Homwork Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Homwork - Research Paper Example To begin with, children with televisions in their bedroom perform poorly in school and have high propensity to have sleep problems. Also, children who have television in their bedrooms are likely to be overweight and have higher risk for smoking. According to Parker-Pope, one of the consequences of having a television in a child’s bedroom is that the child end up watching programs that are not suitable for them without the knowledge of their parents (Parker-Pope Para 3). The article presents several studies that have been carried out to demonstrate the effect of having televisions in children’s bedrooms. For instance, he presents a study that was conducted on eighty children aged between 4 to 7 years in Buffalo. The findings of the research indicated that having a television in the bedroom increased average viewing time by approximately nine hours, from 21 hours to 30 hours. According to the research, there is high probability of parents of such children with television in their bedrooms to misjudge their children’s viewing time. In the article, Professor Leonard H. Epstein argues that the parents are usually unaware of what their children watch when the televisions are put in their bedroom. The television set is usually in the child’s bedroom and it becomes difficult for parents to remove television set from the child’s bedroom. In their one two-year research, Dr. ... The researchers discovered that reducing television viewing time did not increase play rate, but the children snaked less. This research did not simply the data by bedroom television viewing. However, the journal Pediatrics, 2002, reported that children with televisions in their bedroom risk being overweight. Further, the journal Obesity reported that boys have higher risk of becoming overweight. In a French research on adolescent, boys with television in their bedrooms showed higher likelihood of having larger waist, body fat and body mass index than their counterparts with no television in their bedrooms. In another study that was conducted among 400 children in six schools in Northern California, approximately 70 percent had television in their bedrooms. These children performed significantly and constantly lower on math, reading and language-art examinations. However, children who said they have computers in their bedrooms scored higher in the tests. Despite the fact that the pro found impact of bedroom television remains oblivious, it could be a big distraction from doing homework or it obstructs sleep leading to poor performance at school. A study on kindergartens indicated that children with bedroom televisions had sleep problems. Another research of over 700 middle-school students aged between 12 and 14 revealed that children with bedroom televisions have higher likelihood of smoking. 42 percent of those who had bedroom televisions in the study smoked compared to 16 percent of those who had no bedroom television. In another article, Parents Urged Again to Limit TV for Youngest by Benedict Carey, the American Academy of Pediatrics warned parent to limit the time that their children spend on televisions, computers and self-described educational games. The

Clinical diversity analysis on a nursing subject Essay

Clinical diversity analysis on a nursing subject - Essay Example With this in mind, it is necessary that nursing students equip themselves both theoretically and in practice. A nurse must be thorough in all aspects of health care because a patient’s recovery rests on their hands. In the field of nursing, care has its provisions in various settings; it mainly depends on the convenience of the patient and the availability of resources with the inclusion of the population demand. This paper is centred on reflection in consideration to my learning experiences as the semester comes to a close. The purpose of reflecting is to identify how far I have come in as far as training and knowledge in this chosen field is concerned. There are difficulties and obstacles I have had to overcome for me to pass the qualification necessary to proceed with my training. This paper will be looking into reflection upon the topic; what learning and practice experiences did I expect before embarking on my second year? What was the outcome of the topic, learning and practice? The paper will also feature the various challenges and barriers faced during the course of the semester as well as the outcome of such adversity; how does such challenges influence my continuing professional development as I pass on to the next year of training and in my nursing career in general? During the semester, the lecturer involved the students in rigorous learning activities in a bid to make the learning experience enjoyable and friendlier to the students. For instance, the lecturer made use of tutorials which were made available to the students. Tutorials were a great way of giving the students a chance to learn on their own. When students learn on their own they develop a better understanding of the patient. Additionally it challenges the student to think harder while also giving an opportunity for the student to conduct research on the given topic to enhance

