Five Days at Memorial. Five Days at Memorial: Life and Death in a Storm-Ravaged Hospital is a 2013 non-fiction book by American journalist Sheri Fink. The book details the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina at Memorial Medical Center in New Orleans in August 2005, and is an expansion of a Pulitzer Prize-winning article written by Fink and published in The New York Times Magazine in 2009. It describes the events that took place at Memorial Medical Center over five days as thousands of people were trapped in the hospital without power.
The triage system put into effect deprioritized critically ill patients for evacuation, and a number of these patients were euthanized by medical and nursing staff shortly before the entire hospital was evacuated on the fifth day of the crisis. Fink examines the legal and political consequences of the decision to euthanize patients and the ethical issues surrounding euthanasia and health care in disaster scenarios. Background Content The book is divided into two parts. Nellie Bly. Early years Nellie Bly working in a factory producing boxes At birth she was named Elizabeth Jane Cochran. She was born in "Cochran Mills", today part of the Pittsburgh suburb of Burrell Township, Armstrong County, Pennsylvania. Her father, Michael Cochran, was a modest laborer and mill worker who married Mary Jane.
Cochran taught his young children a cogent lesson about the virtues of hard work and determination, buying the local mill and most of the land surrounding his family farmhouse. As a young girl Elizabeth often was called "Pinky" because she so frequently wore the color. As she became a teenager she wanted to portray herself as more sophisticated, and so dropped the nickname and changed her surname to Cochrane. She attended boarding school for one term, but was forced to drop out due to lack of funds.
In 1880, Cochrane and her family moved to Pittsburgh. Asylum exposé Bly being examined by a psychiatrist Around the world Later years Gallery The First-Known Medical Consent Form Dates Back To 1524. The Worst Nobel Prize Ever Awarded.
Carrie Buck. Carrie E. Buck (July 3, 1906 – January 28, 1983) was the plaintiff in the United States Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell, after having been ordered to undergo compulsory sterilization for purportedly being "feeble-minded. " The surgery, carried out while Buck was an inmate of the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded, took place under the authority of the Racial Integrity Act of 1924, part of the state of Virginia's eugenics program. Early life Carrie Buck was born in Charlottesville, Virginia, the first of three children born to Emma Buck; she was soon joined by a sister, Doris Buck, and a brother, Roy Smith.
After her birth, Buck was placed with foster parents, John and Alice Dobbs. Vivian was adopted by the Dobbs family, who had also raised Carrie, for a time. She was an [average student], neither particularly outstanding nor much troubled. By all accounts Vivian was of average intelligence, far above feeblemindedness.
Supreme Court case Legacy 9 Well-Meaning Public Health Policies That Went Terribly Wrong. Raising Safety Standards for Virus Labs I understand how you came to your conclusion, but there's a valid point and good reason for doing it. I feel like while raising the standards was a good thing the actual implementation was poor. Also, I'd like to add the Food Pyramid as one of the things that was well meaning but has gone terribly wrong. In an attempt to stem heart disease by lowering fat intake they ended up causing everyone to binge on carbohydrates.
Companies lowered the fat of their food and replaced it with sugar. The government subsidized corn and HFCS was discovered. It was a perfect storm that lead us to diabetes and more heart disease, now that we've discovered that the worst forms of cholesterol come from frutose and not direct consumption of cholesterol and fat. Yes, I was thinking of nutritional programs when I was putting this up.
How barbers became surgeons. Man who was shot in the stomach became the first human guinea pig. How an early psychiatric treatment lead to widespread mutilation. You know, that's a theory I've held for some time now too. I have a friend who is majoring in psychology, he's currently undertaking his Master's courses for it (but is on summer break) and what I find especially interesting is now that he's learned quite a bit he's always busy diagnosing and pointing out the flaws and issues he sees in others.
Yet he never turns that around on himself. I've pointed this out to him and he states there's nothing wrong with him at all. My intense studying of human beings ever since I was a child states otherwise. Moody, prone to fits of anger and occasionally rather extreme physically violent rages, history of drug use and abuse, some alcoholism, etc etc etc. Nope. Ignores all of that and says he's fine but it's everyone else that's f*cked up. Then again, I've always been of the belief that people who point out flaws and shortcomings in others are doing so because they themselves are guilty of those very things except they don't want to acknowledge it. A disturbing "care pamphlet" given to families of lobotomized soldiers.
