PTSD Research Update

My analysis of PTSD continues as I watch 60 Minutes episodes on PTSD. These accounts of PTSD caused on the battlefield help me understand the importance of finding ways to help veterans in order to fight their PTSD symptoms. Marine Clay Hunt is a shining example of the sudden change in demeanor in a marine when he returns home from war. PTSD overtook his mind and his life. Veterans need support and the lack of societal support disappoints me as an American citizen who values democratic beliefs being protected by our soldiers. Operation Proper Exit is another 60 Minutes episode that describes the relationship between traumatic brain injuries caused in war and PTSD. Many soldiers experience permanent damage to their brain (more severe than concussions) and return to the battlefield with PTSD and are incapable of performing to their peak in a war zone due to their injuries.

Episodes:
The Life and Death of Marine Clay Hunt,
Coming Home: Justice for our Veterans,
Operation Proper Exit: A Return to the War Zone

PTSD Research Update

I started my research for PTSD on Gale Virtual Reference Library where I read two segments. The first was more of a general background information article on PTSD that discussed the history, causes, aftermath, and treatment of PTSD. This article was a broad overview on PTSD and defined PTSD as a psychological disorder. The second article was much longer and went into more depth than the first. Prevalence, epidemiology, and comorbidity was discussed in regards to PTSD, as well as risk factors and indicators that promote resilience. Also, assessing a suspected PTSD victim was covered in the second article.


"Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)." The Gale Encyclopedia of Psychology. Ed. Bonnie Strickland. Detroit: Gale, 2001. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 2 May 2013.

Pfefferbaum, Betty. "Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)." International Encyclopedia of Marriage and Family. Ed. James J. Ponzetti. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2003. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 2 May 2013.

Gay Athletes Receive Mixed Messages from Media

Jason Collins, an NBA veteran who has played on six teams, recently announced he is gay in a soon-to-be released column in Sports Illustrated. Professional athletic organizations including the NBA and NHL have shown their support for Collins-reaffirming their policies of inclusiveness. Collins is the first openly-gay male athlete in the four major American pro team sports. The Human Rights Campaign praised Collins, suggesting "Jason Collins has forever changed the face of sports." This type of praise wasn't portrayed by the entire sports community. Chris Broussard said "If you're openly living in unrepentant sin, whatever it may be, not just homosexuality, adultery, fornication, premarital sex between heterosexuals, whatever it may be. I think that's walking in open rebellion to God and to Jesus Christ." Broussard can believe whatever suites him and his religion, but even the slightest implication that anything is wrong with being a homosexual is not only inappropriate, but also unfair and despicable. Professional wide receiver for the Miami Dolphins, Mike Wallace, tweeted an absurd comment in response to Collins' coming-out. Wallace tweeted, "All these beautiful women in the world and guys wanna mess with other guys SMH [shake my head]." Broussard and Wallace demonstrate that the inclusive policies of professional sports organizations might not be enough to encourage closeted players to come out, so long as there is harsh criticism when players like Collins announce their sexual orientation.

Supreme Court Hears Arguments for DOMA and Proposition 8

The U.S. Supreme Court is in the process of hearing arguments in regards to the constitutionality of Proposition 8, an initiative in California that banned same-sex marriage, and the Defensive Marriage Act, a federal law enacted in 1996 that prevents the federal government from offering benefits to same-sex couples, even if they are considered to be married by the state they reside in. The arguments in favor of Proposition 8 and upholding DOMA are far-fetched to say the least. Advocates for Prop. 8 contend that restricting marriage to heterosexual couples must be rational because for thousands of years people widely agreed that marriage involved the union of a man and woman. They also argue that marriage's purpose is to ensure that children are born into families; therefore, California should be allowed to limit marriage to only those capable of having babies. If you think of sterile marriages between heterosexual 50 year-olds, for example, they most likely can't have babies, but are still allowed to marry, while most gay couples, no matter their age, aren't allowed to be legally married in 40 states.
My hope is that the Court's ruling isn't narrow. If the justices rule in favor of allowing same-sex marriages, it should set precedent for all the states. Prop. 8 could be knocked down on procedural grounds, resulting in the Court's ruling to have a limited effect on other states besides California. I believe this will not be the holding, however. Polls show the majority of Americans support extending marriage rights to gay individuals. The Court should affirm what most Americans believe in, not only because it is the right thing to do, but also because homosexuals are people, and therefore deserve equal civil rights as heterosexuals. Sexual orientation shouldn't prevent people from getting married, just like people with different skin color are protected from federal discrimination under U.S. law.

Implicitly not a racist

My racism test result was "little to no" automatic preference towards European-Americans and African-Americans. The test's intention is to help demonstrate to the world that people tend to have an automatic preference towards one race. I do believe in the test's accuracy after reading how the test evaluates answers. Some people (not including me!), according to the test, prefer their own race over others, which is an ignorant mindset. The word "good" shouldn't be bound by race, but according to average results, 54% of test takers have a strong or moderate automatic preference for white people over black people. This 54% ultimately shows that more than half of the population have an automatic preference for white people, while a smaller percentage is racist in favor of blacks. In other words, the world we live in and the people who surround us are racist more than half of the time, and they generally don't even know it.

