On Nov. 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court published its landmark 4-3 decision in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, which declared that the state constitution did not legally exclude gays and lesbians from marrying. The ruling made Massachusetts the first state in the nation to legalize gay marriage. Much has changed since then. Just 10 years later, 15 states now permit same-sex couples to marry, with Illinois recently passing legislation that could soon legalize it as well. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a section of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the federal law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman, was unconstitutional. The court also declined to hear a challenge to a federal court ruling in California that had overturned Proposition 8, a voter referendum, effectively paving the way for same-sex marriage in the most populous state.Margaret H. Marshall, Ed.M. ’69, the now-retired chief justice who authored the majority opinion in Goodridge, is a senior research fellow and lecturer on law at Harvard Law School. Marshall spoke with the Gazette about the precedent-setting ruling and the rapid cultural and legal shifts that have taken place in its wake.GAZETTE: Take me through that day: What happened in those first few hours?MARSHALL: I frankly did not anticipate the national and international reaction to the decision. Of course, I knew that the litigants and public were waiting for the decision to be released. The Goodridge decision, as all Supreme Judicial Court decisions, was released at 10 in the morning. It was only later that afternoon when I was driving back from a judicial conference and happened to turn on National Public Radio that I realized that Goodridge would be different. I did not expect NPR to cover the story, but it was all over the news. That was the first inkling I had that Goodridge would receive such wide press coverage. In retrospect, people have suggested that I was naïve not to anticipate the media explosion. But a justice of a state court is very different from a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. There have been many court decisions in Massachusetts that receive press coverage here. Very seldom do those rulings make national news. The media response to Goodridge really did catch me unawares. Representatives of media do not telephone justices for comment. We had an excellent public information officer, Joan Kenney: Her phone was ringing off the hook. But mine was not. Even legal friends and colleagues are inhibited, appropriately, about telephoning a justice to discuss a particular decision. So I went about my daily life. I went back to my office and started working on the next case or dealing with a budget issue, or whatever it was I was doing on that day.GAZETTE: Were you worried the decision might be overturned on appeal or that the Legislature would amend the state constitution to render the decision null?MARSHALL: No. We are fortunate in the United States that people — in government and out of government — obey court orders. In Goodridge, we included a provision delaying the implementation of access to same-gender marriage [for six months]. The court wanted the appropriate authorities to have an opportunity to prepare the appropriate forms and so on. That is not unusual. It allows the appropriate city and town officials to read the decision, absorb the decision, and act accordingly. You didn’t want to have people running into the clerk’s office and saying “Please give me a license” when the clerks hadn’t even been informed of the decision.GAZETTE: How were you treated in the days and weeks after the decision was out? Did you receive any letters or threats?MARSHALL: Yes. I don’t speak about the negative reaction. It was not an easy time. The court received hundreds of letters. The public doesn’t necessarily know that they couldn’t write to ask me to change the decision. It was a challenging time, it was a challenging time. The New York Times reported Goodridge on its front page. The following day the front page of The New York Times had a picture of the chief justice of California swearing in Arnold Schwarzenegger as the governor. From my point of view, my opinion was a one-day story. It was same-sex marriage one day and the swearing in of Gov. Schwarzenegger the next day. Well, that turned out to be not quite accurate. And the hostility to me personally continued for a long, long time.GAZETTE: What kinds of debate went on behind the scenes?MARSHALL: You know I can’t talk about that. I think there is an important reason why the discussions among justices are confidential. To the extent that anything is ever written about Goodridge, I hope it will be after the last justice who ruled on the case is deceased. I have left all of my papers to the Radcliffe Institute, and the Goodridge papers will not be opened until after the last justice is deceased. One thing I can say is that the Supreme Judicial Court it is a remarkably collaborative and collegial court. The justices always worked hard to make sure that people who read the opinions understood the legal dispute. In the majority opinions and the dissenting opinions in Goodridge, there are no ad hominem attacks by one justice on another. All of the opinions are devoid of any suggestion that a justice reaching a different conclusion is advancing arguments another justice did not respect. Same-sex marriage was an issue that divided our court, and divided every state Supreme Court until the issue reached Iowa, which issued a unanimous decision affirming same-sex marriage. New York and New Jersey, I think, were the next two cases. Both courts issued split opinions. And of course, in the U.S. Supreme Court in [United States v. Windsor] and a related California case, the Perry case, the court was divided. I feel most proud because the differing opinions in Goodridge are devoid of any suggestion that an opposing justice has misread the constitution