|Due By (Pacific Time)||12/09/2016 02:00 pm|
Use the Justice-Based Ethics theory to justify the ethical decision that you would make concerning the dilemma in the article. APA format please.
Justice-based ethics is based on an important moral restraint called “the veil of ignorance.” The philosopher John Rawls believed that all social contracts, such as who should receive a scarce organ donation, should be handled so that no one would know the gender, age, race, health, number of children, income, wealth, or any other arbitrary personal information about the recipient. This “veil of ignorance,” meaning we would not see the recipients of our choices, would allow the decision-makers (such as Congress or medical experts) to be impartial in their decisions. The so-called “veil of ignorance”means that no one person is advantaged or disadvantaged. In effect, the “least well off” person would then have the same chance for scarce resources and justice as the more educated and wealthy. Rawls, who equated justice with fairness, assumed that people have a self-interest when forming social contracts such as who will receive medical care.
The justice-based model of ethics infers that every citizen should have equal access to medical care. For example, children with genetic diseases which would require large financial resources deserve good care simply as a matter of justice. Proponents of justice based ethics believe insurance premium rates and risk should be spread over all members of the nation such as in a federal single-payer system.
Opponents of this theory believe it is unfair for the healthy to subsidize the unhealthy. Furthermore, under the current gigantic healthcare system and media coverage it is impossible to have the “veil of ignorance” that is demanded by this ethical model.
out of 1971 reviews
out of 766 reviews
out of 1164 reviews
out of 721 reviews
out of 1600 reviews
out of 770 reviews
out of 766 reviews
out of 680 reviews