4012010EthicsHU 245-01Final ProjectK.docx

4/01/2010
Ethics
HU 245-01
Final Project
Knowledge Acquisition
Here is a summary of the key concepts and theories that I
learned in this course. I will elaborate on my understanding of
these and also give some examples of my work on these
throughout the class where possible.
What is ethics?
What is bioethics?
What are the consequentialist theories of morality?
What are the non-consequentialist theories of Morality?
How do ethics apply to the following:
Business
Healthcare
Society
Environment

2
What is Ethics?
“Ethics, according to our readings, is similar to morality, in
which it is the values by which human beings live in relation to
other human beings, nature, God, and/or themselves. (Thiroux
and Krasemann) To me this is the ways or rules or guidelines
that we give ourselves to follow in life in addressing everyday
issues in relation to anything that we encounter. They shape
who we are and how we are perceived by others. They influence
every decision that we make and they can play a major role in
our families or relationships with others. People may base this
personal set of rules off religion, law, personal feelings, etc.
It’s the way we reason and reconcile our decisions to ourselves.
Having a clear ability to understand your own ethical conduct
allows you to see how your actions will affect yourself and
others in the future after your actions have been made. Your
ethics shape who you are as a person.”
Unit 1 Discussion Question #1
What is Bioethics?
Bioethics is concerned with the moral decisions that we are
involved in making in the medical world. When it comes to the
care and treatment of the sick, there are lots of grey areas. We
run into a numerous amount of situations where ethics play a
role in the decisions that we make. A few of the situations that I
am referring to are the treatments of dying patients, mercy death
or killing, behavior control, human experimentation, informed
consent, organ transplantation, birth control, etc. This is

sometimes referred to as “life ethics”.(Thiroux and Krasemann)
Obviously, these issues are only the tip of the iceberg when it
comes to bioethics but there are many ethical theories relating
to them all. We learned about several different issues in
healthcare regarding ethics; however, I am only going to use a
couple in my illustration of the knowledge gained in this area.
Later on, I will show work I have done in the abortion, and
dying aspects of bioethics.
Consequentialist Theories of Morality
Consequentialist theories are based on the idea that there
are consequences for the actions that we choose and decisions
we make.
Psychological Egoism- is a scientific theory stating that is some
capacity people act in their own self interest. (Thiroux and
Krasemann)
Ethical Egoism- is a prescriptive theory claiming that a person
should act in their own self interest, I should act in my own self
interest but don’t care what others do, and that everyone should
act in their own self interest. (Thiroux and Krasemann)
Utilitarianism- we should follow the morally correct act that
would be the best for everyone involved. There are two forms of
utilitarianism: act and rule. Act Utilitarianism chooses the act
that brings about the most good over bad. The rule
utilitarianism chooses the act that will bring about the most
amount of good consequences for all involved. (Thiroux and
Krasemann)
Arguments against consequentialist theories- the main argument
is that this theory is based on the idea that we are able to
determine all the possible consequences for any given situation
which is highly impossible. It also states that we can determine

what is good for other people. (Thiroux and Krasemann)
Care Ethics- this is a theory by Carol Gillian, a psychologist
who had different views about the moral attitudes between men
and women. She thought that women’s have to do with
generosity, harmony, reconciliation and working to maintain
close relationships; where as men, are more independent, live
by rules and are competitive and their attitudes have more to do
with justice and their rights. Some argue that these are saying
what men and women’s roles should be instead of insisting
equality among genders. (Thiroux and Krasemann)
Non-Consequentialist Theories of Morality
The theory that states that consequences of moral actions should
have no weight on the decision. Instead that we should have set
“rule” or standards by which are decisions are made.
Act non-consequentialist theories-assumes that they are no
general moral rules or theories, but there are actions, people and
situations that we can’t generalize. (Thiroux and Krasemann)
This theory states that we should make decisions based on what
we feel is right.
Rule non-consequentialist theories- believes that there should
be set rules and the only thing morally important is following
those rules, not the consequences that may result. For example,
Divine Command Theory.
Arguments against non-consequentialist theories – A big
argument against the act non-consequentialist theory is that its
too individual to assume we know what is best for everyone
involved and are able to make momentary decisions that will be
best for everyone. The arguments against rule non-
consequentialist theories are basically that we cannot ignore
possible consequences and that it doesn’t provide a moral

