Question

Scenario #6 Dr. Daniel McKay and his wife, Carol, had only a few moment of joy at the birth of his son. They learned almost immediately that their child was severely impaired. Half an hour later, the infant was dead-Dr. McKay, a veterinarian, had slammed him onto the floor of the delivery room. Mrs. McKay had had problems during pregnancy. An ultrasound test indicated excessive fluid in the uterus, a sign that something might be wrong. Dr. Joaquin Ramos assured the McKays that everything was all right and that the pregnancy should continue. On June 27, 1983, he ordered Mrs. McKay admitted to the Markham, Illinois, hospital so that labor could be induced. ?Don?t do any heroic measures,? Dr. McKay told Dr. Ramos when Dr. McKay learned that the infant was impaired. Dr. Ramos explained that that was not his choice, for hospital policy required that everything possible be done for babies, even ones like the McKay baby that might not live more than a few months. The child had webbed fingers, heart and lung malfunctions, and missing testicles. It was suspected that the child also had a genetic disorder that might mean kidney malfunctions, mental retardation, and death within months. Dr. McKay smashed the infant?s head against the floor several times, splattering the wall and floor with brain tissue and blood. ?Dan, what have you done?? a nurse shouted. Dr. McKay later said that while holding the child he asked himself ?Can I accept and love this child, or would it be better off dead?? He had just talked to his wife. ?I said to Dan, ?Is it a boy or a girl?? He said it was a little boy. I said, ?Oh, Dan, we got our boy!? Dan really wasn?t saying anything. He had tears in his eyes.? She then realized that the baby was not crying and asked her husband to go see what was wrong. Dr. McKay was charged with murder. Two defense psychiatrists testified that he had been temporarily insane. Two others said that he had succumbed to stress. A prosecution psychiatrist said that he was legally sane but that ?he made a decision that he had a moral imperative to do what he did.? The jury could not agree whether Dr. McKay was guilty, not guilty, guilty but not mentally ill, or not guilty by reason of insanity. A mistrial was declared, but another trial was scheduled. ***************************************************************************** Dr. Daniel McKay and his wife Carol were looking forward to having a child. Their child was born with severe impairments. neither of the parents wanted any heroic measures undertaken to sustain the child's life. The hospital has a policy of everything possible to sustain newborn children. Dr. McKay took the infant and slammed the child's head onto the floor killing the child. Is the hospital policy of doing everything possible for every newborn morally correct? How would someone respond to this question using the ethical principles of: (Respond using the principles of KANTIAN

Answer 1

Answer1. It is morally correct on the part of hospital and its policy to do all the possible things to treat and keep the newborn alive, the reason being that every living being has the right to live and ethically also, it should be given chances to live a life.

Answer 2. According to this law, all the humans due respect and dignity in treating each other in accordance with one's moral duty rather than one's desires.

With this rule, the act done by Dr. McKay should not have been done, rather than the newborn should have been given extra care and services, so that he could live more or at least not been killed by anyone.