Literature Review About Fast Food free essay sample

Moreover, proximity to future fast food restaurants is uncorrelated with current obesityand weight gain, conditional on current proximity to fast food. The implied effects of fast-food oncaloric intake are at least one order of magnitude smaller for mothers, which suggests that they areless constrained by travel costs than school children. The study shows that policies restricting accessto fast food near schools could have significant effects on obesity among school children, but similar policies restricting the availability of fast food in residential areas are unlikely to have large effectson adults. Conclusions:This study investigates the health consequences of proximity to fast food for two vulnerable groups:young teens and pregnant women. The focus on very close distances and the presence of a large arrayof controls alleviates issues of endogenous fast-food placement. The results point to a significanteffect of proximity to fast food restaurant on the risk of obesity. Specifically, They show that the presence of a fast food restaurant within a tenth of a mile of a school is associated with at least a 5. We will write a custom essay sample on Literature Review About Fast Food or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page percent increase in the obesity rate in that school (relative to the presence at . 25 miles). Consistentwith highly non-linear transportation costs, they do not find evidence of an effect at . 25 miles and at. 5 miles. The effect for pregnant women is quantitatively smaller and more linear in distance. Theyfind that a fast food restaurant within a tenth of a mile of a residence results in a 4. 4 percent increasein the probability of gaining over 20 kilos. This effect is reduced to a 2. 5 percent increase when afast-food is within a . 5 miles from the residence of the mother. Causes and Consequences of Fast Food Sales Growth, Mark D. Jekanowski,January-April 1999. With today ¶s hectic lifestyles, timesaving products are increasingly in demand. Perhaps one of the most obvious examples is fast food. Today the demand for the, hectic lifestyles, timesaving products are increasingly. Obliviously one of the example is Fast Food Industry. The rate of growth in consumer expenditures on fast food has led most other segments of the food-away-from home market for much of the last two decades. Since 1982, there is growth rate inconsumer spending at fast food. The consumers spent at fast food outlets grew at an annually he proportion of away-from-home food expenditures on fast food also increased. Everyone eats Fast Food even knowing that it is not healthy for them. Reasons are because of speed, convenience and price. However, fast food has many hidden costs,including the high price of bad health. Not to mention the fact that for such cheap food, youre actually being overcharged by a big amount. So the real reason is not price, butconvenience. You can get much cheaper food by cooking for yourself, but you are notalways at home to do the cooking, or you do not always feel like cooking. Consumer perception about fast food in India: an exploratory study byAnita Goyal,(Management Development Institute, Sukhrali, India), N. P. Singh, (Management DevelopmentInstitute, Sukhrali, India). Abstract: Purpose ± This paper seeks to estimate importance of various factorsaffecting the choice of fast food outlets by Indian young consumers. Design/methodology/approach ± The study applies multivariate statisticaltools to estimate importance of various factors affecting the choice of fastfood outlets by Indian young consumers. In addition, the authors analysedthe consumption patterns, impact of hygiene and nutritional values, andrating of various attributes of McDonalds and Nirulas. Findings ± Results indicate that the young Indian consumer has passionfor visiting fast food outlets for fun and change but home food is their first choice. They feel homemade food is much better than food served atfast food outlets. They have the highest value for taste and quality(nutritional values) followed by ambience and hygiene. Three dimensions(service and delivery dimension, product dimension, and qualitydimension) of fast food outlets attributes are identified based on factor analysis results. The two fast food outlets rating differs significantly onthe seven attributes. McDonalds scores are higher on all attributes except? variety?. Further, consumers feel that fast food outlets must provideadditional information on nutritional values and hygiene conditions insidekitchen. Practical implications ± Fast food providers need to focus on quality andvariety of food besides other service parameters. There is need tocommunicate the information about hygiene and nutrition value of fastfood which will help in building trust in the food provided by fast food players. Originality/value ± Estimates importance of various factors affecting thechoice of fast food outlets by Indian young consumers. As. J. Food Ag-Ind. 2009, 2(03), 412-433, Asian Journal of Food andAgro-Industry, ISSN 1906-3040,Food safety research in IndiabyR. V. Sudershan , Pratima Rao and Kalpagam Polasa:Abstract:With growing international trade, food safety has emerged as animportant global issue. The present research was an attempt to study thefood safety research in India in the past ten years during 1995-2005. Many studies were focused on detection of pathogenic microorganisms,adulterants and contaminants in food. However, there is a striking paucityof reliable data on important issues like evaluation of risks throughadulterants, additives and contaminants. Consequently, the protection of diets from these hazards must be considered one of the essential publichealth functions of any country, which emphasizes the need for total dietstudies. MethodologyThe status of food safety research in India was reviewed by assessing data published in journals,websites and published data from universities in the form of doctoraltheses and dissertations atthe post-graduate level. For this, literature for the years 1995-2005 wasreviewed. The studies that wereincluded for this review were those with a representative sample size andcarried out by scholarsstudying in well-reputed universities, doctoral theses, original researcharticles in peer reviewed journals, annual reports of research organizations and institutions. Qualitative reviews werereviewed in similar topics and the results were tabulated and compared toget a better understanding of the research carried out in these issues. The findings of the selected studies have been discussed under thefollowingtopics:Health Risk: probability of an adverse event of diarrhea. Hazard Identification: pathogens, adulterants, contaminants and their health effects. Industrial food safety: existing laws, standards, sanitation and hygiene practices, specific hazards. Hazard ExposureAssessment: how much people eat, what food theyconsume and where they consume. Consumer Behaviour: hand washing, hygiene. I

National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA)

National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) The National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) was founded in 1890. Preceded by: National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA) and American Woman Suffrage Association (AWSA) Succeeded by: League of Women Voters (1920) Key Figures Founding figures: Lucy Stone, Alice Stone Blackwell, Susan B. Anthony, Harriot Stanton Blatch, Rachel Foster, Elizabeth Cady StantonOther leaders: Carrie Chapman Catt, Anna Howard Shaw, Frances Willard, Mary Church Terrell, Jeannette Rankin, Lillie Devereux Blake, Laura Clay, Madeleine McDowell Breckinridge, Ida Husted Harper, Maud Wood Park, Alice Paul, Lucy Burns Key Characteristics Used both state-by-state organizing and push for a federal constitutional amendment, organized large suffrage parades, published many organizing and other brochures, pamphlets, and books, met annually in convention; less militant than the Congressional Union / National Womans Party Publication: The Womans Journal (which had been the publication of the AWSA) remained in publication until 1917; followed by the Woman Citizen About the National American Woman Suffrage Association In 1869, the woman suffrage movement in the United States had split into two main rival organizations, the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA) and the American Woman Suffrage Association (AWSA). By the mid-1880s, it was apparent that the leadership of the movement involved in the split was aging. Neither side had succeeded in convincing either many states or the federal government to adopt womens suffrage. The Anthony Amendment extending the vote to women through constitutional amendment had been introduced into Congress in 1878; in 1887, the Senate took its first vote on the amendment and soundly defeated it. The Senate would not vote again on the amendment for another 25 years. Also in 1887, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Matilda Joslyn Gage, Susan B. Anthony and others published a 3-volume History of Woman Suffrage, documenting that history mostly from the viewpoint of the AWSA but also including history from the NWSA. At the October 1887 convention of the AWSA, Lucy Stone proposed that the two organizations explore a merger. A group met in December, including women from both organizations: Lucy Stone, Susan B. Anthony, Alice Stone Blackwell (Lucy Stones daughter) and Rachel Foster. The next year, the NWSA organized a 40th-anniversary celebration of the Seneca Falls Womans Rights Convention and invited the AWSA to take part. Successful Merger The merger negotiations were successful, and in February 1890, the merged organization named the National American Woman Suffrage Association, held its first convention, in Washington, DC. Elected as the first president was Elizabeth Cady Stanton and as vice president Susan B. Anthony. Lucy Stone was elected as the chairman [sic] of the Executive Committee. Stantons election as president was largely symbolic, as she traveled to England to spend two years there right after being elected. Anthony served as de facto head of the organization. Gage's Alternative Organization Not all suffrage supporters joined the merger. Matilda Joslyn Gage founded the Womens National Liberal Union in 1890, as an organization that would work for womens rights beyond just the vote. She was president until she died in 1898. She edited the publication The Liberal Thinker between 1890 and 1898. NAWSA 1890 to 1912 Susan B. Anthony succeeded Elizabeth Cady Stanton as president in 1892, and Lucy Stone died in 1893. Between 1893 and 1896, womens suffrage became law in the new state of Wyoming (which had, in 1869, included it in its territorial law). Colorado, Utah, and Idaho amended their state constitutions to include womens suffrage. The publication of The Womans Bible by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Matilda Joslyn Gage and 24 others in 1895 and 1898 led to a NAWSA decision to explicitly disavow any connection with that work. The NAWSA wanted to focus on womens vote, and the younger leadership thought criticism of religion would threaten their possibilities for success. Stanton was never invited to the stage at another NAWSA convention. Stantons position in the suffrage movement as a symbolic leader suffered from that point, and Anthonys role was stressed more after that. From 1896 to 1910, the NAWSA organized about 500 campaigns to get woman suffrage on state ballots as referenda. In the few cases where the issue actually got on to the ballot, it failed. In 1900, Carrie Chapman Catt succeeded Anthony as president of the NAWSA. In 1902, Stanton died, and in 1904, Catt was succeeded as president by Anna Howard Shaw. In 1906, Susan B. Anthony died, and the first generation of leadership was gone. From 1900 to 1904, the NAWSA focused on a Society Plan to recruit members who were well-educated and had political influence. In 1910, the NAWSA began to try to appeal more to women beyond the educated classes and moved to more public action. That same year, Washington State established statewide woman suffrage, followed in 1911 by California and in 1912 in Michigan, Kansas, Oregon, and Arizona. In 1912, the Bull Moose / Progressive Party platform supported woman suffrage. Also at about that time, many of the Southern suffragists began to work against the strategy of a federal amendment, fearing it would interfere with Southern limits on voting rights directed at African Americans. NAWSA and the Congressional Union In 1913, Lucy Burns and Alice Paul organized the Congressional Committee as an auxiliary within the NAWSA. Having seen more militant actions in England, Paul and Burns wanted to organize something more dramatic. The Congressional Committee within NAWSA organized a large suffrage parade in Washington, DC, held the day before Woodrow Wilsons inauguration. Five to eight thousand marched in the parade, with half a million onlookers―including many opponents who insulted, spit on and even attacked the marchers. Two hundred marchers were injured, and Army troops were called in when police would not stop the violence. Although black suffrage supporters were told to march at the back of the march, so as not to threaten support for woman suffrage among white Southern legislators, some of the black supporters including Mary Church Terrell circumvented that and joined the main march. Alice Pauls committee promoted actively the Anthony Amendment, re-introduced into Congress in April of 1913. Another large march was held in May of 1913 in New York. This time, about 10,000 marched, with men making up about 5 percent of the participants. Estimates range from 150,000 to half a million onlookers. More demonstrations, including an automobile procession, followed, and a speaking tour with Emmeline Pankhurst. By December, the more conservative national leadership had decided that the Congressional Committees actions were unacceptable. The December national convention expelled the Congressional Committee, which went on to form the Congressional Union and later became the National Womans Party. Carrie Chapman Catt had led the move to expel the Congressional Committee and its members; she was elected president again in 1915. The NAWSA in 1915 adopted its strategy, in contrast to the continued militancy of the Congressional Union: the Winning Plan. This strategy, proposed by Catt and adopted at the organizations Atlantic City convention, would use the states that had already given women the vote to push for a federal amendment. Thirty state legislatures petitioned Congress for womens suffrage. At the time of World War I, many women, including Carrie Chapman Catt, became involved in the Womans Peace Party, opposing that war. Others within the movement, including within NAWSA, supported the war effort or switched from peace work to war support when the United States entered the war. They worried that pacifism and war opposition would work against the suffrage movements momentum. Victory In 1918, the US House of Representatives passed the Anthony Amendment, but the Senate turned it down. With both wings of the suffrage movement continuing their pressure, President Woodrow Wilson was finally persuaded to support suffrage. In May of 1919, the House passed it again, and in June the Senate approved it. Then the ratification went to the states. On August 26, 1920, after the ratification by the Tennessee legislature, the Anthony Amendment became the 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution. After 1920 The NAWSA, now that woman suffrage had passed, reformed itself and became the League of Women Voters. Maud Wood Park was the first president. In 1923, the National Womans Party first proposed an Equal Rights Amendment to the constitution. The six-volume  History of Woman Suffrage  was completed in 1922 when  Ida Husted Harper  published the last two volumes covering 1900 to victory in 1920.

