Devry LAWS420H ALL WEEK Discussion 1 & 2 LATEST 2015 october

Devry LAWS420H WEEK 1 Discussion 1& 2 Letast 2015 octoberDiscussion 1People sometimes confuse legality and morality, since (1) breaking the law is not always or necessarily immoral, and (2) just because an action is legal does not guarantee that it is morally right. Without using the examples cited in Chapter 1, share an example of (1) and an example of (2) above. Explain your two choices. Comment on selections made by other students. Do you agree with their positions? Why do you think that the law and morality are sometimes different? Why can’t laws always be written to be moral?Disussion 2In Idaho, a young doctor agreed to a 10-year, 50-mile radius in her employment contract. Upon leaving the employer’s chiropractor office after five years, she set up a new office, but only went 49.5 miles away, thinking that would satisfy the 50-mile radius requirement.The employer did not agree and filed for an injunction (which is a court order to prevent the doctor’s actions) to stop the doctor from opening her office. The courts agreed with the employer. The employer was able to enforce the injunction and shut down the young doctor’s new office. The ensuing financial issues grew for the young doctor because she now had signed contracts for the building, equipment, and utilities, but was not able to practice in the location.The 50-mile radius requirement would force the doctor to completely move from the town in which she grew up. The nearby towns are saturated with doctors and she would not be able to acquire many patients, if any, in those towns. She is now considering leaving medicine altogether.As non-compete clauses have gained popularity, some state courts have moved to deem them invalid altogether, and other states have severely restricted their impact. The ultimate test that the courts have used is the reasonableness of such clauses. What are the various ethical considerations of the impact of the non-compete clause? Do you think that the non-compete clause in this example is reasonable insofar as the combination of distance and length of time? Argue the pros and cons of enforcing this particular clause as it is now written. Are there any professions in which a non-compete clause may be essential?Devry LAWS420H WEEK 2 Discussion 1& 2 Letast 2015 octoberDiscussion 2What is a just society? Which of the three theories of economic justice discussed in Chapter Three (utilitarian, libertarian, or Rawls’s theory) do you feel would best create such a society? Why have you selected this theory and rejected the others? If our society were to be structured to incorporate the theory that you selected, would there be any negative impacts on you or on those whom you care about? What would these be?Discussion 1According to many sources, such as.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty.html”>the U.S. Census Bureau,.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Poverty.asp”>Global Issues, and the.jcpr.org/”>Joint Center for Poverty Research, the United States has a widening gap between the rich and the poor. Some say that such measures of poverty are exaggerated (.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1796.cfm”>Understanding Poverty and Economic Inequality in the United States). Which side is more persuasive? If we assume the gap is widening, is our current economic system ethically defensible? Is it ethical for the U.S. government to redistribute income through taxation from one group to another group in order to address the poverty of that group? Why or why not?Devry LAWS420H WEEK 3 Discussion 1& 2 Letast 2015 octoberDiscussion 1Following World War II, leading Nazi doctors were brought to justice before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. Twenty doctors were charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Nuremberg trial of the doctors revealed evidence of sadistic human experiments conducted at the Dachau, Auschwitz, Buchenwald, and Sachsenhausen concentration camps.Since the Nuremberg trials, our society has had to confront the reality that Nazi doctors were guilty of premeditated murder that was masqueraded as research. Professional modern medicine has had little difficulty condemning the Nazi doctors as evil men. But what is being said of the continued use of the Nazi doctors’ medical research? Many scholars are now discovering that there are multiple references in reputable medical literature to Nazi experiments and republished works of former SS (elite corps of the Nazi Party) doctors. These studies and references frequently bear no disclaimer as to how the data were obtained. In recent years, several scientists who have sought to use the Nazi research have attracted attention, and this has stirred widespread soul searching about the social responsibility and potential abuses of science.These incidents prompt a number of questions for the scientific community. Is it ever appropriate to use data as morally repugnant as that which was extracted from victims of Nazism? If so, under what circumstances would this be acceptable? If it is discovered that the Nazi doctors learned about the basic building blocks for a cure for cancer that would, if used as part of current and legitimate research, be the missing link that would save millions of lives, should this tainted data be used? If used, should limitations or conditions be placed on what can be done with a percentage of the profits that any drugs traced to this data would generate (e.g., requiring that the profits to be donated to the survivors of concentration camps)?Source to Consider:.jlaw.com/Articles/NaziMedEx.html”>The Ethics Of Using Medical Data From Nazi ExperimentsDiscussion 2It seems reasonable and unproblematic to say that we may be loyal to other human beings because they are flesh and blood entities. But what about loyalty to a business? When we feel loyal to a corporation, is it the business for which we are expressing loyalty or are we actually being loyal to the people who are within that business? Should people be encouraged to or discouraged from feeling loyalty to companies? If the business actively encourages a sense of loyalty among its employees, does the business morally owe something more than a typical severance package if it must terminate a worker’s employment?Devry LAWS420H WEEK 4 Discussion 1& 2 Letast 2015 octoberDiscussion 1Read.inc.com/magazine/19980701/961.html”>Would You Lie to Save Your Company?.Did the CEO do the right thing? Who benefited from his choice? To whom did he owe his primary duty as a CEO—to his company’s shareholders, to the airline customers for whom his company had repaired engines, to the flying public who could be injured or killed as a result of the faulty engines, to his company’s employees who might lose their jobs by this disclosure, or to himself? From an ethical standpoint, what would you have advised the CEO to do? What other observations do you have about this situation?Discussion 2A whistle-blower is typically an employee who reports company criminal misconduct publicly in order to have corrective action taken. Usually such misconduct takes the form of a regulatory compliance violation, a safety violation, financial fraud, or