Wuthering Heights Heathcliff Personality Essay free essay sample

Personality Heathcliff is one of the main characters in the renowned novel, Wuthering Heights, by Emily Bronte. Heathcliff is such a memorable character due to his unique personality and how he approaches and engages conflicts in his life. Whether Heathcliff’s actions spark sympathy or lead to disappointment with his conduct, some characteristics of his personality do seem to stand out throughout the novel. Traits such as his unwillingness to forgive those for events in the past, his selfish nature, or even the deep emotion that emerges through this seemingly dark figure. In the novel Heathcliff is betrayed by those around him. He is forced to do servant duties by Hindley, who he lives with for many years. As if this is not degrading enough, he begins to lose the love of his life, Catherine, because Heathcliff can no longer provide her with the luxurious life to which she is accustomed. We will write a custom essay sample on Wuthering Heights Heathcliff Personality Essay or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page This betrayal probably is what caused him to develop his unforgiving nature, especially since it causes dramatic alterations to his lifestyle, cripples his chances for a successful future, and leaves him emotionally distraught. In chapter 7 of the novel Heathcliff says, â€Å"I’m trying to settle how I shall pay Hindley back. I don’t care how long I wait, if I can only do it at last. † This quote shows the grudge he holds against Hindley and his unwillingness to forgive him. Quotes like these can be plucked out from various chapters in the novel, but they all reveal the same thing about Heathcliff. No matter whether it has been a week or years, he seems to hold his grudges and be unable to forgive. Another trait that Heathcliff exhibits throughout the novel is his selfish side. I believe this side emerges hand in hand with his unforgiving nature. I think when his world is crashing down around him he decides that he is the only person he can trust and he developes a fear of building a bond that can be severed leading him to be selfish. This selfishness is also reflected in his love affairs as he yearns to be with Catherine once again, not for her own good but simply because he cannot live happily without her. This trait is reflected well when Heathcliff exclaims, â€Å"Catherine Earnshaw, may you not rest so long as I live on. † This quote shows that he could care less if Catherine is able to rest. Instead Heathcliff wants to assure that Catherine will not be freed from her internal conflict before Heathcliff is able to put to rest his own emotional battles. Although many of the traits that Heathcliff is guilty of possessing are on the negative side, he does show great love and emotion in some portions of the novel. This is the side of Heathcliff’s personality that can really make one feel sympathy for him, as it seems that his deep love probably contributes to his negative side. Heathcliff so desperately wants Catherine to return to him that he can hardly live through a day without his emotional tornado wrecking his relations with others. Heathcliff really shows that he wants nothing more than Catherine’s love when he confesses to her his feelings even while she is married. If he loved you with all the power of his soul for a whole lifetime he couldn’t love you as much as I do in a single day. † The fact that Heathcliff is completely unable to move on and get over his feelings for Catherine really display his emotional nature. Heathcliff is one of those characters that will only be fully understood by the person who created the character. For everyone else there will always be room for discussion and disagreements concerning the unforgiving, selfish, yet desperately e motional personality of Heathcliff.

