21st Century Situational Ethics

21st Century Situational Ethics Although the term Situational Ethics only seems to appear in Joseph Fletchers book named Situation Ethics: The New Morality in 1966, partial and similar ideas of situational ethics have been in the mind of others earlier before. Such as will be Durant Drake that published The New Morality, Emil Brunner with his published work Divine Imperative as well as Reinhold Niebuhr with his Moral Man and Immoral Society. During the same year where Fletcher published his book, John Robinson published his book named Honest to God. Although as equally popular as Fletchers book, it was Fletchers book that seemed simpler and less systematic. In 1952, The Roman Catholic Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office labeled this new principle as the new morality. Pros and cons of situational ethics Similar to other ethical principles, Situational Ethics has its pros and cons as well. To make things simple, following are the pros and cons of the Fletchers Model of Situation Ethics that is based upon Christian Love:- Advantages:- Situational Ethics is personal. Since Situational Ethics is based on the teachings that ethical decisions should be made based on flexible guidelines it demonstrates sensitivity towards circumstances, context, particularity and cultural traditions; besides, it has only a single basic principle to adhere to, love, so people can freely, easily, and creatively make their decisions in the various situations among the numerous alternatives available. Thus, this ethical theory may seem attractive to the many individualistic human beings exist in this modern era. Situational Ethics is specific. In Situational Ethics moral decisions are made on a case-by-case basis as in there is no fixed solution to various cases. Therefore, decisions made depend on the situation one is in and the solution to each situation is unique. (why is this good? Justify more) Situational Ethics about goodness. Love is supposed to be a good element and Situational Ethics teaches that right acts are those which are targeted to promote the well being of people (love). According to Situational Ethics, the well being of people can be promoted by maximizing human welfare and happiness that would be beneficial to individuals or a society. Disadvantages:- Love is vague and abstract. Although theoretically Situational Ethics is based on Christian love, but the term love in this principle does not have any definite meaning; every individual is unique by him or herself and every of them feels and interpret love in very different ways which may be due to different living environments, upbringing methods, genetics, and cultures. If everyone was to practice Situational Ethics, it might lead to confusion and therefore very inconsistent outcomes. For example, two very dissimilar decisions might be made in two very similar situations by two different people because their loves are not the same. Situational Ethics is very subjective and emotional-based. Love is a type of emotion and not some kind of reasoning element; because emotions are very individual-based, it is impossible for two persons to feel and express love in exactly the same way. It is generally agreed by ethicists that any ethical theory should be based mainly on reasons. So how can such a subjective-based Situational Ethics be tenable then in 21st century? Definitely people will involve some kind of biasness due to personal feelings when making decisions under such ethical principle; thus, fairness or justice cannot be upheld in Situational Ethics. Love by Fletcher was Self-Contradicting. According to Fletcher, he based his model upon the basic principle, love as interpreted in the new Testament of Bible, God is Love. This statement makes Situational Ethics reasonable at first glance, but actually in the very next chapter of the same Bible, there is another statement says so, This is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome. This latter statement is encouraging its believers to follow Divine Command Laws, is it not? Due to this, it makes Fletcher together with its Situational Ethics to be less convincing. Situational Ethics is difficult to implement. Like Act Consequentialism, Situation Ethics is not a practical ethical theory in a society as each situation is so different from another that if this system was to be implemented, then when a person faced a moral dilemma, he or she would need a considerable amount of time to consider what was the best action that could bring out the most love. Besides, it is often very difficult to determine what are the boundaries of every situation as well (like when did the situation begin and end). Furthermore, such ethical system that is so relativistic and has only one basic principle often produces very inconsistent results and thus is very challenging to be taught to the younger generations too. Situational Ethics may be misused by some in names of love. Based on Situation Ethics, any particular action does not have an inherent moral value as its good or bad depends on the results or the consequences of the action. Therefore, it seems that situation ethics allows a person to carry out acts that are normally classified as bad, such as killing and robbing, if those acts could be justified to be the expression of love by the committer. To summarize up, Situational Ethics is far too impractical in its own sense and possesses too many obvious flaws. In this 21st century where moral dilemmas simply become more and more complex, this ethical theory, if applied universally, will only produce more instability and