The UBRP Ethics Retreat took place Thursday and Friday, May 22 and 23 at the Biosphere II in Oracle, Arizona.  Presenters included Dr. Parmi Suchdev '97, Medical Epidemiologist at the CDC and Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at Emory University; Dr. Charles Putnam, Professor of Surgery and Instructor in MCB at UA; Dr. Lynne Oland, Research Scientist, Arizona Research Laboratories, Division of Neurobiology; Douglas Kreutz, Reporter, Arizona Daily Star; and Jody Perin, Pima Community College Family Literacy Instructor and doctoral student in anthropology at UA.  Twenty-six UBRP students attended. In addition to stimulating presentations and lively discussions, UBRPers took time to tour the Biosphere II, and Karl Dutson taught us how to drum.  UBRP rocks!

To summarize what they learned in the retreat students prepared a short report on one of the topics covered.  What follows are summaries of some of the students' presentations.

Environmental Ethics

(Dawne O'Brien, Kalonda Johnson, David Alvarado, Karl Dutson)

Environmental ethics encompass all decisions concerning actions and policies that directly or indirectly impact the environment.  On an individual level, people need to recycle, reuse, and reduce, thereby limiting their personal impact.  They should also follow proper hazardous material disposal procedures in their home and at their workplace.  As a community, people need to decide where their responsibilities lie and what they should direct their collective effort towards. They should be teaching cohesive ideas within the schools so the community functions as a unit and as a result has a larger positive impact on their surroundings.  The government is responsible for regulating corporations, enforcing laws and hiring nonpartisan officials who will interpret guidelines without being influenced by profit margins.

A large problem with environmental ethics is deciding when it is appropriate to intervene.  For example, a bird species native to northern California is being out competed by a bird species from Southern Oregon.  Which raises the question, when would it be appropriate to regulate the population of the invasive species?  How can one determine if it is natural selection or human interference that is causing the Oregon birds to migrate?  Does it matter?  From this simple example it is evident that environmental ethics are complicated and do not have a single right or wrong answer.  Any decision will affect the future.  For example, if it was decided to eliminate the Oregon species, there could be an enormous impact on the ecosystem and eventually even humans' everyday life.  To minimize the impact, as a result, certain preventive measures can be taken.  Guidelines can be implemented or rewards can be given to those who practice eco-friendly actions.  Local school systems can do more educational outreach programs, give informative lectures, and take kids on field trips to places that show environmental friendliness:  sustainable communities, beach clean-ups, and Biosphere II, etc.  It's our environment, we are responsible for it, and our actions affect everyone.  Try to reduce your footprint!

Ethical issues related to International Service Projects

(Samantha Jeschonek, Jenny Zhu, Lisa Danowski)

An ethical principle of interest relates to proper cultural understanding and appreciation when undertaking international service projects.  The best way to understand this issue is in terms of an example.

A philanthropist volunteer organization raises $10,000 in the states to provide aid to a developing country.  When they arrive at the country the locals inform the organization that they are in desperate need of sources of clean water and latrines.  In touring the city the organization finds that the local school, while in a sheltered and sturdy environment, could benefit from a larger and better-equipped building.  The locals agree that while a school would be beneficial, they would prefer latrines.  The organization instead of listening to the desires of the locals, decide an improved educational system would be a better influence.

So the question arises:  Does the organization build the school, build the latrines, or come to some sort of compromise?  The ethical solution is to build what the people need as opposed to what the organization thinks the locals need.  After all, the philanthropic act should provide the service that would do the most good.  A possible alternative might be to initially build the latrines and on a subsequent visit (for which additional funds have been raised) to build a new school, which the locals do note would be a benefit. 

This is an important concept because it illustrates the necessity of understanding others' needs and beliefs.  This cultural appreciation is not only critical in performing local service projects, but becomes increasingly important as global travel and service increases.  If we do not listen to the needs of others, we are fulfilling our own ideals and values rather than providing a truly necessary service.