To: Hospital Staff, Peer Review Committee, Hospital Trustees From: -Lead Surgeon
Date: January 20, 2013
Subject: Heart Transplant Candidate
The purpose of this memorandum is to come to a conclusion about which individual should receive the heart transplant taking into account ethics. There are three people who are in need of the organ transplant; Jerry, Lisa, and Ozzy. In order to make an informed decision it is important to look at all three cases. Candidate #1-
Jerry is a 55 year old male with three children. In his early 20’s Jerry used steroids which in turn damaged his heart. His life expectancy would increase by about 10-15 years with this transplant. Candidate #2-
Lisa is a 12 year old female. Her heart was damaged when she contracted pneumonia a year ago. Lisa has had health problems all her life due to a lupus-like immune deficiency. Even with the transplant, it is unlikely that Lisa will live through her 20’s. Candidate #3-
Ozzy is a 38 year old male who has a history of drug abuse. As a result of Ozzy’s drug use, he will not be able to live past the month. With the transplant Ozzy has the life expectancy of 10+ years.
The Rights Theory
The Rights Theory state that an action is ethical is it respects the rights that all individuals have. Taking this theory into account, I do not think it is ethical to accept the 2 million dollars which are being offered to the hospital in exchange for Lisa to receive the transplant. All three of the candidates should have the same opportunities and the money is clouding the issue at hand. The hospital will not be accepting donations at this time, or in the future, for organ transplants. Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism states that rightness or wrongness of one’s actions is determined by their consequences. Using the utilitarian point of view, the heart should go to Lisa. She is the youngest of all three candidates and also has the potential for a life of greatness. Lisa is also the only candidate...