disorder in this world. In short, it will definitely not be the best ethical principle to follow. To further advocate our standing, we have continued to do research and found out some problems and issues regarding Situational Ethics. Q: What are some of the issues or problems with Situational Ethics? Issues and Problems of Situational Ethics Is there a proper standard of value in determining the good? In the Fletcher model, moral agents are asked to calculate which action in a particular situation will produce the greatest amount of goods (love) for the greatest number of people. However, this method cannot be applied without some standards of value to aid figuring out the good and bad effects and then in balancing them; without clarifying the proper standards, what good deeds ought to be done in the situation cannot be determined. Besides, Fletcher came to say that he has said enough when he identified human welfare as the standard of value. As an example, he has substituted human welfare for pleasure as the standard of evaluation of both ends and effects, impliedly stating that human welfare is the ultimate love that can be given to other people in any situation. However, it is not clear that Fletchers appeal to human welfare will suffice. Will other religious people and atheists be convinced to follow Situational Ethics? As has been mentioned before, the main source of the theory of Situational Ethics is the Christians holy bible. Its original basic principle, love which has been interpreted by Fletcher was largely influenced by its own faith in Christianity. For example, Fletcher saw love as the Holy Spirit for himself. But what does Holy Spirit mean for other religious people? Do atheists even recognize the existence of Holy Spirit? Indeed, it is true that love exists in any society and culture and so non-Christian people can actually apply this ethical theory in their life as well; however, its Christianity origin may deter part if not all of these people from trusting in this ethical theory because it does seem to have some biasness in its interpretation of love. 3. Can people always act out of love and suppress their self-interests? This is one of the main problems that relates to the practicality of Situational Love Ethics. According to Fletcher, the love he suggested should mean the largest possible care of the well being of others; however, is it really possible for all human beings to set their self-interests aside and be as objective as possible when analyzing each situation? As mentioned, love is a kind of emotion and everyone feels and expresses it distinctively from another. The usual loves people give out are for families and friends. So what if in the specific moral dilemma context, someone a person loves a lot is involved? Can he or she really willing to sacrifice that important person for the sake of the majority and act in the most loving way? 4. Do ends always justify the means? Situational Ethics is very similar to Consequentialism in the way that both emphasize the prediction of the future and the end consequences that could happen, and then only decide on the action that could bring out the most desired outcome. As such, Situational Ethics shares the very same problem with Consequentialism as well: will any mean used to achieve the end be justifiable? In many circumstances, some living beings might need to be sacrificed for the sake of the majority. For example, in order to find out the most effective medicine to cure AIDS which affects millions of people, can scientists be allowed to use the fastest way (use selected human beings to conduct experiments) to achieve that goal? These scientists might consider that as the most loving way to act because they are trying to save millions of people in the end by merely risking a few human lives. But can this really be justifiable? 5. People prefer to have a more Secure Environment Situational Ethics consists of only one and only absolute basic principle to guide the general population; thus, it seems to abolish all the existing rules and laws that exist in every culture. If people were allowed to break the rigid rules and laws when they found that their actions could be justified in names of love (or some other absolute norms), werent those laws and rules be unenforceable anymore? This is definitely going to be a very risky ethical theory to apply because in this 21st century, where the societies and human populations are so complex, without definite laws and rules, people will only feel confused and chaos will happen everywhere. Thus, such a relativistic moral system seems not to be a better choice if compared to some other more absolutistic ethical systems. Best Ethical Principle/ System Q: What do you think would be the best ethical principle for your group to follow? A: After discussion, our group comes to agree that an ethical theory that combines the Confucius Virtue Ethics with the authors (Thiroux and Krasemann) Humanitarian Ethics will be the best for us to follow. After discussion, our group members have reached the agreement that Confucius Virtue Ethics combined with the Ethics textbooks authors Humanitarian Ethics will be the best moral system for our group to believe in and practice, mainly because of the fact that its main purpose is to create humans that implant good moral characters in themselves, or in short is to create virtuous human beings. In this 21st century, many ethicists have come to believe that humans have become more morally corrupted and morality is dying or even dead. In our modern world, people have tried to build up a moral society mainly through the act of