Pa.per Assignment #1: Utilitarianism

REGIONAL

ETHICS BOWL

CASES

FALL 2022

Written and edited by:

Michael Funke

Rhiannon Dodds Funke

Alexa Bishopric

Contributing Authors:

Matthew Mangum

Juliana Hemela (NHSEB)

Meredith Sheeks (NHSEB)

© Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2 022

Editor’s Note: Please note that source materials cited may be used multiple times, but only

identified once per case.

2 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

1. Abandoned? Well, that’s too bad

The Rowe family is suing Blue Energy LLC for compensation regarding an incident that

occurred in May 2012, although they say not even a million dollars would be sufficient for the

horrors they endured. Reuters reported that “Hanson and Michael Rowe noticed an overpowering

smell, like rotten eggs, seeping from an abandoned gas well on their land in Kentucky. The

fumes made the retired couple feel nauseous, dizzy, and short of breath.”1 Unfortunately, the

Rowes faced significant difficulty in holding the well's owner accountable. While the well was

on their land, the well itself was owned and drilled by J.D. Carty Resources LLC in 2006. Carty

dissolved in 2008 and sold the well to a company that was then acquired by Blue Energy, LLC,

which denied any ownership or obligation for the well.

The state of Kentucky declared the well an environmental emergency and ran a 40-day operation

to plug it, while the Rowes moved to a trailer on their property with no running water.

Regulators determined the leak was a toxic blend of hydrogen sulfide, a common drilling

byproduct, and the potent greenhouse gas, methane.

In last year’s bipartisan infrastructure law, 4.7 billion dollars were provided to plug and

remediate abandoned oil and gas wells.2 There are anywhere from 750,000 to over 3 million

abandoned oil and gas wells in the U.S. and they emit millions of metric tons of methane per

year. In addition to climate impacts, they also can contaminate ground water and even pose

safety hazards. And these wells are labor intensive and expensive to plug, costing anywhere

between $76,000 to $1 million for each well3. If you do the math, the funds set aside for fixing

the issue are a good start but nowhere near sufficient to fully address the problem.

While the issue of abandoned wells has been pervasive for decades, our lawmakers have only

begun to focus on remediation in the last few years. Many saw remediation of abandoned wells

as politically popular because it could become a source of jobs in so called “energy transition

communities” or areas where fossil fuel industry jobs dwindle as we transition to cleaner energy.

And although the money will be put towards reducing emissions, something which we must do

in order to reduce the most dire effects of climate change, some lawmakers have stated that the

private companies who caused this problem should be footing the bill, not the federal

government. Increasing bonding requirements for future well drilling could ensure that private

companies put aside money in advance to deal with abandoned wells, but this would not address

wells that have already been abandoned. Additionally, the money allocated in the bipartisan

infrastructure law for remediation of abandoned wells will not solve the systemic problems that

resulted in the abandonment of wells that emit methane, which would only accelerate with a

transition away from fossil fuels.

1 Nichola Groom, “Special Report: Millions of abandoned oil wells are leaking methane, a climate menace” June 16,

2020, Reuters https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-drilling-abandoned-specialreport/special-report-millions-of-

abandoned-oil-wells-are-leaking-methane-a-climate-menace-idUSKBN23N1NL 2 H.R.3684 - Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-

bill/3684/text 3 Daniel Raimi, Alan J. Krupnick, Jhih-Shyang Shah, and Alexandra Thompson, “Decommissioning Orphaned and

Abandoned Oil and Gas Wells: New Estimates and Cost Drivers” Environmental Science & Technology 2021 55

(15), 10224-10230 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.est.1c02234

3 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

But, as made clear by the Rowe’s situation, these abandoned wells are causing harm in

communities, and the debate over who should pay would not have helped them live in a safe

home. If there is political capital so to speak, many argue that the opportunity should be grabbed

by the horns.

4 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

2. Happy to be alone?

On May 18, 2022, the New York Court of Appeals heard a case on whether Happy the elephant

has the right of Habeas Corpus, and therefore, whether she is considered a legal person. This was

the first case of its kind in an English-speaking high court and called into question what

constitutes a person in the United States.1

For the past 45 years, Happy the elephant has been kept at the Bronx Zoo in a one-acre

enclosure, with intermittent contact with other elephants.2 A petition led by the Nonhuman

Rights Project (NhRP) garnered almost 1.5 million signatures calling for Happy’s release to an

elephant sanctuary. The petition, titled “End Happy The Elephant's 10 Years of Solitary

Confinement”, states that Happy has been in isolation since her companions Grumpy and Sammy

died. Zoo defenders assert that Happy is not alone, and that she receives extensive care,

including efforts at interaction and enrichment, unlike prisoners in solitary confinement who

receive little if any human contact. For instance, Happy resides next to another female elephant,

Patty, who is separated by a fence and the two elephants can see and smell each other, and even

touch trunks.3

Proponents on both sides agree that a ruling in favor of Happy’s personhood would have massive

ramifications. The Nonhuman Rights Projects filing the case on behalf of Happy, argue that the

ruling could help animals achieve the bodily liberty that has been denied to them across human

history. Whereas in a brief, attorneys for the Bronx Zoo wrote “Expanding the notion of a

‘person’ to include animals … has implications not just for zoos, but for pet owners, farmers,

academic and hospital-based researchers and, most critically, every human who might seek or

need access to the judicial system.”

Happy was, in part, selected by the NhRP because in 2005 she was the first elephant to pass the

mirror test, previously only passed by great apes and dolphins. The mirror test determines

whether an animal possesses the ability of visual self-recognition and is often associated with

capacity for empathy. It is unclear whether opening the legal recognition of personhood to

Happy the elephant would set the stage for all animals to fall under this category. There have

been many theories on how to quantify the moral value of a being, whether that is self-

awareness, capacity for pain, or the capacity of rational thought. Some philosophers have even

addressed consideration for the moral weight of plants.

NhRP argues that those who have claims against their case do so for personal interest, such as

the National Association for Biomedical Research, which claimed that “extending habeas rights

to animals would ... drive up the cost of conducting critical research using animals, threatening to

1 Michael Doyle, “Happy the elephant's case poses heavy philosophical” Politico, 05/12/2022

questionshttps://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/eenews/2022/05/12/happy-the-elephants-case-poses-heavy-

philosophical-questions-00032060 2 Vicki Constantine Croke, “Happy the elephant had her day in court. We humans are better for it.” The Washington

Post, June 23, 2022 https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/23/bronx-zoo-elephant-lawsuit-happy-

captivity/ 3 Jill Lepore, “The Elephant who could be a person” The Atlantic, 11, 2021

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/11/happy-elephant-bronx-zoo-nhrp-lawsuit/620672/

5 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

impede important medical breakthroughs and other major scientific advances that benefit

humans and animals alike.”4

Three Buddhist scholars countered in a brief that “this legal moment for Happy represents a great

opportunity to consider the treatment of sentient beings from a cross-cultural and more moral

perspective than we have done before, so as to avoid perpetuating a great moral wrong merely

because it has been a habit of the law.”

