Reitha And Ken Lakeberg's Ethical Dilemmas

People from all walks of life face many ethical dilemmas. These dilemmas have consequences. Our worldview determines how we deal with these dilemmas, and guides us to the right decisions. In this essay, I will examine an ethical issues through my Christian worldview. I will also present other viewpoints, and compare them to mine.

Ethical dilemmas occur when there is a disagreement about a situation and all parties involved question how they should behave based on their individual ethical morals. (Newman & Pollnitz, 2005). The dilemma that I will be addressing in this essay involves Michael, recently employed male educator working in the nursery, and parents of a baby enrolled at the centre. The parents have raised concerns about male educators changing their child’s nappy as they have cultural practices that do not allow this practice to take place. This situation is classed as an ethical dilemma as there is a dispute between cultural beliefs and legal requirements within the workplace. There are four parties involved (parents, child, educator and director), all

It is easy to see the reasons that led Sara and Brian to make the decision, but following your heart is not always the ethical thing to do. The doctor mentioning the option of genetically engineering a child is unethical. The code of ethics that challenges both these actions is “act in professional matters for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustee, and shall avoid conflicts of interest,” (Grimm). Both decisions are conflicts of interest as the doctor and parents do not see the effects of both Kate and the future child. First, as the doctor, I would never mention genetically engineering a baby as an option to a family I would not have the right to suggest something so life changing, and the possible outcome of the family could be severe and are unknown. The doctors decision in not ethical. Also, as a parent, I would not create a child to cater my other child’s needs, due to the fact that it is not fair to both children. I believe the decision made my Brian and Sara is unethical. They decided to create a baby for the sake of sacrificing one child to save another's life.

In America, abortion is an age old argument and most Americans have sided with being either Pro-Choice or Pro-Life. But what happens when it comes down to aborting only one of the fetus twins or triplets? In David J. Ayers article, “Abortion’s Slippery Slope: The Two-Minus-One Pregnancy”, Ayers explains the rare medical procedure when a women wants to abort one of her fetus twins. This twin reduction is a way for mothers to use their constitutional right of choosing how many babies she wants. But what are the basic medical ethics when it comes to choosing which baby is aborted? The choice comes to the decision of the doctor and the mother, the baby’s location, sex, and health. Abortion in itself is a battle with a mother’s conscience. Having to choose, is a lifelong choice that can affect a mother in this conscience struggle.

When I was only 15 years old, a close friend of mine got pregnant. After spending a few days talking it over with her parents and now ex-boyfriend, she elected to have an abortion. At first I was totally appalled that she had reasoned to kill her newborn child. “How could someone find it so easy to take away another life?” I thought. Now, three years older and more mature me is finally able to process the reasoning behind not keeping the child.

As a person who as has a sibling that I love dearly I think it is completely unethical to separate twins at birth for no other reason than to study them. They deprived these of a childhood, and the resulting bond, with their twin. In addition, the researchers did not tell the children or parents what the object of the study was. All the adoptive parents knew was that their child was part of an ongoing child development study. Separating children at birth also raises the question of whether anyone has the right to make that decision like that for someone else. Obviously if they were infants there is no way they could have sighed an informed consent form. The decision was made to separate them without their knowledge or consent. To me this is wrong and a violation of their basic rights. If we allow ourselves to make such momentous decisions for other people in the name of science, where does it end? What else will researches be allowed t do? If we allowed unethical studies such as this one to continue unchecked, the violations of privacy and personal right would be

In disagreement many people say that one person?s right to life always outweighs another person?s right to autonomy. However Thomson?s argument makes a very interesting unwanted pregnancies resulting in permissible abortions. To counteract her claims I?m going to use a hypothetical situation as she did. Let?s say a mother gives birth to a set of conjoined twins. The twins grow up having a somewhat troublesome life considering the fact that neither one has the opportunity to achieve autonomy. Once they get older, lets say age 18, twin A obtains the information that twin B?s survival depends on the use of twin A?s vital organ?s. However twin A would survive if twin B was too be separated from him thus granting twin A his right to autonomy. It seems that it is obvious that it not permissible for twin A to kill twin B. The following argument shows a more concrete view of the situation. It is morally impermissible for twin A to kill twin B if he has the right to life and the right to twin A?s body. Twin B does have a right to life. Twin B prima facie has the right to twin A?s body. Therefore it is morally impermissible for twin A to kill twin B. In turn this would create the argument that abortion is not permissible even when the pregnancy is not voluntary.

