To identify these chemicals Essay Example for Free

To identify these chemicals Essay Problem: you are provided with 3 unknown chemicals which are labelled A, B, C, D and E. Carry out appropriate test to identify the chemicals. Method: to identify these chemicals I will carry out two types of test: Flame test and chemical test. Flame test:   To carry out the flame test I will dip the metal wire in the roaring Bunsen flame.   Then I dipped the wire in hydrochloric acid   Next I placed it into the sample and then I placed it into the roaring Bunsen Flame. After I recorded the colour of the flame Safety:   I wore goggles to protect my eyes from acid (hydrochloric acid is corrosive)   When I was not using the Bunsen burner, I put it on safety flame   I also used small amounts of acid and have a safety mat Test for cat ion: Chemical Flame colour Cat ion A Yellow Na+ B Lilac K+ C Green Cu2+ Test for an ion: Substance Test observation Sodium chloride Add Dilute hydrochloric acid It fizzes and carbon dioxide gas is produced. Copper carbonate Add Acidified silver nitrate White precipitate Potassium sulphate I added Acidified barium chloride solution White precipitate Evaluation: Flame test and chemical test tell us which chemicals are present. This is called a qualitative analysis. In industry, it is also very important to know how much of the chemical is present. The difference between my tests and the tests carried out in the industry is that they find the amount as well as the type of chemical.

Comparing Families of Fifty Years Ago with Families of Today :: Compare Contrast Comparison

The definitions of a family today and a family in the past are far from similar. The definitions may have some similarities but they have changed dramatically in many more ways. 50 years ago, families had rules that were stricter and families were closer in the sense of a relationship. Although some families today are more distant from each other and have fewer rules to maintain order, there are still some that maintain the same styles of the families 50 years ago. Families have changed a lot but still have some similarities depending on their home-life. Families today just do not seem to spend time with each other. The mother and father both have jobs and tend to not be home for the children after school therefore causing more independence among each member of the family. Children that have more independence make mistakes on their own without being warned about them. Independent children have no guidance and get out of hand because there is not a strong boss type figure around most of the time to help distinguish the difference between right and wrong. Eating dinner as a family is a major tradition that has been forgotten as the years have gone by and caused more separation among the family. A family 50 years ago that did not eat dinner together would be a strange one but today it seems to be of the norm. Once again, the job affects this aspect of the family as well. People are just too busy at work or too tired to even participate in dinner at home anymore. Either families just do not have time for each other anymore or they j ust are not together due to divorce. Divorce is another thing that was like â€Å"illegal† 50 years ago. Divorce is tragic for the children in the family today and causes the children to hate both or one of the parents. Divorce causes total chaos. This may result in the children to be neglected because single parents need to work to support themselves and their children. Thus, causing no guidance for a growing child. Losing touch with family ties have caused a lot of trouble and will continue to cause more. Families now and 50 years have similarities among the pile of differences. Comparing Families of Fifty Years Ago with Families of Today :: Compare Contrast Comparison The definitions of a family today and a family in the past are far from similar. The definitions may have some similarities but they have changed dramatically in many more ways. 50 years ago, families had rules that were stricter and families were closer in the sense of a relationship. Although some families today are more distant from each other and have fewer rules to maintain order, there are still some that maintain the same styles of the families 50 years ago. Families have changed a lot but still have some similarities depending on their home-life. Families today just do not seem to spend time with each other. The mother and father both have jobs and tend to not be home for the children after school therefore causing more independence among each member of the family. Children that have more independence make mistakes on their own without being warned about them. Independent children have no guidance and get out of hand because there is not a strong boss type figure around most of the time to help distinguish the difference between right and wrong. Eating dinner as a family is a major tradition that has been forgotten as the years have gone by and caused more separation among the family. A family 50 years ago that did not eat dinner together would be a strange one but today it seems to be of the norm. Once again, the job affects this aspect of the family as well. People are just too busy at work or too tired to even participate in dinner at home anymore. Either families just do not have time for each other anymore or they j ust are not together due to divorce. Divorce is another thing that was like â€Å"illegal† 50 years ago. Divorce is tragic for the children in the family today and causes the children to hate both or one of the parents. Divorce causes total chaos. This may result in the children to be neglected because single parents need to work to support themselves and their children. Thus, causing no guidance for a growing child. Losing touch with family ties have caused a lot of trouble and will continue to cause more. Families now and 50 years have similarities among the pile of differences.

