Ethical Issue: Abortion

ETHICAL ISSUE: ABORTION INTRODUCTION The root question to ethics is whether abortion is considered murder or a justified killing? Is it morally wrong and if so, should it be made legal or illegal? There are mainly 2 views towards abortion. The pro-choice regard abortion as acceptable in some circumstances as women should be given a freedom of choice. Whereas the pro-life regard abortion an absolute act of wrong and should be criminalized. Let us first take a look at various approaches to help us better understand and justify both sides of the argument. RIGHTS APPROACHA pro-choice would argue that women have the rights to her life, body and health. Before abortion was permitted, women will either have to carry their pregnancy to term or desperately seek to abort due to various reasons (eg. health, incest, rape, career), thus resorting to unsafe and life-threatening procedures. However, with access to safe and legal abortions, women will have the basic right of managing their own bodie s and the risk of health will be reduced. One example is an article extracted from the National Organization for Women which mentioned the deaths of women who turned to illegal and unsafe abortions. Refer to Example 1) Besides, women have the rights to liberty and thus have the power to exercise their rights to abortion. In the event a woman needs to continue her employment or meet other obligations, she will not be forced to bear a child against her will which can result in misery as it becomes impossible for her to carry out her duties and obligations in the usual manner. An example is from the New York Times Magazine (LIVES – When One Is Enough). A woman named Amy Richards explains why she decided to go for abortion. (Refer to Example 2) In addition, women have the rights to sovereignty.By allowing abortion, women would not be unjustly forced into motherhood which in turn forces them into submissive roles in society. Thus their rights to livelihood and continuation of educ ation and profession will not be depleted. They can have the potential of being on equal status, dominion and power as men. Under the concept of personhood, it is argued that fetuses are not yet born and are not sentient beings. They do not have the capacity to have experiences (eg. feeling pain) and are not yet reasoning, self-aware beings capable of moral reciprocity.Hence, they do not have a substantial right to life yet. However, I feel that fetuses are considered human beings from conception and thus they should enjoy the full moral status of born human beings. It is said that although fetuses may not be persons yet, they have the potential to become one and thus, fetuses should enjoy basic moral rights to life. Hence, the rights of an unborn should not be compromised against the rights of the mother. UTILITARIAN APPROACH On one hand, it is argued that legalizing abortion diminishes the maternal mortality rate of women within the society.Studies have indicated that after the le galization of abortion, it has resulted in a much lower percentage of maternal death rates due to greater access to safer and legal methods of abortion and timely abortions, thereby reducing the risk of health complications. (Refer to Example 3) Besides, timely abortions can be made. Abortions done in early stages (1st trimester) will greatly reduce the fetus’s suffering compared to later stages where the fetus starts developing into a sentient being (capability to experience suffering).In addition, it can potentially reduce the number of unwanted children. In the cases of rape or physical and mental defects of the unborn child, abortion will be the better alternative to reduce the potential physical and mental suffering the mother feels that her child will possibly face in future. For instance, the child suffers psychologically due to his peers teasing his physical defects. Furthermore, it can help diminish the growth of over-populated areas especially in countries like Sing apore. The New Statesman indicated that â€Å"The world as a whole is overpopulated by 2 billion†.A decrease in population can help to reduce the rate at which natural resources are being used and reduce competition for employment opportunities which results in a higher standard of living. However, I believe banning abortion has its benefits as well. A study revealed that women who had undergone abortions place themselves at a higher death risk than women who give birth. A Finland study revealed a 7 fold increased death rate among aborting women resulting from suicide due to post-abortion distress. Besides, it encourages economic growth.Parents will have to spend financial resources on their child for the purposes of education, clothing and food. Due to the increase in expenditure, demand increases, leading to a rise in supply. The overall effect will lead to an increase in the country’s Gross Domestic Product. Furthermore, it encourages population growth in under-popu lated countries such as Australia. This prevents the excessive exploitation of resources such as food, energy and minerals and helps to better maximize the utility of such resources.In addition, in the event that the mother decides to send her child for adoption