Tag: preferences

We can work on LP2 Assignment: Self-Esteem Boosters and Communication Preferences

  Directions First, reread “How to Increase Your Self-Esteem” in Chapter 4. In Part 1 of this assignment, pick four of the the following “self-esteem boosters” listed in the textbook that you feel would be the most powerful (You can also list ways to raise self-esteem which are not listed in the textbook.):Search for theRead more about We can work on LP2 Assignment: Self-Esteem Boosters and Communication Preferences[…]

We can work on Law and Ethical Reasoning Name of Student Institutional Affiliation  Law and Ethical Reasoning Living a will provide people with the opportunity to state their preferences about the type of medical treatment they can receive if they are unable to give informed consent (Rao, 2000). The living wills are useful in any case where the patient cannot state their medical choices. In a large number of states, pregnant women do not have equal right as other people to create and adhere to a living will. The justification for the exclusion of pregnant women is that they may not have considered the effects of their choices during pregnancy. These statutes claim to protect women who would be devastated to find out that the doctor continued with a life-ending treatment while in fact, she would have chosen to continue with life-sustaining treatment to give the fetus an opportunity to grow. Living wills for pregnant women are heavily influenced by the politics surrounding abortion. Most state legislatures have a clause to sidestep the living will as it is only logical to protect the life of the unborn baby by giving the incapacitated pregnant woman life-sustaining treatment. However, this decision does not consider that forcing medical care on the pregnant patient violates her autonomy as a woman. The pregnancy exemption laws impermissibly restrict the woman’s right to refuse unwanted medical intervention as well as their right to abortion. These exemptions also infringe on the pregnant woman’s ability to control their end of life healthcare, more commonly known as the “right to die” (Villarreal, 2018). In most cases, the illness or accident that incapacitates a pregnant woman also jeopardizes the health and survival of the fetus. Therefore, continuing the pregnancy is often futile. Maintaining a woman on life support is harmful to the fetus because ventilators and catheters often cause an infection that further jeopardizes the development of the fetus. The exemption of a pregnant woman from the right to enact a living will do not allow for the consideration of the pregnant woman’s pain, the growth of the unborn baby or the prognosis of the unborn baby (Villarreal, 2018). Pregnancy exemptions to living wills are unconstitutional, not only because they create an undue burden on the woman’s right to have an abortion before the fetus is viable but also because the state’s interest in the prospective life of the unborn baby cannot overrule a woman’s right to refuse medical care. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the court stated that women maintained the right to terminate a pregnancy before it was viable (Villarreal, 2018). However, the state’s interest in life would be allowed to proceed only if the restriction on the woman’s right to choose does not place an undue burden on the woman. If the woman is incapacitated due to injury or illness, continuing the pregnancy infringes on their right to choose by placing an undue burden on the woman (Epstein & Walker, 2013). Most states with the exemptions on pregnancy women coerce women into accepting unwanted medical care if it is possible that the fetus will grow to pave way for “live birth”; a standard that is vague and medically uncertain and therefore places an undue burden on the rights of women to abortion. In In re Quinlan, the court ruled that the individual’s right to privacy also includes the right to decline from unwanted medical care as well as the right to abortion (Rao, 2000). The ruling found that the state cannot compel unwanted medical care on people that have expressed their wish to stop life-sustaining medical care to medical professionals and others through the healthcare power of an attorney. This ruling should take precedence when a pregnant woman is incapacitated. The state’s interest in human life should not outweigh the person’s right to refuse unwanted medical care. Therefore, the state’s interest should not justify the violation of a woman’s bodily autonomy notwithstanding how far along she is in the pregnancy (Epstein & Walker, 2013). In my opinion, society should choose to maintain the woman’s autonomy over her body, above all else. If the patient is incapacitated with no signs of recovery, I will opt to discontinue treatment. Continuing to put a woman such as nancy under medical care would place a burden on her dying body to support a fetus. It would also lengthen the suffering of the patient. The purpose of medical care is to alleviate suffering not to increase it. Also, continuing to give medical care does not guarantee the survival of the fetus. It may also lead to the birth of an infant with severe defects. This infant would then begin a life with difficulties, and the chances of their survival would be minimized due to the lack of a mother. Continuing medical care also places financial stress on the family as well as the healthcare providers. Even though theoretically, the patients financial status should not determine the level of care they receive, in reality, it is among the most crucial factors in determining a patient’s access to healthcare. Therefore, society should consider the financial implications too. References Epstein, L., & Walker, T. G. (2013). Constitutional Law: Rights. Sage. Rao, R. (2000). Property, privacy, and the human body. BUL rev., 80, 359. Villarreal, E. (2018). Pregnancy and Living Wills: A Behavioral Economic Analysis. Yale LJF, 128, 1052.

