Case study biomedical science Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Case study biomedical science - Essay Example He was required to undergo splenectomy and surgical repair to the liver, lungs, and kidneys. A septic shock is defined as a continuum response of human being to infection. It is predominantly caused by gram negative organisms. The most common source of gram negative infection is the genitourinary system, followed by the respiratory system, and lastly, by the biliary system (Schwatz 1994). Plasma sodium concentration is the primary measurement that is available readily to the clinician in evaluating the fluid status of a patient. Under many conditions, it is a reasonable indicator of plasma osmolarity. Although plasma osmolarity is not measured routinely due to sodium and its associated anions that is mainly chloride, it accounts for more than 90% of the solute of extracellular fluid. Hypernatremia is a condition when the plasma sodium concentration is above normal. On the other hand, hyponatremia occurs when the plasma sodium concentration falls below normal level (Guyton and Hall 1996:308). This patient has hyponatremia (plasma sodium concentration of 132mmol/L) that is caused primarily by trauma and volume depletion. In addition, the high amount of potassium in the blood of the patient (6.8mmol/L) is linked significantly with renal dysfunction and haemolytic anaemia. The renal dysfunction could be from severe dehydration and electrolyte imbalance secondary to septic shock. Blood urea is an indicator of renal function. Increased urea concentration exhibited by the patient (10mmol/L) is due to enhanced protein metabolism, a normal reaction of trauma injury, stress, haemorrhage in the gastrointestinal tract, and sepsis (RNCeus 2006). Creatinine clearance is a test that gives an estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR), and is a good indicator of renal function. Increased blood urea nitrogen and creatinine levels support the diagnosis of septic shock (Health Diseases 2008). Plasma bilirubin measures

A building that inspires me Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

A building that inspires me - Essay Example Earlier this year, I was asked to help in the restoration works of this building by a colleague. There are several reasons why this building has inspired me. Despite being built in 1690, Buckie House is still standing today. When Buckie House was built, most buildings in Europe were built with stone and clay mortar - materials which can easily cave in to neglect and climate changes over time. A lot of tourists visit Anstruther and as these pass by Buckie House cracks on the wall and damage to the shells have been the result of 80-90 years of heavy road traffic. Aside from these â€Å"wear-and-tear† consequences, Buckie House has also survived changes brought about by modernization. Some buildings in the Anstruther area have been demolished, abandoned or used for purposes other than the initial reasons for putting them up. For example, according to an appraisal report by Arc-Architects, â€Å"a magnificent medieval church in Anstruther Western was reduced in the 19th century, changed into a church hall in 1963 and is now marked for foreclosure.† Through the years, the city council has made decisions regarding infrastructure in this part of Scotland to satisfy the need for more efficient land & property allocation. Another battle Buckie House has won is aesthetic in nature. The house features various styles. Some shells are formalised in a pattern to mimic ashlar (large rectangular stones) whilst other areas have completely artistic patterns and form abstract designs, even a huge butterfly. Although it had been the trend in the 1900’s to decorate one’s house with shells, there is only a small handful remaining today. Changing fashion has seen the shells removed from many similar houses. For Buckie House, there has been much effort to maintain it and keep it as a landmark for this city in Scotland. Previous restoration works had been done on the house prior to the job I was asked to help out with. The public has been

United States-Russian relations in the post Cold War era Essay Example for Free

United States-Russian relations in the post Cold War era Essay The global affairs after the Second World War were dominated by two superpowers with totally different political and socioeconomic models. The central drama within the global system was characterized by conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union expressed in the form of capitalism and communism. These two superpowers had at their disposal the greatest armies and artilleries that no any other country could match during this period of time (Donnelly, 1965). The internal organization of these two superpowers was radically different with the United States having a democratic polity and a market economy while the Soviet Union having a totalitarian political system and a command economy. Each of these nations believed in the superiority of their system and thus attempted to actively promote the replication of these systems in other countries while at the same time hindering the expansion of the others system. The competition between the United States and Russia was thus driven by this ideological divide. Put simply, the United States and the Soviet Union were not only rivals because of their greatness in the international system but also because they were two powers with irreconcilable visions concerning how the political, social and economic life should be organized. During the initial stages of the final decade of the twentieth century, one side in this bipolar ideologically divided system collapsed and for the first time in the history of the modern world, there occurred a shift the international balance of power without a major conflict leading to war. For the political leaders in Russia and the United States, these were hard times and talks were initiated concerning the new task of transforming Russia into a democratic polity, market economy and a new associate with the West, instantly erasing the cold war. However, as the century concluded, the attitude in the United States-Russian relations was becoming more inclined towards the cold war era than with the more optimistic periods of the early nineteen nineties. The policies that the Clinton administration had pursued toward Russia were derided by members of the Congress, academics, journalists and the emerging campaign by George W. Bush for the presidency. The question that they most often asked was whoever â€Å"lost Russia†. In particular, the Clinton administration was charged with failing in virtually every issue. It was accused of delving too much into Russian internal affairs, ignoring or even supporting corruption among leading Russian officials, over personalizing their relationship with Yeltsin, being blind to the evils of Russia towards the breakaway Republic of Chechnya and failure to stop Russia from assisting Iran with its nuclear weapons program. Listening to the experts and the Republicans led to the conclusion that every conceivable thing that would have gone wrong concerning the United States-Russian relations did go wrong (Masci, 1998: 232-3). The major question that one is bound to ask is whatever happened between the years that the Soviet Union collapsed and the witch hunt for the lost Russia less than a decade later. Various argument have been put forward with some holding that it was largely the fault of the first Bush administration for failing to offer enough assistance to the fledgling regime of Yeltsin in 1992 (Goldgeier McFaul, 2003). Others still argue that all the wrong kinds of assistance was provided by the Clinton administration after 1993 or that it had pursued â€Å"anti-Russian† policies which maximized Russian resentment for the West (Beschloss Talbott, 1993: 9). The relations between Russia and the United States seemed to have taken a decisive turn in the aftermath of the 9/11 attack in 2001, hardly a year after George Bush became the president. Russian president showed a good gesture by moving quickly to show his sympathy for the United States and pledging his support for collective responsibility against global terrorism. There was much optimism that Russia was being inclined to the West. The relationship between the United States and Russia seemed better until the period of the American-led war with Iraq. In looking at the relationship between the United states and Russia, I am primarily interested in the perception of the United States policy makers concerning what they intended to accomplish and their understanding of the events. For instance, did they understand that there was a transition going on in the Soviet Union in 1991 and what was their belief concerning what they could do? Did the United States believe that the enemy was gone once the Soviet Union disintegrated? The most transformative events in the affairs of the world since the period that immediately followed World War II was marked by the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Before this period, the United States foreign policy was focused of containing the threat posed by the Soviet Union. The Americans, prior to 19090s, saw every issue in the world in the perspective of the cold war struggle with the Soviet Union-whether it was peace in the middle East, defense of Europe, African civil war or even the development of resources on the floor of the ocean. Thus, the collapse of the Soviet Union dealt a blow for United States foreign