Student Name Chamberlain University ETHC-445 Principles of Ethics Prof. Name Date Abortion: A Moral and Social Debate Abortion remains one of the most contentious ethical and political issues in contemporary society. Pro-choice advocates argue that a woman should have full autonomy over her body and the freedom to make personal decisions, including whether to continue or terminate a pregnancy. One central claim supporting abortion is that embryos lack sentience and consciousness, thus not qualifying as “persons” in a moral or legal sense. Conversely, pro-life supporters argue that life begins at conception, and abortion constitutes the unjust termination of a human life, which they equate with murder. This ethical division is deeply influenced by religious, legal, and philosophical beliefs. The Moral Dilemma: Maria’s Situation Case Overview Maria, an 18-year-old woman, engaged in consensual sexual relationships through dating apps. She discovered she was pregnant and faced an emotional crisis. Fearful of her deeply religious parents’ reaction and societal judgment, she sought an abortion in secret. Initially, she took abortion pills but later opted for surgical intervention due to inefficacy. The psychological aftermath left her in emotional turmoil—feeling guilt, depression, and shame. Her story illustrates how restricted access and social stigma surrounding abortion can negatively affect women’s physical and mental health. Ethical Perspectives on Maria’s Dilemma To determine the most moral course of action, we analyze Maria’s situation through various ethical frameworks: Ethical Egoism, Social Contract Theory, Utilitarianism, Natural Law Theory, and Aristotle’s Golden Mean. Ethical Egoism Ethical egoism maintains that individuals should act in accordance with their self-interest (Rachels, 2018). From this perspective, Maria’s decision to have an abortion was morally justified because it prioritized her well-being over societal and familial expectations. Ethical egoism does not account for external judgments; it emphasizes personal autonomy and psychological needs. Therefore, Maria was morally right to choose abortion if she believed it was the best decision for her future. Social Contract Theory Social contract theory asserts that individuals agree to adhere to societal rules and moral responsibilities in exchange for the benefits of living in a structured society (Stark, 2019). According to this view, abortion breaches the moral obligations tied to protecting human life. Maria’s pregnancy, while unintended, represented a life that the social contract considers valuable. Hence, from this standpoint, she had a moral duty to preserve that life and avoid terminating it, even at personal cost. Utilitarianism Utilitarianism, rooted in welfarism and consequentialism, evaluates morality based on outcomes and the maximization of overall well-being (Felzmann, 2017). Applied to Maria’s case, if abortion brought her peace, safety, and restored her mental health, then it was a morally right choice. This view does not emphasize fetal rights but focuses on the overall happiness and welfare of those involved, primarily the mother. Natural Law Theory Natural law theory argues that morality is derived from universal human values and divine command (Irving, 2000). It often opposes abortion, positing that human life begins at conception and is sacred regardless of the circumstances. However, in exceptional cases—such as rape or when the mother’s life is at risk—it can permit abortion. Maria’s case might not qualify under natural law for an abortion, unless her mental health is significantly jeopardized. Aristotle’s Golden Mean Aristotle’s ethical philosophy promotes finding a virtue-based balance between extremes (Aristotle, 1999). Maria exhibited moral courage by choosing her autonomy over societal expectations. Although her decision might seem selfish to some, it was a rational choice made amid emotional and social pressures. According to the Golden Mean, her actions fell between cowardice (avoiding action due to fear) and recklessness (acting without thought), making her decision morally acceptable. Ethical Theories Compared Theory Core Belief View on Abortion Application to Maria Ethical Egoism Morality is determined by self-interest Supports abortion if aligned with personal needs Maria’s choice is justified if it protects her well-being Social Contract Theory Societal obligations shape moral conduct Opposes abortion as it breaches societal duty to unborn life Views abortion as immoral; Maria should accept responsibility Utilitarianism Actions are moral if they benefit the majority Supports abortion for maximizing well-being Her mental and emotional stability validates the abortion decision Natural Law Theory Morality stems from divine/natural human order Generally opposes abortion unless life is in danger Likely opposes abortion unless her health is at serious risk Aristotle’s Golden Mean Virtue lies between extremes Emphasizes balanced decision-making Maria showed rational courage by prioritizing her needs over fear and stigma Abortion Ethics in Practice: Case of Abuse and Minors A Second Dilemma In another disturbing scenario, a 16-year-old girl became pregnant after enduring months of sexual abuse by her stepfather. Due to legal and parental