or has done anything other than express a legal view about a difficult legal issue.GAZETTE: Unlike these other state and federal decisions?MARSHALL: I hesitate to point fingers, but I think if you look at the decisions from other states and even the Supreme Court on this issue, the justices seem to be far more critical, accusatory even, about each other. The role of a justice is to decide a case, and to educate the people who will read the opinion — first and foremost, the litigants and their counsel, and then trial and other judges who have to follow the ruling, and then the public. It is not helpful if justices are shooting arrows at each other. The SJC [Supreme Judicial Court] justices tried very hard to make sure that in our opinions there was a minimum of legal “junk language” and to explain a ruling in straightforward English so that the public could read and understand it.GAZETTE: How did your experience living in South Africa during apartheid inform your thinking on the issue of inequality?MARSHALL: It did not inform my thinking on the Goodridge case directly. Certainly I was not aware of any influence. Looking back, I have come to understand this: As a child, apartheid taught me that black people were inferior, that they did not deserve to be educated, that they did not deserve the right to vote, that they did not deserve the right to be elected officials. Black people were always “the other,” different, inferior, lower, not entitled to the same rights as whites. When you discover, as I did, that those views were palpably untrue, it makes one hesitate before reaching conclusory views about “the other,” whoever “the other” is, whether it’s a different religious group or a different racial group, or people of a different national origin. I tend to be far more skeptical of claims that “the others” don’t deserve the same degrees of respect, the same privileges and responsibilities that we have. I was not thinking of that when I wrote Goodridge. When you are a judge, you get the case, you look at the arguments, you look at the claims, and you decide as best you can how to resolve those claims. Of course each judge brings her own life experience — not particular views — to the work of judging. I had no view, none whatsoever, on same-sex marriage before the case was brought in the Supreme Judicial Court, and I did not, before the case was argued, have any idea what my colleagues on the court thought about the issue.GAZETTE: Did you ever envision how swiftly the public would embrace the merits of the decision?MARSHALL: You think the public has embraced same-sex marriage “swiftly.” But that depends on where you’re sitting. The first claims for a state to recognize same-sex marriage were brought some 40 years ago. If you are in a same-sex relationship, one might say it took 50 years before there was any momentum toward embracing same-sex marriage. That’s a long time to wait. That is one perspective. The second is this: For several years after Goodridge, there was no forward movement or there appeared to be no forward movement to recognize same-sex marriages in other states. The first cases, I think, were New Jersey and New York, both courts that I respect a great deal, but they went the other way. There was nothing to indicate within the first six years after Goodridge that any state court would follow Massachusetts. It is not unusual for a state court to be ahead of the rest of the country. The United States has seen many instances when a state court was ahead of a national consensus. The closest analogous case may be the decision of the Supreme Court of California in 1948 ruling that a statute prohibiting interracial marriage was unconstitutional. Around that time, according to Professor Randall L. Kennedy in his wonderful book “Interracial Intimacies: Sex, Marriage, Identity, and Adoption,” fewer than 2 percent of the American population were in favor of interracial marriage. That was 1948. And laws prohibiting interracial marriage finally were invalidated for all states by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1967 in a case called Loving v. Virginia. That was almost 20 years later. The decision, of course, put an end to all state statutes prohibiting interracial marriage. So, from that perspective, [for] same-sex couples, it’s moving a little more slowly. In [the] Windsor and Perry [cases], the U.S. Supreme Court did not rule that all DOMA statutes are unconstitutional.GAZETTE: Why do you think marriage equality has been accepted so readily, as compared to Loving v. Virginia?MARSHALL: Judging by public polls, there is certainly a big tilt in favor of same-sex marriage, especially in younger generations. If you talk to my grandchildren who are in their late teens and early 20s, for them, same-sex marriage is not even an issue. And that, I think, in part is because of the courage that same-sex couples have shown in pressing for their right to marriage. It’s not easy to bring a case like this. When the seven couples in Goodridge started their case, no state had recognized their right to marry. It takes a great deal of courage to explain to your parents and your children and your friends that you are going to challenge a long-established reality. The Supreme Judicial Court could have ruled against them, as happened in New York and New Jersey, and that must be a profoundly painful experience.The lawyering for both the commonwealth and for the plaintiffs in Goodridge was of an exceptionally high quality. They really were. The briefs were excellent, and the way the case was presented to the Supreme Judicial Court made very clear what the issues were. But that did not guarantee any particular outcome. I’ve always felt that on this case we had the benefit of superb lawyers, and that makes an enormous difference to the justices. In the U.S. Supreme Court, because there is a very sophisticated bar that argues many cases in that court, the court typically has the benefit of excellent lawyering. In a state court, especially on the