Law and Ethical Reasoning Name of Student Institutional Affiliation  Law and Ethical Reasoning Living a will provide people with the opportunity to state their preferences about the type of medical treatment they can receive if they are unable to give informed consent (Rao, 2000). The living wills are useful in any case where the patientRead more about We can work on Law and Ethical Reasoning Name of Student Institutional Affiliation  Law and Ethical Reasoning Living a will provide people with the opportunity to state their preferences about the type of medical treatment they can receive if they are unable to give informed consent (Rao, 2000). The living wills are useful in any case where the patient cannot state their medical choices. In a large number of states, pregnant women do not have equal right as other people to create and adhere to a living will. The justification for the exclusion of pregnant women is that they may not have considered the effects of their choices during pregnancy. These statutes claim to protect women who would be devastated to find out that the doctor continued with a life-ending treatment while in fact, she would have chosen to continue with life-sustaining treatment to give the fetus an opportunity to grow. Living wills for pregnant women are heavily influenced by the politics surrounding abortion. Most state legislatures have a clause to sidestep the living will as it is only logical to protect the life of the unborn baby by giving the incapacitated pregnant woman life-sustaining treatment. However, this decision does not consider that forcing medical care on the pregnant patient violates her autonomy as a woman. The pregnancy exemption laws impermissibly restrict the woman’s right to refuse unwanted medical intervention as well as their right to abortion. These exemptions also infringe on the pregnant woman’s ability to control their end of life healthcare, more commonly known as the “right to die” (Villarreal, 2018). In most cases, the illness or accident that incapacitates a pregnant woman also jeopardizes the health and survival of the fetus. Therefore, continuing the pregnancy is often futile. Maintaining a woman on life support is harmful to the fetus because ventilators and catheters often cause an infection that further jeopardizes the development of the fetus. The exemption of a pregnant woman from the right to enact a living will do not allow for the consideration of the pregnant woman’s pain, the growth of the unborn baby or the prognosis of the unborn baby (Villarreal, 2018). Pregnancy exemptions to living wills are unconstitutional, not only because they create an undue burden on the woman’s right to have an abortion before the fetus is viable but also because the state’s interest in the prospective life of the unborn baby cannot overrule a woman’s right to refuse medical care. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the court stated that women maintained the right to terminate a pregnancy before it was viable (Villarreal, 2018). However, the state’s interest in life would be allowed to proceed only if the restriction on the woman’s right to choose does not place an undue burden on the woman. If the woman is incapacitated due to injury or illness, continuing the pregnancy infringes on their right to choose by placing an undue burden on the woman (Epstein & Walker, 2013). Most states with the exemptions on pregnancy women coerce women into accepting unwanted medical care if it is possible that the fetus will grow to pave way for “live birth”; a standard that is vague and medically uncertain and therefore places an undue burden on the rights of women to abortion. In In re Quinlan, the court ruled that the individual’s right to privacy also includes the right to decline from unwanted medical care as well as the right to abortion (Rao, 2000). The ruling found that the state cannot compel unwanted medical care on people that have expressed their wish to stop life-sustaining medical care to medical professionals and others through the healthcare power of an attorney. This ruling should take precedence when a pregnant woman is incapacitated. The state’s interest in human life should not outweigh the person’s right to refuse unwanted medical care. Therefore, the state’s interest should not justify the violation of a woman’s bodily autonomy notwithstanding how far along she is in the pregnancy (Epstein & Walker, 2013). In my opinion, society should choose to maintain the woman’s autonomy over her body, above all else. If the patient is incapacitated with no signs of recovery, I will opt to discontinue treatment. Continuing to put a woman such as nancy under medical care would place a burden on her dying body to support a fetus. It would also lengthen the suffering of the patient. The purpose of medical care is to alleviate suffering not to increase it. Also, continuing to give medical care does not guarantee the survival of the fetus. It may also lead to the birth of an infant with severe defects. This infant would then begin a life with difficulties, and the chances of their survival would be minimized due to the lack of a mother. Continuing medical care also places financial stress on the family as well as the healthcare providers. Even though theoretically, the patients financial status should not determine the level of care they receive, in reality, it is among the most crucial factors in determining a patient’s access to healthcare. Therefore, society should consider the financial implications too. References Epstein, L., & Walker, T. G. (2013). Constitutional Law: Rights. Sage. Rao, R. (2000). Property, privacy, and the human body. BUL rev., 80, 359. Villarreal, E. (2018). Pregnancy and Living Wills: A Behavioral Economic Analysis. Yale LJF, 128, 1052.[…]

