Sanctuary Cities: Pros and Cons Sanctuary Cities usually limit their cooperation with the federal government in efforts to enforce immigration laws on the basis of encouraging immigrants to report crimes, enroll their children in schools and use other health and social services. This is said to reduce the fear of deportation and family break-ups. This has a number of pros and cons. Let’s start with the pros. For one, it is a fact that sanctuary cities encourage good relationships, or at least better, with law enforcement. Undocumented immigrants are less likely to report being victims of or give information about crimes. This makes criminals thrive while the general public suffers. Sanctuary cities reduce these risks significantly. Secondly, sanctuary cities’ policies are protected by the operation of the 10th Amendment though the separation of federal and State powers. This means that Congress cannot compel States to collect immigration status. Thirdly, sanctuary cities have a wider labor base. It is not uncommon to find relatively cheap labor in Sanctuary cities; immigrants get jobs and employers get affordable labor. Schools in these cities also welcome children and make them feel safe. Children from immigrant families can attend schools in these cities without fear of their information getting shared with enforcement agencies and consequently being rounded up. It suffices to say that sanctuary cities curb family break-ups through legal action. Without their protection, federal law enforcement becomes more likely to separate families by deportation. Therefore by their mere operation, sanctuary cities prevent the break-up of immigrant families. Finally, sanctuary cities are a good thing for the economy. Simply put; immigrants are people. People equate to labor, labor equates to production, manufacturing and distribution. The end result is a significant progress in economic development both in these cities and nationwide. However, these cities also come with certain legitimate dangers for their residents and for the country. These are discussed below. First, it is a fact that sanctuary cities tend to harbor criminals and create a dangerous environment for U.S citizens. These criminals cannot be effectively ousted from the country because of lack of cooperation. Out of 8,145 undocumented immigrants released from detention requests between January 1, 2014 and August 31, 2014 in an Francisco, 63% had previous criminal convictions or were marked a public safety concern; 36.6% had felony charges or convictions and 2.9% had three or more misdemeanor convictions (ProCon, 2016). These statistics present a strong case for safety; such individuals as referred to above create an unsafe environment for Americans and other law-abiding citizens. It may be said that America has criminals even without the consideration of immigrants. However, having one problem doesn’t make it right to compound on it. Secondly, sanctuary cities prevent police from investi.

1. Sanctuary Cities: Pros and Cons
Sanctuary Cities usually limit their cooperation with the federal
government in efforts to enforce immigration laws on the basis
of encouraging immigrants to report crimes, enroll their
children in schools and use other health and social services.
This is said to reduce the fear of deportation and family break-
ups. This has a number of pros and cons.
Let’s start with the pros. For one, it is a fact that sanctuary
cities encourage good relationships, or at least better, with law
enforcement. Undocumented immigrants are less likely to report
being victims of or give information about crimes. This makes
criminals thrive while the general public suffers. Sanctuary
cities reduce these risks significantly. Secondly, sanctuary
cities’ policies are protected by the operation of the 10th
Amendment though the separation of federal and State powers.
This means that Congress cannot compel States to collect
immigration status. Thirdly, sanctuary cities have a wider labor
base. It is not uncommon to find relatively cheap labor in
Sanctuary cities; immigrants get jobs and employers get
affordable labor.
Schools in these cities also welcome children and make them
feel safe. Children from immigrant families can attend schools
in these cities without fear of their information getting shared
with enforcement agencies and consequently being rounded up.
It suffices to say that sanctuary cities curb family break-ups
through legal action. Without their protection, federal law
enforcement becomes more likely to separate families by
deportation. Therefore by their mere operation, sanctuary cities
prevent the break-up of immigrant families. Finally, sanctuary
cities are a good thing for the economy. Simply put; immigrants
are people. People equate to labor, labor equates to production,
manufacturing and distribution. The end result is a significant
progress in economic development both in these cities and
nationwide. However, these cities also come with certain