something that is a direct threat to the public or the employees. Research whistleblowing at a site such as.whistleblowers.org/”>The National Whistleblower Center and choose a reported incident that you found the most compelling. Why do you think the person brought the matter to light? Why would others have failed to do so? Do you know what happened ultimately to the whistle-blower?week 5Discussion 1Read .inc.com/magazine/19981015/1107.html”>True Lies.During their start-up days, many Inc. 500 CEOs tell half-truths to win over customers, while others tell outright lies.Are some lies worse than others? Using the lies described in the article, which ones do you think are harmless to the public and helpful to the business? If a customer is misled by information, but is ultimately not harmed, does that make the lie acceptable? Is there an ethical difference between posturing and overt deception? Does it matter? Why or why not?Does our capitalist system force entrepreneurs who are starting small businesses into a position where they can only succeed if they exaggerate and posture? If they have no track record and tell the truth about their size and experience, how can they compete with established businesses? Discussion 2At the WTO Ministerial Conference held in Seattle in December of 1999, protesters campaigning for many causes took to the streets and eventually faced tear gas and rubber bullets from the police.Read the .wto.org/english/news_e/pres99_e/pr155_e.htm”>WTO Press Release 155, November 29, 1999 for one perspective. Can you find any articles on the Internet that describe another viewpoint?What are their respective positions? Which do you feel is more valid? Can globalization be an ethical force in the world?week 6week 6Police Privacy (graded)“In January 2007, a Los Angeles police disciplinary board ruled officer Steven Garcia was justified in shooting to death a 13-year-old boy who allegedly tried to back over Garcia with a stolen car after a chase two years ago. This finding outraged some in the community and contradicted the earlier finding of the civilian Police Commission, which said the officer should face discipline for the shooting of Devin Brown. Exacerbating this outrage, according to city leaders who spoke out after the case, was that the disciplinary board’s hearing was conducted entirely in secret.” (Winegar, N. Hidden Behind a Badge?)The recent California court case of Copley Press v. County of San Diego curtailed media access to documents generated in police misconduct hearings. In that case, the court stated, “Copley insists that ‘public scrutiny of disciplined officers is vital to prevent the arbitrary exercise of official power by those who oversee law enforcement and to foster public confidence in the system, especially given the widespread concern about America’s serious police misconduct problems.’ There are, of course, competing policy considerations that may favor confidentiality, such as protecting complainants and witnesses against recrimination or retaliation, protecting peace officers from publication of frivolous or unwarranted charges, and maintaining confidence in law enforcement agencies by avoiding premature disclosure of groundless claims of police misconduct.”Which is more important, the privacy of the police officer or the community’s desire to know who is patrolling their neighborhoods?Waivering (graded)Reporter Judith Miller was released from jail after 85 days, because she had received a voluntary, direct waiver from her source, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Jr., releasing her from her promise of confidentiality and enabling her to testify in the federal investigation of a CIA agent’s leaked identity. Many reporters are concerned that this use of waivers will undermine the profession. Bob Zelnick, chair of Boston University’s journalism department and a former ABC News correspondent, calls a request for a waiver “a functional betrayal of the source and the relationship, and I am disheartened to see how many of my colleagues have rushed to this little life preserver at the expense of their sources.” Myron Farber is a former New York Times reporter who served 40 days in jail in 1978 for refusing to turn over his interview notes about a New Jersey physician accused of murdering his patients. In most instances, Farber says, reporters are trying to persuade people to share information, not highly motivated whistle-blowers, but reluctant citizens who might know something pertinent to their stories. “Many times you don’t even know what sources are going to say,” he says. “You’re a professional journalist; it’s your responsibility to figure out whether this person knows something. If the person is adamant that they’re not going to talk to you except in confidence, you have to make a decision—either it’s in confidence, or you’ve got to live without the information. You can’t then go back and say later on, ‘That information wasn’t as good as I thought it was,’ or ‘That information is involved in a legal situation, and I’ve got to extricate myself,’ or ‘I can’t afford to go to jail for one reason or another,’ or ‘My paper doesn’t want me to go to jail.’ That is ethically wrong, and it is completely impractical in the real world” (Smolkin, R. Waivering, American Journalism Review, February/March 2006). Do you think that sources may feel coerced if a journalist, facing jail, asks them for a waiver? Is this a pragmatic way to stay out of jail or a breach of journalistic ethics that could pose big problems for the profession?week 7Insider Trading (graded)A study published in 2004 by Alan J. Ziobrowski of Georgia State University found that U.S. senators, on average, beat the market by 12% a year. “The results clearly support the notion that members of the Senate trade with a substantial informational advantage over ordinary investors,” Ziobrowski stated, noting that the law does not prohibit senators from trading stock on the basis of information acquired in the course of their work.Wall Street brokerages, moreover, have made billions in recent years by using complex software to foretell what their large customers, like mutual and pension funds, will be doing before they do it, based on their knowledge of the customers’ past behavior.If the authorities turn a blind eye to public officials who profit from non-public information and corporate insiders who make money based on what they learn behind the boardroom doors, and if it is legal for big trading houses to take advantage of what they know about their customers’ trading habits, what is the value of insider trading law?Some have argued that seeking to benefit through ingenuity and shrewdness is good business, and good business is as important a professional trait as good medicine, good law, good education, and so forth. Do you agree?diss 2Affirmative Action (graded)The concept of affirmative action evokes strong emotions in many people. Complete the You Decide for this week. As an associate at the law firm, what do you believe is the proper course of action for you to take? Do you believe that Susan was hired as an associate at Smulderbaum, Hammers, & Stein because of affirmative action? Why or why not? What factors did you use to make this determination?