Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Foundations of Maternal Newborn and Womens Health Nursing 5th Edition Murray Test Bank
Foundations of Maternal Newborn and Womens Health Nursing 5th Edition Murray Test Bank
Foundations of Maternal Newborn and Womens Health Nursing 5th Edition Murray Test Bank
Test Bank
MULTIPLE CHOICE
ANS: C
Pregnancy and birth, especially for teenagers, are important contributing factors for
becoming homeless.
Most people contemplating retirement have made provisions.
Migrant workers may seek health care only when absolutely necessary, but many are not
homeless.
Many substance abusers are not homeless.
2. The United States ranks 29th in terms of worldwide infant mortality rates. Which
factor has the greatest impact on decreasing the mortality rate of infants?
a. Resolving all language and cultural differences
b. Enrolling pregnant women in the Medicaid program by the eighth month of
pregnancy
c. Ensuring early and adequate prenatal care
d. Providing more women's shelters
ANS: C
Because preterm infants form the largest category of those needing expensive intensive
care, early pregnancy intervention is essential for decreasing infant mortality.
Language and cultural differences are not infant mortality issues but must be addressed
to improve overall health care.
Medicaid provides health care for poor pregnant women, but the process may take
weeks to take effect. The eighth month is too late to apply and receive benefits for this
pregnancy.
The women in shelters have the same difficulties in obtaining health care as other poor
people, particularly lack of transportation and inconvenient hours of the clinics.
Elsevier items and derived items © 2010, 2006, 2002, 1998, 1994 by Saunders, and imprint of Elsevier Inc.
ANS: D
Documentation on the chart should include all factual information regarding the client's
condition that would be recorded in any situation. The nurse completes an incident
report when something occurs that might result in a legal action against the clinic or
hospital.
The report is a warning to the legal department to be prepared for a potential legal
action.
Incident reports are not a part of the patient's chart.
Incident reports are not mentioned in the nurse's notes.
ANS: A
In the deontologic theory, life must be maintained at all costs, regardless of quality of
life.
5. When a nurse decides whether an ethical dilemma exists, which step of the nursing
process is being used?
a. Assessment
b. Analysis
c. Planning
d. Evaluation
ANS: B
When a nurse uses the collected data to determine whether an ethical dilemma exists, the
data are being analyzed.
Assessment is the data collection phase.
Planning is done after the data have been analyzed.
Elsevier items and derived items © 2010, 2006, 2002, 1998, 1994 by Saunders, and imprint of Elsevier Inc.
Test Bank 3-3
ANS: C
Elective abortion is an ethical dilemma because two opposing courses of action are
available.
Abortion laws are clear concerning a women's constitutional rights.
The Supreme Court has not ruled on when life begins.
Abortion does not require third-party consent.
ANS: C
Each surrogacy case is decided individually in a court of law.
Surrogacy is not governed by federal law.
Surrogacy is not governed by state law.
Protective child services departments do not make decisions about surrogacy.
ANS: B
Elsevier items and derived items © 2010, 2006, 2002, 1998, 1994 by Saunders, and imprint of Elsevier Inc.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
poorer and more ignorant and excitable of the brethren. The Vatican
affected to believe that Carbonarism was an offshoot of freemasonry,
but, in spite of sundry points of resemblance, such as the engagements of
mutual help assumed by members, there seems to have been no real
connection between the two. The practical aims of the Carbonari may be
summed up in two words: freedom and independence.
A Genoese of the name of Malghella, who was Murat’s minister of
police, was the first person to give a powerful impetus to Carbonarism,
of which he has even been called the inventor, but the inference goes too
far. Malghella ended miserably; after the fall of Murat he was arrested by
the Austrians, who consigned him as a new subject to the Sardinian
government, which immediately put him in prison. Whatever was truly
Italian in Murat’s policy must be mainly attributed to him. As early as
1813 he urged the king to declare himself frankly for independence, and
to grant a constitution to his Neapolitan subjects. But Malghella did not
find the destined saviour of Italy in Murat; his one lasting work was to
establish Carbonarism on so strong a basis that, when the Bourbons
returned, there were thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of
Carbonari in all parts of the realm. The discovery was not a pleasant one
to the restored rulers, and the prince of Canosa, the new minister of
police, thought to counteract the evil done by his predecessor by setting
up an abominable secret society called the Calderai del Contrapeso
(Braziers of the Counterpoise), principally recruited from the refuse of
the people, lazzaroni, bandits, and let-out convicts, who were provided
by government with 20,000 muskets, and were sworn to exterminate all
enemies of the church of Rome, whether Jansenists, freemasons, or
Carbonari. This association committed some horrible excesses, but
otherwise it had no results. The Carbonari closed in their ranks, and
learned to observe more strictly their rules of secrecy.
