Answer:
C: By sending money and supplies
Hmm....
This is straight from my own Memory but which Catherine the Great was it?
If it is the second one, then I would Say either C or D
(Sorry Im too lazy to search up :v)
Pressure = force/area
This is the relationship between area of contact and pressure
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!
