Capital punishment is defined as the death penalty, as a punishment imposed on a person found guilty of committing a heinous crime. This form of punishment is generally reserved for crimes such as murder, but the application of the death penalty varies widely. Execution is most often carried out by medical methods, using a combination of IV medications. Many problems can arise with this procedure, especially if the people administering the lethal injection are not properly trained. This means that health care providers, including doctors and nurses, have been required to participate in administering lethal injections. This article will discuss the ethical dilemma regarding health care providers participating in the administration of lethal injection from the philosophical perspectives of deontology and utilitarianism, present arguments in light of both, and address other ethical theories such as virtue ethics as well as feminist ethics. . The article will also seek to highlight critical perspectives regarding the two theories. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essay Utilitarianism is known as a consequentialist ethical theory, it emphasizes that consequences must be considered when review of the action. For utilitarianism, the most important consequentialist theory, the highest good is happiness. This is not the happiness of the individual decision maker; it is the happiness of all the people potentially affected by his decision that counts. Utilitarians strive to produce the greatest happiness possible for everyone involved. Utilitarianism provides a simple formula for selecting the action which, overall, will produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. According to utilitarianism, it would be acceptable to sacrifice the happiness of a few people in order to maximize the happiness of a few people. overall happiness for the collective. I think utilitarians would advocate for the nurse or health care provider to participate in administering a lethal injection to a criminal. For Utilitarian, since this action would prevent the criminal from committing future crimes in society, specifically by deterring the criminal from committing murder, then it would be acceptable for the nurse to perform this action. I think most people in society would prefer this choice. Thus, protecting society and producing the best results for the greatest number of people involved. I believe that taking a life by administering a lethal injection would be ethical within the framework of utilitarianism, because it would prevent the death of another innocent life, should this criminal reoffend in the future. Ultimately, asking the nurse to administer the lethal injection and take such measures is for the protection/health of the citizens in the society and would promote social utility. Looking at this from a critical perspective, I think it's a downside for Utilitarian to balance happiness. hard to improve the satisfaction of everyone else. It is too easy to convince medical professionals to participate in lethal injections and put someone to death using this balancing principle. Just because the majority of the population thinks something would be good does not mean it is ethical. The most serious criticism of utilitarianism is that it could, in principle at least, sanction actions generally considered immoral. Deontologists view morality as a system ofduties, principles, rules or moral imperatives. The task of the moral agent is to discern what his duties are and to act consistently with and in the spirit of those duties. The morality of an action is based on good intention, which is defined by its fidelity to a rule or set of rules. Kant believed that duties were absolute and called them a categorical imperative. A categorical imperative can be seen as a test when faced with a decision, formulating the rule or maxim on the basis of which you propose to act. Then ask yourself if it would be reasonable for anyone and everyone to act based on that same rule in any situation, then it would be acceptable to “universalize” that rule. This would then be deemed morally right. Ethics focuses only on the right or wrong of actions and does not examine the right or wrong of the consequences of the action. In considering whether ethics would approve the involvement of health care providers in administering a lethal injection for purposes of the death penalty, I think it could go either way. First, if the nurse was employed by a correctional facility whose procedure and policy was that the nurse or doctor administer all lethal injections, then it would be her duty to administer the injection . Therefore, it could be considered good and morally right to participate in administering a lethal injection to prisoners/criminals in a correctional facility. You could justify the maxim in this situation by saying: "only administer a lethal injection to a criminal in a prison." This could be considered universally acceptable and the nurse administering the injection would not be seen as guilty of their actions, but rather as having followed the duties or set of rules put in place. It could be argued that the nurse would participate in administering the lethal injection to ensure that it is performed correctly with as little suffering as possible. This could be considered a universal maxim or law and judged to be morally right. On the other hand, I think some ethicists would not support health care providers administering a lethal injection and would consider it a morally wrong action. The nurse participating in the lethal injection could be considered inhumane, cruel and unacceptable. Because this violates human dignity and constitutes a violation of human rights. As Sobstyl says, ethics is often seen as following the golden rule and respecting the inherent dignity of each person. For most deontologists, killing is wrong and participating in it under all circumstances. Some ethicists may argue that this is a violation of medical ethics, that it conflicts with the regulatory body's code of ethics and goes against the nature of the relationship between the nurse and the nurse. and patient or doctor and patient. This could be considered immoral when considering the obligation or duty of the provider to maintain the integrity of their profession. As a nurse, you must refrain from causing death, especially deliberately, even when the law allows it. Therefore, refraining from participating in the administration of the lethal injection would be considered the right thing to do. This is considered a violation of the nursing code of ethics and I believe it would be accepted as a universal maxim or law. The death penalty kills, and murder is always wrong. Participating in murder is a universal law and is always wrong in my eyes. Virtue ethics considers themoral life as having less to do with rules or principles for determining right action than with habits and dispositions. The emphasis is on moral character: not on actions or decisions per se, but rather on the type of person one is and should be. Virtues are those habits and character traits whose perfection allows us to realize and fulfill our nature. A virtue is a positive character trait that gives a person the inclination to act, think, and feel in a morally good way. Virtues include honesty, compassion, diligence, and loyalty, to name a few. I believe that virtue ethics would not advocate that the nurse or medical professional participate in administering a lethal injection. Entering a health professional is “entering a moral community”, whose values ​​and certain characteristics have been established and practiced for a long time. This is true in the case of nursing. Nurses are trained to establish morals and virtues in order to contribute to the general good of society and our patients. For this reason, it would be morally wrong or unjust for the nurse to participate in administering a lethal injection as far as virtue ethics is concerned. I think virtue ethics is the only non-imperfect theory of ethics. I believe that virtue ethics would ultimately conclude that a nurse participating in a lethal injection would be wrong. Nurses must demonstrate the virtues of caring, respect, dignity, honesty and reliability. Participating in lethal injection can be considered wrong because it harms people and goes against nurses' commitment to act virtuously. Because virtue ethics is an approach that focuses on character with the assumption that a person of good moral character will behave in a manner consistent with their character. It is therefore appropriate for nurses to make choices that improve well-being. Therefore, it would be unethical for a nurse to administer a lethal injection. Feminist ethics is based on the understanding that society remains patriarchal in many ways. Men's interests and perspectives are often privileged and women's are suppressed, sometimes in subtle and taken-for-granted ways, as if they were "natural." Feminist ethics does not seek to understand differences in the ways in which men and women seek to remedy ethical dilemmas. Rather, feminine ethics emphasize the disparity between the treatment or understanding of the sexes (bias) in our culture and in institutional policies such as those we follow in health care. care environments. Feminist ethics examines the links between masculinity and power, even unfair treatment, and femininity with powerlessness, emotion and good judgment. Feminist ethics values ​​the values ​​of women who may have been historically oppressed. It attempts to balance power between women and men. I believe that feminist ethics would hold that it is wrong and unethical for a medical professional to participate in administering a lethal injection. Most men use standards of justice to resolve dilemmas, whereas women would be more likely to use care, compassion, and the well-being of others to resolve ethical dilemmas. The criminal justice system and the idea of ​​the death penalty seems to be an old way of thinking created from traditionally male perspectives and ideas. I believe that feminine ethics would consider the death penalty as.