Fort Hood Massacre Trial Set to Begin

Major Nidal Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, sat through a pre-trial proccession yesterday where Judge Colonel Tara Osborn turned down plea deals, saying it would be tantamount to admitting guilt to a capital offense, which isn't required under military policy. Hasan has been charged with killing 13 people at Fort Hood in November 2009. In an age of multimedia, Judge Osborn ruled that pre-trial publicity wouldn't influence a jury. The trial is set to begin at the end of Spring. Prosecutors feel confident in their ability to prove Hasan was a radical Islamist. They have already shown that Hasan had been in communication via e-mail with a radical cleric who was killed in 2011 by a U.S. drone. The issue of troops' mental health seems to be most prevelant today, but with issues such as Army majors turning on their friends and fellow troops, killing them in cold-blood, is a new issue in itself. Many Americans expressed outrage over the Fort Hood Massacre and wish for Hasan to receive the dealth penalty which is a potential option if he is found guilty of murder.

Improper Action Taken by U.S. Military following Troops' Brain Trauma

Lt. Col. Richard Brunk was involved in an explosion seven years ago in Baghdad that broke his wrist, shattered his eardrums, and rattled his skull- it was the first of two blasts in 2005 that damaged his brain. These injuries are impossible to avoid during battle, but the military's response to brain injuries is often inconsistent and incorrect. The Pentagon has required troops since 2009 suspected of having head injuries to rest immediately after blast exposure, a crucial period allowing the brain to heal itself. However, in 2005, Brunk was allowed to return to active duty within hours of his first exposure. When doctors eventually recognized that he had neurological damage, he was sent home for three months, but was treated for hearing problems. He was then permitted to return to Iraq, at his own request, where he had a second, potentially devastating head injury. This flexibility by the U.S. military allowing troops to return to duty after experiencing brain damage is not only inappropriate but also extremely dangerous.

Colorado's Stronger Gun-Control Laws Pending

Colorado's House of Representatives gave preliminary approval to legislation requiring background checks on private gun sales and limits on magazine capacity. Colorado Democrats are pushing hard for this legislation following the Aurora movie theater shooting last year and the Newtown tragedy. Republicans argued back and forth for hours claiming that limiting magazine capacities wouldn't prevent a mass shooting and would have little effect on gun violence. State Representative Jared Wright (Republican) claimed, "It makes no difference to public safety if there are 10 rounds in a magazine, whether there are 15 rounds in a magazine or whether there are 30 rounds." Representative Wright is wrong however. As a prospective student of the University of Denver, I would feel much safer if I knew there was a limit on magazines. 10 rounds is a huge difference than 30 rounds, which is why some Republicans that are proponents for weaker gun laws aren't logical. These preventative measures that are pending in the Colorado House are essential in saving lives when another mass shooting occurs.

Federal Appeals Court Halts Georgia Execution

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals granted Warren Lee Hill a stay of execution while he was being prepared for lethal injection. There are questions regarding whether or not Hill is mentally disabled. In 2000, three experts testified in court agreeing that Hill wasn't mentally disabled. He is now mentally disabled (12 years later) according to all three experts who have reviewed the case again. The mystery surrounding his mental capability/capacity led to two of the three judges on the review panel to rule that further review is needed. The U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2002 prevents executions of mentally disabled offenders because it is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court of Georgia and the state parole board both declined to stop the execution. If Hill in fact meets the criteria of mental disability, then the Feds saved the state of Georgia from committing an unconstitutional act of execution.

Florida Cases in U.S. Supreme Court Involving Drug-Sniffing Dogs and 4th Amendment

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that an officer's use of a drug sniffing dog to search a truck during a traffic stop in Florida was appropriate and within the boundaries of the law, even though the drugs found weren't what the dog was trained to detect. This key fact in the case didn't stop the justices from unanimously ruling in favor of the drug-sniffing dog because there was probable cause for the dog to be used- the defendant had an open beer can in the middle console. Another case in Florida involved a drug-sniffing dog on Halloween smelling a cannabis-grow in a Miami home leading to an arrest. This case hasn't been decided on yet in the Supreme Court, but there is skepticism that this case intrudes on the defendant's Fourth Amendment right. As long as the dog is trained, then the chance of dogs randomly alerting its officer are slim. In the second case, there is no probable cause for the dog to be on the defendant's property which is why this case will most likely rule in favor of citizen's privacy from drug-sniffing dogs on private property.

Sexual Assault and Institutional Barriers

Steubenville, Wesleyan, North Carolina University, and Notre Dame are institutions that approached sexual assault cases incorrectly or didn't approach them at all even though they were well-aware of the sexual assaults on their campuses that have taken place. Across America, there is outrage towards the self-interest these schools have leaned on in order to avoid the publicity and confrontation of sexual assault cases. Admirable schools take the moral high-ground and report the cases, investigate, then utilize consequences against the perpetrators to reinforce safety on their campuses. However, there are many institutions, such as Notre Dame, that act as institutional barriers themselves, preventing the invesitgation and publicity of rape.

