The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1974, which defined “sex” discrimination to include discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and child birth (Jennings, 2006). Because Paula is not pregnant, she has the right under the Equal Employment Opportunity and cannot can not be treated less equally which would be disparate treatment. Management should grant the transfer, make sure Paula is aware of the chemicals in case she does get pregnant and place Sam on probation excluding him from being around Paula. If his action occurs or he continually harasses Paula, Sam should lose his job to prevent the harassment from going to court. Newcorp would face the charges and pay Paula if she wins the case in
It is produced from a feeling of indignation and intolerance for the conduct that takes place in prostitution. That feeling brings the opponents to believe that the society finds itself in a vulnerable position. In this vulnerable state, the community becomes threatened by immorality, but how can they determine whether or not sex for money is immoral? Perhaps, one would consider a profession in taking people’s homes that have been affected by the Recession more criminal than prostitution, but that occupation by no means criminalized. This brings one to the conclusion that it is impossible to assume there is one shared morality because different opinions exist.
After the case was reviewed, The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the police couldn’t use the confession because they had failed to inform Miranda of his rights to consul and against self-incrimination. This case really changed the Criminal Justice system because it keeps people from being able to abuse the system. Also people don’t always know all of the laws, so having counsel present is very important, having an attorney keep people from self-incrimination because the lawyers can tell them when to stop talking about whatever they may have been involved in. An attorney is very important in cases like these where people who have no educational back ground and aren’t mentally stable have someone to represent them. In the Law & Order: SVU case, the boy was 17, and although he waived his right to being questioned
However, her actions breaks the ‘ACA Code of Ethics’. According to American Correctional Association, “Members shall refrain from accepting any gifts, services, or favors that is or appears to be improper or implies an obligation inconsistent with the free and objective exercise of professional duties,” expressing that no one should accept gifts from inmates. By my coworker accepting candy her credibility became murky water. If I do not report her imprudent actions I will be as ethical irresponsible as her which will not fly. On the other hand, other coworkers would not report her so, they could have power over her by blackmailing but this action is against American Correctional Association Code of Ethics, as well.
Even though Margaret Sanger aimed to improve women’s health care, the end still does not justify her means. Women empowerment can either be beneficial or detrimental to society. When there is power over another, the abuse of persons or goods are encouraged, while personal power impels a reassessment of personal potential. Many women have experienced this abuse and through personal power, realize a change in the “self” is essential to the solution and take charge of their situation (Porter
Jason Campanile 4/8/11 Hist 400w Analytical Book Review Book Review of Resisting McCarthyism: To Sign or Not to Sign California’s Loyalty Oath McCarthyism in America included an era of suspicion, distrust and betrayal. During no other time period in the 20th century has so many of the basic democratic values of America been under threat. Many Americans found no hope in trying to stand up to the scrutiny they were put under during this time. With their jobs and careers on the line, most succumbed to the paranoia that forced them to give up their basic constitutional rights. Very few stood up to the McCarthy era’s witch hunts.
Critical Analysis on “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate.” Dan Gardner’s publish, “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate”, is strongly controversial in his position against increasing enforcement of drug laws, and boosting penalties for violators. He believes that you should actually limit enforcement and hardship of sentencing when it comes to drugs. Was his argument persuasive enough in the essay to actually influence his wishes into society? Personally, I don’t think so. Gardner’s ideas are too drastic and I believe he didn’t have enough support in his argument that his plans would actually decrease the murders in gang violence.
Interoperability is dangerous to the concept of Federalism because although New Orleans was granted money to fund the system by the national government, at the state level, it was never implemented. The dangerous part comes in when the public asks whose fault it was that the system wasn’t in place when it really mattered. The state believes the national government should have been more involved to mandate deadlines and be more proactive in the implementation. The public and many other professionals involved believe the local government could have ironed out all the ethical issues and implemented the system with only the financial help from the national government. Unfortunately for Katrina victims, that’s not what took
In this aspect justice has not been achieved for other victims of sexual assault. Identity was an issue in the trial. The judges found the experiment was a miscarriage of justice. "In our view there must, regrettably, be a new trial because of this ground," the judges said. Because the judges decided that a retrial was appropriate in this situation it showed that it was not only a fair judgment but also was not bias to any side which showed that the justice system operates
Garrett Overley Gun Control As a simple understanding of economics invariably predicts, “Regulation of a legal black market is bound to fail when a healthy black market exists for the same product” (Levitt and Dubner 131). This point, made in “Freakonomics”, explains why tougher gun control laws have little impact on deterring crime. The debate over gun control has always been a riveting and controversial issue; but, with the realization that stricter gun control laws have little impact on lowering murder rates when such a healthy black market exists, the “pro gun” advocates have gained the upper hand. While there are several arguments in favor of gun control, the three main reasons are the inability of gun control to reduce crime, the