I Quit Again Ethical Dilemma Case Study

Ethical Dilemma Examples

Upstanding dilemmas are situations in which there is a hard pick to exist made between two or more than options, neither of which resolves the situation in a manner that is consistent with accepted ethical guidelines. When faced with an ethical dilemma, a person is faced with having to select an option that doesn't marshal with an established code of ethics or societal norms, such as codes of law and religious teachings, or with their internal moral perceptions of correct and wrong. Explore ethical dilemma examples to see how yous might handle these hard situations.

cheating couple ethical dilemma

Upstanding Dilemma Situations

Ethical dilemmas occur all as well frequently in everyday life. At that place is rarely a clear respond regarding right and wrong. Instead of beingness able to rely on external standards, people have to rely on their morals and values to navigate such situations. A storytelling arroyo, as introduced by Lawrence Kohlberg in the 1930s, is often used to encourage people to think through possible outcomes and consequences of ethical dilemmas.

Ethical Dilemmas in Personal Relationships

Michael had several friends including Roger and Daniel. Roger has recently met and started dating a wonderful lady named Phyllis. He is convinced this is a long term relationship. Unknown to Roger, Michael observed them at a restaurant several days agone and realized Phyllis is the wife of his other friend Daniel.

Michael is deciding whether to tell Roger that Phyllis is married when he receives a phone call from Daniel.
Daniel suspects his wife is having an affair. Since Daniel and his married woman share many friends and contacts with Michael, Daniel asks if Michael has heard anything regarding an affair.
What should Michael practise in this ethical dilemma? To whom does Michael owe greater friendship or loyalty in this situation?
No matter who he tells, he knows that it is going to finish up hurting 1, if not both friends.
Should Michael reveal to Roger that Phyllis is married?
Should Michael tell Daniel what he knows well-nigh Roger and Phyllis? Does that fact that Daniel asked him a direct question accept an affect on what Michael should practice?
Should Michael speak up to both Daniel and Roger? Does he remain silent and hope his knowledge is never discovered?

In this situation, Michael has to weigh the variables in the situation to brand the decision he feels is best. If truth is a guiding principle of his morality, he's likely to tell both of his friends what he knows and promise that they don't arraign him for any negative consequences they feel as a result of telling the truth.

Life or Expiry Bear upon

Consider a state of affairs in which a group of people are enjoying an outdoor take chances together. Ane person gets stuck in the but way in or out of an enclosed infinite, such as a cave. Water starts rising in the cavern due to loftier tide or heavy rainfall. Everyone will perish if the person isn't removed from the entrance. At that place is no way of removing the person who is stuck so that the private volition survive.

The group has to make an extremely difficult decision. Do they take an extreme activity that will toll 1 member of the grouping her life? Or, practise they do nothing, knowing that chances are good that none of them will survive if that selection of action is taken.
Who would be responsible for making such a determination? Is it different if the person who is stuck offers to sacrifice herself versus members of the grouping suggesting that she be eliminated?
What are the consequences of facing such an extreme moral dilemma? It is normally accepted that killing a person is incorrect, simply what nearly when it's done to save others?
What might the consequences be for the survivors if the group chose to kill the person who is stuck so they might survive? Would there exist legal consequences? What about guilt?

This is one of the most farthermost moral dilemma examples, as well as an ethical dilemma. The choice is between actively causing one person's expiry or allowing people (including oneself) to die. Someone following a utilitarian approach to ethics would likely choose to eliminate the person who is stuck, as this philosophy is based on choosing actions that outcome in the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Someone who focuses primarily on the sanctity of each individual life, withal, would not consider harming the person who is stuck to be a viable selection.

Following the Rules

1 of the about of import characteristics of an effective leader is treating people equitably. This involves fairness and consistency, including regards to applying the rules to everyone as. What should a jitney do when a few superstar players get caught breaking rules that should lead to their suspension from the squad immediately before a big game that is very important to the team?

If the star players don't play, there is a adept chance the squad will lose. If the team has to win this game to advance to the championship game, should that touch on the coach's decision?
If the coach doesn't apply advisable consequences to the deportment of the players who broke the rules, what lesson are those players learning? Will they keep to break rules?
What about the other players who exercise follow the rules. Will they larn that the rules are just suggestions and experience like they don't need to comply in the futurity?
What if ane of the players who broke the rules will miss a chance to be seen past professional scouts if he doesn't play in the game?
What if the squad'southward school will earn a big corporeality of money from idiot box coverage of the big game if the team goes to the championship?
What if the charabanc is set to earn a big bonus or meaning pay increase if the team advances to the title game?