Ethical dilemmas

Abstract This paper looks into the legal and physiological as well as a counselors best measures to take incase of an emergency relating to an abused woman who has a baby that could suffer if the woman is further exposed to the harm she has been undergoing. Introduction Ethical dilemmas are offset by conflict of ethical codes and a patient’s interest. According to Hill, Glaser and Harden, an ethical dilemma is a result of ‘no appropriate course of action, since each course of action conflicts with a set code of ethics all which expose the decision makers to uncertain risks (18-19). As such, the clinician or therapist has to assess the best course of action, help and recommendations to resolve a case without exposing both himself and the patient to risks. In this case, Jean is faced by an ethical dilemma in which she has to weigh her options without destroying her therapeutic relationship with Mary and her work. Jean has to assess her professional codes, the possible legal implications and the client’s needs before embarking on finding resolve. Though Mary is now absorbed in the counseling, it’s not clear how committed she is to the therapy, secondly, Mary is possibly too emotionally impaired that, she is confused about positive resolve. Mary’s from the onset doesn’t want her problem to be exposed, and also, she is afraid her decisions might result to further complexion of her life, endanger her little boy and subsequently expose her to risks. She has confided in Jean and Jean has, through professional ethics, to seek a proper methodology of arresting Mary’s problem. According to Hill, Glaser and Harden, ethical consideration which covers intuitive and cognitive levels of reasoning and con ­crete models for ethical decision making, and comments is seen to arise as Mary does not want to be known that she is attending counseling lessons most definitely by her husband. Issues of regarding the information and situation of the victim confidential is conflicting with a set of procedures which would help resolve Mary’s case. As such some ethical considerations on the side of Jean are necessary so as to find a solution and to more appropriately help Mary and the boy. Ethical considerations Jean has an obligation to safeguard respect for persons. This translates to respecting the autonomy and self-determination of the victim. The context of confidentiality arises as the foremost problem Jean is facing. Mary is seeking redress however; she is still rigid about eventualities which she has to face in the event of complete separation with her husband. Most accurately, she is fiscally unable hence would rather tolerate further abuse than starve in the streets. From this perspective, Jean is facing a profound ethical dilemma since she has to evaluate the need for assisting this woman while at the same time; she remains silent about her problem. This is a result of Mary’s anxiety about the destructive social, physical, psychological and legal consequences of dis ­closing her experience. Her situation is characterized by instability, insecurity, fear, dependence and loss of autonomy. Jean has a duty to protect those who lack autonomy, including providing security from harm or abuse. Any legal action aimed at Mary’s husband will certainly invoke an impasse which will further affect Mary. Mary has confided in Jean and Jean’s responsibility is to weigh and assess the options best suited to help Mary without further infringing her physiological well being. However, Jean has a more profound role in her capacity; she is now entrusted with the welfare of Mary and the child involved (Nama & Schwartz 2002). She has a role which includes minimizing risks and assuring that benefits which Mary will get outweigh risks and eventualities which would harm Mary and her child. The child is another issue which Jean has to ethically consider. The child has suffered and is still exposed to both physical and physiological dangers. Jean has a duty to ensure that, the child is protected and that she evenly distributes the benefits of child protection without infringing Mary’s physiological well being (Brasseur 2001).On this child issue, research has shown that both maternal depression and social adversity lead to compromised social, cognitive, and emotional outcomes for infants (Murray & Cooper, 1997), as such Jean has a huge responsibility to help the child as well. Read also Ethical Dilemma â€Å"Glengarry Glen Ross†Ã‚   by David Mamet However; Jean has to weigh the liability incurable if she helps the victim. Her decisions and involvement in implementing the most effective and concise decisions might result to drastic legal repercussions on her side (WHO 2007). According to Nama and Schwartz, as a social worker, Jean might find herself going beyond her employer code of ethics (6). Confidentiality The context of confidentiality