Latino film Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Latino film - Essay Example Similarly, the character of Frida Kahlo in 2002 Frida film (dir. Julie Taymor) is a central figure in a movie that tells the story of Frida Kahlo’s life. This character, despite some major differences from the character of Rosa, is able to fight for her own happiness and evolves as a strong representation of a Latin American woman. THESIS STATEMENT: Although women in El Norte and Frida are represented through completely different stories, time periods, and in totally different contexts, they have several important things in common. First of all, they both struggle against life circumstances; they both set out on a quest for happiness; they both evolve as strong personalities; and they both face untimely deaths without having found happiness on earth. Rosa in the Movie El Norte Rosa and her brother Enrique are the protagonists of El Norte, an epic movie about immigration and cultural conflicts and the quest for happiness. At its simplest, the movie may be perceived as a chronic led attempt of two Guatemalan teenagers to escape the brutalities of the military regime in Guatemala through illegal emigration to the United States. Rosa (Zaide Silvia Guierrez), a teenage Guatemalan girl, is portrayed epically, through a range of events in her life. She thinks, decides, acts, and eventually occupies the leading position in the film: when she dies, Enrique’s (David Villalpando) life goes empty and he supposedly commits a suicide. In this section of the paper, the focus will be put on the character of Rosa: what role it has in the film, how she changes throughout the film, how she struggles for her happiness, and how she evolves as a strong personality in due course of the film. Rosa’s central role in El Norte is evidenced by her clear decision-making part and her drive to find a better place to live, to achieve happiness and peace. An Indian woman by origin, she takes the decision to take her chances and flee to the U.S. with her brother Enrique. The off-spring of the Maya who have lived in Guatemala for centuries, Rosa makes up her mind to seek peace and happiness in a totally different culture. Raised on myths of the Mayan people, who have their own perception of the world and their own vision of life, Rosa makes a really tough decision. For her, to go to the United States or to go el norte means to enter the world totally alien and appallingly different. Yet she takes this step driven by her desire to find a home far away from the place where she was born and raised. Indeed, Guatemala failed to be her home, so Rosa hopes to find another one. While these dreams are not devoid of practical background (Rosa gets to know from Enrique that in the United States even poor people own their cars), her decision is more romantically inspired than carefully developed. Anyway, in the empty house where she and Enrique are under the threat of being murdered or abducted (just as their parents were), no one waits for them, except for the gho sts of their ancestors. Thus, there is no choice. Yet, there is hope. Hence, Rosa’s central role is displayed through her decision-making, which proves central to the whole movie. As a female character, Rosa constructs her character through a series of morose events and happenings, all of which leave an imprint on her tender yet resolute self.

Questions on 4 difrent subjects, each 4 paragraphs Essay

Questions on 4 difrent subjects, each 4 paragraphs - Essay Example This can be done as a dramatic scene/dialogue, or as an assay. If Malcolm X was standing perilously close to a cliff as Ralph Waldo Emerson and Jonathan Edwards walked by arguing about cosmological strategies, both men would stop to talk to the distraught Malcolm. Emerson would talk about if Malcolm committed suicide, he would be in effect killing part of God. Edwards, on the other hand would talk to Malcolm about the fate of hell fire for anyone that committed suicide. Malcolm would come up with different responses for both men. Emerson would go first, explaining that if Malcolm went over the cliff he would never find God. The search for God cannot be found after death, but during life. All of Malcolm’s experiences were trials and blessing that would bring him closer to God. The only thing Malcolm had to do was hear these experiences. Malcolm might reply that all of his experiences have told him the Christian God did not care about him. If Emerson’s views were correct, than Malcolm should jump off the cliff because the nature has related to him God does not exist, or worse does not care about him. After Emerson, Edwards would have to speak quickly to stop Malcolm from jumping. Edwards would speak about an all powerful God that had the power to damn him to hell for suicide. Suicide is the only sin God could not forgive, because the dead could not ask for forgiveness. Then Edwards would talk about the predestination of him and Emerson coming upon him as a sign Malcolm should live. Malcolm might hesitate two seconds before jumping after Edwards’ plea. This whole scenario would never happen due to the inner strength of the African American candidates given for this question. Malcolm X would not listen to Emery or Emerson, because of the differences between the three men. Malcolm would feel like both men as Christians and white men would never understand his point of view. 2- Anne Hutchinson, Mother Ann Lee, Mary Baker Eddy, What do the lives,

