Do you believe that you have a “social contract” with the United States, similar to that described by Socrates in the Crito? If you HAVE entered into a social contract with the US, what should you do based on Social Contract Theory?

/in /by

Ethics week 4 discussion post

Your trial was fair – you were represented by an attorney and the jury was not coerced in their decision.
The jury’s guilty verdict was unanimous.
Your representation was fair, i.e., you were represented by a competent attorney (not a first-year law student) who had adequate time and resources to develop your case.
You believe that your attorney truly had your best interest in mind – and perhaps s/he even believed you were not guilty.
You do not need to be concerned with the fact that you may appear to be guilty if you flee.
The prison in which you will be incarcerated is a federal penitentiary, not a federal prison with “white collar criminals.”
Your main discussion prompt: If you had a chance to escape and flee to another country (or remain in hiding in the USA), would you do so?

Consider and discuss the following:

1. Do you believe that you have a “social contract” with the United States, similar to that described by Socrates in the Crito?

2. If you HAVE entered into a social contract with the US, what should you do based on Social Contract Theory?

3. What do you think you actually would do?

If you believe you DO have a social contract with US in #2 but would choose to escape and break that contract, explain why. How would you justify your escape?
4. Would a different punishment warrant different behavior on your part, e.g., would you make the same choice if your prison sentence was only 1 year?

5. Finally, if this case was applied to your sibling or child, what would you counsel him/her to do?

Explain and justify your reasoning for 2 detrimental aspects to your scenario. Basically, what are two detriments of doing the action.

/in /by

Current Event Topic

Describe the topic in enough detail so the rest of the analysis is clear.
Let the reader know in what way this is a current event or current topic, why it is important to us.
You must include your Scenario and Ethical Dilemma as this is what you will be doing the analysis of
Section 2: Beneficial Aspects

Explain and justify your reasoning for 2 beneficial aspects to your scenario. Basically, what are two benefits of doing the action.

You must clearly identify AND JUSTIFY each of these beneficial aspects as follows, so that it is clear to the grader:
A beneficial aspect is XXX (and then explain)
Section 3: Detrimental Aspects

Explain and justify your reasoning for 2 detrimental aspects to your scenario. Basically, what are two detriments of doing the action.

Clearly identify AND JUSTIFY each of these detrimental aspects as follows:
A detrimental aspect is XXX (and then explain)
Section 4: SOCIETAL / ETHICAL ISSUES

Here you will discuss 3 Issues that affect society and/or are ethical issues based on the scenario that you have assigned again based on doing the action.

Use the following formats to clearly identify each item as a societal issue or ethical issue. The grader will NOT try to figure it out, if it is not clearly identified you WILL NOT get credit for it.
Clearly identify AND JUSTIFY each as follows, so that it is clear to the grader. A societal (or ethical) issue is XXX (and then explain)

Can a societal/ Ethical Issue also be a beneficial/detrimental aspect? – be sure it is appropriately explained under each heading.
Section 5: Intended Consequences of the doing the action of the dilemma – identify 3
Remember that intended consequences may be negative or positive.
Identify consequences as primary, secondary or tertiary as well as intended or unintended
An intended [primary/secondary/tertiary] consequence is XXX (and then explain)
Can an intended consequence also be a beneficial/detrimental aspect?  – be sure it is appropriately explained under each heading.
Section 6: Unintended Consequences of doing the action the dilemma – identify 3
Remember that unintended consequences may be negative or positive.
Identify consequences as primary, secondary or tertiary as well as unintended
An unintended [primary/secondary/tertiary] consequence is XXX (and then explain)
Can an unintended consequence also be a beneficial/detrimental aspect?  – be sure it is appropriately explained under each heading.
Citations & Bibliography

Compare and contrast plato’s and Aristotle’s views on the role of art, vis-à-vis character formation. If alive, how would these two thinkers likely assess the character and moral messages of Medea or pulp fiction.

/in /by

Plato’s and Aristotle’s views on the role of Art

Compare and contrast plato’s and Aristotle’s views on the role of art, vis-à-vis character formation. If alive, how would these two thinkers likely assess the character and moral messages of Medea or pulp fiction. Be sure to defend your responses.

In a five paragraph essay, apply ONE ethical theory to decide the moral course of action in the medical case of the premature twins studied in class.

/in /by

Essay

Judge the medical case studied in class during Week 8 in the Discussion Board. In the video, philosophers applied the three major ethical principles you learned in this class: Kant’s Categorical Imperative, Utilitarianism, and Virtue Ethics. In a five paragraph essay, apply ONE ethical theory to decide the moral course of action in the medical case of the premature twins studied in class. Apply the ethical theory in each paragraph to support your arguments throughout the entire essay. Not using the ethical theory results in an automatic zero. Using more than one ethical theory results in an automatic zero.

