Briefly explain the core moral ideal or principle of the theory and how that could be the basis of an objection to your argument.

This course has three written assignments that build upon one another and are designed to take you step-by-step through a process of writing a paper that identifies an ethical question, examines the context, issues, and arguments surrounding the question, and attempts to defend an answer to that question using strong moral reasoning.

In the Week 1 assignment, “Ethical Question,” you chose an ethical question, provided an introduction, a position statement and supporting reason, and an opposing position statement and supporting reason.

*In which I chose- Is Abortion ethical or nonethical

In the Week 3 assignment, “Applying an Ethical Theory,” you explained utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics, including its core moral principle or ideal, and applied that theory to the topic by demonstrating how its principles would support a particular position on your ethical question.

In this final written assignment, you will combine what you have done in these two exercises by examining an ethical issue and defending your own position on an ethical question regarding that issue.

This final written assignment should be written in essay form with the following clearly labeled sections:

Introduction

Ethical Argument

Explanation and Defense

Objection and Response

Conclusion

The paper should be between 1,300 and 1,500 words, utilize three scholarly resources, and include a title page and reference page.

 

Part 1: Introduction

In this section of the paper, you will begin with your ethical question, introduce the topic and paper, and close with a thesis statement.

The ethical question may be the same as your Week 3 written assignment (“Applying an Ethical Theory”) or a revised version of it.

The introduction should be revised in a way that reflects your additional thinking on the issue and question.

End this section with a thesis statement that states your position on the issue (the answer to the ethical question you believe is strongest) and provides a brief summary of the main ideas you will be presenting in the paper. Please see the assignment guidance for examples of thesis statements.

Place the introduction under the Part 1: Introduction heading.

 

Part 2: Ethical Argument

In this section of the paper, you will present the strongest argument you can in support of the position you have stated in your introduction.

This will be similar to the “supporting reasons” you offered in the first assignment; however, this argument should reflect your research into the key ethical issues that need to be identified and addressed, the arguments on different sides of this problem, and the theories of moral reasoning we have studied in the class (you will discuss the specific details and implications of the moral theories in the next two sections).

You can think of this as a summary of the main argument you would give if you were an attorney trying to convince a jury of your position.

Place this information under the Part 2: Ethical Argument heading.

 

Part 3: Explanation and Defense

In this section, you will explain and defend your argument by drawing on the moral theory that aligns most closely with the argument you presented in Part 2. This may be the same theory you discussed in your second assignment, but it may also be a different theory.

You must first explain the theory in general terms similar to how you explained a theory in your second assignment, including a brief account of the historical background of the theory and the philosopher(s) associated with it and general overview of the core moral ideal or principle of the theory, including the way it guides and constrains moral reasoning.

You should then clearly show how your argument represents an application of that form of moral reasoning.

In other words, if the argument you present in Part 2 is utilitarian, deontological, or virtue-based (teleological), you will want to explain utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue ethics in general terms, then explain how your argument from Part 2 reflects or draws upon the core principles and values of that theory. Please refer to the Week 3 assignment instructions for directions on how to explain and apply the moral theory.

Place this section under the Part 3: Explanation and Defense heading.

 

Part 4: Objection and Response

In this section of the paper, you will present the strongest objection you can to your argument, and briefly defend that objection by appealing to a different ethical theory than the one you focused on in Part 3.

Briefly explain the core moral ideal or principle of the theory and how that could be the basis of an objection to your argument. For instance, if you explained and defended your own argument by applying the principles of virtue ethics, you could raise an objection from the perspective of utilitarianism by briefly explaining the core utilitarian principle and how applying that principle could lead someone to a different conclusion than the one you are defending.

Next, you should respond to the objection by explaining why it is not strong enough to undermine the main argument in defense of your position.

See the assignment guidance for suggestions on how to effectively respond to the objection.

Place this section under the Part 4: Objection and Response heading.

 

Part 5: Conclusion

In this section of the paper, provide a summary of what you have done in the paper by briefly describing what you accomplished in each of the above sections.

Place this section under the Part 5: Conclusion heading.

 

Resource Requirement

You must use at least three scholarly resources, only one of which may be the textbook. In other words, you must use at least two scholarly resources in addition to the textbook.

Acceptable ways of using a source include providing a quotation, summary, or paraphrase; merely providing a citation, especially when it is unclear how or where the text supports your claim, is not sufficient.

If you need help with finding additional resources or are unsure about whether a particular resource will count toward the requirement, please contact your instructor.

For sources to count toward the resources requirement, they must be cited within the text of your paper and on the reference page. Sources that are listed on the references page but not cited within the paper do not count toward fulfilling the resources requirement.

In your paper,

Introduce the topic and paper.

Provide a thesis statement.

Present an argument in support of the position.

Defend the argument by explaining and applying the ethical theory that most closely aligns with the argument.

Present an objection to the argument by appealing to a different ethical theory.

Respond to the objection.

Provide a conclusion that describes what was accomplished in each of the sections of the paper.

The Ethical Reasoning Final Paper

Must be 1,300 to 1,500 words in length (not including title and references pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center’s APA Style  (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.resource.

Must include a separate title page with the following:

Title of paper

Student’s name

Course name and number

Instructor’s name

Date submitted

For further assistance with the formatting and the title page, refer to APA Formatting for Word 2013 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site..

Must utilize academic voice. See the Academic Voice (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. resource for additional guidance.

Must use at least two scholarly sources in addition to the course text.

The Scholarly, Peer Reviewed, and Other Credible Sources (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. table offers additional guidance on appropriate source types. If you have questions about whether a specific source is appropriate for this assignment, please contact your instructor. Your instructor has the final say about the appropriateness of a specific source for a particular assignment.

Must document any information used from sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center’s Citing Within Your Paper (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. guide.

(Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.Must include a separate references page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. See the Formatting Your References List (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. resource in the Ashford Writing Center for specifications

Select one of the following classic studies in social psychology. While many of these studies are referenced in Social Beings, you may need to do additional research other resources.

Select one of the following classic studies in social psychology. While many of these studies are referenced in Social Beingsyou may need to do additional research other resources.

  • Solomon Asch’s (1940, 1956) classic work on normative influence and conformity; sometimes referred to as the Asch effect
  • Stanley Milgram’s (1965, 1974) research on obedience and the situational variables that make obedience to authority more likely
  • Leon Festinger’s (1957) study of cognitive dissonance or Festinger and Carlsmith’s (1959) work on cognitive dissonance
  • Henri Tajfel and his colleague’s (1971) work on the impact of minimal groups and ingroup bias
  • Muzafer Sherif and colleague’s (1961) classic Robbers Cave study, including the concept of shared goals and the contact hypothesis
  • Darley and Latane’s (1968) study of the bystander effect, including the concept of diffusion of responsibility and the conditions under which people are more or less likely to help
  • A different classic social psychology study approved by your course instructor

Write a 1,050- to 1,400-word paper about a classic study in social psychology that includes the following information:

  • A summary of the study and how it was conducted
  • An explanation of the study results: What happened? Were there any unexpected findings? What did the authors conclude? What did the results mean, and what are their implications?
  • An explanation of how the concept situationism applies to the study results
  • Answers to the following questions:
    • Do you think the study results might have been different if the participants were from a different cultural, ethnic, or gender group? How so?
    • Do you think the results of the study are important and relevant to contemporary society? Explain.

Format your paper according to APA guidelines. Cite your work. Add references.

Briefly summarize your personal reaction(s) to making the initial change and how it altered the subsequent outcomes. Explain how differences in life events create differences in human development.

Prior to completing this discussion, read the required materials from the Shaffer (2011) text, as well as the Berzonsky (2004), Fiese (2013), and Burkitt (2010) articles.

Review the PSY605: Mila Singer Life StoryPreview the document document. Choose one aspect of Mila’s life to alter. This element can be an event, a personal characteristic, an environmental factor, or an aspect of the timeline. In your initial post, identify the original life story element you intend to change and explain how you intend to change it. Use Erikson’s psychosocial stages of development to explain Mila’s stage of development at the time this change takes place and address how the change affects Mila’s psychological development into adulthood.

