If there is more good that will result from a decision in an ethical situation then the reasoning stands that it is ethically and morally correct. Utilitarianism reasoning normally applies to a large number of people and not the individual themselves. This could include government, businesses, communities, and our surroundings. One scenario would be if a person was given an option to harm another person that would benefit a group of people then that person would harm that one person. Hurting one person is justified because there will be more good that comes from that single action versus not doing it. Utilitarian reasoning would justify harming one person versus multiple people. In both instances, there are consequences. The biggest mistake in this reasoning is that it is based on the opinion of what one individual deems as morally acceptable. Hurting anybody is never okay, but utilitarianism says it is acceptable if it is for the greater of the good. This is one extreme of reasoning or justification for decision making. On the other hand we have Religious/Deontological theory which is on the other end of extreme reasoning. Religious/Deontological also is not a new standards of moral or ethics …show more content…
Kant’s golden rule was to not do anything to another that you would not want to happen to you. So, we tend to create principles that are generated from the 10 Commandments that creates an obligation, to make moral decisions on ethical issues. We can find religious/deontological theory in the medical field. The hospitals, public health professionals, and hospital managers would push to benefit society, while a doctor who has a doctor-patient relationship sees the individual being just as important if not more and are incline to help them even if it does not benefit anyone else. This we actually saw in the scenario Chimerix (doctor) and patient Josh Hardy. The hospital did not want to give the brincidofovir to the kid because it would take away from others. Also, it took away from the company having drug therapies for the market. Chimerix found a loophole by creating a different trial that allowed him to use the drug for Hardy. After it was said and done Hardy improved but Chimerix was released from being CEO on the company. What he did was against policies of the hospital, but he was willing to sacrifice his position to do what he thought was morally right. Individuals that reason with this theory do what is best for a single person, because of their obligation to do