restrictions, she attempted an unsafe self-managed abortion. Her mother discovered her unconscious, leading to hospitalization. The ethical tension here lies between maintaining patient confidentiality and reporting abuse for legal intervention. Professional Nursing Ethics According to the American Nurses Association (ANA) Code of Ethics (2001), nurses must protect patient autonomy while also upholding legal and moral duties. In this case, the nurse’s primary responsibility is to the patient’s safety and well-being. Given the suspected abuse and the patient’s minor status, reporting to authorities and social services becomes a legal and moral obligation, even if it conflicts with the patient’s wish for secrecy. Ethical Theories Reapplied Utilitarianism The greatest good is served by reporting the abuse to protect the child and prevent further harm. Although it may breach trust temporarily, the broader benefit—rescue and rehabilitation—outweighs individual discomfort. Natural Law Theory Abuse is inherently immoral and must be addressed. The nurse, acting in accordance with moral intuition and divine law, should report the incident to uphold the child’s right to safety. Aristotle’s Golden Mean The balanced action here is not secrecy or immediate punishment but a careful, supportive intervention. Reporting the case through proper channels (e.g., social worker) helps navigate between extremes and respects both justice and compassion. Conclusion Both scenarios explored present complex ethical dilemmas. While personal beliefs, cultural values, and religious ideologies deeply influence abortion debates, ethical theories offer structured ways to evaluate

Student Name Chamberlain University ETHC-445 Principles of Ethics Prof. Name Date Week 6 Discussion: Applying Rand’s Objectivism Required Resources Introduction Ayn Rand’s Objectivist philosophy is often criticized as a doctrine of selfishness, yet it is built on four fundamental epistemological principles: In the early 1960s, when a student inquired about the fate of the poor in an Objectivist society, an Objectivist representative responded, “If you want to help them, you will not be stopped.” This reply aligns closely with the ethos expressed in Rand’s novels, Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, suggesting personal freedom to act according to one’s own values without coercion. ETHC 445 Week 6 Discussion: Applying Rand’s Objectivism Initial Post Instructions and Responses Question Answer What do you conclude from the answer given by the Objectivist spokesperson? The spokesperson’s answer implies that within an Objectivist society, individuals have absolute freedom to act as they wish based on their moral judgments and self-interest. Helping others is a choice, not a mandate, reinforcing personal autonomy. This freedom does not impose an obligation to assist the poor but allows those who choose to help to do so without interference. Essentially, moral action is voluntary and grounded in individual values rather than enforced altruism. Examine the notion that Objectivism, like moral relativism, is the opposite of ethics. Provide support for your position. Contrary to some claims, Objectivism is not the antithesis of ethics but rather proposes a distinct ethical framework rooted in rational self-interest rather than traditional altruism or moral relativism. Moral relativism denies universal moral truths and bases ethics on subjective perspectives, while Objectivism insists on objective reality and reason as foundations for moral decisions. Rand argues that ethical behavior is acting in ways that sustain and enrich one’s own life, which is a defined, objective standard, not a subjective or relativistic one. Thus, Objectivism rejects moral relativism and offers an ethical system with clear principles. What clue in what she taught leads to your conclusion? A key insight comes from Rand’s emphasis on reason as the only guide to knowledge and action, along with her assertion that “Man must choose his actions, values and goals by the standard of that which is proper to man…which is his own life” (Introduction to Objectivism, n.d.). This highlights an objective, human-centered ethics, contrasting with moral relativism’s flexible, situational morality. Her focus on individual rights and capitalism further points to a structured ethical system prioritizing life, reason, and voluntary cooperation. Additional Reflection When making ethical choices, it is essential to balance personal judgment with respect for others’ perspectives. Acting solely in self-interest without regard for consequences may lead to social isolation, but rigid altruism can suppress individuality. Rand’s philosophy encourages individuals to pursue their own happiness and success, provided they do not initiate force against others. This nuanced understanding clarifies that Objectivism advocates ethical self-interest, not unchecked selfishness. References Chamberlain University. (2018). Lesson 6: Ethics within Human Relationships. Retrieved from https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/34375/pages/week-6-lesson-ethics-within-human-relationships?module_item_id=4086714 ETHC 445 Week 6 Discussion: Applying Rand’s Objectivism Introduction to Objectivism. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.aynrand.org/ideas/philosophy

