Health care law and biology

¶ … rights EMTALA grants, to whom, when, and in what setting.

EMTALA is short for the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. It was part of the larger Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986, which is commonly referred to as COBRA. The EMTALA legislation governs how and when a patient may be refused treatment and/or when they may be transferred from one hospital to another while in an unstable condition. The "avowed purpose" of EMTALA prevents "hospitals from rejecting patients, refusing to treat them, or transferring them to 'charity hospitals' or 'county hospitals' because they are unable to pay or are covered under the Medicare or Medicaid programs" (EMTALA, 2015). Basically, it protects patients that are near-death or are otherwise in medical distress from being sent off to another hospital due to concerns about payment for services rendered. In other words, it prevents a hospital from treating patients based on their ability to pay or lack thereof, at least as it pertains to life-threatening situations.

2. What are you opinions regarding economic caps on medical malpractice lawsuits?

As with most things, there is no solution that is "clean" and "pure," but the reasoning behind the economic caps is fairly easy to see. Indeed, if there is no cap placed on the damages that can be paid in light of a medical malpractice lawsuit, then this would mean that the doctors would have to pay sky-high rates for malpractice insurance or they would have to face the full liability cost on their own. At the same time, it would seem that the removal of the caps has led to lawyers deciding that there is not enough cash in it for them to take on medical malpractice cases if the punitive and other damages (beyond actual injury) are capped or eliminated. The author of this response would say that there needs to be caps because juries sometimes do very stupid things and many (most?

) malpractice cases are due to simple mistakes rather than intent or gross negligence.

3. Write a brief description of the Belmont Report.

As stated clearly on the associated website, the Belmont Report is something issued by the Department of Health and Human Services. The non-catchy title of the report is the "Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research." Issued in April of 1979, it was a product of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (HHS, 1979)

3. What do the three basic principles include?

The three basic principles mentioned are the basic ethical principles mentioned in the report. Those principles are respect for persons, beneficence and justice. The respect for persons part of the equation is built on two major things, those being that individuals should be treated as autonomous agents and that people that are in a state of diminished autonomy are entitled to protection.

BIOLOGY

1. Why is using looks only, at times a disadvantage?

Because, as they say, looks can be deceiving. For example, there is the concept in science of analogous and homologous creatures. Even if a creature is a dead ringer for another one, that does NOT mean that they are related or from the same basic ancestry. A brother and sister (of any mammal, to be clear…including humans) would be homologous because they share a common ancestor or ancestors. In other words, they share one (if not both) parents. Thus, they are genetically similar specifically because of this. However, if there are two people that are strikingly similar in appearance but are NOT linked by a common ancestor, then the reason they look alike is because of environmental coincidences rather than genetics. The point to be made and learned is that similar appearances may mean something…but they may not (Berkeley, 2015).