Legal Issues

Lafi PLC is a large and public company that manufactures and sells sportswear. Anyone related to this large company, be it a supplier, or a partner, or a logistics andor delivery team member, has the power to affect the image and reputation of this company. Therefore, everyone related to this company does not only have the responsibility to uphold the reputation and brand image of the company in the eyes of the public and especially competitors, but they also have the empowered authority in unspoken understanding that they are the guardians of the same (Stone, 2005).

Since Mick is the van driver responsible for the delivery of goods for Lafi Company, he is responsible for the image of the company due to the fact that for a given period of time during every delivery transaction, he is representing Lafi Company in a way. From the moment he loads material and goods for Lafi company in his van to the moment he unloads them at destination, his van represents Lafi. Important to note here however is the fact that the van belongs to Mick and he is the one who maintains is  however, such is the power of brand association that anything that goes wrong due to this van, it will affect in some way or the other on Lafi as a company as well. This is also because of the terms of the contract (Fox, 1974, and Kaufman, 2004) between Lafi and Mick, which expect Mick to work for Lafi a rgular 40 hours per week, and to stay present at Lafis premises whether there are any deliveries to be made or not.

Thus, when one day, while on a delivery run for Lafi, Micks van hits a lady and knocks her down, causing her to have a heart attack as a result of the shock, he is surely in trouble. This is because there are more factors to consider than the mere accident part of the whole incident (Fox, 1974). While it is true that accidents are just that  accidents, it is also true that Mick had been indulging in unethical behavior while on this delivery run for his employer, and had broken a law or two as well, which put the burden of the blame on Mick.

First off, despite being on duty, he was running a personal errand (delivering Christmas presents to his own family). This is simply unethical, no matter how innocent the errand is. Had he not been running this personal errand, he might never have encountered the lady on the road whom he knocked down and gave a heart attack to. If the company was to be blamed, they have no way to deny that Mick was on a personal errand because the incident took place while he was on duty for the company. Secondly, he was exceeding speed limit. This spells trouble from the very start, for both Mick, and the Lafi Company by extension. Whats most troubling is the fact that not only does the accident cause an elderly lady to have a heart attack after which she is left permanently incapacitated, all of which can be claimed in damages (Garner, p.16), Ollie, an elderly neighbor of Normas (the victims) is witness to the whole incident. To top it off, due to the shock of witnessing such an accident, she herself becomes ill with post-traumatic stress disorder (PSTD) (Satcher, 1999).

What I would advice Lafi PLC to do is to let Mick go of his job, as a public gesture of protest against his lack of responsibility toward his ethical obligation toward his job and duty. It would also make a public statement on behalf of Lafi PLC against his lack of respect for traffic laws, and thus would put Lafi PLC in a good light in front of its customers and general public. This is morally correct for Lafi PLC to do because apart from this being a matter of protecting the business, it is also a matter of Lafi PLCs right to responsible behavior on the part of its employees, in whom Lafi PLC has obviously invested it trust upon hiring.

I would advise Normas and Ollies representatives to sue Mick andor Lafi PLC for damages. I would advise Mick on the other hand, to accept his fault gracefully, plead guilty, and accept his penalty with whatever dignity that is left. The advice I have for PLC though, is that they should pay damages to Norma and Ollie not only on behalf of Mick (Wood, 2004), who probably will not have enough on him to do so himself, but also on behalf of itself (Sprack, 2006) as a company that has the publics best interest at its CSR-driven heart, and would not have let this unfortunate incident happen if it could control it.

Before entering college, I worked as an Assistant Manager at a local retail-store chain. Much to my amazement and excitement, I was offered the position as Manager in another location, to which I accepted.  Before I could take over as the official manager, I was required to complete several training courses through the company.  I completed courses on emergency situations,  banking responsibilities, monthly reporting, and a human resource course centered on the hiring and firing of employees. I had no idea how important the course on the hiring and firing of employees would be until the Christmas season of 2005.
   
The Christmas season really does not begin in retail after Thanksgiving, but rather it begins around the first part of October.  Managers are advised to hire one additional full-time employee and two additional part-time employees during this period.  I hired two male part-time stock employees to be used mainly on truck delivery days and several hours during the day.  Finally, I hired Jackie to be the new full-time cashier.  This would later prove to have been a mistake.
   