due to reasons like being financially handicapped, there will be more opportunities for infertile couples to adopt a child. COMMON GOOD APPROACH On one hand, allowing abortion reduces the overall suffering of unwanted children in the society which; can be due to the inexperience and financial instability of the mother. Some children thus remain in the foster care where a sense of loss and overwhelming rejection is developed.It also gives women the liberty to abort the baby based on their right to privacy as they might not want others to learn about their pregnancy. The US Supreme Court found that women have better mental health when offered abortion as an option. This means children who are born are wanted more by their fami ly and thus they will be able to attain a better welfare and education. In addition, abortion has allowed women to have an opportunity to pursue their life and educational goals which they may not be able to pursue after being a mother.Furthermore, legalizing abortion serves to protect the safety of women as now; many will not turn to illegal abortion but instead seek proper medical aborting procedures. Nonetheless, I feel that banning abortion emphasizes on the importance of responsible contraceptive usage and birth control methods which is crucial to help reduce the occurrence of accidental pregnancy.. According to the National Abortion Federation, 78% of teenage pregnancies are unintended, out of which 35% sought abortion.It also increases the awareness of respect for sex. It is important to understand that a woman is not an â€Å"object† for sexual gratification nor is sex to be abused without regard. Thus, banning abortion stresses on the importance for taking responsibi lity for one’s actions. Furthermore, it helps us to better appreciate human lives. A life of an unborn cannot be undermined to the life of a born human. This teaches us to have compassion and empathy towards any human life. VIRTUE APPROACH By allowing abortion, one of the virtues developed is love.Love leads the mother to abort the baby as she is unconfident of being a good mother to the child, thus she rather not let him live a difficult life in the long run. Self-accountability is also developed as the mother has to face possible consequences that could arise as a result of her abortion. (Eg. Depression, guilt) Besides, courage and fortitude is developed as the mother has to confront the reality of abortion and take courage to accept the responsibility of abortion and its aftermath effects (Eg. post traumatic stress disorder).In addition, resilience is developed in the mother throughout the entire abortion process for having the strength and ability to cope with the reality and effects of abortion. This helps them to move on with their lives instead of being overwhelmed with emotional trauma and setbacks. On the other hand, by banning abortion, it gives the mother determination to carry on her pregnancy despite external factors that may sway her decision such as being a single mother and unconfident of bringing her child up singlehandedly.It also develops self-accountability as one has to responsible for one’s own actions. In addition, courage and fortitude is developed as the mother may have to face possible consequences for taking responsibility for the child such as spending more financial resources for the child’s sake. Impartiality can also be developed as the mother is able to be objective in her views and preserve the life of an innocent despite the fact that her child was the result of rape. Self-sacrifice and selflessness can also be developed as the mother decides to put aside her own needs to keep the child.She may have to qui t her current job and terminate all other obligations even though she might not be mentally prepared to raise a child yet. Fore-sightedness is developed as the mother would have to plan ahead of time to provide her child the best treatment possible. FAIRNESS/JUSTICE APPROACH It is argued that if abortion is allowed, everyone will be given an option to abort regardless whether they want to. Since everyone is given a choice, it is fair as it respects everyone’s individual rights.Since an unborn is only considered human when it is a sentient being, it is fair to abort it in its early stages and not treated as homicide. Furthermore, since it is not born yet, it does not possess human rights to life and thus its life should be decided by its mother. Furthermore, it is only fair that the mother has the right and option to decide what to do with her child since it is her flesh and blood. On the contrary, I believe a human life is determined at conception. Hence abortion equates to t he murder of any born human. Thus, it is only fair to grant an unborn an equal right to living as any born human.Additionally it is also fair to grant the baby the right to live as the baby is an innocent party that should not be dragged into abortion as a result of rape, incest, careless or irresponsible acts of humans. PERSONAL STAND In conclusion, multitudes have come to believe that they benefit from abortion. However, they had failed to realize that if a choice needs to be made, it should be done so before conception of the child. There is no real