Professional Portfolio Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 5750 words

Professional Portfolio - Assignment Example With his history of asthma, he was also manifesting anxiety over possible asthma attacks. His anxiety also put him in danger of a possible asthma attack. (42 words) After discharge, he was set to be discharged back to his home with his wife as his primary care giver. His wife is 70 years old, arthritic and has severe memory problems. She has difficulty moving around the house, but is determined to provide care to her husband. (48 words) Patient needs a nebulizer (salbutamol) in order to ease his chest congestion and speed-up his recovery. He also needs to complete 7-days of antibiotics in order to ensure complete recovery and prevent any relapse of his lower respiratory tract infection. (40 words) The patient is concerned about his prolonged recovery and possible asthma attacks. The carer is concerned about the patient’s difficulty in breathing which may be difficult to manage without medical assistance. (31 words) Patient needs to be referred to a respiratory therapist for further assessment of his coughing. He also needs a social worker who can assist in arranging his care and his daily activities. A private nurse who can assist his wife in the administration of medications and in the nebulization process can also be retained. (54 words) The patient also needs to be referred to his general practitioner for follow-up check-up on the progress of his recovery. He also needs to be referred to a private nurse who can help in the nebulisation and monitor his condition during instances when breathing may be difficult. (47 words) The wife may not be the best care giver for the patient because she is also senile and can sometimes be forgetful in her duties as carer. The wife has also admitted that she is concerned about her husband’s condition and that she does not know how to handle her husband’s condition, especially where difficulties in breathing and asthma attacks would occur. (62 words) The

Administrative law in Public Policy Essay Example for Free

Administrative law in Public Policy Essay The manholes are public utilities that are owned by municipals, regional authorities, or even companies which are hired to maintain them.   They are mainly used as access points to underground utility vaults for sewers, electricity, telephone storm drains and gas (Buckley, 2004). A fall into a manhole caused by negligence is cause enough to sue.   In this case if you can prove beyond reasonable doubt that if the authority in charge of that particular network of manhole into which you fell did not properly maintain or inspect the manholes, then, you may stand a chance of winning the case.    The ‘person’ to be sued in this case would be the authority responsible for the particular public utility, for which that particular manhole is used for (Buckley, 2004). To win, you would have to offer sufficient evidence to prove that the Authority in question had actual or constructive notice of the condition of the manhole as required by the utilities service facilities exception to governmental immunity act which provides that, â€Å"A dangerous condition of the facilities of steam, sewer water way, except that the claimant to recover must establish that the dangerous condition created a reasonably foreseeable risk of the kind of injury which was incurred and the local agency had actual notice under the circumstance of the dangerous condition at a sufficient time prior to the event to have taken measures to protect against the dangerous condition†, as per sec. 8542 (b) (5) (Buckley, 2004).   Failure to prove this would result in a compulsory no suit. Reference Buckley, W. Okent, C. (2004). Torts and Personal Injury Law (The west Legal studies series) New York: Clifton Park: Delmar Learning.

Transcendentalism And A Belief In A higher Power :: essays research papers

Transcendentalism and A Belief In A "Higher Power" We do not have good reasons to believe in something transcendental. Most of the arguments in favor of God, or a so-called "higher power" are based on faith and emotion, and not a clear logical argument. In fact, these arguments are often in favor of throwing logic out the window. In many ways, this question is similar to someone attempting to prove the existence of an invisible elephant. It is far easier to prove that the elephant does not exist than it is to prove that it does. Socrates' principle of examination states that we must carefully examine all things. The tools we humans use to do this are logic and the scientific method. In order to believe in something transcendental, you cannot examine your beliefs using logic and science. If you do, there is no way to prove the existence of a higher power. The primary argument against the existence of a Judeo-Christian all- knowing, all-powerful, righteous God is the argument from evil. This argument argues against the presence of a higher power using facts of ordinary life. This argument states that most would agree that some of the pain and suffering (evil) in this world is unnecessary. To be considered a necessary evil, the occurrence must be the only way to produce something good, which outweighs the evil. Many events, such as infant deaths, would not be classified in this category. If such an all-knowing deity existed, it states, He would know that this evil was occurring. If He was all-powerful, He would have the power to stop this evil. If He was righteous, He would stop the evil from occurring Therefore, the existence of evil cannot be compatible with the existence of this type of God. The primary response to the argument from evil is the appeal to human freedom. This argument states that God sees evil as necessary so that we humans may be free to choose our own path. The fatal flaw in this argument is that there are evils that exist not as a direct result of human choice. Natural evils such as floods, earthquakes, and tornadoes serve no purpose according to this definition, and are therefore unnecessary evils. A theist might respond to this with another weak rebuttal, stating that every evil produces compassion and understanding in others, and creates good in that regard. This is an overly positive, almost delusional view of evil. Almost everyone will be able to come up with at least one example of someone who has suffered an evil that has not directly or indirectly led to anything good.

