Parenting Module six free essay sample

What is a family? What is family composition? A family is a bunch of people that are either related, live together, or affectionate towards each other. Family composition is about the people in the family, having to do with their ages, number of people, and relationships towards each other. 2. What is cultural bias? What is an example of this? Cultural bias is what you have when you are judging someone else’s culture because of the standards of your own. For example, saying that certain religious groups and their forms of conduct are weird because they are different from our own. What are stereotypes? How are they different from prejudice? Stereotypes are quick to the point assumptions about someone mainly because of what they look like. They are different from prejudice because prejudices are assumptions that are made before getting to actually know someone. 4. What is the difference between a nuclear family and an extended family? A nuclear family is a traditional family. We will write a custom essay sample on Parenting Module six or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page An extended family is a family of multiple generations whom all live together. Critical Thinking Questions 1. How can families assimilate to a new culture? Families can assimilate to a new culture by starting to accept the other culture’s ideas and beliefs. 2. What are some of the problems with stereotypes or cultural bias when looking at families? Some of the problems with this are that you are basically judging people that you don’t actually know. You are making up ideas about them based on how they look, and this means that you could be missing out on getting to know some wonderful people. 3. Adversity affects today’s family, just as Black Death affected families from earlier times. What kinds of adverse challenges do today’s families face and how can they manage the situations? Families today face a number of adversities. For example, they may have very little money. They now have to work more to provide for the entire family. 4. Why are families diverse in composition? How are family lifestyles of today different than the past? Families are more diverse in composition now because there aren’t as many nuclear or traditional families. There are so many different living arrangements nowadays which can include many people from many backgrounds living together.

How To Do Remarkable Customer Research With Rand Fishkin

How To Do Remarkable Customer Research With Rand Fishkin Where do your customers hang out? What kinds of things do they like? What publications do they read? Customer research involves a lot of leg work, so does this information even matter? How can you leverage such insight for SEO? Today, we’re talking to Rand Fishkin, founder of SparkToro and author of Lost and Founder. He is a powerhouse in the content marketing and SEO world. Some of the highlights of the show include: Background, origination, and purpose of SparkToro Reaching/Researching Audiences: Slow, frustrating, and inaccurate process Companies spend money contracting agencies for a list of top customers, blogs, podcasts, and events Bones of Audience Intelligence: 1) Identify audiences across channels; 2) Know audience density; 3) Use trustworthy and valuable metrics How to obtain, benchmark, filter, and analyze data Data Points: Which to focus on and where to get them Social Network Profiles: Report follower count and engagement Biases generate unrepresentative data influenced by SEO Significant sample sizes and diverse groups are needed for true coverage Examples of missing specific audiences SparkToro lets you find people who practice specific fields Does current audience intelligence data represent the market as a whole? Improve SEO by helping audience accomplish tasks, and identifying and broadening link sources Powered by PodcastMotor Actionable Content Marketing powered by By AMP081: How To Do Remarkable Customer Research With Rand Fishkin From SparkToro 00:00/00:00 1x 100 > Download file Subscribe on iTunes Leave Review Share Links: Rand Fishkin on Twitter SparkToro Lost and Founder Project Event Safe Moz SurveyMonkey Audience Nate Silver SimilarWeb Pro AMP on iTunes leave a review and send screenshot to podcast@.com If you liked today’s show, please subscribe on iTunes to The Actionable Content Marketing Podcast! The podcast is also available on SoundCloud, Stitcher, and Google Play. Quotes by Rand: â€Å"If you’re looking at a social network profile, don’t just report on follower count, go look at the last 20 or 50 postsreport on how much engagement did each of those get.† â€Å"Go out there, build a company, make mistakes, just don’t make exactly the same ones I did.† â€Å"You get biased by your existing understanding of the field.†

