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

    WEDNESDAY CAMPBELL

    by Picoult, Jodie

    The chap­ter opens with Camp­bell, a lawyer, engag­ing in a heat­ed phone debate with the prin­ci­pal of Pon­a­ganset High School over the polit­i­cal cor­rect­ness of a Native Amer­i­can stu­dent group nam­ing their bas­ket­ball league “The Whiteys.” Camp­bell defends the stu­dents’ right to free speech, draw­ing par­al­lels to the school’s own con­tro­ver­sial mas­cot, the Chief­tains. The con­ver­sa­tion ends with the prin­ci­pal hang­ing up, and Camp­bell instructs his assis­tant to reas­sure his client, Ernie Fishkiller, that the law­suit threat is emp­ty. The scene high­lights Camp­bel­l’s sharp wit and unyield­ing stance on con­sti­tu­tion­al rights, even as he bal­ances a heavy work­load.

    Amidst his pro­fes­sion­al duties, Camp­bell reflects on a past con­ver­sa­tion with a woman, pos­si­bly a roman­tic part­ner, about rein­car­na­tion and their play­ful ban­ter about return­ing as a cat or cat­nip. This fleet­ing mem­o­ry con­trasts with his cur­rent stress, as he strug­gles with sleep depri­va­tion and a chal­leng­ing new case involv­ing a drug deal­er caught on video­tape. His mus­ings are inter­rupt­ed when Julia Romano, a guardian ad litem and a fig­ure from his past, unex­pect­ed­ly enters his office. Their reunion is tense, filled with unspo­ken his­to­ry and unre­solved emo­tions, as they awk­ward­ly nav­i­gate small talk about her hair and their shared past.

    Julia reveals she is assigned to Anna Fitzger­ald’s case, shift­ing the focus to their pro­fes­sion­al roles. Camp­bel­l’s attempt to steer the con­ver­sa­tion toward Anna is met with skep­ti­cism from Julia, who ques­tions his com­mit­ment to under­stand­ing the young clien­t’s emo­tion­al needs. Their exchange grows con­tentious as Camp­bell pro­pos­es a dras­tic legal mea­sure to remove Anna’s moth­er from the home, argu­ing it’s nec­es­sary to pro­tect Anna’s legal rights. Julia vehe­ment­ly oppos­es this, accus­ing Camp­bell of pri­or­i­tiz­ing his own inter­ests over Anna’s well-being, echo­ing the nov­el­’s broad­er theme of eth­i­cal dilem­mas in legal advo­ca­cy.

    The chap­ter con­cludes with their argu­ment esca­lat­ing, as Julia chal­lenges Camp­bel­l’s motives and his past aban­don­ment of their rela­tion­ship. Camp­bell, vis­i­bly affect­ed, strug­gles to main­tain his com­po­sure while his ser­vice dog, Judge, sens­es his dis­tress. The con­fronta­tion under­scores the ten­sion between Camp­bel­l’s pro­fes­sion­al detach­ment and Juli­a’s empa­thy, leav­ing their per­son­al and pro­fes­sion­al dynam­ics unre­solved. The scene sets the stage for fur­ther explo­ration of Camp­bel­l’s char­ac­ter and the com­plex­i­ties of Anna’s case, blend­ing legal dra­ma with emo­tion­al depth.

    Down­load PDF Sum­ma­ry

    FAQs

    • 1. What is the central conflict in the conversation between Campbell and the principal of Ponaganset High School, and how does Campbell defend the Native American students’ rights?

      Answer:
      The conflict arises from the principal’s objection to Native American students naming their intramural basketball league “The Whiteys,” which he considers politically incorrect. Campbell defends the students by pointing out the hypocrisy of the school using “Chieftains” as their mascot since 1970. He argues that the Constitution protects the students’ rights to free speech and assembly, comparing the situation to other racially implicit terms like “White House” or “White Pages.” His legal reasoning highlights the principal’s selective outrage and underscores the importance of First Amendment protections, even for provocative expressions.