Jackie showed up on the open interview day that I had set up to take applications and do on-the-spot interviews.  She was an African-American woman in her mid 30s.  She had completed high school, but only had two prior work references.  She explained that this was due to the fact that she had gotten married and chosen to stay home with her two young children until they were in school.  All perspective employees were given an on-the-spot drug urinalysis screening and a form to fill out for a background check to be performed (Shaw, 2010).  This policy was mandated by corporate management.  Both the drug test and her criminal background check came back negative, and I was given the okay to hire her.  In the meantime, I had attempted several times to contact her two prior employment references.  One of the prior employers had gone out of business, and the second employer stated that the business was under new management, therefore he could not give any reference for an employee that had never worked for him personally.
   
When I formally offered the position to Jackie, she was very excited. I explained to her that employment the company did not provide a set schedule, but that she was guaranteed a 40 hour work week.  I stressed to her the importance of attendance and due to the Christmas season.  She said she understood.  The next morning Jackie was on time for work.  I introduced her to Tabby, my assistant manager, who would be training her over the next five days.  Jackie missed her third day of training due to car trouble.  She was not written-up, but was given a verbal warning.  I again explained that it was imperative that she be at work when scheduled, especially during the companys probationary period (Shaw, 2010).  Jackie apologized and promised that it would not happen again.
   
Less than a month into Jackies employment, she began missed more time. Family and personal illness and more car trouble were the reasons given.  When I requested a notice from the doctors office to put in her employee record, Jackie became angry and stated I was only asking for an excuse because she was black (Donahue, 2007).  She stomped out of my office, clocked out, and went home.  Honestly, I could have fired her at that point, but I chose to give her another chance because when she was at work, she did an excellent job.  Later in the week, Tabby asked to speak to me in private.  She explained to me that she had noticed Jackie ringing up her friends, but only scanning one or two of the items when there were clearly over 20-30 items on the counter.  I asked Tabby why she had not intervened and asked to see the receipt, but Tabby explained that she was on another register.  I then pulled the security tapes to validate Tabbys assertion, and they did.  I then contacted my regional manager.

Within the week, my regional manager showed up at my store.  He viewed the tapes and informed me that I was to insert a new tape into the surveillance system in my office.  I was then instructed to terminate Jackies employment immediately.  The regional manger signed the necessary forms, due to the fact that Jackie was being fired without a written warning (Shaw, 2010).  I called Jackie into my office that afternoon when she showed up for work.  I explained to Jackie the allegations that had been made against her without revealing the source. I explained to her that because this is a form of theft, she was terminated (Paetkau, 2007).  Jackie flew into a rage.  She insisted she was being fired because of her race.  I asked her to please turn in her nametag and company smock by the next day when she could pick-up her last paycheck. She continued her tirade throughout the store, knocked items off shelves, and broke things as she made her way to the door.  This made matter worse as I was required by company policy to contact the police to report the damages (Paetkau, 2007).  The regional manager also had to be contacted, and he chose to press charges for destruction of property and theft. The police dropped in at random and stated that Jackie fit the profile of someone who would try to retaliate in some way.  Two employees quit out of fear.
   
This was my first experience in firing someone, and I must say that it certainly has left a lasting impression.  If I had not listened to my assistant manager, my job would have been in jeopardy.  Theft creates problems with inventory and ends up costing the consumer more money for the products that they purchase.  Would I do things the same way today  Yes, I would because I was hired to do a job just as Jackie was hired to do a job.  My company had faith in me to uphold my position of employment and the responsibilities that it entailed.  I did what I was hired to do.  Jackie did not.

In the corporate governance, the boards of directors play a leading role of reforming the firm. The legal obligation of the directors in todays business in the reforms proposal are emphasizing on the legal acts of directors rather than their ethical responsibility of the directors. Legal reforms without the emphasis of ethical obligations lead to non-effective results (Riordan manufacturing, 2010). Despite the fact that the ethical role of the directors is critical, directors have the overall responsibility for the maintaining the ethics and compliance program as well as legal acts within the cooperation. Overall ethical and legal environment of the firm is characterized by the directors tone, and reinforces these acts in order to provide a good overview of the business financial performance.

