The Welfare Principle in the UK Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

The Welfare Principle in the UK - Essay Example In which, the rights, powers, duties, responsibilities and authority of the parents are provided concerning their children. In addition to that, it enables the court to hear and make decisions about the welfare of the child. The Adoption and Children Act 2002 changed the law pertaining to the parental responsibility.2 For children born on or after 1 December 2003 [England and Wales], 4 May 2006 [Scotland] and15 April 2002 [Northern Ireland], both biological parents remain owners of the parental responsibility if they are registered on the birth certificate of the child [whether or not the parents are married]. Contact Order definition According to section 8(1) of the Children Act, a contact order means an order requiring the person with whom a child lives or is to live, to allow the child to visit or stay with the person named in the order, or for that person and the child otherwise to have contact with each other.3 However, in case of clash between the interests of the parents and t he interests of children, the interests of the child will be preferred as was stated by the Court of Appeal in Re P (Contact: Supervision) [1996] 2FLR 314 at p.328. What are the interests of a child that the court is going to protect? For example, the child does not have only physical needs and educational needs, but also requires emotional support in order to grow naturally and complete the cycle of mental and physical growth. If parents are only able to satisfy the physical and education needs, but not the emotional one, it would not be easy for the court to serve and protect the interests of the child due to a clash between the different interests. Even in this case, if the court grants the contact order, the court compromises on the emotional needs of the child. On the other hand, if the court does not entertain the contact order request from the parents, the court again fails to properly serve the interests of the child. In order to ascertain the interests of the parents and th e interests of the child, the court needs to consider the contact order factors that assist whether contact order should be made or not. They include: Above all, the court has to consider what they believe to be in the best interests of child and the welfare of the child remains the main priority. In this regard, the feelings and wishes of the child as far as can be ascertained and they must be considered in the light of the child’s mental level and understanding: There is no specific age bracket provided to ascertain the mental level of a child. If the child faces a very specific mental disorder and the doctors remain unsuccessful to highlight the impact of the mental disorder on the child’s main mind function, under that situation, the age consideration may become irrelevant. Even the court decision to issue a contact order will not be able to serve the main objective of the child welfare. The court is required to take into account the child’s emotional, physi cal and educational needs as well: For example, if parents want to nurture their child and they are financially in a position to fulfil the physical and educational needs of the child, but they are unable to satisfy the emotional needs of the child. There are no particular emotional needs mentioned in the Children Act 1989 that must be satisfied before granting a contact order. In addition, there are different types of emotions and

