PHI208 Ashford University Week 3 Utilitarianism Explanation & Application Paper

User Generated

Xlzben17

Humanities

PHI208

ashford university

Description

This second written assignment is a four-part exercise comprised of the following sections:

  1. Ethical Question
  2. Introduction
  3. Explanation of the Ethical Theory
  4. Application of the Ethical Theory

For sections (1) and (2) revise and expand on what you did in the first assignment.

Sections (3) and (4) are new.

The main purpose of this paper is to define the nature and scope of the ethical theory in a way that shows how the core principle(s) of that theory lead to a specific moral conclusion on your ethical question. Another way to think of this is to explain how someone who is fully committed to the moral reasoning of the ethical theory would answer your ethical question (even if it is not necessarily how you would answer the question).

The assignment should be 900 to 1,000 words, written in essay form with clearly labeled sections as indicated below, and include a title page and reference page.

Part 1: Ethical Question

State the ethical question beneath this heading.

  • This question should be on the same topic as the question presented in the week one assignment, and if necessary, revised based on your instructor’s comments and the additional insight and information you have gained from research on the topic. If you would like to switch topics, you should first consult with your instructor.

Place your ethical question beneath the Part 1: Ethical Question heading.

Part 2: Introduction

Provide an introduction to the topic and question.

  • This should be revised and expanded from the Week 1 Introduction in light of your instructor’s comments and the additional insight and information you have gained from research on the topic.
  • For instance, you may find that your original ideas about the issue have changed and clarified, that the focus of the ethical question has shifted or become more specific, and/or that there are important background and contextual details that need to be explained.
  • The revised introduction should reflect your additional thinking on the scope and significance of the ethical issue, and address any feedback provided by your instructor.
  • The introduction should be at least 300 words in one or two paragraphs.

Place the introduction material under the Part 2: Introduction heading.

Part 3: Explanation of the Ethical Theory

Ethical theories provide accounts of how to reason well about moral questions and of what justifies answers to those questions. In this section of the paper, you will discuss either the ethical theory of utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics.

You should not discuss your topic in this section, but focus only on the ethical theory.

The discussion should include the following elements:

  • A brief account of the historical background of the theory and the philosopher(s) associated with it.
  • An explanation of the core moral principle of the theory, or if there is more than one, the principle that you will focus on in applying that theory to your question.
  • A brief, general explanation of how the theory and its core moral principle applies to moral questions, using an example different from the issue that is the main focus of your paper. (For example, if your focus is on how deontology applies to using animals in medical research, you could explain Kant’s moral theory by discussing how it would apply to an issue like lying for the sake of the greater good.)
  • This section should focus only on the ethical theory. For instance, if you are discussing physician-assisted suicide from a utilitarian perspective, this section should only discuss utilitarianism in general terms; you should not discuss physician-assisted suicide, euthanasia, or other related topics until the next section.
  • The discussion should be around 300 words and must incorporate at least one quote from the required resources on the ethical theory you have chosen to discuss. Required resources include the textbook chapter focused on that theory (3, 4, or 5) or the “Primary Sources” listed at the end of Chapters 3-5.

Place this section under the Part 3: Ethical Theory heading.

Part 4: Application of the Ethical Theory

Now that you have explained in general terms the core principle of the ethical theory you are focusing on in this paper, you will apply that theory and its core principle to your ethical question.

  • Explain as clearly and precisely as you can how that principle leads to a particular conclusion.
  • You can think of that conclusion as the answer someone would most likely give to your question if they were reasoning along the utilitarian, deontological, or virtue ethics lines you explained in Part 3.
  • Note: This conclusion does not need to be the same as the position you stated in the Week 1 assignment. In fact, it could be the opposing position you discussed there. See the remarks about main purpose of the paper above.
  • This section should be around 300 words.

Place this section under the Part 4: Application of the Ethical Theory section.

In your paper,

  • Identify the ethical question.
  • Introduce the topic and question.
  • Explain the ethical theory of utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics.
  • Apply the selected ethical theory to the ethical question.

The Applying an Ethical Theory paper

  • Must be 900 words in length (not including title and references pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center’s APA Style (Links to an external site.) resource.
  • Must include a separate title page with the following:
    • Title of paper
    • Student’s name
    • Course name and number
    • Instructor’s name
    • Date submitted

For further assistance with the formatting and the title page, refer to APA Formatting for Word 2013 (Links to an external site.).

