BHS 400 - Module 1 SLP (Stress Management) Essay

BHS 400 - Module 1 SLP (Stress Management) - Essay Example So effective management of stress, can make a person successful in all aspects of his life. Identification of stress is the most important thing one must learn. â€Å"Most people are exposed to much higher levels of stress than they realize. Brain cells, "talk to each other" by means of chemical messengers. When a person is exposed to too much stress, chemical communication in the brain begins to fail. When these messengers fail, a person suffers from sleep disturbance, aches and pains, depression and anxiety. This condition is called -- OVERSTRESS. Three brain messengers control your sleeping, your energy levels, and your feelings of pain and pleasure.†(Steve Burns MD). Stress is often related to some kind of worries. Identifying the root cause of such worries and rectifying it will result in reduction of stress. The effects of stress depend upon: the Individuals Appraisal of the event, person or situation. To some people, a job interview is a life or death crisis; to others it is an enjoyable challenge. So the reason for stress remains in your perception of incidents in your daily life. Some people like to take challenges in order to excel in their jobs and for getting promotion. Some others will be satisfied with what they are now and they won’t be ready to take challenges. Unnecessary Worries often lead to stress. For example, religious people are always worried about the sins they committed. They are afraid of the final judgment of God and will be lead a stressful life until their death. They must remember that even the Bible says â€Å"all the human beings are sinners and those who have regretted in their sins will be forgiven†. They will avoid the fact that even one of the thieves crucified along with Jesus Christ, has got salvation. We must remember that each and every problem in the universe has at least one solution. In some cases there will be more than

Schedule Recovery Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Schedule Recovery - Essay Example The flight routes are of the same time length and as such flight swapping has no effect on the amount of fuel cost or maintenance operation per flight time. Both aircrafts travel the same hours as previously scheduled. Aircraft A will be in SCL at the end of the recovery period instead of being in ALX while Aircraft B will be in ALX at the end of the recovery period rather than in SCL. Aircraft swapping as a recovery option also requires crew to swap. The one of the two crews assigned to each flight has to swap as the other one remains with the aircraft. Flight swapping calls for the reserve crew to be called to fill in the gap created (Belobaba, Odoni, Barnhart 265). The crew now assigned to WA 1269 will end up in ATL at the end of the recovery period on flight WA 1276. The three crew remaining will be assigned to flight WA 1270 and at the end of the recovery period they will end up back in SCL on flight WA 1280. Passenger disruption is minimized in this schedule. The affected flight 1269 results in zero passenger disruptions. Flight WA 1270 will have to be delayed for 20 minutes before departure arriving in PHX at 1500h. As a result, there is 20 minutes arrival delay. Although the flight is delayed, the passenger to ALX will not be affected as the next flight WA 1280 will be ready for departure as scheduled at 1600h. The connecting passengers on flight WA 1270 but on a different airline have a chance of misconnecting. Deadheading costs of crew members that find themselves in one position rather than in the usual position. This crew, although, not flying the plane are still considered on duty and have to be paid for this flight. This cost is affected by the place of residence of the crew. Compensation cost of passengers by the airline affects those passengers that have connections to different locations, but with a different airline network. This cost is influenced by the number of passengers who are connecting with different

Breach of Contract and Negligence

Breach of Contract and Negligence 1)  Mega will be looking to bring an action in breach of contract and negligence against Super for both their failure to install the cash machines until December 2006 and the negligent installation my Tom and Manoj which caused the registers to be out of action over the Christmas period. The problem they will have with this is that Super trade under a standard contract which contains clauses which apparently exclude liability for both delay to installation and consequential loss arising in either contract or tort. This includes the loss of profit which Mega wish to claim form them. However, it may well be that Super are not able to rely on those clauses. For an exclusion clause to be effective it must first be validly incorporated into the contract. Then the construction must be such that on a proper interpretation it covers the type of liability which has arisen. Each of these issues will be discussed in turn to establish whether or not Super will be able to fend off an action by Mega by relying on the exclusion clauses. To be effective as an exclusion clause the term must be incorporated into the contract at the time when the contract was made. It will not be effective if it is added at a later stage[1]. The terms must be contained or referred to in a document which is intended to have contractual effect. In the case of Super’s standard terms they are referred to in brochures, order forms, price lists and quotations and