Dilemma #4

[Jazzy]

In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. the drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $400 for the radium and charged $4,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money and tried every legal means, but he could only get together about $2,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying, and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from if." So, having tried every legal means, Heinz gets desperate and considers breaking into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife.

Should Heinz steal the drug? Why or why not?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

The person who discovered the drug should have every right to sell it for whatever amount he chooses. Maybe he should choose to show compassion at times but again that should be his choice.

Now it is wrong for the husband to steal the product but I can't blame him for doing it in the least.

 

[seasidemike]

Of course he should steel it, he should do what ever he needs to so to save his wide and then deal with the consiquences of his actions later

 

[Bluezone777]

No, stealing the drug is wrong no matter how good your intentions are for going through with the theft of it. Their is no assurance the drug would even work so you are risking your freedom and gaining a criminal record for a drug that might end up doing nothing for her anyway.