Gun Control And Gun Regulation - 1806 Words

As I know, gun regulation has always been a controversial topic among the United States. According to a Federal report, Lisa M. Hepburn and David Hemenway discovered that over 60 percent of all homicides in the United States in 1999 involved a firearm and firearm ownership in the United States, particularly handgun ownership, is much more common than in other developed nations(Firearm Availability and Homicide: A Review of the Literature). Also the research of the Homicide Trends in the United States, 1980-2008, done by the Office of Justice Programs, data from 1980-2008 shows that homicides were most often committed with handguns. And the number of handguns-committed-homicides is averagely triple that of the number of homicides committed by other weapons (Smith and Cooper). Guns could killed many people as a lethal weapon, so I think guns should be more strictly regulated in U.S. to reduce crimes. The shooting on November 20th at Florida State University hurt three students. One of the three victims shot and wounded, Nathan Scott, wants to see concealed gun allowed at college(Mcgrory, Kathleen). People like Scott might think that if there had has somebody carrying a gun in the campus, the gunman could have been killed earlier and victims could avoid the shot. However, if there had more weapons, the situation would have been worsen. In an active-shooter situation on campus, the last thing campus police need is multiple gunmen who could potentially be engaged in aShow MoreRelatedGun Control And Gun Regulation1867 Words   |  8 PagesGun regulation has been a serious controversial topic over years. Politicians from opposite parties always have extensive debates about it during election time. Advocates for gun right believe the ability to own a gun gives people protection. Advocates for gun restriction believe guns are weapons and would do more harm than good. In the past years, the deathly incidents involving guns have significantly increased. Shooting in Orlando and the shooting in Dallas are one of the most memorable eventsRead MoreGun Control and Regulation Essay1716 Words   |  7 PagesGun Control and Regulation The idea of gun control and regulation is becoming more and more popular throughout the U.S., although it may still bring up resistance among some people. Guns are sort of a foundation of American culture. This countrys freedom was won over bloody and heroic wars with guns. Guns are portrayed throughout television, movies, and video games. Guns are a popular symbol of power, control, authority, dominance, and can be associated with security and defenseRead MoreGun Control Regulations Should Be Banned Essay1535 Words   |  7 PagesGun violence in recent years has increased significantly in various parts of the word. Most often the ones caught in the crossfire are children and young adults; who are also perpetrators. The question every wants to know is: Are gun laws, strict enough and what else can be done to reduce such violence from occurring. This is the debate that lobbyist and government officials have been arguing over for years. With more lives being affected on a regular basis, the increase concerns arise as to howRead MoreGun Control Regulations Act Of 19751058 Words   |  5 PagesLafayette have recently been the settings of dreadful tragedies. Each of these catastrophes results in select politicians, and even President Barrack Obama, demanding Gun control across the United States of America. Some anti-gun activists desire stricter gun laws, while other anti-gun activists have acquired aspirations for a ban on all guns across the nation. They claim that the Second Amendment is outdated, and that we will be safer in the complete absence of firearms. This has been, and continues toRead MoreGun Control, Or Firearm Regulation, Can Be Defined As The1929 Words   |  8 PagesGun control, or firearm regulation, can be defined as the set of laws or policies that regulate the manufacture, sale, transfer, possession, modification, or use of firearms by civilians. In America and countries across the world, the distribution and legalization of guns and gun related products has created great controversy in contemporary politics. The purpose of the debate being an attempt to find the middle area between constituent safety and rights of civilians to own or protect themselvesRead MoreNo Guns More Crime : Gun Control Laws And Regulations Across The United States1486 Words   |  6 PagesNo Guns More Crime A growing number of states in the US have passed stricter gun policies for citizens to own bare arms. The almighty goal is to have all the guns taken away from gun owners and future gun owners. The policies have adjusted citizens to go through a process just to obtain a gun license or permit. For example, rigorous background checks and sponsorship from law enforcement. This process contradicts the 2nd Amendment from the U.S Constitution. Every American has the constitutionalRead MoreGun Control Regulations Do Not Deter Violence And Crime1356 Words   |  6 Pagespeople were killed by gun violence in 2013 alone.† After the Sandy Hook shooting, in Newtown, Connecticut with a death toll of 26, Congress has still failed to pass these regulations which 90% of Americans wish to have. While tightening the gun control may not guarantee the complete absence of mass shootings or gun violence and crime, it has definately been shown to significantly reduce these rates. America is in need of tighter gun control laws because current regulations do not deter violence andRead MoreGun Control Is The Government Regulation Of The Sale And Ownership Of Firearms1660 Words   |  7 Pages2/22/16 Block 3 DC Gun Control Gun control is the â€Å"government regulation of the sale and ownership of firearms.† (Dictionary.com). In D.C., handguns, rifles, shotguns, and revolvers may be registered. Sawed-off shotguns, machine guns, short barreled rifles, unsafe handguns, assault weapons, and .50 caliber rifles are all prohibited in D.C., meaning that there is no possible way to own them. (DC.gov, 2014). A single person may only register one handgun every 30 days unless the gun was owned in anotherRead MoreGun Control1095 Words   |  5 PagesGun Control: The Battle Rages On Abstract This paper discusses and is centered around the on-going debate over gun control, I directly address how each major political party views this subject and what I believe the United States Government should do to be able to best combat this tremendous issue. I use research from multiple sources that contrast each side of the argument and give an overall insight into the world of modernized gun control. Gun Control: The Battle Rages On With the SecondRead MorePresident Obama s 2015 Executive Actions On Gun Control1242 Words   |  5 PagesActions on Gun Control. National Conference of State Legislatures. 5 Jan. 2016. Web. 09 Jan. 2016. President Obama s 2015 Executive Actions on Gun Control. Susan Frederick is the senior federal affairs counsel at National Conference of State Legislatures. She writes an article, President Obama s 2015 Executive Actions on Gun Control, in which she gives an overview of President Obama’s actions regarding gun regulation policy. Frederick begins by writing that the new regulations towards gun control are

