Possible risks Essay Example for Free

Possible risks Essay Determination of pregnancy is not certain until the second trimester, at around twenty weeks, when the fetal heart beat can be heard via a fetoscope. Albeit there are presumptive and probable signs associated with pregnancy, like the early morning sickness or the growing size of the abdominal area, these could also be caused by a different pathology. Hence, it can be inevitable for a woman who is not aware of her pregnant state to be exposed to radiation, most especially if she is not aware of her current menstruation cycle. Radiation exposure usually occurs whenever a person is exposed to cosmic rays, external radiation from radioactive ores, internal exposure through radiation therapy given for treatment in cancer patients, and most commonly through diagnostic x-rays. More often than not, pregnant women who are not aware of their pregnant state could have gotten their diagnostic x-rays taken, which is equivalent to receiving 70 millirem. Also, she could have been exposed to other radiation sources, like watching the television and living next door to a power plant. But exposure to radiation can have an acceptable limit of 350 millirems for the pregnant woman. For the pregnant woman, the most critical period wherein the fetus will suffer the most health consequences is when the she is exposed to radiation around two weeks to fifteen weeks gestational age. At two weeks gestational age, if the mother is exposed to a radiation that measures greater than 5 rad or 5000 millirem, a miscarriage can take place or even death inside the womb. If the fetus is exposed to radiation at the gestational age of eight to fifteen weeks, the fetus is to suffer a severe brain damage from the exposure. This can result in lowered intelligent quotients or IQs, mental retardation, stunted growth and other birth defects. Mental retardation is defined as a general developmental disorder characterized by a lower than average intelligence marker and the child is to suffer from limited daily living skills due to limited learning capabilities. Stunted growth in a child will be evidenced by a sluggish growth and development progress, as evidenced by a lower than normal height, weight and even cognitive skills. After this critical period, the two to fifteen weeks of gestational age, the fetus will unlikely suffer from radiation exposure, unless the exposure is extremely large. Only having been exposed to at least five thousand x-rays at one time can give harm to a 16 week old fetus. At 26 weeks gestational age, the fetus cannot be harmed by radiation exposure, and if ever exposed to radiation, the fetus will unlikely suffer serious health consequences. This can be compared to a newborn being exposed to radiation; the chances of having defects are greatly decreased if not invisible already. However, some of the effects of being exposed to radiation cannot readily be seen or manifest in the early life. Studies also show that fetuses are extremely sensitive to the cancer causing effects of radiation exposure; hence this can increase their risks in acquiring cancer later in life. Radiation exposure can be limited, if not avoided. The pregnant woman needs to be aware of her physiological state. She would have to consult all of her diagnostic exams and her workplace to her physician, so that radiation exposure can be prevented early on the pregnancy.

Walt Disney Essay example -- essays research papers fc

Disney Productions is one of the leading entertainment businesses, bringing tremendous profits not to mention the joy it brings many people. It has not always been this easy for Disney however. It took the mind of one man to bring it to what it is today, and that’s mans name is Walt Disney. Walt Disney’s life was devoted to the arts and entertainment almost from birth. However, Walt’s fortunes and fame didn’t take form until his creation of Mickey Mouse. Walt Disney was born on December 5, 1901 and was the fourth child of Elias and Flora Disney. He was an extremely talented child, exhibiting tremendous creativity at such a young age. Walt began drawing pictures in the 1st grade and continued until the day he died. Another of his exceptional talents was acting. Walt relished each opportunity to perform on stage or in class. While in elementary school "on Lincoln’s Birthday every year until he graduated, Walt was hauled from class to class by the principal to give the Gettysburg Address." (Fisher, 18) Walt got bored with school however and dropped out at the age of 16. He immediately got a job as a waiter on a train line and kept this job until the U.S. entered the war. Walt had a great desire to join the army, but was rejected because he was to young. Since he still desired to have some role in the war he became a volunteer with the Red Cross. Within a week he was sent to the front and didn’t return for one to two years. When Walt returned from he war he told his father that he wanted to become an animator, but his father did not approve. Walt ignored his father’s advice and enrolled in art school. Walt attended art school for several months in both Missouri and Kansas City and then later found a job at an advertising firm in Kansas. There he met a talented artist named Ubbe Iwerks. Ubbe was a great animator and he and Walt became good friends. Walt and Ubbe worked all day for the advertising company, but at night they studied the art of animation and experimented with ways to make animation smoother by using light and a camera. Walt soon quit his job at the advertising firm because he was not satisfied with the work he was doing. He found a job in Kansas City at a Film Ad Company. Walt was quickly fired from this job and having nowhere else to go, he returned home. Walt and his brother Roy decided to form their own business available jobs did... ...found 200-acre lot in Anaheim, California and purchased it immediately. Construction was completed and the park opened in 1955 and by that time Disney Productions was a financial success. People were so anxious to be the first ones in Disneyland that when only 15,000 tickets were sold for opening day 33,000 people showed up, half of them had counterfeit tickets. Certainly, Walt Disney was a man of vision. A man who had the creativity to develop ideas and then have the patience and perseverance to carry them out. Walt Disney showed courage and the desire you need to build a successful life. Even when all odds were against him, he still was able to find a way to conquer his dreams. He taught us many things and I hope we remember this man not only for his cartoons, but also for his work ethics and the contributions he made to society. Bibliography Fanning, Jim. Walt Disney. New York, NY: Chelsea House Publishers, 1994. Fisher, Maxine P. Walt Disney. New York, NY: A First Book, 1988. Greene, Katherine, and Greene, Richard. The Man Behind The Magic. New York, NY: Penguin Books, 1991 Schroeder, Russell. Ed. Walt Disney, His Life In Pictures. New York, NY: Disney Press, 1996.

