"WASHINGTON (AP) — The Defense Department is refusing to comply with orders or sign contracts to clean up 11 hazardous waste sites, and has asked the White House and Justice Department to intervene on its behalf.
"The dispute between the Pentagon and the Environmental Protection Agency has simmered over the last year since the EPA began issuing orders compelling the Air Force and Army to clean up four properties where contamination poses an "imminent and substantial" risk to public health and the environment. To date, the Pentagon has agreed to comply with only one of those orders, at an Air Force missile plant near Tucson, Ariz..."
more from the AP
Monday, June 30, 2008
U.S. Evidence in Guantanamo Case Absurd
"...With some derision for the Bush administration’s arguments, a three-judge panel said the government contended that its allegations against a detainee should be accepted as true because they had been repeated in at least three secret documents.
"The court compared that to the absurd declaration of a Lewis Carroll character: “I have said it thrice: What I tell you three times is true.”
“This comes perilously close to suggesting that whatever the government says must be treated as true,” said the panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
"The unanimous panel overturned as invalid a Pentagon determination that a detainee, Huzaifa Parhat, a member of the ethnic Uighur Muslim minority in western China, was properly held as an enemy combatant.
"The panel included one of the court’s most conservative members, the chief judge, David B. Sentelle...
"...Mr. Parhat, a former fruit peddler who once passed a message to his wife in China that she should remarry because his imprisonment at Guantánamo was like already being dead..."
read more from "The New York Times"
"The court compared that to the absurd declaration of a Lewis Carroll character: “I have said it thrice: What I tell you three times is true.”
“This comes perilously close to suggesting that whatever the government says must be treated as true,” said the panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
"The unanimous panel overturned as invalid a Pentagon determination that a detainee, Huzaifa Parhat, a member of the ethnic Uighur Muslim minority in western China, was properly held as an enemy combatant.
"The panel included one of the court’s most conservative members, the chief judge, David B. Sentelle...
"...Mr. Parhat, a former fruit peddler who once passed a message to his wife in China that she should remarry because his imprisonment at Guantánamo was like already being dead..."
read more from "The New York Times"
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Just So You Know What You're Dealing With in VA - A Post About VA ASAP (The Drug Rehab I'm Basing My Rant On)
Category: Government Corruption
Central Virginia ASAP,VASAP,James River Alcohol Saftety Action Program extortion, intimidation, threats against job, unlawful illegal access into DMV database in effort to slander and defame for purposes of extortion, slander and defamation, perjury, falsification of records Ripoff Charlottesville Virginia
Rebuttal Box
Respond to this report!
Are you an owner, employee or ex-employee with either negative or positive information about the company or can you provide "insider information" on this company?
Victim of this person/company?
Are you also a victim of the same company or person? Want Justice? File a Ripoff Report and don´t let them get away with it!
Jmaes River Alcohol Saftety Action Program
Phone:
Fax:
610 Avon Street,Charlottesville,VA. 22901
Charlottesville, Virginia, 22901
U.S.A.
Submitted: 8/24/2007 1:35:10 PM
Modified: 8/24/2007 1:35:00 PM
Gamble
Jolinski, Virginia
Dear Rip Off reports,
Its a priviledge to write this post. I am a victim of extortion, intimidation, threats against job. VASAP(Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program is guilty illegal access into DMV database in effort to slander and defame for purposes of extortion. This agency is guilty of slander and defamation, perjury,falsification of records.
I am also writing to you in regards to civil liberties violations here in the state of Virginia. This has to do with corruption within a state agency in Virginia. The Commonwealth Attorney's Office along with The Virginia Attorney General's Office along with state representatives will not pursue investigation. I have court documents, transcripts and audio transcript of a court proceedings to show perjury and behavior indicating extortion tactics.
The Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program operates on intimidation, extortion and threats in order to extract monies from individuals and does not provide services to clients. Director of James River VASAP, David Dutcher is guilty of perjury in a circuit court in an effort to extract monies by extortion. There is a transcript of the trial and also audio recordings to prove the allegations.
Director of James River VASAP, David Dutcher is illegally using his access into the Virginia DMV database to forever bar individuals from legally ogtaining drivers license until monies are paid directly to him. This is unethical, illegal, immoral, malfeasence and corrupt. Among other federal violations,This clearly describes a violation of due process laws and deprivation of life and liberty under the consitution.
Director of James River VASAP, David Dutcher and others within this VASAP agency across the state of Virginia make it a practice of using the court system as a leveraging tool to force monies not owed them from individuals. Threats of false reports being forwarded against individuals to the courts are used as a tool of threat to force monies from individuals to satiate the threat.
Private, highly skilled and trained doctors and medical professionals such as hospitals and private clinics are not deemed as suitable providers of medical treatment. VASAP is left to be determining agency for all treatment, if any, and all fees. Also, the extent of duration of time constraints is open-ended and can last decades if not an individual's lifetime. This is with no regard to state or federal law. Individuals can be held in limbo for decades with no recourse of remedy except possibly the federal courts. I am sure there are thousands of people across Virginia out there with similiar experiences. As a taxpayer and disabled military veteran I am voicing my concerns.
The number of state representatives and agencies I have contacted here in Virginia will not address these matters; saying this is not a matter that can be investigates. The Attoney General's Office in Virginia will not even investigate.
I hope you in help me in regards to this matter.
Sincerely,
Steve XXXXXXXX
XXX)XXX-XXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX@yahoo.com
Steve
Jolinski, Virginia
U.S.A.
Central Virginia ASAP,VASAP,James River Alcohol Saftety Action Program extortion, intimidation, threats against job, unlawful illegal access into DMV database in effort to slander and defame for purposes of extortion, slander and defamation, perjury, falsification of records Ripoff Charlottesville Virginia
Rebuttal Box
Respond to this report!
Are you an owner, employee or ex-employee with either negative or positive information about the company or can you provide "insider information" on this company?
Victim of this person/company?
Are you also a victim of the same company or person? Want Justice? File a Ripoff Report and don´t let them get away with it!
Jmaes River Alcohol Saftety Action Program
Phone:
Fax:
610 Avon Street,Charlottesville,VA. 22901
Charlottesville, Virginia, 22901
U.S.A.
Submitted: 8/24/2007 1:35:10 PM
Modified: 8/24/2007 1:35:00 PM
Gamble
Jolinski, Virginia
Dear Rip Off reports,
Its a priviledge to write this post. I am a victim of extortion, intimidation, threats against job. VASAP(Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program is guilty illegal access into DMV database in effort to slander and defame for purposes of extortion. This agency is guilty of slander and defamation, perjury,falsification of records.
I am also writing to you in regards to civil liberties violations here in the state of Virginia. This has to do with corruption within a state agency in Virginia. The Commonwealth Attorney's Office along with The Virginia Attorney General's Office along with state representatives will not pursue investigation. I have court documents, transcripts and audio transcript of a court proceedings to show perjury and behavior indicating extortion tactics.
The Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program operates on intimidation, extortion and threats in order to extract monies from individuals and does not provide services to clients. Director of James River VASAP, David Dutcher is guilty of perjury in a circuit court in an effort to extract monies by extortion. There is a transcript of the trial and also audio recordings to prove the allegations.
Director of James River VASAP, David Dutcher is illegally using his access into the Virginia DMV database to forever bar individuals from legally ogtaining drivers license until monies are paid directly to him. This is unethical, illegal, immoral, malfeasence and corrupt. Among other federal violations,This clearly describes a violation of due process laws and deprivation of life and liberty under the consitution.
Director of James River VASAP, David Dutcher and others within this VASAP agency across the state of Virginia make it a practice of using the court system as a leveraging tool to force monies not owed them from individuals. Threats of false reports being forwarded against individuals to the courts are used as a tool of threat to force monies from individuals to satiate the threat.
Private, highly skilled and trained doctors and medical professionals such as hospitals and private clinics are not deemed as suitable providers of medical treatment. VASAP is left to be determining agency for all treatment, if any, and all fees. Also, the extent of duration of time constraints is open-ended and can last decades if not an individual's lifetime. This is with no regard to state or federal law. Individuals can be held in limbo for decades with no recourse of remedy except possibly the federal courts. I am sure there are thousands of people across Virginia out there with similiar experiences. As a taxpayer and disabled military veteran I am voicing my concerns.
The number of state representatives and agencies I have contacted here in Virginia will not address these matters; saying this is not a matter that can be investigates. The Attoney General's Office in Virginia will not even investigate.
I hope you in help me in regards to this matter.
Sincerely,
Steve XXXXXXXX
XXX)XXX-XXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX@yahoo.com
Steve
Jolinski, Virginia
U.S.A.
Widespread Panic Over Your Electric Bill?
I just got a copy of today's "Richmond Times Dispatch" and see that my electric bill has been 'approved' to jump to $107 a month, on average. A warning below posts that 'much bigger natural gas bills could be close behind'. So we're supposed to pay that, along with increasing gas and food costs. Never-mind what our economy ignores, (as posted below). What is wrong with this world? Trying to price the middle class out of existance? Nooooooooo not in our socitey. Yeeeeeeessss. We're screwed. Never mind what you can't pay for with minimum wage, lets look at what you can't pay for with an average income. Basic needs, that's what you can't pay for.
And this is helping society how? I guess only wealthy people are qualified to contribute substantially to our progress. WRONG. But never mind that. If you can't pay for gas, electricity, food, well, you might die. But nevermind, let us die then, and decrease the surplus population, as Ebeneezer Scrooge once said.
Yep, it all winds back to a Dickens novel.
From "The Richmond Times Dispatch" - "Electric rates across Virginia will jump more than 18 percent - just in time for the hottest part of the summer - as Dominion Virginia Power yesterday won regularots approval to collect an additional $1.3 BILLION from customers."
And it's more expensive why?
