like it anywhere on tv,
either mainstream or scifi. I tried to put myself in Franklin's place and wondered what I would have done. Although
Sinclair may have been right, in a way he took the easy way out. He did nothing. I always felt that Franklin's mistake
was not to give credence to the beliefs of others, possibly because they were aliens. If he had truly listened to them
and accepted their beliefs then he would have gone along with them. He asserted his human arrogance to prove he
was right, but of course, he was wrong. The boy wanted to live but not under the conditions of having an operation
which would destroy his soul. I still don't know what I would have done. It's a classic philosophical question.

 

[GKarsEye]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

From the point of view of someone who shares Franklin's beliefs (like, I presume, most of us), his biggest mistake was not studying up on their religious beliefs enough. Maybe if he would have known the parents would have killed the kid, he would have taken a different course of action.

While all nice and good to say "everybody's right, all beliefs are equal," etc, I don't have a problem with asserting mine, either. Franklin was right, and I'm not ashamed to say that.

I do like the episode and love the ending, but since I know it so well, it's not one I'm going to watch over and over. I usually don't dig medical melodrama stuff.

 

[ElScorcho]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

The whole thing smacks of "PRIME DIRECTIVE", a term widely known in the Star Trek mythology. The ethical crisis between rudimentary and enlightened civilisation. We would obviously declare these people incredibly stupid for not curing their child of a sore throat, and rightly so. Of course he made the right decision, it's the parents that should be smacked.

 

[The_One]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

You have some very good points there Joe. I suppose there is no right or wrong answer - and the kid would have died either way. This episode is indeed very well written and really makes you think about what you would have done. I really don't know what I'd have done in Franklin's situation.

Oh, and one other thing - does anyone know what Kosh's line was about in that episode?

By the way, Joe, this comment really makes you seem like a sadistic bastard when seen out of context "I love the fact that they killed the kid."

/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

 

[hypatia]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

Kosh's line I thought was one of the most straightforward and clear that he ever uttered. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif I took it to mean that events were moving forward uncontrollably. 'The avalanch has started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote' or something like that.

To me it means that events are overtaking them, they cannot stop the invitable even if they want to. It is too late and now this catastrophic event simply must be allowed to play itself out. Like an avalanch.

As far as JoeD's comment: yea, I dare say a lot of things we say could look bad to an outsider who didn't know the context! /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Spoilers from Season 5:
[spoiler]










Like when so many here say "I can't wait for Byron to die". /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif And don't deny it, many of you can't wait for that episode in Season 5. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif I understand what they are saying (although I never found Byron as annoying as some do). [/spoiler]

 

[dragon69]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

Well, I'll be bold and say that I think Franklin was wrong to do what he did, demonstrating that senior professionals can make the wrong decisions, and such decisions can have consequences.

The story behind believers mimics the philosophical questions that are asked everyday in a hospital, where the beliefs of the relatives may affect the health of a patient. Like a blood transfusion that will save the life of a jehovahs witness. If a doctor is fully aware that a patient is a jehovahs witness, and were to go ahead with a transfusion anyway, that doctor could be taken to court and struck off (making him/her unable to save lives in the future). It is only in extenuating circumstances, which have to be proved in court, that could justify such an action.

Franklin believed in saving the childs life, and suggested that his belief was as strong as the parents belief not to. This is the hypoctratic oath the doctors and nurses make when they become qualified. As Delenn stated to the parents; "Who's belief is more correct? And how do you prove it?". However, it is not all about one belief verses another, there is also the debate over who should make such a decision. Franklin, because he is medically trained? Or the parents because they are the gaurdians?

The fact is that it was not Franklins decision to make. If he wanted to suspend the parents parental authority due to medical reasons, such as mental illness, or incapacity to understand the situation, then that is one thing. But to suspend the parents parental authority over a religion is something entirely different.

Furthermore, in Paediatrics in the UK, if a child can demonstrate full understanding of their situation, known as the Gillick Competancy, then their beliefs should be respected. The episode clearly showed both the parents and the child wishing not to proceed with the surgery for religious beliefs. Franklin did not respect these beliefs, and was therefore wrong for his actions.

This is not to say that Franklins beliefs were any less important than the parents or the childs, or even that he was going against his hypocratic oath; ultimately, it was not his decision to make. Seans decision not to have surgery is no different to a heart attack victim stating 'No Resus'. In the situation presented in the episode, Seans beliefs ultimately affected only himself. Franklins beliefs did not affect himself, but more someone under his care, which is different.

A muslim does not eat pork, and a hindu does not eat beef. Fine, each to their own. But if the muslim tries to force feed beef to the hindu because he thinks it would be good for him, well, this would have consequences. Sean does not want an operation, Franklin proceeds with the operation anyway, since Sean is hardly in any position to stop him. Fair? I think not.

