CASE #2: One Million For A Kidney: That Best Supports Your Solution

CASE #2: One Million for A Kidney
Mr. Reyes underwent a yearly medical check‐up in a well‐known hospital in Makati. He is 50

years old and a businessman. Until recently, his business is in danger of bankruptcy as a result of
the US economic crisis.
While he was resting in his hospital suite, he was informed by his doctor that a visitor wants to
talk to him. The visitor related the story of a 25‐year old American scientist working on genetic
engineering. The scientist is about to make an astounding discovery that will cure many of the
diseases that plagued mankind. Unfortunately the genius has a unique blood and tissue type and
hence cannot just accept any kidney from any donor. The doctors of the scientist were searching
for almost a year for a compatible donor. Fortunately the blood and tissue type of Mr. Reyes is a
perfect match with the American. Mr. Reyes was offered one million pesos for one of his
kidneys.
If Mr. Reyes does not accept the offer, the young scientist will die. And with his death, the
prospects of the cures for the diseases that plague mankind will die with him. If he accepts the
offer, losing one kidney will inevitably shorten his life span. He will not also be able to engage in
strenuous physical activity, like camping, mountain climbing, and hunting. But he needs the
money to save his business from bankruptcy.
QUESTION: What will you do if you are in the place of Mr. Reyes? Cite the moral principle
that best supports your solution.
Case #5: Cheating or Leveling the Playing Field?
During one of my midterm examinations in my Economics class in college, I was faced with an
ethical dilemma. My friend and I were studying for the exam when he explained that he was
going to punch the formulas into his calculator. He said that he has attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder (ADHD) and that it was difficult for him to remember formula. I shrugged off the
suggestion in the hope that he would exclude me from his decision.
A few days later, during the examination, I looked around and noticed that he was not the only
one who had entered the formulas in their calculators. My first reaction was “damn, maybe I
could have done the same thing.” Then I remembered how the professor had told us that this was
not allowed and that we had all signed onto the college’s “honor code” system, which stated that
we would not cheat and that we would report those who did it. It was at that moment that I
1|Page
realized I was faced with a dilemma: to tell or not to tell. I violated the honor code if I kept
silent; I violated my friend’s trust if I told. After all, I thought, he did have ADHD. Shouldn’t he
be given a break? Also, I didn’t want to tell so many students. I’m not a police officer.
QUESTIONS: What would you have done in this situation and why? Do you agree with this
student’s logical thinking and his ethical reasoning? Explain. What would you have done
differently and why? Justify your answer.
Case #7: ETHICS OF LAUGHTER
In 2008, Danilo (not his real name), a Cebuano male florist in his 30s was teary-eyed when he
saw the video of his surgery circulating in the internet. He heard about the so called “canister
scandal” but was so shocked to know that it was him when someone informed him about it. The
unauthorized 2:54-minute video of a noisy operating room shows Vicente Sotto Memorial
Medical Center (VSMMC) doctors and nurses laughing., giggling, and cheering after a metal can
of Black Suede body spray was pulled out of his rectum. The can was inserted by a man he had
casual sex with. Danilo said that his rights to privacy and confidentiality were violated; and that
he was further humiliated when the video found its ways to the internet. However, Dr. Emanuel
Gines, the hospital’s committee chairman on media said, “The hospital does not take a video of
all operations but only select cases for academic purposes, and hence will conduct investigation
regarding the matter.”
QUESTIONS: Is there such a thing as Ethics of Laughter? Is what is funny an aesthetic or

moral concern? Explain. What ethical principle(s) would support your stand?
CASE #8: THE INCRIMINATING E-MAIL
You are the network administrator for a rather large company. You have a young family
and need your job to support them. Part of your responsibility as a network administrator is to
monitor the e-mails for the organization that have been accidentally blocked by the spam filters.
One day, you get a helpdesk request from a staff member asking for an e-mail to get released.
Normally it’s standard procedure, except this time the request has come from the wife of a very
good friend of yours. The moment you recognized the name on the helpdesk request, you quickly
attended to the problem. As part of the procedure you need to manually open up the e-mail to
ensure that it isn’t actually spam. You find that it turns out to be an e-mail to your friend’s wife
2|Page
from her lover. You scan the rest of the contents of the e-mail and there is no doubt that she has
been having an affair for some time now.
You release the e-mail, but you can’t decide what to do now. Your initial reaction is to
call your friend up and tell him about the e-mail, however you quickly realize that company
policy is very strict about revealing the contents of staff e-mails, and you will certainly lose your
job if your boss finds out. In any case you know that revealing this information presents great
risk, because even if you don’t do it directly, there is a good chance that the dots will be joined
somewhere along the line and you will be found out. However you feel that by not telling your
friend you are helping his wife to get away with adultery and this troubles you greatly.
QUESTIONS: What would you do if you were the network administrator? ethical/ moral
principles that would support your stand?
CASE #10: In the Face of Death
In 1942, Adina Blady Szwarjger was a 22 year old doctor who worked at Warsaw
Children’s hospital. About a year earlier, the Nazis who occupied Poland created what was then
known as Warsaw ghetto. Dr. Szwarjger heard and witnessed the horrors of many people
suffering and dying from starvation, torture and massacre. Even the sick and dying elderly
people were not spared. Every Jew was brought to the cattle trucks to death camps to finally
eliminate them. Nazis went to shut down every hospital and shot every patient in bed. The day
came when she heard gunshots and screaming from almost every wing in the hospital. Dr.
Szwarjger immediately administered morphine to the children to spare them --- assuring them
that the pain would disappear. By the time the Nazis entered the ward, the children were all dead.
QUESTIONS: Given the situation, was Dr. Szwarjger’s action of giving morphine to the
children to hasten their death and save them from the Nazis morally justified? Why or why
not? Explain ethical/ moral principles that would support your stand.
3|Page

CASE #2: One Million For A Kidney: That Best Supports Your Solution

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE #2: One Million For A Kidney: That Best Supports Your Solution

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE #2: One Million For A Kidney: That Best Supports Your Solution

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE #2: One Million for A Kidney

Mr. Reyes underwent a yearly medical check‐up in a well‐known hospital in Makati. He is 50

Case #5: Cheating or Leveling the Playing Field?

Case #7: ETHICS OF LAUGHTER

QUESTIONS: Is there such a thing as Ethics of Laughter? Is what is funny an aesthetic or

CASE #8: THE INCRIMINATING E-MAIL

CASE #10: In the Face of Death

You might also like