civil side, it is very expensive to litigate, and parties can’t always retain the very best lawyers because of the cost involved. But what a real difference excellent lawyering makes to judges.GAZETTE: In a 2005 edition of the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, the plaintiffs’ attorney, Mary L. Bonauto, said of the decision, “It was not so much a sharp, abrupt break with the past as it was the logical, if brave, next step.” Was it brave?MARSHALL: I don’t feel that it was brave. If the bravery was anywhere, it was on the part of the litigants. I hope my opinion was well-reasoned. It’s a little nerve-wracking when scholars and others from all over the world read just one opinion of mine. I don’t mind the scrutiny of my opinions, but I wish scholars looked at a full range of my cases. Of course, every opinion of a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court is examined. Some are good; some not so good. Over time, a balanced view about the jurisprudential skills of a particular justice is formed. When only one opinion is being held up to the light, as usually happens for me with Goodridge, the light feels a little more harsh.GAZETTE: Is this the decision you should be remembered for, or are there others that will become equally important over time?MARSHALL: I don’t know the answer to that question. As a judge, you never think that any one opinion is more important than any other. I can think of cases where the court reversed a murder conviction or affirmed a murder conviction. And believe me, to the litigants and families of the litigants in those cases, that opinion is just as important as Goodridge. Paying attention to every case, treating every case as the most important, is how respect for the courts is developed over time. It does not matter how important the public thinks a case is. It does not matter how important politicians think a case is. Every case is important to the parties of that particular case. Every single litigant must know that the case will receive the same treatment as a well-publicized case or case represented by very successful lawyers. When I said that excellent lawyering helps the judges, it does. But where the lawyering is not particularly good, judges pay particular attention to the case because you want to make sure that justice is done [and] that the lawyering, good or bad, does not determine the outcome of the case. You cannot do this work, you should not be a judge if you are following the headlines in the newspapers. You should not look at the headlines before you decide a case, and you should not look at the headlines after you decide a case. Headlines should play no part in reaching a decision.This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Read Full Story The rapidly evolving field of digital phenotyping involves uncovering specific health-related information in the moment-to-moment data created when people use their smartphones. A recent $517,000 gift from Mindstrong Health is supporting the research of Jukka-Pekka “JP” Onnela, an associate professor of biostatistics at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who is developing new statistical and computational methods for analyzing this smartphone-generated data.Human behavior is context-specific, notes Onnela, which is why characterizing life in everyday surroundings, outside of research labs, is critical. Digital phenotyping can gather 1 billion data points per subject per month — passively, objectively, and continuously. Paul Dagum, founder and chief executive officer of Mindstrong Health, believes that progress in improving outcomes for people with neurodevelopmental and neurodegenerative disorders depends on having better data through rigorous, real-world measurement.“Digital phenotyping can measure detailed information about a person’s mood, cognition, and behavior,” Dagum says. “We can capture a lot of data that, as humans, we’re not really equipped to process.” Indeed, digital phenotyping has the potential to help patients with mental or brain disorders such as schizophrenia, perinatal depression, post-traumatic stress, and dementia detect changes in their conditions days before clinical symptoms emerge.“We’re very excited to be funding JP’s work,” said Dagum. “His research is helping the field grow — and we need people like JP to fully develop and understand the potential of digital phenotyping. Our vision is to make this successful at a global scale.”Dagum notes that 3 billion people in the world have smartphones — a number that will grow to 6 billion by 2020. “The information from smartphones can be used at the individual level to help people manage chronic conditions, even beyond mental health,” he says. “And it can be used at an aggregate level for public health. Imagine having a heat map of the planet that can show hot spots of, say, emotional volatility or cognitive decline from stress, contagion, or toxins. The potential’s big.”Most of Onnela’s research so far has been supported by the unrestricted funding of his 2013 NIH Director’s New Innovator Award. “That award gave us the flexibility to do something that many people thought was not possible,” he says. “Initially, our goal was to conduct just one study and develop a couple of methods. Now, we’re involved in some 20 different studies.” The Mindstrong gift also provides flexible funding, which is especially important in an innovative area of study.“We’re extremely grateful for this gift,” says Onnela. “It boosts our ability to develop methods to make sense of massive amounts of data. This gift enables us to be nimble and tackle problems as they arise. That’s very important for us being able to make efficient progress on our research, and it will mean that we can have greater translational impact with our work. If we can measure social and behavioral markers in people’s environments, I think it’s going to be huge, especially for psychiatric and neurological conditions. I’m biased, but I really think that it will transform the field.”
