The Graffiti Exposure in Wynnum Essay example -- essays research paper

The Graffiti Exposure in Wynnum Is it a work of art; or a piece of scrawl sprayed across some bare surface? Ladies and Gentlemen, should Wynnum be exposed to Graffiti? Firstly, I would like to ask you. What is the cost to the government to ‘cover up' this unwanted advertisement? One recent attack placed a school approximately $4000 out of pocket. Further more, over the last twelve months, my school has experienced nine attempts at destroying the asthetic appeal of the buildings within. I could also safely say that most of the other schools in the Wynnum Manly district, both public and private, received similar encounters of degradation. It's not just the cost, it's also the time. What about the cleaners? What about the painters? What about the police? I am sure there are more constructive projects to cover than cleaning up after some graffiti vandal. It is not just our schools who experience the attacks. Scout dens, parks, businesses, trains, just to name a few, all lie in the mercy of the local crew, or graffiti gang. Is there a reason for such an act? Criminologists suggest that there are many motives for graffiti. These motives all point to one main factor. Targeting the higher authority: Revenge towards the authority; Anger towards the authority; Boredom from lack of authority; To convince of self-existence, and To explore prohibited areas placed by authority. The pattern of locations the police established, is that all the tags, or the writer's signature, are pla...

Censorship and the Internet :: Free Essays Online

  Ã‚   The foundations of America and of its citizens' individuality were built over 200 years ago with the creation of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.   The First Amendment, ratified December 15th 1791, is probably the most important Amendment as well as the most difficult one to interpret.   It states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" (National Archive Constitution Ammentment#1).   Thus, this Amendment grants Americans specific inalienable rights and allows them to be at least somewhat separate from the government.   Still, it is this Amendment that is under particular scrutiny in today's information age.   It is through the interpretation of this statement that we must assess the rights of the Internet surfer, determine what responsibility the government has to censor any or all explicit pages from innocent under aged children and evaluate if that censorship violates our inalienable rights as American citizens. Yet, no matter what censorship rulings the government passes, the responsibility of monitoring Internet use must ultimately fall in the hands of the parents. Just a week ago (April 5th 1999), The Justice Department appealed an Anti-Censorship ruling made by the Federal Judge, Lowell Reed, of Pennsylvania.   Reed had the opportunity to evaluate and rule upon the Children's Online Protection Act (COPA), Congress' second attempt to regulate content on the Internet1.   Judge Reed rejected this act on grounds that it was in direct violation of the first Amendment.   He argued that "the first Amendment was designed to prevent the majority, through acts of the Congress, from silencing those who would express unpopular or unconventional views" (speech1).   Reed continued to demonstrate that before the widespread use of the Internet the ability of a person to express his or her views to a large group of people was limited by " the costs [of] reaching the masses" (Reed Text 1).   Before the Internet, people who wanted to express their ideas had to pay great amounts of money for advertisements and propaganda to promote their views.   It was very difficult for an individual, especially one without a lot of money, to get his or her ideas out to the public - the Internet allows the individual to do so in an inexpensive way.

Case Study †Catfish Dispute

â€Å"The Vietnamese catfish importers are enjoying the fruits of our work,† This was the main discontent of the domestic (US) catfish industry. Undoubtedly, the catfish farmers had put a lot of effort in improving the aquaculture technology to raise the catfish with better quality; thus, raised the demand of domestic market. At the same time, they had invested about US$50 million in the industry’s marketing. When catfish became the third favorite seafood of the American, leading to a total consumption of 275 million kilograms in 2000, it inevitably attracted people to get in the market.However, based on the fact that the US Congress had approved the U. S. -Vietnam Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) with a reduction in tariff, it was the right for American importers to start the new business – importing Vietnamese catfish. The agreement was approved by the Congress due to the important reason: the trade benefits. To capture these benefits, they had to undertake the possible risks. Indeed, it was a fair game played by both parties. From the article, it was clear that one of the sources of discontent from domestic farmers was the quality considerations difference between the American-grew and Vietnam-grew catfish.The quality of US catfish is justified by the inspection of 17 federal agencies and can meet the standard of the Catfish Institute of America, whereas the Vietnamese catfish only need to pass the Food and Drug Administration’s approval. This preferential practice should not sustain. The authority should consider standardize the quality requirement of both places’ catfish, for example, make it compulsory for Vietnamese catfish products to undergo the same inspections as the US catfish. Or at least, ask for proof of quality issued by Vietnamese government for all imported catfish.