Biography of Audrey Hepburn, Elegant Actress

Biography of Audrey Hepburn, Elegant Actress Audrey Hepburn (May 4, 1929–Jan. 20, 1993) was an Academy-Award winning actress and a fashion icon in the 20th century. Having almost starved to death in the Nazi-occupied Netherlands during World War II, Hepburn became a goodwill ambassador for starving children. Considered one of the most beautiful and elegant women in the world then and now, Hepburns beauty shone through her doe eyes and contagious smile. A trained ballet dancer who never performed in a ballet, Hepburn was Hollywood’s most sought-after actress in the mid-20th century. Fast Facts: Audrey Hepburn Known For: Famous 20th-century actressAlso Known As: Audrey Kathleen Ruston, Edda van HeemstraBorn: May 4, 1929 in  Brussels, BelgiumParents: Baroness Ella van Heemstra, Joseph Victor Anthony RustonDied: Jan. 20,1993 in  Vaud, SwitzerlandNoted Films: Roman Holiday, Sabrina,  My Fair Lady, Breakfast at Tiffany’sAwards and Honors: Academy Award for Best Actress and Golden Globe for Best Actress (Roman Holiday, 1954), BAFTA (The Nuns Story, 1960), Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award (1993), Emmy Award for Outstanding Individual Achievement – Informational Programming (Gardens of the World with Audrey Hepburn, 1993)Spouse(s): Mel Ferrer (m.  1954–1968), Andrea Dotti (m.  1969–1982)Children: Sean Hepburn Ferrer, Luca DottiNotable Quote: The beauty of a woman must be seen from in her eyes because that is the doorway to her heart, the place where love resides. Early Years Hepburn was born the daughter of a British father and a Dutch mother in Brussels, Belgium, on May 4, 1929. When Hepburn was 6 years old, her father Joseph Victor Anthony Hepburn-Ruston, a heavy drinker, deserted the family. Hepburns mother Baroness Ella van Heemstra moved her two sons (Alexander and Ian from a previous marriage) and Hepburn from Brussels to her father’s mansion in Arnhem, Netherlands. The following year in 1936, Hepburn left the country and moved to England to attend a private boarding school in Kent, where she enjoyed dance classes taught by a London ballet master. In 1939, when Hepburn was 10, Germany invaded Poland, beginning World War II. When England declared war on Germany, the Baroness moved Hepburn back to Arnhem for safety. However, Germany soon invaded the Netherlands. Life Under Nazi Occupation Hepburn lived under Nazi occupation from 1940 to 1945, using the name Edda van Heemstra so as not to sound English. Still living a privileged life, Hepburn received ballet training from Winja Marova at the Arnhem School of Music, where she received praise for her posture, personality, and performance. Life was normal at first; kids went to football games, swim meets, and the movie theater. However, with half a million occupying German soldiers using up Dutch resources, fuel and food shortages were soon rampant. These scarcities caused the Netherlands child death rate to increase by 40 percent. In the winter of 1944, Hepburn, who had already been enduring very little to eat, and her family were evicted when Nazi officers seized the Van Heemstra mansion. With most of their wealth confiscated, the Baron (Hepburn’s grandfather), Hepburn, and her mother moved to the Baron’s villa in the town of Velp, three miles outside of Arnhem. The war affected Hepburn’s extended family as well. Her Uncle Otto was shot to death for attempting to blow up a railroad. Hepburn’s half-brother Ian was forced to work in a German munitions factory in Berlin. Hepburn’s half-brother Alexander joined the underground Dutch resistance. Working for the Dutch Resistance Hepburn also resisted Nazi occupation. When the Germans confiscated all the radios, Hepburn delivered secret underground newspapers, which she hid in her oversized boots. She continued ballet and gave recitals to make money for the resistance until she was too weak from malnutrition. Four days after Adolf Hitler ended his life by committing suicide on April 30, 1945, the liberation of the Netherlands took place- coincidentally on Hepburn’s 16th birthday. Hepburn’s half-brothers returned home. The United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration brought boxes of food, blankets, medicine, and clothes. Hepburn was suffering from colitis, jaundice, severe edema, anemia, endometriosis, asthma, and depression. With the war over, her family tried to resume a normal life. Hepburn no longer had to call herself Edda van Heemstra and went back to her name of Audrey Hepburn-Ruston. Hepburn and her mother worked at the Royal Military Invalids Home. Alexander (age 25) worked for the government in reconstruction projects while Ian (age 21) worked for Unilever, an Anglo-Dutch food and detergent company. Rise to Fame In 1945, Winja Marova referred Hepburn to Sonia Gaskell’s Ballet Studio ’45 in Amsterdam, where Hepburn studied ballet for three more years. Gaskell believed that Hepburn had something special; especially the way she used her doe eyes to captivate audiences. Gaskell introduced Hepburn to Marie Rambert of Ballet Rambert in London, a company performing night revues in London and international tours. Hepburn auditioned for Rambert and was accepted with scholarship in early 1948. By October, Rambert told Hepburn that she did not have the physique to become a prima ballerina because she was too tall (Hepburn was 5-foot-7). Plus, Hepburn didn’t compare to the other dancers since she had begun serious training too late in her life. Ups and Downs Devastated that her dream was over, Hepburn tried out for a part in the chorus line in High Button Shoes, a zany play at London’s Hippodrome. She got the part and performed 291 shows, using the name Audrey Hepburn. Afterward, Cecil Landeau, producer of the play Sauce Tartare (1949) had spotted Hepburn and cast her as the girl walking across the stage holding up the title card for each skit. With her impish smile and large eyes, she was cast at higher pay in the play’s sequel, Sauce Piquant (1950), in a few comedy skits. In 1950, Hepburn modeled part-time and registered herself as a freelance actress with the British film studio. She appeared in several bit parts in small movies before landing the role of a ballerina in The Secret People (1952), where she was able to show off her ballet talent. In 1951, the famed French writer Colette was on the set of Monte Carlo Baby (1953) and spotted Hepburn playing the small part of a spoiled actress in the movie. Colette cast Hepburn as Gigi in her musical comedy play Gigi, which opened on Nov. 24, 1951, on Broadway in New York at the Fulton Theater. Simultaneously, director William Wyler was looking for a European actress to play the lead role of a princess in his new movie, Roman Holiday, a romantic comedy. Executives in the Paramount London office had Hepburn do a screen test. Wyler was enchanted and Hepburn got the role. Gigi ran until May 31, 1952, earning Hepburn a Theatre World Award and plenty of recognition. Hepburn in Hollywood When Gigi ended, Hepburn flew to Rome to star in Roman Holiday (1953). The movie was a box-office success and Hepburn received the Academy Award for Best Actress in 1953 when she was 24 years old. Capitalizing on its newest star, Paramount cast her as the lead in Sabrina (1954), another romantic comedy, directed by Billy Wilder and in which Hepburn played a Cinderella type. It was the top box-office hit of the year and Hepburn was nominated for Best Actress again  but lost to Grace Kelly in The Country Girl. In 1954, Hepburn met and dated actor Mel Ferrer when they co-starred on Broadway in the hit play Ondine. When the play ended, Hepburn received the Tony Award and married Ferrer on September 25, 1954, in Switzerland.