Policies for Child Protection

Policies for Child Protection Introduction and Overview The concept of children having specific rights is of comparatively recent origin. Traditional perceptions of society towards children have for centuries held them to be emotionally, physically and intellectually immature, incapable of looking after their own selves and inadequately equipped to make their own decisions (Bronfrenbrenner, 1979). With children furthermore being regarded as little more than possessions of parents, (with no personal rights of their own), the law has historically also granted unquestionable rights for chastisement and corporal punishment to parents (Bronfrenbrenner, 1979). The subservient status of children in British society even a hundred years ago can be gauged from the fact that whilst the prevalence of child cruelty was common knowledge in the 18th and 19th centuries, the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals came into being, in 1840, practically half a century earlier than the creation of the National Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children (Bronfrenbrenner, 1979). Such was the widespread social and political agreement on the rights of parents to do as they willed with their children. Even in the days of the industrial revolution the penalty for seriously harming an animal was far more severe than for causing grievous injury to a defenceless child (Bronfrenbrenner, 1979). Although preliminary work on enhancement of children’s rights started haltingly in 19th century Victorian England, the perceived need to take better care of children grew and received concrete legislative backing only in the first half of the 20th century (Maier, 1979). Initial work in the area however focussed primarily on health, safety and education of children, and stopped well short of intruding upon the foundational rights of parents, or the patriarchal rights of fathers with regard to ownership and control (Maier, 1979). Legislative inroads into the all encompassing rights of parents, vis-à  -vis their children, grew rapidly only after the Second World War, and resulted in (a) the rising legal authority of social workers to protect children, and (b) the establishment of rights of children for primary and secondary education, as well as for comprehensive health facilities (Prout, 2000). Whilst the interventionist policy of the British welfare state reached its apex during the late 1970s, (and was based upon the idea that the state had every right to step in for the protection of children, if those caring for them failed to do so), this approach was toned down significantly in the wake of the dismantling of the welfare infrastructure in the mid 1980s (Prout, 2000). The enactment of the Children’s Act 1989, in the wake of the 1987 Cleveland Report, (Therapy with Children) brought about a sea change in the practice of service delivery, and the state and agency relationship for social work practice was subsequently recast by New Labour into today’s working partnership approach (Prout, 2000). Partnership working, a process that is at the heart of current initiatives of service delivery in community and social work, involves, as per the Audit Commission of 1998, a â€Å"joint working arrangements where parties, (which) are otherwise independent bodies, †¦ agree to co-operate to achieve common goals, create a new organisational structure on process to achieve these goals, plan and implement a joint programme and share relevant information, tasks and rewards† (Aldgate Statham, 2001, p 36). Whilst partnership working in social work is not a brand new concept and was in fact taken up during the years of the welfare state, (in various urban and community development partnerships in the 1970s, as also in the regeneration partnerships in the 1980s), its use in service delivery became widespread only after New Labour, which had previously announced its intention of shifting from a culture of contracting to one of partnership, came to power in 1997 (Aldgate Statham, 2 001). The working partnership model for service delivery can be considered to be significantly different, both from the bureaucratic functioning of Old Labour and the market orientation of conservatives; it is based on trust and communication, rather than on command or on price mechanisms (Aldgate Statham, 2001). Debate over the growing authority of social workers with regard to the protection of children, especially in the context of their staying with their parents or being entrusted to care, reached significant proportions for the first time in 1975, in the case of seven year old Maria Caldwell, where the social worker misrepresented the actual position of the case to the court and forced the child to return to her natural parents, despite the child having formed close bonds with her foster parents (Bullock Others, 1993). With little heed having been paid to the wishes of the child, (who used to repeatedly run back to her foster home), the decision of the court, on the recommendation of the social worker, led to the tragic death of Maria. The conviction of her father for manslaughter was followed by public outrage and debate that resulted in the enactment of the Children Act 