Coaches are responsible for winning, only they're too responsible for setting an appropriate example of leadership for players and treating all team members adequately. What may seem to be an obvious pick between right and wrong at outset glance is actually much more complicated.

The Cost of a Cure

Imagine yous were in a situation where someone in your family unit was extremely ill. Your relative's physician says that there is an experimental medicine that might help your loved ane, expressing that it is the only matter that might work. Your family has very limited financial means. The medication costs $1,000 per calendar month and health insurance volition non cover the cost. You lot try to borrow money to pay for a course of treatment only are unable to do then.

When faced with a financial barrier to a potentially life saving treatment for someone you beloved, would stealing money to pay for the medication be morally justified?
Would it thing what form the stealing took? Would your decision exist different if you were because robbing a bank versus stealing a credit card from some other relative to use?
What near the pharmaceutical visitor? Do you feel it is ethical to charge so much for a medication that has a unique power to potentially save people?
What about your feelings toward the ethics of the insurance company'south refusal to encompass the medication?

When faced with the possibility of losing a loved i simply due to a lack of funds, it's possible that someone who is ordinarily completely opposed to stealing might be able to rationalize such an activity. They may see stealing to potentially save someone's life every bit morally justifiable, while stealing merely for one'southward own financial gain to be immoral. Further, there is the event of the pricing and coverage decisions made past the pharmaceutical company and insurance provider. These things, while they might anger the person facing a moral dilemma, are beyond the individual's control.

Disadvantaging Yourself to Do What's Right

The reliance on digital advice in the business world surely has created ethical dilemmas involving data access and privacy. You could find yourself in a situation of needing to get information from a coworker'southward computer when that person was out of the role. Yous know y'all're not supposed to admission others computers, merely this coworker is a friend of yours and she has shared her password with y'all in the past. When you login, yous observe that your coworker has been saving client'south credit carte information on the computer, which is a violation of company policy.

Saving client credit card data is a violation of customer privacy and company policy. Yous suspect the information may be being used for identity theft or credit carte fraud.
Your company'southward code of ethics specifies that employees are responsible for reporting violations of the policy to management.
Your company'due south it specifies that employees should not share their passwords or login to accounts or equipment used by other employees.
If you turn in your coworker, you could also get in trouble since you but gained the information through violating a visitor policy.
If y'all don't plough in your coworker, the people whose credit menu information she saved could be victimized by fraud or theft.
Should you risk your chore by telling management what you saw on your coworker's computer? Practice you owe loyalty to your coworker, the company or the customers?

This is a difficult dilemma to face, as is the case with all ethical dilemmas. If y'all choose to continue yourself out of trouble, will the fact that you know what your coworker has done go along to bother you? Volition you be responsible in some way if customers are defrauded as a consequence of your coworker's actions?

Upstanding Perspectives

You can written report ethics from both a religious and a philosophical indicate of view. There are five branches of ethics, each of which offers a different perspective.

Normative Ethics

The normative approach to ethics, which is the largest branch, deals with how individuals can figure out the correct moral action that they should take. Philosophers such equally the Greek philosopher Socrates and John Stuart Mill are included in this branch of ethics.

Meta Ethics

The meta ethics branch seeks to understand the nature of ethical backdrop and judgments such as if truth values can exist found and the theory behind moral principles.

Applied Ethics

Applied ideals is the study of applying theories from philosophers regarding ethics in everyday life. For case, this area of ethics asks questions such equally "Is it adequate to take an abortion?" and "Should y'all plow in your friend at your workplace for taking home office supplies?"

Moral Ethics

The branch of moral ethics questions how individuals develop their morality, why certain aspects of morality differ betwixt cultures and why certain aspects of morality are more often than not universal.

Descriptive Ideals

Descriptive ethics is more than scientific in its approach. Information technology focuses on how human beings really operate in the real globe, rather than attempting to theorize virtually how they should operate.

Making Difficult Choices

Deciding how to best resolve difficult moral and ethical dilemmas is never easy especially when any choice violates the societal and ethical standards by which we have been taught to govern our lives. To learn more nigh these matters, explore the differences betwixt ethics, morals and values.

bradfieldthicity.blogspot.com

Source: https://examples.yourdictionary.com/ethical-dilemma-examples.html