Recent orders
Ethical Dilemma In Euthanasia
Ethical Dilemma In Euthanasia
Many leading medical practitioners have over time expressed differing opinions on the issue of euthanasia. For example ten doctors from major hospitals wrote in a New England Journal of Medicine stating that “it is not immoral for a physician to assist in the rational suicide of a terminally ill person” (Wanzer, 1989, p. 844). There is also the famous case of Dr. Jack Kervorkian who used his suicide machine on a patient suffering from Alzheimer’s disease in 1990 to end her life in the back of a Volkswagen car (Risen, 1990). According to Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs (1992) “surveys have consistently indicated that a large majority of people in the United States would like to be allowed to end their lives before incurable and painful diseases finally kill them” (p. 2229). These events and many more similar cases have made euthanasia a controversial issue that begs for a solution. It is an ethical debate that seeks to provide answers to the question whether assistance to commit suicide is right or wrong and whether family members have the right to request for the ending of the life of one of their own.
In order to understand the ethical considerations of euthanasia, it is imperative to first provide a concise definition of euthanasia. The American Medical Association defines euthanasia as “the act of bringing about the death of a hopelessly ill and suffering person in a relatively quick and painless way for reasons of mercy. In this report, the term euthanasia will signify the medical administration of a lethal agent to a patient for the purpose of relieving the patient’s intolerable and incurable suffering” (Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, 1992, p. 2230).
Euthanasia has also been defined as “the act or practice of painlessly putting to death persons suffering from incurable conditions of diseases” (Wolhandler, 1984, p. 363). Euthanasia is better understood when it is subdivided and classified as voluntary or involuntary and as active or passive euthanasia. Voluntary euthanasia refers to the ending of someone’s life by another person with the consent of the one being killed. The consent can be in the form of writing such as a will or last testament. Involuntary euthanasia refers to the ending of another person’s life without his or her consent. The American Medical Association describes the issue of consent as follows:
“Voluntary euthanasia is euthanasia that is provided to a competent person on his or her informed request. Non-voluntary euthanasia is the provision of euthanasia to an incompetent person according to a surrogate’s decision. Involuntary euthanasia is euthanasia performed without a competent person’s consent” (Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs, 1992, p. 2230).
Passive euthanasia refers to the act of letting a patient die by removing him or her from an artificial life support system such as a respirator or feeding tubes. It can also involve the discontinuance of medical treatment that is critical to the sustenance of the patient’s life. Active euthanasia on the other hand involves taking active measures to bring the life of a patient to an end by, for example, a lethal injection (Gifford, 1993).
Euthanasia is a controversial issue that can be supported or opposed from different ethical perspectives. Legalization of euthanasia has been a movement popularized since the 19th century in Britain and has gained a large following in the United States in recent times. The popularity of this movement can be attributed to emergence of groups like the Hemlock Society whose members actively agitate for the right of a terminally ill person to a dignified death (Gifford, 1993).
Euthanasia can be supported by the fact that every individual has rights guaranteed by the Constitution to choose when to die. These rights are provided from the standpoint of self-determination and right to privacy. Liberty is a basic guarantee of the constitution which involves the right to choose when to die. Therefore any individual should be allowed to seek the services of a medical practitioner for assistance to commit suicide or active euthanasia when there are valid reasons for it.
Secondly, passive techniques of euthanasia can be argued to be morally acceptable since they simply provide a way for natural death to take place unlike active methods which independently cause death. It has been argued that putting a terminally ill person on artificial life support system can be equated to the use of technology to prolong life unnaturally. Adams (1992) addresses the issue of passive techniques of euthanasia by posing the question, “Is a physician who turns off a functioning respirator actively turning off a machine or ‘omitting’ to provide air, or is a patient who refuses food and water actively starving or ‘omitting’ to eat?” (p. 2028).
Thirdly, patients in great pain are usually given large amounts of pain relief medications because the pain they undergo can be so great that it can easily lead to death. From an ethical standpoint, a physician who administers a lethal dosage of pain relief medication can not be blamed because his or her intention was to bring comfort to a suffering patient even though the ensuing death could have been foreseeable. Such cases can not be differentiated from active euthanasia which is done with the consent of the patient’s family.
Newman (1991) states that euthanasia gives a terminally ill patient control and ability to face the agony of sickness and death effectively and a “total ban on assisted deaths might have another unintended, detrimental effect…persons with diseases like Alzheimer’s are now tempted to try suicide at an early stage of their disease when they are still mentally and physically fit… if they knew euthanasia were available later, perhaps through an advance directive or health care proxy, these individuals might choose to live longer, through a later stage of the illness” (p. 183). In any case, the state does not reserve the right to control the body of an individual when it does not have any compelling interest in the person. When performed under clearly set guidelines that regulate the conduct of all persons involved, euthanasia might even elevate the level of trust patients and the general public have towards the medical profession.
