Nurse Practitioners as Primary Care Providers Essay -- Health Care, Th

Nurse Practitioners as Primary Care Providers Every individual in the world deserves to enjoy health and wellness. Maintaining or achieving proper health needs enables individuals to be productive at work and leisure. Traditionally, many people have had barriers obtaining adequate healthcare due to economic constraints or personal inconveniences. Despite impressive technological advances in medicine, the challenge of delivering quality healthcare to the Americans continues to be debated amongst the nation’s political and healthcare leaders. The aging baby-boomers and the increased number of uninsured people add to the equation of population growth which results in limited access to primary healthcare for the entire public. On the other hand, this has ignited the need for advanced practiced registered nurses to unveil the profession’s fullest potential. Nurse practitioners have been called to the public to meet the demand for safe and convenient healthcare. These academically and clinically well prepared nurs e practitioners demonstrate their knowledge, skill and leadership in the communities (Hansen-Turton, Miller, Nash, Ryan, & Counts, n.d.). Due to the magnified concerns for additional access to healthcare, ANA has supported nurse practitioners’ ongoing work in retail-based health clinics to reflect a positive movement towards accurate, quality medical care for all citizens. Since the year 2000, the nurse practitioners have been employed by convenience care clinics or retail clinics such as Minute Clinic and Take Care Health Systems. Either independently owned or as commercial chains, the retail clinics staff a family nurse practitioner or a physician’s assistant that offer the convenient location and evening hours... ...istered nurse should have a clear understanding about the prevailing need for advanced practice nurses in our communities. Next, all nurses must realize the need to convene as one voice in order to participate in the transformation process that affects the nursing profession. In fact, the influential nursing voice representing the largest healthcare workforce can substantially impact the policies and reform that affect our communities. Equally important, nurses should prepare to improve clinical and communication skills in preparation to accept more responsibilities for promoting and managing today’s healthcare complexities. Nurse Practitioners in retail care clinics, demonstrating skill and artistry as primary care providers, symbolize the positive transformation the nursing profession is engaged with in fulfilling the urgent needs of the communities.