policymakers. Considering that the main American enemy was defeated, there was need for the vacuum to be filled posing an intellectual and organizational challenge of refocusing and reorienting foreign policy away from the period of cold war and toward a new relationship with Russia. With the end of the Cold War, an opportunity for creating a basically new and cooperative relationship between Russia and the United States was established. The establishment of a positive United States-Russian partnership was seen to offer benefits not only for the two nations but also in confronting the challenges that the human race is faced with during this period of time. A necessary climate for beefing up United States-Russian relations was created by the changes that were introduced in the foreign policy of the Soviet Union during Gorbachevs tenure. The new way of thinking introduced by Gorbachev held that the preservation of peace must be the fundamental objective of all nations. The Marxist thought of class struggle was abandoned as the central guiding principle in foreign policy. Instead, the global human values were to go beyond the narrow class interests in guiding the conduct and behavior of nations. This New Thinking was not the same as the principle adopted by Khrushchev. In his principle of peaceful coexistence, Khrushchev advocated for the evasion of all out war between communist and capitalist system even though he did not indicate that the struggle between capitalism and communism should be concluded. He continued to maintain that one of the systems will emerge to be the victor. Gorbachev and his associates saw the world as an interrelated totality where every nation must cooperate for in the interest of the survival of entire human race. The basic argument was that nations of communist and capitalist orientation should not exist in a state of perpetual struggle. It was held that every nation should make concerted effort to ensure that the world is a safe place. Gorbachevs New Thinking was not simply a rhetoric or propaganda but was supported by dramatic changes in the international behavior of Russia. Gorbachev saw the collapse of the Berlin Wall and signed important agreement with the United States. Russia also sought for integration in the world economy besides seeking for a more positive relation with democracies of Western Europe. The United States and Russia also participated jointly in dialogs aimed at resolving regional conflicts in places like Africa. The Soviet troops were also removed from Afghanistan and Africa by the soviet government. There was also cooperation between the two nations in their response to the Kuwait invasion by Iraq. With this regard, the relation between the United States and Russia improved so much during the tenure of Gorbachev. It was during this period that the thinking and preferences of Russians with regard to foreign policy underwent massive transformation. Russia discarded their confrontational approach of depending on their military force in favor of diplomatic cooperation as the preferred method of building and managing positive relationships with other nations. The Soviet principle of New Thinking stressed on the holistic nature of the world community, offering a significant and appropriate set of concepts for guiding the behavior of nations in the global environment. Ronald Reagan who had described the Soviet Union as an evil empire changed his view considering the dramatic changes that the Soviet Union underwent. When he was asked if he still considered the Soviet Union as an evil state, he responded that his initial remarks were meant for a different time and era. With the end of the Cold War, the animosity between the two nations also concluded. This spirit that was started by Soviet leaders was adopted by other succeeding leaders. After taking office, Yeltsin stated their aim to become involved with other countries in the world in the process of â€Å"asserting the ideals of humanism, freedom and democracy in the community of mankind†. He also stated Russias intention to pursue â€Å"an honest, open and moral policy which is not subordinated to ideological dictate†. This statement shows that Russia was slowly being integrated into the global system by changing from a military to civilian based economy. As much as his foreign policies appeared to be a continuation of the non-confrontational approach, the strategies that he adopted encompassed basic domestic changes that had implications for the United States foreign policy (Cross Oborotova, 1994). The attempt by Gorbachev to carry out reforms within the context of the existing socialist system had led to some ambiguity and suspicion in the United States concerning the intention of Soviet leadership. It also restricted the degree to which shared values existed between the former Soviet Union and the United States. Yeltsin on the other hand openly rooted for capitalism, abandoning the socialist model, thereby eliminating ideological ambiguity and extending the foundation for common United States-Russian values and objectives. He reiterated his commitment to nurturing democratization of Russia and embracing a free market economy which are the sacred values of American tradition. Although the Yeltsin era is a representation of the continuation of the peaceful policies that had been placed during the time of Gorbachev, it is during his tenure that one can actually begin talking about a new chapter in the relations between the United States and Russia. As much as the United States was cautious in their response to these dramatic changes in the former Soviet Union particularly during the tenure of Gorbachev, its administration welcomed such changes and were willing to exploit the new opportunities to improve bilateral relations. James Barker, once the United States Secretary of State, classified the progress of United States policy towards the former Soviet Union and Russia from the period of Gorbachev to the period of Yeltsin and moving â€Å"further than detente and even diplomatic cooperation† to â€Å"broad international partnership†. The leadership of Yeltsin changed the conception that the United States of the Western powers were potential enemies of the Russian Federation (Allin, 1995). Clinton recognized the heavy task faced by the new Russian Federation reformers, appealing to the United States to support the Russians. According to him, the Russians were attempting to carry out three fundamental changes at once. These fundamental changes were; the shift to market economy from communism, a shift to democracy from tyrannical dictatorship and a shift to an independent state from a great empire-an endeavor that the United States ought to support (Cohen, 1993). Clinton emphasized the importance of Russia at the 1993 Russo-American summit in Vancouver, reaffirming the United States economic and security interest in establishing a favorable United States-Russian relationship. He pointed out that the progress of Russia and the new independent states of the former Soviet Union toward democracy and free market was held with much importance by the United States as it represents a great security challenge and provides great economic opportunities (Weber, 1993: 253). After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the United States president George Bush and the Russian president Yeltsin signed the Camp David Declaration which defined the relations between the two countries as founded on â€Å"friendship and partnership†. Andrey Kozyrev, Russian Foreign Minister, stated that the goal of Russia vis-a-vis the United States is the stable establishment of relations with an inclination toward strategic partnership and alliance founded on common values (Friedman, 2000). Conclusion Russia and the United States would do much injustice to each other if they choose to pursue isolationist course. However, there has been an increase in public support for withdrawal from the foreign scene in both countries. In the last American presidential elections was dominated by domestic issues. This trend was also seen almost two decades ago in 1992 when the presidential election was also characterized by domestic issue. After the Second World War, the Americans saw that their freedom and security were threatened by communism and thus were ready to support presidential appeals to counter the expansion of Soviet around the world. However, the post-Cold War era lacks Soviet as the enemy and thus the American public increasingly became uninterested in foreign affairs. Many Americans fail to strike the link between domestic and foreign issues as they are basically concerned with the rising unemployment, sagging economy, health care and a variety of domestic problems and hence lack the sympathy to invest their energies in dealing with the problem of other countries. Consequently, in Russia, policymakers, academics and the general public have circulated arguments that the country should concern itself with internal problems and that shifting from international realm would be integral for resources to be freed for domestic purposes. One variation of this trend seem to have gained prominence among politicians and scholars. The position holds that the Russian foreign policy should be continentalist as opposed to globalist. This position posits that the domestic problems in Russia hinders its possibilities for pursuing an active and multifaceted foreign policy (Cross Oborotova, 1994). As such, there is a general feeling among the proponents of this position that Russia should