#I am a professional and have been entrusted with such access for my professional duties

[clonerightsagenda]

Gotta say lads I am not optimistic about a fall Alecto release date considering it has not made it to any of the review journals yet and is not in Edelweiss either.

[criticallensessays155-blog]

essay writer online

About me

4 Common Types Of Essays You

4 Common Types Of Essays You Choose what kind of labor you want us to put in writing, specify the number of pages or phrases, anticipated supply date, etc. We’ve been where you are actually – sitting there on the verge of screaming, thinking “write my essay for me”. Don’t anticipate essay writing might finally your essay, for the best essay paper writing services, we set by you. They cooperate with you and you based on the shortest deadlines we make use of writers will create something at McDonalds? Feel free features supplied are a professional essay your self. An expert recommendation to select the requirements of a worth list, the sensible ones! If you must pay each work particular person style of your tutorial battle. You Need Essayyoda stands out more expertise which simply can’t be carried out the shoppers who graduated final minute work. Reasonable prices provided are covered to start working along with your task, whether or not what wants and it difficult. But what you seen the number of the beneficial sources. Make the worth of them to solely the most daunting duties of sleep deprivation. Not solely will this work out cheaper for you, but we also offer fourteen days so that you can evaluation your essay and request any adjustments. We can also format your essay based on your specific requirements. Firstly, you have to kind a title of your essay, in order that the bot may find relevant content. Your success is important to us and in order to avoid unnecessary issues with your professor, we write unique work only, tailor-made just for you. Our Privacy Policy completely protects your personal information from third events. Data is never shared with third parties whenever you join to make use of our service. We’ll occasionally ship you promo and account associated emails. We provide a telephone service and a reside chat service, both of which are available all day every single day. We do advise you to provide us so long as potential the place you can although. We would go out more about the way to fear about that. If you entrust in a small research, term paper, a deadline with the deadline. It’s why we’re particular and night to supply clients of hard to fool your possession. We have not a wide range of working together with your coursework – be done earlier than writing service. Essay mills let you pay another person to do your work – you inform them what you need and they’ll write it for you. I am a man, I am referred to as Dan, and I am a pupil. The majority of my time is spent underneath levels of stress that can only be described as 'pretty excessive'. I'm paying £9000 a 12 months for access to PowerPoint presentations even my lecturers don’t wish to learn. It is an impressive customized essay writing providers we will. The worth of your essay, research, it's a time period papers no use to firmly say that the educational requirements, with a good time. We assure you’ll get a excessive-high quality paper if you want it. Pay solely whenever you receive a complete, one hundred% plagiarism-free paper & are happy. ”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy coverage.

[channelnewswire-blog]

Another year on earth - Hard News - Public Address

Sometimes-- often, even-- grief is an ambush. You do not know what's in there up until you lose something, or someone. You do not know how the experience of loss will make you feel about yourself, or what to do about it.

It was chance that brought me back into the ambit of my old buddy Grant Fell and his wife Rachael at the end of 2017. Formally, Grant was clear of the brain tumours that had been the central reality of his life for three years, and I wanted to do a follow-up on an interview I 'd done with him for a prepared Audioculture post-- which itself had actually taken 2 or 3 efforts to carry out, as he shuttled in and out of healthcare facility. He wasn't addressing his phone or returning messages.

Eventually, I acquired Rachael, who informed me that problems from treatment had actually made Grant really ill, really rapidly. He was back in hospital and it wasn't great. I went and visited him, but we never did the follow-up interview. My old good friend was passing away.

I don't mean to pretend I was among the group of people, led by Rachael herself, who took care of Grant for every single day of those 3 years. I 'd just seen him sometimes. I think I did sense quite rapidly that it was time for me now to step up. One of the very first things I did was break the law.

Grant appeared to have actually benefited earlier in his cancer fight from the modest use of cannabis oil. It can be found in a syringe, handed down from another cancer patient who had passed away, but Rachael's mother had actually mistakenly thrown away the last of it when she cleaned up the fridge. Rachael and I discussed it and I stated I figured I could source some more.

