A
potential ethical concern that may result from the ruling stated above
is:
<span>d. patients who cannot afford to purchase bone marrow will have to wait for voluntary donors.</span>
By
the time supply is not enough to address the high demand; some donors will find
all means to provide the best deal they think will benefit them the most. On
the other hand, the patients will be forced to buy the needed bone marrow as emergency
needs arise. Therefore, rich patients can secure a donor immediately while poor patients will still have to wait for a voluntary donor since priority is set to those to have the money not to those who are in need of it so badly.
Of the opening sentences that were presented here that strongly engages the reader and provides context to them would be the second one which is "We could have had a worse weekend, but it's awfully hard to beat Bigfoot and bugs."
The first and third one were just not good enough because it exposes the rest of the context to the reader and lets them have the idea of what you are talking about which usually leads to the readers not choosing to continue to read, thus taking out the reader's engagement but still provides context. The last one is better than the first and third, but it spilled the beans when it mentioned the particulars as to what made the weekend bad to worse. The answer is just right. It has the impact that would hook the reader to know more about your weekend and why is Bigfoot and bugs together in your statement. The rain wasn't mentioned which would be ideal to make the story telling take a turn to much worse which would spike up the interest of the reader.
