Grama's profileGrama's space bubblePhotosBlogListsMore Tools Help

Blog


    Winter is Here in Lancaster, CA

                                          Grace & Charity taking a break from building the snowman

     

    It's snowing.  It's snowing.  The old man is snoring!

    It is a winter wonderland.  Grace and Charity made a  B-I-G  snowman.

    They gave it a smile and green eyes.  It was pretty cute.  See for yourself.

     

                                         the snowman

    He looks pretty small, but eyes can be deceiving.  Check it out next to Grace.

                                         Grace & the snowman

     

    The flakes of snow came down all day long.  Sparky and Charity liked it a lot.

     

                                                 Sparky &  Charity

    Sparky didn't understand what all the fuss was about.  He could take it or leave it.  He'd rather leave it.  He likes his water melted.  It splashes better that way.  He would rather splash in it than slide on it.  That is just the way it is with his breed.

    It has been quite a few years since it snowed here.  I guess that blows the warming theory out the window--it is no longer warm on this side of the earth!

    A Life Versus Death Struggle

    Technorati Tags:

    "A Life Versus Death Struggle:"  If the Medical Profession Calculates the Value of Life on an Economical Basis, Who Calculates the Value of Death?

    By Trudy A. Martinez

    Once upon a time in America, an individual was guaranteed the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Then death was a natural process. The meaning of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" changes with the growth of the Medical industry. Life itself becomes a pursuit of the medical profession, leaving the value of death obscure as medicine views death as a failure and the right to die hinders medicines’ quest for technological immorality.

    Because death is a failure to the medical profession, the prolonging of life by artificial means rejects bereavement, leaving death with no place in life. When Mary Catherine Bateson examines, "What is needed to give death its proper place in life?" She says, "In rejecting death, [society sets itself] against nature"(8). "Having interfered with the process . . . [society] should accept the fact that the cast and glory of technical progress is to require choice: . . . choice of how to die"(8).

    In other words, Bateson advocates the "right to die". In 1971, the Supreme Court rules “there is no constitutional right to choose to die" (Kearl 412). Nevertheless, death does not necessitate constitutional approval. Death is a natural process.

    On the other hand, death revolts physicians since natural death hinders medicine's quest for technological immortality (Guillemin 32). Therefore, "dying . . . is not something the individual patient . . . really does, [dying] is a matter of . . . withdrawing life supports" (Guillemin 32). Many doctors feel to choose to die over maintaining life on life support is committing suicide. In ancient time, “because life was so trivialized, Romans and Greeks raised few moral objections to suicide, and they usually only protested suicide when it caused economic or social loss"(Barry 25).

    Life in America, on the other hand, is not trivialized; instead, life is immortalized, causing death to lose its right. As a result, in an immortal society for an individual to re-claim the natural right of death, he resorts to what the medical institutions now define as suicide, unplugging the machines. Such a death does not constitute a social loss when the individual's quality of life is gone. To retain life that has loss quality causes an unnecessary economical drain on the family and the patient, while at the time, it has the opposite affect on medical professionals; they benefit economically. Although a medical professional may believe he has the patient's best interest at heart, not always does he serve the patient’s best interest. This is especially true when considering the spiraling cost of maintaining life supports in the equation.

    "If antiquity privatized suicide and objected only when there was economic or social loss, Medieval Christianity saw a deeper meaning and value in life"(Barry 26). However, in current times, death to a Christian has more value than life as the medical institutions defines life. For a Christian death brings life forever after. Yet, life, in the sense of forever, is in heaven, not on earth. To some dying individuals, whether Christian or not, death has worth; it ends suffering and pain. To the Medical industry, life has worth; it increases profits, while at the same time, decreases a sense of failure. Consequently, a safeguard to the health-care profession's own perception of adequacy requires the devaluation of death.

