【生死教育第三講】
講題 Title:預設醫療指示與預設照顧計劃 Advance Directive and Advance Care Planning
報名鏈接Registration Link: https://bit.ly/3tE9RgE
日期 Date:12/6/2021(Sat)
時間 Time:3:00-4:30pm
地點 Venue:沙田澤祥街12號香港中文大學鄭裕彤樓地下演講廳1A (LT1A)
Lecture Theatre 1A, Level 1, Cheng Yu Tung Building, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 12 Chak Cheung Street, Shatin, N.T.
講者 Speaker:陳裕麗教授 Prof Helen Chan / 鍾一諾教授 Prof Roger Chung
主持 Moderator:伍桂麟先生 Mr Pasu Ng
講座內容 Synopsis:
現今醫療科技發達,很多疾病均可治癒或受控制。當疾病到了末期,醫療科技有時只能提供維持生命治療,但延長死亡過程對病人可能沒有意義,甚至增加痛楚。面對這情況,病人、家屬和醫護人員可以商討是否中止對生活質素沒有幫助的維持生命治療,讓病人安詳離世。香港中文大學醫學院那打素護理學院副教授陳裕麗博士和香港中文大學公共衛生及基層醫療學院助理教授鍾一諾博士會在由中大公共衞生及基層醫療學院主辦的公眾「生死教育」四講系列的第三講和大家分享『預設醫療指示』 (Advance Directive)和『預設照顧計劃』(Advance Care Planning)的概念與應用。這兩種健康護理選擇不但可以免卻家屬決定病者死時所受到的困難和壓力,減少作出決定後感到矛盾和內疚的機會,亦體現對病者生命和意願的尊重。
Thanks to the advancement of medical technology, most diseases can be cured or subsided. However, there are times that medical technology could only prolong one’s life but could not cure the terminal illness. Facing such situation, patients, family members, and medical staff can discuss whether to withhold or withdraw from life-sustaining treatments that may not help improve patients’ quality of life so that they can die peacefully. Professor Helen Chan, Associate Professor from The Nethersole School of Nursing and Professor Roger Chung, Assistant Professor of the School of Public Health and Primary Care of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, will share with us the concepts and values behind Advance Directive and Advance Care Planning in the third public seminar of the four-lecture series on life and death education organized by the School of Public Health and Primary Care, CUHK. These two health care options aim not only to reduce the pressure faced by patients’ family when making end-of-life healthcare decision, but also show respect to patients’ will.
講者介紹:
Professor Helen Chan’s research interests focus on end-of-life care, gerontology as well as care ethics. She has conducted a number of research projects on promoting palliative and end-of-life care, especially advance care planning, among older adults and people with advanced progressive diseases.
陳裕麗教授的主要研究範疇集中在臨終護理、老年病學和護理倫理學上。她的研究項目包括推廣有關老人和晚期疾病患者的紓緩照顧和臨終護理服務,尤其是預設照顧計劃。
Professor Roger Chung’s research aims to empirically inquire into the social determinants of health inequalities, as well as aging‐related issues on multimorbidity and long‐term/end‐of‐life care, and to utilize such evidence to inform health services and policy, domestically and beyond.
鍾一諾教授的主要研究範疇為健康不平等的社會決定因素,與老年有關的多重疾病,和晚期與臨終護理政策,並運用研究成果為本地及國際公共衛生服務和政策提供意見。
生死教育 X 伍桂麟
同時也有10000部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過2,910的網紅コバにゃんチャンネル,也在其Youtube影片中提到,...
