Showing posts with label Children. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Children. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

NOM Spokesperson: Children Of Same-Sex Couples Will Resent Their Parents

Among the speakers at Tuesday’s anti-gay Marriage March was National Organization for Marriage spokesperson Jennifer Roback Morse, who heads up NOM’s Ruth Institute. Morse has a reputation of saying horrid things about gay people and young people’s perceptions of LGBT issues, and she did not disappoint at the rally. Stoking fears that same-sex marriage has some kind of unforeseen experiences, she attempted to speak on behalf of the children of same-sex couples, claiming they would resent their parents for depriving them of a parent of the opposite gender:

MORSE: Eventually, young people are going to see that redefining marriage sets aside the interests of children for the convenience of adults. Now in the unhappy event that the Court should redefine marriage, which we pray that they will not — we pray that they will allow us to continue this nationwide conversation and discussion that we desperately need to have. But if they do redefine marriage, 40 years from the young people of that generation will have one simply question for our generation, “What were you thinking?”

They’re going to say, “Dad, you and your partner are lovely guys, I love you Dad, but did you really think I would never need a mom? What were you thinking?” “Mom, I know you love me, you and your partner are nice ladies, but the biological connection that was so important to you — did you think it would never be important to me? What were you thinking? What were you thinking?” That’s what they’re going to ask us.

Watch it (via RightWingWatch):

Actually, same-sex marriage is in the best interest of the many children already being raised by same-sex couples. And usually, they call both dads “Dad” or both moms “Mom,” and they wouldn’t have to say “partner” to describe a husband and a wife. Morse clearly demonstrates that she has little understanding or empathy for same-sex families. Oddly, NOM does not actively campaign against same-sex adoption even though the well-being of children is supposedly at the core of the arguments against marriage equality.


View the original article here

Friday, June 28, 2013

Justice Kennedy Suggests Children Of Same-Sex Couples Suffer ‘Immediate Legal Injury’ From Ban

Early in this morning’s Supreme Court oral argument over the constitutionality of the California ban on same-sex marriage, Justice Anthony Kennedy suggested the children of same-sex couples suffer “immediate legal injury” from Proposition 8, according to Bloomberg. “They want their parents to have full recognition and status,” Kennedy said, adding that the “voice of those children” is important.

Kennedy, who is likely the swing vote, also suggested he was very uncomfortable striking down Proposition 8, according to a tweet from SCOTUSblog. Kennedy raised dismissing the case, which would leave in place the lower court ruling invalidating the same-sex marriage ban, but would not set any precedent about equal rights or marriage equality.

In response to Kennedy’s assertion, Justice Antonin Scalia questioned whether children would actually be harmed by Proposition 8, saying there is “considerable disagreement” about the “consequences” of same-sex marriage. “I take no position on whether it’s harmful or not, but it’s certainly true there is no answer to that scientific question,” he said, according to tweets from the Huffington Post’s Ryan Reilly.


View the original article here

Thursday, June 20, 2013

Remarks by the President at the Hall of Children, Yad Vashem

Remarks by the President at the Hall of Children, Yad Vashem | The White House Skip to main content | Skip to footer site map The White House. President Barack Obama The White House Emblem Get Email UpdatesContact Us Go to homepage. The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts 2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

2012: A Year in Photos

Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Executive Orders Presidential Memoranda Proclamations Legislation Pending Legislation Signed Legislation Vetoed Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Visitor Access Records Financial Disclosures 2012 Annual Report to Congress 2011 Annual Report to Congress 2010 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff A Commitment to Transparency

Browse White House visitor logs

President Obama greets White House visitors

Issues Civil Rights It Gets Better Defense End of Iraq War Disabilities Economy Jobs Reform and Fiscal Responsibility Strengthening the Middle Class A Plan for Refinancing Support for Business Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Immigration Reform Taxes Tax Receipt The Buffett Rule Rural Urban Policy Veterans Joining Forces Technology Seniors & Social Security Service Snapshots Creating Jobs Health Care Small Business PreK-12 Education Women Violence Prevention Now Is The Time

To do something about gun violence

Now Is The Time

Immigration Reform

Creating an Immigration System for the 21st Century

Immigration Reform

The Administration We the People

Create and Sign Petitions Now

We the People

President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Chief of Staff Denis McDonough Deputy Chief of Staff Rob Nabors Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco Counselor to the President Peter Rouse Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House White House On the Go

Download our mobile apps

Download our mobile appsEaster Egg Roll

Be Healthy, Be Active, Be You: April 1, 2013

White House Easter Egg Roll Inside the White House Interactive Tour West Wing Tour Video Series Décor and Art Holidays Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows President’s Commission About the Fellowship Current Class Staff Bios News and Newsletters White House Internships About Program Presidential Department Descriptions Selection Process Internship Timeline & FAQs Tours & Events 2013 Easter Egg Roll Kitchen Garden Tours Take a Virtual Tour of the White House Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources /* Maximize height of menu features. */if(typeof(jQuery)!='undefined')jQuery.each($('#topnav'),function(i,v){var o=$(v),oh=o.height(),sh=o.siblings().height();if(oh Home • Briefing Room • Speeches & Remarks   The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release March 22, 2013 Remarks by the President at the Hall of Children, Yad Vashem Yad Vashem
Jerusalem

10:22 A.M. IST
 
THE PRESIDENT:  “Unto them I will give my house and within my walls a memorial and a name…an everlasting name that shall not be cut off.”
 
President Peres, Prime Minister Netanyahu, Chairman Shalev, Rabbi Lau -- thank you for sharing this house, this memorial, with me today.  And thank you to the people of Israel for preserving the names of the millions taken from us, of blessed memory -- names that shall never be forgotten.
 
This is my second visit to this living memorial.  Since then, I’ve walked among the barbed wire and guard towers of Buchenwald.  Rabbi Lau told me of his time there, and we reminisced about our good friend, Elie Wiesel, and the memories that he shared with me.  I have stood in the old Warsaw ghetto, with survivors who would not go quietly.  But nothing equals the wrenching power of this sacred place, where the totality of the Shoah is told.  We could come here a thousand times, and each time our hearts would break.
 
For here we see the depravity to which man can sink; the barbarism that unfolds when we begin to see our fellow human beings as somehow less than us, less worthy of dignity and of life.  We see how evil can, for a moment in time, triumph when good people do nothing, and how silence abetted a crime unique in human history.
 
Here we see their faces and we hear their voices.  We look upon the objects of their lives -- the art that they created, the prayer books that they carried.  We see that even as they had hate etched into their arms, they were not numbers.  They were men and women and children -- so many children -- sent to their deaths because of who they were, how they prayed, or who they loved.
 
And yet, here, alongside man’s capacity for evil, we also are reminded of man’s capacity for good -- the rescuers, the Righteous Among the Nations who refused to be bystanders.  And in their noble acts of courage, we see how this place, this accounting of horror, is, in the end, a source of hope.

For here we learn that we are never powerless.  In our lives we always have choices.  To succumb to our worst instincts or to summon the better angels of our nature.  To be indifferent to suffering to wherever it may be, whoever it may be visited upon, or to display the empathy that is at the core of our humanity.  We have the choice to acquiesce to evil or make real our solemn vow -- “never again.”  We have the choice to ignore what happens to others, or to act on behalf of others and to continually examine in ourselves whatever dark places there may be that might lead to such actions or inactions.  This is our obligation -- not simply to bear witness, but to act.
 
For us, in our time, this means confronting bigotry and hatred in all of its forms, racism, especially anti-Semitism.  None of that has a place in the civilized world -- not in the classrooms of children; not in the corridors of power.  And let us never forget the link between the two.  For our sons and daughters are not born to hate, they are taught to hate.  So let us fill their young hearts with the same understanding and compassion that we hope others have for them.  
 
