The world is slowly traveling back in time, a time when race is influencing how the world is run. To run the world there are laws and regulations to insure that safety of the people. Even with these laws, crimes are still happening all over the world. But it’s said that the police are always there to protect the people, and yet the people are still in trouble. One example is of a young woman pulled over for a not turning her signal, she was presumed dead in the next three days while she was in police custody. Slowly but surely, law enforcement is abusing their power and disregarding laws, thus taking matters into their own hand based on race. This is called police brutality. The power they have should be used to improve the lives of people, not to destroy the world one person at a time.

Many officer seem to be overstepping their boundaries on laws which is police brutality.  One example of police abusing their power happened recently in Stockton, California. A video is taking of a young african american teen jaywalking, for this he was hit multiple times and tackled by multiple officers. As stated in an article at FindLaw.com jaywalking pentalties depend on whether it was an infraction or a misdemanor. An infraction is a petty offense and isn’t “considered a criminal offense and thus not punishable by incarceration (Findlaw.com).”  A misdemeanor is “punishable by a fine.” Neither of these penalties call for physical violence, so why was this action taken? Maybe it was because this young man was African American and he was “resisting arrest” (stated in the video) from a Caucasian officer for a crime that everyone commits.

Police brutality is an alarming issue in the United States.A reporter named Aaron Morrison from the international Business Times took the issue of the police attitude to the people. Through social media Mr. Morrison asked if Americans were to grade the police, like teachers grade students, what would this grade be. The articles states “that nearly half of Americans give their police department a “D” grade or a failing grade.” People are seeing that law enforcement is decreasing in their efforts to protect the people. This decrease can cause distrust in the laws and the people enforcing said laws. One of the tweets mentioned in the article says the reason police are averaging a “D” grade is because “More Americans are killed by cops.”  If the police aren’t protecting the people then it is more likely they are causing damage to the people.

One death from police abusing their power is in the case of Sandra Bland. She was 28 years old when she pulled over by a Texas officer for failing to turn on her turning signal. This offense normally calls for a fine. But in Bland’s case the trooper said she was “argumentative and uncooperative” this lead to her being arrested for “assaulting a public servant.”(CNN) in the video the officer asked her what is wrong and Bland comments that she is irritated, but that frodoesn’t stop him from giving her a ticket. Afterward he continues to comment on her attitude, then proceeds to ask her to get out of the car. Bland then explains that he has no right to make her get out the car. Which is true, according to Martin Kron a traffic court judge says "It's perfectly legal for you to say in the vehicle.”  So there is no reason for the trooper to get aggressive and continually demand Bland to get out of the car or for him to arrest her. Later in the video it is also shown that Bland is shoved to the ground she then screams “you slammed my head into the ground.” This doesn’t always happen when someone is pulled over for a simple misuse of their signal.

After Bland’s arrest she was place into a cell for three days. Later on she was found dead in her cell. The police claimed that it was a suicide but all family members that knew Bland said that the thought of her committing suicide is “unfathomable”(CNN). Frosted Illustrated also made the point that she was left in her cell for three more hours after she was found dead. Why would someone be left in their cell three hours after they were found dead unless the police had something to do with it.

It is most likely that this situation escalated so quickly because of the color of her skin and because she wasn’t doing what she was told. In the world Black People are mostly seen as suspects, even when they aren’t doing anything. An article written by a law professor from huffingtonpost.com states that “The police stop blacks and Latinos at rates that are much higher than whites. In New York City...when whites were stopped, only 8% were frisked. When blacks are stopped 85% were frisked according to information provided by the NYPD.” Only 8% of White People were frisked in a place mainly populated by Black people. This shows that the police system is more trusting in the white population since their is such a big difference in the percentages.

Extreme anxiety, endless hours of preparation, and billions of dollars all go towards an inaccurate representation of students and their capabilities on information that will eventually be forgotten. According to TIME Magazine, standardized tests have been around for more than 50 years and for more than 50 years they have been a controversial subject within schools. Standardized tests should no longer be incorporated in schools due to the incapability to show all students’ skills, the unnecessary cost, and the intense stress and anxiety.

Standardized tests are just not an accurate measurement of every student’s performance because they only test a narrow range of skills and knowledge. Not every child wishes to pursue a career that uses English, mathematics, or writing. Some children want to pursue skills of theirs that are not being tested on standardized tests. The American Institute for Learning and Human Development put it this way: “Standardized tests don’t value creativity. A student who writes a more creative answer in the margins of such a test, doesn’t realize that a human being won’t even see this creative response; that machines grade these tests, and a creative response that doesn’t follow the format is a wrong response.” Standardized tests shouldn’t be given to students because it does not test on all skills. It is simply telling children that creative fields are not as good as the ones that require more logic. Not to mention, even the material that the tests asses on are things that will only be in the children’s minds temporarily. The Brookings Institution published a study in 2001 that found that 80% of what children learned by studying for the test was temporary and did not affect long term learning. (Procon.org) If standardized tests are not even helping kids learn new things and improve their learning, there is absolutely no point for them in school. It defeats the purpose of school, as it is a place to expand knowledge and grow in learning. The benefit is not worth the cost.

