Utilitarian Bioethics

515 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Essay on bioethics

My brother deserves to die. My grandmother should have died sooner than she did. My brother is autistic, cannot speak, and cannot even completely dress himself-he makes no visible contribution to society-therefore he should not be allowed to live. My grandmother had Alzheimer's disease, slipped into a coma after Valentine's Day, and was placed on a feeding tube until she finally passed on two days before my 16th birthday-but she should not have been allowed to waste my family's money and stay in the hospital for weeks. My family should have just let her die and get over with it.

Well, that is what I would think if I were a utilitarian bioethicist. This breed of bioethicists believes in "ethical distribution" of medical resources. They believe that medical resources are limited and certain standards should be created to determine who should receive treatment and who should not. Utilitarian bioethicists do not consider human life to be sacred; they argue that "some human lives are have greater moral and social value than others and that the authority to set these comparative values belongs rightfully to their elite group. They also believe in denying medical care to the elderly if their illness would impact the quality of their lives, even if patients believed their lives were still worth living or in fact enjoyable." (Koontz 354)

Utilitarian bioethicists also believe that if a person is sick, either physically or mentally, and if their life is being a "burden" to their family members, then they have a duty to die and release the family. A burden can be defined as "emotional, extensive care giving, destruction of life's plans, and/or financial hardship." (Smith 153)

Many doctors today are willing to violate the Hippocratic Oath that all doctors are supposed to adhere to because they are in agreement with the utilitarian bioethicists. I must be in the minority because I refuse to "jump on the bandwagon" of that inhumane type of bioethics. I believe that this kind of ethics is dangerous, dehumanizing, and very unethical. Nobody has the right to decide whose life is more important than others or whose life contributes more to society. Many people with disabilities are able to function very well and greatly contribute to society. There are many famous athletes, actors, and even politicians who have disabilities and yet play an important role in the world.

There is an understated, subversive theme in the utilitarian bioethicists way of thinking: our love for each other as humans should be conditional.

Show More
Related

  • Analysis Of Conscientious Objection In Medicine: A Moral Dilemma

    867 Words  | 2 Pages

    At first, I believed that a patient should have the say so and get what they demand. I didn’t feel sympathetic for the health care provider one bit. I was able to look through the eyes of a physician and see the trials that they have to go through. It is not easy making the decisions that they have to make. There job is based on decisions, and most of it is the patient’s. “There will certainly be times when I will be faced with a request from a patient or patient’s representative that I will personally find morally difficult, but one that is still legally and ethically acceptable. must be very difficult to work in an area with little control over what you want to do.” (Bradley 1). Even though I do not fully understand a health care providers everyday role, I do know that they are faced with painful options. I personally feel that I can not work in this field for that exact reason. Health care providers play an extremely important role in our society, and others need to look upon

    Read More

  • A Bioethical Decision

    708 Words  | 2 Pages

    Nathaniel Wu, a talented and dedicated microbiologist, should be hired for the Intercontinental Pharmaceutical Company (ICP) under certain conditions. Wu, who was diagnosed with Huntington’s disease, was seen as the ideal candidate for the employment position the IPC was offering until this inconvenience was unveiled. To offer Wu employment unconditionally is extremely risky for the medical costs and equipment damages he can bring to the company can be devastating; to deny Wu employment entirely is a violation of bioethics and discrimination, for he was already offered the job position conditionally before taking medical tests. By offering Wu employment under certain conditions, Wu can be part of the IPC and have him employment terminated as soon as his condition begins interfering with his work quality.

    Read More

  • Euthanasia and Frankenstein

    1448 Words  | 3 Pages

    There are several important ethical issues related to euthanasia. One is allowing people who are terminally ill and suffering the right to choose death. Should these people continue to suffer even though they really are ba...

