With the growing advancement of technology, we are able to solve many problems we originally couldn’t. I’m not talking about things like faster communication or instant food delivery, but something on a more…serious level. Gene editing, in vitro fertilization, infertilization, etc. 

And often when we have these new technological benefits and accomplishments we look at the positive aspects, since they were designed to help solve a problem for people. But after creating these things, we don’t look at the other aspects. The ones that could  be potential difficulties in the future.

For example, who gets a claim on the three-person child? What happens if the parents get a divorce? Could the third parent come in between them and suddenly claim on the child? Could the third parents be considered a legal guardian or a family member? What would happen if a medical condition of the donor suddenly becomes part of the child’s life now? What if the child develops mental conditions due to the donor’s conditions? 

A lot of these factors come into major play over the course of time, making three-parent children a risky business. 

Let me first explain what IVF (or three-parent child) is. So a three-parent baby is pretty much an offspring from the genetic material of  three parents; one male and two females. There is mitochondrial replacement therapy (MRT) and three-parent, in vitro fertilization (IVF).  This is usually done so to prevent  the inheritance of mitochondrial disease; a 1 in 400 maternally-inherited mutation that can cause a range of illnesses. There are no cures for this, hence the use of MRT.9

One way to do so is by injecting a small amount of cytoplasm from an egg cell (ovum) of a healthy donor into the mother’s egg, which is then fertilized by the father’s sperm and implanted in the mother’s uterus using IVF. Another way is to remove the nucleus from a donor egg and replace it with the nucleus from the mother’s egg cell. The egg is fertilized with the father’s sperm and then transferred to the mother’s uterus for normal gestation. And there are many other ways this could be performed. But they all generally require one thing, an egg from a healthy donor.10

Given that, would the donor be a biological parent to the child? Not really. The donor is never the legal parent, meaning they are not responsible for the child and have no parental rights to the child. They waive all rights to any children born due to the egg donation under the terms of an egg donation contract.5 This includes the right to initiate contact with the child in the future. In assisted reproduction (IVF, egg donation, etc.) the woman who gives birth to the child is always the mother, even if the eggs were donated by another woman. Besides having no right to the child, there are other requirements as to who is allowed to donate eggs.4 Candidates can be disqualified for lifestyle habits (such as smoking or a history of drug use), health concerns (genetic disorders, obesity, etc.), usage of certain types of contraception, and basic commitment to scheduling appointments. Egg donors should also be no older than 29, as egg quality and quantity diminishes as women reach their mid to late 30s

But if it was in the case of surrogacy, things would be different.

In surrogacy, another woman is asked to have a baby for them. She is called- in Texas- as the gestational mother. In this, the couple must be married and have to make a written agreement with the woman called a gestational agreement. In this agreement, it explains the legal relationship that each person has with the child. It talks about who will provide healthcare for the mother and baby during the pregnancy, the gestational mother giving up all parental rights to the child, other donors - if involved- also needing to give up all parental agreement, the gestational mother having the right to make all healthcare decisions for herself and the embryo, and the intended parents become the child’s legal parents after being born. 

Of course, in this the court is also a part of the agreement. You must ask the Court to approve the agreement before the gestational mother gets pregnant, file a Petition at Court, and have the intended file a birth notice after birth. If the court does not approve of the gestational agreement then the gestational mother is the legal mother. If the gestational mother decides to keep the child, the intended parents have no legal rights to the child, and if they want to become the legal parents they would have to adopt the child.11

Besides having no right to the child, there are other requirements as to who is allowed to donate eggs. Candidates can be disqualified for lifestyle habits (such as smoking or a history of drug use), health concerns (genetic disorders, obesity, etc.), usage of certain types of contraception, and basic commitment to scheduling appointments. Egg donors should also be no older than 29, as egg quality and quantity diminishes as women reach their mid to late 30s. Not only that, they are screened and checked for genetic diseases.

Donors can be carriers, meaning they have the recessive allele for the mutation and do not develop or have symptoms of the disease despite testing positive. That doesn’t necessarily mean they are unhealthy, but rather they carry the mutation. It would only affect the child if the father is a carrier of the same disease. Despite this, these donors would be disqualified. 

There are many risks, however, with donating eggs. For example, long-term effects include aggressive breast cancer, loss of fertility, and fatal colon cancer. Even without any family history of these illnesses, it is suspected the egg donation is the cause. Infertility rates continue to increase and the desperation for fertility services follows. Young women are lured into donating, often unaware of the health risks when they apply as they are offered monetary compensation during a financially vulnerable moment in their lives. When it is said there is “no known risk” it simply means that there is a complete lack of data than an absence of risk, making it misleading.7 This now leads to another question; is it right for these donations to continue when it can be harmful to the donor? Should we risk providing for someone else’s life when we risk our own? These women have their own futures ahead of them so is it right that they have to suffer when they do something to help others?

The answer is complicated. There’s a 0.000004% risk of dying, 0.1% risk of internal bleeding, 0.5% risk of infection, and a 2-6% chance of developing pain and swelling in the ovaries as a result of the self-injected hormone treatments.3 With this. We still need to research more about whether egg donation is safe for donors long-term. Despite the probability these effects come from egg-donation, there could be a way to prevent them with further research. That could potentially make egg-donation safer and help with the growing infertility rates. But for now, there is- as far as I have read- not many laws or regulations protecting women from things like these. 

Why not just use adoption instead? Adoption is the other and safer option-in this case- for those with infertility. However, adoption doesn’t give all the benefits donors do. 2

Mainly, the pregnancy experience. Having a donor allows parents to carry and deliver their adopted child themselves as they live through the pregnancy experience. Parents also have legal rights and responsibility for the embryos prior to attempting a pregnancy. Donations also cost less than adoption, and have a short wait to them. However, it is noted that donations will not always result in live birth, while adoption with a reputable agency will bring a baby into the home. 

Now in case of a divorce, what happens then? Could the father make a claim that the mother shouldn’t get the baby as she is infertile? Would he use that against her? There should be some law or requirement that prevents either parent from being held unfairly simply for this reason. Something like this shouldn’t be held against you in any way at all.