focus its energies on seeking relationships with the neighboring countries in Europe and Asia. Within the increasingly interdependent world community, isolationism is not a realistic option. Limiting the relation between United States and Russia would not serve the interest of either nation. As much as the United States is the major remaining power and the undisputed leader of the Western world, it would be wrong to think that it can maintain peace in the world alone. It lacks the resources to carry out this role and must therefore cooperate with other major global powers so as to effectively counter the challenges existing in the post-cold War arena. Russia is still a strong nation and a nuclear superpower and hence the cooperation between these two countries is very important. As much as Russia is a Eurasian nation, it cannot ignore the role of the United States or become absorbed with its own domestic problems. There have been concerns with regard to Russia becoming an adversarial competitor of the United States if it decides to support her. The basic argument is that Russia has always been an aggressive and hostile nation besides being an expansionist power. However, this question cannot be answered at the moment. Nevertheless, there may be disastrous consequences for United States interests if it ignores of fail to focus its attention and resources in furthering a favorable U. S. -Russian partnership. The Russians have thus exhibited remarkable patience in the transition period. Most Russians have shown their commitment to move ahead despite the economic difficulties, recognizing that they have endured many hardships in the past and that they cannot go back to the repressive and inefficient system that characterized their past. In order for the United States and Russia to achieve an enduring and full scale partnership, there are many obstacles that still need to be overcome despite the favorable developments in their relations that have been witnesses in the past decade. Russia does not possess much experience with market economy neither does it comprehend fully democratic principles. Its political traditions are founded on the autocratic czarist rule. Its aspirations for reforms demand a deep cultural and psychological transition coupled with the establishment of a concrete and enduring democratic representative institutions. This shift to democracy is not a linear process and thus, Russia may experience some setbacks and even some reversals. Again, the interests of the United States and Russia may not correspond owing to the multitude of cultural, historical, geopolitical and economic reasons. Work cited Allin, D. (1995). Cold War Illusions: America, Europe, and Soviet Power, 1969-1989, NY Beschloss, M. Talbott, S. (1993). At the Highest Levels: The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, Cohen, W. (1993). America in the Age of Soviet Power, 1945-1991, NY Cross, S. Oborotova, A. (1994). The New chapter in United States-Russian relations: opportunities and challenges. Greenwood Publishing Group Donnelly, D. (1965). Struggle for the World: The Cold War, 1917-1965, NY Friedman, N. (2000). The Fifty-Year War: Conflict and Strategy in the Cold War, Annapolis, Garthoff, R. (1994). The Great Transition: American-Soviet Relations and the End of the Cold War. Brookings Institution Press Goldgeier, J. McFaul, M. (2003). Power and purpose: U. S. policy toward Russia after the Cold War. Brookings Institution Press Masci, D. (1998). U. S. -Russian Relations: Is the Post-Cold War Friendship in Trouble? CQ Press Weber, M. (1993). The Emergence of the Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation. Communist and Post Communist Studies, vol. 26, no. 3

Aetiology and Psychology of Terrorism

Aetiology and Psychology of Terrorism The purpose here is to examineanalyze scrutinize, evaluate and present synthesize what has been stated in the scientific and professional literature about the etiology of terrorism. This discourse is not intended to propose suggest that the scientific discipline of psychology and psychiatry provides the only, or necessarily the best, logical framework for understanding terrorism. Like all the approaches to understanding or explaining human behaviorbehaviour, these approaches have advantages and limitations. Even though the fundamental problem of defining terrorism has been difficult, but for the purpose of research one should specifically look at the acts of violence, rather than to the threats or intimidation, which are deliberately carried out on civilian non- combatants, with the objective of promoting some ideological political or religious point of view. A primary Our focus on psychological dimensionsdimensions, will, de-emphasizes analysis of of significant sociologically based explanations, or the so-called root causes or macro-level economic and political theories of terrorism.. In the global war on terrorism, it is pertinent to query what is meant by terrorism. The common definition of terrorism is to some extent the use or threat of violence, by small groups against non-combatants of large groups, for avowed political goals.1 (McCauley, 2007). Terrorism is the warfare of the feeble, and it is the option for those who are desperate for a cause that cannot be won by fair and square means. It is interesting to note that state terrorism against its own citizens like the one carried out by Mao, Hitler and Stalin, far exceeds the number compared to the anti-state terrorism, where the number of people killed is comparatively insignificant. The concepts of terrorism have changed over the yearstime and so have the terrorists, their motives, and the causes of terrorism. Hence in approaching this task,task, it is vital to to give a an astute overview of all the relevant literature on the subject one is wary of Walter Laqueurs incisive conclusion based on more than a quarter century of personal research on the topic is valuable to mention. Laqueur, one of the leading experts on terrorism and international strategic affairs, recounting the history of terrorism and, more importantly, examining the future of terrorist activity worldwide, gives a list of alarming feasible options for terrorists. Chemical and biological weapons are cheap and relatively easy to make or buy. Even nuclear devices are increasingly possible choices . Laqueur traces the chilling trends developing in terrorism perpetrated by groups of oppressed nationalists and radicals seeking political change to small clusters of fanatics bent on vengeance and simple destruction. Coinciding with this trend is the alarming availability of weapons of mass destruction.2 (Laqueur, 2003). As psychiatrist, Jerrold Post,a psychiatrist, emphasizesmakes that caution even more directly applicable to an exploration of the psychological dimension of terrorism. He warns that: There is a broad spectrum of terrorist groups and organizations, each of which has a different psychology, motivation and decision-making structure. Indeed, one should not speak of terrorist psychology in the singular, but rather of terrorist psychologies. 3 (Post, 2001). The available literature on etiology of terrorism is mostly biased, lopsided and outlandish. For instance, the literature, on psychodynamics of so-called Muslim Terrorism is bizarre and far-fetched. To explain the etiology of terrorism the authors used the garb of (Laqueur, 2003)4 existential and Freudian dynamic concepts. The simple facts are convoluted and magnified disproportionately to blame Islam as a religion and responsible globally for terrorism. Changes in the Concept of Terrorism in the last Quarter Century There have been significant changes in the concept of terrorism over the last quarter century. Most of the terrorist activities were designed to achieve specific identifiable and mostly achievable political objectives. The transformation has occurred partly because of the changes in the larger international political circumstances. For example, some of the old methods of terrorism were designed more for objectives that could be considered national liberation or self-determination; the kind of situations that have been involved in most of the Palestinian terrorism as well as terrorism in, for instance, Northern Irish groups. While most of those objectives having already been achieved, but not in the case of Palestine. This was also relevant in the case of various former African colonies which after their independence declared their freedom fighters (the so-called terrorist) as heroes. The decolonization of these countries has made it all irrelevant. A facilitating society is one that sees them as heroes and provides refuge to them. Their belief or ideology is that they are doing the right thing or Gods will. In fact, they cannot succeed without this key ingredient. At present, clearly the actions for which Nelson Mandela was convicted in 1964 did not constitute terrorism. Thus the confusion between the ends and means has given an adage, that one mans freedom fighter is other mans terrorist such a long life. Whether they are struggling for freedom, to enforce repressive theocracy to suggest freedom fighter, is an alternative to terrorist is to confuse ends and means.'