Such practices can lead to vile immorality and atrocities.” By all accounts, empathy is one of the most important qualities in a humane society. To do away with empathy, much like in the case of Plato’s society, is to turn society into a collective of cold, calculating zombies. Dr. Wax summates Plato’s point of view by saying “the contradiction of public health “greater good” out-competes the needs of each individual.” Following this train of thought, any, or at least most forms socialized or state-run healthcare is counterproductive to the needs of the patient. Society puts certain standards in place for doctors. We make them go through ten years of school and gain an extensive knowledge of the medical field by way of interning and on the job experience.
The argument that I have chosen to discuss in this essay is the extreme liberal view. My aim is to show that this argument is false by critically examining and evaluating the argument and the consequences of the extreme liberal view. I am concentrating on the extreme liberal view because I find it to have many more consequences than the other three views. I also find it to be quite a controversial view that I’m sure is not widely held in society. The extreme liberal view states that “the foetus is, in most if not all morally relevant respects, like a piece of tissue or a bit of the human body” (Hursthouse, 1987).
This research studies the pros and cons of using steroids. Then, it weighs out the pros and cons and talks about which outweighs the other and why. Finally, this leads to the decision that steroids are way too dangerous and risky for any athlete to even consider about taking them. Money, fame, success, pressure, or just plain stupid: why do athletes take steroids? We have all heard of famous athletes having their career and life jeopardized because of taking steroids.
The question then arises, when does one cross the line into making a certain issue unethical? We discuss the topic in a classic movie from the early 90s, Jurassic Park, which tells a story of what happens when scientists use the technique of genetic cloning to recreate dinosaurs for a theme park. When they accidently create a species that is smarter, and more aggressive than they intended, the argument arises on whether genetic cloning is ethical or unethical. I believe that genetic cloning is unethical if a species has been extinct by a natural process. “The central ethical dilemma of the 1993 Steven Spielberg film, Jurassic Park, hinges on the question of whether man should employ his knowledge of genetics to revive a species that had become extinct as a result of natural processes” (Stolyarov II).
Or a chicken that transforms into an egg. Anthropomorphic analogy says that it is like an old man who grows younger and younger until he is again a fetus. This is why the Turritopsis dohrnii is also known as the Benjamin Button jellyfish. Unfortunately, this discovery barely even registered outside of the academic world. Having learned of the existence of immortal life, you would expect that scientists would start to dedicate enormous amounts of money and resources into learning about how the jellyfish is able to resist death.
Jerry was accused of a medical malpractice because of prescribing a refill without the authorization of a physician. There were many legal and ethical issues that affected the decision Jerry made in ordering the prescription refill, and the knowledge of right and wrong deterred Jerry from deciding to refill the prescription. There are several methods and types of values at hand that Jerry could have used to help him make an ethical decision. Determining the appropriate course to take when faced with a difficult ethical dilemma can be a challenge, but it is always important to engage in a carefully considered ethical decision-making. Everyday health care workers around the world are faced with tough decisions.
When I first saw the title of the article “Why Innovation in Health Care Is So Hard” I was expecting it to be another negative prognosis (pun intended) of our healthcare system. Even before reading it’s content, I could list many of the hurdles that people from all parts of the sector face that would be expounded upon; the pleasant surprise was the upbeat, practical messages that the presents, actually turning the very obstacles into assets! It is an interesting concept to consider that the major forces that hinder progress can actually be used to drive innovation. For example, key people, or “players,” are an oft overlooked force which, as is demonstrated, can literally close down an new initiative. Yet by recognizing how it will affect these key players, their support can be a powerful force to contribute to the success of new ideas or startups.
Compare and Contrast: Jennifer and Rachel and Narcissus Cloned In today’s society, people have different opinions about the many debatable issues that affect our nation every day. One of the most controversial topics has to do with the discovery and use of cloning. The articles “Jennifer and Rachel” by Lee M. Silver and “Narcissus Cloned” by John Conley both identify the concern of cloning and state there side on the issue. The main question at hand is “Is cloning harmful/moral?”, and if so, why? The two articles state opposing arguments by using different literary techniques and strategies to convince the reader to take their side based on their arguments.
Assisted Suicide Assisted suicide is a very controversial topic in our country today. Even after weighing in all of the evidence, I am still not sure how to feel about this dilemma. I understand and empathize with the people that support assisted suicide and also with the people that are against it. There are several aspects to consider on such a diverse topic. One aspect to consider about assisted suicide is the legal one.
“Many physicians say they would be clouding their roles as healers if they helped patients to die” (Buchanan 36.) Physicians even take the Hippocratic Oath, which states that “a physician promises to help the sick and never to cause harm” (Buchanan 36.) As Daniel E. Lee, a reporter for the Hastings Center, says “Meaning and hope are possible in all of life’s situations, even in the midst of suffering” (17.) If the United States were to nationally legalize assisted suicide, it would be a disaster, not only because the way it would go against our morals, but the way it would negatively effect today’s society. “Janet, Sherry , Marjorie, and Susan were not terminal by accepted medical definition…[they] were not Kevorkian’s patients in any traditional sense.