Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.

Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde was an incredibly well plotted story which became immensely popular, and implanted itself into the popular psyche.

The story is told mostly from the perspective of a third party, the lawyer Mr Utterson, and concerns his friend the scientist Dr Jekyll and Jekyll’s associate, the misanthropic and widely loathed Mr Hyde. Utterson suspects Hyde of using Jekyll due to a change of will; however when Hyde disappears following a brutal murder Utterson is temporarily satisfied. However Utterson grows increasingly concerned about Jekyll’s erratic behaviour, and after Jekyll becomes a recluse in his room making strange demands in an unfamiliar voice Utterson, along with Jekyll’s butler, break down the doctor’s door, only to find Mr Hyde who is dead from apparent suicide.

The events of the story are later explained through the testimony of a doctor, Lanyon – who witnessed a transformation from Hyde into Jekyll – and, in greater depth through Jekyll. It turns out that Mr Hyde was the result of one of Dr Jekyll's experiments, and that, upon consuming the ‘transforming draught’ Jekyll became a loathsome character almost the opposite of his usual self.  Over time Jekyll found himself transforming into Mr Hyde without taking the draught, and when the drug ran out he became trapped as Hyde. Upon taking the last of the drug Jekyll writes ‘I bring the life of that unhappy Henry Jekyll to an end.’

The book is often said to be typical of a certain type of Victorian gothic novel, with suspense playing a key role, and a gruesome aspect prevalent. The role of medical science was also an important theme, as well as the theme of dual personalities, a theme which Stevenson often studied.

The novel was immediately incredibly popular, and stage adaptations occurred in Boston and London within a year of publication. The tale was also used by many as a moral fable, and religious leaders used the story for moralising sermons – altering the tone of the book. It has often been noted that the book has since become popular by those who don’t read novels, largely as it was initially seen as having a moral dimension which the author probably didn’t intend. However the language of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde has passed into popular culture and has an enduring popularity for many reasons.

One reason which the tale may still be as popular as ever is the psychological power of the idea of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Many people claim to have a Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde personality, or claim to know others with that personality; it is a powerful psychological idea which many people relate to. According to Dalrymple it allows people who claim to follow such a pattern themselves to be able to say that, though they may do evil, they are intrinsically good. Similarly if they claim that someone they love has a Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde personality it justifies they’re love saying they are ultimately good, even if that is not mirrored in the way they often act.

The psychological attraction of the Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde story is merely one way in which it holds onto the popular imagination. It is also possible to talk of it as being relevant to alcohol, with the ‘transforming draught’ turning an individual from one of virtue to one with all the worst possible characteristics. It is worth looking at the following passage when Jekyll describes first taking the transforming draught, seeming to replicate the sensation of being drunk for the very first time:

‘…I came to myself as if out of a great sickness. There was something strange in my sensations, something indescribably new and, from its very novelty, incredibly sweet. I felt younger, lighter, happier in body; within I was conscious of a heady recklessness, a current of disordered sensual images running like a mill race in my fancy, a solution of the bonds of obligation, an unknown but not an innocent freedom of the soul. I knew myself, at the first breath of this new life, to be more wicked…’

It is certainly worth noting the Stevenson is alleged to have written much of the book under the influence of cocaine, and he was not one averse to transforming his own mental state.

Another way in which the book could be tackling themes which people can still relate to, is the fact that the book could well be seen to tackle the changes which occur with age. Stevenson often talked of the profound changes which come with age. Was Jekyll having a midlife crisis, and was therefore reaching out to the more reckless side of his personality?

In conclusion there are many reasons why this book has the enduring popularity which it does. Not least among these reasons is the fact that it is still a very good read.

A History of the Origins of Television

For the first half of the twentieth century, the dominant media in western society had been newspapers, radio and cinema. Then, in the early 1920s, a man named John Logie Baird created the first television, which has since become the dominant media of the second half of the twentieth century. Television has had an immense impact on human society in many forms including sociality, knowledge, experience and leisure.

After the first experimental broadcasts in America in the 1920s, the British Broadcasting Corporation was set up in 1922, however television broadcasting did not begin until 1936 when an estimated 23,000 people saw the first broadcasts. In 1939 television had ceased and was described as something that would amount to nothing. During the war the radio was extremely popular and this was the case for several years after as television sets were expensive and had limited broadcasting hours with poor receptions.

The BBC was dominated by their director general, John Reith, who had negotiated a position where the BBC was independent from both the government and free from the pressures of market forces. For the BBC had an assured income from all those who owned radio receivers. Reith had established a corporation with aims to inform, educate and entertain the public as a whole, making available cultural experiences that they would otherwise not have seen [HOLLAND, 1997: Page 8].

Up until the 1950s the BBC had a monopoly on broadcasting and it wasn’t until 1951 that various criticisms began to emerge. The 1951 Beveridge report was critical of the stance and arrogance of the BBC and there were even reports suggesting that it should be discontinued. In 1953 the coronation of the Queen was broadcast live on the BBC easing the pains of the Beveridge report and causing a television boom. In 1950, only 4% of the population owned a television set, by 1960 the figure had risen to 80% [HOLLAND, 1997: Page 11]. A consumer society was emerging with developments in popular culture and a youth orientated society.