The experience of doing so, and briefly going into the neighborhood where these things are shared, was humbling and interesting. As I composed later in a submission on the federal government's medicinal marijuana expense, it seemed to make a crucial difference to Grant

's final, valuable days. When Grant left us, we were fortunate to have Hilary Ord, a brilliant and knowledgeable celebrant, to lead the small group of pals entrusted with putting together a funeral service. She described to us what a funeral for somebody like Grant indicated-- it would not be a little affair. I was charged with rapidly raising some money. We didn't reveal the names of individuals who helped financially at the time, but I think it's appropriate to tape them here. The New Zealand Music Foundation, Tim Wood, Phantom Billstickers, the Music Managers Federation and Flying Nun Records, thank you.

At Rachael's demand, I likewise delivered the eulogy. That was a deep dig. I believe it was the very first time I've spoken some words of te reo Māori and not been simultaneously conscious that I was doing it: it was as if the words at the end merely streamed up through me. I nearly wasn't sure what had actually happened.

It wasn't practically Grant, however about everybody; the kids who satisfied all those years back, matured and did things. About how typically we did things since Grant decided they might be done and beckoned all of us in to the doing. I discussed it in interviews and in the Audioculture article-- and every time it made me assess the method he 'd altered my life.

It likewise made me think a lot about tribe and identity, about who all of us were and what was important to us. In specific, about my function in our tribe. Outside of the bonds of family, it seemed the most enduring duty I had.

Something it wasn't was a job. After 9 years of a minimum of 20 weeks annually of TELEVISION loan, I was obliged in 2018 to transform the whole thing. It wasn't simple and sometimes I questioned whether it was even possible. I have actually long been comfortable with the dangers of freelance life, but it was getting a lot harder. Each time editors are ordered to cut editorial budgets, the very first and simplest place to do that is self-employed costs. It was hard to get commissions and when I did, the word rate was barely better than it had remained in the 1990s.

We're house owners, so we are not bad. But with 2 adult handicapped children still in your home, we're not an inexpensive home to run. It's not an enjoyable feeling, burning through long-time cost savings just to keep things going. I wasn't depressed, however there was the odd despondent day. You simply keep pitching.

And all the time, things circled around back to Grant. I discussed him at the Taite Music Prize event, then did a little crisis PR the next day. I wrote the medicinal marijuana submission about him, then took a trip to Wellington to make an oral submission to the committee. I do not think I was launched up until the Headless Chickens played that big, psychological set in his name at The Other's Method festival.

There was also Public Address. I've been thinking about how much I utilized to do here and I genuinely don't understand how I had the bandwidth. Writing blog posts most days, moderating the sprawling discussions in the most intensive, in some cases mentally taxing, way. Trying to have brand-new concepts. And due to the fact that it typically wasn't a living, making a living somewhere else.

This is a quieter place than it utilized to be, for a range of factors. A new, more professional generation of digital publishers has emerged. The most immediate argument now occurs on social networks, and Twitter in particular. Likewise, I could not actually do it any more.

I've constantly been great at drawing a crowd; at tossing a celebration. A community had formed around Public Address and it brought me terrific new buddies. However when you're the host, you're accountable when the visitors-- some of whom had actually literally been together under my roofing system at different times-- begin fighting, it's not enjoyable. It feels like there has actually been a new, sharper, more polarised sort of argument abroad in the last few years that the site is ill-equipped to handle. That I am ill-equipped to handle. Perhaps it fits locations where nobody is actually accountable; where there is no host cleaning up the empties. In that sense, this being a quieter location has actually been an option.

I also feel less likely to basic commentary these days. I 'd rather compose about the things I have experience with and insight on. You primarily get drug policy, music, bike-riding, the occasional fact-check. Often this year, I've been too hectic worrying about not having writing work to simply write, and all at once aware that that's a dumb position to be in.

The entry of Press Client and its voluntary subscription platform has come a little late for any big strategies on my part, but I want to reveal my deepest appreciation to those of you who have actually contributed. It's a substantial motivation to keep going with this. I have actually started to treat it as not just support for the website, but support for what I perform in general. The majority of months, the $700 to $800 it generates has actually been an essential part of our household managing.

Happily, things enhanced in the latter part of the year and I'm fairly optimistic that I'll remain in a position to ask CactusLab to do some modest deal with the website. I'm not actually hiring new blog writers, however I want to clean the cruft of years, retire all our inactive individual bloggers to an emeritus section and maybe open a number of new topic blog sites for periodic contributors. I believe Access has been of worth because sense and I'm grateful to Hilary Stace in specific for her care and commitment to impairment concerns.

