You are a Hispanic Registered Nurse (RN) who has recently received a two-year grant to establish a family planning clinic in an impoverished, primarily Hispanic area of a large city. The project will be evaluated at the end of the grant to determine whether continued funding is warranted. As Project Director, you have the funds to choose and hire three health care workers.You will essentially be able to manage the clinic as you see fit. The average age of your patients is in their mid teens. Many come from single-parent homes. In addition, the population with which you will be working has high unemployment, high crime, and truancy levels, and great suspicion and mistrust of authority figures. You are aware that many restraining forces exist that will challenge you, but feel strongly committed to the cause. You believe that the high teenage pregnancy rate and maternal and infant morbidity can be reduced.
1. Identify the restraining and driving forces in this situation?
2. Identify realistic short-and long-term goals for implementing such a change?
3. How might the Project Director use hiring authority to increase the driving forces in this situation?
4. Is refreezing of the planned change possible so that changes will occur if the grant is not funded again in two years?
MARX AND MILL’S VIEWS ON FREEDOM. This exposition thoroughly analyzes Karl Marx and J.S. Plant on their understandings of opportunity and their investigations of the obstacles to its acknowledgment. Both Marx and Mill concur that individuals are equipped for gaining ground and that the idea of flexibility is an end in itself. Along these lines, they considered opportunity to be a way to acknowledge singular potential and self-assurance. In any case, both contrast on the idea of flexibility acknowledgment and the hindrances to opportunity. Factory contends that the obstruction to flexibility is the manly society while Marx contends that the obstacle to opportunity is the bourgeoisie. Moreover, the paper examines the mediation by state/society into flexibility. Plant attest that the general public can meddle into somebody’s flexibility when there is hurt done to others. For Mill opportunity ought to be practiced insofar as there is no mischief done to others while Marx bolsters the flexibility to oust the bourgeoisie . Then again, Marx sees hold that the administration/society ought to intercede in singular opportunity to maintain a strategic distance from uniqueness that prompts private property and thus making classes. Both Marx and Mill consider opportunity to be an end in itself. As per Marx’s meaning of opportunity, was seen as an end in itself. “Just in group has every individual the methods for developing his endowments every which way; just in the group, along these lines, is close to home flexibility conceivable. In the past substitutes for the group, in the State, and so on individual opportunity has existed just for the people who created inside the connections of the decision class, and just seeing that they were people of this class,” Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. For Mill, the right to speak freely, sentiment and the privilege to connect with others, were essential for the advance of humanity. Opportunity of decision is and do what is attractive insofar as no mischief is done to others is an end in itself. As Mill along these lines say that , “… however the traditions be both great as traditions… yet to fit in with custom… does not… create… human resources… practiced just in settling on a decision.” (Mill 60). It is apparent that opportunity of decision is critical to the advancement of singularity and advance of the general public all in all. In this manner, flexibility is an end in itself, on the grounds that using human prompt settle on decisions is helpful for self-improvement. Thus, the view that considers opportunity to be an end in itself can be ascribed to both Marx and Mill. Then again, there are impressive contrasts amongst Mill and Marx points of view on sees with respect to flexibility. For Mill, flexibility is imperative to search for truth and for motivations to live and for advance ( Mill 29). Plant states that a man must be allowed to seek after his bliss and delight. Besides, Mill in “On Liberty” attests that individual opportunity is the foremost boss for the advance of society. The assessment of the individual must be sustained and permitted to develop with the goal that he can utilize his advantages and abilities to profit the general public everywhere ( Mill 63). Therefore, Mill, can be condensed in On Liberty : “The main flexibility which merits the name, is that of seeking after our own particular great in our own specific manner, inasmuch as we don’t endeavor to deny others of theirs, or obstruct their endeavors to get it.” An individual has the capacity and the ability to be innovative in a general public that perceives that capacity. Also, Mill contends for the right to speak freely for everybody and that every individual conclusion ought to be regarded paying little mind to its substance. Factory likewise contends that flexibility/freedom is imperative for the quest for joy (Mill 29). However , Marx states that individuals ought not be individualistic and ought not seek after their own advantages but rather should fit in with the general public’s standards. For instance in “On The Jewish Question: Zur Judenfrage, ” Marx condemns the liberal idea of flexibility and contends that it expect that an individual is “a separated monad” ( Max 364) who seeks after his own particular private bliss and furthermore tries to maintain a strategic distance from struggle with others ( Marx 370). He contend that an individual can’t be dealt with independently from society. The individual is an integral part of society and there is no place he/she will work in disengagement without influencing the general public all in all. Henceforth, Marx contends that the comrade framework would make it feasible for everybody including kids and ladies to