The single biggest factor for the emergence of a consumer society was the post war economic boom. The Conservative Party using Keynesian economic policies introduced by Labour had just come into power. This meant a mixed economy based on a mixture of both free markets and government assisted growth. A boom in technology coincided with improvements in the standard of living and a society wanting to consume and spend money. There was a growing campaign for commercial television and in 1954 the Television Act ended the BBC monopoly and created ITV which was funded entirely by advertising. Regulated by the independent television authority (ITA), it had its own news and offered services the BBC did not, such as a regional focus [HOLLAND: 13].

In order to attract advertisers ITV had to give the people what they wanted. By 1957 through a mixture of popular programmes, open and inquisitive news and reporting on elections, ITV had gained three-quarters of the broadcasting audience. By 1960 ITV had made a ten million-pound profit [HOLLAND: 14]. The BBC feared that it would have to abandon ‘public service broadcasting’ in order to compete with ITV.

However the 1962 Pilkington report praised the BBC for its quality and savagely criticised commercial television by stating that ‘ITV’s approach was a cultural decline seen as an Americanisation of Britain’ [HOLLAND: 16]. The 1964 Television act enabled the BBC to create another channel in BBC 2. This new BBC channel pioneered colour television on its higher quality signal [HOLLAND: 17]. This increased the pressure on ITA to continue to broadcast quality programmes such as world in action.

The period from 1964 – 1979 became known as the golden age of broadcasting where the BBC became more populist and ITV offered a more public service forming a ‘cosy duopoly’ [Williams, 1998: p.128]. However the cosy relationship began to breakdown as the economy began to decline. The 1973 oil crisis left the economy at a point of crisis, leading to a return to a conservative government and with it, in 1979, Margaret Thatcher as prime minister. Thatcher was a great believer in the free market and strongly opposed state ownership. As a result of this, she strongly opposed the BBC. With Thatcher leading the country and ratings down the BBC was struggling to justify the license fees.

By the early 1980s Britain was divided with many economic and political problems. This social unrest had an impact on broadcasting and in 1982, the Broadcasting act created channel 4, a free market channel broadcasting quality but controversial programmes. Such programmes provided adverts for specialist markets including youth and ethnic minorities. This channel became popular largely to a high pornographic content and American sitcoms.

As the 1980s progressed the Conservatives became more and more opposed to the BBC. They accused them of bias and attacked their programmes. However, the Peacock report of 1985 opposed the government and supported the BBC. It was during this period that satellite TV and videos were introduced in the UK. This led to the possibility of having hundreds of channels through their satellites or through underground cables. This led to yet more pressure on the BBC to become a commercial channel as questions began to arise as to whether they could survive on license fees alone. People like Rupert Murdoch promoted market forces and declared:

This public service television has, had in my view, debilitating effects on British society, by producing a television output which is so often obsessed with class, dominated by anti-commercial attitudes and with a tendency to hark on about the past [Murdoch, 1989 cited in HOLLAND: p.23].

Murdoch’s savage criticism of the BBC strongly supported the commercialization of television with the belief that people should be allowed to choose from as many channels as possible. In 1990, the Broadcasting act enforced an auction system upon ITV companies. This meant companies had to bid to get their franchises renewed leading to a grossly commercialized market obsessed with profit making. The last of the terrestrial channels, channel 5 was set up in 1997, which signaled the decline in standards of television. A decline which has been due largely to the huge companies involved in television, the rise of satellite and cable television and a move into digital broadcasting.

 Global Warming and Alternative Energy

People are inflicting major damage to the Earth’s environment, and if we don’t do anything to stop the destruction soon, the results could be devastating. Most people know about global warming and think it may be a serious problem in the future. What most people don’t understand is that global warming is happening now, and we are already feeling some of its destructive power. Because of the dangerous effects of global warming, alternative energy sources need to be aggressively pursued. Finding and utilizing alternative energy sources may be the only way to combat the increase of global warming.

“Scientists agree that the main reason for global warming is the depletion of the ozone layer surrounding the Earth due to increased levels of carbon dioxide and the increased release of greenhouse gas emissions.” Dr. Robert Watson from The Alliance of Concerned Scientists also adds, “These atmospheric concentrations of emissions are directly linked to human activities.” Fossil fuel emissions from gasoline and oil account for 52% of greenhouse gas emissions while coal burning energy plants and coal burning factories account for another 44% of emissions released (Samuelson 31). Americans especially are adding to global warming woes being ‘energy hogs’ driving gas-guzzling SUVs and cars, and being careless with energy draining appliances in their homes. Deforestization in the US and other countries also adds to the growing problem by taking away the largest source of CO2 filters. Millions of trees are harvested each year due to increased demand for their byproducts, and because of this, our environment suffers (Kenworthy 2). The United States accounts for over 51% of the energy used yearly through out the world. From 2000 - 2004 there was a 100% increase in greenhouse gas emissions in all established nations, and there seems to be no slowing down in the future with a projected 110% energy increase by 2010. At this rate scientists agree the world will be facing an energy crisis by 2020 if new energy sources aren’t found (McQuinn).

