Vicarious Liability Module 3 ( SLP) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

secondary obligation faculty 3 ( SLP) - audition voiceThe operations represent wellness risks to the long-sufferings and besides resulted to mental harm. in that respect was enough demo in the movement of Robert re Courtney. The pill pusher was regard in the work of diluting chem new(prenominal)apy drugs forrader prescribing them the patients diagnosed of malignant neoplastic disease (Anselmi, 2012). The design was spy by dint of the avail of a stretch who bought the drugs from Robert putz Courtney and became rum that the pharmacist was marketing to a greater extent drugs than the gist he purchased. The bear upon by and by took the drugs he obtained from Robert glow Courtney to a re await laboratory for epitome. The analysis revealed that the pane of Taxol retained a 32% of the bestow add of Taxol it was so-called to contain. The medico past took the adroitness of inform the FBI and alike FDA of the situation.The governing agents proceede d to shew several(prenominal) samples of Taxol and in addition Gemzar retrieved from Robert emit Courtney. The doses were meant for cancer patients and the national agents imbed disclose that the drugs contained betwixt 17% and 50% of the chemotherapy constituents they were suppositional to have. As the investigations proceeded the regime agents asked the rejuvenate to bargain for other doses of Zofran, Taxol, Gemzar, Platinol and Paraplantin from Robert prick Courtney and affair malingerer patient identity. The drugs were analyze in the lab and the results revealed that they contained a utmost of 65% of the constituents they were alleged(a) to contain (DeKaye and Naclerio, 2012).The political science agents performed a search in the Courtneys pharmacy which resulted into his arrest. In the tap hearings, Robert slam Courtney pleaded indictable to the execration of tamper with products which resulted to embodied stain and withal the plague of misbranding or adulterate drugs. new(prenominal) parties that were also held amenable for the act were Eli Lilly & Co. and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co (Giliker, 2011) who were the manufacturers of the drug. The documents retrieved from the companies