Based on “Case Study: Fetal Abnormality” and other required topic study materials, write a 750-1,000-word reflection that answers the following questions:

1. What is the Christian view of the nature of human persons, and which theory of moral status is it compatible with? How is this related to the intrinsic human value and dignity?
2. Which theory or theories are being used by Jessica, Marco, Maria, and Dr. Wilson to determine the moral status of the fetus? What from the case study specifically leads you to believe that they hold the theory you selected?
3. How does the theory determine or influence each of their recommendations for action?
4. What theory do you agree with? Why? How would that theory determine or influence the recommendation for action?

Remember to support your responses with the topic study materials.

While APA style is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a rubric.

You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.

Rubric

Explanation of the Christian view of the nature of human persons and the theory of moral status that it is compatible is clear, thorough, and explained with a deep understanding of the connection between them. Explanation is supported by topic study materials. 30%

The theory or theories that are used by each person to determine the moral status of the fetus is explained clearly and draws insightful relevant conclusions. Rationale for choices made is clearly supported by topic study materials and case study examples. 15%

Explanation of how the theory determines or influences each of their recommendations for action is clear, insightful, and demonstrates a deep understanding of the theory and its impact on recommendation for action. Explanation is supported by topic study materials. 15%

Evaluation of which theory is preferable within personal practice along with how that theory would influence personal recommendations for action is clear, relevant, and insightful. 10%

Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

All format elements are correct.

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Here is a link to the Khan video on Moral Status. It will help explain the five theories discussed in the lecture: 

https://www.khanacademy.org/partner-content/wi-phi/wiphi-value-theory/wiphi-ethics/v/moral-status 

You are correct to point out that the doctrine of the imago Dei (as articulated in Genesis) is about the moral, spiritual, and intellectual nature of humanity. This point highlights that we are more than physical bodies, and therefore healthcare is arguably more than just physiology.

Another point to bring up involves the broader context of Genesis 1. This is the Creation story where God works for 6 days and rests for 1, and humans are made in the image of God on Day 6. If we stopped the story there, we can look at what God does to figure out what it means to be an image bearer. God creates out of nothing. While we do not create out of nothing, it is important to recognize that there is something fundamentally similar between God creating and our identity as image bearers (see Bartholomew and Goheen, 36). An image bearer is like God in that she creates out of the raw materials that God provides in his creation. Bartholomew and Goheen explain,

“In Genesis 1:26, God says, ‘Let us make man in our image, . . . and let them rule . . . over all the earth.’ He then says to the human beings he has created, ‘Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over it . . . ‘ (1:28). From this it should be clear that the fundamental similarity between God and humanity is humankind’s unique vocation, its calling or commissioning by God himself. Under God, humanity is to rule over the nonhuman parts of creation on land and in sea and air, much as God is the supreme rule over all” (Bartholomew and Goheen, 36).

So how does this relate to healthcare? I think that our calling as images bearers expanded after the Fall. Genesis 3 provides a theological explanation for why the world is broken, and part of that brokenness includes sickness and death. Before Genesis 3, our calling as images bearers was limited to creating out of the raw materials that God has provided. After Genesis 3, our calling now includes repairing the parts of God’s creation that have been broken. When the doctrine of the image of God is coupled with the doctrine of the Fall, we have a theological foundation for promoting healthcare as a Christian vocation. This vocation is only confirmed when we consider the redemption that accompanied Jesus life and ministry.