2 pages
1 page on assessment: Describe techniques of how a social worker would  assess the presenting issue. Explain any cultural factors that should be taken into account during  assessment. Provide scholarly evidence to support technique.
1 page on   Recommendations for treatment: Recommend one of these evidenced-based family interventions to treat this family. Discuss the theoretical orientation of the theory behind the intervention, the major tenets of the intervention and the strategy/techniques used.Explain why your group recommends this treatment.•Evaluation: Describe how a social worker could evaluate treatment outcomes for this family to determine the effectiveness of the intervention.
At least 3 References: Be sure to include a reference list and assign appropriate citations

QUESTIONS
1.In a US work environment, would reading a newspaper or magazine with nude pictures on the cover besexual harassment?
2.If so, would it be sexual harassment in Germany when working for the same company? Why or why not?
3.Frau Knies argues that Rebecca’s request to prohibit Germans from reading newspapers which offend her isno different than prohibiting German women from dressing in ways which offend Islamic immigrantsworking in the plant. Is this a valid argument? Why or why not?
4.What should Rebecca do?
5.What should Rebecca’s company have done to prevent this problem?

L = { <M,s> : s ∈ L(M) and |L(M)| % 2 = 0}. For example, suppose that L(M) = {aa}. Then
<M,aa> ∉ L because |L(M)| = 1, 1 % 2 = 1; If L(M) {a,aaa} then <M,ℇ> ∉ L because ℇ ∉ L(M),
but <M,aaa> ∈ L. Prove that L ∉ D by reduction from H.
Your proof could implement R, the mapping reduction function, as a Java or Python program in
the form demonstrated, which allows the user to configure whether M halts on w.
We start the proof by creating R. We start are by thinking of the input to ouput. What’s the
input to the function R? Remember that R is a mapping reduction from H to L. So the input to
R must be something that could be in H. <M,w> has the correct syntactic form. Could R return
this: <M#,aaa>? think of terms of whether the output of R could possible be in L.
R(<M,w>) =
1. Define M#:
1.a
1.x Run M on w
2. Return M#,aaa>
M halts on w, <M#,aaa> is in L. So if you make it through step 1.x, then M#,aaa satisfies the
characteristic function of L.
and if M does not halt on w, <M#,aaa> is not in L. If you don’t get through 1.x, then you lack
some component of the characteristic function.

L = { <M,s> : s ∈ L(M) and |L(M)| % 2 = 0}. For example, suppose that L(M) = {aa}. Then
<M,aa> ∉ L because |L(M)| = 1, 1 % 2 = 1; If L(M) {a,aaa} then <M,ℇ> ∉ L because ℇ ∉ L(M),
but <M,aaa> ∈ L. Prove that L ∉ D by reduction from H.
Your proof could implement R, the mapping reduction function, as a Java or Python program in
the form demonstrated, which allows the user to configure whether M halts on w.
We start the proof by creating R. We start are by thinking of the input to ouput. What’s the
input to the function R? Remember that R is a mapping reduction from H to L. So the input to
R must be something that could be in H. <M,w> has the correct syntactic form. Could R return
this: <M#,aaa>? think of terms of whether the output of R could possible be in L.
R(<M,w>) =
1. Define M#:
1.a
1.x Run M on w
2. Return M#,aaa>
M halts on w, <M#,aaa> is in L. So if you make it through step 1.x, then M#,aaa satisfies the
characteristic function of L.
and if M does not halt on w, <M#,aaa> is not in L. If you don’t get through 1.x, then you lack
some component of the characteristic function.