Categories
Ethics

Use the chapter references for each section.

Please review the enclosed instructions and complete the worksheet. Use the chapter references for each section.

Categories
Ethics

(please note that you need to use theories of ethics, logic, and reasoning, to discuss the opposing argument.

Complete the entire scenario.
2. Fill out the template attached below, ask your professor for details on submission.
3. Compose the last question on the template reflection in a Word document and be sure to address, at a minimum, the following questions:
• Why do you feel the way you do about the issue presented?
• Of the four responses offered in the scenario, which do you think is the most ethical and why?
• Which ethical theory would you use to support your stance? Why does this theory work?
4. Support your conclusions with evidence and specific examples from the textbook, including a minimum of one theory of ethics to defend your stance.
5. Your reflection must be 1-2 pages in length and follow APA formatting and citation guidelines as appropriate, making sure to cite at least two sources, including your ethics textbook.
Dear writer,
Please check the attachment for documents. Please use chapter 10 for a quote from the textbook and the second reference should be from outside sources. From the scenario speaking file between 2 people to answer the template’s questions and write one page of reflection. (please note that you need to use theories of ethics, logic, and reasoning, to discuss the opposing argument. utilitarians, Kantian,or UNOS )
This is a good source to use
UNOS Staff. (2022). Frequently asked questions on organ transplants. United Network of Organ Sharing. Retrieved from https://unos.org/transplant/frequently-asked-questions/
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks

Categories
Ethics

Instructions are detailed on how this assignment should be completed.

PLEASE READ THROUGH THE ATTACHED RUBRIC CAREFULLY FOR PROMPT, PLEASE READ THROUGH THE RUBRIC CRITERIA. INSTRUCTIONS ARE DETAILED ON HOW THIS ASSIGNMENT SHOULD BE COMPLETED.
FOR SPEAKER’S NOTES, PLEASE GIVE DETAILED EXPLANATION BEHIND EACH SLIDE (10 SLIDES IN TOTAL). PLEASE COMPLETE THIS WITHIN THE NUMBERS OF PAGES REQUESTED.

Categories
Ethics

This professor is very strict about forming a proper exegesis for each theorists view, proper citations, including references, grammar and flow.

Instructions are attach along with the reading materials provided in class. This Professor is very strict about forming a proper exegesis for each theorists view, proper citations, including references, grammar and flow. Please be thorough. Thank you!

Categories
Ethics

As a christian leader why is it essential to make decisions using strong analytical data?at least 4 high quality peer-reviewed sources.

Faith Integration Paper: Analytical Data in Decision-MakingFaith Integration Paper: Analytical Data in Decision-Making –
As a Christian leader why is it essential to make decisions using strong analytical data?at least 4 high quality peer-reviewed sources. The Ahmed (2019), and Bartlett (2013) course textbooks are required sources.
include abstract

Categories
Ethics

Based on thousands of past papers i have read, your first sentence is the most likely sentence to have grammatical or stylistic issues, and of all paragraphs, your first one is the most likely to be the least readable.

n a three page paper, no more than 1200 words, no less than 950 words, double spaced, size 12 font, one-inch margins, address the following:
1) Describe one ethical dilemma you struggled with in your life. Put your description in a personal and historical context; in other words, use I statements, and locate yourself within place, time, and relationships. Do not spend more than a page and a half on your description. 50 Points
2) Analyze the dilemma by using theoretical tools provided by the text, handouts, or lecture slides. E.g., Schools of ethics or Lonergan’s operations of consciousness, etc. 50 Points
Helpful Hints:
1. Have a concise introduction, no more than one paragraph, no less than three sentences.
2. Clearly, and early on, state your dilemma in one sentence. E.g., “My ethical dilemma consisted of whether or not I tell my friend Emma (use pseudonyms) that her partner Elijah is cheating on her,” or “My dilemma was whether I leave my insurance information on the parked car I hit or whether I drive off,” or “The moral conflict I experienced was whether I report the incident I witnessed or whether I remain silent.”
3. Do not include any irrelevant information – there is not enough space in this short paper. E.g., if it is the first dilemma above, I don’t need to know about Emma’s relationship with her mother, or where she works, or Elijah’s preference for partying (unless it is relevant).
4. Do not leave out relevant information. 4a. if after your description your reader does not know what actually happened, or the gravity of what happened, then you are not saying enough. (e.g., leaving out what you meant by theft or cheating (taking something trivial or theft of the paycheck from a single mother; holding hands cheating or sexual intercourse cheating?). 4b. if you don’t feel comfortable revealing relevant information, then you probably shouldn’t. I.e., the case is too close and you need to pick another one. to write about.
5. If your dilemma involves a serious crime consider the following before writing your paper. FERPA protects your privacy against inappropriate sharing by faculty and administration. But it does not protect against a subpoena and the like.
6. Since this is YOUR dilemma, you need to carefully state what YOU chose to do and WHY you chose to do it. This will reveal your preferred school of ethics in this instance. E.g., If you worried that Emma could, with continued sexual activity with Elijah who is cheating, acquire an STD, or that Elijah could bring another life into the world causing Emma emotional and financial stress, then you are clearly using consequentialism. If you worry that your source for the information is unreliable and that Emma will drop you as a friend if you tell her, then also consequentialism. If, on the other hand, you were angered at the cheating and subsequent lying (to your friend by their partner) and your anger was located in the ideal of promise-keeping, a value for truth-telling, and relational fidelity, then you are clearly using Virtue Ethics. Make sure you explain the theory (Lonergan or Schools) you are drawing on and how it applies in detail.
5. Based on thousands of past papers I have read, your first sentence is the most likely sentence to have grammatical or stylistic issues, and of all paragraphs, your first one is the most likely to be the least readable. Suggestion: write your introductory paragraph LAST.
6. Finally, come up with a concise summary conclusion about whether you would make the same choice knowing what you know now, or something you learned about yourself.