Aquinas on the Possibility of Merit †Religion Research Paper

Aquinas on the Possibility of Merit – Religion Research Paper Free Online Research Papers Aquinas on the Possibility of Merit Religion Research Paper Thomas Aquinas is known for having presented both a moral and spiritual view of the world he lived in, yet it is still very much applicable to the world that we live in today. Thomas believed above anything else that the final end of man lies entirely in God and no one else. And while Aquinas attempted to reiterate and model his works after his predecessor Augustine, his views differed, and mainly in one fundamental area. Unlike Augustine, Thomas’ view of man, nature, and the free will is much kinder, desiring for good despite the threat of sin and evil. With that said and done, Aquinas questions merit. Why Can People Merit From God? Thomas compares merit with a reward, saying that they are essentially the same thing. He goes on to explain that God is on a different level than that of man, and even if we attempted to compare ourselves, we could never do so. Furthermore, God does not want our merit, or our reward, he wishes only for fulfillment. This fulfillment meaning that we as his people do what we ought to do using the will given to us by God himself. We can only merit from God by doing this, because if we are successful and we even wish for this merit we must do our deeds and good works. God does not wish to gain anything from these good works he wishes only to be glorified by them. Still if we are unsuccessful in this endeavor it is impossible for us to gain merit from God. Objections to God’s Merit? To successfully go back and answer this question of merit, Thomas first had to raise some objections to this idea that had been brought up in the past. While there were many questions that were raised and still exist today, some are much more fundamentally important than others. It is said that no one can possibly merit a reward by simply repaying what he owes another. In this fashion, how could it be that we could ever merit from God. We owe him so much that we could never get to the point to which we could repay him, let alone surpass this level and wish for a reward for our works. No matter how many good works we do, they can only be used in our vale attempt to repay God exactly what we owe. Thomas calls us â€Å"unprofitable servants,† that we only do what is our duty to do. It is also said that if anyone profits from another that makes him his debtor. However there is no way that God could be our debtor. He is a much higher level than to ever be the debtor, as he started the cycle by giving and because of this we are forever in debt to him, no matter how hard we try or how much good we can do. We are in second place from the start and our lives are only lived in order to fulfill what he has destined for us. And while we will never be able to fully repay him, we still work hard each and everyday to do so, because this action appeases God and will eventually lead him to favor us. Thomas’ Answer to These Objections: Thomas answers these objections by stating that merit and reward are one in the same. We commonly call a reward something that is given to someone in return for his work or labor, as a price for it. To give this reward to someone that has in fact done something for you is justice. And Thomas believes that philosophically speaking, justice is synonymous with equality. Thomas believes that some justices are owed, or even deserved, like a son who deserves something from his father or even a slave that deserves from his master. And while it seems that man would argue that he deserves that justice, this can never be challenged. For man and God both suffer from a great inequality, in fact, the distance between the two is infinite. Therefore, and to end all arguments, the kind of justice that is obtained by and only through absolute equality could never and will never exist between man and God. This is where Thomas believes this argument and any objections have to end, for God and ma n are more like two separate being, meaning that they share no grounds for comparison and because of this the true equality lacks. And it is this equality needed to find if merit can be deserved. So it absence scratches the question and holds no weight for any other objections. Thomas’ Idea of â€Å"Ordination†: Thomas’s idea of a â€Å"divine ordination† is his key component of man ever being able to merit from God. It is this ordination, which is given to us by God that allows us to achieve anything, be it in our eyes, or in the eyes of God. Simply put, man can only receive from God what God has given man the power to work for and earn through his own efforts. God is responsible for creation in the beginning and it was at this time that God gave us all of the tools and abilities that we would need throughout our life. So by using these tools that God has given us, we will be able to achieve great things. These great things will then hopefully fulfill God and his intentions and only then may we receive merit from him. From the beginning of time is has been this ordination that has molded us into what we our. It is because of this divine ordination that we are in debt to God in the first place. This ordination is the gift that was so great that no matter what we do and try to give back to God, nothing, especially no one single act, nor the sum of all of our works ever duplicate or surpass the importance of this ordination that God gave us so long ago. Thus the difference in what God did when he created us all is that he only gave this ordination to man. No other being has been or ever will be blessed or bestowed the same honor. For unlike the other beasts that inhabit the earth, God’s giving us this gift supplied us with free will, something we have only for ourselves. It is with this free will that we can be rational and move ourselves toward actions that we know to be good and to also be pleasing to God. And it is this action alone that could ever be important enough to receive merit. Therefore we say that