UTILITARIAN LAW 2
Running Head: UTILITARIAN LAW 2
Utilitarian Law
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
There are laws in the United States that support the welfare of pregnant women, although in different forms. The Texas law is one of the most obstructive, as it projects that regardless of the procedural process of the pregnancy, a woman should be given life-sustaining treatment up to the point she will deliver (Gostin, 2014). There are various significant variations in different places with some aspects considered including, the possibility that the fetus reaches the point of birth and the desires of the mother. Some states do not have considerable legislation, while a few give chances to women to project their positive wishes on pregnancy in their care plans.
From a utilitarian moral perspective, it is not right to remove a pregnant mother from life support as this will risk the life of the fetus who may also be alive. I discussed the case of Marlise Munoz with someone else, and we were both for the idea that it was appropriate to remove Marlise from the life support machine as she was already brain dead and it would affect the life of the baby. I also support the idea that the husband of Marlise Munoz should only be given his request to remove his wife because of his concerns that the baby would not survive and not when the fetus could have been healthy because it would be unethical to take away the fetuses life when they had a chance of survival.
As in this case, the utilitarian ethics support the idea of pulling down the switch so that that the train diverts to the track with one person. Utilitarian ethics will approve the action based on the lower adverse consequences when the switch is brought down. I believe that the kind of moral choice between the lesser evils as in the Trolley problem is a realistic reflection of the challenges faced in places of employment as managers may always approve of evils that lead to better outcomes. I believe that there is an ethical choice of choosing the lesser evils because there are cases where individuals hope for options closer to their ideal but that is not what they get, and they, therefore, have to choose the lesser disappointing options. For instance, a person having to choose the death of one of their two loved ones, under unavoidable circumstances.
References
Gostin, L. O., (2014). Legal and ethical responsibilities following brain death: the McMath and Muñoz cases. Jama, 311(9), 903-904.