Ethical Dilemmas

post has two assignments

http://www.letour.com/le-tour/2016/us/

View a video of the crash involving the Yellow Jersey near the end of Stage 12 of the 2016 Tour de France. Each student will pick a part to play in our Ethical Dilemmas discussion.

Everyone must read the Tour de France Race Regulationsand the UCI Cycling Regulations, in particular those rules and regulations that might apply to the event in question. Those students who take the part of the judges will also need to research precedents from 2016 previous stages as well as any major crashes in the past two years’ Tours.

You must Google research your person, and you will be presenting your person’s point of view in our discussion. Please write a minimum of 2 pages that gives some background and your person’s credibility. Give your person’s reason why a specific outcome should be given. Thencreate a document to list all the websites (minimum of 5) you visit for information in MLA format. Please write a paragraph (100 words) about each website as to why you think the website is a credible source or not. Post this assignment on the Discussion Board under the thread for your person.

For class discussion, each person will give his/her reason why a specific outcome should be given. YOUR reasoning does not have to be the same as was actually stated. The judges will give a decision based on the evidence presented and recommend solutions to the problems that contributed to the incident—the decision does not have to be the same one officially given.

What to Consider
How it Happened:
• After attacking off the overall favourites group in the final two kilometres,Froome and Porte were poised to distance Nairo Quintana by at least 30 seconds after the Colombian had cracked after several unsuccessful attacks of his own.
• Porte was taking a turn at the front while Mollema had bridged the gap.
• Then chaos ensued.
• A race moto could not pass through a tunnel of fans and stopped abruptly, causing Porte to face plant into the motorbike with he, Mollema, and Froome all falling to the ground.
• His bike too damaged to continue,Froome panicked and started
running until the Mavic neutral service car provided him with an ill-fitting bike upon which he could not progress.
• Mollema, Porte, and then Quintana all passed Froome until the Sky car reached their Leader.
• Froome crossed the line visibly frustrated.

Results
• After the stage, the yellow jersey was initially awarded to Adam Yates, and Quintana’s time, initially, did not reflect his time loss earlier in the stage.
• Meanwhile, race organizers, team directors, and other stakeholders discussed an outcome that fairly reflected that this was not a normal race incident.
• The UCI Jury awarded Porte and Froome the same time as Mollema, five minutes and five seconds down on stage winner De Gendt.
• The UCI’s decision sees Froome retain the Yellow Jersey and van
Garderen and Porte move up to 7th and 11th place respectively.

Were the Following Taken into Account?
• The incident with the motorbike is yet another in a string of incidents hazardous to riders, and at the Tour the intrusion of the crowd can at times be too close, not only for comfort but also for safety. The UCI rule 2.2.072 states, “Cameramen shall film in profile or ¾ rear view. They may not film as they overtake the bunch unless the road is wide enough.
• In the mountains and on climbs, filming shall be carried out from behind”
• It is time that there is a much harder line taken by the UCI in policing these rules, particularly in races where there is potential for massive crowds on the sides of the road. Surely it makes sense for the motos to not be an accident waiting to happen, riding so close to the peloton, that they have no margin to avoid an incident.
• The other half of the equation are the fans, the majority of whom provide a lot of colour and immeasurably add to the spectacle of the Tour. The minority that seem intent on getting themselves on camera for as long as possible are the problem, a problem that hasn’t yet seen a solution despite the increased presence of gendarmes along the route.
• Short of a complete ban on roadside spectators, there doesn’t appear to be a clear solution. I’m not convinced penalties for the behaviour we see will be an effective deterrent. Very few people deliberately attempt to obstruct the riders, it’s just ignorance in fully appreciating the dangers of dumb roadside behaviour.
• Perhaps, with the passing Tour caravan, some education can be provided as well as free sponsored paraphernalia to the often inexperienced cycling watchers on the roadside.
• Added to the mayhem was the particular circumstances of the stage, with the reduction of the final ascent after strong winds rendered the exposed section of Mont Ventoux too dangerous to ride. The finishing barriers appeared to begin later than they normally would and perhaps the late shortening of the race route affected the amount of fencing available.