From the kingdom of Naples, Carbonarism
[1816-1821 . .] spread to the Roman states, and found a congenial
soil in Romagna, which became the focus whence
it spread over the rest of Italy. It was natural that it should take the
colour, more or less, of the places where it grew. In Romagna, where
political assassination is in the blood of the people, a dagger was
substituted for the symbolical woodman’s axe in the initiatory rites. It
was probably only in Romagna that the conventional threat against
informers was often carried out. The Romagnols invested Carbonarism
with the wild intensity of their own temperament, resolute even to crime,
but capable of supreme impersonal enthusiasm. The ferment of
expectancy that prevailed in Romagna is reflected in the Letters and
Journals of Lord Byron, whom young Count Pietro Gamba made a
Carbonaro, and who looked forward to seeing the Italians send the
barbarians of all nations back to their own dens, as to the most
interesting spectacle and moment in existence. His lower apartments, he
writes, were full of the bayonets, fusils, and cartridges of his Carbonari
cronies: “I suppose that they consider me as a dépôt, to be sacrificed in
case of accidents. It is no great matter, supposing that Italy could be
liberated, who or what is sacrificed. It is a grand object—the very poetry
of politics. Only think—a free Italy! Why, there has been nothing like it
since the days of Augustus!” The movement on which such great hopes
were set was to begin in the kingdom of Naples in the spring of 1820.h
The effect
[1821-1832 . .] produced by
those abortive
revolutions was very disastrous to Italy.
They introduced over the whole
country a hateful system of espionage,
caused by suspicion in the rulers and
dislike in the subjects, which was not
soon relaxed, and has still left painful
traces. However, the measures of this
sort which were adopted, with some
which occasionally removed causes of
complaint, were effectual in keeping
the people tolerably quiet for about ten
years. In Sicily a conspiracy broke out
in 1822, and in 1828 a weak P L XII P R
insurrection at Salerno was suppressed.
Tuscany and Lombardy remained
tranquil under a mild despotism and thirty thousand Austrian bayonets;
but the French Revolution of 1830[29] gave an example which was
followed next year by the states of the church, by Modena, and by
Parma.
We may be assisted in discovering causes for the insurrection in the
papal states, by examining one or two of the principal acts of the
government after the death of Pius VII, which took place in 1823. On the
5th of October, 1824, the new pope Leo XII issued a motu-proprio which
annihilated at a blow the charter of 1816. The administration both of Leo
and his successor, Pius VIII, was conducted in accordance with the spirit
thus indicated. The arbitrary proceedings of the police became a
universal pest; the administration of criminal justice was again secret,
irresponsible, and inhumanly tedious; and, both in that department and in
civil causes, the judges were openly charged with general venality.
Besides all the old burdens, some new or obsolete ones were imposed,
especially the focalico, a tax on every hearth, which weighed very
heavily on the peasantry; and the customs were increased exorbitantly,
while the government-monopolies were extended.
In Modena, it seemed to have been resolved to sweep away every
vestige that the French had left behind them. The old laws of the Este
had been re-enacted, but were every day infringed by edicts of the
prince, and by special commissions of justice. The taxes were raised to
nearly five times their amount under Napoleon; and for the elective
functionaries of the communes, the sovereign substituted young
noblemen, chosen by himself.