They performed the surgery in terms to “save” the developing child but putting Angela’s health at risk. The overall outcome is that both lives passed, and the surgery was the main reason why. Informed consent was also an issue in this case. Physicians believed that patients are obliged to treatment if the physicians believe that it is in their best interests. This is where informed consent comes to play. Even though autonomy doesn’t mean all patients will make good decisions, they have the right to refuse treatment. Patients are supposed to sign the informed consent form prior to any treatment/surgical procedures, to make sure they understand what they are going in for and the side effects that may come with treatment. But since the court and hospital are forcing her to surgery, would she need to sign the informed consent form, since she’s not willing? I believe that it should be her decision to undergo the surgery or refuse it. Munson also mentions that “If one holds that the fetus, at every developmental stage, is a part f the woman’s body and that she is free to do wit her body as she pleases, then there can be no conflict” (pg. 44). This implies with Angela because she is decided for the best interests for herself and it would be a violation of autonomy if her actions are regulated, whereas nonpregnant and men’s actions aren’t.

The topic on abortion involves my response to a woman who has been struggling between aborting and keeping her baby. Susan, a career driven woman has been waiting for many years to have a baby. Through blood tests, she has been notified that her baby unfortunately has Down syndrome. Her doctors and trusted friend Richard suggested that she aborts the baby. They feel as though if Susan brings human life into the world, she will cause more suffering for the baby and herself. Therefore, she is torn between the two difficult decisions. Susan is aware that if she goes through with the pregnancy, her child will have lifelong suffering and it would be immoral for her to bring her child into the world. However, she really wants to have a baby. Although her baby would suffer with Down syndrome, she should make the ethical decision of keeping the baby. Susan ignores

Dear Leo, -I had a conversation with my case manager Ms., Mila from WSIB she told me that I needed to go to a specialty clinic to get a new diagnosis on my soft tissue injuries because you sent her such referral for me nonetheless I was never informed by you nor you discussed such referral with me in my first visit to the physiotherapy clinic where we met and you completed form 8 for WSIB conversely Dr. Daniels as a family physician with high ethical standards with his professional practice got very concerned that I might had internal bleeding when my co-worker took me after picking me from the stairs injured and upon my request he drove me to his walking clinic where my co-worker narrated to Dr. Daniels as a witness my accident Dr. Daniels

In The Giver, new children that are twins, or that are born unhealthy, are sent to elsewhere. When twins are born into the community, the one that weighs less is disposed of. "Well, they can't have two identical people around! Think how confusing it would be!" (pg.3). In the US babies are under life support is they are unhealthy. In a way this is not humane because the doctors are keeping the parents hopes up and the baby would have a very hard life or not live past a year. The decision about the child’s life should be up to the parents. The decision to keep the baby on life support is theirs to make. Parents usually keep both of their twins. This is humane because if they are both healthy and the parents can support them, then they should be able to take

This case can be compared to that of Quinlan in 1976. The patient or the surrogate is now able to reject treatment even if is the only thing to save their life. It is frowned upon by numerous people, but it ultimately gives the patient the autonomy they deserve as a human being and put a stop to their suffering on earth. Mrs. S was able to decline surgery considering she believed this was God’s will for her and although her doctors and son were not in favor of this decision, the doctors still respected her freedom to choose. Along with this, the Duran case can be brought into this discussion in view of the fact that of the idea of a proxy versus the chain of surrogacy. In the Duran case, the patient had a proxy of the same religion to ensure nothing would be done to conflict with her beliefs as a Jehovah’s Witness. After problems stemmed from medical issues, the husband demands the doctor give a blood transfusion, against her religion and the proxy’s authority. Applying this to Mrs. S’s case, the patient had strict rules and regulations as to what they want to happen in lieu of these events. Both the husband in the Duran case and the son in Mrs. S’s case, both do not agree with the patient’s wishes and want to change

The court cases such as Baby M or Davis vs. Davis brought the question of who is the rightful owner of the child. In the case of Baby M, the surrogate mother did not want to give up the child after she was born. In Davis vs. Davis, a man refused to have his sperm implanted in the eggs, and so the question of the embryo being a person or property arose. In both instances, informed consent made the rightful parents. That is to say, whoever had the right and responsibility on the contract, was the rightful parent. This definition and regulation of ‘who is the parent’ was created while the ethical problems

“Brad is a production engineer at a bicycle company and part of his job includes inspecting broken bikes and drafting the design repairs for their repair” (Bartlett). Brad is considering replacing a broken brake cable with a more durable material, even though the customer did not request it in their order and specifically requested that “No aesthetic changes be made to the bike” (Bartlett). Brad’s manager suggests that his considered actions would go against the company’s policy of “The customer is always right.” Should Brad disobey the manager and the customer to possibly lose his job or go along with

| In this option Michelle’s parents take the approach that one healthy child is a better option than one very sick child and another that could potentially be injured trying to save the sick child’s life. The parents are basically going to be left with one healthy child and the grief involved with the impending death of Michelle.