difference between killing a child before or after it is born. In the case of rape, it is true that the mother may not have come to terms ith carrying her pregnancy to term. However, it is important to adopt an objective view. An unborn should not be killed simply to alleviate the suffering of the mother. Moreover, if abortion is so easy attainable, how many would stop to think of the cruelty of taking away a life of an innocent? Now that legal abortion gives women a safeguard, more will turn to it. Since the Supreme Court handed down the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, there had been a 64% increase in the number of abortions in the United States. In addition, family values may be distorted in generations to come.By aborting her baby, the mother-to-be will lose part of her motherhood and respect. Legalizing abortion also makes it easier for one to overlook the negative consequences and take abortion for granted. Whereas, banning abortion allows people to think twice before acting and take responsibility for their actions. Therefore, I believe abortion should be banned. (1930 words) EXAMPLE 1 [pic] EXAMPLE 2 [pic] EXAMPLE 3 [pic] REFERENCES Josh Levinson. (2004). Abortion poses great ethical dilemma. In The daily campus. Retrieved 18 May 2012, from http://www. dailycampus. com/2. 7438/abortion-poses-great-ethical-dilemma-1. 067241. Josh Marshall. (2004). The Abortion Dilemma: Legal Isn't Always Ethical. In Ethics s coreboard. Retrieved 18 May, 2012 from http://www. ethicsscoreboard. com/list/abortion2. html Claire Pomeroy. (2008). Abortion and Women's Rights: Unification of Pro-Life and Pro-Choice through Feminism. In Serendip. Retrieved 18 May, 2012 from http://serendip. brynmawr. edu/exchange/node/1845 Amy Richards. (2004). LIVES; When One Is Enough. In nytimes. Retrieved 18 May, 2012 from http://www. nytimes. com/2004/07/18/magazine/lives-when-one-is-enough. html Unknown. (2008). Utilitarianism vs.Moral Duty: Ethical Dilemmas of Abortion. In ivythesis. typepad. Retrieved 18 May, 2012 from http://ivythesis. typepad. com/term_paper_topics/2008/02/utilitarianism. html Abortion Access Project. (2003). The impact of illegal abortion. In ourbodiesourselves. org. Retrieved 18 May, 2012 from http://www. ourbodiesourselves. org/book/companion. asp? compID=100&id=20 Unknown. (2005). When abortion was illegal. In socialworker. org. Retrieved 18 May, 2012 from http://socialistworker. org/2005-2/562/562 _06_Abortion. shtml EI. (2002). Abortion Increases Women’s Mortality Rate. In afterabortion. rg. Retrieved 18 May, 2012 from http://afterabortion. org/2002/abortion-increases-womens-mortality-rates/ Austine Cline. (Unknown). Abortion is a serious ethical issue. In atheism. about. Retrieved 18 May, 2012 from http://atheism. about. com/od/abortioncontraception/p/AbortionEthics. htm Kundan Pandey. (2011). Ethical Issues on Abortion. In goaccess. org. Retrieved 18 May, 2012 from http://www. goaccess. org/ethical-issues-on-abortion. html BrookesB. (2005). Abortion: An ethical dilemma. In writework. Retrieved 18 May, 2012 from http://www. writework. com/essay/abortion-ethical-dilemma

Same Sex Marriage Essay

Same sex marriage is the legal joining of two people of the same gender who are lovingly committed and dedicated to one another, just like any other marriage between a man and a woman. Many people are against same sex marriage because they believe marriage should only be between a man and a woman. However, others believe that marriage between anyone, of any gender, should be allowed because it is a civil right. In the majority of the United States, there is a limit on the benefits that homosexual couples can receive; they are much more limited than the benefits many heterosexual married couples enjoy. Marriage is a civil right and not allowing people of the same gender to marry is discrimination against individuals due to their sexual preference. This discrimination is in direct opposition to the constitution’s commitment to liberty and equality. Many same sex couples are deprived of health benefits, spousal life insurance, retirement plans, and the ability to adopt, foster, and/or raise children. Other areas affected are taxation brackets and hospital visitation rights. Bi-national families can also be penalized by recognition or non-recognition of same sex marriage. Additional benefits that can be affected are military spouse supports, social security benefits, and rights to property and intellectual property. Even homosexuals who are able to exercise these rights that other couples around the nation enjoy, often suffer ridicule and questioning of their rights. For example, if a homosexual couple gains the right to be parents, they still may face an uphill battle to be treated the same at school, in their neighborhood, by other parents, etc. In addition, work discrimination against homosexuals, especially couples who choose to parent, is very common in the United States. There are many positive aspects to allowing same sex marriage. Marriage is shown to have a correlation to physical and psychological health benefits and depriving gay and lesbian individuals of these benefits could increase the rate of physical and psychological disorders. Marriage