Tuesday, December 16, 2014


News Clips For The Day


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/newtown-victims-families-sue-maker-and-seller-of-rifle/

Families of Newtown victims sue maker and seller of rifle
CBS/AP December 15, 2014, 9:49 AM

Photograph – In this Jan. 28, 2013, file photo, firearms training unit Detective Barbara J. Mattson, of the Connecticut State Police, holds up a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle, the same make and model of gun used by Adam Lanza in the Sandy Hook School shooting, for a demonstration during a hearing of a legislative subcommittee reviewing gun laws, at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford, Conn.

HARTFORD, Conn. -- The families of nine of the 26 people killed and a teacher wounded two years ago at the Sandy Hook Elementary School filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer, distributor and seller of the rifle used in the shooting.

The negligence and wrongful death lawsuit, filed in Bridgeport Superior Court and released on Monday, asserts that the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle should not have been sold publicly because it was designed for military use and is unsuited for hunting or home defense.

"In order to continue profiting from the sale of AR-15s, defendants chose to disregard the unreasonable risks the rifle posed outside of specialized, highly regulated institutions like the armed forces and law enforcement," the plaintiffs wrote in the complaint.

In addition to Bushmaster, the defendants are Camfour, a firearm distributor, and Riverview Gun Sales, the now-closed East Windsor store where the gunman's mother purchased the Bushmaster rifle in 2010.

Messages seeking comment from the defendants were not immediately returned.

The so-called AR-15 rifle was first build by Armalite for military use, but the design was later acquired by Colt, which produced the M-16 automatic weapon for the U.S. military. In the early 1960s, Colt began marketing the semi-automatic AR-15 rifle as the civilian version of the fully automatic M-16. Many other companies have since begun manufacturing and selling AR-15-type rifles, including the Bushmaster X-15.

The rifles are extremely popular in shooting competitions due to the light weight of the gun and ammunition and the weapon's accuracy.

Bill Sherlach, whose wife, Mary, was killed in the shooting, said he believes in the Second Amendment but also that the gun industry needs to be held to "standard business practices" when it comes to assuming the risk for producing, making and selling a product.

"These companies assume no responsibility for marketing and selling a product to the general population who are not trained to use it nor even understand the power of it," he said.

The plaintiffs include Sherlach and the families of Vicki Soto, Dylan Hockley, Noah Pozner, Lauren Rousseau, Benjamin Wheeler, Jesse Lewis, Daniel Barden, Rachel D'Avino and teacher Natalie Hammond, who was injured in the shooting.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified monetary damages.

New York attorney Robert Fellows told CBS News correspondent Don Dahler the bar is high for a lawsuit.

"If you can prove that a manufacturer knew in some way that the gun would end up the hands of a proscribed purchaser, someone who shouldn't have the gun, you might be able to show liability. But it is going to be very difficult," he said.

Nicole Hockley, the mother of 6-year-old victim Dylan, and Mark Barden, the father of 7-year-old victim Daniel, appeared at a news conference Monday morning with U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy. They declined to comment on the lawsuit and instead pushed for new laws and programs to restrict access to weapons and improve mental health treatment.

"My little Daniel's death was preventable," Barden said. "Dylan Hockley's death was preventable."

The Newtown gunman, Adam Lanza, shot and killed his mother, Nancy Lanza, on the morning of Dec. 14, 2012, before driving to the school and gunning down 20 children and six educators with the semi-automatic rifle. He committed suicide as police arrived.

In 2005, Congress and President George W. Bush approved a federal law that shielded gun makers from lawsuits over criminal use of their products, with some exemptions.

In a lawsuit over the .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle used in the Washington, D.C.-area sniper shootings that killed 10 people in 2002, Bushmaster and a gun dealer agreed to pay $2.5 million to two survivors and six families in a 2004 settlement. It was the first time a gun manufacturer had agreed to pay damages to settle claims of negligent distribution of weapons, according to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

In that settlement, Bushmaster paid $550,000 and the Washington state gun dealer, where the sniper's rifle came from, paid $2 million.

In 2002, a federal judge in California ruled that Bushmaster and other gun manufacturers were not responsible for a 1999 shooting spree that killed a postal worker and injured five people at a Jewish community center in Los Angeles. The judge said a lawsuit by the victims' families did not show a link between the manufacturers and the shooting rampage.

On Sunday, the community of Newtown quietly marked the second anniversary of the shooting. No public memorial events were held on a day town officials said instead would be for private reflection and remembrance.