Must include a separate references page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. See the Formatting Your References List (Links to an external site.) resource in the Ashford Writing Center for specifications.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Running Head: ETHICAL ISSUE DISCUSSION Ethical Issue Discussion Lanisha Johnson Ashford University PHI 208 11-18-2019 1 ETHICAL ISSUE DISCUSSION 2 Ethical Question Should physicians provide patients with the necessary information and the necessary means to facilitate voluntary life-ending acts? Introduction Assisted dying is one of the most controversial topics among many health professionals worldwide. Assisted dying refers to the acts of people terminating their own lives voluntarily through the indirect or direct administration of certain lethal substances by physicians. In other words, physicians provide to patients with certain prescribed medications that the patients use to end their own lives (Battin et al., 207). Assisted dying has its supports and opposers. Doctors who are in support of the practice argue that the practice is voluntary and nobody is forced to end their lives. The patients administer the dosage themselves once their doctors have approved the means. Others in support of the practice argue that since we live in a society that is free, everybody should be given the right to decide what they want to do with their lives, and removing this kind of freedom would require a good reason. Those against the practice argue that by administering the life-ending substances, physicians violate the physicians’ code. They suggest that doctors or physicians should not assist patients in committing suicide because the practice goes against the role of healers (Materstvedt & Kaasa, 2002). The strongest opposers of the practice are religious bodies, which argue that only God has the right to take lives since He is the one that gives it. However, medical experts in support of assisted dying have suggested that the practice is beneficial especially to patients who may suffer a lot of pain due to certain illnesses such as cancer. They suggest that assisted dying can actually be useful in removing indignity and suffering in patients, especially those who are in so much pain. In fact, many people have ended their lives through assisted dying. For instance, the Independent reported on June 4, ETHICAL ISSUE DISCUSSION 3 2019, that a 17-year-old rape victim ended her life through assisted dying because she could not bear the suffering that she was going through. The girl had on several occasions asked doctors to end her life after suffering a series of rape encounters while at 11 and 14 years of age (Staff Reporter, 2019). Position Statement Physicians should never aid patients in ending their own lives, but it might be moral for physicians to do so if they are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that doing so would remove pain suffering and excruciating pain from patients who have 0 percent chances of survival. Reasons in Support of Position Statement I am entirely against the practice of assisting patients in ending their lives. However, in situations where the patients are in so much pain and no medication can cure their conditions, it would be appropriate for physicians to assist patients in ending their lives in order to remove their pains. Cancer patients in their last stages, for instance, usually go through a lot of pain because it reaches a point where their bodies do not respond to medication (Malpas, Mitchell & Johnson, 2012). Under such circumstances, it would be moral for physicians to assist a patient in ending his or her life. Opposing Position Statement Physicians should never advocate for assisted dying because it would be an immoral and deadly thing to do especially in the current health care system that is profit driven. Reason in Support of Opposing Position Statement The healthcare system is nowadays driven by profits, and patients might be misled into ending their lives in exchange for money. This means that some physicians might actually recommend assisted dying to patients with the aim of making profit even when it is not actually necessary (Anderson & Caddell, 1993). For instance, a medical facility in one ETHICAL ISSUE DISCUSSION state that does not have medications for a specific illness might not be willing to transfer patients in another state where they might get assistance for the fear of losing. Instead, they might suggest the idea of assisted dying under the lie that their illness cannot be cured. 4 ETHICAL ISSUE DISCUSSION 5 References Anderson, J. G., & Caddell, D. P. (1993). Attitudes of medical professionals toward euthanasia. Social Science & Medicine, 37(1), 105-114. Battin, M. P., Van der Heide, A., Ganzini, L., Van der Wal, G., & Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D. (2007). Legal physician-assisted dying in Oregon and the Netherlands: evidence concerning the impact on patients in “vulnerable” groups. Journal of medical ethics, 33(10), 591-597. Malpas, P. J., Mitchell, K., & Johnson, M. H. (2012). I Wouldn’t Want to Become a Nuisance under any Circumstances. A Qualitative Study of the Reasons some Healthy Older Individuals Support Medical Practices that Hasten Death. NZ Med J, 125, 9-19. Materstvedt, L. J., & Kaasa, S. (2002). Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in Scandinavia—with a conceptual suggestion regarding international research in relation to the phenomena. Palliative medicine, 16(1), 17-32. Staff Reporter (2019). Teenager who was sexually assaulted multiple times ends her own life after requesting legal euthanasia. Independent. Retrieved from https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/euthanasia-clinic-suicidedepression-rape-anorexia-netherlands-teenager-noa-pothoven-a8944356.html
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

1
Running head: ETHICAL ISSUE

Ethical Issue Discussion
Lanisha Johnson
Ashford University
PHI 208
11-18-2019

2
ETHICAL ISSUE
Part 1: Ethical Question
Ethical Question
Should physicians provide patients with the necessary information and the essential means to
facilitate voluntary life-ending acts?
Part 2: Introduction
Introduction
Assisted dying is one of the most controversial topics among many health professionals
worldwide. Assisted dying refers to the acts of people terminating their own lives voluntarily
through the indirect or direct administration of certain lethal substances by physicians. In other
words, physicians provide to patients with certain prescribed medications that the patients use to
end their own lives. Assisted dying has its supporters and opponents. Doctors who are in support
of the practice argue that the practice is voluntary, and nobody is forced to end their lives. The
patients administer the dosage themselves once their doctors have approved the means (Keown,
2018). Others in support of the practice argue that since we live in a free society, everybody
should be given the right to decide what they want to do with their lives, and removing this kind
of freedom would require a good reason.
Those against the practice argue that by administering the life-ending substances,
physicians violate the physicians’ code. They suggest that doctors or physicians should not assist
pa...


Anonymous
Just what I needed…Fantastic!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags