Recently Lorna J. Wendt turned down a $10 million divorce settlement from her husband of thirty one years, Gary C. Wendt, the CEO of General Electric, whose net worth may be as much as $100 million. She argued that helping put her husband through Harvard Business School, and then taking on the role of a corporate executive?s wife, which involved, in her case, playing hostess at business parties, organizing charity events, relocating on very short notice, and listening patiently to tales of office woes, were investments that entitle her to one half of Mr. Wendt?s fortune. While a 50?50 settlement is common practice in divorce cases, American courts generally will not award a wife one half when more than 10 or 15 million dollars is at stake. Instead, the wife is awarded an amount that enables her to live in the style to which she has become accustomed. Martha Fineman, a Columbia University law professor who testified at divorce proceedings for Ms. Wendt, says that a decision against Ms. Wendt ?would say that [women?s] typical contributions to a marriage are not valued.? Mr. Wendt says, ?she (Ms. Wendt) was not responsible for my success ??this is about who created and preserved the assets.?

==============================

Case # 2 Oprah speaks out--what’s the beef?

Category:

Business Ethics

Case:

Oprah Winfrey is currently being sued by a group of cattle ranchers from Amarillo, Texas under a newly enacted Texas statute that creates legal liability for questioning a perishable food’s safety without “sound scientific proof.” Twelve other states have enacted similar laws. Oprah’s case, however, is the first of its kind. On April 16, 1996 the price of cattle dropped a dramatic 1.5 cents per pound on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange after Oprah’s program that day. The program, which occurred during the time that the British “mad cow” epidemic broke as big news, dealt with the safety of American beef. Oprah’s guest, a former cattle rancher turned vegetarian, claimed that large numbers of cows that are “fine at night, dead in the morning” get ground and fed to other animals. According to the cattle ranchers who sued Oprah there is no evidence of mad cow disease in the United States. They protest that the “Oprah crash” on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange resulted in devastating financial loss for cattle ranchers.

Is the Texas Statute under which the cattle ranchers have sued Oprah Winfrey a reasonable law to protect the legitimate financial interests of food producers or does it encroach upon the fundamental right of free speech?

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 3 Intra-familial organ transplants

Category:

Bioethics

Case:

A 19-year-old woman is being treated for a serious kidney disease. She is currently on a dialysis maching, but treatment is steadily decreasing in efficacy. Before her condition declines any further, the physician suggests family members undergo tests to determine tissue compatibility to transplant a kidney. Only the brother shows a degree of compatibility high enough to be considered a candidate. The physician meets the brother alone to discuss the risks and benefits of the operation. Although agreeing to be tested, the brother decides not to donate a kidney after weighing the various alternatives because of the risks, and because, as he puts it, he doesn’t “feel he and his sister have ever been close enough that they would ever take that kind of a risk for each other.” The physician repeats a full explanation of the risks involved, and urges him to rethink his decision because of the serious nature of his sister’s illness with increasingly little time to spare. The brother remains adamant in his refusal. What should the physician tell his kidney patient?

==============================

Case # 4 Loyalty & Betrayal

Category:

Personal ethics

Case:

Elia Kazan, now 87 years old, was one of the most important American film directors during the 1950’s and 1960’s, having directed classic films such as On the Waterfront and Viva Zapata, A Streetcar Named Desire, and East of Eden, which launched the careers of Marlon Brando and James Dean. This past year Mr. Kazan was rejected, as he has been now for many years, for lifetime achievement awards by both the American Film Institute and the Los Angeles Film Critics Association. The reason for this is that in 1952 Mr. Kazan appeared before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC) and informed on eight friends, all film writers and directors as having been, like Mr. Kazan, members of the American Communist Party in the 1930’s. Kr Kazan did not accuse the eight individuals of any specific actions injurious to the United States. Nonetheless, none of them were able to work in the film industry for many years, in some cases, ever again, as a result of Mr. Kazan’s testimony. Kr Kazan’s testimony took place at the height of the McCarthy era when the HUAC was zealously looking for evidence of Communist influence in Hollywood. Mr. Kazan was under pressure to testify, as were other former members of the American Communist Party in the film industry, because failure to cooperate with the HUAC had led to many writers and directors being blacklisted by film studios, which made it impossible to find work. Movie critics are deeply divided over the decision not to honor Mr. Kazan. Some believe that, in the words of one member of the American Film Institute, “All that matters is the movies. You’re honoring a person’s body of work.” Other critics disagree. “When you’re honoring someone’s entire career, says another critic, you’re honoring the totality of what he represents, and Kazan’s career, post 1952, was built on the ruin of other person’s careers.”

Should Mr. Kazan receive a lifetime achievement award? If so, why? If not, why not?

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 6 Conflicting Interests

Category:

Business ethics

Case:

In 1962 the Atlantic Cement Company began operating a cement plant outside of Albany, New York. The Company employed over 300 local residents and by 1970 had invested $45 million in the plant. The plant emitted large amounts of pollution, however, as well as causing constant vibrations and loud noise. Local residents filed suit against the Company, claiming that the loud noise and the vibrations were harming their health and property. The suit asked that the court issue an injunction that would close down the plant until the pollution and vibrations could be eliminated. The Company was already using the best available technology, which meant that the suit was asking that the plant be closed down indefinitely. The court refused to issue the injunction, reasoning that the costs of closing the plant outweighed the benefits to be gained by the residents. Instead of closing the plant, the court ruled that the cement company should pay residents a one—time fee to compensate them for ongoing harms. This fee was calculated to be a fair market price for what the residents would receive if they were inclined and able to rent their property.

Was the decision of the court in this case fair? If so, why? If not, why not?

==============================

Case # 7 The Quiet Samaritan

Category:

Social ethics

Case:

Walking down the street Jones sees a flowerpot fall out of a window, threatening another pedestrian. Jones could save him simply by shouting a warning but he keeps silent. Under prevailing law in the United States, in cases of this kind, Jones is not liable for failing to warn the pedestrian.

Should the law be changed so as to impose liability upon a bystander such as Jones in the preceding situation? If so, why? If not, why not?

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 8 Responsibilities after Divorce

Category:

Family ethics

Case:

Elmer donated a pint of blood that his wife Doris needed during operation. Elmer and Doris were subsequently divorced. Several years after the divorce Elmer was in an accident and needed a pint of blood. His new wife, Cora, was of a different blood type, and thus could not contribute blood to Elmer. Doris still lived in the same area as Elmer, and there were no health-related reasons that would have prevented her from donating blood.

Was Doris morally obligated to donate a pint of blood to Elmer; “Yes,” “No,” or “It depends”? Whatever your response explain the reasoning behind it.

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 9 Licensing parents?

Category:

Family ethics

Case:

. Jack C. Westman, who teaches psychiatry at the University of Wisconsin Medical School, believes that people should be required to secure a license if they want to become parents. Securing the license would require that parents be a minimum age (18), that they sign a pledge not to abuse or neglect their children, and that they complete a certified course in parenting. If not, then under Dr. Westman’s proposal, the children people bring into the world would be taken from them, at least until they satisfy the necessary requirements for the parenting license. Dr. Westman, who works intensively with abusive and neglectful parents in his psychiatry practice, believes that much abuse and mistreatment would be prevented by his proposal.

Should Dr. Westman’s proposal for licensing parents be adopted? If so, why? If not, why not?

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 10 Integrity in Business

Category:

Business ethics

Case:

You are a recruiter for an executive recruitment firm that has recently been retained by one of the largest corporations in the United States to find appropriate candidates for the position of President of the corporation. If the corporation hires one of the candidates you find then your firm will receive one third of the President’s cash compensation —— salary and bonus, an amount in excess of $750,000. Several weeks into the recruitment process it becomes clear to you that the company has gone about the search in a severely flawed way, making it highly unlikely that it will find the kind of candidates it needs. The Board of Directors, in your judgment, has allowed the CEO to control the search. It is clear to you that he wants someone who will be deferential towards him, which, in your judgment, will make it extremely difficult to attract the most highly qualified candidates. You discuss the issue with your superior. She says that given the intensely competitive environment for executive search firms, it would seriously disadvantage your firm to offend the Board of Directors of one of America’s largest corporations. She reminds you that the Board of Directors is responsible for hiring the President of the Corporation. A recruitment firm, she says, bears no legal liability if a candidate it presents to a company is hired and proves unsuccessful in his position.

What should you do in this situation, and why?

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 12 Showing Appreciation

Category:

Legal ethics

Case:

In May of 1997 Edith and Henry Everitt revoked a $3,000,000 gift for the construction of a children’s zoo in New York City’s Central Park. The zoo was to replace a smaller children’s zoo in the park which had been constructed with funds donated by former New York Governor Herbert H. Lehman and his wife. A granite gate at the zoo entrance has an inscription on it honoring the Lehmans. A contract that the city entered into with the Everitts called for placing a plaque honoring the Everitt’s gift in the center pier of the gateway with two smaller plaques on flanking piers, one noting the Lehman’s gift of the original zoo, and the other noting their gift of the gateway. The city commission, which must approve changes in art and architecture on city owned property rejected the plan called for in the Everitt’s contract because the commission concluded that the name of an original donor should not be removed or obscured from view. Under the plan approved by the commission, the only official acknowledgment of the Everitt’s gift would have been a plaque two inches tall.

Were the Everitt’s justified in revoking their gift? If so, why? If not, why not?

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 15 Retaliation

Category:

Military ethics

Case:

In 1944 it became known to the Free French Partisan fighting forces that the Germans had executed 80 partisans and planned soon to execute more. The Partisans thus decided they would shoot 80 Germans prisoners who had recently surrendered to them. At this point the Red Cross intervened, won a postponement of the executions, and sought an agreement from the Germans to treat captured partisans as prisoners of war, who may not be shot. The Partisans waited 6 days and the Germans did not reply. The Partisans then shot 80 German prisoners. After these shootings the Nazis executed no more Partisans.

Was the shooting of the 80 German prisoners by the Partisans morally justifiable? If so, why? If not, why not?

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 16 Conflicting interests

Category:

Legal ethics

Case:

Suppose that six physicians are discovered by the IRS each to have understated his or her taxable income by over $50,000. As legal advisers to the IRS Jerry and Paul agree that all six must pay tax on the income they failed to declare at appropriately high rates on that income and substantial financial penalties. Jerry and Paul disagree, however, concerning the criminal prosecution of the doctors. Jerry believes that all six should be prosecuted and sent to prison. Paul, however, believes, that only two of the doctors should be prosecuted on the grounds that the community cannot afford to lose any more than four doctors at this time (the six doctors all live in a predominantly rural region with limited resources for medical care). Jerry disagrees strongly. He views the needs of the community for medical practitioners as irrelevant to the decision to prosecute. He contends that the evidence of criminal violations of the tax code against all six doctors is equally strong, and thus they all should be prosecuted.

Who is right, Jerry or Paul? Explain your answer.

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 17 Drunk Driving

Category:

Legal ethics

Case:

In New Jersey a person convicted of his first drunk driving offense faces a mandatory suspension of his license for six months, and the possibility of a thirty-day jail sentence. In addition, the offender must pay a mandatory fine of $250 and a $100 fee to support law enforcement efforts to catch other drunk drivers. Convicted drunk drivers are also required to undergo a minimum of 12 hours counseling for which they must pay a $1,000 surcharge for each of three years, as well as $50 a day. In addition, drunk drivers receive 9 “insurance points” that could subject them to huge increases in their insurance premiums. The total cost for a first offense of drunk driving in New Jersey probably exceeds $9,000.

Is the New Jersey penalty for drunk driving fair or unfair? Explain your answer.

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 18 Equal opportunity

Category:

Social ethics

Case:

Under federal regulations for implementing Title IX of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964, which deals with sex discrimination in education, colleges receiving federal funds must provide equal opportunity in intercollegiate athletics for members of both sexes. The Office of Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education interprets this to mean that intercollegiate level participation opportunities for male and female students must be provided in numbers substantially proportional to their respective enrollments. This means that, for example, if 40% of the student body at a college is female then roughly (give or take 5%) of the participants in intercollegiate sports at the college should be female. The above standard has come to be known as the proportionality requirement. Under the U.S. Department of Education’s interpretation of Title IX, if a school fails to meet the proportionality requirement it must be able to show that its athletic programs satisfy one or the other of the following conditions: first, the program is part of a continuing effort to increase substantially the opportunities for women to participate in intercollegiate athletics; second, despite not meeting the proportionality requirement, the school’s athletic programs nonetheless adequately meet the needs and address the interests of female students at the college in regard to participating in intercollegiate sports. The proportionality requirement has been the subject of unabated and intense controversy since the early 1990’s. Given unrelentingly tight budgets, colleges and universities say that often they can find no other way to meet the proportionality requirement than by making significant cuts in men’s sports programs — i.e. either by eliminating entire programs in certain sports, or by capping the number of participants on various teams. Many colleges and universities would like to see the proportionality requirement eliminated.

Is the proportionality requirement fair or unfair? Explain your answer.

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 19 Going Nude

Category:

Personal ethics

Case:

Twenty-nine year old Debora Rodriquez is a militant member of Brazil’s landless movement, the Movimento Sem Terra (MST) which is battling for redistribution of under utilized land to as many as 4.8 million landless families. Recently Ms. Rodriquez made a decision to appear in an upcoming Brazilian edition of Playboy, photographed in the nude. Many fellow members of the MST are highly critical of her decision, believing that it will tarnish the Movement’s image. Some other members (apparently) do not have this concern, but believe Ms. Rodriquez should contribute a portion of the $18,000 she will earn to the MST’s efforts on behalf of impoverished Brazilian farmers. Ms. Rodriquez says she will use the money to buy a home for herself and her two children, aged 11 and 9, as well as other things the children need. Currently Ms. Rodriquez and her children live in a tent at a settlement organized by the MST.

Is Ms. Rodriquez’s decision morally justifiable? If so, why? If not, why not?

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 20 Jury Nullification

Category:

Legal ethics

Case:

The phrase “jury nullification” refers to the acquittal of a defendant by a jury regardless of the weight of the evidence. Jury nullification is possible because once a jury retires to the jury room to decide its verdict no one can compel the jurors to reach a particular verdict, and once the jury has reached its decision, it simply has to announce it. It doesn’t have to explain or justify it. Juries thus cannot be prevented from engaging in nullification. At this time, however, only two states, Indiana and Maryland, allow a judge to instruct a jury that it has the right to do so. In a recent Yale Law Review article, Professor Paul Butler has argued that individuals serving on juries that hear cases in which the defendant is a young African American male, and the crime at issue is a non—violent drug—related offense, should vote to acquit regardless of the evidence. In this connection, Professor Butler points to what he views as widespread discrimination against African Americans in the criminal justice system. He also contends that individual defendants, the African American community, and society as a whole, would all be better of f if young African American males, who commit non—violent drug—related offenses, remained in the community, rather than going to prison.