comes up when Mary confesses her traumatic life and the sensitive issue of the boy’s harassment. Jean has been privileged by Mary as a confidant regardless of her position as a social worker. Secondly, Mary has testified that the boy is in great risk if the father continues to be near him. The need for confiding is to edge nearer to the truth about both Mary’s and the baby’s condition and if the father had in any way molested or even sexually assaulted the baby. This is based on the fact that Mary wants the issue of the baby and the father kept secret. Jean has a duty to warn the patient of the impending dangers of going back to her husband and the subsequent eventualities on the baby (143). The husband might be more violent and as he is used to, beat her and abuse the child. Jean should, assess and document Mary’s problems and inform the liable authorities. This way, the principles of the practice of informed consent won’t put Jean at a risk of prosecutions since if ‘the clients' safety is jeopardized, Mary risked with her consent fully aware of the implications as advised by Jean (Bednar et al., 1991). According to Hill, Glaser and Harden, ‘the protection of Mary takes precedence over Mary agreeing to treatment in this emergency situation (143). Addressing the issues From the onset, Jean should document Mary’s case and inform the facilitator of the impeding problem. This way she will be able to present credible evidence about Mary’s case to any referral or during counseling. Documenting Mary’s case is the initial step to address the problem. This, she should do in a manner that wont risk the confidentiality of the victims. She should make available the basic care Mary and the child need. This she should do at the earliest convenience even before Mary tells away any further problems she is facing. Jean has already assessed the immediate consequences of foregoing treatment and since Mary’s behavioral reac ­tion to the current situation is potentially harmful to herself and the baby. If help is not offered immediately, she has to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure no harm comes to Mary and the baby (Bednar et al). As such, Jean has to protect the confidentiality to ensure the baby and the mothers are safe as well as herself (WHO, 2001). Jean should take into consideration that the victim’s physical safety is the most important step; as such she should not allow Mary to leave the facility whatsoever until a resolve is found. Also, she should make sure the confidentiality of the victim remains prioritized. Each resolve she uses should be aimed at reducing any possible caused to Mary. The baby should be given all necessary child protection amenities and kept safe. This should be prioritized to avert Mary’s irrationality from taking unprecedented emotional toll on the baby. These actions will safeguard both the mother and baby. Consultation There is an urgent need for Jean to consult with relevant authorities about the issue of the husband. This is based on an intuitive and the critical evaluative levels of moral reasoning as argued by Kitchener (1984). This will help Jean have a background and a foreword on what Mary needs in therapy and if, she Jean, is capable or cannot, based on a cognitive evaluation of the confidence aspect of the case, continue to counsel Mary. This will promptly lead to consulting with another counselor to help Mary. Jean has to account if the cognitive and rational respites are good for both the subjects and herself, and if, in her perspective, would they befit her (Hill, Glaser and Harden, 12). Through consultation Jean can be able to identify a better treatment. She and the colleague can re-examine the data Jean has collected about the patient and come up with a more decisive resolve. The new resolve might affect Mary and breach the ethics of confidentiality, but they are effective and would result to helping Mary once and for all. Not to honor the client's choice without compelling reasons would constitute a paternalistic response from the Jean (Hill, Glaser and Harden, 25). The considerations here should aim at making sure more benefits and less harm came to Mary conceptually regardless of her perception. Jean will continue to evaluate and consult about the case to find more appropriate resolves in principal. To consult with someone and document the consultation when in doubt is a mandatory practice which Jean should not ignore. Consultation is mandatory since the situation involves physical harm to both Mary and the baby and threats and circum ­stances in which abuse is susceptible (Hill, Glaser and Harden, 25). Responsibility Jean Is now bound in principal as the guardian to Mary. She has to follow up the case and make sure that Mary’s therapy continues so as to have her empowered to become independent and have the ability to have autonomy and an emotional