Rationale and legal significance case

Rationale and legal significance case Introduction Equity will not perfect an imperfect gift, this maxim from Milroy (1862) had been recognized as the strict rule that apply to the area of law related to the transfer of a gift. Judges and the legal profession had adopted this rule for many years. Nonetheless, this rigid requirement had been relaxed after the decision in Pennington (2002). In the followings, I will discuss the rationale and the legal significance of this case. Decision in Chancery Division Before the case went to the Court of Appeal, Judge Howarth (Judge of Chancery Division) held that Mr. Pennington was not the companys agent. He held that the gift of 400 shares became effective when Ada executed the share transfer form and there was no legal requirement for the form to be delivered to the donee /company. He also held that the breach of article 8(B) did not render the gift ineffective. Two of the beneficiaries appealed to the Court of Appeal on the points that: (1) Doctrine in Re Rose should be applied and the transfer form should be delivered to the donee/ company prior to the donors death. (2)And the transfer breached a pre-emption clause in article 8(B); (3) The donor could not be said to have done everything in her power to effect the transfer[1]. Decision of Court of Appeal The court unanimously dismissed the case, but for different reasons.[2] The summary of the judgment and reasoning will be discussed below. Arden LJs 1st Judgement The pre-emption provisions in the article 8(B) of the company did not prevent Adas share to be transferred to Harold. Reasoning Article 8(B) required a sale notice to be given. No sale notice was served on the company under article 8(B). Therefore, it appeared that Ada, Harold and Pennington were unaware of the pre- emption provisions in the article 8(B) of the company. 2nd Judgment It would be unconscionable for Ada or her personal representatives not to transfer the shares to Harold Reasoning There were 6 facts in this circumstances that give rise to the judgment : (1) Ada had made the gift of her own free will; (2) Ada had told Harold about the gift; (3) Ada had signed a form of transfer; (4) Ada had delivered the form of transfer to Mr. Pennington for him to secure registration; (5) Mr. Pennington had told Harold that there was no action that he need to take and Harold had not questioned this assurance[3]; (6) Harold agreed to become a director of the company without limit of time, which he could not do without shares being transferred to him.[4] The general rule was that Equity will not assist a volunteer [5], but AdrenLJ relied on the judgment in Choithram Although equity will not aid a volunteer, it will not strive officiously to defeat a gift,[6] and hence prefect the transfer of the shares in equity. She believed that in the above circumstances, where donors conscience was affected and it would be unconscionable and contrary to the principles of equity to allow Ada to resile. 3rd Judgment Delivery of the share transfer before her death was unnecessary so far as perfection of the gift was concerned. Reasoning Although Re Rose required the stock transfer form to be handed over to the donee, she did not think that the ratio always requires a delivery of the share transfer form to the donee,[7] and this requirement can be dispensed with in some circumstances. In this circumstance, there was a clear finding that Ada had a clear intention to make an immediate gift. The requirement of actual delivery could be dispensed with. Moreover, Adren LJ adopted the principle of benevolent construction to construct Mr Pennington as an agent for Harold for the purpose of submitting the share transfer to the company.[8] Therefore, traditional requirements of Re Rose were thus satisfied.[9] Clarke LJs The judgment of Clarke LJ seems to be different from that given by AdrenLJ. The main difference in the judgment will be explained below: Judgment Ada had executed a valid transfer of the equitable title with the result that Ada had retained the legal title as trustee.