Bioethics (PHIL 235)

Manchester College, January 2012 Instructor: Steve Naragon
Welcome! Course Objectives Course Requirements Writing Schedule Glossary Resources Philosophy FAQ Latin Phrases Make More Money! [MC Angel site] [Instructor Homepage] [Registrar] [Religion/Philosophy Dept.]	Writing [discussion forums] [pre-class blogs] [extra credit journals] [writing tips] [plagiarism] Discussion Forums [top] Full credit in the course will require writing four posts and commenting on eight posts written by others (so, for each forum, you will write one post and comment on two posts by other students). These forums will take place on ANGEL, where you will find the topics and due dates (for the posts and comments); the latter are also listed in green on the reading and assignment Schedule. NB: You are encouraged to make these posts as early as you can. Feel free to comment on posts as soon as they are available. Each post should be at least 500 words and is worth up to 6 points; the comments should be at least 100 words each, and each is worth up to 2 points (see the rubric). A good post will show evidence of having worked through the relevant readings, perhaps also responding to class discussion, and is written free of grammatical errors and typos. About the comments: (1) If a post already has two comments, then choose another post on which to comment. (2) These comments should be more than simply praise or a note of agreement. I want you to interact with the claims made in the post, or with the argumentation: Do you agree or disagree, and why? Is the author overlooking something? You might offer further evidence for the author’s views, or else counter-evidence. Try to raise at least one useful question for furthering the discussion. (3) Feel welcome to comment as often as you wish on the posts; for any given forum, I’ll grade your two most substantial comments (that appear to be 100 words or more), but shorter comments are also welcome, and can add immeasurably to the conversation. Extra credit opportunity: You may receive up to two additional points commenting on more than two posts and/or responding to comments on your own post. A point will be given for substantial comments or responses. (In general, I’m wanting to encourage conversations among you, and I am happy to reward your efforts in this direction.) Pre-Class Blogs [top] Before about one-half of the class sessions, either morning or afternoon, you will need to post a brief discussion of an assigned case study to your small group blog (on ANGEL). These are due no later than 30 minutes before the start of class (thus, either 8:30 AM or 12:30 PM). Late entries will be penalized. These will be completed on ANGEL, and evaluated using these rubrics. To get some idea of my expectations for this assignment, see the samples below. [Veatch, et al., Case Study 17-1, “Therapeutic Privilege: Scaring the Patient to Death with News about Risks”] Sample of an excellent blog entry This case study asks whether a patient’s informed consent must be obtained before performing a certain diagnostic procedure (a translumbar aortography). The physician believes the procedure will benefit the patient, but she also believes the patient will probably refuse to undergo the procedure if he is informed of all the risks (because of the patient’s irrational fears). The values at stake are (1) the patient’s physical health (promoted by a more accurate diagnosis) and (2) the patient’s autonomy (which requires that the patient’s consent be given before the procedure is performed). The physician is claiming “therapeutic privilege” in this case, which would allow her to perform the procedure without the patient’s consent. This involves a kind of paternalism that was common-place fifty years ago, but is considered less permissible now. The options available: (1) perform the procedure without getting informed consent, (2) omit to mention those risks that would most upset the patient, and thus hope for the patient’s consent (even though it wouldn’t be fully informed), (3) explain the risks of the procedure and accept the patient’s refusal, (4) take more time to explain all the relevant risks, both of the procedure and of not performing the procedure, with the hope that the patient will make the right choice. Options (1) and (2) are both paternalistic, and they might also expose the physician to a lawsuit, should some of the bad side-effects occur. Option (3) would protect the physician from a possible lawsuit, and honor the patient’s autonomy, but it otherwise might be harmful for the patient. Option (4) is preferable. The physician, in taking the interests of the patient as primary, needs to find some way to convey the information in a manner that helps the patient — who is mentally competent — understand that the fewest overall risks occur by doing the procedure. This might take more time to talk through — and so use up a valuable resource that won’t be available to other patients — but this will allow the physician to both promote the patient’s health as well as respect the patient’s autonomy as a competent adult. Sample of a good blog entry Problem raised by the case study: Can a medical procedure take place without the patient’s informed consent? The physician believes that the procedure will benefit the patient, but that the patient will likely refuse the procedure if he is told of all the risks. The patient is bad at weighing risks. The values at stake are beneficence and autonomy. The procedure will likely benefit the patient; but doing the procedure without the patient’s informed consent will violate his autonomy. The physician could do one of the following: (1) perform the procedure without getting informed consent, (2) explain all the risks, and accept the patient’s rejection of the procedure, (3) explain the risks, both of the procedure and of neglecting the procedure, until the patient finally gives his consent. The physician should do (3), although that might take longer. Sample of a poor blog entry A patient needs to have a test done, but he will probably refuse to have it done if he knows about some of the bad things that could happen to him from the test. The physician thinks he should have the test done. Is it OK to do the test, without getting the patient’s permission? I don’t think so. The patient might be scared or a little irrational, but he’s still a competent adult, and needs to be allowed control over his life. The physician just has to know when to let patients make the decisions. Extra Credit Journals[top] You may write brief essays for extra credit, if you wish. These are opportunities for exploring additional texts, films, videos, podcasts, etc., as listed under “Other Resources” on the Reading and Assignment schedule. A journal can be submitted on any item marked with an [EC]. These should be at least 600 words (about two pages), and will be graded on their length, content, and basic mechanics (see the rubric, and see the sample journal). The content should include two parts: a brief summary of the text, film, or talk, and a rather longer discussion of what was philosophically of interest. These journals need to be turned in no later than three days after the date on which they were listed. [NB: I have provided links for trailers to many of the films; this is for your convenience. The journal needs to discuss the film itself, not the trailer.] Please submit them to the “EC” drop box on ANGEL, with the title of the article or film in the subject line. You may write up to one