SSK 12 Log B Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

SSK 12 Log B - Essay Example I realize now that it is OK for me to identify myself with all the parts of my culture I currently possess and that I can add to these by being successful at university. This knowledge is empowering to me because I have never identified strongly with academia as I envisioned it. This has at time made me wonder if university was really right for me. I now realize that succeeding at university adds another layer to who I am. It does not destroy the experiences I have had so far. It doesn’t have to change who I am unless I want to. I understand that at the university there are many cultures coming together. I have the power and opportunity to help shape the university culture in a small way by bringing by personal strengths and abilities to add to all of the other students. This past week has broadened my understanding of culture at university and how I fit into it. This week I discovered that there are many different ways to look at what it means to be a literate person. I always thought that I had to have read lots of books on all kinds of different subjects and that’s what literate meant. I have discovered this week after reading some of the assignments and interacting with my classmates and communicating with some professors, that I am a literate person even though I haven’t read the classics. I can see that I am entering a very specialized, professional type of education. And what I realized is that I am going to be very literate within that field. I want to have a broad understanding of how the world works and how to analyze the things that are happening in the broader world, but I don’t need to feel guilty if my focus is on my studies in my specific field at this point. This new understanding is helpful to me in the sense that I don’t need to worry about the things I don’t know yet. I don’t need to feel less than someone else simply because they have read a book that I haven’t or if they understand a concept

Health Discrimination in Hong Kong Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Health Discrimination in Hong Kong - Essay Example Body In order to fix the health inequities which relate to gender in Hong Kong, possible health care priorities in health policies must include HIV/AIDS screening and treatment opportunities open to all citizens regardless of gender or sexual orientation. Another health priority would be the improved access to women seeking maternal and child care before, during, and after their pregnancy. Gender inequities can sometimes be apparent in relation to access of healthcare programs for women sex workers and for homosexuals (Abdullah, et.al., 2000). These gender inequities must be set aside especially as far as AIDS screening and treatment is concerned. Instead, reforms must include the establishment of mandatory annual screening for STDs and AIDS among sex workers (Wong, 2003). This access must be made available to male, female, including homosexual sex workers and anyone seeking access to these same health services. No discrimination in terms of gender must be made before such services c an be accessed. This mandatory screening would help manage the AIDS problem in Hong Kong, and ensure that the numbers of AIDS sufferers would decrease. Health reforms should also target the prioritization of services for health workers in relation to AIDS. AIDS has become one of the rapidly growing health issues in the world; it is also one of the most preventable diseases, especially with proper health education and the application of other preventative remedies, like mandatory annuals AIDS and STD screening (Wong, et.al., 2006). Access of sex workers to health services is often hampered by their limited financial resources; moreover, the health system does not make these screenings available to all sex workers due to their limited resources. In effect, future health policies must prioritize the allocation of funds for these mandatory annual screenings for high-risk women and other sex workers (Wong, et.al., 2006). Considerations of income or gender must not be made a basis for who the recipients of these screening services. Inequities in this regard must be neutralized. Future health policies on addressing the gender disparities in health must also include the establishment of outreach clinics for sex workers (Wong, 2003). These specialist centers would help ensure that female sex workers would be able to gain access to essential services based on their convenience. The clinics would be open at hours convenient to them and it would also reduce the stigma from the rest of society (Wong, 2003). In other words, health reform also means accepting the fact that some females work in the sex industry, and the fact that these activities are basically against the law should not be their basis for gaining access to essential health services (Wong, 2003). Female sex workers are fully aware of the fact that there is a stigma against them from the general population; for which reason, they also prefer not to access health services from the main hospitals for fear of bein g stigmatized. Moreover, society, including hospitals can indeed discriminate against them in terms of equal access to health services (Wong, et.al., 2006). Future reforms in health care must therefore include a more specific program which would

Malthus's Prediction in the Epic Book An Essay on the Principle of

Malthus's Prediction in the Epic Book An on the Principle of Population - Essay Example The question that arises is that why the human civilization hasn’t been able to find a permanent solution to the problem. This problem-solution essay proposes a hypothesis that technology isn’t capable of solving a problem of Traffic jams. Its rapid advancement in the past few decades hasn’t proved to be effective for the problem of Traffic jams. This study also explores the psychology and motivations of motorists who spend their valuable time in meaningless queues of a Traffic jam. The countries around the world have made the slow transition from being rural and agrarian societies to becoming dependent on metropolitan cities. These metropolitan cities serve as an engine to the growth of the region’s economy. But with rising of mega-cities and gigantic sky-scrapers, the problem of Traffic jams has continued to tease the mankind. Whether it is Shanghai in the east or New York in the west, researchers show that millions of ‘human hours’ are wasted in Traffic jams. People miss their appointments, job interviews and arrive late at other important occasions. These Traffic jams create physical discomfort as the people are confined to one place for a long time. In hotter regions of Asia and South America, the heat and sweat make the condition inside the cars and trucks extremely unbearable. There is also danger to the health of people as they inhale poisonous gases emitted by vehicles; this problem being more common to developing countries than dev eloped countries. The movement of emergency vehicles such as Police vans and Ambulances also gets restricted. The solutions that have been tried range from strict traffic rules to increasing installation of CCTV cameras. The traffic reports are announced on the radio so that passengers can avoid the jams. Hefty fines are imposed on faltering motorists and usage of public transport is promoted by governments. But no policy seems to be effective in reducing the number of cars on the road.