With the rapidly increasing rate of infertility in today’s world we’re taking advantage of new technology to solve this problem. Using egg donors, IVF, and MRT we have come up with a number of ways to produce a child to infertile couples. But, with the ability to do so, there are going to be legal issues involved. Among this we have parental rights on the child, protection and health risks of donors, surrogacy rights, and more. There are also many restrictions regarding who is a donor or surrogate in order to make sure there is a healthy child produced. Despite the few successful attempts to use three-parent child methods to produce an offspring, the ethical and legal complications for this arise, making us question whether this is appropriate or not. For example, ‘should we be risking the life of a donor simply for the want for a child’, or, ‘is it right for a surrogate to give up a child they raised and worked hard to take care of for 9 months to someone else’. These questions remain in doubt, with very frail answers to them. Only with more research can we actually make a proper law to protect those who need it for becoming a donor or being a part of three-parent children. 

Works Cited

1 "1 in 6 People Globally Affected by Infertility: WHO." World Health Organization (WHO), 4 Apr. 2023, www.who.int/news/item/04-04-2023-1-in-6-people-globally-affected-by-infertility#:~:text=Around%2017.5%25%20of%20the%20adult,prevalence%20of%20infertility%20between%20regions 

2 "Donor Embryo Cost Breakdown: Donation Vs. Adoption." Donor Nexus: Leading Egg Donation Agency in California, donornexus.com/blog/donor-embryo-cost. 

3"Egg Donation Risk and Reward." Public Health Post, 12 Oct. 2020, www.publichealthpost.org/viewpoints/egg-donation-risk-and-reward/ 

4 "Egg Donor Requirements | What Are the Qualifications to Donate Eggs?" West Coast Egg Donation, www.westcoasteggdonation.com/become-egg-donor/requirements#:~:text=Potential%20candidates%20can%20be%20disqualified,the%20inability%20to%20commit%20to 

5 Fertility, Santa M. "Do Egg Donors Have Parental Rights? - Legal Considerations of Egg Donation (2022)." Santa Monica Fertility, 16 May 2022, www.santamonicafertility.com/blog/do-egg-donors-have-parental-rights-legal-considerations-of-egg-donation/ 

6 "Infertility Patients Fear Abortion Bans Could Affect Access to IVF Treatment." NPR.org, 21 July 2022, www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/07/21/1112127457/infertility-patients-fear-abortion-bans-could-affect-access-to-ivf-treatment 

7 "Know Your Rights: Egg (Ovum) Donation." Legal Voice, 9 Dec. 2022, legalvoice.org/know-your-rights-egg-donation/. 

8 "Paths to Parenthood: Receiving an Embryo Donation." Harvard Health, 3 Feb. 2022, www.health.harvard.edu/blog/paths-to-parenthood-receiving-an-embryo-donation-202202032682#:~:text=If%20you%20are%20seeking%20to,is%20considerably%20less%20than%20adoption 

9 "Three-parent Baby Raises Issues of Long-term Health Risks." University of Oxford, www.ox.ac.uk/research/three-parent-baby-raises-issues-long-term-health-risks#:~:text=This%20means%20the%20baby%20has,by%20far%20the%20smallest%20contribution 

10 "Three-parent Baby." Encyclopedia Britannica, www.britannica.com/science/three-parent-baby 

11www.3sisterssurrogacy.com/forms/351741Assisted_Reproduction_and_Gestational_%20Agreements.pdf 

Let’s get one thing straight, the British Monarchy should be stripped of their title. They’re a family of racist, lying, thieving colonizers who should give up their title. Bash on me all you want for this post, but I’m gonna be real honest here. As the posterity of my ancestors who faced brutality, torture, starvation, and a miserable life because of the British empire, I have reason to think this way.

If you haven’t read my post on the Queen’s passing, then here is the link for that: Queen Elizabeth II’s Death
In that I cover more in depth stories and events as well as reactions to the Queen’s death which will further justify my clams listed below. 

This post was originally going to be titled, ‘Why the British Monarchy can go suck it’, but given that it’s a little too bit of a vulgar term, I’ve revised it to something more suitable. 

I live in a country that sometimes glorifies the British. The British are our allies, which is stupid since our original founding fathers moved to America to get away from England. I can’t agree with these views since, well, they aren’t great. Let me comprise a list of reasons why the monarchy can go suck it be abolished:

• They are so frickin useless like goddamn what do they even do
• Lying, cheating, stealing, dirty colonizers who ruined my people + so many others
• Haven’t apologized (nor would I accept their apology but whatever) 
• The monarchy is stupid
• What a bunch of hypocrites calling themselves a democracy but have such a screwed up political system + monarchy that does nothing
• Oh yeah so just because you have some special title makes you better than us yeah right
• They love attention
• Them stupid Brit’s and people are fueling their own money into their dumb coronation and stuff
• No I am not salty that they are wealthier and more powerful than me I’m stating facts and showing the truth
• I’m entitled to my opinion so have at it

First, the British monarchy is useless. Like what is the actual point of them? They have their own Parliament- which is more flawed than anything else mind you- and still need royals to act as some face or whatever. Sure, the British monarchy was once the rulers of this great empire or something, but times have changed. Do we need you? No. The only purpose they actually serve is waving at people they take money from while sitting and looking pretty as they open new museums and sign birthday cards for 100-year-olds. Yeah, totally living the royal life.

They could be literal trillionaires or even billionaires with the amount of wealth they have yet they still get money from the people. Like, what is the point of that? Relax guys, I think they can survive without a few million dollars. Oh yeah, wanna know what else? All that money and wealth they own isn’t theirs. A good portion of their wealth- including their ‘sacred’ Crown Jewels- are stolen from former countries and colonies they ruined. It would be really nice if they returned the Cullinan Diamonds or even the Kohinoor back to the original owners.

Another thing I want to point out is that the whole West is better than East conception. It’s often seen with America and the UK being seen as some supreme country that is all-powerful or something. Yeah not really. I mean, in terms of technology and development you could say so. But in reality, a lot of policies they implement or even things they’ve done are just really hypocritical.
For example, calling things a flawed democracy or a full democracy. There’s something called a Democracy Index which is an index compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit- a division of the Economist Group which is a UK-based private company. Emphasis on UK-based. How biased. A flawed democracy is defined as a nation where elections are fair and free and basic civil liberties are honored but may have issues. (Media freedom infringement and minor suppression of political opposition and critics.) There are 5 categories of which 60 questions are asked:

• Electoral process and pluralism
• Civil liberties
• Functioning of government
• Political participation
• Political culture

Given this, I will very much point out that the UK does not deserve to be as highly ranked as it currently is. (18th)

Firstly, the UK Parliament- is split into the House or Lords and House of Commons. The House of Commons is an elected chamber with 650 members and the House of Lords has 778 members and has a kind of passed-down title. Although this is now abolished, there are still 92 out of 750 hereditary peers who sit in the House of Lords. Now, putting all this aside, I want to point out the biggest hypocritical factor in all this. Minor suppression of political opposition and critics.

