Case study in Biomedical Engineering Ethics Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

In Biomedical Engineering Ethics - Case Study Example In the case study there is clear evidence that in that development of the TEHVs Pedia Valve as a start-up company is responding to biomedical engineering obligations. They are employing their research knowledge, skills and capabilities towards enhancement of public welfare in terms of health and safety. Considering the limitations of the current equipment in use such as bioprosthetic valves and Cadaver homograft valves such need for repeated future surgeries as well as inherent risks, the company is striving to increase safety for the patients. There are also the obligations in terms of biomedical engineering and training. They are required to comply with available guidelines in terms legal, governmental, research and ethical responsibilities. There is need to respect rights of subjects, colleagues the science community and entire public. In making the choice between the two options the company has also considered the question of training especially for the doctors and other medical personnel. To this end I think the company has complied significantly and obtained the necessary FDA approvals. There are various ethical and professional considerations applicable to the case study of Pedia Valves which the company has not ignored. A major ethical issue in the case study as has always been when it comes to using modern technology to give life to patients is the question of faith. While Pedia Valve and other likeminded companies undertake research and testing in order to innovatively enhance life, there always voices from the religious community especially who think it is the work of God to give life. There are also the ethical issues of using animals and humans as subjects for researching and testing the technology. The argument from opponents has always been that the rights of subjects are violated. In making of the decision of whether to enter the market with the first or second option, there are important issues of

The Watergate Scandal and Its Aftermath Essay Example for Free

The Watergate Scandal and Its Aftermath Essay On January 21, 1969, Richard Milhous Nixon was inaugurated as the 37th President of the United States and re-elected in January 3, 1973. On August 8, 1974, Nixon became the first US President to resign after impeachment proceedings were initiated against him over what has become known as â€Å"The Watergate Scandal.† (Watergate Chronology) The term Watergate has become synonymous with political cover-up, lies, crime skullduggery and scandal in the United States and worldwide.   The fact that a simple botched burglary opened a prodigious can of worms makes it all the more mind-boggling. As people began to realize that they were in the midst of a conspiracy that reached all the way to the top, they began to wonder just how deep, and how widespread, the rot went. Nixon himself has denied any complicity in the matter, until evidence that this was not so become too compelling to ignore, hence the subsequent impeachment articles and resignation. However, his motivations, aside from the mandatory â€Å"for the good of the nation†, was never satisfactorily explained. Regardless of the why, the effect of Watergate on the political status of Nixon is unexpected. It, of course, killed his Presidency, and although successor President Gerald Ford extended him a full pardon and he did not go to jail, many believed that he embodied the essence of all that was wrong in American politics of that era. Watergate colors any good he may have done during his term of office. However, he was far from quietly fading into the good night. After his resignation and pardon, Nixon proceeded to quietly regain respectability in the eye of the American public.   By the time of his death, he had managed to author nine books and served as adviser to US Presidents Bush Senior and Reagan. Whenever he spoke about American foreign policy before a crowd, people listened because he had made it his business to travel and get a political feel of the various countries he toured and the mindset of the political leaders he visited. In fact, his last book, Beyond Peace, was a less than flattering summation of American foreign policy that was timely in the face of the political crises such as in Bosnia and Korea after the Cold War. (Stacks, 1994) Nixon failed in the midst of his success, and succeeded in the midst of his failure. Ruthless in his pursuit and determined in his endeavors, he managed to rise above the ashes of the Watergate Scandal that destroyed the careers of at least 30 of the most prominent men of his time and died in 1997 regarded by many as an elderly statesman. What of the country he had, as many people still firmly believe, betrayed to further his own interests and control? What has his abuse of power done to affect American policy? The Watergate incident succeeded in opening an Aegean stables of graft and corruption, throwing into sharp relief the special interest groups that had bought their way into favor and prompted a US President to stake all.   