[1] The Evolution of Terrorism Terrorism is continually persistently changing. While onat the surface it remains the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat to inculcate fear it is rapidly becoming incresingly the predominant strategic tool of opponents. The twenty-first century has seen the new adaptations in the terrorists tactics and strategies according to the developing global socio-political environment. Some of these changes facilitate the abilities of terrorists to operate, procure funding, and develop new capabilities. These global changes are leading to an altered relationship with the world at present . Other changes are gradually moving terrorism into a different relationship with the world at large. Historically, it is essential to remember that society and governments have changed over the years. As there were no central form of governance, or a single leading political power it was not possible to use terrorism to bring about change. Modern forms of governance and states came into being after 1648 (Treaty of Westphalia). Thus terrorism is a relatively recent phenomena used by anti-state elements to bring about change. Thus the game of warefare became open and availabl to many more more players ,,due to the absence of a governing central authority . Also, the absence of central authority meant that the game of warfare was open to many more players. Instead of national armies, a variety of non-sovereign landed gentry nobility, armed forces, religious group leaders, or commercial companies participated in warfare. Their involvement in warfare was considered to be perfectlyabsolutely legitimate. This distinguishes the modern period, where nations go to the war, but private involvement is actually against the law. Psychological approaches to understand violence in the context of terrorism As psychology is regarded as the science of human behaviorbehaviour, hence it is a reasonable, and potentially productiveuseful line of inquiry. Before investigating the exploring psychological approaches to the specific particular problem of terrorist violence, at this stage it would be pertinent,it may be helpful first to examine the explainations given bywhether and how psychology and other behaviorbehavioural sciences have resorted to explain violent and agressive behaviorbehaviours in more generallly. An act that deliberately hurts physically or harms another being will fit in the definition of violence. Violence is generally defined as how harm is caused to others, but it also takes in the form of violence to self by means of suicide and self-mutilation. However, several social scientists might not agree and find these parameters to be constricted and limiting to provide any meaningful description of violence. They might argue that threats as well as overt acts be included, tha t psychological or emotional harm is as relevant as physical harm, and that injury is merely an outcome and not a descriptor of the act. On the other hand, some would contend that intentional harm is too restrictive because it would include legitimate behaviorbehaviour in some contact sports or consensual infliction of pain. Available evidences and observations support that violence is caused by multiple factors, many of which are strongly related to, and even affect each other. These factors are a a complex interaction of biological, social, contextual, cognitive, and emotional in nature that occur over a period of time. Some of these causes will be more prominent than others for certain individuals and for certain types of violence and aggression.5 (Borum et al, 2004). A second general observation is that most violence can be usefully viewed as intentional. It is goal-directed and intended to achieve some valued outcome. It is not the product of innate, instinctual drives, nor is it the inevitable consequence of predetermining psychological and social forces. Obviously, many factors influence that decision and the competing options are available, but humans typically are not passive receptacle for involuntary displays of behaviorbehaviour. Indeed there are exceptions. For instance an individual could become aggressive or violent, if there is some emotional disturbance or cerebral dysfunction, as these conditions can generally lead to lack of self- control or dis-inhibition. However this behaviorbehaviour would be inconsistent with the kind of organization and planning necessary to carry out a terrorist attack. Thus a terrorist action simply, is a calculated well-planned violent act against civilians and military personnel in times of peace, carried out by a group of people who use terrorism to publicize their cause which could be religious or political. ThusAnd/or threatening or pressurizing a government(s) or civilian population into accepting demands on behalf of the cause. To identify the relevant social science literature the focus will be on locating professional literature published in major books or in peer-reviewed journals. A comprehensive review of scientific and professional literature is fundamental to the holistic approach in order to succinctly to comprehend the underlying understand the causes, motivations and determinants of terrorist behaviorbehaviour. Earlier literaturey writings on the psychology of terrorism were based mostly on psychoanalytic theories (e.g., narcissism, hostility toward parents), but now, the new research data has provided most researchers have since moved on to other explanations,in this context.6 (Borum et al., 2004). Psychologists have introduced the term psychology of terrorism to answer questions like, how and why people become terrorists, and are there any personality traits typical for terrorism. Psychological theories relating to terrorism: Frustrating Psycho-social Environment: Frustration due to poverty, marginalization, and unemployment is one of the oldest theories which are the earliest identified is factors significant in sociology related to terrorism. Terrorists usually belong to the above-mentioned categories. They suffer from social alienation and it is these socially disadvantaged people who are reported to be more at risk for getting involved in acts of violence. Psychopathology and severe mental disorders: The persons who commit acts of extreme violence and destruction, killings and carnage have been regarded as inhuman, fanatical and abnormal. Terrorist organizations are now known to be well-organized and disciplined. It is unlikely that they would induct mentally ill people in the organizations. Possibly there is some casual screening, for serious psychopathology prior to induction in a group for organized terrorism. Personality disorder: People resorting to terrorism, may have some form of psychopathology such as personality disorders.But The problem is that they are frequentlygenerally recognized as terrorists after a long period of association to a group The so-called narcissistic traits, for example extreme sensitivity to criticism, extreme fluctuations of mood, tendency to divide the world into extreme black and white, rather than understanding that there is a large grey area in life ,which must be comprehended in order to get adjusted to the world., which one needs to get adjusted to. Besides, characteristics like inability to form intimate bonds, insensitivity to others needs and feelings could also be the causes which may result in people to join fundamentalist, fanatical or otherwise terrorist organizations. Fanaticism: A fanatic is described as a person who is passionately engaged in a religious cause. For a fanatic the world is divided in two categories: one is of those who are keenly involved in a religious cause; and the other who are not keenly involved in a religious cause. The concept of fanaticism has somecarries some implications of mental illness. The terrorist is branded as fanatic, mainly due to the actions which lead to self-harm in psychological terms., However, Taylor (1988)7 does not categorize fanaticism as a diagnostic entity in mental illness. He believes that the common assumptions about the relationship between fanaticism and mental illness are inappropriate. The fanatic often has fastidious perspective to the world view, which is at the extreme end of a continuum. Terrorist Strategy According to Alexanader and Klien (2006)8 the objectives of terrorists vary leading to the following reactions: cCreates mass anxiety, fear, and panic, fostering a sense of helplessness and hopelessness; demonstrating the incompetence of the authorities; destroying a sense of security and safety provoking inappropriate reactions from individuals or the authorities (e.g. repressive and/or incompetent legislation or the excessive use of violence against suspect individuals and organizations). In addition, large-scale terrorist incidents can have adverse effects on world financial markets, travel and tourism, and may trigger xenophobic counter reactions. Modern terror organizations devote a lot of time and effort, as well as extensive resources into techniquesmethods of psychological warfare. They meticulously studycarefully observe their target- population which can be exploited. Research studies in terrorism indicate that they target countrys media in order to get their threats across and the media gets into their trap by magnifying the fears of the population and leads them to intensely condemn amplify criticism of the government and its policies. Radical viewsebellious views in the society are skilfully exploited carefully collected and used to create doubts inhallenge the populations beliefs in the rightness of its own ways. The terror organizations from the outset, plan that that they will not necessarily achieve their goals purely by means of terror attacks. They recruit the help of its victims themselves in gaining its objectives by inculcating fear. A conquest that would be impossible