Annotated Bilbliography And Source Evaluation

Gender Equality

Institutional Affiliation

Student’s name

Course

Date

Annotated Bibliography: Gender Equality

Inglehart, R., Norris, P., & Ronald, I. (2003). Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world. Cambridge University Press.

According to this scholarly, Inglehart and other authors emphasize on the changes which have been experienced in various societies. Unlike according to traditions where men were believed to carry out various roles like leadership, the need for change has redefined gender roles. Although the author highlights the effectiveness of practicing equal gender roles, he still insists on the variation that is still there due to the difference in the social classes. Looking at the poor societies they are still practicing the traditional customs, where men are given higher ranks when it comes to education among other things. This source is reliable since the facts being elaborated are still present in the current society. That is as much as the society is trying to equalize the roles between both genders, there are still some of the other factors which prevent people from attaining it. One of them, as mentioned, is the difference in social class, ignorance among other things.

Runyan, A. S., & Peterson, V. S. (1999). Global gender issues. Westview.

In this book, the authors maintain that the women empowerment among other associations has played a great role in achieving and representing gender equality. It is through the voice of people especially women who have risen in the past years to represent women in society. Their efforts are actually importance since through them girl child can freely be allowed to get the education to whichever level and also participate in roles that were thought to be for men alone. Having Gender issues as global issues has also enhanced the achievement of gender equality, even though some societies and institution still fails to change their perspective on gender roles due to different factors. The book is not current but its information is a true reflection of what is happening in the world today. Most associations have been formed in ensuring that people are educated on the importance of practicing gender equality.

Verloo, M. (2007). Multiple meanings of gender equality: a critical frame analysis of gender policies in Europe. Central European University Press.

This book aims at getting the different meaning of gender equality. Actually, according to the book, it’s not just a matter of allowing all genders to participate in different things, but also there is an idea of providing equal resources among other things. The book emphasizes on defining gender equality so that society can well understand what it’s all about. The idea of creating rules and regulations to govern various aspects related to gender equality are also mentioned. This is basically a major step in making people understand various things that need to be done as a way of attaining equality and avoiding all forms of discrimination. The information provided is important and reliable since it gives greater insight into the theme of gender equality.

Baker, D. P., & Jones, D. P. (1993). Creating gender equality: Cross-national gender stratification and mathematical performance. Sociology of Education, 91-103.

In this study on the need for practicing gender equality, Baker and Jones carried out statistics and collected information on the performance of mathematics in different countries. The results showed that men actually performed better generally as compared to ladies. And the big question was, what was the actual cause of the variation in the performance when both genders are given equal academic resources? In this research, the idea of social perception of the ability of men and women was raised, where it was noted that society believes such hard subjects can only be well handled by men. The concept in this research is important up to date since the same issues are also experienced in the current society. The art of discouraging different genders on different tasks is a form of gender inequality most people fail to realize they are contributing. This supports the conclusion that society also participates in enhancing gender inequality.

Squires, J. (2007). The new politics of gender equality. Macmillan International Higher Education.

In this book, Squires highlights various steps the government has taken in ensuring gender equality is practiced. In the past years, women have been accommodated into the political field and were in a position to carry out different leadership roles. The book actually demonstrates efforts being taken by the government in ensuring there are enough women represented in the government. The article is important in helping the readers understand various efforts that are being put in place in dealing away with different instances of gender inequality. This means that when it comes to this global issue, it is not just a matter of common citizens within the society, but also the government as well. This supports my conclusion of emphasizing that it is the role of each person, institution and even the government to participate in ensuring that there is gender equality. This is the only way it would be possible to transform the whole society.

References

Baker, D. P., & Jones, D. P. (1993). Creating gender equality: Cross-national gender stratification and mathematical performance. Sociology of Education, 91-103.

Inglehart, R., Norris, P., & Ronald, I. (2003). Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world. Cambridge University Press.

Runyan, A. S., & Peterson, V. S. (1999). Global gender issues. Westview.

Squires, J. (2007). The new politics of gender equality. Macmillan International Higher Education.

Verloo, M. (2007). Multiple meanings of gender equality: a critical frame analysis of gender policies in Europe. Central European University Press.

Ant Good Topic For Example Border Wall

Border wall

Thesis statement: As the students in American schools are less safe due to increased mass shootings there is a need for strict gun control policy.

Increased mass shootings in American schools makes it a crucial matter for the school authorities. Mass shootings remain one of the serious issues of educational institutes as the number of mass shootings increased significantly in recent years. The issue of mass shootings reflects the need for devising strategies at school level that lead to the solution of problems. Socrates claims that he “clings to the state as a sort of gadfly to a horse that is large and well-bred, but rather sluggish from its size and needing to be aroused.” (Apology, 22). Three main problems highlighted in the paper include access of bullied youth to guns, the psychological conditions of shooters and lack of education regarding the removal of mass shootings. To overcome the issue of mass shootings the schools need to formulate solutions.

Least restrictive strategies result in easy access of youth to guns and firearms. The prevalence of least restrictive gun control laws remains a major threat faced by the schools. Lenient gun policies allow students to keep guns for self-defense that poses challenges for the school authorities to prevent shootings or mishappenings. Increased violence at schools depicts the need for limiting access to guns. Many states in American allow students to carry hidden, loaded guns for self-defense. The states including Kansas, Vermont, South Dakota, and Alaska permit students to carry weapons at institutes. The schools face serious risks due to the shootings taking place at different educational institutes CITATION JAF09 \l 1033 (Fox and Savage). The central cause behind Parkland shootings in Florida was easy to access to guns. Buying the semiautomatic gun in America is easy due to the state's laws. Recent trend depicts, “A 9-year-old former student of the school, was legally able to buy the AR-15 rifle he allegedly used to perpetuate the shooting that left at least 17 dead and 14 injured” CITATION Kat18 \l 1033 (Taylor and Hanbury). The facts reveal that easy access to guns minimizes the role of schools in preventing violence CITATION Kat18 \l 1033 (Taylor and Hanbury).

Bullied students are more likely to engage in gun violence. Increased access of bullied students to guns increases chances of committing violence. Students who encounter bullying experiences build negative attitudes that influence their personalities. Facts indicate, "the count of undergraduates and graduate students murdered at school numbered 51, an average of about 10 per year” CITATION JAF09 \l 1033 (Fox and Savage). Aggression and violence are common personality traits of these students. Psychological profile and ill-mental state of the students pose risks for American schools. Empirical evidence depicts that the majority of the young offenders involved in the mass shootings displays ill-mental state. Disturbed mental conditions of the youth motivate them towards deadly crimes including mass killings CITATION Gre17 \l 1033 (Caskey). Deprivations and connections of students with poor socio-economic background remain a common motivator of crimes. Feelings of aggression and delusion influence the actions of offenders and they are unable to exhibit self-control CITATION Mar121 \l 1033 (Follman, Aronson, and Pan). The paper uncovers the psychological problems encountered by the offenders as they suffer the problem of isolation and social detachment from society. The evidence suggests that social isolation and demographic factors influence the behaviors of young people. CITATION Emm13 \l 1033 (McGinty, Webster, and Barry).

Weaker schools policy reforms increase the threats of mass shootings. American schools encounter the problem of mass shootings due to weakened internal policies that emphasize on maintaining security. Least restrictive schools laws regarding security provide an opportunity to the students in associating themselves with the killings. School and college administration neglects the significance of adopting strict gun laws that result in deteriorated interior defense. The schools ignore their roles in educating students and promoting safety. The negligent role played by the schools and colleges increases risks of mass shootings. Facts also reveal that irrespective of the increased mass shootings the institutions take no actions and relies on state CITATION JAF09 \l 1033 (Fox and Savage). Schools can keep maintaining a record of students that carry concealed weapons. The purpose of the strategy is to restrict access of students to guns that eliminates the opportunity of gun-related violence CITATION Kat18 \l 1033 (Taylor and Hanbury). The school can adopt strict laws focus on presenting warnings to the students that to minimize the role of offensive acts. Through strict punishments such as heavy fines and penalties, the schools can maintain pressures on the gun holders that will prevent them from engaging in criminal acts CITATION Sto18 \l 1033 (Stone).

The counter-argument states that students must be allowed to carry firearms for there safety at district schools where crime rates are high. Without guns, the students will lack the capacity of protecting themselves, and this will be more in favor of violent students. The restrictive policy will only minimize the possibilities of self-defense for the non-violent students. This policy will only support the offenders who can find alternative ways of carrying guns.

Though mass shootings remain one of the critical problems faced by American schools, adoption of effective security measures eliminates the potential risks. The paper identifies the common problems associated with mass shootings including easy access of students to guns, failure of schools to eliminate bullying and weakened the role of educational institutions in providing counseling to the disturbed students. The appropriate solutions for dealing with the problem of mass shootings involve the adoption of strict gun control laws and limiting the access of students to firearms. Education and counseling in school settings emphasize on eliminating bullying that prevents mass shootings.

Work Cited

Caskey, Greg. A dangerous mix: Bullied youth report access to loaded guns more than other youth. 2017. 17 04 2018 <https://theconversation.com/a-dangerous-mix-bullied-youth-report-access-to-loaded-guns-more-than-other-youth-79619>.

Fox, J A, and J Savage. "Mass Murder Goes to College An Examination of Changes on College Campuses Following Virginia Tech." American Behavioral Scientist 52.10 (2009).

Follman, Mark, Gavin Aronsen and Deanna Pan. "A Guide to Mass Shootings in America." Mother Jones (2012).

McGinty, Emma E., Daniel W. Webster, and Colleen L. Barry. "Effects of News Media Messages About Mass Shootings on Attitudes Toward Persons With Serious Mental Illness and Public Support for Gun Control Policies." The American Journal of Psychatry (2013).

Stone, Brianna. Here are the gun laws for all 50 states in the U.S. in 2018. 18 04 2018 <https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/gun-laws-by-state/>.

Taylor, Kate and Mary Hanbury. Here’s how easy it is to legally buy a semiautomatic gun in the US. 2018. 18 04 2018 <http://www.businessinsider.sg/how-to-buy-a-gun-2017-10/>.

Applied Ethics Essay

[Name of the Writer]

[Name of Instructor]

[Subject]

[Date]

Ethics Theory and Lifestyle

Introduction

When one talks about the virtue ethics, then they are the broader them of the theories and perspectives the talk about how important the role of character is for the person and how the virtue is supposed to be there as far as the way moral philosophy is supposed to work. As a matter of fact, it goes beyond the notion of how one should be doing their duty and how these duties are supposed to be bringing good consequences at the point of time (Egels and Hanssonm, 2016). The virtue ethics practitioner is the one that is supposed to ensure that they are acting as a virtuous person during their whole life at any given point of time. Specially, this should reflect on the lifestyle choices that are made by them and how they tend spend their lives. In this paper, it would be seen that an article of clothing such as jeans would be reflecting upon the virtue ethics and how the choice of wearing a denim can reflect upon the moral obligation of the person at a point of time. Aristotle's perspective on ethics was based on the virtue of being human; in other words, virtue ethics. There are two important distinctions between Aristotle's approach to ethics and the other predominant perspectives at the time. First, Aristotle did not consider ethics just a theoretical or philosophical topic to study. To understand ethics, Aristotle argued, you actually have to observe how people behave.

Discussion

Before one goes into the ethical implications of wearing a denim, the key thing that has to be kept in mind is that is the process behind wearing a jean. Now, this comes across as an interesting debate, but most of the times, the lifestyle choices that are made by the person should be reflected upon their ethical perspective. The typical pair of denim goes through following processes (Egels and Hanssonm, 2016).

Weaving: It is a process that starts at the cotton fields, where workers are supposed to pick the cotton that is going to be used to create the denim material. The machines then process the cotton as that cotton is twisted and treaded into the large spools.

Cutting: This is where the large pattern is being mapped out of the denim and then it is being cut using the sharp cutters. It must be noted that anything between 20 to 200 layers of the denim can be cut at once

Sewing: This is where the pieces are sewed together by the workers and the whole process is carried out using the complex machinery. There are variety of stitches that are involved in the whole process.

Washing and drying: Jeans are then washed multiple times to make sure that the color is brought down and the prevention of the indigo dye from bleeding is made possible.

Looking at the whole process, there are many ethical implications of the whole thing and it must be kept in mind that the person who is wearing jeans as the part of their lifestyle is doing something that has questionable ethical implications. There are lot of sustainability concerns as well as the problems regarding the long term social concerns that are there when it comes to wearing jeans and thus effort has to be made to made that if one is wearing these jeans, then they should keep in mind what are going to be the ethical virtue of it (Egels and Hanssonm, 2016).

For instance, the usage of the water is quite extensive from the denim supply chain. There are cotton and the raw components where they are being used at quite at extensive level. As per the statistics that are showed by the WWF, it takes about 20 thousand liters of water to produce 1 kg of cotton. Now, this is lot of water and keeping in mind the state of the water these days, it is quite extravagant spending of a natural resource that goes into the article of clothing (Egels and Hanssonm, 2016). So, this whole thing has to be taken into consideration when a person is wearing a jean. Not only that, the typical pair of denims are being washed at least twice before one is supposed to wear them in order to make sure that the fabric is soften3ed and the dye that goes into the whole process are being removed (MacDonald, 2017).

Not only the usage of the water, there are extensive chemicals that are being used during the course of the production of the denim and effort has to be made to ensure that the cleaner processes are needed to be there that are not using the chemicals that are likely to be harmful to the environment. Now, the global demand of the denims is such that at times, it is important for the companies that are producing denims to make sure that they compromise the safety standards and thus it means that harmful chemicals are going to be used to produce the material. Not only that, there are issues that are witnessed in terms of the way these chemicals are being disposed of, so this is another area of concern for all the stakeholders at the point of time (MacDonald, 2017).

Then comes the fact that how the labor workers that are treated in the factories are being treated at the point of time. There are many people who believe and have seen that the working conditions in the factories in which these people are supposed to work are quite bad and not only that, the wage structure and the compensation and benefits are not available to these workers as most of them are part time workers who have no stake in the whole process during the way these things are being managed at the given point of time. The process of sandblasting is one of the biggest concerns regarding the health of the workers. The risk on their health is much greater if there is an instance where the process is performed without protective equipment. Thus, there are many ethical concerns that are witnessed during the process of manufacturing of the denim and the person who values their ethical wellbeing should not be using denim (Rinaldi et al, 2017). Many of the issues surrounding denim today are due to a lack of transparency. Labor injustices and sustainability issues can often be traced several levels down the supply chain, where many brands lack visibility. With Transparency-One, brands can discover their supply chains from source to store, identify uncertified suppliers, and search for impacted products by commodity or country.

