Abstract
This paper uses the Reason Model of Accident Causation to analyse the events following the Qantas accident in Bangkok in 1999. The issues relating to the crew's actions in the minutes prior to the precautionary disembarkation are investigated. The paper makes specific reference to the functions of organisational defences as described by Professor James Reason and stresses the significance of his accident causation model in aviation. It continues by suggesting the use of the accident causation model is not exclusive to accident investigation, but also using the concept as an error management tool to improve organisational safety performance. Recommendations are made for managers to implement a Safety Management System considering organisational defences and providing sufficient training to minimise active failures.

Outline
Abstract
Introduction and Background
Functions of Defences and Accident Causation
Case Study: The QF1 Accident
Using the Reason Model in Practice
Conclusion and Implications

From the Paper
"The investigation report (ATSB, 2001) into the accident thoroughly details the events of the approach, landing and disembarkation. As the Boeing 747 attempted to land in extremely heavy rain, inaccurate aircraft handling by the first officer (pilot flying) led to the aircraft floating much further along the runway than planned. As the captain of the flight realised this he instructed the pilot flying to apply full power in an attempt to go-around. Almost simultaneously the aircraft's main wheels touched down on the runway. As a consequence, the captain rejected the go-around by retarding the thrust levers, but without specifying this to the first officer. Subsequently, confusion in the cockpit between the first officer and captain resulted in reverse thrust not being applied at any stage during the landing roll."

Tags:bangkok, causation, defences, depth, failures, hazards, latent, management, organisation, procedures, safety, sops, standard, training, unsafe

Abstract
This essay looks at the laws of defamation in the U.K. and the ways in which they inhibit a journalist's ability to publish stories which serve the public interest. It looks at all related legislation (U.K .and European) and legal processes involved in defamation cases, what defamation is, the defences available and different criticisms of the system.

Outline
Introduction
Money, Money, Money
Innocent Until Proven Guilty, Yet False Until Proven True
Other Defences
What Harm Did it Do?
Article 10 ? A New Hope?
Conclusion

From the Paper
"Defamation is a strict-liability tort, that is a civil wrong for which damages can be claimed whereby it is not necessary to prove intent. There are two forms of defamation, slander, the spoken form, and libel, the permanent form which includes statements made in radio and television broadcasts (under the Broadcasting Act 1990) and in a staged play (under the Theatre Act 1968) A statement is considered to be defamatory if it lowers a person in the estimation of right thinking members of society, disparages them in their profession or calling, causes them to be shunned or avoided or exposes them to hatred, ridicule or contempt."

Tags:aitken, archer, jury, libel, major, purgery, qualified, rights, slander, wilde

Abstract
This paper discusses how the problem of evil has evolved into one of the most argued, and hence comprehensive, topics in the debate about God's existence. While nontheists claim that the existence of evil provides strong arguments against theism, theists hold that these arguments are merely speculative and lack logical strength. This paper examines the logical problem of evil, discusses some representative defences and theodicies (namely, the free will defense, the Irenaean theodicy, and the 'best of all possible worlds' solution), and critically evaluates these approaches.

From the Paper
"Nontheists may utilize the problem of evil to identify the logical incongruity of the presence of an all-powerful, omniscient and omnibenevolent God alongside morally unwarrantable evil. This line of reasoning states that since God is omniscient, He knows that evil exists, and being omnibenevolent, He must be motivated to prevent evil, and finally, since He's also all-powerful, He has the ability to deter or eliminate evil. However, morally unjustifiable evil exists; therefore God is not all-powerful, omniscient, and/or omnibenevolent (Wachterhauser, 1985). Since theists claim that God necessarily possesses all of these three powerful characteristics, non-theists attempt to disprove a monotheistic God's existence using the above formulation. Importantly, the basis for the logical problem of evil is founded on the belief that all evil is logically unnecessary and should therefore not exist at all (Peterson et al., 2003; Zagzebski, 1996). "

Tags:god, atheists, Irenaean

Abstract
Studies are looked at to examine how victims can continue on and improve their situation and continue with their healing process. Denial is addressed as it is one of the popular defences victims use to help them face their situation.

Abstract
This paper discusses a shift in Australian law towards the rights of the patient as compared to medical standards or the expertise and discretion of the doctor. It focuses on how this shift has created a crisis of insurance and malpractice claims in Australia. The paper presents a hypothetical case study centered on a patient, Rhonda, advised to undergo surgery in order to investigate a possible malignancy situated near the spinal column. The paper then discusses the consent and liability issues that are associated with the case.

Table of Contents:
Introduction
Refusal versus Consent
If Consent was Given
The Hospital's Possible Liability
Defences against Rhonda's Possible Claims
Concluding Remarks

From the Paper
"An obvious weakness in the Patient's Rights approach which demands that physicians produce all possible information regarding proposed procedures or treatments towards informed patient consent rests in matters of sheer information, the ability of the patient to interpret it, and with doctors relying on the research community as a kind of de facto alibi it is not meant to be in order to reduce their personal liability. One does see the room for sometimes ludicrous results in cases of routine procedures, not to mention in dealings with patients or their guardians of kinds apt to sue opportunistically. Despite altered tort law hoped to remove the worst effects of the medical indemnity and insurance crises it seems likely that conservatism may prevail, for some years, in Australian medicine. As in the U.S. and elsewhere affected by much litigation, a typical response on the part of doctors is to recommend treatments including surgery sparingly."

Tags:indemnity, litigation, physician