Is Professor Butler’s proposal morally justifiable? If so, why? If not, why not?

==============================

Case # 21 Financial Aid

Category:

Academic ethics

Case:

Until 1993 Carleton College, in Northfield, Minnesota, did not take a student’s ability to pay tuition and living expenses into account in making admissions decisions. That year, however, Carleton changed its policy. It adopted a system, now used by numerous other colleges and universities, under which the college admits as many students without looking at need as its financial aid budget allows, offering these students enough money to attend. When the aid budget is exhausted Carleton then only admits students who need a grant of $2,000 or less to pay the $25,610 that, at this time, a person needs to cover tuition and living expense costs at Carleton. Under this policy, Carleton took a student’s ability to pay into account for the final 5% of admitted students in 1994, and for the final 9% in 1995 and 1996. At the time Carleton changed its policy the financial aid budget comprised one fifth of the school’s annual expenditures, and the budget for financial aid had increased 38% from the previous year.

Is Carleton’s policy fair or unfair? Explain your answer.

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 24 Government Subsidies?

Category:

Government ethics

Case:

Foster Friess, a wealthy manager of a multi billion dollar mutual fund loves music, but strongly believes that government agencies should not subsidize the arts. “Why should the single mother who makes $6 an hour as a clerk be subsidizing ... my seats at the symphony through the local, state, and federal taxes taken out of her paycheck”, asks Mr. Friess. Recently Mr. Friess offered a donation of $40,000 to the Grand Teton Music Festival in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, which has an annual budget of $1.2 million, on the condition that the Festival not accept a grant of $10,950 from the National Endowment for the Arts, an agency of the federal government.

Assume you are on the Board of Directors of the Grand Teton Music Festival. Do you vote to accept or reject Mr. Friess’s offer? If so, why? If not, why not?

Notes:

Fourth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2/26/98

==============================

Case # 26 Cliff Notes

Category:

Academic ethics

Case:

You are in tenth grade. Your school’s handbook prohibits “cheating, which includes plagiarism, academic dishonesty, copying the work of others, and other conduct that undermines the academic objective of the assignment.”

A. Your English class is reading A Tale of Oedipus’ Scarlet Tempest, a long, difficult work of literature that has bored and puzzled generations of students.

1.If the teacher does not say anything about the use of study aids, is it cheating to use Cliff Notes as long as you read the book as well?

2.If the teacher does not say anything about the use of study aids, is it cheating to read Cliff Notes instead of reading the book?

3.If the teacher specifically forbids the use of study aids, is it cheating to use Cliff Notes as long as you read the book as well?

4.If the teacher specifically forbids the use of study aids, is it cheating to use Cliff Notes instead of the book?

5.Should English teachers state that they prohibit the use of Cliff Notes and similar study aids, both in school and out of school? If so, how does the teacher respond when a student points out that the teacher was seen reading literary criticism in the library the day before teaching the novel?

B. Assume your first paper on A Tale of Oedipus’ Scarlet Tempest is due next week. You must develop your own topic.

“Write a piece of literary analysis; this is not a research paper,” the teacher said. Teacher has said nothing specific about the use of study aids. Without using Cliff Notes, you read the novel. You are proud of yourself for having identified water as a symbol of cleansing and rebirth. You prepare an outline and rough draft.

Four days before the paper is due, you borrow a friend’s Cliff Notes. It contains a section on key symbols and themes, including “Water Symbolism.” You read it and realize that you made virtually all of the same points in your rough draft, but you believe the Cliff Notes analysis sounds more sophisticated. You tinker a bit with your rough draft and reword a few of your ideas, based on Cliff’s insights. You prepare a final draft and turn in your paper.

1.Have you cheated if you cite Cliff Notes?

2.Have you cheated if you do not cite Cliff Notes as a source?

3.Assume the teacher is Brady Olson. He has been on the faculty since the Eisenhower administration.

He reads your paper (cited or not, it doesn’t matter), and says, ‘This paper on water symbolism is right out of the Cliff Notes. It’s not acceptable.” What do you say? What should he do?

Notes:

Ethics across the Curriculum Workshop, Summer, 2000, University of San Diego

==============================

Case # 28 Caring Criticism

Category:

Personal ethics

Case:

Jane and Mary, two young women in their early twenties, have been close friends since they met during their second year of college. The now both live in the same city where each is pursuing her career, Mary as a teacher and Jane as a computer systems analyst. Jane’s current boy friend Sam frequently borrows money from her. Jane has complained to Mary several times about not having enough money to buy things, but, as Mary observes, she (Jane) never presses Sam to pay her back. Last week Jane lent her car to Sam for a period of two weeks so that he could visit some college friends out of town. Jane doesn’t need her car to get to work, but not having the car on weekends has meant she will have to put off several shopping trips to furnish her new apartment. It also seems to Mary, from what Jane told her, that Sam was a little vague to her about the identities of the people he plans to visit.

Jane has told Mary that she considers Sam one of the most intelligent and creative persons she has ever known. Mary has met Sam several times. He talks constantly about grandiose plans for different business ventures, but has yet to follow through on any of them. Sam has no steady job at this time, and, so far as Mary can determine, doesn’t seem terribly concerned about this.

Mary recalls well that Jane also considered her boy friend in her junior year of college, Gary, a graduate student in biology, as exceptionally bright. Gary had a difficult relationship with his thesis adviser, about which he bitterly complained to Jane almost daily, often for well over an hour. Mary recalls that Jane endured Gary’s non-stop venting of frustration, discouragement, and anger without ever saying anything to Gary about the emotional strain it caused her (about which she often complained to Mary). Mary also remembers that Gary proved completely unable, or unwilling, to extend emotional support to Jane, even in situations where she needed it badly. For example during a very tense period when Jane and her family feared that her mother might have cancer, and were awaiting test results (fortunately they turned out to be negative for cancer), Gary continued to go on about his adviser completely oblivious to Jane’s situation. Eventually Gary ended the relationship and very shortly thereafter became involved with another young woman.

Mary has the highest regard for Jane. She considers her a superb friend, and a responsible, caring person. Mary believes that Jane is extremely bright, interesting, and capable. She also views Jane as very sensitive, however. During all the years of their friendship Mary has never said anything to Jane that Jane could understand as strongly critical of her.

Notes:

Fifth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2000

==============================

Case # 29 Money and Friendship

Category:

Personal ethics

Case:

Shawn and Kevin, two young men in their mid-twenties, have been close friends since they met during their college years. They share numerous similar interests and greatly enjoy each other’s company. Kevin gratefully acknowledges to himself that Shawn has been a fine friend in every respect that counts. Shawn has listened patiently, and responded empathetically, on the many occasions Kevin sought him out to talk about major issues in his life concerning, for example, school plans, job opportunities, or romantic matters. Shawn has always been there when Kevin needed encouragement. He has provided assistance unselfishly in large and small matters - e.g. lending Kevin his car when Kevin’s broke down, several times helping Kevin move his belongings from one apartment to another, and putting up Kevin’s relatives from out of town when Kevin didn’t have room for them at this apartment. This is not to say, however, that the friendship has been one sided in any way. Kevin has provided similar kinds of support, encouragement, and assistance to Shawn over the years. Kevin does not view all the things he and Shawn have done for one another as at all like a sequence of quid pro quos, but instead (although Kevin has never consciously stated the point in this way to himself) he views the deep reciprocity between Shawn and himself as flowing organically from the nature of their friendship.

Shawn, who has written a number of short stories and poems, has been working on his first novel for the past two years. Kevin is well aware of Shawn’s first major literary project and fully supports it, in the sense of considering it a highly worthwhile thing for Shawn to do. Several weeks ago Shawn learned about a small house in a quiet semi-rural outer suburban area. He believes the house would provide an ideal working environment for him.

Recently Shawn has asked Kevin to loan him $5,000 for the down payment on the house. The request takes Kevin by surprise. Over the years of their friendship neither Kevin nor Shawn has asked the other for a loan until now. Monetary affairs have not played a significant role in their relationship as friends, either directly or indirectly. Kevin and Shawn both grew up in families where discussion of personal financial issues outside of the family was disapproved of strongly. For this reason, both Kevin and Shawn seldom, if ever, discuss their personal finances with each other.

Kevin, who works as a project manager for a large engineering firm, can afford to loan the money to Shawn. He (Kevin) is not sure, however, exactly how Shawn plans to repay the loan on his salary as manager of a small bookstore. Kevin feels acutely uncomfortable raising issues with Shawn such as how he plans to repay the loan, what might be a reasonable repayment schedule, and so forth.

Notes:

Fifth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2000

==============================

Case # 30 A Matter of Principle

Category:

Bioethics

Case:

In early 1982 Ms. Corrine Worthen, a registered nurse, protested against assignment to perform kidney dialysis upon a terminally ill patient who was a double amputee. She notified her head nurse that she “had moral, medical, and philosophical objections” against doing so. Prior to her protest Ms. Worthen had performed the procedure on the patient and twice had to interrupt it because the patient suffered cardiac arrest and severe hemorrhaging. Convinced that the procedure was more harmful than beneficial to the patient, Ms. Worthen asked to be reassigned. The head nurse granted her request.

Several months later, however, Ms. Worthen again was called upon to dialyze the patient. She objected, stating that she thought she had worked out an agreement not to be given this assignment. The head nurse referred Ms. Worthen to the treating physician who informed her that the patient’s family wanted the patient kept alive, and that the patient would soon cease to live without dialysis. Nonetheless, Ms. Worthen said she refused to dialyze the patient anymore. The head nurse then warned her that she would be fired if she continued in her refusal. Ms. Worthen continued to refuse to dialyze the patient, and she was terminated.

The Code of Professional Ethics for Nurses, that applied to Ms. Worthen at the time she was fired, contained a provision with the following words:

1.4 THE NATURE OF HEALTH PROBLEMS

The nurse’s respect for the worth and dignity of the individual human being applies irrespective of the nature of the health problem. It is reflected in the care given the person who is disabled as well as the normal, the patient with the long-term illness as well as the one with acute illness, or the recovering patient as well as the one who who is terminally ill or dying. ….

If personally opposed to the delivery of care in a particular case because of the nature of the health problem or the procedures to be used, the nurse is justified in refusing to participate. Such refusal should be made known in advance and in time for other appropriate arrangements to be made for the client’s nursing care. If the nurse must knowingly enter such a case under emergency circumstances or enters unknowingly, the obligation to provide the best possible care is observed. The nurse withdraws from this kind of situation only when assured that alternative sources of nursing care are available to the client.

Ms Worthen sued the hospital for terminating her and lost.

Notes:

Fifth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2000

==============================

Case # 31 An explosive Dispute

Category:

Legal ethics

Case:

The use of firecrackers is a prominent ritual in many traditional celebrations of the Chinese New Year. For the past three years, however, the administration of New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani has refused to allow the setting off of firecrackers in Chinese New Year celebrations. Citing safety considerations, a spokesperson for the Mayor’s office recently noted an Associated Press report of a firecracker storage area in China that caught fire, resulting in the deaths of forty seven people. Opponents of the Giuliani administration’s policy say they simply want to be allowed to use firecrackers in specially designated areas under close city supervision. They point out that such procedures are used in large public fireworks displays on the Fourth of July, which to their knowledge, have not resulted in any deaths or serious injuries. The opponents of the firecracker ban emphasize the enormous cultural significance for many of the Chinese people living in New York City of celebrating the Chinese New Year in a traditional manner that includes using firecrackers.

In February of 1998 Mr. Wang Jian, a twenty eight year old former U.S. Marine, set off a string of firecrackers on the steps of New York City’s City Hall. Seconds later he walked down the steps and calmly allowed himself to be handcuffed by police officers who arrested him. Mr. Wang was charged with four misdemeanor counts, including reckless endangerment and disorderly conduct, and one count of an administrative code violation, unreasonable noise. Released on $500 bail, he faced, possibly, up to a year in prison and a fine of $1,000. “I did it to make a political statement,” said Mr. Wang. “I wanted the politicians to know that the Chinese will stand up for what they believe in.”

Upon his release Mr. Wang received a hero’s reception from many residents of New York’s Chinatown. “He did what many of us didn’t have the courage to. …. He is not only my hero, but a hero for the whole community, said Mr. Thomas Lee, a businessman who waited in line in a Chinatown restaurant to shake Mr. Wang’s hand shortly after he was released on bail.. Restaurant owners in New York’s Chinatown offered Mr. Wang free meals, local businessmen offered to contribute money towards his legal defense, and even police officers showed deference towards him.

Some members of the Chinese community in New York, however, were critical of Mr. Wang’s action. Mr. Richard Hsueh, President of Chinese American Voice, a radio station in Flushing, expressed the opinion that Mr. Wang went too far in expressing his point. “I do not have any problems with a safe legalized fireworks display, …. But [Mr. Wang] should not have done what he did, It’s dangerous,” said Mr. Hsueh.

Mr. Wang said that before setting off the firecrackers on the steps of New York’s City Hall, he made sure the steps were empty. “Public safety was the most important thing in my mind that moment,” he said.

Notes:

Fifth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2000

==============================

Case # 32 The Hurricane: Truth and Fiction

Category:

Miscellaneous

Case:

In 1967 Rubin “Hurricane” Carter, then a strong contender for the middleweight boxing championship, was convicted with a co-defendant, Mr. John Artis, of murdering a bartender and two patrons in a sudden attack of gunfire on a tavern in Patterson, New Jersey. After a twenty year legal struggle, Mr. Carter and Mr. Artis had their convictions overturned. This struggle is the subject of a recent film entitled The Hurricane, starring Denzel Washington, and directed by Norman Jewison.

At the trial of Mr. Carter and Mr. Artis in 1967 the prosecution introduced no motive. The only witnesses who testified for the prosecution were two petty criminals, who admitted to having committed a burglary near the scene of the crime, and claimed to see Mr. Carter and Mr. Artis emerge from the scene of the crime holding guns. Sentenced to life imprisonment, Mr. Carter undertook relentless efforts to overturn the conviction. In 1973 he was able to secure the help of a lawyer in the New Jersey Public Defender’s Office and a free lance journalist, who continued the search for evidence. In 1974 the attorney, and a reporter for the New York Times tracked down the two petty criminals, who separately recanted their testimony, claiming they had been pressured into it by the prosecutors. Mr. Carter’s case became an international cause celebre, with Bob Dylan writing and performing a song about it.

The New Jersey Supreme Court overturned Mr. Carter’s and Mr. Artis’ convictions. After only ninety days of freedom, however, in 1976 the prosecution brought the case to trial again, this time contending that Mr. Carter and Mr. Artis, who are both African-American, had been motivated by racial vengeance. The murders in the tavern had occurred only shortly after an African-American tavern owner in Patterson, New Jersey had been killed by a white assailant. One of the petty criminals from the original trial took the stand again and recanted his recantation. Mr. Carter and Mr. Artis were reconvicted and returned to prison.