And this is helping society how? I guess only wealthy people are qualified to contribute substantially to our progress. WRONG. But never mind that. If you can't pay for gas, electricity, food, well, you might die. But nevermind, let us die then, and decrease the surplus population, as Ebeneezer Scrooge once said.
Yep, it all winds back to a Dickens novel.
From "The Richmond Times Dispatch" - "Electric rates across Virginia will jump more than 18 percent - just in time for the hottest part of the summer - as Dominion Virginia Power yesterday won regularots approval to collect an additional $1.3 BILLION from customers."
And it's more expensive why?
Speaking of Ways the Government Robs Us, Racket #2, State Mandatory Rehabilitation Programs
There is something inherantly unethical about a system that claims to exist to provide rehabilitation aid and profits from it. If you're making money from it, you have an interest in people not being rehabilitated, clearly. Not all people are that greedy but I'd go so far as to say our government is, especially these days. And if you work in a state-supported program and your supervisor is telling you you have to meet your quota or lose your job, you might go against your social work or whatever related background to cover your ass. Especially when jobs are becoming increasingly hard to find and cutbacks are becoming commonplace. Yes it's happening now, just read the news and you'll almost immeidately see. Rising gas prices aren't the only critical economic issue at the moment. What sense does a quota make in a rehabilitation program? Any source you read will tell you that results vary widely from person to person. SO they will logically vary widely from class to class. And a quota is rational why?
Think people wouldn't do that? Ask someone who's participated in one of the manditory programs. They shouldn't be hard to find if you live in a state that does this, as fines for substance abuse related charges double, more and more people are being arrested. What a surprise. (I've heard tales of lines to pay fines winding around the courthouse and seen overflowing courtrooms.) One man said that he was the only person in his 'class' (where instructors often have participants simply sit for several hours and read out of the book and showing videos seems to be the primary rehabilitation method), who did not test positive for drugs and alchohol during his enrollment but was the only person required to repeat it. And that's paying attention to the actual rehabilitation of participants in what way? It's not an isolated incident either.
Many, many people say they are double or otherwise over charged for fees and being told one thing then the opposite by staff seems to be the norm. Sure, that happens a lot in any business, (the double-talk anyway, the double-charging would be a crime for a private business) but when mistakes lead to jail-time, (which makes more money for the state from things like canteen, phone cards, etc - don't let the claims of the high cost of keeping prisoners fool you, there's more to it. Jails are also paid, in NC at least, $25 a day for state prisoners, $75 for federal. You don't hear much about all that.)
Sure people who are in these programs are there because they did something wrong. And yes, they should be pennalized. But what goes on pretty much amounts to extortion and often wrongful imprisonment. I've never heard of it making sense to punish crime with more crime. Why in the hell don't we just pass a law that forces you to leave your keys with the bartender rather than, or along with your debit card? Now that would prevent more drunk driving than any of the actions ever taken by the law to date. It would be very simple. You'd be fined for allowing people to leave when they'd drank enough, (i.e. any) to endanger themselves and others, including running the risk of a DUI, (you can get one for a bac = 1 drink). Similar to being fined for serving underage people. Pennalize the bar too. NO ONE would drive drunk after leaving a bar if that happened b/c they wouldn't have their keys. People would undoubtedly still drink at home and drive, but if that were the cause of most DUI's police wouldn't swarm around bars/bar areas in cities after closing time would they? But nooooo, if we did that, business owners would lose money rather than individual citizens. Can't have that.
Furthermore, shouldn't the concern be eliminating the problem? A.A., for example, has been proven to work very well, N.A. too, why not place people on regular probation, (which you don't have to pay for but still recieve drug testing in), with alcohol testing added where applicable, and require that they go to A.A. or N.A.? Clearly the only reason is to make money. If the concern were really rehabilitation, more would happen than reading from a book and watching videos, for one. And people who failed drug and alcohol tests would, as a matter of course, at least remain in the program. Not what happens.
Take a look at the success rate:
From MADD:
"Mandatory assessment and treatment of DUI offenders address substance abuse problems. A comprehensive educational program of education, treatment, and some form of follow-up monitoring (e.g., supervised probation or aftercare) has been shown to decrease repeat offenses by seven to nine percent. (Wells-Parker, 1995) "
Why, 7-9%, that's overwhelming! Meanwhile, the statistics of rehabilitation programs overall report double or more the success rate as a general rule:
"The typical success rate of most drug rehabs is 2% to 20%.. There are drug rehabs with success rates as high as 75%." http://www.drug-rehabs.org/
So, if the point is really rehabilitation, why aren't mandatory state programs modeled on those? Clearly the point isn't rehabilitation. And if it isn't, then why on earth do the programs exist? I return you to the above-offerred regular probation/proven methods of rehab suggestion.
Per the National Institute of Health, successful rehabilitation programs must meet standards mandatory state programs fail by a wide margin: (that's logical now isn't it):
Now, this is straight from the horse's mouth.
"1. No single treatment is appropriate for all individuals. Matching treatment settings, interventions, and services to each individual's particular problems and needs is critical to his or her ultimate success in returning to productive functioning in the family, workplace, and society."
Ok, so lets put all offenders into one program and see how that goes why don't we?
"2. Treatment needs to be readily available. Because individuals who are addicted to drugs may be uncertain about entering treatment, taking advantage of opportunities when they are ready for treatment is crucial. Potential treatment applicants can be lost if treatment is not immediately available or is not readily accessible."
Good luck contacting your case manager if you're in a mandatory state rehab. program. Again, ask around and you'll find the common response is 'they don't call back'. And, if you miss two, or even one appointment or class for reasons short of death or near-death, literally, you can't participate. And this makes sense outside of the fact that the state makes money when people are in jail and going to jail does not exclude you from having to pay even more from the program why?
"3. Effective treatment attends to multiple needs of the individual, not just his or her drug use. To be effective, treatment must address the individual's drug use and any associated medical, psychological, social, vocational, and legal problems."
Yea, good luck with that. By this definition the programs should at least be working with state social service and mental health agencies. They do not.
"4. An individual's treatment and services plan must be assessed continually and modified as necessary to ensure that the plan meets the person's changing needs. A patient may require varying combinations of services and treatment components during the course of treatment and recovery. In addition to counseling or psychotherapy, a patient at times may require medication, other medical services, family therapy, parenting instruction, vocational rehabilitation, and social and legal services. It is critical that the treatment approach be appropriate to the individual's age, gender, ethnicity, and culture."
Nope, treatment is one size fits all, whether you're 16 or 66. Additionally, from what I've heard the staff will tell you not to take your medication, that it's all feeding addiction. Sure it is. That's really healthy - and I'm sure everyone who works there is a medical doctor or at least a nurse practitioner. Not even one on staff to evaluate you.
"5. Remaining in treatment for an adequate period of time is critical for treatment effectiveness. The appropriate duration for an individual depends on his or her problems and needs (see pages 11-49). Research indicates that for most patients, the threshold of significant improvement is reached at about 3 months in treatment. After this threshold is reached, additional treatment can produce further progress toward recovery. Because people often leave treatment prematurely, programs should include strategies to engage and keep patients in treatment."
State Mandatory programs last for 12 'classes', regardless of the individual's issues. So a 17 year old who was drunk for the first time receives the same 'treatment' as someone who has had an alcohol problem for decades.
"8. Medical detoxification is only the first stage of addiction treatment and by itself does little to change long-term drug use. Medical detoxification safely manages the acute physical symptoms of withdrawal associated with stopping drug use. While detoxification alone is rarely sufficient to help addicts achieve long-term abstinence, for some individuals it is a strongly indicated precursor to effective drug addiction treatment (see Drug Addiction Treatment Section)."
But detoxing with the threat of jail if you don't is really the only action taken by these programs. And that doesn't so much work with alcohol because participants have notice of testing and can avoid drinking the night before. And they REALLY monitor you to see that you're 'safely' withdrawing from drugs, legal or illegal. Rather, refer to the above-stated insistance that you take no medication. Even if you're insane, (and, arguably, someone withdrawing from drugs is insane whether they're legal or illegally using them). No help for those who don't have the money to continue medical care due to the rapidly escalating costs either. No the government isn't a social service agency, but if they set one up, shouldn't it work? Or do a little more than just pretend to be one on it's facade?
And it goes on in direct condradiction of state drug and alcohol programs. Read it and hope to God you never find yourself in one: http://www.nida.nih.gov/PODAT/PODAT1.html
Oh but that won't happen to the average person! NO! Only people who are serious criminals have to deal with this right? Wrong. If you have even one drink at happy hour and are pulled you're paying thousands of dollars, dealing with the above and a restricted license - with up to 3 years of probation. One drink. At least in Virginia. And as soon as fines increased, it's amazing how many more people were convicted! Is it really that that many more people are committing crimes? Hell no. The state has more of an interest in arresting you, that's all.
NO ONE should drink and drive. I'm not saying that. I have lost several friends to it. But handling the situation in the above manner does, even per MADD, little to nothing. In fact, it encourages letting the problem continue - if everyone really went to successful rehab when convicted, it would cut the DUI rate almost in half (the percentage of DUIs that are repeat offenders is 1/3 or half or something like that) and then how would we fund these marvelous programs? This is bullshit.
Anyone who cares about stopping drunk driving or other alcohol and drug related crimes, (and there's another flaw - if the concern were stopping the problem, you'd have to go to rehab for any drug or alcohol related offense, not just driving - but you don't. You can get drunk and beat your wife and kids all you want - you don't get a restricted child license or even have to go to domestic violence prevention classes, let alone treat the problem that's really behind it all), would push for the abolition of this crap and the institution of effective programs. And if offenders continue to bear the cost, which does make some amount of sense, eliminate incentives, quotas and all that so that staff has no vested interest in them not recovering.
