Hippocratic Oath for Physicians essays

Hippocratic Oath for Physicians essays All physicians must first take the Hippocratic Oath before beginning on their path of medicine and healing. The oath is thousands of years old and represents the key elements of the physicians beliefs and ideals toward his patients and medicine in general. This ancient oath is still practiced all over the world today, and represents man kinds long and arduous attempt to master healing and medicine. The beginning of the physicians oath opens with an invocation of Greek gods and goddesses, most noteworthy Apollo and Asclepius. In this way, the physician taking the oath is swearing by his most scared beliefs to fulfill his duty. If he were to ever break his oath, that would be blasphemous, he would be breaking his promise to the gods. This oath originated in ancient Greece and therefore still has ties to ancient Greek customs and beliefs. Apollo was one of the major Olympian gods who presided over human affairs. Asclepius was the demigod of medicine and healing. His daughter, Hygeia was the goddess of health and cleanliness. The ancient physician would have revered these deities due to his connection to the things they governed. This beginning passage of the oath also proves significant for it shows how much power the physician actually carries within his hands. He carries a gift from the gods, and this oath ensures that he will use that gift for the good of all man kin d, rather than for selfish or immoral reasons. Within the context of this oath, physicians who teach others their highly crafted art are revered as father figures to their students. This is entirely justifiable, for they teach life lessons which ensure both the success of their students and the benefit of their patients. Parents are the primary source for life lessons, and so physicians who become teachers tap into that role when they divulge the secrets of medicine and healing to their students. This analogy is also justifiable in th...

Supply Chain Management Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Supply Chain Management - Assignment Example Perhaps the foremost social and economic responsibility levied upon private and public organisation in recent decades is the maximisation. This responsibility is being increasingly codified in law and various governmental orders. Its influence is becoming increasingly pervasive through a constant series of federal court decisions as well as steady enlargement in the size and scope of administering agencies. Despite the pressure from the competitors Nostovia's new airport will undertake effective supply management as the cutting edge. Higher number of satisfactory customers and efficient services will maximise the profitability of Nostovia by attracting a large number of foreign tourists. It is argued that the supply chain standards are not fixed at a uniform level or universal conditions cannot be established. Several factors should be taken into consideration while implementing a supply chain implementation or improvement plan. Factors contributing to the effective development of supply chain management are many and varied, which include: The main source of competitive advantage in services industry is efficient service for the customers. Supply chain plays an important role in the efficient service provision to the customers. "The goal of a supply chain should be to maximise overall supply chain profitability. Supply chain profitability is the difference between the revenue generated from the customer and the total cost incurred across all stages of the supply chain. Supply chain decisions have a large impact on the success or failure of each firm because they significantly influence both the revenue generated as well as the cost incurred. Successful supply chains manage flows of product, information, and funds to provide a high level of product availability to the customer while keeping costs low." (Chopra & Meindl, 2004;

United Kingdom Health Service Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

United Kingdom Health Service - Essay Example As any organisation with relatively long history and thousands of employees, the NHS has certain norms and rules that traditionally determine the nature of managerial practices. However, these rules and norms do not seem to be effective these days when the problem of management in NHS has turned into one of the major issues associated with this organisation. The case study and other scholarly studies provide sufficient information to identify the factors that may contribute to such situation. There are several types of standards applied within the organisational practices to evaluate effectiveness of management. However, the NHS is a specific organisation with outputs which are exceptionally difficult to measure objectively: for example, a middle level manager in a construction company has absolutely clear performance goals which must be achieved by certain deadline with the available resources. Failure to achieve the goals despite favourable situation and no force majeure circumstances demonstrates that the manager might lack skills and/or qualification to effectively perform his basic functions. These functions have been formulated over the second half of the 20th century and include planning, organising, leading, controlling and assessing (often these functions are abbreviated to POLCA) (Morgan, 1986). Evidently, this set of basic functions is valid for the NHS, but it is also clear that the specifics of healthcare does not allow for the possibility to evaluate the manager's failure or success in the same way as it is done in other industries such as construction, automotive, financial, etc. The explanation is simple: there are too many factors affecting health outside the health care industry to evaluate performance of the industry in easily measurable terms such as deaths per 100 beds and other statistical data. The impressive amount of intangibles involved in the process of healthcare management requires specific approach in evaluation of associated factors, including effectiveness of management. Therefore, one of the major problems related to management in the NHS might be absence of the correct evaluation criteria. As Willcocks (1997) puts it, "...the research literature fails to provide empirically-based standards against which to judge and compare managerial behaviour. A central problem is that the researchers have neglected the manager's role demands or expectations and concentrated on role performance or behaviour" (Willcocks, 1997: 181). Development of the adequate criteria that can be applied to assessment of managerial performance in the environment characterised by lack of statistically measurable parameters and oriented rather toward improvement of the process than achievement of any final goals may be a helpful solution in this regard. Absence of such criteria can probably be referred to as the most essential primary problem which acts as the major reason for other problems associated with management in the NHS environment. Managing Professionals Managing educated professionals such as doctors, architects, lawyers

