Thursday, April 21, 2011

USAccident part II




Hurray, finally! We've got ourselves another accident report (or as a friend suggested, a 'gewondheidsverklaring'). I thought we'd never get another. Is it just me, or are you wondering how Kwint managed to hit his foot against his forehead too. Limber dude right?




Related to accident issues, my eldest son is an avid insect hugger, which can be potentially harmful both for insects and Lucas. Yesterday we were playing outside when he found a fly.

Lucas: "Look mom, a fly."
Me: (basking in the sun with my eyes closed) "Good for you, hon!"
Lucas: "Look mom, I put in on my hand."
Me: (still eyes closed) "That's nice."
Lucas: (more insistent) "Look!"
Me: (ok, this cannot be ignored). "Ah, cool"
Me: (upon closer look) "Uhm, hon, I don't think that's a fly." "It's a wasp."
Me: (definitely trying not to panic). "It's not such a good idea to put wasps on your hand, Lucas. They can sting. Anyway, I think the wasp is tired, we should put it in the bush here."
Lucas: "Yes, the wasp is tired. It needs to go to sleep." "And after he wakes, he can watch some television, right mom?"

And on a completely different note: I got invited to attend a private Botox party. Dubious honor I know. But if they manage to get 15 people to attend, we all get a discount AND free appetizers. Now, who can refuse that?

Monday, April 18, 2011

Pardon the pun(ishment)

I know I have been notoriously absent these days. But I've got excuses, many of them even legal. First of all, we had some friends over. This meant a lot of nice evenings and road trips to Yosemite and San Francisco. I won't bother you with the details, you'll just get jealous. Secondly, I've attended a very interesting brain workshop in Berkeley. But perhaps my most legal excuse is the fact that I've started to write a column in a monthly magazine on pedagogical issues (Tijdschrift voor Orthopedagogiek). That also means I won't be writing about all my interesting new ideas and experiences on this blog anymore. You will have to make do with discards.

But do not fear. There are so many things to write about that my cup floweth over. Today's highly controversial subject is capital punishment. Always a drop-dead party topic. As it so happens, I live in a state which has the death penalty. To make matters even more interesting, we're also the proud owners of the 'three strikes and you're out' law. So I've taken some precautions: I don't cross any speed limits, I do not jaywalk, and I most certainly do not walk my elephant down Market Street (SF) unless I have him on a leash. Imagine the stress when Ellie (pet name for our elephant) did a Houdini on me. But luckily the curious incident of the elephant in the nighttime went unnoticed by the police. I'm sorry, I am digressing yet again.

Capital punishment. Highly controversial. The brain-workshop enlightened me on the subject of lethal injections. Apparently, the current system involves three injections which are in fact all lethal in and of itself. Talk about overkill. The first injection consists of sodium thiopental, which causes unconsciousness and eventually death in 30 to 40 minutes. The second injection consists of pancuronium, which is a muscle relaxant, causing paralysis of all muscles (including the ones you use to breathe with). The last and most lethal injection consists of potassium chloride which stops the heart in a matter of minutes.

I won't hide the fact that I am dead set against capital punishment. But this aside, I was mildly amused to hear about the issues surrounding lethal injections. For instance, they were produced by one company only, an Italian pharmaceutical company who eventually declined this dubious honor. Allegedly, this has led to shortage of supply for some states, as well as problems regarding approaching expiration dates.

So far for the general stuff. On to the psychological stuff, my area of expertise. I was shocked to hear about a recent incident concerning Texan psychologist Denkowski who conducted assessments on inmates facing death penalty. These assessments were conducted as a result of a 2002 ruling of the Supreme Court that states that mentally handicapped persons can not be executed, although they failed to formulate criteria for a mental handicap. I guess the notion is based on the idea that mentally handicapped people are unaccountable for their actions. In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), mental retardation is diagnosed based on three criteria:

  1. Significantly sub average intellectual functioning (IQ of 70 or below), AND
  2. Concurrent deficits or impairments in present adaptive functioning, AND
  3. Onset before the age of 18.

Although Denkowski used the formal criteria of the DSM, he inflated scores of inmates based on his personal encounters with them. Concerning intellectual functioning (the first criterion), try to follow his reasoning:

Apparently, Denkowski feels that traditional IQ tests do not compensate for social and cultural factors. Can you follow? No? I'll make it easier: people from impoverished backgrounds may not be able to answer questions correctly, because their community did not give them access to this knowledge. Now, do you follow? No? What about this: some people do not know how to use a thermometer, because their community does not value using a thermometer. But that does not mean that these people are mentally handicapped.

Now, it gets better (or worse). Consider his reasoning on the criterion of adaptive functioning. Usually, this is done by administering questionnaires and interviews with family and friends of the person under assessment. But no, according to Denkowski, this would lead to an underestimation of the skills since family and friends would want to evade execution of their friend or family member.

Why was Denkowski able to get away with a settlement with the Board of Psychologists? His penalty consists of a fine of 5500 dollar and an agreement that he will not conduct intellectual disability tests in criminal cases ever again. I'd say that definitely beats the penalty his victims got, even though their crimes might have been terrible.