Ethical Decision Making Framework
FOCUS: IDEALS
NAME: Paul Anderson
STEP ONE: THE DETAILS OF THE CASE
(1) Choose one inquiry, from inquiries 1 - 28 (pages 114 - 117). Indicate which inquiry you chose, and then briefly explain it in your own words:
I choose inquiry #20 about the man who was elected president of a small country and then became a tyrannical dictator, but was eventually put to death by a small group of the people he had oppressed.
(2) Stakeholders:
The president, his army and secret police, the government and the people of the country all have a stake in the situation. The group that assassinates him are considered to be people of the country.
(3) Are the details given sufficient? Why or why not?
The details are sufficient to give insight into the situation, establish the ideals in conflict and make a decision about the actions taken.
(4) What additional questions does this inquiry raise?
Who did the small group of assassins represent and was their motive to make the country a better place to live or were they just usurping his power to replace his injustices with their own?
STEP TWO: THE RELEVANT CRITERIA
1. Obligations (aka "duties"):
The obligations of citizenship would definitely apply in this situation as well as professional obligations.
2. Moral Ideals (aka "virtues"):
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Prudence:
Prudence applies here as it is the exact opposite of rashness and impulsiveness which may apply to a small group of people assassinating another small group of people.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Justice:
Did the assassination of the president and his accomplices represent justice? * Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Temperance:Probably not applicable in this situation.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Courage:
Courage definitely applies here. Possibly to the president having the courage to do what he did also to the people who assassinated him having the courage to risk their life to accomplish their goals.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Loving Kindness:
Probably not applicable here.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Honesty:
Honesty was definitely violated here by the president. It sounds as if he became president under one pretense and then revealed his true objectives.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Compassion:
I believe that the assassins acted with compassion for their fellow citizens.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Forgiveness:
Not applicable here!
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Repentance:
Not applicable here!
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Reparation:
Not applicable here.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Gratitude:
Not applicable here unless the people of the country show gratitude to the assassins for removing the dictator from their country.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Beneficence:
Not applicable here.
* Conflicting ideals--consider the relative importance of each; determine which ideal represents the greater good (or the lesser evil). See pages 110-11 for clarification.
Murdering the president and his men would present a conflict in ideals, but I believe the assassins considered it the lesser of two evils given that the president was murdering seemingly innocent people.
3. Consequences (aka "outcomes" or "results"): Optional this week
STEP THREE: POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION
Alternative #1:
Seek to remove the president from office through traditional political channels.
Alternative #2:
Seek help from international sources such as the United Nations or other countries sympathetic to the preservation of human rights.
STEP FOUR: THE MOST ETHICAL ACTION
Examine the action taken or proposed and decide whether it achieves the greater good (the most widespread "respect for persons")...if it does not, choose one that will, from your alternatives. Where the choice of actions is such that no good can be achieved, choose the action that will result in the lesser evil.
I believe that assassination of the president was justified. In the case of the Arab guerrillas holding the Israeli Olympic athletes hostage, the authorities had to kill the guerrillas to prevent the murder of more innocent people. This case is similar in that the president was executing the people of his country, so his assassination prevented the further loss of innocent lives.
SELF EVALUATION
1. In your own words, describe something new that you learned from this week’s assigned reading material and guidance.
The explanation of courage was meaningful to me. I guess I never really thought of it as having 3 dimensions. I was moved by the story about the little girl on the bus who befriended the other boy. I would not have thought about it being a conflict of ideals – I now realize that it was not exactly honest, but it was certainly the right thing to do.
2. In your own words, describe in detail some insight you gained, about the material, from one of your classmates' blogs this week.
I cannot honestly answer this question because I only read the instructor blog.
3. Did you post a thoroughly completed post to your blog on time this week?
Yes, except for the question above.
4. Did you ALSO print this out, so you can bring it to class and earn total points?
Yes.