So the monarchy doesn’t have much power, yet it still has some say in the way of politics. For example, a Royal Assent of the Monarch is required for all Bills to become law, and certain delegated legislation must be made by the Monarch by Order in Council. The Monarch also has some executive powers to do this such as make treaties, declare war, award honors, and appoint officers and civil servants.
So really, they are still somewhat significant in politics. My main point is that there still is oppression against criticism against the Monarchy. Just recently, during the King’s coronation, a group of ‘Not my King’ activists protested during the ceremony and had 64 people arrested. The reasons for arrest were:

• Prevent a breach of the peace
• Conspiracy to cause a public nuisance
• Concerns people were going to disrupt the event

So even basic protesting is wrong? I mean, the whole point of protesting is to get your voice heard and motivate change. Sure, these are valid concerns. But, really? Protests will cause public nuisance. Not everyone will like them but that doesn’t mean they’re necessarily bad. If they had started to get violent then yes, it’s a problem. But from the clips and articles I’ve seen, these protestors were peacefully protesting.
Now, while some arrests made were for weapons and drugs, others seem to be simply for disrupting the event.

Is expressing an opinion now wrong? Can people no longer freely express what they feel about something anymore? Not everyone has to like the monarchy, and if people want to bring some change about it by protesting peacefully, shouldn’t they be allowed to do so? Even before the coronation was set to begin, they were told that over 1,000 protestors were expected to gather and demonstrate against the event. Taking this into account, shouldn’t they have known that there would be some public nuisance? This also goes against the basic civil liberties, as stated for one of the categories which a government is labeled. If one gets arrested for expressing these civil liberties, then really, shouldn’t they be lower in their ranking?

A big problem I have with the British Monarchy when they colonized India is how they did it. They didn’t come to India under the motive of colonization, but under business. They actually deceived the people and took advantage of Indians and their resources. Before anyone realized what had happened, the British were already too powerful. During their rule, they treated Indians like they were dogs. They would have signs saying, ‘No dogs or Indians allowed’. They destroyed the education system and wiped out our history, replacing it with their system. India’s GDP was between 25 and 35% of the world’s total GDP, and that dropped to 2% by India’s Independence in 1947. The literacy rate was at 70% and dropped to 12% after the British. People were starving; they were dying and struggling to live. They were deprived of their food, resources, wealth and education after the British colony, leaving India to the country it is today: A small country with a big population.

Do you know how infuriating it is to see the British Monarchy flaunt their golden carriages and Crown Jewels across the world to the countries they stole it from? Do you know how much it angers me to see them enjoying the luxuries and goods they stole from my people and so may others? Do you know how painful it is to imagine your ancestors suffer and cry and watch helplessly as the ancestors of those royals and British proudly took our resources, our wealth, our history and culture, and even our lives? How they watched as we suffered and killed ourselves so we wouldn’t be killed by them? How even today, such events are considered ‘a shame’? How not even a simple, sincere apology is uttered? How do they dare to flaunt their wealth so proudly to millions across national and even global television with no shame as to how they even got these luxuries from?

And they still think they deserve to be called royals or to have some position? Despite how hypocritical and racist they are? None of them do. That’s why I believe the British Monarchy needs to be abolished and the Crown Jewels as well as wealth should be returned back to the countries they stole it from.

It’s laughable, really, how you never truly understand something until it’s slowly approaching your own life. Only when it actually affects you, do you start to understand what it truly means, or the gravity of that situation.
My grandfather…doesn’t have much time to live. 

I traveled to India two weeks ago with my mother to visit him. The reality of the situation had not yet hit me at that time either, when I had first decided I wanted to go with her. In fact, reality seemed like a dream. I couldn’t believe I was going to India so suddenly. What had been weeks of planning for my previous trip had become an hours prior decision for this one. I sent emails out to my teachers, messages to my friends, informing them of my situation and of my responsibilities to keep up with the current school work. Comforting replies came back, and I was overwhelmed by the love and compassion from so many of them. It was still then I didn’t realize the situation.

Even at the airport, after clearing security and boarding the first flight. It was surreal. The hours slowly went by as I squeezed in moments of homework and movies and music through the flights, my mind elsewhere from where we were going to.

Even stepping foot in India didn’t feel real. How strange it was to be back only a little after a year. The memory of me crying on the car ride to the airport to fly back home greeted me. The moment where I cried, wondering if I wouldn’t be able to come back for years again. What would I have thought at that time, knowing I would return just as quickly, but under different circumstances?

Even after stepping into my uncle’s home and seeing my grandparents, I still didn’t understand my situation. It did, though, show me how age had left its mark on my grandfather.

He’s 76 and weaker than I had seen him a year ago. He had lost weight. A lot of it. His arms were skinny and he had lost a considerable amount of weight from his upper body. I learned that this was from an inability to eat. He could only eat a liquid form of rice and dal, and still only a small portion of it. His face also looked weary; his eyes yellow and frowned from sadness. He was frail; needing to sit down often and take frequent naps. His responses have slowed, and it takes him a minute to understand something said or asked.

Disregarding all this, I still can’t forget one thing that stood out to me that day. The happiness in his smile seeing me and my mother enter the house. The way he pulled both of us into a hug and held us there. I still didn’t understand the situation.

Days passed by. It was too hot. I felt sticky. I couldn’t concentrate on my homework. What was an exurb again? How do I solve a polar function? Oh, I missed gram staining…that's alright. I slowly adjusted. My wandering mind at night overcame the pestering jet lag. Melatonin and late night discussions helped. Lingering questions did not.

I guess I really understood the situation a few days later into my trip. It was when I saw my mother cry; when I saw my aunt cry; when I saw my grandmother cry. After seeing these three women- these three amazing women in my life who have supported me and stood stronger than I have- break down quietly and even loudly in front of me, I understood the situation.

