HR Issues in the Organisations Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

HR Issues in the Organisations - Essay Example Such a degree of centralisation is leading to employees’ frustration and disengagement (Vosburgh, 2007). There is a totally flawed reward system (Secord, 2003) working in the organisation, which again is designed by the ministry of defence. This design is not pragmatic (Pilbeam, S. & Corbridge, 2010) when it comes to dealing with civilian workers. Apparently, most of the work in these organisations is done in teams, but the reward system in place is not suited to this form of working. Moreover, this type of a reward system is anti teamwork and leads to a rift created between employees (Ulrich & Smallwood, 2005). With employees not receiving their deserved recognition and line mangers being helpless in this regard, organisational motivation is falling exponentially (Yeung & Brockbank, 1994). This entire problem is being caused by the â€Å"Cluster Panel†, which is totally callous to the working environment and is responsible for making appraisal decisions. The group has a defective method in place to assess an employee. The entire appraisal system (Yeung, Woolcock, & Sullivan, 1996) is dependent upon the line manager’s recommendation of an employee and that too is further conditional on his writing effectiveness. Even if a manager effectively encodes an employee’s accomplishment on the appraisal form, there is still no guarantee that this would secure an appraisal for the employee. This deficiency has two folded repercussions, one has to do with the line manager’s motivation level and the other has to do with an employee’s alienation with the organisational procedures (Newman & Hodgetts, 1998). One aspect that needs special attention over here is that of the military staff. Since they form a part of the total workforce of these organisations, they deserve to be treated like any other employee. On the contrary they are considered as alien to the organisational setting when they receive their compensation from the defence ministry. This sort of handling of the military personals is leading to a confusion arising in their midst with regards to their role, both in the military and in these organisations. Another important draw back in these organisations has to do with the absence of a motivator. Since employees consider performance bonuses as some sort of a lottery rather than a form of recognition, and manager’s acclamations as shallow, there exists a serious deficiency of a driving force (Miner & Crane, 1995). In these organisations mangers are the ones who are occupying the most pitiful position. They have no power what so every to express their viewpoint. They are mere spectators who are just watching the show, having no power what so ever to exert influence on any level of the bureaucracy (Losey, Mesinger, & Ulrich, 2005). Recommendations for Changes: In these circumstances in which the employees are feeling totally dejected with the organisational procedures, and mangers rather than being inspirational are showing a sorry picture it is important to come up with more effective Human Resource policies (Kramar, Mcgrew, & Schuler, 1997). It is inevitable that organisational productivity will fall and the purpose for which these organisations are in place will suffer a deep blow. In order to prevent such damaging consequences, change management needs to be implemented on an emergency basis. In this change management program,

Stopping bullying in schools Essay Example for Free

Stopping bullying in schools Essay It is sometimes difficult to understand how schools can provide the environment for bullying to take place yet they are very well supervised. Bullying however is carried out secretly and in hidden areas and adults including parents and teachers are not able to notice when it is going on. Other reasons that make it hard to detect is the fact that the school staff may see it as harmless play and therefore decide not to intervene. There may also be lack of enough supervisory settings that could lead to detecting the behavior in its likely occurrences (Wright, 2003). a) Laws on Bullying Anti bullying legislation has been developed to help curb the rise and spread of bullying within the school environment. The legislation provides for firm and fair enforcement of discipline within the school and security measures that provide for a climate that does not allow for bullying and threat making. The laws have been developed to help the school administrators’ deal with the issue. They require the schools to develop anti bullying policies and programs (Clabough, 2010). A national legislation that is against bullying has been proposed to make it mandatory for all schools to have these programs and policies that will help reduce the bullying incidents. The laws have been developed to emphasis to the schools that much is not being done to deal with bullying and that more needs to be done since bullying is an important issue that is affecting the schools. The laws are allowing for various legal actions to be taken up against the bullies who are reported to have bullied a fellow student. The legal action to be taken depends on the type of offence that has been reported (Clabough, 2010). For example where the offence reported involved included threatening the victim, legal action can be taken for threatening behavior and this is treated as a criminal offence. When the bullied acts involve sexual assault towards the victim, the legal action can be taken against indecent assault which is also treated as a criminal offence. An offence of common assault is charged against the bully when the victim was physically abused. Legal action may also include applying for an injunction against the bullies to prevent them from bullying the victim. The injunction can be used to instill fear upon the bully and hence stopping them from bullying the victim. Legal action however is only carried out if the actions of the bully are in more that two separate occasions and they are constant and ongoing. Evidence has to be gathered to prove the harassment and it must show that it led to severe damages to the victim (Clabough, 2010). The two offences of indecent assault and common assault can also be carried out without touching the victim. b) Their importance The anti bully legislation is very important in reducing the cases of bullying in the schools when everything has failed. The law can help sensitize the issue and teach the parents and teachers the need and importance of stopping the bullying behavior as it leads to severe consequences that are long term in some cases. The teachers and staff at the schools are taught how to identify and deal with bullying cases and establish effective strategies that enable the children report the cases of bullying within the school (Antibullying, n. d). The laws can also be used to teach and educate the children on bullying the strategies and types of bullies that are in existence and how they can deal. The laws can also help curb the spread of the practice to other areas like the work places and other environments outside the school environment. Bullies can also be helped since most of them end up committing other crimes in the adulthood (Dombeck, n. d). The consequences of bullying can also be reduced especially where they are long term and severe like in the cases of suicides and psychological impacts on the children. c) Suicides by Children The need for these laws has been necessitated by the increase in the number of suicides cases that have been reported. One case in particular is the case of Phoebe Prince, a 15 year student who committed suicide after she was continuously bullied by her new classmates for over 3 months (Rota, 2010). She had continuously been harassed verbally and physically by nine of her classmates, six of whom have been charged in court since the incident happened (ODowd, 2010). She had been a student of South Hadley High School located in Massachusetts, and had endured a lot of cyber bullying through popular websites like facebook, Twitter, Craigslist and Form spring and she also received threatening messages on her cell phone (Clabough, 2010). In school things had been thrown at her, while her face had been scribbled in her photographs that were hung on the school walls. The parents and the school officials had not done enough to stop the bullying even though they knew of the extent it had gone into. They had instead turned away and assumed a mentality of kids will be kids that led to the suicide. This was one of the cases that led to the Massachusetts anti bully legislation that was to curb such incidents from occurring (GLAD, 2010). d) Long Term Psychological Impact Bullying has been known to lead to long term effects that affect the victim’s psychology. Some of the effects of bullying include self esteem problems that may cause the adult to think lowly of them selves (Dombeck, n. d). They also tend to avoid social situations due to the interpersonal difficulties that they experience. Some of the victims of school bullying have reduced occupational opportunities since they do not get the chance to perform well in school. They have lingering bitterness and desires to seek revenge against the bullies. Some tend to have a lot of difficulty trusting people and they do not make many