[10] The execution of a stock transfer form can have effect as an equitable assignment without the necessity of a transfer or delivery of the form Reasoning ClarkeLJ held that when Ada executed the stock transfer form, she had passed the beneficial interest to Harold. She would then hold the legal interest in the shares on trust for Harold until registration in Harolds name. Although the strict rule was that the donor must have done everything possible to effect the transfer of his equitable interest. But he believed the maxim cannot be absolutely true since there is always something more that the donor could have done. ClarkeLJ believed there was no need of a transfer/ delivery, since even Ada had delivered the transfer form to Harold, she could have done more by making a specific request to the company to register the shares in Harolds name. Moreover, there was nothing in the Stock Transfer Act 1963 s.1 which suggested that delivery was necessary to effect the transfer. Therefore ClarkeLJ believed that Ada had done everything possible thing possible to effect the transfer for the followings reasons: (1)Ada had executed the correct share transfer form; (2) Ada had given it to Pennington; (3) Ada had not thought it necessary to take any further steps to effect the transfer to Harold, and if she had been asked to do so, she would have done it; (4) Ada had not at any stage intended to reserve a right to withdraw the form; (5) The shares that she intended to give to Harold during her lifetime did not form any part of the subject matter of her will. Controversial This case is regarded as being controversial since ArdenLJ adopted two innovative ideas to perfect the transfer even without actual delivery of the share transfer form; they are (1) Unconscionability Test and (2) Benevolent Principles of Construction. The idea of unconscionability come from the decision of Choithram that if in the circumstances, the donors conscience is affected and it would be unconscionable and contrary to the principle of equity to allow the donor to resile from the gift. But in the judgment of ArdenLJ, she didnt give any concrete explanation of what will satisfy the requirement of unconscionability nor give any guideline. Arden LJ explained that the constitution of unconscionability is solely relied on the finding from the facts and depended on the interpretation of the court. Particularly, Harold did not show any evidence of detrimental reliance in order to fulfill the test. Therefore the requirement of what will satisfy the Unconscionability Test is blurred and depends on the discretion of the court. In Milroy, the court will not give a benevolent construction as to treat ineffective words of outright gift as taking effect as if the donor had declared himself a trustee for the donee.[11] But Arden LJ adopt the principle of benevolent construction on the meaning of words This requires no action on your part used by Pennington in writing to Harold and she constructed the words as meaning that Ada and, through her, Pennington became agent for Harold for the purpose of submitting the share transfer to the company. ArdenLJ did not give any guideline on the principle of benevolent construction, such as what will satisfy the requirement of benevolent construction; and when will the court adopts the usage of benevolent construction. Differences from the prevailing law The general rule in Milroy is that settlor must have done everything necessary to be done to transfer the property. If settler has not done everything necessary to effect transfer, the court/ equity will not construe a failed gift/transfer as a declaration of trust. The rule has been applied strictly in cases such as Richards (1874)[12] and Re Fry (1946). The strict application of the rule in Milroy had been relaxed in the cases of Re Rose (1952), Mascall (1984) and the recent case of Choithram (2001)[13]. In Re Rose, the court relaxed the strict rule and held that it was not necessary that the donor should have done all that it was necessary to be done to complete the gift. It was sufficient if the donor had done everything in his power to transfer title to the trustee, even there was short of registration of the transfer. Therefore in Re Rose, trust constituted if donor does everything in his power to divest himself of the trust property and transfer of legal title fails for another reason. The doctrine in Re Rose has been followed in Mascall (1984)[14]. But the execution of the document of assignment by the donor and the actual delivery of the form/ document of the assignment to the transferee were still the essential requirements. In Trustee of the Property of Pehrsson v von Greyerz (1999), the transfer is failed due to the lack of actual delivery of the transfer. In Choithram (2001), the court had further relaxed the strict rule in Milroy. The judge held that although equity will not assist a volunteer, it will not strive officiously to defeat a gift[15] This case introduced the idea of unconscionability as discussed above in para.5. In the decision in Pennington contravened the decision in Milroy that equity will not assist a volunteer. In this case, Harold did not give any consideration except he agreed to become a director. It also