Just stress, or mental health issues?

According to an article I found, one in three college students is depressed and one in four contemplates suicide. These numbers surprised me. Current college students are under so much stress, especially in ivy league schools where there is so much competition. Freshmen come into college and are used to getting straight A's in high school and being in the top of their class. Then they come to college and get C's and start freaking out. It is definitely a shock to suddenly not get the good grades that you're so used to getting.

The student health director at Washington University in St. Louis says that keeping lines of communication open is very important. Parents and teachers need to talk to the students before academic stress turns into a tragedy. Alan Glass, director of Student Health and Counseling at Washington University, thinks this issue could also be tied to 9/11. After those attacks, students became more globally aware. Thinking about the issues facing our country today can be very stressful, especially the current recession. What are your thoughts on this issue? How do you think it can be solved?

http://news-info.wustl.edu/tips/page/normal/4198.html

Go Green

Over the past decade people have become aware of the fact that the health of the environment is a major problem. Because the environment is not in a good state, there have been many movements to change the way we live. The Green Movement has gained a lot of steam recently, this has led to increased awareness and also alternative environmentally friendly ways of doing normal things. Most people agree that steps need to be taken to improve the health of the planet, because of this the government and many big businesses have started green programs to try and reduce their negative impact on the environment. There are also many individuals who have changed their habits to live a greener life, mostly through the products they buy. There has also been a movement among colleges and universities to be green. UCLA has dorms with solar-heated water. College of the Atlantic in Maine has been carbon neutral since 2007 and gets over 90 percent of the campus’s lighting from compact fluorescents. Arizona State University has more solar panels than any other school in the United States and they also established a School of Sustainability in 2007. Middlebury College has a biomass gasification plant that reduces carbon emissions by 40 percent, and they aim to be carbon neutral by 2016. Oberlin College has the EcoOlympics, which is a four week competition of environmentally themed contests between the dorms. There are over 110 colleges and universities that have built environmentally friendly or efficient buildings. Because students are so proactive about this issue it has motivated many schools to dramatically change their operations on campus to be more environmentally friendly. There are some drawbacks to going green; it can be extremely expensive especially when constructing an environmentally efficient building. What do you think about this issue? Is going green worth the trouble? Should Merrimack try to become more environmentally friendly? If so, what should they do to accomplish this?

Co-Ed Housing in College Dorms

Co-ed housing in college dormitories has gained more and more popularity within the last fifteen years. It used to be that boys and girls were only allowed to live in separate wings or floors of a dormitory. Today, society has come so far as to let boys and girls live together not only on the same floor, but in the same room! Harvard University, Brown University and Clark University are some of the many colleges that are allowing boys and girls to live in the same room together. The residence life staff here at Merrimack College believes that Merrimack will not see co-ed rooms for a VERY long time, do to our Catholic background. Public Universities however, are more likely to see this type of diversity in its dormitories.

What do you think about this idea of boys and girls living together? For those of you who live in ASH Dormitory, you may already live next to a room full of the opposite sex. Those of you in the Deegans, how do you like the way boys and girls are separated by floor? Do you think co-ed housing is a good idea?

