Instructions For This Week's Assignment: Respond To One Of T

Instructionsfor This Weeks Assignment Respond To One Of The Following

Respond to one of the following options, and include Option 1, 2, or 3 as part of your heading.

Option 1: Name and describe in detail a key specific and recent healthcare technology. What are at least two key moral problems this technology creates? What are the proper moral guidelines for dealing with it in your view? Compare your approach to what a utilitarian and ethical egoist would say (each independently). Consider whether differing ethical beliefs globally might or not agree with what you say.

Option 2: Name and describe in detail a key specific and recent social technology. What are at least two key moral problems this technology creates? What are the proper moral guidelines for dealing with it in your view? Compare your moral approach to what a utilitarian and social contract ethicist would say (each independently). Consider whether differing ethical beliefs globally might or not agree with what you say.

Option 3: John Doe, Patient One, is in late stage of kidney disease. If he does not receive a new kidney, then he is predicted to die within a week. Doe is 45, single, and has no children. Doctors theorize that Doe damaged his kidney by not following a low-salt diet. Doe inherited one million dollars and is known for giving money to charity. Without a transplant, he will probably be forced to spend all his money searching for a kidney outside of the usual legal channels. Patient Two is Jane Doe (no relation to John). Patient Two is a mother of two children (ages 21 and 24). She is divorced and 55 years old. She developed kidney problems due to eating a high-fat and high-sugar diet. If she does not receive a kidney within one month, doctors believe she will die. Patient Three is an orphan. This orphan lives in a state facility. She was born with a genetic condition that constantly damages her kidney. The only known approach to her condition is to provide her with a kidney transplant every so often. She is 11 and has already undergone two kidney transplants. She will perish in two months if she does not receive another transplant. All three patients are at the same hospital. The hospital only has one kidney to give out. The orphan's birth parents were known to be of a religion that is opposed to organ donation. The other patients come from religions that do not oppose organ donation. Who should get the kidney? Why should that candidate receive it over the others? Devise a course of social action and a solution for this case by using the ethics of egoism and then utilitarianism to a key moral conflict involving health care in this case. Appraise the interests of diverse populations (in terms of ethnicity, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.) and how they relate to the case. Consider whether differing ethical beliefs globally might or might not agree with what you say. Consider all the above, cite the textbook, and incorporate outside sources, including citations. Do not use previous discussion or assignment texts. The presentation will be an audiovisual project, such as a narrated PowerPoint, with a transcript provided. Indicate if the case is hypothetical or based on real events, and provide relevant articles if applicable.

Paper For Above instruction

Among the various contemporary ethical challenges faced in healthcare and social technology, the issue of organ transplantation and the fair allocation of scarce medical resources remains profoundly complex and morally charged. This paper explores the moral dilemmas associated with organ allocation, focusing particularly on a hypothetical case where a single kidney must be allocated among three patients with differing backgrounds, needs, and moral considerations. It employs the ethical frameworks of egoism and utilitarianism to evaluate the moral conflicts and proposes socially responsible courses of action grounded in these theories, while considering the diverse global perspectives that influence moral judgments.

Introduction

Organ transplantation exemplifies a significant advancement in modern medicine, offering life-saving opportunities to patients suffering from end-stage organ failure. Yet, this medical miracle is accompanied by ethical quandaries concerning fairness, justice, and morality. The scarcity of donor organs necessitates difficult decisions about who should receive priority, making it imperative to analyze these choices through robust ethical lenses. The hypothetical case involves three patients, each with unique circumstances, necessitating a nuanced ethical analysis that considers personal, societal, and cultural factors.

The Ethical Dilemmas in Organ Allocation

The core moral issues in organ allocation revolve around fairness, equity, and maximizing benefits. Fairness entails developing criteria that do not discriminate based on race, gender, religion, or socio-economic status. Equity involves giving priority to those with the most urgent need or the greatest chance of benefit. Moreover, utilitarian approaches prioritize maximizing overall health benefits for society, while egoism focuses on individual self-interest. The case epitomizes these conflicts: should the priority be given to the patient with the greatest chance of survival, the patient with the most social contribution, or the one whose religious and cultural background aligns with organ donation?

The Case Analysis Using Ethical Frameworks

Utilitarian Perspective

The utilitarian approach advocates for the allocation that results in the greatest good for the greatest number. Applying this to the case, the hospital should consider the potential lifespan extension and quality of life improvements each patient might experience. The orphan, with the highest need and a likely urgent demise without transplantation, arguably presents the greatest potential for saving a life. The focus is on maximizing societal benefits, which could support prioritizing the orphan due to her vulnerability and the immediate threat to her life.

Ethical Egoism Perspective

In contrast, ethical egoism emphasizes actions that serve one's own interests. If the hospital or society operates under egoist principles, the decision might prioritize the patient whose transplant would promote the institution’s reputation or societal standing. Alternatively, individual decision-making might favor the patient with the greatest personal contribution or social worth. For example, prioritizing the wealthy patient who could potentially donate or fund further research might align with egoism’s focus on self-interest or institutional benefit.

Global Ethical Perspectives and Cultural Considerations

Differences in cultural and religious beliefs significantly influence attitudes toward organ donation and allocation. For instance, the orphan’s parents’ opposition to organ donation based on religious beliefs underscores the importance of respecting cultural diversity. Globally, religious doctrines may oppose or support organ donation; for example, Islamic communities often encourage organ donation as a charitable act, while certain Orthodox Christian groups oppose it on theological grounds. Such differences necessitate culturally sensitive policies that balance respect for cultural beliefs with the imperative to save lives.

Social Action and Policy Recommendations

To address the ethical dilemmas in organ allocation, policies should be grounded in transparency, fairness, and respect for cultural diversity. Prioritization protocols could incorporate medical urgency, likelihood of success, and social contributions, balanced against respecting religious and cultural beliefs. For instance, explicitly excluding or including certain patients based on their religious objections requires careful ethical consideration. Education campaigns could be implemented to increase organ donation awareness, especially in communities where opposition stems from cultural or religious misconceptions.

Conclusion

Allocating scarce resources like kidneys involves balancing competing moral principles—fairness, utility, and respect for cultural diversity. Employing ethical reasoning through utilitarianism and egoism highlights the importance of maximizing benefits and serving individual interests while maintaining societal fairness. Greater understanding of cultural and religious differences can foster policies that are ethically sound and socially inclusive, ultimately contributing to more equitable health resource distribution. This case underscores the ongoing need for ethical sensitivity in biomedical decision-making that respects diversity and maximizes overall well-being.

References

• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Persaud, N. (2018). Ethical issues in organ transplantation. Journal of Medical Ethics, 44(2), 123-128.
• Shaw, D. (2020). Cultural considerations in organ donation. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 24(3), 215-230.
• American Transplant Foundation. (2022). Organ donation statistics and policies. Retrieved from https://www.atransplant.org
• Sanders, K., & Williams, R. (2017). Ethical dilemmas in organ allocation. Bioethics Journal, 31(4), 245-253.
• World Health Organization. (2019). Global policies on organ donation and transplantation. WHO Publications.
• Rogers, W. (2021). Religious perspectives on organ donation. Journal of Religious Ethics, 49(1), 102-117.
• Sandel, M. (2010). Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
• Childress, J. F. (2019). Ethical decision-making in healthcare. Journal of Medical Ethics, 45(6), 385-391.
• Leff, B., et al. (2019). Social and cultural considerations in organ donation. Annual Review of Public Health, 40, 473-488.