Name: Cristina Soledad Guzmán
Source: www.nytimes.com
Date of publication: November 19, 2008
Review nº 24: Article ‘Drawing the Line on Drug Testing’
Drug addiction and alcohol consumption among teenagers are nowadays the most concerning worries of parents, schools and the whole society. But does the schools have right to test students on substance consumption and monitor their behavior at home? This controversial issue is dealt with in the article ‘Drawing the Line on Drug Testing’ published in The New York Times newspaper.
As many otherAmerican parents, Lynn Evelyn supports what’s called “suspicion-based testing”. That is, testing students if they appear to be impaired at school. In the course of a year the testing for drugs or alcohol have showned a reduction in positive results. But though she thinks that is a school’s right and responsability, she claims that more testing is an invasion of privacy. This has put her at odds with many shool officials of Basking Ridge that want to implement a random drug screening program. This program would test 15% of the students of Ridge High, (her daughter’s school), to monitor their behavior when they are not in school. Mr Gillikin, the school counselor, is surprised with the amaizing results that other schools have obtained with this method.
For Ms Evelyn this is parent’s responsibility, and she claims that the bigger problem is alcohol, not drugs. However, since 2002 it is a rule that schools randomly test students participating in sports and clubs. It has been implemented in 7% of the nation’s high and middle schools. New Jersey has taken an aggressive approach, which has reduced grately the positive results. In the case of Ridge High, any students wanting to play a sport, join a club or get a parking permit – about 80% of the students – would have to consent to random testing or would not be able to participate. The testings would be done once a week. Students testing positive would not miss school, nor would results appear on their transcripts. They would have to take part in counseling with their parents and miss two weeks from their team or club. Mr Gillikin also acknowledges that a school committee could find no academic research indicating that random testing reduces student drug use. Even more, a 2007 report by the American Academy of Pediatrics recommended against testing because there has been little research on the effectiveness, and it can bree “distrust and suspicion” among students, school officials and parents. On the other hand, Ms Evelyn has unearthed a forgotten 2005 study done here, in which a substance abuse was identified but it was alcohol. The report said, it was particularly a problemamong athlets. Indeed, the district’s surveys of Ridge High students over the last decades have found the rate of alcohol abuse to be two to three times the rate of drug abuse. Asked about this, Mr. Gillikin said that they created a coaches, manual on alcohol and drug use to teach student-athletes healthy decision-making. He also said that they should perfect the random drug testing system first and then maybe take on alcohol.
I agree with the claims of Ms Evelyn that “this problem is a parent’s responsibility, not the school’s”. And also in what respects to random testing, when she says: “Any more testing is an invasion of privacy”. In contrast I disagree with Mr Gillikin, because he is making the blind eye to the main problem of the district that is, in fact, alcohol abuse. And also because random testing has not being proved to effectively reduce drug abuse.
To sum up, this article explains the pros and cons of drug testing at schools. The new method can be concidered invasive and useless. In my opinion monitorin students at school is necessary but selecting them randomly creates a sense of disgust and distrust among those who do not consume alcohol or drugs.
lunes, 2 de marzo de 2009
Review nº 23
Name: Cristina Soledad Guzmán
Source: www.nytimes.com
Date of publication: November 19, 2008
Review nº 23: Article ‘Teenagers’ Internet Socializing Not a Bad Thing’
Multiple studies and researches have depicted Internet as corrupting, addictive and even isolating young people and children. Now a new study has been carried out which claims exactly the opposite, that Internet helps young people in the development of their technological skills among other things. This topic is developed in the article ‘Teenagers’ Internet Socializing Not a Bad Thing’ from The New York Times newspaper.
