Case:

Consider Rebecca, a single mother of 4 who has been a long-term welfare recipient.  Rebecca is a weekend meth user who often spends her money on meth.  However, without her welfare money, her children would not have any food or medical treatment and would most likely be placed in foster homes where their lives could go worse than they currently are. Rebecca’s yearly welfare application is due.
Now consider Jimmy, a veteran of both Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom.  During the battle, Jimmy was wounded and now suffers from some moderate physical disability and post-traumatic stress.  Sadly, although Jimmy tried to find a job, there weren’t many systems in place to help him re-integrate or work through his issues.  Each day Jimmy begs for money at his local off-ramp.  Through no fault of his own, Jimmy has fallen through the proverbial cracks. Jimmy applies for welfare.
Options
You are the welfare overseer.  At most one person can get welfare. You can make ONE of the following three decisions:
1. Give the welfare only to Rebecca
2. Give the welfare only Jimmy
3. Don’t give any welfare

Essay:

1. Explain the case at hand back in your own words.
* This should be no more than one paragraph.  It’s just a quick summary so I know how you’re understanding the case.
2. Explain the theories of the two philosophers that are assigned in that particular week.
* This should be where you show that you understand the arguments of the philosophers that are covered in a particular topic.  So if you’re writing on the Welfare Case Analysis, you’d explain the arguments of Walzer and Murray.
* This should be completely neutral — just a succinct presentation of the arguments that isn’t influenced by or that mentions the case.
* This should be at least two paragraphs, and probably more like four.
3. Present an argument applying the philosophers’s arguments to the case at hand.
* Here you should take the work you did in task two and apply that to the story.  So if you were writing on Welfare, you might say that Walzer’s theory would give the aide to person X because of reason Y and then justify that.  You’d then do the same with Murray.
* This should be at least two paragraphs, and could easily be four.
4. Present an argument explaining why one philosopher has a better solution to the case at hand.
* Do to this you need to explain what you think a successful solution to the case would demonstrate and then show hoe one of the philosophers does this better than the other.
* This should be two paragraphs.
5. Explain what you would do and why.
* This should be exactly one paragraph.