Discuss the following: What type of method do you think the researcher was utilizing? Can you identify the hypothesis and/or theory?

To prepare for this discussion, please read Chapter 1 of your textbook (Feenstra, 2013). In addition, read Exploring the Ethics and Psychological Impact of Deception in Psychological Research (Boynton, Portnoy, and Johnson, 2013). Finally, review Instructor Guidance and Announcements. (Not reviewing these each week can affect your performance, be mindful to include these readings in your study time.)
In this discussion, you will consider principles of scientific research, including methodology and ethical considerations. Be sure to use your own academic voice and apply in-text citations appropriately throughout your post.
1. Visit https://www.socialpsychology.org/expts.htm. Select any study from the list. (Note that some links may be broken; if you choose a study that is unavailable, simply pick another option.). Participate in the research by following the instructions. After you have completed the study, answer the following questions:
a. Indicate the study you completed, including the web link.
b. Briefly describe the research that was conducted. What did you do?
c. Discuss the following: What type of method do you think the researcher was utilizing? Can you identify the hypothesis and/or theory?
d. Review the research based on your experience. What elements of the study “worked” and what would you suggest the researchers do to improve their study?
e. Identify any relevant ethical concerns. Was deception utilized?
f. Summarize what you learned about research in general and social psychology in particular by completing this research. You may find it helpful to locate additional scholarly sources on the topic to further inform your thinking about the study in which you participated.

What are the effects that the chemical/compound chosen can have on the human body from the initial exposure to elimination?

Imagine that you are an industrial hygienist or a safety officer, and you have been asked to create a safety data sheet (SDS) for the employees within the manufacturing facility where you work. However, in this assignment, you will not actually create the SDS. You will just be collecting and studying specific data about the toxicity of certain chemicals that could be used to create it. Assume that the following chemicals/compounds are released during the manufacturing process:
benzene,
vinyl chloride, asbestos, ammonia, and hydrogen chloride.

Choose one of these chemicals, and review the toxicology data for it.

Create at least a two-page essay which outlines the following information about the chemical:

How can the route of exposure affect the toxicity of the chosen chemical/compound?

How are the mechanisms of action and modes of action established surrounding how to deal with exposure to the chemical/compound?

What are the effects that the chemical/compound chosen can have on the human body from the initial exposure to elimination?

Your essay should also discuss how the Bradford Hill criteria for causation is used to determine the strength of the toxicology data you reviewed. The essay should be at least two pages in length (not counting the title and reference pages) and should utilize proper APA citations and references.
The websites below are good places to begin looking for information regarding your specific chemical/compound

Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/substances/index.asp) Occupational Safety and Health Administration (https://www.osha.gov/chemicaldata/)

Select three public health statistical methods that you would use in a public health program for your selected health issue or health disease topic.

Compare and contrast qualitative and quantitative methods used for designing a program. (Use a 2×2-table format to present your analysis).
Review the decision tree for statistics. You can review the tree online at the following:

The Decision Tree for Statistics. (n.d.).

After reviewing the information:

Select three public health statistical methods that you would use in a public health program for your selected health issue or health disease topic.
Provide a complete analysis for each statistical method.
Explain why these methods are important and what data or information you could obtain for your program.

Write a 1-paragraph response. Support your methods with appropriate examples and scholarly references. Comment on the postings of at least two peers with scholarly information.

Explain the tests of causation and remoteness to determine whether the plaintiff suffered harm as a result of the defendant’s breach of duty Yes

