The Influence of Police Culture

The Influence of Police Culture In order to appropriately address the topic of discussion, firstly, it is important to understand what is meant by the concept police culture. After establishing its definition, it then becomes a task to assess whether police culture does indeed have a negative influence on the way the police work as an institution or whether it merely ensures that a certain level of consistency in achieved in terms of the way officers conduct themselves in their daily working environment. The term police culture has in itself been a topic of some discussion with sociologists being divided over what the definition should and should not include as there isnt an established, concrete definition of the concept. For example one contributor who has attempted to rectify this problem is Reiner (1992) who describes it as the values, norms, perspectives and craft rules which inform police conduct (Reiner 1992 quoted in Loftus 2009: 3). Whereas another definition comes from Manning (1989) who defines it as accepted practices, rules, and principles of conduct that are situationally applied, and generalised rationales and beliefs (Manning 1989 quoted in Loftus 2009: 3). Although these definitions dont appear too different at first glance, there is in fact a clear distinction between the two that should and must be made mainly the fact that Manning stresses that such principles of conduct are situationally applied, which of course suggests that police culture is not always necessa rily influential to an officers conduct. Some officers can and do hold a certain level of professionalism when taking to the streets and any values which may corrupt such professionalism remains behind closed doors in the company of their colleagues only. Yet Reiners provided definition suggests that the police culture remains with the police officer when they take to the streets and he/she then enforces the informal rules which have been established with their fellow colleagues, which generalises that all police officers act in accordance to the police culture . However what must be taken from both definitions is that there is reason to suggest that there is a network of a shared set of norms and values within police forces which could potentially have an effect on how they operate in a working environment. What also must be stressed is that there is also a distinction between the terms police culture or cop culture (as its otherwise known) and canteen culture which is another concept which crops up time and time again in countless criminology texts. Canteen culture, as mentioned by Waddington (1999), is understood to be the norms and values held by police officers whilst off-duty, whereas police culture is the norms and values which are expressed during the course of their occupational lives (Waddington 1999 cited by Crank 2004: 16-17) Newburn (2007) also makes this a key point by explaining that there is a common tendency to assume that what police choose to say and how they choose to act when off-duty is not only indicative of how police officers think, but also how they act in public. (Newburn 2007: 216) Yet Waddington has a problem with such assumptions, as he claims that this is not the case all of the time. The way officers act and the views they hold whilst off-duty, whether in the pub with friends or work colleagues is but a safety valve to release the pressures of the realities of life as a police officer (Waddington quoted by Newburn 2007: 618) Such an argument claims that in experiencing somewhat controversial views outside of the working sphere, a person is opened up to new perspectives which sociologists such as Waddington would argue helps to avoid them from being over-exposed to a particular ideology which could then influence the way in which they carry out their duties. But what also must be considered is just how valid Waddingtons argument actually is. Yes, of course in some instances exposure to different attitudes and values can be beneficial to an officer in terms of becoming more aware of the possibility of potential new threats, but there are also some officers who would then, due to any extreme views which they may have been subjected to, may target an individual or a group of people because of the stereotypes attached to such persons and not because of genuine suspicion. Police culture, it is claimed by Reiner (1992) has many characteristics in which it can be identified with, with suspicion being just one of them. Suspicion is an absolute necessity in the police force as it is suspicion that helps the police prevent crimes from occurring and therefore everyday working experiences encourage officers to generalise people into particular labels, whether or not this is a legitimate way to suspect possible offenders (Reiner cited by Newburn 2007: 618). Unfortunately there is a strong link between suspicion and ethnicity, with ethnic minorities suspected to engage in criminal activity more than people of white ethnic origin. The 2005/2006 Home Office statistics relating to police searches provide a great example for this. In interpreting the results of stop and search practices, 15.4% of the entire UK Black community were stopped under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE Code A) in comparison to only 1.6% of the entire white population. This d iscrimination however doesnt just end with the police; it branches out into other areas of the criminal justice system such as the prison service. Genders Player in (1989) claimed that prison officers sometimes use active stereotypes and labels to help order their working environments by predicting inmate behaviour in order to maintain authority at all times. Prisoners within the ethnic minority demographic