What Makes Someone A Criminal - 1461 Words

What makes someone a criminal? June from Brotherly Love is a criminal in the laws eyes but not really one in the communities eyes. Brotherly Love is a movie about a star basketball player named sergio and his friends and family. June is the oldest brother of his siblings and he takes care of them. In the laws eyes he is a criminal but in the eyes of the community and to his family he is just someone who is taking care of his family the only way he knows how. June is an outlaw hero for many reasons such as his age, looks, and his lack of care for laws. Brotherly Love is a movie about a the number one ranked basketball player who lives in Philadelphia and attends Overbrook High School along with his sister Jackie. His father died and now†¦show more content†¦So in Junes eyes he has to make quick money and a lot of it. His sister also asks for fifty dollars everyday before school. Even some of the people in the community blame the hood rather than than the gangster or drug deal er. Meaning they say it is because they grew up in the hood that they are selling drugs and acting out instead of blaming the person for doing the crime. For example when June and Sergio went into the barbershop the barber was talking to Sergio and said â€Å"I done seen this hood take down the best.† His community does not think of him as a criminal instead they are divided in half. One side thinks that the hood did this to him and the other half thinks that he is just doing this to support his family. Either way his community does not see him as a criminal instead they blame everything else. June himself knows that he is doing illegal things and he does not seem to care. He thinks it is a quick way to get money to support his family. Society on the other hand looks down upon these actions. They think it is not enough of a reason to just say he is doing this because this is what he was raised to see or he is just doing it to support his family. While June and his three frie nds were hanging out in his room one of his friends started swinging a gun and June said â€Å"stop†. His friend then said â€Å"you scared to die.’ June replied with â€Å" No I just have responsibilities.† June knows that these illegal actions have consequences but he does notShow MoreRelatedWhat Makes Someone A Criminal?1753 Words   |  8 Pages Paper 1 What makes someone a criminal? I would imagine that this question is on a lot of peoples minds, everyone wants to know what makes someone commit the crimes that they do. Well there are seven theories, deterrence, rational choice, routine activities, biological, bio social, psychoanalytical, and psychological. These theories help us understand why people are criminals, and they also help us determine why some of us are not. Using theseRead MoreWhat Makes Someone Become A Criminal?2312 Words   |  10 PagesWhat Makes Someone Become a Criminal? Have you ever watched the news or read an article about a horrific crime that was committed and wonder what would make a person do such a terrible thing? Is there a biological, psychological, or social factor that causes these actions? Are they born with a specific gene or is there something psychological that eventually surfaces that causes their actions? Are people born innocent and criminal tendencies are learned throughout life through observations, environmentRead MoreTaking a Look at the Death Penalty1029 Words   |  4 Pagesthat has always had moral principles and ethical issues. There’s really no in between with what people believe, they are either fully for the death penalty, or completely against it. However, both sides have completely ethical reasons as to why they believe what they do. People supporting the death penalty claim that it is deterrence because it prevents future murders, while other people believe that if someone takes a life then they should give t heir life. People against the death penalty feel itRead MoreWhat Makes a Criminal?734 Words   |  3 PagesWhat makes a criminal? Can anyone become a criminal? What makes people do certain things and behave a certain way? There are many contributing factors that leads to criminal behavior such as the economy, social environment, family, mental disorders etc. A criminal is someone who has committed a crime or broken the law. Anyone and everyone can become a criminal. Deviant behavior is seen everywhere in the world today. There are many types of crimes, from speeding, to stealing, on up to being a serialRead MoreDiscussing the Death Penalty1472 Words   |  6 Pagesremoved it as a choice. Why is this debate important? Well as U.S. citizens we need to make a decision of what is the best way to deal with criminals. Is it better to execute these criminals or incarcerate them? This paper will discuss the considered pros and cons of the death penalty and what my view is, on this topic. Proponents of the death penalty have the belief that a criminal should be killed for what he or she has done. They believe that it is moral because it creates a feeling of justiceRead MoreCapital Punishment Should Be Abolished1115 Words   |  5 Pagescrimes can lead one to an equally severe punishment known as capital punishment. Capital punishment is the authorization to kill someone for the crime he or she has committed. Capital punishment, commonly referred to as the death penalty, should be abolished in all states because it can put innocent lives at risk, it costs millions of dollars each year, and killing someone, even if they have done wrong, is never the solution. The death penalty puts thousands of lives at risk each year. WithoutRead MoreThe State Laws And Regulations904 Words   |  4 Pagesfrom the idea that the state or the government is an institution that was put in place to protect the community. The state enforces laws and regulations in order to ensure everything is in order and that everything is well for the citizens. When someone has done something that has breached a law on the highest offense possible, in this case, first degree murder, then it is recognized by the state and the public that the person is a threat to community. The person has harmed the community and hasRead MoreThe Wrongful Acts Of The United States850 Words   |  4 Pagesbe considerate and realized that we make mistake, but we need to learn from it and have another chance to make things right. Prison it is a way to punish and give a second chance to a person even if it is for the rest of their life. We must never take a life for another life, because we will be becoming a criminal as well. The wrongful acts of punishment in this society is to create deterrence, torture, and self satisfaction; instead of just putting criminals in jail without deciding if they shouldRead MoreThe Criminal Mind, What Does One Know About It? All One926 Words   |  4 PagesThe criminal mind, what does one know about it? All one hears about is what a criminal did wrong. One never hears the reason behind why the individual did the crime. Isn’t one curious as to how the mind of criminal works? That’s why there are people who study for years trying to learn the concept of getting inside a criminal’s mind. These individuals are known as a criminal psychologist. The job of a criminal psychologist is to study the wills, thoughts, intentions, and reactions of criminals. TheRead MoreEssay about Capital Punishment1022 Words   |  5 Pagesseveral years later. They say they have learned their lesson, but yet when they do get out they commi t more crimes. Thus, sending them back into jail. The only way to make sure these ruthless murderers don’t commit these crimes again is by capital punishment. As the Bible says, quot;an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. quot; If someone commits a capital offense, they should receive a capital punishment, because the state won’t have to pay for the criminal’s lifetime in jail, it provides the most