80 yard run Essay Example for Free

80 yard run Essay 80 yard run BY tmille30 The main character of the short story, The Eighty Yard Run is Christian Darling. Everything in life cannot be handed to anyone on a silver platter and Christian finds this out the hard way. He is a man who thinks he is a famous football player but soon finds out he is not as good as he thinks. He was an athlete but not a gifted one, he spent the most of his career blocking for someone else better. Louise is Christians wife and she treats him like gold and spoils him with many gifts. Christian Darlings haracter completely changes throughout this short story as he goes from riches to rags. A mans football career is never remembered by what he does at practice. It might be remembered for a day but never a lifetime. Football is Judged by what you do on the field when a war between two teams is at hand. Christian did not have many long runs in his life while playing running back. I think this is why an eighty-yard run was so important to him at practice. He was trying to make his legacy in life more about football rather than something else better than that. Football is not all that people make it out to be, yes if you are great you may get the fame and fortune but the chance of that happening are slim to none. Football is a sport that is terrible on the body no matter what the age of person playing is. All is does is beat your body every single day but that is why some people love it. Football was all Christian knew and he makes it out to be that it is the only thing he loved in life. He wanted to be running the ball every down rather than blocking and wants to be making the big plays rather than going unnoticed. What he does not realize is the fact that football is a team sport and not everyone gets the glory. Linemen block every single play and they have no glory that comes from I but they still do their Job. The real glory of football is walking off the field after every game knowing you did all you could do to help your team win. That is the true meaning of football and Christian is not smart enough to realize that, he is Just blinded by spotlight. Christian wants to be remembered as a great football player but at the end of the short story they are at a game and people o not even know who he is let alone even if they have heard of Christian Darling. Christian is a very well liked man by all, Just from his football standpoint. It seems like everyone loves football players Just because of the lone fact they are popular. Louise loved him for who he really was; they got married after they both graduated college. He is very spoiled and does not seem to do anything on his own, everything seems to be given to him in life and in most cases it is nota good thing. It seems Darling is only with Louise for all that she gives him and does for him. I think this because once he was out of money and her fathers company gave them debt up to their heads he began to constantly drink and lost his mind. This would make Louise extremely unhappy and Christian is lucky he did not lose the only thing that has stayed with him for the majority of his life. Football is a sport that you cannot play your whole life because of how hard the game has to be played and Darling does not realize this. Louise is a woman that will always be there for him unlike football. Christian needs to wake up and realize that he needs to treat Louise with respect and love her like he hould. It is not her fault football is no longer in his life or the fact her fathers you have to make the best of them rather than crumble under all the pressure and just give up. Everything was fine when Louise was wealthy and good buy him gifts all the time. This Just shows that Darling does not truly care about anyone but himself. A relationship is not about gifts or money; it is about being truly happy with your significant other for who they are. In conclusion Christian Darling is a man who starts at the top with a loving wife, lots of money, and a football career but lets life rag him down when life get tough. He drastically changes as a person when he has to make the transition from football player to a man that has to work an everyday Job. Darling stays at home and drinks his life away and lives in shame while his wife goes out and works for all the money she can to try and pay the debt off. This character just goes to show us that no matter how easy life seems, anything can change for the worse at anytime and you must be ready. You must make the best out of it rather than sit back and feel sorry for yourself or let someone else do everything for you.