“The negligence and wrongful death lawsuit, filed in Bridgeport Superior Court and released on Monday, asserts that the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle should not have been sold publicly because it was designed for military use and is unsuited for hunting or home defense. "In order to continue profiting from the sale of AR-15s, defendants chose to disregard the unreasonable risks the rifle posed outside of specialized, highly regulated institutions like the armed forces and law enforcement," the plaintiffs wrote in the complaint. In addition to Bushmaster, the defendants are Camfour, a firearm distributor, and Riverview Gun Sales, the now-closed East Windsor store where the gunman's mother purchased the Bushmaster rifle in 2010.... In the early 1960s, Colt began marketing the semi-automatic AR-15 rifle as the civilian version of the fully automatic M-16. Many other companies have since begun manufacturing and selling AR-15-type rifles, including the Bushmaster X-15.... New York attorney Robert Fellows told CBS News correspondent Don Dahler the bar is high for a lawsuit. "If you can prove that a manufacturer knew in some way that the gun would end up the hands of a proscribed purchaser, someone who shouldn't have the gun, you might be able to show liability. But it is going to be very difficult," he said.... U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy. They declined to comment on the lawsuit and instead pushed for new laws and programs to restrict access to weapons and improve mental health treatment.... In 2005, Congress and President George W. Bush approved a federal law that shielded gun makers from lawsuits over criminal use of their products, with some exemptions.... In a lawsuit over the .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle used in the Washington, D.C.-area sniper shootings that killed 10 people in 2002, Bushmaster and a gun dealer agreed to pay $2.5 million to two survivors and six families in a 2004 settlement. It was the first time a gun manufacturer had agreed to pay damages to settle claims of negligent distribution of weapons, according to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. In that settlement, Bushmaster paid $550,000 and the Washington state gun dealer, where the sniper's rifle came from, paid $2 million.”

In the DC case the maker paid $550,000 and the seller paid $2,000,000. If the gun maker has to be proven to have known that the gun would be misused, it's hard to see how that could be done. How could the manufacturer know that? The seller was supposed to have done a check on the buyer. In the Sandy Hook case, the buyer was a woman who had a collection of other guns as well as the Bushmaster. The lawyer in Sandy Hook has written that the gun manufacturers “...disregard the unreasonable risks the rifle posed outside of specialized, highly regulated institutions...” Those who are opposed to the sale of such weapons to the public have tried to push through laws specifying the “unreasonable risks” of their use, but the NRA keeps lobbying against the legislation and the Republicans always back them up – they are in fact owned by the NRA.

While I hope this lawsuit succeeds for the victims at Sandy Hook, I am doubtful that it will, and am instead in favor of new and more restrictive laws to prevent automatic rifles being sold at all except to the military or police organizations. There is no good use for one in civilian society. They are useless for hunting and not necessary for target shooting. If a child gets to one and it is loaded, he could unleash a large number of bullets at once, killing perhaps his whole family. Automatic pistols are equally dangerous in the wrong hands. The gun crazies that have taken over the US in the last few years – those guys walking around in WalMart or some other public place of business with automatic rifles strapped across their chests, for instance – are literally borderline insane, to me. I don't have faith that they won't actually shoot somebody who's just trying to pick up a dozen eggs or something. They are political and social extremists at the very least, and one of those fools could accidentally shoot someone while they are strutting around showing off. Open carry should be outlawed throughout the US along with automatic weapons.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/secret-service-independent-review-of-fence-jumping-incident-completed/

Secret Service independent review of fence-jumping incident completed
By CBS INTERACTIVE STAFF CBS NEWS December 15, 2014, 3:17 PM

CBS News White House Correspondent Bill Plante reports that the review of the Secret Service fence-jumping incident that was to be completed by an independent outside panel has now been submitted to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson. Johnson will meet with the panelists later this week to discuss their assessment of and recommendations for securing the White House, and a summary of the report will be made public at a future date.

Johnson appointed the panel of four independent experts in October, after the Secret Service faced heavy criticism over a September breach of the White House. A 42-year-old Texas man, Omar J. Gonzalez, was able to scale the White House fence, enter the unlocked front doors of the building, and run all the way into the East Roombefore he was apprehended by an off-duty Secret Service agent. The incident ultimately led to the resignation of Secret Service Director Julia Pierson. Johnson also directed the review panel panel to recommend candidates for a new director for the Secret Service.




