Last semester I took a health class and I took American Government. In both classes, the professors did a lecture on drugs. In the health class, the focus was on how bad illegal drugs were and the top 20 worst drugs on the planet. I definitely learned a lot about drugs I didn't even know existed. I also learned that Marijuana doesn't have major side affects like some of the more serious drugs such as cocaine and heroin, yet it is still advertised as deadly. In that class, I also learned that there is a focus on looking down on people who do "illegal" drugs and not so much on people who abuse prescription drugs. Those addicted to illegal drugs are seen as unstable and unpredictable in our society. On the other hand, in my government class my professor focused on government involvement in relation to ALL drugs. The amount of unbiased information I learned in that class was incredible. I had no idea, prior to taking that class, that our government was so involved in the illegal drug market. I was completely unaware that in many instances we funded countries to grow illegal drugs only to mask it with "the war on drugs" facade. 


Despite of my personal view on the war on drugs, the fact of the matter is that people in our society have trouble with addiction. Despite of who supplies cash for the drugs, despite of who distributes the drugs, and despite of who gets the blame for drug trafficking; the important factor here is that our society should not be so harsh on individuals who are suffering from addiction. How do individuals who need help with their addiction get the help they need from a society with a focus on "the war on drugs". The war on drugs is focused on advertising the "bad" in illegal drugs and focuses on discouraging people from using drugs. This same war on drugs has yet to fund a program for addicted individuals who need therapy. The war on drugs preaches that drugs are bad but does nothing other than voice the drug's "evil" doings. Why don't they focus on helping people overcome their addictions if they truly want illegal drugs off the streets? Wouldn't it make more sense to help individuals dealing with addiction to prevent them from using drugs, than doing absolutely nothing about it? 


I also find it comical that the same people who are behind the war on drugs are the ones receiving a cut from pharmaceutical companies-our government. Despite that our government likes to just preach on illegal drugs and do very little, if anything at all, in regards to helping people in society overcome addiction, they also promote using legal drugs. I understand that legal drugs are made for medical purposes, despite of the million horrendous side effects each drug can potentially have, and that illegal drugs have no benefit to them. I think what our society fails to identify, perhaps because the government wants people to forget, that both types of drugs have significant physiological changes in the brain with prolonged used. what is the difference between a person becoming addicted to pain medication or becoming addicted to cocaine? they both have the potential to cause death, create dependence, cause severe depression, etc. Whether a person is addicted to a legal or illegal drugs, the fact of the matter is that  individuals suffering from addiction need help. If the government is so concerned about ending the drug usage in our society, then how about using the billions of dollars it spends yearly on a useless campaign against the drugs they supply, and instead use those billions of dollars toward the recuperation of individuals suffering from addiction? Now there's an idea!

I just finished watching a documentary called "The Lottery". This documentary focused on several students waiting to win a charter school lottery for acceptance into the school. The documentary focused on these student's struggles in the public school system in Harlem. All of the student parents wanted a better education for their children. None of the parents felt that a good education could be achieved by attending a public school.

My public education history was great. I attended Nova High School in Davie, FL. My school was focused on being a good school and having great teachers. I wasn't a great student most of my life. I had great potential and many of my teachers noticed. Unfortunately, like those kids in the documentary, my life a little less peachy than most people attending that school. I should have attended a different school, but my father had done his homework and knew Nova was better. I lived in bad neighborhood and I was a child of an immigrant. My father lied in order for my sisters and I to attend Nova. He said we lived elsewhere, although they didn't believe him, still we were able to attend after all. My sophomore year in high school, I decided to turn things around and focus on my education. I attended a great school that allowed me to focus on my education. In all of my childhood misfortunes, I was fortunate enough to have attended a good school.

