Slavery Impact On The United States’ Development Sample College Essay

Slavery is an alien concept to the modern citizens of the United States of America. Since late 19th century, this undemocratic institution has been abolished in the US. However, during the time the colonization of America took place, slavery was the driving force behind Europeans’ conquest of Americas. Millions of African-American slaves played a pivotal role in the economic growth of the colonies and provided the foundation for the economic dominance of the US. The legacy of slavery continued to shape the course of American history decades after slavery was abolished. In this paper, the researcher analyzes the history of slavery in order to identify the impact it had on the development of the US.

Slavery had a tremendous impact on the economy of the US. In the early 17th century, during the beginning of America’s colonization, English indentured servants were introduced to the British colony of Virginia to work on tobacco fields (Fields, 1990). Seeking to increase profits, the landowners turned to African slaves as a cheaper alternative. From the first days of their introduction, they were offered limited protection by law, served longer terms in comparison to their European counterparts, and were enslaved perpetually, which meant they could be sold and bought like a livestock (Fields, 1990). These factors made African slaves the most convenient labor force and led to the spread of slavery to other colonies. Slavery was established as the most cost efficient way of producing goods and services. By the late 17th century, rural slaves did agricultural labor, “tended stock and raised crops”, and helped develop Northern agriculture (Berlin, 1980).

Urban slaves worked as house servants in cities (Berlin, 1980). Until the middle of 18th century, African slaves enjoyed some level of dignity and freedom; however, the nature of slavery changed when the supply of white servants was reduced by the European wars (1980). The limited supply of slave workers and the increased demand for American cotton led to the new wave of slavery and the large-scale production of cotton by African slaves. By the end of the 17th century, half of the US export earnings were from slave-grown cotton (Was slavery the engine of economic growth? 2016). Thus, slaves were behind manufacturing the major consumer goods which allowed their owners to amass capital and led to the subsequent economic growth. In addition, many of American businessmen grew rich on slave trade, which was banned only in 1807. Eventually, the conflict between South and North on the issue of slavery led to the American Civil War, which completely changed the course of American History.

The institution of slavery continued to influence American history even after it was abolished. Although slaves were granted freedom in the aftermath of the Civil War, they had to overcome new challenges due to their ancestry. Biondi claims that the failure of the government to transfer landowners’ lands to freed slaves, racial stigma, the harm inflicted by slavery, including health and income disparities between white and African-American populations, led to the creating of the civil right and black liberation movement of the 20th century (2003). The rise of this movement started discussions on the important topics of racial inequality, racism, and discrimination which continue to this day.

African slaves have contributed to every aspect of the US development, and the consequences of slavery led to the creation of a democratic America as it is known today.

Slavery is the great bulwark of the colonization of the Americas process from the sixteenth century (Rose, 2016). Far from sticking to a homogeneous form of working relationship, slavery was marked by the most different characterizations throughout the colonial period. In the case of American colonization, the use of slaves was always seen as the most viable alternative to the expensive exploration projects of the African continent.

To work around the growing demand for workforce, American slave masters decided to invest in the coming slave trade directly from the African coast. This option became viable for two main reasons. First, the domain that America already had in parts of Africa and the profit opportunities that the sale of these slaves could bring to the coffers of the American territory were enormous. Second, there was the support of the early Christian missionaries and explorers (Rose, 2016).

In addition to encouraging the exploration of a new commercial activity, slave trade also promoted the development of other economic activities. For example, the shipbuilding industry grew by expanding the need for vessels that could make the transport of captured black slaves to American land. At the same time, slavery in America enhanced the development of agricultural activities such as growing of tobacco and sugarcane. These agricultural products were usually used as bargaining chips to obtain slaves with much ease.

Acquiring slaves was made from affirmation of trade agreements with some tribes, especially those located in the Atlantic coastal region of the African continent. In fact, slavery was already part of the social and economic practices of Africans even before the colonial process began. In general, slavery was used by local African chiefs as a way of imposing penalties against those who committed some kind of crime or evil in society. Slavery became an essential economic activity. After being brought to the colonial environment, these slaves were usually separated from their friends and family to refrain from any attempt to escape.

The routine work of these slaves was hard and could reach a turn-around of eighteen hours daily. The living conditions were precarious. Besides, those who rebelled against the imposed routine were killed or tortured. Due to the myriad working conditions, the average life of a field slave rarely reached a period of twenty years.

Other types of slaves also made up the colonial atmosphere. Domestic slaves who lived inside the residences had better living conditions and had the relative confidence of their owners. Generally, domestic positions were occupied by slaves responsible for homemaking, taking care of children and even expected to be sexually available to their masters.

