HSS 4107 Final Exam questions n
correct answers A+ rated
According to James Rachels, explain how Jack Palance's Sandwich Scenario challenges absolute moral
distinctions, particularly between acts of commission and omission. - correct answer ✔✔- you are
responsible for your omissions if you could have easily saved someone (could have easily saved that child
by giving him a sandwich, but by your acts of omission, you allowed the child to die)
- you cannot used euphemism "nature took its course" because you could have saved him
- acts of omission, passively killing
According to James Rachels, explain how the Smith & Jones Bathtub Scenario challenges absolute moral
distinctions, particularly between acts of commission and omission. - correct answer ✔✔You can be evil
through both passive & active means, there is no absolute moral distinction between commission and
omission. You can also be compassionate and ethical through both means.
- either method which lead to the death of that child makes you morally responsible
According to Peter Signer, how did the case of Tony Bland begin a shift toward the quality of life ethos? -
correct answer ✔✔1) Forced Justices to make quality of life decisions on a patient. The traditional
sanctity of life does not allow for trade-offs. From now on, in British court cases, they will make QoL
decisions, even if they do not use positive acts. By pulling food and water (omissions), they were
admitting that he had no infinite value or quality of life.
2) Ending the life of an innocent human being. He was not a criminal on death row. They were admitting
that he had no QoL, allowed his life to end by omission, and admitted that this would speed up his
death.
What is significant in the New Jersey Supreme Court case (In re Quinlan: 1975): findings concerning acts
of omission? - correct answer ✔✔- No omissions or commissions were allowed
- recognized the emergence of QSoL (acts of omission may be ethical)
- permitting acts of omission (pulling respirator) and rejecting as legally viable acts of commission would
be a balanced approach and it respects the Judeo-Christian scripture
, - Court admits that it is reasonable to withdraw treatment because there is no possible return to
cognitive life (QoL judgement)
- pulling respirator was speeding up death, but it was not the omission causing death, it was the disease
What is significant in the Nancy Cruzan (Missouri Supreme Court in Cruzan v. Harmon: 1988) concerning
acts of omission? - correct answer ✔✔-Deciding between acts of omissions
- was only allowed to remove extraordinary treatment (ventilator) and not ordinary/natural (PEG tube)
- Did not want to be part of causal chain if cause of death was starvation/dehydration
What is significant in Justice Blackmar's opinion in dissent concerning acts of omission? - correct answer
✔✔- SoL is not absolute, even in Missouri (capital punishment)
- need to be realistic, rather than absolute. Cannot ignore contingencies, depends on context.
What is significant in the Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health (Supreme Court of the
United States: 1990) concerning acts of omission? - correct answer ✔✔- court stated that there must be
clear and convincing evidence to show that the patient would have wanted this.
- court allowed feeding tube to be removed
- paradigm was shifting, 89% of Missourians would have wanted the same
Using a formula, what does the "slippery slope" mean, generally speaking? - correct answer ✔✔If action
X is morally permissible and we allow action X, through a small series of steps Y, circumstance Z will
occur. Circumstance Z is immoral so we a=cannot allow action X to occur. (X —> Y —> Z)
What are the two (2) specific tenets of a "slippery slope" thesis? - correct answer ✔✔1) Causal premise
2) Normative premise
Causal Premise of slippery slope argument - correct answer ✔✔Can prove that X will lead to Y which will
lead to Z
Normative Premise of slippery slope argument - correct answer ✔✔Can prove that when you end up
with circumstance Z, it is reckless and destabilizing
correct answers A+ rated
According to James Rachels, explain how Jack Palance's Sandwich Scenario challenges absolute moral
distinctions, particularly between acts of commission and omission. - correct answer ✔✔- you are
responsible for your omissions if you could have easily saved someone (could have easily saved that child
by giving him a sandwich, but by your acts of omission, you allowed the child to die)
- you cannot used euphemism "nature took its course" because you could have saved him
- acts of omission, passively killing
According to James Rachels, explain how the Smith & Jones Bathtub Scenario challenges absolute moral
distinctions, particularly between acts of commission and omission. - correct answer ✔✔You can be evil
through both passive & active means, there is no absolute moral distinction between commission and
omission. You can also be compassionate and ethical through both means.
- either method which lead to the death of that child makes you morally responsible
According to Peter Signer, how did the case of Tony Bland begin a shift toward the quality of life ethos? -
correct answer ✔✔1) Forced Justices to make quality of life decisions on a patient. The traditional
sanctity of life does not allow for trade-offs. From now on, in British court cases, they will make QoL
decisions, even if they do not use positive acts. By pulling food and water (omissions), they were
admitting that he had no infinite value or quality of life.
2) Ending the life of an innocent human being. He was not a criminal on death row. They were admitting
that he had no QoL, allowed his life to end by omission, and admitted that this would speed up his
death.
What is significant in the New Jersey Supreme Court case (In re Quinlan: 1975): findings concerning acts
of omission? - correct answer ✔✔- No omissions or commissions were allowed
- recognized the emergence of QSoL (acts of omission may be ethical)
- permitting acts of omission (pulling respirator) and rejecting as legally viable acts of commission would
be a balanced approach and it respects the Judeo-Christian scripture
, - Court admits that it is reasonable to withdraw treatment because there is no possible return to
cognitive life (QoL judgement)
- pulling respirator was speeding up death, but it was not the omission causing death, it was the disease
What is significant in the Nancy Cruzan (Missouri Supreme Court in Cruzan v. Harmon: 1988) concerning
acts of omission? - correct answer ✔✔-Deciding between acts of omissions
- was only allowed to remove extraordinary treatment (ventilator) and not ordinary/natural (PEG tube)
- Did not want to be part of causal chain if cause of death was starvation/dehydration
What is significant in Justice Blackmar's opinion in dissent concerning acts of omission? - correct answer
✔✔- SoL is not absolute, even in Missouri (capital punishment)
- need to be realistic, rather than absolute. Cannot ignore contingencies, depends on context.
What is significant in the Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health (Supreme Court of the
United States: 1990) concerning acts of omission? - correct answer ✔✔- court stated that there must be
clear and convincing evidence to show that the patient would have wanted this.
- court allowed feeding tube to be removed
- paradigm was shifting, 89% of Missourians would have wanted the same
Using a formula, what does the "slippery slope" mean, generally speaking? - correct answer ✔✔If action
X is morally permissible and we allow action X, through a small series of steps Y, circumstance Z will
occur. Circumstance Z is immoral so we a=cannot allow action X to occur. (X —> Y —> Z)
What are the two (2) specific tenets of a "slippery slope" thesis? - correct answer ✔✔1) Causal premise
2) Normative premise
Causal Premise of slippery slope argument - correct answer ✔✔Can prove that X will lead to Y which will
lead to Z
Normative Premise of slippery slope argument - correct answer ✔✔Can prove that when you end up
with circumstance Z, it is reckless and destabilizing