I had never seen my mother cry. Heard, yes. Seen, no. She’s a strong woman, who sees things with a determined point of view. Seeing her cry was different. I didn’t know what to do other than quietly hug her and pat her back, like she does for me. Same with my aunt. It was my first time seeing her cry, and I tried to comfort her all the same. Seeing my grandmother cry was devastating.

On our last day, before we left for the airport she started crying- no, sobbing. She hugged my mother first, and as I slowly approached her she grabbed me into a tight hug as well. How hard it must be for her, but I did not know what to say.

The final hug with my grandfather upsets me. Why didn’t I cry? Why couldn’t I cry? How could I not cry? How foolish I have been to take the time I have with him for granted these past years, and how upsetting it is that I act this way in possibly the last moments I see him in person again.
My mother must have realized it as well. As we sat on the couch with him- my mother and I on opposite ends and laying our heads on his shoulder, his arms around us- I heard her cries. Why couldn’t I do that? To at least show what I truly felt at that moment. Perhaps it was my own brain not wanting this final memory to be of me crying as he hugged me.

I had cried a few times before during the trip. Once late at night while talking to my mother, another when my mother was talking to my cousin and I, and a third later on. I cried realizing how limited my interactions with him had been. The downside of being a child of immigrant parents appeared before my eyes. I had counted 7- maybe one or two more- visits in which I had been with him in person out of all 15 years of my life. I cried again as my mother explained my grandfather’s condition to my younger cousin and I, and how we needed to make use of the remaining time left: pictures, audio recordings, talking. I didn’t want to cry but it started to dawn on me more and more, just how serious things were becoming. I cried a third time when I realized how the world moves on regardless of what happens in your life.

My tears were mainly of frustration. I had gotten emails about making up the English STAAR I had missed, as well as completing my math test before an upcoming deadline. I had a Biology STAAR the day after I returned, and an orchestra concert two days afterward. ( I had not practiced in a week) I got frustrated with my dad- who at that time was trying to help me manage my studies and test preparations- every time he called me about homework. How could everything else keep going when I’m faced with this current situation? Why do I have to do this? I wanted to stop doing all my work and just use my time with my grandfather. Of course, I couldn’t. That’s the last thing he would want.

I cried while writing this post. Several times, actually. I video called him this morning and I wanted to cry. The way he greets me each phone call, saying ‘Hi beta,’ and waving. The way he quietly listens for the majority of the call as my aunt talks with us. The way he slowly understands what I say, and then responds a minute later.

Seeing how I am now, I don’t know what I'll be like when he passes away. More importantly, what about my mother? I’ve known him 15 years of my life and with few interactions while she has for longer than I have. Before he was my grandfather, he was her dad. He being the person she cried to or argued with. He is the one who supported her more than anything. He is the one who pushed her and raised her. How can I help her at that moment? When she’s at her most vulnerable, most upset, and most devastated? I’m not ready for that moment.

Do you see how ridiculous it is? How can you only understand something until it affects you? You realize how sympathy does little to help, other than make you upset or somewhat comforted when others care. You want them to understand how you truly feel, but also hope they don’t have to go through this situation as well. Time is a cruel thing, and even crueler when you live halfway around the world from your family. If only I could turn back time to last year, or any point in the 7 years before that where I could have gone to India at least once just to visit. That way I could have spent more time with them- him. But time doesn’t work like that. So I have only one thing left. To call him. As often as I can, no matter what. Just to ask if he’s eaten, or how he is, or anything else. Something I want to do but can’t without some complications. But still, I must keep trying. Because, time is precious and you don’t realize it until you have a loved one close to dying.

 Hey so I wrote my very first ‘legal’ contract. So here’s how I got to this very difficult position. My grades were not up to par with my very much Indian parents’ expectations. (Mind you I’ve got excellent grades. Not impressive enough apparently.) Due to this very tiresome reason, I got my Instagram app deleted. (And Weverse but we don’t talk about that ) In order to get my beloved very useless social app back, I made a deal with my very much so Indian father on a list of activities I would need to complete for a certain period of time. These were then condensed into a contract, which I have written down below. Please enjoy reading about my suffering. Thank you. :)  

PS: My contract writing business is now open and I am willing/very desperate to take new clients. Please support this business run by a teenager. 

 The Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols is a body of Public International Law, designed for the treatment of civilians, prisoners of war, and soldiers incapable of fighting. There are four Geneva Conventions and three Additional Protocols; and these are a major part of international humanitarian law adopted by all nations in the world.

The First Geneva Convention was in 1864, and was adopted to protect wounded and infirm soldiers and medical personnel who are not in active hostility against a Party. The first attempt to expand this treaty being unsuccessful led to a clarification of these ru;es, and extended them to maritime warfare. 

The Second Geneva Convention improved and supplemented the 1864 convention by extending its protections to victims of maritime warfare, including shipwrecked soldiers and other naval forces, as well as special protections to hospital ships. 

The 1929 conference yielded two conventions. One, for the protection of wounded and sick armies in the field, was the third version to replace the original 1864 convention, and the other was adopted after the experiences of WWI showed the deficiencies in the protection of prisoners of war. The Third Geneva Convention required that ‘belligerents treat prisoners of war humanely, furnish information about them, and permit official visits to prison camps by representatives of neutral states.’ It replaced the 1929 Geneva Convention that dealt with prisoners of war. 

In addition to these three conventions, a Fourth Geneva Convention was added with protection of civilians. It gave civilians the same protections from inhumane treatment and attack afforded to sick and wounded soldiers in the first Convention. This was added after WWII due to the horrific acts on and off the battlefield performed by the Germans. 

With two Geneva Conventions revised and adopted, and the second and fourth added in 1949, the whole set is referred to as ‘Geneva Conventions of 1949’ or just the ‘Geneva Conventions. The 1949 conventions have been further modified with three amendment protocols. 

Protocol I increased protections for civilians, military workers, and journalists during international armed conflicts and blended the use of “weapons that cause superfluous injury  or unnecessary suffering,” or cause “widespread, long-term and severe damage to teh natural environment.”