    When death is devalued, the voice of the people rings out: "Whose death is it, anyway?” (Seligmann 69). Once, death came naturally. Then, a decision to die was not necessary. However, technology changes all that. For example, the question asked about Carrie Coons, 86, was "Does she want to die?" Such a question is unfair. Nobody wants to die if his or her life has a promise of quality. However, Mrs. Coons lost through deprivation a quality of life. She was "kept alive by a feeding tube," a state "her doctor called a 'persistent vegetative state'"(69). "Dr. Michael Wolff . . . called her chances of recovery 'nil'"(69). Even though she was in a vegetative state with no hope of recovery, Mrs. Coon's sister had to seek and receive a court order "to have the feeding tube removed"(69). With total disregard for the family wishes and with the knowledge that her chances of recovery were non-existent, the doctor requests a hearing that blocks the order "to remove the feeding tube". Why? Because doctors believe in order for death to be natural, it requires a decision. When the doctor asks Mrs. Coons "whether she wanted her feeding tube removed", she answers, "according to Wolff, it would be a difficult decision"(69). Wolff assumes her answer implies she wants to live regardless of her quality of life. Yet, is this really the case? Her sister says, "From the look in her eyes . . . she [is] trying to tell me, 'Let me go'" (69). She lingers now "in limbo until she either speaks clearly or dies"(69). In other words, her sentence is a life of suffering, not a life of happiness, but one that is literally a "Hell on Earth".

    In the past when our ancestors cried: Give me life, liberty, or death, little did they know that when life is given, liberty is curtailed, and death is denied. ". . .To dispense death is one [decision] in which society as a whole has no interest"(The Economist 60). Today ". . . autonomy decides . . . theright to die’ but it is a principle that . . . leans toward life, not death"(The Economist 60). This is probably so because most people want to live. Nevertheless, some want to end the suffering and pain and die as naturally as possible. They want "To civilize death, to bring it home and make it no longer a source of dread . . . . The road leads . . . to acceptance and understanding" (The Economist 60).

    Not all doctors agree abandoning treatment achieves the primary good or that an individual has the capability to decide for himself. For instance, Dr. David C. Stolinsky, M.D. says, lawyers and ethicists persuade us to regard “. . . The cessation of active treatment for the senile or incurably ill and the omission of effective treatment at the patient's request . . . as definite goods to be eagerly embraced . . . . [Therefore, the] competing good--beneficence--has been largely displaced. . . . [In addition] autonomy has out paced beneficence. . . I believe it is a mistake to make [autonomy] superior to ‘Thou shalt not kill’ . . . . But those who encourage it, even for the best motives, are in fact performing an experiment with all of us as subjects . . . I don't recall giving my informed consent" (Appelbaum 2).

    The trouble with doctors like Stolinsky is they feel they are superior and they should rule over a patient's right to autonomy.

    Stolinsky says, too much autonomy can lead to blaming the patient for his illness, an abdication of responsibility for decision-making, an uncaring attitude toward society's unfortunates, and (in the extreme) allowing various "undesirable" to die as we stand by (Appelbaun 2).

    He says autonomy should not be superior to "Thou shalt not kill", but in fact, unknowingly, he puts beneficence superior to "Thou shalt not steal." When technology deprives a patient of death by supporting a life lacking of quality has not a theft occurred? Because of these type of circumstances, patients like L. McAfee are being forced to "petition . . . [courts] for permission to turn off" ventilators or other artificial means that purport to "prolong life", when in actuality, they are only "prolonging death" (Death Wish 67).

    McAfee's death was prolonged after ". . . a motorcycle accident left him paralyzed from the neck down", leaving him dependent upon artificial means to maintain a life without quality or hope. McAfee won his right to autonomy, his right to refuse medical treatment. In winning his right to refuse medical treatment, McAfee gains his "death wish" (Death Wish 67). "McAfee's situation has revived a smoldering controversy over whether health-care providers should help the disabled commit suicide" (Death Wish 67). The question is disconnecting an artificial means that maintains an inadequate quality of life committing suicide? If Stolinsky were to decide, the answer would be yes. However, Stolinsky puts no value on death. On the other hand when you consider all McAfee wants is to allow the removal of artificial means that robs his death from him, the answer to the question should be no. When the value of life is not meaningful, the value of death is priceless. Judge Johnson found McAfee to be a rational adult and that his "death wish" had value. Consequently, he ruled that McAfee had the "right to refuse life-sustaining treatment. . . ." The Judge said, "The ventilator to which he is attached is not prolonging his life; it is prolonging his death"(Death Wish 67).

