Automobile - Fuels Essay Example for Free

Automobile Fuels Essay General Motors has been at the center of one of the nation’s largest controversies over clean emissions-cars. In 1996 the company introduced the EV-1 electric car in California and Arizona. Hundreds of the electric cars were soon on the road. Then they all disappeared. The mystery behind their disappearance is the subject of the documentary Who Killed the Electric Car? Electric vehicles had many advantages over their competitors in the early 1900s. They did not have the vibration, smell, and noise associated with gasoline cars. Changing gears on gasoline cars was the most difficult part of driving, while electric vehicles did not require gear changes. Even though the cars seemed to be the next big thing, they ended up being not so successful. There have been many allegations to whom or what happen to kill the electric car. In 2000, tragedy struck as all EV-1’s were recalled. In 2003, California’s zero emissions vehicle mandate was killed and General Motors officially closed down the entire EV-1 project despite the long waiting lists and positive feedback from EV-1 drivers. This terrible crime did not go unnoticed by the public. Consumers were outraged by the recalling of EV-1’s. They wanted to know why someone would get rid of a car that would help out the environment and would make things better for the future. Someone is to blame for killing the electric car, but who? Was it the big oil companies and their fear of losing money? Could it be the battery technology in the EV-1’s that was faulty?

Essay --

Abortion is a major debate in society today and has been an impassioned topic for decades. At issue is whether or not abortion should be permissible. Generally I support the idea of abortion given specific circumstances. If a woman becomes pregnant due to rape, she has no moral obligation to carry the baby to full term. It is a gross expectation for society to think a woman should give birth to a baby conceived from rape and to take care of the child as her own. In this discussion I will argue that abortion is permissible if the mother was a victim of rape. Judith Thomson is a philosopher that supports abortion. Judith starts off with her debate stating that â€Å"a fetus is no more a human than an acorn is a tree†. When does an acorn become an oak (Thomson 37-56)? The answer is that no one truly knows, there is no direct moment when one thing becomes another, it is the same way as a fetus. When does a fetus become a baby? Thomson uses the â€Å"famous violinist† analogy. In this analogy you are kidnapped, when you wake up in the morning you learn that you are connected to a famous violist who needs your kidneys for nine months. It is stated the violinist is an innocent person with a right to life whereas separating yourself from the violinist would kill him/her (Thomson 37-56). I believe in this case it would be moral to unplug yourself from the violinist, even if it means his/hers death. You did not consent to supporting the violinist for nine months and therefore you do not have an obligation to do so. This scenario can be used to support the victim who has been raped. If you have been raped you did not consent to sex or make a conscience decision to accept the ramifications from forced actions of copulation. Furthermore y... ... unjust aggressor who has violated the woman's dignity. Rape is an act of force and violence, unlike the conjugal love in marriage whereby both spouses give freely of themselves in an act of love. The woman who was raped is not responsible for the action, and thereby has the right to prevent the pregnancy or even stop the pregnancy through abortion. However, I agree with any arguments that state killing is wrong. I do agree that killing is wrong from the time the fetus becomes a human being, up to any age of an adult. People should not be allowed to take the life of another person as this is a crime. I believe that abortion should stay legal for several reasons; because women should have the right to make decisions regarding their own body and especially if they are a rape victim, and because they have the autonomy to exercise that right regardless of state laws.

