Ethical And Legal Issues In Education Sample Assignment

Child educators are constantly faced with ethical dilemmas. At the same time, they are expected to uphold their ethical responsibilities towards the children and their parents. Making a difference between ethical dilemmas, ethical responsibilities, and knowing which those are is paramount for a successful education and child care. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the presented ethical issue, determine whether it is a dilemma or responsibility, and provide possible solutions to benefit all of the stakeholders involved.

The Ethical Issue

Jane, a three-year-old preschooler, refuses to drink her milk in class and drinks only water instead. The parents insist on forcing her to drink milk by any means necessary, as it would be good for her health. The father suggests not letting the girl drink water until she drinks milk. Kristen, the class supervisor, seeing that Jane does not drink milk and cries, allows her to drink water. The child also asks Kristen not to tell her father about it. What should Kristen do about this situation, and could she use the NAEYC code to guide her actions?

Is it an Ethical Issue?

It is an ethical issue because it concerns several ethical and moral tenets of the profession, as well as the rights of all stakeholders involved. It concerns the child’s right to choose and the parents’ duty to do what is best for their child. For the teacher, the situation concerns her professional ethics and integrity, as she is requested to lie on the child’s behalf.

Is it an Ethical Dilemma?

No, it is not an ethical dilemma. According to the NAEYC code, the first and governing principle of ethical conduct is as followed: “Above all, we shall not harm children. We shall not participate in practices that are emotionally damaging, physically harmful, disrespectful, degrading, dangerous, exploitative, or intimidating to children. This principle has precedence over all others in this Code” (“Code of ethical conduct,” 2011, p.3).

Not giving the child any water if she refuses to drink milk is a direct violation of this principle since there is a possibility that the child will not drink milk out of protest, thus endangering her health. All other considerations in this situation, such as the benefits for her health from drinking milk or following the demands of her family, are considered secondary.

Conflicting Responsibilities

In this scenario, the educator has conflicting responsibilities towards the girl and the parents. On the one hand, the code of ethical conduct requires her to safeguard the child’s health, while on the other hand, she is required to promote the child’s health and adhere to her parents’ wishes. In this case, the responsibility to safeguard Jane’s health overrules all other considerations.

Possible Solutions

It is important to find a solution that would be ethical towards the parents, the child, and the educator, as the child’s health and emotional well-being are inseparable from that of the family (“Code of ethical conduct,” 2011, p.3). If the situation is not resolved, the conflict is likely to reoccur in the future. One possible solution to make Jane drink milk is the use of positive reinforcement instead of a negative one. Jane could be promised a reward for drinking milk, such as sweets, a toy, or even verbal praise. That way, if she does not comply with the necessity of drinking milk, her life would not be in danger for doing so. In addition, the educator must teach the girl about the benefits of milk in order to convince her to drink it.

Reference

Code of ethical conduct. (2011). Web.

Industrialization In The 19th-Century America

Introduction

The Industrial era drastically changed the working and living conditions of people, resulting in an at the same time unprecedented boom of production and a decrease in the demand for labor. While containing within itself both extensive benefits and substantial drawbacks, industrialization became a process that fundamentally changed the course of human development. Thus, a compelling way of analyzing its effects would be through a direct examination of nineteenth-century thought presented within the Scientific American periodical.

Innovation

Modernization within manufacturing remains the most famous example of industrialization, often highlighting people as becoming minor within the factory production process. The Scientific American‘s header even poses it as a journal that promotes industry first and advocates any technical improvements only second (“Scientific American magazine, vol. 2 issue 1,” 2009). However, while manufacturing was the most affected field, the impact of industrialization-influenced innovation could be felt in all spheres of nineteen-century life.

Scientific Discoveries

The most significant cause of industrialization was scientific discovery, which effectively propagated change. An apt mid-century example would be a US committee on machinery observing “self-acting machines at work in the making not only of textiles and firearms but a dozen other products ranging from pianos to hairpins” (Rodgers, 2014, p. 66). Such use of machines, however, was just the first result of some of the effects of industrialization, brought about through successful scientific exploration.

Advanced steamboats, shingle machines, a mechanism for eased ship-steering, and a sewing machine are some of the many advancements possible to trace to 1848 (“Scientific American magazine, vol. 2 issue 1,” 2009). Through the implementation of such innovations, the quickening of the production process becomes possible, and the first steps towards future household-use of machines are taken.

Power Sources and Materials

New methods of production required new resources but not necessarily new laborers. Machines, after all, needed people only because they were responsible “for the task of supplying it with the raw material, and of oiling and cleansing it” (Rodgers, 2014, 67). Monitoring only the inventions within Scientific American allows seeing advancements in iron casting and blacksmithing, harnessing of electromagnetic and steam energy, and mechanics, which altogether amounted to widespread industrial progress (“Scientific American magazine, vol. 2 issue 1,” 2009). Steam and electricity, thus, gradually supplant coal as the primary source of power, drawing researchers’ interest through providing hope for more efficient energy suppliers.

Industrialization became an inter-linked cause and effect process, with discoveries creating modernized materials that in turn lead to new revelations. The most obvious example would be the patenting of a unique type of pavement, which promised fast setting and eased re-setting in the event of roadworks (“Scientific American magazine, vol. 2 issue 1,” 2009). “More products being created with less labor” becomes an almost official slogan of industrialization (Le Blanc, 2016, p. 25). New or re-imagined materials meant brand-new quality, however not specifying if it were better or worse, generally orienteered towards price-effectivity.