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

Oh, and one other thing - does anyone know what Kosh's line was about in that episode?

Kosh's line is as simple and clear as anything he says in the entire series. The mother asks him, "How would you feel if they wanted to perform an unauthorized operation on you?" Kosh's reply, "The avalanche has already begun; it is too late for the pebbles to vote."

That's just Vorlon for, "That train's already left the station" or "Been there, done that, got the t-shirt." Because (as Franklin himself points out) the B5 medical staff did perform an unauthorized medical procedure on Kosh - in The Gathering. And they did it because they thought they had a reason for doing so that overrode the normal diplomatic niceties. Kosh is merely referring, in that slightly poetic Vorlon way of his, to the fact that this has already been done once, and to him. So he doesn't think he has much chance of talking the Humans out of doing it to someone else.

(Now, the moral and ethical considerations in Kosh's case were different. He was comatose, and therefore couldn't be asked if he wanted them to save his life even at the cost of opening his encounter suit. All they had to go on was what his "next of kin" said. But who is to say that Kosh - under the circumstances - would have agreed with them? Also there was more than Kosh's life on the line. Depending on who tried to kill him there was the possibility of interstellar war to worry about.)


Regards,

Joe

 

[Derian]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

Morally or ethically, I don't think there is a right answer. Legally, I agree with dragon. A patient (and in the case of a minor, the patient's parents) have the right to refuse treatment. Therefore, it was ultimately not Franklin's decision to make. the only time that I know of (currently in the US at least) when doctors can treat without concent (adult or a minor) is when there is an emergnecy situation and the patient (or guardian) cannot give or deny concent.. such as an unconscious patient, or parents that can't be located.

 

[KoshFan]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

I believe that Franklin should have respected their beliefs more. However, the thing is that Franklin has a very hard time with letting things go. He feels terrible if he loses anyone, and if he'd just let the boy die, doing nothing, he'd feel even worse. He could not, in his own mind, stand by and do nothing. His duty as he sees it is to save lives, no matter the risk -- witness his decision in the Earth-Minbari War to destroy his notes, witness his decision to risk his own life to save Garibaldi with the alien healing device. Now he can always say that he did what he thought was right. BOTH sides of the argument come away feeling that they did the right thing.

Also regarding Kosh -- it's a very interesting line of his, and one of his best. It's clear and straightforward, yet it can mean three (or more!) different things:
-- one, Kosh perceives that Franklin will go ahead and try (Vorlon telepathy or just a good judge of Human character)
-- two, as Joe said, he's had the same thing done to him
-- three, the Shadows are coming, like it or not. That's how I always interpreted the line, anyway. As is typical of the prophecies and predictions in this show, the statement can mean many different things. Everything Kosh says has meaning. We just have to look at it in a mirror while hanging upside down.

 

[dragon69]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

In an emergency situation, the decision to proceed with a procedure is made by the doctor when the patient or next of kin is unable to give consent. However, a doctor, in the UK at least, can override a patients decision, and in cases such as a 'No Resus' situation, sometimes do. However, in such an event, the doctor will at some stage have to justify the reasons for this action, and takes full responsibility for any consequences that may occur.

Justification for overriding a patients decision may include factors such as patient/relatives not acting in the best of interests (differences in religion are not enough to determine this fact), insufficient understanding and intelligence to comprehend what is proposed, or lack of sufficient capacity (partial consiousness, mental state of mind etc.). Such justifications are necessary both before and after the procedure, sometimes in a court or trust hearing.

Since both the parents and patient were fully complus-mentus, none of the above justifications apply. If the doctor wanted to proceed, and override their requests, then a second opinion has to be sought after, unless the urgency of the patients condition prevents this. Sometimes this may involve court intervention. In the case with believers, the second opinion was provided by the commanding officer of Babylon 5. Sinclair judged the situation fairly, and followed the correct process to determine the outcome.

Dr. Franklin was fully aware of both the patients and parents requests, both made under full understanding, intelligence and full capacity. The differences in religious beliefs were the only point of contention. A second opinion was sought after and given, which added the final lick of paint to the line that should not have been crossed. Dr. Franklin then crossed it; as a professional he should have known better. I think he learnt his lesson; the hard way.

Rules are there for a reason. If Dr. Fanklin can break those rules for his beliefs, then I guess Garibaldi can go around brown sector spacing those he believes are guilty of crime, of Talia can go around reading the minds of suspected criminals without consent. There are moral and ethical implications involed in most aspects of the Babylon 5 universe, just as there is in this one.

Sometimes the right decisions are the hardest ones to make, and this episode of Babylon 5, amoung others, clearly demonstrates this.

 

[Galahad]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

I think the unseen conversation between Sinclair and shon is a very interesting thought provoker, all we know is that Sinclair came out saying Shon was a "smart kid!" We do not know what went on to make Sinclair reach that conclusion.