Conclusion

In the hindsight. It can be said that now for a person who has virtue ethics as the part of their belief and system must inculcate these values all the time and if the person is wearing jeans, then they should look at the way these things are being manufactured. There are many questionable practices that are being carried out in the industry. Thus, effort must be made to ensure that the person does not wear ones that are coming from questionable places. Producing more ethical denim requires full knowledge of the supply chain to ensure environmental and social practices are respected by all. In an era where consumers are more mindful of their purchases, supply chain transparency is of utmost importance.

Works Cited

Egels-Zandén, Niklas, and Niklas Hansson. "Supply chain transparency as a consumer or corporate tool: The case of Nudie Jeans Co." Journal of Consumer Policy 39.4 (2016): 377-395.

MacDonald, Kenneth Iain. "Grabbing'Green': Cynical Reason, Instrumental Ethics and the Production of'The Green Economy'." (2017).

Rinaldi, Francesca Romana, and Salvo Testa. The responsible fashion company: integrating ethics and aesthetics in the value chain. Routledge, 2017.

Are All People Treated Equaly

Are all people treated equally?

Analyzing Peter Singers Are all people treated equally?

Introduction

Peter Singer has provided a case based on discrimination among animals on the basis of speciesism. He focuses on how this discrimination serves the purpose of human animals. He has resented a case against the animal suffering, which he believes emanates from their use by human animals. Throughput the article, Singers arguments are based on speciesism, which he presents as the form of racism. He believes that all such discrimination provides the basis for factually underestimating equality among animals. His arguments also incorporate the debates about the consumption of products linked with animals. According to him, the discrimination based on differences in speciesism serves human purposes and nothing else. Considering his arguments, this essay will be based on the presumption that consumption of animal products are not related to the differences in speciesism.

Summary

Singer’s arguments against speciesism

‘Speciesism’ was introduced by Richard Ryder in an essay related to animals and after that widely used by Peter Singer. Speciesism is related to the discrimination between species and is mostly ascribed to mentioning the differences between human animals and non- human animals. Speciesists give less moral deliberation to one species compared to others. The most used to justification they provide is that ‘not each species can serve the purpose of human existence on Earth ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"mRrrtIPk","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Singer, 1974)","plainCitation":"(Singer, 1974)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":284,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/s8f0QVnP/items/GH9L7I36"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/s8f0QVnP/items/GH9L7I36"],"itemData":{"id":284,"type":"article-journal","title":"All animals are equal","container-title":"Philosophic Exchange","page":"6","volume":"5","issue":"1","source":"Google Scholar","author":[{"family":"Singer","given":"Peter"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1974"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Singer, 1974)’. They also substantiate their arguments on the basis that some species have fewer powers and some have more. Also they believe, that considering such aspects, human-animal should make use of them. They quote such reasoning just to prove their arguments and Speciesists view about killing animal for food or killing them just to entertain their needs like leather and wool. These Speciesists argue that it is against morals to consider one animal less superior just for the reason that it has fewer capabilities, therefore its life has less value.

The arguments Singer provide just to substantiate his argument about racism or speciesism among animal lacks sense. For example, in light of each argument Singer has put forward, the human gives weight to their interests. Invalidating this point, one may need to focus over human’s segregation of society and the existing class divide. Human differentiates themselves in races which makes case for racism and some humans even consider other humans as inferior to others, which makes case for speciesism. Such division among humans serves their own benefit and makes much of their tasks easier, but how does this idea relate to animals? Singer has answered this question in some ways. For example, Singer base his argument on the idea of human conception of equality. Human considers females among them inferior and male as superiors, but still it appears as a not a justification for applying it over animals. Or if this division among human is morally or factually right, does it proves Singers’ a justification for the application of moral consideration upon animals.

The idea of equality

Why the idea of equality is not an authentic argument offered by Singer. The concept of equality among humans is based on their capabilities. We see that humans live in a different environment compared to non- humans. There are various facets which can relate the concept of equality among humans, similarly, there are roles and responsibilities upon which human substantiate the concept of equality. Singers’ argument is related to animal capabilities and how they may benefit human civilization. We observe that since ‘race’ or ‘sex’ cannot define the concept of equality, neither in humans and nor among non- humans, therefore it is true that some animals have more capability to help humans and some have not. Singer mentions that ‘a person’s sex is no guide to his or her ability ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"f8ejgDS2","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Singer, 1974)","plainCitation":"(Singer, 1974)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":284,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/s8f0QVnP/items/GH9L7I36"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/s8f0QVnP/items/GH9L7I36"],"itemData":{"id":284,"type":"article-journal","title":"All animals are equal","container-title":"Philosophic Exchange","page":"6","volume":"5","issue":"1","source":"Google Scholar","author":[{"family":"Singer","given":"Peter"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1974"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Singer, 1974)’. Another idea about equality is also misinterpreted, for example, when human says that ‘every human is equal’, it not relate to the general abilities of human living on the face of earth, rather this can be interpreted based on certain conditions.

Singers’ critique over the human’s conception of equality is so far based on morals and upon generic endowments. As the concept of equality among humans is dependent upon specific and not the general conditions, therefore, the concept of equality among animals is also based over such factors. For example, Einarsson argues that some animals may appear suitable in certain environment and some may not ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"OY7MAdvS","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Einarsson, 2003)","plainCitation":"(Einarsson, 2003)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":286,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/s8f0QVnP/items/VAZNPQES"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/s8f0QVnP/items/VAZNPQES"],"itemData":{"id":286,"type":"chapter","title":"All animals are equal but some are cetaceans: conservation and culture conflict","container-title":"Environmentalism","publisher":"Routledge","page":"81–92","source":"Google Scholar","title-short":"All animals are equal but some are cetaceans","author":[{"family":"Einarsson","given":"Niels"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2003"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Einarsson, 2003). Singer has generally considered the difference among animals as serving the interests of humanity, which is not right. It is the environment, human needs and specific human’s thought about that animal which defines its consumption. The discrimination of animals on the notion of equality serves the interests of humanity, which also remain prudent for animal. Singer’s argument ‘the segregation based on racism or speciesism is dangerous if are environmental in origin’ appear narrowly addressing the circumstances. For example, among the animals some can serve humans and some may not, and this all again depends upon the environmental settling they face interaction.

Reflection

Considering Singer’s argument, it is right to opine that animal cruelty remains an issue of the contemporary world. Like many issues surrounding human civilization today, this issue also holds greater significance today. Before Singer, there was negligible literature suggesting animals after, but Singer has very narrowly worked over exploring different aspect of this problem. In his article he has elaborated in greater detail the instincts of many animals, he also elaborates how they use them when it comes with interaction to the non- human animals, but that too remains very thin in describing the relation of human and animals. I believe that since human and animals are the living creatures of this planet earth, but the difference naturally defined must be respected. For example, there happen to be many incidences where humans make use of animals to get their aims or to get their work done. It is prudent that if humans make use of them and in return feeds them or offer any other substantial thing.

But when it comes to morals or ethics there must be some distinction. Although I agree that each moral aspect and value must be kept alive in treating animals, I believe a safe distance, however, must be maintained. Humans may treat them to behave in a certain manner or in a definite way, but at the last hours, they still prefer their animal abilities over what they have been taught unnaturally or by making use of external environment. By referring to Singers’ examples of different animals like rats, owls, dogs, monkeys or cats, it is again right to augment that their cognitive abilities are more self- directing. Human use of these animals is quite a disturbing fact but some of them are beneficiaries of human kindness and affection too.

Lastly, the difference in speciesism is based on certain human-driven norms, which may be false, but they remain imparting. Singers’ arguments throughout the article have remained concerns about the treatment of animals. It is all the way right since it encompasses human manners and his attitude with animals, but different in species, however, effects the use of animal products. Human tends to build relations with animals of affectionate nature which generally defines human interaction with animals.

Argument

Mina Fadeel

Professor

Philosophy 100

26 February 2019

Political Argument: Gun Control in American Campuses Today

In the U.S., the issue of gun control is a debate rife with controversy and emotion. A rising number of shooting incidents, in particular in educational institutes, have led growing concerns and have made it a leading public policy debate in which public and politicians alike remain divided. The debate sparked in colleges and institutes of higher education when the state of Texas allowed legally carrying guns, with certain restrictions, in American campuses, that conservatives and liberals remain sharply divided about. Each side has presented its own set of arguments to justify whether carrying weapons into campuses and in general, should be legal or not, which shall be further illustrated in the discussion below.

Today, a growing number of liberal-leaning public and students are of the view that firearms themselves are a source of violence due to their inherently lethal nature. This is further reason why college-aged individuals should not be allowed to carry weapons in campuses because they have a greater tendency to engage in aggressive, irresponsible and impulsive acts such as binge-drinking, fighting, etc. In these cases, it is the availability of lethal weapons that can lead to violence, injury or death resulting from an escalation in the absence of which, it would only remain a common act of aggression. In turn, it affects the safety, well-being, and security of everyone on the campus, creating an atmosphere of fear. Another argument given by liberal-leaning individuals is that allowing weapons on campuses does not create a sufficient deterrence effect that can prevent an incident of gun violence from occurring or reduce their impact. As a result, there are no foreseeable practical benefits to be achieved from carrying guns, since they only create fear and distraction among students CITATION Fir16 \l 1033 (Webster, Donohue, and Klarevas).

Moreover, it is further argued that allowing individuals to carry weapons in educational institutions or places of similar nature create a greater likelihood of a person randomly ‘snapping’ and shooting everyone at sight. Any depressive or impulsive trigger can lead to a situation where many would suffer from the consequences. Furthermore, guns as self-defense are not effective especially in the case of women, who have a greater likelihood to be victims of gun violence from their intimate partners, in general, compared to men. Non-lethal weapons, instead, should be used such as pepper-sprays or Tasers if self-defense is the objective. Likewise, in calling for guns to become illegal in campuses, these individuals are of the view that carrying weapons should only be restricted to professionals who should be especially hired to provide security in campuses. Large-Scale ownership of weapons leaves ordinary law-abiding citizens to be vulnerable and increases the threat of risks for them. Therefore, besides prohibiting any weapons on campuses, certain laws such as mental health laws should be expanded to make the possession of weapons even more difficult. Provisions that allow family members and associated to report or confiscate weapons from individual owners should be enacted to prevent irresponsible individuals from contemplating harm to themselves or others. Furthermore, only handguns should be allowed in extreme circumstances to be used or sold in order to reduce potential lethality and ability to create a massacre-like situation.

In contrast, the conservative position is completely opposite and favors the carrying of weapons and guns in and out of campuses as a means to deter acts of gun violence and provide a sense of safety and security to individuals. The 2nd amendment is frequently brought up to argue that no laws or authorities have the right to bar a citizen from carrying weapons. Using the argument from the constitutional provision, further arguments that relate to the physical safety and deterrence value of weapons are presented. For instance, firearms provide a sense of safety and assurance to those concerned about burglary, theft, or similar crimes from being perpetrated against them. The value of weapons to provide a deep sense of security, along with the self-defense argument is used to strengthen the call for allowing weapons on campuses. Conservative students argue that they feel vulnerable and would be left with inadequate protection if they are barred from carrying weapons. A 2005 poll suggested that the sense of assurance regarding personal safety which stems from carrying weapons is the primary reason why people prefer legislation allowing weapons to be carried in public places CITATION Fla15 \l 1033 (Flapping).

Moreover, some of the liberal assertions regarding deterrence and lack of value are counter-argued using evidence from reports which suggest that allowing concealed carry of weapons in certain states led to a significant reduction in murders, aggravated assaults, and robberies, with nearly an 8.5% difference. Likewise, in those states where there are less restrictive laws on gun control have a significantly lower number of homicides, reported murders, and incidences of gun violence, which points to the safety and deterrence value provided by guns CITATION Mau07 \l 1033 (Mauser). Therefore, besides the constitutional rights to carry weapons for self-defense that are inviolable, there is a case for allowing weapons since a basic need to feel safe and protected exists among humans, in which guns help them feel empowered to protect themselves and their families from harmful incidents. The conservative side also advocates that besides the deterrence value of weapons, responsible and law-abiding citizens can cut the gun-violence incident short by attacking the perpetrator, thereby reducing their potential to inflict more harm although the latter point remains a matter of disagreement with each side presenting different evidence to back their claims.

Another argument that is made is that if laws strip people of their weapons, in case of any incident they will be defenseless. It is not reasonable to rely on police protection alone in this case. The normal police response is that it transforms the helpless victims into those who discourage violent attacks. The criminal will think before committing any offensive act. In addition, they pick targets who are defenseless. The average police response time is 11 minutes, and it is enough to cause damage to the victim. Research confirmed that 37 incidents of shootings were resolved before the arrival of police (National Threat Assessment Center). In addition, allowing to carry weapon on campus is that most schools have open environments in which it is not feasible to arrange airport-grade security. Inadequate protection in colleges makes the incidents unavoidable and considerable resources are required to arrange defensive measures such as metal detectors. Hence, if responsible teachers and students are allowed to carry guns and weapons, it will definitely fill the security gaps and will provide considerable protection to them. Besides, it can cut the cost and time of any worse incident and killing spree of the offender will also be reduced.

In conclusion, it can be seen that disagreement over whether weapons are a cause or a source of violence remains deep, with a number of ideological, political, and circumstantial and social arguments presented by the liberal and the conservative side to justify their position. The intense nature of the debate often translates to disagreements among policymakers and legislators and consequently prevent practical action to be taken, regardless of whether it favors the liberal-Democrat side or the conservative-Republican side. A number of individuals and policymakers are inclined towards a mediated solution wherein weapons are allowed to be carried but with greater restrictions on the type, nature, extent of the weapon, and to whom the license is to be issued. At the moment, states, as well as colleges and institutions, remain divided, which leads to varying rules in different states and campuses.

Works Cited

BIBLIOGRAPHY Flapping, Brian. Gun demanding: the psychology of why people want firearms. 7 October 2015. 2 January 2019. <https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2015/oct/07/gun-demanding-control-firearms-psychology>.

Mauser, Gary. "Some International Evidence on Gun Bans and Murder Rates." Fraser Forum October 2007: 23-27. <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239579177_Some_International_Evidence_on_Gun_Bans_and_Murder_Rates>.

National Threat Assessment Center. Safe School Initiative: An Interim Report on the Prevention of Targeted Violence in Schools. U. S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center. Washington DC: ERIC, 2000. <https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED447392.pdf>.

Webster, Daniel W., et al. Firearms on College Campuses: Research Evidence and Policy Implications. Baltimore: John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 2016. <https://www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/johns-hopkins-center-for-gun-policy-and-research/_pdfs/GunsOnCampus.pdf>.

Argument Analysis

Argument Analysis

[Name of the Writer]

[Name of the Institution]

Argument Analysis

Argument 1

Claim: It is wrong for a person to report a false claim for certain financial gain from an insurance company.

My Position: I disagree with that claim. I believe it is wrong.

