Application of the Normative Ethical Theories
Assignment 1: Application of the Normative Ethical Theories – Case 2.2
Normative ethical theories can be described as the study of ethical action, and it investigates the questions that occur when one plans to act. The normative theories examine, from a moral perspective, the questions that arise when individuals consider how to act. Furthermore, the theories investigate the rightfulness or wrongfulness of individual’s actions based on set standards. Various morality questions arose in when Dr. Cee, an established veterinarian, was handling Sandy, Ms. Kay’s dog. This paper, therefore, will explore the rightfulness or wrongfulness of Dr. Kay’s actions pertaining to Sandy’s case.
Various professional ethical issues surrounded the treatment of Sandy. For instance, experiments that had been conducted in treating the condition had a 94% success rate, which therefore meant that the success of the treatment was not assured. At the same time, failure to treat the dog would have made it suffer tremendously. Thus, one may question whether the doctor’s actions morally and ethically right or wrong. The normative ethics will be instrumental in judging whether the actions were right or wrong. The normative moral theories that will be employed in determining the case are the Aristotelian virtue ethics and the utilitarian theory, specifically the Act and Rule utilitarianism theories.
Aristotle states that the person who is virtuous or excellent in character does the right thing at the appropriate time, and in the proper way (Fritz, Anand, & Vaidya, 2008). This assertion forms the basis of the Aristotelian virtue ethics. With respect to this theory, there are two concerns that arise, one being personal happiness; in that, the theory requires that personal happiness be promoted at all costs. Furthermore, the Aristotelian theory stipulates that individuals should behave and have habits that promote or lead to personal happiness (Philosophy, 2008). For the Aristotelian theory, people have to assess things such as the actions or their intentions were aimed at leading to more personal happiness. The rightfulness or the wrongfulness of the actions is based on the happiness derived from the actions.
Dr. Cee’s actions were fueled by the need to make Sandy and her owner, Ms. Kay happy. As at the time, Sandy substantially influences Ms. Kay’s happiness, thus being ill reduced her happiness. Furthermore, it is apparent that the doctor did not want Sandy to suffer during the treatment, which was the reason why he considered euthanizing the dog. Sandy’s suffering caused unhappiness to Ms. Kay. While the actions of the doctor may appear inhumane, they were aimed at promoting the happiness of Ms. Kay. Since many experiments in the treatment of the condition had occurred, there was a high risk that even the treatment of Sandy was unsafe. Nevertheless, Dr. Cee believed that he could his actions would be the appropriate ones, and even Ms. Kay approved his actions, despite knowing the risks that were associated with the treatment. Therefore, as per the Aristotelian theory, the actions were morally right and acceptable, and the results were positive, would result in increased happiness. At the same time, Dr. Cee was sensitive, in that he did not give Ms. Kay high hopes, thus preparing her in the event that the worst happened during the treatment.
Other than the Aristotelian theory, the utilitarianism theories will be used to examine the morality of Sandy’s treatment. The utilitarian normative theories can be used to investigate whether actions are ethically and morally right or wrong (Peters, 2012). The focus of the utilitarian theories is the individual’s actions, with the main concerns including the effects of one’s actions. Proponents of the utilitarian theory believe it is part of their responsibility to make sure that morality is observed by making life better by adding to the number of goods moments (Peters, 2012). The good moments may include pleasure and happiness. Nevertheless, for there to be increased happiness, the amount of bad things must reduce (Philosophy, 2008). With the Utilitarian theories, moral codes do not apply, rather, the rightfulness or wrongfulness of actions is based on the contribution that the actions make to people’s happiness.
Dr. Cee found Sandy to be suffering from a disease that was difficult to treat, which made her owner unhappy. Besides, the treatment of the condition was substantially expensive, took time, and the success rate was 94%. Nevertheless, failure to treat the condition would have resulted to increased suffering to Sandy and her owner. It is, however, apparent that the doctor’s intentions were to make both Sandy and her owner happy. He was willing to take the appropriate actions to ensure that the dog experienced the least suffering when being treated, and reducing Mrs. Sandy’s hopes of getting her dog back. Thus, it can be seen that the doctors actions were aimed at reducing the suffering of the Sand and Ms. Kay, which would have increased their happiness.
Therefore, one may argue that Dr. Cee’s actions were morally right in that his actions were intended at making Ms. Kay and Sandy happy. For instance, one may even note that the doctor did not want anything in return for the treatment of Sandy, which was expensive. Besides, he was cautious enough not to give Ms. Kay assurance on the success of the treatment, which would decrease her suffering even if the worst would happen.
Hence, one may conclude that as per the Aristotelian virtue ethics, the right thing was done, at the right time, and in the right manner, with the aim being increasing happiness. As per the Utilitarian theory, the purpose of the actions was to reduce suffering and to increase happiness. Thus, the actions could be considered as having been ethically and morally right.
References
Allhoff, Fritz, and Anand J. Vaidya, eds. (2008). Professions in Ethical Focus: An Anthology. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.
Philosophy 333 Professional Ethics – Print Reading FIle. 2011. Athabasca, AB: Athabasca University.
Peters, J. (2012). Aristotelian ethics in contemporary perspective. New York: Routledge
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!
NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
