Using Utilitarian Ethicals to Determine Right From Wrong Essay

Throughout Philosophy, morality is a central theme. Although each scholar views the definition of morality differently, the goal of people to be better and think for themselves is the main focus. Many philosophers have defined and categorized utilitarianism in different ways. In normative ethics, Jeremy Bentham believes an action is right if it promotes happiness and wrong if it produces the reverse of happiness but not just the happiness of a person who performed the action but also everyone that was affected by it (Duignan). Utilitarianism is the view that the morally right action is the action that has the most good (Driver). The foundation of morality in utilitarianism comes from utility or intrinsic value (Skorupski 256). In utilitarianism actions are evaluated by their utility instead of intrinsic properties of the actions (Skorupski 256). Utilitarianism says certain acts are right or wrong in themselves making us perform them or do not do them at all. On the contrary, concepts of the good go hand and hand with that of rights and obligation causing obligation to be determined by intrinsic value (Skorupski 256). John Stuart Mill theory of utilitarianism reveals what is utilitarianism, the morality, proof of validity, and the connection between justice and utility in the study of thinking.

Bentham argues that humans only commit actions on the bases of utility, which is the desire to enjoy happiness and prevent pain. He is certain that utility alone governs human morality and that the principles of utilitarianism are morally correct for every situation. Bentham claims that the purpose of morality is to increase the happiness of society and every action should aim to benefit the greatest number. He argues that without attaining happiness for the greatest number, society becomes dysfunction. In Bentham’s perfect utilitarian society, individuals would put aside their personal desires which cause pain to society as a whole in order to promote universal happiness. Bentham, strongly suggests that utilitarianism has no uncertainties, period. After objective analysis under Utilitarianism, before committing any action an individual must first examine the happiness which can be extracted from the action and the potential harms that it can cause, if the action yields more pain to the greatest number it is immoral. Bentham concludes that pain can’t yield happiness and that for an action to be morally correct it must

Working in the field as health care professionals, we are faced with ethical dilemmas almost always. Although each individual posses different values, there are specific codes of conduct to abide by, despite personal beliefs. Without the use of a structural code, individuals in the health care field would make decisions based on their own personal beliefs in accordance to their culture and religion. In the case of Marion and the pacemaker, we witness the desires of the patient at hand, Marion, and her family, be interrogated by the floor nurses. Although the intent behind the actions of the floor nurses can be described as morally just, thinking they are helping preserve the life of Marion, based on medical ethics, their behavior is of some degree to be questioned. This paper will focus on the boundaries we witness crossed by floor nurses and how they go against the medical ethics approved, and what effects they have on patients and their care givers.

After going through the case of Margie Whitson, the dilemma is the fact that Margie is looking to have her pacemaker removed which will in turn would end her life. So far, Margie Whitson has had a rough year and has come to the decision that she wants her pacemaker deactivated because she believes it is delaying her death. Her pacemaker is the only thing keeping her heart beating at this point. But even at that, her doctor, Dr. Vijay, refuses to deactivate it due to the fear of legal action/misunderstandings of the ethical and legal acceptability. Margie Whitson is very determined to have her pacemaker removed so she call for Jane Robison, the social

The morals that are in conflict with this issue is nonmaleficence because the doctors, nurses, social worker, and ethics committee main priority is to make sure that nonmaleficence is not being implemented by any means. Other morals that are in conflict would be justice and autonomy because the committee has to take in consideration the patient’s right to make her own decision about wanting to live or not but they also have to take into consideration the benefits and risks of the patient that could come along with going through the patient’s request of removing her pacemaker.

Jeremy Bentham is widely regarded as the father of utilitarianism. He was born in 1748 into a family of lawyers and was himself, training to join the profession. During this process however, he became disillusioned by the state British law was in and set out to reform the system into a perfect one based on the ‘Greatest Happiness Principle,’ ‘the idea that pleasurable consequences are what qualify an action as being morally good’. Bentham observed that we are all governed by pain and pleasure; we all

The dilemma that goes before the ethics committee is that Margie Whitson, age 95, wishes to have her pacemaker deactivated and her physician declined her request based on ethical concerns. By deactivating the pacemaker, the physician feels that patient would not survive. Mrs. Whitson’s physician, Dr. Vijay, is concerned that the deactivation of the pacemaker would be in conflict with the code of conduct and code of ethics as set forth by the American Medical Association, and his moral commitment to the welfare and livelihood of the patient. Therefore, the conflict arises as to whether or not the patient should have the pacemaker deactivate so that she can end her quantity of life and would this action be morally

"Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do" (1). Ethics and its subsequent practice have been a very contentious issue in American society of late. Our current economic resulted almost entirely of excessive greed and unethical actions of key financial institutions. As a result of their lack of integrity, the entire world economy has subsequently suffered in a very severe manner. Many have lost their homes; even more have lost their retirement savings, while still others have lost their livelihoods. Such is the power of ethics and how its practice can have both positive and negative consequences on society as a whole. With all the attention placed on the financial community and in particular, Wall Street, many are often neglecting the unethical practices of the health care industry. I believe a very ubiquitous and widespread issue apparent within the health care industry is that of patient dumping. Throughout this document, I will provide the ethical considerations regarding patient dumping and methods in which to prevent the spread of its practice. In particular, I aim to highlight the practices and potential ethical threats to Health South Inc.

An ethical dilemma is an incident that causes us to question how we should react based on our beliefs. A decision needs to be made between right and wrong. I have experienced many ethical dilemmas in my lifetime, so I know that there is no such thing as an ethical dilemma that only affects one person. I also know that some ethical dilemmas are easier to resolve than others are. The easy ones are the ones in which we can make decisions on the spot. For example, if a cashier gives me too much change, I can immediately make a decision to either return the money or keep it. Based on Kant’s, categorical imperative there are two criteria for determining moral right and wrong. First, there is universalizability, which states, “the person’s

Utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory that holds the morally right course of action in any given situation is the course of which yields the greatest balance of benefits over harms. More specifically, utilitarianism’s core idea is that the effects of an action determine whether actions are morally right or wrong. Created with the philosophies of Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806–1873), Utilitarianism began in England in the 19th Century. Bentham and Mill built their system of Utilitarianism on ancient hedonism (pursuing physical pleasure and avoiding physical pain). Although both of these philosophers agreed on the basic principals of Utilitarianism they disagreed on what exactly hedonism is.

The power disconnection by Mercury Energy resulted to the premature death of Mrs. Muliaga. Though health specialists assigned to Mrs. Muliaga had only given her 1-3 years of life, she had defied the odds and lived for over five years. When the news of Mercury Energy participation reached the public, the media become awash with accusations of how the state owned Mercury Energy victimizes its customers. Mercury Energy was accused on implementing capitalist principles in its operations. Capitalism in business means that a company is driven to make profits. Mercury Energy disconnected the Muliaga’s power supply without determining the underlying issues that could have caused the delay in payment. Mercury Energy was accused of ethical misbehavior by failing to overlook their disconnection policy based on the patient’s need for an operational oxygen machine.

Utilitarianism is a moral theory that has long been the subject of philosophical debate. This theory, when practiced, appears to set a very basic guideline to follow when one is faced with a moral dilemma. Fundamental Utilitarianism states that when a moral dilemma arises, one should take action that causes favorable results or reduces less favorable results. If these less favorable results, or pain, occur from this action, it can be justified if it is produced to prevent more pain or produce happiness. Stating the Utilitarian view can summarize these basic principles: "the greatest good for the greatest number". Utilitarians are to believe that if they follow this philosophy, that no matter what action they take, it

Making consistently ethical decisions is difficult. Most decisions have to be made in the context of economic, professional and social pressures, which can sometimes challenge our ethical goals and conceal or confuse the moral issues. In addition, making ethical choices is complex because in many situations there are a multitude of competing interests and values. Other times, crucial facts are unknown or ambiguous. Since many actions are likely to benefit some people at the expense of others, the decision maker must prioritize competing moral claims and must be proficient at predicting the likely consequences of various choices. An ethical person often chooses to do more than the law requires and less than the law allows.

Utilitarianism is one of the most commonly used ethical theories from the time it was formulated by Jeremy Bentham and John Stewart Mill in the nineteenth century. In his work, Utilitarianism, Bentham “sought to dispel misconceptions that morality has nothing to do with usefulness or utility or that morality is opposed to pleasure” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 53). To simplify the utilitarian principle, which is one of utility, one can surmise that morality is equated with the greatest amount of utility or good for the greatest number of people (MacKinnon, 2012). Also, with its orientation to the “end or goal of actions” (MacKinnon, 2012, p. 54), Utilitarianism thus, espouses the consequentialist principle, e.g., the evaluation of any human act lies not so much in the nature of the act or the drive behind the act but rather the result of the act (MacKinnon, 2012).

The word “ethics” comes from Greek ethikas meaning character. Today, we use ethics to describe the normative standard of behavior. The history of philosophical ethics has been broken up into five rational methods: Virtue, Traditional, Modern, and Post-Modern Ethics. Within these periods, the philosophy of ethics changed along with the changes being made within society.