2. Desired section: Entertainment is what I'm aiming for but World Affairs is something that interests me too.
3. My experience: Well, I'm currently studying English in Year 10. We've done various essays which include comparisons, reviews, stories and newspaper articles.
4. My example: This a recent newspaper article I was required to write. It's a discussion about face transplants
Spoiler: Click to Toggle the Spoiler.
A Change of Face
Are you unhappy with your face? Are you fed up of buying all of those expensive creams and cosmetics? Well you may just be in luck. At least that’s what some ethical societies think. A lady named Connie Culp has revealed herself to have had the most extensive face transplant to date. Some say it’s a miracle. Some say it’s playing God. What’s certain is that it’s controversial.
The issue of face transplants arose in November 2005 when Isabelle Dinoire, a French woman in her late 30’s, received the world’s first partial face transplant. The procedure was performed after Dinoire was mauled by the family dog, losing her lips, nose and chin. Professor Bernard Devauchelle was the main surgeon carrying out the transplant. After two years, Dinoire is recovering well even though issues like kidney failure and tissue rejection have been raised.
So what's the problem with face transplants? Some people have raised concern over the fact that the patient receives a stranger’s face. For example, before her partial face transplant, Isabelle Dinoire had a wide tilted nose, a prominent chin and thin lips. After her transplant Dinoire has a straight, narrow nose, a neater chin and a fuller mouth. This, on the one hand, has led critics to raise concern over the psychological effects this would have on the patient, with Dinoire herself saying she struggles to accept her new appearance. However, on the other hand, surgeons have stated that the recipient will not look like the donor nor their former selves. This is due to the different bone and muscle structure that the donor and recipient would have. Even before the transplant, psychological assessments are carried to make sure the recipient would cope with the procedure.
Another ethical issue raised by Dinoire herself has been the ownership of the transplanted face. In an interview, Miss Dinoire stated “Having the inside of the mouth of someone else . . . It didn’t belong to me. It was atrocious.” Iain Hutchinson, chief executive of Saving Faces - the Facial Surgery Research Foundation, said "The transplant would have to come from a beating heart donor. So, say your sister was in intensive care, you would have to agree to allow their face to be removed before the ventilator was switched off." Despite this, the unnamed family of Connie Culp's face's donor have revealed that they have been "moved" by the images of Culp with her new face.
While critics have argued that a face transplant carries too many risks for a condition that is not life-threatening, others have said that the procedure gives people back the ability to do things that we take for granted. Dr. Alex Clarke of the Royal Free Hospital in London said “These transplants have proven that the technical difficulties can be overcome and psychologically the patients are doing well. They have all reacted positively and have begun to do things they were not able to before.” Isabelle Dinoire, the first recipient of a face transplant, stated in 2008 that full sensitivity had returned to her face, enabling her to smile for the first time in years. Even Connie Culp, months after her operation, can breathe without aid and eat normally.
An additional medical issue that has been raised is the immunosupressors needed to be taken after the surgery. These are powerful drugs which inhibit the immune system, preventing it from attacking the new tissue. These are said to increase the chance of infection or disease and heavy use of them can cause cancer. Despite this, surgeons have attempted to counter the problem by giving the recipient tiny doses of material from the donor to get their immune system used to it. The transplant has also been described as improving quality of life despite the life-threatening risks themselves, with Roger Green, president of the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons, saying "This particular surgery is a way of giving back a life to a patient who has been horribly scarred by burns, trauma or a tumour.”
So what does the future hold for these kinds of transplants? There have been concerns over the current and future reactions the public may have, with Arlene Judith Klotzko, a bioethicist, stating “Will people tear up their donor cards out of fear that someone else will wear their face after their death?”A survey conducted by Peter Butler, a plastic surgeon, was carried out on 120 people, asking if they would donate their faces in the event of death, with 100% of those asked saying no. Klotzko added “It reminds us of Frankenstein’s monster, who was assembled from bits of the dead bodies his creator found in charnel houses”. There is also the possibility that face transplants will become a part of cosmetic surgery like a nose job or a face lift with the chance that you could be walking down the street and see the face of your deceased friend or family member on someone else’s body. And now that face transplants have been carried out, what next? What if, in a number of years, a team of surgeons successfully transplant the brain of a patient into a donor body? Would that be a miracle, or playing God? These are some of many questions that surgeons and ethicists alike have been asking.
While many have predicted a future where humans will play God, there are those who are not so pessimistic. Dr Maria Seimionow, Connie Culp’s surgeon, stated “As you can see we have now a healthy person and happy person. She has reduced dramatically her pain and also she's able to walk on the street without being called names." If future medical procedures can produce a similar result, what harm is there? The first heart transplant was performed on the 23rd of January, 1964 which, like the recent face transplants, raised many ethical and moral questions. Today there are 3500 heart transplants every year which are recognised as life saving operations. A similar case can be seen with cornea transplants when nearly 2,500 people in the UK had their sight restored in 2007-08 after undergoing one.
While many people point out the negative situations a face transplant can cause, there are clearly benefits that outweigh the risks. In my opinion, face transplants are just as beneficial and essential as any other organ transplant. If you lost the ability to breathe normally and eat normally, wouldn't you want the operation that could give it back to you? And if you knew that donating your face in the event of death could give someone back their life, wouldn't you do what's right? Face transplants could become common in the near future, and that is why we should decide now: are they wrong and unethical or essential and life-saving? Whichever way you look at it, there's no denying that face transplants change lives.
