Medicinal use of marijuana

Each student will select a topic to prepare a research paper on. The paper should be five to seven single spaced pages long, with a bibliography of at least five sources. Subject matters are to be selected in consultation with the instructor on a topical ethical health care issue. Examples include but are not limited to the following:
1. Cochlear implants;
2. H.I.V. /A.I.D.S. partner notification (preventing harm versus confidentiality);
3. Mandatory vaccinations;
4. Medicinal use of marijuana;
5. Mental Health Outpatient Commitment laws;
6. Opt-In or Opt-out system for organ donations;
7. Physician assisted suicide;
8. Surrogate motherhood;
9. Therapeutic cloning;
10. Using Nazi research.
The paper should include at a minimum the following sections:
A. Background explanation of the ethical issue; (Be sure to include a
brief summary of the arguments for and against).
B. Reference, cite and explain the current legal status of the topic (cases,
statutes, and/or proposed statutes, etc.);
C. Reference and discuss at least two authors’ opposing (i.e.one for and one
against) perspectives of the ethical issues raised by the topic;
D. Argue at least two opposing (i.e.one for and one against) ethical perspectives of the issue utilizing at least two of the ethical theories and principles cited in the course readings. These ethical theories and principles (limited to consequentialism, utilitarianism, deontologism, virtue ethics, autonomy, paternalism, double effect, and honesty) are all contained in the materials for weeks one through four.
E. The conclusion weighs the two approaches taken in the paper and then uses ethical reasoning to assess which approach makes the most sense.
As you work on your paper feel free to consult with the instructor around any
problems or concerns.
Rubric for Assessment of Term Paper
Due September 19:
1. Background explanation of the ethical issue. (Preliminary Version)
a. Clearly articulated and insightful with a sense of purpose. (15 points)
(Be sure to include a brief summary of the arguments for and against).
b. The presentation of the ethical issue may be strongly articulated, insightful, or purposeful, but fails to be all three. (12 points)
c. Focuses more on substantive health issue not the ethical issue. (9 points)
d. Hard to tell what the ethical issue is. (6 points)
Due October 10:
2. Reference, cite and explain the current legal status of the topic (cases, statutes, and/or proposed statutes, etc. (Preliminary Version).
a. Legal reference is relevant for the ethical issue, timely, and explained clearly. (20 points)
b. Legal reference is relevant for the ethical issue, timely, and/or explained clearly, but fails to do all three. (15 points)
c. Reference is not particularly appropriate for the ethical issue. (10 points)
d. No legal reference is cited. (0 points)
Due October 31:
3. Reference and discuss at least two author’s opposing (i.e.one for and one
against) perspectives of the ethical issues raised by the topic. (Preliminary Version)
a. The two authors’ opposing perspectives were relevant, balanced and discussed in an insightful manner. (20 points)
b. The two authors’ opposing perspectives were relevant, balanced and/or discussed in an insightful manner, but not all three. (15 points)
c. Only one relevant author and/or ethical perspective was referenced. (10 points)
d. No authors’ ethical perspectives were referenced. (0 points)
Due November 21:
4. Argue two opposing (i.e.one for and one against) ethical perspectives of the issue utilizing at least two of the ethical theories and principles cited in the course materials. (Preliminary Version)
a. The two ethical theories or principles were relevant, balanced and discussed in an insightful manner. (20 points)
b. The two ethical theories or principles were relevant, balanced and/or discussed in an insightful manner, but not all three. (15 points)
c. Only one relevant ethical theory or principle was referenced. (10 points)
d. No relevant ethical theories or principles were referenced. (0 points)
Due December 4: Final Version of Full Paper
1. Background explanation of the ethical issue.
a. Clearly articulated and insightful with a sense of purpose. (3 points)
Be sure to include a summary of the arguments for and against.
b. The presentation of the ethical issue may be strongly articulated, insightful, or purposeful, but fails to be all three. (2 points)
c. Focuses more on substantive health issue not the ethical issue. (1 point)
d. Hard to tell what the ethical issue is. (0 points)
2. Reference, cite and explain the current legal status of the topic (cases, statutes, and/or proposed statutes, etc.
a. Legal reference is relevant for the ethical issue, timely, and explained clearly. (3 points)
b. Legal reference is relevant for the ethical issue, timely, and/or explained clearly, but fails to do all three. (2 points)
c. Reference is not particularly appropriate for the ethical issue. (1 point)
d. No legal reference is cited. (0 points)
3. Reference and discuss two author’s opposing (i.e.one for and one against) perspectives of the ethical issues raised by the topic.
a. The two authors’ opposing perspectives were relevant, balanced and discussed in an insightful manner. (3 points)
b. The two authors’ opposing perspectives were relevant, balanced and/or discussed in an insightful manner, but not all three. (2 points)
c. Only one relevant author and/or ethical perspective was referenced. (1 point)
d. No authors’ ethical perspectives were referenced. (0 points)
4. Argue two opposing (i.e.one for and one against) ethical perspectives of the issue utilizing at least two of the ethical theories and principles cited in the course text.
a. The two ethical theories or principles were relevant, balanced and discussed in an insightful manner. (3 points)
b. The two ethical theories or principles were relevant, balanced and/or discussed in an insightful manner, but not all three. (2 points)
c. Only one relevant ethical theory or principle was referenced. (1 point)
d. No relevant ethical theories or principles were referenced. (0 points)
5. Conclusion
a. The conclusion weighs the two approaches taken in the paper and then uses ethical reasoning to assess which approach makes the most sense. (8 points)
b. The conclusion is reasonable and supported within the paper; however, it is not made clear why other perspectives were discounted. (5 points)
c. The conclusion seems to be weighted heavily from an opinionated as opposed to a researched point of view. (2 points)
d. There is no conclusion. (0 points)
6. a. The paper is five to seven single spaced pages. (2.5 points)
b. A bibliography with a minimum of five reference

Last Completed Projects