Watch the linked video and answer the following questions BEFORE class on Friday
- Describe the ethical aspects of the case as though you were describing it to someone who hasn’t seen the video.
- Explain which bioethical principles are involved.
- Describe what you think should have been done in the case. Justify your answer by appealing to concepts from the course.
In-Class Discussion Questions
- Discuss each other’s answers for 2 above. Reach a consensus.
- Dworkin makes the distinction between attaching “unreasonable” weights to values and failing to act according to values.
- In which type of case do you think paternalism is more permissible?
- Which of these two kinds of situations best describes Dax’s case? Explain your answer.
- In Dworkin’s article (P. 102 beginning in the first full paragraph), he considers what sort of paternalist policy a rational person might accept with respect to suicide.
- Summarize his view.
- Would you apply these policies to the Dax case? Why or why not? Justify your answer.
- On p. 102 1st full paragraph of the 2nd column, Dworkin describes a “third class of decisions” which involve dangers which are either not sufficiently understood OR appreciated correctly by the persons involved (or both).
- Do you think either or both of these describe the Dax case? Justify your answer by appealing to specific parts the documentary.
- Dworkin offers two principles that must be met for paternalistic legislation to be morally legitimate.
- What are they?
- Suggest a policy for cases like the Dax case. Explain how your policy is consistent with the two principles.
- If you had been the doctor, what would you have done? Justify your answer.