Ethical

But wouldn’t the policy factor into any cost/benefit analysis that Jane might do at arriving at a decision?
just need this question answered from this post,
Utilitarian ethics would respond that the action of organ harvesting is a good practice. From a utilitarian point of view, an act is good when the outcome from the act is deemed as good. When the consequence of the action brings sadness, then the action is bad. Therefore, utilitarian ethics argue that one organ donor can save up to eight people, and one tissue donor can save up to 50 people (Rogers, 2019). The utilitarian ethicists would then argue that the results of the organ donor have saved many people and brought happiness to these people, while the tissue donors have also helped many people. Utilitarian ethics looks at things in terms of the outcomes and the consequences of the actions of the donors. The utilitarian ethics argument would look at the problem to solve the bigger problems and the results from the organ and tissue transfer.Deontologists would argue that the actions are wrong. The deontologist would argue that the organs were being harvested without the permission of the donors. In this case, the donors are forced to donate their organs. Universally, organ donors should donate their organs without being forced to make donations. The deontologists base their arguments on what is taken as universal truths. The deontologists look at the problems based on the process rather than the consequences and outcomes. Deontologists focus on the process of achieving the results and not on the consequences. Therefore, deontologists perceive the processes as based on what is accepted as the truth and based on the cultures and values in the society. Deontology differs from utilitarianism because whereas one looks at the outcomes, deontology looks at the processes that remain important and what has been accepted as being important. Deontology and utilitarian ethics are two viewpoints that remain vital in ensuring that various activities can be understood.A choice between helping 50 people and the right of one person guides utilitarianism. However, the method of extracting the organs and harvesting from one donor to help the 50 people remains critical in knowing what is right and what is wrong(Rogers, 2019). The difference between the perception of utilitarianism and deontology is based on what can be perceived. People who are imprisoned are also viewed in the same since the prisoners also have rights. Deontologists also perceive the imprisoners as having their rights and should be based on the protection of their organs. Commission of heinous crimes like murder does not guarantee individuals to be subjected to unfair organ harvesting. However, even at this point, utilitarianism ethics believe that the prisoners will help other people when their organs are harvested.The policy of Ammaco does not affect Jane’s actions according to utilitarian ethics. In utilitarian ethics, the end justifies the means, and the outcomes dictate what is right or wrong. In utilitarian ethics, when the actions lead to the outcomes that are preferable, like in the case of Jane’s communication in the social media, then the actions are considered as good. However, deontological ethics argue that the case of Jane is bad since she did not follow the laid down procedure by the company. The procedure laid down by the company dictates what is right and what is wrong according to the deontological theory.ReferenceRogers, B. (2019, February 5). The nightmare of human organ harvesting in China. The WallStreet Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-nightmare-of-human-organ-harvesting-in-china-11549411056