1975, which in turn called (a) for taking the feelings of children into account in care decisions and (b) for their right for representation by a court appointed social worker, rather than by the social services department of the local authority (Bullock Others, 1993). Whilst media and public debate continued to focus on the need for interdisciplinary working between health, education, social services, and the police, in issues relating to child protection, the next watershed occurred only in 1987 when 121 children in Cleveland were taken into care by social service authorities on concerns of physical and sexual abuse at their natural homes. With opinion on the issue being sharply divided with the social workers and the medical fraternity on one side and the media and the police on the other, the Cleveland Report, (prepared by a committee set up to specifically investigate the matter), commented adversely on the breakdown of communication between agencies and the dominant tendencies of agencies to act without considering the feelings of children; it also discussed the possibility that parents might well act against the interests of their children and recommended the need to involve children in the decision making process (Prout, 2003). The Children Act 1989, which was influenced by the findings of the Cleveland Report, caused a major shift in child care policy; away from state intervention in family life; towards partnership with families and caregivers; and with an emphasis on child intervention in decision making (Prout, 2003). Despite the introduction of such legal and policy safeguards, the tragic affair of young Victoria Climbie, who was abused, tortured, and ultimately killed, in April 2000, by her aunt and the man with whom she lived, under the eye of social service agencies, revealed that true partnership in working, and consideration of the wishes of the child, was yet to take place (Prout, 2003). Commentary The report that followed the death of Victoria Climbie was accompanied with the publication of a green paper called Every Child Matters, which focussed on four key themes, (a) increasing the focus on supporting families and carers, the most critical influence on children’s lives (b) ensuring necessary intervention takes place before children reach crisis point and protecting children from falling through the net, (c) addressing the underlying problems identified in the report into the death of Victoria Climbie, namely weak accountability and poor integration, and (d) ensuring that the people working with children are valued, rewarded and trained (Background to †¦, 2008). The green paper was followed by intense debate and consultation with people working in children’s services, parents, children, young people and other members of society, and led to the publication of Every Child Matters: the Next Steps, and the enactment of the Children Act 2004 (Background to †¦, 2008), steps that provided legislative support for developing more effective and accessible services directed around the needs of children, young people and families, and the use of partnership working in child protection, the focus of this essay. The rights of children in present day Britain are legally protected by laws that deal especially with the protection and well being of children, as well as by laws on health care, education, and social security (Prout, 2003). Children’s rights are protected by family law, education law and employment law. The United Nations Convention on Human Rights, ratified by the UK in 1991, not only gives children over 40 specific social, economic, cultural/civil and political rights, but also provides guidance on how governments should enumerate and protect these rights (Prout, 2003). Whilst the British legal framework provides a robust support system for safeguarding children’s rights, New Labour has, over the last decade also worked at establishing the concept of working in partnership by all bodies, schools, local authorities, medical relief agencies, carers, and parents, for protecting children; it is a concept that calls for active involvement of parents and consultation with children as well as for their participation in the decision making process (Milligan Stevens, 2006). With participation with children also being a key tenet of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the practice of service delivery is shifting to include the views, opinions and experiences of children and young people in care, as well as in their natural homes (Milligan Stevens, 2006). This principle, that of enabling children to participate in the decision making process, however continues to be a topic of intense debate, with many individuals still remaining unconvinced of the ability of children to rise above their emotional predilections and take logical decisions. As the recent case of Baby P, the 17 year old infant who was tortured and murdered by her mother and her boyfriend in Haringey Council of North London shows, it clearly does not apply to children who are too young to express their feelings or to develop opinions. Whilst the benefits of allowing children to participate actively in decisions that concern their emotional and physical well being have been