ONTOLOGICAL PARADOX Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

ONTOLOGICAL PARADOX - Research Paper Example ne has the ability to choose from the multiple patterns of lives with the chance of being embedded in one of the possible past-future pairs (Santas 39). The possibility of breaking out of limitations of only being able to exist in the present has led to many depictions of possible situations where human beings are able to freely move through the past present and future. Obsession with changing the past has not been limited to popular culture but has also featured in academic field such as physics and philosophy. This essay argues against the notion presented by some physicists and philosophers that one can travel back into the past to change based on the inconsistencies of time travelling. In this kind of fantasies, many tend to perceive an instrument such as special machine that will facilitate the backward time travel, think of a special machine which will enable man disappear from one place and time and reappear at a past time in a different or same place. There is a philosophical line of thought based on the existence of what is called a closed timelike curves (CTCs) discovered by philosophers and physicists working on time travel. CTCs are â€Å"curves in space and time† which provide â€Å"possible paths of bodies† to move through various universes. The model containing CTCs was discovered by Kurt GGdel in the 1940s and was believed to be models of the Einstein field equations (Seaman and Ssler 141). Based on model, Godel makes a theoretical assumption that it is possible for one to travel and come back at the exact time and place by making a round trip on a rocket ship in a suitably wide curve. This means that the object will get back to its past to the exact moment when it commenced the journey. The argument presented by Godel is based on the belief by some philosophers and physicists that the past, present and future equally real. These views on past, present and future represent the ideas of externalists group of theorists who argue that there was no

An Evaluation of Globalisation from Two Perspectives

An Evaluation of Globalisation from Two Perspectives Evaluation of Globalisation from Two Perspectives. As an Emotive Force, in Being Beneficial and a Key to  Future World Economic Development as well as  Being Inevitable and Irreversible. And as a Force that Increases Inequality Within and  Between Nations, Threatens Employment and  Living Standards and Thwarts Social Progress Introduction Globalisation as a word is that utilized in differing contexts within the public lexicon. It is one of â€Å"†¦ the most widely used- and misused – keyword †¦ in recent years, as well as being â€Å", one of the most rarely defined, the most nebulous and misunderstood, as well as the most politically effective †¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Beck and Camiller, 2000, p. 19). We tend to think of globalisation is as a modern term, first defined in the Merriam Webster Dictionary in 1944 (University of Pennsylvania, 2005) its historical roots in terms of it being a part of human history can be traced back â€Å"†¦ at least 5,000 years† (Wallerstein et al, 1980, p. 15). Said beginnings, â€Å"†¦ In the fifteenth and early sixteenth century †¦Ã¢â‚¬  is when the â€Å"†¦ European world-economy †¦Ã¢â‚¬  came into existence as â€Å"†¦ a kind of social system the world †¦(had) †¦ really known before and which is the distinctive feature of the modern world-system† (Wallerstein et al, 1980, p. 15). The underpinnings of why Wallerstein et al (1980, p. 15) take this view is that is represented an economic rather than political entity that differed from the â€Å"†¦ empires, city-states and nation-states †¦Ã¢â‚¬  that preceded it. Eisnstadt (1968, P. 41) helps to clarify the preceding by defining empire as a term utilized â€Å"†¦ to designate a political system encompassing wide, relatively high centralized territories †¦Ã¢â‚¬  which consisted of an emperor and â€Å"†¦ central political institutions †¦Ã¢â‚¬  And while empires were a primitive means by which economic domination was conducted, they laid the foundations for globalization through economic flows as represented by trade (Eisenstadt, 1961, pp. 82-107). The preceding has been utilized as an historical guide to the roots of globalisation, which is generally credited as being the individual credited with using it in an economic sense (Tedlow and Abdelal, 2005). Levitt’s definition of globalisation is based upon its applicability to corporations and products and what he termed as ‘homogenized demand’ (Tedlow and Abdelal, 2005). That view, while revolutionary at the time, in hindsight is a narrow conception of the broader concept that we understand globalisation to be in today’s terms. Shariff (2003, pp. 163-178) states that globalisation is the global process representing the homogenising of prices, wages, products, interest rates and profits that relies upon three forces, 1. human migration, 2. international trade, and 3. the swift movement of capital along with the integration of financial markets. Bhaqwati (2005, p. 3) advises that globalisation â€Å"†¦ can mean many things†. He focuses on glo balisation as being economic, constituting the â€Å"†¦ integration of national economies into the international economy through trade, direct foreign investment (by corporations and multinationals), short term capital flows, international flows of workers and †¦. flows of technology †¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Bhaqwati, 2005, p. 3). The World Bank, which agrees with Beck and Camiller (2000, p. 19) and states that there is no precise and universally agreed upon definition and, adds that over time it, globalisation, has come to encompass â€Å"†¦ cultural, political and other connotations in addition to the economic† (PREM Economic Policy Group and Development Economics Group, 2005). Their explanation of globalisation