The results of global warming are undeniably negative for the human race. Over the past ten years, the average surface temperature of earth has risen five degrees. Even though five degrees doesn’t seem like a major change, it has caused a disruption in the Earth’s fragile ecosystem (Watson 3). This increase has caused the melting of the polar ice caps and glaciers, which has caused the sea level to rise by a reported inch and a half so far. If the temperature continues to rise, coastal areas could soon become flooded. Large partitions of New York City, New Orleans, and other cities on or near the coast could be found under water in the near future (Watson 4). The disruption of the ecosystem has also been attributed to extreme weather changes. The world is experiencing warmer and more frequent heat waves, more extreme floods, longer and more devastating droughts, more frequent wild fires, more tornadoes, and many more hurricanes than ever before. The occurrence of forest fires in California has risen 15% in the past 3 years. The Western plains region is experiencing its longest reported drought in the past 200 years. The Gulf Coast has experienced a 47% increase in hurricanes in the past two years alone (Samuelson 32). Lives and properties are lost due to extreme storms, and scientists believe they will only get worse as global warming continues.

Alternative energy sources may be the only answer to our growing world energy crisis. In the past century, humanity has made many great strides in the development of new energy solutions. One of the most utilized clean energy sources is nuclear energy because of its impressive efficiency. The past couple of years, there have been some concerns about nuclear energy plants and their safety. Chernobyl is still in the minds of many as more nuclear power plants are being built, but new safety technology and procedures are being adapted and nuclear power is now safer than ever. Tom Kenworthy from the Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment states, “Nuclear power very well could be the best choice to reduce the threat arguably posed by fossil fuels. It is a clean, practical alternative that would satisfy the world economy’s growing energy demand.” Today there are 212 nuclear power plants in the world and the number is expected to rise to 250 in the next five years. Nuclear power already provides 75% of power in France and 20% here in the United States (McQuinn). Like nuclear energy, wind energy is also becoming more popular and efficient. Large wind turbines powered completely by wind gusts generate up to 233 megawatts of power every minute (Roberts 12). Homeowners and farmers can now own their own wind turbines and have their unused energy purchased by energy companies. Wind energy is very popular in Germany especially where at least 33% of the countries energy comes completely from wind turbines (Roberts 13).

Solar power is nothing completely new; it has been used for years to power small devices from calculators to watches, but what is new is its improved efficiency. Solar panels can be used to collect energy from the sun and now are being used on a much larger scale. Homeowners and business can use energy generated from the panels to power their homes and offices and have it purchased by energy suppliers. Solar power is proving to be an economical energy source available to the public that is consumer friendly. The newest and most exciting energy alternative source today is the biofuel ethanol and its possible replacement of unleaded gasoline. Ethanol is almost entirely distilled field corn that has comparative fuel efficiency to gasoline. Unlike fossil fuels, Ethanol, when burned, emits no ozone depleting emissions or harmful gases. It is even cheaper to distill than it is to drill oil. Ethanol is already being sold by some gas stations in the form of E85; an 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline blend. Many carmakers such as Ford, Toyota, and Hyundai are manufacturing cars that are able to run on higher concentrations of Ethanol fuel (McQuinn). The discovery and use of Ethanol has had a positive impact on American agriculture. Ethanol is giving business to the American farmer for fuel needs instead of Middle Eastern oil titans, and keeping American money in the states instead of the most unstable regions in the world. For all of alternative energy’s positive attributes, the general public has yet to fully jump onboard.

“The only major issue with alternative energy is its high price tag,” claims Dennis McQuinn from the Coalition for the Prevention of Global Warming. “Consumers have to pay much more for energy saving light bulbs, energy friendly appliances and other eco-friendly things. It’s no wonder that consumers rarely buy these products. They’re just too expensive for them, and it’s going to take a few years for production costs to go down.” A consumer survey taken in 2005 found that 70% of consumers who don’t buy ‘eco-friendly’ products realize that they are better for the environment, but don’t purchase

them because of their higher price (McQuinn). The reason of the increased rates is the cost of the research that went into their improvement. Prices have already fallen, but will stay more expensive until there is more consumer interest.

The average American citizen is somewhat informed about global warming but feels that they as an individual have no impact, and that is a problem. Americans are so content with their day to day energy draining lives, that they view environmentally friendly changes in their conduct as unimportant and too much of a hassle. Other nations are similar to the US in the fact that major changes for the environment are viewed as something unnecessary (Kenworthy 1). Undeveloped nations put even less importance upon environmentally friendly practices because of their lack of understanding. Even if they did become aware of the damages they create, they wouldn’t have the resources to correct them. If we truly want to put a stop to global warming, it would take a complete stop of greenhouse gas emissions, which is totally unrealistic. People need to shift their views and start seeing consequences to their actions and start doing something to correct them. Costs and citizen unawareness are the two biggest contributors to alternative energy underutilization.

What is the American government doing about the problem? According to Dr. Robert Watson from the ACS, they’re not doing enough. “The Bush Administration and the Republican Congressional majority have tried to dismiss every report on global warming. They refuse to acknowledge reality and refuse to fund absolutely any alternative energy research because of their ‘big oil’ influence.” It was reported that from 2000-2006 Shell oil donated $29,098,000.00 to congressional political campaigns, BP Amoco gave $31,673,000.00, Marathon oil gave a cool $34,370,000.00, Chevron donated $42,353,000.00 and Exxon-Mobile was the most charitable giving $72,839,600.00 to political campaigns (Roberts 4). This being taken into account, it is any wonder why congress and our president dismiss global warming reports and refuse to fund research for alternative fuels?

