Making Sense of the Topic Are L.A.'s Hospital's Safe?

by B.J. on 7/16/2008 12:47:00 PM 1 comments Print this post

What I saw in this lecture was a very real tension between the real suffering of the patient and the heavy dose of expectations and standards to be met within these enormous factory-like hospital systems.

The topic centered around hospital-induced infections in Los Angeles.

The panelists, three. One from the people's perspective, a patients-rights advocate. Two from the practitioner's perspective, a director from UCLA Medical Center and some kind of Risk Management/PR person from Kaiser Permanente.

The fireworks officially set ablaze when the patients-rights advocate demands transparency in hospitals.

"Transparency" in the sense that the general public know of the shortcomings and limitations that hospitals and doctors have. Transparency is just another means of making sure that the hospitals are "accountable." "Accountable" meaning reliable and trustworthy.

Trustworthy hospitals mean that doctors, nurses, and other caregivers are treating their patients/everyone well.

Treating their patients/everyone well. Keyword "/everyone."

Meanwhile, on the flip-side, from a doctor or health-care giver's perspective, what the patients' rights advocate was advocating was probably just one more teardrop of annoyance to a bucket load of them. I felt that with every joke the UCLA Medical Center guy was making and the corresponding audience laughter on topics such as making the patients pay for their care.

Years of medical school, internships, paying loans, generally in attempt to help people's wellbeing, 24-hour workdays, no holidays or weekends, seeing countless patients a year and having to treat everyone individually. It's only a matter of time before everyone becomes anyone, which you don't mean to, but you're too tired to care. On top of that, hospitals in LA are going bankrupt and closing down. There seem to be less and less doctors and other resources around to do anything.

But these people on the outside, the patients, their advocates don't see any of this struggle. They probably struggle to, but that isn't seen at all and even more variable outside of the hospital context. Not when that medical practitioner's top-rated hospital is moving into a billion-dollar state-of-the-art facility in the broken neighborhood of Westwood. This prestige and wealth only serves as fuel to the fire --- more reason for the advocate to run full force at the system yelling at the practitioner to stop fucking up! If they can fight the big fish, the patients will be heard.

All that the UCLA dude and Kaiser woman could talk about were the way they managed their hospitals. He was keen to point out that he was like a "mayor" of a small town. The woman was proud to report that they had taken steps in Kaiser to improve safety as adapted from the airline industry, which I thought was something of an odd connection to make from a patient/consumer perspective because airlines give no shit at all about how you're doing even if you do pay to be pampered. Actually, on second thought, maybe there is a connection after all!

They were very specific about the management improvements they've implemented in each of their hospital systems. They were very much in love with the systems implemented. UCLA dude was happy to talk about all the numbers achieved in his time as top dog. #3 rated Medical Center in the United States. Hitting the 99th percentile on public health measures intra-hospital.

Essentially, he was hitting on stuff that patients don't give a beer dump about, which he actually knows intuitively and mentions, but as a defense mechanism has to bring up anyway. All he could point out were these rankings and numbers, which is impressive. But anytime someone's argument of defense relies entirely on numbers, usually there's something weak underneath the argument. Numbers and standards ideally should never be an ends to meet, especially in a field that depends on individual well-being.

...but unfortunately it seems that's what these large bureaucratic systems inevitably entail...some blind adherence and satisfaction to an abstraction, numbers that are highly relative, which say virtually nothing about the quality of care. There's nothing wrong with him or any other hospital manager focusing on numbers as a means to show that you're doing well, but as long as these hospitals are overworked and remain underresourced thanks to the HMO system, they're never going to progress to a level where doctors en masse will see eye to eye with patients.

Inicidentally, UCLA guy mentioned that 1 out of 3 people still wouldn't recommend UCLA Medical Center to a friend, but it's odd that this wasn't a focus of the discussion.

Inevitably, the UCLA and Kaiser people's involvement with the management end elicits talk about the responsibility laying with individuals. System works fine, our standards work fine, its the individuals who fuck up. Individual doctors, whom they weren't going to talk about at all in this public lecture setting. And the faceless individual impatient patients. This is where the tension flares up.