We can work on The Walt Disney Company and Pixar, Inc.: To Acquire or Not to Acquire Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation The Walt Disney Company and Pixar, Inc.: To Acquire or Not to Acquire Part 1 Walt Disney Company has experienced various strategic issues. One of the issues is that the company has lost a significant percentage of its subscribers in the “Entertainment and Sports Programming Network (ESPN).” Currently, the company’s ESPN has few consumers compared to previous years. The primary reason why consumers have shifted from ESPN is the emergence of less expensive internet platforms (Alcacer et al., 2019). Before, customers watched sports with Disney, but currently, they can watch video sports using cheaper internet platforms. Over the years, the market position of Walt Disney had been high. The high market position was obtained through the company’s appeal to customers by charging low prices. People, especially young adults, prefer watching sports and as a result, they invest most of their time in viewing sports, which means that they cannot pay higher prices for internet platforms that provide sports videos. The causes of issues faced by the company include resources and market factors. Company resources include both physical and human resources. Human resources consist of brand names and intellectual capital, while physical resources include distribution networks and plants (Dyer et al., 2019). In this case, although Disney Company has advanced technologically, its “ESPN” brand name has caused customers leave the platform because of the increased charges. Regarding market factors, Alcacer et al. (2019) affirm that, ESPN has caused Walt Disney Company to experienced intense competition from its rivals. The company primarily deals with entertainment, which focuses on the tastes and preferences of consumers. The fierce competition has caused a reduction in the company’s revenue. Besides, the management of the company does not aim at the deliberate approaches of meeting consumer demands. Consequently, the company has been criticized whenever it releases new sports videos in the market. Walt Disney has not been able to attract new consumers and, therefore, it has been a challenge for the company to enhance an excellent market position by concentrating on the customer’s preferences and tastes. Walt Disney Company can address strategic issues by realizing the best action. For instance, analyzing the company’s value chain will help in achieving its operational goals and strategy. Although the company lost its ESPN platform, it can create synergies by customizing and combining resources with another company. For instance, if Disney acquires Pixar, the independency or resource combination will enable Disney Firm to increase its profits. Moreover, the company can change its operations to sustain quality and decrease prices. Lowering prices and sustaining the quality of services offered will help in maintaining the current consumers, and restore the customers lost by the company to its rivals. Furthermore, the company can focus on dealing with educative and motivational films, because customers do not criticize educative products and will remain attentive to educational films concerned with their social and business lives. Part 2 Should Disney Pursue the Acquisition of Pixar? Dyer et al. (2019) speculate that, companies perceive alliances and acquisitions as strategies that spur growth. However, alliances and acquisitions strategies have unique disadvantages and advantages. Companies that ignore the differences, risk in purchasing firms they should have allied, or allying enterprises they should have bought. For that reason, it is imperative for a company to acknowledge when to use the ally and acquire strategies. For instance, if a company desires to generate collaborations by integrating its efforts and another firm’s efforts, it should ally with the firm. However, if the said company seeks to combine production plants to acquire synergies, the company should purchase the firm to regulate economies of scale. .For example, Disney Company requires physical resources such as animation. Animation is essential to the corporate strategy of Disney Company, since the characters from Disney’s animated films increase company sales. In 2012, the aggregate revenue of Disney Company