The Hippocratic Oath is an oath of ethics taken by physicians. It is one of the most known of Greek medical texts. In its original form, it requires a new physician to swear, by a number of healing gods, to uphold specific ethical standards; the oath is the earliest expression of medical ethics in the Western world, establishing several principles of medical ethics which remain of paramount significance today. These include the principles of medical non-maleficence; as the seminal articulation of certain principles that continue to guide and inform medical practice, the ancient text is of more than historic and symbolic value. Swearing a modified form of the oath remains a rite of passage for medical graduates in many countries; the original oath was written in Ionic Greek, between the fifth and third centuries BC. Although it is traditionally attributed to the Greek doctor Hippocrates and it is included in the Hippocratic Corpus, most modern scholars do not regard it as having been written by Hippocrates himself.
The oldest partial fragments of the oath date to circa AD 275. The oldest extant version dates to the 10th-11th century, held in the Vatican Library. A cited version, dated to 1595, appears in Koine Greek with a Latin translation. In this translation, the author translates "πεσσὸν" to the Latin "fœtum." The Hippocratic Oath, in Greek, from the 1923 Loeb edition, followed by the English translation: I swear by Apollo Physician, by Asclepius, by Hygieia, by Panacea, by all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will carry out, according to my ability and judgment, this oath and this indenture. To hold my teacher in this art equal to my own parents. I will use treatment to help the sick according to my ability and judgment, but never with a view to injury and wrong-doing. Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when will I suggest such a course. I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause abortion, but I will keep my life and my art. I will not use the knife, not verily, on sufferers from stone, but I will give place to such as are craftsmen therein.
Into whatsoever houses I enter, I will enter to help the sick, I will abstain from all intentional wrong-doing and harm from abusing the bodies of man or woman, bond or free. And whatsoever I shall see or hear in the course of my profession, as well as outside my profession in my intercourse with men, if it be what should not be published abroad, I will never divulge, holding such things to be holy secrets. Now if I carry out this oath, break it not, may I gain for reputation among all men for my life and for my art. – Translation by W. H. S. Jones, it is said that the exact phrase "First do no harm" is a part of the original Hippocratic oath. Although the phrase does not appear in the AD 245 version of the oath, similar intentions are vowed by, "I will abstain from all intentional wrong-doing and harm"; the phrase "primum non nocere" is believed to date from the 17th century. Another equivalent phrase is found in Epidemics, Book I, of the Hippocratic school: "Practice two things in your dealings with disease: either help or do not harm the patient".
The exact phrase is believed to have originated with the 19th-century English surgeon Thomas Inman. The oath is arguably the best known text of the Hippocratic Corpus, although most modern scholars do not attribute it to Hippocrates himself, estimating it to have been written in the fourth or fifth century BC. Alternatively, classical scholar Ludwig Edelstein proposed that the oath was written by the Pythagoreans, an idea that others questioned for lack of evidence for a school of Pythagorean medicine, its general ethical principles are found in other works of the Corpus: the Physician mentions the obligation to keep the'holy things' of medicine within the medical community. However, several aspects of the oath contradict patterns of practice established elsewhere in the Corpus. Most notable is its ban on the use of the knife for small procedures such as lithotomy though other works in the Corpus provide guidance on performing surgical procedures. Providing poisonous drugs would have been viewed as immoral by contemporary physicians if it resulted in murder.