Not even close, but thanks for playing. In the age before pharmaceutical psychiatry, people did DO things to mental patients, generally not very pleasant things, like straitjacketing them, or electroshocking them, or dunking them in ice baths or just locking them up for the rest of their lives. They invented the lobotomy because they were looking for a more humane way to deal with mental patients and possibly allow them to live at home/semi-independently. Also, murder rates and unwanted pregnancy rates have been coming down since deinstitutionalization in the 60s, explain that.
Actually, my father was schizophrenic, and he was given quite a number of drugs that were constantly being switched around, he was also straitjacketed and given electroshock therapy, and that was in the '70s and '80s. So, it was not either/or. uh huh, and what about suicide rates? They're constantly going up. Some people need to be institutionalized. The strange, sad history of the lobotomy. Crownsville Hospital Center. Crownsville Hospital Center, February 8, 2010 The Crownsville Hospital Center is a former psychiatric hospital located in Crownsville, Maryland.
It was in operation from 1911 to 2004. History The facility was enabled by an act of the Maryland General Assembly on April 11, 1910 as the Hospital for the Negro Insane of Maryland. This act also explicitly specified that the facility should not be located in Baltimore. On December 13, 1910 the Board of Managers purchased farm land located at Crownsville, Maryland for the sum of $19,000 which had formerly been farmed for willow and tobacco.
The facility was founded following a 1908 report of "The Maryland State Lunacy Commission" which stated: "It is with a feeling of shame and humiliation that the conditions which exist in the State among the negro insane are chronicled and known to the public. As early as 1899 the Maryland Lunacy Commission in its Annual Report stated: Again in its 1900 report it stated: In 1953, the Superintendent, Dr. The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. Tragic chapter of Crownsville State Hospital's legacy - CapitalGazette.com: For The Record. One image shows African-Americans lounging on the grass on Family Day; in another photo, obviously staged, nurses attend to a smiling patient dressed in a coat and tie. Other snapshots show an adult chained to a wall, a child with her frail arms strapped to a chair, men crammed into a windowless dorm room.
An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety. Login Or, use your linked account: Need an account? Create one now. This was life at what became known as Crownsville State Hospital, now a group of buildings boarded up and crumbling on Generals Highway. Neither the state nor the county seem to want any part of the old asylum. Missing records and a state bureaucracy intent on closing off patient records haven’t deterred them. “I am attempting to save black history,” Lurz says. Lurz came to Crownsville State Hospital in 1964 as a student social worker. “This is history of us,” Hayes-Williams says.
Rbaltimore comments on Prior to the development of Thorazine, the Transorbital ("ice pick") lobotomy was a popular psychiatric, and often devastating, treatment-- here's a how-to video. Buck v. Bell. Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., in which the Court ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, "for the protection and health of the state" did not violate the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The decision was largely seen as an endorsement of negative eugenics—the attempt to improve the human race by eliminating "defectives" from the gene pool. The Supreme Court has never expressly overruled Buck v. Bell. However, in the last 50 years, both federal and state courts have severely criticized and questioned the legal reasoning underlying the decision. Background The case While the litigation was making its way through the court system, Priddy died and his successor, Dr. The ruling was written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Historian Paul A. Dr. State Issues Apology for Policy of Sterilization. SACRAMENTO — It was a dark chapter in American history. For more than half a century, California and other states forcibly sterilized 60,000 mentally ill people as part of a misguided national campaign to eliminate crime, "feeblemindedness," alcoholism, poverty and other problems blamed for dragging society down.
On Tuesday, Gov. Gray Davis apologized, placing California in a small group of states that have issued formal regrets. "To the victims and their families of this past injustice," Davis said in a statement, "the people of California are deeply sorry for the suffering you endured over the years. Our hearts are heavy for the pain caused by eugenics. As eugenics was practiced in California and 31 other states at various times between 1909 and 1964, when it stopped, individuals considered defective included alcoholics, petty criminals, the poor, disabled and mentally ill. Sen. Davis issued the official regrets shortly after state Atty. Eugenics: Compulsory Sterilization in 50 American States. Lutz Kaelber, Associate Professor of Sociology, University of Vermont Presentation about "eugenic sterilizations" in comparative perspective at the 2012 Social Science History Association: 1, 2.