On June 16, 2022, the top New York Court ruled that Happy cannot claim habeas corpus rights,

and therefore, is not a legal person. While this may put to rest this challenge seeking animal

personhood in the United States, the law is not necessarily coextensive of morality.

4 Kathleen M. Sullivan, Amicus Curiae Brief, September 24, 2021

https://www.nonhumanrights.org/content/uploads/Kathleen-Sullivan-brief-Happy-Court-of-Appeals.pdf

6 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

3. Knowledge for the sake of … lizard dewlaps?

An ecology lab at a renowned University focuses their research on animals largely found in the

Caribbean and the southeastern United States. One of the groups focuses on anoles, a type of

lizard of which there are more than 425 species, and focuses on one of these species. The Anolis

Distichus had been selected out of hundreds, due to the dearth of research on the particular

species, because it is smaller and quicker, and therefore harder to catch than others. The group

researches the lizard’s dewlap, a brightly colored extendible flap of skin, and seeks to determine

its true purpose as it has been hypothesized that male anoles use it to attract mates. In the course

of research, teams of students are sent to capture wild anoles for study, measurements are taken,

and then the lizards are released. But sometimes during this process, accidents happen, and the

lizards die due to sun exposure, dropping of containers, or other unforeseen circumstances.

It is unclear to some, what this research would do for either humanity, or for the lizards

themselves. This begs the question whether knowledge, for the sake of knowledge, is a goal

justified in it of itself, in exchange for the loss of animal lives. Others may argue that scientific

discoveries sometimes lead to unexpected advantages in other aspects of life. Like how scientists

discovered that sharks resist infection, and then transitioned this knowledge into studying the

sharks’ immune system with the hope that their immunity could unlock secrets to improve

human health1. Scientists may not always know the application of their study until after findings

are made. Thus, it’s possible the dewlap research could become relevant for conservation of

lizard habitats if, for instance, we learn that they need to use their dewlaps in a particular

location, climate, or time of day. And even if the research does not impart some immediate

further application, some could say the knowledge alone is powerful. But the anoles at the

moment do not get a say.

The above is an example where animals are accidentally killed in the field, but in many cases,

animals are killed at the end of experiments due to factors such as stress or illness, that would not

allow them to be returned to the wild. Many consider this a reasonable cost of better knowledge

and understanding of our world. In Germany, there are investigations into whether the routine

culling of unused research animals should be allowed, as they were not even used “for the

greater good”. For example, the European Union estimated that in 2017, EU labs culled 83% of

mice in labs without any studies, due to space or time constraints.2 Animal rights activists in

many countries have tried and failed for decades to get stricter animal testing laws on the books.

The Animal Welfare Act is the only federal legislation that regulates researching animals in the

U.S, but it does not cover 95% of the animals used in laboratories such as mice, rats, birds, and

fish.3

1 Melinda Ratini, “Understanding Cancer -- the Basics” WebMD, January 20, 2022

https://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20170721/what-sharks-can-teach-us-about-our-health 2 Hinnerk Feldwisch-Drentrup “Germany weighs whether culling excess lab animals is a crime” Science, May 5,

2022, https://www.science.org/content/article/germany-weighs-whether-culling-excess-lab-animals-crime 3 Susan Gilbert, Gregory E. Kaebnick, and Thomas H. Murray, “Animal Research Ethics: Evolving Views and

Practices,” Special Report, Hastings Center Report 42, no. 6 (2012) http://animalresearch.thehastingscenter.org/u-s-

law-and-animal-research/

7 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

4. Do no harm

On December 24, 2017, 75-year-old Charlene Murphey was admitted to Vanderbilt University

Medical Center with a subdural hematoma.1 Two days later, Murphey’s condition had improved,

and she was prescribed a sedating drug, Versed, to allow her to be still during a final MRI before

release. RaDonda Vaught, a registered nurse with seven years of experience at the hospital, was

ordered to administer the sedative. Vaught attempted to withdraw the sedative from an

automated dispensing cabinet by keying “VE” into the search function. When this failed Vaught

used an override code to manually withdraw the medication. Unfortunately, Vaught mistakenly

withdrew vecuronium, a paralyzing drug, the administration of which led to the death of

Charlene Murphy.

Vaught admitted her error to Vanderbilt administrators, explaining that she was distracted by a

trainee and had been complacent. That information was not passed on to medical examiners, as

required by law, and Murphy’s death was attributed to natural causes. In the following month

Vaught was fired but retained her nursing license as Vanderbilt continued to suppress public

knowledge of the incident. In October 2018, the incident became public due to an anonymous tip

and Vaught faced a hearing with the Tennessee Department of Health’s Board of Nursing.

Vaught explained the incident and that overriding the automated dispensing system was daily

practice, that “You couldn’t get a bag of fluids for a patient without using an override function.”

The board allowed her to retain her license.

Vaught was arrested on February 4, 2019 and charged with reckless homicide and impaired adult

abuse. To fund her legal defense, Vaught started a GoFundMe campaign writing, “Many feel

very strongly that setting the precedent that nurses should be indicted and incarcerated for

inadvertent medical errors is dangerous.” Nurses rallied to Vaught’s defense raising over

$100,000, appearing at her trial, and writing letters of support. Janie Harvey Garner, a St. Louis

registered nurse and founder of Show Me Your Stethoscope, a nurse’s group with more than

600,000 members said, “In response to a story like this one, there are two kinds of nurses,”

Garner said. “You have the nurses who assume they would never make a mistake like that, and

usually it’s because they don't realize they could. And the second kind are the ones who know

this could happen, any day, no matter how careful they are. This could be me. I could be

RaDonda.”2

Pharmacists have taken Vaught’s case as an object lesson in the need for reform in the control of

dangerous medications. For example, pharmacist confirmation of drugs obtained by overriding

an automated dispenser, limiting overrides to emergency situations, separate control systems for

paralytic drugs, like vecuronium, and other increases in institutional safeguards.3 Under

1 Brett Kelman “The RaDonda Vaught trial has ended. This timeline will help with the confusing case” Nashville

Tennessean March 27, 2022. https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/health/2020/03/03/vanderbilt-nurse-radonda-

vaught-arrested-reckless-homicide-vecuronium-error/4826562002/ 2 Brett Kelman “As a nurse faces prison for a deadly error, her colleagues worry: Could I be next?” NPR, March 22,

2022 https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/03/22/1087903348/as-a-nurse-faces-prison-for-a-deadly-error-

her-colleagues-worry-could-i-be-next 3 Myungsun (Sunny) Ro and Emily B. Holcomb, “More Lessons Learned From RaDonda Vaught Case” Pharmacy

Practice News June 27, 2022 https://www.pharmacypracticenews.com/Operations-and-Management/Article/06-

22/More-Lessons-Learned-From-RaDonda-Vaught-Case/67213

8 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

increased federal scrutiny Vanderbilt developed a “plan of correction” which satisfied officials

and allowed it to continue operations with federal funds.

