Utilitarian, and Kantian Ethical Principles - Case Study Example

Utilitarian, and Kantian ethical principles Introduction Doctors quiet often come across with difficult situations in which they wereconfused of whether to inform the patient about his/her critical conditions or not. Most of the patients may develop more stress and their condition may become too bad if they came to know that their diseases are incurable and their remaining time in the earth is limited. This often prevents the doctors from informing them about their exact conditions. But as per medical ethics a patient has every right to know about his medical condition even if it is worst or good. In the given case study the doctor is facing such a dilemma in which the fellow doctors ask him to reveal the truth to the cancer affected patient about her critical condition while her husband never interested in doing so. This paper briefly analyses such a medical condition through the perspectives of Utilitarian and Kantian ethical principles. As per the Utilitarian theory, the moral validity of an action is determined by the outcome of the action and hence the doctor should not reveal the truth to the patient that she is going to die in the near future. But as per Kantian ethical theory the purpose of morality is not to make others happy, but to do the right thing just for the sake of doing (Maccarelli) and hence the doctor should inform the patient about her limited time ahead. Utilitarian approach A utilitarian always analyses things based the utility of the outcome. In the given case study the patient may not get any benefit or utility in knowing her critical condition. But there is every chance that the patient may develop depression or anxiety when she knows about her limited days. But as per medical ethics the patient have the right to know about her medical condition and the doctor is liable to explain her medical condition to her. Legally the doctor don’ have the right to keep her condition as a secret. Keeping the patient optimistic about the recovery when there is no chance for that is one way of cheating the patient. The patient has trusted the doctor and hence it is morally wrong to give her false expectations and beliefs. Moreover the patient can prepare herself for her future death once she realized about it just like Britain’s famous reality show celebrity Joe Goody did. Joe Goody has celebrated even her death and she has earned lot of money for kids by selling the outright claim for telecasting her last moments. Same way the patient in this case study also can prepare her for the death if she gets prior information about it. But as per the principles of utilitarianism, cultural, intellectual and spiritual pleasures are of greater value than mere physical pleasure because the former would be valued higher than the latter by competent judges. (Utilitarianism) Revealing the truth to the patient may bring some material benefits to the patient (Like the Joe Goody case), but the patient will never get spiritual pleasure by knowing the truth and hence there is nothing wrong in denying the patient information about her possible death as per the utilitarian approach. Kantian approach “Kant defines the demands of the moral law as "categorical imperatives." Categorical imperatives are principles that are intrinsically valid; they are good in and of themselves; they must be obeyed in all situations and circumstances if our behavior is to observe the moral law. A categorical imperative is an unconditional obligation; that is, it has the force of an obligation regardless of our will or desires”. (Immanuel Kant) Kant believed that human being has a special place in the creations of god and hence morality is the core of every actions or duties performed by human being. He has explained morality in terms of categorical imperatives. In the given case of the cancer patient, as per the Kantian theory, the doctor should explain the medical condition to the patient even if it may bring negative results. Since man cannot have absolute surety in what is going to happen in the next moment, it is his mission to do his duty and don’t bother about the outcomes. In other words, man come to this earth for a temporary assignment and he is not sure about his mission in the past, present and in future. So we don’t have the authority to keep things as secret since it is against the principles of morality. As per the Kantian theory of universal law formulation (ULF) "Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." In other words maxims be chosen only if they may true everywhere. Another perspective of ULF is "Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end." (Categorical Imperative) Maxim formulation and revision as per Kantian ethical theory “Nobody knows from where we come and where we go” The above maxim seems to be true everywhere since nobody on earth has ever proved from where they come and where go. But as per Kantian theory, human being has a special role in the creations and hence we can safely say that Kant believed in creations or in other words he believed in God or the Creator. In that sense, we can argue that we came to this world as part of the mission of the God and after the mission ended we will go back to God. So God is the only person who knows about origin and life after death. So the above maxim can be revised as “No human being knows about their origin or life after death”. Comparison of utilitarian and Kantian approach Kantian philosophy and the utilitarian philosophy are entirely different in my opinion. Kant stresses the importance of morality in every action while as per utilitarian theory; the outcomes of actions are important rather than moral principles. Utilitarian theory emphasizes that out actions must be for the wellness of the human being and hence deliberate actions which may result in negative impacts should be avoided. It is difficult to keep both Morality and Utility at the same time in an action since both of them have their foundations on almost opposite principles. In my opinion Kantian ethical theory is more useful to human beings since we don’t have any control over the outcomes even if we adopt utilitarian approaches. “Man proposes God disposes” and hence nobody can guarantee the result of a utilitarian approach. On the other hand, morality has its foundations on the existence of God and hence the belief in moral values will definitely provide hope for human being even after the end of our mission in this world. Utilitarian approach only aimed at the temporary gains in this world and hence I strongly believe in Kantian ethical theory. Conclusions Utilitarian theory and Kantian theory are two distinct theories about life on earth. Utilitarian theory measures an action based on the utility of the outcome while Kantian theory doesn’t mind about the outcomes. Kantian theory stresses the importance of morality even if the outcomes were not so good. In my opinion Kantian theory is far better than the utilitarian theory and hence the doctor should inform the cancer patient about her limited days as part of his moral responsibility irrespective of the outcomes Works Cited 1. Maccarelli, Sarah. “The Ethical Theory of Kantianism.” 2006. 6 June 2009. 2. “Categorical Imperative”. 6 June 2009. 3. “Immanuel Kant”. 6 June 2009. 4. “Utilitarianism”. 6 June 2009. Read More