tends to focus on the economic side of the ledger, but adds that it, globalisation, is not uniform stating that in the poorer lesser developed countries it is more a case of being excluded from it rather than being impoverished by it (PREM Economic Policy Group and Development Economics Group, 2005). Hirst and Thompson (2001. p. 3) agree with the fact that there are broadly differing contexts attached to globalisation and that in today’s terms it largely means placing economic aspects in the forefront, keeping in mind the cultural, political, and social variables that are intertwin ed. The International Monetary Fund (2000) combines pieces of definitions from the preceding in stating that globalisation represents â€Å"†¦ a historical process †¦Ã¢â‚¬  which is attributable to â€Å"†¦ human innovation and technological progress†, and â€Å"†¦ refers to the increasing integration of economies †¦Ã¢â‚¬  on a global basis â€Å"†¦ particularly through trade and financial flows†. Stiglitz (2003, p. 4) asks the question as to â€Å"Why has globalization – a force that has brought so much good – become so controversial?† Bhaqwati (2005, p. 4) also asks this question as to â€Å"Why are the critics of globalization so agitated?† Hist and Thompson (2001. p. 2) also are quizzical as to this phenomenon. What is it about globalisation that has proponents lined up on one side, and antagonists on the other? This examination shall seek to equate both sides of this highly charged arena, looking at the views that see globalisation as an emotive force, where some see it as a process that is beneficial, representing a key to future global economic development that is not only inevitable, but irreversible as well. And on the other side of the fence there are those that view globalisation with hostility, and believe that is increases inequality between nations as well as within them, threatens employment along with living standards and thwarts soc ial progress. According to Giddens (2006), we are in the second phase of the debate on globalisation. His perspective is that there were discussions regarding the phase and attempting to determine what is was and is while it was unfolding. Giddens (2006) views us as being in the second phase of the debate as globalisation is firmly entrenched in economics, politics, cultural and social areas, as we again attempt to determine what it is, along with its consequences and how it can be properly accommodated. Whether one subscribes to this view is a matter of opinion, but the point is there is a debate on globalisation with one side seeing it as representing benefits to society, and the other as promoting inequalities and other negative connotations. Or, is that actually the case? Could it be that it is parts of globalisation that opponents are against? Could it be that the problem with globalisation is its inequality in that there are the nations gaining from it and distancing themselves from those la gging or being left behind? The questions are almost endless. In seeking to reach a determination, this examination will look at both side of the globalisation issue, offering those facets for and those against it. Ohmae (Ray, 2005) sees globalisation as the liberalisation of individuals, consumers, business corporations as well as regions from the confines of the nation state. He sees the world as representing a global village â€Å"†¦ because wealth will migrate across national borders†. He sees, in commercial terms, as well as in consumer terms that the world is â€Å"†¦ an increasingly borderless economy, a true global marketplace† with political influences seeking to control the process (Ohmae, 1996, p. 8). Yip (1989, p. 29) sees the process of globalisation as a ‘must’ facet that major business corporations have to participate in as a result of almost all products having foreign competitors. This preceding view not only means that a company needs to look at this from its own domestic market and staving off competition, but also from the viewpoint of growth and profits as there are customers to be won in foreign markets as well (Yip, 1989, p. 29). Yip’s corporate focus on globalisation looks at falling trade barriers as governments and regions understand the importance of opening their markets to enable them to enter others in a quid pro quo. The corporate process of globalisation results in increased competition, jobs, better products, innovation and lower prices as the lines between products, goods and services have become increasingly transparent, with consumers as the beneficiaries in the process. The opening up of markets, and the loosening of trade restrictions and borders is a positive contribution of globalisation as it makes the new battlefield one of profits, markets and expansion as opposed to conquest, war and destruction (Held et al, 1999. pp. 32-35). Globalisation’s main engine has been a result of economics, it is money that has underpinned the flow of products, printed materials, the Internet, documentaries and other informational exchanges, along with products, goods and services. The elements of increased trade have brought the need to stabilize currencies in order to permit the corporations within countries to effectively compete on the global stage and is an important underpinning resulting in the formation of the euro in the European Union. The foregoing has brought about a â€Å"†¦ high degree of economic interdependence among today’s economies †¦Ã¢â‚¬  and the preceding reflects â€Å"†¦ the historical evolution of the world’s economic and political order† (Carbaugh, 2006, p. 3). Evidence of the equalization process of globalisation can be found in the example of the United States which was the most dominate economic and political nation after the end of World War II (Carbaugh, 2006, p. 3). This has been referred to as neocolonialism, which represents Imperial powers controlling other societies through economic means on the international stage, which