Although the international attention to the case faded, the lawyers who represented Mr. Carter and Mr. Artis at the second trial continued to work on their behalf for over ten years without pay, eventually unearthing key evidence that the prosecution had suppressed at the second trial. During this period a commune of social activists from Canada became interested in Mr. Carter’s case and established communication with him. The commune members provided Mr. Carter important emotional, moral, and financial support to continue the struggle to gain his freedom. In 1985, after nine years of unsuccessful appeals in State court, Mr. Carter’s attorneys persuaded a federal judge to overturn Mr. Carter’s and Mr. Artis’ convictions. In 1988 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the decision of the federal judge.

Film makers have always taken dramatic license by simplifying history, and even conflating characters and events for narrative purposes, while striving to retain the essential truth with respect to the subject matter of a film. This is often difficult. In The Hurricane Mr. Carter’s and Mr. Artis’ two trials are compressed into a brief courtroom scene. No mention is made of the testimony of the two petty criminals. The film leaves Mr. Artis almost completely out of the story even though, in reality, with great moral heroism, he defiantly rejected an offer to avoid a long prison sentence by falsely incriminating Mr. Carter. The Hurricane depicts members of the Canadian commune as uncovering vital evidence. In reality, although the commune members did useful para-legal work, as noted above, Mr. Carter’s attorneys unearthed the critical evidence that lead to the setting aside in federal court of Mr. Carter’s and Mr. Artis’ convictions. In The Hurricane there is a racist detective intent on keeping Mr. Carter behind bars, who, in one dramatic scene, almost succeeds in causing the deaths of several commune members. All of this was purely fictitious. There was no actual person corresponding to the racist detective in the film.

Notes:

Fifth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2000

==============================

Case # 33 An Artful Dodger?

Category:

Business ethics

Case:

Carl Y is the Director of Z Museum, a major art museum on the east coast of the United States. Carl badly wants to bring to Z Museum an exhibit of works by young British artists that recently concluded a very successful show at a museum in London. Carl is familiar with the works of many of the artists, and considers them among the most interesting on the contemporary art scene.

Unfortunately the transportation and installation costs are immense. One piece of sculpture in the London show, for example, weighs several tons. Government support for the arts has declined substantially in recent years, so Carl concludes that in order to bring the show to Z Museum he needs to find a private donor who will help him cover the costs. All the works in the show in London belong to a British art collector named Jeremy Q. Carl proposes to Jeremy that he make a large donation to help the Z Museum put on the exhibition, and Jeremy agrees to do so.

After agreeing to support the exhibit at Z Museum, Jeremy persuades M’s, a prestigious auction house, to co-sponsor the exhibit, as it did in London. To persuade M’s Jeremy tells Henry P, President of M’s British division, that he plans a major sale of works in his collection later in the year after the exhibit at Z Museum has concluded, and that he might use M’s as the auctioneer. At about the time that Jeremy says this to Henry P., Carl Y has a lunch meeting with Anne S, President of M’s North American division. Carl tells Anne that Z Museum is considering a significant program to sell its holdings in all collection categories, especially modern art, which happens to be M’s specialty.

As planning for the show at Z Museum proceeds, Jeremy Q proves to be very demanding and opinionated with respect to artistic details. He insists that the paintings be hung low, and he doesn’t want labels affixed too closely to them. The Museum staff wants to eliminate some paintings from the show, but Jeremy strongly urges their inclusion. Some of Jeremy’s requests are expensive. He wants Z Museum to use special shipping crates, he insists that the galleries be repainted, and he wants Z. Museum to pay $20,000 for bringing his special installation consultant to the Museum for several weeks.

Carl Y and the Z Museum staff go along with most of Jeremy Q’s wishes. They consider him, after all, as probably the most knowledgeable person in the world about contemporary British art. Jeremy, however, is also interested in attracting corporate sponsorship for his collection. In this regard consultants tell him that a successful show at Z Museum would be highly advantageous. When the exhibit opens, Jeremy Q’s financial support is not made public.

The Code of Ethics for Museum Directors says that Directors should “assiduously avoid” activities that compromise their institutions. On the subject of exhibition financing, the Code only contains two vague sentences that say a Director should not compromise standards for the sake of revenue.

Notes:

Fifth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2000

==============================

Case # 34 Comparable worth

Category:

Gender

Case:

In October of 1999 the government of Canada agreed to pay 2.3 billion dollars to 230,000 federal workers, both current and retired, in the form of back pay with interest, to conform with the principle of “equal pay for work of equal value” embodied in Canada’s Human Rights Act. The drafters of this law, enacted more than twenty years ago, noted that the vast majority of women in the workforce in Canada were clustered in a small number of “women’s” jobs, such as office worker, nurse, or waitress. Women in these jobs, the drafters of Canada’s Human Rights Act observed, usually receive less pay than men in predominantly male jobs, which, despite their higher salaries, are comparable to the predominantly female jobs in terms of factors such as the mental or physical demands of the job, working conditions, or educational prerequisites.

To address this situation, the government of Canada organized a committee made up of employees and managers drawn from various Canadian federal government departments to develop a numerically based system for comparing predominantly male and predominantly female jobs. The committee rated a wide array of jobs in terms of four factors: educational prerequisites, job responsibilities, mental demands, and on the job working conditions. The committee determined that “male” jobs tended strongly to have higher salaries than female jobs at the same point levels. For example, a chief librarian made $35,050 while a dairy herd improvement manager made $38,766. A computer operations supervisor made $20,193, while a forestry project supervisor made $26,947. A typist made $10,531, while a sailor made $14,097. In all of the above instances the predominantly female and the predominantly male jobs were determined to have comparable point levels.

The Canadian government’s 2.3 billion dollar settlement has drawn strong criticism. Monte Solberg, a Reform Party member of the Canadian Parliament lamented that “[t]o come up with some concept where a bunch of bureaucrats arbitrarily decide, based on some abstract theory, that one job that women dominate is somehow the same as another completely different job that men dominate - it’s unworkable.” Other critics protest that the settlement will increase the taxes in Canada, whose taxpayers already shoulder the highest tax burden among the Group of Seven industrialized nations.

Defenders of the Canadian government’s settlement view it as needed to rectify, what they consider, the discriminatory impact upon female workers of the Canadian government’s employment compensation policies over many years. Even if the lower wages for predominantly female jobs reflect going market salary rates, say the supporters of the settlement, these market rates themselves reflect pervasive discrimination against women in the workforce. Furthermore, the supporters of the settlement contest that the settlement will have a severely negative impact upon the Canadian economy. In this regard, Daryl Bean, President of the Canadian federal service union, estimated that over 40% of the 2.3 billion would be returned as taxes to the government.

Notes:

Fifth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2000

==============================

Case # 35 MP3 on campus

Category:

Academic ethics

Case:

MP3 audio files enable users to exchange compact disk recordings digitally over the Internet. Music lovers use MP3’s to search for rare recordings. They also can use them to copy an entire compact disk and transmit it to anyone at no cost. Recently the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has undertaken a major effort to combat copyright violations. The RIAA sends letters to colleges and universities whenever its researchers discover on campus servers offering copyrighted music. According to Frank Creighton, an RIAA Senior Vice President, when the Association began its monitoring efforts several years ago it discovered that about seventy per-cent of the infringing sites were on university campuses. “…We’re willing to give individuals or students a first pass,” said Mr. Creighton. “But if we catch you doing it again,” he said, “we have no alternative but to take the stance that you’re thumbing your nose at us, and you don’t take us seriously, and there are potential civil and criminal remedies that we will invoke if we need to.”

In the fall of 1999 network administrators at Carnegie Mellon University, without prior warning, checked the public folders of two hundred and fifty (250) student computers connected to the University’s network, and found seventy one (71) students whose files contained illegally copied MP3’s. The students lost their in-room Internet connections for the rest of the semester, which meant they had to use a university computer lab to gain access to the Internet. All the students were given a right to appeal their penalties, and students who attended a ninety minute class on copyright had their penalties reduced by one month. Speaking of the investigation, Paul G. Fowler, Carnegie Mellon’s Associate Dean for Student Affairs said, “It wasn’t a big caper. All we did was go in to take a look at the culture of our Internet.” Mr. Fowler noted that prior to the investigation, University officials had discussed whether it would be a good idea to step up efforts at educating students about copyright violations. “We now know it would be,” he said.

Under the Digital Millenium Act, which Congress passed last year, on-line service providers, such as universities, can avoid liability if they take certain steps specified in the Act. These include, in cases when the university has been informed of an infringement, shutting off access to the infringing material, and notifying the user who posted it, so that he or she can take up the matter with the copyright holder. The user must be given the right by the university to appeal the shutoff. According to Mr. Arnold Lutzker, an attorney for the American Library Association, if a university meets the above requirements, in all likelihood, it will avoid liability for any given infringement.

“I’m no fan of the recording industry,” said Mr. Fowler of Carnegie Mellon, “but our students need to understand they’re probably going to be out there creating software some day that’s going to make them a million dollars.” If that software winds up in some shared community,” Mr. Fowler observed, “their livelihood is jeopardized.” “So why should we not afford the same opportunities to make a living to other members of our community?”, asked Mr. Fowler.

Notes:

Fifth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2000

==============================

Case # 36 Who owns genetic resources?

Category:

Bioethics

Case:

Country X,

located in Latin America, has recently adopted a policy of strictly limiting the collection of biological specimens, both plant and animal, within its borders. Under the new regulations individual scientists and companies must apply for permits that, in one case, cost $600,000, and can take more than three years to obtain. Formerly Country X had no policy in regard to collection of biological specimens for research by foreign scientists. During the 1950’s and 1960’s a major American drug company developed two drugs that turned out to be effective for treating certain types of cancer from plants found in the jungles of Country X. Country X did not share at all in the Company’s profit.

John R, a scientist with the National Institute of Health in Washington, DC, believes that experimentation with another native plant of Country X could lead to a significant breakthrough in regard to treatment of other kinds of cancers. He has been waiting for Country X to process his permit application for two and a half years now, and fears the plant may become extinct by the time he obtains permission to collect it.

Other nations, which, like Country X, historically did not restrain the collecting of biological specimens within their borders, have begun to impose such restrictions. One driving factor in this regard is the perception of many nations that genetic engineering has significantly increased the potential for commercial use of genes. For example, researchers at the University of Wisconsin have isolated a substance 2,000 times sweeter than sugar from a West African berry. If a table sweetener is developed from this substance it would be produced, in all likelihood, in genetically modified bacteria, which would eliminate the need to use the berry. Another driving factor in the new restrictive policies of several nations is the patenting of genetically modified plants and animals in the United States, which has been allowed since 1980 under a major decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. Some nations take the stance that if, for example, a company genetically engineers a seed taken from a farmer’s field, patents the engineered seed, and makes a profit, then, in all fairness, the company should pay substantially for the original seed.

Many scientists agree with the preceding point of view in principle, but complain that existing rules are much too restrictive. One study, conducted by researchers at Columbia University, concluded that in the Philippines, since that nation enacted its permit regulations in 1995, only two permits have been granted out of thirty seven applications. Drug companies contend that some nations overestimate the value of raw genetic resources. They note, in this regard, that in developing a drug a company may have to invest $500 million dollars over fifteen years.

At the Earth Summit in Rio De Janiero in 1992, a convention on bio-diversity was developed which states that nations have sovereignty over their genetic resources, and are entitled to “fair and equitable sharing of their benefits.” The Clinton Administration supports the bio-diversity convention, but the U.S. Senate has never ratified it.

Notes:

Fifth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, APPE, 2000

==============================

Case # 42 The Case of the Weak Resistance Fighter

Category:

Military ethics

Case:

The Background

Turnia is a small, independent country with a vigorous culture and a strong ethnic background. It is invaded by a more powerful and vicious adversary. Through the use of force and terror, the invaders impose a tyranny on the country and take harsh steps to eliminate the traditional culture of Turnia. A young man, born and raised in the country, sees it as his duty to join the resistance and fight against the invaders. He does so, but he is very much afraid of being caught and tortured. He has always had a low threshold of pain, and he agonizes that he may not have the strength to resist torture. He decides, therefore, that if he is caught, he will take a lethal poison he always keeps at hand.

He is caught, tries to take the poison, but is prevented. What he dreaded comes to pass. In prison, he sees the mangled bodies of fellow prisoners and his fear approaches panic. When he is brought before a clever and experienced interrogator, he is told that he will be given a new drug that dissolves people’s resistance. Under its influence, those interrogated answer whatever questions are put to them, saving time and effort in the torture chambers. In a few cases, the drug does not work, he is told, so the torture chambers have not, ha ha, been put into mothballs. And no one, no one, ever resists expert torture very long.

He stoutly refuses to provide information, so he is given the drug, the session is tape recorded, and afterwards he is shown the tape by the interrogator. He revealed all he knows, even though he does not remember doing so. Then the sadistic interrogator reveals what is in fact the truth. While there is a truth drug, the young man was given a placebo. The interrogator notes that the young man’s fear was sufficient to take over, defeat his feeble attempt at self-control, and move him unconsciously to betray the resistance movement. He is released, as is the tape, and he is left to cope with the consequences of having been instrumental in the capture, torture, and death of a number of his fellow freedom fighters.

The Problem

The resistance fighter did not choose to betray his comrades, he did not know he was betraying them as he did so, and if he could have acted otherwise, he would certainly have done so. Nonetheless, what he did was not morally neutral. If someone else, in the same situation, had remained silent, that would have certainly been better. The young man blames himself, and many others in the movement blame him as well, some bitterly. Are the young man and those who blame him right? To agree is to accept the principle that it is appropriate to praise and blame people morally for what they do, even if their actions are involuntary. Such a judgment contradicts the common opinion that moral judgment is justifiable only for actions that agents consciously choose to perform. But if we answer “no,” then we cannot say that the resistance fighter ought not to have betrayed his comrades. This view contradicts the common opinion that a man who stands up to his torturers is more admirable than one who does not.

The Council Meeting

The leaders of the resistance in Turnia call a meeting to decide what to do about the resistance fighter case. They have to decide whether he is to be blamed and punished for what he did. The issue is not an abstract one. It addresses immediately important questions about the lessons learned from the case for the recruitment of resistance fighters and about assuring the loyalty and the morale of current members.

Notes:

1. This group is the council.

2. The council knows all the facts.

3. The discussion of the council has focused on the question of blame, not on the subsequent question of what to do if the resistance fighter is properly blamed or exonerated. The question of blame has yet to be resolved.

