Here you can read our ultimate free guide on the CMRJ-501 Week Seven Discussion: The “Write” Question and its solution.
Instructions of CMRJ-501 Week Seven Discussion
W7: The “Write” Question
Please answer both of the following Discussion Posts:
Class,
As identified by research regarding both traditional and online education, higher forms of learning take place when students are able to take an active part in curriculum development.
Subsequently, this week the Discussion posts are a bit different from those earlier weeks.
Rather than me posting a series of questions, each of you will instead develop a graduate level question (i.e., not simply one which can be answered via regurgitation and no original thought), and then you will answer the very question you composed.
1: Compose a graduate level question related to the relationship/connection between social policy and capital punishment as a deterrent to criminal behavior and/or controversies associated with the insanity defense covered in class thus far.
Note: In forming your question, one of the following verbs must be used: argue, interpret, assess, defend, propose, develop, analyze, or compare.
2: Fully answer the question you have created.
Note: This Discussion is directly connected to the following Course Learning Objective:
LO3. Judge the impact of criminological theory and research on social policy
LO6. Evaluate the use of capital punishment as a deterrent to criminal behavior
LO9. Examine the controversies associated with the insanity defense
Module Objectives:
MO1: Analyze the impact of new criminology theories on public policy.
MO2: Critique the influence on capital punishment that criminology theories provide.
Instructions: Now as always, within your post, please place the first Discussion response (i.e., your draft question this week) on top of the second Discussion (i.e., your response to the question you composed), i.e., both Discussion responses should be in the same post within the Discussion.
Again, this is an approach that teaching research has shown to be very capable of not only including a much wider variety of topics and discussions but to also aid enhanced learning for all.
COPYRIGHT 2023 APUS, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Step-By-Step Guide CMRJ-501 Week Seven Discussion: The “Write” Question
Introduction to CMRJ-501 Week Seven Discussion
The CMRJ-501 Week Seven Discussion: The “Write” Question requires you to compose a graduate-level question that explores the relationship between social policy and capital punishment as a deterrent to criminal behavior or the controversies associated with the insanity defense. You will then answer the question you created comprehensively. The goal of this CMRJ-501 How-To Guide is to demonstrate your ability to critically analyze and articulate complex criminological concepts supported by scholarly evidence.
1: Compose a graduate-level question related to the relationship/connection between social policy and capital punishment as a deterrent to criminal behavior and controversies associated with the insanity defense covered in class thus far. Note: In forming your question, one of the following verbs must be used: argue, interpret, assess, defend, propose, develop, analyze, or compare.
Crafting the Question
To start the CMRJ-501 Week Seven Discussion: The “Write” Question, we must formulate a question explaining the relationship between social policy and capital punishment as a deterrent to criminal behavior or the controversies associated with the insanity defense.
- Review class materials on social policy, capital punishment, and the insanity defense.
- Identify critical themes, debates, and controversies discussed in class.
- Choose one of the specified verbs: argue, interpret, assess, defend, propose, develop, analyze, or compare.
- Ensure the verb aligns with the analytical depth and critical thinking required for a graduate-level question.
- Combine your understanding of the scope with the selected verb to craft a precise and focused question.
Example
Analyze the controversies surrounding the insanity defense and its legal and social policy implications.
2: Fully answer the question you have created.
Answering the Question
After formulating the question, we will answer it.
- Begin with an introduction that restates the question and outlines your approach to answering it.
- Divide the response into clear sections, each addressing a specific aspect of the question.
- Use scholarly sources, including peer-reviewed articles, books, and class materials, to support your arguments.
- Incorporate real-life examples and case studies to illustrate key points.
- Critically analyze the evidence, highlighting strengths, weaknesses, and implications.
- Summarize the key findings of your analysis.
- Provide a reasoned conclusion that directly answers the question.
- Discuss broader implications for criminological theory, policy, and practice.
Example
The insanity defense, which allows defendants to argue that they should not be held criminally responsible for their actions due to mental illness, is one of the most controversial aspects of the criminal justice system. Critics argue that it can be misused to avoid accountability, while proponents claim it is a necessary protection for those who are not culpable due to their mental state. This essay will analyze these controversies and discuss legal and social policy implications.
The primary controversy surrounding the insanity defense is its potential for abuse. Critics argue that defendants may feign mental illness to escape punishment, undermining the integrity of the justice system. High-profile cases, such as that of John Hinckley Jr., who attempted to assassinate President Ronald Reagan, have fueled public skepticism. Hinckley was found not guilty because of insanity, leading to widespread outrage and calls for reform. Critics argue that such outcomes can erode public confidence in the criminal justice system and its ability to deliver justice.
On the other hand, proponents of the insanity defense emphasize the importance of distinguishing between those who commit crimes due to mental illness and those who do so with complete understanding and intent. They argue that punishing individuals who are not mentally capable of understanding their actions or controlling their behavior is both unjust and ineffective. The insanity defense serves as a crucial safeguard for protecting the rights and dignity of individuals with severe mental illnesses.
The implications of these controversies for legal and social policy are significant. One key issue is the standard used to determine insanity. The M’Naghten Rule, which focuses on whether the defendant knew right from wrong at the time of the crime, is criticized for being too narrow and excluding individuals with significant cognitive or emotional impairments. Alternative standards, such as the Model Penal Code’s substantial capacity test, offer a broader approach but also face criticism for potentially being too lenient.
Another important implication is treating and rehabilitating individuals found not guilty because of insanity. Legal and social policies must ensure that these individuals receive appropriate mental health treatment rather than merely being incarcerated. This requires a robust mental health infrastructure, adequate funding, and coordination between the criminal justice system and mental health services. Failure to provide adequate treatment can lead to recidivism and harm individuals and society.
In conclusion, the controversies surrounding the insanity defense highlight the tension between ensuring justice and protecting the rights of individuals with mental illness. While concerns about misuse are valid, it is crucial to maintain protections for those who are genuinely incapable of being held criminally responsible. Legal and social policies must balance these competing interests, ensuring that the insanity defense is applied fairly and that individuals found not guilty because of insanity receive the treatment they need. This analysis underscores the complexity of the issue and the need for ongoing dialogue and reform to address the evolving challenges in the criminal justice system.
Closing
The CMRJ-501 Week Seven Discussion: The “Write” Question encourages you to engage deeply with criminological concepts and debates, developing your ability to formulate and answer complex questions. By crafting a focused question and providing a comprehensive, evidence-based response, you will enhance your analytical skills and contribute to a deeper understanding of key issues in criminology. This Owlisdom How-To Guide underscores the importance of critical thinking, structured analysis, and scholarly rigor in addressing multifaceted criminological topics. In the upcoming module of CMRJ, we will explore Final Exam.
