A Landmark Supreme Court Case - 856 Words

A landmark Supreme Court case is one in which a precedence is set and there is an impact on society. There are many reasons for the importance of landmark cases and the studying of such cases. Some of these reasons are to study how the judicial branch works, try to understand how decisions made in the judicial branch affects laws and everyday life, and predict how current issues and cases will be affected by past decisions (The Judicial Learning Center, 2012). There are many examples of Supreme Court cases that are considered to be a landmark, but one example is Texas vs. Johnson. Outside of the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas, many people protested President Ronald Reagan’s policies. Among the protestors was one man named Gregory Lee Johnson. This man was so upset by the policies of the President that he burned an American flag in protest. By doing this, a statute in Texas was violated. This statute prevented the desecration of an American flag if it could possibly anger other people amongst the protest. Johnson was arrested and charged with this violation. He was later tried in court and convicted, but he made an appeal stating that by burning the flag he was expressing his rights of â€Å"symbolic speech† which are protected by the first amendment (uscourts.gov). The definition of symbolic speech is the same as a term called â€Å"speech plus†. This is a form of expression in which behavior is used by itself or in coordination with written or spokenShow MoreRelatedLandmark Supreme Court Cases Project Essay1293 Words   |  6 PagesLandmark Supreme Court Cases Project Part I Judicial Activism- When judges deny legislators or the executive the power to do something unconstitutional. Judicial Restraint- A legal term that describes a type of judicial interpretation that emphasizes the limited nature of the courts power. Judicial restraint asks judges to base their judicial decisions solely on the concept of stare decisis. Precedent- A legal decision or form of proceeding serving as an authoritative rule or pattern in futureRead MoreCase Study : Gideon V. Wainwright1359 Words   |  6 PagesLandmark U.S. Supreme Court Case Study Name of Case: ____Gideon v. Wainwright_________ Year: ___1963____ 1. What is the essential question of this case? Did the state courts failure to appoint a lawyer for Gideon violate his right to a fair trial and due process of law as protected by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments? 2. Using the evidence you found during your reading, summarize the background of this case in three complete sentences. A witness saw Clarence Earl Gideon break into Bay HarborRead MoreV. Ohio : Illegal Search And Seizure1144 Words   |  5 PagesSearch and Seizure Sara Webster Liberty High Liberty High School 4A Mapp v. Ohio was a historical case in which the United States Supreme Court declared that all evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, could not be held against you in court (Landmark Cases of the U.S. Supreme Court, 2015). The exclusionary rule and selective incorporation were applied to this case. The ?exclusionary rule? which prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of theRead MoreCase Study: Tinker vs. Des Moines795 Words   |  3 PagesCase Study: Tinker v. Des Moines The Vietnam War was, and still is, a highly controversial subject within American history and politics. Thousands of Americans took to the streets to show their discontent for the nations actions abroad. It was during this time that Tinker v. Des Moines took place, forever changing the way the nation viewed free speech. The case of Tinker v. Des Moines revolved around Americans discontent for the actions the country was taking overseas in Vietnam. In 1965Read MoreLoving vs. The Commonwealth of Virginia: Significance in Marriage Law1174 Words   |  5 PagesLoving v. Virginia Significance in Marriage Law A case is said to be landmark when it produces a precedent that is regarded as law by jurists during other cases. These cases are seen as such, generally, because they change the direction of the people making the laws and sitting on the courts, and forge a new path for justice which is more often than not seen as a perfection of the law. One such case occurred in Loving v. The Commonwealth of Virginia in 1967. The original complaint was made inRead MoreBrown V Board Of Education1386 Words   |  6 PagesLandmark Supreme Court Cases ï  ¬ Brown v Board of Education (1954) ïÆ'Ëœ The Background: In the 1950’s, schools were separated by race. Linda Brown and her sister had to walk down a dangerous railroad switchyard to get to the bus stop to their all-black elementary school. There was an all-white school closer to the Brown’s house, and the Brown family believed that segregated schools violated the Constitution. ïÆ'Ëœ The Constitutional Issue: This issue violated