Ethical dilemmas are a common occurrence when persons find themselves experiencing challenges when making decisions that are likely to have serious moral consequences irrespective of the decision made (Miljeteig, Defaye, Desalegn, & Danis, 2019). In most cases, it can be argued that each of the options given in an ethical dilemma does not achieve the expected ethical outcome, which becomes a key challenge for the persons involved. The resolution of ethical dilemmas often reflects on a process through which one is expected to rethink the values or principles that define what can be justified as being ethical. That would help ensure that the decision reached, although not ethically acceptable, befits the core beliefs that one may hold in a given situation or scenario. It is from this perspective that this report will embark on an in-depth analysis of an ethical dilemma with the intention of having to resolve it in an amicable manner.
Ethical Dilemma
The ethical dilemma selected for this case involves Susan, who gets pregnant after years of trying but medical reports show that her baby has Down syndrome. Based on the advice that Susan gets from her doctors, her baby is likely to suffer, which serves as a justification for having to procure an abortion. Susan also seeks advice from Richard, a professor or evolutionary biology, who supports the whole idea of the abortion on the view that human beings have a responsibility of increasing happiness while decreasing suffering. In that view, Susan’s decision not to abort is much more likely to result in lifelong suffering not only for the child but also for herself.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Richard believes in the fact that the best possible decision, in the case, would involve termination of the pregnancy with the view that this would not only help alleviate suffering but also serve as the most ethical decision. The ethical dilemma that Susan is facing reflects on whether she should make the decision to procure an abortion taking into account that this would go against her core beliefs. On the other hand, she is faced with the decision of allowing the baby into the world with full knowledge of its exposure to lifelong suffering (Dawkins, 2014).
Core Beliefs
One of the core beliefs that is of great importance to consider in dealing with this ethical dilemma is the Christian worldview, which is reflective of a religious perspective on how one is expected to make his or her decision. The sixth commandment states that, “You shall not murder” (Braye, 2017, p.216). Basically, the idea of having to abort a live fetus can be considered as being murder, which goes against the principles of Christianity. The decision to terminate her pregnancy would mean that Susan would be in violation of the commandments that serve as driving principles for Christianity.
Another core belief that can be considered reflects on negative utilitarianism. Negative utilitarianism is built on the idealistic approach of having to minimize the total amount of aggregate suffering while seeking to maximize on the total amount of happiness (Gjuraj & Gjuraj, 2018). From this point of view, it is clear that Susan’s decision ought to be based on the need to promote happiness and reduce suffering. That shows that Susan ought to weigh her decision based on the extent to which it is likely to bring out happiness not only to herself but also to all other persons including the child that is to be born.
Resolution
Based on the core beliefs, as have been presented in the previous section, it is clear that Susan faces a key challenge in seeking to make a decision that would be reflective of the best possible outcome. However, the most effective resolution to the dilemma would involve having to terminate the pregnancy with the view being that this would help prevent suffering and increasing happiness. An evaluation of the moral asymmetry of happiness and suffering suggests that the decisions that one makes determines the extent to which he or she experiences a sense of happiness or suffering (Robinson, Page-Gould, & Plaks, 2017). In this case, Susan ought to understand that although her decision would go against her Christian core beliefs, she has a key responsibility towards promoting happiness for herself, her child, and everyone around her. Making the decision to bring the child into the world would go against this moral expectation, as it is only likely to result in a buildup of suffering.
Evaluation
As a result of the decision by Susan to terminate her pregnancy, she remains assured of the fact that she is able to protect her baby from the possibility of lifelong suffering attributed to lack of proper care as a result of Down syndrome. The basic expectation is that Susan’s decision to procure an abortion would be considered as the most effective decision that is reflective of best possible expectations for both Susan and her child. Additionally, she will also be assured of the fact that she will be in a much better position of having to push for happiness considering that she will have avoided an instance where her child would result in her having sleepless nights trying to find ways of trying to take care of him or her. Although she is likely to experience a sense of guilt due to her decision, this does not measure when compared to the suffering avoided based on her decision.
Comparison
If Susan was to consider the Christian worldview when making her decision, she would make the decision to keep her pregnancy irrespective of the advice that she receives from her doctors and Richard. Basically, her decision will be grounded on the fact that she may work towards finding ways through which to provide for her child regardless of the fact that he or she may be suffering from Down syndrome. Additionally, she will also make her decision based on the fact that she has been struggling to get pregnant for a while to not avail; thus, meaning that this child is a gift from God. However, her decision is likely to have unintended consequences on the fact that she is likely to bring about suffering not only on herself but also on her child. The ultimate result is that her decision would be overshadowed by the fact she avoided promoting happiness.
Conclusion
Ethical dilemmas often create a challenge considering that they reflect on the need for persons to make decisions with none of the possible options being ethically acceptable. In this report, the ethical dilemma considered involves the case of Susan, who after struggling to get pregnant for a while, is pregnant with a baby that has been diagnosed with Down syndrome. Susan has the option to procure an abortion on the basis that bring this child into the world would expose him or her to lifelong suffering. Susan also faces the decision to keep the child considering abortion goes against the Christian worldview. From the analysis of both positions, Susan ought to resolve the ethical dilemma by aborting the child with the view being that this would help maximize on happiness while reducing on suffering. Her decision ought to be grounded on the fact that she has a responsibility to promote happiness not only for herself but also for her child and others.
References
Braye, S. (2017). “You Shall Not Murder”: Atos at the Paralympic Games. Journal of Disability & Religion , 21 (2), 215-229.
Dawkins, R. (2014, August 21). Abortion & Down syndrome: An apology for letting slip the dogs of Twitterwar [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://richarddawkins.net/2014/08/abortion-down-syndrome-an-apology-for-letting-slip-the-dogs-of-twitterwar/
Gjuraj, E., & Gjuraj, T. (2018). Moral Belief on Utilitarianism toward Misused Approach to Moral Evaluation. Itinerari di ricerca storica , (2), 227-238.
Miljeteig, I., Defaye, F., Desalegn, D., & Danis, M. (2019). Clinical ethics dilemmas in a low-income setting-a national survey among physicians in Ethiopia. BMC medical ethics , 20 (1), 1-13.
Robinson, J. S., Page-Gould, E., & Plaks, J. E. (2017). I appreciate your effort: Asymmetric effects of actors' exertion on observers' consequentialist versus deontological judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 73 , 50-64.
