Understanding Medical And Social Model Of Disability Social Work Essay

Understanding Medical And Social Model Of Disability Social Work Essay The understanding of disability is still unknown to many people. The way people see disability have different meaning to the way society see disability. Different cultures have different meaning to the term disability. There are some people, who consider people with disability are paying for their sins. It is believed that they must have done something bad in their pervious life and are paying for it in this life. Because of some cultural differences, they mostly are labelled to be look through negative perspectives. Swain (2003) says that what term societies are meant to use? Disable People or People With Disability. Using the term People with Disability is considered more human and more positive compared to Disabled People it makes people feel part of the society instead of being left out. To make people with disability feel more part of the society the government bought laws so that everyone was equally, the DDA Act 1995. However it got change in 2005. The (Disability Discrimination Act) DDA Act 2005 states that as having a disability for the purposes of the DDA where they have a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. (Department of work pension 2005) Yet what can be considered day to day activities? It is not clearly defined correctly as some people with disability could use some part of their body where there are some who can not. Because of this people with disability are often labelled and left out. Calling someone handicap or dump or deaf and dump is being labelled. Being labelled is quite negative towards people with disability. It makes them feel that the society does not consider them equal. This discourages some people to make friends or go out into the society. Shakespeare (2006) explains that labelling is viewed negatively in the disability communities. It is because, people with disability do not want to be labelled and ask other people for help. Some people do not want to ask for charity. If people do need help, how do they come across it? Do they have to provide evidence that they are disabled? Which moves to the medical and the social model of disability? The medical model of disability is sees the disabled person as the problem. They are meant to adapt and fit in to the world and if its not possible then they are shut away. (Rieser 2002) The social model of disability the social model is a concept which recognises that some individuals have physical or psychological differences which can affect their ability to function in societies.  (Brain.HE 2006) The medical model is used for those that need help. It is with the medical model that people can get support. If individual needs help from the government and need money or any other support they need to go through a series of process where they would have to under assessment to see if they can qualify for help. The medical model is used through examination or testing or by professional expert which will then give evidence if you have a disability or not. The advantage of the medical model is that it can provide support to those that need help. It can provide finical support and can also provide information to those individual that need operation and can also provide guidance to a cure. The medical model can also share understanding towards others as it can make other people understand the similar dilemmas that they may be facing as well. However, a cure was something that could help in understanding that the medical model and gave people the belief that their disability would go away. Yet like any other model that have been discovered the medical model has its fault. For example in the medical model the individual is the one that has an abnormality. That the disability is in the person and the only way is to cure it. Another problem with the medical model was that the environment was ignored. If someone had an accident, it was considered a tragedy yet if someone had been born with impairment, it was considered a disability. The medical model also considered that they are independent on themselves and will always need help from others or charities. It made them look pitiful and helpless. However, the problem was that the medical model is still dominated because, to know what is happening to an individual, they need to be asses. It was also used more as a critique than by the medical professional themselves. It is the job of the professional to find a cure and to help those that need help. Because of the medical model, people began to think differently and the social model comes into process. The social model of disability was the big idea, in the British disability movement. (Shakespeare and Watson 2003 p3 It was a starting point to those who felt that the medical model did not help. It gave those individual the point where they did not need to depend on others. The social model of disability was there to help people with disability feel part of the community. With the model, it can overcome barriers such as labelling and any other barriers that society can come up with. (Crow 1996) pp66) states that the social model was a means to escape. It was meant for those individuals who wanted to overcome any issues regarding disability. The people see that being disabled is not a bad thing. That you can do many day to day activity like any other person. It makes a better social relationship with the society. However, like the medical model, the social model had its fault. Where an individual needs help, now believes that the social model is making them feel that they are too being pitied that they can not do anything by themselves. The model is important because it enables the identification of a political strategy and its main focus was to try and remove barriers, which helped, because the medical model did not try to remove barriers such as external ones. The social model also focuses on the influence of the family, the income, the education and any other factors as well. However, there is now a shift. Once where the medical model was dominated and was the answer to most questions has transfer to the social model. But, here lies the problem as well. The social model is now considered outdate as well. Union of the Physical Impairment Against Segregation (UPIAS) called for an alternative model of disability. Mark, 1999 said that the social model argues that the key issues are that the individual must have a positive identity as disabled. With this it showed that unless you have a label, you can not be given help. This shows that, even though the social model is there to help, the medical model still dominates and now the social model is outdated because people with disability do not want to be looked at as needy. Tom Shakespeare is one of those who believe that the social model is an outdated and that need much more updating. In the journal research in social science and disability he wrote an article dedicating that the social model of disability is now outdated. He explains that the model needs to be improved from new direction. It needs to be improving as social cultures are need and different views are need as its more focus on the British people and needs to be view from different culture as well. The social model of disability is also being criticised by Grabe and Peters (2004) who explain that the social model needs to recognise the significance of bodily experience. That it is not easy to distinguish between people with disability and people without disability. They also explain that the model does not cover everything. The model is there to make a person feel important about them and that they would feel that the model is helping them. Oliver 2009 (p49) criticise that, there are five important things have come from the social model of disability. The first one is that the model does not consider the realities of impairment, as the model is based on misunderstanding because the model is not based on personal experience. The second is that the pain of impairment and disability is ignored by the society. The third is that it is unable to incorporate social sates and social division. The fourth is issues of otherness. This is where it is viewed from other persons perspective, and the final is that the social model is inadequate. This shows that the social model of disability now is outdated as there are many problems that model is facing. In conclusion, it is shown that the social model is outdated and the society needs a new view. But there lies that problem. Because where the social model was a new thing now has become outdated, what will happen when there might be a third model. Will they consider the new model outdates when its time will come. It seems to be going in a cycle. The social model of disability has its fault like the medical model disability. However, unlike the social model the medical model of disability, it is still dominated despite the trend towards the social model, the medical model is needed for those individual who need support finically and support from the government. Yet at the same time they do not want to become dependent on the government as well. This also causes the issues, as the social model of disability is there to support those individual who need to feel that they want to do something for their lives and not just depend on others. Author such as Liz Crow, Tom Shakespeare and Michael Oliver, all believe that the social model of disability is outdated. Their factors are that the social model of disability does not cover all factors that are necessary and needed. They believe that the model needs to be looked at a new angle or modify or even bring in a new model, as the current one is giving problems. If the society does bring in a new model will it not criticize the model as well? As all it seems that people do is criticise that this model is not good or that model is not good. True the social model of disability needs a new change, but despite the model being outdated, the model still helps those individual feel better about them. The model has given encouragement to those individual with disability, the ability to give something back to the society. The medical model of disability is there for the medical professional as guidance in attempt to find a cure as the medical model of disability gives facts only and the social model is there for support and moral and encouragement and is effective to those people with disability. There will be some individual that will complain about their situation compared to others, and will say that they need extra support, but what these people need to understand is that they need to stand up and become braver. True, there have been cases where individuals with disability have had hardships and have had no support, but what they need to understand is that the models do not run their lives; they merely are guidance on how they should live morally and finically. The medical model of disability gives facts and the social model gives support. So despite the social model being outdated, the social model of disability makes it feel to those individual people that they have support that they need, thus the model is still affective. Word Count: 2000

