Posted: October 27th, 2022

Proposal Argument Essay

Proposal Argument Essay Assignment

A Policy Proposal as a Guest Editorial 

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Proposal Argument Essay
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

Write a 1,500-1,750-word policy proposal related to the sale, trade, or donation of human organs using five to seven academic resources. The policy proposal should be suitable for publication as an editorial in a college or city newspaper or in a publication associated with a particular group, such as a church newsletter or employee bulletin. The voice and style of your argument should be aimed at readers of your chosen publication. Remember to not use first person pronouns (I, me, us, we, our, my, mine) or second person pronouns (you, your, yours) in this guest editorial writing, unless given permission by your instructor. 

Your editorial should have the following features:

  1. Identify the problem related to the sale, trade, or donation of human organs.
  2. Persuade the audience that you have selected that this is a problem that needs solving; give it presence.
  3. Propose action offering specific details to show how the actions will help alleviate the problem.
  4. Justify your solution; the reasons why your audience should accept your proposal and act on it.

This essay is NOT simply a persuasive essay on organ sale, trade, or donation. It is an argumentative proposal that offers a practical and justifiable solution to a problem related to organ donation. 

First Draft Grading

  • You will receive completion points for the first draft based upon the successful submission of a complete draft.  
  • Because your first draft is a completion grade, do not assume that this grade reflects or predicts the final grade. If you do not consider your instructor’s comments, you may be deducted points on your final draft. 

Final Draft Grading

The essay will be graded using a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations.  

Sources

  • Include in-text citations and a references page in APA Style for FIVE to SEVEN scholarly sources outside of class texts.
  • These sources should be used to support any claims you make and should be present in the text of the essay. 
  • Use the GCU Library to help you find sources.
  • Include this research in the paper in a scholarly manner.

Format

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide.

ENG-106 Rubric: Proposal Essay

16%

16%

Criteria

% Value

1: Unsatisfactory

2: Less Than Satisfactory

3: Satisfactory

4: Good

5: Excellent

% Scaling

0%

65%

75%

85%

100%

Content & Ideas –

40%

Proposal

Content and Ideas Should:

Include an effective title.

Use a thesis that centers on a proposal argument.

Give a problem presence.

Develop the proposal argument by using claim-type strategies that support proposals (categorical, ethical, and/or cause and effect claims).

Present specific evidence to supplement supporting arguments.

40%

Does not have title, and has missing or indiscernible thesis statement and minimal evidence to support main ideas. The writer gives the problem no presence. Argument includes elements of a proposal, but the argument does not center on the proposal. The writer does not use strategies that support proposal arguments.

Title may not suggest subject and does not spark interest. Thesis statement and/or the controlling idea are not clearly stated. The writer gives the problem little presence. Argument includes elements of proposals, but the argument does not center on a proposal and/or the writer does not use strategies that support proposal arguments very well. Ideas are underdeveloped and clichéd. They do not support the thesis. Evidence from outside sources can be irrelevant.

Title suggests subject but does not spark interest. Thesis statement identifies the main point the author is trying to make. The writer gives the problem some presence, though the problem could be explained more forcefully. Most of content relates to thesis statement, but lacks sufficient support through appropriate strategies for making proposal arguments (categorical, ethical, and/or cause and effect claims). Argument may not center specifically on a proposal. Cited evidence sometimes does not justify ideas.

Title suggests subject but does not necessarily spark interest. Thesis statement clearly identifies the main point the author is trying to make. The writer gives the problem presence. Argument centers specifically on a proposal and uses strategies that support it (categorical, ethical, and/or cause and effect claims). Most of the content supports thesis, and cited evidence usually justifies ideas.

Title suggests subject and sparks interest. With a clear, controlling idea, thesis statement effectively identifies the main proposal the student is trying to make. The student gives the problem full presence. Content supports thesis well by effectively using strategies that support proposals as necessary (categorical, ethical, and/or cause and effect claims). Specific, cited evidence justifies ideas and enriches the essay.