Employee Law
The law for the employment and human resources is often a difficult area in dealing with the business. It is also the area that has employee challenges in regard to ethical issues despite the fact they dont notice any shortcomings of their ethical acts (Roszovsky, 2008). Since prevention is cheaper than handling the effects of unlawful legal acts, the interest of the corporate should rely on the fact that employees are informed on the latest development legal laws and have immediate access to them when in need .

There are several acts several employee Acts which every employee should be aware of, such as the  Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) which set minimum standards for employees pensions as well as health plans in the private industry (Roszovsky, 2008).

Management Behavior
By reflecting the importance of the type of behavior that every successful manger should demonstrate in order to maintain a stable corporate, the following legal acts should be performed to the employees
Equitably rewarding the employees for performing their jobs effectively
Ensuring that the employees work in a collaborative manner with the managers.
Creating a conducive environment for a performance for productivity of the corporate.

Enterprise and product responsibility
Since consumers are interested in the ingredients or rather information about the product safety measures, the effects of the corporate products on health, the quality of the product, the liability of the product as well as its warranty, the development of the product, and the manufacturing process of the product. This information should be accorded to them whenever they are in it of it. More so, the interest or needs of the consumer from the corporate could include the information about manufacturing processes, that is changing goods from raw product to finished goods, the condition of the place of manufacturing, how the standards of the products are met. Whether the consumers are limited to present or future or include also the former consumers who have a stake in the product liability as well as the product warranty issues arising from the past purchases (Riordan manufacturing, 2010).

The issues relating to economic development should also be put into consideration. This includes consideration for tax base as well as other revenues, the safety as well as the security risks knowledge on consumer complains about corporate activities, and about how to handle the corporate matters with the community on matters regarding to protection of human rights, since such relationship could result to introduction of new product by the corporate.

The corporate also includes various stakeholders such as corporate shareholders as well as the banks. Information should be shared with these institutions in order for them to make a sound judgment about the future opportunities, risks as well as the legal liabilities. Therefore, the responsibility of the corporate is to provide the knowledge on overall strategy of the whole enterprise, its compliance with the laws as well as regulations according to the business laws stipulated, and its risks and reputation management (Roszovsky, 2008).

Thesis Statement
Prisoners should be entitled to free education while they are staying in prison.

Right of Education
Every person has a right to get education if heshe wants. A prisoner is not only confined to a limited space in a jail, but he is also confined to the options he has. While the person is in prison, he gets more ignorant and indifferent. The objective of sending criminals to prison should be to get him right instead of giving a punishment. When the prisoner completes his stay in jail and gets out, he should be a person with a better civic sense. Without providing any avenue of change, imprisonment of prisoners is not a sensible idea (United Nations, 2009). Without any positive influence on the prisoners, like education, the government will create frustrated and angry individuals who will not be of any good to the society once they leave the prison.

The prisoners are given the basic rights of humans like food, health care and security is a prison except for education. Education is the fundamental element of life which enlightens an individual and keeps him away from crimes. All the educated societies of the world get involved in crimes at a very low rate than those which are illiterate and ignorant. While the individuals stay in jail, they become more backwards in life, remain ill-informed and ill-advised. These individuals have lost all their hopes and relationships with most of the friends and family. Only education can make them better individuals for the society. One these individuals leave the jail, they can do more good to the society than harm if they are educated.

Why Educate the Prisoners for Free
The population in jails is increasing day by day in majority of countries. Most of these prisoners are youngsters and middle aged individuals. When these people, especially the youngsters, are kept in jails for years, their personality is shattered. They get influenced by others around them and see their future as dark and gloomy. Educating the prisoners will allow them to get in the process of self-correction. Education will not only keep the prisoners busy but also give them a better reason to live.
Most of the prisoners in developing countries are those who are not educated or are completely illiterate. One of the causes of crimes is illiteracy. Once these individuals in jails are educated, they can be expected to not again get involved in crimes. If these individuals are educated in jails, once they get out they will be able to get employment if they are able to get some degree or diploma.