resurfaced after WW II, having similarities to the colonialism periods of the sixteenth through twentieth centuries (Selfa, 2002). The foregoing is driven by economic means as capitalism represents â€Å"†¦ an economic mode †¦ that †¦ operate within an arena larger than †¦ any political entity can totally control †¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Wallerstein, 1976, pp. 230). The preceding has provided capitalists, and thus globalisation, with the foundation to pursue consistent â€Å"†¦ economic expansion of the world-system †¦Ã¢â‚¬  which Wallerstein (1976, pp. 230) argues is skewed in its distrib ution of rewards. Globalisation is thus a combination of political aims to strengthen national economies through â€Å"†¦ political power, authority and forms of rule †¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Held et al, 1999, p. 32) that aids capitalism, commerce and companies. Globalisation has since evened the playing field as nations, regions and countries have devoted their efforts into strengthening their competitive positions in the commerce arena through regional trading blocks such as the European Union, ASEAN, SAARC, Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and other organizations evolved â€Å"†¦ the world community into a complicated system based on a growing interdependence among nations† (Carbaugh, 2006, p. 3). China has risen from a developing nation into a world power through its march into capitalism via the innovation of socialist economics, which retains the centralized Party control. Globalisation has aided in the preceding as well as the development of the Chinese military into a sophisticated technologically equipped force (Wortzel, 1994, pp. 168-170). The market reforms of 1978 has enabled the country to harness the commercial potential of its market of 1.3 billion citizens under ‘socialism with Chinese character istics’ which has transformed China from the 32nd largest trading nation in 1978 to second in terms of GDP purchasing power behind the United States (Dellios, 2004). The power of participation in the international flows of globalisation has proven its ability and potential to transform economies and nations as well as the economic balances of power. Globalisation is for most intents and purposes a Western dominated process that is influenced and guided by corporations. In pursuing international markets multinational corporations have opted on a course of standardising their product lines to permit them to make adaptations to reach foreign consumers in the quest for increased market share (Hayler, 2006). Localisation represents the adaptation of products, goods and or services to address the tastes, preferences, cultural â€Å"†¦ and other requirements of a specific target market† (W3C, 2007). A key example of standardisation combined with localisation can be found in portable telephones. Companies need a standardised approach to the production of basic components in a globalised economy for framing, wiring and related components to permit a universal platform of manufacture. With facilities in 15 countries and sales in over 130, Nokia is a prime example of a globalised company (Nokia, 2001). However, individual marke ts require localisation to appeal to consumers in the face of competition, as well as the recognition of preferences, tastes and needs. Nokia innovated the first mobile phone that was designed to provide â€Å"†¦ commands in English, Chinese, Thai, Bahasa for Indonesia and Malaysia, and Spanish for the Philippine market (Hoberg-Petersen et al, 1999). The preceding is an example of the combined utilization of standardisation and localisation required to capture consumers in the competitive globalised marketplace. Nokia’s deft understanding of the variables of the international marketplace represent the application of Porter’s (1998, pp. 59-61) value chain organization, which represents the various activities inside as well as outside a company, equating logistics, operations, marketing and sales, support activities, procurement, technology development, company infrastructure and utilizing the inputs and results from these activities to improve operations by adapti ng and changing where needed to meet the demands of the marketplace. The importance of an international stance in the today’s global economy enables corporations to cope with international competition by leveraging their domestic operations overseas and learns lessons from the unique characteristics of foreign markets to bring back to its own domestic market. The preceding expands the company’s innovation by coming to grips with specialized needs that can translate into new features and approaches that boost sales. Accepting the principle of globalisation is not a luxury that companies can afford to ignore in the face of foreign competition. It is an undeniable facet of competition as any product, goods or services that has a representative market domestically, will be under attack sooner or later by some company or companies seeking to expand. Evidence of the impact of globalisation is shown by the fact that the ratio of exports plus imports as calculated against the global gross domestic product has increased from 16% in 1960 to 40% in 2001 (World Bank, 2002). The forgoing seemingly suggests that localizing products, goods and services from a standardised format to meet the needs of individual markets has proven successful. But, in the larger scheme of things, is globalisation actually helping to increase inequalities between nations and threatening living standards, social progress and employment? As in all questions, there are two sides to every story. The preceding is a highly complex principle to equate as well as measure, as such is dependent upon the relative sophistication of a country’s ability to meet the varied demands of globalisation called for through institutions, infrastructure development, educational systems, professional and skilled worker