Discussion and Concepts for A Crime of Compassion: Per. 2

ACOC

QaI

Dealt with the morality of preserving human life

Personal impact of the current legal situation

The fact that we don’t have the right to die – and the implications of this

Dealt with the concepts of justice and propriety – and who can determine this

Scope

Juxtaposes Para 5,6 the description of Mac before and after – with vivid description to show the changes that had happened

Deals with personal experience, not economics or philosophy – deals with the impact on an individual

Entire piece seems to focus on anecdotes – lots of information, but not much analysis

Evidence

Seems to contradict claims/evidence from Walzer article re. pain treatment

Anecdotes – one series of personal events

Concepts

Human ability to play God – the decision to live or die – and just what “playing God” means.

Who makes the decisions about end of life?

How to define “quality of life”

Implications

That the government should permit people to choose end-of-life care

That medics might be forced into – or willingly do –

something wrong

Inferences

POV

Someone in the health care field

Religious person, someone who is close to the patient in question (personal relationship)

*Call into question the credibility of people who have not personally dealt with this situation

Assumptions

That the audience shares her beliefs regarding the response to pain and what to do in this situation

Audience is religious (?)

Purpose

Provide a point of view that uses emotions to justify.

Make reader reconsider how they view PAS

“Until there is legislation, it is illegal to help a patient die” – to push for this legislation?

Make the audience feel pity for patients in this position – and for the health care workers who are legally prevented from taking this action

EXTENDED RESPONSE:

EVALUATE: Compare the writing style / rhetorical elements of this piece with one of the others, commenting on what makes this article a more or less effective way of addressing the issue.

*keep in mind that the different authors have different purposes.

*write in complete paragraphs, and support your characterizations with specific (quoted) evidence from the passages.