Japan and Germany and making big advancements, their Nations are more energy independent and environmentally friendly due to research and support of alternative energy. Our country prides itself on having the best standard of living, military, economy, and even being the most technologically advanced, so why has the US fallen so far behind these other countries? We have some of the brightest scientists and many crucial resources for expanding knowledge, but we had to ‘copy’ Japan’s idea for a hybrid car and ‘borrow’ wind turbine plans from Germany. “It’s truly pathetic,” states Paul Roberts from The Alternative Resource Research Foundation, “America has stooped to playing copycat instead of taking some real initiative.” The US needs to get its head in the game if it wants to keep its ‘better-than-everyone-else’ title.

What’s not helping the global warming situation is the US’s continued reliance on foreign oil. The United States imports 65% of its oil and it comes from unstable Middle Eastern countries (Roberts 4). Do we really want our oil money to go to those regions? If a major problem in the Middle East and oil trading was halted, American life would be crippled. An old phrase says it best, warning people that ‘you shouldn’t lean on others so

much, they could let you fall.’ Americans are feeling the pain of rising gasoline prices at the pump when prices hit an all time high in July 2006 at $69.53 a barrel (McQuinn). More Americans if given the chance would choose an alternative and the time is now to make a change.

Energy sources we depend on now like coal and oil are non-renewable and will run out sometime. Because of the dangerous effects of global warming, alternative energy needs to be aggressively pursued. Americans and other nations need to realize what they are doing to our environment and that something needs to be done about global warming before it’s too late. People need to be proactive instead of reactive and prevent a catastrophe due to global warming instead of reacting afterwards when it may be more expensive and difficult to deal with. “Higher sea levels and more hurricanes are a warning. Nature is trying to tell us something is wrong, and this may only be the tip of the iceberg,” warns Dr. Watson from the ACS. Sadly, extreme results of global warming may be the only thing that will get people to change their ways. We need to look for and use an alternative now, before there is no alternative.

Global Significance of the AIDS Virus

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome which stands for AIDS, Aids is a human viral disease that ravages the immune system, undermining the body’s ability to defend itself from infection and disease. Caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), AIDS leaves an infected person vulnerable to opportunistic infections. Such infections are harmless in healthy people, but in those whose immune systems have been greatly weakened, they can prove fatal. While there is no cure for AIDS, new drugs have prolonged the life spans and improved the quality of life of many infected people.

Infection with HIV does not necessarily mean that a person has AIDS, although people who are HIV-positive are often mistakenly said to have AIDS. Some people who have HIV infection may not develop any of the clinical illnesses that define the full-blown disease of AIDS for ten years or more. Doctors prefer to use the term AIDS for cases where a person has reached the final, life-threatening stage of HIV infection.

AIDS was first identified in 1981 among homosexual men and intravenous drug users in New York and California. Shortly after its detection in the United States, evidence of AIDS epidemics grew among heterosexual men, women, and children in sub-Saharan Africa. AIDS quickly developed into a worldwide epidemic, affecting virtually every nation. By 1999 an estimated 33.6 million adults and 1.2 million children worldwide were living with HIV infection or AIDS. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that from 1981 to the end of 1999, about 16.3 million people died as a result of HIV infection. More than 3.6 million of those who died were children under the age of 15.

In the United States and Canada, at least 44,000 new HIV infections occur each year. Over 30 percent of these infections occur in women, and 60 percent in ethnic minorities. In 1999 more than 900,000 Americans and Canadians were living with HIV infection. The incidence of new cases of HIV infections and AIDS deaths has significantly decreased in Canada and the United States since 1995. This decrease is attributed to the availability of new drug treatments and public health programs that target people most at risk for infection. But while the overall rate of HIV infection seems to be on a downturn, certain populations appear to be at greater risk for the disease. In the United States in 1987, Caucasians accounted for 60 percent of AIDS cases and blacks and Hispanics only 39 percent. But by 1999 the trend had reversed: 38 percent of new cases were diagnosed in Caucasians and 61 percent in blacks and Hispanics. Likewise the number of female AIDS patients in the United States and Canada has increased significantly in recent years, from 7 percent of all AIDS cases in 1985 to 23 percent in 1999. In the United States, African American and Hispanic women accounted for 80 percent of AIDS cases among women in 1999.

The first cases of AIDS were detected in western Europe in the early 1980s, and by the late 1990s, at least 30,000 new HIV infections occurred each year. In 1999 more than 520,000 western Europeans were HIV positive, and 20 percent of these cases were women. Before the break up of the Soviet Union in 1991, eastern Europe reported few

HIV cases. But since 1995, HIV infection has spread rapidly in cities of several eastern European countries, including Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova. WHO estimates that the total number of HIV infections in this region may have risen from less than 30,000 in 1995 to more than 190,000 in 1997.

The social, ethical, and economic effects of the AIDS epidemic are still being played out, and no one is entirely certain what the consequences will be. Despite the many grim facts of the AIDS epidemic, however, humanity is armed with proven, effective weapons against the disease: knowledge, education, prevention, and the ever-growing store of information about the virus’s actions.

Down Syndrome

Down syndrome is a genetic disease caused by three major factors, genetics, chromosome formation and cell division. Through scientific research, scientists have made vast discoveries on how to "treat" people with the disease and how to help families cope with a child with Down syndrome. Through our research we hope to make more people aware of Down syndrome, how it is caused, how they can help and what is being done to treat people with the disease, so that one day it may be "curable."