1 2105AFE – ASSIGNMENT Semester 2, 2015 HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION (Week 11) (Please submit your Assignment via ‘SafeAssign’ submission point under the Assessment tab on L@GU). WEIGHTING: 15% INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS: Students may refer to course materials and textbooks to answer the question. This is an individual assessment item and not a group assignment. Accordingly, each student must submit a separate assignment. Faculty policy states that students who are proven to have cheated in the assignment will receive no marks for the whole assessment item. Please read the instructions in Section 6.1 of the Course Profile (Outline). Word Limit: 1700 – 2000 words. Please note the following: Referencing Cases: example – Donoghue v Stevenson (in italics) (the year of the case and other details need not be provided). Referencing legislation: The reference to the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) can be written in abbreviated form – CLA. A “Bibliography” or a List of References is NOT required. Framework for answering a legal problem The answer to the hypothetical question must be written under the framework of – Issues, Legal principles, Application of Law and Conclusion (ILAC). 2 You will be assessed on: • depth of understanding of the question and identification of relevant issues; • accuracy of the law (cases and legislation) used to support arguments • the extent to which you have applied the law to the issues and argued as required by the question. • correct spelling, grammar and proofreading. The use of relevant headings within the body of your answer is encouraged. Relevant Law: Do NOT write detailed explanation of the legal principles or rules under the “Relevant Law”. Please provide only the ‘names of cases and Sections/subsection numbers of the Legislation that provide the legal rules, which will be used in your ‘application of law’ part of your answer. Writing the “LAW” in brief would help you to not go over the maximum word limit. (Continue with a mini ‘Issue, Law Application’ with respect to the ‘elements of an action in negligence’) and finally provide an – Overall conclusion – You may have ONE overall conclusion at the end of the answer. For further information, please refer to the ‘Negligence Framework (General)’ document available under Assessment area on L@gu. Presentation: The assignment must demonstrate presentation, writing and literacy skills. The answers must be typed in Times New Roman font size 12.5 and double-spaced, should have the student’s name, and student number clearly visible. Pages should be numbered. Assignment cover sheet need NOT be attached. Assignments must be submitted via ‘SafeAssign’ submission points under Assessment tab on L@GU. Late submission penalties will apply unless the student has an approved extension from the Course Convenor. Please note that the late submission of evidence will only be accepted in very exceptional circumstances. 3 Assignments will not be accepted via email or fax. Students should keep a copy of the assignment for themselves. A detailed marking scheme will be available under the Assessment folder on Learning@GU. Students should scrutinise the scheme before submitting their assignment to ensure they have covered all relevant requirements. Hypothetical Question It is a wet and stormy Saturday night in Fortitude Valley near the Brisbane Central Business District. Herbert has left his car in a multi-story car park owned by the Brisbane City Council whilst he visits a local nightclub with work colleagues, as he has done so on almost a weekly basis for the last two years. After spending four hours drinking beer and socializing with his friends at the nightclub, Herbert returns to the car park. Herbert rides an elevator to the third level of the car park. Every level of the car park contains a small, dimly-lit lobby where the elevators are located. The floors of the lobbies are each lined with vinyl for the purpose of preventing people from slipping over. However, the floors still have the tendency to be slippery on wet days and nights when a large number of people are returning to their cars after walking through the rain. The Brisbane City Council is fully aware of the tendency of the vinyl lobby floors to be slippery when there has been rainfall. Although no warning signs have been placed in any of the lobbies due to the risk of theft, they have hired cleaning staff to regularly dry the floors during days and nights in which there has been significant rainfall. One month ago however, the cleaners were removed on weekend nights as a cost-cutting measure. The elevator arrives on the third level and Herbert walks out of the elevator. Whilst walking into the third level elevator lobby, Herbert glances at his watch and panics. He has just realized that it is 10:55pm and he needs to 4 rush back to his car to ensure he is able to drive out of the building before it closes at 11:00pm. Herbert starts to run through the lobby towards where his car is parked. He slips, falls over and breaks his leg and suffers facial injuries. As a result of these injuries, Herbert is hospitalized for four months accruing $60,000 in medical expenses. He was also unable to work as a bicycle courier for a period of six months resulting in a $20,000 loss of income. After he spent a month in the hospital, Herbert purchases an investment property in Surfers Paradise on the Gold Coast, in order to get his mind off his injuries which have caused him mild depression. Due to a slump in property prices over the last year, the property value has depreciated 10% and Herbert has lost a total of $20,000 in his investment. Advise Herbert if he can claim damages for his physical injuries and his financial losses in an action in negligence against the Brisbane City Council and what defences may apply. Explain your answer fully making reference to appropriate case law and the Civil Liability Act (2003) Qld.                                   Week 9                              Lecture Coverage   Need to Know In lecture?  Time limits for tort actions in Queensland and the differences between tort, criminal law and the law of contract No     Recognise that negligence is but one action under the law of torts and identify other actions under tort law Yes     Understand the role of common law and the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld)(“CLA”) in the context of negligence Yes     In a negligence action, explain when the defendant owes a duty of care to the plaintiff and the tests that the Court uses to determine whether a duty of care exists Yes Explain when the defendant breaches the duty of care and the tests that the Court uses to determine breach Yes Explain the tests of causation and remoteness to determine whether the plaintiff suffered harm as a result of the defendant’s breach of duty Yes Explain how contributory negligence and voluntary assumption of risk can be used to defend a negligence action and how a successful defence affects the plaintiff’s damages Yes Explain the duty of care owed by occupiers to persons entering premises Yes – Week 9 or 10 lecture       Note: The five main issues in a legal action relating to ‘negligence’ are:   1.   Did the D owe the P a duty of care? 2.   Did the D breach the duty of care? 3.   Did the P suffer harm (loss) as a result of the D’s breach of duty? 4.   Can D rely on any defences? 5.   What damages can P claim?             