The debate over whether it is ethical to allow transgender people to be publicly accepted in every aspect always seems to be changing. President Trump used to be for allowing these people equal rights in public, but now seems to be shifting his views. This article is a story about a girl named Hannah who was born a male, and her journey through entering the transgender world.
Hannah decided very early on in her life, at about age 14 to be exact, that she wanted to be a girl. The doctors then placed a puberty-blocking implant inside of her to start this process. Studies show that if we accept these people and their decision to change what type of gender they are, then we will lower suicide and depression rates dramatically. This has been the main reason that doctors and facilities have made these procedures more well known and support them.
In Universities, it is now mandatory to incorporate these lectures and studies in class, because it is an up and coming practice that will begin to become more popular as people start to open up to the idea of change. In many places, it was frowned upon and considered unethical up until this point, so lots of people aren’t happy with this new change in curriculum or society.
I believe that not allowing this practice is unethical. Mainly, because if someone is willing to open up about their sexuality and want to make this change, we should have the understanding and willingness to not judge their decision. It is morally wrong to be unaccepting of this change when it can make them the happiest they’ve ever been, and decrease suicide and depression rates significantly. Mill’s Utilitarianism idea, also known as, the Greatest Happiness Principle, reminds us that the most important thing is the greatest overall happiness for the greatest amount of people. I believe that the greatest happiness will be achieved by allowing these people to make this decision without being judged, and others to be accepting as if they are 100% equal.
This article expresses the opinions in the recent debate over schools around the country being able to allow a drug over dose antidotes in their nurses office. Faculty argue that it is necessary in case of emergency especially due to the dramatic changes in kids now a days in relation to their involvement in drugs and alcohol. It is thought of like a defibrillator, in that it is very rarely used, but when necessary, it saves a life that otherwise could not have been saved. Many people are concerned that this is an issue that you cannot waste any time on, and if the student had to wait for an EMS service to arrive, they would most likely not be able to be revived.
It is argued on the reverse side, that we cannot allow our schools to carry this due to sending the wrong message to students, staff, and families, that the school involves itself in drug usage. This is a false acclimation because schools should be able to have these antidotes on hand in case of an emergency and unfortunately times are changing, so they need to adapt effectively in order to maintain the high standard of student health care importance in schools.
Many schools around America are participating in allowing antidotes to be kept in the nurses office. The State Department of Health in select states, allow a free kit to be provided to every school, containing two doses of antidote. They claim that they are going to be prepared no matter what, for the sake of the student; regardless of what other popular public opinions may be.
This matter relates very much so to the ethics of McFall in that maintaining our consistency among our moral beliefs and actions must stay constant no matter the extent of the situation. Many people may think that they would have the students best interest in mind when a health care emergency occurs, but very few would allow these antidotes to be accessible by schools. Its like saying that people believe its okay to have a defibrillator accessible in case of sudden arrest of the heart, but in case of a drug over dose we cannot have an antidote to save them because why? It’s the same concept. But since it is drug related, it immediately has a negative outlook. McFall states in the Olaf Principle “Some things we aren’t prepared to do, but must do.” This principle requires some of ones commitments to be unconditional, and I believe this is exactly what school faculty is living by when they consider the overall essential back up plan for students.
It is important to remain consistent in your believes regardless of the situation, and to consider maintaining our consistency in our actions as well. Allow this example to influence your perspective on necessary things we need to be prepared to have, even though it is placed in an education system. Times are changing, and people are changing. This is enough of a reason to make sure schools are provided with the best care in case of a life altering event taking place!
Over 1,000 health care organizations have had issues with health care breaches within the last few years, along with a massive amount of private data leaks. This is causing an ethical problem worldwide in regards to how things are being handled at this point. The data being stolen is as valuable as the social security numbers of many people, addresses, and other important, private health records.This article explains just how easy organizations make it to allow breaches, with almost 90% of all organizations having had at least one significant breach in the last few years. Therefore, individuals are taking the hit to this problem with about one third being directly breached by the release of their own personal information.
