The Divorcee (1930) and Its Challenges Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

The Divorcee (1930) and Its Challenges - Essay Example A husband has a brief extra marital affair and considers it nothing. He asks his wife for forgiveness but his wife, in order to make him realize the sensitivity of the issue, has an affair with her husband’s friend and then the husband realizes that it must mean something. The film starts with a party in New York with a number of social elite. Jerry Bernard, played by Norma Shearer, is an informal leader of the group who breaks the news of her engagement with Ted Martin, played by Chester Morris, at the party. Paul, played by Conrad Negel, is in love with Jerry and he is disappointed by the news of Jerry’s engagement with Ted. Paul gets drunk at the party and on his way home he gets into an accident and causes facial disfigurement to Dorothy, played by Helen Johnson, who was a passenger in the car. Paul gets remorseful and decides to marry Dorothy himself. On the day Paul decides to marry Dorothy in a hospital bedside ceremony, Jerry and Ted also get married and have a lavish wedding ceremony. Years pass and Ted and Jerry lead a happy married life. On the third anniversary of their marriage, Ted is compelled to go out of town for a meeting in Chicago. The friends of Ted and Jerry take them out for a party and they bring another woman named Janice Meredith, played by Mary Doran, with them. The fact that Janice accompanies them upsets Ted but they go anyway. Janice corners Ted in the kitchen and here it is disclosed that Ted and Janice had a brief affair a short time earlier. Jerry finds Ted and Janice in the kitchen with Janice’s arms around Ted. A short time later Ted admits to his wife that he had a brief affair with Janice. He justifies his position by saying that he had been drunk and the affair was nothing but an unfortunate incident. After Ted leaves for Chicago, Jerry feels upset because of the disclosure of Ted’s brief affair. To cheer her up, Don played by Robert Montgomery, Ted’s best friend takes Jerry out. Don flirt s with Jerry and Jerry responds. Ted returns from his trip a week later and he is filled with remorse. He asks for Jerry’s forgiveness and justifies his position by saying that the affair meant nothing. They had almost reconciled their differences when Jerry admits that she had balanced their accounts when Ted was away for the trip. She, similar to Ted, justifies her position by saying that her short lived affair meant nothing and it too should be overlooked. Jerry expects Ted to be reasonable and treat her affair as he treats his own but Ted refuses to forgive her. Jerry becomes outraged at Ted’s behavior and after arguing, both of them decide to divorce. Both of them regret the break up but due to their stubbornness, do not reconcile. Jerry has a series of affairs afterwards and years pass. Ted moves to Paris due to his job. Paul encounters Jerry in train while she was in the company of Ivan. Paul knocks Ivan out when he mistreats Jerry. Paul tells Jerry that he want s to marry her and he can even dump his wife for her. While Jerry considers Paul’s proposal, she is visited by Dorothy who asks her not to destroy her marriage. Jerry then renounces Paul’s proposal and moves to Paris. She hopes to find Ted and visits various nightclubs for that purpose. Finally she finds Ted and he is surprised to see her in Paris. Ted initially thinks that Jerry is there for her honeymoon with Paul but she says that Ted is her only read husband. At this point they finally reconcile their

Political Climate of the 1970s Essay Example for Free

Political Climate of the 1970s Essay The 1970s were times of chaotic events held over from the chaos of the 1960s. The 70s brought Americans an end to the Vietnam War and a change in the political and social perspectives, another presidency term with Richard M. Nixon, and his policies of engagement, and the Watergate scandal, leading to the first resignation of an American President. The end of the Vietnam War led to political and social fallout around the globe, especially in America. All of the chaos of the 1970s also led Americans to have a changed perspective in their government. People were beginning to notice similarities between Nixons policies of engagement and strategies used during the Cold War, and the aftermath of the Watergate scandal led many Americans to doubt the role of their government and its power. In 1969, Nixon built his presidential campaign on the idea of ending the Vietnam War. Early in his administration, the president outlined a foreign policy based on a low profile and on reductions in the U.S. role abroad. Many believe this was the reason for Nixons election. Fed up with the war in Vietnam, Americans were ready to get our soldiers home. Nixon considered his engagement strategy peace with honor. Nixons priority was the settlement of the Vietnam crisis while using the peace with honor code. Nixon found an ally in Henry Kissinger who was the Nation Security Advisor and working together to end the crisis in Vietnam. One strategy was called Vietnamization, a carrot