Standardized tests cause extreme anxiety and put huge amounts of stress on students. Students already have piles of responsibilities with school being first and foremost. Standardized tests cause unnecessary anxiety. Students are already getting graded on their learning. Procon.org, a website that assesses the pros and cons of controversial topics reads, " According to education researcher Gregory J. Cizek, anecdotes abound "illustrating how testing... produces gripping anxiety in even the brightest students, and makes young children vomit or cry, or both." [7] On Mar. 14, 2002, the Sacramento Bee reported that "test-related jitters, especially among young students, are so common that the Stanford-9 exam comes with instructions on what to do with a test booklet in case a student vomits on it.” The people who make the tests are already planning on students to vomit which means they know that these tests cause so much anxiety. Getting good grades is more than enough for kids to be worrying about.

       For all of this, standardized tests cost billions of dollars. An article on the Huffington Post explains, “Standardized Testing Costs States $1.7 Billion A Year, Study Finds. A new report by the Washington-based Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institution calculates states spend a combined $1.7 billion annually on standardized testing.” This money should be going to schools in need and not to unnecessary tests. School districts around the world could greatly benefit from even a small portion of this money.

When asked, school district administrators might say standardized tests are a fair and accurate representation of students. But on closer inspection, skills are being left off the test that are important to many. Standardized tests are unnecessary. They cause more problems than they are solving. Although some may disagree because it supposedly weeds out people for colleges, this argument is invalid. It only weeds out the ones who don’t have extreme skills in the few topics that children are tested on. In order to make the students (the future leaders) succeed they must be eliminated from schools.

WORKS CITED

Fletcher, Dan. "Standardized Testing." Time. Time Inc., 11 Dec. 2009. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.

Armstrong, Thomas. "15 Reasons Why Standardized Tests Are Worthless."|American Institute for Learning and Human Development. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.

"Standardized Tests - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.

Kuczynski-Brown, Alex. "Standardized Testing Costs States $1.7 Billion A Year, Study Finds." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, n.d. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.

2fer #2: Secondhand Smoke Kills

Since the year 1964, over 2.5 million nonsmokers in the United States have died from secondhand smoke related health problems. In 1995, the first statewide law on smoking in public places was enforced in California. Since then, there continues to be waves of laws in different states making it illegal to smoke in public places.. Some smokers say that banning public smoking is an infringement on their individual freedom. However, people who inhale secondhand smoke are not doing so consensually. There are too many people being put at risk by secondhand smoke. Because smoking causes bigger concerns to other people than to the smoker, smoking in public places should be banned.

Inhaling secondhand smoke is just as hazardous as smoking. People that are exposed to secondhand smoke absorb the same about of chemical compounds that the smokers do. The chemical compounds that come from cigarettes and tobacco are proven to contribute to many different diseases including heart disease, asthma, and immune system deficiency. Out of the 4,000 chemical compounds in cigarettes, 69 are proven to cause cancer. The EPA, International Agency for Research on Cancer, and the US National Toxicology Program all consider secondhand smoke as a “known human carcinogen”. In addition, there is evidence that secondhand smoke is linked to lung cancer, breast cancer, leukemia, brain tumors in children, and many other kinds of cancer. Many people are in danger of life threatening diseases due to smoking in public places. When people to smoke in public places, it puts many other people in harms way of dangerous and life threatening diseases.

While secondhand smoke causes many different diseases, it is also proven that is has a large impact on newborns, infants, and babies still in the womb. Exposure to secondhand smoke while pregnant increases the chances of pregnancy and delivery problems such as miscarriage and stillborn birth.The Institute of Environmental Medicine in Sweden has proven that the most common health threat associated with secondhand smoke is lower respiratory infections in children under five years old. The National Cancer Institute’s studies show that children are exposed to secondhand smoke more than adults at a two to one ratio. Despite the slow decrease of smokers worldwide, more than two-thirds of the children in the United States are exposed to secondhand smoke in their everyday routine. This exposure can cause major health issues as they get older. If smoking was banned in public places, fewer  children would be exposed to it.

Secondhand smoke kills children and adults that are nonsmokers.  In the United States, 42.1 million adults smoke cigarettes.  In one year, approximately 58 million nonsmokers are exposed to secondhand smoke. Exposure to secondhand smoke caused 603,000 deaths in 2004. An estimated 49,000 of those deaths were caused by heart disease or lung cancer. Since 2004, the number of smokers in the United States has decreased. However, there are still millions of people who smoke, and they millions of nonsmokers at risk of inhaling secondhand smoke everyday. People are dying because of something that is legal.

It is not the goal of a smoker to kill people with their secondhand smoke. However, it still happens. The medical risks and death rates caused by secondhand smoking can be cut down drastically. Although the harms of secondhand smoke may only seem important to secondhand smoke victims, it should in fact concern anyone that smokes as well because their family and friends are at risk to become secondhand smoke victims. One way to protect the health of many people is to quit smoking if you are a smoker. Another option is to make sure all children go to a tobacco-free daycare or school. Even if a person changes everything in their power to avoid secondhand smoke, there will continue to be places where they can be exposed to secondhand smoke. Dreams of a secondhand smoke-free society will never come true if the country does not start by eliminating smoking in public places.

