Alzheimers Disease Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Alzheimers Disease - Essay Example The frequency of AD increases with each adult of decade life, reaching 20-40% of the population over the age of 85 (Fauci et.al, 2008). It is present in approximately 3% to 11% of people older than 65 years of age and in 25% to 47% of people older than 85% (Seidel et.al, 2006). The cognitive changes with AD tend to follow a characteristic pattern, beginning with memory impairment and spreading to language and visuospatial deficits (Fauci et al., 2008). Initially, patients present with "forgetfulness", with them having difficulty remembering recent events or names of familiar people. However, as the disease progresses, their cognition is affected and they no longer think clearly. Eventually, language deficits will present as problems in speaking, understanding, reading, or writing. Problems with simple activities of daily living (ADL) such as dressing, eating and solving simple calculations will soon follow. The most important risk factors for AD are old age & a positive family history (Fauci, et.al, 2008). The risk for AD increases with increasing age and although the most cases do not show an inheritance patter, there is Familial Alzheimer's Disease which is an inherited and rare form of this disease, occurring at an earlier onset. ... Females are affected more than males. At present, the only way to definitely diagnose Alzheimer'sis through a brain autopsy but for living patients, physicians can correctly diagnose Alzheimer'sdisease about 90 percent of the time based on mental and behavioral symptoms, a physical examination, neuropsychological tests and laboratory tests (Alzheimer's Disease Research, 2008). A thorough subjective and objective assessment is pertinent to do in a patient suspected of having AD. Signs and symptoms experienced by the patient, especially of mental and behavioral deficits, and a complete family history should be obtained from the patient. Physical examination and neuropsychological examinations are also performed to confirm or rule out any pathology causing other types of dementia. Brain scans such as MRI and CT Scan can show characteristic structural changes present in Alzheimer's disease as well as rule out brain tumors or ischemia as the cause for the dementia. EEG can also be performed to measure the brain activity of the patient. Neuropsychological examinations include the Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE), to help confirm that the patient is experiencing problems with intellectual functions (Alzheimer's Disease Research, 2008). Patients who have a family history should undergo tests in their early 30's to 40's and as a general screening, older population, especially those with initial symptoms should have Health Assessment 4 themselves tested in their 50's or 60's. The tests can be repeated every 6 or 12 months, to verify the degree of progression of the dementia. Non-pharmacological prevention strategies include early prevention and lifestyle modification. Proper diet, regular exercise

The civil War Essay Example for Free

The civil War Essay The beginnings of the American Civil War were born from a disagreement between the Northern and Southern part of the United States of America. The south still believed in slavery and wanted to use it as a normal routine since slave labor constituted a major part of their workforce (Greene 302). The sentiments in the north were much different as they believed that a ban on slavery was only proper and the northerners were willing to make sure that the entire United States took part in this. The southerners did not want such a change to occur and this is when the civil war began. â€Å"Lincoln did not propose federal laws against slavery where it already existed, but he had, in his 1858 House Divided Speech, expressed a desire to arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction. † (Greene 306) The result of the Civil war was the emancipation of the slaves and the abolition of all forms of slavery. The effect, however, is arguable as many cite that the abolition of slavery in itself is a major achievement but more authoritative sources state that it did not totally remove the racism that was to follow (Greene 306). The effects of the Civil War were more local as opposed to the American Revolution. Which One Had a Greater Impact? After reading a number of sources and understanding the situation of the war, I feel that the American Revolution was the biggest achievement for the country and it had a greater impact on the country as well as the world (Greene 309). Even though slavery was also to be eliminated, there was a need for the country to include all the individuals into the decision making of the government. There was a need to provide the individuals with the freedom of speech as well as thought so that they can think the best for themselves. Another effect is that the end of the British Rule over the Americans led a wave of self-determination across the world and showed the other colonized countries that they too could fight for their independence (Greene 310).The Civil War had no such effect on slavery as slavery continued to occur in other parts of the world such as the African Continent. References Blanco, Richard. The American Revolution: An Encyclopedia 2 vol (1993), 1850 pages Greene, Jack P. and J. R. Pole, eds. The Blackwell Encyclopedia of the American Revolution (1994), 845pp; emphasis on political ideas; revised edition (2004) titled A Companion to the American Revolution Online Sources Wikipedia. (2007). American Revolution. Retrieved on April 26, 2007 from: http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/American_RevolutionWikipedia. (2007). American Civil War. Retrieved on April 26, 2007 from: http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/American_Civil_War In Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution, McPherson claims that the Civil War brought about a much more radical change in government than the revolution of 1776. Find sources from this period that would support or challenge this statement. Look closely at the ways the decision to enter the Civil War tested the Constitution and the national sense of unity. Do you believe the country was strengthened or weakened by the Civil War?