My hypothesis is that Sinclair asked him what he believed/wanted to happen. Shon said something to the effect of, "I want to live, I don't think this will make me lose my soul, but my parents faith is important to them and they are not going to be able to handle this if I carry on. I belive Shon was prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice for the sake of his parents' beliefs. Sinclair saw and respected that desire, leading him to say what he did exiting Medlab. I also believe that Sinclair's handling of the situation despite representing the parent's views, would have hinged on what Shon wanted.

Are Shon's race similar to the platypus in some way, as they appear to be mammals like us, and they walk upright... yet they lay eggs to reproduce.. how does this work? Presumably their infants are slightly smaller than human newborns.

 

[Chilli]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

My take - Franklin couldn't have done the right thing. No matter what he did he would be breaking somebody's principles. One thing he could have done would have been holding the operation secret and pretend the other methods he suggested had been effective - if theoretically possible. Yes, it would go against the kids parents belief, but this is not a matter about the parents belief, it was a matter of the kid's beliefs - and franky, it wasn't old enough to really make the decision and form out his own beliefs. If the parents had not known, the kid would have lived and would have had time to form his own beliefs

I'm sure this thesis is fundamentally flawed and several posters here will take it apart /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif Any way - A great episode. And I loved the way it ended - TV shows having the guts to end an episode as unhappily as this one must be praised.

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

-- three, the Shadows are coming, like it or not.

????? Why would Kosh, who is trying hard not to let anyone, including the command staff, know that he's aware the Shadows are coming, throw in a completely non-sequiter prophecy into the middle of a conversation about medical procedures with two strange aliens? I think people have a tendency to over-think some of these lines. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, after all. I don't think there is anything in this episode that remotely supports that interpretation. When JMS has a character make a prophecy, he's usually very clear about it. And he nearly always has the same character repeat the prophecy, or does a flashback to it, when it is about to come true - just to remind the audience. Where is the corresponding scene where Kosh talks about pebbles and avalanches again?

Your first two possibilities are really two sides of the same coin. Kosh may be predicting that Sinclair will authorize Franklin to do the surgery. The reason he can make that prediction is that Sinclair did just that with Dr. Kyle the last time such a situation came up.

Regards,

Joe

 

[dragon69]

Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

ChiLlBeserker, you say Franklin could not have done the right thing. Consider this, when a Nurse determines who lives and who dies, or priority of treatment, it's called 'Triage'. Most decisions are pretty clear to make, i.e. when it's a broken neck verses broken finger the answer is obvious. However, some decisions are not so clear cut, especially in field medicine or a major incident. Such decisions can have moral and ethical implications, there may not be a clear right answer, but a decision has to be made regardless.

Laws, guidelines, rules, knowledge, experience and training all help to make these decisions easier. Medicine has many different kinds of patients, from all ages, to all colours, all races, all religions to all sizes. You'll quite often find that moral questions are dealt with every day in medicine. If a doctor causes an incident at every moral dilema he faces, then he would not last in medicine very long.

As a doctor, Franklin expressed his concerns, tried to persuade the parents and patients, and sought a second opinion. After that he should have respected their beliefs; but his pig-headed arrogance got the better of him, and his quest to be proved right clouded his judgement. The hypocratic oath is a pledge to give the best medical treatment and care possible. It is not to be interpreted as 'By any means necessary'. Note that the hypocratic oath originated from the Greeks, at a time when racial differences were unheard of, and made by the upper echelons of society, and thus never challenged.

ChiLlBeserker, Franklin did perform the operation in secret, as you were suggesting, but never got the chance to pretend that he didn't since the parents took one look at Sean and knew what had occurred.

On the point about the child being blissfully unaware of his treatment, you say that he is too young to form his own beliefs and can therefore live to see another day to confirm them. Firstly, read my previous posts concerning the Gillick Competency, based on a human child. Secondly, he was not a human child, their anatomy, religion, race apparently unheard of; what looked like a 9 year old boy could have been 36, who's to know how long they live and the length of infancy. How do you prove a child has had enough time to form their own beliefs? Finally, you suggest that Sean may grow up to find that his beliefs differ from his parents. What if he did form his own beliefs and discovered that actually they were the same as his parents? He'd be pretty shafted really, since he now has no soul (and being unaware of this does not make it any better, as JMS said, you can't prove that his soul didn't escape during surgery). Your suggestion is morally all wrong.

Galahad, you present an interesting view on the conversation between Sean and Sinclair off camera. However, we did see Sinclair ask Sean what he wanted. To paraphrase, he said he wanted to live, but didn't want to lose his soul. Sinclair responded by saying that he had an operation once but is fine now. Sean's retort was simple; "But you were not born of the egg". Clever answer, hence Sinclair's statement "Smart Kid". This simple statement by Sean has many implications, including the suggestion that his spirit is contained differently because he was born from an egg. Prove otherwise.