Down's syndrome was discovered in the late 19th century by John Langdon Down. His scholarly work published in 1866 earned him the recognition as the "father" of the syndrome. "Jerome Lejeune identified Down syndrome as a chromosomal anomaly. Down syndrome is an extra partial or complete 21st chromosome, which results in the characteristics associated with Down syndrome" (Madnick 2). "It is characterized by low muscle tone, flat facial profile, oblique palpebral fissures, dysplastic ear, single deep crease across the center of the palm, hyperflexibility, dysplastic middle phalanx of the fifth finger, epicanthal folds-small skin folds on the inner corner of the eyes, excessive space between large and second toe, and enlargement of tongue in relationship to size of mouth" (Madnick 5).

One of the causes of Down syndrome is genetics. "Genetics are grouped along rod-like structures called chromosomes. Normally, the nucleus of each cell contains 23 pairs of chromosomes, half of which are inherited from each parent" (Madnick 2). However, in Down syndrome, the cells usually contain not 46, but 47 chromosomes; with the extra chromosome being a number 21. "Because 95 percent of all cases of Down syndrome occur because there are three copies of the 21st chromosome, it is referred to as "trisomy 21" (Madnick 2). Chromosomes can be studied by examining blood or tissue cells. Individual chromosomes are identified, stained, and numbered from largest to smallest; this visual display is known as a karyotype.

Another way that Down syndrome is caused is through cell division; usually through an error in non-disjunction. However, two other types of chromosomal abnormalities, mosaicism and translocation, are also implicated in Down syndrome-although to a lesser extent. Regardless of the type of Down syndrome, all people with Down syndrome have an extra 21st chromosome, which adds more genetic material, altering the course of development. "Nondisjunction is a faulty cell division which results in an embryo with three number 21 chromosomes instead of two. Prior to, or at, conception, a pair of number 21, in either the sperm or the egg, fail to separate" (Madnick 3). As the embryo develops, the extra chromosome is replicated in every cell of the body. This faulty cell division is responsible for 95 percent of all cases of Down syndrome. It has been postulated that some environmental factors may be implicated in nondisjunction. However, the causes of nondisjunction are unknown even with years of research.

Mosaicism occurs when nondisjunction of the 21st chromosome takes place in one of the initial cell divisions after fertilization. "When this occurs, there is a mixture of two types of cells, some containing 46 chromosomes and some containing 47. Those cells with 47

chromosomes contain an extra 21st chromosome" (Madnick 3). Because of the "mosaic" pattern of the cells, the term mosaicism is used. Some research has shown that individuals with mosaic Down syndrome are less affected than those with trisomy 21. However, broad generalizations are not possible due to the wide range of abilities that people with Down syndrome possess.

The last cause of Down syndrome is translocation. Translocation is a different type of chromosomal problem and occurs in only three to four percent of people with Down syndrome. "Translocation occurs when part of the number 21 chromosome breaks off during cell division and attaches to another chromosome. While the total number of chromosomes in the cells remains 46, the presence of an extra part of the number 21 chromosome causes the features of Down syndrome" (Madnick 3). As with nondisjunction trisomy 21, translocation occurs either prior to or at conception. Translocation is not linked to maternal age, unlike nondisjunction. "Most cases are sporadic, chance events. However, in about one-third of cases, one parent is a carrier of a translocated chromosome. For this reason, the risk of recurrence for translocation is higher than that of nondisjunction" (Madnick 3). Genetic counseling can be sought to determine the origin of the translocation.

Down syndrome is a disease that is very hard to understand. When a child has Down syndrome there are certain characteristics that set the child apart form other children. When we take a look at Down syndrome we need to understand that the physical features will be different than that of a normal developing child. The tiresome 21 that cause Down syndrome affect many areas of development. The area of development that are seen most of the time is the physical features meaning the face and their height.

When a person has Down syndrome they will look slightly different. The child’s head will be smaller than average. The nose tends to be smaller and the bridge of the nose seems to be somewhat low. The eyes are slightly different from the average. The child with Down syndrome their eyes are slanted upwards. The child’s mouth is relatively small and the roof of the mouth a bit short. These are just a few characters of a child with Down syndrome. Theses are different but they are very special children and should be treated the same as an average child.

The next feature that deals with the physical characters is the child’s growth. The child’s height is affect by the disease a great deal. The growth of a child with Down syndrome tends to be short and their built is stocky. (Smith 31) Their growth up to age four is slightly behind average. Then it decreases each year. The height is different when we take a look at boys and girls. The average height of a boy with Down syndrome is about the same height of that of eight- year old child. That is about the tallest the boy will get. The average height of a girl with Down syndrome is about the same as a ten-year old girl. The average height of a man with Down syndrome is about five feet tall. The average height of a female is about four foot seven. Theses are the average but a child could access these levels.

Babies with Down Syndrome can have special medical problems. Although some of

these problems can be quite serious, medical treatments have improved so much that today the vast majority of babies with Down Syndrome can grow up healthy and active. Extra genetic material can cause a wide variety of medical conditions, including heart, intestine and eye problems.

