Deontology is more of a moral system having its focus on the obedience and thus adherences to independent moral duties and rules. Deontologists argue that actions are not wrong if the motive is not wrong. The consequences of actions are not the determinants of the righteousness or the wrongness of actions but the motives of the person taking the action (O'Hear, 2004). Therefore, considering deontological viewpoint Silano refusal to volunteer is justified because his motive is for own self good and may be safety from the consequence of volunteering which will cost him a needle piercing.
Since Silano’s action to refuse to donate blood for the DNA test is of good will, it is justifiably right of him considering the argument of deontologists that actions should be dependent on adherence to duty and duty starts with the consideration of doing pure good. The good considered is the highest good that is good in it and without qualifications. Good will is argued to be the only thing in the world and even beyond the world that is good in it and without qualification (O'Hear, 2004).
In the contrary, the consequentiality ethic’s doctrine may render Silano’s action unethical in that he did not consider the consequences of his actions. The consequentialists hold that human actions should guided and judged by their consequences and rational human ethical being should usually consider achieving the ultimate good of their actions which is the result of maximum good less all the bad (O'Hear, 2004). In reference universal consequentialism Silano’s actions are unethical in that the ultimate bad things that may result from his refusal to donate blood are more than the good; this is because he might have been arrested like Pitchfork. Silano should have cooperated and donated blood for the forensic DNA test because he was aware of the possible consequence that might follow his actions.
O'Hear, A. (2004). Modern moral philosophy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.