Support For My Position: It is a fact that insurance companies mostly don't accept the claim of their clients (Tennyson, 2008). Most people find their ways to convince them and accept their claims. The insurance companies are doing wrong in certain cases. However it doesn't mean that a person should also do what is considered as wrong and unethical. The false claims are unethical, and a person should avoid being unethical for a small financial gain. The company policy and terms and conditions are disclosed to the client. The client should study all the conditions thoroughly before signing the agreement.

Analysis: This is a deductive argument. Both the premises of the argument use the deductive approach. The claim and evidence are general and not targeted specifically Janes who recorded the false claim for her car damages.

Argument 2

Claim: It is quite logical to invest more in the project that returns more to the organization.

My Position: I believe it is right. I agree with this claim.

Support For My Position: As the population is growing the health-related issues are also soaring with great pace. The hospitals are have invested a huge amount of money on different ICUs such as the adult medical care units (MICU) and neonatal critical care units (NICU) (Capan et al., 2016). If one of the department is earning and its cost-benefit analysis is showing a better number. The hospital administration should invest more in that department. Moreover, the hospitals incur a huge amount of expenses so that the profitable department could contribute to the overall cost of the hospital.

Analysis: This is a deductive argument. Both the premises of the argument were deductive. The focus of my analysis was to discuss the issues of health care units generally. The cost benefits analysis indicated the NICU is earning more for the hospital.

References

Capan, M., Hoover, S., Jackson, E. V., Paul, D., & Locke, R. (2016). Time series analysis for forecasting hospital census: Application to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. Applied clinical informatics, 7(02), 275-289.

Tennyson, S. (2008). Moral, social, and economic dimensions of insurance claims fraud. Social Research, 1181-1204.

Argument Reconstruction

Argument Reconstruction

Your Name

Course Name

Professor’s Name

1st February 2019

Argument Reconstruction

Introduction

“Meno” is recognized as the one well-known philosophical construction formulated by Socrates in an effective manner. It is worthy to mention that this form of paradox is used by the philosopher to build a value argument about the prospect of immortality and its association with the soul. This particular arrangement illustrated by Socrates is important because it effectively set grounds to make better judgements about the idea of Meno paradox. Consideration of this argument further helps to determine the nature of the virtue in its true aspects. The paradox set in the form of Meno paradox come up with the idea that it is impossible for the humans to successfully access the true form of inquiry. The argument about virtue developed by Plato lately addressed by Socrates in the form of his dialogues with the youth of the region. Here the particular focus is to critically develop the argument about Socrates’s view on the entire scenario of Meno paradox.

Discussion

The idea of virtue is critically addressed by Socrates through his conversation with the slave boy, Meno. It reflects the idea of thinking to access the true perspective of the argument. It is important to consider that throughout the response, Meno comes up with the strong interpretation and explanation of his interpretation of the virtue and the response of the human nature concerning the concept of the soul. Socrates set his response when Meno set his paradox about the human perspective of inquiry. Socrates builds his response when it comes to the idea of comparison. This specific paradigm is responded by Socrates by the following words: “That I might make another of you. I know this- which all the famous beauties love being put into comparison.”. By asking different forms of questions to the boy, Socrates successfully constructs the argument that provides an indication about the aspect of learning in case of different individuals. Various questions about learning raised by Socrates to the Meno ultimately helps him to develop and explain his argument about the nature of virtue in the context of the immortality of human beings.

The domain of entire discussion or conversation between Meno and Socrates helps him to describe his main argument about the perspective of soul. The main idea is developed and explained in the particular form as “soul is immortal and often born, having seen what is on earth and what is in the house of Hades.”. Socrates clearly defines that idea that there is nothing in the world that can be learned by the humans in its true form. The example of the truth of lines and space used by Socrates to deliver his argument about the concept of teaching others and the specific way people used to perceive concepts and truths about the nature of the world and learning. He articulates his concept about the true perspective of teaching virtue to others. He associated this concept with the domain of the human nature that plays a central role in the entire development of the feature of mortality.

Conclusion

To conclude the discussion about the Socrates’ argument about Meno paradox, it is important to mention that it helps to understand the argumentative forms of moral values and the approach of learning set by the human beings in various forms. The particular argument of Socrates is the result of the conversation between Meno, a slave boy and Socrates about the nature of learning and humans’ inclination to achieve the desired level of learning. The main idea of the paradox is that it is impossible for a human to adopt the true form of inquiry whereas this idea is rejected by Socrates through the explanation about the immoral perspective of the human soul.

Bibliography

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Rouse, W. H. D., and M. S. Santirocco. Great Dialogues of Plato. Penguin Publishing Group, 2008. https://books.google.com/books?id=WMbS85Ijg2oC.

ARGUMENT RECONSTRUCTIONS

ARGUMENT RECONSTRUCTION

Your Name (First M. Last)

School or Institution Name (University at Place or Town, State)

ARGUMENT RECONSTRUCTION

The argument reconstruction is made on the use of animals for laboratory test. Irrespective of the purpose of the test, the harm that humans give to the animals cannot be justified. Many argue that it is not unjust while others argue that it is unethical to use nonhuman animals. Tom Regan in his research discussed that animals are used in harmful, non-therapeutic medical research. He argued that although humans are used for vivisection after proper ethical appropriation, while non-human animals’ vivisection is not developed by fully satisfied ethics (Regan, 2012). The animals face pain for an experiment or research which would not benefit them. Peter Carruthers argues that humans possess moral standing while nonhuman animals do not have such stands. This is because animals do not have any rights. Therefore there is no violation of rights and ethics during vivisection.

Argument of Tom Regan is true as evidence shows that most of the other arguments are based on the benefits that humans get by vivisection while it is also important to research and argue on the loss or harm of the animals. Comparison between the species can allow people to minimize the harmful impact over the non-human animals due to vivisection. The other argument given by Peter Carruthers is proven through the evidence that animals have emotions and feelings like a human. But the way humans claim moral and rights, animals do not. The animal only needs protection that no unnecessary harm shall be given to them (Carruthers, n.d.).

From the two arguments, it is concluded that non-human animals are used for vivid sections. It is beneficial for the human. But it is not giving any benefits to the animals that are being used for experiments. Also as they possess feelings and emotions, I think moral values and ethics should be appropriately addressed before using them for vivisection. Peter Carruthers has focused on the benefits of humans. Therefore, he concluded his argument in favor of vivisection by ignoring the fact of the life cycle that depends on not only humans but also plants and animals.

References

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Carruthers, P. (n.d.). Against the Moral Standing of Animals.

Regan, T. (2012). Empty Cages: Animal Rights and Vivisection. The MIT Press. Retrieved from http://mitpress.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.7551/mitpress/9780262017060.001.0001/upso-9780262017060-chapter-7

Argumentative Essay

Argumentative Essay

[Name of the Writer]

[Name of the institution]

[Date]

Argumentative Essay

Introduction

We often come across certain situations to which it becomes hard to critically reflect in all aspects before passing judgment on anything. Similar is the case with the presence of mental health patients in the emergency rooms of the hospitals. The United States of America is a country in which it sometimes becomes challenging to live peacefully. People develop different types of mental illnesses due to the situations they are involved in. In the past few decades, more and more people are observed to be getting affected by the mental disorders that are also becoming a threat to their lives e.g. Major depressive disorder, Social anxiety disorder, Bipolar disorder, and many more disorders. Initially, people try to cope up with them but ultimately it becomes difficult for them to even take breathe when the mind is collapsing due to which they immediately rush to hospitals for assistance (Lam, Arora & Menchine, 2016). As the most convenient as well as an accessible place in the hospitals are the emergency rooms so psychiatric patients occupy the entire space in the hopes that a doctor will soon arrive in relieving them the mental pain (Knaak, Mantler & Szeto, 2017). This is getting a very problematic situation as in many states of America, mental health patients are doing this on an almost daily basis. The question of ethics and morality arises here as to whether the hospital emergency departments should be used to treat mental health patients or another platform should be provided for them. This paper critically analyzes all the aspects related to the availability of emergency departments for mental health patients. The paper aims to answer the ethical dilemma linked with this prevalent practice that is evidently occurring in many states. The paper will present arguments systematically from both sides made on this social dilemma that is creating serious ethical issues in hospital management. Hospital emergency departments should not be used to treat mental health patients because this practice might threaten someone else’ life who needs to be treated urgently and is more serious.

Discussion

It is often said that never blame someone for something if you have not walked in their shoe for a mile. This can be easily used to justify the argument that mental health patients should not be blamed for occupying the emergency departments of the hospitals as they are already mentally unstable and needs immediate treatment (Smith, Stocks & Santora, 2015). They cannot stand a queue and wait for their return because during that time they might end up having a nervous breakdown. Emergency departments are used for all the kinds of emergencies which include mental health emergency as well because mental health care is also important.

Many people do not understand the severity of the mental illness and treat the disease to be casual affection or something that can go untreated. This is not the case especially when the individual becomes suicidal and might threaten to take his life if someone does not come to rescue. It's the state's responsibility to take care of all the health patients irrespective of the fact whether they are physical or mental. Hospital management cannot wait for someone to end their lives and then claim that the mental health patient was very serious and needed immediate treatment. This is the extreme point in the case but is not impossible to happen therefore hospital emergency departments should be equally used to treat the mental health patients because they have nowhere to go and seek medical help (Clarke et al.,2014).

Many people find this approach to be unethical on the basis of fairness and equity. It will not be fair with those who are brought to the hospital’s emergency departments in the most critical conditions. These people are more serious and are facing the matter of life and death in survival than the ones who are standing there and screaming from the anxiety attacks. There are more chances of death in those who are physically critically injured than those who are mentally damaged and needs doctor attention in treatment (Zun, 2012). The severity and intensity of real emergency patients cannot be compared with the mental health patients because of the reasons for which emergency departments were built.

The purpose for the creation of emergency departments was that on the spot medical help should be provided to save someone from the death not by panic and anxiety attacks. Mental health patients should not be allowed to visit the emergency departments of the hospitals as they make the situation worse to handle by the doctors and nurses (Nazarin et al.,2017). Although mental health illnesses have severe symptoms that need spontaneous medical treatment if not provided immediately on the spot then the patient can wait and till then might as well feel a little better. This measure cannot be taken with someone who is bleeding severely and is asked to wait because till then it will become too late to save him and the blame will be placed on the doctors who were helpless in the present situation.

Conclusion

Looking at both the aspects of the argument being made on whether to allow treatment to the mental health patients in emergency departments or not, it is concluded that the central approach should be followed. Both the arguments are not the sole solutions to the problem. Mental health patients should not be given permission to be treated in emergency departments as it will be fairly wrong with other patients who truly deserves the urgent treatment there. But, it will also be wrong to give no access to mental health patients anywhere in hospitals. It is not completely their fault if they do not have another alternative to opt for. Hospitals must take their responsibility by providing enough resources for them, make the medical specialists equally available in mental health centers and separate systems for their treatment to help the patients in the middle of his mental health crisis.

References

Clarke, D., Usick, R., Sanderson, A., Giles‐Smith, L., & Baker, J. (2014). Emergency department staff attitudes towards mental health consumers: A literature review and thematic content analysis. International journal of mental health nursing, 23(3), 273-284.

Knaak, S., Mantler, E., & Szeto, A. (2017, March). Mental illness-related stigma in healthcare: Barriers to access and care and evidence-based solutions. In Healthcare management forum (Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 111-116). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.

Lam, C. N., Arora, S., & Menchine, M. (2016). Increased 30-day emergency department revisits among homeless patients with mental health conditions. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 17(5), 607.

Nazarian, D. J., Broder, J. S., Thiessen, M. E., Wilson, M. P., Zun, L. S., & Brown, M. D. (2017). Clinical policy: critical issues in the diagnosis and management of the adult psychiatric patient in the emergency department. Ann Emerg Med, 69(4), 480-98.

Smith, M. W., Stocks, C., & Santora, P. B. (2015). Hospital readmission rates and emergency department visits for mental health and substance abuse conditions. Community mental health journal, 51(2), 190-197.

Zun, L. S. (2012). Pitfalls in the care of the psychiatric patient in the emergency department. The Journal of emergency medicine, 43(5), 829-835.

Argumentative Essay

[Name of the Writer]

[Name of Instructor]

[Subject]

[Date]

Argumentative Essay

I have chosen care ethics as an ethical theory that guides my life the best. My essay will first address how this theory aligns my actions, worldviews, and beliefs. Then, I will explain how am I planning to apply this moral philosophy to my future as a student. I will discuss conflicts with my moral philosophy and the duties of being a student or a new profession that I am going to choose. In the end, my essay will discuss the counterargument of my central claim.

In my opinion, anyone who follows the codes of care ethics in life will radiate the brightest light of positivity and love in the world (Hämäläinen, 2016). Today, everyone knows about ethics and morality but no one pays attention and give importance to its values. People find it hard to go against the perpectives and demands of the society even if they are drastically wrong. Is it really that hard to follow what is right? Or does following the codes of ethics bring no good in one’s life? Why is that people prefer what is okay and statisfactory for the majority? I have witnessed so much wrong around me. I have seen that there are many unethical evils that are horribly encouraged in this society resulting in the shattering, breaking, wounding and shaking the roots of the society. In past, whenever I saw a group of bullies bullying some weak child without any reason, a group of divas or “cool boys” body shaming someone with more weight, someone with fair skin passing racist comments, or someone just being not understood and declared as good enough for a task or job just because her gender is “female.” Seeing that made me question myself why am I silence? How should I act? Do I need to keep up with the majority and just go with the flow? I couldn’t because I know it was wrong and inside my head, there was a constant battle that was pushing me to do something about it. Deep down I knew there is a way and as I grew up, I finally found it.

I learnt that the change does not miraculously happen, it starts from within, and a single person can fight the darkness with the brightness of his/her light. I learnt that all the wrong that is circling around is the outcome of carelessness. How? No one even cares to raise a voice against what is wrong and unethical. It is not that people do not know about what morality and ethics are they just do not pay attention to eradicating the social evil that spreading their venom in the society. I decided I will start it with myself because I was among those people too. I choose to focus on my actions and beliefs. Since then, my perspectives started to change, for instance, before passing anyone any comment I make sure that my words aren’t unkind and offend that individual, and before I throw garbage on the streets or use more plastic, I think how much harm it will do to the environment that I live in. In short, before performing any actions, I think about its consequences, and I make sure that they reflect positivity and kindness.’

I am now seeing the world with different eyes and following this way of life has mended my inside. It feels like my life has a purpose and the best part is, it is an amazing and good one. That is why I am planning to apply this moral philosophy in my future as well, and I don’t think I will be able to leave it in my life. As a student, I will make sure that I do not do anything that can offend or harm my class fellows or the students of the campus. I have made a strong vow that my actions and my words will never support or participate in bullying, racism, sexism, gender discrimination, body shaming, or making fun of anyone because of his/her unique and distinctive style because of his/her religion, culture or personal choice. Other than that, I will make sure that I do not do anything unethical in maintaining my academic record, i.e. I vow that I will not cheat, use shortcuts just to get good grades and steal someone else’s work. Why? I believe it is entirely unfair and a horrible thing to do as it is an open robbery of the rights of those who have done hard work and are smart and genius. I believe I am more than that and my personal efforts will take me to the level that I deserve.