It is not easy for a criminal to leave his crime life even after many years of imprisonment if he is sentenced. Usually the criminals, once they get out of the jail, pursue their criminal life and get back to the crimes they used to do. The reason for this is that their personality stays the same, most of the times even gets worse, and they stand at the same point as before when they leave the jail. The lives of these criminals need to be changed in prisons so that their personality can be changed and their social responsibility can be awakened.

These prisoners mostly are poor and unemployed. Therefore they cannot pay for education of higher levels as they are not even able to work in prisons. Their education needs to be funded by the public in order to turn a criminal into a better and responsible person.

Determining what is ethically right has been a long debated topic.  It is safe to say that from the beginning of time, people have failed to agree on what is considered ethically right.  Generally, ethics is based upon religious faith, culture, individual experiences, time in history, etc.  This concept is exemplified by the fact that ethics and morals differ from country to country, culture to culture and historical period to historical period. With such being the case, an on-going debate on whether ethics are absolute or relative exist, and in the context of the United States criminal justice system, how can a consistent set of ethical rules be applied to the actions and conduct of criminal justice employees

Before delving into the debate as to whether a consistent set of ethical rules can be applied to the actions and conduct of criminal justice employees, the differences between absolute ethics and relative ethics needs to be explored. Absolute ethics is the belief that only one eternally true and valid moral code applies (Stace, Ethics Arent Relative).  This universal moral code applies to anyone, anywhere at anytime.  This code even applies whether a person is aware of it or not (Stace, Ethics Arent Relative). The basis for absolute ethics often rests in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Morality and ethics is derived from Gods commands so it does not matter the time or circumstance.  The Greek philosopher Socrates raised the question, Is conduct right because the gods command it or do the gods command it because it is right (The Importance of Ethics in Criminal Justice). The issue with this issue arises when you have two people of different religious faiths.  Who is right

On the flip side, relative ethics denies there is one universal code that applies to everything, everywhere all the time (Solon, Relative Ethics). A believer of relative ethics supports the idea that ethics and moral change depending upon the individual conviction, the cultural context or the historical context (Solon, Relative Ethics).  This theory is very easy to understand and follow.  It allows for adaptation and change.  Ethics change depending on the situation, the culture and place.  However, it fails to provide adequate guidance as to who is correct when religions or cultures overlap.

For example, it is common for to compare two civilizations against one another.  In order to determine which civilizations is better, an external moral standard needs to be applied (Stace, Is Ethics Relative). In addition, if relative ethics is actually true, there can be no progression from one age of society to the next.  A common moral standard would have to exist to measure the progression (Stace, Is Ethics Relative).  The idea of a common moral standard conflicts with the very foundation of relative ethics.

With both absolute ethics and relative ethics failing to solve the debate on ethics, maybe Walter Terence Stace was on the right track when he wrote, I shall reject ethical absolutism.  But I shall also reject ethical relativity.  Morality, I shall try to show is relative in the sense that it is relative to the universal needs of human nature (Stace, The Concept of Morals). Stace ended up concluding that morality was universal, just not absolute (Stace, The Concept of Morals).

The American Buddhist monk, Bhikkhu Bodhi, explained in A Buddhist Response to Contemporary Dilemnas of Human Existence that morality shall serve as a guide to conduct, it cannot be propounded as a self-justifying scheme but must be embedded in a comprehensive spiritual system which grounds morality in a transpersonal order.  R.M. Hare points out , however, that ethical terms do not affirm or deny that moral facts exists, only that human logic applies to our moral assertions consequently, they postulate an objective and preferred standard of moral justification (Hare, Sorting Out Ethics).  These competing concepts may explain the difficulty in finding consistent ethical rules to be applied to the actions and conduct of employees in the criminal justice system.

For the most part, we use ethics to provide a blueprint to moral choices when uncertainty as to what to do in a situation concerning morality.  In everyday life, moral rules are desirable, not just because they express absolute truth, but because they are generally reliable guides for normal circumstances (Singer 1995, p. 175).  Problems arise when criminal justice employees steer away from this normal application of moral rules and deliberately act unethically in carrying out their functions or fail to make the ethically right decision (The Importance of Ethics).  A prime example is the abuse of police authority.