“Johnson will meet with the panelists later this week to discuss their assessment of and recommendations for securing the White House, and a summary of the report will be made public at a future date.... The incident ultimately led to the resignation of Secret Service Director Julia Pierson. Johnson also directed the review panel to recommend candidates for a new director for the Secret Service.”

I would like to see the summary when it comes out. That incident was as embarrassing to the President as the drunken exploits in two other incidents. The Secret Service has not been under tight enough supervision, and perhaps they should be more highly qualified before they are hired. One article last year caused me to look up their qualifications on the Net and they aren't all required to have a bachelors degree from college. They are probably chosen because they can pass physical tests and shoot straight, but they need personal responsibility and a greater than average alertness and logical ability as well. The guy who was stationed inside the White House at the front door didn't even bother to have it locked, and of course the official who had the door alarm shut off because it made too much noise is equally to blame. They need to do more than just force the Director to resign. They need to change the way they operate.

Thank goodness at another time recently one of them saw the trespasser and released their two attack dogs, who know no rule other than to take down whoever is running away, so that fence jumper was caught. I would personally prefer a large German shepherd to protect my house over a gun which I have to find, load and then hold it steady enough to shoot straight, before the bad guy jumps me and disarms me.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-previous-homeowner-claim-can-jack-up-your-rates/

Claim from previous homeowner could jack up your insurance rates
By MITCH LIPKA MONEYWATCH December 16, 2014, 5:25 AM

Most consumers don't know that a claim made by a previous homeowner could raise your current insurance rates or that even a claim that was never filed could push up both your auto and home insurance, according to a report and survey released on Monday by insuranceQuotes.com.

About three-quarters of those surveyed did not know a prior owner's claims could affect their rates, and 51 percent didn't know their own claims could affect their rates. Unfiled claims can cause rates to raise if damage or an issue is described to the insurance company in an attempt to determine whether it's appropriate to file a claim, the report said.

Details about claims are included in an insurance industry database called CLUE (Comprehensive Loss Underwriting Exchange), a tool only about 18 percent of consumers said they had even even heard of. The database shows the date of the incident, the type of claim made and how much was paid by the insurer.

Claims remain in that database for seven years, according to insuranceQuotes.com, meaning any claims activity that occurred during that period can be seen by any insurer.
"Most consumers are shocked to hear that denied claims, never-filed claims and claims made by a previous homeowner can raise their insurance costs," Laura Adams, insuranceQuotes.com's senior analyst, said in a statement.

But knowing about the database can prove advantageous, particularly to someone who's going to buy a home, because it could reveal important details about problems that might have previously happened at the property. Plus, it could have an impact on their insurance costs.

"Prospective homebuyers should ask the seller for a copy of the property's CLUE report before making an offer," Adams said. "Unfortunately, we found that only 10 percent of homeowners have done this. And people need to be really careful when filing claims or even discussing potential claims with their agents."

Consumers are entitled to a copy of their CLUE report once a year. You can request it here.



https://personalreports.lexisnexis.com/fact_act_claims_bundle/landing.jsp
C.L.U.E.® Report
In Compliance with FACT Act

The C.L.U.E. Personal Property report provides a seven year history of losses associated with an individual and his/her personal property. The following data will be identified for each loss: date of loss, loss type, and amount paid along with general information such as policy number, claim number and insurance company name.

The C.L.U.E. Auto report provides a seven year history of automobile insurance losses associated with an individual. The following data will be identified for each loss: date of loss, loss type, and amount paid along with general information such as policy number, claim number and insurance company name.

Note: If you have not filed a claim against your auto or property insurance policy in the last 7 years, you will likely receive a clear report.

C.L.U.E. Personal Property Report
DESCRIPTION:
Report includes your C.L.U.E. Personal Property loss history, inquiry history, and information on how to dispute the claims in your report.

C.L.U.E.® Home Seller's Disclosure Report
More home buyers, concerned about possible previous insurance losses experienced at a property they are considering, are requiring home sellers to provide a C.L.U.E.® report as a contingency to a purchase offer.
A C.L.U.E.® Home Seller's Disclosure Report is an independent source of information about insurance losses at your home address within the past five years. If your home has not experienced a loss within the past 5 years, the report can provide comfort to a potential buyer. When there are no losses are associated with a property the report would state that no losses were found for the address shown.