balance so as to make rational decisions. Her commitment to Mary is to ensure Mary recovers and regains her autonomy Other considerations Jean should assess if the potential risk of Mary and the boy coming to harm and if all suggestions made to clients were meant to ensure clients' safety. She should make sure Interventions initiated to decrease the risk of the baby coming to harm. On the case of the mother, she should consult clinical opinions regarding clients' capacity so that she can assess if the mother’s ability to determine right from wrong. Consultation with other professionals and supervisors so as to have Mary watched and advised incase she is not within proximity of the facility. Works cited Brasseur. D (2001) Ethical considerations in clinical trials;(CPMP) Hill, M., Glaser, K., & Harden, J, () A feminist model for ethical decision making Murray, L., & Cooper, P. (Eds). (1997).   Postpartum depression and child development. New York: The Guilford Press. Nama.N., & Swartz.L., (2002): Ethical and Social Dilemmas in Community-based Controlled Trials in Situations of Poverty: A View from a South African Project : Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 12: 286–297

A History to the US Prohibition Era - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 4 Words: 1339 Downloads: 8 Date added: 2019/07/03 Category Society Essay Level High school Tags: Prohibition Essay Did you like this example? Prohibition was established by the 18th Amendment in 1920. This amendment prohibited the manufacture, transportation, and sale of intoxicating liquors. The prohibition was an effort for moral reform since many thought alcohol was to blame for the increase of failed marriages and separated families. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "A History to the US Prohibition Era" essay for you Create order Many saw this as a moral improvement and thought it would help the lives of the poor and just the community in general. Nevertheless, it led to many unintended complications. The prohibition was an effort for moral reformation, however, this backfired and caused more problems than it solved such as organized crime, illegal sale and production of alcohol, and secret drinking spots. Prohibition first came to light in the 1820s and 30s due to a religious movement and an increase for temperance in the states. Religions on the rise such as Evangelical Protestantism preached about the corruptness of alcohol and how it only linked to sin. In 1846, Maine passed the first prohibition law and by the time the Civil War came around many others followed. Soon after, societies started to push for the ban of alcohol and stressed a need for a betterment in societys morals. Societies such as Womens Christian Temperance Union, started in 1874, would spread awareness to their cause by going to saloons and telling them to stop selling alcohol. While they were there, they would stand outside singing and praying for the people inside partaking in drinking. By 1911, this group gained much popularity with over 245,000 members and became the largest womens group in history. The Womens Christian Temperance Union then started to move on to other issues besides prohibition such as opening kindergartens for immigrants. However, these moral reformers still ran into problems with immigrants, since alcohol was popular amongst their community and was often used for different customs. Other groups such as the Anti-Saloon League, established in 1893, also contributed to the prohibition movement and essentially helped ratify the 18th amendment. By the end of the century, there were temperance societies located all across the United States. At first, the new law was a success with even a decline in alcohol-related arrests and a 30% drop of alcohol consumption. Others, such as factory workers, supported the law since it would help prevent accidents in the workplace and help to increase work production. This was very important at the time since the 1920s was an era of growth in industrial production. The majority of the support came from the rural South and West, where there was a large population of native-born protestants. Nevertheless, as time went on the law became increasingly difficult to enforce. At first, the IRS was in charge of enforcing the amendment, but the task was then given to the Justice Department. The Volstead Act was soon established, which was an agency that was in charge of patrolling 18,700 miles of coastline and inland borders, monitoring highways, and supervising industries to ensure the law was being followed. However, the government failed to budget enough money for the task, and the agency only had 1,500 poorly paid federal agents and local police to oversee the entire operation. Along with poor enforcement came waning support for prohibition all together. By the end of the 1920s, people started to