Who cares about a bunch of addicts who commit irresponsible crimes? We all do because it effects all of us. It effects our taxes, the crime rate, the death rate, all sorts of things. And the process in place to address the problem, by the NIH's own definition, can't possibly work. Makes a lot of sense.
What can be done? I don't know. Most people can't possibly afford the cost of rehab, however, it's neccessary by all statistics to eliminate or even begin to control the problem. It would seem that a strong program would be just as easy to create and maintain as a crappy one and if the state is going to claim responsibility for doing so they ought to actually do it. Not doing so perpetuates the problem. From drug-rehabs.org:
"Almost all addicts tell themselves in the beginning that they can conquer their addiction on their own without the help of outside resources. Unfortunately, this is not usually the case. When an addict makes an attempt at detoxification and to discontinue drug use without the aid of professional help, statistically the results do not last long. Research into the effects of long-term addiction has shown that substantial changes in the way the brain functions are present long after the addict has stopped using drugs. Realizing that a drug addict who wishes to recover from their addiction needs more than just strong will power is the key to a successful recovery. Battling not only cravings for their drug of choice, re-stimulation of their past and changes in the way their brain functions, it is no wonder that quitting drugs without professional help is an uphill battle."
So good luck. If you support your states laws about this, then you're supporting a system that does little more than ensure that bandaids will continue to be put over bullet wounds and the problem of repeat offenders will not only continue but grow as incentive grows to arrest a higher number of people. Good luck to us all on this one.
My suggestion is that if you care about the crime rate where you live write to your representatives and/or start a petition to change the way the system works. The changes that have been made have been proven not to work for citizens. This means you. Do you really want to be driving down a highway of impaired addicts who have no access to treatment? That's what you're doing, especially with the health care, private and Medicare/Medicaid, crisis at hand.
Something clearly should be done. In fact, I think penalties should be tougher, (for example, requiring people who commit any drug or alcohol related offense to participate in and yes, even pay for, rehabilitation), but they should also work or we're just wasting everyone's time. And just because your tax money doesn't pay for the pseudo-rehabilitation doesn't mean you're not paying. You're paying far more for the cost of catching, prosecuting and incarcerating repeat offenders than you could possibly pay for, example, having offenders placed on regular probation that will have a far lesser corruption rate among those who run it b/c there is no profit, and requiring them to participate in proven treatment programs.
And I don't doubt for a second that the war is creating more substance abuse problems - the New York Times, for example, did a study of murder rates in returning soldiers and it's shocking. There are over a hundred listed, mostly for killing family members but the second majority is vehicular manslaughter while under the infulence.
Perhaps a rant about how horrifically sub-standard our Veterans health care is will follow. I worked for a good while for one of the only firms in the country that helps vets sue VA hospitals, so I know firsthand. They're appalling.
Think people wouldn't do that? Ask someone who's participated in one of the manditory programs. They shouldn't be hard to find if you live in a state that does this, as fines for substance abuse related charges double, more and more people are being arrested. What a surprise. (I've heard tales of lines to pay fines winding around the courthouse and seen overflowing courtrooms.) One man said that he was the only person in his 'class' (where instructors often have participants simply sit for several hours and read out of the book and showing videos seems to be the primary rehabilitation method), who did not test positive for drugs and alchohol during his enrollment but was the only person required to repeat it. And that's paying attention to the actual rehabilitation of participants in what way? It's not an isolated incident either.
Many, many people say they are double or otherwise over charged for fees and being told one thing then the opposite by staff seems to be the norm. Sure, that happens a lot in any business, (the double-talk anyway, the double-charging would be a crime for a private business) but when mistakes lead to jail-time, (which makes more money for the state from things like canteen, phone cards, etc - don't let the claims of the high cost of keeping prisoners fool you, there's more to it. Jails are also paid, in NC at least, $25 a day for state prisoners, $75 for federal. You don't hear much about all that.)
Sure people who are in these programs are there because they did something wrong. And yes, they should be pennalized. But what goes on pretty much amounts to extortion and often wrongful imprisonment. I've never heard of it making sense to punish crime with more crime. Why in the hell don't we just pass a law that forces you to leave your keys with the bartender rather than, or along with your debit card? Now that would prevent more drunk driving than any of the actions ever taken by the law to date. It would be very simple. You'd be fined for allowing people to leave when they'd drank enough, (i.e. any) to endanger themselves and others, including running the risk of a DUI, (you can get one for a bac = 1 drink). Similar to being fined for serving underage people. Pennalize the bar too. NO ONE would drive drunk after leaving a bar if that happened b/c they wouldn't have their keys. People would undoubtedly still drink at home and drive, but if that were the cause of most DUI's police wouldn't swarm around bars/bar areas in cities after closing time would they? But nooooo, if we did that, business owners would lose money rather than individual citizens. Can't have that.
Furthermore, shouldn't the concern be eliminating the problem? A.A., for example, has been proven to work very well, N.A. too, why not place people on regular probation, (which you don't have to pay for but still recieve drug testing in), with alcohol testing added where applicable, and require that they go to A.A. or N.A.? Clearly the only reason is to make money. If the concern were really rehabilitation, more would happen than reading from a book and watching videos, for one. And people who failed drug and alcohol tests would, as a matter of course, at least remain in the program. Not what happens.
Take a look at the success rate:
From MADD:
"Mandatory assessment and treatment of DUI offenders address substance abuse problems. A comprehensive educational program of education, treatment, and some form of follow-up monitoring (e.g., supervised probation or aftercare) has been shown to decrease repeat offenses by seven to nine percent. (Wells-Parker, 1995) "
Why, 7-9%, that's overwhelming! Meanwhile, the statistics of rehabilitation programs overall report double or more the success rate as a general rule:
"The typical success rate of most drug rehabs is 2% to 20%.. There are drug rehabs with success rates as high as 75%." http://www.drug-rehabs.org/
So, if the point is really rehabilitation, why aren't mandatory state programs modeled on those? Clearly the point isn't rehabilitation. And if it isn't, then why on earth do the programs exist? I return you to the above-offerred regular probation/proven methods of rehab suggestion.
Per the National Institute of Health, successful rehabilitation programs must meet standards mandatory state programs fail by a wide margin: (that's logical now isn't it):
Now, this is straight from the horse's mouth.
"1. No single treatment is appropriate for all individuals. Matching treatment settings, interventions, and services to each individual's particular problems and needs is critical to his or her ultimate success in returning to productive functioning in the family, workplace, and society."
Ok, so lets put all offenders into one program and see how that goes why don't we?
"2. Treatment needs to be readily available. Because individuals who are addicted to drugs may be uncertain about entering treatment, taking advantage of opportunities when they are ready for treatment is crucial. Potential treatment applicants can be lost if treatment is not immediately available or is not readily accessible."
Good luck contacting your case manager if you're in a mandatory state rehab. program. Again, ask around and you'll find the common response is 'they don't call back'. And, if you miss two, or even one appointment or class for reasons short of death or near-death, literally, you can't participate. And this makes sense outside of the fact that the state makes money when people are in jail and going to jail does not exclude you from having to pay even more from the program why?
"3. Effective treatment attends to multiple needs of the individual, not just his or her drug use. To be effective, treatment must address the individual's drug use and any associated medical, psychological, social, vocational, and legal problems."
Yea, good luck with that. By this definition the programs should at least be working with state social service and mental health agencies. They do not.
"4. An individual's treatment and services plan must be assessed continually and modified as necessary to ensure that the plan meets the person's changing needs. A patient may require varying combinations of services and treatment components during the course of treatment and recovery. In addition to counseling or psychotherapy, a patient at times may require medication, other medical services, family therapy, parenting instruction, vocational rehabilitation, and social and legal services. It is critical that the treatment approach be appropriate to the individual's age, gender, ethnicity, and culture."
Nope, treatment is one size fits all, whether you're 16 or 66. Additionally, from what I've heard the staff will tell you not to take your medication, that it's all feeding addiction. Sure it is. That's really healthy - and I'm sure everyone who works there is a medical doctor or at least a nurse practitioner. Not even one on staff to evaluate you.
"5. Remaining in treatment for an adequate period of time is critical for treatment effectiveness. The appropriate duration for an individual depends on his or her problems and needs (see pages 11-49). Research indicates that for most patients, the threshold of significant improvement is reached at about 3 months in treatment. After this threshold is reached, additional treatment can produce further progress toward recovery. Because people often leave treatment prematurely, programs should include strategies to engage and keep patients in treatment."
State Mandatory programs last for 12 'classes', regardless of the individual's issues. So a 17 year old who was drunk for the first time receives the same 'treatment' as someone who has had an alcohol problem for decades.
"8. Medical detoxification is only the first stage of addiction treatment and by itself does little to change long-term drug use. Medical detoxification safely manages the acute physical symptoms of withdrawal associated with stopping drug use. While detoxification alone is rarely sufficient to help addicts achieve long-term abstinence, for some individuals it is a strongly indicated precursor to effective drug addiction treatment (see Drug Addiction Treatment Section)."
But detoxing with the threat of jail if you don't is really the only action taken by these programs. And that doesn't so much work with alcohol because participants have notice of testing and can avoid drinking the night before. And they REALLY monitor you to see that you're 'safely' withdrawing from drugs, legal or illegal. Rather, refer to the above-stated insistance that you take no medication. Even if you're insane, (and, arguably, someone withdrawing from drugs is insane whether they're legal or illegally using them). No help for those who don't have the money to continue medical care due to the rapidly escalating costs either. No the government isn't a social service agency, but if they set one up, shouldn't it work? Or do a little more than just pretend to be one on it's facade?
