The issues of HIV and STD have been on the global health agenda for quite a while. Even though new problems have emerged, toning down the gravity of the HIV- and STD-related ones, there is still the necessity to educate young people about the threat of STD. For this purpose, new campaigns are designed regularly, Get Yourself Tested Again promoted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Friedman et al., 2014) and Get Checked by the Health Department (New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, 2017) being exemplary specimens thereof. By focusing on using the latest technological innovations to reach out to the target population, the programs embrace a wide range of community residents, thus, contributing to active knowledge acquisition and serving their purpose successfully.
Despite the fact that the campaign created by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is aimed at the general audience, it is still linked directly to the program to be implemented at the New York City STD/HIV Prevention Training Center (NYC STD/HIV PTC) since both address the issue of raising awareness. The artifacts from the campaign can be seen by clicking at the link below. The fact that the CDC program has a more general goal driven by the problem of the social stigma, which HIV/AIDS victims bear, can be considered its advantage since it helps promote understanding and cooperation (Friedman et al., 2014). The restriction to a single social function, however, makes the program rather narrow and, therefore, lacking efficacy. Facebook and Twitter was chosen as the key form of media since it helped get the message across to a wider range of participants. The program can be characterized as educational; thus, it can be used to design the tool for the current program that will be used to address the lack of awareness about AIDS, HIV, and STD.
Similarly, the Get Checked program helps shed more light on the importance of learning more about STD and HIV. In addition, active use of social media such as Facebook as the tool for bringing the community together and educating young people about the significance of proper sexual behavior is what both the currently designed program and the Get Checked campaign have in common. The promotion of unity can be viewed as the essential strength. Furthermore, the campaign also seeks to encourage young people to engage in the consistent acquisition of the relevant knowledge so that new threats could be recognized and avoided successfully, which is a significant advantage. However, the small scope of Get Checked (i.e., a promotion of testing) is its key weakness. Nevertheless, it can be assumed that Get Checked can provide the foundation for improving the NYC STD/HIV PTC program, especially as far as the enhancement of community integrity is concerned (New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, 2017).
Since both of the programs use the available social media tools as the foundation for bringing the community together and promoting active knowledge acquisition among the target population. As a result, the foundation for engaging the target community members and motivating them to learn more about the issue of HIV and STD is built. One must give both programs credit for integrating social networks into the general health promotion strategy. The use of the identified tools allowed for a rapid dissemination of the relevant data among the community members. Thus, awareness was raised within a comparatively short amount of time. Both campaigns, therefore, can be viewed as a graphic proof of the significance of using social media as the means of unifying the community and promoting cooperation among its residents. Thus, they should be used as models for designing a comprehensive program for NYC STD/HIV PTC.
References
Friedman, A. L., Brookmeyer, K. A., Kachur, R. E., Ford, J., Hogben, M., Habel, M. A.,… McFarlane, M. (2014). An assessment of the GYT: Get Yourself Tested campaign: an integrated approach to sexually transmitted disease prevention communication. Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 41(3), 151-157.
New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. (2017). Get checked. Web.
Close Reading Of Alice Spencer’s “White Things”
The works of Anne Spencer, one of the well-known representatives of women’s poetry of the 20th century, are distinguished by their vivid and expressive literary techniques. In her poems, she touches upon serious aspects of interpersonal relationships and universal values. As an object of analysis, her poem “White Things” will be examined. The literary tools and style reflect the poetess’s indignant and even aggressive stance on racial inequality, which was an acute issue during her career. Evaluating her poem reveals how dangerous social inequality can be and how racial bias entails such an unjustifiable crime as killing innocent people.
General Observations
One of the key techniques that Spencer uses in this poem is contrast. From the very beginning, she uses the metaphor of color to convey the diversity of life and utilizes nature as an auxiliary tool: “most things are colorful things – the sky, earth, and sea (Spencer 259). The main context is the oppression of national minorities by white colonialists. For persuasiveness, the poetess repeats individual expressions, thereby emphasizing their meaning – “so rare, so rare” (Spencer 259). Many epithets are another feature of the poem, which is an approach to emphasize the contrast even more. Spencer describes “golden stars,” “darkened pine,” and red hills, but the key meaning of this technique is to convey the same subtext of racial difference (259). The use of verbs in almost every stanza of the poem allows the poetess to maintain a tense syllable and convey specific actions clearly – stole, strewed, blanched, turned, burned, and some others (Spencer 259). The meaning that Spencer puts into these techniques is evident: she has a clear position on the proposed problem and conveys her concerns through such a nervous style by emphasizing each action individually and acutely.
