Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell declared that beginning January 1st, Carson’s department must implement an Obama administration rule that helps people in poverty afford housing in areas with better schools, jobs, and opportunity.
Maternal mortality rate in the United States had increased by more than 25 percent from 2000 to 2013. Reducing maternal death during childbirth requires in-depth examination of isolated causes of death. With the major growth of big data and applications, it is possible to collect, analyze and compare specific maternal death causes and contributing factors to predict who’s susceptible to fatality and what can be done to prevent it. It will help to develop focused clinical and public health prevention programs.
Maternity death is rising for unclear reasons in United States. USA is the only developed nation where that rate is increasing and getting worse.
American women are more likely to die from childbirth than women in any other high developed country. Based on research and analysis by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, maternal death greatly increased from 2000–2014 and more than half of such incidents could have been prevented with the current medical technology.
Most of the cases were result of medical error and unprepared hospitals. Doctor’s ability to protect the health of mothers in childbirth is a basic measure of a society’s development. Yet every year in the United States 700 to 900 women die from pregnancy or childbirth-related causes, and some 65,000 nearly die. By many measures, the worst record in the developed world.
We have ability to prevent it, by analyzing each cause and predict with monitoring the cases and usage of the Big Data and Analytics.
Whenever someone claims that their personal freedom is the most important value (say in discussions of the first amendment or the second amendment), it is critical to ask who gets harmed by the full expression of their personal freedom....
One of the thus-far hypothetical questions I ask myself frequently is how I would feel about my own children having the same kind of access to the internet today. And I find the question increasingly difficult to answer. I understand that this is a natural evolution of attitudes which happens with age, and at some point, this question might be a lot less hypothetical. I don’t want to be a hypocrite about it. I would want my kids to have the same opportunities to explore and grow and express themselves as I did. I would like them to have that choice. And this belief broadens into attitudes about the role of the internet in public life as a whole.
I’ve also been aware for some time of the increasingly symbiotic relationship between younger children and YouTube. I see kids engrossed in screens all the time, in pushchairs and in restaurants, and there’s always a bit of a Luddite twinge there, but I am not a parent, and I’m not making parental judgments for or on anyone else. I’ve seen family members and friend’s children plugged into Peppa Pig and nursery rhyme videos, and it makes them happy and gives everyone a break, so OK.
But I don’t even have kids and right now I just want to burn the whole thing down.
Someone or something or some combination of people and things is using YouTube to systematically frighten, traumatize, and abuse children, automatically and at scale, and it forces me to question my own beliefs about the internet, at every level. Much of what I am going to describe next has been covered elsewhere, although none of the mainstream coverage I’ve seen has really grasped the implications of what seems to be occurring.
Many nondisabled people were introduced to disability rights activism in 2017 with splashy protests from ADAPT, Housing Works, and other organizations who fought ferociously to defend health care on Capitol Hill. Those protests joined a long and rich history of political engagement on the part of the disability community, but they also highlighted the fact that sustained political action can make a big difference. While the wins on health care were very public, some of the other work accomplished in 2017 was more subtle — but also very important.
On the last day of November, the Democrats announced they would be backing the Disability Integration Act (DIA), a piece of legislation that affirms the right to live in our communities. The DIA has had trouble gaining momentum — 2017 wasn’t the first time it was introduced, but 2017 was a particularly bad year for it, with very partisan politics in Washington making it challenging to pass any disability legislation, despite the fact that disability is very much a bipartisan issue.
So what brought this about?
Stephanie Woodward, an ADAPT activist who was particularly visible in 2017, says their earlier actions laid the groundwork for the DIA announcement. The organization has long been a force for change on Capitol Hill, but in 2017, politicians on both sides of the aisle came to understand what it means when vans loaded with ADAPT activists show up: It’s going to get noisy, and it’s going to get embarrassing.
When ADAPT got wind that Democrats were holding a fundraising event to celebrate the launch of the DNC Disability Council, they decided to invite themselves along. “Maybe not as guests,” says Woodward, “but as…educators outside their event. Educators with large signs, fliers, and chanting.” ADAPT RSVP’d to the Democrats, and in return, they got the promise of a meeting.
In politics, it’s not uncommon for activists and organizers to be fobbed off with a “meeting” that goes nowhere. That’s not what happened with this meeting, though: The Democrats knew better than to tangle with ADAPT. They pushed Democrats to endorse the DIA, and the Democrats ended up doing even more than that. They also spoke out against the subminimum wage and criticized attacks on the ADA, education rights, and access to health care.
ADAPT didn’t stop there. As long as the group was in Washington, organizers stopped by a number of Congressional offices for a little chat, leaning on Democratic members of Congress to sign on to the DIA as cosponsors. Gregg Beratan, another ADAPT activist, said the results were immediate, and gratifying — their trip to the Hill yielded several new sign-ons, with more likely in the works. The party endorsement of the DIA made this process much easier — if your party supports it, why haven’t you signed on?