our free will is meritorious, and this is what separates us from all other creates that God created. Does Thomas’ Ordination Differ From Other Views? While we have studied other differing opinions and views on both the questions of grace and merit and the possibility of predestination, Aquinas’ view differs from all of them. As some believe that God has our futures predetermined and mapped out so that we merely live our lives but have no ultimate effect on its’ outcome, others believe in a two fold strategy. While God does have a plan in mind for us he is open to allow the human the chance to either prove God right or wrong according to his good works, perhaps even to the point in which God ultimate decision about our eternal future may be swayed. Thomas’ ordination presents an altogether different spin on things. Unlike the idea of God having complete control and the final say or even man being able to work to save him self, Thomas believes in God’s belief in us. That is to say that God has already done his part, he has given us the tools that we need. It is up to us to take what he has given us and use it, or simply neglect God’s gift and squander it all away. It is almost like God has a partnership with us, with him being the investor, investing his ordination into us and we being his worker. He has laid us a good foundation and put us on the right track and our actions will ultimately tell if we profit from this investment or we lose it all. Aquinas is the first to say that we can save ourselves, as long as we fulfill God’s wishes for us, and win his favor. And while this may not always seem easy to do, it is not unattainable. Thomas’ Link Between Predestination and Merit: By clearly understanding Thomas’ teaching on predestination, his idea of the possibility of merit becomes more understandable. While he makes it clear that God has given us the abilities to be able to do what it is we do, we must understand that it is our place to work for God. Nothing we will ever do will reward God, for he cannot be rewarded. Our worship of God rewards us instead, for even if we gain his merit, he gains nothing from us, for we do not profit him, we only glorify his name. God therefore will never be a debtor to us; rather he will be a debtor to himself, because it is our right to fulfilled everything that he has ordained. Afterthought†¦. Therefore, although it has been said that we may never merit from God because we may never be able to fully repay God for what he has given us, this may not be the most important issue. Rather, it appears that God would be willing to grant merit to us if he does in fact see that we are working to fulfill the wishes that he ordained in us from the beginning. This fulfillment would bring him happiness and his happiness could bring us his favor and perhaps the gift of eternal life. As long as we know that our role is to serve his name and be thankful for the gifts we have been given, we may be able to work in conjunction with God so that we can both receive just what it is we want. For God, the glory that our good works provide and for us the ultimate gift that only a select few will ever receive. Research Papers on Aquinas on the Possibility of Merit - Religion Research PaperThe Effects of Illegal ImmigrationCanaanite Influence on the Early Israelite ReligionMind TravelBringing Democracy to AfricaHarry Potter and the Deathly Hallows EssayGenetic EngineeringMoral and Ethical Issues in Hiring New EmployeesNever Been Kicked Out of a Place This NiceResearch Process Part OneHip-Hop is Art

Patient Satisfaction and Retention Strategies in Hospitals Thesis

Patient Satisfaction and Retention Strategies in Hospitals - Thesis Example This paper illustrates that the performance of any hospital is dependent on the patient satisfaction and retention strategies for hospitals. Studies have been conducted on how hospitals can improve their patient satisfaction and retention strategies, as well as, how hospitals can attract patients. However, the studies did not explain explicitly the tactics that can be implemented to help attract patients and retain them at the same time. Therefore, the need to understand and analyze various factors that can help in improving patient satisfaction and retention in hospital settings. Although studies have been conducted to establish why different hospitals perform better than others, employee satisfaction has always satisfaction has always been a very important tool for medical staff. Staffs who are content will be more productive than discontented staff and will also have the low turnover of staff. The question of why some hospitals perform better than others is asked by many and by co nducting a research on the patient satisfaction and retention strategies on Sheikh Khalifa some of the questions will be answered. Though sickness is not something that can be wished for it is foolish or naà ¯ve to ignore the fact that people fall ill. It is in this context that SKMC tries to understand that treating a patient does not necessarily mean he or she is satisfied with the services offered. SKMC was built in 2005 due to the merger of publicly managed health care providers in Abu Dhabi. It encompasses several ‘Centers of Excellence’ and it is run by the Cleveland Clinic. It functions as the leading institution in SEHAs system. It is overseen by its obligation to practice modern health care services to high standards as high as the world’s best medical facilities. SKMC’s broad healthcare services provide for the priorities of the people of Abu Dhabi. It ensures both the finest levels of patient satisfaction and care and promotes overall health th rough awareness and education. SEHA is standing for Abu Dhabi Health Services and Company. SEHA is the Arabic word for health. It was launched in December 2007 and it is owned and run by the Abu Dhabi government. SEHA was launched by the government has plans to reform the healthcare sector in Abu Dhabi and represent a positive milestone in the provision of the best healthcare services in the world by His Highness Sheikh Khalifa.

