And then with various permutations for the child being yours or a stranger and/or the people on the right being your parents and / or strangers.
We are not well equipped to make such decisions.
We just don't have a socially accepted notion of "scientific monkhood" yet I suppose.
Perhaps not monkhood, but as an eccentric removing himself from society is a common occurrence. And for sufficiently levels of ability and talent, people are willing to forgo social convention.
I forget who it was, but one of the great ones long gone was extremely uncomfortable around people. To the extent that people were told that they should casually walk up to him, and without addressing him directly, talk to the air about the problem they were facing or had come up with.
If it's my child or someone I know, save him/her.
If they are all strangers, save the greater number.
If I know both the child and one or more people among the set of 3, prioritize based on genetic or family proximity.
The point is, this can be solved algorithmically and/or game theoretically.
But it would be interesting to run the experiment in a psychology lab and see what kind of results arise.