All those hours teenagers spend socializing on the Internet are not bad thing. In fact, this gives them the technological skills and literary needed to succeed in the contemporary world. The study describes new-media usage but does not measure its effects. There has been some confusion about what kids are actually doing online. Teens usually have a ‘full-time intimate community’ with whom they communicate in an always-on mode via mobile phones and instant messaging. They also use new media to explore new romantic relationships, through interactions causal enough to ensure no loss of face if the other party is not interested. While online socializing is ubiquitous, many young people move on to a period of tinkering and exploration, as they look for information online, customize games or experiment with digital media production. The most intense Internet use is called “geeking out”, in which young people delve deeply into a particular area of interest. New media also allow for a degree of freedom and autonomy.
I think this is true that young people develop multiple skills when using internet. And also that this skills will help their successful development in the modern world. But I think it is also true that the use of new media without a close parental control can produce a kind of addiction on them. Some teenagers cannot live withouth their cellphones near them, and others are all day long connected to internet. I think that parents should instruct themselves about the use of these new technologies in order to understand what their children do when they are using them.
In conclusion, this article explains all the good aspects of Internet and new technologies use on teenagers. And it also advices parents to inform themselves about them so that they can understand what their children do with them and how they learn form technology.
Source: www.nytimes.com
Date of publication: November 19, 2008
Review nº 23: Article ‘Teenagers’ Internet Socializing Not a Bad Thing’
Multiple studies and researches have depicted Internet as corrupting, addictive and even isolating young people and children. Now a new study has been carried out which claims exactly the opposite, that Internet helps young people in the development of their technological skills among other things. This topic is developed in the article ‘Teenagers’ Internet Socializing Not a Bad Thing’ from The New York Times newspaper.
All those hours teenagers spend socializing on the Internet are not bad thing. In fact, this gives them the technological skills and literary needed to succeed in the contemporary world. The study describes new-media usage but does not measure its effects. There has been some confusion about what kids are actually doing online. Teens usually have a ‘full-time intimate community’ with whom they communicate in an always-on mode via mobile phones and instant messaging. They also use new media to explore new romantic relationships, through interactions causal enough to ensure no loss of face if the other party is not interested. While online socializing is ubiquitous, many young people move on to a period of tinkering and exploration, as they look for information online, customize games or experiment with digital media production. The most intense Internet use is called “geeking out”, in which young people delve deeply into a particular area of interest. New media also allow for a degree of freedom and autonomy.
I think this is true that young people develop multiple skills when using internet. And also that this skills will help their successful development in the modern world. But I think it is also true that the use of new media without a close parental control can produce a kind of addiction on them. Some teenagers cannot live withouth their cellphones near them, and others are all day long connected to internet. I think that parents should instruct themselves about the use of these new technologies in order to understand what their children do when they are using them.
In conclusion, this article explains all the good aspects of Internet and new technologies use on teenagers. And it also advices parents to inform themselves about them so that they can understand what their children do with them and how they learn form technology.
Review nº 22
Name: Cristina Soledad Guzmán
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Date of publication: Tuesday November 18, 2008
Review nº 22: Article ‘New research tells us we judge people on their looks. Watch out for Father Christmas and Gordon Brown’
Could it be possible to do what we have always been told not to do? Is it possible to judge people on their looks? Though we are always told not to judge people on their looks a new research states that we can, in fact, judge people based on their appearance. This topic is developed in the article ‘New research tells us we judge people on their looks. Watch out for Father Christmas and Gordon Brown’, published in The Guardian newspaper.
Scientists have discovered that men with rounded faces, soft jawlines, thin eyebrows, bright eyes, small nostrils, large mouths, thin lips, a warm, bright complexion and no facial hair are considered the most trustworthy. The research must have been restricted to white male faces, otherwise things would probably have been frightfully complicated. Even within this restricted group, results are fairly confusing. We have to think carefully about our own often misplaced perceptions of people based on facial characteristics. The research is not actually telling us people are untrustworthy because of the way they look, just that we assume they are untrustworthy.
I agree with the writers opinion about such kind of research. It seems to have been among a selected group of people with similar features, or else it would be considered very discriminating. Apart from that we can see from the authors point of view that such researchs are not as thrustworthy so as to believe blindy on their statements. This may be due to the fact that it seems to be based in very subjective opinions rather than scientific serious research.