And it goes on in direct condradiction of state drug and alcohol programs. Read it and hope to God you never find yourself in one: http://www.nida.nih.gov/PODAT/PODAT1.html
Oh but that won't happen to the average person! NO! Only people who are serious criminals have to deal with this right? Wrong. If you have even one drink at happy hour and are pulled you're paying thousands of dollars, dealing with the above and a restricted license - with up to 3 years of probation. One drink. At least in Virginia. And as soon as fines increased, it's amazing how many more people were convicted! Is it really that that many more people are committing crimes? Hell no. The state has more of an interest in arresting you, that's all.
NO ONE should drink and drive. I'm not saying that. I have lost several friends to it. But handling the situation in the above manner does, even per MADD, little to nothing. In fact, it encourages letting the problem continue - if everyone really went to successful rehab when convicted, it would cut the DUI rate almost in half (the percentage of DUIs that are repeat offenders is 1/3 or half or something like that) and then how would we fund these marvelous programs? This is bullshit.
Anyone who cares about stopping drunk driving or other alcohol and drug related crimes, (and there's another flaw - if the concern were stopping the problem, you'd have to go to rehab for any drug or alcohol related offense, not just driving - but you don't. You can get drunk and beat your wife and kids all you want - you don't get a restricted child license or even have to go to domestic violence prevention classes, let alone treat the problem that's really behind it all), would push for the abolition of this crap and the institution of effective programs. And if offenders continue to bear the cost, which does make some amount of sense, eliminate incentives, quotas and all that so that staff has no vested interest in them not recovering.
Who cares about a bunch of addicts who commit irresponsible crimes? We all do because it effects all of us. It effects our taxes, the crime rate, the death rate, all sorts of things. And the process in place to address the problem, by the NIH's own definition, can't possibly work. Makes a lot of sense.
What can be done? I don't know. Most people can't possibly afford the cost of rehab, however, it's neccessary by all statistics to eliminate or even begin to control the problem. It would seem that a strong program would be just as easy to create and maintain as a crappy one and if the state is going to claim responsibility for doing so they ought to actually do it. Not doing so perpetuates the problem. From drug-rehabs.org:
"Almost all addicts tell themselves in the beginning that they can conquer their addiction on their own without the help of outside resources. Unfortunately, this is not usually the case. When an addict makes an attempt at detoxification and to discontinue drug use without the aid of professional help, statistically the results do not last long. Research into the effects of long-term addiction has shown that substantial changes in the way the brain functions are present long after the addict has stopped using drugs. Realizing that a drug addict who wishes to recover from their addiction needs more than just strong will power is the key to a successful recovery. Battling not only cravings for their drug of choice, re-stimulation of their past and changes in the way their brain functions, it is no wonder that quitting drugs without professional help is an uphill battle."
So good luck. If you support your states laws about this, then you're supporting a system that does little more than ensure that bandaids will continue to be put over bullet wounds and the problem of repeat offenders will not only continue but grow as incentive grows to arrest a higher number of people. Good luck to us all on this one.
My suggestion is that if you care about the crime rate where you live write to your representatives and/or start a petition to change the way the system works. The changes that have been made have been proven not to work for citizens. This means you. Do you really want to be driving down a highway of impaired addicts who have no access to treatment? That's what you're doing, especially with the health care, private and Medicare/Medicaid, crisis at hand.
Something clearly should be done. In fact, I think penalties should be tougher, (for example, requiring people who commit any drug or alcohol related offense to participate in and yes, even pay for, rehabilitation), but they should also work or we're just wasting everyone's time. And just because your tax money doesn't pay for the pseudo-rehabilitation doesn't mean you're not paying. You're paying far more for the cost of catching, prosecuting and incarcerating repeat offenders than you could possibly pay for, example, having offenders placed on regular probation that will have a far lesser corruption rate among those who run it b/c there is no profit, and requiring them to participate in proven treatment programs.
And I don't doubt for a second that the war is creating more substance abuse problems - the New York Times, for example, did a study of murder rates in returning soldiers and it's shocking. There are over a hundred listed, mostly for killing family members but the second majority is vehicular manslaughter while under the infulence.
Perhaps a rant about how horrifically sub-standard our Veterans health care is will follow. I worked for a good while for one of the only firms in the country that helps vets sue VA hospitals, so I know firsthand. They're appalling.
New Child Support Fee Supports War Debt - a Single Mom's Rant
I've now officially had it. Custodial parents who are paid support through the often un-reliable DCFS are now being charged a $25 annual fee in many states: let's take money from those who need it most why don't we sure, it's not a massive amount of money, but it sure adds up for the federal gov't, who receives most of the proceeds from the money the states collect. Millions of dollars to offset the debt run up over this assinine war, not to mention the doubtless high cost of torturing and spying on citizens.
Why does this make me so mad? For one, the system is already milking single parents by holding on to the money as long as they can quite often. I, very fortunately, have somehow managed to avoid having to resort to having child support paid through DCFS, however, my child's father likes to make my life as complicated as possible by, among other things, waiting until the 5th of the month, (after all bills are due, of course), to pay. When he gets really passive aggressive, he waits until later. (Unless he's planning on taking me to court for something, then he pays on time, presumably to eliminate things that would reflect badly on him). This has resulted in thousands of dollars in late fees over the years that I'd love little more than to sue him for, along with the fact that he contributed nothing to the exorbetant cost of initial equipment and other infant needs but doubt I have legal recourse.
What are my options? Surely I can do something about that, right? Wrong. The only thing I can do about it is have the court order he pay through DCFS, which would, theoretically, guarantee payment on the first. However, everyone I've talked to who receives support in this way says sometimes months go by with no payment at all. They just hold on to the money and can get away with it. Now if that happened, I'd likely be homeless, thousands of dollars in late fees would be the least of my problems.
And now this obviously corrupt system, clearly out for it's own interests, not those of the people they're supposedly set up to serve or everyone would be paid every month on time, is going to charge for their flawed services. No other service industry is allowed to do this. Can waiters and bartenders charge an automatic 20% tip whether they do a good job or not? No, though I'd argue they should be able to. SO why can the government?
Being a single parent is difficult enough, believe me. Even people with strong family support systems, in-state fathers and jobs and/or homes that haven't (yet) been hit by our fast falling into a Dickenson-like economy say so. Nevermind what those who do not have some or all of the above go through.
Attend the tale of your host and see if you think we should be charging for the few crappy services that do exist or creating new ones/improving those we have:
I was 29 when I discovered I was pregnant. The father lived a block away, I had a large 2 bedroom apartment and a great support system of friends, many with children, who I'd known for years. I was working as a paralegal with great health insurance at a firm that was talking about sending me to law school and was also making money as a writer part-time. In the event of some sort of job emergency, which I didn't anticipate, I had a lot of experience as a bartender/waitress and in retail too. I've also been to college and was an honor student to boot. The father owns his home and rents part of it as an apartment and is a PhD with a job that fits the title. It seemed, considering all of these factors, that it would be irresponsible not to have the child.
I fairly immediately knew something was wrong with the pregnancy but my doctor didn't believe me. Consequently, my employer didn't believe me when I said I was perpetually extremely ill. Ultimately, they pushed me out of my job, (it was a civil rights firm, they were too intelligent to fire me), and I found myself literally deathly ill, 7 months pregnant and jobless. The father was helpful with going with me to doctors appointments (that ignored what was going on) but offerred no help with the situation.
I had no choice but to move from my great apartment and support system back to my hometown, where I hadn't lived in 11 years. The doctor there didn't pay attention to my complaints either and I discovered that the cost of living was radically different to boot - I paid more for a barely 2 room apartment than I'd been paying for a huge, Victorian 2 bedroom. Somehow I managed to keep both apartments, hoping and expecting that I would return soon after the birth of my child. I didn't know anyone. All of my friends here had been in high school. Both of my parents are physically disabled and my brother needed help himself at the time. Needless to say, my support system was extremely limited. Oh, forgot to mention I also didn't drive - and had left a town with pretty good public transportation for one with crappy public transportation.
Well, then I almost died. I had been right all along, I had toxemia. If I had known that my mother had it too, I could have given the medical history to my doctor and would have avoided the entire nightmare described above. But, because she is disabled and had me in the 70s in then medically backward North Carolina, doctors assumed her complications were due to her disability and never screened her/told her she had it. So it only came out when my pregnancy went way over the due date, (my doctor here moved it up almost a month, undoubtedly worsening the situation), and I was seeing spots and having acute shoulder pain. I had flu at the time too. Fortunately, I'd done a lot of medical malpractice work and recognized the symptoms as blood pressure or I may not be here writing now. (Should have turned all that legal experience on to the doctor and law firm but oh well - to tell the truth, after goign through all that, and as a new parent, good luck finding the time or energy, let alone affording the lawyer.)
But I didn't die so there I was with a wonderful, healthy baby boy in spite of the medical community, (they tell you not to drink or smoke at all while pregnant but it's apparantly fine to pump you full of something that shuts down your central nervous system for 2 weeks - yep, 2 weeks. The nurses were appalled and telling me I could insist on a c-section, that the doctor was going way too far and in the old days they put you in a dark room with barbituates to keep you calm for several months. Instead I'd been battling family members, dealing with an out of state move and all the while trying to help my brother for several months. Not to mention the stress of the extreme unemployability of a 7 month pregnant, critically ill person. Again, my family didn't believe that I was ill either so boy did I catch an ungodly amount of shit and met with almost no help. There is a very unhealthy mindset in this country that pregnant people aren't supposed to feel good. I'm not kidding about that.
So, you'd imagine I'd be able to go right back to the paralegal thing after having maybe a few rough months right? Or that the apparantly responsible father, especially after seeing that I truly was ill and had no choice but to move or seirously risk my life and the life of the child, helped move us back, right? Wrong.
