Evaluate the following case using: a. Kant’s theory
b. Utilitarianism.
c. Provide an overall recommendation.

Harold Smith is a 27-year-old man who used to live a dangerous lifestyle. He like nothing more than an extreme thrill, such as cliff diving and off-road racing. He lived alone and had few friends. He worked as a guard for an armored vehicle company, a job he tolerated. He is close with his parents and would visit them frequently. They continually tried to get him to live a less dangerous lifestyle. He seemed to enjoy their prodding but simply smiled in response. He recently broke his neck in a diving accident. He was quickly brought to an emergency room and intubated because he could not breathe on his own. Within a few days, it became clear that he was permanently paralyzed from the neck down. Without a ventilator, he would quickly die.

Harold began to insist that his ventilator be removed, saying that he would rather be dead than live in a paralyzed state. His parents, however, instructed the health care team to not remove the ventilator. The attending physician understands Harold’s objections but believes there is a small but significant chance that Harold will soon become independent of the ventilator and that he will adjust to his situation and find a way to make a meaningful life for himself, as so many others have done before him. In short, his physicians think it best not to remove the ventilator until Harold has psychologically adjusted to his new condition. After three weeks, Harold continues to demand that his ventilator be removed" (Jones & Demarco, 2016).