Ethics Case Study: To Rescue Others at What Risk? What is the Ethical Dilemma?

An ethical dilemma in the words of Fletcher, Holt, Brazier, & Harris (1995) "occurs when there are at least two possible courses of action that may be taken but each option is problematic" (p.7). With regard to the case study under consideration, the ethical dilemma each and every individual who has succeeded to make it to the roof faces is whether to take the risk of descending the stairs to save the lives of those trapped below or to remain on the roof where it is relatively safe. Those who elect to remain on the roof would be doing so to enhance their safety as they wait for help. In the scenario presented, no individual can embrace both alternatives, i.e. The individuals involved cannot remain on the roof in an attempt to enhance their safety and at the same time take an obvious risk in an attempt to save those trapped below.

What is your value and ethical position related to the case? Include discussion of theory and principles on which your position is based.

In my view, the most appropriate thing to do would be to descend the stairs and save those trapped below. In that regard therefore, I specifically support John's suggestion that he be accompanied by Joseph downstairs to see what they can do to save those trapped. Such a course of action would in my view be inherently correct. I regard some actions a personal duty and for this reason; my view is not largely limited to...

My principles and theory are thus essentially based on deontological ethics. As Tannsjo (2008) observes, consequences are not of great importance when it comes to deontological ethics. Corrigan and Farrell (2010) define deontological ethics as "a moral theory based around obligation and not the consequences of your actions" (p.207).
What are some other alternatives for resolving the problem?

Several other alternatives could be used to solve the problem in this particular case. Herein, I concern myself with three such alternatives. To begin with, there is of course the alternative I highlight in the section above, i.e. John and Joseph going downstairs to help Margaret in the rescue efforts. However, the five individuals could also wait for Margaret who has just descended to come back. Here, all the agents would be going by Joseph's and Peter's suggestions to remain on the roof. According to Joseph, it would be too risky to go back as the stairs are already smoke-filled. Making it back to the roof could prove to be an uphill task. In this particular case, Joseph seems largely concerned with the consequences of attempting to save those trapped below. His position and that of Peter is therefore largely founded on consequentiality theories. Ethical decisions when it comes to consequentialism are usually based on the computation of good in terms of consequences (Preston, 2007).

Secondly, John could…