Categories
Ethics

When in rome do as the romans do.

Ruth Macklin is trying to develop a principled middle ground between two extreme views on what to do with cultural beliefs and practices when they conflict with conflict with Western Bioethical beliefs and practices. The two extremes are:
Always accommodate the other culture. The customer is always right. This show respect.
Never accommodate the other culture. People must assimilate. When in Rome do as the Romans do. They are in Rome now.
Macklin’s position is attempting to show that some alleged conflicts are misunderstanding of the Western position (particularly on Informed Consent) and tries to articulate principles which gives guidance to when these practices can be tolerated and accommodated and when they should not be. One or the ways she does this is by discussing an array of cases and teasing out the principles that should apply.
This exercise is a quick rundown of some of those cases (There is more case detail in Macklin’s article) plus a couple that I added .
The Rabbi’s case. Does Jewish Ethics and Autonomy conflict?
‘The rabbi told the story of a man with an abiding fear of cancer that visited his doctor because he was worried about a small growth on his upper lip. The pair had a long-standing physician-patient relationship, and the doctor was aware of the patient’s deep fear of cancer. When the patient paid a return visit following a delay in which the biopsy was examined, he said to the doctor: “It isn’t cancer, is it?” The physician, after a brief hesitation, reassured the patient that he did not have cancer. ….
‘The impression the rabbi sought to convey was that secular bioethics mandates truth telling to patients even when it means inflicting unwanted information. In contrast, the more benevolent Jewish medical ethics allows for withholding diagnostic information and can support telling “white lies” in order to avoid harming the patient.’
[“Although the patient did, indeed, have a form of cancer, it was a tiny growth confined to a small region of the skin, of a type that does not spread and could not have metastasized. The growth could be completely removed and there would be no further consequences.”]
Should the doctor tell the white lie?
There are exceptions to Informed consent. One of them is therapeutic privilege (see the module on Autonomy and Informed consent). Does this case qualify?
The Voodoo case I. Are believers in Voodoo incompetent to give consent?
A medical resident in a New York hospital questioned a patient’s ability to understand the medical treatment he had proposed and doubted whether the patient could grant truly informed consent. The patient, an immigrant from the Caribbean islands, believed in voodoo and sought to employ voodoo rituals in addition to the medical treatment she was receiving. “How can anyone who believes in that stuff be competent to consent to the treatment we offer?” the resident mused
Do you agree that a believer in voodoo is rendered incompetent to consent to treatment because this religion is so contrary to Western rationality?
The Voodoo case II. Who gets to determine treatment?
Two brothers of a Haitian immigrant were conducting a conventional Catholic prayer vigil for their dying brother at his hospital bedside. The patient, suffering from terminal cancer and in extreme pain, had initially been given the pain medication he requested. Sometime later a nurse came in and found the patient alert, awake, and in excruciating pain from being undermedicated. When questioned, another nurse who had been responsible for the patient’s care said that she had not continued to administer the pain medication because the patient’s brothers had forbidden her to do so. Under the influence of the heavy dose of pain medication, the patient had become delirious and mumbled incoherently. The brothers took this as an indication that evil spirits had entered the patient’s body and, according to the voodoo religion of their native culture, unless the spirit was exorcised it would stay with the family forever, and the entire family would suffer bad consequences. The patient manifested the signs of delirium only when he was on the medication, so the brothers asked the nurse to withhold the pain medication, which they believed was responsible for the entry of the evil spirit. The nurse sincerely believed that respect for the family’s religion required her to comply with the patient’s brothers’ request, even if it contradicted the patient’s own expressed wish.
Some cultures have family members make medical decisions for them (usually the Husband or elder member). Western doctrine of Informed consent allows a person to designate a surrogate decision-maker. What should be done in a case like this where there is palpable fear of evil spirits?
Mercury sprinkling to ward off spirits: Santería and public health. Can harm to others override religious practices?