Here we hope.  Because after you walk through these halls, after you pass through the darkness, there is light -- a glorious view of the Jerusalem Forest, with the sun shining over the historic homeland of the Jewish people; a fulfillment of the prophecy: “you shall live again…upon your own soil.”  Here, on your ancient land, let it be said for all the world to hear:  The State of Israel does not exist because of the Holocaust.  But with the survival of a strong Jewish State of Israel, such a Holocaust will never happen again. 
 
Here we pray that we all can be better; that we can all grow, like the sapling near the Children’s Memorial -- a sapling from a chestnut tree that Anne Frank could see from her window.  The last time she described it in her diary, she wrote: “Our chestnut tree is in full bloom.  It’s covered with leaves and is even more beautiful than last year.”  That’s a reminder of who we can be.  But we have to work for it.  We have to work for it here in Israel.  We have to work for it in America.  We have to work for it around the world -- to tend the light and the brightness as opposed to our worst instincts.
 
So may God bless the memory of the millions.  May their souls be bound up in the bond of eternal life.  And may each spring bring a full bloom even more beautiful than the last. 
 
END
10:29 A.M. IST

Extending Middle Class Tax Cuts

Blog posts on this issue March 22, 2013 11:20 AM EDTFirst Lady Michelle Obama Visits Military Families at the Fisher House and Walter Reed National Military Medical CenterFirst Lady Michelle Obama Visits Military Families at the Fisher House and Walter Reed National Military Medical Center

First Lady Michelle Obama (and First Dog Bo) celebrate an early Easter with military families

March 22, 2013 11:01 AM EDTLloyd Austin to Lead U.S. Central Command

The general becomes the first African-American in the post.

March 22, 2013 10:28 AM EDTBeing Biden Vol. 2: A Good Omen

In the latest installment of the audio series "Being Biden," the Vice President takes you to St. Peter's Basilica, just after the Inauguration Mass of Pope Francis.

view all related blog posts ul.related-content li.views-row img {float: left; padding: 5px 10px 0 0;}ul.related-content li.view-all {padding-bottom: 3em;} Stay ConnectedFacebookTwitterFlickrGoogle+YouTubeVimeoiTunesLinkedIn   Home The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Issues Civil Rights Defense Disabilities Economy Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Taxes Rural Urban Policy Veterans Technology Seniors & Social Security Service Snapshots Women Violence Prevention The Administration President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House Inside the White House Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows White House Internships Tours & Events Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources The White House Emblem En español Accessibility Copyright Information Privacy Policy Contact USA.gov Developers Apply for a Job

View the original article here

Saturday, June 1, 2013

Top Anti-Gay Attorney Insults Chief Justice Roberts And Justice Thomas’ Decisions To Adopt Children

The "second-best option" for the Roberts children

When President Bush announced his decision to nominate future-Chief Justice John Roberts to the Supreme Court, his wife Jane stood nearby holding the hands of two beautiful children — Jack and Josie Roberts. Both of these children were born in Ireland, and later adopted by the future Chief Justice and his wife. Justice Clarence Thomas also has an adopted son, his grandnephew Mark Martin, Jr., who Thomas adopted when Martin was six.

So it is a bit hard to understand why a top anti-gay advocate decided to insult adoptive parents in general — and Chief Justice Roberts in particular — as the justices are preparing to hear two cases that will decide whether same-sex couples will enjoy the same right to marry as all other Americans. According to John Eastman, a law professor and chair of the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage, Roberts and Thomas’ adopted children are only growing up in the “second-best” environment:

The justices also are not immune to considering how they might be affected by the course one side or the other is advocating in a dispute before them. . . . [Johns Hopkins Sociology Professor Andrew] Cherlin, who does not follow the high court especially closely, wondered whether the gay marriage cases might take on a similar dynamic. “If justices consider their own family lives in these cases, it may change the way they rule,” he said.

Gay marriage opponents said they are not worried about the votes of Roberts and Thomas.

