Common Morality Case Application
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Kentucky *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
SW 625
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by MegaRainFalcon32
Common Morality Case Application Outline Worksheet
Apply the common morality framework as you reason through the provided case using this worksheet. Be sure to include your reasoning (the ‘why’) for each of your answers. A simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ is insufficient. First
: Determine the person to whom the social worker owes a moral obligation in the case. Why? Consider this person as you review the case. Write that person’s name here: Melinda, because her adoption is the reason the family is seeking therapy. Second
: Determine what the ethical dilemma is in order to determine the two sides of the dilemma. Use those sides (Side 1 and Side 2 below) as you complete the worksheet. Side 1: Terry would like for Melinda to attend the birthday party to meet her birth-
mother, Corinna. Side 2: Jean doesn’t want Melinda to meet her-birth mother or have any contact with her birth-mother due to the belief that she is a bad influence. Third
: Review the case using this worksheet that outlines the common morality framework. Use the common morality handout that details the framework and identifies the moral rules, the harms, and the benefits. You must use that terminology as you work through the dilemma, and this is the reason the ‘why’ for each answer is essential. Fourth
: You must come up with a comprehensive answer to the ethical dilemma once you have reviewed the case. After all, that is the whole point of the framework! Use the facts uncovered via Step 1 and the answers to Step 2 as you formulate the specific answer to the ethical dilemma. STEP 1: Review the Morally Relevant Features (MRFs) for both sides of the ethical dilemma. This is the fact-
collection portion of the framework.
MRF 1: What moral rules are Side 1
Do not cause pain: Corinna could possibly harm Melinda emotionally or even physically.
Side 2
Do not cause pain, do not deprive of freedom, do not deprive of pleasure, do not deceive, keep your promise, obey the law, do your duty.
MRF 2: What common morality harms are avoided
and prevented
and caused
? Why? Side 2
Prevented: Do not cause pain – potential risk of Melinda suffering due to being disappointed by Corinna.
Caused: Prevented: Pain, loss of pleasure, loss of freedom due to the emotional pain of not meeting her mother and not having a say in the matter.
Side 1 Prevented: Pain, loss of pleasure, loss of freedom due to the emotional pain of not meeting her mother and not having a choice in the matter.
Caused
: Do not cause pain – potential risk of Melinda suffering due to being disappointed by Corinna.
MRF 3: What are the desires and beliefs of the person toward whom the moral rule
is being violated?
Side 1
Melinda desires to meet her birth-
mother and believes she should be allowed to meet her.
Side 2 Melinda desires to meet her birth-
mother and believes she should be allowed to meet her.
MRF 4: Do you (the social worker) have a relationship with the person toward whom you
are thinking about violating moral rules that means you have a duty to violate those rules without that person’s consent?
Why?
Side 1
No, morality is not based on who you have a relationship with, and there is not much risk of harm because Terry and Jean can also attend the party.
Side 2
No, there is not much risk of harm because Terry and Jean can also attend the party.
MRF 5: What common morality benefits are being promoted by this moral rule
violation/action?
Why?
Side 1
Freedom, ability, and pleasure – the freedom and ability to meet Corinna satisfies Melinda’s desire bringing her pleasure.
Side 2
Pleasure – because Jean believes that Melinda will probably be happier or better off not meeting her birth-mother.
MRFs 6 & 7: Are unjustified/weakly justified violations of moral rules being prevented or punished? Why?
Side 1 & Side 2
: No rules are being broken to punish anyone, nor are any rules being broken to prevent someone else from breaking a rule. These two morally relevant features are not applicable in this case because this case does not take place in a criminal justice setting where they are most likely to be applicable. MRF 8: Are there any alternative actions (i.e., community resources) or policies that exist and can be implemented to mitigate harms and rule violations? (Really be creative here! Brainstorm! This is where
social workers shine!)
Side 2
Terry and Jean can meet with Corinna alone first to ease Jean’s anxiety, or have Melinda write letters, text, or social media to get to know Corinna better then utilize FaceTime/Zoom for the first few meetings.
Side 1
Terry, Jean, and Melinda can meet with
Corinna with a social worker present, attend an adoption support group together, request for Corinna to take a drug test, or even request the adoption
agency supervise their first interaction.
MRF 9: Are the moral rule violations being done intentionally or
knowingly?
Why?
Side 2
Jean is aware of the moral rule violations, as the adoption agreement was signed by both adoptive parents. Jean is aware of Melinda’s desire to meet Corinna but may not consider the suffering this could bring Melinda. Side 1
Terry is aware that there is a potential for harm but thinks Melinda is old enough to meet Corinna.
MRF 10: Is this an emergency situation that no person likely plans to be in? Why?
Side 1
No, Melinda’s safety is not at risk by keeping her away from Corinna.
Side 1
No, Terry and Jean can always be present for Melinda during meetings.
STEP 2: Answer all 3 questions for both sides of the ethical dilemma. This is the portion
of the framework that examines whether the moral rule violation/action is publicly allowed. In other words, this step is determining whether any rational, impartial person
would hold that the moral rule violation/action is publicly allowed.
Remember that this section is based on societal norms and ideas of morality, not on our own biased ideas. Moral rule violations/actions can be morally permissible even if we would not take the action for ourselves or for those about whom we care, as long as
they align with broadly held societal norms and ideas. Use the facts from Step 1 to Question 1: Must be RATIONAL to allow the violation/action
: Would rational people agree that this action should be taken in
these circumstances?
Why?
Side 2
While Jean’s fears are rational, to act on them is not. Jean signed a legal document agreeing to allow them to meet in person, and not following through could cause legal Side 1
Yes, because there is hardly any risk of harm to Melinda and they legally agreed to allow Corinna to have face-
to-face time.
Question 2: Must be IMPARTIAL to allow the violation/action
: Could everyone else in a similar
circumstance do this too?
Why?
Side 1
No, because it is not what is best for Melinda, they agreed to allow face-to-
face time with Corinna, and multiple moral rules are broken by this action.
Side 1
Yes, because there is a very low risk of harm to the child, and it is what they promised to do in order to adopt Melinda and will satisfy many moral rules.
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
Question 3: Must be PUBLICLY ALLOWED to allow the violation/action
: Could everyone know that this violation can and will occur in these circumstances? Why?
Side 1
No, because the harms outweigh the benefits of keeping Melinda away from Corinna even though some parents may sympathize with her rationale.
Side 1
Yes, because they had a written agreement, and there is little possibility
of harm to Melinda.
What is the answer to this dilemma? Be specific. Use facts from Step 1 & information from Step 2 to justify
your answer. Ethical Dilemma Answer The answer to this dilemma is to recommend they allow Melinda to go to the birthday party because the benefits outweigh the harms from keeping her away from her birth-mother. Both Jean and Terry can (and probably will) attend the event in case Corinna begins to show
signs of harming Melinda in any way and can remove Melinda as soon as they feel uncomfortable. While there are moral rules that are being violated on both sides, there are more moral rules being broken that would cause harm to Miranda by keeping them apart, many of which will negatively impact her emotional development. As previously mentioned, many people (especially parents) may sympathize with Jean’s desire to keep Miranda away from Corinna to protect her, the rational public would likely agree with Terry and permit Miranda to attend the party.