The Ethical Dilemmas Of The United States

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

There are many ethical dilemmas that occur daily in our hospitals across the world. Not everyone agrees with standards and policies that are required in hospitals or even with the law. If not everyone obeys the law, ethical cases form. In Springfield, Missouri, a holistic nurse got fired for fighting against Cox South hospital policies. Carla Brock has been a nurse at Cox South hospital and not only refused the flu shot, but also refused to wear a mask. She refused due to religious beliefs, she gets short of breath while wearing the mask, and she feels the mask is meant to intimidate and humiliate those who refuse the shot. The ethical question in this case study is to decide if Carla should have been fired for not wearing a mask after refusing the flu shot and what are other potential proposals. The four-way method will separate out what are the truths, consequences, fairness, and character, of this ethical case study.

On the fateful May day of 1846, America, under President James Polk, declared war on Mexico. By the end of the war in 1848, Mexico lost nearly almost half its territory to the United States. Do you think this was justified? Taking another’s land through 2 long years of war? Is it worth it? I believe that Polk and Congress’s decision was wrongful for the following reasons: Polk had provoked war, [American but Amerishouldn’t] and finally the United States was committing a robbery by stealing Texas.

According to Nature.com, Crispr has been the largest leap in science since 1985, when the previous gene editing software was invented. This software, called PCR took tens of thousands of dollars and several years just to modify a single gene. Crispr, however, can do the same thing in less than a month for as little as thirty dollars per gene. What twenty years ago took a team of highly qualified researchers can now be done by anyone with a high school education. This could also be viewed as a bad thing, should crispr be released to the public, it would put unlimited power into the hands of nearly anyone in the world. Another possibility would be a rise in bioterrorism. Imagine a terrorist organization getting its hands on the power to shape a virus or bacterium however they pleased. While there are safer, albeit less effective ways to fix a genetic disorder, most scientists agree that it would be a waste to "toss crispr in the trash" simply because of its scary

The Mythical Norm is a set of attributes that are advantageous in what one seeks to have. These advantages vary in race, class, physical features, sex, sexual orientation, gender, age, and religion. Lorde (2001) describes these norms in America being “defined as white, thin, male, young, heterosexual, Christian, and finally secure” (p. 178). People who seek the Mythical Norm fail to recognize their privilege from those who lack them.

The 44th president of the United States, Barack Obama, granted clemency to 248 drug offense convicted felons with 61 of those being recently added to the release list. Over 9,115 inmates have met qualifications and have petitioned for clemency as well. President Obama has recently expressed that he is making his focus on reforming the Criminal Justice system. He has made clear vocally through many press conferences that he does not believe that these non-violent drug offenders, some having life sentences, should be behind bars. The initial ethical dilemma would be the releasing of the inmates, but upon further research into the topic, the dilemma becomes the effect of these released inmates in society.

Modifying genomes hasn’t been perfected, and is far too great of a risk to use on society. No one knows what could happen to the population after man starts messing with mother nature. Scientists who are trying to destroy genetic diseases could create new problems or end up killing its test subjects later down the line. The possibilities for disasters are endless. People also claim that modifying humans is the fastest and most efficient way to getting rid of physical and mental health problems, but according to Molecular biologist Ellen Jorgensen, Using CRISPR isn’t what people see it to be. Ellen explains that using CRISPR is not actually easy at all. To use the technology, damaging the gene is crucial. Once the gene is damaged, and the cells start to repair, scientists can then manipulate the cells to repair the way they want it to, and not naturally. This is a complicated process, and it not in any way

Many Americans have the luxury of purchasing new electronics almost every year. Something that is ignored, since it has become so natural, is exactly how their little devices had come to their lives and what happens when it is thrown away. In a more perfect world, the production of electronics would that of an ethical process, but it is unfortunately not that case. It all starts with the harvesting of raw materials.

The genetic engineering used for genetically modifying embryos and the thought of genetically modifying embryos is a technology that has caused an unethical dilemma within today’s society. This genetic technology comes at a risk, however, the most common way to genetically modify a human embryo, let alone anything living is known as CRISPR Cas9. This tool uses the enzyme Cas9 to cleave onto DNA to cut it, however according to Alex J. Maben a journalist who wrote an article on the flaws of this technology states “’The Cas9 enzyme that CRISPR uses to cleave DNA… could also make cuts where it’s not intended to, potentially causing cancer’(Kaiser, para5). Also, once CRISPR is in the body, it stays in the body” (Maben). This is an ethical dilemma because as stated above the CRISPR tool can cause cuts to

An ethical dilemma can be characterized as a set of circumstances where one’s typical guiding moral influences clash in such a way that any possible conclusion will be perceived unfavorably. In today’s world, healthcare professionals can expect to be increasingly confronted with and play key roles in the resolution of ethical dilemmas. This paper serves to explore, in detail, an ethical dilemma relating to civil confinement and the implications from its lack of use in regard to the recent Arizona shooting tragedy. A January 11, 2012 article obtained from The American Broadcasting Company (ABC) News called “Tucson Shooter Jared Loughner: Could Anything Have Stopped Alleged Gunman?” will be a prime resource for this purpose. This paper will examine the alternative of civil confinement and its significance in the context of this tragedy using Uustal’s framework for ethical decision making. Ethical theories and principles will be presented and discussed as supportive arguments.

Although codes of ethics have become part of the public relations profession, Newsom et al. (2013, p. 49) state that not all practitioners adhere to their respective standards. Bernays (1998, p. 29) notes that unlike most other professions, public relations lack an ethical code that gives the state the power to restrict the practice of those who breach any such code. Bernays (1998, p. 32) believes the public relations profession should have ‘…registration and licensing by the state…’ so that both the practitioners and publics can be confident in the profession’s ethical standards. The Public Relations Society of America’s code of ethics was first implemented in 1950 but is essentially unenforceable (Fitzpatrick, cited in Sha 2001, p. 122).

"Technological innovations in the reproductive area means being prepared to explicitly acknowledge that it is acceptable to destroy embryos under certain circumstances in order to encourage research on alleviating disease embryos. This in turn acknowledges the role of science in rectifying what may have gone a defective state during development.” But what is wrong with it that makes it questionable to those who follow christianity? It is the fact that many label this act as immoral and lives are being loss in the process as of which it really a flip of a coin on whether the “test tube baby”, or experiment some would call, would survive or not. We know that God is the author of life, but scientists

My first key question I think is important is authority. I think that they should not use CRISPR. I think this because of my religious belief. I think that god made us for who we are and using CRISPR would change who we would be as a person. God created each person for who they are. For example, if someone had autism but they took it away before the fetus is born then they are changing that fetus whole life that God had planned

If you have seen the film Gattaca (1997) the idea of being able to manipulate the DNA of a human in order to make perfect beings is polarizing to say the least. Some would argue this could prevent humans from being born with many birth defects including down syndrome, or heart defects. On the other side, others argue it is wrong for humanity to play god and no one knows just where the line will be drawn. This debate may have to be settled sooner than later though since CRISPR technology may make the manipulation of DNA a reality. If CRISPR technology is fully realized we as humans will have full control of our DNA structure, allowing us to essentially play god. The Nation has done a story on CRISPR, but that was almost a year ago and much has happened since then. Many pharmaceutical companies

“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