Month: August 2020

A Few Words About That Ten-Million-Dollar Serial Comma.

Join us: facebook.com/unitedhumanists

A Few Words About That Ten-Million-Dollar Serial Comma.

The case of the Maine milk-truck drivers who, for want of a comma, won an appeal against their employer, Oakhurst Dairy, regarding overtime pay (O’Connor v. Oakhurst Dairy) has warmed the hearts of punctuation enthusiasts everywhere, from the great dairy state of Wisconsin to the cheese haven of Holland.

Nothing, but nothing—profanity, transgender pronouns, apostrophe abuse—excites the passion of grammar geeks more than the serial, or Oxford, comma. People love it or hate it, and they are equally ferocious on both sides of the debate. Individual publications have guidelines that sink deep into the psyches of editors and writers. The Times, like most newspapers, does without the serial comma. At The New Yorker, it is a copy editor’s duty to deploy the serial comma, along with lots of other lip-smacking bits of punctuation, as a bulwark against barbarianism.

While advocates of the serial comma are happy for the truck drivers’ victory, it was actually the lack of said comma that won the day. Here are the facts of the case, for those who may have been pinned under a semicolon. According to Maine state law, workers are not entitled to overtime pay for the following activities: “The canning, processing, preserving, freezing, drying, marketing, storing, packing for shipment or distribution of: (1) Agricultural produce; (2) Meat and fish products; and (3) Perishable foods.”

The issue is that, without a comma after “shipment,” the “packing for shipment or distribution” is a single activity. Truck drivers do not pack food, either for shipment or for distribution; they drive trucks and deliver it. Therefore, these exemptions do not apply to drivers, and Oakhurst Dairy owes them some ten million dollars.

Judge David J. Barron’s opinion in the case is a feast of subtle delights for anyone with a taste for grammar and usage. Lawyers for the defense conceded that the statement was ambiguous (the State of Maine specifically instructs drafters of legal statutes not to use the serial comma) but argued that it had “a latent clarity.” The truck drivers, for their part, pointed out that, in addition to the missing comma, the law as written flouts “the parallel usage convention.” “Distribution” is a noun, and syntactically it belongs with “shipment,” also a noun, as an object of the preposition “for.” To make the statute read the way the defendant claims it was intended to be read, the writers would have had to use “distributing,” a gerund—a verb that has been twisted into a noun—which would make it parallel with the other items in the series: “canning, processing,” etc. To the defendant’s contention that the series, in order to support the drivers’ reading, would have to contain a conjunction—“and”—before “packing,” the drivers, citing Antonin Scalia and Bryan Garner, said that the missing “and” was an instance of the rhetorical device called “asyndeton,” defined as “the omission or absence of a conjunction between parts of a sentence.”

Lest we lose perspective, this law on the books of the State of Maine applies to people who work with perishable foods, and the point is that pokey employees should not be rewarded for taking their sweet time getting the goods to market. Possibly (but improbably) for this reason, in an effort to illustrate (or not) ambiguity in a series, the coverage of O’Connor v. Oakhurst Dairy served up a lot of food imagery. The Times noted that it would break with style and add the serial comma in the following sentence: “Choices for breakfast included oatmeal, muffins, and bacon and eggs.” The Guardian, too, would avoid ambiguity at the breakfast table: “He ate cereal, kippers, bacon, eggs, toast and marmalade, and tea.”

Contrast these with a dinner described in a recent e-mail from John Pope, the author of a collection of obituaries that ran in the New Orleans Times-Picayune, who remains adamant in his rejection of the serial comma: “The next day, I enjoyed pan-roasted oysters with a tomato sauce over rice, broccoli salad and bread pudding with chocolate sauce.” A comma after “broccoli salad” would have cleared the table before dessert.

The case of the dairy-truck drivers’ comma has got several things going for it. It’s got David and Goliath in the story of the little guy sticking it to a corporate boss. It’s got men driving around in trucks with copies of Strunk & White in the glove compartment. And you know what else it’s got? Of course you do. It’s got milk. For all the backlash against the dairy industry—the ascendance of soy milk, almond milk, hemp milk (note the asyndeton), none of which, by the way, are really milk, because you can’t milk a hazelnut—there is something imperishably wholesome about cows and milk.

Got milk? Got commas?

Source: https://bit.ly/3gEtQWG

The made-up and mysterious world of Munchhausen Syndrome / Factitious Disorder.

Join us: facebook.com/unitedhumanists 

Things to Know about Factitious Disorder.

Most of us hate going to the doctor and being sick. It’s no fun to get blood drawn, take medication or undergo procedures. So when you learn about someone who is intentionally creating an illness or exaggerating symptoms on purpose, it can be mind boggling and confusing.

Causing illness in yourself or in someone else isn’t just a disorder that happens in Hollywood or on the big screen. Instead, recent movies and shows like Mommy Dead and Dearest and The Act have helped to shine light on a very real illness.

Psychiatric social worker Karen Salerno, MSSA, LISW-S, helps to break down this type of mental illness.

So what actually is it?

Factitious disorder imposed on self (FDIS) is a type of mental disorder in which a person will intentionally cause, create or exaggerate an injury or illness in his or herself. It was formerly referred to as Munchausen syndrome.

Factitious disorder imposed on another (FDIA) is a type of mental disorder when someone in a caretaker role (usually a parent or someone caring for an elderly relative) intentionally creates, causes or exaggerates an illness or injury in the person they’re caring for. It was formerly known as Munchausen by proxy.

Someone with factitious disorder will go to great lengths to make it seem like he or she is very sick, when in reality they may be the cause of their own illness. From tampering with test results, to lying and causing physical harm to themselves or the person they’re caring for – nothing is off-limits.

And why would someone do this? The main motivator behind factitious disorder is often a concrete gain in attention from others. Whether it’s from family, neighbors, colleagues or even on social media.

It’s believed that an estimated 1 to 2% of hospitalized patients have factitious disorder. But because it’s a disease of deceitfulness (and takes a team of doctors to diagnose), the number could actually be higher.

“It’s hard to account for how many people might actually have factitious disorder,” says Salerno. “A person with this disorder typically goes to multiple doctors all over the country. It’s challenging to keep track of what the person is doing and to establish a pattern of behavior.”

It takes a medical team made up of multiple providers and close scrutiny of medical records to diagnose the disorder.

A disorder of deception

Most people with factitious disorder don’t believe they have a mental illness. And because this disorder deals with deception and dishonesty, it can be difficult to spot.

Signs of factitious disorder can include:

  • Reporting symptoms that aren’t witnessed by others.
  • Receiving healthcare from multiple providers and often leaving healthcare facilities against medical advice.
  • Undergoing numerous extensive procedures and treatment.
  • Erratic medical history with a strange set of symptoms.
  • Enjoyment from being hospitalized.
  • Reluctance to allow anyone else to speak with their doctors.

These red flags can also be true of factitious disorder imposed on another.

When illness becomes your identity

Factitious disorder can come in all shapes and sizes, but over the past several decades, medical experts have started to piece together this mysterious illness.

Here are eight things to know about the disorder:

1.) Electronic medical records have made it easier to identify.

Before the arrival of electronic medical records, those with factitious disorder could typically move from doctor to doctor with little explanation or paperwork. But when healthcare organizations switched over to digital patient files, it helped professionals begin to track and see a patient’s full medical history.

“It was harder to diagnose factitious disorder when medical records were just on paper,” explains Salerno. “You had no idea what other doctors the patient was seeing and what symptoms the patient was reporting. Electronic medical records still don’t show us everything, but it helps piece things together and establish a pattern of behavior.”

2.) People with factitious disorder are “professional patients.”

Most people with factitious disorder are knowledgeable about medical terminology and the medical field. Often times, the person may have worked previously in healthcare. This allows them to describe their symptoms and illness in great detail. He or she might know a lot about medication, tests and treatments and may even ask for invasive medical procedures by name.

3.) Social media has made it easier for patients to deceive a wider audience.

With social media, it has made it easier for those with factitious disorder to receive attention or sympathy from a larger group of people.

“A lot of people with this disorder will post things on social media about their illness that simply aren’t true,” says Salerno. “It’s all about attention-seeking behavior, whether it’s asking for money or to gain emotional support through others.”

4.) Factitious disorder imposed on another is a form of abuse.

Any time a person fakes or creates an illness in someone they’re caring for, it’s considered a form of abuse. This can be done to a child, elderly adult or someone with a disability.

Suspect it’s happening to someone around you? Salerno recommends to:

• Keep a journal of the person’s symptoms.
• If you can, discuss your concerns with the person’s treating physician.
• Call Child or Adult Protective Services (your identity will remain anonymous).

5.) Attention is often the main motivator.

People with factitious disorder are often looking for emotional support and attention from others. They believe they can achieve this through faking an illness or injury. The worst part? Attention only fuels more lies and deceitfulness.

“It can be attention from family, neighbors bringing over food or even strangers donating money on social media,” says Salerno. “The attention the person receives further encourages the behavior.”

6.) The cause is complex.

Although the exact cause of this illness is unknown, most experts believe that factitious disorder is linked to both biological and psychological factors, says Salerno. So whether it’s from family conflict, parental divorce, grief, trauma or abuse – it can all play a role in developing this type of mental illness.

7.) It takes a village to diagnose.

Given the lying and deception involved, those with the disorder are often times the least suspected – and that’s what makes it so tricky to identify. In order to be officially diagnosed, someone else has to physically witness the person inducing the illness or injury in themselves or in another person. Often times, it takes a large team to help diagnose (which can include psychiatrists, physicians, social workers, case managers, infectious disease specialists, bioethicists and sometimes even law enforcement officials). The medical team looks at the patient holistically and tries to piece everything together to get the bigger picture of what’s really going on.

8.) There is treatment available.

Some people with factious disorder might not ever admit to causing their symptoms. Those that do have a long road to recovery to identify the issues that caused this type of behavior in the first place. The person has to be willing to acknowledge that there’s a problem.

Types of treatment can include psychotherapy (also known as talk therapy) and cognitive behavior therapy (CBT).

“CBT helps identify thoughts and feelings that are contributing to the deceptive behavior,” says Salerno. “If the person strongly identifies in the ‘sick role’ then it’s hard to see themselves as healthy. CBT provides skills that the patient can use to form relationships that are not associated with being sick,” says Salerno.