Ethics Of Organ Donation Incentives Case Study

PAGES
3
WORDS
870
Cite

Ethics can be situational, and certainly the dilemmas or morality and choice have different answers depending on the particular time and place they occur (MacIntyre, 2006). Even prior to the formalization of the terms utilitarianism and deontology, the core ideas of each have been debated for centuries. The Ancient Greeks argued over the needs of the individual as opposed to the needs of the. Showing just how much this concept has permeated popular culture, the philosophical issue even made it to the modern motion picture screen. Utilitarianism holds that the most ethical thing one can do is any action that will maximize the happiness within an organization or society. At the center of this debate is the notion that many remain dissatisfied with the definition of "good" or "appropriate" being at the whim of a particular social order, or ruling elite. This debate may be found in Aristotle, Socrates, and Aquinas, leading to more contemporary political notions from Lock, Kant, and even Martin Luther King, Jr. Forming the core modern argument, for instance, Aquinas argued that there were certain universal behaviors that were either right or wrong as ordained by the Divine. Hobbes and Locke differed, and put forth the notion that there were natural rights, or "states of nature,"...

...

Kant took this further, reacting, and argued that a state or society must be organized by the way laws and justice was universally true, available, and, most importantly, justified by humanity. Yet, for Kant, these innate principles should be mindful of the freedom and choice (autonomy) of the individual. In this way Kant, prescribed that basic rights were necessary for civil society, and becomes a rubric by which we may understand modern utilitarian principles and their interdependence with the concept of human rights (Haydn, 2001). Actions have quantitative outcomes and the ethical choices that lead to the "greatest good for the greatest number" are the appropriate decisions, even if that means subsuming the rights of certain individuals (Troyer, 2003, 256-52). It is considered to be a consequential outlook in the sense that while outcomes cannot be predicted the judgment of an action is based on the outcome -- or, "the ends justify the means" (Robinson and Groves, 2003).
Deontology is a compatible, but alternative ethical system that has its roots in Ancient Greece, but is most often attributed to Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher writing about a century prior to Mill and Bentham. In

Sources Used in Documents:

Utilitarianism and Deotology - At the very center of the debate on euthanasia lies the core of individual and societal ethics. Philosophically, ethics is a rubric used to understand and explain the way humans morally organize events or actions. The focus is on understanding the way moral choices are presented than judging the outcome of the decisions made. Ethics can be situational, and certainly the dilemmas or morality and choice have different answers depending on the particular time and place they occur (MacIntyre, 2006).

Even prior to the formalization of the terms utilitarianism and deontology, the core ideas of each have been debated for centuries. The Ancient Greeks argued over the needs of the individual as opposed to the needs of the. Showing just how much this concept has permeated popular culture, the philosophical issue even made it to the modern motion picture screen. Utilitarianism holds that the most ethical thing one can do is any action that will maximize the happiness within an organization or society. At the center of this debate is the notion that many remain dissatisfied with the definition of "good" or "appropriate" being at the whim of a particular social order, or ruling elite. This debate may be found in Aristotle, Socrates, and Aquinas, leading to more contemporary political notions from Lock, Kant, and even Martin Luther King, Jr. Forming the core modern argument, for instance, Aquinas argued that there were certain universal behaviors that were either right or wrong as ordained by the Divine. Hobbes and Locke differed, and put forth the notion that there were natural rights, or "states of nature," but disagreed on the controlling factors of those natural tendencies. Kant took this further, reacting, and argued that a state or society must be organized by the way laws and justice was universally true, available, and, most importantly, justified by humanity. Yet, for Kant, these innate principles should be mindful of the freedom and choice (autonomy) of the individual. In this way Kant, prescribed that basic rights were necessary for civil society, and becomes a rubric by which we may understand modern utilitarian principles and their interdependence with the concept of human rights (Haydn, 2001). Actions have quantitative outcomes and the ethical choices that lead to the "greatest good for the greatest number" are the appropriate decisions, even if that means subsuming the rights of certain individuals (Troyer, 2003, 256-52). It is considered to be a consequential outlook in the sense that while outcomes cannot be predicted the judgment of an action is based on the outcome -- or, "the ends justify the means" (Robinson and Groves, 2003).

Deontology is a compatible, but alternative ethical system that has its roots in Ancient Greece, but is most often attributed to Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher writing about a century prior to Mill and Bentham. In


Cite this Document:

"Ethics Of Organ Donation Incentives" (2011, June 22) Retrieved April 19, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/ethics-of-organ-donation-incentives-42706

"Ethics Of Organ Donation Incentives" 22 June 2011. Web.19 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/ethics-of-organ-donation-incentives-42706>

"Ethics Of Organ Donation Incentives", 22 June 2011, Accessed.19 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/ethics-of-organ-donation-incentives-42706

Related Documents

The flaws have been reverted through the policy of no-give, no-take, "under this system in order to receive an organ the individual has to previously signed their organ donor card" (Alexander, 2004). The merit of such policy is that "it satisfies most people's moral intuitions, the people are comfortable with the morality of reciprocity, those who are willing to give should be the first to receive" (Alexander, 2004). In 2004,

However, these side effects are a small price to pay in light of the alternative, which is often a severely compromised quality of life and early death. The donor should consider several topics. There is no additional financial risk to being an organ donor. Furthermore, the body is not disfigured during organ removal; thus, open casket funerals are possible. Also, donated organs will be used for transplants into recipients

Organ Donation There is a space for a small pink sticker on everyone's driver's license which you choose to affix or to leave off of the identification. The sticker signifies that, should you be in a car accident and are declared to be brain-dead with no chance of recuperating, you agree to allow medical professionals to donate your organs to people who are in very dire need of them. When people

In the U.S. For instance, Abuona (2003) indicated that the very first criterion is the donor's geographic location as compared to that of the recipient followed by the histocompatibility matching and blood group compatibility. The third criterion is a point system that each of the waiting-list patients accumulate in regard to the following variables; waiting time, medical urgency, as well as the age of the patient. This allocation technique

Do patients understand what it means to donate tissue to science? Not only that, but use of EG cells confuses stem cell research with the debate over abortion, bring up the risk of biasing emotions (McDonald 7). So, while stem cell research is an exciting new field that holds much promise, ethical problems arise to delay research, discovery of benefits or dangers, and involve many who have no knowledge of

Buy and Sell Organs for Transplants: The consideration of the possible negative socio-ethical repercussions of allowing people to buy and sell their non-vital body organs for transplant fortifies the argument of all opponents to the proposition. As stated in the U.S. Constitution, human beings are created equal and given the un-separable rights to life, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness. While in the pursuit of these rights, the American society has