[Close]
Are you unhappy with your face? Are you fed up of buying all of those expensive creams and cosmetics? Well you may just be in luck. At least that’s what some ethical societies think. A lady named Connie Culp has revealed herself to have had the most extensive face transplant to date. Some say it’s a miracle. Some say it’s playing God. What’s certain is that it’s controversial.
The issue of face transplants arose in November 2005 when Isabelle Dinoire, a French woman in her late 30’s, received the world’s first partial face transplant. The procedure was performed after Dinoire was mauled by the family dog, losing her lips, nose and chin. Professor Bernard Devauchelle was the main surgeon carrying out the transplant. After two years, Dinoire is recovering well even though issues like kidney failure and tissue rejection have been raised.
So what's the problem with face transplants? Some people have raised concern over the fact that the patient receives a stranger’s face. For example, before her partial face transplant, Isabelle Dinoire had a wide tilted nose, a prominent chin and thin lips. After her transplant Dinoire has a straight, narrow nose, a neater chin and a fuller mouth. This, on the one hand, has led critics to raise concern over the psychological effects this would have on the patient, with Dinoire herself saying she struggles to accept her new appearance. However, on the other hand, surgeons have stated that the recipient will not look like the donor nor their former selves. This is due to the different bone and muscle structure that the donor and recipient would have. Even before the transplant, psychological assessments are carried to make sure the recipient would cope with the procedure.
Another ethical issue raised by Dinoire herself has been the ownership of the transplanted face. In an interview, Miss Dinoire stated “Having the inside of the mouth of someone else . . . It didn’t belong to me. It was atrocious.” Iain Hutchinson, chief executive of Saving Faces - the Facial Surgery Research Foundation, said "The transplant would have to come from a beating heart donor. So, say your sister was in intensive care, you would have to agree to allow their face to be removed before the ventilator was switched off." Despite this, the unnamed family of Connie Culp's face's donor have revealed that they have been "moved" by the images of Culp with her new face.
While critics have argued that a face transplant carries too many risks for a condition that is not life-threatening, others have said that the procedure gives people back the ability to do things that we take for granted. Dr. Alex Clarke of the Royal Free Hospital in London said “These transplants have proven that the technical difficulties can be overcome and psychologically the patients are doing well. They have all reacted positively and have begun to do things they were not able to before.” Isabelle Dinoire, the first recipient of a face transplant, stated in 2008 that full sensitivity had returned to her face, enabling her to smile for the first time in years. Even Connie Culp, months after her operation, can breathe without aid and eat normally.
An additional medical issue that has been raised is the immunosupressors needed to be taken after the surgery. These are powerful drugs which inhibit the immune system, preventing it from attacking the new tissue. These are said to increase the chance of infection or disease and heavy use of them can cause cancer. Despite this, surgeons have attempted to counter the problem by giving the recipient tiny doses of material from the donor to get their immune system used to it. The transplant has also been described as improving quality of life despite the life-threatening risks themselves, with Roger Green, president of the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons, saying "This particular surgery is a way of giving back a life to a patient who has been horribly scarred by burns, trauma or a tumour.”
So what does the future hold for these kinds of transplants? There have been concerns over the current and future reactions the public may have, with Arlene Judith Klotzko, a bioethicist, stating “Will people tear up their donor cards out of fear that someone else will wear their face after their death?”A survey conducted by Peter Butler, a plastic surgeon, was carried out on 120 people, asking if they would donate their faces in the event of death, with 100% of those asked saying no. Klotzko added “It reminds us of Frankenstein’s monster, who was assembled from bits of the dead bodies his creator found in charnel houses”. There is also the possibility that face transplants will become a part of cosmetic surgery like a nose job or a face lift with the chance that you could be walking down the street and see the face of your deceased friend or family member on someone else’s body. And now that face transplants have been carried out, what next? What if, in a number of years, a team of surgeons successfully transplant the brain of a patient into a donor body? Would that be a miracle, or playing God? These are some of many questions that surgeons and ethicists alike have been asking.
While many have predicted a future where humans will play God, there are those who are not so pessimistic. Dr Maria Seimionow, Connie Culp’s surgeon, stated “As you can see we have now a healthy person and happy person. She has reduced dramatically her pain and also she's able to walk on the street without being called names." If future medical procedures can produce a similar result, what harm is there? The first heart transplant was performed on the 23rd of January, 1964 which, like the recent face transplants, raised many ethical and moral questions. Today there are 3500 heart transplants every year which are recognised as life saving operations. A similar case can be seen with cornea transplants when nearly 2,500 people in the UK had their sight restored in 2007-08 after undergoing one.
While many people point out the negative situations a face transplant can cause, there are clearly benefits that outweigh the risks. In my opinion, face transplants are just as beneficial and essential as any other organ transplant. If you lost the ability to breathe normally and eat normally, wouldn't you want the operation that could give it back to you? And if you knew that donating your face in the event of death could give someone back their life, wouldn't you do what's right? Face transplants could become common in the near future, and that is why we should decide now: are they wrong and unethical or essential and life-saving? Whichever way you look at it, there's no denying that face transplants change lives.
[Close]
Thanks for looking, hope I hear from you soon
