You say there are ethical limits ... fine. We all agree.
But you refuse to tell us what you think those limits are; you even refuse to say whether or not this case is within them.
What "sides" are there in this debate? How do we even know that you have a side, when you refuse even to tell us what defines the "sides" at all?
It's really odd that you're trying so hard to avoid this particular case -- strange enough that one is forced to wonder whether your reticence has its roots in something less wholesome than a commitment to "both sides being heard."
One might almost think, in fact, that you really don't want both sides heard in this case.
as i said i feel for the parents and i have grave concerns about the ethical limits of such situations. i have made no secret of it, but i think it is far more important that people feel free to express their opinions without the THOU SHALT NOT JUDGE flag being waved in their faces. i have seen it happen many times. question my motives all you like, as i said i am comfortable with my posting history and reputation on FR. i don't engage in flamewars, don't call names or cast aspersions. i am calling for civil discourse on this thread from both sides and that makes me suspect? odd.