In conclusion, this article is an invitation to reflectionate on the assumptions people do based only on others’ physical appearance, or the way they dress and talk. I think that it is only by face to face interactions that we will come to have a hint of how trustworthy people can be. We can not judge the innerself based only on physical appearence.
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Date of publication: Tuesday November 18, 2008
Review nº 22: Article ‘New research tells us we judge people on their looks. Watch out for Father Christmas and Gordon Brown’
Could it be possible to do what we have always been told not to do? Is it possible to judge people on their looks? Though we are always told not to judge people on their looks a new research states that we can, in fact, judge people based on their appearance. This topic is developed in the article ‘New research tells us we judge people on their looks. Watch out for Father Christmas and Gordon Brown’, published in The Guardian newspaper.
Scientists have discovered that men with rounded faces, soft jawlines, thin eyebrows, bright eyes, small nostrils, large mouths, thin lips, a warm, bright complexion and no facial hair are considered the most trustworthy. The research must have been restricted to white male faces, otherwise things would probably have been frightfully complicated. Even within this restricted group, results are fairly confusing. We have to think carefully about our own often misplaced perceptions of people based on facial characteristics. The research is not actually telling us people are untrustworthy because of the way they look, just that we assume they are untrustworthy.
I agree with the writers opinion about such kind of research. It seems to have been among a selected group of people with similar features, or else it would be considered very discriminating. Apart from that we can see from the authors point of view that such researchs are not as thrustworthy so as to believe blindy on their statements. This may be due to the fact that it seems to be based in very subjective opinions rather than scientific serious research.
In conclusion, this article is an invitation to reflectionate on the assumptions people do based only on others’ physical appearance, or the way they dress and talk. I think that it is only by face to face interactions that we will come to have a hint of how trustworthy people can be. We can not judge the innerself based only on physical appearence.
Review nº 21
Name: Cristina Soledad Guzmán
Source: www.nytimes.com
Date of publication: November 14, 2008
Review nº 21: Article ‘Mormons Tipped Scale in Ban on Gay Marriage’
Same-sex marriage has become an issue of heated debate all around the world. Religious groups defending marriage between man and woman protest against gay marriage, whiel gay people fights for their right to getting marriaged. This issue is discussed in the article ‘Mormons Tipped Scale in Ban on Gay Marriage’ from the New York Times newspaper.
Frank Schubert, the chief strategist for Proposition 8, which defines marriage as between man and woman, was rising money to intensify the campaign to ban same sex marriage. It rised more than $5 million, including a $1 million donation from Alan Ashton, the grandson of a former president of the Mormon Church. It ultimately won with 52% of the vote. The California measure, Proposition 8, was to many Mormons a kind of firewall to be held at all costs. The campaign was first approached by the Roman Catholic archbishop of San Francisco a few weeks after the legalization of sam-sex marriage in May. The other religious groups that joined the campaign included Catholics, evangelical Christians, conservative black and Latino pastors, and myriad smaller ethnic groups with strong religious ties. The group is known as Protect Marriage. Though Mormons were the last major group to join the campaign, the made up more than 80% of the volunteers. Their tasks ranged from “wakers” assignedd to knock on doors; to “sellers”, who would work with undecided votersd later on; and to “closers”, who would get people to the polls on Election Day. Leaders were acutely conscious of not crossing the line from being a church-based volunteer effort to an actual political organization. By mid-October oppponents were still effectively rising money. The response was Mr Schubert desperate e-mail message to the three top religious members of his executive committee. On October Mr. Ashton donated $1million he said he was following his personal beliefs and the direction of the church. Even with the Mormons’ contributions Proposition 8 strategists had to distance themselves from “more extreme elements” opposed to rights for gay and lesbians. To that end, the catholic group rejected efforts by some groups to include a ban on domestic partnership rights. But the “Yes” side also initially faced apathy from unconcerned voters. To counter that, advertisements for the “Yes” campaign also used hypothetical consequences of same-sex marriage, painting the specter of churches’ losng tax exempt status and people. This campaign was denounced by opponents as dishonest and divisive, but the passage of Proposition 8 has led to second-guessing about the “no” campaing, too, as well as talk about a possible ballot measure to repeal the ban. The legality of the same-sex marriages performed from June to Election Day is also questioned.
