Health Care Policy, Law, and Ethics Discussion Wk 7

“Patient Consent and Legal Reporting in Health Care” Please respond to the following:

• *From the scenario, evaluate the efficacy of both the documentation protocols requiring patient consent by physicians and the legal reporting requirements, as they apply to protecting patients’ rights. Examine the primary way in which such documentation could help both physician and patient in the event of litigation.
  • Scenario attached.
• Analyze the major professional roles that physicians and nurses play, as they apply to following the requirement for obtaining patient consent. Examine the process whereby health care professionals can legitimately challenge patients’ rights to refuse treatment, based on the condition of verbal, written, or implied consent.

***This is a discussion, not a paper. Need 2 strong paragraphs and references. ***

AT LEAST 200 WORDS EACH DISCUSSION, CITE ALL REFERENCES USED SEPARATE EACH DISCUSSION

Discussion 1

Which do you believe presents the greatest threat to civil society: a corporation that commits crimes (e.g., murder, environmental crimes, or bribery), or persons who commit crimes that harm businesses (e.g., embezzlement, fraud, or larceny)? Defend your response, using at least one example from current events.

I need two scholarly citations

Discussion 2

Review the Constitution in Appendix A and choose one of the following sections of the U.S. Constitution or a specified amendment to use as the basis for your initial response:

• Any of Congress’s enumerated powers under Article I, Section 8
• 1st Amendment
• 4th Amendment
• 5th Amendment
• 14th Amendment

Identify the section of the Constitution or its amendment that you have chosen. Discuss how this section of the Constitution or its amendments both limit and protect business in general. Describe an example of how the section of the Constitution or its amendment that you have chosen could be applied to your professional life (past, present, or future). In your example, discuss whether the section of the Constitution you have chosen to address limits business or protects it.

Need two citations

Discussion 3

When to form an LLC (Limited Liability Company) (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. discusses why the LLC is one of the most popular types of business entity. After reading the article and Chapter 30 of the textbook, compare an LLC with a C corporation and with an S corporation. If you were operating your own business, would you choose the LLC as the organizational form for your business? Explain your reasoning

Need two citations

the main question this paper is about is how Black women responded to being marginalized by these two different social movements (civil rights and the women’s movement)

i am comparing two specific Black feminist groups that emerged as a result of the experiences of being marginalized in both the Black liberation and women’s movements. has to have primary sources like their original writings, texts, artwork, manifestos, poetry, etc. etc. i want to look at how Black women responded to this marginalization. i used the national black feminist organization and the combahee river collective. the paper also needs to describe a policy black women went through like reproduction rights or welfare.

primary sources are very important

The paper should be a minimum of 20 pages, double- spaced, using 10- or 12-point font and margins no larger than one inch. The paper should utilize parenthetical citation and have a complete bibliography. This means that everything cited in the paper must be in the bibliography, and all items listed in the bibliography must be cited in the paper. The page length does not include the bibliography.

the paper needs outlines

attached is a power point presentation

Initial instructions for the first two forum responses:

Please read the following cases, Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007) and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009), which are attached to this announcement and which are in your resource folder. After quickly summarizing the two cases in the forums, please take a position on the following state, “these two cases represent in combination the death of notice pleading in the federal court.” In a 500 word initial post and two posts of 250 each, please stand on this controversial statement. In order to support your position, I strongly encourage you to do some independent research as this topic. Just for your guide, the statement has spawned a considerable about of debate over the elements of notice and fact pleading over the past years. I look forward to a lively debate over this topic.

FORUM RESPONSE 1

An article in the ABA Journal explains a bit about how these two cases altered federal court pleading standards.₁ These two cases, in doing so, caused the federal courts to require plaintiffs to come up with a lot more facts if they want to survive a motion to dismiss₂ under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.₃ My question is, how can the court do that suddenly, when there has been no official action to change Rule 12(b)(6)?

