Search Jump: Comments
    Chapter Index
    Back to Story
    Cover of My Sister’s Keeper
    LiteraryLiterary FictionRelationshipYoung Adult

    My Sister’s Keeper

    by Picoult, Jodie
    “My Sister’s Keeper” by Jodie Picoult follows 13-year-old Anna Fitzgerald, who was conceived as a genetic match to donate organs and blood to her older sister Kate, who suffers from leukemia. When Anna is asked to donate a kidney, she sues her parents for medical emancipation, challenging the ethical boundaries of family obligation and bodily autonomy. The novel explores themes of sacrifice, moral dilemmas, and the complexities of love through multiple perspectives. Picoult’s narrative delves into the emotional and legal turmoil faced by the Fitzgerald family, raising profound questions about medical ethics and personal choice. The story is inspired by the real-life case of Anissa and Marissa Ayala.
    PreviousNext
    My Sister’s Keeper

    MONDAY CAMPBELL

    by Picoult, Jodie

    The chap­ter intro­duces Camp­bell Alexan­der, a prag­mat­ic lawyer who ini­tial­ly dis­miss­es a teenage client, Anna Fitzger­ald, assum­ing her law­suit is about typ­i­cal ado­les­cent rebel­lion. Anna reveals her true pur­pose: to sue her par­ents for bod­i­ly auton­o­my after being pres­sured to donate a kid­ney to her ter­mi­nal­ly ill sis­ter, Kate. Camp­bel­l’s ini­tial skep­ti­cism shifts when he real­izes the grav­i­ty of Anna’s situation—her entire life has been defined by serv­ing as a med­ical donor for Kate, con­ceived specif­i­cal­ly to be a genet­ic match. The chap­ter high­lights Anna’s resent­ment and exhaus­tion, as well as Camp­bel­l’s inter­nal con­flict between pro­fes­sion­al detach­ment and eth­i­cal respon­si­bil­i­ty.

    Anna’s back­sto­ry unfolds as she explains her repeat­ed med­ical dona­tions since birth, from cord blood to bone mar­row, all with­out her con­sent. She describes feel­ing invis­i­ble to her par­ents except when her body is need­ed to sus­tain Kate. Camp­bell rec­og­nizes the eth­i­cal dilem­ma of “design­er babies” cre­at­ed for spare parts, a top­ic he pre­vi­ous­ly dis­missed. Anna’s artic­u­late plea and her mea­ger savings—$136.87—to hire him under­score her des­per­a­tion. Despite his ini­tial reluc­tance, Camp­bell sees the case as a legal slam dunk and a chance for pro­fes­sion­al acclaim, though Anna chal­lenges his motives, ques­tion­ing whether the sys­tem will tru­ly pri­or­i­tize her auton­o­my.

    Their dia­logue reveals Camp­bel­l’s cyn­i­cal world­view, con­trast­ed with Anna’s sharp wit and defi­ance. She calls out his name’s irony (“Camp­bell Alexan­der” being back­ward) and rejects the idea of anoth­er adult decid­ing her fate, even a court-appoint­ed guardian. Camp­bell pro­pos­es fil­ing for med­ical eman­ci­pa­tion, but Anna remains wary, dis­trust­ing the legal sys­tem’s abil­i­ty to pro­tect her inter­ests. The ten­sion between them mir­rors the broad­er con­flict between insti­tu­tion­al author­i­ty and indi­vid­ual agency, with Anna refus­ing to be reduced to a means to an end.

    The chap­ter ends with Camp­bell reluc­tant­ly com­mit­ting to Anna’s case, though his rea­sons remain self-serv­ing. Anna’s resilience and the moral weight of her sit­u­a­tion force him to con­front his own bias­es. The nar­ra­tive sets up a pro­found explo­ration of ethics, fam­i­ly dynam­ics, and bod­i­ly rights, with Anna’s fight sym­bol­iz­ing a larg­er cri­tique of med­ical and legal sys­tems that com­mod­i­fy human life. Camp­bel­l’s jour­ney from indif­fer­ence to engage­ment hints at his poten­tial growth, while Anna emerges as a com­pelling voice against sys­temic exploita­tion.