Pro-choice

The argument about abortion is one of the most controversial topics discussed today. At the end of the day, what is the right decision or is there a right decision? In 1973, the famous Roe vs. Wade case established the law that allowed women to get an abortion if they so desired. New laws have established a limited time slot to get an abortion of the first trimester. I believe there is an answer to this question.
Pro-choice is the right decision in this case. Arguments against abortion are very valid. It is a harmful procedure that may prevent a woman from ever having children in the future. It is easy to grasp the "killing a life" concept. For those of you who are religious, we know that it is not accepted by the Catholic church. But give it a rest anti-abortion lobbyists, you will never win.
If you choose to not want to get an abortion for whatever reason, it is your right to not ever get one. But can you make that decision for another woman? As Americans, we have rights to our body and what we choose to do with them. After the first trimester, I agree that it is just too late, but before then, a woman should have a choice.
If a law was passed that made it illegal to have an abortion, besides the inevitable riots and fights that would ensue, only harm would become of it. Just like teens and adults will search out illegal drugs despite the law against it, woman will seek out an illegal abortion. But instead of being in a hospital with sterilized equipment and trained professionals, it will be done in someones basement with whatever they could find in their kitchen. This will not only cause the woman to never be able to give birth to a child indefinitely, but also could lead to death in extreme cases. Is this what we want for America? Do we want adults who are not ready to bare a child to go to these measures, or for a stupid teenage girl who got taken advantage of to jump down a flight of stairs in desperation? That is what will happen in this case, and it is wrong for a woman to be reduced to desperation when she could just go to Planned Parenthood.
The same people who lobby for anti-abortion laws, also lobby for the teaching of abstinence, which everyone knows is a lost cause. People will do whatever they want to, and it is wrong to deny teens the right information they need to be safe.
Overall, we know as Americans that we have a freedom to do as we please with our body, with obvious limitations. While every argument against and for abortion is valid, the fact remains that it would be a very unintelligent decision to put a law against abortion. For those of you who stand by your anti-abortion decision, I admire your choices, but it is time for everyone to realize the real meaning and consequence of that choice.

A Not So Carefree Childhood

Throughout my early childhood my parents rarely left my side for more than 10 minutes. They kissed away every "boo-boo", made sure I was never cold or hungry, and encouraged my developing imagination. What I took for granted that made me the person I am today, is something that thousands of kids each year don't have.

In 2007, the United States Department of Health and Human Services estimated about 794,000 children were victims of abuse or neglect. That the same year approximately 1,760 children ended up dead as a result of child abuse and neglect. What's more is that many abuse and neglect cases are never reported, and many child fatalities are not detailed as resulting from abuse or neglect.

In some cases, maltreatment can be thought of as a cycle. Adults who were abused or neglected as children are likely to become parents who repeat such actions towards there own children. Another factor with a high correlation to abuse and neglect is poverty. Sometimes the parents are not financially able to support their children, making the neglect unintentional. A final key factor related to abuse and neglect is substance abuse. Many cases of neglect and abuse involved primary caregivers who abused drugs and alcohol.

Child abuse and neglect has a strong negative impact on the child's development. It affects their performance in school, their self-esteem and self- confidence, and their ability to form friendships and future relationships.

I'm sure that most, if not all of us, grew up in non-abusive households. How often do you take this for granted? What are your feelings on child maltreatment?

Below are two articles on child maltreatment.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,280635,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Nov26/0,4670,BrainInjuredGirl,00.html

Sports and the Economy, Does this seem right?

Athletes nowadays are becoming more and more like celebrities. They end up in newspapers, are in television adds, and sometimes play roles in movies. They also get paid enormous amounts of money, money that a person could only dream of making. These past couple of years, we have also been experiencing the worst economic depression since the Great Depression back in the 1930's. Jobs have been lost, wages have been cut, and more and more families seem to be falling into poverty. Does this seem right?

Very recently Real Madrid, a spanish soccer team, spent a world record $372 million on 3 players, both breaking and setting a new world record for the most amount spent on a single player in the process. They had to take out 2 bank loans in order to complete this transaction and are receiving much disdain from the rest of the soccer world; Gianni Rivera, a soccer legend said "Is soccer still a game or a business?". The New York Yankees have the largest payroll in Major League Baseball, paying over $208 million for all the players, Alex Rodriguez earning the most with $33 million. It is surprising that in the middle of an economic depression that some people can still manage to scramble together such portions of money. So the question remains, what is reasonable? Should these people still be paid this amount of money to hit, kick or throw a ball while we have people giving their lives in foreign countries for less money? How much money becomes too much?

