Which of following characteristics does not differentiate Mental health counseling from the medical of care ? a) It deals with normal human development b) It deals with problem of living c) It deals with psychopathology d) Diagnosis is largely irrelevant o treatment method

Which of following characteristics does not differentiate Mental health counseling from the medical of care ? a) It deals with normal human development b) It deals with problem of living c) It deals with psychopathology d) Diagnosis is largely irrelevant o treatment method

answer c Which of following characteristics does not differentiate Mental … Read More...
1 | P a g e Lecture #2: Abortion (Warren) While studying this topic, we will ask whether it is morally permissible to intentionally terminate a pregnancy and, if so, whether certain restrictions should be placed upon such practices. Even though we will most often be speaking of terminating a fetus, biologists make further classifications: the zygote is the single cell resulting from the fusion of the egg and the sperm; the morula is the cluster of cells that travels through the fallopian tubes; the blastocyte exists once an outer shell of cells has formed around an inner group of cells; the embryo exists once the cells begin to take on specific functions (around the 15th day); the fetus comes into existence in the 8th week when the embryo gains a basic structural resemblance to the adult. Given these distinctions, there are certain kinds of non-fetal abortion—such as usage of RU-486 (the morning-after “abortion pill”)—though most of the writers we will study refer to fetal abortions. So now let us consider the “Classical Argument against Abortion”, which has been very influential: P1) It is wrong to kill innocent persons. P2) A fetus is an innocent person. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. (Note that this argument has received various formulations, including those from Warren and Thomson which differ from the above. For this course, we will refer to the above formulation as the “Classical Argument”.) Before evaluating this argument, we should talk about terminology: A person is a member of the moral community; i.e., someone who has rights and/or duties. ‘Persons’ is the plural of ‘person’. ‘Person’ can be contrasted with ‘human being’; a human being is anyone who is genetically human (i.e., a member of Homo sapiens). ‘People’ (or ‘human beings’) is the plural of ‘human being’. Why does this matter? First, not all persons are human beings. For example, consider an alien from another planet who mentally resembled us. If he were to visit Earth, it would be morally reprehensible to kick him or to set him on fire because of the pain and suffering that these acts would cause. And, similarly, the alien would be morally condemnable if he were to propagate such acts on us; he has a moral duty not to act in those ways (again, assuming a certain mental resemblance to us). So, even though this alien is not a human being, he is nevertheless a person with the associative rights and/or duties. 2 | P a g e And, more controversially, maybe not all human beings are persons. For example, anencephalic infants—i.e., ones born without cerebral cortexes and therefore with severely limited cognitive abilities—certainly do not have duties since they are not capable of rational thought and autonomous action. Some philosophers have even argued that they do not have rights. Now let us return to the Classical Argument. It is valid insofar as, if the premises are true, then the conclusion has to be true. But maybe it commits equivocation, which is to say that it uses the same word in multiple senses; equivocation is an informal fallacy (i.e., attaches to arguments that are formally valid but otherwise fallacious). Consider the following: P1) I put my money in the bank. P2) The bank borders the river. C) I put my money somewhere that borders the river. This argument equivocates since ‘bank’ is being used in two different senses: in P1 it is used to represent a financial institution and, in P2, it is used to represent a geological feature. Returning to the classical argument, it could be argued that ‘person’ is being used in two different senses: in P1 it is used in its appropriate moral sense and, in P2, it is inappropriately used instead of ‘human being’. The critic might suggest that a more accurate way to represent the argument would be as follows: P1) It is wrong to kill innocent persons. P2) A fetus is a human being. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. This argument is obviously invalid. So one way to criticize the Classical Argument is to say that it conflates two different concepts—viz., ‘person’ and ‘human being’—and therefore commits equivocation. However, the more straightforward way to attack the Classical Argument is just to deny its second premise and thus contend that the argument is unsound. This is the approach that Mary Anne Warren takes in “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion”. Why does Warren think that the second premise is false? Remember that we defined a person as “a member of the moral community.” And we said that an alien, for example, could be afforded moral status even though it is not a human being. Why do we think that this alien should not be tortured or set on fire? Warren thinks that, intuitively, we think that membership in the moral community is based upon possession of the following traits: 3 | P a g e 1. Consciousness of objects and events external and/or internal to the being and especially the capacity to feel pain; 2. Reasoning or rationality (i.e., the developed capacity to solve new and relatively complex problems); 3. Self-motivated activity (i.e., activity which is relatively independent of either genetic or direct external control); 4. Capacity to communicate (not necessarily verbal or linguistic); and 5. Possession of self-concepts and self-awareness. Warren then admits that, though all of the items on this list look promising, we need not require that a person have all of the items on this list. (4) is perhaps the most expendable: imagine someone who is fully paralyzed as well as deaf, these incapacities, which preclude communication, are not sufficient to justify torture. Similarly, we might be able to imagine certain psychological afflictions that negate (5) without compromising personhood. Warren suspects that (1) and (2) are might be sufficient to confer personhood, and thinks that (1)-(3) “quite probably” are sufficient. Note that, if she is right, we would not be able to torture chimps, let us say, but we could set plants on fire (and most likely ants as well). However, given Warren’s aims, she does not need to specify which of these traits are necessary or sufficient for personhood; all that she wants to observe is that the fetus has none of them! Therefore, regardless of which traits we want to require, Warren thinks that the fetus is not a person. Therefore she thinks that the Classical Argument is unsound and should be rejected. Even if we accept Warren’s refutation of the second premise, we might be inclined to say that, while the fetus is not (now) a person, it is a potential person: the fetus will hopefully mature into a being that possesses all five of the traits on Warren’s list. We might then propose the following adjustment to the Classical Argument: P1) It is wrong to kill all innocent persons. P2) A fetus is a potential person. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. However, this argument is invalid. Warren grants that potentiality might serve as a prima facie reason (i.e., a reason that has some moral weight but which might be outweighed by other considerations) not to abort a fetus, but potentiality alone is insufficient to grant the fetus a moral right against being terminated. By analogy, consider the following argument: 4 | P a g e P1) The President has the right to declare war. P2) Mary is a potential President. C) Mary has the right to declare war. This argument is invalid since the premises are both true and the conclusion is false. By parity, the following argument is also invalid: P1) A person has a right to life. P2) A fetus is a potential person. C) A fetus has a right to life. Thus Warren thinks that considerations of potentiality are insufficient to undermine her argument that fetuses—which are potential persons but, she thinks, not persons—do not have a right to life.

