Free Essays on Davids Mother

After watching David’s Mother, I believe I now have a more knowledgeable and empathetic perspective of how parents of children with special needs manage their lives. David’s Mother sheds light onto the easily-neglected world of the parent of a child with special needs, and seeing the parental issues involved. Viewing how Sally dealt with the widespread issues that evolve from raising and caring for such a child, really made me wonder whom we should pity. The child, or his/her helpless parent? (Besides for the fact that pity is not the appropriate emotion to express towards these children anyway.) Let’s face it. Sally has it pretty tough. Can you really blame her for getting too immersed in her son’s situation? How would any one of us cope with such a severe prognosis? She loved her son David with all of her heart, down to the core. Who can limit a mother’s love for her child? On the other hand, there is a famous quote, â€Å"The road to Hel l is paved with good intentions.† Although I’m positive that Sally intended only the best for David, that doesn’t mean that she wasn’t completely wrong when it came to knowing what proper care dictates. Sally acted as any mother would, the nurture and compassion that she displayed are innate instincts that even animals possess. Although I was a bit surprised at some of her apparent callousness towards her son at times, it was obvious that she loved him so much, that in her own eyes she wasn’t callous at all. She would sometimes get upset at him for ignoring her, did she really expect him to answer? No, that was just the relationship that they shared; she spoke, and she answered for him. Think what you may, but surely no one has a deeper affection for David than his own mother. After watching this film, I believe that parents have a special connection with their children, especially those with special needs. There is some type of understanding that exists, although it ... Free Essays on David's Mother Free Essays on David's Mother After watching David’s Mother, I believe I now have a more knowledgeable and empathetic perspective of how parents of children with special needs manage their lives. David’s Mother sheds light onto the easily-neglected world of the parent of a child with special needs, and seeing the parental issues involved. Viewing how Sally dealt with the widespread issues that evolve from raising and caring for such a child, really made me wonder whom we should pity. The child, or his/her helpless parent? (Besides for the fact that pity is not the appropriate emotion to express towards these children anyway.) Let’s face it. Sally has it pretty tough. Can you really blame her for getting too immersed in her son’s situation? How would any one of us cope with such a severe prognosis? She loved her son David with all of her heart, down to the core. Who can limit a mother’s love for her child? On the other hand, there is a famous quote, â€Å"The road to Hel l is paved with good intentions.† Although I’m positive that Sally intended only the best for David, that doesn’t mean that she wasn’t completely wrong when it came to knowing what proper care dictates. Sally acted as any mother would, the nurture and compassion that she displayed are innate instincts that even animals possess. Although I was a bit surprised at some of her apparent callousness towards her son at times, it was obvious that she loved him so much, that in her own eyes she wasn’t callous at all. She would sometimes get upset at him for ignoring her, did she really expect him to answer? No, that was just the relationship that they shared; she spoke, and she answered for him. Think what you may, but surely no one has a deeper affection for David than his own mother. After watching this film, I believe that parents have a special connection with their children, especially those with special needs. There is some type of understanding that exists, although it ...

