REWRITE REFLECTION and Draft

So far on my paper I have expanded each paragraph with more analysis and I've added stronger intro and outro sentenced. I also went through and fixed spelling errors and grammatical errors that I had. I decided to spend more time discussing the pathos and ethos, because that's a big part of what we learned about. I still want to expand more but I need some guidance on how to do so.

David Bornstien's article, For Drug Users, a Swift Response Is the Best Medicine Rhetorical Analysis, puts the argument of treatment versus punishment for drug abusers into perspective. He presents the pros and cons of both treatment and punishment and presents what side he takes very early on. The factual evidence that he provides matched with his drawing on pathos makes the argument he is presenting very effective. His use of facts and emotions pair up to make his piece effective in showing that treatment is the best way to help drug abusers, not punishment. He leaves room for you to make your own decision on the matter, but his argument is so well put that you have no other choice but to agree with his reasoning.

David first talks about the pros and cons of treating drug abusers. He throws some facts that don't make an impact until later in the piece, but talks about how 83% of treated drug abusers stay clean after treatment and don't run into to trouble with drugs and the law. He also talks about how treatment saves tax payers money because the legal system costs tax payers lots of money. However, the downfall of treatment is it costs the drug abuser money, which many cannot afford. It also requires the abuser to be dedicated to the cause or the treatment will be unsuccessful. His facts surrounding treatment for drug abusers makes it very hard to argue for punishment before he even presents the negatives of punishment

David then talks about the pros and cons of punishment. He states that many people who are thrown into jail because of drug charges end up becoming more dependent on the drugs and often become involved with prison gangs in order to receive the drugs that they need. Only 34% of inmates after being released from prison end up staying sober and that percentage is dropping drastically, says Bornstein. He goes to talk about how expensive it is to keep an inmate in prison and how almost all of the costs are paid for by tax payers. He makes very good points concerning tax payers' dollars, which is a big debate going on right now in society.

The last very good point that Bornstwein makes is the effects of treatment versus punishment on abusers families. When in treatment, such as halfway houses, and detox facilities, abusers are allowed to see their family in most cases whenever they want. Most treatment centers also provide family counseling for the abusers and their families. When the treatment is over, the families are stronger, making the abuser less likely to go back to using drugs. Unfortunately, when punishment and jail time is involved, the effects are the exact opposite. Must drug abusers, when sentenced, are sentenced in different counties than their families, and depending on the case, out of state. This makes it very hard for families to visit the con, which often leads to broken homes due to prison time. This makes drug abusers that are locked up more likely to start using drugs once they are out. The involvement of families and emotions into his argument really makes it hard to argue against him.