This article shows the capacity that major religious groups have when joining to fight for a common issue like the protection of marriage. As Michael Otterson, the mormon director of public affairs said: “ it was a matter of standing up for what the church believes is right”. Supporters to same-sex marriage and opponents to it had the same rights to fight for their beliefs. Mormons stated that “It was not their goal in this campaign to attack the homosexual lifestyle or to convince gays and lesbians that their behaviour is wrong – the less we refer to homosexuality, the better”.
To sum up, this article deals with a very controversial issue such as same-sex marriage versus traditional religious marriage. That is the encounter of two opposite groups, religious groups versus gay people. Neither group is wrong on their campaigns because both have rights to fight for their own rights and beliefs. But there is a sense that gay rights will never come to an agreement with religious trends of thought.
Source: www.nytimes.com
Date of publication: November 14, 2008
Review nº 21: Article ‘Mormons Tipped Scale in Ban on Gay Marriage’
Same-sex marriage has become an issue of heated debate all around the world. Religious groups defending marriage between man and woman protest against gay marriage, whiel gay people fights for their right to getting marriaged. This issue is discussed in the article ‘Mormons Tipped Scale in Ban on Gay Marriage’ from the New York Times newspaper.
Frank Schubert, the chief strategist for Proposition 8, which defines marriage as between man and woman, was rising money to intensify the campaign to ban same sex marriage. It rised more than $5 million, including a $1 million donation from Alan Ashton, the grandson of a former president of the Mormon Church. It ultimately won with 52% of the vote. The California measure, Proposition 8, was to many Mormons a kind of firewall to be held at all costs. The campaign was first approached by the Roman Catholic archbishop of San Francisco a few weeks after the legalization of sam-sex marriage in May. The other religious groups that joined the campaign included Catholics, evangelical Christians, conservative black and Latino pastors, and myriad smaller ethnic groups with strong religious ties. The group is known as Protect Marriage. Though Mormons were the last major group to join the campaign, the made up more than 80% of the volunteers. Their tasks ranged from “wakers” assignedd to knock on doors; to “sellers”, who would work with undecided votersd later on; and to “closers”, who would get people to the polls on Election Day. Leaders were acutely conscious of not crossing the line from being a church-based volunteer effort to an actual political organization. By mid-October oppponents were still effectively rising money. The response was Mr Schubert desperate e-mail message to the three top religious members of his executive committee. On October Mr. Ashton donated $1million he said he was following his personal beliefs and the direction of the church. Even with the Mormons’ contributions Proposition 8 strategists had to distance themselves from “more extreme elements” opposed to rights for gay and lesbians. To that end, the catholic group rejected efforts by some groups to include a ban on domestic partnership rights. But the “Yes” side also initially faced apathy from unconcerned voters. To counter that, advertisements for the “Yes” campaign also used hypothetical consequences of same-sex marriage, painting the specter of churches’ losng tax exempt status and people. This campaign was denounced by opponents as dishonest and divisive, but the passage of Proposition 8 has led to second-guessing about the “no” campaing, too, as well as talk about a possible ballot measure to repeal the ban. The legality of the same-sex marriages performed from June to Election Day is also questioned.
This article shows the capacity that major religious groups have when joining to fight for a common issue like the protection of marriage. As Michael Otterson, the mormon director of public affairs said: “ it was a matter of standing up for what the church believes is right”. Supporters to same-sex marriage and opponents to it had the same rights to fight for their beliefs. Mormons stated that “It was not their goal in this campaign to attack the homosexual lifestyle or to convince gays and lesbians that their behaviour is wrong – the less we refer to homosexuality, the better”.
