Changing the Conversation About Heroin Addiction

Changing the Conversation About Heroin Addiction: A Message From Mikela Ryan


Tonight at 9 PM EST a new documentary is airing on MTV - one that could change the conversation about heroin addiction and the epidemic that is killing our nation. It is called Prescription for Change: Ending America's Opioid Crisis. In this documentary rapper Macklemore, a recovering addict himself, travels to Washington, D.C. to speak with President Obama about the issue on a national level. He also travels out to Seattle, WA, one of the most afflicted cities in our nation, to meet with young, recovering addicts at their school. This is really the amazing part - these young people are attending a school in the Seattle Public School System just for them. It is called Interagency Recovery School and guess what....IT IS WORKING. Who would have thought...let's take a bunch of kids struggling with the same issues who can relate to one another and put them in a clean, supportive environment full of resources....sounds like a no brainer to me. Unfortunately, not much is known about this type school. Hopefully this documentary will change that and open everyone's eyes. This is an attainable, realistic goal. This can work all over the nation and we need to make it happen. We must end this epidemic and we can do that together.

On Standing Behing Women- What I Know and Mr Trump Never Learned

The huge blowback against Donald Trump's body language during the debate- particularly his propensity to stand behind Hillary Clinton when she was talking in a way that struck many women as intimidating- brings to mind something I experienced when I was younger which hints at the saliency of that issue
For those of you who haven't met me in person. I am a fairly large person -6'0' tall and over two hundred pounds. Before I was hobbled by multiple surgeries, I liked to walk extremely fast when I was in the street or on a subway platform,, passing most people as I whizzed by
However, I learned to slow myself down whenever I was walking a street which was dark or relatively sparsely populated because of the response of women when I passed them. Many were terrified. They heard the footsteps as I approached and thought the worst- that I was someone who was going to rob them or assault them This didn't happen just once. It happened many many times until I learned to slow down and simply accept that I couldn't walk fast without making women';s hearts race.
At the time, I attributed it to the muggings and robberies that were fairly prevalent in NYC from the late 60's through the mid 90's, but in retrospect, I think the fears might have also come from experiences with men that were much more private and personal
In any case, I learned something then that Mr Trump apparently doesn't know or doesn't care about- that when you are a large man, you don't hover over,,walk behind or stand close to women when you are angry or in a hurry because it triggers fears and traumas that come from a lifetime of negative experience.
It would be ironic, though in some way appropriate, if his failure to abide by that ends up being one of the nails in the coffin for his Presidential prospects.

Notorious Phd Debate Post Mortem: Hide Your Children-It's Going to be a Wild Ride

Donald Trump at his best in a public forum- which we saw last night- was not enough to turn the tide of the building momentum for Hillary Clinton.

First, his image as a bully was confirmed by his propensity to interrupt Hillary Clinton and the moderators, which he did over and over again. It was also symbolized by his propensity to get up and stand behind Hillary Clinton, almost as if he was trying to intimidate her. These gestures confirm the image he created from the Republican debates, from his persona at rallies, and from the Access Hollywood tapes.

Because of this, Mr Trump made NO HEADWAY in trying to win over college educated women skeptical of his candidacy, and young women voters.

Second, Mr Trump resorted to the demagogues path of hyperbole and insult over and over again, letting repetition substitute for analysis while Ms Clinton made substantive detailed presentations on policy. To wit:

Obamacare = Disaster
Inner Cities = Disaster
NAFTA = Greatest Disaster in American History
Hillary Clinton= She Lies

At times, as when claiming that murder rates rose the fastest in over forty years, his analysis was wildly inaccurate and will not stand up to fact checking

Third, he attacked Barack Obama ("we can't afford four more years of Obama) at a time when he is far more popular in polls than either he or Ms Clinton.

The result: Mr Trump made NO HEADWAY among the following groups of voters he needed to sway to have any chance of winning the election'

College Educated Suburban Women
African American Voters
Latino Voters
Young Voters.

He did assure that all attempts by Republic Leaders to force him to resign were nipped in the bud.

This election is going down to the wire. Hang on to your hats and hide your children

It's going to be a wild ride.