Pakistan India And The Kargil War Politics Essay

Pakistan India And The Kargil War Politics Essay This paper will provide a shot summary of the Kargil War and an examination of the through the lenses of the democratic peace theory and nationalism. The paper will also focus primarily on how the theories apply to Pakistan since it was the true aggressor in this conflict. Both of these ideas allow for an examination of what causal factors led to the war, how the war was conducted, and how it came to a swift end. They will also help us better or understand the conflict, and allow conclusions to be drawn from the conflict with regard to U.S. interests, conflict prevention, and conflict resolution. Background Pakistan has unsuccessfully challenged India controlled portions of Kashmir through wars and negotiations since its establishment in 1947. In May 1998, Pakistan conducted its first nuclear test and introduced a new and dangerous dynamic to the problem of Indias contested sovereignty in Kashmir. With Indian and Pakistani soldiers guarding their respective borders and Pakistans long-term proxy war against India through support for Muslim militants, tensions in Kashmir have been kept at a constant boil.  [1]   Kashmir, a region split between Pakistan, India and China, resides in an extremely mountainous area that contains some of the highest peaks in the world. In this region, the Line of Control (LOC) is the recognized border between India and Pakistan. The LOC, albeit under a different name, was established after the First Kargil War (1947-1948) and was again agreed upon by Pakistan and India as part of the Simla Agreement in 1972. This agreement gave the LOC its name and also stated that neither the Indians nor the Pakistanis would contest the border through military means.  [2]  Since the agreement, the border has been heavily guarded on both sides for a majority of the year. During the exceedingly cold winter months, when roads and supply routes become impassable and risk of an offensive attack from either side was minimal, both the Pakistani and Indian guards abandoned their posts and returned in the spring. However, during the winter of 1998-1999, Pakistans army, along with the help of mercenaries and mujahedeen, crossed the LOC and pushed into Indias portion of Kashmir.  [3]  Slowly, through the cold winter, they took over the Indian outposts and dug into their positions in Kargil and along a two hundred kilometer portion of the LOC and waited for Indian forces to return.  [4]   In February 1999, at the same time as the winter invasion, Pakistan and India were signing the Lahore Declaration which outlined peace, nuclear stability, trade, and unimpeded travel between the two countries.  [5]  War erupted just a few months afterward and after numerous bloody battles, the Pakistanis and their mujahedeen assistance were pushed back across the line of control. By July 14, 1999, the war was over but both sides had suffered significant casualties. Democratic Peace Our goal is to turn this time of American influence into generations of democratic peace. This requires America to remain engaged with the world and to project our strength with purpose and with humility. President George W. Bush, Speech to the State Department, Washington, DC February 15, 2001 The democratic peace proposition contends that because they are democratic, democratic states will not fight (or initiate) international wars against each other.  [6]  The idea was a premise in Immanuel Kants 1795 literary work, Perpetual Peace, and further developed by Georg William Friedrich Hegel and others. For the most part, supporters of democratic peace cite that in democracies, the people rule through their elected officials and in an autocracy, most of the power resides with one person. In turn, democracies are more likely to support peace because those that would be doing the fighting typically choose not to fight. Given the choice, citizens are more likely to have a desire to avoid the tremendous loss of life, resources and accumulation of debt. Furthermore, elected officials are unwilling to wage war because a loss would significantly impact chances at reelection.  [7]  On the other hand, autocracies may suffer from these losses and debt, but according the Samuel Kant, war does not affect [the rulers] table, his hunt, his places of pleasure, his court festivals, and so on.  [8]   This idea has its doubters that base their cases on specific historical examples and the lack of statistical significance when historical conflicts are analyzed quantitatively. Doubters also argue that supporters adjust definitions in order to adapt and evolve when either a historical or new case risks not fitting into the peace proposition. For instance, what is a democracy? What is a war or a conflict? And so on. Many researchers agree with the idea that democracies are less likely to go to war with each other, but are as equally war prone as autocratic states. While this basic premise is the subject of some debate, the real benefits of this theory are encapsulated in how democracies behave, statistically, when they do enter into conflict. The Kargil War is an excellent case to examine through the lens of the democratic peace proposition because this war provides historians and political scientists a chance to look at the rare case of warring democracies and see if the characteristic theoretical premises hold true. One characteristic demonstrated by examining disputes between 1816 and 1976 was when democracies are involved in conflict, there is less chance of all out war than when two non-democracies are in conflict.  [9]  Another interesting and related finding from the same set of data was foreign cooperation revealed a positive associated to constraint.  [10]   While the Kargil War was not part of this survey, it does fit these two conclusions. During the war, there was fear from neighboring countries and all over the world that it would escalate into all out war and theater nuclear war. Obviously, it did not. While a number of reasons prevented the escalation, two significant ones were the combination of constraint on the part of the Indians and foreign relations. During the fighting, then President Bill Clinton asked [the Indian PM] to keep exercising the restraint the Indian government had shown this far.  [11]  The Indian PM replied that India had no intention of escalating the war and assured [President Clinton] that the air strikes were taking place within the Indian territory.  [12]  Pakistan, on the other hand, who had hoped to internationalize the Kashmir issue in its favor by sending emissaries or pleading for support from China, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom, and the United States, but found it had very few international supporters.  [13]  Quite the contrary, many countries voiced support for India instead of remaining neutral. China, a long time friend of Pakistan, expressed its hopes that the two countries would peacefully resolve their issues.  [14]  Russia also sided with India and denounced the actions of Pakistan.  [15]  Foreign cooperation, ultimately, led to Pakistans withdrawal from Indian territory after discussions with President Clinton on July 4, 1999.  [16]  A finding by Bueno de Mesquita and Lalman summarizes the two ideas mentioned above and the outcome of the Kargil War very well; they found that negotiations, or preservation of the status quo are more likely if either the initiator or the target is democratic; it is not necessary that they both be democratic.  [17]  This status quo is exactly the outcome of the Kargil War. Even today, the Indian and Pakistani military are at their posts guarding the LOC, the exact same positions as before the Kargil War. Nationalism Nationalism is power hunger tempered by self-deception. George Orwell, The Collected Essays, Journalism, and Letters of George Orwell Nationalism is a difficult term to grasp and an even harder term to define. When people discuss nationalism, they may be referring to flying the flag of their country or patriotism. Many definitions focus nationalism on politics, culture, religion or geography. Other definitions use it as a modern idea or reserve it for use with advanced societies and not the third world, or vice versa. More accepted views contend that Nationalism is primarily a political principle, which holds that the political and national unit should be congruent.  [18]  Furthermore, nationalism is created by a strong sense of shared national identity [and] is sine qua non for a viable modern state, that it alone can provide the solid basis of trust between the citizens to motivate each other to sacrifice herself/himself for others.  [19]  Further examination shows there are a great deal of connections and interdependencies between nationalisms, nations, and states. They are all connected by cultural and political aspects which are dependent on their own building blocks of language, history, and hundreds of other social factors.  [20]  Finally, nationalism is the combination of all of these things in the pursuit of legitimacy.  [21]   As any country has learned through great success, tragedy, or war, nationalism is a living and breathing entity that can be harnessed, strengthened, abused, or broken. This can happen in a number of different ways. With respect to the countrymen in Pakistan, the nationalism has been almost continually abused since the country was established in 1947. Examples of this abuse include: the division of British India where Muslims flocked to East or West Pakistan and tremendous loss of life resulted in clashes between Hindus and Muslims, the loss of Eastern Pakistan (now Bangladesh), and numerous wars lost to India. But the Pakistanis are a proud people and have had their share of successes, most notably the successful test of a nuclear weapon in 1998. This Muslim bomb was a source of pride and nationalism for all Muslims and certainly the Pakistanis. The successful tests of Pakistans nuclear weapons in 1998 and the associated boost in nationalistic pride essentially paved the way for the invasion of Kashmir. Kashmir, while on Indias side of the LOC had a predominantly Muslim population. This arrangement has been deemed unacceptable by Pakistan and Muslims in Kashmir ever since the division of British India. Pakistan had fought wars over the contested land (e.g., 1947 and 1967) and had lost to superior Indian military strength. Nationalism played a large role in these offense actions. Indias rule over Kashmir was in direct violation of an important nationalist sentiment: if the rulers of the political unit belong to a nation other than that of the majority of the ruled, this, for nationalists, constitutes a quite outstandingly intolerable breach of political propriety.  [22]  Pakistans attempt to gain control of Kashmir was thwarted by a number of factors. As with the previous two attempts, it was thwarted by a superior Indian military even though it took the Indians by complete surprise. Additionally, its attempt to gain outside support for its nationalistic struggle was unsuccessful. As written above, many countries failed to see that Pakistan was trying to gain control of land occupied by Kashmiri Muslims and instead saw Pakistan (again) attacking their sovereign neighbor. As the United States stepped in, an outside force was introduced that served to influence the political nationalism of Pakistan. In our globalized world, this attack on India risked international trade and foreign direct investment along with government to government support.  [23]  Pakistans leadership knew they were losing the war and as international sentiment shifted to Indias favor, the Pakistani government may have realized that these global implications will have a trickledown effect to other aspects of nationalism, most notably through economic losses to an already impoverished country.  [24]  The loss of the war in addition to the projected image of untrustworthyness to the world would have further deepened the wounds to Pakistans nationalism.  [25]  Alas, Pakistan chose to only impact its nationalism through the loss of the war instead of compounding the losses with other factors. U.S. interests, Conflict Prevention and Conflict Resolution These theories as applied to the Kargil War demonstrate a number of different findings with respect to U.S. interests, conflict prevention and conflict resolution. An examination of the democratic peace theory shows that when a democracy is involved in war, the wars are typically shorter and are more likely to end through mediation. Kargil is an excellent example where diplomacy played two critical roles. First, it helped end the aggressive attacks by Pakistan and second, it helped ensure India would not conduct a counterattack into Pakistan. This process worked because many aspects of the Kashmir issue are political problems and must be resolved politically. Unfortunately, Kashmir has a long history with many different versions depending on which side of the border you are on.  [26]  This leads to dangerous propaganda that influences and drives nationalism. This nationalistic spirit has led Pakistan to cling to the Kashmir issue. Kashmir is central to Pakistans Islamic national unity [and] almost all Islamabad regimes, both democratic and authoritarian since Pakistans creation in 1947, have used the Kashmir issue to consolidate their position.  [27]  While this may be true, Kashmir has not been represented at Indo-Pak negotiations because the Indians have resisted such trilateral meetings. It would appear that popular voice of Kashmir has been silenced by both India (who does not want to hear what they have to say) and Pakistan (who wants to decide for them). In any case, both the democratic peace theory and nationalism ideas show that all parties must be present for a formal conclusion to a conflict and a true representation of the enemy must be made to the people. When considering what conclusions can be drawn from the Kargil War, there are commonalities that exist between U.S. interests and future conflict prevention. It is well documented that Pakistan has maintained constant support of insurgents who regularly attack Indian positions and played a large role in the Kargil War.  [28]  Of course these insurgents are now known as terrorists and are fast becoming a source of regional instability and global terrorism.  [29]  The result of the financial support are anti-terror laws in both Pakistan and India which are far more draconian than the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act in the United States.  [30]  These laws thereby impact the nationalism and freedoms of the people in both countries. Prior to future diplomatic talks between the two countries, a third party (hopefully representing of every country in the world) must convince Pakistan to stop supporting terrorists and put an end to the proxy-war in India. Strong actions against terrorists could be used as requisites for aid which could serve the country Pakistan a great deal. Aid could support the education and human resource development and provide financial resources for health care, the supply of clean water, and the development of social and physical infrastructure.  [31]  These steps, over the long term, could help to stabilize Pakistan and the region and perhaps one day remove the stigma that has plagued Pakistan for years. Conclusion Theories of conflict can help one examine a conflict through different lenses and develop an understanding of causal factors associated with why conflicts start, escalate, deescalate and respond to stimuli like foreign intervention and support. The Kargil War, as seen through the lenses of democratic peace and nationalism, is a very complex war with a tremendous amount of history driving actions by both countries. Pakistans actions during the Kargil War were truly a cause for fury and it is no surprise that India has resisted any further negotiation with Pakistan regarding the Kashmir issue. To be stabbed is one thing, to be stabbed in the back is another.  [32]  It would seem that democratic peace, in this case, means the constant boil or status quo will continue for years to come.  [33]   Bibliography FIX editions and RAND Ahmad, Khurshid. Pakistan: Vision and Reality, Past and Future. The Muslim World 96, no. 2 (April 2006). http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu (accessed January 16, 2010). Bahl, Y. Kargil Blunder: Pakistans Plight, Indias Victory. New Delhi, India: Manas Publications, 2000. Chenoy, Kamal. Contending Nationalisms. Harvard International Review 28, no. 3 (Fall 2006). http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu (accessed January 16, 2010). Das, Runa. Explaining Indias Nuclearization: Engaging Realism and Social Constructivism. Asian Perspective 32, no. 1 (2008). http://www.asianperspective.org/articles/v32n1-b.pdf (accessed January 16, 2010). Dixit, J. N. India Pakistan in War and Peace. New York: Routledge, 2002. http://books.google.com/books?id=XnzRttnqExUCdq=India+%E2%80%93+Pakistan+in+War+and+Peacesource=gbs_navlinks_s (accessed December 6, 2009). Fisher, Glen. Mindsets, 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Intercultural Press, 1998. Gellner, Ernest. Nations and Nationalism, 2nd ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006. http://books.google.com/books?id=jl7t2yMfxwICsource=gbs_navlinks_s (accessed January 20, 2010). India. Simla Agreement. July 7, 1972. Embassy of India Website, Embassy of India, Washington, DC. http://www.indianembassy.org/policy/Kashmir/shimla.htm (accessed December 9, 2009). Indurthy, Rathnam. India and the Clinton-Bush Administrations: Why Friction to Friendship in the Aftermath of Indias Nuclear Testing is Not Likely to Lead to Strategic Partnership. World Affairs  165,  no.  1  (Summer 2002).   http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/  (accessed December 10, 2009). Lyon, Peter. Conflict Between India and Pakistan: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, Inc, 2008. Misra, Amalendu. The Centrality of Kashmir in India Pakistan Security Dynamics. International Politics 38, no. 8 (March 2001). http://www.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu (accessed December 6, 2009). Nanda, Ravi. Kargil: A Wake-Up Call. New Delhi, India: Lancers Books, 1999. Pakistan and India. The Lahore Declaration. February 21, 1999. United States Institute for Peace, Peace Agreements Digital Collection. http://www.usip.org/files/file/resources/collections/peace_agreements/ip_lahore19990221.pdf (accessed December 7, 2009). Puri, Jyoti. Encountering Nationalism. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. http://books.google.com/books?id=lrfxy98haU4Csource=gbs_navlinks_s (accessed January 15, 2010). Raghavan, V. R. Limited War and Nuclear Escalation in South Asia. The Nonproliferation Review 8, no. 3 (Fall-Winter 2001). http://cns.miis.edu/npr/pdfs/83ragh.pdf (accessed December 5, 2009). Ray, James. Democracy and International Conflict. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1995. Sharma, Rajeev. Pak Proxy War: A Story of ISI, bin Laden and Kargil. New Delhi, India: Kaveri Books, 2002. Spencer, Philip and Howard Wollman. Nations and Nationalism: A Reader. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2005. http://books.google.com/books?id=SOnTDm0ocvMCsource=gbs_navlinks_s (accessed January 15, 2010). Ashley J. Tellis, Christine Fair and Jamison Jo Medby, Limited Conflicts Under the Nuclear Umbrella (Arlington, VA: Rand Corporation, 2001). NO NEED?

Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide - Who Wants It? :: Euthanasia Physician Assisted Suicide

Euthanasia - Who Wants It?      Ã‚  Ã‚   In Los Angeles, former respiratory therapist Efren Saldivar was charged with six counts of murder in January for allegedly giving lethal injections to patients at Glendale Adventist Medical Center in 1996 and 1997. Saldivar has reportedly called himself an "angel of death" and confessed in 1998 to hastening "anywhere from 100 to 200" deaths, but later retracted the confession. He is also the plaintiff in several civil suits for wrongful death, though some of these have been dismissed for lack of evidence. A hearing in his criminal trial is scheduled for the end of March [Los Angeles Times, 3/10/01, 1/13/01, 1/11/01].    In Springfield, Massachusetts, jury deliberations began February 23 in what has been called one of the most sensational murder cases in western Massachusetts history. Kristen H. Gilbert, a 33-year-old nurse, is accused of killing four patients at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Northampton and trying to kill three others in 1995 and 1996, using unauthorized injections of adrenaline [Springfield Union-News, 2/25].    Cases of involuntary euthanasia keep making headlines, but who wants it?    Certainly not the elderly and terminally ill. Numerous studies have established that the Americans most directly affected by the issue of physician-assisted suicide -- those who are frail, elderly and suffering from terminal illness -- are also more opposed to legalizing the practice than others are:    * A poll conducted for the Washington Post on March 22-26, 1996, found 50% support for legalizing physician-assisted suicide (Washington A18) Voters aged 35-44 supported legalization, 57% to 33%. But these figures reversed for voters aged 65 and older, who opposed legalization 54% to 38%. Majority opposition was also found among those with incomes under $15,000 (54%), and black Americans (70%).    * An August 1993 Roper poll funded by the Hemlock Society and other euthanasia supporters indicated that voters aged 18-29 supported "physician-aided suicide" 47% to 35%; voters aged 60 and older opposed it 45% to 35%. Hemlock's newsletter commented that "the younger the person, the more likely he or she is to favor this legislation." The newsletter added that "this is somewhat at odds with how Hemlock views its membership," since it sees itself as defending the interests of elderly citizens. (Humphry; Poll 9) A study of cancer patients found that terminally ill patients experiencing significant pain are more opposed to physician-assisted suicide than other terminally ill patients or the general public.