Overcrowding in America’s Prisons Essay

Abstract America’s prison system has become extremely overcrowded and managing it has become a job of staggering proportions. In 2001, there were 1.4 million men and women incarcerated in state and federal correctional institutions. This overcrowding has increased the cost to operate prisons at alarming rates. Due to a high recidivism rate, many experts believe that lack of rehabilitation has played a great role in this increase. One of the major reasons that prisons have become overcrowded is that crime control strategies and legislative changes have favored longer sentences. These approaches have taken several forms that, when combined, have incarcerated people for longer periods of time with less possibility for early release. Many factors such as new offenses, mandatory sentences, lengthening terms, and habitual offender laws, have added to prison overcrowding. Although an exact cost can not be associated with overcrowding, we can look at present costs incurred in prison and anticipate their increase as the system takes on more and more inmates. When looking at the cost of overcrowding, we not only have to look at the cost to taxpayers per inmate but also construction cost needed to build the new prisons to relieve the overcrowding. The operating cost for a prison over its life span cost about fifteen to twenty times the original construction cost. Overcrowding causes serious depravation in the quality of life for everyone in a correctional institution. Overcrowding may cause a number of problems such as emotional stress, increase in disciplinary infractions, and some physical health problems. Overcrowding also causes litigation forcing the federal and state prisons to build new facilities to relieve overcrowding. Rehabilitation has been around for many years and throughout those years the chance to study models good and bad have given us much research to work with in knowing which rehabilitation models work and which do not. Rehabilitation programs should change or modify the offender or help them to modify themselves, as well as changing or modifying life circumstances and social  opportunities. Some types of rehabilitation programs in use are mental health and counseling programs, educational programs, and substance abuse programs. The results of many studies are statistically aggregated and assessed as one sample an their findings showed that effective programs reduced the reentry rate by approximately 36.4 percent in 1998. Generally 25 to 35 percent of the experimental treatment programs studied achieved favorable results. With statistics like these, I feel we can reduce the number of repeat offenders through the use of effective rehabilitation programs. Overcrowding in America’s Prisons Can rehabilitation help lower the growing numbers of repeat offenders? With overcrowding, managing America’s prisons has become a job of staggering proportions. As of December 31, 2001. Over 1.4 million men and women were incarcerated in state and federal correctional institutions. Operating cost of U.S. prisons rose 224 percent between 1980 and 1994. The Federal Bureau of Prisons estimates that operating costs could grow $4.7 billion by 2006. Many factors have led tot this increase such as mandatory sentencing and recidivism of offenders. Many in the field believe that lack of rehabilitation training geared toward marketable skills, along with no treatment of substance abuse, have played a great role in this increase. One of the major reasons that prisons have become overcrowded is crime control strategies and legislative changes have favored longer sentences. These approaches have taken several forms that, when combined, have incarcerated more people for longer periods of time with less possibility for early release. There was a 22 percent increase in arrests from 1986 to 1997. Overcrowding has also created a problem with understaffing in the â€Å"job rich 1990’s†. However, as the crime rate increases and people become more frightened, the politician’s answer with â€Å"tougher sentencing legislation† and not rehabilitation. The desire to reform convicted offenders has a long history in policy and practice in the American correctional system. As early as the eighteenth century to the present, politicians, correctional professionals, religious leaders, scholars and prison inmates themselves have participated in an ongoing reform movement and experiments all designed to rehabilitate lawbreakers, towards being law-abiding, self supporting individuals. What I will look at in this paper is the overcrowding in today’s prison and some of the causes and costs of this overcrowding. I will define rehabilitation and what is has meant throughout history while exploring what options are available in today’s prisons and the effectiveness of those options. In conclusion, I will show that if we refocus the system on rehabilitation and not merely the warehousing of criminals; we could reduce the number of repeat offenders and relieve some of the overcrowding in America’s prisons. Overcrowding in the American prison system is a growing problem that we must tackle. The growth rate of the prison population since midyear 2002 was 3.8 percent that is 7.6 percent annually. The tremendous increase in the prison population has resulted in continuous overcrowding the last two decades. Neither prison construction not the availability of bed space to accommodate the growing prison population has kept pace. As state above, changes in sentencing legislation and crime control have played a major role in prison overcrowding. This is obvious because of the number of commitments to prison has grown disproportionately greater than increases in population, the number of crimes and the number of arrests or the number of convictions. To better understand how these changes have played such a major role in overcrowding we must look at changes that have occurred in most states. One change is the creation of many new offenses that can result in prison terms or the revocation of probation or parole, sending offenders from the community back to prison. Some examples would be the newly created laws against stalking, as well as laws that make it a felony to intentionally transmit Aids. There have also been new rulings regarding penalties that now make prison terms mandatory for some offenses not previously associated with incarceration, such as DWI or DUI and certain drug convictions. Judges can no longer use discretion in deciding which punishment the offender should receive. A finding of guilty mean that incarceration for a set term is automatic. These same laws prohibit probation for certain offenders. An example is in California, legislation has restricted or eliminated the possibility of probation for arson, specific sex offenses, not limited to child molestation and residential burglary. Most states have lengthened prison terms associated with some convictions, particularly if certain weapons (aggravated crimes), or types of victims (children, elderly, handicapped) were involved, or if certain quantitative amounts of drugs were present. These â€Å"special circumstances† are said to enhance the seriousness of the crime. We have also seen many laws directed toward repeat offenders, with the passage of the habitual felon laws in which life sentences are possible for offenders convicted for a third time of a similar felony. Previously, only the maximum sentence allowed for that particular felony was permitted. The life sentence is a cumulative punishment for what the courts have called a â€Å"criminal career†. Many modifications and alterations were made for other sentences as well. For example, felons may be given sentences of life in prison without parole. Previously, all prisoners, after a designated time, became eligible for parole, regardless of whether or not they were actually granted the release. Many modifications of existing parole eligibility requirement force offenders to serve more time before becoming eligible for parole. Alterations to the â€Å"good time† statues have occurred letting prisoners accumulate less time for good behavior and thus taking longer to acquire credits