1 | P a g e Lecture #2: Abortion (Warren) While studying this topic, we will ask whether it is morally permissible to intentionally terminate a pregnancy and, if so, whether certain restrictions should be placed upon such practices. Even though we will most often be speaking of terminating a fetus, biologists make further classifications: the zygote is the single cell resulting from the fusion of the egg and the sperm; the morula is the cluster of cells that travels through the fallopian tubes; the blastocyte exists once an outer shell of cells has formed around an inner group of cells; the embryo exists once the cells begin to take on specific functions (around the 15th day); the fetus comes into existence in the 8th week when the embryo gains a basic structural resemblance to the adult. Given these distinctions, there are certain kinds of non-fetal abortion—such as usage of RU-486 (the morning-after “abortion pill”)—though most of the writers we will study refer to fetal abortions. So now let us consider the “Classical Argument against Abortion”, which has been very influential: P1) It is wrong to kill innocent persons. P2) A fetus is an innocent person. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. (Note that this argument has received various formulations, including those from Warren and Thomson which differ from the above. For this course, we will refer to the above formulation as the “Classical Argument”.) Before evaluating this argument, we should talk about terminology: A person is a member of the moral community; i.e., someone who has rights and/or duties. ‘Persons’ is the plural of ‘person’. ‘Person’ can be contrasted with ‘human being’; a human being is anyone who is genetically human (i.e., a member of Homo sapiens). ‘People’ (or ‘human beings’) is the plural of ‘human being’. Why does this matter? First, not all persons are human beings. For example, consider an alien from another planet who mentally resembled us. If he were to visit Earth, it would be morally reprehensible to kick him or to set him on fire because of the pain and suffering that these acts would cause. And, similarly, the alien would be morally condemnable if he were to propagate such acts on us; he has a moral duty not to act in those ways (again, assuming a certain mental resemblance to us). So, even though this alien is not a human being, he is nevertheless a person with the associative rights and/or duties. 2 | P a g e And, more controversially, maybe not all human beings are persons. For example, anencephalic infants—i.e., ones born without cerebral cortexes and therefore with severely limited cognitive abilities—certainly do not have duties since they are not capable of rational thought and autonomous action. Some philosophers have even argued that they do not have rights. Now let us return to the Classical Argument. It is valid insofar as, if the premises are true, then the conclusion has to be true. But maybe it commits equivocation, which is to say that it uses the same word in multiple senses; equivocation is an informal fallacy (i.e., attaches to arguments that are formally valid but otherwise fallacious). Consider the following: P1) I put my money in the bank. P2) The bank borders the river. C) I put my money somewhere that borders the river. This argument equivocates since ‘bank’ is being used in two different senses: in P1 it is used to represent a financial institution and, in P2, it is used to represent a geological feature. Returning to the classical argument, it could be argued that ‘person’ is being used in two different senses: in P1 it is used in its appropriate moral sense and, in P2, it is inappropriately used instead of ‘human being’. The critic might suggest that a more accurate way to represent the argument would be as follows: P1) It is wrong to kill innocent persons. P2) A fetus is a human being. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. This argument is obviously invalid. So one way to criticize the Classical Argument is to say that it conflates two different concepts—viz., ‘person’ and ‘human being’—and therefore commits equivocation. However, the more straightforward way to attack the Classical Argument is just to deny its second premise and thus contend that the argument is unsound. This is the approach that Mary Anne Warren takes in “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion”. Why does Warren think that the second premise is false? Remember that we defined a person as “a member of the moral community.” And we said that an alien, for example, could be afforded moral status even though it is not a human being. Why do we think that this alien should not be tortured or set on fire? Warren thinks that, intuitively, we think that membership in the moral community is based upon possession of the following traits: 3 | P a g e 1. Consciousness of objects and events external and/or internal to the being and especially the capacity to feel pain; 2. Reasoning or rationality (i.e., the developed capacity to solve new and relatively complex problems); 3. Self-motivated activity (i.e., activity which is relatively independent of either genetic or direct external control); 4. Capacity to communicate (not necessarily verbal or linguistic); and 5. Possession of self-concepts and self-awareness. Warren then admits that, though all of the items on this list look promising, we need not require that a person have all of the items on this list. (4) is perhaps the most expendable: imagine someone who is fully paralyzed as well as deaf, these incapacities, which preclude communication, are not sufficient to justify torture. Similarly, we might be able to imagine certain psychological afflictions that negate (5) without compromising personhood. Warren suspects that (1) and (2) are might be sufficient to confer personhood, and thinks that (1)-(3) “quite probably” are sufficient. Note that, if she is right, we would not be able to torture chimps, let us say, but we could set plants on fire (and most likely ants as well). However, given Warren’s aims, she does not need to specify which of these traits are necessary or sufficient for personhood; all that she wants to observe is that the fetus has none of them! Therefore, regardless of which traits we want to require, Warren thinks that the fetus is not a person. Therefore she thinks that the Classical Argument is unsound and should be rejected. Even if we accept Warren’s refutation of the second premise, we might be inclined to say that, while the fetus is not (now) a person, it is a potential person: the fetus will hopefully mature into a being that possesses all five of the traits on Warren’s list. We might then propose the following adjustment to the Classical Argument: P1) It is wrong to kill all innocent persons. P2) A fetus is a potential person. C) It is wrong to kill a fetus. However, this argument is invalid. Warren grants that potentiality might serve as a prima facie reason (i.e., a reason that has some moral weight but which might be outweighed by other considerations) not to abort a fetus, but potentiality alone is insufficient to grant the fetus a moral right against being terminated. By analogy, consider the following argument: 4 | P a g e P1) The President has the right to declare war. P2) Mary is a potential President. C) Mary has the right to declare war. This argument is invalid since the premises are both true and the conclusion is false. By parity, the following argument is also invalid: P1) A person has a right to life. P2) A fetus is a potential person. C) A fetus has a right to life. Thus Warren thinks that considerations of potentiality are insufficient to undermine her argument that fetuses—which are potential persons but, she thinks, not persons—do not have a right to life.

