January 25, 2016


News Clips For The Day


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/violence-against-the-worlds-children-is-epidemic-report-shows/

Violence against the world's children is epidemic, report shows
By MARY BROPHY MARCUS CBS NEWS
January 25, 2016

Photograph -- child hides in a stairwell


A new study reveals an epidemic level of violence against children across the globe - including kids here in the U.S.

More than one billion children ages two to 17 - over half of the world's kids - experienced violence in the past year, researchers report in the study, published Monday in the journal Pediatrics. The problem is equally rampant across both developed and developing countries alike.

"There are two billion children in the world. This is a minimum of one out of two, and we're not just talking about their whole life. We're talking just in the past year," said lead study author Susan Hillis, senior advisor for global health at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Hillis and colleagues from the CDC and Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School analyzed 38 reports covering 96 countries and estimated that at least 50 percent of children in Asia, Africa, and North America experienced past-year violence, as did more than 30 percent of children in Latin America.

They parsed the data by country, age group, and type of violence: physical, sexual, emotional abuse, or multiple types.

Hillis said they were interested in creating a full picture. "Our interest was all locations - in homes, schools, the community."

The scientists also looked at detailed breakdowns of different types of violence, including if a child had been kicked, choked, beaten, whipped, burned, bullied, or had suffered emotional violence and felt unloved or unwanted by a caregiver or parent.

The study included violence by any type of perpetrator - parents, caregivers, teachers, strangers, romantic partners, peers.

Hillis believes the findings, while grim, actually underestimate the problem of violence against youth.

"The shocking and sad truth is our estimates are actually low estimates," she said, because incidences are under-reported.

She said their research carries greater weight when you consider that it's based on self-reported violence by young people themselves, aged 13 and up, or the caregivers of children younger than 13.

She said North America rated the second worst region, just below Asia and above Africa.

"We're right up there. It's a serious problem in Northern America," Hillis said. "There's absolutely no way we can say it is their problem and not ours."

Violence against children needs to be viewed as a public health issue as important as exposure to tobacco and unsafe drinking water, the author said. It's linked to increased risk for illness in later life: heart disease; infections such as HIV/AIDS; mental health problems, including depression, suicide, and PTSD; teen pregnancy; and lifelong disability.

"The consequences are so vast and enduring," said Hillis.

Dr. Joel Fein, co-director of the Emergency Department Violence Intervention Project at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) and The University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, told CBS News that the new report is important and well done.

"It shows the prevalence and impact all countries have regarding violence to children," said Fein, who is also an attending physician in the emergency department at CHOP and a professor of pediatrics and emergency medicine at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania.

He said hospitals and health care systems need to get involved beyond their own walls to help find solutions to the violence against children. His hospital's programs reach out to schools and communities to address the problem.

"We understand the trauma that many of our children and their families go through and how that impacts them and we really want to capitalize on peoples' strengths and build on that," Fein said.

While some of CHOP's initiatives center on teachers and students to address bullying, others focus on mothers or fathers involved in domestic violence.

"We have them take responsibility for connecting and getting support at community organizations," Fein said.

"We are providing the right care at the right time," said his colleague, Stephen Leff, a psychologist in the department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences and co-director of the Violence Prevention Initiative at CHOP.

Leff agreed that the new report is a "very, very strong study."

"This supports the reason why we do this work," said Leff, also a professor of clinical psychology at Penn's Perelman School of Medicine.

"The fact that this is being published in the journal Pediatrics really does speak to the point that the health care system has a strong role in addressing this issue," he added.

But he said part of the message is also that families can be motivated to make changes.

Study author Hillis said that while the study reveals that the issue of violence against the young is "monumental and urgent and unconscionable," there is hope.

"The world appears ready as never before to act wisely, to act now, and to act together to implement effective sustainable and scalable solutions that work to protect children from violence," she said.



