Neurofibtomatosis NF1 and NF2 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Neurofibtomatosis NF1 and NF2 - Essay Example Thereafter, this affliction is also known as von Recklinghausen’s disease. (Von Recklinghausen, 1882). Crowe, Schull and Neel estimated that the prevalence of NF1 in the general population was 1 in 5000. Moreover, though all persons having the NF1 genes will show features of the disease, there is a large amount of variation shown in the presentation of this disease even in the same family. (Crowe, Schull and Neel, 1956). Moreover, sporadic cases are known to occur (without any family history of the disease), believed to result from germ cell mutations. (Mulvihill etal, 1990). Neurofibromatosis 2 Kantner, Eldridge, Fabricant, Allen, and Koerber found that amongst patients thought to suffer from neurofibromatosis, a certain subset of patients had propensity to develop central nervous system tumors, especially, tumors of the auditory nerves (acoustic neuromas). These patients were genetically and clinically distinct from the other neurofibromatosis patients and were subsequently identified as NF2. (Kantner, Eldridge, Fabricant, Allen, and Koerber, 1980) The prevalence of NF2 is less, estimated to be in the range of 1 in 210 000 population. (Husom, 1989.) Body Systems Affected NF1 mainly affects the skin, peripheral nerves, optic nerve, iris and long bones (e.g. those of the extremities) of the body. NF2, on the other hand, affects the central nervous system and causes the premature formation of cataract in the eyes. Characteristics of the Disease Gutman etal have summarized the features of the diseases. (Gutman, 1997). Neurofibromatosis 1 is characterized by the presence of cafe-au-lait spots, brownish colored patches on the skin. They may also display freckling in the axilla or groin. They develop tumors of the peripheral nerves called neurofibromas, which can arise in the nerve endings in the skin (cutaneous neurofibromas), peripheral nerves (nodular neurofibromas) or optic nerves (optic gliomas). Extensive tumor formation in the peripheral nerves is the most easily identifiable feature of NF1, leading to grotesque disfiguration of the face and limbs, a condition known as plexiform neurofibromatosis. The so-called Elephant Man, Mr. John Merrick is believed to be a victim of this condition. In addition, patients with NF1 may suffer from thinning of the long bones of the body. Some patients develop typical tumors in the iris of the eye called Lisch nodules. Patients with NF1 also have an increased tendency to develop other tumors like those of the adrenal gland (phaeochromcytoma), thyroid and parathyroid glands (as part of a syndrome called Multiple Endocrinal Neoplasia), small intestinal tumors and chronic myeloid leukemia. These patients often have a larger than average sized skull (macrocephaly) and are shorter in stature. Abnormalities in the functioning of the pituitary gland may lead to precocious puberty and growth hormone deficiency. They may also have learning disabilities. Other problems associated more frequently with this condition are epilepsy, headaches and deafness. The characteristic feature of NF2 is bilateral vestibular schwannomas or acoustic neuromas (tumors of the 8th cranial nerve – the auditory nerve). As a result, these patients present with gradual, progressive hearing loss. Other central nervous s

Corruption between inmates and correction officers Term Paper

Corruption between inmates and correction officers - Term Paper Example Interestingly, there is no formal definition of correctional corruption. However, the penal codes define corrupt acts to be: acceptance of honorarium, bribery, accepting sexual favors and improper influence; but, they do not authoritatively describe what constitutes corrupt. Corruption is always evident as an abuse of power, whereby individuals presume that the use of power leads to the achievement of a purpose other than what it granted. In correctional facilities, there are instances of promotion or hiring of a less qualified staff based on their relation with the supervisor. Some of the inmates may receive preferential treatment from the security personnel on the grounds that they serve as house trustees. A group of inmates may be denied their civil rights or privileges because of their faith or religion (Souryal, 28). On the other hand, use of oppression is also a form of corruption that is evident in correctional facilities. A warden may pile up charges on an inmate or an office r, which they did not commit, because of ethnicity or race. In some instances, officers and inmates may experience physical abuses, which are permitted by others, due to their different lifestyles. In the prison context, there are three metrics which generally define corruption, that is, Acts of Misfeasance, Acts of Malfeasance and Acts of Nonfeasance. Acts of misfeasance are the illicit acts, which the correction officers are supposed to undertake, nonetheless, they willingly contravene for personal gain. These acts are more often than not committed by high-ranking officers in the correctional hierarchy or by outsiders, who are linked to the prison facility through professional or political appointment. Generally, acts of malfeasance are committed by prison officers at the middle or lower management levels. These acts involve acts of misconduct or criminal acts, which the officers intentionally commit in violation of agency rules and regulations and/or state laws (Souryal 29). Acts that are in this category are trafficking of contraband, embezzlement, extortion, official oppression and the exploitation of inmates or their families for goods, money or services. Lastly, acts of nonfeasance involve avoidance or omission knowingly committed by prison officers who are responsible for undertaking such acts. These acts are common in the correctional facility despite an officer’s rank. There are two types of nonfeasance: an officer ignoring a prisoner’s violations of the institutional laws and the failure to report other officers of misconduct as a repayment of an earlier favor or personal loyalty. Additionally, there are other metrics that can be used to measure corruption in correctional facilities, which are drawn from the Path-Driven Taxonomy of Corruption Metrics. It is composed of four metrics, which are: Political-Economic-Social (PES) metrics; Public Administration (PA) metrics; Citizen Engagement (CE) metrics and Cultural (CU) metrics. In the c orrectional facilities context, the PES metrics will examine the general conditions and draw a parallel between situations or events, which make the occurrence of corruption to be very high in the prevention stage. In addition, it will also measure the existence or insight of existence of corruption in the correctional facilities; its different units and partners in the detection stage of corruption. Furthermore, the metrics will also focus on the perceived or existent actions to fight