Explain the difference between patient autonomy and customer sovereignty, according to Miller, Brody, and Chung

Login for writer: hidden, available for the assigned writer only
Password for writer: hidden, available for the assigned writer only
Order Description

Bioethics Take Home Final Exam
Take Home Final Exam Date Due: Wednesday, December 17th at 10:00 p.m.

Submission:

You must turn in your exam through the courses Sakai site, under the Assignments tab. Your exam will be run through a plagiarism check. Please see your syllabus for details about late penalties. Exams that are not submitted within six days of the deadline will receive a 0.

Note: It is your responsibility to make sure that you have successfully uploaded your paper prior to deadline. If the document cannot be read by the plagiarism software, you will not receive on time credit until you have reformatted your paper and re-uploaded it. You can check the status of your paper after submission by going to your assignments on the Sakai site and opening your originality report. Only after that report has been generated will you receive credit for having successfully submitted the paper in a format that can be read by the software.

Programming compatibility: Take home exams must be written in a word processing program that can be read by the plagiarism detection software we subscribe to through Sakai. Only submissions that are readable by this software will be graded, so students need to ensure that documents are saved in one of the following format:

Microsoft Word (DOC and DOCX) Corel WordPerfect HTML Adobe PostScript
Plain text (TXT) Rich Text Format (RTF) Portable Document Format (PDF) Hangul (HWP)

You may also want to send me an email with your take home exam attached by the deadline to make sure you get on time credit.
General Requirements:

1. Format: Include a full heading, page numbers, word counts for each answer, and titles for each subsection and question you are answering.

2. Resources and Academic Honesty: You may only use your class texts and class notes while researching and writing your exam. You may not use any other sources including internet websites. You may not collaborate with any other students in any way. Failure to adhere to this requirement will result in you receiving a 0 for the exam.
3. Length: Each section describes the word limits for your answers. You must list your word count for each answer in the exam.
4. Quotes: You may not use any quotations in your take home exam. You may paraphrase the text in your own words, but be sure that you do not ghost plagiarize from the textbook or the slides (where you mirror the sentence structure and language too closely).

Bioethics Take Home Final Exam

Section A: Define and Explain (20 points)

Choose and identify the number for 2 questions, each limited to 250 words. DO NOT ANSWER ALL 3 Answers in this section are graded based on the accuracy, clarity, and completeness of your definitions of key terms based on the texts referred to (without plagiarizing the authors wording), and the depth and originality of your explanations of the reasons authors use to defend their positions.

1. Explain the difference between patient autonomy and customer sovereignty, according to Miller, Brody, and Chung. Why is this difference morally significant in their argument against the permissibility of cosmetic surgery?

2. R.B. Brandt argues that it is possible for suicide to be morally and rationally defensible, under certain conditions. (a) Explain the conditions under which suicide could be rational, (b) briefly describe an example of rational suicide, and then (c) provide two reasons he gives for thinking that a person suffering from depression may not be equipped to judge their situation.
3. John Robertson argues that PGD for the selection of embryos with perfect-pitch should not be ruled out on ethical grounds if certain conditions are met. He describes five general conditions (factors) that must be satisfied for non-medical trait PGD to be ethically permissible, and in each case he argues that perfect-pitch PGD satisfies the conditions of a permissible action. (a) Describe two of these conditions or questions we should ask ourselves, and (b) explain how Robertson argues that PGD for perfect-pitch satisfies those conditions.

Section B: Opposing Side (30 points)

Choose and identify the number for 2 questions, each limited to 300 words. DO NOT ANSWER ALL 3 Answers in this section are partly graded based on the accuracy and clarity of your initial explanation of an authors argument. But the second half of your answer to each question is worth significantly more than the first half. The second half (opposing side) will be graded based on the originality of your argument, the reasons or examples you develop in support of the opposing side, the charitability to all authors that you exhibit in your tone and reasons, and the success or persuasiveness of your proposed opposition.

Note: Avoid I believe or In my opinion statements. These questions are not asking for your personal beliefs or opinions. The opposition you develop might match what you actually believe. But either way, the fact that you believe something is not a good reason in and of itself for others to believe it too. The opposition you develop should aim to persuade someone else of a problem with the position youre targeting. Better reasons, addressing accurate and fair interpretations of the text you are targeting, lead to more persuasive opposing sides.