contravened the doctrine in Re Rose. Ada didnt deliver the transfer form to Harold, it contravened to the requirement of actual delivery in Re Rose. The adoption of the principle of benevolent principle contravened to the decision in Milroy, that court will not give a benevolent construction so as to treat ineffective words of outright gift as taking effect as if the donor had declared himself a trustee for the donee[16] The judgment of ClarkeLJ, that Ada had executed a valid transfer of the equitable title with the result that Ada had retained the legal title as trustee, it contravened the decision in Choithram. Since Choithram required the donor to declare himself to be one of the initial trustees and Ada didnt declared herself as trustee in this case. Whether the decision was correct I think that the decision in Pennington is not correct. Although if the court held that the transfer of share was ineffective, it would be unfair / unconscionable to both Harold and Ada since both parties did have the intention of completing the transfer. Certainty in law must be strictly respected and it should be the first priority. Judges should follow Milroy and Re Rose strictly. I think that the lack of actual delivery of the transfer form is fatal in this case. Since I agreed that the actual delivery is the strongest evidence in showing the intention of transferring the beneficial interest. And this evidence was absent in this case. It is also incorrect for ArdenLJ to construct that Pennington was the agent for Harold only by the words This requires no action on your part in the letter that Pennington had written to Harold. It was only an assumption by ArdenLJ. There was no evidence that neither Ada nor Harold intended to appoint him as an agent. Moreover, the unconscionability test set out by ArdenLJ should not be satisfied either. It is because detrimental reliance is always the central element in the idea of unconscionability. Harold didnt show detrimental reliance. Harold only signed the form and accepted to become a director. He had neither financial contribution nor any change in his position that could constitute to a detrimental reliance. The decision in Pennington do not left the law in a reasonable situation. Since after Pennington, unconscionability and the principle of benevolent construction were introduced. ArdenLJ did not give any guideline/ requirement of the unconscionabilty test. That means that the unconscionability test would give the court a wide discretion in allowing equity to perfect a transfer. It would cause flood gate in this area of law, since every parties will use the idea of unconscionability in arguing their cases. The amount of law suits in this area of law will definitely be increased. Moreover, it is unclear that when the court could adopt the principle of benevolent construction and also where the construction should applied. ArdenLJ did not give any direction /guideline in this area. The well established formula in this area of law that developed in cases such as Milroy and Re Rose have been totally broken by these two innovative ideas of unconscionability and principle of benevolent construction. Practical implication This case has a greater practical implication on individuals. Individuals usually do not have specific legal knowledge on the transfer of a gift. Therefore individuals would easily miss some critical requirement such as actual delivery. After Pennington, lack of delivery it is not fatal. Since individuals can argue that in the specific circumstances, it is unconscionable for the donor to resile. Then it is the courts interpretation on whether the unconscionability test is satisfied in the circumstances that the individual encountered. The practical implication in business is that it is more difficult to ascertain the real legal requirement in the constitution of a valid transfer. Before Pennington, businessman can rely on the rule set out in Milroy and Re Rose to ascertain legal certainty. After Pennington, it becomes difficult for a businessman to interpret the meaning of unconscionability. Certainty in law is essential to give confident to businessman in doing economic activities. Precaution should be made due to the uncertainty in law. The implication on legal advisers is that flood gate situation would likely to occur. Lawyers can rely on unconscionability to bring legal action for their clients, and the amount of law suits will increase dramatically. Application in later UK case In a later UK case, Jordan v Roberts (2009) in Chancery Division, the concept of unconscionablity/ inequity that used in Pennington have been adopted by the Judge George.Bompas.Q.C. The fact