by military means is thus subtly achieve d through a prolonged campaign of psychological warfare that steadily wears down the target-populations will to fight. Hoffman, 1998).9 An important understanding is that becoming caught up in terrorism is a process. No one is born a terrorist. It is neither the question of bad genes, nor does a person suddenly wakes up one morning and makes a decision that he would start planting bombs in public streets. In the first instance, becoming a terrorist is an matter of socialization. Most of the societies possess some minorities or dissatisfied groups who rightly or wrongly perceive that the world is treating them cruelly. In other cases there could be a genuine and very significant cause for grievance. Individuals who belong to or identify with such disenchanted groups share a sense of injustice and discrimination. It is from such groups of people that individual terrorists emerge. The transition from a disaffected individual to the violent extremist is usually facilitated by a catalyst event. Usually the instigating event is police or security forces brutality; or a rival group against the individual, family, or friends; or just anyone they can identify with. The combination of sense of belonging to an under-pressure group combined with the experience of extreme violence against, either oneself or significant number of others, is the impetus for some to engage in terrorism. (Silke, 2003; 11 Shamim, 2009).10 According to McCauley: A terrorist group is the apex of a pyramid of supporters and sympathizers. The base of the pyramid is composed primarily those who sympathize with the terrorist cause even though they may disagree with the violent means that the terrorist use. In the present time the instance of Northern Ireland, the base of the pyramid constitutes who agree with Brits Out. In the Islamic world, the base of the pyramid is all those who agree that the US has been hurting and humiliating Muslims for decades. The pyramid is essential to the terrorists for cover and for recruits. The terrorists hope that a clumsy and over-generalized strike against them will hit some of their own side who are not yet radicalized and mobilized, will enlarge their base of sympathy, will turn the sympathetic but immobilized to action and sacrifice, and will strengthen their own status at the apex of this pyramid. (McCauley, 2007).12 In 1986, the US attempted to retort to Libyan-supported terrorism by bombing Libyas leader, Muammar Khaddafi. The bombs missed Khaddafis residence but a nearby apartment building was badly damaged, killing several women and children. This blunder was downplayed in the US but it became a public relations success for anti-US groups across North Africa. Interestingly, in 1998, a similar act was committed by the US when it sent cruise missiles against terrorist camps in Afghanistan and against a supposed bomb factory in Khartoum as retaliation to a terrorist attack on US embassy. (It appears now that the bomb factory was in fact producing only medical supplies). Usually a terrorist does not aim for a violent response that is not well aimed . Terrorists hope for a reaction of stereotyping and prejudice in which the y are seen as typical members of the cause they sa y they are fighting for. Often the terrorists are only a tiny splinter of the group they aim to lead. Their mo st dangerous opposition is mostly from their own side, from moderates who see alternatives other than violence. If the reaction to terrorist attack is to put together all those who sympathize with the cause the terrorists claim to serve, to see a whole ethnic or religious group as dangerous and violent, then the moderates are undermined and the terrorists win. The hardcore terrorists are usually a tiny splinter of the group. They aim to lead and expect a reaction of stereotyping and prejudice; which enhances their image. Their most dangerous opposition is often from their own side, from the moderates who see alternatives other than violence. If the response to terrorist attack is to lump together all who sympathize with the cause the terrorists claim to serve, to see a whole ethnic or religious group as dangerous and violent, then the moderates are undermined and the terrorists win. Discrimination in the form of hostility and offensive behavior Rudeness, suspicion and hostility directed toward Arabs and other Muslims in the US and Europe will possibly lead to empathy with the terrorists. The reactions of stereotyping and prejudice observed against them is more likely to become a source of help to the terrorist instead of being a positive force against terrorism. Profiling or other infringement of civil rights of Arabs and Muslims by US agencies of state security would help encourage a sense of victimization. Several thousands of Arabs and Muslims who were jailed since 9/11 on suspicion of terrorist activities will be obviously antagonized, leading them to feel aggrieved and violated by the infringement of their rights, when they are finally released. The US stance of threat and hostility towards Arabs and Muslims, following 9/11 has proven dangerous. Join our war against terrorism or else has clearly, now risked and undermined the Western leaning governments andof states, where fundamental Muslim forces are contesting government cooperation with the West. If the reaction to terrorism is seen as a crusade against the Muslims, the terrorists will be in a position to lead a jihad in their countries. Anti-terrorist activities in Afghanistan and invasion of Iraq are again seen as pursuance of the same policy. Pakistan at present is bearing the fall-out of this policy and suffering the brunt of the war on terror as the frontline state for terrorist activities. (Ereira Wallace, 1995).13 Alexander and Klien (2005)14 provided a critical analysis of the western perspective of psychological aspects of terrorism at The Royal Society of Medicine Conference in April 2005. We need to view this phenomenon not through a moral prism but through a psychosocial one. This not an easy challenge and mental health specialists are more comfortable dealing with the impact of terrorist activity than with the motives and the psychological makeup of those who perpetrate such incidents. This is indeed one of the rare positive points of view of a leading expert in psycho-trauma from the Western World. The biased use of the term terrorist is often useda convenient one to stigmatize the adversaries. It is also understandable why such events, like the destruction of the World Trade Center; the car and suicide bombings in Iraq; the Bali nightclub bombing; and the London suicide bombing of July 2005, provoke public anger and egg on politicians and other prominent figures in civil society to compete with rival each other in their expressions of condemnation denunciation. Howeverr, emotional catharsis of this kind does not add to the efforts to deal with terrorism. (Gunaratnam et al. 2003).15 There are several misconceptionsyths about terrorists and suicide bombers in particular. The term suicide bomber is clearly a misleading misnomer, propergatederpetuated particularlymainly by the media. (Salib, 2003).16 It is not suicide; it is an act of faith and martyrdom inbued and permeatedsuffused with religious and/or political motives. According to Pape (2005)17 over 95 per cent of suicide terrorist attacks have resulted as a part of a strategic campaign to compel the withdrawal of foreign military forces from an occupied territory where religious differences exist between the occupier and the occupiedd. Alexander and Klien identified some of the common realities about the terrorist: Most terrorists are not mentally ill, and most do not have violent or psychopathic personalities (such individuals would find it very difficult to remain covert as part of a sleeping cell) Not all terrorists come from impoverished or disadvantaged backgrounds (e.g. Osama bin Laden and the Badder-Meinhof group). Disadvantaged environments are more likely to produce sympathisers than terrorists Not all terrorists are religious fanatics, and many belong to secular groups (those who do belong to ex tremist religious groups may be motivated by the prospects of immortality and the rich rewards following their ascendancy) Terrorists are not typically brain-washed or coerced into terrorist activity, although there is often a charismatic and inspira tional leader There is now a move to involve females. Also, children as young as 12 years have been recruited by the Tamil Tigers of northern Sri Lanka . (A recent survey31 alarmingly confirmed, from a survey of school children in Gaza, that 70% wished to become a shahid in a self sacrificing act of martyrdom) Regularly found among terrorists are: poor self esteem, a sense of hopelessness, shame, a need for revenge, and a sense of vulnerability . Most of the research data does no t support the concept that suicide bombing is primarily a result of T hus, the idea that the cause of suicide bombing is religious fanaticism.There is ample authentic research evidence that suicide bombing ,is also used as a tactic by several secular groups. does not stack up with the data; many groups adopting suicide-bombing tactics, including those in the Middle East, are entirely secular. Specifically, the idea that Islamist belief is the root- cause of suicide bombing is false and misleading; the majority of suicide bombings in the last two decades of the 20th century were conducted by the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, from a