BLAW 201 – Winter 2025
Ethics Writing Assignment
Assignment: In a typewritten paper, analyze and resolve ethical dilemmas in the below Hypothetical
Story according to the below Instructions. In analyzing the dilemmas, use the dilemmas,
models, and rationalizations discussed in the Ethics by Jennings Article (located in
Week 6 in Blackboard). Do not use any sources other than the Hypothetical Story for
the facts and the Ethics by Jennings Article for the ethical principles that will apply to
those facts. Citations to these sources are not needed. The paper must include your own
novel thoughts and ideas about the dilemmas in the Hypothetical Story.
Due Date:
Friday, February 21 at 5:00 p.m. through Turnitin on Blackboard
Format:
The paper must be 4 pages (no less, no more), double-spaced, and 12 pt. type. Your
writing should include proper punctuation, grammar, and spelling, and be clear, wellreasoned, and logical.
Hypothetical Story:
NeuraPharm, a pharmaceutical company, created a new drug, Seranova, to treat patients with diabetes.
Based on scientific studies provided by NeuraPharm, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved
Seranova as a safe and effective experimental treatment of diabetes. To compare Seranova with two
other similar drugs, NeuraPharm launched and funded a clinical research study, the “Horizon Study,”
on newly diagnosed diabetes patients. Patients would be randomly prescribed a drug (Seranova or one
of the other two diabetes drugs) for 52 weeks and doctors would evaluate the effectiveness of the drug
during that time. The study did not allow doctors to switch patients to another drug if the randomly
assigned drug did not provide medical improvement.
To recruit and study the effectiveness of the drugs, NeuraPharm paid doctors to enroll patients in the
Horizon Study and to treat and monitor the patients during the study. After meeting with NeuraPharm
representatives about the study, Dr. Gray agreed to enroll and treat diabetes patients in the Horizon
Study. Dr. Hart, Dr. Gray’s partner, however, decided not to assist with the study.
Based on his agreement with NeuraPharm, Dr. Gray regularly informed patients diagnosed with
diabetes about Horizon Study and encouraged them to participate, saying the drugs were safe and
effective. After consulting with Dr. Gray, Ella Thompson agreed to enroll in the Horizon Study. Ella
was randomly prescribed Seranova by Dr. Gray and visited him every two weeks. One month after
starting the Horizon Study, Ella reported that she was more tired than usual and felt faint at times. Dr.
Gray decreased her Seranova dosage, but she still reported feeling tired one month later and asked
about a different drug. Dr. Gray insisted that Ella continue with Seranova and again changed her
dosage. One week later, Ella was rushed to the emergency room after fainting in a store and badly
hitting her head. She later learned that several patients prescribed Seranova by Dr. Gray had
experienced similar fainting issues, and that this information had been reported to Dr. Gray and Dr.
Hart’s medical practice.
Instructions:
A. Identifying Ethical Dilemmas:
In 3 separate paragraphs, identify 3 different ethical dilemmas/decisions by 3 different parties (persons
or entities) in the Hypothetical Story. In each paragraph: (i) identify a party from the Hypothetical
Story; (ii) identify an ethical dilemma/decision from the Ethics by Jennings Article (What are the
Categories of Ethical Dilemmas section) that the party identified in part (i) is facing; and (iii) explain
how the ethical dilemma applies to the party (the party should be making a choice that involves the
ethical dilemma; the party should not be a victim of the decision involving the dilemma).
B. Resolving the Dilemmas Through Ethical Models:
In 3 separate paragraphs, resolve an ethical dilemma identified in Part A using an Ethics Model
discussed in the Ethics by Jennings Article (Resolution of Business Ethical Dilemmas section). In each
paragraph: (i) identify an ethical dilemma from Part A (each paragraph should involve a different
dilemma); (ii) identify an Ethics Model from Jennings (each paragraph should apply a different
Model); and (iii) answer all of the questions in the model from the perspective of the party facing the
dilemma and discuss how you think it should be resolved.
C. Identifying Rationalizations that Lead to Unethical Decisions:
In 3 separate paragraphs, identify at least 2 different rationalizations from the Ethics by Jennings
Article (Why We Fail to Reach Good Decisions in Ethical Dilemmas section) that may cause the
parties experiencing the ethical dilemmas to make an unethical choice. In each paragraph: (i) identify
a dilemma from Part A (each paragraph should involve a different dilemma); (ii) identify two different
rationalizations that may be applied by the party experiencing the dilemma (do not repeat the same
rationalizations in each paragraph. Be creative.); and (iii) explain why the party may use that
rationalization.
*There should be a total of 9 paragraphs. An introduction/conclusion is not required.
Grading Rubric:
Format (4 pages; double-spaced paragraphs, 12-point font)
Grammar, Punctuation, Spelling
Part A (10 points each paragraph)
Part B (10 points each paragraph)
Part C (10 points each paragraph)
-5 for each
element that
is missing
10
30
30
30
Points in Parts A, B, and C will be based on the logic, reasoning, and coherence shown and the use of
the information in Ethics by Jennings Article and the Hypothetical Story.
2