Research Technique Study Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Research Technique Study - Essay Example This research options must be clarified in the early stage of the research planning. In this period of globalization, innovations has introduced the Internet that have generated new methods in conducting surveys, these surveys are done through electronic mail or e-mail and the World Wide Web. In e-mail surveys, the content of the survey is in the original message of the e-mail, in this case the respondents can complete the survey just by answering the original e-mail (Bradley, 1999). While Web surveys, are powered by host websites, in this case the respondents can just click on the website then complete the survey. Internet surveys are presently in trend mainly because of four accepted statements about how they pile up against more-conventional survey methods (Coomber, 1997): (1) the responses are quick; (2) they are equally even better than conventional surveys (3) they are much economical to perform; and (4) they are easier to implement. On the other hand, these statement may be true or not, depending on the individual conditions of the survey. In the most common sense, conducting market survey research using the Internet engages performance one or more events and examining the outcomes. Researchers perform testing for a broad range of basis, series from pre-testing a research design to challenging to process a measuring instrument. A widespread application engages examining fundamental hypotheses. Once suitable, a prescribed testing gives the most reliable proof of causation possible (Deacon ET. Al.:1999). To perform one, researchers must employ two things. First, researchers must influence at least one independent variable. One does not just watch and calculate an independent variable as it obviously takes place. As an alternative, it is restricted and diverse as part of the design of the study. Second, opportunity practices must decide whether or to what extent a person investigational contributor is depicted to the independent variable. This is also

Free

Free Will in Experimental Philosophy Essay Although the â€Å"free will† problem envelops a spectrum of ideas, I agree with the following belief: â€Å"The folk are compatibilists about free will. † While there are, of course, incompatibilists and indeterminists, for the most part, the general population consists of compatibilists. Now, I know experimental philosophy has a problem with the use of generalizations without actual statistics, but throughout this paper, I will explain exactly why the world revolves in a generally compatibilist manner. Firstly, to speak of compatibilism, you’d have to assume that the world is deterministic, meaning that everything that happens from here on out, including human action, is caused by the facts of everything that has happened before it. With that assumption in mind, compatibilist believe that we still have free will as long as we aren’t operating under external limitations. The problem with that is that although compatibilists believe we are free, there is still disagreement on just exactly how free we may be, which is the weak spot indeterminists and incompatibilists use to try to break the argument. One nature of compatibilism is referred to as classic compatibilism. This means that we’d be acting freely as long as we, without being impeded by any outside force, take a course of action that we personally choose for ourselves. These compatibilists believe that it is the presence of impediments such as â€Å"physical restraints, lack of opportunity, duress or coercion, physical or mental impairment, and the like† that would cause us to not act freely (Caruso, 2012). However, this line of reasoning is not accepted by those who support the Consequence Argument. In the simplest terms, this argument states that no one has power over the facts of the past and the laws of nature. Also, no one has power over the fact that the facts of the past and the laws of nature entail every fact of the future (i. e. , determinism is true). Because of that, no one has power over the facts of the future (McKenna, 2004). Compatibilists respond to this by saying that the focal point should be the differentiation between free and un-free, and not by the absence of causes. Other philosophers argue that we act freely when our first order and second order desires become aligned. Because our mental processes are more developed than those of younger children and simpler animals, we have the rationale to decide whether our instincts or raw desires should be acted upon. That rationale is referred to as the second order desires (Frankfurt, 1971). For example, Chris is at the