「primary number中文」的推薦目錄:
- 關於primary number中文 在 Roger Chung 鍾一諾 Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於primary number中文 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於primary number中文 在 おしゃれキリ教室 Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於primary number中文 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的最佳解答
- 關於primary number中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳貼文
- 關於primary number中文 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於primary number中文 在 疑難雜症萬事通- primary中文的推薦與評價,YOUTUBE 的評價
- 關於primary number中文 在 質數與合數- 7年級數學(Grade 7 Math - Prime and composite ... 的評價
primary number中文 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的精選貼文
【After Winning Majority in LegCo: Beijing's Crackdown May Trigger International Intervention】
***感謝Hong Kong Columns - Translated,將我早前撰寫『議會過半想像:以「#國際攬炒」反制「臨立會2.0」』長文(https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/photos/a.313299448762570/2887650867994069/)翻譯成英文,鼓勵國際社會關注立會選舉一旦過半的沙盤推演,在最惡劣形勢下的制衡策略。***
中文精簡版本:https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/photos/a.564294826996363/2888641404561682/
Hongkongers have experienced our revolution for over half a year. They no longer take a consequentialist view to the effectiveness of their movement as they did years ago, or waste time second-guessing the intentions and background of fellow activists. Following the defensive battles at CUHK and PolyU, November’s District Council election saw a great victory of unity. More marvellous is the union between peaceful and “valiant” protesters.
In the process of resisting tyranny, the people have realised that one cannot prioritize one strategy over another. This is also how the common goal of “35+” came into being—the hope that we will win over half of the seats in the Legislative Council (LegCo) this September, such that the political spectrum that represents the majority of Hongkongers is able to gain control of legislative decisions. The political clout of Hongkongers will increase if 35 or more seats are successfully secured on our side. It is certainly one vital step to achieve the five demands within the system.
The possibility of realizing legislative majority
Technically it is not unrealistic to win a majority even under the current undemocratic system. Back in the 2016 LegCo election, we already won 30 seats. In addition to the District Council (First) functional constituency seat that is already in the pocket of the pan-democrats, as long as the candidates in Kowloon East and New Territories West do not start infighting again, we could safely secure 33 seats based on the number of pan-dem votes in 2016.
The other 3 seats required to achieve a majority depend on democrats’ breakthrough among the functional constituencies by dispersing the resources of the Liaison Office. They also count on whether the turnout this September could exceed 71.2% — that of last year’s District Council elections. Some of the factors that could affect the turnout include: will the epidemic persist into the summer? Will there be potential violent repression of protests in the 2 weeks preceding the election? Will Hong Kong-US relations be affected by the downturn of the global economy?
Therefore, the ambition of “35+” is to be prioritised by the resistance as both a means and an end. I have already expressed my support for an intra-party primary at the coordination meeting. In the meantime, it is pleasing to see the ongoing debates reaching a consensus of maximising the seats among geographical constituencies in the upcoming election.
Whilst enthusiastic coordination, we should also assess the post-election landscape and gauge Beijing’s reactions: if we do not reach 35 seats, Hong Kong will be subject to tighter control and more severe repression by China; but if the democratic parties successfully form a majority in LegCo, CCP’s fears of a “constitutional crisis” would become imminent. Hence, the key questions are how the Pan-Democrats should deal with the volatile political situation in Hong Kong and how they are going to meet Beijing’s charge head-on.
Watching out for Beijing’s dismissal of LegCo after reaching majority
To take back control of LegCo such that it faithfully reflects the majority’s principles and needs is the definition of a healthy democracy. Recently, however, DAB’s Tam Yiu-chung has warned that the plan of the Pan-Dems to “usurp power” in the LegCo would only lead to Beijing’s forceful disqualification of certain members or the interpretation of the Basic Law. This proves that winning a majority in LegCo is not only a popular conception but also a realistic challenge that would get on the nerves of Beijing. Could Beijing accept a President James To in LegCo? These unknown variables must be addressed upon achieving a majority.
While there is no telltale sign as to Beijing’s exact strategy, we are already familiar with the way CCP manipulated the Basic Law in the past 4 years. Having experienced three waves of disqualifications in LegCo, twice kicked out of LegCo with my team, and thrice locked up in jail, I have no false hopes of an easy compromise from Beijing: they would not let Pan-Dems control LegCo for half a year and wait (as is the proper procedure) until after having negatived the Budget to dissolve the legislature, and thereby giving them an easy victory in the re-elections. The greater the Pan-Dems threaten Beijing’s rule in Hong Kong, the more likely that it will trigger Beijing’s repression.
