The term quantitative refers to data that is measured or identified on a numerical scale. It is preferred by Positivists such as Durkheim as they like scientific data that is representative and reliable. On the other hand qualitative data is ‘rich’ data that explores the meanings and motives of different human behaviours. Qualitative data is preferred by Interpretivists such as Douglas as they want to gain validity and verstehen. Suicide can be operationalised in different ways, and it is argued that the different ways that it is operationalised results in what therefore is learnt about suicide.
His trivialized view of the rational nature of suicide is one that I do not think translates to the American situation. Dalrymple views the large number of attempted suicide as being promoted by what he terms “the boredom of self-absorption”. The post attempt treatment that the patient receives is credited, according to Dalrymple, for giving him a sense of vitality. He also sees the attempted suicides as a way in which people try to avoid certain situations, whether they are an upcoming court hearing or the start of a new job. For Dalrymple, the overdose is the easiest way to relieve the crisis in their lives.
Gordon Brown, former prime Minister, warned ‘frail and ill people would be under pressure to end their lives if the suicide laws were changed.’ It would also risk pressure on the vulnerable people in society who may feel their existence a burden to others. A survey showed that 70% of disabled people would feel more pressure to kill themselves if the suicide law was changed. There is also the issue of people’s wishes fluctuating. Would it be making it too easy for people to end their lives and be legally helped to end their lives? Assisted Suicide is one of those controversial topics where everyone has different opinions, and everyone thinks their opinion is right.
Content Book 1 – Extra Social Factors Suicide and Psychopathic states: Durkheim, as mentioned in the introduction, conducted the study of suicide to prove that it was social, rather than extra social factors that influenced suicide. The first extra social factor, to which suicide was mostly attributed to is insanity. Durkheim investigated this theory and pointed out that if suicide was caused by a certain insanity then this would be termed as ‘monomania’ – in Durkheim’s words, “a delirium of localized nature” that is, a person is otherwise normal but has sudden desires to drink or use abusive language. It was believed that a sudden emotional disturbance was enough to provoke monomania. However, Durkheim rejected this theory for two reasons; one, there is no concrete proof to show the existence of monomania, second, mental functions are completely dependent on one another, and insanity is present in one area, then it should also be present in another as well, that is if insanity affects one function it should affect at the other functions as well.
The ones that are against racial profiling have thought of an alternative solution, which is behavioral profiling. Behavioral profiling, hence the name, means to base the law enforcers' suspicion according to that person’s behavior instead of race. With this more effective system, it balances our protection from both terrorism and violating someone’s civil rights. One reasonable example on why we shouldn’t racial profile is the popular bomber in United Kingdom, Richard Reid, who doesn’t fit the profile that they have created for terrorists. Individuals have also made good arguments about the negative outcome that racial profiling might bring to our society.
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.
In contrast to Scalia I think he has good points but he needs a better argument than the judical system has faults. Scalia is for the death penalty. She thinks about the victims in the crimes. She agrees that there is a lot of pian done to the victims however she is not considering all the pain the prisoners will go threw also. This “cocktail” is not just a shot and that’s it, she should know that already.
On the other hand opponents of assisted suicide do not believe this is the only way to secure a good health alternative. Opponents believe that it is important to make a patient feel comfortable and help them improve their quality of life not end life just because it is an option or that they may feel they are a burden to loved ones. Assisted suicide can be performed by a physician or a person who is willing to help a patient end their life. This paper will focus on physician assisted suicide (PAS), this has been a controversial issue in many countries and have many different opinions on the ethics behind assisted suicide. To further examine the data the utilitarian ethics approach will be used.
The main argument starts with Durkheim who explains that sociology can be a science. Durkheim uses the example of suicide and how we can study such a personal and individual act in an objective manner using statistics. From his studies of suicides Durkheim found that there were patterns in the suicide rate which meant that the act wasn’t a product of the individuals motives but instead a social fact. The suicide therefore had to be a result of wider social forces which we have no control over. Durkheim went on to explain that the social facts responsible for determining the suicide rate were the levels of integration and regulation an individual has in a society.
From the con side of the topic Physicians legally and morally should not assist in suicide of terminally ill patients. This simple fact could boil down to the simple fact that suicide is suicide and it is morally wrong. A lot of countries around the world feel as though this is not moral and this why it is illegal in a vast majority of countries around the world. You could argue that this goes against a doctor’s job. The medical person who is administering the drug is not doing their job as a doctor, which is to help people not kill