The dilemma regarding the AIDS inflicted citizens in Africa is a modern day paradox.

Authors Avatar

Hutson

Hutson, Makary

Ethics Paper

December 8, 2003

        The dilemma regarding the AIDS inflicted citizens in Africa is a modern day paradox. On one hand, mankind can achieve huge strides in the research necessary to control the malady which has already killed so many. On the other, modern civilization risks the exploitation of fellow human beings born into a more unfortunate and primitive lifestyle deficient in modern healthcare. In general, the debate which takes precedence above all others is the question of equality in the context of morality. According to the traditional perspective of Immanuel Kant constructed in his Metaphysics of Morals, the universal presumption of moral principles is that they apply to all rational autonomous beings at all places and at all times. Thus, Kant would argue that the medical care provided to trial participants in Africa should be equivalent, or at least comparable, to the treatment offered to citizens in more advanced societies as long as it does not compromise the rational autonomy of the people involved.

        To approach the issue from Kant’s perspective, it is important to first delineate the considerations Kant would reason to be the most morally relevant when attempting to provide a conclusion. In his work, Kant clearly outlines three general principles about moral duties as well as other considerations which can are applicable to the situation. First of all, it would be essential to determine if giving inferior treatment to uneducated individuals in Africa is a choice based on a sense of duty, or if ulterior aims might exist. On first glance, this seems to lead to an initial conclusion that failing to provide volunteers with comparable treatment is an unfair and immoral choice based on monetary and political motives. However, further analysis reveals that the rational autonomy of the individuals in question must also be considered. Providing the luxurious treatments seen in more advanced countries to people in Africa may violate their rational autonomy by tempting or deceiving them into an action they would not normally undertake. Therefore, any choice made in regards to AIDS treatments must reflect a desire to do what is right while preserving and respecting the rational autonomy of the individuals.

Join now!

Kant’s second consideration would be to base the moral quality of his decision on the intentions of that choice, not the action’s consequences. Thus, the issue cannot be resolved by developing a best case scenario, but must be determined by distinguishing which option is enacted with the best moral intentions. In this way, it is likely that the most morally acceptable choice would be the one which puts Africa’s citizens on an equal consideration with the rest of the world, and so would include providing identical treatment. Thirdly, it is important to make sure that whatever direction is taken, it ...

This is a preview of the whole essay