      2. How does the chapter reveal Campbell’s personal struggles beneath his professional demeanor?

      Answer:
      Despite his confident handling of the principal and legal cases, Campbell’s internal turmoil surfaces through his exhaustion, fragmented memories, and emotional reaction to Julia’s unexpected appearance. He experiences moments of disorientation (like at the coffee shop) and dwells on nostalgic thoughts about Julia, revealing unresolved feelings. His service dog, Judge, also signals his hidden vulnerabilities—likely tied to an undisclosed condition—which he masks with professional bravado. These details paint Campbell as a complex character grappling with past regrets and present stresses beneath his composed exterior.

      3. Analyze the significance of Julia Romano’s reappearance in Campbell’s life. How does their interaction reflect their shared history and current tensions?

      Answer:
      Julia’s return as the guardian ad litem in Anna Fitzgerald’s case forces Campbell to confront their unresolved past. Their stilted conversation—veering between polite professionalism (“Your hair isn’t pink anymore”) and pointed barbs (“Whose fault is that?”)—reveals lingering hurt and attraction. Julia’s accusation that Campbell prioritizes winning over Anna’s well-being mirrors their personal history of abandonment, suggesting he still struggles with emotional commitment. The “stranger on a bus” metaphor underscores their emotional distance, while their focus on Anna’s case becomes a proxy for addressing their own fractured relationship.

      4. How does the author use Judge, Campbell’s service dog, to convey subtext in key scenes?

      Answer:
      Judge serves as both a literal support animal and a symbolic reflection of Campbell’s state. His whining and nudging during Campbell’s tense exchange with Julia signal Campbell’s rising anxiety, which he verbally dismisses. The dog’s presence hints at an undisclosed medical or psychological condition, contrasting with Campbell’s assertive public persona. Additionally, Julia petting Judge—and Campbell’s jealous reaction—subtly mirrors their past intimacy and current barriers. The dog’s actions (like sighing or barking) often punctuate emotional beats, revealing truths Campbell avoids acknowledging outright.

      Answer:
      Campbell’s aggressive tactic to remove Anna’s mother from the home—prioritizing legal victory over familial stability—aligns with his pattern of avoiding emotional complexity, much like his past with Julia. Julia criticizes this approach as self-serving, echoing her own experience of being “used” by Campbell. His insistence on “winning” may stem from a need to prove himself, but it risks repeating his tendency to overlook deeper human needs. The case could force Campbell to reconcile his professional ruthlessness with personal growth, especially as Julia’s presence challenges his detachment.

    Quotes

    • 1. “I imagine it sends the same message that you did when you picked the Chieftains as your school mascot.”

      This sharp retort highlights the hypocrisy in the principal’s argument about political correctness, turning his own logic against him. It showcases the protagonist’s quick wit and sets the tone for the chapter’s exploration of identity and double standards.

      2. “The Constitution does protect various individual rights to Americans, including Native Americans—one for assembly, and one for free speech, which suggest that the Whiteys would be granted permission to convene even if your ridiculous threat of a lawsuit managed to make its way to court.”

      A powerful defense of First Amendment rights that underscores the chapter’s theme of legal principles versus social sensitivities. The quote demonstrates the protagonist’s legal acumen while making a broader point about constitutional protections.

      3. “It’s not all that hard to avoid someone, when you want to. You of all people should know.”

      This loaded exchange between Campbell and Julia reveals their complicated past relationship. The quote encapsulates years of unspoken tension and regret in a single sentence, marking a pivotal emotional moment in the chapter.

      4. “How ironic is it that a kid who wants to stop being used for another person’s benefit winds up picking your name out of the Yellow Pages?”

      Julia’s cutting remark connects the novel’s central legal case to Campbell’s personal history, suggesting he may be repeating past mistakes. This quote represents a key thematic intersection between the professional and personal storylines.

      5. “Have you even bothered to get to know her?”

      This simple but devastating question challenges Campbell’s approach to the case and his entire professional demeanor. It represents the chapter’s moral crux, questioning whether legal victory should outweigh human connection.

    Quotes

    1. “I imagine it sends the same message that you did when you picked the Chieftains as your school mascot.”

    This sharp retort highlights the hypocrisy in the principal’s argument about political correctness, turning his own logic against him. It showcases the protagonist’s quick wit and sets the tone for the chapter’s exploration of identity and double standards.

    2. “The Constitution does protect various individual rights to Americans, including Native Americans—one for assembly, and one for free speech, which suggest that the Whiteys would be granted permission to convene even if your ridiculous threat of a lawsuit managed to make its way to court.”