Having a strong presence in the historical development of the American society, African slavery brought deep marks that can still be felt to the present day. One of the challenges associated with African slavery in America was the massive process of socio-economic exclusion and especially the issue of racial prejudice. Although slavery was 19th century disposition, it is crucial to mention that the legacy of African slavery and the desire for social and/or racial justice has been immensely echoed in the modern day American constitution.

Historical pundits believe that the economic power of America grew out of slavery. The hard working and sacrificial trends set by the African slaves have continued to this date. Slavery began as a socially destructive process that eventually uplifted the economic powerhouse of America.

After the American Revolution (1775-1783), many settlers (especially in the North, where slavery was relatively unimportant to the economy) began calling the oppression of black slaves to their own oppression by the British, and to call for the abolition of slavery (Joiner, 2005). Hence, it can be argued that the American constitution was greatly shaped due to calls for fair representation. Were it not for slavery, equity in the constitution would have been null and void.

In the late 18th century, the land used for the cultivation of tobacco grew smaller. The South faced an economic crisis while the continued growth of slavery in America was skeptic. In 1793, Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin (Joiner, 2005). This was a simple mechanized device that efficiently removed seeds from cotton fibers. Therefore, slavery led to rapid industrialization due to the readily available skilled and non-skilled labor.

Slavery itself was never common in the North. Many of the entrepreneurs who enriched themselves came from the southern region. Between 1774 and 1804, all northern states abolished slavery, but the so-called “peculiar institution” remained absolutely vital to the south (Derby, 1996). Although the US Congress prohibited the African slave trade in 1808, domestic trade flourished and the slave population in the US nearly tripled over the next 50 years. In 1860 had come about 4 million, with more than half living in the producing states of southern cotton. The large number of slaves brought the much needed transformation in the labor sector of the American economy not forgetting the fact that these slaves later became the top notch American professionals.

References

Berlin, I. (1980). Time, Space, and the Evolution of Afro-American Society on British Mainland North America. The American Historical Review, 85(1), 44-78.

Biondi, M. (2003). The Rise of the Reparations Movement. Radical History Review, 87, 5-18. Web.

Derby, L. (1996). Slavery and Beyond: The African Impact on Latin America and the Caribbean. The Historian, (3), 637.

Fields, B. (1990). Slavery, Race and Ideology in the United States of America. New Left Review, 1(181), 95-118.

Joiner, L. L. (2005). Slavery: A Pivotal Era in American History. Crisis (15591573), 112(1), 51-52.

Rose, P. I. (2016). Americans From Africa : Slavery and Its Aftermath. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.

Was slavery the engine of economic growth? (2016). Web.

Nursing: Dorothy Johnson’s Behavioral System Model

Need to write a paper on Dorothy Johnson’s Behavioral System Model? Check out our essay for inspiration! Here, you’ll find Dorothy Johnson theory summary, subsystem, metaparadigm, and application of the Johnson behavioral system model in nursing practice. Sounds interesting? Keep reading to learn more!

Dorothy Johnson’s Behavioral System Model: Introduction

Various nursing theories are used today to find the most optimal approach to patients and to achieve a good quality of rendering medical care to those in need. One of such concepts is Dorothy Johnson’s behavioral system model, which was developed in the second half of the 20th century and implied a set of rules to which nurses should adhere. Today, this theory is quite actively used in many medical institutions and is one of the fundamental models of the junior medical personnel’s work. Therefore, the effectiveness of this concept is proved in practice, and the possibility of its application in medical institutions of different profiles makes it possible to achieve better results in the process of nursing care.

Meaning of Dorothy Johnson Theory

According to Johnson’s model, the patient has a set of interconnected subsystems of behavior. It is necessary to consider how the person perceives his or her behavior and how much it can be changed. The first concept of the theory is as follows: particular attention should be drawn to how the patient adapts to specific illness and how stress, real or potential, can affect a person’s ability to adapt.

According to Holaday (2015), the patient is predisposed to a particular type of behavior that is created by different actions and surrounding objects. The second assumption is that a specific way of life is explained by existing habits. Some people can experience discomfort during the course of treatment, being influenced by certain addictions, for example, smoking or excessive food consumption. It means that it is these two concepts that underlie Johnson’s theory.

Both assumptions are inextricably linked to each other. People live in the society, which implies their close communication with one another and often determines a particular type of behavior. Surrounding objects and situations are frequently defining factors in the process of the human traits of character and lifestyle formation. At the same time, as Alligood (2014) claims, behavioral habits formed in childhood and developed in the process of life, also directly influence how precisely this or that person acts. Accordingly, both Johnson’s concepts intersect with each other and are the fundamental aspects of her model.

