Gays Adopting Children Essay Example for Free

Gays Adopting Children Essay Society is a flexible structure. Only this way it can serve the best way for its members. Democratic process is aimed to increase the rights of its citizens. Nowadays the theme of sexuality becomes an important social issue. Recognition of rights of homosexuals is an important process, which signifies that a lot of people are ready to express freely their sexual preferences and are ready to fight for their rights. Legalization of homosexual marriages and the right of such couples to adopt children is an important and controversial issue of our time. â€Å"Researchers estimate that the total number of children nationwide living with at least one gay parent ranges from six to 14 million† (Gottman, 105). At the present moment many countries legalized the right of lesbian and gay couples to adapt children. Such countries as Andorra, Belgium, Guam, Iceland, the Netherlands, Sweden, South Africa, Spain, the United Kingdom. It is also legal in some separate parts of the Australia, Canada and the United States. In the United States of America 22 states allow lesbian and gay couples to adopt children. The issue is so burning because for homosexual parents adopting becomes the only way to have a child. Even the artificial insemination can not be applied in all cases. First of all this method can be used only for lesbian couples. In addition another spouse form the couple has to adopt a child in order to become his legal parent. For gay couples this method can not be applied. In addition, adopting is a right of each person. That is the reason the question is more important than just an opportunity for homosexual couples to have children. In April 2001 Holland enlarged the definition of marriage and enabled the people of the same sex to get married. Same did Belgium in 2003. The next was Canada. Same sex couples can get married in San Francisco since February 12 of the 2004, because of an action by their mayor. The question of the legislation of homosexual marriages becomes more and more burning and needs a deep survey. There are a lot of reasons against same sex marriages. One of the reasons is that homosexual marriages contradict the tradition. The idea of homosexual marriages threats the very idea of the sanctity of the marriage. The term marriage should refer to a loving relationship between man and woman. The institution of marriage considers the union of two adults of different sex living together. For centuries the marriage was considered just between the people of the opposite sex and by now the marriage of the people of the same sex can be wrong on an evolutionary scale (Coolidge, 1997). People don’t have much faith in the marriage institutions now and the legislation of the heterosexual marriages can weaken this faith. In addition, if the homosexual marriages are legalized to protect the freedom of human why there should be other restrictions for the marriages such as marring the relative or the age of getting married? So called domino effect can cause the demand to cancel all kinds of restrictions on the marriages. If the marriages between the people of the same sex can be accepted like a demonstration of the free will of the individuals, why can’t be accepted the marriage between the brother and the sister or other close relatives? In the case of legalization of homosexual marriages we speak only about the rights of homosexual people. The issue becomes much more complicated when it comes to adopting children. In this case the rights of both, homosexual parents and the rights of adopted children should be considered. Since children are not able to express their own will during the process of adoption, the society must make an important choice deciding on the rights of children. From the other hand it is necessary to mind the right of homosexual couples, who also have their rights and desires. There are many arguments pro and contra adopting children by homosexual couples. Those who stand for giving homosexual couples this right state that all people must have rights to adopt children. If both parents are able to give their child all normal conditions for living, there is no reason to ban homosexual parents to adopt children. Those, who are against this right, state that homosexual couple will not be able to provide normal life conditions for children. In this case the question about â€Å"normality† arises. Social norms are expanded with each year. Homosexual relations, which were considered sinful and even criminal several centuries ago, become a social norm nowadays. This means that the meaning of â€Å"normal† family structure and â€Å"normal† life conditions can also be transformed with the flow of time. Those, who support an idea to give the right of adopting to homosexual couples state that many children wait for adoption and giving this right to homosexual couple would help to improve the situation. In addition specialists, who stand for the legalization of the right of homosexual couples to adopt children state that only small number of children from heterosexual families have normal life conditions. â€Å"Most children in the United States do not live with two married parents. In fact, according to the 2000 census, only 24% homes were composed of a married mother and father with children living at home. † (Green,1978, p. 19) In the case with homosexual family