Category: Ethics

Please answer discussion questions numbers 1 and 2 at the end of chapter 1. The responses should be prepared in a narrative form The discussion questions will help to assess what you learned in Chapter 1.
1.Critically examine the reasons for studying ethics discussed in this chapter, modify as needed, and offer additional ones.
2.Critique these statements:
*A technically incompetent manager is as unprofessional as an ethically incompetent one.
*An ethically competent manager will be working on technical competence; the opposite may not be true.
*Ethical competence may be more important, harder to come by, and more difficult to recognize than technical competence.
“A professional is someone who can do his best work when he doesn’t feel like it.”—Alistair Cooke

After studying the course materials located on Module 5: Lecture Materials & Resources page, answer the following:
Name some very important organs that are not vital organs.
List the functional descriiption of all the normal vital organs, including today’s exceptions.
Is it possible to live without a vital organ? Why? Example?
Distinction between assisting or substituting vital organs. Bioethical analysis.
Do the following practices assist or substitute the vital organ? Why?
Dialysis
Respirator
Ventilator
Tracheotomy
CPR
Read and summarize ERD PART FIVE Introduction.
Unconscious state: Definition.
Clinical definitions of different states of unconsciousness: Compare and contrast
Benefit vs Burden: bioethical analysis.

Submission Instructions:
The paper is to be clear and concise and students will lose points for improper grammar, punctuation, and misspelling.
If references are used, please cite properly according to the current APA style. Refer to your syllabus for further detail or contact your instructor.

Explain the difference between the public and private spheres;
2) Why is there so much controversy relative to religion in the public sphere?; and
3) What do you think about this?
HELPFUL LINKS:
Casanova, Jose. Public religion in the modern world, Chicago. University of Chicago Press. 1994. Accessed May 1, 2016. http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/233615726?pq-origsite=summon.
Habermas, Jürgen. “Religion in the Public Sphere.” European Journal of Philosophy, vol.14, no 1 (2006). Accessed July 19, 2019. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-0378.2006.00241.x.
Marx Karl. On the Jewish Question. 1844. Accessed May 1, 2016. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/
Mendieta, Eduardo, Vanantwerpen, Jonathan (eds.). The Power of Religion in the Public Sphere. Essays by BUTLER, HABERMAS, TAYLOR, and WEST, New York, Columbia University Press, 2011. Accessed May 1, 2016. http://www.roeduseis.ro/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Judith_Butler_J%C3%BCrgen_Habermas_Charles_Taylor_BookZZ.org_.pdf.
Rawls, John. “The idea of public reason revisited.” Chicago Law Review, vol.64, no. 3 (1997). Accessed July 19, 2019. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5633&context=uclrev.

1) In Dale Jacquette’s work, A Dialogue on the Ethics of Capital Punishment, chapter three explores the conditions for the right to life. What are they? What do you think about them?
2) What does retribution mean to you? Is capital punishment just retribution? Why?

What obliges the public to obey the laws?
Their sense of morality and ethics? Religion? Social acceptance?

