Students will conduct an interim review of the philosophical issues involved in determining what is ethical and not-ethical in terms of the values that are expressed when making public health decisions. Students will compare the various opposing positions on the question of ADAP funding and eligibility in terms of ethical authority, utility, and the critical method. The purpose of this comparison will be to identify and discuss possible philosophical conflicts that arise between the application of these methods to the same set of agreed upon facts, namely that there are indivuals in need of assistance, that funding is short, that research has not yet solved the problem with a cure, and that drug costs are not likely to go down. Students will identify all philosophical differences with the instrucotr's help, and will attempt to articulate a position that renders them mute. This can be accomplished in part by creating focus groups on each issue identified, and then through open class discussion and online forums.