Friday, November 8, 2019
Ethics and Government Policy
At the beginning of this week, we discussed how ethics and morals play into politics. While morals are our individual guides for acting appropriately and justly, ethics are external guidelines for acceptable, righteous behavior – set by outside sources like the government. To me, it was interesting that the government can have such a large say in our ethical principles; laws are essentially written out rules for how our country’s ethics should be carried out, protected, or enforced. A new law means a new ethical standard to hold oneself to. The government very clearly sets some ethical beliefs through targeted ethical regulations – like the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) that sets a precedent that sharing identifiable patient information is unethical – but also sets ethical principles indirectly as well – like making murder or stealing illegal, which doesn’t directly say that these things are unethical, but implies that they are. Obviously, these examples are very black and white in terms of why they are ethical or unethical, and I doubt any sane person would disagree with the moral values these ethical guidelines enforce(medical information should be private and killing and stealing are wrong). But what happens when it is unclear or controversial what ethical principle should be endorsed by the government? This is a major factor in many political debates, like the one surrounding abortion. If the government were to make abortion illegal, then in American society it would be unethical for a doctor or pharmacist to provide abortion services to anyone ever. On the other hand, if the government were to make abortion completely legal, then in American society, doctors would have ethical responsibility to provide the option to patients no matter their personal beliefs. The issue becomes whether we as a nation want to ethically prioritize the pro-life or the pro-choice ideal. Essentially, the government creating new laws either endorses or rejects certain beliefs of right and wrong, which means they have an essential role in determining American ethics. How far should this ethical influence go? And is it more of a positive or negative that society holds larger ethical standards, influenced by the government, that people are expected to maintain?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My Bio class has recently been discussing the difference between ethics and morals but I had been slightly confused because I had previously thought that the two words were interchangeable. Thank you for clearing that up for me! I liked the abortion example that you used to convey an example of the government's ethical dilemma because as it is a current issue that hasn't yet been resolved, it is clear how much of an ethical influence the government's decision will have on the American people. As one who is indifferent/not yet sure where to stand on the abortion issue, I think that from an ethical standpoint the government should legalize abortion and allow the women to make the choice since by the government directly making it illegal they will be making the decision for the woman. Those who are pro-life can choose not to get abortions if they ever come into that situation but it is ethically not right for the government to rule out such an option for a woman if she desires getting one. I think that it can be either positive or negative that society holds ethical standards because it all depends on the location and time period. For example, Jim Crow laws which were passed after the Reconstruction era set an ethical standard that racial segregation was acceptable and the right behavior, which had a negative impact.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading this blog post a lot! It cleared up the idea of ethics versus morals, and in my opinion, an individual's moral decisions are their own, and the government should not have much of a say in a decision such as an abortion because if an individual decides one thing, her morals are different from another individuals and the other individual should not have a say in her decision.
ReplyDelete