The cleansing tide of public opinion and media criticism enabled the disheveled American government to rally around and expose the core of the problem. But the aftermath was more complicated than what was anticipated. People started to lose confidence in their political leaders, seeing them as untrustworthy and vulnerable to large corporations with deep pockets. Conspiracy theories cropped up that seemed increasingly probable, and suspicion of the â€Å"men in black† such as the FBI, CIA etc., agencies that served the will of people in power and not the American people increased. This may have been due to the fact of the FBI’s involvement in the attempted cover-up. (Watergate) The belt was tightening around campaign finance, and at first the measures were stringent. Campaign contributions could neither be from questionable sources nor more than $1,000.00. A federal commission on elections was formed to watch over the general election between Ford and Jimmy Carter. However, these measures could not last with clever politicians and court interpretations of the law backing the claim that campaign contributions were covered under the First Amendment. (Jackson, 1999) Soon, the amount of contributions from special interest groups and large corporations to both the Democratic and Republican parties reached epic proportions, undreamed off during Nixon’s time. Tighter media vigilance also succeeded in promoting transparency and accountability among the politicians. However, the unfailing skepticism of the spoken and written word became an integral part of this vigilance, lending material for many a stand-up comedy act that nevertheless undermine the efforts of politicians and statesmen to effect positive and progressive change in American policies, never mind if they be honest and morally upright. The media coverage of the Watergate hearings became the focal point of interest for at least 85% of the population at any given time in the initial proceedings, at one time dominating airtime with 13 hours of coverage in the six days following the first hearing on July 24, 1974. (Garay) While this kept people informed of what was happening, a change in the American psyche also resulted. The people post-Watergate lost their confidence in their elected officials and had adopted a passive, if not overtly hostile, attitude towards the whole process. This has filtered down to later generations and now less than 50% of the voting population actually bothers to vote. The general opinion is that all politicians and people in power are liars, or are not telling the whole truth, in pursuit of their own advancement and self-interests. This belief has translated into an overzealous, almost paranoid, eye for political corruption. Ethics committees and procedures, independent counsel law, public integrity sections and other such agencies are devoted solely to having a weather eye cocked for the smallest misstep. What was once acceptable political give-and-take, such as free football tickets, is looked at askance as a symptom of much bigger largesse. (Jackson, 1999) This has not stopped any chicanery, however. There are many ways around a committee, and around the law, if one has enough resources to pull it off. Many use this vigilance to discredit a rival or to gain favor in the public eye, most probably while doing the same thing or something else equally or more unethical or even illegal. The important thing is, from a political point of view, is not to get caught, as Nixon so very openly was. All this reform, disclosure and transparency has given way to two very significant results: One, those in politics bent on serving their own interests has become very good at fooling the watch dogs down paths that they want to expose while covering their own tracks; and two, those who have the nation’s interest at heart has an uphill climb in gaining the trust and confidence of the people. And what of the media? Many forget that the media is also a special interest group, but instead of currying favor from politicians to get special treatment by giving campaign contributions and other donations, the media uses politics and politicians to exploit whatever the issue of the moment is and sell. While many are legitimate publications with reliable sources or well-formed opinions, the great influence they have on public opinion are not always used judiciously. Their motivation is to sell. The bigger the scandal, the better, never mind if it is not always in the public interest to know all. Bad news sells better than good news, and many times the public focuses only on who’s doing what to whom rather than what good some have been doing, or trying to do. In the case of Watergate, media fed on the thirst of the public to know, but failed to provide a complete picture of what actually happened that 30 years down the line has provided to some extent. The damage has been done, the people no longer trust government, and are ready to believe the worst without giving benefit to doubt. What was most interesting to those who analyze the raison d’etre of the scandal was that it seemed almost pointless, as Nixon at the time was at the top of his form, having just been re-elected with a