Astronomy †Distance in The Stars and The Solar System

Astronomy – Distance in The Stars and The Solar System Free Online Research Papers Astronomy Distance in The Stars and The Solar System ***All italic words are located at the bottom accompanied by their definitions*** The Solar System The solar system consists of the Sun, nine planets, sixty-eight satellites (of the planets), large numbers of comets and asteroids, and the interplanetary medium. All the planets orbit in the same counter-clockwise direction looking down from above the Sun’s north pole or in a prograde direction. All except for Venus and Uranus, whose rotations are defined as retrograde. The nine planets are classified in several ways: By composition: Terrestrial or rocky planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars: The terrestrial planets are composed mostly of rock and metal and have relatively high densities, slow rotation, solid surfaces, no rings and very few satellites. o Jovian or gas planets: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune: ? The gas planets are composed primarily of hydrogen and helium, and generally have low densities, rapid rotation, deep atmospheres, rings and lots of satellites. By size: o Small planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars and Pluto. ? The small planets have diameters less than 13000 km. o Giant planets: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune. ? The giant planets have diameters greater than 48000 km. o Mercury and Pluto are sometimes referred to as lesser planets (not to be confused with minor planets which is the official term for asteroids). o The giant planets are sometimes also referred to as gas giants. By position relative to the Sun: o Inner planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars. o Outer planets: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto. o The asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter forms the boundary between the inner solar system and the outer solar system. By position relative to Earth: o Inferior planets: Mercury and Venus. ? They are closer to the Sun compared to the Earth. ? The inferior planets show phases like the Moons when viewed from Earth. o superior planets: Mars thru Pluto. ? farther from the Sun than Earth. ? The superior planets always appear full or nearly so. By History: o classical planets: Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. ? known since pre-historical times ? visible to the unaided eye o modern planets: Uranus, Neptune, Pluto. ? discovered in modern times ? visible only with telescopes Stars: Are huge spherical masses of gas that began radiating energy because of nuclear reactions occurring deep within their interiors They differ in size, shape, luminosity, temperature, and composition Distance To Stars: First measured by Friedrich Bessel in 1838, method called Trigonometric Parallax As the earth moves around the sun, a star relatively nearby will appear to shift its position in the sky relative to more distant stars. By measuring these minute angular shifts, the distance of a star can be determined trigonometrically. Half of the total apparent shift of the star with respect to the background is called the star’s trigonometric parallax. It follows that the parallax of a star is the angle formed t the star by the triangle formed between the star and each end of the radius of the earth’s orbit. Glossary: Jovian planets: The planets with orbits beyond that of Mars: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. Parallax: The apparent change in position of a star relative to the distant, background stars as seen from the Earth at opposite points in its orbit around the sun. Prograde: Counterclockwise, when viewed from north of the ecliptic, rotation of a celestial body around its axis. Retrograde motion: The motion of a planet from west to east among the stars over a lengthy period of time. It is when the earth overtakes another planet as they both orbit the sun. Star: A celestial body made up of hot gases held together by its own gravity and emitting light and heat resulting from its internal nuclear reactions. Our Sun is a typical star. Terrestrial planets: The planets with orbits within the orbit of Jupiter, Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars. The Distance To A Star Tan( 1 ) = 93 000 000 Miles 9000 X X= 4.8 x 10 A.U.= Astronomical Unit= 150 million Kilometres = 93 million Miles 1 minute= 1 1 second= 1 60 3600 A= 0.4 seconds = 1 9000 Research Papers on Astronomy - Distance in The Stars and The Solar SystemThe Spring and AutumnWhere Wild and West MeetThe Relationship Between Delinquency and Drug UseCanaanite Influence on the Early Israelite ReligionBionic Assembly System: A New Concept of Self19 Century Society: A Deeply Divided EraIncorporating Risk and Uncertainty Factor in CapitalDefinition of Export QuotasMarketing of Lifeboy Soap A Unilever ProductResearch Process Part One

All About the Ancient Roman Family

All About the Ancient Roman Family The Roman family was called familia, from which the Latin word family is derived. The familia could include the triad with which we are familiar, two parents and children (biological or adopted), as well as slaves and grandparents. The head of the family (referred to as the pater familias) was in charge of even adult males in the familia. See Jane F. Gardners Family and Familia in Roman Law and Life reviewed by Richard Saller in The American Historical Review, Vol. 105, No. 1. (Feb. 2000), pp. 260-261. Purposes of the Roman Family The Roman family was the basic institution of the Roman people. The Roman family transmitted morality and social status across generations. The family educated its own young. The family tended its own hearth, while the hearth goddess, Vesta, was tended by state priestess called Vestal Virgins. The family needed to continue so that dead ancestors could be honored by their descendants and connections made for political purposes. When this failed to be motive enough, Augustus Caesar offered financial incentives to families to breed. Marriage The wife of the pater familias (the mater familias) might have been considered part of her husbands family or part of her natal family, depending on the conventions of the marriage. Marriages in Ancient Rome could be in manu in the hand or sine manu without the hand. In the former case, the wife became part of her husbands family; in the latter, she remained tied to her family of origin. Divorce and Emancipation When we think of divorce, emancipation, and adoption, we usually think in terms of ending relationships between families. Rome was different. Inter-familial alliances were essential for garnering the support needed for political ends. Divorces could be granted so that partners could remarry into other families to establish new connections, but the family connections established via first marriages need not be broken. Emancipated sons were still entitled to shares of paternal estates. Adoption Adoption also brought families together and allowed continuity to families that would otherwise have no one to carry on the family name. In the unusual case of Claudius Pulcher, adoption into a plebeian family, led by a man younger than himself, allowed Claudius (now using the plebeian name Clodius) to run for election as tribune of the plebs. For information on the adoption of freedmen, see The Adoption of Roman Freedmen, by Jane F. Gardner. Phoenix, Vol. 43, No. 3. (Autumn, 1989), pp. 236-257. Familia vs. Domus In legal terms, familia included all those under the power of the pater familias; sometimes it meant only the slaves. The pater familias was usually the oldest male. His heirs were under his power, as were the slaves, but not necessarily his wife. A boy without a mother or children could be a pater familias. In non-legal terms, the mother/wife could be included in the familia, although the term usually used for this unit was domus, which we translate as home. See Familia, Domus, and the Roman Conception of the Family, by Richard P. Saller. Phoenix, Vol. 38, No. 4. (Winter, 1984), pp. 336-355. Household and Family Religion in Antiquity, edited by John Bodel and Saul M. Olyan Meaning of Domus Domus referred to the physical house, the household, including the wife, ancestors, and descendants. The domus referred to the places where the pater familias exerted his authority or acted as dominus. Domus was also used for the dynasty of the Roman emperor. Domus and familia were often interchangeable. Pater Familias vs. Pater or Parent While pater familias is usually understood as head of the family, it had the primary legal meaning of estate owner. The word itself was usually used in legal contexts and required only that the person be able to possess property. The terms usually used to denote parenting were parens parent, pater father, and mater mother. See Pater Familias, Mater Familias, and the Gendered Semantics of the Roman Household, by Richard P. Saller. Classical Philology, Vol. 94, No. 2. (Apr. 1999), pp. 182-197.