The father refused to help with moving and agreed to pay 1/2 of what the state would order for child support. Enter the problem of finding/paying for a lawyer. Sure, the court is set up so you don't have ot have one for such proceedings and that may be well and good if you're up against someone in the same financial position as yourself, as people often are. But good luck with it when the other party has the money for the crookedest of attorneys and is also incredibally shrewd. So I ended up naievley believing an even more crooked attorney who claimed he would help for free, blackmailed me, then hooked the father up with an extremely unethical attorney and pulled out of my case before it went to court. Fortunately, my legal background helped me avoid getting totally screwed, but belive me, I still got screwed and went through such an extreme amount of stress it's unimaginable. It destroyed several relationships, (combine all that going on with a serious case of undiagnosed post-partum).
Oh but why didn't I have it togehter? I had years of experience in a specialized, well-paying job. What the hell was wrong with me? Well, for one, law is state specific and most of my experience being out of state was a serious setback. I eventually did find a job but it was very low paying. It took years before I was able to return to a 'normal' paralegal salary, (though the father's attorney tried to assign it to me when calculating support). And it wasn't for lack of trying. I think I applied to every firm in town. Actually, I tried to find a job doing absolutely everything I was qualified for, which hits a broad spectrum, and again and again met only with frustration.
Why? I return to the lack of a support system, (now, recall I had a great one when I made the decision to have my child) and the impossible child care situation in this country. As I said, for several years I was only able to find low paying legal jobs and/or restaurant work. The restaurant work was more money but good luck finding a sitter for the hours required. Now, I did manage to do that, but it was almost impossible to work until 3, then be up until 4 or 5 because, as anyone who works in a restaurant will tell you, you're wide awake when you're done, and then get up at 6 or so with an infant. Try that for a few days and see if you don't start hallucinating. And I was still not making a living wage. I tried to get subsidized child care, but no such thing for those kind of hours and when I was working in law offices I was told, in spite of the fact that after paying for the least expensive child care I could find I'd literally take home $50, that I made too much to qualify. I hear they've raised the bar even higher now.
Ultimately, like I said, I did return to a 'normal' paralegal salary, (but at twice the cost of living that I'd had before my move, that's without adding the cost of raising a child). Then my car got totalled and I could no longer get to said job all the time. This caused problems. I couldn't get a loan for another car because I hadn't been at the job long enough. In retrospect, I should have just gotten a $500 car, (why no bus? I return you to the lovely state of public transportation in this fair city). However, at the time I didn't even know such a thing existed. Incredible until you take the fact that I'd only been driving for a couple of years into account. That, along with a few other political reasons, (the same firm fired a good friend of mine for being 'too intelligant), cost me the job.
I worked it out again for a time, using my strong theater and writing background for a career change in education that rapidly worked out to the same amount of money, albiet without benefits. The schedule made childcare much, much easier- (not so difficult to find someone or initially expensive when what you need is a few hours at a time, which is how it worked). By that time I did have a slightly better support system, but good luck building a really strong one in a new town without the childcare to go out and network. Good old catch 22.
Then the school I was working with closed, my Dad became critically ill and I added full time care of him to full time care of a still not in school child and the stress of it all culminated in a near fatal accident that took over a year to really recover from. So, back to the drawing board. I did, however, save my Dad's life. And I've managed to have my wonderful child in very good pre-schools & be very involved in his starting Kindergarten, have had room-mates who are strong role models and now am living in a fantastic neighborhood/house that finally doesn't make me rue the day I ever left that Victorian - basically, somehow I've worked it out.
But, as you see, I think anyway, it's been almost impossible. In fact, at times it has been impossible. Friends and family, (sadly, more often family), have far more often carried on about how untogether I am rather than sit and seriously take a look at what would solve the underlying problems, which has definitely made it harder. I think not being around me for 11 years, or in the case of my friends not knowing me for most of my adult life, makes it easier to fall into that. 'So many people do this all the time' they say, 'they don't have this much of a problem.' Sure they don't. Try google and see if the hundreds of postings by single parents and non-government social service agencies about what it's like to 'get it together' without a support network and see how long the theory holds up. Probably about 5 seconds. Or, better yet, try googling support services for single parents in your area and see how 'easy' it is.
I'm not trying to have a pity party here - I'm simply telling my story the way it really is and suggesting that, should you be so callous as to join the cast and crew of those who relentlessly have given me crap over the years, (usually people who don't have children or who had them in a 2 parent family and now they're grown - never mind the fact that the occurrrence of 2 disabled grandparents, especially coupled with an out of state father, is probably unheard of) - anyway, should you be tempted to do that, seriously, Google as I suggested before you do so.
And keep in mind, by all outward logic, I did not 'choose' to have such a difficult situation. Rather, I had a great job, a nearby father and a lot of support. But the unexpected happened. Over and over again. It seems to me that these are the sorts of situations society should most have some sort of safety net in place for - but no go.
Instead, the very agency that claims to exist to help single parents is now charging them a fee to not pay them on time. Just what we need. And like I said, it's not that it's that much money, though the amount of money the government ultimatey makes off of it is appalling. It's rather reflective of the attitude of the country towards single parents -
So, what's my point here? Is it just to tell you my sad tale? No. It's that many people are without the neccessary support systems to manage single parenthood. This is a problem that is even more ignored than the at least intermittently acknowledged national child care crisis, and undoubtedly feeds it. It is assumed that because the majority of single parents have parents who help with childcare everyone does. Clearly not the case if you Google as suggested. Social service agencies don't quite know what to do in these situations either, non-federal/state ones that is. The federal/state agencies just say tough luck if you make $10 an hour or so apparantly. Privately funded ones at least try to help and, per the posts on-line, often find themselves at a total loss.
And somehow it's logical to cut or add fees to the services that exist because why? While at the same time carrying on about family values and all that. Whatever. Single parents are already screwed in this country- or, rather, the children are. And that's really, really sad. The lovely government and much of the population is not only anti-abortion but anti-child if you ask me.
Is it the governments responsibilty to pick up all this slack ad infinitum? Hell no. I don't think any self-respecting person would want them to, or want parents and friends to for that matter. But in situations like that described above or any number of other ones, people who make responsible decisions and then have catastrophic events have no recourse if they can't figure it out on their own. And, clearly, sometimes this really is impossible.
I have a hard time seeing how even those who are proponents of hands-off government would advocate the above-described circumstance. Why not start a fund that helps new single parents obtain good legal help, (legal aid services do not help in chid custody/support proceedings outside of DCFS helping you get child support and we see what a concerned social service agency that is)? If I had had that in the beginning, I would undoubtedly have gotten a lot more help from my child's father, (and this is coming from a very strong legal background). That's who should be helping, especially in this instance where his income is such that he can well afford it. But no, no such service. And family just railed about how I needed to 'get it together'. Ulitimately, they lent or gave me far, far more than a lawyer would have cost to begin with. And social services do the same.
Now, this may not work in every case. Some parents don't have the income to really do but so much. But I imagine I'm not the only person in the country in something like this situation. In fact, I know some people who have dealt with even more ridiculousness from the father of their children/their families etc. Again, no, it's not the responsibility of my or anyone else's family, certainly not friends, to pick up all this slack. But something, somewhere has to give or the situation will just perpetuate itself. There's no way around it.
And again, this is from someone who is qualified to make $45,000.00 or more with the other parent making even more than that, (who knows how much, he won't say and is meanwhile trying to get support reduced and refusing visitation, which would at least allow me to work without paying childcare for a few weeks, go on job interviews as needed rather than as I am able, not to mention giving me a break for the first time in what has now been 6 years without more than a week or so at a time in the aforementioned child-care free universe. Forget going out, or playing regular gigs or anything like that. Though that's surely at the bottom of the priority totem pole.) I hate to imagine what people who have the odds stacked even more heavily against them are going through.
And now agencies are going to do less as the economy gets worse, as friends and family have less to give as a result -- what is going to happen? "Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?" As Scrooge said. Guess the workhouses will return. They'll probably charge a fee for those too.
Takes a lot to get me going but when I do I sure don't shut up do I?
Why does this make me so mad? For one, the system is already milking single parents by holding on to the money as long as they can quite often. I, very fortunately, have somehow managed to avoid having to resort to having child support paid through DCFS, however, my child's father likes to make my life as complicated as possible by, among other things, waiting until the 5th of the month, (after all bills are due, of course), to pay. When he gets really passive aggressive, he waits until later. (Unless he's planning on taking me to court for something, then he pays on time, presumably to eliminate things that would reflect badly on him). This has resulted in thousands of dollars in late fees over the years that I'd love little more than to sue him for, along with the fact that he contributed nothing to the exorbetant cost of initial equipment and other infant needs but doubt I have legal recourse.
What are my options? Surely I can do something about that, right? Wrong. The only thing I can do about it is have the court order he pay through DCFS, which would, theoretically, guarantee payment on the first. However, everyone I've talked to who receives support in this way says sometimes months go by with no payment at all. They just hold on to the money and can get away with it. Now if that happened, I'd likely be homeless, thousands of dollars in late fees would be the least of my problems.
And now this obviously corrupt system, clearly out for it's own interests, not those of the people they're supposedly set up to serve or everyone would be paid every month on time, is going to charge for their flawed services. No other service industry is allowed to do this. Can waiters and bartenders charge an automatic 20% tip whether they do a good job or not? No, though I'd argue they should be able to. SO why can the government?
Being a single parent is difficult enough, believe me. Even people with strong family support systems, in-state fathers and jobs and/or homes that haven't (yet) been hit by our fast falling into a Dickenson-like economy say so. Nevermind what those who do not have some or all of the above go through.