reprinted in invoices and receipts. It is likely that order forms would be considered to be a document with contractual effect. In the present case, however, Super took the order from Mega over the telephone. The contract would have been concluded at that time. It is therefore necessary that the exclusion clauses be incorporated at that time. For a clause to be validly incorporated the other party must be given notice of its existence. At this stage there is no details of the discussion between Mega and Super when hew order was taken. What is clear is that if the exclusion clauses were not mentioned in the telephone conversation and Mega did not know about them then they will not be validly incorporated by their inclusion in the invoice or receipt[2]. What amounts to reasonable notice will depend on the facts of the case. If it can be shown that Mega had actual knowledge of the terms they will be reasonably incorporated. It might well be for example that they had read the brochure and were therefore alerted to the existence of standard terms and should reasonably have enquired as to what they were. The fact that a party has to take further steps to find out what the terms of which he has been given notice are does not necessarily mean that reasonable notice has not been given.[3] However, it seems more likely on balance that the courts would hold that a mere reference to the standard terms in these pre contractual documents is insufficient notice of an exclusion clause. The present clauses are particularly onerous as they attempt to exclude a substantial amount of liability on the part of Super. In the case of Spurling Ltd v Bradshaw [1956] 1 WLR 461 Lord Denning held that the more onerous the clause the more that would have to be done to bring it to the attention of the other party. He stated that in some cases the clause would have to be printed in bright red ink with a big red hand pointing to it. This has become known as the red hand test. In the present case it would seem that some form of red hand would be required for there to be sufficient notice of the exclusion clauses. Therefore if Super did not specifically draw them to the attention of Mega then they will not be validly incorporated. I will proceed on the basis that the terms were validly incorpo rated for the purposes of analysing the terms themselves, but if they were not then Super will not be able to rely on them at all. The next issue to deal with is the construction of the clauses themselves. The courts have traditionally construed exclusion clauses very restrictively. It must be show that the clause, properly interpreted does actually cover the damage caused. The ‘contra proferentem’ rule means that any ambiguity will be resolved against the party seeking to rely on the clause. There does not seem to be any ambiguity in Clause 10.2. It clearly states that they will not be liable for delay howsoever caused. At this stage it seems unlikely that Mega will be able to claim for any losses caused by the delay to the installation. It might be however that Mega can rely on the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 section 3 which protects parties who are either dealing as consumers or dealing on the other’s standard terms of business as Mega are in this instance. Section 3(2) (b) (i) of the Act states that a party is not by reference to any term of the contract entitled to: â€Å"†¦render a contractual performance substantially different from that which was reasonably expected of him.† It is certainly arguable that a delay of two to three months would be outside the sort of delay that would be reasonably expected of a company. On balance I would be of the opinion that the delay will not be sufficient to allow Mega to avail them self of this protection. With regards to the loss of profits over the Christmas period, Mega will have to make a claim in negligence against Super. The first point to note is that just as Tom and Manoj will be protected by the clause, Super will be vicariously liable for their actions if the clause is not held to cover negligence. Super will be relying on clause 10.3 to suggest that they have excluded liability for consequential loss, including loss of profit for the negligence of their employees. The question is whether 10.3 actually has that effect. The general rule is that if a party wishes to exclude liability for negligence they must do so explicitly[4]. In the present case though Super have not referred specifically to negligence stating: â€Å"†¦neither the seller nor any of its employees shall be liable for any consequential or indirect loss suffered by the Buyer whether such loss arises in contract or tort.† The next step the courts will take is to establish whether the words used are wide enough to cover negligence on the part of the employees of the proferens[5]. It seems likely that Super will be able to show this as they have referred to ‘tort’ However the final and rather contradictory stage is that the court must consider: †¦whether the head of damage may be based on some ground other than negligence’[6] There cannot be any doubt that clause 10.3 could cover something other than negligence. Even leaving out the contract section it covers every type of tort. It is clear that where this is the case the proferens (Super) will not be able to rely on the clause to exclude liability for negligence. If the clause is held to cover exclusion of liability for negligence Mega may be able to rely on the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. Section 2(2) of that Act states: â€Å"2 Negligence liability: In the case of other (other than death or personal injury) loss or damage, a person cannot so exclude or restrict his liability for negligence except in so far as the term or notice satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.