Origins of Dorothy Johnson Theory

By the mid-20th century, when Dorothy Johnson first introduced her behavioral model, there was a rather significant difference in opinions in American society, which was mainly acute in residents’ political views. At that time, people were well aware of what rights they had, but due to the insufficiently developed level of medicine, the quality of services sometimes left much to be desired (Masters, 2014).

What concerns nursing care, Johnson developed her theory mainly because the behavior of people who needed specific treatment was often caused by their established habits and personal beliefs. The theorist realized that the sources of patient problems were not only illnesses but also changes in lifestyle and behavior related to the surrounding social environment. It was this evidence that Johnson cited as support for her theory, based on personal experience and long-term communication with patients from different social groups.

The motives that prompted the author to develop the theory are quite obvious: she sought to bring to the public the fact that the existing order of life is one of the basic factors that determines patients’ problems. In her work, Johnson used a regulation and control approach to ensure the stability of patients. This model of nursing care is called behavioral, and its fundamental theses are quite reasonable and justified.

Application of the Johnson Behavioral System Model in Nursing Practice

Johnson’s nursing theory is useful in practice because it allows junior medical personnel to provide not only physical but also psychological support to the patient, as well as inhibit inadequate behavior caused by this or that reason. This model makes it possible to change the motives of behavior created by existing experience and adjust the settings shaped by the environment. Through specific interventions, nurses use the behavioral model to protect patients and simultaneously stimulate their emotional state, trying to create a psychological contact with people (Bluhm, 2017).

Such a theory is relevant and practical today as the rapid movement of society towards progress often negatively affects the mental state of people. The advantage of the model is that any person can get qualified nursing care that aims not only at patients’ adaptation, for example, after a severe trauma but also at improving emotional well-being.

Also, Johnson’s theory allows partially predicting the results of treatment and imagining what emotional problem the patient is experiencing, and what measures should be taken to eliminate it. Targeted work on changing behavioral motives of people is sufficient when a medical worker has a full understanding of what type of disorders a specific patient is experiencing and what exactly concerns him or her. Such a nursing model can be used, for example, in departments where people undergo rehabilitation after a severe trauma or surgery. As a rule, such patients experience depressive moods and are prone to a depressed emotional state.

The task of the nurse, in this case, will be to assess the degree of the patient’s concern and take necessary measures to ensure that the recovery period passes as quickly as possible. Also, this practice will help protect people from ill-considered and dangerous acts and make them adapt to temporary living conditions in a medical institution.

Dorothy Johnson’s Behavioral System Model: Testability

It is necessary to assess the patient’s condition concerning each subsystem of behavior to determine the type of intervention and learn how much Johnson’s theory is testable. The success of work depends on how competently and timely the nurse defines the imbalance in the subsystems of patients’ behavior and their causes. The effectiveness of this model can be checked in practice in any medical institution where there are patients who experience behavioral disorders and stresses caused by different factors.

Johnson’s theory has become quite popular in the medical environment and has generated various types of research, including multiple analyses of its effectiveness, as well as possible modifications in the algorithm of nursing care. It generated various qualitative studies on the usefulness of its implementation and comparison with other nursing theories. One of these studies was conducted by Arora (2015) who considered this model in connection with other theories and evaluated its effectiveness and the possibility of application in modern conditions. The results of the research confirmed that Johnson’s concepts are relevant and can be used as one of the methods of complex treatment of patients’ behavioral disorders.

Author’s propositions relate to how the described model can be used to care for patients for short, intermediate, and long-term purposes (Arora, 2015). Also, the author claims that nursing intervention can limit inadequate behavior, protect the patient from adverse environmental factors, and suppress negative and inadequate responses to specific situations (Arora, 2015). Thus, the theory is testable and justified from the point of view of its efficiency.

Overall Evaluation of Dorothy Johnson Theory

A described theory is specific enough to apply it in practice in specialized medical institutions without the necessity to change any of its provisions. In a general sense, Johnson’s model reflects the order in which nurses work with patients who experience behavioral problems. However, the concepts that are included in the theory are entirely accurate and suitable for working with people at different stages.

The strength of the model is the possibility of its application for a variety of cases, including both severe behavioral disorders and less severe deviations. Moreover, Johnson’s theory allows nurses to assess the psycho-emotional state of each patient thoroughly and draw the right conclusions based on the information obtained (McEwen, 2014). Perhaps, its only weakness is that it is suitable for treating behavioral problems and cannot be used in other cases, for example, to provide physical assistance.

