• Neonatal Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.80-83
• /
• 2008

Purpose : Inguinal hernias are common in children and sometimes are associated with dangerous complications, such as incarceration. There are no established management guidelines for ovarian hernias. We have reviewed the clinical course of ovarian hernias in infants. Methods : We reviewed the medical records of female infants diagnosed with ovarian hernias by ultrasonogram at Kwandong University College of Medicine, Cheil General Hospital, and the Women's Healthcare Center between March 2001 and August 2007. We analyzed the patients gestational age, birth weight, age at the time of detection of the inguinal mass, the patients chief complaints, operative time, post-operative complications, and ultrasonographic findings. Results : Eight female infants had ovarian hernias, four of whom were born prematurely. Seven infants had left-sided ovarian hernias, and one infant had a right-sided ovarian hernia. Five infants underwent surgery and there were no postoperative complications or recurrences. Three girls did not have surgery, and the ovarian hernias regressed spontaneously, with no recurrences or complications. The regression time of inguinal masses ranged from 70-161 days after birth. Conclusion : Physical examination to detect movable masses within the labium major in premature female infants is important because the incidence of premature inguinal hernias is much higher than in term infants. No rational medical treatment plans for female ovarian hernias have been published to date. We cared for three girls with spontaneous regression of ovarian hernias. Pediatricians should be aware whether emergent surgery for ovarian hernias is indicated.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.145
• /
• pp.351-380
• /
• 2018

In every society, citizens must decide how to punish criminals, uphold the virtue of justice, and preserve the security of the community. In doing so, the members of society must ask themselves how they will punish those who carry out the most abhorrent of crimes. Many common responses to such a question is that death is an acceptable punishment for the most severe crimes. But to draw some theoretical distinction between a crime that deserves incarceration and a crime that is so heinous that it deserves capital punishment is subject to three errors. First, what possible line could be drawn? To decide on a particular number of deaths or to employ any standard would be arbitrary. Second, the use of a line would trivialize and undermine the deaths of those whose murderers fell below the standard. Third, any and all executions still are unjust, as the State should not degrade the institution of justice and dehumanize an individual who, although he or she has no respect for other human life, is still a living person. Simply put, all murders are heinous, all are completely unacceptable, and deserve the greatest punishment of the land; however, death as punishment is inappropriate. Also, while this article arrives at the conclusion that the death penalty is an inappropriate form of punishment, I have not offered an acceptable alternative that would appease those who believe capital offenders deserve a punishment that differs in its quality and severity. This is a burden that, admittedly, I am unable to meet. I finally conclude that the death penalty is unjustified retribution. This is the only claim that can effectively shift the intellectual paradigms of the participants in the debate. The continued use of the death penalty in society can only be determined and influenced by the collective conscience of the members of that society. As stated at the outset of this article, it is this essentially moral conflict regarding what is just and degrading that forms the backdrop for the past changes in and the present operation of our system of imposing death as a punishment for crime.