America’s Drug Crisis

By Caleigh Pelrine

         I have a vivid memory of being offered Percocet at 14 years old. I just recall being told it “makes you feel good.” Wondering how a 14 year old could even obtain such a substance, I looked it up and found out about the opioid epidemic. Percocet is just one of many prescription opioids that millions of Americans abuse daily. This is not something that is taught in school. All I was ever taught is that drugs are bad, and I should never do them. I had never realized it was this big of an issue.

         The opioid epidemic began in the late 1990’s when new prescription opioid painkillers were being manufactured. Pharmaceutical companies assured the medical community and the public that these substances were not addictive which led healthcare providers to prescribe them at a greater rate than ever before. By 2007, thousands had died from opioid related drug overdoses, and hundreds of thousands were misusing opioids. A decade later, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) declared a public health emergency. At this point, 130 people were dying from opioid overdoses daily, and over 2 million people had an opioid use disorder. Donald Trump’s 2019 budget includes over $74 million for overdose-reversing drugs, and the HHS has issues over $800 million in grants to support treatment, prevention and recovery. Additionally, in 2017 the HHS launched a 5-point strategy to combat the epidemic; better addiction prevention, treatment, and recovery services; better data; better pain management; better targeting of overdose reversing drugs; better research. Though some changes have been made, the epidemic is only getting worse. Deaths from opioid related overdoses are predicted to skyrocket in the coming decade.

        We must take action. The youth of America need to be educated before it is too late. Junior high schools and high schools should be required to educate students about opioids and the severity of this terrible epidemic. Healthcare providers should also be required to inform his or her patients of the possible side effects of anything he or she prescribes. This genuinely is a life or death situation considering that the vast majority of opioid abusers began using these drugs due to a prescription from his or her healthcare provider, probably unaware that he or she could become addicted. People need to know exactly what is going into their bodies. If students are educated about the crisis now, it could save hundreds of thousands or even millions of lives down the line.

Digital Communications Division. “5-Point Strategy To Combat the Opioid Crisis.” HHS.gov, US Department of Health and Human Services, www.hhs.gov/opioids/about-the-epidemic/hhs-response/index.html.

National Institute on Drug Abuse. “Opioid Overdose Crisis.” NIDA, 22 Jan. 2019, www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/opioids/opioid-overdose-crisis.

Lonely With The World at Our Hands

By Karah Estillore

Technology is everywhere.  If you’re bored, you can whip out the brand new Nintendo switch you got for your birthday.  Just had a bad breakup? Don’t worry, if you have your phone on you, Twitter’s there to listen.  In a world that has become heavily reliant on the use of technology, however, it’s hard not to question whether the time we spend on our devices makes us more alone.  In my opinion, they do.

Some might argue that, in a time where we are able to contact someone from across the globe in a matter of seconds, people are more connected than ever before.  While this is substantially true, it also isn’t, in a sense. LivePerson conducted a 2017 poll asking 4,000 young adults from several different countries about their communication preferences.  Of the 4,000 that were Americans, “nearly 74% of respondents would rather send a text message instead of having a conversation in person.” Connection lies in our ability to communicate with others, and while technology has enabled us to do just that without even having to move an inch, it has taken away the chances of people having valuable social interactions outside it.

Without a doubt, the advances in modern technology have made many things in life easier.  At what point, however, have things been made too easy?  People can shop without having to step foot outside.  Food can be ordered without verbally communicating what you want to a cashier.  Even my own experiences lead me to believe that technology undermines the potential in real connection; hangouts with some friends usually end up with us scrolling away on our phones silently.  The thought that the devices that are supposed to help increase our social connections are what is taking away from them is what makes it more unsettling.

Now, I am aware that this can’t be solved with something as simple as telling people to just put down his or her electronics.  We have become reliant on our technology after all. However, continuously finding ways to increase social interactions outside the use of our devices can be an effective solution, no matter how small.  Go to the mall, awkwardly list off your order at Panera, grab a friend and do something that won’t make it tempting to pull out your phone. There can be value found in these genuine interactions that you have, for they won’t be behind a screen.

Social interactions are fundamental to human connection.  With the technology that has become ingrained into our society—so ingrained that our daily routines often revolve around their use—genuine connections are now harder to make, but not impossible.  When it comes down to it, we can take charge to prevent ourselves from being lonely with the world at our hands.