Ethical Health Care Issues Essay

Breast Cancer is a serious issue that affects almost every woman worldwide, either directly as someone diagnosed with cancer, or indirectly through the illness of a loved one (Women’s Health Resource, 2014). Breast Cancer is found in women, in their twenties and thirties, and those with a family history of the disease. In 2006, approximately 212,920 new cases of invasive breast cancer were diagnosed in the United States alone (Women’s Health Resource, 2014). The case scenario will discuss the ethical and legal issues regarding a 25 year old female patient stricken with breast cancer, who refuses treatment for the disease, in addition to the four (4) ethical principles, (a) autonomy (respect for persons), (b) justice, (c) beneficence, and (d) non-maleficence. Case Scenario A 25 year old female patient made an appointment with her primary care physician because she discovered a lump in her breast after a routine check. On the day of the appointment, the physician examined her breast, and made a referral for her to visit and oncologist, who specializes in the diagnoses and treatment of cancer. There are three types of oncologists. They are (a) medical oncologist (uses medicine (chemotherapy) to treat cancer), (b) radiation oncologist (uses radiation to treat cancer), and (c) surgical oncologist (treats cancer with surgery) (The Denise Roberts Breast Cancer Foundation, 2009). The patient schedules an appointment with the oncologist, who then will inform her of the diagnoses and treatments if needed as per the result of the biopsy. The result of the biopsy will confirm if the patient has breast cancer or not. Autonomy (respect for persons) acknowledges a person’s right to make choices, to hold views, and to take actions based on personal values and beliefs (Chowning et al., 2007). To refuse treatment, the patient must be legally and mentally capable, and 18 years or older. Parents with children under the age of 18, have the right to consent or refuse treatment for his or her child. Physicians also have a  moral and legal obligation to comply with a patient’s voluntary, informed refusal of life sustaining treatment, regardless of a physician’s judgment concerning the medical or moral appropriateness of this (Miller et al., 2000). A 25 year old patient with breast cancer refused medical treatment as suggested by the oncologist. Conflicts may arise with the patient as she made a decision to not receive care, which can ultimately lead to death. Death may be seen as a failure, rather than an important part of life (Smith, 2000). Upon receiving the patient choice to deny treatment, the oncologist is then obligated to inform, and educate the patient about the benefits of treatment, and risks associated with not receiving treatment. The patient has the right to deny treatment, even when the physician suggests the benefits of treatment. The following treatment options are available to the patient such as, lumpectomy, mastectomy, chemotherapy, radiation therapy and eventually, surgical reconstruction (Woman’s Health Resource, 2014). Autonomy When a patient refuses treatment to care for the disease, autonomy then becomes a bit challenging. While there may be opposing views in regard to treatment or non-treatment, medical professionals must respect the patient decision, and support the patient during this process, while delivering quality care (Stringer, 2009). The rules of law are based on ethical beliefs that are commonly held in our society. These basic ethical principles include respect for individual autonomy, beneficence (helping others), non-maleficence (not harming others), and justice or fairness. Regardless of whether these ethical duties are derived from religious faith, natural law, or a social contract, these principles form the basis for the legal rules of our society (Harris, 2007). Beneficence The principle of beneficence means that the health care provider must promote the wellbeing of patients and avoid harming them (Rosenthal, 2006). When a patient refuses treatment(s), the health care professional must communicate the risks of not receiving treatment. The job of the health care professional is to provide quality of care to the patient, even when a patient refuses treatment. The health care professional must remain compassionate, as the patient expects the medical professional to still  treat him or her with dignity and respect. Non Maleficence Non Maleficence means to do no harm. Health care professionals must always strive to do their work without malice or the intention thereof to the patient (Ask.com, 2014). The health care provider is obligated to aid the patient to the best of his or her ability by providing benefits, protecting the patients’ interest, and improve wellbeing. To ensure that the patient is not harmed while refusing treatment, the health care professional can conduct a risk benefit analysis where research on the disease and various medications can be found. Upon his or her findings, the health care professional should explain the effects of treatment or non-treatment. Under non maleficence, there is a legal â€Å"duty to warn† third parties, which is a critical and legal concept (Rosenthal, 2006). Justice The principle of justice means to treat others equitably, distribute benefits or burdens fairly (Chowning et al., 2007). Health care professionals must provide patients with treatment alternatives, and not misinform the patient about any of the medical processes involved. The major issue with this principle is that economic barriers can interfere with access to appropriate therapies and medications (Rosenthal, 2006). The health care organization is required to provide services or care to a patient regardless of health care coverage. Patients should also be treated equally regardless of age, race, or ethnicity. Patients must be treated with dignity and respect, even though he or she may refuse care or treatment for their medical condition. Conclusion One of the most common place ethical dilemmas in the health care industry is a patient refusing treatment to care, as this action may threaten his or her wellbeing or health. The health care professional must determine what aspects of autonomy, beneficence, justice, and non-maleficence need to be used before providing care. A physician has the legal right to ensure and provide the patient with sufficient information about treatment plans, and care. Health care administrators must examine underlying issues such as competence of the patient, the distinction apparent, and refusal of care (Michels, 1981). In the case of the 25 year old patient, ethical issues were  present because her right to refuse treatment conflicted with the oncologist’s obligations to provide quality care to her. References Ask.com (2014). What Is Non Maleficence? Retrieved from http://www.ask.com/question/what-is-non-maleficence Chowning et al. (2007). An Ethics Primer. Seattle WA: Northwest Association of Biomedical Research. Retrieved from https://www.nwabr.org/sites/default/files/NWABR_EthicsPrimer7.13.pdf Harris (2007). Contemporary Issues in Healthcare Law and Ethics, 3e. Retrieved from University of Phoenix Michels, R. (1981). The Right to Refuse Treatment: Ethical Issues. American Psychiatric Association, 32(1), 251-255. Miller, F., Fins, J., & Snyder, L. (2000). Assisted suicide compared with refusal of treatment: a valid distinction? Annals of Internal Medicine, 132(6), 470-475. Rosenthal, M. S. (2006). Patient misconceptions and ethical challenges in radioactive iodine scanning and therapy*. Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology, 34(3), 143-50; quiz 151-2. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/218613783?accountid=458 Smith, R. (2000). A good death: an important aim for health ser vices and for us all. British Medical Journal, 320(7228), 129-130. Stringer, S. (2009). Ethical issues involved in patient refusal of life-saving treatment. Cancer Nursing Practice, 8(3), 30-33. The Denise Roberts Breast Cancer Foundation (2009). Breast Health. Retrieved from http://www.tdrbcf.org/oncologist/index.html Women’s Health Resource (2014). Breast Cancer. Retrieved from http://www.wdxcyber.com/breast_home.html