Since the disqualification and arrest of lawmakers have already become “normalised”, one can even imagine the police stepping into the LegCo building to force Pan-Dems into voting. Neither is it beyond our imagination to expect the CCP to kick out all 70 lawmakers in a fit of rage and replace them with a provisional LegCo “2.0” [HKCT note: The first was from 25 Jan 1997 to 30 Jun 1998]. To depend on a majority that could lead to a chapter of a “new testament” for One Country, Two Systems is perhaps what many elites long for, but they are overly optimistic:for a ticket to the promised land will not be available at the Chief Executive election campaign a year and a half later.
Admittedly, the Pan-Dems cannot unilaterally initiate “Laam-chaau” [HKCT note: mostly translated into “scorched-earth” mentality or “mutual destruction”; some even translated into “If I burn, you burn with us”]. The most they can do is to force a standstill of the government, and not for long the LegCo will have been eliminated from the equation to make the wheels turn again. It all leaves the plan of “Negativing the motion → Dissolving LegCo → Re-election after re-election → the stepping down of Carrie Lam” merely as overly positive speculation, probably resulting from their overestimate of CCP's capacity for rational calculation. The Pan-Dems must guard their frontlines and recognise what the biggest threat from Hong Kong to China could be. In this case, should LegCo sessions be disrupted or suspended, the Pan-Dems would have to be well prepared to surmount the expected obstacles and prevent the disqualification crisis 4 years ago—a Catch-22 indeed.
Productive tension from global intervention: Using Laam-chaau against the CCP
What aggravates the CCP the most is the potential threat to Hong Kong’s unique status as the one and only “separate customs territory”. Any miscalculation will compromise its role as the Chinese economy’s “white gloves”. Imagine if CCP were to disqualify all 70 elected lawmakers and convene a meeting north of the Shenzhen River to pass a resolution to Hong Kong’s affairs (much like the Provisional Legislative Council “1.0" in 1997), how great will the shock be in a world with an effective Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act? However hard it is to predict the future one thing is certain: With the US presidential election just around the corner, blows to the separation of powers would not be tolerated, and the West would necessarily effect countermeasures against the Hong Kong government.
Beijing has been relying upon Hong Kong to navigate the international community for decades. While clamping down on the political freedom of the cosmopolitan city, Beijing desires to maintain the financial centre’s economic freedom. Hence, we started lobbying for the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act four years ago, and today we are determined to promote “Laam-chaau” on an international scale.
The will of the voters must be reflected in an election. If a “35+” legislature were to be dismissed and replaced, such flagrant violation of democracy would assuredly cause a greater backlash than the infamous extradition bill. Knowing what the reality ahead of us could be, we have to combine our election and international strategies to oppose the placement of a 35+ LegCo with an “Emergency Legislative Council 2.0”, to advance an international “Laam-chaau” to Hong Kong’s status as “separate customs territory”. Only then will we stand a chance to resist the regime and to realise the five demands.
Adjusting our mindset: Overcoming the “constitutional crisis” to reach a resolution
Upon the realization of the “35+” LegCo, it is expected that the CCP will launch a devastating counterattack. The Pan-Dems should not expect LegCo to run normally; neither can the lawmakers realise their governing blueprints they have for Hong Kong. Rather, candidates will be able to compete against one another with visions of a liberated Hong Kong through popular vote. Bringing this point up has nothing to do with undermining the common goal of reaching a majority in LegCo, but rather channels the battle of LegCo to positive use upon the rule of law’s death and a “constitutional crisis” ahead. Knowing that Hongkongers have nothing to fall back on, all Pan-Dems should not miss the only way to the realization of “35+”.
Thus, be they partisans, nonpartisans, incumbent politicians, amateur politicians, or the civil society as a whole – if we stay in the political discourse of 2016 and continue to perpetuate old stereotypes, that is to deal with the divisions on the pan-democratic camp by favouring the most “local” faction; to consider only resource allocation and self-aggrandizement as the purpose of a LegCo campaign; to ignore how potential lawmakers are fitted to what specific roles; to turn a blind eye to the journey of resistance since last summer (extending indefinitely into the future)—They would lead as astray and cost us lose a precious opportunity for change by winning a 35+ majority.
