Tip: "emergency" buttons on smart phones

You may or may not have taught your youngsters how (and why) to dial 9-1-1 (and to not practice it - sorry, local PD). It's a very good idea to do so. However it's one thing to teach 2-4-yr-olds how to operate a push-button phone (assuming they know which buttons are which). It's quite another to get them to navigate multiple touch screens on the newest smartphones to even get to the dialer window. A lot of adults I know can't manage this.

The Lock Screen (and eventually, an ambulance) to the rescue.

My phone, a T-Mobile G-1 (not an endorsement of their product or service), has a lock screen - a privacy/security feature whereby you have to input a pattern or code to be able to access the phone. (I'm told the iPhone has this as well.) In case of emergency - when you can't, in a panic, remember the pattern, or you're incapacitated and some samaritan is trying to call help on your phone - there is a single button to get to the dialer, where it only connects to emergency numbers.

We were recently reinforcing to our 3-yr-old son the hows and whys of calling for help. My wife got one of those new phones that has a full QWERTY keyboard instead of a dedicated number pad. We're still working on 6 vs. 9, so throwing a bunch of letter keys on top of everything didn't clear up any confusion. We turned to my phone, and realized that, "press the green button with the phone picture," doesn't always open to the dial pad - sometimes contacts, sometimes call log.

I had turned my lock screen off, because I felt it too much of a bother to use each time I wanted to access the phone. When I first enabled it, allowing my son to entertain himself with the new "game" of drawing lines between the dots on the screen, I was sure to instruct him to never press "the white button with the red cross" (at least not any more) - that it was for calling for help, if someone was hurt, or there was a fire. I've since turned the lock back on, for this very reason. It's one button that my son can access and enables him to dial 9-1-1 in an emergency.

Tip: Cell phone as stand-in travel night light

We frequently do overnights at Grandma & Grandpa's house, but we often neglect to take a night light.

Solution: mobile phone.

It occurred to me one day as I was leaving my phone charging, powered on, that it emitted enough light to illuminate the room, just barely.

Our son simply cannot go to sleep in total darkness - plus, as a grown up, it helps to see where you're going when navigating the luggage and toys in the spare room, plus navigate to the bathroom in the middle of the night.

Many phones have advanced features, such as being able to power themselves off after a set time (if you only want it while the little ones fall asleep, but not all night), besides doubling as an alarm clock.

You know who else prayed that their god would smite their political enemies?

from the comments: So if a Muslim, quoting the Qu'ran, preaches violence against Americans, he's a terrorist.

But if a Christian hides behind the Bible to call for the assassination of the President, that's okay?

clipped from gawker.com Christian Conservatives Praying for God to Kill Obama There's a hilarious new meme in the wingnut sectors of the internet: someone's coined a bumper sticker slogan encouraging people to pray for Barack Obama. But here's the funny part: it's really a secret Christian code for "Kill the President!' Psalm 109 is known as "A Cry for Vengeance," which is one of the foundational values of Christianity, along with small-business tax cuts. The Psalm 109:8 gag is one in what's becoming a long line of cheekily coded Obama death threats: There was the classified ad someone placed in a Pennsylvania paper hoping that he follows in "the footsteps of Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy," all of whom were assassinated. And there was the gun-toting New Hampshire teabagger with a sign saying it is time to "water the tree of liberty"—a reference to Thomas Jefferson's reminder that the tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the "blood of tyrants and patriots."

2010 California Marriage Protection Act | Safeguarding marriage from the evils of divorce

2010 California Marriage Protection Act | Safeguarding marriage from the evils of divorce.

Best. Cause. Ever.

Seems some would like to choose from the scriptures like it was a buffet.

 

pointless to follow the news of the war(s)

clipped from stuartbuck.blogspot.com C.S. Lewis on Wartime News and Newspapers in General to strive to master what will be contradicted the next day, to fear and hope intensely on shaky evidence, is surely an ill use of the mind. Most of what he remembers he will therefore have to unlearn;

My insurance company wants to sue my 3-yr-old

In an effort to not have to pay the ER bill I incurred, Captial BlueCross is suggesting I go after my preschooler for the money.

Let me explain. One nice, quiet, peaceful summer evening, as I was putting my then 2-year-old son to bed, he retaliated by sending me to the emergency room.

OK, not exactly, it wasn't intentional (so he says), but he threw his head back, straight into my mouth, splitting my lip open vertically across my unstraightened teeth.

After the blood stopped gushing, I gathered the courage to examine the inside of my lower lip, discovering it split almost completely through to the other side. Opened up just like, well, a pair of lips.

When I got to the ER, I explained to the admitting/intake clerk what happened - that my son's head struck my face, splitting my lip open. She shook her head, took notes, gave me a bracelet and told me to have a seat.