Moral Relativism Essay

Moral relativism is the view that moral judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint; for instance, that of a culture or a historical period, and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others. It has often been associated with other claims about morality: notably, the thesis that different cultures often exhibit radically different moral values; the denial that there are universal moral values shared by every human society; and the insistence that we should refrain from passing moral judgments on beliefs and practices characteristic of cultures other than our own. Historical Background Even though moral relativism did not become a prominent topic in philosophy or elsewhere until the twentieth century, it has ancient origins. In the classical Greek world, both the historian Herodotus and the sophist Protagoras appeared to endorse some form of relativism the latter attracted the attention of Plato in the Theaetetus. It should also be noted that the ancient Chinese philosopher Zhuangzi (read as Chuang-Tzu) put forward a non-objectivist view that is sometimes interpreted as a kind of relativism. Among the ancient Greek philosophers, most people consider the ideas of Plato but I will explain about the ideas of historian Herodotus, because I found his arguments to be interesting and what we call thinking out of the box. The historian Herodotus tells the story of how the Persian king Darius asked some Greeks at his court if there was any price for which they would be willing to eat their dead father’s bodies the way the Callatiae did. The Greeks said nothing could induce them to do this. Darius then asked some Callatiae who were present if they would ever consider burning their fathers’ bodies, as was the custom among Greeks. The Callatiae were horrified at the suggestion. Herodotus sees this story as vindicating the poet Pindar’s dictum that â€Å"custom is lord of all†; people’s beliefs and practices are shaped by custom, and they typically assume that their own ways are the best. Herodotus’ anecdote is not an isolated moment of reflection on cultural diversity and the conventional basis for morality. In the early days, moral relativism was a concern of philosophy only but in modern times it began to shift into the concern of anthropology, and there was a need for somewhat a link or common ground between these two. An important early bridge from anthropology to philosophy was established by Edward Westermarck, a social scientist who wrote anthropological and philosophical works defending forms of empirical as well as meta-ethical moral relativism. He also ranks as one of the first to formulate a detailed theory of moral relativism. In the modern era the main push for such a position came from cultural anthropology. Anthropologists were fascinated with the diversity of cultures, and they produced detailed empirical studies of them. Early on anthropologists accepted the assumption of European or Western superiority. But this was challenged by the ideas of Franz Boas, Ruth Benedict, Melville J. Herskovits, and Margaret Mead all of which clearly expressed important forms of moral relativism in the twentieth century. The various views of Moral Relativism Defining moral relativism is difficult because different fields and also writers use the term in slightly different ways; in particular, supporters and antagonists of relativism often diverge considerably in their characterization of it. Therefore, it is important to first distinguish between some of the positions that have been identified or closely associated with moral relativism before setting out a definition that captures the main idea its adherents seek to put forward. a.Descriptive Moral Relativism Descriptive moral relativism is a theory about cultural diversity. It holds that, as a matter of fact, moral beliefs and practices vary between cultures and sometimes between groups within a single society. For instance, some societies condemn homosexuality, others accept it; in some cultures a student who corrects a teacher would be thought disrespectful; elsewhere such behavior might be encouraged. This particular view of moral relativism suggests that there are many different moral standards for moral judgments and we should just accept this differences. It denies that there are any moral universals, norms or values that every human culture accepts. None the less descriptive moral relativism only explains about the difference that exists, it does not tell us how we should base our judgments on these differences and does not necessarily support the tolerance of all behavior in light of such disagreement. b.Meta-ethical Moral Relativism Meta-ethical moral relativism holds that moral judgments are not true or false in any absolute sense, but only relative to particular standpoints. This theory first states that people disagree about moral issues and it also adds that terms such as â€Å"good,† â€Å"bad,† â€Å"right† and â€Å"wrong† do not stand as universal truth, rather they are relative to the traditions, convictions, or practices of an individual or a group of people. Some meta-ethical moral relativists focus more on the justification of moral judgments rather than on their truth. They focus on how the moral judgments are made and to what cause. For example, most people would agree that lying in court to avoid a fine is wrong, while lying to a madman to protect his intended victim is justified. Saying that the truth of a moral claim is relative to some standpoint should not be confused with the idea that it is relative to the situation in which it is made. c.Normative Moral Relativism Normative moral relativism is the view that it is wrong to judge or interfere with the moral beliefs and practices of cultures that operate with a different moral framework to one’s own, that what goes on in a society should only be judged by the norms of that society. The motive behind it is to avoid arrogance and promote tolerance. Normative moral relativists can also argue that judging other cultures is misguided since there are no trans-cultural criteria to which one can refer in order to justify one’s judgment. Normative moral relativism is mostly considered as an additional idea to that of meta-ethical relativism. However, what makes this view standout on its own is its stances on tolerance. Let us see these statements â€Å"we think it is moral to tolerate behavior† and â€Å"other people think intolerance of certain behaviors is moral.† Philosopher Russell Blackford says,† We need not adopt a quietism about moral traditions that cause hardship and suffering. Nor need we passively accept the moral norms of our own respective societies, to the extent that they are ineffective or counterproductive or simply unnecessary.† So according to normative moral relativists it is perfectly reasonable for a person or group to defend their subjective values against others, even if there is no universal instruction on morality and we can also criticize other cultures for failing to follow even their own goals effectively. Pros and Cons of Moral Relativism One of the main advantaged of moral relativism is giving response to the perceived problems with moral objectivism. Moral objectivism is a concept advocating the necessity of a universal or some common standpoint for view and evaluating all moral issues, since this non-existent, according to moral objectivism there would have been a major blockade. Never the less thanks to moral relativism which states such standpoint is not necessary, because each situation or moral issue is judged according to its own context. The other clear benefit of moral relativism is that it promotes tolerance. As you all know the world has a never ending conflict of ideas, though most of this are simple ones which can be dealt with a little compromise, some are quite serious which there is simply no way for agreement. These ones call for a more developed and acceptable solution that is tolerance. If it wasn’t for tolerance quarrel, fights, dispute and even war would be a day-to-day scene. Unfortunately like all human spawned ideas, moral relativism is not without flows. Moral relativist exaggerate cultural diversity; this is mostly directed against descriptive moral relativism. Every human culture has some sort of moral code, and these overlap to a considerable extent. There is a common core of shared values such as trustworthiness, friendship, and courage, along with certain prohibitions, such as those against murder or incest. Some version of the golden rule—treat others as you would have them treat you—is also encountered in almost every society. The existence of these universal values is easy to explain as they enable societies to flourish, and their absence would jeopardize a society’s chances of survival. Moral relativism undermines the possibility of a society being self-critical. Based on the definition of moral relativism we must judge every action in reference to its context. But if the rightness or wrongness of actions, practices, or institutions can only be judged by reference to the norms of the culture in which they are found, then how can members of that society criticize those norms on moral grounds? This dilemma make moral relativism a main means of bias for self-criticism; as a result, resistance to change. Conclusion To sum up moral relativism should be taken as a useful tool although it has many criticisms. I think it is a purely advantageous idea, and the criticisms come from extremists who take each and every proposition to its furthest practicality to make seem faulty. If we were able to overlook this small defects it is my strong belief, we would finally end the long lasting quest for an all-encompassing and universally justifiable standard for evaluating moral issues.

