Medical Ethics Week 1 Discussion

docx

School

Harvad university *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

416

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Nov 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by MinisterPuppy2886

Report
Medical Ethics Week 1 Discussion Consequentialists and non-consequentialists are two opposing approaches to ethics. The main difference between the two approaches is what is assessed when differentiating between what is wrong and what is right. Consequentialists consider the results of an action when determining right and wrong (Portmore, 2020). Simply put, consequentialists consider morally befitting behaviors as those that realize positive or beneficial outcomes. If an individual’s actions results in greater good, the action is deemed to be morally right. On the other hand, actions which result in harm or negative results are considered to be wrong and immoral (Portmore, 2020). In contrast, non-consequentialists do not look at the consequences of an action in determining whether it is wrong or right. Non-consequentialists investigate the action itself to determine whether it is morally right or wrong. A theory that falls under consequentialists approach to ethics is utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist approach that considers the general outcomes of an action. The action that results in the greatest good and the greatest benefit is considered to be morally right (Tseng & Wang, 2021). An example of a utilitarian approach in action is during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic where lack of capacity in most hospitals resulted in the provision of beds and ventilators to patients who the clinical team thought they would be able to save as opposed to patients who were at the highest risk of death. A utilitarian approach would argue that saving those with the biggest chance of recovering would result in greater outcome as opposed to focusing on all patients and ending up losing even those that would have survived the virus if resources were focused on them. The main weakness of utilitarianism as an approach to ethics is that it ignores the essence of humanity (Tseng & Wang, 2021). When one human is provided with an opportunity to get treatment over another, it communicates that one human is better than the other.
A theory that falls under the non-consequentialist approach is deontology. Deontology considers that individuals have specific duties and responsibilities that they must adhere to. Deontology also considers the presence of rules which differentiate between wrong and right (Tseng & Wang, 2021). Rules such as ‘do not kill’ are non-negotiable and there is no situation or circumstance that can be used in justifying killing another human being. The main challenge with deontology is the lack of flexibility regarding considering the consequences of one’s actions (Tseng & Wang, 2021). For instance, deontology blanketly considers lying as wrong while sometimes it can be necessary to lie to protect someone. References Portmore, D. W. (Ed.). (2020). The Oxford handbook of consequentialism . Oxford University Press, USA. Tseng, P. E., & Wang, Y. H. (2021). Deontological or utilitarian? An eternal ethical dilemma in outbreak. International journal of environmental research and public health , 18 (16), 8565.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help