Abuse Neglect Or Nothing to Worry about Case Study

Abuse put down Or Nothing to Worry about - Case mull ExampleBroudy for assistance. She nones that Kim had shown her cuts on her body and confessed that she was fed up with her condition. While Kim had revealed that her father was involved in her condition, bloody shame suspected domestic torment or self- annoyance, concerns that she communicated to Ms. Broudy. Broudy determined to help but Kim was not willing to propagate up. As a resultant, Broudy reported the matter to the school principle and counselor but they took no action. Kims parents were equally unconcerned about her condition. Possible action for Ms. Broudy Ms. Broudys position identified her as a custodian to students while within the schools premises. She also had a moral obligation as a member of the society to ensure others well being. A number of good issues therefore lift to determine mathematical courses of action for any person in Bourdys position. She was for example bound by ethical principles of respect for the dignity of persons, responsible caring, and responsibility to society (Pope and Vasquez, p. 93, 94). As a result, Bourdy was under ethical obligation to protect any of her students from any form of bodily degradation such as molestation or physical abuse. The duty of care and social responsibility also required her to protect students from possible self-inflicted harm. ... My decision to talk to Kim and finally report the matter to the administration would be supported by consequentialist hypothesis that values impacts of a decision or an action. This is because if successful, such actions would help Kim out of her problem. I would also manage reporting the matter to law enforcement agency if the school failed to help Kim (Strike and Soltis, p. 158- 160). Neglect or abuse incident of neglect Neglect defines failure to provide for and protect a child from harm. Based on the facts of the case, if the parents were not involved in abusing Kim, then they were responsible for negligence. This is because the parents had evidently failed to take actions to protect their child from her source of harm. The injuries having been on Kims wrist suggested that the parents were aware of what their child was going through but did not bother to try a solution. Similarly, their response when called upon by the schools administration also indicated lack of interest in protecting Kim from her problem. While her mother did not even comment on the matter, her father repeled it. Kims parents were therefore negligent for failing to protect her from her deteriorating condition. They, contrary to Mary and Broudys actions, communicated lack of social responsibility, disregard to other peoples welfare and lack of the moral doctrine of utilitarianism. The parents were as a result neglecting indicators of Kims problems that remained unsolved (Pope and Vasquez, p. 93, 94). Difference between neglect and abuse While abuse involves direct infliction of harm to a person, neglect re lates to failure to ensure a persons safety from harm. Neglect is therefore an act of omission while abuse is an act of