the children will have two parents, even if they are of the same sex. In â€Å"normal† families children often have only one parent. The proponents of legalization of adoption give data, which proves that children, grown up in one-parent and homosexual families, have same level of emotional and social adaptation as children from heterosexual families. This means that homosexuality of parents has little effect on the development of a child. As state specialists, children are more influenced by their relations with their parents and social surrounding than by the sexual orientation of their parents. Even the American Association of Paediatrics agreed with this opinion and supported the legalization of adoption. In addition, if we turn to legal issues, there is no official reasons to ban homosexual couples to adapt children. There is no special amendment in the Constitution, which would deny gay and lesbian couples their rights to adopt children. Most courts, which should make a decision concerning adopting, are be driven by the interests of a child. It is evident that for children having non-traditional family with loving parents is much better than not have any. If sexual orientation of parents has little impact on the living conditions of their children, homosexuality of parents should not be an obstacle for adopting of a child. There are no serious objections, which would prove that gay and lesbian couples will make bad parents. â€Å"Home environments with lesbian and gay parents are as likely to successfully support a childs development as those with heterosexual parents† (Schelberg, Mitnick 2006) Specialists state that here is not connection between sexual orientation and parenting skills. This means that homosexual people can be perfect parents, same as heterosexual people can be bad ones. In addition there is a legal controversy, concerning the right to adoption. Legally, even single parents have right to adopt children. Here arises a kind of controversy since one person can adopt a child but he or she can not do the same thing if he has a spouse of the same sex. Those, who stand against the legalization of homosexual’s right to adopt a child give their arguments in order to support their position. They state that homosexual environment can have an extremely negative effect on child’s development. Some researches (Golombok, Tasker) state that children, raised by homosexual parents, are more likely to adopt same patterns of sexual behaviour. In other words children, raised in homosexual families have more chances to become homosexuals as well. As Golombok and Tasker state: â€Å"by creating a climate of acceptance or rejection of homosexuality within the family, parents may have some impact on their children’s sexual experimentation as heterosexual, lesbian or gay† (Golombok, Tasker, 1993, p. 124). According to their opinion homosexual couples should not be giving a right to adoption. Sexuality is not only personal affair. It’s also social phenomenon society has to deal with. Woodhorse talks about the fortification of gender roles and restrictions to this roles brought to the social culture by transvestites. He believes that cross-dressing and transvestites make a potential danger for the society as it can lead to the displacement of gender categories and gender roles. On a social and cultural level the two groups (male and female) are equally restricted. (Woodhouse,1996, p. 117). The marriage is an institution aiming to create a family first of all and the family presumes giving birth to children. Homosexual marriage create no opportunities for natural reproduction. Modern science gave people opportunities to have children even in the same sex marriage but a number of problems appear. It’s commonly known that men and women are equal creatures and have same rights and obligations but they are not identical and usually presume different models of behavior, models of reactions and thinking. A lot of research made by scientists proves that the child needs both – a mother and a father to become a full personality (Donovan, 2001). There are some things during the upbringing which can be taken only from women’s or only from men’s behavior patters. The children raised in the homosexual families will not have the opportunity to see both –female and male behavioral patters, which can cause serious problems for their future life. In addition the children raised in a homosexual surrounding are more probably to pick up same lifestyle in the future and to copy the model of homosexual relationship. Another problem the children from the homosexual families can and most probably will come across is an attitude of the surrounding. The children can meet a social hostility from the very beginning of their social interaction due to their family background which can make more difficult the social adaptation in the future (Stone 2006). A lot of homosexual couples meet social and religious disapproval but they have chosen their type of behavior themselves and must be responsible for their decisions. The children raised in the homosexual families do not have this choice. Negative attitude of the church to same sex marriages can create additional problems for children. Another problem appears with the children, adopted by gay couples. The patters of family behavior, which are presented in homosexual families, are very different from patterns, peculiar to