Two discussions Module 7 and 8. 125 words initial post for each and two replies of 50-60 words each discussion. I will post the replies later.
The Department of Homeland Security, created in 2002, created the second largest government agency in the country (second only to the Department of Defense). The creation of this agency was highly controversial in the United States Congress for two primary reasons. First, the cost of administration of the new agency immediately created a new, huge financial obligation of the government that did not exist previously and, secondly, the new agency became an “umbrella” agency that managed twenty-two previously autonomous agencies already assigned the basic mission directives of security within the United States. Are these alleged criticisms valid, or did a new need exist?
The living will is a relatively new doctrine and instrument in the English Common Law. The living will is a creation of necessity that came about due to the huge and unforeseeable medical advances that occurred in the 20th century due primarily to technological breakthroughs. Prior to this time, the common law allowed an individual to make her medical decisions only during such time as she was physically competent to do so. If and when such competency ended, the law imposed a strict protocol of persons to whom the duty of decision-making would fall. No allowances were made for what we now call advance directives. Is this an improvement of the law or do living wills and advance directives create more problem than they solve? Please use a concrete example to support your argument.
