Kantian Ethics Vs Utilitarianism

1. What are the ethical issues and concerns raised? Sort them by Kantian and Utilitarian perspectives. State the defining characteristics of each theory and briefly apply to the concerns you noted.
Kantian ethics is a deontological ethical theory attributed to the German philosopher by the name of Immanuel Kant. It focuses on duties and the moral obligation. The primary formulation of Kant’s ethics is the Categorical Imperatives , which are moral principles that are applied to all rational adults. One's behavior should accord with universalizable principle and ought to always treat others with respect and dignity and not use them merely for some purpose. According to Kantian ethics, the ethical issues raised by the case of harvesting prisoner’s organs are the practice of autonomy, nonmaleficence, voluntary consent, and the respect of cultural sensitivity.
The practice of China harvesting prisoner’s organs without their consent is morally wrong. Kant's principle of non-instumentalizaion prohibits one from being used as a means. Physicians and other medical personnel should never do any harm and the decisions should be based on the interest of the patient.

On the other hand, viewing this case from a Utilitarian perspective, the goal is to maximize the common utility of the greatest number of people that can benefit while minimizing harm.

Utilitarianism is a moral theory that mainly focuses on consequences. Doctors involvement with execution to harvest prisoners organs is a major ethical concern, however, from a Utilitarian point of view the doctors end goal is to preserve life. For every deceased individual, up to eight people can benefit. Utilitarian's justification for organ donation is due to the shortage of organs. To meet the needs of the unfortunate, it would be acceptable to coerce individuals to be an organ donor, and to even harvest organs without to fulfill the moral

obligation.
2. What three recommendations would you make you in terms of what policy should be followed to resolve the dispute? Give reasons for each of the three recommendations and note which one you think is strongest and why?
Organs are scarce and many people are dying while on the waiting list, however, harvesting organs from prisoners without their consent or their family's consent is morally wrong. Medical professionals should respect an individual wishes of what wants to be done with their body. There are certain policies that needs to be followed before determining whether or not the organs from the decease will be donated. First and foremost, the individual must sign a voluntary consent that is free of coercion stating that he/she wants their organs donated. To ensure that the consent is uncoerced, the individual will need to take a polygraph test which will be very accurate in indicating if the individual is being truthful that the consent was voluntary signed and they were not under pressure or any form of intimidation. Second, if the deceased have not signed a consent to be an organ donor then the family should be able to make a decision. According to the article "China accused of harvesting the organs of political prisoners, researchers say it's time Canada take action" Chinese prisoners have been dying at the hands of surgeons harvesting their organs. To solve this issue, the third policy will prohibit doctors from participating in any forms of direct execution. This last policy is the strongest and most effective policy because doctors will be fulfilling individuals voluntary decision, following their medical code of ethics "do no harm", therefore leading to the resolution for this dispute of harvesting prisoners organs.
3. Drawing from either Kant or Utilitarianism--set out a defense for your position with regards to China's practice of harvesting the organs from prisoners.
One of the most serious problems with China's use of executed prisoners' organs in transplant operations is that the prisoners' prior consent for organ removal is reportedly often not sought. According to Chinese law, a corpse cannot be used for dissection or organ transplantation purposes unless the consent of the person whose body is to be used or the consent of their family is first obtained. The official "Rules Concerning the Dissection of Corpses," issued by the Ministry of Health in 1979, states that ordinary dissections may be carried out only when "the deceased has so provided in a will" or when no one claims the body. Prisons is China are steady breaking the law and participating in unethical acts.
Many Chinese follow the principles of Confucianism which is a philosophical and quasi-religious system developed from the teachings of the Chinese philosopher Confucius. The Confucian teaching maintains that one is born with a complete body and should end the same way. Their belief is that the body, skin, and hair are gifts from parents and organ donations are considered the most unfilially act.
Prison officials and medical professionals ought to respect cultural sensitivity by acknowledging one's cultural differences and values. According to Kant, before making a decision one should ask themselves; does my action respect the goals of human beings rather than merely using them for my own purposes? If the answer is no, then one must not perform the action. If prison officials and medical professionals follow Kant's ethical theory, then they will not be using prisoners as a means to an end. Instead they will be respecting the individual autonomy and will entitle one to freely decide what they want to be done with their body after death.