Ethical Healthcare Issues Paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Ethical Healthcare Issues Paper - Essay Example These factors always yield ethical issues that question the ethical nature of the allocation method (Reiser, 2006). For instance, people are allocated organs just because they are wealthy and can pay for them. A medically needy person living far away from the donor may fail to receive the organ, which is given to a less needy person near the donor. Such ethical concerns clearly posit that there lacks an ethical approach for allocating transplant as some people are unfairly treated during the allocation process. In this regard, this paper evaluates the transplant allocation process using the four major ethical principles, including the principle of non- maleficence, justice, autonomy and beneficence. This determines the possibility of a more ethical way to allocate transplants. Autonomy The autonomy principle is highly employed in the healthcare sector. However, when it comes to determining the criteria for the transplant allocation process, it has minimal use. In fact, Reiser (2006) highlights that to be fair and effective, the allocation process should not be guided by the autonomy principle. Autonomy means deliberate self-determination or self-rule. The autonomy principle allows a person to make the decisions that one perceives to be morally right without third party interference. Although it is the basis of individual moral values, the principle cannot be employed in the allocation process. This is because in some cases, those allocating transplants may develop sympathy-driven emotional bonds with transplant recipients, such as those who have waited for long and the very young persons, including babies. If the principle of autonomy is applied by those allocating the organs, they are likely to act based on emotional pressure. Essentially, the allocators are more likely to allocate organs based on emotional bonds development rather than on any specific criteria or fairness. Hence, fairness or justice overrules autonomy in the allocation process to limit ethica l issues in the allocation process. Beneficence Beneficence directs that the allocators do not harm, promote the recipients welfare and do good. Nevertheless, how is this possible in allocating transplants, which are scarce resource?. Ideally, as Jensen (2011) indicates, it is difficult to avoid doing harm, doing good and promoting the welfare of the recipients when allocating transplants. Notably, allocating a kidney to a child based on age or other factors over an older woman who has stayed long in the waiting list or any other factor involves doing good to one patient and harming the other. It may be argued that focusing on the medically needy is doing good, avoiding harm and promoting the welfare of the recipients. However, other factors, such as the probability of success and being on the waiting list for too long still show that the allocation process may not avoid doing harm or promote recipients welfare. Ideally, it may become evident that a needy person with low or almost z ero success chances has been allocated a transplant over a less needy person who with high success rates. In this case, when the transplant fails, it will do no good. In fact, it may cause harm because the ‘less needy’ person may suffer unnecessarily because the transplant could have been successful on him or her. Categorically, although it is crucial to uphold the principle of beneficence in healthcare, it cannot help formulate an allocation process

Laws Governing Our Behaviour Philosophy Essay

Laws Governing Our Behaviour Philosophy Essay à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦the very fact that a man obeys the law is due to his goodness. (Aquinas: 96) The gap between how people actually behave and how people ought to behave is so great that anyone who ignores everyday reality in order to live up to an ideal will soon discover he has been taught how to destroy himself. (Machiavelli, The Prince, p. 48) But fear restrains men because they are afraid of punishment, and this fear never leaves them. (Machiavelli, The Prince, p. 52) It is essential that anyone setting up a republic and constitution for it should assume that all men are wicked and will always give vent to their evil impulses whenever they have the chance to do so. (Machiavelli, Discourses, p.92) Men never do anything good except when forced to. (Machiavelli, Discourses, p. 93) Laws do not make men good. Critically compare Aquinas and Machiavellis responses to this claim Laws cannot make people good and virtuous, it should be people who have to make laws good Human beings do not just exist as biological creatures, they are also social creatures. Humans have to fulfill some responsibilities to live in a commune, for that reason every individual have to obey the spoken and the written rules. Society without law is impossible to think of. It can only regulate and work properly with laws. However laws do not make men good. People do not need laws and rules to know what is right or wrong. This knowledge is to be inside of every individual. Basic issue that my term paper needs to examine is that laws make men good or not. I will explain Machiavellis and Aquinas response to these questions then I will explain my argument. According to Machiavelli, virtu is skill and ability in ruling. It is not a moral thing. A man that has virtu means he is extremely good at what he is doing. To survive and lead to victory, he believes, sometimes prince should act unjustly. The virtuous man is the one who has the qualities that lead him to success in his actions. Prince is a decent man but sometimes he should act without morality.