Joan told me, during one of our very earliest sessions, "The Story of My Life In Six Short Chapters." It goes like this.
Chapter 1: I walk down the street; I fall in the hole; I don't know where I am, and I can't get out.
Chapter 2: I walk down the street; I fall in the hole; I know where I am, but I can't get out.
Chapter 3: I walk down the street; I fall in the hole; I know where I am, and I can get out.
Chapter 4: I walk down the street; I almost fall in the hole, but I don't.
Chapter 5: I walk down the street; I see the hole and I go around it.
Chapter 6: I walk down a different street.
I think this is one of the best metaphors for personal growth and change. However, at least in my life, this story does not occur once over many years, but rather repeats itself many times over. And once I find a new street, I usually don't stay there too terribly long at first. Rather, I tour the new street, decide it's perfect, start walking down it, and then somehow make my way right back to the old street with the hole.
That's where I found myself not long ago. After spending an entire summer learning my way onto a new street, once school began I just couldn't keep myself away from the old one. I have various theories to explain this phenomenon (and they're probably all pieces of the puzzle) but what I have realized is that identifying why something happens does not always solve the problem. Right now, what I need is a how: how to get off this street and work my way back to the next one. So I've developed a plan that involves two concepts: Robert Moore's theory of humility and my dad's theory of "fake it 'til you make it."
Robert Moore says that true humility simply means recognizing your limitations and getting the help that you need. I have a real problem with this. Previous to reading this definition, I had always considered myself a humble person due to my constant self-deprecation and chastisement. By letting my internal bully reign supreme, I not only prevented myself from truly realizing my personal limitations, but I made the prospect of getting support out of the question.
What to do when you find yourself in a familiar rut but feel too low to get yourself out yet too high to ask for assistance? You behave yourself into believing. In other words, force yourself to act as you would if you already are the person you are trying to become. For me, this involves structuring my day with activities that I don't necessarily want to do, that are scary for me or challenging or tedious, but ones that would be rote for a healthy, integrated person. I ask to be held accountable and establish consequences for failure to complete these activities. Initially, I am rarely strong enough to hold myself accountable. I have finally grasped this very real limitation, and thus have at least summoned the strength to ask others to help me with this task.
Eventually, I will find enough comfort in these rituals and peace in this routine that I can hold myself accountable; some activities may even become so enjoyable that I wouldn't even consider skipping them. Others will probably never be easy, but will become somewhat tolerable simply out of force of habit. I also know that I'll revisit my old street from time to time, but hopefully just to view the hole from afar, contemplate jumping into it, and then walk away.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
The Ethical Violations of The Smoking Ban
I wrote this essay for my Biomedicine, Ethics, and Culture class last week. Even though the smoking ban is old news, I think the central points regarding the dangers of big government and the loss of autonomy are relevant. Don't get me wrong, I love returning from a night out and NOT smelling like an ashtray, but I value my right to choose more...
In this essay, I argue that government-enforced smoking bans in bars and restaurants is unethical. Using a deontological perspective, legally mandated bans encroach too heavily upon our natural rights. Even from a utilitarian viewpoint, these bans fail to reach their objectives of promoting public health, reducing pollution, or protecting citizens against the damaging effects of second hand smoke.
John Locke asserts that government is a social contract that should protect humans’ natural rights of life, liberty, and property (Class Lecture, Week 1). A smoking ban does very little to protect the right to life since, according to the American Heart Association, most life-threatening second hand smoke damage most likely does not occur while spending an hour or two dining out but rather in the home (http://americanheart.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=365). Also, by inviting the government to regulate personal health and well being, citizens begin a creeping infringement on their bodily rights. It is not a stretch to imagine the next steps involving the restriction of certain foods or physical practices (such as tattoos or piercings) deemed unhealthy or dangerous.
On the other hand, the smoking ban would not only fail to protect but actually hinder, beyond reason, the natural rights of liberty and property. For while it is true that certain freedoms must be regulated or suppressed in order for Locke’s social contract to function, government should make every effort to allow its citizens as much autonomy as possible. By doing so, government secures its proper role as servant to the people and protector of human dignity. A smoking ban imposes a three-fold eradication of choice. First, it removes the choice of the business owner to decide how he or she would like to run his or her business. Second, it limits the business owner’s range of targeted clientele. Third, it prevents the patrons from choosing how they would like to enjoy their dining/drinking experience.
Closely linked to autonomy is right of property. Property owners should have the right to use their land or space the way they see fit, as long as they remain within legal boundaries. The sale and use of tobacco products is legal, and therefore it should lie in the hands of the landowner whether or not to allow it inside his or her realm of ownership. In cases of rented space, it should be the landlord’s decision and should be included in the lease agreement.
When considering the utilitarian standpoint, two issues arise. An argument could be made that cigarette smoke is a pollutant, and thus should be strictly regulated. However, there are many more pressing and dangerous air pollutants contaminating our atmosphere today, such as vehicle exhaust, industrial emissions, and chemical solvents (http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/). Thus, this argument does not hold on the grounds that a smoking ban is not really solving the pollution problem and distracts lawmakers from passing more effective regulations. By forcing smokers out onto the street instead of confining them to an enclosed room or patio, one could also make the case that a smoking ban would either worsen or have no effect on cigarette smoke pollution.
