Ethics

Read Chapter 5 of the Steneck text.Prepare 2-3 paragraphs total that answer the following questions:1. What was the most interesting thing you learned from the reading assignment?2. he chapter describes a variety of different kinds of conflicts of interest. Which of the various types of conflicts do you think are common at Iowa State University (ISU)?3. Describe some conflicts of interest that would be likely in laboratories in your discipline. How should they be managed?

This essay must be 1,000 words (+/- 10%) and written in first person. With an understanding of the various conceptual approaches to ethics, choose one, or several, that fit best with your own core beliefs as discussed in Week 1:·        Describe what inspired you to choose these conceptual approaches. How do they fit into your personal belief system as discussed in Week 1?·        Discuss how these approaches can be successfully integrated into the field of applied intelligence within the area of study National Security.·        Identify strengths and shortfalls of utilizing these approaches in your field. Give real-world examples.·        Use both in-class and outside-of-class literature and research to support your conclusions.·        Proper APA formatting is required. For specific APA layout for titles and headings, see https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/ (Links to an external site.)  and for a sample APA paper, go here: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/18/ (Links to an external site.).·        Abstracts are not necessary for this assignment and do not count towards the word count. Title page, references, and running heads/footers are not counted towards the word count. Sections should include Title page, Introduction, Main Body OR Discussion, Conclusion or Recommendations, andReferences.Sources below; Birsch and Olson are in-class materials. The rest you can use as well. But find others if you prefer:1.      Gallagher, B. (2019). The Ethical Dilemma (Links to an external site.)2.      Birsch, Introduction to Ethical Theories: A Procedural Approach, Preface & Chapter 1 ‘Beginning to Think About Ethics’3.      Birsch, Introduction to Ethical Theories: A Procedural Approach, Chapter 6 ‘Immanuel Kant’s Theory’4.      Ericson article (2007) ‘The Need for Ethical Norms’ from CIA.gov5.      Bonde, S. & Firenze, P. (2013) article ‘Making Choices: A Framework for Making Ethical Decisions’1.      Birsch, Introduction to Ethical Theories: A Procedural Approach, Chapter 5 ‘Utilitarianism’2.      Birsch, Introduction to Ethical Theories: A Procedural Approach, Chapter 7 ‘Moral Rights Theory’3.      Olson, J. (2006). Fair Play: The Moral Dilemmas of Spying. Scenario No. 8: Journalism Cover, pages 72-76.4.      Velasquez, M., Andre, C., Shanks, T., et al. (2015) article ‘Thinking Ethically’ Rubric:Described what inspired you to choose your conceptual approaches and how they fit into your personal belief system. This is significant for this assignment and should be a major component of your essay.Discussed how ethical approaches can be successfully integrated in the field of applied intelligence within your chosen area of study (National Security)Identified strengths and shortfalls of utilizing the approaches in your field. Provided at least 2 real-world examples. Hypothetical examples are not sufficient. Historical events, current events, or events from your personal experience are expected here.Should include at least 2 references using course materials and at least 3 references that you sourced on your own from outside materials.

ETHICAL DILEMMA 2 Situation 1 You are serving on a jury for a murder trial. The evidence presented at trial was largely circumstantial and, in your mind, equivocal. During closing, the prosecutor argued that you must find the defendant guilty because he confessed to the crime. The defense attorney immediately objected and the judge sternly instructed you to disregard the prosecutor’s statement. While you do not know exactly what happened, you suspect that the confession was excluded because of some procedural error. Would you be able to ignore the prosecutor’s statement in your deliberations? Should you? Would you tell the judge if the jury members discussed the statement and appeared to be influenced by it? Ethical Judgment: Moral Rules: . Ethical system (1): Ethical system: (2) **** Do a critical analysis of Dilemma 2 in terms of Moral Judgment, Moral Rules and Ethical Systems. You MUST have a paragraph for each of the three topics: 1) Moral Judgment, 2) Moral Rules , 3) Ethical Systems  Which Ethical System or Systems would apply to this Dilemma and why? You can discuss more that one Ethical System, if applicable. Whichever ethical system you choose, you MUST justify why it is applies.