2. legitimate dangers for their residents and for the country. These
are discussed below.
First, it is a fact that sanctuary cities tend to harbor criminals
and create a dangerous environment for U.S citizens. These
criminals cannot be effectively ousted from the country because
of lack of cooperation. Out of 8,145 undocumented immigrants
released from detention requests between January 1, 2014 and
August 31, 2014 in an Francisco, 63% had previous criminal
convictions or were marked a public safety concern; 36.6% had
felony charges or convictions and 2.9% had three or more
misdemeanor convictions (ProCon, 2016). These statistics
present a strong case for safety; such individuals as referred to
above create an unsafe environment for Americans and other
law-abiding citizens. It may be said that America has criminals
even without the consideration of immigrants. However, having
one problem doesn’t make it right to compound on it. Secondly,
sanctuary cities prevent police from investigating, questioning
and arresting persons who break federal laws; they often have to
wait for repeat crimes to occur just to get these individuals off
the streets. It also costs a lot of funding to support immigrants,
a duty which cannot be bypassed on the grounds of
documentation. Sanctuary cities also contribute to the loss of
jobs for American citizens because of competition with cheaper
labor from undocumented immigrants. The status of being
undocumented makes immigrants desperate for jobs, which
means they are more prone to being employed over citizens and
with substandard employment conditions.
At the end of the day, one has to weigh the security, welfare and
development concerns of American citizens against the morality
of being a sanctuary city. While these cities provide a lot in
terms of augmenting relationships, it will be pointless if these
relationships are created on a foundation of hurt, job loss and
insecurity for the everyday law-abiding citizen. If immigrants
are to be integrated into the American society, it should be done
lawfully.
References

3. Pro Con Editors (2016). Sanctuary Cities: Top 3 Pros and Cons,
procon.org, December 8, 2016, web, retrieved from:
www.procon.org/headline.php?headlineID=005333
Sun Sentinel Editorial Board (2017). Sanctuary Schools Make
Students Feel Safe, sunsentinel.com, March 15, 2017, web,
retrieved from: www.sunsentinel.com/opinion/editorials/fl-
editorial-safe-schools-20170308-story.html
Teresa Swain
1 posts
Re:Module 7 DQ 2
Module 7 DQ 2
What does it mean to be "normal" or "abnormal," and to what
extent does your place in a given culture at a moment in history
influence this?
Support your position.
Historical causes for abnormalities such as mental, physical or
cultural were attributed to the supernatural, biological or
psychological reasons (Zuern & Ashley, 2012). However, there
various definitions for the terms normal and abnormal
depending upon the benchmark used for measurement, the
context in which the behavior is occurring as well as the
cultural and societal influences acting on said behavior. For
example, according to an article by authors Zuern &
Ashley(2012), even Jesus himself was considered abnormal
when he sat with the unclean and criminals as he was
questioned by the Pharisees for his outrageous behaviors. Now,
his behavior is seen by many Christians as the noble, correct
way to treat others and is perfectly normal and acceptable in the
Christian culture.
Furthermore, culture impacts the validity of diagnosing certain
psychiatric disorders as demonstrated by the introductory
chapter in the DSM-5 Cultural Issues Subgroup: Cultural
Aspects of Psychiatric Diagnosis (American Psychiatric
Association, 2013). The goal of this specification is to include

4. worldwide cultural and contextual factors such as social and
environmental peculiarities where individuals develop.
Moreover, cultural systems include such as experiences and
interactions, social structures (access to resources, racisms, and
marginalization), local material environment (access to
resources such as health) and individual circumstances that can
vary from time to time (Lewis-Fernandez & Aggarwal, 2013).
Additionally, the person’s interpretation of the situation as well
as the pathology of the behavior according to others in the local
setting, perceived severity, and persistence of the disturbance
and availability of support systems or interventions is part of
the validity and usefulness of diagnosis.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and
statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington,
DC: Author.
Lewis-Fernandez, R. & Aggarwal, N.K. (2013). Culture and
psychiatric diagnosis. Adv Psychosom Med., 33, 15–30.
doi:10.1159/000348725.
Zuern, G. A. & Ashley, W. M. (2012). In quest of the meaning
of normal and abnormal behavior
American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 2(9),
20-25.
Deborah Hill
2 posts
Re:Module 7 DQ 1
Consider the neurobiology of our most basic drives. How do
substance-abuse disorders most notably interfere with these
basic human drives and the areas of the brain that control them?
Support your position. Substance abuse is the after effects of
prolong chemical use. It masks or numbs problematic thoughts,
and feelings that becomes too difficult to address. However, the
natural processes of brain and body functions are inhibitors to
neurological and biological drives. Recent research studies
report that compulsive and repetitive use may result in tolerance

