PHIL 148A: FINAL

-should organs be prohibited to sell? if so, will this create a black market?this is backed by utilitarians. they argue that the life saved is justified in breaking the rules. however, a deontologist adhere to rule based ethical principals and therefore would oppose a black market. in addition, it leads to exploitation of the donor, as they are coerced by money. also could lead to organ theft, in murdering others for their organs -the autonomy:l. because of the high demand, and the act of saving another life, they are often pressured into the situation. in addition, doctors do not often tell risks involved, and regret later

active euthanasia- actively ending another's life, usually through lethal injection, taking direct action

when a patient dies due to the fact that there was no medical intervention by the doctor, not lengthening a patient's life, through either ending treatments or not resuscitating after cardiac rest *differences: killing vs letting die, the distinction is important as it creates a line of which physicians must not cross between letting nature take its course and actively ending a patients life

the patient is fully aware and takes his/her own life either directly or refusing treatment

against patient's wishes, contrary to their views

Non-voluntary euthanasia (sometimes known as mercy killing) is euthanasia conducted where the explicit consent of the individual concerned is unavailable.

1) the patient has the right to die, and doctor's cannot go against their patients' right -weak argument in that the patient cannot only be thinking of themselves as they are not the only ones affected. also their autonomy may be altered, as who's rational in wanting to die? 2) its the doctors duty to end suffering -sometimes the only way the doctor can benefit the patient is to end their life -backed by principal of beneficence

1) doctor's duty to save lives and do no harm -backed by beneficence, Hippocratic oath -doctor should do whatever it takes to save a life 2) it's playing god -being able to take your own life, is not rational and is playing god. one should let nature take its course. -weak argument in that doesn't affect all groups of people -different cultures and different religions

to cure a disease, or restore a patient to the best state of health. to pick the healthiest genes (treatment)

to work on an already healthy body -aka enhancement - deals with drugs and procedures to improve human capacities or characteristics

1) not playing god -by saying you are playing god, you are then saying to use natural selection. thus saying no to all medicine, as medicine goes against nature. against pos and neg engineering -weak: doesn't mention genetic variety, and creates a gene pool that's limited 2) genetic supermarket -promotes diversity, limits what the parents can choose not to harm -good for therapeutic, bad for non-therapeutic (sex ratio, creating selfish and competitive people)

1) too risky -the risks are high, consequences are fairly unknown. who knows what new genes could be linked to something else? -weak: clinical trials are done every day, medicine advances through trying, many good has come in this 2) less genetic diversity -nobody wants to live in a world of the same people -messes with the natural selection process and adaptive genes

generate cells, tissues, organs creates a "perfect fit" if someone needed a new liver for example

producing genetic offspring directly identical to the cell donor. applies to dolly the sheep case

-helping the infertile, specifically gay/lesbian couples -will allow them to have genetic offspring without having an unknown sperm/egg donor. -helps non traditional couples -weak: specified towards gays, has to be open to everyone it would create mental problems for the child having to meet certain standards of the parents

diminish the sense of individuality in an human clones may be seen as being devalued in society society likes uniqueness -medically risky as well, experimenting on children, leads to miscarriages, still births -strong argument for utilitarian in that the ends doesn't justify the means.

The genotype is the genetic makeup of a cell, an organism, or an individual. internally coded, blueprint for building and maintaining a creature

A phenotype is any observable characteristic or trait of an organism: such as its morphology, development, biochemical or physiological properties, behavior, and products of behavior (such as a bird's nest). these can be influenced by outside environmental factors. -expression of the geneotype

demands that each rational, competent person be given the right to make medical decisions. must not be influenced by internal or external factors.

doctors law to benefit the patient at all costs -one should "do good" make lives better and healthy

above all do no harm

-breaking a law constitute not having health care? -taxpayers feel the blunt, and limited resources: create a happy medium -yes they choose the worst job, but its our social responsibility to help others out as they are productive members of society

Direct-to-consumer advertising (DTC advertising) usually refers to the marketing of pharmaceutical products but can apply in other areas as well. directed towards patients, rather than health care professionals. unduly influence prescribing of unnecessary drugs.

without profits, drug companies couldn't make life-saving and life improving medications -also inform people of the diseases that are out there, raises public health awareness

harmful side affects, not fully autonomous in making health care decisions as they are not fully aware of the consequences of drugs -lose trust in medicine, more interested in making money than improving lives

"social welfare vs individual autonomy" -decision making, privacy, and paternalism vs individualism -P vs. I: most important in that a patient must make own decision or follow a doctors advice (paternalist). can affect their decision

-prioritize preventing new infection, early detection and response globally, greatest medical needs.