† On the present facts it does not seem to be an unreasonable clause. The bargaining power of the two parties seems relatively even on the face of it and there do not appear to have been any particular inducements to enter the contract with that term included. However there may be circumstances which are not included in the instructions which would render the term unreasonable. In conclusion I would be of the opinion that subject to the clauses being found to have been validly incorporated, Super will be able to relay on clause 10.2 to avoid liability of the delay in installation. On balance I would not expect them to be able to rely on clause 10.3 to save them from liability for the negligence of Tom and Manoj as the terms is not specific enough to negligence. It seems likely that loss of profit is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of negligent installation of cash registers and therefore Super will be liable for any loss of profit suffered by Mega over the Christmas period which is attributable to the lack of functioning cash registers. BIBLIOGRAPHY Olley v Marlborough Court Ltd [1949] 1 KB 532 Jayaar Impex Ltd v Toaken Group Ltd (t/a Hicks Bros) [1996] 2 Lloyds Rep 437 Spurling Ltd v Bradshaw [1956] 1 WLR 461 Thompson v London, Midland and Scottish Rly Co [1930] 1 KB 41, CA Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v R [1952] AC 192 at 208 2. Joe Pain, suffering and loss of amenity On the assumption that Katy was negligent Joe will be entitled to recover damages from her under two general heads, general damages and special damages. General damages cover the compensation which will be received by Joe for his injuries. This is commonly referred to as damages for pain suffering and loss of amenity. Pain and suffering is viewed separately to loss of amenity and I will discuss them in that order. Damages are awarded to the claimant for pain and suffering caused by the injury and any treatment relating to the injury both in the run up to trial and in the future if appropriate. It is important to bear in mind that awards for pain and suffering are subjective in that they relate to the actual pain suffered by the Claimant. In relation to Joe he is therefore unlikely to be able to claim for pain and suffering for the 2 weeks which he was unconscious.[7] This does not apply to loss of amenity which can be claimed whether the claimant was aware that they had lost amenity or not. Loss of amenity is an objective measure of the claimant’s losses. For example because of the loss of a limb as in Joes case. The fact that Joe can no longer row will be taken into consideration under this section of the head of damage and this is likely to result in an increased award. Overall damages are awarded for pain suffering and loss of amenity on the basis of what is fair just and reasonable.[8] The Judicial Studies Board issues guidelines as to the level of award based on recent judgments. In relation to amputations below the elbow the award is between  £56,000 and  £63,625. Which end of the scale it will be is determined by factors such as whether it was the claimant’s dominant arm. Loss of Earnings The claimant is entitled to be put in the position he would have been in had the injury not occurred.[9] In relation to his pre trial loss of earnings this will be the net figure which he would have earned during that period after national insurance tax and any other deductions which would have been made. We are not told at this stage whether Joe earned  £45,000 per annum before or after tax, but assuming it is after tax this would amount to  £22,500. He will also be entitled to claim the bonuses which he would have received during that period. At the most this will amount to  £6000, but Joe will have to prove that he would have earned his maximum of  £1000 per month. Whilst the  £650 does not represent wages from the employer, but a collection on the part of the other employees, I would expect it to be deducted from the loss of earnings because otherwise it would represent double recovery as Joe would not have received it without the injury. Assuming Joe returns to work before the trial there will be a further deduction from his loss of earnings award to take account of the fact that he is receiving wages at a reduced rate. For the period of time between his return to work and the trial he will receive a sum representing the net total amount he would have received as calculated above minus the net total amount he did receive as a result of his new position. Future Loss of Earnings Joe’s future earnings have been substantially reduced by the accident. When calculating the future loss of earnings the courts start with the net annual loos of earnings suffered by the Claimant. This sum is adjusted by taking into account other factors such as the loss of a chance to get promoted and increase earnings etc and the fact that the claimant is receiving a capital lump sum now rather than earning it over the years. The final figure is called the ‘multiplicand’. This is multiplied by the ‘multiplier’ which is the number of years for which the loss is likely to continue, usually the number of years between trial and the likely date of retirement. Other losses Joe will also be able to claim the money spent on repairing his bike in the sum of  £1500. He will have to prove the loss in the form of a repair receipt/invoice. Any savings made as a result of the NHS care will be set off against the income claim. Joe will not be able to claim for Darinder’s loss of earnings as they are not a loss suffered by him. However, the fact that Darinder has had to take time off work to help Joe adjust to the disability suggests that he is no longer able to perform household tasks which he would have been able to perform before the accident. Where a member of the claimant’s family voluntarily undertakes to perform those tasks the Claimant is entitled to an award in damages representing the value of those services.