system that is in the greater good for everyone involved.
(Thiroux and Krasemann)
“While reading about Kant and his duty ethics I found myself
understanding and agreeing with much of what he said.
Obviously when you start to hear his position critiqued you
begin to understand that side as well. However, I would like to
think that there are absolutes to live by but most of which
would have a situation where they would be challenged
legitament. The only absolute that I could say would never have
an exception would be ones dealing with the sexual abuse of
children. I am not sure how much emotion determines what is
ethical and what isn’t . I think for the most part ethical
decisions should feel good being made to one party or the other.
I think that some laws have to be made because decisions based
on emotion could result in poor decisions. So no I don’t think
that a decision, ethical or otherwise, should ever be made when
we are emotional because this can result in a poor decision.
However, when ethical guidelines are in place I think that
following the right thing to do can cause emotion. We have to
look at the consequences of our decision for everyone involved
in the long term and not just try to look for immediate
gratification for our self and what would feel good at the
moment for us. Even if it is immediately gratifying even for
ourselves then it could potentially cause us harm in the long
run. I think that emotion should be left at the door when it
comes to determining what is ethical and what isn’t.”
How do ethics apply to business?
Business Ethics, Affirmative Action, and Honesty

People and companies cheat for all kinds of reasons but
mostly because it will get them ahead of the game or make more
money. I believe they cheat because they don’t have the
confidence that they can do it themselves without cheating.
Cheating causes some major damage. It shatters the trust that
we need in relationships whether its personal or business.
(Thiroux and Krasemann) Cheating is unfair to people who are
doing what they are suppose to be doing to be a good just
individual. I haven’t dealt with it a lot luckily. However, I have
seen people lie on resumes about previous job experience and
things to get a good job and they never even checked them out.
So I thought it was just a downfall on the businesses part. But I
wasn’t involved and it didn’t affect me so I minded my own
business.
Reference:
Thiroux, Jacques P. and Krasemann, Keith W. Ethics: Theory
and Practice. Kaplan Higher Education2009: Pearson Education,
Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ.
In the case of Allen Lopez vs. ExtremeNet it is my
understanding that Allen Lopez wants to keep his job at
ExtremeNet after creating a fictional website portraying content
that is very similar to that of the business affairs of
ExtremeNet. ExtremeNet is offended and wants the website
removed. It is my assumption that Allen has not been willing to
remove the website prior to this ruling and that it is the
executives at ExtremeNet’s wish to terminate his employment.
Based on the facts of this case, this website does not use any
company slogans, or other identifying mark. It only represents

the views of the company on employee factors and is getting
feedback on those views. These are views that are not
necessarily owned solely by ExtremeNet and could also reflect
the policy of other companies. However, since Allen works at
ExtremeNet and previously expressed his objection to their
policy prior to creating the website, ExtremeNet is confident
that the website is a plot of slander upon them.
ExtremeNet’s concern is that they have worked hard to make a
good name for their business and this could consequently
damage their reputation. It is also fair to state that in their early
decisions that caused all of this; their intent was to benefit the
consumers by only allowing the most current, knowledgeable
and successful employees to keep their jobs during a hard time
for the business when critical cuts needed to be made. (Thiroux,
Kraseman) They believe this was a deliberate attack made on
them by Allen as a form of rebellion from their previous
discussion.
One the other hand, Allen, did not do anything that was a direct
attack on the company. He does have the right to free speech,
especially in light that this was not done on company time. This
was done out of the privacy of his own home with no direct
connection back to ExtremeNet. I believe that further discussion
by the executives based on the reason why the decisions were
made when Allen came to them before all this would have made
this result differently. ExtremeNet’s executives should have
called a meeting to address Allen’s concerns and pushed to find
a solution back when Allen addressed them with the initial
concern.
It is my in my judgment that ExtremeNet has no grounds on
which to terminate Allen’s employment. Employ policies are
normally pretty public and so they should have nothing to hide.
In addition, I do not feel the need for Allen to withdraw his
website. This is a personal website, with personal views and
arguments and doesn’t directly impact ExtremeNet. I would
advise that he took it down to promote peace with in a company
that he will continue to work in but it will not be mandatory.