Program Evaluation Paper Part III - smoking cessation Term - 1

Program Evaluation Part III - smoking cessation - Term Paper Example The program is extensively large since the target population is the entire populace of smokers in the US (Goel , 2008). This is however not a shortfall since the subject of smoking itself does not require a lot of study since the outcomes of a small comparison group will suffice. The subject being an addiction means that what will be displayed in one smoker will most likely be homogenous among all other smokers. Obtaining information would be considered rather easy. The records of those who have previously been enrolled in smoking cessation programs in health facilities will be found to be useful. Smokers would also voluntarily provide information. As mentioned before that the programs have been in place for some time, information from previous evaluations that were done on a smaller scale will be used as a baseline for this evaluation. This approach of employing surveys will involve distribution of questionnaires to people who smoke or are affected by smoking. The main components of the questionnaires will be finding out how many people admit to being a smoker. Another question would be to find out those who have considered quitting and also to find out what is the biggest challenge that they face when trying to stop smoking. The respondents will be samples collected from different geographical locations to ensure that the sample population is representative of the whole population. It will also be important to have questionnaires designed differently to be filled out by health providers. These questionnaires will be primarily used to find out professional opinions that will be crucial in developing and implementing the smoking cessation program. (Auxin, 2006) Examination of archival documents will also be a vital source of information. These types of source will be used mostly where information like national smoking prevalence is required. Existing records will have to be the latest and most credible. An important

The Economic Reality of Hybrid Vehicles Essay Example for Free

The Economic Reality of Hybrid Vehicles Essay The high price of gas at the pump has many Americans looking for alternates to their gas powered vehicles. One of the most popular option right now is a hybrid vehicle. The question that comes to mind is, are hybrid vehicles worth it? With record high gas prices due to the price of oil, most car owners out there have major concerns over their gas usage. Over the past ten years, the cost of gasoline has grown 250%! The price of oil has doubled since January of this year. The high prices of oil and gas is the driving factor for most of the people to trade their gas powered vehicles for hybrid vehicles. These vehicles promise to give consumers more mileage per gallon, the truth is that only a few vehicles currently in the market actually make any sort of financial sense. There are quite a few issues with buying hybrid vehicles, even with gas prices at more than $4 a gallon. First, these vehicles are much higher in price than their gas powered counter part so, the premiums attached to their price tags do not justify extra mileage that you get. In some cases car dealers are selling popular vehicles at much higher prices than MSRP. Second, there are no laws and regulations controlling the technology, price, and the mileage per gallon required out of these vehicles. Currently, there are hybrid vehicles in the market that offer an improvement of 3MPG to 18 MPG over their gas powered counterpart. This is a huge range that needs to be controlled. Third, the demand of these vehicles is driving the prices of the vehicles even higher, if people knew that it would take many years for fuel savings to pay back the hybrid premium on many models, the demand on these models would be much lower, driving the prices down. The solutions that I would like to propose is the government to work with auto manufacturers to develop a standard for hybrid vehicles. This standard should control the minimum mileage offered per gallon, and control the premium allowed to be charged by the manufacturers. There are vehicles in the market that offer only a marginal benefit over the gas powered vehicles and yet the manufacturers charge thousands of dollars premium. Background: Today people all around the world are facing unusually high oil price hikes. Oil has become so very expensive that people are trying all kinds of extreme measures to lower the price. The hike in price has affected every nation; the entire world is trying to find a way out of the soaring prices. Thanks to the oil prices, travel expenses have increased, not just flying being expensive, driving your own car is very expensive. The chart below shows a trend in oil prices since 1990 with some of the major events leading to this increase. Note that since January of 2007 the oil prices have increase by 162%. With high gas prices, hybrid cars are a more affordable option than ever in terms of gas mileage, but only a handful of hybrid cars make solid financial sense, and only for some consumers, according to a new study by NADAguides. com, a vehicle pricing and information website. Using current gas prices for ten major metropolitan areas, the company studied the number of miles needed to recoup the extra cost of buying a hybrid car over its gasoline-only counterpart. The study showed, for example, that a driver in Los Angeles, the city with the highest gas prices in the study, will break even about 18 percent faster than a driver in Houston, the city with the lowest gas prices, assuming both are driving the same miles. The study found that, even at todays high gas prices, only a handful of hybrid cars make financial sense for a consumer who buys a new car every five years or less and drives an average number of miles per year. Even at Los Angeles-area gas prices, there are only five hybrid cars that would allow consumers to recoup their additional investment before they sold the car, assuming they drive an average of 15,000 miles per year. In order of shortest time to break even, they are: 1. Toyota Camry Hybrid 2. Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid 3. Nissan Altima Hybrid 4. Toyota Prius 5. Honda Civic Hybrid Following is a chart of the top five hybrid cars with the greatest return on investment and the number of miles to break even in 10 major metropolitan areas at current gas prices. Issue: Even with gas prices at more than $4 per gallon, there are quite a few issues with buying hybrid vehicles. Issue 1: High Prices Hybrid vehicle prices are higher than their gas powered counterpart. The demand for these vehicles in the last year has increased a lot, increasing the prices even further. In some areas people are actually paying premium over MSRP and waiting for more than two years to get some vehicles. The price premium attached to the hybrid vehicles are just too great to be considered a cost savings relative to purchasing their gasoline counterpart. If people knew how long it would take them to pay off the increased premium the demand for the hybrid would be lower than what it is now, decreasing the prices. Issue 2: High Prices The second issue with the hybrid vehicles is that there are no laws and regulations controlling the technology, price, and the mileage per gallon required out of these vehicles. Currently, there are hybrid vehicles in the market that offer an improvement of just a few miles per gallon over their gas powered counterpart, yet the manufacturers are charging thousands more for the premium for a so called hybrid technology. The table shows the amount of time it would take a buyer to offset the hybrid premium by fuel savings. The table also shows the miles per gallon and annual gas savings. These numbers clearly show the need to have some regulations to control the miles per gallon offered and the amount of premium that is charged by the manufacturers. Let’s look at some vehicles: Starting with the worst of the bunch, the Lexus LS600H. The premium charges on this vehicle is about $19,000, yet it only offers about 20 to 22 miles per gallon. It would take almost a century to break even. The next worst seems to be the Saturn Aura which only offers an annual gas savings of $171. The best one seems to Toyota Prius, but this car is so popular these days that in some areas there is a wait list of two years. In areas where it’s available, the dealers are charging more than $5,000 over MSRP. Solution: ?Better education to customers about the ownership costs of a hybrid vehicle ? Government should offer incentives like tax break to buy hybrid vehicles ? Have a standard to develop hybrid vehicle to encourage mass production, bringing the vehicle prices to even less than current gas-powered vehicles ? Force auto makers to sell hybrid vehicles at no more than, about 10%, premium to the customers Conclusion: Reference: Web Site: Bespoke Investing Group http://bespokeinvest. typepad. com/bespoke/.

G-protein Cycle and its Regulation by RGS Proteins

G-protein Cycle and its Regulation by RGS Proteins Julia Weigandt G Proteins, also known asguanine nucleotide-binding proteins, are a family of membrane resident â€Å"go-between† proteins that are important molecular switches in the mediation of GPCR signalling1. In their inactive state, G-proteins exist as heterotrimeric complexes composed of ÃŽ ±, ÃŽ ² and ÃŽ ³-subunits. Upon its stimulation, a GPCR will catalyse the GDPà ¯Ã†â€™Ã‚  GTP exchange at GÃŽ ± leading to the dissociation of the trimer complex as a GÃŽ ±-subunit and the GÃŽ ²ÃŽ ³-dimer, both able to interact with a number of effector systems responsible for cellular responses. Upon hydrolysis of GTP to GDP+P by GÃŽ ±, the G-protein mediated signalling is terminated, whereby a group of proteins, the regulators of G-protein signalling (RGS) appear to play substantial role1,2. Every organ system utilises G-protein mediated signal transduction evoking such diverse outcomes as neurotransmission, immunity, cardiovascular function and hormone secretion3. Consequently, GPCRs present a variety of opportunities as therapeutic targets for treating cancer, cardiac dysfunction, central nervous system disorders and pain. In fact, drugs targeting members of this protein superfamily account for 40% of all prescription pharmaceuticals on the market2. GPCRs constitute the largest and most diversefamily of heptahelical transmembrane receptors  that receive a signal (e.g. small peptides, lipid analogues, amino-acid derivatives, and sensory stimuli such as light, taste and odour2)from outside thecelland transmit this signal to the cell interior via interactions with G-proteins leading to activation of downstream effector systems4. In mammals 21 GÃŽ ±-subunits, six GÃŽ ²-subunits and twelve GÃŽ ³-subunits have been described5. Depending on their GÃŽ ± similarity, G-proteins are grouped into four main classes: GÃŽ ±s, GÃŽ ±i/o, GÃŽ ±q/11 and GÃŽ ±12/13 which show selectivity with respect to both, receptors and effectors due to the presence of recognition domains complementary to G-protein binding domains in receptors/effectors6. The main targets for G-proteins include adenylyl cyclase, phospholipase isoforms, Rho A/Rho kinases (a system that controls mainly signalling pathways involved in cell growth/proliferation), and the mitogen a ctivated protein kinase (involved in the control of many cell functions such as cell division), and ion channels7,8. In its inactivated state the complex is freely diffusible in the plane of the cell membrane due to fatty acid chain anchors on each subunit7. Stimulation of GPCRs by agonists leads to conformational changes in the receptor resulting in the acquirement of high affinity to the G(ÃŽ ±ÃŽ ²ÃŽ ³) complex. Due to their subsequent association, a GDP->GTP exchange in the ÃŽ ±-subunit will occur leading to dissociation of the G-protein complex from the receptor in form of a GÃŽ ±(GTP)-subunit and a GÃŽ ²ÃŽ ³-dimer. Prior the activation of the G-protein the GÃŽ ²ÃŽ ³-dimer is bound to a hydrophobic pocket present in GÃŽ ±-GDP. GTP binding to GÃŽ ± removes the hydrophobic pocket and reduces the affinity of GÃŽ ± for GÃŽ ²ÃŽ ³9. Both have a signalling function and can interact with various downstream effector systems 7,9. The duration of G protein-mediated effector activation is dependent on the intrinsic GTPase activity of the GÃŽ ±-subunit. GTP-hydrolysis results in dissociation of GÃŽ ±(GDP) f rom the effector to reunite with GÃŽ ²ÃŽ ³ completing the cycle7. Several studies have shown that the kinetics of G-protein signalling are regulated by RGS proteins that can not only act as GTPase activating proteins (GAPs) on GÃŽ ±-subunits hereby accelerating GTP-hydrolysis, but also as scaffolds to help assemble signalling complexes and providing a critical mechanism of regulation of cellular responses10. Over 30 RGS/RGS-like domain containing proteins have been described and classified into nine distinct subfamilies based on primary sequence homology and presence of additional domains, including the A/RZ (prototype RGSZ), the B/R4 (prototype RGS4), the C/R7 (prototype RGS7), the