Assignment #10

Ethical Decision Making Framework FOCUS: IDEALS

NAME: Brittany Dzioba



STEP ONE: THE DETAILS OF THE CASE

(1) Choose one inquiry, from inquiries 1 - 28 (pages 114 - 117). Indicate which inquiry you chose, and then briefly explain it in your own words:

I chose inquiry number 13 on pg. 115. This inquiry is about a group of doctors who are about to make a difficult decision. There are two patients who are in need of a heart transplant but the doctors will have to make a decision to figure out which one will be the next patient for the procedure. These patients consist of a 12 year old girl named Anne and a father of four kids who is forty eight years of age, Mark. The doctors decided to choose Anne.



(2) Stakeholders: Name each person, group, organization, etc., that has a stake in this outcome.

-The group of doctors

- Anne (one of the patients)

- Mark (another patient)

- Anne's parents and friends

-Mark's kids or family and friends

- The donor of the heart





(3) Are the details given sufficient? Why or why not? Erase this sentence & insert your own answer

No the details are not sufficient. Although this case gives me the why, what , who questions, this does not answer the question of when and where this case has taken place. When is important because I can verify the amount of hearts being used for transplants around this time. This is important because this tells me how low the supply for hearts were or how quickly one can get a heart in that period of time. This will make my decision easier if I know the waiting time for a heart transplant is within a short time frame. The question of where this took place is also important when analysing this situation because this could have been taken place in an area where there is a long waiting period for a heart transplant rather than other areas.



(4) What additional questions does this inquiry raise?

This raises a personal question with Mark. How old are his four kids? Based on this answer I can find it easier to make the right decision. Knowing that Mark is forty eight years old his kids should be between 18-25 years of age. If his kids were that old than its best to give the 12 year old patient a chance at life considering that Mark has enjoyed several years of life above Anne's and his kids should be at the age where they are or almost grown adults and may not need there father as much.



STEP TWO: THE RELEVANT CRITERIA1. Obligations (aka "duties"): Optional this week2. Moral Ideals (aka "virtues"): See breakdown of ideals below3. Consequences (aka "outcomes" or "results"): Optional this weekNOTE: Not ALL of the following ideals will apply! Only consider the main ones that you believe apply, in the inquiry you chose. Don't just pick the easy ones to consider, because you didn't take the time to thoroughly read the chapter and learn what each one of these actually means. I will quiz you when we do group work on Thursday.*



Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Prudence:

I believe that this ideal applies to this case because the group of doctors had to make a decision based on experiences. They are use to making these difficult decisions because they established a waiting list of names who are in need of heart transplants.



* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Justice:

This applies because the group of doctors are trying to give heart implants to those with weak hearts, saving lives. One patient at a time.



* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Temperance:

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Courage:

I believe that courage is an important piece to this case because the doctors have to be brave enough to make the difficult decision on who should be the next patient for a heart transplant. Even though the outcome of their decision may lead to the death of one patient and their loved ones.



* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Loving Kindness:

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Honesty:

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Compassion:

This ideal applies to this case because the group of doctors hold a great deal of compassion for their patients. They feel sympathy because they know they can not give every patient a heart transplant due to the low supply of them. Therefore they must make their decision based on the understanding of their patients' age and whether or not they have children.

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Forgiveness:

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Repentance:

I believe this applies because when making their decision and when their chose goes wrong or something happens during surgery, doctors are always prepared for the worst case scenario and when informing a family member of the patient, they are ready to give their remorse or an apology.

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Reparation:

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Gratitude:

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Beneficence:



* Conflicting ideals--consider the relative importance of each; determine which ideal represents the greater good (or the lesser evil). See pages 110-11 for clarification. Erase this sentence & insert your own answer.

I believe that if two were conflicting with one another I would have to say the ideal of justice and compassion. Justice can mean that the doctors want to succeed with completing the list of patients for the heart implant procedure. This way the doctors could pick from the order of names on the list rather than having the compassion for making the decision of who deserves to be the next patient on the list. In this case only one out of the two patients can be saved when the next operation is available, doctors must choose wisely rather than going through the order of who appeared to be first on the list. This may be different if the doctors were given a wide majority of names, then I can see the doctors following the patients by order. Knowing that the inquiry does not state when the two patients were put on the list, I will assume that the patients appeared on the waiting list around the same time. Given that it is between a 12 year old girl vs. a man who is forty eight years old. I believe that in this case the 12 year old should go first for the procedure and the man can be in line for the next operation. Therefore I feel that compassion is the greater good in this situation.



STEP THREE: POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTIONAlternative



#1: The group of doctors can get more details from their patients starting with the age of Mark' kids when making their decision.

#2: The doctors can review the medical results of their patients' hearts and see which may be worse than the other and which can hold off for the next upcoming procedure.


STEP FOUR: THE MOST ETHICAL ACTION Examine the action taken or proposed and decide whether it achieves the greater good (the most widespread "respect for persons")...if it does not, choose one that will, from your alternatives. Where the choice of actions is such that no good can be achieved, choose the action that will result in the lesser evil.

Like discussed in this chapter about courage. Courage consists of facing the truth. (pg. 108) Regardless of their action there will always be the fear of losing a life. In this case the doctors must make a decision amongst two individuals where one that is not chosen for the surgery of a heart implant might be faced with death. The doctors understand this and are faced with the truth of a patient dying but must remain their courage in order to save one's life. With this courage I feel that the best alternative is to review both of their records to view how bad one patent's heart is from another and make their decision based on their analysis. This way the patient that may not have a worse off heart may be able to make it through the waiting period until the next procedure. This way both patients may be able to survive.