Student Name Chamberlain University ETHC-445 Principles of Ethics Prof. Name Date ETHC 445 Week 5 Course Project Milestone: Annotated Bibliography Abortion: A Complex Social Issue Abortion is commonly understood as a medical procedure to terminate an unwanted or unplanned pregnancy. Despite its long history, abortion remains a deeply controversial and often taboo subject in society. Various groups hold vastly different views on this issue. On one side, pro-choice advocates defend a woman’s right to make decisions about her own body, while on the other, anti-abortion groups often protest at clinics such as Planned Parenthood, opposing the procedure vehemently. A landmark moment in the history of abortion rights in the United States was the 1973 Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade. The court ruled that a fetus does not have legal protection, thereby legalizing abortion across the country (Ruggiero, 1992). Recently, abortion has come under renewed scrutiny as several states have passed laws making abortion illegal, sometimes imposing jail time even in cases of miscarriage—situations beyond a woman’s control. This crackdown has driven many women to seek unsafe and clandestine procedures, resulting in increased health risks and mortality. One paradox of the abortion debate is that many of the laws restricting abortion are pushed primarily by men—individuals who do not experience pregnancy themselves. Even more troubling are laws that eliminate exceptions for rape or incest, forcing women to carry pregnancies against their will. These policies highlight a broader issue regarding bodily autonomy and governmental overreach. There is growing concern that the government is reversing rights once seen as moral and legal, shifting public perception of abortion from acceptable to immoral overnight (Ruggiero, 1992). Thesis Statement The purpose of this paper is to explore the paradox surrounding abortion rights, arguing why abortion should remain a legal and accessible option for women. It also highlights why men should not control reproductive decisions and discusses the detrimental consequences of criminalizing abortion. Annotated Perspectives on Abortion and Disability Author & Year Summary Key Points Nuccetelli (2017) Discusses whether parents have the right to abort fetuses diagnosed with severe disabilities. Argues carrying a pregnancy with serious fetal defects can cause more harm than well-being; thus, abortion in such cases can be morally justified. Manninen (2015) Reflects on abortion due to fetal disability, questioning how it reflects societal views on disabled lives. Supports pro-choice but critiques the devaluation of disabled lives implied by selective abortion. McKinney (2016) Examines selective abortion as a moral failure and its connection to stigma around disability. Suggests selective abortion perpetuates harmful stereotypes, pressuring women to make rushed decisions. Crossley (2015) Encourages parents to carefully process fetal disability diagnoses before deciding on abortion. Proposes that raising a child with disabilities can enrich parent-child relationships, encouraging reevaluation. 10 Things You Need to Know About Abortion Laws in the US The current legal landscape in the U.S. is rapidly changing, with some states implementing near-total bans on abortion, including in cases of rape or incest (Amnesty International, 2019). These laws create significant barriers to safe abortion access, forcing women to pursue risky alternatives. The tightening restrictions demonstrate how political and social forces are shaping reproductive rights and endangering women’s health. Question and Answer Section Question: What was the significance of Roe v. Wade in abortion rights? Answer: The 1973 Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade established that a fetus does not have constitutional rights, effectively legalizing abortion nationwide. This decision affirmed a woman’s right to choose abortion as part of her privacy rights under the law (Ruggiero, 1992). Question: How have recent state laws impacted abortion access? Answer: Recent legislation in several U.S. states has criminalized abortion, sometimes punishing women even for miscarriages. This has led to women taking unsafe measures to terminate pregnancies, increasing health risks and mortality rates. Certain laws eliminate exceptions for rape or incest, forcing women to carry pregnancies regardless of circumstances (Amnesty International, 2019). Question: Why is the involvement of men in abortion legislation problematic? Answer: Since men do not experience pregnancy, their significant influence in legislating abortion restricts women’s autonomy over their bodies. This male dominance in decision-making often leads to policies that neglect women’s rights and needs, undermining bodily autonomy. Question: What are some ethical considerations regarding abortion for fetal disabilities? Answer: Opinions vary on abortion due to fetal disability. Some argue it is morally justifiable to prevent suffering (Nuccetelli, 2017), while others caution against devaluing disabled lives (Manninen, 2015; McKinney, 2016). A balanced approach encourages parents to thoughtfully consider their capacities and relationships before making decisions (Crossley, 2015). References Amnesty International. (2019, June 11). 