friends. They therefore tend to be lonely even in their adult life. In some cases the victims of school bullying continue to be bullied even in their work places and in other areas even in their adult life (Dombeck, n. d). e) Helping the Victim Overcome Victims of school bullying are usually very sad and deeply unhappy when they are in school (Banks, 1997). They suffer from low self esteem since they are usually self rejected by the classmates. There are various that the school can help the victims overcome the bullying and prevent it from occurring to them again. The first step of intervening is to ensure the victims safety. The victims are usually weaker than the bullies and hence they are not able to face the bullies on their own. The victims can be monitored when they are in schools to identify the times that they are bullied (Wright, 2003). The victim can also be encouraged to make friends with other students who will influence him or her positively. This will help increase the self esteem and confidence of the victim. As the victim makes more friends they may be able to help him when they are being bullied. They can be taught basic social skills to enable them make more friends. Mentors can also be allocated to the children who are bullied to be able to monitor them and protect them from the bullies (Wright, 2003). Victims can also be taught some skill that can they can use to stand up to the bullies especially when they abuse is verbal. The parents of the victims can help the children to overcome the effects of bullying. The parents can become more involved in the lives of the child to ensure that they are able to notice the instances of bullying. They can help the child speak out when they are being bullied. Counseling can also help the child deal with the psychological effects of bullying such as depression, low self esteem and anxiety. They can therefore be able to deal with the anger that they may feel against the bullies and the need to seek revenge (Dombeck, n. d). f) Helping Bullies Bullying is normally carried out in a secretive manner and can be difficult to identify within the schools (Wright, 2003). Teachers and school administrators may not be aware of how it is carried out. They must therefore assess the seriousness of the behavior and ensure that the students are aware of the seriousness of the matter. They should also be aware of the consequences of bullying and the charges that exist for bullies. If the bullies continue threatening the lives of the other students the teachers and the school administrators should now come up with ways to help the bullies turn around their behaviors. They can confront the bullies in a firm and fair manner that will not provoke them. They can communicate to the bullies without threatening them and give stern warnings that their behavior will not be tolerated. More stern measures can be put up if the bullies do not change their behavior. The confrontations should be carried out in private to ensure that they bully does not become defiant and refuse to compliance (Wright, 2003). To encourage them to change their behavior they can be rewarded if the cases for bullying reduce. Parents can be involved in the process to establish the reasons that lead the children to bully others. Where the reasons are based on the environment at home the parents can be involved in the process of reforming the behaviors of the bullies. Counseling can be used to help the children deal with the issues at home and reduce their chances of taking out their problems or anger on other students (Banks, 1997).

Brain in a Vat Critique

Brain in a Vat Critique Donald Davidsons philosophical writings include a variety of essays that plays an important role in the realm of Philosophy of Action, Mind, and Language. His profound essay Action, Reason, and Causes (1963) set about a standard for the action theory wherein he begins by claiming that reason rationalizes the action and that this rationalization of an agent (characterized as having a pro-attitude and a belief) is a species of causal explanation. In addition to this, Davidsons significant contribution to the Philosophy of Mind is his concept of Anomalous Monism which serves as a foundation of his philosophical work. Now, let us consider a sceptic argument of Brain in a vat, a fiction so created via scientific technique, as discussed by Renà © Descartes1 and Hilary Putnam. Just to assume, what if we are all brains in a vat, being fed electrical impulses by computers [as operated by scientist] impulses that alter our brain states and thereby create pseudo-experiences, and beliefs.2 If we regard this assumption to be true, then the hypothesis of Brain in a Vat in prospect brings with it the illusion of experience of performing an action and having some beliefs (that are actually being imposed by the scientist). Here, two positions are considered- one, Davidsons theory of Belief and Action and, other, the sceptical hypothesis of being a Brain in a Vat. So, considering Davidsons philosophical approach towards human actions, beliefs, and thoughts; in this paper, I intend to figure out his response to this given- assumed- situation of Brain in a Vat and the extent to which he can dissipate such sceptical argument, in order to justify his theory. I have divided my paper in three main sections wherein section I is an overview of Davidsons philosophy followed up by section II which takes into account the exposition of Brain in a vat argument. And finally, section III which shows Davidsons dissipation of such a sceptical hypothesis. I. An Overview of Davidsons Philosophy Davidson is accredited of presenting a suave philosophical account of interpreting human actions that depicts the very existence of human beings and so can be expressed as a means of self- expression.3 He maintained that every action that an agent perform (under a description) has a primary reason involved, inclusive of a pro-attitude (, i.e., desires, wants, urges) and a belief (, i.e., knowing, perceiving). This constitutes the rationalization of an agent (as governed by reason) which Davidson argues is a species of causal explanation. This can be formulated as: R is a primary reason why an agent performed the action A under the description d only if R consists of a pro attitude of the agent towards actions with a certain property, and a belief of the agent that A, under the description d, has that property.4 So it can be said that the essential point in Davidsons approach towards action is that an action so performed by the agent is voluntary in nature; it is an intentional act performed with reason, under a particular description. But, here, Davidson pointed out that to know the primary reason of an action so performed by the agent is to know the intention of an agent in performing the action, but the converse is not necessarily true.5 Moreover, he emphasized on the role of causal concepts in the description and explanation of human action6 which brings with it the foremost concern that even primary reason for an action is its cause.7 There is a proper pattern of cause and effect that is involved in explanation of an action that connects the physical event being performed with the mental event (or intention) of an agent. Now, a question can be asked as to what is this Mental that Davidson is talking about? What does he mean by Mental? Simon Evnine has clearly explained this notion by characterizing mental states into sensations (that an agent may feel) and the intentionality which includes beliefs, desires (that are also referred as propositional attitudes). Davidson is primarily concerned with the propositional attitudes that have propositional content and so has confined himself to the content-bearing, propositional states8. As he said: The distinguishing feature of the mental is not that it is private, subjective, or immaterial, but that it exhibits what Brentano called Intentionality.9 Moreover, mental states can be analysed from two perspectives: the first-person point of view and the third-person point of view. The former is according to agents sensations and the latter is in accord with propositional attitudes that is pertinent to Davidsons view. This is because, as Evnine mentioned, understanding in terms of rationality is a distinctive human activity (or is a communal activity) which is in principle public and observable to all. And the states like belief, desire play an important role in this way.10 Also, two kinds of laws are generally considered in relation to the Mental the psychophysical laws that connect mental states to physical states; and the psychological laws that connect mental states to mental states itself. Davidson denies the value or presence of both these laws and this is what he has in his mind when he talks about The Anomalism of the Mental. As he writes, . . . The causal dependence, and the anomalousness, of mental events are undeniable facts.11 Thereby, Davidson advocated his theory of Anomalous Monism which exhibits the fact that mental states or events cannot be given purely physical explanations; such that not all events are mental, while . . . all events are physical.12 This may mean that, since there is a categorical difference between the mental and the physical state, it is regarded that there cannot be any strict psychophysical law. As he stated in his essay Mental Events (1970): It is a feature of physical reality that physical change can be explained by the laws that connect it with other changes and conditions physically described. It is a feature of the mental that the attribution of mental phenomenon must be responsible to the background of reasons, beliefs, and intention of the individual. There cannot be tight connections between the realms if each is to retain allegiance to its proper source of evidence.13 Davidson pointed out that, although the two states of mental and physical cannot be connected with any particular law, in spite of having some causal interaction between them, yet it can be said that the characterisations of mental events somehow depend on the characterisation of physical events. This may be termed as Supervenience, i.e., an object cannot alter in some mental respect without altering in some physical respect.14 But this does not imply any sort of reducibility whatsoever. Further, as it has been observed that Davidson is primarily concerned with the interpretation of human actions, wherein both mental and the physical state or event has a distinctive role to pay, the next consideration demands the specific attribute of interpretation itself. The question may be asked: what makes interpretation possible? What is the role of understanding in interpretation? Given a situation, what if you land up in a place you are completely unaware of. You cannot understand the language or utterance of the people (of that unknown place) and so you are unable to interpret their happenings or the behaviour of the people of the unknown environment. This implies that without understanding, no interpretation is ever possible. In order to interpret the actions of the people (of the unknown place), to attribute beliefs, desires and other mental states to them, to assign meaning to their utterances and say what they are doing, we have to begin from scratch.15 Thereby, Davidson posits the problem of interpretation and maintained that All understanding of the speech of another involves radical interpretation.16 So, having a great influence of Quines Radical Translation, Davidson advocated (a little different) doctrine of Radical Interpretation wherein the interpreter tries to understand the actions of the people, allocating meaning to their sayings, according to the environment they are living in. In a way, Radical Interpretation, as Evnine explained, is a theoretical exercise designed to reveal the interrelations between the various intentional, or propositional states and events like beliefs, desires, linguistic utterances and actions, and the relation between these states and events and non-intentional states, and events such as brain states, noises; marks on paper and bodily movements.17 Now, Radical Interpretation has been credited of having two features- Normativity and Holism. Normative principles are general principles that is applicable to every other person in concern which deals with the question, how things should or ought to be? Davidson claims that radical interpretation should be guided by normative principles for mental states can justify other mental states, having an assumption that the person concerned is rational. So rationalization has an essential role in terms of attribution of mental states. However, rationality, here, is restricted in the sense of its relation to the world and actions being performed.18 Secondly, regarding the holistic feature of radical interpretation, it is claimed that mental states are adhered only in relation to other mental states. The attribution of the mental states is based on the behaviour of the agent performing actions, but such attribution is not fixed and so must be made according to the attributes of other mental states. So in the light of other attributions, the reason for an action can be considered.19 Thereby, it can be said that in Davidsons view actions and mental states mesh together in a holistic network . . . a web in which everything is connected, either directly or indirectly, to everything else.20 Thus, Davidsons account of interpretation as normative and holistic is about rational interpretation and attribution of mental states only. But this does not mean that no error in terms of interpretation is ever possible for there can be a gap between interpretation of belief of someone and his actual belief. This brings us to take into account the indeterminacy of interpretation which allows the possibility of having more than one set of interpretation. Moving on, can we say, in Davidsonian context- Is there any connection between Interpretation and Anomalous Monism? Quite obviously, there is a strong connection between Interpretation and Anomalous Monism that yields a correct analysis of utterance of the speaker. To explain this- utterance is an action, and so an event, and to interpret a certain event, we ought to describe it. And this description gives the meaning of the uttered sentence. So, in context of Interpretation and Anomalous Monism, we are concerned with events and descriptions. Events, in themselves, are opaque and meaningless. But they can be seen as intentional actions or mental events only when they are described in a certain way.21 As Davidson writes: we interpret a bit of linguistic behaviour when we say what a speakers words mean on an occasion of use. The task may be seen as one of redescription.22 Now, Radical Interpretation occurs only when the interpreter is able to understand the unknown language for which meaning of language is very important as the essence of language lies in understanding and its usage. But how can we account for the truthfulness of the sentences being uttered by the speaker? Or, how can we account for the validity of the interpretation itself? In order to answer this, Davidson accommodated The Principle of Charity, i.e., an assumption that the speakers utterances will be counted as true, in terms of his belief as well as his meaning. For the belief of the speaker and the meaning of the sentence incorporates the truthfulness of the sentences being uttered by the speaker. The underlying thought of this principle is the fact that given this Principle of Charity, it is generally assumed that the speakers utterances will be regarded as true and rational. Although even this assumption is guided by rationality (in broader context), however, the Principle of Ch arity also include the possibility of mistaken beliefs for its base is assumption only. The point is that The Principle of Charity cannot be sidelined if we are to adhere to Radical Interpretation, in Davidsonian context. This is so because the concept of belief, desire, meaning and intentional action are defined by what the theory, the principle of charity, says about them.23 But, even The Principle of Charity, which has been adopted as an across-the-board basis24, can be sorted out into two main principles The Principle of Correspondence and The Principle of Coherence. The former principle takes into account the assumption of the truthfulness of the speakers utterances per se whereas, the latter principle takes into account the principles governing attribution of attitudes to an agent and description of the agents behaviour so as to make the agent out to be by and large rational.25 Also, Davidson in concern with epistemology upholds the position that coherence yields correspondence; wherein coherence allows a set of true beliefs of an agent (as guided by his rationality and understanding). Again assumption plays a central role here as well, as he said: There is a presumption in favour of the truth of a belief that coheres with a significant mass of belief. Every belief in a coherent total set of beliefs is justified in the light of this presumption, much as every intentional action taken by a rational agent . . . is justified.26 However, it should be noted that Truth is not to be defined specifically in terms of coherence and belief, for truth is primitive, according to Davidson, and is always in relation of correspondence with the existing world. More so, in spite of adhering to his coherence theory as assuming the truthfulness of beliefs of an agent, Davidson accepts the possibility of even coherent set of false beliefs that an agent may have because of the gap between what is held to be true and what is true.27 II. Being a Brain in a vat The sophisticated form of the sceptical hypothesis of being a Brain in a vat in prospect has been addressed by Hilary Putnam in Reason, Truth and History (1981). This possibility urges us to assume, what if we are really brains in a vat? , i.e., what if the experiences (or sensations) I am currently having is as per the scientists wish? In other words, the argument of Brain in a Vat as stated by Putnam, says: A human being . . . has been subjected to an operation by an evil scientist. The persons brain . . . has been removed from the body and placed in a vat of nutrients which keeps the brain alive. The nerve endings have been connected to a super- scientific computer which causes the person whose brain is to have the illusion that everything is perfectly normal.28 This implies that a being can never know that he is not a brain in a vat because it might be the case that the experience he is having is being fed to him by the scientist, and that his experience is ex-hypothesi identical with that of something which is not a brain