In my Bible study of 1 John I point out that the word practice has two popular uses: 1) to do something "I practice law" 2) to do something with the intention of doing it better. This post is referring to the second kind of practice. I am trying to get better at doing the kind of annoying advice I give to most complainers, in particular the kind of complaints directed against other people.
I insist that the offended person look at the issue from the perspective of the other person, give them the best possible motivations, practice sympathy rather than judgment, etc.
So I was recently slighted by some people in a not very important way but it still hurt my feelings. The strict interpretation of my constant advice is to train my thoughts against imagining their dislike of me. It is all too natural for me to start thinking "They don't like me... I don't fit in... I am an outsider." [I am aware of the "embrace the solitude" individualist perspective and reject it as inhuman]. My advice would be to train your thoughts against the negative interpretation of their actions and focus on the best interest of others. But that is not happening...
So I practice what I preach. I might not win this fight or it might take months to convince myself that these people do not dislike me or if they do that it a mistake on their part, or something like that. Until then the best I can do is practice at it. I have been disliked before, fairly and unfairly and there have been times with increased time together I have made new friends and earned respect (this happens a lot at work where my offensive nature sometimes gets the first impression). and it is possible that a person can get to know me and still think little of me and that is something I have been okay about (I have never been bothered by those who dislike my attitudes toward money).
So I guess what I practice at this point is 1) not dwelling on the hurt/offense 2) not striking out at others because of it. It is a mental battle which I might sometimes lose but that is why I want all the more to practice what I preach. It is better to try to live in peace with others and mess up then to separate from any who offend (anyone can) or not even try to live in peace.
btw sometimes separation is the best path but even then the hope is for some future re-connection and this particular case is nothing so drastic. That is a sort of nuclear option.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Monday, July 20, 2009
"Fiscal conservatives grumble over tab for reform"
pre-script: Hey Martin, I just tagged you because I know this is one of your core issues, but you aren't specifically mentioned.
The SF Chronicle posted an article(http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/07/20/MNAR18QUG7.DTL) about House Speaker Pelosi having difficulty getting her ten year, trillion dollar Health Care Reform Bill through the Congressional Budget Office. It is a pretty ambitious bill, covering pretty much anyone making between 43K and 88K, excepting illegal immigrants. I am guessing that exception is a compromise to make the bill more palatable, but think that the courts could very easily make it so that immigrants would have to be included or else throw out the bill if it were passed. There is a pretty high tax increase for those making 350K and businesses with payrolls above 250K and an even bigger bump for individuals making more than a million.
However, Democrats which the article repeatedly names as "conservative Democrats" have criticized the bill because it will almost certainly increase the federal deficit. I think that if the bill is having trouble in the house (the most radical part of congress) that it will die in the Senate (which is always more conservative). But what is more interesting to me is the politics within the actual Democratic Party.
The article reads: "Liberal Democrats warned conservatives that there would be hell to pay if they brought down the president's top initiative and denied health care to millions, while conservative Democrats warned that mounting federal debt and new taxes, especially on small businesses, would be the party's undoing."
I'm always interested in battles for the heart and soul of a party, Republican or Democrat. I usually root for the moderates on either side
The SF Chronicle posted an article(http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/07/20/MNAR18QUG7.DTL) about House Speaker Pelosi having difficulty getting her ten year, trillion dollar Health Care Reform Bill through the Congressional Budget Office. It is a pretty ambitious bill, covering pretty much anyone making between 43K and 88K, excepting illegal immigrants. I am guessing that exception is a compromise to make the bill more palatable, but think that the courts could very easily make it so that immigrants would have to be included or else throw out the bill if it were passed. There is a pretty high tax increase for those making 350K and businesses with payrolls above 250K and an even bigger bump for individuals making more than a million.
However, Democrats which the article repeatedly names as "conservative Democrats" have criticized the bill because it will almost certainly increase the federal deficit. I think that if the bill is having trouble in the house (the most radical part of congress) that it will die in the Senate (which is always more conservative). But what is more interesting to me is the politics within the actual Democratic Party.
The article reads: "Liberal Democrats warned conservatives that there would be hell to pay if they brought down the president's top initiative and denied health care to millions, while conservative Democrats warned that mounting federal debt and new taxes, especially on small businesses, would be the party's undoing."
I'm always interested in battles for the heart and soul of a party, Republican or Democrat. I usually root for the moderates on either side
Mandatory Reporter Paper (review)
Ahoy hoy,
This is my paper review for the law roudntable in Dr. V's 5311 class. If you are tagged it is because you are either in my credential program or else are on the teacher track as well. Feedback is okay.
If it seems a little long for the roundtable assignment... I think you are correct.
BTW pastors are also mandatory reporters.
p.s. team 50 don't forget the cover page.
....
