Reference no: EM13257652

Be sure to carefully read each question and answer each part of the question. Remember that you are required to cite the primary text in each response. See the instruction sheet for full instructions.

Kant

Pharmaceutical companies sometimes decide to conduct clinical trials overseas, because running trials there is cheaper. It is also the case that laws governing the design of the tests and treatment of test participants are more lax. In the last 15 years, there have been cases (in India, Uganda, Nigeria, and other countries) in which patients received experimental drugs without being aware that they were participants in a clinical trial (case 1). In other cases in which participants were aware that they were taking part in a trial, the trial was not halted when serious side effects in, or the death of, some participants occurred (case 2), and those who became ill as a result of their participation in a trial were not given proper medical care (case 3). Patients in developing countries who receive drugs may feel compelled to participate or stay in trials as this is a means to getting other healthcare for themselves or their families. What might the maxims of the drug companies be in these cases? From a Kantian perspective, is (all or some) such treatment wrong, and if so, why? How would the first two versions of the categorical imperative apply to these kinds of treatment? Do these acts fall under some sorts of acts that Kantian deontology counts as wrong? Explain enough of Kant's theory to explain whether he would find these practices wrong, and if so why.

Attachment:- Critical-Response-Questions.pdf