Cassandra Vs Connecticut State Summary

The case of Cassandra vs Connecticut state is about Cassandra, a teenager from Connecticut, who was diagnosed with Hodgkin lymphoma, a type of cancer. Cassandra refused to get chemotherapy for Hodgkin lymphoma deeming the treatment itself as poisonous. Casandra’s mother Jackie Fortin gave up on her daughter and respected her decision after attempting to convince her to get chemotherapy. So, Cassandra and her mother often missed their medical appointments. Cassandra’s doctor reported Casandra’s mother, Jackie Fortin, to Department of Children and Families for neglecting her child for avoiding cancer treatment which would be highly fatal to Cassandra. So, Cassandra was taken from her mother’s home to be placed under state’s custody. Then,

Deontological ethics is normative ethics theory which judges an action based on the rules rather than consequence of actions. The chief good of duty-based ethics as per Kant’s duty ethics is good will, which is most important factor that should be aimed to achieve or to do something that’s morally right. The decision-making factors in Kant’s deontology which determine if an action is morally right or wrong is having a good will, and doing duty for its own sake rather than for a benefit that results from the action. One of the ways decision-making factors can guide to determine morality of an action is to first, determine if motive of action was good or bad since good will is chief good in Kant’s duty ethics, and then determine if action was driven by self-interest or for the sake of duty because another factor requires in Kant’s duty ethics that duty to be done sake of or out respect for the moral law. First, quotes from Kant’s Grounding the Metaphysics of the Morals which supports Kant’s theory is “A good will is not good because of what it effects or accomplishes, nor because of its fitness to attain some proposed end; it is good through willing its willing, i.e. it is good in itself.” (Kant 7) This quotes above emphasizes why good will is most important factor for being morally right. Quote above remarks that good will is

Outcome of any action from this deontological view might not always be favorable because there may disagreement morality of action and where this deontological view could have applied. In this case, Cassandra’s mom, Jackie supported her daughter decision while the state disagreed with Cassandra and forced her to get chemotherapy. First, one ways a rational person might disagree with deontological view applied would argue that Cassandra made the choice not get chemotherapy and she had constitutional right to do whatever she chose do. So, deontological view cannot be applied here since state cannot force someone to do something he/she doesn’t want. Second, another way a rational person might disagree against deontological view being applied here is that Cassandra was old enough to make medical decision. Connecticut’s supreme stated that if Cassandra, who was 17, was at least 18 years old, she would be of legal age to make her medical decision. In this case, Cassandra’s public defender argued that “You don’t go to sleep a17-year-old knucklehead and wake up an 18-year-old sage.” So, the rational person might agree with agree with Cassandra’s public defender and argue that state had violated her rights by forcing her to have chemotherapy like the person in first argument. Therefore, these are some ways