“You’re looking at what is the best course society wide to get you the optimal result in the widest variety of cases. That often is not open to people in individual cases. Certainly adoption in families headed, like Chief Roberts’ family is, by a heterosexual couple, is by far the second-best option,” said John Eastman, chairman of the National Organization for Marriage. Eastman also teaches law at Chapman University law school in Orange, Calif.

There is nothing “second-best” about the family environment Roberts and Thomas have provided to their adopted children. While many critical things can be said about Justice Thomas — and we have said a lot of them — his decision to adopt his grandnephew is admirable and speaks well of Thomas’ capacity for personal sacrifice:

Neither Thomas nor his wife nor several Savannah sources contacted for this story would discuss the circumstances behind Thomas’ taking custody of Mark. But others say that the situation, while not dire, called for a responsible person to step in quickly. Mark Sr., Thomas’ nephew, had been in prison on cocaine trafficking charges. And Mark Jr.’s mother, Susan, was struggling with her own problems, raising four children, including young Mark Jr., on her own. Thomas believed that the boy would face lifelong trouble if he were not removed from his environment soon, and the parents agreed. “He was paying back his own grandfather by taking care of Mark,” says one friend.

The Roberts’ adoption story is rooted less in family tragedy and more in their devout faith. John and Jane Roberts married late in life — Jane was 42. The Chief Justice and his wife chose not to seek medical treatment that would have enhanced Jane’s ability to conceive because “Catholic doctrine prohibits most forms of fertility treatment,” and instead chose to adopt two children. As with Thomas, there are many critical things that can be said about the Chief Justice, but he is by all accounts very kind in his personal interactions and he and his wife provided their adopted son and daughter with a household where they could thrive. Roberts deserves praise for adopting children, and he certainly does not deserve the aspersions cast upon adopted parents by Professor Eastman.

Eastman is also not the first attorney involved in the marriage cases to suggest adoptive parents are somehow a second-best opinion for children. In his brief on behalf of the House Republicans defending the Defense of Marriage Act, conservative superlawyer Paul Clement claimed that “[b]iological parents have a genetic stake in the success of their children that no one else does.”


View the original article here

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Advice For The Woman Who Wrote Salon Worried She Can’t Protect Her Children From Global Warming

Advice columnists are like financial analysts. The overwhelming majority can’t beat the market — which, for the analyst, is an S&P index fund and, for the columnist, is your typical friend or relative.

And like your friend or relative, sometimes the advice is very good, and sometimes … not so much. As an instance of the latter, we have the ‘advice’ of Salon’s Cary Tennis in a column titled “How to protect my children?”

The letter writer, “Mom of Three,” is “a happily married woman in my mid-40s, with three children ranging in age from 8 to 15.” She has a good job and her life is great. She says, “I’m not sure what advice you can offer me, but I feel compelled to write”:

I love my family dearly, and my children bring me great joy.  So what’s the problem then? I worry that I’ve brought them into a world whose future holds overpopulation (for which I myself feel a bit responsible) and global warming. My children have such bright futures ahead, which may be completely devastated by these global crises.

I feel guilt at having brought them into the world, and yet I can’t imagine not having them in my world. I feel so hopeless that I am unable to make the world a better place for them. My happiness in the present is marred by my heartache thinking of their future.

How do I cope with these feelings?

Fair enough question. And similar to questions I’ve thought a lot about both as a father and as someone who spends a lot of time speaking with college students.

The full response by Mr. Tennis is too long to repost, but you’ll get the painful gist of it here:

Dear Mom of Three,

Your heartache is the heartache of all parents. Let this heartache be with you and do not be unkind to yourself because of it. It is not only the heartache of all parents. It is the heartache of all humans.