    Read More

  • Medical Futility: An Increasing Legal, Ethical, and Moral Dilemma

    1919 Words  | 4 Pages

    A divergent set of issues and opinions involving medical care for the very seriously ill patient have dogged the bioethics community for decades. While sophisticated medical technology has allowed people to live longer, it has also caused protracted death, most often to the severe detriment of individuals and their families. Ira Byock, director of palliative medicine at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, believes too many Americans are “dying badly.” In discussing this issue, he stated, “Families cannot imagine there could be anything worse than their loved one dying, but in fact, there are things worse.” “It’s having someone you love…suffering, dying connected to machines” (CBS News, 2014). In the not distant past, the knowledge, skills, and technology were simply not available to cure, much less prolong the deaths of gravely ill people. In addition to the ethical and moral dilemmas this presents, the costs of intensive treatment often do not realize appreciable benefits. However, cost alone should not determine when care becomes “futile” as this veers medicine into an even more dangerous ethical quagmire. While preserving life with the best possible care is always good medicine, the suffering and protracted deaths caused from the continued use of futile measures benefits no one. For this reason, the determination of futility should be a joint decision between the physician, the patient, and his or her surrogate.

    Read More

  • Doctor-Assisted Suicide and the Hospitals' Bottom Line

    1217 Words  | 3 Pages

    Unnoticed by the mainstream press, a disturbing study published in the Fall 2000 issue of the Cambridge Quarterly of Health Care Ethics reveals how far the futile-care movement, in reality the opening salvo in a planned campaign among medical elites to impose health-care rationing upon us, has already advanced. The authors reviewed futility policies currently in effect in 26 California hospitals. Of these, only one policy provided that "doctors should act to support the patient's life" when life-extending care is wanted. All but two of the hospital policies defined circumstances in which treatments should be considered nonobligatory even if requested by the patient or patient representative. In other words, 24 of the 26 hospitals permit doctors to unilaterally deny wanted life-supporting care.

    Read More

  • Ethical and Professional Implications

    1249 Words  | 3 Pages

    Garrett, Thomas, Baillie, Harold, and Garrett, Rosellen. Health Care Ethics; Principles and Problems. 4th Ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. Prentice Hall,

    Read More

  • Dr. Kevorkian's Utilitarianism

    1688 Words  | 4 Pages

    Mill’s utilitarianism, it is evident that absolute morality is necessary to understand Dr. Kevorkian’s actions. Utilitarianism would argue that terminally ill patients would inevitably die and in accordance to the Hippocratic Code, the patients’ welfare and financial state must be taken into consideration by the physician.(Cahn 575) They would argue using the Greatest Happiness Principle where morality is measured on the happiness it creates for the individual making the decision. Utilitarianism would focus on Dr. Kevorkian’s intentions as being moral by supporting his patients’ suicide. They would argue that he helped his patients avoid the financial burden and suffering of their illness through suicide. Although some validity is evident, they disregard the possibility that Dr. Kevorkian may have been wrong in his diagnosis and acted immorally in his failure to keep his patients alive through his decisions. If the utilitarianism decide to interpret the Hippocratic Oath as a reason for Dr. Kevorkian’s decision to kill his patients, they avoid questioning the implications of Dr. Kevorkian’s decisions on his role as a physician. By acting outside of good will, he violated his role as physician to keep his patients alive since “prevention is better than cure” by giving himself the power to play God. He did so by crossing the boundary that prevents healers from taking life from his/her patients and thus stepped into the realm of executioner rather than healer. (Lasagna) For Dr. Kevorkian to decide when his patients can die, he not only violated the Hippocratic Oath, but led to question the role of the physician whose job is to treat the sick and not determine when a person could die. Although he have granted his patients what they wanted and believed that he was acting in his role as a physician, the outcome reinforces Kant’s philosophy to act in an absolute

    Read More

  • Persuasive Essay: The Pros And Cons Of Euthanasia

    1907 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...t’s family should be able decide for the patient whether or not prolonging their life is moral.

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay Euthanasia

    1299 Words  | 3 Pages

    However, to preserve the individual 's self respect they would not want their family to see them fall apart and wither away. Nevertheless, the end of a family member 's life is hard on all loved ones and the last memories they have should be ones of joy and care. A patient should be able to pass away peacefully knowing that they did so with their respect and dignity intact. In the article “Is physician-assisted death in anyone 's best interest?”, James downar explains that many people try and delay death, even when faced with a hopeless situation. However, although they remain cognitively intact, other patients have limited life prolonging options and their quality of life and function deteriorate below the threshold that they consider acceptable. This portrays the idea that regardless of whether or not a person is in favour of, or opposed to euthanasia, all people would agree that they would want a dignified death for themselves and their loved ones. The problem starts when people cannot agree as to the definition of 'dignity. ' According to a new survey commissioned by ‘Dying With Dignity Canada’, approximately 84 per cent of Canadians support assisted dying. These results clarify that terminally ill patients need their rights recognized. That being said, those who are continually opposed to voluntary euthanasia must not deny people the right to die with

