Capital Punishment Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words - 2

Capital Punishment - Essay Example He says: â€Å"Contrary to major media bias, most Americans support the use of capital punishment.† Americans were of the view that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev should be sentenced to death if found guilty of bombing the Boston Marathon. The Americans also wanted James Holmes and rapist Ariel Castrol to face capital punishment if found guilty. Several politicians and governors in the United States have tried to repeal death penalty but citizens support it. These two authors have based their arguments on some specific aspects to support their stands and opinions. Capital punishment in other states The author who is against the death penalty in the first article says that capital punishment should be abolished in the United States because a majority of the world states have eliminated it. A research was done by Amnesty International and they found out that the United States is among the very few states that still practice this penalty. He is the view that the United States is against fundamentals of a civilization by saying that: â€Å"The fact that the United States is among this percentage should be disturbing to anyone who believes in the basics of a civilized society.† The author against capital punishment does not care whether the act is practiced in other states but he is majorly concerned with the idea of the free world or rather a freedom. He is after protecting the civil society and ensuring that every individual in the United States enjoys the freedom which is a fundamental human right.

Skokie vs. Collin Essay Example for Free

Skokie vs. Collin Essay In Skokie, Illinois Frank Collin wanted to march in the Village of Skokie, Illinois. Skokie had the most Jewish residents per capita in the United States at the time. His political views are representing the National Socialist Party of America because he was a regional leader of the organization. Frank Collin was eventually granted permission to march by the seventh United States circuit court of appeals by the ruling, â€Å"1st amendment is King†. The court also determined that the government couldn’t restrict expression because of a message, idea, subject matter, or content. In the case of Collin vs. Smith, I disagree with the ruling of the seventh US circuit court of appeals. Some people agree with the ruling because if the government were to deny the NSPA the right to march, it could have given the party even more political leverage against the very people who disagree with them. The NSPA could claim the unconstitutionality of the case ruling and would raise more political attention than they had already received. While society wants to morally deny the NSPA the right to march in a public park and express what some may refer to as hate speech, which only instills more political power in the NSPA. I disagree with this stance because if the court denies Frank Collin and the NSPA the right to march, than the court is not granting more attention and political power to them, it is simply following the rules established in the constitution. The NSPA could not use this court ruling against the United States to appeal the decision even further. This ruling would be consistent with all other forms of hate that were denied the freedom of expression. The marches, which were to take place, were certainly in the wrong place at the wrong time and in the wrong manner to promote general welfare and ensure domestic tranquility. Also, I disagree with the ruling of the court because the first amendment does not protect all speech such as hate speech, slander or libel. The signs that the NSPA had were promoting the death of Jewish people and all other non-white Americans or â€Å"anglosaxon descent†Ã¢â‚¬â„¢. This is hate speech and is not protected by the first amendment. The written Libel on the signs has a malicious tone and the spoken slander by the Socialist party violates the first amendment. In conclusion, I disagree with the ruling of the seventh US circuit court of appeals in the case of Collin vs. Smith. The court decided that Collin had every right to demonstrate his ideology in a peaceful protest as protected by the first amendment. This ruling serves no justice because the socialist party was violating the exceptions to the first amendment such as hate speech, libel, and finally slander. The demonstrations did not promote general welfare, and violated the tranquility of others.