Works Cited:

1. "Secondhand Smoke (SHS) Facts." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 20 Aug. 2015. Web. 08 Oct. 2015. <http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/secondhand_smoke/general_facts/>.

2. "Secondhand Smoke." Secondhand Smoke. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Oct. 2015. <http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/tobaccocancer/secondhand-smoke>.

There are women of all different races and sizes across the world, and none of them are identical. The images in the media only represent a small slice of the diversity in the world. Images of popular women that appear in the media and in magazines have an effect on the women who are viewing these images. Many people follow what they see when it’s a new trend or is popular for the moment, but some women are easily influenced and change not for themselves, but for spouses, the media, etc. As a result, women do not always acknowledge their own body types as beautiful.

It seems that women are heavily influenced by what they see in life, what they want, and to what other people seem most attracted. In this case having a specific body type is important to most women. Studies at a colleges like Stanford University and the University of Massachusetts show that 70% of women look down on themselves after looking at the images and seeing the readings of women in magazines. “People see the same images over and over and start to believe it’s a version of reality,” says Deborah Schooler, one of the researchers. “If those bodies are real and that’s possible, but you can’t attain it, how can you not feel bad about your own body?” When thinner women are broadcasted all over they are disguised in make-up, their body is altered by the computer, and more. This is all to make it seem like these women are perfect and naturally beautiful. But perceptions of perfection are subjective. This then causes other women to want what they see for themselves because they feel it’s a better look. Their body is no longer looked upon as good enough. This shows how women pay attention to how popular women are being displayed and they then want that for themselves.

Models are very popular and they are shown many times on television, in magazines, and social media networks every day and it has a big impact on women. When they see certain women being projected as a particular image that is deemed beautiful, they are influenced into thinking that’s how they are supposed to look. However, some women have low self esteem and others just believe that skinny and tall is better. When reading an article a woman said “Being thin and/or muscular has become associated with being “hard-working, successful, popular, beautiful, strong, and self-disciplined.” This explains how women feel like they won’t succeed if they don’t look this way. This most likely has an effect on their work performance.

The look that women usually see attract the most attention are tall and thin. According to magazines, tv broadcastings, etc.  they have a beautiful body and they are supposed to represent the ideal for all women. Another article I researched about mentions how “Very few women possess the genetics to naturally produce the ultra-long, thin body type.” With this being said, it is challenging for other women who constantly see this projected in different places like New York Times magazine and know they can’t have that body for themselves. If the media showed more of women who are in shape, but maybe heavy set then it would make more women feel comfortable with themselves. Instead they only display this one particular image of women. Women who don’t fit this criteria are rarely spoken about in a positive way.

It would benefit society as whole if mainstream media created a situation where women could feel comfortable with their bodies. It would be ideal if women were not constantly exposed to unattainable media images. The things that appear in the media are designed to look perfect. Therefore, women can take that into consideration and adjust their bodies if necessary to them, but it shouldn’t be dependent on other things. The popular women that are shown aren’t always reliable enough to base a personal body image off of their portrayal.

Works Cited:

1. "Body Image." Web. 8 Oct. 2015. <http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/nutrition_&_eating_concerns/body_image.php>.

2. Women's Ideal Body Types Throughout History. (n.d.). Retrieved October 8, 2015.

Suspension is a common way to discipline students who commit an offense against the school’s code of conduct. To suspend a student simply means that they are not allowed to come to school for a certain amount of time because they broke a school rule. Most American school administrators believe that the use of suspension as a tool to discipline students is successful. However, contrary to popular belief, suspension is an extremely ineffective way to discipline students because it only creates a wider gap between them and their education.

One of the biggest flaws with the system of suspension is the lack of communication between the student and administrator. Even though a small meeting is conducted, where the cause of the suspension is discussed. However, it is not enriching enough to make a positive change for the student. After the short meeting, students are isolated from their school campus and are unable to work with their administrators to try to solve the problem that landed them with a suspension in the first place. Students do not learn anything constructive about what went wrong while they were absent. So, they end up in trouble again for similar reasons. Many times, students misbehave due to bullying, personal family issues or even a misunderstanding in the classroom. Instead of removing them from school, the administrator should try to talk with the student along with a psychologist and make them feel heard and understood. These feelings will help improve the student’s behavior. According to the National Association of School Psychologists, “School psychologists work with administrators to design, implement, and garner support for comprehensive school mental health programming, and school mental health programs have been shown to improve educational outcomes by reducing out-of-school suspensions…” By working with a professional who can truly understand the student, the root of the student’s problem can be found.

