Razavi Nima Ethical Dilemma Argument Essay

timer Asked: Feb 23rd, 2019
account_balance_wallet $40

Question Description

Topic: When there is no clear right and wrong choice, how do you decide? To what principles can you turn for guidance?

Instructor Note: carefully read and follow

* Your thesis needs to specifically answer these questions: "When there is no clear right and wrong choice, how do you decide [on the right decision]? To what principles can you turn for guidance [to face and deal with an ethical dilemma]?” Keep in mind that a strong, sophisticated thesis does three things: states the topic, states your point of view on the topic, and provides a hint of reasons and/or a preview of the direction your essay will go.

* Each body paragraph topic sentence should present and argue for one criterion, one principle, that then can be supported with specific dilemmas, such as euthanasia, with personal experience, and with citations to the articles in Part One Chapter 11 (you need at least to cite from at least two of the essays in Chapter 11) to show how what you propose will work.

*Also at least one body paragraph must be a counterargument that presents at least one view that is opposite your thesis. Remember, the topic sentence needs appropriate counterargument language to indicate that you are presenting an opposing view.

*do not use second person: “you,” “you,” yourself,” etc., in your essays! The only place second person can possibly work is in an opening hook. Otherwise, I should not see it anywhere in your essay. It is too colloquial for academic writing. Use a specific noun instead.

You must use at least two of the sources in Part One Chapter 11. You can use only one additional source; make sure that it is credible source

Required final draft length 2500-3000 words (5-6 pages, not including your Works Cited page). Only MLA format is allowed

My Note:

Please use Euthanasia as a support in one of your paragraphs. i have attached a draft on Euthanasia for you to review. You can also use one of the sources that i have in the rough draft and use the same quotes from that one source for your support.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Razavi 1 The Ethical Dilemma of Euthanasia Euthanasia is a term that is commonly used to refer to the act of ending an individual’s life to alleviate their pain and suffering. There are various forms of euthanasia, including voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia, passive and active euthanasia, assisted suicide and indirect suicide. The ethical problem of euthanasia is deciding whether an individual has the right to determine their date and method of death. The rules and legal regulations regarding euthanasia are different in countries all over the world, with only some forms being allowed in select countries. According to the Debating Europe website, only three states have legalized euthanasia – the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Belgium ("Should Euthanasia Be Legalized Across Europe?"). A few other European countries have only begun to be more liberal on the issue of euthanasia, only tacitly permitting it in the form of assisted suicide or euthanasia. It seems as if the rest of the world applies a deontological perspective and considers euthanasia to be immoral and unethical. The moral admissibility of euthanasia can be best analyzed using the theoretical framework of patient-centered deontology. However, the emotions of other associated parties (the loved ones and parents) should be removed or disregarded when looking at euthanasia as a method for death. In his book, Bioethics: Principles, Issues and Cases, Lewis Vaughn articulates that the theories of deontology not only sanitize actions depending on their results or consequences but also depending on their ‘intrinsic nature’ (Vaughn p.13). The better choice, according to the deontological perspective, is the one that fulfills moral duties. Patient-centered deontology is based more on rights and less on duty, but it still maintains its essence because, in the case of the ethical dilemma of euthanasia, deontology calls for an in-depth analysis of the ‘killing' itself and not the consequences expected from it. Just as all human beings possess the right to life, they also have the right not to be taken advantage of. Many individuals who are against euthanasia recall Immanuel Kant's principle of autonomy to argue that terminally ill patients are merely using doctors for their benefit. Vaughn establishes a point of reference through Kant's theory by determining that the principle of autonomy confers respect to individuals (not to be used by others for selfish benefits) and assigns value which ‘derives from their nature as free, rational beings, capable of directing their own lives, determining their own ends, and decreeing their own rules by which to live' (Vaughn p. 650). Although Immanuel Kant would not support euthanasia, his principle of autonomy is commonly applied when arguing on the moral permissibility of euthanasia in the event of the patient’s consent. Besides, the difference between passive and active euthanasia subsides the whole concept of patient autonomy. Deontology sums up the belief that instead of instead of letting terminally patients die, we should seek all avenues to extend their lives and treat their condition no matter the stakes. The act of killing a human being or positively contributing to their self-killing is intrinsically wrong by nature, no matter the circumstances and future consequences. The deontological argument against euthanasia seems to be reasonable, but if a patient can be entirely free from suffering and illness, or they are merely being kept alive by expensive Razavi 2 machines shouldn’t they be allowed to opt for death? The famous theory of utilitarianism is used to argue for euthanasia alongside deontology. In the practical view, it is significant to distinguish passive euthanasia from active euthanasia. Passive euthanasia refers to the act of letting one die, and it may involve engaging the medical doctors to neglect the necessary life support systems keeping the patient alive. Active euthanasia, on the other hand, consists of the use of active agents such as potassium chloride and other muscle-relaxing agents to end the life of the sick person. Utilitarians hold the view that any action should provide the greatest happiness for the most people and the consequences, in the end, is what should determine the morality of an effect. Because euthanasia reduces suffering and pain and increases happiness at the same time, Utilitarians argue that it is morally correct. Most terminally ill patients go through levels of pain as the sickness progresses to worse levels. It becomes increasingly difficult to enjoy the things in life that pleased them and there possibly could be no higher spiritual or intellectual effort that would offset the balance of unhappiness caused from the physical pain. It may become a heart-wrenching sight for the family and loved ones of the sick individual to watch the disease escalate to its climax and increase their suffering and pain. Contrastingly, the death of the individual (euthanasia) will raise the score to zero and thus reduce the misery of the individual and in some cases, the medical expenses to the family. Moreover, apart from being free from pain, the suffering individuals get to regain their respect and dignity. Utilitarians believe that an individual has sovereign authority over the decisions they make regarding their bodies. If a person decides in a lucid state to give up their life to be free from physical pain and suffering, then it is entirely up to them and no other authority whatsoever. I would take a virtue-based approach when dealing with the ethical dilemma of euthanasia as opposed to the deontological and utilitarian theories. The evolution of the practice of medicine has shifted the paradigm for medical ethics, and this demands the application of rational and objective rules to specific cases of euthanasia. While the principle of autonomy is essential in the deontological perspective, virtue-based ethics initiates an approach that is centered on three virtues- benevolence, compassion, and respectfulness. The virtue of compassion calls for empathy and deep engagement and identification with the suffering of the terminally ill patient. Benevolence, by definition, refers to the disposition to do good deeds or being kind-hearted. The virtue of charity calls for the kind and helpful actions that reflect a deeper understanding of the predicament of terminal illness. Respectfulness is the recognition that the suffering individual is capable of self-fulfillment from knowing themselves. If the ethical dilemma is tackled with the ethics of virtue in consideration, a more positive dialogue will be advanced between the patient, the doctors and the loved ones instead of relying on doctor-directed or patient-centered deontology theories which are mostly based on the principles of autonomy. It is significant to note that in line with virtue ethics, the objective of medicine is to achieve better patient welfare. Concerning terminal sickness, however, better patient prosperity cannot be obtained, and continuous life might even prove to be harmful. James Rachel establishes in The Elements of Moral Philosophy that the balance of happiness over unhappiness Razavi 3 is always the right thing to do, and sometimes the balance can be brought about through Euthanasia. He justified mercy killing to be morally right because it meant less pain and suffering for humanity. Euthanasia can be explained as the compassionate, respectful and benevolent response to the plight of the patient. In conclusion, many arguments can be advanced to establish the moral permissibility of mercy killing as it becomes a significantly popular issue in contemporary society. More people now align their opinions with the teleological aspects of John Stuart Mill's theory of utilitarianism. In addition to having complete authority over one's body and control over their fate, allowing individuals to opt for euthanasia frees up hospital space and enables many other people to receive treatment for their ailments. The practical approach to euthanasia confers the highest amount of happiness and the least amount of suffering. Works cited "Should Euthanasia Be Legalised Across Europe?" Debating Europe, 18 Mar. 2015, www.debatingeurope.eu/2015/03/16/euthanasia-legalised-acrosseurope/#.XFV9EFwzbDc. Razavi 4 "The Ethical Dilemma of Euthanasia | NewsActivist." NewsActivist | Read, Write, React, newsactivist.com/en/articles/media-ethics-section-03002-fall-2015/ethical-dilemmaeuthanasia. Behrens, Laurence, and Leonard J. Rosen. Revel for a Sequence for Academic Writing Plus the Writer's Handbook -- Access Code Card. Pearson, 2018. Vaughn, Lewis. Bioethics: Principles, Issues, and Cases. Oxford UP, USA, 2016. Instructor peer review: 1. the introduction engage your interest in the issue and help you understand the issue being debated? If not, make suggestions for improvement. You are not exactly answering the issue which is how would YOU deal with an ethical dilemma. . When there is no clear right and wrong choice, how do you decide? To what principles can you turn for guidance? Your task in the synthesis will be to wrestle with ethical dilemmas and to argue for a clear course of action based on principles you make plain to your readers. 2. Is there enough background information on the topic? If not, state what you feel you as a reader need to know in order to understand the topic. You are arguing about euthanasia. That is not the assignment. So I found your thesis, but it is very late in the paper, meaning you actually have too much background information. 3. Rate the strength of this paper's thesis. 1 of 5 4. Does the thesis preview the organizational plan of the paper? I do not see a thesis that answers the assigned writing prompt 5. Does the essay follow this organizational plan? since the thesis is very late, it is not possible to really tell. 6. Does each paragraph of this paper logically progress from the former ones? Why or why not? most of the paper is informational rather than defendign what you the writer think is the best approach when dealing with any ethical dilemma. We are not only dealing with one dilemma. that is not the assignment. 7. Do all the topic sentences relate to the thesis statement? Razavi 5 again, the topic sentences in the beginning are not focused towards a thesis because there is no thesis until very late. (I made a comment to indicate where your thesis is. 8. Does this paper sustain a coherent point of view? Why or why not? needs restructuring around a thesis that answers the writing prompt of this assignment. 9. Rate this paper's overall readabilty 3 of 5 10. Can the conclusion of this paper be convincingly drawn from the thesis and the argument made in the body of the paper? Why or why not? sort of 11. Is there a counterargument paragraph that both presents and refutes opposing positions and has effective "counterargument language? make suggestions for improvement. there are opposing views, but they need to be presented more directly as opposite of what the writer suggests and then refuted. 12. Is each paragraph unified? In other words, are there too many points in any paragraph? yes 13. Does the logic of this paper's argument ever fall flat? Where? What might be done to correct this? no 14. Do you feel this paper relies on evidence, or on opinion or intuition? If the latter, cite examples of where this paper relies on opinion and intuition and give suggestions as to how the writer can write more objectively. there is a lot of research, but again it is not all focused on the thesis, rather on the background information 15. How smoothly does this paper integrate examples into its own argument? Does it clearly illustrate connections between the evidence it cites and the ideas they support, or does it merely assume them? Explain. all evidence should be used to support a topic sentence that then support the thesis 16. How clearly does the author express his or her ideas? 4 of 5 17. Could the writer of this paper have omitted certain passages to make this paper more concise? If yes, which ones? yes, it takes far too long to get to the point 18. At which point did you feel most interested by this piece? When least? Explain. Least in the beginning since there are multiple paragraphs before the thesis. Too many. Razavi 6 19. How effective was the writer's use of language? 4 of 5 20. Scan and spot the paper for the any of the following problems: colloquialisms, informality, clichés, and wordiness. Give a few examples of these problems, if they exist. none seen ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