The Role of the Individual: A look inside the Galactic World of Star Wa

Star Wars takes place a long time ago in a galaxy that is unlike anything modern society could conceive as being authentic. It exists in a time before Earth was even thought of. At the start of the movie, a civil war is occurring between the Rebel Alliance and The Galactic Empire. A leader of the Rebel Alliance, Princess Leia, stole plans from the Galactic Empire (also known as the Imperial forces) for the Death Star. The Death Star was a very heavily armed space station with weapons capable of destroying an entire planet. After stealing the plans, Princess Leia sent two droids, R2-D2 and C-3PO, to the planet Tatooine with a copy of the plans in R2-D2's memory bank. The droids are then captured and sold to a farming family. The nephew of the farming family was Luke Skywalker. Skywalker decided to clean the droids and triggered a message from Princess Leia requesting assistance from an Obi-Wan Kenobi. Skywalker doesn't know who that is but he does know of a Ben Kenobi. The next day he seeks out Ben Kenobi and Ben introduces himself as Obi-Wan Kenobi. He reveals to Skywalker that he was a former Jedi Knight. A Jedi Knight is a peacekeeper in the Star Wars galaxy. This is the point in the movie where some action begins. Kenobi reveals to Luke that Luke's father, Anakin Skywalker, was also a Jedi Knight. Ben and Anakin fought together in the galactic wars. Luke is told his father was killed by Darth Vader. Kenobi gives Luke his father's light saber. Kenobi views the message that the droid R2-D2 contains. In the message, Princess Leia begs Kenobi to take the plans stored in R2-D2's memory bank to the planet of Alderaan. Princess Leia wishes for her father to analyze the Death Star plans. Luke is asked by Kenobi to accompany him on... ...TH 32). The light saber is much more than just a weapon in the Star Wars galaxy. The lightsaber must be used actively. It is not like a magical amulet or talisman that provides passive protection against evil. It is something that must be actively used and the way it is used can be for good or evil. The wielder holds a lot of power when it comes to a light saber. If Luke uses it for good, the light side of the force, then the light saber is a symbol of justice. However, if he uses it for evil, the dark side of the force, then it is a symbol of destruction. The light saber being given to Luke is just one of Kenobi's responsibilities. The other responsibility of Kenobi is to help Luke find his place in society by introducing him to the Force. In order for Luke to understand what the force is about, Kenobi must guide him how it is used for both good and evil (MYTH 36).

