Below you will briefly describe a previous, or current, relationship for each of the stages found in Knapp’s Model of Relational Development from Chapter 8 located in the “Modules Section”. The relationship you choose could be an acquaintance, co-worker, family member, friend, or romantic partner. You may also choose a different relationship for each stage; you don’t have to use the same one for all of them.
Your responses don’t need to be lengthy. They can be a few sentences or so. An example would be: “Stage 2: Experimenting – My wife and I were in the experimenting stage years ago when we first met. I remember getting to know each other and trying to find out what common interests we had. It was exciting and a bit nerve-racking, but in the end it was a good stage for us.”
You can write a bit more if you want, that is fine, just not necessary. You will have a week to complete the activity. It will close Sunday at 11:59pm.
Describe an example from a relationship you have experienced for each of the stages below (again, you can find descriptions for each stage in Chapter 8 in the Modules Section):
Stage 2: Experimenting
Stage 3: Intensifying
Stage 5: Bonding
Stage 8: Stagnating
Stage 9: Avoiding
Stage 10: Terminating
services in non emergency medical circumstances because emergency departments see all patients, regardless of insurance status (New England Healthcare Institute 5). Over the long term, restrictive policies that fail to provide access to comprehensive health care have contributed to unjustifiable health discrepancies between refugees and undocumented immigrants versus citizens. Though there is a well documented “migrant effect” in which individuals driven to migrate for economic purposes are generally younger and healthier than the population at large, there is an equally well documented flip side in which asylum seekers and refugees typically are generally less healthy (Bradby and Humphris). Many of the main health problems affecting refugee populations are attributed to living in refugee camps and side effects of undertaking long and often dangerous journeys (i.e. malnutrition, infectious diseases, trauma symptoms) (Bradby and Humphris). In Germany, migrants have a 40% lower age standardized overall mortality than the majority population (Brzoska et al.). Another study in Germany examining illegality as a risk factor for poor health at a specific Berlin clinic found “… the effects of illegal status resulted in four areas of disparities: 1) limits to the overall quality and quantity of care for mothers and infants; 2) delayed presentation and difficulties accessing a regular supply of medication for patients with chronic illnesses; 3) difficulties in accessing immediate medical attention for unpredictable injuries and other acute health concerns; and 4) a lack of mental health care options for generalized stress and anxiety affecting health” (Castañeda). Essentially, the problematic nature of inadequate healthcare for refugees is twofold; not only are rights and dignity being infringed upon through grotesquely scant accessibility, but this injustice is exacerbated by the increased vulnerability associated with illegality and lack of defined status as a whole. For displaced individuals, the struggle to find improvements in living conditions and higher quality services is evidently not as straightforward as simply migrating. Though healthcare is acknowledged as a right, that right is not clearly evident in context of ground level implementation. In the U.S. and Germany alike, current laws have left already vulnerable migrants without access to many fundamental services, with degradation of overall health and systematic efficy issues following suit. Though there are legitimate arguments and perspectives on many sides of the migration debate, what is unequivocally not justifiable is the existence of a medical lower echelon of millions of individuals who have access only to the bare bones of health services.>GET ANSWER