DEBATE ASSIGNMENT

Group 1 will debate Group 2 on VoiceThread. The debate is to focus on the following:

Consider the following statement by Richard Fogoros, MD. “None of the pools of money we have created (or ever could create) to pay for our healthcare - whether those pools of money reside with the insurance companies or the government or both - can possibly buy all the healthcare that might benefit all Americans. This means we have to ration healthcare (i.e., intentionally withhold at least some beneficial healthcare from at least some of the people who would benefit from it).”

Two recent examples of rationing suggest it is well established in the transplant field- a 10 year old not allowed on the adult transplant list, and a 16 year old denied access to a new heart due to perceived issues of compliance.

To what extent is Fogoros correct? Is rationing inevitable, and if so, to what extent?

INSTRUCTIONS

There will be 2 teams, 3 students each, one arguing in the affirmative, the other team will present the opposing viewpoint. Group 1 is to argue that rationing IS inevitable, and Group 2 will argue in the negative (Fogor is incorrect. We do not need to ration, everyone should have equal access).

Elect one class member to serve as moderator. The moderator’s role consists of the following: The moderator’s score (only the moderator) is based on items below- 5 points each.

1. Post an introduction to the debate, providing a brief overview of the issue. (5) 2. Maintain control over the debate in terms of length and time limits as applicable. (and getting participants to post in a timely fashion)! (5) 3. Provide a summary of the main points made by both sides. (5)

OPENING STATEMENTS

1. The debate begins with an opening statement from the 1st speaker in Group 1 arguing in the affirmative. This should include: a. Description of the topic b. Present the team's position on the topic and give a brief summary of the points the team will make. c. Present the first argument of the team's case.

2. The 1st speaker on the negative team (Group 2) must first state whether the team accepts or rejects the opposing team's definition of the topic. a. Then state the team's position and provide a brief summary of the points the team will make. b. The opening negative speaker must also rebut some of the points made by the opening affirmative speaker and present the first half of the team's case. FIRST REBUTTALS

3. After the opening statement, the next members on each team present the first rebuttals. a. During this portion of debate, the 2nd speaker from the affirmative team (Group 1) begins by restating the team's position. b. S/he then rebuts the main points made by the opening speaker on the negative team and presents the second half of the team's case.

4. This is followed by the 2nd speaker on the negative team. (Group 2) a. This person also begins with a restatement of the team's position. b. S/he then rebuts the main points presented by the second affirmative speaker and presents the second half of his team's case

SECOND REBUTTALS

5. Next the 3rd member from each team presents the second rebuttals. a. This portion begins with a 3rd member of the affirmative team restating the team's position. b. S/he then must rebut all of the points previously made by the negative team. She then summarizes her team's case and closes her team's argument.

6. Finally, the 3rd speaker from the negative team also restates the team's position. a. S/he then rebuts all the remaining points from the affirmative team's case and presents a summary of the team's case before closing the argument.

MODERATOR SUMMARY At the conclusion, the moderator summarizes the main points from the arguments presented.

Q&A and DECISION At the conclusion, I may have a few questions for one or both sides. Once I get answers to those, the debate will be scored. Individual scores will be based on the following: (3 points each)

1. Clarity and framing of the issue (3)

2. Strength of the arguments/rebuttals (3)

3. Degree to which arguments/rebuttals are based on literature, legal requirements and practice responsibilities (3)

4. Principles of professional responsibilities and the philosophy of the CNL role (3)

5. Knowledge of the topic (3) In addition, a decision will be rendered by me as to whether teams won, lost or came to a draw in the debate