All humans feel this same heartache as we see that those we love we cannot protect and that everything we know and love will one day be gone. We are all filled with occasional sorrow when we stop to glimpse the fact that all that is familiar and safe, all that is beautiful, all will be gone as we also will be gone and those we love will be gone, and all the torments also, all the things we are catching up on and taking care of, all the things we are dreading and disapproving of and wishing we didn’t have to deal with, all those things, too, will be gone, and all the evils we despair of and all the tragedies whose lessons we use as guideposts, all that will be gone, the lessons of politics and philosophy, the works of art, the music, the novels, everything will be gone. Everything. Nothing can outlast the ceaseless churning of idea and matter and time. And because everything will be gone none of this will matter, either, none of what I say or you say or what we feel, and that is the farther assumption, the one we often do not get to, that since we will die and everyone we know will die, none of this worrying will matter in the least, and so, if we accept that all this will be gone, we can accept that all our worrying is just the fretting away of precious moments, a vain and fruitless mental activity over which, indeed — and this is the important part — we have some measurable, demonstrable control!

… You will be forgotten. I will be forgotten. This whole thing will be gone. Yet I think that our consciousness will remain. This I have experienced firsthand. So I am not worried. Nor am I as crazy as I used to be. I am merely more certain that I can do nothing about anything….

… Meditate on these things. Just meditate. Just sit and let these things enter your consciousness, and if there is strife and conflict in your relationships with your husband and your kids, see what you can do to lower the conflict. Let them be. They are going to go. They are beyond your control already. You are just a passenger now.

I know what you’re thinking, “Dude, chill out!” Or, maybe, “Dude, you’ve chilled out so damn much you’re frozen.” Either way, you’re probably thinking he may not be cut out to be an advice columnist and indeed that he needs an advice columnist more than she does. But I digress.

For me, what’s of interest is that he completely missed the point of the question, treated her specific concern as if it were existential angst, and gave a not terribly germane reply.

But what if we actually tried to answer her question? What is a mother to do who feels certain responsibility, guilt, and heartache for bringing her children into a world that may be devastated by overpopulation and global warming, who feels hopeless about her ability to make the world a better place?

The first point is, I think, to acknowledge that these feelings are entirely reasonable in a world that is literally engineering its own self-destruction. I don’t, however, think the answer to a feeling of hopelessness is Tennis’s brand of disempowering fatalism.

Personally, I don’t share the feelings of this woman, but then I spend all my time trying to do something about this problem. I am quite certain that if I didn’t spend all my time trying to do something about it, I would want help coping with similar feelings. But everyone is different.

The question really has two parts, I think:

What should the woman do to cope with her feelings?How can the woman help her children (and her entire family) best prepare for what is to come?

Not being a psychologist or psychiatrist, I can’t offer much help beyond the advice of “get involved” (in the climate action movement or something similar). Fortunately, however, I do know Dr. Lise Van Susteren, a psychiatrist and co-convenor of the 2009 NWF conference on the Psychological Aspects of Climate Change. I published some advice she gave 4 years ago in a post, “Dealing with climate trauma and global warming burnout.” I’ll repost that at the end.

I’d like to comment on the second part, however. As I say, I have spent a lot of time on colleges talking to students about this issue. My goal is not to alarm them or even to motivate them to become climate activists. No, I just try to describe as best I can —  based on a review of hundreds of studies and interviews with dozens of the top climate experts in the country — the world as it is likely to be in the coming decades.

Knowledge is power. And while there can be little doubt that future generations will be cursing our names if we keep on the do-little path and destroy a livable climate, there is equally little doubt that within about two decades the humanity will become desperate to slash emissions and adapt to what we can’t stop. Then, say, over the course of 2025 to 2050 — the period I called “Planetary Purgatory” in my book Hell and High Water – the nation and the world will be increasingly focus its talent and resources (trillions and trillions of dollars) on mitigation and adaptation.

And this is all to say that someone who is in school today could benefit greatly from knowing how the future is likely to play out, much as it would have been useful for a teenager to know, say, in the 1970s that the future was going to be computers and the like (which, of course, some did).

If you want career security in the coming decades — and don’t want to become a gerontologist or diabetes specialist or podiatrist or the like — then you couldn’t do much better than becoming an expert on, say, water efficiency/resources or low-carbon technology or sustainable low-resource-use agriculture or building levees, to name a few.