on a stick method, which would to gradually move the troops away and force the South Vietnamese to fight for themselves in order to advance peace talks in Paris. (Davidson et al., 2002 pg 895) The truth of the matter is that Nixon continued with the Vietnam War for nearly four more years. Nixons peace with honor code or policy of engagement was similar to Truman and the Cold War. Truman used the treat of nuclear arms attacks to scare the communist bloc from expanding. When the peace with honor code did not work, that is when Nixon took action on an earlier threat by using troops, force, and weapons. Nixons policy of engagement also differs somewhat from the strategies used by others during the Cold War. Where containment assumed a bipolar world, Nixons policy of detente saw the world as multi-polar. (Davidson et al., 2002, p. 907) By the end of March 1973, The Vietnam War had ended. All U.S. fighting forces  had been withdrawn. (Vietnam War, 2007) The political and social aftermath of the Vietnam War hit America almost immediately. In July 1971, for the first year in the century, it appeared that the U.S. would import more merchandise than it exported, and consequently it faced a severe deficit in its balance of payments. A federal budget deficit of about $20 billion was projected for fiscal 1971. In August, a crisis in world monetary stability was evident, and the value of the dollar was threatened for the second time in a year. (The Vietnam War Period, 2007) By the end of the 1970s, the National Debt was nearly $382 billion. From spending money during the war and cutting costs to federal programs, the nation was experiencing severe recession in 40 years. This recession affected many families, which became dual income households due to necessity. The government tried to fix this spiraling problem by raising minimum wage, but with each wage increase came inflation and higher unemployment rates. To curb this growing problem, reversing his previous refusal to impose price and wage controls, Nixon announced a 3-month freeze on wages, prices, and rents. (TVWP, 2007) Before Nixon had a chance to work on changing the economic problems in America he was surrounded by the Watergate scandal. From the fall of 1973 through the summer of 1974, the evidence steadily mounted that President Nixon himself was implicated in the Watergate burglary and its attempted cover-up, and that it was indeed only one aspect of a series of lawless acts committed by the administration. As a result, by the beginning of August 1974 the president was faced with imminent impeachment. He resigned on August 9, the first president of the U.S. to do so. (TVWP, 2007) Americans have come to believe the worst about government, politics, and politicians. It didnt start with Watergate, but Watergate turned an erosion of public confidence into a collapse. The downturn came to a climax with Watergate. Americans saw a presidency disintegrate before their eyes, criminal conspiracies at the highest level of government and a president driven out of office. The effect on public trust was immediate and dramatic. Watergate crushed the publics faith in government. In 1974, a little more than a third of Americans 36 percent said they still trusted the government. (Americans in the 1950s and 1960s saw there government as successful. They had led the country out of a depression and won a World War. The 1970s did  not carry that same prestige, instead the American public saw there elected leader in the center of a severe scandal, the worst recession in 40 years, and an embarrassing loss to an un-winnable war. Since Watergate, nothing has happened to restore public trust. (Bill, 1997). By the end of the 1970s, Americans were ready for change. The Vietnam War had ended, Nixon had resigned from office, and there was a lack of trust in government officials. Many Americans believed the 1980s were going to be that time of change. Nixon was a professional politician when elected president. Since that did not fare well, there was heightened contempt in professional politics. This created a market for outsiders and non-professionals for the job of Presidency. Many Americans today still crave for the Eisenhower or Kennedy era, but not since then has there been that kind of support for an elected president. Only when special interests groups stay out of politics or presidents remember they are leading by example will that return. Lets all hope that day will be sooner rather then later. References Vietnam War. (2007). _World Almanac Encyclopedia,_ Retrieved November 19, 2007 from facts.com database. Davidson, J. W., Gienapp, W. E., Heyrman, C. L., Lytle, M. H., Stoff, M. B. (2002). _Nations of Nations: A Concise Narrative of the American Republic_ (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill. Bill Schneider, (1997). Cynicism Didnt Start With Watergate. _allPolitics_. Retrieved November 19, 2007, from http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1997/ _United States of America: HistoryFrom Watergate Through the 2000 Election._ (n.d.). Retrieved November 21, 2007, from The World Almanac Encyclopedia @ FACTS.com database.