between same sex couples would also make it easier for them to adopt children. Doing this would provide a home to more children who currently are in need of a stable home and family or are in foster care. Heterosexual marriages and â€Å"family values† will not be changed, harmed, andor altered with the legalization of same sex marriage, therefore, it is a matter of debate about what is really holding society  against same sex marriage. Many people say that traditionally, the institution of marriage is defined as only between a man and a woman and that allowing gay couples to wed could possibly weaken the institution of marriage further. Same sex marriage is also not compatible with the traditions and beliefs of some specific religions. Allowing same sex marriage could offend people and their religious affiliations. Many people also argue that extending the right to marry to same sex couples is bad because they can not biologically produce children together and if they did adopt or use an alternative method to have children it would provide an unstable household in which the children are raised without the typical and â€Å"proper† motherly and fatherly figures. Sixteen countries since 2000 have entirely legalized same sex marriage including AR, BE, BR, CA, DK, FR, IS, NS, NZ, NO, PT, ES, SA, SE, The UK, and UY. Parts of Mexico have also legalized same sex marriage. In the United States, only nineteen states have legalized same sex marriage including CA, CT, DE, HI, IL (Illinois’ same sex marriage law only recently took effect on June 1st, 2014), IA, MA, MD, ME, MN, NH, NM, NJ, NY, OR, PA, RI, VT, and WA (LGBTQ Nation). Same sex marriage has also been legalized in the District of Columbia. Just under half of the U.S. population lives in a state that provides some sort of protection for same sex couples where as just under 44% of the U.S. population lives in a state where same sex couples have the freedom to marriage equality (Freedom to Marry). Most states have adopted prohibitions of same sex marriage by adopting language that defines marriage as: â€Å"In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife† (DOMA). Twenty-nine states have put this language into their constitution (Defining Marriage). At the time DOMA was passed in 1996, the year it was signed by President Clinton, only  ¼ of Americans supported same sex marriage. However, support has grown steadily in America since 1996. The DOMA ruling does not require any state to legalize or recognize a same sex marriage from another state but, the US government must recognize legal same  sex marriages. Among individuals born in 1981 through 1996, 74% support same sex marriage. This is in deep contrast with seniors, of whom only 33% support same sex marriage. Republicans tend to have far lower acceptance of same sex marriage than democrats and independents do (Balanced Politics). In the last 4 years, opinion polls in America reflect a majority of citizens are behind same sex marriage. The percentage of Americans in support had been growing for 10+ years until its first majority in the year 2010. Besides youth, other factors relating to support for same sex marriage are: better educated, residency on the west or northeast coasts, and females. Low levels of support are reported in the Plains, the Deep South, and Appalachian states. Of Republican voters over age 50, only about  ¼ state that they are in support of same sex marriage. Some polls of people who live in states that have not legalized same sex marriage reflect that the citizens of those states actually form a majority in support of it. Other groups who are noted for being in majority support are Catholics, Jews, and people with no religious affiliation. In 2008, Voters in California passed proposition 8 by a margin of only 52% to 48%. Two federal courts declared it unconstitutional and in 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that the appellants had no standing in the suit. Proposition 8 was created by opponents of same sex marriage and put on the ballot along with the election of 2008. It sparked protests all over the United States. It was upheld in California courts but struck down by federal courts. Ultimately, the US Supreme Court ruled that the federal courts had aired. Same sex marriage was to resume almost immediately. In May 2012, President Barack Obama became the first US president to support same sex marriage. He appeared in several interviews on the subject; a turning point was when he stated â€Å"At a certain point, I’ve just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married† (CNN). Later the same year, he called a news conference at which he stated â€Å"My baseline is a strong civil union that provides them [same sex spouses] the protections and the legal rights that married couples have and I think that’s the right thing to do† (WTOP). Works Cited â€Å"19 States with Legal Gay Marriage and 31 States with Same-Sex Marriage Bans – Gay Marriage – ProCon.org.† ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 May 2014. . â€Å"BalancedPolitics.org – Same Sex Marriages (Pros & Cons, Arguments For and Against, Advantages & Disadvantages).† BalancedPolitics.org – Same Sex Marriages (Pros & Cons, Arguments For and Against, Advantages & Disadvantages). N.p., n.d. Web. 18 May 2014. . â€Å"Defense of Marriage Act: One Hundred Fourth Congress of the United States of America AT THE SECOND SESSION.† gpo.gov. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 May 1930. . â€Å"Defining Marriage: State Defense of Marriage Laws and Same-Sex Marriage.† Defining Marriage: State Defense of Marriage Laws and Same-Sex Marriage. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 May 2014. . â€Å"Freedom to Marry.† Freedom to Marry. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 May 2014. . Gast, Phil, Jessica Yellin, Bill Mears, Dan Gilgoff, and Jim Acosta. â€Å"Obama announces he supports same-sex marriage.† CNN. Cable News Network, 1 Jan. 1970. Web. 30 May 2014. . â€Å"Marriage Equality.† LGBTQ Nation RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 May 2014. . Moats, David. Civil wars: a battle for gay marriage. Orlando: Harcourt, 2004. Print. â€Å"Obama quotes on same-sex marriage.† – WTOP.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 May 2014. .

My Sociology Paper Essay

Today’s generation is equipped with highly advanced and sophisticated technology that are very useful in many ways particularly in keeping and obtaining information. The internet serves not only as stock files of information but also for commercial advertisement, and for publication of all sorts of both scholarly and worthless articles as well as biased and non-biased piece of writings. This sort of complexity however, gives as a wide range of option and choices as to what one intends to do. For those who seek quality information scholarly and journal articles provides a strong references. The only thing that needs to do is evaluate the source whether its content are scholarly. In view of these, this paper will attempt to evaluate the articles listed above whether they are biased or non-biased sources by discussing the main issues raised by these sources. At the end the paper will conclude whether these sources are biased or not, based on the careful analysis of the content of each of these articles. Discussion of the articles In the first article, the main issue is the mandatory minimum sentence imposed on persons convicted of possessing half a kilogram of cocaine powder or more to at least five years imprisonment. The authors cited that this mandatory minimum have a strong bipartisan support from elected representatives and even from presidential candidates. While there are pros and cons in this issue, in view of the authors the mandatory minimum sentence can be viewed as means of attaining the country’s drug control objectives (Caulkins, J. P. ; Rydell, P. ; Schwabe, W. L. ; & Chiesa, J. 1997, par. 3). Controlling drug use in the country could be a welcome objective as often times; guns and violence are linked with drug use. According to Scott Newark in his article entitled â€Å"The 2006 Crime Stats Analysis- Time for the Truth† drugs like cocaine, heroin, and crystal meth are astoundingly 21% up over the past five years (Newark, par. 17). While the authors discussed and considered other available alternatives on easing drug problems, their opinion were focused on reducing drug consumption rather than its impact on the society. Thus, they put more emphasis on treating heavy users than on the criminal offenses associated with the use of illegal drugs. The Second Article, written by Steven Levitt, primarily deals with the decline of crimes in America. Levitt pointed out that while most experts are predicting an explosion of crime during the early and middle of the 1990s, crime rates plunged precisely at this expected period and authorities were not anticipating it to happen. Levitt refused to attribute this decline to the popular perceptions like increased imprisonment, tougher gun control laws, strong economy, and so forth. Levitt was not surprised by this turn of events rather he questioned why the decline of criminality did not happen earlier.  (p. 164). According to Levitt, what is remarkable with the decline of crimes in the USA during this period was it magnitude from the 1950 to 2001. Of all the criminal offenses, Levitt identified homicide as the most serious crime that had experienced the biggest drop between 1991 and 2000, from 9. 8 to 5. 5 or a drop of forty-four percent. While Levitt focus in his article was to identify the real causes of the decline of criminal offenses in the US during the period from 1991 to 2001, he seemed to have to fail to categorically identify the real causes of such decline. Instead he shifted his emphasis on the remarkable aspect of this decline. He noted that this decline appeared unusual compared with other countries in the world, in which most of the most common criminal offenses such as homicide, robbery, and burglary experienced sharp decline from 1991 to 2000. The author also discussed the universality of this drop in crime citing decline in each subgroups for all crime categories (p. 167). However, at the end of the article, the author recognizes six factors namely, the strong economy, the changing demographics, better policing strategies, gun control laws, laws allowing the carrying of cancelled weapons, and increased of capital