Context and Meaning
Since the poet herself was the representative of the racial minority community, her work and, in particular, “White Things” convey the idea that she advocated throughout her career. By emphasizing the superiority of whites over blacks, Spencer uses unambiguous metaphors to reflect aggression – “they pyred a race of black, black men” (259). The inability to influence those events is felt in the poetess’s impotent rage, and she seeks to convey her grief through literary devices and techniques. The mention of not only African Americans but also Native Americans proves that Spencer is concerned both with the problem of the black population and other ethnic minorities. People who suffered from the atrocities of colonialists and their aggression based on racial hatred are the target audience. Slavery issues are another context that also comes up in the poem. Spencer states: “black men are most men; but the white are free!” (259). This thesis helps her convey her position on an evident racial division and makes it possible to argue that freedom is one of the main human benefits that cannot be taken away or questioned.
Analysis of the Poem’s Literary Style
Although the poem is titled “White Things,” the key subtext is hidden in emphasizing the importance of the life of other races and their right to freedom. The allegory used to reflect the violence of the white population towards the black reveals the essence of the problem – colonialists’ total domination: “and burned them to ashes white” (Spencer 259). In addition, the contrast that is the poetess’s key technique conveys her great despair. She tries to persuade the reader that no community can dominate over others due to the initial equality of people: “for the skull of a black is white, not dull” (Spencer 260). The structure of the rhyme is simple, which is done on purpose so that not to distract the reader with complex constructions from the key message. The poem ending with an appeal to God carries a semblance of prayer. Spencer states: “men-maker, make white!,” thereby demonstrating the powerlessness of the colored population to resist white aggression and a request to equalize people to avoid further bloodshed (260). All these techniques serve the same purpose – to convey to the reader the inadmissibility of bias and racial violence.
Significance of the Poetess’s Message
A crime against humanity perpetrated on the basis of racial bias is the key theme of Spencer’s poem devoted to the inability of ethnic minorities to defend themselves against white colonialists’ and slave owners’ aggression. The use of the aforementioned literary devices and the approaches taken by Spencer emphasizes the importance of the problem she raised. The unambiguousness and rigidity of the verbs, metaphorical contrast, and numerous epithets make it possible to understand how relevant the issue of social equality is and what unacceptable manifestations of cruelty racial bias can carry. The significance of paying attention to this topic is conveyed through clear messages, and calling out to God is an extreme degree of despair that the reader can notice in the poetess’s words. Thus, the poem in question is a valuable work that helps draw attention to an acute social problem through effective tools of influence and direct calls to stop the violence that has no objective grounds.
Work Cited
Spencer, Anne. “White Things.” The Norton Anthology of Literature by Women: The Traditions in English. Vol. 2. 3rd ed., W. W. Norton & Company, 2007, pp. 259-260.
Juvenile And Adult Correction Facilities Management
A correction facility refers to a residential amenity aimed at restricting the movement and activities of those individuals convicted of having committed an offense. The correction facilities are essential for keeping criminals out of society and are crucial centers for rehabilitating them so that they can become safe and resourceful in society. A juvenile correction facility differs from an adult correction center in that a juvenile correction facility is a residential facility where youth offenders (people below the age of 18) are placed when convicted or while they await court hearings. An adult correction facility is only meant for adult’s offenders who are above the age of 18 (Bartollas &Sieverdes, 1983).
The court usually sends minor offenders to a juvenile facility to guarantee the public safety and embrace their wellbeing. In this context, juveniles should be managed differently from adult criminals. It is more appropriate if the facilities are located in separate places further apart. In case they are established in the same location there should be adequate facilities and structures to accommodate and deal with young offenders’ needs separately inside the adult correction facility. This could ensure that appropriate education and rehabilitation program required for young offenders is delivered effectively.
The management of juvenile correction facilities should be separated from adult correction facilities because children have unique needs that significantly vary from those of adults. Children mainly have low fear of danger and are characterized by playful behaviors. They usually have a different perception of issues and time and they are not able to concentrate for long. They usually have volatile patterns of behaviors and sentimental states, and they are more prone to contamination from offensive influence as they interact with adults. The maturity level differs and needs between children and adult’s offenders. Therefore, their behavioral characteristic calls for a separate approach from those of adult’s offenders. The separation of managing juvenile correction facilities from adults correction facilities is also highly crucial in stopping children’s criminalization and influence that may happen because of children and adults offender’s contacts. Children have growth and developmental needs that require a separate management approach and programs from those for adults. It helps to protect the safety and the wellbeing of children.