In making ethical decision, mental health counselors should abide by all but which if these principles ? a) Beneficience and nonmaleficence b) Justice and fidelity c) Common sense and autonomy d) Personal gain

In making ethical decision, mental health counselors should abide by all but which if these principles ? a) Beneficience and nonmaleficence b) Justice and fidelity c) Common sense and autonomy d) Personal gain

answer d
Slap is an acronym that can assist a professional mental health practitioner in assessing for sucide plan . which of the following is not a step in the slap modal a) Specificity which relates to how detailed and specific the plan for suicide are. b) Lethality which relate to how deadly are the means that the client plans to use c) Access to means or how available are the means for suicide. d) Power of implement or what is the likelihood that the client has the will to commit auicide.

Slap is an acronym that can assist a professional mental health practitioner in assessing for sucide plan . which of the following is not a step in the slap modal a) Specificity which relates to how detailed and specific the plan for suicide are. b) Lethality which relate to how deadly are the means that the client plans to use c) Access to means or how available are the means for suicide. d) Power of implement or what is the likelihood that the client has the will to commit auicide.

answer c
Fact Debate Brief Introduction Crime doesn’t pay; it should be punished. Even since childhood, a slap on the hand has prevented possible criminals from ever committing the same offense; whether it was successful or not depended on how much that child wanted that cookie. While a slap on the wrist might or might not be an effective deterrent, the same can be said about the death penalty. Every day, somewhere in the world, a criminal is stopped permanently from committing any future costs, but this is by the means of the death. While effective in stopping one person permanently, it does nothing about the crime world as a whole. While it is necessary to end the career of a criminal, no matter what his or her crime is, we must not end it by taking a life. Through this paper, the death penalty will be proven ineffective at deterring crime by use of other environmental factors. Definition: The death penalty is defined as the universal punishment of death as legally applied by a fair court system. It is important for it to be a fair legal system, as not to confuse it with genocide, mob mentality, or any other ruling without trial. Claim 1: Use of the death penalty is in decline Ground 1: According to the book The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective by Roger Hood and Carolyn Hoyle, published Dec. 8th, 2014, the Oxford professors in criminology say “As in most of the rest of the world, the death penalty in the US is in decline and distributed unevenly in frequency of use” even addressing that, as of April 2014, 18 states no longer have a death penalty, and even Oregon and Washington are considering removing their death penalty laws. Furthermore, in 2013, only 9 of these states still retaining the death penalty actually executed someone. Warrant 1: The death penalty can be reinstated at any time, but so far, it hasn’t been. At the same time, more states consider getting rid of it altogether. Therefore, it becomes clear that even states don’t want to be involved with this process showing that this is a disliked process. Claim 2: Even states with death penalty in effect still have high crime rates. Ground 2: With the reports gathered from fbi.gov, lawstreetmedia.com, a website based around political expertise and research determined the ranking of each state based on violent crime, published September 12th, 2014. Of the top ten most violent states, only three of which had the death penalty instituted (Maryland #9, New Mexico #4, Alaska #3). The other seven still had the system in place, and, despite it, still have a high amount of violent crime. On the opposite end of the spectrum, at the bottom ten most violent states, four of which, including the bottom-most states, do not have the death penalty in place. Warrant 2: With this ranking, it literally proves that the death penalty does not deter crime, or that there is a correlation between having the death penalty and having a decrease in the crime rate. Therefore, the idea of death penalty deterring crime is a null term in the sense that there is no, or a flawed connection. Claim 3: Violent crime is decreasing (but not because if the death penalty) Ground 3 A: According to an article published by The Economist, dated July 23rd, 2013, the rate of violent crime is in fact decreasing, but not because of the death penalty, but rather, because we have more police. From 1995 to 2010, policing has increased one-fifth, and with it, a decline in crime rate. In fact, in cities such as Detroit where policing has been cut, an opposite effect, an increase in crime, has been reported. Ground 3 B: An article from the