Ethics

I won't rehash the synopsis since that's been well handled already.

But did Starfleet cancel the industrial safety training course at the Academy? How could those barrels be stacked on the second level of the storage rack, and not even be secured? That ship is always bouncing all over the place. Someone needs to get fired.

Worf has an accident that leads to paralysis and Dr Crusher faces an ethical dilemma.

This is an interesting but slightly melodramatic episode that lives up to its title.

The plot is a very straightforward medical drama that addresses a number of points such as experimental treatment, and assisted suicide. It also attempts to create moments of suspense, but this largely fails due to the level of the stakes involved.

When it addresses the issues at the heart of the story it is at its most effective. The conflict between Dr Crusher and Dr Russell is the strongest point for me. Gates McFadden gives one of her best performances with a very intriguing subject.

The parallel conflict between Worf and Riker is also pretty good, but a lot more aggressively stated. Jonathan Frakes puts his heart into the argument, but the writing associated with Riker's stance on the subject is a bit preachy at times.

Michael Dorn does a great job portraying Worf as you would expect the character to react in this circumstance. His interactions with everyone are excellent. He is such a cool character.

As ever Captain Picard puts his ultimate philosophical stamp on both arguments and Patrick Stewart does it with his usual level of class.

It ends with an attempt at creating suspense that is fairly well made, but falls flat because we obviously know what the outcome will be and even how we might get there due to a hint given earlier.

It's interesting with the Covid Vaccine, a lot of people say it was rushed and its dangerous, but millions of people have gained from it. Including me At the end of the day, should your life be up to you?

Worf's spine is crushed, leaving him paralyzed. He wants to perform a ritual suicide to die with honor, but the self-righteous Crusher and Riker want to force him to live with the disability. Meanwhile, a specialist comes on board with an experimental procedure that could make it possible for Worf to walk again, but she meets constant resistance from Crusher.

For a normally left-wing show, this episode has a strong stench of the right-wing moral police. We're lead to believe that Worf shouldn't commit suicide, because of some moral objection two other characters have (when it's not about their lives). Other reviewers have mentioned "Half a Life" and how the message was not to interfere with another culture with a ritual suicide, but here, the exact opposite message is preached. They're right about the contradictory messages between these two episodes.

The episode reminds me of the Terri Schiavo case. She was in a persistent vegetative state and as per her positions from before going into a coma, she didn't want to be on prolonged life support, but the conservatives decided to stick their nose in and there was a huge polemic where there didn't need to be.

On the other hand, if this episode had focused on the ethics of the specialist using patients as objects of experimentation, it might have had a good message, but in the end, it seems to have been written by a preacher who wanted to push his life-is-sacred dogma even when he's not in church.

What could have been a great episode was ruined by one thing....Dr. Beverly Crusher. She was right for not allowing Worfs suicide but her actions regarding an experimental medical procedure were just way over the top. Considering that Worf was not going to ever give in and accept his paralysis, how could she take the position she did? Even Picard was on board. And while her lashing of the visiting doctors actions at the end were likely warranted, her arrogant holier than thou attitude throughout the episode were ridiculous. How many times has she tried crazy ideas to save someone in other episodes? I'd say very many.