Reference no: EM132408466
Assignment -
Read the case study and address the following questions in a 4 page essay.
Essay questions: Respond to all of the following questions and make sure the essay is in essay form--with an introductory paragraph, and then a development of the responses to the questions below with proper paragraphs, transitions between paragraphs, and so on.
The document 'What is Critical Evaluation' (located in General Information in our Content section) has information about proper introductory paragraphs (towards the end). This first essay is a little different than what you will be doing for Essays 2-4. Essays 2-4 are standard "critical evaluation of an argument" type essays, and the document 'What is Critical Evaluation explains that type of essay. You can hold off reviewing that document until we get to Essay 2 (except for reading the end of that document which explains introductory paragraphs, etc)
You can view this first essay as similar to a case resolution in the sense that it examines a case study and asks you to make a moral decision and support that moral view with reasons/argument. BUT!!! It is an essay, and so, once again, you must make sure to write an essay--with a proper introductory paragraph, and then in the body (with proper paragraphs, transitions between paragraphs, etc) you must address all of the questions listed below.
The case study raises a conflict between the principle of autonomy and the principle of beneficence.
Explain each of the principles, and how they are relevant to the case study. (Please refer back to previous chapters and lectures for discussions of these principles)
Explain what the "past-wishes versus present-interests" problem is (see the Mappes reading from this Module) and how that problem can be understood as a conflict between the principle of beneficence and the principle of autonomy (some thinking is needed on your part here...!)
Explain why the case of Margo is an example of the "past-wishes versus present-interests" problem and why it does therefore present a conflict between autonomy and beneficence.
Briefly explain what reasons may justify refusing to honor an advanced directive (see the Mappes article for this Module pp368-369)
What do you think should be done in the case study (should Margo be given the treatment or not be given the treatment)? Defend your answer/support what you say with reasons.
And what this may involve is any of the following or some combination of the following: arguing that the principle of autonomy should take priority over the principle of beneficence OR vice versa; arguing that Margo's past wishes take priority over her present interests OR vice versa; arguing that Mappes' reasons for why it may be justified to not honor an advanced directive are not good reasons (and hence Margo's advanced directive should be honored.
Attachment:- Case Study.rar