Organization –

12%

Organization

12%

No apparent organization present. The piece does not explain that a problem exists, provide a solution, and/or justify the solution. Ineffective introduction does not invite readers or explain the subject. The reader cannot find the thesis statement. Underdeveloped paragraphs lack focus and topic sentences. No conclusion present.

No apparent organization present. The piece might explain that a problem exists, offer a solution, and justify the solution, but may do so only minimally. Introduction explains subject, but does not engage readers. Thesis is difficult to find. Underdeveloped paragraphs lack focus and topic sentences. Weak conclusion offered.

Organization is clear, but with minor errors. The piece might explain that a problem exists, offer a solution, and justify the solution without doing all three convincingly. Introduction explains subject, but does not adequately engage readers. Thesis may be misplaced. Paragraphs are not developed around topic sentences, and may not always advance essay’s ideas. Conclusion summarizes but does not conclude.

Organization aids readers in understanding content. The writing somewhat persuades readers that a problem exists and is important, provide details about the solution, and justify the solution. Introduction explains subject, but may not engage readers. Thesis statement is placed appropriately, according to the genre of writing set forth in the assignment description in the syllabus. Well-ordered paragraphs are developed around topic sentences, and advance essay’s ideas. Conclusion may be more of a summary.

Logically organized to help readers understand content. The writing persuades readers that a problem exists and is important, provide appropriately specific details about the solution, and justify the solution. Introduction explains subject and engages readers. Thesis statement is placed appropriately, according to the genre set forth in the assignment description in the syllabus. Well-ordered paragraphs are developed around topic sentences, and advance essay’s ideas. Conclusion provides strong, satisfying ending, not a mere summary of the essay.

Format –

16%

Paper Format

16%

Layout: Essay lacks more than THREE of the following: double-spaced, 12 pt, Times New Roman font, 1″ margins, heading (with name, course, date, and instructor), assignment title, and page numbers using appropriate header function. Not all information, paraphrases, quotations, and borrowed ideas are cited on the page they appear; little or no in-text citations and/or entries on reference page used; major documentation oversights noted; major format errors and omissions noted; inappropriate number of required sources used.

Layout: Essay lacks THREE of the following: double-spaced, 12 pt. Times New Roman font, 1″ margins, heading (with name, course, date, and instructor), assignment title, and page numbers using appropriate header function. Not all information, paraphrases, quotations, and borrowed ideas are cited on the page they appear; missing more than one citation and/or reference entry; significant documentation oversights noted; significant format errors or omissions noted; inappropriate number of required sources used.

Layout: Essay lacks TWO of the following: double-spaced, 12 pt. Times New Roman font, 1″ margins, heading (with name, course, date, and instructor), assignment title, and page numbers using appropriate header function. Not all information, paraphrases, quotations, and borrowed ideas are cited on the page they appear; missing one in-text citation and/or reference entry; minor documentation oversights noted; minor formatting errors or omissions noted; appropriate number of required sources are used.

Essay lacks ONE of the following: double-spaced, 12 pt. Times New Roman font, 1″ margins, heading (with name, course, date, and instructor), assignment title, and page numbers using appropriate header function. All information, paraphrases, quotations, and borrowed ideas are cited on the page that they appear and are listed on the references page (APA format); some minor errors or omissions in format noted; appropriate number of required sources is used.

Layout: Essay is double-spaced with 12 pt. Times New Roman font, 1″ margins, heading (with name, course, date, and instructor), assignment title, and page numbers using appropriate header function. All information, paraphrases, quotations, and borrowed ideas are cited in parenthetical APA format; all sources are listed on the references page (APA format); all citations and reference entries are complete and in alphabetical order; appropriate number of required sources is used.