In addressing the specific concern of hospital-induced infections, Kaiser woman could only stress the importance of washing hands, as if this was the cure to AIDS. UCLA man said washing hands was important but not visiting the hospital was probably best. Patient advocate presses on these big level administrators to give more specifics about how things apply to the patients.

With so much rancor flying between the patients-rights advocate and the hospital admins, it usually means that both sides expect too much from each other and don't get what they want.

The patients expect too much from the hospital admins/doctors/staff, and hospital admins/doctors/staff expect too much from the patients.

Patients expect doctors to be nice, they want better working facilities, they expect everything to be perfect, they don't pay etc. etc.

However, it's always easy to blame the individual patient for being in the wrong. What makes it appear this way is that patients usually aren't the united front and powerful organization that a hospital is. An impersonal, methodologically organized group of people who have been in the business for years dealing with numerous people can't possibly be wrong over some individual patient's judgement can they?

Moreover, there's this American idea that you must pay for everything with money. Like other industries, it also seems as though patients should pay for all the work and extra anguish that doctors go through. It's a business, no free lunch. Patients should be grateful for whatever service they get and being so open to taking patients in.

Patients are "consumers" in the sense that they do demand a limited resource --- the doctors' service. However, they are NOT consumers in the sense that they will keep demanding a good or service. They are not really ready, willing, and able consumers, but people who believe that they are not well and thus seek an avenue to be well.

There is not much sympathy in American public discourse for patients, and this extends towards the attitude toward the patient in the hospital.

Judging from my mom's stories and the discourse in this dialogue, hospital staff seem to expect that patients should understand what they personally go through as doctors/etc. They seem to expect patients to know how things in the hospital work. They expect patients to check for conditions online as if they were the ones who went to medical school and could diagnose and treat themselves. And the kicker is that they actually want people out of the hospital. Doctors thinking everyone is invested in healthy like they are, expect too much of their patients, so they get tired and frustrated as well.

Thus the equilibrium of tension between doctors and patients in LA hospitals continues. It seems that nobody really gets what they want at a hospital, but it's there because it's business. What strikes me is that doctors really don't want patients to come to the hospital cause they have enough people coming over, but they also want to make sure that they keep up business, especially if they could pay for it.

In the end, the management folks at UCLA and Kaiser could only talk about how patients need to "arm" themselves with information.

There isn't much taught in the public discourse about handling health crises yourself. The internet and google search might be changing that a bit, but not everyone has the internet nor search abilities necessary quite yet. People generally aren't wired to practices of folk remedies, etc.

In America's education system and public discourse, we see and we learn that it is hospitals that we must go to first for any and all health care needs. It's the most visible object. So then here comes the patient expectation system. It's big, it's grand, somebody's got to know something when you go there, right? Doctors know what they're doing, they're rich, they'll help me.

People generally DO NOT want to be in the hospital, but they simply do not know any viable options and hospitals seem to have been marketed as the place to be when sick. There isn't any curriculum in schools for home remedies, alternative medicines, and public health measures are kind of a joke.

The business of healing strikes me as crisis-oriented, kind of like calling a plumber to unclog your sink. It makes me wonder whatever happened to the home visit doctor that I would see in Lassie and other assorted 50s television shows.

Labels: , , , ,

 

Read Entire Post...





Reflections on ALOUD LA Conversation with Deanne Stillaman on her book Mustang

by B.J. on 6/26/2008 10:31:00 PM 0 comments Print this post

I didn't grow up around any horses, I've never ridden one, unless you count the ponys at Griffith park, but I decided to go to a lecture on the history of the wild horse in American history with Deanne Stillman.

I'm a city kid. LA Kid. Yellow-ish-brown kid born in an age of hyper- and inter-dependence on hip-hop and technological infrastructure.

From my viewpoint, what I wanted to learn more about was how these horses or mustangs were used in transportational infrastructure. I was inspired by an article I had read a few months earlier, From Horse to Horsepower.

However, I didn't quite find that information in this lecture, this conversation but nontheless still interesting.


What she wanted to convey with the book was that the horse was the animal that helped define America as a nation. Indigenous to this continent. A silent witness to our battles in war. Our real best friend in nature. Very important to our identity as Americans she says.