heterosexual families. This issue is very important since children most probably will adapt the type of relations they see in their family. Homosexual relations usually are thought to be not traditional ones and talking about sexuality in this type of relations is difficult due to the multiple variations of these relations. There are a lot of distinctions between homosexual and heterosexual relationships. Complementary nature of the most heterosexual relations is not so evident in homosexual ones. In most of the homosexual relations there is a division, which is expressed more directly in heterosexual relations. In homosexual relations two people take different roles. Usually, in both, female and male homosexual relationship there are active and passive partners. The roles may change but usually the division to active and passive partner is saved and this relation is usually transmitted to other spheres of life of the couple. Passive partner usually takes female roles in sex and everyday behaviour. An active partner plays the role of the man accordingly. There are derivations in the models of homosexual relations. Tapinc (1992) distinguishes four additional models of homosexual relations. In the first model both males are homosexual. This is one of traditional homosexual models. â€Å"The homosexual mail pair consists of the erastes and the eromenos, ‘lover’ and ‘beloved’; we can infer an active/passive division, but strictly speaking these are not examples of inserter/receptor terminology. (Norton, p. 2002 5) Homosexual male relations are rarely monogamous. Journal of Sex Research made a study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals. â€Å"Research found that only 2. 7 percent claimed to have had sex with one partner only. Research elsewhere indicated that only a few homosexual relationships last longer than two years, with many men reporting hundreds of lifetime partners† (Bozett 1993, p. 112). This way if homosexual parents get an opportunity to adopt children, this most probably will result in the transformation of the role and functions of family. Children, grown up in such untraditional families with untraditional family values, will use this model in their future families. This may result in the increase of the families with untraditional family values. Possible consequences of this phenomenon are very hard to predict. To sum up, there are many reasons for and against adopting children by gay and lesbian couples, There is no one definite opinion concerning this issue. The debates concerning this subject are hold in several spheres, such as religions, social and political ones. A lot of important factors should be considered in order to take a right decision concerning this issue. Adopting concerns the rights of both – children and homosexual couples and decision should the best way serve to the interests of both sides. References 1. Atlanta Journal-Constitution, (2002, Oct 4). NA. Retrieved February 19, 2008, from Database. Gale Power Search. 2 . Bailey, J. M. , Bobrow, D. , Wolfe, M. Mikach, S. (1995), Sexual orientation of adult sons of gay fathers, Developmental Psychology, 31, 124-129; 3. Bozett, F. W. (1987). Children of gay fathers, F. W. Bozett (Ed. ), Gay and Lesbian Parents (pp. 39-57), New York: Praeger; 4. Coolidge, David Orgon, (March 1997). Same-Sex Marriage? Baehr v. Miike and the Meaning of Marriage, South Texas Law Review, 38:1-119 5. Davidson, Arnold (1987) ‘Sex and the emergence of sexuality’, Critical Inquiry, 14 (Autumn), 16-48, reprinted in 6. Stein, Edward (ed. ), Forms of desire (1992, 1990), 89-132. 7. Donovan, (2001,Sept 14). Judge upholds Florida ban on gay adoption. National Catholic Reporter, p. 37, 39. 8. Gay rights. The Advocate, (2002, April 30). p. 18(1). 9. Gottman, J. S. (1991), Children of gay and lesbian parents, F. W. Bozett M. B. Sussman, (Eds. ), Homosexuality and Family Relations (pp. 177-196), New York: Harrington Park Press; 10. Golombok, S. , Spencer, A. , Rutter, M. (1983), Children in lesbian and single-parent households: psychosexual and psychiatric appraisal, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 24, 551-572; 11. Green, R. (1978), Sexual identity of 37 children raised by homosexual or transsexual parents, American Journal of Psychiatry, 135, 692-697; Huggins, S. L. 12. Lewin, Tamar (2001, August 31). Court backs Florida ban on adoption by gays. The New York Times, p. A14 13. Stone, Andrea (2006, Feb 21). Drives to ban gay adoption heat up. USA Today, p. 01A. 14. Schelberg, Neal S. and Carrie L. Mitnick, (2004). Same-Sex Marriage: the Evolving Landscape for Employee Benefits,

Washing and Constant Cleaning, an Obsessive-compulsive Disorder (OCD) E