A Santería ritual involves scattering mercury around the household to ward off bad spirits. Mercury is a highly toxic substance that can harm adults and causes grave harm to children. Shops called “botánicas” sell mercury as well as herbs and other potions to Caribbean immigrants who use them in their healing rituals.
Should we make this practice illegal?
Virginity Tests
(Non-Macklin) A young woman is brought to a Doctor and asked to check her for virginity (intact hymen). Doing so may expose the girl to stigmatization, or even put her at risk of being the victim of an honor killing. If the doctor certifies her virginity regardless of the result it may/will break the doctor’s compact of trust and honesty with patients. The tests are scientifically worthless because a non-intact hymen can be caused by many other things other than coitus.
See also: Virginity tests.pdf
Should the medical profession accommodate this practice of virginity tests?
Unwanted touching
(Non-Macklin) A female nurse is working with a foreign male doctor who likes to touch her in ways that Westerners think inappropriate and would not accept from American doctors. This doctor says this is just how doctors in his county express appreciation for their nurses. Do you accommodate the friendly gropes? (Adapted from a case study in International Council of Nurses publication).
How can Navajo give consent if they do not want to hear disclosure of risks?
Informed consent involves telling the risks and benefits of a treatment. But if risks are regarded as bad news, which is not to be spoken, then how is informed consent possible with the Navajo?
What do you do if the Navajo does not want to hear the risks of treatment?
Burning your baby’s belly to cure crying and appetite loss.
Another case vignette describes a Laotian woman from the Mien culture who immigrated to the United States and married a Mien man. When she visited her child’s pediatrician for a routine four-month immunization, the doctor was horrified to see five red and blistered quarter-inch round markings on the child’s abdomen (Case Study: Culture, Healing, and Professional Obligations 1993). The mother explained that she used a traditional Mien “cure” for pain, since she thought the infant was experiencing a rare folk illness among Mien babies characterized by incessant crying and loss of appetite, in addition to other symptoms. The “cure” involves dipping a reed in pork fat, lighting the reed, and passing the burning substance over the skin, raising a blister that “pops like popcorn.” The popping indicates that the illness is not related to spiritual causes; if no blisters appear, then a shaman may have to be summoned to conduct a spiritual ritual for a cure. As many as 11 burns might be needed before the end of the “treatment.” The burns are then covered with a mentholated cream.
Is this a practice that should be tolerated? Or reported to authorities as child abuse or what?

Summary of questions (You can paste and answer. Please us paragraphs)
Summary of questions (You can paste and answer. Please us paragraphs)
The Rabbi’s case. Does Jewish Ethics and Autonomy conflict?
Should the doctor tell the white lie to the patient who is afraid of cancer?
There are exceptions to Informed consent. One of them is therapeutic privilege (see the module on Autonomy and Informed consent). Does this case qualify?
The Voodoo case I. Are believers in Voodoo incompetent to give consent?
Do you agree that a believer in voodoo is rendered incompetent to consent to treatment because this religion is so contrary to Western rationality?
The Voodoo case II. Who gets to determine treatment?
Some cultures have family members make medical decisions for them (usually the Husband or elder member). Western doctrine of Informed consent allows a person to designate a surrogate decision-maker. What should be done in a case like this where there is palpable fear of evil spirits?
Mercury sprinkling to ward off spirits: Santería and public health. Can harm to others override religious practices?
Should we make this practice illegal?
Virginity Tests
Should the medical profession accommodate this practice?
Unwanted touching
Do you accommodate the friendly gropes?
How can Navajo give consent if they do not want to hear disclosure of risks?
What do you do if the Navajo does not want to hear the risks of treatment?
Burning your baby’s belly to cure crying and appetite loss.
Is this a practice that should be tolerated? Or reported to authorities as child abuse or what?
Summary question: Where do you think you stand on the accommodation of these practices?
Accommodate them all or Do not tolerate any of them or some yes some no. If the last do you have some principle(s) that differentiates the acceptable and the unacceptable? Macklin was arguing for the harm principle, prevention of injury to public health and some because they don’t conflict with Western bioethics.