What is Fair?
• What are the race officials to make of this mess at the end?
• Do you nullify the whole stage or let the results stand?
• Do you follow the Yates precedent (established in Stage 5 when the collapsing flame rouge took out the Orica Bike-Exchange rider when he had a seven second gap on his rivals)?
• It’s an unenviable task, trying to extract a sensible outcome from the confusion. It would be tempting to say none of it counted, nullify the time for the general classification and leave it at that. Attempting to rationalise any decision to grant an artificial result is going to be nigh on impossible. Let’s put the whole sorry affair to bed, learn from it without the spectre of worrying about who’s gaining or losing time to affect people’s opinions.
• Others will say that the ‘fairest’ thing to do is to do what the race organisers ended up doing, giving Froome and Porte the time of the least affected rider of the three, Bauke Mollema.
• The question remains, what does that do to the integrity of the race? Did it matter that Froome went into a panic, running up the hill after abandoning his bike, climbing on possibly the worst neutral support bike possible and then a third bike in the space of less than a kilometre?
• Is it fair on Mollema, who picked himself up quickly and remounted to stay ahead of the rest of the contenders into the finish? He is in the position where he can effectively no longer race against Froome and Porte, and indeed he helped them gain time on everyone else. No wonder he was frustrated post-race after his best performance of the Tour.
• What was interesting was that the Yates’s precedent wasn’t invoked—
that involved the time gaps at the crash being translated to the finish which would have certainly given more time to the unlucky trio.
• Of course, that solution has its own raft of problems.
• How do you get accurate time checks in the midst of all the chaos and
does it have the effect of artificially shortening the race unfairly to those who had saved energy behind for one final push to the line?
• The Tour de France and the UCI will have to answer some hard
questions before the Tour descends into a spectacle where the ridiculous trumps the dignity and integrity of the race

Your Assignment—Judges What Would You Decide Based on the Evidence Presented

The UCI rules governing race incidents (2.2.029) grant broad powers and discretion to the race officials in coming up with a solution:

“In case of an accident or incident that could impinge upon the normal conduct of a race in general or a particular stage thereof, race director may, after obtaining the agreement of the commissaires panel and having informed the timekeepers, at any moment, decide:

• To modify the course,
• To temporarily neutralise the race or stage,
• To declare a stage null and void,
• To cancel part of a stage as well as the results of any possible intermediate classifications and to restart the stage near the place of the incident,
• To let the results stand or
• To restart the race or stage, taking account of the gaps recorded at the
moment of the incident.”

Works Cited
Penninger, Jamie Finch. “Tour de France Stage 12: Time for a Harder
Line. In a Race that has Already Seen the Drama, Comedy and Unexpected Turns Worthy of an Epic Piece of Theatre,Last Night’s Stage Saw an Element of Farce
Thrown into the Proceedings.” SBS Cycling Central, 15 Jul 2016,
http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/blog/2016/07/15/tour-de-france-
stage-12-time-harder-line.

2: Medication errors in Anesthesia

Identify a clinical issue, health problem, or service delivery issue of interest to you? Is there an aspect of this clinical issue, health problem, or service delivery issue that can be improved on or needs further investigation? Please describe the significance of this problem and the consequences of not addressing the issue/problem. Please upload the assignment in the appropriate assignment dropbox. The purpose of the assignment is to start thinking about a potential area of interest for a future Capstone Project. Please use AMA Format and see Writing Evaluation Rubric (3 page maximum).

Written Papers
Written assignments in this course are expected to be of a caliber reflective of professional graduate students enrolled in a doctoral degree program. All written assignments and papers, unless otherwise specified by the course professor, should be formatted with 1 inch margins, double spaced, include the use of titles and subheadings, and all reference and literature citations are to be formatted following AMA (CRNA track).

Use the AMA Manual of Style, 10th edition (which is the format required for manuscripts submitted to the AANA Journal ? Information for Authors https://www.aana.com/newsandjournal/Pages/Information-for-Authors.aspx ). For examples of AMA Style citations see the FIU Library Guide (https://libguides.fiu.edu/c.php?g=159885&p=1509678#s-lg-box-4576945 ) and this example ( https://www.lib.jmu.edu/citation/amaguide.pdf ).

Anesthesia