ADD Forums - Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Support and Information Resources Community  

Go Back   ADD Forums - Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Support and Information Resources Community > ADULTS AND ADD/ADHD > Adults with ADD > General ADD Talk
Register Blogs FAQ Chat Members List Calendar Donate Gallery Arcade Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-08-04, 03:30 PM
Trooper Keith's Avatar
Trooper Keith Trooper Keith is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,841
Blog Entries: 16
Thanks: 226
Thanked 3,330 Times in 1,335 Posts
Trooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond repute
Post Attention Deficit Disorder and Moral Development

Please do not read any replies to this thread before you, yourself, have responded.

Kohlberg, a psychologist in the 60s, was interested in studying the moral development of individuals throughout their lives. He devised a series of questions and surveys and interviews and so further to determine this, and thereby developed stages of moral reasoning, as well as the normal age ranges during which these stages appear...

One such question he used is the commonly used Heinz Dilemma. I am wondering whether or not we, here, as a population, demonstrate a particular trend, deviation, or anything else concerning moral reasoning...as such, this is a kind of pseudo-experiment...really just the same as any other poll, just I can't put poll options up, because it asks "why."

At any rate, I am posting the Heinz Dilemma. If you want to answer, I'd ask that you:

1) Please DO NOT read anyone elses replies before you post your own. After reading, just go to the "post reply" button at the TOP of the thread, and reply answering the questions in the format given...

2) Please answer truthfully and honestly. Stages of Moral Development have no value rating, and it's important to keep bias down so we can see an accurate reading of moral development here.


A follow up as to what your reply means will be posted as a reply to this thread immediately after it is posted. PLEASE DO NOT READ THAT REPLY UNTIL YOU HAVE ANSWERED.

Obviously, I won't be able to tell if you don't follow what I asked, so we're going on the honor system here...

Without further ado...

The Heinz Dilemma

Scenario 1

A woman was near death from a unique kind of cancer. There is a drug that might save her. The drug costs $4,000 per dosage. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money and tried every legal means, but he could only get together about $2,000. He asked the doctor scientist who discovered the drug for a discount or let him pay later. But the doctor scientist refused.

Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

Scenario 2

Heinz broke into the laboratory and stole the drug. The next day, the newspapers reported the break-in and theft. Brown, a police officer and a friend of Heinz remembered seeing Heinz last evening, behaving suspiciously near the laboratory. Later that night, he saw Heinz running away from the laboratory.

Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?

Scenario 3

Officer Brown reported what he saw. Heinz was arrested and brought to court. If convicted, he faces up to two years' jail. Heinz was found guilty.

Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?



IN REPLYING: please answer the why or why not. The important part of the question is not what the response should be, but the why/why not answer. Please copy/paste the questions below and answer them in your reply so we can see what are answers to what.

Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?



Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?



Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?
__________________
I wish I was a headlight on northbound train; I'd shine my light through the cool Colorado rain.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-08-04, 03:38 PM
Trooper Keith's Avatar
Trooper Keith Trooper Keith is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,841
Blog Entries: 16
Thanks: 226
Thanked 3,330 Times in 1,335 Posts
Trooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond repute
Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

Yes, Heinz should steal the drug for his wife, because to not do so would dishonor himself and his family. Even though it is against the law, Heinz has to live up to certain moral standards. It is best if Heinz will later reimburse the druggist for his loss, though. If he didn't, then his actions would harm the other unduly, and that should be avoided. Nevertheless, Heinz has little choice but to steal the drug, after he has done all he can do to get it legitimately.

Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?

Brown should report what he saw as obligation to his duty. As a police officer, he needs to uphold the law. It he did not, then he'd be failing to live up to his duty and he'd be failing to do what he stands for. Even though Heinz is his friend, it is his first and primary duty to uphold the law. Failing to do his duty would be dishonorable.

Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?

The judge should punish Heinz, unless Heinz can reimburse the Druggist later down the line. Even though Heinz was doing a greater good in stealing the drug, he still broke the law. As such, he still needs to be held accountable for doing such. If we don't enforce the laws, what is the point of them? It would have been worse for Heinz if he had not stolen the drug and let his wife die, but his actions still have consequences.
__________________
I wish I was a headlight on northbound train; I'd shine my light through the cool Colorado rain.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-08-04, 03:42 PM
Trooper Keith's Avatar
Trooper Keith Trooper Keith is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,841
Blog Entries: 16
Thanks: 226
Thanked 3,330 Times in 1,335 Posts
Trooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond reputeTrooper Keith has a reputation beyond repute
A SUMMARY OF LAWRENCE KOHLBERG'S
STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT
Copyright 2000 by
Robert N. Barger, Ph.D.
University of Notre Dame
Notre Dame, IN 46556

Lawrence Kohlberg was, for many years, a professor at Harvard University. He became famous for his work there beginning in the early 1970s. He started as a developmental psychologist and then moved to the field of moral education. He was particularly well-known for his theory of moral development which he popularized through research studies conducted at Harvard's Center for Moral Education.