Saint Mary’s College’s Students Supporting Autism club hosted its fourth-annual Light It Up Blue Walk last Saturday in honor of Autism Awareness Month. The event raised $2,700 for the Dan Ryan Children’s Fund at the LOGAN Center, a group that assists families with the costs of services for those with autism or other disabilities, Gabrielle Moody, president of Saint Mary’s Students Supporting Autism club, said in an email.“The walk first started my freshman year and has grown every year,” she said. “The amount we raised has doubled every year and so did participants. It was extremely successful this year and everyone raves about how enjoyable it is for their families.”Nancy Turner, chair of the education department and the faculty advisor for Students Supporting Autism, said she believes the growth of the walk as well as the club’s presence on campus is helping increase autism awareness at the College and the surrounding community. All those from the community were welcome to attend the event.“There were people from the community, as well as students,” Turner said. “I would say overall it’s both. Some of the people associated with LOGAN Center came. In addition, the radio station 97.7 Rock was instrumental in promoting the walk, so some people representative of the radio station came as well.”First year student Alex Guevara Stevens said in an email that the range and number of people who attended the walk was one of her favorite aspects of the event. She also said the walk was special to her because her brothers are both on the autism spectrum.“I loved seeing my friends, classmates and different people from all over the community come together to support the walk,” she said. “It was a great outcome. It is a cause that is very dear to my heart because in the past my family has been dependent from resources that are similar to those the Logan House provides.”Guevara Stevens also said she hopes more people take the time to learn about autism and finding happiness in what can be seen as a difficult situation.“Autism has affected my life because growing up with my brothers has taught me about finding joy in different places, about compassion, but most importantly I have learned that our differences are what make us beautiful,” she said. “Being different is not a bad thing, rather it’s something that makes each and every human being special and unique, and something that we should be proud of.”Furthermore, Moody said the walk allows her to celebrate the people she has met with autism throughout her life.“I hope the tradition of the walk continues after I graduate,” Moody said. “My favorite part about it is celebrating all the individuals with autism that have touched my life in some way. Autism has played a huge role in forming me into the woman/teacher/person I am today, and I am extremely thankful to SMC for giving me the opportunity to spread awareness on our campus.”Turner also hopes that the walk continues to grow and that Students Supporting Autism can continue to bring awareness through the activities they sponsor throughout the year.“I would just say I hope that the walk continues to occur. It’s only one of many activities that Students Supporting Autism plans over the year,” she said. “I’ve had many wonderful students over these years who have really dedicated so much time to not only the walk, but as I said, many events including working directly with children with autism. That’s one of the things this particular group has done. Raising awareness, as I said, just raising money. I’m confident that as these students graduate, which they are and I’m sad to see them go, but I’m sure that we’ll have other students that will step in and take their place. Hopefully the walk and the group will continue to do good things.”Tags: Autism, logan center, saint mary’s, Students Supporting Autism
Additional details about the project, including a timeline, book writer and director, have yet to be announced. The show is based on the adventure novel of the same name by French author Jules Verne. It follows Phileas Fogg, a Londoner who, after a bet with his friends, attempts to circumnavigate the entire globe in—you guessed it—eighty days with his valet Passepartout. Scherzinger, along with stage and screen favorite and upcoming Late Late Show host James Corden, will join Barlow at film honcho Harvey Weinstein’s pre-Oscar dinner ceremony on February 20 to perform five numbers from the new tuner. Rita Ora will also be in attendance and will perform the number “Play,” which she recorded for Neverland’s forthcoming concept album. Weinstein is the executive producer behind Finding Neverland and is also attached to Around the World in Eighty Days. Gary Barlow may be bringing the second star to the right to Broadway this spring with Finding Neverland, but he already has yet another project up his sleeves that will take him to even more fanciful locales. According to the Daily Mail, the Take That singer-turned musical theater composer is at work on a musical version of Around the World in Eighty Days, collaborating with his Neverland partner Eliot Kennedy. Pussycat Doll and West End Grizabella Nicole Scherzinger is on board during the show’s early developmental stages. View Comments