Over forty percent of babies with Down Syndrome are born with heart defects. For decades these defects meant early death, but today advanced medical treatment with drugs and life-saving surgery are common, even almost routine. There are several types of heart defects. The most common is called an Endocardial cushion defect. This means that the walls between the two upper chambers and the two lower ones of the heart, as well as the valves between them, maybe deformed. There may also be a whole between the two lower chambers. This condition is called Ventricular Septal defect. There are less common defects, involving a whole between the two upper chambers, problems with the heart valves, and the major arties attach to the heart. Most children with down syndrome have the same quality of sight as other children and develop the same control of their eyes, but because eye sight can affect other facets of development, it is especially important to make sure your child’s eye sight is normal as early as possible. The three most common eye defects are crossed eyes, nearsightedness, farsightedness and cataracts. The ears of babies with Down Syndrome tend to be smaller than normal, which can cause some problems. This middle ear is smaller as well, and that is where most ear problems start. The middle ears of children can often become filled with fluid. Treatment of ear infections ranges from medicine to surgery, depending on the severity of the ear congestion. Other problems that children with Down Syndrome may have are thyroid problems and vertebrae instability.

Human development is a complex process of growing and acquiring skills. The foundations of the developmental process are in a baby’s genetic make-up and their environment. There are many factors such as psychological, biological, cultural and environmental factors that have a tremendous impact on the way one develops. Development is an evolving process that is subjected to both positive and negative influences. Erik Erikson developed a psychosocial theory that divided the development process into eight stages. We will examine the first three of these eight stages and compare how a child who is considered to be “normal” develops in contrast to a child who is born with Down syndrome develops. These first three stages are crucial to the development of a child in that the changes that occur during these times are extraordinary. A child will develop a general control over their body and will become a social being.

The first stage is Trust vs. distrust, which takes place during the first year of infancy. In this stage it is very important for the infant to learn that they can trust their primary caregiver for affection, protection and comfort. If this is not learned, then the child will develop distrust because their needs are not being met. This is a time for laying foundations. Being able to establish love, security and trust will help motivate a baby to move, explore and challenge themselves. Babies born with Down syndrome are no different than a baby who is “normal” at this stage of development. It is just as important for them to learn how to trust their primary caregiver and it is even more important their

needs are being met at this stage of development. As a child with down syndrome advances to the next stage, their development tends to slow down. Babies in this stage are working on their gross motor skills such as crawling, walking and using large muscles like the legs and arms. For a simple task like smiling, it can take a month or two longer for a baby with Down syndrome to achieve that task. Another task like rolling over, can happen when a baby is about 8 months for a Down syndrome baby compared to about 3 months for a child who is normal.

The second stage, Autonomy vs. shame and doubt, covers the years 1-2. During this stage, children gain control over eliminative functions, learn to feed themselves and are allowed to play alone and develop a sense of independence. If a child is too restricted during this stage, then they can develop a sense of shame and doubt about their own abilities. For infants, this stage represents a period of transition. Changes that will occur at this stage are so critical for the baby’s life. There are three major changes that will occur during this stage. The first is the start of independent movement. The next is the understanding of object permanence and the third is the beginning of the use of language. An activity such as sitting alone, can happen for a normal child around 7 months. For a Down syndrome child, it can be expected to happen around 10 or 11 months. Another activity, crawling, will usually happen around 12-13months for a Down syndrome baby where as this usually occurs around 8 months for a normal child. Not that much of a difference really, even a “normal” child can take a little longer to develop these activities.

The third stage, Initiative vs. guilt, takes place from 3 to 5 years. This is where the children’s motor and intellectual abilities continue to increase. This is a period of intense skill development. It is so important in this stage for a caregiver to accept the child’s developing initiative. If they fail to do so, a feeling of guilt will be instilled upon the child. Some of the tasks being accomplished in this stage for a Down syndrome baby are standing, walking, talking in words and sentences. These tasks are being accomplished, but at about 6 to 7 months behind a normal child. It is so important for the parents to be involved in their baby’s development, especially when that child has Down syndrome. Most of the children will choose to learn new tasks in the way that is easiest for them. Because of the unique characteristics particular to babies with Down Syndrome, they need special guidance to help them master these stages of development.

In many ways, raising a baby with Down syndrome will be the same as raising any other baby. But there will be some differences as well. As a parent of a child with Down syndrome, you have to be very conscious about the childs development. You will have to help direct his or her development and also join in, in this work.. Teaching is a very important job of the parents and the professionals as well. One of the methods a parent can use is observing. The characteristics a parent would be observing are responsiveness, is the child alert? Is he or she aware of his environment? A parent would also be observing movement. This would include observing how a child grasps objects or is the child using just one side of the body? A third area of observation would be communication. What you would be observing here is looking to see if the child understands familiar words or names. You could also just be observing to see if certain

activities or movements motivate the child to talk. A couple of other areas that should be observed are sensory input, responsiveness or energy level.

There are a variety of teaching strategies that can be used to make teaching your child more effective. You need to be a consistent as you possibly can. Being more consistent in your approach will foster new learning. You also have to have well-defined expectations. If the goals you set are too lofty for your child, then these tasks might not get accomplished. You also need to be very positive in your approach. You’ll need to use a lot of praise a d other positive rewards in order to motivate your child to learn. Repetition is also a very important part of the learning process for your child. You as a parent, might get bored easily with repetition, but it is important to stay focused in this step. Lastly, take small steps. Too big a task might mean not being able to accomplish certain tasks.

Is Nuclear Power Safe for the Environment ??