[10] The damages will be assessed on the basis of what it would have cost to employ someone else to do the tasks.[11] Other claims against Katy All of the potential claims against Katy will be for psychiatric harm. There are principles to be applied when determining who will be able to claim for psychiatric harm which will be discussed throughout this section. The basic premise is that a duty of care in relation to shock in the sense of psychiatric damage is owed to those foreseeably and directly involved in the horrific event caused by the defendants negligence.[12] Charles  ­Charles was clearly directly involved in the accident as he was in the car at the time. It is not necessary for him to have suffered physical injury to recover damages, the fact that he feared for his own safety and was in fact endangered by the event is sufficient.[13] He was a primary victim of the accident and therefore it is not necessary that Katy foresaw psychiatric injury specifically. The fact that injury was foreseeable is sufficient.[14] Lord Lloyd of Berwick in Page v Smith[15] reasoned that if the psychiatric injury had been as a consequence of a physical injury it would clearly be recoverable. The fortuitous absence of physical injury did not make a difference. Stella Stella witnessed the accident. Psychiatric damage caused by witnessing an event first hand may be recoverable in certain circumstances. Stella clearly perceived the accident through her own senses and was physically and temporally proximate to it as required by Alcock[16] However the third criterion in Alcock is that the witness must have a close relationship to the victim of the accident. Stella was a passer by and therefore would not satisfy this criterion. The only other way Stella could recover damages from Katy is if she could prove that she was a primary victim. The fact that she suffers from post traumatic stress disorder suggests that the accident put her in fear for her own safety and the bike did cross her path. She may therefore be in the same position as Charles. However to recover under this head the claimant must actually have been in danger.[17] Stella might have difficulty proving that she was ever in actual danger as the bike mounted the pavement in front of her not towards her. Darinder Darinder did not witness the accident first hand. The fact that she was told about it by the police officer will not be sufficient to give her the proximity required[18]. It is possible to recover damages if you witnessed the immediate aftermath of the event and that includes the hospital scenes[19]. However it is still necessary that the psychiatric injury be brought about by shock so she will have to show that seeing Joe coming out of an operating theatre caused her shock. Incidentally the close relationship tie is assumed in spousal relationships. With regard to the nervous break down brought about by the continued care of Joe, Darinder is unlikely to be able to recover. The injury must be brought about by a sudden assault to the senses rather than an accumulation of feelings and distress.[20] Overall it is unlikely that Darinder will be able to recover damages unless she can prove she was shocked by seeing Joe coming out of the operating theatre and then she will only be able to recover for psychiatric harm caused directly by that shock. BIBLIOGRAPHY Wise v. Kaye [1962] 1 Q.B. 638 Heil v Rankin [2001] QB 272 Livingstone v Rawyards Coal Co (1880) 5 App Cas 25 Hodges v Frost (1983) 53 ALR 373 and Daly v Genera Navigation Co Ltd [1980] 3 All ER 696 Daly v General Steam Navigation Co Ltd ibid Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310 Dulieu v White Sons [1901] 2 KB 669 Page v Smith [1996] AC 155 McFarlane v EE Caledonia Ltd [1994] 2 All ER 1 Ravenscroft v Rederiaktiebà ¸laget Transatlantic [1992] 2 All ER 470 McLoughlin v OBrian [1983] 1 AC 410 Taylor v Somerset Health Authority [1993] PIQR P262 [1] Olley v Marlborough Court Ltd [1949] 1 KB 532 [2] Jayaar Impex Ltd v Toaken Group Ltd (t/a Hicks Bros) [1996] 2 Lloyds Rep 437 [3] Thompson v London, Midland and Scottish Rly Co [1930] 1 KB 41, CA [4] Canada Steamship Lines Ltd v R [1952] AC 192 at 208 [5] ibid [6] Ibid per Lord Morton [7] Wise v. Kaye [1962] 1 Q.B. 638 [8] Heil v Rankin [2001] QB 272 [9] Livingstone v Rawyards Coal Co (1880) 5 App Cas 25 [10] Hodges v Frost (1983) 53 ALR 373 and Daly v Genera Navigation Co Ltd [1980] 3 All ER 696 [11] Daly v General Steam Navigation Co Ltd ibid [12] Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1992] 1 AC 310 [13] Dulieu v White Sons [1901] 2 KB 669 [14] Page v Smith [1996] AC 155 [15] ibid [16] Note 8 [17] McFarlane v EE Caledonia Ltd [1994] 2 All ER 1 [18] Ravenscroft v Rederiaktiebà ¸laget Transatlantic [1992] 2 All ER 470 [19] McLoughlin v OBrian [1983] 1 AC 410 [20] Taylor v Somerset Health Authority [1993] PIQR P262