lose support and social views were changing. After World War I, many people wanted to let loose and enjoy life. They stopped thinking of alcohol as a sin but more as a way of socializing and having fun. Prohibition was a clash between big cities and small towns since it was better enforced in small towns then in urban areas. Problems began to arise due to little support for the law and lack of jurisdiction. One of the first problems that arose was bootlegging, or the illegal sale and production of alcohol. Some of the earliest bootleggers began smuggling alcohol past the borders of Canada, Mexico, and sea coasts through foreign registry by either Bahamas, Cuba, or French Islands. These bootleggers under foreign registry would dock three miles outside of Atlantic City, NJ where enforcement lacked. However, that became very risky and expensive and the U.S. Coast guard began stopping and checking ships. Despite that, bootleggers found other ways to get alcohol, which included making their own at home called moonshine. Moonshine was around well before the prohibition era and is still made today mostly in southern states. Moonshine, also known as White Lightning and Bathtub Gin, was made out of corn in large copper pots that were used to distill the liquor. Sometimes whole towns would be in on the bootlegging and moonshine operation. These operations were usually done in the woods to avoid being caught by the police. Another major source for bootleggers was medicinal whiskey that sold only across drugstore counters. This medicinal whiskey could be acquired with either a real or forged prescription from a doctor. Some industries later started to see the boom of bootlegging and wanted in. So these industries used denatured alcohol mixed with chemicals not fit for drinking. They would then illegally divert or wash the liquor of the chemicals, mix it with water and a splash of alcohol, and then sell it. With all this bootlegging going on, secret drinking spots started to sprout up all around the cities called speakeasies. To even enter a speakeasy one needed a password, form of ID, or a card to get in. Once inside you would find both men and women of either the middle-class or upper-middle-class drinking and socializing. Speakeasies were equipped with trap doors, collapsible shelves, and codes just in case there was ever a raid and they needed to hide or dispose of any alcohol quickly. Many even had passages for the bootlegged alcohol to be stocked without people seeing. Bootlegging and speakeasies also brought up another problem: organized crime and gang violence. Gangs started forming around the area and many would control entire chains of bootlegging with a monopoly of distribution to various places. Violence between gangs started to run rampid, and many gangs would have competition or turf wars with rivals. Some gangs of different cities joined forces with others to expand their operation and power. Before long, bootlegging within gangs led to traffic of narcotics, gambling, prostitution, and extortion. Prohibition is remembered as a period of gangsterism and organized crime that lasted well after prohibition. During this time, the American Mafia of Italian bootleggers and other gangsters rose to power in New York City in the 1920s and early 30s. One of prohibitions most notorious gangsters, Al Capone, kept his empire by killing off his competition and giving bribes. The gangster operated in Chicago, and by 1927, his estimated wealth was close to $100 million. The man hired by the U.S. Department of Justice to stop Al Capone was the head of the Prohibition Bureau in Chicago, Eliot Ness. Him and his dedicated team, dubbed the Untouchables, helped send Al Capone to jail and also led raids on illegal drinking spots. Al Capone was very good at covering his tracks and was only sent to jail for tax evasion in 1932 even though he did far worse things. Many movies would be later made about the gangsters and the Untouchables. These problems of bootlegging, speakeasies, and organized crime had their effects on society at the time like corruption of law enforcement and a homicide rate that was driven up 80%. By the mid-1920s, only 19% of Americans still supported prohibition. Politicians voted to repeal the 18th amendment in order to keep popular vote. Due to this, on December 5, 1933 Utah became the 36th state to ratify the 21st Amendment that repealed the 18th Amendment. In conclusion, after 13 years prohibition finally ended and there was a big celebration throughout America that became known as one of the biggest parties in history. The 18th Amendment is the only amendment to ever be repealed from the Constitution. Even though prohibition was meant to solve social problems, it only made it worse and created new ones along the way such as organized crime, illegal sale and production of alcohol, and secret drinking spots.