I don't think that people understand these questions offer no alternatoves ,there are scenarios in which you have only the choices presented in the question itself , they are used in philosophy classes usually for arguments in the value of life ,euthanasia,abortion,choice and death in general .
Anyway as per this scenario there are many different philosophical schools that could give different answers ,or the same one but for different reasons , for example in the case of saving the child from the fire it could be argue that you stop direct harm whereas the starving children are facing a somewhat more indirect death to you. Other schools would argue that the aim is to minimize damage and you do that by saving the most amount of children and therefore letting the one child die in the fire. It could be argued forever ,either way there is no right or wrong answer in philosophy it's more so a projection of our inner world and moralities