Volunteer report Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Volunteer report - Essay Example I made sure that the activities were adequate so that they did not feel exhausted at the end of the workout. I assisted them in the form of groups and visited the place thrice a week i.e. Monday, Wednesday and Friday. My tenure ended on April 10, 2014. The only difficulty which I had to face was communicating with the people as two of the group members had listening problem. It is true that elderly people are like new babies who require a lot of attention and care. I allocated sufficient time and efforts during the whole volunteer period so that I could provide them a marvelous experience of their life. There were about six people in my group and I had to make sure that I address the demands of each person appropriately. One person spoke at such a low volume that I had to listen to her talk with complete attention. I even made sure that I gave time to each individual so that they could share their feelings and thoughts effectively. I even asked them open ended questions to have clarity about their requests so that their queries were resolved. I even did physiotherapy of a person on his request as his legs were hurting and I asked him to guide me so that I could perform the exercise effectively. I definitely feel that the helping skills have to be used according to the situation and they should be in alignment with the instance so that the desired results are attained. I believe that my clients were contended with my behavior and they appreciated my efforts. One of the clients even mentioned that she feels relaxed after talking to me. Also, other person was satisfied with my helping actions as he stated that I have the ability of proactively responding to other individual’s requests efficiently. Despite all these points, I think that I have to develop an understanding about people’s psychology so that I can assess their demands from the body language and assist them in resolving their

Populism and the Military, and the Struggle for Democracy Essay

Populism and the Military, and the Struggle for Democracy - Essay Example This gained him a lot of support from the large majority who were being oppressed and this saw him get elected in 1946 as the president. His ideologies later became known as the populist nationalism (Pearson 17). He maintained his power by ensuring that the urban working class had improved social and economic lives than their previous status in any other government. Peron played a major role in the development of Argentina. His government was considered as one of the most progressive governments in the 20th century. In the historical development of Argentina, Peron established trade unions in every industry to represent the working class. Thus, the Peronism era contributed largely to the development of the country and its people economically (15). In his era, he managed to liberate Argentina from foreign holds by buying major industries back from the British and he laid groundwork to ensure that Argentina became independently stable economically. He also monopolized the export industry resulting in larger sales of Argentina’s products overseas. He also introduced new programs such as free education for his people and this greatly empowered them. Peron was a reformer as his developmental changes were aimed at equally distributing the country’s wealth to everyone in the

CRITIQUE the ASSUMPTIONS of MAINSTREAM THEORY Essay

CRITIQUE the ASSUMPTIONS of MAINSTREAM THEORY - Essay Example The market also experiences power centers, such as in monopolies, oligopolies, and government regulations, for price determination. Mobility of factors of production and high levels of awareness also identify imperfect market, contrary to the theory’s assumption. Sellers are for example free to move into and out of a market based on presumed profitability levels. The assumption that consumers are consistent in their preferences is also not valid. Existence of sales promotion strategies such as advertisement continues because of their success in influencing consumers’ preferences towards marketed products. Consumers’ preference also depends on environmental factors such as peer influence, weather conditions, and religious and political ideologies and is therefore a variable in individual consumers subject to environmental changes. The theory’s assumption of homogeneity of factors of production is an inaccurate assumption because the factors of production can be classified based on their distinct characteristics. Land, for example, has distinct features from labor and capital to dispute the homogeneity assumption. Each of the factors of production further lacks homogeneity within it and has sub classes with distinct

