Structural theory and family development applied to a hypothetical Assignment

Structural theory and family development applied to a hypothetical case - Assignment Example The nurse will also work in collaboration with the spiritual leaders to uplift hope in life Ungar (2010). Additionally, the nurse will be instrumental in seeking the assistance of local or government authority that would offer them help, in this case Mrs. Jones. In this particular scenario, family structural and development theory can be of great help. In the case of household development theory, the family as a unit is viewed in biological, social and psychological perspective and development. For the event of the biological needs, the member of the family in needs, will be taken care of more. For the babies in the family, will need more of the care than the teenage. The biological need for the chronically ill patient needs to be more than the healthy one. According Ungar (2010) the social development of the family can be affected by the culture and the society and development. For the nurse taking care of the family need to put the culture and the society in consideration. The psychological development of the family can be compared with individual stage of growth. Since in this scenario the family is mature, and the mother has grandchildren, so the approach needs to be mature. The family structural theory, on the other hand, the persons character is a function of our relations with others. This family behavior will be developed in accordance with relation with others. This family has many relations where the widow is a mother with the chronic illness, the daughter who is the bread winner and the grandchildren. The interrelation of the family needs to be robust to have good behavior in the family. Family education in this scenario is very vital. The information is given on how to live positively and reinforced with knowledge to help this family to have control over and allow them have improved health. This will enable the family to shift the focus from just the behavior

Dworkin and legal positivists seek to provide guidelines for impartial Essay

Dworkin and legal positivists seek to provide guidelines for impartial judicial decision making, but do so in different ways and with different results. Discu - Essay Example non-Dworkian sense implies that the legal validity of a given norm, and hence whether it forms part of the law of that system, depends on its sources, not its merits. This paper discusses the jurisprudential basis of impartiality in judicial decision-making based on the theory of Dworkin and juxtaposing the same with another contemporaneous legal positivist, Professor H.L.A Hart. Dworkin, in his paper ‘The Model of Rules’, identifies and attributes to Hart a four-fold doctrine:2 (1) that law consists of ‘rules’ (understood as legal standards that differ from what Dworkin calls ‘principles’); (2) that legal rules are identified via a ‘rule of recognition’; (3) that where a rule does not control a case, judges have discretion; and (4) that in those cases where judges have discretion, neither party has a pre-existing legal right to prevail. Dworkin rejects the merit of all these four doctrines, but for the purposes of the present essay we shall limit our discussion to the last two of these four doctrines identified by Dworkin. The purpose of this essay in so far as it attempts to juxtapose Dworkin’s theory with Hart’s, shall be better served if prefaced by a brief survey of how Hart perceived the impact of judicial discretion on law-making. The variance in the two approach is best illustrated by taking as an example the ‘hard cases’ to be decided by a court of law- that is, cases which have a uniquely singular problem which has not be covered by the text of the relevant statute or which it is abundantly clear has never come within the contemplation of the legislature. Hart has consistently taken the view that, as a conceptual matter, what constitutes a question of law as ‘hard’ is that the pre-existing law is substantively indeterminate with respect to that question and is insufficient to determine a uniquely correct answer.3 Hard cases, therefore, arise because there is a gap or vacuum in the coverage of pre-existing law. Since, in such

Critical period in language development Essay Example for Free

Critical period in language development Essay The concept of a critical period is well in nature. In human beings there seems to be a critical for the first language acquisition. Research shows that any human who is not exposed to any language before puberty, becomes completely unable to the syntax of their first language later in life. From my personal experience I have learnt that any individual who learns their first language at infancy and later (at puberty) gets to move from their motherland to foreign land where no one speaks their language, no matter how long these individuals stay from home they can never forget their mother tongue. Accent may change but they will always remember their first language Here is another practical example to prove that there is a critical period in language development. I happen to be living in Africa; my bosses are Italians (man and wife) they have had to learn English and Kiswahili for easy communication with the locals. They have a five year old baby. When the baby is with her parents they always speak in their first language; when she is left behind with the nanny she is spoken to in Kiswahili all the time. The nanny knows no other language apart from her mother tongue and Kiswahili. This baby has been looked after by this same nanny since she was born. At the age of three a teacher from America was employed to teach this girl. She knew no other language but English. Now look at this closely; the baby is now very fluent in two languages; her first one Italian and her second one; Kiswahili. She is so fluent that she corrects her parents on it! She seems to be doing just fine in English for the last two years she has been taught. Interestingly her teach who is very interested in learning Kiswahili asks her enough times to translate to her in English what has been said in Kiswahili by colleagues. I would say that all depends with the stage at which the language was introduced to an individual. The stage in life. †¢ Kiswahili is a language for the East African state and some of the West African.