establishing various rules and laws, but sadly that has been proven to be pretty ineffective; thus, both rule consequentialism and non-consequentialism principles will not be the best ethical principle to follow. In order to resolve this problem, Virtue Ethics is suggested to be applied universally because its main aim is to construct human beings that are truly ethical and excellent from within, not relying on outside forces such as rigid rules and laws. Virtue Ethics requires its believers to act virtuously and make it a habit; they practice what they do because they realize those acts are morally right and not because they are forced to. If everyone was to follow Virtue Ethics, then the dream of creating a moral society will be more likely to be reali zed. Humans are social beings who do not live in isolation; generally, they are dependent among each other. Thus, Virtue Ethics is advantageous as well in this case. Confucius Virtue Ethics has 4 main elements in total: De, Shu, Li and Ren, all of which are crucial to achieving social harmony. De means the virtue acts to be practiced by individuals so as to bring the great goodness to the people surrounding. Shu teaches people to reciprocate among each other, suggesting that distribution of justice is to be practiced. Li provides guidance to act appropriately in different contexts and to respect others, especially the higher authorities and therefore contributes to social stability. Lastly, Ren tries to compromise individuals interests with that of societys, in which enhances human interrelationships and promotes humane behavior; for example, it includes the Silver Rule (not to do to others what you do not wish to be done upon yourself), which can be used to test whether an action should be taken or not in any particular situation. In overall, as you can see, Confucius Virtue Ethics is very humanistic and social-based, which makes it seems very ideal in our current diversified and complex societal world. For example, if leaders in this 21st century were to follow Confucius Virtue Ethics, then their followers will be more likely to show loyalty to them because the leaders are doing right and are concerned about their respective followers instead of merely using coercive or tyranny methods. One of the basic assumptions made by Thiroux and Krasemann, the authors of our Ethics textbook that any workable ethical principle should have is to be rationally based and yet does not eliminate emotion; indeed, Confucius Virtue Ethics is one that has this characteristic. It is an undeniable fact that many moral decisions involve emotional elements, and this ethical principle tries to achieve a balance in between reason and emotion; not only that it urges people to act virtuously, but it also wants its followers to feel good about their deeds. Besides, that, Confucius Virtue Ethics also fulfills other basic assumptions made and thus really seems to be a very practical ethical principle: logically consistent, has universality, and can be taught to the younger generations. Of course, Confucius Virtue Ethics is not flawless. One of its main problems is how to define what virtue means and what does it constitute? Many people will have very different opinions about which acts can be considered as virtuous. To solve or lessen this problem, perhaps a group of experts can sit together and discuss about what should comprise virtuous acts and then make out a list of virtues (and vices) to guide the general population what they should (and should not) do. Another main problem about Confucius Virtue Ethics is that it does not really fulfill the fifth basic assumption mentioned by textbooks authors in which a workable moral system should have: ability to solve conflicts. Although Virtue Ethics can serve as a good guideline about what goodness comprises of, it does not provide instructions for us about how to set priorities when two goodness conflict and how to solve moral dilemmas properly. This is when our group members all think the authors Humanitarian Ethics with its 5 basic principles come to be useful (source: Ethics textbook by Thiroux and Krasemann):- 1. The Principle of Appreciating Human Life (primary) 2. The Principle of Doing Good and Avoid/Deter Doing Bad (primary) 3. The Principle of Fairness in Distribution (secondary) 4. The Principle of Honesty (secondary) 5. The Principle of Individual Freedom (secondary) While critically analyzing and reasoning a conflicting or complicating moral situation, it is said that the first two primary principles should be given the priority first, then only consider those in the secondary category; if the conflicting principles are in the same category (for instance in the case of mercy killing), then the individuals freedom of choice will come into play. This reasoning method is very compatible with Confucius Virtue Ethics because as can be noted, virtues can all actually be the goodness that are required in the second principle. Thus, in short, all the virtues taught in Confucius Virtue Ethics can be used by the general population as their daily-routine guidelines and when exceptional situations happen, people can use these 5 basic principles to make justifiable moral decision judgment. Hence in conclusion, our group believes that the combination of both Confucius Virtue Ethics and the authors Humanitarian Ethics is perfect because this combined version of moral system can not only fulfill all the basic assumptions for an ethical theory to be practical, but if it is implemented well, it can also create many ethical and excellent human beings that can live harmoniously with each other.