Arendt-Theory of Totalitarianism Essay Example for Free

Arendt-Theory of Totalitarianism Essay Hannah Arendt is widely regarded as one of the most important, unique and influential thinkers of political philosophy in the Twentieth century. Arendt was greatly influenced by her mentor and one time lover, Martin Heidegger, whose phenomenological method would help to greatly shape and frame Arendt’s own thinking. Like Heidegger, Arendt was sceptical of the metaphysical tradition which tended towards abstract conceptual reasoning; ultimately at odds with the reality of human lived experience. Consequently, Arendt was highly dubious of being referred to as a philosopher, as she felt philosophy was, by its own essence, confined to the proverbial ivory tower. She believed political life was at the apex of human experience and so she identified as a political thinker/actor. Her emphasis on the phenomenological nature of the lived political experience permeates her life’s works and perhaps can be said to constitute her own distinct brand of political philosophy. Arendt’s early publication, Ideology Terror: A Novel Form of Government, is a profound elucidation of the nature of the theretofore unprecedented (she argues) phenomenon of Totalitarianism and its â€Å"origins elements and functioning † A Novel Form of Government: Arendt posited that the totalitarian forms of â€Å"government and domination† (Arendt. 03) which characterised the Nationalist Socialist party in Germany and Stalin’s oppressive regime in Soviet Russia, which saw systematic genocide and terror visited upon literally millions of innocent people, were unprecedented in the history of political systems, and were not mere modern manifestations of ancient forms of violent government such as despotism or tyranny. She went further even, to suggest that totalitarian systems had destroyed the very foundations upon which traditional ideas and presuppositions of government rested. Although totalitarianism seemed to contain elements of tyrannical or despotic forms of government i. e. terror, violence, absolute power etc Arendt contended that totalitarian regimes differed in important ways which rendered them qualitatively distinct. Tyranny and dictatorships, she argues are marked by â€Å"Arbitrary power, unrestricted by law, yielded in the interest of the ruler and hostile to the interests of the governed, on one hand, fear as the principle of action, namely fear of the people by the ruler and fear of the ruler by the eople †(Arendt. 306) Terror, according to Arendt, has traditionally been used as a means to an end, or tool for tyrannical regimes, namely the end of maintaining and sustaining a position of power over its subjects. Totalitarian systems however, do not function in this way, ideologically at least, According to Arendt. â€Å"total terror leaves no arbitrary lawlessness behind it and does not rage for the sake of some arbitrary will or for the sake of despotic power of one man against all. † (Arendt. 311) Context and Content: In order to understand the nature (if there is one) of Totalitarianism forms of government, it is important first to understand both their historical contexts and the Ideologies which underpin them, as Totalitarian regimes, are by their nature ideological, as Arendt shows. Take for example National Socialism, the political ideology which took root in Germany during the 1930’s, characterised by militant nationalism and overtly inherent racism. The context in which the Nazi party rose to prominence was the extreme devastation, debt and resulting poverty and hunger left in Germany in the wake of the First World War. It can indeed be argued that Adolph Hitler’s demagoguery and flair for rousing public sympathy with his intense speeches, was also crucial to the widespread proliferation, acceptance and support for Nazi ideology, at a time when people yearned for a clear solution to their plight and poverty. Hitler’s bellicose rhetoric displayed a typical trait of ideologies; a final solution, the idea that the answer to all of life’s problems can be understood and solved by following a particular stringent course of action determined by a single unambiguous worldview. Ideologies-isms, which to the satisfaction of their adherents can explain everything and every occurrence by deducing it from a single premise† (Arendt. 