Language & Style – 16%

Language & Style

Voice & tone are inappropriate and ineffective in creating appropriate mood. Inappropriate word choice used. Sentence structure includes ungrammatical structures and no variety. Writing is wordy.

Voice & tone are inappropriate and ineffective in creating appropriate mood. Word choice fails in use of appropriate, precise language and strong verbs. Includes too many “to be” verbs. No attempt to vary sentence structure noted. Writing is wordy.

Voice & tone usually do not characterize ideas appropriately or effectively create appropriate mood. Word choice includes nonstandard outdated usage, too many “to be” verbs, is not precise, and is occasionally incorrect. Some slang or jargon exists in the paper. Inadequate variety in sentence structure noted. Writing is wordy.

Voice & tone usually characterize ideas effectively create appropriate mood. Word choice usually includes current standard usage, active verbs, concrete nouns, and precise words. Some slang or jargon exists in the paper. Some variety of sentence structures strengthens the ideas, creates vitality, and avoids choppiness in the writing. Writing is mostly concisely written.

Voice & tone characterize ideas and effectively create appropriate mood. Word choice includes current standard usage, active verbs, concrete nouns, and precise words. Sentence structures strengthen the ideas, create vitality, and avoid choppiness in the writing. Writing is concise.

Grammar & Mechanics – 16%

Grammar & Mechanics

Demonstrates no control of grammar, spelling, & punctuation conventions.

Many errors, such as:

Apostrophe use

Capitalization

Commas misplaced or missing

Parallelism

Faulty point of view shifts

Pronoun agreement

Quotation errors

Semicolons misused

Run-ons & fragments

Spelling errors

Subject-verb agreement

Tense shifts

Demonstrates minimal control of grammar, spelling, & punctuation conventions. Several errors, such as:

Apostrophe use

Capitalization

Commas misplaced or missing

Parallelism

Faulty point of view shifts

Pronoun agreement

Quotation errors

Semicolons misused

Run-ons & fragments

Spelling errors

Subject-verb agreement

Tense shifts

Demonstrates reasonable control of grammar, spelling, & punctuation conventions.

Some errors, such as:

Apostrophe use
Capitalization
Commas misplaced or missing
Parallelism
Faulty point of view shifts
Pronoun agreement
Quotation errors
Semicolons misused
Run-ons & fragments
Spelling errors
Subject-verb agreement
Tense shifts

Demonstrates high control of grammar, spelling, & punctuation conventions. Few errors, such as:

Apostrophe use
Capitalization
Commas misplaced or missing
Parallelism
Faulty point of view shifts
Pronoun agreement
Quotation errors
Semicolons misused
Run-ons & fragments
Spelling errors
Subject-verb agreement
Tense shifts

Demonstrates outstanding control of grammar, spelling, & punctuation conventions.

No errors, such as:

Apostrophe use
Capitalization
Commas misplaced or missing
Parallelism
Faulty point of view shifts
Pronoun agreement
Quotation errors
Semicolons misused
Run-ons & fragments
Spelling errors
Subject-verb agreement
Tense shifts

PAGE

© 2012. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

7

Sale, Trade, and Donation of Human Organs

Davina Carey

Grand Canyon University

English Composition II / ENG-106

Professor Tasha Green

February 10,2021

Sale, Trade, and Donation of Human Organs

Physicians have suggested selling organs as a possible solution to the almost endless shortage of organs for transplantation. However, several people consider this concept unethical and claim that the practice will be malicious and the government should abolish it. This paper will concentrate on kidney transplantation because the kidney is the most frequently transplanted organ. The ethical documentation on organ dealing is mainly about kidney business from live beneficiaries. ‘Organ deal’ excludes the supply of other body products, a classification that includes blood, eggs, hair, and sperm. For example, the possibility of permanent mischief is slightly less on account of hair and blood donations. Besides, the sale and donation of sperm and eggs raise other problems associated with creating and raising children. Significant major concerns regarding organ sale and donations are comparable, and in both cases, there are exceptionally same questions about abuse and consent.

