Fetal Abnormality: Application of Utilitarianism in Medical Ethics

This essay explores the ethical considerations of fetal abnormality cases through the lens of utilitarianism. It examines the conflict between preserving life and making difficult decisions in medical care, focusing on the principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. The essay contrasts utilitarianism with deontological approaches, analyzing how utilitarianism, which prioritizes actions that maximize overall utility and happiness, influences decisions regarding abortion and the well-being of the mother and the fetus. The analysis considers the weighing of potential benefits and harms, the concept of consequentialism, and the influence of societal well-being on decisions about the child's future. The essay concludes by emphasizing that ethical theories are often limited by the conditions of life and that the decision to protect or take life depends on the circumstances and the benefits to society.

Running header: Fetal Abnormality 1
Fetal Abnormality
Student’s name
University

Fetal Abnormality 2
Fetal Abnormality
Ethics in medical care require making decisions between preserving life and taking away
an individual’s life. Different strands of thought in ethical decision making exist that shape the
decisions that are formed by practitioners within the field of medical care. These are
utilitarianism and deontological approach. These theories guide the ethical dilemmas that exist in
conflict on duty. This is based on four fundamental principles of autonomy, beneficence,
nonmaleficence, and justice (Garbutt & Davies, 2011). This essay analyses the application of
utilitarianism in the fetal abnormality case study.
Utilitarianism
Proponents of this theory base their decisions on actions that maximize the utility of the
individual. This means that the sum of all pleasures that will be derived from a situation need to
uphold the basic happiness principle. Utilitarian approach is based on decisions that lead to the
greatest benefit to the individual and achieving of total utility (Harriss, 2005). This is a
consequentialism approach where outcomes are based on morality of the intervention that
maximizes pleasure and reduces pain. Every decision that a medical practitioner arrives at is
based on a balance between benefits and harms without considering other factors like past
experiences or evidence (Rachels & Rachels, 2012). This means that the healthcare system and
resources need to be used to achieve the best outcome to the patient. In making medical
decisions practitioners are required to weigh circumstances and the state of the decisions to
determine the benefit that the result of the decision will bring to the patient.
Deontology
Mandal, Ponnambath, & Parija, (2016) suggest that deontology is an ethics of duty that
looks at the morality of the action and the nature of the action. This means that the decision may

Fetal Abnormality 3
be good for the individual but may not produce a benefit for the society (Norcross, 2009). This
means that the relationship between the doctor and the patient is deontological in nature to
control medical negligence. This means that the doctor should consult the patient and give all the
available options to allow the patient to make a decision on which course of action that can be
taken.
Application of utilitarianism on the recommendation
From the utilitarian approach, two courses of action can be weighed against each other to
determine the pain and pleasure that each action will bring. The action that brings the highest
number of utilities is the one that will be adopted. This should be a balance between the degree
of pain and pleasure that the individual will receive from a certain action that is taken towards
the individual (Mill, 2011). The decision that the doctor, the patient and other interested parties
in the case arrive at should be based on maximum pleasure and the interests of all the parties.
This means that the decision of a safe abortion or keeping the pregnancy should be based on the
feeling of the mother and the life that the baby will lead in case it grows to birth.
Consequentialism allows the parties involved to meet the consequences of the situation.
This entails keeping the pregnancy and see the baby suffer the challenges of the deformity or
having a safe abortion to save the baby and suffer maternal blues that are associated with the
pregnancy. Further, the welfare suggests that the rightness and wrongness of any decision is
based on the effect that it has on the wellbeing of the society. The child’s wellbeing is the
determining factor since the parents have to make a decision that will determine the kind of life
in future. The decision to keep or remove the pregnancy is thus based on the decision between
losing the baby to save it from the worst future that it will lead or save the baby and expose it to
a future that will be challenged by life deformities.

Fetal Abnormality 4
How utilitarianism will influence the decision
Utilitarianism is based on the decision that maximizes utility and brings the best pleasure
in life. This means that the doctor and the patient need to be influenced by the need to achieve
pleasure for the patient (Mandal, Ponnambath, & Parija, 2016). This theory will influence the
decision that will be arrived at since it is a decision of maximizing utility and bringing the best
pleasure to the fetus. Therefore the decision that Jessica will make regarding the pregnancy need
to be based on the best pleasure by weighing the right thing to do to achieve maximum happiness
for herself and the baby
Conclusion
Ethical theories emphasize the right to life but are limited to the conditions that the same
life will lead the individual to. In choosing whether to protect or take life, the decision is based
on the benefits that the society will receive when such a life is taken. This means that rightness
and wrongness of a decision will depend on the circumstances of the situation.

Fetal Abnormality 5
References
Garbutt, G., & Davies, P. (2011). Should the practice of medicine be a deontological or
utilitarian enterprise? Journal of Medical Ethics, 37, 267-270.
Harriss, I. (2005). Ethics and euthanasia: natural law philosophy and latent utilitarianism. 12th
Annual Conference of Australian Association for Professional and Applied Ethics .
Mandal, J., Ponnambath, D. K., & Parija, S. C. (2016). Utilitarian and deontological ethics in
medicine. Journal of Tropical Parasitology, 6(1), 5-7.
Mill, J. S. (2011). A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive. Forgotten Books.
Norcross, A. (2009). Two Dogmas of Deontology: Aggregation, Rights and the Separateness of
Persons. Social Philosophy and Policy, 26, 81-81.
Rachels, J., & Rachels, S. (2012). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. McGraw-Hill Higher
Education.