“Most consumers don't know that a claim made by a previous homeowner could raise your current insurance rates or that even a claim that was never filed could push up both your auto and home insurance, according to a report and survey released on Monday by insuranceQuotes.com. About three-quarters of those surveyed did not know a prior owner's claims could affect their rates, and 51 percent didn't know their own claims could affect their rates. Unfiled claims can cause rates to raise if damage or an issue is described to the insurance company in an attempt to determine whether it's appropriate to file a claim, the report said.... an insurance industry database called CLUE (Comprehensive Loss Underwriting Exchange), a tool only about 18 percent of consumers said they had even even heard of.... "Prospective homebuyers should ask the seller for a copy of the property's CLUE report before making an offer," Adams said. "Unfortunately, we found that only 10 percent of homeowners have done this. And people need to be really careful when filing claims or even discussing potential claims with their agents." Consumers are entitled to a copy of their CLUE report once a year. You can request it here.”

I have never heard of a CLUE report, and I certainly didn't know that claims by a prior owner could be held against me, but according to the above website they are available once a year free of charge on both house and car. (That's the good news.) I am forewarned after reading this article not to call my insurance company and ask about coverage unless it's a large loss, also. Apparently just talking to them on the phone to ask about coverage will get the fender bender listed against me, though I don't file a claim or get paid. I've been of the opinion that the insurance industry is a racket most of my life. Their aim is to collect my money and if possible, withhold service. I'm sure that if the law didn't require auto coverage, most people wouldn't buy any. I must say, GEICO has “been good to me,” in that they have sent tow trucks and once defended me against an injury claim with their lawyers. They probably did raise my rates, but not by much. I think that if you have to buy insurance it pays to buy from a well-known company and if, in dealing with them they seem to be cheating in any way, cancel the coverage and go to another company. There are numerous companies to choose from.





http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Teachers-Disparage-Special-Education-Students-Online-Chat-285908031.html

New Jersey Teachers Accused of Insulting Special Needs Students in Online Chat
Tuesday, Dec 16, 2014 

Parents of special needs children in a New Jersey school district say they want three teachers who were caught in an online chat allegedly making disparaging comments about students and former colleagues.

The chat was discovered by a co-worker after the three teachers at Edison schools spent the morning of Oct. 23 voluntarily training on Chromebook laptops, according to NJ Advance Media, which first obtained a transcript of the chat. 

One of the teachers, Tyler Van Pelt, invited the others, Maria Weber and Maryellen Lechelt, into what he called a "personal wiseass backchannel discussion" on a public chat program called Today's Meet, according to the chat transcript. 

"i like the group name 'morons,'" Lechelt allegedly wrote of one group of her special education students. "they take the tart cart home."

Van Pelt allegedly called children "short bus kids," adding that he referred to one of his groups of students as "I hate you don't waste my time." 

Lechelt allegedly said she referred to another group as "jesus christ, why the ---- did they place you with me?" 

"Middle group = just shut your mouth and do your work," she added of another group of students. 

The two are teachers at Lincoln Elementary School. Weber, a teacher at James Monroe, did not respond to those messages, transcripts show. But she allegedly participated in disparaging the woman running the computer training program that day in a conversation filled with sexual innuendo. 

The chat was discovered by another teacher in the training room, who said she heard them laugh after she turned around to shush them, according to NJ Advance Media. She suspected they were chatting about her, and found the chat transcript insulting. She reported the chat to her principal. 

The three were suspended with pay and are accused of unbecoming conduct, insubordination for misuse of school technology, failure to pay attention to the training and violating the district's sexual harassment and affirmative action policies, among other charges.

At a meeting Monday evening, the Edison Board of Education moved forward in a process to potentially terminate the teachers, putting them on paid leave for 120 days. Their case will be sent to an arbitrator, who will decide whether to fire the teachers, reduce their pay or reinstate them. 

Parent Anthony Pasquale said during the public remarks portion of the meeting: "I truthfully feel there should be an apology by those teachers to the school district and to the township." 

"If you choose to be a teacher, it's a public work. You're dealing with kids. If you don't have it in you, I feel like the decent thing for you to do is to resign," said parent Andrea Siragusa. 

A fourth teacher who participated in the chats, Jonathan Bauza, resigned rather than face disciplinary action, the district told NJ Advance Media. 

NBC 4 New York was unable to reach the teachers' lawyers Monday, but Lechelt's lawyer told NJ Advance Media prior to the vote that he believes the teachers' punishment is inappropriate. 
-- Checkey Beckford contributed to this report. 