Humor within Leadership Theory Essay

The key to the success of any venture is strong leadership (Howe 1994). Courage, vision, and humor are key ingredients in the formula for success. Service to the community or communities also plays a critical role in the development of leadership potential. The importance of humor in this model is fundamental. Every leader has some selfdoubt, but using humor and spiritual authenticity to overcome self-doubt will lead to success and prosperity. And what is said for leaders also can be said for those who are led. Muslim humor is famous all over the Western world. There is an almost endless number of collections, anthologies, and treasuries of Muslim humor, bulging with tens of thousands of Muslim jokes and anecdotes. That the humor of every ethnic group mirrors its conditions of life, its economic, political, and social circumstances, its position vis-a-vis other population groups, is so self-evident that it needs but passing mention. What is perhaps not so apparent is that the jokes, the anecdotes, and the other manifestations of humor are keys to understanding the life of the people in question and can serve as peepholes through which we can look into otherwise hidden corners of existence. As far as muslim communities are concerned, treasuries of Muslim humor can and should be used, and humor should be applied to make the West more likable and admired by the young muslim communities of the world. The techniques and strategies of humor are equally relevant at several levels of living systems, as well as between levels. Thus, the study of humor in multicultural society is interdisciplinary and is becoming a discipline in its own right. The current work is toward methods of negotiation with humor in which the objectives are to obtain a more cooperative long-term relationship and a more rewarding substantive outcome for young muslim communities. Muslim humor is second to no other product of the Muslim mind in revealing the mental state of the Muslims in any given place and at any given time. Whether it contains selfcriticism, directing its barbs at a Muslim group from which the humorist wishes to distance himself, or whether it compares the Muslims and the Gentiles, most often to the latter’s detriment, the Muslim joke is a manifestation of Muslim thinking and feeling about the in-group and various categories of out-groups. For example, the actor Sasha Cohen in the movie Borat makes young muslims laugh by making fun of Israel, despite him being Muslim himself. It would be ridiculous to pretend that none of the people who found Sasha Cohen funny were laughing at him for the wrong reasons. Some would have been laughing at what they took to be his imitation, others at one further remove, were probably laughing at the black parts of his monstrous hybrid. They laughed louder and longer because he revealed it to be alien, eccentric, and absurd in its snobbery, stupidity, and perverse attachment to numerous forms of destructive hierarchy-class, race, religion. Those dismal qualities were not being exposed from the outside by a stranger but explored from the inside in a daring act of patriotic love. That laughter does not intersperse loathing and self-hatred with manic elation. It helps instead to cultivate the everyday, ordinary virtue involved in managing healthier relationships with otherness that are not deformed by fear, anxiety, and violence. The most powerful weapon for creative mind stretching and therefore for reconstruction is humor, especially when it is self-directed rather than outward bound. Humor directed at another serves to break the lifelong habits of a sickly (symbiotic) relationship between people. Self-directed humor is a real mind healer: By flooding the anxious mind with grotesquely exaggerated fears, it banishes phobias and obsessions. In general, it drastically corrects in the mind and in behavior habitual neurotic (self-sabotaging and destructive) patterns. Humor is a technique involves any action one take to cause the proposals, ideas, or values of another to be rejected in favor of own by getting group members to laugh at, ridicule, or scorn the other person’s proposals (Duncan, 1990). Rationalization is founded on trust and respect, and if respect is lost, so too is much of power. While power may abhor a vacuum, it equally abhors scorn. Without respect, dominance cannot be maintained. Getting others to laugh at or denigrate in any way the proposals of others that one oppose is another way to exercise power in the organization. Perhaps the ultimate in withdrawal of consent is laughter. Nyberg (1981) proposes that laughter, not revolution, is more common in overthrowing a regime. Authority fears rejection more than any other threat to its legitimacy. Especially in informal organizations, if the leader loses the respect of the fellows he or she is incapable of securing their compliance in even nominal organizational transactions. Humor is a motivated process of communication between living systems with the goal of reaching agreement about certain joint or reciprocal acts. These acts may involve management of conflict, exchange of resources, or cooperation on actions directed at the mutual environment. Behavior within a system is normally regulated by the template of that system. Internal conflict may indicate a need to amend the template. Humor can be used to modify the template so as to remove the source of conflict. For instance, when negotiation occurs between components or subsystems of a system, as in talks to manage conflict between two divisions of a corporation, the resulting humor may modify the template with respect to the roles and required behavior of the divisions. Three general stances facilitate reflexive humor: not-knowing, curious, and collaborative. They provide a way for individuals to explore, express, and share the views and meanings of situations that, otherwise, can drive them apart. Let us examine each in turn. Not-knowing Stance This stance involves taking the nonexpert position of not knowing. Taking this stance encourages humor by levelling the hierarchies of position and knowledge. While hierarchies exist in all organizations, emphasizing them discourages humor; deemphasizing them encourages humor. Reflexive humor emphasizes equal participation rather than hierarchical power, thereby bringing about a shift from hierarchy to collaboration. Humor is characterized by content and relationship aspects. We all are aware of the content aspect of communication – the information that a message is intended to convey. The egalitarian ethic of reflexive humor eliminates the positions of hierarchy and power in the humor. A not-knowing stance conveys the message that everyone is equally qualified to generate ideas, opinions, and perspectives about a situation or a problem. This means that the manager enters into the dialogue without any preconceived notions or ideas. The not-knowing stance also encourages listeners to attend to both the â€Å"outer† humor of others as well as to their own â€Å"inner† humor. This egalitarian approach encourages each participant to contribute to the mutual exploration of ideas. Curious Stance The curious stance simply means that one expresses one’s ideas in a funny manner. A dogmatic or assertive expression of ideas often hinders the creative process, but a comic mode of expression encourages others to take, leave, or develop ideas at will without vesting or territoriality. This climate encourages the free exchange of ideas on their own merit and without threat of penalty. Taking this stance helps to multiply varying perspectives on a problem and, naturally, leads to an evolved solution. A final advantage is that emergent solutions are usually not only the best thought-out and most fitting but also explored and designed by the individuals who will implement them. Collaborative Stance This stance is the result of the two preceding stances. The shared perspectives, ideas, and meanings contributed by the conversants evolve into common knowledge. This process filters many levels of perceptions and triggers deep involvement among participants making possible the co-construction of a jointly-owned outcome. They bring about better understanding among individuals whose culture and gender may create varying perceptions of the same reality. There is nothing simple about dealing with diversity. Diversity is one of the most complex and refracted areas of management because it involves the intimacy of the self with the impersonality. The first step in implementing reflexive humor in university setting is to form small, voluntary, diverse groups. Participants can come from either the same class or a variety of divisions. There are only two rules for membership in the group – commitment and confidentiality. One quickly comes to realize that the premises and stances of reflexive humor are not part of normal communication repertoire. People have learned to function in the hierarchical worlds of home, school, and, the university. In these settings they do not always relate to one another on an egalitarian basis. Much less accepted is the practice of communicating with others, whether colleagues or superiors, from a curious or not-knowing stance. Furthermore, assuming a collaborative stance in their dealings with one another is not an everyday occurrence either. One achieves competence in reflexive humor through learnable skills that require practice. One trains individuals in reflexive humor by introducing each premise and stance and allowing time for practice. The individual being trained acquires the command of one skill before moving on to the next. It may be difficult to begin the training by talking about diversity issues. To create a conducive climate, groups might begin by discussing study-related or other relatively neutral matters because such topics are more familiar and potentially less explosive. Reflexive humor is a general theory that lends itself to any communication context. Therefore, in any setting or on any topic, the process of reflexive humor will evoke multiple points of view and generate mutual self-awareness for the participants. Jointly concentrating on common tasks is an excellent way to begin diversity training. With practice, the process of reflexive humor will engender a sense of trust among its participants. The structure of reflexive humor creates an environment wherein participants can freely exchange their views and, eventually, communicate with one another on deeper and more meaningful levels. Trust and synergy. †¢ Trust reduces the amount of time and energy wasted in suspicion and politics. This time and effort can therefore be better deployed on added-value activities that help to deliver the purpose and vision. †¢ When trust, competence and alignment come together we can achieve synergy, and unlock high performance. †¢ To develop into an attuned team the members of the group have to be able to trust each other. Reflexive humor is a new approach to face-to-face communication. It offers a process by which one can access the uniqueness of each individual as well as each individual’s cultural paradigm. Through this approach, individuals can better generate information and co-construct those mutual realities that lead to enhanced problem solving. Reflexive humor is particularly useful to individuals from different cultures who wish to establish a common ground for mutual understanding and action. Humor is not just joking, and management is not just the bloodless supervision of humans in the machine-like achievement of goals. Human emotions and feelings are involved in many issues, especially in culturally diverse settings. The reflection of feeling captures the emotional aspect of human nature. The purpose of this microskill is to identify and make explicit emotions that are often concealed allowing the listener to tune into the speaker’s emotional experience. While nothing seems more ordinary than to empathize with another, the reflection of feeling has a specific structure. The reflection of feeling informs the speaker that you are aware of his or her emotions. This in turn encourages the speaker to clarify further the issue at hand. The listener needs to be cautious about inaccurately labelling feelings. Adequate time and care must be given to identify the precise feeling correctly. Mislabelling an emotion is a sure sign of misunderstanding the speaker. The reflection of meaning may be the microskill that is most relevant to the diverse workplace. It has to do with how different racial, ethnic, gender, or cultural groups organize life and experiences as well as the meaning they draw from those experiences. This microskill may appear to be very much like the preceding ones of the paraphrase (which restates thoughts) or the reflection of feeling (which reflects emotions). Indeed, the reflection of meaning combines thoughts and meanings. One should remember that both reflecting skills of humor deal with profound issues – emotions, values, meanings, and the particular sense each one of us makes of the world. Neither skill should be used insincerely or manipulatively. Inappropriate use can cause as much anger and distrust, on the one hand, as understanding and trust, on the other. However, used ethically, with a sincere attitude, no microskill is more useful, what joke one may make of situation, what values may motivate seemingly culturally different behaviors, or why an action or word that is unimportant (or important) to you may be important (or unimportant) to a colleague. Patterns of eye contact and gaze also play an underestimated role in sense of humor. White males have their own, unique, eye contact patterns. When speaking, a white male looks away from the listener most of the time, making eye contact with the listener to emphasize significant points. While listening, a white male looks at the speaker most of the time. Eye contact indicates that the listener is paying attention to what is being said. Another pattern of eye contact signals the moment when turn-taking occurs for speaker and listener. Generally, when the speaker is nearing the end of a statement, he briefly looks away from the listener. Then, upon finishing the utterance, he reestablishes eye contact to signal that it is the turn of the other person to speak. Major humor problems can result if eye contact patterns are not in synchrony. Without either conversant being consciously aware of it, at appropriate times in the white male style a trustworthy person looks in the eye, while an untrustworthy person does not. If both parties share this pattern, conversation flows smoothly. If the patterns are at odds, one may call the other shifty, while the other may feel uncomfortable. In such a situation, the humor becomes strained, and the participants are conscious of that fact. White males do not seem to employ or recognize the value of nonverbal communication, in general, or of eye contact, in particular. Yet, it is evident that eye contact patterns play a significant role in effective humor. The general white male pattern is for speakers to gaze less at listeners and for listeners to gaze more at speakers. This is how white male listeners demonstrate their intentional listening or attending behavior. One of the most significant characteristics of the Muslim verbal communication style is its oral tradition. Muslims were forcibly transported from traditional societies that were oral. The heritage of orality may be most evident in two areas of the Muslim verbal communication style: the mode of listening, and the importance of expressing feeling during interpersonal interaction. Comparative studies have found that Muslims and whites have different verbal communication styles. Whites tend to make more use of the attending or listening skills in their face-to-face communication by using a forward lean of the upper body or asking open-ended questions. Muslims tend to be more directive by giving advice or confronting. An earlier discussion of microskills noted that open questions are less direct and invite a conversational partner to provide more information on a topic while closed questions tend to retrieve specific pieces of information and limit dialogue. Depending upon the circumstances, each type of question is equally valid. However, a dialogue with predominantly closed questions can take on the tone of an interrogation. Similarly, humor replete with open questions lends a less tenuous tone by giving respondents more room to provide information at their own pace. Therefore, the type of question sets the tone of a conversation. The Muslim’s expression of feeling may also contrast with white expression of feeling. Whereas emotions may be more openly expressed according to the Muslim humor paradigm, they are more repressed by the mainstream white paradigm. According to the Muslim humor paradigm, one is more congruent when one expresses emotions. According to the norm of the white male humor paradigm, one expresses one’s reason and logic dispassionately. For many Muslims, the expression of feeling is crucial to genuine humor between individuals. Therefore, in the Muslim paradigm one is credible when one expresses emotions; one is more credible when emotions are expressed resolutely. Thomas Kochman, scholar of linguistics, holds that one achieves ultimate credibility when logic and affect harmoniously intertwine. Only then can there be congruence between one’s thoughts and verbal communication. When one represses thoughts and feelings and expresses only logical thoughts, the discrepancy is likely to emerge through nonverbal behavior, such as moving away or breaking eye contact. The meanings that may be attributed to such incongruencies according to the Muslim communication paradigm may range from deceit or hypocrisy to weakness. The Muslim style of greater and more open expression of feeling can result in behaviors that may seem overly assertive and even confrontational to many whites. In conflictual situations, Muslim nonverbals tend to include loud tones of voice, intense eye contact, and sweeping gestures. Verbally, Muslims may freely express their emotions and, according to Kochman, directly challenge not only facts or ideas but also the individuals who present them. Many may interpret such behaviors as not only confrontational but also preludes to aggression. However, for Muslims the expression of one’s mind and spirit only mean being true to oneself. Whether one stands close together or far apart can make people feel more or less comfortable in dealing with one another. Some research indicates that, while conversing, Muslim children tend to stand closer together (Baxter 1973). In her analysis of research on proxemics, Halberstadt found that Muslims tend to stand closer to one another when young but farther apart when older – Muslim primary school children stand closer together than Muslim junior high or high school students. Distances increased still more for Muslim adults. Additional research indicates that Muslim adults tend to greet each other and stand somewhat further apart than other ethnic groups. Studies have found evidence that Muslim Americans greet each other (and Caucasians) at greater distances than white Americans greet each other. A comparative study showed that Muslim Americans interact at the greatest distances, Mexican Americans interact at the closest distances, and white Americans interact at intermediate distances (Baxter 1973). Another study concluded that during interviews whites tend to sit farther away from Muslims than they do from other whites. Humor is particularly significant to Muslims. The heritage of humanism and person-oriented behavior as well as the tendency to express emotions freely inclines some Muslims to be more reliant upon humor. On the basis of her review of the literature, educator Janice Hale-Benson states that Muslims are more proficient than are whites in expressing and detecting emotions. Any sign of understanding what another person has told encourages him or her to say more. Paraphrasing more powerfully encourages continuing the humor and elaborating thoughts resulting in more details about concerns and issues. One paraphrases by restating, in one’s own words, the essence of what a colleague has said. Paraphrasing has three specific components: beginning stem; restatement; and concluding, checking stem. Men’s body postures tend to convey messages of gender power and dominance rather than of affiliation. Often such kinesic behavior discourages rather than invites humor. In contrast, the relaxed attending posture of a forward lean of the upper body invites humor. Such attending nonverbal humor reflects an individual’s openness and willingness to listen and enter into a friendly humor. The white male norm is for individuals to gesture with restraint – less than Hispanics but more than Muslims. Wrists and hands are used much more than arms to gesture. Except at times of great joy or sorrow, elbows generally are not raised above shoulder level. Those who gesture more than this norm may be considered flamboyant; individuals who gesture less than this norm may be considered uptight or cold fish. A new approach to managing diversity is necessary. Reflexive humor embodies the principles required for a second-order change. Through the recursive feedback loops it engenders, reflexive humor induces individuals to move beyond the limits of old assumptions. Furthermore, by flattening the hierarchy, its egalitarianism encourages the participation that unfolds to find new and creative solutions. This new approach to humor delineates how individuals can come together to work on constructing mutual realities. The process of reflexive humor establishes commonalities rather than magnifying differences. It provides individuals with the opportunity to come to know one another through a continuous process of mutual interchange. Such an approach inclines to modify subjective meanings and to create the common grounds that are the bases for common understanding. The reflexive process of sharing information creates the recursive loops by which one clarifies and reduces the uncertainties that all have about each other. Therefore, the nature of this change is both organic and evolutionary. The second-order change induced by reflexive humor is not the result of external injunctions by trainers to change one’s assumptions about groups, as may have been true of some previous training approaches. Rather, the change produced by humor is the result of a volitional, egalitarian, and mutually-induced process. The continuous interchange of humor creates the fertile ground where individuals studying together co-create solutions of a second-order change. This change emanates from newly-developed assumptions based on newly-generated realities. In effect, humor induces greater convergence in the thoughts, beliefs, perceptions, and meanings of the individuals who engage in it. As Johns Hopkins linguist Lawrence Kincaid puts it, an effective humor logically leads to the â€Å"state of greater uniformity, or the successive reduction of diversity† (Lawrence 1988). Thus, applying humor in the diverse society can lead to a place where the construction of new realities is possible. This is where cultural issues and cultural differences meld, and a new reality ensues as a result of the information-sharing process. Hence, myths about differences begin to diminish and common realities begin to evolve. From these emerge the common ground, the convergence that is essential for the shared understanding that common action requires. Humor is the missing link of diversity training. It is the second-order process by which individuals can mutually change themselves and each other according to their own pace and direction. Humor is perhaps the least tangible aspect of organizational life, but it seems to have very powerful and tangible effects on people from different cultures. In a high energy atmosphere one can sense people’s excitement just by watching the way they move, the way they interact and go about their business, and even the expressions on their faces. When one walks out of a very positive atmosphere, one wants to go back. If the atmosphere is stifling, unwelcoming, filled with tension, and not much fun, then one does not want to return. If the place happens to be one’s workplace, the effect can be very powerful. The microskills are specific tools that enhance the humor process. They are relatively easy to learn. The skills are best learned oneat-a-time. Following the presentation and discussion, practice provides a hands-on approach to the mastery of each skill. As one gains proficiency in one skill, another is added and practiced simultaneously. Thus, each remaining skill is added until the complete set of microskills has been acquired. The key to proficiency with the microskills is practice. While these skills are easy to comprehend and implement individually, making them part of students’ everyday behavior may not be as easy. Only through continued conscious effort in using and practicing the skills can we successfully make them part of our behavioral repertoire. They are skills that can be applied to any life setting to enhance understanding of one another and, hence, relationships. References Baxter C. ( 1973). â€Å"Interpersonal spacing in two-person cross-cultural interactions†. Man-Environment Systems, 3. D. Lawrence Kincaid. (1988). The convergence theory and intercultural communication. In Young Yun Kim & William B. Gundykunst (Eds. ), Theories in intercultural communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Howe, Susan E. S. (1994). â€Å"Exploring New Leadership Styles. † Pennsylvania CPA Journal 65, no. 1. Nyberg, David. (1981). Power Over Power. Ithaca, N. Y. : Cornell University Press. Thomas Kochman. (1981). Black and white styles in conflict. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Poems by Seamus Heaney “Death of a Naturalist” and “The Barn” Essay