Hunter V Moss Criticisms

Certainty of subject matter and the critcisms of hunter v moss When creating an express trust knight and knight articulated that there must be certainty of subject matter, certainty of intention and certainty of objects. Certainty of subject matter is where there must be an identification of the trust property and certainty as to whom is which part of the trust property to be held. In relation to uncertainty of beneficial interests, the trust will fail where the method of distribution is stipulated by the sethlow but cannot take effect (Boyce v Boyce).However the trust will not fail where the method of distribution is not stipulated by the sethlow leaving the court to intervene (re napton). If there is an effect of lack of certainty in respect of the beneficial interests in the trust property a resulting trust will be imposed because equity hates a vacuum, the trust property will therefore be held on trust for the sethlow or if he is dead for his estate.In regards to identification o f the trust property If there is a lack of a proper identification of the trust property, the trust will fail because the property never leaves the sethlow and there is no need for a resulting trust. However the term residue estate will not fail a trust because it means all the remaining trust property. It is quantifiable A problem occurs where the wording used is not sufficiently certain as to know what property is intended to be held on trust and where the property that is held on trust is not segregated by the sethlow from a larger amount of similar property he owns. If a trust fund is not segregated then there will be no certainty of subject matter and the trust will fail. The problem is identifying the property that constitutes the trust fund. The property must be identifiable otherwise the courts would not know which property is to be distributed to the beneficiaries. It must be shown that the sethlow intended to create a trust over specified property. In Palmer v Simmons â₠¬Ëœthe bulk of her estate’ was not sufficiently certain and ‘remaining part of what is left’ also (sprange v barnard).However in Re Golay the court looked at the tester’s intention’. To deduce what ‘reasonable income’ meant Oliver J articulated the orthodox approach or rule in re London wine where property must be segregated form a lager mass of similar property for there to be a valid trust he said â€Å"To create a trust it must be possible to ascertain with certainty not only what the interest of the beneficiary is to be but to what property it is to attach. â€Å"The ‘mere declaration that a given number of animals out of the flock would be held on trust would not create a trust’. This approach was followed in re Goldcorp which affirmed that property must be separately identifiable before it can be held on a valid trust. The contention arose with Hunter v Moss which did not follow the orthodox approach where Hunter wa s entitled 50 out of moss’s 1000 shares. Under the Goldcorp rule there would be no trust because the property was not separated however Dillon J said there was a valid trust.The rationale for this controversial decision was that it would have made no difference which 50 shares would have been given because they were all identical. So here there was no need to segregate the property if it was intangible. The problem with this case is that Dillon is giving the trustee of the will who only has legal title subject to the terms of the trust an executor status, i. e. putting him in the shoes of the sethlow.This is a problem because the executor acquires legal title in all of the deceased’s person’s property with a power to make a division of property in accordance with the terms of the will as personal representative of the deceased. Whereas the inter vivos trustee makes a division subject to the terms of the trust. So inter vivos trustee cannot know what property fal ls under his remit whereas the executor knows that he has title in the whole property formally vested in the testator so there is no uncertainty of subject matter.Dillon did not make a distinction between tangible and intangible property. But did say that â€Å"the London wine case concerned chattels and this case concerned a title over shares† This case has been applied in Holland v Newbury where the securities were intangible property and therefore did not require segregation. This may mean that Hunter v Moss is precedent because it was resolved in the C of A whereas Goldcorp was decided in the Privy Council and can only be deemed a persuasive authority.However the earlier case of MacJordan v Brookemount may have supported Dillon because the judge thought it was not necessary to segregate part of the bank account from a larger amount of money in the same account. However here there was no identifiable bank account in the first place to establish a trust so it was void. Othe r problems with Hunter v Moss is that it ignores traditional property law which requires there to be specific and identifiable property which is the subject to a trust. There was only a valid trust because there were ufficient shares to satisfy the claim. The C of A could not have decided this in Goldcorp because there were more claims than there was property to satisfy them. If there was a distinction to be made between cases in which it would be valid to hold one trust valid despite insufficient segregation and another trust invalid on grounds of insufficient segregation it would not be based on whether the property was tangible or intangible but rather whether the legal owner of that property was solvent or insolvent which in Goldcorp he was insolvent..So it seems Dillon lj's reasoning is ill founded. Another problem is that why should there be a specific rule for intangible property. Tangible property could be subject to the same rules. In Caswell v Powell â€Å"bushels of whea t are indistinguishable† and that in relation to a 1000 ball bearings it does not matter if 500 were separated because they would be all the same. So the distinction based on tangible and intangible property is weak and that it would be better to base a distinction on whether the trustee was solvent or insolvent.The reaction to Hunter v Moss has been mixed Alistair Hudson says that â€Å"Hunter v Moss is concerned with achieving justice between the parties†. Because Goldcorp concerned the allocation of property whereas HAUNTER V Moss the court was concerned with preventing the employer from benefiting from a breach of contract. However David Hayton argues that Dillon’s judgment may well come to be stigmatised as determined perilously close to vacation.He highlights questions left open by hunter v Moss Because, Moss declared himself trustee of 50 of his shares, an obvious problem arises because there is no certainty as to which 50 of the 950 shares the trust relat es. Thus, if Moss subsequently sells 50 shares how do the Revenue know whether he is selling his own shares, so that he is chargeable to capital gains tax, or if he is selling Hunter's shares so that Hunter is so chargeable?If the proceeds of sale are profitably or detrimentally reinvested does the new investment belong in equity to Hunter or Moss, bearing in mind that it is only if Moss is acting wrongfully in respect of specific shares that Hunter can take advantage of the equitable tracing rules to apply whichever of them suits him best? Can Hunter obtain an injunction to prevent Moss selling or mortgaging any shares or only more than 900 shares? Does Hunter really have any specific proprietary interest capable of assignment?Despite these criticisms Jill Martin says that Hunter v Moss appears fair, sensible and workable also Allison Jones says the decision is a sensible one. She says it seems absurd that there could be a valid trust of the entire contents of a bank account which could then be traced wrongly into another account of the trustee but that there cannot be a valid trust of part of the funds in an account. But even Therese Villiers says that â€Å"the flexibility provided by Hunter v. Moss may yet prove to have deleterious effects† Hancock v Watson exception?