Important:   When answering negligence hypothetical questions please ensure that your answer incorporates the legal issues in the Flow Chart provided below. Flowchart – Negligence                       If “Yes” to Issue 1                                     If “Yes” to Issue 2 If “Yes” to Issue 3           General damages: pain and suffering; loss of expectation of life; loss of amenities; disfigurement . Specific damages: loss of earnings; medical expenses; gratuitous services Flowchart – Negligence (Occupier’s Liability)   NEGLIGENCE FRAMEWORK (GENERAL)[1] THIS IS AN EXAMPLE FRAMEWORK ONLY TO ASSIST IN PREPARING YOUR ANSWER TO HYPOTHETICAL PROBLEMS ON ‘NEGLIGENCE’ INCLUDING ‘OCCUPIERS’ LIABILITY’ AND ‘VICARIOUS LIABILITY’.  PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE “LAW” MUST BE SUPPORTED BY REFERENCES TO CASES AND LEGISLATION CIVIL LIABILITY ACT (2003) QLD.   TO DETERMINE IF LIABILITY ARISES IN NEGLIGENCE THREE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS MUST EXIST: 1.   Issue: Did Defendant (D) owe Plaintiff (P) a duty of care? Relevant Law (a)  Reasonable Foreseeability Test: ·         Would a reasonable person have foreseen that harm[2] may result from D’s conduct? ·         Did P come within a class of people that might possibly be at risk of harm by D’s actions? (b)  Control and Vulnerability: ·         Is Defendant in a position of control and Plaintiff in a position of vulnerability such that P relied on D and that position required D to protect P’s interests; ·         Any policy considerations such as: Fairness of extending liability to D Would such recognition lead the defendant to indeterminate or unlimited liability? (Case Examples: Donoghue v Stevenson; Chapman v Hearse; Hanlon v Hanlon; Swain v Waverley Municipal Council)   (Note:  Early in the development of the law of negligence, in order for there to be a duty of care two elements were considered necessary: (i) Foreseeability; and (ii) Proximity – Is P and D in a sufficiently proximate (or close) relationship? Proximity could exist in three ways: Jaensch v Coffey – (1) Physical proximity – space or time between the person or property of P and the person or property of D; (2) Circumstantial proximity – exists in particular circumstances (e.g. employees and employers, professionals and clients); (3) Causal proximity – closeness or directness of the relationship between D’s act / omission and P’s harm. In recent High Court cases, Perre v Appand (1999); Sullivan v Moody (2001) the proximity test has been replaced by the ‘control and vulnerability’ test as a general criterion to determine a duty of care.  Although ‘ proximity of relationship’ between D and P is still relevant in particular areas of negligence e.g. cases of economic loss and mental harm).   Application of law –  You must do by reference to facts of the hypothetical Question.   Once satisfied that a ‘duty of care is owed’, then must determine if the Defendant has breached the ‘standard of care required’ of D in the circumstances: (Note:  The provisions of the Civil Liability Act (2003) Qld apply to the following elements of Negligence)   2.   Issue: Did Defendant Breach the Duty of Care (Standard of Care)? Relevant Law Foreseeable risk of harm: ·         Was the risk of harm foreseeable? (section 9(1)(a) Civil Liability Act. ·         Was the risk not insignificant? (section 9(1)(b)). ·         Would a reasonable person in the position of D have taken the precautions against the risk of harm? (section 9(1)(c)). 4 Factors apply: (i)   The probability of harm if care were not taken (section 9(2)(a)) Lower probability = reasonable person less likely to take precautions (ii)  The likely seriousness of the harm (section 9(2)(b)) (iii)  The burden of taking precautions to avoid risk of harm (s 9(2)(c)) ·         What is the expense and inconvenience of removing the risk of harm? Small expense and little inconvenience = reasonable person likely to take the precautions. (iv)  The social utility of the activity that creates risk of harm (if relevant) (s  9(2)(d)) ·         how useful is the activity to society? Weigh social costs/benefits against probability and seriousness of harm.   Case Examples: (Students to do – please select the relevant case from this list or lecture notes to support the legal principles above) Bolton v Stone; Paris v Stepney Borough Council; Wyong Shire Council v Shirt; Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW v Dederer; Soper v Gold Coast City Council ;Waverley Council v Ferreira.     Note: There is no breach of duty if the defendant fails to warn of obvious risks of harm. (However, see the exceptions below). Obvious Risk: This includes: ·         Risks that are clear to the Plaintiff or within the common knowledge of the Plaintiff (section 13(2)), and may be obvious to the Plaintiff even if the probability of the risk occurring is low (section 13(3). If the risk of harm is “obvious” to the Plaintiff, then the Defendant’s liability will be reduced or limited. If the risk of harm is NOT OBVIOUS to the Plaintiff, then a Defendant’s liability is assessed by an application of ‘foreseeable risk of harm’ Test under section 9 of CLA (as explained above) Exceptions: ·         Defendant does NOT owe a duty to warn Plaintiff of an “obvious risk” of harm (s 15(1)) unless:- ·         Plaintiff has requested information about the risk (s 15(2)(a)); ·         Defendant is required by a written law to warn of the risk (s 15(2)(b)); ·         Defendant is a professional (not a doctor) and the applicable risk is a risk of death or personal injury arising from the provision of professional services by Defendant (s 15(2)(c)). Case Examples: Agar v Hyde; University of Wollongong v Mitchell.    Application of law –  You must do by reference to facts of the hypothetical Question. If you answer ‘yes’ to Issue 2 then go to Issue 3.   3.   Issue: Causation and Damage: Did Plaintiff suffer harm as a result of the breach of duty?   Relevant Law Factual causation: Did D’s breach of duty cause P’s harm? s11(1) ·         But for test: Would P have suffered harm but for D’s negligence? s11 (3) or ·         Common sense test: Can P prove on the balance of probabilities that D in fact caused P’s harm? ·         Is there a Novus Actus Interveniens? This is an event, which is not reasonably foreseeable and breaks the chain of causation between D’s negligence and P’s harm. Then D is not liable. Remoteness of Damage:  Should D be responsible for the harm (section 11(4) or is the harm too remote a consequence of D’s breach of duty? ·         Would a reasonable person have foreseen the kind of harm suffered by P? If no, the damage/loss is too remote. Case Examples: (Students to do – please select the relevant case from this list or lecture notes to support the legal principles above) State Rail Authority v Wiegold; Yates v Jones; Wagon Mound (No 1) case; Commonwealth v McLean; Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee.   Application of law –  You must do by reference to facts of the hypothetical Question.   (If you answer ‘yes’ to Issues 1, 2, 3, of the elements of negligence, then the Defendant is liable unless D can rely on one of two available Defences):    DEFENCES TO NEGLIGENCE 4.   Issue: Can Defendant rely on the Defences of ‘contributory negligence’ or ‘voluntary assumption of risk’?   Relevant Law (a)  Contributory Negligence: Plaintiff is partially at fault which contributed to P’s harm. ·         Court applies the breach of duty factors (section 9) and factual causation to work out whether P contributed to their own harm: (section 23); ·         If there is contributory negligence by P, Court will apportion liability in % terms between P and D; Ingram v Britten; Sayers v Harlow Urban District Council. ·         Court can apportion liability 100% to Plaintiff if it considers just and equitable to do so (section 24). (b)  Voluntary Assumption of Risk:  Plaintiff is aware of the risk of harm and has consented to risk.  Then Plaintiff bears the responsibility for the harm/loss: McCracken v Melbourne Storm Rugby League Football Club; Avram v Gusaroski. If the risk is obvious, then P presumed to be aware of an obvious risk of harm unless P can prove otherwise (s 14); Definition of obvious risk (see section 13)   Application of law –  You must do by reference to facts of the hypothetical Question.   