Final Exam Study Guide Flashcards
o How does Menzel understand the right to healthcare?
healthcare is a basic need, must be accessible and affordable to all
- individuals have the right to make decisions about their own lives and bodies, based on their values, beliefs, and preferences
autonomy
obligation toact in ways that promote the well being of others, decisions that are in the patients best interest
beneficence
avoiding causing harm, first do no harm, minimize potential harm from treatments, ensuring any harm caused is outweighed by benefits
nonmaleficence
maximizing overall well being or benefit while minimizing harm, rooted in utilitarianism, achieving the greatest good for the greatest number of people
utility
utility rooted in
utilitarianism
concerned with fairness, quity, and equitable distribution of benefits, risks, and resources. Ensure individuals or groups are treated equally and without discrimination
JUSTICE
focus on determining what actions are morally right or wrong, set of rules, principles, or guidelines for ethical behavior
theories of right action
o Emphasize duties and rules
deontological theories
o Judge actions based on their outcomes
consequentialist theories
focus on inherent morality of actions themselves, regardless of outcomes,
deontological theories
intentions matter more than the consequences
deontological theories
action is morally right if it produces the greatest good for the greatest number
consequentialist theories
ends justify the means
consequentialist
focus on character and virtues of the moral agent rather than specific actions
virtue based theories
decisions that are in the patients best interest, what moral principle
beneficence
ethical theory that evaluates the morality of actions, policies, or decisions based on their consequences, specifically in terms of maximizing overall well being or happiness and minimize suffering
utilitarianism
Kantian ethics looks at what
actions rather than consequences
actions are morally right if they align with the natural purpose of things and contribute to human flourishing
natural law theory
focuses on character and moral virtues of individuals making decisions, rather than on rules or outcomes
virtue ethics
ethical theory that emphasizes the importance of care, relationships, and interconnectedness in moral decision kaking
ethics of care
critiques traditional ethical theories and frameowrks from a feminist perspective
feminist ethics
conceptual agreement that indivuduals would make to form a just society veil of ignorance, ensures impartiality in decision making, would choose rules and principles that are fair for all, as they could end up being anyone in society
Rawls contract theory
2 principles of Rawls contract theory
equal liberty and difference principle and fair equality of opportunity
o Does Brown think it is legitimate to hold agents morally responsible for their health/unhealthy lifestyles?
Not always legitimate, sometimes there are external factors that don’t allow people to be healthy
o How does Brown use Petit’s notion of “fitness to be held responsible”?
assess the legitimacy of holding individuals accountable for their helath related behaviors, brown argues it is often unjust to hold indivuldals fully accountable for their health behaviors when external factors undermine their ability to make autonomous and informed decisons
o What are health-risky behaviors?
Actions or habits that inc likelihood of developing health problems or diseases
What are some of the different positions on organ donation with health risky behaviors that Glannon considers?
personal responsibility for health, role of external factors
o What are QALYs? What are they meant to measure?
Measure used in health economics to assess the value of health outcomes by combining both the quantity and quality of life lived
o What are some reasons for criticizing the idea of a QALY?
Not respresentative for older people or those with disabilities
What is the mere difference view of disability?
Being disabled is simply a difference in bodily or mental functioning, should nto automatically be seen as something that makes. Aperson worse off or less valuable.
What is the bad difference view?
Disabilities are differences that have negative consequences for individuals
o What is the overall goal of Barnes’ article?
Challenge the idea that disabilitiy is inherently harmful or detrimental to a persons well being.
How does Barnes respond to the objection that “if disability doesn’t make someone worse off, then it is permissible to cause disability and impermissible to cause nondisability”?
awknowledging disabiity as value neutral does not make it permissible to cause it, autonomy must be respected, it is okay to cause nondisability due to the societal structures in place that may discriminate against those with disabilities
it is permissible to cause disability, is impermissible to cause nondisability
She critiques them for their narrow exclusionary nature, health should not be defined solely in terms of normal biological functioning, as this excludes individuals who may not meet conventional norms but still lead meaningful lives
o What is meant by “leveling” health care?
ideas of reducing disparities in the access, quality, and distribution of healthcare services
o What does Silvers have to say about arguments for “leveling” healthcare
She supports it, healthcare should be universally accessible and responsve to the diverse needs of individuals, including those with disabilities
o What two aspects of functioning does Silvers focus on,
individual functioning – persons biological or personal capacity to perform tasks, manage activities of daily life, meet certain internal standards of health or well being , social functioning – how well an individual is able to participate in society or interact with the broader community
What does the personhood debate refer to
personhood begins at conception, when personhood begins
why might personhood debate result in stalemate
the question of when personhood begins is deeply dividive and hinges on moral, religious and philosophical views.
why does establishing personhood (or the lack of personhood) matter with respect to the abortion debate.
