Read the summary for at least SIX other Case Studies (other than yours), and pos

Read the summary for at least SIX other Case Studies (other than yours), and post a comment for each. That is SIX total comment posts, Include a heading with the name of the person and the Case Study to whom/which you are responding. Your comments should be positive, thoughtful, and demonstrate that you read your classmate’s summary. To DEMONSTRATE that you have read the summary, refer to specific items in your comments. Address the person and topic to whom/which you were responding.

NATALIYA
1.Is it legal? Yes, it’s legal to work in the hospital with epilepsy and there is no federal law barring people who have this disability. For instance, Janet got a job in the hospital and they knew about her condition and still hired her. 
2. Is it balanced? Although she went to school for nursing, the hospital feared that their reputation would be ruined and they didn’t give her a chance to be a nurse in the hospital. Instead, they gave her to the medical records department and it was unethical. 
3 How does it make me feel? In my opinion, the hospital is in the wrong for putting Janet in the medical records department because of her disability. Janet should gotten the opportunity to be a nurse and health administrators shouldn’t judge a book by its cover. The physician who helped Janet when she was experiencing seizures told the administrators that because of her condition, the hospital’s reputation would look bad which does not show any professionalism and instead shows a lack of teamwork and unity in the hospital.
ALEX
* Is it legal? Why or why not?
1. Yes. Janet K.’s termination is unlawful. While termination due to departmental downsizing is not illegal, Janet’s termination is based in discrimination. Janet faced discrimination several times before being terminated as well. First was being hired to work in medical records and not  allowed to work in surgery due to concerns that her epilepsy would negatively affect her and the patients, even though she had already been working in surgery at her previous hospital without issues. Second, is her coworkers avoiding her due to the fear of not knowing how to help her if she did have a seizure, and management not doing anything to educate these employees or speak with them about how their actions are inappropriate. Finally, Janet was discriminated against when the physician who assisted her when she had a seizure requested her to be terminated, (which ultimately did lead to her termination ) because he thought “Janet should not be allowed to work in a hospital because it gave the hospital, with its image of healing, a bad reputation.” All of these situations are instances of discrimination, and Janet’s termination was a violation of the ADAA.
* Is it balanced? Why or why not?
1. No, this situation is not balanced. Janet was treated unfairly due to her disability. Janet was not allowed to work in a department she had already been working in and was comfortable with because of the fear that she might have a seizure and endanger herself and her patients. 
* How does it make me feel? Why?
1. If I was in Janet’s position my mental health would have taken a huge hit. Not being allowed to do what I love, and then on top of that being the only one fired in my department, would destroy me. It would greatly discourage me from further pursuing a career in the medical field. I would also further isolate myself at any new workplaces for fear of being fired again due to my condition. If I was a close friend or family member of Janet’s, I would be furious. She was treated so unfairly for something she couldn’t help, something that she had been living with her whole life.
AMINA
* Is it legal? Why or why not?
It is illegal being because as stated in the Americans with Disabilities Act it prohibits employees from discriminating against such individuals. The employee should have informed the employer about the situation but have told them to fire her. 
 
* Is it balanced? Why or why not?
It’s not balanced because they ended up firing her instead of finding a new solution or agreement with Janet to work with her condition. 
 
