Ethics of Reciprocity: My Moral Compass

General ethical theories have provided guidance for moral decision making for a few years now. Major theories have been created which emphasize different rules or principles to follow when moral difficulties arise, specifically in the medical context. These major ethical theories like Utilitarianism, Deontology, Natural Law of Ethics, Care Ethics, Virtue Ethics, and the Ethics of Reciprocity, to name a few, stand for different principles which overall formulates the major differences between these theories. However, after deliberating over the man principles and rules of each theory, the ethical theory which resonated most with my own decision making process, is the Ethics of Reciprocity.

The Ethics of Reciprocity’s fundamental principle,

Utilitarianism is the belief that a person should choose that action which produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people. After reading in depth about the greatest happiness principle. A major reason I do not relate to this theory is the fact that this theory justifies the imposition of great suffering on a few people for the benefit of many people. Immediately, I thought about how many developing countries are being abused for their resources, in order to produce amenities for a greater amount of

However, the second theory stating, “Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged,” permits the inequalities of treatment under certain conditions. Liberties can be restricted provided that the restrictions are for the benefit of all. In contradiction to this theory, the Natural Law Ethics, supports the idea that the rightness of actions can be determined by nature itself, rather than by the laws and customs or principles of society and individuals. This theory provides strong implications for end of life issues. This theory suggests using ordinary means to find a cure or be healed but there is no requirement to use extraordinary means. For me, I believe every life has a purpose and helping others as much as one can, and if you have the ability to save a life by performing extraordinary measures, one should do it, which is a major reason I do not conform to the Natural Law of Ethics.

As for Virtue Ethics, Feminist Ethics and Care Ethics, although I agree with many of their fundamental theories, for instance Care Ethics suggests to act in accordance with the values of care, be compassionate, sympathetic, kind and helpful. However, this theory along with the other two provide no obvious way to resolve moral conflicts. Relating to the principles behind Virtue Ethics, it relies on the idea that a person is predisposed to