D/R12 (prototype RGS12), the E/RA (prototype Axin), the F/GEF, G/GRK, H/SNX and I/D-AKAP2 subfamilies3,10,11. They differ widely in their overall size and amino acid identity, and many family members possess a remarkable variety of structural domains and motifs that regulate their actions and/or enable them to interact with other binging partners with diverse cellular roles. RGS proteins have a highly conserved RGS domain of 120 amino acids3,11 which allows for selective binding to the transition state of GÃŽ ±(GTP->GDP+P)8 , accelerating the GTP-hydrolysis up to a 1000-fold5,10 by stabilising this transition. Some studies have shown that RGS proteins can also act as effector antagonists by binding tightly to GÃŽ ±(GTP), hereby blocking effector activation5,11. It has been suggested that simple RGS proteins (those of A/RZ and B/R4) have an almost exclusively negative regulatory function acting as modulators of G-protein signalling as for instance shown by the function of RGS4, an effective GAP protein for GÃŽ ±q family members. In mammalian cells RGS4 doesn’t block the receptor and GÃŽ ±q/11-directed inositol lipid/Ca2+ signalling completely but elicit rhythmic Ca2+ oscillations in mammalian cells10, 11. On the contrary, the larger RGS proteins can link active GÃŽ ±s to other signalling pathways and therefore serve as multifunctional integrators. Integration can occur via activation of kinases, recruitment of cellular scaffolds/associated proteins or by direct receptor interactions11. Two of the R12 family members (RGS12 and RGS14) were shown to coordinate components of the Ras/Raf/mitogen-activated protein kinase signalling pathway8,10. RGS proteins display specificity and selectivity in their interactions not only with G-proteins, but also GCPRs, ion channels and other signalling events3,5 which may be accomplished by firstly, differences in GAP activity towards different types of GÃŽ ±-subunits (e.g. RGS19 was shown to interact strongly with GÃŽ ±i1, GÃŽ ±i3 and GÃŽ ±o, weakly GÃŽ ±i2 but not with GÃŽ ±s and GÃŽ ±q5; secondly, the ability to interact with specific GPCRs or with effectors within the GPCR signalling axis directly, due to presence of characteristic structural domains and motifs (e.g. RGS2 and RGS4 bind selectively the 3rd intracellular loop of M2 and M5 muscarinic receptors5); thirdly, by formation of an RGS/G-protein complex that prevents the G-protein from binding its receptor or the downstream effectors; and lastly, by co-expression of the RGS-proteins with its target protein(s) in order for selective interactions to take place. An example is illustrated by the expression of the alternative splice d RGS9-1 and RGS9-2 in entirely different tissues, thus having different functions and selectivity for different targets. While RGS9-1 is expressed in the photoreceptor cell layers of the retina and is involved in the phototransduction pathway by regulation of photoreceptors, RGS9-2 is predominantly found in the brain and shows selectivity for the regulation of dopamine D2 and opioid  µ receptor signalling pathways5. RGS proteins play and essential regulatory role in G-protein mediated signal transduction, being able to regulate a great number of GCPR signalling events with great specificity and accuracy. By fully understanding the mechanisms and the significance of their expression, role and targets it can lead science to advances in the development of novel therapeutic drugs against disorders involving G-protein mediated signalling. References Baltoumas, F. A., Theodoropoulou, M. C., Hamodrakas, S.J.; Interactions of the a-subunits of heterotrimeric G-proteins with GPCRs, effectors and RGS proteins: A critical review and analysis of interacting surfaces, conformational shifts, structural diversity and electrostatic potentials. Journal of Structural Biology.2013;(182):209-218 Filmore, D.; Its a GPCR world. Modern Drug Discovery  (American Chemical Society).2004; (November): 24–28 Bansal, G., Druey, K.M., Xie, Z.; R4 RGS proteins: regulation of G-protein signaling and beyond. Pharmacology and Therapeutics. 2007;116(3):473-495 Joost, P., Methner, A.; Phylogenetic analysis of 277 human G-protein-coupled receptors as a tool for the prediction of orphan receptor ligands.Genome Biology. 2002;3(11): research0063.1–0063.16 Xie, G.X., Palmer, P.P.; How regulators of G protein signaling achieve selective regulation. Journal of molecular biology. 2007;366(2):349-365 CABRERA-VERA, T.M., VANHAUWE, J., THOMAS, T.O., MEDKOVA, M., PREININGER, A., MAZZONI, M.R., HAMM, H.; Insights into G Protein Structure, Function, and Regulation.  Endocrine Reviews. 2003;24(6):765-781 Rang, H.P., Dale, M.M., Ritter, J.M., Flower, R.J., Henderson, G.; Rang and Dales Pharmacology. 7th ed. UK. Elsevier Churchill Livingstone ; 2012; 3(32-33) Kimple, A.J., Bosch, D.E., Giguà ¨re, P.M., Siderovski, D.P.; Regulators of G-protein signaling and their GÃŽ ± substrates: promises and challenges in their use as drug discovery targets. Pharmacological Reviews. 2011;63(3):728-749 Oldham, W.M., Hamm, H.; Heterotrimeric G protein activation by G-protein-coupled receptors.NATURE REVIEWS | molecular cell biology. 2008;9:60-71 Keinan, D., Yang, S., Cohen, R.E., Yuan, X., Liu, T., Li, Y.P.; Role of regulator of G protein signaling proteins in bone.Front Biosci (Landmark Ed). 2014;1(19):634-648 Hollinger, S., Hepler, J.R.;. Cellular regulation of RGS proteins: modulators and integrators of G protein signaling.Pharmacological Reviews. 2002;54(3):527-559

The Age Of Criminal Responsibility Criminology Essay

The Age Of Criminal Responsibility Criminology Essay One must be aware that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child professes anyone under the age of eighteen is a child. However, in the criminal law, greater distinctions are made: anyone under 18 is a juvenile, aged 14-18 are classed as young persons and a person under 14 years old are classed definitively as a child. What does it mean to be a child in this modern era? Every person has experienced life as a child and could easily accumulate their own perspective, but that is exactly what it would be; a subjective definition that begins with infancy and ends when they reach adolescence. However, adolescence, for legal purposes must portray a mental, intellectual, emotional and more specifically, a moral capacity to differentiate right from wrong. Before one looks at the legal observations of childhood, it is only sensible to consider the words of those who dedicate their lives to the study of child psychology, and ultimately have wider knowledge. Psychological