On the contrary, there are several moral and ethical arguments that can be advanced in opposition to euthanasia. The major argument against euthanasia is the fact that the practice overlooks the sanctity and societal respect of life. This can be attributed to a hypothetical situation where euthanasia becomes commonplace and is used in the medical practice in the same way other healing methods are used to an extent where the society becomes desensitized about death and life is no longer sacred or valuable. This is an attitude that would degrade humanity by devaluing life thereby promoting violent crimes and murder in the society. Doerflinger (1989) states that, “euthanasia undermines the overall quality of life and leads to a deterioration of the society” (p. 16).
If euthanasia is legalized, there is a high potential for abuse by caregivers leading to unnecessary losses of lives. It might lead to psychological intoxication by medical practitioners involved in the exercise so much that they might end up performing euthanasia on other patients even without consent. Wolhandler (1984) asserts that “legalized voluntary euthanasia inevitably would lead to legalized involuntary euthanasia because it is impossible to draw a rational distinction between those who seek to die because they are a burden to themselves and those whom society seeks to kill because they are a burden to others” (p. 377).
In conclusion, the issue of euthanasia is actually a controversy of ethics. It is about a value debate between people who weigh values and the place of human beings in this world in two different ways. It is also an ethical dilemma for the physician because the imperative of the medical profession is based on the Hippocratic Oath. The oath confines doctors to the duty of preserving life by all means. It makes any effort at ending life contrary to the ethical and moral obligations of the profession. Therefore the practice, if legalized, would severely undermine ethical standards of the profession.
References
Adams, R. (1992). Physician assisted suicide and the right to die with assistance. Harvard LawReview, 105, 2021-2040.
Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs. (1992). Euthanasia. Journal of the American MedicalAssociation, 265, 2229-2233.
Doerflinger, R. (1989). Assisted suicide: pro-choice or anti-life? Hastings Center Report,January/February, p. 16-19.
Gifford, E. (1993). Artres moriendi: Active euthanasia and the art of dying. UCLA Law Review,40, 1545-1583.
Newman, S. (1991). Euthanasia: Orchestrating “the last syllable of . . .time”. Pittsburgh LawReview, 53, 153-191.
Risen, J. (1990). Death and the doctor: Jack Kervorkian has long taken an interest in the dying,but did he go too far in assisting a suicide? Los Angeles Times, June 21, p. E1.
Wanzer, S. (1989). The physician’s responsibility toward hopelessly ill patients: A second look.New England Journal of Medicine, 320, 844-848.
Wolhandler, S. (1984). Voluntary active euthanasia for the terminally ill and the constitutionalright to privacy. Cornell Law Review, 69, 363-382.
The contingency Approach to Management
The contingency Approach to Management
(Name)
(University)
(Instructor)
(Course)
(Date)
Introduction
Engineer Mark is the overall Manager at Delmont Juice Processing Company Limited (DJPL). DJPL is a juice processing company specializing in the processing of different fruits including passion fruits, papaws, melons, pineapples, mangoes, and oranges. The most preferred drink is the mango juice sold in plastic containers or cartons packed in 250 grams or 500 grams. Eng. Mark is the head of processing unit and being the chief engineer for the company, he is responsible for many activities within the factory. To start with, the Mark supervises all the senior technicians and engineers in the organization. On the other hand, he is responsible for commissioning machine shutdown, repair, and yearly maintenance. As a manager, Mark keeps records of the daily, monthly, and yearly juice production from the company and creates the relevant budgets for the production department. In addition, the manager liaises with other managers from different departments in the company during various meetings for the purpose of company improvement. The manager understands that managers today have to make crucial decisions regarding business opportunities every single day. The greatest challenge is that the business environment is fast growing and extremely dynamic. One finds that whatever business strategy that worked yesterday effectively is no longer applicable today (Daft, & Marcic, 2008).
The study borrows advice from Taylor’s theory and Max Weber’s theory. According to Max Weber Theory, managers should possess certain characteristics, which include: a well-defined hierarchy, division of labor and specialization, setting rules and regulations in a company, good relationship between managers and employees, competence, and a good record. These are some of contingency approaches to management established during the interview. From the interview, it was discovered that the impersonality emphasis leads to personal frustration in relation to employees and other line managers, while generating red tape to reinforce previously authorized decisions. In the above context, bureaucracy is increasingly viewed, both by its employees and the public, as a passionless instrument for responding to human needs (Roth, 1998).