Mother Daughter Relationships - Mothers and Daughters in Amy Tans The Joy Luck Club :: Joy Luck Club Essays

Mothers and Daughters in The Joy Luck Club The first three stories in this section are talking about the relationship between mothers and daughters and the last one is concluding the whole book "The Joy Luck Club".   By examining this section, there is one moral in these four stories, which is the relationship between daughters and mothers, is very strong and mothers and daughters have similar fate and face.   The plots in these four stories can prove the moral above.   In "Magpies", when An-mei hsu thinks about her daughter's marriage is fallen apart, she recalls her mother and how she followed her mother to Tientsin.   An-mei also recalls the conflict between her mother, Wu Tsing and Second wife of Wu Tsing.   She remembers how Second wife lied to her mother and how Wu Tsing forced her mother to become his Fourth wife.   Finally, An-mei's mother died by taking too much opium.   An-mei realizes her mother's situation is as same as her daughter, both of them cannot save their lives very well and they like magpies.   In "Waiting between the Trees", Ying-Ying St. Clair recalls her story in the childhood, when she sees signs in her daughter's house.   Ying-Ying recalls how was her first marriage, how she met her first husband and final result on her first marriage.   Ying-Ying also talks about her birth year of Tiger and the relationship between she and Clifford St. Clair and how both of them become equally. Ying-Ying realizes the relationship between her and Clifford St. Clair is also as same as her daughter and her husband.   Ying-Ying also talks that her daughter is as same as a Tiger.   At the end, Yin-Yin know her daughter will go upstairs when her daughter fight with her husband and she will wait for her coming.   In "Double Face", when Lindo Jong looks at her daughter's face, she compares American faces and Chinese faces.   Lindo Jong recalls what her mother had told her fortune by looking her face.   She also remembers how she moves to America and she realizes that her face becomes American face already.   In "A pair of Ticket", Jing-Mei Woo talks about her feeling before she meet her two sisters.   Also, Jing-Mei talks about the meeting in the Airport with her father and aunt.   In the meeting, Jing-Mei's father talks about Jing-Mei's mother and how she escaped when Japanese came to China and how she leaves her two daughters on the rail.

Avarice in the Crucible

Cambria Anderson Petersen AP English III/Period 3 11 November 2012 Avarice and Vengeance in The Crucible The play The Crucible takes place during the Salem Witch Trials of the 1800s. Yet Arthur Miller does not reveal the tragedy of the witch trials in the manner expected. Miller expresses the underlying causes of the accusations made as those stemming from personal greed and the feeling of revenge. Abigail Williams, Mr. and Mrs. Putnam, and Reverend Samuel Parris all have their own agendas as to why they â€Å"cry witch† on others in their village.Miller outlines the history between Abigail Williams and John Proctor in Act One: Abigail was removed from the Proctor home by Elizabeth, Proctor’s wife, because of an affair happening between her and Proctor. Because of this, Abigail harbors a hate and jealousy towards Elizabeth. In Act Two, a warrant was sent for Elizabeth’s arrest: The girl, the Williams girl, Abigail Williams, sir. She sat to dinner in Reverend Parr is’ house tonight, and without word nor warnin’ she falls to the floor.Like a struck beast, [Parris] says, and screamed a scream that a bull would weep to hear. And [Parris] goes to save her, and, stuck two inches in the flesh of her belly, he draw a needle out. And demandin’ of her how she come to be so stabbed, she [†¦] testify it were your wife’s familiar spirit pushed it in. (Miller 79) Abigail knew that from the beginning of the witch scare that she could exact revenge on those who she felt wronged her or took something from her, which would be the case of Elizabeth.Abigail knew Mary Warren made a doll, and was planning to give it to Elizabeth; she also saw Mary Warren stick the needle back in. Abigail took advantage of the situation to provide seemingly irrefutable evidence of witchcraft on Elizabeth’s part. Through this, Proctor sees that vengeance runs these trials, and how easily people turn on one another to get what they want. Proct or also knows that Abigail’s revenge has no limits; she has no shame, and always believes that she is right, much like the character of her uncle, Reverend Parris.At this point, Proctor had to juggle keeping his past a secret from the public and protecting Elizabeth, as Abigail will turn on anyone who â€Å"wrongs† her. Mr. Thomas Putnam and Mrs. Ann Putnam have a sorrowful history of losing their newborn children, while only having one that survives. Mrs. Putnam finds comfort in blaming their midwife, Sarah Osburn, for the deaths, saying, â€Å"I begged [Thomas] not to call Osburn because I feared her. My babies always shriveled in her hands! (I. 50). Mrs. Putnam finds that crying witch on Goody Osburn would solve the â€Å"murder† of her children, yet does not desire to take into account her own role in her pregnancy, being that Miller says she is fourty-five years old (I. 13). Mrs. Putnam, in a way, wants someone to feel the pain of losing seven children, be ing that she is a selfish woman – putting her child in the dangers of witchcraft to find the identity of the person who â€Å"killed† her babies.Accusing someone of witchcraft, and potentially running their life, was the perfect way to exact her so-called â€Å"revenge†. Although Reverend Parris never accused anyone of witchcraft, he refuses to defend Proctor of any charges brought up against him – from insulting the court to claims of witchcraft. In