Ethics and Values

Assignment

Submitted by
Ashim Datta
(08bee025)

1
 Moral Dilemma
Ethical dilemma or moral dilemma is a complex situation that will often involve an
apparent mental conflict between moral imperatives, in which to obey one would result in
transgressing another. This is also called an ethical paradox since in moral philosophy,
paradox often plays a central role in ethics debates. ( source wikipedia )

The case that I have decided to discuss under this topic is a real life incident and I happen
to be related someway with the characters. I have changed the names of the people
involved to avoid any unwanted controversies regarding the subjects.

Cancer is one of those diseases that medical science hasn’t yet found a proper solution to.
Nevertheless there is one way by which a cancer patient can be cured, and that is by stem
cell transplantation. Though the chances of survival with this kind of treatment aren’t
cent percent but still it serves as a ray of hope for many dieing cancer patients. The
process involved in such transplantations is quite complex and the DNA of the stem cells
need to match exactly with the patient’s. This narrows down the number of donors for a
particular patient only to a handful few, namely, the patient’s parents, siblings or child.

Mr. Arunava Sen was a happily married man. But his success and luck went astray in no
time. His wife left him right after the birth of their first child and he suffered a huge loss
in the share market. Things got much worse for him when he came to know that he was
suffering from multiple myeloma, a cancer of the plasma cells in bone marrow. After
conducting the required medical tests his doctor said that as his disease was in a primary
stage, and so there was probably a chance of survival with stem cell transplantation. Mr
Sen was a lonely man in this world. He had no siblings and his parents had died. His
child was also too young to donate stem cells. However at this point Mr. Sen remembered
that the umbilical cord of his baby was preserved and during the birth of his child, he was
said that this cord will serve as an excellent source of stem cells in case the child requires
it for any kind of transplantation in future. The child’s DNA as said earlier would match
perfectly with the father’s and thus stem cells from the preserved cord could be used for
Mr. Sen’s treatment. But, using the cord for once would mean that it would be unusable
in future for the child. Mr. Sen was just in his mid 30’s and he did not want to die so
young. Hence he went to his divorced wife and asked for the umbilical cord of their baby.

This incident put Ms Sheila ( Mr Sen’s ex wife) in a moral dilemma. On one side was her
ex husband whom she loved once and on the other side was her child who was her sole
responsibility then. Moreover it is believed, though not confirmed by medical science,
that cancer might be a hereditary disease. On humanitarian grounds Sheila could give her
child’s umbilical cord to her ex husband but her child’s future was at stake. If we think
about the situation from Mr. Sen’s perspective, we would feel that he did deserve the
cord as it was the question of his life and death. But at the same time, the child’s life
could be put to danger however small the extent may be. Ms Sheila refused to give her ex
husband the umbilical cord of their child stating that she could not put her child’s life at
danger for someone with whom she had no connections then.

2
According to Sheila’s statement we can say that she was motivated to take such a step
because of her duty and responsibility towards her only child. If she would have given
away the cord, then in future there would be no source of stem cells for the child in case
he gets cancer (God forbid) just like his father. However Ms Sheila’s action was
completely based on presumptions. The child was fine and healthy then and in future if
he ever got cancer he could have been married by then and could have had his own child
or it could also be that by then medical science would come up with some solutions to
this disease. Sheila could have saved the life of a dieing man if she would have thought
from the viewpoint of Mr. Sen. I felt really bad for Mr. Sen when I came to know about
this case. I don’t know how a mother’s heart works but if I would have been in Sheila’s
place, I would have given away the cord and saved Mr. Sen. One question really bothered
me at that point of time “ Would have Sheila behaved differently if she was still married
to Mr. Sen?”. I felt perhaps not.

Well as I said in the beginning, that I happen to be related with the characters by some
way, so after some days of the incident I came to know about the real reason behind
Sheila’s refusal to give away the umbilical cord to her ex husband. I learnt that the child,
Sheila gave birth to, wasn’t Mr. Sen’s and hence the cord would be of no use to him. It
was from a short term affair that Sheila had with a neighbor when Mr. Sen was abroad on
a business tour. I also learnt that though Sheila wanted to confess everything and ask for
forgiveness from Mr. Sen, she could not, after hearing the fact that he was going to die.
This again puts me in one of the most fundamental moral dilemmas ‘Is a truth, which will
definitely hurt worse than a lie which can give you momentary satisfaction? or
otherwise”?