ap dbq Essay example

ap dbq Essay example ap dbq Essay example AP Psychology Summer Assignment The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat by Oliver Sacks Morgan Wailes P-5 Cravens 08/19/2013 The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat The lesson learned in this specific case could be one of many things. The patient, Dr. P, teaches us that not everything has to be fixed, or can be fixed. He can go about his life normally as long as he sings or hums a song for the task at hand. For example, the patient’s wife explained that he has songs for everything, dressing, eating, and bathing. If he does not, he will not understand the task. He may not be able to identify objects or people with his eyes or mind but he can identify with sound, like a voice or song. Dr. P doesn’t really need to have a surgery or take medication because his â€Å"medicine† is music. Dr. P’s strange inability not judge his wife’s head as a head, but as a hat or a glove as a glove is as a result of a massive tumor or a degenerative process in the visual parts of his brain. One of the most unique aspect of Dr. P’s case is the progression of his art, it started off â€Å" naturalistic and realistic† th en started becoming â€Å" less vivid, less concrete† to cubist styled (i.e. Pablo Picasso), and then even just lines and abstract (i.e. Jackson Pollack). In a way, it was like we could see into the patient’s mind as his condition degenerated. The Lost Mariner We learn from Jimmie that drinking, especially heavy drinking, really affects our bodies, especially later in our lives. His renegade amnesia was caused by Korsakov’s Syndrome which resulted from the patient’s heavy drinking after he left the navy. I found that his inability to recall the time he spent after 1945 very interesting, and that he could remember everything from his height of glory in the navy vividly, yet had difficulty remembering the doctor’s face after a few minutes of not seeing him. Also, what was interesting and unique is that he could vaguely remember the doctor by key facial features (e.g. his beard) but couldn’t place when he saw him or what his name was. The Disembodied Lady The author opens this chapter with a quote by Wittgenstein, â€Å"[the] aspects of things that are most important for us are hidden because of their simplicity and familiarity. (One is unable to notice something because it is always before one’s eyes.) The real foundations of his enquiry do not strike a man at all.† I believe this is the lesson we learn from this case. We aren’t able to notice something so simple before us, because we’ve accepted it and taken it for granted in our everyday lives. In Christina’s case, she lost her sense of body, the sense of herself in it. She was unable to control her limbs, her muscles, and her senses unless she used her eyes to focus on them. She suffered from severe sensory neuronopathies, said to be caused (in other cases) by taking enormous quantities of Vitamin B6 or pyridoxine. What I found unique and interesting about her case is that she dreamed of it before the symptoms showed. It is interesting o see tha t her mind warned her of what was going to happen, before it happened. The Man Who

Case Note Essay

Case Note Essay Case Note Essay Case Note Smith v. Shannon, 100 Wn. 2d 26, 666 P.2d 351 (1983) Facts In February 1976, Vera Smith was referred by her attending physician Dr. Raymond Lynberg to Dr. Roger Shannon, a radiologist with defendant Radiology Associates of Spokane. Regarding Ms. Smith’s possible kidney complications, Dr. Shannon chose to administer an intravenous pyelogram (IVP) to Ms. Smith and took X-rays on her kidneys and ureters. Before administering the IVP, Dr. Shannon informed the patient of some possible risks along with the treatment. She might become flushed, nauseous and unconscious. However, he did not inform her of 10 other risks mentioned in the Physician’s Desk Reference (PDR). In this case, Renographin-60, as the contrast agent, might cause thrombophlebitis to the patient, but Dr. Shannon did not inform his patient of this information. Ms. Smith began to sneeze and experienced a shooting pain down her arm while receiving the injection. But Dr. Shannon viewed these reactions as insignificant and didn’t notice her pain. A week after t he IVP, Ms. Smith visited Dr. Lynberg for the pain in her arm persisted. And Dr. Lynberg diagnosed reactive phlebitis, an inflammation of the vein in reaction to the Renographin-60. The plaintiff’s pain has continued and she has seen several physicians and been through related surgery twice. Specialists have diagnosed her pain as caused by damage to the nerves in her arm. But the record does not disclose whether or how this damage is related to Dr. Lynberg’s initial diagnosis of reaction phlebitis. Procedural History Ms. Smith filed a suit under two cause of action against Dr. Shannon. One is that Dr. Shannon is negligent; the other is that he failed to obtain her informed consent. However, the trial court dismissed Ms. Smith’s claim of the physician’s negligence, since she had not demonstrated any deviation by Dr. Shannon from the established standard of medical practice. Also, the trial court rejected Ms. Smith’s second claim, on the ground that though Dr. Shannon didn’t inform her of all risks described in the PDR, the plaintiff had failed to prove that the information â€Å"was in fact medically important or recognized risks†. The trial court especially noted that Ms. Smith had failed to provide sufficient expert testimony on the issue and it considered such testimony necessary. Ms. Smith appealed and the Washington Supreme Court affirms the trial court’s judgment that a valid disclosure was made and that the claimed error in determ ining negligence had not been preserved for appeal Discussion As to the lacking informed consent claim, the Court firstly points out that the doctrine of informed consent is premised on the fundamental principle that â€Å"every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body†. Schloendorff v. Society of N.Y. Hosp., 211 N.Y. 125, 129, 105 N.E. 92 (1914) (Cardozo, J.). A physician should inform his or her patient of the attendant risks of the treatment and obtain the patient’s consent. In Washington state, Miller v. Kennedy, 85 Wn.2d 151, 152, 530 P.2d 334 (1975) is the seminal case on this doctrine. In Miller, the Court of Appeals emphasized that it is for the patient to evaluate the risks of treatment and that the only role to be played by the physician is to provide the patient with information as to what those risks are. It is the patient to determine what information should be disclosed; otherwise, it would be in direct conflict with the underlying principle of patie nt sovereignty. However, it does not mean that every risk, no matter how minute, must be disclosed. Only when the possible risks are of a serious nature should them be disclosed by the physician. That is, â€Å"the guide for disclosure is materiality†. Miller, at 287. The test of materiality is an objective one incorporating the underlying concept of patient sovereignty. If the specific risk is

Article on opportunities of interprenuers Term Paper

Article on opportunities of interprenuers - Term Paper Example In order to better grasp a clearer picture, one does not only look at the external factors that dictate the course of action, but rather delve into the internal workings of the mind of an entrepreneur on how he deals with such external stimulants. To put it plainly, this deals with how entrepreneurs create opportunities subject to the way of how they generally think and analyse situations. Contrary to popular belief, opportunities are not easily just out there waiting to be ceased by whosoever first stumbles upon them, the subjective research points out that entrepreneurs possess a certain set of knowledge and a level of alertness which enables them to recognise and create these opportunities (Endres & Woods, 2007). It was already established earlier that the subjective approach is an inside-out analysis on the entrepreneur. With that said, past experiences and psychological and internal perspectives also dictate the behaviour and responses of an entrepreneur and must be considered in a subjective approach with the rationalization that individuals view their external environment with respect to their own way of thinking. It is important to understand how entrepreneurs generate their interpretations despite constraints of uncertainties and unknowns and how they overcome this and project profitability with respect to these hurdles. Based on the definition of economics, being comprised of two aspects of action such as the purposeful nature and the entrepreneurial element, it can be concluded that entrepreneurs have a high level of desired and contentment state since one cannot will to change ones current state if he is easily contentment. In simpler terms, entrepreneurs are ambitious people who ca n foresee and visualize the means and ends of an idea to generate profit (Endres & Woods, 2007). Alertness in the environment is a crucial attribute for entrepreneurs. The ability of recognising opportunities that