Ethics is a component of philosophy that helps in differentiating between what is right and what is wrong. An ethical dilemma is a complicated situation, usually one that involves two decisions to be made, such that obeying one would affect the other. It is also referred to as ethical paradoxes because it involves the resolution of the paradox ( Barrett, 2000 ). The dilemma can be resolved by either using end based ethics or care-based ethics. Ethics does not support the law in the case at point, considering the desire of the child herself; she had never wanted to go back to her biological parents, seeing as she has spent all of her nine years under the care of foster parents. As such, she should have the right to decide on the question of her preferences in terms of parentage, of which the law appears to violate. Considering the consequences of the case, the foster parents should still have had the right to have custody of the child, entirely due to the previous behavior of the biological parents in question ( Barrett, 2000 ). In regard to the likely end effects of the decision, the court ought to have given both parents custody of the child, allowing the biological parents monitored visitations whilst maintaining the child under the care of her foster parents, in accordance with her preferences
According to the situation in the case, end based and care-based ethics can be used to solve the dilemma that it presents. End based ethics looks at the consequences of a situation and considers the action that has the best consequence, whereas care-based ethics bases its decision in consideration of what makes an action either right or wrong.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In this case, if the rule were to be passed in regard to end based ethics; the court would first have had to weigh the end consequences of its ruling to all of the parties involved, and this would have been done in the best interests of the foster parents, the biological ones and of the child’s. The courts focus solely on rules based ethics, and this disregards the possible consequences of placing the child under a parentage which she disapproves of. Placing the child under such like care predisposes her to mental disturbances. Besides, there exists the possibility that her biological parents may relapse into drug taking, and this might expose her to even further harm, physical as well as mental ( Barrett, 2000 ). The child’s foster parents appear responsible, seeing as their commitment to the child’s overall wellbeing has won them her affection. As such, in regard to end based care, the child should be retained under the care of her foster parents. Additionally, her parents should, if any, only be allowed supervised visitations, seeing as they too should have the right to access to their child.
Care based ethics preoccupies itself with whatever makes an action to be considered as right or wrong. The court, considering the facts relative to the case at hand, should uphold the child’s right to parents whom she approves of, in this case, her foster parents, seeing as this is central to the protection of her overall wellbeing. Besides, the child’s biological parents, compared to her foster parents, have a poor history with regards to parental responsibility. As such, applying history as well as the prevailing feelings on the part of the child, she can rightfully only be placed under the care of her foster parents.
Both schools rely on the moral value in decision making, whereby everyone has to be responsible for his/her actions. The difference between the two is that end based ethics looks at the consequences of a situation and considers the action that has the best consequence, whereas care-based ethics makes decisions in consideration of either the right or the wrong that’s inherent in an action.
The two schools of ethics are worthy of use in real-life situations, and especially in the current situation. The courts, in order to uphold the sanctity of the rule of law, should consider the rulings in relations to the associated consequences as only the attainment of the best consequences can assure the provision of justice ( Sachs, 1999 ). In addition, any ruling or decision, made in court or otherwise, should be aligned with moral values, putting in mind what is the intrinsic goodness or wrongness of the facts that surround them, in order to enhance the fair dispensation of justice.
Aristotle would have approved of both of my solutions to the case; He argues that moral virtue is the only practical road to effective action (Sachs, 1999). He goes ahead and says that what the person of good character loves with right desire and thinks of as an end with right reason, must first be perceived as beautiful, thus, his thinking is line with my solution.
In conclusion, therefore, end based and care-based ethics, are primary schools of thought whose application would have been crucial to the resolution of this case.
References
Sachs, J. (1999). Aristotle’s Metaphysics . New York: Green Lion Press.
Barrett, M.S. (2000). Moral Decision-Making. Retrieved from https://www.aacap.org/App_Themes/AACAP/docs/member_resources/ethics/foundation/approaches/moral_decision_making.ppt
