Nurofen Specific Pain Case

The allegation in this complaint is inappropriate prescribing of pain medication by Dr. Warbritton, to patient Paul Faulconer. A medical review of the case was performed by Dr. Cupp who submitted several follow-up questions. Dr. Warbritton also responded to the Board in writing, saying Faulconer’s healthcare has been complicated and pain management is essential. Kay Pratt (complainant) felt Dr. Warbritton prescribed Paul OxyContin, but Dr. Warbritton said he never prescribed OxyContin to Faulconer, only Oxycodone. Paul did receive OxyContin for pain management, but it was from the hospital following his surgery.

Case: 791 F2d 189 Thompson Medical Co. Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission Facts: This case concerns a complaint brought by the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC" or "Commission") against petitioner Thompson Medical Company under Secs. The Commission ordered Thompson to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that Aspercreme is effective and to disclose in the product 's labeling and advertising that it does not contain aspirin. Thompson challenges the FTC 's order as arbitrary and capricious, contrary to public policy, unsupported by substantial evidence, and discordant with applicable Commission precedent.

I do agree that companies who create such products that easily cause harm to people should have some sort of action taken against their use but to that extent, I say that the companies also have to specify how much to use and when the consumption of their products becomes too much. However, the precedences for more positive descriptions of that side of the topic are a lot more complicated to explain and as such my view starts to hit a wall and I will now talk about how I disagree with Coffman 's claims. First off, Coffman makes it seem that the companies who produce legal but harmful products, which in its own right can be taken multiple ways, should pay settlements for the problems caused by their products. The problem with claims like this is that when a company makes a product they have normally created it for a specific purpose and have set in place guidelines to prevent potential harm, an example of a type of product like this would be aspirin which is commonly used as a pain reliever in the form of pills but can cause harm if too many are

They were to report on patients’ side effects, patients use of the drug, and both patient and physician subjective evaluations. Physicians who were interested in participating in this research would be paid three hundred dollars for ever patient they entered into the study, as well as an additional three hundred for the patients who participated in a one year follow up evaluation. The payment in this case was considered compensation for physician’s time and effort.

The company's stock would go down more and more because the company would lose money. Therefore, people would lose money and they would lose their homes and jobs. Also, bank failures happened and innocent people would lose money if they put their money in that bank. A lot of people became homeless because of this scenario. The Stock Market Crash had a significant impact on how Herbert Hoover’s presidency played out.

Although there were numerous beneficial experiences for the Consumer through the supported decision-making process, the deterioration in mental state and the concern relating to exposure of vulnerability and openness to manipulation by others could not be overlooked (Office of the Public Advocate Systems Advocacy, 2014). Dignity of risk relates to the Consumers right be able to make decisions that can involve a level of risk, however the duty of care of the primary nurse and treating team was to ensure that safeguards are in place to minimise risk of harm to the Consumer and/or others that may be effected by the decision made (Victoria Government Department of Human Services,

Presented is the main issues of the case, variables at play, an assessment of the outcomes, and recommendations going forward. The Case

Legal rules currently do not sufficiently discourage predatory pricing of prescription drugs, in this case EpiPens. The price of EpiPens rising in the pharmaceutical industry is legal and immoral. However, Mylan Pharmaceuticals may have violated the antitrust law in its EpiPen sales to schools. In 1890 the United States passed down the antitrust law also known as the Sherman Act. The Sherman Act regulates the conduct and organization of business corporations in order to promote fair competition and outlaw monopolistic business practices. The Federal Trade Commissions Act was passed down in 1914, and it bans unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices.. In August of 2012, Mylan Pharmaceuticals started the “EpiPen4Schools’

In this paper, I am going to discuss and explain my opinions on why company Q is or is not socially responsible. Company Q recently closed a couple of stores in high crime areas. Company Q also started offering very limited health conscious and organic products. The local food bank has contacted Company Q requesting day old food for donations. Company Q has declined the donation request due to possible fraud by its employees and has started throwing the food away.

Davis (as cited by Khalidah, Zulkufly, & Lau, 2014) defined Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as “… the firm’s consideration of, and response to, issues beyond the narrow economic, technical, and legal requirements of the firm. It is the firm’s obligation to evaluate in its decision-making processes the effects of its decisions on the external social system in a manner that will accomplish social benefits along with the traditional economic gains, which the firm seeks. It means that social responsibility begins where the law ends. A firm is not being socially responsible if it merely complies with the minimum requirements of the law, because this is what any good citizen would do.” A firm will not survive without the support of both the stakeholders and shareholders, thus the CSR proposes the indication which stats that a firm can never exist In a vacuum (Khalidah et.

A patient is admitted to Nightingale Community Hospital to the surgical unit following an infection to a post-op wound. There were several deficiencies found on the patient’s tracer audit once the patient was admitted to the hospital. One deficiency that was found was that the patient was given medication related to pain and the patient was not reassessed properly per Joint Commission Standards (JC). The deficiency found is within the pain assessment policy of the hospital.

While the nurse may not have believed that the patient suffered pain, it did was not guaranteed. As a nurse, the patient stands as the primary concern, and their signs and symptoms must be noted. It is not ethically justifiable to falsely advertise a medication to a patient. In trials where placebos do get used, the patient consents, whereas in this case study, the patient did not receive information. The nurse assumed an action of a patient and altered her medication, which not only stands

It is the firm’s obligation to evaluate in its decision-making processes the effects of its decisions on the external social system in a manner that will accomplish social benefits along with the traditional economic gains, which the firm seeks. It means that social responsibility begins where the law ends. A firm is not being socially responsible if it merely complies with the minimum requirements of the law, because this is what any good citizen would do.” A firm will not survive without the support of both the stakeholders and shareholders, thus the CSR proposes the indication which states that a firm can never exist In a vacuum (Khalidah et. al.).

Introduction This case study explores the acquisition of the Body Shop, which is one of the largest franchise cosmetics companies in the world, by L’Oreal. The main concentration of the case study aims at investigating the impact on business ethics and corporate social responsibility by the concentricity of the Body Shop and L’Oreal and how the general attitude and buying behaviour is distorted in the course of this acquisition. L‘Oreal being the big conglomerate in the cosmetics industry acquired the Body Shop International which is comparably small but having iconic brand of environmental and socially responsible concerns, on 17 March 2006, through a covenant of $1.2 billion. The combination of two brands in a newly formed conglomerate implies a combination of values, principles and associations that might affect a company’s appeal. The verity that L 'Oreal 's acquisition of the Body Shop provides plenty of potential growth opportunities is undeniable; nevertheless the question of how well the acquisition sits in the group of the world 's largest cosmetics company is another matter.

In my following literature review, I will be summarizing and discussing five articles that I have researched which all relate to different businesses that have portrayed unethical behaviours in some way. I will also be