Unit 8 Arbitration Paper Project
How do ethics apply to business?
Employee Loyalty
How do ethics apply in health care?
Abortion
The issue of abortion brings up many issues to many people.
This is why there isn’t a single right answer for everyone to
agree on. Below I listed my work on the discussion board and as
a project on this issue.
“Sites for both sides of the issue are very well organized
and informative. They are both very persuasive and make you
feel like their issues are supported by very important people in
the medical profession or in politics. Just as in the readings, all
the arguments are very well thought out. When you read the
ideas behind each side they are compelling and make you
second guess your opinion. I know that I have to really go back
to the core feelings that I have on the issue in order to not feel
just stuck in the middle because both sides have a great
argument. It is quite obvious why this issue is debated so much
in our society. There is no right answer that can be agreed on by
everyone. I don’t notice any ethical style but that they both
believe that the position that they are fighting for are ethically
correct based on their beliefs. I don’t really know that my view
of the methods used is any different after viewing the sites.
They all give key people who support them. They all have life
stories of women who went one way or the other and profess
how that was the right decision. They are just both very well
educated on the facts behind their opinion and obviously feel
they are in the right. I do not think that one side gives a better
argument then the other, as they are both very compelling.”

“Pro-Choice states that a person believes a woman has the
right to her body and to choose what is allowed to live inside it.
This position has several levels but the moderate position
maintains that a woman is ethically correct to choose an
abortion when the fetus is abnormal, causing harm to the
mother, not wanted, or the mother has chosen not to continue
with the pregnancy for other personal reasons. It also argues
that a fetus is not considered a human being until conception
rather than at fertilization as pro life advocates argue.
Therefore, when a woman chooses to abort a pregnancy they are
not ethically incorrect, according to the pro-choice advocates,
because they are not murdering since the conceptus isn’t a
human being yet.”
Unit 3 Position Paragraph Project—Original
I am still kicking myself in the butt a little on this position
paragraph. I was concentrating so much on not starting a huge
debate on the discussion boards over issues that I forgot to take
a side on the position paragraph, hence the title “position”
paragraph, since I was suppose to take a position. Therefore, I
want to rewrite this some.
“Pro-Choice states that a person believes a woman has the
right to her body and to choose what is allowed to live inside it.
I believe that a woman is ethically correct to choose an abortion
when the fetus is abnormal, causing harm to the mother, not
wanted, or the mother has chosen not to continue with the
pregnancy for other personal reasons. Advocates, including
myself, also argue that fetus is not considered a human being
until conception rather than at fertilization as pro life advocates
argue. Therefore, when a woman chooses to abort a pregnancy
they are not ethically incorrect because they are not murdering
since the conceptus isn’t a human being yet.”
Unit 3 Position Paragraph Project– Rewritten