As an aside, it occurred to me as I waited that anyone who opposes state-run medical facilities for fear of having to wait to see a doctor has never actually been to an "emergency" room. No, I was not in mortal peril - it was evening, and a weekend, so there would be no GP to consult. Still, I waited most of the evening to see someone.

I eventually did see the triage nurse. He took a look inside my mouth and concluded I would require stitches. When he asked how I came to have this injury, I reiterated the above story. He was amused, but not unsympathetic.

I was then admitted inside, and proceeded to wait further to see another medical professional. An attending nurse prepped the room, pulling out all manner of instruments for suturing deep lacerations. And then I waited some more.

Eventually a doctor's assistant (I believe - in any case someone capable of attending to my injury and making a qualified examination thereof) came in and said that my lip had mostly healed already (!!). I could have stitches if I wanted, but that itself would be painful, and that area of the mouth heals very quickly (I didn't think I had waited that long). So off I went back home, with my discharge papers, new bracelet and an ER co-pay bill in my hand.

To the point of this story, I did tell the attending doctor('s assistant) the same story about how my lip came to be that way.

Months go by, and I get the Explanation of Benefits from CBC. They're denying payment, because they've come to believe that the injury was the result of an auto accident (?). They suggest filing a claim against my auto policy.

The part of my brain that believes conspiracy theories wondered if they were trying to weasel out of paying - "clearly the nature of your injuries suggests they were sustained in an automobile accident" - but having a wife who works in the health care field, I understand how someone could write down the wrong code on a form, and my injury could be misclassified. I call to clear up the confusion.

The clerk I spoke with was more than pleasant. He, like everyone, was amused at my retelling of how my son came to bust me in the mouth. He said he would make the proper notations, and that would be it.

Always be wary when someone in that position says something like that.

I've just now gotten a letter - a form to fill out, actually - an "Other Party Liability Report." My "contract contains a Subrogation provision that includes the right of recovery for benefits provided when a third party has first payment responsibility." In other words, tell us who's responsible, so we can go after them for the money.

They want to know if it was (again) the result of an auto accident, or was work-related. Under "Section 2 - Complete this section if another person or party was responsible for the injury/illness," it asks, "has or will the person file a claim against the responsible person or the insurance company?" Then it asks for their insurance information - uncuriously, it's the same as mine. It then asks if I've retained an attorney.

No, I wasn't planning on suing someone with the same last name who lives at the same address, who's on my insurance policy. Yes, I know forms like these often get kicked out automatically by "the system" and that they're usually applicable, but considering everyone involved should know by now how it happened, I shouldn't have to explain it again.

The Bad Sleep Well

the title of an old Japanese movie, in case you were wondering how anyone at Bank of America could sleep at night. Thousands of loans where both the lender and the borrower could have been helped by modification end up in foreclosure anyway. Ever wonder why?

clipped from open.salon.com “According to my records there were no attempts by Bank of America to reach me,” I assert.  He tells me according to his records I’m incorrect so I ask for specific dates and times of these alleged attempts to reach me.  “We don’t keep a log of those,” he responds I could go around in circles all day with this guy bending his absence of critical thoughts into origami baseball bats and beating him senseless with them but I see no point. Foreclosure: Staring Down the Barrel of a Loan Mod Ray Gun

Define "pre-existing"

John 1 (Americans 0):

(via crosswalk.com)

ı In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being 4 in him was life, and the life was the light of all people.

I can have been in multiple auto accidents - causing all of them through my own faults - have had my driving privilege revoked (temporarily), and still be able to purchase (government mandated) auto insurance (albeit at a higher cost).

I can purchase a home in southern California and many agencies would still sell me flood, mudslide and fire insurance, though it would be more costly than for someone in, say, Montana.

The point is, I could get it.

How does, "sorry, you had that before you got here," only apply when you're paying for medical care?

If I'm a woman and I've had a C-section or been the victim of domestic abuse, or if I was born with a congenital health issue and turn 18 and am no longer covered under my parents' plan, under all the circumstances I can find myself unable to acquire health insurance. They just won't sell it to me.

Or, having an insurance policy, if I change jobs and get a new employer-sponsored health plan or my current employer changes providers, or again am the above woman, I can, legally, be denied payment for necessary treatments.

Sometimes we need to pay for conditions we already have. And if we're paying for "just in case," we expect the case to be paid for, should the time arise.

Without payment there is no treatment. Without treatment, there is severe illness and death. And we allow this to go on.

The idea that something could have existed in some form before it became manifest is a debate for theologians, philosophers and quantum physicists. Not politicians and lobbyists. And if more insurers employed more theologians and philosophers, there wouldn't be much of a debate at all.

Word.