landslide victory, and popular with the nation. Many asked what could be his reason for wanting to bug the offices of the Democratic Party’s National Committee, housed then at the plush Watergate Hotel. Political spying and sabotage seemed to be the most obvious reason, as FBI investigators established in 1972, and it appeared reasonable what with the coming elections. However, the popularity he had gathered with his delivery of the â€Å"Silent Majority† speech on the Vietnam War seemed to make these efforts superfluous. (Watergate.info) To this day there has been no satisfactory answer as to the why as many closely involved with the scandal have died, and have taken the mystery with them. What is not a mystery today is the ripple-effect of Watergate on American politics and policy, and the establishment of Richard Nixon as a public figure. Political bashing and mud-slinging has become the order of the day, and the media has run true to form in exploiting the dollar value of a good scandal. Campaign financing has become big business, reaching astronomic levels, with the added bonus of being legitimate, thanks to slick interpretation and manipulation of the law by clever legal counsels. Political ingenuity has plotted an indictment-free zone so that money can talk in government policy. And despite skepticism, the American public relies heavily on the media to form their opinion regarding whom and what to believe, especially since Watergate when there were no holds barred as to what the media could put out.   People believe that the printed and televised words is inviolate, but more often than not the voices of the ones who have truly pure motives get drowned out with all the noise the ones with the deep pockets make. And where is Nixon in all this, that focus of Watergate? He lives on in the memory of the Americans as the President who authored the mother of all scandals (and was unfortunate enough to get caught) and the man who afterwards stood back up and brushed himself off to exert his influence in the political arena in spite of it. As he reportedly put to Russian Vice President Alexander Rutskoi following Rutskoi’s release from prison after his failed takeover against Boris Yeltsin, â€Å"that, for some, there can be life after hell.† (Stacks, 1994) References Watergate Chronology Washington Post retrieved December 28, 2006 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/watergate/chronology.htm Watergate: The Scandal That Brought Down Richard Nixon Watergate.info retrieved December 28, 2006 from   http://www.watergate.info/ Garay, R. WATERGATE   The Museum of Broadcast Communications retrieved December 28, 2006 from http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/W/htmlW/watergate/watergate.htm Jackson, B. 1999. A Watergate Legacy: More Public Skepticism, Ambivalence All Politics: CNN Time retrieved December 28, 2006 from http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/gen/resources/watergate/watergate.jackson/index.alt.html Stacks, J. 1994. Victory in Defeat All Politics: CNN Time retrieved December 28, 2006 from http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/gen/resources/watergate/watergate.stacks/index.alt.html Watergate Case Closed retrieved December 28, 2006 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/crime/caseclosed/watergate.shtml

Regeneration By Pat Barker Analysis English Literature Essay

Regeneration By Pat Barker Analysis English Literature Essay The story takes in the past. The entire story is in 1917. You can know that because it is during the First World War. In the beginning Rivers is reading a poem of Sassoon from July 1917 and in the end he wrote a date on a file of Sassoon which said: Nov. 26, 1917. In total I think the story takes a couple of months. In the beginning of the story Rivers reads a poem of Sassoon what is written in July 1917. So it will be in July or later. The story ends at November 1917 because that is what Rivers writes down on Sassoons files. So in total it will probably take a couple of months S. Sassoon July 1917 He drew the final page towards him and wrote: Nov. 26, 1917. Discharged to duty. The story takes place in Edinburgh, Scotland. Nearly always at Craiglockhart. Craiglockhart is a mental hospital. Its a standard, boring hospital with long hallways. On every room there sleep two patients and there is door of a patients room that has a lock except the one of Sassoon. Not even the shower. The town itself is hardly described. The only things they talk about are the restaurants and pubs in a street. This is you room. Youre lucky; its the only one which has a lock. Plot Sassoon is against the war and is being send to Rivers to cure him. They talk about the war and why Sassoon doesnt want the war to continue. Sassoon wants to go back to the war to help his friends when he is cured. At the end he is inspected and declared fit and goes back to the front. Characters Siegfried Sassoon, Dr. W.H.R. Rivers, Billy Prior As reader, you follow Sassoon the most. Sassoons father left him when he was a child. He is against the continual of the war and writes poems about it. He was a very good soldier and hes being loved by his