10 things you need to know about abortion laws in the US. Retrieved November 17, 2019, from https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/06/abortion-laws-in-the-us10-things-you-need-to-know/ Crossley, M. (2015, August 1). Normalizing disability in families. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. Retrieved December 1, 2019, from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/jlme.12236 Manninen, B. A. (2015). The Replaceable Fetus: A Reflection on Abortion and Disability. Disability Studies Quarterly. Retrieved December 1, 2019, from http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/3239/3831 McKinney, C. (2016). Selective Abortion as Moral Failure? Revaluation of the Feminist Case for Reproductive Rights in a Disability Context. Disability Studies Quarterly. Retrieved December 1, 2019, from http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/3885/4213 ETHC 445 Week 5 Course Project Milestone: Annotated Bibliography Nuccetelli, S. (2017, March 28). Abortion for fetal defects: two current arguments. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 20(3), 445–453. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11019-017-9765-2 Ruggiero, V. R. (1992). Ethical Issues in Health Care (3rd ed.). Cengage Learning.

Student Name Chamberlain University ETHC-445 Principles of Ethics Prof. Name Date INTRODUCTION This paper explores the ethical dilemma surrounding the allocation of a scarce resource: a kidney transplant. The case involves three patients, each with unique personal histories and religious beliefs, ranging in age from 11 to 55 years old. The ethical question at the heart of this study is: who among these patients should receive the kidney transplant? WHO SHOULD GET THE KIDNEY? After evaluating the three candidates, my recommendation is to prioritize patient two for the kidney transplant. This patient is a 55-year-old divorced woman with two children, facing imminent death within one month without the transplant. Her situation presents a critical urgency compared to the other patients. REASONS FOR CHOOSING PATIENT TWO Several factors support the selection of patient two as the transplant recipient: Patient Age Survival Time Without Transplant Survival Chance Post-Transplant Additional Notes 1 11 Longer Has financial resources (~$1M) Can potentially afford transplant elsewhere 2 55 1 month Highest among the three Has dependents (two children) 3 N/A 2 months Moderate Has already had two transplants Patient two not only has the highest likelihood of survival with the transplant but also faces the most immediate risk of death without it. Patient one’s financial ability to seek alternative treatment reduces the ethical imperative for prioritization. Patient three, with an estimated two months to live and prior transplants, can endure a brief wait. ETHICS OF EGOISM The ethical principle of egoism, which prioritizes self-interest, is illustrated in this scenario by patient three. Despite her parents’ religious and cultural opposition to organ donation, she has sought and received two kidney transplants for her own benefit (Rachels, 2018). This demonstrates ethical egoism, where actions are justified by their benefits to oneself, sometimes regardless of communal or cultural values. UTILITARIANISM IN THE SCENARIO Utilitarianism emphasizes maximizing overall happiness and treats each individual’s happiness as equally important. In this case, however, utilitarianism faces challenges because only one kidney is available, which cannot be divided. Therefore, although the principle calls for the greatest good for the greatest number, a decision must be made favoring the candidate whose transplant will result in the greatest benefit (Jonsen, 2012). This means the choice may deviate from strict utilitarian ideals to accommodate practical realities. HOBBES ARGUMENT According to Hobbes, individuals might resort to violence to obtain what they desire (Messerly, 2015). While this transplant scenario does not involve physical violence, conflict among decision-makers is possible regarding who should receive the kidney. Hobbes’ idea that the less powerful can overcome the stronger by forming alliances is relevant here: collaborative decision-making bodies could check the influence of dominant parties, leading to a fairer allocation process. CONCLUSION Ethical decisions are inherently complex and subjective, often varying based on individual values and societal norms. Determining the most appropriate candidate for a kidney transplant among these patients brings moral challenges to the forefront. To mitigate biases and favoritism, legal frameworks and ethical guidelines have been established to govern such life-and-death decisions, ensuring equity and justice in organ allocation. REFERENCES Jonsen, A. R. (2012). The ethics of organ transplantation: A brief history. AMA Journal of Ethics, 264-268. Messerly, J. (2015, May 1). Summary of Hobbes’ political and ethical theories. Retrieved from Reason and Meaning: https://reasonandmeaning.com/2015/05/01/hobbes-political-and-ethical-theories-in-two-pages/ ETHC 445 Week 4 Greater Good Analysis Rachels, J. (2018). The elements of moral philosophy (9th ed.). [VitalSource Bookshelf 9.2.1]. Retrieved from vbk://9781260213003

Student Name Chamberlain University ETHC-445 Principles of Ethics Prof. Name Date Abortion The ethical debate surrounding abortion is complex and highly contested. This discussion explores the moral perspectives on abortion through the lenses of ethical egoism and social contract ethics, aiming to present an unbiased analysis of both viewpoints. Advances in medical technology have enabled procedures and medications that alleviate suffering, including abortion, which is the termination of pregnancy. Abortions can be performed surgically or medically (Gugliotta, 1996). Despite medical progress, abortion remains an ethical dilemma, with approximately half a million procedures occurring annually in the United States alone (Rachels, 2018). The core of the controversy centers on moral questions about the value of life and individual rights. What are the positions of an ethical egoist and a social contract ethicist on abortion? Ethical egoism is a moral philosophy grounded in the principle of self-interest, meaning individuals prioritize their own well-being when making decisions (Rachels, 2018). From an ethical egoist perspective, the choice to have an abortion aligns with personal interest, especially if the individual feels unable or unwilling to care for a child. This view supports abortion as a morally permissible act based on self-interest, regardless of broader societal implications. However, ethical egoism also aligns with the concept of commonsense morality, which includes respecting truth, keeping promises, and avoiding harm (Rachels, 2018). The act of abortion can conflict with the commonsense moral principle of not harming others, since pro-life advocates argue abortion constitutes the killing of a developing life, which they equate to murder. Conversely, social contract ethics bases morality on mutually agreed rules within society. According to this view, rational individuals accept norms that maintain social order (Rachels, 2018). This means the morality of abortion depends on societal consensus and context. For example, in scenarios of overpopulation, abortion may be seen as a necessary measure to regulate population growth. Alternatively, in cases where population decline threatens societal survival, abortion might be regarded as immoral to preserve humanity. The complexity of abortion is further highlighted by medical risks. McLean et al. (2019) refer to maternal death during abortion procedures as a “silent pandemic,” emphasizing the risk to the mother’s life in addition to the fetus. For social contract ethicists, this presents a conflict between personal and societal obligations. If a mother with existing children faces financial hardship and health risks, the decision to continue or terminate a pregnancy must weigh the welfare of current children against the potential loss of the mother’s life. ETHC 445 Week 3 Course Project Milestone – Abortion How do these ethical perspectives apply to abortion in practical terms? Ethical Perspective Core Principle Position on Abortion Key Considerations Ethical Egoism Self-interest Supports abortion based on individual choice Moral conflict arises from commonsense principle of “do no harm” (Rachels, 2018). Abortion justified if caring for child is against self-interest. Social Contract Ethics Mutual agreement and societal rules Morality of abortion depends on societal context Views vary with social needs (e.g., population control). Balances personal obligations with societal well-being. Risks of maternal death influence moral judgment (McLean et al., 2019). What implications does abortion have for nursing ethics? The American Nursing Association emphasizes the nurse’s role in promoting community health, preventing disease, and alleviating suffering regardless of personal beliefs (Zahedi et al., 2013). This ethical mandate supports providing care that prioritizes the patient’s well-being. In cases where pregnancy endangers the mother’s life, abortion may be viewed as a moral necessity to save the mother’s life, even if it means ending the life of the unborn child. Nurses must navigate these ethical challenges while respecting both patient autonomy and professional ethical codes. References Denis, L. (2007). Abortion and Kant’s Formula of Universal Law. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 37(4), 547-579. Gugliotta, M. (1996). Ethical dilemma of medical abortion. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 155(1), 18–19. Kain, J. (2009). Kant’s Defense of Human Moral Status. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 47(1), 59–101. https://doi.org/10.1353/hph.0.0083 ETHC 445 Week 3 Course Project Milestone – Abortion McLean, S., Desalegn, D. N., Blystad, A., & Miljeteig, I. (2019). When the law makes doors slightly open: ethical dilemmas among abortion service providers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. BMC Medical Ethics, 20(1), 60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-019-0396-4 Rachels, J. (2018). The Elements of Moral Philosophy (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Zahedi, F., Sanjari, M., Aala, M., Peymani, M., Aramesh, K., Parsapour, A., Maddah, S. S. B., Cheraghi, M. A., Mirzabeigi, G. H., Larijani, B., & Dastgerdi, M. V. (2013). The Code of Ethics for Nurses. Iran J Public Health.

