There are three candidates waiting for the heart transplant. The first candidate is Jerry, who has 3 teenage daughters studying and an unemployed wife. He is the bread winner in the family and is 5 years short of his retirement eligibility. His chances of living after a heart surgery will be 10-15 years.
The second candidate is a 12 year old girl named Lisa. Her father works in the same hospital and offered to donate or give $2 Million dollars if the heart will be transplanted to Lisa. Lisa suffered 12 years of lifelong health issues and her chances of living after the surgery are not good. The hospital needed money to finish the construction of the specialized facilities that could help a lot of patients.
The third candidate is Ozzie who happens to be a 38 years old homeless drug abuser. He is single and his heart condition is due to excessive intake of cocaine. He is also a volunteer in a certain charity and is teaching and helping troubled teens and giving them insights and wisdom against drug abuse and other issues. He signed a contract in the same charity and will continue working as a counsellor-mentor if he will get the transplant.
Ethics is defined as the study of right or wrong conduct which focuses on moral situation (Ruggiero, 2008). In the situation above we can definitely say that making the decision on granting the heart transplant to only one of the three candidates is very difficult. There are a lot of things to consider. At first, when evaluating the three candidates, my feelings deeply sympathize for Jerry. Jerry is the most suitable candidate to get the transplant because he is the one which has the highest chances of living years and he has 4 family members who will be benefited.
His 3 children need his support for their education and his wife is unemployed. But in making an ethical decision, feelings such as sympathy are not reliable for analysing moral issues (Ruggiero, 2008). When deciding by feelings, it is completely ignoring other people’s feelings (Ruggiero, 2008). According to J.S. Mill and Jeremy Bentham who are the most famous teleological ethicists, the most ethical action is the one based on utility or consequence and is the one which gives the most benefits and least harm. When making a decision on principles of utilitarianism, we should consider everyone affected by the decision. In this situation, Jerry will directly benefit 4 persons, Ozzie will benefit the troubled children and Lisa will help the hospital finish the specialized facilities and will help a lot of patients. Lisa’s condition may not be good after the heart transplant, but her father, an oncologist in the same hospital, will donate a big amount of $2 Million that will greatly help improve the hospital and will therefore serve and help more patients in the future. The benefit that Lisa can give is a long-term benefit to a number of patients. Granting the transplant to Lisa will definitely boost Dr. Doe’s loyalty to the hospital and his loyalty to the patients. Although Ozzie can help a lot of troubled children serving as a counsellor-mentor, his chances of recidivism to drug addiction is high. And if he