315) Nazi Ideology had at its core, a politically and indeed racially motivated perversion of the Darwinian concept of a natural hierarchy of species, in which the stronger/more successful species would inevitably replace the weaker ones. Darwin’s profound insight into the ways in which organisms evolve was warped and misrepresented by the Nazis, who filtered it through their racist and nationalist worldview, justifying the extermination of Jews and other supposed degenerate races by claiming they were following and indeed implementing a Law of Nature. In Darwin, Arendt explains, the Nazi party had found what they saw as an unbending Natural Law, the very source from which positive (manmade) laws had been traditionally derived. far from being lawless, it goes to the sources of authority from which positive laws received their ultimate legitimation† (Arendt. 307) Arendt argues that this Law of Nature was taken to be a suprahuman edict which was used justify their campaign of terror and genocide, and furthermore usurp any positive laws which were counter-productive to their cause. Nature itself mandated the extermination of lesser â€Å"degenerate† races according to Nazi ideology. And so the carryin g out and indeed hastening of the process of this â€Å"Natural† decree was the end which the Totalitarian regimes sough to effect. In fact, Totalitarian ideology sought for the actual societal embodiment of these supposed Laws of history and nature, and asserted that by the strict implantation and of these laws, a utopia on Earth would be realised. â€Å"the Law of Nature or the law of History, if properly executed, is expected to produce mankind as its end product† (Arendt. 307) Arendt is highly critical of this thinking which she describes as particular to Totalitarian government. One of the most obvious critiques which she makes is the complete disregard in this line of thinking for basic anthropological concerns i. e. ow humans actually tend to behave and function. â€Å"It applies the law directly to mankind without bothering with the behaviour of men Totalitarian policy claims to transform the human species into an active unfailing carrier of a law to which human beings otherwise would only passively and reluctantly be subjected† (Arendt. 307) Terror as the essence of Totalitarian rule: Built into the notion of executing the Laws of nature and history is an inherent eschewing of the legitimacy, importance and even relevance of manmade or positive laws, which are intended to govern and ease the functioning of societies in which people participate. The denial of positive laws and their replacement with the bringing into effect, a Law of Nature or indeed a Law of History as per Totalitarian ideology, is, Arendt argues largely what separates Totalitarian regimes from despotism and tyranny. Because they drew their justification from the very source of all positive laws i. e. Natural law, Totalitarian regimes were able to substantiate this denial of the legitimacy of positive laws by claiming that in aiming to produce the perfect rule of Natural Law on earth, that mankind itself would become the very â€Å"embodiment of the law† (Arendt. 08) By claiming to actualise and bring into effect fundamental laws which determine the inevitable course of history by establishing the perfect rule of Natural law on earth through use of terror, Totalitarian regimes subvert at the same time traditional notions of government and also notions of the utility of terror. Terror was no longer merely an arbitrary tool of oppression, (although it was of course the methodology with which the terrible ideology of Totalitarianism was realised) Terror was itself the embodied form which submission to the supposed Law of Nature took, or as Arendt puts it â€Å"Terror as the execution of a law of movement Arendt. 311)† Terror was in fact now the end goal itself; as such Terror is indeed Totalitarianism’s essence. Arendt uses a good analogy to illustrate this point. â€Å"the absence of crimes in any society does not render laws superfluous but, on the contrary, signifies their most perfect rule-so terror in totalitarian government has ceased to be a mere means for the suppression of opposition, though it is also used for such purposes. Terror becomes total when it becomes independent of all opposition; it rules supreme when nobody any longer stands in its way. If lawfulness is the essence of non-tyrannical government and lawlessness is the essence of tyranny, then terror is the essence totalitarian domination† Dangerous Ideology: What made Nazism and Stalinism so dangerous, according to Arendt, were not merely the ideas which characterised their respective ideologies i. e. racism and dialectical materialism, but the logic which one could arguably follow from these types of thinking. If Ideologies are the logic of ideas, (which they are! ) then it is the seemingly logical implications of these ideas, which made them dangerous. To put it simply, if one concludes that there are suprahuman forces which determine the very course of history, as espoused by Nazism and Stalinism, then one must be bound to follow the logical steps which lead from this idea. â€Å"Whoever agreed that there are such things as dying classes and did not draw the consequence of killing their members, or that the right to live had something to do with race and did not draw the consequence of killing unfit races, was plainly either stupid or a coward†. (Arendt. 