The theory that best describes the case: Back from the Dead is deontology. That theory of deontology is “the study of duty.” The theory of Deontology states that the situation in which one may find oneself does not matter for the use of reasoning. Ethics deals with command imperatives. That is, using the word should make a complaint. Ethics concerns a person's duty as a professional to fulfill their obligations to their clients and themselves. The case that provides a moral dilemma is: Return from the dead. This case concerns Dr. Cee, a veterinarian with an established practice in a small town. Her client, Ms Kay, has a dog called Sandy who has been diagnosed with a rare blood disorder. The vet knew of only one experimental treatment for the disease, but it was expensive, time-consuming and very uncomfortable for the dog. It was also found to be 95% ineffective in laboratory tests. The client decided not to treat the dog and put him to sleep because she didn't want him to suffer any more. The moral dilemma arises because the doctor went ahead and began treatment on the dog because he believed that most researchers had made crucial errors and that he might be able to treat the dog effectively. He did not tell Ms. Kay about the experimental treatment because of his concern about the dog's discomfort. The dog cleared of all symptoms within a month and he returned it to Mrs. Kay without charging her for the treatment despite the thousands of dollars it had cost to treat the dog. There are many different ways to look at this case. For Dr. Cee he has a moral obligation to carry out his work while respecting the client's wishes. The client didn't want him to follow procedure... middle of paper... and not really good ways to arrive at a moral decision. Virtue ethics deals with the process that will make the customer happy. The client clearly wanted the dog not to suffer, but the vet went against her wishes. Utilitarianism is concerned with the act of maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. The vet clearly went against the client's wishes and made the dog suffer without knowing the outcome. Each of these ways to resolve the moral dilemma does not have sufficient evidence to show that they are better ways to resolve the moral dilemma than using deontology. In conclusion, the way the vet handled the moral dilemma was probably not the best way to handle the situation. . Although the dog survived, he clearly went against his client's wishes. In the professional world there are ethical rules to respect and he did not choose the correct way to handle the moral dilemma.