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 

For my policies class, I was asked to write a letter to the editor of a newspaper in response to a news article. The article should regard a Florida policy and should state my opinion regarding it. I chose an article about a FL bill recently passed that allowed for eviction notices to be distributed or evictions to be performed during holidays. Law makers considered this bill to be fair to all in the population. Well, how about the children affected by the evictions? Are they going to understand that it is a "fair" thing to happen on a holiday? I was simply so upset after reading the article. I tried to think of the good that can come from this bill, but I simply cannot think of any.

I understand that evictions need to be performed. I understand that people who cannot afford their homes will suffer the consequences regarding lack of payment. However, this is more than just a business transaction. I know lawmakers have a different mind set regarding these situations. Lawmakers find these measures "necessary". Yet, do they stop to think of how these events affect people? Losing a home is a traumatic event in people's lives. To top it off, people need to go through a traumatic eviction on a holiday. Is this necessary? 

There is no good reason for lawmakers to have to impose such laws on homeowners. Everyone can fall victim of the economy. I know of many successful people who have been laid off and cannot find another job. This is not the way people should be treated on a holiday. A little sympathy from politicians for members of our community would be nice. 

Here is the letter I wrote to the Editor of The Palm Beach Post. The link below is to the article I discussed. 

Dear Editor, 

Recognized holidays are days that most people hold dear to them. During holidays, people try to forget their sorrows and give themselves hope. Now that this bill passed (HB 921), people will be reminded during dear times that they have become victims of the economy. The families affected will have to put an end to their celebration and focus on the cruel reality of their lives. Losing a home is not something that people want to face, especially not on a holiday, but unfortunately it is part of the recession. However, would it be too wrong to ask lawmakers to make it so, that at least on holidays, people may enjoy a glimpse of hope? Is it truly necessary for the Sheriff’s department to come knocking on people’s doors with notices of eviction on Christmas Eve? This Bill allows eviction notices to be delivered promptly, but it does nothing to improve a person’s psycho-social status. I believe that all people deserve the right to hope for a better tomorrow. It is simply morally wrong to deprive people of hope with a thought of homelessness. At least, during holidays people should not be tormented by the thought of eviction. 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/bill-allowing-holiday-evictions-passes-house-2207347.html

Andrea B.

Sunrise, FL

954-643-3017

Last week, I wrote a policy brief on the topic of child maltreatment. The bill I chose to discuss was "The Supporting Child Maltreatment Prevention Effort in Community Health Centers Act (S.54)" which was introduced by Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii. The bill was introduced in 2011 and is currently being reviewed by the Committee of Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Hopefully after its review in the committee, the bill will make its way to congress, senate, and President. 

The S.54 bill, if passed, would place government funded community health centers that would serve to promote family well-being. These health centers would develop different programs geared to the prevention of child maltreatment in communities by helping families develop better family dynamics. All people in a community would be able to receive services from such health centers despite their economic status. These health centers would provide adequate mental health screenings for parents with at risk of child maltreatment behaviors. The sole focus of this bill would be for the prevention of psychological, physical, and sexual abuse as well as neglect and other maltreatment of children. S.54 would implement programs targeting factors and behaviors that place children at risk of abuse, as well as treating those children who have already become victims of maltreatment and their families. 

For the most part, children see their parents or guardians as the absolute law and view the parent’s behaviors as acceptable. When parents abuse or neglect their children, these children don't necessarily view these behaviors as wrong but as "normal". Not only do children often think that the maltreatment is "normal", but they might even imitate these behaviors until adulthood. The point is that children cannot advocate for themselves. The reason for this is simple, children do not have the knowledge required to know that not all behaviors exhibited by adults should be deemed acceptable. Even when children are taught that their parent's behaviors are not the norm, the fear of the trauma lingers as a side effect of the abuse. 

The Supporting Child Maltreatment Prevention Effort in Community Health Centers Act (S.54) would give children the opportunity to seek treatment, receive counseling, become involved in programs with other children who have gone through similar experiences, and it would provide their parents with the right psychological help needed to fight learned behaviors. In order to fight a problem, we need to target the root of the problem. This bill would provide the help and resources needed in order to improve family dynamics in communities for the prevention of child maltreatment. Sure, the bill could implement a few other things, but the main focus is there... to promote wellness in the children of America. 