The use of this theory in advanced personal practice helps to assess the patient’s condition from a professional point of view and draw the appropriate conclusions regarding the optimal course of treatment. Furthermore, this model is universal and suitable for patients with different behavioral problems. Nurses following the described concepts can achieve efficient results of treatment and gain the patients’ and leaders’ trust.

Dorothy Johnson’s Behavioral System Model: Conclusion

Thus, the effectiveness of Johnson’s system model is proved in practice. The theory is useful and relevant and can be applied in various medical institutions for patients with some behavioral disorders. The concepts are testable and have been a basis for scientific research. The practical benefits of the model are manifested in various advantages and can be of considerable help in the nursing care process. The implementation of the theory helps to achieve particular professional success and gain recognition among patients.

References

Alligood, M. R. (2014). Nursing theorists and their work (8th ed.). Sent Louis, MO: Elsevier.

Arora, S. (2015). Integration of nursing theories in practice. International Journal of Nursing Science Practice and Research, 1(1), 8-12.

Bluhm, R. (2017). Nursing theory, social theory, and philosophy of science. In M. Lipscomb (Ed.), Social theory and nursing (pp. 35-59). New York, NY: Routledge.

Holaday, B. (2015). Dorothy Johnson’s behavioral system model and its applications. In M. C. Smith & M. E. Parker (Eds.), Nursing theories and nursing practice (4th ed.) (pp. 89-104). Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis Company.

Masters, K. (2014). Nursing theories: A framework for professional practice (2nd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.

McEwen, M. (2014). Theoretical frameworks for research. In G. Lobiondo-Wood & J. Haber (Eds.), Nursing research-e-book: Methods and critical appraisal for evidence-based practice (9th ed.) (pp. 66-87). Sent Louis, MO: Elsevier.

Mental Health Issues: Incarcerated Adults

Introduction

The major goal of epidemiology consists of the promotion of public health through the creation of appropriate programs for high-risk populations (Fletcher, Fletcher, & Fletcher, 2013). Apart from that, the development of measurements for the outcomes of such programs is also a necessity. Indeed, the measurements can be employed as a part of a program’s planning while also producing the data on the success of the program, which can be used to improve it or other similar programs (Perrin, 2014).

An Advanced Practice Nurse (APN) needs to be familiar with both processes to be able to contribute to public health efforts (American Association of Colleges of Nursing [AACN], 2006). In the present paper, the development of the interventions for the incarcerated population at risk of mental illnesses is going to be discussed, and the mechanisms of offering outcomes measurements for them will be considered.

Evidence-Based Interventions: An Epidemiological Perspective

To understand the process of the development of pertinent interventions, the epidemiological triangle might be helpful because it allows determining the factors that can be modified to reduce a population’s risks (Stanhope & Lancaster, 2014). The agents of mental disorders depend on the specific illness, which is why they are not considered in this paper, but the host and environment have some factors that are more or less typical for mental issues in general.

With respect to the phenomena that are pertinent to the host, various addictions can be controlled (Rich, Allen, & Williams, 2014). From the perspective of the environment, multiple stressors, and sources of traumatic experience or anxiety that can lead to mental disorders may also be controlled (ECRI Institute Evidence-Based Practice Center [EIEBPC], 2013). Apart from that, a major environmental issue in correctional settings is the problem of screening and treatment, which can also be modified (EIEBPC, 2013; Martin, Colman, Simpson, & McKenzie, 2013). In summary, the epidemiological analysis implies that multiple risk factors for the incarcerated population with mental issues can be controlled, which calls for the development of appropriate interventions.

Primary prevention measures are a major instrument in promoting mental health in incarcerated populations. They are aimed predominantly at the promotion of the behaviors and settings that reduce risks and the discouragement of the practices that have the opposite effect (Fazel, Hayes, Bartellas, Clerici, & Trestman, 2016; Fletcher et al., 2013). For instance, the development of a safe environment is critical for the mental health of incarcerated populations (Fazel et al., 2016).

An example of an intervention that can improve the safety of the environment is the training of the staff of an institution, including healthcare providers and officers. For instance, the training intervention by Melnikov, Elyan-Antar, Schor, Kigli-Shemesh, and Kagan (2016) was aimed at reducing mental issues-related bias in the officers of a correctional institution. The study provides evidence that suggests that such educational efforts are capable of reducing stigma, which implies that their implementation at a larger scale is desirable for the promotion of inclusive, bias- and stigma-free environment for the incarcerated population. In turn, such an environment would be expected to be more conducive to various levels of prevention (for example, screening) and characterized by a reduced exposure of patients to stigma-related stress.