How do ethics apply in health care?
Dying
This issue is a big one! This involves allowing someone to die
at their own free will, Mercy Death and Mercy Killing. Below
is some of my work on these very important issues.
“I feel like everyone has the right to choose to end their
own lives if a time comes that they feel they need to. Shouldn't
we have the right over our own body and life? He wants to die
with dignity and to avoid prolonged suffering. I don’t think that
Will actually is deciding the course of his own death. I believe
that fate already done that when his body was taken over with
cancer. He just chose to have an option available to him that
would give him a way out if he was unable to stand the pain any
longer. Its not like Will has given up easily. He is under a lot of
pain and despair already, when he asks the physicians to do this,
and he isn’t asking them to kill him right now. He just asks that
they allow him this one last say in his life, which is ending
anyway.
Obviously there are many ethical implications of Will’s request.
One of the most prevailing to me as Christian is the religious
one. There is also the possibility of cures or medical advances.
He is also putting a burden on his physicians and family who
will have to live with his decision. Some people also feel like
by doing this, his physicians are abandoning him and his family
and forcing suffering on them.” Professors Response to this
thread : “One problem with leaving it up to the individual is
that often in times of pain people are not very rational. Other
times death is not always certain. People may want to choose
death even with the hope of recovery in order to stop the
suffering.” My response to professor: “I do understand that, and
I don't think that it should always be left up to the individual
but in Wills case I think it should have. I say this because if it
were me, if I was in so much pain knowing that I would be

leaving behind a loving family and still I would choose death
over life, then the pain must be pretty unbearable and I would
hope I would have the option to make it stop. This almost seems
like a case of selfishness. On the part of the patient who would
rather die then live through it and also on the family who would
rather their sick relative suffer then leave them alone. Pretty
touchy subject.”
“ I believe that my answer to the first question would be the
same if Will was on life support. He has the right to choose not
to suffer any longer. He asked for this before he had his stroke
and the stroke didn’t make things better for him, they made it
worse. Therefore, I think it is his wife’s duty, since she knows
at heart what her husband wanted, to carry out his wishes even
if these are not her own. It may not be fair to her, and it will
surely be difficult in the present and future but this is what she
agreed to by her acceptance to be his surrogate health care
decision maker and his medical power of attorney, not to
mention in marriage. It’s not like she is assuming what he
wants, he already told her.
Now in the case that Will was not terminally ill, I would be
against what he has asked. I would say this without the
knowledge of the exact circumstances, although I am sure that
there would be circumstances where I may say otherwise.
However, if a person is not in pain and dying anyway then I
can’t see any reason to end their life. But I am sure there is
some case somewhere that would prove me wrong.”
Capital punishment is when certain states allow criminals who

meet certain criteria to be punished for their crimes by death.
There are many issues that arise when we discuss this topic. I
believe I covered a lot of the issues in a discussion post for unit
5 listed below:
“The book defines capital punishment as the infliction of
death for certain crimes. In our readings we learn that people
who are against capital punishment argue that the criminals are
not given a chance to rehabilitate themselves and become active
and useful members of society. They claim that there is too
often only circumstantial evidence that convicts these people
and so the possibility of killing an innocent person is too high.
They claim that this is ineffective in society. In the old days
this didn’t detour thieves from stealing when they saw the
convicted hung in public and that now days it is carried out in
private so society don’t even know that its necessarily
happening. Finally they claim that killing a criminal for their
crime doesn’t undo what they have done. It won’t take pain
away from the loved ones or bring back the dead.
Now on the other side of the issue: Capital punishment supports
say that this would be more effective if it was used more often.
They say that eye for an eye should prevail. They claim that
criminals who commit these types of crimes give up their right
for life and other rights when they commit their crimes. They
also say why should they have the right to rehabilitation when
most killers kill again. They odds of rehabilitation is extremely
low and this puts society at risk. They feel that this is a form of
societies self defense and claim that technology today allows
for a secure conviction.
If I had a family murdered then I would definitely want the
capital punishment considered. I would want revenge and I
would want that person to suffer as my family member and our
family did. If they are able to take an innocent life then society
should be able to take their non-innocent life for their crime.
Plus, why should another family have to possibly go through the
same thing if this prisoner is released or escapes and then kills
again? I don’t think they should get a chance to live a normal