the Equal Protection Clause of the FourteenthRead MoreMapp Vs. Ohio State1291 Words   |  6 PagesMapp vs. Ohio State(1961) Background: In the Mapp vs Ohio state court case, the issue disputed was when the appellant Dollree Mapp was convicted of possessing â€Å"obscene† materials after an illegal police search of her home for a fugitive. During the year of 1961, Ohio police were looking for a criminal accused of a bombing and had been told that he was hiding in Dollree Mapp s house. Police acted quickly and came to her house but when she didn t answer the door, police officers forced themselvesRead MoreEssay on Judicial Review980 Words   |  4 PagesConstitution. Judicial review gives the court the power to review and change laws and government acts that violate the Constitution (Huq, n.d.). Allowing the court system this power helps prevent government officials from using the Constitution to illegally use their position in making laws and regulations in the United States. The judicial review was first used in an unusual way and under unusual circumstances. The most important case in Supreme Court History was in 1803 with Marbury v. Madison;Read MoreHazelwood vs. Kuhlmeier, An essay.1047 Words   |  4 Pages Should a school be able to censor their students? This question has reached the supreme court multiple times, such as in this case, or in Tinker vs. Des Moines. While restricting a freedom may be annoying, it can be necessary, but when is it dictatorship, and when is it necessary? That is what is questioned in this court case. The U.S. Supreme Court had a difficult decision in the court case of Hazelwood vs. Kuhlmeier, and they were right in their ruling, because even though censorship is oftenRead MoreThe Landmark Case Of Griswold V. Connecticut Served As A Precedent For Following Landmark Cases Regarding Privacy893 Words   |  4 PagesThe landmark case of Griswold v. Connecticut served as a precedent for following landmark cases regarding privacy. First I will like to discuss the effect this decision made on an organization. It is important, because this organization is a large vehicle to the effort of birth control. Planned Parenthood, is an organization which offer its services to help family control pregnancies, counsels young woman on abortion, and it s a lead voice in protection of the body of the female over the offspring

Veronica Kronvall Remembers How Excited She Felt About

Veronica Kronvall remembers how excited she felt about buying her house in 2007. It was her first house, in the small city of Ponder, Texas. Her kitchen was filled with her favorite color, purple, everything from mixing bowls to the microwave. She planted roses and planned on having a garden. She planned at living in this house for decades. What Veronica did not imagine was that 4 years later and energy company would drill 5 wells behind her home, with the closest being less than 300 feet from her backyard. Green pipes and tanks loom over her fence. The rumble of trucks and equipment rattled the glasses in her cupboard, and the smell of an acrid blend of chemicals was constant. She began having symptoms she had never had before, her eyes†¦show more content†¦Once the well reaches the right depth, it turns right or left and becomes horizontal. This is called the kick off point. The horizontal section can span anywhere from 1,000 to 6,000 feet. The drill is removed but the sur rounding steel casing remains. These steel casings are meant to protect the groundwater and the surrounding area from any potential leakage during the fracking process. Down at the horizontal section of the well, little holes are punctured through the steel in thousands of spots. Then, a water solution is pumped at a extremely high pressure down the well. This causes tons of cracks and fissures in the rock. Additives and sand in the water mixture hold the cracks open, allowing oil to escape and be brought up to the surface. Hydraulic fracking isn t all good though, there are many controversial things about it. First off, water contamination is a hazard. There are many ways that the water supply could be contaminated by fracking. One way is by groundwater entering through cracks that fracking has made. The water solution that s pumped into the ground is a mixture of water, sand, and chemicals. Water and sand make up 98% of the mixture, while the remaining 2% is chemicals. Although fracking companies have never realised the chemicals used, scientists studying wastewater have found many harmful additives. A few of these are benzene, toluene, and many acids, all of which pose huge threats to humans. For each fracking well, more than 8 million liters of