Problem Formulation and Identification Process Essay

â€Å"It doesn’t matter which side of the fence you get off on sometimes. What matters most is getting off. You cannot make progress without making decisions† (Jim Rohn). In the corporate world, leaders are faced with decisions that can make or break the organizations they represent. Several methods, consensus, brainstorming, systematic, and democratic are used in the decision making process. This paper will investigate the decision-making processes most prevalent in each team member’s organization, compare and contrast them, and will show the most favorable aspect of each style. Consensus The name of my company is Envicor. Envicor is a plastics molding company that manufactures anything that can be made of plastic. This author was recently hired as the national sales manager to oversee Envicor’s newest product line, sporting goods equipment. This author’s job is to promote the sale of portable pitching mounds to a broad range of customers. When it comes to decision making, Envicor uses the consensus method. Consensus is a process using group decision making. The input and ideas of all participants are gathered and synthesized to arrive at a final decision acceptable to all. Through consensus, the company is not only working to achieve better solutions, but also to promote the growth of community and trust. Consensus takes more time, as many resources are investigated before a decision is made. Team members become committed to the decision through consensus. The consensus method gives everyone experience with new processes of interaction and conflict resolution. For consensus to be a positive experience, the group should have 1) common values, 2) some skill in group process and conflict resolution, or a commitment to let these be facilitated,3) commitment and responsibility to the group by its members, and 4) sufficient time for everyone to participate in the process† (C.D.T. 2009). The goal of Envicor is to expand our product line to as many customers as possible. After making contact with a catalog company, a meeting is called  in order to discuss the pros and cons of including our product in the catalog. In the meetings, each person gets a chance to give his or her opinion. Once everyone has spoken, a decision is made. By using the consensus method, the group is able to come together and make a decision based on each person’s opinion. Advantages and disadvantages exist when using the consensus method of decision making.. Some examples are:Strengths:†¢Encourages cooperation instead of competition†¢Garners trust and confidence; everyone is involved in the final decision†¢Everyone agrees to the final decision no matter whether a majority, minority, or lone voiceWeaknesses†¢Lack of experience may lead to inefficient use of the method†¢Lack of control in meetings, conversation goes off topic†¢No â€Å"ownership† when decision is not correct or no consensus made (Notes on Consensus-Decision Making). Consensus seems to work well for smaller companies because it allows them to actually talk out their decisions and come together. Bigger companies might struggle with this type of decision making process because there might be too many employees and it could waste a lot of time. Brainstorming In the brainstorming model, all employees use free thinking to create ideas that will later be used as part of the project’s process. Brainstorming is useful because it allows all employees, some with extensive experience, to give their input. All members’ contributions allow them to â€Å"own† their role within the group and therefore, believe they have been a larger part of greater good. Like other decision making processes, brainstorming has advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that all decisions are reached by consensus of the entire group. The larger the group is in a brainstorming session, the better the results will be. Everyone works from his or her strengths, weaknesses, experience, and education to find the best results for the project. Next, by making the decision a group project, everyone has a chance to  participate in the decision making process. They are able to voice their objections and give alternative suggestions. This open forum allows ideas to flow freely, and sound decisions are made quickly. A disadvantage of brainstorming is similar to one of its advantages. With more than two or three employees making a decision, the result can become a point of contention and a fight for power within the group. The more people involved in the process, the greater the propensity for debate, creating the possibility of a stalemate. Another disadvantage of brainstorming is something called group think. This occurs when one member of a group makes a statement, and the others follow along. Nothing is accomplished because only one person is making the decision with no alternate suggestions. An open dialogue does not exist; therefore, solutions to problems are not properly explored. SystematicThe systematic approach to decision-making is rational and analytical. (Concise Handbook of Management) This approach employs existing data, and the goal of the decision is the focus of the steps taken to put the decision together. This author’s organization uses the systematic approach for making most decisions. A strength of using the systematic approach is that information used to reach the final decision is based on factual data. The goal has been clearly identified; the objective(s) have been defined; the impact of not addressing the issue has been established. A weakness of systematic decision making, an example of which will be described in the following paragraphs, is that the decision can become stalled in the