![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
DevoPsych and Roe vs Wade
Jul. 1st, 2022 11:07 amAt a certain point, I am sure, I will slow down in these studies. Whilst the semester doesn't actually start until July 4, today I completed the work for Week 4 of "PSYCH 323 Changes Across the Lifespan". It has been quite interesting for me as the first few weeks have been on early childhood development an area of knowledge that I have neglected in the past, albeit have had some sympathy for in terms of politics. Several interesting points to make; (a) early childhood psychologists often have knowledge and experience even greater than parents, whose training and experience is usually limited to a few years per child and with a smaller dataset (b) child temperament and parental attachment style are a surprisingly strong predictor of future outcomes even into adulthood, (c) moral development in childhood is expressed across cognitive, behavioural and emotional vectors which can be explained by developmental theories in cognition, social learning, and psychoanalysis, respectively. As fortuitous aside, the Fabian Society in WA had former SA Premier Jay Weatherill speaking on early childhood development last Sunday. Weatherill made a very good case for civil intervention in the lives of children who are developmentally vulnerable, with the cost of non-intervention estimated at 15.2 billion in Australia.
On a related topic, like many others, I am saddened and disappointed at the decision of the US Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs Wade. For pretty much my entire life this has been a key milestone in women's rights in the United States. Of course, it must be recognised that Roe vs Wade did not enshrine a woman's right to abortion, but rather made it possible by invoking the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provided a right to privacy. That, of course, is part of the problem; the United States is just that, a federation of states, where states have rights that are greater than individual rights, i.e., it is not a confederation of equal and free people, which is what most people recognise as the legitimate foundation of public governance. The decision will certainly result in increased maternal mortality in which the United States is the worst example in the advanced world. Further, the system of appointments of the Supreme Court is so thoroughly politicised that the court can be (and has been) stacked by partisan interests, who will target other civil liberties. I have much more to say about this, and I'm currently composing an article for the Isocracy Network.
On a related topic, like many others, I am saddened and disappointed at the decision of the US Supreme Court to overturn Roe vs Wade. For pretty much my entire life this has been a key milestone in women's rights in the United States. Of course, it must be recognised that Roe vs Wade did not enshrine a woman's right to abortion, but rather made it possible by invoking the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provided a right to privacy. That, of course, is part of the problem; the United States is just that, a federation of states, where states have rights that are greater than individual rights, i.e., it is not a confederation of equal and free people, which is what most people recognise as the legitimate foundation of public governance. The decision will certainly result in increased maternal mortality in which the United States is the worst example in the advanced world. Further, the system of appointments of the Supreme Court is so thoroughly politicised that the court can be (and has been) stacked by partisan interests, who will target other civil liberties. I have much more to say about this, and I'm currently composing an article for the Isocracy Network.