5.   Overall Conclusion – Court to assess liability and Damages. What damages can Plaintiff claim? For voluntary assumption of risk: no damages awarded to P. For contributory negligence: a percentage of the damage claim awarded P. If no defence available to Defendant, full amount of damages awarded to P. [1] In any answer, you would need to back up the legal principles with relevant case law that applied the principles. Refer to lecture note Week 9 for the relevant case law. [2] Harm includes (but is not limited to) personal injury, property damage and economic loss Lecture  – Week 9 LAW OF TORTS Law of Negligence; and Liability of Occupiers of Premises (Required reading: Gibson (custom ed 2014) , Ch 7, 8 and Ch 9 pp 209 – 216); (Further reading (optional): Pentony, Ch 24 p 689 – 698; Ch 25 p 708 – 742; Latimer: 4.010-4.050; 4.060-4.170; 4.270 Objectives ·         define a tort and distinguish a tort from a breach of contract. ·         explain the elements that must be proved to make out the tort of negligence. ·         list the circumstances where courts have held that a duty of care is owed by one person to another and when that duty will be regarded as having been breached. ·         explain the defences to negligence. ·         Understand the role of the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) (“CLA”) in the context of negligence ·         outline the other types of liability situations in negligence.   1.   The Law of Torts The word tort is taken from the French word meaning “wrong”. ·         A tort is defined as an injury other than a breach of contract, which the law will remedy with damages. A tort consists of an act (or failure to act) by one person causing damage or injury to another person, or to property. ·         Torts v Contract: Torts are different from contractual breaches: contractual rights arise only because the contracting parties have intentionally agreed to perform legal obligations. In contrast, the law of torts protects the general rights of individuals: e.g. rights not to have one’s person, property, economic interests and reputation damaged or injured. ·         Damages in tort are awarded to restore the injured party to the position that he or she occupied before the breach. Damages in contract are awarded to place the injured party in the position that he or she would have occupied had the contract been performed. ·         The remedy claimed under the law of torts: the common law remedy of damages or an equitable remedy, e.g. an injunction. 1.1   Civil Liability Law Reforms Introduction Australia has experienced monumental change in the tort of negligence. Following public concern about the costs and availability of liability insurance and the collapse of HIH, one of Australia’s largest insurance companies, the State and Commonwealth governments appointed Justice Ipp, a Supreme Court judge, to review the tort of negligence. The Ipp review made a number of recommendations to change the law. With the exception of Northern Territory, all States and Australian Capital Territory passed civil liability legislation, which adopted the Ipp review recommendations to varying degrees. The Queensland government passed the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) (“CLA”) which commenced operation on 2 December 2002.  You do not need to know the entire legislation, only the sections which are covered in the lecture. It is beyond the scope of this course to consider all of the civil liability reforms. The CLA makes some changes to the laws of negligence relating to standard of care, causation, voluntary assumption of risk, contributory negligence and assessment of damages. The CLA does not affect the common law principles concerning the general duty of care (covered in Week 9 lecture). It is important to note that the CLA is not a “codification” of the laws of negligence. This means that the CLA does not replace all of the existing common law principles of negligence. Remember from Week 1 lecture that where there is an inconsistency between the common law and statute, statute will override the common law. The CLA overrides most, but not all, of the common law principles relating to negligence. The Act makes life complex for lawyers. Any acts of negligence before 2 December 2002 are covered by the common law/case law. Any negligent act after 2 December 2002 is determined by the CLA. You will realise from the lectures that the CLA has adopted many principles that are similar to the common law. Thus, case law, which pre-dates the CLA will still provide us with guidance as to how the court will apply the CLA in the future.           1.2      Types of Tort The law of torts consists of many and varied causes of action. To list just a few: ·         trespass to land ·         trespass to persons ·         nuisance ·         defamation ·         negligence   2.   Elements of Negligence Legal Principles:  In order for the plaintiff to succeed in an action of negligence, it is necessary for the plaintiff to prove that: ·         the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of care recognised by law; ·         the defendant failed to conform to the required standard of care and therefore breached that duty of care; ·         Causation: the plaintiff sustained injury and/or damage as a result of the defendant’s breach of duty or care, i.e. a causal connection exists between the conduct of the defendant and the injury or damage suffered by the plaintiff; and ·         Remoteness of damage: the plaintiff’s damage or injury was not too remote a consequence of the negligence of the defendant.   2.1           DUTY OF CARE      Legal Principles:  Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562. (precedent) Not all careless conduct will give rise to a cause of action in negligence. Conduct that may be considered to be morally wrong will not necessarily amount to a legal wrong. Lord Atkin aptly drew this distinction in Donoghue v Stevenson.. In Donoghue v Stevenson Lord Atkin laid down a principle subsequently held to be pivotal in determining when a duty of care can be said to arise. The principle, which has become known as the ‘neighbour principle’ was expressed in the following terms: “You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour.’ ‘Who, then, in law is my neighbour? The answer seems to be – persons who are so closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation as being so affected when I am directing my mind to the acts and omissions which are called in question”.   2.1.1    Requirements necessary to establish a Duty of Care: (a)    Test of Reasonable Foreseeability. (b)    Relationship of Control and Vulnerability (a)   Test of “Reasonable Foreseeability” Reasonable foresight is the foresight of the reasonable person. The foresight of a reasonable person is the foresight which justice and fairness, objectively determined requires. ·         There must be a reasonably foreseeable likelihood of harm Nova Mink Ltd v Trans Canada Airlines [1951] 2 D.L.R. 241. Facts: The defendant airline flew an airplane over the plaintiff’s mink farm. The noise from the aircraft was shown to have upset the female minks and to have caused them to eat their young. Decision: ·         The court held no duty of care was owed by the defendant airline to the plaintiff. The plaintiff had been unable to prove that there was a reasonably foreseeable likelihood of harm of the kind that occurred in the circumstances although the possibility of such harm existed.   (ii)        Harm to a particular plaintiff, as an individual need not be reasonably foreseeable. It is sufficient that plaintiff as one of a class be within the range of reasonable foresight Chapman v Hearse [1961] 106 C.L.R. 112. Facts: Dr Cherry stopped to help Chapman following a road accident in which Chapman had been thrown unconscious onto the road. Hearse, who was driving along the road following the accident, negligently ran down and killed Dr Cherry. Decision ·         The Court held that Hearse owed a duty to avoid injury to Dr Cherry. It was not necessary that Dr Cherry himself be shown to have been within the range of reasonable foresight. It was concluded that a reasonable person might foresee the attendance of a class of persons, of which Dr Cherry was one, fulfilling a moral and social duty to assist victims of the accident. (iii)   A duty of care must be established as owed by the defendant to each plaintiff. Where there is more than one plaintiff, one of them cannot claim a right to damages, which is derivative of a duty of care owed by the defendant to another. Hay (Bourhill) v Young [1943] A.C. 92. (precedent) Facts: The plaintiff, who was eight months pregnant, alighted from a tram and was in the process of collecting her basket from the driver’s platform when she heard a collision between a motor cyclist and a motor car approximately 45 to 50 feet away from her. After the cyclist’s body had been removed she approached the scene and saw blood left on the road. She sustained nervous shock and subsequently lost her unborn baby. Decision ·         The court dismissed the action holding that the cyclist did not owe the plaintiff a duty of care. It was not reasonably foreseeable that someone in the plaintiff’s position would suffer injury from the cyclist’s negligent driving, although the motor car driver by contrast was within the range of reasonable foresight (iv)  Generally, no duty of care is owed where harm to an ordinary person is not reasonably foreseeable. The fact of an abnormal susceptibility to the harm in question does not itself create a special duty of care. However, where that susceptibility is known a duty of care arises.   Levi v Colgate-Palmotive Pty Ltd [1941] 41 S.R. (NSW) 48. Facts: The plaintiff used a free sample of the defendant’s bath-salts. As a consequence her skin turned red and an itch developed which persisted for some time. The evidence showed that the salts were made of the usual ingredients but the plaintiff was unusually allergic to the ingredients. Decision: No special duty was owed to the plaintiff as she was unusually allergic the ingredients.   Haley v London Electricity Board [1965] A.C. 778. Facts: The plaintiff, who was blind, negotiated his way to a bus stop each working day by using a cane. Workmen, employed by the defendant, began excavations on the pavement that lay along the plaintiff’s route. The workmen dug a trench and placed an obstacle near the trench (a punner-hammer) as a precaution to passing pedestrians. The plaintiff’s cane missed the obstacle so that he tripped and fell onto the pavement. As a consequence, the plaintiff became deaf. Decision ·         The duty of care extended to all those persons whose use of the roadway was reasonably likely and thus reasonably foreseeable. Use of the roadway by blind persons was held to be reasonably foreseeable and the blind person was one of such a class of persons. The obstacle used was not an adequate precaution against likely injury to the plaintiff in the circumstances. The Electricity Board owed a duty of care to the Haley. (b)    Relationship of Control and Vulnerability ·         Whether there was a relationship of vulnerability or dependency between defendant and plaintiff; was the defendant in a position to be protective of the plaintiff or was the defendant in a controlling position through resources, knowledge or legal duty; was the plaintiff reliant on the defendant? ·         Other factors that a court considers include: the type of harm suffered by the plaintiff and any relevant moral or ethical question; the need for people to take personal responsibility for their own actions; the possibility of indeterminate liability – if a duty of care is recognized could it be extended to so many that an indeterminate liability arises which are public policy considerations. Proximity:   Early in the development of the law of negligence, in order for there to be a duty of care two elements were considered necessary: (i) Foreseeability; and (ii) Proximity – Is plaintiff and defendant in a sufficiently proximate (or close) relationship. In some circumstances, although injury to the plaintiff due to the defendant’s negligence is reasonably foreseeable, the court will hold that no duty of care is owed because the relationship between the plaintiff and defendant is not sufficiently proximate. Hence the requirement of proximity limits or controls the general test of reasonable foreseeability. As such, proximity is a legal principle that is used to further narrow the duty of care liability. ·         In Donoghue v Stevenson the concept of proximity was expressed by the requirement that a close and direct connection between the defendant’s conduct and the plaintiff’s injury be reasonably foreseeable. ·         In Jaensch v Coffey Deanne J. provided three broad, non-exhaustive categories of proximity: Physical proximity – nearness in the sense of space and time between the person or property of the plaintiff and the person or property of the defendant. Circumstantial proximity – where there is an existing relationship between the plaintiff and defendant, which would justly give, rise to a duty of care. For example, the relationship between an employer and his/her employee or of a professional person and his/her client. Causal proximity – where the position of the plaintiff in relation to the defendant would give rise to a close and direct connection between the conduct of the defendant and loss or injury to the plaintiff: Bryan v Maloney (1995). Facts: A builder built a house for X. The house was built with defective materials. X sold the house to the plaintiff and cracks developed in the house because of the defective work. Held: the builder was liable. The direct connection between the negligence of the builder and loss suffered by the plaintiff created the necessary causal proximity.   Jaensch v Coffey Facts:  Plaintiff’s husband, police motorcyclist, was badly injured in a collision with a car negligently driven by the D. The P was not at the scene of the accident but she was called to the hospital. The P saw her husband in severe pain before and between a series of emergency operations. The Plaintiff feared that her husband would die. Although he recovered, the experience caused the P to develop severe anxiety and depression. P sued the D alleging that her nervous shock had been caused by the Defendant’s negligent driving. The D denied that he owed the P a duty of care.   Decision ·         The Defendant owed the Plaintiff a duty of care in respect of the psychiatric injury. ·         Justice Deane described those situations which will satisfy proximity, including:- ·         Where the plaintiff feared for his or her own life or safety or that of some other person being a relative; ·         the Plaintiff either saw or heard personal injury or death to another; or ·         the Plaintiff saw or heard the immediate aftermath of an accident either at the scene or elsewhere. However, in later cases, the High Court has cast doubts upon use of proximity as general test for duty of care. Proximity is considered not applicable in all cases of alleged negligence, especially where the alleged negligence involves claims of pure economic loss. (Pure Economic loss is financial loss arising a negligent misstatement relied upon which leads to loss of investments (i.e. not from personal injury or property damage). In recent High Court cases, Perre v Appand (1999); Sullivan v Moody (2001) th