Government Funding Stem Cell Research Essay

Stem cell research is a relatively new science that is the source of much medical promise yet much controversy as well. The type of stem cells required, embryonic stem cells, are only obtainable one way: through the destruction of human embryos. In 1996, the Dickey-Wicker Amendment was passed, making the government unable to fund any research where human embryos are created or destroyed. At first the amendment was a minor obstacle the government had to work around to still get the stem cell scientists the money they needed. It wasn’t until August 23, 2010 that Judge Lamberth’s ruling halted all government funding for stem cell research. Today, stem cell research does not receive government funds as the research, though potentially life-saving, crosses moral and religious barriers that inhibit its growth as a science and as a gateway towards future medical breakthroughs. With the opposing arguments in mind, I feel the government should fund stem cell research as doing so will help speed up the research process and get us closer to saving lives and ending human suffering. There are two types of stem cells, adult stem cells (found in adults) and embryonic stem cells (found in embryos). Although both possess at least some ability to replicate and develop into mature specialized cells, such as skin cells, heart cells, or nerve cells, the adult stem cells are much less numerous than embryonic and generally much more limited in the types of cells they can form. Embryonic stem cells are pluripotent, meaning that they can form any kind of tissue and any type of cell. Embryonic stem cells are currently not used for medical treatments yet are the source of much medical promise in the near future. Obtainable only through the destruction of human embryos, embryonic stem cells can be viewed as life savers or the products of life destruction. A type of adult stem cell, the hematopoietic stem cell, is already widely used to treat leukemia; in fact, they are the only kind of stem cells currently used to treat diseases. Though past and current applications of stem cell therapy with humans may seem a bit underwhelming, scientists around the globe agree that stem cell research is worth the attention and will bring much relief to victims of many diseases. The main reason for government not to fund stem cell research is that it funds or at least encourages the destruction of human embryos. Judge Lamberth severed the government’s loophole used to fund stem cell research, appealing to the numerous United States citizens who do not want their tax dollars going towards the destruction of human embryos. Judge Lamberth concludes that â€Å"the fact that embryonic-stem-cell research ‘involves multiple steps does not mean that each step is a separate ‘piece of research’ that may be federally funded, provided the step does not result in the destruction of an embryo’† (Keiper). The issue here arises from the belief that human embryos are potential humans, and therefore, the destruction of human embryos should be considered the destruction of human life. Adam Keiper, the editor of the New Atlantis, states that â€Å"presuming the incalculable moral significance of human life, was certainly the intent of the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, and should be the aim of any decent society† (Keiper). He believes that the government should not fund stem cell research regardless of which part of the research it is funding; such funding of any research that involves the process of the destruction of human embryos, or potential human beings (as some may see them), incentivizes just that. With that in mind, one’s position on the stem cell research may be decided on simply weighing the potential lives saved by conducting the research with the potential lives saved by not conducting the research. That decision relies heavily on one’s morals, religious beliefs, and whether or not human embryos should be considered potential humans beings. Many embryos created through in-virto fertilization (IVF), a process that replicates conception, are never used by the patients of the IVF banks; they are spares and would never become humans without the consent of the parents of the embryo, or embryos. To answer the question of â€Å"whether or not human embryos should be considered potential human beings†, one must first answer the question: What makes a human? A simple answer to the question would be â€Å"anything that, under the right conditions, could become a human. † However, the crucial step in the development of a human is the decision of the parent; without parental consent, those spare embryos will never become humans. Thus, the embryos have no future as a person and should not be seen as potential life. The parents of the unneeded embryos have the option to donate the spare embryos to stem cell research or have them discarded. Laura Bothwell is a doctoral candidate in the history and ethics of public health and medicine in the Department of Sociomedical Sciences at Columbia University. She believes that â€Å"it is a great gift to humanity that the embryos left over from the assisted reproduction cycles can be used for research that has the potential to alleviate human suffering† (Bothwell). Hundreds of thousands of spare embryos in IVF banks have no future as humans, making it unwise to not use them for stem cell research. In which case, the argument that the government is funding the destruction of potential human life is fundamentally flawed. We need to stop worrying about the lives of those who will never live and begin focusing on the lives of those already living. In the novel â€Å"Brave New World† by Aldous Huxley, the world has been transformed from what it is today. Humans are grown in factories with specific traits to fill specific roles in the society. Obviously, this is not the case today, and most would agree that is a good