journal per class day, and at the end of the semester, the very last journals are due on Wednesday, January 25. Plan accordingly. Each journal is worth up to 10 points, and up to 50 points may be accumulated. A full 50 points will add 4% to your course grade. Writing Tips [top] Please carefully proofread these writing submissions. You need to use complete sentences, proper punctuation, and correct spelling. Both in college and after you graduate you will be judged, in part, by how well you write. Typos, mispellings, poor grammar — in short, sloppy writing — is like so much stink coming from the bottom of your shoes. It won’t matter how nicely your hair is combed or your shirt is pressed if you can’t write a decent paragraph. Words and Expressions Commonly Misused: at least once a year, everyone should read through this list from Strunk & White. I hope it never comes to this, but my comments on your writing might make use of some of the following abbreviations: awk: awkward. This is a sentence problem; the sentence should be re-written for greater clarity. frag: sentence fragment. Another sentence problem; your sentence is lacking something vital. Like a subject. Or a verb. Don’t fall into the trap of writting essays that sound like advertising copy. We all can do better than that! wc: word choice. You might find a better word to suit your sentence. Consult your dictionary for a more accurate meaning. sp: spelling. Consult your dictionary! ?: Huh? You’ve lost your reader. TS?: Topic sentence? This is a paragraph problem. There needs to be a topic sentence (normally, the lead sentence of the paragraph) that indicates what the paragraph is all about (what you are hoping to do in the paragaph; or it’s the claim for which the paragraph will now offer support, or an observation for which the paragraph will now offer some elaboration, etc.). CO?: Cohere? Another paragraph problem; the sentences in this paragraph don’t fit together very well. Try re-arranging them. Ask yourself: (a) What goal am I trying to acheive with this paragraph? and (b) Is each sentence working towards this goal? Q?: Quotation? Quotations should be used only when a paraphrase will not do the job as effectively. Common problems include failing to properly introduce a quotation, failing to properly cite a quotation, quoting more than is helpful, and using a quotation when a paraphrase would be better. Academic Dishonesty [top] [This text is copied from the college Catalog] Membership in the Manchester College community requires a devotion to the highest principles of academic and personal integrity, a commitment to maintain honor, and a continuous regard for the rights of others. There can be no rights without individual responsibility. Manchester College faculty are committed to teaching and learning as a career and a profession. Each instructor is presumed to develop and use methods and techniques which enhance learning and which best fit his or her personality and subject matter area. At the same time, the instructor is expected to abide by the general principles of responsible teaching which are commonly accepted by the academic profession. These principles suggest that faculty keep complete records of student performance and that they develop and apply express, uniform criteria for evaluating student performance. Students are free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study. While they may reserve judgment about matters of opinion, they are responsible for learning the content of any course in which they are enrolled. At the same time, students are expected to abide by the general principles of academic honesty which are commonly accepted in educational settings. When a student chooses not to follow the general principles of academic honesty, the following policies and procedures will apply. Plagiarism Plagiarism is the presentation of information (either written or oral) as one’s own when some or all of the information was derived from some other source. Specific types of plagiarism encountered in written and oral assignments include the following: ● Sources have been properly identified, but excerpts have been quoted without proper use of quotation marks; or the material has been slightly modified or rephrased rather than restated in the student’s own words. ● Key ideas or items of information derived from specific sources that present material that is not common knowledge have been presented without proper identification of the source or sources. ● Unidentified excerpts from other sources have been woven into the student’s own presentation. ● A paper or speech may be a mosaic of excerpts from several sources and presented as the student’s own. ● An entire paper or speech has been obtained from some other source and presented as the student’s own. ● Texts in another language are translated into English and presented as the student’s own. Cheating Cheating consists of any unpermitted use of notes, texts or other sources so as to give an unfair advantage to a student in completing a class assignment or an examination. Intentionally aiding another student engaged in academic dishonesty is also considered cheating. Submission of the same work (essay, speech, art piece, etc.) to fulfill assignments in separate classes requires the permission of both faculty members (if both courses are being taken in the same semester), or the permission of the second faculty member (if they are taken during different semesters). Penalties • Unintentional Plagiarism. In cases of plagiarism in which no deception is intended (such as ignorance of proper citation of sources), the student should expect a reduction in the paper’s grade; in some cases, the student may be given an option to rewrite the paper. No disciplinary letter will be filed. • Deliberate Plagiarism and Cheating. In cases of deliberate plagiarism, and in all cases of cheating and attempted cheating, the work assigned will be failed. At the instructor’s discretion, the student may also fail the course (regardless of the grade-weight of the work assigned). In either a case of deliberate plagiarism or cheating, a disciplinary letter recording the deception will be sent to the student, with copies sent to the vice president and dean for academic affairs, the vice president and dean for student development, and the student’s academic advisor. Given the incompatibility of deceptive behavior with the integrity of the community, students guilty of academic dishonesty a second time during the course of their academic career are liable to disciplinary probation, suspension and possible expulsion. These actions will be initiated by the vice president and dean for academic affairs. The student has the right to appeal probation, suspension or expulsion for Academic Dishonesty to the president (or his/her designee) of the College within five days of the receipt of the probation, suspension or expulsion letter. The president shall render a final decision. Appeal Any student who is convinced that he or she has been charged inappropriately with deliberate plagiarism or cheating, or who believes his or her final course grade is inaccurate, has the right to file a grievance. In accordance with established procedures, grievances unrelated to academic performance may be referred directly to the Office of Academic Affairs. See the Academic Grievance Procedure in the Source for details regarding the appeal process.
Manchester College // Registrar // Department of Religion and Philosophy // Last updated: 3 Jan 2012