Case Study on Diploma of Nursing - MyAssignmentHelp

Questions: Part 1: In your owns words, briefly describe the following legal and ethical concepts: (That is: research, paraphrase and correctly reference your understanding of the following terms :) Ethics Bioethics Nursing ethics Autonomy Non-maleficence Beneficence Justice Rights Civil Law Common Law Stature Law Vicarious Liability Open Disclosure Precedent Defendant Plaintiff Trespass Damages Harassment Assault Battery False Imprisonment Defamation Right to Refuse Part 2: Case Study Susan is a 76 year old lady who was swooped by a magpie when out walking. The bird hit Susans left eye at speed and caused severe injury. The ambulance is called and Susan is taken to City South Hospital. Susan is triaged in the emergency department where she was given pain relief and reviewed by the Ophthalmic surgeon. The surgeon tells Susan that although it is not urgent, she will need to have surgery on her eye. The surgeon has a cancellation on his theatre list that afternoon. So he asks Susan to consent to having the surgery that afternoon. Hazy from the pain medication, Susan signs the consent form. As a result of the extent of injury to the eye, Susan looses permanent sight in her left eye. Whilst recovering in the ward, Susans friend (a doctor) comes to visit her. EN Stuart who is looking after Susan, tells Susans friend that Susan is blind in one eye after surgery and gives Susans chart to the friend to read when he requested. EN Stuart gave the friend the chart because she believed that it was alright to do so because he was a doctor. It is City South Hospitals policy that bed rails are used for all post operative patients. EN Stuart did not put the rails up and Susan fell out of bed and hit her head. EN Stuart does not want to get into trouble so she does not tell anyone or document the event. EN Stuart helps Susan back to bed. Susan then develops a delirium secondary to a hematoma on her brain. Susans behaviour is quite erratic and the RN uses a sheet to tie her to the bed. The afternoon shift arrives and the nurse assigned to Susan notices that she is retained to the bed via the sheet and is non-responsive. The nurse calls for assistance and medical team arrive however they are unable to revive Susan. 1. Please explain if legal, informed consent was obtained from Susan. In the answer discuss:a) What is Informed Consent? Include in your definition the legal age of consent. b) Was the consent obtained from Susan Informed Consent? Explain your answer by applying one (1) example of legislation, regulation, guideline or policy that guide nursing practice in regard to informed consent.c) Discuss the four (4) elements to the process of open disclosure in the health care environment, in your discussion, include your role as an EN and the roles of other health care workers, use examples from the case study to show your understanding of the principles of open disclosure.2. Please explain whether EN Stuart should have given Susans chart to her friend to read? In the answer:a) Define privacy and define confidentiality.b) Then, provide two (2) examples of legislation, regulation, guidelines or policies that guide nursing practice and apply these to EN Stuarts actions in regard to privacy and c onfidentiality of documentation.3. Please discuss whether EN Stuart was negligent and whether he breached his duty of care to Susan. In the answer discuss:a) The tort of negligence including 1) duty of care, 2) breach of duty of care, 3) standard of care, 4) foreseeability, 5) omission and 6) reasonable standard b) Using one (1) example of legislation or regulation that guides nursing practice in regard to duty of care, and apply it to your discussion of negligence above.4. EN Stuart did not document the use of physical restraint. a) What are the legal requirements for documentation in your role as an EN? b) Document a nursing progress note for the use of physical restraint on a patient c) What is the protocol for using restraint in a healthcare facility? (list the steps).5. Susans death is a coroners case. a) Discuss the functions of the State Coroner b) What is the legislation and/or regulation that guides nursing practice in regard to reportable deaths, including the nursess resp onsibilities? 6. An inquest is held into Susans death.a) Define what is meant by the term Expert Witness. b) Discuss what evidence might be required by the coroners court, and include the evidence that EN Stuart could be asked to provide.7. Explain if EN Stuart was in breach of the Codes and Standards that govern EN practice? Using the Codes and Standards that govern EN practice, identify and discuss how EN Stuart was in breach of one (1) from each of the following documents: a) Nursing Code of Conductb) Nursing Code of Ethics and c) Enrolled Nursing Competency Standards8. Choose an ethical dilema from Susans situation, and in your own words, define the steps of the Moral Decision Making Model, using your chosen ethical dilemma as an example to discuss each step of the Model.9. A relative complained about Susans care while she was in hospital.a) As an EN state how you would sensitively receive the family members complaint as per hospital policy.b) How would you encourage the family member to advocate and support Susans right to care?c) How would you respect and support Susan and her familys decision to lodge a complaint?10. Susan is a fit and healthy 76 year old person normally, however hypothesise that you were caring for a 76 year old person who was admitted to your ward who appeared to be malnourished with multiple cuts and bruises. Using one (1) example of legislation that guides your nursing practice, discuss the mandatory reporting responsibilities of the enrolled nurse in regards to elder abuse. Answers: Part 1: 1. Ethics: It is known as the moral viewpoint and is defending, recommending and systematizing conceptions in relation to the distinction among the right things and the wrong things (Roth, 2005).2. Bioethics: It is the revise of contentious moral question that come out from newly-fangled possibilities and situations introduced by the development in medicines and biology. It is linked with medical guiding principles, research and practices (Dickenson, 2012).3. Nursing ethics: These are moral principles of nurses and the commitment of the nurse to the healthiness and care necessities of the patient. This ethics are meant on behalf of all the practicing nurses and at all stages of resolution construction (Ulrich, 2012). 