Kohlberg Heinz’s Dilemma

Kohlberg’s research focused on giving people hypothetical dilemmas.

So, here’s his famous “Heinz’s Dilemma”, the story of Heinz and his wife Clara.

Heinz’s wife, Clara is dying because of a special kind of cancer. There is only one drug that the doctor
think might save her. It is a form of radium which a pharmaceutical company in the same town have
recently discovered. The drug is expensive to produce, but the pharmaceutical company was charging
ten times the production cost. Heinz goes to every one he knows to borrow money, but he could only
collect half of what the drug cost. He tells the CEO of the company that his wife is dying and ask him to
sell it for cheaper or let him pay later. But the CEO refuses, he can make no exemptions. The research
has been very expensive, and the company need to make a profit from it. So, Heinz got desperate and
broke into the man's laboratory to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the
laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

If you answer Heinz should steal the drug, because it is only worth $200 and not how much the druggist
wanted for it; Heinz had even offered to pay for it and was not stealing anything else. Or Heinz should
not steal the drug, because he will consequently be put in prison which will mean he is a bad person.
You belong to Obedience Stage under pre-conventional Stage.

If you answer Heinz should steal the drug, because He will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if
he has to serve a prison sentence. Or Heinz should not steal the drug, because prison is an awful place,
and he would more likely languish in a jail cell than over his wife's death. You belong to Self-interest
Stage under pre-conventional Stage.

If you answer Heinz should steal the drug, because He will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if
he has to serve a prison sentence. Or Heinz should not steal the drug, because prison is an awful place,
and he would more likely languish in a jail cell than over his wife's death. You belong to Self-interest
Stage under Conventional Stage.

If you answer Heinz should steal the drug, because his wife will benefit, but he should also take the
prescribed punishment for the crime as well as paying the druggist what he is owed. Criminals cannot
just run around without regard for the law; actions have consequences. Or Heinz should not steal the
drug, because the law prohibits stealing. You belong to Conformity Stage under Conventional Stage.

If you answer Heinz should steal the drug, because everyone has a right to choose life, regardless of the
law. Or Heinz should not steal the drug, the scientist has a right to fair compensation. Even if his wife is
sick, it does not make his actions right. You belong to Social contract orientation Stage under Post-
Conventional Stage.

If you answer Heinz should steal the drug, saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the
property rights of another person. Or Heinz should not steal the drug, because others may need the
medicine just as badly, and their lives are equally significant. You belong to Universal human ethics
Stage under Post-Conventional Stage.
Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that determines right from wrong by focusing on outcomes. It is a form
of consequentialism.

Utilitarianism holds that the most ethical choice is the one that will produce the greatest good for the
greatest number. It is the only moral framework that can be used to justify military force or war. It is
also the most common approach to moral reasoning used in business because of the way in which it
accounts for costs and benefits.

However, because we cannot predict the future, it’s difficult to know with certainty whether the
consequences of our actions will be good or bad. This is one of the limitations of utilitarianism.

Utilitarianism also has trouble accounting for values such as justice and individual rights. For example,
assume a hospital has four people whose lives depend upon receiving organ transplants: a heart, lungs,
a kidney, and a liver. If a healthy person wanders into the hospital, his organs could be harvested to save
four lives at the expense of one life. This would arguably produce the greatest good for the greatest
number. But few would consider it an acceptable course of action, let alone the most ethical one.

So, although utilitarianism is arguably the most reason-based approach to determining right and wrong,
it has obvious limitations.