Breast Cancer The Second Most Common Cancer - 1403 Words

In the United States, breast cancer is the second most common cancer in women. Although it can occur in both men and women, it is very rare in men. An individual’s breast has many components. It contains glands, ducts and breast tissue that contains fat, connective tissue, lymph nodes and blood vessels. The most common type of breast cancer in the U.S. is ducts carcinoma. This type of cancer begins within the cells of the ducts, but it can also begin in the cells of the lobules and other tissues of the breast. There are five stages of breast cancer. The stages are dependent on the tumor size, lymph node status and metastases. The progression of the cancer tends to be consistent and predictable. When cancer is left untreated, it will†¦show more content†¦Typically, individuals at this stage are about 52 years old. Stage two breast cancer has many subcategories. The tumor is typical 2 cm in diameter or less, but the cancer cells have already metaswized to the lymph nod es. A breast tumor that is larger than 5 cm, and had not spread to the lymph nodes is also considered stage 2 breast cancer. Stage three breast cancer is often referred to as a â€Å"locally advanced† breast cancer. At this stage, the primary tumor is greater than 5 cm in diameter, and has no apparent metastasis, or the tumor is is between 2-5 cm, with evidence of rather significant metastasis. Another way that stage three breast cancer can be looked at is that an individual with either have a large but operable breast cancer, or a medium sized tumor that is difficult to treat with surgery alone. Many times, the cancer will invade a muscles, or attach to major arteries, nerve trunks or veins in an individual’s body, which therefore makes them impossible to surgically remove completely from the body. Stage four or â€Å"advanced stage† breast cancers â€Å"indicate the presence of distant metastasis to other parts of the body, such as the liver or bones† ( Halls 2015). The prognosis for stage four breast cancers is very low, often being 16-20%. These breast cancers may be recurrences following an individual’s initial treatment. Bone scans, chest Xrays, CAT scans, MRIs, and blood tests may be used to check for metastasis† (Halls 2015). Often times

Good Country People Free Essays

In the short story â€Å"Good Country People,† Flannery O’Connor utilizes the characters Joy Hopewell and Manley Pointer to expose how believing in nothing makes a person isolated and spiritually empty. Joy Hopewell is a well-educated, thirty-two year old atheist with an artificial leg. Joy’s lack of belief causes her to lose all the human civility and decency she has. We will write a custom essay sample on Good Country People or any similar topic only for you Order Now She even changes her name to Hulga. Flannery O’Connor’s use of the mythological Trickster persona to seek, attract, and repulse the protagonist Joy-Hulga leads to her spiritual enlightenment. Manley Pointer through the Trickster persona seeks out the Hopewells, specifically Hulga. From the beginning the Bible salesman uses the svelte and persuasive words used by the Trickster. Pointer maneuvers himself inside when he tells Mrs. Hopewell, â€Å"Lady, I’ve come to speak of serious things. † He continues, using her own thoughts and feelings to manipulate her, telling her, â€Å"I know you believe in Chrustian service† and â€Å"People like you don’t like to fool with country people like me. † The Trickster knows that Mrs. Hopewell is just being polite, but he persists, taking advantage of her desire to avoid all conflict and her love of â€Å"good country people. † Manley craftily gets himself invited to dinner out of sympathy. Knowing that Joy-Hulga has a heart condition, the Trickster deceives Mrs. Hopewell by telling her, â€Å"I got this heart condition. I may not live long. When you know it’s something wrong with you and you may not live long, well then, lady†¦Ã¢â‚¬  Through deceit and smooth talking, Pointer guarantees he’ll spend the evening at the Hopewell’s home. The Trickster has found his way inside and can now focus on his target Hulga. The Trickster has found his target and continues to use his mythological persona to attract Joy/Hulga. Pointer uses his silver tongue to convince disagreeable Hulga to accompany him on a picnic the next day. The con-artist tells Hulga, â€Å"I think you’re brave. I think you’re real sweet† and then later asks her, â€Å"Don’t you think some people was meant to meet on account of what all they got in common and all? Like they both think serious thoughts and all? † Manley is establishing a connection between Hulga and himself to make himself seem more attractive. Manley Pointer further personifies the mythological Trickster persona when he shows up the next day for their picnic in a broad-rimmed hat, and he’s also described as very tall, â€Å"Then suddenly he stood up, very tall, from behind a bush on the opposite embankment. Smiling, he lifted his hat which was new and wide-brimmed. † These are two physical traits of the mythological Trickster persona. As they reach the barn, Pointer tricks Hulga and baits her into climbing up to the second floor where the climax of the story occurs. The Trickster fools Hulga by acting innocently as he â€Å"pointed up the ladder that led into the loft and said, ‘It’s too bad we can’t go up there,’† implying that she can’t do it because of her handicap, so she quickly proves him wrong. Hulga’s pride and feeling of superior intellect blind her from seeing that she’s being duped by the Trickster. Flannery O’Connor uses the Trickster persona to repulse the protagonist bringing her to spiritual enlightenment. After Manley Pointer lures Hulga up into the loft of the barn, he becomes more demanding, using Hulga’s feelings for him to manipulate her into giving him what he wants, he says, â€Å"’I known it,’ he muttered, sitting up. ‘You’re just playing me for a sucker. † The Trickster starts to show his true character more and more now that he has Hulga where he wants her. Manley manipulates Hulga into giving him her fake leg which symbolizes Hulga/Joy’s soul. As the Trickster takes Hulga’s leg, he starts to bring her back into the light and give her a new start. You see it happening when Hulga says, â€Å"When after a minute, she said in a hoarse high voice, ‘All right,’ it was like surrendering to him completely. It was like losing her own life and finding it again , miraculously, in his. † Pointer takes Hulga’s leg and leaves her there stranded in the loft to ponder her new spiritual enlightenment. Flannery O’Connor uses the Trickster persona to seek, attract, and repulse the protagonist, thus bringing her new enlightenment on her life. Hulga/Joy had lost all human civility and decency in her life using her intellect as an excuse. As Hulga sits in the loft, she is finally forced to realize the error in her ways. How to cite Good Country People, Papers