was that the donor(B) wished the first defendant (D1) to hold 51% of shares and therefore transferred his shares to D1. The legal issue was whether the donor(B) has successfully transferred his shares to D1[17] . In any event, the relevant shares could not simply have been transferred to D1. It required an instrument of transfer, but donor failed to do so. It was similar to that of Pennington. The Judge citied Pennington v Waine in perfecting the transfer and held that it would be inequitable for the donor (B) to resile. Conclusion The concept of the unconscionability and the benevolent Principles of construction might give the court a greater discretion to apply justice depending on the special circumstances on each particular case. Nevertheless, certainty in law is the most fundamental issue in common law legal system. In my opinion, the decision in Pennington disrupted the legal certainty and left the law in this area in a doubtful and non-predicable manner. Ian Hunter, Equity and Trust: The Constitution of a trust, Case Comment, Coventry Law Journal 2002 John Mc Ghee 2003 Ian Hunter, Equity and Trust: The Constitution of a trust, Case Comment, Coventry Law Journal 2002 Judith Morris, Question: When is an invalid gift a valid gift? When is an incompletely constituted trust a completely constituted trust? Answer: After the decisions in Choithram and Pennington, Private Client Business Article 2003 Para. 52 of the judgment in Pennington v Waine (No.1) [2002] EWCA Civ 227; [2002] 1 W.L.R. 2075 (CA (Civ Div)) Para. 60 of the judgment in Pennington v Waine (No.1) [2002] EWCA Civ 227; [2002] 1 W.L.R. 2075 (CA (Civ Div)) Ian Hunter, Equity and Trust: The Constitution of a trust, Case Comment, Coventry Law Journal 2002 Para. 67 of the judgment in Pennington v Waine (No.1) [2002] EWCA Civ 227; [2002] 1 W.L.R. 2075 (CA (Civ Div)) John Mc Ghee 2003 Ian Hunter, Equity and Trust: The Constitution of a trust, Case Comment, Coventry Law Journal 2002 Para. 60 of the judgment in Pennington v Waine (No.1) [2002] EWCA Civ 227; [2002] 1 W.L.R. 2075 (CA (Civ Div)) Richards v Delbridge (1874) LR 18 Eq II Mascall v Mascall (1984) CA Judith Morris, Question: When is an invalid gift a valid gift? When is an incompletely constituted trust a completely constituted trust? Answer: After the decisions in Choithram and Pennington, Private Client Business Article 2003 Para. 60 of the judgment in Pennington v Waine (No.1) [2002] EWCA Civ 227; [2002] 1 W.L.R. 2075 (CA (Civ Div)) Jordan v Roberts [2009], EWHC 2313

Anything Goes Play Review Essay

On Thursday, February 20th, I finally saw my first college play. Unlike the majority of plays I’ve seen in the past, Anything Goes actually caught my attention for once. Musicals and plays were big in my high school, but East Central took it to the next level in terms of talent and preparation. After watching the play, I came to the conclusion that Mrs. Grace Austin did a wonderful job as the director, putting on an intriguing show. I’m no expert in terms of set design, but I was really impressed with how real it looked. While watching the play, I could easily imagine myself being on that ship. What made it look most lifelike was the lifesavers hanging up alongside the walls of the ship’s staircases, and the authentic looking wood making up parts of the ship. Opposite of the set design, I thought that the lighting could actually have been a little better. While there was nothing actually wrong with the lights, I think there was room for improvement. The lights were very simple throughout most of the play, which is sometimes good, but there could have been more color and movements with the lights to make it more exciting. The spotlight, however, was perfect. As for special effects, there was nothing noticeable besides the lights. Good thing that the play had decent lighting, that way the audience was able to see the perfectly fitting costumes. Everyone was mostly dressed up and looking nice to match the luxury theme. I liked everything about the costumes, but I didn’t get why the angel costume was red. It would have made more sense to be in white, but did not make much of a difference. All of these things came into play to make a pretty good performance. The main characters were Riley Dunn who played Billy, Sam Rodgers who played Hope, Lee Garner who played Evelyn, and Sarah Hopp who played Reno. Overall, Anything Goes turned out to be a pretty good story line. And thanks to the ECC casting crew and Mrs. Grace Austin, they provided a high quality production that I wouldn’t mind seeing again. Even being critical, I would give ECC’s production of Anything Goes a 7 out of 10. It was enjoyable to watch.