The system of suspension cause students to unnecessarily fall behind on school work due to missed classes. While the student's peers move onto new subjects in class, they are at home wasting time that could have been used productively. Instead, the student will have to make up the work at a later time while also trying to keep up with current school work. This causes a backup in the student’s academic progress. Suspension can also be harmful to the whole class’s academic success. According to Dignity in Schools, “Schools with high suspension rates score lower on state accountability tests and rank lower in National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) achievement rankings in mathematics, writing and reading than schools with lower suspension rates.” By being absent from even one class, vital class material is missed, making it hard to follow later lessons. So when students come back to school after a suspension, they are lost in many classes. This means that their teachers will have to spend more of their time teaching the same material again, instead of being able to move onto other topics and skills. These negative effects of suspension continue to widen the gap between students and their education.

Another huge flaw with the system of suspension is making students feel excluded and unwelcome in their own school community. After committing an offense, students need support from their school so they can understand where they went wrong and why they shouldn’t do it again. However, when they are suspended, they feel like they are not wanted and don’t belong. This feeling causes students to resort to other activities to pass time. In some cases this means criminal activity. According to Dignity in Schools, “...80 percent of youth incarcerated in a state facility had been suspended...from school.” Instead going to school, students are lured into situations that can possibly land them in jail, like drugs and dangerous gangs. Instead of being suspended, the students should be disciplined while still being able to attend their classes. This would make it so that students would have less time to fall into the trap of criminal activity and would help shorten the gap between them and their education.

When asked, administrators might say that suspension is an effective way to discipline students, but on closer inspection suspensions only ruin the delicate relationship between students and their education. The practice causes students to lose communication with administrators, fall behind academically and even feel unwelcome in their own school community. The best solution to this problem, as mentioned before, is by conducting an additional meeting between the student and administrator with a psychologist on board as well. This technique will also help bridge the gaps between the administrator and student, instead of students feeling resentful towards them and school in general for being punished. This kind of resolution would be a more useful way to spend their time, without creating a gap in the student's education. It could also help come up with a solution to the student’s initial problem.

Citations:

School Psychologists: Improving Student and School Outcomes. N.p.: National Association of School Psychologists, 2011. School Psychologists: Improving Student and School Outcomes. National Association of School Psychologists. Web.

"Fact Sheet on School Discipline and the Pushout Problem." Fact Sheet on School Discipline and the Pushout Problem (2010): n. pag. Fact Sheet on School Discipline and the Pushout Problem. Dignity in Schools. Web.

The emergence of the Internet brought upon a digital revolution of how information is both created and stored. As a result, the landscape of media consumption, is shifting quicker than anybody could have possibly anticipated. In fact, many are singing the swan song of corporeal books and printed information, as the world marches towards an increasingly digitized age. But in truth, it may not be all that simple, because for a variety of reasons that stretch from the practical to the psychological, paper may in fact be around for quite awhile yet.

Based on the current beleaguered state of of newspapers, this claim seems almost absurd. Print newspapers seem to have taken the full brunt of the rise of digital media, as numbers around the world are showing the rapid decline of newspaper sales. Statistics from stateofthemedia.org shows the shocking data: from 2003 to 2012, American newspapers sales from advertisements plummeted from over 46,000$ to just a little over 22,000$. In response, many newspapers and magazines have seen it fit to make the transition to become strictly online news providers. One of the world’s oldest newspapers: Lloyd’s List newspaper printed its last material copy of the news outlet in December of 2013, declaring that from now they would operate solely on the inter-webs to bring people crucial information. it seems all the more likely many more newspapers and magazines will follow suit, especially the UK’s Guardian, which has openly admitted in the face of declining sales, that they are working towards the paper strictly existing online. But what’s important to remember is that newspapers are just one facet of media that is distributed on a wide-range scale, and depending from what angle is being perceived, the landscape looks very, very different. Newspapers are simple there to carry crisp and concise information, something that obviously a digital alternative would do better, at least in terms of distribution and speediness of updates. When the needs of the readers become much more complex, that’s when simply reading words from a screen simply doesn’t seem to cut it anymore.

Take the second piece of media formally associated with paper: books. According to Statista.com, book sales have remained relatively stable for the last few years, while The Kindle, Amazon’s digital alternative for printed novels, has done abysmal in sales, at least in comparison to expected numbers. Investment website Forbes.com estimates an annual revenue of 265$ million to 530$ million a year for Amazon every year from e-books, which may seem like a lot, except when you compare that to the net worth of Amazon’s CEO: Jeff Bezos, who Forb.com estimated at about 29.9 billion dollars.

All of this information points a deeper, more ingrained psychological aspect to why paper may not be circling the metaphorical drain quite yet. While reading has shown to improve comprehension and concentration, e-books are plagued by many minor annoyances that material copies simply do not have. The brain isn’t able to process information as thoroughly through a digital format, getting more easily distracted from processing, reading e-books for long periods can cause eye-sores and headaches, and needless to say, you never need to worry about a paper book running out of batteries.  The Washington Post recently published an article in February that showed a staggering majority of college students polled prefer traditional paper books to their electronic counterparts, for many of these exact reasons.