On the other hand, the Tennessee Department of Health’s Board of Nursing reversed its earlier

decision and revoked Vaught’s nursing license. Vaught was subsequently convicted of criminally

negligent homicide and abuse of an impaired adult. Although guilty of very serious charges,

Vaught was sentenced to three years of probation and while she will likely never be a nurse

again, she will also likely not serve time in prison. Still, many worry that the apparent

institutional cover-up and chilling effect on nurses will cost other patients their lives.

9 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

5. Do innocents pay the price?

On February 24, 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine in an escalation of long-standing tensions

between the nations. The on-going conflict has caused humanitarian problems including food

shortages and a refugee crisis. In response to the conflict American and EU nations have

provided and pledged billions in military support to Ukrainian defense. Individuals and private

organizations have refused to carry Russian vodka in restaurants, liquor stores, or bars; refused to

play symphonies by Russian composers. Additionally, western nations have implemented an

aggressive series of escalating sanctions on the Russian state and individual powerful Russian

citizens.

Beyond western state sanctions, some private organizations have chosen to apply pressure on

Russia within their own spheres of influence. In one such case, Wimbledon, the oldest and

perhaps most prestigious tennis tournament in the world, banned Russian and Belarussian

athletes. Wimbledon’s ban impacts a handful of top players including Daniil Medvedev, the

number two ranked men's tennis player, and Aryna Sabalenka, the number four ranked women’s

tennis player.1

Wimbledon wrote in explanation, “Given the profile of The Championships in the United

Kingdom and around the world, it is our responsibility to play our part in the widespread efforts

of Government, industry, sporting and creative institutions to limit Russia’s global influence

through the strongest means possible.”2 The statement continues, “In the circumstances of such

unjustified and unprecedented military aggression, it would be unacceptable for the Russian

regime to derive any benefits from the involvement of Russian or Belarusian players with The

Championships.” Ian Hewitt, Chairman of the All England Club, commented: “We recognise

that this is hard on the individuals affected, and it is with sadness that they will suffer for the

actions of the leaders of the Russian regime.”

In response to Wimbledon’s actions, both the men’s and women’s professional tennis tours

stripped the points available for Wimbledon participants. A statement from the Association of

Tennis Professionals (ATP) condemns Wimbledon’s decision as undermining the merit based

ranking system. It goes on to add, “Discrimination based on nationality also constitutes a

violation of our agreement with Wimbledon that states that player entry is based solely on ATP

rankings.” Novak Djokovic, the top-ranked men’s player and Serbian war survivor describes the

decision as “…crazy. The players, the tennis players, the athletes have nothing to do with it

[war]. When politics interferes with sport, the result is not good.” Martina Navratilova, a nine-

time Wimbledon champion, says “as much as I feel for the Ukrainian players and Ukrainian

people,” excluding players is “unfair” and “not helpful.”3

1 Rachel Treisman “Wimbledon bans Russian and Belarusian players — including No. 2 Medvedev” NPR,

April 20, 2022 https://www.npr.org/2022/04/20/1093741869/wimbledon-russian-players 2 “Statement Regarding Russian and Belarusian Individuals at The Championships” Wimbledon April 20, 2022

https://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/news/articles/2022-04-

20/statement_regarding_russian_and_belarusian_individuals_at_the_championships_2022.html 3 Lee Igel “Wimbledon Ban On Russian And Belarusian Players Serves Points About Sports And Politics”

Forbes, Apr 26, 2022 https://www.forbes.com/sites/leeigel/2022/04/26/wimbledon-ban-on-russian-and-belarusian-

players-serves-points-about-sports-and-politics/?sh=267ffc22473e

10 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

Since originally writing this, in an ironic twist of fate, this year’s Wimbledon Women’s

Champion was Russian born Elena Rybakina. Rybakina plays under the flag of Kazakhstan and

travels with a passport from that country. Reportedly her decision in 2018 to play as a Kazakh

was made primarily due to financial considerations and her parents continue to reside in

Moscow.

11 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

6. Are sports dope?

Performance in sports is enhanced by regular training, adequate rest, good nutrition, and

supplemental medication. There is apparent universal agreement that the first three of these are

foundational to the values of sports. But the use of supplemental medication to enhance

performance has been quite controversial.

In 1935, Adolf Butenandt and a team of German scientists first synthesized human testosterone

for the treatment of hypogonadism and depression. Butenandt would go on to win the Nobel

Prize in Chemistry for his work on “sex hormones.”1 By 1954 the Soviet weightlifting team was

using testosterone injections to enhance their performance, but with detrimental health effects

such as prostate enlargement. In 1956, to compete with fewer side effects, U.S. weightlifting

doctor John Ziegler synthesized the anabolic steroid methandrostenolone (Dianabol).

Unfortunately, dianabol does have rather serious side effects including liver damage and

increased risk of stroke. These very serious potential health consequences are the reason

performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) are often prohibited in competition.

1960 Sports Illustrated published an exposé on the use of amphetamines, tranquilizers, cocaine,

and other drugs in elite sports.2 Eventually the international Olympic committee included

anabolics and testosterone on their banned substances list. The Montreal Olympics of 1976 were

the first Olympic games to drug test for anabolics and testing regimes have grown since then.

Now all major U.S. sporting leagues, including the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, MLS, and UFC, test

for a range of substances from marijuana to anabolic steroids. But these leagues do not test

equally and the growth in testing is not without its critics.

Libertarians have long advocated an end of prohibition arguing that the use of PEDs should not

be regulated beyond the individual’s choice. For decades now serious athletes have suspected

that most of their competition is using some form of banned PED and this belief leads to a

prisoner’s dilemma in which using PEDs seems like the only rational choice.3 This belief seems

supported by studies where over 50% of anonymous competitive amateur athletes admitted using

PEDs in the previous year.4 Some hope to change the calculation by increasing surveillance on

athletes, but more testing leads to more creative drug regimes and it seems impractical to reliably

catch even most PED users.5

Further complicating the situation are the apparent inequities of enforcement regimes. Recently a

Russian Olympic figure skater, Kamila Valieva, tested positive for Trimetazidine, a banned

substance. But her case is in arbitration, and she has not been suspended, in part because she is a

minor. Some draw a comparison to the case of Sha’Carri Richardson, a U.S. sprinter who was

1 “What is the history of anabolic steroid use?. National Institute on Drug Abuse website.” NIDA April 12, 2021.

https://nida.nih.gov/publications/research-reports/steroids-other-appearance-performance-enhancing-drugs-

apeds/what-history-anabolic-steroid-use 2 George Walsh “Our Drug-Happy Athletes” https://www.si.com/more-sports/2008/03/11/steroid-timeline 3 Haugen KK. “The performance-enhancing drug game.” Journal of Sports Economics2004;5:67–87. 4 Ulrich, R., Pope, H.G., Cléret, L. et al. Doping in Two Elite Athletics Competitions Assessed by Randomized-

Response Surveys. Sports Med 48, 211–219 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0765-4 5 Brandon Specktor “Why Is It So Easy to Cheat at the Olympics?” LiveScience

February 13, 2018 https://www.livescience.com/61747-how-widespread-olympic-doping.html

12 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

suspended for marijuana she reportedly used in the days following the death of her mother.