It hasn't been all bad. I've leared new skills and written some things I'm really pleased with. It was great to be totally vindicated on the "meth contamination" ordeal I blogged about two years earlier. I've really taken pleasure in working a couple of days lately at RNZ and it looks like that will continue in the new year. I'm hugely happy that my older ASD kid is working once again, with excellent people who like and appreciate him, at the excellent Cotto restaurant.

I have actually also been cheered and enriched more than ever by the music made by individuals around me. Blair Parkes, Tom Scott, Julia Deans, Tom Scott, Julian Dyne, Marlon Williams, Sandy Mill, Anthonie Tonnon and others, thank you. You make a distinction to us-- to me. And The Beths: guys, you would not think how lots of dishes and kitchen clean-ups your brilliant, bouyant album has helped with. I'm also personally pleased to have provided on what I composed this year after Golden Dawn closed-- about making your own areas. On Friday night, our final DJ night for the year at Point Chev's Cupid bar was great. It really seemed like we 'd done something. We'll be back there next year. Come see us.

I was happy that you all voted "compassion" as the Public Address Word of the Year. Do respect each other, and believe what kindness means in action. Have a great summertime and take pleasure in people and locations. Swim, ride, stroll. Request for aid if you require it, use assistance when it's needed. Be kind.

And next month, Grant's anniversary will occur, and that will be difficult for Rachael more than anybody else. I'll weep, yet once again, when I think of him. We'll all believe once again about who we are, where we have actually come from and what matters to us. We'll be another year in the world.

[clubofinfo]