toward parole eligibility or discharge of the sentence. Although exact cost associated with overcrowding cannot be determined, we can look at present expenses incurred by prison and anticipate the increases as  the system takes on more and more inmates. Currently, taxpayers spend between $30,000 to $50,000 per inmate per year to maintain the state and federal correctional systems. That includes the operating costs and the cost of new construction. Depending on the level of security and the geographic region of the United States, it can cost anywhere from $30,000 to $130,000 to build each new bed space. The cost range was around $56,000 in 1992. Four out of five capital outlay dollars in construction, however, go for building expenses other than the housing area itself. Construction costs are only the down payment of a prison’s total cost to society. The Federal Bureau of Prisons explains the operating cost for a prison over its practical life span at about fifteen to twenty times the original construction cost. Cost per inmate per day varies from state to state, and within each state from prison unit to prison unit. The units with greater security or larger amounts of medical and psychiatric treatment services will, of course, be more expensive to build and operate. Personnel is the major operating expense, usually accounting for an average of 75 percent of an agency’s total operating budget. The results of overcrowding are serious deprivation in the quality of life for everyone in a correctional institution. Even though we have build hundreds of new prisons and expanded facilities in the last ten years, the average amount of space per inmate has decreased over 10 percent. Stretching resources beyond their capacity is something the courts watch carefully when monitoring prison conditions. Overcrowding may be measured in shortages of basic necessities, such as space, sheets, hot water, clothing and food. Vocational, educational, and recreational programs may become seriously overloaded. Medical services and supplies may be insufficient, thereby posing health risks. Throughout the total system, high inmate to staff ratios lead to poor supervision and scheduling difficulties, which result in less inmate activity and greater safety risks for both the employee and the prisoner. The nature of a crowded environment itself may have serious effect on the health and well being of inmates. Noise and the lack of privacy associated with crowding may contribute to emotional stress and the development of mental health problems. Studies have shown that crowding may increase the number of disciplinary infractions per inmate. Inmates in densely populated units may suffer from higher blood pressure. It has also been concluded that, as density of the population increases, so does the rate of mortality in inmates over the age of forty-five (Paulus 1988). Common conditions such as the spreading of colds, sexually transmitted diseases, and other infectious diseases are increased in overcrowded areas. Many studies have claimed the rate of psychiatric commitments and suicides reveal increases for inmate in crowded living areas. Research has also linked higher subsequent rates of criminal behavior to inmates from institutions that were overcrowded. Increases in violence, particularly staff and inmate assaults, are associated with overcrowded conditions as well. It is argued that living too close together heightens tempers and aggression, leading most likely to confrontations. The nation’s courts are sentencing and admitting more offenders in America’s prisons than the facilities can hold. The Government Accounting Office reported for fiscal year 1992-1993, twenty-five state correctional systems requested funds for eighty-five new facilities that would add over fifty-six thousand new prison beds. Texas alone asked for $600 million to finance the construction of twenty-five thousand new beds. The American Correctional Association guidelines call for a standard cell area of sixty square feet for inmates spending no more than ten hours per day in their cell. In many prisons, inmates are double bunked in cells designed for one or sleep on mattresses in unheated prison gyms or on the floors of dayrooms, halls or basements. Some are housed in tents, other sleep in the same bunk different times of the day. Many taxpayers do not consider overcrowding a problem because they believe that discomfort should be a part of the punishment. Research has only recently begun to explore the effects of crowding beyond those on individual inmates, groups of inmates and the programs and services they receive. Information is still needed on the effect crowding has on the  staff, on the management strategies, on budgeting and government responses, on facility and equipment durability, and on the cost of operations under various strategies to reduce overcrowding. In 1996, nearly half (48.4 percent) of the respondents surveyed by the Survey Research Program (College of Criminal Justice, Sam Houston State University) thought that the most important goal of prison should be rehabilitation, while only 14.6 percent saw punishment as the most important goal of prison. One third thought that crime prevention/deterrence was the most important goal of prisons. Throughout most of American history correctional policy makers have positioned rehabilitation among the most important correctional goals. Treatment has appeared in many forms and clearly many ideas have proven ultimately to be unfounded. The earliest institutional treatment models, for example, place heavy reliance on the qualities of institutional life combined with spiritual contemplation as a source of individual reformation. The earliest penal facilities were founded under a Quaker influence supported either solitary confinement or a congregate model that imposed total silence upon its prisoners. It was assumed that in both systems would be isolated from the evil influences and subject to strong discipline. The outcome they believed would be a responsible citizen who had seen the error of their ways. More realistically, the practice of solitary confinement produced many instances of mental illness before its use was abandoned. Historians have referred to this period as a time in which harshness was too quickly assumed to be discipline, an abusive discipline that did more to breaks spirits rather than reform them. A more positive approach was introduced shortly after the Civil War and put into practice in 1876 at the Elmira Reformatory for youthful offenders in New York. That program used ideas that we recognize today a related to operant conditioning. Borrowing from earlier Australian reforms, know as the â€Å"mark†, system reformers planned a model in which inmates could earn transfers to less secure prisons and ultimately their release through good behavior and work performance. The reformatory system is known for the  contemporary introduction of the indeterminate sentence and post-release supervision or parole. This afforded the correctional professionals the opportunity to predicate a release decision based upon an inmate’s satisfactory rehabilitation. The Elmira Reformatory, and other built shortly after in other states, can be recognized for their educational and other programs designed to facilitate change instead of passively waiting for inmates to see the need for c hange. More intensive efforts appeared from 1900 to 1920, when progressive reformers seized upon the new clinical approaches offered by social and psychological sciences. The social wisdom of the day encouraged public education and the belief that social ills, including crime, could be prevented. Science, particularly social, medical and psychological sciences, also asserted that causes could be identified, diagnosed, and ultimately treated. The field of criminology during those years was characterized by the work of the positivists, researchers who found the roots of crime to be in biological traits and psychological ills, rather than in the rational choices made by offenders. The criminals, in other words, were ill. These progressive reformers sought to first diagnose the cause of crime and then treat