When asked, people might say that paper is falling out of the eye of public media as the Internet becomes increasingly relevant to society. But on closer inspection, they might realize that that paper in truth adds psychological and practical advantages to the reading experience, advantages that aren’t likely to be implemented into a digital format any time soon. It’s difficult to imagine in our modern world that a better alternative to paper for storing information won’t eventually be perfected, but as it stands currently, paper doesn’t seem to be on the way out, at least in the foreseeable future. The simple truth is that the world of the Internet is still one that is being built, one still in its adolescence, and in the kaleidoscope of the new possibilities available, we’re still figuring what works currently. In some areas, like how we get our news, the digital revolution seems undoubtedly the future, but as shown, not all areas of media or the human experience is going to translate immediately and smoothly into this new era. Like everything, an adjustment period will be needed, and that adjustment period will likely last longer for paper than we will see in the rest of lifetimes.

Works Cited:

1. Lawler, Ryan. "The Death Of Paper." TechCrunch. Techcrunch, 2 Dec. 2012. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

2. "» Newspapers: By the Numbers." » Newspapers: By the Numbers. Stateofthemedia.org, 7 May 2013. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

3. Musil, Steven. "World's Oldest Newspaper to End Print Edition." CNET. CNET Magazine, 25 Sept. 2013. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

4. Wallop, Harry. "The Kindle Is Dead, the Book Is Back. Or Is It?" The Telegraph. Telegraph Media Group, 9 Jan. 2015. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

5. "Revenue of the U.S. Book Publishing Industry 2014 | Statistic." Statista. Google, n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

6. Trefis, Team. "Estimating Kindle E-Book Sales For Amazon." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 2 Apr. 2014. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

7. Rosenwald, Michael S. "Why Digital Natives Prefer Reading in Print. Yes, You Read That Right." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 22 Feb. 2015. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

The Instability of Football

Less than a year ago, emerging NFL star Chris Borland retired from football. After a rookie season with more than 100 tackles, he was destined to be one of the next great NFL linebackers. But the 49ers’ player decided to give up the money and fame, because he was worried about his mental health problems down the road. Borland’s early retirement has marked a new age in football, where players are actually starting to rethink the repercussions of the game. His decision is a small representation of the larger problems at hand in football. As a result of the downsides that come with the sport, there are additionally declining numbers of participants. Therefore, despite the NFL’s popularity, football will eventually cease to exist as an organized sport because it is not physically or financially sustainable.

It is no secret that football causes injuries. This has been true since the beginning of the game. However, as of recent, an understanding of how detrimental it can be to one’s brain and body has come to light in large studies. A 2007 article published by The New York Times touched on how problematic the game can be to young players. According to the report, since 1997, fifty or more youth football players have experienced serious brain damage or died as a result of playing the game. In 2012, the Huffington Post added that the chances of NFL players being diagnosed with ALS (also known as Lou Gehrig's disease) or Alzheimer's is 4 times higher than the rest of the world.  Studies like this make clear just how dangerous the sport of football is to its players. It shows how troubling football is to the body and how the world is coming to more knowledge of it. These statistics are just beginning to have an impact on the world of football and ultimately won’t help the game’s sustainability in the long run.

Injuries in football create a cause and effect system. As more people get injured, the more money it costs. This is due to rising insurance rates and increased costs to protect those kids when they are injured. Chris Fischer of WTSP in Tampa wrote, “The Florida High School Athletic Association mandates, each school has a medical base plan of $25,000 per athlete before the student can even step foot on to the field of play.” This information shows how pricey and expensive football is to run and handle. Not only does each player need to pay insurance to get on the field, but the school districts and teams need to also pay hefty sums to run games. As people continue to get hurt, insurance and costs to run a football organization are going to rise. As they grow, more teams, schools districts, and players will be unable to pay the fee and play.

All of these problems also force a lot of costly legal issues, especially in the NFL. ESPN’s Rick Reilly added to this notion in a 2013 article, when he touched on the gigantic lawsuit the NFL had just paid out. Because of their harmed brains, the league handed out about 765 million dollars across more than 4,500 former NFL players. The hefty costs will surely not cease with these retired professionals, and might even begin at the high school and college level. The NFL can handle the lawsuits, but will smaller organizations be able to give out millions of dollars? Regardless, people will continue to ask for money as compensation for their damaged brains and it does not bode well for football.

At the same time, the world is becoming better informed about football today and the injuries and legal matters that go along with it.  In a recent poll by HBO Real Sports and the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, it was documented that 86% of adults noticed a connection between concussions (a common occurrence in football) and long-term brain trauma. Due to the influx in price and injuries, parents, teams, and players are starting to rethink if the game is worth it. According to The New York Times, in the past five years, football participation in high school has fallen by 2.4 percent, despite the rise of overall high school students. Furthermore, the Press Herald of Maine added that football in its state has decreased by a whopping 14 percent from 2006 to 2014. All of this shows how football is beginning to decline in number of players. Who knows how long it can sustain the information spilling out about injuries or the increasing amount of money it costs to play the game. However, if the sport cannot do anything to solve these problems, it seems as if participation in football is going to keep slowly declining.