The White Collar Crime

The White Collar Crime In 1986, Kenneth Lay merged Houston Natural Gas and InterNorth to form Enron and then in the early 1990s he helped initiate the selling of electricity at market prices. By doing so, it later led to the US Congress to pass legislation deregulating the sale of natural gas. Consequently this made it possible for traders to sell energy at higher prices, allowing companies to significantly increase their revenue. This allowed Enron to rise to be the largest seller of natural gas in North America by 1992. In 1999 Enron opened up EnronOnline, to better manage its contracts trading business but to further encourage growth Enron pursued a diversification strategy. By the end of the 1990s, Enrons capitalization exceeded $60 Billion dollars and was viewed as the most innovative large company in America. So what happened to Enron? On December 2nd, 2001 Enron filed for bankruptcy leading to the downfall of one of the most corrupt corporations in recent U.S. history. Top executives and board members sold their stock for huge profits knowing the pending outcome of its demise would send its stock in a spiraling descent. Leaving thousands of employees and investors with massive losses the U.S. Department of Justice launched an investigation into the top executives and board members to discover the depth of the scandal. The massive fraud that Enron executives accounted for fell into the category of White Collar Crime. To further examine the massive fraud that Enron executives committed, we will look into the anatomy behind the mind of the white collar criminal, its sociological concepts, and correlate between the research and the textbook article on Enron. When looking at the history of white collar crime one must go back to the 1940s, when Edwin H. Sutherland coined the term white collar crime. He sought to dismiss the notion that crime was the domain of the lower classes of society. He believed that it could not be explained at the individual level and it should be researched at an organizational level. He stated that flaw of character was not the cause but the situations and relationships with in an organization that created an environment that encouraged white collar crime. When analyzing this theory in a sociological prospective it falls into differential association theory; a theory that Sutherland attributes to excess of deviant associations over conventional ones. Although, his theory is still advocated and a majority of research into white collar crime followed his anti-psychological position, there is a movement within the financial and accounting fields to better understand the behavioral characteristics of the individuals. Since there is little understood between individual behavioral traits and white collar crime the FBI has started using its Behavioral Science Analysis Unit to incorporate behavioral traits of white collar criminals in developing profiles to assist investigators. To understand what constitutes a white collar crime, the US Department of Justice defines it as the illegal acts characterized by deceit, concealment, or violation of trust that are not dependent upon the application or threat of force or violence. The socio-economic status of the offender is not incorporated into the definition or is it an important element in why someone commits a fraudulent act. The common depiction of the stereotypical white collar criminal is he or she is a first time offender, considered a good citizen, well educated, middle aged, and a trusted employee. While this depicts the ideal company executive, a more modern approach to challenging these common perceptions of white collar criminals is by taking account of personality traits such as: anti-social personality, narcissism, and psychopathy. By doing so, this illustrates that the same traits that enables criminal acts and explain why some turn towards crimes of violence, also apply to white collar criminals who manifest their aggression into a different form such as fraud. Alternatively, there is a sub-group within the white collar crime family known as fraud-detection homicide. This is the willingness to resort to violence, namely murder to prevent their fraud schemes from being detected and disclosed. When looking farther into why white collar criminals commit such deviant acts, a modern approach is to look at the personality traits associated with the offender. At first glance, the explanation behind white collar crime is greed and dishonesty but with further exploration there are three key traits among them. First, is an Anti-social personality which white collar criminals blame their victims for being ignorant or deserving of their fate, minimize the harmful consequences of the fraud, or simply display an arrogant indifferenceà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ also probably believe that it is a dogà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ eatà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ dog world and that everyone is out for himself or herself (DSMà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ IV Task Force, 1994). Second, is narcissism, their narcissism may not allow them to fully appreciate how their actions play themselves out because their sense of entitlement requires a need for gratification, and the use of deception to achieve fraud does not create a moral dilemma for them to r esolve(Barnard, 2008). Third, is psychopathy, Specifically, Ray (2007) found that the psychopathic traits that drive WCCs intention to commit fraud are the traits of egocentric, manipulative, exploitative, deceitful, a Machiavellian attitude where the means justify the ends regardless of it criminal nature. With these traits that are attributed to white collar criminals, it is easy to understand why they would commit these crimes. Most white collar criminals attribute their crimes to several factors but most noteworthy are: 1) to obtain money, property, or services. 2) To avoid the payment or loss of money. 