The O.J. Simpson Trial Essays -- Simpson Trial Murder Case Essays

The O.J. Simpson Trial On June 12,1994, Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were murdered. Their bodies were discovered outside Nicole Simpson's condominium. Nicole Simpson was the estranged wife of the famous football player and T.V. star O.J. Simpson. The people directly involved with this case are Judge Lance Ito, the prosecution lawyers, Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, the defense lawyers, Johnnie Cochran, Robert Shapiro and Robert Blasier , the jury and the defendant, O.J. Simpson. The families of the victims have also been present in the courtroom, as well as other spectators and news media. This case has heard one hundred and twenty witnesses over a nine month period. The prosecution's physical evidence includes a bloody glove, bloody socks, hair, and fibres and a trail of blood drops connecting the crime scene and O.J.'s estate. Defence lawyers say this physical evidence means nothing because it was either purposely tainted or contaminated. Kenneth Berris testified that two laundry bags are still missing from Simpson's Chicago hotel room. The bloody clothes and murder weapon have never been found. The prosecution says DNA tests place Simpson's genetic markers on the drops of blood leading away from the bodies. There were also blood samples, similar to Simpson's and the victims, found on O.J.'s Bronco truck. Simpson's blood was also found on his driveway and his foyer. The prosecution says Simpson cut his hand during the murder. The defence says Simpson cut his hand when he reached for his phone in his Bronco and later cut his hand on a glass. The main focus of the defence is the contamination of physical evidence. Roger Martz testified, for the prosecution, that the blood he tested contained no significant amounts of EDTA. He said the blood found at the crime scene didn't come from a test tube with special preservatives used at a crime lab. Defence lawyer Robert Blazier filed papers stating that Roger Martz has a habit and custom of changing F.B.I. reports, removing helpful defense information and has falsely testified in a number of cases. Microbiologist, John Gerdes, testified that he found sloppiness so serious at the LAPD lab that it could have allowed foreign DNA to be introduced into evidence samples. He showed pictures of the lab where test tubes were touching each other which could cause the contamination. Gerdes also... ...s claimed " I did not, could not and would not have committed this crime." My opinion about this case is that O.J. Simpson is guilty. The defence tries to say there was all this conspiracy to frame O.J. but I don't think they proved any of this happened. The defence said Furhman was a racist but this does not prove that Simpson didn't commit the crime. They say the blood samples were contaminated but I don't think every single one was. The prosecution proved he was an abuser and I think something finally snapped inside him and he killed Nicole and Goldman. The gloves the killer wore were the same type O.J. wears. When they say O.J. tried on the gloves and they didn't fit I think he tightened his hand up so the gloves would be hard to put on. The shoeprints at the crime scene were the same style and size he wears. Bloody clothes or a murder weapon have never been found but neither has the missing laundry bags from O.J.'s hotel room. I have to wonder why O.J. lead the police on a big chase if he is so darn innocent. My opinion is that O.J. Simpson would have been found guilty a long time ago if it wasn't for all the publicity surrounding the case and the fact that he's famous.

Cyp 3.4: Support Children and Young People’s Health and Safety

CYP 3. 4: support children and young people’s health and safety Task 1 1. 1 When planning health and safety indoor and outdoor environmental services we must take into account †¢The individual needs abilities and ages of the children and young people. †¢Certain risk factors †¢Mobility ,sensory ,medical needs †¢The needs of carers and extended family †¢The environment and the services that are available The duty of care to always have the child’s safety and welfare in mind. †¢The desired outcome clear aims and objectives based around the EYFS framework. Lines of responsibilities everyone has responsibility for the health and safety of the children and young people each member of staff need clear reporting responsibilities. 1. 2 Health and safety is monitored within the setting by †¢Daily risk assessments †¢Comprehensive policies which may include †¢Lost child, behaviour ,house rules, safeguarding children and young people, fir e safety, emergency cover for medical needs, medical and medicine permission, †¢Accident/incident record book. †¢Indoor play area. Quiet area toys and equipment Outdoor area toys and equipment checked grass areas checked for animal mess or litter. †¢Outing risk assessments in place for planned trips. †¢Each risk assessment is reviewed 6/12 to meet the needs of growing children and young people. †¢Visitors book checked daily †¢Smoke alarms checked weekly and recorded †¢Fire escape plan in place and fire drill practised each term †¢All windows ,doors locks are secure to stop children leaving the building †¢Policy’s are up to date and signed by parents. †¢My daily risk assessment †¢Risk Assessment †¢Daily checks RoomRisksActions All Rooms Electric sockets coveredShock, burns deathCover all sockets House PlantsPoison allergy rash No plants in play area Windows and low level glassCuts falls Cover with safety glass Cords