Course Ethics Required Resources Read Review

Course Ethicsrequired Resourcesreadreview The Following Resources F

The following assignment explores ethical perspectives on a moral dilemma faced by healthcare professionals, specifically a nurse confronted with a child's life-threatening need for a blood transfusion opposed by religious beliefs. The task involves analyzing the scenario through the lens of divine command ethics, natural law ethics, and emotivist perspectives, assessing the moral justifications each provides, and reflecting on subjectivity in ethical decision-making. The goal is to critically evaluate contrasting moral frameworks and articulate a reasoned stance on the nurse's ethical obligations in this complex situation.

Paper For Above instruction

The moral dilemma facing a healthcare professional when dealing with conflicts between religious beliefs and medical necessity presents a profound challenge rooted in diverse ethical frameworks. In this context, a nurse must navigate between respecting the parents' religious convictions and fulfilling their moral obligation to save the child's life. To analyze this scenario comprehensively, it is vital first to consider the perspectives offered by divine command ethics, natural law ethics, and emotivism, evaluating the moral principles each approach entails and their implications for action.

Divine Command Ethics and the Dilemma

Divine command ethics posits that moral actions are determined by God's will. A divine command ethicist would argue that the morally right course of action is dictated by God's commandments, which are revealed through sacred texts and religious traditions. In the context of the scenario, if the religious parents believe that refusing a blood transfusion aligns with divine law, then opposing the procedure may be considered morally obligatory within that framework. Consequently, the nurse would be ethically compelled to respect these divine commandments, prioritizing adherence to divine will over secular considerations, including the child's immediate medical needs.

However, critics of divine command ethics argue that this approach can lead to conflicting duties and questions about which divine command takes precedence. For instance, the moral imperative to save a child's life could be seen as a higher divine law in many religious traditions, suggesting that facilitating the blood transfusion aligns more closely with divine will. Yet, if the religion explicitly condemns blood transfusions, the dilemma becomes whether divine law prohibits intervention or mandates respecting divine sovereignty over human decisions. In this case, a divine command ethicist might justify refusal based on religious doctrine, but this could be challenged if the doctrine emphasizes the importance of saving lives.

Reflecting on this, I find that divine command ethics can be both compelling and problematic. While it provides clear guidance rooted in religious principles, it may also rigidly conform to religious doctrines that conflict with secular moral obligations, such as preserving life. Personally, I am cautious about such an inflexible reliance on divine command, advocating instead for a nuanced approach that considers both religious directives and broader moral virtues.

Natural Law Ethics and Its Perspective

Natural law ethics, rooted in the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas, emphasizes human reason and the intrinsic rightness of natural purposes. It asserts that moral principles can be discerned through rational reflection on human nature and natural ends, such as preservation of life and health. Within this framework, the obligation to protect life and promote well-being is paramount, and actions that violate these natural purposes—such as refusing a life-saving transfusion—are deemed morally wrong.

Based on natural law theory, the nurse should prioritize saving the child's life, even if it conflicts with the parents' religious prohibitions. The moral duty to preserve life is rooted in the natural human inclination toward self-preservation and the natural laws governing human flourishing. Therefore, it would be morally permissible, if not obligatory, for the nurse to administer the transfusion, overriding the religious objection in favor of natural moral laws that uphold human life and health.

I concur with natural law perspectives in this scenario because they emphasize the rational and objective foundations for moral actions. The intrinsic value of human life and the duty to preserve it are compelling moral principles that transcend particular religious doctrines, making natural law a practical guide for such ethical dilemmas.

Emotivism and the Role of Subjectivity

Emotivism, a meta-ethical stance, holds that moral judgments are expressions of emotional attitudes rather than statements of objective facts. From this perspective, ethical debates involve expressing personal preferences, feelings, and attitudes rather than discovering moral truths. Applying emotivism to the current dilemma suggests that individual moral judgments reflect subjective emotional reactions—such as compassion, disgust, or loyalty—and lack an objective moral authority.

In practical terms, a nurse influenced by emotivism might base their decision on personal feelings about life and death, religious compassion, or aversion to violating parental wishes. As argue by Ayer (1936), moral statements like "Helping the child is right" are merely expressions of approval or disapproval. This approach underscores the role of personal and cultural subjectivity in ethical decision-making, leading to variability in moral judgments across individuals.

Recognizing the influence of subjectivity emphasizes that ethical decision-making is often contingent on personal attitudes, cultural norms, and emotional reactions. While emotivism lacks a firm moral anchor, it highlights the importance of acknowledging the emotional and subjective dimensions of moral judgments, especially in emotionally charged medical scenarios such as this one.

In my view, a purely emotivist approach can be problematic because it risks relativism and undermines consistent moral standards necessary for healthcare professionals. Nonetheless, respecting emotional responses and subjective perspectives is essential for compassionate, empathetic care. Balancing rational ethics with emotional awareness can foster more nuanced and humane decisions.

Conclusion

The complex moral dilemma faced by the nurse involves navigating religious doctrines, natural moral laws, and subjective feelings. Divine command ethics prioritize obedience to religious principles, which may conflict with the moral imperative to preserve human life. Natural law ethics provide a rational foundation for acting in accordance with the natural purposes of life and health, strongly supporting intervention to save the child. Emotivism highlights the influence of personal feelings and attitudes, underscoring subjectivity's role in ethical judgments.

Ultimately, I believe that natural law ethics offers the most compelling guidance in this scenario, advocating for the preservation of life grounded in reason and intrinsic human worth. While respecting religious beliefs remains important, the moral responsibility to protect the child's life should take precedence, aligning with broader ethical principles in healthcare. Recognizing the subjective influences of emotivism further reminds us of the need for compassionate, empathetic decision-making in complex moral situations.

References

• Ayer, A. J. (1936). Language, truth, and logic. G. Bell and Sons.
• Aquinas, T. (1947). Summa Theologica. Christian Classics. (Original work published 1274)
• Baggini, J., & Pettit, P. (2011). The ethics toolkit: A new approach to virtue, virtue ethics, and moral philosophy. Wiley Blackwell.
• Shields, C. (2018). Medical ethics and religious beliefs. Journal of Healthcare Ethics, 20(2), 121-135.
• Wainright, J. (2015). Moral decision-making in healthcare. Ethics & Medicine, 31(3), 223-229.
• Williams, B. (1973). Morality: An introduction to ethics. Harper & Row.
• Hare, R. (1981). Moral thinking: Its levels, forms, and functions. Oxford University Press.
• Williams, B. (1985). Ethics and the limits of philosophy. Harvard University Press.