Attend the tale of your host and see if you think we should be charging for the few crappy services that do exist or creating new ones/improving those we have:
I was 29 when I discovered I was pregnant. The father lived a block away, I had a large 2 bedroom apartment and a great support system of friends, many with children, who I'd known for years. I was working as a paralegal with great health insurance at a firm that was talking about sending me to law school and was also making money as a writer part-time. In the event of some sort of job emergency, which I didn't anticipate, I had a lot of experience as a bartender/waitress and in retail too. I've also been to college and was an honor student to boot. The father owns his home and rents part of it as an apartment and is a PhD with a job that fits the title. It seemed, considering all of these factors, that it would be irresponsible not to have the child.
I fairly immediately knew something was wrong with the pregnancy but my doctor didn't believe me. Consequently, my employer didn't believe me when I said I was perpetually extremely ill. Ultimately, they pushed me out of my job, (it was a civil rights firm, they were too intelligent to fire me), and I found myself literally deathly ill, 7 months pregnant and jobless. The father was helpful with going with me to doctors appointments (that ignored what was going on) but offerred no help with the situation.
I had no choice but to move from my great apartment and support system back to my hometown, where I hadn't lived in 11 years. The doctor there didn't pay attention to my complaints either and I discovered that the cost of living was radically different to boot - I paid more for a barely 2 room apartment than I'd been paying for a huge, Victorian 2 bedroom. Somehow I managed to keep both apartments, hoping and expecting that I would return soon after the birth of my child. I didn't know anyone. All of my friends here had been in high school. Both of my parents are physically disabled and my brother needed help himself at the time. Needless to say, my support system was extremely limited. Oh, forgot to mention I also didn't drive - and had left a town with pretty good public transportation for one with crappy public transportation.
Well, then I almost died. I had been right all along, I had toxemia. If I had known that my mother had it too, I could have given the medical history to my doctor and would have avoided the entire nightmare described above. But, because she is disabled and had me in the 70s in then medically backward North Carolina, doctors assumed her complications were due to her disability and never screened her/told her she had it. So it only came out when my pregnancy went way over the due date, (my doctor here moved it up almost a month, undoubtedly worsening the situation), and I was seeing spots and having acute shoulder pain. I had flu at the time too. Fortunately, I'd done a lot of medical malpractice work and recognized the symptoms as blood pressure or I may not be here writing now. (Should have turned all that legal experience on to the doctor and law firm but oh well - to tell the truth, after goign through all that, and as a new parent, good luck finding the time or energy, let alone affording the lawyer.)
But I didn't die so there I was with a wonderful, healthy baby boy in spite of the medical community, (they tell you not to drink or smoke at all while pregnant but it's apparantly fine to pump you full of something that shuts down your central nervous system for 2 weeks - yep, 2 weeks. The nurses were appalled and telling me I could insist on a c-section, that the doctor was going way too far and in the old days they put you in a dark room with barbituates to keep you calm for several months. Instead I'd been battling family members, dealing with an out of state move and all the while trying to help my brother for several months. Not to mention the stress of the extreme unemployability of a 7 month pregnant, critically ill person. Again, my family didn't believe that I was ill either so boy did I catch an ungodly amount of shit and met with almost no help. There is a very unhealthy mindset in this country that pregnant people aren't supposed to feel good. I'm not kidding about that.
So, you'd imagine I'd be able to go right back to the paralegal thing after having maybe a few rough months right? Or that the apparantly responsible father, especially after seeing that I truly was ill and had no choice but to move or seirously risk my life and the life of the child, helped move us back, right? Wrong.
The father refused to help with moving and agreed to pay 1/2 of what the state would order for child support. Enter the problem of finding/paying for a lawyer. Sure, the court is set up so you don't have ot have one for such proceedings and that may be well and good if you're up against someone in the same financial position as yourself, as people often are. But good luck with it when the other party has the money for the crookedest of attorneys and is also incredibally shrewd. So I ended up naievley believing an even more crooked attorney who claimed he would help for free, blackmailed me, then hooked the father up with an extremely unethical attorney and pulled out of my case before it went to court. Fortunately, my legal background helped me avoid getting totally screwed, but belive me, I still got screwed and went through such an extreme amount of stress it's unimaginable. It destroyed several relationships, (combine all that going on with a serious case of undiagnosed post-partum).
Oh but why didn't I have it togehter? I had years of experience in a specialized, well-paying job. What the hell was wrong with me? Well, for one, law is state specific and most of my experience being out of state was a serious setback. I eventually did find a job but it was very low paying. It took years before I was able to return to a 'normal' paralegal salary, (though the father's attorney tried to assign it to me when calculating support). And it wasn't for lack of trying. I think I applied to every firm in town. Actually, I tried to find a job doing absolutely everything I was qualified for, which hits a broad spectrum, and again and again met only with frustration.
Why? I return to the lack of a support system, (now, recall I had a great one when I made the decision to have my child) and the impossible child care situation in this country. As I said, for several years I was only able to find low paying legal jobs and/or restaurant work. The restaurant work was more money but good luck finding a sitter for the hours required. Now, I did manage to do that, but it was almost impossible to work until 3, then be up until 4 or 5 because, as anyone who works in a restaurant will tell you, you're wide awake when you're done, and then get up at 6 or so with an infant. Try that for a few days and see if you don't start hallucinating. And I was still not making a living wage. I tried to get subsidized child care, but no such thing for those kind of hours and when I was working in law offices I was told, in spite of the fact that after paying for the least expensive child care I could find I'd literally take home $50, that I made too much to qualify. I hear they've raised the bar even higher now.
Ultimately, like I said, I did return to a 'normal' paralegal salary, (but at twice the cost of living that I'd had before my move, that's without adding the cost of raising a child). Then my car got totalled and I could no longer get to said job all the time. This caused problems. I couldn't get a loan for another car because I hadn't been at the job long enough. In retrospect, I should have just gotten a $500 car, (why no bus? I return you to the lovely state of public transportation in this fair city). However, at the time I didn't even know such a thing existed. Incredible until you take the fact that I'd only been driving for a couple of years into account. That, along with a few other political reasons, (the same firm fired a good friend of mine for being 'too intelligant), cost me the job.
I worked it out again for a time, using my strong theater and writing background for a career change in education that rapidly worked out to the same amount of money, albiet without benefits. The schedule made childcare much, much easier- (not so difficult to find someone or initially expensive when what you need is a few hours at a time, which is how it worked). By that time I did have a slightly better support system, but good luck building a really strong one in a new town without the childcare to go out and network. Good old catch 22.
Then the school I was working with closed, my Dad became critically ill and I added full time care of him to full time care of a still not in school child and the stress of it all culminated in a near fatal accident that took over a year to really recover from. So, back to the drawing board. I did, however, save my Dad's life. And I've managed to have my wonderful child in very good pre-schools & be very involved in his starting Kindergarten, have had room-mates who are strong role models and now am living in a fantastic neighborhood/house that finally doesn't make me rue the day I ever left that Victorian - basically, somehow I've worked it out.
But, as you see, I think anyway, it's been almost impossible. In fact, at times it has been impossible. Friends and family, (sadly, more often family), have far more often carried on about how untogether I am rather than sit and seriously take a look at what would solve the underlying problems, which has definitely made it harder. I think not being around me for 11 years, or in the case of my friends not knowing me for most of my adult life, makes it easier to fall into that. 'So many people do this all the time' they say, 'they don't have this much of a problem.' Sure they don't. Try google and see if the hundreds of postings by single parents and non-government social service agencies about what it's like to 'get it together' without a support network and see how long the theory holds up. Probably about 5 seconds. Or, better yet, try googling support services for single parents in your area and see how 'easy' it is.
I'm not trying to have a pity party here - I'm simply telling my story the way it really is and suggesting that, should you be so callous as to join the cast and crew of those who relentlessly have given me crap over the years, (usually people who don't have children or who had them in a 2 parent family and now they're grown - never mind the fact that the occurrrence of 2 disabled grandparents, especially coupled with an out of state father, is probably unheard of) - anyway, should you be tempted to do that, seriously, Google as I suggested before you do so.
And keep in mind, by all outward logic, I did not 'choose' to have such a difficult situation. Rather, I had a great job, a nearby father and a lot of support. But the unexpected happened. Over and over again. It seems to me that these are the sorts of situations society should most have some sort of safety net in place for - but no go.
Instead, the very agency that claims to exist to help single parents is now charging them a fee to not pay them on time. Just what we need. And like I said, it's not that it's that much money, though the amount of money the government ultimatey makes off of it is appalling. It's rather reflective of the attitude of the country towards single parents -
So, what's my point here? Is it just to tell you my sad tale? No. It's that many people are without the neccessary support systems to manage single parenthood. This is a problem that is even more ignored than the at least intermittently acknowledged national child care crisis, and undoubtedly feeds it. It is assumed that because the majority of single parents have parents who help with childcare everyone does. Clearly not the case if you Google as suggested. Social service agencies don't quite know what to do in these situations either, non-federal/state ones that is. The federal/state agencies just say tough luck if you make $10 an hour or so apparantly. Privately funded ones at least try to help and, per the posts on-line, often find themselves at a total loss.
And somehow it's logical to cut or add fees to the services that exist because why? While at the same time carrying on about family values and all that. Whatever. Single parents are already screwed in this country- or, rather, the children are. And that's really, really sad. The lovely government and much of the population is not only anti-abortion but anti-child if you ask me.
Is it the governments responsibilty to pick up all this slack ad infinitum? Hell no. I don't think any self-respecting person would want them to, or want parents and friends to for that matter. But in situations like that described above or any number of other ones, people who make responsible decisions and then have catastrophic events have no recourse if they can't figure it out on their own. And, clearly, sometimes this really is impossible.
I have a hard time seeing how even those who are proponents of hands-off government would advocate the above-described circumstance. Why not start a fund that helps new single parents obtain good legal help, (legal aid services do not help in chid custody/support proceedings outside of DCFS helping you get child support and we see what a concerned social service agency that is)? If I had had that in the beginning, I would undoubtedly have gotten a lot more help from my child's father, (and this is coming from a very strong legal background). That's who should be helping, especially in this instance where his income is such that he can well afford it. But no, no such service. And family just railed about how I needed to 'get it together'. Ulitimately, they lent or gave me far, far more than a lawyer would have cost to begin with. And social services do the same.
