week two replies 815
arnita
Week2dbCLED815-CaseStudyreplies.docxWeek 2 db CLED 815: Case Study replies
YesterdayMar 22 at 10:48pm
Case Study 4.2 highlights the ethical dilemma of animal rights and explains “Morgan College is an undergraduate private liberal arts institution that is church affiliated” (49). In reflection, the fact that Morgan College is a “church affiliated” institution is an important factor in this case. Accordingly, the scriptures read: “then God said, let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground” ( Genesis (Links to an external site.) 1:26 (Links to an external site.) ).
This means, animals have rights and we as human beings, have a responsibility to species other than ourselves. Moreover, all life and lifeforms are special and serve a purpose in creation. At the same time, the Biblical worldview holds man (unlike animals and other life forms) was created in the image of God. Thus contrary, to views consistent with animal rights activists, animals are not equal to nor better than humans. However, the life of animals should not be disregarded or disrespected.
When it comes to medical science and research, the life of an animal can humanely serve a purpose that benefits the betterment of creation and mankind. For example, in the case of pithing frogs, the pros outweigh the cons. Meaning, although a precious lifeform is taken, the benefits for science and research justify the means for which the life was taken.
For this reason, if the student reader were the chair of the biology department, such procedures would be permitted. Even if the animal were a dog, a cat, a horse, the pros would still outweigh the cons. Additionally, a legal practice doesn’t necessarily make it ethical. For example, some states (and countries) may legally permit gambling and prostitution. Although entirely different in nature, these activities (like pithing) represent legal practices that some would argue are unethical.
In closing, Pevsner , (2002), highlights the work of Leonardo da Vinci and explains: “Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519) made far-reaching contributions to many areas of science, technology, and art. Leonardo’s pioneering research into the brain led him to discoveries in neuroanatomy (such as those of the frontal sinus and meningeal vessels) and neurophysiology (he was the first to pith a frog). His injection of hot wax into the brain of an ox provided a cast of the ventricles, and represents the first known use of a solidifying medium to define the shape and size of an internal body structure” (Pevsner 2002).
Even today “We are fascinated by Leonardo today because his curiosity was unparalleled, and the breadth of his accomplishments is inspirational”. Nonetheless, we can appreciate that he tried to understand seemingly all aspects of the brain from structure to function” ( Pevsner 2002).
Pevsner , Jonathan (2002). Leonardo da Vinci's contributions to neuroscience. Trends in Neuroscience Volume 25, Issue 4, 1 April 2002, Pages 217-220, https://www-sciencedirect (Links to an external site.) com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/science/article/pii/S0166223600021214?via%3Dihub
SundayMar 20 at 10:23am
Upon digging into Case Study 6.2, it is certain Ned (the school principal) is in quite the pickle between Robert (the troubled child) and his disciplinary father, Frank. The ethical dilemma boils down to whether Ned should report Frank's apparent excessive (and witnessed) use of force on school property to the authorities as suspected child abuse.
To handle this situation with biblical accuracy, this researcher believes there are a few things to consider. First, "do schools have the right to determine how parents may discipline their children?" (Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2016, p. 92). Secondly, what are the purpose of the state laws handling child abuse; and lastly, what is the best solution for this problem (Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2016, 92)?
There is no clear-cut answer to the first question under review. However, when considering the history of educational systems (Anthony & Benson, 2011), one can come to the conclusion that schools have been created to serve as a communal bridge between the family and societal edification. This is where the argument stems; for how extravagant of a bridge should schools be in the lives of children? At what point do parental roles and the focus on the family surrender its authority and purpose to the institution? This researcher believes the topic of discipline should rest in the hands of the familial unit (ESV, 2016, Proverbs 13:24, 19:18, 22:6, 23:13-15, and 29:15,17). Whether they are disciplining in sin or righteousness should be between them and God (ESV, 2016, Psalm 37:8, James 1:19-20, Ephesians 4:26).
However, this conversation should not stop here... The second question under consideration is that of the law and its purpose. This researcher believes the law is a safety net for the parental use of discipline and the school can/should rely upon it in order to backstop their societal role and greater responsibility to the children they serve. Within the State of Ohio, the Ohio Revised Code Section 2919.22 has been passed to safeguard children from endangerment and abuse (ORC, 2022). Under ORC Section 2151.031, an abused child is defined as one who has evidence of physical or mental injury or death. When such evidence exists, the school and their employees should report the suspected child abuse. Furthermore, the sticky area surfaces from subsection (D); wherein, "the acts of his parent, guardian, or custodian, suffers physical or mental injury that harms or threatens to harm the child's health or welfare". It is hard for schools (specifically Ned in this case study) to determine what "threatens to harm".
This proverbial loose end brings this researcher to the third question, which addresses the best solution for the case at hand. In understanding the biblical mandate, supporting verses, and ongoing role for parental discipline, there is no doubt Frank should discipline Robert. However, how and how much causes pause. Striking him "no fewer than eight times" (Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2016, p. 91) causes the Spirit some concern. Given the description of Frank's conduct leading up to the strikes (verbal statements and physical conduct against Robert), Ned needs to ask if Frank's anger is bordering/crossing into sin and causing a threat to harm Robert. Ned certainly could call the authorities based on what he has witnessed; however, is it the best biblical response?
This researcher believes a visit to Matthew 18:15-17 should be conducted; for, given Frank and Ned's apparent positive relationship to date, perhaps a conversation about the events (after the fact) could garner a clearer group resolution to the situation. Frank may have just been heated when he said he would decide what was necessary for his son (Shapiro & Stefkovich, 2016, p. 91). However, if Frank is not receptive to a de-brief of the events, a follow up interview with Robert should be conducted (in conjunction with the school counselor and nurse) to see if there is evidence of physical or mental harm to Robert; which would then garner a formal report to be made. Conducting this multi-step resolution brings about the opportunity for forgiveness, grace, wisdom, love, and patience to be born. Simply treating the scenario as a black and white, do or do not report, situation does not afford for a biblical response. The fact of the matter is, Christian leadership and its underlying ethical dilemmas and challenges are hard and complex. They must be handled with proper discernment and a thorough go of biblical wisdom.
References
Anthony, M., & Benson, W. S. (2011). Exploring the History and Philosophy of Christian Education: Principles for the 21st Century. Wipf and Stock Publishers.
Ohio Revised Code (ORC), 2022, https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-2919.22 (Links to an external site.)
Shapiro, J. P., & Stefkovich, J. A. (2016). Ethical Leadership and Decision Making in Education (4th Edition). Taylor & Francis. https://libertyonline.vitalsource.com/books/9781317681106
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. (2016). Crossway Bibles.