One could also point to the grim death tolls attributed to second hand smoke: a reported 3,000 lung cancer deaths and 62,000 deaths from coronary heart disease. However, these numbers are incredibly difficult to test for accuracy; numerous factors , such as high blood pressure or cholesterol, diabetes, air pollution, and asbestos, could play into the cause of both diseases and it is almost impossible for current medical technology to fully identify the principle culprit(s) (http://www.emedicinehealth.com/lung_cancer/page2_em.htm#Lung%20Cancer%20Causes and http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/heart-disease/DS01120/DSECTION=causes).
Since severe second hand smoke damage results from heavy, extended exposure, it is reasonable to assume that such harm most likely occurs in the home. Thus, a smoking ban in bars and restaurants does little to shield humans from the incidental consequences of smoking. If, after enforcing a ban for a period of time, the government is still dissatisfied with second hand smoke mortality rates, would it then attempt to expand its jurisdiction to private homes? This question points again to the slippery slope of expanding government power and responsibility instead of trusting the collective wisdom of the majority. In other words, if it is legal to do something in public, it only makes sense that the same rights should exist in the private home.
It is important to distinguish between smoking bans for bars and restaurants versus bans in other places of business. This distinction is necessary primarily due to the fact that, while bars and restaurants are purely recreational, other places of business such as offices, grocery stores, drug stores and the like, are vital to a person’s livelihood. Thus, arenas in which people are veritably forced to coexist should enforce regulations that serve the greater good and protect the rights of the majority. My friend’s uncle, having never touched a cigarette in his life, ascribes his throat cancer to working in a smoking environment in the oil industry, for instance. Cases such as his can and should be prevented.
Just as alcohol is a legal substance that is regulated, certain regulations for cigarette use are not wholly unwarranted. Alcohol can only be served at certain times and in certain amounts in bars and restaurants. It would not be unreasonable to require restaurant and bar owners who wish to allow smoking to confine smoking patrons to a designated room or patio with proper ventilation. However, I would still argue that such a restriction is more practical for restaurants than for bars, since bars are usually much smaller spaces in which those frequenting are aware of the surrounding conditions.
Ultimately, the United States of America is a free market society that makes an unprecedented attempt to expand the rights and liberties of every citizen. As smoking becomes increasingly frowned upon in our society, there will be a market for each type of consumer. Some prefer a smoke-free environment, some are indifferent or consider themselves occasional or “social” smokers, and true addicts undoubtedly value a smoking-friendly atmosphere. Consumers should have as many options as possible and business owners should have the freedom to cater to whomever they choose. The market will, in the end, have the final say as to what type of business is viable - not the government. Smoking bans violate both deontological and utilitarian values, both of which are the primary bases of determining ethics and morality and are interwoven into the founding of our nation.
In this essay, I argue that government-enforced smoking bans in bars and restaurants is unethical. Using a deontological perspective, legally mandated bans encroach too heavily upon our natural rights. Even from a utilitarian viewpoint, these bans fail to reach their objectives of promoting public health, reducing pollution, or protecting citizens against the damaging effects of second hand smoke.
John Locke asserts that government is a social contract that should protect humans’ natural rights of life, liberty, and property (Class Lecture, Week 1). A smoking ban does very little to protect the right to life since, according to the American Heart Association, most life-threatening second hand smoke damage most likely does not occur while spending an hour or two dining out but rather in the home (http://americanheart.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=365). Also, by inviting the government to regulate personal health and well being, citizens begin a creeping infringement on their bodily rights. It is not a stretch to imagine the next steps involving the restriction of certain foods or physical practices (such as tattoos or piercings) deemed unhealthy or dangerous.
On the other hand, the smoking ban would not only fail to protect but actually hinder, beyond reason, the natural rights of liberty and property. For while it is true that certain freedoms must be regulated or suppressed in order for Locke’s social contract to function, government should make every effort to allow its citizens as much autonomy as possible. By doing so, government secures its proper role as servant to the people and protector of human dignity. A smoking ban imposes a three-fold eradication of choice. First, it removes the choice of the business owner to decide how he or she would like to run his or her business. Second, it limits the business owner’s range of targeted clientele. Third, it prevents the patrons from choosing how they would like to enjoy their dining/drinking experience.
Closely linked to autonomy is right of property. Property owners should have the right to use their land or space the way they see fit, as long as they remain within legal boundaries. The sale and use of tobacco products is legal, and therefore it should lie in the hands of the landowner whether or not to allow it inside his or her realm of ownership. In cases of rented space, it should be the landlord’s decision and should be included in the lease agreement.
When considering the utilitarian standpoint, two issues arise. An argument could be made that cigarette smoke is a pollutant, and thus should be strictly regulated. However, there are many more pressing and dangerous air pollutants contaminating our atmosphere today, such as vehicle exhaust, industrial emissions, and chemical solvents (http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/). Thus, this argument does not hold on the grounds that a smoking ban is not really solving the pollution problem and distracts lawmakers from passing more effective regulations. By forcing smokers out onto the street instead of confining them to an enclosed room or patio, one could also make the case that a smoking ban would either worsen or have no effect on cigarette smoke pollution.