4. Autonomy: It is the power of creation of verdicts and it is the independence of performing according to the knowledge of a definite one (Black, 2011). 5. Non-maleficence: It is to attain an advantage juncture without causing harm to any other human being (Omonzejele, 2009).6. Beneficence: It is the activity that is performed for others advantage of other person. It is performed to eliminate the harms (Peppin, 2013).7. Justice: It is the equality and impartiality. In nursing provided that of sufficient nursing care along with equal opportunity for everyone (Robards, 2011).8. Rights: It is the patient right to get full care and medication by the nurse and medical practitioner (Clark, 2011).9. Civil Law: It conquest with the clashes among the persons or with the persons and the corporations connecting to the privileges and the responsibilities to each other (Vitug, 2003). 10. Common Law: It is a structure of regulations that administers the civilization and to uphold impartiality, upholding integrity and put a stop to harm causing to persons (French, 2009). 11. Stature Law: It is a work of the legislature in written form that commands, declares or prescribes something relating to a particular set of matters. It contains a bunch of provisions relating to any particular law. Constitution of the commonwealth is the biggest example of stature law. Apart from that Australian insurance contracts act 1984 is also an example of stature law (Aph.gov.au, 2015). 12. Vicarious Liability: It refers to the when somebody is held responsible for the actions done by the other person. Like an employer can be liable for the actions of its employees (Humanrights.gov.au, 2015). 13. Open disclosure: It is the discussion of the incidents that has caused harm to patients while getting care from the nurses and the doctors (Safetyandquality.gov.au, 2015).14. Precedent: It is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts (Wi seman, 2011).15. Defendant: It means a person who has brought up before the court due to his wrongful act in civil nature (Fedcourt.gov.au, 2015). 16. Plaintiff: It means a person who has made the petition before the court of law regarding the enforcement of his or her right (Legallawyers.com.au, 2015). 17. Trespass: It means an unlawful admittance into the property of any other person (Activistrights.org.au, 2015).18. Damages: It is the penalty paid against any civil wrong done by a person; it is famous in the name of compensation (Stewart Stuhmcke, 2009).19. Harassment: It is irritable torture to a person. It includes telling insulting jokes about particular racial groups, sending explicit or sexually suggestive emails, displaying offensive or pornographic posters or screen savers, making derogatory comments or taunts about someones race or religion, etc (Humanrights.gov.au, 2015).20. Assault: It is the activity of accomplishing anxious and injurious contact along with a person (Aic.gov.au, 2015).21. Battery: It is deliberately and willingly causing hurt and wrongdoing to a human being or thing connected to him or her (Judcom.nsw.gov.au, 2015). 22. False Imprisonment: It is the unlawful confinement of a person in jail without any justifies cause (Findlaw.com.au, 2015). 23. Defama tion: It a fake allege made to an individual other than the person who has been defamed (Arts Law, 2015).24. Right to Refuse: It is the right of a person to refuse any work which may cause damage or unfavourable condition (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, 2015). Part 2: Case study 1. a. Informed consent is the right of the patient to independence and personal fortitude. It signifies positive answer from the part of the patient to act upon him or her in relation to any treatment after disclosing all the benefits and risks of the treatment. It is inquired from a person who has attained the age of 18 years and a person with sound mind and if he or she has not attained the age of 18 years then the guardians or the parents is entitled to provide the informed consent. Elements of Informed consent:1. A statement relating to the conditions.2. An explanation regarding the purpose. 3. The expected time duration of the research.4. Disclosure about the facts relating to risk and the expected chances of success. 5. A description relating to the expected benefits.6. Disclosure of alternative available procedures. b. Susan did not give her consent because she was not in state of condition to provide a valid consent; she was anguish from intolerable pain. According to the law of contracts consent of a person can be taken into consideration as a valid consent if it is given in a stable mental condition and the person who is giving the consent is capable understanding the conditions. With this regard Susan was not competent to give consent.c. Open disclosure refers to open discussion of patients critical condition to the concerning patient as well as patients family especially when health care is provided to the patient. It is very much significant from patients point of view. Mainly four elements are associated with this. These are as follows: 1) Concerning person who is involved in the discussion with patient, should include an expression associated with regret followed by composed explanation of actual condition (Hess, 2011).2) Patient as well as their family gets an opportunity to relate and share their own experience.3) Patient and their family should aware of the various adverse effects of that particular critical condition.4) Give a structural over view for the management of that critical condition. 2. a. Privacy is an anticipation of autonomy from not permitted interruption or needless publicity.Confidentiality denotes disclosing necessary information of the concern patient only with the relevant individuals as mentioned by the patient or lawful representative of the patient. b. First one is ethics: EN Stuart ought not to provide her acquaintance the visual aid devoid of inspecting her name in the programmed manuscript presented to the healthiness concern which says who all be able to identify about the health of Susan. It is similar to enlightening confidentiality of Susan. Second one is professionalism: EN Stuart has given the information diagram to her acquaintance as she believes she is a medical doctor so she knows how to examine it. According to the penal statutes this is a grave offense to disclose the privacy of the patient to any other physician apart from the personal doctor of the patient. 