To sum up, this article deals with a very controversial issue such as same-sex marriage versus traditional religious marriage. That is the encounter of two opposite groups, religious groups versus gay people. Neither group is wrong on their campaigns because both have rights to fight for their own rights and beliefs. But there is a sense that gay rights will never come to an agreement with religious trends of thought.
Review nº 20
Name: Cristina Soledad Guzmán
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Date of publication: Monday November 10 2008
Review nº 20: Article ‘The power of speech’
Daniel Everett has experienced a radical change in his life as almost any other man or woman has ever experienced. He went to the Amazonia with the intention to convert the Piraha tribe to Cristianity. Instead, he learned to speak their unique language and ended up rejecting his faith, losing his family and picking a fight with Noam Chomsky. This shocking story of life is depicted in the article ‘The power of speech’ published in The Guardian newspaper.
Yet Everett’s life could be a more dramatic example of enlightenment and destruction than any fictional encounter with a drastically different culture. Thirty years living with the Piraha, an Amazonian tribe, destroyed his evangelical faith in God, wrecked his marriage and stranged him from two of his three children. It also dismantled his intellectual framework and set him on a collision course with the reknown linguist Noam Chomsky. Everett first went to live with the Piraha tribe in the late 70’s with the intention of converting them to Christianity. Instead, he learned to speak their language. Everett studied for a doctorate in the 80’s and took advice from Chomsky whose theories he adopted. Gradually, however, as he spent more time with the Piraha, he came to doubt Chomsky’s claims fo “universal grammar”. Chomsky had recently refined his theory to argue that recursion – the linguistic practice of inserting phrases inside others – was the cornerstone of all languages. Everett argued that he could find no evidence of recursion in Piraha. The Piraha exist almost completely in the present, absorved by the daily struggle to survive, they do not plan ahead. This culture of living in the present has shaped their language. Chomskyites rushed to defend universal grammar and academics cast doubt on Everett’s view of the Piraha. After he first arrived in the Amazon, Everett realized Piraha were rarely violent, but intensely rejected any kind of coercion. Crucially, he came to see his religion fundamentally coercive. Everett translated the Book of Luke, read it to the Piraha and they were utterly unmoved. By 1985, he had privately lost his faith. Religion should produce peaceful, strong, secure people who are right with God and right with the world. The Piraha already had all these qualities that he tried to tell them they could have. Only until the late 90’s he was able to communicate his family his loss of faith, as they are all ‘committed’ Christians his marriage broke up, and two of his children cut off all contact. Nowadays Everett has remarried and has not visited the Piraha since January 2007. Everett, however, is worried about the future of the tribe because outsiders try to impose their values and materialism on them.
This incredible story reflects the difficulties that an open-minded person may find when trying to show different perspectives that contradict the thoughts and believes of narrow-minded people. One example of this is provided by Everetts words when he refers to Chomsky’s attitudes towards his discoveries: “I’m not denigrating his intelligence or his honesty but I do think he is wrong about this and he is unprepared to accept that he is worng”. He also says: “If you can find evidence that I am making 19th-century claims, I will be shocked and disappointed in myself”, when referring to his story of his life with the Piraha. In this respect I agree with him when he says: “It’s wrong to try and convert tribal societies”. I think that if the Spanish conquerors would have understood that our history and may be our lifestyles would be different.
In conclusion, the whole article well worth be read and spread around. Everett discoveries should be taken into account and seriously investigated. May be what our develop civilization do not understand is what only his understanding did, life is simple and no matter what religion or believes you have as long as you live it being “right with God and right with the world”.
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Date of publication: Monday November 10 2008
Review nº 20: Article ‘The power of speech’
Daniel Everett has experienced a radical change in his life as almost any other man or woman has ever experienced. He went to the Amazonia with the intention to convert the Piraha tribe to Cristianity. Instead, he learned to speak their unique language and ended up rejecting his faith, losing his family and picking a fight with Noam Chomsky. This shocking story of life is depicted in the article ‘The power of speech’ published in The Guardian newspaper.