318) The dangers of commitment to the logic of ideas bviously are determined by the extremity of the ideas themselves, however as Arendt rightly points out, it is this ice cold reasoning which both Hitler and Stalin were very fond of which gave their ideologies a trajectory of power and an pseudo-scientific guise which legitimated them. Rather than a principle of action aimed at some common good or societal benefit such as the prevention of crime, this â€Å"logicality of ideological thinking† (Arendt. 321) is what makes Totalitarian government tick. Isolation, The Phenomenology of Terror: As we have seen, terror is the essence of Totalitarianism. But it is important to realise exactly what this means for the experiencing subject of Totalitarian rule. Terror, Arendt explains, destroys the ability to engage in any public life. Isolation is the most salient feature of terror. Terror wrought isolation has been used throughout the centuries by tyrannical rulers to inhibit political agency and thus destroy the possibility of revoltâ€Å" terror can rule absolutely only over men who are isolated against each other and that, therefore, one of the primary concerns of all tyrannical government is to bring isolation about Isolation and impotence, that is the fundamental inability to act at all, have always been characteristic of tyrannies. † (Arendt. 321-322) The final way in which Totalitarian governments differ from those regimes of tyranny, which have also employed terror as a tactic, is for Arendt, the destruction by terror of the private sphere of human life. Total terror, as it were, is not content with merely destroying the public life of people and their ability to interact. Total terror permeates the mind and destroys the faculties of creativity and mental autonomy. Totalitarianism seeks to destroy the entire ability for people to create something new and bring it into the world. While it obviously needs to destroy the ability of political life, it also enforces utter personal isolation (loneliness) on the mind of the individual, so that he or she has no outlet vent and indeed no ability to form ideas of their own. â€Å"In isolation, man remains in contact with the world as the human artifice; only when the most elementary forms of human creativity, which is the capacity to add something of ones own to the common world, are destroyed, isolation becomes altogether unbearable Totalitarian government, like all tyrannies, certainly could not exist without destroying the public realm of life, that is, without destroying, by isolating men, their political capacities but totalitarian domination as a form of government is new in that it is not content with this isolation and destroys private life as well. It bases itself on loneliness, on the experience of not belonging to the world at all, which is among the most radical and desperate experiences of man. † (Arendt. 24) The phenomenological and anthropological implications of this total terror are for Arendt the complete breakdown of the human actor. She argues that humans are essentially social beings who need social interaction to function and live as we are hardwired to do so; our complete sense of who we are and what our world means ultimately derives from our experience of interacting with others. â€Å"For the confirmation of my identity I depend entirely upon other people† (Arendt. 324) In conclusion I think it may be prudent to summarise the central elucidations which Arendt makes in Ideology and Terror. . Totalitarian governments were unprecedented governmental forms before the early 20th century. 2. Totalitarian governments are ideological in nature and functioning, and derive their justifications from suprahuman â€Å"Laws of Nature and History† and implement the logic of these ideas through use of terror. 3. Terror is the primary tool and also the essence of Totalitarian governments, i. e. Total terror becomes the actual embodied form of the Laws of History and nature made manifest 4.  Totalitarian governments destroy the ability to act politically as all tyrannies do, but also they destroy the realm of private life as well, rendering human existence a miserable one in attempting to make each person the actual embodiment of Natural and Historical Laws Arendt’s masterful work has shed light on one of the darkest periods in human history and it al so lends insight into the nature of government, society and the human subject more broadly speaking. She remains a seminal figure in the discipline of political philosophy and continues to inspire thought and debate to this day.