on blinds and curtainsStrangulation deathTie up or remove Trailing wire and cablesTrips falls head injuryAll wires secure FlooringTrips falls head injuryAll falling secure on rugs Heating/VentilationOver/under heatingRegulate with thermometer Other Entrance/Hall/landing Front door-lockable and keys availableChildren could escape onto busy road of lock carer out of settingSafety lock at high level Keys at high level Stairs and banistersTrips ,falls Stairs kept clutter free safety gates in place ShoesGerms, dirt, harm to younger children if stood on. Shoes removed and put away after outdoor visits Meter cupboardShock burnsLocked away Smoke AlarmSmoke inhalation burns deathAlarms checked weekly Other Reception Room/Lounge/Dinning Room Table ClothsSpills burns suffocationNo table cloths AlcoholPoison ,sickness Alcohol looked away Hot drinksBurns scalds No hot drinks in play area Fires and heatersBurns scalds over heatingRegulated with thermometer Toys and resourcesCuts falls harmChecked daily for wear and tear. Remove or replace Harness on highchairFalls strangulation Monitor child and strap in securely Other Kitchen Knives and sharp implementsCuts harm to self or othersLocked away CookerBurns scaldsKitchen gate Dangerous substancesPoison burnsLocked away Hot surfaces and cooking utensilsBurns scaldsGate on kitchen Electrical appliances Shock, burns deathAt secure level on trailing leads KettleShock burns scaldsAt secure level on trailing leads Washing machineDrowning electric shockSwitched off at plug DishwasherDrowning electric shockSwitched off at plug Fire BlanketSuffocation At safe level Fridge (food correctly stored, in date etc)Food poison e coli Fridge temp checked and recorded Pets (food bowls) Litter trayPoison sicknessKept away from play area Other Bathroom/toilet MedicinesPoison In safe cupboard First Aid BoxMisuse cuts poison from creamsIn safe cupboard Toilet BrushPoison upset stomach In locked cupboard Temperature of waterBurns scaldsRegulate temperature Cleaning materialsPoison burns scaldsIn locked cupboard Locks on doorsChild could lock themselves in and put them self at risk of harm. All at high level Other Bedrooms Safe bedding/cotsStrangulation suffocation deathSecure all ties cellular blankets Windows (upstairs restrictors)Falls broken bones deathSecure locks in place Other Garden Gates and fencesEscape ,cuts fallsSecure all gates /fences surfacesSlips falls Clean/clear all areas daily Play equipmentFalls, broken bones. Check for wear and tear . remove or replace Water (ponds, drains and butts)Drowning deathCover all water features securely Paddling poolsDrowning death Never leave un attended Sand pitsPoison animal messCheck daily and replace each term Out buildings (sheds)Poison harm from tools equipment Keep locked at all time Tools, equipmentElectric shock ,cuts burns scaldsKeep locked away at all times Washing linesStrangulationRemove or cover PlantsPoison falls on sticksCheck for safe plants and no bamboo sticks. Animal faecesPoison blindnessClean up immediately Other 1. 3 †¢The sources I use are Ofsted standards ,EYFS, NCMA and my CDO †¢The main source I work within the EYFS which states The EYFS Welfare Requirements The General Welfare Requirements Safeguarding and promoting children’s welfare The provider must take necessary steps to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. The provider must promote the good health of the children, take necessary steps to prevent the spread of infection, and take appropriate action when they are ill. Children’s behaviour must be managed effectively and in a manner appropriate for their stage of development and particular individual needs. Suitable people Providers must ensure that adults looking after children, or having unsupervised access to them, are suitable to do so. Adults looking after children must have appropriate qualifications, training, skills and knowledge. Staffing arrangements must be organised to ensure safety and to meet the needs of the children. Suitable premises, environment and equipment Outdoor and indoor spaces, furniture, equipment and toys must be safe and suitable for their purpose. Organisation Providers must plan and organise their systems to ensure that every child receives an enjoyable and challenging learning and development experience that is tailored to meet their individual needs. Documentation Providers must maintain records, policies and procedures required for the safe and efficient management of the settings and to meet the needs of the children 1. †¢I have policies in place which cover †¢Safeguarding policies and procedure for reporting †¢Suitable person all adults have a current CRB †¢Suitable premises comprehensive risk assessments are done and recorded daily †¢Car travel, lost child, notify able diseases, large play equipment and garden policy, behaviour and physical intervention. Ac cident and incident policy and record book, medical record, permission policy and emergency plan /childcare. Plus many more to meet each child’s age and abilities to safeguard myself and the child, parent/carers. †¢Task 3 †¢ 3. 