3) To secure personal or business advantages. White collar criminals view fraud as both acceptable and common to overcome financial difficulties or to make a profit for the organization. When society discovers the acts of white collar criminals they are labeled out of character because it is often their first offense against the law. When lifting the curtain surrounding the mind of a white collar criminal there is a vastly different view they hold of themselves compared to the rest of society. In a recent study, white collar criminals claimed they felt justified to commit fraud to save the company, the employees jobs, and other businesses that relied on their survival. White collar criminals have the ability to rationalize fraud because of the ability to attach a moral argument to the offense by pointing out higher purposes behind the fraud. White collar criminals use a technique known as neutralization to void any internal moral objections and to justify or rationalize their activities. With the personality traits and the ability to use neutralization to their advantage, whiteà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ collar criminals cause substantial social harm by undermining the economy, e xacerbating the divide between poverty and wealth, eroding trust, and depriving individuals of time and resources (Ford, 2007). When looking at white collar crime from a sociological perspective, you can see that is a perfect example of differential association theory. When comparing corporate white collar crime to this theory, corporations use specific tactics to hide its fraud which is learned while conspiring with other employees. When looking at how white collar criminals rationalize their behavior, they use this rationalization as a way to gain their general needs and desires despite the fallout when their fraud is caught. In the case of Enron criminal behavior was learned by its employees because of its loose business ethics and its organizational culture. With an understanding of key traits involved in white collar crime, its easy to see why Enron failed when you dig deeper into to the organizational culture and rituals practiced at Enron. The organizational culture of Enron, for example was the belief that its members must make the corporation prosper by maximizing its profits and expansion in certain ways. This belief was put into action often enough for it to become a ritual of the organization(291). With Enron practicing such loose business ethics, employees saw the practices of the higher executives as a normal way of business within the company, leading to the common practice of deceit within the company. With such deceit running wild thru the company, it allowed executives to set up dummy corporations to offload its debt allowing it to be seen by its shareholders and the public as largely successful. If only one person within the company was committing fraud it would have been noticed long before but when applying differential association theory to the mix, more employees learned of the techniques used to offload the debt and favored the delinquent acts in favor of the law because of their need to secure personal and business advantages. The positivist theory of differential association show how white collar crime is a deviant act committed by a person with an excess associations of deviants. Organizational deviance is not just affiliated at the top but a conglomerate of employees across the company accepting and learning how to socially accept forms of deceit, self-gain, and un-ethical practices. A self-governing organization allows a breeding ground for the corrupt if not property monitored, such as the case for Enron. By Enron practicing outside the law, it breads a culture of deceit by associating employees with criminal behavior. With such deviance the executives had to play a shell game with their debt, which had to bring more employees in to the mix by seducing them with large incentives and a culture of self-gain. By researching into the organizational level of white collar crime, there is a clear indication that the situations and relationships within Enron, created an environment that encouraged white colla r crime. With such an environment, its no wonder so many employees were caught up in the scandal because of the excess in deviant associations. Summary paragraph In 1940, Edwin H. Sutherland coined the term white collar crime. He said situations and relationships within an organization created an environment that encouraged white collar crime. He also believed that it could not be explained at the individual level and that it should be researched at the organizational level. The typical white collar criminal is middle aged, well educated, a trusted employee, and considered a good citizen. Common reasons that a person commits white collar crime are to obtain a material or personal advantage and to avoid the loss of money. The Department of Justice defines white collar crime as illegal act characterized by deceit, concealment, or violation of trust that are not dependent upon the application or threat of force or violence. The definition encompasses both individual and organizational offenders. In the mind of a white collar criminal they view their acts as both acceptable and common to overcome financial difficulties or to make profit for thems elves or their organization. They have the ability to rationalize the fraud because they attach a moral argument to the offense by pointing to higher purposes behind the fraud. When looking in the context of sociological theory, people with regular associations in deviant behavior learn to accept it as a norm within their organization and see fraud as a normal act in their business practices. White collar crime falls in the realm of differential association theory and in the case of Enron; it has a positivist approach to its business culture. Enron was a prime example of how corporate greed and miss leading business practices created a breeding ground for white collar crime by associating its employees with deviant acts daily.