Adolph Archie, an African-American male, life ended at the hands of the New Orleans police in March 1990 (Human Rights Watch, www.hrw.orgreports98policeuspo93.htm).  Police accused Archie of fatally shooting a white police officer.  When Archie became injured in an accident associated with the shooting, the police did not take him to a hospital that was 7 blocks from the incident, but took him to the police station where the deceased officer was employed.  At the police station, a fight broke out between Archie and police officers and as a result, Archie fell, which caused blood to stain the floor. The sergeant on duty at the police station claimed he never saw Archie or saw fight.  He did order the blood stains to be cleaned up.

When Archie finally made it to the hospital, it was evident that he had severely been beaten.  Many concluded that his injuries were the cause of his death.  Eventually, his death was ruled as a homicide by police intervention by the city coroner.  Later it was reported that the New Orleans police has brutalized Archie, however, no police officer was ever held accountable (Human Rights Watch).  The city did compensate Archies family for his death in an out-of court settlement, which ethical questions about the police use of force against Archie and the possible cover-up of illegal conduct.

The issue of employee ethics can also be detected in the court system.  Defense attorneys often complain about prosecutorial misconduct as the cause for wrongful imprisonment.  One example, concerns Michael Ray Graham, Jr. (Truth in Justice,  HYPERLINK httpwww.truthinjustice.orgno92.htm www.truthinjustice.orgno92.htm).  At 37, Graham was freed from death row after 14 years in prison.  Charges against Graham were dismissed because the state determined that it had no credible evidence linking him to the crime.  His conviction rested purely on a jailhouse snitch that was known to be a habitual liar and had struck a deal with prosecution.  The plea bargain with prosecution was never revealed during his trial.  Sadly, even the prosecutor admitted to having a weak case and it should have never gone to a grand jury.

Attorneys admit that this type of prosecutorial misconduct is not uncommon, but woven into the very fabric of the criminal justice system (The Importance of Ethics in Criminal Justice).  Anyone who reads the newspaper or watches the evening news can attest that the misconduct of police officers as in Adolph Archies case is common as well.  Many would even go as far to say that police brutality is woven into the fabric of the United States criminal justice system as well. Both Archie and Graham illustrate the need for the adherence of ethics in the criminal justice system.

Everyone faces ethical dilemmas, not just employees in the criminal justice system.  Everyday we make decisions involving ethical issues in our personal and professional lives.  These issues concern questions of right or wrong and what is proper conduct.  We must make decisions as to whether to lie in order to get a promotion or do we use behavior considered wrong by society in order to right a wrong.  Ethical dilemmas are so important in the criminal justice system because criminal justice professionals are often faced with having to make decisions that involve ethical issues (The Importance of Ethics in Criminal Justice). Maybe police officer and the prosecutors in the above example determined their behavior was justified in order to right a wrong that they perceived. This behavior is generally frowned upon by the greater society because criminal justice employees are expected to be able to say if I judge it wrong for you, I must be prepared to say that it is wrong for me as well (Holmes, 1998, p.151).  For the most part, when criminal justice employees step outside these moral norms to satisfy a personal need, there is an expectation they will be reprimanded.

When criminal justice employees violate the law, they are expected to be held accountable for their actions as would any other citizen.  There are also specific regulations that govern such employees behaviors as well.  For example, New Mexico has personnel rules that govern judicial branch personnel.  The New Mexico Judicial Branch Personnel Rules provide ethical guidance to court employees (Judicial Education Center,  HYPERLINK httpjecclassroom.unm.educlerkethics httpjecclassroom.unm.educlerkethics). For example, Rule 9.05C(3)b authorizes discipline of employees for just cause.  Just cause is defined as 1) attempting to use influence to affect an outcome in a court action or 2) acting in a manner that reflects poorly on the integrity of the judicial branch (Judicial Education Center).  However, the difference of criminal justice employees and the average citizen is the rights that are afforded such employees.

Todays criminal justice employees are far more sophisticated about employee rights than they were just twenty years ago (Chaires and Lentz, Criminal Justice Employee Rights An Overview).  In addition, criminal justice employees are generally protected by employee organizations that are there to make sure the employee is treated fairly. These employee organizations often wield political, economical and clout (Chaires and Lentz, Criminal Justice Employee Rights).  This protection is not something that the average citizen has.

