Moral Reasoning and Value Statements

Assessment – Professional Code of Ethics Paper

Instructions:

Review case narrative in Lessons:

Write paper using prompt below

Prompt:

Based on the case narrative we discussed last week, your assignment is to form an ethical argument about one of the agents in the case. You may imagine that an ethics board for Investment Advisors has been convened to review the case, and particularly the actions of Donald Bevalaqua, founder of Vanguard Health Strategies.

For the purposes of the assignment, you are to use the CSC, Inc. Investment Advisor Code of Ethics as the standard for ethical practice in the field. Your warrants will be “stipulation” warrants (see Kallenberg ch 3, pp 66-67).  (Distinct from any legal action Bevalaqua may confront, there is the issue of morally evaluating his actions in terms of the standards of his profession.)

The CSC, Inc ethics board typically organizes its review into four major sections: Facts, Question, References, Discussion and Conclusion.  Organize your paper around these same four sections. The template—these four sections—is what you are given. The content is what you must construct using the case and the Investment Advisors code.

*Two keys:

One key is that you don’t miss any reasons that support your claim, but also don’t include reasons that don’t really support your claim. A “complete argument” has all the available reasons that are truly relevant.

The other is to choose the right warrant—that is, the one that builds a bridge between your reason and your claim, and thus provides the logical license to move from reason to claim.

The four sections are to be interpreted as follows:

Facts: (One long paragraph, up to 2/3 of double spaced page) Summarize in your own words the relevant facts of the case. In this part, you are to be objective. In other words, stick to the facts and do not evaluate at this stage. This can later be used as a source for reasons.

References: Type out in full each of the lines CSC, Inc “Invesment Advisor Code of Ethics” that you think are relevant to this case.

Discussion:

Formulate a Value Claim about Mr. Bevalaqua (i.e., thumbs up/ thumbs down)

Write one paragraph for every reason & warrant. There should be a paragraph for every excerpt of the code that you have listed in References.

For each paragraph, use the following order (be repetitive!): value claim, followed by reason, followed by short cite for warrant. (see example below)

Example: “Ms. Vinson acted reprehensibly [Value Claim], because she did not consult the audit committee when she suspected that the CEO was asking her to commit fraud [Reason].” (SEPP, Letter D “Resolution of Conflict”)

Use only excerpts from the Investment Advisor code as warrants.

Conclusion: Compose a one-sentence Value Statement using proper form but including every reason you’ve generated.