Affordable Health Care Act without sovereignty to native Americans Essay

Affordable Health Care Act without sovereignty to native Americans - Essay Example But as the Act is remarked by experts to be rigid with concern to the citizens’ need, it is ought to face different consequences (ProCon.org, 2010). This paper reviews the difficulties faced by the act as well as the citizens of the U.S. with respect to the implementation of the act. Literature Review On October 29 2009, the Affordable Health Care Act was introduced in the United States House of Representatives. Through the implementation of this act, the government intended to serve the citizens of Native American nations with efficient healthcare services and that too in a minimum expense. But the implementation of health care act has provided for various contradictions to itself which has been stated by various authors (H. R. 3962, 2009). First (2005) states that inconsistency practices in US health care system are a result of insufficient consideration to the quality systems which also caused other disadvantages related to its sole purpose. One of the major reasons for the drawback is that the policies concerning healthcare system in US was tangled with issues faced in the early experiences. The practices in relation to health inconsistencies involve the social and the technical facts as significant aspects. It is very essential to identify the problems associated with the implementation of the Act by the authority responsible, so that the outcome delivers the sole purpose widely concerned on the health securities of the citizens without or with minimum social or economic consequences. So, the U.S. government’s effort should be on eliminating the drawbacks and it should also focus on improving the quality of care provided to the patients (First, 2005). Background of the Act It has been depicted in the article of Health Policy Brief (2011) that approximately 30 lawsuits have been filed by private citizens, law makers, organizations and the state governments challenging the features of the Affordable Care Act 2009 (Health Policy Brief, 2011). In the article, it has been mentioned that sec 1501 of the Affordable Care Act identifies the ‘individual responsibility requirement’, also known as Individual Mandate. By the year 2014, the provision specifies that US citizens and nationals need to maintain ‘minimum essential health insurance coverage’ or else are required to pay a penalty allotted. Coverage can be available through an employer or individuals or even through public programmes such as Medicaid and Medicare among others. This policy measure, as mentioned in the Act, can be of adverse affect as the penalty has been sanctioned. Citizens who are below the poverty line are forced to purchase the health care policy which might result into difficult prospective. Therefore, the healthcare act should not be entitled to penalise rather the act should be implemented with great care as it is a need rather than demand (Health Policy Brief, 2011). A dilemma has often aroused regarding Health Care Act. For instance the action of federal government to impose the Act was argued to be subjected to their limitations to participate in such social development issues. Danner (2011) opposes the provision mentioned in the Act, i.e. the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which states the Individual Mandate. The policy of Individual Mandate states that each and every American must buy the Health Insurance or else will be penalised. According to Danner (2011), this is overextending usage of government power. Providing the health care by violating the freedom of the citizen is of no good and is also unconstitutional (Danner, 2011). Complaints by the associated states The Attorney Generals