(Prince,18). If he wants to hold on to power, he should learn how not to be good. Because, in some circumstances, his goodness would damage him if he cannot use it skillfully.But even virtue cannot guarantee success. So fortune is an important term for prince to achieve his goal.( Prince,20). Some events happening in our lives and we are not able to change it. Machiavelli says that fortuna determines one half of our actions but it also leaves us to control the other half.(Prince,74). A ruler who only depends on his luck will not survive long because when his fortuna changes, it will destroy him. If one knew how to change, as times and circumstances change will survive with his luck. Virtu depends on fortuna and Machiavellis prince needs fortuna to survive long. Both luck and skill needed him to overcome problems. He says the way that people behave and should behave is differ and they obey the rules not because they are good but because fear restrains them (Prince,48). Hence laws do not make men good, people pretend to act good and they only obey it because they are forced, we cannot say law contribute them to be act virtuously. People can easily corrupt and it is their nature to want to be ambitious and to be greedy. Where there is a freedom of choice, they will immediately abuse it. So they only act justly when they are forced to.(Prince,93). Obeying rules does not make them just, they behave this way because they fear. On the other hand, Aquinas supports that law is a measure and rule which governs peoples acts.(Aquinas,77). It is a kind of teacher that teaches people how to act virtuous. So for Aquinas, human laws are required not only to prevent the vicious acts, but also to lead them to be virtuous. Law, even by forcing and punishing, leads men to act good.(Aquinas,100). For him, happiness is the final end of human life and lawful acts tend to produce happiness and blessedness to reach the final end.(79). He also believes there is a natural law in people. He points out that every individual understand what is good or bad for himself and human laws derive from the natural laws. Laws are the guardians against the human nature because people would corrupt the freedom if they are not restrained. However rules are not enough to make people good. It just help us to understand people who are tend to bad things. We do not need rules and laws to know what is wrong or right. This knowledge we should have inside. If law compels citizens to act good and they only obey it because they are forced, we cannot say law contribute them to be act virtuously. It is a fact that human beings react in different circumstances in different way of acting. Virtue is something which people acts morally without any external force. So for that reason it frees people from obligation because virtuous person is choosing to act morally by his own. It is a fact that if laws restrain a man not to kill anyone it can never leads him to have virtue. It must be chosen voluntarily otherwise it does not make him good in real. In conclusion, the thought of fear and punishment restrains peoples acts. To ensure the peace, human laws are required. However when people act involuntarily good, it does not make them really good. Acting virtuously is a choice that people accept it freely. It is impossible to improve people as virtuous by putting control mechanisms. They may act just today but when things change they can easily corrupt and act the way they please. If some people who tend to act badly have the chance, will not hesitate to do what they pleased. So laws cannot make people good and virtuous, it should be people who have to make laws good. Glossary Prince: Machiavelli uses prince not to mean a kings song. His term means ruler. This ruler should be both loved and feared, but since it is difficult to be successful in both at the same time, it is much better to be feared. Virtu: Machiavellis understanding of virtue is quite different from the common understanding of the virtue. Of course his virtues include courage, justice, prudence and honesty but he accepts all this actions when they are successful. Virtu means for him skill and ability in ruling. It is not a moral thing. A man that has virtu means he is extremely good at what he is doing. To survive and lead to victory, he believes, sometimes Prince should act unjustly. The virtuous man is the one who has the qualities that lead him to success in his actions. Prince is a decent man but sometimes he should act without morality.