Topic

health and safety

53 petitions

Started 2 weeks ago

Petition to Government of Ontario

End Daylight Savings Time !

Everyone enjoys that extra hour of sleep in the autumn when we "fall back" to Standard Time, but inevitable cost comes each spring when we "spring forward" and lose an hour. But the impacts go well beyond an hour of sleep. Messing with our natural circadian rhythm is neither healthy nor productive.  Employees are more prone to error because of sleep deprivation in the days immediately following the beginning of daylight saving time.  Workplace injuries see a dramatic spike, along with the severity of injuries over the days immediately following the time change. Ultimately, this costs employers money, and creates a drag on the economy. Students suffer too, with numerous studies finding lower test scores among secondary students in particular following the time change. It isn't good for our health either. Changing our exposure to sunlight inhibits the production of melatonin, a hormone that promotes sleep. Insomnia can result, possibly lasting longer than the first few days of adjustment to the time change. Researchers at the University of Alabama at Birmingham found that heart attacks increased by 10 percent in March in the days and weeks immediately following the time change in a 2012 study of the impacts. Other researchers looked at the data from patients in Michigan hospitals from 2010 to 2013. They found that on the Monday after daylight saving time went into effect, there were 25 percent more heart attacks than on a standard Monday.  Daylight Savings Time came about as an effort in WWII to save energy and fuel. But the war is long over, and in the modern era there is no evidence that logic holds true. In fact as a result of the time changes, people run their air conditioners longer in the summer (and their heat longer in the winter), and we no longer live in a 9-5 Monday-Friday economy, it's a 24/7 world today. It is time to leave this antiquated policy, with all of its negative impacts, behind. The planet's rotation and our biological clocks can't be social engineered. It is time to end daylight savings time. It is as simple as the Ontario Government passing legislation to do so. (Yep, silly as it sounds, "time" is a provincial jurisdiction, not a federal one) We the undersigned call up the Ontario Legislative Assembly and the Government of Ontario to immediately introduce legislation to end the practice of "Daylight Savings Time" in Ontario by the end of 2017.

Shawn Lewis
57 supporters
Update posted 3 weeks ago

Petition to American Psychological Association, Dr. Jodi Quas, Dr. Lauren Fasig Caldwell

New APA Position Statement: Some children are manipulated into rejecting a parent.

The American Psychological Association (APA) is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States, with more than 122,500 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students as its members. This prominent group of leading professionals currently has no official position on whether children can be manipulated by one parent to reject the other parent who does not deserve to be rejected. This has provided too many people with the ammunition they need to cast doubt on innocent victims and to deny the existence of such a situation. The demands outlined below, if they are publically acknowledged, will end the debates and the controversies. A position statement by the APA will lift the long-standing stigma surrounding our situation that has driven away the vast majority of psychologists and other professionals. It will start to protect our families from therapists who do not have the expertise required to fully diagnose and treat our situation. It will start to protect our children from the abusive influence that has overtaken them. It will open the doors for adult children to find the true help and understanding they need so they can reunite with those they were pulled away from. A position statement will be the first step toward ending this nightmare. Our situation is not a child custody issue, it is a child protection issue. If you sign, and if you are comfortable with it, please consider sharing a summary of your story. Our stories are the force that will drive the changes we want to see. Thank you. As parents who have lost children to this epidemic, as well as those who support us: We demand that the APA formally acknowledge and bring to the attention of the general public that children can be manipulated by one parent to reject the other parent who does not deserve to be rejected.At the June 2010 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) Annual Conference in Denver, audience members at the Opening Plenary Session were asked to complete a one page survey. About 300 of the estimated 1,000 audience members completed the survey. Nearly all of the respondents to the survey (98%) endorsed the question, “Do you think that some children are manipulated by one parent to irrationally and unjustifiably reject the other parent?”AFCC eNewsletter, Vol. 6 No. 5, May 2011 (Page 5)The APA already recognizes that "refusal to visit a parent" and "parental undermining of the child’s relationships with the other parent" are "complex post-separation situations":Guidelines for the Practice of Parenting Coordination, APA, Jan. 2012 (Guideline 2a)The DSM-5 already recognizes "excessive parental pressure" and "unwarranted feelings of estrangement" as "Problems Related to Family Upbringing" under "V61.20 Parent-Child Relational Problem":American Psychiatric Association, (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5. Washington, D.C: American Psychiatric PublishingThe American Psychiatric Association already recognizes the existence of pathogenic parenting practices found within "the marriage and family lives of patients with BPD" (Borderline Personality Disorder):– "parentify their own children" (role-reversal relationship)– "excessively bind their children to themselves" (cross-generational coalition)– "exert extreme possessiveness of their children" (suppression of child's attachment motivations toward the other parent)– "demand absolute, unlimited control [over their children] while threatening rejection" (child becomes a regulatory object)– "projection of disavowed elements of the self onto the spouse" (projection)– "revive the feeling of attachment to early traumatic and disappointing objects" (trauma reenactment)The American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Personality Disorders, (2005) (Page 364) We demand that the APA formally acknowledge and bring to the attention of the general public that manipulating a child in the manner outlined above is a form of psychological and emotional abuse which makes it a systemic, social problem that impacts society and causes devastation in families.Manipulation is a form of "coercive control" which the APA considers psychological abuse:Childhood Psychological Abuse as Harmful as Sexual or Physical Abuse, APA Press Release, Oct. 8, 2014Forcing isolation from family is considered a form of psychological abuse by the US Department of Justice:Domestic Violence, US Department of Justice, Oct. 6, 2015The APA considers childhood psychological abuse to be as harmful as sexual or physical abuse:Childhood Psychological Abuse as Harmful as Sexual or Physical Abuse, APA Press Release, Oct. 8, 2014“The U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect has declared the problem of child maltreatment to have reached the level of a national emergency.”“[Child abuse (including physical abuse, sexual abuse, and emotional abuse) and neglect] often impedes the development of children and fosters psychological harm.”“Abused and neglected children often are not provided with treatment that may alleviate such harm and that may prevent further ill effects.”Psychological Issues Related to Child Abuse and Neglect, APA“Of greatest concern is the pattern of violence characterized by coercion and control, psychological abuse, intimidation and threats of harm, economic control, and often severe physical and sexual violence. Victims of such violence are at very high risk following separation and in contested custody cases and may be best served before and after divorce by court intervention.”Guidelines for the Practice of Parenting Coordination, APA, Jan. 2012 (Guideline 4)We expect that all mental health professionals would agree that teaching, conditioning, and/or empowering a child to be psychologically and emotionally abusive toward another person is itself a form of child psychological abuse.We expect that all mental health professionals would agree that this form of abuse becomes especially horrific if the child had previously formed a deep attachment to the person that they are now being manipulated into abusing. We demand that the APA formally recognize our families as a special population who require specialized professional knowledge, training, and expertise to appropriately and competently diagnose and treat.“Family law cases involve complex and emotionally charged disputes over highly personal matters, and the parties are often deeply invested in a specific outcome. The volatility of this situation is often exacerbated by a growing realization that there may be no resolution that will completely satisfy every person involved.”Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings, APA, Dec. 2010 (Guideline 5)“The complex conflicts of interests and values present in many child maltreatment cases create needs for special training of psychologists and other professionals involved in such cases.”Psychological Issues Related to Child Abuse and Neglect, APA“Particular competencies and knowledge are necessary to perform psychological evaluations in child protection matters so that adequate and appropriate psychological services can be provided to the court, state agencies, or other parties.”“Professional competence in performing psychological assessments of children, adults, and families is necessary but often insufficient to address, competently and ethically, many referral questions in child protection matters. For example, because child protection proceedings specifically focus upon allegations or findings of abuse and/or neglect of a child, psychologists conducting assessment in these matters seek to develop sufficient expertise in assessment of child maltreatment that is often beyond the scope of general clinical psychology practice.”Guidelines for Psychological Evaluations in Child Protection Matters, APA, Jan. 2013 (Introduction & Guideline 5)“The practice of parenting coordination requires the acquisition and application of specialized psychological knowledge relevant to effective implementation of the PC (Parenting Coordinator) role.”“Review of these topics may not reflect a sufficient and exhaustive understanding of the content relevant to all parenting coordination cases. The PC may need to gain additional specialized knowledge or training.”“Given the unique and complex role of the PC, competencies for standard psychological practice are generally insufficient for competent functioning as a PC.”Guidelines for the Practice of Parenting Coordination, APA, Jan. 2012 (Guidelines 2a & 3)We expect a therapist who diagnoses and treats our families to be required to have much greater specialized knowledge, training, and expertise than a Psychological Evaluator or a Parenting Coordinator. We say "much greater" because, when acting within these roles, Parenting Coordinators are not allowed to diagnose nor treat, and Psychological Evaluators are not allowed to treat. We demand that the APA formally acknowledge and bring to the attention of the general public that attempting to clinically treat a child who is being psychologically abused in the manner outlined above, without a period of separation of the child from the abusive parent, can present a serious risk of harm to the psychological well-being of that child.“[Parenting Coordinators] understand that when intimate partner violence and/or child maltreatment is present or alleged in a custody case or ongoing litigation, parent–child contact may create opportunities for renewed intimidation, violence, or trauma and pose risks of abuse and exposure to the children.”Guidelines for the Practice of Parenting Coordination, APA, Jan. 2012 (Guideline 4) We do not bring you these demands because we think they are "a nice idea". We bring them to you because our children have been kidnapped from us, they are being psychologically abused, and we expect the proper authorities to protect them and to restore our families. We have found ourselves powerless to protect them ourselves. Only the mental health and legal systems have that power, but they have failed our families in every way. So now we are beginning to band together in order to demand that the mental health system listen to us and help us. There are an estimated 22 million families in the United States alone who are affected by this epidemic, and we intend to recruit every one of them to continuously contact the APA and make demands until action is taken to protect our children and to restore our families. What is happening to us is not some "new" phenomenon that just surfaced 30 years ago. What is happening to us is a timeless issue that has been happening since families ever existed. There is no need for the APA to conduct extensive research into our situation before they can help our families. The APA has already done such an incredible job of defining pathologies and psychological constructs that there is already a way to diagnose and treat our problem. Our situation is not some form of "new" disorder, our children are not suffering from some form of mental illness, "new" or otherwise. There is no need to define our situation as a "new" syndrome or a "new" pathology. Defining our situation as some sort of "new" pathology would be like trying to say that a person with athlete's foot and a cold has some sort of "new" disease, when in fact they just happen to have athlete's foot and a cold at the same time. Imagine the confusion if people kept insisting that when you have athlete's foot and a cold at the same time, you actually have some "new" disease that nobody knows how to treat yet. Imagine if doctor's couldn't get past the idea that if you have athlete's foot and a cold, then there was nothing they could do for you because nobody has done any research on this "new disease", so nobody knows how to diagnose it or treat it. So now hundreds of patients suffer with athlete's foot and a cold, without treatment, until years and years of research are completed, only to discover that, all they ever really had was athlete's foot and a cold. This is exactly the situation that our families are in. Everything that is happening to our families can already be diagnosed and treated using existing and well-established psychological principles and constructs. For all of us, we have found our situations to be composed of the following components: Cross-generational coalition Narcissistic/borderline personality pathology The pathology of splitting The pathology of projection The psychological decompensation of narcissistic/borderline personalities into delusional beliefs under stress Role-reversal relationships The attachment system Internal working models of attachment (schemas) Attachment trauma (disorganized attachment) The association of childhood attachment trauma to the formation of narcissistic and borderline personality traits The reenactment of attachment trauma patterns The misattribution of anxiety The misunderstanding of a grief response Any therapist whose domain of professional competence includes "Attachment Theory", "Narcissistic and Borderline Personality Disorders", and "Family Systems Theory", should be able to accurately diagnose and treat our families. They should already have everything they need to help us. When you mix a cross-generational coalition with the pathology of "splitting", you end up in the situation that our families are in. In order to survive emotionally, our children have had to become allied and enmeshed with a highly manipulative parent. The "allied" parent, through the enmeshment of our children, has created a trauma reenactment narrative where our children are induced into the role of the allied parent as a "victimized child". This trauma reenactment narrative is a false drama created from the decompensating delusional pathology of the allied parent. Our children have been assigned the allied parent's internal working model of the "victimized child" role. By way of our children's rejection, we have been assigned the allied parent's internal working model of the "abusive parent" role. This has allowed the allied parent to self-adopt and conspicously display their internal working model of the all-wonderful, ideally nurturing and "protective parent" role. The "bystander" therapists, attorneys, social workers, teachers, and judges will then become witnesses to and validate the authenticity of the false narrative being created by the pathology of the allied parent. In all of our situations we have found that the allied parent has: censured our children for expressing love toward us; coerced our children into adopting the allied parent's negative beliefs about and attitudes toward us; deceived our children into believing that we are bad and/or abusive parents, despite evidence to the contrary. The above actions of the allied parent have, over time, caused our children to: entirely reject us; treat us as dangerous, and/or treat us as inferior and punish us without mercy; hold grudges against us with no avenue of recompense and/or falsely accuse us of abuse. Psychologically speaking, the clinical symptoms that our children display in relation to the above are: a complete suppression of their attachment bonding motivations toward us; narcissistic/borderline personality disorder traits (but only in regard to us) which include:– grandiosity;– absence of empathy;– entitlement;– haughty and arrogant attitude;– splitting;and in some cases our children display the following phobia characteristics:– persistent unwarranted fear (DSM-5 Phobia criterion A);– severe anxiety response (DSM-5 Phobia criterion B);– avoidance of us (DSM-5 Phobia criterion C). intransigently held, fixed-and-false beliefs (delusions) regarding our supposedly "abusive" parental inadequacy. A therapist with the proper expertise, when they see all three of these clinical symptoms in our children, will be able to come to the conclusion that the symptoms could not possibly have spontaneously developed in our children. They had to have been induced by someone close to them. It will become evident to the therapist that the allied parent is inducing these symptoms in our children. The therapist, seeing that the allied parent is inducing 1) Developmental Pathology, 2) Personality Disorder Pathology, and 3) Psychiatric Pathology, will conclude that this is psychologically abusive, make an official diagnosis of V995.51 "Child Psychological Abuse, Confirmed", and take the appropriate measures to protect our children. The appropriate DSM-5 diagnosis for each of our situations is: 309.4 – Adjustment Disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct V61.20 – Parent-Child Relational Problem V61.29 – Child Affected by Parental Relationship Distress V995.51 – Child Psychological Abuse, Confirmed An accurate assessment of us and our parenting will find that: we love our children dearly, and they openly and freely loved us prior to succumbing to the influence of the allied parent; we are not dangerous and have done nothing to deserve being treated or punished by our children in such a harsh manner; we have not been "bad" nor "abusive" parents; our parenting will be found to have been entirely normal-range. You will find that all of us, as so-called "targeted" parents, act consistently with the findings of Dr. Jennifer J. Harman PhD and Dr. Zeynep Biringen PhD, who conducted research on a large group of targeted parents and found that: we are well versed in all the research findings; we are active in mental health and/or legal reform movements; regardless of the fact that we exhibit signs of severe trauma as a result of ongoing intimate partner abuse, complex grief from the unresolved loss of our children and being continually re-victimized by family court, we remain steadfast and persistent in trying to protect the health and well-being of our children; in the face of torturous adversity:– we stay true to our family values;– we do not engage in retaliation;– we do not discourage our children from having a relationship with the other parent, as long as it is safe. We, the "targeted" parents, and all of our families are all the empirical evidence that the APA needs to move forward toward a solution. A solution that does not involve years and years of court battles costing hundreds of thousands of dollars. A solution that mirrors what any abusive situation warrants: protection of the victim from the source of the abuse. We demand that the APA publish a position statement that acknowledges our four demands outlined above. Before any professionals can seriously help us, or even decide to look into helping us, it needs to be universally understood that this situation is real, it is abusive, it requires specialized expertise to diagnose and treat, and it is severe enough to warrant protection. A position statement with those four items will act as a springboard for mental health professionals to start digging into what is going on, without fear of being marginalized or ostracized. For more information on The American Psychological Association visit the APA website.  

Parental Restoration
7,266 supporters
Update posted 3 weeks ago

Petition to MINISTERS OF HEALTH, UN WOMEN & WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION - PATIENT SAFETY

Breast Implants and Women's Health: A Silenced Epidemic

In the 1990s, studies uncovered a link between silicone breast implants and systemic illness. A connection was made linking human leukocyte antigen, the genetic component to our individual immune systems, to an increased risk of reaction. Dangerously high levels of platinum circulated in these women with a clear entry point – the silicone shell. The removal of the device and the scar capsules surrounding them alone lead to improvement and recovery. The medical community and government health authorities discounted this scientific evidence presented before them; which could have prevented a public health tragedy from continuing as further generations of women became ill. Even after these studies were published, women continued to suffer from neurological damage, autoimmune diseases, hair loss, chronic fatigue, infertility, as well as heart and lung conditions as a result of silicone based medical devices. They were misdiagnosed, disbelieved, and not given the medical intervention desperately needed to improve their health. In the 1920s, cigarette ads were commonly seen endorsed by doctors; today tobacco smoke is proven to cause lung cancer. In the same manner, the implant industry is equally flawed in reporting adverse effects. The sad part; implementing sensitivity testing against native device material, identifying if a woman carries a genetic predisposition to silicone intolerance and ensuring higher quality standards could eliminate the majority of these cases. There are many reasons why women opt for breast implants and for most; other options are not available. Breast cancer, breast development dissatisfaction, drastic anatomical changes, and genetic abnormalities are just a few of the many reasons why women are faced with making the decision to have breast surgery. Reasons that do not discriminate and can happen to any woman in her lifetime. The right to life, the right to transparent informed consent, and the right to justice have been denied in regards to breast implants and women's health. With advancements in breast reconstruction and enhancement using a woman's own fat and stem cells, options do exist for women who are at risk. There are methods to help reverse the associated illnesses and complications for women who have developed symptoms before their health declines to the point of permanent disability, organ damage, and in some cases – death.  Please help support transparency and ask health departments and international organizations to oversee this health travesty before more lives are taken. Your support is greatly appreciated, Members of IAC

The Implant Awareness Campaign
2,440 supporters
Update posted 1 month ago

Petition to justin.trudeau@parl.gc.ca; Hon.Jane.Philpott@Canada.ca;kirsty.duncan@parl.gc.ca;

Stop the Pain! Stop Vivisection Canada!

This petition seeks to first stop some of the most painful experiments on animals while implementing a phase out of all similar animal experiments. In Canada there is no specific legislation to protect animals in research laboratories. The Canadian Council on  Animal Care (CCAC)  is a national organization responsible for setting and maintaining standards. It is a peer review and inspections are confidential. The Three Rs, started by W.M.S. Russell and R.L. Burch, was supposed to have reduced the numbers of animals used but it has failed. There has been a steady increase. This is due in part to a lucrative vivisection industry that includes increasing biotech private companies. In 1959, Russell and Burch proposed the concept of the Three Rs that stand for Replacement, Reduction and Refinement. (CCAC)  We urge you to support a phase out of all experiments using scientifically fallacious “animal models” over the next 10 years or sooner. This would stop the waste of scarce health care funds to provide better health care research for human maladies, and stop abuses to nonhuman animals. Detailed reasons for this major improvement in our health care and research system is provided in Stop Vivisection Canada!  https://www.facebook.com/StopVivisectionCanada/?ref=ts We hope you will look at Vivisection 101 to learn how the research system works. Contrary to common public perception the “animal model” part is not only done before human clinical/epidemiological studies but can be done during and/or afterwards. It can be phase out without any adverse impact on human health. The phase out would also allow the lucrative vivisection industry to adapt to the needed changes. A comparison is similar to fuel industries evolving to green energy to stop Global Warming. Why Don’t Animal Models Help Our Health? Numerous doctors agree that vivisection retards scientific progress because these animal models are unlike naturally occurring human diseases or injuries. The researcher is not looking at the actual human malady. Furthermore, methods tested, such as drug therapies, react differently on various species of animals because there are major biological and anatomical differences between and within species in addition to sex and age differences. Data obtained from animal models cannot be reliably extrapolated to solve complex human problems. Documented reviews of medical history in such fields as spinal cord research, heart disease, diabetes and AIDS research substantiate the position that major medical advances are a result of studies that include in-vitro (non-animal) tests and human clinical and epidemiological studies (the study of naturally occurring diseases or injury). The inhumane, scientifically fallacious vivisection can be phase out over the next ten years. There have been billions of animals killed over the 150 years of vivisection atrocities yet there has been no added protection to people when drugs or medical procedures were tested in human clinical tests and epidemiological studies.  Phasing Out Vivisection First steps would include 1) stopping the chronic restraint of animals such as nonhuman primates and 2) ending the presently permitted Pain Categories #4 and #5 (experiments causing extreme pain). 1) In regards to chronic restraint, nonhuman primates can be kept in restraint devices for days, weeks, and months. Sometimes because of the nature of the experiments and also convenience of not moving the subjects repeatedly from cages tor restraint.  It has been 36 years since the Lifeforce Foundation laid the first and only Canadian Cruelty to Animal Charges against researchers. Wild caught baboons were imprisoned in restraint devices for 4 months. Lifeforce dropped the charges because the University of Western Ontario agreed to stop these experiments funded by the Ontario Heart and Stroke Foundation. Although CCAC meetings were held to discuss to stopping such restraint  - it wasn’t and the restraint of primates and others continue today.  2) CCAC  has defined 5 types of experimental procedures called “categories of invasiveness”. Each category outlines the various pain and discomfort on a scale of 1 to 5. The most inhumane procedures are Level 4 and Level 5. Level 4 permits “moderate to severe distress or discomfort” (CCAC >  moderate to severe distress or discomfort). Level 5 permits “severe pain near, at, or above the pain tolerance threshold of unanesthetized  consciuous animals” (CCAC >  severe pain near, at, or above the pain tolerance threshold of unanesthetized conscious animals ). The other levels 1, 2, and 3 are 1.most invertebrates or live isolates, 2. little or no discomfort or stress, and 3. minor stress or pain of short duration (CCAC)  In 2013 (the last available numbers) there were 3,023,184 animals used in research, teaching and testing reported to the CCAC . Not all research labs report. The majority of animals (61.6%) were used in studies of a fundamental nature/basic research or Purpose of Animal Use (PAU) 1, representing 1,897,813 animals (Table 2). In the highest Category of Invasiveness E ,78,294  animals were counted (93,242  counted in 2012). (CCAC information) Government tax money, pharmaceutical/cosmetic/ pesticide etc. businesses, military, and often unknowing public donations to health organizations also fund the lucrative vivisection industry. We must keep in mind that whatever research spokespeople may claim there are no bans on species used and experimental methods. Anything is permitted under the name of scientific freedom.  Please help stop vivisection and develop a safe, humane research system for freedom for all life.

Lifeforce Foundation
2,350 supporters