Expert: The media has focused on gay adoption for quite a while, perhaps because it is controversial and controversy – like sex – sells. So, it is little wonder the attention being given to gay rights advocates who are up in arms about laws they see as discriminating against them in the adoption arena based on religious beliefs of adoption agencies such as the law recently passed in  Kansas granting legal protections for faith-based adoption agencies that refuse to place children in LGBTQ homes. LGBTQ activists have now been joined by “tech giants” Google and Apple lobbying against such laws that prevent the state from denying grants and contracts to faith-based agencies for refusing to place children into homes that don’t align with their religious beliefs. A similar bill passed the house in Oklahoma and heads for the Senate. South Dakota, Michigan, Alabama, and Texas have all passed similar legislation. It amazes [and offends] me that, of all the pressing issues in child adoption today, this is the one these mega corporations chose to take on and stand up for.  Is this really the most pressing current wrong in adoption? What about child trafficking for adoption? What about pressure, coercion, exploitation to meet a demand for babies? What about rehoming? What about establishing a national child abuse registry so people cannot move state to state like the Hart family did to avoid detection of their abuses to the vulnerable children entrusted to them, and may possibly have prevented the murder of six adopted children? What about denial of adoptees right to access their own birth certificates? None of that matters? It is shocking that Apple and Google find the alleged rights of the LGBTQ community more important to take a stand on than all of these other issues facing adoption. Sadly, none of these issues which cause harm and suffering to innocent children ever garnered the attention that the issue of gay adoption has. They are just not popular or sexy. Sad realities don’t sell like warm fuzzy happily-ever-after – or even indignant – stories do. Let me be perfectly clear. Despite the recently freorted horrific abuse and murder of six children adopted by Jennifer and Sarah Hart, as a lifelong friend, ally, and supporter of LGBTQ rights to equality, to live free of harassment and violence perpetrated out of hate and discrimination and to marry whomever they choose, I know that same sex couples and gay individuals can and do make excellent care-takers and parents of children, of that I have no doubt or concern and plenty of hetero adopters have brutally abused, abandoned, and murdered children in their care (as have natural parents). At Issue The argument is that adoption agencies should not have the right to discriminate against same sex couples and gay individuals and that to do so causes suffering to children who need adopting by reducing their options for a loving home, a preposterous claim when demand for children to adopt greatly outweighs the “supply.” It’s also a deceptive argument inasmuch as neither state adoptions from foster care nor secular private adoptions are being challenged. These avenues remain open to people of all persuasions. No one is screening out potential families for these children based on religious beliefs or sexual preferences.  Thus, it is patently untrue that LGBT people are discriminated against when it comes to adoption. Gay adoption – like international adoption – is masqueraded as being in the best interest of “unwanted” children who are “languishing” in foster care.  It is true that there are approximately half a million children in state care in the United States. Many are awaiting reunification with their families. Others who can be adopted are, for the most part, ignored by those seeking to adopt because of the children’s age, because of their physical, emotional and educational abilities and limitations, or they are sibling groups. But there are still other paths to adoption open to same sex couples. As noted in The Nation’s recent article “The Left’s Assault on Adoption”: Same-sex couples have abundant options to foster and adopt. Every state in the country allows fostering or adoption by same-sex couples. As one LGBT advocacy group has documented, there are no states where same-sex couples face legal restrictions when petitioning for fostering, joint adoption, or stepparent or second-parent adoption. Most private adoption agencies, as well as all public agencies in America, are willing to place children in same-sex households. The number of adoptions by same-sex couples has more than tripled from 6,500 couples in 2000, to 22,000 in 2010. And almost 40 percent of all adoption agencies, and 83 percent of public agencies, report that they have made at least one adoption placement with an LGBT person. Same-sex couples adopt and foster and are not prevented from doing so by the continued existence of adoption agencies that prefer to place kids with married moms and dads. Anyone – regardless of their gender, marital status, or sexual preference  – is perfectly able to adopt a child needing a family. The only restriction in question is one that pits the non-existent right to adopt against the right of faith-based adoption agencies – often funded by religious institutions  – to operate in keeping with their religious beliefs and to provide services to specific communities that choices such religious based services. The Nation also recognizes: Faith-based adoption agencies that follow their religious beliefs have a high level of success in placing older and disabled children. They also provide services for vulnerable women seeking help with unplanned pregnancies. Moreover, some women facing an unplanned pregnancy want their child to be raised by a married man and woman. A birth mother should have the freedom to work with an agency that honors her preferences and shares her values. In general, I am opposed to businesses refusing to serve LGBTQ customers which can result in health professionals refusing to serve clients based on their religious beliefs.  However, when it comes to adoption agencies, there are multiple clients served – those seeking to adopt , the families seeking placement, and the child. Adoption is not, or should not be, merely a business transaction.  And herein lies the difference between adoption agencies and wedding photographers or bakeries who are serving a single client. This is nothing new. There have long been specifically Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, and Evangelical adoption agencies that serve their communities, providing families the option of selecting who might or might not want to raise their child based on religious values and practices. Should that right be taken from families in need of finding alternative, extra-familial care for their child? It is, after all their child up until they relinquish their parental rights or have those rights terminated by the state.  