This is a sociology conflict dispute and resolution course. If you are not familiar with it please Hand it to a writer who is knowledgable. I am studying law this powerpoint relates to sociology and law
This powerpoint should contain 2 points A diagnosis and a Prescriiption.
Part 1. A diagnosis is essentially a conflict assessment of a case of your choice. In real life, a conflict as- sessment includes structured private interviews with all the stakeholders and parties involved in a given conflict in order for a mediator to draw a “map” of the conflict. For our sake, however, it will consist of the analysis of your case using The Seven Elements of Integrative Negotiation, and as we move forward in the course, using the other “tool boxes” provided by the other readings like Difficult Conversations and Beyond Reason.
Part 2. A prescriiption is a proposed negotiation strategy. You will use your conflict assessment, i.e your analysis of the case in part 1, to propose, in the second part, a solution to resolve the conflict. By “solu- tion,” however, we do not mean a ready-made solution, that is you telling the parties what they should do. Rather, it is a negotiation strategy that is likely to lead the parties to a negotiated agreement, i.e. a strategy that a mediator would use to help the parties negotiate an agreement. In the real world, if a mediator says to the disputants “here’s your solution”, it’s very unlikely that they would both accept it. What a mediator does, instead, is to help them negotiate their own solution to their conflict. Your assignment for the second part is therefore to put yourself in the shoes of a mediator and do as if you were hired by the parties to help them resolve their conflict. Your tool boxes for the prescriiption are the same as for the diagnosis.
you need to find a documented case with actual parties (i.e. people or a group of people) having gone through a conflict over abortion or sexual harass- ment. If their conflict was settled in court, that is if they did not negotiate and a judge or a jury decided for
them (as it was the case with Roe vs Wade, the historical dispute over abortion rights in 1973), you need to ask yourself “What if they had negotiated? What could have been their negotiation strategy? What kind of agreement could they reach? Would it be a sustainable one? If so, why?
I told my teacher I want to incorporate my stop and frisk experience that was published by The NY Times and he said via email
“You can use your own experience for insights on the emotional dimension of the problem. But you need to find and work on a documented case of conflict over stop and frisk, not just do a presentation on the topic in general and advocate for one side.”
please use his response In consideration while incorporating my article along with other cases to support this
please get me an A thanks in advance