punishment that according to Levitt, played little or no role in the crime drop. He also acknowledge the four factors that explained the decline of crime such as the increase in number of police, the rising prison population, the receding crack epidemic and the legalization of abortion. The last article, by Scott Newark, deals with crime statistics which was accordingly â€Å"disappointing without critical analysis by the media† (par. 3). Contrary to the article by Steven Levitt, Newark’s Crime Stat Analysis reveals the other side of police records of criminal offenses. While Newark was talking of the crime rates in Canada, he noted indirectly that recorded crimes are only the most serious ones suggesting that there are more crimes unreported, aside from those that were not recorded by the statistic gatherer. This means that Levitt’s account of crime drop in the United States is clouded with doubts, indeed, according to the United States Crime Rates 1960-2007, in 2000 United States was ranked as â€Å"22nd having highest Criminal Index† (United States Crime Rates). From the way it looks, Newark’s article was a fair assessment of the reality of criminal offenses and offenders. He emphasized that it is unrealistic to spend billions of dollars with the rehabilitation of serious offenders who when released, will commit the same crime again. Conclusion The three articles discussed in this paper provided basic ideas about criminal offenses. Although the paper did not give a clear stand in each of the articles discussed, it leaves the paper a debatable issue regarding the seemingly contradicting views between the reality of crimes and offenses in Canada and the United States as revealed by Levitt and Newark respectively. However, while the three authors have different views and emphasized on different aspects of criminal offenses, it was clear that their common objective is to shed light on issues that they deemed needed to be pointed out to the public. Quality of Sources The first article entitled Mandatory Minimum Drug Sentences: Throwing Away the Key or the Taxpayers’ Money by Jonathan P. Caulkins, C. Peter Rydell. William L. Schwabe and James Chiesa, was biased in the sense that the authors appeared to one sided in their opinion. They seemed to focus merely on reducing drug consumption without giving due consideration to the implication of drug related offenses. This seemed to promote sympathy of the heavy user, rather on the consequence of violating the law. This is quite tantamount to tolerating the use of illegal drugs and then rehabilitates the users later on. The second article, Understanding Why Crime Fell in the 1990s: Four Factors that Explain the Deadline and Six that Do not by Steven Levitt is not biased article in view of its critical and balanced presentation of facts and evidences. Although The article appeared surprising given the sharp decline of crimes in the US amidst the proliferation drugs in the inner cities of America as cited in an internet article entitled â€Å"Operation SOS. † The article noted the proliferation of drugs in the city causing violent crimes in the neighborhood (Operation SOS) yet the author was able to shed lights on all sides affecting the issues being discussed. The third article The 2006 Crime Stats Analysis-Time for the Truth by Scott Newark is also not biased article on the ground that this source was a realistic point of view. With out pretense, the author reveals the other side of the crime statistics release by law enforcers which in view of the author, is often selective and statistic gatherer are watering down their statistics to include only the most serious offense. The source is not bias because the writer was very objective and open minded in perception of the realities behind the law enforcements records of criminal offenses. References Caulkins, J. ; Rydell, P. ; Schwabe, W. L. & Chiesa, J. Mandatory Minimum Drug Sentences: Throwing Away the Key or the Taxpayers Moneyhttp://www. fathom. com/media/PDF/2172_ss. pdf Levitt, S. (2004) â€Å"Understanding Why Crime Fell in the 1990s: Four Factors that Explain the Deadline and Six that Do not† Journal Of Economic Perspectives—Vlume 18,Number1http://pricetheory.uchicago. edu/levitt/Papers/LevittUnderstandingWhyCrime2004. pdf Newark, S. The 2006 Crime Stat Analysis- Time for the Truth Prime Time Crime July 23, 2007http://www. primetimecrime. com/contributing/2007/20070723newark. htm United States Crime rates 1960 – 200 http://www. disastercenter. com/crime/uscrime. htm â€Å"The Operation SOS† Division of Citizen Services City of Buffalo 2001- 2008http://www. ci. buffalo. ny. us/Home/City_Departments/Special_Programs_and_Agencies/Save_Our_Streets/OperationSOS

Social Penetration Theory of Irwin Altman & Dalmas Taylor Term Paper