predominantly Hindu culture (Pape, 2003).17 Equally disingenuous is the portrayal of suicide bombers as typically young single men, disenfranchised, unemployed and uneducated. Suicide bombers can be men or women aged anywhere between early teens to late-forties, religious or secular, unemployed or employed, destitute or privileged, educated or uneducated, married or single, socially isolated or socially integrated (Pape, 2003).17 The other common media explanation is that suicide bombers, particularly the young, are somehow brainwashed or coerced into such attacks. However, virtually all would-be suicide bombers are volunteers. The problem today for groups employing suicide attacks is not recruitment; it is managing the over-supply of volunteers. (Hassan, 2001).18 A recent survey of schoolchildren in Gaza found that 70 per cent wished to become a shaheed in a martyr operation. Eyad Sarraj, psychiatrist and director of the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme, concludes: If you ask a little child in Gaza today what he wants to be, he doesnt say doctor or engineer, or businessman. He says he wants to be a martyr. (Hawley, 2002;19 Marsden Attia, 2005).20 Theoretical Models Following are the main psychological theories that have been applied to understanding violence: Instinct Theory Psychoanalytic Model: The most widely recognized theory that addresses the roots of all forms of violence is the psychoanalytic model. Despite its influence on writers in the political science, sociology, history, and criminology literature, this model has weak logical, theoretical, and empirical foundations (Beck, 2002).21 Freud considered aggression generally as an innate and instinctual human trait, which is generally cultivated in the normal course of human development. A later development in Freuds theory was that humans had the energy of life force (eros) and death force (thanatos) that required internal balance. Violence was seen as the displacement of thanatos from self and onto others. (Corrado, 1981).22 Freud wrote: One has, I think, to reckon with the fact that there are present in all men destructive, and therefore anti-social and anti-cultural, trends and that in a great number of people these are strong enough to determine their behaviorbehaviour in human society. (Freud, 1927, p. 7). Early writings on psychological dimensions of terrorist behaviorbehaviour were dominated by psychoanalytic formulations, reflecting, in part, the prevailing theoretical orientation in clinical practice at the time. The two themes consistently at the center of these formulations were: (1) that motives for terrorism are largely unconscious and arise from hostility toward ones parents: and (2) that terrorism is the product of early abuse and maltreatment. One of the earliest examples of the former was Feuers (1969)23 conflict of generations theory, which is based on a Freudian interpretation of terrorism as a psychological reaction of sons against fathers, a generational phenomenon rooted in the Oedipus complex and, thus, in maleness (Crenshaw, 1986).24 The idea that terrorism is rooted in childhood abuse (often unconscious squealae) is a relatively common theme, and is still held by some contemporary analysts. (McCormick, 2003).25 The premise was that terrorist behaviorbehaviour was rooted in a personality defect that produced a damaged sense of self. The essence of pathological narcissism is an overvaluing of self and a devaluing of others. It is not difficult to see how one might observe these traits among terrorists. In fact, political scientist Richard Pearlstein concluded: the psychoanalytic concept of narcissism is the most complete and thus most intellectually satisfying theory regarding the personal logic of political terrori sm.26 Crayton (1983), for example, posed the psychology of narcissism as a framework for understanding terrorist behaviorbehaviour, using Kohuts concepts to guide his argument. According to Clayton, the two key narcissistic dynamics are a grandiose sense of self and idealized parental imago ( If I cant be perfect, at least Im in a relationship with something perfect). With regard to the effect of groups, he argues that narcissistically vulnerable persons are drawn to charismatic leaders and that some groups are held together by a shared grandiose sense of self. As others have posited, he suggested that narcissistic rage is what prompts an aggressive response to perceived injustice. Indeed narcissistic rage has been posed by more than one observer as the primary psychological precipitant of terrorist aggression. In developmental context the way in which this evolves is that as children the budding terrorists are deeply traumatized, suffering chronic physical abuse and emotional humiliation. This creates a profound sense of fear and personal vulnerability that becomes central to their self-concept. To eliminate this fear and create a more tolerable self-image, such individuals feel the need to kill off their view of themselves as victims. These viewpoints have obviously evolved from Western school of thought and thus they can be partially applied to the terrorist groups in the Muslim world. There are clearly other significant social, political and religious factors which also contribute to the profile of a terrorist emerging in the Muslim Word. Ethology: Ethology is defined as the scientific study of animal behaviorbehaviour, especially as it occurs in a natural environment and as the study of human ethos, and its formation. (American Heritage Dictionary, 2000).27 According to Konrad Lorenz, cited in Borum et al. (2004):28 Aggression arises from a very basic biological need —- a fighting instinct which has adaptive value, as humans have evolved. He proposed that the drive from aggression is innate and that, in humans, only its mode of expression is learned through exposure to, and interaction with the environment. According to this theory, the instinctual drive for aggression builds up over a period of time, and is fueledfuelled by emotional or psycho-physiological arousal, and it is consequently discharged by a process of release, which presumably decreases drive. Significant differences were observed by social scientists, anthropologists and experimental research, in the nature and level of aggression in different cultures, They argue that aggression can be environmentally manipulated, which is an argument against universality of this human instinct. Drive Theory Frustration Aggression (FA): The basic premise of the frustration-aggression (FA) hypothesis is twofold: (1) Aggression is always produced by frustration; and (2) frustration always produces aggression. Thus it is not reasonable to view frustration alone as a necessary and sufficient causal factor. In an important reformulation of the FA hypothesis. Berkowitz (1989)29 hypothesized that it was only

Death of a Salesman Structure Metaphoric Language and Theme Essays

Death of a Salesman Structure Metaphoric Language and Theme In looking at the characteristics of the tragic hero, it can be see that Willy Loman is not a tragic hero but a victim of a false idealistic pursuit of the â€Å"American Dream†. Willy strives to become and instill in his sons the success of the self made man that American society often advertises but ultimately falls short, and instead, escapes accepting his failure through lies and death. What many flaws Willy possesses, most do not correlate with the classic tragic hero. Willy Loman, was never really of noble stature, as was summed up by Linda, the person who knew him best. â€Å" Willy Loman never made a lot of money. His name was never in the paper. He’s not the finest character that ever lived.† Willy’s harmartia was his obsession with the false American Dream that caused him to become delusional and totally blind of his actual situation. If this is so, then he cannot he commit a true and calculated error of judgment and then his downfall is due to an overriding irrepressible mental condition which cancels his own fault in his downfall. His delusional state of mind blurs reality and causes him to never accept or understand who he is or his downfall erasing any notion that he experienced an epiphany of any sort. In fact, it can be said that he dragged one of his sons with him. In front of Willy’s grave Happy vows to continue Willy’s dream. â€Å" He had a good dream. It’s the only dream you can have- to come out the number-one man. He fought it out here, and this is where I’m gonna win it for him.† Willy Loman is an example of the middle class man caught as a victim of society where the odds are against him, a â€Å"has-been†. As a victim he unwillingly suppressed hi... ...t, but Ben is also dead. Willy’s father went off to Alaska to find wealth but also ended up dead. In the â€Å"Requiem†, Happy vows to finish what his father started and therefore following in his footsteps, â€Å"I’m gonna show you and everybody else that Willy Loman did not die in vain.† He ends the proclamation with, â€Å"I’m gonna win it for him.† Three people with the same goal, economic success and freedom, with what can be assumed the same outcome, death. Alternatively, the story of David Singleman acts as an oracle in the way that it foreshadows Willy’s death, â€Å"- and by the way he died the death of a salesman.† Within the past, present and future actions of characters the effects of a preordained outcome are clearly visible. By looking at character relations and incorporating old techniques with more modern ones a dark pattern of design looms over the Loman family.

