The Heinz Dilemma: Moral Complexity in Everyday Life
The Heinz dilemma, is one where you have to question is stealing morally wrong? This is Heinz dilemma essay where I will give the answer to this question.
Heinz’s wife was on her deathbed and the doctor informed him there was a drug that may save her life – but it came with a hefty price tag. The doctor spent two hundred dollars to create the drug but informed the man that it would cost him two thousand dollars. Unfortunately, Heinz could only come up with one thousand dollars to pay for the drug; which wasn’t enough. He pleaded with the doctor to either sell it cheaper or set-up a payment plan, to which the doctor refused because he intended to profit from the creation of this drug. Heinz doing all he felt he could to save his wife; broke into the man’s laboratory to steal the drug. Was Heinz right or wrong to break into the laboratory to steal the drug that may save his wives life?
Utilitarianism, or the act that yields the most good for the most amount of people, can be argued on either side of the spectrum. In stealing the drug for his wife Hein’z most definitely yielded the most amount of good for his wife as well as himself. For his wife, he stole a drug that could potentially save her life, and for himself he potentially got a longer time to spend with his wife. A utilitarian could definitely argue that more people benefited from the theft of the life-saving drug.
On the other hand, a utilitarian could also argue that the theft of the drug did not benefit the druggist at all, and he lost money. I think the utilitarian view may not the most efficient to use because it is difficult to determine who really benefited. There could be two arguments, a live was potentially saved, but also that the Doctor encountered a financial loss. Also, the theft of the drug was not a guarantee of a life saved it was just a potential for a life to be saved.
We could also look at how a care ethics would approach this situation. Care ethics believe that the highest good is maintained when we promote the well-being of others, especially in a care giver type of situation. With that being said, I believe that a care ethicist would believe that Heinz ultimately made the right decision. They hold interpersonal relationships as well as care as the highest of virtues. I think they may admit the druggist lost money however Heinz’s decision to potentially save his wife would be of more moral importance.
In my opinion, care ethics would be the ideal view for this specific situation. Utilitarianism would make it hard to view this situation since a majority is not involved, there are only three parties in the situation. A care ethicist has a pretty clear moral idea and this situation is a great example of their view. Heinz did what he needed to do as a caregiver to save his wife, he respected her life as well as his interpersonal relationship, which they argue is of the highest moral importance. I believe that Heinz made an ethical decision, I think that the loss the druggist incurred was a small price compared to the loss Heinz was ultimately facing.