underlined time and again and indeed are integral to the modern partnership working model, it is difficult to apply the same yardstick, as is normal with adults, to all children (Milligan Stevens, 2006). The maturity and learning of children, child psychiatrists confirm, are strongly influenced by their life experiences, which include their natural home or care environments and their access to health services, as well as by care and learning programmes (Emond, 2003). A number of research studies reveal that the quality of early childhood life and programmes can significantly improve the ability of children to do well in education, work and in life; this being especially true of children who are experiencing disadvantage (Emond, 2003). Whilst such studies do point towards the existence of sharp differences in the abilities of children from diffe rent backgrounds to participate in decision making, such issues are accentuated for children in care or in disturbed domestic situations, because of the absence of the democratic process in their everyday lives (Emond, 2003). Extant research also points to the fact that notwithstanding governmental initiatives and instructions to social workers to involve children in decision making, the views of children or youth are seldom considered, not just by administrators but also by researchers. Two recent research exercises one by Berridge and Brodie, in 1998, and Thomas, in 2005, on children’s homes, whilst delving in depth on views of managers and social workers, give scant attention to the views of children (Stevens, 2006). Such attitudes, which are too ingrained to be removed by recent legislation, dampen cognitive evolution and the ability and confidence of children to participate in decision making. â€Å"Residential child care units may be seen as sites where these micro-political processes can be seen at work. Children in residential child care tend to be among the most powerless in social terms and reports of their opinions rarely contain their actual views† (Stevens, 2006). The extent to which children can participate, experts argue, can also be linked to the way they are perceived in society. Children in care are by and large perceived with ambivalence, either as possible victims who require to be taken care of, or as potential threats who need controlling; â€Å"one of the consequences of this ambivalence is that they are seen as passive recipients of services, and not as â€Å"active and creative actors, as a subject and citizen with potentials† (Stevens, 2006). Osborne and Bromfield (2007) concluded on the basis of an extensive study on children in care that the decision making facilities of such children can be affected in small and large ways by a multitude of developments. â€Å"Even small oversights can have a lasting and negative impact on the child or young person; for example, not being told why workers had moved on, or not being able to bring a pet to a new placement. Such occurrences can compound feelings of loss, grief, sadness and the feeling of being ‘different’ from other children and young people† (Osborne and Bromfield, 2007) A â€Å"CREATE† Foundation report (2004) found that children were also affected by negative care experiences that arose from systemic defects like the ones elaborated below: â€Å"(a) slow systemic procedures that prevented timely and adequate response, (b) court processes that did not adequately consult with children and young people, (c) lack of resources, support and training for carers and caseworkers, (d) inadequate early intervention strategies to support families to stay together and prevent entry into care (e) inadequate entry into care support, (f) inadequate support and preparation for young people preparing to leave car, and (g) inadequate post-care support.† (CREATE Foundation, 2004) Similar issues come up when children live in disturbed natural homes and feelings of insecurity and attachment could well make them cling on to oppressive natural parents or opt to remain in distressful conditions. Issues of culture and overall family environment also play a large part in shaping the response of children in disturbed homes, and partnership agencies and parents need to understand this phenomenon and respond accordingly. Children from ethnic backgrounds often face specific challenges on account of the different cultural environment of their homes, their inadequate English language skills, and the exclusion of their families from mainstream society. â€Å"There is apparent under-reporting of child sexual abuse in Britain’s Asian communities and a varied capacity amongst professionals to respond with cultural competence. Professional approaches originate in cultural contexts, which are often different from those of most British Asians. If the proportion of children and non-abusing carers from Asian communities who access relevant services is to increase, professionals need to develop better understandings of cultural imperatives which determine behaviour in those communities. Consultations with Asian women in Bradford reinforce the view that culturally competent practice and respectful dialogue are essential to the protection of children. They also highlight a number of recurring themes. Members