Capital Punishment Essay - We Need the Death Penalty :: Argumentative Persuasive Essays

We Need the Death Penalty For the past several years Americans have regularly listed crime and violence as the number - one problem facing the nation, far surpassing worries over the economy or health care. Despite the many government and community initiatives launched during recent years to reduce crime, most Americans see no improvement. In a 1993 survey asking respondents if they felt crime was increasing or decreasing in their areas, only 5 % felt that it was decreasing, a full 93 % felt that crime was either increasing or staying the same. And it is not just statistics: I consider myself along with those 93 %. Because while Guiliani administration is talking about crime rates in the New York City going down, all I see and hear in the media are reports about horrible crimes committed by New Yorkers. As George Pettinico states in his article " Crime and punishment: America changes it's mind ": The media's extensive coverage of crime, especially the most brutal and horrific cases have heightened the public's fear and anger over this issue to a near frenzy. When asked in January of this year, " How often do you see reports of violent crime on television ? " 68 % replied " almost every day ". Although the media have played an important role in raising the public's awareness of lawlessness, crime in America is far from a media - created phenomenon. Government statistics support the image of a nation which has overwhelmingly lost the war against crime. For instance, in 1960 there were 161 reported violent crimes per 100,000 people By 1992, the figure had jumped to 758 per 100,000 -- a rise of over 350 %. More and more people today are starting to think that something is terribly wrong when a modern, civilized nation must confront statistics like these. The American public is demanding an end to this violence, and surveys show that they believe swift and harsh punishment is the most appropriate and effective means to these ends. The death penalty, or as it is sometimes being called " capital punishment " is the hardest punishment that could be received when a person is convicted of a capital offense. Until recently it did not exist in New York State but after new governor, George Pataki was elected he managed to bring it back. Since September 1, 1994 the death penalty law was in effect. And even though, as far as I know, there is no strong statistical evidence that the death penalty lowers the murder rate, many people were very happy

Part Four Chapter II

II Parminder was not supposed to be working the next morning, but she had a meeting in Yarvil. Once the children had left for school she moved methodically around the house, making sure that she had everything she needed, but when the telephone rang, she jumped so much that she dropped her bag. ‘Yes?' she yelped, sounding almost frightened. Tessa, on the other end of the line, was taken aback. ‘Minda, it's me – are you all right?' ‘Yes – yes – the phone made me jump,' said Parminder, looking at the kitchen floor now littered with keys, papers, loose change and tampons. ‘What is it?' ‘Nothing really,' said Tessa. ‘Just calling for a chat. See how you are.' The subject of the anonymous post hung between them like some jeering monster, dangling from the line. Parminder had barely allowed Tessa to talk about it during yesterday's call. She had shouted, ‘It's a lie, a filthy lie, and don't tell me Howard Mollison didn't do it!' Tessa had not dared pursue the subject. ‘I can't talk,' said Parminder. ‘I've got a meeting in Yarvil. A case review for a little boy on the at-risk register.' ‘Oh, right. Sorry. Maybe later?' ‘Yes,' said Parminder. ‘Great. Goodbye.' She scooped up the contents of her bag and hurried from the house, running back from the garden gate to check that she had closed the front door properly. Every so often, as she drove, she realized that she had no recollection of travelling the last mile, and told herself fiercely to concentrate. But the malicious words of the anonymous post kept coming back to her. She already knew them by heart. Parish Councillor Dr Parminder Jawanda, who pretends to be so keen on looking after the poor and needy of the area, has always had a secret motive. Until I died, she was in love with me, which she could barely hide whenever she laid eyes on me, and she would vote however I told her to, whenever there was a council meeting. Now that I am gone, she will be useless as a councillor, because she has lost her brain. She had first seen it the previous morning, when she opened up the council website to check the minutes of the last meeting. The shock had been almost physical; her breathing had become very fast and shallow, as it had been during the most excruciating parts of childbirth, when she had tried to lift herself over the pain, to disengage from the agonizing present. Everyone would know by now. There was nowhere to hide. The oddest thoughts kept coming to her. For instance, what her grandmother would have said if she had known that Parminder had been accused of loving another woman's husband, and a gora to boot, in a public forum. She could almost see bebe covering her face with a fold of her sari, shaking her head, rocking backwards and forwards as she had always done when a harsh blow had hit the family. ‘Some husbands,' Vikram had said to her late last night, with a strange new twist to his sardonic smile, ‘might want to know whether it was true.' ‘Of course it isn't true!' Parminder had said, with her own shaking hand over her mouth. ‘How can you ask me that? Of course it isn't! You knew him! He was my friend – just a friend!' She was already passing the Bellchapel Addiction Clinic. How had she travelled so far, without realizing it? She was becoming a dangerous driver. She was not paying attention. She remembered the evening that she and Vikram had gone to the restaurant, nearly twenty years ago, the night they had agreed to marry. She had told him about all the fuss the family had made when she had walked home with Stephen Hoyle, and he had agreed how silly it was. He had understood then. But he did not understand when it was Howard Mollison who accused her instead of her own hidebound relatives. Apparently he did not realise that goras could be narrow, and untruthful, and full of malice †¦ She had missed the turning. She must concentrate. She must pay attention. ‘Am I late?' she called, as she hurried at last across the car park towards Kay Bawden. She had met the social worker once before, when she had come in for a renewal of her prescription for the pill. ‘Not at all,' said Kay. ‘I thought I'd show you up to the office, because it's a rabbit warren in here †¦' Kay led her down a shabby, deserted institutional corridor into a meeting room. Three more women were already sitting there; they greeted Parminder with smiles. ‘This is Nina, who works with Robbie's mother at Bellchapel,' said Kay, sitting down with her back to the venetian-blinded windows. ‘And this is my supervisor Gillian, and this is Louise Harper, who oversees the Anchor Road Nursery. Dr Parminder Jawanda, Robbie's GP,' Kay added. Parminder accepted coffee. The other four women began talking, without involving her. (Parish Councillor Dr Parminder Jawanda, who pretends to be so keen on looking after the poor and needy of the area †¦ Who pretends to be so keen. You bastard, Howard Mollison. But he had always seen her as a hypocrite; Barry had said so. ‘He thinks that because I came from the Fields, I want Pagford overrun by Yarvillians. But you're proper professional class, so he doesn't think you've got any right to be on the side of the Fields. He thinks you're a hypocrite or making trouble for fun.') ‘†¦ understand why the family's registered