bar with his girlfriend Ana. While Chris has stepped away to the restroom, Jose approaches Ana and flirts with her in a manner that she does not feel comfortable with. Once out of the bathroom, Chris sees this. Enraged, he initially wants to go and physically put Jose in his place. In spite of this, he remembers that he is up for a promotion at work, and getting into a bar fight probably won’t help his chances of receiving it. He tells Ana to collect her things. They leave. What we see here is the protagonist, Chris, experiencing first order desires that make him want to hurt Jose. His second order desires are what tell him that although he is feeling those first order desires, his second order desires are not in agreement and therefore, he shouldn’t act on them. Although some compatibilists seem to be satisfied with this reasoning because it justifies the causation of our actions, it doesn’t explain whether our thoughts and desires are consequences of the past as well. An example would be that Kate feels the desire to take a run in the park and does so. Yet, if determinism is true, which compatibilists believe it is, she is already determined to feel that way, and although she may want to feel that way, without any outside force acting on her she is not free (McKenna, 2004). Her first order and second order desires may even align, but without the ability to do otherwise, due to determinism, she would not be free. Even so, compatibilist Michael Levin says â€Å"minding or accepting one’s desires is as much an effect of past causes as the desires themselves,† but if our internal desires are causally determined, they cannot also be free. All it would be is a different form of causality (Caruso, 2012). Nevertheless, compatibilists argue that it isn’t necessary for an individual to have been able to do otherwise (Nahmias, Stephen, Nadelhoffer, Turner, 2005). If there were the choices of A through Z and someone that could manipulate me into doing A that would do so if I didn’t do it on my own, I would still have free will if I picked A without the manipulation. In this case, compatibilist see me as having had free will because I chose A on my own. My 1st order desires were aligned with my 2nd and that is why A happened. If I had been manipulated to do so, then the problem of free will would once again come into question, but being that the manipulator is fairly irrelevant to the story since I acted on my own accord, and would have done the same thing without the potential manipulative factor. Also, there a couple of studies done to determine what relationship non-philosophers believed existed between free will, determinism, and moral responsibility. In Study 1, there were three scenarios. Scenario 1 was negative. Scenario 2 was positive, and Scenario 3 was neutral. In all three cases, between 68 – 79% of folk said there was free will. While there were some fluctuations in percentages when it came to the association between free will and the ability to choose otherwise, the amount of participants making judgments that disagreed with incompatibilism was two to three times greater than those that followed along with incompatibilist intuitions. This study was supported by their second study. In this study, they tell the subjects that everything in the universe is caused completely by their genes and environment. The scenario takes twins, Fred and Barney, and places Fred with the Jerksons and Barney with the Kindersons. One day they both find a wallet with $1000. Fred keeps it, while Barney returns it to its rightful owner. When polling the participants, 76% said they both acted on their own free will and could have done otherwise. This shows that the majority of folk believe that compatibilism is true, and while external factors and facts of the past might influence the choice making process, it does not define it; therefore we are free within the confines of a determined universe (Nahmias, Stephen, Nadelhoffer, Turner, 2005). Now, why do I personally find â€Å"the folk are compatibilist about free will† to be true? Aside from the aforementioned statistics, the reason is that if we did not find a middle ground between free will and determinism, we wouldn’t do any of the things we do. Everything from the grading systems used in schools to receiving a promotion at work all the way to fighting wars is done in a compatibilist manner. The premise of all these concepts is the idea that if you choose do X, having the option of Y, Z will happen. If you work hard enough in school (X), you will receive good grades (Z), even though you can just be lazy (Y). If you are the most productive and pleasant at your job (X), you will receive a promotion (Z). If we go into a war (X), we