The insurrection began in Modena, where, in the night of the 3rd of
February, 1831, a body of conspirators were arrested in the house of Ciro
Menotti. The people rose, and the duke fled to Mantua. On the 4th, being
just two days after the election of Pope Gregory XVI, Bologna was in
open revolt. The rebellion spread over the greater part of the Roman
state. At the same time, the ex-empress Marie Louise fled from Parma,
which was likewise in tumult. The subjects of the papal provinces
declared openly against the temporal sovereignty of the pope, and on the
26th of February, deputies from all the revolted states united in
proclaiming a new republic. The allied sovereigns did not lose a day in
putting down the insurrection. On the 9th of March the duke of Modena
with an Austrian army retook his capital; and, after some resistance, the
Germans, before the end of the same month, had restored to the holy see
all its possessions. In Modena, Menotti and Borelli, the leaders of the
revolt, were hanged, and more than a hundred others were imprisoned
for life. In Parma, Marie Louise acted mercifully, and voluntarily
redressed some of the grievances of which her subjects, perhaps with less
reason than their neighbours, had complained. In the papal states no
executions took place, but many men were condemned to imprisonment
for longer or shorter periods.
The leading powers of Europe interposed to recommend concessions
by the pope to his subjects; and, on the 5th of July, 1831, the holy father
issued a motu-proprio, which, for the third time since 1814, altered the
administration. It resumed much of the charter of 1816, retaining the
division into delegations, and the subdivision of these into districts; but it
narrowed greatly the functions of the congregations, which were merely
to have a consultative voice. And the new act did not give to the people
even that share in election which, as to the communal boards, the decree
of Consalvi had bestowed on them.
The subjects of the papal state did not conceal their disappointment at
the pretended reforms. In January, 1832, the eastern districts were again
in insurrection; and the slaughter of forty inhabitants of Forlì, men,
women, and children, drove the people of the country nearly mad. Before
the end of the month, the revolt was again suppressed by the Austrian
grenadiers. This new interposition, however, at length aroused the
French king, Louis Philippe, probably a little ashamed of the part he had
already acted. On the 22nd of February, 1832, a French squadron,
anchoring off Ancona, landed troops, which seized the town and citadel.
Austria and its satellites professed high indignation at this interference;
but the act seems to be quite defensible on diplomatic grounds, in the
position which France occupied as a guarantee of the papal kingdom. In
the kingdom of Naples, Francis, the prince-vicar of 1820, succeeded his
father, and ruled feebly but not unkindly for a few years, after which his
throne devolved on his son, Ferdinand, then a youth of twenty-one.d
Thus the enterprise of 1831, though extensively supported, had been
undertaken without any fixed plan and, as we have seen, ended in
complete discomfiture. The scattered and persecuted sette [societies],
when once more rallied and united, carried on their operations under a
new name; and the ill-starred faction, which was destined to mislead and
vitiate the national impulse of 1848, assumed the title of Young Italy.
“Austria,” says Gualterio, “acquired in this society a new ally.”
In 1831, a young Genoese, Giuseppe Mazzini
[1831 . .] [born in 1808], obtained celebrity by the
publication of a letter in which he exhorted
Charles Albert, who had just succeeded to the throne, to undertake the
liberation of Italy. The boldness and self-confidence displayed in this
production was admired by the cervelli bollenti of the day; and the exiles
and refugees, whose disappointment was recent and who were smarting
under persecution, were predisposed towards one whose counsels were
uttered with oracular authority, and who cheered them with new and
undefined hopes.
Mazzini soon became the acknowledged centre of the new sect, of
which the establishment was contemporary with that of “Young France”
and “Young Germany,” and which was intended to transform and
assimilate those already in existence, and to give them unity of purpose
and command.[30]f
“In the name of God and Italy; in the name of all the martyrs of the holy Italian cause
who have fallen under the blows of foreign or native tyranny: by the duties which bind
me to my country, to the God who created me, and to the brothers God has given me;
by the innate love in all men for the spot where his mother was born and her children
have lived; by the shame I feel before citizens of other nations in having neither the
name nor the rights of a citizen, neither national flag nor fatherland; by the memory of
ancient power; by the consciousness of present abjection; by the tears of Italian mothers
over sons dead on the scaffold, in dungeons, or in exile; by the misery of Italian
millions: believing in a God-sent mission to Italy and the duty of every Italian born man
to contribute to its accomplishment; convinced that wherever God has wished a nation
to be there the necessary forces exist to create it—that the people are the depositary of
this force, and in the guiding of this force by the people and with the people rests the
secret of victory—I adhere to Young Italy, an association of men holding the same
faith, and I swear:
“To devote myself entirely and forever to constituting a national Italy, one,
independent, free, and republican; to help in every way my associated brothers; now
and forever (Ora e sempre); I also swear, calling on my head the anger of God, the
horror of men, and the infamy of perjury, if ever I venture to betray all or part of my
oath.”
