Hi, My name is Jiyoung. I am taking the Business Accounting program part time. I think
my biggest challenge will be juggling studying, taking care of kids and doing house
chores. I was working at Starbucks but now I am on maternity leave because I gave a
birth 2 months ago.
Two truths and a lie
1. I have 3 kids and a dog
2. English is my native language
3. I am a nurse.
Mediation: List one advantage and one disadvantage to using mediation. Give an
example of when mediation would be an appropriate dispute resolution method and
when you would not use mediation.
Mediation is when there is a person who is in the middle of two people arguing. Their
job is to help with negotiation, but they are not able to make any decisions. Another
main point about a mediator, is that when they are used, they are neutral and both
parties volunteer to use it. One good advantage about using a mediator is that it can
help with keeping a good relationship with both groups. Since both groups volunteer
in hiring mediator, they are willing to keep good conversation. An example of using a
mediator would be in a workplace conflict. One disadvantage of using a mediator
could be when maybe a mediator has too much power and can influence the result.
An example for a disadvantage to using a mediator is in criminal case where there
was violence.
모듈 2
Question:
The Supreme Court of Canada has held that a pregnant woman does not owe a duty
of care to her unborn child. If a woman carelessly causes an accident and her child
is born with a disability that child cannot sue in negligence. However , if a father
causes injury to his unborn child, then he can be held liable if that child was born
with a disability. This rule denies a duty of care between a mother and her unborn
child to protect a women's freedom of action, as anything a mother does can affect
her unborn child and a duty of care would unfairly put the mother to be on guard for 9
months (Dobson vs. Dobson). Do you agree with the Supreme Court (note: who
was one of the other interested parties that participated in the Supreme Court
appeal)? Does this mean a pregnant woman can carelessly injure her unborn child
without consequence from a legal perspective? What about an ethical perspective?
Response:
The Supreme Court of Canada made a big decision in the case of Dobson v. Dobson.
They ruled that a pregnant woman doesn't legally owe a "duty of care" to her unborn
baby. This means that she can't be sued if her actions during pregnancy lead to a
disability in the child. I agree with this decision, especially as a mother of three.
Groups like the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC) even weighed in during the
appeal, sharing their views in support of this. This ruling is important because it
protects a woman's freedom to make her own choices. If a pregnant woman could be
sued, then everything she does could be watched and judged. Legally, if a mom
causes an accident while pregnant and her child is later born with a disability, she
generally can't be sued for it, even though a dad could be in a similar situation. This
difference might seem odd, but it really comes down to a woman's right to control her
own body. While some might see this as ethically tricky, the court focused on
protecting a woman's personal freedom from constant legal scrutiny.
Matthew Lindsay got scammed, and it is Uber’s responsibility to fix this. As his lawyer, I'm
writing to explain why the New Year's Eve ride he took shouldn't count as a real agreement.
First, this price was just unfair! Over $1,100 for a ride that usually costs less than $100? No one
in their right mind would agree to pay that much. Uber didn't make the huge price clear before
the ride started. They basically took advantage of Mr. Lindsay needing a ride late at night.
Also, Mr. Lindsay thought he was agreeing to a normal price, not something so high. The
difference between what he expected to pay and what Uber charged is a lot. If Uber's app didn't
show this insane price clearly, then he didn't truly agree to it.
Because of these problems, we believe the contract isn't valid. Mr. Lindsay shouldn't have to pay
that unfair amount. We're asking for Uber to refund the extra money he was charged, so he just
pays a normal price for the ride.
Thank you