This paper investigates whether incarceration has an effect on political orientation, addressing the hypothesis that the experience of incarceration also shapes the political behavior and attitudes of those who have been confined (Manza, Uggen 2006; Clear 2007; Travis 2005). The primary aim of the research is to identify what role, if at all, the penal system plays in how incarcerated individuals think about politics. The data relied on to reach conclusions about the incarcerated population derives from voluntary responses to a survey implemented within a company that hires formerly and currently incarcerated persons. I find that the majority of the sample I surveyed became more politically liberal as a result of incarceration and a vast majority want to participate in the political process. These findings corroborate my hypotheses regarding the effects of incarceration on political beliefs, but contradict my assumption regarding the effect of social capital on their desire to participate in politics.

Realistically, everyone should either be in jail or in court for crimes that everybody
commits. Outside of the house, there are people speeding, jaywalking, littering, sharing
medication, and driving without seat belts. Inside the house, people are downloading
music/movies, drinking while underage, using (and abusing) social media while under the age of
18, and reading another person’s mail. With so much of a focus on serious crimes, or felonies,
people tend to forget about the everyday actions in America that are also illegal. For example, a
police officer may not do anything if several cars are going well over the speed limit on the
highway, because it is normalized. This paper explores two sides of this issue: the psychological
side and the legal side. The goal is to find out how culpable people really are for their actions
when they do not have the mental intent that the they are determined to have in court. All human
behavior will be divided into two sections (people with non-extreme mental disorders and people
who have total control over their behavior). First, I dive into the complexity of anxiety,
depression, and ADHD, and explain how these disorders will subtly change someone’s behavior.
Next, I examine how actions like speeding and jaywalking and explain how certain illegal
actions have become so normalized that people may not be very guilty, even when they are
knowingly committing these crimes. I use different misdemeanors as examples for each of these
types of behaviors to argue why people should be more culpable (aggravating factors) or less
culpable (mitigating factors) because of their respective predispositions. Finally, I discuss issues
of fixing the criminal justice system such as: how to make all punishments fair/accurate, how to
fix the public’s distrust towards the law, and how to stop these normalized illegal behaviors for
all people, regardless of mental health or intent.

With the advancement of modern technology, antibiotics and vaccinations have allowed humans to live longer. Deadly infections like strep throat and measles are now considered an inconvenience. The main reason for this phenomenon is the medical revolution of the 20th century. Although Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin in 1929, the full potential of antibiotics was not recognized until the 1940’s. This decade marked the commercialization of penicillin and opened possibilities for new classes of medications like corticosteroids. By the 21st century, pharmaceutical companies perfected the craft of antibiotics and designed them to treat specific infections. Consequently, as humans live longer, chronic illness has become more prevalent in contemporary society. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), chronic diseases are the “leading cause of mortality in the world representing 60% of all deaths”. Contrary to popular opinion, chronic diseases are more prevalent in developed nations such as Europe and America. By 2025, it is estimated that nearly half of the American population (49%) “will be affected by a chronic disease”.
My personal experience with chronic illness served as inspiration for my thesis. At the age of five, I was diagnosed with severe asthma. The following year, I was hospitalized with pneumonia for nearly a month. Despite my health issues, I had a supportive family and grew up relatively well. During my freshman year of college, I hardly experienced any respiratory or allergy problems. Unfortunately, this time period was very short-lived. Due to rapid expansion, the natural flora and fauna of the desert has changed significantly within the last decade. Throughout the remainder of my undergraduate experience, I had a series of respiratory relapses that resulted in numerous medical withdrawals. In addition to health problems, I discovered the college environment poses unique challenges for students with chronic illnesses. Ultimately, this led me to delve deeper into this topic for my thesis.

When considering the differing worlds of moral ambiguity and the dismantling of moral absolutism, it’s clear that the two concepts work hand-in-hand. With the former expanding the grey area between good and bad while the latter questions whether or not the extremities of good and bad exist in the first place, it becomes transparent (while examining the world through this viewpoint) that there are trade-offs in actions. This creative literature, Boy Mimics Man, explores this very concept of moral ambiguity. Can the past be enough to justify present or future actions?

Second, is/can religion be used as a lens to justify objectively oppressive things. With the novel set in 2027, this novel assumes complicity played out leading to a dystopian future where being gay and queer is illegal. Religion is the justifying indicator to push for advocacies that do more harm than good. But the objectively bad act is justifiable through the good lens of religious pursuit. With that said, is moral ambiguity used in a way to mask atrocities or justify them?


This creative writing piece is the set-up to moral ambiguity and the twists and turns that the protagonist will eventually take. To survive and thrive in this culture, what do we have to do to hide? When it comes to the exploration of religion, what components of religion justify treating people like second-class citizens? Or, what components of religion do we use unfairly to push an ideology that holistically acts against the best interest of the people?

This paper looks to examine the person of Boethius in order to illuminate his position as an instrumental influence, a “bridge”, between Greek and Roman sources and posterity, in particular, the Scholastics of the late medieval period. To do this it follows a three part arrangement: Part 1 offers biographical information regarding Boethius so as to familiarize the reader into his person and achievements. Part II examines historical evidence and connections that examine Boethius’s influences and influencers so as to show why he was so important to those who followed him. The third, and last part, is my attempt at a commentary of Boethius’s Consolation in an effort to revive this traditional method so prevalent in Boethius’s time. The paper is then concluded emphasizing the merits of Boethius and what this work aimed to achieve.