FOOTNOTES
[25] [With regard to Naples there was an interminable and difficult debate
about the documents which were found in Paris, and which clearly proved the
treacherous thoughts of Gioacchino [Joachim Murat] against the allies. The
final result was that even Austria which had upheld him detested Murat, and
on the 10th day of April declared war against him as we have seen. After
these proceedings there was nothing to prevent the congress of Vienna from
taking possession of Naples also. It was again adjudged to King Ferdinand IV.
He was already in possession of the kingdom when the congress restored it to
him.c]
[26] [Stillman calls it still less—only a “diplomatic expression.”]
[27] [Literally “charcoalers,” charcoal-making being a prominent industry
in the wilds of the Abruzzo and Calabria where Carbonarism found its refuge.
The ritual of the organisation was founded on charcoal-makers’ terms, thus
meetings were called vendite or “sales.” The idea spread to France, where La
Fayette was a prominent member. See volume XIII, chapter I.]
[28] [The Spanish Revolution, which originated in Cadiz in 1819, resulted
in the establishment of a constitution accepted by the king, and sworn to by
the king of Naples himself as an infante of Spain. This event was full of
interest to the Neapolitans, who felt their own need of a similar guarantee.—
W .f]
[29] [The influence of French politics on Italy has been remarkable. We
have seen the effect of the spirit of 1793 and the Napoleonic idea. The French
revolutions of 1830 and 1848 had like influence.]
[30] [Shortly after the July Revolution of 1830 Mazzini, having been
entrapped by a government spy into the performance of some trifling
commission for the Carbonari, was arrested and imprisoned in the fortress of
Savona on the western Riviera. “The government was not fond,” so his father
was informed, “of young men of talent, the subjects of whose musings were
unknown to it.” After six months’ imprisonment Mazzini was acquitted of
conspiracy, but was nevertheless exiled from Italy.—M .e]
[31] [“Pius IX had a heart and mind of sufficient calibre to comprehend the
line of conduct he must follow in the midst of these circumstances. He hoped
to realise gradually in his own territory and to second elsewhere all that the
present asked for, but not to let himself be dragged further. “It will take ten
years,” he said, “for the national and political spirit to penetrate the masses.”
He worked for this end from the first day with his minister Gizzi. He called
upon the municipal and ecclesiastical bodies for the best means of inspiring
popular education; he established commissions to investigate the condition of
all branches of the administration, but he took care to meddle with nothing
that directly concerned politics. The respect and sympathy of popular opinion
encouraged Pius IX’s work. Following his example the other sovereigns took
up reforms. But what Pius IX lacked was promptitude of resolution and the
assistance of men practical enough to carry out the aspirations of his heart.”—
Z .l]
CHAPTER XX. THE LIBERATION OF ITALY
The Italian kingdom is the fruit of the alliance between the strong monarchical principles of
Piedmont and the dissolvent forces of revolution. Whenever either one side or the other,
yielding to the influence of its individual sympathies or prejudices, failed to recognise that thus
only, by the essential logic of events, could the unity of the country be achieved, the entire
edifice was placed in danger of falling to the ground before it was completed. When Garibaldi
stood on Cape Faro, conqueror and liberator, clothed in a glory not that of Wellington or
Moltke, but that of Arthur or Roland or the Cid Campeador; the subject of the gossip of the
Arabs in their tents, of the wild horsemen of the Pampas, of the fishers in ice-bound seas; a solar
myth, nevertheless certified to be alive in the nineteenth century—Cavour understood that if he
were left much longer single occupant of the field, either he would rush to disaster, which would
be fatal to Italy, or he would become so powerful that, in the event of his being plunged,
willingly or unwillingly, by the more ardent apostles of revolution into opposition with the king
of Sardinia, the issue of the contest would be by no means sure. To guard against both
possibilities, Cavour decided to act.—C C .b
In the papal states, the enthusiasm for the pope declined when he did not
satisfy the exaggerated demands quickly and completely enough, and when he
earnestly rejected the desired declaration of war against Austria as incompatible
with his position and religious dignity. Even the expulsion of the Jesuits, who
were oppressed and threatened in all the Italian states, and the maintenance of a
constitution as the “fundamental principle for the worldly rule of the papal
state,” did not succeed in winning back his former popularity. The celebrated
allocution in a consistory of cardinals, with the determined declaration that he
would not wage war with Austria, was generally interpreted as the beginning of
a reactionary change. What was the position, then, of the Roman troops and
volunteers under the able general Durand which the liberal government had sent
to join the army of fighters for independence across the Po? They were looked
upon as rebels until Pius himself placed them under the protection of Charles
Albert.