Video Games and Today's Youth

A recent study just came out and said that 97% of American kids play video games. They also said that an astounding 99% of boys play and 94% of girls do. This asks the question…how much is too much? A separate study was also conducted and they concluded that on the weekdays, male gamers play for about 58 minutes while females play for 44 minutes. However, on the weekend the males played for 1 hour and 37 minutes and the females for 1 hour and 4 minutes. Personally, I don’t think that these number are really that bad because if you break them down it’s basically an average of a little over 10 minutes a day on the weekdays and around 40 minutes on Saturday and Sunday. However, these averages take into account those that play very little and those that play for hours a day, so there are obviously those who have a problem with how much they play.
Another problem with video games is the first person shooter games contributing to violence in kids today. Games like Grand Theft Auto pollute the kid’s minds with drugs, prostitutes, alcohol, and killings. There was a study at Indiana University where they tried to gage how much of an effect on emotions violent video games had. Their results were that there was increased activity in the part of the brain that controls emotions in children who played the violent video games. This proves the point that violent video games in fact contribute to the child’s emotions and possibly violent attitude in some ways. So the question in the end is…how much is too much? and what type of games should they be playing?

Culture of Sex

In today’s society there in an incredible emphasis on sex. With influences like music, television, and magazines the idea of sex is becoming less of a taboo. People are becoming more comfortable with the ideas of sex. The most frightening part is that a majority of these people are children. Think back to the past 24 hours. I feel safe in saying that you have experienced at least one moment where sex or sexuality was a prominent reference. These references are becoming less surprising, and as a society we are becoming numb and accepting to the blatant themes of sexuality.
Some may argue that becoming comfortable with the idea of sex is normal and healthy and that a prude culture would be the downfall. Sex in itself is not a bad thing and people should be open to talking about it. It is stating the obvious but sex is necessary for life and everything else that follow. The bible even praises sex in the correct context. The context in which is think about sex is where the controversy arises.
There is a strong counter argument to the stance that sex is not a bad thing. Religious views aside, sex can be a social stigma. It goes back to the old concept of “too much of a good thing.” There is a difference between talking about sex in general, and talking about it on a personal level. If two people are applying for a job and they both have the same qualifications and the interviewer is aware that one of them has a long list of sexual endeavors, that applicant is less likely to get the position. Sex is a social stigma.
The point that it comes down to is sex sells, plain and simple. Commercials for products like toothpaste are advertising with half naked women and sexual innuendos. The main questions are is this culture of sex detrimental?
Here is an article describing how the obsession with sexuality and appearance can be extremely damaging to young women.
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/National_News_2/America_s_sex-mad_culture_4777.shtml

Should You Live Until You Die?

Euthanasia can be defined as the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit. Many people refer to Euthanasia as "assisted suicide" or "mercy killing". Whatever you call it, it brings up a lot of debate and discussion. If your loved one was in crucial pain and their quality of life was deteriorating, what would you want to happen? Some argue that euthanasia is doing the terminally ill a favor by 'putting them out of their misery', or relieving them from extreme pain. Other arguments for Euthanasia claim that it is simply another case of freedom of choice, and on the upside it helps free up loved ones from being weighed down in unnecessary medical funds. Those against Euthanasia argue that assisted suicide devalues human life, and could become a source of heath care cost containment. Those against Euthanasia feel as though human life should be protected and that no one besides God should be able to take your life away from you.
I'm sure you all remember the case of Teri Schiavo which dominated news stations back in 2005. Terri Schiavo was diagnosed as being in a PVS ( persistent vegetative state) for seven years before her husband, Michael Schiavo ultimately won the case and had her feeding tube removed on March 18, 2005. The case involved 14 appeals, and led to involvement by the Florida Legislature, the United States Congress, and George W. Bush himself to try and keep her alive. Schiavo was euthanized by an act of omission which is the intentional causing of death by not providing ordinary means of survival (such as food and water). Schiavo died on March 31, 2005 due to dehydration and starvation.
Some argue that Schiavo was in such a poor state of being that causing her death was doing her a favor. No one should live in a vegetative state for the remainder of their life. Others think that starving someone to death is no different than murder--no matter what their current physical state of being may be. What do you think? If you found your self in a situation where you had to decide whether a loved one dies or lives, what sort of things would be going through your mind? Is Euthanasia moral?




