Democrat chastized for saying 'uterus' on House floor | Florida politics blog: The Buzz | tampabay.com & St. Petersburg Times
"I think it's a sad commentary about what we think about sex education in the state"- Scott Randolph
I agree, Mr. Randolph. We are approaching 1984 when the appropriate terminology for parts of the body (we aren't even talking about the penis or the vagina) become inappropriate language to use in public. Would you like us to use some newspeak, Florida Republicans? I'm sure there are already a few approved words in the GOP Newspeak, like "you betcha" "real Americans" "Reagan."
What GOP approved words & phrases would you add to the Newspeak lexicon? This could be fun...
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Friday, March 25, 2011
Abbie Dorn's Fate as a Mother
At what point as a parent or guardian do you lose the right to have a relationship with your children? It's easy to draw a line in the sand when the parent or guardian commits a crime against their own children or even other children. What about when the parent/guardian has done nothing wrong? Nothing illegal?
Abbie Dorn's fate as a mother will be decided soon, perhaps even by tonight.
Abbie Dorn suffered traumatic brain injury due to excessive bleeding and cardiac arrest during the cesarean birth of her triplets in June of 2006. According to family, she is able to communicate through eye-blinks and is aware of her surroundings. Her former husband, Daniel Dorn, doesn't agree. He divorced Abbie exactly one year later, believing she would never recover. Abbie is cared for by her parents.
Do children have a right to know their parents if they are severely disabled? I happen to think they do. Daniel Dorn doesn't agree.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Daniel did nothing to prepare the three children for their first visit with their mother this past December. He didn't tell the children about their mother until they were 4 years old, he never showed them pictures or talked about the accident, and he didn't read the evaluation of the children and extended family that was done by a court-ordered psychologist.
In addition to the lack of preparation for the visit, Daniel Dorn also lied about Abbie Dorn being blind. Abbie's mother says that the visit went well. Daniel disagrees, although he admitted that the children expressed a desire to see their mother again. Daniel expressed concern that the children's behavior deteriorated upon returning to LA but he admitted to not seeking help from a child psychologist or pediatrician. He also didn't mention this to his lawyer and school officials did not notice any issues with the children.
Personally, I think Daniel Dorn is behaving like a douchecockasaurus. Not only is he denying his children the ability to know the woman who birthed them, it seems as if he would have been content to live as though she never existed in the first place. Do I think they need shared custody? Absolutely not. She is in no position to be a primary or secondary caregiver to the children. However, she and the children deserve regular visitation and I don't believe Daniel will be willing to oblige without a court order.
Should Abbie Dorn's disability revoke her rights as a mother? What does this say about our society?
UPDATE: Abbie Dorn has been temporarily granted visitation.
Abbie Dorn's fate as a mother will be decided soon, perhaps even by tonight.
(CNN)
Abbie Dorn suffered traumatic brain injury due to excessive bleeding and cardiac arrest during the cesarean birth of her triplets in June of 2006. According to family, she is able to communicate through eye-blinks and is aware of her surroundings. Her former husband, Daniel Dorn, doesn't agree. He divorced Abbie exactly one year later, believing she would never recover. Abbie is cared for by her parents.
Do children have a right to know their parents if they are severely disabled? I happen to think they do. Daniel Dorn doesn't agree.
(AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes)
According to the Los Angeles Times, Daniel did nothing to prepare the three children for their first visit with their mother this past December. He didn't tell the children about their mother until they were 4 years old, he never showed them pictures or talked about the accident, and he didn't read the evaluation of the children and extended family that was done by a court-ordered psychologist.
"You told the children that their mother would not know if they were present or not?" Meyer asked in court.
"That's correct," he responded.
"What did you do besides telling them she's basically not there?" Meyer asked.
"I told them she loved them very much, that a doctor made a mistake and, because of that, she can't move and she can't talk, and there's not any interaction you can have with her," Dan recounted. "I'm pretty sure I also said she's blind."
In addition to the lack of preparation for the visit, Daniel Dorn also lied about Abbie Dorn being blind. Abbie's mother says that the visit went well. Daniel disagrees, although he admitted that the children expressed a desire to see their mother again. Daniel expressed concern that the children's behavior deteriorated upon returning to LA but he admitted to not seeking help from a child psychologist or pediatrician. He also didn't mention this to his lawyer and school officials did not notice any issues with the children.
Personally, I think Daniel Dorn is behaving like a douchecockasaurus. Not only is he denying his children the ability to know the woman who birthed them, it seems as if he would have been content to live as though she never existed in the first place. Do I think they need shared custody? Absolutely not. She is in no position to be a primary or secondary caregiver to the children. However, she and the children deserve regular visitation and I don't believe Daniel will be willing to oblige without a court order.
Should Abbie Dorn's disability revoke her rights as a mother? What does this say about our society?
UPDATE: Abbie Dorn has been temporarily granted visitation.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Nuclear Power's Death Knell?
Is Fukushima the death knell of nuclear energy?
Fukushima has been compared the likes of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. Of the two, I think Three Mile Island is the closest in comparison.
In addition to the tragedy, there are now allegations that information regarding a damaged portion of the reactor were brought to the Trade Ministry of Japan by an engineer, Mitsuhiko Tanaka. He claims that "he helped conceal a manufacturing defect in the $250 million steel vessel installed at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi No. 4 reactor while working for a unit of Hitachi Ltd. (6501) in 1974." Does this change the story? the outcome?
Are we overreacting? Is nuclear energy still a "green" source of energy or is the risk too great? Is there a better solution? What else must be considered?
The Lessons of Three Mile Island
(credit: CBS, March 2011)
Fukushima has been compared the likes of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. Of the two, I think Three Mile Island is the closest in comparison.
1 - The measurable scope of the radiation fallout was/will be fairly limited.
2 - The incident took place in a wealthy, capitalist society.
3 - There was/will be a large backlash from the populace regarding the expansion of nuclear energy.
In addition to the tragedy, there are now allegations that information regarding a damaged portion of the reactor were brought to the Trade Ministry of Japan by an engineer, Mitsuhiko Tanaka. He claims that "he helped conceal a manufacturing defect in the $250 million steel vessel installed at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi No. 4 reactor while working for a unit of Hitachi Ltd. (6501) in 1974." Does this change the story? the outcome?
Are we overreacting? Is nuclear energy still a "green" source of energy or is the risk too great? Is there a better solution? What else must be considered?
The Lessons of Three Mile Island
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)