Bioethics for Medical Nutrition and Hydration - MyAssignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theBioethics for Medical Nutrition and Hydration. Answer: Medical nutrition and Hydration is the intervention that is developed by medical research and practice to meet the nutrition and the water needs of the patient. Withholding or withdrawing of this intervention may lead to dying of the patient due to malnutrition and dehydration (1). Medical nutrition and Hydration is given to patients in various clinical situations such as difficulty swallowing or feeding themselves, if the patient is unconscious or is permanently unresponsive or in case of advance life threatening illness or if the patient is dying (2).The essay deals with the argument that Medical nutrition and Hydration is routinely provided to the patients, including those with the post-comma unresponsiveness. In response to the argument the essay aims to critically assess the arguments for and against the withdrawal of Medical Nutrition and Hydration or MNH. Medical nutrition and Hydration is thus provided to the patient in ways other than by mouth. In patients who have lost excess fluids from the body and cannot be feeded orally there are 2 ways to replace the fluids. In such patients, fluid can be put right into a vein also called as intravenous fluid replacement. The fluid can be injected under the skin which is also called as subcutaneous fluid replacement and hypodermoclysis. In some cases a nasogastric tube is put through nose, down the throat and into the stomach (3). There are several problems associated with the MNH. During hypodermoclysis, the speed of the drip changes, the site of the insertion of needle will swell and turn painful and sometimes the blood is collected in the tube, and high risk of infection (4). These are the minor complications which are avoided due to larger benefits of MNH. For instance a person with the advanced life threatening illness may swallow the water and the nutrition needs. If this form of treatme nt is withdrawn then the patient may fall in deep sleep or comma and usually die within 3 weeks. The health care team undergo ethical and legal dilemma when making decision related to giving of the MNH (2). In many cases the people deny this treatment as it is not a medical care (1). There are negative implications associated with the withdrawal of MNH. (5) argued that the withdrawal of this form of care is dictated by the denial of unreasonable obstinacy enshrined in law and is justified by the health complications associated with the withdrawal. In various countries the reluctance in withdrawal of this treatment is due to symbolic value attached with the food and nutrition. If the hydration system is withdrawn then the patient may die badly while suffering from hunger and thirst. Fear of such implication is other factor that hinders the withdrawal of the treatment (6). Further, there is a difficult distinction between the medical act and the euthanasia which is the cause of reluctance in making such decision (7). However, such reluctance can be overcome by ensuring flawless accompaniment, appropriate comfort care and associating sedation with clear justification not only to the caregivers but also to the family members. The rationale and the implication of this type of decision should be made clear by the health care team (8). The patients undergo serious burden of pain and suffering, financial expenditure, high risk of injury and mortality. MNH is provided to the patient even during post comma unresponsiveness. However, withdrawal of treatment in such scenario is mostly demanded by the family members. It is perceived by the family member that MNH does not ensure improvement in the health related quality of life. It is perceived by the family members of the patient in comma that MNH offers no reasonable expectation of maintaining of improving health (6). MNH in case of patients in persistent vegetative state is questionable. MNH is considered morally optional in this case. It can be argued that the treatment in these patients will continue indefinitely as the patient will be permanently unconscious. It is considered waste of health care resources to prolong the life of such patients as nothing can help of harm the patient (8). This prolonged treatment makes people believe that dying is better than MNH. Therefore, withdrawal of MNH in such circumstances is considered justified and is morally requested to be removed by the patients family members. The medical ethicists are concerned about the peoples rights in case of patients in minimally conscious state and permanent vegetative state. They must consider the empirical data pertaining to this situation before applying ethical theories to medico-legal realities. Even in cases where the patient is not in the vegetative state withdrawal of MNH is preferred. According to (2) patients with stroke have severe difficulty in swallowing food and they also have altered state of consciousness. Therefore, they need artificial nutrition and hydration. By law it is a treatment and not considered as basic care. Therefore, it is mandatory