please answer with a full paragraph each post (9 people) Cite your work and check your grammar and spelling. This is a discussion board.

Please answer with a full paragraph each post (5 people ). Cite your work and check your grammar and spelling. This is a discussion board.

1-Amy’s discussion post

I believe providers should be accountable for medical negligence. I think that noneconomic damages and punitive damages (intended as punishment) are worthy of caps. I do not agree with the abolishment of punitive damages. Since these are subjective in nature. How can anyone really put a dollar amount on pain and suffering? The potential of not being used fairly or to "bleed" the system is not beneficial for anyone, except the person/families that are awarded these exorbitant rewards.  I believe that the caps need to be fair and punitive damages should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Neither should make the individual or families in a better situation than they would have been prior to the negligence, but, they should be substantial enough to carry them through the years. 

Harris, D. (2014). Contemporary Issues in Healthcare Law and Ethics. (4th Edition). Health Administration Press.

2-Carlee’s discussion post

Medical malpractice is defined as a doctor, physician or healthcare provider causing injury by neglect or omission. Doctor's are expected to meet a certain quality of care for patients. Doctor's can be examined for this by the standard of care. Most physicians treat and care for patients very similarly and when one goes well outside of these parameters it can be considered negligent. This can be in unnecessary tests, medications, procedures, the list goes on.  The goal of the healthcare provider is not always to make more money, but also to ensure that they are doing all that they can for the patient. This can be considered a good practice, but it inevitably costs the patient more and more money. 

3-Professor’s discussion post (question to me)

Genesis,

Do you think there are some people who go from doctor to doctor to obtain a different opinion or look to sue doctors just to get the money?

Laurie

4-Jennifer’s discussion post

EMTALA or the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Law Act were established by congress to treat patients n medical emergencies.  (Dean. 2014). EMTALA bans healthcare providers from refusing patients but forcing them on another provider, because of lack of monetary funding.  The providers need to examine the patients and determine if they need medical attention immediately.  If it is determined patients need attention immediately they must treat the patient.  There are hospitals that are required to treat patients.  This is based on state legislation and a board of commissioners.  

EMTALA has its challenges healthcare facilities are required to care for patients without being paid of reimbursed by the government.  The patient often will not be able to pay even though they will be billed, the costs will then be passed on to others in a process of cost shifting. (Dean. 2014. pg 264). 

5-Erin’s discussion post

Hospital obligations under EMTALA are no longer applicable if the patient does not have an emergency condition.  If it is determined that the patient has an emergency condition then the hospital must provide further examination and care to stabilize the patient.  The need may arise that the hospital may need to transfer the patient which is acceptable if within the requirements according to federal law. 

In my opinion, EMTALA is an important provision for patient safety.  It also aligns with healthcare ethics.  Any patient, regardless of their ability to pay, should be entitled to emergency care.  For some patients, immediate treatment could have tragic adverse effects.  This law is also necessary to prevent financially burdening public and teaching hospitals which previously provided care to many of these patients.

-Erin

Reference:

Harris, D. M. (2014). Contemporary issues in Healthcare Law & Ethics. Health Administration Press.

6-Hannah’s discussion post

   What I found out about myself was that I am truly and unfortunately addicted to social media/technology. What did surprise me was once I started doing a task that didn’t include technology, I was fully committed. I didn’t worry about checking my phone or seeing if I needed to text someone back. I got a lot done without my phone or other technology. I read two full books, did a lot of cleaning, and spent a lot of time with my dogs and boyfriend. Media technology plays an enormous role in my everyday life. I truly use it during most times. 

7-Professor’s discussion post (questions to me)

As some of you will point out this week, while media technology is often promoted as facilitating human interaction, it can actually get in the way of really connecting with family and loved ones. People can all be hanging out in the same space, but have their attention focused on their media technology and not each other, be it text messages, or the TV, or the internet.  The rise of texting in particular amongst young people in the last handful of years has fundamentally changed the etiquette at many dinner tables.  On school field trips, where kids used to play cards together, tease each other, sing songs, etc, now most have headphones on, or are watching a movie, or texting on their cell phones.  We are in the same space, but we aren't together.  Where is this going?  Are we losing the art of direct human interaction?

Could it be that by keeping ourselves constantly entertained and tuned in to things outside of ourselves, modern media technology makes us one of the least self-reflective generations ever? 

8-Bobby’s discussion post

I think after reading both entries this week, watching the video, and going through the lectures one thing stood out to me. We know a lot more than our Grandparents did when they were at our ages. We know more about how the world works, about how things don't work, and about the conditions people live in. I recently got an experience to visit a Veterans home and talk to some of the people, and wow do they have great stories. But if people like this, who sacrificed so much for all the people in the country can be forgotten, or cast away after people think their usefulness is gone, how can we as a people actually care about the planet? 

9-Professor’s post

The uniquely human ability to step back (for a bit)

It is unique to humans and consciousness that we can, at least momentarily, disengage from our lives and look at them from the outside, seeing how silly and arbitrary they are.  We can contemplate the possibility that we just happen to exist, without rhyme or reason, and we might lose our moorings for a bit and start to feel a kind of philosophical vertigo, as in, why bother, or why do anything if in the end it all comes to naught?  But we can never sustain this disengagement.  We get hungry, our child gets hurt, it’s time to go to work, and we are back in our lives, totally caught up in them.  There is no reason to believe that any other creature can take this step back.  Only to humans can our lives seem absurd and pointless.  A mouse, for instance, is always caught up in its life.

-Professor Max