Starting Something Versus Finishing What You Started, Including Life
Be sure you support your views with one or more underlying moral principle(s) that have not already been shown to be flawed unless you can say why and how the flaws do not apply or are not really flaws.
Read the set of questions carefully. It is not about abortion, but is primarily about conception versus euthanasia (of an adult). The principle to be developed will apply to abortion, but the question itself is not specifically about abortion.
Keep this in mind while answering the set of questions below: The whole purpose of these questions is to understand whether the criteria that justify finishing something you started and have put time and energy into are the same criteria that would justify beginning it in the first place. Address that general question in answering #10 below.
Suppose you go to a 3 hour and 20 minute play on Broadway that your parents have given you tickets they received for free as part of some advertising promotion they could not attend and were not really interested in anyway, and that they thought you and your spouse might enjoy. The first three hours are somewhat okay, but not all that great, with some of it pretty boring, and the last intermission is about twenty minutes before the end of the show. The last twenty minutes may tie it up real well and make it worthwhile having gone to or it may not. I won’t tell you which way that works out, but the overall experience was not anything to rave about, though it was also not the worst night of your life. On your way out of the theater, the management selects you to give two free tickets to give to friends.
1) Should you accept the tickets and give them to your friends? If you do, you are not allowed to tell them anything about the play or your experience and feelings about it. You either give them the tickets or you do not. If you give them the tickets, they will go (because they will take it as a recommendation and because they won’t want to spurn your offer or offend your apparent generosity). Basically you are controlling whether they go or not, so you have to decide for them by deciding whether to give them the tickets or not. The idea is that this is just like conceiving a child, where what you do doesn’t give the child any real choice in the matter and you don’t get to consult with it, to see what it wants, and it can’t research to see whether it wants to be born or not. (And remember, we are talking here only about conception — which is about fertilizing the egg and creating a pregnancy in the first place, not about abortion. If you conceive the child, you will carry it through to birth. This is not an abortion question. So you have to decide whether to conceive and therefore bring a child into this world or not, and in the same way you have to decide whether to send your friends to this play or not. Giving them the tickets is analogous to conceiving the child.)
The play is not about a subject they are known to be any more or less particularly interested in then you are, so you have no reason for thinking they will enjoy the play any more than you did. They may or may not, but the odds are they won’t like it any more than you did. So, would you accept the tickets to give to your friends or not? Why or why not?
2) Should you stay for the last 20 minutes, or should you have just leave during that intermission at the end of the first three hours? Why?
3) Would you have gone to the show in the first place if you had known it was going to be like this, or would you have told your parents you couldn’t go and suggest they give the tickets to someone else or sell or return them? Why? It will not hurt their feelings if you can’t accept the tickets.
4) Would it make any difference in your decision to give your friends the tickets if you were also given $1,000 on the condition you gave them the tickets and they went to the show? Why or why not? But again you are not allowed to tell them anything about the play or how much or little you liked it. And you are not allowed to share any of the money with them or use it to buy them anything to make up for sending them to this play, even if they do not enjoy it.
5) What if your friends were disabled and though they could go, it would be a hardship for them to travel and get into the theater, and they had to secure a baby sitter for their children, go out on a weeknight, etc? Would you give them the tickets? Why or why not?
Explain and justify your answers. Then suppose that this is an analogy, where the play represents life in general, and giving your friends the tickets represents conceiving and giving birth to a child. The $1,000 represents any pleasure you get at having the child regardless of what pleasure or pains the child finds in life (or the couple has in going to the play). 6) Should you conceive a child and give birth to it under any of these conditions? Why or why not?
To help make clear the premise of the scenario, consider this scenario also, which is supposed to be the same basic problem: Tickets go on sale two months ahead of time for a concert by a band you are somewhat interested in seeing, but it is not a must-see band for you, not one of your favorite bands. You go to the box office (because the tickets are not on sale online) and the line is long but should move quickly. However, it does not move quickly, and after various promising starts you find you have been waiting in line for nearly three hours, but it will be just twenty more minutes (for sure). 7) Should you wait the twenty minutes, or should you leave and do without the tickets? 8) If you had known the total wait would have been 3 hours and 20 minutes, should you have gone to get the tickets in the first place? 9) Should you call a friend to come down to get in line at the end of the line (so the friend has to wait 3 hours and 20 minutes to get his/her tickets — because you can’t let the friend cut in and you can’t buy more than your own ticket at the window) or not? If you call the friend, you are not allowed to tell him/her about the length of the wait in line. The friend has about the same level of interest in this particular band that you do, as far as you know.
10) The purpose of these questions is to understand whether the criteria that justify finishing something you started and have put time and energy into are the same criteria that would justify beginning it in the first place. Why or why not? Are the grounds for remaining alive, for someone who suffers, the same grounds for their being conceived in the first place? What about when they are still in the womb with regard to being born or carried to term? Explain and justify your answer, and use an underlying general moral principle for support (as I used my principle for support in the “supermarket examples” in the Introduction to Ethics).

