Sociology Discussion Responses Response to Post #

Sociology Discussion Responses Response to Post # Your post raises some very important issues that face the entire nation as well as the individual states such as New Mexico. The largest social services programs such as Medicare and Medicaid are unsustainable for the long-term, largely because of the dramatic demographic changes in American society since their development. Today, the average longevity is almost double what it was in the early 20th century when the average life span was only 47 years of age.

Likewise, the fact that the post-Word War II Baby-Boom generation is now entering retirement age means that larger than ever numbers of program beneficiaries will have to be supported by fewer working program contributors. Meanwhile, the economy is undergoing a very difficult period and unemployment and underemployment rates, even for college graduates, are at all time lows.

Some of the most sensible approaches to solutions might include raising the retirement age (or the eligibility age for program benefits) and devoting much more attention to identifying and eliminating the sources of financial waste such as duplication of services, unnecessary services, and fraud and abuse of social welfare programs. Response to Post # 2 While I certainly agree with the sentiment of your post, I am confused by some of your statements.

For example, you suggest that there are plenty of financial resources available but that they are not being appropriately directed where they might do the most good for children's services. Is that really the case in your state; because in my experience, social services across the nation are struggling financially. You seem to acknowledge that various strategies have been attempted that have been unsuccessful at improving the effectiveness of child protective services in your state.

Unfortunately, you describe a situation of continuing inability to protect children adequately and you provided several extremely troubling examples. I would be curious to know what specific strategies or alternative solutions you might suggest instead of those you have described as being ineffective.

For example, if additional training and certifications are contraindicated in many cases because of the additional time pressure they represent what other types of improvements might help make a beneficial change that you would support? Response to Post # 3 I understand the frustrations that you have expressed in your post. However, I would be curious to know what other types of approaches you might recommend to ensure that social services meet specific program criteria and goals and that practices satisfy the applicable regulatory criteria.

Certainly, when viewing individual decisions in from an isolated perspective, it is conceivable that controls that are established to maintain the sufficiency and safety of extensive programs might produce less than optimal results. However, I wonder whether those standards and policies also serve important functions in the aggregate. In my opinion, when evaluating the record-keeping functions you describe, it might also be important to consider the benefits they provide and what harms might occur with greater frequency and severity in similar situations where records and authorizations are less strictly mandated.

Response to Post # 4 Before reading your post, I was not aware of the extent to which certain states, such as California in your case, have outsourced the care for mental health program beneficiaries to private organizations. I know that this is very common in penal systems throughout the nation and that this privatization of prison facilities has often raised serious concerns in relation to the quality and sufficiency of incarceration services.

Naturally, the bidding system creates an incentive for bidders to cut costs in order to secure the lowest bid for their services. Therefore, I would be curious to know how you think this approach to reducing the cost to the state of providing mental health services might affect the relative quality of those services, programs, and facilities, and whether you are aware of any problems that have surfaced in that regard.

Specifically, I would be curious to know how the services change when they are privatized in this way and whether you believe their relative quality changes for the better, for the worse, or remains essentially the same but at a cheaper cost to the state. Response to Post # 5 As I expressed to my colleague's post above, I certainly do understand the potential negative consequences of privatizing various institutional functions traditionally handled by the state.

I would also agree that the penal system is a prime example of the extent to which the cost-savings motive is behind the trend toward the privatization of prisons in the United States. On the other hand, I have to admit that there may also be a partisan motive for opposing privatization that sometimes comes across in discussions of these issues with people who are employed within the field.

For example, your post goes into quite a bit of detail about the consequences to prison guards employed within the traditional penal system framework but deals much less with the issue of whether or not replacing government employees with private-sector civilian employees is actually detrimental to the quality of services provided and the potential benefits to state budgets. That is not to say that I am insensitive to the obvious consequences anytime employees within any industry lose their primary means of occupation.

However, in my opinion, focusing on the fact that state employees need.