This research explores how to best communicate positive body images to women. This project was intended to improve a blog I created my freshmen year in college called You're Not A Potato where I used original illustrations to tell a narrative about body image issues. The thesis begins with an historical overview of body image issues and finds that women have been dealing with high levels of body dissatisfaction since the Victorian era. The thesis then recaps the role of traditional media as well as contemporary social media and the role they play in imposing rigid beauty ideals on women's bodies. After an analysis of social media culture, it becomes evident women still communicate about their bodies in a negative manner, not only towards themselves, but towards others. To address this issue, I define the Body Positive movement and explore how public figures are using social media to implement Body Positivity. To conclude this project, I utilize my new-found knowledge in body positive communication by impacting my university campus community. I started a "You're Not a Potato" Campaign for Body Pride week with the help of the ASU Wellness Team and designed and facilitated several engaging programs that reflected the values of the Body Positive movement to our students. Through this research, I discovered how our appearance-based culture has stolen self-confidence from young women today, but by the end of this project, I explain how we can attempt to rebuild our culture by effectively communicating self-love and body acceptance in our online and physical communities.

Universal healthcare has become a regular feature of most developed nations around the world. This characteristic, however, does not extend to the United States, where some 28.2 million Americans remain uninsured or underinsured. In the past few years, the US has been on the precipice of major healthcare overhaul which has brought the debate on government-sponsored coverage to the forefront of political discourse. This thesis explores what it may mean to establish affordable access to healthcare as a right for all Americans. In doing so, it utilizes rule-utilitarian principles to define and assess the moral obligation of the United States' federal and state governments to provide sufficient coverage to all qualifying individuals within the country. This paper focuses on evaluating the current healthcare system in the United States while concentrating particularly on how its fragmented approach limits its success and longevity. It then offers a cross-comparison with the universal healthcare systems of Canada, France, and Japan, nations that outperform the United States in most healthcare measures such as life expectancy, infant and under-5 mortality, medical costs per capita, and disease prevalence. The free-market criticisms of government-provided coverage and its alternative private-insurance-based approach to healthcare in the US are also deliberated. In light of these considerations, this thesis concludes with a commentary on what healthcare reform could look like for the nation as well as examines how a utilitarian appeal to rights likely makes the best case for adopting universal government-sponsored healthcare coverage in the United States.

Alzheimer's disease and related dementias are a growing issue in the United States. While medical experts try to develop treatments or a cure, what are we as a society to do in the meantime to help those living with Alzheimer's? The arts seem to be an answer. In this thesis, I highlight numerous programs already in place across the United States that utilize the visual, musical, and dramatic arts to give people with Alzheimer's an avenue for expression, a connection to the world around them, as well as a better quality of life. I address the largely positive impact these arts engagement programs have on caregivers and their perceptions of their loved ones. I discuss what it means to have narrative identity and personhood in the midst of a disease that appears to strip those things away. Finally, I share my own experiences creatively engaging with residents at a local memory care facility and what those experiences demonstrated with regard to narrative, being, and Self. The examination of material and experiences demonstrates that art taps into innate parts of human beings that science is unable to touch or treat; however, the reverse is also true for science. When faced with an issue as complex as Alzheimer's disease, art and science are strongest together, and I believe the cure to Alzheimer's lies in this unity. In the meantime, we must utilize the arts to validate the Selves of and improve the quality of life for our growing Alzheimer's population.

Through this thesis, I intend to explore what sociologist Arthur Frank means when he describes illness as "a dangerous opportunity" (Frank, 1991, p. 1). It is my objective to more fully understand the lived experience of illness and how narrative can aid in transforming illness from tragic to transcendent. In doing so, it is first necessary to understand how illness differs from disease and how the medicalization of human health has displaced narrative from medical practice. Since illness is best understood as a lived experience, I will discuss how narrative is an exemplary means of communicating these experiences and restoring identity that is threatened by illness. Lastly, I will address how narrative might be more effectively utilized in the context of medicine, in respect to both patients and physicians. In this work, I propose that the opportunities posed by illness might be seized by actively exploring it by means of narrative expression. It is my hope that this thesis might contribute to extending the notion that narrative is a means of attributing greater meaning to illness and constructing a more complete, compassionate approach to medicine.

The purpose of this thesis project is to analyze the legalization of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) as an option for the terminally ill in the United States from a rule-utilitarian perspective. The moral theory of utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory that judges the moral permissibility of an action or rule based on the best possible outcomes. Rule-utilitarianism conforms an action to an articulated moral rule that leads to the greatest good whereas act-utilitarianism only considers the best possible consequences on a case-by-case basis. Since legalization of PAS is a policy that requires passage of laws, rule-utilitarianism is more appropriate compared to act-utilitarianism. Euthanasia is a controversial topic worldwide that dates as far back as the 5th century BC with the Greeks and Romans. Comparing the euthanasia then and now, the nations are slowly but surely reconsidering the policies regarding PAS. There are both benefits and harms that the paper addresses. The possible benefits include the prevention of elongation of suffering, both physically and psychologically, respect for the patient autonomy, the right to die with dignity, and the decriminalization of the innocents. The potential harms include undermining the integrity of the medical profession and the aim of medicine, violation of the Hippocratic Oath, targeting of the vulnerable population, unmotivating the efforts to develop and improve better palliative and hospice care, and the slippery slope argument, which implies that the legalization of PAS would eventually set the precedence to legalizing voluntary active euthanasia and nonvoluntary euthanasia. Overall, the moral calculus that the paper provides comes to the conclusion that the benefits outweigh the harms.