Google case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Google - Case Study Example This acquisition with android has given a very positive impact on the financial conditions of the Google. This program of Google is executing with the thought of the customers having an Android phone will be able to connect all the contacts of Google like: Google+, Google chrome, Gmail and many other Google applications that are being used by the customers on daily basis. From 2008 with adaptation of android technology the net income of strikes high profits and increases with more then 30% each year till 2012. The impact of acquisition with android has proved it self by its remarkable performance in gaining the rapidly increasing profits with high percentage. In 2012 there were approximately 700,000 applications available for android and 25 billion applications were downloaded by the users from Google play. This sounds a great achievement for Google. Answer#2 In the opening quarter of 2012, the financial report speaks that Google brought around $2.9 billion in net income on $10.9 bil lion of revenue. On the other side, Motorola mobility lost around $89 million on $3.1 billion in revenue during the first quarter of 2012. In the initial phase after buying Motorola Corporation Google encounters with some losses but Google strategy was to earn with the long term strategic plan. Two big transactions made by Google in December 2012 that greatly impact over the financial position of the company. The manufacturing operations of Motorola mobility were sold by Google to Flextronics for $75 million and sold Motorola Home business division to Arris group for $2.35 billion in a cash and stock transaction. By these two transactions Google acquired 15.7% stake in Arris group valued at $300 million. This immediate effect develops the understanding that Google acquisition with Motorola will give some great and huge innovation in their pipeline products or services as we saw that before 5 years when Google acquisition with android undertaken. There are three big returns for Googl e in merging with Motorola. Right of entry to the portfolio of Motorola patent which it may possibly then permit to links like HTC and Samsung to secure next to the extended arm of Apple’s  lawyers. An integrated hardware/software takes part in to battle with Apple Corporation. The difficulty  with this reason is that  the agreement does not address the  breakdown on the Android platform which is the more difficult problem. The set-top big business to make better its covering Google TV offering. Answer#3 The android operating system with its open source model approach confronting with the criticism of the model causes code (software) base to fragment. Another criticism encountered that is online services and the android operating system does not connect with each other. Along with the criticism this technology provides a wide range of benefits to the users. The advantages of open source approach are as follows: 1- Superior in quality with the continuous development pr ocess. 2- Customizability in its development. 3- It gives the liberty of using with own intend. 4- Flexibility in advancement of both software and hardware. 5- Interoperability. 6- Audibility with the derived standards for removing the unwanted deviations. 7- Make available support options for making easier for the user. 8- Inexpensive in cost as compared to others. 9- It

International Business Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words - 1

International Business - Essay Example International Business As organisations begin to operate in foreign markets structural and environmental complexity and uncertainty increases. "If the domestic environment can be labelled uncertain, the international business environment is doubly so." (Mascarenhas 1982) International managers must know that international business environment is multidimensional that includes cultural differences, political risks, exchange risks, legal and taxation regulations. According to Mascarenhas the multiple factors a multinational faces due to environmental uncertainty are foreign exchange uncertainty, political uncertainty, and employment problems. However most experts of international business environment believe that it can be classified into four categories: administrative, engineering, entrepreneurial, and regulatory. More recently, Guisinger (2001) has put forward some of the main features of international business environment. They are: culture, legal system, political risk, income profile, tax regimes, exch ange rate, and restrictions. Culture may be described as the values, beliefs and attitudes of a country. These tell apart one country from another. International managers need to be aware of this while they travel, communicate or negotiates with people of other countries. Cultural differences are extremely important. An organization must give top priority to learning the foreign countrys proper cultural practices as well as cultural taboo.