Drug Testing Welfare Recipients Essay

According to a study on the government of Canada’s website, in 2003, 1.7 million people were on government assistance and that number has continued to grow. The current unemployment rate in Canada is 7.2% and many of those families rely on the government to put food on the table, a roof over their heads and clothes on their bodies, meaning that money is absolutely necessary. However, working citizens are often resentful of the citizens taking the money that they earned and some are demanding that welfare recipients be drug tested in order to be eligible. Although nowhere in Canada requires drug testing to receive welfare, several states in the United States do. However, this idea fails to consider that drug testing recipients punishes children, ignores that drug addiction is a disease that needs treatment, and that it has proven to not save money. Therefore, drug testing in order to be eligible for welfare is callous and nothing but a symptom of discrimination and selfishness in society. Taking away money from a citizen that tested positive for drugs would unfairly punish their children, who are innocent and didn’t choose to have the parents they were born to. 81.5% of assistance recipients in Oklahoma are children (Richey), which means that many children could suffer immensely because of their parent’s actions. If a person on welfare were to test positive for drugs and their funds were to be taken away, their children would lose their entire source of income, which would mean they would suffer infinitely more than they already did. The kids born to drug addicts would have no lunch money or clothes for school while alcoholics’ children still received funds. This would be extremely hypocritical and it is cruel to disadvantage children that already have the odds stacked against them. Living in poverty could  cause them to do poorly in school and possibly turn to drugs themselves, completely obliterating any chance they had for a better future. It is possible to argue that if parents are using drugs, they are already wasting the money that could go towards their children. Although this argument is true, completely taking away all of the money is not going to solve the problem. More over, sending more children into the already crowded foster care system would also only cause more problems, a fact that American Public Health Association, the National Association of Social Workers, and the National Association of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Counselor all agree with as they oppose all laws mandating drug testing in order to receive government funding (Richey). Finally, the money that families receive could help struggling parents get into rehab and back on their feet, allowing the children to overcome poverty and live a better life. The blatant disregard for how drug testing those on welfare would ruin children’s lives proves that the policy is callous and selfish. In society it is common for citizens to discriminate and stigmatize drug addicts. They are stereotyped as lazy but in reality, drug addiction is a disease that needs treatment. A person addicted to drugs cannot simply quit when they want to. Continued drug use changes the chemistry of the brain, alters its structure and its ability to function normally. Moreover, images taken of drug addicts’ brains show that the areas that are necessary for proper judgment, and behaviour control are greatly damaged. Once someone is addicted to drugs it is no longer a conscious choice to use, but something their body needs to function. It is wrong to discriminate against addicts because it is first and foremost, a disease, just like any other mental illness and there should not be any stigma attached to it. Therefore, entry into a medically supervised treatment centre is necessary so taking away that addict’s only source of income will not help them in any way and will only result in an increase in the homeless population. It is possible that some people on welfare may be waiting to get into a treatment program and need the money to support themselves while they do so. The blatant disregard that the policy of drug testing welfare recipients has for the physical and neurological effects that drug addiction has on a person clearly indicates the callousness and discrimination that the policy demonstrates. The final and most important argument is that drug testing does not save any money. In  fact it wastes it. The entire idea for drug testing is that drug user’s assistance could be terminated, and therefore save taxpayers from wasting their money however, this is not the case. The costs of producing and administering the tests have proven to cost more money than the governments saved from terminating those found to have been using drugs. Utah spent $30 000 drug testing people on welfare and only 12 people tested positive. Similarly, only 2% of people receiving government assistance in Florida failed the test, compared to national drug usage rate of 8% (Covert). This suggests that the majority of drug users are not those living in poverty, and hints at the unjust discrimination they face. Additionally, a recent New York Times article stated that testing in Florida cost the government an additional $45 780, which is grossly wasteful. Comparably, out of the 8 states that are enforcing legislation, none of them are saving money. In Arizona, only 1 person in 3 years tested positive (Kelly). Every single study done has shown that the state governments are losing money but more and more states are proposing it and citizens of Canada are pushing for it as well. As of 2013, 29 states have proposed the legislation, which is completely nonsensical. If no money is being saved, why are so many people behind the policy? The only possible reason has to be selfishness and the reluctance of citizens for their taxes to be going toward fellow citizens less fortunate than themselves. This exemplifies how drug testing the poor is simply a symptom of discrimination in society and not a means to save money. With all of the evidence considered, there is no rebutting the fact that drug testing in order to be eligible for welfare is callous and nothing but a symptom of discrimination and selfishness in society. The testing punishes children, which is unfair, ignores the fact that drug addiction is a disease and most significantly, doesn’t save any money. So many people are supporting this legislation but being poor should not result in someone being labeled as less than and a delinquent. It is unfair that the only standing reason for implementing or sustaining laws requiring drug testing is that people don’t want their money going to the less fortunate that ultimately, need it for survival. For any person that supports these legislations the main question that should be pondered is why? Why should the poor be drug tested when everyone receives government funds in one way or another? The fact is, they should not. Bibliography Covert, Bryce.†Utah Spent More Than $30,000 To Catch 12 Drug Users On Welfare.† ThinkProgress RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Mar. 2014. Kelly, Brian P. â€Å"An Inane, Money-eating Sham: Drug Tests for Welfare a Huge Failure.† Saloncom RSS. N.p., 29 Aug. 2013. Web. 23 Mar. 2014. Richey, Kate. â€Å"Five Reasons Not to Drug-test.† Oklahoma Policy Institute. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Mar. 2014

