Homework #13
Due: Friday May 1
Read: Kazez, "Family Ties"
Length: 2 pages
(1) Discuss the passage about ethicist Peter Singer. What's his view about how we can live meaningfully? Does he ignore parenthood or fit it in somehow? Who are his paragons of living meaningfully?
(2) Discuss the passage about ethicist Thomas Nagel. Why does he think life is absurd? I say parenthood is an answer to this sort of absurdity. Explain my point and discuss whether you are persuaded.
(3) Why have philosophers tended to ignore parenthood? My explanation has to to with the "fragility" of parenthood. Explain.
(4) I offer an account of what it is to live meaningfully. What are the three requirements? Do you think I should have left out something or added another requirement?
(5) I argue that parenthood does a good job of fulfilling requirement #2 (see question 4), drawing on ideas from philosopher Harry Frankfurt. Explain. Do you have any objections?
(6) But what about people who don't have children? Does my essay relegate them to meaninglessness?
Homework #12
Due: Friday April 25
Read: English, “What do grown children owe their parents?”
Watch: Mildred Pierce (1945) (click to view movie)
Length: 1 page
Imagine Jane English had used the relationship between Mildred and Veda as an illustration. How would she have assessed Veda's behavior? Explain carefully. Do you agree with English's assessment, or do you see Veda in a different way? How? Defend your view.
Homework #11
Due: Monday, April 14
Read: Kind, "Creative Mothering" (loads slowly, be patient)
Length: 2 pages
(1) Give an example of lying to children you see as permissible and then an example of lying to children you find problematic.
(2) Give an example of a philosopher who claims that lying is always wrong (whether we're lying to children or to adults). How do they support this view?
(3) Give an example of a philosopher who thinks there's nothing inherently wrong with lying. How do they support this view?
(4) Kind argues that lying to children is not as bad as lying to adults. How does she support this view?
(5) Does Kind's account make sense? Either support her or make an objection.
Homework #10
Due: Monday, April 7
Read: Feinberg, “The child's right to an open future” (bb); UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
Length: 2 pages
(1) First look at the UN Convention on the rights of the Child. What do you find noteworthy or surprising about this list of rights? Should anything be added or subtracted from the UN's list of children's rights?
(2) Explain Feinberg's distinction between A-C rights, A rights, and C rights. Characterize each class of right and give some examples. What is the chief C right that he discusses?
(3) Explain the issues addressed by the Supreme Court in Wisconsin v. Yoder. How does Feinberg use his own account of children's rights to discuss the case? Does he or doesn't he approve of the way the court ruled on the case? What's his reasoning?
(4) Feinberg says his account of children's rights "is threatened by a number of philosophical riddles" (p. 140). Explain one of these riddles and then explain how Feinberg resolves it.
Homework #9
Due: Wednesday, April 2
Read: Poisson, “When parents keep child’s gender a secret” ; Erdely, “About a girl”
Length: 1-2 pages
Note: the debaters don't have to do this homework but (of course) should do these readings and think about the issues below.
The resolution for Wednesday's debate is "We should teach gender roles (but not restrict them)." The homework is to weigh in on this. Do you agree with the resolution or disagree? You must discuss both readings to receive full credit. Is the Storm's family doing wrong by not teaching gender roles? Are Coy's parents doing wrong by accommodating Coy's gender non-conformity? Another possible issue: are girls harmed by the way parents typically teach gender roles?
Homework #8
Due: Wednesday, March 26
Read: Mary Shanley, “Fathers rights and mothers wrongs”(bb)
Length: 2 pages
Note: You don't have to read the whole article from beginning to end. The questions below indicate the crucial pages.
(1) First read about Baby Jessica and Baby Richard on pgs. 44-46. What would have been in the best interests of the child in each case--remaining with the adoptive parents or being raised by the biological fathers?
(2) Read a bit of historical background on pg. 48-50. What were the rights of fathers in the 19th century?
(3) Explain the decision in Stanley v Illinois (pg. 51-52). Skim the pages on more recent decisions (pgs. 42-55). What is the trend, when it comes to father's rights?
(4) What is the difference between the fitness test and the best interest test for deciding custody cases (see p. 57-58)? What does Shanley see as problematic about the best interest test?
(5) Some say mothers have stronger rights in custody cases. What is their reasoning? See pgs. 59-62.
(6) Explain Shanley's proposal as to how custody battles should be resolved--see pgs. 62-65.
(7) Explain how Shanley thinks the Baby Jessica and Baby Richard cases should have been handled (see pgs. 70-75).
(8) If you had been the judge in these cases, what would you have decided?
Homework #7
Due: Wednesday, March 19 (at the beginning of class)
Read: Sandel, "The Case Against Perfection"
Length: 2-3 pages
(1) What does Sandel mean by "designer children"? What procreative techniques does he discuss in the article? What sort of "designing" is he against? What sort (if any) is he not against?
(2) Sandel tackles the ethics of designing children by first discussing various types of pharmaceutical and genetic enhancement or selection. What (in some detail) are his four main examples?
(3) What does Sandel say about those four types of enhancement/selection? What does he see as objectionable about them?
(4) How does Sandel extend that critique to the issue of designing children?
(5) Sandel objects to designing children and also to modern "hyperparenting." Explain what he sees as the similarity between the two.
(6) Now assess. What do you think of Sandel's views on (a) pharmaecutical enhancement, (b) designing children, and (c) hyperparenting?