them. They envisioned prisons like hospitals and diagnostic centers. Perhaps the greatest impact the progressive reformers had was in the development of a less adversarial and more rehabilitative ideology. While more treatment staff was later added, prisons did not become hospitals; maybe because public investment in treatment was never sufficiently achieved. Nevertheless, the goals of individualized treatment, classification, and community corrections, and substitution of humane, reform oriented programs of punishment dominated correctional policy throughout the first half of the twentieth century as rehabilitation enjoyed unchallenged status until mid-century as the correctional priority. Rehabilitation was also helped by two presidential crime commissions and resulting legislation that provided state and federal seed money for many new crime prevention and treatment initiatives. These promotions, however, were short lived. Conservatives were lamenting a high crime rate and asserting that deterrence and incapacitation, the â€Å"get tough† approaches to  crime, were more effective. In the mid 1970’s a review of the treatment evaluation literature by Robert Martinson (1974) concluded that rehabilitation had achieved â€Å"no appreciable effect on recidivism†. The Martinson report was indeed supportive of the subsequent swing to a far more conservative crime agenda. Over the next twenty years there was a move away from indeterminate sentencing toward determinate or presumptive sentencing models or guidelines. A drop in available money for new demonstration programs and cuts in many existing correctional treatment budgets only added to the conserva tive appeal. American prisons became frightfully overcrowded growing by 168 percent from 1980 to 1991 largely on the political promises to â€Å"get tough† on crime. However, correction agencies did not totally give up on rehabilitation. A growing drug problem required new strategies for dealing with drug and alcohol addictions. Treatment research and evaluation efforts continued and began to show more favorable results. While current use of treatment and rehabilitation technology is not what it should be in actual practice, most rehabilitation scholars conclude that a good deal has been learned over the past decades about specific strategies that work. Rehabilitation is synonymous with interventions or treatment. Sometimes rehabilitation might more accurately be called â€Å"habilitation†. â€Å"Habilitation†, in this sense refers to the offender whose behavior is the result of not having received the skills or personal qualities needed to live a life free from crime. The Palmer Model (1992) is a rehabilitation program model, which has shown favorable results. Whether speaking of rehabilitation, habilitation, intervention services, or treatment we are referring to distinct, correctional programs that a) change or modify the offender or help them modify themselves or b) change or modify life circumstances and improve social opportunities. Such methods should utilize, develop or redirect the powers and mechanisms of the individual’s mind and body in order to enhance the ability to cope and grow. Palmer excludes from his definition any correctional options that try to reduce, physically traumatize, disorganize or devastate the mind or body by means such as dismemberment or electroshock techniques. He includes measures that try to  affect the individual’s future behavior, attitudes toward self, and interactions with other by focusing on such factors and conditions as the individual’s adjustment techniques, interest, skills, personal limitations and/or life circumstances. Often correctional options are put forward as measures toward reducing future crime, while most options offer no real plan to change targeted criminal behavior. Halfway houses by themselves do not constitute treatment unless there is a treatment program in place. The distinction between treatment, control and custody may be a confusing one for policy makers and others, because one seldom hears of new correctional options put forward without some promise, to either solve the crime problem, or reform the offenders. Boot camps, for example, have been touted as short-term treatment programs for first time offenders, particularly drug offenders. But the military regimen has little basis in any treatment model, and often no interventions are specifically targeted to the drug problem. In the same fashion, intermediate sanctions such as intensive probation, house arrests, and electronic monitoring serve a custody and control function rather than one of treatment. There are many types of correctional rehabilitation programs. Rehabilitation may occur in mental health and substance abuse, educational or vocational programs. Some might also include spiritual programs, although there is very little research devoted to religious programs used for rehabilitation. Mental health programs comprise a wide array of strategies. In rare cases, an institution may provide in-depth psychotherapy for seriously troubled inmates. Such approaches would deal with internalized conflicts, anxieties, phobias, depression, uncontrollable anger, neurosis and other serious mental health problems. Many factors such as early abuse, trauma, abandonment or dysfunctional family like could cause these problems. Strategies known as â€Å"here and now† treatment models are however far more common approaches to treating or counseling prison inmates. As the names suggests â€Å"here and now† programs assist clients in dealing with  current issues in their lives, such as how poor attitudes might influence work performance. â€Å"Here and now† strategies include behavioral programs, social learning approaches and cognitive therapies. The â€Å"here and now† approach is preferred for a number of reasons. One is cost; much less the in-depth psychotherapy and does not require the use of highly skilled clinicians. Correctional personnel holding a bachelor’s or a master’s degree can be trained to use Reality Therapy and behavioral approaches. Also â€Å"here and now† strategies are more apt to deal with observable behavior that with the more abstract, subconscious processes that are the subject of psychoanalysis. Finally, â€Å"here and now† strategies work well in-group settings. In fact, most treatment approaches in the corrections area are group-counseling programs, necessitated by the large prison population and the limited resources. This is not necessarily a disadvantage, because group treatments offer more than just money savings. Group cohesiveness and peer influence can be vehicles for change in themselves. One other thing is group approaches afford an opportunity for social interaction that cannot take place in individual counseling situations. Education and competence of prison inmates speaks strongly of the need for prison educational programs. In 1984 a staggering forty-two percent of the incarcerated adult population functioned below a sixth grade academic level. Over half of the inmate population appears to lack basic reading skills. Many would qualify for special educational programs, especially those for the learning disabled. Even with these tragic statistics and the fact that academic and vocational education has long been identified as an important goal of correctional agencies and correctional professional organizations, the status of educational programs in American prisons is not a commendable one. Adult populations are largely under-served and program effectiveness is questionable. The most common programs in today’s prison are those that address academic deficiencies. Adult basic literacy programs or Adult Basic Education programs for example promote literacy and address the basic academic  deficiencies. Such programs can be self-paced and require the use of programmed materials rather than classroom instruction, thus are cost efficient by using outside volunteers and other inmates to facilitate instruction. General Education Diploma (GED) classes are available in most adult correctional settings. Participation in these programs for adults is usually voluntary and part time. Both the GED and the basic education programs