In 2016, the UN General Assembly adopted a Resolution on State-provided Health Care. The Resolution expressed “total support for the right of all persons, however needy, to be provided, directly by their governments, with the health care of the highest available quality.” It went on to call on all states to “institute, without further delay, comprehensive systems of government-delivered universal health care” for all persons within their jurisdictions. Several states, including several major states, spoke out strongly against the Resolution, but after a vote, it was adopted by a large majority (181 in favor, 5 opposed, 8 abstentions). One delegate gave a speech proclaiming that “the Resolution represents a significant development in international public health law” and the UN General Assembly had instituted “a firm global commitment to universal government-delivered health for all.”
The positions of States X, Y, and Z on this matter are as follows:
State X voted in favor of the Resolution. It issued a statement that praised the Resolution as “a statement of international law.” However, it went on to say that “certain unfortunate and unavoidable economic constraints preclude the government of State X from implementing the Resolution immediately.” The statement continued: “When the economic climate is sufficiently improved, State X undertakes to give prompt and full effect to the terms of the Resolution.”
State Y also voted in favor of the Resolution. It also, however, expressed concern about the compatibility of the Resolution with a pre-existing treaty obligation, which committed it to safeguard “the right of private enterprise to play the predominant role in health-care delivery” in State Y.
State Z voted against the Resolution. In a statement, it noted that “the government of State Z is of the opinion that the resolution is utopian and aspirational, and consequently is wholly devoid of legal significance.”
To what extent, if any, is EACH of these states (X, Y, and Z) legally bound by the contents of the Resolution? In each case, explain the reasons for your conclusion.

Answers should be typed, printed out and no more than 1500 words in length. All sources must be properly referenced and there should be an appended bibliography of all of the sources consulted.

“You don’t simply say ‘I’m sorry to a man you’ve robbed. . . . You return what you stole or your apology takes on a hollow ring.” Consider the ethics of reparation in the USA that attempts to address harms done to racial groups other than whites and women. That is, in the realms of racism and sexism.

Let’s bring the discussion of reparation for harm done down to the ethical foundation underlying it. Forget, for now, the apparent achievability of implementing programs that may seem impossible to implement. For example, giving back the land robbed from native people may sound utterly impossible to implement, but perhaps it is the only truly ethical choice in this circumstance. What about reparation for the enslavement of African Americans? Or for the economic, personal, and societal impacts of sexism on women? There are, of course, more examples of groups affected.

Please write a 2-page paper in our standard format on the ethics of reparation. Examine your own actual ethical view on this topic and write from that stance. Choose one, two, or three groups that have been discriminated against (African Americans / Native Americans) and envision ways that reparation might become a reality. Try to dig deep and consider what would actually make up for the harm done, as well as achieve a level of equality currently. If you feel that reparation and/or equality are not appropriate, then substantiate that stance.

Carefully read the chapter prior to writing and bring in material that supports your ideas. Put yourself in the shoes of the groups you are examining. Would your reparations make a difference to you? If not, what might? Gaining equality of opportunity and well-being in all areas of life is an important part of reparation. Can you begin to address this possibility? The idea, in philosophical writing, is to be clear and succinct.

Philosophy Ethics required textbook (Timmons, Mark. Disputed Moral Issues: A Reader. Fourth Edition. Oxford University Press, 2017 (Chapter 6 Sexism, Racism, and Reparation).

1. During the selection process, how do you maintain fairness and inclusivity? Do you use a structured interview method to make sure each applicant is asked the same questions? Do you use employment tests? If so, how do you make sure these are reliable and valid?
2. Do you have a set way of handling promotions or dismissals to make sure that they are not discriminatory? Do you conduct exit interviews to ease employees’ concerns about fairness when being dismissed?
3. If an employee has a concern about workplace discrimination, where can they go to discuss their concerns? Is there a process to deal with the issue?

1. Have you ever had a situation where a coworker failed to accept another person’s diversity? If so, what actions did you take?

2. In recent years, the LGBT community has become more visible and created some workplace issues that did not exist in the past, such as restroom usage. Has your organization been able to solve some of these issues in a way that makes them feel included and valued? If so, could you provide an example?

3. What has your company done to shatter the glass ceiling.

4. What changes would you make in the workplace to eliminate bias and create diversity and inclusion?

You are asked to analyze, evaluate and critique the various counseling theories/approaches covered in your textbook. Please do not simply summarize each theory or simply quote the authors. Rather, evaluate and critique the theory’s view of human nature, its key concepts, the therapeutic process it lays out and the techniques and procedures it applies. Identify with rationale, aspects of each theory/approach you tend to incorporate into your own developing philosophical and applied approach to counseling.

This paper should not be opinion based; you must demonstrate sufficient research and ability to apply the research as a counselor. Each reaction paper body will be between 5-7 pages in length (typed and double-spaced) in proper APA format This paper will focus on the theories covered in chapters 10 (Feminist Theory and Therapy) and 11 (Constructive Theory and Therapy)

You may want your paper to emphasize one of the theories over the others because it is particularly meaningful or relevant to your goals as a counselor. This is acceptable, provided that you still address all theories covered for that assignment, dedicating at least one page to each theory within your paper. Also, elaborate on the application of the theories and techniques and discussing their differences in concept and practice.

Discuss one of the major subsections of this chapter. Evaluate the importance of the issues contained in that section of the chapter to the role of the addictions counselor.

Next, discuss which aspects of the chapter caused you to think about professional and ethical issues that they may not have thought about in the context of addictions counseling