Gail DeBonis Richmond on Donald Trump and His Apologists

You know- I woke up upset about this again.
And the article from the Guardian I posted really summed up why I was so angry about this when I didn't even realize why myself.

It wasn't the words as much as watching what followed his remarks is what upset me. Hearing the vulgar words and the intent but then watching this woman, with no knowledge of  what Trump said, look confused when the men got off the bus. "Give Donald a hug". And you could tell she paused.  She was split second second guessing herself.  The result of  being put in a position of subjugation to male dominance. She was being judged for hugging. Or for not hugging. Being judged for laughing too much or not enough.

That's what clicked for me watching that video. All those years of anger at this kind of  male behavior sort of spilled over for me. So to read ignorant statements from women over the past 2 days has brought out this beast in me.

Hear me. I don't care what Bill Clinton did. He was disgusting, too, but there was no Facebook to vent on.
Hear me. Bill Clinton isn't running for office.

So I thank you, Mark Naison, for writing about your profound discomfort for this kind of behavior. My husband falls in the same category. My father fell in the same category. I have lots of friends who fall in this category. There are great men out there.

Not all men look at women this way (which is wholly different than thinking someone is beautiful).

I'm still very very angry ESPECIALLY at the women excusing his behavior. I deleted about 20 people last night.
Not for their political views. Because I no longer need to be a party to the reason America continues to raise these boys. Why America continues to have a rape and date rape mentality.
Mothers, as much as fathers have a lot to do with it I found out last night.

People putting partisanship over what's right makes me sick.

Women Are Not the Only Ones Offended by Donald Trump's Vulgar Behavior

As some apologists for Donald Trump have suggested, the type of language Mr Trump used in the "Access Hollywood" video just uncovered is hardly unique to him. Unfortunately, they are right about this. Not only did Bill Clinton use it through most of his political life-something I know from first hand testimony as well as rumor-it can be found in locker rooms and work places all over the country wherever men gather without women present, or in such numbers that women are too intimidated to protest. Many men still consider the use of such language a sacred right, which is why some country clubs still ban women from their bars at certain hours of the day.

However, this is something we as a society have been working very hard to overcome as women have moved into positions of influence in our economy and public life. From police stations and fire houses to television stations and the trading floor of investment banks, women have fought a lonely uphill battle to end the normalization of this demeaning intimidating language and the actions that follow it. I have story after story from former students who joined previously all male occupations about the struggle they waged for dignified treatment from men who thought talk about women's private parts or their own sexual exploits was an integral part of the culture of their workplace. The most horrifying stories came in the 70's and 80's and 90's when women first began to break into law enforcement and the financial sector. They have been significantly reduced in the last few years.

So the question I ask is- do we really want to elect a President who is an unapologetic representative of this culture and who has lived it for most of his adult life? I had hoped we were better than that. That we were moving away from the toxic male culture that so many women have had to fight at the workplace,and unfortunately in their personal lives

But this is not only an issue for women, there are men who find it objectionable as well.

I am one of those men. I spent much of my time in the 1970's playing sandlot football and schoolyard basketball in parks and schoolyards and gyms around the city. On some of the teams I played on, sexual banter and comments about women's anatomies were an integral part of the conversation, to the point where it became a form of bonding among men from different racial backgrounds. I still have vivid memories of Sunday morning football games where the main subject of conversation was who people f....d the night before. As someone who was dating and eventually married a feminist, and whose life was enriched by many strong women friends, I found this discourse offensive and deeply troubling. But I wanted so much to be part of this team that I never openly protested. My protest, pathetic as it might seem, was complete silence. I just went out on the field and hit people, devoutly hoping my teammates would JUST SHUT UP.

I am sure there were and still are many men like me who would feel liberated if this kind of talk were no longer welcome where powerful men gather.

I hope they join with me and women across the country in assuring that someone with Mr Trump's values and persona never becomes President.

How Special Ed Teachers Get Marginalized in ICT Classes.

This is my fourth year as a teacher. I have two degrees in education, five teachers licenses, a passion for my content, and I love teenagers. This is my first year teaching under my SPED license and last week when I walked in to target and saw that they were hiring I was really tempted to apply. 

