Identifying Issues (with types) & Conclusions

1. Corporate managers are always interested in techniques for increasing the productivity of
their workers. One interesting suggestion made by productivity consultants is to pipe music
into the work area. Several recent studies have explored the extent to which different types
of music affect workers' output. The primary hypothesis examined in the studies was that
soft-rock music would prove the greatest aid to productivity. The research has found almost
universally that country and western music is the greatest inducement to efficiency.
Therefore, corporate officials should seriously consider playing country and western music
as a stimulus to worker productivity.

1. Issue: What kind of music should corporations play for their workers?
Conclusion: They should play country and western music.

Type of issue: This is a prescriptive issue because it asks what SHOULD be done, and the
conclusion is signaled by an indicator word THEREFORE, which begins the last sentence.
Refer to slides 6 & 8 of the ARQ 2 PowerPoint for types of issues.

2. People suffering from mental illness are nearly twice as likely to smoke cigarettes as people
with no mental illness, according to a new study by Harvard Medical School researchers. The
researchers found that people with diagnosable mental illness comprise nearly 45 percent
of the total U.S. tobacco market. The study suggests that people with mental illness often
use the nicotine from cigarettes to enhance their mood, relieve anxiety, and cope with
stress.

Issue:
Conclusion:
Type of issue (why):

3. A recent court case in California involved the question of the legality of same-sex marriages.
Because the majority of the United States is conservative, most people are probably against
same-sex marriages. While most people consider the issue to be a clash of values, the
question is really based on financial problems. Same-sex couples face many financial
problems that heterosexual couples do not face. For example, if a married person dies
without a will, the property automatically transfers to the surviving spouse. However, same-
sex couples must draft wills that leave their property to their partner. The cost of drafting
these wills can range from $5,000 to $30,000. This cost is simply unfair to same-sex couples.
Furthermore, health insurance for a heterosexual partner is usually offered through an
employer. However, same-sex partners are not covered through employer insurance.
Although there are many financial biases against same-sex couples, these people face the
problems because of their love for one another. In a country in which one out of every two
new marriages ends in a divorce, we must not discriminate against those who practice love.

Issue:
Conclusion:
Type of issue and why:
 Identifying Issues (with types) & Conclusions

4. Early this year the administration came out with new rules for organ transplant allocation:
Sickest patients go to the top of the waiting list. That sounds like a caring and fair solution
to the organ shortage problem, but is it really? During the last year, the number of people
waiting for transplants vs. the number of transplants supplied, respectively, were: kidneys
36,013 vs. 11,949; livers 7,467 vs. 4,058; pancreas 1,786 vs. 1,022; hearts 3,935 vs. 2,381
and lungs 2,546 vs. 844. These shortages persist despite public and private efforts to make
potential organ donors and their families aware of donation options. Transplantable organ
shortages would disappear overnight if people were permitted to sell organs. You say,
“Williams, people shouldn’t make money selling organs!” I say, “Why not? Everybody else is
making money on the deal.”

If you think the sale of body parts is unlawful, how about this: we already sell hair ($1000),
plasma ($300), surrogacy ($45,000), eggs ($8000), and bone marrow ($3000). In fact, about
65 percent of women said there was at least some financial motivation in deciding to donate
eggs even though 73 percent said altruism was more important to them than making
money. Egg donors are compensated at almost every step of the process, earning $7,000 by
the time they finish their first donation cycle. Women receive $7,500 for a second donation
and $8,000 for each additional cycle, up to a total of six, incurring no out-of-pocket costs
along the way. The fact of life is that there must be some way to decide which sick person
gets an organ. One way to decide is to have a government mandate whereby the most
critically ill gets first priority. That could result in waste because a not-so-critically-ill person
has a greater chance of survival and a smaller chance of needing another transplant.

We shouldn’t allow America’s elite to decide who gets what in health and other areas of our
lives. We wouldn’t begin to tolerate somebody deciding that housing, food, cars, and
clothing be distributed on a first-come, first-served basis or on a who-needs-them-the-most
basis. If we did, there’d be desperate shortages in housing, food, cars and clothing just as
there are shortages in organs available for transplant. There are other benefits from
allowing people to sell their organs. For example, I smoke cigarettes and cigars. If I knew
that my heart and lungs could become a part of my estate, I would take better care of them.
But since my heirs can’t monetarily gain, it makes sense for me to die with completely used-
up organs just like I’d try to die with a zero bank balance if Congress wouldn’t allow me to
bequeath money to my heirs.

Issue:
Conclusion:
Type of issue & why: