A.P Writ 150 Blog

The Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act that was implemented during the Obama Administration caused conflict between parents, the public school system, and the government. Where parents opposed the dictation of health and nutrition to their children and public school systems opposed the costly structural changes to school lunch. Governmental stance to this opposition placed children's health over feelings of autonomy and the expenses associated with large structural change.  Despite the select feelings of discontent, Government intervention in Public Health is necessary to contribute to the health of children. Backed by medical professionals, the Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act advocated to fight childhood obesity. This act ensured that public schools were following healthy nutritional standards for children. With childhood obesity rates skyrocketing, the government stepping in to contribute to the overall health of the youth was justified. Changing public school system meals was within the ...

Paternalism in public health is historically a controversial topic. From the public feelings of distrust towards the government and questions about the government's involvement in everyday life, society has commonly pit governmental power against personal freedom. The Healthy - Hunger Free Kids Act is another example of government intervention in the daily lives of citizens' along with the controversy surrounding it. Supporters of this act claim that childhood obesity rates are skyrocketing due to public school lunch menus. Claiming that because lunch menus that are funded by the government, it is the government's responsibility to protect and encourage healthy eating habits. Supported by public health officials and the general public, most argue that this act is for the improvement of the overall health of children. This act introduces the necessary food groups and nutrition into children's lunches promoting long term healthy eating habits. Dissenters of this act argue...

  Where each character in Scrubs shows a more complex emotional side of medical professionals, the different characters and the professional phases they represent point to an overarching theme of corruption within the medical industry.  This progression of the average person becoming a corrupted medical professional can be seen through the different characters with varying experiences. Focusing on J.D (26), Dr. Cox (42), and Dr. Kelso (59) we can see the progression of the corruption of professionals with good intent change to professionals focused on monetary and financial gain over ethical or moral.                  J.D (Age:26) : J.D, as previously discussed in Blog Post #1, is a representation of the initial medical professional with low levels of experience, naivety, and good intentions. He plans on contributing to the medical field and making a difference by helping others but he is unrealistic in pursuing these...

            This week I watched a couple episodes of Scrubs and looked into the varying characters and how each character represents societal norms within and outside of the medical field. With traditional perspectives portraying medical professionals as heroic, knowledgeable, and stoic, Scrubs brings another, more complex perspective to the values held within the medical industry.            Background : Scrubs is a medical sitcom with the main characters: J.D, Elliot, Christopher, Carla, Perry, and Bob. Each character has a different persona and the characters range in ages, medical specialties, and perspectives on the medical field. These characters and their diverse perspectives on their professions reveal the complexity that medical professionals deal with logistically and emotionally.          J.D (Age:26) : J.D is the lead character of the show. In season 1, he represents the nati...