The Caparo Case Study

On February 26, 1986, a female student, whom the court records refer to as C.R., at Morton East High School in Illinois brought a note to her school psychologist, Dr. Rosario C. Pesce. The note informed the plaintiff that C.R.’s male friend (“J.D”) was struggling with shame, confusion, and suicidal thoughts because a male teacher at Morton East High School allegedly abused J.D. sexually. After hearing this, Dr. Pesce gave C.R. a professional therapist’s contact information to pass along to J.D., and later that day, J.D. chose to come see Dr. Pesce in his office to discuss his confusion and suicidal thoughts (“Dr. Rosario”).

The case of R.v. Saulte Ste. Marie is an interesting case, where the city got into an agreement with a private corporation, for the disposal of waste that was within the city. The city was unable to maintain their operation of waste disposal. The private company started piling waste into the creek, to which they were eventually charged, as well as the city. This essay will be organized by answering the questions in chronological order; to which in the first question, I will be looking heavily into the case of R.v. Saulte Ste. Marie and Roach. It will incorporate the regulatory offences and the mental blameworthiness and how strict liability acts as a balance between the two. It will also include the defence of due diligence. Which would bring in the next question of absolute liability offences. I will be focusing on several other cases presented in class, R.v. Saulte Ste. Marie and Roach to further explain the question.

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.

The case of R. v. Schoenborn is a troubling case involving the death of three children and the defence of not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder. This defence must be critically analyzed along with the evidence and expert opinions as it could absolve the accused of the charges. As well, the precedent that the verdict provides is critical to the legal system and its future implication and thus give the decision more importance. After a thorough examination of the facts, it is evident that the verdict of the Supreme Court of British Columbia is correct and reflects the administration’s objectives and beliefs. This will be demonstrated through the application of legal principles and elements.

“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

Tort reform has influence not only on the court and victims, but also on clinicians and medical field. Many health providers and clinicians are in favor of the tort reform (Santiago, 2016). The tort reform make clinicians have no full responsibilities to compensate for the malpractice, and they will not need pay for the cost. However, this is not mean that it is unfair to patients. For big medical treatments, such as surgeries, patients’ families usually need to sign a contract for possible medical risks that might happen. This is also a protection to doctors.

In Crito, a play by Plato, Socrates and Crito deliberate about the justifications of breaking out of prison. Crito provides numerous evidences that should appeal to Socrates emotional side by bringing up his friends and family, however, Socrates maintains his composure. Instead he contributes a logical and concise argument to act justly by staying in prison and accepts his punishment for ‘corrupting the youth’, among other things. I believe that Socrates argument is most effective due to his content, which is filled with logic and reasoning to prove his premises, as well as his style; not filled with flare and insignificant common phrases.

Colin Newmark was diagnosed with cancer. The cancer was life threatening. His parents were Christian Scientists and refused to consent for chemotherapy for Colin. Their refusal was protected under State Law as it exempted parents from the neglect and abuse statutes if the refusal was supported by medical reasons. The plaintiff, Child Protective Services petitioned to continue treatment for Colin.

The University of Notre Dame argues that they do not owe Letitia Hayden a duty to protect her from the third party’s actions. The reasoning behind this was that the actions of a third party are unforeseeable, therefore Notre Dame owed Letitia Hayden no duty to anticipate the actions and protect her. Therefore, Notre Dame is not liable.

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 case I will be concentrating on is Tomcik vs. Ohio Dep’t of Rehabilitation and Correction in which Tomcik was imprisoned under the custody of Department of Rehabilitation and correction, based on the Legal and Ethical Issues for Health Professionals book. The problem stimulated from continuous negligence from nurses and doctors at the department, which initially was when Tomcik received a physical evaluation, included the breast examination by Dr. Evans who stated that the examination was cursory and lasted only a few seconds, which means that not much attention was presented regarding the patient and his job. The next day Tomcik noticed a lump as being about the size of a pea in her right breast, however it was not reported by Dr. Evans.

BACKGROUND: Deliveroo is a British online food delivery company that operates in the UK, the Netherlands, France, Germany, Belgium, Ireland, Spain, Italy, Dubai, Australia, Singapore & Hong Kong. It was founded by two childhood friends Will Shu, who has a background in finance, and developer Greg Orlowsk in 2013. This unique idea arose to founder, Will Shu, when he moved from New York City to London to work as an investment banker and was dissatisfied by the food delivery options. He witnessed that customer’s choice was limited only to restaurants that already provide a takeaway service. Thereby, he analyzed the opportunity to exploit the niche market by creating partnerships with higher-end restaurants. Together, they established own network

The case was implied a Magistrate Judge, whose brief discoveries and recommendation completed up, and "the Pledge does not slight the Establishment Clause." The District Court grasped that proposition and released the protestation on July 21, 2000. The Court of Appeals turned around and issued three separate choices talking about the benefits and Newdow 's standing. As it would see it, the offers court consistently held that Newdow has remaining as a watchman to challenge a practice that meddles with his qualification to facilitate the religious direction of his daughter. That holding managed Newdow 's remaining to challenge not only the game plan of the school locale, where his young lady still is enrolled, moreover the 1954 Act of

Everyone makes mistakes, but some are more deadly than others. Malpractice is the illegal or negligence, professional activity or they’re working out of the their scope of practice. Medical malpractice is one of the top causes of death in the United States. With this being said, insurance for medical practitioners would be considerably higher. Should the amount of malpractice insurance be lowered even though malpractice is one of the leading causes of death? The answer is yes, malpractice insurance should be lowered.

This essay will look into how the concepts of resilience and the four trajectories proposed by Bonanno can be applied in the case studies. The target population of the case studies is people with medical conditions, namely, spinal cord injury, SARS and breast cancer. Furthermore, this essay will focus on the similarities of how people behave when facing a stressful situation. [[[[[Different percentages of trajectories, the possible predictors and the reason of the differences in the percentages of different trajectories]]]]]]