of Asian communities are aware of child sexual abuse, they recognize that the issue needs to be addressed by all communities and they report that many of those affected within their own communities have found it difficult to acces s relevant services† (Gilligan, Akhtar, 2005). Decisions regarding removal of children from natural homes also need to take account of the influence of grandparents and fathers upon children and not be swayed totally by considerations of maternal ability and circumstance. With the role of grandparents in the lives of children reducing steadily, the role of fathers in child development, welfare and protection has never been more important. Fathers play critical roles in child development that often go much beyond that of providers of economic security, and incorporate nurturing, caring and supporting activities. Fathers play strong roles in (a) healthy child development in the home and school context, (b) creation of gender identity for both male and female children, (c) responsible sexuality and reduction of teen pregnancy, (d) emotional and social commitment, and (e) financial security. Whilst current service methodologies are women focussed, with social workers feeling more comfortable working with mothers, partnership working calls for much greater involvement of fathers, where possible, as well as consideration of the feelings of children about being separated from their fathers. â€Å"Mothers are the gate keepers to the father’s participation. Mothers have to believe that the family will benefit from the father’s participation. Furthermore, this discussion implies a systemic bias for excluding fathers. It is easier to manage the ongoing interactions over the course of a case by working only with one parent, the mother. In frontline practice, the potential for a compliant relationship with the mother takes precedence over a comprehensive working relationship with all the family.† (Father Involvement †¦, 2005) Mothers and social workers need to involve fathers as much as possible for partnership working to be more responsive towards child needs. Involvement of fathers by agencies could however lead to complications where relationships between parents are strained or in case of divorced and single mothers. Maternal grandparents can play significant roles in such conditions in creating conducive environments for protection and welfare of children and their involvement in partnership working could prove to be immensely beneficial. Conclusion The building of effective partnerships for protecting children is dependent upon involving all relevant agencies, namely the local authorities, social work agencies, schools, medical providers, police, community organisations, parents, and children. The recent episode, involving the horrific murder of the 17 month old child, known as Baby P, at the hands of her young mother and her boyfriend, despite the active engagement of social workers and medical practitioners, (Hyland, 2008) should not be seen as an aberration but as an indicator of the potential dangers faced by children in extremely different conditions and the individual and collective responsibilities that need to be exercised by all partnership members. The incident also reveals the vulnerability and limitations of methodologies that depend upon taking the opinion of children in cases where they are too young to express themselves. The extent of cooperation between social workers and parents also plays a critical role in the success of working partnerships. Whilst the barriers that come about because of cultural differences between social workers and members of Britain’s ethnic communities, especially from concepts of shame and honour, have already been elaborated earlier, barriers of class, income and education can also lead to lack of communication between social workers and parents and affect the appropriateness of decisions that concern child protection. In such cases, where unintended and invisible power differences work against the establishment of an equal working partnership, it is the paramount responsibility of social work agencies and social workers to build the foundation of a stable, democratic and equal working partnerships, take special pains to find out the wishes of affected children, and involve them as far as possible in the decision making process. The problems associated with knowing the wishes of children are complex; they differ from individual to individual, can be applied only to children over a certain age, and can even otherwise be solved only with patience, open mindedness, respect for children, and understanding. Working in partnership with parents for the protection of children, whilst a desirable objective, has numerous limitations and needs to be approached with care and caution. The adoption of a one shoe fits all approach in such cases is inherently fallible and can lead to horrific tragedy, as was evidenced by the Baby P tragedy, where the social workers kept the child with the mother despite numerous indicators of the dangers of doing so. Policy makers and social workers need to realise that all methodologies have their advantages and limitations. Social workers need to work with empathy; they need to scrutinise the working of all involved agencies, as well as parents, and refrain from being blinkered or authoritative in their approach, if they are to protect today’s beleaguered children from the fate that befell Maria Caldwell, Victoria Climbie, and Baby P. Words: 3290 References Ainsworth, F, (1997), Family-Centred Group Care: Model Building. Aldershot: Ashgate. Aldgate, J, Statham, J, (2001), The Children Act Now: Messages for Research. London: The Stationery Office. Background to Every Child Matters, (2008), Every Child Matters: Change for Children, Retrieved December 18, 2008 from www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/aims/background Badham, B, Wade, H, (2005), Hear by Right: Standards for the Active Involvement of Children and Young People. Swindon: NYA/LGA. Barber, J. G., Delfabbro, P. H., Cooper, L. (2001). The predictors of unsuccessful transition to foster care, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 42(6), 785–790. Bowes, J. M. and Hayes, A. (2004), Contexts and Consequences: Impacts on Children, Families and Communities, in J. M. Bowes (ed) Children, Families and Communities: Contexts and Consequences, Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Bowlby, J. 1951 Maternal Care and Mental Health, London: World Health Organization. Bronfrenbrenner, U, (1979) The Ecology of Human Development, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bullock, R, Little, M, Millham, S, (1993), Going Home, Aldershot: Dartmouth. Berridge, D, Brodie, I, (1998), Children’s Homes Revisited, London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Cashmore, J, (2004), Child Protection and Substitute Care: The Responsibility of Families, Community and State’, in J. M. Bowes (ed) Children, Families and Communities: Contexts and Consequences, Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Colton, M., Sanders, R. and Williams, M, (2001) An Introduction to Working with Children: a Guide for Social Workers, Houndmills: Palgrave. CREATE Foundation, (2004). In their own words: Experience of ACT children and young people in care. Canberra: Office of the Community Advocate, Delfabbro, P. H., Barber, J. G., Bentham, Y, (2002), Children’s satisfaction with out-of-home care in South Australia, Journal of Adolescence, 25, 523–533 DeLeon, P, (1997), Democracy and the Policy Sciences, New York: State University of New York Press. Dryzek, J. S, (1990), Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy and Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Emond, R, (2003), Putting the Care into Residential Care: The Role of Young People, Journal of Social Work 3(3): 321-337. Father Involvement in Child Welfare, (2005), Jordan Institute for Families, 11, 1 Fulcher, L. C, (1985), Group Care Practice with Children, London: Tavistock. Gardner, H. (2004a). Perceptions of family: Complexities introduced by foster care. Part 1: Childhood perspectives. Journal of Family Studies, 10, 170–187. Gibbs, I, Sinclair, I, (1999), Treatment and Treatment Outcomes in Children’s Homes, Child and Family Social Work, 4: 1-8 Gilbertson, R., Barber, J. G, (2002), Obstacles to involving children and young people in foster care research, Child and Family Social Work, 7, 253–258. Gilligan, P Akhtar, S, (2005), Cultural Barriers to the Disclosure of Child Sexual Abuse in Asian Communities: Listening to What Women Say, British Journal of Social Work, 36(8):1361-1377 Hyland, J, (2008), The tragic death of Baby P, WsWs, Retrieved December 18, 2008 from http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/dec2008/baby-d04.shtml Maier, H, (1979), The Core of Care: Essential Ingredients for the Development of Children at Home or away from Home, Child Care Quarterly 8(4): 161-173. Milligan, I, Stevens, I, (2006) Residential Child Care: Collaborative Practice, London: Sage. Milner, J. (2001), Women and Social Work, Basingstoke: Palgrave. O’Neill, C, (2004), I remember the first time I went into Foster care—It’s a long story†¦ Children, permanent parents, and other supportive adults talk about the experience of moving from one family to another. Journal of Family Studies, 10, 205–219. Osborne, A Bromfield, L, (2007), Participation of children and young people in care in decisions affecting their lives, Australian Institute of Studies, 6 Prout, A, (2000), Children’s Participation: Control and Self-Realisation in British Late Modernity, Children and Society, 14(4): 304-315. Sinclair, R, (1998), Involving Children in the Planning of their Care, Child and Family Social Work 3: 137-142. Stevens, I, (2006), Consulting Youth about Residential Care Environments in Scotland, Children, Youth and Environments 16(2): 51-74. Retrieved December 18, 2008 from http://www.colorado.edu/journals/cye Thomas, N, (2005), Has Anything Really Changed? Managers’ Views of Looked after Children’s Participation from 1997-2004, Adoption and Fostering, 29(1): 67-77. United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, full text version. Retrieved on December 18, 2008 from www.unicef.at/kinderrechte/download/crceng.pdf Ward, H, Skuse, T Munro, E.R, (2005), The Best of Times, the Worst of Times: Young People’s Views of Care and Accommodation, Adoption and Fostering, 29(1): 8-17.