Section 31, Children Act 1989 Threshold Criteria

Section 31, Children Act 1989 Threshold Criteria Before a court can make a care order, it must be satisfied that the ‘threshold criteria’ in Section 31 of the Children Act 1989 have been met.[1] The order must also promote the welfare of the child.[2] The main effect of a care order is to give parental responsibility for the child to the local authority.[3] If a care order is made, the child can be removed by the local authority at any time.[4] The threshold criteria, therefore, play a significant role in that they prevent care orders being made simply based on what is in the best interests of the child.[5] However, as this paper will demonstrate, the threshold for state intervention at various stages of the child protection process has been extremely controversial. Section 31 Children Act 1989: Threshold Criteria One of the great problems in the law of child protection is that if the wrong decision is made, great harm may result. As Bainham said: â€Å"The law in this area has to strike a careful balance between enabling the protection of children at risk of harm, with protecting the rights to respect for family life for children and their parents†[6] Not surprisingly, there is substantial case law on the interpretation of s.31 of the Children Act 1989 and the House of Lords have considered their interpretation in some important cases which will be assessed afterwards.[7] An analysis would be made about whether the courts have interpreted the threshold criteria in a strict or lax way. If interpreted in a strict way, this would imply that it would be more problematic for the local authority to satisfy the grounds for a care order. Under the first limb of threshold, the local authority must show that the â€Å"child concerned is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm† when applying for a care order.[8] Although quite straightforward, there have been concerns about when the alleged state of affairs must be shown to exist.[9] ‘Is suffering’ In Re M[10], the key issue was the meaning of ‘is’ in the threshold criteria. In this case, the children’s father had murdered their mother. Three of the four children were placed with their aunt. The remaining child was placed with foster carers, but later joined her aunt. However, the local authority still wanted a care order just in case it became necessary to remove the child from the aunt’s house. By the time the case came to court, it was hard to say that the child was, at that time, suffering from significant harm or that she was likely to. Their Lordships hence explained that the correct test was â€Å"whether the child was suffering from significant harm at the time when the local authority first intervened†.[11] Given that interpretation of the threshold, this was clearly satisfied. That decision is clearly correct, as their Lordships indicated or else it would be difficult for the local authority to obtain a care order in cases where child ren were put in excellent care.[12] It was a lax interpretation of the threshold criteria as a strict interpretation would have made the law hard to operate. ‘Likely to suffer significant harm’ The alternative ground on which the local authority can satisfy the first limb of the threshold criteria under s.31(2)(a) of the Children Act 1989 is the likelihood of future significant harm. One of the major issues that local authorities encounter is that predictions that child abuse will occur are difficult to make. Removing a child on the ground of speculative harm is controversial as it is impossible to know whether or not the harm would occur.[13] In Re H[14], there were several issues for the court. The first was the meaning of ‘likely’. Their Lordships held that ‘likely’ meant that significant harm was a ‘real possibility’.[15] It was not necessary to show that the harm was probable in the sense of ‘more likely than not’.[16] This is a notably lax interpretation of the threshold criteria. They also held that it must be shown, on the balance of probabilities, that the threshold was satisfied. They rejected the view that the criminal burden of proof should be applied. However, rather confusingly, Lord Nicholls said that â€Å"where there was a more serious allegation, more evidence would be required to establish it on a balance of probability than a case of a less serious allegation†.[17] This dicta was reconsidered by the court in Re B[18] where their Lordships made it clear that Lord Nicholls was not suggesting that, in cases of serious abuse, the criminal burden of proof should be used.[19] The civil balance of proof should be applied in all cases under the Children Act 1989. Instead, what Lord Nicholls implied, was that â€Å"some allegations will be inherently unlikely and they will require more evidence to establish them than others†. This interpretation was followed in Re S-B[20]. This aspect of the decision in Re B and Re H is perhaps best viewed as a lax interpretation, although it is probably not as lax as it could have been. Requiring a criminal burden of proof would have indeed made it very difficult for the local authority to obtain a care order. However, Lord Nicholls’ approach to the standard of proof, as well as its wider implications for protecting children at risk of harm has attracted strong academic criticism. Re B also confirmed another aspect of the decision in Re H. Risk of significant harm can only be established based on ‘primary facts’ which would then have to be proved on the balance of probabilities. Mere suspicions are not sufficient. In Re H, a 15 year old girl alleged that she had been raped by her stepfather. The local authority sought a care order in respect of the girl’s three younger siblings who continued to live with the man. There was a strong suspicion that the older girl had been abused and that the younger girls were at risk of being harmed. However, as it had not been proved on the balance of probabilities that the girl had been abused, no primary facts had been proved and thus, no care order was granted. As Lord Hoffman in Re B stated, â€Å"either a fact happened or it did not and there was nothing in between†. If there are no facts to support a finding of risk of future harm, the court is powerless to proceed.