This Letter Is an Example:
My name is Mrs. Maples and I am the lead Special Education teacher at George Washington Elementary School. I attended your last round-table discussion and have been thinking about the difficulties you are having with securing volunteers for the upcoming book sale. I may have a solution that will help us both.
From the explanation Mrs. Reed gave at the meeting, the primary problem is finding a consistent group of volunteers — you train five or six new helpers every month and lose 10, which could mean cutting future events. I know our students love the book sale and winter carnival. The staff does, too. We would all hate to lose these annual joys.
I may have a source of steady volunteers that can help with this problem.
My fifth grade Special Education teacher, Ms. Evans, has informed me that her class is available to serve as student helpers at the next book sale. These children are passionate learners and eager assistants. They are currently volunteering in the library and cafeteria — so they are no stranger to a bit of hard work!
I understand that working with special needs students may seem like a challenge, and it is, but the rewards for both you and the students would be great. With nearly 25 students, the class would more than satisfy your volunteer quotas and Ms. Evans and myself will also attend to delegate duties and assist with supervision. But most importantly, the students would be learning a valuable lesson about the operation of this enormous event. They would all have a deeper appreciation for the books sale, understanding all of the work that goes into making these little miracles happen at George Washington.
I will be available from 9 am-6 pm, Monday through Thursday, if you would like to discuss the potential for a partnership between the fifth graders and the PTA. I hope that we can establish a bond that will last for many years to come.
Mrs. Evelyn Maples
Rogerian Argument Sample/Example
Euthanasia Is Morally Wrong
Every human life is precious. Regardless of age, gender or race, each individual is entitled to his or her self-preservation. While we have the innate duty to maintain our personal welfare, it is morally sound to say that we also have a responsibility to avoid inflicting harm towards other people, whether we personally know them or we are total strangers to them and vice versa.
In the medical field, doctors are presumed to cure their patients and provide them with utmost care for their health. Family members or relatives of patients are likewise expected to see to it that their loved-ones in hospitals are given the proper medical attention. All of these things point to the undeniable fact that we bring our ailing friends or family members to hospitals so that they will be cured and be brought back to their normal lives.
In extreme life-or-death cases, our impulse to keep our loved ones alive is stronger more than ever. Patients with terminal cases or those who have very little chance of survival are expected to receive the best medical treatment in order to address the risks involved. These patients, too, are human beings just like any one of us, except that they are suffering from tormenting ailments. They can feel pain. They have lives.
Euthanasia, or mercy-killing, is killing. Any way you look at it, euthanasia involves taking away the life of a person. When a patient is induced with euthanasia, the primary intent is to kill the patient. Some say that the reason why some patients are induced with euthanasia is to relieve them of their pain. Apparently, it is a fact that dead people can feel no pain because, of course, they are already dead. But that should not mean that just because a patient has a terminal disease we should resort to euthanasia in order to end his or her suffering.
Think about this. If you really intend to preserve the life of a person, not the least someone who is close to you, you find ways to extend his or her life no matter how short that extension may be. Killing that person for the sake of saving on medical payments or of cutting short his or her physical suffering does not justify euthanasia. It only adds to the fact that killing is wrong any way you look at it. No one has the right to deprive others of their right to live, not even doctors and family members. Not even when the patient "wills" her death can ever begin to justify to take the patient's life into our own hands and decide once and for all to end his or her life. To do so is to become an accessory to the wrong deed.
It is for these reasons that euthanasia is morally wrong.
The short essay above is just one example/sample of a Rogerian Argument. You may want to read other Rogerian Argument topics.
>>HIRE US and we'll write your papers for you!