SMARTHINKING's E-structor Response Form

(Your marked-up essay is below this form.)
HOW THIS WORKS: Your e-structor has written overview comments about your essay in the form below. Your e-structor has also embedded comments [in bold and in brackets] throughout your essay. Thank you for choosing SMARTHINKING's OWL; best wishes with revising your paper!

*Strengths of the essay:

Welcome, Jenny! My name is Elizabeth R. I’ll be helping you with strengthening your memorandum about the decision to give the donated heart to Jerry. Now, let’s take a look at your draft, starting with a strength. Your presentation of each candidate is clear with a balanced discussion of the pros and cons of each claim.
*Jenny 5806136 has requested that you respond to the Main Idea/Thesis:
The memorandum should tell the reader exactly what the issue is and give all the essential information in the subject line and in the first sentence of the first paragraph. Your subject and first sentence are too general:

* Transplanting Organs * The purpose of this memorandum is to inform you that the recipient of the organ transplant has been chosen.

Your memo is not about organ transplants in general; it is about the decision to give a heart to Jerry. What will you say in the subject line to tell your readers exactly what the memo is about?
Avoid an announcement style in your first sentence. Instead, state the topic. For example, “The committee has decided to implement three changes to improve the effectiveness of the sales team.” What is the decision that you are informing your readers of? They want to know your main idea—who will receive the organ—before they read your reasons. You can go on to explain the dilemma and the benefits for Jerry and denial of benefits for the other two candidates.
I encourage you to inform your readers of the main idea—the decision—in the subject line and in your first sentence.
*Jenny 5806136 has requested that you respond to the Organization:
In describing the candidates, you have repeated some information such as Jerry’s use of steroids and Lisa’s illnesses. A memorandum is supposed to be concise, so the reader should not have to read the same information twice.

In order to avoid repetition, consider following your assignment brief more closely: The dilemma to make a painful medical decision and to explain, in writing, who benefits from what you decided, who gets denied a needed benefit, and why.

What is the dilemma? Is it that three candidates all have good claims to the heart? What is the decision? Who benefits? Is it Jerry and his family? Does anyone else benefit? Who is denied a benefit? Is it only Lisa and Ozzie? What about Lisa’s family and the hospital and the children Ozzie was helping?

How can you edit your memo to avoid repetition?
Grammar and Mechanics:
Keep an eye out for subject-verb agreement. It is important to make sure that the subject and verb are either both singular or both plural in form. Otherwise it is not clear what parts of the sentence work together. Let’s take a look at an example of where you could revise by bringing the verb in line with the plural subject:

* The parents has offered to donate $2 million.

Singular verbs and plural nouns end in –s.
Example:
The way that girl talks irritates me. (all singular)
The girls talk all the time. (plural subject and verb)

Your subject is plural—parents. The verb is singular—has. What is the plural form of has? It is an irregular verb, so use this example to help you: he has come; they have decided. Later in your paper, you said the end justify the means. What must you change to make the subject and verb agree?

Please check your paper for correct use of singular and plural. Look at these links for more information on agreement Subject/Predicate Agreement; Agreement Between Subject and Verb

Summary of Next Steps:

You have made a good start with your memo, Jenny. Here are suggestions for the next steps:

* Reveal the main point in the subject line and the first sentence * Organize your material to conform more closely to your instructions and the avoid repetition * Check subject-verb agreement

I've enjoyed working with your memo about the dilemma of choosing who will receive a donated organ, Jenny, and I hope my comments have been helpful to you. Good luck with your revision! Elizabeth R.

Find additional resources in SMARTHINKING's online library:
You can find more information about writing, grammar, and usage in SMARTHINKING's student handbooks. You can visit the SMARTHINKING Writer's Handbook or the SMARTHINKING ESOL (English for speakers of other languages) Writer's Handbook.
**********************************************************************
Please look for more comments in your essay below. Thank you for visiting SMARTHINKING. We encourage you to submit future essays.
**********************************************************************

To: Prof. Rodríquez
CC: Peer Review Committee
From: Jenny Peters, Student
Date: February 8, 2014
Subject: Transplanting Organs

The purpose of this memorandum is to inform you that the recipient of the organ transplant has been chosen. Everyday many people across the globe are in need of an artificial organ. Advance in medical treatment have resulted in dramatic increase in the number of organ transplants performed annually. Someone’s life will be changed for the best; because of the decision that was made due to the life-and-death situation. The decision that was made was based on moral, professional and ethical choices. [The purpose of your memorandum, as expressed in the first sentence presupposes that the readers will know about organ transplants, the need for organs, and the increasing number of transplants. This is therefore not the sort of background information required here. What information could you include in the introduction as background to the decision that has been taken? Who were the possible recipients? What criteria were used in making the decision?]