training and development, access to raw materials, governmental practices and internal policies. It is simple enough to look at examples of inequality, and related factors, however, in the case of Africa and Latin America, they have only recently opened their markets, beginning in the 1980s, as opposed to the United States, Europe and Japan, which were all engaged in the process shortly after World War II (Bardhan, 2006). China adopted market reforms and changed the precepts of socialism to accommodate a process that enabled them to harness their educational, industrial and internal systems and infrastructure to utilize globalisation to reinforce the power of the state. The ir example points to the internal resourcefulness of government to utilize means to transform the way things were done, into what they viewed as needing to be done (Bardhan, 2006). In a free market system inequalities mark the underpinnings of the business process as companies seek lowered costs via which to produce what they are in business for. Such means moving facilities and or processes to those locales that will enable them to maintain quality, but cut costs, and labor, represents the largest cost item. In a report titled â€Å"A Compendium of Inequality† (Martens, 2005) which refers to a United Nations Development Report published in 2005, found that approximately fifty countries, of the total one hundred and seventy-five countries studied, lost ground in terms of their economic standing, GDP and other areas. In order to achieve economic progress, reduce poverty and improve their quality of life, developing countries need increased employment opportunities, improved labor productivity and governmental incentives to attract industry and business as well as to develop them internally. Achievement of the foregoing requires a sustained productivity growth along with increased capacity of the country’s populace in skills and development that will foster the conditions for the attraction of multinational companies and permit the country to compete on the international stage (Little, 2005). Multinational companies bring with them advanced production and management techniques as well as offer increased wages in terms of relative practices thus increasing the standards, thereby attracting the better labor from the available employment pool. The process is slow, yet effective, and the foregoing represent facets used by China, India, Brazil, and the Asian Tigers, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore, that aided these countries in making progress in global commerce. Conclusion Globalisation can trace its roots back over 5,000 years, with the modern application of the term credited to Levitt (Tedlow and Abdelal, 2005). The consistent evolution of globalisation has caused theorists and scholars to define and redefine the term with the understanding that in its present complexities that there is no universally agreed upon definition to adequately describe the process that includes economics, social processes, cultural facets, political considerations and the complex entangled web of interdependent relationships these areas have. In this examination, the term globalisation has been narrowed to focus on its economic and business ramifications in examining whether the process is beneficial, and a key to future world economic development that is inevitable and irreversible, or is it a process that promotes inequality within as well as between nations that threatens employment along with living standards and thwarts social progress. And while globalisation does ha ve its less than desirable effects, it has proven its worth in lowering international borders to increase trade, migration and stabilize currency and capital flows in an era that has seen unprecedented growth in innovation, communications and the seeking of a better understanding of humanity’s needs. The process is not going to disappear or reverse itself as whether we like it or not, the world is driven by economics and the interests of corporations to generate profits on behalf of stockholders, and stakeholders in addition to the vested self interests of governments to protect and foster favorable business conditions for corporations that generate employment and pay taxes to support the political structure. The preceding has been and will continue to be an interdependent relationship that has existed since the Chinese dynasties, through the Egyptian era, as well as the Greek and Roman empires. It is not a question of what direction the world is going in, but one of the direction the world has always been going. Corporations are not going to disappear and our way of life that has been evolving change. Commerce, trade and the migration of people has always been with us, globalisation is just the present form that has manifested itself as have as conquests, exploration and wars in addition to trade and commerce been the former means that mankind has utilized from the beginnings of civilisation. As history has taught us, the more advanced nations use the less advanced to further their ends, with the offshoot of the process that the weaker nations through this association, become stronger and sooner or later establish their own independence and dominance in a never ending cycle of ebbs and flows that has seen shifts in political and economic power. Such was the case with the British empire, the rise of the United States, the emergence of the European Union, the development of regional trading blocks and the ascension of China. This examination has shown that while globalisation does have its inequalities and less than desirable points, it, as in all human endeavours, is an evolutionary process that is still learning from itself. As we progress as a race of peoples, so to does our understanding of our mistakes and the drive to correct them. Institutions such as the United Nations are proof of this evolutionary process. Thus, the faults in globalisation do not lie in its proces s, but in our application of them, which those whom opposed to it aiding in pointing out its shortcomings. As we learn, we listen and reshape ourselves to devise ways to better serve ourselves as well as humankind. The examples presented herein point to the foregoing. Bibliography Bardham, P. (2006) Does Globalization Help or Hurt the World’s Poor. 26 March 2006. Scientific American Beck, U., Camiller, P. (2000) What is Globalization. Polity Press Bhaqwati, J. (2005) In defense of Globalization. Oxford University Press Carbaugh, R. (2006) International Economics. Academic Internet Publishers, Inc. Dellios, R. (2004) The Rise of China as a Global Power. Retrieved on 29 January 2007 from http://www.international-relations.com/CM6-2WB/GlobalChinaWB.htm Eisenstadt, S. (1968) Empires. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences Eisenstadt, S. (1961) The Causes of Disintegration and Fall of Empires: Sociological and Historical Analysis. Vol. 34. Diogenes Giddens, A. (2006) The Second Globalization Debate. Retrieved on 27 January 2007 from http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/giddens/giddens_index.html Hayler, A. (2006) Standardization is not the answer to the challenge of globalization. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http://www.businessintelligence.com/ex/asp/code.145/xe/article.htm Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D., Perraton, J. (1999) Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture. Stanford University Press Hirst, P., Thompson, G. (2001) Globalization in Question: The International Economy and the Possibilities of Governance. Polity Press Hoberg-Petersen, T., Stuart, C., Wetstone, R. (1999) Nokia Mobile Phones: A Lesson in International Strategy. Yale School of Management International Monetary Fund (2000) Globalization: Threat or Opportunity. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/ib/2000/041200.htm#I Nokia (2001) Nokia Helps Lead IT Industry to Customers with Disabilities. Retrieved on 29 January 2007 from http://www.design.ncsu.edu/cud/projserv_ps/projects/case_studies/nokia.htm Ohmae, K. (1996) End of the Nation State: The Rise of Regional Economies. Touchstone Porter, M. (1998) Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. Free Press PREM Economic Policy Group and Development Economics Group (2005) Assessing Globalization. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http://www1.worldbank.org/economicpolicy/globalization/documents/AssessingGlobalizationP1.pdf Ray, J (2005) Ohmae’s Subversive Definition of Globalization. Retrieved on 18 January 2007 from http://www.heritagetidbits.com/archives/2005/08/ohmaeas_subvers.htm Selfa, L. (2002) A New Colonial Age of Empires? May-June 2002. International Socialist Review Shariff, I. (2003) Global Economic Integration: Prospects and Problems. Vol. 1, Issue 2. International Journal of Development Economics Stigliz, J. (2003) Globalization and its Discontents. W.W. Norton Company Tedlow, R., Addelal, R. (2005) Theodore Levitt’s â€Å"The Globalization of Markets†: An Evaluation After Two Decades. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/79/07879685/0787968579.pdf University of Pennsylvania (2005) A Very Long-Term View: Globalization Since the Fourteenth Century. Retrieved on 27 January 2007 from http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dludden/global1.htm W3C (2007) Localizations vs. Internationalization. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-i18n Wallerstein, I. (1976) The Modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York Academic Press Wallerstein, I, Tilly, C., Shorter, E. (1980) The Modern World-System I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. Academic Press World Bank (2002) Financing the Poorest Countries. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2002/09/06/000094946_02082404015853/Rendered/INDEX/multi0page.txt Wortzel, L. (1994) China Pursues Great Power Status. Vol. 38, Issue 2. Orbis Yip, G. (1989) Global strategy in a world of nations. Vol. 30. Sloan Management Review

The Differences Between A Club And A Gang :: essays research papers

The differences between a club and a gang, are quite distinct, but it is the connotational differences between these two words which distinguishes one from the other. The New Lexicon Webster's Dictionary of the English Language defines a club as; "...an association of people with some common interest who meet periodically..." It defines a gang as "...a number of men or boys banding together, esp. lawlessly..." This definition is traditionally slanted toward applying to male youth, and stereotypical gangsters, from the Mafia to street criminals. Persons who often have a negative attitude toward youth see gangs. Often individuals form gangs out of fear and for the protection of their members whether they are the Bloods and Crips of Los Angeles or the Sharks and the Jets of "West Side Story." Gangs may not possess a set of formal written rules, but all of them have their own sets of customs or conditions. Gangs may or may not be facilitated in a branch of higher and lower members, mimicking a military model. Gangs often have a loosely defined set of goals, and are often involved in delinquent activities. A socially approved form of a gang is a club. Americans generally view clubs as character building leadership opportunities; whereas, individuals typecast into gangs are persecuted as criminals. Clubs are formed with constructive goals in mind, such as making it easier for its members to find parts for a particular brand of automobile. Socioeconomic class, academic achievement, or perceived roles in society for its members all play a part in the preferential treatment given to a group which a society deems a club rather than a gang. For instance, parts of the public anticipated that motorcycle riders would cause a massive rise in crime within the Hollister area during the motorcycle rally.

