Ethics Paper Assignment
Format:
Size 11 Arial font
1” margins
Single space with double spacing between paragraphs
The body of the paper must not exceed two pages in length. If you must go to a 3rd page for references, that is okay.
You paper should contain the following:
I. Introduction
Your introduction has a dual purpose: to indicate both the premise of the scenario and to state your position; as well as to arouse your reader’s interest in what you have to say.
II. Present Your Position /Argument ?You should have at least two points as part of your argument for your position on the assigned scenario for this paper. [In the actual debate, you may have 4-6 points, but for this paper choose two of your strongest points.]
III. Apply ethical principles addressed in class ?When writing your two strong points as part of your argument for your position, you need to incorporate at least three ethical principles taught in class. [Note: if you opt to use non-maleficence then do not use beneficence unless there is a strong separation in how these principles are being used to support your points. Explained in class.]
IV. Conclusion ?
The simplest and most basic conclusion is one that restates the premise of the scenario and your position in one paragraph, using different words to help reinforce the implications of your argument/position.
V. References
Be sure to cite any resources you use to support your position.
Four Principles Approach
? Respect for autonomy
? Beneficence
? Non-maleficence
? Justice

Autonomy—is to respect the patient or individuals right to make decisions for oneself. To be autonomous requires the individual to have the capacity to deliberate a plan of action and to put that plan into action. This is difficult when the patient is comatose or incompetent due to age or mental health particularly as it relates to decisions requiring informed consent.
Beneficence—provide good…where the good outweighs the risks. Risk-benefit analysis must occur, and the risk part of the equation is the non-maleficence part where the goal is to do no harm or at least to make decisions where the benefit outweighs the risk.
Beneficence must overlap with autonomy—because the patient’s opinion is not always the same as the healthcare providers.
Justice addresses the issue of distribution of healthcare given scare or costly resources. At it’s core is a fundamental question: is healthcare a universal right? If not, then how are we to provide care to those who cannot afford it; and, if yes, to what level of care do we provide and how do we afford it for all?