The provision of health and social care services adapt themselves in order to meet the needs of their service users. Numerous factors are influential in the planning of new and upcoming changes within the health, social and childcare sector.
AO1 Four different categories traditionally divide health and social services. These include a statutory sector, this is provided by the state and is gained through legislation; they include the national health service and local councils. There is also the voluntary sector, these include non-profit organisations and are set up through volunteers. These tend to turn into services through the registered charities, an example being age concern, whereby they provide day centres for the elderly, they also provide services to help individuals with everyday tasks like going food shopping or cleaning tasks. Furthermore, there is a private sector, this includes private health care and social services. They, unlike the voluntary sector, run as a business in order to gain profits, these include private hospitals, residential homes and dental care. The fourth and most commonly unnoticed group of carers which provide health and social care service for those in need is the informal carers, these individuals are usually unpaid workers, and could be partners of the person in need, a relative or even a friend. Another example of this would be that of church lunch club, whereby it is easy access for people. It should be noted that all of these services, whether they are profit or non-profit do perform and work together at a local level. The provision of health and social care services adapt
It is accepted that a person may generally defend themselves and their property from attack. To what extent do the laws of self defence and the prevention of crime support this contention?
Sarah Ghalaey Self defence essay It is accepted that a person may generally defend themselves and their property from attack. To what extent do the laws of self defence and the prevention of crime support this contention? 50 marks While it is accepted that a person may generally defend themselves and their property from attack, the courts and parliament have always been mindful of minimizing the risk of over-zealous retaliation in such a situation. There is always the danger that the defendant may take on the role of attacker. Public policy also dictates that revenge attacks or vigilante type behaviour must be discouraged at all costs. For this reason, the use of any force in self defence must always pass the test of reasonableness. This is however a question of fact for the jury, taking into account all revelant factors in the case. Force causing damage to property, injury or even death may be justified if the force was reasonably used in the defence of certain public or private interests. The use of lawful force is not an offence: because an element of the actus reus is missing. There are actually three situations where force can be used:- Firstly there is self defence which is regulated purely by the common law. Secondly there is prevention of crime which is covered by s.3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967, which provides that a "person may such force as is reasonable
contract law
"I have no radical proposals for the wholesale review of the doctrine of consideration. I am not persuaded that it is necessary. And great legal challenges should only be embarked upon when they are truly necessary....On balance it seems to me that in modern practice the restrictive influence of consideration has markedly receded in importance. Secondly, it seems to me that in recent times the courts have shown a readiness to hold that the rigidity of the doctrine of consideration must yield to practical justice and the needs of modern commerce." [Lord Steyn in 'Contract Law: Fulfilling the Reasonable Expectations of Honest Men' (1997) 113 LQR 433, 437] Critically evaluate this view and consider whether you are persuaded that it is necessary to review the doctrine of consideration. Consideration stands an idealistic approach to ensuring that a promise is fair, understood and ultimately enforceable. It returns to the basic idea of party A giving party B something as long as he promises, in example, a service. Logically it makes sense that one would not just take someone's word for it, especially in a commercial setting, without the idea of a deposit or safeguard that action will come from the words exchanged. The conditional element of consideration that there must be a benefit to the promisor as the consideration moves from the promisee ensures this.1The doctrine of
In Henry IV Part One, first impressions are never correct. By the end of the play, we have been forced to re-assess our feelings about the main characters. Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement.
In Henry IV Part One, first impressions are never correct. By the end of the play, we have been forced to re-assess our feelings about the main characters. Explain why you agree or disagree with this statement. The main characters definitely appear to change throughout the play and their true selves emerge by the end. The first character on stage is the King; we first see him addressing the court about what has happened since he became King. He is a very powerful man and decides the way to 'win the hearts' of his country is to go on a crusade to the Holy Land. His country has turned to civil war due to his indirect path to the throne. His attitude towards Hal is anything but fatherly. He considers Hal to be unworthy of inheriting the throne because Falstaff's influence has made him rebellious and irresponsible, unable to handle tasks a King has to carry out. The King would rather have Percy (Hotspur) as his son than Hal. He sees Hotspur as a worthier heir to the throne-Henry believes they were swapped as babies by 'some night-tripping fairy'. I feel this is quite heartless towards his own son, as he obviously shows no compassion for him. Hal would never have had to contemplate being heir to the throne if Henry hadn't made an unlawful path to the throne so it is expected that Hal would not be the 'perfect heir'. By Act III, Sc. III Henry states that he needs his own son,
The writer will define what a family is, describe the three different forms of families which are Nuclear, Extended and Reconstituted. Further more the writer will discuss the functions of the family, give reasons for decrease or increase in
Introduction In this assignment the writer will define what a family is, describe the three different forms of families which are Nuclear, Extended and Reconstituted. Further more the writer will discuss the functions of the family, give reasons for decrease or increase in each family setting and the effects on children and the society in which they live. Next the essay will examine the advantages and disadvantages of each form of family and discuss the extent to which the family has lost its function. Finally the essay will critically analyse the advantages and disadvantages of lone parenting. The simplest definition for the family is a group of people related by blood and marriage today this includes cohabiting couples and adopted children. The majority of people have lived their lives within some kind of family set up, though each experience may have been very different (Livesy, 2001). The Nuclear family is based around a two generation household of parents and their children either own or adopted (Haralambos, 2004). The nuclear family is also referred to as the cereal box family which are the father who is the breadwinner and makes all the rules, the wife who is in charge of the household duties and the kids (Leach, 1967). . Womack (2005) stated that in Britain today only seven in ten of Britain's seventeen million families include a nuclear family the reasons why
delegation law
Business Law Seminar 1 questions Common Law That part of the English law not embodied in legislation. It consists of rules of law based on common custom and usage and on judicial (court) decisions. English common law became the basis of law in the USA and many other English-speaking countries. Common law developed after the Norman Conquest 1066 as the law common to the whole of England, rather than local law. As the court system became established under Henry II in the 12th century, and judges' decisions became recorded in law reports, the doctrine of precedent developed. This means that, in deciding a particular case, the court must have regard to the principles of law laid down in earlier reported cases on the same, or similar points, although the law may be extended or varied if the facts of the particular case are sufficiently different. Hence, common law (sometimes called 'case law' or 'judge-made law') keeps the law in harmony with the needs of the community where no legislation is applicable or where the legislation requires interpretation. 2. Introduction on delegated legislation In this essay I am going to describe what delegated legislation is, clarify why it needs to be controlled, discuss the controls that exist and the problems that exist with the controls and finally state whether I believe the controls are adequate and if not reformations that could take
When is government interference with an individual's freedom justified?