Evaluate organizational theories in relation to healthcare administration utilizing critical thinking and collaborative therapeutic intervention strategies of the professional role

Week 5: Management of Power Paper Purpose The purposes of this assignment are to: a) identify and articulate at least one leadership theory to support your management of power as the nurse executive at Saint Louis Medical Center (SLMC) (CO 1, 2), b) compare and contrast organizational structures that may influence the management of power of your role (CO 3), and c) provide empirical, scholarly evidence to support your assignment in a clear, succinct, and scholarly manner (CO 4). Course Outcomes Through this assignment, the student will demonstrate the ability to: (CO 1) Evaluate organizational theories in relation to healthcare administration utilizing critical thinking and collaborative therapeutic intervention strategies of the professional role.(PO 5) (CO 2) Synthesize management and leadership theories with a caring, holistic, collaborative approach in preparation of nurse administrator roles; utilizing critical thinking, communication skills and therapeutic intervention strategies, of the professional role related to health outcomes. (PO 2, 5) (CO 3) Compare and contrast the effect of organizational structures, e.g. organizational charts, standards, resources, philosophy, procedures, and culture on work processes and organizational and patient outcomes; utilizing critical thinking, interprofessional collaboration, communication skills and strategies of the professional role. (PO 1, 2) (CO 4) Apply the use of research in the evaluation of healthcare outcomes; utilizing critical thinking skills, and interprofessional research strategies. (PO 4) Due Date:Sunday 11:59 p.m. MT at the end of Week 5 into the CCN Dropbox. This assignment will automatically be uploaded to Turnitin (TII). Total Points Possible: 200 Requirements: 1.     This paper will be graded on quality of paper information, use of citations, use of Standard English grammar, sentence structure, and organization based on the required components. 2.     Create this assignment using Microsoft (MS) Word, which is the required format for all Chamberlain documents. You can tell that the document is saved as a MS Word document because it will end in “.docx.” 3.     Submit to the appropriate. Any questions about this paper may be discussed in the weekly Q & A Discussion topic. 4.     The length of the paper is to be no greater than three (3) pages, excluding title page and reference page. 5.     APA format (6th edition) is required in this assignment, including a title page and reference page. Use APA level 1 headings for the organizational structure of this assignment.Remember that the introduction does not carry a heading that labels it as a level heading in APA format. The first part of your paper is assumed to be the introduction. See APA manual for details. See resource under Course Resources, “Guidelines for Writing Professional Papers.” Use the suggested format and headings to organize your assignment: 1.     Include introduction (do not label as a heading in APA format) 2.     Leadership theory 3.     Organizational structure influences 4.     Supporting evidence 5.     Conclusion Preparing the paper Note: Use the resources under Course Resources related to SLMC to assist in completion of this assignment, as required. 1.     Clearly introduce your management of power in the introduction paragraph. Include a sentence that states the purpose of your paper. 2.     Clearly identify and articulate at least one leadership theory to support your management of power in your role as the nurse executive at SLMC. 3.     Clearly compare and contrast the effect of organizational structures (at least two) that may influence your management of power at SLMC. 4.     Include of a minimum of three sources of scholarly, empirical evidence. See resources under Course Resources related to SLMC if you need to review the information. 5.     Provide concluding statements that should summarize your overall assignment content. 6.     The paper will be three pages maximum, excluding title and reference page(s). 7.     Title and reference page(s) must be in APA format (6th edition). 8.     Use 12 Times New Roman font and one-inch margins on all sides of the paper.