Business law coursework Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Business law coursework - Essay Example Lord Kenyon held: â€Å"There are many situations in life, and particularly in the commercial world, where a man cannot by any diligence inform whom he deals; in which cases he must apply to those whose sources of intelligence enable them to give that information. If no injury is occasioned by that lie, it is not actionable; but if it be attended with a damage, it then becomes the subject of an action. It is admitted that Defendant’s conduct was highly immoral, and detrimental to society. And I am of opinion that the action is maintainable on the grounds of deceit in Defendant, and injury and loss to Plaintiff.†1 The next steps in proving the existence of tort of deceit is the fact that the claimant relied on the provided information and this caused loss to him. Even though it seems that Peter’s situation fits under these regulations, there is one big â€Å"On the other hand†: â€Å"in an action for deceit, it is not enough to establish misrepresentation alone; Fraud is established where it is proved that a false statement is made: (a) knowingly; or (b) without belief in its truth; or (c) recklessly, careless as to whether it be true or false.† 2 This is the House of Lords’ ruling in the case of Derry v Peek (1888). Breach of duty occurs in the situation when the defendant owed a duty of care and his actions were lower than the reasonable standard. Smith and Keenan (2010, p.464) state that the test of a reasonable man should be applied to individuals â€Å"who have held themselves out as possessing a particular skill†3 as to average specialist in that domain. For example, as in Peter’s case, Bumble&Co – recommending themselves as a company which conducts financial analysis – were expected to act as an average accountant. By providing a financial statement of poor quality, Bumble&Co actually provided misinformation to the shareholders. The company ignored its duty of care, established by objective standards, and provided false information. It accepted to

The plight of the homeless in the United States Essay

The plight of the homeless in the United States - Essay Example In the United States, de-institutionalization of mentally ill population in the late 1970s and cuts in housing and social services in 1980s contributed to homelessness (Donohoe). According to National Alliance to End Homelessness, in January 2005 around 744,313 people were homeless (National Coalition for the Homeless). According to the statistics of National Law Centre, around 700,000 to 2 million people are homeless in America on a given night (Policyalmanac). The estimates of National Alliance to End Homelessness highlight that around 22 people out of every 10,000 people are homeless and on any given night in the United States, 671,859 people are homeless, in which 37 percent are families and 63 percent are individuals (National Alliance to End Homelessness). Between 2007 and 2009, family homelessness in the United States has increased by 30 percent and this percentage is expected to increase further (National Public Radio). The statistics show that homelessness in the United Stat es has actually become a serious concern for the economy. The number of homeless people in the United States is increasing rapidly and various factors are contributing to this increase. The typical reasons which may contribute to homelessness include disturbance in family support systems, natural disasters, civil wars, impact of structural adjustment activities and urbanization however, two major causes of homelessness in the United States include decline in affordable rental housing and poverty (Vickery, Williams and Lugo). The president of National Alliance to Homelessness, Nan Roman argues affordable housing crisis is the primary driver in homelessness and this problem cannot be solved unless the crisis is addressed (USA Today). In short, the problem of homelessness cannot be solved unless the root causes of the problem are addressed. Homelessness in the United States is significantly affecting the overall economy. The state incurs

The U.S. Civil War was more about State rights than the liberation of Essay

The U.S. Civil War was more about State rights than the liberation of slaves - Essay Example 2). 1 To a large extent, The American Civil can be regarded as a war directed more towards State rights than the liberation of slaves. This is because the ensuing dispute between some states in the South and others in the North regarding taxation of cotton exports, as well as conflicts about the issue of slavery, precipitated the war. Although President Lincoln had tried to make both sides unite, they turned down a treaty called â€Å"The Pickwick Papers.