was composed of human and physical resources such as resorts, parks, internet, consumer products, studio entertainment, and media networks (Dyer et al., 2019). Therefore, revenue will increase highly if Disney acquires Pixar. Although Disney Company will experience a financial risk amounting to $7.4 billion, the amount is not small for the company. Also, the acquisition will result in overlapping and overstaffing of businesses and sectors. For example, the businesses and sectors of Pixar Company are similar to those of Disney, which could cause a substantial reduction in profit and a rise in workforce cost. Consequently, the acquisition will be influenced by market factors. For example, it will cause an increase in competition, because of increased advancements of the techniques used by the companies rivals (Alcacer et al., 2019). As a result, the Company can acquire synergies by retaining significant employees and motivating them to be more productive. The company should focus on solving the stability problems of the acquired company by creating adequate space for employees’ improvement. Moreover, Disney Company should adjust salaries and awards adequately, and ensure that the leading technology and creativity talents remain locked in the combined syndicate. Also, the company should focus on avoiding unmerited expenditures caused by certain behaviors and overlapping of departments. The new company will generate innovative ideas and reduce its operational cost. Acquiring the Pixar Company will increase Disney’s market power. Pixar Company has ten years of registered animation technology, which cannot be purchased by other companies. Furthermore, the total box of Pixar doubles that of Disney, indicating that acquisition will enable Disney to have a stronger market power (Alcacer et al., 2019). Furthermore, the quality standard, creativity, and 3-D technology of Pixar Company will enable Disney to increase its diversification and reduce its operational costs. The acquisition will help the two companies to establish mutual goals through excellent communication by retaining the creativity and unique features of the acquired company. References Alcacer, J., Collis, D., & Furey, M. (2019). The Walt Disney Company And Pixar Inc.: To Acquire of Not to Acquire. Harvard Business School. Dyer, J., Kale, P., & Singh, H. (2019). When to Ally and When to Acquire. Harvard Business Review.

The Walt Disney Company and Pixar, Inc.: To Acquire or Not to Acquire Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation The Walt Disney Company and Pixar, Inc.: To Acquire or Not to Acquire Part 1 Walt Disney Company has experienced various strategic issues. One of the issues is that the company has lost a significant percentage of itsRead more about We can work on The Walt Disney Company and Pixar, Inc.: To Acquire or Not to Acquire Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation The Walt Disney Company and Pixar, Inc.: To Acquire or Not to Acquire Part 1 Walt Disney Company has experienced various strategic issues. One of the issues is that the company has lost a significant percentage of its subscribers in the “Entertainment and Sports Programming Network (ESPN).” Currently, the company’s ESPN has few consumers compared to previous years. The primary reason why consumers have shifted from ESPN is the emergence of less expensive internet platforms (Alcacer et al., 2019). Before, customers watched sports with Disney, but currently, they can watch video sports using cheaper internet platforms. Over the years, the market position of Walt Disney had been high. The high market position was obtained through the company’s appeal to customers by charging low prices. People, especially young adults, prefer watching sports and as a result, they invest most of their time in viewing sports, which means that they cannot pay higher prices for internet platforms that provide sports videos. The causes of issues faced by the company include resources and market factors. Company resources include both physical and human resources. Human resources consist of brand names and intellectual capital, while physical resources include distribution networks and plants (Dyer et al., 2019). In this case, although Disney Company has advanced technologically, its “ESPN” brand name has caused customers leave the platform because of the increased charges. Regarding market factors, Alcacer et al. (2019) affirm that, ESPN has caused Walt Disney Company to experienced intense competition from its rivals. The company primarily deals with entertainment, which focuses on the tastes and preferences of consumers. The fierce competition has caused a reduction in the company’s revenue. Besides, the management of the company does not aim at the deliberate approaches of meeting consumer demands. Consequently, the company has been criticized whenever it releases new sports videos in the market. Walt Disney has not been able to attract new consumers and, therefore, it has been a challenge for the company to enhance an excellent market position by concentrating