1. Claudia Mills argues against prescribing Ritalin to children when it is not medically necessary. (a) Briefly explain one of her normative claims in support of her argument and then (b) raise an objection to one of her claims from the opposing view.

2. Robert Wachbroit defends the ethical permissibility of technology to clone human beings. (a) Briefly describe one of his reasons and then (b) develop an objection against his argument (without restating objections by Kass and others that he considers).
Bioethics Take Home Final Exam

3. Kai Nielsen argues that a society that values equality and autonomy for its citizens should strive to efficiently provide for the health needs of everyone equally. (a) Briefly explain how Nielsen derives the moral norm that all people deserve equal access to equally good health care when it comes to their basic health care needs, and then (b) develop an objection against his argument (being careful to first understand Nielsens argument concerning moderate scarcity of resources, efficiency of delivery of services, and liberty of doctors and wealthier patients, if you choose to target those elements).
Section C: Case Studies (50 points, 25 points each)

Choose and identify the number for 2 case studies, and write an essay addressing the tasks described below. Each essay should be between 450-750 words. The instructions for the essays are described in detail below. DO NOT answer the questions in the textbook attached to each case study. While it may be useful to think through those questions as you prepare to write your essay, this assignment is entirely separate from the case study questions in the textbook.

Case studies should be written in paragraph form, double-spaced, and the total length for each must be between 500 and 750 words, with the word count listed at the end of each case study. No outside resources, print or online, may be used in researching or writing case studies.
1. CASE 13 (Page 712-3), Crouch and Tucker 2. CASE 27 (Page 719), Callahan and Rachels 3. CASE 32 (Page 722), Kass (Implications of Prenatal Diagnosis) and Purdy
Part 1 (5 points): Very briefly describe the most morally relevant features of the case in a few sentences. Do not repeat all the details of the case select the most important features and explain why they are important. Then clearly explain the moral dilemma presented by the case. Then identify the people representing two opposing sides of the dilemma in this case (like patients, families, doctors, nurses). In your explanation be clear about how the dilemma relates to ethical concepts defined in this course (like autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, the harm principle, paternalism, ethical relativism, etc use only those concepts applicable to your case).

Part 2 (10 points): Above youll see two authors associated with each case study while they will have different arguments about the case, they may not necessarily disagree in terms of outcomes. In paragraph 2 you should choose one of them and explain in detail how they would propose to resolve the dilemma. You do not have to use the first author listed in this part, and should choose the order based on which you think works better as an opposing view to the other. In this part, your explanation of the first authors view should be backed up with reasons, examples, and any evidence from either the authors essay or the case study itself which you think helps make their position stronger (without overstating it). Do not merely summarize the authors position in general. The task in this paragraph is to apply the author to the case study, explaining what the author would think is most important about the details of the case, and what the people involved should do in concrete terms. You may choose to organize this part into more than one paragraph.

Part 3 (10 points): In paragraph 3 you should develop an opposing view from the perspective of the second author (whichever you did not use in paragraph 2). While it is likely helpful to briefly summarize what you think the second authors view on the case would be. Your task here is to explain how the second author would oppose the reasons given on behalf of the first author. A significant component of
Bioethics Take Home Final Exam

your grade will be based on your ability to demonstrate recognition of what is difficult about the dilemma, so case studies should not be presented in one-sided tones or with asymmetrical weight on one side of the dilemma. You may choose to organize this part into more than one paragraph.

Exam Format Example:

Full name Page Number Instructor Name Class Title Date

Bioethics Second Take Home Exam

Section A.

1. [Your answer here]. Word count: [enter at the end of the answer]

3. [Your answer here]. Word count: [enter at the end of the answer]

Section B.

2. [Your answer here]. Word count: [enter at the end of the answer]

3. [Your answer here]. Word count: [enter at the end of the answer]

Section C.

1. [Your answer here, organized by multiple paragraphs]. Word count: [enter at the end of the answer]

2. [Your answer here, organized by multiple paragraphs]. Word count: [enter at the end of the answer]
Currently 1 writers are viewing this order