* How does it make me feel? Why?
The hospital staff knew about Janet’s epilepsy before hiring her so I feel as though they shouldn’t have fired her and should have approached her about what had happened and how they could move forward in her case. If they truly looked at the image of their hospital, hiring her shouldn’t have been done in the first place instead of hiring and then firing later on. Janet also got hired in the department of medical records which I feel is a lot safer than the department of surgery which is also why I feel she shouldn’t have gotten fired.
FERNANDO
1.) Is it legal? Why or why not? This particular case that stands out for me is Janet’s condition of epilepsy. Not having a real opportunity to perform surgery as far as the summary was written we would never know how her skills would have been at the hospital. Using the Blanchard-Peale Three-Step Ethics Model I as an individual do not see anything against this legality case. Meaning my why would be simple as the hospital as crude as they were never allowing a chance for her to prove herself in surgery the hospital never intended any bodily harm towards Janet. Also nor did they disobey the legal system meaning they were in the law. So I can concur as bad as this was for Janet the epilepsy was a protection for others just in case her control would not harm patients in the end she could have applied elsewhere or found a different location to work at a different hospital hoping she could get a chance in nursing. 
2.) Is it balanced? Why or why not? Absolutely not in my opinion this action was not balanced. My why is as simple as Janet suffered from epilepsy if given an opportunity equal to another nurse how can we justify if she never got an opportunity to prove herself? Not knowing the full result makes this action for me unbalanced we can only determine one outcome as said in the summary of chapter eight in the end “Janet should not be allowed to work in a hospital because it gave the hospital, with the image of healing, a bad reputation.” Only to get fired by budget cuts you tell me how this was balanced? 
3.) How does it make me feel? Why? Well as strong of an opinion as I hold with the medical code and law of ethics we should all have an equal opportunity to prove what we can be capable of and Janet being denied an opportunity only makes me feel the hospital could have accommodated her for slower shifts or a graveyard shifts anything that would be a small start. Well my why is I disagree with the hospital as there could have been at least one opportunity for them to demonstrate compassion as Janet was eager to be a nurse. We would never have known if she could have performed well with various help from the hospital staff if they were supportive instead of demoting her and trying to avoid reputation for her unfortunate condition of epilepsy. 
PAULINA
1.Is it legal? Why or why not? No, it is discrimination to ask someone to be removed because of the concern of a bad reputation at the hospital. Janet being terminated makes me wonder the reason why she was let go. Was it because she had seizures once a month at her job? Maybe the reason was not disclosed to her. But based on her experience of the physician asking for her removal makes me suspicious. Maybe she didn’t know the reason. Legally, if this occurred post 1990, Janet could sue that she was discriminated against because of her disability and was let go.
 
2.Is it balanced? Why or why not? No, because it is the physician is asking for her removal at work because he is afraid of the hospital’s “image.” He is not gaining anything. In this case, it is unbalanced because he is asking for his coworker to be terminated.
 
3.How does it make me feel? Why?
Staff are humans as well and are not immune to illnesses. It makes me feel like the physician complaining of Janet’s health problem and asking for her to be terminated is unprofessional and baseless. What if Janet is a great healthcare professional? Does she deserve to not work because she is prone to seizures? Should another employee not be allowed to work because maybe they were born with one arm/limb? What if the employee is diabetic; should they also not be allowed to work in case their sugar gets too low, and they become lightheaded and unable to work for a while? Or, how about an employee who is tachycardia; should they not be allowed to work in the case their heart rate leads into a dangerous heart rhythm, and they suffer a myocardial infarction? There are many wonderful healthcare professionals who have their own health issues. I think a healthcare employer who has a positive, robust team will be able to affectively attend to a patient AND a staff member who finds themselves in trouble. And, if this help is available and staff feel supported, then, wouldn’t employees want to work for an employer who takes care of them? I think that speaks volumes about a workplace. Things can happen at any given time, whether to a patient, family member/visitor of a patient or staff member. I don’t feel like the image or reputation of a hospital would be damaged if a non-staff member witnessed a healthcare staff member have a seizure.
 