“People who get pets as surprise Christmas gifts generally have some moresurprises coming,” Strickland said. Certainly not the surprises that could follow, said Jim Strickland, a veterinarianwith the University of Georgia Extension Service. Christmas decorations. “Dogs like to chew electrical cords,” he said, “and mayeven bite down on tree lights and glass ornaments. Keep those out of reach of thepets.” Leftover turkey. “Too many leftovers and long, brittle bones can choke orpenetrate the digestive tract of dogs or cats,” he said. “Table scraps can causechronic digestive upset in dogs, too.” Holiday candy. Chocolate, the biggest danger, has a toxin related tocaffeine that can kill a dog or cat by overstimulating the heart. Unsweetenedbaking chocolate is especially deadly. Hard candies, too, can easily choke dogs andcats. Puppies and kittens are cute and cuddly, he said. But they don’t usually comefully trained. They can leave some unpleasant “gifts” in inappropriate places. “The best thing about owning a pet may be that special bond that developsbetween the animal and its owner,” Strickland said. Check with the vet to schedule vaccines, dewormings and flea and tick control fordogs and cats and heartworm prevention for dogs. “Go ahead and set a timetableto have it neutered, too,” Strickland said. What could be a better surprise than a cuddly puppy sporting a bright ribbon onChristmas morning? But be sure to get the pet’s medical records. Then take the pet and its records to alocal vet as soon as you can — within a week, if possible. Once you settle on food and shelter, the next job is to get your pet through theholidays. “Dogs and cats can encounter more dangerous things at Christmas thanare normally around them,” Strickland said. Among the dangers: But that’s when people like most to give them. And many breeders and pet shopsgear up to meet the holiday demand. And pets do make fine gifts. Seasonal plants. “Things like mistletoe, poinsettias and Jerusalem cherry may betoxic to dogs and cats,” he said. “All this adds up to the fact that Christmas really isn’t a good time to get a pet,”he said. Depending on how well the giver knows the recipient, the pet itself might even beinappropriate. “Sometimes people end up with large or active dogs and no place toput them,” Strickland said. Puppies and kittens need to be fed often, he said. “They probably should be fedthree or four times a day at first,” he said. “If you don’t feed them properly, theyhave a greater tendency to be destructive around the house.” Increase the timebetween feedings as the pet gets older. If you find a cuddly surprise under your tree, he said, the first thing you need todo is provide a good place to keep it. Another “first thing” is to feed your pet. Many stores sell a variety of pet foods. Arule of thumb Strickland uses is that “it takes an ounce of feed a day for eachpound a dog weighs.” Cats require a little less than that. If it’s going to be an inside pet, he said, have a place where you can beginhouse-training it.
Walter Reeves Tired of mice and voles in your yard? In the season’s final episode of “Gardening in Georgia” Oct. 25 and 28, host Walter Reeves shows how to rid your yard of voles and meadow mice naturally, by building a home for a family of screech owls.Reeves also tells how plant labels are like footnotes for your garden. He demonstrates how to make labels from plastic knives, stones and aluminum cookie sheets.Finally, Reeves shows off a great way to prevent weeds under shrubbery. He spreads a weed-preventing landscape fabric underneath and covers it with mulch. Reeves shows how easy the task can be.Wednesday, Saturday on GPTVDon’t miss “Gardening in Georgia” Wednesday at 7:30 p.m. and Saturday at 12:30 p.m. The show is designed especially for Georgia gardeners. It’s produced by the University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences and GPTV.
