Joseph and Chrissy Rivera were devastated last month when they were told that their three-year-old little girl Amelia was ineligible to receive a kidney transplant. Kidney transplants are rare, especially in children, but that was not why this little girl was being denied help. Amelia was being denied a transplant because she suffers from Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome, a rare genetic disorder that has left her with mental disabilities. Her doctors said her quality of life was not adequate to justify a kidney transplant. A hospital social worker explained that the little girl was better off anyway because she would not be able to take care of herself in the future when her parents passed away. Amelia’s story has prompted a public outcry as more than 37,000 people have signed an online petition to urge the hospital involved to reconsider. In the face of massive public pressure, the Philadelphia hospital has now relented and is allowing the family to go through a review process, although they have yet to confirm whether Amelia will be approved for a transplant. This story is far from unique, as an ever-increasing number of medical practitioners use a “quality of life” calculus in determining how they will and will not treat their patients. If the patient’s “quality of life” is deemed sufficiently low, they will be given more limited treatment options or, in some cases, deprived of care altogether. Given the financial cost and burden to the system, the argument goes, theirs is in not a life worth saving. This is no small matter, as it represents the triumph of Darwinian ethics over Biblical ethics of life. According to Darwinism, man is not made in the image of God and neither is life sacred. Instead, evolution views man as one among many anomalies in the evolutionary process — a selfish animal who only thinks himself superior to others in the animal kingdom. What is the result of this denial of God’s Word? Darwin stated it succinctly: “The survival of the fittest”; the weak and infirm should be left to die. The doctors’ response to Amelia is textbook Darwinism. Instead of recognizing her as a little girl made in the image of God and using their skills and knowledge to improve her health, the doctors involved have deemed her not fit to survive due to her mental disabilities. The ethical implications of Darwinism are serious, and we as Christians must be prepared to address them with clarity and conviction, as Vision Forum does in our Bioethics of Life DVD Collection.Where the curtain falls on these issues — as the case of little Amelia shows — means life or death for the weak.