Roundtable 1
Law Roundtable- Mandated Reporting
Sabina Nizami
Michael Gardner
TED 5311
Dr. Bette Vervais
July 16, 2009 In American it is estimated that one in four children are victims of abuse. This can be physical, sexual and emotional, but it all has long lasting, and even generational, effect. As teachers we have a special role on the lives of our students, spending more hours during a week with the child than any other adult. Students will look up to, trust and depend on us. This creates a responsibility which we can not morally abandon. But as teachers there are also legal requirements and protections concerning abuse and the reporting of abuse which we need to know. This discussion will introduce the legal standards of teachers concerning reporting observed and even suspected abuse, including our legal status as mandatory reporters, how to correctly report abuse and some signs of abuse.
As teachers we are legally classified as mandatory reporters. This means that we must report abuse and suspected abuse or else face the risk of up to six months in jail and a fine of up to a thousand dollars,# to say nothing of thee possibility of seriously endangering a child. Congress passed the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act in 1974 which states:
a mandated reporter shall make a report to [the police, sheriff’s department, county probation department or county welfare department] whenever the mandated reporter, in his or her professional capacity or within the scope of his or her employment has knowledge or observes a child knows or reasonably suspected has been the victim of child abuse or neglect.#
This report is expected to be made as soon as practically possible by phone and must be followed by a formal written report within 36 hours.
Being a mandated reporter also provides legal protection form civil and criminal prosecution for reporting abuse and suspected abuse. This means that you can not be sued for reporting a reasonably possible suspicion. You also can not even be identified as the reporter unless there is a court order to that effect.
It is not necessarily expected that every mandated reporter should be an expert at diagnosing or recognizing abuse but the law defines the reasonable suspicion we must be “objectively reasonable for a person to entertain a suspicion, based on the facts that could cause a reasonable person in a like position… to suspect child abuse or neglect.”# We can list some signs but ultimately what the law requires is something like common sense, depending on your experience and training with cases of abuse.
It is natural that when the subject of child abuse is made someone’s responsibility that it would cause strong feelings that are difficult to deal with. It might even be normal to want to avoid the issue. However, even aside from our legal responsibility we should remember that the reason we choose to teach. We want to improve the lives of people when they are most receptive to help. It is a great gift to teach children to read, strengthen and expand their mind but it pales in comparison to helping preventing abuse. It is even possible to save someone’s life. We can not save everyone but we can and we must be willing to make a difference.
This is my paper review for the law roudntable in Dr. V's 5311 class. If you are tagged it is because you are either in my credential program or else are on the teacher track as well. Feedback is okay.
If it seems a little long for the roundtable assignment... I think you are correct.
BTW pastors are also mandatory reporters.
p.s. team 50 don't forget the cover page.
....
Roundtable 1
Law Roundtable- Mandated Reporting
Sabina Nizami
Michael Gardner
TED 5311
Dr. Bette Vervais
July 16, 2009 In American it is estimated that one in four children are victims of abuse. This can be physical, sexual and emotional, but it all has long lasting, and even generational, effect. As teachers we have a special role on the lives of our students, spending more hours during a week with the child than any other adult. Students will look up to, trust and depend on us. This creates a responsibility which we can not morally abandon. But as teachers there are also legal requirements and protections concerning abuse and the reporting of abuse which we need to know. This discussion will introduce the legal standards of teachers concerning reporting observed and even suspected abuse, including our legal status as mandatory reporters, how to correctly report abuse and some signs of abuse.
As teachers we are legally classified as mandatory reporters. This means that we must report abuse and suspected abuse or else face the risk of up to six months in jail and a fine of up to a thousand dollars,# to say nothing of thee possibility of seriously endangering a child. Congress passed the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act in 1974 which states:
a mandated reporter shall make a report to [the police, sheriff’s department, county probation department or county welfare department] whenever the mandated reporter, in his or her professional capacity or within the scope of his or her employment has knowledge or observes a child knows or reasonably suspected has been the victim of child abuse or neglect.#
This report is expected to be made as soon as practically possible by phone and must be followed by a formal written report within 36 hours.
Being a mandated reporter also provides legal protection form civil and criminal prosecution for reporting abuse and suspected abuse. This means that you can not be sued for reporting a reasonably possible suspicion. You also can not even be identified as the reporter unless there is a court order to that effect.
It is not necessarily expected that every mandated reporter should be an expert at diagnosing or recognizing abuse but the law defines the reasonable suspicion we must be “objectively reasonable for a person to entertain a suspicion, based on the facts that could cause a reasonable person in a like position… to suspect child abuse or neglect.”# We can list some signs but ultimately what the law requires is something like common sense, depending on your experience and training with cases of abuse.
It is natural that when the subject of child abuse is made someone’s responsibility that it would cause strong feelings that are difficult to deal with. It might even be normal to want to avoid the issue. However, even aside from our legal responsibility we should remember that the reason we choose to teach. We want to improve the lives of people when they are most receptive to help. It is a great gift to teach children to read, strengthen and expand their mind but it pales in comparison to helping preventing abuse. It is even possible to save someone’s life. We can not save everyone but we can and we must be willing to make a difference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)