for the person to receive this form of treatment else it may lead to risk of severe disabilityand very poor quality of life. In catholic communities the MNH is considered a moral obligation particularly in case of patients with the permanent unresponsiveness where the patient is neurologically incapable of feeding themselves (9). Most people feel guilty of denying nutritional substance to others when they themselves are having it. The decision of withdrawal is criticised by many researchers in this area. In most cases the criticism is the outcome of suspected intentions. In some cases the withdrawal may be requested by the family member with the intention to kill (10). It may also be requested if the family members are overburdened with the treatment cost (11). On the other hand some people perceive that it is unreasonable for the person in persistent vegetative state to be alive in undignified condition. Rather the family members believe that it is reasonable to relieve them of the burden of living (9, 10 ad 11). These suspected intentions cause decision-making by the health care professionals a very difficult process. According to (12) people prefer withdrawal of MNH even if the patient is not permanently unresponsive. In some countries the withdrawal is considered to be justified for instances England and Waless particularly in case of permanent vegetative state of patients. The withdrawal is in patients best interest and is based on judicial approval to reassure the patients families (13). In case of patients with terminal illness people perceive that MNH offers no reasonable expectation. Instead people prefer procedures that can improve the heath without creating serious burden on the patient or on the family care givers (10). If there is limited life expectancy of the person then it is justified to withdraw MNH (11). It can be morally requested to withhold MNH if the patient is unable to handle the pain and suffering associated with the artificial hydration system. However, the burden cannot be determined by the care givers or the health care professionals. It can only be determined by the pat ient followed which the health care professionals and the law can be obliged to approve withdrawal. It was argued by (12) that even if the patient is not terminally ill MNH should be morally optional considering the extreme distress caused to the person. Such situation may be possible although tragic. However, making this decision is complicated as a person has high potential to recover from non terminal illness. In this case maintaing the improving health is perceived essential y the healthcare professional (1 and 2). This decision is critical because it is difficult to find the distinction between trying to commit suicide and refusing the oral nourishment (13). This, moral dilemma cannot be resolved easily for instance if food is causing extreme distress then it is reasonable to refuse medical nutrition from the patient perspective (14). This idea is consistent with (tragic situation) leaving reasonably and taking reasonable care of our life (15). The decision to withdraw MNH from terminally ill patients is less complicated when compared to making similar decision in case of peop le in permanently vegetative state as they later cannot express their concern related to distress or refuse the treatment. In case of the patients who are in persistent vegetative state the health care professionals face moral and ethical dilemma to withhold r withdraw the MNH. It is due to various suspicious arguments put forward by the family members and relatives in this context. Withdrawal is considered to be killing by many people which leads to the argument of rights. Since everyone has the right to live, killing cannot be morally justified. These conflicts have remained unresolved since decades (10, 11 and 14). Further, an important aspect of ethical question in many situations is the quality of life is. This may be irrevalant to the moral questions about preserving life. Further, arguments against withdrawal of MNH involve needless suffering which is unreasonable (16). In case of dementia patients MNH may be more burdensome or frightening as they cannot comprehend what is happening (17). In conclusion, the review of literature from decades of research in this area concludes the decision to withdraw or withhold MNH from patients in terminal, non-terminal illness, permanently unresponsive state as indecisive. This is the outcome of various suspicious arguments in regards to MNH. These arguments are made in face of many unresolved theological issues and uncertainty of the treatment. Based on the discussion, the withdrawal of MNH may be justified to some extent in case of patients with terminal illness or fatal pathology. However, the same may not be justified for patients in the permanent vegetative state and it is still debatable if they should generally