DILEMMA: Imagine that a man comes into the emergency room after being in a car E
ID: 246358 • Letter: D
Question
DILEMMA: Imagine that a man comes into the emergency room after being in a car ETHICAL accident. He has lost a lot of blood from the various cuts on his body but has no other life threatening injuries. He is conscious and aware of his surroundings. The doctor determines that this patient needs a blood transfusion or he is in danger of dying. However, the patient refuses the blood transfusion and explains that it is against his religion. Waiting in the emergency room for the patient are his wife and their two young children USE YOUR OWN WORDS NO OUTSIDE SOURCES 1) According to utilitarianism, is it ethical for a physician to give this patient a blood transfusion against his will? To answer this question, you must argue as if you are a utilitarian, written out in full sentences and paragraphs, to show which course of action is moral. If you need to assume any facts to complete your analysis, be sure to state that in your argument (be sure to identify which type you are using in your example, act or rule) (this should take roughly 3 full paragraphs: 1 to explain positive consequences, 1 to explain negative consequences, and 1 to show which one outweighs the other). According to libertarianism, what kind of law should govern the above ethical dilemma (a competent patient refusing life-sustaining treatment) and why. To answer this question, you need to explain what negative and positive rights are and which the government should protect and why according to libertarianism as well as how this would apply to the specific question (this should take roughly 2-3 full paragraphs)? 2) 3) a) What is the veil of ignorance according to Rawls, what is its purpose, and how does the veil relate to Rawls 2 principles (this should take roughly 1 paragraph to explain)? b) Explain Rawls two principles in your own words and explain whether they protect negative and or positive rights and why (this should take roughly 2 full paragraphs: 1 each to explain both principles and 1 to explain whether they protect negative/positive rights and why)?Explanation / Answer
1) Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that determines the course of action which maximizes the happiness. The morality of action should maximize the utility, maximizes the happiness, and reduce the suffering. He is in the state of losing his life. Therefore the physician should consider of saving the patient's life. As a utilitarian, one should approach the way of providing best possibilities for the everyone. So administering the blood transfusion, and saving his life is the best approach.
Religions have set of values which has determinant has right and wrong. The rules and ideas are derived from the religious leaders. people believe that the flouting of the religious rule is a sin which leads to god's Punishment. Here, the man is also in the same situation of fear of God's punishment. If he has undergone transfusion, he will worry about not followed his religious rule and become depressed which further worsens his condition.
This is an ethical dilemma where the physician has to follow the two principles of beneficence and non-maleficence. The ethical principle of non-maleficence is avoiding harm to the patient. But according to beneficence, providing maximum benefit and minimizing harm to the patient. If he followed the rules against the religion, he will lose his respect in his society and feels of guilty. Considering the patient autonomy and his decision, providing a rationale for blood transfusion and the positive religious considerations and make him accept the transfusion which benefits his well-being and health condition.
2) Libertarianism allows the individual to take their own choices and they are responsible for their actions. Individuals should have right for the secure life. The government proposed a law to protect the rights of the individual and the society. Individuals have the right to pursue their respect and equal rights in the society.
Patients believe that the harm caused by blood transfusion is greater than the harm without the transfusion. Overridden of patient's wishes also harm the patient. So all the three ethical principles and legal justice are refusing the blood transfusion. But the principle of beneficence encourages to save the life. Analysing the all four ethical principles is complex. So the patient has to change the decisions and should realize the bad consequences of health condition if the blood is not transfused.
3 a). All people will become a dilemma in some situations to decide on their own thing. Rawl's suggest that the situation should be handled by sitting behind the veil of ignorance and to think of that societal circumstance and the situations. The people behind the veil of ignorance is could cause either harm or benefit. Based on justice, one should get best possible outcomes and improve their position through equalities. The two main principle that surrounds the veil of ignorance is the principle of liberty and the difference principle.
b). According to liberty principle, everyone should enjoy maximum happiness without any interruptions. One should get maximum benefit without hurt of others. On the basis of difference principle, everyone should get equal opportunities without any social and economic differences. Everyone should have rights and liberty, power and opportunities.
Applying these principles to the ethical dilemma will help us to decide based on the justice. Think of how the religious rules are structured and believes of society and essence the right thing through the justice. Based on the justice, the religious belief is socially structured for the well-being of the society and doing well-being for the individual is the justice.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.