End-of-life Essay

End-of-life care is a form of medical treatment which is usually provided for terminal illnesses, when the condition is no longer curable and every effort should be made at improving the quality of life rather than increasing the duration of life. Cancer is one condition which is incurable during the advanced stages. End-of-life usually does not involve provision of anticancer treatment but concern for lowering the physical symptoms (especially pain so that the patient is comfortable), addressing the psychosocial issues and the spiritual concerns, so as to improve the quality of life. Often an ethical dilemma exists at the situations under which end-of-life care should be started. The need to provide end-of-life care arises out the physician’s obligation to ensure that the patient can live and die with dignity, compassion, comfort and respect. Two of the cases which demonstrate the physician’s obligations to the patients were the Ann Quinlan case (1976) and the Cruzan V. Harmon case (1988) (Meisel, 2005 & Rekel, 2007). In the Quinlan case, Ms. Quinlan suffered irreversible damage to the brain cortex and was left in a permanent vegetative state. She required ventilator support, artificial nutrition and artificial hydration to maintain her medical and nursing care. She could be kept alive for any duration, but this was morally not required and not in the patient’s best interest. The physician’s refused to remove ventilator support and hence the family had to go to the New Jersey Court. The court in the landmark decision permitted to remove ventilator support as it was not in the patient’s best interest. The court had said that although the patient was in a permanent vegetative state and did not have to ability to make a decision about withdrawing ventilator support, it did not mean that she could not exercise her choice and give her decision. The decision-making could be made by a surrogate who would be doing so in the best interest of the patient. In the Roe vs. Wade case, the court gave the decision that the patient could control their medical treatment and had the right to make decisions. In the Cruzon case, after the ventilator was removed, the patient survived for about 10 years. The Missouri court in this case did not follow the advice of the parent’s on removing life-saving support. The court said that all measures should be done in best interest of the patient, and if there were not clear evidence of the patient’s wishes, then the legal guardian should be acting in the patient’s best interest. The court said that even if there was a need to prolong life through ventilator support, if there was no evidence that the patient’s best interest would be fulfilled. In the case Westchester County Medical Ctr (1988), the New York court said that there had to exist clear and convincing evidence whenever important decisions had to be taken by the surrogate (Meisel, 2005 & Rekel, 2007). Some of the common ethical issues regarding medical treatment have been ‘beneficence’ and ‘non-maleficence’. The physician should do treatment that benefits the patient and does not cause more harm. They should help reduce the suffering and help the patient to return to health. However, in the end-of-life issues, the patient would be dying due to the terminal cancer condition, and using life-sustaining treatment would not have any potential benefits, as it would prolong life, but not improve the quality. In this case medical treatment is doing lot harm than benefits, and hence using it would be inappropriate. However, a clear judgment has to be made in the clinical-decision making and one of the most important issues is whether the patient has made the intention of withdrawing all the life-saving treatment and instead goes into palliative care (in which symptomatic treatment would be provided so as to improve the quality of life during the last few days). Having the patient make this decision is based on another ethical principle known as ‘autonomy’. The patient has the right to choose or disregard whichever treatment he/she wants as the have the right to control any act that is done with their body (Walker, 1999 & Meisel, 2005). Implications of risk management – †¢ Mainly with the use of opioids to manage pain (especially from its prolonged use) †¢ Clinical practice guidelines and protocols should be followed to ensure the greatest amount of benefits for the patient in the form of improved quality of life and lowered discomfort levels (Hoffman, 1998). The right to autonomy of the patient should not be disregarded under any circumstance. The patient has the right to choose palliative treatment or reject it based on their own choices. The patient may also want to undergo curative treatment for cancer even though the survival rate may be low. The patient should be informed of the benefits, risks, options, outcome and costs of all forms of treatment available. The physician should answer all the queries the patient has of all the available forms of treatment. No treatment should be done against the will and intention of the patient. If the patient is not able to make a reasonable decision as they may not be legally competent, then the