She pitied men always as if they lacked something. How does Woolf Essay

She pitied men always as if they lacked something. How does Woolf contrast masculine and feminine in To the Lighthouse - Essay Example Ramsay. The sentence is thought by Lily Briscoe in the novel and the whole sentence is This sentence clearly shows that the novel, â€Å"To the Lighthouse† is written with feminist theme in which, the writer wants to depict that men are naturally lacking while on the other hand, women have some power. Mr. Ramsay, who is Mrs. Ramsay’s husband, is a philosopher who has a good reputation on the basis of his knowledge but in the whole novel, he is shown dependent on Mrs. Ramsay. Mr. Ramsay is shown worried about the existence of his work as he thinks at one juncture, â€Å"and his fame lasts how long? It is permissible even for a dying hero to think before he dies how men will speak of him hereafter. His fame lasts perhaps two thousand years. And what are two thousand years? (asked Mr. Ramsay ironically, staring at the hedge).† These lines by Mr. Ramsay indicate towards his doubts about the remembrance of his work and himself. All his doubts about his existence and being remembered receive a sense of satisfaction because of Mrs. Ramsay who is always there to help his husband. He while talking to Mrs. Ramsay informs her about his doubts about his work being forgotten and he gets encouraging responses and back up from his wife. Mrs. Ramsay is not shown as a perfect woman but she is always ready to support men and while helping them, she sympathizes with them and tries to find solution to their problems. With Mrs. Ramsay, every character of the novel feels relaxed and comfortable because of her complacent and supportive attitude. She is like a source of support to the other characters of the novel including her husband, who looks a strong person but appears to be very weak before her wife. Mr. Ramsay appears wholly dependent on Mrs. Ramsay for confidence and encouragement. Woolf portrays Mr. Ramsay as a person and a man, who feels himself incomplete without Mrs. Ramsay. Woolf tries

Philosophy Final Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Philosophy Final - Essay Example This is applicable because analytic sentences of normal language show a substantial diversity of form and complexity that makes their use in interpretation unreasonable. Although logic is favorable in real time interpretation of concepts, other philosophical applications are also essential in making inferential arguments. Inductive and Deductive Reasoning This reasoning entails evaluation of suggestions resulting from some examples. In this manner, interpretations are made from general ideas to individual instances that suggest truths (Hausman, Kahane and Tidman 5). This concept involves reasoning from detailed observations and processes, which start from discovering patterns and consistencies, articulating some tentative suggestions that are discovered and then formulating a general inferences or theories. The synthesis of ideas from general opinions of specific makes this logic to be called â€Å"bottom up† logic (Burgess 8). For instance, if A is true and B is true, the C i s probable. These logics also employ restrictive probability meanings to signify procedures of the degree to which suggestion statements support theories. Inductive reasoning is probable to fail and produce misconceptions, such as a speedy conclusion mistake. Despite the mistakes made in inductive and considering the level of the limitations, most perception is inductive. For instance, inductive reasoning is applied in cell theory, which is among the basics of current biology uses the concepts of inductive reasoning. This is because all creatures observed are made up of cells. The argument is either true or false because biologists consider that all existing things are made up of cells (Minto 17). On the other hand, deductive reasoning operates to provide the truth of the inference offered that the statement’s evidences are accurate. This explains that, in a deductive argument, the evidences are planned to provide such close support for the deduction that, if the suggestions are true, then it would be inconceivable for the deduction to be untrue. Such an argument where the evidence accurately supports the conclusion is a â€Å"deductively† valid argument. For instance, if A is correct, and B is correct, then C must be true. This means that if a valid claim has true deductions, then the argument is comprehensive and valid. This is approach explains the use of the term "top-down" approach. It entails narrowing down on a topic of interest into comprehensive and specific theories that can be explained (Hausman, Kahane and Tidman 7). However, the variance between the inductive and deductive arguments originates from the connection the author of the claims takes to be between the evidences and the deduction. This implies that if the author of the claim believes that the accuracy of the evidences establishes the truth of the inference due to description, reasonable structure or scientific requirement, then the argument is logical (Burgess 10). On the ot her hand, if the author of the claim does not consider that the accuracy of the evidences establishes the truth of the assumption, but considers that their truth offers good cause to believe the inference true, then the claim is inductive. The two bases of argument help philosophers and authors to make convincing conclusions about their theories or claims. This makes arguments valid and reasonable by the connections derived from claims and conclusions (Burgess 10). Conversely, deductive reason