“The chat was discovered by another teacher in the training room, who said she heard them laugh after she turned around to shush them, according to NJ Advance Media. She suspected they were chatting about her, and found the chat transcript insulting. She reported the chat to her principal. The three were suspended with pay and are accused of unbecoming conduct, insubordination for misuse of school technology, failure to pay attention to the training and violating the district's sexual harassment and affirmative action policies, among other charges.... Their case will be sent to an arbitrator, who will decide whether to fire the teachers, reduce their pay or reinstate them. Parent Anthony Pasquale said during the public remarks portion of the meeting: "I truthfully feel there should be an apology by those teachers to the school district and to the township." "If you choose to be a teacher, it's a public work. You're dealing with kids. If you don't have it in you, I feel like the decent thing for you to do is to resign," said parent Andrea Siragusa. A fourth teacher who participated in the chats, Jonathan Bauza, resigned rather than face disciplinary action, the district told NJ Advance Media.”

I agree with the parents who are quoted here. A person who will behave with such disrespect and lack of empathy should not be a teacher. Teachers, parents, healthcare workers, police officers, and others who have a position of power over the lives of those who can't defend themselves should be punished soundly for the kind of abuses that too often hit the news media. They are willing to take money for being a type of caretaker, but don't put the right kind of effort and humanity into the job. I include police officers in this group because when a person is mentally ill or disabled, they shouldn't be abused by an officer, but protected. They swear to “serve and protect” the citizenry, and too many times they don't carry that pledge out.





http://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/ruble-collapses-after-russia-tries-rescue-it-fails-n269096

Ruble Collapses After Russia Tries to Rescue It And Fails
-- NBC News Staff, CNBC and Reuters
First published December 16th 2014

The Russian ruble is in a tailspin and measures to prop it up have come to naught. The currency dropped more than 10 percent for the second day on Tuesday, recording its most severe drop since the 1998 Russian financial crisis. It regained a bit of ground later in the day.

The Russian central bank tried to shore up the currency with a rate hike, but when that proved ineffectual, confidence in the bank evaporated and the sellers piled on. The ruble opened around 10 percent stronger against the dollar following the overnight 650-basis-point rate hike, but it reversed gains in early trade and fell to record lows, pushing losses this year against the dollar to over 50 percent. At 0637 ET, the ruble was down over 11 percent against the dollar at 73.00 after dipping past 74 rubles per dollar for the first time. It was more than 15 percent weaker versus the euro at 92.99, dragged lower against both currencies by falling oil prices, increasing market panic and Western sanctions over Ukraine. The Central Bank of Russia (CBR) unexpectedly hiked rates by 650 basis points in a midnight session on Monday evening. It raised its base rate to 17 percent from 10.5 percent after the ruble suffered its worst trading day for 15 years.




“The Russian ruble is in a tailspin and measures to prop it up have come to naught. The currency dropped more than 10 percent for the second day on Tuesday, recording its most severe drop since the 1998 Russian financial crisis. It regained a bit of ground later in the day.... It was more than 15 percent weaker versus the euro at 92.99, dragged lower against both currencies by falling oil prices, increasing market panic and Western sanctions over Ukraine. The Central Bank of Russia (CBR) unexpectedly hiked rates by 650 basis points in a midnight session on Monday evening. It raised its base rate to 17 percent from 10.5 percent after the ruble suffered its worst trading day for 15 years.”

I don't understand much about economics, but I know when the Great Depression hit, one of the things that occurred was that the worth of our currency changed drastically. In this case it is said to be partly because of the Western economic sanctions on Russia. Of course, the price of oil is also part of it, and OPEC was recently in the news for refusing to cut back on how much oil they produce in order to raise the price of it. Both the US and apparently also Russian oil interests are being hurt by that. Of course, we who drive cars are happy because gasoline costs less, as a result. I do hope we don't have another and worse worldwide economic breakdown over the price of oil or the sanctions, either. The last time the US tried to fix the economic situation we gave away huge amounts to American banks – and none, of course to the people – because they were “too large to fail,” and the people are still trying to recover financially from their personal losses. It is said that wars are always caused at least partially by economic conditions, and the Great Depression was followed shortly by World War II. With the active hotspots around the globe now, I am somewhat worried.





http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/16/living/feat-brutally-honest-parenting-naked/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Brutally Honest: Is it OK to be naked in front of your kids?
By Kelly Wallace, CNN
December 16, 2014

Editor's note: Kelly Wallace is CNN's digital correspondent and editor-at-large covering family, career and life. She is a mom of two girls. Read her other columns and follow her reports at CNN Parentsand on Twitter.

