Introduction
The Queen vs Dudley and Stephens is a historical judicial case that questions the vague boundaries between basic survival needs and the immorality of murder. Essentially, this case puts Maslow’s hierarchy of needs up directly up against God’s Ten Commandments. This essay will analyze the ethicality behind the murder in the Queen vs Dudley Stephens case and whether punishment was appropriate under the circumstances.
In July of 1884, an English crew of four men were cast away in a storm at sea, roughly 1600 miles from Cape of Good Hope. The men were forced to flee from the yacht to an open boat that had no supply of water and only 2 lbs of turnips for the men to survive off of. After roughly 18 days of living off of said turnips, 1 turtle, and collected rain water, two of the men concurred that the …show more content…
The defense of this case also argued that the murder was necessary for the survival of the three other men and if they had not committed the crime, the youngest man was likely to have died before them anyways. The prosecution argued that the crime was defined as murder and there was no reasoning of self-defense nor the act of killing to prevent a greater crime from occurring to avoid prosecution. The judge concluded that the crime was illegal on the terms that there was temptation to the act but it wasn’t a necessity. This is because there was no reasoning behind why the youngest man was to be sacrificed nor is the act of killing to increase your own chance of survival defined as a necessity. The judge’s decision fits closest with deontological ethics, an approach that focusses on the wrongfulness or rightfulness of the action itself. The judge charged the men with murder because they committed murder and sentenced them to death for their
The Queen vs Dudley and Stephens is a historical judicial case that questions the vague boundaries between basic survival needs and the immorality of murder. Essentially, this case puts Maslow’s hierarchy of needs up directly up against God’s Ten Commandments. This essay will analyze the ethicality behind the murder in the Queen vs Dudley Stephens case and whether punishment was appropriate under the circumstances.
In July of 1884, an English crew of four men were cast away in a storm at sea, roughly 1600 miles from Cape of Good Hope. The men were forced to flee from the yacht to an open boat that had no supply of water and only 2 lbs of turnips for the men to survive off of. After roughly 18 days of living off of said turnips, 1 turtle, and collected rain water, two of the men concurred that the …show more content…
The defense of this case also argued that the murder was necessary for the survival of the three other men and if they had not committed the crime, the youngest man was likely to have died before them anyways. The prosecution argued that the crime was defined as murder and there was no reasoning of self-defense nor the act of killing to prevent a greater crime from occurring to avoid prosecution. The judge concluded that the crime was illegal on the terms that there was temptation to the act but it wasn’t a necessity. This is because there was no reasoning behind why the youngest man was to be sacrificed nor is the act of killing to increase your own chance of survival defined as a necessity. The judge’s decision fits closest with deontological ethics, an approach that focusses on the wrongfulness or rightfulness of the action itself. The judge charged the men with murder because they committed murder and sentenced them to death for their