Due to the challenges associated with the sale, trade, or gift of human organs, it is critical to understand its drivers. There is a shortage of organs available for transplantation worldwide. This disparity in interest and supply has caused various people in Western nations with organ failure to search for transplants overseas, frequently in developing countries. These individuals often do not ask about how the doctors acquired the organ (Elias, Lacetera & Macis, 2015). Furthermore, fake healthcare professionals and intermediaries who see the potential of financial gain enhance this process. They manipulate both the primary recipient and the helpless dealer. It is a terrible behavior affecting human nature; people would want to discover a net income anywhere there is a business, regardless of human abuse.

Many governments are not able to regulate the trafficking of organs, despite strict and subtle legislations. Nor are they capable of supplying the needy with organs. There are accounts of the kidnapping and murder of young people and adults to “reap” their organs. Many people are persistent, not because the organs are not available, but because “ethical quality” does not allow them to have organs. “Arguments against the “organ deal” are based on two significant factors: (1) the deal is in contrast to the social status and (2) the significance of harm (Crepelle, 2016). Experts analyzed both of these grievances and concluded that, as compared to mental stability, they represent a state of simple moralism. It argued that a living human body comprises an essential source of supply of tissues and organs and that physicians should consider the potential effects of its appropriate use. People cannot test commercialization by refusing their honest to goodness necessities to a poor person yet by rendering the prerequisite departments efficient.

There are regulations relating to the selling, exchange, or donation of human organs. Others have suggested that the best approach to solving organ failure is not to focus on building up the supply of organs from dead or living organ donors but rather to abuse the capacity of preventive medicinal and tissue regeneration solutions through various means (Wall, Plunkett & Caplan, 2015). The first would boost the health of the population and would later minimize the number of people needing kidneys (or multiple organs) along these lines. While the second would offer appointive therapies to organ dissatisfaction, such as restoring organs using immature microbes. On the off chance that these methods were to yield the results their proponents anticipated, people might foresee a potential end to the organ shortage and the awful masses that drive it (Wall et al., 2015). The following three draft proposals seek to increase the supply of organs. Each project stands alone, and people should not be view in combination with the other two but independently.

The first one is “paired donation and list donation” (Wall et al., 2015). These are creative forms of organ donation that allow living donors who are organically incompatible with their intended recipients to collaborate or to make donations conceivable in circumstances where they would not be otherwise, under the general public keeping up the rundown. As part of a “chain trade,” paired donation and list donation can be incorporated and used together. Chain trades contain two sets (A and B) in their least complicated structure that do not fulfill all conditions for a consolidated donation, meaning that both donors do not control the opposite pair’s recipients. Instead, pair A’s beneficiary matches only the benefactor of pair B. The benefactor of pair A donates a kidney to the suggested recipient of pair B in a network exchange. The giver of pair B gives a kidney to the general list of kidneys like this. Pair A’s expected recipient then rises the standing tight kidney checklist.

Secondly, there is donation after controlled cardiac death. In some, highly specified clinical situations, physicians and families can choose that the life of a given patient is still valuable life-maintaining care. These weakening individuals are sometimes possible organ donors who doctors can remove their organs before they die (Wall et al., 2015). The act of suspected “organ donation after monitored cardiac death.” Proponents of the procedure claim that it has obscured potential in the fight to develop the supply of organs until now because some transplant centers and doctor’s facilities still do not have donation after regulated cardiac death guidelines.