    Life is "The heartache that has no end" in the case of Kim Goetchius. She suffers from a severe head injury received after she fell from a "careening golf cart". Since then, she has been in a persistent vegetative state for a period of eight years. Hope for her recovery is non-existent. Nevertheless, artificial means keeps her alive, hoping for a miracle. She is not alone; 10 percent of the patients at the St. John Dealon Hospital share the same status. The spiraling cost annually per patient suggests profits of the institution plays a role in the decision to maintain life supports. Why else would Kim's grave condition leave her doctor, Timothy Keay, agonizing "over the unanswerable question:" Are we ". . . protecting life or making a mockery of it?" (Buckley 54).

    Not only is death prolonged but death also comes prematurely through unnecessary medical intervention. "Death comes from medical reason, not moral reasons” (Kearl 418) for the sake of profit. Evidence points to economic factors that leave the government with the bill. A Congressional investigation in 1977 discloses, "The likelihood of receiving unnecessary treatment is related to one's position in the status hierarchy. . . . Useless surgery being performed on the needy and the poor [occurs] at twice the rate of that of the general population"(Kearl 419). Needlessly, the useless surgery lead to profits as further evidence reveals "2.38 million unnecessary operations" cause "11,900 needless deaths" and reaps "4 billion dollars" in the process (Kearl 418-419). "In overthrowing . . . the moral [reasons], medicine must now address . . . how patterns of death [relate] to the economic . . . structure . . ."(Kearl 423).

    Since life through the health care system "is being . . . sold in the marketplace and distributed on the basis of who can afford to pay for it (Kearl 423)," then it must hold true calculated financial factors determine the value of life. Successively, the value of death must come from the individual through the choice of not buying what is sold.

    Not buying what is sold may mean not calling 911. Nine-one-one is a cry for help. If you do not wish help through resuscitation, have your family call the mortuary instead. A call to 911 brings paramedics and police officers. Once the call is made, all attempts possible will be made to resuscitate whether you want that or not. Only the immediate producing of a recorded copy of a Heath Care Power of Attorney can stop an unwanted procedure (the person with the power of attorney must be present to decline help). In addition and as a normal procedure, a police officer investigates the scene to insure no foul play has occurred. To eliminate the hassle, call the mortuary and claim the value of your death.

     

    Bibliography:

    Appelbaum, Paul S. "Death and the Doctors". Commentary. Vol.82. July ' 86. 2-4.
    Barry, Robert "The Paradoxes of 'Rational' Death.” Society. Vol. 29. July/August ' 92. 29-33.
    Bateson, Mary Catherine. "Death--the Undiscover'd Country": What is Needed to Give Death its Proper Place in Life? Omni. New York. April '92. vol. 14. p8.
    Buckley, Jerry. "How Doctors Decide Who Shall Live, Who Shall
    Die”: The Heartache Has No End. U.S. News & World Report.
    January 22 '90. Vol. 108. 50-58.

    "Death Wish": Quadriplegic L. Mc Afee Wins Right to Refuse
    Medical Treatment. Time. Vol. 134. September 18 ' 89. p67.
    The Economist. "How to 'Civilize' Death.” World Press Review.
    Vol. 38. October '91. p60.

    Guillemin, Jeanne. "Planning to Die". Society. Vol. 29. July/August '92. 29-33.
    Kearl, Michael C. "Death and the Medical System.” Endings: A Sociology of Death and Dying. Oxford University Press: New York. 1989. 406- 453.