Moreover, I am planning that when I enter in the professional field, I will abide by all the codes of the care ethics and will not even make a single effort to take advantage of something unethical. I believe ethics and morality are significant in every aspect of life and hence, it is impossible for an organisation to run for a long time without them (Adkins, 2017). Social evils like bullying, gender discrimination, sexism, and body shaming exist in the work environment too. If they are not controlled in the early stages, it creates an uncomfortable and suffocating environment for the employees, and it affects the performance of the company seriously. I will make sure that my actions and my words do not participate or support any unethical misconduct and if I see something magical going on, I will find it as the best option to file a complaint against it. For instance, If I observe and witness that someone is bullying, body shaming or harassing someone by any means, I will consider it as my duty to file a complaint against that person to human Resource Mangement of my office, and encourage the victim to speak up for his/her rights.

Furthermore, if someone at the workplace asks me to do something unethical and wrong, even if he/she is my manager, CEO, or a higher authority, I will make sure I will refuse it with all my heart. I know sooner or later the outcome will be drastic and I do not want to be a part of it by any means.

When people neglect the importance of morality and encourage unethical misconduct, it gives rise to terrible consequences that eat away the peace of society. If people start giving codes of ethics importance, things will take a good turn, and it will lead in the transformation of the environment that houses peace, equality, and fairness. It is true that our society needs a lot of improvement and works in accomplishing this success, but it needs to be taken into consideration that change starts from within (Yeager, 2002). Ideas, thoughts, and philosophy of a single person are just like an example of the last match stick remaining. A single match can light up the entire fuel of the society and burn all the negativity and unethical misconducts. A person needs to encourage himself/herself to start participating and applying codes of ethics in practical life. The world would be a happier and heavenly place if the people actually hold on to what is right and virtuous.

Work Cited

Hämäläinen, Nora. Descriptive Ethics: What Does Moral Philosophy Know about Morality?. Springer, 2016.

Adkins, Brent. Guide to Ethics and Moral Philosophy. Edinburgh University Press, 2017.

Yeager, Leland B. Ethics as social science: the moral philosophy of social cooperation. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2002.

Argumentative Essay /Prompt Choose

Name

Instructors’ Name

Course Title and Code

Date

Argumentative Essay

Me too movement is one of the most important, powerful and impactful civil rights movements, which has spread across the globe. The term ‘Me too’ is not new for society, as it has been echoing for the past decade at the least. However, it only became powerful and got recognition in the United States of America during the past two years. Women have always been the subject of sexual abuse, violence, and harassment in each and every field of life. Even the women, who do not work in offices and are enrolled in some educational institute or are just simply housewives, are also harassed at least one times in their lives. The harassers are the male members of the society, who are not punished, because most of the women do not take stand against their abuse as they threaten them to the extent that they are unable to speak for themselves. There have been a number of cases, where young girls and even women were raped and even after public identifying the criminals, they were unable to get them punished by the law. The ‘Me too’ which initially emerged due to the sexual assault allegations of a Hollywood film producer, has now reached to sexual assaulters and harassers in each and every part of the society, irrespective of their powerful status. ‘Me too’ may have been one of the most impactful civil right movements of the modern era, which provides the confidence and support to the women to speak up against their assaulters and get time punished by the law and wants to change contemporary liberal democracy in the United States of America, by enabling the women to become the agents of social change and serve the society.

Sexual violence and abuse against women is not a new phenomenon for society as women have always struggled to get their due rights and recognition in society. Back to the time of slavery, the African American women were sexually harassed and abused as well by their white masters, who then forced them to raise, their illegal children. Most of the African American women did not only face the slavery in the social context but in the sexual context as well, as their white masters had the right to abuse them and were not punished by the society. Apart from the African American women, the white women also had to face the abuse of their husbands or other male members of the white community (Mackinnon, 46). They were not allowed to file the complaints regarding sexual misconduct against any male member of the society, because of the control of the men over different departments of the society in addition to it women were confined to their homes and they had to struggle for years, in order to get their due rights from the society. Seneca Falls convention, suffrage movement are examples of the struggle of the women during the nineteenth and twentieth century (Clair, et al., 4).

Things have changed a lot in the twenty-first century, however, some of them are secretly the same and the women still have to struggle for them. One of the most important is the gender inequality in the workforce. The society is still biased towards the women and they are not allowed equal opportunities of progress and recognition in their workplace. They are not rewarded for their efforts and the dilemma is that they are sexually abused and harassed by their superiors, in order to get their due recognition and support in the workplace. The superiors not only threaten them to stay silent in order to ensure the continuation of their jobs but also some time threaten them that they would kill them or harm their families if they tried to file any complaints against them (Tobias, 13). The things which have changed greatly in the twenty-first century is the silence of the women after facing the abuse or harassment and getting afraid of the threats of their assaulters. The ‘Me too' which started almost a decade ago in the united states of America has now become more impactful and reached other parts of the globe as well, as women of different countries of the world are publicly revealing the dark faces of the assaulters and demanding justice from society (Abrams, 749).

In the United States of America, women have emerged as greater forces of social change, by not getting influenced by the influential status of the men of the society. According to an article by the New York Times, almost two hundred men in the United States of America have lost their jobs and position in the society after being accused of sexual assault and harassment, which was proved in the court. A great number of these men belong to the entertainment industry, as well as news media agency, who have harassed multiple women, in order to stop their progress as well as maximize their benefits. In addition to it, there are a number of other men belonging to the field of politics and even justice system which have abused the women who are now receiving their punishments. The president of the United States of America, Donald Trump is also among the people who have been revealed as sexual abusers by not only one woman but multiple women, however, they were not able to prove anything against him, which is the main reason he is still in power. The women had to face the glass ceiling, as well as harassment at their workplaces, due to their position and competence, as the men were unable to see them progressing to the higher positions than them. However, after the criminal proceedings against hundreds of men, the women are provided with the opportunities of heading the organizations and getting rewarded for their efforts and services (Carlsen et al., 1).

‘Me too’ movement wants to change contemporary liberal democracy in the United States of America by making the criminal justice system strong enough to take action against the wrong men of their society, irrespective of their social or political status. In addition to it, the movement wants to give confidence to the women that whatever happened to them was not due to their fault and they need to speak up about it, in order to get the criminals punished. Another important objective of the movement is to not let the women suffer at their workplaces due to the criminals and women should be promoted to higher ranks, instead of the criminals. According to the movement, the social critique is necessary in order to improve the system and working of the society and to make it clear to the society that things cannot work in that way and need to be dealt properly, in order to ensure the progress of all the sections of the society. Protests and critique can fundamentally change the society by motivating the lawmakers to improve the existing laws to make the new ones to ensure the safety and security of all the citizens, in addition to helping them get their due equal rights of progress in the society (Kreis, 1).

‘Me too' is one of the most impactful civil rights movements of the twenty-first century, which has motivated the women to not feel ashamed but raise their voices against the men who have sexually abused or harassed them. A number of prominent personalities from the entertainment, as well as new media agencies of the United States of America, have been identified as harassers and are now facing the charges of their actions, while some of them are still roaming free in the society. The movement wants to change the liberal democracy of the United States of America by introducing and implementing the laws which would assure the safety of the women and the punishment of the criminals.

Works Cited

Abrams, Jamie R. "The# MeToo movement: An invitation for a feminist critique of rape crisis framing." U. Rich. L. Rev. 52 (2017): 749.

Carlsen, A., et al. "MeToo brought down 201 powerful men. Nearly half of their replacements are women." New York Times (2018).

Clair, Robin Patric, et al. "# MeToo, sexual harassment: an article, a forum, and a dream for the future." Journal of Applied Communication Research (2019): 1-19.

Kreis, Anthony Michael. "Defensive Glass Ceilings." George Washington Law Review 88 (2019).

Mackinnon, Catharine. "Rape: On coercion and consent." Writing on the body: Female embodiment and feminist theory(1997): 42-58.

Tobias, Sheila. Faces of feminism: An activist's reflections on the women's movement. Routledge, 2018.

Argumentative Essay/ Prompt

Name of Student

Name of Professor

Name of Class

Day Month Year

Argumentative Essay

The French Revolution assumes a critical role in the historical context. Initiated in 1789 until 1799, it was moderately successful in achieving the objectives for the middle and lower class of France. These revolutionists nourished the primary goal to acquire strength for the Third Estate, break the absolutism of the monarchy and topple the aristocracy, establish a constitution to confine the authority of the upper class in making critical decisions and sanctioning prerogative to the lower class to exercise freedom. At the beginning of the French Revolution, the upper class cultivated the dominant power within the state but the lower class advanced to raise a revolt against them. The French Revolution succeeded top obtain immense power for the lower class, promulgating a constitution, restricting the hegemony of monarchy and offering the third Estate significant control over the population of France.

To begin, the French Revolution was successful to harness control and power for the Third Estate. At the beginning of the revolution, the common French communities collaborated to pursue mutual goals. In essence, the Third Estate represented a lower, working and middle class in the state. In 1789, a mob of persecuted French community stormed the Bastille which was the largest prison of French populated by the lower class. The event urged King Louis to act and maintain authority over the lower class. The third estate, thus, acquired power in the government as manifested in the acceptance of the constitution which minimized the authority cherished by the aristocracy. It is an explicit illustration of the success of the French Revolution to accomplish the control and power in the government ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"Ar8xkIDT","properties":{"formattedCitation":"({\\i{}NewYork_10_FrenchRevolution.Pdf})","plainCitation":"(NewYork_10_FrenchRevolution.Pdf)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":13,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/yvjivw9i/items/U6K6XHCF"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/yvjivw9i/items/U6K6XHCF"],"itemData":{"id":13,"type":"article","title":"NewYork_10_FrenchRevolution.pdf","URL":"https://www.c3teachers.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NewYork_10_FrenchRevolution.pdf","accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",4,22]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (NewYork_10_FrenchRevolution.Pdf).

Besides, the French Revolution potentially manifested in the dispensation of freedom and rights for the people of France. The immense monarch power advanced to collapse as the lower class accomplished privileges and rights that permitted them to dictate their position in the government. By 1972, it was a radical democracy that granted them rule over their population ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"JL4E6U9A","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(\\uc0\\u8220{}History of Liberty\\uc0\\u8221{})","plainCitation":"(“History of Liberty”)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":14,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/yvjivw9i/items/VC7F99NM"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/yvjivw9i/items/VC7F99NM"],"itemData":{"id":14,"type":"post-weblog","title":"History of Liberty: The French Revolution, a Critical Analysis","container-title":"STUDENTS FOR LIBERTY","abstract":"Picture source: Flickr. History of Liberty: The French Revolution, a Critical Analysis “To punish the oppressors of humanity is clemency, to forgive them is barbarity” – Maximilien Robespierre, Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité. The French Revolution The …","URL":"https://www.studentsforliberty.org/2017/01/30/history-of-liberty-the-french-revolution-a-critical-analysis/","title-short":"History of Liberty","language":"en-US","issued":{"date-parts":[["2017",1,30]]},"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",4,22]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (“History of Liberty”). The Constitution of 1971 was primarily promulgated to restrict the influence of the aristocracy and monarchs in their contribution toward the decision making of the government. These laws were incorporated into the government under the supervision of the National Assembly as a success of the revolution to cultivate the freedom and rights for the lower class.

In 1793, the French Revolution witnessed success in Vendee when the lower class confronted the royalty of France which attempted to counter-combat the revolt against the French revolutionist. A wide range of the upper-class aristocracy comprising judges, mayors, educationalists, National Guardsmen and priests were the part of making attempts to regain the hegemony over France. The aristocracy was brutally and immediately extinguished as 44,000 troops were sent in a profound attempt to exterminate the feeble revolution comprising inexperienced and unarmed aristocracy ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"50nVGZkM","properties":{"formattedCitation":"({\\i{}List of 10 Major Events of the French Revolution - History Lists})","plainCitation":"(List of 10 Major Events of the French Revolution - History Lists)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":16,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/yvjivw9i/items/2ZS8CYLE"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/yvjivw9i/items/2ZS8CYLE"],"itemData":{"id":16,"type":"webpage","title":"List of 10 Major Events of the French Revolution - History Lists","URL":"https://historylists.org/events/list-of-10-major-events-of-the-french-revolution.html","accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",4,22]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (List of 10 Major Events of the French Revolution - History Lists). Thus, the lower class regained hegemony and the upper class was defeated. The French revolutionists suppressed and demoralized the attempts of aristocrats to preserve the rights of the lower class and enable them to sustain power and freedom.

In addition, the French revolution constituted a law which permitted them to execute people in courts. People who were suspected of treachery against the republic were the target of these proceedings in courts. Consequently, the instances of treason against the republic were reduced to a significant extent and the number of traitors was curbed in France. Moreover, the National Assembly, in 1793, promulgated the Law of Suspects in a victorious attempt to preserve the rights of the commoners in France ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"QyrYkudW","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(kanopiadmin)","plainCitation":"(kanopiadmin)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":18,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/yvjivw9i/items/LD3FUZRJ"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/yvjivw9i/items/LD3FUZRJ"],"itemData":{"id":18,"type":"webpage","title":"What Brought on the French Revolution?","container-title":"Mises Institute","genre":"Text","abstract":"Bad economics and an overextended empire contributed to creating conditions that led to disaster, writes H.A. Scott Trask.","URL":"https://mises.org/library/what-brought-french-revolution","language":"en","author":[{"family":"kanopiadmin","given":""}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2004",4,9]]},"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",4,22]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (kanopiadmin). The law lifted the spirits of the French Revolution immensely as the power and hegemony of the lower class of France.

Furthermore, the French Revolution manifested the accomplishment of goals even after the revolution ended. In 1799, Napoleon introduced his ideas and exercised power. A critical appraisal of the matter reflects various objectives established by Napoleon adhered to the very fundamental principles of the French Revolution. Since the ideas intended to protect the rights and sanction freedom to the lower class, Napoleon’s ideas further extended the motives of the French Revolution. However, these ideas came into existence after the French Revolution had ended. It can be postulated these ideas were generated as a continuity of the spirits emanating from the remnants of the French revolution and thus the revolution assisted the lower community in the form of production of new ideas.