Sign up for our COVID-19 newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest coronavirus news throughout New York Nassau County Legis. Delia DeRiggi-Whitton (D-Glen Cove), left, ex-lawmaker Dave Mejias, center, and others announce their opposition to building a casino on Long Island on Thursday, Feb. 14, 2013.About a dozen members of a new anti-gambling group declared their opposition Thursday to any proposals to build a casino in Nassau County, citing quality of life concerns and worries that a deal to bring Atlantic City-style gaming to Long Island could be in the works.The group dubbed themselves Nassau Residents Against Gambling Enterprise Development, or N-RAGED for short, during their debut press conference on the steps of the Supreme Court building in Mineola. Members of various neighborhood civic organizations as well as current and former local Democratic lawmakers round out its ranks.“We are afraid that our suburban quality of life will be torn apart by some backroom deal in Albany,” said Dave Mejias, an attorney, a former Nassau legislator and the chairman of N-RAGED. “We want to make sure that Long Island is not going to be sold out to those special interests.”He was referring to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s proposal to legalize casino gambling in New York State, a plan that requires a second consecutive vote of approval in the State Legislature before voters ultimately decide its fate in a referendum. The Shinnecock Indian Nation in Southampton has been scouting for a location to build a gaming facility since winning federal recognition in 2010.Despite the timing of the rally about an hour after fellow Democratic former Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi held a press conference announcing his intentions to reclaim his old position, Mejias maintained that the group was “a-political.” Nevertheless, participants praised Suozzi’s agenda and criticized the Republican who unseated him, Ed Mangano, for proposing a casino at Nassau Coliseum. Also speaking at the anti-casino rally was Nassau Legis. Delia DeRiggi-Whitton, another Democrat from Suozzi’s hometown of Glen Cove.“It’s a question of whether or not we really want to push gambling,” said DeRiggi-Whitton, adding that she prefers alternative proposals to build sports or research centers that have been floated for Uniondale and Elmont. She and others also expressed concerns that bringing casino gambling to LI would further strain social services because there might be an increase of gambling addicts losing their homes after betting on cards and other games of chance and tearing their families apart.Cuomo had said during his State of the State address last month that he thinks whatever casinos New York builds should be located upstate, drawing tourists from LI and New York City. When reminded of the governor’s idea, Mejias said it’s still possible LI could be dealt a gaming facility while negotiations continue.Shinnecock Trustee Chairman Randy King told the Press in a statement that if and when the tribe settles on a potential location to open a casino, they are required by federal law to ask the community for input.“There has not been any recent activity regarding Shinnecock gaming in Nassau County,” the statement read in part.Aside from the aging coliseum in Uniondale, there have also been proposals in recent years to build a casino at the Belmont Racetrack in Elmont, where the latest development pitch is for a soccer stadium for the New York Cosmos.A spokesman for State Sen. Dean Skelos (R-Rockville Centre), the co-leader of the chamber who has been instrumental in Belmont redevelopment talks, did not return a call for comment. Neither did a spokeswoman for Mangano.“We spend a lot of money sending our kids away to college,” said Mejias. “They’re not going to be able to live here if they come back to be cocktail waitresses and blackjack dealers.”
9SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr Marketing your mobile lending platform should be no different than marketing your credit union: Define what your credit union’s brand identity is and ensure your marketing strategy supports that brand. If mobile lending is not a significant part of your brand, then don’t market it for the sake of ‘marketing’. On the other hand, if mobile products do support your brand identity, marketing mobile lending can increase member satisfaction and bring opportunities for new loans. Here are some recommendations on showcasing your mobile lending products:1. Walk in Your Member’s Shoes: Before going to market with your mobile lending product, make sure it works well with your mobile banking app, and that it is easy to use. Keep it simple, and test it out. According to Robert Israelite, lending and compliance specialist at CUNA Mutual Group, “Most credit union staff have never applied for a loan in a member channel, and that’s a problem”. “They have internal ways of doing it. Staff need to put themselves in the shoes of a “real member” or potential member who doesn’t have strong ties to the credit union.”2. Video Kills It: Video is no longer an “up-and-coming” marketing tactic, the statistics are astounding. A 2016 marketing report2 found a 200-300% increase in click-through rates if videos are sent by email, and an 80% increase in action if the video is on your site. What’s more, 64% of users are more likely to buy a product online after watching a video. Create a video that demonstrates just how easy it is to use your product. Demos are a great way to remove any intimidation a new product brings: continue reading »
The Telegraph 28 November 2017Family First Comment: Another good reason to promote marriageGetting married could significantly reduce the chances of developing dementia, a new study suggests. Levels of social interaction may explain the finding, experts have said, after the research showed that people who are single or widowed are more likely to develop the disease.Researchers analysed 15 previous studies which held data on dementia and marital status involving more than 800,000 people across Europe, North and South America, and Asia.Their study, published in the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, found that those who are single throughout their life have a 42 per cent increased risk of dementia compared those who are married.People who have been widowed had a 20 per cent increased risk compared with married people, they found, although no elevated risk was found among divorcees compared with those who were still married.The researchers, led by experts from University College London, said that previous research has shown that married people may adopt healthier lifestyles.They may also be more likely to be socially engaged than people living alone.READ MORE: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/28/want-avoid-dementia-get-married-research-suggests/ Keep up with family issues in NZ. Receive our weekly emails direct to your Inbox.
Nov. 2, 2007 Box Score PENSACOLA, Fla. – The West Florida volleyball team cruised to a 30-23, 30-16, 30-18 victory over the Tigers from West Alabama Friday night, to improve to 28-4 on the season, and 11-0 in the conference. Setter Madeline Gonzalez (Jr. / Puerto Rico) had an outstanding evening with 42 assists as she spread the ball around magnificently. Five different Argo attackers had at least eight kills, as Kimberly Clark (Jr. / St. Petersburg, Fla.) led the way with 14, while Isabela Gualberto (Sr. / Brazil) added 13 kills.Game one was close throughout and West Alabama closed to within one point at 24-23 after a kill from Teresa Clements. However, the Argos rattled off the next six points, with three of them coming on kills by Clark, including the game winner. The Argos carried the momentum and emotion of Senior Night thru games two and three for lopsided wins. In fact, in game two, the Argos hit an amazing .630 with 19 kills in only 27 attempts. Clark was the hot hand in game one, while Danielle Spitzer (Sr. / Birmingham, Ala.) put away six kills in game two, and Gualberto had five kills in game three to help keep the Tigers on their heels.Coach Melissa Wolter was very pleased, “We played very well tonight, and with a lot of emotion because of Senior night. We won the serve and pass game, and we controlled the blocking game also. Overall we played very well against a very good team (West Alabama is 26-5 on the season), and much of the credit goes to Madi (Gonzalez), as she was outstanding. She moved the ball around well, this was one of her best matches.” Gonzalez also had 14 digs and four kills go with her 42 assists.West Alabama was led by Allison Nail with 10 kills, and Gabby Pedrosa with 11 digs. Meanwhile, Luciana Rapach (Jr. / Brazil) had a nice all-around match for the Argos, with 11 kills, eight assists, and 16 digs. Jerica Carter (Jr. / Gainesville, Fla.) chipped in defensively with 10 digs. Freshmen Chelsea Wilhoite (Jacksonville, Fla.) had a strong night hitting .300, with eight kills.The Argos play their final Conference match tomorrow afternoon at the UWF Fieldhouse at 3:00 pm against Montevallo. UWF is 11-0 in the conference and is shooting for a perfect 12-0, before they head to the conference tournament next weekend as the #1 seed. The conference tournament is held this year in Searcy, Arkansas, and West Florida plays Ouachita Baptist in the first round on Friday, November 9th, at 2:30 pm. All the West Florida matches will be broadcast on Stretch Internet. Print Friendly Version Share UWF Volleyball Rolls Over West Alabama 3-0 on Senior Night