==============================

Case # 44 The Case of the Forty-Seven Samurai

Category:

Military ethics

Case:

The Background and the Myth

In the twelfth century, the samurai came to prominence in Japan. Fiercely loyal warriors whose duty was to protect the regional warlord to whom they owed their loyalty, they developed a stringent code of honor. Becoming a samurai required years of education, practice, and discipline. The samurai trained themselves to be neither fearful of death nor hopeful of victory. They entered combat with a fierce intensity that was at the same time emotionless, formidable opponents who fought to the last man and won many battles on the basis of their reputation alone.

In 1701 an event involving the samurai established an enduring legend. Three warlords were summoned to the imperial shogun’s court. One, knowing little of court etiquette, insulted by a lord of the shogun’s court, was compelled by honor to draw his sword, subsequently wounding the man who had ridiculed his manners. To draw a sword in the presence of the shogun was an unheard of crime, however, and the shogun commanded the warlord to commit seppuku, the ritual suicide by disembowelment. The warlord, a man of honor owing complete loyalty to the shogun, obeyed.

The shogun knew well the code of the samurai, and he knew that the warlord’s protectors were sworn to avenge the death of their daimyo by killing the lord who had insulted him. To prevent further bloodshed, the shogun sent his warriors to surround the warlord’s castle with overwhelming force. To carry out their mission of avenging their daimyo, the forty-seven samurai made a pact and then surrendered, subsequently disavowing any obligation they felt to their dead lord. For two years, they wandered the land separately, some becoming drunkards, some hired mercenaries, some brothel operators. Their swords rusted, and they were despised by all. But after two years, they secretly assembled, assaulted the castle of the lord who had insulted their daimyo, and beheaded him. They carried his head to the daimyo’s grave. Having failed to protect their lord, and having violated the dictate of their shogun not to avenge his death, each of the forty-seven, sitting in a large circle, then committed seppuku.

Such is the tradition of the samurai.

The Situation

You are the commander of a battalion of the force occupying Japan in 1945 following the conclusion of the war. A member of the Japanese nobility, standing in the road, sword in hand, when your column arrived outside the city of Honai, had charged the vehicles and soldiers with the sword over his head. The advance guard shot and killed him on the road. Your interpreter later explained that the Japanese lord had sworn to fight to the death and thus was honor bound to attack the column.

He had also extracted from his ten samurai an oath not to avenge his death as required by the giri, the samurai code of honor. The samurai, compelled by honor not to conduct themselves as their code required, were shamed. Your interpreter further explained that that evening, the group would commit suicide in the tradition of the forty-seven ronin.

The Problem

You do not believe in suicide for any reason, let alone the obscure one apparently at work here. You also have orders to establish a stable environment in Honai. You suspect that the ten samurai and their lord are in the process of becoming legendary martyrs and thus a rallying cry for armed resistance, a potential problem of major proportions for your occupying force. Should you take steps to prevent the predicted suicides from occurring? You are too far away from your higher headquarters to request orders and get an answer before the ceremony of seppuku.

You have called a staff meeting and asked for the advice of your staff officers.

==============================

Case # 45 The Case of the Two Soldiers

Category:

Military ethics

Case:

Heavy enemy pressure has resulted in orders for all units to move a mile to the rear to more defensible positions. LT Taggart’s platoon has packed up and is ready to move. Taggart has a special mission in the adjustment. He has been told to move directly to an ambush position in a defile that leads to a corps chemical unit providing early warning of the use of chemical munitions by the enemy forces. His ambush is critical because only he can reach the position in the thirty minutes he has been given—the thirty minutes that will allow him to ambush a small, fast-moving enemy column headed directly for the defile through the line of hills that constitutes the new line of defense. His ambush will be part of his mission to protect the chemical unit.

As Taggart prepares to give the order to move out, his platoon sergeant tells him that one of two reconnaissance patrols being pulled back to the platoon has just returned. The three-man patrol reports that they observed members of the other recon patrol, two soldiers, being captured by a squad of enemy soldiers. They followed the enemy squad on a trail into some dense vegetation and captured the man in the rear of the enemy column at a sharp bend in the trail. That prisoner revealed that the squad is on its way to a POW collection point, but the POW will not reveal its location.

The platoon sergeant says, “LT, we have got to get those guys back! You know what the enemy has been doing to prisoners! If they are lucky, they will just be shot! Give me five minutes with the guy the patrol brought back and I will have the exact location of their POW collection point. If it’s close, we can snatch them back in no time.”

A quick check of the distance to the ambush site convinces Taggart that he must leave within ten minutes to fulfill his protection mission. It is now 0900 and he has been ordered to establish the ambush not later 0945. If the platoon sergeant does learn enough to mount a rescue mission, Taggart will probably have to split the platoon to try to accomplish both purposes. As he ponders, his RTO tells him that the company commander has passed the word to move quickly. Division is calling in a series of air strikes on the positions now being vacated, hoping to catch the enemy units in exposed positions moving forward.

Should LT Taggart allow the platoon sergeant to question the prisoner? Should he try to mount a rescue operation?

==============================

Case # 46 The Case of the Different Culture

Category:

Military ethics

Case:

1. Overall Situation

It is the year 200X. You are a Company Commander in the 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry). The Division has deployed to the fledging Republic of Paldora in South America. Its mission is to conduct Nation Building Operations and to assist the Paldorans in the maintenance and development of their democratic institutions.

Paldora is a new country. It was founded in 200Y after economic and political turmoil resulted in the disintegration of Brazil. The country is approximately the size of America’s Northeast. Although large in area , it has a small population. Much of the land is part of the Amazon rain forest. Economically the nation is struggling. The Brazilian Civil War destroyed most buisnesses and industry.

2. Extract - Your mission briefing from COL Highpower.

“This is a nation building mission. We are here to assist the Paldorans in building and modernizing their country. In order to succeed, we have to increase the standard of living for the common Paldoran. This means everything from building schools to giving inoculations. Work through the local government officials in your area. We need to show that they are in charge and that we working with them. I don’t want to give the people the impression that we are down here for any other reason than to help their own government.

One of the things you have to be particularly aware of is the fact that the Paldorans are a very mixed bunch. Parts of the population consists of well-to-do middle class that would fit into our culture with ease. Other parts of the country are less advanced. The highlands have a large population of people we might call superstitious peasants. The population of the rain forest consists of tribes who are not all that far removed from the primitive hunter-gatherer society. Whatever your sector is, it is important for you to get a feel for the customs and beliefs of the locals. You have to be the expert in your sector. Because of the size of the area and the differences in people and culture, you will have to use your best judgment in making decisions that will affect the overall success of the mission. I have the utmost confidence in your abilities.”

3. BDE S-2 Intellingence Report

Your company has been assigned to one of the rain forest sectors. The tribe that populates your area of operations is the Tiní. We have limited intelligence on them.

History: Little is known about the Tiní prior to 1998. It is only in the past ten years that they have been exposed to the outside world. Prior to that they lived deep in the rain forest. In 1998, Brazil launched massive lumber projects in the heart of the Tiní lands. Because of the lumber operations, we discovered the Tiní people.

General Information: The tribe consists of about 40,000 (est.) men, women, and children. For the most part they are a peaceful society that has adapted quickly to the outside world. Although generally peaceful ,they have a reputation for being implacable enemies when wronged. Neighboring tribes call their warriors the “ghosts that seek vengeance” due to their ability to move through the forest unnoticed.

Culture - The Tiní are a deeply religious people who place great value on ritual and tradition. Both their religion and society place an emphasis on promoting the welfare of the society over the individual. Many considerTiní society a theocracy because the tribal chiefs function as civil, military, and spiritual leaders. Their power derives from their special relationship with the Gods.

4. Tiní Religious Beliefs

a. The world of the Tiní is in perpetual danger of destruction from the forces of Evil, led by the serpent god, Balzaar.

b. The constant efforts and sacrifices of Leal (the great, good god) prevents final destruction of the world.

c. Only those who follow in Leal’s footsteps and sacrifice for the common good of society will be rewarded. The reward will be reincarnation in a higher life form or eternal life with Leal in “Parva” — the Tiní version of paradise.

5. The First Story of Leal, Tiní Legend

(Balzaar is attempting to destroy the world by drying up the earth’s water. Having just finished his second battle against Balzaar, Leal has found a place to rest.)

“As the great god Leal lay hurt and bleeding from his battle with Balzaar, an old woman appeared with cool water and herbs to treat his wounds. As she finished, the Tochis (demon warriors) of Balzaar appeared and attacked. Although Leal ultimately defeated the demons, one of the Tochis chopped off the leg of the old woman. After the fight, Leal cared for the woman. As he was doing this, the serpent god himself appeared and attacked Leal. Weakened by his wounds, the great god was unable to defend himself and suffered wound after wound from Balzaar’s fierce fangs and mighty opé (war axe). In one terrific blow the serpent king severed Leal’s sword hand, leaving him defenseless. As the Evil one coiled for the strike that would destroy Leal, a young girl appeared. Without hesitation she threw herself at Balzaar in an attempt to protect Leal. Infuriated, Balzaar sank his fangs into her throat and then cut her apart with his opé. While the serpent king was distracted, Leal regained his sword and with a mighty swing cut off one of Balzaar’s heads. Howling with rage and pain, the serpent king fled.

Leal then went to the hurt old woman and the body of the young girl. He touched some of his blood to the woman’s leg and healed it, saying, “In helping me you have helped all of mankind. You shall be reborn a great and wise queen.” He then approached the young girl’s body and said, “You who have sacrificed all for mankind shall receive eternal bliss.” He then raised her spirit up to paradise.

6. Situation to Date

After three weeks in sector you are making excellent progress. Your troops have already built a small clinic that is providing needed medical aid. You also have begun building a new school and a levee to protect crops from flood damage.

Relations with the Tiní are good. They are a friendly, generous people who appreciate your efforts to help them. They have been assisting your soldiers on all the projects. Many of the tribes have unofficially adopted members of your company and provide them with food.

As your first month draws to a close you receive an invitation to the “Moon Ceremony.” This ceremony signifies the triumph of Leal over Balzaar in their continual struggle. You and many of your men attend. Tribesmen pour into the area for the semi-annual ceremony. After a dinner feast, the actual ceremony occurs. Several warriors lead an elderly woman and young girl to an open area. Amid great ceremony, they reenact the fight of Leal and Balzaar. As the ceremony concludes two of the tribal leaders suddenly step out carrying opés. With practiced blows they kill and dismember the woman and child. Their act brings forth a wave of cheering and chanting from the assembled tribesmen.

Stunned by the sudden change of events, you ask the tribe’s chief for an explanation. He tells you, “These two have gone to help Leal fight Balzaar. By their willing sacrifice they ensure the continuation of the circle of life. Great honor and rewards shall they receive in their next life with Leal in eternal paradise.”

As you leave the ceremony, you can see the incidents have horrified and angered your soldiers. One of your troops gets into a scuffle with the executioners. Only quick intervention by your First Sergeant prevents it from getting out of hand.

During the night, your First Sergeant comes to see you and tells you the soldiers are in an ugly mood. The ceremony horrified them. The elderly woman was a friend of your troops. Rumors are flying that the “Moon Ceremony” runs for three days, repeating the ritual of sacrifice each day; so more people will die tomorrow. Your soldiers are talking about what they can do to stop it.

The next morning you confirm that the ceremony does run for three days More executions are scheduled. On your rounds, you feel the tension in the air. Several times you have heard your men talking. They are saying things like “This is plain wrong,” and “We have to stop it.” Concerned, you radio higher for guidance, but none comes. You are the leader on the ground; make a decision.

7. Task Force Rules of Engagement (ROE)

1. American troops have the right of self-defense at all times. The use of deadly force is authorized to protect the lives of our soldiers.

2. Deadly force is authorized to protect the lives of Paldoran Nationals.

3. Riot control agents and weapons can be used at the discretion of company commanders.

4. The use of force should be a last resort. When faced with hostile situations, soldiers and units should first issue verbal warnings, then use warning shots and physical force prior to using deadly force.

==============================

Case # 49 Tissue Donations

Category:

Bioethics

Case:

In early fall 2000, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (Boston) and Duke University Medical Center were the first of several health care facilities to enter into a partnership with Ardais Corporation, a biotechnology company. Ardias Corporation’s stated goal is to accelerate understanding of the links between certain genetic patterns and disease, and so improve clinical applications by facilitating better diagnosis, drug development, and treatment. Ardais will create a tissue bank to provide genetic researchers with disease-specific tissue and detailed patient information to enable researchers to link specific genetic sequences with diseases such as cancer, heart disease, and neurological disorders. Ardais plans to “systematize and standardize the collection and processing of high quality clinical materials and associated information”. Ardais will then provide biological materials that would otherwise be discarded as medical waste, process them into usable samples, and make them available to researchers.

Prior to surgery, patients will be asked by a hospital nurse if they would be willing to donate tissue samples left over from their surgery to the tissue bank. Surgeons will not know which patients have consented, to prevent the possibility that additional tissue will be removed for the purpose of providing samples. All patient information will be anonymous, protected by a rigorous coding system. The hospitals will sell this tissue to Ardais. Ardais in turn will sell the patient information to biomedical researchers. Ardais will also receive license fees.

Although sale of human organs is illegal in the United States, no similar legal restriction applies currently to the sale of human tissue. The medical community, at this time, has not discussed extensively either the morality of selling human tissue, or, assuming that such sales are morally permissible, the question of who might have a right to share in the profits.

Notes:

Case #1, Ethics Bowl 2001

==============================

Case # 51 Native American Rights

Category:

Government ethics

Case:

In 1997 the Skull Valley Band of the Goshutes, a small Native American nation, agreed to store 40,000 metric tons of high-level uranium on its reservation (60 miles southwest of Salt Lake City) until a permanent site is opened elsewhere. Utah State officials and environmentalists adamantly oppose the project. Governor Michael Leavitt reasons that since Utah has no nuclear reactors, it should not be responsible for other States’ nuclear waste. He also fears that the temporary site could become a permanent one given the difficulty and expense involved in transporting nuclear waste to the site.

Leon Bear, a Goshute leader, however, condemns the opposition to the temporary storage plan of “blatant racism.” He says, “Before Utah was even a State my people signed a treaty with the federal government. We were granted a small reservation in Skull Valley. During the past fifty years, the Utah and U.S. governments have built many hazardous-waste facilities and disposal sites near our reservation, even burying sheep killed by nerve gas on our tribal lands. Did either government ask for our permission? Of course not.”

For Leon Bear, opposing the temporary storage project is tantamount to denying the Goshutes the right to pursue financial prosperity. Few economic opportunities exist on the reservation, and the project will provide desperately needed income. The estimated cost of the project exceeds $3 billion, and, although the Goshute’s remuneration is confidential, sources predict that each tribal member should receive $100,000 at a minimum, and, possibly, as much as $2,000,000.

The agreement marks a significant shift in tribal leaders attitudes toward the environment and nuclear waste. In 1992 leaders wrote: “European Americans must re-examine their lifestyles and ask how we can co-exist with the environment. They must understand, as Chief Seattle warned over a century ago, that man is only a strand in the web of life.”