ICT partnerships either work or they don't. It's an arranged marriage of sorts where the administration gets together and decides to pair teachers based on their strengths and weaknesses. This year, in a new school, I was paired with a content teacher to teach a prep class to students who have failed the regents. I've taught this kind of class to students who don't know a word of English, to students way below reading level, and general education students for 3 years. 

And now, at the beginning of my fourth year I am being treated like a secretary or at best an assistant. I get the lesson plans the night before, well after I've gone to sleep, and with little time to differentiate them. During my prep when I'm supposed to write IEPs or meet with parents or differentiate a lesson I'm handed work and asked to go make copies. I was asked by administration why I thought it was necessary to have a desk. You know, a place to store highlighters to show struggling readers how to annotate, or keep things for students with ADHD to fidget with to help concentrate, or a place for a well educated adult to do their paperwork and other administrative tasks...? The common planning time I have with my co teacher is right after lunch and oftentimes they decide to use the periods back to back to go run errands or go out to lunch. Which, I wouldn't have a problem with if I had any idea what I was supposed to do tomorrow. In meetings when I speak I'm asked who is my "lead teacher". As if I have no idea what I'm doing. I tried to fix a mistake in the online grade book and a window popped up saying I needed permission from the lead teacher to make changes. 

During lessons together the lead teacher takes the pen to the smart board around the room with them so I can't even write on the board without permission. When I try to address the class because I've seen the same misunderstanding happen with a few students, they speak over me as if what I am saying is not important. On Fridays I'm handed the entire file from the week and told to go home and grade while the teacher discusses all the fun things they're doing this weekend. Before and after school I clean the classroom because a clean and organized space is important for all students but especially for special education students. The other teacher sits there and won't even help when he's asked. 

I've tried having conversations with the co teacher, the administration, and other teachers I know about how to handle this situation and the general consensus is that this is just how it is. 

I hear target is hiring.

Data Dictatorship: How the Police State Has Invaded Graduate School Applications

Note: This was written by a brilliant graduate applicant who chooses to remain anonymous. Read it and weep!

Merriam-Webster defines the term “excess” as “an amount that is more than the usual or necessary amount.” A second, but equally fitting definition, includes “behavior that is considered wrong because it goes beyond what is usual, normal, and proper.” I would certainly describe the inordinate amount of security measures imposed on me during my recent experience sitting for the GRE exam as excessive—to say the least.

But it shouldn’t be a problem, right? Security is a good thing. As a prospective graduate student, I am expected to be quiet, follow orders, and take my exam. I am not to find any part of the security protocol uncomfortable or disconcerting. I could (and did), but I know I wouldn’t dare express my discomfort, as that would mean the end of my ambition to attend graduate school and earn a doctorate. Even if I had chosen to opt-out that morning and choose another testing center (which like Voldemort, need not be named), the security measures for high-stakes testing would remain the same. I am required to present GRE scores in my applications to graduate programs, and as such, forced to accept all of the requirements regarding test day. But what happens when security measures intended to discourage inequity infringe on a student’s right to privacy? What happens when test center protocol intended to facilitate a successful test day, hinder it?

Before I begin a general overview of the process, it is imperative to point out that the proctors at the testing center were helpful and ready to answer any questions I may have had. The draconian policies that they are required to enforce, however, is a different matter entirely. 

First, I was asked to familiarize myself (quickly) with all of the test center’s policies and copy a statement in which I promise not share the content of my exam—a standard part of any “official” exam. Then, I was monitored as I placed my items in my designated locker and only allowed to keep my ID with me. No writing materials (fine), but no water either (even if you were to bring a spill-proof water bottle). Test-takers waited in line as proctors called each of us one by one through an unremarkable metal detector. All of the above were procedures that did not feel intrusive, yet. 

