An army surgeon performed an unnecessary operation on a battalion commander mere

Question

An army surgeon performed an unnecessary operation on a battalion commander merely to remove him from battle during the time he would need to recuperate from surgery. As a result of over-aggressiveness, the battalion commander had an abnormally high casualty rate among his men, and the surgeon knew that by performing the operation he would probably save the lives of hundreds of soldiers who otherwise would have been victims of the commander’s eagerness. A fellow surgeon, counseled him that it was unethical to operate on a healthy body even under those circumstances. But the operating surgeon, feeling that more good than bad would come out of his action, performed the operation anyway.

To what extent do you feel each surgeon was right in his moral position? Do you feel that in this case the good end justified the means the operating surgeon was using? Why or why not? Is there ever a time when a good end justifies any means used to attain it? If so, when?  If not, why not?

Explanation / Answer

THE FIRST SURGEON WAS HAVING GOOD INTENTIONS ANS HAS SEEN TH EFFECT OF THE COMMANDER BEING RETURNING TO THE BATTLEFIELD AND THE DEATH OF MANY SOLDIERS JUST BECAUSE OF HIS AGGRESSIVENESS AND HE HIMSELF NOT LEADING THE FORCE. HIS ORDERS WERE TO DANGEROUS FOR THE BATALLION. PVER THE DOCTOR WAS MAKING USE OFA GOOD PRACTICE TO SAVE THE SOLDERS AND GET A GOOD END.

THE SECOND SURGEON WAS ALSO CORRECT IN HIS PLACE BECAUSE HE KENW THAT IT WAS ETHICALLY WRONG TO OPERATE A PATIENT WITHOUT HIS CONSENT. THE DOCTOR HAS TO GIVE AUTONOMY TO THE PATIENT BEFORE DOING ANY TRATMENT. AND IN THIS CASE THERE WAS NO NECSSITY AT ALL TO OPERATE. THUS THE SECOND SURGEON WWAS ALSO CORRECT IN HIS PLACE.

OVER HERE WHAT WE SEE IS THAT IT IS A WROBG ACT BY THE SURGEON HE IS TRYING TO ACHEIVE A GOOD END BY DOING AN EVIL ACT. HIS ACTION IS NOT JUSTIFIABLE ON ANY GROUNDS DUE TO THE EVIL ACT.

A GOOD END CAN BE JUSTIFIED TO USE ANY MEANS IF THE DECISON HAS GOOD EFFECTS ONLY FOR THE PATIENT AND NOT OTHERS LIKE GIVING MORPHINE TO A PATIENT IN ACUTE PAIN WHICH ON THE OTHER HAND WILL SHORTEN THE LIFE BY AFFECTING RESPIRATORY SYSTEM. BUT IF THE GOOD END AFFECTS OTHER PEOPLE THEN THE PATIENT AND IS DONE BY AN EVIL ACT THEN IT CANNOT BE JUSTIFIED.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.