Support for the project within the tribe is not unanimous, however. Margene Bullcreek, who lives three miles from the proposed site, believes that the repository is inconsistent with traditional Indian respect for the land. “It’s about being in harmony with our creator, and showing Him we do not wish to spoil His gift to us,” she says.

Despite the widespread opposition to the Skull Valley repository, plans continue to move ahead. In May 2000, Governor Leavitt conceded that the State of Utah may not have legal authority to stop the project in virtue of the 1863 treaty between the Goshutes and the federal government which gave the tribe sovereignty over its traditional land, which includes Skull Valley.

Notes:

Case 3, 2001

==============================

Case # 53 The Protocols of the Elders of Zion

Category:

Academic ethics

Case:

You are the Principal of Pleasantville High School, located in an area twenty-five miles from the center of a large Midwestern city. Originally semi-rural, the area has undergone rapid growth and social change over the past two decades. Completion of a major expressway has brought high tech growth and large numbers of engineers, scientists, and other professional people with extremely diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds.

Ahmed Said, a student at Pleasantville High School, browses the shelves of the school library one day in search of sources for his history paper on the historical roots of the Arab-Israeli conflict. His eyes fall upon a volume entitled “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion* which he looks over and decides to check out. The next day at school he tells other students about the contents of the book. A Jewish student, David Greenburg, overhears Ahmed’s description of The Protocols and tells his parents about it.

Deeply disturbed, David’s parents contact the B’nai Brith Anti Defamation League ((ADL), a group devoted to combating anti-Semitism). After verifying that Pleasantville High School’s library in fact has a shelf copy of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the ADL lodges a furiously angry protest with the Principal of Pleasantville High School (i.e. yourself). You, in turn, investigate the situation and learn the following. It appears that in the early years of the high school, when it opened in the late 1960’s, there was an assistant school librarian with anti-Semitic inclinations who worked for the high school only a short time before being let go for unsatisfactory work. This individual, however, during her short tenure, had the responsibility of ordering books, and it is believed that, without authorization, she had The Protocols of the Elders of Zion purchased by the library.

*The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a notorious tract of anti-Semitic propaganda, widely used to stir up anti Semitic passions in Europe in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. Purporting to be the manifesto of a tightly knit Jewish conspiracy bent on dominating the world, The Protocols is a fraud, in all likelihood, the work of secret police in czarist Russia during the late nineteenth century, who wanted to provoke widespread anti-Semitic violence against Russian Jews.

Notes:

Case #5 Ethics Bowl 2001

==============================

Case # 57 SUV Rollover

Category:

Legal ethics

Case:

One of the most popular and profitable vehicles on the road today is the sports utility vehicle (SUV). Auto makers like the vehicle because they can make $8,000-$20,000 profit on each one. Consumers like the SUV because of its multiple use capacities - the family car and the rugged adventuresome truck. But the big tall vehicle has an Achilles’ heel; it rolls over much more frequently than a standard car. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), last year rollovers accounted for 66% of SUV deaths, but for only about 20% of deaths in cars.

Vehicle manufacturers are aware of the rollover problem. They have placed warning statements in owners’ manuals for almost twenty years, informing motorists that the “vehicle may roll over” if the driver makes sharp turns, as in an accident avoidance situation. Additionally, the SUV’s high center of gravity and narrower track can be deadly when a vehicle swerves at freeway speeds. In the past twenty years, though, little has been done to design greater stability in the vehicle.

Information regarding the risks of driving an SUV has not been shared with consumers. A record 3.1 million SUV’s were sold last year to many consumers who were unaware they could tip over if they hit a curb, soft shoulder, ditch, loose gravel, or guard rail. NHTSA has asked for “consumer information notices,” but still has proposed no minimum safety or stability requirements for SUV’s. Last year NHTSA pledged to issue consumer information on crash tests, however, Congress, under pressure from the auto industry, blocked plans to publish rollover ratings.

The New York Times printed an analysis of federal crash statistics in November 2000 showing that since 1991 occupants of Ford Explorers have been 2.3 times as likely to die in rollovers (tire related or not) than occupants in traditional cars. They are nearly twice as likely to die in rollovers as are occupants of Jeep Cherokees and Grand Cherokees, SUVs that are built like cars. (The Explorer is essentially a roomy passenger cabin with luxury seats and family friendly amenities bolted onto a Ranger pickup frame. This allows Ford to build the Explorer on the Ranger assembly line, using many of the same robots and parts.) Additionally, the analysis showed that Explorer’s fatal rollover rate has been rising considerably. Rates for cars and Jeep SUVs have remained steady (40 fatal rollovers per million vehicles), while the Explorer’s rates rose from 53 per million in 1994 to 121 per million last year.

In addition to the rollover problem, SUV’s are not required to meet the same safety standards as passenger cars. In this regard, SUV occupants are not protected by the side-impact crash safety, air bag, or bumper strength standards that apply to passenger automobiles.

Notes:

Case #9 Ethics Bowl 2001

==============================

Case # 61 Death on the Screen

Category:

Journalism ethics

Case:

In 1999, five California TV news helicopters broadcast live the fatal shooting by police of a man who had led authorities on a three-hour freeway chase. The episode occurred the day after Thanksgiving and dominated morning TV when many children were home and tuning in to watch cartoons. The chase was aired to its conclusion (the shooting), though no close-up images were aired. With thousands of strangers, the dead man’s mother, ex-wife, and adult daughter watched as he was shot.

In 1998 TV stations had aired live telecasts of a bank robber killing himself and a man shooting himself in the head on a freeway exchange after a lengthy standoff with police. Critics of live TV expressed horror at exposing children (or adults) to graphic violence. If coverage is live, outcomes cannot be predicted, so viewers cannot be warned about up-coming violence. Following strong, negative public reaction, TV stations promised to reevaluate their policies for live coverage and consider instituting delaying mechanisms that permit interruption of transmission should events turn tragic (or ugly).

Critics questioned whether such coverage has any value to viewers. TV spokespersons retorted that persons in urban areas need to know when commuter routes are closed, or when for safety’s sake they should avoid particular streets or intersections. They further claim that such incidents are news, the coverage of which is their raison d’etre, and that the public has an interest in and a right to know about such incidents. (Some viewers called TV stations to complain that close-in shots of the killing should have been provided.) Opponents charge that the motivation for live coverage is not a commitment to professional reporting but to garnering the best ratings.

The Society of Professional Journalists recognizes commitments both to making news stories available to an interested public and to avoiding harm. The Society further recognizes the importance of independent action; i.e., avoiding conflicts of interests, and pressure to cover news so as to promote goals other than providing truthful information.

Whatever the motivation, live coverage of potentially violent events is on the rise. Mediascope, a non-profit public policy research group working to improve the ways social issues are covered by the media, reports that crime constitutes the content of 30.2% of local TV news broadcasts across the country.

Notes:

Case #13 Ethics Bowl 2001

==============================

Case # 62 Friends and Lovers

Category:

Personal ethics

Case:

Tony, Claire, and Beth were the best of friends through high school. Tony and Beth attended the same college and began dating each other in their sophomore year. After graduation they announced their engagement and Beth asked Claire to be her maid of honor. About six months before the wedding, Beth’s mother became ill. Since Beth was unemployed, her father asked her if she could stay home and take care of her mother. Because her mother needed her constantly, Beth found little time to spend with Tony. Although Tony became quite lonely, he was very understanding and tried to be as supportive as he could.

Two months passed and Beth’s mother’s condition worsened. Given the circumstance, Claire offered to help Beth to call off the wedding. However Beth explained that the wedding was now even more important to her mother than it was before and that she had no intention of calling it off. Claire understood and continued to be a supportive friend both to Beth and Tony. Knowing Beth’s fragile emotional condition and Tony’s feelings of loneliness, Claire made a point of spending time with both of them.

One evening Claire met Tony for dinner, and noticed while dining that he was very quiet. She asked him if there was something bothering him, other than the obvious circumstance with Beth and her mother. Tony paused for a moment and asked Claire if she could keep a secret. Claire warmly assured Tony that he could tell her anything. He proceeded to confess that he had had a brief affair shortly after Beth’s mother became ill. After his confession, Tony told Claire how grateful he was to have gotten all of that off his chest and thanked Claire for being such a good friend. Still, Claire was speechless.

The following week, Beth called Claire and asked her to help her pick out a restaurant for the rehearsal dinner. Beth and Claire spent the afternoon driving around visiting restaurants. In the car Beth mentioned that she thought that Tony seemed a little preoccupied for the past month, but also added that the last few times they were together he seemed like his old self again. She then asked Claire for her opinion about whether “something was going on with Tony”.

Notes:

Case #14 Ethics Bowl 2001

==============================

Case # 67 “Abortion and Embryo Adoption”

Ever since it became possible to freeze embryos as part of the process of assisting in reproduction, doctors and the couples themselves have faced a growing problem: what to do with the frozen embryos.

Couples who are trying to have a baby are usually advised to freeze and store “extra” embryos, that is, the embryos not implanted on the first attempt at conception. There is a simple reason for this: the process of harvesting the eggs to be fertilized is a highly invasive one for the woman, not only requiring surgery but also a regime of drugs designed to force the production of multiple eggs at one time. Minimizing the number of such invasive procedures is medically wise, since those procedures take a significant toll on the woman producing the eggs. It is better, all things considered, to maximize the possible benefits from putting someone through such a procedure.

Often, couples who have successfully gone through fertility treatments and now have the size family they desire simply want to forget about the hardships they have gone through to conceive; they are happy simply to get on with the task of raising their children. Memories of the process are often painful. In some cases, this results in couples simply abandoning the remaining embryos at the fertility clinic, not even responding to letters about what should be done with the remaining frozen embryos.

In other cases, however, couples want to see those frozen embryos bring happiness to other couples with infertility problems, especially those who cannot produce eggs on their own. As a result, they give their physicians permission to give those embryos to other couples trying to have a baby. Doctors often send frozen embryos to other physicians with infertile couples who are looking for a good biological match with the embryos (eye and hair color, etc.). This is largely an informal network among physicians who want to help their patients get pregnant. It is not a money-making network, since such exchanges are usually done simply for the cost of the transportation. Such exchanges may be viewed simply as donations akin to organ donations or may actually be covered by a legal contract similar to those used for transferring property. Typically, there would be no screening of those who receive the embryos other than the fact that they are patients of the participating physician. Recently, there has been pressure to regulate this process and, in particular, to require the receiving couple (or single woman) to go through the type of screening and home study that is mandatory for adoptions. Such screenings insure that the embryos will receive a good home, just as they are intended to insure that adopted children are placed in an appropriate setting. Embryos are not property, advocates of this recommendation maintain, and thus cannot be bought and sold like property or even given away like gifts.

Several states are now considering legislation that would require that embryo transfers be treated like adoptions, with all the safeguard that have over the years been built into the adoption process for the protection of the adopted child. Opponents of such legislation worry that it could erode abortion rights for women, since it provides legal support to the view that embryos are persons, even at this very early stage of fetal development.

A few legislators are even considering the next point of analogy between embryo transfers and adoptions: should those who are donating the embryos be required to participate in some kind of counseling? After all, the embryos that will be brought to term are their full genetic offspring and, biologically speaking, siblings to the other children they have together. What might happen if, for example, the child they bring to birth dies in an accident several years later? They realize that they have another biological offspring somewhere. What might they then do?

Finally, what rights might the adopted embryo eventually have in regard to knowledge about his or her biological parents? Should they be able to request that information be available to them when they reach adulthood? How is this to be balanced with the interests of the couple that has donated the embryos, who may not want such contact? Indeed, the couple may not even have told the children they have raised that they were conceived through artificial reproductive techniques.

Imagine that you are the legislative aide to a state senator whose committee has been charged with the responsibility for developing policy recommendations that address this problem. You have been asked to develop those policy recommendations for your senator. Faced with the set of issues outlined above, how would you develop a public policy to guide us through such situations? Explain clearly what your recommended policy is and how it addresses the multiple interests and concerns outlined above.

==============================

Case # 69 Overweight Children

Category:

legal ethics

Case:

At 156 pounds and just under 4 feet and seven inches tall, first grader Taylor Bibian found himself in the middle of a dispute between the Florida Department of Children and Families (FDCF) and his own family. The FDCF believes that Taylor’s obesity poses significant health risks to the seven year old, and four times sought the approval of juvenile courts to intervene. The FDCF is legally sanctioned to investigate allegations of child abuse and neglect, and may take protective custody of a child if a harm (or risk of harm) to a child is significant enough, and is due to some action or inaction of a parent/guardian. According to the FDCF, harm may be categorized as abuse or neglect. The FDCF defines “abuse” as “non-accidental infliction of physical or psychological injury or sexual abuse by a parent, adult household member or other person responsible for care of the child,” and “neglect” as “failure/omission by a caretaker to provide the care, supervision, services or protection necessary to maintain physical and mental health.” On some occasions the FDCF will allow a child to remain in the care of a neglectful or abusive parent, if there is a court approved safety plan in place.

Taylor, whose parents are divorced, now lives with his father and grandmother. Taylor’s family said that they do not understand the State’s concern. “He’s just going to be a big kid,” his father said, “I was the same way.” “He’s been overweight his whole life,” added Taylor’s grandmother, Darlene Bibian. “If weight is such a worry,” she said, they should monitor every fat kid.” “This is Big Brother telling you how to raise your kids. They want to control his diet, his exercise .. This is ridiculous. This is supposed to be America?”

The FDCF offered to drop charges if the family would agree to State oversight of Taylor’s health, but the family declined. The Bibian’s claim that they are taking steps to control Taylor’s weight, putting him on a strict diet. They reported to the judge that Taylor likes raw vegetables and fruit, and that Taylor also swims and takes tae kwon do. Taylor’s father Tony, 24, added that he was planning to have Taylor checked by a pediatrician since he now has medical insurance through a new job.

At a recent court proceeding, the State of Florida called as a witness a doctor who examined Taylor. Although the doctor said that he was troubled by Taylor’s weight and the risk of future complications, he concluded that the problem was not life threatening.

Based on the evidence presented, Polk County Judge James Yancey concluded that there was insufficient justification to allow the FDCF to intervene and oversee the health and nutrition of Taylor Bibian.

Notes:

ASSOCIATION FOR PRACTICAL AND PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN CINCINNATI, OHIO ON FEBRUARY 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 70 Global Warming

Category:

Environmental ethics

Case:

There is growing consensus in the scientific community that increasing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions since the advent of the Industrial Revolution is causing global climate change - specifically, global warming or the “greenhouse effect.” The United State is currently responsible for a quarter of global CO2 emissions. Not surprisingly, withering U.S. commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions has sparked heated debate.

