ETHC 445 Week 4 Greater Good Analysis

Name

Chamberlain University

ETHC-445 Principles of Ethics

Prof. Name

Date

INTRODUCTION

This paper examines the ethical considerations involved in determining which of three patients should receive a kidney transplant. The patients come from diverse backgrounds and hold different religious beliefs. Their ages range from 11 to 55 years, presenting a variety of life circumstances that complicate the decision-making process regarding organ allocation.

WHO SHOULD GET THE KIDNEY?

Among the three patients evaluated, Patient Two emerges as the most suitable candidate for the kidney transplant. This 55-year-old divorcee has two children and faces a dire situation; without a transplant, she is likely to die within a month. The urgency of her condition makes her case particularly compelling.

REASONS FOR CHOOSING

The choice of Patient Two is largely driven by her significantly higher chances of survival compared to the other patients. Furthermore, if she does not receive the transplant, her chances of survival diminish rapidly. In contrast, Patient One has the financial means to seek a transplant elsewhere, as he has access to one million dollars. Patient Three, while also in a precarious situation, has a slightly longer timeframe of two months before her condition becomes critical, allowing her to wait for a potential future donor.

ETHICS OF EGOISM

The ethical framework most relevant to this scenario is that of ethical egoism. Patient Three exemplifies this concept, having received two prior transplants that prioritized her interests. Her decisions have seemingly disregarded her parents’ religious beliefs and cultural values, which may oppose organ donation (Rachels, 2018).

UTILITARIANISM IN THE SCENARIO

From a utilitarian perspective, morality is grounded in the equal consideration of everyone’s happiness. Actions are deemed morally right if they foster overall happiness. However, utilitarianism has limitations, particularly in this scenario where only one kidney is available. This scarcity necessitates a decision that may contravene utilitarian ideals, ultimately favoring the candidate who presents the best chance for successful transplantation.

HOBBES’ ARGUMENT

Thomas Hobbes posits that individuals may resort to violence to attain their desires (Messerly, 2015). Although our kidney transplant scenario does not involve overt violence, it does present conflicts among decision-makers regarding the allocation of the transplant. The dynamics of power could lead to a situation where the stronger candidate might be favored, unless weaker parties—such as the decision-makers—unite to advocate for a more equitable resolution.

CONCLUSION

Ethical decisions regarding organ transplants are inherently variable, influenced by individual perspectives and societal norms. The task of identifying the most deserving candidate for the kidney transplant among the three patients raises significant moral questions. Society has established frameworks and laws to address these situations, aiming to mitigate favoritism and ensure a fair process.

REFERENCES

Jonsen, A. R. (2012). The ethics of organ transplantation: A brief history. AMA Journal of Ethics, 14(3), 264-268.

Messerly, J. (2015, May 1). Summary of Hobbes’ political and ethical theories. Retrieved from Reason and Meaning: https://reasonandmeaning.com/2015/05/01/hobbes-political-and-ethical-theories-in-two-pages/

ETHC 445 Week 4 Greater Good Analysis

Rachels, J. (2018). The elements of moral philosophy (9th ed.). [VitalSource Bookshelf 9.2.1]. Retrieved from vbk://9781260213003