† The Confederate states of the South included California, Florida, and Kansas while the Union States in North comprised of New York, Tennessee, Delaware, Alaska, and Oregon. Based on this, therefore, the paper will provide concrete arguments as to why the American Civil War is considered as war for State rights. The main Objectives of the Union Army at the beginning of the war President Lincoln At the beginning of the war, the main objective that Abraham Lincoln had was to preserve the Union and prevent the Southern states fr om seceding. He had the goal of bringing the seceding states back to the union as soon as it could be possibly done. His adoption of the Winfield Scott’s â€Å"Anaconda† Plan reinforced his efforts to prevent the secession of states. This plan agitated for a blockade of all ports in the south, as well as dividing of the Confederacy through controlling Mississippi. Lincoln was determined to see that the seceding states joined the Union since he saw the secession as a threat to his presidency. The secession of the states in the South marked the beginning of the civil war and this happened at a time when Lincoln assumed the office of the president. As such, his determination was to overcome the challenge posed by the secession (Burlingame 2011, p. 10).2 Union Generals2 At the onset of the Civil War in the United States, the army comprised of 16, 367 officers, 4 artillery regiments, and 198 line companies, 5 mounted regiments and infantry, comprising of 10 regiments. The m ajor objective of the Union Army Generals was to maintain the status quo by discouraging the secession of states. This portrays that the Union army believed that the Union had to be maintained so that the states no changes could be witnessed in the states. At the beginning of the war, the Union Generals strived to discriminate against and segregate the blacks. The Generals did not accept the commissioning of black officers in the army, with only one hundred of the blacks being commissioned at the start of the war (Barney 2011, p. 6).3 Union Soldiers/Wives/Citizens/Blacks At the beginning of the civil war, the Union Soldiers fought with the main objective of subduing the seceding states. The war against the South aimed at blocking all the ports in the seceding states. Troops of Union Soldiers advanced towards the South with the main objective being capturing the Confederate states. At the start of the civil war, the objective of the blacks was to see an end to slavery. They had the d etermination to fight against the conditions of servitude, segregation and discrimination that they had faced over the years. African Americans joined the army with the hope that they would help their fellow blacks overcome the slave-like conditions that they had endured for many years (Cimballa & Miller, 2002).3 The main Objectives of the Confederate Army at the beginning of the war. President Davis At the beginning of the Civil War,3 Jefferson Davis used to be the president of the Confederate

Investigating the rising population in UK prisons

Investigating the rising population in UK prisons The prison population in the UK has increased dramatically in recent decades. The number of incarcerated men and women in England and Wales rose over 65% between 1995 and 2009, going from 49,500 to 82,100 (Ministry of Justice, 2009). A comparable increase over a similar time period has also been seen in the USA, the prison population increasing 53% from 1,053,738 in 1994 to 1,613,656 in 2009 (Bureau of Justice Statistics 1995, 2010). In England and Wales this can be partly explained by tougher sentencing for drug-related crimes and violent offences against the person as well as a higher recall rate of offenders to prison due to the breach of their release agreement (Ministry of Justice, 2009); similar trends can be seen in the USA (Hanlon et al, 2007). Increasing prison population means that proportionally more parents go to prison and research has shown that there is a correlation between parental incarceration and negative outcomes for the offspring (Huebner and Gustafson, 2007; Foster and Hagan 2007). There are however no official records on prisoners families in the UK (Murray, 2005) or in the USA (Miller, 2006) and the available data is often unreliable due to the incompleteness and duplication of records (Miller, 2006). Lack of methodologically strong research means that the needs of prisoners families may be neglected, it is important to investigate how imprisonment affects this vulnerable group and which policies could ameliorate their situation (Dallaire, 2007). Incarceration may affect all family members, including parents, siblings and more distant relatives yet the developmental influences are greatest on the children of prisoners and therefore, for the purposes of this essay I define family as a group consisting of two parents and their children living together as a unit (OUD, 2011). I aim in this essay to discuss the effects of imprisonment on prisoners family members during incarceration, first by exploring the current theoretical framework that helps to explain the consequences of parental incarceration and then by investigating the effects of parents imprisonment on children and the wider family, mainly drawing on studies carried out in the USA and the UK. There is an important difference in the observed impact between maternal and paternal imprisonment on the family and I will discuss this before finally identifying the limitations of existing research and suggesting how research could inform policies to help prisoners families. There are three main theoretical frameworks that try to explain the devastating consequences of parental imprisonment on their offspring: strain theory; socialisation and