Charlie Gordon Flowers For Algernon Ethics

Adams
What are ethics? How do they help in daily life? Ethics are similar to virtues. They separate what is right from what is wrong. Ethics modify how you act on a day to day basis. They are standards that should be followed, but are not always followed. An example of ethics not being used is Charlie Gordon and his operation in the short story "Flowers for Algernon". Charlie Gordon wasn't necessarily bright. He had an I.Q. of 68 and struggled with things such as reading, writing, and math. He was told by two scientists, Doctor Nemur and Doctor Strauss, that he could be smart. He simply had to undergo a operation. The truth was, the doctors didn't know exactly what would happen. The only information they had was the data they had collected

The Hippocratic Oath states, "I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know" (Lasagna). Charlie's doctors didn't respect the well-being or privacy of Charlie. They took over his life and made him do everything the way that would best benefit themselves. They Oath also states, "I will apply, for the benefit of the sick" (Lasagna). Charlie wasn't necessarily sick, however the doctors didn't take into consideration what would best benefit Charlie. They put Charlie through the operation assuring him that everything would go well. They didn't tell him what the after effects would be. Charlie didn't have the mental capability to register exactly what was going on. He only wanted to become smarter. The doctors found a "simple" and "easy" way to accomplish

While what they did was not necessarily ethical, they could have been thinking it was for the better in scientific breakthroughs. With the experiment conducted on a human being rather than a lab rat, the doctors could have gathered more information to help the cause. This is minor 'could have' however, there is no guaranteeing they got the information they were searching for. "It is impossible to know all the facts about a situation" says author of Five Steps to Better Ethical Decision making, Arthur Dobrin. The doctors gathered all the information they could at the time, thus supporting the fact they may have thought ethically. They didn't, however, sift through the other four steps in ethical decision making, again proving they acted unethically. If the doctors had taken the time to think rationally about the operation they were going to perform, then they may have found a better