surrogate (including the family member or a legal guardian) of the patient should make a decision on the patient’s behave, keeping in mind the clear interests of the patient (Walker, 1999, Meisel, 2005 & Rekel, 2007). There may be a lot of competing loyalties between the patient and the organization:- †¢ The organization may try to keep the interest of the patient in mind and may do all that it can to reduce sufferings, improve the quality of life and ensure a peaceful end †¢ The organization may demonstrate a greater opinion towards anticancer treatment as it would involve higher costs (even though it is not beneficial to the patient anywhere) †¢ Even though the patient can benefit to a reasonable extent from anticancer treatment, the organization may force end-of-life care on the patient, as the family members have provided consent. In this case the family members would be having conflicting interests with the patient and may want a faster end to the patient. To prevent any conflicting interest of other parties, it is important that any decision made regarding use of anticancer treatment of initiation of end-of-life care should be clearly justified and documented through evidence-based findings. An ethical approach should be initiated to ensure that all issues are sorted out keeping the patient’s interest in mind:- †¢ The physician should ensure maintaining autonomy of the patient at all stages †¢ If the patient is not competent enough to make a decision by himself, decision-making should be done by the surrogate keeping in mind the patient’s interest and choices †¢ It is the obligation of the physician to ensure that the patient lives †¢ The patient’s competence needs to be determined so that a reasonable decision can be ensured †¢ The patient has to be informed of all the alternative choices available at all the stages †¢ In case of diagnosis of a terminal illness, confirmation should be taken from two physician’s (second opinion) †¢ In case of terminal illness, and the patient choice palliative care, efforts should be made at all stages to improve the quality of life (through symptomatic treatment of physical problems, addressing the psychosocial and spiritual issues), rather than on prolonging life The other issues which need to be addressed include:- 1. Active Euthanasia – This is legal in only a few states of the world including Netherlands and Belgium. The patient should make a reasonable decision, and should be a native from that state in which euthanasia is legalized. The physician himself would take the active step of ending the patient’s life. The patient should be diagnosed with a terminal illness 2. Physician-Assisted Suicide – This has been legalized in the US state of Oregon, PAS has been legalized. The patient would perform the active step of ending life and the physician would merely assist the patient. The patient should be diagnosed with a terminal illness (in which death would be certain within 6 months). The patient should be legally competent to make a reasonable decision (Rekel, 2007). References: Hoffmann, D. E. (1998). â€Å"Pain Management and Palliative Care in the Era of Managed Care: Issues for Health Insurers†, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 26(4), 267-289. http://www. aslme. org/research/mayday/26. 4/26. 4c. php Meisel, A. (2005). Ethics, End-of-Life Care, and the Law: Overview, Retrieved on August 16, 2008, from Hospice Foundation Website: http://www. hospicefoundation. org/teleconference/books/lwg2005/meisel_jennings. pdf National Cancer Institute (2002). End-of-Life Care: Questions and Answers, Retrieved on August 16, 2008, from NCI Website: http://www. cancer. gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Support/end-of-life-care Rekel, R. (2007). Rakel: Textbook of Family Medicine, 7th ed, Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier. Walker, R. M. (1999). Ethical Issues in End-of-Life Care, Cancer Control, 6(2):162-167. http://www. medscape. com/viewarticle/417700_1

Franklin Delano Roosevelt: The Savior of America

It seems that everyone knows what these three simple letters mean. FDR, which stands for Franklin Delano Roosevelt, was the 32nd President of the United States, the savior of America during mid-20th century, also the hero of mine. As we all know, FDR, known as Franklin D. Roosevelt, is the only president of the United States who was elected to more than 2 terms and up to 4 terms. It’s not so hard to find out that the reason for being the one elected to 4 terms is leading the whole nation overcome the worldwide economic crisis and the World War II. In this essay, I am going to discuss how FDR leaded America pull through the economic crisis which happened in 1927 and what FDR did for fighting against the Fascists with the Allies. First of all, I would like to talk about the worldwide economic crisis. It is known to us all that the Great Depression caused by the economic crisis in 1927 destroyed the whole economy of the world, not only the United States, but also the whole Europe and some parts of Asia including Britain, France, Germany, Japan, etc. It was like a domino effect, all the countries sank into the abyss from which no one can escape. At the