Check it out here
I found this at abc news. Lester Peterson needed surgery on his heart. He had made plans to have it done. His daughter, Dawn, was a teacher in Texas, and was recovering from a torn achilles tendon, so she was going to come back to Iowa to help her father. Sadly, Dawn never made it to him. A blood clot formed in her injury and traveled to her heart and caused it to stop beating. Doctors finally got her heart to start beating again, but the lack of oxygen to her brain caused it to stop functioning. Her parents began to fill out papers to donate her organs, and suddenly her father had an idea. He wanted to use her heart to help replace his. He said that it was a way that his daughter could still be with him, but his doctor did not want to do it. This kind of surgery would be far more dangerous than just using a standard valve. After he thought about it, the doctor decided that it was an option and they could try it.
I found this to be an incredible story. In my opinion, the loss of a child would be the hardest thing to face in life. It was not any different in this case, other than the fact that this child could help her father live on. I can understand the reason this father wanted to use his daughter's heart instead of the standard valve, even though the risks were high. According to the doctor, he would have to make 4 large incisions instead of 1 small incision. This could cause potential for more leaking. Before this could even get started, the doctor would have to make sure Dawn's valve was the correct size for her father. This can only be confirmed after Lester was already on the operating table. I can see myself wanting the same thing if I were in his shoes. I would feel that something good came out of my daughter's death, just like Lester and his wife stated as they were going through the organ doner process.
I think that it is different how some things work out sometimes. I am sure that the family probably wishes that it could have been different, but you can't look back. You can only look forward.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Shrink to Survive? City Downsizes
Check it out here
I found this at abc news. Flint, Michigan was once a thriving community when General Motors helped hold a strong work force, but then GM made tens of thousands of job cuts since the automaker industry declined. This put Flint at the population of 115,000 instead of it's 200,000 before. The county treasurer, Dan Kildee, got an idea. There are about 10,000 vacant homes in Flint. More than 84,000 people have left, and they didn't take their houses with them, Kildee stated. He wants to tear down about 6,000 of these homes to get rid of competition, and bring Flint back to a thriving community. In place of the loss of homes, Kildee wants to eventually turn it over to open land or forests that can help later on.
When I first started reading this article, I thought this guy had a great idea. He was trying to help his community get back to where they used to be. He was taking something that had gone wrong and making it right.
This was not Rush Limbaugh's thoughts at all. He thought that downsizing a city was un American. He thought that it was unheard of. He later stated, if they are going to tear down 40% of this city, why not tear down the whole thing. I listen to Rush and agree with a lot of issues, but I would have to disagree with this one. The mayor of Flint, Dayne Walling, says that the downsizing of these homes to match their current population is not an attempt to push people out. He emphasizes new construction homes on larger lots. They would also like to pay people to relocate when money is in the budget. I think that this community is looking at the bigger picture, and is trying to do what is best for their community. I don't think that it should be looked at as un American. They are pushing through what was a bad time, and trying to make it better. It's not like they are tearing down houses that could easily be fixed. They can not be lived in. A lot of them were just the shell of what used to be a home.
Overall, I completely agree with what this community is trying to do. They are trying to rebuild and start new. I am always for someone trying to work with what they have to make it better. If that means tear down old, abandoned houses, then so be it.
I found this at abc news. Flint, Michigan was once a thriving community when General Motors helped hold a strong work force, but then GM made tens of thousands of job cuts since the automaker industry declined. This put Flint at the population of 115,000 instead of it's 200,000 before. The county treasurer, Dan Kildee, got an idea. There are about 10,000 vacant homes in Flint. More than 84,000 people have left, and they didn't take their houses with them, Kildee stated. He wants to tear down about 6,000 of these homes to get rid of competition, and bring Flint back to a thriving community. In place of the loss of homes, Kildee wants to eventually turn it over to open land or forests that can help later on.