Laser Dentistry essays

Laser Dentistry essays Laser dentistry is a relatively new form of dental care. Laser Dentistry uses lasers to perform surgery, prepare cavities, and harden dental resins. This use of lasers has allowed dentists to perform tasks with less pain and with improved results. There are many different types of lasers used in the dentistry field. Theses lasers included the argon laser, the diode laser, the neodymium: yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser, the holmium: yttrium aluminum garnet (Ho:YAG) laser, the erbium: yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) laser, and the carbon dioxide (CO2) laser. Each laser has different properties, such as wavelength, that allow the laser energy to be absorbed by different compounds. A laser that is well absorbed by water would be used on blanched tissue, and a laser that is well absorbed by skin pigments would be used on skin or gums. The argon laser is most commonly used on skin tissue because it well absorbed by melanin and hemoglobin. The argon laser operates at two wavelengths of 488nm and 514nm. The 488nm wavelength is used to catalyze dental resin polymerization. This use of the argon laser allows for faster curing of dental resins, and causes the dental resin to have a strong bond to the tooth. The argon laser is also used for laser teeth whitening. One of the downsides of using the argon laser is that the laser requires a large amount of energy to create lasing, and to cool the laser cavity. The diode laser is a useful tool because it allows for a smaller more reliable unit. The diode laser operates at wavelengths of 820nm and 830nm. These wavelengths are absorbed by pigmented tissue. This laser is used on gums and other skin tissue for some types of dental surgery. The diode laser is a very useful laser in dentistry because of its compact size. The Nd:YAG laser is the most commonly used laser in dentistry. The Nd:YAG laser operates at a wavelength of 1064nm. This wavelength is absorbed by both pigmented tissue an...

