Life and Death: A Moral Dilemma

What do you think about the thought experiment below?  Do you think the author successfully violates the moral principle from the first paragraph with the situation in the third?  If so, explain why.

“You are a doctor in a hospital’s emergency room when six accident victims are brought in.  All six are in danger of dying but one is much worse off than the others.  You can just barely save the person if you devote all of your resources to him and let the others die.  Alternatively, you can save the other five if you are willing to ignore the most seriously injured person.”

“It would seem that in this case you, the doctor, would be right to save the five and let the person with the terminal injuries die….  Next, consider the following case:”

“You have five patients in the hospital who are dying, each in need of a separate organ.  One needs a kidney, another a lung, a third a heart, and so forth.  You can save all five if you take a single healthy person and remove his heart, lungs, kidneys, and so forth, to distribute to these five patients.  Just such a healthy person is in room 306.  He is in the hospital for routine tests.  Having seen his test results, you know that he is perfectly healthy and of the right tissue compatibility.  If you do nothing, he will survive without incident; the other patients will die, however.  The other five patients can be saved only if the person in room 306 is cut up and his organs distributed.  In that case, there would be one dead but five saved.”

Pojman, Lois P., Ethical Theory, pp465-466 (Excerpted from The Nature of Morality, Harman, Gilbert, Oxford University Press,Inc;1977)

Why?