MacNaughton(2003) states curricula can be defined as conforming Essay

MacNaughton(2003) states curricula can be defined as conforming reforming or transforming.Critically discuss extent each of thes - Essay Example Consequently, reform in education is currently the standard rather than the exception. Nonetheless, in spite of the continuous spectacle of reforms, only a slight portion of the core changes. Institutions and individuals should evolve over time or face the possibility of extinction. Valuable changes enhance the institution or individual so that it may work more successfully in, and be more sensitive to, a relentlessly evolving environment. But efforts at educational reform usually create new problems rather than improve its foundation and processes. There are those who find fault with comprehensive reforms in education which forces several schools to give in, or conform to mainstream standards. Hence, according to MacNaughton (2003), â€Å"curricula can defined as conforming, reforming, or transforming†. This essay will explain this statement and relate it to post-16 curriculum. The discussion will also take into account the points of view of different practitioners. Curriculu m as ‘Conforming’ Before 1998 in England it was teachers, in theory, who chose the curricula and objectives of their schools. There were actual issues about this, not merely the often broadly disparate policies between schools (Ross 2000). However, there was a more deep-seated problem. Why should teachers be granted this authority? Do they have the knowledge and experience which qualify them to such choices? Are they qualified to make decisions whether to ‘conform’ or ‘reform’? According to Webster (2011), the term ‘conform’ means ‘to fit, accommodate, adapt, suit or befit’ (para 3). Following this definition, there is certainly a valid argument against granting macro-decisions to conform or not to teachers. They are just one sector of the population, but decisions about the routes education should follow involve everyone. Cuban (1993) suggests a paradigm of varied curricula for the study of curriculum. He proposes tha t we treat curricula in four groups (as cited in Joseph, Braymann, Windschitl, Mikel & Green 2000): Official curriculum can be found in curriculum guides and conform to state-mandated assessment. Taught curriculum is what individual teachers focus on and choose to emphasise—often the choices represent teachers’ knowledge, beliefs about how subjects should be taught, assumptions about their students’ needs, and interests in certain subjects. Learned curriculum encompasses all that students learn; learned curriculum may be what teachers planned or have not intended, such as modelling teachers’ behaviour or what students learn from other students. The fourth curriculum Cuban calls tested curriculum; these tests—whether derived from the teacher, the school district, state, or national testing organisations—represent only part of what is taught or learned (ibid, p. 4). Similar to MacNaughton (2003), Cuban advises us to be careful of the view that curriculum is ‘conforming’, or how the state or school embodies itself, but not essentially suggestive of what transpires in classrooms (Joseph et al. 2000). Cuban (1993 as cited in Joseph et al. 2000) argues that we have to take into account these varied perspectives of curricula if we are genuinely interested with reform in education; reforms in tested and official curricula could be pointless unless we address the learned and taught curricula. The varied curricula model of curriculum

