Friday, November 9, 2012

Short Form Annotated Bib

Topic: Electroconvulsive Shock Therapy

Sources:

Snyders, Matt. "Electroconvulsive Therapy May Not Be Helpful." Mental Illness. Ed. Roman Espejo. 

Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Minnesota Mental Health Patient 

Ray Sandford Forced into Electro-Shock Therapy." City Pages 20 May 2009. Gale Opposing Viewpoints 

In Context. Web. 9 Nov. 2012.

-This article breaks down the reasons why ECT would not benefit the patient in a very articulate way, outlining a very clear cause and effects. It is also well written and coherent and fluid in its logic that even I understand it despite limited exposure to medical terminology.

Flint, Val. "Electroconvulsive Therapy Can Be Effective." Mental Illness. Mary E. Williams. Detroit: 

Greenhaven Press, 2007. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "The Place of ECT in Mental Health Care." 

Kai Tiaki: Nursing New Zealand 11.9 (Oct. 2005): 18-19. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 9 

Nov. 2012.

-This is the opposing viewpoint from above, written in a very similar manner and rebutts effectively. 

"Magnetic therapy shows promise for depression." Age [Melbourne, Australia] 24 Oct. 2012: 8. Gale 

Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 9 Nov. 2012.

-This article shows how ECT is breaking out to the public and becoming common knowledge and its potential usage.


"How To Help Anxious Minds." Newsweek 22 Sept. 2008: 69. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context

Web. 9 Nov. 2012.

-This lists ECT as an alternative method and its reccomendations

Bethune, Brian. "A shocking truth: once thought barbaric, electroshock therapy is making a comeback." Maclean's 15 Oct. 2007: 68. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 9 Nov. 2012.

-This is exposing the renewed interest in ECT

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Girl, Interrupted (Complaint)

Cut off. Interrupted. I turn my face away from the person that cut me off and make a make to no one in particular. I was not done talking. I'm never really done talking (my rants continue silently) but I'd like to spit out one entire thought before giving you a chance to speak. It's only common courtesy, one should never just butt in a debate or discussion without giving the floor to whoever has the turn to talk. Why do we let this slide sometimes though? If we as members of society where arguments are so tied to our socializations, why do we let people interrupt us?

Because not everyone is rude and the majority of those who have spent a majority of their lives with civilization have a filter or some polite manner within them. It is commonly said that two wrongs won't make a right (but two lefts will!) so if I'm interrupted I usually don't interrupt them right back and say, "Excuse me, I was not finished." I only interfere if the topic we are discussing is something I am truly passionate about or whether this person has interrupted me before. If it is the first time, honest mistake. We all act rude sometimes. But if this is the norm within our conversations: no. I wait until they are finished because I am not inconsiderate like them and say, "I was not finished...[insert what I was going to say here]..."

One reasons as to why this might irk me considerably is because I know I have an inflated sense of self. I am aware that I can come off somewhat snobbish or elitist because in certain areas I am. I do not like when people interrupt me because for a split second I think, "What I am saying is more important than what you just interrupted me with." Usually it's true but I'm biased.

We live in an impatient society, ready to pounce on any opportunity to show off specific skill sets to impress, to gain a one-up on the rest of the people. But nothing can be accomplished if someone is blatantly cutting off someone's ideas or thoughts, leaving one person rude without correction and the one interrupted feeling resentment.

So shut up and let me talk.

Definition

Here