One could also point to the grim death tolls attributed to second hand smoke: a reported 3,000 lung cancer deaths and 62,000 deaths from coronary heart disease. However, these numbers are incredibly difficult to test for accuracy; numerous factors , such as high blood pressure or cholesterol, diabetes, air pollution, and asbestos, could play into the cause of both diseases and it is almost impossible for current medical technology to fully identify the principle culprit(s) (http://www.emedicinehealth.com/lung_cancer/page2_em.htm#Lung%20Cancer%20Causes and http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/heart-disease/DS01120/DSECTION=causes).
Since severe second hand smoke damage results from heavy, extended exposure, it is reasonable to assume that such harm most likely occurs in the home. Thus, a smoking ban in bars and restaurants does little to shield humans from the incidental consequences of smoking. If, after enforcing a ban for a period of time, the government is still dissatisfied with second hand smoke mortality rates, would it then attempt to expand its jurisdiction to private homes? This question points again to the slippery slope of expanding government power and responsibility instead of trusting the collective wisdom of the majority. In other words, if it is legal to do something in public, it only makes sense that the same rights should exist in the private home.
It is important to distinguish between smoking bans for bars and restaurants versus bans in other places of business. This distinction is necessary primarily due to the fact that, while bars and restaurants are purely recreational, other places of business such as offices, grocery stores, drug stores and the like, are vital to a person’s livelihood. Thus, arenas in which people are veritably forced to coexist should enforce regulations that serve the greater good and protect the rights of the majority. My friend’s uncle, having never touched a cigarette in his life, ascribes his throat cancer to working in a smoking environment in the oil industry, for instance. Cases such as his can and should be prevented.
Just as alcohol is a legal substance that is regulated, certain regulations for cigarette use are not wholly unwarranted. Alcohol can only be served at certain times and in certain amounts in bars and restaurants. It would not be unreasonable to require restaurant and bar owners who wish to allow smoking to confine smoking patrons to a designated room or patio with proper ventilation. However, I would still argue that such a restriction is more practical for restaurants than for bars, since bars are usually much smaller spaces in which those frequenting are aware of the surrounding conditions.
Ultimately, the United States of America is a free market society that makes an unprecedented attempt to expand the rights and liberties of every citizen. As smoking becomes increasingly frowned upon in our society, there will be a market for each type of consumer. Some prefer a smoke-free environment, some are indifferent or consider themselves occasional or “social” smokers, and true addicts undoubtedly value a smoking-friendly atmosphere. Consumers should have as many options as possible and business owners should have the freedom to cater to whomever they choose. The market will, in the end, have the final say as to what type of business is viable - not the government. Smoking bans violate both deontological and utilitarian values, both of which are the primary bases of determining ethics and morality and are interwoven into the founding of our nation.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Healthcare Bill
Shock: Inside the Healthcare Bill
It's worse than you can possibly imagine. Peter Fleckstein (aka Fleckman) is reading it and has been posting on Twitter his findings.
This is from his postings (Note: All comments are Fleckman's)
Pg 22 of the Bill MANDATES the Govt will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!
Pg 30 Sec 123 of bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you receive.
Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED.
Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your Health care Benefits for you. You have no choice in the decision.
PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill - Healthcare will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise.
Pg 58 - Govt will have real-time access to individual finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued.
Pg 59 H C Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for direct funds transfers.
PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).
Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating a Healthcare Exchange to bring private healthcare plans under Govt control.
PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private Healthcare plans in the Exchange
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specifics for Benefit Levels of Plans = The Government rations Healthcare based on cost benefits to government.
PG 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Govt mandates linguistic appropriation services or translation services for illegal aliens.
Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups like ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt Healthcare plan
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specifics of Benefit Levels for Plans. #AARP members - your Health care WILL be rationed.
-PG 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid.
pg 124 lines 24-25 No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" allowed against Govt monopoly
pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill - Doctors/ AMA - The Govt will dictate what wage you are allowed to make. (Wage limits).
Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employers MUST enroll their employees into the public option plan. THEY HAVE NO CHOICE, and neither do the employees.
Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay premiums for every employee, part time employees AND their families as well.
Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with a payroll of $400,000 will have an 8% tax levied on all payroll.
pg 150 Lines 9-13 Employers with payroll between $251,000 & 400,000 who does not provide in full, the public option, will have a 6% tax on all payroll levied.
Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC coverage according to Govt mandate, will be taxed at 2.5% of their income for healthcare. So, you will have government healthcare coverage, or you will be punished.
Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay)
Pg 195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Administration (GOVT) will have total and complete access to ALL your personal financial, bank and investment information.
PG 203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that.
Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid, Seniors, low income, and poor.
Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Wages for all doctors will be made the same. Specialists like Brain Surgeons will make the same money a General Practitioner makes.
PG 253 Line 10-18 Govt sets value of Doctor's time. Govt. decides value of humans.
PG 265 Sec 1131Govt mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries.
P G 268 Sec 1141 Fed Govt regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs
PG 272 SEC. 1145. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!
Page 280 Sec 1151 The Govt will penalize hospitals for what Govt deems preventable re-admissions.
Pg 298 Lines 9-11 Doctors that treat a patient during initial admission will be penalized.
Pg 317 L 13-20 PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Government dictates what Doctors can make and how much they can own.