What's most striking however is her very real, very personal attachment to the horse. She not only grew up around them, but in her own words, "horses litteraly saved [her] life." She briefly touched on how she went from riches to rags. When that happened, she moved to the "wrong side of the tracks." The horses galloped to the rescue and gave her mom her first job, as an Equestrian trainer.

However as time progressed, gradually friends and relatives began to distance themselves away from her. It was during these rough times where she learned life lessons critical for her inspiration to the books.

Tidbits of Interest:

1) The Horse is indigenous to the Americas, crossed the Bering Land Strait, and moved back with the Conquistadors. The entire population of Mustangs began with just 16 horses!

2) By the turn of the 19th century there were over 3 million horses. Today there are only about 23,000.

3) Cattle and sheepmen hate(d) mustangs because they stole from cows.

4) The same way that Horses built America on the battlefield, Horses built Hollywood.

5) Herds of wild horses need at least 100 to be genetically viable. We don't see a lot of that today.

6) The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has 4 million cattle on Public Lands, to produce 3% of beef, which according to her isn't much. She says that livestock has a very powerful lobby. In comparison, there are only 6,000 on BLM lands.

7) Under the Bush administration, a piece of legislation sponsored by Conrad Burns

Reflections:

1) Horses are never really "domesticated." According to the author which was received as a joke, they can "go wild" in 2 seconds. I was wondering about this in metaphor to transportation. You can't really control the car either; it's fluid, we depend on it to the extent that we don't just chop it up and kill it when it's done.

2) I am ambivalent to her call to action. One of her points to join the cause is that the horses are critical to American identity, the American cowboy which I'm not sure I care too much for. America the whole, doesn't really define me as part of its national fabric, so why again should this have any meaning for me? However, I do enjoy the bit that inspires her to keep doing her work and at least more curious at best.

If you're interested in more, her article is dropping right about...here.

Labels: , ,

 

Read Entire Post...





Notes on Glocalism

by B.J. on 5/23/2008 09:02:00 PM 0 comments Print this post

I was just websurfing on a Friday night. Happened upon a newly wedded old Muslim friend's xanga site. Then happened upon her friend's site. This friend of a friend directed a PCN, a Pilipino Cultural Night, that I had watched at SD and even let me crash at her place for the night.

She posted something interesting about consumerism that I had been wanting to post, but I never really quite put it all together. I've wanted to talk even more about the consumer culture we live in, and explain how I try and live outside of it as much as possible. These notes she wrote about are a good springboard for me.

Here's an excerpt from her post

GLOCAL notes
Glocal 11.9.2006
Consumerism

What is the good life?

This is what caught my eye...particularly because Dom wrote that on my shirt, and the song by Kanye is on heavy repeat.

""American Dream": ownership, family first, white picket fence,
"2.5 kids," inward focused life = protective, exclusion, money for
vacations, social status, financial stability, disposable income,
productivity, time equals money, focus on what you have, shopping as
recreation, if you want something you should have it, more cars than
drivers, having the latest of everything, kids are involved in
everything and attend private/prestigious schools"


Redefinition: perhaps involving redefining what is "best," outward
focused = good life for everyone (redistributing) considering all of
humanity, living sustainably, rich relationships (spend time, not
money), cultivate talents, stronger connection to the earth, peace of
mind/contentment, self-reflection/awareness,
community involvement,
balance of work, play, health, conscious consuming, quality time,
shared resources, freedom to pursue dreams/passions, access to nature,
freedom from financial fears, quality food with friends, time for
creativity, value shift out from under the burden of productivity,
slowing down, living by the rhythms of life and the cycles of the
seasons

Where do you get caught up?
· Self-comparison
· When you are at the end of your rope and need a quick fix/act of
desperation

I guess this is fine cause we all fall, but not too much.

· Community reinforcement
· Traditions, gifts, souvenirs
· Convenience
· Laziness
· Wastefulness
· Unconscious consuming
· Societal expectations
· Have to "own" otherwise your not fiscally responsible/successful

This is something I've just discovered: you don't have to own something to utilize it. I "own" lots of books, but what it's ultimately useless if those books and knowledge don't even end up being circulated in my consciousness and used by me.

· Earning more money to keep up same lifestyle


The old saying about teaching a man to fish. I'm sick of paying people to do things for me. To cut up, fry, and cook my food.