Important similarities and differences between Judaism and Christianity

Judaism and Christianity are both monotheistic religions with a common root in that they share in descent from the patriarch Abraham. Christianity after all was founded by Jews, and even when it first had Gentile converts for a while they followed Jewish practices, such as keeping the food laws, until Peter’s vision a t the home of Cornelius ( Acts 10) They are linked by the search for the Saviour or Messiah foretold in the scriptures that both share e. g, Isaiah 35 – and known by Christians in the New Testament. Goldberg and Rayner begin their book ‘The Jewish People’ :-The history of the Jewish people begins with Abraham, the history of the Jewish religion begins with Moses. Jews take their name from the fourth son of Jacob by his wife Leah. They would have in times past called themselves Israelites. The name Jew comes from the Romans who referred to Idumea, an area south of Israel. The fundamental difference is that Christians believe that Messiah came i n Jesus of Nazareth some 2000 or so years ago, while Jews, unless they claim to be Messianic Jews, a growing group, are still waiting. Another massive difference is that one is born a Jew.As long as your mother was Jewish you are Jewish, whether or not you are in any way religious, whether or not you keep the laws of Judaism and even whether or not you believe in God. Descent is through women, because then, if a foreigner impregnated a Jewish woman, whether by consent or by rape, the child would still be part of the people of God. This applies even when the women of a family have married non Jews for several generations and worship as members of another faith. It is the religion of a race and it is very difficult for anyone to become a Jew in any other way than to be born to it.Christianity on the other hand is a religion open to anyone, but though one can be born into a Christian family and dedicated or christened soon after birth, as a young person or adult each person must decide for themselves to follow Jesus as Saviour. Christians believe in one God, but refer to God as Trinity, three in one, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jews prefer to think of God as one. Yet in the Old Testament there are references to God as Father ( Psalm 68 v 5 ‘A Father of the fatherless†¦. is God) and as Spirit, ( Numbers 11 v 17) and also to his sending of a Saviour.( Isaiah 42)Like Christianity Judaism has over the years divided into various groupings, orthodox, liberal and so on, but just as all Christians of whatever denomination relate back to Jesus Christ, so all Jews relate back to the patriarchs. By the time of Christ though Judaism had become a very different religion as far as its every day practice – so much so the writer Ninian Smart in ‘The World’s Religions’ differentiates them into the religion of the Israelites and Judaism. ( pages 202-203). This was a gradual evolution rather than a sudden change.When the Israelites were only a few in number they worshipped together. When they made their Exodus and spent 40 years in the wilderness they worshipped together in the tabernacle Change began at the time of the Exile, when the majority of Jews were separated from temple worship, and synagogues developed. After C. E. 70 when the Romans destroyed the Jerusalem temple and Jews fled from Israel to become part of the Diaspora, non sacrificial synagogue worship became the only type available. The period of temple worship is still looked back to as when at Passover each family makes the pledge ‘Next Year in Jerusalem’.These forced changes also meant that home worship as a family became more important. Judaism is essentially the religion of the group. Judaism has its scholars and mystics, but never took up the solitary or single sex contemplative life, such as that of Julian of Norwich or groups such as the Franciscans, that began in Christianity in the second century with the desert fathers and continues t o some extent to the present day. The position of women in both religions has been problematic and is divided upon denominational lines.In the Chambers Dictionary of Religions and Beliefs, page 271, Rosemary Goring tells us about this in some detail. She explains how Reformed Judaism has tried to redress its traditional exclusion of women from worship as in the introduction of a coming of age ceremony for girls as well as for boys. The first woman became a rabbi in the Reformed tradition in the1970s. Even Conservative Judaism took the same step in 1985, but in Orthodox synagogues women are still separated from men in worship and they are only obliged to keep the negative laws i. e.thou shalt not commit adultery, and not the positive ones at certain times. The claim is that this is a matter of difference rather than a matter of inferiority.The same claim would be made by certain Christians. There have always been women in leadership roles within the church, but, despite verses such a s Galatians 3:28, â€Å"There is no difference between Jews and Gentiles, between slaves and free men; between men and women, for you are all one in union with Christ Jesus. † actual ordination has been a long time coming and in certain denominations has either not arrived or again been minimal in its effect.Judaism is a quite legalistic religion. There are rules that cover every area of life, and Orthodox Jews in particular are meticulous in keeping such rules. Christianity on the other hand, although it too has rules, these are more concerned with morals than with such minutiae as the kind of knot that can be used on the Sabbath. Galatians 2 v 16 perhaps sums up the different attitudes to legalism. ‘’We know that a person is put right with God only through faith in Jesus Christ, never by doing what the law requires.