peer review

Peer Review/Issue Proposal ENGL 1302
____________________________________________________________
When responding to each draft, be positive and offer constructive criticism. Avoid negative comments. You also should refrain from answering with “yes” and “no” responses. You will need to provide at least 3-4 sentences for each point in order to receive full credit. Also, if a drafter does not address one of the points listed, you will need to state that the point is not addressed and make a recommendation of how the writer might work this important aspect of the assignment into his or her proposal.

After reading your peer’s proposal, respond to the questions on the worksheet and then save the document to your computer. Reply to each peer draft by responding to the draft posting and attaching the completed peer worksheet to your reply.
• When responding to each draft, be positive and offer constructive criticism. Avoid negative comments. You also should refrain from answering with “yes” and “no” responses. You must provide at least 3-4 sentences for each point in order to be eligible to receive full credit. Also, if a drafter does not address one of the points listed, you will need to state that the point is not addressed and make a recommendation of how the writer might work this important aspect of the assignment into his or her proposal.
•
• NOTE EACH PEER REVIEW MUST BE ON SEPARATE PAGE
• 2 PAGES NEEDED
•

1. What issue is presented? Explain the “exigence” or problem surrounding the issue. Write out the central question posed by the writer.

2. Explain why the issue is compelling to the writer.

3. Explain what the writer knows about this issue.

4. Explain what more the writer needs to learn about this issue.

5. What other suggestions for revision (such as spelling, grammar, structure, readable, etc.) do you have for the writer?

Peer-
1. Dionne J Hooks

Vaccines: Healthy for Us or Harmful for Us
There has been great lack of trust for science that has started to circulate, even throughout history, but with the growth of different media outlets and various information that is at the fingertips of any individual can lead to misinformation and spreads like fire. Anyone can go to any internet engine, such as Yahoo or YouTube and search any given topic, such as vaccines and it cause so many fears due to most information leading anyone to think that vaccines could cause arm to us and how science is trying to hide the dangers of vaccines from the public. Vaccines are one of the biggest health achievements of the 20th century (WHO), but still more people are questioning the need for vaccines. According to the World Health Organization the hesitancy of one getting vaccines is now one of the top-ten global health threats to society (WHO). I feel and believe that vaccines are not just necessary for public health but are a necessity to live life, protecting us from getting sick. Parents should by all means continue to vaccinate their children as recommended by the American Pediatric Association, due to the viable fact that vaccines significantly reduce the occurrence of infectious diseases, and that there is no link between receiving a vaccine and causing developmental delays such as Autism.
There have been many proposals that vaccines are dangerous to our health and building momentum in the past couple of decades due to study’s and publications such as, Andrew Wakefield’s study stating there is a link between Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine and Autism. Since the publication of this study there has been a tremendous drop in vaccinations from 92% to 84% (Hussain). Regardless of how many scientist have placed a rebuttal and proven that Wakefield’s study has no proof to stand on, also having Wakefield retracting his study, there are still many parents today that have chosen to believe that there is a link between the MMR vaccine and Autism. The fact that has been proven is that around the same time a child would receive the MMR vaccine are around the earliest times Autism can be diagnosed by a medical professional.
It is well known today, due to the various successes of vaccines reducing or eradicating many infectious diseases, it is difficult for one to imagine a would without vaccines. Majority of us alive have not been a firsthand witness to how one of the eradicated diseases could harm an individual and the visualization of what that looks like, thus leading people to not value the need for vaccines.