(Prince,18). If he wants to hold on to power, he should learn how not to be good. Because, in some circumstances, his goodness would damage him if he cannot use it skillfully.Both luck and skill enable him to overcome problems. Fortuna: According to Machiavelli, even virtue cannot guarantee success. So fortune is an important term for prince to achieve his goal.( Prince,20). Some events happening in our lives without our reaction. Machiavelli says that fortuna determines one half of our actions but it also leaves us to control the other half.(Prince,74). A ruler who only depends on his luck will not survive long because when his fortuna changes, it will destroy him. If one knew how to change, as times and circumtances change will survive with his luck. Virtu depends on fortuna and Machiavellis prince needs fortuna to survive long. Underlying problem Basic issue that my term paper needs to examine is that if law makes men good or not. I will explain Aquinas and Machiavellis response to this claim then I will critically discuss it in my argument. The questions that will help me; Do people act justly because of they forced? Is it beneficial to act justly? Do laws always illustrate the rights? Are there natural laws? Philosophers response According to Machiavelli, the way that people behave and should behave is differ. Hence, they obey the rules not because they are good but because fear restrains them.(Prince,48).Laws do not make men good. They act colorable. People are easily corrupted and they are selfish. Where there is a freedom of choice, they will immediately abuse it. So they only act justly when they are forced to.(Prince,93). But acting justly does not make them just because they behave this way because they fear. On the other hand, Aquinas claims that law is a measure which governs peoples acts. It is a kind of teacher that teaches people how to act virtuous. So for Aquinas, human laws are required not only to prevent the vicious acts, but also to lead them to virtue. My Argument In my essay, I will support the Machiavellis idea and will refuse the idea of Aquinas. I will argue that laws do not make men good. Laws cannot make people good and virtuous; it should be people who have to make laws good. Of course there are natural laws exist which accepted by majority. They are unique and inconvertible. But natural laws are not enough for ruling the city. So to ensure the peace, human laws are required. Fear and punishment restrain peoples acts and lead them to act just. However when people act involuntary good, it is impossible to say that they are virtuous.

Revelation through Experience in Heart of Darkness, Going After Cacciat

Revelation through Experience in Heart of Darkness, Going After Cacciato, and The Things They Carried Foreign lands seemingly possessed by evil spirits as well as evil men, ammunition stockpiles, expendable extremities and splintered, non-expendable limbs carpeting the smoking husks of burnt-out villages, the intoxicating colors of burning napalm, and courage mixed with cowardice in the face of extreme peril. These are just a few examples of the spell-binding images presented in the novels read in the class entitled The Literature of War at Wabash College. These images and their accompanying stories do far more than fill the mind with fantastic ideas of war and heroism; they force the reader into uncomfortable situations thereby compelling the him or her to contemplate and evaluate his or her own personal ideas of valor, honor, decency, morality and mortality. While reading these stories, the reader is not only thrust inside the hearts and minds of the characters as he or she accompanies them upon their physical and/or mental journeys, but he or she is also forced to e xplore the darkest corners of being that exist inside every human being, male and female. Almost all of the novels are set during wartime and focus on the trials and tribulations faced by the common soldier. In his book The Great War and Modern Memory, Paul Fussell suggests that war literature can generally be broken down into three stages; the first being the innocence stage before the soldier goes to battle, the second being the loss of innocence precipitated by experiencing the horrors of war, and the third stage being the consideration stage where the soldier is removed from the war and contemplates his experiences. (Fussell). ... ...d Tim O’Brien have lost their innocence and in doing so, they have unwittingly destroyed the blissful ignorance that made their previous lives possible. One of the only means that these three men find to ease their pain is in the telling of stories. By voicing their feelings and experiences, they are able to continue living and cope with the awful truths they have learned about the war and more importantly the truths they have learned about themselves. Works Cited Conrad, Joseph. Heart of Darkness. Penguin Group. London. 1995. Fussell, Paul. The Great War and Modern Memory. Excerpts from In-Class handout. 2002. O’Brien, Tim. Going After Cacciato. Broadway Books. New York. 1978. O’Brien, Tim. The Things They Carried. Penguin Group. New York. 1990. Remarque, Erich M. All Quiet on the Western Front. Ballantine Books. New York. 1930.