Although football is still one of the most popular games in the United States, it is significantly descending. According to the International Business Times, 114 million TV sets in 2015 were turned into the 2014-15 Super Bowl. But if fans stop and look past the NFL’s success, they would realize that the game doesn’t only have professional teams, but smaller organizations that cannot afford the costs of football. The NFL has made large amounts of income to help support their cause, but they are an extreme outlier. Paying for millions of dollars worth of lawsuits and regulations may not be a possibility for high schools or PeeWee football teams. Therefore, football is sure to have trouble in the future and some day it may just be history.

Works Cited

"Young Players, Serious Injuries." The New York Times. The New York Times, 15 Sept. 2007. Web. 08 Oct. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/09/16/sports/20070916_CONCUSSION_GRAPHIC.html?_r=0>.

Almendrala, Anna. "Here's What We Know About Football And Brain Injuries." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, n.d. Web. 08 Oct. 2015.

<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/18/football-brain-injuries_n_6894534.html>.

"Concussion Concerns May Lead to Fewer Boys Playing Football." The Chart RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Oct. 2015. <http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/23/concussion-concerns-may-lead-to-fewer-boys-playing-football/>.

"Thin Rosters Have Some Football Teams on the Edge - The Portland Press Herald / Maine Sunday Telegram." The Portland Press Herald Maine Sunday Telegram Thin Rosters Have Some Football Teams on the Edge Comments. N.p., 04 Oct. 2015. Web. 08 Oct. 2015. <http://www.pressherald.com/2015/10/04/participation-in-varsity-football-at-several-maine-high-schools-has-fallen/>.

Reilly, Rick. ESPN. ESPN Internet Ventures, n.d. Web. 08 Oct. 2015. <http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9932209/nfl-becoming-guilty-pleasure>.

Schulzke, Eric. "High School Drops Football, Replaces It with Soccer for Homecoming." Telegram.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Oct. 2015. <http://www.telegram.com/article/ZZ/20151005/NEWS/310059861>.

Fischer, Chris. "What Does High School Sports Insurance Cover?" 10NEWS. N.p., 13 Oct. 2014. Web. 08 Oct. 2015. <http://www.wtsp.com/story/sports/high-school/2014/10/13/sportsinsurance/17216061/>.

Riccobono, Anthony. "Super Bowl Ratings: How Many People Watched The New England Patriots, Seattle Seahawks Game?" International Business Times. N.p., 02 Feb. 2015. Web. 08 Oct. 2015. <http://www.ibtimes.com/super-bowl-ratings-how-many-people-watched-new-england-patriots-seattle-seahawks-game-1803116>.

Imagine this scenario: A woman needs a hysterectomy, the surgeon wants to do it robotically, instead of working directly with his hands, he'll will sit at a console, manipulating a set of robotic arms outfitted with tiny surgical instruments to do his work for him. In recent years, this imaginary scene has become reality, and robotic surgery has been recognized for being one of the most beneficial advantages in the medical field. Many Americans believe that the added usage of technologies has created a significant advantage in this modern world of surgery. With that being said, however, those people fail to realize that the added usage of robotic surgery creates a higher risk of complications among patients which caused significant rise of adverse events since robots are unable to perform range of things human surgeons can perform.

Becnel Law firm are one of the top firms dealing with medical malpractice suits. “The Da Vinci Surgical Robot” is being used as a minimally-invasive alternative to the abdominal incision prostatectomy. According their firm, robotic surgery has been the cause of serious traumatic situations for patients all over the country. According to Becnal Law Firm, “Having only the sense of sight to discern whether something has torn is far less accurate than being able to actually feel the tear with one’s own two hands. Because of this, more patients are suffering from damage to tissue and blood vessels.” These kinds of tear may leave the patient in serious bleeding conditions afterwards without the doctor’s knowledge. These robotic machines do not have any system to detect any misbehavior in blood flowness or the muscle structure that a doctor can notice if the surgery was done by hand. Becnel Law Firm also states, “Robot arms are used 10-15 times, instead of the three times recommended. As more surgeries are performed, the arms degrade, causing a loss in energy that travels down the arm to the tip of the instrument the surgeon is using.” The loss of energy may result in the machine not cooperating with the surgeon and leaving the patient with torn tissues, bleeding, scarring or bladder injuries, which are not easily curable with the machine. Degradable arm can result in an unsuccessful operation causing the patient to go through the robotic surgery once again.

Robots certainly don’t have the mentality to perform tasks that normal human beings can do easily, when faced with unexpected challenges. They can only do things that it’s assigned by the surgeons. Numbers of deaths may even rise because of the advance usage of these robots. Noticeable changes can be seen when looking at the rate of success the machines have achieved. According to a report in The Wall Street Journal,  “Because of the rising number of incidents—282 injury reports last year, including 28 deaths, up 34% from the year before—the FDA inspected Intuitive earlier this year and in July issued a warning letter stating the company hadn't reported certain safety changes to its Da Vinci robotics system, asking for additional corrective actions. The machines were used without any additional corrective actions which are supposed to be updated every year for any surgical equipment. Companies that are producing these kinds of machines are not legally documenting the effects which are causing problems in the long run. The increasing usage of these machines also increased the rate of death up to a shocking 34%, showing clear misbehaviour caused by these machines. Although recovery time may be faster, taking chances and trusting some machine that are not yet qualified  to support these kind of surgeries may not be worth it.