    A powerful defense of First Amendment rights that underscores the chapter’s theme of legal principles versus social sensitivities. The quote demonstrates the protagonist’s legal acumen while making a broader point about constitutional protections.

    3. “It’s not all that hard to avoid someone, when you want to. You of all people should know.”

    This loaded exchange between Campbell and Julia reveals their complicated past relationship. The quote encapsulates years of unspoken tension and regret in a single sentence, marking a pivotal emotional moment in the chapter.

    4. “How ironic is it that a kid who wants to stop being used for another person’s benefit winds up picking your name out of the Yellow Pages?”

    Julia’s cutting remark connects the novel’s central legal case to Campbell’s personal history, suggesting he may be repeating past mistakes. This quote represents a key thematic intersection between the professional and personal storylines.

    5. “Have you even bothered to get to know her?”

    This simple but devastating question challenges Campbell’s approach to the case and his entire professional demeanor. It represents the chapter’s moral crux, questioning whether legal victory should outweigh human connection.

    FAQs

    1. What is the central conflict in the conversation between Campbell and the principal of Ponaganset High School, and how does Campbell defend the Native American students’ rights?

    Answer:
    The conflict arises from the principal’s objection to Native American students naming their intramural basketball league “The Whiteys,” which he considers politically incorrect. Campbell defends the students by pointing out the hypocrisy of the school using “Chieftains” as their mascot since 1970. He argues that the Constitution protects the students’ rights to free speech and assembly, comparing the situation to other racially implicit terms like “White House” or “White Pages.” His legal reasoning highlights the principal’s selective outrage and underscores the importance of First Amendment protections, even for provocative expressions.

    2. How does the chapter reveal Campbell’s personal struggles beneath his professional demeanor?

    Answer:
    Despite his confident handling of the principal and legal cases, Campbell’s internal turmoil surfaces through his exhaustion, fragmented memories, and emotional reaction to Julia’s unexpected appearance. He experiences moments of disorientation (like at the coffee shop) and dwells on nostalgic thoughts about Julia, revealing unresolved feelings. His service dog, Judge, also signals his hidden vulnerabilities—likely tied to an undisclosed condition—which he masks with professional bravado. These details paint Campbell as a complex character grappling with past regrets and present stresses beneath his composed exterior.

    3. Analyze the significance of Julia Romano’s reappearance in Campbell’s life. How does their interaction reflect their shared history and current tensions?

    Answer:
    Julia’s return as the guardian ad litem in Anna Fitzgerald’s case forces Campbell to confront their unresolved past. Their stilted conversation—veering between polite professionalism (“Your hair isn’t pink anymore”) and pointed barbs (“Whose fault is that?”)—reveals lingering hurt and attraction. Julia’s accusation that Campbell prioritizes winning over Anna’s well-being mirrors their personal history of abandonment, suggesting he still struggles with emotional commitment. The “stranger on a bus” metaphor underscores their emotional distance, while their focus on Anna’s case becomes a proxy for addressing their own fractured relationship.

    4. How does the author use Judge, Campbell’s service dog, to convey subtext in key scenes?

    Answer:
    Judge serves as both a literal support animal and a symbolic reflection of Campbell’s state. His whining and nudging during Campbell’s tense exchange with Julia signal Campbell’s rising anxiety, which he verbally dismisses. The dog’s presence hints at an undisclosed medical or psychological condition, contrasting with Campbell’s assertive public persona. Additionally, Julia petting Judge—and Campbell’s jealous reaction—subtly mirrors their past intimacy and current barriers. The dog’s actions (like sighing or barking) often punctuate emotional beats, revealing truths Campbell avoids acknowledging outright.

    Answer:
    Campbell’s aggressive tactic to remove Anna’s mother from the home—prioritizing legal victory over familial stability—aligns with his pattern of avoiding emotional complexity, much like his past with Julia. Julia criticizes this approach as self-serving, echoing her own experience of being “used” by Campbell. His insistence on “winning” may stem from a need to prove himself, but it risks repeating his tendency to overlook deeper human needs. The case could force Campbell to reconcile his professional ruthlessness with personal growth, especially as Julia’s presence challenges his detachment.

    Note