After controlled heart passing, the donation should be honed only within the framework of an express therapeutic center approach that articulates specific successful and medical criteria. The following six requirements will include an ethically credible therapeutic center approach (Shaikh & Bruce, 2016). To begin with, the option of pulling back speculations must focus on the willingness to give freely. Second, as non-givers, donors must obtain similar end-of-life palliative care. Third, the health facility should provide the families of the possible contributors the option of being available when life support is pulled back and, in general, take every step to encourage families and associates to bid farewell dignifiedly (Wall et al., 2015). Also, parents should not carry any additional expenses associated with a donation. Fourth, after complete discontinuation of heart capacity, acquisition groups must retain the specified time measure before the organ expulsion begins (Shaikh et al., 2016). Fifth, healthcare workers prescribing drug withdrawal must not hurry the patient’s passage, irrespective of whether the organs may become un-transplantable. Sixth, if patients do not die fast enough to wind up donors, they should develop a method to transfer these patients to a place where they can progress more comfortably. 

Thirdly, there is cash payment for organs (Cherry, 2015). One of the most spoken about and controversial strategies for increasing the supply of organs is to amend the National Organ Transplantation Act of 1984 to legalize cash transactions for organs, a move that could require any of several systems. .This proposal justifies an increased dialog to some extent, in the light of its apparent quality in late open negotiations.

There would be no less than two essential people, the organ ‘seller’ and the organ recipient, in any system in which people provided organ payments. It is possible to have three kinds of categories of organ traders. The main class comprises living beneficiaries who agree to the present offering of their organs. These sellers will be restricted to supplying a kidney, a liver section, or even a lung flap for security purposes (Brandt, Wilkinson & Williams, 2017). The second class involves prospective donors who offer their organs with future rights that will be available after death, on the off chance that they should bite the dust in a manner that makes them suitable donors. In this classification, the dealers could be interested in what people commonly refer to as a “fates market” (Cherry, 2015). The third category would consist of departed beneficiaries; whose chosen aides would pay at the period of organ procurement. The surrogates may include family, associates, or perhaps an organization that is most valued, such as a charity (Shaikh et al., 2016). As a consequence, the surrogate would receive the expired organs and could then sell them.

Despite established legislations, a possible solution to the country’s organ shortage was monetary desires for organ donations. Opponents can refer to countless concerns about the use of financial benefits for the living (Cherry, 2015). Moreover, cadaveric donations, most of which have ended up being unpersuasive. Still, they fail to offer a superior choice. It is doubtful that financial driving factors can achieve complete acceptance from society because of paternalistic concerns of exploitation and abuse. The government can reduce these fears with strict directions and supervision.

No organ acquisition scheme has seen success worldwide. It is a great chance to try another system. The moment has come to accept the possibility that providing motivating forces involving money will solve the nation’s organ shortage. Those limited to motivating factors effectively condemn a significant number of people to death yearly, and many more to a life of suffering, by maintaining the use of a motivator-based organ acquisition system.

References

Brandt, R., Wilkinson, S., & Williams, N. (2017). The donation and sale of human eggs and sperm.

https://stanford.library.sydney.edu.au/archives/win2019/entries/gametes-donation-sale/

Cherry, M. J. (2015). Kidney for sale by owner: human organs, transplantation, and the market. Georgetown University Press.

Crepelle, A. (2016). A Market for human organs: an ethical solution to the organ shortage. Ind. Health L. Rev., 13, 17.

https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/inhealr13&div=5&id=&page

=

Elias, J. J., Lacetera, N., & Macis, M. (2015). Sacred values? The effect of information on attitudes toward payments for human organs. American Economic Review, 105(5), 361-65. DOI: 10.1257/aer.p20151035

Shaikh, S. S., & Bruce, C. R. (2016). An ethical appraisal of financial incentives for organ donation. Clinical liver disease, 7(5), 109.  doi: 

10.1002/cld.548

Wall, S. P., Plunkett, C., & Caplan, A. (2015). A potential solution to the shortage of solid organs for transplantation. Jama, 313(23), 2321-2322. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.5328

Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away

Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.

Calculate the price of your order

You will get a personal manager and a discount.
We'll send you the first draft for approval by at
Total price:
$0.00

Order your essay today and save 30% with the discount code ESSAYHELP