Answer is Christianity, Islam, buddhism, & Hinduism
Answer:
D
Explanation:
cuz u didnt give us a chart or something
Answer:
This information about Jon that he and the others were unaware of would fall under the unknown area in the Johari Window before the incident.
Explanation:
The Johari Window is a technique developed by psychologists in 1955. It is commonly used in self-help groups. The Window consists of four areas: open, blind, hidden, and unknown. From a list of adjectives, a subject selects the ones that describe him/herself. Then his/her peers also select adjectives from the list to describe the subject.
In the open area, the adjectives that were selected by the subject as well as the peers are placed. In the blind area, the adjectives selected only by the peers are placed, showing what is perceived by others but not by the subject. In the hidden area, the adjectives selected only by the subject are placed. Finally,<u> in the unknown area, the adjectives that were not selected by any of them are placed.</u>
<u>As we can see, anything that is unaware to the subject or his peers falls under the "unknown" category. However, the subject might very well have those qualities. It's just that he and others haven't seen them being displayed yet. That's precisely what we have in Jon's case. No one knew of his strength, independence, and optimism until he finally displayed those qualities due to an incident. Therefore, they would have fallen under the unknown area before that incident.</u>
Answer:
Hi
My name is ----. I have studies in Business Administration and Management. The methodology oriented to the action and results, allowed me to develop a great capacity to solve problems and acquire a global perspective of all the areas. Throughout my training, he enhanced my spirit of teamwork, initiative and involvement in daily tasks, as well as my knowledge of languages, in English and French, through intensive courses in England and France. Finally, I had the opportunity to develop my first work experiences through internships in some companies.
Explanation:
Answer:
The Willowbrook study refers to a 14-year research which involved the use of demented children as lab animals in an experiment involving the study of Hepatitis for the purpose of developing a cure.
For a medical practice to be ethical, it must conform to the following rules:
It must be Autonomous: Autonomy in Medicine speaks to the right of rational and psychologically healthy adults to participate in their own medical care having been informed of all the consequences. Where children and adolescents are involved, the decision has to involve their parents. All parties (especially the children) must be in sync with the ramifications of the choices and legally capable of contributing to the decision making process.
It must speak in the direction of Justice: This principle tilts heavily towards the rights of the individual. It begs the following question:
can the medical decision be considered fair to the patient if it is held under the scrutiny of the law?
- is it consistent with their legal rights?
- viewed in from a balanced societal paradigm, it is fair?
3. Beneficence: This principle takes speaks to the requirement for all medical actions and or medical experiments to keep the benefit and wellbeing of the recipient and or participant above all other considerations. That is, if it is not beneficial, if it is harmful to the recipient or participant, then it's unethical.
4. Non-maleficence: This principle is often explained alongside Beneficence. The Medical Practitioners and or the Medical researcher is required by this principle not to take any actions that will harm or put the patient in harm's way.
According to the journals which discussed the Willowbrook Incident, all the four principles above were violated.
- There was no foreseeable benefit of the experiment to the children
- The children, mentally challenged, were incapable of electing to participate or not. Even if the parents allowed it, it was still morally wrong for the experiment to have taken place given that it was not in the benefit of the children.
Cheers!