    Seligmann, Jean "Whose Death is it, Anyway?” Newsweek. Vol. 113. April 24 '89. p69.

    Talking about New Addition

     

    My daddy and my mommy, Manny and Tanya, got prepared.  All my soon to be Aunts were there.

    Kim, Tanya, Manny, & Susie Manny Thompson & Tanya Manny Thompson & Tanya & the quilt Gramma Nell & I made.

    Aunt Kim, Tanya & Manny & Aunt Susie    Mom & Dad & Gramma Nell & G-Aunt Trudy's quilt

                                                                    Gramma Nell was there in spirit; she designed

                                                                     my blankie.

     

    Manny Thompson & Tanya opening shower gifts Oh what a surprise Susie, Peggy, Kim & her daughter, Faith Rose (8 years old)

    Mom & Dad got a whiff of what to expect from me.    Grandma, Aunts, & one of my new cousins

    Susie, Peggy, Kim And just for fun my G-Aunt Trudy put an old picture of my Grandma Peggy, Aunt Susie and Aunt Kim when they were young just so I could see what they looked like when they were kids way before me. 
      

    I am "Wyatt Liam" born December 06, 2007 at 9:08pm, weighing in at 7 pounds 6 ounces and 19.5 inches in length.  My mommy, Tanya, and  my daddy, William (Manny) are happy to announce my arrival in Vail, Colorado.  As a result of my coming,

     wyatt Liam Thompson

    But I was always there I just was hidden inside my mommy's tummy. 

    Don's Show in Las Vegas

    Don's Show in Las Vegas 

    Technorati Tags:

    Storyline by Trudy A. Martinez, aka:  GramaTrudy 

    The Zappos.com Las Vegas Marathon (2007)

    clip_image002

    Here is what Don had to say about the Marathon race:

    Copy of DSC07990 [A before the race photo]

    Photographer:  Grace Blanton

    “I have to admit - it feels good to have dropped 30 pounds these last six months by running and better diet.  Less weight - no white beard - people don't think I'm 60+ anymore [I am only 46].  It had been 10 years since I last ran an organized race - which was [the] LA Marathon back in Mar 1997 [26.2 miles] . . . I only took up jogging again last May to lose weight.”

     Vegas Marathon Story

    “My Time for [the] 13.1 mile . . . [race] . . . in low 30 degree temps [was]: 1 hour 56 min 33 sec . . . my time is on page 13 of 83.  Not bad for old man.  My goal was to break 2 hours . . . 9 mile a minute pace . . . ended up with 8.54 pace. . . Now - the goal is to not to gain 30 pounds again!  Hard to do when you are naturally lazy like me!clip_image001” -Don Blanton-

    5.  And I'm NOT too old after all.  They chased me to the end. [After the race photo]

    photographer: Charity Blanton

    The Zappos.com Las Vegas Marathon & Half Marathon  

    There are pictures at the Marathon web site.

    However, GramaTrudy personally likes the family style photos; they tell a more interesting story.

    You know how they say, "A picture is worth a thousand words."  And what is there to deny when the story is told in living color!  Check these photos out (and the story-line)!

    1.  I came by so fast the picture blurred I came by the photographer, Charity Blanton, so-so fast

     the picture got blurred.

    2.  Yes, that's my tounge hanging out.  I am panting like a dog Yes, that is my tongue hanging out (click on photo to enlarge and get a better view).  I am panting like a dog.

    photographer:  Charity Blanton

    3.  I finally passed them I finally passed them.  It took some doing.

    4. Just so I can say, it's not often I have women chasing after me Just so I could say, It is not often I have

     photographer:  Charity Blanton                   women chasing after me!

    5.  And I'm NOT too old after all.  They chased me to the end. And I am not too old after all.  Those women chased me to the end.

    photographer:   Charity Blanton

    Nevertheless, truth be told, there was this one . . .

    clip_image002[6] who just would not give in . . .

    clip_image002[8] So like a gentleman, I let the lady go first.

    And as you can see . . . She's a foot ahead of me when she hits the line!

