A Case Study: Fetal Abnormality University Essay Example

Introduction

People tend to act differently according to specific situations depending on how they affect them mentally, physically, socially and economically. The case study on fetus abnormality has raised different perspectives about its moral status. Some people believe that a fetus has rights from as early as conception, others believe they have no right, while a good number believe that the moral status of a fetus increases with gestation. In that context, this paper will discuss the theories used or associated by Jessica, Marco, Maria and Dr William from the case study and how these theories determine their views and recommendations.

A Christian view of the nature of the human person and the supporting theories

Human beings are created in God’s image and likeliness; therefore, they should act and lead morally upright lives. According to White, human dignity should be valued and upheld by all beings since it is linked to God’s image (2020). A good percentage of Christians believe that all human beings have God-given free will: this means they are free to make their own choices and decisions. Christians believe that human beings are unique in God’s creation, which is why they are capable of making conscious decisions and can lead a moral life.

Theories compatible with Christian beliefs on moral status include virtue and deontological theories. Virtue theory focuses on individual character and human nature. Christians ought to live lives that glorify God, for God himself gave human beings moral commands to live by in their daily lives. The deontological theory emphasises the biblical teachings of treating others with the same capacity you would like to be treated. Since every human being is created equally in God’s image, they deserve to be treated equally and righteously as God’s unique creation.

Theories used by characters in the case study and their influence

In the case study ‘Fetal abnormality’, Marco, Jessica, Maria and Dr Wilson are influenced by different moral theories in determining the moral status of Jessica’s fetus. Dr William applies the approach of cognitive properties to assess the situation. He believes he should tell Jessica about the fundamental nature and conditions surrounding the fetus, and not doing so is going against his obligations as a doctor. He acts rationally by relaying Jessica’s options for the fetus, which shows that he sees the fetus as having no moral status; hence the mother is the one to decide (GCU, 2015). Marco uses the relationship theory on the fetus’s moral status because he considers Jessica’s feelings. As Jessica’s husband, he acknowledges his responsibilities, including protecting his wife’s feelings. He values Jessica’s reaction more than the fetus’s moral status. Maria applies the theory of human properties as she does not consider abortion an option. She wails, prays and advises Jessica against abortion. She believes that all human beings have moral rights; thus, abortion is immoral. Aunt Maria has a Christian worldview, as seen in her prayer, phoning the priests and her beliefs in God’s plan for all creation, including the unborn (GCU, 2015).

On the other hand, Jessica uses the theory of moral agency and sentience theory. Jessica feels the fetus is alive and deserves a chance at life but is also torn between her financial ability. Jessica is a moral agent and tries to work for herself to make the most appropriate decision.

In comparison with all other characters, Jessica is in a better position to determine the moral status of her unborn child. She holds the sole decision of undertaking abortion or saving the child. The relationship theory will also influence her decisions since she has to look into her family’s economic status and consider Aunt Maria’s advice and Dr William’s.

Influence of the theories on the recommendations for action

In relationship theory, Jessica shares a relationship with her child, which is why she finds it hard to consider abortion. Maria also acknowledges that Jessica is responsible for caring for the fetus as a mother. Marco respects his relationship with Jessica and is ready to go with her decision. Dr William understands his relationship with Jessica because, as her doctor, he is obliged to explain the nature of the situation and the possible alternatives.

Theories I agree with

I agree with the theory of human properties that all humans and animals have full moral status but varying degrees. Mentally incapacitated human beings have more excellent moral status than that animals. Therefore, the fetus, in our case, is of no difference. The fetus still has a better chance of surviving, and the possibility of it being mentally stable is low. Also, on the relationship theory, I believe a fetus is part of a woman’s body; hence it is her responsibility to take good care of it. Getting rid of a child is like getting rid of a considerable part of you. I recommend that Jessica carries the baby to full term since the chances of survival are higher despite the abnormalities. There are a lot of children with abnormalities who still lead everyday lives like any human beings.

Conclusion

Despite lacking rationality, a fetus will eventually grow and become an ordinary being; therefore, they deserve a chance at life whether they have abnormalities. Since the unborn child is created in God’s image, it should be allowed to live.

References

Dunnington, K. (2018). Humility, pride, and Christian virtue theory. Oxford University Press

Grand Canyon University (GCU), (2015). Case Study: fetus AbnormalitySebo, J. (n.d.). Moral Status

Metz, T. (2019). An African theory of moral status: A relational alternative to individualism and holism. In African Environmental Ethics (pp. 9-27). Springer, Cham.

White, N. (2020a). God, humanity, and human dignity. GCU Digital Resources. Web.

Challenges Faced By Native Communities In America Essay Example

I). Loss of Land.

Loss of land and dispossession of property is a great challenge faced by the Native tribes in the United States of America. The new data set quantifies that these communities have lost 99 percent of their land, leading to forced migration. They are forced to reside in fewer valuable areas, which excludes them from the economic development in the United States of America. Two of the climate change concerns that pose the biggest threat to modern Indigenous lands are high temperatures and low precipitation levels. The current data set also reveals that indigenous territories have 24 percent fewer oil and gas resources than historical areas. This implies indigenous people have had fewer chances to benefit from the energy economy’s reliance on fossil fuels. He speculates that specific indigenous communities might not have used those materials as extensively as European colonists did. However, they were never given a chance to decide otherwise.

However, this problem and dispute in Native America began in 1786 when the United States established reserves for the Native Americans. “The myth of the United States “plenary power” has been used to steal the homelands of Indian peoples living east of the Mississippi River by removing them from their traditional ancestral homelands through the Indian Removal Act of 1835” (Newcomb., 2009 p186). The Native Americans resisted the Europeans from gaining more land during the colonial period. The European nations were rushing to scramble for land in the “New World,” which resulted in conflict with the indigenous inhabitants of America. However, the Natives had been weakened by European diseases such as smallpox, which killed almost 90 percent of their population. These land disputes have continued to this day, where the Native communities have been pushed to less productive areas.

II). Continued issues of self-governance and rights to vote.

The Native Americans were deprived of self-governance and determination by the federal government, “Within the first decade of existence of the federal government, the fledgling democracy’s inexorable need to expand led to increased conflict between indigenous and non-indigenous people” (Lobo et al., 2009 p191). The right to vote and self-governance for Native American s has been uphill. Although the Indian Citizenship Act was passed in 1924, many Native Americans living on reservations were still denied the right to vote. Native Americans in New Mexico and Arizona won a court case guaranteeing their right to vote in 1948. Only in the latter years, between 1957 and 1958, did any states provide Native Americans living on reservations the ability to vote. When voting rights were finally won, voter suppression laws prevented Native Americans from exercising them and running for office.

Native Americans living on reservations did not pay state taxes or were wards of the federal government was used as an excuse by several states to deny those Native Americans the right to vote. Native Americans, for instance, were deemed by the courts in Arizona for decades to qualify as “persons under guardianship.” As a result, they were denied the right to vote following the state’s constitution. In a historic ruling from 1948, the Arizona Supreme Court finally granted Native American citizens the right to vote. In the same year, a federal three-judge court ruled in a New Mexico case that a state constitutional clause barring “Indians not taxed” from voting was unconstitutional under the 14th and 15th Amendments. In 1957, Utah overturned its law that prevented Native Americans from casting ballots in state elections. Native Americans won the right to vote nationwide, but some states still used discriminatory methods like literacy tests to suppress their votes and the votes of other minorities.

Responses to these challenges.

The Natives first responded to the voting and self-governance issue through “Increased political participation and territory expansion” (Wilkins, 2009, p189). Native Americans Rights Fund suggested a new project in January 2015 to bring together voting rights campaigners, lawyers, civil rights experts, and tribal advocates to debate voting concerns in Indian Country and explore solutions. In the past, there was no united effort to safeguard Native Americans’ voting rights; thus, campaigners worked alone. Much of the effort was in response to an imminent threat, not planned before an election. NARF wanted to change that. People formed the Native American Voting Rights Coalition (NAVRC).

The Coalition’s primary goal is to make sure that voting opportunities are available to Native Americans and that they can cast their ballots in all elections. The National Association of Voting Rights Commissioners (NAVRC) has increased its efforts to prevent voter suppression and violations of voting rights legislation as evidence of these issues has developed. This includes preparing for redistricting that will take place following the census in 2020, resolving irregularities that were noticed in the 2016 elections, and supervising the largest survey of Native voters ever performed to learn more about the current situation of voting in Indian Country.

The Native Americans responded to the challenge of loss of land through litigation, demonstrations and protests, and armed resistance. For example, the Native communities first resisted the Land Removal Act of 1830 by force, “Armed resistance; under duress” (Lobo et al., 2009 p189). In addition, Native American groups in the United States are organizing marches to the capitals of their respective states, where they will stage protests and interact directly with government officials. Native American communities in the United States that lack governmental protection have organized their patrols to keep an eye out for unlawful activities and remove undesirable guests. These patrols also remove unwanted visitors.

Native Americans are also using the Supreme court to fight against the non-Natives grabbing their land. In a landmark decision for tribal sovereignty, the U.S. Supreme Court held that states could prosecute non-Native people who commit crimes against a Native person on tribal territories, reversing decades of practice. After being convicted of child abuse in 2015 for abusing his Native American stepdaughter on the Cherokee Reservation in Oklahoma, non-Native Victor Manuel Castro-Huerta was given a 35-year sentence. The Supreme Court’s ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma, which upheld the idea that states cannot prosecute crimes committed on Native American grounds without federal authority, was the basis for Castro-appeal Huerta’s conviction.

References

Lobo, S., Talbot, S., & Carlston, T. M. (2016). Native American voices. Routledge.

(2020, December 20). YouTube. Retrieved September 24, 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVer6Z9wMzw.

Newcomb. (2009). Ebook Central. “500 years of injustice” (pp. 182–187). Taylor & Francis Group. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csla/reader.action?docID=4415695&ppg=188.

Wilkins, E. (2009). eBook Central. A history of federal Indian policy” (pp. 188–201). Taylor & Francis Group. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/csla/reader.action?docID=4415695&ppg=188.

Challenges Faced By Women In The Modern Society Free Sample

In the ever-changing modern society, women have continued to participate in roles initially reserved for men. This aspect is so, especially in the journalism profession. However, while gender injustice has continued to influence this profession in society today, the prioritization of gender equality has played an incredible role in ensuring gender justice in journalism. The aspect has, however, allowed women Journalists to occupy prominent positions in the field. Despite compensation being viewed as the reward that individuals get from offering their services, necessities, and goods, Women journalists have continued to face challenges, especially in the area of fair pay compared to their counterparts. The issue has not only affected their performance in the field but also explains the low living standards of many women journalists today. Since the 1980s, the gap in the pay difference between men and women journalists has continued to widen. The aspect sets equal pay as the biggest challenge for women journalists, geared by the continued rise of commercialized media, unreasonable pay systems, unequal contracts, changing female responsibilities, and gendered story allocations.

Some of these women journalist challenges stem from the fact that the market economy and mass media largely influence modern media. In the United States, for instance, media are independent of government influence. Instead, media are viewed as commercial companies that, to a considerable degree, rely on the public to make money. For this reason, they mainly rely on their advertising level and public demand for the media to have influence and earn profits. To ensure this, journalists undergo professional journalism training, abide by professional ethics, use accurate and logical language, and take risks to provide people worldwide with truthful and fast information[1]. However, unlike other professions, journalism is merely a means of making a living, implying instability in the career. For this reason, media is a product of the business world and a contract system subject to termination. Like Christine Craft‘s book Too Old, Too Ugly, and Not Deferential to Men, media companies make a fortune by pleasing their clients.[2] For instance, when Kansas City television stations want to raise audience ratings, they hire a female anchor. Moreover, she was given makeup and clothing guidance according to the audience’s preferences and even provided with a particular “clothing calendar.[3]” However, when Craft cannot meet the audience’s expectations, which is the market demand, and becomes “too old, too unattractive, and not sufficiently deferential to men,” she will be fired. Even though her reports are accurate, she has strong journalistic skills.

However, a number of female journalists’ problems emerge from the commercialization of the news industry. While women are expected to fulfill the professional ethics of journalists, such as reporting truthfully and writing excellent news for their clients, they are also expected to meet the audience’s high expectations for female journalists.[4] These expectations may include their mode of clothing, maintaining a particular skin color, accessories, makeup, hairstyle, and voice alongside other expectations. While during the 1980s, men could wear the same outfit for some days, only changing the accessories. In contrast, women were expected to wear different outfits to fulfill the audience.[5] This is so because men were the audience in the media. Also, unlike men, women’s attitudes, character, personal opinions, and political leanings were judged.[6] With gender discrimination on the rise in this period, the audience wanted to see a woman who was not as wise as themselves, precisely, without critical thinking like Craft, who could question the mayor and understand the difference between the United States and the National League. In the book I Want a Wife, Judy Brady states that women take the “second shift” in their families when they are away from work.[7] Compared to men, women too more time to care for the children.

Furthermore, despite women’s special responsibility to give birth, they attract the same pay rate as men. This is so since most media companies’ pay system is anchored on aspects such as the number of days worked, news quality, and quantity.[8] Thus, pregnancy, childbirth, and breastfeeding imply women will attract less pay for the period. Like Dorothy Butler Gilliam, described in Trailblazer: A Pioneering Journalist’s Fight to Make the Media Look More Like America, had to work part-time after having children.[9] The aspect implies that media companies have less or no specificity of women during critical periods, especially during childbirth. Thus these women undergo the severe challenge of raising kids with no pay explaining the noble decision for most of the journalist women ate marriage and not having children. The equal work and unequal pay are further necessitated by the fact that women choose to work extra hours in order to create time for their families.[10] Working under a flexible schedule implies low pay as compared to men. To compensate for this and deal with the livelihood issues, Butler Gilliam had to forego her traditional role as a mother after her first child. Under the current system, there has been a severe conflict between childbirth mothers and their remuneration.

Balancing childbirth and profession has been a severe challenge for women journalists. For instance, since ten months of pregnancy is the beginning of the marginalization for many female journalists in the workplace, then giving birth heralds that they must temporarily leave their jobs. When female journalists return after giving birth, someone else may have replaced the position. It is a minimal team model of journalists, editors, managers, and vacancies in the industry are very limited and depend on who leaves.[11] Once a journalist leaves, it is challenging to return to their previous positions and teams. What is more, for women, there are only a few newsrooms and teams that will open a small number of places to women, as Butler Gilliam got a referral and worked at The Washington Post. When women want to get back in or find a new female-friendly newsroom, it is almost impossible.

Labor contracts are also challenging in the women journalist context. For instance, Craft had been awarded an unequal labor contract called a standard contract. Neither wage increases nor duration of work is guaranteed in the contract. At the same time, a “moral clause” was also blatantly added. A TV station can fire a person at will because she is considered unacceptable within the community. This kind of violation of privacy and civil liberties clauses was blatantly added to the labor contracts of female journalists and deceived into signing them. This kind of contract further deepens women’s challenges in equal pay, labor security, and the pursuit of justice.[12]

The gendered story allocations of male and female journalists engaged in the news-types lead to income inequalities. News covering politics, business, economics, diplomacy, and sports is often referred to as hard news. In contrast, feature-type stories, family, childcare, social affairs, education, lifestyle, and the arts are often referred to as soft news. Although more and more women have begun to join hard journalism in recent years, sports, science, foreign affairs, and business reporting are considered off-limits for most female journalists, and the vast majority of women remain trapped in soft journalism, traditionally dominated by The field of women’s reporting. The main reason hard news is male-dominated is that the masculine newsroom culture discourages women from accessing hard news.[13] Many editors subconsciously prefer strong-talking masculine men over women. In addition, being in power has formed a tight alliance between men at the top of government and other men in the news industry, preventing women from joining the network of complex news relationships as newcomers. Those who write hard news are privileged and highly regarded because their content hugely impacts the economy, finance, government, and international relations and are promoted faster than those who write less important soft news. At the same time, the salary will naturally be higher. The wage gap between women and men in journalism stems from the fact that they are restricted to writing only soft news stories, and deep-rooted gender biases hinder women’s opportunities to report hard news.

With the changing journalism environment, gender justice is continuing to get traction. However, some media companies still hold policies that have continued to propel challenges to women journalists, making it easy for women to lose their jobs and spend more time and money to satisfy audiences.[14] Also, these companies pay systems are insensitive to women’s challenges, especially during birth. Women’s responsibility puts women at significant risk of losing their jobs after giving birth. Also, unfair labor contracts and high audience demand for women, alongside other policies, explain the inherent difference between men and women journalists today. These gender-dominated news genres hinder women journalists’ promotion and leadership. However, addressing these issues would play an incredible role in making women journalists’ professions easy and fulfilling.

Bibliography

Brady, Judy. “I Want a Wife.” New York Magazine, December 20, 1971.

Chambers, Deborah, Linda Steiner, and Carole Fleming. Women and Journalism. 1st ed. London: Routledge, 2004.

Craft, Christine. “Chapters 2 and 3.” Essay. In Too Old, Too Ugly, and Not Deferential to Men, 29–67. New York: Dell, 1989.

Gilliam, Dorothy Butler. “Chapters: ‘Coming to the Washington Post, 1961,’ ‘Being Mrs. Sam Gilliam, 1962-1982,’ and ‘Return to the Washington Post.’” Essay. In Trailblazer: A Pioneering Journalist’s Fight to Make the Media Look More like America, 1–211. Nashville: Center Street, Hachette Book Group, 2019.

Kim, Kyung-Hee, and Youngmin Yoon. “The Influence of Journalists’ Gender on Newspaper Stories about Women Cabinet Members in South Korea.” Asian Journal of Communication 19, no. 3 (September 23, 2009): 289–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292980903039004.

North, Louise. “The Gender of ‘Soft’ and ‘Hard’ News.” Journalism Studies 17, no. 3 (2016): 356–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670x.2014.987551.

[1] Christine, Craft. “Chapters 2 and 3.” Essay. In Too Old, Too Ugly, and Not Deferential to Men, 29–67. New York: Dell, 1989.

[2] Christine, Craft. “Chapters 2 and 3.” Essay. In Too Old, Too Ugly, and Not Deferential to Men, 29–67. New York: Dell, 1989.

[3] Deborah, Chambers Linda Steiner, and Carole Fleming. Women and Journalism. 1st ed. London: Routledge, 2004.

[4] Christine, Craft, 52

[5] Christine, Craft, 65

[6] Christine, Craft, 66

[7] Judy, Brandy. “I Want a Wife.” New York Magazine, December 20, 1971.

[8] Deborah, Steiner, and Fleming, 43.

[9] Gilliam, Dorothy Butler. “Chapters: ‘Coming to the Washington Post, 1961,’ ‘Being Mrs. Sam Gilliam, 1962-1982,’ and ‘Return to the Washington Post.’” Essay. In Trailblazer: A Pioneering Journalist’s Fight to Make the Media Look More like America, 1–211. Nashville: Center Street, Hachette Book Group, 2019.

[10] Butler Gilliam, 131.

[11] Butler Gilliam, 10.

[12] Christine Craft, 51.

[13] Kyung-Hee Kim and Youngmin Yoon, “The Influence of Journalists’ Gender on Newspaper Stories about Women Cabinet Members in South Korea,” Asian Journal of Communication 19, no. 3 (September 23, 2009): pp. 289-301, https://doi.org/10.1080/01292980903039004.

[14] Louise North, “The Gender of ‘Soft’ and ‘Hard’ News,” Journalism Studies 17, no. 3 (August 2016): pp. 356-373, https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670x.2014.987551.

error: Content is protected !!