At the end of the study only 127 men were left alive, following the Senate investigate, survivors were given penicillin and financial compensation. When analyzing this film from an ethical standpoint, there are many points of views to be addressed and discussed in detail. It is hard to clearly judge whether Miss Evers is a moral or amoral character because there are several degrees of complexities and this also depends on our moral beliefs and values. If we look at the study overall, one could say that this is experimenting with human lives and a disrespectful act towards a person's’ rights. However, if we put ourselves in Miss Evers’ position, another side of the argument is also valid. The great philosopher Aristotle believed that being a “good person” is about being virtuous, finding the right balance between the two extremes of character, also known as the ‘golden mean’. He believed that we could all become good by doing …show more content…
Despite the negative consequences Kant urges everyone to take on these two roles in order to encourage good intentions and good people thereby. As a nurse Miss Evers not only has the duty to care for her patients but more importantly she has the responsibility to protect their rights and to stand up for their interests at all times. Her universal duty, outside her nursing role is to be kind to people and to respect their rights as a person. To some extent Miss Evers does care for and is very sympathetic towards her patients but she fails to fulfill her roles entirely because she makes decisions based on her emotions and not her intellect. When making decisions based on our emotions, we often tend to do what we ‘want’ and not necessarily what we