Effect of Drugs on Clinical Defence Mechanisms

Effect of Drugs on Clinical Defence Mechanisms Neither seeking pleasure nor damage motive are not enough to explain humans odd solution way for get ride of their misery life which represent addiction. In spite of the fact that misery life has inevitable side, substance addicts have problems with defining the emotions, difficulties with resist the pain. This individuals discover that substance which make them addict enable them to control and reduce permanantly their social problems and supriseful life events. So that substance implications use against explain feelings, depression, boredom, and anger. Psychodynamic approach form fundamental method for explaining substance function and meaning and the way addicts act toward cope their problems. Surely genetic, social science, family and system theories have effect on determining substance addiction one by one (Larssons et al., 2001). Khantzian (1985) stated in his self treatment hypothesis that weakness of ego, lack of self awarness, impulses and emotional defences direct individuls use substance or close to use (p. 105). Protecting personality as a ego function is a little bit complicated. It is a part of a sequence of defence and function such as signal, anxiety, evaluate truth, control, synthesis, decision. When a problem occur in this fuctions then defence mechanisms step in like denial, projection, and rationalization. In addiction process ego put forward as a focal point of pathology. Especially regression, denial, and projection emphasised (Fine Juni, 2001). Ãâ€"gel (2001) stated that lack of love and safety in psychosexual development stage lead to drug use for repress the anxiety and handle this situation when the child reach adulthood (p. 62). According to Ãâ€"gel (2001) as cited in Gà ¼lkan (1994) study on substance addiction with MMPI claim that this individuals have significant independency and negative thoughts, dense change in feelings, impulsive behavior, dissadtsfaction, discomfort and, imbalance. Also their are unable to comprehend and change the situaitons which they came up. This people also can describe as rigid, stubborn, sceptic, difficult and exremely sensitive and they strain social stimulies with defence mechanisms. The people who show their hostile feelings indirectly, use projection, have dominant umbrage thoughts, and sceptic aspects have instable thoughts , stress and anxiety intensively. They tend to exaggerate existing problems consciously and seem worse than they actually are due to taking more attention and escape from their responsibilities and taking more attention. These people use intellecttualization and rationalization but these defences became ineffective because their defences are weak (p. 72 – 73 ) .Denial is perhabs one of the best known defense mechanisms, used many times to define conditions where individuals appear unable to meet truth or accept an obvious reality. Drug users or alcoholics useally deny that they have a problem, while victims of traumatic events might deny that the incident never happened. Observation on addicts show that inadequacy object related task and difficulties on evaluating reality (Rutherford,1996). If our instinct expressed randomly we faced dangerous situations because ego defence mechanisms control and warn us. In this respect drug addictions have inadequate ego capacity for protect their selves. When desired effect received repetetive manner, person start to use less other answers and dealing with problems . As a result of approved by society this people tend to gradually increase regression. Nevertheless in the absence of other compliance mechanisms, for reducing the stressful situation ; prefered substance amount increased or they thought using another drug reduce the side effect of origanal substance (Mulder et all, 1996). Malaysia has changed its medicine programs from compulsory drug detention centers to ambulatory care programs with good care of hospitalized patients just in three months subsequently by after-treatment programs in order to cover permanence of the treatment program. The aim of this is to make ready patients to orientating to the society. Orientating is can be very difficult for addiction patients. A recovered addict uses his defense mechanisms in order to maintain his moderation. By and by, adapting styles might be incapably utilized by recuperating addicts as a part of their exertions to maintain a strategic distance from unpleasant circumstances and it happens when safeguard components are not being overall overseen. This is on the grounds that they make an agreeable circumstance since the addicts dont need to manage the unpleasant circumstances (Gorski, 1992). As their component of guards justifies the activity, their come back to medication utilization is prone to happen. Except their difficulties, their actions are logical and justifiable. Borderline and antisocial personality disorders (Presniak, Olson, MacGregor, 2010), and emotional problems: depression and anxiety (Blaya, Dornelles, Blaya, Kipper, Heldt, Isolan, Bond, Manfro, 2007) are personality disorders and ego defense mechanisms can be associated with them. In order to treat drug addiction with psychotherapy, the researches on defense mechanism have been extended. Defense mechanism have been observed in drug addicts of young adults (Grebot Dardard, 2010), substance abusers with psychotic symptoms (Aleman, 2007), and outpatient drug addicts (Redick, 2002). Gorski (1992) claimed that denial and avoidance defense style in the relapse process and the research development emphasizes the importance of studying the components of defense mechanisms. Studies above show that there is a connection between drugs and defense mechanisms. In the following list, we are going to see how defense mechanism effected by drugs; Here is the list of defense mechanisms that used by alcoholics and drug addicts: DRUGS AND DEFENCE MECHANISMS Denial The best evidence of drug using is denial of the reality. It is the clear evidence that a person drugging. Denial is the situation between, ‘I do not use drugs,’ and ‘I do use drugs but it is under my control.’ This kind of defense mechanism is the clear evidence that the defense mechanism do controlled and continued to controlling by drug. And also this process continues in spite of thinking about the disadvantages of drug addiction. The person also fears to not manage the usage of drug addiction and this kind of defense mechanism is the evidence for it. Selective Recall Interestingly, the defense mechanism takes only the good part of the experience and turns all deeds acceptable and justifiable. For example a person may say that he / she felt good and enjoyed the evening or he / she can say that everyone amazed of him / her. However, he / she do not remember the later part of the evening. In order to justify his / her deeds, a person remembers only good part of his / her experience with drugs and it is the work of defense mechanism. It is also called euphoric recall. Repression It may looks like selective recall because it also repression shameful and bad experiences during drug usage experience. Defense mechanism represses all things that are against his / her self or personality. It makes feeling that experience has not been lived. And it forces a witness of that experience to doubt about his vision and reality-knowledge. When someone questions or criticizing a drug user, he / she can use denial, selective recall and repressive defense separately or collectively. Projection In order to justify his / her drug use, a person can use this sort of defense mechanism. In order to be reasonable, person blames others or his / her environment to justify his / her deed. For example, a person may say that it is other fault and he / she should argue with himself / herself. Person may blame his parents and tell them that they have pressure on him / her and they should not gave him a birth. Or even a person can claim that other people never loved him / her. Rationalization When people do not expect the result of their actions, they mostly use this type of defense mechanism. It justifies their drug usage. For example, a person may claim that he / she deserve the celebration because he / she worked hard. Or he / she may connect his exam failure with his / her depression. And in order to justify his / her drug and alcohol usage he / she may say that everyone else was drunk and used drug, so he / she could not do anything. Regression Regression is when a person clings to childish actions in order to avoid the adult responsibility. A person in order to avoid his / her adult responsibility, takes role of a child. Person will try to take attention not to the drug usage but to his / her behavior such as screaming, crying and etc. When a person acts and defends himself / herself like this, those people who are against his / her drug usage focus not on his / her problems with drugs, but on person’s behavior. After all, they will let him do whatever he wills to do. Minimizing This defense mechanism tries to minimize the problem. For example, if a person used alcohol he may say that it was just two drinks or joints and that he knew what was going on. Or if a person sleeps deeply he may defend himself telling that he just took a nap for a while. Even if a person hits someone he may say that he did not hit another person hard. Also, he may deny that he is an addict by giving reasons such as he just uses Dope and E and not Coke and Heroin. REFERENCES Aleman, K. (2007). Object relation quality, alexithymia, and defense mechanisms of drug abusers with antisocial personality disorder. Social Behavior and Personality, 35 (10): 1335-1352. Blaya, C., Dornelles, M., Blaya, R., Kipper, L., Heldt, E., Isolan, L., Manfro, G. G., Bond, M. (2007). Brazilian-Portuguese version of defensive style questionnaire-40 for the assessment of defense mechanisms: Construct validity study. Psychotherapy Research, (3): 261-272 Fine J, Juni S: Ego atrophy in substance abuse: addiction from a socio-cultural perspective Am J Psychoanal 6 1(3):293-304,2001. Gorski, T. T. (1992). The Staying Sober Workbook: A Serious Solution for the Problem of Relapse. Independence Press: Missouri. Grebot, E., Dardard. J. (2010). Cognitive schemas, addictive beliefs, and defenses in cannabis addiction in young addiction. French Psychology, 55: 373-387. Khantzian EJ: The self medication hypothesis of addictive disorders: focus on heroin and cocain dependence. A J Psychiatry 142:1259-1264, 1985 Larsson S, Lilja J, Borg S, et al: Toward an integrative approach in the analysis of dependency problems, Subst Use Misuse 36(9-10):1323-1356, 2001. Mulder RT, Joyce PR, Sellan JD, Sullivan PF, Cloninger CR: Towards an understanding of defense style in terms of temperament and character. Acta Psychiatr Scand 93(2): 99- 104, 1996. Ãâ€"gel (2001) Ä °nsan, YaÃ…Å ¸am ve BaÄÅ ¸Ãƒâ€žÃ‚ ±mlÄ ±lÄ ±k TartÄ ±Ãƒâ€¦Ã… ¸malar ve Gerekà §eler. Ä °stanbul: IQ Kà ¼ltà ¼r Sanat YayÄ ±ncÄ ±lÄ ±k Cherry, K (n.d.) . In About.com Psychology. http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofperso nality/ss/defensemech_3.htm. Presniak, M. D., Olson, T. R., MacGregor, M. W. (2010). The role of defense mechanisms in borderline and antisocial personalities. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(2): 137-145. Redick, R. (2002). The defense styles of outpatient substance abusers vs. non substance abuser. Unpublished doctoral dissertation: Chicago, Illinois. Rehab centers ca addiction treatment advice. http://rehab4addictions.com/?page_id=361 Rutherford MJ, Cacciola JS, Alterman Al, McKay JR: Assesment of object relations and reality testing in methadone patients. Am J Psychiatry,153(9):1189-94, 1996.

