Answer:
a. The fewer risk factors the better, so their unborn child is likely to be better off even with the limited help the social worker provided.
Explanation:
According to a different source, these are the options that come with this question:
a. The fewer risk factors the better, so their unborn child is likely to be better off even with the limited help the social worker provided.
b. Their unborn child is not likely to be benefited by eliminating only one risk factor.
c. The unborn child might have been benefited if prenatal care were found, but improving prenatal nutrition is not important.
d. The health care and stress factors will only be important after the child is born.
In this example, the social worker is not able to help Robert and Nadine with all their problems. The couple still needs to find work and prenatal care. However, the social worker was able to help them find enough food to eat. Although the baby still faces some risks, the fewer risks, the better. Therefore, he is still better off than he was before thanks to the limited help of the social worker.
By have an over population of people all over which we would need to make more rules too keep violence under control
<span>Anthropocentrism is the belief that humans are the most important entity on earth and the universe. It is very prevalent among people and has been criticized as harmful to the environment and other species on earth, but it's also promoted as an potentially good thing, because humans need an healthy and diverse environment to thrive, which would make anthropocentrism beneficial for the biosphere as well as the humans.</span>
In the Midwest of US. Mostly mountains