Wall Street Journal, dated May 28th, 2011, also cites a decline in violent, only this time, citing the reason as a correlation with poverty levels. In 2009, at the start of the housing crisis, crime rates also dropped noticeably. Oddly enough, this article points out the belief that unemployment is often associated with crime; instead, the evidence presented is environmental in nature. Warrant 3: Crime rate isn’t deterred by death penalty, but rather, our surroundings. Seeing as how conditions have improved, so has the state of peace. Therefore, it becomes clear that the death penalty is ineffective at deterring crime because other key factors present more possibility for improvement of society. Claim 4: The death penalty is a historically flawed system. Ground 4A: According to the book The Death Penalty: Constitutional Issues, Commentaries, and Case Briefs by Scott Vollum, published in 2005, addresses how the case of the death penalty emerged to where it is today. While the book is now a decade old, it is used for historical context, particularly, in describing the first execution that took place in 1608. While it is true that most of these executions weren’t as well-grounded as the modern ones that take place now, they still had no effect in deterring crime. Why? Because even after America was established and more sane, the death penalty still had to be used because criminals still had violent behaviors. Ground 4B: According to data from Mother Jones, published May 17th, 2013, the reason why the crime rate was so high in the past could possibly be due to yet another environmental factor (affected by change over time), exposure to lead. Since the removal of lead from paint started over a hundred years ago, there has been a decline in homicide. Why is this important? Lead poisoning in child’s brain, if not lethal, can affect development and lead to mental disability, lower IQ, and lack of reasoning. Warrant 4: By examining history as a whole, there is a greater correlation between other factors that have resulted in a decline in violent crime. The decline in the crime rate has been an ongoing process, but has shown a faster decline due to other environmental factors, rather than the instatement of the death penalty. Claim 5: The world’s violent crime rate is changing, but not due to the death penalty. Ground 5A: According to article published by Amnesty USA in March of 2014, the number of executions under the death penalty reported in 2013 had increased by 15%. However, the rate of violent crime in the world has decreased significantly in the last decade. But, Latvia, for example, has permanently banned the death penalty since 2012. In 2014, the country was viewed overall as safe and low in violent crime rate. Ground 5B: However, while it is true that there is a decline in violent crime rate worldwide, The World Bank, April 17, 2013, reports that the rate of global poverty is decreasing. In a similar vein to the US, because wealth is being distributed better and conditions are improving overall, there is a steady decline in crime rate. Warrant 5: By examining the world as a whole, it becomes clear that it doesn’t matter if the death penalty is in place, violent crime will still exist. However, mirroring the US, as simple conditions improve, so does lifestyle. The death penalty does not deter crime in the world, rather a better quality of life is responsible for that. Works Cited “Death Sentences and Executions 2013.” Amnesty International USA. Amnesty USA, 26 Mar. 2014. Web. 15 Mar. 2015. <http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/reports/death-sentences-and-executions-2013>. D. K. “Why Is Crime Falling?” The Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 23 July 2013. Web. 12 Mar. 2015. <http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/07/economist-explains-16>. Drum, Kevin. “The US Murder Rate Is on Track to Be Lowest in a Century.”Mother Jones. Mother Jones, 17 May 2013. Web. 13 Mar. 2015. <http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/05/us-murder-rate-track-be-lowest-century>. Hood, Roger, and Carolyn Hoyle. The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2002. 45. Print. Rizzo, Kevin. “Slideshow: America’s Safest and Most Dangerous States 2014.”Law Street Media. Law Street TM, 12 Sept. 2014. Web. 12 Mar. 2015. <http://lawstreetmedia.com/blogs/crime/safest-and-most-dangerous-states-2014/#slideshow>. Vollum, Scott. The Death Penalty: Constitutional Issues, Commentaries, and Case Briefs. Newark, NJ: LexisNexis, 2005. 2. Print. Theis, David. “Remarkable Declines in Global Poverty, But Major Challenges Remain.” The World Bank. The World Bank, 17 Apr. 2013. Web. 15 Mar. 2015. <http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2013/04/17/remarkable-declines-in-global-poverty-but-major-challenges-remain>. Wilson, James Q. “Hard Times, Fewer Crimes.” WSJ. The Wall Street Journal, 28 May 2011. Web. 13 Mar. 2015. <http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304066504576345553135009870>.

