Family planning is widely regarded as a human right that is necessary to creating gender equality and women’s empowerment as well as a means of poverty reduction and economic growth for many developing nations. Interestingly, however, this study examining perceptions of C-sections in Chiapas, Mexico found that many women also associated family planning with C-sections, a mentality that can be traced to the Mexican Ministry of Health’s Post-Obstetric Event Contraception Program (1995-2000), which encouraged and ingrained practices of implementing contraception use immediately after birth, particularly coupling the C-section and tubal ligation procedures. Considering the negative health outcomes of C-sections shown in the quantitative study and constraints to choice in family planning (i.e. questionably obtained consent, strained healthcare systems) shown in the qualitative study, I argue that is not ethical to continue to perform medically unnecessary C-sections for family planning purposes in Chiapas, Mexico.
It’s easy to forget the incredibly complex logistics that underlie how water gets to our taps every day. Even more difficult to comprehend is life without such easy access to water. So it’s easy to understand why who provides that access can raise ethical concerns: why would private interests be handed control over a town’s water supply? Decisions are not always that simple though, and governments often balance the desires of their citizens with hopes for efficiency through private partnerships.
This poster examines privatization in the form of concessions, asking whether privatized water supply and sewerage systems are better than public systems.
Laura’s presentation aims to identify gaps between the language used by lawmakers and by college students to define verbal sexual coercion. The study focuses on three coercion scripts to better understand how students discuss sexual coercion in everyday life.
In this study, Selina examines Christian research on the moral object of abortion, specifically the ways in which extenuating circumstances of pregnancy and environment impact the morality of decisions related to abortion.
Shannon studies the motivation for smokeless tobacco use of undergraduate members of male-dominated organizations on college campuses. In particular, the study looks at whether motivation for participating in a male-dominated organization, perception of peer use of smokeless tobacco, and conformity to masculine norms are related to smokeless tobacco use.
MARGARET DUNNE + ELEANOR BIRCH
Margaret Dunne (NHS’17) and Eleanor Birch (NHS’17), both International Health majors, first encountered the issue of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) — the non-medical partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to female genital organs — in a class at Georgetown on Maternal and Child Health.
Most FGM/C is performed by “traditional circumcisers,” but nearly one-fifth is performed by healthcare professionals in a practice known as “medicalized” FGM/C. The poster focuses on the moral responsibility of physicians and others involved in the practice, suggesting that there are no easy or quick answers in this domain.
Though both authors began their exploration firmly opposed to the medicalization of the practice, their research ultimately led them to reverse course, and their poster advocates medicalization as a harm-reduction technique and morally-acceptable intermediate step to the ultimate eradication of the practice.
2015 FIRST PRIZE WINNER
ROSA CUPPARI + ANNA BUTTACI + ANDREW MESHNICK
Rosa, Anna, and Andrew explore the bioethical issues surrounding the water crisis in Flint, Michigan—looking first at the American Academy of Pediatrics’ position on the role of physicians as activists for the health of children, and second, at the intersection of poverty, health, and democracy, and how this intersection affects local communities.
Their analysis concluded that the children of Flint will need decades of health interventions to support them well into adulthood, and made recommendations for best practices to those operating in the public advocacy and medical industries.
AMANDA FINNELL + HANNAH SMITH + KATHARINE MANGIALARDI
Amanda, Hannah, and Katharine analyze the increasing shortage of organ donations—responsible for up to 21 lost American lives per day and nearly 8,000 lives over the course of a year—to see if offering additional opportunities for college students to enroll as organ donors could function as a potential solution to this problem.
Their inquiry found primary ethical dilemmas surrounding organ transplantation arise from the shortage of available organs. Individuals are only actively solicited to become organ donors when they interact with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).
They also concluded that there needs to be additional opportunities for organ donor enrollment to gain the organ donors needed to alleviate this organ shortage, adding that Georgetown University is currently working to institute a pilot program to pose this question to students. The results and effectiveness will be reported to national organ donation advocates with the intention to advance this potential solution nationally.
2016 FIRST PRIZE WINNER