When I first started reading this article, I thought this guy had a great idea. He was trying to help his community get back to where they used to be. He was taking something that had gone wrong and making it right.
This was not Rush Limbaugh's thoughts at all. He thought that downsizing a city was un American. He thought that it was unheard of. He later stated, if they are going to tear down 40% of this city, why not tear down the whole thing. I listen to Rush and agree with a lot of issues, but I would have to disagree with this one. The mayor of Flint, Dayne Walling, says that the downsizing of these homes to match their current population is not an attempt to push people out. He emphasizes new construction homes on larger lots. They would also like to pay people to relocate when money is in the budget. I think that this community is looking at the bigger picture, and is trying to do what is best for their community. I don't think that it should be looked at as un American. They are pushing through what was a bad time, and trying to make it better. It's not like they are tearing down houses that could easily be fixed. They can not be lived in. A lot of them were just the shell of what used to be a home.
Overall, I completely agree with what this community is trying to do. They are trying to rebuild and start new. I am always for someone trying to work with what they have to make it better. If that means tear down old, abandoned houses, then so be it.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Hawaii's Budget Cut: No School Fridays
Check it out here
I found this at abc news. Hawaii has been facing a budget crisis and is trying to fix it by only having school 4 days a week. Instead of cutting some teachers and increasing class sizes, they will be out of school on Fridays. This raises a lot of concern, since Hawaii is ranked one of the lowest on test scores. It also concerns many parents that have to stay home on Fridays now and play teacher. Is this the best way to help Hawaii and its budget crisis?
My first reaction was they are crazy. I think that the students are being cheated just to help save some of the teachers jobs. A child has to have a good education, and shortening the week is not going to help this at all. I think that it will only let them fall even farther behind than they already are.
As stated in the video, the US is already in school a lot less than many other countries at 180 days. Now Hawaii will only be in session for 163 days, compared to Japan that goes to school 243 days. I don't think that the school year needs to be increased any more, but I definitely don't think that it needs to be shortened. One parent stated that they feel there kids are losing out on their education for the sake of the teachers. I think that this will lead them to fall even farther behind. The entire nation is in a crisis, and there are many things that are being done to try to fix it. I just feel that this isn't the best solution for the problem.
I found this at abc news. Hawaii has been facing a budget crisis and is trying to fix it by only having school 4 days a week. Instead of cutting some teachers and increasing class sizes, they will be out of school on Fridays. This raises a lot of concern, since Hawaii is ranked one of the lowest on test scores. It also concerns many parents that have to stay home on Fridays now and play teacher. Is this the best way to help Hawaii and its budget crisis?
My first reaction was they are crazy. I think that the students are being cheated just to help save some of the teachers jobs. A child has to have a good education, and shortening the week is not going to help this at all. I think that it will only let them fall even farther behind than they already are.
As stated in the video, the US is already in school a lot less than many other countries at 180 days. Now Hawaii will only be in session for 163 days, compared to Japan that goes to school 243 days. I don't think that the school year needs to be increased any more, but I definitely don't think that it needs to be shortened. One parent stated that they feel there kids are losing out on their education for the sake of the teachers. I think that this will lead them to fall even farther behind. The entire nation is in a crisis, and there are many things that are being done to try to fix it. I just feel that this isn't the best solution for the problem.
Friday, October 23, 2009
$2 Painting Might be a Picasso
Check it out here
I found this at abc news. After her neighbor passed away, Parker helped out his relatives by taking some of his belongings, so they wouldn't have to take them back with them. She held a garage sale and sold one of the paintings he had for $2. The lady that bought the painting was about ready to hang it on her wall, when she realized there was writing on the corner of it. It read, Pablo Picasso. She couldn't believe it. She called the FBI because she thought that it might have been stolen, but after investigation they found that it was not on the list. It is now being looked at to confirm if the painting is a fake or not. Parker is overwhelmed, and wonders what would have happened if she would have just kept it.
