Kate's Advantage

Prompt: Kate's Conundrum

To be a social worker is to do just that. You make a commitment to serve those throughout the community who are less fortunate than most; and without such support they would not survive. Who are we judge why people end up the way they do? Perhaps they were never educated, had children at a very early age and never had the desire to better their life. No matter the cause, people need help. We all need help with some things in life. I’m sure we all have had unexpected situations occur and the last thing we would ever want to go through are others judging us.

It’s not so much growing up in a “poor” home. That’s not a reasonable excuse. Being poor does not make you a bad parent nor does it provide an unstable home. It’s sad when a child has to grow up in a home where education is not supported. There is no path for them to lead down in life; there is no guide to help them along the way.

If in Kate’s shoes, my first response would be directed at the school. What does it mean for our children and our future? What does it mean when an educational facility whose only purpose is to educate the world, turns their backs and condemns our children “uneducable”?

Dealing with an alcoholic as a young teen I know all too well. It’s hard as hell to live sometimes and all you want to do is GET OUT. As Kate, I might relate a probable cause of these children’s positions in life not only due to a family who is illiterate, but also the possibility of abuse. There is a pregnant child, school wants nothing to do with the children and there is an alcoholic father in the picture. Maybe they should be taken from the home altogether. If not, they will have reached a dead end without the hopes of a better tomorrow.

To work beside fellow employees who have derogatory attitudes, who took the vow to serve and help provide a support system to human beings, would deeply trouble me personally. It would bother me, but not to the point of having an effect of how I pursued my decision. Even now, as I’m starting my career in nursing, there are many discouraging individuals whom I have to look over. Their thoughts and opinions will never influence neither my work ethics, nor the support and care that I provide to others.

Yes, the government system is robbed everyday by those who choose to live off of welfare instead of getting a job; which then leads to the increase of taxes and angry Americans. In regards to the situation of this family, one would probably exhibit resentful perceptions. For example, women having children because they know they’ll receive an increased salary at the end of every month or an alcoholic who receives monthly disability checks because they can’t find employment that allows drinking on the job.

Slaying is something you hear of in a third world country; that’s exactly the definition I would use to define this situation. Even though losing my job would be inevitable, I would never forgive myself for an innocent life yet to be born, to be taken without the consent of the mother. The family would be notified of such decisions; it is their right.

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

Prompt: Human Rights v. Majority Rule

When asked about this topic I have somewhat of a mixed emotion. I never want to come across as someone who stereotypes or treats others differently just because they are not like me or that I do not share the same beliefs as they do. I do believe that everyone has their own human rights and should be free to express themselves in whatever way makes them who they are or want to be.

To me, it’s rather sad to think that one could not be a school teacher or have the career of their choice based on their sexual preference; however, as a mother of two small children, I have to admit I would feel uneasy knowing my children had a homosexual teacher. Especially for subjects such as physical education; just as I would also feel if I had a young daughter and her PE coach was a heterosexual male. Not all homosexuals mean to harm innocent children as we hear on the news from time to time and in no way am I implying that every homosexual is a child molester, nor would I assume just because of there sexual status.

I believe the gay community to no longer hide their status because they feel as if they should no longer conceal who they are as an individual. I try and put myself in their shoes, how would I feel knowing I had to keep my true identity to myself; practically hiding away from the world. I could never imagine having to go through such an ordeal just to be accepted by mankind.

If we are to discriminate and deny employment of homosexuals, doesn’t that counteract our own human rights? Such as a human rights violation: “A certain race, creed, or group is denied recognition as a person.” Another thought, what about fighting in war? Illegal immigrants are able to fight and when they are killed in battle, they are granted citizenship. But a homosexual is not allowed into the military. When looking up information on gay rights in the military I came across a fact via Yahoo answers: “gays can serve in the armed forces, but not openly. They must conceal their sexuality.” Just the same as gay couples having children; what’s to happen in the future when the child has to explain to the world that they have two mothers or two fathers? As long as the child is presented with a structured home with loving parents, who cares?

"We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be okay."

Prompt: Hijack!

I often wonder….. what if we had the choice on September eleventh two thousand and one….what if we had the choice of our loved ones dying that day or living? What would we have done…? Obviously, we didn’t have an option that day.

While researching our nations’ policies, I came across conflicting statements: (1) Our official U.S. policy states that we are to make no concessions to and strike no deals with terrorists and bring terrorists to justice for their crimes. (2) U.S government will not pay ransom, release prisoners, change its policies, or agree to other acts that might encourage additional terrorism. (3) At the same time, the U.S will use every appropriate resource to gain the safe return of American citizens who are held hostage by terrorists. Then it States: U.S has established counter-terrorism assistance programs to resolve terrorist incidents in a manner that will deny the perpetrators benefiting from their actions.