5. to the effect of the drug and withdrawal symptoms when use is
reduced or stopped (Qi, Tretter, & Voit, 2014).
Depending on the type of substance dependence, different
neurotransmitters have been suggested as targets. Specifically,
alcohol can increase inhibitory neurotransmission through
gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), while simultaneously
reducing excitatory neurotransmission through glutamate (Glu).
Substances like amphetamine increase the dopamine level in the
synaptic cleft, whereas nicotine mimics psychopharmacological
effects of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine and modulates
dopamine release (Qi, Tretter, & Voit, 2014).
Alcohol affects several neurological pathways and powerful
enough to cause significant changes in the brain. The effects of
alcohol works like all the other drugs affects the central nervous
system (CNS). The type of alcohol commonly consumed is
ethanol with different alcoholic beverages containing different
percentages of it. Ethanol acts to depress brain function
(Banerjee, 2014).
The results of abuse translates into destruction of organ
functioning such as, liver damage or (cirrhosis) caused by
alcoholism. The effects of chemical intrusion destabilizes and
impairs alert systems visually, mentally and physically, slowing
down reactions and coordination (Banerjee, 2014). All of which
impair sound reasoning, thinking, posture, walking and long-
term negative effects on cell deficits. For example, depressed
mood observed by alcoholics demonstrate rumination, and
confusion often times leading to difficult or incoherent
conversations.
References:
Banerjee, N. (2014). Neurotransmitters in alcoholism: A review
of neurobiological and genetic studies. Indian Journal Of
Human Genetics , 20 (1), 20-31. doi:10.4103/0971-
6866.132750
Qi, Z., Tretter, F., & Voit, E. O. (2014). A Heuristic Model of
Alcohol Dependence. Plos ONE, 9(3), 1-8.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0092221

6. Herve Preval
1 posts
Re:Module 7 DQ 1
Consider the neurobiology of our most basic drives. How do
substance-abuse disorders most notably interfere with these
basic human drives and the areas of the brain that control them?
Support your position.
As we discuss substance abuse disorders, it is important to
understand that the effects of substances will vary based on the
class of drugs. Research has shown that chemical dependence
and / or abuse involves a dysregulation of the pleasure pathway
located in the mesolimbic portion of the brain (Spence, DiNitto,
and Straussner, 2001). For example, the Central nervous system
stimulants such as cocaine and amphetamines elevate the mood.
They act on the central nervous system activating brain cells. A
user of this type of drug is usually talkative, energetic, and
anxious. The central nervous system depressants such as
barbiturates and tranquilizers depress the central nervous
system. A user of that class of drugs becomes generally calm
and less anxious. Abuse of this type of drugs can lead to coma.
The hallucinogens such as cannabis and LSD work on the brain
to affect the sense and cause hallucination. The opiates such as
morphine, opium, and heroine induce sleep and can alleviate
pain. Available research in neuroscience has studied abused
substances and the finding show that all abused substances
elevate a brain neurotransmitter called dopamine in the nucleus
accumbens, a dimesized area of the brain dubbed the “pleasure-
center” (Epright, Guest, Carmela, 2010). Consequently, this
promotes the behavior of repeating the substances. It was also
noted that environmental factors may be associated with the
substance and encourage the substance usage behaviors
(Epright, Guest, Carmela. (2010).
References
Epright,Raymond Anton Guest Edited by M.Carmela. (2010).
Conundrums and controversies in mental health and illnes:

7. Substance abuse is a disease of the human brain: Focus on
alcohol. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 38, 735. Retrieved
from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohos
t.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edslex&A
N=edslexD1B51E84&site=eds-live&scope=site
Spence, R. T., DiNitto, D. M., Straussner, S. L . (2001).
Neurobiology of Addictions: Implications for Clinical Practice.
Binghamton, NY.