Freedom Power and Democracy Assessed Essay When is government interference with an individual's freedom justified? In order to establish when it is justifiable for a government to interfere with an individual's freedom it is necessary to establish first what that 'freedom' is. Although 'freedom' is a popular political slogan, its definition has always been a source of confusion and conflict for political theorists. A reasonable starting-point, however, is that suggested by Barry i.e. that "in ordinary speech we understand liberty or freedom to mean the absence of constraints or obstacles" i.e. that 'freedom' is the state of not being subject to constraints or obstacles. In reality, of course, no individual has or expects to have absolute 'freedom' in the sense of being subject to absolutely no constraints or obstacles. Instead citizens expect to enjoy specific freedoms to do or be something - and even then they expect there to be at least some limitations on those specific freedoms. In a modern society few would argue against the proposition that that there have to be at least some restrictions on individual freedom(s) imposed by the government to protect the interests and freedom(s) of the rest of society. "Since any society will have a whole range of perfectly justifiable restrictions on liberty, there can only be particular arguments about specific liberties." N.
Explain what is needed for a balanced diet, including vitamins and minerals.
Explain what is needed for a balanced diet, including vitamins and minerals. A BALANCED DIET is a diet that contains adequate amounts of all the necessary nutrients - carbohydrates, proteins, fats, vitamins and minerals - required for healthy growth and activity. A diet is balanced when food intake is equal to the body's needs. These needs vary according to age, gender, level of activity, pregnancy and size - the average adult male requires 11000 KJ of energy per day while the average adult female requires 9000 KJ per day. Carbohydrates are the body's primary source of energy, and are a large part of most people's diets. They are also building blocks for larger molecules. Carbohydrates can be obtained by eating cereals, wheat, bread, pasta and potatoes. Proteins are used in growth and repair, and in rare cases as energy. The main sources of proteins are meats, eggs, lentils and beans. Fats help in shock absorption and warmth, their main function being long-term energy storage. Fats are found in oils, butter, peanuts, milk and processed foods. Vitamins are organic compounds required in small amounts by the body. They are essential in all food, with the exception of Vitamin D, which can be produced by our bodies when exposed to enough sunlight. Vitamins act as co~enzymes, and are a component of active chemicals (like Vitamin A in retinal). Vitamins are also
Privacy: Inherent to Freedom.
Brett Switzer Mr. McGowan AP Lit & Composition October 9, 2003 Privacy: Inherent to Freedom In 1776, the forefathers of the United States of America essentially wrote a constitution, a social contract, guaranteeing the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. "In recent years, the right to privacy has been added to the short list of human rights (Grant)." According to Thomas Paine, man did not enter into society to become worse off than he was before or to have fewer rights than he had before, but instead, to have those rights he started with better secured. According to the stipulations of the social contract agreed upon, the government provides national safety, public safety, public health, and civil rights/liberties in exchange for the fees necessary to provide these services and the ability to coerce citizens with punitive measures for breaking the codes of the contract. As long as a person poses no threat to the safety, health, and freedoms of any other citizen, then the government is obliged to honor all of the freedoms granted in the social contract. To unlawfully invade one's privacy is to effectively rid them of their human dignity and effectively eliminate true freedom and democracy. Milan Kundera enters the discussion of privacy in Testaments Betrayed with a discussion of Jan Prochazka, a figure of great opposition to the government, whose
Causality in Lynch Vs. Fisher. Did the original negligence of the driver of the parked truck set in motion a chain of circumstances following consecutively one upon the other which led to plaintiffs injury?
Scott Schauer 7/28/10 Philosophy of Law Causality in Lynch v. Fisher Causation presents a very difficult task in some tort claims. Our central concern is to find a balance between the responsibility and fairness of each claim, which sometimes gets obscured by the difficulty in proving causation. Clearly, the case of Lynch v. Fisher represents the Law of Torts, and correspondingly etches out the subtle differences each action has on the outcome of all claims of causality. In the case of Lynch v. Fisher a truck driver, who is an employee of the defendants, Harry Fisher and Roger Wheless, parked a pulpwood truck on the right-hand side of a main highway. The truck driver then proceeded to leave the area where he had negligently parked the truck. Shortly after, a passenger car, driven by the defendant, Robert Gunter, along with his wife in the passenger seat, violently collided with the parked truck and sent them into disarray. Robert Gunter was also held negligent for operating his car at an unlawful speed and not paying attention to the road. A nearby good Samaritan and also plaintiff of the case, William Lynch, heard the collision and rushed to the scene to save Mr. Gunter and his wife. While pulling Mrs. Gunter out of the car which had just caught fire, he found a hand gun near the floor mat and proceeded to hand it to Mr. Gunter while attending to his wife. In
