Write A 750-1000 W Essay 036497

write A 750 1000 W

Write a word analysis of "Case Study: Fetal Abnormality." Be sure to address the following questions: Which theory or theories are being used by Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson to determine the moral status of the fetus? Explain. How does the theory determine or influence each of their recommendations for action? What theory do you agree with? How would that theory determine or influence the recommendation for action? Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

Paper For Above instruction

The case study "Fetal Abnormality" presents a complex ethical dilemma faced by several individuals—Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson—each of whom employs different moral frameworks to assess the moral status of the fetus and determine appropriate actions. Analyzing their viewpoints reveals the influence of distinct moral theories, primarily on their decision-making processes.

Jessica utilizes a deontological approach, emphasizing moral duties and adherence to ethical principles. From her perspective, the fetus’s moral status is inherent due to its potential human life, aligning with Kantian ethics that regard individuals as ends in themselves. Jessica advocates for respecting fetal life regardless of its abnormalities, emphasizing the duty to preserve and protect innocent life. Her recommendation leans toward continuing the pregnancy, respecting the fetus’s intrinsic moral worth, as mandated by her deontological stance.

Marco adopts a consequentialist or utilitarian perspective, prioritizing the outcomes of actions over inherent moral duties. For him, the decision hinges on weighing the benefits and harms associated with terminating or continuing the pregnancy. If the fetus’s abnormalities imply significant suffering or burdens for the family and society, Marco might favor abortion to minimize overall suffering. Conversely, if carrying the pregnancy to term results in greater happiness or minimal harm, he may support continuing. His decision-making is driven by evaluating the likely consequences for all involved.

Maria’s viewpoint appears rooted in relational ethics, emphasizing the importance of relationships and caregiving responsibilities. She considers the impact of the decision on familial bonds and emotional well-being. Maria may view the fetus’s moral status as intertwined with the relationships surrounding it, advocating for actions that nurture and support the family’s moral and emotional health. Her recommendation might favor abandonment of the pregnancy if its continuation threatens familial harmony or imposes undue suffering, emphasizing compassion and relational responsibilities.

Dr. Wilson employs a medical ethical stance, integrating principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, and respect for autonomy. He assesses the fetus’s potential for suffering or developmental viability and considers the mother’s rights and autonomy. His evaluation involves balancing the benefits of prenatal intervention or continuation against potential harms, respecting the mother’s informed choices. His recommendations focus on providing comprehensive information and supporting autonomous decision-making based on medical facts and ethical principles.

The influence of each theory on their recommendations is clear: Jessica’s deontological ethics promote unwavering respect for fetal life, Marco’s utilitarianism emphasizes outcome-based decision-making, Maria’s relational ethics focus on emotional and familial contexts, and Dr. Wilson’s medical ethics aim to balance medical benefits with respect for autonomy and beneficence.

In my view, the utilitarian framework offers a balanced and pragmatic approach. It considers the broader consequences of actions, including the welfare of the fetus, mother, family, and society. This approach provides flexibility, allowing decisions to be tailored to specific circumstances while aiming to maximize overall well-being. For instance, if the fetus’s abnormalities predict profound suffering, a utilitarian stance might support pregnancy termination to prevent future suffering, aligning with compassionate care principles.

Applying utilitarian ethics to the case suggests that the decision should be guided by careful assessment of potential outcomes, weighing physical, emotional, social, and financial factors. Healthcare providers and families should consider medical prognoses, quality of life potential, and the psychological impact of each choice. This pragmatic approach helps ensure that decisions prioritize reducing suffering and promoting well-being, recognizing the complexities inherent in fetal abnormalities.

In conclusion, understanding the differing moral theories provides insight into the divergent recommendations of Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson. While each offers valuable perspectives, a utilitarian approach arguably fosters a more comprehensive and ethically sound decision-making process, balancing respect for life with compassion for the realities faced by families. Incorporating such a framework in clinical practice can enhance ethical clarity and support informed, compassionate choices regarding fetal abnormalities.

References

• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Gerecke, L. (2017). The ethics of prenatal screening and diagnosis. In Wertz, R., & Hamilton, S. (Eds.), Ethical Challenges in Stem Cell Research, Cloning and Regenerative Medicine (pp. 185-204). Springer.
• Jonsen, A. R., Siegler, M., & Winslade, W. J. (2010). Clinical Ethics: A Practical Approach to Ethical Decisions in Clinical Medicine (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. (Trans. H. J. Paton, 1948).
• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of Biomedical Ethics (8th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Fletcher, J. (1978). Morality and Medicine: A Christian Appraisal. W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
• Leiblich, A. (2019). Ethical issues in prenatal diagnosis and fetal therapy. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 41(10), 1374-1382.
• Shapiro, J., & Riopelle, R. (2015). Ethical decision-making in prenatal testing. Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal Nursing, 29(1), 42-47.
• Thompson, B. (2019). Ethical perspectives on fetal abnormality. Journal of Medical Ethics, 45(3), 156-161.
• Wilson, M. (2018). Medical ethics and the fetus: Balancing autonomy and beneficence. Bioethics, 32(4), 265–272.