(CNN) -- Let me say at the start that there is no way around the topic of nakedness in front of your children without getting personal and slightly uncomfortable. I'm already feeling somewhat tense as I type this.

I joke that the only person who should have to see me naked is my husband. He signed up for it, right? My kids certainly didn't.

A lifetime of body image issues means I'm not one to walk around naked at home. But I don't cover up around my daughters, 7 and 8, when I'm getting dressed or in the bathroom, either. I don't want them to think there is anything wrong with my body or theirs.

And when they ask hilarious questions such as "Mom, why do your boobs hang?," I can't help but laugh and use the opportunity as a chance to tell them my body has changed over time and theirs will, too.

'Brutally Honest': When is it OK to leave your teen home alone overnight?

In conversations over email with mothers and fathers across the country and in Canada, it's clear there is no "one size fits all'" approach to the questions of whether it's OK to be naked in front of your kids and if there's an age when it's no longer OK.

Rhonda Woods, a mother of three, says ever since her children, now 20, 13 and 13, were little, she and her husband have been teaching them not to be ashamed of their bodies. They have also never hidden their bodies from their kids, she said.

"As they get older, my husband is more discreet around our daughters and I am more discreet around our son. Not because we are uncomfortable, but because they may be," said Woods, a real estate agent in New Milford, Connecticut.

"So when it is time for me to undress, I tell whichever of my kids is in my room talking to me, that I plan to do so and they have the option to leave."

'Brutally Honest': What if you don't like your kids' friends?

Comfort is key

A common theme I heard from parents is comfort. If both you and your children are comfortable with you being naked in front of them, there isn't anything "inherently wrong with that at all," said Avital Norman Nathman, who says her 8-year-old son is used to seeing her and her husband naked on occasion when they are getting dressed or in the shower.

"If my son were ever to say or even act as if he was uncomfortable by it, we would of course respect that," said Norman Nathman, editor of the motherhood anthology "The Good Mother Myth: Redefining Motherhood to Fit Reality" and founder of the blog The Mamafesto.

"Nudity, when it's within your home and 100% nonsexualized, isn't going to traumatize a child, especially if you're all on the same page, are all consenting and are all comfortable with it."

Nancy Friedman, a New York City mom of two middle schoolers, said while every child is different, most kids make it clear when their mom or dad's nudity no longer works for them.

"I think your kids let you know when it's time to stop being naked in front of them -- usually about the time they decide they don't want to be naked in front of you," said Friedman, co-founder of the video sharing site for tweens called KidzVuz.

As children age, they certainly develop their own sense of modesty around others, said Micky Morrison, a mom of two in Islamorada, Florida, and founder of BabyWeightTV.

CNN's Kelly Wallace lets her daughters see her naked -- but somewhat reluctantly!

"But even my 12-year-old son doesn't hesitate to undress in front of me. I figure that he will one day, and that's OK," said Morrison. "Perhaps one day he will avert his eyes or become uncomfortable with my nudity as well. And that's OK, too."

Amanda Rodriguez, a mom of three boys in Frederick, Maryland, said she reached a point with each of her sons, usually no later than age 5, when she thought it was no longer OK to be nude around them.

"I began to feel uncomfortable being naked in front of them because of the questions and the poking and prodding and search for Mommy's 'inside penis' -- that's what they thought a vagina was," said Rodriguez, founder of the blog Dude Mom.

"I don't think it makes them terrible people or scars them for life if they stumble into the bathroom while I'm going, but it's easily avoidable awkwardness none of us really needs to experience on a daily basis."

Terry Greenwald, a divorced father of three, puts himself solidly in the no-being-naked-in-front-of-kids' camp.

Read: 28 Web abbreviations every parent should know

"It would be very difficult to teach children any sort of modesty and humility if a parent thought it OK to be naked in front of their children. It also would bring up questions and conversations they might not be ready to handle," he said.

Blogger: Why I want my sons to see me naked

A few months back, a post by blogger Rita Templeton about why she wants her four sons -- ages 2, 5, 6 and 9 -- to see her naked, was republished on The Huffington Post and went viral. Templeton said she wanted her sons to see what "real" women look like before they are bombarded with an ideal in the media that doesn't match reality.

