Catherine Kieu Becker’s Penis Cutting Indictment Could Bring Life Behind Bars

1.) The hospital room assigned to her was cold, never more than 16 degrees Celsius (60.8 degrees F). The hospital staff insisted that that whole side of the hospital wing was cold due to a problem that cannot be fixed.

2.) The old lady developed a kidney infection. The hospital staff had not noticed the blood in her urine until family members drew the staff’s attention to that problem. The cause of the kidney infection was most likely that the water the staff provided for the old lady could not be reached by her and was, as it was left untouched by the lady, then taken away again.

3.) A few days ago, the old lady had developed pneumonia, and that brought about her demise, just six weeks after she had begun her stay in the Lamont Hospital. Unfortunately, she passed away a day or two before her family had a chance to have a scheduled meeting with the Lamont Hospital board at which they had hoped to discuss some of those problems.

I don’t know what her family will do now, but it appears that it is not likely that an inquest of the circumstances of the old lady’s death will be held. It could be said that she is safely out of the way and no longer able to testify, so perhaps an inquest would be waste of time.

Should anyone care about what caused the death of a 97-year-old woman?

The relatives of this old woman, a woman who had dedicated her whole life to the care of her family, had placed her in the care of a hospital and trusted the hospital to make her life comfortable. It seems to me that their trust has been betrayed.

I know of some people who are convinced that the hospital provided good care for them, but I also know of some other people whose relatives were without doubt neglected in that hospital, involving circumstances beyond belief. Those people are afraid to speak up because they fear retaliation when their time comes and they require the services of that hospital.

Hundreds of millions of the most poor in the world would immediately benefit from that. It would start with the most basic aspect, enormously more efficient energy use, cleaning up the environment in millions of homes by making the air breathable and preventing serious lung disease for their inhabitants (primarily for those who do the cooking), and it would immediately make an enormous contribution for the global environment by reducing one of the major causes of deforestation, by saving most of the wood burned in inefficient, open cooking fires.

The benefits would be immediate. No sophisticated infrastructure would be required, while no magic washing machine could operate without an electric distribution system that presently is not even in the planning stages for most of the areas affected by the most severe poverty. People who are forced to cook their food on open fires do not have or cannot afford electricity for washing machines.

That is largely true, but it is not quite correct that he was the only Russian who did the sort of research of history you described. There were not many who did so, but he was not the only one to do it. In his own words, he gives credit for doing that sort of research also to the mathematician Igor Shfarevich, in his foreword to Shafarevich’s book, The Socialist Phenomenon:

While it makes use of a voluminous literature familiar to specialists throughout the world, there is an undeniable logic in the fact that it emerged from the country that has undergone (and is undergoing) the harshest and most prolonged socialist experience in modern history. Nor is it at all incongruous that within that country this book should not have been produced by a humanist, for scholars in the humanities have been the most methodically crushed of all social strata in the Soviet Union ever since the October Revolution. It was written by a mathematician of world renown: in the Communist world, practitioners of the exact sciences must stand in for their annihilated brethren. [My emphasis –WHS]
http://robertlstephens.com/essays/shafarevich/001SocialistPhenomenon.html#pagestart_vii

The critical aspect of that is that thousands upon thousands of historian in the USSR were exterminated, so that it was only a few individuals like Solzhenitsyn and Shafarevich who were not even historians who survived and did what untold numbers of historians died for in trying to do.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/16/riots-may-have-killed-britains-green-consensus/#comment-721017

It seems to me that a far more effective way to fight what is happening would be to question the validity of “no-fault” divorce.

No-fault divorce was originally proposed to be assumed when both spouses agreed that they wanted a divorce. I don’t think that the misapplied interpretation of that, namely that “no-fault” divorce is assumed when only one spouse wants out of the marriage never was part of the original proposal. That just got in when “no-fault” divorce got its foot in the door.

I hope that someone else who reads this can offer a better opinion.

“Dr. Phil’s” testimony was delivered during a July 13, 2011 hearing on the Violence Against Women Act held by the Senate Judiciary Committee. (Full Story)

I found a very interesting article on a divorce website having to do with using a legal charge, known as “Abuse of Process” to break the nearly-automatic awarding of custody to the parent who files first for divorce and the often-associated “Temporary” Custody.

If I understood the article, I am thinking they are suggesting to file a civil suit for “Abuse of Process” against the parent who filed first, was awarded the “temporary custody” during the divorce proceeding, then won the permanent custody, and its associated child support (and often, spousal support).

In other words, I believe this offers a backup plan for the inevitable losing of custody to the party who was “first to file”.

An award under this claim would begin to establish a reform, but I am assuming that to truly become effective, it will need to be taken all the way to the state supreme court. This would then set the precedent which would be quoted in all future cases. I have no doubt there will be a defendant/mother who lost her case under this charge, who will appeal it all the way.

Can others please review this article, especially you attorneys, and post your thoughts? If this has validity, it might quickly stop this madness (Custody by “First to File”). It will require someone filing the civil action in their respective state, and thereby establishing a case law for future cases to refer to).

The topic is “Leveling the Child Custody Field”, and is located at: http://keepthewasheranddryer.com/2011/04/07/leveling-the-child-custody-field/

Thank you.

When the State Breaks a Man, by William Norman Grigg