Brilliant Answers

1

Running header: OPTION 3: GREATER GOOD ANALYSIS 1

2

OPTION 3: GREATER GOOD ANALYSIS

Title

Name

School

Date

Situation

A Hospital has three patients in need of a kidney transplant. John Doe is one of the patients and is predicted to die within the week. He is 45, single, with no children. He is a millionaire and spends much of his money on supporting charities but, his luxurious life eating habits has contributed to his kidney damage by not following a low salt diet. If he doesn’t receive this kidney, he will likely have to find one unconventionally spending all his money. Another patient is 55-year-old Jane Doe, she is a mother of two children (ages 21 and 24) and is divorced. Her diet of high fat and high sugar diet, doctors say contributed to her kidney damage and now has one month to live. Patient three is an eleven-year-old orphan with a genetic disorder that damages her kidney. She has to undergo multiple kidney transplants throughout her life due to the genetic disorder. She will perish in two months if she does not receive this kidney.

Who Should Get the Kidney & Why?

Technically in the hospital there are rules and regulations about who can get the donor kidney. It is the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) and they would decide who gets the kidney. They look at who is the highest person on the list, which is determined by the time they have left, compatibility, their condition, survival rate, and their pediatric status. Taking this information into account John Doe has the shortest life span projection but he didn’t comply with his low salt diet feeding into his kidney damage. He has lived a full life of riches and could potentially find another source to receive a kidney to live. The mother of two, also contributed to her own demise by her diet. Her children are grown up. Also, she only has one month to live without the kidney. The orphan is only 11 with two months to live. Her genetic disorder causes her liver damage and she is not able to control this. Her parents also believe in a religion that that does not agree with organ donation and receiving organs. She may never get the chance to go back to her parents if she does not live but would they be able to accept her if she received the transplant? There also is the possibility of her finding a home that will accept her the way she is. I do not believe that she should die because the parents who gave her up do not believe in organ donation. Although she will need transplants further in the future, I believe she should get the organ. She has a long life ahead of her to grow and her uncontrollable disease could be treated with future medicine. John Doe would be my next of choice because he did contribute to his own demise, but he only has one week to live. He has a better chance of finding another kidney than the child. The mother also has a month for them to find her another kidney.

Ethical Egoism View

“On their view, known as Ethical Egoism, each person ought to pursue his or her own self-interest exclusively,” (Rachels, 2019). If this were the case each person would take the kidney for themselves. This is the morality of selfishness and it looks at what is best for our own self. That is why there are regulations and rules on picking who would get the organ donation. There would be mass chaos if the ethical egoism view was present in this decision. The other patients would not be told about the organ, only the patient that is receiving the organ will know. This will make sure there isn’t any controversy due to the fairness of UNOS. It gives equality of care and does away with self-interests. The regulations don’t allow for manipulation or bribery to get organs above others suffering. The way I used ethical egoism in my view was that I was selfish and chose who the organ should go to. I used my own moral values to choose the child who needs the organ. They still have a long life ahead of them and they could not have prevented their condition.

Utilitarianism View

“Morality, he urged, is not about pleasing God, nor is it about being faithful to abstract rules; instead, it is about making the world as happy as possible,” (Rachels, 2019). I believe some of the healthcare we experience today is aimed at making the patients as happy and healthy as possible. “In the context of medicine, this means we should aim to create healthcare policies which promote the best standard of health for the greatest number of patients,” (Lawson-Frost, 2017). In this scenario it is hard to make every patient happy without causing suffering to another. If we give the kidney to one the others may die without finding another kidney. That is why there is a list of who gets what organ to give happiness to the ones who need it most.

Conclusion

To conclude, if we look at both the ethical egoism and utilitarian views, we can see that medical rules were made to prevent and cause these ethical views. These cause happiness but also bring suffering to those who do not receive the medical treatment. It truly is a moral dilemma to choose who will live and who may die. I think I take both ethical egoism and utilitarian’s views when I made my decision to give the kidney to the orphan. It is selfish of me to choose who it should go to. Yes, the child has many years to grow and live if she gets the kidney, but she does have two months without it to find another one. John doe only has a week to live but he can find another kidney using unconventional ways. I believe I have a soft spot for children who are genetically predisposed to be sick and are unable to change it. The utilitarian view I look at in my decision brings happiness and life to a child so she may find a happy home one day.

Reference

Lawson-Frost, S. (2017, 4th December). Does Evidence Based Medicine Imply Utilitarianism. Retrieved: May 30, 2020. From: https://www.students4bestevidence.net/blog/2017/12/04/evidence-based-medicine-imply-utilitarianism/

Rachels, S., & Rachels, J. (2019). The elements of moral philosophy. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.