Bioethics (PHIL 235)

Writing

[discussion forums] [pre-class blogs] [extra credit journals] [writing tips] [plagiarism]

Discussion Forums [top]

Full credit in the course will require writing four posts and commenting on eight posts written by others (so, for each forum, you will write one post and comment on two posts by other students).

These forums will take place on ANGEL, where you will find the topics and due dates (for the posts and comments); the latter are also listed in green on the reading and assignment Schedule. NB: You are encouraged to make these posts as early as you can. Feel free to comment on posts as soon as they are available.

Each post should be at least 500 words and is worth up to 6 points; the comments should be at least 100 words each, and each is worth up to 2 points (see the rubric).

A good post will show evidence of having worked through the relevant readings, perhaps also responding to class discussion, and is written free of grammatical errors and typos.

About the comments:

(1) If a post already has two comments, then choose another post on which to comment.

(2) These comments should be more than simply praise or a note of agreement. I want you to interact with the claims made in the post, or with the argumentation: Do you agree or disagree, and why? Is the author overlooking something? You might offer further evidence for the author’s views, or else counter-evidence. Try to raise at least one useful question for furthering the discussion.

(3) Feel welcome to comment as often as you wish on the posts; for any given forum, I’ll grade your two most substantial comments (that appear to be 100 words or more), but shorter comments are also welcome, and can add immeasurably to the conversation.

Extra credit opportunity:

You may receive up to two additional points commenting on more than two posts and/or responding to comments on your own post. A point will be given for substantial comments or responses. (In general, I’m wanting to encourage conversations among you, and I am happy to reward your efforts in this direction.)

Pre-Class Blogs [top]

Before about one-half of the class sessions, either morning or afternoon, you will need to post a brief discussion of an assigned case study to your small group blog (on ANGEL). These are due no later than 30 minutes before the start of class (thus, either 8:30 AM or 12:30 PM). Late entries will be penalized. These will be completed on ANGEL, and evaluated using these rubrics. To get some idea of my expectations for this assignment, see the samples below.