Constructs a presentation that fully answers and responds to DB question(s) direction(s) in a clear, concise, organized initial post. How COVID-19 Magnified a Public Health Emergency.

/in /by

Podcast: Racial Health Disparities: How COVID-19 Magnified a Public Health Emergency

Constructs a presentation that fully answers and responds to DB question(s) direction(s) in a clear, concise, organized initial post. Content is original and/or correctly paraphrased/synthesized/summarized, cited, accurate, relevant, & provides depth to advance learning. Content is appropriate for the doctoral student audience and is sophisticated and complex, although clearly stated.
Ethical content is described and correctly applied. Texts are used as required and are substantively used—more than a quick/brief reference of isolated material; rather, content demonstrates a thoughtful approach to the readings.
Postings are evidence-based (EB), integrated with assigned reading(s) & incorporate other relevant resources to support all statements of facts, theories, practice standards, experiences, and opinions. Cites additional resources as appropriate and satisfies the number of outside references required for the specific assignment. Evidence of application of newly acquired knowledge from course. Provides a minimum of 3 scholarly published references in addition to the required texts by Fowler and Jonsen et al. Professional/science-evidence based websites may be used as well in addition to databased pubs.

Identify the stakeholders and their obligations. Identify and consider all of the people affected by a decision – the stakeholders. Identify the accounting and auditing issues.

/in /by

Ethical dilemma

1. what is the primary ethical issue in this case?
2. Gather all the facts. Specify the relevant facts, disagreement, and other conflicts situations.
3. Identify the stakeholders and their obligations. Identify and consider all of the people affected by a decision – the stakeholders.
4. Identify the relevant accounting ethics standards involved in the situation. Identify the most ethical values of the accounting profession that should be considered in evaluating the facts and alternative courses of action.
5. identify the operational issues
6. Identify the accounting and auditing issues.
7. List all the possible alternatives that you can or cannot do.
8. compare and weigh the alternatives. Is it legal ( in conformity with Laws PCAOB rules)? is it consistent with professional standards AICPA principles, IMA ethics standards; GAAP, and GAAS? Is it consistent with in-house rules
(firm’s policies and its own code of ethics), is it right?
what are the potential harms and benefits to the stakeholders? is it fair to the stakeholders? Is it consistent with virtue considerations?
9. Decide on a course of action. After evaluating the ethics of the alternatives, select the one that best meets the ethical requirements of the situation.
!0. Reflect on your decision.

Have you or someone you know ever had an experience with challenging online phenomena like trolling, cyber-hate speech, or disinformation campaigns? Who do you think should be responsible for overseeing the web—individuals, online communities, corporations, governments, or international coalitions?

/in /by

The Future of Free Speech,Trolls, Anonymity, and Fake News Online

Choose one of the themes discussed in The Future of Free Speech,Trolls, Anonymity, and Fake News Online and, in a paper of 500 to 750 words (approximately 2 to 3 pages), develop a policy to address the issues raised by your selected theme. Discuss steps that individuals, online communities, scholars, corporations, governments, and/or international coalitions can take to successfully address the issues. Support your analysis with one or more of the ethical frameworks (utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics, social justice and social contract theory). Use properly cited evidence from the Study Materials to support your points.

Video: Center for Strategic and International Studies. (2018, September 10)

After reviewing the Study Materials for this module on free speech, trolls, and disinformation campaigns, consider your own experience online. Have you or someone you know ever had an experience with challenging online phenomena like trolling, cyber-hate speech, or disinformation campaigns? Who do you think should be responsible for overseeing the web—individuals, online communities, corporations, governments, or international coalitions?

Do you think that conscience is the best guide or indicator of moral truth? What was your reaction to this person? How should we respond to people who seem to lack morals and hurt others?

/in /by

Ethics week 3 discussion

All posts should be thoughtful, respectful, and add substantive value to the discussion. One or two sentences is not a substantive response. All posts should be written using full sentences in paragraph form. The use of philosophical concepts is required to earn full points. Please provide both in-text citations and post-text references. Do not bother claiming that you did not provide in-text citations and post-text references because everything came from your head. You are required to include textual evidence for your claims.

Discussion Prompts

Select one of the three prompts below to respond to in your initial post this week. You are encouraged to respond to peers that explored prompts that you did not.