The extent to which the pan-democrats can stay united in light of the political atmosphere since last summer is another problem that our side must to address. Before the watershed moment of 12th June 2019, many democratic delegates were trapped in the mentality of needing to “preserve people’s livelihood”, “be content of what we have accomplished”, and other strategies that favours stability. As the government refuses to heed to the five demands, whether the democrats, especially those in the functional constituencies, have the political will to go all-in is the real difficult question that confronts us in the upcoming LegCo election.
All in all, if “35+” cannot be realised, it is unsurprising to see LegCo being more heavily suppressed in the next 4 years; even if "35+" is achieved, it is questionable whether the pan-democrats are able to weather multiple attacks, verbal or physical, from the regime (judging from its power in the last four years) and utilise the international Laam-chaau strategy against the displacement of LegCo. Adhering to the motto of “we fight on, each in his own way”, I can only hope that Hongkongers in elections, street confrontations and international front can reconcile with each other, so that we may collectively compel the government to yield to our demands in the next six months. It is only by reaching a resolution before a real constitutional crisis that we can combat the institutional violence of the regime and not be devoured by it.
https://hkcolumn.blogspot.com/2020/04/joshua-wong-after-winning-majority-in.html?fbclid=IwAR216gf53pG_j9JOpDfr2GItvjLfrFSekKTPzoEs3-s9KBqvPEwz865P8vw
primary number中文 在 おしゃれキリ教室 Facebook 的最佳貼文
問:是否可視之為中大校方與學生割蓆?
—我是分隔線—
【香港中文大學聲明】
對於中大校園昨日 (11月12日)發生的連串衝突、暴力及違法行為,大學深表遺憾,並予以強烈譴責。儘管校長及高層人員屢次嘗試作出調停及談判,最終都因雙方持續對峙而不果。在對峙及衝突過程中,在場人士持續投擲汽油彈及攻擊物品等,警方亦多次發射催淚彈及橡膠彈等,導致校內多名員生受傷,大學深表遺憾及歉意。
香港中文大學有責任保障校園內所有員生的安全,絕不容許任何形式的暴力或危害他人安全的行為。任何人士如意圖利用大學校園作出任何違法或暴力行為,大學必須按照大學既定守則及法例,維護校園及所有員生安全。大學懇切呼籲所有員生及社會各界人士,給予大學時間及空間讓大學盡快恢復秩序及安寧,讓大學可以繼續履行教與學的任務,以知識貢獻社會。
昨晚段崇智校長親身到警署了解被捕中大學生的情況,三位學生已獲保釋並獲安排醫療及法律協助。大學會繼續為其他受傷員生提供協助。
Statement by The Chinese University of Hong Kong
The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) expresses deep regret and strong condemnation over the sequence of conflicts and violent, unlawful activities which took place on the CUHK campus yesterday (12 November). Despite multiple attempts to coordinate and negotiate with both parties made by the Vice-Chancellor and senior management, the negotiation ultimately failed due to sustained confrontation. Petrol bombs and injurious objects were continuously thrown by the crowd present during the confrontation, while the police fired volleys of tear gas and rubber bullets. The University is saddened to learn that a number of colleagues and students were injured in these incidents.
CUHK has the responsibility to ensure the safety of all staff and students on campus. All forms of violence or acts that pose a danger to others are prohibited. If anyone should use the campus for any illegal or violent activities, the University is duty bound to invoke its established rules and regulations to safeguard the security of the campus and the safety of all CUHK members. The University sincerely appeals to all members of the University and different sectors of the community to give us time and space for a prompt restoration of order and function on campus, so that the University can carry on with our primary mission of teaching and learning to service the community by means of knowledge creation and dissemination.
Upon learning of the arrest of CUHK students yesterday, Professor Rocky S. Tuan, Vice-Chancellor and President of CUHK, went to the police station to visit the arrested students. Three students were subsequently released on bail and provided medical and legal assistance. The University will continue to provide appropriate assistance to other injured members of the University.
primary number中文 在 質數與合數- 7年級數學(Grade 7 Math - Prime and composite ... 的推薦與評價
... <看更多>