Question

further discussion: would your rankings change if:
a) mother of 6 was homeless, on medicaid
b) auto mechanic was a registered sex offender
c) your mother has early alzheimer’s symptoms
d) politician has views that were different from your own
e) research scientist specializes in immunology
f) singer has donated thousands of dollars to charities
**adjust your ranks according to this new information, use a different color to indicate changes made from your first list.
final task
based on your ranks and discussion with your team(distance learning), develop a (unified if team) ethical basis for making biomedical decisions about transplants with consideration to limited resources. your plan should address how transplant committees should decide who gets hearts first and why some might be placed at the end of the line. you can write this as a paragraph or a bulleted list that shows how these decisions will be made.

Explanation:

To develop an ethical basis for transplant decisions with limited resources, we prioritize medical need (severity of condition, likelihood of success), then consider factors like compliance (e.g., following post - transplant care), and social responsibility (e.g., not being a threat to others like a sex offender). Transplant committees should assess these: those with urgent medical need, good compliance, and positive social impact get priority; those with low medical need, non - compliance, or negative social factors (like sex offenders) go to the end.

Answer:

• Medical Need: Prioritize patients with the most severe and urgent medical conditions (e.g., immediate risk of death without transplant) and highest likelihood of successful transplant (considering age, overall health).
• Compliance & Responsibility: Favor patients who follow medical advice (e.g., post - transplant care) and have no history of actions endangering others (e.g., registered sex offenders are deprioritized).
• Social Impact/Need: Consider cases like a mother of 6 (dependent care) or a research scientist (public health impact) for moderate adjustments, but never over medical urgency.

Transplant committees should use a scoring system combining these factors: highest score (urgent need + compliance + positive impact) gets first access; lowest score (low need + non - compliance + negative impact) goes to the end.