His theory of moral development was dependent on the thinking of the Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget and the American philosopher John Dewey. He was also inspired by James Mark Baldwin. These men had emphasized that human beings develop philosophically and psychologically in a progressive fashion.

Kohlberg believed...and was able to demonstrate through studies...that people progressed in their moral reasoning (i.e., in their bases for ethical behavior) through a series of stages. He believed that there were six identifiable stages which could be more generally classified into three levels.

Kohlberg's classification can be outlined in the following manner:

Pre-conventional
1 Obedience and Punishment
2 Individualism, Instrumentalism, and Exchange

Conventional
3 "Good boy/girl"
4 Law and Order

Post-conventional
5 Social Contract
6 Principled Conscience

[I edited the format of these to fit the forum format better - Keith]

The first level of moral thinking is that generally found at the elementary school level. In the first stage of this level, people behave according to socially acceptable norms because they are told to do so by some authority figure (e.g., parent or teacher). This obedience is compelled by the threat or application of punishment. The second stage of this level is characterized by a view that right behavior means acting in one's own best interests.

The second level of moral thinking is that generally found in society, hence the name "conventional." The first stage of this level (stage 3) is characterized by an attitude which seeks to do what will gain the approval of others. The second stage is one oriented to abiding by the law and responding to the obligations of duty.

The third level of moral thinking is one that Kohlberg felt is not reached by the majority of adults. Its first stage (stage 5) is an understanding of social mutuality and a genuine interest in the welfare of others. The last stage (stage 6) is based on respect for universal principle and the demands of individual conscience. While Kohlberg always believed in the existence of Stage 6 and had some nominees for it, he could never get enough subjects to define it, much less observe their longitudinal movement to it.

Kohlberg believed that individuals could only progress through these stages one stage at a time. That is, they could not "jump" stages. They could not, for example, move from an orientation of selfishness to the law and order stage without passing through the good boy/girl stage. They could only come to a comprehension of a moral rationale one stage above their own. Thus, according to Kohlberg, it was important to present them with moral dilemmas for discussion which would help them to see the reasonableness of a "higher stage" morality and encourage their development in that direction. The last comment refers to Kohlberg's moral discussion approach. He saw this as one of the ways in which moral development can be promoted through formal education. Note that Kohlberg believed, as did Piaget, that most moral development occurs through social interaction. The discussion approach is based on the insight that individuals develop as a result of cognitive conflicts at their current stage.
__________________
I wish I was a headlight on northbound train; I'd shine my light through the cool Colorado rain.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #4  
Old 10-08-04, 04:05 PM
Ian's Avatar
Ian Ian is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 4,698
Blog Entries: 6
Thanks: 29
Thanked 295 Times in 107 Posts
Ian has disabled reputation
Scenario 1
No he should not. Death is inevitable and if he hasn't got the money, he might have (as might his wife) have the capacity to come to peace with it all as we all need to.

Scenario 2
Brown has to report. If not he jeopardises his own dependants well being by threatening his job.

Scenario 3
No jail. No need to, he isn't a threat to himself or others.
__________________
A: Yes.
>Q: Are you sure?
>>A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
>>>Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-08-04, 06:04 PM
One on One One on One is offline
Member
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 39
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
One on One is on a distinguished road
1. Yes. Saving a life is more important than money.

2. No. Don't snitch.

3. No. He saved a life.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-08-04, 07:39 PM
Tara's Avatar
Tara Tara is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Middleboro, MA USA
Posts: 6,363
Thanks: 23
Thanked 492 Times in 228 Posts
Tara is a name known to allTara is a name known to allTara is a name known to allTara is a name known to allTara is a name known to allTara is a name known to all
Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

No, I don't think he should break into the lab. It's awful that his wife can not get the meds but stealing is wrong. There are also so many consequences to doing so. Many of which could prevent this man from spending the last moments of his wife's life with her.




Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?

Ok here comes my ADD related indesiveness...I don't know if he should report the him. I think a lot depends on how good of friends they are and how dedicated this person is to his job. If he doesn't tell then he should probably look for a new line of work. These are things that are parts of his job description which he agreed to follow when he tool the job.



Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?