The Brave Fighters of Islam Essay Example for Free

The Brave Fighters of Islam Essay â€Å"Those who were sure that they would meet their Lord said: How often has a small group vanquished a numerous group by Allah’s permission, and Allah is with the patient. † [AlBaqarah 2:249] â€Å"Every time they (Persians Turks Empires) come against you, they are defeated. Now, the Arabs have defeated you although they are the weakest of all creation. Their bodies are naked and their stomachs are hungry. They have neither gear nor weapons. Yet they still defeated you at Busra, Hawarn, Ajnadayn, Damascus, Ba’labakk Hims† said the Roman Emperor Heraclius. After a ridiculous argument with his priests and generals, Heraclius decided to gather his largest force to be assembled from all corners of his kingdom to face against the Muslims. Although there are differences in opinion regarding the size of the army ranging from 200,000-350,000! However others state that it ranged from 600,000-1,000,000! When the 40,000 Muslim force lead by Abu Ubaidah Amr ibn Al Jarrah found out about such a number, they decided to march towards the plains of Al-Yarmouk due to its strategical advantages. When the Roman army arrived there, they sent out an initial army of 60,000 Christian Arabs lead by Jabalah bin Al-Ayham. After numerous negotiations and pitiful diplomacy with the arrogant Romans, Abu Ubaidah slammed all talks saying: â€Å"There can never be peace between us until you pay either Jizyah or accept Islam! Failing that the sword will decide between us! By Allah! Were it not for the fact that we consider treachery to be an evil deed, I would have struck you down with my sword right now! †. The Sahabah discussed among themselves of how many soldiers they should send to face the 60,000. Abu Sufyan ibn Harb Saifullah Khalid bin Waleed were among the ones who were consulted. Khalid bin Waleed gave his opinion to fight them with the elite of Muslims and not the full army in order to drive fear into the hearts of the enemies. Abu Sufyan agreed and enquired how many should they send out. The Sword of Allah SWT, Khalid confidently replied â€Å"I propose 30 horsemen! Each of whom will have to face 2000 Christians! †. Confounded by such a ludacris answer, Abu Sufyan was the first to reply from the astonished crowd that it was ludicrous to send that much and proposed sending out 60 men, as the ayah in the Qur’an says: â€Å"if there are twenty patient ones of you they shall overcome two hundred, and if there are a hundred of you they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they are a people who do not understand. † [Al-Anfal 08:65]. Abu Ubaidah agreed to Abu Sufyan’s opinion. The individuals that Khalid choose were based on â€Å"Their patience, steadfastness and the way they forge ahead in battle†. Now dear brothers and sisters, who do who think that Khalid bin Waleed choose for this monumental task? Was it just the average Abdullah like you and me? No! Wallahi, the individuals he selected are among the best of people. ] He called out for 60 Sahabah’s! He called out the veterans of Badr! He called out the Ansar! He called out the Muhajireen! He called out the scribes of the Prophet (peace be upon him) Suhrabil bin Hasanah Amr At-Tamimi! He called out Hudaifah bin Al Yaman who Raslullah (peace be upon him) trusted with the secret list of the hyprocrites! He called out the honest Ka’ab bin Malik! He called out the brother in laws of Raslullah (peace be upon him) Abdullah ibn Umar Ibn Al-Khattab Abdur Rahman ibn Abu-Bakar As-Saddique [The sons of the 1st two Caliphs of Islam]! The cousin of Raslullah (peace be upon him) AlFadl ibn Al-Abbas. He called out Dhirar ibn Al-Azwar the bare-chested warrior descried as a â€Å"devil† by the enemies and brother of the brave female companion Khawlah bint AlAzwar! He called out Yazid ibn Abu Sufyan who was one of Khalid’s best generals brother of Amir Mua’wiya ibn Abu Sufyan! He even called out the disciple of Raslullah (peace be upon him) and one of the 10 promised paradise AzZubair ibn Al-Awaam! [May Allah SWT be pleased with them all]. After choosing 60 of the â€Å"La creme de la creme (cream of the cream,) among the Muslim army. Khalid told them â€Å"You have already defeated the legions of Rome, so when you defeat these Arabs fear will descend in their hearts and they will turn in defeat†. The 60 replied in â€Å"Oh Abu Sulayman, do with us as you please! †¦Ã¢â‚¬  in the affirmative. Next morning after Fajr, The 60 bare farewell the their loved ones and marched out with the Lion of Islam, Khalid bin Waleed in the centre of the pride. The two armies met under the blazing sun. Like a true champion, Khalid shouted to the Christians: †Oh worshippers of the sallib! Oh enemies of Ar-Rahman (The Most Merciful), come to the battle and slaughter! † Jabalah and his army shrugged off the taunt due to the pitiful size of the Muslims who were at a 1000-fold disadvantage in numbers. The 60,000 Christians charged forward but the Muslims remained solid and firm. The battle was ferocious and nothing but the roars of battle-cry could be heard. Both armies fought with the clashing of bone and sinew, No one whether it be Roman or Muslim thought that the 60 would survive. The onlooking Muslim army looked anxiously at their brethren and wept with sadness, some even said â€Å"Khalid has deceived and destroyed the Sahabah of Rasullah (peace be upon him)†. On the other side the Romans were content as they were convinced that they had won. The battle continued with the Sahabah fighting with full vigour, zeal, honor, strength, determination courage. Shining knights Khalid, Az-Zubair, Abdurahman ibn AbuBakar, Abdullah ibn Umar, Al-Fadl and Dhirar fought side by side, shoulder to shoulder, sword to sword heart to heart in the intense flames of war whilst never separating. As Allah SWT says the in Qur’an: †Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way in ranks as if they were a firm and compact wall. † [Surah As-Saff 61:4]. Kh alid then cried out to rally the Muslims at a certain point whilst he himself penetrated to the centre of the enemies and was surrounded. Al-Fadl bin Abbas rushed to aid alongside the brave Az-Zubair, shouting â€Å"Leave our friends alone. That is Az-Zubair ibn Al-Awwam and I am AlFadl ibn Abbas, the cousin of Rasulallah (peace be upon him)†. The Muslims then launched a great counter strike against the Romans and fought until Maghrib time! Now the onlooking Muslim army was really worried, especially Abu Ubaidah who anxiously said â€Å"O companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him), Khalid and his men have doubtlessly been destroyed† and got them ready for battle. But suddenly as the smoke cleared and the dust settled. The thunderous roar of â€Å"Laillah illalah Wallahu Akbar† was heard. Each sahabah shouting the Islamic testimony â€Å"I bear witness that there is no deity except Allah alone, He has no partner, and Muhammad is His Slave and Messenger! †. Khalid bin Waleed emerged from the midst of the turmoil with clear signs of fatigue and exhaustion. The army of 60,000 was humiliated by a crushing defeat by 60 heroes, 10 of whom were blessed with martyrdom and 5 of them captured.