‘Medicalization’ in Current Health Policy

‘Medicalization’ in Current Health Policy Changing Public Health Priorities From Medicalization to Improving Built Communities Laura Schultz, Brett Weed, Ashini Fernando, Carolyn Moore,  Andrea Andersen, David Garcia Medicalization has greatly increased the emphasis on the delivery of clinical services to individuals, often at the expense of population-based solutions. We examine this phenomenon and offer an alternative that promotes public health by improving social, environmental, and physical determinants of health[HS1]. ‘Medicalization’ in Current Health Policy ‘Medicalization’ is the tendency for the practice of medicine to view a greater proportion of human behavior through a clinical lens (Zola, 1986). Among the examples of medicalization is the direct-to-consumer solicitation of prescription drugs for an arguably ever-increasing repertoire of conditions and afflictions (Frosch, Krueger, Hornik, Cronbolm, Barg, 2007) and increasing access to medical care as is evident through the initiatives implemented by the ACA[HS2]. Ever increasing amounts of money are being invested in treatment of chronic diseases, while a comparatively much smaller proportion is invested in preventing the same conditions (HHS, 2003). The United States spends more than 17% of their GDP on healthcare[HS3]. This per capita health expenditure is more than twice the average of countries of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (Balding, 2014[HS4]), yet these numbers have translated not into better health but instead, a worsening trend in chronic diseases. US citizens also have significantly lower life expectancy in comparison (Woolf Aron, 2013). Despite these considerable investments in health care delivery, the costs associated with treating the manifestations of poor health continue to rise unabated. Over the last five years in North Carolina alone, approximately USD 80 million of the federal budget for public health was appropriated for primary care for the underserved populations (Trust for America’s Health, 2014[HS5]). Public Health Spending In contrast, public health only receives approximately 3% of the government budget and is underfunded (Balding, 2014). Nationally, 95% of health spending is for the apportionment of clinical services, while only 5% is invested in population-based solutions (Lantz, Licthenstein, Pollack, 2007). In North Carolina this division is even more extreme, with less than 1% of health spending dedicated to public health operations (Table 1[HS6]). Table 1. North Carolina Public Health Appropriations as a Percentage of Public Health Care Spending (Trust for America’s Health, 2014; Chantrill, n.d.) It is worth[CDL7] noting that the leading cause of mortality in the US, cardiovascular disease, accounts for annual healthcare costs that exceed USD $312.6 billion (HHS n.d.), yet when diagnosed early, disease progression can be addressed with non-pharmacological interventions[HS8]. In North Carolina, a mere 0.81% (~ USD 15 million, 2013) of the federal budget for public health was appropriated for prevention measures of all chronic diseases (Trust for America’s Health, 2014). These funding trends appear to support medicalization of health instead of prevention through public health efforts. Rather than continue to invest in a stopgap strategy of mitigating the impact of illness, we propose to instead invest in the prevention of illness[HS9]. Addressing Social Determinants Population health investments within corporate environments have shown considerable financial success and value beyond return on investment (ROI). One corporate wellness program saw a ROI of close to 300%; another company saved an estimated $224 per employee in 2003 dollars from promoting health rather than treating a lack of it (HHS, 2003[HS10]). Applying this same per capita savings rate to North Carolina, shifting funding to prevention and health promotion could yield savings of $2.2 billion annually[3], more than offsetting the annual increases in health services expenditures. Value beyond ROI includes physical and mental health, quality of life, perceived health status and functional capacity. Workplace well-being also promotes other intangibles such as increased social cohesion (Pronk, 2014). There is an established correlation between positive social relationships and health. As Robert Putnam wrote in 2000 in Bowling Alone, â€Å"social capital† conveys the essential health promoting value of communities[HS11]. It is defined as â€Å"the social networks and interactions that inspire trust and reciprocity among citizens† (as cited in Leyden, 2003). Social isolation, independent of other lifestyle factors, is linked to premature death and decreased resistance to disease (Cohen, 2001). Beyond individual health, social capital is associated with political engagement, volunteerism, decreased crime rates and economic development (Leyden, 2003). Research has shown that when we design