Charlie Gordon's Ethical Dilemmas

Parker
Charlie Gordon experienced a lot of suffering when he became intelligent after the operation carried on by Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss. He wanted the increase of his intelligent because he couldn't understand and spell any hard words. Then, why was he suffering from becoming smarter? Why, after getting all he wanted, was he depressed and didn't feel cooperative anymore after the operation? It's because the doctors didn't act ethically about doing surgery to Charlie. The doctors didn't decide rightfully according to the Hippocratic Oath. When making steps to decide if Charlie truly needed surgery that would help him a lot, they had skipped a step or two. Many people believe that the doctors did only what Charlie wanted to do. They think
Nemur and Strauss, some people believe that they did ethical actions. Charlie wanted the increase of the intelligence, so they just conducted the operation how Charlie wanted. They believe that those doctors had answered questions in each category of making ethical decisions. "What are the probabilities of success of various treatment options? … Is the patient unwilling or unable to cooperate with medical treatment? If so, why? … What are plans and rationale to forgo life-sustaining treatment? … Are there parties other than clinicians and patients, such as family members, who have an interest in clinical decisions?" (Siegler). Each questions are from each section respectively, Medical Indications, Patients Preferences, Quality of Life, and Contezual Features. Dr. Nemur and Dr. Strauss had argued together if Charlie had potential for succeeding this operation; they asked Charlie if he really wanted to do this operation, and Charlie answered he'll try his best; they had made a plan for the future with the operation: keep helping Charlie while publishing the results also; the doctors had asked Miss Kinnian for her advise about this treatment and Charlie's potential. The doctors had answered all those questions from each sections of making rightful
Based on the evidence, the doctors did not make rightful decision for operating Charlie. They had violated the Hippocratic Oath because they didn't prevent harm from the patient, or preventing Charlie's realization of evilness in intelligence, which drove Charlie back to his normal state, even more depressed. Though some people think that those doctors answered questions for ethical decisions making really well, they had skipped some important steps into making ethical choices, which is complete opposite of answering the questions thoroughly. First of all, they didn't think about the future. They should have known what could have happened to Charlie if he was done with the operation and understand the whole world. Second of all, the doctors might have answered some crucial questions but not all of them. "In sum, how can this patient be benefited by medical and nursing care, and how can harm be avoided? … Has the patient been informed of benefits and risks, understood this information, and given consent? … What are the prospects, with or without treatment, for a return to normal life, and what physical, mental, and social deficits might the patient experience even if treatment succeeds? … Are there issues of public health and safety that affect clinical decisions?" (Siegler). These are the questions that the doctors had forgotten to