    Down­load PDF Sum­ma­ry

    FAQs

    • 1. What is the significance of Campbell Alexander’s opening statement: “When you only have a hammer, everything looks like a nail”?

      Answer:
      This metaphor illustrates Campbell’s perspective on the American civil justice system, suggesting that people who feel trapped or desperate will use whatever tools they have to fight back—whether through physical confrontation or legal action. In the chapter, Campbell applies this idea to Anna’s situation, where she sees litigation as her only recourse against her parents’ demands for her kidney donation. The phrase also reflects Campbell’s cynical yet pragmatic approach to law, recognizing that lawsuits often stem from power imbalances rather than purely legal disputes.

      2. How does Anna Fitzgerald’s medical history reveal the ethical complexities of her case?

      Answer:
      Anna’s detailed account of being used as a medical donor for her sister Kate since birth—from cord blood to bone marrow—highlights the disturbing reality that she was conceived as a “designer baby” to save Kate. This raises profound ethical questions about bodily autonomy, parental rights, and the limits of medical intervention. Anna’s sophisticated medical vocabulary underscores how normalized these procedures have become for her, yet her decision to sue marks a turning point where she asserts her right to refuse further donations, challenging the assumption that her body exists primarily to sustain her sister.

      3. Analyze Campbell Alexander’s initial reluctance to take Anna’s case and what ultimately changes his mind.

      Answer:
      Campbell initially dismisses Anna’s case as trivial, assuming it involves typical teenage rebellion (e.g., birth control access). His attitude shifts when he learns the gravity of her situation: being forced to donate a kidney. Two factors sway him: the legal certainty that no court would compel organ donation (making it an easy win) and the case’s potential for high-profile publicity, which would boost his reputation. His pragmatic decision-making reflects his character—self-interested yet not wholly unfeeling—as he balances professional gain with the rare opportunity to genuinely help Anna.

      4. What does Anna’s statement, “It never stops,” reveal about her psychological state and motivations?

      Answer:
      This succinct remark captures Anna’s exhaustion and resentment over being treated as a perpetual medical resource for Kate. Her words convey a breaking point after years of involuntary donations, where her identity and agency have been overshadowed by her sister’s needs. The phrase also underscores her fear of an unending future of sacrifices, motivating her to legally emancipate herself. It reflects a deeper existential crisis—she questions whether her life has value beyond her utility to Kate, a theme central to the chapter’s exploration of familial obligation versus individual rights.

      5. How does the chapter use humor (e.g., the “Wampum” exchange) to characterize Campbell and Anna’s dynamic?

      Answer:
      The banter about Campbell’s fees—Anna’s shock at his $200/hour rate and his sarcastic “Wampum” retort—lightens the tense mood while revealing their personalities. Campbell’s dry wit masks his underlying sympathy, as he eventually agrees to work pro bono (joking about doorknob polishing). Anna’s earnest offer to walk his dog shows her determination despite her lack of resources. This humor humanizes both characters: Campbell’s sharp edges soften, and Anna’s vulnerability is tempered by resilience, setting the stage for their unconventional attorney-client relationship.

    Quotes

    • 1. “WHEN YOU ONLY HAVE A HAMMER, everything looks like a nail.”

      This opening quote establishes the chapter’s central metaphor about limited perspectives shaping actions. It introduces Campbell’s cynical view of the legal system as a tool people use indiscriminately when cornered.

      2. “They had me so that I could save Kate…They went to special doctors and everything, and picked the embryo that would be a perfect genetic match.”

      This revelation about Anna’s “designer baby” origin story captures the ethical dilemma at the heart of the chapter. It exposes the instrumentalization of her existence and sets up the moral conflict about bodily autonomy.

      3. “Because,” she says simply, “it never stops.”

      Anna’s terse explanation for her lawsuit represents the chapter’s emotional climax. This three-word statement powerfully conveys her breaking point after years of being treated as a medical resource rather than a person.

      4. “I’m here, aren’t I?”

      This defiant rhetorical question marks a key turning point where Anna asserts her agency. It demonstrates her resolve to challenge her family’s expectations, forcing Campbell to take her case seriously despite his initial dismissal.

