Patient Compliance with Recommendation of Physical and Cognitive Rest Following Concussion

Undergraduate Research ScholarshipAn important area of emphasis in the media and sports governing bodies during the past two decades has been the dilemma of traumatic brain injuries, namely concussions. The CDC reports that over 1.2 million mild traumatic brain injuries occur each year, and recent literature reports that concussion injury continues to rise in incidence across all levels of sports participation. Despite evolutionary efforts in both concussion treatment and prevention, and important hurdle to managing concussion yet remains: patient compliance with the physician's recommendation of physical and cognitive rest. The current study tracked two patients during the two weeks following a single, acute concussion injury. During these two weeks levels of daily physical and cognitive activity, as well as symptom severity, were recorded and compared with controls. Both patients showed non-compliance with the recommendation of cognitive rest during the first week post injury, while only one was non-compliant with the recommendation of physical rest during the first week post-injury. This patient also demonstrated more severe and prolonged symptoms than the patient who did physically rest during the first week post-injury. The current study presents an interim analysis of available data, and remains actively recruiting participants as of the date of submission.College of Arts and Sciences Honors ProgramNo embargoAcademic Major: FrenchAcademic Major: Microbiolog

The Bederman Lecture on Law and Jurisprudence: Public Law & Custom

Law professors love puzzles. Give us a legal doctrine that does not make sense, or appears counterintuitive, or does not appear to comport with some methodological assumption, and we can spend months (if not years) plumbing its depths and producing reams of paper in exploring its contours. The good news today is that my exegesis shall be limited to the length of this lecture. Let me first set out the character of the puzzle and see if I cannot solve it in the time allotted

Exploring the Foreign Country Exception: Federal Tort Claims in Antarctica

On November 28, 1979, an Air New Zealand DC-10 aircraft carrying tourists bound for an expedition to Antarctica crashed into the side of Mount Erebus, the highest peak on the frozen continent. All aboard perished. Four years later, the families of some of the New Zealander skilled in the accident brought suit against the United States Government under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). They claimed that the negligence of the air traffic controllers at the United States scientific base at McMurdo Sound, Antarctica, was the proximate cause of the crash. This Article considers numerous aspects of this litigation and the theoretical issues it raises for federal practitioners and international lawyers. Part II offers a complete survey of the foreign country exception to federal tort claims jurisdiction. Although the application of this exception hinges on the interpretation of the phrase foreign country and whether a claim actually arises in such a place, no consistent definition has ever been provided for those two words under the FTCA. This Article provides a taxonomy of cases in which the foreign country exception has been raised as a defense by the Government, systematizes the definitions that have been offered, and correlates these with the express and implicit policies underlying the exception. Part III answers the question whether Antarctica can or should be considered a foreign country. Such an analysis requires a careful assessment of certain aspects of the continent\u27s international legal status, past American practice, and the analogy of criminal jurisdiction. It also requires the application of the various tests for a foreign country surveyed in Part II. Finally, Part IV explores the venue and choice of law problems arising from a federal tort claim originating in Antarctica