The assignment is composed by 2 activities: 1 reflective journal of 150 words, and a learning activity with the remaining words in the contract.  Journal Reflection  In your own words, what is utilitarianism? Provide an example. (150 words, 10 pts)   Learning Activity  You have been invited to sit on a committee that will decide who gets the next available organ transplant. Please rank each potential recipient from 1 to 5 (1 is the first candidate and 5 is the last person eligible to receive a transplant). Melissa is a 19-year-old high-school dropout. She works as a CNA (certified nursing assistant) at a local senior care facility. Melissa lives alone, has no close family, and no significant friends or attachments outside of work. The residents at the facility love Melissa and think she is very caring. Robert is a 31-year-old substitute teacher. Robert served in the Marines until he lost one arm and one leg in a combat situation. Robert has a fiancé and is getting married in two months. He is the track coach at the high school and runs a tutoring program for at-risk teenagers. Robert also serves as a deacon at the local church. Ethan is an 81-year-old retired grandfather with 16 grandchildren. Ethan and his beloved wife Lucy care for many of the grandchildren during the day so the children’s parents can work. Ethan and Lucy own a farm with lots of land. They run the local animal rescue and foster many disabled and abused pets. Recently Lucy was diagnosed with dementia, and Ethan keeps track of Lucy during her “spells” to keep her safe. All the children and grandchildren gather every Sunday for dinner at Ethan & Lucy’s house and cannot imagine life without either of them. Lucas is a 52-year-old undercover CIA agent. He is a language specialist who speaks more than a dozen languages. Lucas has led over 70 undercover operations in 30 years, saving hundreds of civilian lives. Lucas lives in a studio apartment outside of D.C. He has no immediate family, as he grew up in foster care. Serena is a 47-year-old lobbyist for feminist causes. Serena has an accomplished professional career and is currently in the running for the Nobel Peace Prize. Sara’s accomplishments have changed women’s health care access in third-world countries. Serena has helped over 1500 women receive preventative health care in developing nations. Serena’s friends and family adore her. She has a large support system. Melissa, Robert, Ethan, Lucas and Serena have all been given 30 days or less to live. Each person requires an immediate organ transplant to sustain life beyond that time frame. From a utilitarian perspective, rank them from one to five to decide who gets the first available organ. As a committee member, you understand the likelihood of more than two organs within a month is non-existent. Please explain why you ranked each person accordingly. (This learning activity is worth 25 pt.)