Everyone deserves the right to attend a great school. The education system shouldn't stay the way it is. The world is moving forward through the use of technology. Most public schools in my neighborhood ask the student's parents to bring toilet paper. These are the same schools that will not have new technology in their class for students. The world is so different now from what it was when the educational system was formed. How can we expect children to have a great education when the teaching methods are ancient? Many teachers are restricted by strict guidelines and cannot teach the way they would like. The school system is built on strict measures that schools must follow. The documentary explained how the teachers' union had great influence in the decision making of the education system. It also explained how the union dictates of policies and reforms and keep politicians from changing things.

Charter school are the last resort for students attending public schools to receive a good education. Charter schools do not follow the same educational guidelines required by public schools. They have longer school days and longer school years. They promote teacher independence in terms of curriculum and they encourage team support. Charter schools focus on child education by leaving behind the politics involved in the public school system. The teachers' union hires outside organizations, such as ACORN, to protest against charter schools. a spokesperson for them stated in the video thatthe problem were not the schools but rather poverty. She mentioned that the majority of latino and blacks do not do well in the system because they are poor. She also stated that poverty impedes education. I am proof that she is wrong. My family was poor and I grew up in a bad neighborhood. I graduated high school, I am college now, and my future is brighter than ever.

All of those kids in the documentary should have a great education. It is the responsibility of the school system to grant them a great education. All of those children had great parents who were focused on finding the right school for them. The neighborhood they live in, their ethnicity, or their family life should not be an excuse for the school system to have failing students. Something is not working with the current educational system and it must be fixed. Why is has yet to change?....I'm not entirely sure.

My professor provided me with an article about a physician, Dr. Goodman, who advocated for assisted suicide. This physician made it possible for a bill to pass in which doctors are now allowed to "speed-up" the process of dying for a terminally ill patient with a prognosis of 6 months or less. The law passed in Oregon as the Death with Dignity law. Dr. Goodman used this law to end his life after being diagnosed with a rare brain disease. In the article, Dr. Goodman expresses that having control over his death allowed him not to feel any fear of dying. The doctor also expresses that it was more difficult than he anticipated to use the law to end his own life. The law is effective in both Washington and Montana. Over 500 people in those two states have used the law to end their life. 


My reflection on the article was tricky. I don't disagree with Dr. Goodman's actions for ending his life, or for advocating a law for terminally ill patients to face their death in a different manner. I would be hard to say what I would do if I were in Dr. Goodman's shoes. I certainly do not believe in assisting in deaths, however, these patients were already going to die. It is almost "nice", for a lack of better word", that terminally ill patients in Washington and Montana have the choice to have a "better" form of dying. I also found it interesting that Dr. Goodman stated that having control over his death made it easier for him to accept it. Again, I'm not in that situation, but I can definitely understand what Dr. Goodman meant by that statement. I imagine that accepting that a terminal illness will be the cause of one's death must be tough on its own. It must be equally as tough to not know when one's death will come. For those patients who can use this law, they will leave their families without leaving any loose ends. Undoubtedly, I understand Dr. Goodman's reason's for advocating for such law to have passed. However, there is also a very tricky aspect to all of this. In my personal experience, a doctor can give a prognosis but it doesn't mean that it is accurate. 


This is my personal story of a wrongful prognosis. I met my fiancee's grandma about six years ago. Grandma suffered from COPD and Asthma (along with several other things) and was for the most part very stable. When I met grandma, It had been two years since she was given a prognosis of no more than a year to live due to the severity of her condition. Shortly after meeting grandma, she was given another prognosis, by a different doctor, of no more than three months to live. Surprisingly, grandma lived for another several years before passing away two months ago. In the last years we had with grandma, my fiancee and I were able to bond and enjoy grandma in a different manner. 


If this Death with Dignity law were to have passed in Florida at the time that Grandma was told she would die in three months... my fiancee and I would have missed out on the time we had with grandma. I understand that some people need this law in order to face their time of death with a little less fear. Still, what if the prognosis is wrong? I guess this is just one of those stories that are meant to leave you thinking...

Here is the article about Dr. Goodman
http://www.npr.org/2012/03/12/148459270/assisted-suicide-advocate-uses-law-to-end-his-life