Getting it Right for Every Child (GIRFEC) policy

Getting it Right for Every Child (GIRFEC) policy Social Work as a profession is heavily influenced by political rhetoric and ideology albeit there has been a shift in governmental philosophy from the beginnings of the profession. Due to Neo-Liberal ideas commonly adopted by the main political parties in the United Kingdom, social work services are beginning to be based on free market principles. Social work and social care services have seen an increase in privatised quasi markets. The role of the social worker in all of this is one that can be contested and is certainly not static; it is a profession that I believe should attempt to be diverse and fluid. The aim of this essay is, to discuss too what extent there is a social work role beyond ‘the rationing of scarce services and managing of poor people’ (Ferguson and Lavalette 2013:108) This will be achieved by looking the Getting it Right for Every Child (GIRFEC) policy and what it means for social workers in a statutory children’s and families team before draw ing a conclusion. I intend to highlight the importance of early intervention as laid out in GIRFEC and what this means for social workers. GIRFEC also emphasises the importance of joint up working and I intend to highlight some of the failings of this and the tensions this creates for social workers on the front line. Finally, I will look at how GIRFEC is being put into practice by drawing on research from the Institute of Research and Innovation in Social Services (IRISS); Changing how we work: a case study in East Lothian. Firstly, however it is important to briefly explore the beginnings of policy implementation and how todays austerity measures effect policy being put into practice. Social work services go back over one hundred and fifty years but it was during the late 1960s that it became apparent that a framework of legislation was needed. This resulted in the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968. The Kilbrandon report 1964 was a major driver in this act along with the white paper Social Work and the Community 1966. The Kilbrandon report called for the introduction of children’s hearings and ‘introduced a new way of dealing with what were described as children who were in need of compulsory care’. (Fabb and Guthrie 2007:150) Smith and White (2008:21) add that ‘the thinking of the Kilbrandon Committee was strongly educational, reflecting longstanding views that social wellbeing and social cohesion through education should be the ambition of the system.’ The Kilbrandon report is still one of the most significant policies in relation to social work practice. Ferguson and Lavalette (2013) highlight how austerity measures and welfare reform mixed with the marketization of social work services is impacting on the social work task. Neoliberalism is an ideology now adopted by the main political parties in the United Kingdom and is a take on classic liberal beliefs such as ‘free trade and the free market’ (Hoffman and Graham 2009:) Neo-liberal theorists believe that the role of welfare should not lie with the state and they ‘question the need for the majority of publically funded, state delivered, or state regulated institutions that, taken together, comprise a welfare state.’ (Ellison 2012:) This can be seen in society today in many ways, for example, with the introduction of universal credit and benefit capping both making an attempt to reduce welfare costs. This could also explain the ever growing involvement and use of the voluntary or third sector in social work services. GIRFEC: The aims of the policy GIRFEC was introduced by the Scottish Government in 2008 in an attempt to improve the way in which work is undertaken by professionals working with children and their families. The policy was developed after a string of recommendations and reports surrounding child protection, one of which being It’s everyone’s job to make sure I’m alright Report of the Child Protection Audit and Review(2002: 1) which highlighted the importance of ‘a Scotland in which every child matters’. Another significant report was my turn to talk? (Scottish Executive 2006:), which highlighted that ‘child-related professionals and decision makers across Scotland have both moral and legal obligations to encourage and support children’s participation.’ I believe that this push for child participation will in turn promote active citizenship for children. From these reports and others it was clear that new policy guidance was necessary and so GIRFEC was adopted. GIRFEC aims to co-ordinate the services’ children receive as well as managing the consistency in the delivery of these services. The Scottish Governments guide to getting it right for every child (2012:6) states that ‘it is the bedrock for all children’s services’. Putting the child at the centre of the services they receive is high on the agenda throughout and the policy puts a high emphasis on multi-agency working and the importance of early intervention. The policy was created in respect to ten core components and has a strong set of values that were developed from the Children’s Charter 2004 which ‘reflects the voice of children and young people and what they feel they need, and should be able to expect, when they have problems or are in difficulty and need to be protected.’ (Scottish Government 2004) The wellbeing wheel, my world triangle and resilience matrix, together known as the National practice model, are assessment tools used within GIRFEC to effectively manage and analyse the information required for a child’s plan. The wellbeing wheel consists of eight indicators of wellbeing that ‘are the basic requirements for all children and young people to grow and develop’ (Scottish Government 2012:10). These are: Safe, Healthy, Achieving, Nurtured, Active, Respected, Responsible and Included. (SHANARRI). Deep rooted in this, is the four competences from the Curriculum of Excellence: a successful learner, a confident individual, a responsible citizen and an effective contributor. I consider the combination of well-being and the curriculum for excellence to be a strong indicator for the push for multi-agency work that is evident throughout the policy. GIRFEC: A drive for early intervention and multi-agency working and the tensions these bring. Early intervention is one of the key themes running throughout the policy. The Changing Lives Report of the 21st Century Social Worker Review illustrates a four tiered approach to early intervention, incorporating the social workers role. (Scottish Government 2006:31). It stresses how social workers are involved in the early stages of intervention and how as crisis situations develop, other universal services step back. I wonder how involved we really are at tiers 1 and 2 and believe this will vary between local authorities. The Scottish Government(2006:31) state that, ‘social workers have a significant contribution to make at tiers 1 and 2, supporting and informing the delivery of services both within social work and across partner agencies.’ However, McGhee and Waterhouse (2011:1097) contradict this by arguing that: ‘for social work, early intervention has taken on a different meaning from that at tiers 1 and 2 †¦ early intervention begins at tier 3 and concerns individuals who already present significant vulnerability and risk and who are beyond the remit and capacity of universal services.’ This points out that early intervention may frequently be the responsibility of health professionals and education. However, early intervention at tiers 1 and 2 is perhaps what social work should be about it with its professional values pushing towards social justice. The Highland ‘s children services practice guidance (2013:11) ‘emphasises the critical part played by health and education services in supporting the development of all children. Difficulties or concerns are identified at an early stage and steps taken to ensure that additional help is available when needed. Help is given as quickly as possible and in consultation with children and their families.’ This backs up what McGhee and Waterhouse argue early intervention is like for social workers; their idea that social workers are not involved at tier 1 and 2. Another Key theme to shape GIRFEC is that of the importance of multi-agency working. Although GIRFEC calls for a push towards a better system of multi-agency working it is not something that is new to the literature. (Wilson et al 2011) Multi-agency became high on the political agenda after the death of Victoria Climbie who ‘was slowly tortured to death despite the involvement of four social service departments, three police child protection teams, health agencies and voluntary agencies.’ (Marinetto 2011:1164) An inquiry into Victoria’s death highlighted the breakdown between professional organisations and called for better co-ordination between services and organisations. With the importance of professionals working together and sharing information stressed here it is no wonder that it is such a key feature in policy documents. The principle behind multi-agency working sounds simple; ‘professionals with different backgrounds, from different intellectual dis ciplines and with different roles work together to provide care and support to service users and people around them.’ (Payne 2007:146) However, for social workers there are tensions to be considered. Atkinson et al (2005) looks at research carried out into multi-agency working and highlights eight challenges; fiscal resources, roles and responsibilities, competing priorities, non-fiscal resources, communication, professional and agency cultures, management and training opportunities. Some of the problems identified within these areas were that there was no financial support and many workers did not know what was being asked of their individual role between them and the rest of the multi-agency team. There were often different primacies amongst the different professions leading to conflict. As a social worker it is imperative that I aim to overcome these tensions and difficulties. In regards to GIRFEC, I expect that the introduction of the named person will help coordinate the multi-agency approach although lack of funding and resources is something that is always going to be a threat to the smooth running of a statu tory children and families team attempting to work alongside other professionals under the GIRFEC framework. The Audit Commission (2009:3) states that ‘Effective joint workingneeds active leadership and purposeful relationship management.’ The report highlights how working together in multi-agency teams is not without risk and that difficulties can arise if the agencies have not developed effective relationships. Strong leadership seems to be a key theme throughout the literature. The Scottish Government (2010) states that ‘Partnership working requires leadership at all levels and across services. In order to make partnership working effective, leadership needs to be the responsibility of everyone.’ If this is adopted and everyone is clear on what their roles and responsibilities are it should enable an effective way of working. How can we implement GIRFEC into practice? In October 2012, IRISS worked alongside East Lothian Council to enable them to implement GIRFEC. The sub group working together involved social workers, police, child protection, the third sector, education and health. Collins (2013:) states that she had ‘initially conceptualised this project as a means to help an organisation reflect on and improve their use of evidence, however, as the project progressed it became evident that the lessons really centred around how a multi-disciplinary team can learn to work together well and change the way they work.’ So here we have a positive example promoting the practice of multi-agency working, however, arriving at this conclusion was not easy. The study points out that in the beginnings people were reluctant to the prospect of the group – ‘We don’t even have the same beliefs.’ (Collins 2013:5) The next problem to address was that when it came down to it, people didn’t fully understand the best way to comprehend GIRFEC- ‘The problem is interpretation of GIRFEC. Some people are putting ‘safe’ at the top of the pyramid. But safe is not the only thing. It doesn’t have to be the most important.’ (Collins 2013:7) These difficulties are only to name a few, but as the group moved onward planning strategies were implemented, based comprehensively on reflection which the group named ‘the action research cycle’ (Collins 2013:16), with successful results. Conclusion Going back to Ferguson and Lavalettes quote, it would be ethically undermining to say that social work is about rationing limited resources and welfare management and that the GIRFEC policy aims to tackle every aspect of a child’s well-being with a multi-agency approach. Although as previously highlighted, the importance of multi-agency working is not new to the literature, within GIRFEC there is a drive for a more effective method in which universal services can work together in partnership with a thrust towards early intervention, although it may be argued that social workers are being locked of this. To an extent, I agree with this and believe that austerity measures are influencing this and together with welfare reforms and an ever growing number of families living in poverty then at present social workers roles may be changing but I am uncertain at present as to say to what extent. What I am certain of is that the service users within a statutory children’s and fam ilies team will be effected whether it be through the ever increasing cost of living and proportion of them relying on low income wages or through local authorities having to cut funding to specialised services and protects.

Speech on Euthanasia -- Euthanasia is Murder

Speech on Euthanasia I stand before you today in confrontation. I stand before you today equal to any man. I stand before you today with a challenge! I challenge any man who deems, their morals, their ethics, their beliefs, their conscience enough to find themselves fit to judge others. I challenge any man who deems himself fit to pass judgement upon another’s life. I challenge any man who believes they can play god. I challenge any man who believes in euthanasia. How can you believe in something you cannot justify? There is no justification in euthanasia so how can it even be considered to be preformed, how could anyone ever justify the taking of another’s life. A mercy killing is the literal definition of the word euthanasia, tell me, where is the mercy in killing. Death and murder have no variations, no catalysts or pathways leading around them, murder and death are what they are. Therefore how can anyone make that decision, the decision upon another’s life? What could ever drive a person to believe they have a power others do not, the power of life and death. That they can decide who lives and who dies, and by what aspects can they base such a decision? Whether a life is worthy or not, whether they are using life justly or just wasting it, are they just a drain on society, are they productive in society. By that analysis of life any person who has no job and so drains on society, any person who has no positive aspect on life should be killed? Is that their idea? That just because the body cannot perform a duty then the mind is not worth its life. They say that they can no longer produce commodities, they are like an old m... ...nasia can be a lazy option. Doctors may never realise they have anything to learn. Few things are more rewarding to me than visiting someone dying at home, relieving pain and other symptoms so the person can start to live again. Restoring dignity, quality of life and giving people back control over their lives is far better than fatal injections. Most people are visibly relieved when they are told euthanasia is not an option. When symptoms are properly controlled, fears dealt with, practical help is provided and people feel safe, it is very rare for people to ask again for death by euthanasia. No my companions, we will not give up, we will not frail away from the fight, we will stand firm and oppress that which is euthanasia, we will not let it be legalised, for to legalise euthanasia would be to legalise murder.

Comparing Health Care Systems: The United States and Cuba Essay

For many years, the health care in the United constituted the best that any country had to offer (University of Maine, 2001). But as the facts would tend to display, it is slowly becoming one of the most inefficient in the world (Maine, 2001). The United States health care system may tout itself of being in the category of being the most expensive in the world, meaning a dearth of resources for the care it delivers (Reed Abelson, 2008). But the disparity in the amount that the people spend and the quality of the service attached to that cost is seemingly not parallel to each other (Abelson, 2008). A report released on the United States health care system shows that the country is spending about twice the amount on the health care needs of its citizens is compared to that of the expenditures of other developed nations (Abelson, 2008). But if the prices of health care in the United States, the country is listed at the bottom of countries that in the mortality of people if treated with efficient medical care (Abelson, 2008). This is a growing concern across the social spectrum of the United States (Meena Seshamani, Jeanne Ambrew & Joseph Antos, 2008). The amount that the United States spends annually on health care is truly staggering. In 2006, the United States spent $2. 1 trillion on health care services alone, double what the country allotted a decade back and about half of that is targeted in nine years time (Seshamani, Ambrew & Antos, 2008). The United States currently ranks as the third largest nation in the world, with a population of around 294 million (Samuel Uretsky, 2008). Of this number, it is believed that approximately 75 million Americans have inadequate medical insurance or do not have insurance altogether (Abelson, 2008). It was also found that the quality and the attendants cost of health care greatly varies across the societal spectrum (Abelson, 2008). These costs drain the finances of American businesses, which in turn contribute a quarter of the capital for health care needs (Seshamani, Ambrew & Antos, 2008). The costs to employers in terms of contribution to the health care fund increased by a staggering 98 percent in the span of seven years- from 2000 to last year, which outstripped the increases in wages by four to one (Seshamani, Ambrew & Antos, 2008). In 2007, the cost of employee-based insurance cost about $12,000, nearly matching the wages for minimum wage employment (Seshamani, Ambrew & Antos, 2008). Adding to the burden of high insurance payments is the fact that these have to be paid with higher service and deductions (Seshamani, Ambrew & Antos, 2008). This issue also has an impact on the senior citizens of the United States (Seshamani, Ambrew & Antos, 2008). Elderly Americans, in the current scenario, have to accumulate about $300,000 dollars in non-Medicare covered health costs (Seshamani, Ambrew & Antos, 2008). These costs have contributed to the access of health care by many Americans (Seshamani, Ambrew & Antos, 2008). Citizens who are covered by employer-based health insurance in 2006 fell five percent, from 66 percent to about 61 percent in the six-year period preceding 2006 (Seshamani, Ambrew & Antos, 2008). But how is health insurance in the United States given? The United States offers a variety of avenues of health insurance coverage both from public funds and from the private sector (Uretsky, 2008). In a report released by the United States Census Bureau in 2003, it found that about 6 out of every 10 Americans were covered by employer-based health insurance, about 3 of the 10 from the government, and the remainder with no insurance (Uretsky, 2008). In 2001, it was found that the United States spent more of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) than any other developed nation in the world (Uretsky, 2008). For that period, America spent more than 13. 9 percent of its GDP, compared to Japan, which spent about 7. 8 percent; Canada, 9. 4 percent and the United Kingdom, 7. 6 percent (Uretsky, 2008). It should be interesting to note that even if the United States outpaced Japan in terms of health care spending, the United States ranks just 24th in the world for life expectancy (Uretsky, 2008). Life expectancy in the United States is about 70 years old, while the valedictorian on the list, Japan, comes in at about 74. 5 years for its citizens (Uretsky, 2008). Memberships in life insurance and access to adequate health care have been shown to work together (Devi Sridhar, 2005). The availability of health insurance is essential to instances and times that people would be able to rely on medical care in relation to the overall health of the person (Sridhar, 2005). Lack of available health insurance will take a toll on a person’s physical well-being (Sridhar, 2005). The individual will not be able to go to medical facilities for preventive medical treatment, fill out prescriptions, and will likely be receiving that medical treatment in the latter stages of a disease (Sridhar, 2005). Unlike the United States, Cuba, on the other hand, is not prone to the failures of the private and public fund problems found in the United States (Harvard Public Health Review, 2002). Cuban authorities exercise complete administrative, budgetary, and operational responsibility for the delivery of health care services for all its citizens (Harvard, 2002). The Cuban health care model is purely derived from the government, defining it as a public health care system seeking to provide universal health care coverage for all Cubans (Oxford Journals, 2008). It has been seen as a model of matching few available resources with the needs of the people in getting adequate medical care, often getting extremely high marks (Oxford, 2008). Compared to other developed nations, the United States has the distinction of being the only one that does not provide the availability of universal health care to its citizens (John Battista and Justine McCabe, 1999). In the developed world, it is found that 28 of the industrialized nations practice a â€Å"single- payer system, while Germany practices a multi-payer system akin to the proposed system of the President Clinton (Battista, McCabe, 1999). This would lead most observers to take a second look at the health care system of the United States (Battista, McCabe, 1999). In the analysis of the American health system, it is good to debunk some of the fallacies and errors that have been around the effective and quality of the United States system of health (Battista, McCabe, 1999). The United States, though having one of the best health professionals and an exceptional system of delivery and technology, still lags behind some of the industrial world’s health system (Battista, McCabe, 1999). In fact, if several factors in health care statistics are considered, the report card for the United States is a dismal failure (Battista, McCabe, 1999). Several of these factors would evidence how the system of health care in the United States has failed to give an improving system to its citizens. In 1960, America ranked 12th in terms of infant mortality (Battista, McCabe, 1999). In 1990, the United States ranked 21st in the world, settling at 23rd in recent times (Battista, McCabe, 1999). A central issue in the United States health system is the issue of universal health care. A current misconception of arguing against the consideration of universal health care is the prohibitive costs associated with it (Battista, McCabe, 1999). The opponents for the policy of a single payer system are of the belief that institutionalizing the policy avers that the country might end up paying too much (Battista, McCabe, 1999). In fact, the United States is already paying about 40 percent more than any other country in health care spending per capita (Battista, McCabe, 1999). Two of the top priorities currently in the area of health care are the ever increasing costs in the provision of health and the decreasing levels of access to health care (Sridhar, 2005). This fact is continuing to drive a wedge between those that can afford to provide for their health care needs and those that can ill-afford to purchase or do not have the means and the opportunity to be covered by insurance (Sridhar, 2005). This problem of individuals not covered by the health care system in the United States is expected to expand also to affect the insured patients (Sridhar, 2005). The issue seems to be in how the universal system of health care would operate (Sridhar, 2005). Many opponents of the policy are criticizing the system as an added layer of the bureaucracy and might result in the centralization of the health care system (Sridhar, 2005). But the current practice of Americans in purchasing their health-care needs might be more expensive than the provision for universal health care (Sridhar, 2005). At present, and as mentioned earlier, Americans are covered by health insurance in three ways: it is a benefit to workers and retirees, through government programs and the purchase of non-government insurance (Uretsky, 2008). But is the opposition to the universal, or single-payer, heath insurance system justified? The main opposition as again mentioned is the cost of the system (Battista, McCabe, 1999). In addition to the seeming â€Å"overspending† of Americans on health care, the institutionalization of the single payer system could means savings (Battista, McCabe, 1999). According to studies done by the Congressional Budget Office and the General Accounting office, it shows that with the practice of the single-payer system, the United States can accumulate $100 to $200 billion a year in health care savings, with the coverage expanding to cover uninsured individuals and improving the quality of services offered (Battista, McCabe, 1999). The Cuban Health System: Making do with less, and then some As mentioned earlier, the health care system of Cuba is completely run and operated by the government (Seshamani, Ambrew & Antos, 2008). This health care system provides not only diagnostic procedures, but also preventive, therapeutic and ameliorative treatments for the people of Cuba (Harvard, 2002). The Cuban health system is also distinguished as the one possessing the highest ratio in terms of people to doctors (The London School of Economics and Political Science, 2003). These health practitioners are trained in the country’s 21 medical educational facilities (London, 2003). In turn, the family physicians, as they are called, 20,000 of them, are tasked to administer the health care system of the Cuban government, one family physician to about 600 people (London, 2003). It should also be noted that these achievements in the field of health acre by the government in Havana have been done in the presence of an economic embargo imposed by the United States since 1961 (Harvard, 2002). The embargo put severe restrictions on the ability of Cuba to source out funding for its health car initiatives (Harvard, 2002). Since these sanctions