Ethical Fundamentals Of CIA Bioethics

To analyze the ethical components of the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) use of a false of vaccination program to obtain information, one can used the four levels of moral discourse outlined in Robert M. Veatch’s The Basics of Bioethics. Looking at the four levels of moral discourse allows us to consider possibilities through which the hoax CIA vaccination program could be considered ethical or unethical. Below I outline a relativist belief that when working through the various levels of moral discourse, one can justify the CIA’s actions as ethical depending on the source of ethics used; using principles of bioethics, we see that the CIA’s actions were unethical, but when considering other principles or virtues, particularly those that

For instance, the CIA is an organization that requires many actions of espionage, using false identities and infiltrating organizations in order to promote security interest. If we were to find a similar case to this vaccination hoax and agree that it was an acceptable means of gaining information, then it could be ethical. At the same time, if we see the CIA vaccination hoax is a unique case differing from others, then we proceed to a discussion about rules and rights.
2. Rules and Rights (Codes of Ethics)
At the level of moral discourse with rules and rights, we again can see that there is ambiguity in whether the CIA’s actions were ethical or unethical. First, we look at codes of ethics and rights relevant to bioethics that may apply to the fake vaccination program including the “Principles of Medical Ethics (2001) of the American Medical Association” and the “Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (2005)” (Veatch 189-196). Among various principles listed in the aforementioned codes/rights, the CIA’s actions violate Principles of Medical Ethics related to “uphold[ing] standards of professionalism” with regards to the role of a physician (Veatch 189) as well as violation of principles in the Universal Declaration on Bioethics with regards to “consent”, “benefit and harm”, and “human dignity and human rights” (Veatch 190-191).

Above you will see that I outlined ways that in all levels of moral discourse can argue that the CIA acted ethically. This belief is relativist in stating that different conclusions may be reached about whether the vaccination hoax was ethical or unethical, and there is not necessarily a universal ethical opinion on the CIA’s actions. However, I must consider that this course is one focused on bioethics as the primary code of ethics; in the perspective of a bioethicist, we can conclude that the CIA made unethical choices. We see bioethical problems even at the most specific level of moral discourse, casuistry, as I outlined above. In the end, the final decision by the CIA to discontinue future use of fake vaccination campaigns for their operations illustrates that they did consider their action to be ethically disputable and this is thanks to the bioethical framework used by public health