After identifying the initial change and describing it, create a list of three additional outcomes in Mila’s development across the lifespan that will likely be affected by this change. For each, identify the current outcome in Mila’s life story and propose a rationale for changing this outcome. Apply either Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory or Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory to Mila’s life to create a hypothesis as to how and why these outcomes would likely adjust due to the changes you have made.

Briefly summarize your personal reaction(s) to making the initial change and how it altered the subsequent outcomes. Explain how differences in life events create differences in human development.

References

Berzonsky, M. D. (2004). Eriksonian developmental stages. The Concise Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology and Behavioral Science. Wiley.

Burkitt, E. (2010). Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory. Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Psychology. Routledge.

Fiese, B. H. (2013). Family context in early childhood. Handbook of Research on the Education of Young Children.

Vincent, P. (2014). PSY605: Mila Singer Life StoryPreview the document [PDF]. College of Health, Human Services, and Science.

 Review several of your colleagues’ posts and respond to at least two of your peers who chose a case study different from the one you selected

Setting Boundaries When Working with Clients

Prior to beginning work on this week’s discussion, please review Standard 3: Human Relations (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. in the APA’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Please also read the Asay and Lal (2014) “Who’s Googled Whom? Trainees’ Internet and Online Social Networking Experiences, Behaviors, and Attitudes with Clients and Supervisors,” Harris and Robinson Kurpius (2014) “Social Networking and Professional Ethics: Client Searches, Informed Consent, and Disclosure,” and Taylor, McMinn, Bufford, and Chang (2010) “Psychologists’ Attitudes and Ethical Concerns Regarding the Use of Social Networking Web Sites” articles.

For this discussion, you will examine ethical issues encountered by clinical and counseling psychologists in the digital age. Begin by reviewing the cases of Dr. Arnold and Dr. Washington listed below and selecting one of these ethical dilemmas for analysis.

Case 1
Dr. Arnold is a clinical psychologist who specializes in child and adolescent issues. From time to time, she provides consultation on high lethality cases within the juvenile court system. Recently, she was referred a case involving a 15-year-old male who has a history of aggression, angry outburst, destructive behavior, and cyberstalking.  Concerned for her safety and well-being, Dr. Arnold input the client’s name into a search engine, which yielded the client’s social network page. Dr. Arnold is uncertain whether or not to look at the client’s social network page.

Case 2
Dr. Washington is a counseling psychologist who specializes in trauma and self-harming behavior. Recently, he received a “friend request” from a former client who he provided individual therapy to six months ago. Dr. Washington opted not to accept the “friend request,” but considered sending a private message to the client with the social networking policy from his informed consent.  Dr. Washington is uncertain whether or not to send the private message to the client.

In your initial post, assume the role of a colleague to the doctor named and analyze the ethical issues encountered in your chosen case. Given the situation described in the case study, recommend how your colleague should proceed. Provide support for your response by citing the required articles for this discussion. Consider the current and potential actions of your colleague and explain whether or not he or she is currently, or potentially will be, in violation of the APA’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Provide support for your explanation by citing Standard 3: Human Relations (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. in the APA’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Explain how your colleague might avoid this type of ethical dilemma in the future. Describe what policy or policies you might put in place if you were your colleague.

Guided Response: Review several of your colleagues’ posts and respond to at least two of your peers who chose a case study different from the one you selected by 11:59 p.m. on Day 7 of the week. You are encouraged to post your required replies earlier in the week to promote more meaningful interactive discourse in this discussion.

In your responses, evaluate the recommendations suggested by your peer. State whether you agree or disagree with your peer’s recommendation to the doctor on how to proceed. Suggest other ethical implications your peer may not have considered in this case. What follow up questions might you ask your peer to aid in the ethical assessment of the case? In addition to the suggestions provided by your peer, what recommendations might you make to the doctor so that he or she might avoid these types of dilemmas in the future? What additions or changes might you make to the policy or policies suggested by your peer?