Kohlberg’s theory says there are 3 stages:

1. Pre- conventional
2. Conventional
3. Post conventional

Based on the decision a person takes, they are grouped in different stages indicating what drove them
to take the decision.

1. In the given scenario, let’s assume, Heinz going by the basic moral principles did not steal and lets
his wife die from cancer thereby keeping intact his morale. This decision is what is expected when
the morales are solely build on the ideologies put forwarded by other mostly adults where self-
conviction or affection do not interfere. This is pre-conventional stage of moral development
usually common in kids. As kids will not be so attached to emotions as compared to an adult for
his wife, the decision will be common more in kids.
2. In the second scenario, let’s assume Heinz steal from the lab and saves his wife but later on gets
caught or declare guilty himself thereby going to prison and pleading to serve minimum prison
sentence on moral grounds. Here, the decision is driven by the love he holds for his wife as he
feels that saving a life is more important than going to prison. This behaviour is usually influenced
by the group/society he belongs to and is referred as Conventional stage of moral development.
3. In the third scenario, Heinz must have stolen to save life on moral ground and should get no
punishment as he did what was right although against the existing law. This is post conventional
stage of moral development where people develop a certain set of believes based on experience
and knows that existing laws are going to be breached by his action. But still he will defend his
stand because the situation is averse to his personal interest although there can be large
implications if every individual follow same principles. Therefore, very few people are believed to
be in this stage.

Usually, a person can be in constant transition among these stages based on the situation and the
impact it will have on himself and the society.

Since it is a hypothetical scenario, no decision is correct whereas in real world, some sense can be
build where Pharma Corporates are regulated for high prices by the Govt. and stealing will not be an
easily available option for everyone. Moreover, even if we assume that stealing is an available option,
it is still not justified in any case as it will distort the law and order setup on moral grounds. If every
person starts stealing there will be no social system in place. Therefore, it works two ways, neither the
person selling a cure can ask for exploiting prices nor the option is usually available so easily. The
scenario definitely raises the question of moral strength a person holds within himself and how they
are driven based on the groups or society we belong to.