Euthanasia: Kantianism vs Utilitarianism Essay

The deliberate act of ending another’s life, given his or her consent, is formally referred to as euthanasia. At present, euthanasia is one of the most controversial social-ethical issues that we face, in that it deals with a sensitive subject matter where there is much uncertainty as to what position one ought to take. Deliberately killing another person is presumed by most rational people as a fundamental evil act. However, when that person gives his or her consent to do so, this seems to give rise to an exceptional case. This can be illustrated in the most common case of euthanasia, where the person who is willing to die suffers from an illness that causes great pain, and will result in his or her demise in the not-so-distant future. In this case, killing the person would seem to be the most humane and reasonable thing to do, whereas keeping the person alive would be akin to torture; which is also presumed to be a fundamental evil act. But euthanasia, in essence, is murder, and this might lead one to ask whether there can ever be an exception to murder? And if one were to make an exception in this case, what would then prevent us from making exceptions in other cases? In the worst case scenario, would this not leave an opening for cold-blooded murders to kill people without their consent, and make false claims that they did have their consent? There are a variety of positions, based on the numerous ethical theories that have been developed, that one can take in order to resolve the issue of euthanasia; but the positions I will be looking at in particular, are the positions based on John Stuart Mill’s ‘Utilitarianism’ ethical theory, and Immanuel Kant’s ‘Categorical Imperative’ ethical theory. According to Utilitarianism, euthanasia can be morally justified, whereas according to Kantianism, euthanasia is not morally justifiable; but I will argue that neither position provides an adequate resolution to the issue, due to the significant flaws that are inherent in the reasoning that led to their particular positions. According to Utilitarianism, ethics is primarily an empirical science; essentially implying that the moral standard must be based on human experiences, and not abstract principles that are largely impractical. Hence, based on an understanding of human experience Utilitarianism proposes that the ultimate end of every human action is simply pleasure, and the absence of pain. This fundamental idea then forms the basis for Utilitarianism’s Greatest Happiness Principle which states, â€Å"actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure† (Mill, 7). Also, Utilitarianism asserts that actions are judged as moral solely based on their consequences, and not on their motives. So, if a person acts out of good intentions, but does not produce beneficial results, then his action does not qualify as a moral action. Finally, Utilitarianism asserts that an action is good only if it promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. Therefore, an action that slightly increases your own pleasure, but in turn, dramatically decreases the pleasure of other, according to Utilitarianism is not moral action. Thus, in the context of the case mentioned in the introduction, the Utilitarian position on euthanasia would go something as follows: With respect to the individual who is willing to die, he/she would simply be happiest dead, and unhappiest alive. With respect to the people who care for the individual, they would be happy that he/she is alive, but unhappy at the same time because he/she is in great pain; or if the individual underwent euthanasia, happy because he/she is no longer in pain, but unhappy because he/she is dead. So, in applying the Utilitarian principle to this case, the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people occurs when the person is dead. The reason being that the people who care for the person are both happy and unhappy regardless of whether the person is dead or alive, but the person will only be happy if he/she is dead. Therefore, since euthanasia meets the moral standards set by Utilitarianism, it would support the act of euthanasia as a morally sound action. Unlike Utilitarianism however, Kantianism states that ethics is a purely a priori discipline, thus, independent of experience, and that ethical rules can only be found through pure reason. Also contrary to Utilitarianism, Kantianism asserts that the moral worth of an action should be judged on its motive and the action itself, and not on its consequences. Based on these ideas, Kantianism propose that an action is good only if it performed out a ‘good will’; which is the only thing that is good, in and of itself. To act out of a ‘good will’, one must act in accordance with a categorical imperative. According to Kant there is only one categorical imperative, which is to â€Å"act only on that maxim in which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law† (Kant, 528); and can also be formulated as â€Å"act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as means, but always at the same time as an end† (Kant, 532). Essentially, the categorical imperative states that your actions must not result in a practical contradiction, which can be determined by conceptualizing all other people performing the same act. To illustrate, if I were to make a promise with no intentions of keeping it, and I imagine all other people doing the same, then very idea of a promise would cease to have meaning, and thus, my action would give rise to a practical contradiction, and consequently, be immoral. Finally, the categorical imperative is an unconditional ought, which means that an action must be performed solely out of duty to the categorical imperative, without any ulterior motive, in order for it to be a moral action. Thus, with regard to euthanasia, Kantians would reject the act of euthanasia as a morally good action based on their reasoning that an action is good only if it acts in accordance with a categorical imperative. Taking the categorical imperative in terms of being able to act in ways that can, without contradiction, become a universal law, if one were to universalize killing another person – which is the fundamental act in euthanasia – this would result in a practical contradiction. That practical contradiction being if everyone were to kill one another, then there would be no people left in this world, and as a consequence, the very idea of murder would lose its meaning. Also, if one were to formulate the categorical imperative in terms of treating others (including oneself) as ends rather than means, euthanasia would violate the categorical imperative, in that the person is treated as a means by killing himself, to reach the end goal of eliminating the pain. Therefore, since euthanasia does not meet the moral standards set out by Kantianism, it would not support the act of euthanasia as a morally sound action. However, as I stated in my thesis, I believe that Utilitarianism, and Kantianism do not provide an adequate resolution to the issue of euthanasia, because of the significant flaws in their reasoning. With Utilitarianism, the significant flaw in their position lies in the fact that it is built on the false assumption that the consequences of actions can be predicted, when in actuality they cannot. For example, it is possible that the person, who underwent euthanasia because of the pain he/she suffered, could’ve been misdiagnosed and fully recovered shortly after. Also, inspired by his/her new life, the individual went on to form a charity that raised money for research in pain treatment, thereby increasing the happiness for a great many. Thus, under the utilitarian system, keeping the person alive in this scenario would have been the morally justified act, whereas killing the person would not have been. With Kantianism, the significant flaw in their position lies in the fact that they make an absolute, immutable statement – do not murder – without any consideration for the context in which murder takes place. It is unreasonable, and bordering on foolish, to claim to adequately resolve special cases of murder such as euthanasia through a simple, general statement without taking into consideration its context. Though it is indeed reasonable that deliberately killing another for the sake of harming them is an immoral act, in euthanasia, a person is killed by another only by their own consent, and for the most part, with a good motive. When a person is suffering tremendously and is most likely going to die anyways, it does not at all seem unreasonable to kill him. In fact, killing the person would seem to be the most humane act one can perform, and in not killing the person, and keeping him/her alive in such a state of pain and agony, would be like an indirect form of torture; which in Kantianism is not a moral act. Thus, for these reasons, the positions of Utilitarianism and Kantianism on euthanasia are inadequate in resolving the issue of euthanasia, and euthanasia still remains as a significant social-ethical problem in our contemporary society. Works Cited Mill, J. S. (1984). Excerpts from Utilitarianism, On Liberty and Considerations on Representative Government, 1, 4-42. London: Dent. Kant, I. (1956). Excerpts from Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, trans. H. J. Paton, 61-62, 64-67, 74, 80-92, 95-107. London: Unwin Hyman. Reprinted in E. Sober, Core Question in Philosophy: A Text with Readings, 520-540. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2001.