in a vat.29 Although Putnam considered such a fictional argument that has its space in some physically possible world, however, he denies the practical possibility of the sceptical argument by regarding it to be self-refuting in nature.30 I shall take up this view of Putnam later, for as of now my main focus is to assume the situation of being a Brain in a Vat to be true wherein all that the person is experiencing is the result of electronic impulses travelling from the computer to the nerve endings . . . that if the person tries to raise his hand, the feedback from the computer will cause him to see and feel the hand being raised.31 This may mean that the person is, as though, performing an action (of raising his hand) or having a sensation or feeling; in spite of being a brain as merely placed in a vat. In addition, another case of such a scientific fiction that can be put forward is that of Turings Test a test that can judge whether a computer (or machine) is conscious or not? Turing advocated the following test: let someone carry on a conversation with the computer and a conversation with a person whom he does not know. If he cannot tell which is the computer and which is the human being, then . . . the computer is conscious . . . the conversations are all carried on via electric type-writer.32 The point that Turing maintained is that even a machine can be qualified as being conscious, having thoughts, if it passes the test. But even the test that Turing advocated is criticized for the very fact that there is a gap between the concept of being conscious and the computers technical language. Now, as having considered the point that even a Brain in a Vat (in some sense) is performing some action or is having some belief that may have (in his perspective) some rationalization of his performing an action; although in actuality, those experiences are all being induced by the scientist. Here, let us consider that given this assumed-situation of being a Brain in a Vat to Davidson; let us figure out his response towards such a sceptical position. Quite obviously, Davidson dissipates such a position, but let us see how. III. Against Brain in a vat A Davidsonian version The very assumption of being a Brain in a Vat brings with itself the practical difficulties that can never be accounted for. The reason being that it is a mere scientific technique, a fiction that induces the illusion of having experiences, beliefs or performing actions, to the brain as kept in a created- scientific- environment, a vat. Putnam, himself, attributed such a hypothesis to be self-refuting in nature, and explicitly denies any junction between the brain in a vat world and the actual world.33 But, since my concern is with Davidsons version, let us consider his objection against this sceptical hypothesis with special reference to his Coherence Theory.34 Davidson assumed (and so asserted) that there are coherent set of true beliefs, however, he never rejected the fact that there can also be coherent set of false beliefs. He maintained that beliefs can be false as well but the very concept of false beliefs introduces a potential gap between what is regarded as being true and what is actually true.35 Although the possibility of having false beliefs is minimum in Davidsons context, yet this can be viewed directly against the Brain in a Vat hypothesis as the brain that has been placed in a vat- a created scientific environment, have illusory beliefs merely based on some sensory stimulations*  [1]  that are surely false, and the very fact that the brain in a vat have false beliefs itself shows that there is a practical- potential- gap between the created world of brain in a vat and the actual rational world of human beings. Even Putnam explained this by saying that there is no qualitative similarity between the thought of the brain in a vat and the thought of someone in the actual world.36 Secondly, to consider Quines view, he said that the meaning . . . [of] sentence is determined by the patterns of sensory stimulations that would cause a speaker to assent to or dissent from the sentence.37 Davidson argues that such an account will invite scepticism leading to the falsity of every sentence whatsoever. As he said, when meaning goes epistemological in this way, truth and meaning are necessarily divorced.38 He asserts that sensory stimulations can never be regarded as an evidence or justification for the belief (which is veridical in nature). In his words: Quine . . . ties the meanings of some sentences directly to patterns of stimulations . . . but the meanings of further sentences are determined by how they are conditioned to the original, or observation sentences. The facts of such conditioning do not permit a sharp division between sentences held true by virtue of meaning and sentences held true on the basis of observation . . . I now suggest [to give up] the distinction between observation sentences and the rest. For the distinction between sentences belief in whose truth is justified by sensations and sentences belief in whose truth is justified only by appeal to other sentences held true is as anathema to the conherentist as the distinction between beliefs justified by sensations and beliefs justified only by appeal to further beliefs. Accordingly, I suggest we give up the idea that meaning or knowledge is grounded on something that counts as an ultimate source of evidence. No doubt meaning and knowledge depend on experience and experience ultimately on sensation. But this is the depend of causality, not of evidence or justification.39 This, again, can be posited against Brain in a Vat hypothesis for the hypothesis, in itself, invokes vague- sensory stimulations which go against the possibility of having any valid stimulated belief. As a result, the stimulated belief of a brain which is placed in a created scientific environment of a vat is false. Moreover, to determine the content of a belief, Davidson endorsed the view that in radical interpretation, we should identify the object of a belief with the cause of that belief. This view can also be directed against Brain in a Vat hypothesis. The reason being that according to the sceptic, the content of brains belief is not dependent on their causes.40 But this is not acceptable to Davidson as, for him, causality plays an indispensable role in determining the content of what we say and believe.41 And as interpreters, we must consider the belief of a brain in a vat in accordance with its actual environment, the environment that causes those beliefs, with special reference to The Principle of Charity. So in the case of a brain in a vat, Davidson claims that one must have knowledge of computers technical environment. He argues that though the brain is functioning and is having a sensation of performing some action with an illusory belief, but the brain is only reacting to the featur es of its environment which is, in actuality, a computers technical data storehouse. So, therefore, the only way to interpret those actions is to correlate it with the bits of data that the computer is feeding in.42 And such an action cannot have any logical- valid- interpretation in a rational behaviouristic sense of being human. Further, just to consider Turings Test (as explained earlier in section II), Davidson argues against the Turings test of machines claiming them to be conscious. He gave an example of John, a rational human being and Robo-John, artificially created John proxy. Davidson explains that John is causally connected to the actual things outside in the actual world. But Robo-John is not causally connected with the things outside in the actual world. And so, unlike John, Robo-John does not think. Thus, Turing is wrong as John does think whereas his proxy Robo-John does not.43 If this is the case, then it is applicable to the Brain in a Vat argument as well (in terms of actions), for in such a created- scientific- situation there is no causal connection between the brain (as placed in a created environment) and the actual world. Lastly, Davidsons objection to this sceptical hypothesis can also be posited with the help of the notion of understanding. As Davidson maintained that the coherence theory is about beliefs or sentences held true by someone who understands them.44 But it can be questioned that does Brain in a Vat have any understanding as it involves rationalization pertaining to the normal human behaviour? There is a strong doubt that the functional brain which is placed in a vat is able to understand any activity, in spite of being induced the sensations, the beliefs by the scientist. So even though the hypothesis is accredited of performing some action which is a mere illusion, it will not have any capacity to understand things accordingly. Conclusion Thus it can be said that Davidsons position of an action being performed by an agent, that has a proper belief and pro attitude, is about a rational human agent living in this actual real world of human beings who are guided by reasons. It is certainly not about a brain being placed in a scientific- created- environment, a vat and, then, having an illusion of performing an action and having some illusory beliefs and sensations that are actually being induced by the scientist. Whatever actions or beliefs that a Brain in a Vat is experiencing is not grounded on any primary reason, for