Q: The Texas high court held that the expert testimony relied upon the plaintiffs to establish their case was not reliable. Why did the court not order a new trial? After the cases have been presented, but before the case goes to the jury, a party may request that the court enter a judgment and it’s favor because there is not legally sufficient evidence on which a jury cannot find for the other party. The defense is more likely to prevail on such motion. That is, the judge holds that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient grounds, even what is claim is true, to be able to win a verdict.
It found that Federal Rule of Evidence 501 prompted the recognition of a psychotherapist-patient privilege. Ruling: To the surprise of both participants in the case and legal experts, in a very powerful seven to two decision, the Court ruled that the communication of a psychotherapist-patient relationship is privileged under rule 501. The Court further ruled that the privilege should extend beyond the patients of psychiatrists and psychologists and should also include the patients of social workers. Application: The communication between a licensed psychotherapist and a patient is privileged and that the therapist cannot be compelled to reveal the content of such communication. Federal Rule of Evidence 501, which simply says that all privileges are "governed by the principles of the common law .
Texan Norma McCorvey discovered that she was pregnant with her third child in June of 1969. Texas law at the time stated that the only means of legal abortion was through rape or incest. Unemployable and deeply depressed, McCorvey, who fit neither of the criteria, attempted a scheme where she falsely attested to being raped in order to get a legal abortion. Her plan failed due to the absence of a police report documenting the alleged rape, so McCorvey resorted to illegal methods of abortion. That attempt was ill fated as well with the eventual police shutdown of the unauthorized site.
This first ethical breach I read about was an ethical breach by a laboratory located in Boston that was defrauding the government out of millions of dollars. Forest Laboratories in Boston were illegally marketing versions of the antidepressant Citalopram. The drug makers at this laboratory were marketing Celexa and Lexpro for illegal uses in adolescents and children. Although doctors are able to prescribe drugs for uses not certified by the FDA it is illegal for companies to encourage drugs for those purposes. Forest Laboratories were charged with concerns that two studies were accomplished to help expedite the FDA’s approval of use of these antidepressants in treating young people.
(Since a portion of this thesis is discussion of the correlation of immunologically mediated disorders that silicone may or may cause this article explores this. The article begins defining what a human adjuvant disease is and goes on to say that there were sporadic cases of this disease that had been reported following injections with silicone fluid. But, there have been no clear cases following silicone gel implant mammoplasty Baldwin & Kaplan (1983). The article goes on to describe a particular case of a well 35 year old female who had a soft connection of a reaction to silicone. She became ill after breast implantation, they were removed, the signs and symptoms resolved.
When the doctor performed the procedure on Bruce, an accident resulted in the loss of most of the baby’s penis. The Reimers took their maimed son to several doctors until they ended up consulting medical psychologist Dr. John Money of Johns Hopkins Medical Center in Baltimore. Money told the parents that do to Bruce’s young age he could be raised as a girl successfully since a person’s gender was decided by their environment and not by their DNA. Bruce was an ideal candidate for an experiment to prove this claim since he had an identical twin brother to use as a control. Before then, gender reassignment surgery had never been performed on a child who had normal genitalia.
Engl 112 The Vioxx litigation: Exploring admissibility and reliability of science in the Ernst case. Karolina Bae 39091111 Pharmaceutical companies are never sure in terms of safety of drugs they manufacture because the side effects do not necessarily appear right away. There have been numbers of cases where medications were found to be harmful and were brought to courts by those who suffered from the side effects of them. Therefore, expert testimonies and scientific evidences are inevitably required and it is critical for court to make right judgement based on them. In “Science, Law, and the search for Truth in the Courtroom: Lessons from Daubert v. Merrell Dow”, Bertin and Henifin (1994) argue that science and law have different ways of pursuing ‘truth’ and they question who should be taking burden of this uncertain state.
Morton 1 Precollege 30 April 2010 Gardasil: The Shot You Shouldn’t Get! Everyone has seen the commercial and wants their selves or their daughters to become “one less”. But what they don’t know is that they could be just another one to lose their life from the vaccine. Gardasil is a vaccine (injection/shot) that is used for girls and women 9 through 26 years of age to help protect against the following diseases caused by HPV. The vaccine is usually given in the arm muscle in 3 serious.
Although the infant is finally discharged in good condition, the mistake is a hard lesson for all healthcare workers. Let’s take a closer look at how the error had happened. Phytonadione, an antidote of Coumadin, is frequently used in the prevention of blood thinning in the newborn. The common brand name in the United States includes AquaMephyton and Mephyton. According to Schull’s drug handbook (2006), Phytonadione acts on the liver to promote the production of active prothrombin, proconvertin, plasma thromboplastin component, and Stuart factor.
An author cannot state that America has a high rate of infant deaths because of premature birth and a large number of minorities while also arguing that America does not have a high rate of infant death. This article not only fails my initial plausibility test but also does not provide information that is logically believable. References Atlas, Dr. S. W. (2011, October 3). Another view: Misleading neonatal data distort rankings. USA Today.