Fixed Mindset Will Destroy More Than Your Wardrobe

Fixed Mindset Will Destroy More Than Your Wardrobe Everyones Talking About Fixed Mindset vs. Growth Mindset On Saturday I went to an expo for Lu La Roe, a women’s fashion company that sells dresses, skirts, and leggings at home parties and online. I hadn’t been planning to go, mind you. I was actually headed to a different event – but something told me I should wander in and explore. I didn’t realize I was about to get a lesson in fixed vs. growth mindset – a topic that seems to be popping up everywhere in my life lately. First, there was a conversation at the Wright Foundation on what keeps us from training people to be better than we are. Then, fixed vs. growth mindset arose as the main focus of the ActionCOACH workday I attended on Friday. The next day, I was not surprised to see an article posted via LinkedIn by Susan Howington, My Best Career Advice to You, extolling the virtues of a growth mindset. Fixed mindset, just as it sounds, is a stuck frame of mind that will keep us exactly where we are. It tells us there are no options, that things won’t work, that we can’t do it or learn new things. People living in a fixed mindset are rarely the type of leaders we look up to or who triumph over adversity. They are more likely to be the people complaining. With a growth mindset, in contrast, we see possibilities. We know we can grow and change. We keep getting better and taking risks. People with a growth mindset are open to the ideas other people have for them. It is satisfying to contribute to them. Growth Mindset for My Wardrobe Back to Lu La Roe. I walked into the exhibition hall and my brain immediately told me I would not fit into anything there. I am 4’10† and when I looked at some of the XS tops and they looked huge to me. Instead of keeping my opinion to myself, I said to one of the vendors, â€Å"It seems like there aren’t a lot of things here that would fit me.† That was my first good move. I recognized my fixed mindset and voiced it. The woman immediately called over reinforcements, â€Å"Hey Tiffany! This lady thinks there’s nothing here that will fit her!† Tiffany pulled a dress from her rack and began to show me how wrong I was. Soon, not only was I trying on dresses, but I was learning how to MAKE them fit me! There’s a trick that worked on the first dress, bunching it up from underneath and tying it with a hair band to create a nice diagonal look. And another method worked on a dress that I initially saw as way too long (it was as tall as I am)! I was so excited to have gotten past my fixed mindset that I bought three items from this miracle worker, plus one from another vendor she referred me to. It was pretty easy to get past my fixed mindset about clothing. And it was fun! Creating a Growth Mindset Everywhere Will blasting through my fixed mindset about certain things in my business be as easy? I have some challenges I’m facing and I’ve been pretty hopeless about some of them. But my coaches have helped me see some possibilities there too. In fact, the email you may have received from me today about my college essay price increase came out of one of those conversations. To help understand fixed mindset, I invite you to watch this video clip from Facing the Giants: Brock’s coach literally had to blindfold him to get him past his fixed mindset so that he could not see his own perceived limits. And since Brock was a leader on the team, once he broke through his fixed mindset, his team could break through theirs as well. Note: Brock did not get past his limiting beliefs by himself, as many of us fool ourselves into believing we can do. He needed his coach to believe what he did not believe, just like I needed Tiffany and the coaches at ActionCOACH to get me past some of my stuck thoughts. I have a lot more work to do, and I know I will have to keep stretching my comfort zone. This week I’m taking new actions on my business, including reaching out to executive recruiters and past leads. As for my new Lu La Roe friend, we are talking about going shoe shopping together. Believe it or not, I have a fixed mindset about how I can’t wear dresses in the winter because I wear orthotics and don’t have decent shoes to wear with dresses. I’m ready to have that thinking blown out of the water too. Where do you see you have a fixed mindset that you want to shift? Please share in the comments! 🙂 Log in to Reply Carol says: June 20, 2017 at 9:40 am Thank you for this great article Brenda. It came just when I needed to hear it. I am a writer and am 61 years old. I work part-time for a wonderful nonprofit, but Im struggling to make ends meet. I know I view my age as a big limitation regarding work. I like your idea of receiving coaching as I tend to try to do everything on my own. Any ideas of where I can find low-cost coaching options? I live about an hour north of San Francisco. Than you. Log in to Reply Brenda Bernstein says: June 20, 2017 at 12:42 pm Thanks so much Carol. Im glad my article was so helpful! You might look for coaches trained through the Coaches Training Institute (CTI). Sometimes new coaches have lower rates. For career coaching, I would recommend contacting Thea Kelley! https://www.linkedin.com/in/theakelley/ Log in to Reply Susan Thomson says: June 20, 2017 at 9:44 am I am a work in progress on this! Its been an interesting journey to seek out opinions that are different than mine, question my fixed beliefs about how I invest my time and even how I see other people. Carol Dwecks book MINDSET has helped a lot on self-awareness. Log in to Reply Brenda Bernstein says: June 20, 2017 at 12:40 pm We are all works in progress right? Otherwise wed be in a fixed mindset! Thanks for the book recommendation, and for inspiring this blog!! Log in to Reply Dolores Priegnitz says: June 21, 2017 at 4:49 pm Excellent advice thanks for sharing. I will practice a growth mindset as I pursue new learning opportunities. Log in to Reply Brenda Bernstein says: June 21, 2017 at 5:05 pm Great Dolores! Make sure to have a coach its hard to keep a growth mindset when youre relying on your own mind :-). Log in to Reply

