Central question: Can Principlism render a verdict on the Dax case?  Paper content: Explain and argue for how the Principlist approach to medical ethics as described by Beauchamp and Childress either  (A) is able to render a consistent and plausible verdict on the Dax case, and if so what that verdict is, or  (B) is unable to render a consistent and plausible verdict on the Dax case, and if so why Principlism is inadequate.  The thesis of your paper will be either (A) or (B). Procedure:  (i) State, in an introduction, your paper’s thesis and your main supporting reason for your thesis. (1-2 sentences)  (ii) Explain briefly the basic idea behind Principlism as an approach to ethics and the four principles and duties that constitute this approach. (1-2 paragraphs)  (iii) Describe the details of the Dax case including both the main medical details and the conflict. (1-2 paragraphs)  (iv) Explain which of the four principles of Principlism are at issue in the Dax case and whether there is a conflict in the Dax case between the principles and the duties that come from them. (1-2 paragraphs)  (v) Argue for (A) how Principlism offers a solution to the Dax case and the conflict of duties (if there is one) and what that solution is; or for (B) how Principlism fails to offer a solution to the Dax case and the conflict of duties (if there is one) and why. (remainder of paper)