thing. However, we are slowly beginning to see that it may be possible. The possibility of growing our own human beings is scary to think of. Looming deep in the minds of stem cell researchers and scientists and anyone educated about the science is the fear of what it may lead to. Could it lead us to becoming human engineers? Could it lead to our humanity slip away as we wander into a life where no one is special, where not God but we are the creators of human beings? It may not be a commonly heard question as most would label it farfetched. Therefore, as I support the government funding stem cell research, I also understand the need for it to be monitored. Going into the science of stem cells and still today we do not completely know what will become of it in the distant future. â€Å"President [Bush] declared his intention to name a President’s Council to monitor stem cell research, to recommend appropriate guidelines and regulations, and to consider medical and ethical ramifications of biomedical innovation† (President’s Council on Bioethics). Another reason for the government to not fund stem cell research is that doing so would speed up the research while many, including those of the President’s Council on Bioethics, think it should be monitored and restricted as to prevent it from getting out of hand. Stem cell research is like a fire, some people want to see it grow and prove itself a source of warmth, some people want to see it diminish until there is nothing left; most want to keep it under control and prevent it from becoming a raging inferno. Moral dilemmas and deep inner-looming fears aside, stem cell research has a promising potential that cannot be ignored. Researchers believe that stem cells can be used to treat a large variety of diseases and organ failure. They could be used to create organ transplants that will not be rejected by the patient. Stem cells have the ability to save countless lives across the world. They may be used in the treatment of neurological diseases, such as Parkinson’s disease or Alzheimer’s disease. They may be important for delivering targeted gene therapy. They have the ability to treat liver diseases and metabolic disorders such as Gaucher’s disease. Hematopoietic stem cells are currently used in treating leukemia, a reasonable and well established and accepted method of treatment. Ruth Kirchstein, a former acting director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), notes that â€Å"the ability to use stem cells in disease treatments by simple transplantation makes them a feasible therapeutic approach†, and â€Å"with limited supply of organs for transplants, stem cells are increasingly viewed as an attractive alternative for treating failing organs† (Kirchstein). If the only cost of funding stem cell research were the loss of embryos that had no future human life possibility than the numerous possible benefits of the research should render the cost insignificant. Stem cell research holds much promise yet is deprived of the funding necessary to fulfill this promise. If funded, within years we could be making medical breakthroughs and saving more lives than ever before. Luckily, modern science has unlocked a new possibility, one that could put an end to moral and ethical disputes and put an end to much human suffering. In recent years scientists have made a new discovery, a new way to research stem cells, a way to reprogram skins cells to behave just as embryonic stem cells; they are called induced pluripotent stem cells. This new method of acquiring stem cells breaks no ethical barriers while still giving us access to the life-saving potential of stem cells. In November 2007 a research group in Japan and another in Wisconsin successfully created the induced luripotent stem cells. Initially, the induced pluripotent stem cells had a cancerous tendency that killed some of the mice in the first testing process. However, on November 30, 2007 Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto University, the leader of the Japanese research groups, eliminated the cancerous tendency. â€Å"In the first process, six of the thirty-six mice injected with the cells died of tumors within 100 days, but in the second process, no mice died† (Lewis). Not long after that accomplishment, scientists at Harvard Medical School and Children’s Hospital in Boston created the induced pluripotent stem cells from a human volunteer, adding to the evidence that supports skin cell reprogramming as a promising means of acquiring the valuable stem cells. Andy Lewis, a research editor for the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, declares that â€Å"The breakthrough of inducing skin cells into pluripotent stem cells is an answer to prayer of pro-life advocates, who have long desired an ethical medical solution to combat debilitating diseases and illnesses in society† (Lewis). Induced pluripotent stem cells, being classified as stem cell research, should by all means be funded by the government as it poses no ethical issues and possesses the same potential as human embryonic stem cells do. It is a solution that makes everyone happy. The government should fund stem cell research. Spare embryos with no future as humans should be utilized to improve the lives of those already living. If anything, the government should fund and encourage the creation of induced pluripotent stem cells. Stem cell research has too much potential to not fund, even with taking ethical and moral barriers into consideration. However, we must prevent ourselves from getting carried away; we must monitor the research’s growth, keep it controlled, and, most importantly, maintain our humanity. We can tend to the fire, let it glow brighter than ever, let it provide warmth and comfort for society, but if we let our guard down, if we allow the fire to become bigger than us, a raging, untamable inferno, we may never be able to stomp it out. ?