men. Hes been diagnosed as Shell-shocked. River is his doctor at Craiglockhart. Although he is against the war, he still wants to fight because he does not want to leave his friend behind. River is a doctor at Craiglockhart. His patients never have any physical problems, but always mental problems. By talking with his patients hes trying to find out why they are ill and he tries to help them recovering from it. Sassoon is a special case because he is not really ill. Hes just against the war, but they thought he was shell-shocked. Prior is a lieutenant in the military. Hes been send to Craiglockhart because he couldnt speak. He also suffers from asthma. Prior is difficult patient for Rivers because he doesnt want to talk about his memories of the war. He falls in love with Sarah, a girl who works in a munitions factory. They are main characters because these are the people who you constantly follow during the book. Sassoon: Sassoons the best platoon commander Ive ever known. The men worship him if he wanted German heads on a platter theyd get them. And he loves them. Being separated from them would kill him. Rivers: One of the nice things about serving afternoon tea to newly arrived patients was that it made so many neurological tests redundant. Prior: Prior reached for the notepad and pencil he kept beside his bed and scrawled in block capitals, I DONT REMEMBER. Nothing at all? Prior hesitated, then wrote, NO. Wilfred Owen, Anderson, Sarah Lumb, Dr. Lewis Yealland, Callan, Robert Graves Message As reader of the book you can learn what the effect of a war can haven on people. That it doesnt only gives a lot of casualties and wounded people, but also lots of men who get a nervous breakdown because of the things theyve seen and experienced. I think the writer wrote this story to let the people see and know what a tremendous impact war can have on people. Because war is not only about brave men fighting, but also about young men who die and get crazy because of what theyve seen. The message is conveyed to you through the patients. Every patient has a different disease, but all of them are caused by the war. Throughout the book you discover the reasons why they are ill and those reasons are arguments of why the war should not continue. After being thrown into the air and landing head first in the ruptured stomach of a rotting dead soldier by a shell, which causes him to vomit whenever he eats anything. B: YOUR OPINION I think Rivers and Sassoon are sympathetic. Rivers is sympathetic because he helps all the patients. He could also say: bye, Im not going to help you. Especially mental patients, because they require a lot of attention and time to cure them. Sassoon is sympathetic because he loved him man at the front and they loved him. He was a good leader and bomber. I want to help you, I really do. But in order to do so, youve got to corporate. Sassoons the best platoon commander Ive ever known. The men worship him if he wanted German heads on a platter theyd get them. And he loves them. Being separated from them would kill him. I disliked Dr. Yealland. I disliked him because he uses shock therapy to his patients and he even pushes lighted cigarettes to their tongues. The patient had been strapped to a chair for periods of twenty minutes at a time, and very strong electric current applied to his neck and throat. Hot plates had been applied repeatedly to his neck and throat, and lighted cigarettes to the tongue. Sadness and anger. I felt sad when I read about Burns who landed into the stomach of a dead soldier and the stories of the other patients. I was angry when I read about the methods Dr. Yealland used to cure his patients. After being thrown into the air and landing head first in the ruptured stomach of a rotting dead soldier by a shell, which causes him to vomit whenever he eats anything. The patient had been strapped to a chair for periods of twenty minutes at a time, and very strong electric current applied to his neck and throat. Hot plates had been applied repeatedly to his neck and throat, and lighted cigarettes to the tongue. Then the electrode was applied to the back of his throat. He was thrown back with such force that the leads were ripped out of the battery. Yealland removed the electrode. Remember you must behave as becomes the hero I expect you to be, Yealland said. A man who has been through so many battles should have a better control of himself. He fastened the straps rounds Callans wrists and feet. Remember you must talk before you leave me. Dr. Yealland is trying to cure Callan. Callan is similar to Prior. He cant speak anymore. Through electro-shock therapy hes trying to let him talk again. Hes willing to go on as long as needed. At the end Dr. Yealland manages to let Callan speak again. I think this is the best part of the book because its nearly the only part in the book where something really happens. Nearly everything that happens in the book is people talking with each other. This part has the most action of the entire book. I do not really to read about people talking with each other, I want action. Yes. The write succeeded to convey a message to me. I now realize how bad wars can be