On the contrary, a critical aspect associated with the French revolution was granting freedom to the slaves as the aristocrats refrained to agree with the regulations and blatantly defied the input of the lower class. In 1794, all French colonies abolished slavery which caused several aristocrats to fled the islands and dwell in the states permitting slavery. The venture to grant authority to the lower class utterly failed as the slaves struggled to sustain the power sanctioned to them because of the aristocracy. It is deemed as a failure in the French Revolution in their struggle to grant equal liberty and rights to the lower class. In addition, the French Revolution failed to sanction privilege to the lower class in the dimensions of the economy. For instance, the prices of rice and bread were exceedingly fluctuating. In peasants’ diet, bread was the key element of food and thus the lower class has to suffer inevitably.

Likewise, the French Revolution also struggled to offer freedom and equality among the common population of France. For instance, the National Assembly sentenced approximately 40,000 people to death to curb the counter-revolution and the enemies of the revolution. It created disorder and panic which lasted from 1793 until 1794 ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"RQiacc4q","properties":{"formattedCitation":"({\\i{}Lecture 13: The French Revolution, The Radical Stage, 1792-1794})","plainCitation":"(Lecture 13: The French Revolution, The Radical Stage, 1792-1794)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":20,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/yvjivw9i/items/UKG4GDVK"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/yvjivw9i/items/UKG4GDVK"],"itemData":{"id":20,"type":"webpage","title":"Lecture 13: The French Revolution, The Radical Stage, 1792-1794","URL":"http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/lecture13a.html","accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",4,22]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Lecture 13: The French Revolution, The Radical Stage, 1792-1794). The liberty to the people of France was not granted. The critique of the government caused the lower class to be sentenced to the guillotine. Moreover, it added to the failure of the revolution by preventing the lower class from experiencing equality and freedom after lasting suppression and persecution. The fundamental aspiration to construct a state without hierarchy or class was a failure as the minority of the lower class assumed the power of the rest of the state. However, it never implies the French Revolution was an utter failure. The instances and events discussed above are an explicit illustration of the accomplishment of various goals and objectives of the revolution. The revolution was a success as it gained potential benefits in comparison to the adversities or failures encountered by it.

To conclude, the French Revolution advanced to accomplish a wide range of goals. Their primary purpose was sanctioning rights and power to the lower class of France which was accomplished by them to a significant extent. However, certain failures were also a part of the revolution. The price of food and bread for commoners, equality and freedom for slaves within the French colonies and struggle to attain equal rights for the lower class were some of the failures. The promulgation of laws and confrontation of the aristocratic culture were essentially a manifestation of the French Revolution which further continued after the end of the revolution in Napoleon ideas. To sum up, the French Revolution assisted the lower class to assume an instrumental role in the government and state affairs and thus was successful.

Works Cited

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY “History of Liberty: The French Revolution, a Critical Analysis.” STUDENTS FOR LIBERTY, 30 Jan. 2017, https://www.studentsforliberty.org/2017/01/30/history-of-liberty-the-french-revolution-a-critical-analysis/.

kanopiadmin. “What Brought on the French Revolution?” Mises Institute, 9 Apr. 2004, https://mises.org/library/what-brought-french-revolution.

Lecture 13: The French Revolution, The Radical Stage, 1792-1794. http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/lecture13a.html. Accessed 22 Apr. 2019.

List of 10 Major Events of the French Revolution - History Lists. https://historylists.org/events/list-of-10-major-events-of-the-french-revolution.html. Accessed 22 Apr. 2019.

NewYork_10_FrenchRevolution.Pdf. https://www.c3teachers.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/NewYork_10_FrenchRevolution.pdf. Accessed 22 Apr. 2019.

Aristotle Politics Book 1 Chapter 1

574g bjbjhh . 380ZCCXPB3 n04CCP Name

Professor

Course

Date

Aristotle Politics Book 1 Chapter 1

The passage means that for a region to thrive I ought to have a good number of people representing it on different leadership positions. This is illustrated from the text when the writer talks about having city-state with the highest authority stands better than others that have lesser authorities. From the writers view, he states that different authority positions may seem to be to have little importance. Though each of them plays an important role in the development of the city or are. This is illustrated by the writer when he talks about the different positions like kings, households, statement and others who look after the slaves. Each of these people has different roles to play.

The passage is important in a way that it supports statesmanship. Where statesmanship is having the ability, skills and discernment govern and handle public affairs. With this kind of virtue of leadership, there will be the ability to govern the people irrespective of the number with fairness, equality, and justice. The passage is equally important since it encourages good representation in leadership positions for the people. Will representation, the resources are easily distributed among the people and development is equally brought easily to the people.

The authors political views are that with good representation, there is better development. This is because the closer leadership is brought to the people, the easy it becomes for their views and problems and problems to be heard and are solved quickly and easily. This is because the issues can reach the top of the hierarchy easily. Equally, with good, representation, it becomes easy to solve grassroots problems.

The ideas in the passage relate to the political and social life in a way that. Lets take the example of a country like Kenya. Recently it had to do some census to its people. This was to determine the number of people in the country and afterward they can be able to determine the number of people who will represent the general population. In this country, they usually have elections every five years and in that period each region is given the chance to elect its preferred governor, senator, Member of Parliament, the member of the county assembly and finally the president. After the government has also come in place it appoints different people at the lower level to help in the delivery of service. Thats why in the real sense we are seeing Kenyan in Africa coming up economic wise. And this is best illustrated with the representation that it has.

Surname PAGE MERGEFORMAT 2

@(-.013STUVXZjhUmHnHuhmHnHujhUhhZjhZUhbhWCJOJQJaJhbhbCJOJQJaJhbhWhb )

),-/023WXYZagd dgddagdbdgdb,1h/  s666666666vvvvvvvvv6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666hH66666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666p626FVfv2(6FVfv6FVfv6FVfv6FVfv6FVfv6FVfv8XV 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ OJPJQJ_HmH nH sH tH JJNormaldCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA D

Default Paragraph FontRiR

0Table Normal4 l4a(k (

0No List@0Header

Hd./.0Header Char 0Footer

Hd./.0Footer CharPKContent_Types.xmlN0EH-J@ULTB l,3rJBG7OVa(7IRpgLr85vuQ8CX6NJCFB..YTe55 _g -Yl6NPK6_rels/.relsj0Qv/C/(hO Chvxp_P1H0ORBdJE4bq_6LR70O,En7Lib/SePKkytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlM @w7c(EbCA7K

Y,

e.,H,lxIsQ ,jGW)E 8PKRtheme/theme/theme1.xmlYF/lMBql4F3 iCCiH/6MwFcd

4IsNXp xpop,

we.pC0pm 8MQoDBF1vtp.4IPaQ4qm0qnAy0bfULlRJ3TlNS)a)Cv.xys@oE@)xRe_-4PHI.rm3g--PP

Yu),j-BXRH8@I7E10(2O4kLEzqO2POuz_gx7svnB2,E3p9GQd H

xuv  0F,FKsO3wvfSVbsyX p5veuw 1z@ l,ib

IjZ29LZ15xl.(zmd@23ln-@iDtd6lB63yy@tHjpUyeXry3sFXI

O5YYS.7bdn671.

tn/w/t6PssL.JiN AI)t2Lmx(-ixQCJuWlQyI@

m2DBAR4 wnaQ

W0xBdT/.3-FbYLKK6HhfPQh)GBms_CZys

v@c)h7JicFS.NP

eI Q@cpaAV.9HdHVXAYrApxSL93U5U

NC(pu@d4)t9M4WP5flk_X-CwTB Y,

AoYezxTVOlp

/gTpJ

EG,

AozAryerb/Ch,Eoo.

YgJW____RVW/79AkWjZuk y_Zklc,bUvPK

theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0woo5

6Q

,.aic21hqm@RNdo7gK(MR(.1rJT8VAHubP8g/QAs(LPK-Content_Types.xmlPK-60_rels/.relsPK-kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-Rtheme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-

theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK xml version1.0 encodingUTF-8 standaloneyes

aclrMap xmlnsahttp//schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main bg1lt1 tx1dk1 bg2lt2 tx2dk2 accent1accent1 accent2accent2 accent3accent3 accent4accent4 accent5accent5 accent6accent6 hlinkhlink folHlinkfolHlink/ 222225 ,.58@0( B S ) , - / 0 2 3 V V Y ) , - / 0 2 3 V V Y @ 3 V V f1xRKbZWb ) @ @UnknownG.x Times New Roman5Symbol3..x Arial7.. CalibriABCambria Math1hzgzg0 JHP PxR2xxjeremy omarijeremy omari Oh0  8D

Pdltjeremy omariNormal.dotmjeremy omari1Microsoft Office Word@dN@@Vy .,0hp

 Title  ()-./01236Root Entry FI8Data

1TableWordDocument.SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8,CompObjr F Microsoft Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q

Assay

[Name of Writer]

[Name of Instructor]

[Subject]

[Date]

"Rocks and Ages" is written by Stephen Jay Gould in which he describes his views "NOMA". NOMA stands for non-overlapping magisterial, which means that both science and religion are separate ideas. They are like two separate entities that don't mix, they are like water and oil. He creates the idea of demarcation between these two entities by implying that science is the study of facts while religion is the study of values and morals. Does human's resemblance with apes is because of our common genetic ancestry? And why the structure of our DNA changed? These are questions that come under the umbrella of science. The questions like are we on the same level as bugs or bacteria because we are just an evolution of genetics? And what gives us the right to eliminate other species habitats? These questions are moral and ethical and come under religion ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"WGdazMRm","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Gould and Gould)","plainCitation":"(Gould and Gould)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":88,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/jpfyfVgo/items/27FTHSSX"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/jpfyfVgo/items/27FTHSSX"],"itemData":{"id":88,"type":"book","title":"Rocks of ages","publisher":"Random House","ISBN":"1-4464-8533-1","author":[{"family":"Gould","given":"S. J."},{"family":"Gould","given":"Stephen Jay"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2011"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Gould and Gould).

I do not agree with Jay Gould views that science and religion are separate entities if viewed separately. Science is the study of nature while religion is the study of morals and supernatural. Many religions believe in life after death and it is also scientifically proven that even after death if the body of a human being is practically dead his mind is still active and can sense and feel things. This is an example of science and not just values. Religion does involve itself in science and natural experimentation. Religion thinks of nature in a more instinctive style while science looks at it with analytical style. The best way to evaluate science and religion as entities is by evaluating the religious beliefs of scientists. Which shows that there are conflicts between the two, for example, if science and religion were separate entities it should have held a greater value in many scientists and researchers’ personal life. The case is extremely opposite in reality. A survey among National Academy of Sciences members resulted that 72.2% of scientist don’t believe in the presence of God, 7% recognize themselves as atheists while 20.8% are uncertain ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"Vk33N3f3","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Larson and Witham)","plainCitation":"(Larson and Witham)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":89,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/jpfyfVgo/items/SFFG2KFI"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/jpfyfVgo/items/SFFG2KFI"],"itemData":{"id":89,"type":"article-journal","title":"Leading scientists still reject God","container-title":"Nature","page":"313","volume":"394","issue":"6691","author":[{"family":"Larson","given":"Edward J."},{"family":"Witham","given":"Larry"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1998"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Larson and Witham). The number has increased since then.

Work Cited

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Gould, S. J., and Stephen Jay Gould. Rocks of Ages. Random House, 2011.

Larson, Edward J., and Larry Witham. “Leading Scientists Still Reject God.” Nature, vol. 394, no. 6691, 1998, p. 313.

Assisted Suicide

[Name of the Writer]

[Name of Instructor]

[Subject]

[Date]

Euthanasia

Introduction

The word Euthanasia can be traced back to a Greek origin, meaning “good death”. Euthanasia is defined as a termination of extremely ill people in order to liberate them from illness that is causing unbearable pain. It is significant to note that Euthanasia is usually conducted on a person who is undergoing an incurable condition. It is an undeniable fact that humans much like other living beings try to evade death, taking into account that although death is seen as an unwanted essence, sometimes it is freedom or an alternative to eradicate the slavery of pain. (McGee, et, al. 2018). There are several paradigms associated with Euthanasia, ranging from active to passive death and from voluntary into involuntary and physician-directed death. Euthanasia is an ongoing debate that merges with the edges of ethical, legal, spiritual, social, economic, religious and cultural contexts taking into account that there is an equal number of supporters and opponents for this fact. (De Haas, et, al. 2019). An exegetical analysis reveals any attempt to relieve an entity from pain is an attribute so Euthanasia is a favorable act.

Discussion

Euthanasia, “good death” has been categorized into three main sections. Voluntary Euthanasia refers to Euthanasia conducted in accordance with the conduct of patient. This Euthanasia is legal in many countries such as Luxembourg, Netherland, and Colombia. Non-voluntary Euthanasia is conducted without the consent of patient and it is termed as an illegal act. (De Haas, et, al. 2019). It is restricted in all the countries of the world, however, there are certain conditions in which it is decriminalized such as child Euthanasia. Involuntary Euthanasia is initiated without the consent of patient and it is parallel to murder. These categories are further divided into active and passive Euthanasia. Passive Euthanasia refers to the withholding of common treatments such as antibiotics that are a necessity for continuance of life. While active Euthanasia entails the usage of lethal substances or forces such as the administration of lethal injection with an aim to kill someone. (De Haas, et, al. 2019). Different legal frameworks have been formulated for the validity and invalidity of Euthanasia, highlighting that there are several constitutional reforms that either inhibit or promote this act. The study of euthanasia arises many questions taking into consideration the “lucid issue". It is critical to note that how lucid is a person who is suffering from a severe disease or severe pain every second and in the end decide to end his/ her own life? It infers both pain and emotions in conflict, stressing which of the two is more prominent. (McGee, et, al. 2018).

One of the major arguments infers that Euthanasia negates the universal right to live, however, it is important to note that any individual who has certain degenerative and debilitating condition must be allowed to die in peace. There is nothing adequate other than the idea of peaceful and dignified death rather than a pathetic and painful life. It is important to note that not all the conditions are mitigated by Euthanasia, there are certain devastating and contextual conditions in which Euthanasia is given. The idea of the social spectrum is also prevalent, taking into consideration that people think legalizing Euthanize will place society on a slippery slope. However, an exegetical study infers that social paradigms are formulated on the basis of staunch adherence to human existence and Euthanasia is a paradigm, not determinant. It is a paradigm that can bring ease at the dark edges of society where a number of families are doomed to live in poverty and undesired conditions adhering to the usage of possible resources for facilitating the terminally ill identities. In accordance with “compassion ideology”, it is effective and positive to let a person die in dignity rather than enforced to live when there is no future of life and there is no end to the suffering. (Taqi, et, al. 2019, pp. 226-229).

Euthanasia is more like a support for caregiver’ burden because it is a huge social aspect that cuts through emotional, financial, physical and social realms. The validity of this fact can be traced by the analysis of present situations where lack of financial assistance and very crowded hospitals is one of the major dilemmas. There are few families that could manage to sustain disabled while a number of families spend all possible resources for the sustainability of an illusion that ultimately brings them to devastation. (De Haas, et, al. 2019). One of the paradigms highlights the idea of “refusing care”, taking into account that it is well recognized in law. Refusing care refers to a situation where a patient refuses to get medical treatment that could prolong and sustain life. (Odunuga, et, al. 2019). A common example of this idea is, a person who is suffering from blood cancer may refuse to get any treatment and it is an extension of passive Euthanasia. It is much similar to the idea of mercy killing of deformed babies, asserting it is acceptable to kill someone when there is no way out for an independent and peaceful life.