are sometimes criticized for their failure to stress important like skills and competencies. GED for example is said to be a test-driven model used to certify rather than to educate. This criticism extends to other areas of prison education. Vocational education programs are faulted for their failure to teach inmates marketable job skills; those that would prepare inmates to enter the work force. Many of today’s fields have become much more technical in recent years, and the correctional agencies cannot afford to keep up. These advances and the machinery needed to train inmates in their applications is cost prohibited. Women’s programs are also criticized for emphasizing traditional women’s jobs, which usually equate to lower pay. Many of the women prisoners are single mothers with a real need for higher paying non-traditional jobs. Finally, careers that require licenses or apprenticeships are not well suited to prison, because prison terms are often too short to meet a typical apprenticeship period. By 1978, the federal prison system was operating thirty-three drug treatment units. Although many programs today have been severely limited by budget cuts, attempts have been made to involve not only those inmates under court order to receive treatment but also those who volunteer for treatment. Still, only eleven percent of federal inmates are involved in drug abuse programs. A survey of 277 prison facilities in 1991 determined that about one-third of all inmates participated in some type of drug treatment program. Most had been involved in-group counseling; others were in self-help programs, and some received in-patient services. In prison most common program formats are group therapy, self-help, and drug education programs. Education programs can be offered in short segments, and  reach large audiences for a lower cost. But these programs have been criticized for using scare tactics or for not acknowledging the realities that make drug use attractive to those with troubled lives. Drug education is most effective on a very young population who has not yet used drugs, and this profile does not describe most incarcerated offenders. One of the biggest criticisms of prison treatment programs is that they offer fewer services for shorter periods of time than those of outside programs. Outside programs are more likely to involve family and to provide follow up referral as well as components for instance as job counseling, education, and vocational training. When paroled, continued drug use many result in re-incarceration. In 1990 drug related parole violations in California accounted for thirty-two percent of returns to prison. Several studies have linked substance abuse treatment while incarcerated with later success on parole. Unfortunately many programs do not follow up on their participants to evaluate their success. Four programs that have had a relatively low rate of recidivism were reviewed in 1989. The shared characteristics included offering a wide range of activities, teaching practical life skills, using nontraditional correctional employees who were realistic about the program goals, and formal and informal follow up with participants after release. Spending more time in treatment also appeared to be related to lower arrest rates and successful completion of parole. Recent correctional history shows us that treatment endeavors can be toppled quickly by those who question their effectiveness. When these doubts are voiced in the context of an unfavorable political climate, the results can be devastating. Yet one favorable outcome of the discouraging setbacks to correctional rehabilitation has been approximately two decades of research designed to check the accuracy of the unfavorable reviews. Clearly the most valuable contribution to our knowledge in this area comes from the advent of meta-analyses, in which the results of many studies are statistically aggregated and assessed as one sample. Across these studies, findings typically show that effective programs reduced recidivism rates by  approximately twenty percent. Generally, 25 to 35 percent of the experimental treatment programs studied achieved positive results. The meta-analyses, along with several extensive reviews of the literature, also identify the treatments most likely to succeed. These include behavioral, cognitive behavioral, life skills, family intervention and some multi-modal approaches. The meta-analyses also show us that the treatment modality is only one of the factors that differentiate a successful intervention from an unsuccessful one. Programmatic characteristics also have an impact. These characteristics include: 1. Whether the program is well matched to its clients. 2. Dosage, or how much of an intervention is received. 3. Therapeutic integrity. 4. Administrative management style. 5. Provision of a relapse prevention component. 6. Whether the program was designed according to theoretical model. In an unfavorable, punishment-focused political climate, the relative success of rehabilitation appears to go unnoticed. Politicians quell the public’s fear of crime with promises of yet stricter incarceration policies, more police officers, and occasional digressions into the latest correctional fad. Sadly, the singular focus on punishment is not purely representative of public sentiment. While it is true that the public favors â€Å"get tough† policies, support for rehabilitation is also strong. A series of surveys conducted on the past decade show that indeed the public is punishment oriented, but, the surveys also clearly show the public experts treatment-oriented programs to accompany incarceration. In other words, â€Å"Get tough on crime† does not mean â€Å"to warehouse† or to ignore treatment and  education. As we continue in this new millennium we must make some important choices about what we want our prison system to be. It is clear to me that we can no longer sit back and continue to let our prisons mainly be â€Å"warehouses† for keeping those individuals whose problems we choose not to recognize or treat. The reduction in the recidivism rate by twenty percent when effective programs are used is reason enough for the American public to demand that rehabilitation become more of a focused priority to prison officials as well as politicians and also a priority with the politicians. We are incarcerating large numbers of people who actually have a disease, since most experts consider substance abuse a disease and not criminal behavior. Until we concentrate on curing the problems of society that cause most of these criminals to adopt behavior that they are being punished for, we will continue to see a rise in the numbers incarcerated. I believe rehabilitation can lower the number of repeat offenders if we are willing to redirect the focus of our prisons. It will not be easy and it will not be cheap; but it will be worth it for the good of society as a whole. Rehabilitation of criminals can be greatly improved, and the successful measurement documented by implementing a very old but successful scientific theory of â€Å"cause and effect†. Work Cited Begun, Abbey M. B.A. ed., Jacobs, M.A. ed., Quiram, Jacquelyn F. B.A. ed. Prisons and Jails a Deterrent to Crime? Information Plus 1999 ed. Davis, Bertha. Instead of Prison. New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, Franklin Watts publishing 1986. Lacayo, Richard, â€Å"Law and Order, Crime rates are down across the U.S.-Some dramatically. Is this a blip or a Trend? With so many factors in play, it may be a bit of both. 15 January, 1996 Volume 147, No. 3 (http://www.time.com/time/mag/†¦e/1996/dom/960115/cover.html) McShane, Marilyn. D. ed., Williams III, Frank P. ed. Encyclopedia of American Prisons. New York and London, Garland Publishing,Inc., 1996 Menninger, Karl. The Crime of Punishment. New York, Viking Press, 1968 Oliver, Marilyn Tower. Prisons, Today’s Debate. New Jersey, Enslow Publishing, 1997 United States. Federal Bureau of Prisons. Inmate Programs and Services. (http://www,bop.gov) United States. Prison Statistics. Bureau of Justice Statistics Prison Statistics (http://www/ojp.usdoj-gov/bjs/prison.htm)

Were the Achaemenids Zoroastrians?

