So there's this show on the travel channel called "Living with the ______________ (insert name of remote tribal people here) with Mark and Olly." Basically, two tough and well traveled British guys saunter in to a small village of native Indian people who have hardly seen white people, ask them if they can become part of their lives, and then live with them for 3 months (I think it's 3 months...it might be longer. Or shorter). Their goal is to become a part of the new culture, not to tamper with it, and I think they do a very good job of being both respectful and understanding of a culture with which they are very unfamiliar. This season, however, while they were in a mountainous village in Peru with a people called the Machiguenga, something happened to make them question their temporary role in that society.
You see, the tribal leader's wife gave birth to a baby that was disfigured or unhealthy in some way. Mark and Olly were told that there was something wrong with the baby, but not exactly what. And unfortunately, in Machiguenga custom, if a baby is born with any kind of malformation, or if it seems too sickly to survive, the mother must kill it.
To no one's surprise, Mark and Olly were having great difficulty accepting this. One of them (I'm never sure who is who) was even contemplating intervening to prevent the baby's death. But on the other hand, they didn't want to interfere with normal Machiguenga custom; they were there to observe, not to change things, right?
What would you have done? Would you have allowed the baby to be killed according to the tribe's custom and beliefs and kept your place as the neutral observer? Or would you have tried to stop the baby's death?
Oh, and in case you were wondering, the baby didn't die. After a few days, he started eating normally, so the mother let him live.
8 comments:
Wow, that's a really tough question. I think that I would probably just let the tribal people continue with their custom. (Is that horrible and unfeeling?)
I wonder what type of cultural damage and interrelations would have taken place if the two guys had intervened? I'm glad to hear that the baby got well, though. Then the custom was kept and no moral consciences were disturbed.
Well, I could say all kinds of logical things about it, but the idea of a mother killing her baby makes me want to throw up. I probably couldn't defend what I would do to intervene, but I'd do it anyway.
There's an interesting book out there called "Dancing skeletons" by Katherine Dettwyler (very good read by the way), which addresses this same issue among tribes in West Africa. If the baby isn't completely healthy upon birth they toss it aside and let it die. It is shocking, but for them they think an evil spirit has entered the body and it is their duty to put it out of its misery. Not that I agree with Mother's killing their babies or anything, but I kind of understand that its a culture thing and hard to break.
By the way, March 18th...what's up? Do you want to meet somewhere?
dumb, i definitely wouldn`t have let them kill it. i think i would have taken it home with me. I can respect other cultures and their customs, but some things are just inately wrong, and killing is one of them. people are born with a sense of right and wrong, and no matter what your culture or customs are, you have that sense of something being wrong. do you think the mom would have felt GOOD about killing her baby? probs not, cause she KNOWS its wrong. it may be EXPECTED of her due to customs etc, but customs are nothing that cant be broken. if everyone followed customs, we`d all still be living ...well, like them ;) I used to be a ton more accepting of customs and "cultural" questions than I am now, because culture isn`t killing a baby, or men raping young girls in tribal communities, etc etc etc the list could go on. anyway, so yeah thats what i think. killing babies is not culture, its insane!
march 18- you should come home scrub. i cant believe you arent going to come see me, you totally could, i think you just dont WANT to.
Yikes, that is a hard question. what I wonder is how they would have stopped them from killing the baby. Would it be a public event? How do they communicate with the people? Now I am very intrigued by this show. I might just haveto get the travel channel. And by the way, is Madame Bovary any good?
the problem is that the ethical dilemma is not only in reference to the life of the baby, but also the mother.
In such conditions the baby will die, therefore should the mother risk becoming attached?
The emotional turmoil of the mother would be almost to much to bear. True, one could say that she bore the child and therefore must care for it, however what if this is one of 10 pregnancies that she is going to have in her life time, where only two of the children survive past the age of 3?
Is it unethical? Maybe, but at what expense? The mother, the husband and children who are dependent upon her, plus the society as a whole?
Post a Comment