Crisis Intervention: Rationales in Solving Societal Crisis - Assignment Example

 Crisis Intervention Describe or explain the practical, theoretical and/or philosophical rationales for the decisions that are made by such people as offenders, victims, policy makers, and practitioners. What are the ethical issues you believe may pose challenges to you when you are intervening in the personal crisis of another? For example, some individuals may have difficulty working with clients of a different cultural group, sexual orientation, moral orientation, or gender. Most people would accept the fact that hurting another person or inflicting pain on them physically or emotionally is against their wish. There is no single person who would love seeing another person suffering because of his or her act. However, in certain circumstances, causing others to suffer is essentials for the overall good of others. This drives us into defining punishment. Generally, punishment constitutes causing pain, and, many people tend to ask themselves whether punishing other people with the intention of either correcting their behaviors or without a causative reason is wrong. Most philosophers have different opinions concerning these issues. One group maintains that causing pain on others in form of punishing them is significantly different from causing pain on innocent persons. The latter is inherently right. On the other hand, some philosophers believe that punishment becomes wrong and it is only justifiable if the outcome is positive. Philosophers believe that the first view is unnecessary in justifying punishment beyond the fact that people deserve it. This form of punishment intended for the overall good of others falls under the retributive approach. The second approach in which punishment is unjustifiable falls under the utilitarian approach. Retributive and utilitarian approaches are the two rationales that philosophers use in describing the aspect of punishment. Retributive rationale – The first philosophical approach or rather rationale considers punishment as significant and not evil. In this approach, the form of punishment instilled balances the wrongs committed. However, some circumstances may challenge this rationale. For instance, revenge is personal and not essentially proportional to the injuries caused but retribution is impersonal and proportional to the injuries inflicted. This, therefore, challenges the policy makers in defining punishment. Philosophers even after facing challenges in defining punishment, comes with another definition of punishment. They define it as a pain or other distasteful outcome generated from an offence against the policy administered by other people with the intention of correcting the wrong does. This is a supposition that means that, by having restrictive measures on what needs to be done, and to who and by whom, policy makers manage to negate the wrong behaviors. This view contains two significant elements; first is that, it is the obligation of the society to punish and, secondly, the wrong doer has the right to get a punishment. The decision of the policy makers to inflict pain on those they believe are wrong doers is under the social contract. Even though this philosophy is ancient, it gained a lot of emphasis in the era of enlightenment in the 17th and 18th century. Thomas Hobbes (Leviathan 1651), John Locke (Two Treatises on Government 1690), and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Du contract social 1762) supported this idea and that is why it has some weight in the modern world. Generally, the idea suggests that every individual has a free will of entering into an agreement in forming a society and offering a part of his or her personal freedom in order to get some protection. When one interferes with the rights of other people, one is said to break the social contract and is subject to punishment. A major challenge to the social contract theory in terms of punishment is the supposition that individuals willingly participate in agreeing to adhere to the society’s policies. However, in moral perspective, it is not right to inflict pain on others because every person has a right to do what they want if they are doing it for their own good. This does not mean, that policies should allow people to commit crimes in order to cover their mistakes. There are other ways that policy makers can apply in punishing offenders, instead of either, imprisoning them or issuing capital punishment. Ethically, one would feel bad when inflicting pain on other people. It is uncertain the measure or rather what quantifies a wrong to attract a punishment. Therefore, policy makers pass a verdict based on the social policies, and with the right mind that their sentencing is for the overall good of the entire society. In some other circumstances, political diversity, cultural differences, gender disparities, social orientation may affect the decisions made by policy makers. This is because a certain verdict may interfere with cultural believes, political views and gender differences. It is therefore, the obligation of the policy makers to invent unbiased strategy, which provides justice to every individual regardless of their background information. 2. How do you plan to “work on” or resolve these issues? Be specific! For example, the idea of attending a discussion group would be a general plan. One can apply other rationales in crisis intervention other than involving the legal authority. This is because the law might be biased; therefore, the sentencing passed becomes unjustified. This situation affects both the policy makers and the offender. The policy makers live with the guilty conscious or rather the uncertainty of whether the judgment passed was significant or not. On the other hand, the offender believes that the punishment inflicted was unnecessary and this is something that causes hatred in the society. This is the reason why there is always high crime rate in the society yet there are laws to govern people’s behaviors. This is because people have no trust with the judiciary system. Therefore, I suggest using other rationales in solving societal crisis. Personal counseling is effective in the exploration and solving personal crisis and issues, which if solved through the legal process may inflict severe pain on the individual. Counseling is significant because the offender gets time to reflect on his/her life while continuing with other significant issues in life, for instance, in personal and social development. 