Ethics

The significant ethical issue presented in Mary Shelley Frankenstein is the argument of playing God. Victor Frankenstein performed an act of hubris. He created a living creature, a human being which is the job of God and not man. Victor Frankensteins craziness for scientific knowledge and experimentation and greed for success drove him to act like God. It was the secrets of heaven and earth that he desired to learn and whether it was the outward substance of things or the inner spirit of nature and the mysterious soul of man that occupied him (22). Nevertheless, in the role of God, Victor is so fascinated with the consideration of awakening the lifeless body that he tends to overlook or rather ignore the ethical aspects of this creation that are related to the society itself. His enthusiasm and madness sulked him into believing that there is no reason why creating a life is unethical or unachievable.

It is later when he understands what he has done and what consequences he and his family will have to face. Victor states, How can I describe my emotions at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pain and care I had endeavored to form(34). Just like the stem cell research or the genetic engineering research raise a lot of ethical and moral questions, there are a lot of things to ponder upon also when one tries to alter the system of human existence as created by God.
Seek happiness in tranquility and avoid ambition, even if it be only the apparently innocent one of distinguishing yourself in science and discoveries (200). These lines from the book help me take the argument further as it discloses the self-centeredness of Victors scientific experiment. Shelleys concepts of morality can be applied to todays scientists as well who would cross ethical boundaries to outshine their name in the field of scientific research which challenges the creation of God.

References
Shelley, M. (2000). Frankenstein. Signet Classics.

Frankenstein and theme of Abortion
Doctor Frankensteins conception, an ugly creature not capable of incorporating itself in the human society, extends outside the main plot of the story to present an insight on a contentious subject such as abortion. In the story, Doctor Frankenstein discusses his judgment to confer life to such a frightening creature that will threaten the race of humans. This dilemma relates unswervingly to the pro-life against pro-choice argument that prevails in the modern society. The Doctors formation results in a wretched being continuously on the edge of killing himself because of the same humans who gave life to him. Although he was born unadulterated and sympathetic, the creature faces only abhorrence and aggression, which expel any wisdom from the monsters mind. As a result, the monster hates the life he has been given.

This idea connects to the many pro-life decisions that allow sick or hereditarily changed fetuses to be born. Even though the fetus will be given a chance to embrace life and come into the world, he may always face hated and a miserable life due to the shortcomings in his existence. Nevertheless the child may have a noble character like Frankensteins formation a lack of acceptability in the society may radically influence a person for the bad. The life that Frankensteins creature had to live endorse the thought that such individual, excruciating adversities must be prohibited.

The premise stands valid that abortion must be used only for advantaging the human from misfortunes and exhausting physical and psychological agony. Doctor Frankenstein could have aborted his experiment but his decision to bring the creature to life led to the creatures psychological, physical and emotional collapse. When a persons character is evaluated by his shortcomings or disabilities, the person recognizes himself and judges himself only in the light of this imperfections and disabilities which lead to his ever growing pain and agony.

References
Shelley, M. (2000). Frankenstein. Signet Classics.

Argument against Direct to Consumer advertising of prescribed drugs
Advertising strategies all over the world rely on the premise of accentuating any shortcoming in you and then presenting a viable solution to it via the product being advertised. Direct to consumer advertising is just an example of such instancing which is unethical and is no exception. Try recalling an advertisement for a medication for depression you can simply recall the words isolated, lonely, or feel previously easy tasks are now difficult. With these terminologies comes a solution in the form of a product which is possibly a drug in this case. These advertisements are misleading and can induce the consumer that they need a drug, whereas they would be completely healthy (Donohue, Marisa  Rosentha, 2001).

This isnt reasonable to the user as well as to the physicians who feel the pressures of prescribing drugs that are not required. With serious and sometimes life taking consequences because of the prescription of these drugs, these companies carry considerable moral responsibility when publicizing directly to the consumer.

Advertising drugs which can be obtained through prescription is not the same as any other product. Usually an advertisement attempts to influence the consumer to buy something that they actually dont need. In this case the promoter is trying to convince the costumer to buy a drug which if they realize they do not require and on top of that they should not use. If there is no limitation of space in printed ads or time restriction or aired commercials, a location where additional information can be obtained should be provided. This can be an address of a doctor or a website they can visit online. There are numerous drugs which when tested were seen to be barely effective therefore these direct to consumer advertisement should be prohibited. Also on the other hand, we can see that there is no single cure for any illness and that no drug is better compared to another.

References
Donohue, J. M., Marisa, C.,  Rosentha, M. B. (2001) A decade of Direct to Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs. The New England Journal of Medicine, 357, 673-681.

Argument in favor of Direct to Consumer advertising of prescribed drugs
An argument prevails that whether Direct to Consumer advertisements of drugs is effective or not. I believe it is extremely beneficial to society. When done properly DTC advertising can enlighten the public of such ailments and diseases as well as many potential treatments for these ailments. Just as some argue that direct to consumer advertising can harm the patient relationship with the doctor, it is also argued that they can improve this relationship.  Its likely that after watching the advertisement, a patient may discuss the drugs with their doctors which on the other hand may have never happened. This could be either because of the unawareness of the patient or lack of knowledge towards the many symptoms related to the illness being discussed. Direct to consumer advertising may also serve to take away a certain disgrace connected to the illness that is not discussed openly. Some of these are erectile dysfunction or depression.

Health care has gone through an immense change, and most adults now distinguish the need to play a vigorous role in organizing their own care. Widely obtainable health knowledge for consumers eases this empowerment (Sheehan, 2003). While DTC marketing alone cannot offer all of the knowledge necessary to validate a particular behavior, it motivates consumers to ask their doctors and to study more about the profits and losses of healing alternatives.

Market expansion of the benefits that these drugs can provide is another benefit.  We resolutely think that bringing improvement to the health of more consumers is a benefit to the society and not a costparticularly when outpatient drug therapy can be replaced for more costly alternatives such as hospitalization and surgeries. Clear, easily understandable information is all that consumers (patients) require to be aware of their health and these are some of the viable benefits of this type of advertising that we cannot forego.