with a GP in Pagford?' said one of the three unfamiliar social workers, whose names Parminder had already forgotten. ‘Several families in the Fields are registered with us,' said Parminder at once. ‘But wasn't there some trouble with the Weedons and their previous – ?' ‘Yeah, the Cantermill practice threw them out,' said Kay, in front of whom sat a pile of notes thicker than either of her colleagues. ‘Terri assaulted a nurse there. So they've been registered with you, how long?' ‘Nearly five years,' said Parminder, who had looked up all the details at the surgery. (She had seen Howard in church, at Barry's funeral, pretending to pray, with his big fat hands clasped in front of him, and the Fawleys kneeling beside him. Parminder knew what Christians were supposed to believe in. Love thy neighbour as thyself †¦ if Howard had been more honest, he would have turned sideways and prayed to Aubrey †¦ Until I died, she was in love with me, which she could barely hide whenever she laid eyes on me †¦ Had she really not been able to hide it?) ‘†¦ last seen him, Parminder?' asked Kay. ‘When his sister brought him in for antibiotics for an ear infection,' said Parminder. ‘About eight weeks ago.' ‘And how was his physical condition then?' asked one of the other women. ‘Well, he's not failing to thrive,' said Parminder, withdrawing a slim sheaf of photocopied notes from her handbag. ‘I checked him quite thoroughly, because – well, I know the family history. He's a good weight, although I doubt his diet's anything to write home about. No lice or nits or anything of that description. His bottom was a bit sore, and I remember his sister said that he still wets himself sometimes.' ‘They keep putting him back in nappies,' said Kay. ‘But you wouldn't,' asked the woman who had first questioned Parminder, ‘have any major concerns health-wise?' ‘There was no sign of abuse,' said Parminder. ‘I remember, I took off his vest to check, and there were no bruises or other injuries.' ‘There's no man in the house,' interjected Kay. ‘And this ear infection?' her supervisor prompted Parminder. ‘You said it was the sister who brought him in, not the mother? Are you Terri's doctor, too?' ‘I don't think we've seen Terri for five years,' said Parminder, and the supervisor turned to Nina instead. ‘How's she doing on methadone?' (Until I died, she was in love with me †¦ Parminder thought, Perhaps it's Shirley, or Maureen, who's the ghost, not Howard – they would be much more likely to watch her when she was with Barry, hoping to see something with their dirty old-womanish minds †¦ ) ‘†¦ longest she's lasted on the programme so far,' said Nina. ‘She's mentioned the case review quite a lot. I get the feeling she knows that this is it, that she's running out of chances. She doesn't want to lose Robbie. She's said that a few times. I'd have to say you've got through to her, Kay. I really do see her taking some responsibility for the situation, for the first time since I've known her.' ‘Thank you, but I'm not going to get over-excited. The situation's still pretty precarious.' Kay's dampening words were at odds with her tiny irrepressible smile of satisfaction. ‘How are things going at nursery, Louise?' ‘Well, he's back again,' said the fourth social worker. ‘He's been in full attendance for the past three weeks, which is a dramatic change. The teenage sister brings him. His clothes are too small and usually dirty, but he talks about bath and meal times at home.' ‘And behaviourally?' ‘He's developmentally delayed. His language skills are very poor. He doesn't like men coming into the nursery. When fathers turn up, he won't go near them; he hangs around the nursery workers and becomes very anxious. And once or twice,' she said, turning a page in her notes, ‘he's mimicked what are clearly sexual acts on or near little girls.' ‘I don't think, whatever we decide, there can be any question of taking him off the at-risk register,' said Kay, to a murmur of agreement. ‘It sounds like everything hinges on Terri staying on your programme,' said the supervisor to Nina, ‘and staying off the game.' ‘That's key, certainly,' Kay agreed, ‘but I'm concerned that even when she's heroin-free, she doesn't provide much mothering to Robbie. Krystal seems to be raising him, and she's sixteen and got plenty of her own issues †¦' (Parminder remembered what she had said to Sukhvinder a couple of nights previously. Krystal Weedon! That stupid girl! Is that what being in a team with Krystal Weedon taught you – to sink to her level? Barry had liked Krystal. He had seen things in her that were invisible to other people's eyes. Once, long ago, Parminder had told Barry the story of Bhai Kanhaiya, the Sikh hero who had administered to the needs of those wounded in combat, whether friend or foe. When asked why he gave aid indiscriminately, Bhai Kanhaiya had replied that the light of God shone from every soul, and that he had been unable to distinguish between them. The light of God shone from every soul. She had called Krystal Weedon stupid and implied that she was low. Barry would never have said it. She was ashamed.) ‘†¦ when there was a great-grandmother who seemed to provide some back-up in care, but – ‘ ‘She died,' said Parminder, rushing to say it before anyone else could. ‘Emphysema and stroke.' ‘Yeah,' said Kay, still looking at her notes. ‘So we go back to Terri. She came out of care herself. Has she ever attended parenting classes?' ‘We offer them, but she's never been in a fit state to attend,' said the woman from the nursery. ‘If she agreed to take them and actually turned up, it would be a massive step forward,' said Kay. ‘If they close us down,' sighed Nina from Bellchapel, addressing Parminder, ‘I suppose she'll have to come to you for her methadone.' ‘I'm concerned that she wouldn't,' said Kay, before Parminder could answer. ‘What do you mean?' asked Parminder angrily. The other women stared at her. ‘Just that catching buses and remembering appointments isn't Terri's forte,' said Kay. ‘She only has to walk up the road to Bellchapel.' ‘Oh,' said Parminder, mortified. ‘Yes. Sorry. Yes, you're probably right.' (She had thought that Kay was making a reference to the complaint about Catherine Weedon's death; that she did not think Terri Weedon would trust her. Concentrate on what they're saying. What's wrong with you?) ‘So, big picture,' said the supervisor, looking down at her notes. ‘We've got neglectful parenting interspersed with some adequate care.' She sighed, but there was more exasperation than sadness in the sound. ‘The immediate crisis is over – she's stopped using – Robbie's back in nursery, where we can keep a proper eye on him – and there's no immediate concern for his safety. As Kay says, he stays on the at-risk register †¦ I certainly think we'll need another meeting in four weeks †¦' It was another forty minutes before the meeting broke up. Kay walked Parminder back down to the car park. ‘It was very good of you to come in person; most GPs send through a report.' ‘It was my morning off,' said Parminder. She meant it as an explanation for her attendance, because she hated sitting at home alone with nothing to do, but Kay seemed to think that she was asking for more praise and gave it. At Parminder's car, Kay said, ‘You're the parish councillor, aren't you? Did Colin pass you the figures on Bellchapel I gave him?' ‘Yes, he did,' said Parminder. ‘It would be good to have a talk about that some time. It's on the agenda for the next meeting.' But when Kay had given her her number, and left, with renewed thanks, Parminder's thoughts reverted to Barry, the Ghost and the Mollisons. She was driving through the Fields when the simple thought that she had tried to bury, to drown out, slipped past her lowered defences at last. Perhaps I did love him.