Also, while Cary Tennis may think there is nothing anybody can do about anything, the fact is, this woman could benefit from strategic planning for her family. Maybe she doesn’t buy that beachfront property her husband has been eying or maybe she sells off the one she already has before the market crashes (see “Ponzi 2: What year will coastal property values crash?“). Maybe in 10 years, when planning her retirement, she doesn’t pick south Florida or the desert Dust Bowl Southwest.

Her letter really isn’t specific enough to give a detailed response, but needless to say I take the very opposite view of Tennis. As long as the woman already knows enough to have these legitimate concerns, I think she ought to get involved and learn enough to really help her children and her family plan for what is to come.

I’ll end with an edited version of “Climate Trauma Survival Tips From Dr. Lise Van Susteren,” which, it must be said was aimed at climate hawks, but most of the advice is good for anyone.

Take care of yourself physically and spiritually, through healthy living and maintaining a balance in your professional and personal life.Physical exercise is essential — endorphins, the body’s natural pain killers, are secreted in response to exercise. Endorphins help fight psychic pain, too. Exercise also boots your immune system. If you are stressed out and getting sick a lot — you need regular exercise. Swimming can be very soothing.Get out of doors as much as possible — connect with the forces that drive you and give yourself up to the beauty of nature in the present….Remember that you are not alone. There are lots of other people who may be just as traumatized as you are — they just aren’t talking about it….Your fears are realistic. But what you can do, or what you expect you can do, may not be.Personal therapy can help. You wouldn’t be the first person to conflate some personal problems with what is happening to the planet. Although “we” are working on it, many professionals may not yet “get” the problem with climate.

The Don’ts

OverworkHaving trouble sleeping? … Make sure to cut off the computer at least 2 hours before bedtime. The blue light emitted by computers suppresses a hormone that triggers sleep more than light from other parts of the spectrum. Additionally, turning out lights is not only good for the planet — the resulting incremental darkness sets the body up to sleep. Also, did you know that it can take as many as 9 hours for your body to completely break down caffeine?Believe that you are invulnerable. In fact, admitting what you are going through makes you more resilient.Lose focus on the essential tasks.Don’t give up! Despite the forecast — we are working together like never before.

I’d love to hear your thoughts and advice.

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery('#comment_submit').click(function(){if(jQuery('#comment_check:checked').length

View the original article here

Monday, May 6, 2013

UPDATE 1-FDA halts trials of Amgen drug in children, cites death

* FDA does not know if Sensipar had role in patient death

* Drug approved for adults to remove calcium from blood

Feb 26 (Reuters) - The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Tuesday it has stopped all pediatric clinical trials of Amgen Inc's Sensipar after the death of a 14-year-old patient taking part in a study of the drug.

Sensipar, which is approved for adults, is used to lower dangerously high calcium levels in the blood.

The agency said it was collecting information on the circumstances of the teenager's death. It said it does not know if the Amgen drug had any role in the death.

"This communication is intended to inform health care professionals that we are evaluating the information and will communicate our final conclusions and recommendations when our review is complete," the FDA said in a statement posted on its website.

Amgen, the world's largest biotechnology company, said it had sent a letter last week to healthcare providers alerting them to the trials' halt and the patient death.

"Amgen is working as rapidly as possible to understand the circumstances of what happened. This analysis is ongoing and will be concluded as quickly as possible," the company said in a statement.

Sensipar works by decreasing the release of parathyroid hormone from the parathyroid gland to lower calcium levels in the blood. High levels of calcium in the blood can lead to serious health problems.

Sensipar, which had worldwide sales of $950 million in 2012, is approved to treat adults 18 and over. The trials were being conducted to determine the safety and efficacy of the drug in younger patients.

Drugmakers also often conduct pediatric trials because they are rewarded with an additional six months of patent protection for testing medicines in children.


