Justice and Fairness as Biomedical and Biosystem Engineering Concepts - Biomedical Ethics for Engineers - page 265

NP PP

6 5 4 1 T 7

3 2

Figure 8.4 Line drawing for decision to dispose of hazardous waste.

6. Contaminant A passes untreated (i.e., 5 ppm) causing sensitive people to become acutely
ill, but only for a week with no long-term harm.
7. Equipment is installed at the company that reduces the loading of contaminant A
to 1 ppm.
Drawing each case and our proposed case (T) gives us a relative location with respect to the
negative and positive paradigms (Figure 8.4).

Cases 2 and 3 are closest to the positive paradigm, so they appear to be the most ethical.
In these cases, the amount of contaminant A that reaches the public is kept well below the
regulatory limit and any health threshold. Case 7 is also relatively close to the positive paradigm,
since it is well below the regulatory limit, but even at these levels some sensitive people (e.g.,
newborns, immuno-compromised, and elderly) could experience effects. Cases 6 and 7 are less
ethical because they resemble the negative paradigm, i.e., actions that make the water less safe to
drink. The key, though, is that in the middle of the diagram (Case 4), the burden of the problem
caused by the company is shifted from the private company to the public. This is not the fairest
option by any means.
Although being right of center means that this case is closer to the most moral approach than
to the most immoral approach, other factors, such as feasibility and public acceptance, must be
considered. The location on the line indicates that being fair is different from receiving a “C”
grade. Fairness implies that we need to search for options that move us closer to the positive
paradigm, i.e., the ideal. As we migrate toward options in the negative direction, we give up a
modicum of fairness. This is the nature of balancing benefits and costs, but the engineer must be
fully aware that these balances are taking place. So, like risk assessment, professional judgment
in selecting the most fair designs and projects must account for tradeoffs (e.g., cost effectiveness
versus fairness, security versus liberty, and short-term needs versus long-term effects).

Questions

What three steps can be taken to move our case closer to the positive paradigm?

Care should always be taken when trying to apply objective and quantitative tools to concepts like
ethics and justice. The social sciences and philosophical principles are often highly subjective. While
the natural sciences and engineering strive for objectivity, they also must deal with subjectivity from
time to time.