Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Regarded as beneficial and preferable to the clients, advice delivery has been an integral part of counseling; however, there are controversies over the suitability of giving advice in counseling services, including counseling conducted in the context of prisons. Based on conversation analysis, this article tries to explore when and how police counselors in two Chinese prisons give advice and how inmate clients respond to and seek advice in offender counseling. It is found that advice delivery, supposed to be for the inmate clients' sake, only serves a phatic function in the context of prisons in which security is a priority, and transforming inmates into law-abiding citizen is the overall goal of prison rehabilitation and correction. Hence, offender counselors, intending to alleviate depression and anxiety in inmate clients, are caught in a dilemma.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0306624X12445989 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!