"Before they are exposed to boobs that are as round and firm as cantaloupes and pictures of taut, airbrushed, dimple-less butts, I'm exposing them to a different kind of female body. Mine," wrote Templeton, who blogs at Fighting Off Frumpy.

Her words led to an onslaught of hate mail, nasty tweets and accusations she's sexualizing her sons, she said. Buzz Bishop, a father of two boys in Calgary, wrote a blog post of his own in part as a response to all the outrage. He says he has been playing games called "naked baby" and "naked daddy" at bath time since his children were little while at the same time he teaches his kids not to stare when they are in the open shower in the men's bathroom at their neighborhood pool.

Stay in touch!

Don't miss out on the conversation we're having at CNN Living. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook for the latest stories and tell us what's influencing your life.

Read: Chances are, your teen has sexted

"Rita's doing what works for (her). I'm doing what works for me. You're doing what works for you. And we're all just trying to teach our kids a little respect for each other, and themselves," said Bishop, who writes about parenting on his blog Dad Camp.

There doesn't seem to be much science to help guide us on whether it's better or worse for your child, or it makes no difference at all, if they see you naked. I couldn't find many studies when I searched for them, and those I found had conflicting findings.

For instance, one study found no negative impact on adolescents who regularly saw their parents naked at ages 3 and 6, but another study found that parental nudity when kids were ages 6 to 11 resulted in more permissive attitudes about sex and increased sexual frequency.

For some parents, like Maryellen, a mom of two young girls on Long Island, who only wanted to use her first name, it's all about convenience.

"I'll be honest. Sometimes it's easier and faster just to pull them into the shower," she said. "But my girls are 4 and 6. A year from now I may not be doing it any longer. By then, they may be showering by themselves (dare to hope?)"

Do you think it's OK to be naked in front of your kids? Share your thoughts with Kelly Wallace on Twitter or CNN Living on Facebook.




“A lifetime of body image issues means I'm not one to walk around naked at home. But I don't cover up around my daughters, 7 and 8, when I'm getting dressed or in the bathroom, either. I don't want them to think there is anything wrong with my body or theirs. And when they ask hilarious questions such as "Mom, why do your boobs hang?," I can't help but laugh and use the opportunity as a chance to tell them my body has changed over time and theirs will, too.”

Without worrying too much, I do think that a child “from one to six, as was mentioned in this article, is perfectly safe seeing either parent naked. I don't think constantly going around naked is good, though, and as they approach the teen years they probably shouldn't be forced to be around the parent of opposite sex without something on. I also don't think, by the way, that parents should ever kiss babies or kids of any age on the mouth. That is a highly erogenous zone. We can avoid those extremes while at the same time allowing the kids to learn that their bodies are not shameful and that not all girls are going to look like a Barbie Doll. People can become neurotic in either direction – with kids developing an unhealthy fixation on either parent or becoming so very shy about the human body that they can't dress with the other girls in the gym. I'll never forget when John Ashcroft was made Attorney General and had curtains placed in front of the nude statue of Justice. At least it was said at the time that he ordered it. Wikipedia, though says that “the curtains were put up to improve the room's use as a television backdrop and that Ashcroft had nothing to do with it.” Nudity has been a subject of art as long as there have been sculptors, and among many Europeans it is considered a simple fact of life. They freely go swimming with nothing on and nobody raises a fuss. We aren't brought up to that, of course. I certainly couldn't do it.




UKRAINE TODAY


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12-15/ukraine-seeking-10-billion-in-aid-amid-talks-with-u-s-europe.html

Biden Pledges Aid as Ukraine Seeks $10 Billion to Avert Default
By Daryna Krasnolutska, James G. Neuger and Chelsea Mes  
December 16, 2014

(Bloomberg) --U.S. Vice President Joe Biden has pledged help to Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko as the former Soviet republic seeks billions of dollars to avert a default.

The U.S. is committed to working with partners, including the International Monetary Fund, “to ensure that Ukraine will have the macroeconomic support it needs,” Biden told Poroshenko in a phone call, according to an e-mail statement issued by the White House.

Ukraine wants at least $10 billion in aid to stave off a default as its economy shrinks under the strain of spending cuts and a separatist war, while foreign reserves languish at the lowest in more than a decade. The government is grappling with the deepest recession since 2009, with the hryvnia plunging 48 percent against the dollar this year and a $17 billion international bailout proving insufficient.