​ After a miscarriage, Hepburn fell into a deep depression. Ferrer suggested she return to work. Together they starred in the film War and Peace (1956), a romantic drama, with Hepburn getting top billing. While Hepburn’s career offered many successes, including another Best Actress nomination for her dramatic portrayal of Sister Luke in The Nun’s Story (1959), Ferrer’s career was on the decline. Hepburn discovered she was pregnant again in late 1958  but was on contract to star in a Western, The Unforgiven (1960), which began filming in January 1959. Later that same month during filming, she fell off a horse and broke her back. Although she recovered, Hepburn gave birth to a stillborn that spring. Her depression went deeper. Iconic Look Thankfully, Hepburn gave birth to a healthy son, Sean Hepburn-Ferrer, on January 17, 1960. Little Sean was always in tow and even accompanied his mother on the set of Breakfast at Tiffanys (1961). With fashions designed by Hubert de Givenchy, the film catapulted Hepburn as a fashion icon; she appeared on nearly every fashion magazine that year. The press took its toll, however, and the Ferrers bought La Paisible, an 18th-century farmhouse in Tolochenaz, Switzerland, to live in privacy. Hepburns successful career continued when she starred in The Children’s Hour (1961), Charade (1963), and then was cast in the universally acclaimed musical film, My Fair Lady (1964). After more successes, including the thriller Wait Until Dark (1967), the Ferrers separated. Two More Lovers In June 1968, Hepburn was cruising to Greece with friends aboard the yacht of Italy’s Princess Olympia Torlonia when she met Dr. Andrea Dotti, an Italian psychiatrist. That December, the Ferrers divorced after 14 years of marriage. Hepburn retained custody of Sean and married Dotti six weeks later. On February 8, 1970, at age 40, Hepburn gave birth to her second son, Luca Dotti. The Dottis lived in Rome, but while Ferrer had been nine years older than Hepburn, Dotti was nine years younger and still enjoyed the nightlife. In order to focus her attention on her family, Hepburn took a lengthy hiatus from Hollywood. Despite all her efforts, however, Dotti’s ongoing adultery caused Hepburn to seek a divorce in 1979 after nine years of marriage. In 1981 when Hepburn was 52, she met 46-year-old Robert Wolders, a Dutch-born investor and actor, who remained her companion for the rest of her life. Later Years Although Hepburn ventured back into a few more movies, in 1988 her main focus became helping with the United Nations International Childrens Emergency Fund (UNICEF). As a spokesperson for children in crises, she remembered the United Nations relief in Holland after WWII and threw herself into her work. She and Wolders traveled the world six months a year, bringing national attention to the needs of starving, sick children throughout the world. In 1992, Hepburn thought she had picked up a stomach virus in Somalia  but was soon diagnosed with colon cancer. After an unsuccessful surgery for colon cancer in November 1992, her doctors gave her three months to live. Death Hepburn, age 63, passed away on Jan. 20, 1993, at La Paisible. Her death was announced by UNICEF, the United Nations Childrens Fund, for which she had been a special ambassador since 1988. At a quiet funeral in Switzerland, pallbearers included Hubert de Givenchy and ex-husband Mel Ferrer. Legacy Though Hepburns film career was relatively brief, spanning mainly only the 1950s and 1960s, the American Film Institute named her among the greatest movie stars of all time. The AFI placed Hepburn in the third spot on its AFIs 100 Years...100 Stars  list of the 50 greatest screen legends, behind only Katharine Hepburn, at No. 1, and Betty Davis, at No. 2. (Katherine Hepburn and Audrey Hepburn were not related.) Hepburn is still remembered for such films as Roman Holiday and Breakfast at Tiffanys,  and to this day, she is still looked upon as a fashion icon for her style and elegance. Even decades after her death, Hepburn continues to be voted as one of the most beautiful women of all time on numerous polls. Sources â€Å"AFIs 100 Years...100 Stars.†Ã‚  American Film Institute.â€Å"Audrey Hepburn.†Ã‚  Biography.com, AE Networks Television, 22 Jan. 2019â€Å"Audrey Hepburn.†Ã‚  IMDb, IMDb.com.Friedman, Vanessa. â€Å"Givenchy and Hepburn: The Original Brand Ambassadors.†Ã‚  The New York Times, The New York Times, 13 Mar. 2018.â€Å"The Most Beautiful Women Of All Time.†Ã‚  Esquire, Esquire, 26 Nov. 2018.James, Caryn. â€Å"Audrey Hepburn, Actress, Is Dead at 63.†Ã‚  The New York Times, 21 Jan. 1993.Riding, Alan. â€Å"25 Years Later, Honor for Audrey Hepburn.†Ã‚  The New York Times, The New York Times, 22 Apr. 1991.Roman Holiday. Filmsite.org.

Exploratory Paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

Exploratory Paper - Essay Example The only drug that has the potential to depress these symptoms is marijuana. However, because of its illegality, it cannot be given to patients. This paper seeks to explore the various viewpoints regarding medical marijuana issue and its legalization. Doctors believe that marijuana is an appetite builder, a great painkiller, and reduces nausea. Many patients in California, which legalizes medical marijuana use, claim that it relieves symptoms related to chemotherapy (Beau 12). Patients even report enhancement of prescription drugs by marijuana. However, not all doctors believe in the use marijuana, in the treatment of cancer patients. Dr. Hiebert, a hypnotist who helps people kick marijuana, claims that marijuana worsens glaucoma and increases MS symptoms (Beau 13). The final decision on marijuana use for medical purposes lies with the judicial system and lawmakers (Beau 21). The US Supreme Court has opened hearings into whether marijuana distribution for medical use should be legalized under federal law. This case was prompted, by legislation, to legalize marijuana for medicinal use in California. This shows that some courts are becoming lenient towards the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Federal courts, however, are very serious on the illegality of marijuana and aim to keep it this way. A judiciary panel resolved that marijuana should not be legalized for medical purposes. They labeled it an addictive and dangerous drug as it is under the Controlled Substance Act. Because of this, marijuana has been labeled as psychologically and physiologically damaging without reference to the manner of its use. The federal judicial branch prefers not to legalize it, according to the annual report on alcoholism, as they consider it just as dangero us as cocaine (Beau 23). Law enforcement and government’s approach have a lot of influence on the possibility of legalization of medical marijuana. In states that have

A critical evaluation of the role of Friends of the Earth in the Essay

A critical evaluation of the role of Friends of the Earth in the development of policy responses to climate change in the United Kingdom - Essay Example Thus, one can easily relate Climate Change to the Global Financial Crisis, as the latter seems to be the deterring point behind the ignorance on the former. However, this isn’t the point where it can be established that Climate Change is a lost cause. Instead, a few examples can still be narrated where government involvement led toward policy responses, and that too legally binding in context to the state legislation. The scholarship on climate change indicates that government involvement with the issue is very critical to resolving the crisis at hand. Also, the efforts that are already being done must be rocketed by taking the crucial stakeholders into confidence. In other words, theoretical paradigms in climate change studies indicate that the social interest groups or volunteer organizations can play a positive role in bringing the issue on agenda, and once the issue transforms into a political one legislations are bound to be designed. However, certain steps need to be fol lowed which includes; developing or identifying non-environmental leadership, initiating action in the community, changing lifestyles and lastly transforming it into a global effort. Policy responses on the issue of climate change will only result after the intermingling of three actors; normative rationale on part of government, citizen`s will to take action and accurate consultation designs by organizations/individuals having expertise. To prove the point, a critical analysis of the organization functioning actively in the UK, the Friends of the Earth can be quite insightful. The organization reached a huge breakthrough in 2008, when after many concerted efforts; they were able to incorporate the Climate Change Act of 2008 in the UK, with binding legislations aiming at controlling the environmental damages via limiting carbon emitting gases. The organization i.e. Friends of the Earth initiated their campaign by publishing

Leadership ethics of legalizing marijuana

