When Are We Required to Save a Life? (Article #1)

Introduction

Thus far, we have developed a framework for understanding the following three fundamental principles:

1. The mitzvah to bring life into this world. (Peru urevu)
2. The definition of life and the possible points in time at which life begins. (The status of a fetus in halacha)
3. The infinite value of life and the supreme importance of saving a life that is in danger. (The mitzvah of pikuach nefesh)

We must now try to answer the following questions:

1.  What is the underlying reason that we are required to save the life of someone who is danger?  
2.  To what degree is one required to save a life? In other words, even though there is a tremendous mitzvah to save a life, to what degree must we accept a personal cost in order to save the life of someone in danger?

A) Risk: Do we need to risk our own life in order save someone else's life?

B) Money: Do we need to spend (or lose) money in order to save someone else's life?

C) Time and Effort: How much time and effort do we need to devote to help save someone's life?

3.  Is there a difference between a case where anyone in the world could save this person's life and a case where someone in particular is uniquely able to save their life?

Take the following two examples:

Blood Donation vs. Bone Marrow Donation:

When it comes to giving a blood donation, an argument can be made that there are countless people who could donate blood to save any particular individual who needs a blood transfusion. However, when it comes to bone marrow, there may only be a select few people in the entire world who are a match for someone in dire need of a bone marrow transplant to save their life – in some cases, it is possible that a specific individual can be the only person in the entire world who is a direct match.

Charity vs. Saving Someone Who is Drowning

Similarly, anyone can give charity to help those who are in need; however, if someone is drowning in a body of water and only one other person is in that area, that person might be the only one capable of saving this drowning person.

In both of these cases, does being the only one capable of saving the person in need create a different halachic requirement of pikuach nefesh upon the person uniquely capable of performing the mitzvah of pikuach nefesh?

Case Studies

Let us now analyze the following case studies:

1.  Paying Money

Let’s say you see someone drowning, and without thinking twice, you jump into the water and save their life. However, in the process of saving this person’s life, all of your clothes got ruined, as well as everything that you had in your pockets.

Does the person that you saved have to pay you back for the monetary loss that you incurred?

2.  Risking Your Life

What if you are not such a strong swimmer, and you see someone drowning. Would you be required to risk your own life in order to save someone else’s life? If you don’t jump in, this person will certainly die; but if you jump in, there’s a chance that you will die as well. Are we required to risk our lives for the sake of pikuach nefesh?

Almost all forms of organ donation have a level of risk involved; thus, would one be required to donate an organ – such as a kidney – in order to save someone’s life? And even if one is not required to do so, would it even be muttar, given the fact that there is always a risk involved when it comes to organ donation?

Additionally, what would the Torah say about the following case: there was a man who had a rare recessive gene, and both of his sons received a rare disease which caused their kidneys to fail. Because the father felt responsible, he wanted to donate both of his kidneys to each of his two sons. However, donating both of his kidneys would put this man’s own life in danger, as he would now have to rely on dialysis treatment. Thus, the question would become: is one allowed to put their own life in tremendous risk in order to save the lives of others?[1]

• The Ventilator Case

In a similar sense, what if someone – let’s call him Daniel – was in a car accident, and in order to help him recover, the doctor at the hospital put Daniel onto a ventilator. As the days go by, Daniel begins to recover, and is starting to feel better. A few days later, another patient is brought into the hospital in critical condition and will die if he is not immediately put on a respirator, but the doctors inform the family of this new patient that the hospital is out of respirators.

What should Daniel do? If he gives the new patient his respirator, there is a large chance that he will fully recover; but there is still a small chance that things will escalate, and he will die. However, if he doesn’t give over his respirator, this new patient will certainly die.

Is Daniel chayav to risk his life in order to save this new patient? And even if he is not chayav to do so, would it be muttar for him to risk his life to save this patient’s life?[2]

3. The Relationship Between the Opportunity to Save a Life and the Responsibility of the Outcome

There was a famous case in which a group of teenagers saw a person drowning, and instead of saving this person’s life, they simply stood there and watched him die. This was all caught on video, so following this incident, there was a question regarding whether or not these teenagers should be prosecuted and held responsible for this person’s death.

What would the halacha be in such a case? On the one hand, these teenagers did not actively kill anyone; they just remained passive and chose to not save a person who was in need of help. Does the lack of saving someone qualify as an aveirah? Or, is this only considered a missed opportunity to fulfill a mitzvah? And even if there is something wrong with not saving someone’s life, what exactly would the aveirah be for being passive and not saving someone?

[1] And in this case, the added questions become:

1- Is a parent allowed to incur a greater risk in order to save their children?

2- If one is responsible for the danger to someone else’s life (or even if they feel responsible for the danger), are they allowed to incur a greater level of risk to their own life in order to save them?

[2] And on a more fundamental level, who says that this is even Daniel’s ventilator? This is another question worth thinking about.