Mark’s Contingency approach to management in from the interview
From the interview done to Mr. Mark, the contingency approach to management was determined although the interview indicated many areas where the manager failed to meet these demands. Different organizations have their history and culture influencing management discipline exercised, while individual managers also their history and cultures that determine their managerial characteristics in an organization. All leading managers exist to achieve specified organizational goals; they have what they regard as their core managerial activities and such, all other activities and functions in the organization occur in line with organizational goal. Production and operations are key functions in an organization, which aim at attaining the organizational goal in a cost-effective way while giving regard to time limits and quality of service (Nzelibe, 1986).
Contingency approach to management takes the form of a number of management theories that are appropriate in all the organization situations dealing with different managers in all departments. Taylor theory of management asserts that managers should design valid approaches towards upcoming conditions related to marketing, technology, and leadership. From the interview, Mark lacked full coordination of his department since production sector was not efficient enough due to lack of good relationship with line supervisors and workers. Cooperation is very important in any organization especially between managers in a company. Lack of cooperation leads to failure of an organization meeting the expected goals therefore, the activities lag behind resulting to a fall (Sitorus, 2008; Kotey, & Meredith, 1997). Mark’s cooperation with the CEO, the Human Resource Manager, and the rest of the managers was poor. From this condition, Mark failed to attend scheduled meetings with other managers therefore the issues related to his department were less addressed leading to low production.
The next issue involved in contingency approach to management is taking responsibilities in the workplace. Most managers in the organization failed to undertake their responsibilities and left more work to the HR. Responsibility is a virtue which every individual must possess since it determines the individual’s ability to perform a designated duty. Responsibility also sees the improvement of an organization due to the changing technology, partnerships which require the managers be part of the change through cooperation and performing their duties (Bennett & Stafford, 2008). Mark demonstrated lack of responsibility when they failed to give the expected job description and refused to turn up for the discussion on basic management and leadership principles. One of future of contingency approach is that managers should take responsibility of their positions for the good development of an organization and practice good management activities coupled with good communication and presentation skills (Drunker, 2001).
On the other hand, DJPL manager in charge of production and also as the chief engineer should demonstrate characteristics of a good leader. Some approaches shown in Taylor’s theory shows that a good manager is also a good leader. Leadership is characterized by development of good strategies that ensure employees and the organization staff achieves the organizational goals and objectives. In the leadership development program, the leaders need an effective coaching on their roles and expectations in the company. In addition, the process should enable leaders; develop a positive perception, with regard to various international, as well as cultural impacts of the work that they perform. The program further needs to create a room for the leaders and managers to interact effectively, so that they may share individual experiences and skills for a better, personal-to-personal development (Mabey, & Finch-Lees, (2009).
However, the company needs to undertake an effective and reliable, recruitment and induction of specialists who will actively formulate various strategies that need adoption by the company. The strategies baseline, need to be the expansion of the company, and employee retention. Possible strategies for adoption include behavioral approach in management of the company, and marketing strategies. Behavioral approach strategy aids the company in identifying the various training needs of the employees, reward scheme needed, and development of employee attitude towards the work that they perform. This in turn, creates employee loyalty, and results in improvement, in individual-level performance, and the overall company performance (Barbara, 2005).
Another place where Mark failed was in the issue of changes within the company. Kotter’s Eight-Step plan for managing change would find use by developing a sense of urgency in change adoption on this issue. In addition, the plan aids in developing new approaches of adopting into the new environment. With reference to organization culture, family members encouragement of the need for the change, aided in accepting the change. The change had the stress of missing parents and other family members, as well as friends. The source of stress was the factor that most of college mates had nearby homes where they would go during weekends and weekdays. The stress led to development of low self-esteem. However, the stresses would have been minimized through constant interaction with college mates, and being active in the college environment (Sabri, Gupta, & Beitler, 2006).
The final issue is on respect in the working environment, shown in the case. The manager failed to respect other managers in all matters related to the improvement of the organization. Management should go hand in hand with respect since according to Kotey and Meredith, respect to personal values is the key success to the learning of an organization and most important when the managers have good understanding among themselves, (1997). Creation of a good working environment is very crucial among employees in a company since it allows fluent flow of information from one department to the next. This contingent approach to management ensures that managers are always free with one another to share company issues.