Social Penetration Theory of Irwin Altman & Dalmas Taylor - Term Paper Example Similar to Altman and Taylor’s Social Penetration Theory of exposing more of themselves as levels of intimacy grew over time and interaction, the study of the Taiwanese adolescents indicated some similar patterns but some differences as well. As in the case of the popular onion peel model, the group comprised of males and females primarily teenagers, stated that they did engage more fully with members of the opposite sex as time progressed. Thus, as is the case where people go from revealing basic information to more and more personal information about themselves as they share degrees of companionship, so did the adolescents involved in the test. The results were comparable in real life to the Social Penetration Model. The results differed though with female participants compared to their male counterparts in cyberspace. The males progressed gradually, increasing as time and nature of the relationship grew. The females however, at first establishing a guarded level of self dis closure, gradually revealed more about themselves but then once again became more guarded when the relationship became that of a romantic or sexual one. The interaction performed solely in the realm of cyberspace was done only on the computer so physical and non-verbal communications were absent. While interacting with only a still photograph and written communication, the interaction between the participants would be far less intense than if they were together in person. Still another point that should be made, is that with the degree of anonymity and less vulnerability, the participants may have engaged in more forthright communication. The results also vary according to social norms, customs and cultural background. The females in Taiwan may have retreated when the degree of interaction became one of a sexual nature because of their upbringing and ideas about sexual involvement before marriage. This may not necessarily be the case among adolescents from other countries and cultur es where promiscuity and sexual interaction are more widely accepted. Methods Used to Conduct this Research The survey used to compare the adolescents’ self-disclosure both in real life and in cyberspace consisted of a variety of questions about their desire to engage in conversation about different sexual topics at varying degrees of intimacy. Due to the anonymity, a deindividuated state is induced in cyberspace. The individuals then seem to be more apt to engage in sexual self-disclosure in cyberspace than in real life (Chiou andWan 2006). Therefore, sexual disclosure on the Internet may not be dependent on the level of intimacy in a relationship as it is in real life. The Taiwanese adolescents were divided into three groups from different demographic areas: Northern, Central and Southern Taiwan. An equal proportion of male and female subjects were used and also pertaining to the region they lived in. Therefore a broad cross section represented the participants in the study . The questionnaire used an 11-point scale and was comprised of 15 questions pertaining to feelings about pornography, sexually transmitted diseases, masturbation, sexual harassment and cybersex among others (Chiou and Wan 2006). Conclusions Found in the Study The researchers used mathematical formulas and computations to analyze the results. The

Business Ethics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 33

Business Ethics - Essay Example Therefore, Jack was right to take the pill if this decision does not affect other classmates’ decisions. Although the libertarians view seems appropriate for Jack’s situation, there are a couple of negative implications that can be associated with the decision (Clarke 15). For instance, if Jack chooses to take the pill, it could get his friend in trouble. This is owing to the fact that individuals are not allowed to share prescription drugs as they may a negative impact on the health of other individuals. If Jack decided to take the pill and got a negative reaction, his friend could have gotten in trouble. This shows how the libertarian view could have had a negative implication on both parties. Jack’s decision to take the pill could have given him an unfair advantage over his classmates. Taking the pill could have enabled him to study for longer hours and concentrate more (Clarke 20). This is not only unethical but unfair to the other students. A competition is said to be fair if the students have equal opportunities to study and focus. It can therefore be concluded that taking the pill could have given Jack an unfair advantage over his classmates. Jack is therefore advised not to take the pill. Jack’s decision to take the pill compromised the reputation of the class and the institution. This is because if his actions were reported to the appropriate authorities, this could have cast a shadow of doubt on the learning process in the class and the institution. Jack’s decision could have also influenced the overall performance in class (Clarke 36). The performance of the class is characterized by a normal curve. If Jack takes the pill and it impacts his performance, there will be a disruption in the normal distribution curve. He is thereby advised not to take the pill from his classmate. In summary, the above

Age discrimination in employment in the U.S Research Paper