the brain in concern is merely having false beliefs of experiencing the reality, the false belief of performing some action, it is a case of mere illusion, hallucination that does not have place in Davidsons project. More so, since there cannot be any connection between the brain in a vat world and the actual world of beings, Davidson dissipates the position of being a Brain in a Vat whose scientific, co mputer- created- environment is completely opposed to that of being human and so can never be interpreted in accord with our behavioural patterns and the actions of human agents, as even to interpret the actions of someone, we need to attribute some beliefs in a holistic network according to our rationality. But this seems infirm in the case of brain in a vat. Though the brain placed in a vat is having a belief of performing some false action, still is restricted in his small created domain and so interpreting his actions will be determined in terms of his computer oriented environment which again is being created by a scientist and is contrary to the world of being human per se and hence, is not at par with the rationality of humans as well. And so to understand and interpret the actions or language of a brain placed in a vat in a holistic way would be like interpreting the actions of a swimmer (while swimming) without even knowing what basic technique is required to swim. Hence, t he actions of a Brain in a Vat is merely envision without having any substantial ground. For Davidson claims: If we cannot find a way to interpret the utterances and other behaviour of a creature as revealing a set of beliefs largely consistent and true by our own standards, we have no reason to count that creature as rational, as having beliefs, or as saying anything.45 Reference Notes 1 See Concept of Evil Demon by Renà © Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy, Trans. John Veitch, (Watchmaker Publishing, USA, 2010), 97-103 2 Richard Rorty, Davidson versus Descartes; in Dialogues with Davidson: Acting, Interpreting, Understanding, ed. by Jeff Malpas, (Cambridge: The MIT Press, London, 2011), 3 3 Simon Evnine, Donald Davidson, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), 39 4 See Davidsons essay Action, Reason and Causes in Donald Davidson, Essays on Action and Events, second edition (Oxford: Larendon Press, 2001), 3-5 5 Ibid. , 7 6 Donald Davidson, Essays on Action and Events, second edition (Oxford: Larendon Press, 2001), xv 7 See Davidsons essay Action, Reason and Causes in Donald Davidson, Essays on Action and Events, second edition (Oxford: Larendon Press, 2001), 4 8 Simon Evnine, Donald Davidson, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), 7-8 9 See Davidsons essay Mental Events in Donald Davidson, Essays on Action and Events, second edition (Oxford: Larendon Press, 2001), 211 10 Simon Evnine, Donald Davidson, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), 9 11 See Davidsons essay Mental Events in Donald Davidson, Essays on Action and Events, second edition (Oxford: Larendon Press, 2001), 207 12 Ibid. , 214 13 Ibid. , 222 14 Ibid. , 214 15 Simon Evnine, Donald Davidson, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), 10 16 See Davidsons essay Radical Interpretation in Donald Davidson, Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984), 125 17 Simon Evnine, Donald Davidson, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), 10-11 18 Ibid. , 11-12 19 Ibid. , 14-16 20 Ibid. , 39 21 Ibid. , 99 22 See Davidsons essay Belief and the basis of Meaning in Donald Davidson, Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984), 141 23 Simon Evnine, Donald Davidson, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), 113 24 See Davidsons essay Belief and the basis of Meaning in Donald Davidson, Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984), 153 25 Kirk Ludwig, ed., Donald Davidson, (Cambridge University Press, 2003), 17 26 See Davidsons essay A Coherence theory of Truth and Knowledge in Truth and Interpretations: perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson, ed., Ernest LePore, (Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1986), 308 27 Ibid. , 308 28 Hilary Putnam, Brain in a vat, in Epistemology: Contemporary Readings, ed., Michael Huemer, (Routledge, 2002), 527 29 Jonathan Dancy, An Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology, (Blackwell Publications, 1985), 10 30 Hilary Putnam, Brain in a vat, in Epistemology: Contemporary Readings, ed., Michael Huemer, (Routledge, 2002), 528 31 Ibid. , 527 32 Ibid. , 529 33 Ibid. , 532 34 Davidson never directly attacked or objected Brain in a vat argument in any of his work. I have tried to postulate the objections that Davidson might have against such a fictional possibility and the so called illusory actions being performed. 35 See Davidsons essay A Coherence theory of Truth and Knowledge in Truth and Interpretations: perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson, ed., Ernest LePore, (Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1986), 308 36 Hilary Putnam, Brain in a vat, in Epistemology: Contemporary Readings, ed., Michael Huemer, (Routledge, 2002), 532 37 See Davidsons essay A Coherence theory of Truth and Knowledge in Truth and Interpretations: perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson, ed., Ernest LePore, (Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1986), 313 38 Ibid. , 313 39 Ibid. , 313-314 40 Simon Evnine, Donald Davidson, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), 142-143 41 See Davidsons essay A Coherence theory of Truth and Knowledge in Truth and Interpretations: perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson, ed., Ernest LePore, (Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1986), 317 42 Richard Rorty, Davidson versus Descartes; in Dialogues with Davidson: Acting, Interpreting, Understanding, ed. by Jeff Malpas, (Cambridge: The MIT Press, London, 2011), 4 43 John-Michael Kuczynski, Davidson on Turing: Rationality Misunderstood?, (Principia 9, 1-2, 2005), accessed October 07, 2012; http://www.periodicos.ufsc.br , 114-115 44 See Davidsons essay A Coherence theory of Truth and Knowledge in Truth and Interpretations: perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson, ed., Ernest LePore, (Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1986), 308 45 See Davidsons essay Radical Interpretation i

Biometric Cryptosystem :: Technology, Encryption

As stated in ISO/IEC JTC1 SC37 biometrics is defined as the automated recognition of individuals based on their behavioural; and biological characteristics. As discussed in section-------(Intro to biometrics) the main process involved in biometric recognition are Enrollment and Verification or Identification in general called as recognition. During the Enrollment process features of the captured biometric entity are converted to template, to be stored in database for further matching. At the stage of recognition , template obtained from the features of the realtime biometric entity are compared against the stored template. The result of matching process involved in recognition is either accept or reject[1]. It has been a long time belief that the biometric signals or data cannot be reconstructed from the stored templates but Cappelli et.al and Ross et.al[2][3] has proven that the belief of biometric data reconstruction from the templates is possible. In order to protect the biometric data , several standard encryption algorithms has been used. But, this attempt leaves the biometric templates exposed during every authentication attempt[4]. Even homomorphic and asymmetric encryption schmes [5][6][7] represent some exceptions. Conventional cryptosystems is based on the possession of secret keys and key management is performed using second layer authentication entity like password[8]. Decryption keys in this scheme could be obtained by using the password. To overcome the drawbacks of the existing schemes, biometric template protection schemes which are commonly called as biometric cryptosystems also referred to as Helper data-based scheme are proposed. Two major requirements of biometric information protection as per ISO/IEC FCD 24745 standard are, †¢ Irreversibility Reconstruction of original biometric template from the stored template should be made difficult whereas construction of protected biometric template from the stored template should be made easy. †¢ Unlinkability Several different versions of protected biometric templates can be generated based on the same biometric data, which is referred to as renewability whereas the protected templates should not cross-match, which is referred to as diversity. Biometric cryptosystems herein after referred to as BCS are designed to securely bind a digital key to a biometric or generate a digital key [9]. BCS paves way for the growth of biometric dependant key-release and biometric template protection [10][11]. BCS is more difficult to forge, copy, share and distribute biometric data when compared to that of passwords [1]. Conventional biometric cryptosystems perform fuzzy comparisons by applying decision thresholds. Decision thresholds are obtained based on the score distributions between genuine and imposter subjects, whereas BCS gives only stable keys as output , which are required for matching at the authentication stage.