Protocol II stated that all people not taking up arms be treated humanely and there should never be an order by anyone in command for “no survivors.” It was also added that children should be well cared and educated for, prohibiting taking hostages, terrorism, pillage, slavery, group punishment, and  humiliating or degrading treatment. 

Protocol III was created to recognize the symbol of the red crystal, an additional emblem of humanitarian protection, in addition to the Red Cross, Red Crescent and Red shield of David as universal; emblems of identification and protection in armed conflicts. 

Grave breaches are the most serious crimes. Grave breaches of Geneva Conventions III and IV include:

• Willful killing, torture or inhumane treatment, including biological experiments
• Willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health
• Compelling a protected person to serve in the armed forces of a hostile power
• Willfully depriving a protected person of the right to a fair trial if accused of a war crime

Grave breaches of  Geneva Convention IV also include:

• Taking hostages
• Extensive destruction and appropriation of property not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly 
• Unlawful deportation, transfer, or confinement

The idea for the Geneva Conventions was first brought up by a Genevan business man, Henry Dunant. After witnessing the aftermath of the Battle of Solferino, a gory battle in the Second War of Italian Independence, Dunant wrote a first-hand account of what he had seen; called A Memory of Solferino. Along with his observations, he had proposed a solution: ‘All nations come together to create trained, volunteer relief groups to treat battlefield wounded and offer humanitarian assistance to those affected by war.’ (As noted by HISTORY.com) 

The Geneva Conventions only apply in times of armed conflict, and are primarily designed to protect people who are not or are no longer taking part on hostilities. However, these apply to government who have ratified its terms. Every country has ratified all four Geneva conventions, but the protocols ratified varies. Countries who have ratified all four Geneva Conventions and three protocols include the majority of European and South American countries, the majority of Oceania, a few African Countries, as well as the Philippines and Kazakhstan. The United States has only ratified Protocol III in addition to Geneva Conventions I-IV. 

Despite warfare changing dramatically over the years, the Geneva Conventions are still considered the “cornerstone of contemporary international humanitarian law.” These treaties have come into play in recent international; armed conflicts including the War in Afghanistan, 2003 invasion of Iraq, invasion of Chechnya, and even the non-international armed conflict of the Syrian civil war. The world would have been a much different, possibly less humane place, if these Conventions had not been adopted. 

References:

(n.d.). American Red Cross | Help Those Affected by Disasters. https://www.redcross.org/content/dam/redcross/atg/PDF_s/International_Services/International_Humanitarian_Law/IHL_SummaryGenevaConv.pdf

Geneva conventions and their additional protocols. (n.d.). LII / Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/geneva_conventions_and_their_additional_protocols

Geneva conventions. (n.d.). Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/event/Geneva-Conventions

History.com Editors. (2017, November 17). Geneva Convention. HISTORY. https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/geneva-convention

International committee of the Red Cross. (2018, July 16). International Committee of the Red Cross. https://www.icrc.org/en/document/geneva-conventions-1949-additional-protocols

Protocol additional to the Geneva conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts (Protocol 1). (n.d.). OHCHR. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/protocol-additional-geneva-conventions-12-august-1949-and

There’s a line between ‘enforcing the law’, and ‘police brutality’. Enforcing the law is making sure the law is obeyed and punishing people who do not do so, while police brutality is the excessive and unwarranted use of force by law enforcement against an individual or group. We’ve seen these cases with the BLM movement in 2020 and now the recent one with Tyre Nichols. Back in 2020 we tried to come up with ways to end the police violence that caused these problems, yet we’re here once again, fighting. 

The reality is, we can’t just stop something like this by taking away power or certain methods. People will always find a different way to take a course of action. The way we can do something about this is something psychologically. We, as a society, need to change our mindset. We need to stop stereotyping and having a set prejudice about people. 

Stereotypes/prejudice is something set and rooted in our minds and our thoughts that is difficult to change. We may not see or realize it at first, but there are certain actions we do that shows it. Sometimes it’s a minor thing that isn’t a problem, while other times it’s a major issue. Let’s take a stereotype we are familiar with in the past year. Asian discrimination. Now, the stereotype towards Asians could be at a minor or a major scale. 

For me, I’m a fan of Korean groups like Seventeen and TXT, so whenever I see someone Korean or Asian, my mind goes back to that. I unknowingly associate the two together, leading to a stereotype. On a major scale, there’s Asian hate. Due to the fact that COVID came from China, people have started to discriminate against Asians and Asian-Americans. This has lead to Asian violence, hate crimes, and many other terrible incidences. The fact whether that person was actually the “cause” of a problem or whether they were actually Chinese or not didn’t matter. Violence/ hate was the immediate though towards an Asian because of the pandemic origins. 

Now, with the police, stereotyping can be seen with police brutality. People say police brutality is the human rights violations by the police, when reality, it’s more of a racism/stereotyping issue. It’s a social injustice issue. The police could be given less power, given fewer weapons, or something of the kind. But that won’t change the mindset. The given mindset is that people of color like black people are dangerous. They cause trouble. They commit crimes. This reasoning causes a stereotype to think that all people of the same color or ethnicity are the same- just as dangerous and troublesome. This, deeply engraved in the mind, causes one to act wary or take extra precaution around them. This ‘extra precaution’ could mean using more force than necessary in certain situations. This leads to police brutality. Here’s another example. After 9/11 Muslim-Americans or even people with brown skin- like Indians- were discriminated against. There are reports of increased police attacks against Muslim-Americans after the attacks, despite them being innocent. Today, in airports, people of brown skin are watched with extra caution, simply because of the stereotype they could be a terrorist. The brown skin color is what causes this stereotype. That’s racism.

In America, black people are more strongly discriminated against because of our history. Relating to what I said earlier, the discrimination comes from the perception they- black people- cause trouble. The bleak history of slavery and segregation in the United States is still faintly present in today’s laws, mindsets, and thoughts. Policies and laws are made ever so cautiously in a way to be against black people because of how we thought in the past. Although it’s not directly pointed out, it still exists. 

History and experiences cause these stereotypes, and they as a result get rooted in our inns over time until they become an unconscious perception or even mindset. It alters how we act, how we think, and how we react, leading to problems. Like I said before, this is not a simple issue that can be fixed by taking away power or access to things. It’s a psychological matter. It’s a matter of removing that stereotype from policies, laws, and even minds in order to prevent violence, racism, and discrimination against different races, genders, or ethnicities. Without this, we’ll never be able to change and actually make an impact. 

