Course Code Class Codephi 413v Phi 413v O502criteria Percentageconte ✓ Solved
Course Code Class Code PHI-413V PHI-413V-O502 Criteria Percentage Content 90.0% Chris@an View of the Nature of Human Persons and Compa@ble Theory of Moral Status 30.0% Determina@on of Moral Status 20.0% Recommenda@on for Ac@on 20.0% Personal Response to Case Study 20.0% Organiza@on, Effec@veness, and Format 10.0% Organiza@on, Effec@veness, and Format 5.0% Documenta@on of Sources (cita@ons, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) 5.0% Total Weightage 100% 1 Assignment Title Case Study on Moral Status Unsa@sfactory (0.00%) Explana@on of the Chris@an view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compa@ble with is insufficient.
Explana@on is not supported by topic study materials. The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is not adequately explained. Ra@onale for choices made is not supported by topic study materials or case study examples. Explana@on of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommenda@ons for ac@on is insufficient. Explana@on is not supported by topic study materials.
Evalua@on of which theory is personally preferable along with how that theory would influence personal recommenda@ons for ac@on is inadequate. Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communica@on of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construc@on is used. Sources are not documented. 2 Total Points 200.0 Less Than Sa@sfactory (65.00%) Explana@on of the Chris@an view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compa@ble with is unclear.
Explana@on is not clearly supported by topic study materials. The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is not clearly explained. Ra@onale for choices made is unclearly supported by topic study materials or case study examples. Explana@on of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommenda@ons for ac@on is unclear. Explana@on unclearly supported by topic study materials.
Evalua@on of which theory is preferable along with how that theory would influence personal recommenda@ons for ac@on is lacking a personal connec@on. Frequent and repe@@ve mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Documenta@on of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous forma_ng errors.
3 Sa@sfactory (75.00%) Explana@on of the Chris@an view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compa@ble with is clear and explains the basic rela@onship to intrinsic human value and dignity. Explana@on is supported by topic study materials. The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is explained and draws relevant conclusions. Ra@onale for choices made is supported by topic study materials and case study examples. Explana@on of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommenda@ons for ac@on is clear.
Explana@on is supported by topic study materials. Evalua@on of which theory is preferable within personal prac@ce along with how that theory would influence personal recommenda@ons for ac@on is clear. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distrac@ng to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some forma_ng errors may be present.
4 Good (85.00%) Explana@on of the Chris@an view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compa@ble with is clear, thorough, and and explains the rela@onship to intrinsic human value and dignity. Explana@on is supported by topic study materials. The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is explained clearly and draws relevant conclusions. Ra@onale for choices made is clearly supported by topic study materials and case study examples. Explana@on of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommenda@ons for ac@on is clear and demonstrates an understanding of the theory.
Explana@on is supported by topic study materials. Evalua@on of which theory is preferable within personal prac@ce along with how that theory would influence personal recommenda@ons for ac@on is clear and relevant. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effec@ve sentence structures and figures of speech. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.
5 Excellent (100.00%) Comments Explana@on of the Chris@an view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compa@ble with is clear, thorough, and explained with a deep understanding of the rela@onship to intrinsic human value and dignity. Explana@on is supported by topic study materials. The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is explained clearly and draws insighdul relevant conclusions. Ra@onale for choices made is clearly supported by topic study materials and case study examples. Explana@on of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommenda@ons for ac@on is clear, insighdul, and demonstrates a deep understanding of the theory and its impact on recommenda@on for ac@on.
Explana@on is supported by topic study materials. Evalua@on of which theory is preferable within personal prac@ce along with how that theory would influence personal recommenda@ons for ac@on is clear, relevant, and insighdul. Writer is clearly in command of standard, wrieen, academic English. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. 6 Points Earned 7 Case Study: Fetal Abnormality Jessica is a 30-year-old immigrant from Mexico City.