Peer # 2
Student Sondeep Gill

Premarital cohabitation: is it the solution?
As divorce rates continue to skyrocket many across the globe have begun to reconsider their approaches to partnerships. In the quest for a solution to this ever-increasing predicament one solution that has been proposed is premarital cohabitation. This has been met with strong opposition from traditionalists that deem the institution of marriage sacred and pronounce this proposition detrimental to future of family values.
My hope is to try to understand the potential of premarital cohabitation to be helpful or harmful to those considering it as an alternative living situation. It appears to me that the issue at hand is representative of a larger issue that appears to be much more challenging to tackle and that is the rapidly changing values of our modern society when pitted against those of our parents and their forebearers. Given the apparent controversy over this matter I felt it was a pertinent subject to further explore.
As this is an election year for the coveted role of presidency the arguments portraying shifting American values have come into the spotlight as an issue concerning many individuals throughout our country. The incumbent and current presidential candidate has taken a stance as a protector of American ideals which has led many to begin scrutinizing what exactly those consist of and how they impact our country that is comprised of folks from all walks of life. An alarming and noteworthy issue at hand is that politicians and our fellow citizens feel they have a right to insert their opinions into our households and more specifically our bedrooms.
On a personal note I am invested in this subject because my parents’ marriage was a tumultuous one to put it mildly. Additionally, I am in the process of going through a divorce myself and often wonder if having lived under the same roof as my former husband prior to marriage may have helped us avoid marrying prematurely. I imagine this would have helped to prevent spending vast amounts of financial and emotional reserves unnecessarily. Unfortunately, what I know at this time pales in comparison to the information that is readily available out there. I am particularly interested in the statistical evidence for or against premarital cohabitation and this is partly why I decided to write about this subject as I really do want to learn more about it.
Furthermore, as I began my initial research I discovered that my long held beliefs about the positive impact premarital cohabitation can have on divorce rates may actually be without merit as one of the scientific studies I came across demonstrated that premarital cohabitation has very little bearing on marriage dissolution rates per author Bagley (Bagley, 2020). This is but one article, so I do wish to understand this information better which requires performing additional research. Additionally, if this information is true than I am interested to learn what factors may positively impact longevity in marriages.
Some of the most significant issues plaguing many marriages include poor communication skills, financial mismanagement, shifting gender roles, and much more (Gravningen, 2017). It is a seemingly straightforward solution then to attempt to mitigate the costs associated with the dissolution of a marriage by first living together. The costs associated with divorce extend far beyond what we have already discussed. One other superficially innocuous factor worth consideration are the children that are brought forth because of these unions that are then are forced to grow up in two separate households. It is imperative to understand the far reaching impact divorce has had and will have going forward.
I would like to better understand the impact that premarital cohabitation has had on the institution of marriage, in family life, and how it is impacting our social trajectory at large. I am hopeful to someday enter a long lasting and loving partnership and would like to explore how to best go about it in the future. Given the rising rates of divorce I imagine the answers to these questions are sought after by not only myself but a significant portion of society.
As I previously mentioned when I began research this topic, I found some contradictory evidence that requires further exploration. I imagine there are no clear cut answers and that the solutions different individuals employ have to suit their respective lifestyles and belief systems however I remain confident that additional insight into this matter may be beneficial to our collective understanding of the complex issues at play.

References
Bagley, Lacey A., et al. “Beliefs About Premarital Cohabitation: Do Individuals Believe Living Together Helps Divorce- Proof Marriage?” Contemporary Family Therapy: An International Journal, vol. 42, no. 3, Sept. 2020, pp. 284- 290. EBSCOhost, doi:10:1007/s10591-019-09524-7.
Gravningen, Kirsten et al. “Reported reasons for breakdown of marriage and cohabitation in Britain: Findings from the third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3).” PloS one vol. 12,3 e0174129. 23 Mar. 2017, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0174129

1. What issue is presented? Explain the “exigence” or problem surrounding the issue. Write out the central question posed by the writer.

2. Explain why the issue is compelling to the writer.

3. Explain what the writer knows about this issue.

4. Explain what more the writer needs to learn about this issue.

5. What other suggestions for revision (such as spelling, grammar, structure, readable, etc.) do you have for the writer?

