The article, “The Drowning Child”, brought up the idea of how ethics don’t really change because of distance or cost. I thought the scenario discussed in the article was really interesting because although the ethics involving saving a drowning a child don’t change if they’re in front of you or in another country, I hadn’t really thought about how similar the two situations are. The Calculating Consequences article discussed utilitarianism and what that ethical approach entails. While, the utilitarianism approach is definitely helpful in some scenarios, I keep thinking about how it isn’t really just. A big conflict in this approach for me is how can something be ethical if it isn’t just? Additionally, utilitarianism does not really give a lot of room for grey area, and I personally believe ethics cannot always just be in terms of black and white. Though the approach is beneficial in weighing the benefit versus the harm, I believe it should be used with other approaches and not alone.