Both poems display very rich description from the start and continue this full description throughout the poem giving you a very clear image of the sights, sounds and smells described. The very first lines of each poem show this rich flavour and very much give you the idea that the poems are about nature. The poems are about forces of nature and they both build the effect of these forces using description. Death of a Naturalist uses the description to give the feeling that the author is control of nature that is why when it comes to the last verse it is so shocking to the author because he realises he is not in control anymore and cannot control the forces of nature. The Barn uses the description to give you the feeling you get when you are in the barn. It gives you the feeling that everything is still, dead and cold this gives it an eerie feeling and this feeling is expressed in the last verse not as still, dead or cold but very much alive. Both poems are reminiscing about childhood experiences with the true forces of nature. You can tell that they are childhood experiences because of the language used. In Death of a Naturalist the things that tell you that it is a child speaking through Seamus Heaney are the things that this child does. The child collects ‘jampotfuls’ of spawn and puts them on window-sills at home and shelves at school. Also the language used tells us that it is told through the words of a child. Words like daddy and mammy are examples of the child-like language used in Death of a Naturalist. In The Barn the things that tell you that it is a childhood experience is the description and the actions. The description of the floor ‘mouse-grey’ is typical of a simple childish description. The action that tells us that it is a childhood experience is the way the child lays on the floor face down, although an adult may have been scared in the barn I think that an adult may not have laid face down on the floor so therefore it must have been a child. Even though both these poems are childhood experiences there are more signs of this in Death of a Naturalist than in The Barn because anybody could have been scared of being in a barn alone but I think that every adult knows that when tadpoles are fully developed that they turn into horrible, ugly, slimy creatures- frogs. Both poems show how people feel in control. In Death of a Naturalist the  young boy felt in control of the spawn until the day when he saw the frogs and in The Barn he felt in control because the farm implements were not real the only thing that he wasn’t in control of was his mind which led him to believe that the farm implements were moving. I think of the two poems the more realistic is Death of a Naturalist because of the actions of the young boy and the way the frogs are described in the last verse. The thing that makes The Barn seem more surreal is the last sentence ‘the two-lugged sacks moved in like great blind rats’ because sacks do not move. The Barn seems to depict the tone of the whole poem right from the start. It has a vague threatening feel to it and this is theme is continued throughout the whole poem even at the end when the two sacks seemed threatening because they seemed to be moving. Death of a Naturalist however does not have a particular tone all the way through. At the beginning of this poem the description is of things that are revolting but because the child loved nature so much they are described as likeable aspects of nature and the things that are not revolting are just described as nature. The last verse does not continue this theme and things that are disgusting are described as exactly that and even exaggerated. Death of a Naturalist includes alliteration and onomatopoeia however in The Barn none of these are used. I think that they are used in Death of a Naturalist because it helps to describe items in the poem and the sounds that are made but I feel in The Barn they are not used because they are not needed; just description itself and some similes help to give the poem its flavour. The last verses of each poem are the child’s personal experience with the forces of nature and how they felt small compared to nature. In Death of a Naturalist the young boy feels small compared to these big, ugly war-like frogs. In The Barn the young boy feels small compared to all the objects in the barn and the animals upon the rafters. I think that The Barn has more of a pattern than Death of a Naturalist. In the Barn there are five verses and each of them are of similar length  however in Death of a Naturalist there are two verses of different lengths. Because of the pattern in The barn I think it is more like a poem and I think that Death of a Naturalist is more like a story because of the structure and sequence of events. I think both these poems are similar but within their similarities they have many subtle differences.