3. a. In relation to the performance of the duties towards Susan, there was an act of negligence from the part of EN Stuart. Here the respondent Stuart and petitioner Susan were in a relation by virtue of that Stuart was responsible for appropriate care of Susan but it has not been done by Stuart, as he was negligent in relation to performance of her responsibilities; she has not taken necessary care to pertain bed rails that were compulsory for post surgery patients that amounts to breach of duty of care. She has not fulfilled her responsibilities and she was guilty of negligence. b. The foreseeability under this scenario is as EN Stuart had to identify the results of not giving bed rails. But then too she did that. In this case it was not an incident of omission as no optimistic surveillance is able to be observed. Under this circumstance it was obligatory to set rails as Susan has just gone through a surgery and it is a rule of reasonable standards. 4. a. There are various legal requirements for the proper documentation especially for health care system. This documentation is the vital responsibility of patient which may include the various clinical risk factors, various corporate risk factors. It also includes the some vital physiological assessment record like various blood tests (Katz, 2011).b. from the perspective of nurse physical restrain is imposed for the benefit of the patient. As a nurse follows the direction given by the doctor and the nurse is also empowered to apply her own discretion in relation to the interest of the patient. For instance, if a patient is restricted from some kind of food then it is for the benefit of the health of that patient. c. The following are the protocol in relation to the physical restrain of a patient:i. As per the provisions of Mental Health Act, 200, physical restrain can be imposed upon a patient if that patient is not mentally fit and may cause harm to others.ii. If the physical rest rain is imposed in consistent with the care of the patient. iii. Assessing of the condition of the patient in regular interval. iv. After recovery, the restrain must be removed in the quickest possible time. 5. a. State coroner is mainly responsible for giving the proper power to investigate an incident as well as intense findings of any death, if there is suspicious incident happen. It is mainly applied for Western Australia (Miracle, 2011).b. As per the Births, Marriage as well as death act of 2003, in under section 30 is explain the regulation that identity of the person should be demonstrated in proper way, then indicate the most probable cause of death, is it unnatural or not, is the death is result of management plan and its adverse effect (Parakh, 2011).6. a) An expert witness is the one who by virtue of education, training and experiences is to have special knowledge and expertise in a specific subject above an ordinary individual so the other individuals rely legally upon h is opinion and his opinion is known as expert opinion.b) From the perspective of nurse physical restrain is imposed for the benefit of the patient. As a nurse follows the direction given by the doctor and the nurse is also empowered to apply her own discretion in relation to the interest of the patient. For instance, if a patient is restricted from some kind of food then it is for the benefit of the health of that patient (Sato, 2012). 7. a. Nursing Code of Conduct: As mentioned in conduct statement 1, nurses should have to undertake activities in a safe and competent manner (Nursingmidwiferyboard.gov.au, 2015). As a consequence, it can be said that taking care of the patient is the first concern but here Stuart by doing act of negligence didnt follow out this conduct.b. Nursing Code of Ethics: The value statement 4 of the nursing code of ethics states that the nurses should do their best in providing care to the patient according to the set quality standards assigned to them (Nursi ngmidwiferyboard.gov.au, 2015). In this particular case Susan again didnt amend this law as she didnt meet up the quality of care to Susan by tying her up by sheets and not providing bed rails (Gastmans, 2013).Secondly Stuart didnt even make up the privacy and confidentiality of Susan by providing her friends the medical chart.c. Enrolled Nursing Competency Standards: The competency element 3.3 states that nurses should have to demonstrate analytical skill in accessing as well as evaluating health information of a specific patient (Nursingmidwiferyboard.gov.au, 2015). According to this standard, the nurses performance is assessed to retain the licensee or to practice as a nurse in Australia. In this Stuart license can be retained as she does not meet her competency standards by providing insufficient care to Susan.8. The ethical dilemma for Stuart in Susans situation may be the putting of bed rails which according empirical knowledge she should put but due to some personal belief li ke Susan is an old and matured lady who is having extreme pain so she would not move and stay there in the bed restrained her from putting the bed rails (Valois-Nuez,2011). Steps for decision making model:1. By doing this EN Stuart though all the moral values are followed. 2. This is following the ethics of providing accurate care without injuries. 3.The EN thought not putting the bed rails would not harm Susan as she is mature enough to stay in the bed patiently (Miracle, 2011).4. The EN thought by not putting rails she is doing justice to Susan as she is a grownup who can understand things and are not adamant. She is doing justice to her freedom and her age. 5. The EN is following steps of Humanity in this. She is as a human can fell the uneasiness and lock up feeling by putting a patient in bed rails so for Susan considering her a old grown up lady she didnt put the rails.9. a) As an EN Stuart should first patiently listen to the complaint of her relatives than she should keep her point that she and the hospital staff is doing best to protect and safe guard Susans health. She can also explain the treatment steps that are being followed by the doctor and the care steps that are provided to Susan (Parakh, 2011).b). The family should be encouraged by telling that in spite of meeting with a huge accident Susans life is saved, her pain is lessened but she is blind from one eye. So the nurse should convince the family by saying as Susan is already old and now without an eye they should be with her like a strong support and should bring about positive hopes in her so that she can live her life again in a proper manner (Sato, 2012).c). As an EN the complaint lodged by Susans family must be respected as they do not know about the surgical procedure which was performed on her eye would be so dangerous that she became blind from one eye. So the family should be explained in detail about the happening and the reason of surgery behind this (Valois-Nuez 2011).10. The nurses are required to deal with the old patients more seriously and amending the code of ethics and codes of nursing while dealing with them. Any harm abuse or neglect to the o ld people can be a danger on their nursing license. It is stated as per Aged Care Act 2007 under the section 42 by the Australian government (Zanartu, 2014).