Were The Achaemenids Zoroastrians? The Biggest Empire, which the ancient world has ever seen, would be the Achaemenid Persian Empire. This empire protracted from Anatolia, Egypt, Asia, northern India and Central Asia. Making of this empire began in 550 B. C. The Achaemenid is known as the first Persian Empire and the largest. Ancient history basically tells us Zoroastrianism developed somewhere in Iran about 1000 years after Zoroaster. Scholars have said the Achaemenids era had finally began when Cyrus the great successfully went against his father in law who was ruler of the Medians.That is when Zoroastrianism started to influence the Median tribes. The Median then began to move eastwards past the Zagros mountains. They moved to Kermanshah and began to connect with Zoroastrians. Within the same time period in the southern Iran Persians moved towards the East. The Persians then started to overpower a tribe called the Elamites. While this was taking place Zoroastrianism moved forward among all Medians and Persians which were moving towards the East. Little about Zoroastrianism was known until around 549-550 BCE.When Cyrus the great who lead the Persians founded Western Iran and created the first biggest Persian Empire. The Achaemenid period developed around 558 B. C by Cyrus the great. The Zoroastrian religion then united forces with the Persian Empire. No one actually knows what happen to the Zoroastrian community after Zoroaster passed away. As for his message it was said that it had eventually gone all across the Iranian world. It is not certain how long it had taken for Zoroastrianism to become the Iranians main religion. Zoroastrianism had gone through the Iranian worlds Western part by the 6th century BCE.The Iranian people practiced their traditional Iranian religion up until the beginning of the Achaemenid Empire, on which they had converted to Zoroastrianism. Cyrus king of the Acheamnids Empire had replaced the Median Empire with the Achaemenid Empire. The Achaemenid was the first empire in ancient history that had a huge extension. Zoroastrianism was the main religion of the Iranians under the Achaemenids. There are many signs towards the Achaemenids being Zoroastrians such as Greek writings, Achaemenids monuments, artifacts and also texts, which were from Persia in Old Persian.All research show the early kings religion was not sure of but the later Achaemenids were Zoroastrians. On the other hand, there is a particular way which points out the Achaemenid kings were Zoroastrians. Which would be in the way they use the name Ahura Mazda. The Achaemnids kings frequently mention the supreme God as a creator. In doing so it at least strongly shows the kings were somewhat influenced by Zoroastrianism. It is not certain on Cyrus’s beliefs but it has been believed to be linked somewhere around Zoroaster’s date.It is also believed Cyrus was very much influenced by Zoroaster’s teachings due to his policies and acts. On e of many acts would be he freed all the Jewish people and allowed them to go home. Scholars have said the Zoroastrianism religion had a big influence on his decision. There are many reasons not knowing Cyrus's beliefs one of many would be there is no mention about Cyrus in the Zoroastrian tradition. By the 6th century B. C the Achaemenid royal house had accepted Zoroastrianism. Cyrus the great had also took all Eastern Iranians under his rule.Due to being their first meeting with the Greeks the Persians had already turned Zoroastrian and were learning Zoroaster from them. The Greeks have said Cyrus had named one of his daughters Atossa that comes from Hutaosa the queen of Vishtaspa one of Zoroaster’s royal patrons. Cyrus’s action towards Zoroastrianism showed he was a loyal worshipper. But he did not make any attempted to force the Iranian religion on his alien subject. The fact that Cyrus body had been laid in sepulchers and embalmed and not exposed according to the Zoroastrianism tradition it has kept scholars uncertain on his beliefs.As you can see almost nothing is known about Cyrus's beliefs. Scholars have also said he had followed the guidance of the Magians. It is also strongly believed by Mary Boyce that Cyrus was indeed a Zoroastrian and that he had followed in his ancestor’s footsteps. The God, which the Achaemnid kings believed in, was the great Ahura Mazda. From whom they believed had given them their empire and also who guided them through all accomplished deeds. In the Zoroastrian religion fire plays a very important part, as far as the Old Iranian religion fire also played an important role.Many depictions show the Achaemenid kings worshipping before a fire. This is one of many facts that make you believe the kings were Zoroastrians. As I stated before Cyrus’s beliefs were not sure of, but kings after Cyrus are believed to have practiced Zoroastrianism. As for the Persians just like many other ancient people they had started off with a polytheistic religion and believed in the forces of nature. They had believed there were Gods of nature, such as the sun and sky. They also believed the Gods had social powers. During the 5th century B. C the official Persian religion became the state religion.Even though all mankind were given permission to follow any religion of their choice, the entire Achaemenids Empire was forced to pay a temple tax of 10%. This tax supported the Zoroastrianism practice and encouraged the empire to follow it. There is much of a debate if the Achaemnids were Zoroastrians however the Achaemenids were know to be worshipers of Ahura Mazda. As all conclusions have shown, you can see that the Acheamnids kings and empire were Zoroastrians. I would not say the Persians had much of a choice at first, but as time went on they all practiced Zoroastrianism.I personally would not say all Persians at the time had a fair choice. Even though it was said ‘’ all subjects were per mitted freedom of religion’’. The reason why I do not think they had a fair choice would be, because all subjects were required to pay a 10% temple tax to support Zoroastrianism. In the ancient time I am sure there were poor people who could not afford to pay the tax. Which gave them no choice but to practice the Zoroastrian religion. Another reason I would say Persians had to practice Zoroastrianism because of the royal family who had already accepted the religion.They were the rulers of the empire where mankind was living. Since the rulers had already accepted Zoroastrianism I guess there were some people who accepted the religion and some who did not have a choice. Zoroastrianism is one of the world’s oldest religions that formed in Iran. So it makes it Impossible not to have had an impact change in the ancient times. As I have explained before, it is not certain of Cyrus’s beliefs. However scholars have said his actions have shown he was a loyal worsh ipper towards the Zoroastrian religion.Nothing is known in how long it took the whole Achaemenids to accept Zoroastrianism but eventually they had all accepted Zoroastrianism. In all the information on the Acheamnids religion it all points out that the Acheamnids were indeed Zoroastrians. Bibliography: M. Boyce, ‘’ Zoroaster and His Teachings,’’ in Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and practices. London, 2001 : 48-77 http://www. iranchamber. com/history/articles/achaemenid_society_culture. php http://www. cais-soas. com/CAIS/Religions/iranian/Zarathushtrian/zoroastrianism

Gender And Emotion Essay