for those who fight in it and what the effects can be. The writer makes the message clear by showing all the patients who suffer from the war, which got traumas because of it. It shows you what the effects are. Yes. The message is very important. People must realize how horrible wars are so that we do anything to prevent them. A war will not only kill people physically, but also mentally. Have you ever had any mental problems because of the war? Have you been a doctor who worked with patients who have had mental problems? Why did you wrote the book? I would like to know the answers to these questions because Im curious why he wrote the book and how he got his inspiration, his stories of the patients. C: THE SUMMARY Part I 2 hours Sassoon is against the war. He wants it to stop. Because of that, the military authority has labeled him as shell-shocked. Rivers is a doctor at Craiglockhart. It is a mental institute. Rivers has his doubts about Sassoon coming to Craiglockhart, because he thinks Sassoon is not shell-shocked. Robert Graves is a friend of Sassoon. He thinks Sassoon should stop protesting against the continual of the war, because he cant stop it. Even though he has the same opinion as Sassoon about it. Sassoon wanted to get a court-martial, because then his opinions would in the publicity. But Graves manages to get Sassoon to Craiglockhart instead. When Sassoon meets Rivers they start talking. Rivers finds out that religion is not the reason why Sassoon isnt fighting. He has nothing against fighting. Sassoon has problems with the idea that while others are dying at the front, he is safe at Craiglockhart. At Craiglockhart there is also another patient, Prior. Hes not able to speak, but not physically. He communicates with Rivers via a notepad. After a while he manages to get River talking again, but he still doesnt want to talk about what happened in France. Part II 2.5 hours At Craiglockhart Sassoon meets Owen. Just like Sassoon he also writes poetry. He asks if Sassoon could sign some of his poems. When Sassoon finds out hes also writing poetry he asks to read his poems. Prior, another patient at Craiglockhart goes to Edinburg. There he meets a girl called Sarah. They start walking and at a graveyard they nearly have sex, but at the last minute she pushes him away. Because Prior wasnt at Craiglockhart during the night he was grounded for two weeks. Rivers wants to try hypnosis on Prior to retrieve some memories. It works a little bit, because he remembered how two soldiers in his platoon died. There arrives a new patient at Craiglockhart. Willard. He was injured to the spine while he was under heavy fire at a graveyard. He keeps telling that he cant walk because of pain in the spine, while there is nothing that causes it anymore. Sassoon and Owen start talking in Sassoons room. Sassoon gives Owen some poems to publish into the hospitals magazine. In exchange for that, Sassoon will mentor Owen on his poetry. Prior meets Sarah again in Edinburg. They take the train to the sea. They talk with each other about the war and what his function was in it. Suddenly a storm comes up and they have to take shelter into a bush. There they also have sex. Rivers is ordered to take a three week holiday because he is so exhausted from work. Part III 2 hours At Craiglockhart Sassoon helps Owen with his poem: Anthem for doomed Youth Sarah and her friend Madge got to a hospital to look up Madges fiancà ©, who is wounded. Sarah decides to walk around alone in the hospital and find a tent where are soldiers who are missing limbs. She is angry, because they hide these people away. Prior is being examined by a doctor. He is afraid that they will think he is faking his illness, so that he will be sent back to war. River is meeting some old friends. They are discussing about Sassoon. Rivers realize that Sassoon is free to think about the war he wants, but that it is his job to get Sassoon back to war. At the end, Rivers got offered a top job in London. Although its good for his career, he is not sure if he wants to take it. Burns is an ex-patient of Craiglockhart. He invites rivers to come to his house at the sea for a couple of days. Rivers expected that burns wanted to talk about the war, but Burns hadnt said a thing about it. At a night, there is a heavy storm. Burns walks outside and goes into a cave that floods a high tide. Rivers finds him there suffering from flashbacks of the war in France. When theyre safe home, Burns tells everything to Rivers about the war. Once back at Craiglockhart Rivers meets Bryce and tells him that he is going to take the job in London. Rivers has an appointment with Sassoon. Sassoon tells him that he sees hallucinations of dead friends. Sassoon feels guilty that he is not helping his friends at the front, so he decides that he should return to the front. Part IV 2.5 hours Sarah has told her mother about Prior. She is angry at her because she had sex so soon. She also doesnt believe in true love. Sassoon talks with his friend Graves. Graves thinks that Sassoon should not go back to war and that he must maintain his word. He also tells Sassoon that a friend called Peter has been arrested for