process. Additionally, regardless of how much research is done, if all principal stakeholders are not engaged in the process, a negative outcome is possible. Several years ago this author’s company developed a product that was designed to align with current imaging procedures. The equipment is a dual-head injector for use in CT scan. The purpose of the dual-head is to provide Radiologists with the capability of using not only contrast media for the CT exams, but also saline. Benefits of having the saline option developed as  the clinical team became more familiar with the system, but initially the service team was concerned about damage occurring to the injector head if a saline syringe was not used. At that time, without consulting other stakeholders, the service and engineering teams went to work on a solution that would prevent this issue.Several years later, as the clinical team was successfully promoting saline usage, the engineering department began shipping a cap for the saline side of the injector. Yes, the issue had been clearly identified, the objective for the project was defined, and the impact of not addressing the issue had been determined. However, because all stakeholders in the decision were not involved, and because the process took so long, the decision and resulting action became a very expensive mistake. Democratic In this participative form of the decision making process the superior(s) gives complete ownership of the decision to the subordinates (Sager 1999). The democratic decision making process allows for the employees (stakeholders) to have ownership of the decisions that are made. The majority vote wins, which can lead to fast and effective decisions concerning the stakeholders. In this decision making process the adage regarding having strength in numbers reigns true. A drawback to the democratic process can be that no one person takes responsibility for the decision if something goes wrong. It may be hard to pinpoint how the decision came to such a conclusion if it does not work out for the benefit for the stakeholders. In using the example of the Health Insurance Accountability and Portability Act (HIPPA) of 1996, a vote for change by a group of individuals affected by the way health records were handled was applauded, then when implemented, the act became more a hindrance than a solution to a problem. In the vast health systems used there was a need to implement a privacy feature to protect patients’ information, so the HIPPA regulations were signed into law in 1996. HIPPA was implemented by a democratic decision making process and became popular with health organizations such as Medicare and well known health insurance companies. Later HIPPA’s biggest fans became its biggest objectors because the law made it impossible for anyone to get  health information on the patient, including the parent(s) or guardians of minor children and the elderly, unless there was a form signed by the patient, the legal guardian, or POA. HIPPA soon became more frustrating than helpful, and the majority who voted for its implementation became the majority opposing it. So in implementing the democratic decision making process for the good of the people to whom the power is given, it must be made known that â€Å"with great power comes great responsibility (Uncle Ben, Spider Man Pt1). Contrast and ComparisonProblems and issues are generally inevitable when people are working together. Each individual decision making process can allow for better management of those situations for building a better organization. This does not mean there will be an absence of issues, but whether or not the team resolves the problem effectively. Each decision making process described above demonstrates to the reader the importance of adhering to a process that will work for each organization. The consensus method shows how the power of agreement can lead to a good decision. However, this method can be time consuming and teamwork plays a major role. Brainstorming will allow for creativity and open ideas, but can also cause conflicts and debates among the group members due to so many independent ideas being presented. In the systematic approach to decision making organization is critical. This process bases decisions on factual information. The systematic process can be costly if all members are not involved in the final decision. Democratic decisions are made based on majority input. The stakeholders are in total control of the decision making process. Speedy and effective decisions can be made; however, problems can occur because not everyone who can vote will vote. Then if a decision has a negative impact on the group it can be hard to identify the owner of the problem. The authors of this paper have investigated four types of decision making, consensus, brainstorming, systematic, and democratic. Advantages and disadvantages of each type have been presented, and finally, all were compared and contrasted with each other. References â€Å"Consensus Decision Making.† Aids Coalition to Unleash Power. Retrieved May 19, 2009. http://www.actupny.org/documents/CDdocuments/Consensus.html†Notes on Consensus-Decision Making.† Retrieved May 19, 2009. www.vernalproject.org/papers/process/ConsensNotes.pdfScott, Jonathan T. 2009, Concise Handbook of Management: A Practitioner’s ApproachChapter 17: Managerial Decision Making and Problem Solving, p131- 138retrieved 5/19/09 from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/ehost/pdf?vid=9&hid=106&sid=f7f74d3b-190b-4f87-ae2e-438809c65b35%40sessionmgr109McConnell, C. R. (2006). Umiker’s Management Skills for the New Health Care Supervisor. Ch 25 pp.337-345. Sager, K.L., & Gastil, J.,(1999). Reaching consensus on consensus Communication Quarterly. 47(1), 67-79.