View the original article here

Thursday, May 2, 2013

UPDATE 1-FDA halts trials of Amgen drug in children, cites death

* FDA does not know if Sensipar had role in patient death

* Drug approved for adults to remove calcium from blood

Feb 26 (Reuters) - The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Tuesday it has stopped all pediatric clinical trials of Amgen Inc's Sensipar after the death of a 14-year-old patient taking part in a study of the drug.

Sensipar, which is approved for adults, is used to lower dangerously high calcium levels in the blood.

The agency said it was collecting information on the circumstances of the teenager's death. It said it does not know if the Amgen drug had any role in the death.

"This communication is intended to inform health care professionals that we are evaluating the information and will communicate our final conclusions and recommendations when our review is complete," the FDA said in a statement posted on its website.

Amgen, the world's largest biotechnology company, said it had sent a letter last week to healthcare providers alerting them to the trials' halt and the patient death.

"Amgen is working as rapidly as possible to understand the circumstances of what happened. This analysis is ongoing and will be concluded as quickly as possible," the company said in a statement.

Sensipar works by decreasing the release of parathyroid hormone from the parathyroid gland to lower calcium levels in the blood. High levels of calcium in the blood can lead to serious health problems.

Sensipar, which had worldwide sales of $950 million in 2012, is approved to treat adults 18 and over. The trials were being conducted to determine the safety and efficacy of the drug in younger patients.

Drugmakers also often conduct pediatric trials because they are rewarded with an additional six months of patent protection for testing medicines in children.


View the original article here

Sunday, April 28, 2013

Parents Sue School For Making Children ‘Religious Guinea Pigs’ — By Teaching Them Yoga

Children being indoctinated

A San Diego couple is suing the area’s school district for allegedly violating their children’s religious freedom by offering yoga classes for physical education.

Stephen and Jennifer Sedlock actually have the option to opt their children out of taking the classes, which the school’s superintendent describes as, “stretching, moving, breathing.” But their lawyer, a part of the conservative National Center for Law and Policy, still believes there is a strong case for why yoga classes are an unconstitutional violation religious freedom:

In a press release issued by Escondido-based National Center for Law and Policy, attorney Dean Broyles said the Encinitas yoga program was a “breach of public trust” that sets a “dangerous precedent.”

“This is frankly the clearest case of the state trampling on the religious freedom rights of citizens that I have personally witnessed in my 18 years of practice as a constitutional attorney,” Broyles said.

The lawsuit, which alleges civil rights violations, was filed in San Diego Superior Court. It ultimately seeks to suspend the yoga program indefinitely and “restore traditional physical education to the district.”

If the couple’s lawyer thinks that this is “the clearest case of the state trampling on [religious] freedoms” that he has witnessed, he may want to look a little harder. The First Amendment does not simply protect against legitimate threats to the free exercise of faith, it also forbids the government from endorsing religious views or forcing religion upon others — most often non-Christians. So when an Indiana lawmaker proposes requiring “the recitation of the Lord’s Prayer at the beginning of each school day,” that’s a violation of religious freedom. When a conservative judges places a massive Ten Commandments monument in the middle of the Alabama Judicial Building, that’s a violation of religious freedom.

When a child does a yoga pose, on the other hand, that’s just a good way to stay in shape.


View the original article here

Friday, January 4, 2013

FDA approves Tamiflu for children 2 weeks and up

WASHINGTON -- Children as young as 2 weeks old can take Roche's Tamiflu for flu symptoms, the Food and Drug Administration said Friday.

The FDA approved the drug for babies who have had had flu symptoms for no more than two days. Regulators stressed that the drug is not approved as a preventive measure against flu in children that young. It is also not approved to treat flu in children younger than 2 weeks old.

The FDA had already approved the drug for adults and children ages 1 and older who have shown flu symptoms for no longer than two days.

The agency said doctors must calculate the dosing for Tamiflu in patients younger than 1 based on their exact weight. These children should receive 3 milligrams of Tamiflu per kilogram twice daily for five days.