theory Piaget in his work, The Moral Judgement of the Child  [1]  established a theory of not only the cognitive, but also the moral development of a childs mind, prà ©cising that they cannot undertake certain tasks until they are psychologically mature enough to do so. The psychologist Kohlberg expanded on Piagets position  [2]  , and their theories make it plain that by ten children are not capable of making moral decisions similar to that of an adult, as they have not fully learned to do so. The theories suggest that there are 2 stages of moral reasoning (which sometimes overlap) named the heteronomous stage and the autonomous stage. At the heteronomous stage, the child is egocentric and believes the world revolves around them, and they will act depending on the severity of the outcome. This stage continues past the age of ten, so before they reach the next stage it is unlikely that they will be aware of the severity of any outcome. Subsequently, when they are in the autonomous stage, intentions are more important than the consequences of action and should be the basis for judging behaviour, and it is then that a child should be held accountable for his or her actions, not before. The theories suggested here are, of course, non-conclusive and non-exhaustive, but at least give an insight into the questionable nature of the entire concept of an absolute age of criminal responsibility, so it would be worthwhile to keep these theories in mind throughout the discussion. The age of criminal responsibility The age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales is ten years.  [3]  All children under this age are presumed to be doli incapax (incapable of committing a crime). After reaching the age of ten however, and as Elizabeth Stokes informs us, there is nothing within the substantive criminal law regarding the attribution of guilt, which distinguishes the responsibility of young people from that of adults.  [4]   The Home Office White Paper in 1997, signalled the start of New Labours tough and punitive, No More Excuses campaign by declaring that; Young people who commit offences must face up to the consequences of their actions for à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ No young person should be allowed to feel that he or she can offend with impunity à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Punishment is important as a means of expressing societys condemnation of unlawful behaviour and as a deterrent.  [5]   Even though there was much discussion with reference to raising the age in the late 1960s after the Government White paper Children in Trouble  [6]  (1968) along with Section 4 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1969 which would have raised the age of criminal responsibility to 14 but was never implemented and the provision was repealed in 1991. This introduced an unnaturally bold dividing line between criminal responsibility and irresponsibility for children who offend. This was the case even though arguments have been put forward suggesting that to criminalise and label children is very dangerous, with Deborah Orr proposing that, if a child has behaved in a fashion that he or she feels he had little or no control over, and then is told this is criminal, then the child is being taught that his or her criminality is something over which he has no control.  [7]  The following doctrine attempted to decrease the amount of children being labelled until it was abolished. Doli incapax Protection or a waste of time? Before the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 which abolished the doctrine, there had existed for hundreds of years  [8]  protection for children aged between 10 and 14 years. This protection was the rebuttable presumption that children were doli incapax. Under this legal doctrine, as expounded in the case of C v DPP  [9]  in addition to committing the actus reus and mens rea of a criminal offence the prosecution also had to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they knew what they were doing was seriously wrong. This doctrine was working as a filter which recognised childhood to stop 10 being the absolute age of criminal responsibility. Children aged between 10 and 14 years benefited from the presumption as it protected them from the detrimental effects of the enforcement of criminal law.  [10]  But despite this, it could be suggested that the doctrine did not work as it was professed to as it still did not stop children being prosecuted; as the prosecution only had to prove that children knew the difference between the extreme opposites of right and gravely wrong, and not mere naughtiness and wrong. For example, Bandalli suggests that children have a very flexible approach to ownership, if one were to look at the contents of the Theft Act 1968, s.1(1) describes the crime as dishonesty with intent to permanently deprive a concept which children might only be aware of as merely borrowing. So in practice it did not work sufficiently, but it cannot be ignored that it had very strong symboli sm, which was arguably the most important aspect. The symbolism of the doctrine An excellent point made by Pickford questions why the opponents of abolition continue to have faith in a doctrine which has proved to be so inadequate in protecting children anyway.  [11]  But this is perhaps because at least some acknowledgement was given to the notion of childhood with doli incapax, differentiating their treatment from that of adults. It made the police, the CPS and the judiciary stop and think about the degree of responsibility for each individual child,  [12]  and doing that, however briefly, kept the childhood status in tact. The symbolism of the abolition In spite of these arguments, Jack Straw said on 3 June 1998; with great respect, we are abolishing the concept of doli incapax and thus England and Wales saw the erosion of the policy of protection. However, this was combated with the justification that removal of protection was removal of excuse culture.  [13]  Nevertheless, supporters of the doctrine still implore the judiciary to recognise at least some protection. The recent case of R v T  [14]  in 2008 it was proposed that only the presumption had been abolished  [15]  and that the defence remained in tact. But this proposition was quickly flattened and children aged 10-14 would be treated in the same way as other juveniles in deciding whether to prosecute. The abolition of doli incapax was discoursed in conjunction with increasing the age of criminal responsibility, but now there has been an absolute abolition, the government has carried out one without the other, and has left a vacuum where protection should be. Th erefore, what doli incapax stood for; its symbolism of protection was quashed and children are treated like adults once again. The possible justifications for this are set out in Part Two. PART TWO CRIMINALISATION AND THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD There is little doubt that punitive imperatives have shaped contemporary policy responses to child offenders in England and Wales.