Next, my clothes were examined in case I decided to bring prohibited materials. In essence, I was required to give myself a pat-down as proctors supervised. I had to lift the ankles of my pants so my calves and the tops of my shoes were visible, next my shirt sleeves, and then I had to open and shake every single pocket to prove they were empty. Yes, even the impractical hidden pocket on the inside part of the band on my exercise leggings that I forgot existed (it is big enough to fit a quarter and that’s about it), as one of the proctors so gently reminded me. Then I was led to a hallway in which nervous hopefuls were required to wait outside their particular testing labs until they were “processed.” I sat on a bench outside the lab I spent the next 5 hours in, fidgeting with my fingers until I watched another test-taker being processed in front of me. He was required to prove his identity with a series of personal questions, provide his ID, signature, and his fingerprints (yes, even his fingerprints), all the while the proctor in charge constantly checked his face against the photo on his ID. Next, he was instructed to stand against the wall as his photo was taken and added to the testing center’s database. As he signed in, the last step in the pre-lab process which seemed to last a lifetime, it was then that I noticed the endless sea of security cameras lining the wall. They took note of every student; every movement; every breath. Not only was there surveillance in each hallway, but at each station, monitoring not only the whole lab as an overview, but each student taking an exam. It was then my heart started to pound with the knowledge that I would be watched, literally, the entire time I was taking the exam. And if they noticed any “suspicious” behavior (which was vaguely defined in and of itself) they had every right to enter the lab and, in a manner of speaking, apprehend me. What was even their definition of “suspicious” behavior. As someone prone to anxiety and medically diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, I naturally began to worry. What if my neck hurt and I turned my head in a certain direction? Would Big Brother watching think I was trying to cheat?

Was I in a testing center or correctional facility?

And then it was my turn to be “processed.”

I shook the entire time—it felt like a dream. Not only was I about the take the exam I had prepared for months in advance, but instead of facilitating optimism, I felt hunted by the test center, like I was in a psychological experiment studying how spot a cheater. I no longer was a dedicated student with a passion for learning hoping to join the ranks of academia—I was an untrustworthy, culpable youth.

For the record, I would never condone cheating or the notion that responses to instances of academic dishonestly should be lax and that measures should not be taken to prevent cheaters from getting away with cheating in the first place. But fingerprints? Cameras following your every move, including your own personal one never leaving your station for 5 hours recording every second you bite your nails, wipe the nervous sweat off your brow? And what about the fact I don’t even know the exact conditions of the video recording and what exactly the test center does with that recording? If it was my own error missing the policy, I will fully own up to it, but I can’t say I like the idea of the test center having a five-hour long recording of me taking my exam. How long do they have it for? Do they delete it after the test is complete or do they save it for a rainy day, waiting to catch the next cheater? Such a policy was not made clear.

Of further note, when I left for a 10-minute bathroom break, I was required to sign out. To return, I had to walk through the metal detector for a second time, pat myself down and demonstrate my clothing was still free of prohibited materials, and wait until I was allowed to continue taking my exam.

While I scored well above average on the exam, I know that my performance was certainly affected by the intimidating environment. On average, I scored significantly higher (about 15-20 points) on practice exams made directly by the makers of the test (thus, the type of test prep program is not a variable here). I caught myself thinking about the multitude of cameras on me more often than I cared to, ensuring I refrained from doing anything “suspicious,” which I never intended on doing (nor would ever) in the first place.

Sure, one can argue that it is difficult to secure a student against intimidation and nerves on the day of an important exam. Moreover, I fully acknowledge that such security measures would not exist if students had taken advantage of what previously must have been less stringent policies. However, like many policies and measures intended to “help,” they can often be implemented to the point of exaggeration and excess; to the point where they do not help, but hinder. What’s to stop high-stakes test centers from demanding a saliva sample, once fingerprints are not enough? They could simply employ the same problematic logic (the same logic that is too reminiscent of the motives behind the PATRIOT Act and unencumbered NSA surveillance) once someone nefarious figures out how to dupe the system again. Cue further invasion of privacy.

Yet like every one of my fellow test-takers, I was required to be complacent that the test center had taken such care to ensure an honest and fair experience. I will need to be obedient once more when I sit for the exam a second time, hoping that an acclamation to such drastic security measures (not unlike a US military station in Iraq, as one ex-marine on the net has likened the test center surveillance to) will not intimidate me.

Unfortunately, I need that official score report to be the scholar I dream of becoming. The price? Complacency. While the official score is supposed to be a measure of intelligence, it conveniently refuses to reflect how inimical the ordeal of the high-stakes testing center experience is to a student’s success. 

Note  Here is telling testimony of a former marine who claimed the surveillance he saw at his testing center was military-grade--another pretty important piece to read! 

http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/11/21/have-we-taken-exam-security-too-far/