School: Rice University




Ethical Dilemma
Institutional Affiliation
24th February 2019



Ethical dilemma refers to situations where a person cannot choose which decision is
morally right and which one is not. Morality is the backbone of ethics; hence ethical decision
making has to follow a moral approach. Ethical dilemmas are highly prevalent in our society,
and people find themselves being faced with these situations on a daily basis. There are so many
issues that leave people with ethical dilemmas including the issue of euthanasia. Another
common ethical dilemma is the pro-choice and pro-life issue. Euthanasia is also referred to as
mercy killing which is the dilemma of whether a person should allow a patient or loved one to
suffer immense pain that they have no hope of getting out of or they should choose to give them
a painless death to ease their suffering. The issue of abortion is an ethical dilemma where people
are unable to choose whether it is okay to allow a woman to abort and prevent the baby from
being brought into an undesirable setting or to allow the woman to give birth in order to avoid
killing the baby. This is a dilemma because most people have a different definition of when a
human beings life begins and also because people against abortion are seen to support it in
occasions such as rape or when the child is a result of an incestuous relationship and other
taboos. When people are faced with such dilemmas, there are several approaches that offer
guidance on making ethical decisions. These approaches include utilitarianism, virtue ethics
approach, fairness approach, common good approach, and the rights approach. It is important to
evaluate these different approaches in order to understand how they function in ethical decision
making. We seek to understand how different approaches influence different opinions when
handling a similar matter.
The utilitarian theory was developed in the late 18th century to the early 19th century by
Jeremy Bentham who was a philosopher and John Mill who was an economist. This approach
dictates that when a person is making a choice in an ethical dilemma, they must consider the
decision that has the best overall outcome. Utilitarianism evaluates the morality of a decision by
evaluating the consequences that it brings. The measures of consequences in this approach are
the amount of happiness that this action brings and the effects that it has on everyone else. While
people may think that utilitarianism is only focused on following what makes the person happy,
we realize the decision of a person is only considered morally right when it satisfies those around
them. This, therefore, means that the right choices are those that work for the greater good and
those that are beneficial to everyone. Actions are therefore evaluated on their ability to cause
pains or pleasure; hence actions that cause pain, in general, are morally wrong (Trevino, 1986).
The rights approach was also developed in the 18th by Immanuel Kant among other
theorists. This approach focuses on human dignity were it expounds that human beings are more
intelligent than animals. Therefore...

flag Report DMCA

Top quality work from this guy! I'll be back!

Similar Questions
Related Tags

Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors