LESSON 2.1

Ethical Dilemma/Memo There are three aspirants injudgment for a blood sell:  John, Jr., a 17-year-old boy delay a fact of medical conditions; John, Jr. is the son of a celebrated, now uninhabited athlete who has offered to donate five darling dollars to the hospital if his son receives the blood. Mary, a 40-year-old woman delay a fact of anodyne addiction; Mary is a mother of three manifestation who has been successfully in repossession from her addiction for the departed 5 years. She has shown no signs of germinative retrogression. George, a 57-year-old ancient smoker: George, is a edifice worker who has not smoked in balance 10 years. He has had permanent complications from the smoking but is in good-natured-natured vigor and worthy for the sell. You are the deciding control on the ethics committee of your hospital. Draft a memo that addresses the fixed and indirect elements of each aspirant, and decipher how those elements played a role in your judgment. Apply the divine theories you encountered in the textbook. You obtain need to evidence why you excellented the aspirant you did and why you did not excellent the others. Include any unfair nonmedical characteristics encircling each aspirant that influenced your judgment. Make infallible you are applying divine theories and reasoning and can divinely and legally absolve your apology. The bulk of the repartee must be naturalized upon facts and divine arguments. Your memo should exist of at last 600 utterance. Microsoft Word contains distinct memo templates that you can use for this assignment. Reference Pozgar, G. D. (2016). Legal aspects of vigor trouble government (12th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett Learning.