Moral dilemma

Baby Theresa
 Theresa Ann Campo Pearson, an infant known to the public as “Baby Theresa,”
was born in Florida in 1992, Baby Theresa had anencephaly, one of the worst
genetic disorders. Anancephalic infants are sometimes referred to as “babies
without brains,” and this gives roughly the right picture, but it is not quite
accurate. Important parts of the brain – the cerebrum and cerebellum- are
missing, as is the top of the skull. There is, however, a brain stem, and so
automatic functions such as breathing and heartbeat are possible. In the United
States, most cases of anencephaly are detected during pregnancy, and the
fetuses are usually aborted. Of those not aborted, half are still born. About 350
are alive each year, and they usually die within days.
 Baby Theresa’s story is remarkable only because her parents made
an unusual request. Knowing that their baby would die soon and
could never be conscious, Theresa’s parents volunteered her organs
for transplant. They thought her kidneys, liver, heart, lungs, and eyes
should go to other children who could benefit from them. Her
physicians agreed. Thousand of infants need transplants each year,
and there are never enough organs available. But the organs were not
taken, because Florida law forbids the removal of organs until the
donor is dead. By the time Baby Theresa died, nine days later, it was
too late for the other children – her organs had deteriorated too much
to be harvested and transplanted.
 Baby Theresa’s case was widely debated. Should she have been
killed so that her organs could have been used to save other
children? A number of ethicists – people employed by universities,
hospitals, and law schools, who get paid to think about such things –
were asked by the press to comment. Surprisingly few of them
agreed with the parents and physicians. Instead, they appealed to
time-honored philosophical principles to oppose taking the organs.
“it just seems too horrifying to use people as means to other people’s
ends,” said one such expert. Another explained: “it’s unethical to kill
person A to save person B,” and the third added: “What the parents
are really asking for is, kill this dying baby so that its organs may be
used for someone else. Well, that’s really a horrendous proposition.”
 Is it horrendous? Opinions were divided. These ethicists thought so,
while the parents and doctors did not. But we are interested in more
than what people happen to think. We want to know what’s true.
Were the parents right or wrong to volunteer the baby’s organs for
transplant? To answer this question, we have to ask what reasons, or
arguments, can be given for each side. What can be said to justify
the parents’ request or to justify thinking the request was wrong?
 The benefits argument
 If we can benefit someone, without harming anyone else, we ought to do so.
Transplanting the organs would benefit the other children without harming
Baby Theresa. Therefore, we ought to transplant the organs
 The argument that we should not use people as MEANS

1. Ethicists believe that it is wrong to use people as means to other

people’s ends. Taking Theresa’s organs would be using her to
benefit the other children; therefore, it should not be done.

2. Appeals to the person’s preferences. If she could tell us what she

wants, what would she say?
 The argument from the wrongness of Killing

The ethicist appealed to the principle that it is wrong to kill one person
to save another. Taking Theresa’s organs would be killing her to save
others, they said; so, taking the organs would be wrong.
Why am I bothered?
 What is a dilemma?

Dilemmas are experiences where an agent is confused about the right decision to
make because there are several competing values that are seemingly equally
important and urgent.
 Feelings and dilemmas
 Strong feelings signal the presence of a dilemma.

 But, many people do not always “catch” the dilemma behind the feeling.

 One can be conditioned to be indifferent so that what used to be

NAKAKABAGABAG is no longer a dilemma.
 Dilemmas are not about competing solutions
 We normally handle the “pagkabagabag” by immediately offering solutions
instead of articulating the competing values or issues.

 Example: should I cheat or not cheat

 How should we handle a moral dilemma?

 Certainly not through feelings

 Handling emotion separates the mature from the immature moral agent.
 3 levels of moral dilemma

1. Individual
2. Organizational
3. Structural
 Individual dilemma
 Ramon, a Grade 5 honor student at an all-boys’ Grade school allows
Jose, a large, burly boy seated next to him, to peek at his math
quarterly exam. Unfortunately, the teacher sees this and immediately
gives both boys a failing mark for the quarter exam. Ramon feels
that a great injustice has been committed; that Jose should have been
punished more severely than him.
 Organizational dilemma
 (business, medical and public sector)

 Ms. Ballares, a teacher, assisting as COMELEC member in facilitating national

and local elections, is asked by the chairman, Mr. Enriquez, to help him in
“dagdag-bawas” activity in favor of some influential political candidates.
Knowing it is illegal and morally obnoxious, Ms. Ballares expresses her
objection. However, Mr. Enriques warns her that if she does not cooperate, her
life is in danger as she might be liquidated by the said political candidates.
Thus, she chooses to do the act of assisting out of fear for her life while
retaining her inner objection.
 Structural dilemma
 Refers to network of institutions and operative theoretical paradigms. Example:
universal health care

 Prisoners are told that a biomedical type of research will have to be conducted
among them. It seeks to give them a dose of a newly-invented medicine for
malaria. The substance is not yet tested to be effective for humans. To prevent
possible refusal from the subjects and to push through with the study,
researchers opt not to tell them about its being untested. The medicine provides
hopeful breakthrough for the immediate cure of the mentioned disease. No
similar medicine has been invented.
Is there a necessity that the prisoners be subjected to such research? Why?
 Reference
 Rachels, James. “What is Morality?” and “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism.” In The
Elements of Moral Philosophy, 4th edition, 1-31. New York: McGraw-Hill College, 2004.