HEP 102 five basic principles assignment
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Arizona State University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
102
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
Pages
2
Uploaded by valerievi2002
●
Consider
the five basic principles for moral common ground described in your
textbook.
●
Name
and briefly describe each of the five principles (you may take notes as
you review the PPT, or you may review this information in your text).
●
State
all principles you believe are at play in this case study. For example, if
you believe the principle of autonomy is relevant for discussion of this case
study, state that and write a few sentences describing how autonomy relates.
●
Describe
how two (or more) principles are in conflict in this situation.
●
Evaluate
how you believe the doctor should respond as well as the rationale
behind it in your initial discussion post.
●
Thiroux’s (1995) five basic principles that can apply to human morality:
The five basic principles for moral common ground are: value of life, goodness which has two
parallel principles of nonmaleficence and beneficence, justice which is subdivided into the two
areas of procedural and distributive, truth telling, and lastly, individual freedom (principle of
autonomy).
The principles that I believe are at play in Karen Olsen’s case are:
Justice:
Treating people fairly. Fairness in the distribution of health resources comes into play
at Dr Olsen’s hospital. There are health resources like wellness programs, including a positive
incentive.
Beneficence
: Doing good, being kind, and helping. Dr. Radner suggests Ms Olsen to
participate in the GetFit! Program which would help Ms. Olsen's well-being and health, to
prevent the development of full diabetes.
Non-maleficence
: Preventing and removing harm. Ms. Olsen says it would be difficult to
participate in the GetFit! Program as it interferes with her daily errands during lunch hours. Dr.
Radner must avoid causing harm to Ms. Olsen by considering negative consequences of
recommending a program that might not work for her.
Autonomy
: People having freedom to choose their own way of morality. Ms. Olsen has the right
to make decisions about her own health and wellness, which includes choosing the program
that fits her lifestyle.
Principles in conflict when looking at this case study are autonomy and beneficence. Ms. Olsen
wants to choose the Online education program that fits her schedule, but Dr. Radner believes
the GetFit! program would be more beneficial for her health. Dr. Radner should have a
conversation with Ms. Olsen to address her concerns and find a solution to both benefit her
preferences and health needs. Dr. Radnar could offer a compromise such as helping Ms. Olsen
fit the GetFit! Program into her daily routine by providing resources to manage her errands
better and have time for lunchtime walking.
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