Case #1 THE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY



THE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

You work in the visitation department of Smithville Correctional Facility and are responsible for security in the large open meeting area. Naturally, you keep track of each inmate's visitors. For several months a young college woman named Natasha has been visiting an inmate named Dennis. Dennis had answered Natasha's plea for companionship in the "Personals" section of the local newspaper. He offered her what seemed to be love and she has convinced herself that only a warm-hearted, well-educated person like herself could set Dennis on the right path in life. As you have watched, the romance between Dennis and Natasha has rapidly gained momentum.

Dennis, however, does not lack companionship within the prison walls. He prides himself on his active involvement in high-risk homosexual behavior. It is common knowledge that the facility has increasing numbers of HIV-positive inmates. But Dennis doesn't care about the impact of his sexual behavior on himself and his future partners. He brags openly about his "conquest" of Natasha while blatantly continuing his dangerous sexual activity, unbeknownst to her.

Last week Natasha announced her plans to marry Dennis upon his release from prison in two months. All indications are that Dennis plans to keep secret the health risks he presents to his future wife.

You are deeply concerned about Natasha. She was lonely enough to run an ad in a newspaper to find a friend, and naive enough to be completely swept away by Dennis' words and actions. You also know the code of confidentiality that protects inmates' privacy and requires you to keep silent about the possibly life-threatening danger you suspect Natasha is facing.

What should you do in this situation? Why?

HIDDEN ASSETS

You are Mr. Wilson's secretary. Mr. Wilson is a senior-level engineering manager with whom you have worked for more than five years. During that time you have assisted him in both his professional and business activities. This was what you expected -- your job description specifically included responsibilities like handling his personal financial records, his appointment calendar, and his personal and professional travel plans. You and Mr. Wilson share high regard for each other.

Mr. Wilson told you -- in confidence -- about six months ago that he was planning to divorce his wife within the next year. He asked that you not discuss this with anyone else, and you promised him you wouldn't. However, you have recently become concerned. Within the scope of your secretarial duties, you have assisted him in the transfer and changing tiffs of several major assets and the opening of new bank accounts. While these activities are technically legal, you have concluded that Mr. Wilson is using you to help him hide his assets in preparation for his impending divorce.

What should you do or say to Mr. Wilson, and why?

ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY

You are an Air Force lieutenant-colonel who commands a 50-flier squadron of fighter-bombers. Several months ago you became concerned about safety in your squadron. While the record wasn't terrible, there had been accidents and several close calls.

So you had decided to try a new approach. Every Friday afternoon you convened your fliers in the Squadron's Bar. To pay for refreshments they would each put down a dollar for each mistake or close call they had while flying. And then you would all talk, freely and frankly, about how to improve safety. You had only one rule -- amnesty. Whatever was said within the room was to be held in confidence and nobody would get in trouble for admitting they had made an error while flying.

In the months that followed, the conversation was open and direct, and you began to notice the change you had hoped to see. Your squadron's safety record rose higher and higher in comparison with other squadrons in your wing.

Then last Friday one of your pilots, Jack, recounted an experience that had happened during a routine flight that week. He was flying in formation when the lead plane peeled off into a turn too soon. Having only seconds to adjust to the confusion, he lost his bearings -- experiencing what fliers call "spatial disorientation," When he came out of that potentially fatal condition, his plane was soaring up into the clouds far away from the formation. Deeply shaken, he had returned to base and landed. The conversation that followed Jack's story, about how to prevent such situations, was particularly good.

You know, however, that spatial disorientation is such a serious problem that the Air Force requires any such incident to be reported up the chain of command. The result is usually discipline and retraining. As squadron commander, you are required to obey this regulation. But you had offered your pilots amnesty -- this was the reason why you had been effective in creating an enviable safety record and why Jack had been willing to speak so frankly. You owe him and the other fliers your loyalty.

Should you report the incident? Why or why not?

THE ROAD TRIP

You have assisted Mr. Jones for five years. He is the hardworking sales manager for your company, a frozen food processing plant. He is a star performer who has boosted sales by 20 percent or more each year. His sales keep the plant -- a large employer in your small town -- busy.

Mr. Jones' job dictates that he be on the road much of the time, and because of his extended hours he takes an occasional day off after a strenuous trip. You recognize his need for time away from the job so, up until now, you have make it possible for him to do so. You have assumed that he has an arrangement with the plant manager to take these days off.