The 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Global Warming, signed by then President George Bush, came to fruition in 1997 in the form of the Kyoto Protocol, which represents the most comprehensive effort to reduce CO2 emissions to date. Under Kyoto guidelines, President Clinton agreed to reduce U.S. greenhouse gasses by 40 percent (or 7% below 1990 levels) between 2008 and 2012. Environmentalists and world leaders heralded the treaty as a crucial step towards heading off potentially catastrophic global climate change. During the latest summit held in Morocco in 2001, over 160 countries came to a ground breaking new agreement requiring 40 industrialized countries to reduce gas emissions.

Despite these efforts, the accords recently were rejected by the Bush Administration on the grounds that adherence to them would have grave consequences for the U.S. economy and that global warming is still a scientific uncertainty. The Bush administration has estimated that the required U.S. reduction in CO2 emissions would result in massive unemployment, steep price increases (52% for gasoline and 86% for electricity), and a sharp decrease in gross national product. Moreover, the Bush administration argues, “big league” polluters, like China and India, are exempt from the restrictions that the U.S. is bound to, even though estimates indicate that by 2025 China will emit more CO2 than the current combined total of the U.S., Japan, and Canada.

Critics of the Bush administration policy point to the crippling effect the lack of U.S. support will have on the strength of the accords themselves. The rejection has also been a black eye to Bush administration foreign policy, with world leaders and others characterizing the U.S. as self-absorbed and a poor global citizen. Presidents and Prime Ministers of Germany, France, Thailand, Venezuela, Mexico, and dozens of other countries have severely criticized the Bush administration reversal. The Bush administration has also been criticized by scientists for ignoring evident facts in an over-zealous obsession with economic expansion. In the words of one Dupont official, “We saw sufficient science emerging to warrant what in our judgment was prudent action [to reduce CO2 emissions] back in 1991.”

The Bush administration has made it clear, however, that it has no intention of reconsidering its position at the present time.

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association For Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 71 The American Girl Hostage

Category:

Personal ethics

Case:

Wanda runs a small day care facility out of her home. Her initial motivation was to be able to stay home with her new baby, but at the same time bring in some extra income. However, she found that she genuinely enjoyed day care and has received training beyond what is required by the State. Wanda’s husband Jack was recently laid off and forced to accept a lower paying job. Wanda and her husband now depend more on the day care home income than they did in the past. Because of this, Wanda’s husband complains that she spends too much money on day care supplies and that her day care business could be much more profitable if she would buy fewer or less expensive materials. Wanda can only care for eight or nine children at a time, and once or twice has had to turn away parents when she was at capacity. Lately, she has had a problem with parents canceling at the last minute, leaving Wanda with unfilled “slots.” She now makes sure that the money is paid before she reserves a day care slot for a child.

Wanda recently received a call from an old friend, Sheila, asking for a favor. Sheila had heard that Wanda ran a day care facility and was wondering if she had room for her daughter Karen. Sheila’s in-laws normally took care of Karen during the week, but were moving to a retirement community in Arizona. Wanda agreed to take Karen. In fact, she was happy to get the business, since two of the children she had been caring for were starting kindergarten this year, and would no longer need day care. Sheila asked if she could pay her in a week or two because her husband just started a new job and it would be a couple of weeks until his first paycheck.

Karen fit in well with the other children and was very well behaved. The children often brought toys for “show and tell” and enjoyed playing with each other’s toys. Especially popular toys with the girls were Karen’s “American Girl” dolls and outfits. Wanda was a bit concerned when Karen brought them to day care, since she knew how expensive they are (with the accessories the two dolls were worth about $300) and feared that they might get damaged. Karen and the three other girls Wanda cared for would spend hours dressing up the dolls in the different “American Girl” outfits. Though Wanda discouraged the children from leaving their toys at day care overnight, toys were left frequently, even Karen’s dolls.

One morning, after Karen had missed two days of day care, Wanda received a phone message from Sheila indicating that she was going to have to withdraw Karen. In her message, Sheila explained that she was quitting her job so that she could stay home with Karen. Wanda was concerned because Sheila had still not paid for the two and a half weeks that she cared for Karen. Sheila also stated that she would send Wanda a check in the mail, but that she planned to stop by in the evening to pick up Karen’s dolls. When Wanda mentioned the situation to her husband, he became angry and suggested to Wanda that they keep Karen’s dolls until Sheila pays for the day care services.

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association For Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 72 SAT Exams and Affirmative Action

Category:

Academic ethics

Case:

I would stronly recomend that you password protect the editing link to these case studies regardless of their rather boring content. And in the future you should plan a URL changeover MUCH better... The University of California system is considering a proposal to eliminate the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) as an application requirement for admission to any of its member institutions. The main proponent of this change is the University of California system’s President, Richard C. Atkinson. One important reason for Atkinson’s proposal is the dramatic decrease in minority enrollment after a 1995 decision to bar the use of affirmative action in the system’s admission decisions. According to the National Center for Fair & Open Testing, the two main University of California institutions, UC Berkeley and U.C.L.A., suffered the most dramatic reduction of minority admissions. At U.C. Berkeley, the number of minorities admitted was less than half of the number for the previous year (prior to the elimination of the affirmative action admission criteria). At U.C.L.A., the decline was more than one third. For all eight schools in the University of California system the total of African Americans accepted decreased by 17 percent and Chicanos/Latinos by 7 percent.

Many, including Atkinson, identify the SAT as the primary reason for low minority acceptance rates in the university system. Said Atkinson, “I do worry about the diversity of our student body, and I think the SAT is really brutally hard on underrepresented minorities and students who come from low-income families.” According to critics of the SAT, the exam is skewed in favor of higher-income families since such students are able to enroll in expensive SAT preparation courses. In place of the current admissions criteria that, according to Atkinson, depend too heavily on SAT scores, Atkinson proposes a more “holistic” set of admission criteria that would emphasize not only academic achievement, such as grades, but also other kinds of achievement. Additionally, Atkinson suggests a greater reliance on tests, such as the SAT 2 (previously known as the achievement tests), that measure competence in specific subject areas. Atkinson notes, in this regard, a study showing that the SAT, in combination with the SAT 2 and grade-point averages was not a significantly better predictor of college success than just the SAT 2 in combination with high school grade-point averages.

Many who admit the limitations of the SAT view it, nonetheless, as a useful tool for admission decisions. For instance, while the difficulty of the curriculum may vary significantly from high school to high school, the SAT allows universities to compare applicants uniformly on the basis of one and the same test. For this reason, many critics of Atkinson’s proposal see the SAT as providing an element of fairness by offsetting unfair and misleading grade-point comparisons. There is also concern, especially at the more prestigious UC institutions, such as Berkeley, that eliminating the SAT may lead to admitting under-prepared students and eventually lower academic standards. University of California Academic Senate Chair, Michael Cowan, remarks that although “faculty seem sympathetic to exploring ways of attracting a wider array of students (they) want to make sure that nothing is done that would lower quality.”

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002 Hacked by Bartmoss

==============================

Case # 73 Free Speech and the Klan

Category:

Social ethics

Case:

The “Adopt-A-Highway” programs began in Texas in 1985 to enlist the help of private citizens and organizations to keep highways clean. The program allows an individual or, more typically, an organization to take responsibility for cleaning up and beautifying a stretch of highway that it “adopts.” In recognition of this effort, the name of the organization is posted on a sign along the highway, indicating that particular stretch of the highway is maintained by that organization. Similar programs now exist in most other states and have proven to be an effective way for states to save money and keep highways clean.

In 1994 the Ku Klux Klan submitted an application for Missouri’s “Adopt-A-Highway” program, but was denied on the grounds that the Klan had a history of violating anti-discrimination laws and committing violent acts against individuals from racial minorities. However, the Klan sued, arguing that Missouri’s rejection of its application violated its right to free speech under the First Amendment. The lower courts ruled in its favor. Senior U.S. District Judge Stephen Limbaugh, in St. Louis, stated that “the state unconstitutionally denied the Klan’s application based on the Klan’s views.” Hence, in November of 2000, signs went up designating a one-mile stretch of Interstate 55 south of St. Louis as having been adopted by the Ku Klux Klan. The Klan seemed to have selected that particular section of I-55 because it is used for bussing St. Louis Black students to county schools under a court-ordered desegregation program. In a symbolic response to the KKK, Missouri passed a bill to name that section of I-55 “Rosa Parks Highway” in honor of the famous civil rights heroine. (Parks became a symbolic figure in the civil rights movement after refusing to give up her bus seat to a white man in 1955 in Montgomery, Alabama.)

Missouri’s subsequent appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was joined by 28 other states arguing that a highway sign acknowledging the Klan suggests an implicit acceptance of the Klan and gratitude for its participation. However, forming an unusual alliance, the Klan found legal representation in the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU attorneys representing the Klan successfully argued that the First Amendment protects the organization “against those who would misuse government power to suppress political dissidents.”

Attempts have been made in other states to prohibit the Ku Klux Klan from participating in their Adopt-A-Highway programs. In 2000, high school students in Palatine, Illinois adopted all available stretches of highway in order to prevent the KKK from adopting any section of highway in the state. Maryland’s Anne Arundel County tried a different strategy. When the Klan asked to participate in its Adopt-A-Highway program, the county took down all 52 of the Adopt-A-Highway signs, rather than allow the Klan to participate. In Missouri’s case, some community leaders are suggesting that the Adopt-A-Highway program be discontinued altogether.

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 74 Legalizing Assassinations

Category:

Political ethics

Case:

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush announced that the nation was at war, but emphasized that it is a new kind of war. Unlike traditional acts of war, these attacks were not the official action of a government, but rather the work of the terrorist group Al Quaeda, lead by Osama Bin Laden. To this extent, the attacks seemed more akin to criminal activity. Nevertheless, the U.S. government took the position that it would not distinguish between the terrorists involved in the September 11 attacks and the governments that give them refuge. Even though Afghanistan had no official government (recognized by the United States) the Taliban, a fundamentalist Muslim group had control over the people of Afghanistan and functioned as a government. Because it provided refuge and support to Bin Laden, U.S. military activity was initiated against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Soon after the terrorist attacks, a number of U.S. government officials, including Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, proposed a relaxation of policies and guidelines precluding certain strategies that might strengthen U.S. efforts to combat terrorism. One such policy is the 1976 Executive Order, issued by President Gerald Ford, which was intended to prohibit the assassination of foreign heads of state. The policy, however, is worded more broadly. It essentially prohibits the use of assassination as a strategy by the United States Government. Another policy, adopted by the Central Intelligence Agency in 1995, contains guidelines that place restrictions on the recruitment of persons with criminal backgrounds. This restriction was proposed following the revelation that the CIA had a relationship with Guatemalan military officials who were involved in series of murders in the early 1990s. Others on the CIA payroll have included Col. Manuel Contreras, who was believed connected with a car bombing in Washington that killed former Chilean Foreign Minister, Orlando Letelier. The apparent motivation behind this policy is that the U.S. does not want to be seen as condoning or supporting unethical and illegal activities by enlisting the assistance of those who engage in such activities.

In response to proposals to lift the ban on assassinations and to relax CIA policies on the recruitment of informants, the organization Human Rights Watch wrote a letter to President Bush urging him to maintain these policies as they are. According to Jonathan Fanton and Kenneth Roth of Human Rights Watch, relaxing the current policies on assassination and the CIA recruitment of CIA informants and others with human rights abuses would “threaten the very values that came under attack [on September 11], … the basic values we should now be redoubling our efforts to defend.”

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 75 Inter-sexed Children

Category:

Bioethics

Case:

According to rough estimates, 1 in every 1000-2000 infants born each year has ambiguous genitalia. These inter-sexed infants display various combinations of both female and male genitalia (e.g., an enlarged clitoris without a vaginal opening and with undescended testes).

According to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), “The birth of a child with ambiguous genitalia constitutes a social emergency.” Parents, understandably, are distraught, and the AAP notes that both the ambiguity of the child’s sex and the parents’ reactions to that ambiguity carry significant implications for the child’s long term well-being. The most acute quandary is to determine whether the child will be raised as a girl or boy; in fact, parents are typically advised not to name the child or register the birth until the child can be assigned a sex.

Typically, genetic evaluations are undertaken to determine the infant’s genetic sex (i.e., whether the child’s chromosomal pattern is XX of XY) and the cause of the sexual ambiguity. Additional pediatric, urological, endocrinological and gynecological evaluations determine how best to assign potential fertility capacity for normal sexual function, endocrine function, potential for malignant degeneration, and intrauterine testosterone imprinting. Following sex assignment, surgical interventions are undertaken to revise the genitalia to conform to the selected sex.

While surgical reconstruction is not urgently required for medical reasons in most cases, the majority of pediatricians believe that sex selection should be completed as quickly as possible. Since parents and other family members, as well as members of society, interact differently with boys and girls; until the child’s sex is established, say the pediatricians who favor immediate sex selection, interactions are likely to be stilted, stunted, aberrant, confusing, or discomfited. In addition to the distress of the parents and others, say the majority of pediatricians, the child whose sex is undefined may experience ostracism and suffer from confused self-identity and self-understanding.

This assumption, and accordingly, the propriety of early surgical correction, has come under increasing challenge. Medical ethicists have recently argued that, as intersexuality is seldom threatening to life or health, the surgery should be postponed until the person who will be most affected -- the intersexed individual -- can give autonomous consent. Moreover, autonomous consent requires a full explanation of burdens and benefits, the nature of which have yet to be determined. In opposition to the assumption that early treatment is always in the child’s best interests, intersexed adults have begun to come forward to report various harmful effects of early surgical intervention. For example, first-person accounts testify to the pain and loss of trust that arise upon learning that one’s parents and physicians have deceived them about the nature of one’s gender. This loss of trust is often accompanied by a perception that the deceit stems from embarrassment or from seeing the intersexed person as a “freak.” Further, surgery that involves reducing the size of a penis or clitoris often results in loss of sensation and of orgasmic capacity.

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 76 DanceSafe and Ecstasy

Category:

Social ethics

Case:

In 1999 Emanuel Sferios founded DanceSafe, an organization whose purpose is “promoting health and safety within the rave and nightclub community.” In addition to dispensing free earplugs, condoms, and information on recreational drugs, DanceSafe also provides free (and anonymous) testing of (alleged) Ecstasy.

Ecstasy, also known as MDMA (methylenedioxymethamphetamine), X, and E, affects the brain’s production of serontin, a neurotransmitter that regulates mood, memory, sleep, and body temperature. But unlike other drugs that stabilize serontin levels on a continuous basis (e.g. antidepressants such as Prozac and Zoloft), Ecstasy floods the brain with serontin. This deluge of serontin creates a “high,” but can also lead to dangerous dehydration, overheating, muscle spasms, and seizures.

Pill testing is DanceSafe’s response to Ecstasy’s growing popularity with ravers. Americans buy close to one million doses a week at $20 to $30 apiece. The popularity and price had led to fake or adulterated pills. At best, fake Ecstasy pills are harmless (e.g. Excedrin, whose tablets are marked with an “E” have been sold as Ecstasy). However, pills can be dangerous if other, more toxic, substances are substituted.