Watergate Essay Research Paper On the night free essay sample

Watergate Essay, Research Paper On the dark of Saturday, June 17,1972, constabulary arrested five burglars in the act of teasing the Democratic National Headquarters at the Watergate Apartment composite. The five work forces were discovered crouched behind a desk have oning concern suits, transporting a big amount of hard currency and walky-talkies. The five work forces were James W. McCord, Jr. , Bernard L. Barker, Frank A. Sturgis, Virgilio R. Gonzales, and Eugenio R. Martinez. The following twenty-four hours, June 18, the work forces were charged with second-degree burglary. Amazingly, what appeared to be an mean burglary unraveled into one of the greatest political dirts of all time. Upon the inquiring of one of the suspects, McCord revealed his individuality as a former CIA Security adviser. Arousing involvement, newsmans further investigated and discovered that he worked for the Committee to Re-Elect the President ( CRP, ) making a direct nexus to the President of the United States. We will write a custom essay sample on Watergate Essay Research Paper On the night or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page In August 1968, Nixon stated at a Republican convention # 8220 ; America is in problem today non because her people have failed but because her leaders have failed. # 8221 ; This dry quotation mark foreshadows the death and corruptness of one of the most controversial presidents, Richard Milhouse Nixon. The dirt known as Watergate was non an stray event. In fact, condemnable actions took topographic point throughout the full Nixon disposal. They began when Nixon was faced with the Vietnam War. Nixon started in secret bombing Cambodia, taking at North-Vietnamese military personnels. After this was revealed, most of the populace was upset since it was incorrect to bomb a state that was non involved in the war. Upset that the bombardments were discovered, Nixon was determined to happen out who was leaking information to the imperativeness. His despair led to a series of condemnable Acts of the Apostless and corruptness. The disposal bugged the telephones of suspected authorities functionaries. These were the first of 17 wiretaps used to uncover people leaking harmful information. Installation wiretaps without a justice # 8217 ; s permission is illegal because it disregards the right of freedom of address. In order to forestall other leaks, Nixon told John Ehrlichman, main domestic advisor, to make a particular clandestine organisation to halt the escape of secret information. This group became known as the Plumbers, working out of the White House cellar. The corruptness neer stopped. Nixon # 8217 ; s determination to occupy Cambodia instigated many public anti-war presentations. These presentations became a job when four pupils were killed by the Ohio National Guard at Kent State University. Desiring to cognize more about the anti-war motion, Nixon hired Tom Charles Huston to investigate. He devised a program which consisted of reading people # 8217 ; s mail, interrupting into places, and listening to people # 8217 ; s telephone calls. Nixon approved the Huston Plan in 1970. In 1971, Nixon continued to coerce White House Plutos to acquire information on his enemies. Howard Hunt and Gordon Liddy so created the CRP ( besides known as Creep to Nixon oppositions ) in order to pattern illegal actions on Democratic oppositions. This corruptness in the White House continued into President Nixon # 8217 ; s run for re-election. The codification name for the plan intended to hassle the Democrat was # 8220 ; Sedan Chair. # 8221 ; Worried about the approaching election, Nixon created the CRP. Current poles suggested that the populace favored the Democratic campaigner Senator Edmund Muskie. In an effort to disable Muskie, several programs were instituted. First, a Republican undercover agent applied for a occupation with Muskie as his personal chauffeur. The chauffeur reported everything he overheard in the auto to Nixon and the CRP. The following measure was for members of the CRP to rouse electors in the center of the dark stating they were working for Muskie, inquiring for their ballot. The CRP aimed at other possible democratic campaigners, every bit good, such as Edward Kennedy. In the concluding CRP dirt, Liddy was asked to invent a program to destruct the Democratic run. Liddy # 8217 ; s original program called for snatch oppositions, utilizing cocottes to abash outstanding Democrats, and an intricate wiretapping plan. After being submitted to the caput of the CRP, John Mitchell ( former Attorney General, ) and White House attorney John Dean, the program was rapidly rejected. Liddy created another program which was eventually approved. This program included the wiretapping of phones of oppositions, get downing with Larry O # 8217 ; Brien, the Democratic Party Chairman, at the Democratic Headquarters in the Watergate composite. The full program cost a amount of 250,000 dollars. The first housebreaking was a success, on May 28, 1972, teasing the telephones. In an effort to put in a 2nd series of bugs, the burglars were caught. The White House did non accept duty for the offense therefore get downing a long drawn out cover-up. The ill-famed Watergate cover-up began. Immediately following the burglary, top functionaries of the White House and CRP were notified. No 1 felt that they should acknowledge that the burglars had White House blessing. They kept it a secret fearing the consequence of Republican functionaries being linked to a political burglary. There were excessively many other burglaries and political dirts to put on the line promotion. Secrecy was in order It must be kept a secret. Jeb Stuart Magruder was notified, by Liddy, of the apprehension and of McCord # 8217 ; s