Usually there is a "delivery record" form - one page with basic mom info (G,P, HBsAg, risk factors etc), check boxes for type of delivery, single/twin, etc., time of birth, band number, baby complications, and apgars. Original stays in mom's chart, copy goes in baby's under "history". If there were any problems, MD and or nurse will write a note in baby's chart and OB may mention disposition of baby in a progress note in mom's chart.

That's it as far as what from mom's chart goes in baby's. The only baby info in mom's chart is the birth record and interaction between the two later.

My sister-in-law has a Doctor of Education degree (Ed.D., equivalent to Ph.D.). She can barely write an intelligible sentence or paragraph. She cannot spell. We are close and I have known her for her entire life (over 40 yrs) and she cannot spell my first name.

Hoping not to offend anyone, I would note that the Ed.D. is not always equivalent to the Ph.D. The National Science Foundation and other Federal agencies consider them to be equivalent, but university faculties often do not. Some Ed.D. programs barely require a dissertation, which is one of the ways to learn to write (and, for some Ph.D. students, one of the ways to learn to write badly, in pompous prose and jargon). Many Ed.D. dissertations are based on "projects" rather than on research. I would say that of all the schools in my university, the one whose undergraduate students are most likely to have trouble in my classes are from the School of Education. That expresses my longstanding prejudice as well as my observations, and I don't know which dominates my view of education majors. The one thing that I am sure of is that it bodes ill for our public schools that our schools of education are not recruiting some of the best students on campus. OTOH, some schools of education are intellectually outstanding. I would put Harvard's Graduate School of Education among the outstanding programs. My guess is that students would be better served if there were no undergraduate schools of education, but your sister's inabilities do not attest to my idea that schools of education ought to be a professional graduate schools only.

Sometimes I think the problem lies entirely in K-12 education, and sometimes I think that the universities are doing a lousy job of picking up where the public schools failed. There are universities where the departments of English consider such things as grammar and spelling to be mere conventions, devoting all their teaching to "freeing the student's inner writer." Thus they have students read what I consider to be badly-written prose, such as bad translations of a French writer who wrote about deconstructionism in bad French. I usually have to send students who have been taught that way to one of the online tutorial sites, such as Capital Community College's (Hartford) Guide to Grammar and Writing That site is maintained in memory of a teacher there, Dr. Charles Darling, who thought that grammar and spelling were not just passing conventions.

I'm still having trouble figuring out how Tim Adams came in third on some national ranking of graduate students. It was most definitely not the GRE.

Doesn't offend me, cuz I don't have one! Yes, I know that is considered "equivalent" in many places and not in others. I made the note for folks that had not heard of an Ed.D. Seems to be sufficient for her to have gotten some good positions with school districts in New Mexico and California. She specializes in 'Special Ed Programs'-- she seems to have a talent for that I guess. Though I still can't imagine how a person in the field gets any position without being able to write intelligibly.

When my daughter was in high school, sometimes she'd bring home some instructions written by her teachers and ask me to help her interpret what they said. If she couldn't make out the meaning, neither could I because they were not written in actual sentences. Ya know, like with verbs and nouns and objects and subjects and stuff?

My idea is that this is an unintended consequence of the (slow) ending of gender discrimination in employment. At a time when law, business, and medical schools enrolled few or no women, there were only a few professions that a woman could expect to enter. Teaching K-12 was one of them. I feel lucky to have been taught by some very intelligent and well-educated women who today would likely have entered another profession. I'm not saying that K-12 teaching draws only from the bottom of college graduates, but it is now among the professions that do so. Connecticut's policy has been to provide strong job security and comparatively high salaries for its K-12 teachers, so some Connecticut public schools are outstanding, and many are good -- with the exception of the inner city schools.

(Connecticut has allowed its cities to deteriorate without making any real efforts to reverse the causes of the problems. Instead, the state government looks for magic fixes, like building a large new convention center on the banks of the Connecticut River in Hartford. That center has four events scheduled through mid-August, meaning that it will be empty most of the summer. The events themselves are not the most attractive to help restore the health of a city: a fundraiser for boxing (??), for example. Wealthiest state, poorest cities.)