I think the man should be punished but not sent to prison. He should be required to pay the money back and maybe be given community service or a suspened sentence. Sending him to jail or prison won't help this man or the community. Sending him into the correctional system would probably make this man worse than he was before he entered.
__________________
Tara
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-09-04, 12:25 AM
GeminiChick's Avatar
GeminiChick GeminiChick is offline
Member
 

Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: South Bend, IN
Posts: 56
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
GeminiChick is on a distinguished road
Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?
Yes he should...for the simple fact that he loves his wife and will do anything to help her live...desperate measures for desperate circumstances.

Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?

I'm kind of torn on this, but I would say yes...as a police officer, it's his duty whether he has a personal relationship with the perpetrator or not, plus his conscience would probably bother him if he didn't.

Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?

No...Heinz is undoubtedly guilty of the crime, but he isn't a threat to the community. If his wife hadn't been denied the potentially life-saving medication, he wouldn't have had to resort to stealing.
__________________
Julie
We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are. - Anais Nin
Say what you mean and mean what you say and don't be mean when you say it. - Bergdorf Blondes
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-09-04, 12:57 AM
paulbf paulbf is offline
Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,430
Thanks: 0
Thanked 18 Times in 16 Posts
paulbf will become famous soon enough
Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

Yes. We don't know that it would hurt anyone.


Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?

No (unless there is some consequence we don't know.


Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?

No, he should resign from his position.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-09-04, 02:35 PM
RhapsodyInBlue RhapsodyInBlue is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: ..........
Posts: 2,221
Thanks: 0
Thanked 28 Times in 12 Posts
RhapsodyInBlue has disabled reputation
I scroll down careful so as not to see........

Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?
Yes, he should. I would if I were him because my family are important to me, and I'd risk my own life, so yes. He should steal the drug!!!!

Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?

Part of me wants to say NO, but the logical part says that it is Brown's job to report what he saw. So, going by my own ethics, yes he should report it.

Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?

Grrrrrrrrr, my feeling part wants to say 'no', but my logic says yes. So yes. The same would apply in euthanasia cases. Heinz knew he was breaking the law, but chose to do so out of family love, honor and loyalty. I hope the judge is lenient. I would be.

I really liked this Keith. Thank you for making me think.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-09-04, 03:39 PM
GirlDriver's Avatar
GirlDriver GirlDriver is offline
ADDvanced Member
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 114
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
GirlDriver is on a distinguished road
Heinz dilemma response

1. Yes, Heinz should break in and steal the drug. Loyalty to his ill wife trumps stealing the drug.
2. No, the cop-friend should not report it. Heinz was not really behaving suspiciously. The cop did not witness a crime.
3. No, the judge should not sentence Heinz to two years as the punishment is "up to two years." This seems to indicate a maximum punishment for for an incorrigible theif. The judge should impose the minimum sentence. Heinz had an important reason for stealing, but he assumed the risk of being punished when he broke the law.
GirlDriver


Quote:
Originally Posted by KMiller
Please do not read any replies to this thread before you, yourself, have responded.

Kohlberg, a psychologist in the 60s, was interested in studying the moral development of individuals throughout their lives. He devised a series of questions and surveys and interviews and so further to determine this, and thereby developed stages of moral reasoning, as well as the normal age ranges during which these stages appear...

One such question he used is the commonly used Heinz Dilemma. I am wondering whether or not we, here, as a population, demonstrate a particular trend, deviation, or anything else concerning moral reasoning...as such, this is a kind of pseudo-experiment...really just the same as any other poll, just I can't put poll options up, because it asks "why."

At any rate, I am posting the Heinz Dilemma. If you want to answer, I'd ask that you:

1) Please DO NOT read anyone elses replies before you post your own. After reading, just go to the "post reply" button at the TOP of the thread, and reply answering the questions in the format given...

2) Please answer truthfully and honestly. Stages of Moral Development have no value rating, and it's important to keep bias down so we can see an accurate reading of moral development here.


A follow up as to what your reply means will be posted as a reply to this thread immediately after it is posted. PLEASE DO NOT READ THAT REPLY UNTIL YOU HAVE ANSWERED.

Obviously, I won't be able to tell if you don't follow what I asked, so we're going on the honor system here...

Without further ado...

The Heinz Dilemma

Scenario 1

A woman was near death from a unique kind of cancer. There is a drug that might save her. The drug costs $4,000 per dosage. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money and tried every legal means, but he could only get together about $2,000. He asked the doctor scientist who discovered the drug for a discount or let him pay later. But the doctor scientist refused.

Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

Scenario 2

Heinz broke into the laboratory and stole the drug. The next day, the newspapers reported the break-in and theft. Brown, a police officer and a friend of Heinz remembered seeing Heinz last evening, behaving suspiciously near the laboratory. Later that night, he saw Heinz running away from the laboratory.

Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?

Scenario 3

Officer Brown reported what he saw. Heinz was arrested and brought to court. If convicted, he faces up to two years' jail. Heinz was found guilty.

Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?



IN REPLYING: please answer the why or why not. The important part of the question is not what the response should be, but the why/why not answer. Please copy/paste the questions below and answer them in your reply so we can see what are answers to what.

Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?



Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?



Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-09-04, 05:12 PM
fasttalkingmom's Avatar
fasttalkingmom fasttalkingmom is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 3,343
Thanks: 1
Thanked 21 Times in 18 Posts
fasttalkingmom has a spectacular aura aboutfasttalkingmom has a spectacular aura about
Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not? No, he'd be putting himself at risk of getting into situations that wouldn't be helpful to his wife. And it's stealing !


Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not? he should because he's an officer and that's his job regardless if it was his friend


Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not? yes stealing is stealing
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-09-04, 06:36 PM
Onwari's Avatar
Onwari Onwari is offline
ADDvanced Member
 

Join Date: May 2004
Location: In my own little world.
Posts: 170
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts
Onwari is on a distinguished road
I sure hope no one from work reads this.

1. Yes, Heinz should break into the laboratory. Those doctors discovered the drug to save lives. They should be saving lives. That is why they did the research. I think the doctors are being extrememly greedy. Greedy people...sheeesh. I say Heinz should break into the laboratory, take the drug and leave $2,000 dollars.

2. No, I don't think Brown should report what he saw. If he knows Heinz and what he and his wife are going through, that is. Turn the other cheek dude. If it was a drug addict, turn them in. Let them get the help they need. Heinz's wife will get the help she needs from the break in.

3. No I don't think that poor man should be found guilty. If the Judge sentences him to jail, what the heck has happened to humanity? The doctors should be on trial for their greed! How dare they do what they did!

Maybe make Heinz work community service for punishment if he has to be punished.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-14-04, 11:56 AM
Dreameralive_sky's Avatar
Dreameralive_sky Dreameralive_sky is offline
ADDvanced Contributor
 

Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 533
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Dreameralive_sky has disabled reputation
Talking Sky's honest replies..... ^_-~*

Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

No, I think he shouldn't steal, firstly I think it is not easy to break in to a lab and steal a drug. Secondly I will respect the scientist's decision, as I understand too it is not easy to come up with a trial (Sorry because I studied something about the clinical trial therefore...) and it takes a lot of money. If everyone goes up to him and ask for discounts, the scientist will not be able to make enough money to cover up the expenses incurred in the clinical trial. And the patent issues here, so they wanna make profits fast. It is not fair to make discounts, and make payments later- How can you gurantee me you will really be paying me and not running off payments? Verbally anyone can say it. Stealing is offence, although Heinz loves his wife, but since I thought if I am him, I am not going to be a good thief and I will get caught, I wouldn't wanna risk myself get to jail at the moment when my wife is dying. I think even if I am going to do it out of love and steal the drugs for my wife, I think they will track me down too easily. Their first suspect is me coz the negoiation with doctor failed and I am desperate, Thus I might be the culprit. So since there is so much risks I wouldn't do it if I am Heinz.


Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?


No. Although that Brown is a policeman and it is his responsibilty to uphold justice, but I believe in compassion. Beside he is doing it out of love for his wife. He is already in so much trouble by risking himself like that. If he goes to jail, he can't accompany his dying wife. They will be upset. Although Brown is a policeman, I am sure there is a difference between on job and off-duty life. You are not policeman when you are off-duty, lol , and so you can do what you like. Just pretend that you don't see it. I suspect that if Brown decided to report his friend, maybe is out of justice and responsibility but maybe it is because he wanted this job promotion and wanted to somehow get some good reccomandations on his spirit or something? So I think Brown should just close one eye and pretend he didn't see it.


Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?