Homework #6
Due: Wednesday, Feb. 26 (at the beginning of class)
Watch: Gattacca
Read: Asch, “Prenatal diagnosis” (Bioethics)
Length: about 2 pages
(1) What's the "argument" of the movie Gattacca on selective reproduction to avoid disabilities? What does the movie "disapprove of" and why?
(2) Asch also takes a position on selective reproduction to avoid disabilities. Is it the same message as the movie or different in some way?
(3) Now considered the restricted lives and Kantian principles in Kavka's article. Using those principles, how would you judge selective reproduction in the movie? (Use the Kavka powerpoint and refer to the article as needed.)
(4) Discuss who you agree with, Asch or Kavka. Alternatively, state and briefly defend some third outlook on selective reproduction to avoid disabilities.
Homework #5
Due: Monday, Feb. 17 (at the beginning of class)
Reading: Surrogate mothers here and there. Therstrom, “Meet the Twiblings”; Carney, excerpt from The Red Market (bb)
Monday's debaters: this homework is optional for you but might help you prepare.
Instructions: Provide short answer to all 10 questions. Total length: about 2 pages.
(1) How old is Melanie Thernstrom when she decides to have kids? What's her marital status? What medical interventions does she opt for at first?
(2) Say a bit about Melissa and Fie, the two gestational surrogates Melanie uses. Why do they do it? Do they need the money? How far away do they live? What kind of relationship does Melanie have with them? To what extent does she control their lives while they're pregnant?
(3) Say a bit about the egg donor. Why does she do it? Do Melanie and Michael ever meet her?
(4) Melanie tells people "I'm the only mother" or "Actually, there is no biological mother." Later in the article she says the egg donation is "akin to liver or kidney donation." The egg donor sees egg donation as being like donating hair to cancer patients. Do you think these descriptions are apt or confused?
(5) How much money do the Akanksha surrogates make per pregnancy?
(6) What is the total cost to Americans of using an Indian vs. an American gestational surrogate?
(7) What is life like for the Akanksha surrogates? To what extent does the clinic control their lives while they're pregnant?
(8) Ester Cohen uses a surrogate at the Akanksha clinic. Who are this baby's genetic parents? Is the surrogate the baby's genetic mother?
(9) What's your reaction to Melanie Thernstrom's use of gestational surrogates--is it ethically permissible or impermissible? Explain very briefly.
(10) What's your reaction to Ester Cohen's use of gestational surrogates--is it ethically permissible or impermissible? Explain very briefly.
Homework #4
Due: Wednesday, Feb. 7 (at the beginning of class)
Reading: Thomson, "A Defense of Abortion" (in book)
Length: 500 words (two double-spaced typed pages) -- if you need more space, fine, but try to be succinct.
Guidelines: read the homework guidelines at the tab above
Thomson uses many imaginative scenarios to make various points about the ethics of abortion. Discuss four scenarios below. First task: tell the story. Second task: explain what Thomson is trying to argue, by means of the scenario. You must pick one scenario out of each pair below.
(1) (A) The famous violinist, OR (B) the tiny house with the growing child
(2) (A) Henry Fonda story, OR (B) brothers given box of chocolates
(3) (A) burglar bar scenario, OR (B) people seed scenario
(4) (A) pregnancy that lasts one hour, OR (B) woman who seeks abortion at 7 months
Homework #3
Due: Wednesday, Feb. 5 (at the beginning of class)
Reading: April Martin, “Lesbian Parenting” (bb); Family Research Council, “Ten Arguments”
Length: 500 words (two double-spaced typed pages)
Guidelines: read the homework guidelines at the tab above
The resolution for our debate on Wednesday will be "Same-sex parenting is worse for children." If you were one of the debaters, would you take the affirmative or negative position? Explain and support your answer, referring to the main, relevant facts about Martin's family (e.g., how do the women create their family?) and the main complaints about same-sex parenthood in the FRC article.
Homework #2
Due: Friday Jan. 31 (at the beginning of class)
Reading: Lafollette, "Licensing Parents"
Sum up the core of LaFollette's argument for licensing parents. Be sure to cover whatever he seems to view as his main points. Then respond to the argument. Are you persuaded? Do you find his view absurd or even offensive? Explain and defend your response.
****
Homework #1
Due: Friday Jan. 24 (at the beginning of class)
Reading: Smilansky, "Is there a moral obligation to have children?"
Length: 500 words (two double-spaced typed pages)
Guidelines: read the homework guidelines at the tab above
(1) Is this article mostly about empirical issues, legal issues, or philosophy/ethics? Back up your answer.
(2) What do you think is the best argument in the list of arguments that reproduction can't be obligatory? State the argument. What does Smilansky say to refute that argument? Is his refutation effective? Explain.
(3) What do you think is the best argument in Smilansky's list of arguments that there is an obligation to have children? State the argument. Do you think the argument is a good one? Explain.
(4) Smilansky considers a scenario in which humanity is about to die out. Explain what he offers as his main reason for thinking there would be an obligation to have children in that scenario. Do you agree? Explain. (If you've seen the movies The Road or 28 Days Later, think about them as you ponder this question.)
(5) When you're all done reading the article and answering questions (1) - (4), consider the ethical orientations in the Ethics Toolkit. Where is Smilansky coming from? Name one orientation that's absent from the article and one that's present. Back up your answer with passages from the article.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.