Critics argue that, while both took a banned substance the “difference is that she is black, and

Valieva is white.”6

Compounding the disparity in possible outcomes is the choice between various systems of drug

testing. For instance, leagues like the NFL administer their own drug programs, with team

physicians doing the testing, and lower penalties for marijuana then anabolic steroids. The

Olympic Games use a testing protocol developed and administered by the World Anti-Doping

Agency (WADA). Other organizations, like the UFC, rely on the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency

(USADA) for testing and regional rules for determining penalties. A newer organization, the

Voluntary Anti-Doping Agency (VADA) launched in 2011 with the goal of attracting athletes

who are not required to be tested, but who want to compete without PEDs.

6 Joe Lancaster “Olympic Athletes Can Take Drugs so Long as They Also Get an Unfair Advantage” Reason

February 15, 2022 https://reason.com/2022/02/15/olympic-athletes-can-take-drugs-so-long-as-they-also-get-an-

unfair-advantage/

13 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

7. Anti-Vax or Anti-American

The United States Air Force Academy graduating class of 2022 was three fewer than anticipated

at the May 25th ceremony in Colorado Springs. Three cadets who anticipated graduating with

their classmates and receiving commissions in the USAF refused COVID-19 vaccination and

were not allowed to attend the ceremony. One of the cadets has resigned from the Academy and

may owe the cost of his attendance to taxpayers. The other cadets are in a legal limbo as they

seek to join one of several class action lawsuits filed on behalf of military members who were

required to either be vaccinated or be separated from military service.1

According to former Colorado state Rep. Gordon Klingenschmitt, “These are evangelical

Christian cadets, who are pro-life, and they object to the fact that the vaccines were tested on

aborted fetal stem cell lines. Because of their objection to abortion, their conscience will not let

them … inject this particular drug into their own bodies.” The cadets applied for religious

exemptions for the mandated vaccination, but their requests were denied—as of January 2022,

the USAF had only approved a total of 9 religious exemptions. Director of Public Affairs Brian

Maguire responded saying, “The majority of our religious accommodation requests centered on

the use of stem cells in the development and/or production of the currently available vaccines.

The Moderna and Pfizer vaccines did not use stem cells in the development, testing or

production and were presented as an option. The cadets refused to commit to this vaccine.”2

The cadets received an official letter of reprimand for not taking the vaccine in violation of

Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for disobeying an order from a superior

officer. The letter makes the point that officers in the military are expected to obey orders even

when they disagree with those orders. In this case, disobeying the order to be vaccinated,

“jeopardizes the health, safety and readiness of yourself and of your fellow military members

and compromises our mission.”

According to one whistleblower’s account, in October 2021 Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall

told commanders “no religious accommodations could or should be approved for anyone who

would be remaining in the Department of the Air Force.”3 However, the U.S. military has

allowed numerous medical exemptions to the vaccination policy. For some, this calls into

question the degree to which safety is impacted by unvaccinated members of the armed forces.

Amid concerns that vaccination requirements are overblown and the possible costs that cadets

may face for refusing, some in Congress have taken the side of the cadets and introduced the

Defending Freedom of Conscience for Cadets and Midshipmen Act. The Act would, if passed,

prevent denial of graduation for not being vaccinated against COVID-19; prevent being

1 Lolita Baldor “3 Air Force cadets who refused vaccine won’t be commissioned” AP News

May 21, 2022 https://apnews.com/article/covid-health-united-states-government-and-politics-education-

c8debc71373ab4b4390980b12072ef5a 2 Stephanie Earls “Air Force Academy cadets who refused vaccine, and were denied waiver, could face expulsion”

The Gazette May 14, 2022 https://gazette.com/premium/air-force-academy-cadets-who-refused-vaccine-and-were-

denied-waiver-could-face-expulsion/article_070a3fec-d2fc-11ec-9490-0f8a500e9fd2.html 3 O'Dell Isaac “Air Force Academy cadet submits resignation after refusing vaccine on religious grounds”

The Gazette May 18, 2022 https://gazette.com/coronavirus/air-force-academy-cadet-submits-resignation-after-

refusing-vaccine-on-religious-grounds/article_7ebca986-d6f2-11ec-8d5c-5787c7294f98.html

14 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

dismissed from a service academy for refusing to be vaccinated; and, prevent any cadet who is

not allowed to commission due to their COVID-19 vaccination status from being subject to

repayment claims.4

4 Marco Rubio, “Colleagues Introduce Bill to Protect Air Force Cadets, Midshipmen From Being Punished for Not

Receiving Covid-19 Vaccine” May 25 2022 https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2022/5/rubio-

colleagues-introduce-bill-to-protect-air-force-cadets-midshipmen-from-being-punished-for-not-receiving-covid-19-

vaccine

15 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

8. Damn the dam?

As part of the Colorado River Storage Project, the construction of the Glen Canyon Dam began

in 1956. The 726-foot-tall dam is the United States’ second highest concrete-arch dam. The dam

created Lake Powell—covering parts of Arizona and Utah—which reached full capacity in 1980.

In 1972, the area was declared Glen Canyon National Recreation Area and is managed by the

National Park Service.

Supporters of the dam note that the dam produces five billion kilowatt-hours of electricity each

year which supports the needs of seven western states. Further, as a national park, the lake

provides recreation opportunities to over four million visitors each year. These visitors support a

half-billion-dollar tourism industry. The Bureau of Reclamation, which runs the dam, describes

Lake Powell as a “bank account” of water for dry years. This water supply is essential to three

lower states of the Colorado River Basin.

However, Lake Powell is facing an existential threat: record low water levels caused a two-

decade long megadrought. Currently, the lake is about one-third full and long-term trends

indicate that the lake level will continue to fall. John Fleck of the University of New Mexico told

KUER radio, “It appears to be this permanent phenomenon that’s lowering the lake levels. You

should not expect it to return to high lake levels over long periods of time. That’s just not

something we can expect to happen.” The NPS has been forced to close multiple boat ramps, the

Dangling Rope Marina, and dock access to Rainbow Bridge National Monument because of the

low water levels. Further, the low levels will make honoring water allocations dating from the

1920 difficult if not impossible to honor. In a worse-case scenario, the dam could cease power

production in the near future.

