A highly insightful approach has been adopted by Paul Ramsey, who advocated initially that it is imperative that one focuses on the past Roman Catholic moral theology. The debate encompassing protagonist Christian moralists pivots around the central principle of “Totality”, specifically between a justifiable and unjustifiable “mutilation”. The latter is also related to the intrusion within a person’s bodily “integrity”. As already highlighted humankind enjoys the power but this does not imply that he enjoys the right to manipulate any part of his own body. We enjoy full stewardship, as administrators of our own body .This represents the appropriate act of administration, so as to ensure a holistic bodily life, were health is a cardinal principle.A part of the human body such as Individual limbs, organs, or functions are directly linked to a man’s bodily life within the health dimension .There is a direct relationship between the parts and the whole. Although these may be taken away, their functions will be permanently denatured, whenever this is beneficial for the holistic good. In this respect the principle of proportionality plays a pivotal role. Man can be considered as a “whole “enjoying a high level of dignity, within the context of social “wholes” to which he pertains. At this pt the principle of totality comes into the forepart .Although the principle of totality conditions “self mutilation for one’s own good”, however it does not influence self /mutilation for the case of one’s neighbor. From a subjective perspective, does this militate against the good neighbor policy? Every case needs to be assessed on the basis of its merits. On the same lines of thought, the judgment that the self/giving of organs is not morally accepted on the grounds of the principle of totality does not constitute a minor reflection, or alternatively one the devoid of its core substance so as to attain more meaningful goals .