The Division of Biology and Medicine is composed of Alpert Medical School and the Program in Biology. They perform serious tasks with new technologies which enables them to interact with innovative research and allows them to write on behalf the equipments they use. As the usage of robotic surgeries increasing, the amount of time for the staff to actually stay in the OT is increasing, too. Alpert Medical School stated that, “Robotic assisted heart surgery can take nearly twice the amount of time that a typical heart surgery takes. In a longer surgery, the patient undergo anesthesia for a longer period of time and it costs more to staff the procedure.” The longer the staff have to stay in the OT, the slower or less  focus they will have for their patients. Study shows longer hours for residents may result in less focus on their actual patient. Not only longer anesthesiology require higher bills, it will also cause the patient to undergo a surgery that will take twice longer time than if it was done by hand. In reality, undergoing long hours of anesthesia may leave older patients to become seriously disoriented and delirious for days. Although these conditions may seem normal for going under anesthesia for long hours, being old and dealing with these complications shouldn’t be healthy for them. American Society of Anesthesiologist, an educational association reported patients having “Cognitive dysfunction,” after long hours of anesthesia, causing patient to be in risk of long term memory loss.

In conclusion, robotic surgeries are beneficial for patients sometimes in the future but not now. Robotic surgeries are causing much complications which is causing both the patient and the surgeon to be in a pitfall. Not only that, the whole medical community will be responsible if something harmful happens to the patient because of robotic surgeries. Some surgeons are not fully yet certified for doing these surgeries but even though they do so. In addition, some robots are being overused because of the financial downside of these things. If robotic surgeries really needs to be used in present day, the regulations behalf how it's going to be used should be monitored frequently.

Work Cited

• "Disadvantages to Robotic Surgery." Disadvantages to Robotic Surgery. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.

<http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BI108/BI108_2004_Groups/Group02/Group%2002%20Website/robodisadvan.htm/>

• "Muscle Strain: Symptoms, Tests, and Treatment of Muscle Strain." WebMD. WebMD. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.

<http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/guide/muscle-strain/>

• "Prostate Removal Robot Surgery Lawyers | Robotic Injury Attorney For Prostate Removals | Bad Robot Surgery." Bad Robot Surgery. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.

<http://badrobotsurgery.com/prostate-removal-robot-surgery-injury/>

• "The Pros and Cons of Robotic Surgery." WSJ. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.

<http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304655104579163430371597334/>

• "Effects of Anesthesia." Effects of Anesthesia. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.

<https://www.asahq.org/>

  Is explicit music and television bad for children? There are two sides to this argument. The side that says this is very harmful, and the side that says either no, or that it’s only a little. Why do people take this situation so seriously? Adults pay so much attention to what children listen and watch because they fell that it can influence the kids to do bad things, or to think about things in a negative way. That is why they are concerned. Ultimately, kids will be ok with seeing most of the violent and sexual tv, and the same goes for explicit music. The kids will be affected little to none.

      The website Dailymail.co.uk has a story about a study on this topic. This story says that kids copy the verbal aggression that they see, as well as the physical violence that they see. This worries adults because this could lead to bullying and violence if kids really are that influenced. Not only that, according to psychologytoday.com, multiple sexual images can make a person act sexually active before they are ready. Because a lot of time the sexual content in entertainment is not portayed the best way, it can make kids think that it is ok and consequence-free. Also, boys who see graphic sexual content are 3x more likely to enagage in sexual acts then boys who haven’t. So, this side has some points. Not only that, apa.org says that violent tv can make young people more aggressive, and less social. Not only that, they can actually start to have more fear about the world they live in. But, still, there are ways to avoid that. Even if Leonard Eron, who is a Senior Research Scientist, is right about TV being respsonsible for 10% of the violence among young people, there is a way to prevent that without banning kids from seeing violent or sexual things.

   Many people feel that it is ok for kids to listen to explicit music and watch these type of tv shows. An author on madamenoir.com said that she doesn’t really censor her kids from her music. When her daughter was 3, she cursed towards one of the songs. She told her daughter that foul language is only for adults to use, and she hasn’t cursed since. Madamenoir.com is trustworthy because it is about black women’s lifestyles, so they talk about things like mothering. It’s obvious that this came from a real mother’s experience. On boards.straightdope.com, a mom asked whether she should let her 13 year old son listen to metal music, and a lot of people said yes, one mentioning that he sounds to be a kid without many behavior issues. That was justification to let him listen to the music. On todaysparent.com, one dad named Eric Alper said that he does let his kid listen to explicit music because he wants to be a cool dad, and not be the type that shuts her away from certain music. Also, psycnet.apa.org says that minors have their views on sexual activity don’t change that much when they hear explicit music. They gathered a group of people to listen to explicit music, then a censored version of that song, and then a non sexual song. The people still had similar views about women and sexuality. That really defeats the people saying that it does change the views of people, since this is coming from psychology website.