This often difference if often seen the area of sexual harassment.  No matter whether you work in the criminal justice system or for a private employer, it is generally expected that employees will refrain from making sexual advances andor comments that are deemed inappropriate or offensive.  This includes insinuations or behavior that came than be perceived as such (Judicial Education Center).  Sexual harassment cases are always considered difficult cases no matter what arena you are in because they are rarely clear cut cases. Supervisors are expected to do a thorough investigation when a claim of sexual harassment is made and keep as much of the surrounding circumstances confidential.  In addition, supervisors are to make sure that neither party is retaliated against. This can be difficult to accomplish under any circumstances.  However, when dealing with criminal justice employees other factors complicate the matter.

Often criminal justice employees have a unique bond and relationship.  There is generally a code of ethics amongst the employees that you do not air the groups dirty laundry.  One example is Adolph Archies case.  One of the issues that investigators ran up against was the silence amongst the police officers.  Often known as a group that does not snitch on their own, police often remain silent when one of violates the rules.  Traders can often be punished within the group.  For example, the police officer that took Archie to the police station was supposedly vilified for not killing Archie himself (Human Rights Watch).  Police officers may be an extreme example, but these unspoken codes of silence exist in many organization.

Another issue concerns an issue already raised.  Many criminal justice employees have protective measures in place that make it difficult to even remove the wrongdoer.  The employee organization can prevent the removal of an employee for months, even years.  The political, economic and legal clouts can sway decisions and force the hand of decision makers.  Often the average person does not have such power behind them when they are in similar predicaments.

Most of us would like to think that ethics is absolute. In theory it is.  For the most part, no matter where you are in the world and the period of time you are in, it is wrong to harm, injure or kill somebody.  It is wrong to take things that do not belong to you.  In all societies, there is an expectation that people will not lie and they will be honest.  Yet, the examples in this paper indicate that in reality ethics is relative.  Ethics and morality do evolve and change. Ethics and morality is based upon religious faiths, time in history and cultural experiences and more.  What was deemed acceptable treatment of women and people of color in the United States in the 1700s versus today has dramatically changed, and most would say that it changed for the better.

As this paper indicated that even during the same time period, ethics can differ between groups of people in the same country.  This paper focused on the ethics of criminal justice employees and how ethical rules may apply differently to them versus the average citizen.  Finding a consistent set of ethical rules to hold criminal justice employees up to may be very difficult simply because of the position they hold in society, their knowledge of the laws and the protective measures in place to protect their rights.  Neither pure absolute ethics, nor relative ethics will provide the solution to finding such consistency.

Mens use and abuse of drugs is as old as the beginning of civilization itself. Drugs have been around and are being continuously used by humanity ever since the dawn of time. Many people have an inkling to take in food and beverages that would make them experience relaxation and stimulation. Men and women have used one type of drug or another at least once or twice in their lifetime. The ancient civilizations have discovered that the plants that grow around them are not just for ornamentation but for healing as well. For instance, wine has been popular since the Egyptian times and the medicinal advantages of marijuana have been discovered in China as early as 2737 BC (Drug Rehabs.org).

Due to the developments of science and the advances of technology, many dangerous drugs have been discovered, and these led to the use and abuse of illegal drugs. In the case of the United States, it is a devastating fact that the country is being bombarded by drug illegalities and addiction. The drug craze has dramatically increased over the years. People from different walks of life are being involved in the use and abuse of drugs. Consequently, it has affected many aspects of life such as the health and the family relationships. It has even affected the country in more ways than one.

Drug abuse pertains to the continuous and repeated usage of medicines and other substances to experience a particular effect. These particular substances may come from illegal drugs because of their high potential to generate addictive effects. They may also come from the use of legal drugs like prescriptives and over- the-counter drugs that are being purchased not because of their medicinal purposes but because of the pleasure that the users get from them (Smith and Saisan).

Drug use is a prevalent problem is America today. According to a survey published in USA Today, approximately 11 of the teenagers ranging from 12 to 17 years old are using drugs, and this figure is continually increasing as time passes by. The most probable reason for this is the fact that the American youth are ignorant of the dangers of drugs (Peters and Peters). The use and abuse of illegal drugs have many serious repercussions on the health and relationships of the people engaged in this kind of activity. These people think that by using these drugs alone, they cannot affect or harm others. They remain ignorant of the fact that drug use has a chain reaction that extends its negative influence to the economy and peace of the country.