[21] This is, undoubtedly, a strict interpretation of the threshold criteria. The majority of their Lordships saw this issue in terms of parental rights; parents should not have their children removed on the basis of suspicions. However, it is suggested that this is not a safe approach to risk taking with children.[22] The reason why it is unsafe is that it would be very difficult for the local authority to safeguard a child’s right to be protected from abuse even when there is a serious risk of danger. As this analysis suggests, there are evidential problems and difficulties of predicting the future. The problems of proof partly explain the lengthy delays which can occur in child protection proceedings.[23] With the introduction of the Children and Families Act 2014, there is now a 26-week time limit for completing care proceedings with the possibility of extending the time limit for up to 8 weeks, if this is necessary to resolve the proceedings justly.[24] However, an important issue that arises here is whether this is achievable in complex cases. ‘Timescales can end up replacing professional judgment’.[25] ‘Harm attributable to the care given or likely to be given or the child’s being beyond parental control’ Uncertainty about who caused harm to the child is also another issue which local authorities and courts generally encounter.[26] The issue of the ‘unknown perpetrator’ was addressed in the case of Lancashire CC v B[27]. In this case, it was clear that the child had suffered harm. However, it was not clear whether it was the parent or the child minder who had caused harm to the child. Their Lordships held that as long as it was clear that the abuse was caused by a parent or a child minder, it did not matter which had perpetrated the abuse. On the other hand, where it is not clear whether the harm was caused by a parent or someone who was not a primary carer of the child, then no care order could be made. Although the House of Lords provided a clear guidance on when the threshold criteria would be satisfied in the case of an ‘unknown perpetrator’, they provided limited guidance on how the court should deal with an unknown perpetrator when deciding whether a ca re order should be granted.[28] Their Lordships returned to that issue in Re O and N[29], where it was emphasised that â€Å"just because the threshold criteria was satisfied, it did not automatically mean that a care order had to be made†. In one of the appeal cases, it was evident that the child was harmed by one of the parents, who had since separated. The child lived with the mother. The issue for their Lordships was whether the suspicions that the harm may have been caused by the mother should be considered. Their Lordships held that suspicions could be considered at the welfare stage. Lord Nicholls however emphasised that social workers should be careful in such cases to treat the parents as potential perpetrators, not proved perpetrators. Therefore, in Re S-B, it was confirmed that if both parents were possible perpetrators, the court might decide to remove the child as they were at risk of harm. It is therefore submitted that in Lancashire, the House of Lords took a noticeably lax interpretation of t he threshold criteria as the children could be removed from their parents even if they did not perpetrate the abuse. However, it was probably not as lax as it could have been as it was necessary to show that a primary carer of the child was harming the child. ‘Significant harm’ Even if the facts are known, there is much controversy over how much suffering the child should face before the local authority could intervene. Harm is very widely defined in s.31(9) of the Children Act 1989 as the â€Å"ill-treatment or the impairment of health or development.† ‘Health’ means ‘physical and mental health’. ‘Development’ includes â€Å"physical, intellectual, emotional or behavioural development†. As a result of the Adoption and Children Act 2002, the definition of ‘harm’ also includes the ‘impairment suffered by hearing or seeing the ill-treatment of another’. The legislation, however, does not define the line between ‘harm’ and ‘significant harm’. The Court of Appeal in Re C (A Child)[30] explained that to be significant, the harm had to be â€Å"great enough to justify the local authority interfering in the autonomous life of the family†. The test will therefore be subjective to the particular circumstances. This raises many questions. If a local authority finds that a child is living in a house where the family’s diet is unhealthy and where the children spend all their time in front of the television, what should be done? Joanna Nicolas, a child protection consultant, believes that â€Å"obesity should also be treated as a form of abuse as any type of under-feeding is, because of the physical impact on the child, the implications for their future health and the psychological impact.