Yes. Of course. There is laws in country and if the judge does not, the world will be in riot. But, the judge should also be compassionate and consider his reasons for offences. I actually think the judge could actually not sentenced him to jail immediately, but wait for his wife to die first and sentence him to jail, but not very likely. If he don't sentence Heinz to prison it will be unfair to others who committed similar offences. If he don't others may hate the country and even create more problem. Since this is like a "large-scale" consequences, yes, the appropraite actions be taken. It is different from the Brown's because that the consequences doesn't involve a "large-scale" impacts...and no one will know that Brown witnessed it.
__________________

" If you complain less and appreciate better, you will find in every each hour at least one heavenly blessings. "


" When you refused to open the door to the man who have come delivered a task to you, tomorrow he shall return and brings 7 more new tasks/works for you. The more I prepare in today, the better I have for tml."
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-14-04, 01:17 PM
Kimalimah's Avatar
Kimalimah Kimalimah is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wherever I happen to be
Posts: 3,566
Thanks: 1
Thanked 99 Times in 31 Posts
Kimalimah has a spectacular aura aboutKimalimah has a spectacular aura about
Should Heinz break into the laboratory and steal the drug for his wife?
I don't think he should. There is no knowing if the drug would help, he knows nothing about how it works, what could go wrong, how many doses she would need, or how to administer it. Maybe the scientist had a GOOD reason for not cooperating, like the drug caused so much other damage that the life saved would be no life at all...

In addition, maybe his wife doesn't want to be saved. Maybe she has made her peace with this life and is ready to move on. He would be acting in a really selfish manner without thought for others and what they need or want.

Should Brown report what he saw?
Yes, he should. He swore to protect and serve, to uphold the law. I think it's important, though, that he talk to Heinz first. He needs to tell him that he is going to report what he saw and offer to help him untangle the mess he's gotten himself into. Clearly, Heinz is not functioning normally under all the strain and needs people who care near him to help him cope with the sadness, rage, frustration, helplessness. Perhaps, Heinz will cooperate willingly if he knows he's not alone and has made a mistake. If not, it is not Brown's fault if Heinz continues to make matters worse. He tried to help.

Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison?
No, what purpose would it serve. He is clearly not functioning normally and needs the support of society not the isolation of prison. I am assuming that he has not had trouble with the law before and there is no reason to believe that he would do something like this again. He needs counselling and as "punishment" community service would be far more effective. It would keep him active in his community which is important for his well-being too. Maybe he'll actually find solace in being able to help "someone", even if he couldn't help his wife.



Keith, challenging, thought-provoking, interesting. I am now curious as to how others responded.

Kim
__________________
"Character cannot be developed in ease and quiet. Only through experience of trial and suffering can the soul be strengthened, ambition inspired, and success achieved." - Helen Keller
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-14-04, 02:04 PM
f_wcomboadhd's Avatar
f_wcomboadhd f_wcomboadhd is offline
ADDvanced Contributor
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: cypress tx, (greater houston)
Posts: 508
Thanks: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
f_wcomboadhd is on a distinguished road
Scenario 1

A woman was near death from a unique kind of cancer. There is a drug that might save her. The drug costs $4,000 per dosage. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money and tried every legal means, but he could only get together about $2,000. He asked the doctor scientist who discovered the drug for a discount or let him pay later. But the doctor scientist refused.

Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?
yes, heinz should break into the labratory b/c it is a higher moral imperative to save her life if possible vs. stealing. the scientist doesn't stand to lose his life by providing him with a discount...

Scenario 2

Heinz broke into the laboratory and stole the drug. The next day, the newspapers reported the break-in and theft. Brown, a police officer and a friend of Heinz remembered seeing Heinz last evening, behaving suspiciously near the laboratory. Later that night, he saw Heinz running away from the laboratory.

Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?
this is tougher! if it were my friend i would look the other way. although one could argue this destroy's the public trust b/c its not by the book, i believe that every situation is individual and must be judged based on the specific situation. i would prefer brown to keep silent..otherwise heinz would be in trouble w/ the law b/c he followed a higher moral imperitive.

Scenario 3

Officer Brown reported what he saw. Heinz was arrested and brought to court. If convicted, he faces up to two years' jail. Heinz was found guilty.
if i were the judge i would not sentence him to jail. he is not a violent offender, he has not represented a danger to his society and peers and it does not further justice. i might order him to pay resititution and garner his wages and put him on probation.

Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?



IN REPLYING: please answer the why or why not. The important part of the question is not what the response should be, but the why/why not answer. Please copy/paste the questions below and answer them in your reply so we can see what are answers to what.

Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?



Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?



Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or why not?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ADD in the Workplace Keppig Careers/Job Impact 1 10-16-14 02:33 AM
Christian Advice sweetheartsok Meditation and Spirituality 8 12-31-06 04:04 PM
History of ADHD Nova General ADD Talk 7 10-24-05 09:29 PM
Mental or Made Up Illness ?? nocky General Parenting Issues 7 05-27-05 08:59 PM
History Of Add? Brianne General ADD Talk 0 07-02-04 08:26 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) 2003 - 2015 ADD Forums