FR Question 4

In one of the classes I attended, Mr. Thomas, my cooperating teacher, introduced a moral dilemma to the class.  In the book it states, “Kohlberg measured an individual’s level of moral reasoning by presenting moral dilemmas and rating responses according to the stages.”  Keeping Kohlberg’s theory in mind, listening to the student’s responses made me realize that the students are functioning at the conventional stage of moral reasoning.  The moral dilemma they were presented with dealt with Terri Shiavo.  Terri Shiavo had a massive stroke at a young age and was put on life support.  She was on life support for many years.  The parents wanted to keep her on life support while her husband wanted to remove her from it.  Mr. Thomas presented both side’s arguments very well, making sure that the students were well informed about the pros and cons of each.  Mr. Thomas then presented information about the huge amount of publicity this case received and what happened in the end.  He then posed the moral dilemma.  He asked the students what they would do in that situation and who had the responsibility to remove life support?  The majority of the class stated that the parents should be the ones to decide because they were the ones who raised her and cared for her.  This identifies clearly with the interpersonal stage of the conventional level of moral reasoning, which states that students look to parents to determine the rules.  To help the students advance to a higher level of moral reasoning, say social authority, the teacher could of asked if there should be a law written so that these kinds of decisions can be made by the law, therefore causing less family conflict?