According to agnew and brezina, the effects of early family environment on traits conducive to crime can be significant.
Agnew and Brezina assert that early family environments have a sizable impact on criminal propensity traits. Adverse family circumstances can lead to the development of negative attitudes, poor self control and a lack of social bonding. These circumstances include parental conflict, harsh discipline and inconsistent parenting. In turn, these elements raise the probability of engaging in criminal and delinquent behavior.
A person's values, beliefs, and behaviors are greatly influenced by their upbringing, and dysfunctional family dynamics can inhibit the growth of prosocial attitudes and self control. Understanding the causes of criminal behavior and putting good prevention and intervention strategies in place depend on recognizing the influence of early family experiences on crime-related traits.
Learn more about prosocial attitudes at:
brainly.com/question/3367133
#SPJ4
Explain the origins of state and local government. Is the
federal Constitution involved? Why or why not?
The US Constitution only refers to the federal government and the state governments, despite the fact that Americans frequently refer to three "levels" of government.
However, the federal system implicitly assumes that the states would support local governments in ways that take into consideration local diversity and needs when they exercise the authority granted to them by the US Constitution.
Local governments have actually constituted a third level of the federal structure, both in principle and practice, to the extent that states have made such provisions in the form of state constitutions that offer home-rule power to the local units, such as in New York.
Americans generally hold the underlying belief that while governmental authority can be used for the people's advantage, it can equally be exploited against them.
To know more about federal government:
https://brainly.com/question/14858877
#SPJ4
the supreme court unanimously declared that separate but equal schooling was not equal in
In the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, the Supreme Court unanimously declared that separate but equal schooling was not equal.
This decision overturned the "separate but equal" doctrine established in the Plessy v. Ferguson case of 1896. The Court's ruling held that racially segregated public schools violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote in the Court's opinion that segregation inherently produced feelings of inferiority among African American students, thereby denying them equal educational opportunities. This historic decision paved the way for the desegregation of public schools and played a significant role in the civil rights movement, challenging racial segregation in various other areas of American society.
To know more about civil rights movement. :
https://brainly.com/question/32042116
#SPJ4
the complete question is :
the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously ruled that segregation in public schools is unconstitutional. The Court said, “separate is not equal,” and segregation violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. explain.
Which of the following is not true of requests for medical records?
Multiple Choice
a. They should not be released to a third party
without written permission.
b. A patient's legal representative can give written consent to release records.
c. Requests for release of records may ask for specific records.
d. A patient's complete medical record should always be released on request.
The following is not true of requests for medical records a patient's complete medical record should always be released on request.
The option (D) is correct.
The release of medical records is subject to privacy laws and regulations, such as HIPAA in the United States, which protect the confidentiality of patient information. While patients have the right to access their medical records, there may be certain exceptions or limitations based on applicable laws and the healthcare provider's policies.
Healthcare providers are generally required to release requested medical records to patients, but there may be instances where certain portions of the record are withheld due to sensitive information, potential harm, or legal restrictions.
Learn more about medical records:
https://brainly.com/question/33308256
#SPJ4
A "qui tam" court case can proceed to court only if:
A private citizen has, or can arrange to have, adequate resources for pursuing the claim
The government grants its approval for the lawsuit to proceed
The government first refuses to pursue the case on its own initiative
The government and the private citizen reach a joint agreement concerning the sharing of winnings and costs of litigation
A "qui tam" court case c can continue to court provided that a private citizen has or can organize to have sufficient assets for chasing after the claim.
The option (A) is correct.
In qui tam cases, the private citizen acts as a whistleblower and brings the lawsuit on behalf of the government. The citizen must have the financial means or be able to arrange for resources to pursue the claim, as they are responsible for initiating and pursuing the case.
However, it's important to note that the government's approval is also typically required for the lawsuit to proceed, as the government has the option to intervene and take over the case if it deems it necessary.
Learn more about qui tam:
https://brainly.com/question/32312974
#SPJ4
This question is not complete, Here I am attaching the complete question:
A "qui tam" court case can proceed to court only if:
(A) A private citizen has, or can arrange to have, adequate resources for pursuing the claim
(B) The government grants its approval for the lawsuit to proceed
(C) The government first refuses to pursue the case on its own initiative
(D) The government and the private citizen reach a joint agreement concerning the sharing of winnings and costs of litigation
1. Losers in civil cases may be required to pay monetary damages
for their actions.
A. true
B. false
2. Most cases are settled before trial.
A. true
B. false
The statement that 'Losers in civil cases may be required to pay monetary damages for their actions' is True. Also, most cases are settled before trial. Thus, that is also true.
What are civil cases? Civil cases are non-criminal lawsuits that may include private property disputes, breach of contract, or harassment cases. A civil case is a legal disagreement between two or more parties that arises from an accident, injury, contract, or business disagreement. In a civil suit, one party accuses the other of causing harm or inflicting loss, and the party bringing the claim is known as the plaintiff. Similarly, the accused party is known as the defendant.
The monetary damages in civil cases: The plaintiff, in a civil lawsuit, seeks monetary damages as compensation for the harm or loss incurred. Monetary damages awarded to the prevailing party in a civil lawsuit are intended to restore them to the position they were in before the incident occurred. The goal of monetary damages is to help the injured party regain their financial footing and cover any medical or hospital expenses that may have resulted from the incident.
Actions of the parties: The loser of a civil lawsuit is typically required to pay monetary damages for their actions, as it is the primary goal of civil litigation. Civil litigation is designed to provide financial compensation to the plaintiff who has been harmed or suffered losses as a result of the defendant's actions. In contrast, the defendant is required to pay the plaintiff monetary damages if they are found guilty of causing harm or loss to the plaintiff.
Learn more about Civil cases at: https://brainly.com/question/1065754
#SPJ11
This person, to build and maintain his empire, killed three candidates for Colombia's presidency, over 200 judges, and in excess of 1,000 police officers. who is he?
The person named in the statement is Pablo Escobar, a notorious Colombian drug lord and leader of the Medellin Cartel. Escobar was one of the most powerful and ruthless criminals in history, known for his involvement in the illegal drug trade and violent tactics to defend and expand his empire.
In an effort to maintain control and eliminate threats, Escobar ordered the assassinations of three Colombian presidential candidates. This was done to influence and manipulate the political situation to his advantage.
Escobar also orchestrated the assassination of over 200 judges who threatened his practice by prosecuting drug cases and dismantling his criminal network. The purpose of the targeted assassination was to undermine the legal system's ability to hold him accountable and to perpetuate fear among those who might challenge his authority.
To know more about Colombia's presidency visit :
https://brainly.com/question/29555734
#SPJ4