direct nexus to the CRP. Worried, Magruder met with John Mitchell to discourse the state of affairs. They decided that if they cleared McCord from the instance, there would be no connexion to the White House. Their lone job was that McCord was already in gaol. They decided to call Attorney General Richard G. Kleindienst to acquire McCord out. Kleindienst was highly annoyed for being put on the topographic point, and could non liberate McCord. The first measure of the cover-up had failed. Other links started being discovered between the burglary and the White House. The top adjutant to the President, John Ehrlichman was notified that one of the burglars had a notebook with White House employee E. Howard Hunt # 8217 ; s name in it. The 3rd nexus was the 100 dollar measures found on the five suspects. These measures were all traced back to assorted people who made political contributions to the CRP. In look intoing the mistake in the burglary, Liddy accepted full incrimination. He told Dean he was ready to be shot to decease if it would assist. In the followers yearss after the housebreaking, newspapers which indicated political sabotage were destroyed. The content of Howard Hunt # 8217 ; s safe was locked off for a piece but finally given to the manager of the FBI, L. Patrick Gray Jr. Gray was instructed to destruct the implying paperss. The public probe of the housebreaking was conducted by the FBI, the # 8220 ; fox guarding the henhouse. # 8221 ; When FBI agents began inquiring excessively many inquiries, Haldeman devised a program to halt the FBI probe. CIA agent, Vernon Walters, would advise Gray to halt investigation in order to keep national security. Haldeman discusses this program with Nixon on June 23, 1972. Later it was revealed that all White House conversations were taped. In this conversation, Nixon agrees to Haldeman # 8217 ; s program to halt FBI agents from deriving information on Watergate. Nixon inculpates himself, admiting that he knew of top adjutant John Mitchell # 8217 ; s engagement in the housebreaking, for engagement in the cover-up and dirt. In the terminal of June, the White House and the CRP began doing payments to the burglars for legal costs and to back up their households while in gaol. They besides paid # 8220 ; hush money # 8221 ; to the burglars to do certain they would non state the tribunal who they were working for. A sum of over 220,000 dollars was spent over the following three months. During the months to follow the interruption in, the Justice Department investigated burglary and a expansive jury listened to the grounds. The test focused on the five burglars, since there was no strong grounds against the White House. As things resumed to normal, Nixon, on August 23, was nominated by the Republicans for his 2nd term as president. In his address after the nomination, Nixon stated that John Dean had conducted an probe of the Watergate housebreaking and that no 1 on the White House staff, no 1 in the disposal, soon employed, was involved in T his eccentric incident. What truly hurts in affairs of this kind is non the fact that they occur, because fanatic people in runs do things that are incorrect. What truly hurts is if you attempt to cover it up. The undermentioned hebdomad, the expansive jury finished listening to grounds and indicted the five burglars plus Liddy and Hunt, who were found at Watergate the dark of the housebreaking. The Justice Department concluded that there was no ground to look any farther, since there was no grounds which points to anyone else. Apparently, several newsmans disagreed with that statement. Reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, of The Washington Post, were assigned top the instance. After thorough probe, with several connexions, Woodward and Bernstein wrote and published the first major narrative linking the White House to Watergate. They discovered the money nexus between the burglars and the CRP. Twenty-five thousand dollars were collected by the CRP and placed into Bernard Barker # 8217 ; s Bank history, one of the indicted burglars. The cheque was from Kenneth H. Bahlberg. He Donated the money to Maurice Stans, the main money-raiser for Nixon, intended for the CRP. Other newsmans followed this narrative and revealed that Stans and others working for Nixon had laundered 100s of 1000s of dollars from people through Mexico. Although the General Accounting Office felt that the CRP had broke the jurisprudence, in roll uping money, A.G. Kleindienst said nil of the money when the indictments were publically announced a few hebdomads subsequently. Woodward and Bernstein were the most successful newsmans in bring outing the Watergate dirt. They began by speaking to many people, in secret at dark. Many CRP employees would non talk, fearing their occupation. There most success was based on Woodward # 8217 ; s secret beginning known as Deep Throat. Deep Throat worked in the Nixon Administration, near to the disposal, and knew everything that had taken topographic point. Because of his political repute, Deep Throat did non desire his name revealed. Woodward was the lone 1 who knew who he was and communicated with him utilizing his flower pot as a mark. The two would run into in secret in a garage in the center of the dark. The editor of the Post trusted Deep Throat, for he was ever right. Deep Throat warned Woodward to watch out, the White House was upset at the narratives they have been publication. Anger spread throughout the Nixon disposal in late September. Woodward and Bernstein obtained secret information about John Mitchel. The tandem discovered that as A.G. , before Kleindienst, Mitchell was in charge of a secret run fund through the CRP and had given blessing for the money to be used to descry on the Democrats. It is extremely illegal for a authorities functionary