Social and Political Ethics

This article discusses the philosophical approaches to ethical issues in society, using the case of JoEllen, a 53-year-old lady who attempted suicide. The article explores different schools of thought, including consequentialism and deontological evaluations, and emphasizes the importance of achieving a morally upright and philosophically acceptable resolution.

Running head: Social and Political Ethics 1
Social and Political Ethics
Student's Name
University Affiliation

Social and Political Ethics 2
Every philosophical approach to situations in sociology is of necessity in regard to
decisions process about ethical issues that arise in a society. There already existing
philosophies that have to define the general considerations that need to be employed while
assessing the moral and ethical weight of any particular matter in the society. A productive
societal life must pertain the aspects that define the reason for existence, the essence of life
and all moral and ethical implications that hold the society into a cohesive union. Existing
in any community explicitly displays a need for moral standards that protect the individual
from the unbridled selfishness that exists in different individuals. Philosophical reasoning
about human conduct is intended to bring a standard gauge for right and wrong. It is upon
this standard that judgments can be made while moral reference is done in the light of
attaining truth as pertains any situation requiring such moral evaluation (Murray,2008).
The case in question in this address involves a 53-year-old lady JoEllen who was
admitted because of taking an overdose. The case has moral and legal implications because
it could legally be categorized as an attempted suicide case. According to the categorical
imperative, this case could be evaluated on the aspects of its implications to the individual
involved. A deeper look into the issue brings aspects of examining the clarity in the
motivations of this action earlier taken by the lady. In consideration of the first form of
categorical imperative, it was, therefore, a misplaced action for the lady to do an overdose
against the prescription done. Empirically, the society has outrightly defined the ethical
boundaries that pertain to the sanctity of life and all the issues surrounding to it. While
personal decisions may affect moral standings and ethical practices of health professionals,
it is important that there be no compromise in the situations that need ethical intervention.

Social and Political Ethics 3
Legal actions are always taken against any case that defies societal codes of living (Elwy
et. al, 2012).
Many schools of thought exist in the light of ethical dilemmas that remain a
challenge to health professionals and other aspects of the society. It is therefore wise to
consider these different views in any situation like the one in question. According to
Hobbes, the faculty of willing is very adamant in determination as long as it is unbiased by
any external pressures beyond itself. A moral decision requires a ground that favors the
decision-making process and gives a clear direction on the aspects of objective
considerations in any situation (Hobbes, 2016). The situation in question has three aspects
that could give a proper ground for a fair moral judgment. The action that by JoEllen, the
availability of a written advance directive request against being placed on life support. The
production of the written by her son is also an element that needs consideration in this
regard. Those features are crucial and could be used as a springboard in making a fair
moral decision in JoEllen’s case. The philosophical view gives a chance to relate as
determined by one’s will.
The moral view that regard the meaning of life cannot be reinvented to take
different stages than ones existing. However different people have different approaches to
these aspects of morality. Life is a factor that is universally objective in its value. The
contribution of an individual in the matter of handling a life-threatening situation should be
weighted in the balance of the views held by society. Thus, an individual’s decision to end
their life or to diminish their survival’s capacity is a subjective view and cannot be final in
that regard (Alexander, 2016). The society takes precedence in matters of life and protects
the value placed on human life. Although an individual can make a decision on their

Social and Political Ethics 4
private issues, any decision that could transcend the value of human life in a malicious
effort to diminish its sanctity needs countering. The most familiar aspects of such
decisions are incorporated in the regular societal laws in many communities. Hence, any
member of a society definitely owes the society a sense of responsibility and accountability
in all issues that pertain to the philosophy of reasoning (Bhaskar, 2014).
Every contemporary issue has an emblem of debate that encapsulates within the
moral law and philosophical view. According to Immanuel Kant, any individual in society
should do what they would want others to do to them (Kant, 2012). The extent of the
moral law is universally objective and cannot be compromised for anything else. In the
light of the categorical imperative, the situation, in this case, would be fully transfigured
into a moral form and judged objectively. Therefore, a deontologist like Immanuel Kant
would recommend that the best efforts be made to safe JoEllen’s life. It would be noted that
her document does not uphold moral objectivity in regard to the matter at hand. The
recommendation would be that the health professionals in handling this case to put efforts
and ensure compliance with ethical ideologies (Greene, 2008).
Consequentialists such as John Stuart Mill would give a different opinion regarding
the matter in discussion. The moral view of utilitarianism which is encapsulated in
consequentialism is based on making a decision whose overall consequences will favor the
decision makers. It is therefore important to understand the concept behind John and
Jeremy’s ideology of moral consequentialism (Eggleston, Miller, & Weinstein, 2011). In
making the decision on whether to obey JoEllen’s directive and leave her at the mercy of
her situation or disobey it and save her from the situation is rational in invoking John’s
moral philosophy. Overly, John Stuart would recommend a decision that according to the

Social and Political Ethics 5
medical professionals present would result in beneficence. It is essential to consider the
available choice so that the best and most appropriate moral judgment is an achievement. In
the case where there lacks moral precedence over the situation, philosophical reasoning
would be better placed in analyzing the implications of every available choice and then
critically analyzing all the implications (Willaschek, 2017).
The case of JoEllen’s is a deeply moral issue that not only requires the borrowing of
philosophical ideologies but also an embrace of moral laws in order to broadly evaluate the
situation and give an objective directive. On the thought of consequentialist view, it would
be important to understand the essence of what the lady directed regarding her health and in
line promotion of her happiness. However, if it is found that the decision of directing not to
be placed on life support is a non-issue to promoting her state of happiness, then it could be
defined in the anchorage of the moral law. Philosophical ethics in line with professional
ethics could at times allow euthanasia which also a subject of debate in philosophical
views. Therefore, in the suppression of moral laws and embrace of philosophical reasoning
one’s directive not to be placed in a life support could be obeyed and left to the
implications of such a decision (Kant, 2013). In a personal perspective and point of view,
this would be the best decision to consider if the son to the lady in the case is in support of
her mother’s directive.
Philosophical reasoning is very important in handling moral dilemmas. However,
the consideration that should be made is very important in determining the most valid
choice. Sociological differences demand different views of moral laws, and this is an
essential point of consideration in relation to any moral issue. Matters regarding life and
death become too pertinent to be handled lightly in any ethical standings (Macpherson,

Social and Political Ethics 6
2010). While other situations require totally moral judgments, there are many that need a
broad sociological approach. More importantly, all cases of moral issues that need
philosophical reasoning can fit in either consequentialist or deontological evaluations. The
best consideration is when a morally upright and philosophically acceptable resolution is
achieved. References on moral and philosophical concepts should be defined authentically
so that every ideology is better used in problem-solving. The confidentiality of any
patient’s medical information must be maintained always without any breach of ethical
laws surrounding health care.

Social and Political Ethics 7
References
Alexander, J. M. (2016). Capabilities and social justice: The political philosophy of
Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum. Routledge.
Bhaskar, R. (2014). The possibility of naturalism: A philosophical critique of the
contemporary human sciences. Routledge.
Eggleston, B., Miller, D., & Weinstein, D. (Eds.). (2011). John Stuart Mill and the art of
life. Oxford University Press.
Greene, J. D. (2008). The secret joke of Kant’s soul. Moral psychology, 3, 35-79.
Hobbes, T. (2016). Thomas Hobbes: Leviathan (Longman Library of Primary Sources in
Philosophy). Routledge.
Kant, I. (2012). Fundamental principles of the metaphysics of morals. Courier Corporation.
Kant, I. (2013). Moral Law: Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Routledge.
Elwyn, G., Frosch, D., Thomson, R., Joseph-Williams, N., Lloyd, A., Kinnersley, P., ... &
Edwards, A. (2012). Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice. Journal
of general internal medicine, 27(10), 1361-1367.
Macpherson, C. B. (2010). The political theory of possessive individualism: Hobbes to
Locke.
Murray, M. E. (2008). Moral development and moral education: An overview. University
of Illinois at Chicago website. Last accessed on September, 15, 2008.
Willaschek, M. (2017). Why the Doctrine of Right does not belong in the Metaphysics of
Morals: On some Basic Distinctions in Kant’s Moral Philosophy. In Immanuel
Kant (pp. 49-71). Routledge.