Sferios reports that screening has revealed alleged Ecstasy pills that actually contained caffeine, antacid, over-the-counter sleeping pills and pain relievers. Other pills contained speed, and other life threatening drugs. In 1999 an unusually large number of ravers, having taken what they thought was Ecstasy, wound up in emergency rooms. The pills contained dextromethorphan (DXM), a common ingredient in cough suppressants. DXM can cause convulsions.

DanceSafe’s test identifies the presence or absence of Ecstasy, as well as the presence of speed and several other drugs. If the test demonstrates the presence of Ecstasy, the pill’s owner is given a laminated white sheet that reads: “This test produced a normal reaction. It means the pill contains an Ecstasy-like substance. It does not mean the pill is ‘safe.’ There could still be something else in this pill.”

Critics charge that drug testing encourages drug use, but Sferios disagrees. He argues that most ravers are going to take their drugs anyway, so free and anonymous testing enables users to make an informed choice. Thus, Sferios sees DanceSafe as a part of the growing harm-reduction movement, which emphasizes drug education, rather than abstinence or criminalization. He compares pill testing to another risk-reduction program -- needle exchanges, that minimize the risk of HIV infection risk for IV drug users.

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 77 Post-mortem Sperm Collection

Category:

Bioethics

Case:

Mr. Jamison suffered a severe head injury in an accident and died without regaining consciousness soon after being brought to the emergency room. Upon his death, his wife requested postmortem sperm procurement, telling doctors that the couple had been trying desperately to conceive a child. Mr. Jamison had no advance directive stating, or implying, his wish to father a child, or specifying his agreement to this procedure in case of his death.

The hospital ethics committee noted that, under State law, the spouse of the deceased is the surrogate decision maker, and concluded, for this reason, that the decision rested with Mrs. Jamison. Mr. Jamison’s parents argued that their son would never have wished to father a child who would be raised with only one parent. Mrs. Jamison’s physician expressed the opinion that the Jamison’s efforts to conceive a child demonstrated Mr. Jamison’s desire that his wife have his child. The hospital’s social worker suggested that it would be unfair to bring a child into the world with only one parent. The hospital chaplain pointed out, however, that many children live in stable, loving single parent homes.

The hospital has the equipment to do the procedure and offers services for sperm collection and storage for various reasons, including posthumous fatherhood. However, it has no policy for this situation, where the father is not a competent participant in the consent process.

The medical staff is divided. Some feel that allowing the procedure respects Mr. Jamison’s wishes to father a child with his wife. Others believe it is wrong to be an agent of conception without the explicit consent of both parents.

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 79 Boycoting Convention Cities

Category:

Business ethics

Case:

You are the Executive Director of a large professional organization. One of your responsibilities is to oversee arrangements for the organization’s annual convention. In the first instance, this involves making recommendations about convention sites to the organization’s Board of Directors. On your recommendation, in 2000 the Board approved Cincinnati as site for the 2003 annual convention.

In the spring of 2001 fourteen groups in Cincinnati initiated a boycott movement, appealing to organizations, such as yours, not to hold their conventions in Cincinnati. The boycott movement is principally a response to the following situation. On April 7, 2001, a Cincinnati policeman shot and killed a young African-American man. In the course of pursuing the young man, who had refused to stop when ordered to do so, the policeman thought the young man had reached for a gun, although later investigation revealed he had been unarmed. News of the young man’s death set off three days of rioting, in which arson, looting, property destruction, and shooting took place. Police arrested more than 800 individuals.

The riot, one of the worst civil disturbances in the United States over the past decade, reflected pent-up anger of numerous African-Americans in Cincinnati concerning, what they perceive as, grievous police misconduct over many years toward African-Americans, especially in the vicinity of the Over the Rhine area adjacent to the downtown Cincinnati business district. At the time of the shooting, there had been four African-Americans killed by Cincinnati police since November of 2000, and fifteen killed since 1995. The police contend that every such incident involved circumstances justifying the use of deadly force. Credible evidence seems to establish that in many of the incidents the police indeed responded appropriately. Nonetheless, African-American and civil liberties organizations in Cincinnati have numerous additional complaints against the police dealing with racial harassment and discrimination. In March of 2001, the month before the rioting occurred, the Cincinnati American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and a coalition of African-American organizations, the Black United Front (BUF), filed a lawsuit in federal court against the city, alleging decades of police misconduct toward African-Americans.

In the aftermath of the rioting, two potentially significant efforts to address the underlying problems were initiated. First, Cincinnati mayor, Thomas Luken, announced the formation of a panel to explore ways of improving race relations in the city, and he invited the leader of BUF, Reverend Damon Lynch III to serve as co-chair of the panel, which was named Cincinnati Community Action Now (CAN). Reverend Lynch accepted the mayor’s invitation. Second, the city council of Cincinnati agreed to participate in an effort at achieving a mediated settlement of the lawsuit filed in federal court by the ACLU and BUF. Under the innovative procedures for mediation that the parties agreed upon, focus groups of city, police, and community leaders were to develop six goals for a settlement. The city government, police department, ACLU, and BUF were then to attempt negotiating an agreement to address the six goals, and, if successful, they would then submit the agreement for approval to the federal judge presiding in the lawsuit.

Both of the above mentioned efforts to address Cincinnati’s problems in the area of race relations have moved forward since the weeks following the riots, but, unfortunately, in a polarized atmosphere that makes their success uncertain. Toward the end of September in 2001 the policeman who shot and killed the young man was acquitted (He had been charged with negligent homicide, a misdemeanor). In November of 2001 another Cincinnati policeman, brought to trial on assault charges in connection with the suffocation of an African-American man in November of 2000, was also acquitted. After the second acquittal, Reverend Lynch, leader of BUF, co-signed a letter supporting the boycott movement which accused police in Cincinnati of “killing, raping, planting false evidence, and, along with prosecutors and the courts, destroying the general self respect of black citizens.” In early December of 2001, an incensed Mayor Luken removed Reverend Lynch from his position as co-chair of CAN.

So far the boycott movement has not generated much attention from the media outside of Cincinnati. Most members of your organization seem unaware of it. None has raised the issue with you -- yet. Many member of the organization, however, have deep interest in and concern about, racial justice and civil liberties. (Time still remains for your organization to cancel the arrangements that have been made with the convention center and hotels in Cincinnati.)

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 80 Non-smoking

Category:

Social ethics

Case:

Happy Trails is an adult residential community (neither a hospital nor a nursing home). As in any community, residents need to accommodate mutually exclusive needs in a fair manner. Smokers living at the Happy Trails Retirement and Assisted Care Community insist they have the right to light up when and where they please in their home, which they equate with the community. Non-smokers, however, demand the right to live in a healthy, smoke free environment. One smoking resident noted that she, like many other residents, purchased her unit in this particular community in part because it promised “all the comforts of home.” A facility that forbids smoking in most areas, she contends, does not offer all the comforts of home. Conversely, one non-smoking resident stated that he, like many other residents, purchased his unit in part because this particular community was affiliated with a health care system, and promised a “healthy environment.” A smoke-filled environment is not healthy, he says.

Years ago when some residents purchased their units, they were free to smoke in the dining room, the library, the game room, the lobby, and the hallways. Over time, with increased awareness of the danger of second hand smoke imposed on others (especially the elderly who are at greater risk for respiratory disease), more restrictions were imposed. Smoking is now limited to inside the residents’ private units and any out of doors areas on the property of Happy Trails. However, non-smokers want to breathe fresh air in the garden and on the front porch, and are demanding further restrictions that impose greater limitations on the least ambulatory residents who are increasingly limited in their physical environment.

During a community meeting, residents presented many arguments, and asserted many claims, on both sides of the issue, including the following:

- Additional costs of insurance (cigarettes are the number one cause of fire deaths in the U.S.) and maintenance (more frequent cleaning of carpets, draperies, and furniture) are borne by all residents, smokers and non-smokers alike, which is unfair to non-smokers.

- Some residents, non-smokers as well as smokers, engage in behavior that others find offensive, such as speaking loudly and using profanity. If smokers are restricted then shouldn’t people who engage in the above kinds of behaviors be restricted as well?

- Smoking is not a choice, but an addiction.

- Smoking is a chosen behavior. People can choose to start and choose to quit. - Many residents who are adamant about their right to live in a healthy environment and who are critical of those who choose to smoke, nonetheless eat unhealthy diets, do not exercise, and are overweight -- all choices. Shouldn’t they be similarly restricted?

- Although a monthly surcharge is assessed upon those who smoke in their units, several residents don’t pay this, saying they only smoke outside. Yet they “cheat” and smoke in their units, especially in inclement weather.

- Non-smokers are free to move to other places where the air is not “offensive.” After all smokers have had to remove themselves entirely from some areas.

- Happy Trails does not have the resources to support separate smoking and non-smoking public areas.

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 81 College Athletics

Category:

Social ethics

Case:

The tension between college academics and athletics is nothing new. Maintaining double standards for regular students and athletes dates back to at least 1869, when Rutgers beat Princeton with a football team that included three freshmen who were failing algebra. Early in the twentieth century, President Theodore Roosevelt, by no means adverse to strenuous physical activity himself, proposed outlawing intercollegiate football because he thought it corrupted scholarship.

Academics criticize current college athletic programs for a least five reasons. (1) Colleges routinely lower admission standards for athletes, who, in the Ivy League, have on average far lower SAT scores than the general student population. Many prestigious schools admit athletes with scores of only 820, almost 200 points below the national average, and even farther below their own standards. Some schools, such as Amherst and Williams designate a certain number of admission slots specifically for athletes (at Amherst 75 out of 450). One Middlebury student, whose entrance scores fell far below minimum standards, nonetheless gained admission by virtue of his prowess as a star hockey player. (2) Once in college, athletes often enjoy preferential treatment. Many schools have special tutorial programs aimed solely at helping athletes meet minimum standards. (3) Huge amounts of money are spent on athletic programs. More than a dozen coaches now earn over $1 million a year. The University of Oregon spent $80 million on a new stadium. This big money, critics assert, has turned campuses into sports franchises. (4) Many athletes do not attend college to learn, but rather, hope to use their collegiate experience to land positions on professional teams. (5) Elite athletic programs mean regular students have fewer opportunities to play in college sports.

Those who support maintaining the current practices in regard to intercollegiate athletics counter that: (1) winning teams increase alumni giving and therefore benefit academics in the long run. A consultant recently remarked that the best way for Utah Valley State College to increase alumni contributions would be to implement a high profile football program; (2) intercollegiate athletics is excellent public relations. A former Boston College student from the Midwest states that the only reason he knew about the school, and applied for admission, was the fact that a famous quarterback played there.

The Knight Commission, a panel composed largely of college presidents, concluded last summer that the academic standards for varsity athletes were “abysmal” and “disgraceful.” Some schools are reevaluating their athletic programs. The Trustees of Swarthmore College recently concluded that athletic programs were inconsistent with the school’s academic mission, and voted to abolish football and wrestling. There actions, however, are unlikely to have any impact at schools that covet the public attention of fielding winning teams.

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 82 Drilling in the Alaskan Wilderness

Category:

Environmental ethics

Case:

Drilling for oil in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) has been a source of contention among policy makers for years. In 1980 Congress expanded ANWR by 9.5 million acres, with 1.5 million acres (known as section 1002) set aside for the study of petroleum production potential. In 1987, 1991, and 1995 legal measures to drill in the 1002 area were proposed and defeated. The issue was raised again when President George W. Bush made drilling in section 1002 part of his national energy agenda. The events of September 11, 2001 have resulted in intensifying the debate.

Proponents make three major arguments for drilling in ANWR: (1) In light of recent economic downturns and the unstable diplomatic situation in the Middle East, the U.S. must increase domestic oil supply in order to decrease dependence on foreign oil. (2) The area occupied by wells and drilling equipment has shrunk by approximately 60% since the development of the Prudhoe Bay oil field. Developments in drilling technology allow a single pad to tap multiple oil pockets at distances of up to four miles. These advances have minimized the environmental impact of petroleum extraction. As evidence, production supporters point to the fact that despite fears to the contrary, the caribou herd in the Prudhoe/Kuparuk oil field region has increased in population. (3) Most Inupiat Eskimos in the area favor oil leasing for the economic opportunities exploration may provide.

Opponents of drilling counter that (1) even if section 1002 produces the maximum projected amount, oil consumption will continue to rise exponentially. Conservation (such as increasing vehicle fuel efficiency), rather than expanding production, note the opponents, is the only long-term solution. (2) The negative ecological impact on the area outweighs any potential benefit from oil production, in the opinion of the opponents. The plain of section 1002 provides critical calving area for a caribou herd five times as large as the Prudhoe/Kuparuk herd in an area one-fifth the size. Development in this areas, the opponents contend, would push the herd into the foothills where calves would be prone to predation and starvation from scarcity of resources. (3) The opponents point out that not all Native Americans favor drilling. The Gwich’in Indians, for example, consider the area sacred. The Gwich’in also subsist on caribou and fear the negative impact that petroleum production might have on the herd.

The controversy remains unresolved. Since control of the Senate switched last year, Majority Leader Tom Daschle (Democrat, South Dakota) has vowed to defeat a bill passed in the House of Representatives that would tap ANWR. On the other hand, Chairman of the House Resource Committee Jim Hansen (Republican, Utah) argues that in light of the September 11 terrorist attacks drilling in ANWR is more important than ever, and has urged the Senate to pass the House energy bill in the interest of national security.

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 83 Racial Profiling

Category:

legal ethics

Case:

The tension between civil liberties and national security is posing new challenges for United States public policy. The events of September 11, 2001 have dramatically affected Arab communities across the nations. Nearly 1,200 people have been detained by law enforcement agencies on charges not yet made public. On November 9, the Justice Department announced that over 5,000 visitors from middle eastern countries would be contacted in an effort to discover possible ties to the Al-Quaeda terrorist network. A recent Gallup poll shows that 1 out of 4 Americans support these unusual measures and believe that some civil liberties may have to be compromised in order to combat terrorism. On the other hand, there is growing concern that federal authorities are over-stepping constitutional bounds and violating the rights of individuals of Arab ethnicity.

Across the country, local law enforcement agencies, in conjunction with the Federal Bureau of Investigation are conducting interviews with Arab individuals. There interviews range from door to door visits to the mailing of letters encouraging recipients to schedule appointments at designated law enforcement offices. According to several police chiefs, these on-going queries are similar to those used in any standard crime investigation. According to one federal spokesperson, “These people are not suspects … they are simply people we want to talk to because they might have helpful information.”