were perceived as having a chip on their shoulder, as they felt they were being victims of racial persecution and thus the officers paid more attention to monitoring their behaviour. Arguably the most problematic characteristic of a police culture in terms of the impact it has on police and community relations is the element of racial prejudice. One of the most notable examples of racial prejudices derives within the Macpherson Report (1999), arguably the most notable report in criminology, which followed the death of black teenager Stephen Lawrence. The report found that the police were institutionally racist after discovering that police were ignoring crucial evidence to the investigation and were displaying discrimination in the interviewing process of suspects suggesting that it was black on black crime, despite Lawrences friend (an eye witness) being adamant that it was a racially motivated murder. Despite the findings of the report and the provisions set out to try and avoid the recurrence of racial controversy within the police, there is evidence to claim minority ethnic recruitment still remains low and there are still continuing problems in terms of pol ice relations with ethnic minorities (Croall 2011: 221-222). The aftermath of the Macphereson Report proved that institutional racism was still rife in police recruitment centres, as four years onwards a BBC documentary titled Secret Policeman was aired which centred on the police recruitment centre, Bruche which was located just outside of Warrington. Consequently after the footage of the documentary went public, the centre was forced to close so as to not further damage the reputation of the police. New police training systems were also introduced nationwide to try and expel racism from the police force as a result of the documentary. (The Observer 2004) How officers are socialised is of another great significance. The next characteristic of a police culture is the degree of solidarity, and it is this element which although is reinforced in numerous police forces, it is an aspect which is initially developed between candidates during the recruitment stages. Due to the intense nature of the job including the long hours which officers are required to work, the intensity of some of the work and the expectation of being the ones to prevent social decline, officers are encouraged to bond strongly and they learn to rely on one another, and as such tend to develop an us-against-them attitude. This resulting mentality, in some situations, leads to not officers making pacts with one another in which they agree not to grass on fellow officers for any discrepancies that they might have witnessed whilst on duty. This is more commonly known as The Blue Code of Silence. Just like any other subculture, in order to ensure cooperation and commitment to the Blue Code, a tribal value system is implemented which makes police culture sort of like a family structure in which members of the system will receive emotional support and security from the other officers upon requirement. Several police departments worldwide have been found to have followed the Blue Code, probably most notably was a New York police department which the Mollen Commission reported were to be covering up infringements of their officers. In such case where an officer was to break the Code, then his/her reputation and essentially his career too would be ruined as he/she would then be ostracised and labelled a whistleblower and thus it is the threat of this tarnished reputation that encourages the officer to obey the unwritten rules. (Loftus 2009: 14) Accusations of excessive force by members of the police force are far from uncommon, particularly in America. And it is the use of excessive for which Manning (1970) claims is a perfect example of police culture and how it can have a negative influence on the way officers carry out their duties. (Manning 1970 cited by Crank 2004: 107) However, excessive force is not detected in all cases. Victims of police brutality may feel that the odds are stacked against them in filing a complaint to an officers superiors and are thus reluctant to do so and may feel that even if a complaint is acknowledged and results in a court case, the judge and jury would overlook excessive force as the perceived perspective would be that the victim shouldnt have gotten his/herself in a position in which the use of force was needed in the first place and thus the consequences of their anti-social behaviour was deserved. Yet with that said, there are of course examples where the victim of police brutality are non-deserving of such treatment and thus the police force as a whole have come under criticism despite it being a minority of officers that participate in such excessive violence. For example a British police constable, PC Simon Harwood, was charged with the manslaughter of Ian Tomlinson during the G20 protests in 2009. Tomlinson was finding another route home after his usual route was blocked by the protests when he was struck by PC Harwood with a baton and then pushed to the ground Tomlinson fatally collapsed and an autopsy revealed the cause of death was a heart attack, which the actions of PC Harwood where no doubt a triggering factor. PC Harwood was acquitted of manslaughter, which only strengthens the argument mentioned previously that the courts are sympathetic to the police when the question of reasonable/excessive force is raised. However, it must be stressed that many police forces do have provisions in place to deal with any complaints of unacceptable behaviour regarding their employees in which inquiries will be carried out and, if found guilty, the officer in question may be reprimanded, suspended or permanently dismissed depending on the