|
|
STUDY QUESTIONS
FOR
EXAMINATION
ON
2/5/02
|
1. What does it mean
to have a right? Be able to elaborate upon the various elements involved
in having a right.
2. Distinguish between
legal and moral rights.
3. Explain how rights
are derived from values.
4. Why are rights
important?
5. Explain the trimester
system in Roe v. Wade.
6. How has Casey supported
Roe
v. Wade and how has it amended it implementation? What two major issues
does Casey introduce as a supplement to Roe v. Wade?
7. What test does
Casey
use to make decisions on procedures to procure an abortion? How does this
test relate to the woman's exercise of her right to an abortion?
8. What position does
Roe
v. Wade take on the personhood of the fetus?
9. In what way can
a moral community of commitment take a firm stand on the protection of
the fetus even though a secular society does not?
10. Identify the characteristics
of personhood as represented by Mary Anne Warren. Do you think this is
a good way to think about persons and resolve the abortion controversy?
11. What does it mean
to talk about "protectable human life?" Does this concept help to bring
some common ground to the abortion controversy?
12. What does it mean
to talk about the fetus as an "object of value?" Does this concept help
to move the abortion controversy toward some reasonable resolution?
13. Upon what foundation
does the assertion of John Paul II that the fetus is a person rest?
14. When attempting
to resolve the abortion controversy does it really matter whether the fetus
is a person?
15. Does Marquis'
position make debates about the personhood of the fetus unnecessary?
16. What is Marquis'
basic position on the immorality of abortion?
17. How does Engelhart
characterize the "personhood" of the fetus?
18. What does Engelhart
mean when he says that we should not confuse present predicates with future
predicates?
19. What is Engelhart's
distinction between a person in the strict senseand a person in the social
sense?
20. Does Thompson's
analysis of abortion provide any useful guidance in thinking about the
relationship between the mother and the fetus?
21. Do you think there
is any good reason for having an abortion? Justify your position with a
philosophical analysis.
22. Do you think there
is any situation when abortion is unjustified? Justify your position with
a philosophical analysis.
23. How are the rights
and interests of the mother and fetus weighed in Roe v. Wade.
24. What does it mean
to talk about infertility as a disease?
25. In the technologies
of assisted reproduction and cloning, what does it mean to treat the offspring
as a commodity and/or as means?
26. Be able to formulate
two arguments against assisted reproduction.
27. Be able to formulate
two arguments in favor of assisted reproduction.
28. Is possible harm
to offspring a serious reason to ban the technologies of assisted reproduction/cloning?
29. Do you think that
the nature of the family and interactions in the family are substantially
altered if assisted reproduction/cloning is utilized to generate offspring
within the family?
30. Does embryonic
stem cell research harm a "person?"
31. Does embryonic
stem cell research compromise the value of human life?
32. Can embryonic
stem cell research be justified in light of the promise it might hold for
the curing of diseases that are now incurable?
33. How does the notion
of substituted judgment fit into the case of Nancy Cruzan? Upon what principle
of bioethics is it based.
34. How do the principles
of bioethics apply in the case of Nancy Cruzan?
35. How does the notion
of benefit to the patient fit into the case of Nancy Cruzan?
36. How does the use
of an advance directive fit into the case of Nancy Cruzan?
37. What powers of
the patient does the Supreme Court recognize in its Cruzan decision.
38. What problems
does the Cruzan decision raise as far as the ethical treatment of
patients is concerned?
39. Identify and elaborate
upon the major principles in bioethics. Be able to apply the principles
in case analyses.
40. Identify and elaborate
upon three limitations on each principle.
41. Is the right to
the exercise of autonomy absolute?
42. What kind of benefits
need to be considered when applying the principle of beneficence?
You will be required
to give an analysis of the case of Hugh Finn which is found
at the end of this study guide.
ARTICLES FOR EXAM
I
"The Language of Rights"
(ERESERVE)
Macklin, Ruth. "Moral
Concerns and Appeals to Rights and Duties." (ERESERVE)[helpful
for the distinction between legal and moral rights]
Feinberg, J. "The
Rights of Animals and Unborn Geneerations" (ERESERVE)
[helpful, particularly in the earlier parts].
"Majority Opinion
in Roe vs. Wade" (BE, 478)
Planned Parenthood
of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (BE,482)
John Paul II. "The
Unspeakable Crime of Abortion." (BE, 454)
Warren, MA. "On the
Moral and Legal Status of Abortion" (BE, 456)
Engelhardt, H. Tristram.
"Medicine and the Concept of Person"(ERESERVE)
Marquis, Don. "Why
Abortion is Immoral" (BE, 463)
New York State Task
Force on Life and Law. "Ethical Debates About Intertility and Its Treatments"
(BE 527)
National Bioethics
Advisory Commission. "Cloning Human Beings: Ethical Considerations."(ERESERVE)
"StemCells: A Primer."
<http://www.nih.gov/news/stemcell/primer.htm>
Ulrich, LP. "The
Case of Nancy Cruzan"
Ulrich, LP. "Ethical
Principles for Healthcare Ethics"
"Principles of Biomedical
Ethics." (BE, 39)
CASE FOR ANALYSIS
Hugh Finn was at the
top of his game as a television news journalist when he had a serious traffic
accident. He
suffered a crushed
aorta that resulted in anoxia. His brain was deprived of oxygen for about
15 minutes. He never
regained consciousness
fully. He was placed in an extended care facility and has been there for
three years. He
was DNR in the facility.
He has been tube-fed all this time and he regularly receives antibiotics
for respiratory and
bladder infections.
After one year a healthcare worker who had just finished giving him a bath
heard him say: "You
can go now." Two years
later a nurse assessing his condition said that when she walked into the
room she heard
him say: "Hello."
These were the only two vocal, or any other type of, responses from him
in three years. After the
three years in the
facility Mrs. Finn requested that the tube feedings be removed so that
he could die in peace. She
said that her husband
had often told her, when he was working on similar stories as a journalist,
that he would not
want to live this
way. Mr. Finn's brother rejected this proposal and petitioned the court
to remove his sister-in-law
as surrogate. The
neurological consult presented to the court declared that Mr. Finn was
in a persistent vegetative
state. The laws of
Virginia (where the ECF is located) consider PVS to be a terminal condition.
Although Mr. Finn
did not have an advance
directive, his spouse is considered by law to be his legal surrogate. The
court ordered that
Mrs. Finn was a proper
surrogate and that the tube feedings could be removed.
THE STUDY SESSION
WILL BE ON MONDAY FEBRUARY 4, AT 2 P.M. IN MH 204.