It makes me think what the hell I've really learned in 24 years. All I've learned is how to pay for things, that I'm really too dependent on others, that I'm blessed, and damn, I need to do something.

· Over-commitments/ energy spread too thin
· Impulse buys

How do you break the cycle?
· Setting boundaries:
· Budget/limit

When you're breaking any cycle, it's important at first to set boundaries and reach goals, just to give you a bit of confidence that you can get through something. Then once you meet those goals, just slowly cut back and cut down.

For instance, Facebook and I. I made a goal to not be in it for a year. I really wanted to stop wishing, hoping, and clinging on to these fantasy people that I barely even knew. I needed to stop stalking. Goddamn it was pathetic.

I didn't reach the 1-year goal as I've joined back, but given that I initially set hard boundaries and have made it less a part of my life, it's become exactly just that: less a part of my life. I've discovered that there are a lot more interesting things outside of that reality...

· Creative ways of giving out gifts
· Breaking traditions or redefining
· Small steps/changes
· Pulling people alongside with similar values
· Being a voice to others
· Curbing Media Intake!

Speaking of reality...

Reality is what you take into your world. And if all you take in is crap, your reality is crap.

· Spread awareness
· Sharing: possessions, housing
· Intentional community
· Become an educated consumer
· When you do something you love, you feel full and need less
· Periodically do an internal values check to make sure your actions
are line with values
· Move somewhere simpler/slower
· List where your time is going to see what your priorities are
· Cut out things that are unnecessary
· Intentionally decrease your means so that you are forced to be more
intentional with what you spend (make a financial commitment, start
saving, work less)

Labels: , , , ,

 

Read Entire Post...





Los Angeles' Skid Row from Pras Perspective and the Society that Buries Useful Information

by B.J. on 1/25/2008 05:19:00 AM 1 comments Print this post

Pras from the Fugees finished a documentary last summer that highlights a very important issue. The documentary featured him living first-hand as an actual, walking, breathing homeless person in some of the roughest streets of LA (some say its as bad as Calcutta, whatever that looks like). He filmed with hidden cameras and crew for 9 days, sleeping on the sidewalk, panhandling, and assorted other homeless people stuff.

This is the sort of thing that piques my interest.

When I went to go watch it within 6 days of its stated limited release, it was fucking gone, probably due to lack of interest and uh...lack of marketing.

It really irks me that for issues like this aren't being heard at all. Instead, it's pretty sick that we pay lots of attention to utter bullshit. I don't give a shit if American Idol were canceled tomorrow. I wouldn't die crying knowing that I haven't seen anyone Dancing with the Stars. I shouldn't give a shit about NBA basketball, but I guess that's my form of alcohol.

Part of its on us, but then part of it is that marketers do quite the job...

The know how to saturate and engage, which is why most of them would probably be effective teachers. Teachers are basically just entertainment (least that's what my co-worker told me, and I think that's true too). Wish that talent would devote its time towards more worthy causes than choices of cereals, choices of cars, iPhones, credit cards.

Its sad that the information that would probably be more useful to know is buried underneath the tons of crap thrown at us. I'm glad that we have the internet (unless some corporation goes out and buy this too) to try and change that.

In this age of hyper-globalism and consumerism, with super-marketing (that is the taking over of television, radio, billboards, buildings, the built environment) with all our basic needs (relatively) fulfilled from water, food, shelter, heat, clean air, clean environment, electricity, its as if our only ultimate objective is...to find entertainment for ourselves.

Can't we do something more? If we can learn to saturate ourselves with "useless" stuff, can't we learn to saturate ourselves with better, more useful information?

Can't we find a way to market information such as the number of people who die from water-related illnesses or information about the number of people living with electricity or the number of things we consume?

Can't we find a way to market this type of humanistic media, these movies about the human condition so it becomes THE thing to see?

Watch Pras' Interview with Tavis

Interesting tidbits from Pras.

"I experienced everything - panhandling, sleeping on the sidewalk, the rats trying to get into my tent, defecating, urinating on the sidewalk. Because you know when you're homeless, you can't go into restaurants and use the facilities.

So it was just actually seeing the reality. We have this misconception that oh yeah, people who are homeless are usually lazy or they're on drugs, and that's not actually the case at all. People who are chronically homeless - that means where they need assistance to get out of their situation - only make up about 20 percent of the homeless people (unintelligible). The rest are just regular people (unintelligible) just misfortunes."

