The purpose of this study is to provide characterizations of the kinds of perspectives that go into a general framework for ethical deliberation and then uses that framework to characterize the special role-related obligations that help define the ethics of special education. In other to do this task, An extended example of the case method is used as the point of departure for the discussion. The conclusions which are drawn from the discussions reviewed are as follows: First, the law and ethics cannot be totally separated. neither can they be reduced to one another. In most cases, the legal thing to do will also be the ethical thing to do. But this will not always be so, because laws and regulations may be defective from an ethical point of view. Furthermore, because laws and regulations are unavoidably general, or "open-textured", particular cases frequently require ethical deliberration to fill in the gaps. Moreover, facts and values are related that a host of important educational concepts have both descrive and evaluative uses. Second, there are two basic types of principle-based ethical theories: consequentialism and nonconsequentialism. Consequentialism is the view that the rightness or wrongness of a given action should be judged in term of its consequences. But, a related problem with nonconsequentialism is that principles may be difficult to apply, even when they are not in conflict with one another. Thus, nonconsequentialist insiste on apply independent of the consequences with respect to maximizing the good.