¶ … 2306 Kant. Consider situation: You ill life support. You a transplant organs continue living. Your parents decided biological child specifically organ transplant child / matures a level (assume part organ child survive) Kant's assumption on the present matter is reflected in the well-known maxim and law, "act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law." (Stanford, 2004) Most often this "law" is interpreted as being a set of questions one must ask himself before undergoing a certain action. More precisely, the first step in determining whether the course of action one is about to take is morally correct or not is to actually formulate that action and provide a reasoning for it. Secondly, it is important to consider that action and that reasoning multiplied at a universal level, thought of this action as being a universal law and one the world would need to follow. Thirdly, after consideration of the universe transformed by that maxim or action, one must see whether his own action would be possible in such a world where that action has become a law of nature. Finally, if the previous question yields a negative answer, according to Kant, that initial course of action is not to be followed, as it is morally wrong.

Such reasoning applied to the current situation, would produce most likely a mixed answer....

The morality behind such a choice needs to lie above the will to live and the love parents have for their child. Taking each step from the rational proposed by Kant would lead to a confusing answer particularly because there are underlining issues related to the duty of parents to care and take care of their child.
The first part of the line of thought applies to this case in the moment in which the parents need to decide on whether it is moral or not to bring a child into the world with the aim of saving his brother. This simple statement leads to the second part of the rational in which one would need to imagine that all the world would be full of people and children that are to a certain extent a "donor" for their siblings. Thirdly, would it be possible in such a world to have the initial action set in place? A natural answer would be yes. Finally, if the third question is answered affirmative, then the action can be deemed moral.

Taking into account the simple rational mentioned above, the actual complications that arise from the complexity of the situation make the answer to be less straightforward. In this sense, reverting to the first question, on the choice of the parents to have another child and to use his organs to save their first born. An important detail that may strengthen the decision to have that child is that the family would have wanted a…