What are the differences between Augustinian and Irenaean theodicy? Which of the two kinds of theodicy does Hick favor? Why does he favor one over the other? What is Hick’s soul-making theodicy?

Select 4 questions:
1. Based on Anselm’s ontological argument,what is the nature of the contradiction in the state of mind of an atheist? Gaunilo claims that, for Anselm the conceivability of any concept X logically implies its actual existence is that a correct interpretation of Anselm? explain your answer why is the ontological argument considered as a prior theistic argument?

2. Considering that God, for Pascal is infinitely incomprehensible what then is the role of Pascal’s wager in the formation of a belief in God’s existence? Does theoretical reason have a role in the formation of such a belief? give an account of Pascal psychology of belief or his understanding of the belief-formation process.

3. What is the significance of the stories about the ship owner and the religious islanders to Clifford’s argument? What is wrong with the actions and beliefs of the ship owner and the agitators in the island? Why is belief important according to Clifford? For Clifford, why is wrongness attributable to a belief (not just an action)? Why is it the case that even Uneducated people have the duty to believe according to evidence? For Clifford is it permissible to believe a true belief without sufficient evidence? Explain your answer.

4. Give an account of Aquinas argument for the existence of a necessary being and an account of Aquinas is argument for the existence of the first efficient cause. Based on Aquinas first argument from motion give an account of an Aristotelian proof for each of the following claims: “everything that is moved is moved by another” and “it is not possible to proceed to infinity” how did Aquinas prove God’s existence in his second argument from motion?

5. Give an account of Paley’s analogical version of the teleological argument. Give a brief account of the fine-tuning teleological argument. How do current scientific theories (e.g evolution and multiverse) challenge the teleological argument?

