Question

Imagine you work in a hospital. You discover that a doctor is about to make an important decision. "Dr.

X"is doing research that might help save many hundreds of thousands, or even millions of lives. But to
complete that research, she needs to actively kill a perfectly healthy person to study how a recently-dead,
healthy heart works.
"Dr. X" has decided to use a much older, homeless person with no friends or family. No one but you and
the doctor know this is about to happen. The homeless person will not experience any pain as a result of
the experiment. Let's also say, for the purpose of this scenario, that "Dr. X" won't get caught" unless you
say something to the authorities. You're wondering whether or not you should try to stop Dr. X, perhaps
by publicizing what she's going to do and getting the law involved.
Answer these questions:
(a) How would utilitarian ethics respond, and why? (b) How would Kantian ethics respond, and why?
(c) And which side, if either, has the most rational and well-argued position--and why?

Answer 1

it all boils down to the hippocratic oath, "to do no harm"..every H.C. professional is required to take this oath

Step-by-step explanation:

everyone in the Health Care field has 2 take this oath b4 certification or licensing to be a dr.or RN..even CNA' s take this oath..the purpose is to be aware of your choices, and actions as a H.C. pro...