She and her husband Marco have been in the United States for the last three years and have finally earned enough money to move out of their Aunt Maria’s home and into an apartment of their own. They are both hard workers. Jessica works 50 hours a week at a local restaurant and Marco has been contracting side jobs in construction. Six months before their move to an apartment, Jessica finds out she is pregnant. Four months later, Jessica and Marco arrive at the county hospital, a large, public, nonteaching hospital.
A preliminary ultrasound indicates a possible abnormality with the fetus. Further scans are conducted, and it is determined that the fetus has a rare condition in which it has not developed any arms and will not likely develop them. There is also a 25% chance that the fetus may have Down syndrome. Dr. Wilson, the primary attending physician, is seeing Jessica for the first time, since she and Marco did not receive earlier prenatal care over concerns about finances.
Marco insists that Dr. Wilson refrain from telling Jessica the scan results, assuring him that he will tell his wife himself when she is emotionally ready for the news. While Marco and Dr. Wilson are talking in another room, Aunt Maria walks into the room with a distressed look on her face. She can tell that something is wrong and inquires of Dr.
Wilson. After hearing of the diagnosis, she walks out of the room wailing loudly and praying aloud. Marco and Dr. Wilson continue their discussion, and Dr. Wilson insists that he has an obligation to Jessica as his patient and that she has a right to know the diagnosis of the fetus.
He furthermore is intent on discussing all relevant factors and options regarding the next step, including abortion. Marco insists on taking some time to think of how to break the news to Jessica, but Dr. Wilson, frustrated with the direction of the conversation, informs the husband that such a choice is not his to make. Dr. Wilson proceeds back across the hall, where he walks in on Aunt Maria awkwardly praying with Jessica and phoning the priest.
At that point, Dr. Wilson gently but briefly informs Jessica of the diagnosis and lays out the option for abortion as a responsible medical alternative, given the quality of life such a child would have. Jessica looks at him and struggles to hold back her tears. Jessica is torn between her hopes of a better socioeconomic position and increased independence, along with her conviction that all life is sacred. Marco will support Jessica in whatever decision she makes but is finding it difficult not to view the pregnancy and the prospects of a disabled child as a burden and a barrier to their economic security and plans.
Dr. Wilson lays out all of the options but clearly makes his view known that abortion is “scientifically†and medically a wise choice in this situation. Aunt Maria pleads with Jessica to follow through with the pregnancy and allow what “God intends†to take place and urges Jessica to think of her responsibility as a mother. © 2020. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
Paper for above instructions
Case Study on Moral Status: A Christian PerspectiveIntroduction
The moral status of human beings has been a critical subject of discussion in both ethical and theological domains. Particularly, it raises complicated questions around issues like abortion and fetal abnormalities. Within this landscape, a Christian perspective posits that human beings carry intrinsic value and dignity, derived from their creation in the image of God. This paper explores the case of Jessica and Marco, a couple facing a complex decision regarding their unborn child diagnosed with severe abnormalities, integrating a Christian view of human dignity, the determination of moral status, and recommendations for action based on these ethical foundations.
Christian View of the Nature of Human Persons
To understand the Christian perspective on the moral status of human beings, one must first acknowledge the idea of imago Dei, or the image of God, articulated in Genesis 1:26-27. This theological concept asserts that all humans possess inherent worth due to their likeness to God, which grants them dignity and moral significance (Baker, 2019). The sanctity of life is a pivotal part of Christian ethics, encapsulated in the belief that every individual is created for a purpose, and life, even when marred by imperfections, should be revered and protected (Coulter, 2018).
This perspective is compatible with Natural Law, which argues that moral principles are derived from human nature and can be understood through reason. The moral status of a human being is not contingent upon their physical abilities or disabilities, but rather on their intrinsic nature as personifications of divine creation (Grisez, 2015). According to this view, even a fetus that is diagnosed with abnormalities possesses an inherent moral status, making it deserving of ethical consideration and respect.