For decades, groups have called for the draining of Lake Powell. Some see the low water levels

as the perfect opportunity to do so and return Glen Canyon to its natural state. Glen Canyon

Institute Director Eric Balken told NPR, “All of the best data that we have suggests it’s going to

be mostly empty for now on. So I think it’s really important for policymakers to consider what

phasing out this reservoir looks like, because if we don’t, then we might just be stuck in a harder

situation down the road where it's happening by default.” Balken’s group advocates for using

Lake Mead as the primary water storge reservoir for the states relying on water from the

Colorado River.

Draining the lake could mean recovering what has been called America’s “lost national park.”

Although lower lake levels mean less water-based recreation, slot canyons, grottoes, cliffs, and

spires are emerging to provide different recreation activities. Further, historic and cultural sites

representing thousands of years of human activity in the area could be uncovered.

16 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

9. Freedom of tweets

As Twitter sues Elon Musk to force his purchase of the company or pay a reported one billion

dollars in compensation, the character of Twitter today and under Musk’s proposed leadership

has become contentious. In March 2022, when Musk began his acquisition bid, he polled users

on the platform asking, “Free speech is essential to a functioning democracy. Do you believe

Twitter rigorously adheres to this principle?” Musk’s offer letter contained his response, “I now

realize the company will neither thrive nor serve this societal imperative in its current form.

Twitter needs to be transformed as a private company.”1

Twitter’s content moderation policies have developed over the last ten years to prohibit the

glorification of violence, incitement of violence, harassment, hateful conduct, graphic content

and much more. These policies themselves have clarifying policies, but still require judgment

calls. The judgment of the content moderation team has come under criticism in the past for

being too aggressive, too lenient, and too inconsistent. For instance, when Twitter permanently

suspended former President Donald Trump’s account over tweets relating to the January 6th riots

many viewed the decision as censorship of valid political beliefs and while others lamented the

decision as too late.2

Musk’s perspective is that content moderation should mirror local laws regarding speech and

thus be as lenient as legally permissible and has vowed to reinstate the former President’s

account. Critics wonder, “[i]f Twitter wants to pull back from moderating speech on its site, will

people be less willing to hang out where they might be harassed by those who disagree with

them and swamped by pitches for cryptocurrency, fake Gucci handbags or pornography?”3

Beyond the user experience, others express concern that the rampant spread of misinformation

on platforms like Twitter leads to a degradation of democracy and acts of violence like those of

January 6th.

However, the proposed sale of Twitter resolves the digital public square will continue to be

controlled by a handful leading voices at places like Twitter, Facebook, and Tik Tok. These

leaders are controlled by market forces and their own moral compasses but are not themselves

beholden to a democratic electorate. Some states have taken decisions about content moderation

away from unelected leaders by implementing laws restricting the content on digital platforms.

These new laws include both the Digital Services Act in the European Union, which requires

Twitter to scrub its platform of misinformation and abuse, and Vietnam’s policy of holding

companies accountable for government criticism on their platforms.

1 Jennifer Korn, “Elon Musk's bumpy road to possibly owning Twitter: A timeline” CNN Business, August 19, 2022

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/17/tech/twitter-elon-musk-timeline/index.html 2 Bobby Allyn and Tamara Keith, “Twitter Permanently Suspends Trump, Citing 'Risk Of Further Incitement Of

Violence'” NPR January 8, 2021 https://www.npr.org/2021/01/08/954760928/twitter-bans-president-trump-citing-

risk-of-further-incitement-of-violence 3 Shira Ovide, “Buying Twitter, Elon Musk Will Face Reality of His Free-Speech Talk” New York Times April 26,

2022 https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/26/technology/twitter-elon-musk-free-speech.html

17 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

10. A minor problem…

Joseph Campbell famously discussed the process of “coming of age,” and the need for rites of

passage to help youths transition from childhood into adulthood in “The Power of Myth,” a

transcribed interview between Campbell and Bill Moyers of PBS.1 Campbell talked about how

myths, be they religious (as with Jewish bar and bat mitzvahs at 12 to 13, and Christian

confirmation from about 12 to 15) or secular rites (quinceañera at 15, sweet 16 and drivers’

licenses at 16, and even gang membership from around 12 to 18 years of age), all aim to give the

young person a sense of transition into the world of adult responsibilities and independence.

But notably, the timetable for the transition into adulthood is neither concrete nor consistent for

all groups or individuals. For instance, the religious coming of age celebrations are usually

around 12 to 13, but the secular rites are often a little later, around 15 to 16. States also have

myriad laws when it comes to age of consent2, marriage3, and legal capacity to enter into

contracts4. These laws provide a slow evolution to legal adulthood, granting partial rights that

will become full (or at least fuller) once the youth turns 18 (a few minor rights are still withheld

until 21, such as the age to buy alcohol or to consume marijuana in states where it has been

legalized).

Given that there are different approaches to a minor’s ability to consent to participate in

significant, potentially life-altering behaviors, some ask whether these pre-adulthood rights

should necessarily be tied to other legal rights that a minor may need to exercise, particularly as

relate to medical treatment. In many states, minors may visit a gynecologist or family physician

to obtain birth control, abortion care, or to treat sexually transmitted diseases without a parent

consenting or being present. However, in other states, despite youths being allowed to marry

under the age of 18, they nevertheless cannot see a gynecologist or other sexual healthcare

provider without the consent of a parent or guardian.

Similarly, many states have allowed minors to obtain vaccines against deadly diseases without

parental consent, particularly in light of the public health needs of society, as well as the

potential for serious, even debilitating diseases if vaccines are not administered. As vaccines and

abortions become increasingly controversial, many minors are seeking medical care without the

permission or even expressly against the wishes of their parents. In many states, minors can

obtain birth control without parental consent, and a recent piece of legislation in California may

1 See Campbell and Moyers, The Power of Myth, Betty Sue Flowers, Editor, Anchor Books, a Division of Random

House, Inc., July 1991. 2 “Statutory Rape: A Guide to State Laws and Reporting Requirements,” Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Dec. 14, 2004,

https://aspe.hhs.gov/reports/statutory-rape-guide-state-laws-reporting-requirements-

1#:~:text=In%20the%20majority%20of%20states,and%2011%20states%2C%20respectively). 3 “Marriage Age in the United States,” Wikipedia, last accessed September 5, 2022,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_age_in_the_United_States#:~:text=With%20parental%20consent%2C%20a

%20person,family%20division%20of%20district%20court.&text=Minors%20cannot%20marry. 4 “Legal Ages Laws,” law.jrank.org, https://law.jrank.org/pages/11848/Legal-Ages.html; last accessed Sept. 5, 2022;

Stim, Richard, “Who Lacks the Capacity to Contract?” Nolo.com, last accessed Sept. 5, 2022,

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/lack-capacity-to-contract-32647.html,

18 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

allow children to be vaccinated against COVID-19 without needing their parents’ permission.5

With the proliferation of anti-vaccination movement, critics of these new vaccine rights laws

worry that the legislation may allow children to make decisions they do not fully understand.6

For instance, many in the anti-vaccination movement hold serious concerns about the potential

long-term impacts of new vaccines, which have yet to be tested for long-term impacts to health

that may not be known for years or even decades.