Yet Everett’s life could be a more dramatic example of enlightenment and destruction than any fictional encounter with a drastically different culture. Thirty years living with the Piraha, an Amazonian tribe, destroyed his evangelical faith in God, wrecked his marriage and stranged him from two of his three children. It also dismantled his intellectual framework and set him on a collision course with the reknown linguist Noam Chomsky. Everett first went to live with the Piraha tribe in the late 70’s with the intention of converting them to Christianity. Instead, he learned to speak their language. Everett studied for a doctorate in the 80’s and took advice from Chomsky whose theories he adopted. Gradually, however, as he spent more time with the Piraha, he came to doubt Chomsky’s claims fo “universal grammar”. Chomsky had recently refined his theory to argue that recursion – the linguistic practice of inserting phrases inside others – was the cornerstone of all languages. Everett argued that he could find no evidence of recursion in Piraha. The Piraha exist almost completely in the present, absorved by the daily struggle to survive, they do not plan ahead. This culture of living in the present has shaped their language. Chomskyites rushed to defend universal grammar and academics cast doubt on Everett’s view of the Piraha. After he first arrived in the Amazon, Everett realized Piraha were rarely violent, but intensely rejected any kind of coercion. Crucially, he came to see his religion fundamentally coercive. Everett translated the Book of Luke, read it to the Piraha and they were utterly unmoved. By 1985, he had privately lost his faith. Religion should produce peaceful, strong, secure people who are right with God and right with the world. The Piraha already had all these qualities that he tried to tell them they could have. Only until the late 90’s he was able to communicate his family his loss of faith, as they are all ‘committed’ Christians his marriage broke up, and two of his children cut off all contact. Nowadays Everett has remarried and has not visited the Piraha since January 2007. Everett, however, is worried about the future of the tribe because outsiders try to impose their values and materialism on them.
This incredible story reflects the difficulties that an open-minded person may find when trying to show different perspectives that contradict the thoughts and believes of narrow-minded people. One example of this is provided by Everetts words when he refers to Chomsky’s attitudes towards his discoveries: “I’m not denigrating his intelligence or his honesty but I do think he is wrong about this and he is unprepared to accept that he is worng”. He also says: “If you can find evidence that I am making 19th-century claims, I will be shocked and disappointed in myself”, when referring to his story of his life with the Piraha. In this respect I agree with him when he says: “It’s wrong to try and convert tribal societies”. I think that if the Spanish conquerors would have understood that our history and may be our lifestyles would be different.
In conclusion, the whole article well worth be read and spread around. Everett discoveries should be taken into account and seriously investigated. May be what our develop civilization do not understand is what only his understanding did, life is simple and no matter what religion or believes you have as long as you live it being “right with God and right with the world”.
Review nº 19
Name: Cristina Soledad Guzmán
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Date of publication: Friday October 31 2008
Review nº 19: Article ‘Light drinking in pregnancy may be good for baby boys, says study’
As a pregnant woman you are strongly adviced not to smoke or drink alcohol to help your baby grow up healthy. But researchers found that light drinking during pregnancy has no ill effects and may benefit baby boys. This topic is developed in the article ‘Light drinking in pregnancy may be good for baby boys, says study’, from a publication in The Guardian newspaper.
Boys born to mothers who drank lightly during pregnancy are better behaved and score more highly in tests at the age of 3 than the sons of women who abstained. Light drinking is defined as one to two units a week, or on occasion. The study also found that girls born to light drinkers were 30% less likely to have emotional and peer problems. But doctors were not completely certain that children’s better performance was not linked to their family background. Although it has always been clear that heavy drinking can seriously damage babies, scientists have not had good evidence either to prove or disprove that light drinking does any harm. The British National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence states that it is best not to drink at all for the first three months on the grounds of a risk of miscarriage, but thereafter occasional drink will not harm the foetus. Moreover, the list of food, drinks and activities to avoid is really long.
