Examples Of Act Utilitarianism

Under act utilitarianism, doctors ought to deceive patients if doing so will result in ultimate beneficence. In reality, if providing the truth makes the patient’s condition worse or make the doctor’s job more difficult, then lying is the moral option.

Considering beneficence for the patient, Mac Lipkin from a mostly act utilitarian perspective argues that doctors should lie to the patient as long as it is for the patient’s own good. He claims that many patients fail to properly comprehend medical terms, and the “whole truth” on a serious illness oftentimes drive patients to negative behavior. Lipkin also justifies the use of placebo, and argues that the morality of deception is dependent upon whether it benefits the patient or the doctor.

In the case of deceiving patients, rule utilitarians might say that lying for the patient’s own good might lead to lying for the doctor’s own good, which can ultimately lead to the destruction of the integrity of the medical system: people will be afraid to go to the hospital because they fear that doctors will lie to them and mistreat them in order to make their jobs easier. Lipkin’s raises the possibility that doctors might use lying as a way to benefit themselves and not the patient. And because in practice it is difficult to tell if deception is for the doctor’s good or for the patient’s good, rule utilitarians abide to the rule of honesty to prevent society from going down the slippery slope. The societal rule of honestly ensures the quality of the medical system, and act utilitarians hope to follow that rule in order to maintain that

They believe that every person’s dignity must be respected, and they especially value the rational power of free choice. O’Neil, a Kantian philosopher, is concerned about the patient’s autonomy. He proposes that complete paternalism, the idea of coercing a person for his or her own good, should only be applied when people – such as infants – lack total autonomy. In general, doctors need to respect the degree of autonomy their patients have, a degree that falls between the autonomy of an infant who knows nothing and that of an imaginary being who knows everything. Thus, it is immoral to lie to a mentally-healthy adult patient even if telling the truth might worsen his or her condition. Additionally, if the patient does not understand the situation, the doctor cannot simply operate; they must try their best educating their patient as opposed to simply practice without given knowledge. Under O’Neil’s Kantian view, the only case in which it is okay to exercise paternalism is if the patient is unconscious and the condition is imminently serious: the doctor then has the fundamental consent to