In the case of Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (2007),₄ the U.S. Supreme Court decided that there needed to be a greater amount of evidence, rather than just giving the defendant notice and the grounds of the claim. The Court applied Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,₅ because that is the rule that governs the notice pleading system. The Court ruled the same in this one as in Ashcroft v. Iqbal (2009),₆ which was that the plaintiff needs more evidence. These two cases collide. They concern two completely different details, but they were ruled in the same way. After reading both cases and reading the article from the ABA Journal, I agree that these two cases represent in combo the death of notice pleading in federal court.

The pleading standard was originally set by Conley v. Gibson (1957).₇ In that ruling it was stated that the dismissal of a case is fine, but only if the plaintiff has “no set of facts” supporting the claim. The rulings on Twombly and Iqbal changed all of that. Evidence is the defense’s responsibility, which comes from discovery. This is true in civil rights claims, and the case of Iqbal, and in anti-trust claims such as in Twombly. So, the ruling in these two cases puts the burden of evidence on the plaintiffs. Many believe that this is an unfair burden for the plaintiffs, because they are being forced to provide evidence in the beginning of the trial process rather than in pretrial discovery. Many attorneys disagree with these rulings, stating that the Court did this to weed out and dismiss frivolous cases, while many plaintiffs see it as docket-management, which prevents legitimate cases from being heard. Either way, it is a highly unfair situation. That’s why a lot of people in the legal field feel that the death of notice pleading is coming.

Right now, it is unlikely that these rulings will actually remove or cause the death of Notice Pleading in the federal courts, because doing so would literally have to be an act of Congress. However, Senator Arlen Specter [D-PA] introduced S. 1504 – the Notice Pleading Restoration Act of 2009, which would prevent federal courts from dismissing a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, except, of course, under the standards set forth by Conley.₈ This bill is still stuck in the Senate, but I believe that it will move forward and be passed eventually. In my opinion, it is unwise to simply not follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure just because the Court is the highest in the land. They should not be permitted to pick and choose. Just my thoughts.

FORUM RESPONSE 2

In the case Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, William Twombly, along with other consumers, filed a class action lawsuit against Bell Atlantic Corp. and other telecommunications companies. The class action lawsuit claimed that the telecommunications companies had violated Section 1. The United States Supreme court had decided that there needed to be more evidence to support the case rather than just giving the defendant notice and the claim. The court applied Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which means “A short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new jurisdictional support, a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief and a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in the alternative or different types of relief.” Responding to a pleading means “State in short and plain terms its defenses to each claim asserted against it and admit or deny the allegations asserted against it by an opposing party.” The court ruled the same thing in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009) because the court needed more evidence from the plaintiff. The only difference between the two cases are the details but they were still ruled in the same way.

The pleading standard was originally set by Conley v. Gibson (1957). In that ruling it stated that the case could be dismissed as long as the plaintiff doesn’t have any facts to support the claim. The rulings Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007) stated that it is the defenses responsibility to support the facts. Not only is that ruling true in this claim but it also true when it comes to civil rights claims. Many attorneys disagree with that type of ruling because they think it is unfair for provide evidence at the beginning of a trial rather than pretrial discovery. Not only do the attorneys disagree with this ruling but defendants also think that it is an unfair ruling for the same reasons that the attorneys believe.

I believe that it is unlikely that these rulings will cause the death of Notice Pleading in federal court. As of now, the bill is stuck with the senate and isn’t going anywhere for a while. The precedent set prevents claimants from making unsupportive allegations that the claimant wouldn’t be able to prove in court without discovery. The decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S.Ct. 1955 (2007) is supposed to ensure that the claim is plausible before proceeding. On the other hand Senator Arlen Specter introduced S. 1504 which is also known as the Pleading Restoration Act of 2009 that is meant to prevent federal courts form dismissing a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted under Conley. I believe that the bill is going to move forward soon but as of right now its best not to follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and they should not be permitted to pick and choose whatever they like.

Initial instructions for forum responses 3-4

Discuss the five major purposes of punishment. Discuss which purpose(s) you believe are served by capital punishment. Find a case or news article to share with the class that illustrates your discussion.

