distributive justice can help us in solving the moral dilemma that Mary Smith finds herself in as she tries to decide on the candidate she would cancel for the day.
As the supervisors of Mary, there are a number of factors I would take into consideration in deciding on which candidate should be cancelled for the day; for the sake of equity and justice, I would consider the following factors in making this important decision; the factors are in order of priority. To begin with, I would consider the urgency and the seriousness of the patients’ diagnosis. Justice and equity demands that, all other factors constant, the patient with the most urgent and serious diagnosis should be treated first. The second factor that I would put into consideration is the patient’s availability; the patients who would be available for treatment for the following day should give room to the patients who would not find time to come for treatment the following day. The third factor that I would put into consideration is the amount of money paid by each of the patients. Justice demands that each person should be given his/her due, for that reason, the patients who pay more for the same service rendered should be given the first priority, all the other factors remaining constant. The fourth factor that I would consider is the amount of time required to treat each of the patients; since time was the limiting factor in treating all of the patients, all other factors remaining constant, the patients who would take least time should be handled first. Guided by these four factors, I would proceed analyze each of the case so as to decide on the patient to be cancelled for the day.
To begin with, the star athlete’s condition is not so serious and urgent; we are just told that the athlete needed screening; this fact shows that the athlete’s condition wasn’t so serious. We are, however, told that the athlete needed to be attended on time so as to go back to class because he had been