Question 1

Taken together,the cases of PARC v.Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1971,1972),and Mills v.Board of Education of District of Columbia (1972)illustrate

Accepted Answer

Both cases involved litigation (lawsuits) that resulted in important legislation being passed. In PARC, a lawsuit was filed to protect the right of children with mental disabilities to receive a public education. The result was the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (later renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), which guarantees disabled children the right to a free, appropriate public education. In Mills, a lawsuit was filed to protect the rights of children with disabilities in D.C. public schools. The result was a court order that created a new special education system in D.C. public schools. Both cases demonstrate how litigation can be a powerful tool for creating change and advancing civil rights.

Question 2

Laws are rules of conduct that derive from a society's

Accepted Answer

Laws come from both legislative bodies (such as Congress) and court decisions (through common law). A code of ethics would not necessarily have the force of law, but may guide professional conduct. Therefore, choices A and C are incorrect, and the best choice is D.

Question 3

In the case of Iverson v.Frandsen,Carmel Iverson brought an unsuccessful lawsuit for libel against Dr.Frandsen on behalf of her daughter.According to the text,Frandsen may have prevailed in a lawsuit against

Accepted Answer

Frandsen may have prevailed against the school guidance counselor for breach of confidentiality, as this scenario suggests a violation of privacy which could be a legitimate basis for a lawsuit.

Question 4

From the intelligence test data he gathered at Ellis Island,Henry Goddard concluded that many of the people attempting to immigrate to the United States were "feebleminded." This conclusion was

Accepted Answer

Goddard's use of intelligence tests at Ellis Island has been criticized for using a test that overestimated mental deficiency, known as the Binet-Simon scale. Later research, such as the work of Lewis Terman, showed that this test produced many false positives and was not a reliable measure of intelligence. Therefore, it is likely that Goddard's conclusion that many immigrants were "feebleminded" was largely the result of using an inaccurate test.

Question 5

"If an expert claimed something that most other experts in the field would agree with,the testimony would be admitted into evidence." This statement BEST applies to the admission of expert testimony into evidence as provided by which litigation?

Accepted Answer

This statement is consistent with the Frye standard, which requires that expert testimony be based on a scientific principle that is "generally accepted" within the relevant scientific community.

Question 6

The rightof informed consent refers to testtakers' right to know

Accepted Answer

The right of informed consent includes all options listed - testtakers have the right to know why they are being evaluated, how the test data will be used, and what information will be released to whom.

Question 7

In the 1923 case of Frye v.United States,the Court held that scientific research is admissible into evidence

Accepted Answer

The Frye v. United States ruling established the general acceptance test, which requires that scientific evidence be based on principles that are generally accepted by the scientific community in order to be admissible in court. Therefore, choice C is the correct answer.

Question 8

In the case of Daubert v.Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals,the plaintiff (Daubert)

Accepted Answer

The answer of In the case of Daubert v.Merrell Dow...

Question 9

The significance of Daubert v.Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals is that

Accepted Answer

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals established all of these significant changes in the admissibility of scientific testimony in court cases. The ruling gave trial judges more discretion in determining what evidence is admissible, established a "gatekeeping" function where judges must review the scientific validity of expert testimony, and allowed for the admissibility of scientific testimony that had not yet won general acceptance in the scientific community.

Question 10

The origins of Daubert v.Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals can be traced to

Accepted Answer

The origins of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals can be traced back to Mrs. Daubert taking a prescription drug to relieve nausea. She claimed that the drug caused her child's birth defects, and the case went to court. This landmark case established the standard for admissibility of expert testimony in federal court.

Question 11

At issue in the case of Mills v.Board of Education was whether or not

Accepted Answer

Mills v.Board of Education was a landmark case that established a legal right to education for children with emotional or behavioral disabilities. The ruling stated that children with disabilities have a right to a free and appropriate public education and that schools cannot discriminate against them on the basis of disability. The case had a significant impact on the education of children with special needs, leading to the development of special education programs and services in public schools across the United States.

Quiz 2: Historical, cultural, and Legal Ethical Considerations

Taken together,the cases of PARC v.Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1971,1972) ,and Mills v.Board of Education of District of Columbia (1972) illustrate