Write a response to following post:

What I have encountered negligence is that when I was a sophomore in high school, we were watching a lacrosse game and it was an injury incident. The opponent's stick hit our player's calf hard while fighting for the ball. Our team members immediately fell to the ground and could not stand up. Although the school doctor took him to the infirmary in time and treated him, the school doctor was negligent in his injuries. The athlete's condition diagnosed by the school doctor at that time was a minor bruise that did not damage the bones. A week later, the athlete's injury not only did not recover but became more and more painful. When they went to the local hospital for examination again, they took an x-ray and found that the bone was injured and further in-depth treatment was required. Based on this incident, I don't think the opponent hurt the athlete, and the school doctor faces legal responsibility. First, According to Dr. Carroll, Negligence is an unintentional tort(Carroll, 2013). The opponent did not mean to hurt the player, he just went all out to get the ball in the game. In fact, he also apologized to the player after the game. As for the school doctor, she also did her duty to treat the injured player. However, the misdiagnosis occurred, which can only be explained by her medical technology skill. These factors do not constitute legal responsibility. I personally think that if we want to avoid such an incident when the school doctors cannot make a diagnosis with certainty in terms of their knowledge. They should directly contact the school organization to send the injured athletes to the nearest hospital to prevent the condition from getting worse. Later, our school also made corresponding changes. They hired a new organization of medical staff and added more advanced medical equipment.

From this video case, the negligence I found was the lifeguard did not see the child struggle for a living. The swim counselor swims away from the child and giving up rescuing him is not negligence. The standards breached were the swim counselor had a chance to save the child, but he chose not to. This move is an intentional tort(Carroll, 2013). Then the lifeguards go to work without training, which is also irresponsible. If I were the attorney representing this camp, the only thing I could argue was why the parents of this kid did not investigate the camp beforehand. For example, whether the counselor has a qualification certificate, license, etc., these are all responsible for the children as parents. From this tragedy, we can learn that parents, they must be fully prepared before sending children to various camps. It is important to do the research on the camp online and to hear feedback from others who have attended the camp before.