Jejudo, South Korea
I've been reading the dilemmas recently posted with a big "something is wrong here" feeling for the last two days but I wasn't sure why.
I think the reason is that I fell into the classical trap of following the question and not working around it or questioning the question (LR did too) as too vague.
The ethical thing to do here is to provide solutions so that events such as these don't happen or at least are minimized. In Jim's question for example can we lower the draw bridge and save the child (perhaps at the cost of losing his legs)?
The fact that we can envision such a dilemma means, by definition, that we can work or prepare for a solution. It is wrong, unethical, immoral, to remain passive and let such a situation go without the discussion of it's prevention and/or minimization.
No, we can not envision every problem that will come up, sometimes we will lose to the unexpected, sometimes we will do our best (in preparation or in the attempt to do what we have already cosidered as 'the plan in such an event') and we will fail.
We will make mistakes.
We may fail for lack of realistic resources.
But it is immoral, to my mind, to simply accept either/or questions without offering potential solutions around these specific problems.
If we consider a lose/lose situation now, it is our responsibility to try to solve it.