Physical Development and Health in Middle Childhood

Physical Development and Health in Middle Childhood Rosibel CastroPhysical Development in Middle Childhood The hidden changes in children's bodies that enable the movements so familiar to us-riding bikes, climbing, jumping, skipping (p.289). Between the ages of 6 and 12, children grow 2 to 3 inches and add about 6 pounds each year. Girls age range are head of boys. Girls also have more body fat and less muscle tissue than boys (p.290). Bones mature in such a regular and predictable way that physicians use bone age as the best single measure of a child's physical maturation. The process of bone development gives us a powerful argument in favor of increased exercise or physical activity for children. The endocrine system strongly influences physical growth and development. During the middle school years, the glands of the endocrine system change gradually in ways to prepare the body for the momentous changes that will occur during sexual maturation, or puberty. A muscle mass increases in middle childhood, so does strength. Boys and girls differ in strength in two ways:Boys outperform girls on measures of strength, including tasks that involve using the muscles to apply pressure to a device used to measure muscle force.The ratio of strength to body size is greater amongst boys, thus boys require less effort to move their bodies through space than girls do. Both boys and girls become stronger during middle childhood.Children's capacity for extended physical activity (stamina) rises steeply across the middle childhood years as well. (Gabbard,2008). If we observe children at the playgrounds, we will notice that preschoolers display short bursts of physical activity followed by periods of rest. Changes in stamina are linked to growth of the heart and lungs, which is evident during later years of middle childhood. These changes enable children bodies to take in more oxygen and to distribute it throughout the body more efficiently. Two major growth spurts happen in the brain during middle childhood. (Spreen, Risser, ; Edgell, 1995). In most healthy children, the first takes place between the ages 6 and 8, the second between the ages 10 and 12. Both spurts involve development of new synapses as well as increase in the thickness of the cortex. Some of the first motor skills infants use are eye movements, and slowly this expands to movement of the arms, legs, and hands (even though they're uncoordinated). Eventually, the child begins crawling and walking. Gross motor skills involve activities like rolling over, sitting up, crawling, and walking. These allow the child to gain new perspectives from which to evaluate their surrounding environment, enabling them to begin learning social skills and rules. Fine motor skills involve more intricate tasks like touching, grabbing, and manipulating objects, enabling learning about the details of different objects and people. Advances in both gross and fine motor skills interact to allow children to develop sports skills such as hitting a baseball. About one-quarter to one-third of children in the united states suffer from allergies, immune reactions to substances called allergens. Children who have respiratory allergies experience sneezing, stuffy noses, and more frequent sinus infections. Food allergies can affect the respiratory system as well. The most frequent cause of school absences is asthma. Asthma is a chronic lung disease in which individuals experience sudden, potentially fatal attacks of breathing difficulty. An acute illness has the following characteristics:Onset is usually abrupt and from a single causeDevelops quickly and worsens rapidly, such as an infection, trauma or injuryUsually isolated to one bodily areaCan be diagnosed and responds to treatmentAcute pain stops when the illness is healedMay heal by itself or can be treated and returned to normal within a few days or up to three monthsIf it lasts longer than three months, it may be the start of a chronic illnessThe following are generally descriptive of chronic illnesses:Onset is commonly gradualDuration is lengthy and indefiniteCause is usually multiple and can be a combination of genetic and environmental factorsDiagnosis is often uncertain; getting an accurate diagnosis can be a long, difficult processThere is no cure and requires management over time In my opinion, we do most of the learning about our bodies during middle childhood, the reason I say this is because, we learn about ourselves, the environment around us, this i s the time when we are truly exposed to everything out there. Children are aware that they have allergies, they know they need their asthma pumps if they start having trouble breathing. During this time children know what kind of sports they want to play and they know what limits to push their bodies too. If a child is obese he will not want to join any sports not only because he might be â€Å"fat shamed† but also because he knows his body is not prepare to be put into the sports routine.ReferencesThe Growing Child, Denise Boyd, Helen Bee 2009.https://study.com/academy/lesson/perceptual-motor-development-definition-components.html https://www.navicenthealth.org/service-center/health-associates-general/acute-and-chronic-illnesses

194620 Secondary victimisation Essay Example

194620 Secondary victimisation Essay Example 194620 Secondary victimisation Essay 194620 Secondary victimisation Essay ( 1 ) Critically discuss whether the commissariats for the support, protection, and aid of vulnerable and intimidated informants are an effectual manner of covering with secondary exploitation. ( 2 ) Should victims of serious offenses, such as colza and the household members of homicide victims have the right to legal representation during the test? If so, should they be entitled to such representation at all phases of the test, or merely at the condemning phase? Introductory Note Part ( 1 ) requires a reappraisal of the relevant primary UK statute law. The statutory commissariats that are discussed below are non intended as an thorough but instead a representative list in this respect. The relevant European Union statute law is besides considered in this context, given the possible linkage to UK procedural patterns by operation of theHuman Rights Act, and others. Unless otherwise specified, the footingsvictimandinformantare given separate consideration ; each term is sometimes used interchangeably in the academic literature where secondary victimization is critically analysed. Part ( 2 ) is examined by manner of a two phase analysis: one, the UK attack to victim legal representation at the declared facets of the condemnable test procedure is considered ; two, a comparative attack is adopted to contrast the cardinal characteristics of similar victim representation governments in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The United States was non selected because the condemnable processs in single American provinces has spawned a assortment of somewhat inconsistent attacks that render a comparing with UK pattern hard. As secondary exploitation is the common component for treatment in Parts ( 1 ) and ( 2 ) , the undermentioned definition of the term will be applied throughout the analysis. Secondary exploitationis defined as a circumstance or set of fortunes where a victim of offense ( or in limited fortunes, a household member of a offense victim ) sustains an enhanced degree of enduring due to the insensitiveness of either single individuals or a lawfully mandated procedure within the condemnable justness system, by virtuousness of the victim’s mandated engagement in the system. [ 1 ] The assorted elements of the definition are explored in item below ; secondary exploitation can happen at any occasion within the condemnable justness system continuum that is bounded by a victim’s initial contact with a individual in authorization as a consequence of the committee of a condemnable act, to any concluding contacts with the tribunal or other justness bureaus post strong belief or sentence. [ 2 ] The justness bureaus that have been examined most strictly as prospective culprits of secondary exploitation in the UK include the constabulary services, the Victim Service, the Crown Prosecution Service, defense mechanism advocate and the bench. The look ‘second wound’ is the redolent analogy that has been employed in the academic literature to depict secondary exploitation. [ 3 ] Institutional patterns and values that place the demands of the organisation above the demands of victims are implicated in the job. [ 4 ] An of import issue that is frequently overlooked in the academic interventions of secondary exploitation is the inalterable fact the all signifiers of exploitation have a deeply subjective constituent – there are grades and variableness to victim position. The civil wrong jurisprudence panacea refering the thin skulled complainant is correspondent here. Part ( 1 ) Vulnerable and easy intimidated people are a cardinal component to the map of the condemnable justness system. It is singular that given the prominence of exposure in every facet of offense as either committed or prosecuted that the condemnable justness system initiatives to convey comfort to the vulnerable within the procedure have been so comparatively recent in beginning. There are three basic groupings of UK condemnable justness statute law ( and back uping instance jurisprudence ) that impact upon secondary exploitation constructs. These may be set out in chronological manner relation to the advancement of a typical condemnable proceeding: The first class includes the bond commissariats that are centred upon theBail Act, 1976and its legion subsequent amendments [ 5 ] . These commissariats represent the first legal agencies available to restrict secondary exploitation. The UK condemnable justness system rests on the cardinal rule of the given of artlessness, a rule that is besides the operative footing of bond. Home Office statistics confirm that 55 per centum of all UK [ 6 ] bond orders contain conditions that require the accused to stay off from another individual, frequently the purported victim or a informant. The same statistical mention provinces that over 30 per centum of juveniles and about 10 per centum of grownup individuals breach their bond conditions [ 7 ] . Bail is an imperfect mechanism with which to forestall secondary exploitation in the signifier of prohibited contact with a culprit. The 2nd grouping of available statutory protections for vulnerable individuals are the assorted regulations regulating test processs. The Condemnable Procedure Rules set up a series of protocols to be followed where an accused individual moving on his or her ain behalf proposes to traverse analyze a kid informant or an alleged sexual assault victim of any age or gender. [ 8 ] The Rule prevents such individuals from carry oning their ain defense mechanism in this manner. In fortunes where the exposure or fright on the portion of the victim / informant is established as a fact at test, the combined consequence of the Particular Measures Directions [ 9 ] and the Consolidated Criminal Practice Direction [ 10 ] have created a farther series of procedural devices that are designed to protect the vulnerable participants. These steps include: A screen fashioned over the witness enclosure to allow the accused individual from physically doing oculus contact with the informant without impairing the ability of the accused to hear the informant and therefore do full reply and defense mechanism. [ 11 ] A unrecorded telecasting nexus between a secure room and the tribunal room, where the vulnerable informant and a designated informant support individual are positioned to take part in existent clip but through the distant agencies of closed circuit telecasting [ 12 ] The proviso of a witness’ grounds through an sanctioned intermediary [ 13 ] Evidence obtained by manner of a picture entering [ 14 ] The progress redaction of statements to be tendered by the Crown where the personal identifiers of the informant are removed The exclusion of the populace from the tribunal room ; publication bans with regard to the individuality or other personal specifics of the informant In sexual assault prosecutions in the UK, it is the line of oppugning refering the anterior sexual history of the alleged victim that the accused is permitted to prosecute that frequently raises the more profound inquiries of secondary exploitation. The House of Lords inA, Roentgen[ 15 ] ruled that such inquiries were by and large allowable in a instance turning on the defense mechanism of consent ; the UK strong belief rate in sexual assault prosecutions is less than 10 per centum. [ 16 ] Such statistics beg the inquiry – is a individual a victim as a consequence of an act, or merely upon strong belief of the wrongdoer? The 3rd grouping of legislative commissariats directed at secondary exploitation applies to the station finding of fact / sentencing phase. Victim impact styled statements are admissible for the intents of condemning ; the positions of the victim, as expressed in unfastened tribunal or in composing have changing grades of impact upon the condemning procedure. Like bond conditions, condemning commissariats frequently provide a agency of legal protection for the victim through prohibitions sing contact from the accused. The blunt legalistic linguistic communication of all three types of commissariats does non adequately convey the ineluctable truth of the relationship between a victim of offense and the procedure – one time a individual becomes a victim and reports the happening, they are public belongings. [ 17 ] It is submitted that the victim asde facto‘public property’ and the primacy of the accused right to be presumed guiltless creates a fertile environment for secondary exploitation to boom. The justness system as it is presently constructed can neer neutralize the chance. Viewed from this position, Part ( 1 ) poses the incorrect inquiry – instead than see whether the support and aid rendered to victims and informants is appropriate, the analysis could get down with the proposition ‘what do victim / informantstrulydesire? ’ If the system were oriented to turn to a determineddemand, as opposed to legislatively expectingresult, the replies would be more enlightening. Stated another manner, the current UK system is geared to procure the engagement of the victims and informants who might otherwise baulk at being involved. The system is non designed to needfully supply them with satisfaction in the consequence. Given the primacy of the accused’s involvements within the justness system, the UK Victim Support system is unusually efficient and end directed. The chiefly voluntary construction of the service is alone among Commonwealth legal powers, where similar services are funded at least in portion by the same authorities responsible for the prosecution. [ 18 ] To return to the inquiry of what victims and informants truly want, modern academic commentaries may be distilled to this expression as an reply: Voice / Respect / Trust / Neutrality / Time to talk with the prosecution[ 19 ] Part ( 2 ) Art frequently imitates life ; the fictional barrister Horace Rumpole, whose clients neer plead guilty and for whom ‘the given of artlessness is the aureate yarn of English jurisprudence’ [ 20 ] , is an accurate imitation of the public perceptual experience of condemnable justness and the primary importance attached to the rights of the accused. So long as this involvement is the premier mover of the condemnable justness system, all other involvements including those of the victim will be secondary. As significantly, there is an built-in public involvement in the effectual and orderly control of the test procedure. This construct demands a centralized prosecution service, vested in the State. Assuming that the single rights of a victim or informant within the test procedure are free standing and non merely a sub-set of the State responsibility to direct prosecutions in the public involvement that includes victims, the right to act upon the procedure must hold bounds. The wide prosecutorial public involvement can non be embodied in the private involvements of a victim, no affair how obliging their fortunes or how vile the offense. The legal representation of a victim to actively direct or act upon the behavior of a public test would be the terminal of public condemnable justness. The cause of a peculiar victim would potentially supplant the rights of the accused. If the victim of an alleged serious offense had the right to private legal representation, irresolvable