our communities to encourage social engagement there is a positive effect on the psychological and physical health of the residents (Leyden, 2003[HS12]). Since the advent of the automobile, the design of our communities has included limited transportation choices. Most individuals choose to travel by car because urban design has made most options for pedestrians unsafe (Vandergrift, 2004). The US, compared to other high income European countries with better health measures, have at least 25% more automobiles per 1000 people (Woolf Aron, 2013). European Countries also have policies which limit sprawl and prioritize â€Å"urban centralization†. Though difficult to quantify, these environmental factors are likely to contribute to the health disparities and disadvantages in the US (Woolf Aron, 2013). Political and social conditions and constructs, racism for example, also results in poor urban design that compound health disparities including limited access to businesses and markets, exposure to environmental toxins, and lack of opportunities for social participation. Specifically, infrastructure investment decisions, such as libraries, parks, public safety and maintenance are likely to be allocated to geographic areas populated by citizens with greater socioeconomic status and political power, which further marginalize disadvantaged socioeconomic groups (Schulz Northridge, 2004). Alternatively, mixed use, pedestrian friendly communities are based on thoughtful design and include intact town centers, multiple income residences and well linked streets that are designed for people, not automobiles (Walkable Communities, n.d.). Prioritized determinants of health, which we expect to improve because of innovative planning include increased social engagement, improved economic status and increased physical activity (Walkable Communities, n.d.). As of 2012, approximately 50% of the US adult population has been shown to suffer from chronic diseases. However, adequate physical activity has been scientifically proven to prevent or improve these chronic disease conditions[HS13]. Yet, according to a 2011 statistic from the CDC, 76% of adults did not meet the recommendation for muscle-strengthening physical activity which is a known risk for heart disease (CDC, 2014). There are states where the built environment is viewed as worthy of significant investment to improve population health. Specifically, in Massachusetts there are two examples of lower than average socioeconomic status communities where health impact assessments indicate that built environmental improvements would improve social factors and likely decrease expenses in medical intervention. In Somerville, there is a community driven planned change to a bisecting interstate. This plan, made with consideration for social health determinants of the residents includes multi use bike and walking paths with increased access to all areas of the community[HS14]. Community-wide access will provide opportunities for social interaction, physical activity and increased choices for employment (MassDOT, 2013). A community with similar demographics, Fall River, has proposed common trails for recreation and pedestrian and bicycle travel that connect residents to businesses. This is predicted to improv e every health determinant the HIA evaluated (MAPC, 2013). Based on a review of state sponsored health impact assessments in other communities, there is a significant relationship between communities with walkable pathways and health (Rails to Trails Conservancy, 2013). We propose that thoughtful environmental structure enhancements such as multi-use walking and biking paths will connect neighborhoods and businesses. In turn, we believe these changes will positively affect social cohesion, economic viability and physical activity, which are all key determinants of health that can improve with innovative public policy implementation[HS15]. Conclusion and Recommendations Evidence from state sponsored health impact assessments in other communities, indicates that there is a positive correlation between communities with walkable pathways and health (Rails to Trails Conservancy, 2013). Environmental structure enhancements such as multi-use walking and biking paths that connect neighborhoods and businesses could positively influence population health in North Carolina. We believe these changes will positively affect social cohesion, economic viability and physical activity, which are all key determinants of health that can improve with innovative public policy implementation. In North Carolina there are 31 completed Rails to Trails programs (NC Rails-Trails, 2014). This national program improves the built environment by converting former railroad routes to pedestrian and bike friendly paths. However, only 2 of the 31 completed trails are located in counties with the poorest health scores (RWJF 2014; NC Rails to Trails, 2014). Eastern North Carolina, where 9 out of 10 of the most poorly