Finding Forrester Analysis

Finding Forrester Analysis The film Finding Forrester is a movie about a young boy, Jamal Wallace (Rob Brown) that lives in the Bronx. He has an intellectual talent for writing, quite contrary to his stereotypical ghetto friends. Jamal meets and befriends William Forrester, once a great Pulitzer Prize winning author who now lives in solitary. Forrester mentors Jamal and teaches him life lessons. Jamal in turn helps Forrester break free of his tough, leathery shell and reclusive life. This movie, although slightly boring and predictable, highlights the breakdown of stereotypes in our culture and the relationships that blossom through pure chance. I do not recommend watching this movie in theaters; save your money. Overall, the storyline is unoriginal and dull. It begins during a casual basketball game. Jamal and his friends notice someone hiding behind a window curtain, looking down at them. Known to the boys as The Window, William Forrester (Sean Connery) lives alone, never leaving his apartment. This may sound interesting, but to me, this is the only part of the movie that raises curiosity and suspense. After school one day, Jamals friends dare him to break into the authors apartment. Jamal climbs in through the window and ultimately gets spooked by Forrester, leaves his book bag behind, and flees down the fire escape. If it were my home, the police would be called; however, Forrester doesnt find it necessary. Surprisingly, the next day Jamals backpack is dropped to the street. Well, Jamal recovers his book bag and he finds his journals marked up with corrections, praises and other remarks. Unbelievably, Jamal, wishing to discuss the editorial markups in his journal, returns to Forresters ap artment. I cannot imagine a teenager returning to confront the owner of the apartment he broke into the day before. After knocking on the door, the grumpy author hollers at him to stay away and tells him he should consider writing a 5000 word essay on why he belongs out of his house. The following day, Jamal returns to deliver the essay by leaving it outside Forresters door. Can you guess what happens next? I can. These two characters officially meet face to face the following day when Jamal returns to ask about the essay he left behind. Forrester allows Jamal to enter his home. After a few racist remarks were sputtered, testing Jamals character, a unique friendship begins. Would you befriend Jamal after he breaks into your home? Also, I do not believe black men or women would tolerate racial slurs or remarks that Forrester feels necessary to express. To me the clichà ©, only in the movies rings true. Resuming with the plot, Forrester is amazed at Jamals writing and begins to couns el him on intellect, writing, and life. During this time Jamal receives a scholarship to an à ©lite private school typically attended by rich children with a far different background than him. There he meets Claire Spence (Anna Paquin) and his professor, Henry Crawford (F. Murray Abraham). Claire shows Jamal around his new school and a strong bond cultivates. However, Professor Henry Crawford believes Jamal is only attending the school for his basketball skills and cant believe he is there for any other reason. After all, Jamal is an avid basketball player. The school is inevitably hoping to receive the coveted trophy at the end of the season and Jamal is the boy to do it. After several weeks, Crawford accuses Jamal of plagiarism when he submits a paper he wrote for a writing contest. Conflict and unexciting suspense finally happens again when the professor claims the paper had similarities to an essay Forrester once published. When Jamal refuses to admit he plagiarized or received permission from Forrester himself, he was eliminated from the competition. I would not go out of my way to watch this movie. The ending, with its rather soft climax and humdrum resolution provides entertainment for Sunday mornings when you have absolutely nothing else to do, but watch television. Although, Sean Connery did a wonderful job playing the character of author, William Forrester, I would rather see him playing the role of 007 in James Bond or something with a bit more excitement. I do not think he could do a horrendous job acting even if he was casted in this monotonous movie. Rob Browns acting of Jamal Wallace is rather mediocre. His movements and actions throughout the film were forgettable. I believe he did a satisfactory job representing his character; I just cant brag about his acting abilities in this film. Although, he never plays a leading role, F. Murray Abraham, is also an experienced actor. He ranks near the top of the list with Sean Connery. He did an acceptable job performing his role as Professor Henry Crawford. Even though his character was slightly far-fetched, his acting was believable. At the very end of the film, Matt Damon makes an appearance as Forresters attorney. He is an excellent actor, but the part he plays in Finding Forrester is extremely small. Overall the actors received a passable grade for their abilities to play their parts in this somewhat lame movie. We expect far-fetched movie plots in science fiction or movies about green, three-headed monsters. While watching this flick, you want to believe what you see is true and some aspects are indeed genuine. Every day, we see intellectual children and teenagers do