Leadership ethics of legalizing marijuana Introduction Marijuana, also known as weed, grass, bud, or pot, is the second most commonly used recreational drug in America, behind only alcohol, a legal substance. The drug comes from the leaves of the hemp plant, cannabis sativa. It has a high concentration of the drugs active ingredient, Tetrahydrocannabinols, also known as THC. While many users smoke the leaves of the plant to get high (psychologically impaired), studies show that marijuana has many legitimate medical uses. These uses include alleviating nausea due to chemotherapy, improving the severe weight loss of AIDS patients, and treating pain which may not respond to mainstream opoids such as Morphine. Marijuana has been used throughout history for both medical and spiritual purposes. It has been used to relieve stress, reduce pain, and cure fatigue, however United States Federal Law classifies marijuana as a schedule I substance in the Controlled Substances Act. This act defines schedule I drugs as having three traits: The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse. The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States. There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision. (Controlled Substances Act 2002) This act does also define Tetrahydrocannabinols as a schedule I drug, thus making the possession of marijuana illegal under federal law. However, some state governments have gone against the federal precedent and legalized marijuana for medicinal purposes. In 1996, California was the first such state, under Proposition 215. However, even within these states, some counties may choose to not support the legalization. This had led to the arrest of many patients who may have unknowingly travelled into the wrong county. Outside the United States, the legislation regarding marijuana possession and use is much less restrictive. Parts of Canada and several countries in Europe have legalized the use and possession of marijuana for both medicinal and recreational purposes. The figure below shows several legalization levels for nations around the world. As one can see on the map, a majority of European nations as well as most of South America have decriminalized marijuana use whereas most of the United States are red, meaning marijuana is confirmed illegal. There are three possible options for legalization, each with its own benefits, drawbacks, and ethical issues for our leaders. The three options are complete prohibition (US Federal Law), legalization of medicinal marijuana (California Law), and the complete legalization. This paper seeks to not only analyze the three options for legalization (or prohibition), but more so to evaluate the issues implications for the ethical decisions of leaders. The issue of marijuana becomes an ethical issue when you consider the fact that prohibition of the drug also prevents patients from getting the aid they need. Leaders of the United States and any other government dealing with this issue need to consider the ethical implications of their decisions. As discussed in Defining Moments, these decisions can be considered right vs. right decisions or decisions where both options seem to be right. In the case of marijuana legalization, leaders and lawmakers are considering the ethical weight of allowing patients the medicine they need or completely preventing the abuse of an illicit drug. Both decisions seem right in their own ways but the options exclusive of each other. This forces leaders to evaluate their own morality and utilize their ethical decision making capabilities to make a decision that, based on all ethical factors, they can consider right. Through the examination of ethical, legal, and economic factors, this paper will reveal that the legalization of marijuana is the most forward thinking and ethical option for dealing with marijuana. However, in order to enact this change, transformational leaders who recognize the benefits and drawbacks of all options must be a part of the decision making process. The paper strives to reveal significant insight to the following question. Why do leaders choose to support or oppose the legalization of marijuana? Considering pertinent evidence, what option for the legalization of marijuana is most ethical? And, what type of leadership is necessary to do the right thing? Leadership in Theory Leadership ethics and the moral decisions they are forced to make have long been a topic of philosophers discussions. The way that leaders reveal themselves through their ethical decisions affects how their followers view them. Additionally, the morals which a leader portrays will be mimicked among much of the population. In this way, leaders have the power to mold the morals and views of those they lead. This power can be either beneficial or destructive to the leaders power depending on how its utilized. Adolf Hitler used this power, for horrific purposes, to create a sense of extreme pride and nationalism which caused them to follow him somewhat blindly. Plato, a Greek philosopher, argues that leaders must make ethical decisions based on the greater good of the people affected by the decision. That is, rule not with self interest, but the interest of your followers. This frames the analysis of the legalization decisions because, if leaders believe that the use of marijuana can benefit their citizens then, according to Plato, legalization is the morally right option. In The Ethics of Leadershipip, Joanne Ciulla provides a passage from Plato which states, because our bodies are deficient rather than self sufficient, the craft of medicine has now been discovered. The craft of medicine was developed to provide what s advantageous for a body. (Ciulla, 19) Therefore, if marijuana were proven to be a medicine it would then be considered by Plato advantageous to the citizens. Therefore, providing the ability for the suffering to get this medicine would be good leadership. Ayn Rand would disagree with Plato, however. Rand argues that leaders must rule with their own self interest as their primary motivator. She says, Accept the fact that the achievement of your happiness is the only moral purpose of your life, and that happinessis the proof of your moral integrity. (Ciulla, 51) She believes that the pursuit of ones self interests is indicative of their dedication to their morals and values and that, Rand argues, is the proof of your morality. This frames the analysis of the ethical implications of marijuana legalization, because, as Rand would argue, unless the leaders and lawmakers were somehow benefitting from legalization they should not choose to enact such laws, regardless of what others want and/or need. However, there is one theory that seems to be key to enacting any sort of change in marijuana laws. The necessity for transformational leadership is vital to the cause of bringing about change. Transformational leadership is a type of leadership where leaders use their power to enact valuable and positive change in the people they lead. (Bass) This consideration is important for two reasons. First, in order to reform marijuana laws, transformational leaders will be needed to enact the changes. Secondly, these transformational leaders will be compelled to enact this change if they can see it as valuable and positive. So, if you consider this theory with Platos thoughts, the medicinal purpose of marijuana would be advantageous and, thus, the legalization of it would be a valuable and positive change because it would allow people to get the things their bodies need. So, for the sake of this evaluation, I will examine the presence (or absence) of transformational leaders. Therefore, the framework for this paper will be the three theories of leadership that I have outlined in this section. For each option of legalization, I will discuss the ethical issues that leaders face when dealing with the question of legalizing the use of marijuana. I will also add discussion on each option with respect to each theory; Plato, Rand, and the idea of transformational leadership. What this paper serves to prove is that, under the theoretical framework outlined in this section, the legalization of marijuana appeals to all three of the theories discussed above. So, under this framework, legalizing and taxing marijuana is the most feasible and potentially successful option. However, during this discussion, I will answer the questions of how each option of legalization discussed in this pertains to the