5. Of 25 points total, my efforts this week deserve:
24. I suppose that reading the other students’ blogs is helpful but I did not feel that it was critical for my grade. We all have to be responsible and budget our time as we see fit. I work an average of 48 hours a week and am taking 14 credit hours for the second semester in a row, so anything above the required assignments usually doesn’t make into my schedule. I do read the assignments and try to turn in work that reflects that.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Blog assignment #9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART ONE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this section, we're going to return for a moment to Chapter 7, to the section that discusses errors that are common in the analysis of moral issues (p. 89). Breifly explain each of the following errors in your own words, as if you were explaining the concept to a friend who had never taken this class (consider who, what, when, where, why, how, when); and then give an example of each one, preferably from your own past experience.
Unwarranted Assumptions: To avoid making unwarranted assumptions when we are trying to make a decision on the morality of a given action or decision, we need to be careful to pay attention to only the facts that are given and not assume anything unless it is specifically stated.
Unwarranted assumptions occur frequently in hospital settings. In many instances you may assume that the age/gender of the patient and their visitors are an indication of their relationship. For example you walk into a room and see an elderly man and a young, caring female - you may logically assume the elderly male patient is being visited by his daughter. Or, you see a young male patient with an older female visitor - you may assume that the mother has brought her son to the hospital. I recently walked into a room with an older (late 50's) woman and a young man in his early twenties. (mother/son??) While I was starting an IV on the lady, she began a very descriptive dialogue about her sexual preferences and things that she found very pleasurable in bed. Moral decision on my part: inappropriate discussion for mother and son, especially in the presence of a stranger. Shortly thereafter, she asked him for a kiss, which was deep and wet and sent a wave of nausea over me. I left the room disgusted, only to find out later that the young man was really her "significant other".
Oversimplification: When we examine the morality of a situation we need to be sure to look at the whole picture to make sure that all the relevant facts are considered and we avoid oversimplification.
Recently we had an issue of a pharmacy technician dispensing a medication without a written order from the doctor and without the approval of a pharmacist. In its simplest form this could be grounds for ending the technician's career. Under closer review, it became clear that the technician made the right choice by supporting the E.R. staff and providing the necessary medication to save a patient's life even though there was no written order and there was no pharmacist available.
Hasty Conclusions: When I think of "hasty conclusions" I think of the old phrases "guilty until proven innocent" and "perception is reality". We need to avoid making decisions before we examine the situation fully and make sure that we see things clearly and in the right perspective.
One of the most frequent examples of "hasty conclusions" that I can think of is the conclusion that a man and a woman are having an affair if they work together and get along well. I was the victim of this situation at work. I worked with a woman about the same age as I was and with several things in common to talk about and also a common work ethic. It was several months later that I found out that some of the other employees had come to the conclusion that we were having an affair and that I was the father of her college-age daughter, even though I had known her less than a year and had no contact with her whatsoever outside of our professional relationship.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Briefly answer the following "chapter opening" questions, in your own words, based on what you learned by studying chapter eight:
1. What do we do in situations where there is more than a single obligation?
More than one obligation can lead to some difficult decisions. It is our responsibility to weigh the benefits and consequences of each alternative and then act upon the one that we determine to be the best choice. It is usually best to take the "moral high ground", and act according to accepted values instead of emotions.
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations?
Conflicting obligations need to reviewed and decided upon objectively. You need to examine the obligations fully and in a clear light to determine which one would be the best course of action. We should go with the one that does the most good even if it is not always the easiest choice..
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment?
It reinforced many of the ideas and values that I have acquired after many years in the workforce dealing with people from all walks of life and with values that often seem foreign to me. It made me think about the way that I conduct my life and deal with people on a daily basis, whether that be at home with my family or at work with people from a multitude of cultures.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
I think I will be able to reflect on these chapters when I find myself in a situation that calls for tough decision-making. I think that I will be more able to sort out my obligations and make the right choices, not just the easiest way out.
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer.
