# Lawrence Kohlberg: classic moral problem



## Lifeguards For Life (Dec 24, 2009)

Heinz’s wife has a rare form of cancer that cannot be cured with currently available drugs and therapies. But there is one drug that physicians think might save Heinz’s wife. It is a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug is expensive to make, but the druggist is charging 10 times what the drug cost him to make it. He pays $200 for the radium and charges $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. Heinz goes to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could raise only $1,000, which is half the amount asked by the druggist. Heinz goes to the druggist and tells him that his wife is dying and asks him to sell the drug cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist says, “No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.” What should Heinz do? 

*please formulate an answer based on your own morals, values, and ethics


----------



## Lifeguards For Life (Dec 24, 2009)

You are transporting an EMT who works for your ambulance service, though at a different station. While off-duty and in his private vehicle, he was struck from the rear by a drunk driver. En route to the hospital, the EMT pulls a small baggy of marijuana out of his pants and asks you to throw it out of the ambulance. Do you throw it out? Do you tell the police?


----------



## Onceamedic (Dec 24, 2009)

Lifeguards For Life said:


> Heinz’s wife has a rare form of cancer that cannot be cured with currently available drugs and therapies. But there is one drug that physicians think might save Heinz’s wife. It is a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug is expensive to make, but the druggist is charging 10 times what the drug cost him to make it. He pays $200 for the radium and charges $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. Heinz goes to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could raise only $1,000, which is half the amount asked by the druggist. Heinz goes to the druggist and tells him that his wife is dying and asks him to sell the drug cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist says, “No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.” What should Heinz do?
> 
> *please formulate an answer based on your own morals, values, and ethics



Be very very sure that you won't get caught (not much good to your family in jail) and steal the drug.


----------



## Onceamedic (Dec 24, 2009)

Lifeguards For Life said:


> You are transporting an EMT who works for your ambulance service, though at a different station. While off-duty and in his private vehicle, he was struck from the rear by a drunk driver. En route to the hospital, the EMT pulls a small baggy of marijuana out of his pants and asks you to throw it out of the ambulance. Do you throw it out? Do you tell the police?



Throw it out of the ambulance and say nothing to the cops


----------



## Burlyskink (Dec 24, 2009)

Kaisu said:


> Be very very sure that you won't get caught (not much good to your family in jail) and steal the drug.



Same, but I would also give him the money


----------



## Lifeguards For Life (Dec 24, 2009)

Burlyskink said:


> Same, but I would also give him the money



haha. that is actually the same answer a Mr. Bryan Bledose told his medical school interview committee in the early 80's 



> "I told the medical school interviewers that Heinz should steal the drug and leave what financial compensation he could"


----------



## Burlyskink (Dec 24, 2009)

Lifeguards For Life said:


> haha. that is actually the same answer a Mr. Bryan Bledose told his medical school interview committee in the early 80's



Haha, well the druggist did supposedly discover it.


----------



## JPINFV (Dec 24, 2009)

Lifeguards For Life said:


> You are transporting an EMT who works for your ambulance service, though at a different station. While off-duty and in his private vehicle, he was struck from the rear by a drunk driver. En route to the hospital, the EMT pulls a small baggy of marijuana out of his pants and asks you to throw it out of the ambulance. Do you throw it out? Do you tell the police?



Throw it out. Drug use is very arguably a victimless crime and I'm under no duty to enforce the law outside of limited circumstances (e.g. reporting abuse)


----------



## redcrossemt (Dec 25, 2009)

Burlyskink said:


> Same, but I would also give him the money



+1.



JPINFV said:


> Throw it out. Drug use is very arguably a victimless crime and I'm under no duty to enforce the law outside of limited circumstances (e.g. reporting abuse)



Agree to those points. At the same time, I am not going to handle any drugs that aren't mine, nor throw them out of my ambulance. I may turn the other way if the patient wants to throw it out, but at the same time I am not going to get in trouble (fired/arrested/whatever) for anyone else's mistake.


----------



## reaper (Dec 25, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> Throw it out. *Drug use is very arguably a victimless crime *and I'm under no duty to enforce the law outside of limited circumstances (e.g. reporting abuse)



Haha, you were making a joke!


----------



## JPINFV (Dec 25, 2009)

No. I'm dead serious. Why should the government tell me what I can and can not introduce into my body provided that I am not endangering others by my actions/stupidity? If someone has dependents, then they have a duty to provide which can cause issues (but neglect is already against the law). It's like arguing that alcohol should be outlawed because alcohol is addictive (alcoholics), can cause serious medical disorders (Korsakoff's syndrome, cirrosis, etc), and other bad things. Anyone want to comment on the success of prohibition?


----------



## reaper (Dec 25, 2009)

Does not matter if it is right or wrong. There will always be victims of it. You may think that you doing it alone has no victims, but you would be wrong. It always ends up hurting someone else. That is a victim!


----------



## silver (Dec 25, 2009)

Well most ethicists today don't care about laws. Obeying laws sometimes lead to horrible things.

I would leave the compensation I have, and take the drug. Which is what others had. If you think about what positives and negatives come out of it. In stealing the drug and leaving money, there would be the most prosperity and flourishing in life, or happiness.

simple stuff.