Overcoming Writers Block With Freewriting

Overcoming Writer's Block With Freewriting Heres how writing without rules can help us overcome writers block. If the prospect of having to write makes you uneasy, consider how one student has learned to cope with the problem: When I hear the word compose, I go berserk. How can I make something out of nothing? Thats not to imply that I have nothing upstairs, just no special talent for organizing thoughts and putting them down on paper. So instead of composing, I simply jot, jot, jot and scribble, scribble, scribble. Then I try to make sense of it all. This practice of jotting and scribbling is called freewriting- that is, writing without rules. If you find yourself searching for a writing topic, start by jotting down the first thoughts that come to mind, no matter how trivial or disconnected they may appear. If you already have at least a general idea of what you will be writing about, put down your first thoughts on that subject. How to Freewrite For five minutes, write non-stop: dont lift your fingers from the keyboard or your pen from the page. Just keep writing. Dont stop to ponder or make corrections or look up a words meaning in the dictionary. Just keep writing. While you are freewriting, forget the rules of formal English. Because you are writing only for yourself at this point, you dont have to worry about sentence structures, spelling or punctuation, organization or clear connections. (All those things will come later.) If you find yourself stuck for something to say, just keep repeating the last word you have written, or write, Im stuck, Im stuck until a fresh thought emerges. After a few minutes, the results may not look pretty, but you will have started writing. Using Your Freewriting What should you do with your freewriting? Well, eventually youll delete it or toss it away. But first, read it over carefully to see if you can find a keyword or phrase or maybe even a sentence or two that can be developed into a longer piece of writing. Freewriting may not always give you specific material for a future essay, but it will help you get into the right frame of mind for writing. Practicing Freewriting Most people need to practice freewriting several times before theyre able to make it work for them effectively. So be patient. Try freewriting as a regular exercise, perhaps three or four times a week, until you find that you can write without rules comfortably and productively.

