Study Guide for Test 3page 1

Medical Ethics: Study Guide for Test 3: In-Class Portion

  1. You should be able to identify or be able to answer multiple choice questions requiring an understanding of key concepts such as: consequentialism and-nonconsequentialism; factual/empirical vs normative; cost-benefit analysis; QALYs; NICE (in UK/Great Britain); moral rights (as distinct from legal rights), “yuk factor”; commodification, genetic vs gestational surrogate motherhood, commercial vs noncommercial surrogate motherhood; reproductive cloning vs “cloning for research” (therapeutic cloning); stem cells (derived or not derived from embryos); slippery slope argument; autonomy-paternalism as applied to issues later in course.
  2. What is the point of bioethical inquiry and study? What method is used? What does it hope to accomplish? (You may wish to see the elaboration on original study guide.)
  3. Be able to answer multiple choice questions dealing with main points in the major readings (those in red on the schedule).
  1. On issues like surrogate motherhood, sex selection, having children at genetic risk (as well as euthanasia, etc.), one can ask whether a certain practice is morally permissible. One can also ask the ethical question of whether the practice should be legally permissible? What are the similarities and differences in these two questions? Put differently, understand the difference between ethical questions at the personal/clinical level and those at the level of social policy (often expressed in law).
  2. One premise in Rachels' earlier argument for active euthanasia is if a practice benefits everyone concerned and violates no one's rights, it is morally appropriate. Think about this principle in relation to other issues in the course; e.g, cloning or surrogate motherhood. If someone is opposed to these practices, must they also argue against the italicized ethical premise above?
  3. You should know the major points raised by the student presentations. What are some ethical questions you would like to have explored with each of the presenters if there had been more time?
  4. This is likely to be a such as this. Each statement below expresses a position in an uncritical way. It may contain an obvious flaw, it may simply assume the truth of one particular position, or it may be a distortion of a particular ethical position.

Comment critically in one or two (at most three) sentences by (a) exposing any flaw(s) in it and/or by (b) identifying the position which it assumes and indicating some possible lines of opposing argument. Examples from past years (some modified):

a)Smith's claim that wealthy people are morally obligated to pay for the health care of the poor is flawed because we will never be able to persuade wealthy people to do this.

b)Unlike the scientific part of medicine, which makes claims and backs them up with empirical evidence, ethical judgments cannot be shown to be true or false using empirical evidence. Therefore, ethical judgments are purely subjective and personal and there is no way of saying that any one ethical judgment is any better than any other.

c)If it could be shown to be true that a national health care system for the poor (paid for out of taxes) is communistic, then that would constitute a good ethical argument against a national health care system.

d)Doctors should never lie to patients because patients have an absolute right to the complete truth about their medical condition.