Case Study III
Please be sure you've reviewed the instructions and understand how to exchange with your partner and submit a complete case study. Originally this case study was due Thursday, December 2nd, by midnight at the latest. Given how long it has taken to get the second case studies back, I've pushed the due date to Monday, December 6th.
A few problems continue, inexcusably and inexplicably, to vex these assignments.
Reliability
These are not group projects. They are, rather, collaborative, peer-review studies which depend on partners respecting one another to have their work done in a timely and agreed-upon fashion and, above-all, to not ghost one another. I have never seen a class struggle so much with ghosting--not replying to emails or texts, just leaving partners hanging in panic. How is that responsible? Fair? Just? Helpful? Dare I ask, ethical? I've tried to be understanding, recruiting other students to partner with those who have been ghosted, granting extensions to those who ghost, and so on. But this is obviously only making the problem worse, as I should have expected. Accordingly, if you ghost your partner on this assignment, any submission you do make will be rejected. It's a simple matter to stay in touch with your partner. Do so.
Formatting
The Case Study Instructions contain clear and explicit instructions (or so I had thought) regarding how to submit a Case Study and how to format a Case Study. Bizarrely, I am still having to go back and forth with students on the second case study who seem unable to format correctly. I don't know whether the instructions are being ignored altogether, or whether they are too complicated to follow. From the instructions, here is the format:
This is what you submit as the text of an email to me, suitably fleshed out. I'm not sure how simple formatting instructions have led to so much confusion. Most succeed admirably; too many do not. My practice has been to send an email back asking for a resubmission, but this again is only making the problem worse. So if your third case is not correctly formatted, it will be marked a zero.
Critical Analyses which are Neither
The number of students who seem to think a critical analysis is just an opportunity to opine positively or adoringly about their partner's argument is troubling. Surely you want to help your partner as much as possible. Ask yourself: do accolades or clearly explained criticisms better help them improve their argument? Reflect, if you will, on a great philosopher's words:
Never be cruel, never be cowardly. And never ever eat pears! Remember – hate is always foolish... and love is always wise.
Always try to be nice and never fail to be kind.
Dr. Who, Series Twelve
But what does that mean, "always try to be nice and never fail to be kind"? Isn't it the same thing, being nice and being kind?
Well, no, actually.
It is very nice of you to comment in glowing terms on the genius and insight of your partner's argument. After all, we all want to hear nice things about our work, don't we? Yet it is hardly kind of you to ignore gaps, confusions, missteps, and unjustified leaps in their arguments, for the simple reason that they won't then have the opportunity to improve their argument.
They'll feel better, but they won't be better. Isn't the whole point to be better, and not just feel better?
So, no, being nice and being kind are different things. Always try to be nice. It's good to be nice. But never fail to be kind, even--or maybe especially--when it comes at the cost of being nice.
Sebastian's Demise
Although he is an otherwise normal, intelligent, and healthy seven year-old boy, Sebastian has leukemia.
I should say that Sebastian is healthy in all respects except those directly and indirectly related to his leukemia. He is emotionally stable and has all the hopes, fears, and dreams of other seven year-old boys. He is, however, much more mature than others his age. He has had to come to grips with a fear no other seven year-old entertains--the fear of dying. Even though some physicians and nurses have gone to great lengths to keep Sebastian in the dark about his illness, Sebastian's parents, Mary and Steven, have always told Sebastian every thing they knew. When Sebastian was first diagnosed, Mary and Steven decided that it would be best to be honest with their only son. He has handled it better than they expected.
It looks now as though Sebastian's disease is terminal. Painful bone-marrow transplants and chemotherapy have not proven effective. Worse, Sebastian is extremely thin because of nausea from the treatments. He's lost all his hair and he's extremely frail. Mary and Steven are heartbroken whenever they see their child. Sebastian tries his best, for his parents' sake, he thinks, to stay cheerful and act as normal as he can. But sometimes, late at night in the pediatric-oncology ward, Sebastian cries. He is faced with the terrible knowledge that he will die. He doesn't want to lose his parents. He doesn't want to lose all his friends in the ward.
Steven and Mary both work to try to pay the bills, running by the hospital as often as they can to see Sebastian. On a warm fall day Mary takes a long lunch and, getting a wheelchair for Sebastian, takes him for a walk around the hospital grounds. It's not a good day for Sebastian. The doctors have been running more tests, and some of them make him sick.
"Mom," Sebastian says, "I'm not gonna be cured, am I?"
"I don't know, Sebastian. Nothing the doctors have tried has worked. Maybe they'll come up with something, though."
"They won't. I heard Dr. Srinavasan talking to another doctor. They thought I was asleep. She said that it wouldn't be long for me. She said that they've done everything they could."
Mary started to tear up. She was glad Sebastion couldn't see her.
"Mom?"
"Yes, honey?"
"Thomas died last week. He just kept getting worse and worse. They finally took him to another room, but I know he died. Everybody knows. I don't want to die like that."
"What do you mean, Sebastian?"
"You remember when I was five and we took Kitty to the vet and put her to sleep?"
"Yes, dear, I remember."
"Mom?"
"Yes, dear?"
"Would you put me to sleep, before I get really bad?"
Mary was glad that she had the wheelchair to lean against.
That night, she told Steven about what Sebastian had said. Steven was outraged that Mary would even consider it. He insisted as he always did that they could find a cure at the last minute. Steven stormed out of the bedroom and went to sleep on the couch.
Mary was torn. As Sebastian's health visibly deteriorated, the following week was one of the hardest weeks of her life. Visiting one day after work, she gave Sebastian a pill to help with his nausea. They sat and talked for a while. Then she gave him 10 or 12 pills to take, telling him "it's all going to be alright, Sebastian."
She held his hand long after his breathing had stopped and his hand had gone limp in hers.
Answer each of the following questions in the 'Argument' section of your Case Study, making sure to clearly indicate by section headings which question you are answering. Note that each of your answers will be scrutinized and subjected to rigorous criticism by your partner in the Critical Analysis because they are now so keen to be kind, so it behooves you to think through your answers, anticipating possible criticisms as you go, and designing your argument accordingly. You might even try to include such phrases as, "it could be argued in criticism that..., however, I would argue that..."
- What features of this case would a utilitarian (of any stripe) identify as morally relevant? a Kantian? a Contractarian?
- Given your answers in (1), what conflicts between theoretical approaches arise in the case?
- Which specific theoretical approach (one of the UET's, KET, or SCT) do you find most defensible, and why?
- What is the implication of the theory you defended in (3) regarding the puzzle of whether it was morally right for Mary to euthanize Sebastian, and how do you best argue the theory has the implication you've specified?