Pg 317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion- Govt mandates hospitals cannot expand without government approval.
pg 321 2-13 Hospitals have opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input and approval is required. Can you say ACORN?!!
Pg335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339 - Govt mandates establishment of outcome based measures. Rationing
Pg 341 Lines 3-9 Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc. Forcing people into the Govt plan.
Pg 354 Sec 1177 - Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs persons for care. Can euthanasia be far behind for "undesirables"?
Pg 379 Sec 1191 Govt creates more bureaucracy - Telehealth Advisory Committee. Can you say HC by phone?
PG 425 Lines 4-12 Govt mandates Advance Care Planning Consultation. Euthanasia and Doctor-Assisted Suicide.
Pg 425 Lines 17-19 Govt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, and assume pow er of attorney of all enrollees. Mandatory!
PG 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Govt provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in death decisions to end your life.
PG 427 Lines 15-24 Govt mandates program to mandatory end of life programs. The Govt will mandate how your life ends.
Pg 429 Lines 1-9 An "advance care planning consultant" will be used frequently as a patient's health deteriorates
PG 429 Lines 10-12 "advance care consultation" may include an ORDER to initiate end of life plans. AN ORDER from GOV to terminate a life.
Pg 429 Lines 13-25 - The govt will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.
PG 430 L ines 11-15 The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life
Pg 469 - Community Based Home Medical Services=Non profit orgs. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!?
Page 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORG. 1 monthly payment to a community-based org. Like ACORN?
PG 489 Sec 1308 The Govt will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means government will now be involved in marriage and family decisions.
Pg 494-498 Govt will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, rationing those services.
It's worse than you can possibly imagine. Peter Fleckstein (aka Fleckman) is reading it and has been posting on Twitter his findings.
This is from his postings (Note: All comments are Fleckman's)
Pg 22 of the Bill MANDATES the Govt will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!
Pg 30 Sec 123 of bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you receive.
Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED.
Pg 42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your Health care Benefits for you. You have no choice in the decision.
PG 50 Section 152 in HC bill - Healthcare will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise.
Pg 58 - Govt will have real-time access to individual finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued.
Pg 59 H C Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for direct funds transfers.
PG 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).
Pg 72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating a Healthcare Exchange to bring private healthcare plans under Govt control.
PG 84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private Healthcare plans in the Exchange
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specifics for Benefit Levels of Plans = The Government rations Healthcare based on cost benefits to government.
PG 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Govt mandates linguistic appropriation services or translation services for illegal aliens.
Pg 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups like ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt Healthcare plan
PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specifics of Benefit Levels for Plans. #AARP members - your Health care WILL be rationed.
-PG 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid.
pg 124 lines 24-25 No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" allowed against Govt monopoly
pg 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill - Doctors/ AMA - The Govt will dictate what wage you are allowed to make. (Wage limits).
Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employers MUST enroll their employees into the public option plan. THEY HAVE NO CHOICE, and neither do the employees.
Pg 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay premiums for every employee, part time employees AND their families as well.
Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with a payroll of $400,000 will have an 8% tax levied on all payroll.
pg 150 Lines 9-13 Employers with payroll between $251,000 & 400,000 who does not provide in full, the public option, will have a 6% tax on all payroll levied.
Pg 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC coverage according to Govt mandate, will be taxed at 2.5% of their income for healthcare. So, you will have government healthcare coverage, or you will be punished.
Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay)
Pg 195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Administration (GOVT) will have total and complete access to ALL your personal financial, bank and investment information.
PG 203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that.
Pg 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid, Seniors, low income, and poor.
Pg 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Wages for all doctors will be made the same. Specialists like Brain Surgeons will make the same money a General Practitioner makes.
PG 253 Line 10-18 Govt sets value of Doctor's time. Govt. decides value of humans.
PG 265 Sec 1131Govt mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries.
P G 268 Sec 1141 Fed Govt regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs
PG 272 SEC. 1145. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!
Page 280 Sec 1151 The Govt will penalize hospitals for what Govt deems preventable re-admissions.
Pg 298 Lines 9-11 Doctors that treat a patient during initial admission will be penalized.
Pg 317 L 13-20 PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Government dictates what Doctors can make and how much they can own.
Pg 317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion- Govt mandates hospitals cannot expand without government approval.
pg 321 2-13 Hospitals have opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input and approval is required. Can you say ACORN?!!
Pg335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339 - Govt mandates establishment of outcome based measures. Rationing
Pg 341 Lines 3-9 Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc. Forcing people into the Govt plan.
Pg 354 Sec 1177 - Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs persons for care. Can euthanasia be far behind for "undesirables"?
Pg 379 Sec 1191 Govt creates more bureaucracy - Telehealth Advisory Committee. Can you say HC by phone?
PG 425 Lines 4-12 Govt mandates Advance Care Planning Consultation. Euthanasia and Doctor-Assisted Suicide.
Pg 425 Lines 17-19 Govt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, and assume pow er of attorney of all enrollees. Mandatory!
PG 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Govt provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in death decisions to end your life.
PG 427 Lines 15-24 Govt mandates program to mandatory end of life programs. The Govt will mandate how your life ends.
