Questions to Think About
primary source is
Questions to Think About
Chapter/Primary Source Topic Question: After you have read Chapter 11 and the primary sources for this lesson, think about the following question:
How did dependence on agriculture (especially cotton) and slavery shape the distinctive culture of the Old South and why did southern whites who did not own slaves defend the “peculiar institution”? What proportion of the White South owned slaves and how did such a small number of slave-owning planters exercise such a dominating hegemony over southern society and politics? How did southern apologists argue that slavery was a “positive good”?
Film Topic Question: After you watched the film listed in the Viewing – Comprehension section for this lesson, think about the following question:
While all abolitionists shared a hatred for slavery, they differed in the arguments they made and the tactics they adopted. Discuss the views of two leading abolitionists mentioned in the film – David Walker and William Lloyd Garrison. Which of the two favored non-violence and why?
dose of 80-a hundred and twenty mg is not permissible. moreover, after prescribing a steroid, the impact of immune-suppression brought on due to it, should were foreseen. The effect of immune-suppression brought about due to the use of steroids has affected the immunity of the patient and Dr. Mukherjee has did not be aware of the stated effects. it's also critical to focus on in this judgment that the way wherein Dr. Mukherjee attempted to shirk from his man or woman obligation each in the criminal and civil instances made towards him at the death of the claimant’s wife may be very a whole lot unbecoming of a physician as renowned and respected as he is. liability of Dr. Kunal Saha: The courtroom arrived at determining the contribution of the claimant to the negligence of the appellant docs and the AMRI health facility in causing the loss of life of his spouse because of scientific negligence. The national fee has decided the reimbursement to be paid for scientific negligence at Rs.1,72,87,500. but, the country wide fee become opined that the interference of the claimant has additionally contributed to the loss of life of his spouse. The national commission relied upon the judgment of this court in Malay Kumar Ganguly’s Case to arrive at the aforesaid conclusion which stated that it will be pertinent to note that even though there was interference by means of Kunal Saha at some stage in the remedy, it does now not diminish the number one duty and default in duty at the part of the defendants. despite a possibility of him gambling an overanxious position at some stage in the clinical court cases, the breach of obligation to take simple preferred of hospital therapy on the part of defendants is not diluted. To that quantity, contributory negligence isn't always pertinent. it could, but, have some function to play for the purpose of damages.” therefore, conserving the claimant answerable for contributory negligence, the country wide commission deducted 10% from the whole repayment and an award of Rs.1,55,fifty eight,750/- turned into given to the claimant. Interference can not be taken to be an excuse for abdicating one’s responsibility specially while interference can also were in the nature of concept. Even otherwise, considering the specific defence raised with the aid of them individually, interference by way of Kunal would merely amount to rumour proof and now not direct evidence. The respondents also sought to highlight on the quantity of antibiotics which can be stated to have been administered with the aid of Kunal to Anuradha at the same time as she became in AMRI contending that the said antibiotics were necessary. Kunal then submitted that the stated antibiotics had been prescribed by the docs at AMRI and he did now not write any prescription. The courtroom assumed that the said antibiotics had been administered with the aid of Kunal on his very own, however it now stands admitted that administration of such antibiotics was necessary. To finish, the court docket stated that even though there has been interference via Kunal Saha in the course of the remedy, it in no manner diminishes the primary obligation and default in obligation on a part of the defendants. in spite of a possibility of him playing an overanxious function for the duration of the clinical complaints, the breach of duty to take simple popular of hospital therapy on the part of defendants isn't always diluted. The court docket concluded that the country wide fee committed an errors in retaining that the claimant had contributed to the negligence of the appellant docs and the sanatorium which resulted within the dying of his wife while this courtroom in reality absolved the claimant of such liability and remanded the problem back to the country wide fee most effective for the reason of figuring out the quantum of repayment. The court set aside the finding of the country wide commission and emphasized the locating of this court that the claimant did not make a contribution to the negligence of the appellants-docs and AMRI health facility which resulted within the dying of his wife. vii. AWARD On a consideration of the entirety of the statistics and instances, proof and cloth introduced on document, NCDRC held that common compensation as a consequence of pecuniary and non pecuniary damages works out to Rs.17287500/- within the gift case, out of which 10% quantity as a consequence of the contributory negligence of the complainant within the treatment of Anuradha have to be deducted. so one can make the internet payable quantity of repayment to Rs. 15558750/- (rounded to Rs. 15560000/). From this amount, further deduction of a sum of Rs. 2593000/- which became payable by Dr. Abani Roy Chowdhury (deceased) or his legal representative as the complainant has forgone the claim in opposition to them must be made. In view of the odd records and situations of the case and as a unique case, NCDRC have presented a sum of Rs. 500000/- as cost of litigation>GET ANSWER