Student Name Chamberlain University ETHC-445 Principles of Ethics Prof. Name Date Religion and Ethics Two distinct scenarios involving conflicts between personal choices and religious beliefs will be analyzed. The first concerns an 18-year-old lesbian girl whose religion opposes same-sex relationships. She faces the dilemma of whether to disclose her sexual orientation to her parents. The second scenario involves a couple who lost their child due to a rare disease and, being now infertile, are considering in vitro fertilization (IVF), which their religion forbids. The objective is to explore how ethics and religion intersect in each situation and to identify ethical and unethical courses of action. Ethics & Religion: Lesbian Many cultures and religions hold varied and often negative views on same-sex relationships. In numerous societies, identifying as lesbian or gay is stigmatized or outright condemned. The first case involves an 18-year-old woman wrestling with whether to reveal to her parents that she is a lesbian. According to Christian doctrine, same-sex relationships are prohibited; specifically, Romans 1:26-27 condemns such behavior as unnatural and punishable (Gnuse, 2015). Ethics, defined as principles of what is morally right or wrong, often intersect with religious teachings—individuals loyal to their faith typically follow the moral codes dictated by their religious texts and leaders (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). The woman’s situation is complicated because although she identifies as a lesbian and accepts that aspect of herself, she likely also values her religious beliefs. Ethical and Unethical Paths for the Lesbian Scenario Path Description Ethical Frameworks Involved Ethical She chooses to be honest with her parents about her sexuality. Acknowledging her identity may relieve internal conflict. Emotivism: Encourages expressing true feelings; Natural Law: Advises consulting God and family as part of purpose; Divine Command: Moral obligation to obey God but balanced with personal integrity (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). Unethical She suppresses her identity, denying her true feelings and deceiving her family and herself. Emotivism: May discourage honesty based on personal discomfort; Divine Command: Might view openness as disobedience, but this is debated. Ultimately, the woman’s decision is deeply personal. However, from an ethical standpoint that values authenticity and emotional well-being, disclosing her truth is advisable. Ethics & Religion: IVF Couple Joe and Mary lost their daughter to a rare disease and are now infertile. They desire another child and are considering IVF. The Catholic Church explicitly forbids reproductive technologies like IVF, as it views conception outside natural intercourse as immoral. Catholic doctrine strongly values the sanctity of human life, opposes abortion, and teaches that procreation should occur naturally within marriage (Sallam & Sallam, 2016). This couple faces a moral quandary: should they adhere strictly to religious doctrine or pursue IVF to fulfill their wish for another child? This dilemma demands reflection, prayer, and sincere consideration of their personal values. Ethical and Unethical Paths for the IVF Scenario Path Description Ethical Frameworks Involved Ethical They choose to follow their heartfelt desire to have a child, possibly opting for IVF despite religious prohibitions. Divine Command Ethics: Advises obedience to God’s law, suggesting no IVF; Emotivism: Supports decision based on personal feelings; Natural Law: Encourages prayer and trusting medical science as a gift to aid procreation (Sallam & Sallam, 2016). Unethical They reject their desire for a child to avoid conflict with church doctrine, potentially causing emotional distress. Divine Command Ethics: Strongly favors no IVF; Emotivism: May discourage pursuing IVF if personal feelings align with religion. In conclusion, the ethical choice aligns with the couple’s authentic values and conscience. While religious directives are influential, the couple’s personal ethics and emotional needs are equally significant. Conclusion Ultimately, ethical decisions in situations where religion and personal values clash depend on individual conscience. Choosing a path that feels morally right to the person is the ethical route for them. Decisions diverging from religious teachings are not inherently immoral; morality involves personal reflection and adherence to one’s own sense of right and wrong. References Gnuse, R. K. (2015, May 1). Seven Gay Texts: Biblical Passages Used to Condemn Homosexuality. Biblical Theology Bulletin, 45(2), 68–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146107915577097 Rachels, J., & Rachels, S. (2019). The Elements of Moral Philosophy (9th ed.). New York, McGraw-Hill Education. ETHC 445 Week 2 Religion and Ethics Sallam, H. N., & Sallam, N. H. (2016). Religious aspects of assisted reproduction. Facts, Views & Vision in ObGyn, 8(1), 33–48. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5096425/

