Reference no: EM133563907

Assignment: Directions for Research Paper

In the research paper, you will identify a story of a bioethics dilemma. The paper will explore the question: "What is the morally right action in this dilemma?" according to one Moral Framework or Principle of Bioethics.

The paper must contain all the parts outlined below (Parts 1-5), in any order you decide is most effective, in 5-7 pages. You can write down your answers to these questions. Complete all the parts. The final result will be your Research Paper.

Be aware

Part I: What is the ethical dilemma?

1. Briefly describe the situation. Include only essential and relevant information.

2. State the ethical conflict, using one moral framework (Kant's Formula of Ends, Mill's Utilitarianism, or Care Ethics) or a Principle of Bioethics (Principle of Autonomy, Beneficence, Non-Maleficence, or Distributive Justice). Tip: I highly recommend you discuss only ONE moral framework or Principle of Bioethics. Your reflections are often more detailed and interesting when the objections are based on the same moral framework as your reasons and conclusion. (However, if the moral dilemma is due to a conflict between two principles of bioethics, then it might make sense to discuss both of them). Use your own judgment

Understand the complexity

Part II: What resolutions to the dilemma do other people suggest?

1. Explain the resolution proposed by one author in a peer-reviewed journal article. What is the morally right thing to do in situations like this one, according to that author?

2. Optional: Explain a different resolution proposed by a second author. This could be an author from a peer-reviewed article, the textbook, or another source (book, interview, fellow student in the class, discussion with someone you know. Cite.)

Propose an Action

Part III: What resolution to the dilemma do you think is the morally correct one?

1. What is the morally right thing to do in the situation, according to the Moral Framework or Principle you have chosen? Describe the resolution/right action. The resolution you propose might agree with one of the authors you discuss. Or you might offer a new resolution. This is the paper's conclusion.

2. State the reasons why this is the morally correct resolution to the dilemma by using the Moral Framework or Principle you described in Part I. The goal here is to make a valid argument. This section (III2) is the heart of your research paper. Feel free to spend more time and space on this section, and the next one (III3).

3. Consider an objection. That means, state why someone might think one of your reasons is false, and then explain why it is not false. (Section III3 is a good place to go into more detail, clarify key concepts, or explore nuance.)

Revise your actions

Part IV: What further information could convince you to change your mind?

What new information about the situation might lead you to conclude that a different resolution might actually be the morally correct one? Or could lead you to adjust your proposed resolution? Explain why. This section is required. Answers such as "Nothing would change my mind" do not receive full credit. Dig deep and be thoughtful and kind. This is an opportunity to practice following where the evidence leads you, rather than sticking with pre-conceived ideas.

On Drafts only

Required Reflection: Include the three required sections at the end. Drafts missing these three sections do not receive full points.

1. Describe what you still need to do, and give a brief explanation of what you intend to put in the incomplete sections (if there are any).

2. Ask 2-3 specific questions of the Peer Reviewers about things you need help with to improve your paper.

3. Provide honest reflections on the draft: what you need help with, or wish you could have done better, things you wanted to include but didn't have space, or simply things you are still thinking about.