Contracts in Commercial Law

Contracts in Commercial Law COMMERCIAL LAW where a person contracts as agent, the contract is that of the principal, and not that of the agent and prima facie the only person who may sue is the principal and the only person who may be sued is the principal.to that rule, there are of course many exceptions Per Wright J in MONTGOMERIE V UNITED KINGDOM MUTUAL STEAMSHIP discuss the situations in which an agent may be liable to a third party. A relationship of agency arises where one person, an agent, acts on behalf of another person, a principal, in making legal arrangements with third parties that confer rights and impose obligations on the Principal. It is the Principal that can sue and be sued on the contracts made between itself and the Third Party (Richards, p.449)[1]. However, in some cases, the Agent may be personally or jointly liable to the Third Party. Where there is joint liability, the Third Party must decide whether to sue the Agent, the Principal or both. An agent will be liable when he intends to enter into an agreement as joint principal. This may be apparent from the express terms of the agreement, or from the way in which he signs it. An example of such arrangement can be found in a solicitor’s partnership, where each partner is an agent of the firm and any agreement entered into by them is as agent and joint principal (Denny, p.33)[2]. The case of Shack v Anthony (1813)[3] demonstrates that where an agent executes a deed on behalf of the principal in his own name, he will be held personally liable. For the Principal to take the benefit of the deed, he must be named on it and it is not enough that the Principal is simply disclosed. In some cases, it is trade usage and custom that give agents liability under a contract. For example, insurance brokers take liability for non payment of premiums, and ship brokers accept liability for payment of charter parties (Fleet v Murton 1871)[4]. In both examples, liability is joint with the Principal. A further commercial example is found with Del Credere agents, who take personal liability as surety for their Principal. Several outcomes can follow from contracts made with a non existent principal. If the contract is made prior to the incorporation of a company as in Kelner v Baxter (1886)[5], the Agent will be held personally liable. If the contract is entered into where the Principal is in fact fictitious, again the Agent will incur personal liability, and the same applies where the agent uses someone else’s name. If however the identity of the other person is material to why the third party entered into the contract, the agent will be liable for misrepresentation (The Remco 1984)[6]. An agent will incur liability to a third party if by his conduct he indicates that he intends to be liable to that party. He may, for example, enter into an agreement where there is no reference made to an agency, and which is signed in his own name or profession. In this scenario, he is jointly liable with the Principal. A further example of such liability that might arise can be found in Sika Contracts Ltd v B L Gill and Closeglen Properties Ltd (1978)[7], where an agent acting on behalf of a disclosed but unnamed principal signed contracts in his own name and profession, and was held to be personally liable. This situation could have been avoided had the agent added â€Å"as agent† after his signature, although the mere use of the word â€Å"agent† may indicate either a description or qualification and is not therefore conclusive (Gadd v Houghton (1876)[8], Halsburys s.184)[9]. The agent will always be jointly liable to the third party when acting for an undisclosed Principal because, for all intents and purposes, he appears to the third party to be the Principal (Halsbury’s s.183[10], Saxon v Blake (1861)[11]. Although it is the contract that the Agent has entered into that the Principal is entitled to enforce, the Third Party retains the right to elect to sue either the Agent or the Principal if he subsequently becomes disclosed (Bradgate, p.169[12], Richards p.456). The agent is not however liable where the contract is entered into with an unnamed (but disclosed) Principal, unless there is evidence of intention to be personally liable (Benton v Campbell, Parker Co Ltd 1925[13]). The above examples consider where the agent has found himself either jointly liable under the original contract, or personally liable and in fact, he becomes the principal and takes on all rights and liabilities of that contract, which is binding. However, the case of Collen v Wright (1857)[14] establishes that where an agent enters into a transaction as if he were acting for a Principal and by implication, he warrants that he has the Principal’s authority to act in the matter, if the third party acts in reliance on his representation and it transpires that he has no such authority he may be liable to the third party for breach of warranty. This principle is based on an implied unilateral contract which is formed when the agent, by implication, promises that he will warrant he has authority if the third party enters into a contract with the principal. By entering into the contract with the principal, the third party accepts the offer of the agent and provides consideration for the agent’s promise. This brings about a collateral contract between the third party and the agent. Where the Principal remains liable under the main contract, the agent is not liable as the third party has suffered no loss despite the agen t’s lack of authority (Richards, p.457). Liability under this principal can be extended to warranting the authority of a fellow agent, as was the case in Chapleo v Brunswick (1881)[15]. The agent may also find themselves liable to any third party in the transaction – for example, the mortgage company in a property transaction (Penn v Bristol and West 1997)[16]. The third party may claim damages under the usual principals of contract law, being all damages that flow naturally and directly from the breach (Hadley v Baxendale (1854)[17], the aim being to put the third party back in the position he was in had the breach not occurred (Suleman v Shahsavari 1989[18], Nimmo v Habton Farms 2003[19]). Liability is strict and there is no defence in saying that the agent acted innocently in the matter (Yonge v Toynbee 1910[20]). However, the amount that can be recovered is limited by the amount the third party would have been able to recover from the Principal so if, for example, the Principal becomes insolvent, the amount is limited to how much the third party could have claimed from the Principal’s insolvency. In addition to liability for breach of warrant of authority, if an agent deliberately or recklessless misstates his authority he will be liable to the third party in the tort of deceit (Derry v Peek 1889[21], Richards p.200). However, fraud is very difficult to prove and rarely gives right to recovery against an agent. He can also be liable for negligent misstatement under the principle in Hedley Byrne Co v Heller Partners (1963)[22] if it can be shown that there is an assumption of responsibility by the Agent to create a special relationship between the Agent and the Third Party, giving rise to a duty of care. The Agent, in failing to exercise due and reasonable care in representing the extent of their agency or the fact of its existence, breaches that duty. The Third Party would also need to show that they had suffered loss as a result of breach of that duty (Bradgate, p.175). In conclusion, although an agent is not generally liable to the third party where both the existence and name of the Principal have been disclosed, there are many exceptions to the statement of Wright J in Montgomerie v United Kingdom Mutual Steamship (1891)[23] that only a principal can sue and be sued where an agency exists. The law of agency protects third parties who must be able to rely on an agent’s assertion of authority as a matter of commercial convenience, and where that assertion is incorrect, the agent may find himself jointly or personally liable to the Third Party. As can be seen, it is preferable to explore contractual remedies including breach of warrant of authority rather than negligence or deceit, as these carry with them the strict liability inherent to the law of contract. Bibliography: Richards, P (2006) Law of Contract, Pearson, Essex Denny, R (2002) Commercial Law, ITC, Bedford Halsbury’s Laws of England : Agency Bradgate, R (2000) Commercial Law, Butterworths, United Kingdom Sealy, L.S, Hooley, R, Berwin S.J (2003) Commercial Law: Text, Cases and Materials Lexisnexis UK, England Footnotes [1] Richards, P (2006) Law of Contract, Pearson, Essex [2] Denny, R (2002) Commercial Law, ITC, Bedford [3] Shack v Anthony (1813) 1 M S 573 [4] Fleet v Murton (1871) LR 7 QB 545 [5] Kelner v Baxter (1866) LR 2 CP 174 [6] The Remco (1984)2 Lloyds Rep 205 [7] Sika Contracts Ltd v B L Gill and Closeglen Properties Ltd (1978) 9 Build LR 11 [8] Gadd v Houghton (1876) 1 ExD 357, CA [9] Halsbury’s Laws of England : Agency 7(1)(i)(184) Liabilities of Agent on Contracts – Identity of Principal Not Disclosed [10] Halsbury’s Laws of England : Agency 7(1)(i)(183) Liabilities of Agent on Contracts – Fact of Agency not disclosed [11] Saxon v Blake (1861) 29 Beav 438 [12] Bradgate, R (2000) Commercial Law, Butterworths, United Kingdom [13] Benton v Campbell, Parker Co Ltd [1925] 2 KB 410 [14] Collen v Wright (1857) 8 E E 647 [15] Chapleo v Brunswick Permanent Benefit Building Society (1881) 6 QBD 696, CA [16] Penn v Bristol and West Building Society [1997] 3 All ER 470, [1997] 1 WLR 1356, CA [17] Hadley v Baxendale 1854 9 exch 341 [18] Suleman v Shahsavari [1989] 2 All ER 460, [1988] 1 WLR 1181 [19] Nimmo v Habton Farms 2003 1 ALL ER 1136 CA [20] Yonge v Toynbee). 1910 1 KB 215 [21] Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App Cas 337, 58 LJ Ch 864, HL [22] Hedley Byrne Co Ltd v Heller Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465, [1963] 2 All ER 575, HL; [23]Montgomerie v United Kingdom Mutual Steamship Association Ltd [1891] 1 QB 370;

