Many of us in America are familiar with the Boy Scout Law. Not sure if I could say it word for word, so here it is: "A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent." Not a bad list to train, guide, and lead young men as they prepare themselves for adulthood.
Now I want you to turn your attention to an article in Journal of Medical Ethics published January 19, 2012 entitled, "What makes killing wrong?". This journal is subscription only, but the abstract is available on the web: "What makes an act of killing morally wrong is not that the act causes loss of life or consciousness but rather that the act causes loss of all remaining abilities. This account implies that it is not even pro tanto morally wrong to kill patients who are universally and irreversibly disabled, because they have no abilities to lose. Applied to vital organ transplantation, this account undermines the dead donor rule and shows how current practices are compatible with morality." See: http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/01/19/medethics-2011-100351.abstract
Others on websites have read the article (authors are Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Kenan Institute for Ethics, Duke University and Franklin Miller at the National Institute of Health) and you can research this yourself. This has do with organ donation, when to operate for the organs, and who to operate on. This blog is about the "who".
If you read carefully the abstract above, you will see that it states that the authors feel it is not morally wrong to kill patients who are disabled. Again, if you want to research this topic, you will quickly see that those who think like the authors believe that a certain group should only get organ transplants.
This is a very serious topic and I bring it to your attention because we need to know what our healthcare providers are networking and discussing about. This discussion very well includes us the patient.
No matter how many responsibilities ("hats") a small/medium size business owner has to deal with on a daily basis, they will be a human being first and foremost. Ethics, standards, the man/woman that you are do indeed slide into your business dealings. A business plan, one of which can be found at: http://articles.bplans.com/writing-a-business-plan/a-standard-business-plan-outline/29, describes all parts of a business. But it does not includes your business standards.
These can't be decided upon after a business has begun. They can't be changed in the course of the company's life because many times they are switched to meet deal-of-the-day. Then you will end up disabled as Armstrong and Miller define it. I have worked with those with disabilities and a community thrives when everyone contributes. It would be boring and useless if everyone contributed exactly the same way.
This is where the Boy Scout Law comes in. Measure your ethics against this. Where do you stand? What about your friends and associates? Choose good friends. What ethics attachment have you written alongside your business plan? If you don't, you will be easily swayed. Some people start out meaning well, but if you don't pursue it daily and keep yourself grounded, then when people who like to rationalize like Armstrong and Miller come along, you will be less inclined to follow.
The paragraph below is included in the journal article. It is here purposely to motivate you to write a code of ethics. Make sure your company's code is included in your new employee orientation.
“[I]f killing were wrong just because it is causing death or the loss of life, then the same principle would apply with the same strength to pulling weeds out of a garden. If it is not immoral to weed a garden, then life as such cannot really be sacred, and killing as such cannot be morally wrong.”
No comments:
Post a Comment