Families in crisis considering adoption have the same right to ensure their child is raised in the tradition of his or her family of birth and kin just as every parent does and thus have the right to choose a placing agency to act on their wishes and preferences. Religious and secular adoption agencies have many criteria such as age of those seeking to adopt, standards some may object to or call discriminatory. The alternative, however, is a society in which children are treated like cars that are sold to whomever has the ability to pay. Adoption agencies act on behalf of and represent families in need. We hope they are acting on good faith and using good judgment to do the best not for the paying client – those adopting – but for the silent client, the child. In that capacity, representing the most vulnerable among us, it is their duty to be selective and have criteria. As a society, we want potential adopters subjected to criminal background checks and home studies though many object to being scrutinized in ways that people who become parents naturally are not. But should the safety net for children in need be any less cautious? The powerful LGBTQ lobby I have long avoided writing about this aspect adoption knowing that unless I am totally in favor and supportive of the rights of the LGBTQ community to adopt, I would be seen as biased against gays and deemed homophobic. The rights of LGBTQ people to create anonymous offspring via genetic “donations”, to exploit women as surrogates, and their alleged right to adopt – a right no one has – become hands off, sacrosanct. Speak out against any of these practices that provide children for LGBTQs and you are labeled prejudiced against their sexual preferences, and silenced, despite speaking out against such practices for all. Out of more than 100 blog posts I wrote for Huffington Post, only two were rejected. One was this one, opposing the sale of anonymous genetic material because it stepped on the toes of the gay community, despite my objections being the practices themselves when utilized by anyone, gay or straight. No adoption policy should be formed without hearing and respecting the input of the lived experiences of adoptees.  Anything less treats adopted persons as commodities. Yet, the voices of adult children of same-sex parents who dare to write or speak out about their personal experience in anything but glowing terms, are silenced, discounted as “ungrateful,” bitter, angry by powerful LGBTQ lobby. Those who are less than thrilled at having been raised by same-sex parents report having have great difficulty getting published despite glowing credentials, are labeled homophobes, and are harassed to the point that at least one woman known as Rivka Edelman had to go underground and write under a pseudonym. Gay men and women, like any group of people, are unique individuals and cannot be grouped together based on that one aspect of their lives. Not all women or even all feminists agree on everything any more than all left-handed people, or all Ohioans share similar opinions, or beliefs.  Thus, not all members of the LGBTQ community are incensed or feel discriminated against by religious adoption agencies upholding their criteria. Bryan C. is a gay male adoptee and an adoptee rights advocate. He brings a unique perspective to  this issue: My issue with same sex couples adopting a child is not dissimilar to my issue with any couple or individual legally and ethically adopt[ing], that being the primacy of the child’s well-being above and beyond any real or imagined “need” to parent where biological ability is absent. It is my sincere belief as an adoptee who struggled over years with my own sexuality (self-concept) issues, that a child at all cost, be allowed to thrive in the most stable environment possible. In some instances, single mothers and fathers . . . if assisted by family and professional help would be [able] to maintain an original nuclear family.  In the absence of that possibility, a child placed for adoption for whatever reason, is immediately in a destabilized environment by the very nature of the process. When one compounds that destabilized situation, it is not, in my opinion, ameliorated by adding further to a [child] placement [with] a same sex couple by nature of it not being a societal ‘norm’ (tolerance or lack thereof ) is not itself necessarily a stable environment. A child already struggling with issues of adoption is then faced with the struggle of being raised in a created non-traditional family. There may be instances of success, but in light of what I have experienced as both a ‘successful adoptee’ who grew up and became an experienced gay man, I believe what I have written to be true from my experience. I do not think same sex parents ‘deserve’ to be parents more than stable single parents, it simply adds another potential layer of instability to a child of whom instability, in my honest opinion, is already a large portion of their lives. This is my opinion with the interest of all adopted or potentially adopted children, including those conceived in vitro as primary. My position on adoption As a lifetime advocate for children and families, I too view adoption through one narrow lens: the best interest of children, above and beyond the alleged “rights” of any of the adults involved (birth or adoptive parents) over those of the child, though I recognize the powerful bond created by the mother/child dyad and believe it detrimental to both mother and child to severe that without good cause. As such I do not give primacy for the needs, wants, desires or wishes of anyone seeking to create or enlarge their family through adoption. I believe adoption should always be about finding the best care for children not about filling longing arms. (I am equally disliked for this position in the infertility community which has accused me of being heartless and lacking compassion as in the LGBT community.) Apple and Google and any others who support adoption need to educate themselves and learn the facts. Adoption is glamorized, applauded, encouraged, and promoted as a win-win. It is not. Every adoption, in fact, begins with a loss that creates a lifetime trauma. Many – perhaps even most – adoptees cope well with the separation, loss, lies, and secrecy of the relinquishment at the foundation of every adoption. Their resilience and coping skills do not, however, eliminate struggles such as cultural identity and lack of medical history. Stranger adoption – by any non-related person or persons –  should be a last resort turned to only when there are no extended family able or willing to parent. It should not be encouraged and fought for as a right. Viewing adoption from a child-centric perspective, we need to be less inclined to jump on the band-wagon of anything that increases the enormously high demand for sought-after babies – currently about 36 to 1. It is this demand and the tens of thousands of dollars those seeking children to adopt are willing and allowed to pay, that creates pressure, coercion, exploitation, corruption, and child trafficking. Thus, if one agency turns down one couple there are many other agencies and many others vying to adopt! No child has suffered. No adult’s “rights,” needs, desires, or feelings of entitlement should take precedent over the rights of children in need. http://clubof.info/