Importance of Karachi in Pakistani literature Essay

Discuss the connection between 1947 partition and the fiction of second generation writings. In 1947 partition when people started to migrate most of the Urdu speaking settled in Karachi. The local Sindhis were not very literate but laborers, workers etc but when the Urdu speaking migrated, most of them were highly educated, thus the white collar jobs were given to them. This gave rise to a major conflict between the local Sindhis and the Muhajirs. Mujajirs were looked upon with hatred because the local people thought they’ve snatched their rights. There was a tussle between the two groups. Karachi was becoming the battleground of ethnicity. Karachi is the biggest metropolis of the country with its economic, industrial and financial hub and the main commercial port. According to past census, half of Karachi’s 8.9 million populations had Urdu as its mother tongue, another quarter was made up of speakers of Pashtu and Punjabi while Sindhis were just five per cent of the p opulation of the capital of Sindh, and half of them lived in the suburban area of Malir. On the other hand, Karachi had more Pashtuns than Peshawar, the capital of Pakhtunkhwa! In late 70s and early 80s there were economic issues over the country and the workers from different areas migrated to Karachi, especially the Pathan and Punjabi purely of economic reason. Most of the transport system was dominated by Pathans so it was a blow for the local Sindhis that these strangers are coming to our cities snf tking jobs that belong to us. Same was the case with the Punjabis. They were laborours who used to work on low wages but the main thing was that they were employed. Karachi is a multiethnic, multilingual, multicultural and multireligious metropolitan city. There are many communities in Karachi. There are: Ethnic minorities Sectarian minorities Religious minorities Same thing was happening with the karachians as it was with Bengalis. Bengalis were immigrants on 1947 but in 1971 they were once again asked to leave the country and move to Bangladesh. There was ethnic crisis in Karachi in 1980s and 1990s. It was really hard to live there at that time. Every single day people were massacred. When you have grudges in your mind, it multiplies, you can’t forget about it. These conflicts are highlighted in  Kamila Shamsie’s novels as well as in Tawfeeq Rafat’s poems. In his poem â€Å"Karachi 1968† he writes, â€Å"No, I do not think I shall come in terms With this grey place. It shortens my breath And pinches my eyes.†According to Tawfeeq Rafat, Karachi is a dead city. There is no activity there except that of violence. There is eco melancholia everywhere. Jonathan Raban has described city into two types. Hard city: Material fabric of built environment. Soft city: individualized interpretation of city. So when the karachians dream about Karachi, how it will return to its normal place is example of soft city. Likewise Tawfeeq Rafat talks about a positive region. â€Å"Children salute smartly as we pass, And the old women gathering faggots Have a smile to spare for the stranger.† The people of Karachi never truly got independence. They are suffering from 1947 till now. All they do is hope for a positive region where they can live happily, where they are not taunted for being a muhajir, where they can live a peaceful life according to their own will and all these things are highlighted by the second generation writers. They refer back to 1947 because all of this started from that point.

Scarlet Letter- The Human INclination to Love

The Human Inclination to Love In writing The Scarlet Letter, author Nathaniel Hawthorne was immersed in the era of transcendentalism and romanticism that so greatly influenced his work. Defining the movement was the concept that humans are inherently good in their nature and if they are left to their own devices ultimately they will do that good uncorrupted (Chase 109). Within The Scarlet Letter, this is brought to full awareness through the nature of Puritan society in the early English colony of Boston, Massachusetts.As a civilized, religious, and refined community this setting was foiled by the neighboring nd unexplored North American wilderness, in which the untouched and uncivilized human nature lurked amidst the shadows by society's standards. These settings assisted the specific character development of both Hester Prynne and Reverend Arthur Dimmesdale through the way they came to illustrate the human conditions of the human response to alienation by others, the human struggle between good and evil, and most significantly the inclination for humans to love.Furthermore, in the unique way both Hester and Dimmesdale share struggles and triumphs of human nature, along with the acceptance of their love for one another as influenced by the etting around them, is what allows the novel to be viewed as a romance. As it was established, the Puritan colony at Boston was meant to serve as an escape from the corrupted Church of England across seas and was to provide a place for a Marks 2 purified organization concerned with adherence to scripture, sermon, and above all doing good for the behalf of God.This gave to the affect that the Puritans of Boston did not want their community stained by the abomination that is sin. Upon Hester's emergence from the prison towards the scaffold a community woman violently roclaimed, â€Å"At the very least, they should have put the brand of a hot iron on Hester Prynee's forehead† (Hawthorne 60). This stagnant mindset for the community based upon the call for castigation is what brought to affect Hester's symbol of the crimson â€Å"A†, that which she war forced to wear openly on her breast.The actions and reactions of the defined Puritan settlement set in motion the change in Hester through the course of events of the novel. Graciously Hester accepted with stride her initial humiliation upon the scaffold in which the entire community became aware she was an adulteress. She perfectly reacted to this stringent society to address the question of how as humans we respond to the alienation from others around us. Hester responded in her own original manner primarily through her repentance to discover the virtue of truth and self-satisfaction her scarlet letter embodied.Hester never attempted to free herself from her fate. She could have escaped Boston, however, she decided to continue to be a productive member of society with her cottage on the outskirts of town and sewing business. In addition, she c ontinued to be an active member of the church to further her penance. Hawthorne writes, â€Å"It is the credit of human nature, that, except where its selfishness is brought into play, it loves more readily than it hates† (173).Hester developed to appease the society in which she lived as to make the best of the situation she had created for herself, her daughter Pearl, and partner in sin and lover Reverend Dimmesdale. She welcomed readily a seltless lite sne brought upon herself and lived for others as a symbol for the town. This was reflected in the way Hester transformed herself into a simple woman; she bound up her beautiful hair and wore drab clothing. She was a very attractive woman, however, she sacrificed this in the knowledge she acquired from her sin of passion and physical attraction.In return society came to conclude that Hester's embodiment in the scarlet â€Å"A† had come to signify Hester's unique strength in its newly found representation of the word â €Å"Able† (Hawthorne 175). The scarlet â€Å"A† came to change meaning with Hester's maturing in virtue. The setting came to forgive Hester, better her character, and ultimately do well for her. She bared the amount of strength necessary and was thoroughly able to conquer the evils of her sin through her epentance. Hawthorne writes, â€Å"Shame, Despair, Solitude! These had been her teachers† (215).Hester's goodness of character developed from her repentance is what allowed her to help sustain her lover and partner in sin Dimmesdale in his struggle between good and evil, helping to kindle their feelings for each other. Reverend Dimmesdale and Hester Prynne both fell into their sin far apart from what was acceptable by standards of Boston. According to Hawthorne, â€Å"This had been a sin of passion, not of principle, nor even purpose† (215). It was a sin of adultery, ltimately caused by the part of human nature that falls into physical attraction and pass ion.The sin of adultery as committed willingly together by Hester and Dimmesdale can parallel with the surrounding unexplored wilderness around Boston, which symbolizes in affect the evils and temptations humanity can come to fall to in its nature. Although the character of the wilderness surrounding the strict Puritan community at Marks 4 Boston may have lured Dimmesdale and Hester into their sin, the role of this setting changes throughout the novel. It becomes a sanctuary compared to Dimmesdale's truggle between good and evil in his decision whether to confess his hidden sin or not.The Puritan community in which Dimmesdale ministered served only as a place of his anguish and evil within for him, while the wilderness served to be a safe haven and place of goodness for the sake of his sanity. It also served for the ignition of his more emotional relationship with Hester. Therefore the integrity of Dimmesdale's heart comes to be the developing factor to his character. As minister of Boston, Dimmesdale held the identity of the community; he was the epitome of holiness. All arishioners of the community looked to him to be the carrier of people's sins and sufferings.However, unlike Hester who had openly the â€Å"A† on her chest allowing open repentance, Dimmesdale had no outlet for his evils enclosed in his inner heart while trapped by Puritan society and he was wearily clouded with guilt. He stood on no scaffold because he lacked the courage to confess he had trespassed against the sanctity of his position and his community. This when shed real light upon reveals that the setting itself caused Dimmesdale to betray his own heart and state of mind rather than anything else. Life in society served no assistance to Dimmesdale in his struggle of the human condition that is good against evil.Not any repetition of self- flogging or fasting could bring Dimmesdale closure to his actions. Ironically the setting that provided him with his anguish of sin gave him th e â€Å"moral blossom† of humanity that Hawthorne regards (56). This is love. The culmination of Dimmesdale's triumph ot evil came in his torest conversation witn Hester where their love is tlnally fully culminated. They are revealed Marks 5 as completely human and represent in a sense a new Adam and Eve. Both couples ad sinned together and had been punished for having violated the rules of their