Select 2 questions:

1. What are the differences between Augustinian and Irenaean theodicy? Which of the two kinds of theodicy does Hick favor? Why does he favor one over the other? What is Hick’s soul-making theodicy?
2. Give an account of the problem of evil as an argument for Atheism. What is the difference between the logical problem of evil and the evidential problem of evil? Why do many philosophers think that the logical problem of evil is a weaker version than the evidential problem of evil?

Develop an educational curriculum for nursing students on the nursing process, critical thinking, critical reasoning and the implementation needed to deliver quality nursing care

This assignment has to be complete by Sunday 22,2016 11:00pm.

Develop an educational curriculum for nursing students on the nursing process, critical thinking, critical reasoning and the implementation needed to deliver quality nursing care:

Must include :measurable terminal learning objectives

                      Content outline

                       Teaching strategies Ex role play flipping class

                      Resource

                     Handouts

Identify industries outside of health care that have deployed innovative management techniques, operational practices, or technology to improve their workforce.

Identify industries outside of health care that have deployed innovative management techniques, operational practices, or technology to improve their workforce. 
Identify best practices and determine which could be implemented to improve the workforce for a specific health care service, facility, or other health sector-related occupation.
Write a 350- to 525-word article that explains how a specific management technique, operational practice, or technology can be used to improve a specific health care workforce.

Cite at least 3 reputable references to support your assignment (e.g., trade or industry publications, government or agency websites, scholarly works, or other sources of similar quality).
Format your assignment according to APA guidelines.

Examine the element of INTERVAL in “Recitatif.” Specifically, consider the durations of the privileged episodes that form the plot of the story and the time-gaps that occur in between.

1. In “Recitatif,” most of the story is set in a particular region of New York State. What sort of connotations does the story provide for this “Place”? What are the cultural characteristics of this geographic setting? In keeping with the lecture slides (from both class sessions nine and ten), what kinds of demographics are indicated? Compose a thorough statement based on both the lecture slides and the actual implications provided by the text. Then, briefly describe how both Roberta and Twyla continue to integrate their lives to this “Place” (once they leave St. Bonny’s).

2. Study Toni Morrison’s statements on page 155-156 before responding. Twyla and Roberta meet and become friends in the late 1950s. Before they meet again, the Civil Rights Act and the Voter Rights Act are passed, ushering in a new social era in the United States. Compose a theory that explains why this cultural backdrop seems to push the two women apart as opposed to drawing them together. Base as much of your theory on the actual text, but bring in some of your own social observations as well (if possible).

3. Write an accurate description of the SPACE of the Sunday encounter between Connie and Arnold Friend in “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?”This account should take into consideration as many of the factors indicated in the instructional materials as possible. Using quotations taken directly from the text of the story, describe how Arnold uses the physical dimensions of the space to his advantage.

4. Examine the element of INTERVAL in “Recitatif.” Specifically, consider the durations of the privileged episodes that form the plot of the story and the time-gaps that occur in between. Choose ONE time gap and episode (preceding or following) that strikes you as having the strongest impact on the relationship between Twyla and Roberta. Explain why this gap and episode (or episode and gap) hold so much long lasting power over the two. In your response, make sure you offer a full explanation of how TIME (in its duration) plays such a strong role in the dynamic.

Interview a governmental public health agency or someone working in healthcare

Interview a governmental public health agency or someone working in healthcare (clinician, hospital administrator, etc). Summarize your interview. Include challenges, strengths, and other information you found important/interesting:

 

GPH714 Principles of Public Health

Topic: Informational Interview

 

 

Using the table below as a guide, develop interview questions to ask a representative of a governmental public health agency or someone working in health care.  You do not need to include all the aspects listed below.  In addition, you may include other information not listed in the table.  Your interview should not last more than 1 hour.

 

Organization/Department ·        mission and purpose

·        structure

·        goals

·        priority issues

Public Health Practice ·        implementation of 10 EPHS

·        public health infrastructure

·        emerging issues

Interprofessional Collaboration ·        key partnerships

·        public health working with healthcare

General ·        strengths

·        challenges

·        opportunities

 

Based on the information gathered in the interview, summarize your interview and lessons learned.  Assignment should be between 2-3 pages double spaced.  Submit the completed assignment via Blackboard.

Structure your written assignment accordingly:

·        Introduction/Overview

·        Describe the organization.

·        Identify how the organization puts public health into practice.

·        List examples of interprofessional collaboration.

·        Provide your insight on the organization based upon the concepts learned during the past 2 modules. This may include your recommendations for the organization.

·        Incorporate information about strengths, weaknesses and/or opportunities in the summary.

Note on writing:

Ø  Use professional writing.

Ø  Do not use personal pronouns (I, me, we, us, etc.).

Ø  See rubric in syllabus for guidance on grading.

 

Ø  This assignment should include very limited references/sources. It should mostly be in your words.  If using outside sources, please reference using AMA format.