prostitution. The military now sends Peter to Rivers to cure him because they think he is homosexual. Sarah works at a munitions factory. They talk about the war and Sarah asks why a girl called Betty is not at work. Lizzie tells her that she is in the hospital because she tried a home abortion using a coat-hanger. Rivers talks with Sassoon. In a while, Sassoon will be send back to France. They discuss about homosexuality and that especially during war the authority is hard against homosexuality because it does not benefit the soldiers. The medical board is reviewing a couple of patients at Craiglockhart to decide whether or not they are able to go back to war. Prior is send home and gets permanent home service because he has asthma. He doesnt like it because he thinks that the people will see him a coward and that he cannot find out what type of soldier he would be. Sassoon is tired of all the waiting before its his turn to meet the board, so he decides to leave and have some dinner with a friend. River is angry at Sassoon. Sassoon apologizes and tells River that he still wants to go to France. When Rivers is at his new job in London he meets his colleague Dr. Yealland. Dr. Yealland works very differently than Rivers does. He uses electro-shock therapy to cure his patients. When Rivers joins one of Dr. Yeallands treatments he is shocked by his methods and doubts whether he can work with him. Sassoon is send back to war and River is thinking about the effect Sassoon and last few months have had on him. I did not really had any expectations while reading. There was also not much to expect I think. They talk and thats it. Theres nothing thats going to happen of that someone is going to do something. The end ended as I expected it. Sassoon got back to war. But that is also what he always wanted and said he was going to do. I dont think there should be a different ending. I did not really liked the book. I prefer books with action in it. This book has nearly no action at all. Lots of dialogues and sometimes difficult language. In my opinion there were also no reasons to keep on reading. I can understand why there would be reasons for other people, but not for me. For me there were no things that I really wanted to know, so that I had to keep on reading. In overall I think it wasnt a bad book, but I also did not enjoyed reading it. I prefer different types of books.

A Doll’s House and The Cherry Orchard Essays -- Comparative, Ibsen, Ch

Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House and Anton Chekhov’s The Cherry Orchard were famous for the way in which they depicted the changing of cultures. Both plays act as a sort of social commentary during times of widespread liberation, and use the contortive nature of these seemingly stereotypical characters’ actions to speak about groups of people as a whole. Throughout the course of both plays, this subversion of how different groups of people were typically perceived created a distinct contrast which often shocked and appalled audiences of the time. However, the effects of these plays were felt long after they were presented. Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House, written in 1879, is set in late-19th century Norway. Upon publication, Ibsen’s biting commentary on 19th century marriage stereotypes created widespread uproar. In the play’s first act, the viewer is introduced to a young married couple by the names of Nora and Torvald. In tune with stereotypes of the time, the relationship is controlled almost dictatorially by the husband. Nora is often treated by Torvald the way one might expect a father to treat his daughter. For instance, Torvald incessantly refers to Nora by child-like nicknames such as â€Å"my little squirrel† and â€Å"skylark† and often speaks to her in a condescending manner. Nora, who acts as a symbol of all women of that time, initially fits in very well with the common perception of women in late-19th century Scandinavia. Torvald himself even extends this sentiment of male infallibility and female submissiveness to the whole female race, saying, â€Å"Almost everyone who has gone to the bad early in life has had a deceitful mother (Ibsen 27).† However, throughout the play Nora begins to break the mold of inferiority that was associ... ...Russian society and social norms. The greatest reminder of this is found in the fact that Lopahkin, the man who Ranevsky once spoke to condescendingly, is now the family’s last hope for survival. Ironically enough, Lopahkin is often glancing at his watch, a reminder that time is changing, and a message that he, himself, is a testament to. In both Anton Chekhov’s The Cherry Orchard and Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House the subversion of perception and the insubordination of supposedly inferior characters has massive implications on the overall message of the play. These mechanisms bring to light a multitude of questions about the correctness of social norms and the future of both Russian and Norwegian society. They are powerful reminders of ever-changing society and the nature of human relationships, and they leave the reader at once confused and motivated for change.