Why the Illinois v. Wardlow Case Still Matters Today

Why the Illinois v. Wardlow Case Still Matters Today Illinois v. Wardlow is not a Supreme Court case that most Americans know well enough to cite by name, but the ruling has made a serious impact on policing. It gave authorities in high-crime neighborhoods the green light to stop people for behaving suspiciously. The high court’s decision has not only been linked to a rising number of stop-and-frisks but to high-profile police killings as well. It has also been held responsible for creating more inequities in the criminal justice system. Does the 2000 Supreme Court decision deserve the blame? With this review of Illinois v. Wardlow, get the facts about  the case and its consequences today. Fast Facts: Illinois v. Wardlow Case Argued: November 2, 1999Decision Issued:  January 12, 2000Petitioner: State of IllinoisRespondent: Sam WardlowKey Questions: Does a suspect’s sudden and unprovoked flight from identifiable police officers patrolling a known high-crime area justify the officers stopping that person, or does it violate the Fourth Amendment?Majority Decision: Justices Rehnquist, OConnor, Kennedy, Scalia, and ThomasDissenting: Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg, and BreyerRuling: The officer was justified in suspecting that the accused was involved in criminal activity and, therefore, in investigating further. There was no violation of the Fourth Amendment. Should Police Have Stopped Sam Wardlow? On Sept. 9, 1995, two Chicago police officers were driving through a Westside neighborhood known for drug trafficking when they spotted William â€Å"Sam† Wardlow. He stood beside a building with  a bag in hand. But when Wardlow noticed the police driving through, he broke into a sprint. After a brief chase, the officers cornered Wardlow and frisked him. During the search, they found a loaded .38-caliber handgun. They then arrested Wardlow, who argued in court that the gun shouldn’t have been entered into evidence because the police lacked a reason to stop him. An Illinois trial court disagreed, convicting him of â€Å"unlawful use of a weapon by a felon.† The Illinois Appellate Court reversed the lower court’s decision, asserting that the arresting officer didn’t have cause to stop and frisk Wardlow. The Illinois Supreme Court ruled along similar lines, arguing that Wardlow’s stop violated the Fourth Amendment. Unfortunately for Wardlow, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, reached a different conclusion. It found: â€Å"It was not merely respondent’s presence in an area of heavy narcotics trafficking that aroused the officers’ suspicion but his unprovoked flight upon noticing the police. Our cases have also recognized that nervous, evasive behavior is a pertinent factor in determining reasonable suspicion. ...Headlong flight- wherever it occurs- is the consummate act of evasion: it is not necessarily indicative of wrongdoing, but it is certainly suggestive of such.† According to the court, the arresting officer hadn’t misstepped by detaining Wardlow because officers must make commonsense judgments to decide if someone is behaving suspiciously. The court said that its interpretation of the law did not contradict other rulings giving people the right to ignore police  officers and go about their business when approached by them. But Wardlow, the court said, had done the opposite of going about his business by running away. Not everyone in the legal community agrees with this take. Criticism of Wardlow U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, now retired, wrote the dissent in Illinois v. Wardlow. He broke down the possible reasons people might run when encountering police officers. â€Å"Among some citizens, particularly minorities and those residing in high crime areas, there is also the possibility that the fleeing person is entirely innocent, but, with or without justification, believes that contact with the police can itself be dangerous, apart from any criminal activity associated with the officer’s sudden presence.† African Americans, in particular, have discussed their distrust and fear of law enforcement for years. Some would even go so far to say that they have developed PTSD-like symptoms because of their experiences with police. For these individuals, running from the authorities is likely instinct rather than a signal that they’ve committed a crime. Additionally, former police chief and government official Chuck Drago pointed out to Business Insider how Illinois v. Wardlow affects the public differently based on income level. â€Å"If the police are driving down a middle-class neighborhood, and the officer sees someone turn and run into their house, that’s not enough to follow them,† he said. â€Å"If he’s in a high-crime area though, there may be enough for reasonable suspicion. It’s the area he’s in, and those areas tend to be to impoverished and African American and Hispanic.† Poor black and Latino neighborhoods already have a greater police presence than white suburban areas. Authorizing police to detain anyone who runs from them in these areas increases the odds that residents will be racially profiled and arrested. Those familiar with Freddie Gray, the Baltimore man who died in police custody in 2015 after a â€Å"rough ride,† argue that Wardlow played a role in his death. Officers apprehended Gray only after he â€Å"fled unprovoked upon noticing police presence.† They found a switchblade on him and arrested him. However,  if the authorities had been prohibited from pursuing Gray simply because he fled from them in a high-crime neighborhood, he may very well still be alive today, his advocates argue. News of his death sparked protests across the country and unrest in Baltimore. The year after Gray’s death, the Supreme Court decided 5-3 in Utah v. Strieff to let police use the evidence they’ve collected during unlawful stops in some circumstances. Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed her dismay at the decision, arguing that the high court has already given the authorities ample opportunity to stop members of the public for little to no reason. She cited Wardlow and several other cases in her dissent. â€Å"Although many Americans have been stopped for speeding or jaywalking, few may realize how degrading a stop can be when the officer is looking for more. This Court has allowed an officer to stop you for whatever reason he wants- so long as he can point to a pretextual justification after the fact.â€Å"That justification must provide specific reasons why the officer suspected you were breaking the law, but it may factor in your ethnicity, where you live, what you were wearing and how you behaved (Illinois v. Wardlow). The officer does not even need to know which law you might have broken so long as he can later point to any possible infraction- even one that is minor, unrelated, or ambiguous.† Sotomayor went on to argue that these questionable stops by police can easily escalate to officers looking through a person’s belongings, frisking the individual for weapons and performing an intimate bodily search. She argued unlawful police stops make the justice system unfair, endanger lives and corrode civil liberties. While young black men like Freddie Gray have been stopped by police lawfully under Wardlow, their detainment and subsequent arrests cost them their lives. The Effects of Wardlow A 2015 report by the American Civil Liberties Union found that in the city of Chicago, where Wardlow was stopped for fleeing, police disproportionately stop and frisk young men of color. African Americans constituted 72 percent of people stopped. Also, police stops overwhelmingly took place in majority-minority neighborhoods. Even in areas where blacks make up a small percentage of residents, such as Near North, where they make up only 9 percent of the population, African Americans comprised 60 percent of people stopped. These stops don’t make communities safer, the ACLU argued. They deepen the divides between the police and the communities they’re supposed to serve.

