Is it ethical for the federal government to pay the costs of kidney dialysis for all patients, regardless of age or income, as it now does, but not to pay the costs of other illnesses? Which would be more reasonable and more feasible: extending benefits to those who have other illnesses or withdrawing them from those who need kidney dialysis?
What will be an ideal response?
Answers May Vary
You might also like to view...
Which of the following statements most accurately describes laws regarding homosexuality in the United States?
a. U.S. laws have not been intertwined with moral nor religious principles. b. It is against the law to engage in homosexual conduct in any state in this country. c. More state legislatures have passed sodomy laws in recent years. d. The Supreme Court invalidated sodomy laws in 2003.
Qualitative analysis is easily taught as a series of rote procedures
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
One of the first sociologists to utilize the social survey was
a. W.E.B. DuBois b. Robert Park c. Ernest Burgess d. Emile Durkheim
Which perspective would point to those in positions of power as those who would stand to benefit from strict drug laws?
A. structural functionalism B. conflict theory C. symbolic interactionism D. control theory