During the past two months, however, his unaccounted-for absences have reached alarming proportions. He did not come into the office at all last week although he was neither traveling for business nor on official vacation. He phoned from home everyday to dictate letters and report a few orders.

Today is Monday, and this morning Mr. Jones called and asked you to tell the plant manager that he is in San Francisco working on the Johnson order. You know he is at home because you are to call him there later in the morning.

When the plant manager checks in for an update what should you say, and why?

What should you do about the whole situation that is developing, and why?

FUDGING THE NUMBERS

Your five-person team is frantic to get the report done on new leasing options, and everyone is staying after work to finish the report so it can be presented at a meeting the following morning. At about 6 p.m., the group realizes that one of the leading vendors, Acme Leasing, misunderstood the bid specification, so you need some clarification regarding its final quote. You try calling Acme's office, but no one answers. This vendor has a high profile, so if it's left out of the report, the omission will have to be explained. You and your teammates want to have a complete and comprehensive report tomorrow morning, partly so you will look like capable decision-makers.

Peter and Pauline are eager-beaver types and they say, "Let's just plug in a reasonable number so we can include this vendor in the report. Based on the rest of the bid, Acme will be a second or third choice anyway. This way the project can move forward."

Julie and Jeff are more cautious. "What if the numbers we plug in are wrong, and we have to explain them later? It will make the entire report, and all the rest of our work, suspicious. There's a 50-50 chance Acme will get the contract because Acme has some inside friends here, and they've had the contract before. But they could be selected on totally insupportable numbers. That would make us look like idiots."

Your opinion will lead the group's decision.

What would you recommend, and why?

DRINKING AND BUDDIES

Branch Corporation is concerned that substance-abuse may be a contributing factor in the company's recent decline. In an attempt to recover, they adopted a policy that imposes strict sanctions on those employees found to be working under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs.

You and Jeff Smith have worked together in one of the engineering divisions of Branch for several years. Frequently you have detected-alcohol on Jeff's breath when you are beginning work in the morning and after work breaks during the day. -Until the new policy was announced, it never occurred to you that you should say anything to Jeff about it, let alone tell anyone else about it. Jeff's work has always been first rate, and you are not the kind of person who feels comfortable discussing such matters with others.

Rachel Hillman, plant manager at Branch, knows that you and Jeff have worked together for many years. She has narrowed her choice for Head of Quality Control to Jeff and one other person. She invites you out for lunch to see if she can learn something more about Jeff from you. In Rachel's opinion the new quality control head will play a pivotal role in either making or breaking the company.

Should you tell Rachel about Jeff's drinking? What should you say, and why?

THE "GRADUATE"

You are the chief financial officer of a chain of retail stores. One of your most valued employees, Leon Pierponce, came to your department when your company acquired a much smaller chain for which he worked. Most of the employees of that smaller chain were discharged as part of a cost-reduction program at the time of the acquisition, but you kept Leon because his background was very good -- his resume shows that he has an M.BA from the well-known Eastern Business School. Leon has been promoted several times since then, and he works regularly as your assistant.

Last week you gave an invited talk to the students at Eastern Business School. After the talk, at lunch, you mention to the Director of Placement how pleased you are with the work of your assistant. You give his name, which happens to be unusual and memorable -- Leon Pierponce -- and say that he graduated six years ago.

There is an awkward silence. Then the Director of Placement asks you, "Are you certain that he graduated? You see, Leon used to work for me as an assistant in the office. But if we are talking about the same person, he was put on academic probation for cheating and, to my knowledge, never completed an M.B.A."

Yesterday the Director of Placement called you, confirming his suspicion that Mr. Pierponce was not a graduate of Eastern. Now you are in a quandary. Should you confront Leon? Should you just ignore the situation? Or is there another course of action you should take?

What should you do, and why?

THE FORKLIFTER

You are a student with a high-paying summer job as a forklift operator. The excellent pay will enable you to attend college next year without having to take out any student loans. But here you are, staring at a 50-gallon drum filled with used machine coolant, wondering what you should do.

Just moments ago your supervisor, Joe, had told you to dump half the used coolant down the drain. You know the coolant is toxic, and you mentioned this to Joe. But he wasn't swayed.