So, what would our country do? If there ever came a day it was up to me to prevent a plane with innocent people from being destroyed or allowing terrorists to walk free…..there would be no other alternative than to sadly decline the offer. Why save a few hundred to put billions of Americans in danger? And, can you really “negotiate” with terrorists? It’s very sad to think more blood would have to be shed by the hands of terrorists. But at the same time, to give them what they want, they would only learn their tactics to be successful for future catastrophes.

It’s very different to be on the plane rather than somewhere safely on the ground making such a decision; however, a very different perspective came into play when those aboard Flight 93 came to a decision to do something. What that something is, we do not know. They however, did not think in fear. They knew what had happened to the World Trade Center and Pentagon. They were either going to die and do nothing; or die trying to do something.

There comes a time when we have to draw a line between Liberal actions based on personal beliefs and those of conservatives supporting political policies.

Are You Right or Wrong?

Prompt: Right or Wrong?

I personally am a moral relativist. I believe that certain ideas or beliefs can be changed. As far as all moralities are equally good and that all belief systems are true, I agree due to the fact we all came to a decision at some point in life where we chose to become who we wanted to be and what we wanted to believe. Points of views are different and we may protest another’s thoughts or opinions; however, our decisions are what makes us who we are. It builds our character and I truly believe that is what makes us unique and it is to be appreciated whether we agree or disagree.

It was noted that Moral absolutists judge circumstances to be absolute and inarguably immoral regardless of the beliefs and goals of a culture that engages such practices. Some examples were child abuse, death penalty and war. One might look at such a topic and automatically agree them to be immoral.

But we first have to look at the whole picture and not just from our angle. Such as child abuse; well, what do you consider child abuse? Some might say disciplinary actions such as spanking. I disagree. Where it seems immoral to some, it is a moral approach to others. The death penalty; it is viewed as killing another human being and that is immoral any way you look at it. Whereas in my opinion, it is a justifiable cause due to the slaying of an innocent human being that didn’t choose for their life to be taken from their loved ones.

And lastly war, a very touchy subject. Some portray war as it’s pointless and that there is nothing to gain from war. No one anticipates war. We think of our loved ones being sent off to not return. But on the other hand, we go to war for the good of mankind and for the freedom of our country. There are men and women who chose to serve and protect and their families who love and respect them and their decision. War is immoral to many, but the moral thing any soldier can do is to take a stance and fight and serve for the good of humanity. Frederick William Robertson wrote: It is “Undeniable that out of evil comes good – that evil is the resistance in battle, with which good is created and becomes possible.”

Is it right or wrong? Of course there will never be an absolute answer to that question. I believe you are right in choosing your own beliefs and it’s wrong to not follow your instincts and disregard your own thoughts and opinions just because the person next to you disagrees. We are all equally different and we all learn from one another.

The Ugly Duckling

Prompt: Perception

Georgia’s asserted that objective perception is impossible. He believed that the only way to understand something is to experience it and that people cannot truly understand each other because of the problem of varying perceptions. From a nursing standpoint I find this to be very truthful. Then on the other hand as a citizen of this country, I also find it truthful and logic.


Georgia’s also believed that since people have different ideas about the same thing, no conceptual ideas actually exist. The way I perceive his understanding is one in which we all have our own concepts and beliefs in life so therefore an exact correct answer would be impossible. This is why we have our governments in the world. I have to say I am thankful to be in this country; however, certain ideas and decisions that are made within our government greatly affects us and we are to accept them and move on, no matter how much we may disagree or how much we are hurt in the process….ex: (family going into war; OR family being deported taken away from their loved ones due to immigrant status).


Back to the statement above….the only way to understand something is to experience it. Who are we to judge just because someone looks a certain way? Objective perception does seem impossible because we are quick to look at something or someone and automatically make subjective decisions and then those decisions are the objective and that is how we believe an idea to be truthful. As I mentioned earlier, as a nurse I agree very much with Georgia’s thoughts. For example, a patient in pain; we as nurses are not to judge pain regardless of our opinions such as, knowing from a medical standpoint that the patient is a drug user. We are to treat that person as we would anyone. Every effort is to be made to ensure our patient comfort and relief. Cultural beliefs take a part as well. We are not to make decisions about a patient just because of what they believe and trust. Someone may not accept blood because that is their belief. To us it seems ludicrous because we know that the person could possibly die without the transfusion. But if we are to be competent caregivers, then we have to look at other perceptions other than our own.


Socrates argued that knowledge and virtue are so closely related that no human agent ever knowingly does evil: we all invariably do what we believe to be best. Improper conduct, then, can only be a product of our ignorance rather than a symptom of weakness of the will. I find it very interesting when criminals of our time are time lined back to their origin and we then are able to piece together the traits of their doings. For example, being raised through neglect and abuse, then as they grow the world is how they perceived it as a child and that is the only way they understand how to live. No, that does not support the crime or make punishment less severe, it is an insight, a guide to help us understand how someone perceives and makes judgments to do such things.