Remembering the Murder of Shanda Sharer

Remembering the Murder of Shanda Sharer Few crimes in modern times caused more public horror than the grisly torture and murder of 12-year-old Shanda Sharer at the hands of four teenage girls on Jan. 11, 1992 in Madison, Indiana. The callousness and brutality exhibited by the four teenage girls, ages 15 to 17, shocked the public then, and it continues to be a source of fascination and revulsion as the subject of dozens of books, magazine articles, television programs, and psychiatric papers.   The Events Leading to the Murder At the time of her murder, Shanda Renee Sharer was the 12-year old daughter of divorced parents, attending school at  Our  Lady of Perpetual Help Catholic school in New Albany, Indiana, after transferring the previous year from Hazelwood Middle School. While at Hazelwood, Shanda had met Amanda Heavrin. Initially the two girls fought, but eventually became friends and then became entered into a youthful romance.   In October of 1991, Amanda and Shanda were attending a school dance together when they were angrily confronted by Melinda Loveless, an older girl that Amanda Heavrin had also been dating since 1990. As Shanda Sharer and Amanda Heavrin continued to socialize through October, the jealous Melinda Loveless began to discuss killing Shanda and was observed threatening her in public. It was at this point, concerned about their daughters safety, that Shandas parents transferred her to a Catholic school and away from Amanda. The Abduction, Torture, and Murder Despite the fact that Shanda Sharer was no longer in the same school as Amanda Heavrin, Melinda Loveless jealousy continued to fester over the next few months, and on the night of Jan. 10, 1992, Melinda, along with three friends- Toni Lawrence (age 15), Hope Rippey (age 15), and Laurie Tackett (age 17)- drove to where Shanda was spending the weekend with her father. Just after midnight, the older girls convinced Shanda that her friend Amanda Heavrin was waiting for her at a teenage hangout spot known as the Witchs Castle, a ruined stone home in a remote area overlooking the Ohio River. Once in the car, Melinda Loveless began to threaten Shanda with a knife, and once they arrived at Witchs Castle, the threats escalated into an hours-long torture session. It was the details of the savagery that followed, all of which came out later in testimony from one of the girls, that so horrified the public. Over a period of more than six hours, Shanda Sharer was subject to beatings with fists, strangling with a rope, repeated stabbings, and battery and sodomy with a tire iron. Finally, the still living girl was doused with gasoline and set ablaze in the early morning hours of Jan. 11, 1992, in a field alongside a gravel county road.   Immediately after the murder, the four girls had breakfast at McDonalds, where it is reported that they laughingly compared the look of the sausage to that of the corpse they had just abandoned.   The Investigation Uncovering the truth of this crime thankfully did not take long. Shanda Sharers body was discovered later that same morning by hunters driving along the road. When Shandas parents reported her missing in early afternoon, the connection to the discovered body was quickly suspected. That evening, a distraught Toni Lawrence accompanied by her parents arrived at the  Jefferson County Sheriffs office  and began to confess the details of the crime. Dental records quickly confirmed that the remains discovered by the hunters were those of Shanda Sharer. By the next day, all the involved girls had been arrested.   The Criminal Proceedings With compelling evidence provided by Toni Lawrences testimony, the four girls involved were all charged as adults. With a strong likelihood of death penalty sentences, they all accepted guilty pleas in order to avoid such an outcome.   In preparation for sentencing, defense attorneys spent considerable effort assembling arguments of mitigating circumstances for some of the girls, arguing that these facts reduced their culpability. These facts were presented to the judge during the sentencing hearing. Melinda Loveless, the ringleader, had by far the most extensive history of abuse. At the legal hearing, two of her sisters and two cousins testified that her father, Larry Loveless, had forced them to have sex with him, although they could not testify that Melinda, too, had been so abused. His history of physical abuse to his wife and children was well documented, as well as a pattern of sexual misconduct. (Later, Larry Loveless would be charged with 11 counts of child sex abuse.) Laurie Tackett was raised in a strictly religious household where rock music, movies and most other trappings of normal teenage life were strictly forbidden. In rebellion, she shaved her head and engaged in occult practices. It was not entirely surprising to others that she could have participated in such a crime.   Toni Lawrence and Hope Rippey had no such troubled reputations, and experts and public onlookers were somewhat baffled at how relatively normal girls could have participated in such a crime. In the end, it was chalked up to simple peer pressure and a thirst for acceptance, but the case continues to be a source of analysis and discussion to this day.   The Sentences In exchange for her extensive testimony, Toni Lawrence received the lightest sentence- she pleaded guilty to one count of Criminal Confinement and was sentenced to a maximum of 20 years. She was released on December 14, 2000, after serving nine years. She remained on parole until December, 2002. Hope Rippey was sentenced to 60 years, with ten years suspended for mitigating circumstances. Upon later appeal, her sentence was reduced to 35 years. She was released early on April 28, 2002 from Indiana Womens Prison after serving 14 years of her original sentence.   Melinda Loveless and Laurie Tackett were sentenced to 60 years in the Indiana Womens Prison in Indianapolis. Tacket was released on Jan. 11, 2018, exactly 26 years to the day after the murder.   Melinda Loveless, the ringleader of one of the most brutal murders in recent time, is due to be released in 2019.