control theory and stigmatisation. Strain theory discusses how the deteriorating situation of family left behind by an imprisonment negatively affects a child. According to strain theory, the imprisonment of a parent may lead to difficulties in the familys financial status, whereby the remaining caretaker has less time and money to spend on the child (Hagan and Dinovitzer, 1999). Children are forced to grow up faster as they need to take on new roles of responsibility; this may deter them from education and subsequently increase the influence of delinquent peers on their behaviour (Huebner and Gustafson, 2007). Also, as the burden of supporting the family has fallen into the hands of a single person, the imprisonment can cause an already financially and emotionally strained family to suffer further exertion, making the separation from the parent more traumatising than if the same event had occurred in a stable supportive family environment (Hagan and Dinovitzer, 1999). However, parental incarceration may have a good effect on offspring if the parent was abusive and neglectful (Hagan and Dinovitzer, 1999). Socialisation and control theory focuses not on the remaining support for the growing child but instead looks at the effects of the absence of the imprisoned parent on the development of the child. According to this second perspective, the incarcerated parent cannot contribute to the family life and may threaten the parent-child attachment, depriving the child from social support, a role model and parental supervision (Huebner and Gustafson, 20007). The remaining caretaker has an increased responsibility over the child (Hagan and Dinovitzer, 1999) and reduced parental control over the offspring may increase the influence of delinquent peers and increase the likelihood that the offspring will engage in similar behaviour (Sampson and Laub, 1993). On the other hand, it is uncertain how good of a role model the incarcerated parent was in the first place. Finally, the stigmatisation perspective proposes that criminal behaviour leaves a mark on all family members and that parental incarceration may cause feelings of rejection and shame and could result in the social exclusion of the children (Foster and Hagan, 2007). Stigmatisation may also help understand the intergenerational effects of parental imprisonment: once the family is tainted as criminal the children are more likely to receive a biased treatment from the police and increase the likelihood of getting involved in criminal justice system (Huebner and Gustafson, 2007). The aforementioned theories are not mutually exclusive and it should be noted that there is a significant element of self- selection within these frameworks: families with an incarcerated parent versus those without one differ prior to the imprisonment (Foster and Hagan, 2007). The mechanisms that have been put forward to explain why parental incarceration is so influential for childrens criminality include: men and women with criminal backgrounds tend to marry and have offspring; children may imitate parents behaviour; bias of the police and courts; intergenerational criminality; environmental and genetic risks (Farrington, 2002). Thus, the effects of imprisonment may interact with and be confounded by the pre-existing differences between families (Hagan and Dinovitzer, 1999). Dallaire (2007a) suggests that both contextual and incarceration related factors may affect children whose parent has been imprisoned, making the children whose parents have been imprisoned especially vulnerab le to negative consequences. Contextual influences include poverty and low parental education level, single parenthood, large family size, bad neighbourhood, fragile parental mental health and alcohol and drug abuse (Sameroff et al 1998). Parental incarceration elevates the risk factors related to: the likelihood of the separation of siblings and the placment of children into foster care; the imprisonment of the other parent; as well as the increased likelihood of the involvement of other family members in criminal behaviour (Dallaire, 2007). Contextual risk factors influence childrens educational outcomes and behaviour and when coupled with effects of parental incarceration the previously present problems become amplified, explaining the elevated risks of negative consequences for the children with incarcerated parents (Dallaire, 2007). Although generalisations can be made on how the imprisonment of a parent influences children, the actual consequences vary greatly between individual cases and can broadly be divided into three main categories: direct, mediated and moderating (Murray, 2005). Studies investigating the direct impacts on children emphasise the distress of separation, lack of knowledge about the parent and behavioural problems related to the child identifying with and mimicking the criminal behaviour of the parent (Murray, 2005). Bowlbys attachment theory (1973) explains these outcomes by postulating that parent-child separation negatively affects psychosocial development for children from all age groups, disrupts attachment security and may lead to internalising behaviours like depression and low self-esteem (Emery, 1999). In contrast, Murray and Farrington (2008) argue that