Starting Something Versus Finishing What You Started, Including Life
Be sure you support your views with one or more underlying moral principle(s) that have not already been shown to be flawed unless you can say why and how the flaws do not apply or are not really flaws.
Read the set of questions carefully. It is not about abortion, but is primarily about conception versus euthanasia (of an adult). The principle to be developed will apply to abortion, but the question itself is not specifically about abortion.
Keep this in mind while answering the set of questions below: The whole purpose of these questions is to understand whether the criteria that justify finishing something you started and have put time and energy into are the same criteria that would justify beginning it in the first place. Address that general question in answering #10 below.
Suppose you go to a 3 hour and 20 minute play on Broadway that your parents have given you tickets they received for free as part of some advertising promotion they could not attend and were not really interested in anyway, and that they thought you and your spouse might enjoy. The first three hours are somewhat okay, but not all that great, with some of it pretty boring, and the last intermission is about twenty minutes before the end of the show. The last twenty minutes may tie it up real well and make it worthwhile having gone to or it may not. I won’t tell you which way that works out, but the overall experience was not anything to rave about, though it was also not the worst night of your life. On your way out of the theater, the management selects you to give two free tickets to give to friends.
1) Should you accept the tickets and give them to your friends? If you do, you are not allowed to tell them anything about the play or your experience and feelings about it. You either give them the tickets or you do not. If you give them the tickets, they will go (because they will take it as a recommendation and because they won’t want to spurn your offer or offend your apparent generosity). Basically you are controlling whether they go or not, so you have to decide for them by deciding whether to give them the tickets or not. The idea is that this is just like conceiving a child, where what you do doesn’t give the child any real choice in the matter and you don’t get to consult with it, to see what it wants, and it can’t research to see whether it wants to be born or not. (And remember, we are talking here only about conception — which is about fertilizing the egg and creating a pregnancy in the first place, not about abortion. If you conceive the child, you will carry it through to birth. This is not an abortion question. So you have to decide whether to conceive and therefore bring a child into this world or not, and in the same way you have to decide whether to send your friends to this play or not. Giving them the tickets is analogous to conceiving the child.)
The play is not about a subject they are known to be any more or less particularly interested in then you are, so you have no reason for thinking they will enjoy the play any more than you did. They may or may not, but the odds are they won’t like it any more than you did. So, would you accept the tickets to give to your friends or not? Why or why not?
2) Should you stay for the last 20 minutes, or should you have just leave during that intermission at the end of the first three hours? Why?
3) Would you have gone to the show in the first place if you had known it was going to be like this, or would you have told your parents you couldn’t go and suggest they give the tickets to someone else or sell or return them? Why? It will not hurt their feelings if you can’t accept the tickets.
4) Would it make any difference in your decision to give your friends the tickets if you were also given $1,000 on the condition you gave them the tickets and they went to the show? Why or why not? But again you are not allowed to tell them anything about the play or how much or little you liked it. And you are not allowed to share any of the money with them or use it to buy them anything to make up for sending them to this play, even if they do not enjoy it.
5) What if your friends were disabled and though they could go, it would be a hardship for them to travel and get into the theater, and they had to secure a baby sitter for their children, go out on a weeknight, etc? Would you give them the tickets? Why or why not?
Explain and justify your answers. Then suppose that this is an analogy, where the play represents life in general, and giving your friends the tickets represents conceiving and giving birth to a child. The $1,000 represents any pleasure you get at having the child regardless of what pleasure or pains the child finds in life (or the couple has in going to the play). 6) Should you conceive a child and give birth to it under any of these conditions? Why or why not?
To help make clear the premise of the scenario, consider this scenario also, which is supposed to be the same basic problem: Tickets go on sale two months ahead of time for a concert by a band you are somewhat interested in seeing, but it is not a must-see band for you, not one of your favorite bands. You go to the box office (because the tickets are not on sale online) and the line is long but should move quickly. However, it does not move quickly, and after various promising starts you find you have been waiting in line for nearly three hours, but it will be just twenty more minutes (for sure). 7) Should you wait the twenty minutes, or should you leave and do without the tickets? 8) If you had known the total wait would have been 3 hours and 20 minutes, should you have gone to get the tickets in the first place? 9) Should you call a friend to come down to get in line at the end of the line (so the friend has to wait 3 hours and 20 minutes to get his/her tickets — because you can’t let the friend cut in and you can’t buy more than your own ticket at the window) or not? If you call the friend, you are not allowed to tell him/her about the length of the wait in line. The friend has about the same level of interest in this particular band that you do, as far as you know.
10) The purpose of these questions is to understand whether the criteria that justify finishing something you started and have put time and energy into are the same criteria that would justify beginning it in the first place. Why or why not? Are the grounds for remaining alive, for someone who suffers, the same grounds for their being conceived in the first place? What about when they are still in the womb with regard to being born or carried to term? Explain and justify your answer, and use an underlying general moral principle for support (as I used my principle for support in the “supermarket examples” in the Introduction to Ethics).

My groups topic is about Career Opportunity vs Family Obligations/responsibilities. Make 5 slides with enough content to talk for at least 5 mins about why its right to choose family obligations over career opportunities.
Example and stuff that can be used for argument:
Represents family
Like family business
Helping is way of giving back
Don’t want to disappoint
Ruin relationships
How nursing home facilities aren’t the best
Quality of the care
Want loved one at home
Spent more time with them
Provide them comfort
Can always do your career later
Expensive care facilities
Not good ones
Love ones wanna be home with family
A job opportunity away
Family wants you stay home
Could always have another job have another opportunity
Family is at home
Could always travel

Cowart and Burt view points, instructions are going to be in the document. The log in link for the textbook
available to assigned writer

Guide word count is 300 words and there are no penalties for over or under. may reference guidelines (based in Ireland) or academic sources
1. You are working in primary care as a doctor and your patient comes from a culture in
which it is considered wrong to tell patients that they are dying. The family explain the
cultural context and requests you not to tell the patient they are dying. Discuss FOR
informing the patient?
2. You are working in primary care as a doctor and your patient comes from a culture in
which it is considered wrong to tell patients that they are dying. The family explain the
cultural context and requests you not to tell the patient they are dying. Discuss
AGAINST informing the patient?
3. A medical student falsifies a logbook to say they had attended a home visit to a child
with special needs. The parents contact the school to ask about the visit and the
student’s logbook is reviewed. Discuss FOR the student failing the module
4. A medical student falsifies a logbook to say they had attended a home visit to a child
with special needs. The parents contact the school to ask about the visit and the
student’s logbook is reviewed. Discuss AGAINST the student failing the module?
5. You are aware that there is no evidence for an effective treatment for a particular
condition but the patient and their family are requesting you try an unproven treatment.
Discuss FOR using this treatment?
6. You are aware that there is no evidence for an effective treatment for a particular
condition but the patient and their family are requesting you try an unproven treatment.
Discuss AGAINST using this treatment?
7. You have administered an out of date but still effective vaccine to a patient. Discuss
FOR informing the patient?
8. You have administered an out of date but still effective vaccine to a patient. Discuss
AGAINST informing the patient?