Smoking and Depression by Dr. Jon Kassel and Dr. Benjamin Hankin Article

Smoking and Depression by Dr. Jon Kassel and Dr. Benjamin Hankin - Article Example Dr. Jon Kassel and Dr. Benjamin Hankin in their essay â€Å"Smoking and Depression†   delve in the nooks and crannies of smoking, the numbers of deaths per year, and the different pathways that lead to cigarette smoking. This paper intends to evaluate this particular source in order to ensure that it holds reputable and credible content that can be used to the completion of the researcher’s third essay.Dr. Jon Kassel is an associate professor of psychology at the University of Illinois Chicago.   His primary research interests are on the better understanding factors that underlie tobacco smoking behavior (UIC n.p.). Dr. Kassel received his doctorate from the University of Pittsburgh in 1995 and since then has become a faculty member of the University of Illinois Chicago College of Liberal Arts and Science. He is the director of the Substance Use Research Laboratory and has already authored more than 70 articles and chapters. He is also a multi-awarded researcher on substance abuse. He has received numerous recognitions including the Ferno Award for Innovative Research on Nicotine and Tobacco and is also a recipient of the Outstanding Early Career Contributions Award. Dr. Benjamin Hankin is a psychology professor at the University of Denver. His research interests include depression and mood disorders in youth, developmental psychopathology, and the GEM study (University of Denver n.p.). He received his PhD from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is a notable author for 95 publications and has co-edited two books. He was awarded with the prestigious APA Award for Distinguished Scientific Early Career Contributions to Psychology in 2010.  Ã‚