This article considers the recent calls to provide doctors with immunity from medical negligence claims arising out of the Covid-19 pandemic. It provides a critical analysis as to the conditions that would need to be considered for such a policy as well as exploring the wider ramifications.

A critique is offered on Caroll’s review of key issues in supervision in coaching psychology. It challenges an apparent latent error, inattention to risks, which is attributed to his failure to acknowledge the philosophy of science that underpins his review. Sharing his emphasis on the task-centred character of coaching, contexts of coaching are discussed in terms of three classes of risk that characterise a market economy. Examples of three kinds of tools are suggested as ways of framing these risks and of controlling for latent error.

No abstract

No abstract