    Quotes

    1. “WHEN YOU ONLY HAVE A HAMMER, everything looks like a nail.”

    This opening quote establishes the chapter’s central metaphor about limited perspectives shaping actions. It introduces Campbell’s cynical view of the legal system as a tool people use indiscriminately when cornered.

    2. “They had me so that I could save Kate…They went to special doctors and everything, and picked the embryo that would be a perfect genetic match.”

    This revelation about Anna’s “designer baby” origin story captures the ethical dilemma at the heart of the chapter. It exposes the instrumentalization of her existence and sets up the moral conflict about bodily autonomy.

    3. “Because,” she says simply, “it never stops.”

    Anna’s terse explanation for her lawsuit represents the chapter’s emotional climax. This three-word statement powerfully conveys her breaking point after years of being treated as a medical resource rather than a person.

    4. “I’m here, aren’t I?”

    This defiant rhetorical question marks a key turning point where Anna asserts her agency. It demonstrates her resolve to challenge her family’s expectations, forcing Campbell to take her case seriously despite his initial dismissal.

    FAQs

    1. What is the significance of Campbell Alexander’s opening statement: “When you only have a hammer, everything looks like a nail”?

    Answer:
    This metaphor illustrates Campbell’s perspective on the American civil justice system, suggesting that people who feel trapped or desperate will use whatever tools they have to fight back—whether through physical confrontation or legal action. In the chapter, Campbell applies this idea to Anna’s situation, where she sees litigation as her only recourse against her parents’ demands for her kidney donation. The phrase also reflects Campbell’s cynical yet pragmatic approach to law, recognizing that lawsuits often stem from power imbalances rather than purely legal disputes.

    2. How does Anna Fitzgerald’s medical history reveal the ethical complexities of her case?

    Answer:
    Anna’s detailed account of being used as a medical donor for her sister Kate since birth—from cord blood to bone marrow—highlights the disturbing reality that she was conceived as a “designer baby” to save Kate. This raises profound ethical questions about bodily autonomy, parental rights, and the limits of medical intervention. Anna’s sophisticated medical vocabulary underscores how normalized these procedures have become for her, yet her decision to sue marks a turning point where she asserts her right to refuse further donations, challenging the assumption that her body exists primarily to sustain her sister.

    3. Analyze Campbell Alexander’s initial reluctance to take Anna’s case and what ultimately changes his mind.

    Answer:
    Campbell initially dismisses Anna’s case as trivial, assuming it involves typical teenage rebellion (e.g., birth control access). His attitude shifts when he learns the gravity of her situation: being forced to donate a kidney. Two factors sway him: the legal certainty that no court would compel organ donation (making it an easy win) and the case’s potential for high-profile publicity, which would boost his reputation. His pragmatic decision-making reflects his character—self-interested yet not wholly unfeeling—as he balances professional gain with the rare opportunity to genuinely help Anna.

    4. What does Anna’s statement, “It never stops,” reveal about her psychological state and motivations?

    Answer:
    This succinct remark captures Anna’s exhaustion and resentment over being treated as a perpetual medical resource for Kate. Her words convey a breaking point after years of involuntary donations, where her identity and agency have been overshadowed by her sister’s needs. The phrase also underscores her fear of an unending future of sacrifices, motivating her to legally emancipate herself. It reflects a deeper existential crisis—she questions whether her life has value beyond her utility to Kate, a theme central to the chapter’s exploration of familial obligation versus individual rights.

    5. How does the chapter use humor (e.g., the “Wampum” exchange) to characterize Campbell and Anna’s dynamic?

    Answer:
    The banter about Campbell’s fees—Anna’s shock at his $200/hour rate and his sarcastic “Wampum” retort—lightens the tense mood while revealing their personalities. Campbell’s dry wit masks his underlying sympathy, as he eventually agrees to work pro bono (joking about doorknob polishing). Anna’s earnest offer to walk his dog shows her determination despite her lack of resources. This humor humanizes both characters: Campbell’s sharp edges soften, and Anna’s vulnerability is tempered by resilience, setting the stage for their unconventional attorney-client relationship.

    Note