American Civil Liberties Union Agrees to Dismiss Case Challenging Kansas Abortion Law

A Kansas law passed in 2011 restricts private health insurance coverage for abortions. Abortions aren't covered under general plans unless the woman's life is in danger, requiring women to buy supplemental policies known as riders that cover abortion. "We are disappointed that the court's decision will stand, despite the fact that the American public believes that politicians have no place interfering with a woman's personal and private medical decisions," ACLU attorney Brigitte Amri said. The clear anti-abortion law was among several major anti-abortion initiatives approved by Kansas legislators and signed into law by Republican Governor Sam Brownback.

Abortion is a basic medical need around the world. Women shouldn't be forced to pay out-of-pocket or pay for supplemental policies in order to get abortions. Private insurers should cover abortion in general plans due to the categorization of abortion as a medical treatment. Women's lives shouldn't have to be in danger for abortions to be covered by health insurance providers. Abortions are significant to women and families, adding the burden of having to afford expensive abortion procedures (The cost for an abortion at a clinic ranges from $450 to $1,675, and hospital abortions can cost upwards of $10,000) only makes matters worse for women and their families. 

"Too High to Fail: Cannabis and the New Green Economic Revolution" Blog Post Five

Before Doug Fine sent his final manuscript to his editor on November 15, 2011, DrugSense's Drug War Clock read $35,695,718,424 spent for the year (state and federal). The economic effect alone cannabis has on the U.S. economy is so significant that anything less than legalization is a let-down to the American people. After legalization, Harvard economics professor Jeffrey Miron predicts the tax benefit at $46.7 billion annually, with $41.3 billion additionally let loose into the economy in saved enforcement and incarceration costs. That's nearly a $100,000,000 dollar swing each year. Theoretically, cannabis and the "new green economic revolution" can help push the U.S. federal deficit out of the red and into the black in a respectable number of years, unless of course the U.S. federal government continues to ignore facts and deny cannabis research.

In January 2012, U.S. Attorney Haag's office directly threatened the Mendocino County government with lawsuits and officials with racketeering charges if local legislators didn't kill the Zip-Tie program immediately. This is just another example of the feds threatening another reliable revenue stream that reached an annual 2011 total revenue of over $600,000. Supervisor Hamburg told Willits News, "I am way too knowledgeable about the budgetary situation of our county to think we can carry a lawsuit against the federal government." On January 24, the County Board of Supervisors voted four to one to eliminate the permitting part of the 9.31 program; the part of the program that helped build the local county economy the most was put to death by our federal government. As the Drug War continues, it is fair to predict the road to cannabis legalization will be a bumpy ride as it has been since Reagan's administration.

"Too High to Fail: Cannabis and the New Green Economic Revolution" Blog Post Four

Hemp serves many purposes beyond its psychoactive qualities. The 181 current signatories of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs that have banned production and supply of cannabis are denying humans a vital natural resource that is used around the world and has been used for 10,000 years. The Columbia History of the World says the earliest known fabric was hemp cloth from China, composed 10,000 years ago. Hemp serves as a useful, strong fiber that cultures from Mongolia to Peru have used as food, shelter, clothing, medicine, etc. since the beginning of the Common Era. The oldest surviving paper is cannabis-derived; It's from second century BCE. There is even a famous Chinese medical manual which includes treatments made from cannabis, published a few centuries after the oldest surviving paper. A vast resource such as hemp, capable of growing pretty much anywhere on Earth (except for Antarctica), is deserving of an international-legalized status so that it can be traded and utilized around the world. Thomas Jefferson's draft of the Declaration of Independence was drafted on Schedule I, felonious paper, that's tree-free paper for those of you (environmentalists) who wish to save the rain forests.

"Too High to Fail: Cannabis and the New Green Economic Revolution" Blog Post Three

If you don't want your tax dollars to go to waste, don't support the Drug War. Doug Fine writes, "American taxpayers shell out five hundred dollars per second to fight the Drug War." Barack Obama said in 2004, "The War on Drugs has been an utter failure." The most recent available statistics show cannabis arrests are at an historic high (never mind the pun). According to the FBI, 853,838 marijuana arrests in 2010 accounted for more than half of the total drug arrests nationwide. And let's not forget law enforcement profiling...New York City and Chicago recently changed their marijuana possession laws so that minorities aren't persecuted for, well, being themselves. These steps taken by local jurisdictions are signs of hope in ending the national Drug War.

The federal government, by "fighting the Drug War," is helping to keep black market prices high, prisons filled, and cartels' pockets full and vastly expanding. I suggest we change our drug policies in order to benefit from billions in taxable legal revenue. California alone spends nine billion dollars a year locking people up. This number would be drastically affected if cannabis wasn't a Schedule I drug. Doug Fine explains why government is resisting drug policy changes, "Follow the money. Federal asset forfeiture alone was worth more than a billion dollars in 2009, according to the Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, and the state of California took in $28,789,945 in seized property in 2009, according to a state attorney general's report."