be allowed to die. It can be concluded that MNH is morally justified in case it helps a patient to achieve a good life, provided it should be given to an extent that it can be achieved. It is justified to embrace something that is least worse. It is morally unjustified if MNH does not help achieve a good life. It is re commended that the health care professionals should make decisions related to nutrition and hydration which should be guided by the presumption in favour of MNH. A decision to withdraw such treatment should be based on careful assessment of the positive and negative factors, benefits and burdens of MNH for each patient, their family and community. Withdrawn must not be done with the intention to cause death. However, it is justified if MNH offers no reasonable hope of sustaining life. It is also justified in case there are excessive risks or burdens. There is a need of developing more effective and humane mechanism for reviewing best interest decisions about MNH withdrawal from these patients. References Kitzinger C, Kitzinger J. Withdrawing artificial nutrition and hydration from minimally conscious and vegetative patients: family perspectives. Journal of medical ethics. 2015 Feb 1;41(2):157-60. Tannier C, Crozier S, Zuber M, Constantinides Y, Delezie E, Gisquet E, Grignoli N, Lamy C, Louvet F, Pinel JF. Withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration in severe stroke: medical, legal and ethical considerations. Revue neurologique. 2015 Feb;171(2):166-72. King JO. Nutritional Care of the Terminally Ill Adult. Nutrition and Hydration in Hospice Care: Needs, Strategies, Ethics. 2016 Apr 15. Maillet JO, King D. Nutritional Care of the Terminally 111 Adult. Nutrition and Hydration in Hospice Care: Needs, Strategies, Ethics. 2016 Apr 15:37. Vashi P, Popiel B, Lammersfeld C, Gupta D. Outcomes of systematic nutritional assessment and medical nutrition therapy in pancreatic cancer. Pancreas. 2015 Jul 1;44(5):750-5. Vashi P, Popiel B, Lammersfeld C, Gupta D. Outcomes of systematic nutritional assessment and medical nutrition therapy in pancreatic cancer. Pancreas. 2015 Jul 1;44(5):750-5. Pengo V, Zurlo A, Voci A, Valentini E, De Zaiacomo F, Catarini M, Iasevoli M, Maggi S, Pegoraro R, Manzato E, Giantin V. Advanced dementia: opinions of physicians and nurses about antibiotic therapy, artificial hydration and nutrition in patients with different life expectancies. Geriatrics gerontology international. 2017 Mar 1;17(3):487-93. Druml C, Ballmer PE, Druml W, Oehmichen F, Shenkin A, Singer P, Soeters P, Weimann A, Bischoff SC. ESPEN guideline on ethical aspects of artificial nutrition and hydration. Clinical Nutrition. 2016 Jun 30;35(3):545-56. Hermann DH. Artificial Nutrition and Hydration and the Patient in Persistent Vegetative State: Roman Cahtolic Magisterial Teaching on the Right to Refuse Medical Treatment versus the Obligation to Provide Ordinary Care. U. Dayton L. Rev.. 2015;40:407. Somers E, Grey C, Satkoske V. Withholding versus withdrawing treatment: artificial nutrition and hydration as a model. Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care. 2016 Sep 1;10(3):208-13. Leheup BF, Piot E, Goetz C, Quilliot D, Niemier JY, Wary B, Ducrocq X. Withdrawal of artificial nutrition: influence of prior experience on the perception of caregivers. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. 2015 Jun;32(4):401-6. Marcus EL, Golan O, Goodman D. Ethical Issues Related To End Of Life Treatment In Patients With Advanced DementiaThe Case Of Artificial Nutrition and Hydration. Diametros. 2016 Dec 20(50):141-60. Piot E, Leheup BF, Goetz C, Quilliot D, Niemier JY, Wary B, Ducrocq X. Caregivers confronted with the withdrawal of artificial nutrition at the end of life: prevalence of and reasons for experienced difficulties. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. 2015 Nov;32(7):732-7. Tang ST, Wen FH, Liu LN, Chiang MC, Lee SC, Chou MC, Feng WL, Lin YC, Liu IP, Kuo YH, Chi SC. A decade of changes in family caregivers' preferences for life-sustaining treatments for terminally Ill cancer patients at end of life in the context of a family-oriented society. Journal of pain and symptom management. 2016 May 31;51(5):907-15. Higgins I, Riet P, Sneesby L, Good P. Nutrition and hydration in dying patients: the perceptions of acute care nurses. Journal of clinical nursing. 2014 Sep 1;23(17-18):2609-17. Gent MJ, Fradsham S, Whyte GM, Mayland CR. What influences attitudes towards clinically assisted hydration in the care of dying patients? A review of the literature. BMJ supportive palliative care. 2015 Sep 1;5(3):223-31. Testoni I, Di Lucia Sposito D, De Cataldo L, Ronconi L. Life at all costs? Italian social representations of end-of-life decisions after President Napolitanos speechMargin notes on withdrawing artificial nutrition and hydration. Nutritional Therapy Metabolism. 2014 Jul 1;32(3):121-35.

Technology Impact On 1920 Essays - Manufacturing, Henry Ford

Technology Impact On 1920 Life World War I, "The war that would end all wars.", had ended by 1918; Europe was left in ruins physically, politically, and economically. The years following the most devastating war to take place prior to the 1920s, Europe would struggle with economic and political recovery, but not the United States. Left virtually unharmed by World War I, the United States was even able to experience a decade of peace and prosperity following such a disastrous war. Of the many reasons for America's prosperity, technology played one of the most vital parts in bringing the great economic and cultural prosperity that America experienced during the 1920s. New advancements, new discoveries, and new inventions improved American lives in many if not every conceivable way, but not without a few negative side-effects. One of the first major inventions to become a national craze was the automobile. First developed with a combustion engine in 1896 by inventor Henry Ford, he later started the Ford Motor Company, which mass produced affordable automobiles known as the Model-T. Ford's Model-Ts became such an overwhelming success that he sold over 15 million Model-Ts by 1927 (Gordon and Gordon 77). By the end of the decade, there was almost one car per family in the United States (Bruce 80). As a result, the automobile became an increasingly important part of American lives. Workers no longer needed to live close to their workplace, instead they could live farther away and still arrive at their jobs with ease. Homemakers could run errands with greater convenience. The overall increase in productivity and efficiency left the American people with more time for entertainment and recreation. Families could visit relatives on a constant basis, even distant relatives. The automobile provided a perfect way for people, especially for adolescents, to socialize and make merry. The automobile craze even came to a point where the back seat of a car replaced the parlor as a place for courtship and love (Gordon and Gordon 58). The popularity of the automobile also brought immense economic prosperity. One of the major contributions to the prosperity of the 1920s was the construction of roads and highways, which poured fresh public funds into the economy (Bruce 79). Automobiles appeared everywhere and were being driven everywhere. However a major problem was experienced by everyone as a result of this. According to Kenneth Bruce: "...there were very few good roads outside the east coast; crossing the continent was a real adventure, as during the spring when the snow melted or after a good rain storm, automobiles would sink into gumbo mud up to their hubs. Travelers crossing Iowa or Nebraska were often forced to wait several days until the road dried before moving onto the next town. ..." (79) In 1924, the Federal Road Act offered federal money to state legislatures, which would organize highway departments and match federal funds. Spurred on by this federal money, every section of the country launched ambitious road building programs during the 1920s. By the end of the decade, highway construction programs employed more men and spent more money than any single private industry. The increased use of automobiles touched every corner of the American economy. It stimulated the oil industry, it boosted road construction, extended the 1920s housing boom to suburbs, and even developed new businesses (Bruce 79-80). The success of the Ford Motor Company was so great that it can even be compared to that of today's Microsoft. And like today's Bill Gates, Ford and his Ford Motor Company had become a national symbol of industrial prosperity. By 1922, Ford, who earned over $264,000 a day, was declared a billionaire by the Associated Press (Gordon and Gordon 32). Luckily for the federal government, Ford paid a record $2,467,946 in income taxes for the prosperous year of 1924 (Gordon and Gordon 50). According to Elizabeth Stevenson: "... Nothing ever dramatized the system of factory organization so well as the break in Ford automobile production stretching across a good part of the year 1927. Ford was the epitome of everything in the world of everyday work that the citizens of the 1920s admired. His faults were overlooked or accepted as virtues, and his success in this great mechanical and business venture seemed a test of the health of the nation itself. The public found itself absorbed, entertained, and delighted by such toys as Model-Ts and Model-As. If Ford should fail, they all in some measure failed. But anticipation was joyous. Even the suspense was delicious, it would be a misunderstanding to think that it