Therefore Holly broke these principles as the infant’s birth weight and sex was collected and they were intended to be used in another study. This also broke the principle of personal data being passed on to third parties, if Holly did pass on the data to a third party without consent from the participant this would also not be good practice. The data collected should be obtained with participant’s full consent, as Holly didn’t gain consent this principle was broken. These issues could be addressed by ensuring that only the data needed for a study is collected and that researchers ensure they are familiar with the data protection act and abide by these
Simpson case is vital to the study of criminal justice and prosecution being that the restrictions that were obvious in the testimonies of the witnesses and evidence. As a consequence incorrect verdicts were made regarding the case for the reasons that there was evidence that could not be used like the blood samples and the detectives that gave testimonies that were ambiguous. Furthermore, before any case is taken to trial the state and the defense need to be absolutely certain that they have sufficient evidence in order to maintain their case, especially since a case can be dismissed based on the prima facie evidence provided. Studying this case has certainly changed my perspective because it was obvious that more was needed to be accomplished previous to closing remarks were
As mentioned earlier, the Right of Self-Representation is this right to represent oneself as Pro Sea. Presently, courts at all levels of the Criminal Justice system require that the defendant be aware and understand the disadvantages of representing one’s self as most people not practicing law, will not be aware of certain defenses that can facilitate their case. A person going Pro Sea will have to sign a waiver or
More precisely, she argues for the conclusion that abortion is sometimes permissible; she grants that there are scenarios in which obtaining an abortion would be immoral. What is especially novel is the manner in which Thomson constructs her argument. She begins the essay by pointing out that the debate over abortion seems to many people to hinge on whether or not the fetus is a person. Most feel that if we could only determine the answer to that puzzle, the implications for abortion would be clear; namely, that if fetuses are persons then abortions must be impermissible, and that if fetuses are not persons then abortions must be permissible. Thomson, though, thinks that reasoning in this way is misguided, or at very best is incomplete.
Decisions to withhold or withdraw particular interventions are driven by the principles of best interest and consent (British Medical Association (BMA) 2007). Any decisions, either to withhold or withdraw life-prolonging treatment, will be acceptable insofar as they are in line with these principles. The end of life care pathway is a pathway, not a slide. Patients might travel up and down the pathway. Their condition might take an unexpected turn; or they might change their mind about a treatment; or a treatment might have disappointing effects.
It may boil down to which attorney wins the heart of the judge, but according to the text it says “the outcome depends on the how the judge decides a reasonable person in the position of the defendant would act in the particular circumstances of the case” (Roger LeRoy Miller, 2010). We know that Mrs. Esposito suffered an injury as a result of the collision. We know that Mr. Davis was the cause of that collision. I think that Mr. Davis did breach his duty of care because “individuals are required to exercise a reasonable standard of care in their activities.” The Reasonable Person Standards the courts use state that “If the so-called reasonable person existed, he or she would be careful, conscientious, even tempered and honest” (Roger LeRoy Miller, 2010). In this case Mr. Davis was neither, careful or conscientious.
and 54-196 of the General Statutes of Connecticut states “Any person who assists, abets, counsels, causes, hires or commands another to commit any offense may be prosecuted and punished as if he were the principal offender." When I carefully looked over this case, my argument on this is that Connecticut shouldn’t had such law. The law clearly does violates the rights of the persons privacy according to the Fourteenth Amendment of the constitution. The
This means that nothing harmful to Sandy should be done.Fourthly, Mary needs to think about Sandy’s and her mother’s cultural and religious background. Suspected pregnancy, for example, may be forbidden by their religion. Fifthly, One of Mary’s obligations is to promote and maintain mutual trust in the practitioner-client relationship. Revealing Sandy’s secrets to Mrs. Wilson will jeopardize this relationship, which can exerts a detrimental influence on the procedure of treatment. Lastly, Mrs. Wilson’s primary concern probably is about her daughter’s well-being, as can be seen that she is really worried about her
This is an unconvincing argument, relative ethics, the belief that an action can sometimes be wrong but in other circumstances may be right, are very fair, it takes everyone’s personal issues into account, making sure each circumstance is treated differently and allowing the decision on what to do is the best for that situation, this makes sure the right thing can be done for the individual person. An example of this is would be deciding whether to have an abortion, absolute ethics would say this would not be allowed as it is wrong to take a life, no matter how young, however as relative ethics allows you to base the decision on the best thing to do, an abortion may be allowed, especially if the mother has been raped and not able to live with the burden of that child, the child has a disability and may leave an unhappy, painful and unfulfilling life or the mother is too young and would be unable to look after the child to a high enough standard, as well as all the other reasons that may warrant an abortion, this all supports situation ethics, making sure the most loving thing to do is done and utilitarianism, making sure that everyone is happy. Relative ethics also supports equality; this makes it fair for everyone, no matter what their belief or opinion. It also means that no one’s opinion can be treated better or be seen as right compared to others. This is also incorporated in cultural diversity, the fact that opinions and what is seen as right or wrong, differs from cultures however they are both equally correct and right.
If no consent is given you cannot proceed with the care. It is illegal to put pressure on the person and go against their wished. When supporting a colleague with regards to consent of an individual it is important to ensure that the colleague understands that the decision of the individual is final. I would advise the social care worker to provide the individual with all the information regarding the decision (positive and negative) and in a way that best suits the individual. I