这是一个加拿大的生物医学相关essay作业
Write an essay that addresses all the questions in either option A or option B (do notwrite on both topics).
Your paper should have an introduction, conclusion, and a clear thesis statement. All paraphrased passages and quoted material may be cited using the following format: (author, page number); (ppt name, slide number).
There is no penalty for going over the recommended word range, but a lengthy essay is still required to be succinct (i.e. the discussion/argumentation should be expressed efficiently). This paper should not be shorter than 1500 words and shouldprimarily engage with course readings or content(including lecture). Extensions will be granted through a system of self-declaration: an extension of up to 5 days will be granted for illness or other significant personal disruptions to coursework. Extensions outside of this range will still be considered in exceptional circumstances if they are discussed with me over Zoom.
A) In your view, how expansive should the Canadian policy of physician-assisted death be (that is, do you think PAD should always be permitted, never permitted, or only permitted with certain conditions being met) Use the broad ethical principles relevant to physician-assisted death (e.g. autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice) to defend your view, and support your position through argument/responding to objections. In the course of your discussion, consider whether ‘slippery slope’ concerns support or undermine your thesis (if they undermine your thesis, you should explain how they can be addressed.) Regardless of your position, you should refer to at least two of the readings.
B) What is equipoise Explain the following positions in the debate over equipoise:
(A) researchers are not required to be in equipoise, but must respect autonomy
(B) researchers are required to be in a state of clinical equipoise (and respect autonomy)
(C) researchers are required to be in a state of theoretical equipoise (and respect autonomy). Which position is correctDefend your answer, in part, by considering at least two separate arguments from the readings.