Gert's Moral Violations

In this scenario, Daniela Sackler and her husband were planning to try to have their second child together. Mr. and Mrs. Sackler were both in graduate school, so a lot of time was spent planning for this next child so that they could both take on childcare responsibilities while in school. Ms. Sackler was studying sociology as well as doing interview research with young adults. Her interview schedule was approved by her university's institutional review board, and normally took place in the homes of her research subjects. One evening, she set up an interview at a subject’s house and Mrs. Sackler noticed the subject was being usually friendly. When it became uncomfortable, Daniela tried to leave, but her subject blocked her exits and raped
Applying these things to Gert’s Moral evaluation process, taking the morning after pill does not violate any moral rules. None of the 10 rules of Gert’s ethical behavior are broken. At this point in Mr. and Mrs. Sackler’s situation, conception has not occurred so there is no rules broken or violation. Given the morning after pill purpose, I do not see it as abortion because a fetus has not been conceived yet. If conception had taken place and Daniela Sackler was in fact pregnant and wanted to abort the baby, I would feel that she would be violating some moral rules. If she waited, and found out she was pregnant and tried to take the pill or opted for the RU486 prescription, as I said she would be violating moral rules and it would be unjustified, even if the father ended up being the research subjects. If I was a close friend of Daniela’s, I would suggest to her to go ahead and take the morning after pill as soon as possible, so that she can eliminate the possibility of her research subject being the baby’s father. Also, to give her time to think and evaluate if news of having a baby soon after being raped is best for her mental health. Even if the child did end up being her husbands, I am sure the circumstances would be detrimental to