remarkable things, achieve the unachievable. Personally, if you are going to make a film that others can relate to, specifically, black, inner city teenagers, then everything in the storyline should be realistic. Honestly, I have to admit, I find movies that break stereotypical boundaries motivational, but I would not waste my money paying inflated ticket prices to see Finding Forrester in the theater. I suppose every movie cant be full of suspense and action. To me, this 3 out of 5 star movie is best watched on HBO or Showtime. Save your money. Dont see it at the theaters. Finding Forrester, Dir. Gus Van Sant, 2000, Columbia; Fountainbridge Films; Laurence Mark Productions, DVD, 136 minutes. CAST: Sean Connery: William Forrester Rob Brown: Jamal Wallace F. Murray Abraham: Professor Henry Crawford Anna Paquin: Claire Spence Busta Rhymes: Terrell April Grace: Ms. Joyce Michael Pitt: Coleridge Michael Nouri: Dr. Spence Richard Easton: Matthews Glen Fitzgerald: Massie Zane R. Copeland Jr.: Damon Stephanie Berry: Janice Fly Williams III: Fly Damany Mathis: Kenzo Damien Lee: Clay Matthew Noah Word: Coach Garrick Charles Bernstein: Dr. Simon Matt Malloy: Bradley Matt Damon: Sanderson RATING: C 3 out of 5 stars

The Hot Zone :: essays research papers

Gripping Reality There are many challenges, and day-to-day obstacles that may challenge ones comfort zone. Not often can you find a book that challenges that zone. Richard Preston writes a gripping novel, The Hot Zone, about the deadly Ebola virus. Through gripping detail and realism, Preston accomplishes informing the reader, and challenges the comfort zone, about the Ebola virus between 1967 and 1993. Throughout this 26-year time period, several people became infected with Ebola. Preston first introduces a French man, Charles Monet. Monet had a submissive personality, and only seemed to connect with women. Following a climbing trip from Mount Elgon with one of his mistresses, Monet came down with a headache, and died. However a headache was not the only symptoms Monet had. â€Å"He leans over head on his knees, and brings up an incredible quality of blood from his stomach and spills it onto the floor. With a gasping groan, he falls unconscious. Then comes a sound like a bed sheet being torn in half, which is the sound for his bowls opening and venting blood†(23). As if this wasn’t a horrifying experience for a man to go through, this was not the beginning, nor the end to this virus. Fighting her way to the top, Lt. Col. Nancy Jaax, worked as a Biosafety Level 4 veterinary pathologist. As Level 4 pathologist, Jaax wore a space-type suit, and worked with extremely lethal airborne viruses. The space suit is the only thing that keeps Jaax safe from these deadly viruses. During the dissection of an Ebola infested monkey, the unthinkable happens. â€Å"She glanced down. Her glove. It was drenched in blood, Ebola blood, but now she saw the hole. It was a rip across the palm of the outer glove on her right hand†(87). The reader, and probably even Lt. Col. Nancy Jaax knows the painful, and grotesque death that will soon follow. Preston goes into great detail on each case, causing the reader to cringe at the reality that these cases happened to real people. Even amid today’s technology and medical advances things such as: â€Å"He coughs a deep cough and regurgitates something into the bag†¦ his lips are smeared with something slippery and red, mixed with black specks, as if he has been chewing coffee grounds†(17).

Essay --

1. The 4 most important technological developments were round-hulled sailing ships, the compass, and improved map-making innovations, and knowledge of explosives/gunpowder weapons. These round-hulled ships allowed for further voyages into the Atlantic Ocean and for being able to carry large amounts of goods to trade in other places. The compass gave European’s the navigation tool they always needed to insure the y were going the correct way, allowing for more daring voyages to take place. Improved map making innovations also gave the Europeans a better idea of where they were and gave more confidence for more exploring and traveling to trade in distant lands. Finally gunpowder weapons gave Europeans the military advantages they needed over all the other civilizations in the world and allowed them to come and take port cities or entire civilizations. 2. Hongwu made notable reforms to the scholar-gentry influence and developed ways to check the abuses of other factions. He also tried to get more loyal bureaucrats by adding public beatings for disloyal or corrupted officials. In the first few years of the Ming dynasty, an economic boom happened as China began to contact other civilizations overseas. Population boom also occurred due to introduced crops from the Americas such as maize and potatoes. The merchant class became very wealthy off the economic boom and used their wealth to purchase land, increasing their social status. Chinese expansion occurred at a rate that a never been seen before. The Chinese began to push further out of Central Asia. The main motives for this were to explore other lands and to spread the glory of the Ming Empire. 3. Europeans Americas Cows Potatoes Horses Maize Diseases Sweet potatoes Onions Peanut... ...n put Confucian Scholars at the top and tried to cast aside anything other than Confucian thinking. Hindus became under attack by Mughal leaders that wanted to convert more to Islam. As he Mughals kept pushing deeper into India, tensions heated up as more people converted from Hinduism to Islam. After Newton published his book, it showed of a universe with simple laws and rules. It used rational hypothesis and generalization. It relied less on blind traditions of religious faith. Soon writers affected by the new science, although not scientist, began to attack traditional religious ideas such as miracles. Political change was complicated due to the absolute monarchy that arose in France vs the parliamentary monarchy that arose in England and Holland. These more effective central governments helped Europeans catch up in political forms that had been developed before

Drug Testing for Welfare

The Push for Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients United States lawmakers face one of the most pressing issues of our time-welfare reform. New screening processes, often considered a direct violation of constitutional rights, have already been enacted in many states. Strong evidence exists, asserting that the practice of administering drug testing to welfare recipients will cost the U. S. taxpayers more money in the long run, stigmatize applicants and participants, and serve only the purpose of making the pharmaceutical companies more powerful.In order to protect the constitutional rights of potential welfare recipients, United States awmakers should avoid further criminalizing the poor by submitting them to drug testing and/or a nationwide welfare registry. This year, 29 states have either proposed or already passed legislation calling for drug testing to receive welfare benefits. Brian Kelley reports that of those 29 states, several are seeing a great deal of financial loss as a resu lt of this legislation: During the past year, the state of Utah has spent over $30,000 giving drug tests to welfare recipients.In that time period, only 2. 6 percent of those tested were found to have used illegal substances † well below the national use rate of 8. 9 percent (1). Kelley goes on to report: In 2012, three years and 87,000 screenings later, only one person had failed a drug test. Total savings from denying that one person benefits? $560. Total benefits paid out in that time? $200 million. Even if we include the savings from cutting benefits to the 1,633 people who didn't return the pre-test survey, it brings the total to only 0. percent of the amount distributed over that period (1). The numbers do not lie†little evidence exists that supports the claim that drug testing recipients will save money. Striving to prove that the main source of the drug problem in the United States lies in he recipients of the welfare program, policymakers continue to work ferven tly. The overgeneralization of the poor as drug users has become common practice in Washington. Lawmakers seem to feel that because recipients receive government funding, they in turn give up their constitutional rights as U. S. citizens.The practice of criminalizing the poor has become commonplace in the creation of U. S. governmental policy. Karen Gustafson is someone who knows a lot about the criminalization of the poor. She has spent much of her time researching and writing about Just that. According to Gustafson, â€Å"The public desire to deter and punish welfare cheating has overwhelmed the will to provide economic security to vulnerable members of society (644). † Because of the misuse of welfare funds by a few, the entire underprivileged population has been targeted as criminals†as lazy, drug abusing sponges.Over the past several decades, the United States government has spent billions of dollars in an effort to catch and prosecute those who are abusing the wel fare system. This practice is necessary in order to rid the welfare system of abusers. However, often verlooked is the fact that there are many recipients who are not drug users and are still in need of aid. It is the duty of the U. S. government to provide aid without encouraging potential participants to teel like they are being considered as potential criminals from the very beginning of the application process.The cross-agency process involved in the welfare and criminal Justice systems is unconstitutional and an invasion of the privacy of the American underprivileged. As welfare reform began to take place so did the social misconception that recipients are criminals did as well. In fact, welfare recipients often receive the same treatment as parolees and probationers. This is in part due to the fact that too many law enforcement techniques are embedded in the welfare system.Gustafson tells us: Her social security number has been matched against state and national criminal recor ds The financial information she has provided has been matched against various employment databases, IRS records, and Franchise Tax Board records Her personal information has been entered into the welfare system's database, which may be accessed by law enforcement officers without any basis for suspicion All f this has occurred before she has received a single welfare check (645). There is no doubt that those Americans in need of assistance have been subjected to unconstitutional treatment by the welfare program.As a result of the criminal actions of a few, all of the needy are being unfairly scrutinized. The implementation of unfounded drug testing in addition to the already criminalizing application process will only serve to further stigmatize the needy†and all in the name of the mighty dollar. Some believe that it is not the quest to save money that is the driving force behind the push for this legislation. Rather, it is a desire to make millions for the pharmaceutical com panies that lawmakers are seeking to achieve.Lobbyist interference from multi-million dollar pharmaceutical companies has heavily influenced Washington lawmakers' policymaking. These pharmaceutical companies have their hand in much of the United States lawmaking practice. These powerful corporations stand to make a lot of money from the sale of drug testing supplies and services to the U. S. government. Macdonald reports: several Republican lawmakers in Congress have pushed hard for the mandatory drug testing of anyone, nywhere, applying for welfare.Leading the charge in the senate is Orrin Hatch who received $8,000 campaign contributions in 2012 from the political action committee of Laboratory Corporation of America (LabCorp), $3000 from another political action committee to which LabCorp contributes, as well as $4000 in campaign contributions from another company with major interests in drug testing, Abbott Laboratories (15). According to Macdonald, Orrin Hatch is not the only la wmaker with these corporations in his pocket. â€Å"GOP Congressman Charles Boustany received $1 5,000 from Abbott Laboratories (15).The fact that Congressmen and women are receiving contributions from pharmaceutical companies is disturbing to say the least. The American underprivileged do not stand a chance at ever overcoming their circumstances as long as lawmakers continue to be driven by greed, rather than their best interest. If United States lawmakers really had the best interest of the underprivileged in mind, they would be focusing fewer resources on treating those who test positive for substance abuse and more on the underlying mental and physical causes for the abuse.Pollack tells us, â€Å"Even among women who eported recent illicit substance abuse, depression, physical health problems and limited education were actually more common barriers to self-sufficiency and social tunctioning(2) † Pollack turtner states, â€Å"Most weltare recipients [ . ] were casual mar ijuana users who didn't meet screening criteria for marijuana (or other substance use) disorders. Ironically, chemical testing technologies were most sensitive to identifying marijuana users who rarely needed addiction services (2). Mental and physical disabilities and the lack of healthcare are often the underlying cause of drug use to begin with as a means of self-medication. These issues receive far too little attention in the U. S. government policy decisions, unlike that of drug use. Pollack's research outlines the statistical data on illicit drug use as it compares to mental and physical health problems: However one runs the numbers, illicit drug use disorders are not common among welfare recipients. Other physical and mental health problems are far more prevalent. Drug Testing for Welfare The Push for Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients United States lawmakers face one of the most pressing issues of our time-welfare reform. New screening processes, often considered a direct violation of constitutional rights, have already been enacted in many states. Strong evidence exists, asserting that the practice of administering drug testing to welfare recipients will cost the U. S. taxpayers more money in the long run, stigmatize applicants and participants, and serve only the purpose of making the pharmaceutical companies more powerful.In order to protect the constitutional rights of potential welfare recipients, United States awmakers should avoid further criminalizing the poor by submitting them to drug testing and/or a nationwide welfare registry. This year, 29 states have either proposed or already passed legislation calling for drug testing to receive welfare benefits. Brian Kelley reports that of those 29 states, several are seeing a great deal of financial loss as a resu lt of this legislation: During the past year, the state of Utah has spent over $30,000 giving drug tests to welfare recipients.In that time period, only 2. 6 percent of those tested were found to have used illegal substances † well below the national use rate of 8. 9 percent (1). Kelley goes on to report: In 2012, three years and 87,000 screenings later, only one person had failed a drug test. Total savings from denying that one person benefits? $560. Total benefits paid out in that time? $200 million. Even if we include the savings from cutting benefits to the 1,633 people who didn't return the pre-test survey, it brings the total to only 0. percent of the amount distributed over that period (1). The numbers do not lie†little evidence exists that supports the claim that drug testing recipients will save money. Striving to prove that the main source of the drug problem in the United States lies in he recipients of the welfare program, policymakers continue to work ferven tly. The overgeneralization of the poor as drug users has become common practice in Washington. Lawmakers seem to feel that because recipients receive government funding, they in turn give up their constitutional rights as U. S. citizens.The practice of criminalizing the poor has become commonplace in the creation of U. S. governmental policy. Karen Gustafson is someone who knows a lot about the criminalization of the poor. She has spent much of her time researching and writing about Just that. According to Gustafson, â€Å"The public desire to deter and punish welfare cheating has overwhelmed the will to provide economic security to vulnerable members of society (644). † Because of the misuse of welfare funds by a few, the entire underprivileged population has been targeted as criminals†as lazy, drug abusing sponges.Over the past several decades, the United States government has spent billions of dollars in an effort to catch and prosecute those who are abusing the wel fare system. This practice is necessary in order to rid the welfare system of abusers. However, often verlooked is the fact that there are many recipients who are not drug users and are still in need of aid. It is the duty of the U. S. government to provide aid without encouraging potential participants to teel like they are being considered as potential criminals from the very beginning of the application process.The cross-agency process involved in the welfare and criminal Justice systems is unconstitutional and an invasion of the privacy of the American underprivileged. As welfare reform began to take place so did the social misconception that recipients are criminals did as well. In fact, welfare recipients often receive the same treatment as parolees and probationers. This is in part due to the fact that too many law enforcement techniques are embedded in the welfare system.Gustafson tells us: Her social security number has been matched against state and national criminal recor ds The financial information she has provided has been matched against various employment databases, IRS records, and Franchise Tax Board records Her personal information has been entered into the welfare system's database, which may be accessed by law enforcement officers without any basis for suspicion All f this has occurred before she has received a single welfare check (645). There is no doubt that those Americans in need of assistance have been subjected to unconstitutional treatment by the welfare program.As a result of the criminal actions of a few, all of the needy are being unfairly scrutinized. The implementation of unfounded drug testing in addition to the already criminalizing application process will only serve to further stigmatize the needy†and all in the name of the mighty dollar. Some believe that it is not the quest to save money that is the driving force behind the push for this legislation. Rather, it is a desire to make millions for the pharmaceutical com panies that lawmakers are seeking to achieve.Lobbyist interference from multi-million dollar pharmaceutical companies has heavily influenced Washington lawmakers' policymaking. These pharmaceutical companies have their hand in much of the United States lawmaking practice. These powerful corporations stand to make a lot of money from the sale of drug testing supplies and services to the U. S. government. Macdonald reports: several Republican lawmakers in Congress have pushed hard for the mandatory drug testing of anyone, nywhere, applying for welfare.Leading the charge in the senate is Orrin Hatch who received $8,000 campaign contributions in 2012 from the political action committee of Laboratory Corporation of America (LabCorp), $3000 from another political action committee to which LabCorp contributes, as well as $4000 in campaign contributions from another company with major interests in drug testing, Abbott Laboratories (15). According to Macdonald, Orrin Hatch is not the only la wmaker with these corporations in his pocket. â€Å"GOP Congressman Charles Boustany received $1 5,000 from Abbott Laboratories (15).The fact that Congressmen and women are receiving contributions from pharmaceutical companies is disturbing to say the least. The American underprivileged do not stand a chance at ever overcoming their circumstances as long as lawmakers continue to be driven by greed, rather than their best interest. If United States lawmakers really had the best interest of the underprivileged in mind, they would be focusing fewer resources on treating those who test positive for substance abuse and more on the underlying mental and physical causes for the abuse.Pollack tells us, â€Å"Even among women who eported recent illicit substance abuse, depression, physical health problems and limited education were actually more common barriers to self-sufficiency and social tunctioning(2) † Pollack turtner states, â€Å"Most weltare recipients [ . ] were casual mar ijuana users who didn't meet screening criteria for marijuana (or other substance use) disorders. Ironically, chemical testing technologies were most sensitive to identifying marijuana users who rarely needed addiction services (2). Mental and physical disabilities and the lack of healthcare are often the underlying cause of drug use to begin with as a means of self-medication. These issues receive far too little attention in the U. S. government policy decisions, unlike that of drug use. Pollack's research outlines the statistical data on illicit drug use as it compares to mental and physical health problems: However one runs the numbers, illicit drug use disorders are not common among welfare recipients. Other physical and mental health problems are far more prevalent.