Washing and Constant Cleaning, an Obsessive-compulsive Disorder (OCD) Abstract Washing and constant cleaning, an obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). OCD often goes undiagnosed. Patients obsessively wash, check something or hoard things to relieve themselves of an overwhelming anxiety, and are fully aware their behavior is abnormal. This research studies a 23-year-old married woman who sought treatment for a severe washing and cleaning problem and how the patient was treated. I will discuss how the patient was diagnosed, and treated with a form of cognitive behavioral psychotherapy or CBT (exposure and response treatment) and what medications can be used for treatment. Vickie, a 23 year-old married woman arrived with the company of her husband. Vickie had a problem with severe had washing and cleaning. She would wash her hands up to 30 times a day for at least 5 minutes each time. She always had the feeling that her hands were not really clean, she might touch the side of the sink after she rinsed her hands and then think they were dirty again. She also took two showers a day for up to 50 minutes or until all the hot water was gone. Other things she did to make herself feel clean is use alcohol to wipe things down that she would come into contact with, like her car seat before she set in it. She has been unable to seek employment as a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) due to her symptoms. I conducted four initial sessions, session one and two were to seek information about the history of her symptoms, obsessional content, including external and internal fears cues, beliefs about consequences, and information about passive avoidance patterns and types of rituals (Levenkron, 1991). I also requested Vickie before our next session to record all washing and cleaning that she did, including wiping things with alcohol. She recorded every time she washed, how long she washed, what made her wash, and how anxious she was before she washed. This kind of record will help us identify any sources of contamination she may have gotten and we can also use it to measure her progress during treatment; the third session was devoted to personal and family history; the fourth session was devoted to treatment planning. During the first three therapy sessions Vickie talked about her experiences of recurrent and persistent ideas, thought, impulses, ... ... to obtain anti-obsessional effects. Studies done to date suggest that the following dosages may be necessary: Luvox (up to 300 mg/day), Prozac (40-80 mg/day), Zoloft (up to 200 mg/day), Paxil (40-60 mg/day), Celexa (up to 60 mg/day), and Anafranil (up to 250 mg/day), (Jenike, 1999b). References American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author Engler, J. & Goleman, D. (1992). The authoritative guide for making informed choices about all types of psychotherapy. The Consumer’s Guide to Psychotherapy. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster/Fireside Levenkron, S. (1991). Treating & Understanding Crippling Habits. Obsessive-Compulsive Disorders. New York, NY: Warner Books. Jenike, J. (1999a). How to select a Behavior Therapist. Obsessive-Compulsive Foundation. Available: http://www.ocfoundation.org/ocf_0003.htm Jenike, J. (1999b). OCD medication: Adults. Obsessive-Compulsive Foundation. Retrieved November 18, 2001, from http://www.ocfoundation.org/ocf1050a.htm Obsessive-Compulsive Foundation: How is OCD treated. Retrieved November 14, 2001, from http://www.ocfoundation.org/ocf1030a.htm

Literature Review Essay

They warned the investors not to buy unlisted shares, as Stock Exchanges do not permit trading in unlisted shares. Another rule that they specify is not to buy inactive shares, ie, shares in which transactions take place rarely. Themain reason why shares are inactive is because there are no buyers forthem. They are mostly shares of companies, which are not doing well. A third rule according to them is not to buy shares in closely-held companies because these shares tend to be less active than those of widely held ones since they have a fewer number of shareholders. They caution not to hold the shares for a long period, expecting a high price, but to sell whenever one earns a reasonable reward. Jack Clark Francis (1986) revealed the importance of the rate of return in investments and reviewed the possibility of default and bankruptcy risk. He opined that in an uncertain world, investors cannot predict exactly what rate of return an investment will yield. However he suggested that the investors can formulate a probability distribution of the possible rates of return. He also opined that an investor who purchases corporate securities must face the possibility of default and bankruptcy by the issuer. Financial analysts can foresee bankruptcy. He disclosed some easily observable warnings of a firm’s failure, which could be noticed by the investors to avoid such a risk. Preethi Singh3(1986) disclosed the basic rules for selecting the company to invest in. She opined that understanding and measuring return m d risk is fundamental to the investment process. According to her, most investors are ‘risk averse’. To have a higher return theinvestor has to face greater risks. She concludes that risk is fundamental to the process of investment. Every investor should have an understanding of the various pitfalls of investments. The investor should carefully analyse the financial statements with special reference to solvency, profitability, EPS, and efficiency of the company. David. L. Scott and William Edward4 (1990) reviewed the important risks of owning common stocks and the ways to minimise these risks. They commented that the severity of financial risk depends on how heavily a business relies on debt. Financial risk is relatively easy to minimise if an investor sticks to the common stocks of companies that employ small amounts of debt. They suggested that a relatively easy way to ensure some degree of liquidity is to restrict investment in stocks having a history of adequate trading volume. Investors concerned about business risk can reduce it by