[Veatch, et al., Case Study 17-1, “Therapeutic Privilege: Scaring the Patient to Death with News about Risks”]

Sample of an excellent blog entry

This case study asks whether a patient’s informed consent must be obtained before performing a certain diagnostic procedure (a translumbar aortography). The physician believes the procedure will benefit the patient, but she also believes the patient will probably refuse to undergo the procedure if he is informed of all the risks (because of the patient’s irrational fears).

The values at stake are (1) the patient’s physical health (promoted by a more accurate diagnosis) and (2) the patient’s autonomy (which requires that the patient’s consent be given before the procedure is performed). The physician is claiming “therapeutic privilege” in this case, which would allow her to perform the procedure without the patient’s consent. This involves a kind of paternalism that was common-place fifty years ago, but is considered less permissible now.

The options available: (1) perform the procedure without getting informed consent, (2) omit to mention those risks that would most upset the patient, and thus hope for the patient’s consent (even though it wouldn’t be fully informed), (3) explain the risks of the procedure and accept the patient’s refusal, (4) take more time to explain all the relevant risks, both of the procedure and of not performing the procedure, with the hope that the patient will make the right choice.

Options (1) and (2) are both paternalistic, and they might also expose the physician to a lawsuit, should some of the bad side-effects occur. Option (3) would protect the physician from a possible lawsuit, and honor the patient’s autonomy, but it otherwise might be harmful for the patient. Option (4) is preferable. The physician, in taking the interests of the patient as primary, needs to find some way to convey the information in a manner that helps the patient — who is mentally competent — understand that the fewest overall risks occur by doing the procedure. This might take more time to talk through — and so use up a valuable resource that won’t be available to other patients — but this will allow the physician to both promote the patient’s health as well as respect the patient’s autonomy as a competent adult.

Sample of a good blog entry

Problem raised by the case study: Can a medical procedure take place without the patient’s informed consent?

The physician believes that the procedure will benefit the patient, but that the patient will likely refuse the procedure if he is told of all the risks. The patient is bad at weighing risks.

The values at stake are beneficence and autonomy. The procedure will likely benefit the patient; but doing the procedure without the patient’s informed consent will violate his autonomy.

The physician could do one of the following: (1) perform the procedure without getting informed consent, (2) explain all the risks, and accept the patient’s rejection of the procedure, (3) explain the risks, both of the procedure and of neglecting the procedure, until the patient finally gives his consent.

The physician should do (3), although that might take longer.

Sample of a poor blog entry

A patient needs to have a test done, but he will probably refuse to have it done if he knows about some of the bad things that could happen to him from the test. The physician thinks he should have the test done. Is it OK to do the test, without getting the patient’s permission? I don’t think so. The patient might be scared or a little irrational, but he’s still a competent adult, and needs to be allowed control over his life. The physician just has to know when to let patients make the decisions.

Extra Credit Journals[top]

You may write brief essays for extra credit, if you wish. These are opportunities for exploring additional texts, films, videos, podcasts, etc., as listed under “Other Resources” on the Reading and Assignment schedule. A journal can be submitted on any item marked with an [EC]. These should be at least 600 words (about two pages), and will be graded on their length, content, and basic mechanics (see the rubric, and see the sample journal). The content should include two parts: a brief summary of the text, film, or talk, and a rather longer discussion of what was philosophically of interest.

These journals need to be turned in no later than three days after the date on which they were listed. [NB: I have provided links for trailers to many of the films; this is for your convenience. The journal needs to discuss the film itself, not the trailer.]

Please submit them to the “EC” drop box on ANGEL, with the title of the article or film in the subject line. You may write up to one journal per class day, and at the end of the semester, the very last journals are due on Wednesday, January 25. Plan accordingly.

Each journal is worth up to 10 points, and up to 50 points may be accumulated. A full 50 points will add 4% to your course grade.

Writing Tips [top]

Please carefully proofread these writing submissions. You need to use complete sentences, proper punctuation, and correct spelling. Both in college and after you graduate you will be judged, in part, by how well you write. Typos, mispellings, poor grammar — in short, sloppy writing — is like so much stink coming from the bottom of your shoes. It won’t matter how nicely your hair is combed or your shirt is pressed if you can’t write a decent paragraph.

Words and Expressions Commonly Misused: at least once a year, everyone should read through this list from Strunk & White.

I hope it never comes to this, but my comments on your writing might make use of some of the following abbreviations:

awk: awkward. This is a sentence problem; the sentence should be re-written for greater clarity.

frag: sentence fragment. Another sentence problem; your sentence is lacking something vital. Like a subject. Or a verb. Don’t fall into the trap of writting essays that sound like advertising copy. We all can do better than that!

wc: word choice. You might find a better word to suit your sentence. Consult your dictionary for a more accurate meaning.

sp: spelling. Consult your dictionary!