†These are of course the words of St Paul, who in his earlier life had been most legalistic -a Hebrew of the Hebrews’ as he describes h imself in Philippians, ‘’As far as keeping the Jewish law is concerned I was a Pharisee’ ( Philippians 3 v 5). Jews consider themselves the chosen people of God. Christians consider themselves to have become, because of their faith in the Savior Christ Jesus , also children of God ‘At one time you were not God’s people’ Peter tells new converts, ‘but now you are his people; at one time you did not know God’s mercy, but now you have received his mercy.’ ( 1 Peter 2 v 10)With regard to the after life there are a range of beliefs. Christians believe that Christ has covered their sins and they will ultimately live for ever with God in heaven. Large parts of the New Testament are concerned with teaching on the subject as in I Thessalonians 4. The after life is rarely mentioned in Jewish scriptures. It concentrates more on one’s actions than one’s beliefs. Both Torah and Talmud concentrate on doing one’s duty to God in this life. The web site ‘Jewish beliefs on the afterlife ‘ says :-Succeeding at this brings reward, failing at it brings punishment. Whether rewards and punishments continue after death, or whether anything at all happens after death, is not as important. Despite this there is some teaching on the subject.. Moed Katan is cited on the same page . â€Å"This world is only like a hotel. The world to come is like a home. † In the early history of the people death is likened to a reunion with family. (Genesis 49 v 29) Jacob tells his sons ‘I am going to join my family in death.’It was important to him that he be buried close to those who had preceded him as is obvious in the careful instructions that follow. This contrasts with the fate of the wicked who are described as being cut off from their people. (see Exodus 31 v 14). There is still a belief among the most Orthodox of Jews in a sort of half life after death in a place called She’ol , a world described in Isaiah 14 v 9 and 10. This was expressed to me by a lady who said ‘As long as someone is alive who remembers me I shall be alive’. Both religions have naturally adjusted to changing situations over time.For instance on page 111 of ‘The Jewish People’ Goldberg and Rayner describe how Jewish law was adjusted to conditions in such places as Cairo and Istanbul. It began as the religion of a nomadic people, but became the religion of a minority group living among people who practiced other faiths. This, and the persecution they suffered, led to such things as the Jewish ghettos of mediaeval times, in part forced on them by the majority population, and in part by the natural inclination of people to live near those like themselves.Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire in the fourth century under the emperor Constantine. In the intervening years since its inception the church grew rapidly in fulfillment of the parable of the mustard seed recorded in Matthew ( 13 v 31 and 32). William Frend describes in ‘The Christian World’ how its organization had developed into something that rivaled the state itself with its various officials in each area, so much so that Diocletian and his court in 302 tried to face up to the significant decision as to whether Christ or the traditional gods of Rome should be considered as the guardians of that city.A Roman mosaic from 5th century Rome, shown in the Christian World , (page 39) would depict Christ emperor. Becoming a state religion had both advantages, the protection of Christians and their practices, and problems such as state interference in matters that might be considered as purely church matters. For example Henry 1st of England intervened so much in church life that he wanted to be the one to give authority to the archbishop Anselm, rather than this coming from Rome. Christianity is a missionary faith.Christians have traveled to all parts of th e world taking the good news with them and seeking to bring other people to join them in faith in Christ. Judaism sees no need for this. Judaism follows the commandment found in Exodus 20 v 4 about the forbidding of making images. This is taken to mean images of God. A modern synagogue will perhaps have stained glass windows depicting important t stories from the scriptures – the giving of the law to Moses for instance or the crossing of the Dead Sea, but because they also accept the words of Genesis 1 v 26 in which God says that he created men in his image, there are no depictions of people.This injunction does not seem to apply to photographs. Christians, believing that they are not bound by Old Testament laws frequently celebrate their faith in pictures, including images of Christ and symbolic pictures of God as Father and Spirit. Conclusion These two faiths have both parallels and common roots as well as shared scriptures and monotheism. There are also major differences i n belief and emphasis and the way that religion affects daily life. In both there are sincere believers as well as those of less than total commitment.

