How Far Do You Agree With Buckley's

I have witnessed a “burned out” nurse simply say to a client who is refusing a medication due to a side effect the client does not care for, ‘okay, I will just put refused and tell the doctor.’ This client needs educated about his/her choice. Most of the time, the client does not realize how refusing the medication can have a negative effect on his/her body overtime.

Here, Dorment says that one’s feelings cannot be used as evidence of an injury. He also gives an example from his own life. He and his wife share laundry duty, but when he folds the laundry, his wife does it again. When he asks why she does this, she tells him he folds the laundry wrong. He makes the point that women want to be helped and supported more around the house, but tell men that they are doing things wrong. I can see where Dorment is coming from with these points. In today’s society, people base too many arguments on feelings, instead of facts, truth, and evidence. The feelings of expectations for the house are not men’s fault, nor are men the cause for women’s hardship in this area.

The best way to bring attention to a problem is tragedy. Unfortunately, this means reform will not happen until the loss or harm of life has already occurred. One example of this was seen in New York, the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire. This fire was the cause of 146 deaths and many more injuries; however, this lead to new law regulating work safety standards. While this is a tragedy that caused reform in 1911, the same method of reform stands today. This can be seen in the novel, Into Thin Air by Jon Krakauer. The novel is an account of what happened on the mountain during the 1996 Everest expedition. While the expedition started off with high hopes and dreamers ready

People have a tendency, known as social proof, to believe that others' interpretation of the ambiguous situation is more accurate than their own. Hence, a lack of response by others leads them to conclude that the situation is not an emergency and that response is not warranted. Finally, empirical evidence has shown that the bystander effect is negated when the situation is clearly recognized as an emergency. In a 1976 study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Lance Shotland and Margaret Straw illustrated that when people witnessed a fight between a man and a woman that they believed to be strangers to each other, they intervened 65 percent of the time. Thus, people often do not respond appropriately to an emergency situation because the situation is unclear to them and as a result, they have misinterpreted it as a non-emergency based on their own past experience or social cues taken from others.

In “Decisions and Revisions” by Carol Berkenkotter, she was doing an experiment on unskilled writers. The main point of this article is doing a lab on Donald Murray. She wanted to see how experienced writers edited their work. She met Murray at a conference on College Composition. He introduced himself when he walked into the conference, and she asked him if he could be in a naturalist's study; He said yes. Berkenkotter had been watching him write and she had been listening to his daily recordings. Murray then discusses how he felt during the experiment.

The facts of this case are that Dr. Guiles who is self-conscious of his prostate cancer diagnosis is treated horrendously when he finally decides to have surgery ( Buchbinder, Shanks & Buchbinder, 2014). Considering that Dr. Guiles is already sensitive about his condition, his unbearable symptoms are not helping matters (Buchbinder et al, 2014). Upon arrival at the hospital, he is treated subpar. The admitting clerk is rude and unbecoming to a patient who isn’t feeling well and who is embarrassed about his sickness (Buchbinder et al., 2014). To make matters worse, he has to find his own way up to the floor by walking, which causes him to be even later in checking in because of the need to stop frequently to urinate as well as having difficulty in walking (Buchbinder et al., 2014). Once he arrives on the floor, the charge nurse is not welcoming and unprofessional (Buchbinder et al., 2014). After figuring out what to do with the paperwork; and the nurse aide delivers Dr. Guiles to his room, the nurse aide does not offer to help settle him in (Buchbinder et al., 2014). Therefore, Dr. Guiles is faced with battling obnoxious family members who are on his bed and to make matters worse someone is in the bathroom which doesn’t help his need of having to frequently urinate (Buchbinder et al., 2014). When the issues are brought up to the charge nurse, the charge nurse accuses Dr. Guiles of wanting preferential treatment

People will do nothing to fix minor, everyday problems; even if the problem is as minor as someone invades someone else's personal space. For example, While Buckley was riding on an airplane, he was inconvenienced by a flight stewardess that could not take Buckley's empty food tray back to the kitchen (76). If he would have only been more affirmative with his words, things would have definitely been different for him. So considering that the author has had experience with being complacent in the real world, Buckley knows the problem of people being passive on a personal level. Buckley wants to show the audience that even the author of the essay can go through the same