Conclusion
Most organizations in the present days fail due to lack of understanding among the leaders. It is a high time when the leaders discover the importance of respect, taking care of one’s responsibility, and cooperation among the business partners in the improvement of their activities. Leaders are there to guide the progress of an organization while the others have a responsibility of ensuring that their working environment is conducive and raise an alarm if the situation is not as expected. Managers influence all the activities of an organization therefore, when they fail to cooperate, they put the organization at a risk of failure (Management Innovations, 2008). On the other hand, following the contingency approach in an organization leads to increased production and efficiency among employees.
Reference list
Barbara, W. (2005). Six Important Managerial Skills for Successful Leadership.
Retrieved from:
http://ezinearticles.com/?Six-Important-Managerial-Skills-For-Successful-Leadership&id=71553
Bennett, D. & Stafford, J. (2008). Self-responsibility in the Workplace. University of
Minnesota: Office of the Human Resources. Retrieved from:
http://www1.umn.edu/ohr/careerdev/resources/articles/responsibility/index.htmlDaft Richard L, & Marcic Dorothy. (2008). Understanding Management. The seventh
Edition. United States of America: Cengage Learning.
Drunker, F. P. (2001). Management: tasks, responsibilities, Practices. Oxford: British
Library in Publication Data. pp. 548-549.
Kotey, B. & Meredith, G. G. (1997). Relationships among Owner/ Manager Personal
Values, Business Strategies and Enterprise Performance. A journal of Small Business Management. 35 (2). pp. 37-64
Mabey, C, & Finch-Lees, T. (2009). Management and Leadership Development. The Sage
Handbook of Human Resource Management. London: Sage
Management Innovations. (2008). Role & Importance of Management. Retrieved from:
http://managementinnovations.wordpress.com/2008/12/03/role-importance-of-management/
Nzelibe, C. O. (1986). The evolution of AManagement Thought: Journal of International Studies
of Management & Organization. 16(2). M.E Sharpe, Inc
Roth, W. (1998). Evolution of management theory: Past, Present, Future. Boca Raton. CRC
Press
Sitorus, E. R. (2008). Cooperation in Workplace. WordPress.com. Retrieved from:
http://tiaphari.com/2008/08/18/cooperation-in-workplace/Sabri, E, Gupta, A, & Beitler, M. (2006). Purchase Order Management Best Practices: Process,
Technology, And Change Management. J. Ross Publishing.
Ethical Decision Making
Topic: Ethical Decision Making
Name:
Course:
Instructor’s Name:
Date:
An ethical dilemma is typically described as a difficult circumstance that involves a conflict between different morals or it can also be defined as a intricate situation that often involves an apparent mental conflict between moral imperatives, in which to obey one would result in contravening another. Ethics, integrity, compromise and corruption are areas that have become as imperative as other important areas of law enforcement training and when significant changes can occur which is also called an ethical paradox in moral philosophy, paradox often plays a central role in ethics debates while ethical dilemmas are often cited in an attempt to refute an ethical system or moral code, as well as the worldview that encompasses or grows from it (Gilmartin, 1999).
Taking the topic of ethical decision making, Tenbruensel and Smith-Crowe (2008) present a variance between moral decision making and amoral decision making and within each class of decisions; one can make ethical decision or unethical decisions. They further argue that social scientist should be telling people what is right or wrong but they do acknowledge that is necessary to define principles that define the criteria by which decisions are placed into their typology for purposes of being analyzed since it is very difficult to define ethical behavior.
Individual behavioral control can come through internal or external control apparatuses and the standards of social monitoring can be through monitoring of processes or behavior or the outcomes or results of these patterns.
Other people perceive a behavior to be unethical when one lies, cheats or steals and using this standard of ethics is the means used to achieve an outcome and not the outcome itself that determines whether the decision leading to the behavior is ethical or not. Another vital ethical standard is the use of codes, rules, guidelines and other systems that attempt to identify certain behaviors or means which are in themselves unethical where these culturally designed and promulgated codes of conduct or ethical systems provide lists of dos and don’ts. These ethical considerations may come in the form of common ones well known, such as the Ten Commandments. There are others that are established in the company cultures that need professional adherance like a legal code of ethics or a company code of conduct. They are meant to maintain certain standards such as fairness and equity, respect for others, and systems of non-discrimination and also function to balance power and protect the powerless.
Social units ensure that standards that are socially acceptable are adhered to through external or internal control mechanisms. In ethical adherence in organisations, there are control measures placed in form of rewarding compliance and punishing noncompliance. These meausres mak the members to have the necessary disciplie and control in complyingt the set internal standards and internalize their importance. This is like transferring the powers to the individuals that are expected to adhere to these ethical standards in form of private instrumental and terminal values then individual adopt religious creeds, professional codes of ethics and civic laws as their own personal standards.