Physiological Changes Essay

In order to compensate, more salt is added to the diet. This can contribute to, or exacerbate, a pre existing high blood pressure condition. Changes to the gastrointestinal system can seriously affect the overall body of an older adult. Reduced saliva and imbalanced stomach acid contribute to dehydration and bowel problems. Ulcers can result from the imbalanced stomach acid and limited movement. Sometimes these can become bad enough that surgery is necessary. Then, the person is exposed to a higher susceptibility of alternate infections and secondary problems. Decreased muscle mass causes a lack of physical strength and endurance. Overall body composition begins to change in the older adult. Fat in the body increases as muscle mass decreases. Joints stiffen as glucosamine is lost. Ligaments between bones loosen. When an older person tries to walk, just as they did before, they can likely have a fall. This can lead to broken bones. Within the body’s organ system, plaque begins to build up in arterial walls. Increased blood pressure causes the heart to work harder. This is one explanation for the decreased energy and stamina in older adults. With decreased circulation comes a lack of oxygen throughout the entire body system. Dry skin and general forgetfulness becomes common in the older adult. Cognitive decline begins to happen along with the physical changes occurring with age. Illness, disease, memory loss, and changes in a person’s environment can all contribute to physiological decline. Due to lack of physical exercise, proper hydration, and lack of oxygen, emotional stress becomes a serious issue. As stress levels increase, physical stress increases. This cycle becomes reciprocal in nature. Hormonal changes occur simultaneously. This can be detrimental to body’s ability to process vital nutrients in the dietary intake. The imbalance in hormone levels causes issues with insulin and glucose levels. Lack of hormonal balance and dehydration contributes to poorly maintained nerves. Stress is both a result of these changes and a contributor to them. Hearing loss impacts a person’s social abilities and can lead to isolation. Some older adults may be embarrassed at their lack of ability to hear or understand everyday conversation. They tend to withdraw from social opportunities and become susceptible to depression. Along with hearing loss, comes lack of vision. Cataracts, lack of sensitivity to light, and decreased blood supply to the retina all contribute to the inability to correctly see in one’s environment. This can lead to accidents within the living space. The last factor to consider is socioeconomic status. During retirement, income may decrease and medical costs increase. One of the first areas impacted is the affordability of food containing proper nutrition. Social events are not always accessible. These environmental changes coupled with the physiological changes can accelerate physical and mental decline. Supportive services do help to increase both longevity and the quality of life.