“More than one billion children ages two to 17 - over half of the world's kids - experienced violence in the past year, researchers report in the study, published Monday in the journal Pediatrics. The problem is equally rampant across both developed and developing countries alike. "There are two billion children in the world. This is a minimum of one out of two, and we're not just talking about their whole life. We're talking just in the past year," said lead study author Susan Hillis, senior advisor for global health at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. …. estimated that at least 50 percent of children in Asia, Africa, and North America experienced past-year violence, as did more than 30 percent of children in Latin America. They parsed the data by country, age group, and type of violence: physical, sexual, emotional abuse, or multiple types. …. "Our interest was all locations - in homes, schools, the community." The scientists also looked at detailed breakdowns of different types of violence, including if a child had been kicked, choked, beaten, whipped, burned, bullied, or had suffered emotional violence and felt unloved or unwanted by a caregiver or parent. The study included violence by any type of perpetrator - parents, caregivers, teachers, strangers, romantic partners, peers. …. She said North America rated the second worst region, just below Asia and above Africa. "We're right up there. It's a serious problem in Northern America," Hillis said. "There's absolutely no way we can say it is their problem and not ours." Violence against children needs to be viewed as a public health issue as important as exposure to tobacco and unsafe drinking water, the author said. It's linked to increased risk for illness in later life: heart disease; infections such as HIV/AIDS; mental health problems, including depression, suicide, and PTSD; teen pregnancy; and lifelong disability. …. "We understand the trauma that many of our children and their families go through and how that impacts them and we really want to capitalize on peoples' strengths and build on that," Fein said. While some of CHOP's initiatives center on teachers and students to address bullying, others focus on mothers or fathers involved in domestic violence. …. "The world appears ready as never before to act wisely, to act now, and to act together to implement effective sustainable and scalable solutions that work to protect children from violence," she said.”


I am unhappy that North America is the second from the top of the list by the number of reported offenses. Nearly all of us in this country were physically punished. The Bible does, of course, say “Spare the rod and spoil the child.” Compared to many households my parents did use logic and reasoning more than some, but less than others. They were country people and were brought up in that way, themselves. This country is more rigid than some others in the way people here treat their kids, including lots of rules to follow. That is probably the main reason that we have such a hardcore rightwing fringe element here. They’re half nuts. To many of those people, obedience is the top virtue in a child. My household was more rational about that than most, actually. We did speak our minds. As a result, I did retain the psychological ability to make up my own mind and look for “truth” in the universe, so I don’t feel too angry about all that. My mother merely tolerated my presence, at least half the time, but my father genuinely loved me. I am glad to have one real parent on my side in the Universe.

I do think the issue of parent to child violence (verbal abuse, slapping, “spanking,” hitting with a “switch” and much, much worse) is at the root of most of the violence that those children then develop in their own lives, including hard core crime. Part of the reason is that our society is pretty lowbrow in general in my opinion, and the use of philosophy and gentle persuasion aren’t nearly as common as they should be. Most people here claim to be Christians, but they don’t actually follow his commands and advice. I don’t admire the US citizenry as much as those rightwing “Patriots” do, but I won’t have to deal with it more than another fifteen or twenty years probably, due to my rapidly increasing age. For the most part at this time I truly live by my own rules, and generally succeed in being happy.

Parents are so often emotionally and mentally disturbed themselves that they really don’t know how to properly rear a child, and they are probably “doing their best.” If the situation is too bad nowadays the child welfare agencies will usually step in and remove the child from their home. Unfortunately, the foster parent often does a pretty poor job with the kid also.

I pray that these problems will be improved, but it’s one of those things that EACH INDIVIDUAL has to do for himself. If a battered child can refrain in his lifetime from battering his own kids, that will be a big help. I have hopes of that.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-will-review-obamas-immigration-executive-actions/

Supreme Court will review Obama's immigration executive actions
CBS/AP
January 19, 2016

Play VIDEO -- Obama's immigration plan blocked by federal appeals court
Related articles -- Appeals court rules against Obama immigration plan
Obama files Supreme Court appeal on immigration executive action

The Supreme Court has agreed to review President Obama's executive immigration actions from 2014 that would shield up to 5 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally from deportation.

The plan has been tied up in court since 26 states, mainly led by Republicans, challenged the legality of the plan. In February 2015, a federal judge temporarily blocked the executive actions from taking place and said the states had standing to sue. He did not rule on the constitutionality of the plan.

In November, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the injunction blocking the administration's immigration initiative, prompting the administration to file an appeal calling for the Supreme Court to immediately review the plans.

The case will be argued in April and decided by late June, in the midst of a heated 2016 election where immigration remains a key issue. The decision will come about a month before the [sic] gather for their nominating conventions.

The administration makes three main arguments in its appeal: the states have no right to challenge the policy in federal court; the government followed appropriate procedure; and the administration has broad discretion in the area of immigration.

