176 research outputs found

    The Effects Of Mood Disorders On Families And Their Well Being

    Get PDF
    People who suffer from bi-polar disorder or other types of depression experience a range of symptoms and reactions due to the disorder that causes not only themselves but their loved ones, to experience negative effects. In the relationship between parent and child, the parent’s mental status is altered, in effect taking a toll on their abilities to care for their children. The literature provides examples of how depression affects parenting abilities and in turn affects the development of children of those that suffer from a depressive disorder. The literature does not claim that parents who suffer from these disorders are unable to parent adequately, only that their skills are negatively influenced. In order to look further into this topic, research questionnaires were given to social work professionals who using their experience in family service settings shared information in regards to their professional experiences with the target population. The findings conclude that parents who suffer from depressive disorders are affected in their abilities to properly care for their children but are able to improve their skills when proper services are introduced. Implications for this research would encourage more comprehensive outreach programs to be formed in order to provide better assistance to those seeking help. Also more easily available services need to be formed in order to better meet the demand of need of this population

    Where’s the Meat? Lochner and the President’s Executive Order

    Get PDF
    Rarely do we get the opportunity, distasteful as it may be in this situation, to relive an older Supreme Court case in real time. Today’s situation involving the meatpackers, some of whose employers are taking no precautions to protect against the pandemic virus called COVID-19, is not (yet) in the courts but comes to us in the form of a presidential executive order. These circumstances recall a compelling case from the early twentieth century in which workers similarly faced conditions dangerous to their health and well-being. In Lochner v. New York, a majority of the Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Rufus Peckham, declared New York State days and hours protections for workers unconstitutional after rejecting the evidence the state put forward and the argument that the bakers— who worked for Joseph Lochner and other entrepreneurs in hot basements with flour dust blowing into their eyes and mouths, who had an average life span of forty-two years when other workers had an average life span of fifty years—deserved protection. Whatever conditions businessmen like Lochner wanted to impose to make sure that the bakers at the furnaces made enough bread to sell to a demanding public, New York State in 1905 was prohibited from intervening to restrict the number of hours and days the workers could be in the bake shop. The holding in Lochner made it safe for Lochner still to ask his line bakers after ten hours’ work, “where’s the bread?” While the Court eventually reversed course and began to allow government regulation of the labor market with 1937’s West Coast Hotel v. Parrish,5 with contemporary workers at the slaughterhouses, simultaneously essential and expendable, we are reliving the Court’s prohibition of state regulation of business designed to help workers by requiring a safe and healthy environment. On Tuesday, April 28, 2020, in Executive Order 13917, President Trump used the Defense Production Act of 1950 (DPA) to order Tyson and other meat producers to open their plants immediately because “the American people need meat.” The Order also prevented workers’ suits against their employers if they got sick from COVID-19 because of the working conditions at the slaughterhouse’s plant. The Executive Order accordingly led to the conclusion that the radical elimination of the slaughterhouses’ liability for unsafe conditions was unmistakably the point: during the week of March 16, 2020, Smithfield Foods chief executive Kenneth Sullivan sent marching orders to Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts, complaining that Smithfield employees “work in close proximity to each other and are increasingly asking one question: ‘Why are we here?’ This is a direct result of the government continually reiterating the importance of social distancing.” While meat is economically big business and the heads of the slaughterhouses are powerful, meat is not the only source of protein. Meat may be more important politically and economically than nutritionally, as the concerns set forth in the Executive Order indicate. Furthermore, whereas in previous epidemic emergencies and until the Executive Order, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) health protocols remained in force, this Executive Order transformed those mandatory protective measures to hortatory only, through the power of the DPA. Shockingly, because of the health and lives of slaughterhouse workers at stake, even the factual basis for the issuance of the Executive Order is now questionable. Evidence suggests slaughterhouses’ contractual commitments to China apparently caused the potential or alleged meat supply “crisis” that John Tyson complained about and that Tyson’s “emergency” advertisement in the papers likely was coordinated with the Labor and Agriculture Departments as well as the President in order to inveigle enough employees, sick or well, to keep working or to return to work so the contractually promised meat could be exported to China

    Burdens of Proof: Degrees of Belief, Quanta of Evidence, or Constitutional Guarantees?

    Get PDF
    This Article analyzes the whole range of burdens of proof as well as their constitutional implications. Part H of the Article discusses the traditional burdens of proof and the use of probability theory in legal fact finding. Part HI of the Article studies the decision making processes of law enforcement officers, the judges that review their decisions, and the decision making processes in appellate and administrative review. Part IV of the Article returns to the trial process and analyzes burdens of proof, not as degrees of belief, but as reflections of constitutional due process that mandate a required degree of belief for the trial of certain important rights.Part V of the Article reports the results of a survey of judges on the meaning of various burdens of proof. Finally, the Article concludes that the objective-subjective dichotomy is an attempt to ex-press at pretrial and post trial stages the same policy concern that the Supreme Court has set forth at the trial level: the importance of the interests at stake. The proliferation of new burdens of proof,however, obscures and endangers these interests by confusing the decisionmakers who must apply them

    The Right To Resist The Government: Tyranny, Usurpation, And Regicide In Shakespeare\u27s Plays

    Get PDF
    William Shakespeare (1564-1616) lived in turbulent times. In the guise of examining what the Romans had done, political authority was being challenged seriously from various points along the political spectrum, from communal to individual demands and absolutist stances to the Diggers of the mid- 17th century
    • 

    corecore