Age discrimination in employment in the U.S - Research Paper Example Solis Hilda (2008) observes that ADEA prohibits discrimination on the basis of age in terms, conditions and privileges of employment such as hiring, promotion, termination, training, compensation and benefits. Despite this, employers find themselves stereotyping old age which according to the Act is any applicant or employee aged 40 years and above and hence discriminating against such employees. In â€Å"Age Discrimination by Employers,† Segrave Kerry (2001) argues that age discrimination is rampant in the most centralized and fastest growing industries. Age discrimination at work environment in the U.S is a result of the financial risks that older people present for companies due to lack of productivity, increased health insurance costs and high salaries. Productivity in employment is associated with high performance organizations and employees. It is achieved through use of high skilled, committed and motivated employees. Most employers view old people as having deteriorating physical and mental abilities hence unable to perform their jobs effectively despite the fact that some old people have the ability to perform better than young people. The nature of work keeps on changing as the economy moves from manufacturing to service sector. Most jobs thus require use of technology as opposed to manual skills held by older people. Young people are able to keep up with advancing technology as opposed to the old people who are nearing retirement age and hence see no need in investing in skill advancement. If they happen to lose their jobs, it is difficult for them to be absorbed in the job market due to lack of the required skills. For example, since the introduction of computers most jobs that require tedious paper work have been simplifie d. Information is recorded in the computer where it can be retrieved easily and large amount of work can be done with less time hence improved productivity. However, not many old people have learnt computer technology thus making

Female Homeless Speech or Presentation Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Female Homeless - Speech or Presentation Example I have observed these issues in the culture of the people who live near Acadiana Outreach Center and this could has been one of the drives to establish this center within this place. I know that it is the wish of everyone here to live a dignified life with good places to settle and feel secure in the places in which we live. The places we live after we have divorced, have been bereaved or any form of unfortunate issue that befall us and leave us without a man we can depend on for a shelter and other basic need. Although these issues seem to have little impact on the lives of the people who are directly affected, there are effects that are extended to all the dependants of the women who lack the privilege of a place to stay, a place they can call home. This is because some of the homeless women are not without other roles but carry responsibilities of mothers and the providers for younger children and also are required to offer security to these dependants. These life demands push som e women into the streets or poor shelters where they seek cheap means of sustaining their lives as well as those of the children that depend on them. This is because most of the homeless women have no source of income and therefore, live on limited resources most of which come from begging and daily wages that they get from small businesses and daily labor. Today, we will focus on the ways through which homeless women can get some places to live and establish a sustainable way of living, which would be less dependent begging. This will mean that women will have their own plans to acquire dignified places of residence where they will not be vulnerable to the risky conditions of poor environment, which does not guarantee their security. We will also focus on the provision of the homes that is done by the government and how women can benefit from it with a focus of the requirement that a woman need to have so that be guaranteed it. This will not be a form of one side discussion but it will require all people to participate through asking questions and seeking clarification of an issue at any point in the course of this presentation. We that in mind, we can embark on the discussion on the various issues that have exposed women in the society to the risky homelessness and the contribution of the Acadiana Outreach Center in alleviating the condition. As many of you are aware, there are things that we face as women in the society since the cultural restrictions do not allow the women to own property. Because of this, many single mothers, divorced, unmarried, separated or widowed women who have little income have to undergo serious struggle to sustain themselves in good places in the world. Many of those who have little income do not have enough resources with which they can secure basic needs that they have for their lives. This situation has faced those women who have low education attainments because they do not secure opportunities in good paying labor market and therefore have to undergo a lot of struggle to get their needs (Burt, Pearson & Montgomery, 2007). In this discussion, I will use some materials that are contained in a small booklet that each of you will receive so that they can revisit the discussion later. These booklets will be available for everyone by the time we finish