,PLS3701 Assignment 2 (COMPLETE GUIDELINE)
Semester 1 2025 (872216) - DUE 29 April 2025;
100% TRUSTED Complete, trusted solutions and
explanations.
Multiple choice,assured excellence
Biomedical Ethics Is euthanasia, in the form of physician-
assisted dying, ethically distinct from withdrawing life-
sustaining treatment and allowing a patient to die? Critically
engage with this question by analysing key ethical principles,
such as autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence. Develop
a well-reasoned argument, drawing on philosophical
perspectives and relevant case studies. Business Ethics Examine
the relationship between stakeholder interests and ethical
considerations in a business environment. Is it possible to fully
balance the competing interests of various stakeholders while
maintaining ethical integrity? Construct a critical argument,
engaging with relevant ethical theories and real-world business
dilemmas. Environmental Ethics Social ecology and
bioregionalism offer competing frameworks for understanding
environmental ethics through the lenses of domination and
alienation. Critically evaluate these two perspectives, engaging
with the theories of Murray Bookchin and Donald Alexander. In
your discussion, consider the philosophical foundations of each
approach and their implications for environmental activism and
policy.
, Biomedical Ethics: Euthanasia vs. Withdrawing Life-Sustaining
Treatment
Euthanasia, particularly in the form of physician-assisted dying
(PAD), and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment (WLST) are
both contentious issues in biomedical ethics, often debated in
terms of ethical distinctions. Here’s a critical engagement with
the ethical principles involved:
1. Autonomy: Autonomy is central to both issues, as it
pertains to the patient’s right to make decisions about
their own life and death. In PAD, the patient actively seeks
assistance to end their life, exercising their autonomy
directly. In WLST, autonomy is exercised indirectly through
prior directives or decisions made by the patient or their
surrogate.
2. Beneficence: This principle focuses on the duty to do good
and promote the patient’s well-being. In PAD, proponents
argue that it can be an act of beneficence to end suffering
when all other options for relief have been exhausted.
Conversely, in WLST, beneficence may be interpreted as
allowing a natural death without prolonging suffering or
futile treatment.
3. Non-Maleficence: The principle of non-maleficence
emphasizes the duty to avoid harm. In PAD, ethical
concerns revolve around ensuring that the procedure is
Semester 1 2025 (872216) - DUE 29 April 2025;
100% TRUSTED Complete, trusted solutions and
explanations.
Multiple choice,assured excellence
Biomedical Ethics Is euthanasia, in the form of physician-
assisted dying, ethically distinct from withdrawing life-
sustaining treatment and allowing a patient to die? Critically
engage with this question by analysing key ethical principles,
such as autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence. Develop
a well-reasoned argument, drawing on philosophical
perspectives and relevant case studies. Business Ethics Examine
the relationship between stakeholder interests and ethical
considerations in a business environment. Is it possible to fully
balance the competing interests of various stakeholders while
maintaining ethical integrity? Construct a critical argument,
engaging with relevant ethical theories and real-world business
dilemmas. Environmental Ethics Social ecology and
bioregionalism offer competing frameworks for understanding
environmental ethics through the lenses of domination and
alienation. Critically evaluate these two perspectives, engaging
with the theories of Murray Bookchin and Donald Alexander. In
your discussion, consider the philosophical foundations of each
approach and their implications for environmental activism and
policy.
, Biomedical Ethics: Euthanasia vs. Withdrawing Life-Sustaining
Treatment
Euthanasia, particularly in the form of physician-assisted dying
(PAD), and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment (WLST) are
both contentious issues in biomedical ethics, often debated in
terms of ethical distinctions. Here’s a critical engagement with
the ethical principles involved:
1. Autonomy: Autonomy is central to both issues, as it
pertains to the patient’s right to make decisions about
their own life and death. In PAD, the patient actively seeks
assistance to end their life, exercising their autonomy
directly. In WLST, autonomy is exercised indirectly through
prior directives or decisions made by the patient or their
surrogate.
2. Beneficence: This principle focuses on the duty to do good
and promote the patient’s well-being. In PAD, proponents
argue that it can be an act of beneficence to end suffering
when all other options for relief have been exhausted.
Conversely, in WLST, beneficence may be interpreted as
allowing a natural death without prolonging suffering or
futile treatment.
3. Non-Maleficence: The principle of non-maleficence
emphasizes the duty to avoid harm. In PAD, ethical
concerns revolve around ensuring that the procedure is