circumstances. Also, as in the case of PC Harwood they may also, if necessary, face criminal prosecution or at the very least face a civil hearing if the victim wishes to sue for damages caused by the officers ill-considered actions. But how are the police able to get away with these kinds of infringements? Again, it all relates back The Blue Code of Silence. As already mentioned earlier in the essay, officers of some police forces claim ignorance of any wrongdoings of their work partners and in some cases, they testily which is typically an American slang term for when an officer gives false testimony in court. Relating back to the tribal values, not participating in activities such as testilying would lead to an officer being shunned and sometimes even harassed to the point of retirement as they arent assisting their family members, in effect betraying their own kind. In 1994, the Mollen Commission found that some officers within the NYPD fabricated crucial documents such as arrest reports and warrants and some officers were found to have falsified witness statements for the purposes of manipulating the jury as they felt that an accused individual deserved it. This is particularly common in cases of bad character in which an accused has had a history of offences but has escaped punishment. Although corrupt as it is, testilying is merely seen as another way of getting the job done.   In conclusion, there is a huge interest towards police culture due to the impact it can and sometimes does have on society. if it is to have an influence on the way the police go about their work. The police hold a massively important role to society as they are a visible symbol of law and order and are granted various powers such as those which enable them to arrest members of the public who they feel prove a threat to the rest of society. Although most officers do operate in a reasonable manner, it is generally the actions of the minority which enable the public to misconceive that all officers are bigoted and aggressive. Such generalisations lead to a mass distrust of the police and tensions then begin to occur between the police and their publics. You only need to look at the summer riots of 2011 (which were reported to have been sparked by an officers seemingly unauthorised use of deadly force on a suspect) to see just how damaging poor police-community relations can be to the p olices image as a social institution.

Pierre-Auguste Renoir

Pierre-Auguste Renoir was a French painter, printmaker, and sculptor. He is one of the most prominent founders and leading exponents of the Impressionist style of painting from the late 1860s. â€Å"Renoir’s art is a celebration of the beauty of women and nature; his images both of modern Parisian life and of idealized figures in a timeless landscape suggest an enchanted and radiant world†. (Langdon) In 1878, Renoir broke away from the Impressionist exhibitions to return to the official Salon, where he achieved great success for his work, Madame Charpentier and her Children. Renoir is the modern painter of femininity. In Madame Charpentier and Her Children, he reflects an expression of beauty that is not easy to understand at first glance. He has gone beneath the surface of life and depicts in the characters some â€Å"unexpected, elemental and ineradicable instincts which link us, in spite of all our sophistication, with wild nature. In Madame Charpentier and Her Children, we can see that motherhood is something more than respectable. (Fry) Renoir adds an element of interest in human beings which distinguishes him from the rest of his Impressionist practitioners. Renoir was greatly influenced by Monet in such works as La Grenouillere (1869). His use of large broken brushstrokes and delicately applied flecks of paint suggest atmosphere, and shows his fascination of the true effect and importance of light on the surface of things without restraint. â€Å"Renoir is not like the majority, but a revolutionary. He is not analytical, scientific and destructi ve. He is a purely poetical and constructive genius. He has followed a certain inspiration with naive directness and simplicity of spirit. † (Fry) Renoir sympathizes with the human element between himself and his models which is visible in Madame Charpentier and Her Children. Madame Charpentier was Renoir’s most influential friend and commissioner. She was the wife of Georges Charpentier, who was a famous publisher of the works of the best young authors of the time. It is through Madame Charpentier that Renoir was able to meet all the important figures in art, iterature, music, and politics. Renoir’s son, Jean, wrote â€Å"Her salon was celebrated and deservedly so, for she was indeed a great lady and had succeeded in reviving the atmosphere of the famous salons of the past. Every one of note in the literary world attended those Friday gatherings. Charpentier was definitely on the side of the young painters, even before they came to be known as Impressionists. † (Renoir) The scale of Madame Charpentier and Her Children is grande, measuring at 157. 7 X 190. 