Phil 389 Bioethics with Dr. Griffin/ Dr. Shors Exam 1 GOAL: The goal of this exam is to give you an opportunity to consolidate your thoughts and ideas about the theoretical elements of bioethics and of the doctor patient relationship. __________________________________________________________________ FORMAT: Your exam should be typed, double spaced, 1” margins, standard font. Your response should include references to the texts we have read thus far, notes from class sessions, and/ or other reputable sources that you have properly documented. Your response should be addressed to an academic audience (text-based conventions). Length will be covered within TOPICS (see below). To give you a rough idea of the expectations for papers, here is a qualitative rubric. The source of this rubric is the Writing Program at NMT: A: An A paper makes a unique contribution to our knowledge about a particular subject, significantly applying and extending principles discussed in class. It does not merely quote sources but rather evaluates the claims they make with respect to the overall argument of the paper. Its documentation ethics are unimpeachable. It has style. It presents a polished surface to the audience in terms of visual presentation, grammar, punctuation, and citation. B: A B paper displays mastery of principles taught in class. It contains a strong, arguable thesis addressed to a specific audience. While there may be a few glitches in style and presentation, overall it would be presentable to an advisor for feedback. C: A C paper satisfies the requirements of the assignment as stated, including a recognizable thesis, material from multiple sources, and passable style and mechanics. It is therefore an average performance, suitable for presentation as a rough draft to peers, the instructor, or writing center staff for feedback. D: A D paper fails to satisfy the basic requirements of the assignment in argumentation and presentation. It contains errors in thesis, support, style, documentation, and visual presentation that render it unsuitable to submit to outside readers in an academic environment. F: An F paper seriously fails to meet the requirements of the assignment either through gross inadequacy of effort or through a grave breach of ethics such as plagiarism. Here’s a figure to accompany the above information: excellent very good good fair poor Content/ ideas/understanding of the concepts (weighted most heavily) Development/support— Clear, convincing Presentation is clear and highly readable Part 1 Write a coherent 2-3 page essay* that explores one (you choose) of the following topics. Be sure to reference the readings from your text book and from available handouts as support for your assertions. Make sure that you document your ideas carefully using an accepted documentation style (MLA, APA, CBE…). *Page count does not include Works Cited page. 1. Reflect on the first essay we read for class—“Learning the Language” by Perri Klass. Examine Klass’s observations on the language of doctors through several ethical theories (deontology, utilitarianism, relativism, feminism…). The purpose is to generate insight into the kinds of structures and values that are embedded in the language (and actionsand attitudes) of doctors. Follow up your analysis by determining the dominant model that the physicians employ in Klass’s article. The dominant models are carefully laid out in Chapter 2 of our textbook. 2. Describe how the Dr. / patient relationship has changed through the years, and how ethical theories play into those changes. You might also consider the role of the media and popular culture in marking or facilitating the changes. 3. Discuss the role technology has played in the evolution of medicine and medical ethics. Tie in the ethical theories discussed in class. Part 2 Case Studies can help us tie theory to practice (or praxis). For this part of the exam, you will write two case analyses. You can choose from the 3 options below: 1). Write a clear explanation of the ethical issues that the case involves 2). Discuss how the case should be resolved and why you suggest a particular resolution(s). Your responses should be informed by the ethical theories we have studied in class. Your choices: • Case 2 on page 698 • Case 6 on page 699 • The following case from the popular series House. If you choose the case from House, you need not address every case in the episode. Choose one that you can discuss in detail or several that form some platform from which to discuss ethics. *THE RIGHT STUFF* EPISODE PREMIERE: October 2, 2007 A female Air Force pilot named Greta flies a Stealth fighter jet with precision over a desert landscape. She begins to perceive sounds for the flight rather than visuals. She heads for a crash into the mountainside. Greta is actually in a virtual reality flight simulator inside a warehouse. Angry and confused, she blames the controller for her crash. In the hospital lecture hall, House asks the Fellowship candidates to identify the man on the screen behind him. It is the actor Buddy Ebsen, who was diagnosed with an allergy to aluminum dust in the make-up used on him as the original Tin Man character in "The Wizard of Oz." House dismisses the group to investigate the allergy. Cuddy comes to the door to tell House he'd better start eliminating candidates. House proceeds to fire the entire Row C. Yet when a pretty applicant goes to leave, House changes it to Row D instead. House gets a page from his own pager number. He enters his office to find Greta waiting. She offers him fifty thousand dollars in cash to diagnose what is wrong with her. It appears that she is seeing with her ears, and she hopes to keep this fact from NASA and the Air Force where she is a candidate for astronaut training. House brings the case of synesthesia to the remaining group of applicants and tells them to keep it a secret. He assigns some candidates to perform different tests on the patient. Another group is sent to break into Greta's home to find out what she is hiding. He tells the rest of the candidates to wash his car. While candidate Jeffery Cole washes House's car, the others assigned to it complain. Amber Volakis has them all stop, and she takes the car to acarwash with Cole. The trio designated to break into the patient's home also complain. Henry Dobson, a candidate