There are many controversies about whether nuclear power is really safe for the environment or not. This paper will put all doubt aside and inform the pros and cons of nuclear power to the environment. First look will be at the alternatives in America’s power supplies: coal, natural gas, and oil. They are not environmentally sound, as some people believe. Some countries use nuclear power as a primary source of energy, and almost all countries use nuclear power on some level. Where there is nuclear power there is radiation. There has been a misunderstanding on how dangerous radiation is. What people don’t realize is that they are exposed to radiation on a daily basis, but the radiation is so minimal that there is no medical proof that radiation is responsible for health problems. Nuclear reactors are the same way. No one has been able to prove that people become ill because they live near a nuclear facility. Other controversies are over the extensive nuclear waste that comes from power plants. Scientists have long known how to deal with radioactive waste, but so far, the U.S government hasn’t implemented these recommendations. Nuclear power is not destructive to the environment as some people say, but has beneficial qualities for America’s power supply needs.

Nuclear power is the most scrutinized power supply in the world. Environmentalists feel the use of nuclear power is too costly to the environment for humans to use. One allegation is that radiation leaks out of the reactor and into the air and water, causing thyroid disease. One fear was at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Richland, Washington. Researchers found that conclusions of 3,190 people who apparently had thyroid disease because of the release of radioactive iodine from Hanford were false (Sternberg). All of these people were born between 1941 and 1957 when Hanford was built. Researchers showed that Hanford was not the result of the thyroid disease (Sternberg).

Since nuclear reactors need lots of water, they are always located on major rivers. This is another suspected problem with nuclear power. Environ-mentalists think nuclear power plants heat river waters and damage the aquatic life. They conclude that this isn’t only from nuclear power, but it is true from all sources of power manufacturing. The cooling water from these power plants heat rivers to temperatures where cold-water fish can’t survive. The fish that are affected are Walleye, Yellow perch, white sucker, and fathead minnow. The temperature range is 84-88° F, which the Columbia is said to be just a few degrees off those temperatures (Forman 52-3). The water temperature also affects spawning as well. It puts so much stress on the fish and eggs that in some cases, there is 50% loss of newly hatched fish. When the fry hatch, they need aquatic organisms to eat. When the water temperatures rise, these organisms do not flourish, causing food shortages for the fish. Environmentalists conclude that the rise in water temperatures also creates an environment for algae, which could cause the water to be unsuitable for humans. However, if these allegations were true, we would see several changes in the rivers where these power plants are located. Environmentalists basically say that every year 50% of fish will not survive. If this were true, then why do we still have fishermen on the rivers? Wouldn’t that eventually cause a complete loss in life in these rivers? Also,

the algae would be so bad that the whole river would be affected. According to the environmentalists, trout and salmon would not be able to survive in rivers with power plants on them, and of course we know that’s not true. They also mention that heated water makes fish weak and gives fish more of a chance to acquire diseases. However, the environmentalists don’t seem to convinced because they say, “together, these may result in a significant loss of fish from disease, but in effect, the mortality is caused by a temperature that permits a normally low incidence of disease to become an epidemic” (Forman 56). This gives the reader the understanding that they really don’t know how heat effects fish, but they are willing to try to explain it.

Another concern people have, is the amount of radiation that is released by nuclear power plants. The Bureau of Radiological Health is responsible to keep reports on the amount of radiation released in the area of these power plants (Foreman 61). A study done by the Bureau of Radiological Engineering Laboratory on a nuclear power plant in Illinois concluded that there was no external radiation exposure to the surrounding areas. They tested several different sources such as water, earth, cattle, and vegetation around the nuclear site (Foreman 66). In the areas tested, only 5 millirem a year of radiation could be calculated. To put this in context, each human receives 85 millirem of radiation a year through natural sources. These natural sources consist of; sun, walls in houses, bricks or concrete, and even the TV. When someone goes in for an X-ray, they receive anywhere from 90 to 800 millirem per year. So that 5 millirem could be simply from the natural ground (Cohen 52).

Everyone has heard of Three Mile Island in March 1979. It was plastered all over the news that radiation was leaking and we were going to see another Hiroshima. The truth is that the huge radiation leak was 1.2 millirem, which is no more than you get by watching TV (Cohen 52). The other accident was at Chernobyl, Ukraine in 1986. This was the only accident that released more radiation than people experience daily (Safety 6th edition). There has been an accumulated 10,000 “reactor-years” in the history of the world, with one major radiation leak. Inspectors have said the Chernobyl has been known for it’s unsafe practices, and is working to get better. A report done on Chernobyl concluded, “The Chernobyl accident has not brought to light any new, previously unknown phenomena or safety issues that are not resolved or otherwise covered by current reactor safety programs for commercial power reactors in other Countries” (Safety 6th edition). When building a nuclear power facility in the U.S., one quarter of the total cost goes to nuclear safety. One of the main safety features is the structure around the reactor, which is designed to keep radiation away from the environment. Another safety feature is how reactors are designed to shut down if an earthquake hits the area.

Nuclear hazardous waste has also been a concern with using nuclear power. A single nuclear power plant produces 35 tons of spent radioactive fuel each year. Environmentalists say that there is no way to get rid of this waste, which mostly consists of fuel used in the reactor. However, scientists say the majority of the fuel is capable of being reused, with minimal waste. The fuel would be dissolved in acid, which will separate 99.5% of the reusable uranium and plutonium. This would reduce the 35 tons of radioactive waste down to 1.5 tons of “high-level” waste a year (Foreman 178). This

“high-level” waste would then be made into one truckload of glass to be taken to a federal waste site to be buried. The U.S. Department of Energy is spending $200 million on trying to figure out how to get rid of the nuclear waste, which comes directly from energy costs. The cost of the glass waste program would only cost consumers $5 million a year, which would be roughly 1% of consumers electric bill.

