page MIGHT  be updated for this semester

     Our next unit focuses on How groups deliberate in order to make decisions (i.e. selecting among a set of options). In preparation for the in-class activities of this Decision Making unit. everyone has been assigned to be ready with a role / "areas-of-expertise". See below.  Be prepared to perform your assigned job(s)--which will involve being familiar with your role designation (Chap3) +  understanding decision making procedures (Chap 9)  + becoming informally aware of the dynamics of organ transplant surgery. It also helps to have some awareness with argumentation (Chap 10)  The overall goal of this semi-experiential preview activity is to enhance your understanding of effective group decision making  & your preparation for the next major presentations [DECISION MAKING]. / or/ [DECISION MAKING ANALYSIS]

      For the next several class sessions, you will be "on call" & should be ready to perform as a "participant-observer." We will be roleplaying a large committee as it deliberates to make a decision about the newsclipping case study I refer to as  "The Father, The Daughter and the Kidney."

          This semester. the F.D.K. discussion is scheduled to begin on 2/23/15, continue on 3/2/15, and, if necessary, finish up on 3/4/15.

\=====================================================================\

FYI:   this is the AGENDA to be distributed at the decision making meeting of the University Hospital's Bio-Ethics committee concerning David & Renata Patterson.

\= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

                                             Meeting  Plan :

TOPIC: A Father + a Daughter + A Kidney {based on NYT Article: Girl awaits Father's ....}

PARTICIPANTS: All members of the Hospital's Bio-Ethics Committee = Doctors & administrators {as enacted by all members of the class}

TYPE OF COMMITTEE: Standing (i.e. not adhoc)   {jurisdiction [a.k.a. "area-of-freedom"] covers all medical procedures conducted at the hospital. Committee's decision is binding}

CHARGE TO THE COMMITTEE: Decision Making - WHAT TO DO?

PROPOSED DISCUSSION QUESTION: "HOW should the University Hospital's Bio-Ethics  committee proceed in reference to David Patterson's proposed action?"  {i.e. Policy} {but maybe, instead we should we go down the Fact lane or the Value lane. We'll consider this too.}

BELOW = SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL PROCEDURAL ISSUES THAT OUR COMMITTEE MAY NEED TO PAUSE & ADDRESS IN THE COURSE OF COMPLETING ITS DECISION MAKING TASK.

► maintenance functions =  Throughout our deliberations, how can we disagree without being "disagreeable"?

 ►the decision focus  (i.e. what road to take...?) =  Should the committee's situation be discussed as a  Fact   /or/ a Value  /or/ a Policy  issue[question] ?  (via text)   Why?-

►  the minimum rqmts = What are the appropriate criteria for this decision and what role do they play in making our choices?

► the discussion sequence = What is the rationale behind the 5-7 steps to be followed in the D.M. Process? (SHOULD should we be using the Standard Agenda or something else? see text)

► our jurisdiction = Despite our "charge" what are the real world, operational limitations on this committee's Area-of-Freedom ?

► the brainstorming options = Are there additional options present that we haven't noticed? Are there options that need to be combined in order to really work?

► the people behind the wheel =   In addition to the person(s) designated to lead & moderate the ongoing discussion, how can all committee members help the group to listen & facilitate  discriminative listening, critical thinking &  quality argumentation?

Page #'s = W.I.G. 6ed

Spare copy of agenda:      

the AGENDA to be distributed at the decision making meeting of the University Hospital's Bio-Ethics committee concerning David & Renata Patterson.

\= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = \

                                             Meeting  Plan :

TOPIC: A Father + a Daughter + A Kidney {based on NYT Article: Girl awaits Father's ....}

PARTICIPANTS: All members of the Hospital's Bio-Ethics Committee = Doctors & administrators {as enacted by all members of the class}

TYPE OF COMMITTEE: Standing (i.e. not adhoc)   {jurisdiction [a.k.a. "area-of-freedom"] covers all medical procedures conducted at the hospital. Committee's decision is binding}

CHARGE TO THE COMMITTEE: Decision Making - WHAT TO DO?

PROPOSED DISCUSSION QUESTION: "HOW should the University Hospital's Bio-Ethics  committee proceed in reference to David Patterson's proposed action?"  {i.e. Policy} {but maybe, instead we should we go down the Fact lane or the Value lane. We'll consider this too.}

DISCUSSION AGENDA:  This is Professor's simplified version of Decision Making. To see the full Standard Agenda format, refer to  pp. 243-246-5e

       To be moderated  by______ _tba______________1. Examine the Situation

       To be moderated  by______ _tba___ __________ 2. Determine your CRITERIA

       To be moderated  by_______tba______________3. Specify your options

       To be moderated  by________tba_____________ 4. Analyze each option's limitations & implications [via the agreed-upon criteria from step 2]

       To be moderated  by________tba_____________5. Select the "best" option