Works Cited

“Survey Says 7 In 10 Millennials Would Rather Text Than Talk In Person.” CBS Detroit,

CBS Detroit, 21 Oct. 2017, detroit.cbslocal.com/2017/10/21/millennials-text-talk-in-person/.

Parking Culture of Authority

By Tetyana Stayura

Most people who go to a restaurant, go shopping or even go to a church prefer to find the closest parking spot available. All employees at the given places are required to park at the furthest spots to allow customers to park closer and give them a better experience. At a high school setting, the teachers are employees and the students compare to “customers” as they only stay at the high school for four years. However, compared to employees of other businesses, the teachers receive parking spots--for free--that are the closest rather than students, who pay for their opportunity to park.

One of the choices many students at Elk Grove High School face is whether to purchase a parking pass, which allows you to park closer to the school, or park at a further available parking lot, which is at least a four minute walk.  Many of the lucky students, like me, are able to purchase the $200 parking pass. However, most of us don't know that the spots we get are further than the ones the teachers get. There are no parking spots reserved for any students therefore every morning all of the spots are first come first serve. Many of the students will come to a disappointment when they are only able to find an available spot in the last two rows of a smaller parking lot or the far left of the larger one. The biggest disappointment, however, comes when they realize that the closest spots were taken by teachers. Considering that the teachers already have the closest spots available in both parking lots, it is bewildering as to why they would take some of the closest spots that are available to students. Both of the parking lots come with preinstalled rows of parking for teachers, which are marked by white lines, whereas the rest that are for students are marked in yellow. Elk Grove has a total of 676 parking spaces where ten are for the handicapped and six are reserved for buses which leaves 452 spots for students and 208 for teachers. The penalty for the students who park in the teacher’s spots varies from loss of the parking pass with no refund, car towed - at owner’s expense-, or a detention. The problem many students have with that rule is that the teachers don’t have a similar penalty for parking in the students’s spots.

Some might argue that teachers are unaware of the policy that the spots are color coded.  Nonetheless, students are informed of this rule which is included in a packet they receive when they purchase their parking pass. The staff also faces a problem with the fact that this year, there 240 staff members at Elk grove, 32 more members than staff therefore requiring them to utilize student spots. Why do students get more consequences for parking in a wrong spot when teachers are more likely to do it and still face no consequences? The solution for this problem is an easy one. The school either penalizes both the students and teachers equally or gets rid of it’s penalties.

Enemy Comba-tints

By Aidan Cashman

I am not one to involve myself in the lives of others, and push my view of how things should be onto them. Leave me alone, and I’ll do likewise. That’s how I’ve always lived, and it works for me. But as someone who spends a fair amount of time outside at all times of day, walking or biking, I am becoming more and more concerned with a seemingly innocent trend among auto owners. This past summer, I began to notice myself being constantly confused by the intentions of drivers with tinted windows, hiding from both me and other drivers. Too many times I would try to cross the street, unable to tell whether or not a driver was signaling for me to pass, or if they even knew whether I was there at all. While this is an issue to me and I’m sure countless other walker/bikers/runners etc., this is only one concern that stems from tinted windows. Tinted windows can absolutely facilitate crimes, such as kidnapping and human trafficking.

Then come the counter arguments. “But most states have laws that regulate how dark tints can be for each window”. True, but no one thinks about how hard it would be to not only spot these windows, but also to judge that they are too dark within that fraction of a second that a officer has to inspect a car as it passes by? In addition to this, a 2013 survey conducted by The National shows that up to 10% of cars on the road today break the laws that their states have in place.

To be honest, however, despite the laws and the dangers that these windows present to our communities, I fail to see any justification for their continued legalization or necessity in any capacity. People scream “Privacy! Freedom! Liberty!”, to which I would normally say that you’re right, those should absolutely be priorities. But, for better or for worse, where else in our society, in laws or all policy precedents, does privacy triumph over public safety? Where else can my privacy legally trample your safety, your right to life? The privacy argument falls flat, and, as such, I’m calling on the state of Illinois, which, as we all know, loves to regulate everything into oblivion, to ban these windows, which offer so many threats to the lives of this state’s citizens but offer no tangible benefit to them as any compensation, on all automobiles. And, my dear driver, stop hiding! Stop endangering your life and mine! Quit the use of these unnecessary, egotistical windows! You’re not good enough that no one should have the privilege of seeing your face, not to mention your hand signal permitting me to cross the street! Come on down from that pedestal, and act like what you are, a normal Illinoisan. Even you will appreciate a bright, visible world, free from the fear of the unknown as people walk or bike across the wide streets of this state.

