Take two pages, typed, 1.5 spaced. One-page replies will be returned for additi

Take two pages, typed, 1.5 spaced. One-page replies will be returned for additional writing.
SETTING THE STAGE. You are a member of the Board of Directors for a big pharmaceutical company [Big Pharma] and they’ve developed a drug [‘Memorill’] that can erase traumatic memories [and only traumatic memories]. The intended users of the drug are people who’ve experienced severe emotional-physical violence. For example,
[ ] women and girls who’ve been raped [in war rape camps or in other ways]
[ ] soldiers forced to rape women
[ ] child soldiers who’ve been forced to kill
[ ] people who’ve witnessed horrific violence done to others
[ ] survivors of sexual abuse or violence
[ ] soldiers who fight in battle
[ ] people who’ve lost those close to them in war and other bloodshed.
Once Memorill has been taken under therapeutic supervision only traumatic memories are erased. You will give the drug as soon as the injuries are discovered or reported and the person willingly and freely give their consent to taking it.
One implication of doing this is that those who take the drug will not be in a position to seek justice, nor will those who’ve harmed others be brought to justice. That will mean no moral repair for injuries done – no forgiveness, no repentance, no reconciliation, no justice, no becoming stronger by working through trauma as individuals, families, neighborhoods, communities: no communal solidarity protesting injustice and brutality. You are to consider how important these things are to individuals and communities in your replies.
QUESTION:
[a] If you, as a member of the Board of Big Pharma, decide to market [or not to market] Memorill around the planet, would you defend your decision as a utilitarian or as a Kantian? What would be in your space of considerations? Defend your reply.
For [b] consider the six elements of moral repair and the four dimensions of hope and address each of them (all ten) in your reply.
[b] Is it possible, in light of what you’ve written for [a], that Memorill could be seen as an act of moral repair? Why or why not? Defend your reply.
Bringing forward Walker’s 6 elements of moral repair. Moral repair is served:
[1] by placing responsibility on wrongdoers and others who share responsibility for wrongs
[2] by acknowledging and addressing wrong, harm, affront, or threat to victims and communities
[3] by authoritatively instating or reinstating moral terms and standards within communities where wrong may have caused fear, confusion, cynicism, or despair about the authenticity of those standards
[4] by replenishing or creating trust amongst individuals in the recognition of shared moral standards and in their responsiveness to those standards and support of the practices that express and enforce them
[5] by igniting or nourishing hope that moral understandings and those who are responsible for supporting them are worthy of trust
[6] by connecting or reconnecting in adequate moral relationships those who have done wrong and those who have been harmed as a result, where and to the extent that this is possible, practically and morally. Where that is not possible, moral repair aims to stabilise or strengthen moral relationships amongst others in within communities.
Essential aspects of hope:
[1] futurity – hope shows itself in an openness to what is to come, as a belief that there is opportunity for securing the hoped-for object
[2] desire – the subjectively grounded feeling of wanting something that does not now exist or that is not now a part of my life
[3] belief in possibility – the belief that what is to come has not been shut out by past or present events; belief in radical openness to what can happen, to what I and others can make happen
[4] efficacy or agency – hope presses us toward action, furthering the likelihood of getting what we hope for; the feeling of hope engages patterns of thinking, desiring, attention, imagining, and believing, patterns whose central aim is to achieve the thing hoped for.
Some possible benefits of Memorill
[] Horrible memories erased
[] Pre-trauma level of living restored
[] No additional trauma of working through searingly painful experiences
[] No additional trauma of seeking justice through the criminal justice system
[] Sense of personal safety restored to pre-trauma level
[] _________________ ?
Some possible personal and social costs of Memorill
[1] Personal identity shocked by erasing (traumatic) memories
[2] Justice is not had for harms done, for neither the one harmed nor the offender
[3] Many know that there are offenders in their midsts who will never be brought to justice → this might lead to a kind of vigilante justice
[4] Offenders who walk around wanting desperately to make amends are forever denied the opportunity with all the personally devastating consequences (for some) that follow
[5] The human and social value of seeking justice together as a community is denied
[6] Forgiving another for the harm done is no longer possible
[7] The existence of harms and wrongs done continues on but has to be denied by virtue of erasure of traumatic memories
[8] The tremendous value for the community experiencing affirmation of the legitimacy of widely shared norms by standing with those harmed, by insisting that offenders attempt to make amends, by doing what it can to help restore offenders back to a condition of moral trustworthiness
[9] An singularly important communal affirmation of the conditions for moral relationship is lost by erasure of traumatic memories.

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount. USE Discount code “GET20” for 20% discount