Looking back at the past few years in society, we have been taught different traditions and rules that must be followed by. With these certain traditions and regulations has helped establish peace amongst the community. However, there are issues that are not acceptable in the society that we live in today. “Thou shalt not kill” (Holy Bible KJV) this is based on religious beliefs from the ten commandments that God sat in stone for us to follow. This is a way to help control our society in the political and spiritual sense. In other ways we acknowledge that this rule has been the foundation for our country for many years. Now let’s dig in a little deeper on the reason why, I’m writing this paper.
The reason for writing this paper is for me to analyze this case study that was provided and to apply the worldly views that we learned in class. I will try my best to convey the cases objectives as they are applied to utilitarianism as well as deontology. With, I will also give demonstration on virtue ethics as this relates to our daily lives and this case. In this paper, I will attempt to show that regardless of your intention or outcome that one must decide what is important to them. By looking at which virtue or outcome is going to be their best choice and decide which ideology will get them to that point.
In this case study it is questioning the ethics behind the Chinese receiving funding that provides medical care to small town and to large cities in China. Part of the problem behind most companies funding people is that they expect you to have a plan on becoming self-sufficient. The Chinese corporation did just that, but the way they designed their plan to begin to introduce abortions. They are doing so with the purpose of pulling in the blue-collar people to have more funds to pay than the current patrons and those below poverty. It is sad to say that in their current state; their funders do not assist them enough to help support everyone all the time. Once the funds ran dry the corporation then had to turn people away, which resulted to deaths in the community.
Let’s start off looking at utilitarianism. The definition of a utilitarian is “An action is right if it produces the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of people affected by the action” (DeGeorge, p.56) This will now become more difficult when dealing with certain individualistic minds that insist on everyone receiving an equal share of things. What we need to learn in life is that life is unfair and can be cruel. Beginning to look at some of the ethical issues from utilitarianism standpoint, we need to first state correctly the action that needs to be evaluated. The action now is to see if the Chinese organization is going to get funded with the knowledge of knowing that they will be performing abortions to stay independent after the funding stops. The next step is to figure out who will be impacted by this decision. The people who it would affect is the organizational leaders, the organizational leaders of the Chinese company and myself. People who would be indirectly impacted are the employees of the organization, those who contributed to the organization, the Chinese people who receive service from the clinic, those who would be indulging in the abortions, the NGO’s who previously contributed funds for the free clinics, and the race. Now looking at the list of people that was listed, I would be affected by this move and with this decision this may or may not go against my personal beliefs. It is fascinating to think about how one move can bring down our entire establishment. We must look out for our employees as well as think about the people who are funding us as well. Looking at our organization and stakeholders we need to take them into consideration before we can take a stand as a utilitarian with this problem. The problem still stands on whether we are going to fund the practice of abortion or not. To conclude the utilitarian approach, we need to look at our pros and cons on this matter.
With this move this would help my career out in the long run. The Chinese organization has clinics in large cities and small areas located in the out skirts of the towns. It would be beneficial for my company to donate to the community by funding the program. The small towns would benefit from this because of the medication and services to fight death and poverty. The organization would also gain from this because they can become independent and don’t need any donors. The participants have no more worries dealing with the government policy putting restrictions on the number of people they have because they could always come and abort an unwanted child. Now the citizens don’t have to worry about the extra financial burden and the strain of an unexpected child. Being able to determine the sex of the child would help the family to carry on the name if it’s a male. With the government putting restriction on the number of children and it will give families problems of having that male support. Unplanned pregnancies will be a thing of the past especially for the blue-collar families that weren’t participating before. This will help both parties win because the people will have an opportunity in receiving services in a clean area and it helps them to become independent with the help of our funding.
