“Should refugees from other countries be accepted in the US?”

Assignment Question

“Should refugees from other countries be accepted in the US?”

This is the final essay for my professional ethics class (MPH-250). Students should examine their selected topic or issue consistently and thoroughly from the ethics perspectives introduced in this course.The general idea is to:a) summarize how a particular ethical framework/approach would deal with the select problem or contemporary social issue that you have chosen as the focus of your Final Essay;b) offer relevant historical documentation of how a particular approach has already dealt with this problem or issue; andc) consider why (–or why not) the approach, this school of ethical thinking, or philosophy that you have chosen to work with is particularly relevant to this subject matter.Clearly, certain ethical approaches may not fit perfectly or at all with the subject area you have selected. In these cases, focus instead on the approach in ethics that does address, or is relevant to, this issue and briefly but concisely explain why other approaches do not concern themselves (as competently) with this subject matter. Ultimately, assessment of your project will rest on your ability to demonstrate that you understand the main intricacies of the issue and the finer points of the theoretical and practical approach you are using as your framework. Your research should reinforce this understanding through illustrations and examples taken from class readings, discussions and other relevant outside research. Try to view research as supporting and perhaps productively questioning certain assumptions, and, foremost, focus on providing a competent, more in-depth review of a relevant theory (or two, for comparison-contrast purposes) rather than attempting to “do it all” rather superficially.I have attached detailed guidelines and information on how best to proceed in composing your Final Essay:How to Write an Ethics Paper Instructions for Submission:• The completed assignment should be 5-7 pages in length, not including your required title page or required reference page.• Students should NOT include the assignment questions as part of their submission.• Answers should demonstrate understanding of concepts and ideas expressed in the textbook, but outside sources may be used to support your ideas and provide relevant real-world examples.• Assignments should be double spaced, using 11 point Calibri, Arial, or Times New Roman font with 1-inch margins and include page numbers per APA 7th edition guidelines.• All sources used, including the textbook, must be referenced; paraphrased and quoted material must have accompanying citations.• All references and citations used must be in APA 7th edition style.

Assignment Answer

In addressing the question of whether refugees from other countries should be accepted in the US from an ethical perspective, one possible framework to consider is utilitarianism. Utilitarianism, as articulated by Jeremy Bentham and later expanded upon by John Stuart Mill in the 19th century, focuses on maximizing overall happiness or well-being. From this standpoint, accepting refugees could be justified if it leads to a net increase in happiness for the society. For instance, if refugees bring valuable skills, cultural diversity, and contribute positively to the economy, it aligns with the utilitarian principle of maximizing overall welfare (Mill, 1863; Bentham, 1789; Singer, 1972).

Historically, utilitarianism has been applied to various social issues, including immigration. Policies that promote the greatest good for the greatest number have been considered in shaping immigration laws. Examining historical documentation may reveal instances where utilitarian thinking influenced immigration policies, either positively or negatively. For example, during periods of economic expansion, countries might adopt more inclusive immigration policies to harness the potential benefits of a diverse and skilled labor force. Conversely, during economic downturns, utilitarian considerations might lead to stricter immigration controls to prioritize the well-being of existing citizens (Bentham, 1789). Understanding these historical contexts is crucial for a comprehensive analysis.

The relevance of utilitarianism to the refugee issue lies in its focus on the consequences of actions (Mill, 1863). In the case of accepting refugees, considering the potential positive outcomes, such as economic growth and cultural enrichment, reinforces the utilitarian perspective. However, it’s essential to acknowledge critiques of utilitarianism, as some argue that it may neglect individual rights and justice in pursuit of the collective good (Rawls, 1971). Critics like Rawls contend that a purely utilitarian approach might disregard the rights of minority groups, potentially leading to unfair or discriminatory outcomes.

Despite these critiques, utilitarianism provides a lens through which the ethical dimensions of refugee acceptance can be examined. By assessing the overall well-being of society, policymakers can weigh the potential benefits and drawbacks of accepting refugees. Utilitarianism allows for a pragmatic evaluation of the consequences, considering factors such as economic impact, cultural contributions, and social cohesion.

Alternatively, deontological ethics, as introduced by Immanuel Kant in the 18th century, offers a different perspective. Deontology emphasizes adherence to moral principles and duties regardless of the consequences. Analyzing the refugee question through a deontological lens involves considering whether accepting refugees aligns with fundamental moral obligations, such as the duty to help those in need (Kant, 1785).

Historically, deontological principles have influenced humanitarian efforts and international agreements. The establishment of organizations like the United Nations, guided by the principles of human rights and the duty to protect vulnerable populations, reflects a deontological approach to global issues (Kant, 1785). Examining past instances where deontological ethics played a role in shaping policies can provide insights into the consistency of this approach. For example, the development of asylum laws and refugee protections in international law can be viewed as applications of deontological principles.