During the summer of 2019, I went to my very first and- to this day- my last orchestra camp. I have not gone to one again in the past 3-4 years, and most likely will not ever again. That summer camp left me with a bitter resentment towards myself and my instrument that I was determined to change.

I’ve been playing the violin for almost 9 years now; so since I was 5 years old. The violin has always been the sole instrument I loved and wanted to play. Today, I’m not sure what exactly drew me to this particular instrument, but I can say that it was something I was dead set on. I still remember my first lesson and the amount of joy I had when playing it. As soon as I got home I started practicing. Despite only knowing how to play open-string rhythms I felt excited. It was my instrument. My violin, and I was playing it. Over the course of my lessons I started to play notes. Basic rhythms and melodies from my beginner’s book. I eventually had my very first recital. My piece was the classic, “Twinkle Twinkle”. I think I was last to perform and I remember how nervous I was. I remember holding a paper with the names of students performing unfamiliar pieces and listening to the faint sound of music. Eventually it was my turn. Just as it started, it was over. It was, really, a wonderful moment in my life. I don’t remember my performance details, but I remember feeling proud and accomplished that day. I continued to improve as a musician and I grew with my instrument. I remember each time I got a bigger instrument and how I preferred certain cases over others. I remember my practice sessions and how my teacher would convince me to practice with musical bingo. This continued until our move in 2016. 

Texas was different than the Ohio I had grown up in. Over the course of getting settled, we also had started looking for a violin teacher for me. I’ve had at least 10 different violin teachers from the time I first started up to now. More than half of those come from 2016-2019. Each teacher had a different way of teaching and a different reason we couldn’t continue with them. One was too far away, another was constantly late. One of them left and a different teacher took their place. A different teacher left a year or so after I joined and was then replaced twice. The second time was the last teacher I had before I started middle school. Over these years I grew distant from my instrument. I lost all joy in playing it. It became more of a burden when I had violin lessons than an opportunity to learn. I never practiced or even touched my instrument anytime other than during lessons. I never learned during that period. I remember that before I moved I had just started learning how to use my 4th finger on the instrument. After the move, not a single teacher ever taught me how to use it. I couldn’t even tune my own instrument. No one had ever taught me how to. I always gave it to my teacher and waited until they were finished. Now, not all my teachers were bad. Some of them actually taught me things to improve my musical abilities. But due to the constant switching I never was able to continue those things. 5 years into playing my violin, I still had the skills of a beginner. Maybe even worse than I did when I first started. I never realized it or even felt the need to do anything about it. That all changed during the summer of 2019.

A very good friend of mine has been playing the violin since she was maybe 7 or 8 years old. Not as long as I have, but much, much better than I am. Even though I’ve heard her play for over 4 years, she never fails to amaze me with her skills. She’s an excellent musician and is remarkable. When we first became friends we found out we have a common interest: playing the violin. She invited me for this string camp over the summer to which I was really excited for. There were a few problems though. One, I had a brand new instrument. I had gotten a bigger violin a few weeks prior to the camp and I did not know how to play it. I was still playing with tapes and could not even accurately play a note without them. I was grateful that my friend’s teacher offered to put them on for me when I brought her some tape. Even still, I couldn’t play. Two, the music was difficult. Looking over the string music makes me laugh. The pieces are quite easy and very simple to play. Back then the music frightened me. I couldn’t play or even understand the basic melody at all. It took time for me to even process where we were or what was happening each time we rehearsed. I had to fake every second of it. The camp was a week long- Monday to Friday- and we had a performance Friday afternoon. For 5 whole days, my life was like hell. Each day I went was a feeling of dread. I constantly asked my parents to let me skip or to quit. 

The key memory I have from this was when we had individual sectionals. Each day, after rehearsal all together, we would practice with our individual section. It was the day before our performance. We had a chair test. Everyone had to play a few measures from the given piece, and they would determine which seat you had. Before it started I had told our teacher that I was new and might play at a slow speed. She assured me it was fine and to do my best. So there I sat, maybe 4th to play, anxiously waiting for my turn. My heart was pounding rapidly and my palms were becoming sweatier by the second. It was finally my turn to play. I had heard the previous kids play and I was terrified. I was shaking as I held up my instrument and tried to play. I looked at the page and placed my fingers down. I played one note and that’s it. I couldn’t comprehend where to place my fingers after that or what the next note was. I didn’t know how to play at all. That moment was the most humiliating moment of my life. I could feel all eyes on me as I struggled. I was too overwhelmed and burst into tears. The teacher just silently patted me on the back and told me to go get my performance shirt. I can only imagine what they all through as I walked out. Perhaps ridicule or maybe pity. I don’t even know how I managed to go back there with everyone else after what happened. I was placed last for my section. It gave me the benefit of being hidden so no one knew if I was faking or not, but also showed how poorly I must have done to get that chair. The day during the performance was really the only time I could lighten up. I felt happier solely because it was almost over. We were the second group to play, so while the first was warming up the rest of us were in the audience chatting. I sat with my friend and her other friend. Like my friend, the other girl was remarkable at playing. A piece of advice she gave me when taking was, “Don’t be lazy like me when practicing.” At that time I could only feel frustration and annoyance. Looking back, I can assume she may have only meant well and was being nice. But given the circumstances, I thought she was ridiculing me for my poor performance and was comparing it to herself. 