Fact Debate Brief Introduction Crime doesn’t pay; it should be punished. Even since childhood, a slap on the hand has prevented possible criminals from ever committing the same offense; whether it was successful or not depended on how much that child wanted that cookie. While a slap on the wrist might or might not be an effective deterrent, the same can be said about the death penalty. Every day, somewhere in the world, a criminal is stopped permanently from committing any future costs, but this is by the means of the death. While effective in stopping one person permanently, it does nothing about the crime world as a whole. While it is necessary to end the career of a criminal, no matter what his or her crime is, we must not end it by taking a life. Through this paper, the death penalty will be proven ineffective at deterring crime by use of other environmental factors. Definition: The death penalty is defined as the universal punishment of death as legally applied by a fair court system. It is important for it to be a fair legal system, as not to confuse it with genocide, mob mentality, or any other ruling without trial. Claim 1: Use of the death penalty is in decline Ground 1: According to the book The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective by Roger Hood and Carolyn Hoyle, published Dec. 8th, 2014, the Oxford professors in criminology say “As in most of the rest of the world, the death penalty in the US is in decline and distributed unevenly in frequency of use” even addressing that, as of April 2014, 18 states no longer have a death penalty, and even Oregon and Washington are considering removing their death penalty laws. Furthermore, in 2013, only 9 of these states still retaining the death penalty actually executed someone. Warrant 1: The death penalty can be reinstated at any time, but so far, it hasn’t been. At the same time, more states consider getting rid of it altogether. Therefore, it becomes clear that even states don’t want to be involved with this process showing that this is a disliked process. Claim 2: Even states with death penalty in effect still have high crime rates. Ground 2: With the reports gathered from fbi.gov, lawstreetmedia.com, a website based around political expertise and research determined the ranking of each state based on violent crime, published September 12th, 2014. Of the top ten most violent states, only three of which had the death penalty instituted (Maryland #9, New Mexico #4, Alaska #3). The other seven still had the system in place, and, despite it, still have a high amount of violent crime. On the opposite end of the spectrum, at the bottom ten most violent states, four of which, including the bottom-most states, do not have the death penalty in place. Warrant 2: With this ranking, it literally proves that the death penalty does not deter crime, or that there is a correlation between having the death penalty and having a decrease in the crime rate. Therefore, the idea of death penalty deterring crime is a null term in the sense that there is no, or a flawed connection. Claim 3: Violent crime is decreasing (but not because if the death penalty) Ground 3 A: According to an article published by The Economist, dated July 23rd, 2013, the rate of violent crime is in fact decreasing, but not because of the death penalty, but rather, because we have more police. From 1995 to 2010, policing has increased one-fifth, and with it, a decline in crime rate. In fact, in cities such as Detroit where policing has been cut, an opposite effect, an increase in crime, has been reported. Ground 3 B: An article from the Wall Street Journal, dated May 28th, 2011, also cites a decline in violent, only this time, citing the reason as a correlation with poverty levels. In 2009, at the start of the housing crisis, crime rates also dropped noticeably. Oddly enough, this article points out the belief that unemployment is often associated with crime; instead, the evidence presented is environmental in nature. Warrant 3: Crime rate isn’t deterred by death penalty, but rather, our surroundings. Seeing as how conditions have improved, so has the state of peace. Therefore, it becomes clear that the death penalty is ineffective at deterring crime because other key factors present more possibility for improvement of society. Claim 4: The death penalty is a historically flawed system. Ground 4A: According to the book The Death Penalty: Constitutional Issues, Commentaries, and Case Briefs by Scott Vollum, published in 2005, addresses how the case of the death penalty emerged to where it is today. While the book is now a decade old, it is used for historical context, particularly, in describing the first execution that took place in 1608. While it is true that most of these executions weren’t as well-grounded as the modern ones that take place now, they still had no effect in deterring crime. Why? Because even after America was established and more sane, the death penalty still had to be used because criminals still had violent behaviors. Ground 4B: According to data from Mother Jones, published May 17th, 2013, the reason why the crime rate was so high in the past could possibly be due to yet another environmental factor (affected by change over time), exposure to lead. Since the removal of lead from paint started over a hundred years ago, there has been a decline in homicide. Why is this important? Lead poisoning in child’s brain, if not lethal, can affect development and lead to mental disability, lower IQ, and lack of reasoning. Warrant 4: By examining history as a whole, there is a greater correlation between other factors that have resulted in a decline in violent crime. The decline in the crime rate has been an ongoing process, but has shown a faster decline due to other environmental factors, rather than the instatement of the death penalty. Claim 5: The world’s violent crime rate is changing, but not due to the death penalty. Ground 5A: According to article published by Amnesty USA in March of 2014, the number of executions under the death penalty reported in 2013 had increased by 15%. However, the rate of violent crime in the world has decreased significantly in the last decade. But, Latvia, for example, has permanently banned the death penalty since 2012. In 2014, the country was viewed overall as safe and low in violent crime rate. Ground 5B: However, while it is true that there is a decline in violent crime rate worldwide, The World Bank, April 17, 2013, reports that the rate of global poverty is decreasing. In a similar vein to the US, because wealth is being distributed better and conditions are improving overall, there is a steady decline in crime rate. Warrant 5: By examining the world as a whole, it becomes clear that it doesn’t matter if the death penalty is in place, violent crime will still exist. However, mirroring the US, as simple conditions improve, so does lifestyle. The death penalty does not deter crime in the world, rather a better quality of life is responsible for that. Works Cited “Death Sentences and Executions 2013.” Amnesty International USA. Amnesty USA, 26 Mar. 2014. Web. 15 Mar. 2015. . D. K. “Why Is Crime Falling?” The Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 23 July 2013. Web. 12 Mar. 2015. . Drum, Kevin. “The US Murder Rate Is on Track to Be Lowest in a Century.”Mother Jones. Mother Jones, 17 May 2013. Web. 13 Mar. 2015. . Hood, Roger, and Carolyn Hoyle. The Death Penalty: A Worldwide Perspective. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2002. 45. Print. Rizzo, Kevin. “Slideshow: America’s Safest and Most Dangerous States 2014.”Law Street Media. Law Street TM, 12 Sept. 2014. Web. 12 Mar. 2015. . Vollum, Scott. The Death Penalty: Constitutional Issues, Commentaries, and Case Briefs. Newark, NJ: LexisNexis, 2005. 2. Print. Theis, David. “Remarkable Declines in Global Poverty, But Major Challenges Remain.” The World Bank. The World Bank, 17 Apr. 2013. Web. 15 Mar. 2015. . Wilson, James Q. “Hard Times, Fewer Crimes.” WSJ. The Wall Street Journal, 28 May 2011. Web. 13 Mar. 2015. .