5 Klass, Perri, M.D., “When Should Children Take Part in Medical Decisions?” The New York Times, Sept. 20,

2016, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/19/well/family/when-should-children-take-part-in-medical-decisions.html. 6 Abcarian, Robin, Should kids need parental consent for vaccines? Read this before you decide,” Los Angeles

Times, Jan. 26, 2022, https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2022-01-26/teen-parents-consent-covid-vaccine.

19 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

11. Granola mom is nuts?

Maria was a loving mother. Because she herself struggled with her health and weight, she

decided that she was going to do her best for her child and make best efforts to shield him from

artificial colors and sweeteners, focusing her efforts on growing their own food, buying local,

and serving her son whole, minimally processed foods. In other words, no eating at McDonalds

or drinking Hi-C fruit drinks, but enjoying beef and barley soup and using a juicer to process

fresh fruits and veggies into snacks. Maria’s son started daycare when she had to start work, and

the daycare in question agreed to make modest accommodations for her son. Maria would

regularly bring treats for her child that followed her dietary restrictions to ensure that he could

eat with his classmates and not feel excluded. This meant that the daycare would let Maria know

what color fruit drinks they served, and Maria would bring in fresh juices in place of the Hi-C of

the day. For many months, this went on, and Maria’s son flourished, making new friends,

enjoying mealtime, and learning social skills.

However, this all changed when one day, the daycare staff made a mistake and inadvertently

gave Maria’s son the regular, artificially flavored/colored/sweetened drink, and her son had an

allergic reaction, requiring an ER visit. Maria’s son was in anaphylactic shock, and his throat

was closing, resulting in a near fatal incident until an EpiPen was used to administer life-saving

medication. Maria was incensed that the daycare had not followed her son’s nutritional plan but

was ultimately relieved that her son’s allergic reaction was resolved so quickly.

Unfortunately for Maria, her son’s recovery did not end the stress of the day. Once her son

appeared ready for discharge from the ER, the treating physician pulled Maria aside and

chastised her for choice of diet for her son. He warned her that if she didn’t expose her son to the

colors and flavors he was almost certainly going to encounter when out, it could lead to serious

allergies and that he could end up right back at the hospital; and next time, they might not be so

lucky.1

Maria was shocked and taken aback by the doctor’s response, as she thought she had been

helping her child to become the healthiest he could be. She was now faced with the difficult

decision about whether to continue on her healthful path with her son, or allow her son to be

exposed to the toxins of normal American life in order to ensure he could function in “normal”

society.

(Based on a true story.)

1 See e.g. Bell, Becky, M.S., R.D. “Food Dyes: Harmless or Harmful?” Healthline.com, Jan. 7, 2017,

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/food-dyes#TOC_TITLE_HDR_6 (last accessed Sept. 5, 2022).

20 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

12. My company, my choice?

In light of the recent Supreme Court case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 1

which overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that made access to abortion a constitutional

right, states like Texas, Alabama, Ohio, Idaho, and others have now activated their trigger laws

to effectively ban abortion in a post-Roe world; 2 Many companies have struggled with how to

react to changing healthcare laws that could deter female talent from joining their businesses.3

Some young professionals have legitimate fears of the dangers that could exist in emergency

situations involving reproductive healthcare. To mitigate this hesitation and draw more talented

applicants, as well as to generate positive social capital, some corporations have enacted

corporate policies promising to fund travel for non-life-threatening treatment, including

abortion.4

Texas, particularly, has been marketing itself as a tech haven that promotes lighter business

regulation, lower taxes, and more affordable housing than that found on the coasts.5 These

conditions have, in turn, drawn major corporations to move their headquarters to Texas. Many

such corporations have found benefits in hiring a more diverse workforce—including more

women6—but the enactment of these new abortion restrictions has changed the dynamics and

deterred women from joining Texas-based corporations for fear of a lack of reproductive health

services in cases of rape, incest, or risks to the mother’s life. With the new reproductive

healthcare restrictions, these major corporations face a double-edged sword—respond to their

staff’s needs and provide support for reproductive health out of state, but face potential legal

liability and/or governmental backlash to such policies,7 or maintain the status quo and accept the

loss of many highly qualified individuals who simply do not wish to undertake the risk of being

denied essential forms of healthcare.8

Many corporations have come out on the side of providing leave and even travel cost

reimbursement for their staff who need to make use of reproductive healthcare out of state.9

1 597 U.S. ____, 2022; 2022 WL 2276808; 2022 U.S. LEXIS 3057. 2 “State Bans on Abortion Throughout Pregnancy,” Guttmacher Institute, July 16, 2022,

https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/state-policies-later-abortions. 3 Matt O’Brien, Dee-Ann Durbin, Barbara Ortutay, David Koenig, and Ken Sweet, “Abortion ruling pushes

businesses to confront divisive politics,” PBS.com, June 25, 2022, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/abortion-

ruling-pushes-businesses-to-confront-divisive-politics. 4 Id. 5 Lee, Don, “Silicon Valley’s tech monopoly is over. Is the future in Austin, Texas?” Los Angeles Times, Feb. 9,

2022, https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2022-02-09/silicon-valleys-tech-monopoly-is-over. 6 Phillips, Katherine W., “How Diversity Makes Us Smarter,” Scientific American, October 1, 2014,

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-diversity-makes-us-smarter/. 7 Wiessner, Daniel, “Legal clashes await U.S. companies covering workers’ abortion costs,” Reuters, June 27, 2022,

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/legal-clashes-await-us-companies-covering-workers-abortion-costs-2022-06-26/;

Marr, Chris and Robert Iafolla, “Can States Ban Employer Abortion Aid? Post-Roe Limits Explained,” Bloomberg

Law, June 28, 2022, https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/can-states-ban-employer-abortion-aid-post-

roe-limits-explained. 8 McCarty Carino, Meghan, “How the tech landscape could change if abortion laws do,” Marketplace.org, June 24,

2022, https://www.marketplace.org/2022/06/24/how-the-tech-landscape-could-change-if-abortion-laws-do/. 9 Marquardt, Andrew, “With Roe v Wade overturned, major firms from Starbucks to Tesla will cover employees’

abortion travel costs. Here are the major employers who have promised to cover it,” Fortune.com, May 16, 2022,

https://fortune.com/2022/05/16/starbucks-apple-microsoft-amazon-employee-abortion-travel-expenses/.