2 centimeters. One historian claimed that Renoir worked, â€Å"slowly and patiently†¦ and required a great many sittings. † (Bailey) In this painting, the thirty-year-old, Madame Charpentier is seated on a sofa covered in floral tapestry, the train of her black dress spread out full length to one side with traditionally designed white lace. Her corsage is decorated by a brooch in the form of a daisy or chrysanthemum, and in her left hand she clasps a small golden ornamental ladies case or bag. She rests a protective arm above the head of her three-year-old son, Paul Emile Charles. Like his eldest sister, Georgette Berthe, he wears the same blue and white frilly dress, which was in accordance with the fashion at the time. â€Å"Her daughter Georgette sits atop Porthos, the indulgent Newfoundland that accompanied the family on its lengthy holidays. † (Bailey) Colin B. Bailey explicitly describes the background of Madame Charpentier and Her Children in his book, Renoir’s Portaits: Impressions of an Age; â€Å" Renoir filled in the background with a Japanese screen and an arrangement of fruit and flowers on a small table. The room itself appears to be spacious, but somewhat furnished for the time. In the background to the right, in front of the curtains through which one enters and beyond which can be glimpsed the well-polished floorboards of an adjoining salon, is placed a bamboo tea table and a single bamboo-and-wicker chair. The table is set with a bowl of grapes and a service of desert wineglasses that rest on a red lacquer tray. On the red walls behind Madame Charpentier and her children hang what would appear to be three sections of a dismembered Japanese screen, possibly of the Rimpa School, although only the central panel is shown in its entirety and the panes have vertical lines running hrough them and wavy edges. Reading from the left, we see a pair of peacocks looking down from a branch onto water below; the middle section (less easy to make out) shows branches and foliage; and on the right a splendid crane, with white plumage, swoops to the ground. Next to the screen, attached to a panel of red lacquer at right angles to the wall, is a hanging scroll that shows a s ingle figure in bright and green robes. † Renoir places the characters in an upward right-diagonal position with Madame Charpentier in the center of the canvas. There is a deep sense of humanity seen as her daughter looks lovingly at Madame Charpentier. The children have a soft innocence, sweetness and vulnerability in their faces, further alluding that Madame Charpentier is their protector and keeper. â€Å"In this group portrait, the chic of the sitter’s dress and the fashionable furnishings are secondary to the romance of mother and children â€Å"at home†. An essentially bourgeois, Parisian romance, admittedly, but so well crafted by Renoir’s â€Å"poetical and constructive genius†Ã¢â‚¬ . Bailey) Renoir uses his creative technique handling the vivid colors of paint by taking the Impressionist approach and uses large but soft brushstrokes. There are no definite and precise lines separating one color or object from the next. The somewhat sketchiness of the painting allows the colors to become even more vibrant. The setting has been said to have taken place in a smoking area within the Charpentier house, theref ore Renoir concentrated on the effects of the artificial light and shadow on the models and background to make the scene appear more genuine to the viewer. Renoir shared with his son these words, â€Å"‘Madame Charpentier reminded me of my early love, the women Fragonard painted. The little girls had charming dimples in their cheeks. † (Renoir) He deliberately set out to paint this family portrait in order to please the conventional taste of the Salon, but without sacrificing or lowering his standards for the Impressionist style. The Charpentier family was well known by the time of Renoir’s commission for the large-scale portrait. Their dress and Madame Charpentier’s jewelry, hairstyle, and the background automatically suggest that the Charpentiers are a modern and wealthy family. The bamboo table, wicker chair, and Japanese screens suggest modernity as well, but not in the material sense of the word. Modernity here can be meant to be the passage of one place to another, one city to another, one culture to another. Renoir must have studied, been familiar, or at least been exposed to Japanese art in order to paint it with such exact quality. The loose brush-stroke also suggest movement. The colors are not flat, but alive, as seen by looking at the dog’s hairs, the folds of the train of Mme Charpentier’s dress, and the tussled-look hair of the children. This new visuality into humanity was a great success. With her influence, Madame Charpentier forced the jury of the Salon to admit Renoir’s piece, after a decade of being excluded from acceptance because of his rejected Impressionist style. â€Å"The picture was a great success, and Mme Charpentier used all her influence to force the jury to admit it into the Salon of 1879. After an absence of almost a decade Renoir was again included in the Salon. † (Fry) It was cleverly placed in an open and favorably position in the Salon, across from only one other major artwork. The richness of Renoir’s palette, the liveliness of his touch, the freshness of luminosity of the canvas, the harmoniousness of the composition was all mentioned approvingly. Both Burty and Chesneau analyzed Renoir’s manner of modeling through color and light, without the assistance of lines. † (Benidite) Madame Charpentier and Her Children may be one of Renoir’s finest if not his best work complimenting both contemporary and Impressionist tastes and style. As with other Impressionist artwork of the time, Madame Charpentier and Her Children was paid with a rather feeble commission. The Charpentier’s claimed to have paid a mere 1,500 francs for the portrait. However, art historian Anne Distel writes, â€Å"Renoir mentioned an even lower figure to Vollard, â€Å"around 1,000 francs. † The Metropolitan Museum of Art acquired the painting thirty years later for 84,000 francs. Still today, Renoir’s work touches the hearts of its viewers and calls for a more sensual and human view towards Impressionist styled work. The idea of motherhood and family is something all people can relate to and appreciate, besides being wrapped up with the alluring techniques, and Renoir’s use of color and effect of light on the canvas.