After that performance I only hoped to not go to another string camp again. I never did, but I faced the reality of being in a school orchestra. I started middle school in Concert Orchestra, Second violin, last chair. It was a relatively small orchestra but it was still disappointing. Compared to the Symphonic Orchestra my friend, and a violist in our grade we knew, was in, or the Chamber Orchestra with breathtaking students, Concert was a sad sight. I dreaded 7th period Orchestra every day until I faced the reality: I had to improve. The benefit of a school orchestra is the option of private lessons. They had different PL teachers you could learn from and that was like a dream. The teacher I started with- in middle school- was strict but also wonderful. Immediately on my first day she helped me improve in so many ways. She helped me relax when playing, produce a better sound, tone, and actually play. I remember going home that night and showing my parents what I learned. They were impressed, and more than that, I was overjoyed with this new revelation. The once put out fire I had for learning my instrument started to rekindle again. From that day, I started practicing everyday. I dedicated at least 30 minutes each day to my instrument. As soon as I got home, I would unease and start playing. Over the course of that year, so many things happened. One, I actually learned how to turn my instrument. The one thing I had never been suggested was a tuner. I got my first tuner and learned how to tune my instrument by myself. My days of anxiously asking an adult to tune it for me were over. Two, I moved up. In less than 4 months I moved up from second violin last chair, to first violin second chair. I remained as a first violin from that point and continued to grow. Three, I got my final PL teacher. The teacher I currently learn with has been teaching me for almost 4 years now, and I could not be more grateful for her. She has helped me learn and improve in so many more ways in these 4 years than I ever could have in the past. My goal from that year was to make it into Chamber Orchestra. The Orchestra I could only dream about. I finally did that next year, and was still in it the year after that. I went through a few auditions in that period. I auditioned for Region last year and made it. I auditioned for FWYO Philharmonic Orchestra, twice, and even though I haven’t gotten in yet, I still feel determined to try again. I auditioned and got into Camerata  Orchestra in my high school Orchestra. (The highest a freshman can audition for) The progress I made form that state to now is something I’m proud of. Even though, today, I may not be the best in my Orchestra, I’m still improving. From the beginning of the school year to now I’ve improved and still am. This is what matters most to me. 

We’re currently playing Carmen by Georges Bizet. When we first got this piece I could only gulp nervously and play softly. But now I can play this piece. I can play in the “stratosphere”- as my director likes to call it- and I can play the main themes well. For the other students it may not seem like a big deal to play Carmen, but for me, the fact I can play a piece of this difficulty and play it with my peers at a crazy fast performance speed makes me proud. Considering where I started 3 years from now, I can only feel determined to work harder to improve more. My next goal is to get into high school region, and to make it into our high school Chamber Orchestra. When they first played during our Fall Concert, I decided I wanted to be part of that orchestra. It was middle school all over again. They were truly breath-taking, and I want to be part of that one day. I also want to perform music as complex, beautiful, and wonderful as they did, and play to amaze a crowd like I was that day. I may not be the best right now, but given the previous results, a little determination- and practice- can go a long way. 

Not just for violin, but for any other setback I’ve had in my life. I’ve realized that determination and hard work is what it takes to reach the top. No matter what, that’s the key. 

So there’s been huge news regarding students using AI-based websites such as ChatGPT to complete their work for them. This includes using it to write essays and do assignments they should be doing themselves. Now, I’ve just recently discovered ChatGPT and even discovered it is restricted by my school. Funny story actually. I started using a different device at school than my school-issued one, and I had ChatGPT pulled on up one of the tabs to experiment with it. I accidentally clicked on the tab at school, it refreshed, and popped up as restricted for Academic Fraud. So yeah, it’s banned at my school. At many schools, actually. But that’s besides the point. The whole point is, really, how we could use AI such as ChatGPT at school for BENEFICIAL purposes. No I don’t mean to get a wonderful and fake report card from cheating in order to get a new phone. No no no. I mean, to have a TRULY MODERN way of learning using ChatGPT and other such resources. So let us begin. 

The advancement of technology has become a major breakthrough in our lives, and yet we’re still working on improving it. Technology is outdated when it becomes inefficient and a faster method to do something is found. Every new technological invention is made to be faster than the current, yet will get replaced by a newer faster version. Take writing for example. We used to write essays and papers by hand, and spend painstaking hours creating something to perfection. Especially at a time where ink was commonly used. Imagine how many times the U.S. Constitution could have been re-written due to a spelling mistake. After quills we had pens and pencils. Then typewriters and after that, computers. Computers started advancing and becoming smaller and more powerful. We now have speech recognizing devices like Alexa or Google Home. There’s even development in Natural Language Processing and Neural Networks so we can use our thoughts to write. Technology will never last in one form forever. It’ll keep advancing and soon the world will as well. People will need to keep up with this in order to survive. Those who didn’t will go extinct. (Not literally but you get the idea.) 

So how does this relate to ChatGPT? Well for starters, we can’t ignore the presence in technology in our lives. It’s everywhere around us. However, simply banning it our trying to prevent it from being used isn’t working. Schools are trying to ban the use of ChatGPT and other similar sites to prevent students from cheating. Is that really necessary though? Although ChatGPT can be used to generate essays and do work for students, it can also be used as a supplement to help enhance the learning experience. 

Schools are made solely to teach kids. To make them proficient in the basics of where the current world is today. It’s preparing us for the world by kind of, fueling us with essential information. They want us to learn and then test us to make sure we’ve understood that concept. But the way everyone learns is different. Some can pick up on things quick and ace the topic while others need more time. Even when explained it can be difficult to understand. Sometimes the questions asked aren’t answered and students are left worse than they began. ChatGPT can solve that. It can provide one-on-one tutoring to help them learn at their own pace and even provide practice tests and answers to help them understand. ChatGPT can take the most difficult thing and simplify it in a way you could understand. Perhaps it’s easier written like a poem or maybe composed like a song. ChatGPT could do that and create something truly remarkable that will benefit you. 

ChatGPT could even be used for research assistance. They can help students find and organize research needed by providing summaries, related articles and more. Ever had a difficult time finding an answer to one question? How many articles or websites would you have had to search through to either give up in defeat or finally get it? ChatGPT can help with that. It can quickly pull up exactly what you need. Now, as ChatGPT is an AI model, and like all AI, is imperfect, something’s may be incorrect. AI can only do as much as it is told to do. Hence, it can only have information up to the amount it’s been programmed with. ChatGPT is limited to knowledge up to 2020 (as far as I know) so recent events may not be provided. Even still, it may mess up. Like, earlier today just for fun I asked ChatGPT to list the members of SEVENTEEN in order by age. It took about three tries for it to successfully list all 13 members by age. The first time it started off almost 4 members late and repeated some of them. The second time one member was missing. After correcting the AI for a final time only did it successfully do what was asked. 

Instead of banning AI websites like ChatGPT altogether, maybe they should create a feature that disables them. ChatGPT could be used to learn about new topics and develop a full understanding of them, but turned off when it comes to testing. Simply copy and pasting isn’t learning. If one uses ChatGPT in a way it should be intended- to answer questions and fill the gaps we are unfamiliar with- then is it really that harmful? I don’t think so. Is it wrong to try and learn? In certain circumstances yes, most likely, but otherwise? 