The relevance of deontology to the refugee issue stems from its emphasis on duty and moral obligations (Kant, 1785). Advocates of deontological ethics may argue that accepting refugees is a moral imperative, irrespective of the potential consequences. The duty to assist those in need, especially in situations of persecution or conflict, becomes a guiding principle. However, criticisms may arise regarding the practicality of rigid moral rules in complex sociopolitical contexts (Rawls, 1971). Exploring these nuances enhances the ethical exploration of refugee acceptance through a deontological framework.

Considering the ethical implications of refugee acceptance from both utilitarian and deontological perspectives offers a nuanced understanding of the complexities involved. While utilitarianism highlights the consequences and overall societal well-being (Mill, 1863), deontology emphasizes moral duties and principles (Kant, 1785). Evaluating historical contexts and documenting instances where these ethical approaches have influenced policies enriches the analysis.

To delve deeper into the utilitarian perspective, it’s essential to consider specific examples where utilitarian calculations may have influenced immigration policies. For instance, during the post-World War II period, many Western countries, including the United States, adopted relatively open immigration policies to rebuild economies and address labor shortages. This approach aligns with utilitarian thinking, as the acceptance of refugees and immigrants contributed to economic growth and overall societal well-being.

However, utilitarianism is not without its challenges. One notable critique comes from philosopher John Rawls, who argues that utilitarianism may neglect individual rights and justice in the pursuit of the collective good (Rawls, 1971). In the context of refugee acceptance, critics might contend that a purely utilitarian approach could lead to the violation of the rights of refugees or discrimination against certain groups.

Turning to deontological ethics, the emphasis on moral duties and principles raises important considerations in the context of refugee acceptance. Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative, a central concept in deontological ethics, posits that individuals should act according to principles that could be universally applied without contradiction (Kant, 1785). Applying this to the refugee question, proponents of deontology might argue that the duty to assist those in need is a universal principle that transcends situational consequences.

Historically, deontological principles have played a crucial role in shaping international agreements and humanitarian efforts. The aftermath of World War II saw the establishment of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, reflecting a commitment to certain moral principles irrespective of utilitarian calculations (United Nations, 1948). This document and subsequent treaties on refugees underscore the importance of deontological considerations in addressing global challenges.

However, the application of deontological principles is not without challenges. Critics may question the practicality of rigid moral rules, especially in complex sociopolitical contexts where competing interests and considerations are at play. The refugee issue often involves intricate geopolitical dynamics, and adhering strictly to moral duties may encounter obstacles in implementation.

In conclusion, the ethical analysis of accepting refugees in the US involves examining the issue through various frameworks, such as utilitarianism and deontology. Historical documentation provides context and insights into how these ethical perspectives have shaped policies. The relevance of each framework to the refugee question lies in its unique emphasis, whether on overall societal well-being or adherence to moral duties (Singer, 1972; Bentham, 1789; Mill, 1863; Rawls, 1971; Kant, 1785). A thorough exploration considers critiques and historical applications, leading to a nuanced understanding of the ethical dimensions surrounding refugee acceptance.

Ultimately, the choice of ethical framework depends on one’s philosophical stance, but a comprehensive exploration considers multiple perspectives to form a well-informed conclusion. Acknowledging the complexities involved in the refugee issue, both ethically and practically, is essential for developing policies that balance the well-being of society with moral duties to those in need. As the global community grapples with ongoing refugee crises, an ethical examination that incorporates diverse perspectives can contribute to more informed and compassionate decision-making.

References

Bentham, J. (1789). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Dover Publications.

Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge University Press.

Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer.

Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.

Singer, P. (1972). Famine, Affluence, and Morality. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 1(3), 229-243.

United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What is utilitarianism, and how does it apply to refugee acceptance in the US?

Utilitarianism, a moral framework emphasizing overall happiness, can be applied to justify refugee acceptance based on the net increase in societal well-being, considering factors like economic contributions and cultural diversity.

2. How has utilitarianism historically influenced immigration policies?

Historical instances, such as post-World War II, reflect utilitarian thinking in open immigration policies to rebuild economies. Utilitarian calculations often played a role in addressing labor shortages and contributing to economic growth.

3. What are the criticisms of utilitarianism in the context of refugee acceptance?

Critics, including John Rawls, argue that utilitarianism may neglect individual rights and justice in pursuit of the collective good. This critique raises concerns about potential violations of refugee rights and discrimination.

4. What is deontological ethics, and how does it contribute to the discussion on refugees?

Deontology, rooted in moral duties and principles, advocates for accepting refugees based on universal moral obligations. The duty to assist those in need, as per Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative, becomes a guiding principle.

5. How has deontological ethics shaped international agreements related to refugees?

Deontological principles, evident in documents like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, have influenced international agreements, emphasizing moral duties irrespective of utilitarian considerations. These agreements underscore the importance of universal principles in addressing global challenges.