Now lets look at the other power supply alternatives. People are always looking at different solutions to America’s power needs. One possibility is solar power. That’s easy; all we need is the sun. Wrong! Solar power can only be used somewhere where the sun is out all the time. There has been a proposal to build a solar power facility in Nevada’s deserts. The plan is to build a 10,000 square mile plantation of solar panels. Then there must be the power storage facility to have power at night. These facilities consist of numerous batteries, which are full of extremely hazardous chemicals ready to leak into the ground. In Mike Oliver’s book Environmentalism Gone Berserk, he states, “a single 30 megawatt nuclear power plant requires much less total material than a 30 megawatt solar energy farm” (Oliver).

The next power supply option is coal power. After the Three Mile Island accident, 51% of America’s power needs were contributed by Coal (Huber). Coal power works much like nuclear power does. It heats up large amounts of water, which creates steam, which in turn, turns turbines to produce electricity. The problem with coal burning to cause electricity is that it emits carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, which affects the ever so popular “greenhouse effect” (Editorial 196). These greenhouse effects could cause serous changes in weather climates. Acid rain is also a side effect to burning coal. It can affect everything from crop growth to damaging fish in lakes and rivers. So you have to ask yourself, is coal environmentally safe? If not, what is?

Maybe oil would be the suitable solution to America’s energy crisis. Along with coal, oil has to be burnt to produce electricity. It also creates carbon dioxides and acid rain, but besides these problems, there are additional environmental hardships to deal with. One source of oil for America comes from the Middle East. This oil supply is extremely limited. Offshore platforms are also a source of oil. Due to weather, several thousands of gallons are spilled into the ocean (Lovins 106). Moreover, there are numerous human deaths to be considered when working on a platform. Then the oil has to be shipped by freighter ship to port of origin. In recent years, several thousands of gallons of oil have been spilt into waterways just to have billions of dollars spent on the cleanup. The problem with oil is that once it enters water there is virtually no way to get it all out, thus an environmental disaster.

Finally, there is Natural Gas; the sure solution. Natural gas also burns creating CO2 and acid rain. Natural gas is highly flammable and is consistently under pressure. In Washington State alone, there have been three gas line explosions in the past ten years. Natural gas lines also require lots of energy to function. The gas lines in Alaska require two thousand megawatts of energy to operate the pumps necessary for distribution (Lovins 120). Another words, in order to get natural gas for electricity; electricity needs to be output to get input. An Energy Resource International study concluded that because

of nuclear power, 219 million tons of sulfur dioxide and 98 million tons of nitrogen oxides have been prevented from entering the atmosphere since 1973 from the burning of fossil-fuels (Jones).

Almost everyone has heard of a nuclear power plant accident, thus most people don’t really want a nuclear site near their homes. They have heard about the effects on humans around nuclear sites from the media, which are always hyped up scares. In reality, there are 430 nuclear power plants in the world, none of which have had an accident. Nuclear power contributes one quarter of the world’s power from various countries. Bernard Cohen stated in his book The Nuclear Energy Option that, “In 1988 nuclear power provided 70% of the electricity used in France, 66% in Belgium, 49% in Hungary, 47% in Sweden and Korea, 41% in Taiwan, 37% in Switzerland, 36% in Spain, Finland, and Bulgaria, 34% in West Germany, 28% in Japan, 27% in Czechoslovakia, 19% in the United States and United Kingdom, and 16% in Canada” (Cohen 13). Out of all these countries, why is the United States on the lower end of the usage scale? Nuclear power supporters believe that if nuclear power plants were closely observed, nuclear power would be the cleanest power source. What is amazing is the fact that nuclear power plants are closely supervised and that there hasn’t been adverse affects on the environment aside from the waste solution. In 1995, there were 109 nuclear reactors producing 110 million kilowatts in the U.S. This same year the U.S. accomplished a record of 673 billion kilowatt hours accounting for 78% of the power supply needs for this country. In 1974, 226 reactors were scheduled for completion in the next 20 years (Blair 76). This number is 117 reactors short of the projected goal. Part of the reason for not completing these 117 reactors is the need for electricity has not been as dramatic as expected. Also, the Three Mile Island and Chernobyl accidents have made people more leery about building more reactors until they learn about the long term effects of the reactors. Energy planers say that nuclear power plants are too expensive to build and are not as efficient as other power supplies. However, Gerald Garvey says in his book Nuclear Power and Social Planning that one nuclear power plant would produce enough electricity to pay itself off and bring in enough money to build six more power plants in 30 years of life. He said that in this time span, a nuclear power plant will produce 1000-megawatt, which is at 60% of it’s potential (Gargey 26).

Nuclear power plants have been by far the cleanest power supply facilities available in history. The only waste is the fuel and the core of the reactors. However, this doesn’t seem to be the main problem with building more nuclear sites. Most of the reason is the propaganda from the media and environmentalists. They preach about a total meltdown and mass destruction of communities in the area of these reactors. These statements are not true though. It has been proven that through all the reactors in the world there have only been two accidents, which one of those accidents didn’t release any more radiation than what would be absorbed naturally. The waste issue has been solved if planers would use the information given. By and large from all other power supply facilities, nuclear power is the safest.