setting.Both Dimmesdale and Hester were fraught to bring an end toa close with the society in which they trespassed against, much as like Adam and Eve were reduced to a compromise with God himself after violating his one law in their setting of the Garden of Eden. However, regardless of what was to be of their fate, both pairs always were to be perpetually bonded. The sanctity of Hester and Dimmesdale's relationship was fully revealed in the way the sin they committed together created a similarity in compassion for one another and a need to help one nother.After seven years of no con tact between Dimmesdale and his love, the confirmation that Hester gives Dimmesdale that she still loves him is the help that allows Dimmesdale to finally confess his sin. Therefore, it is truly the nature of man to require human love that allows Dimmesdale to finally triumph the evil he suffers and confess at the final scaffold scene. The knowledge that he was loved in midst of all the suffering he had experienced allowed for an end to a close to the situation created by sin and all the evils that surrounded him and Hester. Hester Prynne andArthur Dimmesdale represented the human condition to turn to temptation; in this case it was against the Puritan community, making it necessary for the strife each Hester and Dimmesdale had for their redemption, bringing them ever so close together in their love. A romance is specifically defined as an emotional attraction or aura belonging to an especially heroic era, adventure, or activity (â€Å"Romance†). Hester's and Dimmesdale's lov e for one another came to an apex through the struggle they faced together in their setting in Puritan society and the trials of the human condition it brought Marks 6 forth.

Tips for Urban Stargazers

Tips for Urban Stargazers Stargazing in the city? Why not?  Just because someone lives in an urban environment doesnt mean they cant do a little sky observing. Sure, its a bit tougher because of bright lights and overall light pollution, but it can be done.   Most articles  about stargazing  recommend finding a good, dark-sky observing site. But for someone living in the city, who cant get to a dark-sky reservations, its tempting to just stay inside and look at the stars on a computer screen. However, it turns out, there are ways to do some city observing, despite the problems posed by light pollution. Much of the worlds population lives in or near cities, so enthusiastic city stargazers can and do find ways to do back-yard or rooftop observing.   Explore the Solar System The Sun, Moon, and planets are readily accessible because theyre bright. The Sun is an obvious choice, but observers do need to take some strict precautions. NEVER look directly at the Sun with the naked eye and especially NOT through binoculars or a scope that dont have solar filters. If an observer has a  telescope  equipped with a solar filter, then they can look at it through the eyepiece, to see the sunspots and any prominences that might be moving up from the Suns surface.  As it turns out, however, theres a very low-tech way to see sunspots without filters. Heres how it works: let the Sun shine through the telescope, and direct the bright light onto a white wall or a piece of paper. The observer gets to see sunspots without burning their eyes out. In fact,  a number of successful sunspot observers use this method all the time. That method also makes it very easy to sketch sunspots since all the observer has to do is direct the view onto paper and then trace what is projected. Checking out the Moon The Moon is also a great target for city viewing. Watch it night after night (and in the daytime during part of the month), and chart how its appearance changes. Its possible to explore its surface with binoculars, and get really finely-detailed views with a good telescope. One popular pastime is to explore all the large basins and craters on the surface.  Another one is to look for mountains and cracks on the surface.   One thing to look for during an observing session is an iridium flare. Thats a glint of light from the surface of an Iridium satellite. These usually happen not long after sunset and are very bright, so bright then can be seen from cities. However, as Iridium satellitesd are gradually phased out, such flares will happen less and less frequently. Seeing Planets from the City The planets are also good targets for city skygazers. The rings of Saturn and the moons of Jupiter  are popular targets. Plus, they show up well in binoculars or a telescope. There are good observing guides to the planets in the pages of Astronomy, Sky Telescope, SkyNews  magazines, as well as many sources online in other languages. A  digital astronomy program or app, such as StarMap 2 or Stellarium also provide precise positions of the Moon and planets in the sky.   The Deep Sky From the Big City Unfortunately, many people who live in light-polluted areas have never (or rarely) seen the Milky Way. During a power outage, theres a chance of seeing it from the city, but otherwise, it can be very difficult to spot unless they can get a few miles outside of town.   