Biomedical ethics are moral principles used to apply judgment and values when practicing medicine. This involves the practical application of the principles in a clinical setting. In biomedical ethics, consequentiality moral reasoning is reasoning which views morality in the consequences of an act. Therefore, the focus is placed on how the experiment will help the world. Deontological ethics is where ethics of an action is judged from how the action adheres to a specific set of rules. When it comes to the issue of biomedical ethics, many scholars have different perspectives of what is right and wrong. An example of this is Watson and Arnerson who have different viewpoints when it comes to the issues in medicine. Clinical trials can be exploitative especially when the trials are done on individuals who are not well informed or those who are unaware of what they are taking part in because they are trials are free. Other individuals such as those who suffer from dementia may not make the right decisions to participate in clinical trials because they may not be aware of what is happening. Therefore, it is important to make sure that moral reasoning is considered in the practice (Wolf, 1990).
According to Watson’s arguments, moral responsibility is linked to how someone can respond to reason. There are instances where reasons can conflict with responsibility. The connection between responsibility and reason has been one that has been defended in various ways. Responsibility should be viewed in actions, responsibility for omissions and responsibility for consequences (Watson, 2001). Therefore, responsiveness which is seen in deontological ethics is not sufficient on its own for certain actions. An example is in clinical trials where an individual suffering from dementia may not be in a position to decide whether they should be part of a trial. Some of these individuals taking part in clinical trials may not be aware of what they are getting themselves into by signing up to be part of the trials since they cannot respond to reason.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In consequential reasoning, all humans should have an equal moral status. Anerson, gives an example of a child drowning. What should an individual do when they see a small child drowning and the attempt to save the child may cost them their own life? The individual would be required to help the child as we should the poor people in our society. This brings about the principle of benovalence. According to this, all human beings have equal rights. The rich should help the poor people regardless of race, gender or cultural differences. Individuals should make donations or take actions which could significantly save lives. Anerson’s principles are consequential as they expect people to do what is good as compared to other alternatives. However, consequential reasoning can be too demanding for people (Anerson, 1982).
In conclusion, in biomedical ethics, the moral reasoning which should be used is consequential reasoning. This is because for any clinical trial, it is important to make sure that all people are treated as equals when experimenting on new drugs instead of testing drugs on people who would be willing to try free clinical trials because of lack of funds or poor judgment because of lack of information. Therefore, morality is of outmost importance when dealing with such cases. Deontological reasoning is also important when specific rules are in place to deal with any ethical issues arising in the medical field.
References
Anerson, R. (1982). The principle of Fairness and free-Rider Problems. Ethics, 92(July): 616-33
Watson, G. (2001). Reason and responsibility. The University of Chicago. Ethics 11, 2001: 374-394
Wolf, S. (1990). Freedom and Reason . New York: Oxford University Press.