The Age of Criminal Responsibility

The Age of Criminal Responsibility In recent years the attitude and mood towards young offenders is more server, due to a wide spread public perception of mounting youth crime, and the killing of toddler James Bulger by Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, who were only 10 years old at the time. Over the past years we are seeing more and more youths engaging in criminal behaviour, some not so serious, and a few striking cases for example, the Jamie Bulger case, and the Doncaster attacks. However only 17 percent of known offenders are aged between 10 and 17, which is surprising considering how much the media report on youth crime (Elliott, Quinn, 2009). Over the past year juvenile crime rates across the continent have remained more or less stable. However, this does not mean that the problem of youth crime is insignificant. Several countries have reported a worrying trend that more young offenders are committing more violent and serious crimes. Young people, who commit crimes at a young age start with an early criminal ca reer, are harder to reintegrate back into a normal life. This is one reason why it is necessary to discuss the problem of juvenile justice in depth (Hammarberg, 2008). There are two different trends in Europe at the current time. One is to reduce the age of criminal responsibility and to lock up more children at younger ages and for more offences. The other trend is in the spirit of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child to avoid criminalization and to seek family-based or other social alternatives to imprisonment. However in the UK theres a debate on whether or not the age of criminal responsibility should be higher, in which I argue it should. However, the age of criminal responsibility varies greatly across the world. It ranges from 6 in North Carolina or 7 in India, South Africa, Singapore and most of the United States of America, to 13 in France 16 in Portugal and 18 in Belgium. There has recently been much talk in England and Wales, where the age is now 10, about whether this should be raised. Britain and other countries set minimum ages at which a child or young person are allowed to make decisions without a adult or guardians consent for good reason. It is related to judgments about a childs intellectual, emotional and mental maturity. The position where a child has to make far-reaching decisions about their future should never be choice, children need appropriate adult support, guidance and, in some cases, veto. Adults take responsibility for children in decision making as it is seen that children cannot make informed choices and do not have the capacity to do it themselves. The United Nations believe that the same principles should be applied to the age of criminal responsibility (Guardian). The age of criminal responsibility is the age at which it is possible to be charged with a crime and put on trial. (REFERENCE) The UN Committee suggested that twelve is a too low number on the rights of a child and has recommended that serious consideration to be given to rising th e age of criminal responsibility throughout the areas in the UK It is difficult to understand and defend the UK and prevailing practices in Europe for being so out on line. Other methods needs to be thoroughly explored when it comes to ensuring that children take responsibility for their own actions, by drawing what the UN Committee have commended by the positive lessons from reparation, referral orders and other restorative justice schemes for offenders. It might also be an area where listening to children could pay dividends (Broadbridge, 2009). In 1985 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Beijing Rules of juvenile justice, which go further than the UN Committee on the rights of the child. The rules state that the age of criminal responsibility shall not be fixed at too low an age level, bearing in mind the facts of emotional, mental and intellectual maturity. It then goes on to argue that countries should consider whether a child can live up to the moral and psychological components of criminal responsibility and details that if the age of criminal responsibility is set too low the notion of responsibility would become meaningless. On this basis the minimum age of criminal responsibility in the UK should be 16 (guardian). It is also important to know and understand that some countries have a rule called doli incapax. It is held with an assumption that over a certain age that children can be criminally responsible, however, sufficiently mature enough for such a responsibility. If the defence team are successful then that child cannot be found guilty (Muncie, 2009). Generally speaking, there are two major issues to this debate. Firstly, at what age can you call a child grown- up enough to understand right from wrong, and the consequences of those actions? Secondly, at what age can a child comprehend and understand the criminal justice system and trail process enough to take part in it? (REFERENCE). Most European countries have a welfare based system in place to deal with young offenders as their age of criminal responsibility is mostly higher than England and Wales. The Criminal Justice Act 1998 abolished the doli incapax increased the tendency to treat children as if they were adults. Which can be seen in the James Bulger case as John Venables and Robert Thompson were tried in an adult court. Although a ten year old may understand what is right and what is wrong, they do not understand the implications of what they have done and what has to be as a consequence of those actions. Capacity and competence relate to age, understanding and maturity should be considered