Commenting on a scary experience he had during his "stay" at Skid Row

"One was when I think I was sleeping in the tent, it was raining real hard and the rats was coming in. I was, like, man, I need to get out of here. But see, what happened is - see, it's like we as human beings, we adapt, and I started to adapt to my environment. So then, like, on the fourth or fifth day I got comfortable and now I'm trying to figure out exactly how I'm going to maneuver.

So I forgot about going back to my other world. Because see, when you get trapped in that world, you've got to find the best way to make it fit for you, you know what I mean?"

Transcript of Tavis Smiley Interview

Skid Row the Movie Website

Last but not least...

Bring the documentary to Los Angeles

So I can watch the damn movie.

Labels: , , , ,

 

Read Entire Post...





Intro to Cultural Anthropology

by B.J. on 1/15/2004 09:28:00 PM 0 comments Print this post

Yep, I got a 20 question quiz tomorrow. No big deal, but still. Study time.

CULTURE: Shared patterns of learned behavior based on the human capacity to conceptualize the world and communicate that conception symbolically. Humans know the world through it. Its our defining feature !

What would humans be like without culture ?

All it would take to find out would be to take a newborn baby and strand it. But that's just wrong.

Is culture actual behavior or what lies behind behavior ?

Culture consists in patterns abstracted from behavior. Culture a blueprint, program, code, or deep structure in behavior.

How much of a culture is shared in one society ?

- Unequal knowledge, different lifestyles, variable prestige, agency of marginalized. ex/ Kresge college history.

- Foucalt suggests that control of the content of classifications is the primary source of power. ex/ Aba Riots or Women's War ?


Difference between sociology and SOCIO-CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY: 1) Anthropology is not good with numbers and 2) Sociology began by studying western cultures, anthro began by studying the "exotic" 3) Anthropologists make qualitative rather than quantitative judgements

ETHNOGRAPHIES are: writings based on living with and observing people intimately over an extended period, 24/7. These observations are made based on friendship/rapport built and may reveal details that wouldn't be elicited in statistics.

The advantage of ethnographies over armchair anthropology is that it gives a fuller understandings of the meanings and workings of social life, covering what isn't written. Ethnographies also give access to deeper and contradictory meanings. Moreover, ethnographies lead a person more open to discovery in a way that sociologists with a set of predetermined questions about their personal lives.

Some criticism of ethnographies are that it is subjective, that it is biased. This appears to be basically the only real constant problem. Answers to that problem have been for anthropologists to explain their points of view, to show where they have been coming from. They can also re-study and go in groups to fix this problem of subjectivism. However after this problem of subjectivity, critics have to cite old anthropology's use of ethnographic present to make it seem like a "traditional" society was one way and would never change. Of course old anthro has been proven wrong, and new school anthropologists have fixed the problem by presenting things historically. Thirdly, another old school criticism also has to do with the sample being isolated. Their actions were not being seen in a bigger context involving surrounding tribes. Again that has been addressed by anthropologists noting local/global relationships. A fourth criticism has been about the anthropologists' lack of representation of others. This has been addressed through the gathering of multivocal and autobiographical accounts.

ANTHROPOLOGICAL METHODS: Participant observation, dialogue, interviews, music/dance, photos/film, mapping, survey questionnaires

ETHICAL ISSUES, Phillipe Bourgois' Ethics. (Phillippe Burgois was a guy who lived among crack dealers in Harlem to get a grip on that kind of culture. His actions are the example of him exercising those ethical issues.):
1. Protect Identity of informants - Change name and places
2. Don't actively influence social, religious, or political life - Minimally distort indigenous social relations
3. Advocacy/Activism, Giving back - Bourgois fosted debate of poverty
4. Respect intellectual property - Respectful, empathetic, suspend value judgements
5. Make contribution to human knowledge - Explain how and why social relations develop in local-global context
6. Identify self as researcher, get agreement from members of community - Informed consent to observe

Bourgois also challenged this notion of a culture of poverty. The culture of poverty essentially blamed the victims of it. Those who looked at poverty before in attempt to explain this trend of unending poverty found that attitudes and values made people unable to improve their life conditions. However, Bourgois said that the structural inequalities limited opportunities. That as a result of these limited opportunities, the men internalized their oppression. And when they did get opportunities, they were involved in a very different uncomfortable situation. They felt the racism from their co-workers. They were reacting to society to gain their dignity and so they have been establishing this culture of drugs for quick money and power. That beating up a guy is not so much a sign for mental problems as it an advertisement to anyone who would want to hire him as a lookout.