Political Influence Essay

A person is fed information throughout their life from various outside influences; this is how one forms values, views and opinions. From this, one is able to shape their political views based on what they believe or have been taught to believe. There are many factors that come into play when these views are formed, such as historical events. Others while apparent have a latent effect, such as gender, race, socio-economic status etc. The way a person is brought up has a fairly large impact on political socialization. Children come to know their parents value systems and beliefs. The children are brought up around these beliefs and these beliefs are instilled upon them in both unconscious and conscious ways. This is the beginning. As a person is introduced to more situations and experiences their views are molded further but the foundations are always there. Most Americans do not look thorough the inner workings of our government and the general idea of politics. Instead they look at what politics has to offer for them. It is far easier to just look at politics based on your opinions rather than through the policies and procedures. With the innovations of modern technology and the mass media, people don’t have to look that hard for issues surrounding politics. All they have to do is turn on their T. V. or read the news on their favorite search engine web site. I think that this has had a negative effect on people’s political views. Instead of reading articles and forming opinions on their own, they are shown the sensationalized view of politics and a fairly biased/limited perspective. My own political views were formed the same way everyone else’s were. My parents taught me about the differences between democrats and republicans, what the president does and even about the legislative branch. These teachings were mainly based around their own views but always with quite a bit of objectivity. I grew up in a fairly free household; my parents encouraged individuality and self-reliance. This gave me the ability to learn and think about things on my own, being able figure out how I felt about them. Another interesting thing about my upbringing is that I grew up without a computer, so when I wanted to know what was going on I had to watch the news on T. V. The school that I went to was fairly progressive and the teacher that I had for Social Studies taught us a lot about both our local and federal governments, all of which have helped me from my political views. I am a very open-minded person and this carries over heavily into how I view politics. I tend to focus on the single issues at hand and not on which party is proposing them. I feel strongly on many issues, to include abortion, education, foreign/domestic policy, welfare and most recently civil unions; however I try to understand both sides; not to agree but to understand. I do feel that I could be far more educated in politics, but I believe I am off to a good start.

Thesis on Natural Hazard

Thesis on Natural Hazard Human population of our planet has been facing natural hazards for as long as it existed. Numerous events have caused loss of millions of lives and significant destructions. On the one hand, natural hazard is a great threat to the human communities all over the world. On the other side, however, these events make us learn from our mistakes and help scientists better understand the nature, protect society and get benefits of this knowledge. Natural hazard, affected among others by human activities and technological progress, is becoming more and more vital, especially for those populations that live in high-risk regions. When watching TV we can every day evidence unusual forest fires, floods, droughts and other natural hazards that affect our daily lives. We should not forget that we are a part of this and as much as we are affected by these events, we can contribute towards the reduction of impact of human communities’ destructive activities by constant awareness and efforts. Based on the knowledge, gathered throughout years of natural disasters and various changes in climate and nature, scientists developed technologies and methods to control and evaluate the level of hazard damage, scale and timing. With the implementation of new technologies people were able to enable better forecasting and monitoring systems that helped the humanity avoid possible victims and destructions. The biggest achievements during the last decade were made in assessment of seismic activities and development of the earthquake systems that are significantly more resistant, than those at the times of Los Angeles Earthquake or Spitak disaster. We are more and more in control of natural hazards, but we will never be able to become superior over the nature. In order to succeed in the human’s endeavours to reduce the damage of these events we should learn to respect and protect the nature.