Managing Conflict in Groups

Managing Conflict in Groups Here are 5 steps to solve the problem in a team. Read what conflicts are the most problematic and how to manage them. Interpersonal conflicts in organizational settings is a favorite topic for academic  study  and discussion, and for good reason: in any group, particularly in a work setting where the things people have in common on a  personal  level are likely somewhat limited, there will inevitably be conflict. And that is not exactly a bad thing; conflict can lead to innovation and new ideas, and the organization that runs too smoothly often finds itself becoming stagnant. Too many conflicts, however, can quickly lead to chaos and cause serious harm to the organization and its people if they are not managed properly. Problems Faced by Students at School Managing conflict – preventing it when possible, and resolving it productively when necessary – requires an understanding of the nature  of a conflict, the reasons which caused this conflict and the different forms it can take. The necessary prerequisite to being able to manage conflict is understanding the people involved; positions or demands aired in a dispute or argument among team members are manifestations of different interests – the fundamental needs and perspectives that lead people to take their particular points of view. Assessing the roles of people in groups can provide helpful insights. The type of conflict must also be correctly identified. Task or objective conflicts are conflicts about how to accomplish particular activities or goals. These kinds of conflicts can be seriously disruptive, but in general are easier to resolve than the second type of conflict, the relational conflicts, which are a clash of personalities. Conflicts between people on a personal level can be extremely difficult to manage  because they introduce a number of ethical hazards for the manager, who must be careful to very clearly relate solutions of a personal nature to job objectives, procedures, and requirements. How People React to Conflicts Every person will respond to a conflict with someone else in one of five basic ways: Avoidance Accommodation Competition Compromise Collaboration One thing that is misleading about much of the available literature on team dynamics and conflict management is that there is a common assumption that any person will have just one of these responses. That assumption makes it a bit easier to develop models of conflict resolution in academic research, but in the real world, people are inconsistent; the quiet technician who is quick to be accommodating to someone with a difference of opinion this time may come out swinging the next time a dispute arises. Much of an individual’s response to a conflict depends on the context, so the first objective of the manager/mediator in a dispute is to gather all the facts. Fortunately, the skills required to do this effectively – active listening and balanced communication – are the same ones that help defuse many conflicts before they even start. 5 Steps to Solve the Conflict in Your Team Step 1. As a manager thrusts into the role as a conflict mediator, you should start by asking two basic questions of everyone involved in the conflict: What is the disagreement about? How does this disagreement impact the objectives of the organization? Because it is a dispute, you will likely hear several different answers to both questions. That’s okay at this point, because the goals here are first, to gather the information you need to understand what is happening, and second, to compel the parties to the conflict to think through the problem themselves to clearly and accurately describe their positions. Step 2.  The next step is to gather everyone who has a stake in the outcome of the conflict. That may mean including some who have not spoken up (i.e., those practicing the avoidance strategy), and it may mean firmly telling some who have no real part in the dispute to go mind their own business. Once the people who are important to resolving the conflict are gathered together, clearly explain what successful  resolution of the conflict will be. Consensus, or common agreement among all concerned, is a good goal to aim for, but in reality a unanimous decision is probably unlikely; instead, a compromise representing the â€Å"highest common denominator† – a solution that meets as many of the group members’ interests as possible at the same time – is a more realistic objective. The important thing is to clarify what success will mean before the discussion begins; the team members will then have realistic expectations of the outcome and will be more inclin ed to reconsider and modify their individual positions as the conversation proceeds. Step 3. Once this is done, the next step – notice that the discussion of the actual problem has not even begun yet – is to agree on the way in which the discussion will be conducted. This might sound a bit silly, but it serves a very good purpose and saves time in the long run. It is a natural reaction of people when given the opportunity to take part in designing a process, even one as simple as the conduct of a group discussion, to strive for the process to have a successful or expected outcome. Step 4. In whatever manner the group decides to approach the rest of the discussion, the next stage is to define the problem. This is one part of conflict resolution where unanimity is necessary; quite often, teams will discover that they do not all have the same understanding of the issue they disagree on due to miscommunication or misinterpreted information. Simply clarifying the problem can ease tensions, and may even be a solution in itself; if not, at least it returns the team to a state of â€Å"working together† by providing a common focus. Step 5. The final and most time-consuming phase of the conflict resolution process is gathering and assessing possible solutions. Everyone with a position in the dispute obviously has a solution in mind; otherwise, there would be no conflict. Each of these potential solutions needs to be assessed by the group to answer three basic questions: Which solution is the most advantageous to the organization? Which solution is the most advantageous to the individuals concerned? Which parts of those two solutions (if they are not already the same) are common? The Art of Effective Problem Solving In general, with a perhaps a few minor changes here and there, the best solution to the problem causing the group conflict will be the set of common parts between the organization- and individual-favoring solutions the group is able to develop. Good references on conflict management and resolution: M.A. Rahim, Managing Conflict in Organizations (3rd ed.). Westport, Connecticut: Quorum Books, 2001. H. Fogler and S. LeBlanc, Strategies for Creative Problem Solving (2nd ed.).   Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2008