My classes this week are journaling on discrimination. Without downplaying them, I wanted to avoid the heavily-discussed topics of race, religion, and gender. Instead, I hoped to challenge my students a little by having them think about discrimination against the addicted, the overweight, and the criminal. It is easy to vilify the racist, the bigot, and the misogynist; but we think less frequently-- and perhaps less comfortably-- about discrimination against these groups.
Of the three topics, the one that sparked the most discussion was the last, which we thought about today. I learned from an article by David Perry (see Perry, David L. "Should Violent Felons Receive Organ Transplants?") that a convicted robber received a heart transplant in 2002, and I used this as a starting point to ask if students believed this man should have received the transplant when the life of another person could have been saved.
I did not anticipate the discussion, and argument, that would follow. Two of my classes spent their entire periods debating the notion that convicted criminals are equally valid candidates for heart transplants; and, for the first time in my career, a number of them willingly brought up religion as a means to justify their stances. Students who normally don't participate spoke up. They asked my personal opinion on the topic, and when I told them, I felt as though I received equal amounts of praise and condemnation. It was certainly divided, but I took heart that, on the whole, they listened to one another and respected each other's opinions.
Of the three topics, the one that sparked the most discussion was the last, which we thought about today. I learned from an article by David Perry (see Perry, David L. "Should Violent Felons Receive Organ Transplants?") that a convicted robber received a heart transplant in 2002, and I used this as a starting point to ask if students believed this man should have received the transplant when the life of another person could have been saved.
I did not anticipate the discussion, and argument, that would follow. Two of my classes spent their entire periods debating the notion that convicted criminals are equally valid candidates for heart transplants; and, for the first time in my career, a number of them willingly brought up religion as a means to justify their stances. Students who normally don't participate spoke up. They asked my personal opinion on the topic, and when I told them, I felt as though I received equal amounts of praise and condemnation. It was certainly divided, but I took heart that, on the whole, they listened to one another and respected each other's opinions.
Comments
Post a Comment