Prompt #1

Has there ever been a time when you (or someone you know) let your conscience be your guide only to end up committing an immoral act? In this case, did you find that you (or someone you know) listened more to your emotional side or rational side when making this decision? (USLO 3.2)

Prompt #2

A doctor is driving down a road late at night. She sees a car in the opposite lane swerve sharply off the road and it crashes. There are no other cars around. Her gut reaction as a physician is to stop to assist the victims. However, she quickly remembers there are no “Good Samaritan laws” on the books in that state to protect her from malpractice lawsuits. Her conscience tells her she is justified in driving on. How would Freud explain the behavior of her conscience in this scenario? Do you believe her conscience was correct? (USLO 3.3)

Prompt #3

Do you think that conscience is the best guide or indicator of moral truth? Share a time when you’ve interacted with someone who seemed to lack a sense of moral sense or conscience. What was your reaction to this person? How should we respond to people who seem to lack morals and hurt others? (USLO 3.1)

Discuss the difference between just and unjust laws as outlined by Dr. King. Use your own words to describe and define just and unjust laws.

/in /by

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s

Dr. King (150 words minimum) – In the Ethics textbook read Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail”. Discuss the difference between just and unjust laws as outlined by Dr. King. Use your own words to describe and define just and unjust laws. Include a quote from the portion of the letter that you determined best characterized just and unjust laws. Provide in-text citation(s), where appropriate.

What is the patient’s medical problem? Has the patient been informed of benefits and risks. Is the problem acute? Chronic? Critical? Reversible? Emergent? recommendations, understood, and given consent? Terminal?

/in /by

Peer review

The Four Topics Chart Medical Indications Preferences of Patients Beneficence and Nonmaleficence Respect for Autotomy

1. What is the patient’s medical problem?

1. Has the patient been informed of benefits and risks of

2. Is the problem acute? Chronic? Critical? Reversible? Emergent? recommendations, understood, and given consent? Terminal?

2. Does the patient have capacity?

3. Where the goals of treatment? Yes: What preferences are they stating?

4. In what circumstances are medical treatments not indicated? No: Have they expressed prior preferences?

5. How can the patient benefit from medical and nursing care, avoid harm?

3. Who is the appropriate surrogate to make decisions for an incapacitated patient?

6. Do critical military mission considerations dictate that the need for preferential care?

4. What standards should govern the surrogate’s decisions?

7. Conscience clause: is there an indication for intervention/patient preference that does not align with physician willingness to treat?

5. Is the patient unwilling or unable to cooperate with medical treatment question if so, why?

Quality of Life Contextual Features Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, & Autonomy Principles: Justice and Fairness 1. What are the prospects, with or without treatment, for a return to an acceptable quality of life (QOL) and what physical, mental, and social deficits might the patient experience even if treatment 1. Are there professional, interprofessional, or business interests that might create conflicts of interest in the clinical treatment of patients? succeeds? 2. Are there parties outside clinician/patient such as 2. On what grounds can anyone judge that some QOL would be undesirable for a patient who cannot make or express such family members who have a legitimate interest in decisions? judgement? 3. Are there limits imposed on pt confidentiality by the 3. Are there biases that might prejudice the provider’s evaluation of legitimate interests of third parties? the patient’s QOL? 4. Are there financial factors that create conflicts of 4. What ethical issues arise concerning improving or enhancing a interest in clinical decisions? patient’s QOL? 5. Are there religious factors that might influence clinical 5. Do QOL assessments raise any questions that might contribute to decisions? Legal issues? a change of treatment plan, such as forgoing life-sustaining treatment? 6. Are there considerations of clinical research and medical education that affect clinical decisions? 6. Are there plans to provide pain relief/comfort after a decision has been made to forgo life-sustaining interventions? 7. Are there considerations of public health and safety that influence clinical decisions? 8. Does institutional affiliation create conflicts of interest that might influence clinical decisions?

“Above the double line” Majority of decisions here made by clinicians. Disagreements above the line: 1. Failure of communication 2. Fear and pain limiting decision-making 3. Lack of trust 4. Values different from traditional medicine

“Below the double line”
Largely dictated by patient preference. These topics are not typically part of a clinical workup, but they are essential to understanding clinical ethics cases. Understand the factors external to the medical problem at hand that fundamentally influence decision-making.
Adapted from: Jonsen AR, Sieger M, Winslade WJ. Clinical Ethics: A Practical Approach to Ethical Decisions in Clinical Medicine. 8th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hills; 2015.
This study source was downloaded by 100000810853814 from CourseHero.com on 10-10-2021 19:49:59 GMT -05:00