There are two main ethical issues that have been identified within this scenario. The first is that the acceptance of McJack’s sponsorship conflict with the schools recent efforts and policies to encourage healthy eating habits and lifestyles. Furthermore, if the school accepts the sponsorship offered in conjunction with the stipulated conditions it would ultimately be endorsing discrimination against Molly based on her appearance.
The focus ethical frameworks that have been use to provide my final recommendations for this scenario are Consequentialism, Non-Consequentialism, Virtue Ethics and Care Ethics.
Consequentialism is an action-based decision making framework which determines whether an act is right or wrong based on the consequences that occur from them. Decisions are considered to be effective when the negative consequences are eliminated or minimised (Baron, Pettit & Slote, 1997; Burgh, 2006). Egoism, Altruism and Utilitarianism are some of the subcategories of Consequentialism.
Egoism states that people should consider their own interests first and foremost (Baron, et al.,1997). Looking from an Egoistic perspective I ought to have cancelled any further association with the fast food chain. I would benefit most from this because I would not have the Principal’s disapproval by endorsing a sponsor which contradicts the school’s healthy living ideals and I would not have to explain why Molly was deemed unsuitable by McJack’s for promotional shots to her and her parents. Alternately, the Altruism perspective does not take into account personal needs and seeks to maximize good consequences for everyone else. Looking through the Altruistic lens I also ought to refuse the sponsorship deal as I would be considering the health and well being of all my students and their families by refusing to sending out mixed messages about fast food. I would, however, be trying to obtain a more suitable sponsorship to ensure my students had the best resources possible. Utilitarian perspective can be described as “the greatest good for the greatest number of people (Burgh, 2006). What I ought to do from a Utilitarian perspective is very similar to the Altruistic perspective however this time I will also be incorporating my happiness into the equation.
The possibilities of adopting the Consequentialism perspective may include that Molly would not be discriminated against and the students would still benefit from alternative fundraising and sponsorship efforts. The schools would stay true to its healthy living policies and my professionalism with the principal will be upheld.
Non–Consequentialism is also an action-based perspective although it focuses on the rule at hand rather than the consequence. Immanuel Kant contended that this perspective refers to acts as simply being right or wrong- irrespective of consequences (Lafave, 2006). The four sub-categories associated with Non-Consequentialism include: Natural Rights, Social Contract, Deontology...