Up@dawn 2.0

Tuesday, February 4, 2014

We discussed a few topics during our group meeting. First, we talked about our standpoints on how we wanted our bodies to be handled after death. We all agreed that it really wouldn't matter how our bodies were used after death such as becoming a cadaver or "silent mentor" as long as our bodies were handled with respect and dignity. Most beliefs view that the soul and body are separate entities, and the soul goes on whether it is incarnation or eternal life. If the body is left behind, why not make a contribution (such as medical studies) for the current and future health professionals to get a better understanding of the human body? (Although there are limits).
Euthanasia was another major topic discussed. I don't believe we came to a consensus on this one. Even though everyone wants a "good death" to end their life, we shouldn't be able to schedule our moment of death. Abortion was the last debated subject. This was also another topic that required views from every angle. We had to consider the definition of life, the fetus' dependence on the mother, and many of the possible situations of conception. This was all left with a gray area.

In conclusion, many of the answers to the questions discussed in Chapter 4 (Clinical Ethics) depends on the condition and situation.


  1. Sorry I forgot a title. Group 3 discussions from Thursday by the way.

  2. yes sir, a lot of these topics seem to make everyone have an opinion. like abortion, a topic discussed so frequently that its almost just like barfing up ideas we have heard from others. i did enjoy this convo are group had since it seemed like the first were we actually had some slight differences in are opinions.
    fq= what is therapeutic misconception?
    answer= wrongly believing a new experimental research project may benefit a particular patients illness.