Values and Technology in Ibsens An Enemy of the People and Becketts Waiting for Godot :: comparison compare contrast essays

Values and Technology in Ibsen's An Enemy of the People and Beckett's Waiting for Godot Literature has been an outlet for authors to express the importance of human values to the literate public. However, even before a good majority of the general public was literate, there were people who learned various stories either from the bible, historical stories, etc. This gave the public a chance to see a story and take the different lessons out of the play. The public could decide whether or not to utilize the lessons in their daily lives. In two different plays ("An Enemy of the People" and "Waiting for Godot"), both authors develop very different societies that display different human values, different situations that one could face in his or her own life, and how technology has helped or hindered the new developing society of today. In Arthur Miller's adaptation of Henrik Ibsen's play "An Enemy of the People," the Stockman Family is faced with many different difficult decisions to make. Dr. Stockman tests the water at a local therapeutic spa; however, when he gets the results back, no one cares to hear the truth. Dr. Stockman represents the importance of honesty in a job. Dr. Stockman has a wealth of knowledge about the chemistry and the bacteria that is causing illness to all of the people that visit this healing place. In contrast to Dr. Stockman, Peter Stockman, his brother, shows the possible corruption that can occur in positions of power. Peter Stockman ultimately shows disloyalty to his brother and is responsible for Dr. Stockman and his family's outcast and downfall. Peter Stockman is obsessed with how he is viewed in the townspeople's eyes, his re-election. This decision to betray his brother led to his nephews fighting at school, rocks being thrown into his family member's home, and possibly the death, even though it is not specifically stated in the play, of his own family members. Where is the line drawn for personal gain and happiness when it interferes with other people happiness and well being? Ibsen shows what can happen to someone (Dr. Stockman) if he is not aware of the opposing forces that are out in the world in many different forms (Peter Stockman). Ibsen shows the importance of compromise, honesty, teamwork, knowledge, and intelligence.