In the case of allowing Janet to scrub in for surgeries; if she did it before and has had epilepsy all her life, why is it dangerous for her to be in surgery with the rest of the team? I am uncertain whether this is discrimination or if it is really a safety issue. If the frequency of her seizures is once/month, is that often enough that she should stay away from the surgical unit? If her medication can help to control her seizure episodes, shouldn’t she be allowed in the operating room?
JILL
1. Is it illegal? Why or why not?
Yes. The hospital’s discrimination of Janet based on her epilepsy’s possibility to cause seizures at a bad moment was against a few laws. The main one being the rehabilitation act. This act prohibits discrimination from an employer due to any sort of disability or handicap.
2. Is it balanced? Why or why not?
I do not think Janet’s case was balanced. She wanted to be a scrub nurse or work in the nursing field, but the hospital gave her a desk job because they felt it was safer for her and the patients. Then they ended up firing her for having seizures which were produced by a condition they were aware she had upon hiring her.
3. How does it make you feel? Why?
This case made me sad, and a bit upset. She completed her nursing program with no health issues, but the hospital discriminated against her ability to be a nurse because of a disability she has had her entire life. Other employees stayed away from her because they did not want to find themselves caught in a situation where they would need to help her and not know what to do or how to help. So, their solution was to just avoid her. They could simply ask her to explain to them what she would like them to do or how they could help her if the need were to arise. They could show her compassion. The hospital eventually fired her to preserve their own image. That was not right or fair to Janet. She can only do so much to prevent seizures, but she did absolutely nothing wrong and they fired her anyway because her having epilepsy made the hospital look bad.
            I have a lot of strong feelings about this case. I personally have been judged or criticized a lot growing up with ADD and being on an IEP. In the eighth grade I had a math teacher who got tired of me asking questions and moved me to a different math class. I just needed a little more instruction, not a whole different class much lower than where I was. That set me back for many years to come. Many people treated me as if I were incapable because I did not learn like everyone else. I now have a 16-year-old son with autism and ADHD and have had to advocate for him his whole life. These last 5 years have not been easy with schools and teachers who did not understand and see him as they would everyone else because he is high-functioning and verbal, but he does not learn the same way others do. A general education setting is too overwhelming for him, and much more than one-on-one instruction gives him severe anxiety. However, he is still capable of the same curriculum as the general education students, and in the right environment, with the right people he can achieve great strides academically and more open socially.
            These conditions are not something anyone chooses to have. But we can all do the best we can to try and overcome them and not let them define us. That does not mean that they will not still be an issue, but that we will have better control over our accomplishments. I do not think it is fair to be judged or discriminated against over something you have little to no control over.
***Below is the Case study and my Homework from PrepMyPaper.***
“The case of Janet K. and Epilepsy”
Janet Kay had suffered from epilepsy since she was an infant. Her condition was well-controlled as she entered adulthood, and she was able to complete a nursing program in good health. She particularly enjoyed working as a scrub nurse in the operating room. Upon graduation she applied at the large university teaching hospital where she had performed her clinical work during her nursing program. The hospital knew of her epilepsy history and offered her a job in the medical records department. Janet petitioned to be able to work in surgery but the hospital administrators felt that it was too dangerous for Janet and for the surgical patients if she should have a seizure there. While working in medical records, Janet seizure began to return. She would have seizure at least every month even though her medication’s had been changed. Janet noticed that some of her fellow medical records technicians would stay away from her to fear of not knowing how to help her during seizure. One afternoon a physician was dictating his case records in a cubicle next to Janet ‘s when she had a seizure. He helped her and then went to the hospital administrator and told her that Janet should not be allowed to work in a hospital because it gave the hospital, with its image of healing, a bad reputation. Janet, at the age of 27, was the only one terminated because of departmental downsizing.
“The Case of Janet K. and Epilepsy” 
       Question 1: Is it legal? Why or why not?
The case was illegal because it violated guidelines directed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and was prohibited from terminating someone due to a medical issue or disability. The case examines Janet’s unjust termination owing to her epilepsy and details the discrimination she experienced in the workplace. It will also look into the potential legal action she could have taken and the moral dilemmas surrounding a disabled employee in a hospital. It is the responsibility of an employer to ensure a safe working environment and the protection of all of their employees. In order to prevent environmental triggers of seizures, Janet’s employer may have implemented suitable modifications like anti-glare filters and dimmed lighting or provided training on how to manage a seizure sufferer.
Question 2: Is it balanced? Why or why not?
Health administrators are crucial in providing the best possible patient care while keeping hospitals and other care facilities operating efficiently. Therefore, the hospital managers’ concern for patient safety is justified in this instance. It would have been wiser to ascertain whether the medical facility could have given Janet the most lavish accommodations possible, enabling her to pursue her career in an area requiring more knowledge and skill, such as operations. Since employee accommodations for disabled patients and patient safety are not adequately followed, there is no balance.
Question 3: How does it make me feel? Why?
My interpretation of the case is that the hospital executives’ decisions were impacted by the doctors’ disapproval of Janet and her presence there, which raised some moral dilemmas. Janet should have been handled relatively, as they should have allowed her to continue working and receiving decent housing. It might be viewed as unfair and immoral if Janet’s termination was based only on her medical condition and without considering other options. The doctor contacted the hospital administration and voiced his worries about the negative impression that Janet’s employment would provide the facility.