----------



## JPINFV (Dec 25, 2009)

If you're going to take the "If somone cares about you doing X, then it hurts them if you do X" can we take it to it's logical conclusion? Driving down the road hurts people. Therefore let's ban it. Eating at McDonalds hurts people, let's ban McDonalds. Being anything but Religion X is bad, therefore everyone should be Religion X.

Where can I stop assigning hurt to your actions if the only thing I need to prove to be hurt is saying that I care?


----------



## Lifeguards For Life (Dec 25, 2009)

> This is a classic moral problem attributed to noted psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg.[2] What Kohlberg (and the medical school admissions committee) was looking for was not so much the answer, but the reasoning used to formulate the answer. Medical schools look for students who function with a high level of moral reasoning because health care providers must always put the needs of the patient above virtually all other needs.
> 
> Kohlberg followed the work of Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget and believed that people pass through different cognitive and moral developmental stages as we age. Kohlberg identified the following stages of moral reasoning:
> 
> ...



Should EMS Be a Part of Public Safety?
Another Perspective

    * Bryan E. Bledsoe, DO, FACEP
http://www.jems.com/news_and_articles/columns/Bledsoe/Should_EMS_Be_a_Part_of_Public_Safety.html


----------



## reaper (Dec 25, 2009)

Never stated "if someone cares" it hurts them. You will will hurt someone by your actions or by letting them down, when needed. I have never seen a single drug user that did not have a trail of victims behind them.

So, to answer the question. No, I would not call the police. That is not my job. No, I would not dispose of it for them. That is not my job. I would tell them it is their problem to get dispose of it themselves and it would be documented in my report. I am not there to cover up for their choices or actions. they know it is wrong, that is why they want to dispose of it!


----------



## JPINFV (Dec 25, 2009)

reaper said:


> Never stated "if someone cares" it hurts them. You will will hurt someone by your actions or by letting them down, when needed. I have never seen a single drug user that did not have a trail of victims behind them.


The only way you can 'let someone down' is if they care. You can't let someone down who doesn't care.  If letting someone down is worthy of banning a substance, why isn't alcohol or tobacco straight out banned?


----------



## reaper (Dec 25, 2009)

JPINFV said:


> The only way you can 'let someone down' is if they care. You can't let someone down who doesn't care.  If letting someone down is worthy of banning a substance, why isn't alcohol or tobacco straight out banned?



Person does not have to care, to be let down. You could be a sales person that has an appointment with a client. You are to stoned to remember the appointment and leave the client hanging. That is letting someone down, that does not "care" about you.

You could be a Medic at work, that is stoned or drunk. You forget a treatment plan for a pt, because of this. Your pt does not Care about you, but they are now a victim of your choice.

Yes, if alcohol is affecting your everyday thinking, then it should be banned too. Tobacco does not affect your thinking or rational, so it is a moot point.


----------



## JPINFV (Dec 25, 2009)

None of that explains why someone shouldn't be allowed to get high on their own time? Sure, if being impaired puts other lives at risk, then it should be outlawed (hence why responding to emergency calls while drunk will lose your certification and open up to legal troubles for adverse outcomes. Same reason why driving under the influence is against the law). However that's not the same as a flat ban.

...and yes, alcohol abuse can cause permanent long term neurological damage.


----------



## reaper (Dec 25, 2009)

I see no problem with someone using on their own time, in their own home. But, make sure you do not leave the house until the drug has lost all affects!


----------



## JPINFV (Dec 25, 2009)

I definately agree that if the use of non-prescription drugs causes a public disturbance, that the act of creating such disturbance should be outlawed (i.e. 'drunk in public')


----------



## mycrofft (Dec 28, 2009)

*When you ask me to help cover up your malfeasance, you do me a tort.*

Oh, you get the radium any way you can then turn yourself in. Call Channel Three on the way in though. And Oprah. And EMTLIFE.


----------



## JeffDHMC (Dec 31, 2009)

Get the drug, by hook or by crook.

Toss the weed.


----------



## Jeffrey_169 (Jan 9, 2010)

Lifeguards For Life said:


> Heinz’s wife has a rare form of cancer that cannot be cured with currently available drugs and therapies. But there is one drug that physicians think might save Heinz’s wife. It is a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug is expensive to make, but the druggist is charging 10 times what the drug cost him to make it. He pays $200 for the radium and charges $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. Heinz goes to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could raise only $1,000, which is half the amount asked by the druggist. Heinz goes to the druggist and tells him that his wife is dying and asks him to sell the drug cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist says, “No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.” What should Heinz do?
> 
> *please formulate an answer based on your own morals, values, and ethics



To be honest and frank, I would do whatever I had to. Let me put it this way; worst case I would have to repent and leave the country, fleeing to a non extradition nation, best case I would get the money one way or another. I know it isn't right, and I know I would pay I the end, but my wife is the only family (besides my children) I have. 

On a more objective note, I am all for capitalism; however I believe no one has the right to withhold life saving treatment from another. 

I realize this post is a contradiction, and so defines the way I feel about it.


----------

