Matt Munson Case Study

The case that sparked my interest on equal protection was Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan. This case allowed Joe Hogan, a registered nurse enrollment in two state supported coeducational nursing programs, but denied him enrollment in the Mississippi University for Women’s School of Nursing’s baccalaureate program, on the grounds that he was a male.

Through years of gender inequality throughout the nation, one of the most important causes for women was when they received the right to vote, as it allowed them to have a voice within the country. While looking throughout the fight for Women’s Suffrage, many would say that it ultimately ended on August 26, 1920- when the 19th Amendment was officially ratified. Although this seems accurate, many others would say that the fight ended when the Supreme Court 's ruling ultimately established the Nineteenth Amendment. This is best shown by the ratification of the 19th amendment, Leser v. Garnett, and the overall process to reach the final ruling during the case.

The case study “The Court Was Appalled” details Tomcik v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation & Corrections. In 1989, Tomcik was in custody within the Ohio Department of Corrections. She received an initial medical evaluation by a physician, Dr. Evans, employed at the facility she was detained at, including a breast exam, who determined she was healthy. Tomcik conducted her own breast exam and found a lump in her right breast. She made repeated attempts to be re-evaluated and several mistakes were made during the subsequent evaluations she did receive. Six months later, a physician not employed with the DOC determined Tomcik needed a modified radical mastectomy. The Ohio Department of Corrections was faulted by the Court of Appeals for

A month prior to the retirement of Auburn head softball coach, Clint Myers, a former football player turned in a complaint stating there was abusive treatment and sexual harassment from the coaching staff.

The district court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s disability claim. The appellant’s essential accommodation claim went to trial, but court excluded evidence regarding disability. The plaintiff is not estopped by her SSDI and long term disability claims. However, the issue should have been decided by the jury. The court foreclosed to grant the plaintiff was not a qualified individual.

All patients in the emergency department should be given the same appropriate medical examinations and services to detect an emergency medical condition. I think hospitals should some type of in hospital insurance for uninsured persons or hospitals could assess patients in getting the right connection to get insurance before they leave the hospital.

Standard of care refers to the degree of care that a similar healthcare professional would apply under the same circumstances while taking into account any unexpected complications or conditions. To put it simply, if another healthcare professional with the same or similar training takes the same course of action as the healthcare professional at issue given the information known and the exact situation, the professional is seen as meeting the standard of care.

The doctor’s diagnosis of Robson says that she has an inoperable tumor in her abdomen that will eventually spread to her liver and metastasize, and eventually killing her. The prognosis was that Robson was to undergo many rounds of chemotherapy to try to prevent the spreading of the disease. Robson later finds out about the baffling misdiagnosis of her doctors. She discovers the tumor was not inoperable, not going to be cured by chemotherapy, and not going to metastasize in her liver. Robson then devises a list of legally worded reasons as to why her diagnosis was incorrect. Robson had the legal power and knowledge to sue the doctors for malpractice and make the doctors pay for the damage they had already done to her such as causing her to lose her hair and to be in physical pain every day from the chemotherapy of which they should not have administered. However, Robson chose not to sue simply and figured the best payback was to show the “world famous doctors” that she was living and healthy without their treatment even though they still claimed they were correct in the first place. What made Robson upset the most was the personal care she received in the doctor’s office from not only the doctors, but secretary as well. The image of the traditional doctor’s office comes back into play, but only this time do the doctors not seem

The district court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s disability claim. The appellant’s essential accommodation claim went to trial, but court excluded evidence regarding disability. The plaintiff is not estopped by her SSDI and long term disability claims. However, the issue should have been decided by the jury. The court foreclosed to grant the plaintiff was not a qualified individual.

Background: In this civil case Timothy W. Gallagher is the appellant, and Cayuga Medical Center (CMC) is the respondents. The case took place in the appellate division of the supreme court of New York, division three. The plaintiff’s complaint was that Cayuga Medical Center had asserted medical malpractice, negligence, wrongful death and emotional distressed. This case was decided on June 15, 2017.

The failure by unidentified correctional staff to respond Rote’s complaints of head pain. For this claim, Rote is also directed to identify the staff member he alleges was involved in this incident, and why he believes the staff member acted with deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs.

In order to regulate the alarming increase popularity of cosmetic surgery, Congress enacted the Federal Cosmetic Surgery Protection Act (FCSPA). Kevin Swanson, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is charged with the enforcement of FCSPA. Under this legislation “A person is not permitted to undergo a major cosmetic surgery procedure, except where necessary for the physical health of the person or to correct a major physical abnormality that interfere with normal appearance, unless approved by Congress a Cosmetic Surgery Approval (CSA) panel created at each facility licensed to perform cosmetic surgery”.

It frustrates me what Dr. Anna Pou had to go through with the lawsuits of the Memorial Medical Center incident. As Healthcare professionals, being sued for making the rightful decision for the patient and the hospital is unjust. Healthcare professionals like Dr. Pou, have taken the Hippocratic oath, and one of the promises made within that oath is “first, do no harm”. Hospital’s should not be so quick to make such an important decision of pressing charges to their faculty; more trust should be placed in them. In addition, she made it clear her intentions were just to ‘‘help’’ patients ‘‘through their pain,’’ on national television. While her actions might not be seen as the best decision, she made one and did her best to make the rightful one under such poor circumstances that were out of her control.

“Medical malpractice claims and lawsuits deal with Improper, unskilled, or negligent treatment of a patient by a physician, dentist, nurse, pharmacist, or other health care professional. Negligence is the predominant theory of liability concerning allegations of medical malpractice, making this type of litigation part of Tort Law. Since the 1970s, medical malpractice has been a controversial social issue. Physicians have complained about the large number of malpractice suits and have urged legal reforms to curb large damage awards, whereas tort attorneys have argued that negligence suits are an effective way of compensating victims of negligence and of policing the medical profession. A person who alleges negligent medical malpractice must

Educate nursing staff who cared for Ms. Gadner on importance of documentation and updating of physicians of patient’s current condition.