PHI413V Week2 Case-Study on Moral Status

Want create site? With Free visual composer you can do it easy.

PHI413V Week2 Case-Study on Moral Status

ORDER NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT:    PHI413V Week2 Case-Study on Moral Status 

PHI413V Week2 Case-Study on Moral Status

Case Study: Fetal Abnormality

Four months later, Jessica and Marco arrive at the county hospital, a large, public, nonteaching hospital. A preliminary ultrasound indicates a possible abnormality with the fetus. Further scans are conducted, and it is determined that the fetus has a rare condition in which it has not developed any arms and will not likely develop them. There is also a 25% chance that the fetus may have Down syndrome.

Jessica is a 30-year-old immigrant from Mexico City. She and her husband Marco have been in the United States for the last three years and have finally earned enough money to move out of their Aunt Maria’s home and into an apartment of their own. They are both hard workers. Jessica works 50 hours a week at a local restaurant and Marco has been contracting side jobs in construction. Six months before their move to an apartment, Jessica finds out she is pregnant.

Dr. Wilson, the primary attending physician, is seeing Jessica for the first time, since she and Marco did not receive earlier prenatal care over concerns about finances. Marco insists that Dr. Wilson refrain from telling Jessica the scan results, assuring him that he will tell his wife himself when she is emotionally ready for the news. While Marco and Dr. Wilson are talking in another room, Aunt Maria walks into the room with a distressed look on her face. She can tell that something is wrong and inquires of Dr. Wilson. After hearing of the diagnosis, she walks out of the room wailing loudly and praying aloud.

Marco and Dr. Wilson continue their discussion, and Dr. Wilson insists that he has an obligation to Jessica as his patient and that she has a right to know the diagnosis of the fetus. He furthermore is intent on discussing all relevant factors and options regarding the next step, including abortion. Marco insists on taking some time to think of how to break the news to Jessica, but Dr. Wilson, frustrated with the direction of the conversation, informs the husband that such a choice is not his to make. Dr. Wilson proceeds back across the hall, where he walks in on Aunt Maria awkwardly praying with Jessica and phoning the priest. At that point, Dr. Wilson gently but briefly informs Jessica of the diagnosis and lays out the option for abortion as a responsible medical alternative, given the quality of life such a child would have. Jessica looks at him and struggles to hold back her tears.

Jessica is torn between her hopes of a better socioeconomic position and increased independence, along with her conviction that all life is sacred. Marco will support Jessica in whatever decision she makes but is finding it difficult not to view the pregnancy and the prospects of a disabled child as a burden and a barrier to their economic security and plans. Dr. Wilson lays out all of the options but clearly makes his view known that abortion is “scientifically” and medically a wise choice in this situation. Aunt Maria pleads with Jessica to follow through with the pregnancy and allow what “God intends” to take place and urges Jessica to think of her responsibility as a mother.

PHI413V Week2 Case-Study on Moral Status

PHI413V Week2 Case-Study on Moral Status

PHI 413V Week 2 Case Study on Moral Status (Fetal Abnormality)

Write a 750-1000 word analysis of “Case Study: Fetal Abnormality.” Be sure to address the following questions:

Which theory or theories are being used by Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson to determine the moral status of the fetus? Explain.
How does the theory determine or influence each of their recommendation for action?
What theory do you agree with? How would that theory determine or influence the recommendation for action?
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

PHI 413V Week 2 Topic 2 Discussion 1

What is the Christian concept of the imago dei? How might it be important to healthcare, and why is it relevant?

PHI 413V Week 2 Topic 2 Discussion  2

As you reflect on Meilaender’s readings, what is his distinction between procreation and reproduction, as well as that of being begotten versus being made? Do you agree with his description? Why or why not?

Case Study on Moral Status – Rubric

Criteria Description

Christian View of the Nature of Human Persons and Compatible Theory of Moral Status

5. Excellent

60 points

Explanation of the Christian view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compatible with is clear, thorough, and explained with a deep understanding of the relationship to intrinsic human value and dignity. Explanation is supported by topic study materials.

4. Good

51 points

Explanation of the Christian view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compatible with is clear, thorough, and and explains the relationship to intrinsic human value and dignity. Explanation is supported by topic study materials.

3. Satisfactory

45 points

Explanation of the Christian view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compatible with is clear and explains the basic relationship to intrinsic human value and dignity. Explanation is supported by topic study materials.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

39 points

Explanation of the Christian view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compatible with is unclear. Explanation is not clearly supported by topic study materials.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Explanation of the Christian view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compatible with is insufficient. Explanation is not supported by topic study materials.

Criteria Description

Determination of Moral Status

5. Excellent

40 points

The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is explained clearly and draws insightful relevant conclusions. Rationale for choices made is clearly supported by topic study materials and case study examples.

4. Good

34 points

The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is explained clearly and draws relevant conclusions. Rationale for choices made is clearly supported by topic study materials and case study examples.

3. Satisfactory

30 points

The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is explained and draws relevant conclusions. Rationale for choices made is supported by topic study materials and case study examples.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

26 points

The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is not clearly explained. Rationale for choices made is unclearly supported by topic study materials or case study examples.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is not adequately explained. Rationale for choices made is not supported by topic study materials or case study examples.

Criteria Description

Recommendation for Action

5. Excellent

40 points

Explanation of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommendations for action is clear, insightful, and demonstrates a deep understanding of the theory and its impact on recommendation for action. Explanation is supported by topic study materials.

4. Good

34 points

Explanation of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommendations for action is clear and demonstrates an understanding of the theory. Explanation is supported by topic study materials.

3. Satisfactory

30 points

Explanation of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommendations for action is clear. Explanation is supported by topic study materials.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

26 points

Explanation of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommendations for action is unclear. Explanation unclearly supported by topic study materials.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Explanation of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommendations for action is insufficient. Explanation is not supported by topic study materials.

Criteria Description

Personal Response to Case Study

5. Excellent

40 points

Evaluation of which theory is preferable within personal practice along with how that theory would influence personal recommendations for action is clear, relevant, and insightful.

4. Good

34 points

Evaluation of which theory is preferable within personal practice along with how that theory would influence personal recommendations for action is clear and relevant.

3. Satisfactory

30 points

Evaluation of which theory is preferable within personal practice along with how that theory would influence personal recommendations for action is clear.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

26 points

Evaluation of which theory is preferable along with how that theory would influence personal recommendations for action is lacking a personal connection.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Evaluation of which theory is personally preferable along with how that theory would influence personal recommendations for action is inadequate.

Criteria Description

Organization, Effectiveness, and Format

5. Excellent

10 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

4. Good

8.5 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.

3. Satisfactory

7.5 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

6.5 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.

Criteria Description

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

5. Excellent

10 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

4. Good

8.5 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

3. Satisfactory

7.5 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

2. Less Than Satisfactory

6.5 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

1. Unsatisfactory

0 points

Sources are not documented.

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.

Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.

Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.

The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.
ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.