Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (Supplement):327-334 (2007)
|Abstract||Although the ethical and legal worlds are often at odds, a wealth of information is gained by evaluating legal decisions from an ethical perspective. Evaluating court decisions from an ethical viewpoint, increases our knowledge, and helps to beneficially influence future court precedent. Of particular importance to the relationship between the law, business, and ethics, is the ideal of beneficence and non-maleficence. It is the court’s role to protect the rights of individuals, especially with regards to their health care provision. These issues are especially present in conflicts that relate to the availability and access to health care and insurance coverage. Patient autonomy, physician malpractice and informed consent are all influenced by such current court precedent as addressed bythe Employee Retirement Income and Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). This leads us to the central theme of this discussion on the ethical implications of the Supreme Court precedent on ERISA|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
John C. Watson (2002). Times V. Sullivan: Landmark or Land Mine on the Road to Ethical Journalism? Journal of Mass Media Ethics 17 (1):3 – 19.
Wendy Netter (2000). ERISA: U.S. Supreme Court Holds Treatment Decisions Made by HMO Physician-Employees Do Not Breach Fiduciary Duty. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 28 (3):309-318.
Angelique EagleWoman, Strate V. A-1 Contractors: Intrusion Into the Sovereign Domain of Native Nations.
Theodore W. Ruger (2004). The United State Supreme Court and Health Law: The Year in Review: The Supreme Court Federalizes Managed Care Liability. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 32 (3):528-531.
Robyn S. Shapiro (1999). In Re Edna MF: Case Law Confusion in Surrogate Decision Making. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 20 (1):45-54.
Simon Butt, The Constitutional Court's Decision in the Dispute Between the Supreme Court and the Judicial Commission: Banishing Judicial Accountability?
Charles T. Kotuby Jr, Private International Law Before the United States Supreme Court: Recent Terms in Review.
Thom Brooks (2003). Does Philosophy Deserve a Place at the Supreme Court? Rutgers Law Record 27 (1):1-17.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2011-12-02
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?