But, all is not lost. There are  some deep-sky objects that city dwellers can try to find. They just need to get out of the way of lights. One trick that many urban observers use is to stay up after midnight when some building owners turn off their outside lights. That might allow a view of such things as the Orion Nebula, the Pleiades star cluster, and some of the brighter star clusters. Other tricks for city observers: Find places to observe from that are shielded from bright nearby lights, such as a corner of a porch, the top of a roof and next to a wall, or from a balcony;Some put a blanket over their heads and their telescopes to block out the direct light;City astrophotographers take long-exposure images of deep sky objects;Use  good star chats  that help a skygazer hop from star to star as you search out a cluster or a nebula.   Ask the Locals Local planetarium theaters often offer stargazing shows, where people can learn the night sky.  They might also have classes for stargazers, so check out the nearby facilities to see what they offer. They are often found in science centers, but also at universities and some school districts offer public access from time to time. Amateur astronomer groups in and near big cities often have observing nights where people can gather with others to do some sky exploration. For example, in New York City, the Friends of the High Line organization have weekly observing sessions from April through October. Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles holds star parties each month, and its telescope is available each week for a peek at the heavens. These are just two of many, many stargazing activities in towns and cities. Also, dont forget the local college and university observatories- they often have observing nights, too. The city might seem like the least likely place to catch a glimpse of the stars, but in cities from downtown New York to Shanghai to Bombay and beyond, people can still often see the brightest stars and planets. It may be a challenge, but the rewards are worth it.

Discuss the arguments for and against the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder Essays

Discuss the arguments for and against the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder Essays Discuss the arguments for and against the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder Essay Discuss the arguments for and against the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder Essay Essay Topic: Arguments Death Penalty The death penalty, the ultimate punishment for man some may say. There are equally valid arguments for both views. This essay will discuss the arguments for and against the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder.Capital punishment is punishment by death hanging, electrocution, gas chamber, firing squad, lethal injection or beheading. It is normally reserved for murder although can be used in certain other exceptional circumstances (E. McLaughlin and J. Munice, 2001).Hanging was used in England and Wales between 1016 and 1964 (E. McLaughlin and J. Munice, 2001: 24). The purpose of which seems to have been retributive as well as deterrent. After May 1868, executions took place inside the prisons as previously, when they were public affairs, spectators often used the occasion as an opportunity to commit further crime thus turning what was supposed to show the power of law into a crime spree itself (E. McLaughlin and J. Munice, 2001).The death penalty was abolished in this country in 1965 (Davies, Croall and Tyrer, 1995: 6) although this was only for a five year trial period and was abolished officially in December 1969 (E. McLaughlin and J. Munice, 2001). It is still retained in some states in the USA and in certain African and Asian countries.In many places where the death penalty is still used as a means of punishment, more people are actually sentenced to death than are killed. For example, in the USA during 1995, 3,000 people were under death sentences but only 56 were executed. Statistics like these often bring about critical questions like, whether there is any point in retaining the death penalty and whether or not it does actually have an effect on society or on crime.Some states may justify the use of capital punishment simply on retributive grounds although the most common political belief is that it has a general deterrent capacity to save further innocent lives and significantly reduce other capital offences (R. Hood, 1 989).With regards to retribution, those who commit crime deserve to be punished, execution is a very real punishment with the criminal being made to suffer in proportion to the offence committed (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html).It is necessary to distinguish two different, although often related, conceptions of general deterrence (R. Hood, 1989: 119). The death penalty implies that the threat of capital sanction, or to be more precise the risk of death, prevents those who are about to commit a capital offence from doing so, in more cases than would the threat of life imprisonment. Therefore there would be an obvious relationship between the risk of execution and the rate of capital offences (R. Hood, 1989).The second conception implies that the existence of capital punishment emphasises the severity of a crime therefore reinforcing criminal inhibitions against committing it (R. Hood, 1989). The death penalty is only a deterrent if execution is an absolute certainty and homicide is usually a crime committed in undeterrable states of mind anyway (N. Walker, 1991: 16).Capital punishment incapacitates criminals, obviously removing them from society permanently, thus eliminating the chance of them re-offending