rated counties for health outcomes are located, also have the fewest trail initiatives (NC Rails-Trails, 2014). This skewed distribution of environmental improvements further demonstrates the way in which populations within poor socioeconomic communities are financially neglected, and thus likely to continue to suffer from worse health outcomes. Using Massachusetts as an example, the state’s Department of Health and Human Services has initiated a program to identify communities with the lowest socioeconomic status and assist them to â€Å"build policies, systems and environments that promote wellness and healthy living† (MassDOT, 2013). In partnership with state and county planning officials, public health leaders, and state demographers, our plan is to target lower socioeconomic communities, initially focusing on a county with the poorest health indicators, to plan and build multi-use trails. We request priority funding allocated through the US Department of Transportation via the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century ACT (MAP-21), as well as private foundation grants that prioritize state population health improvements like the Annie E. Casey and Doris Duke foundations. Our plan for advocacy is to engage community members in the trail project as stakeholders. Specifically we will encourage our members to influence policy decisions through community informational meetings, including letter writing assistance intended to exert pressure on local politicians. We intend to host community or health center â€Å"coffees† with opportunities to meet county commissioners and planners. Media coverage in the lo cal newspaper is another part of our advocacy plan. Specifically, we will engage local media in an effort to â€Å"frame† the problem of poor environmental design and how it impacts health by profiling one citizen with health risks and limited transportation options who lives on a pedestrian unsafe street, visually depicting the social isolation inherent in this environment though a photo layout[HS16]. By engaging our most vulnerable North Carolina citizens to take part in improving their quality of life and ultimately their health and longevity, we will have the best chance at community environmental improvement as a long term effort. The time is now to refocus our priorities on health investment through prevention and promotion of public health efforts rather than treatment of diseases. References Blanding, M. (2012). Public Health and the U.S. Economy. Retrieved from http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/public-health-economy-election/. Chantrill, C. (n.d.). North Carolina Government Spending Chart. Retrieved from http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_2003_2019NCb_16s1li111mcn_13l14t Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2014, October). Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/overview/index.htm. Cohen, S (2001). Social relationships and health: Berkman syme (1979). Advances in mind-body medicine. 17(1):5-7. Frosch, D. L., Krueger, P. M., Hornik, R. C., Cronbolm, P. F., Barg, F. K. (2007). Creating Demand for Prescription Drugs: A Content Analysis of Television Direct-to-Consumer Advertising. Annals of Family Medicine, 5(1), 6-13. Lantz, P. M., Licthenstein R. L., Pollack, H. A. (2007). Health policy approaches to population health: The Limits of medicalization. Health Affairs, 26(5), 1253-1257. Leyden, K. (2003). Social Capital and the Built Environment: The Importance of Walkable Neighborhoods. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1546-1551. Massachusetts Department of Transportation. (2013). Health Impact Assessment of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) McGrath Grounding Study. 2013. Retrieved from http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/groundingmcgrath/HealthImpactAssessment.aspx. Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) (2013). Health Impact Assessment: Quequechan River Rail Trail Phase 2. Retrieved from http://www.mapc.org/quequechan-river-rail-trail-hia. NC Rails-Trails (2014, September). Resources. Retrieved from http://www.ncrailtrails.org/web/resources. Pronk, N. P. (2014). Placing Workplace Wellness in Proper Context: Value Beyond Money. Preventing Chronic Disease 11, 1-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd11.140128 Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon Schuster. Rails to Trails Conservancy. Health and Wellness Benefits. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.railstotrails.org/ourWork/trailBasics/benefits.html. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (2014). County Health Rankings and Roadmaps, Building a Culture of Health County by County; 2014 Rankings; North Carolina. Retrieved from http://www.countyhealthrankings.org/sites/default/files/state/downloads/CHR2014_NC_v2.pdf Schulz, A., Northridge, M. E. (2004). Social determinants of health: Implications for Environmental Health Promotion. Health Education and Behavior, 31(4), 455-471. Trust for Americas Health (2014). Key Health Data about North Carolina. Retrieved from http://healthyamericans.org/states/?stateid=NC#section=3,year=2009,code=undefined US Census Bureau (2014, July 8). NC quick facts. Retrieved from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/37000.html US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (2003, September). Prevention makes common â€Å"cents†. Retrieved from http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/prevention/. US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (n.d.). About Heart Disease Stroke. Retrieved from http://millionhearts.hhs.gov/abouthds/cost-consequences.html#cost. Vandergrift, D., Yoked, T. V. (2004). Obesity rates, income, and suburban sprawl: an analysis of US states. Health Place, 10, 221-229. Walkable Communities, Inc. (n.d.).Walkable Communities FAQ. Retrieved from http://walkable.org/faqs.html. Woolf, S. H., Aron, L. Y. (Eds.). (2013). U.S. Health in International Perspective: Shorter Lives, Poorer Health. Washington DC: National Academies Press. Zola, I. K. (1986). Medicine as an institution of social control. In P. Conrad R. Kern (Eds.), The sociology of health and illness. New York: St. Martins Press. [1] Rounded to nearest million [2] Rounded to nearest ten million; represents NC state and locality public health care spending [3] Based on 2013 NC Population Estimate of 9,848,060 (US Census Bureau 2014). [HS1]Nice introduction to your paper [HS2]Good examples [HS3]Is this from your Balding reference? This statement needs to be referenced. [HS4]This is listed as Blanding on your reference list. [HS5]Very nice section, your reader will have a good understanding of medicalization after reading this section [HS6]Great reference and statistics that support your premise [CDL7]Do not use this construct in this class, â€Å"it is†, â€Å"there are†, etc. [HS8]Such as implementing lifestyle changes with diet exercise. [HS9]Very good! [HS10]Impressive! [HS11]Very interesting, I will be reading this. [HS12]Great examples and points being made, excellent references. [HS13]You need a reference here [HS14]This entire section isn’t referenced. Unless this information is considered to be â€Å"common knowledge† e.g. it came from your own brain or was information you were aware of prior to writing this paper, it needs to have a citation. Please review when to cite from UNC library http://www2.lib.unc.edu/instruct/citations/index.html?section=why_we_cite [HS15]Great ideas [HS16]Great ideas and plan of action

How Does the Dialogue Between John and Elizabeth Proctor in Pages 41 - :: English Literature

How Does the Dialogue Between John and Elizabeth Proctor in Pages 41 - 46 Reflect the Tensions and Strengths in their Relationship? During the first part of act two, the scene is set in the Proctors house, and a conversation takes place between Elizabeth and John Proctor. He has arrived home late, and the conversation that takes place between husband and wife seems, at first to be polite, maybe a little bit static, as thought they had both first met. We can tell from John words that he is trying to please her, and make up to her for being unfaithful. Elizabeth, his wife can tell that he is trying to please her, but she is still not sure of what John thinks of Abigail, and whether she still has a place in his heart. This topic is never raised between the two of them, but we can see that it is the main thing that they are both thinking. John Proctor, we can tell is very guilty about being unfaithful to his wife. He is very upset by the fact that Elizabeth doesn't trust him, and is doing everything in his power to try and gain her trust and make her happy. He wants his wife to know that he is ashamed of what he has done He doesn't feel like a very good husband and regrets what he has done. Even though John knows that he has hurt his wife, he doesn't feel that what he has done is unforgivable and still can get very angry with her, very easily. Elizabeth Proctor is a very kind, intelligent, but unhappy woman that has been deeply hurt by her husband. Whenever she is around her husband she tries to please him, as if she is inadequate for him, and replies to his questions quickly and pleasantly. She doesn't have the courage to say what she thinks at first, but eventually gets up the courage to tell him to go to Salem and tell the court about Abigail. In many of the questions she asks John, you can sense that she is still suspicious of him. Tensions between Elizabeth and John Proctor are prominent at first in the act. Miller describes in the stage directions that John "is not quite pleased. [With the food that his wife has prepared] He reaches to the cupboard, takes a pinch of salt and drops it into the pot". We can see from this stage direction that he doesn't want to make anything even more awkward between him and his wife, and if she sees what he is doing then she may feel insufficient.

