Moral issue question: The moral issue question is covered in the notion stating that banks impose too much control over the financial resources of debit card owners. Thus, the owners of these cards have nothing but consent tacitly with the existing provisions.
First of all it should be stated that the banking provisions, which restrict clients from using their debit cards. When the remaining funds are exceeded, the banks just make a notification when the costs for card services are taken. From the point of view of utilitarianism, it should be emphasized that the moral issues, which are touched upon by these matters, are covered in the notion by Jeremy Bentham. He stated that humankind was placed between two forces – pleasure and pain. Originally, these two masters dictate what people ought to do, and what people will do. The verb ought is generally aimed at emphasizing what is morally good, and what is bad. Taking into consideration the fact that pleasure is good, and pain is bad, it should be emphasized that banks gets pleasure from making clients spend more, and letting them forgive of any restrictions. Card holders, in their turn, would get pleasure if banks notified them of the law remaining. Originally, the main objection of such ethical consideration is the logical conclusion of the fact that every human experiences pain all through his or her life, and aims to minimize it. (Velasquez, 231)
Consequences – Benefits:
- The benefits of applying the moral values towards the banking system will entail higher satisfaction of the clients and card holders.
- Business ethics would be regarded as the high priority issue within the company
- Notifications would increase the trust credit among clients
Consequences – Costs:
- Such innovations would require restructuring of the operating systems
- Some clients would regard it as the violation of their privacy, as they are able to follow their bills by themselves
- Meeting the requirements of clients’ comfort always means the increase of routine operations
Another option of solving the banking issues from the positions of utilitarianism is the explanation of the existing norms and rules as the care of the comfort, security and reliability, which the banking system offers. Originally, some people get irritated when they receive notifications about the remaining funds, while others need to control these funds constantly, thus, clients should have an option whether receive the notifications or not. Anyway, any action, undertaken by the bank management should be explained as the result of the highest care level of the clients. Originally, these are the concerns of the PR manager, consequently PR structure should be essentially developed.
Consequences – Benefits:
- The high priority benefit is that, such approach would create the vision of total customer care, while in reality the environment would stay the same
- Another benefit is that card holders would follow their funds more thoroughly and accurately, if notifications option would become available
- In general, the customer care environment would improve
Consequences – Costs:
- The costs of this option will entail the improvement of PR management structure, and the qualification improvement of PR team
- As for the matters of notification system, the changes in the range of services would require the improvement of IT base.
Comparison of benefits minus costs of Option #1 with benefits minus costs of Option #2.
Taking into consideration the benefits and costs of both options, it should be stated that the second option appears to be more beneficial than the second one.
Conclusion: Finally, it should be emphasized that the issues of utilitarianism, if applied in the business sphere, should be regarded from the point of view of benefits for both – the company and the customers. Originally, it depends on the company, whether customers experience pain or pleasure.
Moral issue question: the moral issue question, which is touched upon in the regarded case is associated with the statement that doctors, who gave the oath of healing and saving people could be attracted for working in the sphere of black medicine. Surely, the tortures and capital punishment themselves should be forbidden all over the world, nevertheless the resort to some sophisticated way of torturing people is not humane, and any representation of such behavior should be pursued and prevented. Moreover, these actions would entail the violation of moral and basic rights of people, who are going to be subjected to tortures.
Would any of the actions called for…Yes/No:
- Yes ____ fail to treat any person with respect and dignity?
- Yes ____ fail to treat any person as a free equal?
- Yes ____ fail to treat any person as she/he has agreed to be treated or would agree to be treated (if she/he were fully rational)?
- Yes ____ fail to treat any person as I (or the actor) would agree to be treated?
- Yes ____ involve lying to any person?
- Yes ____ seriously injure any person?
- Yes ____ involve coercion, manipulation, or exploitation of any person?
- Yes ____ fail to provide any person, whom I have a duty to assist, with a minimally decent human life?
- Yes ____ cause me (or the actor) to violate a morally binding contract?
(In your essays and presentations, only refer to one or two of these criteria – the most relevant. Discuss these one or two thoroughly).
Originally, there is strong necessity to emphasize that the violation of moral rights of tortured people is one of the issues that were discussed while the UNO Statute and Universal Declaration of Human Rights were elaborated. Any representation of tortures are forbidden, as the human dignity, physical and moral health of people are claimed to be defended by these official documents. Taking into consideration that all the questions were answered with “Yes”, there is strong necessity to emphasize that the violation of moral dignity and harm to physical, as well as moral health of the people is obvious, if they are subjected to tortures. Thus, tortures may cause serious injuries, and cause partial o even full disabilities. The fact is that, if tortures are performed with the assistance of qualified doctors, it should be emphasized that these tortures would result in maximum pain and minimum injury. Nevertheless, if physical health of such victims would be preserved, their dignity, moral and psychological health will be seriously injured, and not subjected to full restoration.
As for the matters of doctors’ practice, and the Hippocratic Oath, it should be emphasized that such practices should result in the lifetime confiscation of the medical license, as tortures contradict the basic principles of this oath and medical practice in general.
The morally binding contracts, which are regarded in the list of the questions for this assignment presuppose that people should not be subjected to tortures, especially by those who had given an oath of healing and curing the others. The fact is that such practices violate not only moral contracts, but moral and humanity principles in general. Even the fact, that such tortures or punishments may prevent other deaths or tortures, does not give the right to doctors injure the bodies of the people.
Ethic of Care
Moral issue question: the moral issue of the regarded issue is closely associated with the notion that the superpowers should protect the developing countries from the dangers and hazards which may endanger or harm their development. It is stated that the USA have provided part of the vaccines against H1H1 virus to the World Health Organization, for it could use the vaccines in low income countries. On the one hand, this is a gesture of generosity from the side of the USA, on the other hand, the developing countries complained that they also experience the shortage of vaccines, and claim that superpowers provided them with vaccines.
In the light of the fact that this action by the USA was completely voluntary, and is generally regarded as the will to help those who need this help the most, the complaints of the others should not be regarded seriously, as the USA did not provide any obligations in regard of the other countries. Anyway, this help was offered to the WHO, which is free to use it on its own discretion, however, with the additional condition: these vaccines should be provided for any low-income country. In the light of the fact that low income States are particularly subjected to various pandemics, this help seems to be the most effective. Undeveloped states are regarded as the roots of the pandemics, consequently, there is no need to struggle against the reasons (infection, which is spread in the developing States), however, there is strong necessity to eliminate the roots of the problems (conquer the infection where its spread is the widest).
Nevertheless, if the USA violates its obligation for supplying the required vaccines, the principles of ethics of care will be violated seriously. On the one hand, the USA may reject its obligations freely, however, the moral responsibility for this rejection may be serious. Inaction in the circumstances of world pandemic will cause fatal consequences, associated with dangerous spread of the virus. Finally, the rejection of the obligations to support the stability on the world will decrease the trust credit towards the USA, and the position of the world policeman may be shattered. Inaction may cause the great disruption in morally important relationships. If currently the USA may pretend to control the situation by allocating the vaccines through the WHO, in the case of the violation of taken obligations the WHO may address some other superpower for assistance, thus, the positions of the USA may become endangered.
Finally, it should be emphasized that the business performed by voluntarily taking an obligation is often of great importance, thus, the sides bound with such an obligation should perform their tasks fairly.
Velasquez, M. G. Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases. Prentice Hall, 2005.