struggles would show themselves in the undermentioned cardinal countries of trail process: the power to traverse examine informant the possible that alternate theories of liability may be offered the chance of revoking prosecutions The rights of a victim, no affair how redolent, must give manner to the right of the broader public to drag equity, certainty and predictability. However, assorted victims’ rights advocators, peculiarly since the early 1990s, have taken a different tack, one where a victim has their ain built-in right to legal representation at every phase of the procedure to forestall farther exploitation by asseverating control over the procedure. Victims rights advocators have argued that a profound struggle of involvement arises when the prosecution represents both the populace involvements and those of the victim. This place was the drift to the emerging field of victim legal representation. The authoritative illustration is the determination of the prosecution to offer a supplication agreement to an accused that is unacceptable to the victim ; the victim can non supplant prosecutorial discretion. [ 21 ] It is further submitted that a Fuller scope of victim representations within the test procedure would function to rise, and non cut down the chance of secondary exploitation. Greater engagement and procedural visibleness would transport a corresponding greater figure of chances to re-live or otherwise addition behavior with an unwanted memory. The current system may be said to mistake on the side of restricting victim engagement ; but if it is assumed that the true involvement of victims in the condemnable procedure are accurately captured by the expression described at the decision of Part ( 1 ) [ 22 ] , the current duty upon the prosecution to maintain victim’s informed, to guarantee that a victim has a voice at the clip of sentence while understating secondary exploitation is a sensible attempt to accomplish the aims of victim engagement. Australian enterprises to forestall ‘re-victimisation’ follow a theoretical account approximately similar to the present UK procedure [ 23 ] . The cardinal facets of the Australian doctrine may be reduced to the undermentioned points: that the attempts to forestall rev-victimisation are victim driven within the over all prosecutorial construction that the attempts of victim services to back up victims are crystalline and adaptable to the demands of the single victim These doctrines are echoed in the victim services programmes established in Canada and New Zealand. [ 24 ] The differentiation between victim support and legal representation must besides be delineated. [ 25 ] The UK policy that provides for a ‘Witness Care Unit’ to move as ade factoaffair between victim / informants and the prosecution is besides employed in the other Commonwealth legal powers noted [ 26 ] . It is common to help victims with recommendations that the party seek independent advocate on issues such as condemnable hurt compensation applications or possible civil amendss actions, procedures that are related to but non an organic facet of condemnable prosecutions. [ 27 ] The Victims Rights contemplated by current UK pattern are chiefly informational, without promoting the victim to litigant position in the proceedings. There is a farther evidentiary trouble sing an extension of a victim’s right to legal representation in the test procedure. A cardinal procedural device in condemnable tests is exclusion of informants from the tribunal room to forestall the informant from hearing the other testimony and perchance orienting their ain grounds in response. While such regulations are non an Fe clad warrant of evidentiary pureness, it is submitted that the ability of the tribunal to except a prospective informant who is besides a victim with legal advocate in attending creates the possible visual aspect of exclusion while their designate is listening to the grounds on their behalf. The condemning circle has been employed as a justness tool by autochthonal peoples in North America and Australia for centuries prior to white colonisation. It is the lone mechanism in modern condemnable justness that establishes a victim on an equal terms with an accused individual within the test procedure. The CanadianCondemnable Codeprovides that in the instance of Aboriginal wrongdoers, the accused individual may be sentenced by agencies of the condemning circle as an option toCondemnable Codecountenances. [ 28 ] The condemning circle is likewise authorised in Australian jurisprudence. [ 29 ] The sentencing circle is comprised of representatives of the offender’s community, including the victim and other of their household or relations. While the test justice maintains the ultimate authorization over temperament, condemning circles allow a important chance for input to be obtained from both victims and the local community. There are no ‘prosecution’ or defence’ entries as to punishment ; in add-on to doing representations sing the wrongdoer and the appropriate countenance, a victim and local community members besides provide important input into both the footings of countenance and how the wrongdoer may be supervised within the community. [ 30 ] It is an sarcasm of modern condemnable justness that the philosophical foundation that has supported the building of luxuriant precautions of victim / informant involvements in UK condemnable tests might see the simpleness of native condemning tribunals as a theoretical account for true community based renewing justness. United kingdomLegislative acts Bail Act, 1976 Bail Amendment Act, 1993 Crime and Disorder Act, 1998 Condemnable Procedure Rules, Special Measures Directive Rule 29.1 Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 Human Rights Act, 1998 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 United kingdomgovernments A, R v. [ 2001 ] UKHL 25 BailCrown Prosecution Servicehypertext transfer protocol: //www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section14/chapter_l.html ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) Cornwell, David ( 2006 ) Criminal Punishment and Restorative Justice. London: Waterside Press Fenwick, Helen ( 1997 ) Procedural Rights of Victims of Crime: Public or Private Ordering of the Criminal Justice Process? Modern Law Review 60 ( 3 ) , 317–333 Mortimer, John ( 1988 ) ‘Rumpole and the Age of Miracles’ ( Penguin ) ‘Rebuilding Lifes – Supporting Victims of Crime’ Secretary of State for the Home Department, ( December, 2005 ) pp. 1-54 Victims and Witnesss ( 2007 )Crown Prosecution Servicehypertext transfer protocol: //www.cps.gov.uk/victims_witnesses/index.html ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) Victim Support hypertext transfer protocol: //www.victimsupport.com/vs_england_wales/coping_with_crime/criminal_justice_system/index.php ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) Youthful Wrongdoers and Child Witnesses ( 2007 )Crown Prosecution Service hypertext transfer protocol: //www.cps.gov.uk/legal/section4/index.html ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) European Union European Forum for the Rights of Victims ( 2006 ) ‘The societal rights of victims of crime’ hypertext transfer protocol: //www.euvictimservices.org/EFVSDocs/social_rights.pdf ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) Australia The Penalties and Sentences and Other Acts Amendment Bill, 2000 Patterson, Andrew ( 2005 )Preventing Re-Victimisation: The South Australian Experience hypertext transfer protocol: //www.aic.gov.au/publications/proceedings/27/paterson.pdf ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) New Zealand Ministry of Justice / Restorative Justice ( 2006 ) hypertext transfer protocol: //www.justice.govt.nz/crrj/manual/module-3.html ( Accessed April 9, 2007 ) Canada An Act Respecting Victims of Crime Victims Bill of Rights, 1996 (Ontario ) Campbell, Rebecca and Sheela Raja(1999 )‘Secondary Victimization of Rape Victims: Penetrations from Mental Health Professionals Who Treat Survivors of Violence’Violence and Victims, V. 14 ( 3 ) R. v. Gladue [ 1999 ] 2 CNLR 252 ( SCC ) Wemmers, Jo-Anne and Katie Cyr ‘What equity means to offense victims: a societal psychological position on victim-offender mediation’Applied Psychology in Criminal Justice, 2006, 2 ( 2 ) Witness Protection Program Act, 1996 1