However, our cons have a social and emotional impact when you view abortions. How could we become an organization that only supports abortions with funds, we would be just like any other company. Given this time to aid the Chinese Health Organization, as a company we would be telling future clients and funders that we stand behind the practices that allow abortions. This could go both ways, meaning that it may open new opportunities for more clients and donators who see our same views, or it could put a bad taste in people’s mouth which could close doors. To help gain participants who never thought about abortion prior to us offering the services. We would let them know that we provide sterile equipment and a clean place to receive our service. Even though on positive side of things it may be for the greater good to move forward, but the negatives could change how we are running our company and affect the others we are trying to help.
Now, we need to figure out some outcome for the organization. If we choose on going with the company, they will then start the abortion services and in the next few years become independent. For those that were impacted with the changes will receive medication to help solve some of the deaths. This will then change the look on our company, it would help China with our funding towards by ending the lives of unwanted children. If we don’t want to help the company, then the children will for sure die. Free clinics will provide medication for those who are in need but won’t be provided yearly. Once the funds start running dry then the company won’t be able to help with everything. That means they won’t be able to be independent and for the people seeking service will then still get service in unclean and dangerous areas. The image that we have set for ourselves well be kept up and we will not support something that conflicts against our morals. The organization ethics will stay in place, so that we can continue moving forward with projects with others that doesn’t pose any threats to our company.
The next move as a utilitarian is finding different options. A rational idea would be is to find a different way to help the free clinic gain more revenue for their abortions. One thing they could do is start selling contraceptives cheaper or they perform surgeries that would prevent people from having kids. This will give as another alternative for those who kept having accidental pregnancies and for the people who no longer want kids. Bringing the blue-collar class in the mix this will help them to become independent.
The last and final piece to the puzzle in utilitarianism is what are the long term effects going to look like. If the Chinese corporation receive funds from my company then go on with what they plan to do we would lose the support of their values, which means in short terms a win for them and a lost for us. If they never become independent but our values stay in place, it would become a lose for them and us because we won’t get the exposure or contacts. How I feel about the situation, its not about how much good we try to create, but the least amount of bad. The way thing is looking for the Chinese corporation coming from a utilitarian stand, we should fund them by leading them on using alternative services besides abortion.
Looking at another ideology would be Deontology. The definition for deontology is to “Do the right thing. No matter what.” (DeGeorge, p.62) When looking at the situation from this stance, we must follow these rules of consistency, respect and autonomy. If the action is right to what deontology says it must be consistent. I think this may be the right step for me, but it must be right for everyone. Looking at killing someone in self defense would not meet the criteria for deontology. That means we couldn’t fund them nor could anyone else, because it would have to be consistent.
Moving forward we must give respect to those around us. In our book it tells us to “Act so that you treat your humanity, whether it is your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never as means to an end.” (DeGeorge, p.66) We should be observing the clinic and seeing how each person is impacted. Not trying to make our company to look better, but to help them to become more independent. Our intentions are looking at how everyone is affected with the outcomes and not just how it will impact us.
Finally, we must view Autonomy. This ideology makes us think on is it a good decision or whether we want that outcome. With deontology it makes autonomy require everyone in that situation should make the same decision. If we view this case from the deontology stance, this company would not get one cent for funding. If the outcome is not what we like, then that says that to us its not the greatest decision. Our money wouldn’t be spent on if they were just letting kids die or focusing on abortions. Faced with the circumstances from a deontology stance we should be able to justify our actions if our action is ethical.
Virtue ethics in this case study identifies that the Chinese corporation has some of the same values that our company display. Our choices are clear if trying to take care of the worlds poverty if its our main objective, based on our choices of virtues. If we flip the script and say your virtues are not to help change world poverty, but if we go to the extreme and look at it religious stand point. That would be a sin from what the Bible tells us in the ten commandments. Since abortion is a frowned upon offense, there would be no funding to that corporation. It just depends on your personal virtues and what you hold higher.
In conclusion, whether you use Utilitarianism, Deontology, or Virtue Ethics to make any kind of decision. You must decide what is important to you and which ideology will help you to get to your outcome. I believe that abortion is a choice and all human beings have a right to make. Even though I have more of a deontology perspective when it comes to healthcare. I feel that it is the duty of healthcare professionals to give solutions to help save lives.