All doctors' decision was based on similar sort off moral reasoning. The sole intention was to perform their duties as a doctor and treat his patient until he gets well. For that reason, focusing on one doctor's ethical base behind decision making will represent all doctors’ situation. Dr. Charles Baxter, like all other doctors believed that his foremost duty as a doctor and the purpose of medication is to save human lives in the best possible way. Here doctors are rather focused on the end result i.e., saving human lives than the action they are undergoing to achieve desired outcome. So, any possible way sometimes seems to be the best possible way to keep his patient alive. In Dax Cowart's case, the doctor’s are well aware of the fact that Dax was going through excruciating pain. His plea to stop treating and let him die, so that he can get relief from …show more content…
But the doctor ignored his request and keeps treating him because Dax still had the chance to survive. Dax stated, “The right to control your body is a right you’re born with, not something that you have to ask anyone else for, not the government, not your treating physician, not your next of kin” (Cowart & Burt, 1998). However, providing treatment to keep Dax alive and stable was eventually beneficial to the patient.

In my opinion, the doctor’s action was based on situational ethical theory. The theory justifies any action morally right if the action brings the most loving outcome for that specific situation. In situational ethics there is no hard and fast rule in a particular situation. Doctors will keep treating their patient till the very end at any possible cost. This dutifulness of doctors is not predetermined or prefabricated and they have to take action on situation basis. Though Dax had