However, the absolute ban described in the oath forbids euthanasia. Several accounts of ancient physicians willingly assisting suicides have survived. Multiple explanations for the prohibition of euthanasia in the oath have been proposed: it is possible that not all physicians swore the oath, or that the oath was seeking to prevent held concerns that physicians could be employed as political assassins; the interpreted AD 275 fragment of the oath contains a prohibition of abortion, in contradiction to original Hippocratic text On the Nature of the Child, which contains a description of an abortion, without any implication that it was morally wrong, descriptions of abortifacient medications are numerous in the ancient medical literature. While many Christian versions of the Hippocratic Oath from the middle-ages, expli
Local government elections took place in England on Thursday 4 May 2006. Polling stations were open between 7:00 and 22:00. All London borough council seats were up for election, as well as a third of the seats on each of the metropolitan borough councils, a third of some unitary authorities and shire districts. Several councils elected half of their seats: these were Adur, Fareham, Hastings and Bedworth, Oxford City. Local elections follow a four-year cycle, the 2006 election was the follow-on from the 2002 elections. Mayoral contests were held in the London boroughs of Hackney and Newham, in Watford. Crewe and Nantwich held a referendum on the issue of whether or not to have a directly elected mayor; this was the first set of elections since David Cameron was elected leader of the Conservative Party. The Conservatives strengthened their position as the largest party in local government, making headway against Labour. Note: Figures for number of councils and councillors is only in regard to those councils up for election in 2006, does not include councils not up for election.
Turnout was 36%, compared to 40% in 2004 and 33% in 2002. On 7 April, a report produced by the University of Plymouth for Newsnight, based on results of council by-elections in the past three months, suggested that, compared to the 2002 local elections: Labour would increase their national vote share by 2% to 28% but that they would lose around 130 seats; the Conservatives would suffer a decrease in the national vote share of 4% leaving them with 33% and a loss of around 95 seats. The Liberal Democrats would gain around 190 seats; this prediction may be seen to be entirely inaccurate. In an analysis for the Sunday Times, psephologists Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher, of the University of Plymouth, produced an estimate of the national share of the vote. According to their calculations, the parties would have the following share of the vote: Conservative: 39% Labour: 26% Liberal Democrats: 25% Others: 10%They note that this is estimate not intended to predict the vote share in an actual general election, because voters vote differently in general elections due to local issues, or to a wish to "fire a shot across the government's bows" without removing it.
The BBC had a similar national share prediction, based on the results of 950 key wards: Conservative: 40% LibDem: 27% Labour: 26% Others: 7% In Birmingham, the Acting Returning Officer announced that the votes in the Kingstanding ward had been incorrectly tallied, incorrectly giving a win to the BNP's Sharon Ebanks, whereas she should have been in third place. The only way in which this result can be corrected is for one of the candidates to raise a petition to the courts. Labour's Catherine Grundy did so, was declared the rightful winner. In Crawley, after three recounts, one result showed 500 votes for the Labour candidate and 500 for the Conservative; as per electoral law, the candidates subsequently drew lots. The Conservative candidate Adam G. Brown won, giving his party a majority and switching the council from Labour to Conservative control for the first time since 1971. Another count was tied in St Albans, this time between Conservative and Lib Dem candidates on 1131 votes each; the candidates drew lots with the Lib Dems winning.
In Chester the Conservatives were in third place in one ward, with around only 20% of the votes, however they managed to win the seat with a majority of around 20%, a 45% vote share. Their vote increased by over 110%, was believed to be one of the largest increases in vote share in the country. UK Independence Party launched their local election campaign on 28 March 2006, where they put forward their policies for the local elections which included: the reduction of council tax by 50%; the Liberal Democrats' campaign launch was held on 3 April 2006 and was led by Sir Menzies Campbell MP. Labour's campaign for the local elections was launched on 5 April 2006 and was led by the Prime Minister, Tony Blair MP and the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Blair's expected successor, Gordon Brown MP in the wake of rumours of a split between the two over when Blair should stand down as PM. Respect launched their election manifesto on 10 April 2006 calling the local elections a referendum on New Labour; the Greens launched their campaign on 11 April 2006, having announced that 1,300 candidates will be standing across the country.