Fact Debate Brief Introduction Crime doesn’t pay; it should be … Read More...
ENGL 1102 1st Essay Assignment Directions: For one of the following topics, write a well-organized, clearly thought through, logically and textually supported, and MLA style/formatted essay. Examples for the type of essay you should be writing are found on pages (38-40), (115-118), and (232-235). Be sure to have a clearly stated, single sentence (not question) thesis and clearly stated topic sentences that reference and through their very words work with the thesis. Your argument must be supported with textual evidence within each support paragraph using MLA parenthetical citations and with proper introductions and incorporation of quotes within your own writing. For examples of all of this, see your textbook. If you have questions, ask them. • Write an essay in which you argue how the narrator of “A Rose for Emily” creates a sense of mystery around Emily Grierson? • Write an essay in which you argue for Emily’s assistant’s purpose or effect in the short story “A Rose for Emily” • Write an essay in which you argue whether the husband (the narrator) of “Cathedrals” is jealous or insecure. • Write an essay characterizing the relationship between the wife of the narrator and Robert in “Cathedrals.” • Write an essay in which you argue that the ending of “The Lottery” should not be a surprise to readers. • Write an essay in which you argue about the mental stability of the narrator of “The Yellow Wallpaper.” Does the narrator decline as the story progresses? Is she unstable from the beginning? • Write an essay in which you argue for the reasons of the narrator’s state(s) of mind throughout the story “The Yellow Wallpaper” • Write an essay explaining/describing the relationship between men and women in “A Jury of Her Peers.” • Think of the different ways that the narrator portrays men and women in the story – what does such portrayal imply/convey? • Write an essay thoroughly explaining why Mrs. Wright might have killed Mr. Wright. In other words argue for a motive for her to kill Mr. Wright. • Write an essay arguing for why Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters conceal what they think they know about Mrs. Wright.