it is not separation on its own that causes distress but the nature of separation. Research on children who are separated from a p arent due to illness, death or divorce suggests that while these causes help bring the family together, separation due to incarceration has a different effect because of the humiliation that is associated with it (Fritsch and Burkhead, 1981). Indeed, the longitudinal Cambridge Study of Delinquent Development revealed that young boys who had an incarcerated parent were nearly twice as likely to be incarcerated later in life than boys who were separated from parent for other reasons (Murray and Farrington, 2005). Furthermore, studies focusing on child-parent separation through divorce suggest that childrens problems did not result directly from the separation but rather from aspects related to it, such as conflict between parents, worsened economic situation and tensions in child-parent relationship (Emery, 1999). These could be seen as the mediated effects of parental imprisonment, which although indirectly, strongly affect the level of impact on children. Other indirect influences involve new caretaking arrangements, quality of caretaker-prisoner relationship, changing school and moving to a new home, which all are likely to result in unstable environment for the child (Murray, 2005). Another important aspect is the childrens concerns over the wellbeing of the parent because childrens knowledge about their parent is mediated via the caretaker and many younger children are being lied to or only told half truth about the parents whereabouts, which only adds to their confusion and insecurity ( Poehlmann, 2005). Not all children experience parental separation in the same way and their response to parental imprisonment depends on individual variables and moderating factors. Poehlmanns study (2005) on attachment security in children whose parent had been imprisoned concludes that older children and those who live in an environment with stable caretaking arrangement may be less affected than younger children. Similarly, Hanlon and colleagues (2005) concluded that supportive family environment protects children from destructive outcomes even if their parent was incarcerated substance user. Furthermore, Dallaire (2007b) argues that infants, school-aged children and adolescents face different risks owing to parental imprisonment. She suggests that infants and young children are particularly vulnerable to the direct effects of parental separation due to incarceration, whereas as schoolchildren and adolescents may suffer more from mediating imprisonment effects (Dallaire, 2007b). Moreover, the impac t of parental incarceration depends on the quality of relationship the parent had with the child before the separation. Murray (2005) suggests that the healthier the pre-existing parent-child relationship the harsher the impact of loss on children, whereas the imprisonment of an abusive parent may benefit the child. Factors like intelligence, character, ethnic background and sex may also play a role in how parental imprisonment affects children (Murray, 2005). Thus, individual characteristics and developmental stage of children have a big role in determining the effects of parental incarceration for an individual case. However, perhaps the most important factor could be whether it is the mother or a father who has been imprisoned, which will be explored in the next paragraph. It is difficult to estimate the number of children affected by parental imprisonment with any precision due to a lack of data, however it is natural to assume that a large proportion of the majority male population are fathers. Studies that look at the effects of their incarceration paint quite a pessimistic picture. Findings from a longitudinal study in USA school students reveal that fathers incarceration and poor education level sets in motion accumulation of disadvantages for the offspring, culminating in impoverished educational achievement, reduced political involvement and increased social exclusion (Foster and Hagan, 2007). Additional adversities include socialisation issues owing to fathers absence due to imprisonment and reduced financial support for the child (Foster and Hagan, 2007). Other studies suggest that the absence of biological father, not necessarily due to incarceration, is linked to childrens antisocial behaviour (Pfiffner et al, 2001). Interestingly, the incar ceration of biological fathers is also linked with higher rates of homelessness of daughters, as they may become victims of abuse of the new resident adult male (Foster and Hagan, 2007). Although there are several negative themes, which arise as a result of fathers being imprisoned, the consequences of mothers being incarcerated are far worse and have a greater impact on the lives of their children; there are several reasons for this. First, the increasingly punitive attitude towards crime has increased the length of sentences for women and having dependent children is not considered a special circumstance for a more lenient sentence (Wildeman and Western, 2010). Second, there are fewer prisons for women, which means that they are sent farther away from their family than men, posing further obstacles to children visiting