Comparing Romeo and Juliet and West Side Story :: comparison compare contrast essays

Romeo and Juliet versus West Side Story      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Romeo and Juliet, West Side Story, two timeless dramas that will live forever.   Although both of these stories have many similarities, there are also many differences.   These differences include the differences in sililoquy, the fact that Maria doesn't die, the fact that we never see Tony or Maria's parents, as well as the issues of marriage, the importance of gangs and families to each story.   To understand these differences, I have read and/or watched both Romeo and Juliet, and the similar tragedy, West Side Story.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Above, I named a few of the many differences between William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet and Ernest Leaman's screenplay, West Side Story. One main difference is that in Romeo and Juliet the sililoquy is spoken while in West Side Story there is sililoquy, but it is in song.   While both equally express the character's feelings at the moment, it is my feeling that West Side Story's musical style brings the viewer/listener further into the play and makes the play more effective.   An example of this is when, in Act II, Scene II, of Romeo and Juliet, otherwise known as the balcony scene, Romeo expresses his thoughts in a sililoquy until Juliet shows up.   While in Romeo and Juliet all of this is spoken, in West Side Story, this is written as music shared between Maria and Tony.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Another major difference between these two stories is that in Romeo and Juliet, Juliet sees Romeo dead and decides to kill herself.   While, in West Side Story, Tony (the Romeo of the play) does die - shot by Chino- Maria is not so stricken and overshelmed that she decides to kill herself.   This is very important because in Romeo and Juliet, neither Romeo or Juliet is allowed to move on with their lives.   In West Side Story, however, I'm sure Maria, although not shown in the film, moves on and gets over Tony.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   My theory on why the above is true, is that Romeo and Juliet are kept apart by family ties or blood; Juliet a Capulet and Romeo a Montague.   Blood ties are what family is all about and tend to be very strong bonds.

The Morally Obvious :: Ethics Philosophy Moral Papers

The Morally Obvious I. Obviousness. There is no way to contrive an ethical theory which does not rely in the end upon moral judgments that are subjectively "intuitive" or obvious or "just seen". No matter which of the major approaches to ethical theory one takes, an ultimate reliance upon the individual's intuitive judgment is inevitable. If one supposes that moral valuations are sui generis, irreducible, the deliverances of a moral sense or faculty, then manifestly what one "just feels" or "just sees" to be morally valuable will have to be the final court of appeal. If one supposes that moral values are a special subclass of human likings or preferences, say those things men want overall, in the long run, in the light of man's deepest needs and his sympathetic nature, etc., why then those wants and preferences must themselves be finally known by making their presence felt. The presence of a want, of a satisfaction or fulfillment, of pleasure or pain, is known intuitively and immediately. Finally, if mo ral values are perceived by the eye of reason, as a number of philosophers still urge, so that the wrongness of things is known by the mind in a way similar to its knowing 2 + 2 = 4, this too must be seen as an ultimate reliance upon the intellectually "obvious", or the intuitively known. It appears that whether in ethics or in any field of human opinion we can ask for justifications only so far. Even when a successful justification of an opinion can be given, the very success of that justification involves the "just seeing" of how the justification applies to and supports the opinion. Beyond that, we can always request a proof of the justifying premises or considerations themselves, and if we keep asking for a justification for the justification that has just been given, we will soon reach a point where all that can be said is that the thing just seems obvious, and we can only hope that others will think so too. Notoriously, of course, others often don't. I have said that moral judgments must in the end rest upon an "intuitive" judgment of some sort. The word "intuition" is too useful and too close to what I mean to avoid, but it also has technical connotations I wish to disavow. Philosophers often use "intuition" to mean a way of knowing involving no inference whatever and yielding infallible and incorrigible results.