three theories of Plato, Rand, and transformational leadership. Option 1: Complete Prohibition The first option I will discuss is the complete prohibition of the possession and use of marijuana for any purpose. This is how a large portion of the United States operates. Marijuana is considered taboo to mainstream culture, so its use outlawed. However, cannabis is still the second most used recreational drug in America. (Joy 1999) Pros Now, this does accomplish some important goals. First of all, it serves as a mode to limit the abuse of the drug. By criminalizing the possession and use of marijuana, law makers will deter some citizens from using the drug. Many people do view this deterrence as a good improvement and they cite the harmful effects of smoke inhalation as their justification. One of the most popular argument is the effects that smoking marijuana has on the lungs. As with inhaling any type of smoke, carcinogens in marijuana smoke can cause damage to the lungs and respiratory system. Tan argues, Participants who had smoked at least 50 marijuana cigarettes but had no history of tobacco smoking were not at significantly greater risk for either outcome. (The outcomes were respiratory symptoms and COPD) This statement suggests that smoking marijuana has similar effects on the respiratory system as smoking tobacco. Further, he says, Those who had smoked both tobacco and marijuana had a significantly greater risk of COPD and respiratory symptoms. (Tan, 2009) Tan is proving is that, while solely smoking marijuana is no more dangerous that smoking cigarettes, combining the two significantly increases the risk of respiratory issues. Therefore, the prohibitionists justify criminalization by claiming that the use and abuse of marijuana has degenerative effects on the lungs. Another claim cannabis prohibitionists make to justify their stance is that marijuana use has addictive properties, similar to nicotine. They claim that marijuana addiction is a critical issue in the legalization discussion. Their main focus is the addictive effects on youth. In a study by Iain McGregor on the effects of THC injections on the brains and behaviors of adolescent and adult male rats, McGregor found that adolescent brains are still maturing, and say they seem to be more vulnerable to THC (Youngsters, 2007). The article cites that after the injections of THC, the adult rats avoided the injection area, however, the adolescent rats showed no such aversion (Youngsters, 2007). This observation, McGregor says, shows that the adult rats, contrary from the adolescent subjects, found the THC unpleasant. Since the test was set up to mimic human conditions under heavy cannabis usage, this would suggests that youths are more susceptible to becoming addicted to cannabis since they sh ow no disdain for the effects of the drug. This conclusion is underscored by the fact that, according to the US Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, adolescent cannabis use is rising. This means that more youth are trying marijuana and, based on McGregors results, becoming addicted to the effects of THC. Cons However, the complete prohibition of marijuana, along with the arguments that prohibition supporters use to justify it, has flaws. One of the largest such drawbacks of prohibition is the matter of getting medicinal marijuana to patients. Additionally, marijuana has been shown to have preventative medicinal purposes. An experiment by Prof. Raphael Mechoulam showed that the use of marijuana can significantly slow the effects of Alzheimers Disease. In this experiment, Mechoulams team found that cannabinoids not only prevented cognitive decline, but also reduced the inflammation associated with the disease. Inflammation is normal says Gary Wenk of Ohio State University, however, in some cases, this inflammation gets out of hand and causes serious damage (Pot May Help, 2006). There is a solid link between chronic inflammation in the brain and the progression of Alzheimers Wenk says, but mentions that the anti-inflammatory properties of marijuana can help to prevent this. However, all of t his is null if the drug is criminalized. Those with family histories of Alzheimers are forced to accept the onset of the disease because lawmakers deemed the drug illicit. The justification, discussed above, of the prohibition of marijuana is also flawed. For example, the argument regarding the respiratory damage from marijuana is hypocritical. The study discussed above demonstrated that marijuana smoke is equally as destructive as tobacco smoke. Tobacco, however, is legal. So, how can the prevention of respiratory damage be a viable justification if you are not going to prevent the damage from an equally as dangerous substance? Ethical Issues These benefits and drawbacks of prohibition are part of the ethical struggle that leaders have to face. On one hand, prohibition does what iss morally right by protecting citizens from a harmful drug. However, the proof of the harmfulness of marijuana is light and many studies show it to be no more dangerous than other, legalized, substances. In 1988, then DEA Judge Francis L. Young said, Marijuana is the safest therapeutically active substance known to man safer than many foods we commonly consume (Armento, 2009). So, if it is in fact safer than most foods and, at the very least, it has therapeutic benefits, why is there a need for it to be prohibited? Additionally, the attempt to stop the use is failing. Youth usage levels are rising and the use of marijuana is not isolated to those states that have since legalized medical marijuana. In fact, marijuana usage is no regionally exclusive in this country. The map below shows the states with highest reported marijuana usage in the United States. The graph shows a rather even distribution across the countries, with high usage rates in the Northeast, West, and Midwest. This is a demonstration that the prohibition of marijuana is not successful. In regards to leadership, the leaders supporting the prohibition of marijuana are playing it safe and staying with the status quo. No signs of transformational leadership are being demonstrated by lawmakers who arent striving for change, but instead leading to remain in power. This is despite the fact that data such as the figure above show that the citizens see marijuana as a positive and are yearning for change to the current laws. Transformational leaders would recognize this and work to enact this positive change in government. This means going against the status quo and transforming the legislation into something the people support. The other side of the ethical debate over prohibition is that it limits the ability for patients to receive the medicine they need. I explained earlier how marijuana can be used as a preventative medicine to prevent Alzheimers and in later sections I will discuss, in further detail, the beneficial effects of medicinal marijuana. However, prohibition offers no permissions to patients to obtain the drug. Nor does it allow any judicial allowances to those arrested for the possession or use of marijuana, even if they are using it for medical reasons. Ethically, this is the weakest part of the argument in favor of prohibition. Lets analyze this piece using sleep test ethics. In his book, Defining Moments, Joseph L Badaracco discusses sleep test ethics as a means of evaluating ethical decisions. Badaracco explains sleep-test ethics as a person who has made the right choice can sleep soundly afterward; someone who has made the wrong choice cannot. (Badaracco, 1997) If we apply this to the idea of prohibition, we can see the ethical issue involved in prohibition. If you had to deny a dying patient the medicine to ease their suffering in order to continue a feeble attempt to control the recreational use of the medicine, would you be able to sleep soundly at night? These are the issues that prohibitionist lawmakers face when dealing with marijuana in their districts. It seems to be a policy vs. people debate, but at the heart is the a moral and ethical battle between right and right. Badaracco explains these right vs. right situations as defining moments which are used to not only reveal but shape a leaders character. How our lawmakers handle the issues of marijuana prohibition will affect how others view their morality. Option 2: Legalization of Medicinal Marijuana The second option