The absence of separate management of juvenile and adults correction centres poses severe problems. Mixing both adult and young offenders in adults prison may reverse the advance and the accomplishment of the rehabilitation objectives aimed by juvenile justice, especially because their interactions and contact can promote further criminalization of young offenders. Furthermore, when children are placed in adult correction facilities, they are likely to face sexual assault and even harassment from staff members and adult prisoners. This would only create a stressful situation that can lead to the emotional risk of a child making a dangerous decision like committing suicide. Thus, underage offenders who are convicted in juvenile courts should not be put at the same correction facility as adult offenders (Bartollas &Sieverdes, 1983).
Ways of Managing Separated Adult and Juvenile Correction Facility
The key aim of the correction facilities is to punish the offenders, however, due to the growing nature and characteristics of the children, juvenile centers should emphasize more on rehabilitation other than punishment. Adult correction facility should mainly focus on punishment and offer rehabilitation initiatives meant for adults. In addition, the correction policies should recognize the unique differences between children and adults. Childrens rights and responsibilities should not be the same as those of adults. For instance, due to children’s age, they cannot vote, smoke, or be a member of the armed forces.
The practice of transferring young offenders from juvenile to adult corrective facilities should be revised and discouraged. This is because, children have a unique ability to reform and redeem since they are still growing and have not yet reached maturity age. Juvenile correction facilities should have a reformation and effective programs in place. With appropriate rehabilitation and reformation programs in place, minors who commit crimes can be reformed to become responsible adults more easily as their brains are growing and still changing flexibly. Due to the undeveloped prefrontal cortex, children are unable to control aggression, moral decision-making, long-range planning, conceptual thinking, and mental flexibility. For this reason, the treatment and management of minor offenders and adult offenders should be done in different facilities, whereby rehabilitation and reforms should be more emphasized in juvenile correction centers (American Medical Association, 1993).
Punishment has failed in behavior change, teaching new skills and ideas, and development of beliefs. Harsh punishment only amounts to an increased feeling of vengefulness, as opposed to correction facility objectives of reformation. The creation and growth of vengefulness element in a child could lead to hazardous character on the child. For this reason, harsh punishment should be discouraged in both the juvenile and adult correction facility.
In a situation where both juvenile and adult correction centre share the same location, there should be stringent measures to prevent adult offenders from coming into contact with the minors. This is to help curb issues of further criminalization of the minor offenders, prevent unnecessary harassment by the adults in the adult facility, and ensure their efficient growth and development. In addition, there should be a separate rehabilitation program irrespective of both of them sharing the same location. The rehabilitation program of minors should focus on the growth and development of a child while embracing reformation of the children convicted in the juvenile. The rehabilitation program of adults should emphasize on reasonable punishment and rehabilitation aiming at reforming the convicted adults’ criminals and making them better individuals in the society (Flaherty, 1980).
More rehabilitation incentives should be encouraged in a juvenile facility such as programs that reduce violence incidence, higher academic achievement structures and set goals, programs that restructure effective cognition ability of the minor to make them understand thinking error that may lead them into trouble and secure facilities ensured. This is because of the growing nature of the children’s need to develop their cognitive ability and the intent to make them resourceful individuals in society when they turn adult age. The incentives of adult correction centers should focus on correcting the offenses committed by the adult criminals through reasonable punishment and developing their skills and morals to make them productive and morally upright people in the society, especially after their release (Forst, Fagan &Scott, 1989).
In conclusion, the main reason for correction facilities is to prevent, curtail and eradicate crime and uphold conducive living of society through offering those convicted as criminals help, which includes rehabilitation and educational opportunities. The adult correction facility should be managed differently from juvenile facilities to uphold children’s rights and unique needs as discussed above that differs from those of adults.
References
American Medical Association. (1993). Guidelines for adolescent preventive services. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bartollas, C. &Sieverdes, C. M. (1983). The Sexual Victim in a coeducational Juvenile Correctional Institution. The Prison Journal, 68(1).
Flaherty, M. G. (1980). An Assessment of the national incidence of juvenile suicide in dult jails, lockups, and juvenile detention centers. Urbana-Champaign, US: The University of Illinois.
Forst, M. Fagan, J., &Scott V. (1989). Youth in Prisons and Training Schools: Perceptions and Consequences of the Treatment-Custody Dichotomy. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 59(4).