have the chance of winning (Z). While all the factors in each of those scenarios might have also been determined, there is no reason for us to feel disappointment when we really studied but still managed to only get a B on a test or when we lose troops across seas. Though the previous paragraph does explain that folk believe in free will, it doesn’t explain why folk have the compatibilist view of free will. The reasoning for that is because while compatibilists believe that you can control some aspects of your life, you can’t control all of them. As Michael Levin said, â€Å"Compatibilist usually agree that free will does require behavior at least to be determined, since you cannot freely do what is beyond your control. † For example, we are born and we die. The sun rises. The sun sets. We inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. There are certain laws of physics that we must adhere to. Some will argue that we believe those to be stable laws of how the universe will operate, but only because that’s what it’s done until now. Tomorrow we might not have the sun rise, and tomorrow we might inhale carbon monoxide and exhale nitrogen. However, since certain things have been fixed for a trustworthy amount of time, we, the folk, have accepted it as determined facts of the universe. The determined factors of the universe are the skeleton upon which we place the flesh that is our free will. ? References Caruso, G. D. (2012). The Folk Psychology of Free Will: Arguement Against Compatibilism. Kriterion Journal of Philosophy, 26, 56-89. Frankfurt, H. G. (1971, January 14). Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person. The Journal of Philosophy, 5-20. McKenna, M. (2004, April 26). Compatibilism. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato. stanford. edu/entries/compatibilism/ Nahmias, E. , Stephen, M. , Nadelhoffer, T. , Turner, J. (2005, October). Surverying Freedom: Folk Intuitions about Free Will and Moral Responsibility. Philosophical Psychology, 18(5), 561 584.

Womens Rights Versus Gods Will Essay -- Exploratory Essays Research

Women's Rights Versus God's Will It seems these days that everyone is concerned with their rights. People feel that there are certain rights that they should have regardless of their race, religion, sex, and so forth. And rightfully so – everyone is entitled to basic human rights. Many belonging to specific groups – such as women, and homosexuals - feel that these basic rights aren't enough and that they need more. They feel that their group should be granted special "rights," which aren't really rights at all. The early advocates of women's rights started out with good intentions – they were fighting for the abolition of slavery, suffrage for women and equal pay for men and women, among other similar rights. The first major turning point in the advocates' battle was on July 19th and 20th of 1848. On those dates, the Seneca Falls Convention was held in New York. The men and women at the convention created a document called the Declaration of Sentiments, which they based on the Declaration of Independence. This document created a foundation, a source of where to go, how to go about getting the government to recognize the rights to which they were entitled. As time went on, woman suffrage advocates like Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton formed organizations, such as the NWSA (National Woman Suffrage Association) and the AWSA (American Woman Suffrage Association). Eventually, after the formation of other organizations and after lots of support raising within states, women were granted the right to vote on August 26, 1920. Women's groups didn't stop at getting the right to vote. They worked toward receiving equal pay, equal educational opportunities, and equal job opportunities. In 1963, Congress passed a law req... ...ww.family.org/fofmag/sl/a0010612.html, February 13, 2002. "Ms. Herstory." (Online). Available http://64.29.220.68/msherstory.asp, February 12, 2002. "National Organization for Women (NOW)". Microsoft ® Encarta ® Online Encyclopedia 2001 http://encarta.msn.com (12 Feb. 2002) "Roe v. Wade". Microsoft ® Encarta ® Online Encyclopedia 2001 http://encarta.msn.com (12 Feb. 2002) Wheeler, Marjorie Spruill. "The History of the Suffrage Movement." (Online). Available http://www.pbs.org/onewoman/suffrage.html, February 12, 2002. "The Path of the Women's Rights Movement." (Online). Available http://www.nwhp.org/legacy98/timeline.html, February 19, 2002. "Women's Rights". Microsoft ® Encarta ® Online Encyclopedia 2001 http://encarta.msn.com (12 Feb. 2002) "Woman's Suffrage". Microsoft ® Encarta ® Online Encyclopedia 2001 http://encarta.msn.com (12 Feb. 2002) Women's Rights Versus