Communication

Lines of communication between cities and even countries becomes possible during the industrial era, shocking not only with its possibility but also with its speed. The proposal of creating a connection between the USA and Canada stops being laughable, with the line between Buffalo and New York creating a precedent of a 507 mile-long telegraph line (“Scientific American magazine, vol. 2 issue 1,” 2009). Communication by lightning or connection by magnetic telegraph become synonymous not just because of the source of power but also because of the speed of conversation.

Conclusion

Thus, touching upon numerous domains of human life, industrialization turns into a process that effectively furthers itself, creating miraculous advancements on all fronts of discovery. The Scientific American, as a representative of the popular thought of its time, displays effectively the interest in this process garnered from the public. Widespread changes in machines, materials, and even techniques used became a cornerstone for the transition of nations from one era of development into another.

References

Le Blanc, P. (2016). A short history of the U.S. working class: From colonial times to the twenty-first century. Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books.

Rodgers, D. (2014). The work ethic in industrial America 1850-1920 (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Scientific American magazine, vol. 2 issue 1. (2009). Web.

War On Drugs Through A Socio-Political Framework

Drug addiction is a problem that concerns not only the health of particular members of society suffering from this disease but also the country as a whole. The US drug market is one of the most profitable in the world. Nowadays, one of the most critical tasks is to reduce the level of addiction in the country. Although the global “war on drugs” has been going on for a long time, the state failed to stop the trend towards an increase in the demand and supply of drugs. This paper will examine the major effects of the “war on drugs” through a socio-political framework.

The statement that the “war on drugs” allows reducing or eliminating the production and availability of drugs in the US has not been corroborated by the experience of the past 50 years. In 1971, American President Richard Nixon declared the war on drugs (Casement). In the eyes of the president, drug use was so widespread in 1971 not due to the great social pressure but because drug users were law-breaking pleasure seekers who deserved only punishment (Casement).

First and foremost, the “war on drugs” contributes to the exacerbation of conflicts and violence. To a large extent, this is due to the transfer of control over the “black market” to representatives of the criminal business who usually act extremely tough. In the absence of formal rules governing the market, violence becomes the main tool of the criminals. To provide security and the possibility of expanding a business, drug cartels create armed groups that are often stronger than the state ones. Crime syndicates can finance rebel movements and cooperate with them.

At the same time, illegal income from drug trafficking becomes one of the principal sources of financing terrorist groups which act at the national and international level. A combination of corruption, threats, and real violence in regard to politicians, judges, police, and members of the armed forces derogates the state authority and contributes to the exacerbation of conflicts.

Moreover, legalized violence, including corporal punishment, extrajudicial killings, and executions, is often associated with the “war on drugs” regime. The widespread use of severe penalties for non-serious crimes overloads the criminal justice system, damages health and, as a rule, is associated with human rights record. Increasing the role of law enforcement agencies inevitably leads to the abuse of power on the part of police and security officials, the manipulation of laws, and restriction of civil rights of ordinary people.

People who use or make drugs are an easy target for the police, they face violence, torture or extortion of money under the threat of imprisonment or drug withdrawal. Such severe measures force a person to incriminate and testify against themselves. In the long term, such cruelty can affect several generations of people, provoking the development of a culture of violence among youth.

Also, the violation of fundamental human rights occurs as a result of measures taken to destroy crops of narcotic cultivations. One of the most unwanted consequences of the “war on drugs” is the devastating impact on the environment. Sprayed chemicals are not safe for health because they cause fever, headache, nausea, cold, vomiting, and dysfunction of the digestive tract. Toxic substances penetrate the plants that people consume every day. Spraying sometimes even leads to forced migrations of many groups of people, while the elimination of the primary source of income for these people adversely affects the economic and social well-being of the country.

Furthermore, one of the concepts of the “war on drugs” proposes to change the approach to drug addicts – they should be considered not as criminals, but as patients who should not be punished, but treated. Drug addicts who treat their illness often return to society, live, and work like ordinary people (Sharp 72). Restored drug addicts can start a family, raise children and are a positive and powerful example in their community. It is possible to stop most drug addiction in the United States within a short time, by making all drugs available and selling them at cost (Vidal). A noticeable effect of this concept of “war on drugs” is the decriminalization of marijuana in some states.

For example, Colorado has allowed medical marijuana since 2000 through a system of licensed private dispensaries (Baum). This drug is used for medical purposes to improve health and general well-being of people. Looking at all the effects of the “war on drugs” one may say that punitive drug law enforcement measures did not reduce global drug use (Fulton). Such policies fuel crime, maximize health risks, undermine human rights, and promote discrimination.

To sum up, the “war on drugs” results in a threat to public health, the cause of the emergence of health issues, violation of human rights, discrimination, and the appearance of suitable conditions for the growth of crime and criminal capital. Concerns about the effectiveness of the “war on drugs” led to a decrease in state support for the most relentless aspects of the war at the beginning of the 21st century. The United States should find other approaches to create a safer, healthier and fairer world.

Works Cited

Baum, Dan. “Legalize it all: how to Win the War on Drugs.” Harper’s Magazine, 2016, pp. 21-32.

Casement, Roger. “Nixon’s Drug War – Re-Inventing Jim Crow, Targeting the Counter Culture.” The Hartmann Report. 2012. Web.

Fulton, Deirdre. “Citing Failed War on Drugs, World Leaders Call for Widespread Decriminalization.Common Dreams, 2014. Web.

Sharp, Elaine B. The Dilemma of Drug Policy in the United States. HarperCollins College Publishers, 1994.

Vidal, Gore. Drugs: Case for Legalizing Marijuana. The New York Times, 1970. Web.

error: Content is protected !!