PHI 237: Medical Ethics 5/9/17 Instructor: Shane HemmerExam #3 Possible Short Answer Questions1. Explain Debra Satz’s gender inequality argument against commercial surrogacy (how does commercial surrogacy promote gender inequality, and why does this show that commercial surrogacy is morally wrong?)Current gender inequality lies at the heart of what is wrong with pregnancy contracts. The problem with commodifying women’s reproductive labor is notthat it “degrades” the special nature of reproductive labor, or “alienates” women from a core part of their identities, but it reinforces a traditional gender-hierarchal division of labor. 2. Gerald Dworkin considers three arguments in favor of allowing organ markets. State one of the arguments and explain how it supports allowing a market in organs.We currently accept the legitimacy of non-commercial solid-organ donations. We also accept sale of blood, semen, ova, hair, and tissue. By doing this we accept that individuals have the right to dispose of organs and other body parts if they choose to.3. Robert Veatch endorses a deontological approach to liver allocation for alcoholics which treats alcoholism as significantly voluntary. What is Veatch’s proposal for deciding who gets a liver transplant?1. Break ties on the basis of whether one has a diagnosis of alcoholism or other need related to voluntary health-risky behaviors.2. Second, break ties by time on waiting list.PHI 237: Medical Ethics 5/9/17 Instructor: Shane Hemmer4. Michael Gill argued that a model of presumed consent (“opt-out”) for organ donation would be a moral improvement over the current “opt-in” policy. Why does he think this is true?He thinks it’s true because 70% of people would be willing to donate organs if they believed their organs were viable for transplant. Presuming consent would likely reduce the overall number of mistakes in organ procurement decisions.5. Explain Gill’s distinction between the non-interference model of autonomy, and the respect-for-wishes model of autonomy, and explain why he thinks it shows that mistaken removals and mistaken non-removals of organs are morally equivalent.Noninterference means it is wrong to interfere with a competent person’s bodyunless that person gives permission to do so. Respect for wishes means we should seek to treat a person’s body the way they would wish for it to be treated. Since incompetent or brain-dead people cannot consent, we try to make the decision that would best honor the patient’s wishes. Mistakenly removing organs and mistakenly not removing organs are morally equivalent. 6. Why does Elizabeth Anderson think that commercial surrogacy disrespects and degrades surrogate mothers? (Note: there is more than one correct answer.)Commercial surrogacy reduces surrogate mothers from person’s worthy of respect and consideration to objects of mere use. Surrogacy violates the normsof respect and consideration.PHI 237: Medical Ethics 5/9/17 Instructor: Shane Hemmer7. Why does Elizabeth Anderson think that commercial surrogacy degrades anddisrespects children? (Note: there is more than one correct answer.)Since children are valued as mere use objects by the surrogate mother and surrogate agency, and by adoptive parents, commercial surrogacy degrades children. It treats them as commodities. Children should be loved and cherished by their parents rather than used or manipulated for personal gain. 8. Satz considers and rejects four arguments in favor of the essentialist thesis, which is supposed to support the Special Nature of Reproductive Labor argument against commercial surrogacy. State one of the arguments she considers, and explain her objection to that argument (Hint: on the lecture slides for Satz, look at the slides titled “Justifying the Essentialist Thesis”.)1. Women’s reproductive labor involves a genetic relationship between theworker and her product, while most forms of labor do not.Satz objection: critics of commercial surrogacy also object to it in cases where a woman is impregnated by IVF, mother and fetus would have no genetic relation.Men have a genetic tie to offspring but almost no one opposes selling of