Practical problems in medical ethics: II. Deaf by design

This week we are considering three case studies in medical ethics, proposed recently by my colleague at City College, Jeff Blustein. A couple of days ago we have encountered the first one, a case that stemmed from an unexpected finding of non-paternity, involving a kidney transplant. This time we’ll cut our ethical chops on a situation Jeff refers to as “deaf by design.”

Before we proceed, let me remind you of the six criteria that my colleague suggested in order to arrive at a good philosophical evaluation of the case studies:

1. Formulate the problem. This is not always as easy as it sounds, as there may be more than one way to formulate the problem itself, before we even begin to consider possible answers.

2. Consider the relevant information. If there are critical pieces of information that are missing, articulate why they are relevant to the ethical analysis, and what follows from the fact that they are currently missing.

3. Refer to the ethical principles involved. An ethical dilemma arises when some values dictate incompatible courses of action, and it is not immediately obvious which should take priority.

4. Review alternative courses of action. Consider the possible alternatives, compare the range of outcomes against relevant principles…