"Look,” Joe said, "the toxins settle at the bottom of the drum. If you pour out half and dilute it with tap water while you're pouring it, there's no problem."

You knew that dilution didn't remove the toxins, besides, you pointed out to Joe, it's against the law.

"Look kid," Joe had said, "I don't have time for chit-chat about some silly law. Common sense is my rule. I told you toxins settle at the bottom and stay there. We've been doing this for years and nothing has happened. Anyway, you're pretty lucky to have a good-paying job like this. There are lots of other kids out there wondering if they'll be able to afford college next year who would love to be where you are right now."

Joe had turned and left, fully expecting you to dump the used coolant.

What should you do, and why?

RECOMMENDATION FOR A FRIEND

You and Tom had been friends at State University, where you both studied mechanical engineering. While you had put great effort into your studies, Tom had struggled with classes, spent much time on extracurricular events and frequently borrowed money because of irresponsible spending habits. After graduate school you had gone to work for XYZ Corporation, where you are now manager of the research laboratory. Tom held a series of unsuccessful jobs and three years ago had landed a job in XYZ's computer-assisted design department.

Two weeks ago Tom informed you that he had lost his XYZ job in a departmental budget reduction effort. At his request you had approached Tom's supervisor to see if -there was any way to save his job.

"Tom is a great guy with good ability", his supervisor told you, "but he doesn't concentrate on getting work done; he's more interested in the. stock market and office gossip. He's also turned in some pretty high expense accounts for trips, and while I can't prove it, I think he's padding some of them. Given all this, I think he's one of the obvious choices for a lay-off."

You discussed these comments frankly with Tom, at which point he asked you if you would write a general letter of recommendation to help him find another job.

"You know I won't get much of a recommendation from my supervisor", he said, "and if you help me get another job, I'll really buckle down and work hard."

So you had composed a reasonably positive letter of recommendation for Tom. His weaknesses were not included.

Did you act appropriately? Why or why not?

PUBLIC SCULPTURE

You are a member of Bigtown city council. Bigtown is a moderately conservative community that is becoming more and more racially diverse. Bigtown now has citizens of African-American and Asian-American descent, as well as equally large percentages of Mexican-American and European-American people.

The local Mexican-American Cultural Organization has collected funds to pay a world-renowned Latino artist to create a sculpture that celebrates the pre-Columbian Aztec heritage of the Mexican-American community in Bigtown. The artist has presented the city council with a sketch of the completed 15-foot high granite sculpture. The sculpture reproduces an image of the Aztec Mother Earth goddess Coatlique. A copy of the sketch was made for all the city council members. The Mexican-American Cultural Organization would like the sculpture to be installed in Bigtown's only city park which is across the street from the busy Mexican-American Community Center.

Vocal members of St. Mary's Catholic Church and First Baptist Church have presented their strong objections to the city council concerning the installation of the sculpture. They point out that the city park is quite small. The sculpture would be highly visible from their church's front steps. These church members are outraged at the idea of non-Christian imagery (what they see as idolatry) being placed on and celebrated on public property. Besides, the sculpture would detract from the statue of Joan of Arc that already, stands in the park.

You are due for re-election in the upcoming election. You know that your constituents have long memories, especially when it comes to voting. Bigtown city council is split, and as a respected and senior member your voice and vote will carry significant weight.

Would you vote to install the sculpture or not? Why or why not?

KEEPING SECRETS, KEEPING FRIENDSHIPS

You are a human resources representative for your firm, Sorenson, Inc.

You have learned that the company plans to lay off a long list of employees in three months, and you have seen an advance copy of the list. Your supervisor has reminded you that the list is confidential information (you know how fast gossip travels on the company grapevine), and that the final selection of layoffs will not be made until the monthly sales figures are reported.

Meanwhile, your good friend Frank who also works at Sorenson has excitedly told you about the dream house he and his wife are planning to buy. Frank is on the list of people who may be laid off. You know that he cannot afford the house without the income from his job; if he realized there was even a possibility he might lose his job, he would not consider the purchase of this home at this time.

What should you do?

TO WHISTLEBLOW OR NOT

You are a professor of business, and you are sitting in your office one day when Jill Sullivan, an accounting graduate of 5 years ago, knocks on your door. Jill had been an exceptionally good student and had started with Peat and Price CPA firm upon graduation. After three years with that firm, she had joined MiniCare Health Company as the chief accountant. After being invited in, Jill asks if she can talk with you in private. Once comfortably seated, Jill tells you the following.

