Belmont Report: Moral Responsibility

As a development in Deontological Pluralism, the Belmont Report offers a series of moral duties to consider in medical research and procedure. The Belmont Report considers Respect for Persons, Beneficence, and Justice to be the morals to uphold in medical research. These three moral obligations determine the morality of decisions and allow a deliberation on actions. In the scenario of Troy and Kim, I will consider each moral obligation in terms of applicability and importance in order to determine the most moral action for the couple. As a member of the medical ethics committee deciding whether it is morally permissible to refuse to remove Kim’s birth control implant, I argue it is not morally permissible primarily on the grounds of Respect

Comparing the benefits and consequences of child rearing is relatively straightforward, since the listing of positives and negatives of the scenario can be listed and discussed. The main argument of Beneficence is whether the risks outweigh the benefits of allowing the procedure, and I have argued that the risks are reduced in this scenario due to the intentions of Troy, Kim, and their support group. Respecting the moral obligation of Justice is similarly straightforward, since treating Troy and Kim in the same manner as others wanting to raise a child is the expected response. The complication comes from Respect for Persons in terms of Troy and Kim’s mental disabilities. The level of protection for Troy and Kim depends on their mental faculties. Their caregivers have educated and informed Troy and Kim of the responsibility of parenting several times. At this point, the dilemma of their situation is whether informed consent outweighs the possibility of harm. Harm may include the stress of the birth control removal, the stress of pregnancy and child rearing, the negative impacts on the child due to possible parenting mishaps, and the stresses for Troy and Kim’s support network as they witness and support the child and parents’ care. Respect for Persons and Beneficence are the competing morals at this

Both Troy and Kim have a persistent desire to raise children. Based on the Respect for Autonomy Argument, which we discussed in class in regards to “wannabes,” Troy and Kim’s desire must be respected. Wannabes are individuals with an informed and persistent desire to have one or more healthy limbs removed, and we formulated an argument based on autonomy in the class discussion of addressing wannabe’s desires (Bayne and Levy 75). The Respect for Autonomy Argument was used to justify wannabe’s desires, but this argument is applicable to Kim’s medical procedure. The Respect for Autonomy Argument for Troy and Kim’s situation is as