FORUM REPONSE 3

Good afternoon Prof. and Class

The five major purposes of punishment are: deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitations, retribution and restitution. All of these types of punishment can be debated until the end of time, deciding if those purposes of punishment will stop crime.

Punishment is society’s way of saying “We morally disapprove of this action.” It is said that when the law is broken, society condemns the action and the punishment is the expression of condemnation.

Deterrence has two types: Specific deterrence and general deterrence (1). Specific deterrence refers to the individual and the theory that once a person is punished and served their time or fine, they are less likely to commit another offense against society. General deterrence is society’s view of the individual who has been punished and learning by example. If someone sees that a person will receive life in prison or the death penalty for murder, this would deter a person from committing the same crime.

Incapacitation is a punishment that removes the criminal from the equation. Once a person is incarcerated, or put to death, the theory is that they will be unable to commit any future crimes. We all know that prisons are full of crime and corruption. Society may be safe from the convicted, but this form of punishment does not prevent crime. Another justification for punishment is giving the criminal a “lesson”, showing him that with his crime there are consequences and he will face them.

The topic of capital punishment is a tricky thing to discuss and my views have changed over the years. I think most people are of the mind set if you commit murder, that is a crime that deserves the death penalty. Proponents of the death penalty believe that offenders deserve to be punished for the crimes they commit (2). Equal justice for the innocent person who was murdered.

The shooting in Santa Fe Texas has gotten attention due to the fact that the seventeen year old male who shot and killed 10 and wounded 13 will not face the death penalty. The state of Texas has charged the suspect as an adult with capital murder and aggravated assault on a peace officer, but he can not be executed. This is due to a Supreme Court ruling in 2005 that banned executions of criminals younger than 18 and then another ruling in 2012 stating that juveniles facing life in prison would not be for life, but can be paroled after 40 years (3).

The Supreme Court ruled that putting kids younger than 18 to death was “cruel and unusual punishment” in violation of the 8th and 14th amendments (4). The killer can be brought up on parole, but the board does not have to grant it, so his incarceration could in fact be for life.

The reason I am now against the death penalty is the number of wrongful convictions I have researched through the Innocence Project. There is data that shows that a certain percentage of people on death row have been wrongly convicted and have been exonerated due to DNA evidence. I understand society’s need for justice and “an eye for an eye”, but it can still be called “murder” even when the State administers the justice.

(1) http://open.lib.umn.edu/criminallaw/chapter/1-5-th…

(2) https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ethics-eve…
(3) https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/05…

(4) Id.

FORUM RESPONSE 4

The five major purposes of punishment are deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, retribution, and restitution. Deterrence consists of specific and general deterrence. The way that deterrence works is frightening the defendant or public which in turn prevents future crime. Incapacitation prevents future crime by removing the defendant from society, such as jail or house arrest. Rehabilitation alters a defendant’s behavior through means of schooling or treatment centers. In turn this prevents future crime. Retribution removes the desire for personal avengement against the defendant. Lastly there is restitution that punishes the defendant financially.

Capital punishment is also known as the death penalty. This type of punishment is the legally authorized killing of someone as punishment for a crime. In my opinion capital punishment acts as a deterrent to prevent another crime. People fear death and much rather be imprisoned than sentenced to death.

There are many states that have and continue to abolish the death penalty. Studies performed over the last dozen years or so show that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. It is stated that between 3-18 lives would be saved by the execution of each convicted killer. A 2006 study showed that each execution results in five fewer homicides, the abolishment of capital punishment resulted in 5 additional homicides. According to a 2004 study by an Emory University professor speeding up executions would strengthen the deterrent effect. For every 2.75 years cut from time spent on death row, one murder would be prevented. In 2005, there were 16,692 cases of murder and no negligent manslaughter nationally. There were 60 executions. Although studies show that capital punishment deters homicide, this did not stop the states from abolishing the death penalty.

References

The Purposes of Punishment. University of Minnesota. Retrieved from http://open.lib.umn.edu/criminallaw/chapter/1-5-the-purposes-of-punishment/

Published 2007. Studies: Death Penalty Discourages Crime. Fox News. Retrieved from http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/06/11/studies-de…