Personal Development in Health Essay

Outcome 1: Understand what is required for competence in own work role Describe the duties and responsibilities of own work role. On a day to day basis the daily jobs are as follows: Daily weekly jobs Am Check money tins Visual check of home and exterior Support clients in Breakfast Support Clients in getting up and showering if needed Medication at 9am Handover form Early to Mid shift if needed Support clients in their jobs Own administration jobs to be completed throughout day inc SWIMS, Time Sheets, Emails, objectives, my way forward etc. Link working with clients Answer phone, and complete anything as it comes in Prepare lunch and dinner Medication at 1pm Handover to PM staff at 2pm as long as is needed PM need to check money tins Check jobs and clean etc if needed Support clients as needed 4.45 medication before M shift goes 5.30 evening meal is served Any PM specific cleaning jobs 9pm Sleep shift comes on with Handover 9.30 Evening Medication is given Sleep shift checks fridge and freezer temperatures Sleep specific jobs see cleaning list by microwave Closing checks of Home Assist clients to bed if needed On the wider scale my job is as follows: JOB PURPOSE To provide care and support to individuals residing in a Registered Care Home setting. CLIENT SUPPORT †¢ To actively seek to empower service users to gain and maintain control over all aspects of their lives †¢ To support clients with personal care as detailed in care plans developed by others ensuring they are treated with dignity and respect at all times †¢ To undertake tasks as directed by Senior Registered Support Worker and/or Service Manager †¢ To support clients with laundry activities †¢ To order food for the RCH and/or support clients with shopping †¢ To support and /or accompany clients to collect benefits or other†¦ Continues for 9 more pages  » Read full document Full access is free for premium users. Add to Library (0) DownloadPrint Report this Essay Facebook Twitter Google+ Send Rate This Document 4.5 12345 Read full document Full access is free for premium users. Document Details Views: 168 Words: 2433 Related Essays Unit 332 – Engage in p†¦ †¦Page 1 – Kathryn Di Terlizzi Unit 332 – Engage in personal development in health, social care†¦ 10 Pages October 2013 Engage in Personal Devel†¦ †¦Engage in personal development in health, social care or children’s and young people’s settings†¦. 6 Pages October 2012 Sc32: Engage in Personal†¦ †¦SC32: Engage in personal development in health, social care or children’s and young people’s†¦ 10 Pages March 2013 SHC 32: Engage in person†¦ †¦SHC 32: Engage in personal development in health, social care or children’s and young people’s†¦ 6 Pages March 2014 Unit Shc22 – Introductio†¦ †¦SHC 22 1.1 Describe and explain the duties and responsibilities of your own work role†¦. 7 Pages November 2011

Japanese Father essays

Japanese Father essays Japanese fathers spend very little time with their families and the main reason is their need to put their careers as top priority, to earn and provide for their wives and children. Besides this reason of overworking to give a comfortable life for their families, the mindset of fathers that they must maintain a devoted-worker image in front of their colleagues also limited the time fathers have to interact with the children. This mindset developed because of the Japanese society, as it gave more recognition to men who are being  ¡Ã‚ °masculine ¡ and this masculinity is equivalent to men ¡Ã‚ ¯s ability to earn. The other factor contributing to the little time fathers spend with their families is the need to keep a certain distance from their children. This is a psychological factor, for example if you have a father who constantly nags and monitors you, very soon you will most likely not take him too seriously. However, what or who makes the children have this fear of their fathers and will teaches them a lesson if they misbehave when their fathers are not around at home often? Japanese mothers are the ones molding the minds of their children to believe that their fathers are the authoritative figures and must be work-oriented to support the family. Mothers teach their children to be respectful to their fathers and look upon them as role models. Such teachings may be a little exaggerative of the fathers ¡Ã‚ ¯ authority although it is quite effective in making the children respect and fear their fathers, so that they will not misbehave. However, what the mothers say to their children about how great their fathers are may not coincide with how the fathers behave. Another important point of the article is that although Japanese mothers spend more time with the children than fathers, they earn lower level of respect from their children. This is perhaps because the more time you spend with one person, he or she will be able to see ...