Tamiflu is distributed by Roche's South San Franscisco-based unit, Genentech.


View the original article here

Saturday, April 7, 2012

A Legacy for my Children

What type of future do I want for my children and future grandchildren?  I do not wish for them a future with a financially unsustainable, cradle-to-grave dependency on the federal government. Rather, I wish for those I love so much a future where the federal government encourages and empowers success, personal responsibility, and financial independence.  I also want a future where state governments, or the federal government, can provide fiscally sound, dependable safety-net programs to protect our most vulnerable citizens from a life of poverty.  We have a choice – government dependency, or a dependable, fiscally-sound federal government.  We cannot have both.  I ask America to join me in the fight to end the ever-growing cycle of government dependency – for our children and grandchildren – the fight for freedom and opportunity.
Liberals have continuously expanded entitlement programs far beyond stability.  They have created generation after generation of citizens more and more dependent on the federal government.  This has resulted in greater power for the federal government.  We need to do what is necessary to keep these programs from collapsing under a mountain of deficit spending.  It is a choice between saving and strengthening these programs, or further weakening and destroying the safety net programs that provide security and poverty protection to those most in need.
We must modernize our federal entitlement programs to meet the needs of current and future beneficiaries, and reduce the financial burden on our children and grandchildren.  In many ways our entitlement programs have been successful at protecting millions of Americans from a life of poverty.  We need to save and strengthen these programs so that they are there for our children and grandchildren.
Doing nothing is an unacceptable option.  We are borrowing four out of every ten dollars we spend, and we’re dependent on low interest rates.  If we wait to act, the only solutions will be drastically higher taxes, massive new borrowing, and sudden and severe cuts in benefits or other government programs.   Doing nothing threatens our financial security, as well as that or future generations.
This is why the next President of the United States needs to show true leadership and put federal entitlement programs on a course towards fiscal sustainability.  Tragically, President Obama has not shown such leadership.  He has expanded eligibility for entitlement programs into the middle class and above.
I have demonstrated my commitment to fight for entitlement reform through the successful effort on welfare reform, which ended a federal entitlement for the first time and created opportunity and reduced poverty.
In contrast, President Obama and Mitt Romney’s records are creating health care entitlements and expanding Medicaid dependency through ObamaCare and Romneycare instead of free market opportunities and choice.    Instead of taking entitlements head on, Mitt Romney continues to play games about the earmarks that he has supported.  While Romney focuses on 1% of our fiscal challenges, I will continue to focus on 100% of them for a sustainable future for seniors and young people in America.  We can’t afford not to.
With our government spending 40% more than it has, and our national debt exploding beyond 15 trillion, the time is overdue for strong fiscal leadership rather than kicking the can down the road.  My guess is that the Vegas odds on either President Obama or Mitt Romney actually reforming entitlements are quite low.  I don’t think that even Mitt Romney would make a $10,000 bet on that one.
My plans for entitlement reform would unshackle beneficiaries from the federal government, unleash the power of market competition, and empower Americans with choice and control. For example, I would reform Medicare with a premium-support program that offers beneficiaries choice and control over their healthcare options.  This would transform Medicare from a program run by government to a program that empowers seniors.
I would also block-grant Medicaid so that states have the flexibility to effectively manage their programs and offer the best options for beneficiaries.  These, and other reform ideas will transform our federal entitlements from programs that breed dependency to programs that empower beneficiaries and encourage independence.
Conservatives know that I am committed to limiting government, expanding freedom, and putting America back on a sustainable fiscal path through cutting federal spending and entitlement reform, repealing and replacing ObamaCare, instituting pro-growth tax and regulatory policies, and unleashing America’s energy and manufacturing potential for a brighter future for America.
America faces a deficit of over $1 trillion for the fourth year in a row. The only way to truly tackle these deficits and to preserve our freedom is to reform entitlements, the fast-growing component of government spending.  For the health of our economy and for the sake of our children and grandchildren, that is the path I will take.
View the original article here