Social Studies, 13.01.2020 05:31 cheaterman4121

When divorce is considered a social problem, who is expected to deal with the issue?

Answers: 2

Show answers

Another question on Social Studies

Social Studies, 21.06.2019 23:00

For each of the following, mark whether it is a possible confounder (a factor that mixes up the results, making it look like candy is to blame when it's a causal (or causation) link which supports the argument that candy causes criminal behavior (ie, explains how candy leads to criminality ), or neither (an irrelevant factor, something that may cause people to become criminals but has nothing to do with eating candy). choose your answers based only< on the information given. additives in candy- additives found in candy may adversely affect brain development of young children in ways that could contribute towards adult aggression. impulsive personality-- kids who are highly impulsive and have trouble delaying gratification are more likely to eat candy every day as children and more likely to disobey laws as adults. violent abuse-- children who suffer violent abuse are more likely to become violent adults and commit violent crimes. gender- boys are overwhelmingly more likely to commit violent crimes

Answers: 3

Answer

Social Studies, 23.06.2019 04:50

Which of the following is not a result of increased democracy in russia?

Answers: 1

Answer

Social Studies, 23.06.2019 05:00

Which of the following statements best describes relations between india and pakistan? a. the countries have had peaceful relations since the partition of india. b. the countries have an ongoing trade dispute with bangladesh. c. the countries have had conflicts over the region of kashmir. d. the countries have agreed not to develop nuclear weapons.

Answers: 1

Answer

Social Studies, 23.06.2019 06:00

Ahusband who believed that his wife was having an affair with his brother hired an arsonist to burn down the brother's house. they planned for the husband to take his brother to a ballgame so that the arsonist would be able to set the house on fire without detection. after the husband and brother left for the ballgame, however, the arsonist decided to abandon the plan and immediately left town without doing anything further. when the husband returned from the ballgame with the brother, he saw the house still standing and blurted out what was supposed to have happened. the husband and the arsonist were arrested and charged with conspiracy to commit arson. at the arsonist's trial, his attorney argued that he was innocent of the conspiracy because he decided not to go ahead with the plan, and nothing criminal had in fact occurred.at common law, how should a jury find the arsonist? a not guilty of conspiracy, because going to a ballgame is not a criminal overt act.b not guilty of conspiracy, because the husband, not the arsonist, committed the overt act.c guilty, because the husband executed his part of the plan.d guilty, because the arsonist agreed to set the brother's house on fire.