life through rehabilitation…the innocent life they took wouldn’t
have the same option.”
How do ethics apply to society?
Capital Punishment
“Governor Jay Nixon,
After extensive research on the pro’s and con’s of
capital punishment, I would like to offer my support in Missouri
upholding their laws allowing this as a form of punishment in
our state. I believe that this is very effective in showing
criminals that if their actions constitute the degree of
seriousness required to obtain the capital punishment, then this
is what they will face. This could keep some criminals from
killing, using weapons in robberies, etc. This also serves as a
form of justice for the victims of these crimes. Their families
are given the peace of mind of knowing that other families will
not be affected by this criminal and that they will not be given
the chance to harm again rather it be because of parole or
escape.
However, after reviewing Missouri’s website
Missouri’s Death Row: The History of Capital Punishment in
Missouri, I have learned about the 14 instances in which this
law could be applied. One of these instances was if the victim
was a working police officer, correction officer or fireman. I am
a little confused as to why this would be included. I have
unspeakable respect for these people and what they do and I
fully understand that their jobs put them at an increase risk.
However, I believe that any murder should constitute capital
punishment, not just because of the victim’s title. I believe that

a few of the other instances would fall into this same category
for debate; another being if the victim is a correctional facility
worker.
Overall, the state of Missouri is doing a great job in
showing criminals that these serious actions will not be
tolerated. They are proving to society that they will protect
their citizens. Research has shown that rehabilitation of these
criminals is very rare and although price tags shouldn’t be put
on the lives of people who have a right to their life, these
people should not have that right. Therefore, tax payers money
should not be spent rehabilitating or providing living expenses
for those who are incarcerated. These people will not become
trustworthy useful members of society and should be held
accountable for their crime in a means that is equal. Thank you
for your continued work on this issue.
Sincerely,
Keri Nichol”
Unit 5 Letter to Your Leader Option 2 Project
How do ethics apply to society?
Example of my work in this area:
There are many views on animal and nature’s rights. The
opposing views state that humans have absolute control over
animal and nature, given to them by god and natural order to do
as they need or want to do with animals and nature. The other
side states that we should take more of a wholistic view where
God created all of nature, human and animal and we are all
equal. However, I am more for the moderate view; whereas it
states, that although we were all created by God, humans should
use nature and animals sparingly only as needed to survive and
nourish ourselves and not at its expense. Animals should be free

range and be slaughtered painlessly. Nature should be preserved
at all costs by trying to replace what we take from it. We do not
have the right to use, use, use and not give back.
How do ethics apply to environment?
Animal and Nature’s Rights
Analytical Skill Building
This course gave me many great resources. I entered into the
course with little expectation of learning anything new.
However, although the topics are pretty dated, my knowledge of
the real issues behind them have grown.
When we would enter into a new unit, I would learn of the
subject and automatically bring to mind my own views on the
subject. At that time I was unaware of how little information I
actually had to back up my arguments for my position. As I
learned both sides of issues, I found it interestingly difficult to
keep my stance 100% of the time. I was able to see the points of
both sides, not just my own. Although, I don’t believe anything
changed my mind on the side I took on issues, I do feel that I
have a greater understanding of why I choose the side I am on
and a much deeper respect for the opposing side and their
arguments as well.
I was also a little unprepared for the debate that some of
these issues rose on discussion boards. Although, for the most
part things stayed respectful, I began this course unprepared to
argue my positions but had to step up real quick. This could
possibly of been because of my own ignorance on the key
issues.