     Sometimes, the kids don’t understand song lyrics. On todaysparent.com, one dad named Eric Alper said, “It doesn’t matter if she doesn’t understand what she’s singing – I’m just happy that she’s singing.” It is true that kids don’t always understand song lyrics. There is another example from commonsensemedia.org. The author of the article said that her 8 year old kid wanted to download “Whistle” by Flo Rida. The song was about oral sex, but the kid thought it was about blowing whistles. That is why she let daughter download the song. On circleofmoms.com, one mom asked when will her 15 year old be old enough to hear explicit music. One person said the daughter would rebel. Another said that if she’s a good kid, she should be ok. And another brought up how people used to be against Elvis and The Beatles. Those things are all true. If a teen is mature, he/she can handle any type of music. Same with a kid. People have been hearing inappropriate things for a long time, and they have turned out fine. If a mature person sees another person eat food off of the floor, that person won’t join in. Same goes with entertainment. Morals need to be shown to these kids so they don’t go wild when they see & hear different things. The entertainment can’t be blamed for the way our children came out. If children are raised right, they will turn out fine. If the kids start acting out, the parents need to fix it by having a discussion. If that doesn’t work, therapy or grounding will probably solve the problem. Nothing will influence them for the worse after that. It is the parent's’ responsibility. If 10% youth violence is caused by TV, then parents need to fix that. They need to sit down next to their kids and tell them what is right and what is wrong. They need to promote positivity, and explain why violence is wrong. They also need to tell them why they are too young to be having sex, as well as too young for alcohol and drugs.

For all of the kids who are affected, the real question is how are these parents raising their kids. That’s the problem. If parents talk to their kids about right and wrong, and make sure their kids are mature before letting them watching certain things, they will be ok. The stuff then will have little to no effect on the child. If not, the explicit music and tv shows could become the parents. It is the parents responsiblity to prevent this. Parents and gaurdians need to be involved in their lives as much as possible. If parents do that, the rest will take care of itself. If the parents don’t do this, their kids could end up crazy or sexually active, and then parents will end up blaming tv and music when it’s not the artists or the tv show’s’ fault. It’s actually theirs. The suggestions mentioned in this paper will have kids being able to watch and hear what they want, and have them not turn to do negative things. Parents can prevent most of this from happening by just talking to their kids, as well as being involved in their lives. Simple actions can lead to massive results. That is the conclusion.

Works Cited

"Should I Let My 13-year Old Listen to These Heavy Metal Groups? - Straight Dope Message Board." Straight Dope Message Board RSS. 26 Jan. 2010. Web. 9 Oct. 2015. <http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=549506>.

"At What Age Should I Allow My 15 Yo to Listen to Explicit Lyrics?" Circle of Moms. Web. 9 Oct. 2015. <http://www.circleofmoms.com/welcome-circle-moms/at-what-age-should-i-allow-my-15-yo-to-listen-to-explicit-lyrics-476704>.

Howard, Cori, and Eric Alper. "The Debate: Do You Let Your Kids Listen to Explicit Music? - Today's Parent." Todays Parent. Rogers Media, 2 May 2012. Web. 9 Oct. 2015. <http://www.todaysparent.com/family/parenting/the-debate-do-you-let-your-kids-listen-to-explicit-music/>.

Clark, Laura. "Cartoon Violence 'makes Children More Aggressive'" Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, 5 Mar. 2009. Web. 9 Oct. 2015. <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1159766/Cartoon-violence-makes-children-aggressive.html>.

"The PTC Mission." PTC Mission. Web. 9 Oct. 2015. <http://w2.parentstv.org/main/About/mission.aspx>.

Filucci, Sierra. "My Daughter Wants to Download Raunchy Music." Common Sense Media. 28 May 2013. Web. 8 Nov. 2015.

"Explicit Lyrics: Do You Censor The Music Your Kids Listen To?" MadameNoire RSS. 13 June 2014. Web. 12 Oct. 2015. <http://madamenoire.com/561276/explicit-lyrics-do-you-censor-the-music-your-kids-listen-to/>.

"Sex, Violence, and Profanity in the Media Fact Sheet, TV Statistics - Parents Television Council." Sex, Violence, and Profanity in the Media Fact Sheet, TV Statistics - Parents Television Council. Web. 12 Oct. 2015. <http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/facts/mediafacts.asp>.

"Psychologists Study Media Violence for Harmful Effects." Apa.org. Web. 12 Oct. 2015. <http://www.apa.org/action/resources/research-in-action/protect.aspx>.

Sprankle, Eric L., and Christian M. End. "The Effects of Censored and Uncensored Sexually Explicit Music on Sexual Attitudes and Perceptions of Sexual Activity." Http://psycnet.apa.org/. Web. 12 Oct. 2015. <http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=2009-07965-002>.