Introduction The following essay will analyse the scenario, where in a busy shopping mall a woman faints in front of an individual who is an off duty paramedic. The issue the scenario raises, is that the companion of the woman clearly does not know how to help her and the paramedic carries on walking without offering help. Therefore the essay will outline, evaluate and justify the extent to which the paramedic is criminally and morally responsible in terms of criminal law and responsibility. Criminal and Moral Responsibility Responsibility covers lots of variants including criminal and moral. In general responsibility means that one owes responsibility for something to other. Based on criminal law, standing as a code of …show more content…
Accordingly, this will depend on the role one fulfils. That role determines what one is responsible for and to whom by stipulating what it takes to be in that position. The society’s account as a moral code regards to that role, will additionally include responsibilities in prospect. Legal Moralism will say that each individual is responsible for their acts/omissions as moral agents. This would mean that one is also criminally responsible only as moral agents and only for the moral wrongs that one commits however, criminal law as being more practical is solely focused on wrongdoing. This argument indicates that moral responsibility is a much wider category and would rather govern criminal responsibility in itself and that, it is possible to hold someone criminally responsible without imposing moral sanctions (strict liability offences) and it is also possible to hold someone morally responsible without committing a criminal …show more content…
It imposes a general duty on citizens to provide aid to fellow citizens in peril and imposes criminal liability for failing to do so. This concept is a statutory requirement in more than a dozen of European Countries with legislature of a civil-law based system. However, in countries with precedent law, there is a typical aversion towards the introduction of this concept. It has been argued that law should under no circumstances legislate morality mainly due to the fact that, the decision to help someone in peril should be solely left with individuals and their moral freedom should not be binded. The United Kingdom has no such law and the USA only has it in few states with a very soft penalty contrasted with France’s imprisonment sentence. The notion of such law is that, an individual who becomes aware of a dangerous situation by witnessing it, is guilty of an offence and therefore subject to either moral or criminal liability or both for failing to help regardless whether it is a phone call or render emergency first aid. This liability is expanded to those who only heard about such situation. However, nowadays there is very strong emphasise on the Article 8 right to privacy which indicates that individuals should be concerned with their own, underpinning the exceptional situations requirement of UK’s duty to rescue. This law generally
In this essay, I will argue that though Strawson’s Basic Argument is sound, society has constructed a more applicable version of the term “acting morally responsible” which holds us all accountable for our actions. Firstly, I will provide a brief overview of the Basic Argument as well as distinguish between Strawson’s and society’s definitions of being morally responsible. Secondly, I will justify Strawson’s first premise. Finally, I will raise and refute the response of author Ian McEwan.
A responsibility is something for which one is held accountable. Often people say that one is responsible for one’s own words and actions; if something happens as a result of something one does one is responsible for it. But is it possible that something could be the result of various actions from different people who are therefore equally responsible, or is there always one person who is most responsible for the incident at hand? Such a situation where this question is relevant is present in the novel A Separate Peace by John Knowles. In the novel, the main character, Gene, ponders his responsibility for the death of his best friend, Phineas or Finny. After reading Gene’s account of the events that led to Finny’s death the reader may observe that there are three people who are all partially at fault for Finny’s death. Gene, a classmate named Brinker, and Phineas all had something to do with the incident, but who was most responsible for it?
At the end, I will conclude with whom or what I think is the most important reason that contributes to the blame of their deaths. I will begin with different people who could be to blame. There are many possible people, so I shall start with the Nurse. In one respect, the Nurse is very good at her job, but in another, she is not.
Responsibility is a lot of different things and has many different parts. One part of responsibility is social responsibility. Social responsibility is being responsible for people, for the actions of people, and for actions that affect people. Social responsibility is about holding a group, organization, or company accountable for its effect on the people around it. When you do the wrong thing, many people pay for it, especially everyone that you know.
The case study from “Mercy Killing in the Newborn Nursery,” Sara T. Fry and Robert M. Veatch provide an example of a situation where the duty not to treat is evident:
People (or monsters) feel the need to be responsible for various reasons such as guilt or justice. No matter the source of it responsibility always will act as a correcting force for all of the negative impacts of actions that happen in our society. It allows consequences to be adjusted to acceptable levels and can sometimes even make the situation better than it started because of people feeling more responsible than they actually are. Without this irrational feeling that causes people to look out for others in place of themselves our society could not function as highly as it does now and social interaction would cease to work in a fair way.
However, we are looking at a case study where patients safety has been compromised, professionalism has been voided, lack of communication, nurses aren’t liable for their work, the duty of care has been breached and lot more issues can be discovered. Which will be incorporated in this paper. Looking at the patient Christopher Hammett
In this essay the author will rationalize the relevance of professional, ethical and legal regulations in the practice of nursing. The author will discuss and analyze the chosen scenario and critically review the action taken in the expense of the patient and the care workers. In addition, the author will also evaluates the strength and limitations of the scenario in a broader issue with reasonable judgement supported by theories and principles of ethical and legal standards.
Health Care workers are constantly faced with legal and ethical issues every day during the course of their work. It is important that the health care workers have a clear understanding of these legal and ethical issues that they will face (1). In the case study analysed key legal and ethical issues arise during the initial decision-making of the incident, when the second ambulance crew arrived, throughout the treatment and during the transfer of patient to the hospital. The ethical issues in this case can be described as what the paramedic believes is the right thing to do for the patient and the legal issues control what the law describes that the paramedic should do in this situation (2, 3). It is therefore important that paramedics also
Being responsible means to take ownership of successes and failures. Growing up, I have to take responsibility my parents took when they raised me. I take responsible to manage my finances in order to pay bills and to buy food and clothing. In addition, I have to set my own alarms to wake up for school or work in order to get there on time. Finally, I have to manage my health in order to keep healthy and prevent diseases to attack my body. If I cannot commit
Moral responsibility is when an agent does something good or bad morally for a specific event. For example, Donating money would be something you would be praised for in a moral sense, where as stealing would be seen as immoral. Free will would be required in moral responsibility. Without Free will, People would not be accountable for their actions, such as stealing a car or vandalism.
Accountability defined as the responsibility of an individual in a position of an employee or student. In this section, I am going further to mention some situations and how does this situation demonstrate the responsibility that reflected from the dimensions of my personality, including conditions from communication, diversity awareness, decision-making and problem solving. First am going to point at some of my situation that I experienced as a student and then build it up to the situation that I faced in the work placement program as an employee.
A Paramedic (EMT-P) works directly with the public providing personal assistance, medical attention, and emotional support. They respond to medical emergencies providing on-scene treatment, crisis intervention, life-saving stabilization, and transport of ill or injured patients to a treatment center.
their fellow man in trouble, the majority of Americans seem to be willing to help. Despite several incidents to the contrary, the morals of most people will guide them. These less-talked-about occasions in which people called the police, yelled for help, or even tried to physically stop attackers outweigh the apathetic few. With these facts in mind, this law presents unacceptable violations of the freedom of liberty. Ultimately, then, Good Samaritan laws are both unnecessary and dangerous.
There is a strict distinction between acts and omissions in tort of negligence. “A person is often not bound to take positive action unless they have agreed to do so, and have been paid for doing so.” (Cane.2009; 73) The rule is a settled one and allows some exceptions only in extreme circumstances. The core idea can be summarized in “why pick on me” argument. This attitude was spectacularly demonstrated in a notoriously known psychological experiment “The Bystander effect” (Latané & Darley. 1968; 377-383). Through practical scenarios, psychologists have found that bystanders are more reluctant to intervene in emergency situations as the size of the group increases. Such acts of omission are hardly justifiable in moral sense, but find some legal support. “A man is entitled to be as negligent as he pleases towards the whole world if he owes no duty to them.” (L Esher Lievre v Gould [1893] 1 Q.B. 497) Definitely, when there is no sufficient proximity between the parties, a legal duty to take care cannot be lawfully exonerated and imposed, as illustrated in Palmer v Tees Health Authority [1999] All ER (D) 722). If it could, individuals would have been in the permanent state of over- responsibility for others, neglecting their own needs. Policy considerations in omission cases are not inspired by the parable of Good Samaritan ideas. Judges do favour individualism as it “permits the avoidance of vulnerability and requires self-sufficiency. “ (Hoffmaster.2006; 36)