Detailed commentary between Hamlet and the Ghost Essay

The play ‘Hamlet’ was written in politically tempestuous times in London. Much importance surrounded the outward support of the monarch, Elizabeth. During her reign, religion caused divisions and factions of the Protestant church considered the theatre as sinful, amoral perhaps. In his plays, Shakespeare uses his understanding of humanity to entertain by addressing love, power, loyalty, honour and friendship. These values address unchanging aspects that touch us even today. At the time of this play, Shakespeare was experimenting and developing new theatrical techniques in an attempt to impress his audiences. ‘Hamlet’, a timeless tale of murder, is intended to portray the importance of the monarchy, family dynamics, friendships and betrayals. This then is the underlying setting of the theme for ‘Hamlet’ – opening on a dark winter night, creating an ethos of suspense and intrigue while providing entertainment to an otherwise deprived audience. The conversation between Hamlet and the Ghost can be interpreted and understood in many different ways. It is strongly suggested that the repercussions of this conversation will determine the revenge -tragedy that is the essence of the play ‘Hamlet’. The Ghost begins the colloquy by psychologically manipulating Hamlet into feeling sorry for him; he does so my declaring: ‘When I to sulphurous and tormenting flames,’ thus stating he does not have much time until he has to return to his Catholic purgatory, as he was not allowed to receive the obligatory sacrament before dying: ‘Uhous’led, disappointed, unanel’d. ‘ This would provoke a religious reaction of demonising the Ghost from a predominantly Protestant audience, thus creating a degree of tension – intentionally; a manipulative technique by Shakespeare. Throughout the exchange, ostensibly, the Ghost is attempting to stimulate Hamlet’s motive for revenge on Claudius. ‘If thou didst ever thy dear father love,’ the Ghost targets Hamlet’s filial duty as a son to seek revenge on Claudius because he committed fratricide and regicide. ‘Murder most foul, as in the best it is: but this most foul, strange and unnatural,’ the Ghost further provokes Hamlet to act. Knowing that Hamlet is a procrastinator, the audience is inciting him to take action. How can the Ghost, as the repentant soul it is, ask his son to go against God’s forbiddance of revenge? -‘ Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder? ‘ The Ghost really angers Hamlet when he mentions, ‘That incestuous, that adulterate beast:’ here is where Hamlet is hurt the most, as if adding more fuel to a fire, or rubbing salt to a wound. By use of metaphorical language,’ Prey on garbage’, the Ghost intends to compare itself to the ‘Radiant angel’, Gertrude representing lust and Claudius is the ‘filth’. ‘If thou hast nature in thee, bear it not,’ this really puts Hamlet in an awkward situation; he does feel for his father and clearly wants to seek revenge, but it is clearly against his religion and nature as a person to commit murder. The Ghost’s intention – in providing such vivid detail about his death – is to stimulate and provoke action from Hamlet. Hamlet’s reaction to the Ghost is surprisingly courageous. ‘As meditation or the thoughts of love may sweep to my revenge’. This statement is bursting with courage and bravery and it seems Hamlet will act. ‘O my prophetic soul,’ Hamlet claims he had, (in hindsight) always suspected, that it was Claudius who was responsible for the death of his father, although he has not mentioned it previously. This is a display of youthful assertiveness. ‘O all you host of heaven! O earth! What else? ‘ This statement shows just how distraught Hamlet is by the convergence of having lost his father; his mother perceivably, to Claudius; his throne to Claudius and receiving instruction from a Ghost! This apparition is telling him to seek revenge on Claudius – despite the fact that it may contradict his religious beliefs. By the following non – sequitur statement: ‘O most pernicious woman,’ Hamlet spontaneously turns his attention and thoughts once again towards his mother instead of focusing on the traitor who murdered his father. In this way, he reveals his Oedipus Complex once more: ‘O villain, villain, smiling, damned villain. ‘ This statement could be referring to Claudius, the Ghost itself, or his mother. It is most probable that this statement is referring to his mother because Hamlet seems most distressed by that fact that she re-married! By Hamlet’s light – hearted reference to the Ghost,’ You hear this fellow in the cellarage,’ Shakespeare intends to diffuse the doubting