even though murder has the lowest reconviction rates.One of the main arguments of those who oppose the use of capital punishment is the chance that an innocent person may be incorrectly convicted and sentenced to death. Two of the leading opponents of capital punishment in the United States today, Professors Hugo Adam Bedau and Michael L. Radelet, concluded in a 1987 study that 23 innocent people have been put to death in the United States since 1900 (M. Grossman, 1998: 129). In todays society, courts commit resources to avoid such miscarriages of justice to ensure that innocent people are not put to death, although even as late as 1962, James Hanratty, subsequently considered innocent, was put to death for a crime committed on an English ro ad although another man later confessed to the offence, and in 1997 a British commission concluded that Hanratty may well have been innocent (M. Grossman, 1998).Capital punishment has always faced a lot of controversy. One of the reasons is due to the cost of actually carrying out the death penalty. Those in favour of capital punishment persistently argue that, cost cannot be considered as part of the judicial equation when justice is being sought (M. Grossman, 1998: 60). Those against the death penalty utilise numbers to prove their argument that it actually costs the state more to execute someone that it does to keep them in prison for the rest of their life. Margot Garey states that because of constitutional requirements and the diligence of attorneys in capital cases, death penalty litigation is a long, expensive process where, after conviction, appeals which usually last decades follow as courts examine the case and investigate possible legal errors that could overturn the deat h sentence (M. Grossman, 1998).Another main controversial topic when discussing capital punishment is human rights and the right to life. Does a particular murderer, taking into account the full circumstances of his or her life, really deserve to die at the hands of the state? (A. Sarat, 2001). Criminals, although they may have committed the most awful murders, are still real people who have a life, and with it comes the capability of feeling pain, love, fear and all the other emotions the rest of society feel (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html).There is no such thing as a humane method of putting a person to death, irrespective of what the state may claim (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html). Every form of execution causes suffering and being executed is a terrifying and gruesome ordeal for any criminal (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html). A Canadian writer, Bernard Lande Cohen wrote The state has a duty to protect itself and its citizens not only from foreign enemies but from the domestic variety as well but he also insists the right of a government to take the life of any of its subjects ought to be subject to the strictest review in all instances and no matter how deserving of death and how little deserving of pity, it would be entirely wrong to inflict pain or torture upon him, or any form of death that is of a painful nature (M. Grossman, 1998: 6).An often, overlooked reason for opposing the death penalty is the depth of feelings of the friends and family of the criminal. They suffer pain and trauma leading up to and during the execution and will no doubt suffer serious trauma for years afterwards. Although, some may argue that the criminals family and friends feelings are now the same as the victims and, in that way, just (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html).The discriminatory nature of the death penalty was recognised in the United States by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1972. The evidence shows rac ial bias continuing to influence the jury. A report released in 1990 by the General Accounting office in the states shows indications of racial discrimination. The study concluded that, a person accused of killing a white was 4.3 times more likely to be sentenced to death than a person accused of killing a black (www.igc.org/africanam/archives/eh2/factsheet.html).There does not seem to be any other alternative to the death penalty except life imprisonment without parole. Punishment must be fair and in proportion to the offence committed and for the worst murderers life meaning life is an option. It protects the public from the risk of re-offence and allows time for rehabilitation. Most criminals are only, if at all, deterred by the thought of being caught and even the best review of the evidence from research concludes that it has failed to provide scientific proof that executions have a greater deterrent effect than life imprisonment' (N. Walker, 1991: 16).In conclusion we see th at the arguments for and against capital punishment are both very strong and depending on ones situation, circumstances and beliefs the ultimate decision to support or oppose the death penalty is that of the individual. The likelihood of Britain ever reintroducing the death penalty for murder is minimal. Politically it would be extremely hard given British commitment to human rights and our membership of the EC, which itself is highly opposed to capital punishment and contains no member states that still retain the death penalty as its highest form of punishment (www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6142/thoughts.html).