And Now an Ethics Post About ANOTHER Set of Conjoined Twins…

I can’t resist. What were the odds that both famous sets of female conjoined twins would justifiably spark ethics commentary within just three months of each other? And yet here we are…

In January, Ethics Alarms designated Brittany Hansel, the “single” member of the amazing Hansel twins (who, I would argue, are really a two headed woman), an Ethics Hero for the mind-boggling concessions and sacrifices she has had to (and will continue to have to) endure so her dominant sister Abigail can be married. Now comes the news that he oldest living conjoined twins have died at the age of 62.

I’ve been fascinated by the Schappell twins most of my life, since their birth was widely publicized when I was a kid. They were joined at the head and shared 30% of their brains, so obviously separating them was not a realistic possibility. Frankly, I had forgotten about them until this morning: apparently my brain can only handle one set of conjoined twins at a time.

Digression: Is “set” the accepted term? And that question makes me recall a memorable line from “The Simpsons” in a Halloween episode where Bart is revealed to be one half of a good/evil set of conjoined twins. As the Simpsons’ pediatrician, Dr. Hibbard, tells the tale to Lisa (we don’t see much of Dr. Hibbard any more since it was decided that it was racist to have a white actor voice a “black” cartoon character. That, in turn, is one reason I don’t see much of “The Simpsons” any more), the doctor refers to Bart and his brother as “Siamese Twins.” Lisa, pedantic and politically correct as ever, tells him that such individuals prefer the term “conjoined twins,” to which Hibbard replies, “Hillbillies prefer to be called “Sons of the South,” too, but it ain’t going to happen!”

Digression over…back to the late Schappell twins: Their various obituaries are full of head-spinning (something these twins could not do) details with ethics implications:

  • Feeling sad about recent developments in my own life, as I do right now, I find the lives of the Schappells, like those of Brittany and Abigail, somewhat helpful in the “I cried because I had no shoes until I saw a man who had no feet” tradition. What an amazing 62 years! They graduated individually from high school. They put their heads together and figured out how to coordinate their complex daily challenges. One twin had spina bifida and was 4 inches shorter, so she was rolled around by her sister on an a  stool with wheels. When one sister went on dates, the other brought along books to read, she said. One of the twins was engaged to be married, but the man died in an auto accident. (God works in mysterious ways, or is just an asshole.)
  • Yet what choices did they have? Their lives raise the ancient puzzle of how much credit is due those who behave in the only manner available to them.
  • I was reminded of one of the earliest Ethics Alarms posts that linked to an essay on the topic,  “If a Siamese twin commits murder, does his brother get punished too?”
  • We are told that one of the twins “came out as transgender” in 2007. Wow, that’s impressive: 2007 was before it was a fad. But wait a minute: what does that “came out as transgender”even mean? “George,” as he was then called, was biologically identical to his/her sister: out the window goes the genetic theory of transexualism. Or maybe they both were males trapped in female bodies, and George was the only one with the guts to do something about it. Or he was bored one day and sick of being wheeled around with his sister (who did most of the talking) getting all the attention. He couldn’t take hormones without that affecting his sister; sex re-assignment surgery was not an option. If he could magically decide he was male, why not go all the way and magically decide he wasn’t “conjoined”?

You would think, wouldn’t you, that their lives were strange enough before adding that little detail…

  • The Guinness Book of Records makes several dubious statements in its obituary. Of Lori, the twin who wasn’t called George, it said, “Lori was able-bodied.” I don’t think any conjoined twin can be accurately called “able-bodied. Then we get this stunner:  “George enjoyed a successful career as a country singer, whilst Lori was a trophy-winning ten-pin bowler.” I heard George before he “transitioned”: he could barely speak clearly. In a comment in another forum reacting to the article,  a reader disputed the description, saying that he played the guitar accompanying George on “The Jerry Springer Show,” and “he couldn’t sing a lick.” As for that bowling trophy—come on. I assume it was a special conjoined twins bowling competition.

The AP story concludes with, “It isn’t immediately clear who will now take the title of oldest living conjoined twins.” Yeah, I’m sure we’re all going to stay awake at night worrying about that.

[Ha! WordPress’s bot tells me to tag this post “Fiction”!]

6 thoughts on “And Now an Ethics Post About ANOTHER Set of Conjoined Twins…

  1. Hmm, I just read about their death (interesting that the plural 3rd person pronoun truly applies here!) yesterday, and feel kind of duped for not reading the obituary more critically. The ethics of the press coverage seems at place here.

    For instance, I was fascinated that you could have male-female conjoined twins. My admittedly limited knowledge suggested this was biologically impossible! I assumed it must have been a case of a fraternal male and female siblings colliding in utero and somehow not having their respective immune siblings treat the other as a virus to be destroyed.

    The detail that one was “transgender” was mentioned, but not elaborated on. Nowhere did it say the pair’s “gender assigned at birth”, nor certainly did the papers list George’s “death name”. It simply did not occur to me the papers (ok, websites) would use the “preferred” gender, so I feel thoroughly mislead and confused.

    As to their respective careers, I took it at face value, too. It seemed plausible enough one twin might be able to bowl. The pair probably had a lot of time on their hands. Even the country singer part didn’t seem too far fetched; I know plenty of amateur singers who are better than professionals. A conjoined twin with a journeyman voice could easily attract modest attention. It certainly didn’t occur to me that he might have limited speech due to sharing a third of a brain, and that his so-called career was entirely of the side show variety!

    The only part of the story I feel I correctly assessed was the patience of the other twin to tag along was the other indulged in the lime light for a bit. As you say, how much choice did either have in the matter. They probably got sick of people congratulating them for doing the only thing plausible to them. I for instance get annoyed by signs in the supermarket bathroom “thanking” me for using their hand driers (with paper towels provided, it’s not like they gave me a choice in the matter!)

  2. Kept reading and reading that long Slate article about conjoined criminality expecting a mention of Blackstone’s Ratio and came out disappointed.

    Certainly a fun legal loophole to think about, similar to the fabled Yellowstone “murder is legal” zone explored in the C.J. Box novel Free Fire.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.