Peer # 3
Emily Vance
Physician-Assisted Suicide

Autonomy is the ability to function independently both physically and mentally. What does that word mean to you? To me, it means having the ability and choice to get up every morning and drive to work. It means having the luxury of coming home and eating dinner with the food that I picked out. It means having the choice to end an abusive relationship. What if someone told you, you had to stay in that relationship, or you had to eat certain types of dinner? If someone were to take your autonomy from you, would you feel violated? What would happen if you, or even a loved one, were terminally diagnosed and lived every day in extreme pain? In many cases, these types of diagnosis take radical control of a person’s life and sometimes the people around them. For some people, the thought of Physician-Assisted Suicide becomes an option. For others, it is an unspeakable act. In my opinion, I believe all states should support patients that wish to end their life by Physician-Assisted Suicide. According to deathwithdignity.org, “physician-assisted dying or aid-in-dying laws, stem from the basic idea that it is the terminally ill people, not government and its interference, politicians and their ideology, or religious leaders and their dogma, who should make their end-of-life decisions and determine how much pain and suffering they should endure”. I want to write about this because it hits very close to home for me. There are very strong supporting and opposing opinions on this issue and I’d like to dedicate the remainder of the course on researching this topic to better explain why Physician-Assisted suicide is a persons right and denying them this would take away their autonomy.
When I was a hospice nurse, I saw countless patients die from cancer. Among the many qualifying requirements to be placed on hospice services, was the patient had to have a diagnosis that predicted less that a year to live. Some patients lived past that timeline and sadly, many did not. There were several patients that begged for the pain to go away, or to make it stop. It always made me ask myself, what would I do if I were in their situation? Then, I came across a movie where a man had decided he wanted to end his life with the help of a team of physicians who were medically trained in doing just that. I started to research the topic and found that it is very controversial and that most states, its illegal. On one hand, you have people calling the process murder. On the other, it is seen as mercy and personal choice. I want to research what states allow this and which states it is illegal. I would also like to see where physicians stand on this matter. Their goal is to save lives, and some see this method as breaking their code of ethics. Where as others, see this as giving a patient their own choice as to how they wish to end their life. Only 9 out of 50 states, deem this practice legal. I would like to research if the limited amount number of states makes the process for applicants more difficult, since many will have to travel to accomplish this. I also want to discover what different options are given to patients that precisely ends life. I know from previous research there are various oral medications. An interesting fact to inquire, would be what type of therapy, if any, would be required before making this decision. Would a patient who claims to be of sound body and mind, need to undergo physiological testing and evaluation to determine if their eligible? These questions and many more that I encounter along the way, will be addressed. The method of Physician-Assisted Suicide is a controversial topic for many. I would like to argue why I believe this end of life option should be accepted by more people and made legal in all 50 states.

Work cited

“Death with Dignity Acts – States That Allow Assisted Death.” Death With Dignity, Author Unknown, 15 July 2020, www.deathwithdignity.org/learn/death-with-dignity-acts/.

1. What issue is presented? Explain the “exigence” or problem surrounding the issue. Write out the central question posed by the writer.

2. Explain why the issue is compelling to the writer.

3. Explain what the writer knows about this issue.

4. Explain what more the writer needs to learn about this issue.

5. What other suggestions for revision (such as spelling, grammar, structure, readable, etc.) do you have for the writer?

Example—

Peer # 2
Student Sondeep Gill

Peer review
The Issue Proposal Peer Review
The author of the proposal: Sondeep Gill

The author brings up the point that traditional marital affairs are hard to sustain due to the ever-changing society and its values. Thus, the proposal has its goal to explore the pros and cons of premarital cohabitation and a possible alternative to the old institution of marriage.
Stemming from the title of the proposal the argument is whether premarital cohabitation improves or decreases chances to make the right marital decision between partners. However, there is no explanation of how a premarital cohabitation could improve and sustain a committed marital relationship. Neither was there a proposal of its potential negative effect on future spouses. The author made preliminary research on this issue and plans to continue the literature review. Thus, the recommendation is to describe clearly each perspective, why premarital cohabitation is a solution, and why it is not and support it with evidence from the literature.
The author feels strongly about the potential poor outcome of traditional marriage as she witnessed dissonance between her parents as well as dealing with high costs associated with divorce and its impact on children. Therefore, the author is heavily invested and formed her view on this matter. We encourage the author to approach the issue with a clean slate, in other words, find a way to detach from the personal experiences and avoid confirmation bias during the research.
Personal experience is always a great motivator to start an argument. The writer’s personal experience prompted further exploration of the issue as in the retrospect she wonders whether an alternative approach before a committed marital relationship could have been a better option. The statistics of increasing divorce rates are the reason the writer believes people should reevaluate the traditional approach to marriage since emotionally and financially painful consequences of a divorce could have a significant and long-lasting impact on ex-spouses.
The author appears to properly follow the MLA in-text citation guidelines. Appropriate use of ideas from the research or study cited as supporting evidence for one of the perspectives were noted throughout the entire reading of the proposal. We would like to highlight that the References page in MLA style is usually referred to as the Works Cited page.
The writer’s essay is four pages long, double spaced, written in font Times New Roman in font size 12.