临沧女人小便出血原因临沧为什么我会尿频,临沧房事过多尿血,临沧女性尿尿的地方流血,临沧产检好的医院是哪家,临沧尿不尽尿急尿频,临沧同房会引起盆腔积液吗,临沧妇科临床医生在线咨询

A Northeast Ohio couple is suing a day care in Bay Village, claiming staff members held down their son and physically restrained him because he wouldn't take a nap.The lawsuit lists as defendants the day care itself, Bay Village Kiddie Kollege, as well as the owner of the day care, the administrator and three employees believed to be involved in the incident.January 17, 2019On January 17, 2019, Melissa Laubenthal was in her kitchen with her six-week-old son when her husband, Will Kesling, came home with their toddler son and told her they had to look at him right away.When Kesling picked up his son, who was nearly 2.5 years old, at Bay Village Kiddie Kollege, the day care he'd attended since he was three months old, he said his son was sitting with a teacher, crying. He said that the teacher said there was a "sheet up front for him," which Kesling assumed was an incident report, typically given to a parent when "your kid bumps their head or gets a scratch," Kesling said.When he went to put the child's coat on, he saw "giant bruises on his neck.""I’m like, 'What are these?' And she’s like, 'Well, there’s a sheet up front,'" Kesling said. "I was like kind of perplexed. I’m like, well, this is odd, normally you get an explanation."Another teacher up front, Kesling said, suggested that "maybe he did that himself, maybe he pinched himself" about his son's injuries."I was just dumbfounded," Kesling said.What happened nextKesling and Laubenthal fed their son dinner as Laubenthal called the day care for an explanation."'What happened, can you give me any answers here?' I got the run-around," Laubenthal said. "They wouldn’t be straightforward with me."The couple took photos of the child's injuries, then took him to the emergency room to be checked out. He later spent the night at the hospital."He had bruises on his face, on his neck, on his shoulders and on his back," Laubenthal said, recounting the incident nearly a year later and choking up."I was furious and then [the day care] tried to sweep it under the rug," Kesling said. "They tried to do an observation report as if he came to school this way and you sent him that way."The lawsuit, and the day care's responseThe lawsuit, filed by attorney Hannah Klang on behalf of the family, claims a police investigation found that staff used physical restraints and abuse because the child wouldn't take a nap.An investigation by Bay Village police narrowed down the time frame in which the child's injuries occurred, but because a security camera system in the day care was not recording on January 17, police noted in a report that they were not able to determine which exact individual caused the injuries and that there was not sufficient evidence to file criminal charges against the three day care staff members involved.The Ohio Department of Jobs and Family Services said that if events happened as the day care center described them, then the incident wouldn't rise to the level of needing to be reported to the state.A January 29, 2019 inspection by ODJFS investigating the complaint about that incident could not substantiate that a staff member caused bruising to the child but did substantiate a "derogatory comment."The owner of Bay Village Kiddie Kollege, who is one of the defendants listed in the lawsuit, gave News 5 a statement by phone, saying, "The safety of our children is our number one concern, and it has been for 47 years. We have not yet received the complaint and will continue to respect the privacy of our children, families and employees. Unable to comment further at this point."The aftermathKesling and Laubenthal said their son was traumatized after the incident."Regression in terms of his speech and bedtime and potty and all of the things that he was able to do well. It was really hard," Laubenthal said.Laubenthal added that her son had seen a sleep specialist and play therapist but also experienced night terrors. He is now back in a day care setting, according to his parents, but they don't know what the long-term effects of this incident might be."I don’t know what he really remembers and that’s what’s so scary about this, so we don’t know what we’re dealing with," Laubenthal said. "But my hope is that he would be a happy, well-adjusted little guy."That also makes it difficult to ask for damages in a case like this, according to attorney Hannah Klang."One of the toughest parts about a case like this is that you’re dealing with a child who has now had an adverse child experience," Klang said. "You don’t know how that’s going to materialize later on in life, so you don’t know what treatment he’s going to end up needing later on."For now, these parents want someone to answer for what happened to their child."People pay good money and trust this place with the care of their little ones," Kesling said. "It makes you really angry." 4873

American reporters asked President Trump about Michael Cohen's testimony during a photo opportunity between Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un on Wednesday.Trump didn't answer. Less than an hour later, the White House blocked several reporters from attending the next media availability between Trump and Kim.Press secretary Sarah Sanders cited "the sensitive nature of the meetings."But the press limitations were an abrupt change -- suggesting that the president didn't want to hear any more questions about Cohen.The result: Fewer eyewitnesses were present at the start of Trump and Kim's controversial meeting in Hanoi, Vietnam.The episode came two days after the international media was forced to move out of a hotel in Hanoi because, it turned out, Kim was also staying there.TV networks and other news outlets had to relocate -- prompting grumbling from reporters who said that the White House should have stood up for the American pressPast administrations have pointedly advocated for press access during meetings with repressive governments. The idea was to demonstrate what American democracy looks and sounds like -- pesky reporters and all.Several White House correspondents said the Trump administration is behaving differently."A lot of catering to Kim Jong Un going on in Vietnam," CNN's Jim Acosta tweeted. "First press is kicked out of hotel where Kim is staying. Now some reporters are blocked from pool spray because the dictator doesn't like shouted questions.""Pool sprays" are when a representative group of journalists are allowed to witness a presidential event. Normally they also shout some questions when they see an opening to do so. This custom has existed for decades.Reporters from the Associated Press and Reuters asked about Cohen and North Korean denuclearization during Wednesday's first "pool spray" with Trump and Kim.Staffers from North Korea's government-controlled media were also in the room, but they don't have the same freedom to shout questions.American reporters were anticipating the same level of access for the evening's next photo op, during dinner, but then "Sanders informed us that no print reporters would be allowed in due to sensitivities over shouted questions in the previous sprays," according to Vivian Salama of the Wall Street Journal. Salama was Wednesday's assigned "print pooler," one of many people who serves in a rotation.So in other words, according to Salama, the White House was okay with photographers and camera crews being present -- to take pictures -- but not with the AP and Reuters reporters being there. Correspondents from the Los Angeles Times and Bloomberg were also blocked.Thanks to a show of press solidarity, the White House opened up access a little bit."When our photo colleagues joined us in protest, they decided to allow one print reporter in," Salama wrote.So Salama was in the room to witness Trump and Kim's Wednesday night dinner. The other reporters were not.According to Salama's recap, Trump asked the small group of journalists if they were all "having a good time."He pointed to photographer Doug Mills of The New York Times and told Kim that Mills is "one of the great photographers of the world."Sanders said in a statement that the White House "ensured that representation of photographers, tv, radio and print Poolers are all in the room.""We are continuing to negotiate aspects of this historic summit and will always work to make sure the U.S. media has as much access as possible," she added.A similar dispute happened during Trump and Kim's first summit in Singapore last year.Acosta was excluded "from the first couple of pool sprays," he said on CNN, "and the reason I was given is they were concerned that Kim Jong Un had not been around American reporters yelling questions, shouting questions and so on."After Wednesday's episode, The Associated Press issued a statement that sharply criticized the Trump administration."The AP decries such efforts by the White House to restrict access to the president," the news service said. "It is critically important that any president uphold American press freedom standards, not only at home but especially while abroad." 4198

An air traveler’s service dog is delivering puppies now @FlyTPA We’re a full-service department! pic.twitter.com/4xlPixtcFn— Tampa Fire Rescue (@TampaFireRescue) May 25, 2018 186

