In the movie My Sister’s Keeper, Sara and Brian Breslin make the decision to conceive their daughter Ana through in vitro to donate compatible organs to their daughter Kate who suffers from acute promyelocytic leukemia. The ethical issue in this movie is the decision Ana’s parents made to go through with genetic pre-implementation with the specific goal of saving their older daughter Kate. The moral agent, Ana, faces moral obligations to save her sister by serving as an organ bank. She is at the center of an ethical dilemma as she has to decide what is best for her and her family. She is has to make life changing decisions that can cause health complications down the road and affect the dynamic of her family. At age 15, Kate goes into renal
…show more content…
Next, we will define the categorical imperative and apply it to this ethical dilemma. The Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals starts by making the distinction between “pure” and “empirical” philosophy. According to Kant, “metaphysics” or pure philosophy is based on a priori concepts. A priori concepts are independent of experience or observations. Empirical or a posteriori concepts, on the other hand, are dependent on experience of the world and specific circumstances. Kant explains that developing a “metaphysics of morals” help us gain a clear understanding of moral principles to align them with our moral duties. Kant argues moral principles are not based on factors such as circumstances, needs, and desires; they derive from a priori concepts. He makes the claims that actions are considered moral if they are performed without underlying motives, not on the basis of consequences, and not based out of mere duty. Kant is not a consequentialist and thinks intentions behind an action determines if it is good or bad. This is interrelated with the concept of good will. Kant describes the good will as good without qualification and it is the only thing that is universally absolutely good. “The good will is good not through what it effects or …show more content…
The moral agent is suffering as she has to deal with the pressures from her family and do what is best for her. Based on the Greatest Happiness Principle, Mill uses the criteria to decide whether actions are immoral. Happiness motivates us to act in the first place; Ana’s parents are motivated by the happiness their choice will bring in the future. The birth of their daughter Ana will offer happiness and peace of mind because she is able to donate her organs to their sick daughter Kate. Mill is also a consequentialist as he believes consequences are the central thing we need to use to act in the world. Ana’s parents clearly made the choice merely on consequences it would bring. However, they failed to consider to consequences their action would bring to their daughter Ana. Mill also tells us to consider the people affected and involved. However, he rejects the idea that we must benefit the greatest number of people in all situations. If it was based merely on numbers, Mill would agree with the decision of Sara and Brian as their action would bring the greatest amount of happiness to the greatest amount of people. Although Ana’s parents believe they are bringing happiness and eliminating suffering, they did not consider how much their decision would affect her. Their daughter Ana is part of the equation and is suffering as
Next, we will define the categorical imperative and apply it to this ethical dilemma. The Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals starts by making the distinction between “pure” and “empirical” philosophy. According to Kant, “metaphysics” or pure philosophy is based on a priori concepts. A priori concepts are independent of experience or observations. Empirical or a posteriori concepts, on the other hand, are dependent on experience of the world and specific circumstances. Kant explains that developing a “metaphysics of morals” help us gain a clear understanding of moral principles to align them with our moral duties. Kant argues moral principles are not based on factors such as circumstances, needs, and desires; they derive from a priori concepts. He makes the claims that actions are considered moral if they are performed without underlying motives, not on the basis of consequences, and not based out of mere duty. Kant is not a consequentialist and thinks intentions behind an action determines if it is good or bad. This is interrelated with the concept of good will. Kant describes the good will as good without qualification and it is the only thing that is universally absolutely good. “The good will is good not through what it effects or …show more content…
The moral agent is suffering as she has to deal with the pressures from her family and do what is best for her. Based on the Greatest Happiness Principle, Mill uses the criteria to decide whether actions are immoral. Happiness motivates us to act in the first place; Ana’s parents are motivated by the happiness their choice will bring in the future. The birth of their daughter Ana will offer happiness and peace of mind because she is able to donate her organs to their sick daughter Kate. Mill is also a consequentialist as he believes consequences are the central thing we need to use to act in the world. Ana’s parents clearly made the choice merely on consequences it would bring. However, they failed to consider to consequences their action would bring to their daughter Ana. Mill also tells us to consider the people affected and involved. However, he rejects the idea that we must benefit the greatest number of people in all situations. If it was based merely on numbers, Mill would agree with the decision of Sara and Brian as their action would bring the greatest amount of happiness to the greatest amount of people. Although Ana’s parents believe they are bringing happiness and eliminating suffering, they did not consider how much their decision would affect her. Their daughter Ana is part of the equation and is suffering as