Is the Family a Fabricated Thing

Is the Family a Fabricated Thing Introduction The family has traditionally occupied a central place in society with communities hailing it as the basic unit of society. Families provide the social core in all societies and the nuclear family is present in all societies in the world. The unifying function of the family has been credited with the development and advancement of societies since time immemorial.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Is the Family a Fabricated Thing? specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More For this reason, the family unit is unanimously considered as the basic building block of a successful and functional society. This is the ideal institution within which children are created and brought up in a protected environment until they are able to take care of themselves. The family also serves as a tool for socialization since the shared moral and social values of the community are inculcated in the children withing the family setting. For these reasons, the family is assumed to be an innate experience with some authors suggesting that the family is a natural institution. However, this notion has been questioned by anthropologists whose studies have led them to question the â€Å"naturalness† of the family unit. The findings of these scholars have led them to conclude that the family is not a natural thing but rather a construction of the society. This paper will set out to discuss the ideas of some of the most outstanding anthropologists of the 20th century, Adam Kuper, David Schneider, and Claude Levi-Strauss, in order to show that the family is a fabricated thing. The Idea of the Family The family is regarded as the basic unit of society and at its most base level; it is made up of a man, woman, and their children. Kuper (1982) states that the family preceded the formation of the society and in these early stages, it comprised of a male figure who exercised jurisdiction over his wives and children. Each fami ly paid no regard to the other and acted in its own self-interest. The aggregation of families was the next step in social evolution and the ties of kinship became the basis of societies. The family provided the basis on which societies were ordered with expanded extended families serving as the social core.Advertising Looking for essay on social sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Reproduction is universally considered to be the basis of family relations since each person must have a biological father and mother. This simple parent-child relationship makes it possible to perform genealogical tracing since it is a biological fact that a man and a woman must be involved in procreation. Therefore, the concept of kinship was formulated based on this blood relation and relationships though marriage unions between previously unrelated parties. The naturalness of the family has been presupposed for many centuries due to the prevalence of this social grouping. However, the arguments made by anthropologists suggest that the family is a cultural construct. Family: A Fabricated Concept Adam Kuper’s Ideas Adam Kuper suggests that the family was formulated as an organization through which people could live in harmony and accomplish greater exploits. Before the concept of family, each individual acted at his own discretion and there was no order or system of laws in place. Kuper (1982) records that the original state of human society was characterized by promiscuity rather than family life and this status quo was detrimental to the raising of children. This primitive existence was unsustainable since violence and anarchy reigned. The family unit emerged as a more ordered system of procreation within which the child could exist in a more secure environment. As the family concept became more sophisticated, legal paternity became recognized and the child could grow in an environment where he/she h ad a mother and a father. The extended patriarchal family group provided the basis for jural order and continuity (Kuper 1982, p.73). The earliest form of government was therefore based on the family concept. The political ideas were grounded in the assumption that kinship in blood is the sole possible ground of community in political functions (Kuper 2008, p.723). The family was formulated as the best structure to foster social stability and encourage good governance. The prohibition of some relationships in some cultures while the same relationships are allowed in others is further proof that kinship is a culturally constructed concept. Human beings formulate the laws governing who should marry whom and therefore forms a family and they vary from society to society.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Is the Family a Fabricated Thing? specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Kuper (2008) documents that in the nineteenth centu ry, there was no crime in incest, and there were no rules articulating which marriages were allowed or forbidden. Before the 1880s, incest was an acceptable practice in England and there were no laws against the practice. The social perception of incest only underwent a radical change when the danger of sexual relations between fathers and daughters, or brothers and sisters began to be publicized by the National Vigilance Association. Following this, incest came to be conceived of as an offence with a victim. Because of this change in public perception, the British Parliament passed a Law in 1907 that made incest a crime and criminalized sexual relationships between members of the immediate family. As such, the family is a fabricated institute that is prone to changes based on the public needs. Kuper (2003) argues that the family was necessary to ensure survival in the primitive societies where division of labour was necessary. In these pre-modern societies, the nuclear family compr ised of male and female enabled the parties to specialize in various activities for sustenance. The males typically acted as the hunters while the females were gatherers within a nuclear family setting. This economic function increased the value of the family and kinship was integral for survival Kuper (2003). It is conceivable that without the economic need of family, this institution would never have been created. Further reinforcing this supposition is the observation by anthropologists that with the rise of the individualist modern society, the economic functions of family have shrunk and each sex can manage to exist without the need of the other. Another indication that family is a fabricated concept is the difference in preference placed on a particular side of the family by different cultures. While some cultures emphasize on matrilineal descent (kin from the mothers lineage), others emphasize on patrilineal descent (kin through the fathers lineage).Advertising Looking for essay on social sciences? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More In addition to this, the location of residence differs with some cultures promoting marriage residence at the mothers family house while most promote residence at the fathers family house (Kuper 2003). If the family was a natural construct, there would be universal preferences and all cultures would follow the same conventions. The fact that different ideals are practiced by different cultures proves that family is a human construction. The rapid changes in society that were experienced in the 1950s and 1960s demonstrated that the family was not an integral component of the society. During this period, consensual unions became widespread and the traditional family unit was dismantled in some circles. Some people began to view the family as a major source of discontentment within the society and this greatly discredited the nuclear family as an unshakeable institution. The sentiments of the time are best articulated by Leach who asserts, far from being the basis for the good society, the family with its narrow privacy and tawdry secrets, is the source of all our discontents (Kuper 2003, p.332). The nature of partner relationships has also experienced significant changes over the decades with a marked decline in the importance of the social origin of a partner being exhibited in all modern societies. In the past, great weight was placed on marriage with major kinship involvement in the process (Dykstra 2006). Today, marriage unions are primarily a matter of personal choice and preference with the families on both sides of the partners being involved only marginally. In addition to this, the frequency with which family unions are dissolved has risen tremendously. The increased rate of marriage dissolutions is blamed on the heightened emphasis on the emotional side of relationships, which leads to higher expectations and demands by both partners on each other (Dykstra 2006). In traditional marriage unions, emphasis was placed on the social and material benefits of the union. Claude Levi-Strauss’s Ideas Claude Levi-Strauss is credited with advancing the Structuralism theory in which he argued that the phenomena of the external world are apprehended as having distinct characteristics because of the way our senses communicate these perceptions (Voss 1977). Human beings are predisposed to categorize things into separate units or segments and assign these things named classes. Any material object of culture or belief system is in imitation of human apprehension of nature (Levi-Strauss 1970). Mans perception of nature as segmented is therefore responsible for his view of society as ordered. Advocates of the family as a natural unit might argue for the natural nature of the family structure since it exists universally. Both primitive and civilized societies have some concept of family, which is typically made up of females and at least one male figure either related to the female(s) by blood or by marriage. Levi-Strauss refutes this assertio n by highlighting that cultures are bound to have some similarities since they are all products of human minds (Voss 1977). For this reason, universal features such as the family unit can occur. Levi-Strauss suggests that the basis of marriage rules was to create bonds between otherwise unrelated people. He argues that the since pre-historic times, communities had the option of intermarrying among themselves or giving away their women to other communities (Johnson 2003). The communities that gave away their women cemented political alliances and thus reduced the risk of being annihilated by superior enemies. The incest taboo was formed out of the need to enforce exogamy and therefore increase the societys chances of survival. Voss (1977) best articulates this idea by stating that if survival of a society is dependent upon alliance, strong sanctions against incest must be interdicted (p.28). The family concept was formulated as an important unifying force through which the social coh esion was fostered and propagated. Levi-Strauss formulated the alliance theory in which he argued that sibling groups were linked through the exchange of sisters in marriage thus extending sibling solidarity to larger groupings (Kuper 1982). Levi-Strauss argued that all the pre-modern societies of the world were organized on the basis of cross-cousin marriage (Kuper 2008, p.726). He further stated that the family as a function of marriage was an institution that was formulated to create and maintain alliances. These alliances took place through the exchange between groups as people married for strategic reasons such as to strengthen political alliances (Levi-Strauss 1969). Kinship served the practical purpose of preventing war by setting up a diplomatic alliance between groups. The class structure that is based on family status is a cultural construction. Levi-Strauss considers the practice of totemism an expression of the differences among members of the society. Totemism, which is the naming of individuals or clans after particular plant or animal species, was a widespread practice since historical times (VonSturmer 1970). This practice emerged from the need of man to develop a system of social ordering by giving different class structures. Human beings are able to distinguish each other according to their mutual social status, which is normally articulated in the form of social classification. David Schneider’s Ideas Throughout the 19th century, Americans held the view that the family relationship was biologically given and of huge importance to the society. Many Europeans also shared this assumption and they presumed that kinship was a biological outcome. However, Schneider argues that if this were the case then the same set of ideas would have been developed by other peoples across the world. This is not the case and the family structure varied from continent to continent, and tribe to tribe. For this reason, David Schneider suggested that kinship was a function of civilization and not a feature of primitive society. According to this anthropologist, there is nothing natural about kinship and it is the production of the society. Social conventions alone may lead to a family relationship even if there is no biological relationship between or among parties. This view is corroborated by Johnson (2003) who reveals that a person is regarded as family based on some socially prescribed duties and privileges that the person fulfils in his/her relation to others. The manner in which people act towards each other is based on the concept of kinship, which is a construction of man. Schneider (1984) argues that there is no such thing as kinship and that kinship is in fact a creation of anthropologists and it has no concrete existence. Schneider (1984) suggests that family is a social construction that is useful for the allocation of rights and their transmission from one generation to the next. The family was formulated as an entity throu gh which continuity could be guaranteed. Patrilineage in many societies served as a landholding corporations with parents leaving property to their children. Dykstra (2006) notes that resources are passed down from one generation to the next, in the form of gifts or inheritances for example, or in the form of financial support (p.1). Schneider (1984) theorizes that biological kinship is culturally constructed and it was formulated to help establish paternity with a fair degree of likelihood. He elaborates that primitive man lived at a time when promiscuity prevailed and there was no way of establishing who the childs father was. The concept of marriage of pairs was formulated to help establish paternity and this was the earliest and greatest act of human intelligence. The bonds and ties that are attributed to the sexual reproduction that occurs in the family setting are not natural but a function of the society. Schneider (1984) observes that sexual relations can occur and have sign ificance even outside kinship. However, the social and cultural attributes that are created when sexual reproduction occurs in a nuclear family setting are formulated by the society. Biological relations are for this reason afforded special qualities by the society. This has led to the ties being regarded as natural and inherent in the human condition. The ties between biologically close members are not natural since they would not be special without the social and cultural connotations ascribed to them. The socialization process is responsible for inculcating the concept of kinship in children. As a child grows up in the family, he/she is taught the logic by which his/her specific culture classifies kin and these concepts become ingrained in him/her. The child is often ignorant as to what kinship terms such as â€Å"uncle†, and â€Å"aunty† mean but he/she is brought up to attach special meaning to the relationships. Schneider (1984) points out that the classification s of relatives may extend beyond the simple biological and genetic relationships with stipulated descent being included in the categories. Without the socializing process, the concept of the family would die out as individuals would not be confined to this socially prescribed structure. Schneider strongly rejects the understanding that family has to do with reproduction and he assertively declares that kinship is essentially undefined and vacuous which since it has little that can justify it (Read 2003). The inadequacy of blood relationships for a definition of family is accentuated by the inability for this consanguinity to account for practices such as adoption that still make fatherhood and motherhood possible. Read (2003) argues that it would be more convincing to state that family is a social convention rather than a function of procreation and parturition. Schneider argues that the family is a fabrication since some cultures do not have words that can reasonably translate to f ather or even child. In his ethnographic work among the Yapese, Schneider noted that the relationship between the biological father and offspring could not be translated as father and child in the English sense of the word (Schneider 1984). The Yapese people were able to exist without this genealogically based kinship relationship and even the passing down of property from generation to generation was not done on the basis of biological relationships. Further Evidence In addition to the thoughts of the renowned anthropologists referenced herein, current developments in the family structure provide more evidence that the family is a cultural construct. The traditional gender-specific division of labour has had to change with the increased participation of women in the labour market. Dykstra (2006) notes that the interaction between the partners who make up the family has become more of a matter of negotiation with the traditional gender-specific notions being all but discarded in mos t developed nations. The recent legitimization of gay and lesbian family formation in many Western countries further reinforces the assertion that family is a fabricated concept. For centuries, homosexual relationships were frowned upon by societies with severe penalties being imposed on individuals who engaged in these unions. Schneider (1997) reveals that the notion of sodomy was so abhorred in Western culture that if justified killing and enslaving so many in the 15th and 16th centuries (p.271). This has changed and homosexual unions are today tolerated on a greater scale. Schneider (1997) notes that gay and lesbian rights are today asserted with antidiscrimination laws and fringe benefits being accorded to this previously marginalized sub-group. The traditional notion of family has had to be reinvented as non-heterosexual couples form relationships and become â€Å"families†. Discussion The idea that family is a fabricated concept has led to the fall of kinship studies as modern anthropologists have abandoned the subject due to the many internal problems and theoretical weaknesses contained in it (Kuper 2003). In spite of the different approach taken in their arguments, the three thinkers analysed in this paper, Levi-Strauss, Kuper, and Schneider all contend that family is a cultural construct. The paper has demonstrated that the prevalence of families in all communities is not an indication of their naturalness. Renowned anthropologists such as Levi-Strauss have demonstrated that the seemingly universal concept is not an indication of the naturalness of the family unit. Rather, it is a statement of the scientific operations of classification of objects and phenomena which occurs in both Western and primitive societies. The universal family structure as we know it is a product of identical mental manipulations, which explains the seemingly self-consistent systems exhibited all over the world. The fact that the family unity is not what it used to be is proof enough that the family is a fabricated unit that keeps evolving with the culture of the society. In the recent past, alternative household organizations such as single-parent families and singles have become prevalent hence necessitating a review of the importance of the nuclear and extended family. These realities suggest that the assumption of genealogy or biology as the basis of the family is faulty since if this were the case, the family structure would remain static through time. In spite of the understanding that the family is a fabrication, this unit will continue to play an important role in society. The nuclear family is still the engine-room of socialization and it continues to bestow economic benefits for its members. Even Schneider (1984) acknowledges that kinship is a privileged institution since it is the major building block out of which all social systems are constructed. Conclusion This paper set out to examine the ideas of prominent anthropologists in orde r to demonstrate that the family is a fabricated thing. A review of these ideas has revealed that family is an ideological illusion constructed by man over the centuries. The paper has demonstrated that the concept of family started from the individual actor playing for economic and political advantage and using the family as a tool for social cohesion. The paper has convincingly shown that most aspects of kinship are not natural but rather the social construction of various societies over the centuries. The family relationship is not primarily one of genealogical and reproductively, instead, it is culturally specified and the manner in which it is expressed and perceived is a fabrication. It can therefore be authoritatively stated that family is not inherently human or universal; rather, it is a cultural construction that is arbitrary and variable in nature. References Dykstra, A 2006, Family relationships: the ties that bind, Amsterdam Study Centre for the Metropolitan Environment , Amsterdam. Johnson, C 2003, Claud Levi-Strauss: The formative years, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Kuper, A 1982, ‘Lineage Theory: A Critical Retrospective’, Ann. Rev. Anthropol, vol. 11, no. 1, pp.71-95. Kuper, A 2003, ‘What Really Happened to Kinship and Kinship Studies’, Journal of Cognition and Culture, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 329-335. Kuper, A 2008, ‘Changing the subject – about cousin marriage, among other things’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, vol. 14, no.1, pp. 717-735. Levi-Strauss, C 1969, The Elementary Structures of Kinship, Beacon Press, Boston. Levi-Strauss, C 1970, The raw and the cooked, John and Harper, New York. Read, D 2001, What is Kinship? In The Cultural Analysis of Kinship: The Legacy of David Schneider and Its Implications for Anthropological Relativism, University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Schneider, D 1984, A critique of the study of kinship, University of Michigan Press, Michigan. Schne ider, D 1997, ‘The power of culture: notes on some aspects of gay and lesbian kinship in America today’, Cultural Anthropology, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 270-274. VonSturmer, J 1970, Claude Levi-Strauss: the anthropologist as everyman, Cornell University Press, Ithaca. Voss, S 1977, ‘Claude Levi-Strauss: The Man and His Works’, Nebraska Anthropologist, vol. 145, no.1, pp. 21-38.