beginning of the Great Depression, President Herbert Hoover who was the one before Roosevelt started plenty of programs for reversing the down, but unfortunately all of those failed. Even the worse, the economy and the society turned into a worse condition, and that time became even harder either. At that time, the rate of unemployment and the rate of crime went up, whereas the standard of living went down, and so a huge number of citizens in the United States could no longer live their normal life as before. During that hard time, a lot of people became homeless and died from starvation and disease while another part of people would rather suicide themselves. Finally, Roosevelt defeated Hoover in the election of 1932 and became the 32nd president of the United States. In his Inaugural speech, he encouraged the whole nation with the words that only thing we have to fear is fear itself. And then, in his â€Å"First Hundred days† in office, he started a new series of economic programs named the New Deal which contained Relief, which aimed at protecting the poor and providing jobs to those people who was unemployed, Recovery, whose goal was recovery of the economy to normal levels, and Reform which means rebuilding the economic system to avoid a repeat depression. To support his New Deal, he also passed the Emergency Banking Relief Act, the National Industrial Recovery Act, the agricultural adjustment act, the Social Security Act, and so on which opened a new era. Because of all of those, the economy of America began to recover. That’s the evidence which can prove that it was Roosevelt who helped the United States get out of stuck. Second of all, Roosevelt also made a declaration of war with Japan which meant the United States officially participate in World War II and became a member of the Allies fighting against Germany and Japan. In fact, the United States Congress passed The Neutrality Acts in the 1930s which limited the help from the United States to aid Britain against Nazi Germany. Because of that, Roosevelt opposed the acts and tried to find various ways to assist the Allies. Before the participation of the United States, Roosevelt signed the Atlantic Charter with Winston Churchill, who was the British Prime Minister at that time, and then gave a strong financial support to both China and Britain to fight against the Fascists. On the following day when Japanese attacked on Pearl Harbor, he made a speech calling December 7, when Hawaii Operation took place, â€Å"a date which will live in infamy†. That meant it’s the end of the Neutrality Acts and the beginning of the participation of the United States. After America’s participating, the aspect of World War II has been totally changed, especially after Normandy landings. In the Pacific, The Battle of Midway became the most significant turning point in World War II which caused the cooperation between Japan and America change a lot. At last, as everybody knows, the Axis collapsed, while the Allies got victory. It’s so easy to tell that how Roosevelt contributed to the victory of Allies. While there are still some people hold a point of view that Roosevelt needs to be blamed because he had known some details about the plan that Japanese attacked on Pearl Harbor before that happened but he kept that as a secret and then he allow that tragedy happened in order to rouse the nation for participation to the war. However, the opinion is wrong because World War II was a disaster for all the human beings, while the participation of the United States let the Allies get the final victory and end the war. We should not abuse Roosevelt but thank him because he let us have a peace world. Whereas there are still some people holding another idea as Charles Dorn did that FDR did effectively eliminate one global threat – but left us with decades of cold war. I have to say what he thought is right but that is also the thing no one can avoid. Moss Roberts points out that â€Å"The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. † After defeating the same enemy – the fascist, the United States of America and the Soviet Union turned into enemies because of the different profits of two nations. Actually, the cold war is the best way to solve the problem caused by different profits, compared with wars or battles. In conclusion, Roosevelt is not only the savior of the United States but also the savior of the whole world. He saved America’s economy from the abysm and then saved the world from being destroyed by the Fascists. As the article Visit Little White House to step back into FDR's time said, â€Å"His ‘Fireside Chats’ heard over the radio were as popular as the ‘Grand Old Opry’ or Joe Louis' prize fights. His â€Å"So help us God† speech at the beginning of World War II pulled the nation together. Then later, when word came that he had died, grown men cried unashamedly in public beside their wives. † We can easily figure out that FDR himself and the things he did are all unforgettable to every single American who overcame that hard time. Thanks to Roosevelt, we can have a developed America; thanks to Roosevelt, we can have a peaceful world even though there are still a lot of skirmishes in the world.