Bioethics: brain data and consent
Tue, Mar 9, 2027 · Week 8 · Human Anatomy & Physiology (Human Body Systems)
Today's goal: Debate whether brain-scan data should be used to predict behavior, then post a CER.
This is a model of the work you should turn in today. Use it to check your own: match the structure and the level of detail, do not copy it. Your data and wording should be your own.
Claim: An employer should not be allowed to use a worker's genetic test results to decide who gets hired or promoted.
Evidence: A DNA test can show whether a person carries a gene variant linked to a condition, such as the BRCA1 variant tied to higher breast-cancer risk, but carrying a variant is not the same as having the disease or being unable to do a job. Most conditions also depend on many genes plus environment, so a single result gives a probability, not a certainty. In the United States, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 already bars employers from using genetic information in employment decisions, and results shared for a medical reason cannot be repurposed without the person's informed consent.
Reasoning: Because a genetic result reports a risk rather than a fact about present ability, using it to screen workers would penalize people for a condition they may never develop and cannot control. That trades a person's privacy over their own genetic code for a hiring benefit the data does not actually deliver, so the civil-liberty cost outweighs the weak predictive gain. The strongest counterpoint I considered was that an employer might want to know about health risks to plan for absences, but that concern is better met through voluntary accommodations and consent, not through a test result the worker never agreed to share for that purpose.
This model shows the level of evidence and organization needed to complete: A parallel one-paragraph Claim-Evidence-Reasoning model on whether an employer should be allowed to use a worker's genetic test results in hiring, citing a fact about what a DNA test can and cannot show. It models the CER format and depth for a different consent question and does not answer today's brain-scan prompt.
- Write one defensible claim.
- Choose specific evidence that supports the claim.
- Explain the scientific rule that connects the evidence to the claim.
Keep the structure. Replace the question, facts, measurements, and evidence. Then recheck units, vocabulary, and whether the conclusion goes beyond the evidence.
Also due today: Post to class board and screenshot for your evidence packet.
Turn in: Worked CER on a parallel case
Go to Schoology to turn this in.
Submit one PDF. Put your first and last name in the document header. Name the file: FirstName LastName - Assignment Title - YYYY-MM-DD.pdf.
Open Schoology PDF upload helpIf you cannot get in, see Mr. Mendoza. Do not skip the work.
Claim ceiling: Today's evidence supports a classroom claim about today's lesson. It cannot prove causation, diagnose a real patient, or justify action outside this room.
One exam-style question that uses exactly what you practiced today. Try it before you reveal the answer, then read why each choice is right or wrong.
Tap an answer to see the full explanation. Nothing is recorded or graded.
It builds this reusable test skill: Knowing what each neuroimaging modality actually measures.
- Name the concept or data pattern being tested.
- Cross out choices that violate that rule or the evidence.
- Justify the best remaining choice before checking the answer.