It takes me a long time to read and complete these assignments and find applications in my life that fit the relevant chapters. I try to answer the questions to the best of my ability and put my feelings into the correct format. I believe my work is deserving of the possible 25 points listed on the syllabus.
ASSIGNMENT PART ONE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this section, we're going to return for a moment to Chapter 7, to the section that discusses errors that are common in the analysis of moral issues (p. 89). Breifly explain each of the following errors in your own words, as if you were explaining the concept to a friend who had never taken this class (consider who, what, when, where, why, how, when); and then give an example of each one, preferably from your own past experience.
Unwarranted Assumptions: To avoid making unwarranted assumptions when we are trying to make a decision on the morality of a given action or decision, we need to be careful to pay attention to only the facts that are given and not assume anything unless it is specifically stated.
Unwarranted assumptions occur frequently in hospital settings. In many instances you may assume that the age/gender of the patient and their visitors are an indication of their relationship. For example you walk into a room and see an elderly man and a young, caring female - you may logically assume the elderly male patient is being visited by his daughter. Or, you see a young male patient with an older female visitor - you may assume that the mother has brought her son to the hospital. I recently walked into a room with an older (late 50's) woman and a young man in his early twenties. (mother/son??) While I was starting an IV on the lady, she began a very descriptive dialogue about her sexual preferences and things that she found very pleasurable in bed. Moral decision on my part: inappropriate discussion for mother and son, especially in the presence of a stranger. Shortly thereafter, she asked him for a kiss, which was deep and wet and sent a wave of nausea over me. I left the room disgusted, only to find out later that the young man was really her "significant other".
Oversimplification: When we examine the morality of a situation we need to be sure to look at the whole picture to make sure that all the relevant facts are considered and we avoid oversimplification.
Recently we had an issue of a pharmacy technician dispensing a medication without a written order from the doctor and without the approval of a pharmacist. In its simplest form this could be grounds for ending the technician's career. Under closer review, it became clear that the technician made the right choice by supporting the E.R. staff and providing the necessary medication to save a patient's life even though there was no written order and there was no pharmacist available.
Hasty Conclusions: When I think of "hasty conclusions" I think of the old phrases "guilty until proven innocent" and "perception is reality". We need to avoid making decisions before we examine the situation fully and make sure that we see things clearly and in the right perspective.
One of the most frequent examples of "hasty conclusions" that I can think of is the conclusion that a man and a woman are having an affair if they work together and get along well. I was the victim of this situation at work. I worked with a woman about the same age as I was and with several things in common to talk about and also a common work ethic. It was several months later that I found out that some of the other employees had come to the conclusion that we were having an affair and that I was the father of her college-age daughter, even though I had known her less than a year and had no contact with her whatsoever outside of our professional relationship.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Briefly answer the following "chapter opening" questions, in your own words, based on what you learned by studying chapter eight:
1. What do we do in situations where there is more than a single obligation?
More than one obligation can lead to some difficult decisions. It is our responsibility to weigh the benefits and consequences of each alternative and then act upon the one that we determine to be the best choice. It is usually best to take the "moral high ground", and act according to accepted values instead of emotions.
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations?
Conflicting obligations need to reviewed and decided upon objectively. You need to examine the obligations fully and in a clear light to determine which one would be the best course of action. We should go with the one that does the most good even if it is not always the easiest choice..
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment?
It reinforced many of the ideas and values that I have acquired after many years in the workforce dealing with people from all walks of life and with values that often seem foreign to me. It made me think about the way that I conduct my life and deal with people on a daily basis, whether that be at home with my family or at work with people from a multitude of cultures.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
I think I will be able to reflect on these chapters when I find myself in a situation that calls for tough decision-making. I think that I will be more able to sort out my obligations and make the right choices, not just the easiest way out.
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer.
It takes me a long time to read and complete these assignments and find applications in my life that fit the relevant chapters. I try to answer the questions to the best of my ability and put my feelings into the correct format. I believe my work is deserving of the possible 25 points listed on the syllabus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
