Business Law Case

My father, an orthopedic surgeon who practices in Syracuse, New York, is occasionally faced with a tough decision regarding his work. From time to time, he meets with potential patients who cannot afford the costs of a highly necessary surgery for their health. These potential patients are the population of Americans who make more money than allowed to qualify for Medicaid, but who are not covered by a medical insurance plan. For example, a father in a family of four may make $25,000 a year, but as a small business owner he is not covered by a health care plan that an employee in a large corporation would probably have access to. This man makes too much money to qualify for Medicaid, but with his family of four he has many expenses to cover. Often, my dad meets with this population to discuss a potential surgery. When he becomes aware of the fact that these patients will not be able to afford the full costs of surgery, he is then faced with the decision of whether or not to perform the operation. My father’s decision is to nearly always perform the surgery, and to not bill the patient for the full costs of the operation. My father told me that he once performed a surgery that should have costed a man $2,500, but that performed the surgery for free.

I believe that my father’s decision to operate on individuals who cannot afford to pay for surgery is highly ethical. This decision is a “good” decision because my father’s decision to operate creates more overall utility in this world than there was previously (I mean utility in the economic sense, as a measure of happiness units). While my father certainly faces strong opportunity costs in this decision with regards to both time and money, his choice nonetheless creates more overall good in the world than there was previously. As this decision creates more good for the world than the costs my father incurs, this decision is therefore ethical and should be carried out.

Some