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Goldson (2002) The government is ignoring the widespread discourse and European recommendations about the rights of children. With their apparent stubbornness, not to mention the abolition of the centuries old presumption of doli incapax, the question is why are we wedded to the extreme desire to pull children into the criminal justice system and criminalise, rather than taking the civil route which is based on the foundations of protection and welfare? Their policy has brought a large group of children under the auspices of the criminal justice system where previously they may have been successfully diverted. This current punitive climate can be justified to an extent because people have an innate interest in punishment. Namely, they will view children as adults seeing them as autonomous beings who bear responsibility for what they do, despite their age. In the NACRO youth crime briefing as recent as December 2008, the Committee expresses concern about the findings of a survey commissioned by Barnados  [16]  which show the negative public perception of children: 49% of people believe that children are increasingly a danger to each other and adults, 54% agreed that children are beginning to behave like animals, 35% of people feel like the streets are infested with children. In addition to this, after the 1994 government submission to the UNCRC, Barnados and the NSPCC highlighted their outrage of what the government purported to be happening in England and Wales, that it did not reflect what was happening in reality, and thus decided to write their own submissions such as these, showing that the UK Government has much to answer for. The public have a diverse perception of children in contrast with psychologists  [17]  and they want to prosecute them. To prosecute and put a child through the criminal system costs between  £75,000 (for a youth to be in a young offenders institute) and  £150,000 (for secure accommodation).  [18]  Although it might be a generally useful deterrent to use the threat of prosecution, recently it can be seen how arbitrarily it is used (which is in breach of Art 37(b) United Nation Convention on the Rights of the Child). For example, an article in The Mail Online  [19]  states that in Newark, Nottinghamshire, letters of warning have been sent out that children face prosecution and fines of up to  £100 if they annoy neighbours with ball games. . But if the child was to be prosecuted for kicking a ball around in the street, what would this really achieve? The answer is nothing. Prosecution and custody in this respect would be equivalent to an employer paying a new employee to go through a process which they know does not work,  [20]  which is obviously a waste of time for everyone involved. The government maintains that it is providing proportionate penalties for child offending and in its report to the CRC states they are keen to ensure that children are not prosecuted whenever an alternative can be found but the NACRO youth crime briefing successfully contests this articulating even those who are diverted [away from the courts] by being dealt with reprimand of final warning, are in effect [still] criminalised. It is also exceptionally questionable whether children should be tried in the Crown Courts, as the NACRO briefing  [21]  suggests that the Crown Court is primarily an arena for dealing with adult offenders through jury trial, and children who commit grave crimes are, in large degree, processed as if they were adults.  [22]   And so, in the shadow of sympathetic European progressiveness, New Labour, with its No More Excuses draconian approach has conceded to the whims of the public and are practically stealing away what it is to be a child, including what they deserve and have a right to protection, which a higher age of criminal responsibility would ensure. In Europe: UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) According to United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child regarding the age of criminal responsibility, countries should consider whether a child can live up to the moral and psychological components of criminal responsibility and notes that if the age of criminal responsibility is set too low the notion of responsibility would become meaningless. The Committee has recommended State Parties not to set a minimum age of criminal responsibility at a too low level and to increase an existing minimum age to an internationally acceptable level concluding that the minimum age below the age of 12 is considered unacceptable. According to UK Childrens Commissioners Report to the UNCRC, although the UK has ratified the UNCRC, the Convention is not part of domestic law and remains unenforceable. Recent legislative and policy developments are in clear breach of the UNCRC, for example, the naming and shaming of children subject to anti-social behaviour orders  [23]  . Even if these did not breach the Convention rights, it would be unsuccessful anyway, as some children, especially the higher end of the spectrum would actually be proud of having an ASBO, or as Deborah Orr suggests  [24]  , they would be badges of pride and perverse achievements. Thompson and Venables case study How it came about that two mentally normal boys aged 10 of average intelligence committed this terrible crime is very hard to comprehend . . . Morland, J The cases of R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte V. and R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte T, concerned Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, both 10 ½ year old boys, being convicted of the murder of a two year old boy. They were only just over the age of criminal responsibility. They were sentenced to detention during Her Majestys Pleasure and the trial Judge; Morland J set the minimum term to be served at eight years to reflect their extreme youth. The NACRO youth crime briefing  [25]  Grave crimes, mode of trial, and long term detention, reports that the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR hereafter) determined that the defendants were denied a fair trial since they were unable to participate effectively in the proceedings given the nature of the court room and the intense public scrutiny saying the formality and ritual of the Crown Court must have seemed incomprehensible and intimidating for a child of eleven. This breaches Art 3 of the Convention, to have the best interests of the child as the primary consideration. The Youth Crime Briefing  [26]  reports that even after the Lord Chief Justice issued a Practice Direction (in February 2000), which gave guidance for the conduct of such proceedings and calls upon Crown Courts to have regard to the welfare of the child and to avoid exposing him or her, so far as possible, to intimidation, humiliation or distress (my emphasis added),further cases go on to breach Convention rights. This was detailed in the case of SC v UK  [27]  where an eleven year old boy who did not have the intellectual, moral or cognitive capacity for his age group, had his right to a fair trial breached even though the procedure adopted would have complied with the Practice Direction. The ECHR stated that: [He] has little comprehension of the role of the jury . Even more strikingly, he does not seem to have grasped the fact that he risked a custodial sentence, and even once sentence had been passed à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ he appeared confused and expected to be able to go home with his foster father. The Court then went on to make recommendations as to how a child with the handicap of childhood should be processed that they should be tried in a specialist tribunal noting afterwards that there are at present no proposals to develop one. The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice The Beijing Rules. The Beijing Rules adopted by the General Assembly in 1985, specifies in section 4.1 that the lower age of criminal responsibility shall not be fixed at too low an age level, bearing in mind the facts of emotional, mental and intellectual maturity. The commentary states that a specific approach should be taken, which is whether a child can live up to the moral and psychological components of criminal responsibility and making explicit reference to the individual discernment and understanding. This relates profusely to the theories that Piaget and Kohlberg propose where they have said that moral development is a continual process that occurs throughout the lifespan, and I would suggest that to fix the age at ten is to put a limit on an uncertain event, that is to say, they are severely generalising the mental capacity of children, leading to injustices in the due process that children are entitled to have. Even if it can be argued that increasing the age would lead to net-widening of children (who may have developed moral capacity earlier) being excused for crimes, that does not displace the argument that the majority of crimes committed by children are minor, and could be prevented with concern for the individual offender and n ot the offence. . In fact, the Beijing Rules state in part 11.1, consideration shall be givenà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦to dealing with juvenile offenders without resorting to formal trial emphasizing that, this practice [will] serve to hinder the negative effects of subsequent proceedings, such as the stigma of conviction and sentence. The Rules also make clear the relationship that the age of criminal responsibility must have with its other limitation counterparts; the legal age of consent, the legal age of drinking, marital status, civil majority for example. There is also the notion of the need of a higher mental intelligence, emotional and moral capacity to be responsible in respect to all of these, and this just does not sit well with having the age of criminal responsibility at ten.  [28]   Risk and Predictive Factors In addition to disregarding the Beijing Rules, the government have actually contributed to the reason that children are committing crimes, evidenced by certain predictive factors that have led to increased youth crime in certain contexts. The Youth Offending Board  [29]  maintains that anti-social behaviour and crime is not immediately down to the childs choice, but rather the context in which they are placed. From their web page headed, Targeted Prevention of Youth Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour they raise the policy issue of funding for a start, and reinforce that, one of the best and most cost-effective ways to reduce youth crime is to prevent young people from getting into trouble in the first place, by dealing with the problems that make it more likely they will commit crime or anti-social behaviour. They then proceed to list possible predictive factors such as lack of or poor education, poor family relationships (bad parenting), and the child living in public housing locat ed in high risk, inner city areas. To start with, the report from the UK Childrens Commissioners to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child evidenced that child poverty is high with around 3.1 million people living in poverty (29% of children) in England and more than 1 million children living in poor housing, which is a possible reason why children commit crime. Here it is not individual choice, but the governments own policy that is creating the increased likelihood of child offenders. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation suggests that current measures mean child poverty will rise from 18% to 33% over the next 20 years. They say the poverty gap is created by state benefits which are linked to inflation, rather than earnings, and that is of government concern. And so, if the Government is likely to miss its target to halve the number of children living in poverty by 2010, then they are in theory adding to the offending rates instead of reducing them, defeating their whole objective of being tough on crime. Other factors arise from poor parenting and bad education. In a speech to the Association of Teachers and Lecturers in 2002, the former education secretary Estelle Morris argued that bad parenting has created a cycle of disrespect among children, and again does not show it to be the individuals own choice. Poor education leads to truancy, alcohol misuse and other antisocial activities that adults would not be punished for. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation found that almost half the young people aged 11 to 17 reported committing at least one criminal act in a survey of 14,000 school students.  [30]  It is fair to argue that this shows crimes are being committed by children to whom doli incapax formerly applied, but this paper is not insisting that children between 10 and 14 do not commit crimes, it is reiterating that the punitive measures for this age group are a step backwards in an otherwise progressive world, and alternative measures are needed. The government have excused thems elves of any blame, when it is obvious from the above factors that they have an inherent part to play. Children are no longer treated as special cases when it comes to the types of penalties available to the courts when they ought to be. The status of childhood still remains and needs to be protected. But condemning children to the penalties that adults have, they are subverting the whole concept of childhood and are returning to the stage in history where children were no less than little adults  [31]  a definition which philanthropists such as Mary Carpenter in the very early stages of the youth justice system were trying to eradicate. PART THREE ALTERNATIVES Justice/Welfare Burgeoning youth incarceration and high reconviction rates in England and Wales have prompted a search for alternative responses. Pitts and Kuula  [32]   The overall aims of the criminal justice system are to avoid future re-offending and to exact retribution on behalf of the victim and society  [33]  as defined in s.37 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The UK government for England and Wales have two main options they could take towards a child who has committed a crime; a diversionary approach operating at a cautionary level or to prosecute amounting to either a judicial process of punishment on the basis of harm done or a punishment approach regarding the welfare of the child. The inability to comply with the UNCRC recommendations is exposed where they take the punitive route almost every time. The response to juveniles oscillates between the justice or welfare approach, that is to say whether you look to the offence of the offender. The welfare approach is founded on determinist reasons outside of the childs control, so he or she bears no responsibility. However the justice approach appears to predominate in England and Wales, which will inevitably mean that the age of criminal responsibility will remain too low, as it does not allow a child to be anything but responsible. Civil Law approach The civil family law is an example of the welfare approach. There is an odd dichotomy because, in contrast with the criminal law which employs a fixed cut-off point, family law takes an individualised and functional approach, joined with a completely different perception of childhood, which is in line with the UNCRC. The perception seems nearer to that outlined by Piaget and Kohlberg which understands the vulnerable and dependent nature of a child, and again works on the basis that the childs welfare is paramount. Helen Keating also suggests that the child may also be seen as incompetent in legal terms, and that developmental discourse has found expression in law and has made its way into the system through the test formulated from Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority and Another  [34]  . . The level of competence required is sufficient understanding and intelligence to enable him to understand fully what is proposed and sufficient discretion to enable him to make a wise choice in his or her own interests.  [35]  Despite the problems that the test can amount to, such as delay in ascertaining the competence, its influence has become enshrined in statute. The Children Act 1989 even begins with a checklist for the welfare principle stating that the court should have regard to the the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child considered in the light of his or her age and understanding.  [36]  Ã‚   . There is no such parallel in criminal law, which begs the question of why two systems running side by side are contradictory. It cannot be that the children in family law cases are more vulnerable than those in criminal law, so it must be due to the approach. The UK Government should take a step back and try to ignore the distorted perceptions of children that the public emanate, and look more closely at the individual child perhaps even looking at them as if they were their own young. Comparative Systems With the New Labour policy so behind most other countries it is unsurprising that one can find models of welfare based systems which, despite their own shortcomings (such as paternalistic decision-making) still puts us to shame. Lesley McAra introduces a substantive summary of the developments in Scottish Youth Justice  [37]  noting it exhibited a high degree of stability in its welfare based institutional framework and policy ethos, up until it started acting like England. By filtering in punitive measures such as anti-social behaviour legislation when the Children (Scotland) Act was passed in 1995, Scotland has conceded to the publics moral panics about persistent offenders and is transforming. The fact that their age of criminal responsibility is going to raise to 12 (from 8) when the Scottish Governments Criminal Justice and Licensing Bill passes in 2009, may just have saved them from themselves. This was the philosophy of the Kilbrandon Committees  [38]  childrens hearing system. Here a child, passing several grounds for referral (which are astonishingly similar to the grounds that the civil (family) law invokes for a Care Order  [39]  .. is or is likely to suffer serious harm and/or with admission of guilt) are referred to a tribunal consisting of lay-people, who operated from a needs not deeds viewpoint was in direct contrast with Englands Ingleby Committee. It will bring Scotland into line with most of Europe, but the Scottish Government said the rise would not mean letting off younger offenders, as Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said amongst recent discourse, Evidence shows that prosecution at an early age increases the chance of reoffending so this change is about preventing crime. Rather they will be held to account in a way that is appropriate for their stage of development and ensures that we balance their needs with the need to protect our communities. Similarly in Finland a different approach is taken. The age of criminal responsibility is 15, and their answer is to look at the child on the whole; their environment whilst dividing children into their age groups based on cognitive functions, needs, and understanding. Moving from a punitive to welfare syste