"Two years ago I started working with MiniCare. Not long after I was hired I began noticing that the officers of the company were doing things that I didn't think were right. They overbill Medicare, and senior management-misuses their positions by taking company perks that are against the company's code of ethics. I have talked to my superior, the vice-president of finance, and he told me to mind my own business -- accountants are to report results, not question management."

Jill tells you that she is earning $100,000 a year, far more than she could earn in another company at this stage of her career. She asks you for advice.

What should you recommend to Jill, and why?

REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION

Compass Manufacturing is a small company, so it is not technically required to comply with the quota requirements of the anti-discrimination employment laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). But you believe that your company is morally bound to comply with the spirit of the law. In fact, your cousin Kyla is disabled, needs and wants a job, and would be perfect for the new telemarketing position. Jill Johnson, the company president and your boss, however, doesn't want to even consider hiring someone with a disability. Making reasonable accommodations would be an unnecessary expense, she says; she survives in the marketplace by choosing which battles to fight, and this is one she wants to pass on. "There's no room on our small ship for a charity case," she says.

You have tried to persuade Jill by explaining that this is not a charity case. Cost should not be a problem, you say. The total cost of reasonable accommodations would be less than $150 for some blocks of wood to raise the desk high enough to slide the wheelchair underneath, some new software, plus an adaptive headset for the telephone. But your logic has not swayed her.

You have begun to suspect that Jill may be racist (your cousin Kyla is African American) or homophobic (Kyla has made no secret in your small town about her "alternative lifestyle"). You wonder if she secretly fears a lawsuit or higher medical expenses somewhere down the road. You know that Jill has poured her life savings and years of work into her business to build it up, so you understand her concerns about not wanting to put it all at risk. Still, you believe without reservation that Kyla would be a strong addition to the business.

Your persistent advocacy for Kyla is beginning to take a toll on your working relationship with Jill.

What should you do, and why?

CULTURAL GLASS CEILING

You are the senior vice-president of a machinery manufacturing firm that builds and sells chemical processing equipment worldwide. The design of the equipment is highly technical, and almost all of your younger employees have an engineering background. Approximately 15% of these engineers are women, who started joining the company about five years ago. It is standard practice in your company that the career path for employees has to include overseas assignment, usually in a developing country. Few of the company's female engineers have had overseas experience. Sally Jones, a technical wizard with an excellent sales record, is next in line for such an assignment, and you plan to appoint her at the first available opportunity.

Last week the director of the South American sales division called you. He knows that you are intending to promote Ms. Jones to overseas assignment, but he asked you not to do so.

He said that the firm's clients in those. Latin countries will not accept women in a technical capacity. "The older men will be polite to her, and treat her like a daughter. The younger ones will engage in some harmless flirting which I assume she can handle with ease. But neither the older nor the younger customers will accept technical recommendations from a woman. Sally will be useless in a sales or consultant capacity. If she wants to work in design at our central office and have little contact with clients, that's fine. But otherwise I think you should send her to Europe."

The problem is that company sales in Europe are small, due to strong competition from technically-advanced German and Italian firms. A European assignment would not give Sally the opportunity for advancement that she deserves.

Should you appoint Sally to South America? Why or why not?

CLINICAL TRIAL ON TRIAL

Herpes simplex encephalitis is a disease that leads to brain and nerve damage and death. A new drug called HSE-2 has been developed and seems to be effective in treating the disease.

A clinical trial is being run at Community Hospital, where you work as a nurse and serve on the hospital ethics committee. Most of the researchers at the hospital support the clinical trial. But two members of the research team, Doctor Penner and Nurse Dorn, whose patients are a part of the study, want the research discontinued.

The experiment has divided participants into two groups - a control group that will receive a placebo and an experimental group that will receive HSE-2. The progress of those subjects in the control group will be compared to those people who do receive HSE-2 to see whether the drug controls or reverses herpes.

The major concern of Doctor Penner and Nurse Dorn is that, since there is no cure for this type of encephalitis and since death or serious impairment will likely result, then it is wrong to put some participants on the placebo side of the experiment where their disease is not being treated.

