Decision on the Patient to Receive Heart Transplant - Paper Example

As the lead heart surgeon at the facility, it is my responsibility to assess our patients on the waiting list and decide the protocol based on the urgency of the case for patients who receive heart transplants. I understand this is a controversial mandate and may lead to chaos, but it is in my best interest to serve our clients by maximizing our resources. This is the reason I utilize various ethical guidelines to ensure my decision are competent in multiple cases. For this context, I have decided to give the heart to Lisa who is a young girl and also the only daughter of parents who probably will never be able to have another child. I utilized the utilitarian, categorical imperative, and the majority rule theories to reach my decision.

Utilitarianism

This theory for ethical and moral consideration states that actions are justified if they lead to the highest amount of happiness. The happiness should lead to pleasure for the involved parties. The central moral premises of this theory is the promotion of pressure and free people from pain (Mill, 1863). Lisa was the only child of the parents who had minimal chances of getting another baby, therefore fulfilling their dream of seeing their only child even for a few days would lessen their pain and culminate to pleasure. Lisa as a child had few chances of surviving to the age of 20 years hence granting her the opportunity to see the world even for few days was pleasurable enough. Therefore from the theory, it is only best that she gets the heart transplant before the other patients on the waiting list.

Categorical imperative

This ethical theory states that when people take action, it is essential to consider whether other people would have taken the same position. It evaluates actions based on the acceptance by a majority who might be in the capacity to make similar calls and action (Misselbrook, 2013). This means that it should reflect the thoughts and action of many people in that context. Therefore, in this context giving the heart to Lisa was not only beneficial to the girl but also to her desperate parents, thus a decision that would have cared for the needs of many some which are irreversible such as living without a child forever. Such as a situation could have garnered many sympathy votes, from those in a similar case.

The majority rule

The model is also termed as the democratic theory where more than half of the parties involved in a case approves the judgment and conclusion of a situation. The resolution or mode of action should be in-line with the ideas and beliefs of the parties involved by reflecting their vote as a team (Landemore, 2010). As the lead heart surgeon, I represent the decision of the board, and this makes my decision legitimate and democratic as each member trusts me to make a reasonable, ethical, and moral choice for the best action. Therefore the selection of Lisa as the beneficiary for the heart transplant makes the decision a majority position.

In conclusion, Lisa and other patients on the waiting list were in dire need of the heart transplant and finding the best criteria to determine the one to be given the priority was a challenge. For this reason using ethical theories such as utilitarian, categorical imperative, and the majority rule theories are vital for dealing with such dilemmas.

References

Landemore, H. E. (2010). Majority Rule and the Wisdom of Crowds: the Task-Specificity of Majority Rule as a Predictive Tool.

Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. London: Parker, Son, and Bourn.

Misselbrook, D. (2013). Duty, Kant, and deontology. The British Journal of General Practice, 63(609), 211-211.