INSTRUCTIONS: Please write with economy and fluency on the following questions. Fold the exam lengthwise and place your name ONLY on the back (outside) of the last page. Due date: End of final exam hour (9:40 pm CDT) on Wednesday, May 3. Clear syntax and presentation will be interpreted as reflecting clarity of thought.

Exam suggestions and limits:

• Include ideas necessary and sufficient to answer the questions and convince your readers that you know what you're talking about...but avoid including trivia.
• You should not exceed six manuscript pages in total length (typed, double-spaced equivalent).
• You should write not necessarily to reflect your own views, because it is the supporting justifications, not the position itself, that will receive the most scrutiny. "We care very much about what you think about what they think."

Part I. Application. Credit = 50 points. Do EITHER A or B.

A. The teaching of evolution in public high schools has generated controversy for more than 75 years. Here is an opportunity to examine this question from the bioethical perspective. That is, this question permits you to integrate biology ( e.g., scientific process, the concept of theory, the idea of fact) and ethics ( e.g., duty to whom? honesty and integrity? consequences of good teaching? the presence of values?) into a unified, reasoned position.

Recall the case study entitled, The School Board. THE QUESTION: Should the evolutionists or creationist position, as represented in this case study, be taught in public school biology classes to explain the diversity of life? Why so?

Hint: Consider deeply the remarks in parenthesis found below the Part I title. To whom do science teachers have duties? How about school board members? Who has claims on the teachers? What consequences befall students taught one way or another? Does Natural Law have anything to offer this dilemma? What solution is possible that corresponds to good reason? Where does truth reside? What is just for this school system? What metaphors, if any, that were raised throughout this entire bioethics course (e.g., the Minimally Decent Samaritan, Abraham Lincoln and the pigs, the Star Thrower) provide insight toward an interdisciplinary perspective on this problem?

B. Recall the case study entitled, Daniel and Jane. THE QUESTION: What is the insurance company's obligation? What reasons support this view? Should Jane have the abortion? Are Daniel and Jane behaving in an ethically responsible manner? Why or why not?

Part II. Understanding. Credit = 50 points (2 points per correct box, 3 points per correct explanation)

There is urgent medical and societal need to find a cure for ovarian and breast cancers.

Proposition: It is morally permissible to experiment scientifically on human females who are diagnosed as terminally ill from ovarian or breast cancer. Two conditions are particularly relevant: (1) Patients will never be told that they are in this study because such knowledge will (a) statistically skew the patient sample and (b) cause emotional (and hormonal) responses, both of which will affect the results. (2) The scientific experimentation must be directed toward treating and curing ovarian or breast cancer; hence the subjects themselves may benefit as patients.

The task: For each of the ten thinkers below, identify by checking the appropriate pro or con box whether you believe the thinker would be in favor (pro) or against (con) the proposition above. In the space available to the right of the individual's name, justify your selection in two or three carefully constructed, legible sentences. In arriving at conclusions, you are required only to draw on assigned readings listed in the syllabus; inspect each thinker's overall position, not arbitrary single sentences.