†[31] However, many would argue that this kind of situation is not sufficiently serious to justify intervention. This puts social workers in a difficult situation as they do not know in which circumstances it will be appropria te for them to intervene. Ward LJ also stresses the importance of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights when assessing the significance of the harm, highlighting that Article 8 requires that there must be a ‘†relevant and sufficient† reason for crossing the threshold’.[32] Additionally, if the state is to intervene in a child’s life, the level of state intervention must be proportionate to the risk that the child is suffering. There is a danger that a child who is genuinely suffering will be known to the local authority, but never, quite, be regarded as suffering sufficiently to justify intervention. In Re MA[33], the local authority found that a girl, who was not the biological daughter of the parents, had been badly treated by them. However, no care order was granted in respect of the parents’ other children as their Lordships found that there was no sufficient evidence of a risk of significant harm to their natural children. The decision in this case is controversial as the parents demonstrated a capacity for cruelty and thus gave rise to a real possibility that they would harm their own children. In deciding whether the child is suffering from ‘significant harm’, the ‘child’s health or development must be compared with that which could reasonably be expected of a ‘similar child’.[34] There are a number of issues in regards to the ‘similar child’ test. There is particular controversy over the extent to which the cultural background of the child should be taken into account.[35] It is also unclear to which extent the characteristics or capabilities of the parents should be considered. Reforms and recommendations For the last 40 years, several reforms have been intended to improve the law on ‘child protection’ and compensate for failures in practice. Many of these reforms responded to the cumulative evidence inspections and high-profile reviews into children’s deaths including: the 1974 Maria Colwell inquiry which led to the Area Review Committees, the 1988 Cleveland inquiry which formed the early versions of the statutory guidance Working Together To Safeguard Children and the Victoria Climbià © Report which contributed to the Every Child Matters green paper with recommended policies designed to ensure that it never happened again. Since the individual reforms of the past have all seemed intelligent and well-designed, it seems puzzling that they have not achieved their intended goals.[36] It is submitted that there may have been too many unnecessary targets. Instead of addressing existing practical problems, such as poor system management and inadequate funding, the prev ious reforms have focussed too much on the process of case management and increasing regulation. This may have impeded the real issue of child protection. The Munro report has provided some interesting recommendations to improve the law on child protection with particular focus on early intervention, the transparency and accountability of the system and the expertise of the social work profession. In conclusion, it is submitted that there is no consistent theme in the approach of their Lordships in regards to the threshold criteria. There is however increasing evidence to suggest that the thresholds need to be lower. Witnesses from the courts found little or no evidence of inappropriate removal of children and many instances where earlier removal would have been appropriate.[37] This is backed by academic research. Professor Ward noted that â€Å"there is substantial evidence that many children remain for too long with or are returned to abusive and neglectful families with insufficient support.[38] Word Count: 2500 Bibliography Primary Sources Cases Lancashire CC v B [2000] 1 FCR 509 Re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) [2008] UKHL 35 Re C (A Child) [1993] 1 FLR 257 Re D (Care: Threshold Criteria) [1998] Fam Law 656 Re D (A Child) (Care Order: Evidence) [2010] EWCA Civ 1000 Re H and Others (minors) (sexual abuse: standard of proof) [1996] AC 563 Re L (Children) [2006] EWCA Civ 1282 Re M (A Minor) (Care Order: Threshold Conditions) [1994] 2 FLR 577 Re MA (Care Threshold) [2009] EWCA Civ 853 Re O and N (Children) (Non-accidental injury) [2003] 1 FCR 673 Re O (A Minor) (Care Order: Education: Procedure) [1992] 4 All ER 905 Re P (Care Proceedings) [2012] EWCA Civ 401 Re S-B (Children) [2009] UKSC 17 Re T (A Child) (Care Order) [2009] 2 FCR 367 Statutes and statutory instruments Adoption and Children Act 2002 Children Act 1989 Children Act 2004 Children and Families Act 2014 Secondary Sources Books Herring J, Family Law (6th edition, Pearson Education Ltd, 2013) Harris-Short S and Miles J, Family Law: Text, Cases and Materials (2nd edition, Oxford University Press, 2011) Journal articles Bainham A, ‘Striking the Balance in Child Protection’ [2009] CLJ 42 Hayes M, ‘Uncertain Evidence and Risk-Taking in Child Protection Cases’ [2004] CLFQ 63 Keating H, ‘Shifting Standards in the House Of Lords’ [1996] CFLQ 157 Lowe N and Cobley C, ‘The statutory â€Å"threshold† under Section 31 of the Children Act 1989-time to take a stock’ LQR 396 Masson J, ‘Reforming Care Proceedings- Time for a Review’ [2007] CLFQ 411 Websites Department for Education, ‘Landmark Children and Families Act 2014 gains royal assent’ (Press release, 13 March 2014)