“When we need financial assistance?” Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk said after meeting European Union officials in Brussels. “Let me put it in a nutshell: yesterday.”

Poroshenko told Biden he hoped President Barack Obama will sign a bill passed by the U.S. Congress that would impose new sanctions on Russia over the Ukraine crisis. Signing the legislation will “renew the assurance of solidarity of the American people with Ukraine,” according to a statement on the Ukrainian presidential website today.

Aid Call

Both Poroshenko and Biden urged Russia to ensure “its separatist proxies cease blocking the delivery of humanitarian aid” to eastern Ukraine, the White House said in its statement. Russian President Vladimir Putin denies involvement in the conflict.

While a Dec. 9 truce in Ukraine’s eastern regions of Donetsk and Luhansk has stemmed fatalities, with no deaths reported since Dec. 11, talks over a lasting peace deal have been delayed in a conflict that’s killed more than 4,600. There is still a “high risk” of military action, Ukrainian military spokesman Vladyslav Seleznyov told reporters today.

Ukraine wants a new round of peace talks as soon as possible and in any format, Valeriy Chaly, deputy chief of Poroshenko’s administration, told reporters in Kiev yesterday. Plans to restart negotiations in Minsk, where the first truce was signed in September with Russia and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, have been held up.

‘Eliminate Ukraine’

As diplomatic efforts continue, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov discussed Ukraine with his U.S. counterpart, John Kerry, in Rome, the ministry in Moscow said in a website statement. The officials agreed that all sides must follow agreements already reached in Minsk and see the need for another meeting in that format, according to the statement.

Lavrov said that the U.S. congressional bill urging more economic sanctions against Russia was a hostile step, the Interfax news service reported. The U.S and the EU imposed sanctions after Russia annexed Ukraine’s Crimea in March.

Yatsenyuk said Russia’s ultimate goal is “to take over Ukraine and to eliminate Ukraine.”

Poroshenko intends to appoint former acting president Oleksandr Turchynov as secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, according to Interfax, which cited an unidentified source in the presidential administration.

Chaly said talks with the U.S. and the EU on a financial rescue “are about the amount Ukraine needs to conduct reforms and avert default, and the timing of such support.” He could not state exactly how much the country needed, he said, “but let’s say $10 billion. Otherwise, it will be very, very difficult to resolve the issue.”

Ukraine is seeking to unlock the next tranche of an IMF-led rescue and plans to approve a 2015 budget prepared by the country’s new government on Dec. 26. An IMF mission will return to the eastern European nation early next year, First Deputy Managing Director David Lipton said Dec. 13 in an e-mailed statement.

Ukrainian debt fell after Chaly’s comments. The yield on dollar-denominated government bonds due in 2017 is at a record after soaring more than 3 percentage points yesterday. The hryvnia is unchanged at 15.81 against the dollar at 9:25 a.m in Kiev.




U.S. Vice President Joe Biden has pledged help to Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko as the former Soviet republic seeks billions of dollars to avert a default. The U.S. is committed to working with partners, including the International Monetary Fund, “to ensure that Ukraine will have the macroeconomic support it needs,” Biden told Poroshenko in a phone call, according to an e-mail statement issued by the White House. “Ukraine wants at least $10 billion in aid to stave off a default as its economy shrinks under the strain of spending cuts and a separatist war, while foreign reserves languish at the lowest in more than a decade. The government is grappling with the deepest recession since 2009, with the hryvnia plunging 48 percent against the dollar this year and a $17 billion international bailout proving insufficient.“When we need financial assistance?” Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk said after meeting European Union officials in Brussels. “Let me put it in a nutshell: yesterday.” ... Lavrov said that the U.S. congressional bill urging more economic sanctions against Russia was a hostile step, the Interfax news service reported. The U.S and the EU imposed sanctions after Russia annexed Ukraine’s Crimea in March. Yatsenyuk said Russia’s ultimate goal is “to take over Ukraine and to eliminate Ukraine.”

When asked to have his minions in Eastern Ukraine stop blocking the passage of aid into the area, Putin claimed again that he is “not involved” in Ukraine. Nobody believes him, but he keeps lying. I hope our sanctions are causing him great financial stress, as the falling ruble shows. He is completely without scruples and deserves no mercy. Well, of course our increasing the sanctions is a “hostile” move, but it is the direct result of his own actions. I'm glad we are helping Ukraine. They are honestly trying to move toward Western democratic government, and have put up a courageous fight against Russia's aggression.