Ethics Discussion-7

Project Id:

1124670

Posted By:

lakuana757

Project Title:

Ethics Discussion-7

Writing Type:

Original

Project Type:

Gold

Status:

IN PROGRESS

Subject:

Ethics

Number Of Pages:

1     1.5 spaced (337 words)

Number Of Sources:

2

Type of Document:

online discussion question

Academic Level:

College/University

Citation Style:

MLA

Attachment(s):

N/A

Solution Files(s):

N/A

Description:

Part I: Read Chapter 55 in A Primer for Health Care Ethics. Using the applicable critical thinking questions, read and evaluate the essay. Part II: Does the essay support Devettere’s and Kelly’s positions on euthanasia and PAS? If so, how? If not, why not? Source: O’Rourke, Kevin, ed. A Primer for Health Care Ethics: Essays for a Pluralistic Society. 2nd ed. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2000. ISBN-13: 9780878408023 Devettere, Raymond. Practical Decision Making in Health Care Ethics: Cases and Concepts. 3rd ed. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2010. ISBN-13: 9781589012516 Kelly, David F., Gerard Magill, and Henk Ten Have. Contemporary Catholic Health Care Ethics. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2013. Print. ISBN: 978-1-58901-960-7 Critical Thinking Guidelines The assignments demand attentive summarization and evaluation of text material and related articles. Your instructor will use the following intellectual and critical thinking standards to assess the quality of your work. Clarity: This is the gateway standard. If a statement is unclear, one cannot determine if it is accurate or relevant. To help insure clarity you could elaborate further on the point, give an illustration, or an example. Accuracy: A statement may be clear but wrong, as in “Most dogs are over 300 pounds in weight.” Is that really true? How could one check that? How can we find out the truth? We will rely on, first of all, being attentive to the sources of our study of health care ethics. Precision: A statement can be clear and accurate, but not precise. Could you give more details? Could you be more specific? Relevance: A response can be clear, accurate, precise, but not relevant. How is your response connected to the question? How does it bear on the issue or case? Depth: A response can be clear, accurate, precise and relevant, but superficial. How does your answer address the complexities in the question? How are you taking into account the problems in the case study? Breadth: A line of reasoning may be clear, accurate, precise, relevant, and deep, but lack breadth. One might only recognize the issue from one side of the question. Do you need to consider another point of view? Is there another way to look at the question? What would the issue look like from a conservative point of view, from a liberal point of view, from a theological or religious point of view? Logic: When we think, we bring a variety of thoughts together in some order. When the combined thoughts are mutually supporting and make sense together, then one’s thinking is “logical.” Does your response really make sense? Does it follow from what you have written? How does that follow? If you imply one thing but then say something else, how can both be true?