DO NOT MAKE A TITLE/COVER PAGE–Required ResourcesRead/review the following resources for this activityTextbook: Chapter 13LessonIntroductionIn this session, you have been considering moral-ethical dilemmas you yourself faced or that you know of that you either resolved or failed to resolve, but hopefully learned from. You may never have given much thought to ethical theory nor what ethical premises/paradigms you have unconsciously held.You will be focusing on this case for this assignment:Jane Doe is a nursing student at University X. Jane is in week eight of a course entitled: “Introduction to Ethics”.For the week one discussion, Jane copied work done by her friend John Doe in the same class two months ago (with a different professor). John told Jane it was okay to use his work as John’s professor never checked any work in the class using Turnitin.com. John claimed to have earned an A on the work also.In week two, Jane went to StudentPapering.com and paid ten dollars for a week two essay done by a student (not John Doe) who took the same course four months ago. StudentPapering promises that all its archived work is of excellent quality and cannot be detected as copied. Jane then uploaded an exact copy of the work for the week two assignment.In week three, Jane paid a worker at PaperingStudent.com ten dollars to write for Jane a brand new essay after Jane shared with the worker the essay assignment instructions.In week four, Jane relied on her knowledge of Esperanto. She felt pressed for time and found an article by a professor from Esperanto on the week four topic. She translated Esperanto into English using Moogle Translate, and the translated text served as her week four paper.In week five, Jane was running late again. Jane purposely uploaded a blank paper hoping that she would later claim it was an innocent mistake and not be assessed a late penalty. In a previous course on History, she had done the same (with an earlier paper from the History class rather than simply a blank) and had not seen any late penalty assessed.In week six, Jane took work she did in a nursing course from a year ago and submitted that for her discussion posting in her current class. She simply copied and pasted the work she had labored intensively on a year ago (even though University X forbids this practice as ‘self-plagiarism’). Jane was confident her Nursing instructor never checked that work using Turnitin.com or another method.In week seven, Jane copied and pasted work found on website.com for the paper. Jane did not use any quotation marks or other documentation to show the text was not by Jane.Since Jane’s Ethics professor did not check papers and posting for any issues by using Turnitin.com or another method, the professor graded all of Jane’s work unaware of Jane’s actions throughout the weeks of the class. Jane feels her actions are morally justified both because her economic situation requires her to work too much to devote time to school (although other students are well-off enough to have such time) and her religion forbids cheating, but Jane ignores her religion’s teachings.InstructionsNow that you have had an opportunity to explore ethics formally, create a reflective assessment of your learning experience and the collaborations you engaged in throughout this session. You will submit both of the following:A written reflectionFor the written reflection, address Jane Doe’s and respond to the following:Articulate again your moral theory from week eight discussion (You can revise it if you wish). What two ethical theories best apply to it? Why those two?Apply to Jane Doe’s case your personal moral philosophy as developed in week eight discussion and now. Use it to determine if what Jane Doe did was ethical or unethical per your own moral philosophy.Consider if some of these examples are more grave instances of ethical transgressions than others. Explain.Propose a course of social action and a solution by using the ethics of egoism, utilitarianism, the “veil of ignorance” method, deontological principles, and/or a theory of justice to deal with students like  Jane. Consider social values such as those concerning ways of life while appraising the interests of diverse populations (for instance, those of differing religions and economic status).For the oral presentation, briefly summarize your feelings about taking a course in Ethics and explore your process of transformation in this course.Discuss your experiences of the course, your beginnings, and where you are now. Consider your interaction in discussions. Should health care workers be required to take a course in Ethics? Why or why notWriting Requirements (APA format)Length: 3-4 pages (not including title page or references page)1-inch marginsDouble spaced12-point Times New Roman fontTitle pageReferences page (minimum of 2 scholarly sources)

Conduct research on a Caribbean organization of your choice. You are required to write a contemporary business ethics case study that explores ethical problems in the Caribbean organization you have chosen that need to be considered and addressed, describing adequately the details of the situation, the primary and secondary stakeholders and the ethical issues involved. 1000 words Identify and discuss the ethical issues pertinent to the case you have developed, providing an ethical evaluation of these issues using the relevant ethical theories. (20 Marks) – 2000 words