He exaggerates this sentence and even starts off with it to show how this problem should be handled. He then says that the its treatable only with “massive doses of legal tender”. Carr is referring to money as the only medicine for the disease, but he says it in a very sarcastic tone to again show readers of how ridiculous this issue is. He goes on with numerous cases where people sue for ridicules, pointless reasons. Carr concludes his paper by “I could go on- and on and on- but I’m sick. You guessed it. After reading this report, I’ve come down with a full-blown case of ED. Who do I sue?”(2). Carr really expresses his feelings towards those cases at the end. He went from a sarcastic tone to a very serious and frustrated tone. By saying “I could go on- and on and on- but I’m sick” shows readers of how Carr really feels about these cases and how pathetic and ridicules these cases are. He uses his tone at the end to give his message to his readers, action must be taken immedtaley. His last words, “who do I sue” show how easy it is to sue people. Carr wants this issue to be solved and doesn’t like how it is very easy to sue others simply because anything and get a bag of money.

The first example of this concept is used not even twenty pages in the book with Mildred being found having OD-ed. After Montag had called the hospital to save his wife the men who show up are less than caring. “‘We get these cases nine or ten a night. Got so many, starting a few years ago, we had the special machines built.’” (15) The complacency shown in this section is blatant as they show how relaxed they are and uncaring about Millie’s condition. They also show in the quote how society in this novel is reacting rather than preventing suicides and deaths.

First ‘The Bystander Effect’, states ‘that individuals are less likely to intervene in emergency situations when other people are present’. Latne & Darley, (1970) cited in Byford J.( 2014 pp 232). Simply put, where emergency situations arise, if more than one person is present the likelihood of someone in distress being helped reduces. This is the ‘diffusion of responsibility’ effect were each bystander feels less obliged to help because the responsibility seems to be divided with others present’. (Byford J., 2014 pp233) An example of Bystander Apathy shown within a video (The Open University 2016).

Equally important the nurse indicated that she was in a hurry and unable to sit down, choosing rather to stand while she talks to the patient. What the nurse did not realise was that she had assumed a power stance and had failed to create an environment that was holistic, conducive and

As known from recent issues in the media, lack of communication can prove fatal for example the case regarding Kane Gorny, 22, a keen sportsman who was so desperate for water he phoned police. “Kane was undoubtedly let down by incompetence of staff, poor communication, lack of leadership, both medical and nursing, and a culture of assumption” (Dr Shirley Radcliffe). If the nurses had communicated and listened to Mr Gorny they would have been able to prevent neglect thus preventing his death. Mr Gorny was not only failed by medical staff but also by police forces as we are made aware that he had phoned but as there was no assault found they left but if the police that were present had questioned medical staff once again Mr Gorny’s death would have been prevented. (The Guardian, 2012) Thus proving that without communication mortal incidents can happen because communication also involves listening, understanding and responding, which was not evident in this situation as Mr Gorny was not listened to and did not get a response to his plea. (Pease, 2000).

            In Puritan society, people stress self-reliance, among many other things.  However, the people more than stress self-reliance - they assume it.  The Puritan people assume that you need only yourself and God, and therefore have no need for emotional necessity, no need to have a “shoulder to cry on.”  Once again, for people in the stations of life which Hester and Dimmesdale hold, it is unthinkable for them to comfort each other.  Yet, in the

I was influenced in this decision because I felt obliged to be seen to reduce his anxieties, knowing my actions would be judged by an audience of other care workers and patients on the ward. I did not respond efficiently to reduce his distress and this pressure led me to deal with the situation inadequately and for that I felt guilty (Nichols 1993).

Avoidance results in resolution being delayed rather than resolving the issue in a timely manner (Eason & Brown, 1999). The ill feelings between PCTs and nurses were created by avoiding talking about the problem for a long time. Avoidance resulted in a snowball effect of increasing resentment and anger between the two groups.