in any trial in which a child is a defendant (MaMahon, Payne, 2001). England has one of the highest conviction rates for young offenders; this may be due to the low age of criminal responsibility or the fact that we have a punitive state. Whereas in contrast Belgium on the other hand have a high criminal responsibilit y age with only a faction on youth offenders in custody. (NACRO, 2002) Offenders who are under the age of 18 years old are delt with differently from adults, as it is believed that children are less responsible for their actions than adults, a wish to steer children away from further involvement in crime. Sentencing young people has always posed a dilemma: should such offenders be seen as a product of their upbringing and have their problems treated, or are they to be regarded as bad, and have their actions punished? Over the past couple of decades sentencing policy has swung between two views. In 1969, the Labour Government took the approach that delinquency was a result of deprivation, which could be treated, and one of the aims of the Children and Young Persons act of that year was to decriminalise the offending of young people. The opposite approach was introduced by the conservatives which led to the UK having a high number of young people locked up than any other west European country, but reconviction rates of 75-80percent suggested that this was not benefiting the young offenders or the country as a whole. Since 1982, the philosophy behind legislation has been that the sentencing of young people should be based on the offence committed and not on the offenders personal or social circumstances, or the consequent chances of reform. (Elliott, Quinn, 2009) In law many children do not possess the emotional maturity to be held responsible for their actions. Everyone knows that children cannot always make informed choices. It is for this reason that children are not allowed to vote in many countries and cannot consent to sex or drink alcohol. It is seen that children do not have enough life experience and more importantly they do not have the same mental and emotional abilities as adults. Children are often not aware of the consequences of their actions. It is unfair to hold children accountable for these actions as even though children know the difference between right and wrong, they often do not understand the difference between various levels of wrongdoing. However you could argue that children do know right from wrong, for example. In the abduction of Jamie Bulger in 1993, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson must have known to some degree that what they did was wrong, or they would not have lied about it and tried to cover it up. Moreov er, It is important that the criminal law underlines the difference between right and wrong by punishing children and adults who commit crimes. By criminalising children it harms their development and makes the situation even worse. Labelling a child as criminal at a very young age is less likely to lead to a better understanding of what is right and what is wrong. If the child does not understand the wrongfulness of what they have done, they may feel unjustly treated by society and rebel against them accepting the label in which society has given them, and also feel bitter towards society as a whole. The people who surround the child are more likely to be treated worse such as parents and teachers which inevitably separate them from society.In addition to this, those who are sent to prison or young offender institutes get cut off from their family and friends and can develop friendships with other criminals, they can also learn more knowledge about committing crimes before they went into prison, therefore, never really breaking free from the life of crime. All of these reactions are likely to make the childs situation worse and increase the chance of future criminal behaviour. However criminalising children is a necessary step to show the child that those actions were wrong. Children that have committed crimes have often grown up in communities without a structure or control in their lives. The child may see drug-taking, domestic violence and criminal activity in their homes, and they may have often skipped school. These children need to be punished as without punishment the children will never know the cost of their own actions. The children are then less likely to commit crimes in the future as they now know that if they do something wrong a punishment will follow. In addition to this, other children will be are less likely to commit crimes if they know a punishment will follow their actions. We are not persuaded by the argument that criminalising children is the best route to rehabilitation. As the Childrens Rights Alliance for England put it, responding directly to the Ministers comment- The UK has a well-developed child welfare system that is more than capable of assessing and meeting the needs of children without them having to be charged or treated as criminals. The [JCHR] will be aware of the recent very critical joint report from eight Inspectorate and regulatory bodies into how well children are being safeguarded. Of the youth offending teams work with children in prison, the report concludes, the focus was almost exclusively upon the offending behaviour of the young people, and there was little evidence of welfare needs being considered and addressed. This should give a red signal to a government so intent on responding to children in trouble-especially the youngest ones -through the criminal justice system rather than through our child welfare system (Broadbridge, 2009). It is often said that children who commit crimes are victims of circumstance, and