    Read More

  • The Four Principles in Biomedical Ethics

    1549 Words  | 4 Pages

    In this diverse society we are confronted everyday with so many ethical choices in provision of healthcare for individuals. It becomes very difficult to find a guideline that would include a border perspective which might include individual’s beliefs and preference across the world. Due to these controversies, the four principles in biomedical ethic which includes autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice help us understand and explain which medical practices are ethical and acceptable. These principles are not only used to protect the rights of a patient but also the physician from being violated.

    Read More

  • Racial Discrimination and Health Care

    1821 Words  | 4 Pages

    Steinbock, Bonnie, Alex J. London, and John D. Arras. "Rule-Utilitarianism versus Act-Utilitarianism." Ethical Issues in Modern Medicine. Contemporary Readings in Bioethics. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2013. 12. Print.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism

    1254 Words  | 3 Pages

    There are many essays, papers and books written on the concept of right and wrong. Philosophers have theorized about moral actions for eons, one such philosopher is John Stuart Mill. In his book Utilitarianism he tries to improve on the theories of utilitarianism from previous philosophers, as he is a strong believer himself in the theory. In Mill's book he presents the ideology that there is another branch on the utilitarian tree. This branch being called rule-utilitarianism. Mill makes a distinction between two different types of utilitarianism; act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism. Rule-utilitarianism seems like a major advance over the simple theory of act-utilitarianism. But for all its added complexity, it may not actually be a significant improvement. This is proven when looking at the flaws in act-utilitarianism and relating them to the ways in which rule-utilitarianism tries to overcome them. As well one must look at the obstacles that rule-utilitarianism has on it's own as a theory. The problems of both act and rule utilitarianism consist of being too permissive and being able to justify any crime, not being able to predict the outcomes of one's actions, non-universality and the lose of freewill.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism

    2011 Words  | 5 Pages

    The most important question of all is what should one do since the ultimate purpose of answering questions is either to satisfy curiosity or to decide which action to take. Complicated analysis is often required to answer that question. Beyond ordinary analysis, one must also have a system of values, and the correct system of values is utilitarianism.

    Read More

  • Bioethics

    1906 Words  | 4 Pages

    The case of Dr. Lowell and Mrs. Jackson revolves around a conflict between the doctor, who advocates the implementation of a particular treatment and the patient who disagrees with the doctor and wishes to do things her own way. The doctor feels that the suggested course of action is disastrous and threatens to have the patient declared mentally incompetent. The question now is whether or not the doctor is morally justified in taking action against the patient in order to implement the course of treatment she feels would be most effective. Is this an infringement on the autonomy of the patient or is the doctor morally obliged to do everything that he/she can possible do in order to restore the patient’s health even if that includes to go so far as to take this decision out of the hands of the patient?

    Read More

  • Argument in Favor of Euthanasia

    1897 Words  | 4 Pages

    Today, medical interventions have made it possible to save or prolong lives, but should the process of dying be left to nature? (Brogden, 2001). Phrases such as, “killing is always considered murder,” and “while life is present, so is hope” are not enough to contract with the present medical knowledge in the Canadian health care system, which is proficient of giving injured patients a chance to live, which in the past would not have been possible (Brogden, 2001). According to Brogden, a number of economic and ethical questions arise concerning the increasing elderly population. This is the reason why the Canadian society ought to endeavor to come to a decision on what is right and ethical when it comes to facing death. Uhlmann (1998) mentions that individuals’ attitudes towards euthanasia differ. From a utilitarianism point of view – holding that an action is judged as good or bad in relation to the consequence, outcome, or end result that is derived from it, and people choosing actions that will, in a given circumstance, increase the overall good (Lum, 2010) - euthanasia could become a means of health care cost containment, and also, with specific safeguards and in certain circumstances the taking of a human life is merciful and that all of us are entitled to end our lives when we see fit.

    Read More

More about Utilitarian Bioethics

Open Document