21 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

Although this response from corporate America was welcomed by many, some have questioned

the motivations of these corporations.10 Many of these corporate giants do not appear to have any

issue with providing their tax revenues to such states through their continued presence within the

state.11 Moreover, many of these corporations provided muted or non-existent initial responses

to the leak of the proposed ruling in Dobbs, and only joined the PR bandwagon to enact such

policies after it appeared that other corporate players were gaining positive traction with such

policies.12

Some argue that the policies don’t go far enough. Providing $4,000 to employees seeking

medical care does not necessarily protect the spouses and children who must live in that state, as

well.13 Others argue that the policies go too far, because they create a digital trail that could be

used to prosecute the employees for seeking out of state what could not be done within the

state.14 Still others who support abortion bans would argue that abortion is essentially murder,

and thus, actions within the state to commit murder outside of the state should come with

attendant “conspiracy” charges against employees and/or employers who committed such acts.15

The businesses themselves could thus face potential criminal liability for the implementation of

such travel reimbursement policies. This is particularly true in states like Idaho, where state law

now prohibits travel out of state to obtain an abortion.16

10 Linkins, Jason, “Corporate America Doesn’t Really Care About Your Abortion Rights,” The Soap Box, The New

Republic, July 18, 2022, https://newrepublic.com/article/167053/corporations-abortion-ban-roe. 11 See e.g., Korte, Lara, “Democrats look to recruit businesses from red states restricting abortion,” Politico.com,

June 28, 2022, https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/28/democrats-recruit-businesses-from-red-states-restricting-

abortion-00042716; Cohn, Scott, “As decision on Roe v. Wade looms, states weigh the economic cost of abortion

bans,” CNBC, June 21, 2022, https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/21/in-post-roe-v-wade-world-states-weigh-economic-

cost-of-abortion-ban.html. 12Goldberg, Emma and Lora Kelley, “Companies Are More Vocal Than Ever on Social Issues. Not on Abortion,”

The New York Times, June 24, 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/24/business/abortion-roe-wade-

companies.html. 13 Rowland, Christopher, “Groups that aid abortion patients pull back, fearing legal liability,” The Washington Post,

July 15, 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/07/15/abortion-aid-drying-up/. 14 “Companies covering abortion travel costs for employees could face privacy hurdles,” Moneywatch, CBS News,

July 5, 2022, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/companies-could-face-hurdles-covering-abortion-travel-costs/. 15 See e.g. Belz, Emily, “The Pro-Life Movement Faces Blue State Backlash,” Christianity Today, July 1, 2022,

https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2022/july/roe-wade-dobbs-abortion-blue-states-legislatures.html. (not that

this article may contain inaccuracies, as it states that no U.S. states contain abortion protections, yet others note that

11 states have constitutional protections for abortion access, see “State Constitutions and Abortion Rights,” Center

for Reproductive Rights, https://reproductiverights.org/state-constitutions-abortion-rights/; Marr, Chris and Robert

Iafolla, “Can States Ban Employer Abortion Aid? Post-Roe Limits Explained,” Bloomberg Law, June 28, 2022,

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/can-states-ban-employer-abortion-aid-post-roe-limits-explained 16 Kitchener, Caroline and Devlin Barrett, “Antiabortion lawmakers want to block patients from crossing state

lines,” The Washington Post, June 30, 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/29/abortion-state-

lines/.

22 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

13. Learn to live with your demons?

Caroline Mazel-Carlton began hearing voices as a young child.1 And from a young age, she was

put on medications that were supposed to temper and control those voices. But they had severe

side effects, such as weight gain, self-harm (such as pulling hair out in patches), and erratic body

movements, as well as feelings of isolation and ultimately a suicide attempt.

The National Institute of Mental Health found that these antipsychotic drugs have not improved

since their inception 70 years ago,2 and some studies found that that maintenance on the drugs

may actually worsen outcomes and even cause brain atrophy, though these findings have been

debated.3

Mazel-Carlton found solace working on a farm where she stopped taking her prescriptions cold

turkey. Once she stabilized and learned to process her audial hallucinations with greater skill, she

became involved with a growing effort to reform how the field of mental health treats severe

psychiatric conditions. She became a peer-support specialist, someone who has lived experience

and works alongside medical practitioners, and became involved in the Wildflower Alliance, a

peer run organization.

“She began leading Hearing Voices Network support groups—which are

somewhat akin to Alcoholics Anonymous meetings—for people with auditory

and visual hallucinations. The groups, with no clinicians in the room, gathered on

secondhand chairs and sofas in humble spaces rented by the Alliance. What

psychiatry terms psychosis, the Hearing Voices Movement refers to as

nonconsensus realities, and a bedrock faith of the movement is that filling a room

with talk of phantasms will not infuse them with more vivid life or grant them

more unshakable power. Instead, partly by lifting the pressure of secrecy and

diminishing the feeling of deviance, the talk will loosen the hold of hallucinations

and, crucially, the grip of isolation.”

Antithetical to traditional medical views of risk management, Mazel-Carlton’s treatment focused

instead on acceptance and living with your voices. Medical practitioners claim that drug

regimens can reduce violent actions,4 although most studies reaching such conclusions both

presume optimal or near optimal compliance with the patient’s prescription regimen (which is

not always the case), and further, the odds of violent outbursts are overall very low in any case,

1 Bergner, Daniel, “Doctors Gave Her Antipsychotics. She Decided to Live With Her Voices,” The New York

Times Magazine, May 17, 2022, updated May 22, 2022,

(https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/17/magazine/antipsychotic-medications-mental-health.html); future discussion

of Ms. Mazel-Carlton’s experiences are predominantly drawn from the foregoing article, and citation is

ongoing throughout this case study unless noted otherwise. 2 See “Questions and Answers About the NIMH Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness Study

(CATIE) – Phase 1 Results,” National Institute of Mental Health, https://www.nimh.nih.gov/funding/clinical-

research/practical/catie/phase1results (last accessed July 22, 2022). 3See e.g. David M. Gardner, Ross J. Baldessarini, Paul Waraich, “Modern antipsychotic drugs: a critical overview,”

Canadian Medical Association Journal, Jun 21, 2005, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1150265/. 4 See “Antipsychotic drugs see drop in violent crime,” University of Oxford, May 8, 2014,

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2014-05-08-antipsychotic-drugs-see-drop-violent-crime.