The BNP launched their election manifesto on 14 April 2006. Soon after, Margaret Hodge, the Labour Employment Minister, told the press that 8 out of 10 white voters in her east London constituency of Barking admitted being tempted to vote for the BNP, hinting that the party's share of council seats was set to increase; the Conservatives launched their campaign on 18 April. David Cameron, Eric Pickles, Caroline Spelman and Peter Ainsworth fronted a press conference that focused on environmental issues. One third of the seats in all 36 Metropolitan Boroughs were up for election. One third of the council seats were up for election in 20 unitary authorities. A Derby council was in no overall control after the previous election in a Liberal Democrat/Conservative administration. After a by-election in July 2005 Labour gained one councillor off the Liberal Democrats, thereby gaining control of the council. In 81 English district authorities one third of the council was up for election. Local elections
Impression management is a conscious or subconscious process in which people attempt to influence the perceptions of other people about a person, object or event by regulating and controlling information in social interaction. It was first conceptualized by Erving Goffman in 1959 in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, was expanded upon in 1967. An example of impression management theory in play is in sports such as soccer. At an important game, a player would want to showcase themselves in the best light possible, because there are college recruiters watching; this person would have the flashiest pair of cleats and try and perform their best to show off their skills. Their main goal may be to impress the college recruiters in a way that maximizes their chances of being chosen for a college team rather than winning the game. Impression management is used synonymously with self-presentation, in which a person tries to influence the perception of their image; the notion of impression management was first applied to face-to-face communication, but was expanded to apply to computer-mediated communication.
The concept of impression management is applicable to academic fields of study such as psychology and sociology as well as practical fields such as corporate communication and media. The foundation and the defining principles of impression management were created by Erving Goffman in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Impression management theory states that one tries to alter one's perception according to one's goals. In other words, the theory is about how individuals wish to present themselves, but in a way that satisfies their needs and goals. Goffman "proposed to focus on how people in daily work situations present themselves and, in so doing, what they are doing to others", he was "particularly interested in how a person guides and control how others form an impression of them and what a person may or may not do while performing before them". A range of factors that govern impression management can be identified, it can be stated that impression management becomes necessary whenever there exists a kind of social situation, whether real or imaginary.
Logically, the awareness of being a potential subject of monitoring is crucial. Furthermore, the characteristics of a given social situation are important; the surrounding cultural norms determine the appropriateness of particular nonverbal behaviours. The actions have to be appropriate to the targets, within that culture, so that the kind of audience as well as the relation to the audience influences the way impression management is realized. A person's goals are another factor governing the strategies of impression management; this refers to the content of an assertion, which leads to distinct ways of presentation of aspects of the self. The degree of self-efficacy describes whether a person is convinced that it is possible to convey the intended impression. A new study finds that, all other things being equal, people are more to pay attention to faces that have been associated with negative gossip than those with neutral or positive associations; the study contributes to a body of work showing that far from being objective, human perceptions are shaped by unconscious brain processes that determine what they "choose" to see or ignore—even before they become aware of it.
The findings add to the idea that the brain evolved to be sensitive to "bad guys" or cheaters—fellow humans who undermine social life by deception, theft or other non-cooperative behavior. There are many methods behind self-presentation, including self disclosure, managing appearances, aligning actions, alter-casting. Maintaining a version of self-presentation, considered to be attractive can help to increase one's social capital, this method is implemented by individuals at networking events; these self-presentation methods can be used on the corporate level as impression management. Self-presentation is conveying information about oneself – or an image of oneself – to others. There are two types and motivations of self-presentation: presentation meant to match one's own self-image, presentation meant to match audience expectations and preferences. Self-presentation is expressive. Individuals construct an image of themselves to claim personal identity, present themselves in a manner, consistent with that image.
If they feel like it is restricted, they exhibit reactance or become defiant – try to assert their freedom against those who would seek to curtail self-presentation expressiveness. An example of this dynamic is the "preacher's daughter", whose suppressed personal identity and emotions cause an eventual backlash at her family and community. Boasting – Millon notes that in self-presentation individuals are challenged to balance boasting against discrediting themselves via excessive self-promotion or being caught and being proven wrong. Individuals have limited ability to perceive how their efforts impact their acceptance,and likeability by others. Flattery – flattery or praise to increase social attractiveness Intimidation – aggressively showing anger to get others to hear and obey one's demands. Self-presentation can be either assertive strategies. Whereas defensive strategies include behaviours like avoidance of threatening situations or means of self-handicapping, assertive strategies refer to more active behaviour like the verbal idealisation of the self, the use of status symbols or similar practices.
These strategies play important roles in one's maintenance of s