The Nightingale and the Rose

I like this story entitled The Nightingale and the Rose because the power of love shown by the nightingale is so amazing. The Nightingale willing to sacrifice himself for something he believed in, that why he had a great power to fulfill his dream to made a red rose flower for the student. The plot of the story is very simple. A young student thought that he was madly in love with the professor's daughter. He felt miserable because he could not find a single red rose in the whole garden to give to his love, and he knew that without the rose she would not agree to dance with him in the ball to be given by the prince the next day. The Nightingale overheard this and was deeply touched by what she believed was the expression of the young man's true love. So she decided to help the young man, but she was told that the only way to get a red rose in this cold winter was for her to build it out of her music and her heart's blood. The Nightingale of course also valued her life, but she was ready to lay down her own life for the happiness of the young couple. She therefore did what she was told to do. The next morning, the most beautiful red rose appeared, but the Nightingale was found dead under the rose-tree. Not knowing what it had cost to produce the rose, the student thought that he was very lucky to find this flower and he immediately plucked it and ran to the professor's daughter. The professor's daughter, however, turned him down because she had already agreed to dance with the Chamberlain's nephew who had given her precious stones. The student was very angry, so he threw the rose away and returned to his reading. This is a touching story of love, but not the love between the young student and the professor's daughter, because neither of them understood what true love is. The girl was interested only in power and money, and the young man, in what he considered practical. The only person who understood love, treasured love, and was ready to sacrifice her life for love was the Nightingale. For her love is eternal music, love is the most precious thing: even more precious than life itself, and true love is always in the giving rather than in the taking. The main theme of this story is love, in fact the young Student needs a red rose to conquer the girl he affirms he loves, even if at the end she doesn’t appreciate his act. This makes us understand two things: on the one hand, that love often brings sorrow, as happens to the tender Nightingale whose gesture of love is not understood by the silly Student. On the other hand, it is very difficult to distinguish between real, authentic love and a more superficial sentiment, and only a very sensitive person can appreciate the full value of this feeling. Besides there are other themes: ingratitude, because the Student is ungrateful towards the Nightingale, whose act of love he is too arid to grasp; generosity, because the altruist Nightingale sacrifices her life to help the Student and her sacrifice is actually wasted. As for the girl, she is not merely superficial but also vain and materialistic, as she loses all interest in the Student once she is promised something more ‘precious’ like the jewels of the Chamberlain’s nephew. This fairy tale is very incisive and, despite its apparent simplicity, leaves the reader with a clear moral message: it is important to remember that some people sometimes sacrifice their life or suffer to help others, but at the end they aren’t returned with the same emotional intensity and their actions are not even fully understood. This is a moral message that should be born clear in mind, in an age and period when most people appear to be interested only in their own welfare, without being able to look beyond their limited, subjective perspective, thus failing to see what or who is outside the borders of their very narrow egoistic world.

Diabetes Is A Chronic Disease - 1517 Words

Introduction Diabetes (Diabetes mellitus) is a chronic disease caused by number of reasons. Diabetic patients are characterized by hyperglycemia (high blood in sugar) resulting from defect of insulin secretion (Mellitus, 2005). World Health Organization (2008) defined the Diabetes untreated disease, known by chronic rise of the concentration of sugar (glucose) in the blood. Glucose is a major source of energy in our body; food converts to fats, protein, and carbohydrates. Carbohydrates during eating convert to glucose. The glucose is the source of energy in the body. The World Health Organization (2008) estimates 171 million people in the world with diabetes in 2000 and the number will increase to 366 million by 2030. Types of Diabetes†¦show more content†¦Some women have high levels of glucose in their blood, and their bodies are unable to produce enough insulin to transport all of the glucose into their cells, resulting in progressively rising levels of glucose (Mellitus, 2005). Diagnosis There are many ways to diagnose the diabetes. First, by measuring the glucose levels in blood. When the patient does not eat or drink (except water) for at least 8 hours, the test usually is done. It is done usually early in morning before breakfast (WHO.2008). The normal fasting blood sugar in healthy people is 80 – 90 mg/dl compere diabetic patient is 126 mg/dl (Diabetes Association, 2008). Second , the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). The OGTT is a two-hour test that checks your blood sugar levels before and after two hours of drinking a special sugared drink. The blood sugar in healthy people is 80 – 139 mg/dl compere diabetic patient is 200 mg/dl (Diabetes Association, 2008). Third, by doing a random plasma glucose test. In this test, blood is checked at any time of day if the glucose is higher than 200 mg/dl. Symptoms The common symptoms of diabetes are a rise in urination (polyuria) and thirst (polydipsia) and tiredness (WHO, 2008). Diabetes symptoms differ according to the type of diabetes. The common symptoms in type one diabetes are unexpected weight loss, Fatigue or tiredness, blurred vision, itching skin, nausea, dry mouth, vomiting and in woman, frequent vaginal infection . The common