on the customer’s preferences and tastes. Walt Disney Company can address strategic issues by realizing the best action. For instance, analyzing the company’s value chain will help in achieving its operational goals and strategy. Although the company lost its ESPN platform, it can create synergies by customizing and combining resources with another company. For instance, if Disney acquires Pixar, the independency or resource combination will enable Disney Firm to increase its profits. Moreover, the company can change its operations to sustain quality and decrease prices. Lowering prices and sustaining the quality of services offered will help in maintaining the current consumers, and restore the customers lost by the company to its rivals. Furthermore, the company can focus on dealing with educative and motivational films, because customers do not criticize educative products and will remain attentive to educational films concerned with their social and business lives. Part 2 Should Disney Pursue the Acquisition of Pixar? Dyer et al. (2019) speculate that, companies perceive alliances and acquisitions as strategies that spur growth. However, alliances and acquisitions strategies have unique disadvantages and advantages. Companies that ignore the differences, risk in purchasing firms they should have allied, or allying enterprises they should have bought. For that reason, it is imperative for a company to acknowledge when to use the ally and acquire strategies. For instance, if a company desires to generate collaborations by integrating its efforts and another firm’s efforts, it should ally with the firm. However, if the said company seeks to combine production plants to acquire synergies, the company should purchase the firm to regulate economies of scale. .For example, Disney Company requires physical resources such as animation. Animation is essential to the corporate strategy of Disney Company, since the characters from Disney’s animated films increase company sales. In 2012, the aggregate revenue of Disney Company was composed of human and physical resources such as resorts, parks, internet, consumer products, studio entertainment, and media networks (Dyer et al., 2019). Therefore, revenue will increase highly if Disney acquires Pixar. Although Disney Company will experience a financial risk amounting to $7.4 billion, the amount is not small for the company. Also, the acquisition will result in overlapping and overstaffing of businesses and sectors. For example, the businesses and sectors of Pixar Company are similar to those of Disney, which could cause a substantial reduction in profit and a rise in workforce cost. Consequently, the acquisition will be influenced by market factors. For example, it will cause an increase in competition, because of increased advancements of the techniques used by the companies rivals (Alcacer et al., 2019). As a result, the Company can acquire synergies by retaining significant employees and motivating them to be more productive. The company should focus on solving the stability problems of the acquired company by creating adequate space for employees’ improvement. Moreover, Disney Company should adjust salaries and awards adequately, and ensure that the leading technology and creativity talents remain locked in the combined syndicate. Also, the company should focus on avoiding unmerited expenditures caused by certain behaviors and overlapping of departments. The new company will generate innovative ideas and reduce its operational cost. Acquiring the Pixar Company will increase Disney’s market power. Pixar Company has ten years of registered animation technology, which cannot be purchased by other companies. Furthermore, the total box of Pixar doubles that of Disney, indicating that acquisition will enable Disney to have a stronger market power (Alcacer et al., 2019). Furthermore, the quality standard, creativity, and 3-D technology of Pixar Company will enable Disney to increase its diversification and reduce its operational costs. The acquisition will help the two companies to establish mutual goals through excellent communication by retaining the creativity and unique features of the acquired company. References Alcacer, J., Collis, D., & Furey, M. (2019). The Walt Disney Company And Pixar Inc.: To Acquire of Not to Acquire. Harvard Business School. Dyer, J., Kale, P., & Singh, H. (2019). When to Ally and When to Acquire. Harvard Business Review.[…]

We can work on If you were to become a therapist or if you needed psychotherapy, which type(s) would you prefer? State reasons for your preference(s).

Therapy   Here are some questions to use as a starting point for discussion.  Please feel free to discuss any other material that interests you, and you feel is relevant.  In addition, respond to, at least, one or two posts from other students.   1.  If you were to become a therapist or if youRead more about We can work on If you were to become a therapist or if you needed psychotherapy, which type(s) would you prefer? State reasons for your preference(s).[…]