their mother (Hagan and Dinovitzer, 1999). Third, prior to incarceration the majority of women who commit crimes raise their children without a reliable partner, increasing the likelihood of siblings being separated and children being placed under non-parental care, whereas in case of paternal incarceration, children remain under the care of the moth er who helps to alleviate the stress of separation from father (Miller, 2006). Finally, adult children of incarcerated mothers had 2.5 times higher chances of being incarcerated than those of incarcerated fathers (Dallaire, 2007a). Thus, maternal incarceration seems to have a more severe effect on child-parent attachment and on childrens development than paternal incarceration. Although the majority of the prison population is still men, the female proportion of the population is on the rise (Hanlon et al, 2007; HM Prison Service, 2011a) and so the effects of maternal imprisonment are becoming an urgent matter that affects not only individuals but society as whole, raising the issue of whether mothers should have their parental responsibilities taken into account during sentencing and if a greater emphasis should be made to provide more local imprisonment to reduce the inequality experienced by convicted mothers and their families. In contrast to the evidence already put forward, it is important to note that not all children with parents in prison become criminals and many become fully functioning, law abiding members of society, despite the risks associated with parental imprisonment. Nesmith and Ruhland (2008) interviewed 34 children (the majority of whom were African American boys) who had experienced parental incarceration to hear their side of the story. Opposing the widespread opinion that living in a bad neighbourhood and having criminal family members may somewhat normalise unlawful activity for a child and poor academic performance, most of the children in this study had no difficulties at school and were aware of the negative connotations attached to imprisonment and preferred to keep their parents incarceration private. Children who knew others in their situation found it helpful to discuss their parents imprisonment with these peers, yet the majority did not know anyone with an incarcerated parent. Although the sample of this study may not be representative of children from different ethnicities and gender, it does emphasise the importance of looking at the issue of parental incarceration from different angles. A lot of research on the effects of incarceration on families has relied on the reports of inmates. However, as they are separated from their family they may not give the most accurate account of the adversities suffered by their children and partners. Other flaws include small and unrepresentative sample sizes and the small number of longitudinal studies concerned with this phenomenon. Also, some of the older research may be limited in their value today as the prison population may not reflect the general population, whereas nowadays the two have become more alike (Wildeman and Western, 2010). Parental imprisonment poses difficulties not only for children but also for the new caretakers. They become the intermediaries of the communication, visitation and feelings between the child and the incarcerated parent (Nesmith and Ruhland, 2008). If the caretaker and imprisoned parent do not get along then the children are unable to visit their parent, as individuals under the age of 18 must to be accompanied by an adult during the prison visit (HM Prison Service, 2011b). In case of fathers imprisonment the child will stay with the mother, and suffers less disturbance. Arditti (2003) and co-workers interviewed 56 caretakers visiting the prisoner, most of whom were either a female partners or wife to the inmate. The caretakers felt that it was them who were punished via the imprisonment of the father and expressed concern about their emotional and economic condition. Caretakers became single parents and often had to quit their job to take care of the children, making them dependent o f the welfare system (Arditti et al, 2003). This illuminates the fact that incarceration has unwanted consequences not only for the prisoners family but also for society. When the mother is imprisoned then grandparents are the most likely candidates who will resume care of children (Mumola, 2000). Although this arrangement is more desirable than alternatives, the grandparents who become the caretakers do so unofficially, limiting their access to external assistance and may be under extended financial, psychological and physical strain (Hanlon et al, 2007). Grandparents face issues like depression, poor health and general limitations in daily routine caused by health problems (Fuller-Thomson and Minkler, 2000). In addition, the support systems that help caregivers cope with such demanding responsibility are often limited in eligibility and may be inaccessible to grandmothers because of their fragile health (Hanlon et al, 2007). Grandparents do not receive the same financial help and legal rights as foster parents do and they need to pass the CRB check by the social services to become official caretakers of the children (Collett, 2011). The research on