Ontinuum of care for maternal, newborn, and child health in Australia

Persuasive Essay
? Word limit: 1,200 words
Persuasive Essay: (1,200 words, not including references)
Within the stages of an argument, evaluative language and clause structures will either function to
support an argument or detract from its merit. The argument essay required here is an exposition:
Background: Brief introduction to the issue contextualising the problem
Thesis: States the authori??s position (includes scope, stance & conclusion)
Arguments: Concisely communicate the rationale for the thesis through definition, explanation and
the integration of supporting evidence
Thesis Reinforcement: Restates (rewords) the thesis and summarises salient supporting arguments
The essay will be written for a specialist, academic audience and will identify a recommendation in
response to the social inclusion issue topic. The argument essay outlines the key arguments
supporting a central thesis, referencing relevant evidence to support each argument before reiterating
and reinforcing the thesis through a summary of salient arguments.
In the argument essay students are required to reference at least eight (8) sources outside of the
course materials and demonstrate the ability to synthesise information and views from a variety of
perspectives to produce a coherent, well-supported recommendation.

Model of a Persuasive Essay:
In the international development of penal systems, there are two opposing schools of thought. The
first perspective supports more punitive sentencing and the increasing use of imprisonment, both as a
means of retribution and incapacitation. The second perspective supports a powerful movement
towards the internationalization of probation through the establishment of probation services. These
rehabilitative, probation services are integral for a penal system founded in spiritual and moral codes,
social reconstruction and restorative justice.
The first argument for developing rehabilitative services is a moral, spiritual one. Historically,
probation services in the western world began with the Churchi??s missionary service, seen as an
extension of their normal work of trying to persuade sinners to reform (McWilliams, 1983, p. 68;
Vanstone, 2004, pp. 92-94). Christians had a duty to show mercy to sinners, and charity gave this a
practical form, but active and caring human contact was necessary to persuade i??sinnersi?? to reform.
This kind of work was seen as the business of voluntary organisations and charities rather than
Government. Social and spiritual rehabilitation is commendable, but the overarching goal is salvation,
and other achievements are valued mainly as means towards this end. Evidence of achievement of the
ultimate goal of salvation is beyond the reach of secular social science (Raynor & Robinson, 2009, p. 3).SIBT Department of Linguistics i?? Faculty of Human Science Macquarie University 2014
The second argument for developing probation services as part of the penal code stems from
utilitarian views of social reconstruction. Under this paradigm, the offender to be rehabilitated is
guided to become a good citizen rather than merely a good person (Garland, 1985, p. 279). The aim of
this Utilitarian tradition is a penal system that transforms offenders into decent and useful members
of the community by the most efficient means. This perspective also offers a clear justification for
rehabilitative efforts. These efforts contribute to the service of the community through the availability
of i??decent and useful members of the communityi?? for the collective task of social reconstruction
(Mannheim, 1946, p. 62).
The third argument for offender rehabilitation focuses on the benefit to potential victims and to the
community. Under this view, Rehabilitation is advocated on the grounds that it is better for both
offenders and society because it can reduce further offending and victimizations (McGuire, 1995, p.
28). This primacy accorded to public safety is described by Garland (2001) as a shift in the justification
of rehabilitation: the emphasis moves from the benefit to the offender towards the benefit to
potential future victims; in other words, it is for the communityi??s sake that rehabilitation is attempted.
Such approaches are associated particularly with advocates of restorative justice who believe that
reintegrative processes can help offenders to atone for or make reparation for their offences at the
same time as helping offenders and victims to learn something of each other (Braithwaite, 1989, p. 2).
The aim is the restoration or establishment of social bonds that both offer the offender membership
of a community and consequently strengthen informal controls over his or her behaviour. Therefore,
the aim of probation services is to view rehabilitation not simply as meeting offendersi?? needs or
correcting their deficits, but as harnessing and developing their strengths and assets, achieving both
moral and secular motivations (Maruna & Lebel, 2003, p. 9).
Braithwaite, J 1989 Crime, Shame and Reintegration, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Garland, D 2001 The Culture of Control, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Garland, D 1985 Punishment and Welfare: A History of Penal Strategies, Gower, Aldershot.
Mannheim, H 1946 Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, Routledge, London.
Maruna, S & King, A 2004 i??Public opinion and community penaltiesi?? in A Bottoms, S Rex and G
Robinson (eds.) Alternatives to Prison. Willan, Cullompton, pp. 7-20.
McGuire, J (ed.) 1995 What Works: Reducing Reoffending, Wiley, Chichester.
McWilliams, W 1983 i??The mission to the English Police Courts 1876-1936i??, The Howard Journal, vol.
22, pp. 129-147.
Neave, M 2004 i??Restorative Justicei??: when is it appropriate?, Victorian Law Reform Commission, pp. 1-
Raynor, P & Robinson, G 2009, i??Why help offenders? Arguments for rehabilitation as a penal strategyi??,
European Journal of Probation, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3-20.
Vanstone, M 2004 Supervising Offenders in the Community: A History of Probation Theory and
Practice, Aldershot, Ashgate.