The good produced in the first alternative was evaluated as one positive and one negative because anencephalic children can die peacefully but children who need an organ no longer have a donor. The good produced in the second alternative was evaluated as double positive. The good thing is that babies are kept alive on life support for about a day or two, which is about the same amount of time they would live without life support, where the organs are kept in perfect condition of functioning and furthermore, once a donor is not found, children are able to rest peacefully, prolonging the vegetative state. Once the consequences were determined, I had to select an alternative that would produce the greatest good, which in my opinion is alternative number two. I used teleological ethics during my decision making process. Teleological ethics is an act based on the outcome or consequence of the act. I used this type of ethic because I felt that harvesting organs from a terminal child to give a non-terminal child a chance at a better, healthier life had more advantages or disadvantages. More importantly, I feel that this would generate the greatest good for the greatest number of people