The DSM-5 task force added a section dedicated to trauma and stress. With an
increased exposure to traumatic events, more
individuals are exhibit
ing symptoms related to trauma exposure. Experienc
ing any of these events can result
in an
individual’s suffer
ing from a trauma or stressor-related disorder.
Read the DSM-5 section on trauma and stressor-related disorders,
in particular the articles on PTSD by Van der Kolk (2005) and Agaibi and Wilson (2005). Then search the literature for a study related to a national traumatic event and an evidence-based
intervention used to treat those suffer
ing from trauma and stressor-related issues associated with it.
By Day 3
Post a brief description of the event,
includ
ing a summary of how it affected the
individuals
involved. What are some psychosocial issues that needed to be addressed follow
ing this event? Identify an
intervention that was implemented to address one of the psychosocial issues. Discuss the effectiveness of this
intervention as stated
in the article. What are some of the implications for social work
in connection with traumatic events?
Support your post with specific references to the resources. Be sure to provide full APA citations for your references.
Assignment 2
Public law and administration
question- In order to combat grow
ing security problems at airports, Parliament has passed the (fictitious) Airport Security Act 2017. The Act seeks to give powers to the Secretary of State for Transport to
introduce a range of measures designed to
increase security at British airports. Three sections of the Act are of particular significance:
Section 1, which permits the Secretary of State to draw up Regulations compell
ing airl
ines to take measures to enhance security. The Act states that such Regulations can only be drawn up after “consultation with relevant parties”.
Section 2, which creates a system of licens
ing for all airl
ine employees. The Act states that no person can be employed by an airl
ine until they are approved and licensed as be
ing “suitable” by the Secretary of State for Transport. The Act states that all present employees will be required to apply for a licence, and gives them a three-month period from the com
ing
into force of the Act to make such an application and be granted a licence.
Section 3, gives the Secretary of State various powers. These
include: impos
ing penalties,
includ
ing f
ines; confiscation of equipment; and, for serious breaches of regulations under section 1, revocation of an air carrier’s licence to operate flights; and a similar power of revocation where persons not licensed under the system created under section 2 are employed by an airl
ine. Where a licence is revoked, the airl
ine subject to the revocation will no longer be able to operate flights
in and out of the UK.
The Act has now been
in force for a while, and the Secretary of State has taken a number of steps to enforce the provisions of the Act. As a result, the follow
ing clients come to your office seek
ing advice on the potential success of either application claim for judicial review, br
ing
ing an action
in private law or seek
ing redress through alternative grievance resolution mechanisms
in order to resolve their present problems:
(a) Us
ing the powers under Section 1, the Secretary of State
introduces Regulations requir
ing all airl
ines to conduct searches of passengers at the gate prior to board
ing
in order to prevent ‘dangerous items’ from be
ing taken aboard aeroplanes. Andy, a director of Hullair, a small airl
ine fly
ing from Humberside airport, comes to you for advice. He is aggrieved because Hullair were not consulted prior to the
introduction of the Regulations, and also because Hullair have been subject to enforcement action under section 3. The enforcement action arose because one of Hullair’s searches failed to f
ind a small paper knife, which a passenger had
in her handbag. This was discovered when she began to use it on the flight
in order to open some correspondence. In response to this, the Secretary of State determ
ined that the paper knife was a ‘dangerous item’, f
ined Hullair £250,000 and confiscated the aeroplane where the
incident occurred. Hullair was not offered a hear
ing before the punishment was imposed,
and have not been
informed whether or not the confiscated aeroplane will be returned to them.
(b) The Airl
ine Pilots Association, which comes to you on behalf of a large number of its members. Problems have arisen because pilots who were already employed by airl
ines prior to the enactment of the Act were all obliged to apply for licences under the terms of section 2 of the Airport Security Act 2017. The large number of applications has led to a significant backlog of applications for licences, and the Department for Transport has not issued licences to over 50% of the Association’s members with
in the three-month time limit of the com
ing
into force of the Act as imposed by section 2. Despite this problem, the Secretary of State has stuck rigidly to the provisions of the Act, and has threatened to impose sanctions on any airl
ine us
ing pilots who do not yet have a licence. This situation has led to significant loss of earn
ings for many of the Association’s members, who have been unable to contact the Department for Transport to enquire about the progress of their licence applications as telephone l
ines have not been answered and emails have not elicited a response.
(c) Elif is an airl
ine pilot who wished to apply for a licence to work under section 2 of the Airport Security Act 2017. Elif was concerned that some political activities that she had engaged
in dur
ing her student days may raise doubts about her suitability under section 2 of the Act, so sought advice from the Department for Transport. She received an email from a civil servant
in the Department for Transport advis
ing that her previous political activities would not affect her suitability. As such, she made an application, which has been refused because the Department has stated that her previous political activities render her unsuitable to receive a licence.