Can you imagine having a Picasso painting and then selling it for $2? I would be kicking myself all over the place. It still has not been confirmed if the painting is real. As for the lady that now has possession of the painting, she says that if it is a real Picasso painting she will be selling it for sure. Honestly, I don't blame her. She bought it for $2 and might be selling it for plenty more. Ironic things happen all of the time. According to the article, the man that passed away was an art collector. First, his family had the painting, but didn't want to hall it back home. Then, his friendly neighbor offered to help, by holding a garage sale after they left. The painting was then hers. She realized the painting had Picasso's name on it, but the family said that it was probably a fake, so she sold it. Now it's in possession of another person that will be very lucky if it turns out that this is a genuine Picasso painting. It's a little crazy how things turn out sometimes.
I found this at abc news. After her neighbor passed away, Parker helped out his relatives by taking some of his belongings, so they wouldn't have to take them back with them. She held a garage sale and sold one of the paintings he had for $2. The lady that bought the painting was about ready to hang it on her wall, when she realized there was writing on the corner of it. It read, Pablo Picasso. She couldn't believe it. She called the FBI because she thought that it might have been stolen, but after investigation they found that it was not on the list. It is now being looked at to confirm if the painting is a fake or not. Parker is overwhelmed, and wonders what would have happened if she would have just kept it.
Can you imagine having a Picasso painting and then selling it for $2? I would be kicking myself all over the place. It still has not been confirmed if the painting is real. As for the lady that now has possession of the painting, she says that if it is a real Picasso painting she will be selling it for sure. Honestly, I don't blame her. She bought it for $2 and might be selling it for plenty more. Ironic things happen all of the time. According to the article, the man that passed away was an art collector. First, his family had the painting, but didn't want to hall it back home. Then, his friendly neighbor offered to help, by holding a garage sale after they left. The painting was then hers. She realized the painting had Picasso's name on it, but the family said that it was probably a fake, so she sold it. Now it's in possession of another person that will be very lucky if it turns out that this is a genuine Picasso painting. It's a little crazy how things turn out sometimes.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Florida Boy Set On Fire
Check it out here
I found this at abc news. Michael Brewer, a 15 year old boy, was set on fire by a group of 15 year olds and one 13 year old after they say he owed them $40 for a video game. The group of boys tried stealing a bike from Michael the day before and he reported them to the police. The group of boys were mad that he reported them, so they poured rubbing alcohol on him and lit him with a lighter. Michael is in critical condition with burns that cover over 65% of his body. Doctors say that it is going to be a long recovery. The boys were arrested and are now waiting trial. They are debating on whether or not the 15 year olds should be charged as adults.
I find this to be very disturbing. I can't believe that children would take something like this that far. As the mother stated in the article, we have to get control of our children. They are getting more violent every day.
I think that the boys should be charged as adults. The officer stated that the boys were laughing about what they did when they were being questioned. They showed no remorse. He said that only one boy acted as if he was truly sorry for what he did, and realized that it was wrong. I can't believe that they could be so cruel, and it was over money for a video game.
Michael is going to have a long recovery. He will have to go through major surgeries just to repair his burnt skin, and he will always have the scars that will remind him of what happened that day. Not to mention the kidney and lung failure that could happen in the weeks to come, from his body trying to fight all the damage. My heart goes out to this boy and his family. I wish him the best recovery possible. As for the group of boys that set him on fire, I hope that they get a fair trial that sentences them for what they deserve.
I found this at abc news. Michael Brewer, a 15 year old boy, was set on fire by a group of 15 year olds and one 13 year old after they say he owed them $40 for a video game. The group of boys tried stealing a bike from Michael the day before and he reported them to the police. The group of boys were mad that he reported them, so they poured rubbing alcohol on him and lit him with a lighter. Michael is in critical condition with burns that cover over 65% of his body. Doctors say that it is going to be a long recovery. The boys were arrested and are now waiting trial. They are debating on whether or not the 15 year olds should be charged as adults.
