Hiv Epidemic and Ethics

With nearly 80% of underdeveloped countries lacking the capacity and money to produce drugs to combat the HIV/AIDS pandemic, it is important to look at how we, as a nation, can help, and if, indeed, we should help. We should look at our responsibilities as a country, as a world, and also as individuals to decide the correct course of action.

The utilitarian view of ethics looks to bring about as much happiness as possible for the greatest number of people (Halbert & Ingulli, 2012). This view looks at the consequences of an action for all of those that could be affected by it. It looks to maximize happiness and minimize suffering. By this view, together as one world, we should look to help those that are suffering from the HIV/AIDS epidemic. By donating time, money, technology, and solutions to those in developing nations, we can not only help those who are suffering from the disease, but we can also help the world. Firstly, we should provide medical help to those already infected with HIV/AIDS, and help them live out the rest of their life as comfortable and pain-free as possible; as this would confirm the utilitarian view of minimizing suffering. Also, as a world we should look at preventing the rapes that often cause the infection of the virus. This would involve much more involvement from each country, as we would be changing the behavior of nations. This could involve sending troops in to modernize the developing areas. However, this is controversial, because often in times of "war" (even if it was a war on HIV/AIDS), there is much sadness and suffering by those sent to fight the "war" and by the families that stay home. This is why, on an individual basis, the utilitarian view perhaps does not fully support invading a country and changing their actions. I think, overall, though, that the utilitarian view supports having already developed countries helping those nations that are still developing. Not only would it help those nations, it would also help our world as a whole by supporting, bettering, and growing those countries. By helping heal these damaged nations, we are helping our world as a whole.

Deontology takes into account universal principles, such as fairness, no matter what the consequences are. Deontology is a duty-based ethics, where actions are not justified by their consequences; it is more a matter of what is right given universal principles. In a deontological society, people are required by their human duties to meet others' fundamental needs and uphold their basic moral right by virtue of their humanity and which are independent of personal character traits (Doyle, 2012). In this case, it is our duty; at all levels (world, country, and individual) to support the needs of those affected by the HIV/AIDS virus in developing nations. It is those persons' right to be healthy, and to live. Living is the most basic fundamental right, and we must fulfill our duty to help support this right, by doing all that we can to help. This means increasing research for anti-retro viral drugs, and finding a less costly way of developing them. We need to do this not to make money or to profit, but instead because it is our duty as a country full of technology, knowledge, and resources to use these to better the world as a whole. Though the drugs now are expensive, it is our duty to provide them to developing countries to maintain their right to life and health, and once these drugs are developed, bettered, and cheapened, we must continue to provide them to those in need. I also think that the most basic virtue of humanity is to help those in need. So, deontological ethics spells out the fact that we must help those in need and be virtuous and humanitarians towards them.

I think that amending patents for those counties in need