Political Campaign Contribution Laws for Individuals

If you decide to contribute to a political candidate, you should know that the Federal Campaign Finance Law places legal limits on how much and what you can give. Representatives of the candidates campaign committee should be aware of these laws and inform you of them. But, just in case... The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has released the campaign contribution limits for individual private citizens for the 2019-2020 election cycle, including the presidential election on November 3, 2020. The per-calendar year limits became effective on January 1, 2019. The amount an individual can contribute to a candidate for each election was increased to $2,800 per election, up from $2,700. Since each primary and the general election count as separate elections, individuals may give $5,600 per candidate per cycle.   The following chart shows more details on the FEC campaign contribution limits for individuals in 2019 and 2020: An individual may contribute to †¦ Federal Candidates $2,800 per election National party committees— main account $35,500 per year National party committees—convention account (RNC and DNC only) $106,500 per year National party committees—party building account $106,500 per year National party committees—legal fund account $106,500 per year State or local party committees’ federal accounts $10,000 per year Federal PACs $5,000 per year Note: Contributions to the three national party special accounts (convention, building, and legal) can be used only to pay for expenses related to presidential nominating conventions, headquarters buildings of the party, and election recounts, contests, and other legal proceedings. Note: Married couples are considered to be separate individuals with separate contribution limits. Notes on Contributions to Presidential Campaigns The contribution limits work a little differently for presidential campaigns. You can contribute a total of up to $2,800 to presidential candidates running in state primaries, but the donation is for the entire primary election period. You cannot donate $2,800 for each state primary in which the candidate is running.A portion of your contribution may qualify to be matched by the federal government. If a candidate running in a primary election has qualified for the federal matching fund program, up to $250 of your total contributions to that candidate may be matched with federal funds. To qualify for federal matching, your contribution must be made in written form, such as a check. Contributions such as currency, loans, goods and services, and any type of contribution from a political committee do not qualify for federal matching.  In the general election, however, you may not make any contributions to the campaigns of Democratic or Republican nominees who receive Federal funds. Can anybody contribute? Certain individuals, businesses, and associations are prohibited from making contributions to Federal candidates or political action committees (PACs). Foreign nationals -- may not contribute to any candidate or party in any Federal, state, or local election in the United States. Foreign citizens who have permanent US residency status (posses a green card) are allowed to contribute according to the same laws as American citizens.Federal contractors -- individuals or businesses under contract to provide goods or services to the Federal government are prohibited from contributing to candidates or parties in Federal elections.Corporations and Labor Unions -- are also prohibited from contributing. This law applies to all incorporated organizations, profit or non-profit. Business owners are not allowed to make contributions from their business accounts. Although corporations and labor organizations may not make contributions or expenditures in connection with federal elections, they may establish PACs.Cash -- in any amount over $100 is prohibited.Contributions in the name of another person -- are not permitted. Note: Parents may not make contributions in the names of their children. Persons under 18 may contribute, but must do so willingly, under their own names, and with their own money. What constitutes a contribution? Besides checks and currency, the FEC considers ...anything of value given to influence a Federal election to be a contribution. Note that this does not include volunteer work. As long as you are not compensated for it, you can perform an unlimited amount of volunteer work. Donations of food, beverages, office supplies, printing or other services, furniture, etc. are considered in-kind contributions, so their value counts against contribution limits. Important: Questions should be directed to the Federal Election Commission in Washington, DC: 800/424-9530 (toll-free) or 202/694-1100.