Jane Austen s The King Of The Time - 1219 Words

(Hook sentence.) The Regency is a specific part of the much larger Georgian era, which spreads throughout the rules of the King George s. Regency is considered to be from 1811 to 1820 as the king of the time, George III, was deemed unfit to rule because of a mental illness, causing his son to be instated as his proxy, Prince Regent. Under the rule of the Prince Regent, life was transformed into a decade of social standings, where income and the amount of land you inherited determined your worth to many people. Women of this time were expected to be beautiful, well-mannered, and have good connections, so that they could easily achieve an advantageous marriage. Jane Austen lived almost her whole life in this time, which perhaps is the†¦show more content†¦He believes she has â€Å"more of quickness than her sisters,† and they often converse in amusement about the people around them (Austen 3). Since they aren t of a high society, they are constantly entertained with the desperate attempts of women who strive to marry a man of the greatest advantage. This causes Elizabeth to think highly of her ability to discern the people around her. Since she has never been proved wrong, an innate stubbornness from it was created. Pride over this has caused her to be quick to judge as she sees fit. This trait is especially shown in her first interaction with Mr. Darcy, a wealthy, seemingly proud, and handsome gentleman. The people of Hertfordshire county consider him to be the â€Å"most disagreeable man in the world† (Austen 8). She comes to agree with the gossip when she overhears him commenting that she is â€Å"not handsome enough to tempt [him],† (Austen 9). As they spend more time together he starts to develop feelings for her, but does not act on it because of her lower class. Here we can see how his pride and societal upbringing gives him a preconception against others. Her prejudice against him causes her to see everything he says or does in a negative light. Throughout the novel, this use of pride and prejudice leads to many misunderstandings about the true character of the people in it. The introducement of Mr. Wickham, a handsome man from Darcy’s past, proves to progress the story as an influence Elizabeth s prejudice.