CULTURAL RELATIVISM: Meaning of any action or belief must be understood within context of its own cultural beliefs and practices. It is in strict opposition to ETHNOCENTRISM which is a belief that one's belief is universal.

Some complaints with cultural relativism are that it creates too much of a different, seperate world. With this different seperate world, translation becomes almost impossible. It brings up questions of "where does one culture end and another begin ?" And moreover, it puts a hamper on the arguments of universal human rights. For example, a Chinese man in the United States literally got away with murder because a cultural anthropologist said that it was in the Chinese culture to kill an adulterer. So much debate will continue on that.

IMPORTANT PEOPLE:

Marx = Modes of production
Freud = Unconscious in psych
Levi-Strauss: Calssifications based on binary oppositions
Edward Tylor = Culture
Bronislaw Malinowski = Field work
Franz Boas = Race and culture
Benedict = Consistent and mutually reinforcing internal patterns with culture contrasts with other cultures; ex/ order with the Zuni, indulgence with the Kwakiutul

Geertz = Disparate elements create fabric of meaning and belief; Take any aspect of society and you'll find other stuff embedded in that aspect

Language is arbitrary

Labels: ,

 

Read Entire Post...





Selected Anthropological Facts (Anthro 001, Intro Human to Evolution)

by B.J. on 10/19/2003 12:02:00 AM 0 comments Print this post

In preparation for the midterm (and since I'm the only one in the world who visits this site everyday) I'm going to post random Anthro shit:

[Fixity of Species Folk]

Lyell: (???)

1) Uniformitarianism: The geological processes of the past occur today.
2) "Deep Time"
3) Principles of Geology

Linnaeus:

1) Classification (Systema Naturae)
-Identifies by physical traits
2) Uses genus (morphology) and species (whether they can breed)

Cuvier:

1) Catastrophism: Landscape is the way it is because of violent outbursts
2) Zoology

[External Environment Influencing Species Folk]

Buffon:

1) External environment changing species, but no species giving rise to another
2) Broke down age of earth through cooling of Earth

Lamarck:

1) Acquired Characteristics: ex/ giraffes stretching their necks
2) 1st to explain how and why things change in environment and evolutionary process
3) Coins biology

[Mendel's Contributions: Establishing the rules of discrete inheritance]

1) Law of Segregation: Genes occur in pairs. During gamete production, members of each gene pair seperate, so that each gamete contains a member of each pair. During fertilization, the full number of chromosomes are restored, and the members of gene pairs are reunited.

2) Dominance and Recessiveness

3) Independent Assortment: Distribution of one pair of alleles into gametes doesn't influence the distribution of another pair. The genes controlling different traits are inherited independently.

[Steps of Protein Synthesis]

1) RNA forms
2) Transcription: mRNA copies DNA code
3) mRNA goes to Ribosome
4) Translation: tRNA molecules carry amino acid and match with codons.

DNA provides the template because is it is the sequence of DNA bases (a gene) that ultimately determines the order of amino acids in a protein molecule.



[Hardy-Weinberg Formula]

Predicts the distribution of genes in populations assuming:

1) Mating is random
2) Infinitely large population with no sampling error
3) No evolution

[Modern Synthesis]

A comprehensive explanation of organic evolution incorporating Natural Selection and Mutation, defining it from a modern perspective in two stages:

1) Production and redistribution of "variation"
2) Natural Selection on this "variation."

4 Forces of Evolution:
1) Mutation - A change in DNA

2) Natural Selection - The genetic change or changes in a population due to differential reproductive success

3) Genetic Drift - Evolutionary changes; changes in allele frequences, produced by random factors as a result of small population size.

4) Genetic Flow - Exchange of genes between populations

Phyletic Gradualism - Evolution is a slow process with gradual transformation of one population into another which: a) involves most or all of the ancestral population and b) occurs over most of a species' geographic range.