A series of top Democratic presidential candidates have released sweeping plans to combat climate change over the last two weeks, putting the issue front and center ahead of CNN's climate crisis town halls on Wednesday night.Although the overarching themes of each plan are similar -- all candidates lay out how they believe combating climate change is one of the most pressing issues facing the country -- there are marked differences within each proposal, as the candidates compete to distinguish themselves as the most focused and most willing to spend trillions to stop and reverse global warming.Key differences are especially clear in how each candidate will pay for their plans. While some candidates argue they will fund the massive increase in federal spending by cracking down on polluters or instituting a carbon tax, others pledge to end tax breaks to fossil fuel companies and alter the tax code to ensure the wealthiest in the United States pay more. Some candidates endorse all of the above.The climate crisis is a preeminent issue in the Democratic nomination fight, with polls showing it among the top -- if not the top -- issue on the minds of Democratic voters. A report by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned recently that the planet has only until 2030 to stem catastrophic climate change.Many of the candidates are also looking to tie themselves to former Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, the Democrat who centered his presidential campaign around climate change before he dropped out in August. Inslee met with Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren to discuss her plan, which expressly embraces portions of Inslee's detailed proposals, and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro's campaign touted its work with Inslee's team on its proposal.Joe BidenFormer Vice President Joe Biden released his climate change plan earlier this summer, laying out a plan that pledges to go further than President Barack Obama's administration on climate, but is not as sweeping as the Delaware Democrat's more liberal opponents.Biden's plan would dedicate .7 trillion to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, end fossil fuel subsidies and ban new oil and gas permits on public lands. Biden does not outright support the Green New Deal, but his plan does tout the former vice president's support of elements of the plan that has been near universally endorsed by the left of the Democratic Party.Biden, along with all of his Democratic opponents, supports rejoining the Paris climate accord, a sweeping multi-national climate agreement that President Donald Trump left early in his administration."Science tells us that how we act or fail to act in the next 12 years will determine the very livability of our planet," he said. "That's why I'm calling for a clean energy revolution to confront this crisis and do what America does best -- solve big problems with big ideas."Bernie SandersWhere Biden's plan was scaled back, Bernie Sanders' plan released in August was massive: The Vermont senator called for .3 trillion in spending, comparing the task of combating climate change to a World War II-style mobilization of almost every sector of the economy.The Sanders proposal's goal of reaching 100% renewable energy for electricity and transportation by 2030 matches the timeframe set by the IPCC, which outlined the dire consequences of global warming -- and what it would take to reverse them --in a 2018 report.That timeline, however, is significantly faster than many of Sanders' opponents.Sanders said his plan would create 20 million jobs in the transition away from fossil fuels despite imposing a ban on energy extraction, including fracking and mountaintop coal mining. He would also pursue civil and criminal cases against companies that concealed institutional knowledge of the dangers their products posed to the environment."Climate change cannot only be addressed by the United States. It is a global issue," Sanders said last month in Iowa. "But my promise to you is, instead of ignoring this issue as Trump does, I will help lead the world in bringing countries together to address the issue."Elizabeth WarrenWarren, the other leading progressive hopeful, has made the most explicit overtures to Inslee, adopting on Tuesday significant portions of his plan after the two met.But the Massachusetts senator has also added her own pieces to the puzzle. In June, as part of a broader economic plan, she proposed spending trillion on green manufacturing, research and development, and the marketing of new technology overseas.On Tuesday, Warren offered a fuller picture of her climate platform. Her goals -- which would be spurred by an additional trillion -- include reaching zero-carbon emission commercial and residential for new buildings by 2028; zero-carbon emission on new light-duty passenger vehicles, medium-duty trucks and all buses by 2030; and zero-carbon emission and renewable electricity by 2035.Kamala HarrisCalifornia Sen. Kamala Harris released a climate plan on Wednesday which aims for a carbon-neutral US economy by 2045, a more expedited timeline than others. The Democrat's plan touts trillion in public and private spending, but the amount the federal government would spend was not released.Harris' plan has many of the trademark Democratic climate proposals -- like reversing Trump's actions, investing in zero-emission transportation and carbon-neutral electricity and ending and federal subsidies for the fossil fuel industry -- but her plan also leans into the Climate Equity Act, legislation that she and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez announced earlier this summer that focuses on "frontline communities," those that have experienced systemic socioeconomic disparities.Harris' plan also harkens back to her time as a prosecutor, especially when she helped California win an million settlement with Volkswagen for cheating on emissions tests for its diesel vehicles. If she becomes President, Harris' plan states, she will increase penalties for companies that violate federal pollution laws and restoring the "polluter pays" model for funding the Superfund program.Cory BookerNew Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, too, uses a more expedited timeline in his climate proposal, aiming to spent trillion to reach carbon neutrality by 2045.Booker's plan, released on Tuesday, would put money in Americans pocked with a "progressive climate dividend" paid to Americans through new carbon fees placed on fossil fuel producers and would use executive action to undo much of Trump's climate action.Unlike some candidates, Booker ties combating climate change with a direct focus on minority and vulnerable communities, arguing that those without significant economic means are more directly impacted by the issue."We are facing a dual crisis of climate change and economic inequality," Booker said in a statement. "Without immediate action, we risk an incredible human toll from disasters, health impacts, rising national security threats, and trillions of dollars in economic losses."Julián CastroCastro was another candidate who tied economic instability and vulnerable communities into his plan to combat climate change. Castro claims that his plan released on Tuesday would lead to trillion in spending on addressing the climate crisis, but the former San Antonio mayor does not explicitly outline total federal spending.But it is Castro's calls for an increased focus on how climate change most impacts vulnerable communities that set his plan apart. Castro says that within his first 100 days as president he will "propose new civil rights legislation to address the disparate impact of environmental discrimination and dismantle structures of environmental racism.""The problem is that, like our neighborhoods, pollution is segregated," Castro writes in his proposal, noting a 2007 study that found more than half of the 9 million people living close to hazardous waste were black.Pete ButtigiegSouth Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg takes a more technical approach to combating the climate crisis in his plan released on Wednesday.Buttigieg explicitly outlines how the Department of Defense would take the lead in combating the issue by creating a "Climate Watch Floor" within the department. The plan also creates a new senior climate security role within the Pentagon.In total, Buttigieg's plan would commit between .5 and 2 trillion to combat climate change, a number smaller than his opponents, but his campaign argued on Wednesday that these federal investments would leverage tens of trillions of dollars in private, state and local investments. Buttigieg's plan would also spend an additional billion on climate research and make billion annually available for grants aimed at rural America.Buttigieg outright supports the Green New Deal and reentering the Paris climate agreement and would add billion to the Low-Income Energy Assistance program, which helps cover bills in times of crisis like a heat wave or extreme cold.Beto O'RourkeFormer Rep. 9087

A Walmart corporate worker urged co-workers to stage a sick-out in a mass email that he hopes will persuade the company to stop selling guns.Thomas Marshall, who works in an e-commerce division in San Bruno, California, called for a sick-out general strike in the message he wrote with two co-workers.Walmart is 324