Helping vulnerable populations is an important moral issue that is evident in contemporary society. While some people believe that it is their duty to help those in need, others say that disadvantaged people deserved hardship because they made wrong decisions at some point in their lives. Utilitarianism can be applied to this moral issue, as it considers the consequences of one’s actions for other people. The present paper will show that, according to utilitarianism, assisting vulnerable populations is morally right because it helps many people to achieve a better life.
Utilitarianism is a popular ethical theory that was developed as a branch of consequentialism. Similarly to consequentialism, utilitarianism focuses on the outcomes of one’s actions. However, in this ethical theory, particular attention is paid to the utility. In other words, the principle of utilitarianism states that a morally right choice is the one that brings the most good to the greatest number of people (“Utilitarianism”).
Notably, utilitarianism can be used to justify many activities that are often perceived to be unjust or wrong, including murder or the use of military force against civilians. To apply utilitarianism to the contemporary issue at hand, one should evaluate its impact on different people.
Vulnerable populations include people who are at a disadvantage when it comes to income, health, shelter, or other necessities. For example, people who are chronically ill, as well as those of low socioeconomic status, are considered vulnerable. In most countries, people of color and immigrants are also perceived to be vulnerable populations due to discrimination and social injustice. Children are also a highly vulnerable population group, as they depend on their parents or guardians for care. Sosou and Yogtiba explain that vulnerable populations are at a higher risk of victimization, poor health outcomes, and early death. Therefore, without support, people from vulnerable populations are likely to struggle with many problems, including health issues and crime.
There are two main options for helping vulnerable populations. Firstly, people can develop and promote policies that would support these populations. An example of such a policy is universal healthcare, which has been at the center of attention in the United States for the past few years. Universal healthcare would ensure that people have equal access to medical services, regardless of their income level or employment status. Hence, this policy would reduce health disparities evident in vulnerable populations (Asaria et al. 637). Secondly, people can support charitable organizations that provide assistance to disadvantaged groups, such as shelters for homeless people.
The opponents of helping vulnerable populations often argue that donating to charities would impact their budget negatively. Similarly, because universal healthcare would result in increased taxation, some people are against it. If we were to simplify the moral issue at hand, it would show that there is a conflict between a small portion of people’s finances and the health and well-being of millions of disadvantaged people. By the principle of utilitarianism, the only correct choice is in favor of vulnerable populations. They would gain many benefits from other people’s support, including better health, reduced risk of violence, and improved longevity, while the helping groups would lose very little.
All in all, the paper shows that helping vulnerable populations is a significant moral issue that can be used to exemplify the principle of utilitarianism. Disadvantaged people face numerous risks that could be addressed with proper policies and support mechanisms. When contrasted with relatively small financial losses, the benefits outweigh the costs. Therefore, according to the theory of utilitarianism, helping vulnerable populations is morally right.
Works Cited
Asaria, Miqdad, et al. “How a Universal Health System Reduces Inequalities: Lessons from England.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, vol. 70, no. 7, 2016, pp. 637-643.
Sossou, Marie-Antoinette, and Joseph A. Yogtiba. “Promoting Social Justice and Human Rights among Vulnerable Populations: Implications for a Social Development Approach in Ghana.” Social Development Issues, vol. 38, no. 1, 2016, pp. 25-37.
“Utilitarianism.” Ethics Unwrapped, 2018. Web.