Categories
Ethics

Explain why the topic is important or why readers should care about the issue especially in the health care environment

Introduction
Introduce the ethical issue and the position that you intend to defend
Explain why the topic is important or why readers should care about the issue especially in the health care environment
Thesis statement
The thesis statement is the central position you will be arguing in this research paper. The thesis statement should be clear, concise, and defined.
In your thesis statement, you should take a specific stand on the selected ethical issue. For example, you may construct your thesis as follows: “The use of euthanasia is an immoral choice even when the patient is in constant, extreme pain”, or “It is immoral for patients to choose euthanasia even when suffering constant, extreme pain.”
Explain how your argument will be structured along which you will be arguing in support of your thesis statement
Background
The purpose of the background is to lay the foundation for proving your argument. The background will include the following:
Summary of works being discussed
Definition of key terms-define key terms/concepts
Explanation of universal values and principles in ethical decision making-briefly describe the key universal values and principles that support the ethical issue
Length and APA Requirements: 3 to 4 pages (can exceed the minimum length requirement). Utilize at minimum four appropriate references (i.e. scholarly resources, newspapers, books, PBSC library databases, Google Scholar, etc.) and in-text citations-APA styleLength & APA Requirement
I have attached the prompt to what the paper needs to be about. thank you!!

Categories
Ethics

Apa format.

APA format. ONE SOURCE ONLY. The online textbook will be attached along with instructions for Chapter 3. Main sections for assignment from book are the sections that says “READ”

Categories
Ethics

“call it anything you like.

-Here, you have two questions combined, needing answered in an essay format. Use Times New Roman 12-point font with Top, Bottom, Left and Right side page margins at 1 inch.
– I have included information about Author Mack Lipkin (useful for first question of the essay) and how Paternalism relates to the second question of the essay.
-Do not quote any words. Use your own.
1. Some medical clinics participate in the testing of drugs that are still in the experimental stage. In such situations the Food and Drug Administration stipulates that the physician must explain to the patient the nature of the drug, its possible benefits, and the element of risk in using it. In certain situations, however, physicians may decide not to provide those explanations. The number of their patients may be so large that they feel they cannot spare the time to do so, or their patients may be generally uneducated and therefore likely to be confused by details. Explain whether Lipkin would think either of these reasons justify a physician’s withholding explanation and why or why not. Can you think of any other reason that would justify withholding explanation? Why or why not?
2. “I really don’t understand you,” Dr. Lowell said. “You definitely have cancer of the bladder. We may be able to remove it all surgically, but even if we can’t, chemotherapy or radiation treatments have a good chance of success.”
“I want none of those,” Mark Jenkins said. “I believe that a high-fiber diet and pure, unfiltered water are more likely to help me. I don’t want to be cut or poisoned or burned.”
“You’re crazy,” Dr. Lowell said. “That won’t do anything.”
“I intend to try it. Even if I’m wrong, it’s my life.”
“I won’t let you,” said Dr. Lowell. “Anybody who thinks the way you do about cancer is out of touch with reality. That’s one of the marks of mental illness. And I intend to have you declared mentally incompetent to make decisions about your own welfare. I shall speak to the psychiatrists on our staff and ask the hospital lawyer to arrange for a sanity hearing.”
“That’s fascism!”
“Call it anything you like. But my duty as a physician is to give you the best medical care possible. If that means having you declared mentally incompetent, then so be it.” Dr. Lowell picked up the phone.
Is Dr. Lowell being paternalistic? Explain whether Dworkin and Goldman would think Dr. Lowell is being paternalistic or not and why (and be sure to define paternalism.)
Then tell me your own opinion–Dr. Lowell claims that it is her duty as a physician to provide Mr. Jenkins with the best medical care possible. If this is so, is it her only duty as a physician? Is there some other duty that conflicts with this one? Suppose that Dr. Lowell is successful in getting Mr. Jenkins declared mentally incompetent. Is her action any more or less justified if Mr. Jenkins then fully recovers from his cancer? What if Mr. Jenkins doesn’t recover?