Breaches can occur by a number of ways, most commonly by unauthorized protecting storage apps, back up disks being stolen, and being hacked due to a weak password. Statistics say that about 500 records have been stolen containing high amounts of valuable information in the last few years.
This relates highly to ethical topics in many categories, but one I see most fitting, is the idea of a physicians duties to their patients. It is the job of the doctors and medical staff to ensure 100% of the files and data created for individuals are protected. This includes providing limited access to these files unless you are someone of high priority to the case, and access to these documents is necessary for proper care. Lots of documents created for these patients are easily access by others and this creates for untrustworthiness due to the high volume of potential users. If many people have access to these types of things, they will feel more able to exploit this information knowing there are lots of others who could have also done it.
So often we hear about these breaches, yet so little is done in return. These individuals who have been hacked and had personal information stolen, get little to no compensation for this. What are health care organizations going to start doing in order to prevent these things from happening? However they choose to act on this issue, it needs to be done immediately in order for individuals to feel safe and comfortable sharing personal information with their health care providers.
Have you ever thought about fertility being compared to gambling at a casino? This is what people are beginning to call fertility clinics due to their newest package deals. These clinics are providing families with the option of paying $20,000-$50,000 more than a single in vitro fertilization, in case the first trial fails. This deal allows women up to three tries to get pregnant if the first time fails, and if they don’t get pregnant their money is refunded.
These clinics provide this option, for the families who most likely will not get pregnant on their first try. But they also are doing this to make more money. According to many test trials done, 87% of woman had success with the implanted embryos the first try, so they lost the gamble (money wise). The physicians have admitted that the extra money made after a one time trial with success of one patient, helps cover the trials of others who take all three trials to get pregnant.
The question of whether this is ethical is very debatable. In my opinion, the way these clinics should be running their package deals, is maybe allowing a partial refund if they are able to get pregnant the first time; rather than their patients feeling totally ripped off. This is also an opinion suggested by people in the article. The families that pay extra and get lucky the first try do not believe it is right for these facilities to pocket the extra money, when they should be using it to provide for their new child. They feel it is unethical because they have already gone through so much heartbreak at this point, most likely due to miscarriages or other unfortunate events.
Personally, the main argument that comes to my mind in a situation like this, is Kant’s categorical imperative. If I were in a situation that made it so I couldn’t have children naturally, I would want the full support of the doctors to give me the best chance I had possible, at a fair price. If it took me all three times to get pregnant, I would be grateful of this opportunity to pay a little less. If it took me only one try though, I would feel it is fair to give some kind of refund as well.
I think these clinics provide awesome opportunities for families unable to have children on their own, but also need a little bit of work in making it a fair and patient-favoring process.
This article places the reader’s mind into the daily routine of a young girl who became paralyzed. She allows us to understand the extent of maintenance that is required in order for her to live a life as normal as possible. She became unable to walk due to a terrible vehicle crash she suffered while traveling to her high school track meet. Being the only member of the group who was injured, from there forward, she was recognized as an every day reminder of the incident. The team captains suddenly discouraged her from speaking to any new teammates, and her friends became nothing more than signatures on a get well card.
Disability became the last thing she would use as an excuse to explain an absence or a missed event. As a new student in college, she wanted the friends that she made to stick around; so she tried to do everything in her power to prove that she took her work seriously. To avoid labels, she also down played any improvements she made in physical therapy to sound as if her achievements were impressive and relatable to others progress.
Being accepted into Harvard, automatically had others judging her abilities and people referred to her as a “charity case”. No matter what she did to try and establish a normal life, she was constantly judged. She tried being silent and ignoring her disability in public as well as being straightforward and recognizing she was different; each had their own equal amount of disadvantages.
“Does spending so much time maintaining my body make me an inspiration, or a disability rights failure?”
Living with paralysis requires an enormous amount of willpower and energy everyday. No matter how hard a person works to perceive themselves as normal, they ultimately will never feel normal again. As long as the general public continue to evolve in communities filled with judgement and pitty, the lives of these specific individuals will cease to ever feel normal again.