The preliminary data indicate that HSE-2 is effective. Nonetheless, Doctor Penner and Nurse Dorn want the study immediately closed so that everyone in the control group can be switched over to HSE-2. As a member of the ethics committee, you will have the deciding vote on whether the study continues or is stopped.

What should you vote, and why?

War: Is it ever just?

A small nation located on a seacoast has both the commercial ports and the natural resources that a larger neighboring inland nation needs. The larger nation negotiates for use of the ports and purchase of the resources, and an agreement is reached between the two nations that lasts for several years.

Eventually, however, a new government that has come to power in the larger nation decides that it should not have to pay for natural resources so close to its borders and that it should have complete control of the seaports it now uses. After a breakdown of new negotiations, the larger nation invades its smaller neighbor, and the smaller nation aggressively defends itself.

The smaller nation has alliances through treaties with two of the region’s powerful nations, and the larger nation has alliances through treaties with two of the region’s newer but small nations.

Should the allies enter into the war?

Capital Punishment: Right or Wrong?

A man named Arthur and his friend get drunk and high on drugs. The two of them find a couple of lovers in a car in the woods around midnight. They pull the couple out of the car. The boy is shot to death. The girl is raped and then stabbed over twenty times, dying from the attack.

Both men are tried for the murders and convicted, but Arthur’s friend has a better lawyer, and he is released after spending five years in prison. A nun decides to help Arthur, getting him an appeals lawyer. The appeals lawyer puts up a passionate argument for the abolition of the death penalty: “Death by lethal injection may appear to be humane, but this is only because the condemned person’s muscles have been paralyzed. The torment that is going inside the lungs and other organs is not noticed by onlookers.” The appeal fails, however.

Arthur has never admitted his guilt, even though there is no doubt that he participated in the murders, firing the shot that killed the boy.

As Arthur is strapped down, his final words are, “Killing is wrong, no matter who does it – himself or the government.”

Should Arthur have received the death penalty?

Divorce: Sufficient Grounds?

A Christian couple (Martin and Mary) meets in college and marries. Two years later, the woman becomes pregnant with a baby boy. Five years later, they have a second boy. The first boy, Don, grows to puberty, and then begins to have serious physical problems related to abnormal rate of growth. These problems have no medical solution, and Martin and Mary do what they can to get their boy the help he needs. The younger boy, John, at age 6 manifests emotional/mental problems (ADHD, hyper-excitability) as well as physical problems similar to those of his older brother Don. The couple does what they can to get the boy the help he needs.

Through the marriage, Mary struggles with depression and anxiety attacks. Later, she develops severe physical ailments: acute bronchial asthma, muscular dystrophy, and a heart murmur, and her emotional problems deepen. Martin doubts she has real medical problems, instead encouraging her to believe for mental/emotional healing. Adequate medical and psychological care is not obtained for Mary.

As the couple’s 25th anniversary approaches, Martin becomes sullen and non-communicative. He obtains a legal separation from his wife, removes the younger boy (now 18) from her custody, and a month later files for divorce, saying he can’t allow his son to remain in an unhealthy environment. Three months later, Martin commits the son to a state mental institution, realizing he is unable to care for him.

With the house empty, Mary is unable to care for herself or pay the rent, so she secures residence in a state-run convalescent home to obtain some level of medical and psychological attention. Mary wants to contest the divorce, but Martin threatens to seek to bar her from ever seeing her son if she did. He clearly doesn’t intend for the marriage to continue. Years of emotional suffering are cited as his justification for the divorce.

Should Martin have divorced Mary?

Genetic Engineering: Should they do it?

Carl and Olivia have decided to visit a genetic counselor.

“Carl and I wouldn’t know how to raise a regular child,” Olivia said. “We know what it’s like to be dwarves, and we could help a child who was a dwarf.”

“So you want me to help arrange for the amniocentesis, then counsel you on the results?” Dr. Stratford asked.

“Exactly. We want a child just like us,” Carl said. “We’re proud of being dwarves, and we’re both active in getting people to recognize our culture and way of life is as good as someone else’s. Having a regular child would betray our ideals and be false to our way of life.”

“I don’t know what to say,” Dr. Stratford said. “Usually, people want to avoid having a child with the mutation that produces dwarfism.”

Is Dr. Stratford morally justified in taking steps to help Carl and Olivia conceive a baby that will be a dwarf?

Should Homosexuals as a Class be a Protected Minority?