Doctor Faustus Essays: Applying the Psychoanalytical Approach :: Doctor Faustus Essays

Applying the Psychoanalytical Approach to Dr. Faustus Within the text of Christopher Marlowe's "Doctor Faustus," a reader notices the struggle between the superego and the id. Throughout the play, Faustus struggles with himself while Lucifer and Mephistopheles struggle with him. Though these huge conflicts take place in the text they aren't the greatest of situations when one tries to apply the psychoanalytical approach. The most obvious situation arrives with the introduction of the Seven Deadly Sins. They represent the constant struggle between the id and the superego. They add to the seduction of Dr. Faustus and the constant struggle in a chaotic Hell. The id possesses most of the sins: Pride, Covetousness, Envy, Wrath, Gluttony and Lechery. All six of these sins show characteristics that are strong and powerful. Though these sound as if they were good characteristics, they are actually extremely over-bearing. When the sins explain who they are, they don't leave any room for argument. They just say who they are, and they take what they want. For example, Pride explains what he can do with a woman: "I can creep into every corner of a wench: sometimes, like periwig I sit upon her brow; next, like a necklace I hang about her neck; then, like a fan of feathers I kiss her..." (Marlowe, II.ii.120) Obviously, Pride feels powerful enough to take any woman he wants and perform with her any way he wants. With a sly and mischievous voice Pride states what he can do and no one can change it. Another great representation of the id is Lechery or lust. Lechery just walks out and struts her stuff in front of Faustus. The reader realizes that her power is not in her words but in her presence. Even Lucifer notices her strength because he sends her away almost as fast as she comes in. "Away, to hell, away! On, piper!" (Marlowe, II.ii.177) Lechery closes the deal on Faustus. Her presence is so powerful that Faustus returns to the hands of Lucifer. All six of these Seven Deadly Sins show their strength and power, for they don't back down, except to Lucifer. They do what they want and say what they please, because they are the angels of Lucifer, the most evil angel of them all. In achieving their goals they are very aggressive and Lucifer provides them all the freedom they need in order capture new souls like Faustus.