Pg 429 Lines 1-9 An "advance care planning consultant" will be used frequently as a patient's health deteriorates
PG 429 Lines 10-12 "advance care consultation" may include an ORDER to initiate end of life plans. AN ORDER from GOV to terminate a life.
Pg 429 Lines 13-25 - The govt will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.
PG 430 L ines 11-15 The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life
Pg 469 - Community Based Home Medical Services=Non profit orgs. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!?
Page 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORG. 1 monthly payment to a community-based org. Like ACORN?
PG 489 Sec 1308 The Govt will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means government will now be involved in marriage and family decisions.
Pg 494-498 Govt will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, rationing those services.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Bon Voyage!
I am off to Argentina tomorrow for a week-long adventure. I will post my pictures, travel log, and any inspired essays upon my return. I feel really excited - it's been a year since my last international trip and I'm anticipating this time as a refreshing escape. I'm bringing several books that I hope to have mostly plowed through by the end of the journey. I am purposefully not bringing my laptop, as I want this to be a vacation from all my daily routines/activities. Commitment to internal exploration combined with immersion into an exotic culture usually bears rich fruit full of intense dreams, new perspectives, and renewed awe.
I am looking forward to my return almost as much as I am the trip itself....
I am looking forward to my return almost as much as I am the trip itself....
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Growing Up With The Kings
The summer of 2004, after my sophomore year of college, was a liminal space between some semblance of reality and full-blown fantasy. I left Austin with a barely passing transcript and the final snubs of my pledge sisters and roommates to attend Victoria College for both summer sessions. I spent the next few months breezing through summer school while spending every free moment attached to a boy with whom I felt both valuable and worthless simultaneously. The fall semester, I would begin my official demise by privately withdrawing from life all-together while using every ounce of my energy to keep up an appearance of mind-blowing success. This ruse would consume my entire life for the next three years.
But back to the summer at hand: it was during this time that I became an avid listener of the band Kings of Leon. These Southern bad boys exuded all the glamor and excitement of living in the moment and chasing pleasures while giving little or no thought to the consequences. In other words, sacrificing tomorrow for the sake of today. This philosophy was comforting to me at the time; I was living in sheer terror of what the future held and used that fear to fuel my increasing recklessness and to rationalize my immoral behavior. With each step down the well-tread path of self-destruction, I thought, "Better live it up now, because next year you'll probably be on the streets."
After returning to Austin, I threw myself into another relationship with similar emotional benchmarks but ten times more destructive than the one in Victoria. If I was a sinking ship, he was drilling new holes in my flooring by the day. He too was a fan of the band, only far less passionate than I (I don't think he was really passionate about anything, come to think of it). Shortly after we began dating, he gifted me with tickets to a Kings concert.
Prior to attending, I read an article in which the band admitted that they had left their Christian roots behind in favor of the hard-partying life on the road. They also claimed to be headed straight to rehab once the tour was over. I remember my boyfriend laughing hysterically as I reported what I had read, but inside all I felt was deep sadness. Everything that the Kings had represented for me, everything useful for convincing myself that this path was OK, was leading them not to blissful abandon but rather to a Betty Ford clinic. These lies had already stopped working for them - how long before they failed me, too?
Now, fortunately, I never got into drugs or promiscuity. To this day I am not sure exactly why, since every other choice I made during that time was dedicated to killing my soul. The grace of God must have somehow kept some tiny seed of hope alive deep inside me to prevent any decisions that would have left deeper scars or lasting consequences. Still, the exaltation of personal pleasure and the omission of spirituality, responsibility, and meaningfulness served as creeds for both lifestyles.
I don't know if the boys from Tennessee ever did check into a rehab clinic or even found some deeper meaning in their lives, but I do see a dramatic change in their lyrics and overall sound. Previous albums, Youth and Young Manhood and Aha Shake Heartbreak were filled with good ol' Southern rock with a '70s vibe reminiscent of Creedance Clearwater Revival or Led Zeppelin. Then, with Because of the Times in 2007, a noticeable shift towards soulfulness and honesty began. This is also the year that I abandoned my boyfriend, my friends, my apartment and my lifestyle and committed to creating a similar shift within myself.
The Kings' most recent album, Only By The Night, is a far cry from their early work but also their most popular. However, it has received major criticism from early fans who would have preferred the band to remain true to their original sound. Comments such as "Not the Kings of Leon I fell in love with" and "Where is my wild, screaming, singing, panting, ranting, squealing Caleb?" abound on the iTunes reviews. Many long-time fans feel the band has lost integrity by allowing for more studio editing and pursuing new directions. The underriding tone of most of these reviews seems to really be "Who do you think you are?" or "You totally sold out!"
I can empathize with the Kings' quandary: how do you push yourself to grow and change while not angering those who saw you at the beginning? The answer, I have found, is that there are always going to be those who want to box you up. They want to say, "I know you. This is who you are, and if you ever claim to be anything different you are a fraud and a hypocrite." Sometimes this comes from their belief that no one can really change; this "belief" is usually just a tool to help them feel comfortable with their own lack of growth. Other times these people feel abandoned or even judged, and their accusations and scorn come from a place of defensiveness or hurt.