At least by per capita income, Connecticut is third, closely trailing #1, California; and #2, New Jersey. New Jersey has a similar problem with cities, and tries to fix them with similar measures: for example, by building sports arenas in the city, which mainly makes traffic worse while bringing in people who are generally afraid to go into the rest of the city.

Oh what a fun site! I bookmarked it!

I edited an article on the American West for a friend of mine-- a retired professor in his 80s. My god I never saw so many commas. We fought over the commas (he lives to fight with me). The commas made it difficult to read as it interrupted the flow. He was ADAMANT about these damned things, and I was not permitted to delete any of them. When he wasn't paying attention, I removed a couple of the very worst offenders, which improved the flow and readability quite a bit.

Turned out (he told me after he had the fun of fighting with me) that it was deliberate, as he was writing in the style of a writer "in the day". That is true-- it was the style. We still left out the couple that I deleted.

The 'Guide to Grammar' site is fun because it has a section on Diagramming Sentences. A few years ago, I had a foe on another site-- an attorney with quite a following. He had a following because people thought he was actually SAYING something, which he wasn't. He opposed gov't and promoted chaos as a tool and managed to lead many well-intentioned people in the Election Integrity movement down the garden path and disrupt and divide a portion of the movement. He was a master of writing absolutely nothing with a maximum of words, with patriotic-sounding piccolos and drums thrown in. People thought he was fabulous (because they thought he was smarter than they were cuz he sounded like he was saying what they wanted to hear), but he just baffled 'em with his thoroughly empty chaos bullshit.

He once wrote a prize-winning loooong sentence. It was an absolute masterpiece. It sounded incredible. It was utterly convincing. It said absolutely NOTHING. I sooooo wanted to diagram that sentence because it was so amazingly nothing. But I hadn't diagrammed a sentence in 45 years and couldn't find a tutorial to remind me how to do it. Oh how I wish I'd saved that sentence.

Well, he isn't an attorney anymore. He claims to be a Hollywood screenwriter.

Bingo. Ellie's all over it.

Oooh, oooh, call on me Teach!!!

Tes gave me this phenomenal link while we were in Phoenix! The Gettysburg Address Diagrammed!

The whole thing at: http://www.german-latin-english.com/dia ... ysburg.htm

Makes a Geek happy...

I love this, because I had an English teacher I hated in high school. I'd go out of my way to annoy her in any way possible, including by insisting on spelling everything in the Queen's English once I realized she hated English spellings. But my tour de force was when she assigned 20 vocabulary words and insisted you then use all of them in a sentence and diagram them on the blackboard. So whenever it was my turn, I would use all 20 of them in a single sentence, then diagram that sentence, to take up an entire wall of chalkboard.

This is pretty jerk behavior, but I was justified. She was a petty sadist and a nasty person, and I was very glad to hear she eventually got fired. I'm proud of having tormented her.

I have always, always, always hated (as kids used to say way back when) with a purple passion diagramming sentences. Not that I could not do it, and do it properly, I just thought it was stupid then and I think it's stupid now and I won't do it. I have no problem making a list, you know,

X = Subject
Y = Verb
Z = Adjective

and on down the line, but I thought it was really stupid to have to make all those lines.

I remember well the last sentence I diagrammed in high school. It was a question for the "all-important" extra credit on the final exam. I didn't need no steeenkin' extra credit...but I did it.

The question was along the lines of, Write an sentence of your own construction and diagram it...something like that. So I did. The sentence I wrote and diagrammed, properly I might add was: "I believe diagramming sentences is really fucking stupid."

It got me sent to the principals office (oh, yeah, for the first time ), BUT I argued that I did indeed follow the instructions of the test, did it properly, and I got my extra credit.

Diagramming sentences is really fucking stupid, but you'd have wanted to do it with the 250 word sentence this guy wrote.

It was a thing of beauty. It was of such soaring purpose and so uplifting and elevating that one was nearly left in tears. It was fabulous. But it had no content or meaning at all.

I read it carefully at least 15 times trying to decipher it before I sent it to an English teacher friend of mine to check and see if maybe I'd had a stroke and didn't know it.