There is another portrayal that is associated with “burdening”, taking into consideration that there are a number of families in which a patient himself don’t want to become a burden on his family. Euthanasia is a strong and potent way to help that individual by giving them the right to die adhering to dignity. (Odunuga, et, al. 2019). It is important to note every individual in this world has a right to live and this right to life assert self-determination that, every individual can take his/her own decision. The universality of decision making also includes the decision to live or die so it is futile to assert that Euthanasia is an illegal act. It is significant to note that there are several positive aspects associated with Euthanasia as well, taking into consideration that terminally ill people have a golden opportunity to help others by donating their organs. It asserts a philanthropist view that infers that terminally ill people can help the patients who are suffering from the failure of any organs. It is more like the encouragement of the right to live for others who can live a dignified life. (De Haas, et, al. 2019).

There are a number of arguments that are posed for the invalidity of Euthanasia, taking into account that many researchers think not all deaths are painful, so it is a deniable fact that Euthanasia is not suggested under universal conditions, in fact, there are certain circumstances in which Euthanasia is encouraged. One of the strong arguments against Euthanasia assert that Euthanasia conduction is not an always case, the trauma that is experienced by a patient is not physical, taking into account that drugs are not sufficient and ineffective to relieve the emotional pain that is felt by someone. It is assertive that keeping aside the idea of “death as negative connotation”, it is important to note that people only avoid death when they are happy and enjoying life. The case of a terminally ill individual is different because there is a lot of pain and discomfort, they are not able to enjoy their life. (Taqi, et, al. 2019, pp. 226-229).

There is no ideology that asserts a distorted life picture because life is meant to be lived and if a disease does not allow an individual to live then it incorporates emotional breakdown. Besides the pain of disease, the pain of being disabled and treated as abnormal incorporate emotional distress that hampers the life of relatives and other family members as well. In such a case, Euthanasia is more like a necessity because it allows an individual to give up without being emotionally distorted and endure negative expectations. (Odunuga, et, al. 2019).

Conclusion

In a nutshell, it can be asserted that Euthanasia is a two-way picture where perspective formulates the stance of thinking. Euthanasia is a passage of thinking that paves the way for an individual to live in accordance with the rules of a dignified life. Addressing all arguments it can be found that Euthanasia is more like a lifeboat for people who are fed up from their illness and their disability doesn't allow them to live. It is important to note that if Euthanasia is viewed from the paradigms of compassion, utilitarian view and mercy it can be found that human beings do have the right to practice their will and it is a stance of mercy that allows a patient to overcome distress and pain. Euthanasia is a cost-effective way of dealing with dying people taking into account that health resources are scarce. It asserts that that death is not a negative connotation, in fact, it liberates the financial and social burden that distorts the lifestyle of the other family members as well. It would not be wrong to say that the arguments against Euthanasia such as criminal approach and immoral action are more like an illusion because a single paradigm of positivity can negate it and designate Euthanasia as a stance that can provide patients with a positive attitude in certain conditions. It refers to those who don’t want to be a burden on their family and want to end their life because they cannot endure the pain.

Work Cited

De Haas, M., Sue Hignett, and Gyuchan Thomas Jun. "Provoking the debate on euthanasia in dementia with design." (2019).

McGee, Andrew, et al. "Informing the euthanasia debate: Perceptions of Australian politicians." UNSWLJ 41 (2018): 1368.

Odunuga, Sesan Adeolu. "Euthanasia and Suicide. Does Ownership of Life Lead to Right to Die? Still on the debate." (2019).

Taqi, Arshad. "Euthanasia: is it really a bad idea?." Anaesthesia, Pain & Intensive Care (2019): 226-229.

Autonomy

Autonomy

[Name of the Writer]

[Name of the Institution]

Autonomy

Case 4

Answer 1

Physician’s actions can be justified by defining ethics in healthcare, where ethics are termed as the standards of behaviors. These standards show how one should behave in a particular situation, to which a physician is exposed. This case is more like a professional dilemma because the doctors were split between two decisions, either to listen to the patients or do what is the responsibility of any doctor. In light of the ethical framework suggested by Gene, a physician should make the decision that is proposed or verified by a disinterested panel of the colleagues. In accordance with Gene Lackznaick’s golden rules, it is highlighted that the doctors would act in such a way, that the same behavior, the doctors can also expect for themselves. Also, as per the principle of proportionality, Garrote asserts that a single or minor evil can also be permitted either risk or willed if there is a proportionate reason to do it. Under the stance of these observations and theoretical frameworks, it is asserted that the action of the physician is justified ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"xPeXKmmy","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Moss et al., 2020)","plainCitation":"(Moss et al., 2020)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":366,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/MWDKINEC"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/MWDKINEC"],"itemData":{"id":366,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Journal of Hospice & Palliative Nursing","issue":"1","page":"5–11","source":"Google Scholar","title":"On Best Interests: A Case for Clinical Ethics Consultation","title-short":"On Best Interests","volume":"22","author":[{"family":"Moss","given":"Karen O."},{"family":"Guerin","given":"Robert"},{"family":"Dwyer","given":"Olubukunola Mary"},{"family":"Wills","given":"Celia E."},{"family":"Daly","given":"Barbara"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2020"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Moss et al., 2020).

Answer 2

Yes, there are certain things that the physicians could have done so as to facilitate the patient. Firstly, the doctors could have made attempts to manage the pain. In addition, the patients are more concerned with scarring rather than the danger to life so the doctors should have given her proper counseling. This counseling can be in the form of different ways that can help her overcome or remedy the scars, either by plastic surgery or using some medicines. Also, it is highlighted that the doctor could have consulted any of her family members so as to get the consent. Also, psychiatric consultation should have brought good results. Furthermore, the inclusion of courts would have brought positive results ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"7aItuzcv","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Moss et al., 2020)","plainCitation":"(Moss et al., 2020)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":366,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/MWDKINEC"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/MWDKINEC"],"itemData":{"id":366,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Journal of Hospice & Palliative Nursing","issue":"1","page":"5–11","source":"Google Scholar","title":"On Best Interests: A Case for Clinical Ethics Consultation","title-short":"On Best Interests","volume":"22","author":[{"family":"Moss","given":"Karen O."},{"family":"Guerin","given":"Robert"},{"family":"Dwyer","given":"Olubukunola Mary"},{"family":"Wills","given":"Celia E."},{"family":"Daly","given":"Barbara"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2020"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Moss et al., 2020).

Answer 3

No, it is not right to take away someone’s autonomy, however, there are some situations that may permit this, such as, some serious health concerns because of which a do-or-die situation is created. If the patient has mental instability, then autonomy can be shifted, also, when the patient is not having a stable mental condition, autonomy can be represented by the second person. Also, when there is a situation to opt for beneficence, autonomy is superseded taking into account that there are sufficient grounds to promote good and prevent harm to the patient.

In the case of court, the decision of the doctor can be rejected because the doctor's action will be considered as a deviation from the ethical laws ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"QWvYi63G","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Kanofsky, 2020)","plainCitation":"(Kanofsky, 2020)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":368,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/8D7GVZHY"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/8D7GVZHY"],"itemData":{"id":368,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Physician Assistant Clinics","issue":"1","page":"39–48","source":"Google Scholar","title":"Practical Ethical Decision-Making for Physician Assistants","volume":"5","author":[{"family":"Kanofsky","given":"Sharona"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2020"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Kanofsky, 2020).

Answer 4

If I were the healthcare worker, I would include the consent of any of the family members or someone who is close to the patient so that the stance can be justified legally. Also, I would have included social workers to help me make up the decision of the case. Any consultation from the ethics consultation would also have helped a lot. If I would have had a little more time, I would have also passed the case to the courts, to make a legal decision.

Answer 5

Moral judgments are the evaluation and options that are made with respect to some evaluations and opinions in order to analyze if the action is ethically correct or not. Hence, moral judgment is more like a standard of good that helps to justify the essence of ‘badness’ in the scenario or judgment. However, empirical judgment is an indispensable tool that can help to interpret circumstances and help make conclusions. It is more like exact conformity as is learned by the actual status rather than judgment framework ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"d9HIvLUI","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Kanofsky, 2020)","plainCitation":"(Kanofsky, 2020)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":368,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/8D7GVZHY"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/8D7GVZHY"],"itemData":{"id":368,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Physician Assistant Clinics","issue":"1","page":"39–48","source":"Google Scholar","title":"Practical Ethical Decision-Making for Physician Assistants","volume":"5","author":[{"family":"Kanofsky","given":"Sharona"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2020"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Kanofsky, 2020).

Answer 6

Yes, the decision is itself a moral dilemma because of the fact that there is no direction in which the physicians should proceed. On one side, the patient is ignorant towards her health and on the other side, the moral responsibility of the physicians pushes them to have her operated on.

Answer 7

As implication refers to the consequence of particular action or any proposed action, ethical implication refers to the consequences that are parallel to some ethical decision making or attitudes. Here, ethical implications are that of doing the surgery, with an aim to do good to the woman.

Case No 5

Answer 1

In medical connotation, there is no sound significance of “Cao gio”. It is just a treatment that is counted in the collection of one remedy that is used to treat flu-like symptoms. Taking into account the subject case study, the parent has a belief in the gain, by using this remedy, but the case is inverse in the perspective of the child. In fact, the child is harmed which is not acceptable. There are two major dimensions to consider here, firstly, all this treatment is given without the consent of the patient and then this new remedy is more abusive rather than progressive. So, this home remedy is useless, there is no apparent gain from it, keeping cultural respect aside.

Answer 2

The physicians should stop any cultural practice that is bringing harm to the child. This harm refers to permanent damage or serious threat to the health of the child. In this practice, the outcomes can be very serious. In the case of tonsils, the pain would be due to the action of removing something that would be an additional and unwanted growth and there would be permanent relief from having something painful removed. Also, in medical concepts, there are several treatments to the pain as well.

Answer 3

No, the physician should not be concerned about alienating the mother and the other people of the same ethnicity from modern medicine. As a physician, people would not be segregated from their ethnicity, in fact, medical scenarios assert an ethical principle which asserts justice. This justice should be universal without any discrimination of race, culture or socio-economic values. But, if the parents will be open to my suggestion then I will tell them to be careful while imposing and practicing their beliefs on their children because it might be harmful.

Answer 4

It doesn’t sound acceptable that the physician should report the mother. The mother is taking care of her child as she was taught and the child is also well known to the mother. Mothers can feel the pain of their children. Here, in this case, the mother should not be reported, in fact, she should be taught to deal with the child and ensure that the wrong repetitive actions can cause harm to the children. If the practice does not work well for the first time, she should have consulted the doctors. Here, the severity of the case is not as extreme as to be reported ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"N1o3dW60","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Kanofsky, 2020)","plainCitation":"(Kanofsky, 2020)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":368,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/8D7GVZHY"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/8D7GVZHY"],"itemData":{"id":368,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Physician Assistant Clinics","issue":"1","page":"39–48","source":"Google Scholar","title":"Practical Ethical Decision-Making for Physician Assistants","volume":"5","author":[{"family":"Kanofsky","given":"Sharona"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2020"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Kanofsky, 2020).

Answer 5

No, the physicians should not report the mother, because reporting would have been acceptable in the case if the child is abused. He is just harmed, besides also being eligible for speaking or rushing away from the mother if it would be so unpleasant. Then, the mother only needs to be trained about the treatment with the child and with cultural beliefs as well, because if the mother keeps on applying the same treatment, there should be some sort of obviously harmful effect but if the action is not fruitful, it needs to be considered. There are no sound ethical and moral implications that need to be analyzed or counted. The moral case of the student invited attention towards the training of mother regarding how she should treat the child and ethical implications demand that the mother should be stopped from practicing the cultural treatment on the child.

The moral dilemma lies in the fact that cultural practices are very important for an individual to survive, but in the same instance, ethical implications are prominent where a child is hurt because of the “mythical or hunch-based” practices of the mother. It is so, because the child might feel it as abuse and it may incorporate disrespect for the mother due to the improper treatment of the sentiments of the child, which might be traumatic.

Case # 6 (Euthanasia)

Answer 1

No, life is very precious. The stance of allowing someone to decide their fate in terms of life or death is more like degrading the significance of life. In the same way, euthanasia is more like a splash that eradicates worth associated with life. The women should not have the right to make choices regarding life, particularly in the case of ending her life. It is not moral, neither acceptable to opt for death through any such means, it is more like murder. Euthanasia is not an exception in her autonomy, in fact, it is a threat to the significance of human life.

Answer 2

Yes, there is a great deal between the ideas, dying within six hours or dying after that, or in a couple of days. Either she lives of 6 days or a year, ethics should be followed and it never justifies euthanasia. This distinction is drawn on the basis of the idea that there is no question to "miracles” and there is a possibility that her family are too loving to her and she could leave undenied guilt on the edge of the family members if she would be killed by euthanasia.

Answer 3

No, I don’t see it as a right that the other people have to make decisions in place of her. It is a humiliation of the patient’s self-determination that someone is pressurized by the caregivers or family members to opt for death. However, it would be more positive if the caregivers or the family members will be taught to aid women so that she can spend a good life and can spend happy moments with her loved ones. They can also encourage her in a positive way, in contrast to the death impositions by using caregivers because it will cast a negative impact on the mental state of the women as well.

Answer 4

Money is just a resource and it is not at all precious to be compared with a life of someone. Also, life is something divine and money is a worldly thing. Money can be a source to preserve health because people, in fact, everyone earns for a living. However, the idea that legalizing euthanasia will help people is totally false. Firstly, the legalization of euthanasia is in itself a conflict between morality and being scientific. Euthanasia might create conflict for the patients and doctors because if ending life will be too easy, then people will not struggle for it and it might even eradicate the underlying meaning of life. Then, the doctors might get used to their mistakes and it will also make people have dangling faiths and beliefs which might be destructive ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"FYp2IXgg","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Kanofsky, 2020)","plainCitation":"(Kanofsky, 2020)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":368,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/8D7GVZHY"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/6bWeQAmN/items/8D7GVZHY"],"itemData":{"id":368,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Physician Assistant Clinics","issue":"1","page":"39–48","source":"Google Scholar","title":"Practical Ethical Decision-Making for Physician Assistants","volume":"5","author":[{"family":"Kanofsky","given":"Sharona"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2020"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Kanofsky, 2020).