Without the Supreme Court's intervention, millions of people will be forced "to continue to work off the books, without the option of lawful employment to provide for their families," Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr. said in the court filing.

The executive actions the president unveiled in 2014 would grant a reprieve from deportation to about 5 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally and allow them to apply for a three-year work permit if they can pass a background check, register with the government, submit biometric data, and establish they are eligible for relief.

Mr. Obama did not signing any executive orders to carry out his plans, but rather issued several presidential memoranda that establish new procedures and guidelines for the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice and Labor.

Those who could receive a reprieve if the plan is upheld include the parents of children who were either born in the U.S. or are Lawful Permanent Residents, and children who were brought into the country illegally prior to January 1, 2010, and have lived in the U.S. for at least five years. The latter category represents an expansion of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, known as DACA, which previously required applicants to have arrived before June 15, 2007 and had an age limit.

Texas is leading 26 mainly Republican-dominated states in challenging the Democratic administration's immigration plan.

So far, the federal courts have sided with the states to keep the administration from issuing work permits and allowing the immigrants to begin receiving some federal benefits.

The administration said Texas and the other states don't even have the right to challenge the plan in federal court. The lower courts decided that Texas does have the right, or standing, to sue because at least 500,000 people living in Texas would qualify for work permits and thus become eligible for driver licenses, the cost of which are subsidized by the state. "Texas would incur millions of dollars in costs," the state said in its brief to the Supreme Court.

The justices also said they would consider whether Obama exceeded his authority under federal laws and the Constitution.

Texas asked the court not to hear the case, but Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said he was pleased the justices will examine the president's constitutional power to intercede without congressional approval. "In deciding to hear this case, the Supreme Court recognizes the importance of the separation of powers," Paxton said.

If the justices eventually side with the administration, that would leave roughly seven months in Obama's presidency to implement his plans.

The move was quickly hailed by America's Voice, an immigrant advocacy group.

"This is a great day for millions of immigrants and their allies. At long last, millions of immigrants will have a full and fair hearing before the highest court in the land," Frank Sharry, the group's executive director, said in a statement. "We are optimistic that the underlying legal issues will be resolved in our favor, and the relief fought for and won by the immigrants' rights movement will be unfrozen."



“In November, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the injunction blocking the administration's immigration initiative, prompting the administration to file an appeal calling for the Supreme Court to immediately review the plans. The case will be argued in April and decided by late June, in the midst of a heated 2016 election where immigration remains a key issue. The decision will come about a month before the [sic] gather for their nominating conventions. The administration makes three main arguments in its appeal: the states have no right to challenge the policy in federal court; the government followed appropriate procedure; and the administration has broad discretion in the area of immigration. …. Mr. Obama did not signing any executive orders to carry out his plans, but rather issued several presidential memoranda that establish new procedures and guidelines for the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice and Labor. …. Texas is leading 26 mainly Republican-dominated states in challenging the Democratic administration's immigration plan. So far, the federal courts have sided with the states to keep the administration from issuing work permits and allowing the immigrants to begin receiving some federal benefits. …. "In deciding to hear this case, the Supreme Court recognizes the importance of the separation of powers," Paxton said. If the justices eventually side with the administration, that would leave roughly seven months in Obama's presidency to implement his plans. The move was quickly hailed by America's Voice, an immigrant advocacy group.”


This will be very interesting to watch. I think that both sides of the question are pushing the envelope and are very emotional in their views. I will try to collect each article that I see.




http://www.cbsnews.com/news/oregon-standoff-leader-ammon-bundy-meets-with-fbi/

Oregon standoff leader Ammon Bundy meets with FBI
CBS/AP
January 21, 2016

15 Photographs -- Ammon Bundy, leader of an armed anti-government militia, makes a statement at a news conference at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Headquarters near Burns, Oregon January 5, 2016. ROB KERR/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
Play VIDEO -- Militiamen hold tight in Oregon
Play VIDEO -- Armed activists refuse to leave federal compound in Oregon


BURNS, Ore. -- The leader of an armed group that has occupied a national wildlife refuge in Oregon for nearly three weeks has begun speaking with federal authorities.

Ammon Bundy went to the airport Thursday in Burns, Oregon, close to where federal officials have set up a staging area.