As a way to conclude this post I wanted to share some other AI websites I found that are similar to ChatGPT, except with their own respective characteristics. 

• ChatSonic (The underlying technology behind ChatGPT but going beyond ChatGPT’s limitations)
• Rytr (A way to generate ideas to help get started on a post)
• WordTune (A way to articulate your thoughts or when they sound awkward)
• Essaybot (I would consider this one cheating as it gives you a pre written paragraph re-worded, but otherwise this is an option)
•  Talk to Books (Exploring ideas by getting answers from books)

These were some quick websites I found on the internet. I’m not trying to promote the use of AI websites to do your work. Instead, I’m trying to explain it’s benefits and how it can be used to enhance our learning and working process in order to be more successful. That is not equivalent to copy paste. Anyways, I hope you all have a wonderful evening and I will see you next post. Bye!

So there’s been some pretty intense dramas going on in the past week about the next speaker of the house. If you didn’t know, our new Speak of the House is Kevin McCarthy who gained this position after 15 ballots. Surprisingly, it’s not the highest as the most ballots ever is actually 133. But anyways, let’s indulge in this topic and explore why it took 15 ballots to elect Speaker McCarthy.

Firstly, and for one of my absolute favorite reasons, there’s drama. It’s the classic teenage high school drama, except with adults at higher levels and with more serious topics. One of the representatives who absolutely refused to vote for Speaker McCarthy until the 15th ballot was Matt Gaetz. So apparently there’s this little beef between the two that Mr. Gartz has not let go of. When Mr. Gaetz was accused with sex trafficking claims, apparently, Mr. McCarthy did not present a strong enough defense for Mr. Gaetz. For this reason, Mr. Gaetz absolutely refused to vote for him. If you ask me, I find it amusing how government officials who are respected adults and members still act the way my current peers do. It’s really funny.

In the end, he did vote for him, which is why Mr. McCarthy got the position. Why did it take so long though? What made Mr. Gaetz and the other representatives who refused to vote for him, suddenly changed their mind?

Two words. Back scratching. “I scratch you back if you scratch mine.” The price for Mr. McCarthy to become the next speaker required patience, determination, and a little bit of luck to get the right proposal for a vote.

According to CNN, some of the requirements for Mr. McCarthy to become speaker include:

• Seventy two hours to review the bills before they come to the floor
• Giving members the ability to offer more amendments on the House floor
• More Freedom Caucus representation on committees, including the powerful House Rules Committee
• A McCarthy-aligned super PAC agreed to not play in open Republican primaries in safe seats
• Any member can call for a motion to vacate the speaker’s chair – this is significant because it would make it much easier than it is currently to trigger what is effectively a no confidence vote in the speaker. Conservatives pushed hard for this, while moderates are worried it will weaken McCarthy’s hand.
• Restoring the Holman Rule, which can be used to reduce the salary of government officials

Now the most eye-catching is the Holman Rule. Perhaps you’ve never heard of it before and that’s why it stood out. In fact, I had never heard of it before. (As well as a few other things on the list but that’s for later) So you know what I had to do. I did a little research, and here’s what I found.

The Holman rule is a provision in the rules of the United States House of Representatives that allows for individual line items in appropriations bills to be targeted for reduction or elimination. The rule, which was first implemented in 1876 and has been used intermittently since then, allows for any member of the House to offer an amendment to an appropriations bill that would reduce or eliminate a specific item of spending. The rule is typically used as a tool to target spending on specific programs or projects that an individual member or group of members oppose.

Now, reading that, it doesn’t include anything about cutting salaries. I know. Let me explain. As a measure to make it easier for lawmakers to eliminate federal agencies or slash the pay of individual agencies, the House restored the Holman Rule. As part of this rules package. It will “allow individual lawmakers to reduce the number of federal workers at specific agencies or cut their compensation as a provision or amendment to an appropriation bill.” This rule also allows lawmakers to target specific federal programs or offices, such as the FBI. They can use this to target the FBI or to “zero-out funding for specific federal investigations”. Essentially, they can use this bill as a reason to specifically target and remove agencies they do not want. Sly isn’t it?

Another shady back scratching deal that took place includes a “one-member election trigger”. 20 Republicans held out on voting for McCarthy until the 15th ballot. Why? For different reasons, they all could dislike Mr. McCarthy. That’s why this one-member election trigger agreement must have been a really good deal. The concession gives the ability for just ONE legislator to trigger a vote on whether to remove the Speaker from office. So anytime a legislator, even for a second, doesn’t want Mr. McCarthy as Speaker, all they have to do is say so. (Of course there’s most likely a longer process, but you get the point) This motion has had a long history, but it was raised to a minimum of 5 people to trigger the vacate. This time, it just takes one person. It could be Mr. Matt Gaetz, or maybe Ms. Lauren Boebert. It could be any of those 20 who refused to do so. It could even be a Democrat representative.

One more major event that took place was the restraining of Congressman Mike Rogers. After the 14th ballot, Mr. Rogers- an ally of Speaker McCarthy- was physically restrained for bellowing and jabbing fingers at a fellow Republican who was not supporting Mr. McCarthy. The main reason I brought this up was because it reminded me of The Caning of Charles Sumner. Senator Charles Sumner, an abolitionist Republican, was caned by Representative Preston Brooks, a pro-slavery Democrat, in 1856. Charles Sumner denounced the Bleeding Kansas crisis in a speech. This speech argued for the immediate admission of Kansas as a free state. He talked about the hateful embrace of slavery and the hideous crime. A response to this from Mr. Brooks included a caning. If I remember correctly from my history class, Mr. Sumner was badly beaten. To be fair, Mr. Brooks asked his fellow Representative on dueling etiquette , to which they replied that Charles Sumner was no gentleman - and a drunkard- and did not merit honorable treatment which is expected in a duel. That’s why they believed a cane beating in public to humiliate him would be better suited. Now although the two situations are rather different, this event was the first thing I thought of when I heard about the restraint.

Anyways, that was just the main points I wanted to cover regarding the Speaker elections. I’m now curious to see how things will play out and how each of these new requirements will be used in the future. Bye!