Answer: This recommendation does not guarantee that this will happen because there are people who can develop personality disorders long before thinking about getting married.
Explanation:
People are different and react differently to life events due to several factors. Genetics and environmental factors exert a great influence when a person develops a mental disorder. Genetics influences that people who have a history with a history of personality disorders are more likely to develop the disease. It may be that before marriage he does not have it and then in marriage the person develops this disorder or another. Environmental factors may be due to situations that occur that trigger a response that leads the person to develop symptoms of a disorder.
While it is true that the study found that married people are less likely to develop personality disorders, it is not advisable to do so for these reasons, because the reasons why people decide to marry are different.
If a person decides to marry someone to avoid developing a personality disorder but then when getting married, he sees that things do not work and faces situations for which he was not prepared, this can lead to the person developing anxiety disorders or anxiety. depression, it all depends on the problems that occur.
The reasons for reaching marriage should be clear and people who decide to make this decision should do so not only thinking about their interests. It is important that a person not only takes this recommendation to get married and look at things from another perspective.
Marriage is an important step in the lives of many people. The person who decides to marry must understand the changes that it is going to experience and that certain behaviors that it adopted in its single life cannot be frequent in the married life since the responsibilities are different.
Answer:
a.George Washington and the Democratic-Republicans.
Answer:
an animal that feeds on flesh
Supreme Court, is the highest court in the judicial system, and it is the last court for resolving non-constitutional matters.
The Supreme Court's affirmative action in the case of Regents v. Bakke by the following:
(B) Racial quotas were not used to make admissions decisions.
<h3>The Supreme Court's affirmative action in the case of Regents v. Bakke</h3><h3 />
- The supreme court on June 18, 1978, declared affirmative action constitutional but invalidate the use of racial qoutes.
- Allan Bakke, a white man of California, filed a complaint against The medical school at the University of California, Davis.
- He applied twice to the medical school and with good marks but didnt get admission.
- Bakke said he had been subjected to unjust "race discrimination."
- In the Court, six separate opinions were issued, agreed that the university’s use of racial quotas was unconstitutional, and ordered that the medical school admit Bakke.
Thus, option (B) Racial quotas were not used to make admissions decisions is correct.
To know more about Supreme Court, visit here:
brainly.com/question/1755400