I took the thing and grayed out all of the extraneous, unnecessary words trying to get to the meat and meaning of it. By the time I was done, the entire thing was gray. But he had people thinking he was simply brilliant and they would not admit that they didn't know what the fuck he was talking about. He wrote this way deliberately, posts, paragraphs and articles, garnering credulous fans and followers... he was also a liar, of course. By the time he would actually say something meaningful (seldom), the crowd swallowed the poison whole. I actually got him to outright admit he lied, then he went right on with it.

I can hardly wait to see his screenplays.

Oh-- and he's writing a book.

I used to write coverage opinions on boiler-and-machinery policies. In other words, some contraption or other would break down -- for example, a boiler at a plant where they process 10,000 turkeys a day into, y'know, turkey parts and turkey bologna and so forth -- and the insurance company wanted to know if their policy really covered the loss, and if they had to pay. The boiler is easy, but other claims are more dicey.

Those of you who read my stuff know, nobody ever has to ask me to 'splain what I mean. And even back in them days, I wrote clearly in what they call "Plain English for Lawyers". I also thought it would be helpful, since we were giving advice on claims worth hundreds of thousands of dollars or more, that I would give some odds, like I"d say "if you deny this claim and the insured files a lawsuit, I estimate you'd have a 75% chance of prevailing in the action".

Sometimes my writing style was a real benefit. Within the first six months after law school, I wrote a summary judgment motion that won a $5 million case, by explaining an insurance policy in language that an 8th grader could understand. Having worked for a federal judge, I knew most of them didn't have a clue about industrial property insurance.

But the managing partner in my office (small regional office of a national firm) couldn't stand the way I wrote coverage opinions on those damned boiler-and-machinery policies, and he was right. He'd tell me never to give odds, and to write mushy and incoherent legalese that never came to any conclusion.

Why was he right? Because the mid-to-upper level insurance guys fell for it every time. They'd read my stuff and they'd be able to understand it perfectly, so they'd think what I'd done was simple and they weren't impressed in the slightest. Then they'd read my boss's shit, and they couldn't understand a word of it, so they decided he was a freakin' genius 'cause he was so much smarter than them.

AGJ has the reason Tim Adams didn't come forward sooner:

Saw this at Doc's. Von's video on Tim Adams. I didn't watch the whole thing. (it's too long.)

I did like the part at about 2:45 to 3:05. DUH!


http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2010/06/ ... after-all/

Doc has a link up to deposit "Must See Videos".

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2010/06/must-see-video/

Where's Mouse??!!

I used to love diagramming sentences in school. I remember the day the teacher introduced it. I took to it like a golden retriever to water and would ask my dad to make up sentences for me to include in homework for extra credit. Sadly that teacher, Ms. Waters, who was from England, perished in a Corvair on the Al-Can highway during our spring break, along with my brother's teacher, who was from Ireland.

Does that look like a new room? I thought he was going to jail?

I wondered about jail too. Maybe Mommy bailed him out after all. I don't think it's a new room-- the paneling or whatever looks the same-- like the inside of a wood shack. Camera is at a different angle. He has the usual muscle shirt.

He sure is happy that *finally" there is a Hawaiian "official" that he can believe!

Does Von have any teeth?

I don't know if anyone posted this link in this thread. If they have, please ignore this.

Olbermann pointed out the Council of Conservative Citizens site last night when nominating WND as "third place Worst Person in the World".

http://cofcc.org/introduction/statement-of-principles/

From their statement of principles:


_________________
Q: How many birfers does it take to interpret the Constitution?
A: All of them. Stupidity isn't unconstitutional in America.

I never really got behind all this stuff.

If I was ever taught how to diagram sentences, I have NO memory of it at all. The sentence diagrams that I've seen make no sense to me at all. Interestingly, most people I know my age did learn to diagram, so I think either (a) it was just so traumatic, I've managed to bury the memory completely, or (b) I was skipped ahead a couple of years on my English classes (*only*) manly on the strength of my reading skills, and diagramming was taught during one of the years I was skipped past. I was still in grade school when that happened, though, so I'm actually guessing it's probably (a.)