Studies show that there are genetic factors that can be linked to drug use or alcoholism. The findings reveal that the children who have alcoholic parents have a bigger tendency to develop alcoholic problems than others because of the fact that they have an increased risk and exposure to behavioral and emotional problems. However, alcoholism cannot be determined solely by the genes inherited from ones ancestors. On the contrary, more than one half of the kids of the alcoholics do not become one. The risks may be higher for them, but that does necessarily mean that they will become alcoholics themselves. Hence, genes are not the sole basis of the use of alcohol. Drugs affect the thoughts and emotions of the people in the same way as alcohol does. The behavior and character of the parents towards each other greatly influence their child-rearing. Parents who have been using drugs have no idea that this habit of theirs is affecting the way they take care of their families (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism NIAAA 2).

The effects of drugs have been associated with the nervous system in the same way as genetics has always been associated with alcoholism. Prescription drugs are hugely responsible for this kind of phenomenon. There lies a common misconception that just because they are approved legally and medically, it does not mean that they cannot pose danger and addiction when used improperly. Prescription drugs lessen the pain of the patients and help them heal and recover faster from their illnesses. However, they are also one of the most sought-after addictive drugs in circulation today. A single prescriptive drug can destroy the multiple functions of a cell thereby causing thousands of biochemical changes. The introduction of a second drug can lead to tens of thousands of changes while a third one can cause hundreds of thousands of changes (Francis).

The adverse effects of illegal drugs on the health of the users are no different from the dangers brought about by the prescribed drugs. The Drug Abuse Warning Network provides that more than 380,000 visits to the emergency room were caused by the use of cocaine and more than 160,000 trips to the emergency room were likewise caused by heroin. Some of the mild symptoms of cocaine include increased heart rate, sleeping problems, and even convulsions. Inhaling the drugs through the nasal area can create a permanent damage to the nasal tissues. Cocaine causes heart attacks, brain problems, and even strokes. It also has adverse effects on an unborn child because it causes the tearing of placental wall, early labor, and even miscarriage. Even if many babies recover after being exposed to cocaine in the womb, it also seems that this situation may double the tendency of their developmental delays. Heroin, like cocaine, also has adverse effects on the body. It causes heart and liver damage and respiratory failure. The chronic use ruins the proper circulation of blood, and it increases the risk of having respiratory problems. Users of heroin often use injections and as such, it increases their risk of having HIV. Children who have been exposed to heroine prior to their birth suffer horrible withdrawal syndromes after they are born and they are ten times at risk of dying of SIDS (Adams). Illegal drug use are so dangerous that it can kill even first time drug users. For the users who are lucky to survive, the addiction to cocaine leads to a nasty and expensive habit that requires hundreds and even thousands of dollars every week just to support (Adams). The economy is greatly affected due to the drug abuse because men and women are wasting their hard-earned money in order to buy the substances that will ultimately destroy them. The money that should have been allotted for supporting a family or paying taxes is used by the drug users in order to support their addiction. This should not be the case. This makes the people realize that the real value of a particular product or service is not the amount of money spent on that product or service but the things that the people cannot buy because the money was already spent buying drugs.

Drug use does not only affect the economy of the country, it also causes crimes and violence and disrupts the peace and orderliness of the society. The National Institute on Drug Abuse survey indicates that one in every 20 high school seniors drink alcohol everyday and approximately 61 of them have tried using illegal drugs. It is even more alarming that one in every ten students in their senior year of high school have admitted that they tried to use cocaine. The use of drugs and alcohol by the students poses a serious threat to the country, to the students themselves, and to the education process. There is a noticeable connection between the drug use and the crime rate in the country as stated by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. According to them, more than one half of those youth in the juvenile facilities committed crimes while under the influence of alcohol and drugs. These factors are also the reason why many kids choose to drop out of school and commit violence and suicide (Klauke).