Since time immemorial, emotions have always been a fundamental constituent of human beings. However, not all humans attach or detach the same emotions towards things; different people feel differently about varied things and that is why we are all termed as being unique. It is based on this difference in emotions that a lot of debates and researches have been going around in trying to establish whether the emotions we have affect the brain or conversely, whether the brain affects the emotions. Other researchers have-on the other hand- been looking at the subject of emotions differently by opinionating that it varies from one culture to another, one gender to another or even differing based on varied contexts. It is therefore important to circumspectly look at all the angles that have been propagated by different people if an inclusive and satisfactory answer is to be found for the above questions. Many of the studies that have been conducted by researchers highly suggest that the brain largely determines what we feel about different things. Researches by Norman (2003) support this argument by saying that human attributions for different things result from the brain which in effect dictates human behavior. He further says that humans have large brains than other animals and that is why they are able to act more maturely when expressing their emotions. Elder (1996) gives an example by saying that if we feel fear (which is an emotion), then it is based on the fact that we believe (a signal from the brain) something is threatening to us. According to her, Critical thinking precedes and emotional reaction. However, both of these are equally important and signals them should be treated with equal importance. Waxler (2004) also sentiments that â€Å"Our thoughts have profound effect on our emotions, and by learning how to think in our own best interest, we improve our emotional condition. † He proceeds and says that since it is easy to review our thoughts and even control them, then it becomes even easier for us to control our emotions and feel things that are appropriate for us. However, this capacity of the brain to control things has been subject to misuse by some people. Elder (1996) says that â€Å"As we mature, we learn multiple ways to manipulate others, to influence or control others to get what we want. We even learn how to deceive ourselves as to the egocentrism of our behavior. † this is sometimes even taken to the extent of faking feelings like, empathy, generosity, kindness when in real sense, we mean the exact opposite. So the next time you see someone acting â€Å"all good,† be careful because you may just and read between the lines; you may be happy when all that is being done for you is getting fed on lies. On the other hand, other researches purport that emotions affect how we think. An example is the finals of the 2008 FIFA world cup of where Zinedine Zidane, a renowned footballer of France, head-butted Matterazi (an Italian player) after the Italian allegedly made some abusive remarks to him. Speaking after the Interview, Zidane said that he was overwhelmed by emotions and all he could think of at that particular time was t o harm Matterazi. Matsumoto (n. d. ) furthers this argument by saying that â€Å"It is by controlling their emotions that athletes are capable of maintaining high levels of critical thinking and focus, regardless of what sport they are in. † He goes ahead and opinionates that whenever we are emotional, the capacity to think critically is reduced. As a result, athletes who are normally emotional have the tendency of easily losing focus. Tarleton (n. d. ) similarly support this idea by saying that â€Å"Emotions influence how we perceive and react to life, which in turn, determines how content and/or successful we are. The conceptualization or perception of something-according to them-results from feelings that are harbored in our emotions. So if we are able to control our emotions, then it becomes very easy for someone not to think-and consequently-act irrationally. Elder (1996) reports Goleman’s assertion that sometimes feelings come before thought. According to Goleman, â€Å"the emotional mind is far quicker that the rational mind, springing into action without pausing even a moment to consider what it is doing. † This is relatively dangerous as one may act in a way that is not appropriate and consequently end in problems. On the other hand, it may come in handy more so in situations where a person is in a dilemma and is lost for choice yet needs to act aptly. In addition, there is also a group of researchers who hang in the middle of this debatable subject by saying that both the brain and emotions mutually affect one another. In explaining this symbiotic relationship, Tarleton. edu (n. d) say that â€Å"Our thoughts influence how we feel. How we feel influences how we think. These connections are bi-directional and complex. † They go ahead and explicate this by saying that thinking about something good improves our mood while thinking negatively destroys it. Recent studies by some scholars have fundamentally brought an interestingly fresh dimension to this debate of the brain versus emotions. These scholars argue that gender orientation plays a vital role in how one thinks or feels. In spite of being given much emphasis in the recent times, the issue of gender influencing how a person thinks or feels is not a new concept. Even in the pre-modern times, men and women were expected to think and feel in a specific way based on the stereotypes of that time (Sungur and Tekkaya, 2005). Currently, men are debatably depicted in most areas as being strong and dominant while the women being second. Brescoll and Uhlmann (2007) in their work cite Heilman (2001) and Rudman (1998) articulate that women are should be kinder than men, and they induce negative responses from others when they fail to act according to the premeditated ways expected of them. They expound on this concept by writing that men are believed to be strong and should not show weakly emotions like crying just in the same way, women should not show anger. This has however not augured well with most women-especially the elitists and feminists- who see themselves as being able to â€Å"do better what men can do. † To them, both men and women are equal and none should be given a higher status than the other. When using the gender aspect in depicting intelligence or the capacity to think, the same argument used in emotions is used. Men are disputably depicted as having an upper hand than women. In their defense, they state the numerous organizations that are chaired by them and the many critical positions they hold in the annals of history. Of course this has faced much criticism from the women who consider themselves brighter. However, Pin-pointing who is above the other is not our main concern, what stands out to be counted is the fact that both men and women have made invaluable contributions in various aspects. In addition, their differences and unique qualities make them blend even better in their various roles and thus being to the overall good for both of them. References Tarleton. (n. d. ). Emotions and learning (Mini-mester). Retrieved May 3rd, 2010, from http://webcache. googleusercontent. com/custom? q=cache:m7MMnYFicw8J:www. tarleton. edu/~sanderson/Emotions%2520and%2520Learning(mini-mester). Matsumoto, S. (n. d). Do emotions affect critical thinking? Retrieved May 3rd, 2010, from Retrieved May 3rd, 2010, from http://www. humintell. com/2009/08/do-emotions-affect-critical-thinking/ Waxler, J. (2004) Self-talk: How thoughts affect feelings. Retrieved May 3rd, 2010, from http://www. mental-health-survival-guide. com/cognitive-therapy. htm Lmez. A. Y. Sungur, S. Tekkaya, C. (2005). Investigating students’ logical thinking abilities: the effects of gender and grade level.

