Please watch the 2002 movie “John Q”and answer the following the questions:

1. What is the ethical dilemma that John Q faces in this movie?

- The ethical conflict in the film centers on John Quincy Archibald and his extreme
measures to save his son. When John’s son, Michael, requires a heart transplant that his
insurance won’t cover and he can’t afford, John, facing the prospect of losing his son,
resorts to holding an emergency room hostage to get his son on the transplant list.

2. Do you think everyone has the right to proper health care? Do you believe that it is the
responsibility of the government to provide every citizen an accessible health care? Why or
why not?
- Everyone should have access to proper healthcare because it is a basic human right and
crucial for fairness and social justice. Universal healthcare helps prevent and control
diseases, keeping the public healthy, and it boosts economic productivity by maintaining
a healthy workforce. It also shows a society’s moral duty to take care of all its members,
especially the most vulnerable. Additionally, providing healthcare for everyone is cost-
effective, as it is cheaper to prevent and treat diseases early than to handle emergencies
and long-term illnesses.

3. Do you think the rights of the hostages are violated? Should their rights be neglected to save
the boy?
- The rights of the hostages were clearly violated. John Quincy Archibald, desperate to
save his son, took an entire emergency room hostage. This action compromised the
hostages’ personal freedom and safety. Although John’s actions were motivated by love
and desperation because of the healthcare system’s failures, taking hostages was illegal
and ethically wrong, as it endangered innocent people and caused them significant
distress.

4. What is the ethical dilemma that the cardiac surgeon faces at the end of the movie?
- At the end of the movie “John Q,” Dr. Raymond Turner, the cardiac surgeon, is
confronted with a tough decision. John threatens to take his own life so that his heart
can be used for his son’s transplant. Dr. Turner must decide whether to save Michael’s
life by using John’s heart, despite the ethical and legal rules against using organs from
coerced donors. This puts him in a difficult position where he must balance the
immediate need to save a child’s life with the ethical and legal standards that govern his
profession.
5. Is John Q. Archibald (Denzel Washington) a good person –an ethical person? Explain. What is it
that sets him apart from others? Relate your answer based on the Deontological or
Teleological Theories
- John Q. Archibald, played by Denzel Washington in “John Q,” is a complex character
whose actions can be examined from ethical perspectives. He deeply loves his son and
goes to extreme lengths, like taking hostages, to ensure his son gets a life-saving heart
transplant. While his dedication to saving his child is admirable, it involves disregarding
others’ rights and breaking the law, which challenges ethical principles about respecting
rules and safety. John’s actions are driven by the desire for a positive outcome—his
son’s survival—but the methods he uses raise ethical concerns about their broader
impact and the example they set. His exceptional commitment to his son sets him apart,
forcing him to confront moral dilemmas that push the boundaries of societal norms and
conventional ethics, balancing personal moral imperatives against responsibilities to
others.

6. “Rules are made to be broken” on your opinion what does this statement mean? Do you find
your example related to ethical issues? Please relate your answer based on the Deontological
and Teleological Theories
- The statement “rules are made to be broken” suggests a perspective that rules, norms,
or laws are not absolute and can be disregarded or challenged depending on the
circumstances. From a teleological viewpoint, this could imply that the consequences of
breaking a rule might justify its violation if they lead to a greater good or desired
outcome. In the case of “John Q,” where John Archibald takes extreme measures to save
his son’s life by breaking the law, this aligns with a teleological reasoning where the end
goal—saving his son’s life—could justify the means of breaking rules. However, from a
deontological perspective, which emphasizes the importance of following rules and
respecting rights regardless of outcomes, the statement challenges ethical principles by
suggesting that rules are not universally binding and can be selectively disregarded
based on personal or situational justifications. This dichotomy highlights the ethical
tension between strict adherence to rules and the consideration of outcomes or
intentions when evaluating the morality of actions.