God's Will Essay -- Exploratory Essays Research Women's Rights Versus God's Will It seems these days that everyone is concerned with their rights. People feel that there are certain rights that they should have regardless of their race, religion, sex, and so forth. And rightfully so – everyone is entitled to basic human rights. Many belonging to specific groups – such as women, and homosexuals - feel that these basic rights aren't enough and that they need more. They feel that their group should be granted special "rights," which aren't really rights at all. The early advocates of women's rights started out with good intentions – they were fighting for the abolition of slavery, suffrage for women and equal pay for men and women, among other similar rights. The first major turning point in the advocates' battle was on July 19th and 20th of 1848. On those dates, the Seneca Falls Convention was held in New York. The men and women at the convention created a document called the Declaration of Sentiments, which they based on the Declaration of Independence. This document created a foundation, a source of where to go, how to go about getting the government to recognize the rights to which they were entitled. As time went on, woman suffrage advocates like Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton formed organizations, such as the NWSA (National Woman Suffrage Association) and the AWSA (American Woman Suffrage Association). Eventually, after the formation of other organizations and after lots of support raising within states, women were granted the right to vote on August 26, 1920. Women's groups didn't stop at getting the right to vote. They worked toward receiving equal pay, equal educational opportunities, and equal job opportunities. In 1963, Congress passed a law req... ...ww.family.org/fofmag/sl/a0010612.html, February 13, 2002. "Ms. Herstory." (Online). Available http://64.29.220.68/msherstory.asp, February 12, 2002. "National Organization for Women (NOW)". Microsoft ® Encarta ® Online Encyclopedia 2001 http://encarta.msn.com (12 Feb. 2002) "Roe v. Wade". Microsoft ® Encarta ® Online Encyclopedia 2001 http://encarta.msn.com (12 Feb. 2002) Wheeler, Marjorie Spruill. "The History of the Suffrage Movement." (Online). Available http://www.pbs.org/onewoman/suffrage.html, February 12, 2002. "The Path of the Women's Rights Movement." (Online). Available http://www.nwhp.org/legacy98/timeline.html, February 19, 2002. "Women's Rights". Microsoft ® Encarta ® Online Encyclopedia 2001 http://encarta.msn.com (12 Feb. 2002) "Woman's Suffrage". Microsoft ® Encarta ® Online Encyclopedia 2001 http://encarta.msn.com (12 Feb. 2002)

Leaving Las Vegas

He lost his family and screenwriting job in Hollywood, because of his non-stop consumption of alcohol.   Ben Sanderson became more and more depressed.   He finally decided to just sell off everything he has got; leave Los Angeles and transfer to Las Vegas.   His intention:   to die drinking alcohol.As he was driving drunk into Las Vegas he decided to check into a motel that he thought reads:   â€Å"The Hole You’re In†Ã‚   [which actually says The Whole Year Inn].   Ben think wryly and cynically how apt the situation is.   Then he almost runs over a prostitute:   Sera.     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   They got to know each other because Ben invited Sera to his motel room in exchange for $500.   But Ben did not make love to Sera.   He just wanted to talk.   They became friendly.   They eventually felt enamoured.   However, they decided to create a compact not to change each other’s way and just live happily day by day with no plan for the future.   They both agree.   Ben continues drinking all day long, Sera keeps on being a prostitute.However, as days go by, Sera starts feeling differently about Ben and becomes really concerned.   So she tries to make him eat.   To which Ben refuses and plays unaffected and just berates Sera to remember their agreement.   To top such frustration of Sera, Ben hires another prostitute and brings her to the house of Sera.   This made Sera more than furious and throws Ben out of her house.Days on, Sera receives a call from Ben already dying.   She visits Ben.   And they made love for the first time.   They fall asleep and for a minute Ben awakens seeing Sera on top of him.   Eventually, he breathes his last with Sera still on top of him.Patient Evaluation:Ben Sanderson is prone to depression because the more he indulged in alcoholism because of his life’s failures.   