Determines whther the fetus has the moral right to lfie and how that right weighs against rights of the pregnant person
explain Thomson’s initial violinist thought experiment, and be able to say what she intends to show with it
You wake up attached to famous violinist, hooked up to your kidneys in a life saving arrangement, violinist is sick and requires your kidneys to filter toxins out of his blood for nine months in order to survive, aims to show right to life does not necessarily entail the right to use someone elses body to sustain that life
o What is the point of using thought experiments
used to explore and clarify complex ideas, concepts, or ethical principles by imagining situations that test their logical implications
o What is the extreme view?
no abortion for any reason at all
o What is the point of Thomson’s burglar/people seed thought experiments?
scenarios are designed to explore whether someone has an obligation to maintain a pregnancy even if it was unintended, and to emphasize the importance of consent in moral reasoning.
o According to Thomson, what does a right to life entail?
right to not be killed unjustly
o What is Thomson’s point in invoking the “Good Samaritan” and the “Minimally Decent Samaritan”?
it may be commendable to act as a good samaritian, it is not morally required in the case of pregnancy
o According to Marquis, why is it wrong to kill an adult human?
Deprives the individual of a full life
o Be able to explain how Marquis applies his theory of killing to abortion
Deprives the fetus of a future like ours, killing is wrong bc of loss of potential future experiences
o You should know Purdy’s answer to the question: “Can it be wrong to have a child because of genetic factors?”
yes it can be wrong, especially whe theres a high likelihood that the child will be born with severe genetics disabilities.
how does Purdy defend her answer to it being wrong to have child bc of genetic factors
badness of severe disabilities, responsibility to avoid harm, avoidability of harm
o What is Sandel’s view on human enhancement technologies?
critical view, takes away from the human nature experiecne
Sandel looks at a number of technologies in his article. Which, if any, he approves of
those that prevent serious disease or conditons
o What does Sandel have to say about parenting and enhancements?
enhancements could ruin parent offspring resaltionship, loss of gift of children
o What is Bostrom’s position on human enhancement technologies?
Overall in favor of, emphasizes careful consideration of the benefits and risks.
use of advanced technologies to enahcne human beings physically, intellectually, and emotionally
transhumanism
stance that opposes or critically evaluates the rapid development and use of biotechnologies aimed at enhancing or altering human biology, such as genetic engineering, cybernetics, human enhancement technologies, and other forms of bioengineering
bioconservatism
refers to the right or ability of individuals to alter or enhance their bodies and minds through biotechnological or cybernetic means
morphological freedoms
rights and autonomy to make decisions regarding their reproductive health
reproductive freedoms
o What are the two general worries that bioconservatives have regarding human enhancements,
preservation of human nature, social inequality
what does bostrom say about 2 bioconservative arguments
bostrum says enhancing humans does not lead to loss of humanity but instead consistent with the idea of human flourishing, bostrum says that the social inequality part can be avoided with the proper policies
o What is physician-assisted suicide?
Physician provies a competent patient with the means to end their own life, patient is responsible for carrying out the final act of self admin of lethal substance
what is euthanasia
Euthanasia involves the physician administering a lethal injection
o James Rachels offers three considerations against the AMA’s position (“the AMA doctrine”). What are they?
No moral difference between killing and letting die, active euthanasia can be more humane and less painfaul than passive, ethical relevance of physicians intentions
o James Rachels’ reads the AMA’s position as reflecting a distinction between killing and letting die. Explain what the distinction is. What does Rachels’ argue with respect to this distinction
Killing is actively killing, letting die is doing nothing to stop the dying of someone, Rachels says there is no difference between the two
smith jones thought experiment
drowning kid in bath vs watching him fall and drown but doing nothing to help
o Bonnie Steinbock thinks Rachels has gotten something wrong in his discussion of the euthanasia/PAS discussions. Be able to explain her point.
She says that letting die involves respecting patients autonomy and their right to refuse treatment, killing involves directly intervening in a way that overrides the patients wishes or rights
o What is the difference between ordinary and extraordinary care?
? Ordinary refers to medical interventions that are morally obligatory and proportionate in providing reasonable hope of benefit to the patient. Extraordinary refers to medical intervnetions tthat are extraordinary unusual or disproportionate to the potential benefits they provide
o Does Steinbock think that the right to refuse treatment implies a right to voluntary euthanasia?
she does not, she agrees patients have the right to refuse treatment, this right does not necessarily extend to a right to actively cause their own death