be free as they would not be compelled to work for the anybody (Marx 72). For Marx, this is flexibility. Also, Marx clarifies how “my free action” changes itself into “the distanced and uncaring force” with the fetishism of the item. (Marx, 554). Besides, Mill and Marx offer an alternate point of view on the mediation by state/society into opportunity. Factory contends that there is no support for meddling in other individuals’ feelings and considering. Not even the legislature has the privilege to meddle in somebody’s opportunity. It could be contended this is the establishment of present day singular flexibility. You are free and qualified for your own sentiments as long as you don’t hurt another ( Mill 4). “The purpose behind not meddling, unless for others, with a man’s deliberate demonstrations, is thought for his freedom. His willful decision is confirm that what he so picks is alluring, or if nothing else bearable, to him, and his great is all in all best given to him by enabling him to take his own particular methods for seeking after it,” Mill (14). Conversely, Marx contends that there is a requirement for the state to meddle with private property so property possession may be canceled. The administration ought to have the privilege and the way to control the general population who have private property, along these lines shaping a perfect socialist society. It must be noticed that Marx ‘s contentions depended on the view that free enterprise was shrewd and henceforth should have been supplanted by socialism. Also, Karl Marx, in On the Jewish Question says that “None of the assumed privileges of man go past the proud man, man as he is an individual from common society; that is, an individual isolated from the group, pulled back into himself, entirely engrossed with his private advantages and acting as per his private whim.” Hence, a man needs to adjust to the general public’s standards. In this way, Marx sees counter-contend the view by Mill that the general public should regard the individual opportunity. Then again, Mill cautions against the tranny of the greater part in light of the fact that occasionally the lion’s share’s conclusion isn’t generally right. Along these lines the security of the individual is more vital and must be ensured. Furthermore, Mill’s and Marx’ sees vary on the activity of flexibility. As indicated by Mill, opportunity and freedom is having choice and self-assurance without being subjected to constant law ( Mill 32). Plant includes that development and imagination can be accomplished in a free situation . Along these lines, he advocates for a free situation which considers improvement and development of new thoughts. “Virtuoso can just inhale uninhibitedly in anatmosphereof opportunity. People of virtuoso are … moreindividual than some other individuals” ( Mill, 65). Hence, flexibility of the individual will permit new thoughts and result in the advance of the general public overall. Too, he contends that the general public or the state ought not drive individuals to adjust to the specific standards of the general public and nor intercede in the exercises of the person which add to the advancement of the group all in all. Nonetheless, Mill recognizes that the main time when the legislature or the general public needs to meddle is the point at which it ventures in to keep your hurting other individuals (Mill 68). Along these lines, Mill attests that opportunity ought to be practiced insofar as there is no damage done to others. Plant, a man’s flexibility must be secured and permitted to be investigated without encroaching on other individuals’ opportunity. By the by, the practicing of opportunity ought to be checked. Also, Marx contends that most of the regular workers should battle for their opportunity and beat the oppression of the bourgeoisie (Marx 73). This appears like the perspectives of Mill who contends that the nationals are to have flexibility and the state, which is in little minority, ought not practice oppression over them. Factory, then again, contends that the opportunity to join must be done such that there isn’t damage to others . Factory would see the contention of Marx upholding the oust and taking the property of the bourgeoisie as mischief done to others. In the Manifesto, Marx requires the opportunity of the common laborers to join together and at last to rebel against the creation proprietors otherwise called Bourgeoisie (Marx and Engels, 34). The average workers will ascend for their flexibility. Marx affirms that opportunity can be accomplished through belief system. In the event that the common laborers would learn and know the belief system of the bourgeoisie, they would have the capacity to build up a counter philosophy and subsequently the low class would wind up hesitant and mindful and accordingly have the capacity to oversee and control the methods for generation (Marx 173.) Thus, Marx contends that the average workers would be liberated from distanced work on the off chance that they knew the belief system of the bourgeoisie. This is the manner by which the working class would have the capacity to beat the abuse of the bourgeoisie. For Marx, the common laborers ought to be joined together and battle for their individual flexibility . Too, as per Marx, flexibility could be accomplished if the average workers claimed the methods for generation. It can likewise be seen that entrepreneur framework passes on flexibility to the common laborers in the cutting edge period. For instance, regardless of whether you want to have a specific kind of work, you are not allowed to pick your supervisor. On a similar point the general population who controls the methods for creation have the opportunity to pick among the wealth supply of work. I would concur that socialism in which the methods for creation is possessed by numerous could have been a decent society for humankind. Private enterprise precludes the flexibility from securing decisions to numerous individuals particularly poor people. It le>