As the parens patriae, the government has a huge role to play when it comes to solving a major crisis such as drug abuse. America has been continuously fighting a losing battle against drugs for many years. The budget for combating drug abuse has greatly increased over the last 20 years and the incarcerations of drug abusers are always reaching new records, yet the drug problem still goes on. The situation seems worse than ever. However, the government is not running out of alternatives because according to them, the drug problems can still be reduced at a lesser cost through a change of strategy. The Unites States government has found ways to stop the use of drugs by making a public health approach that focuses on all addicts and abusers. They also funded the social services in order help reduce the numerous causes of abuse, and they have implemented some economic strategies in order to create alternative markets and control the drug markets. The federal budget has recognized this fact through shifting their focus and attention to the prevention, treatment, and the education of these people (Common Sense for Drug Policy CSDP 1-4).

The best way to stop the spread of illegal drug abuse is to prevent it from even starting in the first place. The state, together with the help of the citizens, must make a stand to prevent the use of illegal drugs. The children are the leaders of tomorrow and as such, they do not need this type of substance that can ruin their future. The family may indeed be the smallest political unit there is, but they can make a huge difference in the lives of everybody. Parents can prevent their children from engaging in this destructive habit through proper disciplining and child-rearing. Drug abuse does not involve a problem about moral strength or weakness. It is rather a problem about will power. The use of drugs is a vicious process that ruins the body, the family, and the country. As such, it is impossible to be free from this nasty habit without asking for the help of others. It takes the lives of the people who could have had a better future but was never given a chance to because of drugs. It wrecks the homes and destroys the friendships of many, but one must not give up hope. The proper treatment and support will help a person be unbound from the chains of drug use. The most important consideration that a person has to have is the commitment and dedication of wanting to turn his or her life around. Every person must not turn his or her back on the people with drug problems. Instead, they must be helped and encouraged, and for a person who has a heart for these people, there are many ways of doing so. Nothing is impossible to one who has a willing mind and body.

Confessions, as a source of evidence, are distinguished from admissions. Whereas a confession is a complete acknowledgement of guilt in criminal proceedings, an admission is a statement of fact in either a civil or a criminal case. In former times, the confession was considered the ultimate form of evidence. As soon as the accused confessedoften under duressno further proof was required. In time, involuntary confession came to be rejected as evidence under  HYPERLINK httpwww.britannica.comEBcheckedtopic188090English-law o English law English law, and the burden of proving that a confession was voluntary lay with the prosecutor (Britannica, 2010).

The Teen Mother Murder Case
Christopher Mikels and Douglas Mandichak of Maple Shade, in statements given to investigators, admitted participation to the murder of a 17-year old mother named Felicia Mikels.  On Friday, Jan. 18, the suspects sent her a text message on her cell phone asking her to meet them. With her baby in a stroller, she walked to a bowling alley near her home. She got into a pickup truck with Mikels and Mandichak and they drove to a parking lot at Pennsauken business where the victim was beaten to death with a 4X 4 piece of wood.  The two men wrapped her in a canvas tarp and drove approximately five miles to Cinnaminson, where they dumped her into the icy Pennsauken Creek off North Fork Landing Road and Route 73.  They were subsequently arrested and eventually confessed to the killing. Both Mandichak and Mikels are charged with murder and remain in custody.  Mandichak faces a prison sentence of up to 30 years, of which sentencing is scheduled for April 1, 2010. Christopher Mikels is currently awaiting trial on a charge of murder.

The Miranda Warnings
In Miranda v. Arizona, a written statement of confession by an accused obtained by police without being informed of the right to an attorney to be present during questioning, signed by the accused was considered inadmissible.  In reversing the decision of the trial court, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the mere fact that he signed a statement which contained a typed-in clause stating that he had full knowledge of his legal rights does not approach the knowing and intelligent waiver required to relinquish constitutional rights (Miranda v. Arizona, 1966).

In the aforementioned case, any statements made by both Mikels and Mandichak without the requirements laid down in Miranda v. Arizona would violate the defendants rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution and therefore be inadmissible as evidence against them, of which the consequence may be dismissal of the case upon motion.  By now, before questioning or interrogation, both the accused should be warned prior to any questioning that he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desires.  Opportunity to exercise these rights must be afforded to him throughout the interrogation (Miranda v. Arizona, 1966).  However, the Miranda rights do not have to be read in any particular order, and they do not have to precisely match the language of the Miranda decision, as long as they are adequately and fully conveyed.