CILS 241 Tutorial 2(Wk3) Law, Morals, Ethics and Values
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Bond University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
13-115
Subject
Law
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
5
Uploaded by caitlindayt
Contemporary Issues in Law and Society
WEEK 3 – TUTORIAL 2
Topic 2: Law, Morals, Ethics and Values
Please review Lecture 2.
The Hart v Devlin Debate:
If you would like a better understanding of the views of Lord Devlin and Professor Hart regarding
morality and the law, please watch this: The Hart v Devlin Debate Encore: “The Law Should Reflect
Public Morality.” This was presented by Monash University Faculty of Law. Speaking for Prof. Hart in
the negative: The Hon. Michael Kirby, former judge of the High Court of Australia: https://youtu.be/qWrhEARupCg?si=DXigUzNEpU71IedB
Class reading
Lord Patrick Devlin, ‘Morals and the Criminal Law’ in The Enforcement of Morals
(Oxford
University Press, 1965) Chapter I:
https://bond.leganto.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/delivery/61BOND_INST:BOND/
1292059560002381?lang=en&viewerServiceCode=AlmaViewer
Hugh Mackay, ‘Where do our values spring from?’ in Right & Wrong: How to Decide for
Yourself
(Hodder, 2004) Chapter 3:
https://bond.leganto.exlibrisgroup.com/leganto/readinglist/citation/7076691510002381?auth=SAML
Discussion questions
1.
Most importantly, did you eat the cabin boy?!
2.
What are the problems identified by Hugh Mackay with the ‘golden rule’? 3.
Do you agree with Hugh Mackay’s views regarding regulation? 4.
What is the difference between morals and ethics? Provide two examples of each.
5.
A woman was in hospital having her first child by caesarean under general anesthetic. During
the operation, the doctor identified a serious health condition, which meant falling pregnant
in the future would cause her great harm. Further, the doctor felt that any additional
operation on her abdomen and reproductive organs would be life-threatening. The doctor,
therefore, decided to tie her fallopian tubes to prevent any further pregnancies (and risk to
her life) without her consent. Was this the correct decision made by the doctor? (Hint: here,
we are distinguishing between morals and ethics). 6. Lord Devlin:
(a)
Based on the readings, what is the difference between public and private
morality?
(b)
Why does the Wolfenden Report require special circumstances be shown to
justify intervention by the law? Does Lord Devlin agree with this approach?
7.
Do you agree with R v Brown's
majority or dissenting judges? Be prepared to explain your
position.
Most importantly, did you eat the cabin boy?!
This question seems to be a humorous reference to a historical incident involving cannibalism aboard a ship. It's likely meant to break the ice and engage participants in a light-hearted manner before delving into more serious topics.
What are the problems identified by Hugh Mackay with the ‘golden rule’?
Hugh Mackay identifies several problems with the 'golden rule,' including its susceptibility to subjective interpretation, its contradiction with human instincts for revenge, and its pragmatic reinterpretation by individuals, which may lead to self-serving behavior rather than genuine empathy and compassion.
Do you agree with Hugh Mackay’s views regarding regulation?
Without specific details on Mackay's views regarding regulation, it's challenging to provide a definitive answer. However, opinions on regulation often vary based on the context and the specific regulations being discussed. Mackay's views on regulation would need to be examined in their specific context to form an opinion.
What is the difference between morals and ethics? Provide two examples of each.
Morals refer to individual beliefs about right and wrong behavior, often influenced by cultural, religious, or personal values. Ethics, on the other hand, are broader principles that guide behavior within a particular context or profession, often based on philosophical reasoning. Examples:
Morals: Belief in honesty as a virtue; condemnation of stealing.
Ethics: Medical ethics guiding decisions about patient care; journalistic ethics regarding truthfulness and impartiality.
Was the doctor's decision to tie the woman's fallopian tubes without her consent correct?
This scenario raises complex ethical questions about autonomy, informed consent, and medical paternalism. While the doctor may have acted based on medical necessity and concern for the woman's health, the decision
to perform such a procedure without consent raises ethical concerns regarding patient autonomy and the right
to make decisions about one's own body.
Lord Devlin:
(a) Difference between public and private morality: Public morality refers to the moral standards that society as a whole accepts and expects individuals to adhere to in public life, while private morality pertains to individual beliefs and values that guide personal behavior.
(b) Wolfenden Report and Lord Devlin's views: The Wolfenden Report suggested that the law should not intervene in private, consensual adult behavior unless there were compelling reasons to do so. Lord Devlin disagreed with this approach, arguing that the law has a legitimate role in upholding public morality and preventing behavior deemed harmful to society.
Do you agree with R v Brown's majority or dissenting judges?
This question refers to a legal case involving consensual sadomasochistic activities. Opinions on this case often vary based on interpretations of consent, harm, and the proper role of the law in regulating private behavior. It
would be essential to examine the arguments presented by both the majority and dissenting judges before forming an opinion.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
8.