Provide and explain one Kantian argument against the doctor’s actions in the above case study.

Jeremy is a 48 year old man who presents at a hospital with aplastic anaemia and thus requires a bone marrow donation. Thankfully his daughter, Kim is a match. Doctors estimate that with the transplant, there is a 60% chance of recovery for Jeremy. Without the transplant, he will certainly die within two years. Jeremy turns up at the clinic and has an IV line connected to allow the transplant to take place.Jeremy has been a committed Jehovah’s Witness for the past 25 years, and after the IV is inserted he tells his doctor that he should have made something clear—he will not accept the marrow transplant if it contains any blood whatsoever. Jeremy explains that this is because Jehovah’s Witnesses are commanded to ‘abstain from blood’, drawing support from the bible (Acts 15:28, 29; Deuteronomy 12:15, 16). Jeremy says he would rather die that act against his faith.Jeremy’s doctor, Derek, is well aware that bone marrow will always contain some blood as it is impossible to remove completely. Derek also knows that accepting bone marrow transplants actually qualifies as a ‘conscience issue’ for Jehovah’s Witnesses—i.e. in cases of a conscience issue, the church leaves it up to individuals whether they will accept the treatment. Derek comes to the conclusion that a transplant remains in Jeremy’s best interests. In light of this, Derek assures Jeremy that the marrow contains no blood, and the transplant goes ahead.Your paper should:Clearly state (in your own words) the issues to be examined;Construct a well-justified ethical argument in response to the question;Summarize and critically assess the literature relevant to your argument;Demonstrate understanding of ethical theory;Provide appropriate reference details for research sources, including page numbers;Contain both an introduction and a conclusion.Reference should include readings’ page number