Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Ethical Dilemma: Computer errors related to radiation machines that have…
Ethical Dilemma: Computer errors related to radiation machines that have killed or harmed patients. Continue to use the machine, or discontinue. Where do you draw the line?
Discontinue Using
Pros
-
-
-
System wasn't designed with a fail-safe so there were no devices to report overdosing. Stopping use to eliminate this concern.
Possibly saving the reputation of the company and programmers who built the machine by redeeming their mistakes instead of continuing to use
-
-
-
Cons
-
-
-
-
A lot of investment and money will be lost if the machine is scrapped and needs to start from scratch, or not at all
-
-
The individuals currently using the machine would have to adapt to a new type of treatment which could be hard on their bodies to do so
Continue Using
Pros
-
-
-
Doctors and nurses don't have to learn about a new machine that would potentially replace the Therac-25 if it was discontinued
-
-
-
-
-
-
Alternative 2:
Who benefits if we take Alternative 2?
The developers as they don't have to lose money in developing a new machine/new software.
Alternative 2: Rights may be abridged? People would be getting harmed or killed from a known error that could be fixed.
What if everyone took Alternative 2?
Then morally speaking there are no lessons being learned and people continue to get hurt with little consequence.
Who is harmed? - The patients currently using the machine as well as their families. Also, patients who will use the machine in the future.
Alternative 1:
Alternative 1: Rights may be abridged? Patients that need treatment will not be able to get it anymore.
Who benefits if we take Alternative 1?
The patients and families of patients as they don't have
to have the risk or fear of overdosing. Also the hospital as
they will not be responsible for such a thing arising.
Who is harmed? - The individuals receiving treatment, because they would no longer receive treatment through the Therac-25 and would have to find an alternative
What if everyone took Alternative 1?
There would potentially be a better machine in use doing more good than harm, lives wouldn't be handled as precariously
List the relevant facts:
-
-
-
-
-
A machine this significant should be more thoroughly tested and debugged in a secure environment before risking the lives of patients
-
-
Future?
Software should be thoroughly and exhaustively tested to avoid this same happenstance. Safeguards should never be removed. Short sighted behavior can have irreversible effects.
What if everyone took Alternative 2? - Patients would continue receiving their treatment, however, they would risk being harmed from it
Alternative 1 or 2? - Alternative 1, discontinuing the Therac-25 would be more ethical. If the Therac-25 is discontinued, there would be room for improvement and less lives would be at risk.
What if everyone took Alternative 1? - Patients would no longer receive treatment from the machine and would not have to risk being harmed, however, they would have to find a new form of treatment