Free Essays on Mafia

OMERTA? THE HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN MAFIA Throughout history, crime has existed in many different forms and has been committed by not only individuals, but by groups as well. Crime is something that knows no boundaries; it exists in all cultures, is committed by all races, and has existed in all time periods. Crime exists as a part of the economic institution and is a lifestyle for many people. Crime also exists in both organized and un organized forms. Since the early 1900's, "organized" crime has existed in the United States. The following will show where, when, and why the Mafia came to the United States, who organized it in the United States, and how it differed from its origins in the European mafia. By showing this you will see how this specific type of organized crime has In the ninth century, Arab forces occupied Sicily. The native Sicilians were oppressed and took refuge in the surrounding hills. The Sicilians formed a secret society to unite the natives against the Arab and Norman invaders. This secret society was called Mafia after the Arabic word for refuge. The society's intentions were to create a sense of family based on ancestry and Sicilian heritage. In the 1700's, pictures of a black hand were distributed to the wealthy. This was an unspoken request for an amount of money in return for protection. If the money was not paid, the recipients could expect violence such as kidnappings, bombings, and murder. By the nineteenth century, this society grew larger and more criminally oriented. In 1876, Mafia Don Rafael Palizzolo, ran for political office in Sicily. He forced the voters to vote for him under gunpoint. After being elected into office, he promoted Mafia Don Crispi as Prime Minister. Together the two put Sicily under government control an d funneled government funds to the society known as the Mafia. In the 1800's, New Orleans was the largest Mafia site in the United States. It was while investigating the ... Free Essays on Mafia Free Essays on Mafia OMERTA? THE HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN MAFIA Throughout history, crime has existed in many different forms and has been committed by not only individuals, but by groups as well. Crime is something that knows no boundaries; it exists in all cultures, is committed by all races, and has existed in all time periods. Crime exists as a part of the economic institution and is a lifestyle for many people. Crime also exists in both organized and un organized forms. Since the early 1900's, "organized" crime has existed in the United States. The following will show where, when, and why the Mafia came to the United States, who organized it in the United States, and how it differed from its origins in the European mafia. By showing this you will see how this specific type of organized crime has In the ninth century, Arab forces occupied Sicily. The native Sicilians were oppressed and took refuge in the surrounding hills. The Sicilians formed a secret society to unite the natives against the Arab and Norman invaders. This secret society was called Mafia after the Arabic word for refuge. The society's intentions were to create a sense of family based on ancestry and Sicilian heritage. In the 1700's, pictures of a black hand were distributed to the wealthy. This was an unspoken request for an amount of money in return for protection. If the money was not paid, the recipients could expect violence such as kidnappings, bombings, and murder. By the nineteenth century, this society grew larger and more criminally oriented. In 1876, Mafia Don Rafael Palizzolo, ran for political office in Sicily. He forced the voters to vote for him under gunpoint. After being elected into office, he promoted Mafia Don Crispi as Prime Minister. Together the two put Sicily under government control an d funneled government funds to the society known as the Mafia. In the 1800's, New Orleans was the largest Mafia site in the United States. It was while investigating the ...

Sustainable Stakeholder Capitalism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Sustainable Stakeholder Capitalism - Essay Example This is because employing macro level practical reforms will create a systematic integrity in the financial institutions across the globe. This is essential because it will contribute to responsible risk management for the SSC in the present and future. One of the factors that contributed to unethical economic environment of the Great Global Recession is unregulated capitalism. Unregulated capitalism in the field of economics is one of the risk factors contributing to economic crisis. Petrick argue that the irrational market actors whose aim is to fulfill their self-interest and their unethical behaviors employed in accumulating wealth can be one of the challenges to the economy of a state. This is because it creates economic imbalances in a country and this contributes to other associated problem such as poor resource distribution in an economy. The capitalism nature and ineffective managerial education contributed to the global recession; thus non-market and market stakeholders were unable to prevent capitalism. Secondly, poor market-based regulatory solutions in the global economy contributed to economic crisis. The ineffective fiscal and monetary policies failed to reignite residential investments; thus contributed to financial crisis. The government employs poor fiscal policy in regulation of business activities. Moreover, the unregulated marketing principles contributed to poor price determination in many entities. The managers employed poor managerial theories and practices that affected the marketing activities. For instance, the Wall Street banking and other financial banks employed speculative risks that affected the investors. Lastly, overuse of resources due to need of increasing wealth, and this contributed to resource depletion. The resource overuse resulted due to managerial competences whereby many actors wanted to expand and

English Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 2

English - Essay Example Correct dressing needs sufficient time to prepare and the knowledge of correct kind of clothes that fit a particular occasion, event, or situation depending on the persons that one would communicate with or interact with. Another reason why good dressing indicates good personality is that a balanced personality would indicate that a person has enough knowledge on physical appearance. Important aspects in one’s life that need to be developed and developed to prepare one in interacting with other people, through different situations. Preparations therefore, to develop one’s character include the development of intellectual skills, emotional skills, as well as skills in good grooming to make one presentable at all times. Third reason that supports good dressing indicates good personality is that by knowing how to dress correctly, people will give due respect. It would totally be improper to show excellence in mental skills but be sloppy in physical appearance by dressing i n ill-fitted or inappropriate clothes. A businessman or head of a corporation would look bad in presenting the proposals or strategies in a business meeting, for example, if he is seen to be dressed in shorts and t-shirts.