I find this to be very disturbing. I can't believe that children would take something like this that far. As the mother stated in the article, we have to get control of our children. They are getting more violent every day.
I think that the boys should be charged as adults. The officer stated that the boys were laughing about what they did when they were being questioned. They showed no remorse. He said that only one boy acted as if he was truly sorry for what he did, and realized that it was wrong. I can't believe that they could be so cruel, and it was over money for a video game.
Michael is going to have a long recovery. He will have to go through major surgeries just to repair his burnt skin, and he will always have the scars that will remind him of what happened that day. Not to mention the kidney and lung failure that could happen in the weeks to come, from his body trying to fight all the damage. My heart goes out to this boy and his family. I wish him the best recovery possible. As for the group of boys that set him on fire, I hope that they get a fair trial that sentences them for what they deserve.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Boy Hidden In Wall
Check it out here
I found this at abc news. Ricky Chekevdia was found after been missing for 2 years. A fight between custody battle, which ended in favor of Ricky's father, led Ricky's mother to flee and hide with him at her mother's house. He has been there all along. A tip from a witness said that they were hiding him, so the police went in to search. They found Ricky, with his mother, in a crawl space behind the wall. Ricky's mother and grandmother claim that his father sexually abused Ricky, so they had to hide him. There was no evidence of this. Ricky is in a safe place now, not yet with his father. Child welfare workers are making sure that everything is alright before he can see him again.
My first reaction is how can someone keep a child from being seen for 2 years. After reading the article I found out that there were several secret cutouts and passageways in the house. They say that he didn't live in these, they were just there if they needed to hide him. I also wondered if the claims on the father of sexually abusing him were true. He was never made take a polygraph test, and refuses to take one now. He says there is no need since he was already aquited of the charges. My feelings are who cares. If you didn't do it then prove it. I hate that this boy has had to take on so much at a young age, and I also hope that he ends up in a loving family, which he deserves.
There are so many what ifs in this story, that it is hard to take sides with anybody. The mother was wrong for abducting her son when she found out that the father had custody, but if the accusations are true about his father, I would want my son as far away as possible also. There is also no way that a child should be locked in a house forever. The neighbors say that there was no sign of him being there, so he couldn't had been let outside much, if at all. I also don't agree with the father not taking the polygraph test. I think that it is best for everyone to know the truth. The only person I have to agree with in this story is Ricky. He is a very bright and courageous little boy. I wish him the best of wishes.
I found this at abc news. Ricky Chekevdia was found after been missing for 2 years. A fight between custody battle, which ended in favor of Ricky's father, led Ricky's mother to flee and hide with him at her mother's house. He has been there all along. A tip from a witness said that they were hiding him, so the police went in to search. They found Ricky, with his mother, in a crawl space behind the wall. Ricky's mother and grandmother claim that his father sexually abused Ricky, so they had to hide him. There was no evidence of this. Ricky is in a safe place now, not yet with his father. Child welfare workers are making sure that everything is alright before he can see him again.
My first reaction is how can someone keep a child from being seen for 2 years. After reading the article I found out that there were several secret cutouts and passageways in the house. They say that he didn't live in these, they were just there if they needed to hide him. I also wondered if the claims on the father of sexually abusing him were true. He was never made take a polygraph test, and refuses to take one now. He says there is no need since he was already aquited of the charges. My feelings are who cares. If you didn't do it then prove it. I hate that this boy has had to take on so much at a young age, and I also hope that he ends up in a loving family, which he deserves.