SELF EVALUATION



1. In your own words, describe something new that you learned from this week’s assigned reading material and guidance.
I learned that like obligations in chapter eight ideals also conflict with each other when analyzing a situation. Like on pg. 110, ideals compete with one another such as kindness and honesty. In this case kindness which prompted the little girl to sit with the boy vs. honesty which bids her to stay out of the situation.


2. In your own words, describe in detail some insight you gained, about the material, from one of your classmates' blogs this week. Name the blog, and insert answer here.
The insight I gained is the different amount of alternatives that J.J blogged, from inquiry 10 about the police officer and his brother. I was having trouble coming up with my alternatives so his helped me the insight needed to help form my own.


3. Did you post a thoroughly completed post to your blog on time this week?
Yes, I have answered all of the questions that has been asked of me. My blog will be published on time for everyone to see. : )

4. Did you ALSO print this out, so you can bring it to class and earn total points?
I will have this printed out by tomorrow because the computer I am using does not have a working printer. Therefore I will print mine out before class at the computer lab on campus.

5. Of 25 points total, my efforts this week deserve:
I believe that I deserve the full amount of points because I have done all that was asked of me within the given time frame. I have answered the questions to the best of my ability and made sure there were more than just one sentence. Therefore I deserve the maximum amount of points.

Assignment #9

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART ONE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------In this section, we're going to return for a moment to Chapter 7, to the section that discusses errors that are common in the analysis of moral issues (p. 89). Briefly explain each of the following errors in your own words, as if you were explaining the concept to a friend who had never taken this class (consider who, what, when, where, why, how, when); and then give an example of each one, preferably from your own past experience.

Unwarranted Assumptions:

Unwarranted Assumptions is considered an error when analysing a moral issue because you would use your instinct rather than stated facts. You are making a judgment or opinion based off of what you may know about that individual or situation, but without using facts, your analysis of an ethical dilemma would be inaccurate.

Example: I have been in a situation where I was working in a restaurant as a hostess. This was my first job and it was around the time I was a Junior in high school. We had a party of nine that were suppose to be arriving at the restaurant at 3:00 p.m., so we prepared for their arrival by pushing together tables and setting up the menus. By the time 3:00 p.m. arrived a party of nine entered. Me, assuming they were the party that we were preparing for, did not ask for the name of the party. Instead I walked them to the table that was ready. Fifteen minutes later another party of nine entered the restaurant. Sure enough, I had placed the wrong party at the wrong table, just because I had assumed. As ironic as the situation was, my boss was not too pleased with me.

Oversimplification:

Oversimplification is when you try to take the easy way out of a situation.

Example: An example to this is by trying to find an easy way through college to get a degree. Lets say that you are attending classes on campus and arriving on time. Everyone around you are working hard to study and complete the homework assignments, but you decide to cheat on tests or quizzes and find someone to help the load of homework. This is an easy way out to get a degree. On the other hand, you will not be as knowledgeable and it will be hard for you to sustain a career.

Hasty Conclusions:

This is when you judge something or someone based on the overall look or appearance. Jumping to conclusions based on first impressions will only create problems because in most cases your conclusion will be wrong. There must be evidence or facts towards a situation in order to make your point known rather than jumping to faulty conclusions.

Example: An example of this can be the appearance of how someone may dress. An interview is a good example of this. Lets say that you walk into an interview. You have tattoos and piercings. The interview is going well and the interviewer knows that you have years of experience in the field that you are applying for. Although you have years of experience the company decides not to hire you. Instead they hire someone with no experience within the particular field. From your appearance during the interview, the interviewer may have judged you based on your tattoos and piercings. Thinking you will cause problems within their working environment, when in reality you are nothing but a hard working employee.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Briefly answer the following "chapter opening" questions, in your own words, based on what you learned by studying chapter eight:
1. What do we do in situations where there is more than a single obligation?

In this situation we look at the future. We look at what may become of our decisions that we make when figuring out the best solutions of our obligations. The first thing to do is lay out the different obligations. Next is to think of different outcomes that your obligations may develop. From there you can choose the best obligations that may appear to be more important.

2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations? We can do this by finding which obligation is more important. Just like the situation with the economy crises. People are finding it hard to find jobs as well as keeping the job one may have. A company may have a dilemma where money is running short. Either they can lay off employees or cut back pay. This is a good example when trying to distinguish amongst which is more important. In this case I would believe that although some employees making good pay may not want to cut back, it is better than having no job at all.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment?
Since reading this chapter of obligations, I did not think about some of the issues I may be faced with. The examples made me think of how difficult it can be to choose what obligation may appear to be more important than the other. I understand the amount of thought and analysis one may have to innovate in order to withstand the position of making a difficult decision.

2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
I can use what I learned on an everyday basis by analysing a situation with the use of facts rather than using unwarranted assumptions, oversimplification, and hasty conclusions. The more information I can gather the better I will become at making decisions such as choosing an obligation amongst conflicting ones.

3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer. I believe I deserve a grade within the twenty point range because I feel that I have completing what was asked of me. I gave examples to justify my answers and read the material that was needed of me. Therefore I believe that I deserve a decent grade.