These investigative tactics, however, have been severely criticized. The American Civil Liberties Union and National Association for the Advancement of Colored People assert that targeting persons of a specific ethnicity in criminal investigations is patently unconstitutional. Several police departments have refused to collaborate with federal investigators because, they claim, the procedures violate either state laws or department guidelines. Although officials from the Immigration and Naturalization Service claim the interviews are “voluntary,” some legal experts feel that the threat of incarceration may cause some foreigners to believe cooperation is mandatory, and unwittingly subject themselves to detention.

The question of racial profiling has lawmakers divided. While the Bush administration is pressing forward with the counter-terrorism investigation, many members of Congress who once supported stiff counter-terrorism measures now express misgivings. An Assistant Attorney General defended the Justice Department’s methods, however, by saying: “I agree we have taken steps here that represent a departure from what we have done in recent times. We are not in recent times. Are we being aggressive and hard-nosed? You bet.”

Notes:

Eighth Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl at The Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical And Professional Ethics in Cincinnati, Ohio on February 28, 2002

==============================

Case # 85 Computer Privacy

Category:

Computer ethics

Case:

An interesting post on a computer discussion site (Slashdot) raises some important questions about software installed by cable personnel. Here’s the entry in its entirely Posted by Cliff on Monday October 28, @08:33AM from the fishy-practices dept. {e}N0S asks: “The cable guy came over to install a cable modem at my Dad’s house. As I watched him do his stuff I noticed he was installing something called Broadjump Client Foundation. I know you don’t need software for a cable modem to work so I asked if it was necessary. He said he had to do his list of things, and we had to sign that he did his list of things, otherwise he couldn’t leave it with us to use. Since I can always remove the software, I agreed, but I noticed while he was flipping through the install, he was clicking ‘agree’ on every EULA that came up. Doing a search on Google for ‘Broadjump Client Foundation’ comes up with some pretty scary stuff as far as what it does, like: ‘Builds a database of subscriber demographics and buying behaviors to help evolve and refine marketing efforts.’ Now, how does this affect us? Neither myself or anyone in my family agreed to the software; the cable guy did. And is there anyway to get cable companies to stop doing this as I can imagine since the cable company is a monopoly in this town, that the percentage of people who still have this software on their computers is pretty high.” The author raises some important issues here. One of them is the general issue of the extent to which internet providers can report on the web activities of their subscribers. Another, related issue is the way in which permissions are handled (or not handled) in this case, and obviously the way in which it affects the first issue. A related issue occurs when users unknowingly download software that then monitors their web browser activity. Think about this issue on two levels. First, what do you think is right or wrong (permissible or impermissible) in this scenario? Was it wrong, for example, for the computer technician to click off on the EULA’s? Second, to what extent should these things be regulated? That is, should there be legislation or government regulation overseeing the monitoring behavior of internet providers? If so, what provisions should it contain?

Notes:

The original entry and subsequent discussion can be found at: http://ask.slashdot.org/askslashdot/02/10/26/2311244.shtml?tid=172 This is reprinted with the kind permission of the author.

==============================

Case # 86 Privacy of Abortion Clinic Records

Category:

abortion

Case:

In May, 2002, workers in a county garbage sorting center in Storm Lake, a small town in Iowa made a gruesome discovery: the body of a newborn boy, which had been dismembered by the sorting machines. The body was so damaged that identification of the body was impossible.

Police officials reasoned that the child had been abandoned in a dumpster at birth, probably by the mother. Unable to determine the baby’s identity, the police decided to see if there were any women who had been pregnant and now were not pregnant but did not have a baby. The first step in this process was to identify all the women who have been pregnant at the appropriate time in this same town of 10,000 residents. Police subpoenaed the records of Planned Parenthood to obtain the names of women who had received positive results on pregnancy tests in the previous nine months.

Planned Parenthood refused to comply with the subpoena, arguing that a woman’s decision about her pregnancy is among the most private of matters. Those who came to Planned Parenthood to determine whether they were pregnant ought to not be subjected, nine months later, to police officers knocking on their doors and asking details about the outcome of their pregnancy. They also point out that there is no guarantee that the woman even got a pregnancy test or that she was a local resident, so the search of the records could turn out to be futile.

Notes:

Source: Hannah Wolfson, Associated Press, Los Angeles Times, September 8, 2002, Part 1, Page 1.

==============================

Case # 88 Health Benefits for Fetuses

Category:

abortion

Case:

In the fall, 2002, the federal government of the United States instituted a new rule to the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP), allowing “unborn children” to qualify for health benefits. Supporters of this change maintained that it was an important step forward in improving prenatal care. This includes the fetuses of women who are illegal immigrants, although the women themselves and their immigrant children not born in the United States are not covered by such insurance. Proponents of the new ruling point out that, once these fetuses are born, they will be U. S. citizens if they are born in the United States.

Supporters of this rule say this is not a issue about abortion at all, but about prenatal care. Indeed, they maintain that abortion-rights activists who oppose this rule are in fact diminishing the quality of prenatal care that immigrant women would receive.

Questions: Should federally-funded health care benefits be extended to fetuses or unborn children? (Note that the same in which this question is phrased can prejudice the outcome.) Why or why not? What implications does your view on this issue have for your views on abortion?

Notes:

Source: Amy Goldstein, “US seeks to include fetuses in health plan,” Washington Post, 9/28/2002

==============================

Case # 89 Not out of the Woods yet, The Social Responsibilities of Star Athletes

Category:

Sport ethics; racism; sexism

Case:

When Tiger Woods was finishing up at the British Open in July, 2002, he was asked by reporters about the policy at the Augusta National Golf Club that excludes women from membership. Woods is reported to have replied, “It would be nice to see everyone have an equal chance to participate, but there is nothing you can do about it.” Later in the year, when asked again about the issue, Woods said, “Do I want to see a female member? Yes. But it’s our right to have any club set up the way we want to.”

Many were dismayed by Woods’ response. As the child of a racially mixed marriage (African-American and Thai) in the United States, Woods certainly had to be aware of the negative impact of discrimination. Why did he seem indifferent to such discrimination when directed against women? How, they asked, can he defend the notion that it’s an American right to set up clubs in any way they want—at least in those cases where Americans want to set them up in discriminatory ways. Furthermore, although Augusta is a private club, it in fact plays an important public role, since it hosts one of the most prestigious golf tournaments in the United States, the Masters Tournament, an event that draws many spectators and extensive news coverage.

Woods’ reply to these criticisms was that he wanted to pick his own issues. “We’re trying to do a lot of different things. But what I’ve found is that a lot of people want me to be the head of their cause. It’s hard. I certainly understand what they’re trying to accomplish at Augusta. I also understood the Confederate flag issue a while ago. But I’m trying to keep my focus on my foundation [the Tiger Woods Foundation, which supports golf participation for minority youths], and what we’re tying to do. I don’t think it should be the responsibility of celebrities, or sports figures, to have to be the champion of all causes.”

To make the situation more complex, Woods himself is not a member of the Augusta National Golf Club, so he himself is not a member of the club that is denying membership to women. Augusta does not currently discriminate against members on the basis of race, although apparently it did so in the past. Furthermore, celebrity white golfers who are members of Augusta, like Arnie Palmer and Jack Nicklaus, are rarely asked about this issue.

This reply raises interesting and important questions. What are the social responsibilities of celebrity athletes? Are those responsibilities any different for celebrity athletes who are also members of minority racial and ethnic groups? Should these have a position on various moral and social problems confronting society today? Is it even possible for them to be neutral on an issue? What happens if they espouse a position that many people think is wrong? What role do the media play in this process? Sketch out your position on this set of issues

Notes:

Source: Jere Longman with Clifton Brown “Augusta Debate Catches Woods Off Balance,” New York Times, Sunday, October 20, 2002, Sports Section.

==============================

Case # 90 Telling It Like It Is: Lying on Your Resume

Category:

Personal ethics

Case:

In the early 1970’s, when Quincy Troupe was an adjunct faculty member at the College of Staten Island, someone told him that he would never be hired as a tenure-track professor unless he had a bachelor’s degree. He had attended Grambling, but not graduated. He changed his resume to say that he had graduated from Grambling.

Over the years, high accomplishments and fame increased, and he held several prestigious teaching positions, including an appointment as a full Professor at the University of California at San Diego. He became recognized as one of the best poets in the country as well as a gifted teacher who unstintingly gave back to the community in which he lived.

In 2002, Troupe was nominated as California’s Poet Laureate—the first time this appointment was made in a non-political way. Prior to his appointment, the Governor’s chief of staff had an interview with him to make sure that there were no skeletons in the closet.

Shortly after his appointment, the state legislature’s staffers completed their screening and discovered that Troupe had not graduated from Grambling, despite the fact that this is listed on his resume. They contact Troupe to ask him about this discrepancy, and he immediately confirmed that he had not graduated. Shortly thereafter, he submitted his resignation as California Poet Laureate. He also immediately informed UCSD of what had happened. Imagine that you are on the committee charged with the responsibility for deciding what the university ought to do in response to these revelations about Troupe. What should the administrators of UCSD do in response to discovering that Troupe had falsely claimed to have a bachelor’s degree from Grambling. What should Troupe himself do? What factors ought to be considered in making this decision?

==============================

Case # 92 Privacy of Abortion Clinic Records

Category:

abortion

Case:

Question: Should Planned Parenthood be forced to turn over to the police the records of women who tested positive for pregnancy? Why or why not? What are the competing considerations in this case? To what extent do women seeking a pregnancy test have a right to privacy in such a situation? To what extent do criminal investigators have a right to access otherwise-confidential information? Why doe one outweigh the other?

Notes:

Source: Hannah Wolfson, Associated Press, Los Angeles Times, September 8, 2002, Part 1, Page 1.

==============================

Case # 93 Liasons academiques

Category:

Academic ethics

Case:

In the fall, 2002, the Dean of the law school at UC Berkeley (Boalt Hall) resigned after having been accused by a student of sexual harassment. According to published reports, the Dean believed that what took place was consensual, while the law student maintained that it had not been consensual. Both agree that sexual intercourse did not take place. The law student was not a student in any of the Dean’s classes and was not a minor.

As a result of the allegations, the Dean resigned his position at Boalt Hall. In the aftermath of his resignation, many faculty at Boalt and numerous other academic institutions around the country lack clear-cut policies to deal with sexual encounters between students and faculty. Where regulations are in place, they vary widely from one institution to another. One university forbids all sexual relationships between professors and undergraduate students; it further prohibited all sexual relationships between professors and graduate students directly under their supervision. Another university bans all such relationships between professors and students under their supervision and requires professors having relationships with students not under their supervision inform their Dean of their existence. Many institutions have no explicit policies on this matter.

Imagine that you are chair of a committee at your college or university that has been charged with the responsibility of developing a policy on faculty-student relationships. Consider the following questions:

* • What principles would guide your deliberations as you develop this policy?

* • Policies are often intended to protect against extremes. What are the extremes to be avoided in this area?

* • What are the various interests that must be taken into consideration in developing this policy?

* • Finally, please state your policy.

Notes:

Source: Stuart Silverstein and Rebecca Trounson, “Universities Struggle to Legislate Student-Faculty Liaisons,” Los Angeles Times, December 10, 2002, p. 1.

==============================

Case # 94 Disaster Repreparations

Category:

Social ethics

Case:

In the aftermath of the September 11 2001 terrorist attacks, the United States Congress passed the Victim Compensation Fund, which provided monetary compensation to the families of victims of the Sept. 11th attacks, as part of the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act,, which was passed and signed into law on September 22, 2001. The legislation provided funding for the families of victims to be compensated on the basis of projected lifetime income in much the same way that they would have been compensated in successful lawsuits. In order to be eligible to receive aid from the fund, the families had to waive their right to sue the airlines for damages. The principal purpose of the legislation was the save the airlines from economic ruin after the terrorist attacks. If the families of the victims sued the airlines, so Congress reasoned, the airlines would quickly collapse, having already been weakened by the reduced air travel after September 11. If the airlines collapsed, the United States economy would be devastated.

Victims of other disasters quickly complained of the inequity. The families of victims in the Oklahoma City bombing pointed out that they, too, were victims of a terrorist attack. The victims of families of victims of the first attack against the World Trade Center, in 1993, pointed out that they were victims of an attack against the same building by the same organization. What of victims of attacks against United States embassies, or against the USS Cole? The list grows quickly, and the similarities seem greater than the differences.

Nor has there been unity within the ranks of the families of victims. Basing awards on presumptive earning power, the government appeared ready to provide much bigger awards to some than others. Furthermore, offsetting benefits such as insurance policies were deducted from the award, even though in some cases these other benefits were not in fact paid to the families.

This raises a number of fundamental questions about responsibility, both individual and government. To what extent is the federal government responsible to the families of victims of terrorist attacks? What principles guide your decision in this case? How do these principles then apply to victims of other disasters—crime victims, natural disaster victims, victims of industrial accidents, etc.

Notes:

Source: Lisa Belkin, “Just Money,” New York Times Magazine, December 8, 2002.

==============================

Case # 95 “Not on our network, you can’t…”

Downloading unauthorized files at colleges and universities

Category:

Academic ethics

Case:

At many college and universities in the United States, internet connections began to slow perceptibly in 2002 as more and more students were downloading music and movies, often files that were pirated or that they were otherwise unauthorized to download. In some cases, as much as seventy-five percent of a university’s bandwidth is being taken up with file swapping.

Two distinct issues became intertwined: the size and frequency of the downloads was sufficient to clog college and university networks, often interfering directly with the academic concerns that are primary to the mission of the educational institutions. In addition, students were often downloading files that they were not permitted to download—and were making use of the university’s internet connection to do so.

Administrators have reacted in various ways to this worsening situation. Some have added more bandwidth, often just to see it gobbled up as well. Others have been alerted by companies who felt their rights had been violated. For example, Warner Brothers contacted one college to inform them that one of their students had illegally downloaded a copy of a new Clint Eastwood movie. The Naval Academy, which has a strict honor code that prohibits stealing as well as cheating, confiscated nearly one hundred computers with unauthorized downloaded material on them. Cornell disciplined over fifty students for unauthorized downloading. Other institutions have treated the issue purely as a technical one and explored technical solutions such as limiting the amount of bandwidth a particular student could use at any one time, segregating dorms on the network from academic offices, giving lower priority to the types of files typically found on file-sharing sites, etc.

Imagine that this has become a serious problem at your college or university, and that you are the head of a committee appointed to develop a policy on this issue. What recommendations would you make? What principles would underlie your recommendations? To what extent is this an issue of academic integrity and ethics? What rights do students have to privacy when they are on a university network? What responsibilities do universities have when students are using the university’s resources to accomplish something illegal?

Notes:

Source: Rebecca Trounson , “Pirated Files Clog College Networks,” Los Angeles Times, December 2, 2002, p. 1 Amy Harmon, “Students Learning to Evade Moves to Protect Media Files,” The New York Times, November 27, 2002, Section C

==============================