Explain the Different Types of Discrimination Essay

Discrimination has many meaning and many different ways people can discriminate against others. Discriminations can be as simple as a person making a judgment against someone else by the way they dress or the way they speak or it can be the people are discriminated against (out casted/left out) because they choose to be different or have a disability or different colour of skin or even religion. Discrimination is unfair treatment of a person action based on prejudice which someone has of that individual and it can affect the targeted individual physically, this could be self-harm or eating disorders, intellectually, the individual won’t want to go to work because of how they are being treated, emotionally, which could be depression, anxiety, aggression, stress or fear, and finally, it can also affect them socially, because they might isolate themselves from the people around them which could result in the loss of friends and it may make some of their relationships with others strained because they think that everyone they know is going to treat them in the same way. The types of discrimination are: culture, disability, age, social class, gender, sexuality, health status and cognitive ability. The first type of discrimination is culture. This can be very important to some individuals because it shows their identity to other people and it is also the way in which they lead their life no matter what country they’re living in. Cultural discrimination means that when an individual from a different background or culture follows their cultures rules strictly; they are disliked by some people because they have a different lifestyle, following and they do not follow the same rules because of how they’ve been raised by their family. It is developed within the social group which they have been raised in; and it can change when they become mature enough to decide for themselves which culture best suited for them. In a profession in Health and Social Care it is important for everyone who is concerned to respect other people’s cultures. It is important for the individual because it gives them a sense of understanding and support, promotes their well-being and can also help their health. Also it is important to health and social care professionals because they see the benefits of their care value base and it underlines the importance of respecting an individual’s culture. Sometimes people see this as if the individual is receiving special treatment because they are different; which can make them feel angry or strong jealousy and as a result they will make the individual from a different culture feel isolated; which might make any relationships which the individual has strained and it can make them feel like they have no respect from anyone around them because of how they look or behave. In health and social care a lot of people work with and support people with varying degrees of disabilities. The Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) makes it unlawful to discriminate against someone who has a disability. The act covers employment, access to goods, facilities and services of organisations, education, buying and renting a property and transportation services. There has to be full access ability for anyone with a disability. However, people who are part of the same establishment might discriminate against a disabled person in a wheel chair or with a severe disability; by calling them disrespectful names and say that they don’t deserve to be a part of the establishment just because they are disabled in some way; and this can make the disabled person feel depressed and suffer from anxiety problems because if the same thing has been said enough times then they will believe that they don’t deserve an education or have the right to same things which a non-disabled person has the right to. Age discrimination occurs â€Å"when someone is treated unfavourably because of their age, without justification, or is harassed or victimised because of their age†. There have been some controversies regarding the dispensing of certain very expensive drugs to older people because of their shorter life expectancy due to their age. And as a result some people have argued that the money would be better spent on drugs for younger people. However, this would be denying a drug due to their age and would open the health service to considerable legal risk, and legal advice would be needed before discussions like this could happen. Also, sometimes when there are a lot of elderly people and only a few teenagers waiting to get on a bus and when the bus arrives at their stop the teenagers get onto the bus before the elderly people; the elderly people may decide to talk aggressively to the teenagers just because they are older and they feel that they are more important because they might have a disability. Social discrimination is the actual behaviour of those who treat others differently depending on their social situation, to pigeon-hole someone socially, such that someone on benefits is treated unfairly compared to that of someone who works for a living. Invariably it’s a dysfunctional psychology re-enforced by peer pressure to gear an individual’s thought processes to fail to take into account or assess another individuals sole circumstances before passing judgement. It is not really seen as a problem by the bearer of the discrimination unless the bearer directly experiences some similar discrimination. The social class of an individual is apparent from the area in which they live with their family; the higher the social class, the better the place is kept and maintained. This form of inequality has also infiltrated health and social care. In the foreword to a Department of Health education, the former Secretary of State for Health stated that the poor are more likely to get cancer than the rich, and their chances of survival are lower too; this letter carries on to say that health