Affirmative Action PRO vs. CON Essay

The 108th Congress of the United States brought up the debate of whether to allow public institutions to adopt the Affirmative Action, allowing minorities to have higher opportunities than the majority. Although no specific stand was approached, it clearly shows the growing interest of people on the act of Affirmative Action. I am pro Affirmative Action when dealing with public institutions. However, I believe a private institution should practice equality. Affirmative Action compensates for the past faults and biased treatments toward minorities, provides ample opportunities to unprivileged people who currently can’t be accepted to institutions, and could rid of the biased view many people still have on minorities. Looking back on American history, we can clearly see many prejudiced acts and viewpoints towards the minorities. The most obvious example is with African Americans. Now at present times, Affirmative Action can and will compensate to a degree the hurts and pains minorities suffered. Although people call America the land of opportunity, many people, consisting largely of minorities, never get a chance to succeed. Many colleges screen applicants with a biased standard, calling it tradition. Companies and institutions prevent employees from receiving full privileges, shouting company regulations. Affirmative Action can tear down those obstacles and false standards giving those underprivileged new opportunities. When Asians fluctuated to the United States during the gold rush, many locals responded violently thinking they will take all the jobs there were. Even today, a number of people still hold biased views toward the minorities. It is evident on the existing practices of the Ku Klux Klan. Affirmative Action can change much of those biased views and allow the minorities to be accepted in the eyes of others. Although Affirmative Action should apply to public institutions, equality should be practiced in private institutions. Equal treatments should allow others to participate on making a non-discriminatory system. Equality, not favoritism, should be standards on private institutions. However, on the overall view, I stand pro on Affirmative Action.

Building a Houseâ€Advice From an Architect

Building a House- Advice From an Architect While your new house is an exciting and mind-boggling experience for you, it is routine for the builder (been there, done that). These attitudes often tend to clash. Building your new house should not (and cannot) be a passive exercise. A myriad of decisions have to be made  - by you. When you are unable or unwilling to make decisions, you force the builder to make them. To make sure your new home fulfills your own vision, follow the following guidelines. Understand Your Contract No matter what type of contract you sign, you become a party to a legal document involving a massive amount of money for the construction of your new house. By so doing, you abdicate none of your basic legal rights. Therefore, know your rights and exercise them. Start by reading the contract and understanding it. You are paying (or will pay over the next 25 to 30 years) for the knowledge of the builders: their experience and ability. Plus you are paying your builders a profit above their expenses. What do you expect in return? How do you ensure that you get what you expect? COMMUNICATE  - WRITE IT DOWN  - COMMUNICATE  - WRITE IT DOWN  - COMMUNICATE  - WRITE IT DOWN. Anything you add to the house after the contract is signed, the builder will keep track of  - assiduously! Anything you delete or reduce, YOU keep track of  - assiduously! Save on Building Costs The average house contains approximately 1,500 to 2,000 square feet. Do you need more space than that? Why? How much more? You pay for each and every square foot of space in your house, whether its occupied, usable, or otherwise. If the cost is $50, $85, or $110 per square foot, extra, unused, vacant, and unnecessary areas are provided at the very same cost. You want to be in control of building costs, but you dont want to skimp. Keep costs in perspective; for example, that cost of $10-per-thousand more for a brick you really like translates into a total cost of only $100 more when a typical amount of 10,000 bricks is involved. Do the math yourself. Be smart. Take care that glitz and gadgets suggested by friends, the builder, or magazines do not overwhelm good basic construction. Dont trade them for lesser construction. Bouncy floors where joists are stretched to the maximum are not remedied by a hot tub, flocked wallcovering, skylights, or jazzy door hardware. Know what you like. Check Building Codes Dont expect to control the number of nails used. Do expect a substantially built house, free of defects, and in accord with all applicable codes and regulations. Require proof of such compliance (many jurisdictions issue Certificates of Occupancy) at the closing of your mortgage. This indicates accord with the minimum code and safety standards. Realize that some things are virtually unchangeable; they should be done properly, first off. This includes a properly sized and constructed foundation system, a properly designed and installed structural system, and so on. Changeable items such as finishes and coverings should not distract you from watching for and requiring good basic construction. Watch for things that are not