I think the argument for a utilitarian is difficult, but the argument can be made that the people’s lives who are near death are worth less than the life of the person who is completely healthy. It may be difficult to weigh this against five people, but it is clear that the healthy person contributes more utility, as they are the only individual whose life will be guaranteed to be healthy, barring unforeseen illness, where the individuals receiving the transplants will likely live shorter lives and there could be complications during the transplant. If these people live shorter, lives, or die in surgery, more happiness may not be achieved. It is even possible that complications could cause more pain, after being given hope of saving the lives of these individuals. Even if they are all great people, it seems impossible to take life away from a healthy person, I believe this explains how a utilitarian could stick to their belief system and explain this idea. Other common reasons that may come up when discussing this issue seem to be deontological issues. The doctor’s action, killing the patient is what is deemed immoral, rather than the consequences, where five lives could be saved. Killing a healthy person would clearly violate moral laws.