This course has three written assignments that build upon one another and are designed to take you step-by-step through a process of writing a paper that identifies an ethical question, examines the context, issues, and arguments surrounding the question, and attempts to defend an answer to that question using strong moral reasoning. In the Week 1 assignment, “Ethical Question,” you chose an ethical question, provided an introduction, a position statement and supporting reason, and an opposing position statement and supporting reason. In the Week 3 assignment, “Applying an Ethical Theory,” you explained utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics, including its core moral principle or ideal, and applied that theory to the topic by demonstrating how its principles would support a particular position on your ethical question. In this final written assignment, you will combine what you have done in these two exercises by examining an ethical issue and defending your own position on an ethical question regarding that issue. This final written assignment should be written in essay form with the following clearly labeled sections: Introduction Ethical Argument Explanation and Defense Objection and Response Conclusion The paper should be between 1,300 and 1,500 words, utilize three scholarly resources, and include a title page and reference page. Part 1: Introduction In this section of the paper, you will begin with your ethical question, introduce the topic and paper, and close with a thesis statement. The ethical question may be the same as your Week 3 written assignment (“Applying an Ethical Theory”) or a revised version of it. The introduction should be revised in a way that reflects your additional thinking on the issue and question. End this section with a thesis statement that states your position on the issue (the answer to the ethical question you believe is strongest) and provides a brief summary of the main ideas you will be presenting in the paper. Please see the assignment guidance for examples of thesis statements. Place the introduction under the Part 1: Introduction heading.   Part 2: Ethical Argument In this section of the paper, you will present the strongest argument you can in support of the position you have stated in your introduction. This will be similar to the “supporting reasons” you offered in the first assignment; however, this argument should reflect your research into the key ethical issues that need to be identified and addressed, the arguments on different sides of this problem, and the theories of moral reasoning we have studied in the class (you will discuss the specific details and implications of the moral theories in the next two sections). You can think of this as a summary of the main argument you would give if you were an attorney trying to convince a jury of your position. Place this information under the Part 2: Ethical Argument heading.   Part 3: Explanation and Defense In this section, you will explain and defend your argument by drawing on the moral theory that aligns most closely with the argument you presented in Part 2. This may be the same theory you discussed in your second assignment, but it may also be a different theory. You must first explain the theory in general terms similar to how you explained a theory in your second assignment, including a brief account of the historical background of the theory and the philosopher(s) associated with it and general overview of the core moral ideal or principle of the theory, including the way it guides and constrains moral reasoning. You should then clearly show how your argument represents an application of that form of moral reasoning. In other words, if the argument you present in Part 2 is utilitarian, deontological, or virtue-based (teleological), you will want to explain utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics in general terms, then explain how your argument from Part 2 reflects or draws upon the core principles and values of that theory. Please refer to the Week 3 assignment instructions for directions on how to explain and apply the moral theory. Place this section under the Part 3: Explanation and Defense heading.   Part 4: Objection and Response In this section of the paper, you will present the strongest objection you can to your argument, and briefly defend that objection by appealing to a different ethical theory than the one you focused on in Part 3. Briefly explain the core moral ideal or principle of the theory and how that could be the basis of an objection to your argument. For instance, if you explained and defended your own argument by applying the principles of virtue ethics, you could raise an objection from the perspective of utilitarianism by briefly explaining the core utilitarian principle and how applying that principle could lead someone to a different conclusion than the one you are defending. Next, you should respond to the objection by explaining why it is not strong enough to undermine the main argument in defense of your position. See the assignment guidance for suggestions on how to effectively respond to the objection. Place this section under the Part 4: Objection and Response heading.   Part 5: Conclusion In this section of the paper, provide a summary of what you have done in the paper by briefly describing what you accomplished in each of the above sections. Place this section under the Part 5: Conclusion heading. In your paper, Introduce the topic and paper. Provide a thesis statement. Present an argument in support of the position. Defend the argument by explaining and applying the ethical theory that most closely aligns with the argument. Present an objection to the argument by appealing to a different ethical theory. Respond to the objection. Provide a conclusion that describes what was accomplished in each of the sections of the paper.

Please read the attachment for more details. TOPIC:  COVID-19’s impact in the United States and international development organizations  PAPER REQUIREMENTS: Structure of ideas and arguments, grammar and mechanics of writing, and proper APA/Chicago citation. There are five (5) sections to the integrated essay which you will write: an introduction, a theory section, a methods section, a practice section, and a conclusion. Approximately 27 pages is an expected length, plus references.   Write an essay showing that you can connect theory, research and practice. You may focus your approach on any level of conflict (interpersonal, organizational, or international) you are most confident with.  This question has three integral parts that address theoretical analysis, research and practice. The first part is focused on analyzing and understanding the conflict and includes both theory and research elements. Provide the context for the case analysis and then present three fully explained relevant theories that are useful in this case. Include an explanation of the theories you have chosen and why they help us understand the conflict. Cite major conflict analysis and resolution theorists and thinkers in the field regarding those theories and connect the substance of the theory to specifics of the conflict.

Write an essay (minimum of 1000 words), comparing and contrasting deontology and consequentialism by: Summarizing each theory and provide examples representing each theory. Analyzing the pros and cons of each theory. Evaluating each theory (here you should argue which theory do you think is better and why). Make sure to include sources in a “Works Cited” page

research potential issues with the use of electronic medical records? Discuss the issues and define the problems. Provide applicable prevention tips to the issues. Finally, in your opinion, do you think that these issues can be 100% eliminated? Why or why not.