Punctuated Equilibrium - Speciation occurs quickly with little change for long periods of time. The jumps occur when a beneficial combo reaches a certain threshold percentage.

[Reproductive Isolation]

All genetic mechanisms that prevent or limit gene flow between populations. Stuffs interbreeding. There are 2 kinds of these mechanisms: prezygotic and postzygotic.

Prezygotic: prevents fertilization and development of a zygote.
1) Temporal isolation - The mates may reproduce at different rates
2) Behavioral isolation - Different courtship patterns
3) Mechanical isolation - Intercourse cannot happen

Postzygotic: causes bad stuff to happen after birth
1) Zygotic mortality - Fetus dies
2) Hybrid inviability - Causes defects in offspring or does not live
3) Hybrid Sterility - Causes the offspring to be sterile

[Molecular Evolution vs. Morphology]

Molecular Evolution:
1) Uses direct information
2) Allows quantifiable, replicable studies
3) Appears regularly through time
4) Uninfluenced by significance convergence in form

Morphological Evolution:
1) Indirect information on genotypes
2) Depends on analysis of observed traits
3) Variable in pace of change
4) Subjective in choice of traits

Labels: ,

 

Read Entire Post...





Legal Studies Notes

by B.J. on 10/25/2002 04:01:00 AM 0 comments Print this post

[Edited on 10/30/03 to be much more useful to google searchers. This was originally posted to study for my midterms, posting stuff I had trouble grasping. And I relied heavily on this Introduction to Law book by Joanne Banker Hames and Yvonne Ekern. And if this stuff ain't good for you here are some links: nolo.com, lawlinks, alllaw, findlaw.com, the legal information institute,]

Legal Studies:

Bill = Proposed legislation NOT anything confirmed

Related Cases: 1) Koon v. US (1996 - WTF?! ), 2) Coon v. Joseph (1987 - Reagan era)

Keywords: Recidivism (haha, new word ) = tendency to relapse into criminal ways, Sentencing Guidelines ---> Reduces harm in prisons, Emotional distress, gays unrecognized, Frisco not recognizing gay couple

1) Is it me or do the Koons of this world get dicked around by the judicial system ? Koon was an ass because he beat Rodney King, but the courts jacked him around like an amateur Britney Spears in a fake porn video, as the district court from racist ass Simi Valley made him think he was getting a cheap sentence because of concern for their careers and the low risk of Recidivism, when all of a sudden, the Court of Appeals who finally decided that Koon and co. were asses, and Didn't deserve that kind of special treatment.

2) Coon was denied entrance onto a bus in Frisco of all places. Ervin, Coon�s lover, enters and is bitchslapped by the driver. But Coon was the one who sued because of emotional distress, and only heterosexual couples can sue for their partners. So this shit was dismissed. Frisco did not recognize gay gouples.

Related Cases: 1) Sommer v. Gabor (1995), 2) Hustler v. Falwell (1987), 3) Burnett v. National Enquirer (1983), 4) NYTimes v. Sullivan (1961)

Keywords: Libel, Malice, German case, Outhouse, 1st amendment


4) The New York Times case established that malice needed to be proven in a case of libel. Under that principle the following cases are related: 1) Gabor basically calls Sommer a broken down bitch. She loses. On appeal she tries to apply German law and sue for excess damages but loses. She could not prove there was any malice. 3) Hustler had no malice for Falwell. So Falwell lost. National Enquirer was libelous, but only lost $50,000 in compensatory damages.

Cases: 1) Baum v. New York Central Railroad (1958), 2) Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co. (1928)

Keywords: Negligence, Horse, Fireworks, Proximate Cause

2) While Palsgraf lost the case, the dissenting opinion established what makes up today's law in that duty of care should be a duty owed to society to protect it from unnecessary danger. The question of liability becomes a question of proximate cause, rather than duty of care. This case is what makes drunk drivers more responsible.

1) This case established that damages alone couldn't be grounds for sueing if there was no negligence or some type of legal basis shown. An actor was injured by a horse and sued claiming damages as a result of negligence and breach of warranty. This actor couldn't prove that the owner of the horse had any malice nor knowledge of what the horse would do. The horse just acted like a horse.