The allocution was the first backward step from
the flag of national uprisal. Pius IX, therefore, soon
became as much an object of hatred and enmity on
the part of the patriots as he had before been their
idol. In vain did he nominate the liberal champion
Mamiani as president of the ministry, a position
which as yet only clericals had held, and the
historian Farini as under secretary of state; the
feeling that the head of the church had been faithless
to the national cause alienated the hearts of the
Roman people more and more. He also had to
endure the mortification of having his peace
proposals rejected by Austria, proud over her new
successes at arms. The reactionary coup d’état in
Naples was regarded as the direct result of the
allocution, and influenced the popular passions more
and more against spiritual rule.
The clever Italian Rossi of Carrara, who had once
taught law in Geneva, and had then occupied an
influential position in Paris with Louis Philippe and
O E S . Guizot, and had executed important diplomatic
P ’ ,R missions, was called by Pius IX to form a
constitutional ministry, in order more tightly to seize
the reins of government which threatened to slip out
of the weak hands of the princes of the church. But, by his energetic measures
against the increasing anarchy, Rossi so drew upon himself the hatred of the
Roman democrats that at the opening of the chambers he was murdered on the
steps of the senate on the very spot upon which Cæsar once fell.
Thereupon the unrestrained populace, led by the democratically inclined
Charles Lucien Bonaparte, surrounded the Quirinal and forced the pope,
through threats, to name a radical ministry, in which the advocate Galletti and
the old democrat Sterbini had the greatest influence, next to Mamiani who had
been recalled. From that time law and order disappeared from the holy city. The
chamber of deputies was without power, and became so weakened by the
withdrawal of many members that it was scarcely competent to form legal
resolutions; the democratic popular club, together with the rude mob of
Trastevere, controlled matters. Many cardinals withdrew; Pius IX was guarded
like a prisoner.
Enraged at these acts and threatened as to his safety, the pope finally fled to
Gaeta, in disguise, aided by the Bavarian ambassador Count Spaur. Here he
formed a new ministry and entered a protest against all proceedings in Rome.
This move procured at first the most complete victory for the republican party
in the Tiberian city. A new constitutional assembly was summoned, which in its
first sitting deprived the papacy of its worldly authority, established the Roman
republic, and resolved to work for the union of Italy under a democratic-
republican form of rule. A threat of excommunication from the pope was met
with scorn by the popular union. A provisory government under the direction of
three men undertook the administration of the free state, while the constitutional
assembly laid hands on the church lands in order to form small farms out of
them for the poor, and Garibaldi organised a considerable militia out of
insurrectionary volunteers and democrats.
Garibaldi of Nice (born July 4th, 1807) was a bold insurrectionary leader who
had wandered about in America and elsewhere as a political refugee for a long
time, and who, on his return to his native country, had taken an active part in the
struggle of the Piedmontese and Lombards against Austria. The unfortunate
outcome of the renewed war in upper Italy, which had brought a large number
of refugees to Rome, and the arrival of Mazzini, who for so long had been the
active head of the “young Italy” party and the soul of the democratic
propaganda, increased the revolutionary excitement in Rome. The union of
revolutionary forces determined the powers protecting the papal states, whose
help the pope had summoned, to common action and armed intervention.
While the Austrians after severe battles took possession of Bologna and
Ancona, the Neapolitans from the south entered Roman territory, and a French
army under General Oudinot, the son of the marshal, landed in Cività Vecchia
and surrounded Rome, which was in a state of intense excitement. It was in vain