selecting common stocks of firms that are diversified in several unrelated industries. Lewis Mandells (1992) reviewed the nature of market risk, which according to him is very much ‘global’. He revealed that certain risks that are so global that they affect the entire investment market. Even the stocks and bonds of the well-managed companies face market risk. He concluded that market risk is influenced by factors that cannot be predicted accurately like economic conditions, political events, mass psychological factors, etc. Market risk is the systemic risk that affects all securities simultaneously and it cannot be reduced through diversification Nabhi Kumar Jain (1992) specified certain tips for buyingshares for holding and also for selling shares. He advised the investors to buy shares of a growing company of a growing industry. Buy shares by diversifying in a number of growth companies operating in a different but equally fast growing sector of the economy. He suggested selling the shares the moment company has or almost reached the peak of its growth. Also, sell the shares the moment you realise you have made a mistake in the initial selection of the shares. The only option to decide when to buy and sell high priced shares is to identify the individual merit or demerit of each of the shares in the portfolio and arrive at a decision. Carter Randal (1992) offered to investors the underlying principles of winning on the stock market. He emphasised on long-term vision and a plan to reach the goals. He advised the investors that to be successful, they should never be pessimists. He revealed thatthough there has been a major economic crisis almost every year, it remains true that patient investors have consistently made money in the equities market. He concluded that investing in the stock market should be an un-emotional endeavour and suggested that investors should own a stock if they believe it would perform well. S. Rajagopal. (1996) commented on risk management in relation to banks. He opined that good risk management is good banking. A professional approach to Risk Management will safeguard the interests of the banking institution in the long run. He described risk identification as an art of combining intuition with formal information. And risk measurement is the estimation of the size, probability and timing of a potential loss under various scenarios. Charles. P. Jonesl8 (1996) reviewed how to estimate security return and risk. To estimate returns, the investors must estimate cash flows the securities are likely to provide. Also, investors must be able to quantify and measure risk using variance or standard deviation. Variance or standard deviation is the accepted measure of variability for both realised returns and expected returns. He suggested that the investors should use it as the situation dictates. He revealed that over the past 12 years, returns in stocks,bonds, etc. have been normal. Blue chip stocks have returned an average of more than 16% per year. He warned that the investors who believe that these rates will continue in the future also, will be in trouble. He also warned the investors not to allow themselves to become victimised by â€Å"investment gurus†. Rukmani Viswanath (2001) reported that the Primary Dealers in Govt. securities are working on a new internal risk management model suited for the Indian market conditions. Theattempt is to lay down general parameters for risk perception. The Primary Dealers Association of India (PDAI) is formulating a set of prudential norms for ‘risk management practices’. While internationally the principles of risk management may be the same everywhere, the Association is of the view that they have to identify the relevant issues and apply those principles in the Indian context. It strongly argues that it must work on a model that can help to manage liquidity and interest rate risk. While the existing RBI guidelines on risk management cover mainly statutory risk, the PDAI hopes that its new risk management model will be able to perceive ‘real risk’. These new norms are expected to help gauge several issues like, whether a fall in the prices of securities or yields is a temporary or permanent situation etc. The areas the new norms are likely to address are the assessment of the liquidity situation and envisaging investor appetite for a specific instrument and their appetite for risk. According to thegovt. securities dealers, these norms are expected to help them hedge. FOOTNOTES 1. Grewal and Navjot Grewal, Profitable lnvestment in shares, Vision Books Pvt. Ltd. 36 Connaught Place, New Delhi 1984. 2. Jack Clark Francis, Investment – Analysis and Management, MC Graw Hill, International Editions, 1986. 3. Preethi Singh, Investment management, Himalaya PublishingHouse, Bombay Nagpur and Delhi,1986. . Lewis Mandell, Investments, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, 1992. 5. Nabhi Kumar Jain, How to earn more from shares, Nabhi Publications, Delhi, 1992. 6. Carter Randall Non-stop ~winning from the stock market Vision Books, New Delhi, Bombay (1992). . 7. S. Rajagopal,. â€Å"Bank Risk Management – A risk pricing model†, State Bank of india, Monthly Review, VoI. XXXV, No. 11, November 1996, p. 555. 8. Rukmani Viswanth, â€Å"PDs working on Risk Management Model†, TIE Hindu, Business Lime, Daily, Voi. 8, No. 17, January 18,2001, p. 11

10 Facts About the Velociraptor Dinosaur