parental incarceration has important implications for public policy. Although research has done well to identify the most common problems of parental incarceration we are yet to learn the effects on groups with particular characteristics and finding willing participants may prove challenging (Miller, 2006). As parental incarceration exerts mainly negative outcomes on families and children, regular contact may alleviate the stress of separation and uncertainty about the parent. Unfortunately, prison visits are not always seen as a justifiable right of the family but rather as something that the prisoner must earn with good behaviour (Brooks-Gordon, 2003). A reduced number of visits is often related to longer distances between home and prison, high costs of travelling, unfriendly visitation rules, and costly phone calls (Murray, 2005). In the UK, a prisoners family may apply for Assisted Prison Visits Scheme, which means that low-income families get some of their travel costs refunded (HM Prison Service, 2011b). In addition, there are lot of online resources for families about support groups, prison visits and procedures, yet not all families may have access to the Internet and some older family members may not know how to find these resources. To help families cope with parental incarceration research proposes different support mechanisms like mentoring, church based services (Hanlon et al, 2007), peer-group support and education on prisons to alleviate the stress of uncertainty (Nesmith and Ruhland, 2008). In conclusion, imprisonment has an impact beyond the sentenced individual, causing grief to all family members. The economic and emotional strain on family often takes a toll on the quality of the relationships within the family left behind and between the incarcerated individual and family. Close family-prisoner ties make an immense contribution to the post-release success of the offender (Visher and Travis, 2003) yet imprisonment breaks down a large number of families, decreasing the stability of home environment for children and increasing the likelihood of re-offence (Wildeman and Western, 2010). Incarceration has the strongest effect on children, diminishing their educational achievement, social capital and outlooks for future. Governments should look more into alternatives to incarceration as increased prison population strips the funding from community services and translates into reduced opportunities for children with imprisoned parents and the disadvantages in their lives m ay lead them to become involved with criminal justice system. Thus, it is important to pay attention to the needs of prisoners families because if they are ignored, their problems will be postponed and manifest in intergenerational patterns of prison population in the future.

Argument of Alfarabi’s Book of Religion ::

Argument of Alfarabi’s Book of Religion For this paper I reviewed four works by the philosopher Abu Nasr al-Farabi (864-933d ce). These were the Enumeration of the Sciences, the Book of Religion, Selected Aphorisms, andthe Attainment of Happiness. Three of these were new translations by Ch. E. Butterworth, the fourth Attainment of Happiness: is from the anthology Medieval Political Philosophy edited by Ralph Lerner and Muhsin Mahdi, the latter being the translator of the piece. The assignment calls for an analysis of one of the above works. Some difficulties were encountered associated with returning to this material after a twelve year hiatus and doing so without the benefit (I now recognize) of lectures. I found myself continually backpedaling from the ambitions of my initial outline - which were largely inspired by the introductions which called for careful inspection of the structure of the arguments and attention to the seeming parallels and repetitions both within and between the texts in question. This, it turned out, was somewhat beyond my abilities. Be that as it may I settled on the text the Book of Religion and did what I could. All four of these readings inter-mesh, some explicitly so. The Book of Religion is designed to present an argument answering questions left unanswered by the presentation in The Enumeration of the Sciences, chapter five. My reading of Selected Aphorisms left me thinking that in addition to forming a parallel self supporting piece it was possible to see it as a glossary of supporting arguments and detail covering the exposition in Enumeration of the Sciences. and particularly Book of Religion. The first task I would like to attempt with this paper is to examine Al-farabi’s stated goals for the Book of Religion. I see three statements, two direct and one implicit. There is the opening paragraph in the first section: a definition of Religion, how it exists in a community1, who founds that community and how it is led. What its purpose is. There is the concluding (and penultimate) paragraph: a discussion of order and harmony (and by inference here - prosperity) in the community which flows from a common religion and purpose. And that this is given to a people by God. The first flows gradually and in a crafted naturalness into a discussion of political philosophy and political science. The latter flows out out of it. The implicit argument is in this construction.