Ethics and Aristotle
A married couple, both addicted to drugs, is unable to care for their infant daughter. She is taken from them by court order and placed in a foster home. The years passed. She comes to regard her foster parents as her real parents. They love her as they would their own daughter. When the child is 9 years old, the natural parents, rehabilitated from drugs, begin court action to regain custody. The case is decided in their favor. The child is returned to them, against her will. Do ethics support the law in this case? Discuss.
The natural parents have the right to get their daughter back they became rehabilitated they did what the courts ordered them to do. Let the daughter go into foster care to be loved which was the best thing for the daughter at the time of the addiction since they were not able to care for the child in a proper manner. With this thinking the assumption is that they had visitation rights and they did everything that was in the best interest of the child. Since the foster parents know that normally they are only a temporary situation they should be have been prepared for this at any time. Did the natural parents really plan to be addicted to drugs, where they young and immature. Neither natural parent was making the good judgment calls in regards to their infant daughter. So the state did what was appropriate and place her in foster care but now they are giving the natural parents their child back base on what will be the best option for the most involved which this is end-based thinking or also known as consequentialist theories.
Based on the rule-based thinking the natural parents do not have a right to get their daughter back because they were reckless doing drugs and this little girl does not even know them they did not make visitation visits they spent their time getting rehabilitated which is good but this they don’t know her and she has not clue who they are.