Ravi is a strong supporter of girl child education. He motivates a lot of members of society to realise the importance of girl child education to sponsor the education of a girl child. For the past twelve years, he has been sponsoring the education of Asmita. Now, Asmita has cleared medical entrance exams and her name appears for provisional admission in two of the medical colleges. One of them, say XYZ, is ranked one in the state and happens to be Asmita’s dream college too. Asmita has worked hard day and night for this college and Ravi knows it. The fee of the XYZ college is very high but Ravi is ready to pay it for Asmita’s bright future. However, unfortunately, on the day of the submission of admission fees to XYZ College (which is the last day of fee submission), Ravi’s mother meets with an accident. The doctors tell Ravi that his mother has to go through an operation immediately. Ravi figures out that the operation will cost him a lot and he will not have any money for the admission. If he doesn’t pay the fees, Asmita’s admission might be cancelled. (a) What are the ethical issues involved? (b) What should Ravi do? Justify. (20 marks, 250 words) [GS – 4: Ethics, Integrity & Aptitude]

Introduction:

The given case study delves into the complex issue of conflicting priorities, presenting a challenging dilemma brought about by constraints in time and finances. This scenario highlights the predicament faced by various stakeholders, including Ravi, Asmita, doctors attending to Ravi’s mother, the medical college, and members of society.

Body:

(a) Ethical Issues Arising from Conflicting Priorities:

Paucity of Time and Money: The scarcity of both time and financial resources presents a significant ethical concern. The urgency of Ravi’s mother’s medical condition necessitates immediate action, while Asmita’s education hangs in the balance due to impending college admission fees. This creates a moral dilemma that demands careful consideration.

Family Responsibility vs. Social Duty: Ravi is caught between his responsibility to his immediate family, particularly his mother’s health crisis, and his broader social duty towards Asmita’s educational aspirations. This ethical conflict tests his commitment to both personal and societal obligations.

Life vs. Career: The case study underscores the ethical tension between prioritizing the preservation of a life (Ravi’s mother) and fostering a promising career (Asmita’s medical education). This dilemma forces Ravi to weigh the intrinsic value of human life against the long-term potential of education.

(b) Prioritization Based on Urgency and Importance:

In situations involving conflicting responsibilities, individuals often prioritize tasks based on their urgency and importance. This concept is known as the Eisenhower Matrix, which categorizes tasks into four quadrants:

Urgent and Important: Ravi’s mother’s operation falls within this category, as her life is at stake, demanding immediate attention and resources to ensure her well-being.

Important but Not Urgent: Asmita’s college admission, while significant for her future, falls under this category. While not requiring immediate attention, it holds long-term importance.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the ethical dilemmas posed by conflicting priorities in the case study emphasize the intricate interplay between personal obligations and societal commitments. While both Ravi’s mother and Asmita’s education merit consideration, the immediacy of Ravi’s mother’s medical condition justifies prioritizing her well-being.

In instances where life hangs in the balance, ethical decisions must be grounded in compassion and a sense of humanitarian responsibility. The Indian context adds a layer of complexity, where cultural values of filial duty coexist with broader social responsibilities.

Through such dilemmas, individuals like Ravi are challenged to find a harmonious balance between their roles as caregivers and contributors to societal progress.