Related Cases: 1) Buranen v Hanna (1985), 2) Mapp v. Ohio (1961), 3) Terry v. Ohio (1968), 4) Katz vs. US, 5) Martinez v. Hardtack

Keywords: Illegal search and seizure, 4th amendment, Excessive Force, Katz and his head (hmmmmmm ?)

2) Police raided Mapp's home because they thought there were bombs there, but instead they found a bunch of porn deemed to be against Ohio statute. This case established that authorities can't just take things not in plain view away.

3) This case Terry V. Ohio established that whenever a reasonably prudent officer is warrranted in believing that his/her safety or that of others is endagered, he may make a reasonable search for weapons, aka the exclusionary rule.

4 types of Slander and Libel:

1) Accusation of serious crime
2) Professional incompetence
3) Prostitution
4) Serious illness

Legislative process:

1) Legislation proposed.
2) Introduce bill
3) Refer bill
4) Vote on bill
5) Action by another house
6) Executive options

Writing a Legal paper:

1) Know the facts
2) Analyze
3) Issues
4) Use facts to define issues
a) Relevant Facts � Key, significant
b) Explanatory � Background
c) Unnecessary � Not needed

Should be short, active, and specific.

Id = quotation. You can quote someone if he exists on ID.

Supra = Authorities other than cases and statutes. Authority other than Civics (cases) and Acuras (statutes).

Substantive Laws = Defines rights and duties (e.g. Bill of Rights)

Res Ispita Loquitir = The thing speaks for itself. . .implied negligence (carelessness)

Labels:

 

Read Entire Post...





Legal Studies Notes

by B.J. on 10/20/2002 02:44:00 PM 0 comments Print this post

[Edited 11/06/03 to make it more useful to those on the web. If this site ain't good enough for you, there's: nolo.com, lawlinks, alllaw, findlaw.com, the legal information institute,]

Random Legal Studies

The elements of a Case Brief:

1) Name and Citation of a case with year.

2) History (How case has traveled through courts)

3) Issues - Main question answered

4) Facts - Evidence relevant to court's reasoning and decision

5) Laws - Laws relied upon (statues, case law, articles/ammendments from the Constitution)

6) Analysis or reasoning - How did the court analyze the facts in light of the legal question (issues).

7) Conclusion - How did the court resolve the dispute.

Elements of a Legal Memorandum:

1) Compares facts and issues of client with those found in reported cases

2) Analyzes statutory law [that is the stuff written in the constitutions and shit] appropriate to case [cause interpretation of law is what determines civil cases]

3) Components:

- Issue statement - Compile Facts

- Request Research

- Discussion section - Explains everything you've been researching.

- Conclusion - Summary and Answer to Research

Cases: Katzenbach v. McClung (1964 - Civil Rights era)

Keywords and phrases: Civil Rights (1964), National not State, Interstate Commerce)

Ollie's BBQ discriminated against blacks even though about 2/3rds of the workers are black. The attorney general, Katzenbach, sued this establishment under the basis of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but that was a national law, not state law. So as long as Ollie's didn't do anything interstate, they were cool. But, and a big one, research (like one requested in a legal memorandum) found that the restauraunt purchased a good 46% of their food out of state. So they did stuff across states and made them subject to national law.


Cases: Texas v. Johnson (1989 - Reagan/Bush era)

Keywords and phrases: Flag-flaming (always a die-hard Liberal) like Mitch's beanie hat, 1st Ammendment

What a coincidence ! Johnson burned flags to protest against Reagan and corporations. Johnson was the only one to be convicted of a crime amongst the 100 demonstrators. But, Texas is retarted and stupid, and eventually lost because Johnson had the 1st ammendment backing him and he didn't harm anyone.

Cases: Blanton v. North Las Vegas (1989 - drinking) and Tracy V. Municipal Court (1978 - Chemicals)

Keywords: Petty misdemeanors, Blanton sounds like a drinker name, Tracy McGrady-high

Blanton = Do DUI people have right to lawyer if the max offense is $1000, 6 months in joint ? No !

Tracy = Do people on dope have the right to a lawyer if the max offense is $100 ? Yes !

Labels:

 

Read Entire Post...




Home Page