Aggressive and threatening language

Aggressive and threatening language Essay Pip and Magwitch are the most mysterious and strange quasi family in the novel. They are connected but without either knowing for the most part. Its coincidental that the father of the woman loved by Pip is his benefactor, however a benefactor without knowing his own daughter.  The two first meet in the Marshes. Magwitch, a convict demands a file and some wittles (food) at the cost of the boys life. Here, Dickens brings the scene to life with his use of aggressive and threatening language. Pip brings Magwitch what he has asked and hopes never to be associated with such a man again. In Chapter 39 his fears are answered.  A guest visits Pip, a snobbish almost gentleman Pip.  Pip is shocked and horrified as Magwitch gradually discloses he is his benefactor, that Jaggers is his agent. Magwitch has risked being hanged just to return to England (After serving time in Australia) to see his creation his gentleman. Pip finds him repulsive but shelters him and gives him Herberts bed. In discovering Magwitch is his benefactor, Pip is faced with his own vanity and gullibility. His life has been guided by fantasy. Dickens uses some cold language during this chapter to show Pips annoyance and grief that Magwitch unintentionally has caused. When I awoke without having parted in my sleep with the perception of my wretchedness, the clocks of the Eastward churches were striking five, the candles were wasted out, the fire was dead, and the wind and rain intensified the thick black darkness. Pip.  Magwitch, on the contrary is happy about his (mirroring Mrs. Havisham and Estella) creation.   , lookee here, dear boy, he said dropping his voice and laying a long finger on my breast in an impressive manner.  By Chapter 42 the relationship of the two has increased somewhat. Pip manages to get Magwitch to tell him and Herbert his life story, and about Compeyson. Although Magwitch reluctantly tells the two friends the story, telling Pip so much, indicates he may have begun to truly trust Pip. By this chapter, Pip is maturing; he is only now becoming a real gentleman. Magwitch may have spotted this, and this could be the only reason why Magwitch told Pip so much.  However, it is only by Chapter 46 that they become more open towards each other. In this chapter, Herbert and Pip decide to use a boat to get Magwitch out of the country. The use of language is friendlier between Pip and Magwitch.  Dear Boy he answered, clasped my hands, I dont know when we may meet again, and I dont like Good-Bye, say Good-Night! Good Night!  The use of exclamation marks is more frequent and the actual dialogue is friendlier.  Chapter 54 is the almost escaped chapter. Magwitch gets captured and the reader now sees there is genuine care for Magwitch from Pip, as he promises never to leave his side. During the journey, Magwitch is strangely passive. This may imply that he is going to miss Pip, and he trusts Pip.  Pips failure to export Magwitch out of country makes him pity Magwitch. During Chapter 56, we notice their relationship at its strongest. Magwitch is sentenced to death for his crimes, but dies naturally before. Pip is at his bedside. Pips and Magwitchs language is solemn, as if with a lump in their throat. They have become good friends. Pips final words Youre daughter is beautiful and I love her is a sweet end to an otherwise bitter life, and more fulfilling than having created a gentleman.  The language and emotions shared between them is one as if theyre father and son, which links with Magwitch said back in Chapter 39 READ: Death Of A Salesman EssayLookee here, Pip. Im your second father. Youre my son more to me nor any son. Magwitch, pg.313 Bottom.  The devotion between Pip and Magwitch shows there is a genuine love between them.  O Lord, be merciful to him, a sinner!  Magwitchs created gentleman has now really become a gentleman.  The grouping of Pip and Magwitch is the only one that actually works as a whole. The grouping/quasi family features qualities that keep the grouping together and functional. The members of group rely and can trust each other, they pity each other and they love each other. As a whole none of the other quasi families feature these qualities and so, can be called dysfunctional.

Cultural Issues Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Cultural Issues - Essay Example The cultural variety today becomes a very significant issue in the research field of international relations, first of all for the best understanding of laws of social life, an organization of statehood and management in complex communities, prevention and resolution of conflicts. There is no doubt that cultural factor is obviously present in the modern policy of international relations. Robert Garson (â€Å"extra information†) states: â€Å"issues of culture, rights, and justice drive international relations and international politics in a certain direction†. Moreover, according to Garson, culture is very important because: The cultural variety today becomes a very significant issue in the research field of international relations, first of all for the best understanding of laws of social life, an organization of statehood and management in complex communities, prevention and resolution of conflicts. There is no doubt that cultural factor is obviously present in the mo dern policy of international relations. Robert Garson (â€Å"extra information†) states: â€Å"issues of culture, rights, and justice drive international relations and international politics in a certain direction†. Moreover, according to Garson, culture is very important because:†¢ â€Å"It is the key to our social and ultimately individual identity†;†¢ â€Å"if to look at the rhetoric of international politics, that rhetoric is actually wrapped up in cultural phrases. People talk of themselves as being French or Tanzanian or American, they use these identities†;†¢ â€Å"culture is actually one of the organizing principles of most political communities†.For the first time, the question on cultural variety arises in world politics after the First World War I when the countries-winners have formulated the doctrine of self-determination on an ethnocultural basis as the mechanism of the abolition of imperial states of Austria-Hungary, O ttoman Turkey, Imperial Germany and Imperial Russia. A certain formula of "national self-determination" gradually began to gain a foothold as the international norm of state formation.  There was an idea that the society should be culturally homogeneous.

Random drug testing at school Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Random drug testing at school - Research Paper Example 827). Based on a study that Ringwalt and colleagues had done in 2005 but reported only in 2008, a substantial proportion of schools in the United States are implementing random drug testing. As early as 2005, author Neil McKeganey has observed that random drug-testing has been not only practiced but also widely-developed not only within the United States but also within the United Kingdom (12). ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF DRUG-TESTING. Based on the work of James-Burdumy and colleagues, random drug-testing at schools is being promoted because it can reduce student substance abuse in three ways (xviii). First, it is a deterrent because if students are sufficiently aware of ongoing random tests, the random tests will lead them to eventually stop using drugs or abusing substances. Second, by detecting substance abuse, mandatory and random drug testing can identify users for appropriate treatment or counseling. Finally or third, the random drug testing can have spillover effects on non-users. Reducing drug use or substance abuse is important because negative consequences can result from drug use such as low academic performance, bad habits and risky sexual behaviors (James-Burdumy and Colleagues xvii). COUNTERARGUMENTS. We use the key arguments revealed by researchers Kern and her colleagues, working for the American Civil Liberties Union and the Drug Policy Alliance, on why some educators are saying no on the issue of random drug testing at schools in the United States. In summary, some educators are reported to be saying no to random drug testing because it is ineffective, costly, other methods are more reliable, and because drug testing can lead to other types of problems. The authors raised 8 points on why some educators are saying no to drug testing (Kern et al. 2). First, they say that drug testing is ineffective anyway. Second, drug testing is costly and there more effective