1 It is important to take a balanced approach to risk management to reduce the risk of injury or harm to the individual child †¢The activity should be set up to meet each child s individual needs and be within their individual capabilities †¢The activity should be aimed to enhance learning and but still must be within a safe environment †¢A comprehensive risk assessment should include the individual child s needs and abilities, challenging to the child s development but without excessive risk that may harm themselves of personal †¢Children and young people do not always have the skills to make judgement on safe choices and as carers it is our responsibility to identify any hazards and make the judgement on when it is safe for the child to undertake an activity or make a personal choice. Children and young people need the freedom to explore an activity in a well controlled setting. For example a baby may continue to pull themselves up against a table or cupboard if the table has corner edges cushioned and the area around the table is clutter free this reduces the risk of harm if the baby falls the baby will continue to keep trying without seeing the danger which is clear for adults the baby must e given the opportunity to explore the surrounding areas and do this without the risk of harm which can be eliminated if caution and care is taken. †¢3. 2 The dilemma between the rights of choices for young people and health and safety requirements †¢Children learn by try new and exciting experiences they may not have the skills t make judgement but children are good at judging and deciding when they feel safe to try or join in with activity. †¢Children need the freedom of choice but with reassu rance and firm boundaries of safety they become more confident. †¢Children need the freedom to explore and grow safely †¢Parents and cares need to take caution and reassure not control the situation so the child feels able to make a choice to explore a new activity. †¢3. 3 †¢I have a trampoline policy and agreement between myself and the children in my care each child signs and agrees with the boundaries we set. The rules are made on a health and safety basis. †¢Amount of children at one time. Rules concerning shoes and safe appropriate clothing no loose strings or baggy clothing. †¢The safety of the zip and catch locks surrounding the trampoline and the use of the ladder. †¢If the rules are broken ten the trampoline is out of use until the child re-reads and resigns the policy in place. †¢I also have a behaviour policy which the child and i write together including safety of equipment and around the house. †¢Task 4 †¢4. 1 †¢The accident, incident, emergencies and illness policies within my setting are Accident/Incident Policy The safety of your child is paramount and I will take every measure I can to protect your child from hurting itself. However sometimes accidents do happen and I have written the following procedure on how I will deal with such a situation: †¢I will comfort the child and reassure them †¢I will assess the extent of their injuries and if necessary call for medical support/ambulance †¢I will carry out any first aid procedures that are necessary and that I have been trained to do †¢Once the child is more settled I will contact you as soon as possible to inform you of the accident and if necessary to ask you to return to care for your child/ meet me at the hospital After every accident, however minor I will: †¢complete a report in my accident book †¢ask you to sign the report and then provide you with a copy If the incident requires any medical treatment then I will: Inform Ofsted (under Standard 14. 3 Children Act regulation, inform Ofsted about any significant events) †¢Inform my Insurance Company †¢Contact the NCMA/ BARKING AND DAGENHAM Early Years for additiona l advice/support It is important that you keep me informed regarding your child’s condition following an accident and if you have sought medical advice. Medical Procedures Policy I have received specific training to carry out the following medical procedures: List paediatric /adult first aid I was required to obtain a level of competence in each of these procedures and regular checks will be carried out by specialist staff to ensure these levels are maintained. My Insurance Policy with NCMA/ covers me to carry out these procedures. The welfare of your child is paramount therefore if I am at all unsure about the procedure, or concerned regarding the physical condition of your child whilst in my care I will contact either you the Parents, a member of their nursing team or the emergency services depending on the severity of the situation. I will document all procedures that I have carried out and ask that you sign this record. †¢I will require that you keep me informed as to the current health of your child and if there are any changes to their condition, treatment or medication †¢Permission to seek Emergency Medical Treatment. †¢ I/we authorise ______________________________to administer first aid assistance to my/our child named below as and when necessary, or in the event of an emergency to seek medical/hospital assistance in our absence as appropriate. I/we will provide her/him with up to date details of contact numbers. â⠂¬ ¢I/we understand that you will not be able to authorise any treatment and that I/we as the child’s next of kin will be contacted by the medics in the event of an emergency to give permission, or in a life threatening situation the medics will act in their professional capacity. †¢Name of child †¢ †¢Name of parent †¢Signature †¢Date Sick Child Policy I appreciate that as a working parent you need to be able to go to work, however if your child is unwell then they will be bettered cared for in their own home with a parent. I am happy to care for children with minor coughs and colds but will not care for children who are very unwell, infectious or running a high temperature. I have to go out each day to do school and pre-school runs and need to consider the welfare