covered even the importation and food items and medical supplies, the Cuban government practiced a system of preventive cure as a means to cushion the impact of the embargo (Harvard, 2002). In essence, the family physicians, at least in epidemiological terms, serve their fellow Cubans in the best way that they know how (London, 2003). Not only do the family physicians provide excellent preventive care, they also make it a point to provide treatment and diagnostics to prevent the onset of diseases upon the people (London, 2003). These family physicians are usually stationed in the nation’s consultorios, or small clinics situated in small neighbourhoods that they are assigned to. These doctors usually reside in the space above the clinic or just nearby (The Social Medicine Portal, 2006). These physicians attend to the patients who come in the morning to the clinic, then set out in the afternoon for home visitation for patients who are unable to come to the clinic (Social Medicine, 2006). For complicated and more delicate cases, the people can go a facility called a â€Å"polyclinic† (Social Medicine, 2006). These polyclinics, numbering about 400 scattered throughout the nation, function similar to a hospital’s outpatient department (Social Medicine, 2006). Some outpatient procedures are administered here in the polyclinic, but the facility is mainly geared for consultation sessions with specialists (Social Medicine, 2006). Also, acupuncture, physical therapy sessions and ultrasound procedures are conducted in the facility (Social Medicine, 2006). This is the first level of health care in the island nation; the second tier of care being administered by local and regional health care facilities (Social Medicine, 2006). The Cuban health system is one that can be characterized as an undivided, cohesive and devolved system that caters to the health and well-being of the people (Francisco Rojas Ochoa & Leticia Artiles Visbal, 2007). Also, the right to universal health care is guaranteed as a responsibility of the government under existing Cuban jurisprudence (London, 2003). In stark contrast to the Cuban guarantee of the right to free and adequate health care for its citizens, the United States does not obligate the government to deliver universal health care to is people as one of their rights as citizens of the United States (Battista, McCabe, 1999). This resiliency and dedication of Cuba to provide for its citizens was also seen as one of the reasons that health care delivery was not too affected by the economic crisis in the 1990’s (Oxford, 2008).

A Helicopter Parent

A helicopter parent may have good intentions, but his or her interference could make their child's life much more difficult in the long run. Today, there is an increase in the number of helicopter parents. The term â€Å"helicopter parent† defines the behavior of parents who seem just a tad too involved in their child's day-to-day life. We all understand that parents would do everything to keep their children out of harm's way, but sometimes, this desire can become an unhealthy obsession that can actually hurt their kids. At times I question myself, will the next generation of young people be able to actually think for themselves? Children of helicopter parents can become too dependent of their paternities. It is a very common factor in the Palauan society for parents to help their children with their bills, giving them money, babysitting, and even to the degree of buring their groceries and cleaning their homes. It is a very touchy subject to some as they feel pity for their children and want the best for them but at times it seems to get out hand. Those who constantly protect their children from any disappointment only decreases the child's chance of self-empowerment and growth as they mature. With helicopter parents, time may be more consumed with exaggerated observance and calming themselves down rather than helping their children to be self-reliant and independent. Allowing your children to fail and having them test their limits is the least a parent can do for their kids. In this way, a child can be more resourceful, productive, and become an independent learner, or acquires knowledge through his or her own efforts. Lack of confidence is also an effect of helicopter parenting. Parents who are overly involved and overly hovering around a child is a sign that the parents themselves are very anxious. Children can sense and pick up their parent's anxiety and become anxious themselves. When this happens, a child usually becomes instantly sad, isolated, or depressed. Either way, it brings a child to an unhappy place. Anxiety among your adults has significantly grown in recent years, some have turned depressed or even sick. Though this happens at home when the child lives with his or her parents, it occurs after they leave home as well. When parents guide their children in everything they do, they do not have the chance to show what they are capable of. As they mature, it will only make it difficult for them to make their own decisions as they are used to having someone around telling them what to do. They are also very much terrified of taking risks especially if it is something that is not common to them. Something as simple as, â€Å"You can do this† or â€Å"I'm so proud of you† can encourage a child and help them build their confidence. Believing in someone is simply letting them do what they know instead of being by their side the whole time telling them what to do and what not to do.