There were three qualifying candidates who were in need of the transplant; the first is Jerry a 55 year old male, who is a husband and father of 3 children, aged 14, 16, and 19, a Middle Level Manager at a carpet distributing business and 5 years short of his retirement. His heart is damaged due to the use of steroids in his early 20’s when he was involved with bodybuilding before the dangers of steroid use were fully known. If Jerry gets the heart, his chances of living another 10-15 years are very high.

The second candidate is Lisa; who is a precocious girl who reads voraciously, likes playing with her Barbie Doll, and she’s looking forward of becoming a teenager. In the past, she has suffered health issues all her life due to various viral infections and lupus-like immune deficiency. Her heart was damaged during a nasty bout with pneumonia last year and actually stopped for a brief moment. Even, with a transplant, her chances of surviving into her 20s are not good. She is the only child in the family, and they cannot bear more children. The parents has offered to donate $2 million to the hospital’s construction of specialized facilities if she can get a heart soon enough.

The third and last candidate is Ozzie, 38 year old man with no family. He has lived homeless and in shelters for the past decade. He was brought to the Hospital through the work of a local charity that assists such men with no assets or insurance. His heart condition is due to the continued abuse and overdosing of crack cocaine, and without a transplant the will not live out the month. In recent months, Ozzie has become involved with troubled teens at a local homework and tutoring hangout, and he has provided the wisdom and insight that only an abuser can know about where life can go. [This is a well-constructed sentence with commas placed correctly after the introductory element and between the two clauses joined by a coordinating conjunction (and). Correct use of punctuation makes your sentence easy to read.]

The possibility that some individuals might choose not to develop, not to live up to what an idealistic intellectual regarded as their highest potential, on that Mill was acknowledged only intermittently and reluctantly. The general principle he lays out corresponds to “negative freedom,” a concept later popularized by the philosopher Isaiah Berlin, but the utilitarian Mill somewhat paradoxically argues that individual liberty is justified mainly by its social results. ("Positive freedom," in Berlin's words, means the specious liberty "to lead one prescribed form of life"--precisely What Mill opposed.)

After reviewing each candidate life story, it was a very tough decision to make. The decision was made was based on consequentialist theory, promoting the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people; Where happiness that would come about as a consequence of our individual action, and where the end justify the means to achieve happiness. Each candidate has a different reason for living; but two of the individuals every though they do receive the organ transplant there life will change for the better. Lisa condition may worsen, because of all the health issue all her life due to various viral infections and lupus-like immune deficiency. Also, heart is damaged because of a nasty bout with pneumonia that accrued last year and it actually stopped her heart for a brief moment. Even, with the transplant, her chances of surviving into her 20s are slim to none. Ozzie, who is 38 year old with not family; actually used to live a homeless life with no strive for being a productive citizen. The condition he suffers is due to the continue abuse and overdosing of crack cocaine and has become involve in trouble, he has no potential. [Check word choice, Jenny. When you use the wrong word or form of the word, your meaning is obscured. For example, what is the possessive from of Lisa? How can you show the condition belongs to her (e.g., Ron’s dog)? Is accrued the right word? What similar-sounding word do you need with a different prefix?]

Last but not least, there is Jerry a 55 year old male, a husband, father of 3 children, Middle Level Manager at a carpet distributing business and 5 years short of his retirement. Whose heart was damaged due to the use of steroids in his early 20’s, which was developed because of the use of steroids; not know the cause-and-effects of steroids. Jerry is a productive citizen of society and his life is worth saving because he can make a different.

This was a difficult decision-making, due to the fact that the lives of two citizens will be cut short, because of the decision that was made. A consequentialist theory might reason thus: torture inflicts suffering, and so reduces happiness. But if it promotes more happiness than it causes, then it is justified. So, for a consequentialist, whether or not torture is permissible would depend on how effective it is in producing information that saves lives or generally helps uphold general happiness in the population. (J.S. Mill) [The dilemma involves an organ transplant, not torture; therefore, you need to show the reader the connection between the theory as it relates to torture and the decision to give the heart to Jerry. What can you add to show how the theory applies in this situation?]

Thank you for your understand and attending in this matter. Please feel free to contact me if there are any questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

Jenny Peters
Student
Principal of Ethics