EDUCATION: The Arabic-English Curriculum Debate

In this week's Newsweek, there is an article titled "Speech Impediment" in the periscope section that discusses how, despite the fact that Arab-language programs are on the rise in the U.S., many public schools are facing criticism for including the language in their curriculum. Author Larraine Ali focuses her analysis on the controversy over the nation's first bilingual Arab-English public school, the Khalil Gibran International Academy in Brooklyn, N.Y. and the criticism it is facing from an organization called the Madrassa Coalition.

The Madrassa Coalition claims that its mission is to halt radical Islamist agendas in curricula and believe that a tactic of our Islamic enemies is to use "education and the inculcation of children." In fact, Newsweek notes that their campaign attracted worldwide media coverage and was even able to pressure the school's Arab-American principal to step down. This was an interesting tactic on the part of the coalition because not only were they able to have major influence on one school, but they have also put fear in to the hearts and minds of every principal interested in starting Arabic-languages at their school.

An interesting thing to note, however, is that even despite such controversy, the "National Capital Language Resource center in D.C. estimates that the number of public schools offering full-time Arabic instruction for K-12 students has quadrupled from less than 10 in 2001 to more than 40 today." This goes to show that no matter how influential an organization like the Madrassa Coalition may seem, it is ultimately the public who will decide what and how they want to learn.

-Lisa Rassenti

GLBTQ: Decades-Long Gay Hate Crime Battle Ends in Legislative Victory, Faces Presidential Veto

On Thursday, the Senate passed the first expansion of hate crime legislation since the 1960s including acts of violence based on a victim’s sexual orientation, gender, disability or gender identity; currently, hate crimes law only covers religion, race, national origin and color. Since the House passed the bill earlier this year, hate crime legislation that includes GLBTQ violence will, for the first time, head to the President’s desk for approval. President Bush has said he intends to veto the legislation.

Senate Democrats, however, have employed a cunning strategy in an attempt to force the President to sign the bill. They attached the hate crimes expansion to a defense authorization bill, which, according to Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., no president has ever vetoed. If the President does, however, veto the bill, neither chamber has enough votes to override the veto.

Critics on the right argue social legislation has no role in a defense spending bill; but, it very much has a role. According to a LA Times article that recapped the debate of the bill, Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., as he spoke in favor of the legislation, displayed a photo of a gay sailor who was killed in 1992 because he was gay. In fact, he was so badly beaten that his own mother could only identify him because of the tattoo on his arm.

The bill is nicknamed the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Bill after the Wyoming college student who was brutally beaten and murdered in 1998 because he was gay. The incident received international attention and brought to light the need for inclusion of sexual orientation in hate crime legislation. For those unfamiliar to the story, Wikipedia has very good summary of the attack.

The Human Rights Campaign reports that according to the FBI, 25 Americans each day are victims of hate crimes; that’s one hate crime ever hour. In fact, one in six of those crimes are motivated by the victim’s sexual orientation. So, surprisingly, the President’s veto threat is based on his feeling that the bill is “unnecessary.”

This is the President’s chance to really focus on his legacy – to leave a positive, lasting impact on our society and to stand up to injustice and bigotry. With approval ratings at Nixonian levels, can he really afford not to sign this bill?

EDUCATION: Will money solve problems or make more at Va. Tech?

After the April 16 shootings at Virginia Tech, a memorial fund was created to help victims and the families of those killed. According to the Washington Post, it was created from an outpouring of 20,000 donations from across the country, ranging from $5 to as much as $1 million. All in all, $7.5 million was collected and is scheduled to be distributed within weeks.

In order to receive a portion of the fund, families or victims must have applied by September 15 and, according to the Post, all 78 of the eligible parties applied. Families of those killed will receive about $180,000 each and those injured will receive either $45,000 or $90,000 depending on how long they were in the hospital. They will also receive free tuition at Virginia Tech. Since the money is from private funders instead of the state, accepting money from the fund does not bar families from suing the university- an action many plan to take. A spokesman for many of the victim's families said "they feel that only through legal action will the truth unfold and accountability fall into place."

One controversy arising, however, is whether or not money from the fund will be taxable. In the Washington Post article, the fund administrator is quoted as saying: "Virginia Tech thinks the money is taxable. Other individual family members have consulted with their tax attorneys, and they say it isn't." I believe this comment reflects extremely negatively on Virginia Tech because it makes them seem as if they want the money to be taxed so they can at least get some of it from the state. Unfortunately, this article also reflects negatively on the families. Apparently the families were angry because originally the money was going to be used to fund scholarships for students, but they insisted they get it personally.

I just think it's sad that after such a terrible event, people are fighting over money. It surely won't reflect well on the university that so many families are suing, but it also makes you wonder what these families are really after. It will be interesting to see how the university handles any bad press.


-Lisa Rassenti

Anarchy in the CAR: Government Killing Civilians

The “State of Anarchy: Rebellion and Abuses Against Civilians” report was released yesterday by Human Rights Watch regarding the brutal killings of hundreds of civilians in a counterinsurgency campaign to in the northern part of Central African Republic (CAR) since 2005. One must wonder what it takes for the world to actually respond to modern day human atrocities nowadays. Need we wait for thousands or millions more civilians to be killed?

Since 2005. This sounds just about as bad as the human rights crimes that were occurring in Iraq. Oh, and what’s the difference? There’s no oil involved in the CAR.

Since 2005, the government forces of CAR, rebel groups and zaraguinas, gangs who kidnap children for ransom, have been responsible for these brutal attacks. The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has counted that as much as 102,000 civilians have escaped their homes. The horrifying fact is that the government forces have been the main culprit of this. And get this, not a single soldier or officer has been accused of the CAR massacres.

Once again, these massacres have occurred since 2005. Two years of killings.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) has communicated its concerns to the United Nations and the European Union. “The European Union is considering deploying a civilian protection force to CAR and Chad, to ensure that the force has the mandate and the capacity to provide effective protection to civilians in CAR”, according to HRW. It has also requested CAR’s former colonial power, France, to take action by providing military assistance to the CAR.

What is utterly deplorable is that it has taken this long, since 2005, for world action. The news has been widely disseminated throughout the world, and only recently has the news obtained occasional media attention worldwide. The fact is, human massacres are still occurring, as we speak. It’s about time that international forces step in and quell these atrocities. What kind of government goes about and kills its own people? It is completely ridiculous. Let’s see if and how soon the United Nations, the European Union or France steps up to integrity. Human lives are at stake. Common sense tells me that the CAR absolutely cannot spare another two years of waiting.

-Denise

Coming of Age in Fort Hunt – The “Elderly” Neighborhood

The Monday, September 17, 2007 edition of the Washington Post had an article about Fort Hunt, a neighborhood in Fairfax, VA. Apparently, more than 22 percent of Fort Hunt’s neighborhood is 62 or older, and the neighborhood accordingly reflects that.

Unlike small towns in many parts of American, a visit to Fort Hunt will give you a snapshot of what the future could hold for many of us. The seniors in Fort Hunt have built peer networks and solidified connections within their groups. The family-owned and operated gas station, owned by Ruth Ann-Harvey, 84 has been a landmark since 1960. Run by Harvey who, stays behind the register six days a week, their clientele is primarily the elderly who feel a sense of accomplishment in taking care of their vehicles.

The town also has the Hollin Hall Variety Store that probably has not changed its merchandise since the 1950s. They sell things like 50-cent cards to a community to whom letter writing never lost its appeal. They also have canning produce and tools for the elderly who amazingly do their own canning.

In a world of change and speed, its refreshing that the elderly can find a world to suit them. Many of the contents of the store would not resonate with youth of today but to the inhabitants of Fort Hunt, it speaks to a time when many of them were in their prime.

In a culture where old age sometime signifies the debility, it is refreshing to see a whole community determined to beat the odds. Campaigns to create “Mount Vernon at Home”, are underway. It is supposed to be a non profit organization, run by the elderly to suit their purposes. They want to solidify their own sense of worth and independence in their neighborhood.

Some of these elderly have lived exemplary lives that often belie their ages:

There are some like Myrtle “Mike” Niccolls, age 90 who keeps a daily schedule that many would find exhausting. A fundraiser for her Alma Mater Bryn Mawr College, her days are filled with teas with alumnae and recent graduates, her book club meetings and she even used to belong to a poker club.

Hanna Adams, age 103 lived there until 6 months ago, when she fell and had to move to an assisted living home.

With these lives, there is also a feeling of loss. A feeling felt almost everyday when they glance through the obituary pages. For “Mike”, aging has meant unrelenting loss. She glances through the paper and sees that her friend, 93 just passed. She feels an overpowering sense of loss over many things.

Unlike most parts of the world that have adopted the extended family concept, the American family concept is based on the nuclear family. Grandparents are a “separate” but beloved part of the family. What struck me with these stories about independence and loss and regret was there was no mention of their families. Although they were determined to live independent lives, there was also a great sense of loss with these individuals. Loss because they had lost many of their peers and friends, but what of their families?

In many parts of the world, it is almost unheard of for the grandparents to live apart from the family. The extended family is the norm, and thus it is interesting to discover the difference.

Jasmine -

HEALTH: Healthcare Costs and Inflation

In the past four days there has been a number of articles posted relating to the cost of healthcare. Most notably are the Washington Post article on the regionalism of healthcare spending and the New York Times article on the slowing inflation of healthcare costs. These articles seem to be foils of each other – one emphasizing the exorbitant costs and the other the pseudo-stability of prices.

In sum:

The Washington Post cited Tuesday’s issue of the journal, Health Affairs in saying that the health maintenance costs in the United States, particularly in the Northeast, is a costly business. They noted that annual healthcare spending per person in the Northeast totaled $6,151 per person - with the highest being the District of Columbia ($8,295) and Massachusetts ($6,683). This is compared to the national average of $5,283 per person and the lowest, Utah, which came in with healthcare spending totaling only $3,972.

On the other hand, while the Washington Post reported this seemingly atrocious state of affairs in the Northeast, the New York Times was reporting that there is hope.

Stephanie Saul wrote that, “As overall health care costs continue to rise sharply, prescription drugs have emerged as a surprising exception.” The inflation of drug costs is at the lowest rate it has been at in the past three decades.

Economists are pointing to the increase of valid generic versions on the market to explain the leveling of inflation. Others point to the so-called “Wal-Mart $4 effect” as more companies are turning towards programs that supply generic drugs for minimal costs.

This however, does not mean that the market is at all stable – there has still been an 8.3 percent increase in prices since 2006 according to IMS Health. Furthermore, this increase is unlikely to end soon due to the strain that the aging baby-boomer population presents on the market.

My opinion:

Despite the decrease in pharmaceutical inflation the healthcare industry remains stable. Stable meaning that it is highly profitable and unattainable for a vast majority of the population. Looking at the cost of healthcare and even generic prescription costs, the per capita spending is still much above the financial abilities of many Americans - a fact that both articles seemed to neglect.

To be honest, that people in the Northeast pay the most does not disturb me – perhaps I have simply gotten adjusted to paying for medical care in Washington, D.C. I just don’t think that it should be surprising that the Northeast, the area with the highest personal income, the highest concentration of physicians and the lowest rates of uninsured, should pay the most for their healthcare per year. What would have disturbed me is if the Southwest and Rocky Mountain regions had the highest prices – these areas being more rural and often with lower income brackets.

Even more disturbing, according to the 2006 United States Census, the bottom 20 percent of this country’s households makes less than $23,202 (remember this is per household not per person). Using the national average of healthcare spending ($5,283) and the 2006 Census average household size (2.57 people per household), households in this segment of society spend $13,577.31, or 58.5 percent of their income, on healthcare spending.

Furthermore, 12.7 percent of U.S. households fall below the federal poverty threshold. Even more concerning this that, according to the Economic Policy Institute, 21.9 percent of United State children fall under this poverty threshold – the highest child poverty rate in the developing world.

So who is it, again, that can’t afford healthcare?

-Erika Eckstrom, Issues of Health

FEMINISM: Are Our Teenagers for Sale?

Today, teens are facing a different and more powerful demand with regard to their appearance and popularity. Marketing campaigns have become more intense and messages involving image, health, and lifestyle, which are usually concerns of adults, are now fair-game for teens.

A book called Branded: The Buying and Selling of Teenagers by Alissa Quart dissects various marketing techniques of some of the biggest corporations and studies their impact on lifestyles of teenagers in recent American history. Quart believes "Marketers discovered, or invented, the American teen market during World War II and the early postwar era. They argued that teens would be spending their parent's money on movies, cosmetics, and records." She continues to discuss how marketing to children "kicked off" in the 1980's when movies geared towards children (such as Jaws and Star Wars) were released. Quart discusses how these films spurred a boom in memorabilia related products and how corporations jumped to sell items that were helped marketed by films. Perhaps the corporations felt they could transfer the special connection and feeling from the film to the product directly related to certain characters.

Something to ponder is the psychology and how corporations try to identify the ways in which people are predictable and harness it to sell a product. It's so fascinating to think about the process on how young teens are affected by these marketers. Quart states in her book "In 1945, Seventeen wrote memos to advertisers promising that teens were 'copy cats' who could be trusted to imitate one another by wearing the same clothes and eating the same food." What a powerful statement. Some might be offended by this. The magazine viewed women to be so gullible and lacking free will and originality. However, did they have a point?

Was the same notion was still present among similar publications? After some investigating, it was discovered that Teen published headlines such as “Learn how to get Popular” and a whole section dedicated to “New Body – New You” was seen on Teen Magazine's website (teenmag.com). It became clear that messages being sent to teen girls are not only about the exterior presentations, but also include suggestions on behavior and eating habits. This information is quite disturbing especially since the magazine markets to girls well before their teenage years. There are several 10-11 year old girls who might read Teen magazine and it seems like their parents would have little problem buying the it for them because they feel the “Teen” title will mean politically correct content. Do parents really know what their getting themselves into when they purchase a magazine for their 13 year old child? The material in these magazines is not something that 13 year old girls should be reading; the pressure put on these girls to worry about being popular or about weight at such a young age is not something they should be thinking about. What happened to running toward ice cream trucks and enjoying childhood for what it was; carefree.

Would you want your 13 year old girl to visit teenmag.com and see this in the “Why me?” section of the website where girls recant embarrassing situations?

"Me and my boyfriend have been going out for 7 months. I'm a cheerleader, and he's the head jock. So we are pretty popular. We were making-out behind the school, when all of a sudden I was getting really cold. It turns out that there was a loose nail, and it caught my shirt right around my chest. My boyfriend saw and never really paid attention, because it's not like he hasn't seen it before. We were making out. I have 3 older brothers (all popular) They videotaped it, and now to make sure they don't show my parents. Well, we were having sex. I have to do what ever they tell me to for the next 2 months. I was so embarrassed they showed the whole school for the talent show. I pretty much got suspended for a week. But hey my boyfriend enjoyed it!" (from teenmag.com August 3, 2007) Visit the Why Me Section: http://www.teenmag.com/seen-in-teen/why-me/

Any sociologist would have a field day with this girls need to mention popularity more than once. This is a pretty racy topic for a girl to be discussing so openly on a magazine that’s supposed to be dedicated to an age group between 13-18. Arguably, this website is a marketing tool. Teen magazine at the very least hopes that girls will visit the website and be more inclined to purchase the magazine. It is highly irresponsible for those who monitor the website’s content to allow such obscene material for young girls to see.

When thinking back to what Quart said about how marketers viewed teenagers in the 1940's, the same theory seems prevalent in today's society and marketers will take advantage if they can. But the real question is, can we blame them for merely doing their jobs? This gets into an ethical discussion, because we really should be asking what their limits are in how they affect the lives of young women in today's society. If they are just "doing their job", can they be blamed for influencing women's lifestyles? At the very least, it’s the parent’s responsibility to monitor what their children are consuming.

Today’s marketing campaigns, advertisements and their content, that are geared towards teens and seem to be forcing our children to grow up too quickly. If parents set good examples at home and begin to teach their children right from wrong at a young age, perhaps they can weaken the negative affects of these marketing campaigns and childhood can be carefree once again.

Cosima

INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS: Is The Chinese Government Staying True to Its Words?

There are only 11 more months until the Olympics begin. How well has the Chinese government followed through on its promises to guarantee freedom of the press in exchange for hosting the 2008 Olympic Games?

In 2001, the government assured the International Olympic Committee (IOC) that it would loosen its rein on media control in its bid for hosting the 2008 Olympic Games.

Even last year, the Chinese government stated that it would allow accredited foreign journalists to “freely conduct interviews with any consenting Chinese organization or citizen,” according to Human Rights Watch.

Are Chinese officials actually “walking the walk” or just simply “talking the talk?”

Something seems to have gone terribly wrong. There has been international backlash at how the Chinese government is expressing its promises of media freedom. Just last month, police prohibited foreign journalists from visiting Yuan Weijing, the wife of imprisoned human rights advocate Chen Guangcheng, in Beijing. In another occurrence last month, Jiangsu court officials barred The New York Times and the South China Morning Post from attending the trial of Wu Lihong, an environmental activist.

If China is trying to appear as a nice country worthy of holding the 2008 Olympic Games, what message is it communicating to the world instead?

Truth be told: actions do speak louder than words.

If the Chinese government wishes to communicate a message of peace and harmony to the world, it certainly is not succeeding. After all, wouldn’t a country that holds an international event—a significant convergence of all cultures—be at the very least friendly to foreign journalists? After these incidents, it would be smart for Chinese officials to reevaluate their message to the international public. The wise thing to do would be to prove to the world that it can stay true to its earlier promises of media freedom. After all, wouldn’t any logical nation want to present a venerable image and prove its right to host the Olympic Games?

-Denise Lew

GLBTQ: Workplace Discrimination

Imagine finding the job of your dreams. In fact, it’s not just a job to you – you’re doing something you love, and simply getting paid to do it. Now, imagine you are also one of the millions of hardworking and dedicated gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered or queer Americans. Depending on where you live in the United States, you could be fired at any moment if your employer discovers your sexual orientation.

This is a very real reality in America today. According to an article in today’s Washington Post 31 states allow employers to terminate an employee if s/he is gay or lesbian – no explanation required. The article also mentions the House of Representatives is about to consider the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) aimed at providing equality in most of America’s workplaces.

The ENDA would make it illegal for employers to make decisions about hiring, firing, promoting or paying an employee based on sexual orientation or gender identity (churches and the military exempt). Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., one of two openly gay members of Congress, expects it to pass the House, but few on the Hill are hopeful about the bill’s fate in the Senate.

The article goes on to say that GOP Senate members have already threatened a filibuster and it is unlikely the Democrats can round up enough Republican support to garnish the 60 votes needed to end the filibuster. Let's stop for a minute though. If you take a step back and look objectively at the situation, it so closely resembles the debate surrounding civil rights reform and former Senator Strom Thurmond's famed filibuster that it’s scary. "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere," Martin Luther King, Jr. once said.

Why would our country’s elected officials be opposed to preventing discrimination of any kind in the workplace? Adding women into the workplace didn’t turn out so badly. Neither did including African-Americans. So why more than 40 years later are we still discussing the legality of discrimination in the workplace? Regardless of one’s views on homosexuality or alternative lifestyles, I would think we could all agree that in the 21st century, the workplace is where all Americans can come together on equal footing in our own respective quests for the American dream. However, Republican senators and conservative lobbying groups beg to differ.

Hopefully, in the coming weeks, Republicans and conservatives will see this as a civil issue and not a social one. If you’d like to help extend equality into the workplace for GLBTQ Americans, contact your member of Congress and encourage him/her to support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. Your expression of support could be the tipping point.

IMMIGRATION: Herndon, Virginia and sentiments about Immigration

On Sunday September 16, 2007, the Washington Post contained an article which describes the opening of a new unofficial day laborer’s site following the closing of a controversial permanent hiring site. Herndon, Virginia and its citizens have been especially vocal about illegal immigration and the economy. Last year May, citizens voted to have three supporters of the official day laborer site removed and replaced them with people who supported changes and revisions for the center.

It appears that the authorities are monitoring this new site more closely and have had swifter penalties for people who are seen to associate with the workers. A woman who paused for about 30 seconds to speak to a laborer was ticketed, and a Salvadoran food truck was forced to close shop after being told that he lacked a special permit.

Most Americans have entrenched ideas on the issue of immigration and the day laborer issue. People who would not consider themselves as prejudiced would vote against the issue since the issue would be less about race and more about fairness. Paying for a day laborer site would mean that they are paying for a site to help illegal people earn money from people who have earned their money legally.

For the laborers, it is less about race and more about surviving circumstances that involve families back home. For them, the closing of the center, though a setback, will only spur them on to find other means of acquiring jobs.

This summer Herndon took part in a Federal Immigration Enforcement program. Within two months, they had arrested over 12 dozen suspected illegal aliens. The issue needs clear delineation on whether these illegal aliens are criminals or whether they are criminals because they are illegal aliens.

True, the issue of immigration needs scrutiny. There are two sides to every coin. True also, there must be rules to every legislative agreement. . The problem is defining what motivates the lawmakers? Can an objective platform be found?



Jasmine Addo – On immigration Issues

EDUCATION: Online Shame

As a graduate of the University of Maryland, I have been paying close attention to how the University is dealing with the recent discovery of a noose hanging from a tree on campus. Just a few days ago, the University held a rally to encourage students to “speak out…to express their feelings about the noose and to discuss possible solutions to the racism and cultural separatism that led to it” (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/13/AR2007091302262.html). What I find even more interesting, however, are the comments posted by students on the campus newspaper’s website, The Diamondback, in response to articles published.

On the morning that the first article ran, a student posted that “there better be a MASSIVE cry of outrage from ALL Maryland students.” And on the website, students have been crying out all week—but not necessarily in agreement. While some have written comments in defiance of hate crimes or to suggest peaceful demonstrations, others have posted their belief that people are overreacting or making claims that the noose was hung by black students to gain more funding for their groups on campus.

Regardless of the harsh words being exchanged, one thing to notice is that the students who write the most controversial comments refuse to give their full name. They go by “freedom” or “C Slacker” and write what they want because they can. So my question is: has the anonymity of the online world removed people’s sense of shame from the dialog they have with others? It’s interesting that even in an education environment where students are meant to learn from each other, there is a place where people can voice their most negative feelings without more than a “You’re stupid” reply as repercussion. This is not a trend limited to the education world- but is relevant for all online media. If people feel so strongly that an article is an overreaction, why can’t they give their full name? I believe that creating a pseudonym takes away from the author’s credibility, especially on heated topics. To see the comments posted by Maryland students, visit:
http://www.diamondbackonline.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticleComments&ustory_id=f630e76e-283f-4875-b516-143ab3c219a0#1f2bcbca-e21f-41cf-8f0d-445b346c7872

-Lisa Rassenti

HEALTH: Hispanic Eyes

With today being the start of Hispanic Heritage Month I thought I would present some arguments on health care issues that affect this particular group of people.

In today’s Miami Herald, Fred Tasker focused on eye disease and its effects on people of different ethnicities, especially those of Hispanic origin (“Ethnicity, eye disease linked”). He writes that “more than three-quarters of Hispanics and blacks do not know that their ethnicity is a major risk factor for glaucoma – with rates more than three times that of non-Hispanic whites,” citing the American Academy of Ophthalmology . Though this may be true, what impacts me is not the results of thus study, pointing towards genealogical ethnic difference. What strikes me is that “75 percent of Hispanics with glaucoma were undiagnosed.”

This is where the true issues in medical issues arise. Despite what doctors, scientists, and anyone else may say, health is a cultural reality. It is based in the beliefs and values of the individual and their community.

Lets say that the American Academy of Ophthalmology is right and Hispanics are more likely than white people to have glaucoma (to me the disease is irrelevant, but presents a good argument). Just because something is a scientific fact does not mean that it is a culturally pressing issue. Science cannot force someone to become aware of an issue. It can also not force people to go and get annual eye exams. It might be a motivating factor, but alone it is nothing without culturally grounded realities.

There are many aspects of cultural heritage that play out in political, sociological, and physical realms. For one, Hispanics are less likely to have health insurance – something that may be a result of American society and its own embedded culture. If someone is without insurance, would they pay attention to the science that tells them that they need to have annual check-ups and spend money on doctor fees? My answer is no.

A returned Peace Corps volunteer who served in Africa was speaking to me awhile back about her work with HIV/AIDS awareness in small villages. In her host family there were two teenage twin boys. She asked if they would go and get tested for HIV/AIDS. She said that their reaction was insightful: they would not get tested because what if they did have HIV/AIDS. They said that they would rather not know; rather avoid cultural stigmatization and future medical fees that they would not be able to afford. (See her blog for more details, as she mentions it there)

I think that Hispanics in the United States present a similar case. If they were diagnosed it would just cause more dilemmas in the long run. Yes, they would have an answer, but on the other hand they would always have that nagging feeling that they are trapped, unable to help themselves. Why put yourself in this situation?

So I’ll leave you with one last question – Should people care about issues that are, to them, hopeless?

- Erika, Issues of Health