If the Admiral had never signed the order to unwind his own son, he never would have suffered the great guilt and finally decided to use the rest of...

This
is a tough question, and the answer is best left up to individual readers to defend.At the core
of this question is the debate between saving the one and saving the many.Because the Admiral's
son is unwound, thousands of kids are saved.If the Admiral saves his son, thousands of Unwinds
can't seek refuge at the Graveyard.

To answer the first question about
whether or not it was a good thing that the Admiral had his son unwound, I have to personally
say that it was not a good thing.I personally think that unwinding is a horrible thing.I
understand that the Unwind's parts go to save other people, but that is not the same thing as
current organ donation.A person has the choice to be a donor.A Unwind
doesn't have the choice.Somebody else made the choice for them.Unwinding ends the life of that
child, so in my opinion it is the same thing as murder.The Admiral's decision to have his son
unwound was morally reprehensible, and no amount of later saving work can undo that.

I'm not sure about the second part of the question.I don't know how he could undo his
choice short of time travel, but let's say that is an option.Yes, he should undo his choice and
save his son's life.That action wouldn't condemn those other Unwinds.They would still be left to
fend for themselves, and it is conceivably possible that another person steps into the Admiral's
former role.That is basic Butterfly Effect thinking.The Admiral saved his son which caused a
change, and that small change may have the effect of motivating another person to fill that
former role.The key is that the Admiral can't know any of those future possibilities.All he can
know is whether or not he is saving his son, and he should absolutely make the choice to save
his son.