Jurisdictional Error in the Malhi vs. Minister

Question: Discuss about the Jurisdictional Error in the Malhi vs. Minister for Education Anor. Answer: The applicant in this case was Mr. Amanpreet Singh Malhi who sought a review of the decision that was made by the Migration Review Tribunal. The tribunal had earlier affirmed the decision by the delegate of the minister to deny the applicant a class BS visa under section 65 of the Migration Act 1958. The applicant was required to satisfy cl801.221 of sch.2 of the Migration regulations at the time of the visa application[1]. These regulations required the applicant of the visa to be a spouse of the sponsor whereby the sponsor must be an Australian citizen and must satisfy section 5F of the Act. Section 5F of the Act, states that a person is someones spouse if he/she is in a married relationship. Such persons must have a mutual commitment to a shared life as wife and husband to the exclusion of other persons and the relationship between them should be genuine and continuing[2]. Amanpreet Singh was a male Indian citizen who applied for a partner visa in October 2011 based on his marriage to Ms Teresa Bartlett. He was 26 years old while his sponsor was 52 years of age. Having been denied the visa by the delegate of the minister, she proceeded to the tribunal to review an earlier decision made against him. The tribunal requested that the applicant submit number of documents such as the identity certificates and police clearance certificates. In addition, he was supposed to submit utility invoices, bank statements, travel documents, receipts, a letter from Australian Electoral commission, photographs, greeting cards, and personal statement for the applicant and that of the sponsor. The tribunal made a decision on the matter after considering the applicants relationship with the sponsor based on the following g subheadings. The first consideration was the financial aspects of the relationship between the applicant and the sponsor. Similarly, they considered the nature of the household by checking the financial contributions of the applicant in the household. They were convinced that the applicant had contributed immensely in the payment of utility bills but dismally in the purchase of furniture. There was an indication that all the furniture were purchased by the sponsor. The tribunal also considered the social aspects of the relationship and found out that both the applicant and sponsors parents did not attend the wedding. In that regard, the tribunal formed a view that the two rushed to do a marriage which was to a greater extent not recognized by their respective families. In arriving to their decision, the tribunal delved into the nature of the commitment by the parties. The tribunal explored the aspect of commitment disavowing the age difference between the two as a factor that would deny them a genuine and a continuing spousal relationship[3]. It was persuaded that the couple had a meaningful discussion regarding how they may not have biological children and take credible steps into having one though medical attention or adoption. However, the tribunal was concerned with the applicants decision to enter into a marriage so hastily without having his applicants status being resolved[4]. Similarly, it was concerned about the sponsors decision to enter into a marriage with all the complexities of being in a troubled relationship previously. Considering these concerns, the tribunal did not see it a genuine and a continuing spousal relationship hence they confirmed the earlier decision by the delegate of the minister to deny the applicant the visa. After all the submissions had been done by both the applicant, the delegate of the minister and the tribunal before the Federal Circuit Court, a judicial review was done and the Court was satisfied that the tribunal had engaged in a deliberate and systematic jurisdictional error by failing to undertake their statutory task of satisfying itself whether the relationship between the parties was genuine and continuing as a mandatory condition in line with subsection 5F(2) of the Act[5]. The court asserted that the disavowal of the couples lack of children does not mean that their relationship was not genuine and continuing was a clear indication that the parties had a meaningful discussion that their relationship and discussion of the parties at the commencement of their relationship. For instance, the tribunal argued that if the parties had a genuine and a mutual goal of having a family in future, they would have sought medical advice about the prospects of having children[6]. This clea rly shows that the tribunal was hell-bent on relying on the circumstances surrounding the inception of the relationship including incapacity to bear children as the reason to doubt the genuineness of the couples relationship. Bibliography Malhi v Minister for Immigration Anor. FCCA 119 ( Federal Circuit Court of Australia, February 2, 2017). Neilson, Mary, and Matthew Collins. Going to Live in Australia: Your Practical Guide to Beginning A New Life Down Under. Kidlington, UK: How To Books Ltd, 2004. Commonwealth consolidated regulations. MIGRATION ACT 1958 . Law, Melbourne: Commonwealth, 1958. Spirov, Andrea. Moving to Australia: A Guide for Expats, Lovers and the Otherwise Curious. Brisbane: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2013. Veltman, Laura. Living Working in Australia: Everything You Need to Know for Building a New Life. Kidlington, UK: How To Books Ltd, 2000. Vrachnas, John, Mirko Bagaric, Penny Dimopoulos, and Athula Pathinayake. Migration and Refugee Law: Principles and Practice in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Malhi v Minister for Immigration Anor. FCCA 119 ( Federal Circuit Court of Australia, February 2, 2017). Commonwealth consolidated regulations. MIGRATION ACT 1958 . Law, Melbourne: Commonwealth, 1958. Neilson, Mary, and Matthew Collins. Going to Live in Australia: Your Practical Guide to Beginning A New Life Down Under. Kidlington, UK: How To Books Ltd, 2004. Vrachnas, John, Mirko Bagaric, Penny Dimopoulos, and Athula Pathinayake. Migration and Refugee Law: Principles and Practice in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Veltman, Laura. Living Working in Australia: Everything You Need to Know for Building a New Life. Kidlington, UK: How To Books Ltd, 2000. Spirov, Andrea. Moving to Australia: A Guide for Expats, Lovers and the Otherwise Curious. Brisbane: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2013.