Response to Conflict Kyriaun Davis, Liyana Karim, Ciyaliz Manoj, Gavin Hua Conflicts can’t be averted; they’re a part of life. There are many different ways to deal with conflict, but many disagree on how to resolve it. Although it is true that every situation is different, some methods may be considered extreme. The best way to respond to conflict is with reasoning and civility, but many disagree by saying that the best response to conflict is force and violence. First of all, reasoning would be one approach to solving conflict.
It is only when we can show direct harm to rights, which will almost always mean when an attack is made against a specific individual or a small group of persons, that it is legitimate to impose a sanction. One response is to suggest that the harm principle can be defined in a less stringent manner than Mill 's formulation. This is a complicated issue that I cannot delve into here except to say that Mill does not seem to be significantly concerned with the potential dangers of psychological harm.
It points out that the continued prevalence of this section is proving to be counterproductive to the cause of preventing suicide in India. Those who fail to succeed in committing suicide do not seek medical assistance due to the fear of being arrested and penalized. In fact, the Commission recognizes that a suicide is a “cry for help”. And those who attempt suicide need extensive and prolonged psycho-social care, and a decriminalization of the draconian legislation will not lead to an increase in mortality
It is a controversial topic as some people argue that it is unnatural - thus unethical. Assuming that all that is against the nature is wrong, would it not mean that saving a person is also unnatural. Inaction in this case would be natural way, therefore ethical thing to do. The practice shows that it is unethical to be inactive when a person is in a danger, otherwise there would not have been a law that punishes for inaction. It does not mean that inaction is wrong, but only it question where the boundaries should lie.
Mr. Simpson family and doctors think it’s the best to get the flu shot because it could save his life. Mr. Simpson does not want the flu shot no matter what the consequences or actions that may be done onto him, in other words, he rather die than get the flu shot. Mr. Simpson is not technically making the right long-term decision; he can take care of
It means that it is not right for the terminally ill people that are suffering to be alive. There is different way of saying about the moral distinction between passive euthanasia and active euthanasia. Most people think that it is acceptable to allow doctors to end their patient’s life by withholding the treatment but it is not accepted to kill a patient through an intended process (deliberate act). However, some doctors or medical specialist agree and accept that the doctors are free to provide death to any patients that they want without discussing the moral problem of them if they consciously killed the
That is very true, but the current laws that oppose euthanasia are for the protection of patients from abuse by dishonest actions and methods of physicians who will be ending their life, not to cause needless pain and suffering (Marker and Hamlon). Although there is little evidence on assisted suicide and euthanasia that is collected from real patients, the studies that collect data from current patients, and not hypothetical questioning, show different results than what is most broadcasted by supporters. These studies reveal that those who choose a premature death do so because of the fear instilled in them by the idea of physical deterioration and lose of community with the rest of society (Nolan n. pag.). It may seem that physical deterioration is the same as pain, but in this case, it is not.
Why did I act as I did? This is because I cannot accept failure. Making mistake was not allowed in medical students because in some cases, we may do harm to patients or even worse lead to patients’ death. Although this incident would not cause any threats to the patient, it would be very embarrassing if I told any things which are inaccurate. I believe that I am not confident to face it.
Keeping euthanasia outlawed regulates religion, aids morality, and supports physicians’ ethics. Euthanasia is killing a patient painlessly for medical reasons, even sometimes given without a request from the patient, such as being in a coma. Euthanasia goes against peoples’ one right to life. Some think it is ok because it supposedly helps the patient, but is it realistically helping? There should be so many other options for patients to choose from, instead of thinking death is respectable choice.
Also, ordering treatments in which the patient is purely passive. For example, performing surgery leaves a patient completely passive. These last two restrictors can be very damaging for patients being treated with mental illness. Counseling treatment is a partnership, not a dictatorship. If a Psychotherapist does not listen to the patient or not giving them options, then their patient will not
Why There Are a Large Number of Medical Negligence Claims? A medical negligence also named formally the same as medical malpractice is a circumstances where the patient needs medical care but could not obtain it either as a result of the inaccessibility of the physician in the good time, using the wrong medication by the doctor that may contribute to disability or fatality of the patient, the physician may not make a diagnosis of the disease as it should be, the treatment furnished by the doctor has produced unfavorable effects to the patient or the treatment provided by the doctor is sub standard. Reasons that contribute to medical negligence Medical negligence comes into existence if the patient is caused harm by a physician, nurse or hospital by way of out of order