Now, this may not work in every case. Some parents don't have the income to really do but so much. But I imagine I'm not the only person in the country in something like this situation. In fact, I know some people who have dealt with even more ridiculousness from the father of their children/their families etc. Again, no, it's not the responsibility of my or anyone else's family, certainly not friends, to pick up all this slack. But something, somewhere has to give or the situation will just perpetuate itself. There's no way around it.
And again, this is from someone who is qualified to make $45,000.00 or more with the other parent making even more than that, (who knows how much, he won't say and is meanwhile trying to get support reduced and refusing visitation, which would at least allow me to work without paying childcare for a few weeks, go on job interviews as needed rather than as I am able, not to mention giving me a break for the first time in what has now been 6 years without more than a week or so at a time in the aforementioned child-care free universe. Forget going out, or playing regular gigs or anything like that. Though that's surely at the bottom of the priority totem pole.) I hate to imagine what people who have the odds stacked even more heavily against them are going through.
And now agencies are going to do less as the economy gets worse, as friends and family have less to give as a result -- what is going to happen? "Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?" As Scrooge said. Guess the workhouses will return. They'll probably charge a fee for those too.
Takes a lot to get me going but when I do I sure don't shut up do I?
Friday, June 27, 2008
North Pole May be Free of Ice This Summer
And they once said there was no such thing as global warming. why not sail through the North Pole to beat the heat
Bush Officials Appal Congress in Torture Inquest
From "The LA Times":
"...rather than eliciting new information or forcing damaging admissions from the long-sought witness, the hearing turned into an emotion-charged demonstration of the hostility and mutual disdain between the most liberal critics of the Bush administration's war policies and one of the architects of those policies.
"For his part, Addington provided little specific information on his role in pressing for controversial interrogation tactics at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and with CIA prisoners. At the same time, he made it clear that he had played a central role in the matter...
"when Democrats tried to pin him down on the moral and legal issues they considered crucial, Addington brushed them aside with barely concealed disdain.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), who later characterized Addington's attitude as "smug," asked whether, if the interrogation program was found to be illegal, he would bear any responsibility.
"Is that a moral question or a legal question?" Addington asked, then said he bore no responsibility, legal or moral.
Was President Bush constrained by laws against torture? Addington refused to offer an opinion. Putting the question in extreme terms, Nadler asked Addington if torturing a detainee's child to get information would be legal.
"I'm not here to render legal advice to your committee," Addington shot back. "You do have attorneys of your own to give you legal advice."
"Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) tried to press Addington on whether he had pushed interrogators at Guantanamo to utilize tougher techniques. When Addington said he did not recall, Wasserman Schultz said she found that "hard to fathom."
"Is there a question pending, ma'am?" Addington responded.
"A Senate Armed Services Committee hearing last week showed that William J. Haynes II, former top Pentagon lawyer, helped push harsh techniques down to interrogators working at the Guantanamo prison. Pentagon lawyers helped transform techniques used to train pilots to resist enemy interrogation into tools for American interrogators, the panel found. The methods may have violated prohibitions on torture or cruel treatment...
"...Perhaps the strangest exchange came at the end of the hearing. Rep. Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) asked Addington whether waterboarding was discussed in meetings.
"I can't talk to you," Addington said. "Al Qaeda may watch these meetings."
Delahunt replied that he was sure they did. "I'm glad they finally have a chance to see you, Mr. Addington," Delahunt said. Without missing a beat, Addington answered, "I'm sure you're pleased."
Contempt for Congress Democrats barely concealed Abbingdon behaves horribly
Abbingdon's full testimony
"...rather than eliciting new information or forcing damaging admissions from the long-sought witness, the hearing turned into an emotion-charged demonstration of the hostility and mutual disdain between the most liberal critics of the Bush administration's war policies and one of the architects of those policies.
"For his part, Addington provided little specific information on his role in pressing for controversial interrogation tactics at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and with CIA prisoners. At the same time, he made it clear that he had played a central role in the matter...
"when Democrats tried to pin him down on the moral and legal issues they considered crucial, Addington brushed them aside with barely concealed disdain.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), who later characterized Addington's attitude as "smug," asked whether, if the interrogation program was found to be illegal, he would bear any responsibility.
"Is that a moral question or a legal question?" Addington asked, then said he bore no responsibility, legal or moral.
Was President Bush constrained by laws against torture? Addington refused to offer an opinion. Putting the question in extreme terms, Nadler asked Addington if torturing a detainee's child to get information would be legal.
"I'm not here to render legal advice to your committee," Addington shot back. "You do have attorneys of your own to give you legal advice."
"Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) tried to press Addington on whether he had pushed interrogators at Guantanamo to utilize tougher techniques. When Addington said he did not recall, Wasserman Schultz said she found that "hard to fathom."
"Is there a question pending, ma'am?" Addington responded.
"A Senate Armed Services Committee hearing last week showed that William J. Haynes II, former top Pentagon lawyer, helped push harsh techniques down to interrogators working at the Guantanamo prison. Pentagon lawyers helped transform techniques used to train pilots to resist enemy interrogation into tools for American interrogators, the panel found. The methods may have violated prohibitions on torture or cruel treatment...
"...Perhaps the strangest exchange came at the end of the hearing. Rep. Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) asked Addington whether waterboarding was discussed in meetings.
"I can't talk to you," Addington said. "Al Qaeda may watch these meetings."
Delahunt replied that he was sure they did. "I'm glad they finally have a chance to see you, Mr. Addington," Delahunt said. Without missing a beat, Addington answered, "I'm sure you're pleased."
Contempt for Congress Democrats barely concealed Abbingdon behaves horribly
Abbingdon's full testimony
Customs Agents Asking Americans to Turn Over Computer Passwords, Cell Phones
They're being told to comply or stay out of the U.S. questionable search
In Battle Against Rampant Drug Use, Iran Fights Not Addicts but Addiction
Here's a novel concept, drug education and stressing treatment rather than arresting drug users and putting them in jail cut drastically down on crime, HIV and other social ills. Iran's war against addiction rather than drugs or addicts
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Illegal Hiring Practices in the Justice Department
From The New York Times:
"Justice Department officials over the last six years illegally used “political or ideological” factors to hire new lawyers into an elite recruitment program, tapping law school graduates with conservative credentials over those with liberal-sounding resumes, a new report found Tuesday.
"The blistering report, prepared by the Justice Department’s inspector general, is the first in what will be a series of investigations growing out of last year’s scandal over the firings of nine United States attorneys. It appeared to confirm for the first time in an official examination many of the allegations from critics who charged that the Justice Department had become overly politicized during the Bush administration.."
Clinton was on t.v. about to be impeached for what? And Bush wasn't long ago why?
"Justice Department officials over the last six years illegally used “political or ideological” factors to hire new lawyers into an elite recruitment program, tapping law school graduates with conservative credentials over those with liberal-sounding resumes, a new report found Tuesday.
"The blistering report, prepared by the Justice Department’s inspector general, is the first in what will be a series of investigations growing out of last year’s scandal over the firings of nine United States attorneys. It appeared to confirm for the first time in an official examination many of the allegations from critics who charged that the Justice Department had become overly politicized during the Bush administration.."
Clinton was on t.v. about to be impeached for what? And Bush wasn't long ago why?
Monday, June 23, 2008
God Arrested for Selling Cocaine
A man named God was arrested for the offense in Tampa - near a church even. From the Associated Press
Court Rules in Favor of Guantanamo Inmate
From the Los Angeles Times
"A federal appeals court said Monday that the U.S. military improperly labeled a Chinese Muslim held at Guantanamo Bay an "enemy combatant" and it ordered that he be released, transferred or granted a new hearing.
"The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington marks the first time a federal court has weighed in on the issue of a Guantanamo detainee's classification and granted him the opportunity to try to secure his release through civilian courts.
A lawyer for Huzaifa Parhat, who has been kept virtually incommunicado for more than six years, said he and other members of Parhat's legal team would seek to have him freed immediately. Parhat is one of 17 Uighur Muslims, an ethnic minority in China, who are still being held at Guantanamo even though the U.S. government acknowledges they pose no threat..."
"A federal appeals court said Monday that the U.S. military improperly labeled a Chinese Muslim held at Guantanamo Bay an "enemy combatant" and it ordered that he be released, transferred or granted a new hearing.
"The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington marks the first time a federal court has weighed in on the issue of a Guantanamo detainee's classification and granted him the opportunity to try to secure his release through civilian courts.
A lawyer for Huzaifa Parhat, who has been kept virtually incommunicado for more than six years, said he and other members of Parhat's legal team would seek to have him freed immediately. Parhat is one of 17 Uighur Muslims, an ethnic minority in China, who are still being held at Guantanamo even though the U.S. government acknowledges they pose no threat..."
Man Auctions His Life on E-Bay
Hoping to raise something like $500,000.00 to start a new one. Read this: from Reuters
Crime Reporter Commits Suicide After Being Linked to Gruesome Murders
He reported on the murders, riviting readers with his eye for detail. No joke. check it out.
Drastic Action Against Global Warming Our Only Hope
This is scary. And I remember in the early 90's people were adamantly asserting that there was no such thing as global warming.
"Exactly 20 years after warning America about global warming, a top NASA scientist said the situation has gotten so bad that the world's only hope is drastic action.
James Hansen told Congress on Monday that the world has long passed the "dangerous level" for greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and needs to get back to 1988 levels. He said Earth's atmosphere can only stay this loaded with man-made carbon dioxide for a couple more decades without changes such as mass extinction, ecosystem collapse and dramatic sea level rises...