Analytical Skill Building
EXAMPLES OF DEBATE:
Any abuse of children is never acceptable. I don't think
emotionally legally, ethically or any other 'ally' could make it
alright for a child to be abused. Yet we, as a world still have
serious child abuse problems. If we don't act on all those, how
do we make a difference?
I don't know that ethics is based on feelings of one to another. I
am not sure where you are going with the rest of this post,
please explain.
Julie
“Julie, the statement that I made of ethics feeling good to one
part or the other refers to the fact that when we make an ethical
decision most times it is a decision that benefits somebody. This
is not to say that we benefit from it personally but someone is
made happy by it. I am not sure what your issue is my post but I
feel that it was very self explanatory. The only example that I
can give to help clarify my feelings of leaving emotions out of
ethical decision is the fact that there are times when we are hurt
by someone or something and our immediately "emotional"
response could be to strike back or hurt back however, if we
take a step back and allow emotions to subside then we can
make a clearer more ethical decision.”
Keri
“No issue, I just was not sure what you were saying. Thanks for
the clarification.”
Julie
Unit 2 Discussion Question #1 –My initial post to thread and
Julie Webley’s responses to my post

OR
“Wow, its amazing the response that we get on certain
issues. lol I also indicated that I didn't think emotion should
play a role in ethical decisions. When I made this statement in
my post, I was referring to more of the immediate emotion that
is tied to certain issues. For example, when something happens
and we are hurt, upset, super excited, etc. I think that making
ethical decisions on emotional "highs or lows" is dangerous.
Obviously, emotions do have some degree of affect on our
ethical decisions. I just think that ethical decisions should be
delayed until we are in a normal everyday emotional state where
our entire decision isn't being made based on that emotion.
Sometimes we need time to think and absorb information and
even cool off before we can make a ethical decision. I am not
sure if this is the extent to which you felt emotion should be
inactive or if you thought it should be left out entirely....if that
is even possible?”
Keri,
I think I may be starting to track with on this. Do you mean
something like; when your child breaks a favorite vase while
running through the house and your instant reaction is anger but
you wait to discipline until you are not angry?
I could be wrong.
Julie
Well, yes, that could be an example of what I am referring to.
Keri
Unit 2 Discussion Question #1 –My response to Julie Webleys
response to Kenneth Stephenson initial post.

Practical Application
I know that this course gave me some valuable life skills
that I can use in the future. It really taught me to have respect
for other peoples point of views and to keep an open mind. So
many times we are just set in our own ways but this really
opened my eyes to the idea that there are many right answers to
problems and very seldom just one answer. Just because I think
it is so , doesn’t make it right for everyone. I will be able to use
this in the business world and in my personal life.
I have already found myself getting all sides of
stories before I make a decision. Even at home when it comes to
my kids and their arguments. Maybe I am more of a
utilitarianism since I always try to find a solution that best fits
our whole family or group that the situation arises in. I believe
that I stand beside the same ethical approach that I felt I stood
by in Unit 1 discussions:
“I believe that members of my immediate family would use
utilitarianism. I know that when my husband and I make
decisions regarding our family we don’t put our own needs
before anyone else’s. If anything we put the needs of our
children first. But more than that I think that we look at the
whole picture and see what decision would yield the best
possible outcome for the family as a whole. By doing this, there
are times, probably most of the time, that our own agenda or
needs are put on hold for the betterment of the family. However,
I think that many parents around the world make these same
decisions and they are just labeled as sacrifices that we make
for our children. Thankfully, we don’t have someone looking
over our shoulder waiting to judge our decisions or grade them
based on what we planned the outcome would be. Its just sort of
a jump of faith. We can’t determine for certain what the end
result will ever be so we have to leap and hope for the best.
Most of the time the decisions that we make are based on the
most predictable outcome but that can never be for certain.
However this works well for us because when you have the best
interest of you family as the number one priority, then even

when you fail to meet the goal intended you can’t actually fail
your family because they will always come first. I suppose in a
way, here I would be mostly describing the act utilitarianism as
described in the book at everyone performing the act which
would bring about the greatest amount of good over bad for
everyone effected by the act. ( Thiroux and Krasemann)”
References
Thiroux, Jacques P. and Krasemann, Keith W. Ethics: Theory
and Practice. Kaplan Higher Education2009: Pearson
Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ.

4012010EthicsHU 245-01Final ProjectK.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from gilbertkpeters11344

More from gilbertkpeters11344 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

4012010EthicsHU 245-01Final ProjectK.docx