Question
A hospital board of directors decides to close a pediatric burn treatment center (BTC) that annually admits 50 clients and to open a treatment center for terminally ill AIDS clients (with an expected annual admission of 200). This decision means that the nearest BTC for children is now 300 miles away. What example of ethical reasoning is this decision consistent with?
Obligation or duty “The means justifies the end” Utilitarianism A formalist approach
Obligation or duty “The means justifies the end” Utilitarianism A formalist approach
Answers
GPT-4o mini
The decision to close the pediatric burn treatment center (BTC) and open a treatment center for terminally ill AIDS clients can be analyzed through the lens of ethical reasoning known as **utilitarianism**.
Utilitarianism focuses on the greatest good for the greatest number. In this case, the board's decision appears to prioritize the needs of a larger group (200 terminally ill AIDS clients) over a smaller group (50 children needing burn treatment). The rationale could be that the hospital aims to maximize overall benefit, even at the cost of the pediatric BTC being 300 miles away, as long as the impact on the larger population is deemed more favorable.
The other options, such as obligation or duty and a formalist approach, would focus on adherence to rules or responsibilities regardless of the outcomes, which does not align as closely with the reasoning behind this decision. The phrase "the means justifies the end" might apply somewhat, but it does not encapsulate the primary balance of maximizing overall well-being that utilitarianism represents.
Therefore, **utilitarianism** is the most consistent ethical reasoning reflected in this decision.
Utilitarianism focuses on the greatest good for the greatest number. In this case, the board's decision appears to prioritize the needs of a larger group (200 terminally ill AIDS clients) over a smaller group (50 children needing burn treatment). The rationale could be that the hospital aims to maximize overall benefit, even at the cost of the pediatric BTC being 300 miles away, as long as the impact on the larger population is deemed more favorable.
The other options, such as obligation or duty and a formalist approach, would focus on adherence to rules or responsibilities regardless of the outcomes, which does not align as closely with the reasoning behind this decision. The phrase "the means justifies the end" might apply somewhat, but it does not encapsulate the primary balance of maximizing overall well-being that utilitarianism represents.
Therefore, **utilitarianism** is the most consistent ethical reasoning reflected in this decision.