Chanel has been married for five years. She recently left her husband, Robert, and moved back in with her parents. Chanel wants to divorce Robert and go back to school so that she can earn a college degree. For the past month, Robert has called and texted her at least ten times per day, begging her to come home. Chanel has blocked his number, but Robert seems to get new numbers all the time. Robert often asks Chanel to go out with him, but Chanel has refused.
On one such occasion, Chanel declined his offer and told Robert that she just wanted to stay home and visit with her parents. At the last minute, Chanel changed her mind and went shopping with some friends. When she left the shopping center, she noticed Robert sitting on the hood of her car. Robert was very angry, and accused Chanel of “lying” to him about her plans. Robert grabbed Chanel and attempted to force her into his car, but was thwarted when a security guard drove up and asked him what he was doing. He released Chanel, and she was able to drive home in her own car.
Next, Robert turned up at the same restaurant when Chanel went out to lunch with some friends, and later, at the same movie theater. Both times, he approached Chanel and asked her to leave with him. Chanel declined, and left with her friends. The week after, Chanel slowed down for a yellow traffic light when Robert rear-ended her car. Chanel’s car suffered extensive damage, and although Chanel was not seriously injured, she was bruised and scared. The police interviewed her and Robert. Robert told the police that Chanel was a terrible driver, and that she had just slammed on the brakes so as to cause a collision. Fortunately, video surveillance cameras at a nearby store showed that Chanel was telling the truth, and that Robert had actually sped up and rammed Chanel’s car.
Chanel is confused and, while she is thinking of getting a restraining order against Robert, she continually tells her friends that since Robert never hit her, she does not think that Robert would really hurt her. At the same time, she concedes that she is having trouble sleeping, and she is becoming more worried about what Robert will do in the future, because he cannot seem to accept the divorce.
Assume that the police have referred Chanel to your domestic violence agency, and she has been assigned to you as a client. Chanel is confused about why she has been referred to a domestic violence agency, because she reiterates that Robert has never hit her.
What information does Chanel need to know about stalking so that she can be safe? What should she do to prepare a case against Robert if she wants to press charges? What should Chanel know about restraining orders and stalkers? What should Chanel know about how technology can be used to carry out stalking?
The World is Flat," by Thomas Friedman Distributed: 23rd March, 2015 Last Edited: second January, 2018 Disclaimer: This paper has been presented by an understudy. This isn't a case of the work composed by our expert article journalists. You can see tests of our expert work here. Any suppositions, discoveries, conclusions or proposals communicated in this material are those of the writers and don't really mirror the perspectives of UK Essays. "The World is Flat," by Thomas Friedman, annals the deluge of countless players on the worldwide financial stage that has made a solid power that is as of now influencing Americans. Friedman trusts that these approaching changes can possibly create both positive and negative outcomes. A case that outlines the scope of Friedman's examination is his contention about the effect of the website air pocket and its possible bust. He proposes that in spite of the fact that the bust was terrible for a few speculators, it ended up being great in opening up worldwide markets. The overcapacity which created the bust additionally delivered low costs for broadcast communications, subsequently empowering players from littler monetary districts to partake in a diversion generally saved for greater players. Friedman depicts a few cases of various firms in these districts that have developed to give innovation administrations to American business. One illustration, including an Indian firm that does fundamental government form work for an American bookkeeping organization, mirrors his view that despite the fact that cost points of interest are critical, the genuine criticalness are the aggressive extents and advancements made conceivable by this new innovation. A standout amongst the most imperative acumens of his book is that Americans ought to become accustomed to the way that the United States won't long remain the most grounded player on the field. From my perspective, the United States have severely required a decent measurement of lowliness, and these worldwide movements Friedman recognizes guarantee to move us that way. While at the same time numerous entries point toward the approach of an arrangement of worldwide collaboration where nobody player claims predominance, numerous others expect a win-lose situation, in which Americans will be ruled by the Indians and Chinese on the off chance that they don't start acting responsibly. Friedman begins one of his parts with a short relating of the end result for America's past world strength in b-ball, portraying it as an extraordinary allegory for what is going on in the worldwide economy. Rather than getting a handle on the new levelness of the worldwide financial framework, he wishes for the radiance days when the United States was still big boss. He composes again and again as though the main decision Americans have is to play and win, or to be failures. This inclination is especially plainly obvious in his regular references to the assurance of high-stakes rivalry. "There is no opportunity to rest; we need to work harder; the Europeans are reprobate since they esteem having more occasions." Friedman composes just as this isn't a choice, however there are decisions, or there should be. In the event that the present framework decreases a considerable lot of those decisions, maybe we should change the framework. Globalization is about proficiency. Be that as it may, as Friedman concedes, there's a whole other world to it than that. He considers the burdens and drawbacks in globalization in the section titled "The Great Sorting Out," yet despite everything he appears to be hesitant to genuinely investigate the results. Friedman appears to be unwilling to recognize that the framework is fundamentally influenced by worldwide political structures or the nonattendance thereof. For instance, he says the requirement for the United States to build up a vitality freedom approach, particularly to adapt to the normal colossal increments in the interest for vitality by China and India. Be that as it may, a large portion of this dialog happens in a part on the most proficient method to kick off American science and innovation instruction so we can remain focused. Friedman completes an entirely great job of recognizing globalization's effect on specialists. He perceives that the world isn't yet extremely level yet on the grounds that there are as yet a huge number of individuals who are not ready to contend in the worldwide market. In any case, he is as yet hesitant to point at auxiliary issues. Friedman offers an assessment of how the non-equitable political structures of the Middle East do exclude a significant part of the populace who live there from the advantages of extension and change. I should believe that we require more than trust; The United States needs to create open approaches that have worldwide achieve, that verify that in any event the key players are at the worldwide eating table can agreeably address a portion of the outstanding issues. On the off chance that the cost of these approaches delivers lost effectiveness, we ought to have a genuine discussion about this exchange off, as opposed to expecting that productivity dependably wins.>GET ANSWER