for marijuana legalization is to legalize the medicinal use of marijuana only. Currently, there are 13 states that have disregarded the federal prohibition laws and have legalized the possession and use of marijuana for medical purposes. These states, with the year in which they legalized medicinal marijuana are shown in the table below. Pros Marijuana has been used as medicine since ancient times. It has pain relieving and anti-inflammatory properties when smoked. This is because the heat of burning the cannabis activates the THC in the plant which then enters ones body with the smoke. Through most of the 80s and 90s, the United States federal government prohibited the testing of marijuana smoke for medicinal purposes. However, in 2002, the Drug Enforcement Administration granted approvals to scientists for the limited use [of marijuana] in scientific experiments. (Hilts, 2002) In his article, Hilts said, that scientists at the University of California will begin testing the effects of smoking marijuana on the limb pain experiences due to Multiple Sclerosis and AIDS. Scientists have found evidence that links marijuana, specifically THC, with medical benefits, both curative and preventative. As I have explained above, THC has shown to have preventative effects against Alzheimers disease in older people. Additionally, it is a drug of interest because it is one of the few prescribed for neurological decay that doesnt just focus on the symptoms, but instead, the root cause, the inflammation due to age. However, marijuana also has very significant curative benefits as well for patients. In his review of the Dying to Get High, Ellis cites a story from 1992 where a woman was using marijuana with successinstead of pharmaceutical drugs to control her seizures. (Ellis, n.d.) The seizures, Ellis said were caused by a car accident 20 years ago and the woman, Valerie Corral, had successfully controlled them for those 20 years with marijuana. Ellis elaborates on some of the other proven medical uses of marijuana. He says, In practice, this includes nausea and appetite loss in Cancer and AIDS treatments, chronic pain, glaucoma, and seizures related to multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, and epilepsy. (Ellis, n.d.) Studies have shown that intra-ocular pressure can be reduced by 45% through the use of marijuana (Hanrahan, 2006) This reduction is particularly important to the treatment of Glaucoma. The studies also show that cannabis also has antimicrobial action and antibacterial effects su ch as being able to destroy and inhibit the growth of streptococci and staphylococci bacteria. (Hanrahan, 2006) These bacteria are responsible for staph infections more common and in severe cases MRSA. The results suggest that cannabis, or specifically THC, can be used to eliminate and prevent staph infections. Additionally, by legalizing the use of medicinal marijuana, it is allowing more studies to be done, which may lead to more discoveries and cures. But most importantly, your helping the lives of patients with AIDS, Cancer, MS, and other to be made a little less strenuous and easing the suffering from their disease. Cons Legalization of medicinal marijuana is a somewhat meet in the middle option, meaning that it tries to appease as many people as possible. This option allows for the government to still attempt preventing the recreational use of the drug without denying patients the treatments they need. Therefore, the cons of this option are limited and weakly supported. Ethical Issues By legalizing cannabis for medicinal use, you are recognizing that the drug has beneficial uses for the prevention of many serious diseases, such as Alzheimers, yet you are still deeming it unsafe for recreational use. However, if the drug is being used for preventative measures, then recreational use would actually be beneficial to the population. Granted, abuse may become an issue over time, but so is the case for alcohol, yet that is not currently prohibited. Also, it may be harmful to the lungs and respiratory system, but no more so than tobacco smoke, which is also legal. Ethically however, it appears to be the moral thing to do. While there are some initial signs of transformational leadership, the changes are not significantly affecting all citizens. Leaders, while changing the laws in their state, are not pushing for the change in the federal law, which legally overrules the state laws. Therefore, in reality, the leaders are acting in their own self-interest, as Rand would suggest they do. They are maximizing their votes without taking a firm stand on either side of the argument. This is a way to keep them in office and ensure their own interests. However, they are showing no dedication to their own morals and values, which Badaracco says is how one reveals their ethics, by remaining dedicated to their set of values. Option 3: Complete Legalization Complete legalization is the more sparsely used option of the three. Only certain areas of Canada, such as Montreal, and few nations in Europe, such as Netherlands, have completely legalized the use of marijuana for any purpose, medicinal or recreational. This option shows the highest potential for economic benefit by allowing for the taxation while freeing up funding from the War on Drugs. Pros Throughout this analysis I have made several comparisons of marijuana to alcohol and tobacco. Marijuana is no more addictive or harmful physically than these two legal substances. So, marijuana could yield similar financial benefits through taxation as cigarettes and tobacco. Currently, tobacco is taxed by federal, state, and local governments which generate revenue for all organizations. Some places, where medical marijuana is legal, have begun taxing medical marijuana to benefit from its legalization. Oakland, CA was the first such city to do so, with support of 80% of the population. Once President Obama promised that the federal government would not interfere with a states regulation of the drug, transformational leaders, such as Tom Ammiano of California, introduced a bill to legalize the cultivation of marijuana and its distribution and sale to people over 21. (Puff, Puff, Pay, 2009) It seems that in our current economic crisis, any additional revenue would be viewed as a valuable and significant opportunity and some leaders are realizing that marijuana can be one of those opportunities. The California Board of Equalization estimates that, if Assemblyman Ammianos bill succeeds, the state of California could generate $1.4 billion in revenue. (Puff, Puff, Pay, 2009) The legalization of marijuana would also help to spur a boost in cannabis related tourism. For a state such as California, struggling through the economic turmoil our country has been in, these financial benefits are very appealing. And, if the policy were enacted nationwide, the revenue generated would simply multiply. Cons There are some noticeable drawbacks of the legalization of marijuana, but none nearly as significant as the financial gain from the legalization, sale, and taxation of cannabis. One such concern is that of addiction of people to cannabis. A Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration study has shown that the number of cannabis addicts has risen from 12% to 16% since 1997 (Puff, Puff, Pay, 2009). While this is not a particularly significant increase, this is a valid consideration when discussing the concept of legalizing marijuana use. This number would most likely increase more if marijuana were legal, however, the significance of this increase cannot be estimated. Ethical Issues This option for legalization requires the highest level of transformational leadership. The lawmakers need to realize that the legalization can be a valuable and positive change if executed properly. This positive change could not only allow the medical use of marijuana to cure and ease the suffering of significant diseases but also help their economy. Alcohol and tobacco are currently some of the most profitable industries for the United States government. Marijuana could generate revenue equal to, if not greater than tobacco and alcohol. This concept plays directly into Rands advice for leaders. Creating revenue for their state would secure their place in office as well as possibly affording our leaders some financial gains, such as pay raises and tax breaks due to increased