You have been working with Richard for about a year and have always found him witty, intelligent, compassionate, and friendly. One afternoon he invites you to have dinner with him and his roommate Walter at their apartment.

While there, you discover through conversation that the two men are homosexuals and that they have been living together for three years. You are surprised, because they are not effeminate in any way. In fact, except that they prefer homosexuality to heterosexuality, they appear to be in no way different from a lot of other nice people you know. They do not molest children, they don’t cheat on one another, nor do they attempt to impose their values on anyone else. All they want, they claim, is to live together happily and in peace.

A few weeks later, Richard tells you that Walter has been fired from his job as a junior high school science teacher and basketball coach. A civil rights lawyer has been retained by Walter and a class action lawsuit has been filed against school districts across the nation that have discharged homosexuals from teaching positions, claiming discrimination against a protected minority.

Should Walter be able to claim membership in a protected minority class by virtue of his homosexuality?

Pornography: Trapped by a Victimless Vice?

Pastor Max got an email that featured a picture of a cute girl with a suggestive smile, skimpy clothing, and an offer to preview some photos of her recent vacation. He knew that men of his congregation probably have been sexually assaulted via emails, so he thought it would be wise of him to know what they were encountering, so as to better help them resist this kind of temptation. He jotted down the website on a memo pad, deleted the email, emptied the “deleted messages” folder, tore the memo page off, and slipped the page in his wallet. No way was he going to use a church computer for this research! He would check this out the next time he was at a computer that couldn’t be traced back to him.

Pastor Max forgot about the memo, mixed in with all the other stubs of paper and receipts in his wallet, until one evening in a hotel room while at a conference. He had been looking for the phone number of a fellow minister in the town where the conference was being held. Coming across the memo with the website on it, he stepped over to the desk, and used the complimentary computer in the room to check out the website. An hour and a half later, after visiting not only the original cute girl’s pictures, but also a variety of other linked websites, he sank to the bed in utter defeat. He was ashamed of where his mind and eyes had been. He had no idea that sexual photos and short preview video clips could be so explicit. Some of the young people depicted here were no older than high school members of his church! “But,” he questioned himself, “what harm was there in this research, if it ended up helping him understand what his church members may be struggling with?”

What should be Pastor Max’s next step? Why?

Drilling in the Alaskan Wilderness

Category: Environmental ethics

Drilling for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) has been a source of contention among policy makers for years. In 1980 Congress expanded ANWR by 9.5 million acres, with 1.5 million acres (known as section 1002) set aside for the study of petroleum production potential. In 1987, 1991, and 1995 legal measures to drill in the 1002 area were proposed and defeated. The issue was raised again when President George W. Bush made drilling in section 1002 part of his national energy agenda. The events of September 11, 2001 have resulted in intensifying the debate.

Proponents make three major arguments for drilling in ANWR: (1) In light of recent economic downturns and the unstable diplomatic situation in the Middle East, the U.S. must increase domestic oil supply in order to decrease dependence on foreign oil. (2) The area occupied by wells and drilling equipment has shrunk by approximately 60% since the development of the Prudhoe Bay oil field. Developments in drilling technology allow a single pad to tap multiple oil pockets at distances of up to four miles. These advances have minimized the environmental impact of petroleum extraction. As evidence, production supporters point to the fact that despite fears to the contrary, the caribou herd in the Prudhoe/Kuparuk oil field region has increased in population. (3) Most Inupiat Eskimos in the area favor oil leasing for the economic opportunities exploration may provide.

Opponents of drilling counter that (1) even if section 1002 produces the maximum projected amount, oil consumption will continue to rise exponentially. Conservation (such as increasing vehicle fuel efficiency), rather than expanding production, note the opponents, is the only long-term solution. (2) The negative ecological impact on the area outweighs any potential benefit from oil production, in the opinion of the opponents. The plain of section 1002 provides critical calving area for a caribou herd five times as large as the Prudhoe/Kuparuk herd in an area one-fifth the size. Development in this areas, the opponents contend, would push the herd into the foothills where calves would be prone to predation and starvation from scarcity of resources. (3) The opponents point out that not all Native Americans favor drilling. The Gwich'in Indians, for example, consider the area sacred. The Gwich'in also subsist on caribou and fear the negative impact that petroleum production might have on the herd.

Should drilling in the Alaskan wilderness be allowed? If yes, under what conditions?

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download