Act Three, Parris takes Proctor’s depositions from Corey Giles and Mary Warren personally, warning Judge Danforth that â€Å"[†¦] since [he] come to Salem [Proctor] is blackening [his] name [†¦]† (110) and â€Å"[Proctor]’s come to overthrow this court, Your Honor! (97). Aside from trying to protect his reputation, Parris makes such allegations about Proctor in an attempt to prove Proctor as an unreliable messenger. Parris wants to get vengeance for what he feels Proctor has do ne to him, just as Abigail wants revenge on Elizabeth. But, these alleged wrong-doings have only come from Parris’s mouth; he seems to enjoy taking things personal when they come from Proctor, and the courtroom scene is the perfect place for Parris to return the hate he feels from Proctor.The Salem Witch Trials proved to be a time of tragedy and mass hysteria as accusations ran rapidly through the small Massachusetts village. The source of the witchcraft charges came from the village people’s personal greed and want of retribution, as well as many other contributing factors. Abigail, Parris, and the Putnams all used this situation to their advantage, hoping to get some personal satisfaction out of their charges, thus ruining lives of their victims: Elizabeth Proctor, John Proctor, and Sarah Osburn.

Broken family Essay

THESIS From the suggestion of one researcher that broken homes equal broken people, and that broken people break others. Although this particular article focuses on the idea that boys without authoritative role models are well placed to get caught in the Sturm und Drang of adolescence, it seems the issues these children develop can be teased to a more widespread problem; perhaps it is a perceived brokenness of the normal familial network that creates the sense of injustice and turmoil that fuels the actions of these children. Perhaps it is the social expectation of an American Dream-styled belief that two parents, a healthy marriage and two children, who go to college, plus some sort of pet is what one should receive whilst growing up, despite that this is not only a difficult balance of relationships to maintain but not the ‘norm’ for most people in America. This sense that one has been ‘left out’ or done out of what they believe that everyone else normally receives perpetuates a sense of injustice that often translates into violence within society. Broken Family can be describing as a broken home, this is where a child doesn’t have a both parent at home. The husband and wife are legally separated. Sometimes death of one member of the family can lead to broken family. Or else broken family is incomplete. However, no matter how ideal a family in the terms of their relationship, there are still hardships and misunderstandings that will come along the way. Broken family varies from numerous reasons why it had to be that way. Misunderstanding starts from simple domestic quarrel that grows impertinently damaging the long-forged relationship between the family members. The most common dispute between a husband and a wife is the financial issue. There are difference between a complete and a broken family. Complete family can looked at their child properly than a broken family can. Most of the Teenagers who belongs to a broken family did not graduate. They even suffer emotional stress and depression which usually leads to suicide. While those teenagers who belong to a complete family graduated with even honours. But there are some products of broken family who were successful because their experiences inspire them to make a better family someday unlike the family they have. Members of a complete family are also capable of handling problems than a member from a broken one but they are both acceptable in the society. In today’s society broken family is a major problem that should be given enough attention. The behaviour of family setup affects the social, economic and political aspects of a country. It should always be remembered to keep the family away from the thoughts of separation. One in three children life with a single-parent or with step mom or dad, researchers found that there are 3.8million children, the great majority of them in single-parent families. 30 per cent of the country’s children and their numbers are up by nearly a fifth over the past decade, according to a study by the Office for National Statistics published last June 2010. According also to the ONS analysis of data from its monthly Labour Force Survey of 60,000 households, 3.8million children live with only one of their biological parents because they have a lone mother or their father or mother has left home. And there are 2.7million who live with a single mother and 200,000 with a lone father. A further 500,000 are in cohabiting step-families, and 400,000 in married step-families. Single people and cohabiting couples will significantly outnumber the married by the 2030s, the ONS said. Already the proportion of people who are husbands or wives has fallen below half the adult population to 49 per cent. By 2033 that will become 42 per cent, according to projections on marriage. Numbers of cohabiting couples will rise from 2.3million to 3.8million, the ONS said. There are causes why there are broken families or broken homes, around the world. Some of this are maybe because of the Wrong choice in marriage, Disagreement is the only language they understand.. In this kind of situation, hatred, unfaithfulness, fighting, anger, suspicion, cheating  becomes the order of the day and break-up is the end result. And it may be also because of the Parental or friends influence, because broken homes today are caused by undue influences and interference of parents, friends and relations in the private affairs of the family. Time consuming jobs is not good for the family, most of the parents, when a man or woman stays too