American eugenics refers inter alia to compulsory sterilization laws adopted by over 30 states that led to more than 60,000 sterilizations of disabled individuals. Many of these individuals were sterilized because of a disability: they were mentally disabled or ill, or belonged to socially disadvantaged groups living on the margins of society. American eugenic laws and practices implemented in the first decades of the twentieth century influenced the much larger National Socialist compulsory sterilization program, which between 1934 and 1945 led to approximately 350,000 compulsory sterilizations and was a stepping stone to the Holocaust. This site provides such an overview. Link to "Eugenics" and Nazi "Euthanasia" Crimes gateway page. Eugenics in the United States. Winning family of a Fitter Family contest stand outside of the Eugenics Building (where contestants register) at the Kansas Free Fair, in Topeka, KS. Eugenics, the social movement claiming to improve the genetic features of human populations through selective breeding and sterilization, based on the idea that it is possible to distinguish between superior and inferior elements of society, played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States prior to its involvement in World War II. Eugenics was practised in the United States many years before eugenics programs in Nazi Germany and U.S. programs provided much of the inspiration for the latter. Stefan Kühl has documented the consensus between Nazi race policies and those of eugenicists in other countries, including the United States, and points out that eugenicists understood Nazi policies and measures as the realization of their goals and demands. History Early proponents Immigration restrictions.
The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks Summary - Rebecca Skloot. Henrietta Lacks was born in 1920, the eighth of ten children. Her mother died in 1924, at which point her father took all the children to his family’s home in Clover, Virginia and split them up to live with various relatives. Henrietta was placed with Tommy Lacks, her grandfather, in a four-room cabin that had once been home to slaves.
This cabin was the center of Lacks family life, and everyone called it the home-house. When Henrietta moved in, Tommy Lacks was already raising another grandchild, Henrietta’s cousin David Lacks. David, whom everyone called Day, had been born to an unwed mother on the home-house floor nine years before. Henrietta spent the rest of her life with Day, eventually marrying him and giving birth to five children.
In childhood, Henrietta and Day got up early each morning to tend the farm animals and the kitchen garden. When they were not working, the many children of Henrietta’s extended family went swimming, held bonfires, and played games together. Pay special attention to the Affidavits on p7. Www.columbia.edu/itc/history/rothman/COL476I5027.pdf. Code of Federal Regulations. Tuskegee syphilis experiment. A doctor draws blood from one of the Tuskegee test subjects. The Tuskegee syphilis experiment (/tʌsˈkiːɡiː/) was an infamous clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 by the U.S.
Public Health Service to study the natural progression of untreated syphilis in rural African American men who thought they were receiving free health care from the U.S. government. The Public Health Service started working with the Tuskegee Institute in 1932. Investigators enrolled in the study a total of 600 impoverished sharecroppers from Macon County, Alabama. 399 of those men had previously contracted syphilis before the study began, and 201 did not have the disease. The men were given free medical care, meals, and free burial insurance, for participating in the study.
They were never told they had syphilis, nor were they ever treated for it. By 1947, penicillin had become the standard treatment for syphilis. History Study clinicians Taliaferro Clark Oliver Wenger Raymond A. Protecting Human Research Participants. Www.cioms.ch/images/stories/CIOMS/guidelines/guidelines_nov_2002_blurb.htm. International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects Prepared by the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) CIOMS Geneva 2002 Ethical justification and scientific validity of biomedical research involving human subjects Ethical review Ethical review committees Ethical review of externally sponsored research Informed consent Individual informed consent Obtaining informed consent: Essential information for prospective research subjects Obtaining informed consent: Obligations of sponsors and investigators Inducement to participate Benefits and risks of study participation Special limitations on risk when research involves individuals who are not capable of giving informed consent Research in populations and communities with limited resources Choice of control in clinical trials Vulnerable groups Women as research participants.
Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Nuremberg Code. Human Experimentation: The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly.