Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics EJAIB

28Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 18 (January 2008)gender, education etc., and subsequently influences variousstages of the decision-making process.Forsyth projects that an individual's personal moralphilosophy is composed of both relativism and idealism,which are self-governing magnitudes. Relativism is thedimension to which the individual discards universal moralsystem and founds her own moral judgment on the state ofaffairs per se, along with this states, as well as the peopleconcerned, more than on ethical principles. Idealism is theextent to which the individual focuses moral judgment onvalues pertaining to the principle of nonmalificence(Beauchamp 2001, and Tang 2003). The suppositions areharmonious with previous non-bioethical study that individualswith lower levels of relativism perceive higher levels of moralintensity than those with higher levels of relativism(Beauchamp 2001, and Tang 2003, Singhapakdi 1999,Arrington, and Douglas).Of significance in this background is the fact that idealismis not equal to moral absolutism, but rather a conviction invalues such as unselfishness and a meaning of hopefulness.Idealism and relativism have thus far revealed explicatorystrength related to ethical judgment and decisions in business(Arrington). As well, idealism and relativism are significantlyrelated to moral intensity (Douglas). Idealism is inclined tointensify discernments of moral intensity, whilst relativismtends to decrease them (See the Model in Figure 1).Arguments and Counter Arguments of this ProposedModel, With a Lively Examples, on Which this ProposedModel Could Have Been Applied During the Decision-Making ProcessThat being stated, lively examples are to be illustrated anddiscussed as follows. Scientists have used fetal tissue inresearch since at least the 1930s. Geoffrey Chamberlainreceived a professional award for research (outlined in theMarch 1968 issue of The American Journal of Obstetrics andGynecology), in which he took live aborted fetuses, attachedthem to an artificial placenta, perfused the fetuses with theblood from the latter, in order to see if he could make thefetus continue to be alive or not, and then he pulled the plugoff on the fetus. No one objected to him at that time. Judge noone; yet, the following discussion from the approach of thisproposed model merits attention. The more theaforementioned six components of moral intensity that arepresent, the more likely it is that an individual will recognizethe existence of an ethical problem, with a subsequent effecton judgment, intentions, and behavior. Once more, judge noone, had moral intensity been positively impacted withstronger personal moral philosophy along with other relatedfactors, as well as had this proposed model been applied, theconclusion of the event by Chamberlain would have beencompletely different at that time. It appears that there wouldhave had lots of objection to Chamberlain's act at that time.Hence, in accord with what have been previously pointed out,moral issues can be considered with regard to fundamentaldistinctiveness that affects the different phases of the decisionmaking process. Furthermore, it is as well noteworthy thatmoral intensity is inherent in any ethically uncertain situation(Wood).Another instance is as follows. Nowadays, the secrets ofthe 'Dead-Baby Industry' reveal that aborted fetuses beingdissected alive, harvested and sold in pieces to increase avast research enterprise (Canadian, Likoudis). Theinterchange in fetal tissue springs worldwide into esteemedtax-funded laboratories. The research per se is usually forcreditable objectives, from helping prenatal infants survive tocuring Parkinson's disease (Moriera). But the trade, worthbillions, brings up innumerable moral and ethical problems:Are some humans’ embryos and fetuses being killed tobenefit others? Are women being exploited to support thecollection of fetal tissue? Who is profiting from the trade? Inaddition, what are the social insinuations of such anexistence?Those questions deserve proper answers upon all of ourreflection based on positively charged moral intensity asindicated in this proposed model. Obviously, as clearlyindicated in the section of Arguments (vide infra: inside thesection of Discussion), if the fetus was already aborted beforethe issue of tissue transplant even took place, there is nosense in which the fetus' life is being traded for another.Nevertheless, with such a huge monetary amount of tradinggoing on, for argument sake, even if the fetus were alreadyaborted before the transplantation occurred, how couldanyone guarantee that such a desire for abortion has neverbeen motivated financially?Conversely, of significance in this context is the fact thatsome adult professional even sarcastically states indocumented evidence that ‘although life is sacred and a fetusis alive, he still can support research to certain degrees.’ Sucha kind of slippery argument is hardly justified. Clearly, thefetus cannot make any decision by himself; besides, he is notviable in so doing at all. Even if he were so much willingly andvolitionally to contribute or support research to merely a‘certain’ degree, eventually, it has to be at the expense of his(the fetus’) own life, but no one else’s. Obviously, researcherswho ever made such kind of statement require thereinforcement of moral intensity, and better be guided withthis proposed model. For the purpose of completeness, thelast counterargument against the aforementioned issue is asfollows. Although life is sacred and a fetus is alive, if he canreally support research to certain degrees, likewise, he can aswell decide not to support such a research. Why cannot he?Of importance in this context of aforementionedarguments lies in the fact that when he (the fetus) supportsfetal tissue transplantation and embryonic and/or fetal stemcell research to certain degree as on the very same premisebeen based, there will at least two issues as follow. First, ishe volitionally for so doing? Second, there is a very much highlikelihood that he will lose his own life, and will be no longeralive when he 'supports' such a research, notwithstanding,lack of informed consent given by himself. If there were somekind of informed consent given for so doing, then not only isthe degree of transparency of that so called ‘consent’ isdubious, but also the motivation for so doing is in question.After all, the consent, if any, is definitely not given by him! Thelast but not least, if he can consent himself for such a decisionto support stem cell research, so can he consent the oppositedecision not to support. Such kind of argument in fact reallyviolates the principles of non-maleficence and justice.The aforementioned examples, arguments, and counterarguments well illustrate the fact that this proposed modelwith moral intensity, along with the principles of beingtransparent and that of respect to the human biologicaltissues, can help the process of bioethical decision-making.Hence, moral intensity indeed is predicated on anindividual's evaluation of six different components aspreviously stated (vide infra: the section of the concept ofMoral Intensity) (Jones), which are pertinent to a given ethicalsituation. An appraisal of the components guides us to reachthe impression that adequately evaluating factors involved ismandatory. Such factors include but not limiting in personalmoral philosophy, along with other related elements with theirrespective magnitude and likelihood of possibleconsequences, the timeframe and concentration of suchconsequences, and the relationship among the evaluatingindividuals or so called rater and those who might beinfluenced by the action or inaction.The Other Factors Involved in this Proposed ModelThe balance of factors, such as that of education,occupation, gender, and age on the individual’s perception ofethically questioned issues also need to be considered. They