Annette Heinz The Ethics Of Care Summary

We have all been in situations where we just could not conquer! This situation here not only has a financial issue but they are stuck in a costly situation. Heinz and his wife are in special need of a medical cure they cannot afford. Heinz himself has tried to find every resource available to help his wife but none has worked out in his favor. He has tried everything he could, and asked everyone whom he thought could help him; the druggist himself still is not letting up with the price he has given Mr. Heinz. With the druggist being the only dependable source right now, you would think he would want to help this cancer patient and save her life but that is not the case. The druggists feel as though since he created the cure, and paid for the

radium, he can create his own price for the new cure, and that is just that. With the druggist being so greedy, not even acknowledging that he is the only one who can save Mr. Heinz wife right now. With the love Heinz shares with his wife, you can tell that he is willing to go beyond for his love one.
Understanding that they cannot afford this four thousand dollar dose, it has left Heinz questioning his self whether he should just break in and steal the drug, or to borrowing from the people, he know. Even with the legal means he has tried, that still has not helped him dominate this situation. Me, personally I do not believe that he should break in nor steal the cure. His wife needs him more than most at this moment and two that would just make the situation worst. Because of the simple fact that if Heinz gets incarcerated for burglary, and petty theft who exactly is going to be there to help his wife. Who’s going to be out there maneuvering trying to get the other two thousand her husband already has gained. Stealing the dosage will not only leave him in the predicament of not being able to see his wife for the time she has left, but now in another predicament where his wife will now have to use the money, he’s borrowed to bail him out of jail.
Even though Heinz might have made a promise to his wife, he now has to come up with another proposal in order to complete this mission. Let us look at the bigger picture! Yes, he loves his wife dearly and made a promise, but promises are made to be broken and this would be something he would have to just deal with. Right now, he has to find another source and do what is right! Yes, the love for his wife matters because no one wants to see his or her love one under these critical conditions. No one wants to watch their spouse depart slowly especially when they know there is something out there they can do to try to discontinue this horrible situation. Heinz may not have the whole four thousand now but he has met half his goal still not knowing where the other half may come from! Being that he has now become a factotum of this small European city, because he has been working constantly trying to replete this promise. Heinz now has to defeat another theory in order to gain another two thousand dollars!
Ethical Theory 1 (Virtue Ethics)
Virtue ethics is a broad term for theories that emphasize the role of character and virtue in moral philosophy rather than either doing one’s duty or acting in order to bring about good consequences. A virtue ethicist is likely to give you this kind of moral advice: “Act as a virtuous person would act in your situation.” Virtue "lies in a mean" because the right response to each situation is neither too much nor too little. Virtue is the appropriate response to different situations and different agents. The virtues are associated with feelings. For example; courage is associated with fear, modesty is associated with the feeling of shame, and friendliness associated with feelings about social conduct. The virtue lies in a mean because it involves displaying the mean amount of emotion, where mean stands for appropriate. (Cambridge: Edinburgh University Press, 1997)
I have decided to use this theory because it supports to my question to readers “What would you do, if you were in Heinz shoes?” As I simple explained in paragraph two how he should not break in or steal the drug, I would have taken this route! Understanding that there is always another way goes to about certain situations, and me personally would have found another way. They always said one monkey, does not stop a show. I would have taken my two thousand to another city, trying to find the same cure, and probably even cheaper. The fact that this druggist was the only one in that specific city available at that time, they never said another one was not available in another city. The thought he had to go and break in to steal the cure was out of the courage and eagerness, but the results would’ve left him in more pain, and now shameless that he now have no way to help his wife. His actions, would have described the Virtual theory within the objective this theory withholds, which are moral luck, action guiding, and self-centeredness.
Raising objections to other normative theories and defining itself in opposition to the claims of others, was the first stage in the development of virtue ethics. Virtue ethicists then took up the challenge of developing full-fledged accounts of virtue that could stand on their own merits rather than simply criticize consequentialism and deontology. The Aristotelian understanding of virtue has predominantly influenced these accounts. While some virtue ethics take inspiration from Plato's, the Stoics, Aquinas', Hume's and Nietzsche's accounts of virtue and ethics, Aristotelian conceptions of virtue ethics still dominate the field. There are three main strands of development for virtue ethics: Eudemonism, agent-based theories and the ethics of care (New York: OUP, 1997).
Ethical Theory 2 (Ethics of Care)
The Ethics of Care is another influential version of virtue ethics, which we just discussed.

Developed mainly by feminist writers, such as Annette Baier, this account of virtue ethics is motivated by the thought that men think in masculine terms such as justice and autonomy, whereas woman think in feminine terms such as caring. These theorists call for a change in how we view morality and the virtues, shifting towards virtues exemplified by women, such as taking care of others, patience, the ability to nurture, self-sacrifice, etc. These virtues have been marginalized because society has not adequately valued the contributions of women. Writings in this area do not always explicitly make a connection with virtue ethics. There is much in their discussions, however, of specific virtues and their relation to social practices and moral education, etc., which is central to virtue

ethics.
I’ve decided to use this theory of Ethics of care because it pretty much follows exactly what the Virtue of Ethics has already explained. Heinz wasn’t thinking about the consequences when thought of burglary came into play. He wasn’t thinking about how much more it would cost him and his wife to bail him out on those petty charges, or if he would’ve been eligible for bail. As you can see, Heinz is willing to do whatever it is to see his wife live another day. The love he has for her is obvious because who else would put their life on the life for someone they don’t love.
When feminist philosophers first turned their attention to traditional ethical theory, it’s almost exclusive emphasis upon justice, rights, abstract rationality, and individual autonomy came under special criticism. Women’s experiences seemed to suggest the need for a focus on care, empathetic relations, and the interdependence of persons. The most influential readings of what has become an extremely lively and fruitful debate are reproduced here along with important new contributions by Alison Jaggar and Sara Ruddick. As this volume testifies, there is no agreement on the important questions about the relationship between justice and care, but the debate has deepened and enriched our understanding in many ways. Justice and Care is a valuable collection of readings—an essential tool for anyone studying the state of feminist thought in particular or ethical theory in general (Held, Virginia, 1995).
This theory clearly supports my passage because right now the druggist is not thinking about the dying women, he is just thinking about himself and the income that is coming his way.

Now let us just say that it was the husband on his deathbed, and his wife was the one out there trying to come up with these four thousand dollars. What exactly do you think she could have done differently to get the money? What exactly would this male doctor have made her do, to receive this cure for her husband? If she was the one out there begging and barrowing, do you think she would have, came up with more than two thousand dollars? Do you think if she was the breaking in and stealing, do you think they would have shown her some sort of sympathy? All of these actions falls right back into the ethics of care which also supports the virtue of

ethics.
Finally balancing the rights and responsibilities of Heinz actions, I would have to agree with both of the theories I discussed above. The valid points made in both, would be the justice-based outcome of this situation. With the right to get the life-saving medicine for his wife for the right price and the right to determine what happens to one's intellectual property. In addition, stage six is universal ethics. Heinz is right to steal because human life is more important than money. Even though Heinz is wrong because his wife's life is no more important than anyone else who needs the medicine, he would still have to come up with the proper income for this cure. Heinz made the right decision by not breaking in and stealing, but that now leaves in the constrains of moral luck, depending on others help to come up with this other two thousand that is needed.