In some instances, ethics is reffered to as the study of values and moral behavior while ethical behavior is acting in ways consistent with one’s personal values and the commonly held values of the organization and society (Nelson and Quick, 2008,) and using personal and social variables as criteria in organizational decision making and behavioral choice decisions.
Sometimes ethical decision making is easy and takes very little time the dilemmas where there are conflicting principles or conflicting interests of different parties are harder to resolve. These difficult situations are where the ethical decision making steps are important in reaching the most respectful, caring and ethical decisions.
The Canadian Psychological Association prescribes 10 steps for ethical decision making in its ethics code that help psychologists to amicably arrive at a solution to a conflict after it has already been recognized as an ethical issue (Canadian Psychological Association, 2000)
Therefore using the Canadian Code of Ethics for Psychologists would the best way to deal with the situation at hand.
To start with, it is important to identify individuals and groups that are directly affected by the decision which in this case are the state, my friend, the group that is targeted by the program and I.
Then the issues and practices that are ethically troubling in this particular situation should be pointed out without forgetting that the people that are affected by the situation have rights and opinions. The best interests of the people of interest should be cared for and their dignity should also be respected. It is also imperative to consider that in this situation there are professional relationships that are involved and also a responsibility to the society that is very important.
As human beings, we all have personal bias, stress, or self-interest in every aspect of the society which influences our choices between various courses of action. Therefore in this situation as much as I think this grant is important to the friend and would be a great appreciation for what he has worked for over a long time, it is still not fair and right to the rest of the community that they are not considered.
The state may not take it very well if they come to realize that he did not include all the groups in the program when he was applying for the grant even though the program has the potential of helping more young people.
At this point a number of courses of action have to be identified and looked at. There is the choice of not helping him survey since his scope is too narrow and does not cover the whole population. Alternatively, he can be talked to and convince to include everyone in the scope of the survey. There is also the choice of informing the state that he doesn’t deserve the grant since his scope is narrow.
The major risks, the shortcomings and also the considerable benefits of the courses of action should then be carefully weighed and analyzed to find out how they will affect the youth who are in the program, the state and friend once they are pursued.
It is then very important to pick a course of action either individually or collectively as deemed appropriate to the situation after thoroughly considering and applying existing principles, values, and standards that were looked at. Explaining to the friend that he should widen the scope of the survey since it is only fair that the grant should cover the whole youthful population would be the best course of action that would show the respect to the society and dedication to the development of the society. Helping him in widening the scope of the survey to cover those that were initially not in it also will serve to show a general respect, caring and concern to him.
Hopefully, through dialogue, a more ethical and respectful response will be obtained which will also give a chance to explore other alternatives that lead to positive changes within the programme.
At this point the course of action that was picked has to be implemented with an individual or collective commitment which is also important to be ready to assume the responsibilities of the outcome of the implementation of the action to be taken.
A plan to evaluate the results of the Course of Action should then be put up that will include responsibility for corrections of negative consequences, if they occurred. This action greatly depends on his response to the course of action that was taken that convinced him to include a greater population in the survey.
A negative response will then mean that I will have to act professionally as program evaluation consultant and not be part of the survey. There is also the option of reporting to the state what the evaluation missed during the survey.
Being obligated for the consequences of the action, correcting any negative outcomes, and going back to the decision making process if the ethical problem is not fixed is what should automatically be the next step. If he decides to go on with the survey the way he wanted it in the beginning, another method of solving the stalemate will have to be sought.
An explanation of the consequences of having the survey the way it is might help to prevent future occurrences of this kind of dilemma.
The downside of this kind of approach is that it is very time consuming and this might work against it since some issues are ongoing and a remedy may be needed as soon as possible. In this particular situation, all he may need to do is get another program evaluation consultant who shares his views to do the work for him.
Its advantage on the other hand is that it is elaborate and takes into consideration the feelings and even responsibilities that might arise from the consequences of the action courses that will be taken along the way. At the end of the process all the parties have an understanding of what was going on and if the issue is resolved, then every individual party is catered for in terms of opinion.
References
Canadian Psychological Association (2000). Canadian code of ethics for psychologists (3rd ed.).
Gilmartin, M. J. (1999). Strategy and organizational effectiveness: A case study of health care
services change.Nelson, D.L. & Quick, J.C. 2008. Understanding Organizational Behavior. Mason, OH: Centage
Learning.
Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Smith-Crowe, K. 2008. Ethical decision making: Where we’ve been and
where we’re going. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1): 545-607.