revenue. Therefore, the legalization of marijuana to secure financial gain would be ruling in ones own self-interest, a concept that Rand is very adamant about. Additionally, Platos theories regarding ruling for the greater good come into play in this option as well. By legalizing marijuana completely, you are giving people the right to choose if they want to use marijuana and what they would like to use it for. Giving people more rights can be considered to be for the greater good. Also, it boosts the economy and creates jobs as retail, manufacturing, and shipping organizations will need to be developed to support the legalization. Conclusions This paper analyzed the three options of legalizing (or prohibiting) the use of marijuana for both medical and recreational reasons. It has presented the benefits and drawbacks of both marijuana and its legalization/prohibition. It has framed the analysis within the writings of Plato and Ayn Rand as well as against the ideas of transformational leadership. But what option is best or more right? In order to answer this question we must think of our criteria, or the framework of the analysis. We must judge each option based on this framework. A table below shows each option and how it pertains to the pieces of our framework. From this table we see that, each theory helps to support the case for complete legalization. Both philosophers views are present in the effects and consequences of this option. Allowing people the right to choose and the right to select their medicine is Platos view of ruling for the greater good. The tax benefits that leaders will undoubtedly see (though may never be officially attributed to the legalization of marijuana) is Rands view of ruling with self-interest. And the fact that they are transforming the values, morals, and ideas of what is acceptable of a society for valuable and positive change demonstrates their understanding of and dedication to the theories of transformational leadership. Under these criteria, the prohibition of marijuana completely does not support any of the theories by which we are evaluating. Therefore, in conclusion, the legalization of marijuana seems to be the best option for dealing with this issue. The legalization would allow the people who need treatment to get it and it could help with the economic crisis which is currently ravaging the world. Additionally, since marijuana has proven to actually have benefits, unlike tobacco and alcohol, it is a positive change in the culture of society. While laws pertaining to marijuana will need to be developed (similar to tobacco and alcohol), the regulation of marijuana use by the government will, in the end, prove to be a very profitable decision. I think it is the best decision ethically as well. The people, who want to use it, are. The people, who dont want to use it, arent. I dont feel as though this will change significantly by legalizing the drug. Therefore, the consequences of such a decision are minimal, as its almost a case of realizing the current situation and making legislation to benefit from it. References Armento, Paul. Marijuana Is More Mainstream Than Ever, So Why Is Legalization Still Taboo? Marijuana Law Reform NORML. The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, 3 Nov. 2009. Web. 8 Nov. 2009. . -. The Voters Have Spoken à ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬ Again! Marijuana Law Reform NORML. The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, 3 Nov. 2009. Web. 8 Nov. 2009. . Badaracco, Joseph L., Jr. Defining Moments. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1997. Print. Bass, Bernard M., and Ronald E. Riggio. Transformational Leadership. 2nd ed. N.p.: Psychology Press, USA , n.d. Print. Boulder Planning Board: Tread Lightly on Medical Marijuana.(Nov 6, 2009).TalkLeft: the Politics of Crime (Blogs on Demand),p.NA.RetrievedNovember 12, 2009,fromHealth Reference Center AcademicviaGale: http://find.galegroup.com/gps/start.do?prodId=IPSuserGroupName=lom_gmstar Catherine Laughlin. (2005). U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Ashcroft v. Raich Background.The Journal of Law, Medicine Ethics,33(2),396-9. Retrieved November 12, 2009, from ProQuest Nursing Allied Health Source. (Document ID:860574931). Cops injured in clash with drug traffickers; Two SOG officials were assaulted after they caught two youths carrying ganja by train.(Nov 8, 2009).DNA (Daily News Analysis),p.NA.RetrievedNovember 12, 2009,fromEducators Reference CompleteviaGale: http://find.galegroup.com/gps/start.do?prodId=IPSuserGroupName=lom_gmstar Could Medical Marijuana Benefit Fort Hood Trauma Victims?.(Nov 6, 2009).Digital Journal (Blogs on Demand),p.NA.RetrievedNovember 12, 2009,fromHealth Reference Center AcademicviaGale: http://find.galegroup.com/gps/start.do?prodId=IPSuserGroupName=lom_gmstar CRIMINAL PRACTICE: Marijuana Possession.(Nov 6, 2009).Fulton County Daily Report,p.NA.RetrievedNovember 12, 2009,fromGeneral OneFileviaGale: http://find.galegroup.com/gps/start.do?prodId=IPSuserGroupName=lom_gmstar Ellis, B H(Sept 2009).Dying to Get High: Marijuana as Medicine.Contemporary Sociology,38,5.p.433-434.RetrievedNovember 22, 2009,fromGeneral OneFileviaGale: http://find.galegroup.com/gps/start.do?prodId= IPS user GroupName=lom_gmstar Hanrahan, C.Frey, R. P..(2006).Marijuana.Gale Encyclopedia of Medicine, 3rd ed.,Vol.3(3rded.,pp.2351-2355).Detroit:Gale.RetrievedNovember 22, 20

A Letter To Myself Essay

No one knows you better than you know yourself.   Moreover, out of all you will experience receiving a letter from yourself 50 years ahead in space-time will be your most profound experience.   So, here I am communicating with myself to inform what I have to look forward to in life. In writing I’m remembering receiving this letter five decades ago.   The odd thing is remembering its receipt but experiencing the writing for the first time.   With only 500 words, rather than focus on the strangeness addressing what will be is my mission.   Your life will be a strange and cruel mix of wonder and despair.   You will experience a living nightmare for love.   You’ll marry a woman who’ll turn out to be schizophrenic.   Dealing with her will be more than troublesome, yet the finer qualities of your character will arise out of the ashes of that experience. Knowing I received this letter will not prevent you from having the experience.   We all are purposed to play a role in life.   Writing this letter affirms some things are inevitable, even when you know about them in advance. You’re at an age where talk of marriage and difficult times are somewhat distant to your experience.   You’re yet to reach your teen years and the joy those years will bring.   Like yourself mom will undergo a troublesome marriage after she and dad divorce.   What you see in her next marriage will be a prophecy for your own.   In the midst of seeing her struggles will be happenings in your life that others will envy.   You’ll be very popular in high school and college.   You’ll turn out to be a champion sprinter and hurdler, you’ll sing in a singing group that will gain national prominence and you’ll have girlfriends that most men could only hope for.   Your teen and early adult years will be rewarding.   Those times I still treasure all these years having passed. Your love for learning will be a beacon to illuminate the way through your marital troubles.   Your field of study, along with your faith would be means to help you recover from troublesome times following your marriage.   This will be a battle however, one that would probably break the average man.   You’ll spend almost two decades unraveling the turmoil you experienced in being married for one decade.   In this you’ll get to know yourself as few people do.   You’ll become very wise and insightful as a result and you’ll be a blessing for what life will take you through. Do not be dismayed at what tomorrow will bring, it will lead to wonderful ends.   You will have a son who will do well in life.   A woman will come into your life who will be a dream come true and you’ll wind up content in your living.   You will appreciate life’s foibles and remember , â€Å"Try not to become a man of success but a man of value.†Ã‚   (Albert Einstein, Great Quotations, pg. 225)   That’s what you’ll do I’m proud to say. References Einstein, Albert, The Great Quotations, 225, George Seldes, May, 1978.