This week in class, I was asked to give my opinion on my experience with social security, unemployment benefits, and other federally funded programs or the sort. To be 100% honest, my family has never applied for any of these government programs. Luckily, we have always found jobs when he needed them or helped each other out to help with health costs. I did apply for government assistance in 2010 after resigning from my position as a Surgical Technician. I was denied any form of government help. So, needless to say that I have no had the personal experience of dealing with federally funded programs. So, in order to write my blog this week, I asked my Fiancee if his family has ever taken advantage of any government programs. Fortunately, his family has a long line of service men who have taken advantage of VA benefits. The closest relative to my Fiancee that is currently seeking VA benefits is his brother. He only receives about $300.00 a month, and has most medical expenses covered as long as he goes to a facility where they evaluate VA members. Now, don't judge me, but although I don't know his exact situation and why he receives $300 dollars a month... I find it to be simply not enough money for the years that he risked his life for our country. He spent five years in the navy and he only gets $300.00 monthly? I wouldn't risk my life for five years for that amount. Again, don't judge my thinking; I truly don't know the basis for deciding how much VA members are given. 


My fiancee also told me about his Grandparents receiving social security. His grandparents were very responsible people with very good stable jobs in their prime. His grandma just passed away last month, but she was using her social security benefits to cover her costly health bills. She took advantage of the many resources available through social security. The social security wasn't much but at least it helped her. 


I truly haven't lived any of this myself to have a better formed opinion on federal programs. However, it is  my strong belief that a lot of government programs are outdated and need revision. A plan proposed in 1935, cannot be 100% beneficial for a person in 2012. I think it is important to remember that much has changed in societal living since the times most of these programs were established. From 1935 to 2012, huge technological and medical advances have been achieved to improve people's lives. People are living longer and healthier life-styles. It is time to go through federal programs and make them more current. 

This week in class, I read about poverty and what our government considers poverty. I looked over the 2012 US guidelines for poverty and Self-Sufficiency Standards. The government guidelines basically depict what the government believes is poverty by taking in account certain costs such as food. I wasn't very impressed with the chart the government provides to show these guidelines. It isn't very easy to understand. I couldn't tell what costs it took into account. Reading a little more on the US guidelines, I realize that they are quite outdated. It would be beneficial for these guidelines to be updated and to include factors such as those included in the Self-Sufficiency Standards. I felt more comfortable reading the Self-Sufficiency Standards chart. It is broken down by state and county. I looked at Broward County's chart and it was very descriptive. The chart provided the income amount families need based on different family structures. The chart had single families with no children, families with one or multiple children, one parent families, etc. The Self-Sufficiency Standard chart was very easy to understand.  The Self-Sufficiency Standards takes into account costs such as food, day-care, and other necessities that families are faced with paying on a monthly basis. The price for these necessities keeps climbing making it harder for families to afford these necessities. If the government does not take these factors into account, how can they make an accurate prediction of what it is like to be poor in the US?


I have met several families with both working parents making a decent living. Some of these families, despite of working good jobs, have been faced with hardships and needed assistance. The only problem is that government doesn't consider these families "poor" and therefore will not assist. I remember when I moved out of my parent's home, I was working full time as a surgical technician and living in a one bedroom apartment by myself. The minute I applied for financial aid to start college, I was denied on the basis that I "made too much" to be considered in need of help. Well, due to the fact that I was not given any financial aid, I had to take out loans or pay out of pocket for my education which left a bigger dent in my pocket. I was living paycheck to paycheck, but to the government I was well off. How many people out there in this country want to further their education while continuing to work a full time job, but are faced with the inability to pay for school out of pocket? Shouldn't the government help people better themselves? 


I have been fortunate enough to have never lived in poverty, but I have seen it and been around it. I come from Chile, a place where poverty is not hidden. A place where you might be well off but a close family member may live in poverty. There, the government doesn't offer any help for education or living standards. The US is a great country to live in without a doubt. Still, I find it imperative that the government stay current with the times and continues to improve their programs.