long at work, the other partner will start feeling lonely, neglected, abandoned and sometimes frustrated. Striking a balance will be a good idea. There are Theories that is based on our topic, about being in a Broken Family. The Psychoanalytic theories emphasized the importance of relationship and attachments between children and their parents. This theory tells the three major personality mechanisms which is as follows: The id, ego, and the super ego. One of the major personality mechanisms is the Id. It was contained by the instinctual, unconscious desire and especially sexual and aggressive which a child was born. It was governed by the pleasure principle, seeking to achieve pleasure and to avoid pain. While the Ego was the seat of consciousness, it was developed out of the id about the age of three. It was tried to achieve the desires of the id while taking account of the reality of social convention and could delay immediate gratifications of long-term goals. Children can develop a strong ego if they had a loving and strong relationship with their parents. And the Superego is developed out of the ego at the age of five, it’s also contained two functions, the first one is the conscience and the other one is the ego-ideal. Based on Wikipedia, Conscience is a judgement that assists in distinguishing right from wrong. But in the personality mechanisms Conscience is acted to inhibit instinctual desires that violated social rules. There’s also a formation depending on parental punishment arousing anger that children then turned against themselves. Ideas that are inspired counselling and social work approaches, as they try to rehabilitate the offenders by building up a warm relationship with them. Most studies from the broken homes have focused on the loss of the father rather than the mother. The Modern theories of the relationship between the disrupted families and the delinquency fall into three major classes, the Trauma theories. Based from Wikipedia, Trauma means â€Å"wound† in Greek and it’s often the result of an overwhelming amount of stress that exceeds one’s ability to cope or integrate the emotions involved with that experience. Psychologically traumatic experiences involvement in physical trauma that threatens one’s survival and sense of security. The definition of Trauma differs among the individuals by their subjective experiences. The next major classes of modern theory between disrupted families and the delinquency fall is the Life course theories, this focuses on the separation as a sequence of stressful experiences, and on the effects of multiple stressors such as parental conflict, parental loss, reduced economic circumstances, changes in parent figures, and poor child-rearing methods. And the last one is the Selection theories, which talks about the argue that disrupted families produce delinquent children because of pre-existing differences from other families in risk factors, such as parental conflict, criminal or antisocial parents, low family income, or poor child-rearing methods. What will be the effect of a Broken Family to the Student’s Performance in School? This research is based on the U.S Centre for Marriage and Family as they release their study on November 2005 that broken family structures consistently lead to education difficulties for children. The study says â€Å"When it comes to educational achievement, children living with their own married parents do significantly better than other children.† Children living in a situation other those with their own married father and mother are known as non-intact families. They are significantly higher rates of difficulty with all levels of education. Each child a year spends with a single mother or stepparent â€Å"reduces that child’s overall education attainment by approximately one-half year.† The study also says that the comprehensive review of recent academic research about the relationship between family structure and children’s academic performance. Education outcomes from children growing up with their own married parents to children in non-intact family structures such as divorced, single, remarried or cohabiting parents. These family structures were consistently found as the deciding factor in a wide range of child behaviours that affects their academic performances including their emotional and psychological distress. This also includes the attention disorders, social misbehaviours, substance abuse, sexual activity and the common problem of teenagers, teen pregnancy. Those children from non-intact homes had higher rates of depression,  anxiety, lower self-esteem and stress, particularly as teenagers. They’ve found out that some children from broken homes were three times more likely to suffer from attention deficit disorder than children from intact homes. Thos children from single-parent homes suffered from physical health problems. While Pre-school children from Single-parent homes were less likely to be given help with letter-recognition. Children from non-intact families’ scores consistently lower on reading comprehensions and in Mathematics. And they’re struggling in maintain their grade levels overall. While children from married parents had much lower rates of behavioural problems inside the classroom. Particularly boys from broken marriages showed a higher rate of classroom misbehaviour. 