• Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association
• /
• v.18 no.3 s.41
• /
• pp.1-22
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this study is that I should look for a desirous directions about home economics by studying the requirements and perception of the high school parents who have finished the course of home economics. It was about 600 parents whom I have searched Seoul-Pusan, Ganwon. Ghynggi province, Choongcheong-Gyungsang province, Cheonla and Jeju province of 600, I chose only 560 as apparently suitable research. The questions include 61 requirements about home economics and one which we never fail to keep among the contents, whenever possible and one about the perception of home economics aims 11 about the perception of home economics courses and management. The collections were analyzed frequency, percent, mean. standard deviation t-test by using SAS program. The followings is the summary result of studying of it. 1. All the boys and girls learning together about the Idea of healthy lives and desirous human formulation and knowledge together are higher. 2. Among the teaching purposes of home economics, the item of the scientific principle and knowledge for improvements of home life shows 15.7% below average value. 3. The recognition degree about the quality of home economics is highly related with the real life, and about the system. we recognize lacking in periods and contents of home economics field and about guiding content, accomplishment and application qualities are higher regardless of sex. 4. The important term which we should emphasize in the subject of home economics is family part. 5. Among the needs of home economic requirement in freshman, in the middle unit, their growth and development are higher than anything else, representing 4.11, and by contrast the basic principle and actuality is 3.70, which is lowest among them. 6. In the case of second grade requirement of home economics content for parents in the middle unit young man and consuming life is 4.09 highest. 7. In the case of 3rd grade requirement of economics contents in the middle unit the choice of coming direction and job ethics is highest 4.16, and preparing meals and evaluation is lowest 3.50.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.105-162
• /
• 2020

In the pandemic of infectious disease, restrictions of individual liberty have been justified in the name of public health and public interest. In March 2020, the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea passed the revised bill of the 「Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act.」 The revised bill newly established the legal basis for forced testing and disclosure of the information of confirmed cases, and also raised the penalties for violation of self-isolation and treatment refusal. This paper examines whether and how these individual liberty limiting clauses be justified, and if so on what ethical and philosophical grounds. The authors propose the theories of the philosophy of law related to the justifiability of liberty-limiting measures by the state and conceptualized the dual-aspect of applying the liberty-limiting principle to the infected patient. In COVID-19 pandemic crisis, the infected person became the 'Patient as Victim and Vector (PVV)' that posits itself on the overlapping area of 'harm to self' and 'harm to others.' In order to apply the liberty-limiting principle proposed by Joel Feinberg to a pandemic with uncertainties, it is necessary to extend the harm principle from 'harm' to 'risk'. Under the crisis with many uncertainties like COVID-19 pandemic, this shift from 'harm' to 'risk' justifies the state's preemptive limitation on individual liberty based on the precautionary principle. This, at the same time, raises concerns of overcriminalization, i.e., too much limitation of individual liberty without sufficient grounds. In this article, we aim to propose principles regarding how to balance between the precautionary principle for preemptive restrictions of liberty and the concerns of overcriminalization. Public health crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic requires a population approach where the 'population' rather than an 'individual' works as a unit of analysis. We propose the second expansion of the harm principle to be applied to 'population' in order to deal with the public interest and public health. The new concept 'risk to population,' derived from the two arguments stated above, should be introduced to explain the public health crisis like COVID-19 pandemic. We theorize 'the extended harm principle' to include the 'risk to population' as a third liberty-limiting principle following 'harm to others' and 'harm to self.' Lastly, we examine whether the restriction of liberty of the revised 「Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act」 can be justified under the extended harm principle. First, we conclude that forced isolation of the infected patient could be justified in a pandemic situation by satisfying the 'risk to the population.' Secondly, the forced examination of COVID-19 does not violate the extended harm principle either, based on the high infectivity of asymptomatic infected people to others. Thirdly, however, the provision of forced treatment can not be justified, not only under the traditional harm principle but also under the extended harm principle. Therefore it is necessary to include additional clauses in the provision in order to justify the punishment of treatment refusal even in a pandemic.