3. Evaluate competing hypotheses related to crime and crime control by using multiple and diverse sources of information such as the UCR; NIBRS; NCVS; annual censuses of jails, prisons and detention centers; DUF; Gallop; and students collecting their own data. Name and describe elements of your personal philosophy of crisis intervention. How is this unique to you? The National and state leaders emphasize on the significance of imposing stronger competitive measures to control crime by using different source. The most effective source used in controlling crime is the use of prisons and detention centers. This ensures that both the adults and the youths adhere to the laws and policies that govern the society. This does not mean that the other sources are ineffective; rather they are suitable depending on the nature of crimes they handle. I believe that any source used in controlling crime rate in the society is effective given that the source controls the behavior in the interest of the entire society. There is no person who has a right to infringe other individual’s right with an ill motive. If the legal authority were reluctant in crime intervention, the society would turn into chaos. The first thing is that, one should create a secure, caring and supportive environment in order to deal with crisis intervention. In crisis intervention, individuals may have feelings of resentment, disappointment, but this is not the moment to exercise such emotions. Instead of portraying such negative emotions that may surmount or cause an individual’s intervention to slow down, it is essential to accentuate care and concern to the offenders. If a person realizes that intervention works out best for him/her, they are likely to listen and embrace behavior change. 4. Discuss how this course helped you gain a better understanding of how others define a crisis. A crisis is any effect brought about by the daily activities of the people on the mind. Crises vary from person to person since they are controlled by brains and therefore, people come up with different views on crisis. A person’s crisis is not similar to another person since they have different fears and various distinct ways of reasoning. The fears of a person are always dissimilar from one person to another and therefore how an individual can explain a crisis according to the level of fear on the issue. The intensity of a crisis to a person depends on the level of concern and fear a person has on the issue. The intensity of a crisis depends on how a person views the crisis. For instance, there are people who fear accidents therefore to him or her when an accident happens that would be the worst crisis they have ever witnessed least to another person who finds shooting the worst. Through this course, there are numerous reasons that rise up because in the course people interact from across the globe meet and interact freely. The interactions lead to interactions due to same level of reasoning since the people think around their own visibility. This makes the people come up with various ways on how to tackle a problem. For instance, a person who used to view a crisis in a certain manner can change up the reasoning due to the influence by another group. The person assimilates or comes up with a different way on how to act on the issue and a certain crisis. This depends on how the person will change his or her way viewing the crisis. For example, a person who viewed a crisis as a death may have to grow up and change the view on the crisis making the people come up with a variety of better ways to explain what a crisis means. During the course, the new determinant was age and the level of intelligence. Most people within the society came up with better thinking capacity. The age of a person determines the ideas that the person passes across. The thinking capacity of an older person differs from that of a youthful person. To a youth a crisis may be very simple depending to the stories they tell but the older people think critically and come up with a better reason to explain what a crisis is since they have a better taste and serious with their ages and lives. The gender also can help define what a crisis is since most females are said to be fearful than the men who are considered courageous. This makes fears of the women less serious since they fear small issues and even increase in insects can be a crisis to a woman because an insect traumatizes a woman. Most men find the women unusual since they fear very small issues that even do not sound traumatizing but all in all crisis depends on a person brains. 5. Describe the characteristics of and/or processes associated with effective decision-making by justice system practitioners, policy makers, or judicial officers. Provide a discussion of how this course helped you resolve a crisis in your life. The experience with the people during this course has helped me come up with a variety missions to deal with crisis. Resolving is difficult and entails the various ways in which the people handle the crisis. The major way that I used was creating public awareness on how to prevent the existing crises. Public awareness informs the people on the issues of that are prevailing and requires simple language and interaction with the people in order to come up with a successful test. Through public awareness, the information gets to numerous people within a short period. Public awareness entails the use of billboards, charts and the simple interaction of one person to another. The course has helped me solve various issues in my life, because I understand that crisis intervention revolves around the issues of love, care and honesty. It entails providing support to a person who does not require your support. It is also about convincing a person to accept the truth they hate to see or talk about. It revolves around offering a hand to someone to raise and step ahead when he/she wants to remain stagnant. Crisis intervention seems impossible and a tremendous undertaking and the participants of crisis intervention ought to use the suitable technique and guidance in convincing people they care for to accept the path to recovery in order to improve their future. Reference U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1992). Census of Population 1990, California. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce. Read More