Experimentation is as vital to literature as it is to the sciences. Experimentation through narrative is an evolutionary process that develops the art of storytelling through changing mediums, formats and forms of linearity. Challenging conceptual norms of narrative has resulted in a new genre characterized by interactive nonconventional structures, and the necessity of reading with nontrivial effort. The term ergodic was applied to literature first in Espen J. Aarseths 1997 study Cybertext: Perspectives on Ergodic Literature. In its simplest terms, ergodic literature requires nontrivial effort to transverse the text, as opposed to nonergodic literature, which would be the majority of traditionally formatted and conventionally read literature that requires no extraneous responsibilities of the reader (Aarseth, 1997). The qualities that necessitate a heightened requirement of nontrivial effort vary widely. Literary works like Doug Dorst’s Ship of Theseus (2013) integrates supplemental materials, and notes transcribed in the margins connected to the multiple narratives within the actual pages of the book. Some books such as Mark Z. Danielewski’s House of Leaves (2000) utilize coded messages and hidden information that contribute to the atmosphere of the narrative. These intricacies enclose information that constructs a veritable labyrinth, containing details and material not easily found but ultimately pivotal to the comprehension of the text. And while completion may be a goal of the standard text, it may never even be intended for works such as these. Throughout this discussion I intend to contest that House of Leaves is an apex of literature and experimental narrative. Furthermore, I will highlight the importance of experimentation in narratives and its role in the development of various modes and mediums while analyzing prominent works and themes that fall under the category of experimental narrative or ergodic literature.

Executive orders are legally-binding proclamations issued by Presidents in their own independent capacity as executor of the nation's laws. Despite there being no mention of these orders in the Constitution, they have been implemented since Washington's presidency, with some Presidents issuing over a thousand. Many contemporary legal scholars fear that this practice has gotten out of control over the past 80 years or so, resulting in an inappropriate usurping of Congress' legislative power by the executive branch. In this essay, I will use a chronology of executive orders from across the relevant time period to assess the historical validity of this claim. Additionally, I will use federal court decisions that have overturned executive orders to examine whether anything unconstitutional or otherwise legally improper has taken place over the time period in question. Ultimately, I will conclude that while the legislative authority wielded by the executive branch has grown, this expansion has adequate legal justification and political safeguards until such time that the judiciary provides more robust guidelines.

This project discusses a Medical-Legal Partnership (MLP) between the Arizona Legal Center (ALC) and the Student Health Outreach for Wellness (SHOW) clinic. The ALC is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) legal aid clinic located in at the Beus Center for Law and Society alongside the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law at Arizona State University. They are a community- based legal aid service that helps low income and underserved populations find answers and solutions to their legal questions through free of charge consultations. The ALC is primarily operated by student volunteers and volunteer attorneys. The SHOW clinic is a tri-university, student-led community-based project that works to provide whole person health care for poor, low income, or underserved individuals in Phoenix, Arizona. I was given the opportunity to join in this effort through my role as an undergraduate student volunteer at the ALC during the summer of 2017. Planning and coordination between these two entities has been ongoing, and after several months of work, the partnership has reached a more formative state. Our team estimates our partnership will be implemented into clinical facilities and operational by the Fall of 2018. By the summer of 2018, the SHOW clinic will be providing medical services at three locations: the Human Services Campus clinic, Crossroads Flower clinic, and Crossroads Mesa clinic. These clinical sites are where the MLP between the ALC and SHOW will operate. The ALC will provide legal consultations at each facility once a month, every month during the fall semester of 2018. They will also conduct educational workshops for facility patients once a month, every month. The following paper discusses: 1) a brief history of healthcare delivery and healthcare trends in the United States, 2) discusses what Medical-Legal Partnerships are and why they should be used, 3) specific health needs in the state of Arizona, 4) the developmental process of this specific partnership, 4) the challenge of medical and legal confidentiality, 5) and a proposed timeline of how we intend to successfully implement our partnership at clinical sites.

In an attempt to fix the problem of an abundance of individuals with mental health issues in the criminal justice system, mental health courts have begun to develop as the newest form of problem-solving court. These courts aim to keep individuals with easily treatable mental health issues out of prison and connect them with the treatment that they need. This paper is a literature review examining the development and implementation of mental health courts across the United States. The paper first explains the essential elements to a mental health court and how they function. The main claim addressed is that: through the institution of statewide standards as well as the blanket adoption and regular measurement of national performance measures in each accredited mental health court, the large-scale and longitudinal study of mental health courts will become more practical. When these types of studies become more prevalent, the most effective practices of mental health courts will be identified and innovation will follow. The paper develops this claim by explaining the state and national regulations currently in place and the importance of standardization. It then moves into the national performance measures that should then be examined by courts once state standards are in place. The paper then explains the importance of longitudinal study to the proper collection of the significant data needed to solidify the institution of successful mental health courts. By identifying the most effective practices in mental health courts and standardizing them, this system will be able to: better help the individuals involved get appropriate treatment, promote public safety, and more effectively use taxpayer money.