Secondary and tertiary prevention measures should also be of importance for the discussed population (Fletcher et al., 2013). It appears that the common intervention employed in correctional settings is the intake screening, but institutions need to provide follow-up assessments, especially for at-risk prisoners (Fazel et al., 2016). Martin et al. (2013) state that screening is crucial for the mental health strategy in correctional institution populations since the timely determination of mental issues ensures timely care, which explains the rationale for the approach.

An example of an evidence-based intervention that is geared towards tertiary prevention is the integrated dual disorder treatment (EIEBPC, 2013, p. 6). This intervention treats mental issues and addictions simultaneously, and its major advantage consists of it being tailored to work specifically with the people who suffer from both conditions. Such combinations of issues are rather common in prisons: according to Rich et al. (2014), 70% of inmates with mental disorders report the problem of substance abuse as well, which highlights the appropriateness of the intervention and its ability to address relevant risks. In summary, the interventions that are offered to the incarcerated population can be explained by the need to modify its exposure to various risks.

Identification of Measurement Outcomes for Identified Interventions

Outcomes evaluation is a rather complex activity, and the measurements need to be customized to the intervention’s specifics (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention & Program Performance and Evaluation Office, 2017). For the program developed by Melnikov et al. (2016), the key outcome would be the changes in stigmatization exhibited by the officers. The authors measure this outcome with the help of a three-component questionnaire that collects the data on cognitive, affective, and behavioral stigmatization.

Similarly, the primary outcomes of the dual disorder treatment are the improvement of the patient’s condition with respect to mental issues and their rehabilitation from addiction. Both outcomes can be measured with the help of appropriate tools; for instance, there exists a variety of assessment scales for depression, dementia, and other mental disorders (Karlin, Visnic, McGee, & Teri, 2014; Martin et al., 2013).

On the other hand, the screening interventions that are proposed by Fazel et al. (2016) would be evaluated by documenting the events of screening and monitoring of the people who are considered to be at risk of mental issues development. These criteria would be able to track the intervention’s ability to improve access to screening. Thus, the three examples illustrate the fact that the aims of interventions determine the outcome criteria that need to be considered.

Implications of the Project for the APN Clinical Practice: A Conclusion

The present paper demonstrates the fact that the creation of the evidence-based interventions for the incarcerated populations that are at risk of developing mental issues appears to be connected to some epidemiological considerations, in particular, possible risk factors. Some of the modifiable factors include the specifics of the host’s lifestyle and environment, which results in the development of interventions aimed at the reduction of substance abuse, the improvement of the access to screening and treatment, and the promotion of the safety of the patients. The outcomes measurements for the interventions need to be tailored to their specifics.

The project has contributed to my professional growth with respect to the seventh essential suggested by AACN (2006), which focuses on an APN’s ability to contribute to the improvement of the nation’s health. Moreover, the project also improved my knowledge pertinent to the eighth essential, which describes the advanced nursing practice. In summary, the project has provided me with an opportunity to review the topic of epidemiology and connect it to my field of practice, which is mental care in correctional institutions. As a result, the implications of the project are of direct use to me.

References

American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2006). The essentials of doctoral education for advance nursing practice. Washington, DC: Author.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, & Program Performance and Evaluation Office. (2017). A framework for program evaluation.

ECRI Institute Evidence-Based Practice Center. (2013). Interventions for adult offenders with serious mental illness. Web.

Fazel, S., Hayes, A., Bartellas, K., Clerici, M., & Trestman, R. (2016). Mental health of prisoners: prevalence, adverse outcomes, and interventions. The Lancet Psychiatry, 3(9), 871-881.

Fletcher, R., Fletcher, S., & Fletcher, G. (2013). Clinical epidemiology. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Karlin, B., Visnic, S., McGee, J., & Teri, L. (2014). Results from the multisite implementation of STAR-VA: A multicomponent psychosocial intervention for managing challenging dementia-related behaviors of veterans. Psychological Services, 11(2), 200-208.

Martin, M., Colman, I., Simpson, A., & McKenzie, K. (2013). Mental health screening tools in correctional institutions: A systematic review. BMC Psychiatry, 13(1), 1-10.

Melnikov, S., Elyan-Antar, T., Schor, R., Kigli-Shemesh, R., & Kagan, I. (2016). Nurses teaching prison officers: A workshop to reduce the stigmatization of prison inmates with mental illness. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 2016, 1-8.

Perrin, K. (2014). Essentials of planning and evaluation for public health. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC.

Rich, J., Allen, S., & Williams, B. (2014). The need for higher standards in correctional healthcare to improve public health. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 30(4), 503-507. Web.

Stanhope, M., & Lancaster, J. (2014). Public health nursing. London, UK: Elsevier Health Sciences.

error: Content is protected !!