With reporters watching, he spoke on the phone, apparently with an FBI negotiator. The conversation was streamed online by another member of Bundy's group.

Bundy said his group is "not going to escalate" the situation, and he agreed to speak with authorities again Friday.

CBS affiliate KOIN reported Bundy was seen after the meeting leading a group of trucks out of the FBI headquarters and into town, and it did not appear the group was heading back toward the refuge.

The FBI did not immediately comment.

The group began occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in eastern Oregon on Jan. 2 to protest federal land use policies.

More militiamen from around the country drove in truck-by-truck Wednesday to join the cause, KOIN said.

Bundy reportedly met with his top-ranking counterparts for several hours on Wednesday, but kept a tight lip about what was actually discussed.

The heavily armed militants believe their cause is not only just, but an act of divine intervention.

"God wants us here, there's a sense that's beckoning and it comes from heaven," militiaman Kelly Gneiting told KOIN. "We're doing what's right, we're doing what the founding fathers would do because we're inspired by God, also."

But the town seems to overwhelmingly disagree, and Oregon Gov. Kate Brown has seemingly run out of patience.

Brown said Wednesday that she is angry because federal authorities have not yet taken action against Ammon's group, calling the takeover "absolutely intolerable."

In letters to both President Barack Obama and Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Brown urged federal action soon:

"For more than two weeks now, these radicals have been allowed to stay unlawfully in the refuge approximately 30 miles to the south of Burns...The unlawful seizure of the refuge by criminals seeling [sic] to advance a misguided agenda is in and of itself a strain..." Brown wrote. "The residents of Harny County are being intimidated in their own hometown by armed criminals who appear to be seeing occasions for confrontation ... I request on behalf of my fellow Oregonians that you instruct your agencies to end the unlawful occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge as safely and quickly as possible." ….. More militiamen from around the country drove in truck-by-truck Wednesday to join the cause, KOIN said.Bundy reportedly met with his top-ranking counterparts for several hours on Wednesday, but kept a tight lip about what was actually discussed. The heavily armed militants believe their cause is not only just, but an act of divine intervention. "God wants us here, there's a sense that's beckoning and it comes from heaven," militiaman Kelly Gneiting told KOIN. "We're doing what's right, we're doing what the founding fathers would do because we're inspired by God, also."



I do hope that the FBI will do something effective soon to dislodge this group of squatters from their occupation of Federal property. They really haven’t thought about what their legal rights are. Meanwhile more truckloads are coming in “to join the cause.” The Supreme Court should perhaps rule on this situation as well, since the hoodlums are claiming to be within their rights and doing “God’s will.”

This trend nationwide, from the “Sovereign Citizen” groups to the grazing cattle on public lands without paying rent, shouldn’t be allowed to continue. I don’t think grazing should be allowed in public nature preserves at all, with or without a fee. It gradually kills the vegetation that is native to the area. Sheep are particularly destructive because they not only munch up all the green stuff, they pull up the roots.

These goons, because they aren't being imprisoned, are winning a war of pure intimidation inch by inch and taking no responsibility for their actions. Some white people have taken to calling all black men “thugs” in recent times, but the “thugs” here are Bundy and friends. They are not only occupying government property, but are bullying the decent townspeople who are trying to carry on a normal life in Burns, OR which is nearby. Most of the local ranchers have NOT joined Bundy.

I know the government doesn’t want to commit another error like the horrible fire at Waco that broke out by accident, but which occurred perhaps because the ATF pushed the cult too hard. The FBI is trying to conduct a rational interaction this time instead, and that is in general good; however, I don’t like to see anarchic groups like these gain too much ground on issues that should be decided by law instead of by force. They are being treated by Republicans as though they were a legitimate and peaceful group who simply want to "air their grievances." The problem is that the Republican Party depends on extremely rightwing radical voters to support their slightly less radical Tea Party "conservatism," so they don't want to alienate them. Nobody wants to say that out loud, but it's been true for decades, especially since the Civil Rights movement made changes in this country which infuriated the racists who were hiding under the cover of "conservatism" to promote what amounts to a government takeover in recent decades. It particularly annoys me that they are also covering for a religious power grab by a movement called Dominionism. That's not a religion, but a cult. It's really a dangerous and disturbing situation.



I had an appointment this afternoon which took three hours, so I am stopping the blog here today. Best wishes to all.