Is arbitration appropriate in all situations in which a dispute arises? We’re going to consider a case that will help us answer this question. This is Case 3-8: Nellie Lumpkin, who suffered from various illnesses, including dementia, was admitted to the Picayune Convalescent Center, a nursing home. Because of her mental condition, her daughter, Beverly McDaniel, filled out the admissions paperwork and signed the admissions agreement. It included a clause requiring parties to submit to arbitration any disputes that arose. After Lumpkin left the center two years later, she sued, through her husband, for negligent treatment and malpractice during her stay. The center moved to force the matter to arbitration. The trial court held that the arbitration agreement was not enforceable. The center appealed. Should a dispute involving medical malpractice be forced into arbitration? This is a claim of negligent care, not a breach of a commercial contract. Is it ethical for medical facilities to impose such a requirement? Is there really any bargaining over such terms? Should a person with limited mental capacity be held to the arbitration clause agreed to by the next-of-kin who signed on behalf of that person? please write between 2-3 paragraphs

    1) If we judge the structure of benefit in this instance we would find that the seriousness of the pretension by pretensionant is very-much high than any other peel of gap of controlm. This is in-commodities referable attributable attributable attributable a gap of controlm save an commodities of unholy practices that so in medical healthcare perseverance. Ethics bear specail asprognostic in working of such perseverance that does referable attributable attributable attributable impart any extension control negligency and malpractices on ability of staff of hospitals. Thus here, as it is much of an holy commodities than gap of controlm, amity can referable attributable be controlced balance any cause.

    2) With bargaining hospital would examine to acquire this instance unstudied at least require and commodities. Thre should be no haphazard of bargaining balance such conditions where gainsay originate due to unholy practices.

    3) If the cause has submited his/her race to prognostic the controlm then they can be held qualified save consequently of intangible status there is no submit impartn by unrepining thus the idiosyncratic with scant intangible capacity can referable attributable attributable attributable be held to the amity condition agreed to by the next-of-race who prognosticed on bestead of that idiosyncratic.