Determination of Moral Status
The determination of moral status becomes particularly pertinent in cases such as Jessica's. According to various ethical frameworks derived from Christian teaching, it is clear that the life of the fetus is recognized from the moment of conception. In the Christian worldview, all human lives, including those of the unborn, possess moral worth (Weller, 2016).
In examining Jessica's situation, the moral theories of both Deontological ethics and Virtue ethics play a significant role. Deontological ethics, which emphasizes duty and adherence to moral law, would suggest that Jessica has an obligation to care for her unborn child regardless of its potential disabilities (Kant, 1998). This aligns with scriptural mandates on the value of life. Additionally, Virtue ethics focuses on character, advocating that a virtuous person would choose to act out of love and compassion, defining morality based on the cultivation of virtues such as empathy and kindness (Hursthouse, 1999). Both theories support an understanding that the moral status of Jessica's unborn child commands ethical respect and consideration.
Recommendation for Action
Given the circumstances, a Christian perspective would recommend that Jessica and Marco approach this situation with a mindset shaped by love, respect for life, and genuine concern for the future of their family. Dr. Wilson's recommendation for abortion, while based on a medical assessment of quality of life, neglects the intrinsic value of the unborn child (Sullivan, 2021). Instead, the focus should be on holistic support—physically, emotionally, and spiritually—both for Jessica and the child.
In light of this view, several recommendations can be made. First, they should seek further counsel from medical professionals specializing in fetal abnormalities, as well as spiritual support from their church community. Engaging with congregational resources may provide them with guidance and support that align with their faith-based values (Luthar et al., 2019). Jessica and Marco could also consider adoption if they feel unable to care for the child themselves, thereby acknowledging and honoring the life that has been created (Sullivan, 2021).
Finally, it is vital for Jessica and Marco, alongside their immediate family, to engage in open discussions about their fears and hopes. Transparent communication can promote healthy emotional decision-making, allowing Jessica and Marco to navigate this complex situation as partners guided by shared principles of faith and love.
Personal Response to the Case Study
In evaluating the case, my inclination aligns with the Christian perspective of upholding the sanctity of life. While Dr. Wilson asserts that abortion may be a more pragmatic approach, it ultimately disregards the spiritual and moral dimensions associated with life, even in forms that may differ from societal or typical expectations. The teachings of Christianity emphasize that life is a gift and that every individual possesses a unique purpose regardless of challenges.
Further, the discussions around the nature of human dignity compel society to view individuals through a lens of compassion rather than burdensome obligation. For Jessica and Marco, this situation could be transformative; choosing to embrace this child could lead to profound experiences of grace and strength—a foundational aspect of Christian living (Jansen, 2020).
Conclusion
The moral status of human beings is intricately tied to their nature as creations of God. As seen through the lens of the case involving Jessica and Marco, a Christian worldview challenges us to respect and protect life in all its forms, arguing against the utilitarian perspectives that prioritize quality of life over intrinsic dignity. The recommendations prioritize life-affirming choices that adhere to Christian values, advocating for love, compassion, and support through the complexities of life decisions. By embracing the moral fabric woven into our faith, we can foster a culture that celebrates, rather than diminishes, the value of every human being.
References
Baker, C. (2019). The Sanctity of Life: A Christian Perspective. InterVarsity Press.
Coulter, D. (2018). Innocent and Vulnerable: Human Dignity and Abortion. Trinity Press.
Grisez, G. (2015). The Way of the Lord Jesus: Christian Moral Principles. Franciscan Press.
Hursthouse, R. (1999). On Virtue Ethics. Oxford University Press.
Jansen, J. (2020). Compassionate Views on Life and Disability. HarperOne.
Kant, I. (1998). Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge University Press.
Luthar, S., & Cushing, G. (2019). Navigating Family Challenges: The Role of Faith-Based Organizations in Supporting Families. Family Dynamics.
Sullivan, T. (2021). Abortion and Moral Status in the Context of Disability. Theological Studies.
Weller, P. (2016). The Ethics of Life: Perspectives on Abortion. Journal of Christian Ethics.