23 © Association for Practical and Professional Ethics 2022

with some studies showing that poverty, homelessness, and isolation that often go hand-in-hand

with nonconsensus realities are more likely to cause violent outbursts than the hallucinations

themselves.5

“Mazel-Carlton takes care not to diminish the suffering of people like herself and speaks of

expanding ‘the options for healing.’ Yet she sees her wish as analogous to not just the

mainstreaming of autism but the nascent acceptance of new forms of gender identity. ‘Our

society needs to expand its view of what it means to be human,’ she says. ‘To expand what is

affirmed and honored.’”

Through their work, the Alliance also works on suicide prevention, although their work is very

different than mainstream suicide prevention methods.

“A slide within the training protocol Mazel-Carlton has designed teaches that the

mission is ‘to stay present’ and not ‘to prevent them from doing that.’ ‘Stay away

from fix-it mode, from savior mode,’ Mazel-Carlton tells trainees. ‘With our

capes on, we can’t listen.’ A first principle is that people must be allowed to talk

freely about all that is preying on them, including the wish to take their own lives,

and in the groups, a foundational pact is that no one will be reported, not to any

hotline, not to the police or any practitioner, no matter what he or she expresses

an intent to do.’

To comprehend how thoroughly this defies dominant practice, take the policy of

the country’s most-called—and heavily federally funded—suicide hotline. It

advertises confidentiality but covertly scores risk and, each year, without

permission, dispatches police cars and ambulances to the doors of thousands.”

5 Maurizio Pompili, MD, PhD, Andrea Fiorillo, MD, PhD, “Aggression and Impulsivity in Schizophrenia,”

Psychiatric Times, Vol. 32, No. 7, July 23, 2015, https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/aggression-and-

impulsivity-schizophrenia.

24

14. So sue me! 1

After Gawker Media published a scandalous video of the wrestler Hulk Hogan, Hogan sought

revenge. He ultimately decided to sue Gawker for violating his right to privacy. Luckily for

Hogan though, he was not the only person out for vengeance against Gawker. Years earlier,

Gawker had divulged private and sensitive information about Peter Thiel, one of the wealthy

founders of PayPal. Upon hearing of Hogan’s situation, Thiel secretly invested around 10 million

dollars to help Hogan win his lawsuit against Gawker. Thiel engaged in what is called ‘litigation

financing.’ Litigation financing is the funding of litigation by individuals or groups who are not

parties to the litigation.

While Thiel may have been motivated to invest for personal reasons, often the payoff for

investing in another person’s lawsuit is a significant financial gain for the investor. In the case of

Miller UK Ltd. v. Caterpillar Inc. (2014), for example, the investors on the side of Miller (a

small business litigator) against Caterpillar (a big business defendant) stood to earn millions if

they won the case. Many worry that the potential for financial gain in litigation financing could

lead to further corruption of the already pricey U.S. legal system. With the aim of making a

profit from litigation financing, these investment firms are well positioned to perpetuate

injustice. Such practices could lead to financiers exploiting potential plaintiffs who are in

financial need.

Others don't share these worries. In the end, they argue, legal cases will succeed or fail on

account of their merits, regardless of the money involved. Moreover, they contend that citizens

should be permitted to sell and commodify their own lawsuits because they have a right to do so,

especially if it helps them to cover expensive legal processes. Denying citizens this right out of

sheer speculation that it could lead to negative consequences overlooks the fact that litigation

financing can lead to positive outcomes in the U.S. legal system. Several case examples reveal

how litigation financing has helped many to achieve justice, who could not otherwise afford to

put up a legal fight against their opponents. One example, in NAACP v. Button (1963), the

Supreme Court struck down a Virginia law that prevented the NAACP from funding litigation

cases for those subject to unjust racial discrimination. The case of NAACP v. Button (1963)

reveals how litigation financing can be an important means of achieving justice.

1 This case was developed by the Parr Center for Ethics for use in the National High School Ethics Bowl. It appears in NHSEB’s 2022-2023 Regional Case Set, and is reproduced here with permission. For more information about the National High School Ethics Bowl, please

visit nhseb.unc.edu.

25

15. Justice delayed, justice denied?1

The murder of Emmett Till is one of the most notorious hate crimes in American history. At 14

years old, Till was killed in 1955, while visiting his family in Mississippi. This case has long

symbolized both the racist violence that was perpetrated against African-Americans throughout

the Jim Crow era, and the way in which perpetrators of this violence were rarely held

accountable.

While socializing outside of a store, Till’s cousins allegedly dared him to ask the white woman

in the store, 21-year-old Carolyn Bryant, on a date. The 14-year old Till allegedly accepted the

dare and made comments to her in the store. Bryant initially claimed that Till also made physical

advances on her. When Bryant’s husband Roy, heard of this, he and his half-brother J.W. Milam

went to the residence where Till was staying and forced him into their car. Three days later, the

boy’s mutilated body was found by the Tallahatchie River, only identifiable by an engraved ring

he was wearing. His body was flown back to Chicago where his mother insisted on an open

casket funeral. The news media soon picked up the story after seeing the state of his body, and

Roy Bryant and J.W. Milam were tried for murder in a segregated courthouse in Mississippi. At

this trial, Carolyn Bryant repeated her allegations against Till. After deliberating for less than an

hour, the all-white jury found the defendants to be not guilty. Carolyn Bryant later recanted her

claims about Till, revealing the truth to author Timothy Tyson: Till never touched or harassed

her.2

In July of 2022, an unserved arrest warrant for Carolyn Bryant (now Carolyn Donham of

Raleigh, NC) from 1955 was found in a courthouse basement in Mississippi. Weeks later, a

grand jury was empaneled to decide whether to indict her, as the only living accomplice of the

Till kidnapping and lynching nearly 70 years ago. Ultimately, the grand jury decided not to issue

an indictment over concerns about whether there was sufficient evidence to convict her.3

Critics of the grand jury’s decision emphasize the importance of accountability. Those who

would like to see Donham arrested and convicted argue that, just as Nazis have been prosecuted

years after they committed their crimes, those who engage in horrible acts deserve to be punished

regardless of how much time has passed. Moreover, given the symbolic importance of this case,

it is important to have a formal acknowledgement and condemnation of her role in Till’s

lynching. Yet others question whether prosecuting an 88-year-old woman as an accomplice to a

murder committed seven decades earlier would really constitute justice. Moreover, defenders of

the grand jury’s decision point out, given her age and serious health issues, she would not be

likely to face punishment for this crime even if she were convicted—instead, she would likely

have been sent home on compassionate release.

1 This case was developed by the Parr Center for Ethics for use in the National High School Ethics Bowl. It appears

in NHSEB’s 2022-2023 Regional Case Set, and is reproduced here with permission. For more information about the

National High School Ethics Bowl, please visit nhseb.unc.edu. 2 https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/The-Blood-of-Emmett-Till/Timothy-B-Tyson/9781476714851 3 https://www.npr.org/2022/06/29/1108806145/emmett-till-family-seeks-arrest-after-1955-warrant-is-found