Bibliography

Editorial, National. “Dark Window Tints Are a Clear Danger.” The National, The National, 3 Mar. 2015,

www.thenational.ae/opinion/dark-window-tints-are-a-clear-danger-1.72870.

“Window Tinting Laws in All 50 States.” Instamotor, instamotor.com/blog/window-tinting-laws-50-states.

Hat Rule: Good or Bad

By Ben Barker

Throughout life every person has to follow rules and regulations. Even though many people will argue and try to find a way to bend the rules, but if the rules are given with fact and reason everyone will have to follow them. But when the rules are inconsistent and only pertaining to certain time, style, or even person, what makes a person follow any rule if it is followed with inconsistencies. One rule that has always been inconsistent and followed students all throughout their academic careers is the no hats in school rule. With all of the inconsistencies of this rule comes the question if the rule is good or bad, or even if this rule should even exist at all

Within the past couple weeks I have been participating in an experiment testing my teachers and faculty members all throughout Elk Grove High School. To test the hat rule I have worn different types of hats such as baseball caps, winter hats (ones with the fuzzy ball on top), and an assortment of beanies. The test have spanned over a four week period, throughout seven classes a day. Everyday I wore a different hat and everyday the results have changed. When I wore a baseball cap six out of seven teachers would enforce the rule, but while I wore a beanie or a winter hat the results would average from one to two teachers out of the seven would enforce the rule. But one continuity that has remained unchanged, is the faculty members in the hallways. Throughout the past four weeks I have had only one faculty member enforce the rule on a consistent basis. To finalize my results, I took up one more experiment where I wore the same hat as one of my friends, both male and female. Within the seven classes, most teachers would tell both students or neither students to take off the hat. This proved to me that this rule was not an image thing, and helped show that illegitimacy of this rule. Does this prove the illegitimacy of the rule? Does this show how the rule is not enforce on a consistent level? Or does this prove that this rule is an unnecessary inconvenience?

Personally this rule has only inconvenience myself and many other students here at Elk Grove High School. Normally if there is a rule that the staff will enforce, the students will listen. But because this rule is inconsistently enforced, no student will take it seriously and ignore the rule all together. Many people have tried to argue the hat rule, but there has been no change. What will it take to change this rule? The only way to make this rule legitimate is to eradicate it all together or to have the rule enforced on a consistent level. To make a rule listened to and respected is to make it consistent. Many schools are inconsistent with their rules, and in result makes other rules seem less important. So what makes the hat rule legitimate to other rules, the answer it isn't truly legitimate. If our school wants to live through legitimacy and consistency, then take away the one rule that does not work, and the rule gives the students the inconvenience of something that doesn’t even affect them on a consistent basis.

Thanks, But I Can Look Out the Window

Thanks, But I Can Look Out the Window
by Grace Ritter

   During the recent polar vortex, I sat dumbfounded on my couch watching news reporters talk of record-breaking temperatures; if it is so dangerous to be outside, why are these reporters standing out in the frigid cold? How are we supposed to take these reporters seriously when they are not even wearing the proper winter attire? During every instance of severe weather, reporters try to visually prove to us the exterior conditions. While I am sitting on my couch, in safety, I am more concerned for these people standing in subzero temperatures than actually listening to what they are reporting. If this is how news channels want to boost their ratings, then count me out.

In a quickly expanding age of social media, fake news is on the rise. I agree that video and photographs can easily be doctored, however, I do not see the need to physically stand outside. I do not think reporters would stand in the middle of a fire, just to prove to us that it was happening. I propose that all reporters should film their segments in the safety of a building, and if they feel so inclined, provide video footage for us to see.

I do agree that watching reporters getting swept away in the high speed winds of a hurricane, or getting rain dumped on their heads by the bucket-full is hilarious. But in times of peril, especially ones when so many people can possibly be injured or killed, reporters need to set an example and get to safety. A young child could see news coverage of a hurricane, for example, and if they see a reporter outside they might think it is okay for him or her to be outside too. Obviously that is a worse case scenario, but it could happen.

Considering how much the average news reporter makes annually-about $40,000- they do not make enough to risk their lives. Maybe, if you said you would pay me a quarter of a million dollars, I would stand outside in high speed winds to tell millions of Americans to stay indoors. But until that happens, reporters should stop trying to make me worried sick while I sit on my couch wrapped in three blankets, knowing full well that the windchill is -45.