Check out this website for the legality of Euthanasia in the United States:


http://www.internationaltaskforce.org/assisted_suicide_laws.htm

The Good, the Bad, the Immortal

Most people in contemporary society would scoff at the concept of a literal immortality. The idea that we could preserve our bodies and our beings in an everlasting life is a pipe dream, something that isn't conceivable in the realm of science, right? Scientist Ray Kurzweil doesn't think so. In fact, he believes we're on our way to immortality within a matter of twenty years through nanotechnology. Whether or not what Ray says is ludicrous, it does bring up certain ethical dilemmas.

The nature of the universe seems to be degenerative and chaotic. Living beings are no different. We all age, we all die. It is as it is, whether we like it or not. Death, ironically, is a part of life. And our survival instincts compel us to avoid death. This may in part explain why the idea of the eternal has been a part of life for as long as life could think. Dating back to the earliest written records of man, we see immortality spring on to the scene with the Epic of Gilgamesh. Today, the idea of immortality still permeates society. Most people have, in one manner or another, religious belief in the divine that attests to a metaphysical immortality (some sort of afterlife). And then there's the realm of thought itself, that abstract concepts such as freedom transcend reality as an everlasting truth. Even in science we see that, for example, the universe may very well expand on into infinity.

No one would deny that an inner hunger makes the prospect of immortality at least immediately appealing. We see through the many attempts of individuals to find some sort of "fountain of youth" or even people's desires to simply leave their mark in history that a part of us wants to go on even after we're long gone. And let's be honest. Even if you're convinced that immortality in the physical sense is an immoral thing, you can't tell me that you wouldn't want some of the attributes of an immortal, omnipotent, omniscient being. Perhaps you'd want control of time and the aging process temporarily (so that you could live as long as you like, and then die when you feel the time is right). Or maybe you'd want some of the other potential benefits of nanotechnology, be it super strength or a higher plane of intellect.

Unfortunately, though, we probably all know from experience that what is desirable is not automatically good. Just as much as I am enraptured by immortality, I am equally terrified by the implications of such a thing. Life, as I see it, is made meaningful by death. It may be all about the journey (life) but if there is no finish line (death) toward which we strive then it is not definably a journey at all. It leads nowhere. Immortal life is not life, it might as well be death because it is devoid of meaning. Not to mention, there are all kinds of problems that would arise with it (how would we control population? how would we stop people from committing immoral actions?).

Ultimately, I think immortality is something better left beyond the reach of science and within the reach of science fiction (and religion, pop culture, and so on and so forth).
What about you? What if we could become immortal? Would that be an inherently good thing? What effect would this have on the way we live (such as local and international laws)? How would we have to redefine what it is to be human, to be alive, to exist even?

Source: Immortality only 20 years away says scientist

The Same Story Continues

We can all say that we are over the fact about racism and inequality in the United States of America. So many things have changed throughout the years. The hate has been broken from both sides, we say. We have an African American President. We have all been open to equal opportunity, we say. We see everything as if it is perfect. Well not everything is okay.

Last month a group of students from Washington University went on a senior trip to Chicago, Illinois. They all went to a nightclub to celebrate. According to the club's dress policy people who wore baggy jeans were not allowed in. So about six African American students were not allowed entry because of the way they were dressed. The rest were 200 white students who were allowed to go in. Two of the students had an idea of exchanging jeans to see if both were allowed entry. One of the students who was white the jeans fitted baggy. He was still allowed entry but the other who was African American was denied his entrance.

This was a two day trip which would culminate in a celebration at the Old Mothers Club. This trip was already planned and the party had already been arranged ahead of time with the nightclub by the student class board, which included two of the African American students who were later denied entry to the club. That really sucks. Nobody would want to go through that especially when you are trying to celebrate your final year at college. I really think that there are some people who really are not over this entire race issue. I do believe that there are some racists out there. It's sad that we still have to go over this same issue over and over again. Why can't we just get over it all? Do you feel this is okay? Was this a matter of policy or race? Put yourself in these young students shoes, should you feel outrage? What can we do to get this to stop? Is it in our control or is this out of our control?

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/25/illinois.bar.racism.allegations/index.html

The Real Immigration Complication

The “immigration issue” has long been a point of contention about whether the flow of immigrants to the U.S. should be inhibited. The real issue that can be overlooked is the defective immigration system in our country which some say is doing more harm than good. A recent article by Tyler Moran explains that the “broken” immigration system is having negative effects on people in the workforce-- both immigrants and native-born alike.