From the the A.P.
"Exactly 20 years after warning America about global warming, a top NASA scientist said the situation has gotten so bad that the world's only hope is drastic action.
James Hansen told Congress on Monday that the world has long passed the "dangerous level" for greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and needs to get back to 1988 levels. He said Earth's atmosphere can only stay this loaded with man-made carbon dioxide for a couple more decades without changes such as mass extinction, ecosystem collapse and dramatic sea level rises...
From the the A.P.
Illegal Arms Cover-Up
From the New York Times:
"A military attaché has told Congressional investigators that the American ambassador to Albania endorsed a plan by that country’s defense minister to remove evidence of illegal Chinese origins on ammunition being shipped from Albania to Afghanistan by a Miami Beach arms-dealing company..."
"A military attaché has told Congressional investigators that the American ambassador to Albania endorsed a plan by that country’s defense minister to remove evidence of illegal Chinese origins on ammunition being shipped from Albania to Afghanistan by a Miami Beach arms-dealing company..."
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Judicial Reform in Mexico
Courts change to American-style justice; switch to be fully implimented by 2016: Mexican judicial system
Global Warming Causing Extinction
Creatures run uphill as global warming spreads. It is believed the migration will result in the extinction of at least 2 species by the end of the century. Global Warming
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Integration Opposed at California Prison
Until now, cells in this California prison were segregated. New push to integrate system meets with opposition: http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0613/p01s01-ussc.html
Friday, June 13, 2008
Conservative Member of Parliment Resigns in Oppoition to "Governments Strangulation of British Freedoms"
"The Conservative Party was tonight reeling from the extraordinary resignation of one of their most senior frontbenchers to fight an unprecedented "single-issue" by-election
"David Davis, a right-winger and one of the Tories' political heavyweights, stunned Westminster by announcing he was quitting as both an MP and Shadow Home Secretary to fight against the Government's "strangulation" of British freedoms.
"Mr Davis, who lost the 2005 Tory leadership contest to David Cameron, has been the driving force behind Tory opposition to Gordon Brown's plans to extend detention without charge for terrorist suspects from 28 to 42 days...
"...He reportedly threatened to resign unless Mr Cameron agreed to oppose the proposals, which were narrowly passed by Parliament last night. The Bill is expected to face a tough ride in the House of Lords before becoming law."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4120459.ece
"David Davis, a right-winger and one of the Tories' political heavyweights, stunned Westminster by announcing he was quitting as both an MP and Shadow Home Secretary to fight against the Government's "strangulation" of British freedoms.
"Mr Davis, who lost the 2005 Tory leadership contest to David Cameron, has been the driving force behind Tory opposition to Gordon Brown's plans to extend detention without charge for terrorist suspects from 28 to 42 days...
"...He reportedly threatened to resign unless Mr Cameron agreed to oppose the proposals, which were narrowly passed by Parliament last night. The Bill is expected to face a tough ride in the House of Lords before becoming law."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4120459.ece
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Attempt to Impeach Bush Shot Down
Now that's really too bad. From CNN.com:
"Most of the congressman's resolution deals with the Iraq war, contending that the president manufactured a false case for the war, violated U.S. and international law to invade Iraq, failed to provide troops with proper equipment and falsified casualty reports for political purposes.
"Kucinich also charges that Bush has illegally detained without charge both U.S. citizens and "foreign captives," and violated numerous U.S. laws through the use of "signing statements" declaring his intention to do so.
"Other articles address global warming, voting rights, Medicare, the response to Hurricane Katrina and failure to comply with congressional subpoenas.
"Last year, Kucinich introduced a resolution to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. But the attempt failed in November, when Republicans tried to force a debate on it. Democrats voted to send the resolution to the House Judiciary Committee, where the committee chairman, Rep. John Conyers, has taken no action on it.
"An earlier resolution to impeach Cheney has languished in the House Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties since May 2007."
impeachment a no-go.
"Most of the congressman's resolution deals with the Iraq war, contending that the president manufactured a false case for the war, violated U.S. and international law to invade Iraq, failed to provide troops with proper equipment and falsified casualty reports for political purposes.
"Kucinich also charges that Bush has illegally detained without charge both U.S. citizens and "foreign captives," and violated numerous U.S. laws through the use of "signing statements" declaring his intention to do so.
"Other articles address global warming, voting rights, Medicare, the response to Hurricane Katrina and failure to comply with congressional subpoenas.
"Last year, Kucinich introduced a resolution to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney. But the attempt failed in November, when Republicans tried to force a debate on it. Democrats voted to send the resolution to the House Judiciary Committee, where the committee chairman, Rep. John Conyers, has taken no action on it.
"An earlier resolution to impeach Cheney has languished in the House Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties since May 2007."
impeachment a no-go.
Senate Panel Examines Detainee Interrogation Policies
"A former agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation says U.S. interrogators' use of coercive techniques against suspected terrorists has not produced reliable intelligence and may have helped recruit a new generation of jihadists intent on attacking the United States again. His dire warning came during a Senate hearing to examine U.S. interrogation policies..."
interrogation policies
And here's a surprise, there's a mental health threat if you're detained at Guantanamo: detainees state of mind
"The U.S. military has repeatedly said it treats the prisoners according to international standards..." Looking at the widespread human rights abuses world-wide, I don't think international standards are particularly high.
interrogation policies
And here's a surprise, there's a mental health threat if you're detained at Guantanamo: detainees state of mind
"The U.S. military has repeatedly said it treats the prisoners according to international standards..." Looking at the widespread human rights abuses world-wide, I don't think international standards are particularly high.
Afghan Troops 237 Tons of Hashish
The "Voice of America News" says it may be the world's largest drug bust: Hashish
Over-population, Drought and Famine World-Wide
A listing of features from "The Voice of America":
over-populatio
n
over-populatio
n
Chavez Annulls Intelligence Decree that Would Have Forced Venezuelans to Inform on their Neighbors
From the "Voice of America News":
"Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has annulled a controversial intelligence decree that would have forced Venezuelans to become informants and report on their neighbors or face prison time...
"The new law, which sparked protests, called for Venezuela's two main intelligence services to be replaced with new agencies overseen by Mr. Chavez. It also required Venezuelans to act as informants to secret police and community monitoring groups loyal to the president. Anyone refusing to provide information faced two to six years in prison..."
Chavez
"Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has annulled a controversial intelligence decree that would have forced Venezuelans to become informants and report on their neighbors or face prison time...
"The new law, which sparked protests, called for Venezuela's two main intelligence services to be replaced with new agencies overseen by Mr. Chavez. It also required Venezuelans to act as informants to secret police and community monitoring groups loyal to the president. Anyone refusing to provide information faced two to six years in prison..."
Chavez
Canada Apologizes for Abuses in Schools to Indigenous People
From the AFP:
"Beginning in 1874, 150,000 Indian, Inuit and Metis children in Canada were forcibly enrolled in the 132 boarding schools run by Christian churches on behalf of the federal government in an effort to integrate them into society.
"Survivors allege abuse by headmasters and teachers, who stripped them of their culture and language.
"As well, they say their education left them disconnected from their families, communities and feeling "ashamed" of being born native.
"It was "the darkest chapter in Canada's history," said Chief Phil Fontaine of the Assembly of First Nations.
"They tried to kill the Indian in the child, to eradicate any sense of Indian-ness from Canada," he told AFP.
"The experience has also been blamed for gross poverty and desperation in native communities that breeds abuse, suicide, and crime.
"It was cultural genocide," said Ted Quewezance, a residential school alumni and director of the National Residential School Survivors' Society..."
Canada
"Beginning in 1874, 150,000 Indian, Inuit and Metis children in Canada were forcibly enrolled in the 132 boarding schools run by Christian churches on behalf of the federal government in an effort to integrate them into society.
"Survivors allege abuse by headmasters and teachers, who stripped them of their culture and language.
"As well, they say their education left them disconnected from their families, communities and feeling "ashamed" of being born native.
"It was "the darkest chapter in Canada's history," said Chief Phil Fontaine of the Assembly of First Nations.
"They tried to kill the Indian in the child, to eradicate any sense of Indian-ness from Canada," he told AFP.
"The experience has also been blamed for gross poverty and desperation in native communities that breeds abuse, suicide, and crime.
"It was cultural genocide," said Ted Quewezance, a residential school alumni and director of the National Residential School Survivors' Society..."
Canada
Friday, June 6, 2008
Unemployment Jumps to 5.5% in the U.S.
"The 0.5 per cent jump was far above the 5.1 per cent that analysts had been expecting, and was the biggest month-over-month increase since 1986.
"A year earlier, the rate was 4.5 per cent. The number of people out of work in May was 8.5 million, up by 861,000 from April, and 1.6 million from May 2007.
"Payrolls shrank by 49,000 jobs in May, with losses in construction, manufacturing, retail and temporary help services.
"It was the fifth month in a row that employers have cut jobs."
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/06/06/us-jobs.html
"A year earlier, the rate was 4.5 per cent. The number of people out of work in May was 8.5 million, up by 861,000 from April, and 1.6 million from May 2007.
"Payrolls shrank by 49,000 jobs in May, with losses in construction, manufacturing, retail and temporary help services.
"It was the fifth month in a row that employers have cut jobs."
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/06/06/us-jobs.html
Che Guevara's Children Oppose Use of his Image
HAVANA - "Two of Ernesto "Che" Guevara's children said Thursday they were tired of seeing their father's image used to sell everything from T-shirts to vodka, calling the growth of the revolutionary as a global super-brand "embarrassing."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080605/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/cuba_che_s_children;_ylt=At0QusDuE5_R05UgHkACGSlvaA8F
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080605/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/cuba_che_s_children;_ylt=At0QusDuE5_R05UgHkACGSlvaA8F
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