?: Huh? You’ve lost your reader.

TS?: Topic sentence? This is a paragraph problem. There needs to be a topic sentence (normally, the lead sentence of the paragraph) that indicates what the paragraph is all about (what you are hoping to do in the paragaph; or it’s the claim for which the paragraph will now offer support, or an observation for which the paragraph will now offer some elaboration, etc.).

CO?: Cohere? Another paragraph problem; the sentences in this paragraph don’t fit together very well. Try re-arranging them. Ask yourself: (a) What goal am I trying to acheive with this paragraph? and (b) Is each sentence working towards this goal?

Q?: Quotation? Quotations should be used only when a paraphrase will not do the job as effectively. Common problems include failing to properly introduce a quotation, failing to properly cite a quotation, quoting more than is helpful, and using a quotation when a paraphrase would be better.

Academic Dishonesty [top]

[This text is copied from the college Catalog]

Membership in the Manchester College community requires a devotion to the highest principles of academic and personal integrity, a commitment to maintain honor, and a continuous regard for the rights of others. There can be no rights without individual responsibility.

Manchester College faculty are committed to teaching and learning as a career and a profession. Each instructor is presumed to develop and use methods and techniques which enhance learning and which best fit his or her personality and subject matter area. At the same time, the instructor is expected to abide by the general principles of responsible teaching which are commonly accepted by the academic profession. These principles suggest that faculty keep complete records of student performance and that they develop and apply express, uniform criteria for evaluating student performance.

Students are free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study. While they may reserve judgment about matters of opinion, they are responsible for learning the content of any course in which they are enrolled. At the same time, students are expected to abide by the general principles of academic honesty which are commonly accepted in educational settings.

When a student chooses not to follow the general principles of academic honesty, the following policies and procedures will apply.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the presentation of information (either written or oral) as one’s own when some or all of the information was derived from some other source.

Specific types of plagiarism encountered in written and oral assignments include the following:

● Sources have been properly identified, but excerpts have been quoted without proper use of quotation marks; or the material has been slightly modified or rephrased rather than restated in the student’s own words.

● Key ideas or items of information derived from specific sources that present material that is not common knowledge have been presented without proper identification of the source or sources.

● Unidentified excerpts from other sources have been woven into the student’s own presentation.

● A paper or speech may be a mosaic of excerpts from several sources and presented as the student’s own.

● An entire paper or speech has been obtained from some other source and presented as the student’s own.

● Texts in another language are translated into English and presented as the student’s own.

Cheating

Cheating consists of any unpermitted use of notes, texts or other sources so as to give an unfair advantage to a student in completing a class assignment or an examination. Intentionally aiding another student engaged in academic dishonesty is also considered cheating.

Submission of the same work (essay, speech, art piece, etc.) to fulfill assignments in separate classes requires the permission of both faculty members (if both courses are being taken in the same semester), or the permission of the second faculty member (if they are taken during different semesters).

Penalties

• Unintentional Plagiarism. In cases of plagiarism in which no deception is intended (such as ignorance of proper citation of sources), the student should expect a reduction in the paper’s grade; in some cases, the student may be given an option to rewrite the paper. No disciplinary letter will be filed.

• Deliberate Plagiarism and Cheating. In cases of deliberate plagiarism, and in all cases of cheating and attempted cheating, the work assigned will be failed. At the instructor’s discretion, the student may also fail the course (regardless of the grade-weight of the work assigned).

In either a case of deliberate plagiarism or cheating, a disciplinary letter recording the deception will be sent to the student, with copies sent to the vice president and dean for academic affairs, the vice president and dean for student development, and the student’s academic advisor.

Given the incompatibility of deceptive behavior with the integrity of the community, students guilty of academic dishonesty a second time during the course of their academic career are liable to disciplinary probation, suspension and possible expulsion. These actions will be initiated by the vice president and dean for academic affairs. The student has the right to appeal probation, suspension or expulsion for Academic Dishonesty to the president (or his/her designee) of the College within five days of the receipt of the probation, suspension or expulsion letter. The president shall render a final decision.

Appeal

Any student who is convinced that he or she has been charged inappropriately with deliberate plagiarism or cheating, or who believes his or her final course grade is inaccurate, has the right to file a grievance. In accordance with established procedures, grievances unrelated to academic performance may be referred directly to the Office of Academic Affairs. See the Academic Grievance Procedure in the Source for details regarding the appeal process.

Manchester College // Registrar // Department of Religion and Philosophy // Last updated: 3 Jan 2012