General Instructions for Response Papers

Reflection on a Case or Article

The idea behind each Response Paper is for you to reflect on the case or article and to write a thoughtful, well-reasoned response to the situation or issue presented, incorporating any arguments or conclusions you may make in light of the other readings and presentations in the course. Your evaluation of the case should be based on the following questions: Do you agree with the ultimate outcome of the case or conclusion to the article?

What would you have done differently? Are there any red flags that are raised in your mind? As a Christian, how should you respond to situations or arguments like these? The prompt for each Response Paper will present additional, specific questions for you to consider as you read the case. Each prompt will identify which questions you must address and which ones you may consider and optionally address in your response.

One thing to avoid is an emotional response. You may passionately disagree with the outcome or the views of the author(s) or judge(s); however, you must not turn your Response Paper into an emotional rant. Each paper must be a reflective, intellectual, academic response to the merits of the case or article. Also, be respectful of those involved. Do not insult them by calling them names or using other derogatory language. This will lose you points. You can disagree and be respectful about it.

You must write at least 500 words (about 2 pages) for each Response Paper. Your grade will be reduced if you go below the minimum. Each Response Paper must follow current Turabian format. You must submit each Response Paper as a Microsoft Word document using the submission link in Blackboard. Do not cut and paste your paper. Instead, attach it as a separate file.

1. What do you see as the main problem in this case? Can you foresee a way it could have been resolved earlier than coming to court? What could the couple have done to avoid the problem?

2. Explain how the court resolved the case. Do you agree with the majority opinion of the Tennessee Supreme Court on this resolution? Why or why not?

3. In what ways does this case affect the way you view in vitro fertilization (IVF)?

4. What ethical principles come into play with IVF as it is normally practiced? Which 2 principles can you see coming into conflict, and what would be a way to resolve them?

1. The court depended for much of its testimony—both scientifically and ethically, and especially with regard to the status of the pre-embryo—on the standards set by the American Fertility Society, an organization funded and supported primarily by fertility clinics. In light of the statement that the decision to declare these frozen pre-embryos as persons “would doubtless have had the effect of outlawing IVF programs in the state of Tennessee,” do you think this raises a question of a conflict of interest, since these clinics have a vested financial interest in the outcome of this case? Why or why not?

2. The curt depended heavily on the distinction between embryo and pre-embryo, claiming that at the “8-cell stage, the developmental singleness of one person has not been established.” Do you think the designation of “pre-embryo” should have an effect on how we judge the moral status of these zygotes? Or is this just another stage of development, similar to childhood and adolescence?