Some jobs involve exposure to very hazardous materials, such as ...

[jCorn1234]

Some jobs involve exposure to very hazardous materials, such as lead and other toxic
  materials. Could a company appropriately prohibit women from holding such jobs, on the
  grounds that the toxic environment might harm fetuses of pregnant women? Johnson Controls
  manufactures batteries, using lead as a primary ingredient. Known harm caused by exposure to
  lead includes harm to the fetus carried a female employee. Johnson Control began hiring
  women for work in its factories in 1977. After several workers became pregnant and had lead
  levels in their blood in excess of recommended levels, the company adopted a new policy
  prohibiting any women who were pregnant or of child-bearing age from working in areas of the
  factory where they might be exposed to lead. The U.S. Supreme Court, in 1991, struck down
  the restriction as a violation of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, noting that men could also
  suffer from exposure to lead but were not barred from these jobs.

 
  What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

At the Van Devender middle school in West Virginia, all students are segregated by gender.
  Using research by Leonard Sax, who founded the National Association for Single Sex Public
  Education, girls are in classrooms with dimmer lights than the boys, and girls must share desks
  and sit still. The classrooms for boys provide single desks and beanbag chairs and the students
  are free to move about as they wish. When some families sued, with the help of the American
  Civil Liberties Union, a federal judge blocked the program, noting that certain gender-based
  teaching techniques based on stereotypes and lacking any scientific basis may very well be
  harmful to students. Similar programs have been established in Louisiana, Kentucky, Alabama,
  Florida, Maine, Mississippi, and Virginia, and also are being challenged by law suits. Other
  academic researchers have challenged Sax research.

 
  What will be an ideal response?

[ankilker]

Answer to Question 1

1. Should women alone make the decision of whether to risk exposure to these dangerous
materials? Develop ethical arguments in support of permitting women alone to make this
decision. Then develop ethical arguments in support of the Johnson Control policy.
2. If a child is born with genetic damage suffered during the pregnancy of a woman working
in these risky conditions, who is ethically responsible for the damage, the woman or the
company?
3. Given that men also are at risk from lead exposure, are there other solutions to this
problem?

Answer to Question 2

1. Are there ethical reasons for insisting that public school children be educated in
coeducational classrooms? Develop arguments in support of that position. If research on
the benefits of gender separation were widely accepted by numerous scholars, would
that change your opinion?
2. Other educational research suggests that young African-American boys learn more
effectively in all-male classrooms with male teachers. At least some public school
systems are offering gender-segregated classrooms based on this research. If that
research were persuasive to a wide spectrum of scholars and the benefits to young
African-American boys was substantial, would that justify the segregation by gender?
What ethical arguments could be developed to support this conclusion?
3. If further research demonstrated that young Caucasian children learn more effectively in
all-white classrooms with white teachers, should that research justify racially segregated
classrooms? When, if ever, should we use research on learning to permit segregation in
public school classrooms?