Seminar Two

 1. Review of Work Due  2. Course Content  Review of Consequentialism  Non-Consequentialism  Medical Ethics  Doctor-Patient Relationships  Truth-telling and Informed Consent  Behavior Control  The Impact of New Technologies

 Discussion Board  Two threads  1) Are there certain moral absolutes we all should live by? Do emotions have a place in determining what is ethical and what isn’t?  2) What is the best course of action when the patient’s right to confidentiality potentially conflicts with the well being of others?

 Discussion Board: One thread  Research based posting. Abortion is a sensitive topic, so it is important to research this issue from as many perspectives as possible. You are required to research at least three websites.  Your posting should evaluate the websites you are researching, not your own views on the topic.  Your task is to compare the arguments made in the various sources in terms of quality and to see which theories are being used to support the arguments being made.

 Your task is to write a one paragraph to one page position paper in which you argue for a particular position or stance. For instance, if writing about abortion, you may want to argue that it is never permissible, or alternatively, that it is justifiable under certain circumstances.  You should choose a topic from unit three, bioethics.  Your paper should reference key theories and/or concepts we have discussed thus far. For instance: duty-based reasoning, consequentialism, virtue ethics, prima facie rights, etc.  Don’t forget to check your paper against the grading rubric!

 Review of consequentialism  An action is good based on the consequences it produces.  Utilitarianism: actions that benefit the greatest number of people are good.  Egoism: actions that benefit the actor are good.  Altruism: actions that benefit others are good.  Care ethics: actions that promote caring relations with others and that preserve the well being of loved ones are good.

 Intentions are not taken into consideration  Whether or not an action is good may depend on luck. What does this mean in terms of personal responsibility?

 An act is good when it is in accord with one’s duty, regardless of the consequences.  Act non-consequentialism: a view that states that because no two situations are exactly the same, no rules can be made about moral behavior. Each situation must be approached in a unique way.  Intuitionism: An action is right if it is done in accord with one’s own unique intuition about the situation.

 An act is good if it is done in accord with an absolute rule.  Divine Command Ethics  Kant’s duty ethics  Reason alone can tell us right from wrong  The categorical imperative: act as if your rule for action were a universal law.  Ethical rules must be universal and consistent.  Ethical rules should be “reversible.”

 Respect for others: Never treat another person merely as a means, but always as an end.  Humans are autonomous or “self-determining.” To treat another as a means to an end is to ignore this aspect of an individual.  An action has moral worth when it is done for the sake of duty, not when it stems from an emotion.

 Consequences are not considered.  What happens when duties conflict?

 As a way to respond to criticisms of Kant’s approach to ethics, the idea of a prima facie duty was developed.  A prima facie duty is a duty that in general must be obeyed, but can be overridden by particular circumstances.  When prima facie duties conflict, we must act in according to the highest duty.

 Hippocratic Oath: Do no harm; do not disclose private information  Doctor Patient relationship:  Three general approaches:  Paternalism. “The Doctor Knows Best.”  Radical Individualism. “It’s my body and I’ll do what I want.”  The Reciprocal View “Can’t we all just get along?”

 Truth telling and informed Consent  Do patients have the right to know the truth of their condition?  Is it in fact in my best interest to know everything about my condition? Why or why not?  If information would cause me harm, should it be revealed?

 Informed Consent: Who has heard of the Tuskegee Experiment?  Confidentiality: To what degree should medical information be considered private?  For instance, in 2007, Andrew Speaker, a 31 year old lawyer from Atlanta boarded a transatlantic flight while suffering from a drug resistant form of tuberculosis in order to be married. Should he have been prevented from flying altogether, or does he have a right to move about as he pleases? Do the other people on the flight have a right to know about his health?  Is a quarantine unethical? Why or why not?  If a person has a sexually transmitted disease, should health care officials inform the partner(s) of this individual?

Who had a disruptive classmate when growing up at school? What were the effects of this classmate on the learning process? How was the problem resolved?

 Is it appropriate to require the student to use behavior modifying drugs in order to return to school? A consequentialist would say…  A non-consequentialist would say…  Do we know is clearly appropriate and inappropriate behavior?  Who has seen the movie or read the book A Clockwork Orange?  Why are we concerned with behavior control? What value does it conflict with? What values does it help sustain? Is there a way to balance out these interests when they conflict?

 What kind of ethical guidelines should be established concerning new technologies relating to genetics, stem cell research, and organ transplantation?  As technologies change, our ethical codes likewise need to adapt to these changes.  As organ and tissue transplants become more common, what kind of regulations need to be developed? How do I know where these body parts came from? As a recipient, do I have the right to know the details of the person’s life?