instead of punishing children we need to address those circumstances. Studies such as (REFERENCE) show that more often than not the most vulnerable children have grown up in poverty, and have been uncared for by their parents, often skipped school, and even abused. By sending these children to young offenders institutions, their education is harmed, and the possibility of the University of Crime, other measures should be considered. For example, in Norway, social authorities need to take action to secure a childs development through counselling or time spent in a special care unit. The measures that are take should depend on the childs circumstances, rather than how bad the crime was. This is more than likely to reduce the criminal behaviour of young people in the future. There could be issues to do with class in the mix here. Rich children are less likely to be criminalised as their parents will be abl e to afford better lawyers which will be able to deal with the situation better. However people argue that a child is more at risk if they do not receive a criminal punishment. Not all punishments are retributive; rehabilitation can be combined with the education and training that the child will receive in prison in order to integrate the child back into society. If these sanctions were not in place, it would be more difficulty for younger children to resist the temptation of assisting older criminals. It is seen that children cannot have a fair trial. Many children often struggle to understand the trial process, which can be stressful and also have technical problems. Given the seriousness of being found guilty, it is only fair and important that people do have a fair trial and punishment is given if found guilty. It is more than likely that children do not have the concentration to follow evidence properly, therefore they may not be able to give fluent instructions to their lawyers and are misunderstood. This is a considerable injustice to the child/ children that are on trial, as if they do not understand, or potentially intimidated by the foreign surroundings and language they are not familiar with, then a grave injustice can occur. For example, in the Jamie Bulger case, thoroughout the trail process it was noted that the John Venables and Robert Thompson looked bored and bewildered by the whole process. It is argued that it is possible to make the system work for children. Aus tralia, Singapore and the USA and many other countries have special courts for offenders under the age of 18.The design of the courts are simpler and designed to be less intimidating for a child, which allows them to be able to follow the criminal process more clearly. As long as the safeguards are in place to protect young people, it is possible for a child to have a fair trial, as long as that child is not tried in an adult court. Societies understanding of childhood do not arise because of some innate nature of children childs rights. In particular, childrens competence, to what extent a child a child can assert their legal rights and to what extent do adults interpret a childs competence, with this political question proves the rights and policies for the child. The history of juvenile history reflects the influential portrayals of perceived child competence. The origins of juvenile justice along the welfare approach are based upon the belief that childrens incompetence and lack of criminal responsibility. This foundation lends itself to broad state authority to intervene in childrens lives, which in reality has often proven disastrous for children. In response to these problems, a shift in juvenile justice occurred towards the justice approach, which inevitably constructed a childhood based around the notion that children did have the mental capacity and competence to understand and have criminal responsibility The MACR notes the tipping point among tipping notions about childhood; competencies; liberty and protection rights; and the welfare justice continuum. However in the justice approach the notion of responsibility often, if not always, serves as a trap door rather than a safeguard, in which it was originally intended. Instead of ensuring freedom for the state intrusion, its meaning can become distorted and may legitimise social control over children whose true responsibility is questionable. The effects of moral condemnation and punishment follow even where underlying moral responsibility is missing. At the cost of individual liberly, moral legitimacy, and justice, the publics conscience is relieved and authorities effective social control is consolidated. Paradoxically, the welfare approach may appeal to different concepts of childrens rights, but neither communicates a clear role for society at large, and bother bring the weight of problems down upon individual children and families. Such inherent flaws leave both the justice approach and the welfare approach as problematic models. We also note, as did the UN Committee, that the Government has abolished the common law principle of doli incapax (the rebuttable presumption that children aged 10-13 years are incapable of criminal intent). The effect of this has been described as follows.This means that a 10 year old child, till in primary school is presumed to be as criminally responsible as a fully mature adult. This surely cannot be right. In the light of the removal of this safeguard, we recommend that the government review the effects of the low age of criminal responsibility on children and on crime. The criminalisation of young children has to be justified by very convincing evidence- it is not sufficient to assert that it is the best, or the only way to diverting them from a future of crime.