    [Note:  The photo story line was told by Don's mother-in-law aka: Grama Trudy.  Since she was not able to attend the race herself, she drew her own conclusions from the photos that were presented to her for viewing - Trudy A. Martinez]

    Kern Valley Talent Search For Talent

     

     

    I hope you enjoyed the performance!

     

      Such a sweetie!

    My granddaughter Whitney Hayman and her best friend participated in the Kern Valley Search For Talent competition.  They placed and bought home a trophy.  Way to go girls!

    Technorati tags: ,

    The Debate

    The Debate
     
     
    "This House Believes the Woman's Place is in the Home" was approached by the proposer of the motion as if playing a game of chess.  The possible moves of the opponent are carefully and logically considered, weighted, and countered, resulting in a check-mate.
     
    The effort and preparation of the proposal. "This House Believes the Woman's Place is in the Home", is evident when the proposal is immediately given logic and reason, and expanded upon, i.e. , "The Woman's Place is in the Home by Her Choice and only if she wants her place to be in the home."  This maneuver limits the opponent's move and creates a planned objective, an emotional response which weakens the opponent's position.  The possibility of losing ground and male superiority in the opposing position, the opponent takes a risk when he attempts to discredit and confuse the issue by interjecting emotional reactionary statements aimed at belittling the woman's position and her spirit by implying she lives a life of leisure and of no importance, a lazy, unproductive existence of no worth.  (The opponent risks his pawns)  A pure emotional response without merit or logic.  The opponent went on to justify his position by establishing a dollar and cent value as measurement of worth; a mere attempt to regain superiority. (He therefore, jeopardizes position).
     
    The initial tactic of the proposer of anticipating the move of the opponent and limiting the response, gave the opportunity of clearing up any misconceptions that might have been created by the opponent's revengeful, outburst of emotion. (Thereby, the proposer captures the opponent's bishop.)  In addition, the proposer strengthens his own position by proceeding with reinforced logical, economical, and psychological issues in opposition.  The strength gained left no real logical counter approach to the issue.  (The opponent's knight is sacrificed.)  The final stand of the opponent is a difficult one.  Although he presents himself well, he is left with a mere frantic attempt to regain position with little weight of credibility or hope of possible gain. (Check-mate).  The debate results in victory for the proposer.
     
    In conclusion, a debate is liken to a chess game, in that it must be planned, anticipating the opponent's actions, and blocking those actions with strong logically considered moves which have been weighed and countered leaving the opponent at risk with no strong opposition and, therefore, requiring the opponent to sacrifice his own position and inevitably leaving the proposer in control and the opponent with no avenue of gain.

    Guaranteed Memories by Trudy A. Martinez

    Guaranteed Memories By Trudy A. Martinez
     
     
     
    When I first met Margie Schafer, I would not have dreamed she would create memories I would cherish, relive in thought, and share with others.  Margie is the age of my oldest daughter:  half my age and just beginning life as an adult, but yet she is mature beyond her years.  She applied for a position at the bank where I was employed as an Assistant Vice President in charge of operations.  When I interview her for a position with the bank, her openness and sincerity impresses me.  But it was the statement "I guarantee my work," that sways me. 
     
    She guarantees her work; this I have to see for myself.  Few employees acknowledge mistakes or take responsibility for their actions without becoming defensive.  I could recall none who took pleasure in correcting their errors or who would even allude to guaranteeing their work.  Needless to say, Margie is hired.
     
    Margie is unbelievable; a supervisor's "dream employee."  She learns fast, completes her assignments quickly, and requests additional duties without hesitation.  Day after day she reminds me:  "I guarantee my work."   It became an obsession with me to find an error; I began to scrutinize her work, all to no avail. 
     
    Margie trains and cross-trains on most areas of operation; she is capable of performing the majority of my own duties adequately.  To the extent she is trained, her sense of judgment is excellent. Unfortunately in my absence, she isn't authorized to act as an officer of the bank in those areas of concern. 
     