ENGL 1102 1st Essay Assignment Directions: For one of the following topics, write a well-organized, clearly thought through, logically and textually supported, and MLA style/formatted essay. Examples for the type of essay you should be writing are found on pages (38-40), (115-118), and (232-235). Be sure to have a clearly stated, single sentence (not question) thesis and clearly stated topic sentences that reference and through their very words work with the thesis. Your argument must be supported with textual evidence within each support paragraph using MLA parenthetical citations and with proper introductions and incorporation of quotes within your own writing. For examples of all of this, see your textbook. If you have questions, ask them. • Write an essay in which you argue how the narrator of “A Rose for Emily” creates a sense of mystery around Emily Grierson? • Write an essay in which you argue for Emily’s assistant’s purpose or effect in the short story “A Rose for Emily” • Write an essay in which you argue whether the husband (the narrator) of “Cathedrals” is jealous or insecure. • Write an essay characterizing the relationship between the wife of the narrator and Robert in “Cathedrals.” • Write an essay in which you argue that the ending of “The Lottery” should not be a surprise to readers. • Write an essay in which you argue about the mental stability of the narrator of “The Yellow Wallpaper.” Does the narrator decline as the story progresses? Is she unstable from the beginning? • Write an essay in which you argue for the reasons of the narrator’s state(s) of mind throughout the story “The Yellow Wallpaper” • Write an essay explaining/describing the relationship between men and women in “A Jury of Her Peers.” • Think of the different ways that the narrator portrays men and women in the story – what does such portrayal imply/convey? • Write an essay thoroughly explaining why Mrs. Wright might have killed Mr. Wright. In other words argue for a motive for her to kill Mr. Wright. • Write an essay arguing for why Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters conceal what they think they know about Mrs. Wright.

info@checkyourstudy.com Whatsapp +919911743277
For centuries, misconceptions about the female anatomy have resulted in social policies and attitudes concerning: Question 2 options: The kinds of activities women could engage in The ability for women to hold jobs The sources of mental illness in women All of the above

For centuries, misconceptions about the female anatomy have resulted in social policies and attitudes concerning: Question 2 options: The kinds of activities women could engage in The ability for women to hold jobs The sources of mental illness in women All of the above

For centuries, misconceptions about the female anatomy have resulted in … Read More...
Sex, Gender, and Popular Culture Spring 2015 Look through popular magazines, and see if you can find advertisements that objectify women in order to sell a product. Alternately, you may use an advertisement on television (but make sure to provide a link to the ad so I can see it!). Study these images then write a paper about objectification that deals with all or some of the following: • What effect(s), if any, do you think the objectification of women’s bodies has on our culture? • Jean Kilbourne states “turning a human being into a thing is almost always the first step toward justifying violence against that person.” What do you think she means by this? Do you agree with her reasoning? Why or why not? • Some people would argue that depicting a woman’s body as an object is a form of art. What is your opinion of this point of view? Explain your reasoning. • Why do you think that women are objectified more often than men are? • How does sexualization and objectification play out differently across racial lines? • Kilbourne explains that the consequences of being objectified are different – and more serious – for women than for men. Do you agree? How is the world different for women than it is for men? How do objectified images of women interact with those in our culture differently from the way images of men do? Why is it important to look at images in the context of the culture? • What is the difference between sexual objectification and sexual subjectification? (Ros Gill ) • How do ads construct violent white masculinity and how does that vision of masculinity hurt both men and women? Throughout your written analysis, be sure to make clear and specific reference to the images you selected, and please submit these images with your paper. Make sure you engage with and reference to at least 4 of the following authors: Kilbourne, Bordo, Hunter & Soto, Rose, Durham, Gill, Katz, Schuchardt, Ono and Buescher. Guidelines:  Keep your content focused on structural, systemic, institutional factors rather than the individual: BE ANALYTICAL NOT ANECDOTAL.  Avoid using the first person or including personal stories/reactions. You must make sure to actively engage with your readings: these essays need to be informed and framed by the theoretical material you have been reading this semester.  Keep within the 4-6 page limit; use 12-point font, double spacing and 1-inch margins.  Use formal writing conventions (introduction/thesis statement, body, conclusion) and correct grammar. Resources may be cited within the text of your paper, i.e. (Walters, 2013).

Sex, Gender, and Popular Culture Spring 2015 Look through popular magazines, and see if you can find advertisements that objectify women in order to sell a product. Alternately, you may use an advertisement on television (but make sure to provide a link to the ad so I can see it!). Study these images then write a paper about objectification that deals with all or some of the following: • What effect(s), if any, do you think the objectification of women’s bodies has on our culture? • Jean Kilbourne states “turning a human being into a thing is almost always the first step toward justifying violence against that person.” What do you think she means by this? Do you agree with her reasoning? Why or why not? • Some people would argue that depicting a woman’s body as an object is a form of art. What is your opinion of this point of view? Explain your reasoning. • Why do you think that women are objectified more often than men are? • How does sexualization and objectification play out differently across racial lines? • Kilbourne explains that the consequences of being objectified are different – and more serious – for women than for men. Do you agree? How is the world different for women than it is for men? How do objectified images of women interact with those in our culture differently from the way images of men do? Why is it important to look at images in the context of the culture? • What is the difference between sexual objectification and sexual subjectification? (Ros Gill ) • How do ads construct violent white masculinity and how does that vision of masculinity hurt both men and women? Throughout your written analysis, be sure to make clear and specific reference to the images you selected, and please submit these images with your paper. Make sure you engage with and reference to at least 4 of the following authors: Kilbourne, Bordo, Hunter & Soto, Rose, Durham, Gill, Katz, Schuchardt, Ono and Buescher. Guidelines:  Keep your content focused on structural, systemic, institutional factors rather than the individual: BE ANALYTICAL NOT ANECDOTAL.  Avoid using the first person or including personal stories/reactions. You must make sure to actively engage with your readings: these essays need to be informed and framed by the theoretical material you have been reading this semester.  Keep within the 4-6 page limit; use 12-point font, double spacing and 1-inch margins.  Use formal writing conventions (introduction/thesis statement, body, conclusion) and correct grammar. Resources may be cited within the text of your paper, i.e. (Walters, 2013).

The objectification of women has been a very controversial topic … Read More...
Mental health counselors work on different levels of prevention. There is primary prevention, secondary prevention and tertiary prevention. On the tertiary prevention level the mental health counselor is involved in a) Intentional, before the fact, group or mass, rather than individual prevention measures b) Controlling mental health problems that have already surfaced, but are not severe c) Reducing the impairment that may result from psychological disorders d) Providing information on the proper maintenance of a drug regiment

Mental health counselors work on different levels of prevention. There is primary prevention, secondary prevention and tertiary prevention. On the tertiary prevention level the mental health counselor is involved in a) Intentional, before the fact, group or mass, rather than individual prevention measures b) Controlling mental health problems that have already surfaced, but are not severe c) Reducing the impairment that may result from psychological disorders d) Providing information on the proper maintenance of a drug regiment

answer b
Many people believe that choosing a job and choosing a career are the same. You know my position; I believe a JOB is Just over Broke. What is your position? Explain the differences between a job and a career.

Many people believe that choosing a job and choosing a career are the same. You know my position; I believe a JOB is Just over Broke. What is your position? Explain the differences between a job and a career.

A job is essentially one thing an individual do to … Read More...