Under the current system, employers hire undocumented immigrants who fear deportation at any time. Therefore these immigrants face dangerous working conditions, extremely low wages, or no payment at all but they cannot do anything about it because they do not want to face deportation. They cannot join unions or try to improve their working conditions at all. Is it their own fault for coming to this country? Or is it the faulty immigration system of America?

According to Moran, the majority of corrupt employers do not face consequences for their actions. They are able to make a bigger profit by using unlawful practices. This means that employers who do abide to the law are put at a competitive disadvantage to those who don’t. This also results in authorized workers being subject to the same unsafe working conditions and low wages because it becomes acceptable.

The system as it is promotes abuse of unauthorized workers, lower standards for safe conditions and fair wages for all workers (immigrant and natives), and major disadvantages for employers who run equitable businesses. What is the solution to these problems? If labor and employment laws are modified and most importantly, enforced, will these problems still be so prevalent? It is so easy to blame these problems on immigrants and say that they should be deported. America is a nation of immigrants. Are immigrants really the issue or is it corrupt non-enforcement of current policies?

http://www.alternet.org/immigration/143607/how_our_broken_immigration_system_hurts_both_immigrant_and_native-born_workers/?page=2

Does violence on television affect the behavior of children?

With all the technological advances present today, youths are exposed to more violent images than ever before. The content is the most realistic there has ever been, and are made readily available to children of all ages. Has the media gone too far? Can we no longer simply label it entertainment? Must we begin to render the content dangerous? Or are people overreacting, and simply looking for some scapegoat to explain violence and danger in today's society?

Two professors of communication have voiced their arguments in the book titled "Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Mass Media and Society." James Potter believes that television is harmful to children; while there are other factors that, of course, contribute to the impact, television and the media are the major factors in aggressive and violent behavior in children. Potter's view supports technological determinism, which is a theory that states that technology is the driving force that influences society more than any other factor. Jib Fowles, on the other hand, believes that television is not harmful to children. He adamantly states that correlational data can not prove any positive relationships between the amount of violent television programming watched and the violent behavior exhibited by otherwise vulnerable and impressionable children. Family life (how the children were raised, and the morals and values instilled on them by their parents and peers), predisposed personality traits (if they already have aggressive tendencies, or are cognitively underdeveloped), and unreliable experiments (children are not in their natural environments in laboratories where they are forced to watch television for the experiments) overrule the argument that the media has such a major effect on children. What do you think?

Is There a Need to Escape?

In class we have been discussing the family sphere of the world, what families are, and different types of families. In the latest reading we read an Essay by Margaret Talbot about a family who feels the need to escape from everyday "evils" to fulfill their Christian lifestyle.

The family in the essay "A Mighty Fortress" is about a family who homeschools their children to make them more Christian by singing psalms and reciting the Bible as part of their schooling. They also aren't allowed to watch most television shows, mostly just movies from the 1950's. The family is only friends with other Christians who live life the same way they do. Their oldest children want to grow up to be a missionary and a housewife. And the parents hold a weekly session for other familes to teach them how to live the same way as they do. And they dont believe in dating or any type of attachment until marriage. This type of family who shelters themselves from the outside modern world is seen as radical these days and many people wonder why they chose to live this way.

Talbot explains that the family choses to live this way to keep their values in order. They want their family to stay together. They dont want to feel the pressures of the modern world that wants everyone to fall into the same trap of sin. They want their children to grow up in a safe environment where they keep family, God, and their morals a priority. They believe by exposing their children to the world today that they will just make bad decisions or choices and their lives will just be full of disapointment.

Many other families are choosing to live this way and the number has grown since the 1990's. Why do you think families, especially Christian, feel the need to escape from the modern world? Do you think technology, celebrities, and the media is ruining the hope for radical Christians to live a pure life in today's society? Or do you think these families are just avoiding the modern world because they are afraid to face reality?

Source: Talbot, Margaret. "A Mighty Fortress". February 2007. The New York Times.