of all the children in my care. If you child has had diarrhoea or sickness in the last twenty-four hours please do not bring them, but call and let me know. If your child becomes ill whilst in my care, I will make them as comfortable as possible, isolate them from the other children if necessary and reassure them. I will contact you immediately and continue to care for your child until you arrive. I am happy to administer medication-please see my Administering medication policy. I will contact you if one of my own children is not well, inform you of the illness/symptoms and if I am able to work. This then allows you to make an informed decision as to whether to bring your child or not. If you have any concerns regarding this policy please contact me. Permission to Administer Non-prescription Medication I give permission to my Childminder (name)†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ To administer the following non-prescription medication if my child needs it. (Delete as applicable) Calpol Junior Nurofen Junior Diprol Teething Gel I understand that I will need to have provided this medication in the bottle/packaging it was purchased and clearly labelled with my child’s name and instructions on dosages allowed. I expect my childminder to contact me prior to administering the medication, especially if my child has been in her care for less than 4 hours. I will advise my childminder, when dropping off my child, if I have already given my child any medication prior to arrival. I agree to sign for any medication given when I return to collect my child. Name of Child Name of Parent Signature of Parent Date 4. 2 Requirement for notifying Ofsted The law is slightly different for the Early Years Register and the Childcare Register. 3 If you are on the Early Years Register you must tell us about a child accident, Injury or death on the premises while the child is in your care. It does not require You to tell us if any other person has had such an incident, or if the incident happens Off the premises, or if it happens to a child not in your care, for example with their Parent after the end of any care period on their way out of the premises. 1 The Childcare (General Childcare Register) Regulations 20 08, www. legislation. gov. uk/uksi/2008/975/contents/made; The Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage, http://nationalstrategies. standards. dcsf. gov. uk/node/151379; Early Years Foundation Stage (Welfare Requirements) Regulations 2007, www. legislation. gov. uk/uksi/2007/1771/contents/made. 2 Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995, www. egislation. gov. uk/uksi/1995/3163/contents/made. 3 The Early Years Foundation Stage (Welfare Requirements) Regulations 2007 and The Childcare Register (General Childcare Register) Regulations 2008. 4 Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage, page 26. The National Child minding Association I am registered as a member and i obtain my public liability from the NCMA The cover under the policy can be summarised as follows: †¢Legal liability for or arising out of: †¢Accidental injury (including death) of any person in the care of the Insured Childcarer (including costs and e xpenses incurred in defending any matter forming such claim). Accidental loss or damage caused to a third party or the property of the third party in the course of their childcare activities. †¢Nuisance or trespass. †¢Accidental injury caused by the incorrect application of first-aid treatment. †¢Administering medication/treatment (provided written parental permission has been obtained). †¢Children being left in the care of another adult during an emergency. †¢Damage to property including child minded children's property. Subject to an excess ? 50. 00 in respect of child minded children's property. (1) My CDO (childminding development officer) Social services through my safeguarding children police and procedure.

Compare and Contrast Between Comedy and Tragedy

tragedy is defined as beginning with a problem that affects everyone, i. e. the whole town or all the characters involved, the tragic hero must solve this problem and this results in his banishment or death [run-on sentence]. A comedy is defined as also beginning with a problem, but one of less significant importance. The characters try to solve the problem and the story ends with all the characters uniting in either a marriage of a party.Although these two genres are seen as being complete opposites of each other, through further analysis one can gather that though they are different certain similarities can also be seen. One aspect of these genres that can be compared and contrasted is the narrative or plot. A comparison can be analyzed in that both begin with a problem. In Oedipus Rex, the play begins with a plague devastating the city of Thebes. In A Midsummer Night's Dream there is also a plague that is upon the land. However, a difference between these two beginnings is that in Oedipus Rex the citizen are effecte†¦ .. middle of paper †¦ †¦ morous manner that can help them see that their problems may not be as serious as they thought. While the audience sees the subjects dealt with in different ways both comedy and tragedy help them to gauge their own problems in comparison. While comedy and tragedy are usually viewed as two entirely different subjects, there are some similarities between the two. They both begin with serious problems but the true difference is in the way those problems are handled and the consequences that the characters suffer from those problems.