There are so many what ifs in this story, that it is hard to take sides with anybody. The mother was wrong for abducting her son when she found out that the father had custody, but if the accusations are true about his father, I would want my son as far away as possible also. There is also no way that a child should be locked in a house forever. The neighbors say that there was no sign of him being there, so he couldn't had been let outside much, if at all. I also don't agree with the father not taking the polygraph test. I think that it is best for everyone to know the truth. The only person I have to agree with in this story is Ricky. He is a very bright and courageous little boy. I wish him the best of wishes.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
6 Year Old Boy Faces Reform Shool
Check it out here
I found this at abc news. Zachary Christie, a 6 year old boy was suspended for 45 days and is wanted to go to reform school. He brought a camping tool to school, which had a knife on it, and the school administration deemed him to be in violation of their zero tolerance weapon policy. His parents feel that the action was too harsh. They stated that he was just excited about a new tool his parents bought him for his camping trips with the Cub Scouts, and he wanted to bring it to school to show it off. They think that the rules need to be adjusted for certain ages. Zachary's parents are fighting the board on this ruling.
As much as I feel for these parents, I have to agree with the school on most of the ruling. If a school has a policy, they have to follow through with the actions if a student breaks that policy, or there will always be someone saying that it is not fair that their child got this punishment because he didn't. I do think that the age and the child has to be taken into consideration though. Zachary loved school, and was a great student. It even states in the article that it seemed like the principle did not want to call his mother because he knew that the student meant no harm. I think that the ruling of Zachary having to go to reform school is overboard. I feel that suspension is enough for him to understand what he did was against the rules.
I have a 5 almost 6 year old in kindergarten right now, and I know that if this was me I would be upset at the fact they wanted my child to go to reform school. I could understand their policy for zero tolerance, and that it would be up to the parents partially for not telling the child not to bring stuff like this to school. I always check to see what my daughter is bringing to school is appropriate. I could also see the school adjusting their policy for certain ages of children now that this has happened. There is a big difference in a 6 year old and a 12 year old.
I do feel sorry that this had to happen to a good student and family, but they have to realize that a school has to follow through with their policies. Again, I disagree with the reform school, since this was nothing but a young child bringing what he thought was a cool toy to school. I do agree with having to suspend him for his actions, but look into another way of doing things in the future for certain ages of children. Hopefully this incident gets resolved in a good, clean fashion. Best wishes to everyone involved.
I found this at abc news. Zachary Christie, a 6 year old boy was suspended for 45 days and is wanted to go to reform school. He brought a camping tool to school, which had a knife on it, and the school administration deemed him to be in violation of their zero tolerance weapon policy. His parents feel that the action was too harsh. They stated that he was just excited about a new tool his parents bought him for his camping trips with the Cub Scouts, and he wanted to bring it to school to show it off. They think that the rules need to be adjusted for certain ages. Zachary's parents are fighting the board on this ruling.
As much as I feel for these parents, I have to agree with the school on most of the ruling. If a school has a policy, they have to follow through with the actions if a student breaks that policy, or there will always be someone saying that it is not fair that their child got this punishment because he didn't. I do think that the age and the child has to be taken into consideration though. Zachary loved school, and was a great student. It even states in the article that it seemed like the principle did not want to call his mother because he knew that the student meant no harm. I think that the ruling of Zachary having to go to reform school is overboard. I feel that suspension is enough for him to understand what he did was against the rules.
I have a 5 almost 6 year old in kindergarten right now, and I know that if this was me I would be upset at the fact they wanted my child to go to reform school. I could understand their policy for zero tolerance, and that it would be up to the parents partially for not telling the child not to bring stuff like this to school. I always check to see what my daughter is bringing to school is appropriate. I could also see the school adjusting their policy for certain ages of children now that this has happened. There is a big difference in a 6 year old and a 12 year old.
I do feel sorry that this had to happen to a good student and family, but they have to realize that a school has to follow through with their policies. Again, I disagree with the reform school, since this was nothing but a young child bringing what he thought was a cool toy to school. I do agree with having to suspend him for his actions, but look into another way of doing things in the future for certain ages of children. Hopefully this incident gets resolved in a good, clean fashion. Best wishes to everyone involved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)