Answer 5

If I were the physician, I would have encouraged the woman to live her life. Pain is the part and parcel of life, at least she can spend the days she has by living happily. Also, there is no dark edges for miracles or scientific innovation that can bring her back to normal life. Passing on to the other doctors will not free me of the ethical obligations.

References

ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Kanofsky, S. (2020). Practical Ethical Decision-Making for Physician Assistants. Physician Assistant Clinics, 5(1), 39–48.

Moss, K. O., Guerin, R., Dwyer, O. M., Wills, C. E., & Daly, B. (2020). On Best Interests: A Case for Clinical Ethics Consultation. Journal of Hospice & Palliative Nursing, 22(1), 5–11.

Bioethics: Human Life Issues

Bioethics: Human Life Issues

[Author’s name]

Bioethics: Human Life Issues

Response to Question 1

The particular statement, “one person’s abnormality is another person’s life” by Alice Dreger comprised of the basic perspectives of normality and abnormality. This particular statement delivered by Dreger to critically define the recent role of medicine field when it comes to the approach of normality. She argued that there is a need to consider the actual perception and the interpretation of various people when it comes to the practical implications of the concepts of normality and abnormality. Undoubtedly, it is vital to examine how different individuals perceive differently concerning to their needs of medical assistance. She further explained that it is complex or almost impossible for society to clearly explain the concept of normality without considering the approach of the main stakeholders. The concern of human intersexuality is used as an example by her to explain the actual implications of the idea of normality successfully. Prevalence of difference in any different form can never be ranked as the abnormality of that particular individual. This argument can apply in case of those women who are dealing with the anatomical sexual variations. In simple words, it can explain that the concept of different according to the standards of the society does not mean any form of abnormality. She further explained that fixed concepts in the form of autonomy about the normalizing eventually cause an increase in different psychological concerns. Normalizing individuals is not the ultimate solution to provide better medical assistance to the people who suffer from any disease. Technological advancement in the field of medicine in the form of prevention and treatment also guides to reconsider the conventional approach of illness or abnormality. The genetic condition of human intersexuality is established by Dreger as an example to question the standard definition of normality. She argued that the prospect of genetic variation should not be used to define it someone’s abnormality.

The issue of societal standards is recognized as the basic stereotype associated with the concept of autonomy. It is critical to consider the approach of autonomy when it comes to defining the perspective of normalizing. It is important to reduce the risk of the improper interpretation of the idea of normalizing. The theoretical foundation of autonomy clearly explains that it is one basic right of every individual to make their choices without any burden when it comes to the attainment of different healthcare services. The opinion of the patients needs to be value to develop better consensus level between all the shareholders. Prevalence of the limits of anatomy is another facet in case of normalization. The perspective of the individual can never ignore in any form in case of offering medical assistance. The defining roles set by the society in case of normalization eventually restrict the practical implications of the concept of autonomy. The limits of autonomy exist when decisions are made by individuals other than the ones who require medical help. The perspective of the parents of the intersexed child can be observed as a significant example. Decisions by parents ultimately restrict the authority of the intersexed children about their life. The prospect of differences also appears in case of decision about the medical treatment concerning the specific standards set by society. This certain concern is further addressed by Alice Dreger by considering the different domains of normalization. She comes up with the opinion that the useful idea of autonomy can only achieve to revisit the standard of normalization set by society. The concept of normality should be recognized by examining the pathological features of the issues. Proper social acceptance of the variation is important to encourage the true perspective of normalization by providing psychological support to the ones who recognized as different.

Response to Question 2

Relationship between the healthcare provider and the patient is recognized as the complex in nature. There is a need for deep consideration by both the shareholders to achieve the positive outcomes in the form of healthcare services. It is crucial to mention that reality is undoubtedly different from the desires as there is evidence of many cases of immense clashes between the approach of healthcare providers and patients. There is a need for a proper understanding of the different possible scenario of the difference of opinion in the case of healthcare services. This form of consideration further helps to handle these kinds of issues in the future successfully. Autonomy is established as the standard to provide appropriate healthcare services to the patients. The approach of autonomy makes it possible for the patients to attain detailed knowledge about all the possibilities in case of the treatment procedure. The model of autonomy also permits them to make their own decisions for healthcare process according to their preferences. It is critical to establish that attainment of autonomy with its true perspective is not possible in all kinds of circumstances. The difference of perspective is the reality of the world that also exist in the case of the relationship between doctors and patients. The difference of the opinion ultimately limits the application of autonomy. It is observed in many cases that the prospect of autonomy greatly clashes with the desired form of the principle of beneficence. Refusal of treatment and maternal-fetal conflicts are recognized as the two major issues that prevail in case of inappropriate consideration of the principle of autonomy. It is vital to assess how the concerns in the form of refusal of treatment and the maternal-fetal issue can cause conflict in the case of the principle of autonomy with the consideration of the principle of beneficence.

Refusal of treatment is identified as the one major cause that increases the conflict between the principle of autonomy and principle of beneficence. The problem of refusal of treatment happened when there is a clash between the treatment approach of the healthcare provider and the concern of the patient. It is one common observation in healthcare practice when patients are inclined to make odd decisions about their health and the overall treatment process. It is observed that patients sometimes not encourage to continue the procedure of treatment. Undoubtedly, it is one difficult situation for physicians to adopt the practical domain of the principle of beneficence. Creating a balance between the desire of the patient and the suitable treatment by the healthcare providers is a complicated approach. The difference of opinion ultimately leads to the conflict between the principle of autonomy and the principle of beneficence adopted by the physicians. The well-known medical case of Dax Cowart is one significant example to understand the issue of refusal of treatment. Detailed consideration of this particular case reveals that Cowart continuously wanted to end his life due to unimaginable pain, but his application was always rejected by his physicians. This specific scenario was one clear case when the approach of refusal of treatment was adopted that primarily conflict with the principle of autonomy. The maternal-fetal scenario is another major prospect when chances of conflict between autonomy and the principle of beneficence are high. The phenomenon of pro-choice evidence makes it possible for the women to settle their decision whether they want to carry the fetus to term or not. The conflict in case of the principle of autonomy and principle of beneficence appears when women utilize their right to abortion. This particular practice causes the contradiction between the basic perspectives of beneficence and fundamental form of autonomy.

Response to Question 3

The ethical approach delivered by Kant is one crucial theoretical domain to understand the ethical foundations of the field of medicine. The Kantian ethical perspective established that human beings need to be considered as the ends instead of the approach as a means to an end. In other words, the Kantian philosophy is illustrated in the form that human beings need to be evaluated by considering their goodwill instead of focusing on the implications of their actions. Kantian point of view can be used to apprehend the ongoing debate of organ transplantation effectively. It is worthy of examining the prospect of organ transplantation in the light of ethical approach developed by Kant. Understanding of the Kantian view can be helpful theoretical domain to evaluate the actual implications of the organ transplantation. The phenomenon of organ transplantation refers to saving one individual life by transplanting the organ of the dead person. The Kantian ethical system also come up with the concern to define the condition of death when it comes to the organ transplantation of the dead person. It is critical to indicate that Kantian's philosophy rejects the idea of organ transplantation, considering the functioning of some organs of the patients. The basic statement set by Kantian ethical domain helps to determine the point of view in case of debate of organ transplantation. It is argued in the form of Kantian’s point of view that human’s body is the individual entity that serves in the form of intrinsic value and should not be used in case of organ transplantation to give benefit to others. A clear explanation of the death condition is necessary to determine the Kantian’s perspective on the issue of organ transplantation. The Kantian’s ethical system have explicit consideration that if a person is still breathing and has a heartbeat, then the practice of organ transplantation can never be used as the option for the sake of saving others.

The theoretical foundation of the Kantian ethical system can also help to examine the concern of assisted reproduction critically. The argument provided by Kantian's moral philosophy reveals that the practices of assisted reproduction, such as in the form of IVF can never be permitted. This form of practice is prohibited according to Kantian’s point of view with the argument that it primarily clashes with the natural phenomenon of reproduction. Intentional production of embryos with the clear aim damage the perspective of individuality. The body parts of human beings are used as the approach to the means to an end which violates the basic argument set by the ethical perspective of Kantian’s moral domain. The basic Kantian’s principle never matches the entire process of reproduction as it only focuses on using humans' organs as the approach to produce more.

It is vital to compare the Kantian point of view with the other approach of ethics to assess the actual positioning of the main argument. The utilitarian approach of ethics is established as another significant theoretical perspective to determine the ethical foundations of organ transplantation and assisted reproduction. It is observed that the ethical perspective of the Utilitarian approach is entirely different from the Kantian’s perspective. The Utilitarian school of thought only focus on the paradigm of consequences as compared to actions. It is established that if the end results are good and create maximum benefits for all the stakeholders, then it is a good perspective to be followed. The idea of organ transplantation is clearly favored by the Utilitarian ethical approach. It is argued that it is one useful approach because it causes enhancing benefit for the maximum individuals. Different reproductive advancement in the form of assisted reproduction is favored by the Utilitarian’s point of view.

Response to Question 4

A slippery slope argument is considered as a consequentialist logical fallacy, according to bioethics. It claims that if some particular action is permitted in society, then it will inevitably promote negative trends of that specific action, which is morally unacceptable. People in favor of slippery slope often argue that permitting something today will eventually lead to a series of ethical decisions in the future. It is notable to mention that decisions are viewed on the basis of their potential beginning of a trend, rather than on their own. In the case of euthanasia, the slippery slope argument demonstrates that legalizing voluntary euthanasia can lead to involuntary euthanasia in the future. People often argue that euthanasia should be an option for patients who are suffering from an incurable disease. It is essential to mention that the idea of "autonomy" and "choice" regarding euthanasia can lead to the true danger of "choice in dying". One of the most prominent arguments against euthanasia is that it might weaken the respect of society regarding the sanctity of life. People will start to consider that the lives of a sick person are worthless as compared to others. However, the factor of self-determination and autonomy are potential arguments that determine the need for euthanasia in a given society. Arguments presented in favor of euthanasia are morally acceptable to some extent as people have the right to get rid of unbearable pain. The critical consideration of these arguments needs to be assessed in order to provide a better understanding of this ethical issue. There is an immense need to determine effective criteria to facilitate patients regarding euthanasia. On the dark side, if euthanasia is legalized in the society, then people will be more likely to avail this option once their pain becomes unbearable. With the passage of time, the concept of autonomy and self-determination will eventually follow the principle of a slippery slope. The value of human life will be degraded, and less consideration will be placed once the practice of euthanasia become a regular part of modern society.

Potential arguments are made through the concept of slippery slope regarding genetics. In the past few decades, major advancements have been made in the field of genetic engineering. Now, genetic engineers are able to modify human species how are less prone to infectious diseases. It is notable to mention that advancements have been made in this field to improve control over the characteristics of offspring. Genetic engineers want to enhance health proportionality among human species so it can reduce their suffering by various diseases. The main arguments made in favor of genetic engineering demonstrate the idea of enhancing human capabilities to defend themselves from various deadly diseases. In the considered scenario of genetics, it is essential to determine the concept of a slippery slope to differentiate various crucial perspectives in an effective manner. Increased autonomy over genetics can have a detrimental impact on the entire society. Eugenics is a movement that emphasizes improving the human race by advocating selective breeding to enhance the capabilities of the human race. The concept of eugenics now forces humans to allow various tests in order to improve the characteristics of human offspring. As it dealt with the improvement of hereditary qualities, it often compels humans to select genetic testing, which can discourage sick people. Genetic engineers should not make a decision on behalf of parents as it can ultimately lead to discrimination in society. It is noteworthy to mention that people should have the autonomy to make a decision on their own regardless of the compelling arguments of genetic engineering.

Response to Question 5

Today, the concept of technology imperative is widely considered to offer better living conditions for human beings. The idea of technology imperative is comprised of the argument that new technologies are unavoidable, and it is essential to use them for the overall development of society. This particular theoretical idea favors the extensive role of technology use in different spheres of life. It is interesting to critically examine whether the using of technologies is the only solution to address different problems successfully or it is the tool used by the high-tech business organizations to maximize their profit levels. The idea of the technological imperative is clearly indicating that now it is important for human beings to use various forms of technologies because it is available and the ultimate instrument to upgrade overall life standard. The advance idea of technology usage considered as the major instrument to create new resources for the overall development of society. It is argued that created things can be used as supporting tools to develop new things to enhance the chances of living for human beings.

It is also important to mention that the popular concept of imperative technologies is used to expand the authority of human beings against the natural prospect of living. This specific concept is utilized to expand the power of human beings in case of enhancing their involvement in the procedures of production. The increasing trend of assisted reproduction is one clear example as this approach is closely linked with the idea of imperative technologies. The practice of cloning is favored by some researchers due to the fact that there is the availability of technology in this manner and it should be utilizing to accelerate the process of production. The utilization of the idea of technological imperative can clearly observe in case of practical implications of xenotransplantation. The facet of technological advancements used by the researchers and medical practitioners to achieve the objective of successful organ transplantation for the sake of saving lives as much as possible. Another argument relevant to the idea of the technological imperative is that ethical concerns can never be ignored when it comes to using technological progressions.

Considering the implications of technological imperative in the case of severely impaired newborns is highly important. Advancement in the biological and medical technology have given rise to the bioethical debate regarding severely impaired newborns and the technological imperative. It is notable to mention that advanced technology has increased human expectation. In the considered case of severely impaired newborns, various questions pop up. Should these impaired infants need to be treated using modern technological imperative or not? Whether these impaired infants are left to suffer from their impairments, or they should be treated to provide them with a comfortable life. Severely impaired newborns often suffer from the hardships of impairments in the past due to limited technology. However, it is important to mention that advanced technology has provided with various potential solutions to improve their health status. It is the birthright of every individual to enjoy good wellbeing in society. Therefore, severely impaired infants need to be treated with advanced technology to improve their life expectancy. Providing the ability to prolong life is morally acceptable in a society as people are willing to see everyone sound and healthy. It is the core responsibility of health practitioners to cure severely impaired infants in order to promote a healthy lifestyle in society. However, it is important to set boundaries for the potential implications of the technological imperative to avoid any detrimental effect. Treatment of these severely impaired infants needs to be done in a manner that they can easily bear the potential treatment.

Bioethics: Human Life Issues

Human Beings as Subjects of Scientific Experimentation and Research in Medicine

Name

University

Human Beings as Subjects of Scientific Experimentation and Research in Medicine

Q2a. Explain what Hans Jonas means by the ‘melioristic goal’.

According to Hans Jonas, one of the necessary tools that drive progress is science. Science, in turn, uses research as one of its necessary tools. And in medical science, one of the necessary tools employed by research is experimentation on human subjects. However, the goal of this research is melioristic i.e. it aims at improving the future CITATION Han761 \l 1033 (Jonas, 1976).

