This is a trial of my new blog format, Keep Up | Up Keep. I will write during the week about my professional development experiences of keeping up with current events, and up-keeping my skills and knowledge in my fields of work and interest. This is my first post, and I will use September as a trial to then revisit the format for October. Edit: Wow this is long! Maybe in my revisiting, I should try making this a daily journal format...
Q4 (fourth week of August)
Monday 24 August 2020
Keep Up I subscribe to TheSkimm daily newsletter, and for Monday's newletter, I found the following article from AP: Trump announces plasma treatment authorized for COVID-19. Here are my takeaways:
I cautiously wonder if by "emergency authorization," the meaning behind the phrase may be "hasty authorization." I should trust that emergency procedures are thorough, but I wonder based on previous responses to "potential" cures or vaccines if people will take something seriously if it is not complete, approved, and recommended yet.
I was incredibly taken aback and used some colorful language in my notes when I read that the speculation is that the FDA is withholding a COVID-19 vaccine with political motivations. Frankly, I was disgusted by the notion, resonating with those referenced in the article:
"During Sunday’s 18-minute press conference, Trump said he thought there had been a 'logjam' at the FDA over granting the emergency authorization. He alleged there are people at the FDA 'that can see things being held up ... and that’s for political reasons.' Dr. Joshua Sharfstein said the statement, and Hahn’s silence while Trump said it, 'was disgraceful.' / 'The FDA commissioner basically allowed the president to mischaracterize the decision and attack the integrity of FDA employees. I was horrified,' said Sharfstein."
In my notes, I also cited a Tweet by the president in which saving lives seemed like an afterthought. I once again resonated with those referenced in the article...
"'President Trump is once again putting his political goals ahead of the health and well-being of the American public,' [Benjamin] Corb [of the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology] said."
...and was comforted by the reassurance of the former FDA commissioner:
"'I firmly reject the idea they would slow-walk anything or accelerate anything based on any political consideration or any consideration other than what is best for the public health and a real sense of mission to patients,' [Former FDA commissioner Dr. Scott] Gottlieb told CBS."
Keep Up Action: Contact my representative and tell him that I want to fund the USPS.
Up Keep I subscribe to and support Anti-Racism Daily, and additionally I just finished the book The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison, so catching up on this ARD issue was very applicable to where I am in my continued education efforts. In reading the book, I learned that there is so much more to learn about the failings of the American criminal justice system. This is a perfect time and place to start--we need to prioritize the health of people in our country, including incarcerated people. As this article references:
"Research shows that seniors in prison have more health issues than their younger counterparts on the outside."
What blows my mind about how difficult it is to accomplish change for the betterment of individuals is that it is actually monetarily beneficial for companies and institutions to care for their people.
"In prison, older people who require daily medications or more frequent care drive up medical costs."
Because of this, I was surprised and concerned to learn that prisons are not already a part of health departments across the country's emergency planning. Why don't we see people who are incarcerated as people, too? The article also includes a concrete action based on the COVID-19 crisis and the particular danger that inmates face:
"...criminal justice reform advocates are pressing lawmakers in the Senate to introduce emergency legislation that would reduce the age at which older federal prisoners become eligible for early release from 60 to 55, noting that’s the 'age at which recidivism rates drastically decline.'"
To reiterate my point at the beginning of this ARD entry, there is so much more to learn about the failings of the American criminal justice system, and so much work to do. I was shocked to read the following quote, inferring that we currently unnecessarily incarcerate people at times:
"Decision- and policy-makers need to recognize the dangers of resuming unnecessary jail incarceration during the pandemic, which is exactly what is indicated by the slowing and reversing of population reductions."
The ultimate takeaway I understood from this ARD newsletter is in their conclusion, especially as I come off of my last staff position where we supported vulnerable populations:
When we think of vulnerable populations, we must be diligent in keeping the incarcerated in our minds because they are often forgotten. They are real people, with real stories and families, and their health and safety should be prioritized and valued. Society shouldn’t be judged on how they resolve what can be deemed a crime, but rather how they treat those who’ve committed said crime. Incarcerated people deserve our compassion and advocacy too.
Tuesday 25 August 2020
Up Keep I am a member of the Catholic Campus Ministry Association, and I take advantage of many of the resources they put out. This week on Tuesday they hosted a Facebook Live conversation with Danielle Harrison as part of their Racial Reconciliation series. This was a very good discussion on not just not being racist, but being an ally to minorities.
“Being anti-racist is being willing to interrupt what has unfortunately become the status quo of racism in our country.”
It was very interesting to hear the phrase “people of color” being compared to the phrase “melting pot” in that it is erasing individual cultures and experiences. In a similar way that I thought the concept of the melting pot when I first learned it was very American, I later learned that it is more white-washing, I also thought that "people of color" was a respectful generalization, where it was explained here as an erasure of individualism of culture. I have felt a lot of intimidation and expectation that I know everything about being anti-racist as I learn, but Danielle's rassuring point was
“We aren’t looking for experts, we’re looking for allies.”
Keep Up COVID-19 vaccine explanation video via TheSkimm.
Up Keep I used this day to catch up on a past newsletter from Anti-Racism Daily from 20 August. My key takeaway from this article from Inside Higher Ed was some tentative and still-confused understanding that affirmative action is supposed to be leveling the playing field by creating equal opportunities, but instead we’re leveling the playing field by barring majority races from opportunities. Hmm... This article from Gallup which explained more clearly that the affirmative action is not to block majority races from opportunities, even if doing so would create more diversity. Regardless of the result, barring anyone from opportunity is wrong.
The newsletter goes on about education with this article from Brookings. As I learn about systematic racism, it has seemed clear to me that the root of all of these issues is education. I was affirmed in this article:
"As William L. Taylor and Dianne Piche noted in a 1991 report to Congress: Inequitable systems of school finance inflict disproportionate harm on minority and economically disadvantaged students."
In continuing, I was prompted to ask who makes the decisions about where students are placed. I support state-by-state ruling because it can be tailored to the particular communities in various parts of the country, but this made me wonder if education regulations should be national and more strict:
Strikingly, minority students are about half as likely to be assigned to the most effective teachers and twice as likely to be assigned to the least effective.
Thursday 27 August 2020
Keep Up I was saddened by this article in Time.
“I find it disgusting to intentionally make students a pawn in all this.”
Happy first day of high school to my sister.
Up Keep I am participating in a course by Techforword for remote interpreting. As I am currently working on direct contracts, I was struck and intrigued by this strong mention of what to include in one's contract, and I will be looking into this:
“Ensure that your contract includes a disclaimer that clearly exempts you from any liability if you can’t interpret due to poor audio or video or technical malfunctions. The contracts should also clarify that the platform or client is responsible and liable for providing access to documents both before a meeting and when shown on the screen, guaranteeing you can see the speaker, moderator and participants, maintaining confidentiality and data protection, ensuring that you receive good, continuous audio and video, allowing for relay (if required), and hiring enough interpreters to ensure high quality work given the increased cognitive load in remote interpreting.”
I wonder about implementation for this given that many of the companies I work with are taking a huge step in incorporating interpreters at all, and I do not want to overwhelm them or frighten them away with more regulations. I am still working on striking that balance between being flexible and ensuring that standards are the best possible.
If you made it this far, thank you for joining me on my professional development journey! As I edited in at the top of this post, I might shift to a daily journal format, as this is definitely too long... feedback and dialogue is welcome! Peace and all good.
Comments