I personally find Only By the Night the most moving and compelling of the four, but I concede that this assessment may be clouded by my sentimentality for the synchronicity of the band's journey with my own. As I endeavor to grow and make choices that nurture soulfulness, honesty, and maturity, I at times think about what people from my past might think. "Who do you think you are?" is the incredulous, accusatory voice that comes to mind - one that I believe I have internalized over the years from these former "friends." It is hard to avoid the temptation to fit into the box people have designed for you. I applaud Kings of Leon for having the courage to break the mold, and I pray that I can do the same.
But back to the summer at hand: it was during this time that I became an avid listener of the band Kings of Leon. These Southern bad boys exuded all the glamor and excitement of living in the moment and chasing pleasures while giving little or no thought to the consequences. In other words, sacrificing tomorrow for the sake of today. This philosophy was comforting to me at the time; I was living in sheer terror of what the future held and used that fear to fuel my increasing recklessness and to rationalize my immoral behavior. With each step down the well-tread path of self-destruction, I thought, "Better live it up now, because next year you'll probably be on the streets."
After returning to Austin, I threw myself into another relationship with similar emotional benchmarks but ten times more destructive than the one in Victoria. If I was a sinking ship, he was drilling new holes in my flooring by the day. He too was a fan of the band, only far less passionate than I (I don't think he was really passionate about anything, come to think of it). Shortly after we began dating, he gifted me with tickets to a Kings concert.
Prior to attending, I read an article in which the band admitted that they had left their Christian roots behind in favor of the hard-partying life on the road. They also claimed to be headed straight to rehab once the tour was over. I remember my boyfriend laughing hysterically as I reported what I had read, but inside all I felt was deep sadness. Everything that the Kings had represented for me, everything useful for convincing myself that this path was OK, was leading them not to blissful abandon but rather to a Betty Ford clinic. These lies had already stopped working for them - how long before they failed me, too?
Now, fortunately, I never got into drugs or promiscuity. To this day I am not sure exactly why, since every other choice I made during that time was dedicated to killing my soul. The grace of God must have somehow kept some tiny seed of hope alive deep inside me to prevent any decisions that would have left deeper scars or lasting consequences. Still, the exaltation of personal pleasure and the omission of spirituality, responsibility, and meaningfulness served as creeds for both lifestyles.
I don't know if the boys from Tennessee ever did check into a rehab clinic or even found some deeper meaning in their lives, but I do see a dramatic change in their lyrics and overall sound. Previous albums, Youth and Young Manhood and Aha Shake Heartbreak were filled with good ol' Southern rock with a '70s vibe reminiscent of Creedance Clearwater Revival or Led Zeppelin. Then, with Because of the Times in 2007, a noticeable shift towards soulfulness and honesty began. This is also the year that I abandoned my boyfriend, my friends, my apartment and my lifestyle and committed to creating a similar shift within myself.
The Kings' most recent album, Only By The Night, is a far cry from their early work but also their most popular. However, it has received major criticism from early fans who would have preferred the band to remain true to their original sound. Comments such as "Not the Kings of Leon I fell in love with" and "Where is my wild, screaming, singing, panting, ranting, squealing Caleb?" abound on the iTunes reviews. Many long-time fans feel the band has lost integrity by allowing for more studio editing and pursuing new directions. The underriding tone of most of these reviews seems to really be "Who do you think you are?" or "You totally sold out!"
I can empathize with the Kings' quandary: how do you push yourself to grow and change while not angering those who saw you at the beginning? The answer, I have found, is that there are always going to be those who want to box you up. They want to say, "I know you. This is who you are, and if you ever claim to be anything different you are a fraud and a hypocrite." Sometimes this comes from their belief that no one can really change; this "belief" is usually just a tool to help them feel comfortable with their own lack of growth. Other times these people feel abandoned or even judged, and their accusations and scorn come from a place of defensiveness or hurt.
I personally find Only By the Night the most moving and compelling of the four, but I concede that this assessment may be clouded by my sentimentality for the synchronicity of the band's journey with my own. As I endeavor to grow and make choices that nurture soulfulness, honesty, and maturity, I at times think about what people from my past might think. "Who do you think you are?" is the incredulous, accusatory voice that comes to mind - one that I believe I have internalized over the years from these former "friends." It is hard to avoid the temptation to fit into the box people have designed for you. I applaud Kings of Leon for having the courage to break the mold, and I pray that I can do the same.
I'm Freaked Out
From http://www.drudgereport.com/flashaot.htm
ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA; NEWS TO BE ANCHORED FROM INSIDE WHITE HOUSE
Tue Jun 16 2009 08:45:10 ET
On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care -- a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!
Highlights on the agenda:
ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.
The network plans a primetime special -- 'Prescription for America' -- originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.
MORE
Late Monday night, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay fired off a complaint to the head of ABCNEWS:
Dear Mr. Westin:
As the national debate on health care reform intensifies, I am deeply concerned and disappointed with ABC's astonishing decision to exclude opposing voices on this critical issue on June 24, 2009. Next Wednesday, ABC News will air a primetime health care reform “town hall” at the White House with President Barack Obama. In addition, according to an ABC News report, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, WORLD NEWS, NIGHTLINE and ABC’s web news “will all feature special programming on the president’s health care agenda.” This does not include the promotion, over the next 9 days, the president’s health care agenda will receive on ABC News programming.
Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party's views to those of the President's to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. Our request was rejected. I believe that the President should have the ability to speak directly to the America people. However, I find it outrageous that ABC would prohibit our Party's opposing thoughts and ideas from this national debate, which affects millions of ABC viewers.
In the absence of opposition, I am concerned this event will become a glorified infomercial to promote the Democrat agenda. If that is the case, this primetime infomercial should be paid for out of the DNC coffers. President Obama does not hold a monopoly on health care reform ideas or on free airtime. The President has stated time and time again that he wants a bipartisan debate. Therefore, the Republican Party should be included in this primetime event, or the DNC should pay for your airtime.
Respectfully,
Ken McKay
Republican National Committee
Chief of Staff
ABC TURNS PROGRAMMING OVER TO OBAMA; NEWS TO BE ANCHORED FROM INSIDE WHITE HOUSE
Tue Jun 16 2009 08:45:10 ET
On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care -- a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm!
Highlights on the agenda:
ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House.
The network plans a primetime special -- 'Prescription for America' -- originating from the East Room, exclude opposing voices on the debate.
MORE
Late Monday night, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay fired off a complaint to the head of ABCNEWS:
Dear Mr. Westin:
As the national debate on health care reform intensifies, I am deeply concerned and disappointed with ABC's astonishing decision to exclude opposing voices on this critical issue on June 24, 2009. Next Wednesday, ABC News will air a primetime health care reform “town hall” at the White House with President Barack Obama. In addition, according to an ABC News report, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, WORLD NEWS, NIGHTLINE and ABC’s web news “will all feature special programming on the president’s health care agenda.” This does not include the promotion, over the next 9 days, the president’s health care agenda will receive on ABC News programming.
Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party's views to those of the President's to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. Our request was rejected. I believe that the President should have the ability to speak directly to the America people. However, I find it outrageous that ABC would prohibit our Party's opposing thoughts and ideas from this national debate, which affects millions of ABC viewers.
In the absence of opposition, I am concerned this event will become a glorified infomercial to promote the Democrat agenda. If that is the case, this primetime infomercial should be paid for out of the DNC coffers. President Obama does not hold a monopoly on health care reform ideas or on free airtime. The President has stated time and time again that he wants a bipartisan debate. Therefore, the Republican Party should be included in this primetime event, or the DNC should pay for your airtime.
Respectfully,
Ken McKay
Republican National Committee
Chief of Staff
Friday, June 12, 2009
D+A (6.12.09)
Jungian analyst Robert Moore talks about how the four archetypes of the Self (King/Queen, Warrior, Magician, Lover) are powerful, amoral, jealous and potent. It is important to stay vigilant of them so that they do not rule our lives from the shadows, which results in chaos and destruction. Rather, it is our responsibility to recognize what each brings to the table and how their energies can be both helpful and harmful in our quest to become fully integrated human beings. Each embodies qualities/abilities that are essential to acting appropriately and effectively at certain moments, so it is important to be able to access or "tap into" these archetypal energies when needed.
However, Moore warns that we must do so with great caution and respect for the strength of these forces. Each one wants to be your sole possessor. Therefore, if we are immersed in the energy of one archetype we become either ineffectual and one-dimensional or destructive and uncontrollable. It is the responsibility of the self (not the Self) to discern when each energy is needed and how to incorporate it judiciously.
As I've reflected on my own self, I see how areas of my life suffer due to my lack of integration of these archetypes. The Queen and the Warrior are the two weakest. I've been inviting the Warrior energy out of my subconscious for the past month and have noticed some improvements not only in my actions but in my thought patterns as well. It is becoming easier for me to make things happen, accomplish goals, and accept conflict.
During a related discussion with my parents last night, my father pointed out that my struggle with organization and self-criticism were evidence of a lack in Queen energy. Thus, as I fell asleep last night I attempted to summon her from the depths of my subconscious with the mantra "Your Highness, my Queen, show me who you are, bless me with your energy." Now, this sounds crazy, I know. I think it is important that I clarify that I was not thinking of this as a prayer so much as a psychological exercise; I do not view these archetypes as gods. I do, however, understand them as various facets of the one God and therefore feel it is important to address each with reverence. I then had the following dream:
It is summer time and I am going to visit a....friend? cousin? I am my current age, 25, in my current body but there is an innocence and purity about me that puts me more in the internal consciousness of a 12 or 13 year old from the 1940s or '50s. I arrive at this white house in the middle of a field in the deep south. The house is two stories and very plain and simple in structure. There is a medium-sized rectangular pool in the field next to the house with a small diving board at one end in the shadow of a massive oak tree. This tree is the only tree visible in the entire landscape.
The girl I am visiting is about 11 or 12 years old, with a scrawny figure, mousy brown hair and gray eyes. She lives with her father (or step-father?), who is emotionally removed or perhaps even abusive. I know he loves her but he is also afraid of her and therefore keeps her on a tight leash. I know that this girl has amazing magical powers. She is somewhat aware of these powers, but keeps them hidden from others and often from herself.