attitude of the audience, adding a fleeting touch of humour, perhaps. ‘As I perchance hereafter shall think meet to put an antic disposition on. ‘ Hamlet states he will behave in an eccentric manner, to appear to have taken leave of his senses – to try and learn more about Claudius’ treachery, To catch the conscious of the King’. What Hamlet has not realised is that even if he does find out more information about his uncle’s treacherous behaviour, no one will believe him because of his perceived madness. A contemporary audience would have been disappointed with Hamlet’s decision because they would have wanted Hamlet to act and seek revenge, not to be seen to hesitate or procrastinate. ‘Thou shall not kill’ – this is Hamlet’s religious belief. Here lies a problem for Hamlet. He has already promised revenge on Claudius, ‘I have sworn’t’ without thinking about the consequences of his actions. Hamlet, as a man of God, will find it difficult nigh impossible to kill, as it goes against the will of God, but would he break oath and defy the Ghost’s will? Hamlet is in a conundrum. The longer he waits, the situation intensifies. He is a well – read scholar, familiar with the melodramatic manifestations of the genre of a revenge-tragedy and therefore he plays the role of the typical tragic protagonist well. The Ghost acts and talks as though he still is was the King, ‘My most seeming virtuous queen. ‘ Here the Ghost reiterates to Hamlet that the Queen had nothing to do with his death and he should not think ill of her. However, the Ghost categorically proclaims that Claudius is guilty, ‘And in the porches of my ears did pour the leperous distilment’ and as a consequence of this he should suffer at Hamlet’s hand. The Ghost has already decided who is to blame; who should suffer and who must die. What gives him the authority to do so? It appears that the Ghost’s main purpose is to thicken the texture of the plot and to add to the theme of revenge. The supernatural serves to add a flavour of suspense, energy and tension to the play.

Alcohol And Drugs And Their Effects On First Year Students

Alcohol and Drugs and their Effects on First-Year Students Alcohol has been a part of human society for millennia. It can be found in churches, gas stations, supermarkets, and nearly everywhere else. Drugs are becoming more ubiquitous as well, with the legalization of cannabis now active in some form in 25 states (Maciag â€Å"State†). However, no single place is more saturated with alcohol and drugs than the college campus. Despite the troves of research that have been done to give evidence that they are harmful, there is still an overwhelming voice against control of these substances. First-year students are hit the hardest by this influence, being freshly exposed to the freedom of moving away from parents. It is this freshness, combined with the vast availability and marketing of alcohol, that causes college freshmen to be extremely susceptible to its effects. Despite how drugs and alcohol are romanticized in the media and easily available to college students, these substan ces have a negative effect on sleep habits, attendance, grades, athletic performance, extracurricular participation, and ultimately academic retention, especially among first-year students. Furthermore, the causes and effects of substance use are closely and cyclically related to social pressures brought on by college and its surrounding culture, making a sort of vicious cycle of stress and substance use in many cases. Per a 2016 study, the average first-year drinker reported drinking on 33% of daysShow MoreRelateddrugs and alcohol on college students1105 Words   |  5 Pages Drugs and alcohol, do they have a significant impact on the lives of college students or just the ones that fall short to the influence? There is a major problem with students using and abusing these substances, not only does it have negative effects on the user, but on the user s friends and family as well. A lot of drugs and alcohol become easily available to college students over the course of their college years. What can be done to help prevent students from abusing drugs and alcohol? OverallRead MoreUnderage Alcohol And Alcohol Abuse1597 Words   |  7 Pagesconcerning drug and alcohol abuse in schools whether its at the high school or college level. Not only does drug and alcohol consumption effect your overall health, it can effect your academic performance as well. In this paper I am going to be talking about the problems with drug and alcohol abuse, preventions, risks, costs and much more. We are going to dissect the problems with drug alcohol consumption amongst young a dults, from high