Different Tongues

If I ruled the world; which is highly unlikely of course, I would ban all languages except one – Arabic. The majority of you probably disagree but tell me how many of YOU have found yourself in a class with a teacher speaking some alien language to you? Many times, I assume just like me none of you probably enjoyed it, but hated it to bits and thought of the reason as to how and why you ended up in that state. The reason as to why I chose Arabic is that it is an example of different cultures living in one language; how many Arabic countries do you know of? Syria, Saudi Arabia, Libya and the list goes on, well each one of the countries are their own, they have their own culture, own tradition but the same language, so why can't the whole world be like this? How easy would life be? Those of you who think that without different languages you can't have different culture, you can't be unique, well your wrong as trust me people from Iraq are as different to people from Syria as people from America and Africa are, and they don't have different languages, they have one – Arabic, true they may have changed words here and there but it is still the same language – they can understand each other. So now as you were just informed that it is possible to have the same language and a different culture don't you agree with me about having only one tongue, one language, one way of verbal communication the same as everyone else? It was said that there is 6,809 languages in the world – it might be possible. But that is a significant number of languages. Like for example in Afghanistan, where I come from there are two main languages – Pashto and Farsi. But as I discovered a while ago, there are many more languages in Afghanistan only the main is Farsi and Pashto and Afghanistan isn't even a big country. I am sure many of you didn't know that, I being an Afghan didn't even know until my dad informed me. So imagine if one country had many languages than how many are there in the world? IF mankind was united there would only be one and only one language! Now that exam period is here, what are you more focused on? I think the majority of you are focusing on French, Spanish or German; if not then when GCSEs come I am almost certain you will – unless you haven't taken a language or you already know that language as it is your mother tongue. Without this extra weight on our shoulders we could all become top fliers in other more important subjects such as maths and science. As the fact that learning language becomes harder to learn as we grow older is true, and if it weren't true I wouldn't mind languages but as it is true ( and we weren't taught different languages at the age which was easy for us to learn languages) and all the endless lists of vocabulary is near to impossible to learn, I would rather banish all languages off the face of this planet except one, so that no one has to suffer sitting and learning the vocabulary off by heart – just to get accepted into a good university or to obtain a good job. Aren't there far better things to spend our time on? We all have better time consuming occupations than sitting there, pulling our hair out trying to learn a language made because the human race cannot be united. One language can symbolise unity amongst humans. If animals of the same species can achieve that why can't we? Surely we are supposed to be greater than animals, with larger brains, so why don't we have one language in which everybody would be able to communicate with each other, making everyone's lives easier. Allow me to share an account I underwent a few years back, I went on holiday with my family to France, on holiday, it was great only a major thing restricted me and my family having the utmost maximum fun my achievable – different languages. We went there via ship and car, so basically we had to drive to Paris and as my dad had never been there and didn't know the way, as expected we became lost. We asked a few people but like us they had blank confused looks on their faces, as they couldn't understand us and we couldn't understand them, after a long period of time we reached Paris, but we would have reached our destination quicker if we had one language. That was only one problem, there was problems with the hotel, finding our way around to Eiffel Tower, Disney Land, matters got so bad we ended up giving up not going to Disney Land. That wasn't the only place I had gone for holiday to, that I didn't know the language of and that I had problems in. I'm fairly positive the majority of you, have also had an account like this, would you and I have undergone those problems if we all shared one tongue, one language, one way of verbal communication the same as everyone else? Imagine you were an immigrant from another country, to England, you don't know English, your parents don't know English, you moved here because of war, your father is desperately trying to make money for the family, but he is having difficulty as he doesn't know English even though he is educated. Wouldn't there be less racism if there was one tongue, one language, one way of verbal communication the same as everyone else? Wouldn't our lives overall just be easier?

Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious Essay

As Antonia Peacocke quotes in her essay, â€Å"The show Family Guy is one of the first in history that has been canceled not just once, but twice† (300-301). The show was brought back in August 2000 and again in July 2001 when fans could not get enough of the adult cartoon. As well as being a fan favorite, Family Guy is also a controversial topic for critics all over the world. In the essay, â€Å"Family Guy and Freud: Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious†, Antonia Peacocke analyzes the show and gives her reasons why it is not all negative and crude humor. Antonia Peacocke is a student at Harvard University. She is also a National Merit Scholar, and has won awards such as the Catherine Fairfax MacRae prize for Excellence in both English and Mathematics. She was asked to write this essay specifically for the book They Say, I say: with readings. The Peacocke’s main point of her entire essay is that she wants to let readers know why Family Guy is not a bad show, in her and others opinions, but one that has been criticized for solely bringing entertainment. Peacocke does a successful job in portraying this, but it is not completely clear until the end, where her thesis can be found. The very last sentence of the essay is her thesis: â€Å"While I love Family Guy as much as any fan, it’s important not to lose sight of what’s truly unfunny in real life – even as we appreciate what is hilarious in fiction† (Peacocke 308). Peacocke’s thesis could be a little more clear throughout her essay, therefore, I do not feel it is as effective as it could be, but the author clearly states her argument and presents her case. Peacocke starts the essay of by saying, â€Å" Before I was such a devotee, however, I was adamantly opposed to the program for its particular brand of humor† (Peacocke 300). She makes it clear her feelings about the show in the very beginning. Although she is a fan, she at one time disliked the show. She quotes Stephen Dubner, co-author of Freakonomics, as saying â€Å"a cartoon comedy that packs more gags per minute about race, sex, incest, bestiality, etc. than any other show [he] can think of† (Peacocke 300). She backs up her one time opinions by saying â€Å"It will come as no surprise that I was not alone in this view; many still denounce Family Guy as bigoted and crude† (Peacocke 300). Although the show is currently very successful, she says â€Å"It must be one of the few shows in television history that has been canceled not only once, but twice†¦ The show ran until August 2000, but was besieged by so many complaints†¦that Fox shelved it until July 2001† (Peacocke 300). Also, she says, â€Å"I must admit, I can see how parts of the show might seem offensive if taken at face value† (Peacocke 302). At one point Peacocke realized, â€Å" [I found myself] forced to give Family Guy a chance. It was simply everywhere â€Å" (Peacocke 302). One of Peacocke’s main points is that Family Guy has gained much positive attention. On Facebook, as Peacocke explains, â€Å"there are 23 universal separate Family Guy groups with a combined membership of 1,669 people (compared with only 6 groups protesting against Family Guy, with 105 members total). Users of the well-respected Internet Movie Database rate the show 8.8 out of 10† (Peacocke 303). As you can see, â€Å"among the public and within the industry, the show receives fantastic acclaim; it has won eight awards, including three primetime Emmys† (Peacocke 303). Also, when the show was on the brink of cancellation, â€Å" fans provided the brute source necessary to get it back on the air† (Peacocke 303). The more she was around the show, the more positively she viewed it. Peacocke then goes on to say that those who do not often watch the show, â€Å"could easily come to think that the cartoon takes pleasure in controversial humor just for its own s ake† Peacocke 303). The next main point that Peacocke claims is that viewers who â€Å"pay more attention and think about the creators’ intentions can see that Family Guy intelligently satirizes some aspects of American culture† (Peacocke 304). The next paragraph is a segment from an episode in season 4, which shows Stewie reading a book only because it was on the Oprah reading list. Peacocke says â€Å" [Brian and] Stewie demonstrate insightfully and comically how Americans are willing to follow the instructions of a celebrity blindly – and less willing to admit that they are doing so† (Peacocke 304). The jokes that Family Guy is known for, â€Å"attract a different kind of viewer. Such viewers are†¦conscious and critical viewers† (Peacocke 304). In my opinion, the very last sentence is the most powerful in the whole essay. Peacocke states â€Å"They are not – and I cannot stress this enough, self serving as it may seem – immoral or easily manipula ted people† (304). Peacocke says that it sheds light on, and allows viewers â€Å" the ability to analyze what they are watching, the creators of Family Guy point out the weaknesses and defects of U.S. society in a mocking and sometimes intolerant way† (Peacocke 305). A good example of this is the segment from the episode â€Å"I Am Peter, Hear Me Roar.† In this episode, â€Å"the ‘instructional video’ quoted above becomes not only funny but also insightful. In its satire, viewers can recognize the sickly sweet and falsely sensitive sexism of the 1950s in observing just how conveniently self-serving the speaker of the video appears. The message of the clips denounces and ridicules sexism rather than condoning it† (Peacocke 305). The last main point that Peacocke makes is that â€Å"Family Guy does not aim to hurt, and its creators take certain measures to keep it from hitting too hard†¦ Seth MacFarlane plainly states that there are certain jokes too upsetting to certain groups to go on the air† (Peacocke 307). Also, Peacocke states that â€Å"I believe Family Guy has its intelligent points, and some of its seemingly ‘coarse’ scenes often have hidden merit† (Peacocke 308). In the next sentence Peacocke does admit that â€Å"sometimes the creators do seem cross – or, perhaps, eagerly race past – the line of indecency† (Peacocke 308). In her closing paragraph, Peacocke questions the fact that â€Å"while Family Guy can provide a sort of relief by breaking down taboos, we must still wonder whether or not these taboos exist for a reason† (Peacocke 308). All three main points that the author makes are valid, and as seen in quotes, each main topic is backed up by main points. The first main point is that Family Guy is gaining positive attention. Although this is a valid point, as seen by the popularity, and the awards, this isn’t reason enough to call the show ‘good.’ As the author states, at one point she was not a fan of the show but it later turned onto it by exposure. The content of the show did not change for her opinion to change, she just gave the show a chance and realized she liked the humor. The second main point is that the show makes intellectual references to American culture. This is a valid point as to why the show is good. Any show with a little bit of substance makes references to the past and current topics. It tells what is going on in the world, and explains topics everybody should be aware of. The last main point is that Family Guy breaks rules that no other major TV program or network has been able to break. Although many critics believe these are rules that shouldn’t be broken, the creators believe it needs to be done. This makes it a ‘good’ because it crosses boundaries that others are afraid to cross. Conclusion will link back to first comparison to Freud. Work Cited Peacocke, Antonia. â€Å"Family Guy and Freud: Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious.† They Say, I Say: with readings. Ed. Cathy Birkenstein, Russel Durst, and Gerald Graff. New York: W.W. Norton, 2012. 300-308. Print.