30% of teenage students from broken families more likely miss school, always late or cut class than students from intact homes, because single parents had more difficulty monitoring their children. These may cause the children to be at high risk for smoking, consuming alcohol or drugs. Most of the teenagers now a day were more likely to be sexually active and had higher rates of pregnancy, especially those from the non-intact families. Children who were from single-parent home by the time they were ten were more than twice is likely to be arrested by age of 14. Who never lived with their own father had the highest likelihood of being arrested. These study reports that majority of U.S children will spent a significant part of their child hood by the time they reach 18. And Single parent homes in the U.S. nearly doubled in the period from 1968-2003. Based on other researches, Most of the Children from unmarried parents/separated families often fail and are at risk emotionally. This may not be completely applicable in all instances of broken homes. The environment where a child finds himself/herself goes a long way in determining his learning ability and ultimately his academic. There are different effects of a broken family for the Development of the children. Such as Emotional development, this is the growth in the child’s ability to distinguish between and to express their emotions in socially acceptable way and to be able to understand the emotional content of other people’s communication. Some of the children who show little emotional response are actually bottling up their negative feelings. Educational Development, this talks about the performance of the children inside their classroom, and in what way that broken homes can affect them in their studies. Social  Development, Other children may experience anxiety, which can make it morw difficult for them to seek positive social interactions and engage in developmentally beneficial activities such as teen sports. Teens from broken families might develop a cynical attitude toward relationships and harbour feelings of mistrust. Family Dynamics is the interaction between the family members as well as the varying relationships that can exist within a family. Based on the new living arrangements, the children may need to perform more chores and assume additional roles in the new household’s basic functioning. A broken home can confuse or disrupt a child’s world. This was proven to be true from infancy through the teen years. Most of the children experience wide array emotions to try to navigate. Their Parents have to provide them as much stability as possible and involve other to be the responsible role models, to provide the support for their child. It’s important that the child knows that he/she is still safe, love and cherished. Frustration with a broken family can manifest through open aggression by throwing tantrums, hitting, and other outward expressions of pain. As Lesia Oesterreich, M.S., of the National Network for Child Care website suggest that the younger child is not able to express emotions verbally and does not understand the negative feelings he’s/she’s experiencing. And it’s also important that the parent will help the child to vocalize these emotions and make the children aware that these are valid feelings. The children may feel that their behaviour drove the other parent away and might strive to improve the behaviour of the child in hopes of the parent returning. Reassure your children will not be the cause and will be continue to be loved by both parents. The child should know that just because his parents’ relationship has changed. The child may feel embarrassed that his/her family is not intact and withdraw from normal activities. Those children could put on a brave front, pretending that everything is okay even when hurting. From which Michelle New, Ph.D. of the Kids Health website, suggested. Parents should maintain established routines at home to make everything feel as normal as possible, Encourage your child to have close contact with family and friends to encourage him at this time. Children from broken families are nearly five times more likely to suffer damaging mental troubles than those whose parents stay together, Government  research has found. It also showed that two parents are much better than one if children are to avoid slipping into emotional distress and anti-social behaviour. The findings say that children’s family backgrounds are as important – if not more so – than whether their home is poor, workless, have bad health, or have no one with any educational qualifications. The research adds to a wealth of data that shows children suffer badly from divorce or parental break-up, and that those brought up by a single parent are more likely to do badly at school, suffer poor health, and fall into crime, addiction and poverty as adults. The report, funded by the Department of Health and published by the Office for National Statistics, investigated emotional disorders – ranked as those which cause considerable distress and interference with the way in which children perform at school and during play. It also looked at conduct disorders which result in aggressive, violent or anti-social behaviour. The researchers studied nearly 8,000 children aged between five and 16 in 2004 and found almost one in ten had disorders. The children were checked again last year. The report said that a child whose parents had split during this time was more than four and a half times more likely to have developed an emotional disorder than one whose parents stayed together. They were nearly three times more likely to exhibit a conduct disorder. Eleven per cent of those children whose families broke up had emotional disorders, against 3 per cent among those whose families were still together. Nearly a third of children found to have mental disorders in 2004 still suffered from them three years later. The Department of Health said: ‘The Government is committed to helping children and young people experiencing mental health problems.’ But academic Patricia Morgan, author of several studies on family break-up, said: ‘This does not come as a surprise, and things are going to get worse. ‘Broken families and serial fathers produce homes full of conflict and chaos and they are terrible for children.’