Ney York Times article :: essays research papers

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER Tom Daschle called Cheney’s stance â€Å"unfortunate.† â€Å"The American people have a right to know what the facts are,† Daschle said on CBS’s â€Å"Face the Nation.† â€Å"I think the administration needs to open up, to be willing to be forthcoming with all the information regarding these circumstances.† At issue are meetings Cheney or members of his energy task force held with officials of energy firms, including the now-collapsed Enron Corp., while the energy policy was being formed last year. Cheney spoke on the same day a New York Times/CBS News Poll showed a majority of Americans believe the administration is hiding something or lying about its dealings with Enron. CREATING A ‘CHILL’ Cheney said his office already has given investigators numerous financial and other records. Advertisement What he won’t turn over, despite demands by investigators and Democratic members of Congress, is â€Å"a listing of everybody I meet with, of everything that was discussed, any advice that was received, notes and minutes of those meetings,† Cheney told â€Å"Fox News Sunday.† â€Å"Now, that would be unprecedented in the sense that that’s not been done before. It’s unprecedented in the sense that it would make it virtually impossible for me to have confidential conversations with anybody,† he said. â€Å"You just cannot accept that proposition without putting a chill over the ability of the president and vice president to receive unvarnished advice.† LAWSUIT CONSIDERED David Walker, the head of the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, has said he will decide next week whether to file a lawsuit to force the White House to turn over documents on the meetings. Cheney said the GAO is a â€Å"creature of Congress† whose authority does not extend to the White House. â€Å"I’m a constitutional officer, and the authority of the GAO does not extend in that case to my office.† Daschle suggested that Congress could take action beyond the GAO probe. â€Å"We will analyze just what our options are, what prospects there would be for Congress asserting itself,† he said, without elaborating. White House chief of staff Andrew Card agreed with Cheney that the administration’s ability to have confidential talks with advisers should be fiercely guarded. â€Å"I believe very strongly in protecting the privilege of the president† on recommendations that may not come out in public domain, he said on NBC’s â€Å"Meet the Press.† THE ENRON CONNECTION Cheney said the administration’s stance is the same as it was last August, when investigators sought similar information.

Football teams for the prison inmates Essay

Starting in the early 1930’s, state penitentiary facilities began forming football teams for the inmates. Because many people of that time thought this was inappropriate, prison football teams did not become common until the 1970’s. They play a 16-game season in the fall and have a prison Super Bowl in December. Each facility has 3 teams of 25 players each, with 8 players per team on the field at a time (5 linemen and 3 backs) instead of the usual 11, due to the smaller fields. The convicts compete with the teams within the prison, as well as with teams from other prisons within the state, and willing semi-pro teams. The coaches and players are selected by the facility officials after tryouts, some of which who make it on the teams actually having experience from college and pro football leagues before incarceration. The equipment is donated by state colleges and high schools, and ultimately does not cost the prison hardly any money. But do the full-contact games ever get out of hand? â€Å"In the beginning, almost every game ended in a fistfight. But I think the program is more organized and better supervised now. Overall, the players display good sportsmanship, while at the same time venting a lot of frustrations† says prison guard and referee, Stan Cioccia. So what could prison football be compared to? Babe Wood, prison athletics director at the Tennessee State Prison, has an answer. â€Å"I’d say teams are equal to a junior college team. Once there was a player here from Memphis who could have made any major college team in the country. It’s so sad to see a talent like that wasted. † But what thoughts do students have on a prison football league? â€Å"I think it’s probably better that the inmates are relieving tension through football, as opposed to beating up each other† answered Briana Egger (10). However, Parents of the students had different opinions. â€Å"If you committed a crime bad enough to get yourself into the state penitentiary, then I don’t think you should have the privilege of playing sports† countered Carla Murphy.