[nhlabornews]

New Bill To Create A Death Benefit For School Employees Killed In The Line Of Duty

In 2017, approximately 40 people per day died from gun related injuries according to a report from Gun Violence Archives. Unfortunately this is the world we live in.  This is why children practice “lock down” procedures in school in the event of an armed gunman gaining access to the school grounds.

Today we are not here to discuss how we need to do something about the growing gun violence problem in America: today we want to talk a new bill being pushed in the New Hampshire Legislature to extend death benefits to school employees who are killed in the line of duty.

This week, the NH House Committee for Executive Departments and Administration held a public hearing on HB 1415.  The bill is would simply extend the same death benefit given to police officers, killed in the line of duty, to school employees.

Doug Ley, President of the New Hampshire chapter of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT-NH) testified before the committee on why this bill should be passed.  He cited that since Columbine in 1996, there has been 202 school shootings that resulted in deaths of “164 students, 44 educators & school employees, and at least 3 security/police personnel.”

The American Federation of Teachers, represented the five teachers at the Sandy Hook school in Newtown, Connecticut. Those educators and aide’s were honored as heroes for doing all they could to protect the lives of the children in their care.

Just one example was special education teacher Anne Marie Murphy, 52, a 14-year veteran of the school, was found dead, holding the lifeless body of 6-year-old Dylan Hockley.

“We take great comfort in knowing that Dylan was not alone when he died, but was wrapped in the arms of his amazing aide, Anne Marie Murphy,” the Hockley family said in a statement. “Dylan loved Mrs. Murphy so much and pointed to her picture on our refrigerator every day.”

These heroes should be given the same death benefit as any police officer killed in the line of duty.

Below is the full written testimony of AFT-NH President Douglas Ley Testimony In Support of HB 1415: Death Benefit for School Employees Killed in Line of Duty

Thank you Mr. Chairman and thank you to the Committee for providing me this opportunity to testify in favor of HB 1415, establishing a death benefit for a school employee killed in the line of duty.

My name is Douglas Ley, and I am one of the members from Cheshire County, District 9, representing the towns of Dublin, Harrisville, Jaffrey, and Roxbury. I am also president of American Federation of Teachers-NH, and I have filed all the requisite paperwork with the Legislative Ethics office and intend to participate in the discussion of HB1415.

As we know, NH Statutes currently authorize a death benefit of $100,000 for families of police officers and firefighters killed in the performance of their duties. That is a good thing, and I am proud to have helped pass that legislation. Today, we consider establishing a similar death benefit for the families of school employees killed in the line of duty, and on behalf of AFT-NH I am here to voice our support for this proposed statutory addition.

Dr. Donna Decker is my colleague at Franklin Pierce University and an expert on school shootings, a subject on which she has written and spoken. I asked her the other day just how many such incidents have occurred since the infamous shootings at Columbine High School back in 1999. According to her research, there have been 202 school shootings in the US since Columbine, or an average of 11 shootings per year over the past 18 years at all levels of education. Not all are mass shootings, and not all involve fatalities, but even so, the numbers are staggering—164 students killed, 44 educators & school employees, and at least 3 security/police personnel. Besides Columbine, the most infamous such shooting occurred in Newtown CT, my former hometown (I graduated Newtown High School in 1976)—20 students and six school personnel were cold-heartedly murdered. Thankfully, NH has thus far escaped this phenomenon and I hope that will always be the case, but it is best to be prepared for the worst.

As a negotiator, I have helped negotiate a dozen school personnel contracts. In reviewing them, I find that all include small life insurance policies for the personnel, ranging from $7500 to $30,000, paid for by the Districts. In a few cases, there are also provisions for death benefits in the form of small cash buyouts of unused sick days. None of these benefits, however, come close to the $100,000 benefit proposed here and none of these current benefits would even remotely compensate for the anguish and loss suffered by a family when a school employee is killed in the line of duty.

In my work as a negotiator, I often work with school secretaries. These are the personnel on the front-line of school security, authorizing or denying entry to individuals seeking to enter schools. Their work is often highly-demanding, pulling them in multiple directions at the same time, but the one area about which they always express deep concern is their ability to maintain school security. Like the secretaries, para-professionals, food-service workers, and teachers all tell me over and over that their greatest concern is the safety and security of the children for whom they take responsibility. They wish there was no need for school safety provisions, but they know the world in which they live and work, and they welcome the trainings and drills on how to handle life-or-death school emergencies.

Allow me to close with the following thought. We entrust our children to teachers, para-educators, and all the professionals who work in our public schools. Those school personnel take that charge very seriously, and are ready for whatever emergencies arise. I hope there is never a school shooting incident in NH, but if there is, I am quite certain that school personnel will do all they can to preserve the lives and protect the safety of the children in their charge. Because of the trust and the heavy burden we place upon these secretaries, teachers, para-educators, and all others, providing a $100,000 death benefit to their families in the event of death in the line of duty is right. It can never make up for a family’s loss, but it can provide some aid and assistance and is tangible evidence of the public’s recognition and regard for the heavy responsibilities we place on those in our public schools. Let us do the right thing, and pass HB1415 to the House floor with a recommendation of OTP.

  New Bill To Create A Death Benefit For School Employees Killed In The Line Of Duty was originally published on NH LABOR NEWS