After I arrive, I put my bags in the third-story attic where I am to stay for the duration of my visit. There is a small cot by a tiny octagonal window that overlooks the pool. After unpacking I kneel on the cot and look out the window, where I see the girl in her bathing suit walking around the pool and looking into it. Her faceless father is lounging in a lawn chair nearby, watching her. I put on my suit and head down to join her. I want to get her to have fun and play with me, so I get onto the diving board and smile at her. I say "Watch this!" and do a swan dive into the pool. When I resurface, I encourage her to join me. She is shy and nervous, but she finally decides to venture in.
I then try to get her to play a game of tag, but she is so timid that it ends up just being me tagging her and swimming away while she giggles and I move in for another tag. Then we go underwater and a more reciprocal game ensues, the goal of which is for us to eventually kiss. She continues to resurface for air, but to my delight I discover that I do not need the oxygen. Once I realize that I can hold my breath interminably, I attempt to breath naturally underwater and find that I can not only do that but also talk and sing and walk and glide with ease. I know that the girl is able to do this as well, she just doesn't realize it. I am trying to show her, but she continues to go up for air. Every time I get close enough for us to kiss, she impishly grins at me and returns to the surface.
Now it is night and I am up in my attic room. A gentleman caller arrives at the house to see the girl. He is around her father's age, and I know that this rendezvous is arranged by her father as a way of keeping her unaware of her power or unable to access it. I don't know what exactly is going to go on between the girl and this man, but I know that it is sinister and is another form of this girl's enslavement. I think to myself how sad her situation is. I know that if I can get her away from this I can make her see her potential and the incredible power she holds. As I resolve to do something about it, something to rescue this girl from her predicament, I wake up.
Interpretation to follow, after further reflection...
However, Moore warns that we must do so with great caution and respect for the strength of these forces. Each one wants to be your sole possessor. Therefore, if we are immersed in the energy of one archetype we become either ineffectual and one-dimensional or destructive and uncontrollable. It is the responsibility of the self (not the Self) to discern when each energy is needed and how to incorporate it judiciously.
As I've reflected on my own self, I see how areas of my life suffer due to my lack of integration of these archetypes. The Queen and the Warrior are the two weakest. I've been inviting the Warrior energy out of my subconscious for the past month and have noticed some improvements not only in my actions but in my thought patterns as well. It is becoming easier for me to make things happen, accomplish goals, and accept conflict.
During a related discussion with my parents last night, my father pointed out that my struggle with organization and self-criticism were evidence of a lack in Queen energy. Thus, as I fell asleep last night I attempted to summon her from the depths of my subconscious with the mantra "Your Highness, my Queen, show me who you are, bless me with your energy." Now, this sounds crazy, I know. I think it is important that I clarify that I was not thinking of this as a prayer so much as a psychological exercise; I do not view these archetypes as gods. I do, however, understand them as various facets of the one God and therefore feel it is important to address each with reverence. I then had the following dream:
It is summer time and I am going to visit a....friend? cousin? I am my current age, 25, in my current body but there is an innocence and purity about me that puts me more in the internal consciousness of a 12 or 13 year old from the 1940s or '50s. I arrive at this white house in the middle of a field in the deep south. The house is two stories and very plain and simple in structure. There is a medium-sized rectangular pool in the field next to the house with a small diving board at one end in the shadow of a massive oak tree. This tree is the only tree visible in the entire landscape.
The girl I am visiting is about 11 or 12 years old, with a scrawny figure, mousy brown hair and gray eyes. She lives with her father (or step-father?), who is emotionally removed or perhaps even abusive. I know he loves her but he is also afraid of her and therefore keeps her on a tight leash. I know that this girl has amazing magical powers. She is somewhat aware of these powers, but keeps them hidden from others and often from herself.
After I arrive, I put my bags in the third-story attic where I am to stay for the duration of my visit. There is a small cot by a tiny octagonal window that overlooks the pool. After unpacking I kneel on the cot and look out the window, where I see the girl in her bathing suit walking around the pool and looking into it. Her faceless father is lounging in a lawn chair nearby, watching her. I put on my suit and head down to join her. I want to get her to have fun and play with me, so I get onto the diving board and smile at her. I say "Watch this!" and do a swan dive into the pool. When I resurface, I encourage her to join me. She is shy and nervous, but she finally decides to venture in.
I then try to get her to play a game of tag, but she is so timid that it ends up just being me tagging her and swimming away while she giggles and I move in for another tag. Then we go underwater and a more reciprocal game ensues, the goal of which is for us to eventually kiss. She continues to resurface for air, but to my delight I discover that I do not need the oxygen. Once I realize that I can hold my breath interminably, I attempt to breath naturally underwater and find that I can not only do that but also talk and sing and walk and glide with ease. I know that the girl is able to do this as well, she just doesn't realize it. I am trying to show her, but she continues to go up for air. Every time I get close enough for us to kiss, she impishly grins at me and returns to the surface.
Now it is night and I am up in my attic room. A gentleman caller arrives at the house to see the girl. He is around her father's age, and I know that this rendezvous is arranged by her father as a way of keeping her unaware of her power or unable to access it. I don't know what exactly is going to go on between the girl and this man, but I know that it is sinister and is another form of this girl's enslavement. I think to myself how sad her situation is. I know that if I can get her away from this I can make her see her potential and the incredible power she holds. As I resolve to do something about it, something to rescue this girl from her predicament, I wake up.
Interpretation to follow, after further reflection...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)