Foundations of Human Development in the Social Environment Essay

Write a 700- to 1,050-word paper in which you examine the foundations of human development in the social environment. Address the following in your paper: Describe the interactions between the bio-psycho-social dimensions of development. Explain the concept of human diversity and cultural competence. Explain the connection between general systems theory and social order. The bio-psycho-social dimensions of human behavior are made up of biological, psychological and, social factors that explain human behavior. The biological dimension refers to the role of biological systems—meaning our bodies. The psychological dimension refers to the role of thoughts, emotion, and behavior on others. The social dimension refers to how individuals relate to various groups and institutions in society–and how groups and institutions relate to individuals, or classes of individuals. Social workers can understand a person’s behavior through subjective development. Viewing problems through a bio-psycho-social lens allows a social worker to help clients solve problems and learn coping skills through an understanding of behaviors and how biological, psychological and social aspects of ones life plays a role in behavior. When a Social worker has a better understanding of a client and the relationships in which the client is incorporated in, the social worker can set up a plan of action and the healing process can begin (Dale, Smith, Norlin,, Chess, ,2009).. The strengths perspective is a tool that helps aids in the understanding of people from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds; diversity. Different segments of society interpret things such as hand motion, eye contact and, other non-verbal communications in different ways. When a social worker can become proficient in cross cultural interaction, they will be much better  able to help clients that are from different cultures and ethnic backgrounds. This proficiency requires intense observation, superior listening skills, and a true desire to learn about different cultures, beliefs and traditions. The concept of human diversity can be described as a person or organization clearly understanding different cultures, languages, and beliefs of people and families from all around the world. Cultural competence can be described as skills, behaviors, attitudes, and policies implemented that assist social workers and organizations to efficiently deal with cross-cultural (socialworker.org, 2014). â€Å"Culture refers to integrated patterns of human behavior that include the language, thoughts, communications, actions, customs, beliefs, values, and institutions of racial, ethnic, religious, or social groups. ‘Competence’ implies having the capacity to function effectively as an individual and an organization within the context of the cultural beliefs, behaviors, and needs presented by consumers and their communities. (Minorityhealth.hhs.gov ,Adapted from Cross, 1989).† According to NAACP.org, cultural competence also focuses on population specific issues such as health related beliefs, cultural values, disease prevalence, and treatment efficiency. A culturally proficient social worker can make the difference in the success and failure of their clients. In the human service field when a social worker has an understanding of human diversity and cultural competence he or she can better understand clients from diverse backgrounds such as those with disabilities, the elderly, and the gay and lesbian community (NAACP.org, 2014). General systems theory is comparable to business and industry in the manner in which it is structured. In the business world, inputs are managed by organizational systems to produce outputs. In the field of social work, social workers use resources (inputs) to develop processes and procedures to produce services (outputs). Systems theory can help social work professionals comprehend how systems establish and the order of that social system. When explaining the connection between general systems theory and social order one must describe the two individually. General systems theory can be defined as components, which are in transaction and bounded. The components complement a system that functions within an environment. A component can be anything and exchanges are any relationship that exists between the components. A person is able to be aware of the boundaries  because it is what he or she can see, hear, feel, or sense. Social order is described as the demeanor in which a culture is organized and the standards that are required to manage the organization. Looking at what general systems theory and social order are separately one can see that both deal with groups and environments when working in human services both can work hand in hand when trying to find help and create goals for clients. The general systems theory is used in all aspects of social work, such as children and families, policymaking, and advocacy. Social order refers to a relatively stable system; institution, pattern of interactions, customs, and facts regarding society. To have a systems theory there must be social order. Without social order, one cannot determine the causes and factors within an environment that are causing a problem. Without social order we cannot provide proper treatment. Social order gives us a set of norms within a system. Without social order one cannot use systems theory (Mosby, 2009). In social services, bio-psycho-social dimensions, human diversity, cultural competence, general systems theory, and social order all work together to create a better environment for their clients, and enable social work professionals to better serve their clients. References Dale, O., Smith, R., Norlin, J., & Chess, W. (2009). Human behavior and the social environment: Social systems theory. (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon Zastrow, C., & Ashman, K. (1990). Understanding human behavior and the social environment (2nd ed.). Chicago: Nelson-Hall. Naacp.org, 2014