Ron Paul once said, “We don’t have the freedom of speech to talk about the weather. We have the first amendment so we can say some very controversial things. Cheryl Churchill and Cindy Waters worked with each other at a local hospital in Illinois. Churchill made statements against Waters to a nurse interested in transferring to the obstetrics unit (CYNTHIA). Churchill was fired from her job due to her actions. Churchill took her case to court because she knew her conversation included public and personal thoughts, but hospital officials thought she only covered personal issues (CHURCHILL). This case study examines the Cheryl Churchill versus Cindy Waters case by looking at all angles of the situation, connects it to relevant information in regard to freedom of speech and provides an analysis of lasting implications of the case.
The tension between Churchill and Waters always dominated the relationship. Churchill was a nurse at the hospital in the obstetrics unit and Waters’ was a nurse supervisor in the unit. Churchill went to assist a doctor in a different department when a “code pink” alert went out during an emergency C-Section. Churchill went to help another patient in their early stages of …show more content…
This case involving freedom of speech is an example of fundamental rights. Fundamental rights are universally known rights that cannot be broken. In the Churchill versus Waters case, Churchill’s first amendment rights of freedom of speech were violated. She shouldn’t of been fired for speaking about public concerns. She had the right to share her beliefs. Another key term that relates to freedom of speech is slander. Slander is the action of making a false spoken statement to damage one’s reputation. In the case, hospital officials make false accusations against Churchill to make their story appear accurate. They wanted everyone to believe Churchill’s story solely involved personal
The tension between Churchill and Waters always dominated the relationship. Churchill was a nurse at the hospital in the obstetrics unit and Waters’ was a nurse supervisor in the unit. Churchill went to assist a doctor in a different department when a “code pink” alert went out during an emergency C-Section. Churchill went to help another patient in their early stages of …show more content…
This case involving freedom of speech is an example of fundamental rights. Fundamental rights are universally known rights that cannot be broken. In the Churchill versus Waters case, Churchill’s first amendment rights of freedom of speech were violated. She shouldn’t of been fired for speaking about public concerns. She had the right to share her beliefs. Another key term that relates to freedom of speech is slander. Slander is the action of making a false spoken statement to damage one’s reputation. In the case, hospital officials make false accusations against Churchill to make their story appear accurate. They wanted everyone to believe Churchill’s story solely involved personal