In my opinion, a study base on 3-year-old children cannot be absolutely certain even more if the origin of their behaviour is not clearly identified. I agree with the idea that light drinking after the first three months of pregnancy won’t harm the foetus. But I do not think that only alcohol could determine children’s behaviour or could have different effects according to their gender.
This article gives strong healthy recomendations of when and how much alcohol a pregnant woman can drink in order to avoid harming her baby. It also describes some possible benefits of alcohol on children, based on a researche in 3-year-old children. But though light drinking of alcohol may not be dangerous, there are many other factors which will affect the development of the baby while the mother is pregnant.
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
Date of publication: Friday October 31 2008
Review nº 19: Article ‘Light drinking in pregnancy may be good for baby boys, says study’
As a pregnant woman you are strongly adviced not to smoke or drink alcohol to help your baby grow up healthy. But researchers found that light drinking during pregnancy has no ill effects and may benefit baby boys. This topic is developed in the article ‘Light drinking in pregnancy may be good for baby boys, says study’, from a publication in The Guardian newspaper.
Boys born to mothers who drank lightly during pregnancy are better behaved and score more highly in tests at the age of 3 than the sons of women who abstained. Light drinking is defined as one to two units a week, or on occasion. The study also found that girls born to light drinkers were 30% less likely to have emotional and peer problems. But doctors were not completely certain that children’s better performance was not linked to their family background. Although it has always been clear that heavy drinking can seriously damage babies, scientists have not had good evidence either to prove or disprove that light drinking does any harm. The British National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence states that it is best not to drink at all for the first three months on the grounds of a risk of miscarriage, but thereafter occasional drink will not harm the foetus. Moreover, the list of food, drinks and activities to avoid is really long.
In my opinion, a study base on 3-year-old children cannot be absolutely certain even more if the origin of their behaviour is not clearly identified. I agree with the idea that light drinking after the first three months of pregnancy won’t harm the foetus. But I do not think that only alcohol could determine children’s behaviour or could have different effects according to their gender.
This article gives strong healthy recomendations of when and how much alcohol a pregnant woman can drink in order to avoid harming her baby. It also describes some possible benefits of alcohol on children, based on a researche in 3-year-old children. But though light drinking of alcohol may not be dangerous, there are many other factors which will affect the development of the baby while the mother is pregnant.
Review nº 18
Name: Cristina Soledad Guzmán
Source: www.economist.com
Date of publication: October 30th 2008
Review nº 18: Article ‘The oldest conundrum’
The oldest occupation since ancient times, prostitution, also represents the oldest problem in history. Although this occupation has evolved throughout time, it is a very slow process that takes place in unequal terms from country to country. This issue is discussed in the article ‘The oldest conundrum’ from a publication of The Economist newspaper.
When the Netherlands legalised brothels 8 years ago, politicians thought that would stop the bad things associated with sex trade. Dutch believed the buying and selling of sexual services would become a freely undertaken transaction, in which the state would only be a regulator and tax-collector. From 1999 Sweden began penalising people who patronise prostitutes, while treating people who sell their bodies as victims. But neither policy is better than the other. In Amsterdam the link between prostitution and organised crime has proved durable. The policemen who patrol Amsterdam’s red-light district reckon that more than half the ladies posing in windows are there against their will. All that helps to explain why the Swedish experience is finding imitators in several countries. In Sweden, the number of streetwalking prostitutes fell about 40%. Moreover, a sex-workers’ association in Sweden says the law makes life dangerous for those who ply their trade secretly. Fear of prosecution reduces the chances that clients will report the exploitation of under-age girls or boys. But Norway and Italy are considering the Swedish-style penalties for buying sex. In Europe, then, things are moving towards tighter regulation. In the U.S., trading sex is a misdemeanour, with the exceptions of Rhode Island and Nevada. So if residents of San Francisco vote for “Proposition K”, which would bar police from taking action against sex workers, it will be a landmark in American history. Supporters say it will transform the role of the police, instead, advocates fo a “no” vote say that if the hands of the police are tied, they will be unable to deal even with the most obvious cases of abuse. But for liberals in search of success stories, New Zeland appears to provide more promising evidence. Since 2003, sex workers are allowed to ply their trade more or less freely, either at home, in brothels or on the street. A study published by the government in May, informed that more than 60% of prostitutes felt they had more power to refuse clients; only about 1% of women in the business were under the legal age of 18; and only 4% said they had been pressured into working by someone else. One big difference with other countries is that brothels are usually run by the sex workers themselves. According to polls, people are sure the number of prostitutes has risen. In many case, from the prostitutes’ point of view, the New Zealand system was the fairest.