school to college, and I will be talking about how students are gettingRead MoreDrug Abuse Resistance Education Program1671 Words   |  7 PagesThe war on drugs was declared in 1971 by President Richard Nixon and since that day over a trillion dollars have been spent on the prohibition of drugs in the United States (Branson, 2012). Yet, despite this excessive spending, the U.S. has the highest rates of illicit drug use in the world (Branson, 2012). Although much of this money has been spent on law enforcement agents and prison systems, some funds have been used to develop drug prevention programs. The Drug Abuse Resistance Education ProgramRead MoreSubstance Abuse And Its Effect On Education1348 Words   |  6 PagesAbuse and its Effect on Education Drug abuse is a serious public health problem that affects almost every community and family in some way. Each year drug abuse causes millions of serious illnesses or injuries among Americans. A study done in John Hopkins University School of Medicine, found that individuals who are unemployed have higher rates of substance abuse than those who are regularly employed. Five hundred and fifty nine participants, who were unemployed, at least eighteen years old or olderRead MoreThe Use Of Drugs And Alcohol On College Campuses873 Words   |  4 Pages The use of drugs and alcohol on college campuses has always been a problem but the drastic increase in the amount of college students binge drinking and abusing prescription and illegal drugs from the early 90’s till now is becoming more alarming and has to be acted upon. American colleges have had a problem with alcohol abuse since the first colleges were created, but until recently college drinking has been ignored, and tolerated, although it is proven to have negative effects not only on theRead MoreAlcohol Is The Drug Of Choice Among Youth1692 Words   |  7 Pagesto become addicted to alcohol and drugs? Or why is age of first use of alcohol is critically important? There are many questions raised on consumption of alcohol when it comes on drinking at early age. Alcohol often has a strong effect on people and throughout history, we have struggled to understand and manage the power of alcohol. However, we hardly think how much alcohol is too much for us, unless we get into any kind of trouble or shows some physical or mental effects on our health. Read MoreEffects of Alcohol Abuse on College Students Essay973 Words   |  4 Pages1301-16 12 November 2009 Alcohol and College Students: What are the Effects? College is a time in one’s life to start over, to start off on a clean slate. It is also time for a person to prepare for their future. Most importantly, college is time for people to achieve an education, while furthermore working on who they are and who they want to be. However, when people hear about college experiences, they are mostly focused around wild parties, drugs, and alcohol: the makings of a â€Å"good time†Read MoreSadly, In Today’S Society There Is A Lot Of Issues Concerning1294 Words   |  6 Pagesconcerning drug and alcohol abuse in schools whether its at the high school or college level. Not only does drug and alcohol consumption effect your overall health, it can effect your academic performance as well. In this paper I am going to be talking about the problems with drug and alcohol abuse, preventions, risks, costs and much more. We are going to dissect the problems with drug alcohol consumption amongst young adults, and talk about ways tha t we can prevent these problems. The first thingRead MoreAlcohol and Drug Abuse Essay1671 Words   |  7 PagesAlcohol and Drug Abuse Alcohol is a liquor or brew containing alcohol as the active agent. (Online Dictionary) Although it is legal in the United States it is still illegal to those who aren’t twenty one years of age and other. This includes those persons of age purchasing alcohol for those under age. To some college students, heavy drinking that leads to vomiting is not alcohol abuse but simply having a good time. Alcoholism or alcohol dependence is a chronic disorder characterized by compulsiveRead MoreA Brief Note On Academic And Experiential Learning1038 Words   |  5 Pagesthrough is a combination of psychoeducational and small groups. Psychoeducational groups work on developing and expanding students’ cognitive, social and behavioral perceptions of drug use (Corey, Corey Corey, 2014) while counseling groups will focus on personal, emotional and social/interpersonal development, problem-solving and in introducing new skill sets, which students can practice and apply outside of the school setting. In order for counselors to effectively combine characteristics of academic