For our mini-ethics bowl we will be using 3 cases. “Universal Healthcare” pp. 148-149; “Infant Medical Futility” p. 328; and “The Snowden Leak” p. 334-336. You must be familiar with all 3 cases. You will write and present a case analysis on one of these, and you may be asked to comment on another teams presentation of one of the other two cases.
This Week: Meet with your groups and practice your presentations. You will be responsible for presenting one case with your team, commenting on another case, and judging another case.
Sunday: Turn in a written case analysis on your assigned case (this can be similar to your teammates or your own original case analysis). It must be roughly 2 pages or about 600-800 words. The case analysis should include: 1. the response to the case that you think is morally best. 2. An argument supporting this claim which identifies the moral principles or theories that most directly apply. You should also include any relevant facts that you discover about the case. 3. At least one argument in favor of an alternative response and an explanation of why the response you support is better than this response.