This article describes the different attitudes and policies taken in first world countries about prostitution. Some situations seem better for the sex workers than others. In my opinion the government information is not very much reliable because they tend to change the results to their favor. One prove is the opinion given by people in the streets. That is the case of New Zeland, where “people are shure the number of prostitutes has risen” in opposition to the lowered percentages given by the government.
In conclusion, this article explains the situation of prostitution in developed European countries like the Netherlands and Sweden, and the successful policy of New Zeland in relation with new American policies in this field. In my opinion, sex workers deserve a fair treatment by police forces as well as protection by the law in any place they are.
Source: www.economist.com
Date of publication: October 30th 2008
Review nº 18: Article ‘The oldest conundrum’
The oldest occupation since ancient times, prostitution, also represents the oldest problem in history. Although this occupation has evolved throughout time, it is a very slow process that takes place in unequal terms from country to country. This issue is discussed in the article ‘The oldest conundrum’ from a publication of The Economist newspaper.
When the Netherlands legalised brothels 8 years ago, politicians thought that would stop the bad things associated with sex trade. Dutch believed the buying and selling of sexual services would become a freely undertaken transaction, in which the state would only be a regulator and tax-collector. From 1999 Sweden began penalising people who patronise prostitutes, while treating people who sell their bodies as victims. But neither policy is better than the other. In Amsterdam the link between prostitution and organised crime has proved durable. The policemen who patrol Amsterdam’s red-light district reckon that more than half the ladies posing in windows are there against their will. All that helps to explain why the Swedish experience is finding imitators in several countries. In Sweden, the number of streetwalking prostitutes fell about 40%. Moreover, a sex-workers’ association in Sweden says the law makes life dangerous for those who ply their trade secretly. Fear of prosecution reduces the chances that clients will report the exploitation of under-age girls or boys. But Norway and Italy are considering the Swedish-style penalties for buying sex. In Europe, then, things are moving towards tighter regulation. In the U.S., trading sex is a misdemeanour, with the exceptions of Rhode Island and Nevada. So if residents of San Francisco vote for “Proposition K”, which would bar police from taking action against sex workers, it will be a landmark in American history. Supporters say it will transform the role of the police, instead, advocates fo a “no” vote say that if the hands of the police are tied, they will be unable to deal even with the most obvious cases of abuse. But for liberals in search of success stories, New Zeland appears to provide more promising evidence. Since 2003, sex workers are allowed to ply their trade more or less freely, either at home, in brothels or on the street. A study published by the government in May, informed that more than 60% of prostitutes felt they had more power to refuse clients; only about 1% of women in the business were under the legal age of 18; and only 4% said they had been pressured into working by someone else. One big difference with other countries is that brothels are usually run by the sex workers themselves. According to polls, people are sure the number of prostitutes has risen. In many case, from the prostitutes’ point of view, the New Zealand system was the fairest.
This article describes the different attitudes and policies taken in first world countries about prostitution. Some situations seem better for the sex workers than others. In my opinion the government information is not very much reliable because they tend to change the results to their favor. One prove is the opinion given by people in the streets. That is the case of New Zeland, where “people are shure the number of prostitutes has risen” in opposition to the lowered percentages given by the government.
In conclusion, this article explains the situation of prostitution in developed European countries like the Netherlands and Sweden, and the successful policy of New Zeland in relation with new American policies in this field. In my opinion, sex workers deserve a fair treatment by police forces as well as protection by the law in any place they are.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)