Hans Jonas argues that research in medical science does not aim at preserving the already existing good in society. Since we profit from this existing good, we are obligated to it. As long as the present state is tolerable, striving for improvement (the melioristic goal) is in a way gratuitous. Although our descendants do not have a right to advanced cures for diseases, they definitely have a right to bequeath from us an unplundered planet. However, Jonas argues, we have sinned against this right of our descendants by destroying their inheritance, and in our pursuit of progress, we are destroying it at full blast today.

To justify his stance, Jonas argues that humanity had no claim in advance on any of the great scientists, artists or thinkers who became the drivers of progress. Humanity could not claim a right to the blessing of the deeds of Newton, Michelangelo or St. Francis.

Therefore the melioristic goal of progress does not justify its budgeting in advance. Nor can we consider the reception of its fruits as a due. In fact, the methodical labor aimed at progress may or may not turn out to be good. It must, therefore, be regarded as something similar to grace.

Hans Jonas thinks that melioristic goal is the most inherent in medical science. This goal is not gratuitous for a physician who is committed to curing his patient, and therefore also committed to improving upon the methods to cure. Jonas considers the melioristic goal as gratuitous outside disastrous conditions that are intolerable. A melioristic goal is gratuitous when it is pursued as a social goal in state of affairs that is not intolerable. He still considers it a noble goal.

Therefore, both the gratuitousness and nobility should determine the way in which a patient's self-sacrifice is sought. They should also influence the manner in which a free offer of self-sacrifice is accepted. The foremost condition to observe in this regard is freedom. Surrendering one's body to the researchers for medical experimentation are outside the ambit of the enforceable social contract.

Should such self-sacrifices be considered repayment for enjoying the benefits of progress made in the past? Hans Jonas argues that each one of us are indebted for such benefits not to the society but to the martyrs of the past. The whole society is indebted to them but the society cannot as a matter of right ask me, in particular, to pay the debt in a way it wants. Furthermore, gratitude does not constitute an enforceable social duty. Therefore, any preceding sacrifices in the past should not be used a pressure on any of us to contribute similar sacrifices as a social obligation.

Q2b. How would a utilitarian view the position advanced by Jonas? Why?

A utilitarian would tend to accept the melioristic goal of research in medicine. He would consider the research aimed for the cure of the existing as well as future diseases as something that would result in the greatest good for the greatest number of people CITATION PHI19 \l 1033 (PHIL/RLST 2345 El, 2019). Majority of utilitarians would readily accept it morally justified to subject a patient to experimental research on the ground that a great good would result from the experiment if it succeeded. Utilitarians would justify conducting such research through the greater good even if the research poses risks to the patients themselves.

Jonas takes a Kantian stance and puts the dignity of man above the supposed collective benefits to humanity in the future. Though he considers the melioristic goal noble, he does not consider it sufficient to override human dignity to conduct research of non-therapeutic experimental nature. A Utilitarian, on the other hand, would not consider it principally wrong to ask a patient to participate in such research experimentation that would not bring any therapeutic advantages to him or her.

The focus of a utilitarian is on the greatest good, not individual benefit or dignity. We know that the greatest good has to be defined and accepted for the application of the utilitarian principle. Therefore, in order to accept a utilitarian view, we must first accept that curing the disease is a great collective good- so great that it even outweighs the good of protecting human dignity. Jonas, on the other hand, does not agree to accept that the benefits of scientific experimentation outweigh the risks, especially in cases where there are no benefits for the patients themselves.

There is no moral justification for any action solely on the basis of a positive consequence according to Jonas. A utilitarian, on the other hand, would not consider the autonomy of the patient of paramount importance and would not respect this autonomy when the consequence of experimentation can result in the greatest good i.e. cure. He or she would not consider it morally reprehensible to use a patient solely as a means to the end that is the greatest good of cure.

Although Jonas considers harm to be unacceptable irrespective of its consequences, in a utilitarian or consequentialist approach, it is the outcome of the experimental activity that would determine the question of morality. Therefore, if the net outcome of the experiment is a cure but a patient stands to harm from it, the experiment would be morally justified according to a utilitarian.

Q1c. How would Jonas view the research conducted by aliens in the case of the Alien Abduction? Could a utilitarian give a convincing argument against the alien's research program? In both cases, explain and justify your answer.

Jonas would not approve of the research conducted by aliens. Abduction not only violates the right of self-determination (free consent) of an individual, it also robs him of his dignity. Jonas puts dignity above any potential future benefits. Making strides in medicine at the cost of the dignity of human beings is morally unacceptable for Jonas.

The abduction of human beings and the removal of fetuses from pregnant women to subject them to ectogenesis and genetic research shatter their dignity. To Jonas, it matters little whether they are kept in a clean environment and are supplied well with food and water. It also matters little that the aliens use an anesthetic to perform experiments. What matters is their free consent and dignity. Moreover, killing those subjects who are no more needed again, no matter how painlessly they are killed, blows away the dignity of human beings and their right to live. Just because those aliens are higher species does not mean they have a moral duty to use human whom they consider lower species as a tool to advance themselves. In fact, Jonas would not support such a right for even exploitation of equal species.

The experiments conducted by aliens on humans benefit only the aliens and not humans. It is a melioristic goal chased by aliens towards their own progress and prosperity without any potential benefit for human beings. Jonas does not approve of such melioristic goals at the cost of consent even if the beneficiary is human beings. In this case, a different species is exploiting human beings for their own benefits. Hence, Jonas would consider this self-centric exploitation by aliens morally wrong.

The case study of alien abduction leaves a utilitarian in a difficult position. The aliens are precisely using humans as a means towards an end they deem the greatest good: improvement of the quality of collective life. The only difference is that in this case, the beneficiary is not humanity but aliens. Moreover, a utilitarian himself does not regard the benefit to an individual subject as important when the experimental research can result in greater collective benefit.

However, utilitarians support the use of individual humans as means towards the collective benefit of all humans. In this case, the aliens are not using humans for the collective benefit of humans but for the benefit of themselves. Therefore, utilitarians may consider it morally wrong to exploit humans in such a way that does not benefit humans at any level. This is because utilitarians do not approve of such exploitation even by humans that does not result in the greatest good.

Utilitarians focus on the consequence of an action. In this case, the consequence does not qualify to be the greatest good. Utilitarians might consider it the greatest good if benefits humans as well. They might accept the benefit of aliens. But they would insist that the exploitation of humans for medical research can only be justified if it also benefits human beings along with aliens.

Moreover, utilitarians may object to aliens killing of human beings once they are no more useful. This action of aliens does not result in any positive consequence. Therefore, the killing of useless human beings is not particularly a utilitarian activity.

Although utilitarians can hurl the above arguments to the aliens, these arguments challenge their own stance with regard to the exploitation of species that are inferior to human beings. Just like aliens are exploiting human beings in this case, human beings exploit other inferior species such as animals to their own benefit without any particular benefit to the subject. Therefore, the alien abduction case put utilitarians in a precarious moral position that is not very tenable when defended according to their own yardstick. They would definitely need the help of deontological stance to argue effectively with the aliens.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY Jonas, H. (1976). Philosophical Reflections on Experimenting with Human Subjects.

PHIL/RLST 2345 El. (2019). Section 3: Medical Research. In Bioethics: Human Life Issues.

Bioethics: Human Life Issues

Medical Paternalism and its Refutation

Your Name

University

Medical Paternalism and its Refutation

Q1a. Describe the argument Alan Goldman presents in “The Refutation of Medical Paternalism”.

In "The Refutation of Medical Paternalism" Alan Goldman addresses the question of whether doctors have such authority to make decisions for patients that they would never have as nonprofessionals. First, he delineates the arguments of those who advocate medical paternalism and then provides his refutation. Paternalism is defined as "the overriding or restricting of rights or freedoms of individuals for their own good" CITATION Gol98 \l 1033 (Goldman, 1998). Alan identifies truth-telling and informed consent to treatment as a fundamental issue. He regards the question of making decisions and having access to information of primary interest to the patient himself.

He argues that rights allow people to have control over their own lives and futures. Decisions crucial to a person should be left to be made by the person himself because people are the best judges of their own interests. Their interests are best known to them because their personal values and preferences are known only to them. When others make decisions for someone, they tend to incorporate their own preferences and values. This may hinder the satisfaction for the individual.

Goldman rejects medical paternalism on the ground that it is based on the faulty argument that health and prolonged life are the foremost priorities of the patient. This assumption is faulty. Otherwise, the government should allocate the entire budget to the health sector. Moreover, people engage in taking risks in their lives every now and then. A person might not ascribe as much value to life that is marred by a chronic disease as he would in normal circumstances.

Self-determination carries an independent value, more so in regards to crucial decisions. In medical related issues, the decisions may involve the alternatives of life and death and affect a person's planning to complete major projects. The decisions may have bearing on bodily integrity as well. Everyone wishes to make their own informed decisions and the fulfillment of this wish is extremely important. Overall harm and resentment are far greater when caused by a wrong, though well-meaning, the decision of another person than when caused by one's own decision.

The right of self-determination encompasses the right to be told the truth about one’s health and medical condition. It also includes the right to decide whether or to take treatment on the basis of information provided by the doctor regarding the risks and alternatives.

The duty not to harm should override the duty to provide benefits. Even if the potential benefit of treatment is greater than the risks involved, it cannot be used without the consent of the patient. Therefore, lying to patients about the severity of their illness to avoid depression or distress and subjecting patients to treatment without informing them of the potential risks, no matter how small the risk may be, are unjustified and oppose the principle of self-determination. Lying in such cases is wrong because the person is robbed of his or her right to decide future courses. A person who is not informed fully might not complete some projects which he would have completed otherwise. This makes lying akin to coercing a person to do something he would not otherwise do.

Q1b. Would Goldman approve of Dr. C.’s refusal to disclose full information to Marcia W.? Explain.

Goldman would certainly not approve of Dr. C.’s refusal to disclose full information to Marcia W. She has already shown a great interest in making an informed decision about her further treatment. Goldman would defend her right to self-determination. Dr. C. himself chooses a course for Marcia at the cost of her right to make crucial decisions for herself. So first of all Dr. C has violated her right to such crucial information that has a direct bearing on her future and her decision whether or not to take the treatment.

Goldman would defend her right to know the truth about the risks involved in chemotherapy. Since there is every possibility that she would be among that 10 % who contract leukemia 20 years after chemotherapy, she would be the one, not the doctor, suffering from highly resistant leukemia. Therefore, she has every right to know about a risk that can possibly have far-reaching consequences for her health in the future.

Since the risk involved is grave, even if its possibility is only 10%, it is crucial for Marcia W.’s decision making. Her earlier shown desire that she should be provided with the information required for making an informed decision makes it all the more important that she should be told about the 10% risk. Goldman would argue that hiding this information from her would be akin to coercing her to take the treatment without her will.

She might not be among the 10 percent who contract a form of leukemia that is highly resistant to treatment, but there is a chance, no matter how little, that she might be among the 10 percent. In that case, she would be suffering from a disease that is highly resistant to treatment solely because of someone else's decision.

Goldman would argue that in case she takes up the treatment based on incomplete information and then contracts the said leukemia, the psychological harm to her and the resultant resentment towards the doctor would be far greater than the harm and resented caused by her own decision. Therefore she should be informed about the risks involved in the treatment before subjecting her to it.

Goldman would also highlight that if she is informed about the risk of contracting leukemia after 20 years of chemotherapy, she might plan and complete some important projects in her life beforehand. She may be well prepared for taking the pain and even for death. But without knowing about the possibility of contracting untreatable leukemia, she might miss upon many experiences and might take a course of life she would have never taken had she known about the risk.

Although 50% of patients die within two years of chemotherapy, the prospects of long term lives do exist for the remaining 50%. Likewise, although 10% of that 50 % might get leukemia, the remaining 90% have good prospects. Marcia W. would not have any difficulty in knowing about this positive aspect of the treatment. Therefore, the doctor is wrong in his assumption that divulging the information about risks will rob her of possibility to long term life.

Moreover, the refusal to disclose the information about the risk cannot be justified on the ground that 10% is a small figure. She could still be among that 10 % and if she turns out to be among them, then her life would be totally different from what she would envision in case she knew about the risk. Therefore Goldman would argue that knowing the possibility of leukemia, she could plan and execute some really important projects in her life beforehand. Whether she gets leukemia or not, she could be better prepared for it in the preceding twenty years.

Q1c. Do you think that Dr. C.’s refusal is justified? Why or why not?

I think Dr. C.’s refusal is unjustified. I am aware that it is practically impossible to provide the patient with all the truth because they do not have adequate information related to medical sciences. Therefore they cannot process, understand and digest all the technical details CITATION Mac79 \l 1033 (Lipkin, 1979). However, such information which the patient has the ability to understand and on the basis of which the patient can consequently make rational decisions should be provided to the patient. Providing such information becomes all the more important when the patient has already requested for it in order to make an informed decision about her treatment.

The doctor's assumption that divulging the information about the risk of leukemia in 10% percent of patients will result in a wrong decision on her part is misplaced. It is misplaced because the patient can herself understand the pros and cons of treatment once she is provided with all the information. She already knows that 50% of all patients die within two years of chemotherapy. But she also knows about the better prospects of the chemotherapy i.e. possibility of living a long term life which does exist in the remaining 50% of patients taking chemotherapy. Similarly, she can easily understand that although 10% of surviving 50% might contract leukemia, the prospects for 90% are great. Therefore, she would most probably agree to take the treatment. Since she is already 40 years old and after 20 years she will be 60. Knowing this that chemotherapy can give her these 20 important years, she may become willing to take the therapy and live with untreatable leukemia. Hence the doctor’s assumption that she would not take the treatment is wrong and misplaced.

Whether the 10% risk is higher or lower, knowing it before undertaking the chemotherapy is still very important. As the leukemia is contracted after 20 years, Marcia W can prepare well for the risk beforehand. If she knows about the possible risks, she may plan and execute some crucial projects in her life. In addition, she will be psychologically in a better position to face the situation.

There is no doubt that the harm and frustration would be far greater if she contracts the disease without knowing about it. She might feel stripped of her right to make her own informed decision and therefore her hatred directed towards the doctor will be intense. Therefore, her right to determine a course of action for herself is of paramount importance.

The question of having unnecessary depression and anxiety if she is told about the 10% risk does not arise in the case of Marcia. She is already 40 years old. Undergoing chemotherapy will give her 20 long years of life if she is among the lucky 50%. So even if she contracts leukemia after 20 years of chemotherapy, she would have lived those 20 years pretty well. Keeping in view the prospects of healthy 20 years, she will go for therapy and rationally so. We know that not taking therapy in myeloma is a painful experience. Hence the 10% risk will most probably not deter her or make her depressed.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY Goldman, A. (1998). The Refutation of Medical Paternalism. In A. Goldman, Ethical Issues in Modern Medicine (pp. 59-67). Mountain View, California: Mayfield Publishing Company.

Lipkin, M. (1979). On Telling Patients the Truth.