care is essentially a postcode lottery, which means that having access to health care is often determined by where an individual lives. However, in the Equality and Human Rights Commission it states â€Å"At the heart of human rights is the belief everybody should be treated equally and with dignity – no matter what their circumstances†. An individual cannot be discriminated against because of their gender; if they are however it refers to a bias towards one gender. In the vast majority of careers, this bias means that women do not obtain the same opportunities as men for everything from their initial health care education right through to the hiring process and workplace environment. Their career advancement is also smaller and slower in comparison with career advancement for men. On top of that, women and men may perform the same jobs, but women will receive fewer benefits and less pay than men. Under the Gender Equality Duty 2007, all organisations, including health and social care services, cannot discriminate unfairly due to a person’s gender. Equal rights of access, health care and rights must be adhered to. Sexuality is a very individual thing; although most people are ‘straight’, heterosexual, a significant percentage of the population are gay, bisexual, celibate or asexual. Unfair treatment on the basis of someone’s sexuality – or assumptions about their sexuality – is discrimination and has no place in the sport’s environment. Sexuality discrimination happens when someone is treated unfairly compared with others, because of their sexuality. It can also occur because someone makes assumptions about someone else’s sexuality. Under the Queensland Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (the Act), it can be unlawful to do this. Under federal legislation, it can also be unlawful. The Act says it is against the law to treat people unfairly because of their sexuality, whether they are gay, lesbian, heterosexual or bisexual. The law also protects a person who identifies, or has identified, as a member of the opposite sex by living or seeking to live as a member of that sex. The law also protects sex workers working lawfully. Health status discrimination often occurs when an individual is diagnosed with HIV or AIDS. Sources of stigma include fear of illness, fear of contagion, and fear of death. Fear of illness and fear of contagion is a common reaction among health workers, co-workers, and caregivers, as well as the general population. Stigma is one means of coping with the fear that contact with a member of an affected group; by caring for or sharing utensils with a PLHA will result in contracting the disease. HIV-stigma is often layered on top of many other stigmas associated with such specific groups as homosexuals and commercial sex workers and such behaviours as drug abuse by using needles and casual sex. These behaviours are perceived as controllable and are therefore assigned more blame, receive less sympathy, but instead, more anger and are less likely to receive assistance as opposed to people with AIDS who were infected through circumstances where there was no control, such as receiving a blood transfusion. However, sometimes it can be difficult to make decisions regarding a person’s medical treatment; their expected quality of life after the treatment has been given and their overall life expectancy have to be seriously considered. And the people who are making these decisions for someone should always keep questioning their own assumptions and prejudices; and also do their best to balance the welfare of individual patients with broader funding considerations. Under section 2 of the Family Status Discrimination Ordinance (â€Å"FSDO†), family status means the status of a person who has the responsibility for the care of an immediate family member. An immediate family member is a person who is related by blood, marriage, adoption or affinity. However, this can lead to a variety of discriminations against members of the family; they can be against gay or lesbian parents, single parents, parents of different genders, parents of different races with mixed-race children and other family groupings. It can either direct or indirect discrimination, direct discrimination means that a person is treated unfavorably because of their family status and indirect discrimination means when a condition or requirement, that is not justifiable, is applied to everyone but in practice adversely affects persons who have family status; an example of this would be a company insists that all its employees work overtime and a widower who has responsibility for care of his young children cannot comply with that condition. The company then dismisses him. The complainant feels aggrieved because as a single parent he cannot comply with that condition. If the company cannot justify why each and every employee must meet that condition, it could be a case of indirect discrimination on the ground of family status. Cognitive disability is defined by some as bellow average intellectual function that adversely affects educational and adaptive performance. There are a broad range of disabilities that fit into this criterion. Cognition is the mental process of understanding and acquiring knowledge through the senses, thought and perception. A person with a cognitive disability may have difficulty with some or all of the following cognitive areas: memory formation or retrieval; attention span; reading and comprehension; problem solving; and visual input. Discriminating against someone because of their cognitive ability might arise because of a brain injury, a learning disability or difficulty or a person’s social class or education. It can be easy to determinate against people with cognitive disabilities but care must be taken not to do so. Valuing People Now is a government strategy which aims to improve the lives of people with learning disabilities and those of their families and carers.

10 Bloodiest U.S. Civil War Battles