necessarily what you want and that you will not be able to change easily or cheaply. Question things that just dont look or seem right. Most of the time they indeed are not. Seek some reliable outside, impartial advice- other than your father, even if he is a builder! Be Flexible Be ready and prepared to compromise in order to resolve situations and problems. Be aware, however, of what you may be giving up in this process;  examine and understand both sides. Is the situation worth what you are losing? The builder is fully capable of doing anything or finding someone who can do anything you wish, but anything always comes with a price. Be careful and wary of unique, inordinate, or far-out requests, new technology, and untested materials and equipment. Understand that construction is an imperfect science. Combine that understanding with natural elements (e.g., site conditions, weather, wood members, human foibles), and you might face situations where things could change, must be changed, or simply exceed capabilities. Flat-out errors do happen. Absolute perfection or your idea of perfection may not- and more than likely, will not- be achieved. Drastic imperfections, however, can be corrected, and they should be. It is within your rights to require this. Keep Records Issues not clearly and specifically noted, written, described, or shown will be interpreted by both sides. A meeting of minds must take place, where interpretations are fully understood and resolved. When this resolution does not happen, expect dispute, confrontation, pique, anger, frustration, and perhaps even litigation. Be redundant,  leaving nothing to chance. Follow up verbal discussions and instructions with written verification. Keep records and receipts; records of phone calls and all correspondence; samples you approve; sales slips; model, type, and style numbers; and the like. Dont allow yourself to be reduced to buying any aspect of a pig in a poke. The more time and effort spent up front in programming, planning, designing, and understanding, as well as in establishing specifics of the project, the better the chance for a smoother construction period and a satisfactory result. Be Businesslike Be pragmatic and absolutely businesslike in all of your dealings with the builders. They are working for you; you are not seeking them as new friends. If a friend or relative performs part of the work, treat that person in exactly the same manner:  have a contract and demand adherence to your schedule. Dont let a gift or a good price disrupt the project overall. Summary of Questions to Ask What is a good design for our needs?What is a building code? Does it affect us? How does it work? What doesnt it do?Who is responsible, overall, for my building project?What are good sizes and proportions for rooms? What style do I want?What am I really getting from the builder?What problems do I have in my current house that I dont want to repeat?Where can I find answers and help? How do I make my desires known?What does that line on the drawing mean?What is a dispute? What is a lien?What are specifications? Does the builder write and provide them?What if my builder does something in a way I dont like? Is the house going to be complete? Will something be left out?When will the house be finished?What is a contract? How do I play a part in it? What does it say?What is an extra?Is that a good material? Ive never heard of it.Can I change things?Who picks the color of the paint, wall coverings, tile, type of wood, siding?Is landscaping included and what form does it take? Sod? Seed? Mud and rocks? Slopes? Are landscape features guaranteed? What if I disagree with the builder? Can I stop the work?Am I allowed on the job site? Can I inspect the work as it goes up? Can I bring someone with me?I really want this xyz in the house. How do I get exactly that?I can buy the light fixtures from my brother, but who will hang them? What do I do?Should I close on the mortgage and pay the builder in full? I have several items that I dont like. Must I still close?Why do we have to make all these trips to pick things out? About the Author, Ralph Liebing Ralph W. Liebing (1935–2014) was a registered architect, a lifelong teacher of code compliance, and the author of 11 books on architectural drawings, codes and regulations, contract administration, and the construction industry.   A 1959 graduate from the University of Cincinnati, Liebing taught at the University of Cincinnati School of Architecture and the College of Applied Science Technology at Illinois State University. In addition, he trained carpenters union apprentices, directed classes at community education programs, and taught architectural technology for Daytons ITT Technical Institute. He practiced architecture in both Ohio and Kentucky. Liebing published many textbooks, articles, papers, and commentaries. He was a fierce advocate for not only enforcing specifications and codes but for design firms to engage owners in the process.  His publications include Construction of Architecture: From Design to Built, Architectural Working Drawings; and The Construction Industry. In addition to being a Registered Architect (RA), Liebing was a Certified Professional Code Administrator (CPCA), Chief Building Official (CBO), and a Professional Code Administrator. Ralph Liebing was a pioneer in creating useful, professional web content of lasting quality.