From the onset of the story, he is already experiencing a meltdown, a bridge of no return.Patients stated reason for problemWhat aggravated his high alcohol consumption was his broken marriage and his family disentanglement and his losing his job.History of IllnessNo previous indication of emotional dilemma prior to the family breakup and loss of job.Past Psychiatric illness, treatment, and outcomesNone as indicated in the story.Medical HistoryNone as indicated in the story.Psychosocial History As a professional in Hollywood, Ben Sanderson is seemingly sociable, well connected and enjoyed a fruitful career at an early stage.Drug and Alcohol history Up and until he could not handle the breakdown of his family, he was already an alcoholic.   The more it got worse after his failures in his married life and career.Behavioral Observation The loneliness that has enveloped Ben Sanderson has been so imminent from the beginning of the story.   He easily just talks up any prostitute to join him somewhere.   It was also depicted that his financial resources are always at the ebb.   He had to borrow money from friends for his drinking spree.   The gratuity payment he received from his lost job was for purposes of drinking and drinking only.In one scene with Sera, Ben Sanderson says:   n one You haven't seen the worst of it. I knock things over†¦ throw up all the time. These past few days I've been very controlled. You're like some sort of antidote that mixes with the liquor and keeps me in balance. But, that won't last forever.†Mental States Observation The mere fact that he openly accepts the termination of his boss from his job, he was even thankful for the gracious severance pay.   This is an illustration of being uncaring for one’s future.   But sine he cannot cope with his failure, so Ben Sanderson openly shows he is suicidal.   His purpose of moving to Las Vegas was to die.Functional Assessment The move/story immediately showed a Ben Sanderson already in pieces.   â€Å"†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.[he] was imploding, rigi d in his attempt to maintain control, to smile when he does not feel a smile, to make banter when he wants to scream. He needs a drink. †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. [he is] into the regions of hell. There will be times when he has the DTs, times when he must pour booze into his throat like an antidote to death, times of nausea, blackouts, cuts and bruises. There is a scene in a bank when his hands shake so badly he cannot sign a check, and we empathize with the way he tries to function, telling the bank teller whatever he can think of (â€Å"I've had brain surgery†). Yes, sometimes, he feels better, and sometimes we can sense the charm he must have had (we sense his boss' affection for him even as he's being fired). But for Ben these moments are not about pleasure but about the temporary release from pain.†Ã‚   (Ebert, 2004) StrengthsBen Sanderson is still cognizant of one simple coherent thing in his life:   he needs someone to care for him.   And he needs someone to care for.à ‚   Considering, Sera is the one and only human being in his life in the course of the story, he focuses on her.   Yes, he feels a pure love that is needing and grateful.   He did not even have sex as premium in his mind.   He just simply wants a feeling of belongingness and togetherness.   It is somehow an act of humility that inspite of the suicidal nature of his life, Ben Sanderson exuded even a weebit of dignity by being a needing and concerned human being.Diagnosis Ben Sanderson is borderline depressed andTreatment Psychotherapy will play a major role.   The mere fact that there is still a tinge of lucidness in wanting and needing, Ben Sanderson could very well respond to psychotherapy.   Aid of pharmacological intervention will likewise augment the psychotherapy treatment.Prognosis Sera indeed recommended that Ben sees a doctor which of course Ben refused.   However, had there been a way for the said action been taken, there is very good hope that Ben could have surpassed even the extreme condition of his alcoholism.   Considering that Sera has eventually developed a deep sense of concern and a better prospect for their relationship, it will be a tool to bridge the hope for Ben Sanderson. The DSM-IV CriteriaBen Sanderson experienced clinical disorder that is substance related.   His anxiety disorder is alcohol induced.   The film illustrated clearly as such and the story simply illustrated the basic paradox in humanness in someone who is terminally hopeless.   No myths about mental illnesses was every portrayed or illustrated.References:â€Å"DSM-IVTM   Multiaxial System (Made Easy)†.   Psyweb.comhttp://www.psyweb.com/Mdisord/DSM_IV/jsp/dsm.iv.jspâ€Å"Leaving Las Vegas:   A Review†.   Roger Ebert.   April 25, 2004http://www.rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040425/REVIEWS08/404250302/1023