Question

ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY ON MOUNT EVEREST
Many mountain climbers dream of scaling the highest mountain on Earth. It is a dangerous venture and some of them die in pursuit of this dream every year, including a 33-year-old Canadian woman in May 2012. The following describes one situation involving the ethics and responsibilities of climbers toward one another.

Page 105
In May 2006, several climbing parties passed by David Sharp, 34, who was near death at 28,000 feet on Mount Everest. He later died alone, without companionship in his final hours. He was one of 11 who perished during the 2006 climbing season and one of more than 200 who have died attempting to climb the mountain.

One climber to leave Sharp was Mark Inglis, 47, a New Zealander who was climbing the mountain on artificial legs. He and his party stopped to consider Sharp’s situation. He was in poor condition and near death, but was given oxygen. Rescue was not feasible as helicopters cannot operate at that altitude. The lives of Inglis’s party would likely have been endangered trying to move Sharp to a base camp.

It was disclosed that Sharp’s group was loosely organized without a leader. The members of the group appeared to be functioning independently according to an expedition outfitter. The outfitter said that Sharp’s group did not have sufficient oxygen and climbed without a Sherpa guide.

Discussion of the incident was extensive. One position presented was that climbers do not endanger themselves to save another. Furthermore, looking after another climber may jeopardize one’s own chance at climbing the mountain. Sir Edmund Hillary, who, with his Sherpa Tenzing Norgay, became the first to reach the summit of Mount Everest, said that human life is more important than conquering mountains. Others suggested that the incident was an example of a lack of sense of responsibility and caring for one another.

Questions
What ethical principles are involved in this situation?

Why blame Inglis?

Who is responsible?

Should the climbing of Mount Everest be regulated?

may i have the answers with relevant explanations please

Answer 1

1) The ethical principles in the situation is that everyone must ensure their safety and be prepared well for every situation as help may not be available. David Sharp died alone as per the case study, which also signifies the need to have a good team and a team spirit so that sufficient help can be done. Also it is said in the case study that Sharp's, group didnt had a leader and they were working and moving ahead independently which shouldnot be the case while taking up such a sport. This mountaineering requires high level of understanding and cooperation among all the members. It is not about winning but to succeed and help one another reach destiny. Hence the principle of ethics it follows are to help one another and cooperate. It also includes proper understanding and carrying required material for oneself and also for others if ememrgency occurs. It also includes proper managment and leadership of the team in order to create more responsibility in the minds of all who are in the group.

2) Mark Inglis was among the one who left David Sharp when Sharp was nearly about to die and in a bad situation. Here Inglis and his team knew that their life would be engangered if they woukd help Sharp but that made them more sensible towards their life and not consider Sharp's life. Maybe Sharp could have been saved if he would have been shifted to base area. But situation sometimes becomes worst where rescuing one could take lives of many. The best possible solution must be taken.But as much as possible life of others must be taken into consideration . As said in the case study that many mountaineers dont save lives of other so that they dont endanger their own life. But ethics and moral values must be considered as the person himself could have been in the situation and he finds no help. So it is important to help others as much as one can.

3) Every person who are in the field of this risky situation are responsible. There lies both individual and group responsibility in such a situation. Also carrying required necessities are important. Having a plan and a leader is important who can guide the whole group. Moral ethics pay a vital role. Hence all individuals must remain responsibile for their own life and the lives of other people who they come accross while mountaineering. Responsibility lies in the hands of each and every individual.

4)Yes, climbing Mount Everest must be regulated in order to ensure that people return safely though that cant be guranteed. It is important that as said in the given situation that in case of David Shark, leadership was missing, everyone was moving ahead individually without any group direction. Such events must not occur , hence regulation must be done in order to ensure that the people who are going have a proper plan and management within the grouo also all necessities must be with them. Many things though would change in real situation even after regulation but a certain regulatory steps can help and make all mountaineers responsible .