What Is More Important Morals or Ethics - Essay Example

The moral is the sense of right and wrong. It defines character and personal beliefs. Ethics on the other hand is a set of rules or guidelines that prescribes a certain action and practice of what is proper and acceptable in a given context. Ethics are often influenced by norms, and expectations of society, to a certain degree by morals and other factors that compel proper behavior. Not all ethical practice is morally right because what is the proper thing to do does not automatically mean that it is right. A classic example is a lawyer whose professional ethics compels him to defend his client vigorously even if he knows that his client killed a man which in essence is not moral. His defense of a client albeit the client killed a man, is consistent with another ethical value upheld by a society which is to give every man his day in court when accused of a crime.

In the case of Katy Butler’s parents in the article What Broke My Father’s Heart, the decision that has to be made that would require to use of morals or ethics was the dilemma of whether to stop the pacemaker in Jeff’s heart (Katy’s father) so that it will return to its normal function that will eventually put him to rest. Using the strict measurement of morality, stopping the pacemaker would, according to Dr. Rogan would tantamount to putting a pillow on Jeff’s head insinuating murder, and therefore, wrong. (1)But this is however simply because it failed to consider that Jeff did not want the pacemaker in his body that prolonged his agony and put him in a situation where people around him were forced to consider difficult options such as stopping his pacemaker. His situation was against his consent and could also be considered as not moral. The decision went to his wife who was not fully informed of the consequences of the pacemaker. Valerie, the wife, realized later that Jeff’s decision not to have a pacemaker was after all right because he was like a house that was collapsing after the pacemaker was installed in his body that was given was not a life,” but a prolonged and attenuated dying”.

(2)Thus, in the case of Jeff, the act of turning his pacemaker off was neither euthanasia nor assisted suicide as two of the leading medical association, the Heart Rhythm Society and the American Heart Association provided in the guidelines they issued on how to decide on turning off pacemakers. It is in fact, their moral and legal right to turn off the pacemaker if such a device only prolongs the agony of the patient which in the first place was never assented to by the patient.

(3)Jeff’s deteriorated health was also taking its toll on Martha’s health and she has to be put on anti-depressants and sleeping pills. Jeff’s health, which clearly showed no sign of recovery but only prolonged agony, not only burdens his wife but also makes her sick. Dragging people who cared for him into sickness can also be considered immoral and therefore should be factored in deciding to put off Jeff’s pacemaker.

(4)Finally, the act of prolonging Jeff’s life is also cruel knowing that he is in a miserable state. Letting him rest would not only be the moral and ethical thing to do but also kind knowing that he suffers each day he lives. The options of letting people who are suffering rest are supported by a study that reported that patients who are even a little bit better in their condition would trade a day of excellent health for years of sick condition. Read More