    When I am required to travel out-of-town on bank business, the manager takes on my responsibilities; even so, I never know what to expect upon return.
     
    Once, Margie was directed to open a new business account; the manager delivers the customer to the New Accounts desk for Margie to assist him in deciding all the necessities.  Margie does as he directs without question.
     
    Approximately four (4) months later, the FBI and one of the top echelons from the local base come into the bank to inquire about a fraudulent transaction paid through the bank.  They give photocopies of the instruments in question.  This is strange; I don't recognize the name on this account.  Yet, I review all the new accounts opened on a daily and weekly basis.  I excuse myself to research the mystery.  The account signature card reveals Margie opened the account, my signature of review is not present.  No wonder I couldn't remember the account.  I thought to myself, "Margie has made a mistake!"  Documentation required to open the account was missing:  I wonder how she is going to guarantee this error?  I walk over to discuss the account with her; I show her the check.  I am still thinking to myself, "Boy, when this girl makes a mistake, she does it 'BIG'  Why else would the pleasure of not only the FBI's company but also that of the top echelon of the base be given me?" 
     
    Margie inspects the instruments I give her to prompt her memory.  She retrieves the missing documentation and shows me where she had had the manager review and approve the account.  Margie practices "CYA": cover your actions.   I thought Margie was going to be given the purple heart by the Federal Officials right there in the lobby when she accompanies me to my desk.  I had to practically chase the officials out of the bank to prevent them from stealing my employee.  Margie had over documented.  She could have written a book with the documentation she collected.  Since Margie requires the customer to go to the county building, purchase a fictitious business name for a sole proprietorship, affix his thumb print to a 3 x 5 card, and so on (all of which were not required), she prevents the bank from suffering a huge loss and provides the Federal officials with proof of the identity of this devious character.  
     
    Another time when I had gone out-of town on a business trip, I return to find a stack of counterfeit currency in the vault, segregated from the rest of the currency.  A Time Certificate is opened using them.  Margie suspects the currency of being counterfeit, but she doesn't know what to do, so she asks the manager; he tells her to put them in the vault until I return.  "Margie makes a mistake?"  A nightmare of embarrassment ensues.  I contact the "Feds," explain the situation, and beg their forgiveness; they instruct me how to proceed.  The next morning I have a business appointment.  I neglect sharing with anyone how we are to proceed under the circumstances.  Margie has not been trained on the handling of counterfeit currency.
     
    In my absence, the same man returns to redeem the certificate he opened.  Margie tells him of the interest forfeiture for early withdrawal.  She calculates the interest, informs the man of the amount, excuses herself with the narration she does not have sufficient funds and needs to requisition an adequate amount.  She proceeds to the vault area, has the vault teller activate the cameras documenting the transaction, and then with the vault teller continues to the vault.  The currency retrieved is the counterfeit, the same counterfeit the man had given her the day before.  Margie gives the crook back the counterfeit! 
     
    When I return that day and discover what has transpired,  I nearly have a heart attack.   The "Feds" are surely going to crucify me for this one.  "Was this the way she guarantees her work?"  I was suppose to transfer the counterfeit to the "Feds,"  have a general staff meeting to alert all employees of this devious character, and to work in conjunction with the "Feds" towards his apprehension.  There is no chance; the swindler will ever return again now, not since my ingeniuous subordinate has reversed the circumstances.  Margie had said, "I guarantee my work."  When she corrected her initial error of accepting the counterfeit currency by returning it to its rightful owner, the crook, she guaranteed her work; there was no error left for her to correct.  The only error left was mine as a result of not informing anyone of my discussion with the "Feds" and thereby begetting happenings I will never forget.
     
    As a reward for hiring Margie, I was given a life time of guaranteed memories I will recall, cherish, and share with others.  Margie had guided me through a series of inconceivable, innovative escapades that continually brings about a smile on my face when I venture to recall her statement, "I guarantee my work."
     -Trudy A. Martinez-