Alex's Blog

A key source that I looked at was a scholarly source titled " Implicit Racial/Ethnic Bias Among Health Care Professionals and Its Influence on Health Care Outcomes: A Systematic Review." It was written by William Hall, a professor at UNC Chapel Hill, et al. and it was publish in the American Journal of Public Health. I found this source using keywords such as " implicit bias," "healthcare," and "African-American." I did this in the American Journal of Public Health website, which has many great scholarly sources looking into the social determinants of good quality healthcare. This source was very helpful, and it is definitely a source that I will be using in my paper. This source showed that t he majority of healthcare workers have a positive implicit bias towards white people, and a negative implicit bias towards African Americans. Thus, I can use this source to explain why African Americans are being treated differently in healthcare, even whe...

The demographic that I chose to write about was the African American demographic. In America, African-Americans face a thought of systematic discrimination, from income-inequality to food-inequality, etc. Most notably, they face healthcare inequality. They receive less good healthcare compared to their white counterparts. Many African Americans feel they are unlistened to compared to their white counterparts. They feel as if their voices are diminished when they are trying to voice concerns about their symptoms (they feel as if they are belittled). One study found that even though when insurance status, income, and severity of conditions are comparable to white people, African Americans still receive lower-quality health care. Many healthcare providers have implicit bias, views about African Americans in which they are not consciously aware. This leads to African Americans being discharged faster from hospital. I need to do more research on this implicit bias, to back up the point that...

What I have learned through my research so far is that, pretty interestingly, embryos are given legal victim status, when they are pursued by the mother for their full development. For instance, when they are killed in a car accident, the suspect is charged with murder of the fetus. This is per under the federal US Unborn Victims of Violence Act of 2004. Therefore embryos are given rights to prevent damage to their health, when it is the intention of the mother to fully develop them. Such rights push further the idea that genetic modification should not be done on human embryos, given the great negative affects they can cause, which are greater than the current benefits for the current foreseeable future. I am leaning more toward the position that the most ethical approach to this type of dilemma is to put the rights of unborn children first (children who are pursued by the mother for their full development). Here is how the 4 pillars factor in: It terms of autonomy, modifying genet...

The topic I am choosing is the genetic engineering of human embryos. Genetic engineering is the modification of the genes of someone to change their characteristics, and in terms of a human embryo, it is the genetic modification of an embryo to prevent the developing of certain characteristics, like genetic diseases. This topic relates to all of the pillars of medical ethics, including autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. It terms of autonomy, modifying genetically a human embryo gives the child no autonomy - they have no say in wether or not they want to be genetically modified. In terms of beneficence, genetic engineering of human embryos can actually be of benefit to the eventual child. It can help prevent genetic disease, lower the risks of diseases in generations to come, increase life expectancy, increase intelligence, etc. However, in terms of non-maleficence, genetic modification of human embryos can actually produce disastrous effects as the technology has not ...

My topic is COVID-19 vaccine mandates in public k-12 schools in the United States. I see myself taking the stance that their should be forced vaccine COVID-19 mandates in public k-12 schools in the United States. One of the main points is that COVID-19 vaccines are very effective in maintaining public health, especially in the prevention of the spreading of COVID-19. According to a researcher from the Institute of Public Health at the University of Paris, the majority of scientists believe it will help keep schools open during highly transmissible variants. Additionally, mandating COVID-19 vaccines is of upmost legality. In Jacobson v. Massachusetts, states were given the rights of vaccine mandates, so each state can pick and choose which vaccine mandates to instate. Lastly, COVID-19 vaccine mandates are also of ethicality. This is based on the principle of non-maleficence. According to medical doctor Sween, "a vaccine mandate is ethically justified if it benefits the person being...

My current topic focuses on wether or not COVID-19 vaccines should be mandated in public k-12 schools in the United States. Currently, there is no mandate that has been implemented in any state, accept in the capital of Washington D.C. However, California does have a mandate that is pending (see link ). There are a plethora of prospectives regarding the mandating of vaccines in public k-12 schools. Some of these prospectives include effectiveness, legality, and ethicality. The majority of scientists believe it will help keep schools open during highly transmissible variants, however, there is unclear data about vaccines' efficacies for new variants of COVID-19, like the sub-variants of Omicron (see both of these sources -  link2  &  link 3 ). In terms of legality, this is also highly contested, given that some states have put bans on COVID-19 vaccine mandates. Some say this violates the Constitution. Though, there have been numerous Supreme Court cases saying that it ...