Student Name Chamberlain University ETHC-445 Principles of Ethics Prof. Name Date Week 1 Assignment: Cultural Relativism and Moral Action In clinical environments, healthcare professionals frequently face ethical dilemmas, one of the most common involving cultural and religious differences. Nurses, in particular, may encounter conflicts between their own ethical judgments and the perspectives held by other healthcare team members. McLennon et al. (2013) highlight that ethical challenges arise when nurses feel tension between doing what they perceive as right and the views of colleagues. It is crucial for nurses to navigate such dilemmas ethically and professionally to ensure quality patient care. The dilemma I experienced is rooted in cultural and religious differences between myself and a close friend from high school. As a Muslim, I encountered a situation with my Hindu friend who visited my home with others. During our meal, she refrained from eating or drinking anything, even though she appeared hungry. According to her cultural beliefs, it is forbidden to consume food prepared in a household of a different religion. Despite her hunger and willingness to join us, she chose not to eat out of respect for her religious customs. ETHC 445 Week 1 Cultural Relativism and Moral Action Subjective moralism suggests that individuals determine what is right or wrong based on their own personal beliefs. In this scenario, a subjective moral relativist would support my friend’s decision, affirming that her choice to abstain from eating was morally correct since it aligned with her religious conviction. This perspective respects the autonomy of the individual to make moral choices without external judgment or coercion. In contrast, cultural relativism defines right and wrong based on the norms and values of a particular society or community. A cultural relativist would also validate my friend’s actions, as she adhered to the moral codes embedded within her cultural framework. Lynch (2019) explains that cultural relativism seeks to understand cultures on their own terms rather than by comparing them to other cultural standards. When my friends and I inquired about her behavior, she explained it was a cultural practice, which I honored despite it differing from my own tradition. For example, in my culture, it is considered impolite to leave someone’s home without accepting food or drink, underscoring the importance of hospitality. According to Rachels and Rachels (2019), various cultures have distinct moral codes that dictate what is deemed right or wrong within their communities. Even though I personally believe there might be an objective moral truth in this situation—such as the idea that she could have at least accepted water since she was alone—her cultural values took precedence, and I respected that choice. Table: Analysis of Moral Perspectives in the Dilemma Moral Framework Description Application to the Situation Conclusion Subjective Moralism Individuals define right and wrong based on personal beliefs. Friend chose not to eat due to her religious conviction. Her decision is morally valid within her personal belief system. Cultural Relativism Moral right and wrong are determined by cultural norms and societal context. Friend followed cultural norms forbidding eating in different religious homes. Her action aligns with her cultural moral code and should be respected. Objective Moral Truth There exists a universal right or wrong independent of individual or cultural beliefs. Consideration that drinking water could have been acceptable despite cultural rules. Suggests a possible universal ethical standard, but respect for culture is important. References Lynch, W. T. (2019). Between kin selection and cultural relativism: Cultural evolution and the origin of inequality. Perspectives on Science, 27(2), 278–315. https://doi.org/10.1162/posc_a_00308 ETHC 445 Week 1 Cultural Relativism and Moral Action McLennon, S. M., Uhrich, M., Lasiter, S., Chamness, A. R., & Helft, P. R. (2013). Oncology nurses’ narratives about ethical dilemmas and prognosis-related communication in advanced cancer patients. Cancer Nursing, 36(2), 114–121. https://doi.org/10.1097/ncc.0b013e31825f4dc8 Rachels, S., & Rachels, J. (2019). The elements of moral philosophy (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.