The 15 Competition Cases for 2012

The 15 Competition Cases for 2012

These are brief summaries of the cases that will be used in this year’s high school ethics bowls. Teams will receive full cases.
1. Should the Red Cross be allowed to provide first aid training to Taliban fighters in Afghanistan?
2. Should employers be allowed to request applicant’s social media profiles?
3. Is it morally permissible to consume Adderall, Ritalin, etc. for the purpose of increasing academic grades?
4. If Major League Baseball allows Pete Rose, who gambled on baseball games, to “hold records”, then should it allow him into the Hall of Fame?
5. A baseball team of a religious high school that had strict rules against coed sports forfeited the 2012 Arizona state championship game because the opposing team included a girl. Are there any moral justifications for ignoring another group’s religious beliefs in order to promote fairness and equality?
6. The New York Times reported that students from $200,000 income families score 400 points higher than students from $20,000 families. [Higher income students are more likely to retest and take prep courses.] Should the role of the SAT in college admissions be reevaluated?
7. Should students be allowed to collaborate and “borrow” the efforts of others on homework assignments?
8. Should policy makers in the state of Texas be able to select a history curriculum that reinforces their own ideology?
9. Without reasonable suspicion that a person is carrying contraband, is it morally permissible to strip search anyone, even traffic violators, citing jailhouse security concerns?
10. Did a high school girl who had been raped behave ethically when she defied a court order and released her attackers’ names?
11. A study in Georgia showed that prosecutors sought the death penalty for 70% of black defendants and 15% of white defendants. Is it right to cite statistics to try to prove potential racial bias in individual cases?
12. Is increasing the numbers of polar bears in zoos an ethical way to attempt to save them?
13. Should off-shore drilling be more restricted because of the potential effects of an oil spill, no matter how unlikely such a spill may be?
14. Should company policy forbid lifeguards from helping people outside of a designated area?
15. With regard to the 2012 federal “contraceptive rule” can an employer ethically limit the health care options of its employees based on its institutional morality? Can the government force a religious institution to spend money on actions it finds immoral? / WilmingtonFriends Ethics Bowl Team
Philadelphia-Area High School Ethics Bowl · Villanova University
December 1, 2012. Tentative competitors:
Bishop Shanahan High School (Downingtown, PA)
Camden Catholic High School (Cherry Hill, NJ)
Central High School (Philadelphia, PA)
Cherry Hill East High School (Cherry Hill, NJ)
Conestoga High School (Berwyn, PA)
Moorestown Friends High School (Moorestown, NJ)
Padua Academy (Wilmington, DE)
Phoenixville Area High School (Phoenixville, PA)
Radnor High School (Radnor, PA)
Wilmington Friends High School (Wilmington, DE)
Winning team represents region in National High School Ethics Bowl at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. April 19-20, 2013.

What is ethics?

Ethics is a branch of philosophy that studies right and wrong behavior. It recommends and defends courses of action [what ought to be done]. Ethicists work to establish the best set of moral principles, but understand that reasonable disagreement is commonplace.
Examples of moral principles are: social benefit [consequences for society], benevolence [helping those in need], paternalism [helping those who cannot help themselves], no harm [do no harm to others], justice [due process, compensation for harm] and rights [life, information, privacy, free expression, safety].

What is an Ethics Bowl?

An Ethics Bowl is a competitive event in which teams of up to five members analyze ethical dilemmas. The goal is to demonstrate knowledge of the issues at stake, to develop a framework to direct actions, and to answer questions asked by judges. Teams do not need to take pro and con positions. Both teams can agree with each other. The clarity and persuasiveness of the argument about what we “ought” to do determine the winner.

Contest Format

One or all members of the team may speak, but it is important that the team present a clear and unified position. A coin toss decides the presenting team for the first case. That team will be the responding team for a second case. Blank paper will be provided. Teams may not bring notes or other materials.
Preparation Time / 2 minutes
Initial Presentation / 7 minutes / Presenting Team
Preparation Time / 1 minute
Commentary / 3 minutes / Responding Team
Preparation Time / 1 minute
Response/Rebuttal / 3 minutes / Presenting Team
Judge’s Questions / 10 minutes / Presenting Team
Team responsibilities during the Initial Presentation
Create a strong opening statement [We, school name, hold that . . . ]. Identify the relevant facts [circumstances, laws], the key ethical issues, and the stakeholders involved. Explain clearly the top reasons why the team has drawn this conclusion. Then, convincingly show how this solution offers value and benefit. Show thoughtful consideration of viewpoints of those who may disagree. Offer provisions that address conflicts or holes. Close with a persuasive statement similar to the opening statement. / Team responsibilities during the Commentary
Pose insightful questions to the opposing team. Good questions develop counter arguments. Why didn’t you discuss . . .? We wonder what you think about . . .?
Team responsibilities during the Response/Rebuttal Respond directly to the other team’s comments. “You said this. Here is what we think.” End with a persuasive closing statement.

How judges determine the winner

Initial presentation
Was the presentation clear and systematic? [10 points]
Did the team clearly identify and thoroughly discuss the central moral dimensions of the case? [10 points]
Did the team avoid ethically irrelevant issues? [10 points]
Did the team show awareness and thoughtful consideration of different viewpoints, especially those that would loom large in the reasoning of individuals who disagree with the team’s position? [10 points]
Responding team’s commentary & judges
How did the team respond to the opposing team’s commentary and the judges’ questions? [10 points]
Response/Rebuttal
To what extent did the team deal with the presenting team’s arguments? [10 points]
Preparation
Full text of the 15 2012 competition cases:
http://nhseb.unc.edu/files/2012/08/NHSEB-NQE-cases-2012-13.pdf
Villanova Ethics Program Case Introduction Video:
http://www1.villanova.edu/villanova/artsci/ethics.html
Prepare as a team so that all know the basics of each case analysis
Take the time to identify all the relevant issues involved in the case
This is a conversation among peers, not a fight to be won
Copyright 2012 · Ethics Program, Villanova University