Jordan Renault
Teacher of Law & Criminology at Queen Mary's College. Magistrate for the West Hampshire Bench.
Graduated from Hull University with a First Class Bachelors Degree in Law
Graduated from Hull University with a First Class Bachelors Degree in Law
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (13)
Uploads
Papers by Jordan Renault
From the outset I assert the product model to be deficient in enabling a truly educational curriculum concluding the process model most accurately reflects this concept. I will discuss the curriculum as it is today and conclude that whilst guised as learner-centred and adhering to holistic process principles it is in fact an overtly objective, product based curriculum. Further to this I will discuss the possible impact of using such a model of curriculum in the contemporary FE sector.
This essay will undertake a discussion of rights theory and care ethics as they apply to mental health provision. Beginning with an analysis of the dominance of rights theory in UK law, I will present the difficulties posed by mandatory detention and treatment of mental health patients with respect to the sovereign notion of autonomy as a right. Subsequent to this I will argue that rights theory poses a dangerous centralisation of concern for autonomy, rendering individuals isolated entities within society. Here I will contend care ethics offers an attractive supplementary role toward those suffering from conditions who are in dire need of compassionate assistance. Contrary to the notion of the unencumbered, sovereign self I use care ethics to demonstrate the reality of human vulnerability and the importance of social integration and indeed, paternalism. By doing integrating rights theory in care ethics as complimentary theories, I contend that the availability of multiple ethical approaches, far from being extraneous variables, ought to be embraced as intellectual tools with which we may deduce ethical action in complex scenarios.
In this essay it will be asserted that the ethical desirability of legalising physician assisted suicide (PAS) and active voluntary suicide (AVE) rests upon the value of life and the ethics of suicide itself. Consequently, before any consideration of the ethics on legislation can be accurately made it must first be shown whether suicide itself can be ethically justified. This essay will address this issue by considering the conflicting ethical concepts of the inherent sanctity of life and theories on the importance of autonomy and self-determination. Upon concluding that it is indeed the latter aspects of human life that give it value, it will be argued that an ethical continuum exists that allows for the extrapolation of the ethical justifiability of suicide to PAS and AVE.
This essay will provide an analysis of the Consumer Rights Bill with regard to whether it accurately reflects insights from economic and psychological research on consumer decision making. Contemporary behavioural theories will be considered and applied to Parts 1 and 2 of the Bill which concern the sale of goods and unfair terms respectively. This will be done for the purposes of determining whether the Bill accurately accommodates consumer behavioural tendencies as observed by economic and psychological research. Further to this, the Bill’s potential for improving the function of consumer markets will be discussed throughout with regard to the likely effects of the Bill’s provisions on consumer market participation.
From the outset I assert the product model to be deficient in enabling a truly educational curriculum concluding the process model most accurately reflects this concept. I will discuss the curriculum as it is today and conclude that whilst guised as learner-centred and adhering to holistic process principles it is in fact an overtly objective, product based curriculum. Further to this I will discuss the possible impact of using such a model of curriculum in the contemporary FE sector.
This essay will undertake a discussion of rights theory and care ethics as they apply to mental health provision. Beginning with an analysis of the dominance of rights theory in UK law, I will present the difficulties posed by mandatory detention and treatment of mental health patients with respect to the sovereign notion of autonomy as a right. Subsequent to this I will argue that rights theory poses a dangerous centralisation of concern for autonomy, rendering individuals isolated entities within society. Here I will contend care ethics offers an attractive supplementary role toward those suffering from conditions who are in dire need of compassionate assistance. Contrary to the notion of the unencumbered, sovereign self I use care ethics to demonstrate the reality of human vulnerability and the importance of social integration and indeed, paternalism. By doing integrating rights theory in care ethics as complimentary theories, I contend that the availability of multiple ethical approaches, far from being extraneous variables, ought to be embraced as intellectual tools with which we may deduce ethical action in complex scenarios.
In this essay it will be asserted that the ethical desirability of legalising physician assisted suicide (PAS) and active voluntary suicide (AVE) rests upon the value of life and the ethics of suicide itself. Consequently, before any consideration of the ethics on legislation can be accurately made it must first be shown whether suicide itself can be ethically justified. This essay will address this issue by considering the conflicting ethical concepts of the inherent sanctity of life and theories on the importance of autonomy and self-determination. Upon concluding that it is indeed the latter aspects of human life that give it value, it will be argued that an ethical continuum exists that allows for the extrapolation of the ethical justifiability of suicide to PAS and AVE.
This essay will provide an analysis of the Consumer Rights Bill with regard to whether it accurately reflects insights from economic and psychological research on consumer decision making. Contemporary behavioural theories will be considered and applied to Parts 1 and 2 of the Bill which concern the sale of goods and unfair terms respectively. This will be done for the purposes of determining whether the Bill accurately accommodates consumer behavioural tendencies as observed by economic and psychological research. Further to this, the Bill’s potential for improving the function of consumer markets will be discussed throughout with regard to the likely effects of the Bill’s provisions on consumer market participation.