to work for a political campaigner while in office, particularly since the A.G. is the highest graded jurisprudence hatchet man in the state. Before printing their narrative, Bernstein called Mitchell tardily at dark to inquire for a remark. Mitchell became highly angry and yelled at Bernstein. It # 8217 ; s all been denied. Katie Graham [ publishing house of the Washington Post ] is gon na acquire her # $ % stuck in a large fat wringer if that # 8217 ; s published. Good Christ # 8230 ; .You fellows got a great ballgame traveling. Equally shortly as your throuh paying Ed Williams [ the Post s attorney ] and the remainder of those chaps, we # 8217 ; rhenium traveling to make a narrative on all of you. Indirectly endangering the newspaper, Woodward and Bernstein included Mitchell # 8217 ; s curse in the article. The two published that Haldeman, the adult male closest to Nixon, besides controlled the secret money fund used against the democrats. Although this was true, the newsmans said that Hugh Sloan, former financial officer for the CRP, had told the expansive jury look intoing Watergate that Haldeman was in charge, but Sloan neer did. Haldeman rapidly denied this charge, with no grounds against him. This important error brought unfavorable judgment to the paper, while doing the White House happy. With in a few hebdomads, Nixon won re-election. The test for the seven indicted work forces began on January 8, 1973, Chief justice of the U.S. District Court, John Sirica, presiding. Howard Hunt pleaded guilty, but the staying six pleaded not-guilty. As clip went on, every burglar, except for McCord pled guilty. Liddy and McCord were found guilty. Taking the incrimination for the burglary, none of the work forces would speak about the CRP, maintaining their engagement a secret. Although things appeared to be running swimmingly for the Nixon disposal, their inevitable destiny came easy to stop as their cover-up fell apart. Following the burglary test, in March 1973, the Senate voted to put up a particular commission to decide the enigmas of Watergate making public hearings. The White House publically announced that it would collaborate with the hearings. Dean subsequently revealed that the White House would # 8220 ; effort to keep the probe and do it every bit hard as possible to acquire information and informants # 8230 ; The ultimate end would be to discredit the hearings. # 8221 ; When Nixon nominated Patrick Gray to go the lasting manager of the FBI, the Senate needed to O.K. . They would merely O.K. him after being questioned about Watergate. Gray revealed to the Senate his connexion with Nixon and the CRP. Following Gray # 8217 ; s confession, Howard Hunt, before being sentenced to prison, demanded 120,000 dollars from Dean or he excessively would squeal. It was so, when Dean realized that there would be no terminal to the demand of money and everything would finally come out. Dean met with Nixon to discourse the state of affairs. Dean stated, # 8220 ; # 8230 ; We have a malignant neoplastic disease within, near to the presidential term, that is turning # 8230 ; . # 8221 ; The two decided to pay Hunt 75,000 more dollars to remain quiet for a small piece. The major factor in the unraveling of the political cover-up came from James McCord. Before traveling to prison, McCord wrote Judge Sirica a missive. He explained that throughout the test there had been political force per unit area for the suspects to stay soundless and plead guilty. He elaborated on the bearing false witness during the test and stated that there were many others involved in Watergate, who were neer mentioned in the test. Along with his missive, McCord told the Senate Watergate Committee that Dean and Magruder were involved, faulting them for much of the dirt. At this point, Dean got a attorney and decided to state the truth, acknowledging that he had lied at the test of the burglars. Recognizing he was in problem, Magruder decided to state the truth as good. Magruder and Dean told the populace that Haldeman and Ehrlichman, Nixon # 8217 ; s two top Plutos, were involved in the cover- up. After Dean told Nixon that he was speaking to the prosecuting officers, Nixon used Dean as a scape-goat, faulting him for the cover-up. Magruder told prosecuting officers that Mitchell had approved the Watergate housebreaking. At that point, Nixon # 8217 ; s disposal was in the populace limelight. Recognizing he had to settle things and on April 30, Nixon announced the resignment of Haldeman, Ehrlichman, and Kleindiest, while disregarding John Dean. The probe of Watergate, instantly reopened. After the surrender of A.G. Kleindiest, Congress wanted an foreigner working on the Watergate probe. Nixon moved Elliot L. Richardson into the Justice Department, who promised to put an foreigner on the instance. Richardson chose Archibold Cox, who was given the rubric of particular prosecuting officer and was assigned to happen out what illegal actions took topographic point. As Cox began his probe, the Senate Watergate Committee, under Senator Sam Ervin, began their # 8217 ; s as good. The Committee # 8217 ; s first informant was McCord. McCord acted guiltless, stating that he broke in because he felt there must hold been a good ground for the wiretapping if John Dean and A.G. John Mitchell approved it. The 2nd informant was Bernard Barker. He told the commission that the other burglars did it so that Hunt would assist them and the Cubans. Hunt, under the name of Eduardo, represented Cuban release to them. they wanted to liberate Cuba from Communist regulation of Fidel Castro. Dean, excessively, agree to attest to the Committee if he was given unsusceptibility. Sirica gave him limited unsusceptibility which truly had no consequence in the long tally. At that, Dean began to state the universe of the Watergate dirt.