- Details
- Written by: Kamran Mofid
- Hits: 6007
Those familiar with my blog postings know well that I am a firm believer in volunteerism. The whole foundation and path of the GCGI has been nothing but a journey in and for volunteerism and volunteering for the common good* (See below for more).
The other day I came across a wonderful article which includes the results of a scientific research and study on the benefits of volunteerism, both physical and emotional, which I very much wish to share with you. It goes a long way to support and verify my claim on the wisdom and benefits of volunteerism.
In the said article the author-Dr. Stephen Post- sites the 2010 Do Good Live Well Survey, released by United Healthcare and Volunteer Match, based on a survey of 4,500 American adults. 41 percent of Americans volunteered an average of 100 hours a year. 68 percent of those who volunteered reported that volunteering made them feel physically healthier. Moreover,
|
• |
89% report that "volunteering has improved their sense of well-being" |
|
• |
73% agree that "volunteering lowered their stress levels" |
|
• |
92% agree that volunteering enriched their sense of purpose in life |
|
• |
72% characterize themselves as "optimistic" compared to 60% of non-volunteers |
|
• |
42% of volunteers report a "very good" sense of meaning in their lives, compared with 28% of non-volunteers |
|
• |
96% said volunteering made them "feel happier" |
I very much encourage you to read Dr. Post’s article (noted below). However, before concluding this posting, I wish to continue with the following questions:
So how does the love of others change us? How are we changed when we extend active love?
“First, when so engaged we are freed from preoccupation with the self and its problems, with rumination, and with other destructive emotions. Disappointment and betrayal are unavoidable in life. We get sucked down into a negative vortex of bitterness, despair, and resentment. Simple acts of loving kindness can transform us emotionally. It is said that if you do not feel happy, smile anyway, and happiness will likely follow. The keys to forgiveness are acts of love coupled with patience, because with the passing of time our perspectives mature.
Second, life becomes interesting. Selfishness is boring. When we seek the happiness, security, and well-being of another in creative love the world becomes full and engaging. Sir John Templeton once wrote that it is impossible to be bored if you love your neighbor.
Third, loving others gives us a reason to develop our gifts. Students learn more when they have to tutor younger peers, or when they learn in groups and are responsible for teaching one another. Most great people have fine-tuned their talents in the service of the neighbor.
Fourth, we make deeper friendships. Our friends are no longer the people we just hang out with, but they are the ones with whom we find exhilarating common cause and commitment. Finally we have serious friends, the kind who are loyal and want to keep us on our course and true to our higher selves.
Fifth, loving others is a source of hope because as active agents we use our strengths to make a difference in the life of another, and we can therefore have greater confidence in shaping the future. This is an active hope, rather than the passive variety that just waits for a surprise.
Sixth, loving others is a source of joy. Happiness is to joy as optimism is to hope. Joy, like hope, is not a mere innate disposition, but a virtue fine-honed through bringing creative goodness into the life of the beloved. Thus, we should not worry much about reciprocity, because the benefits are already there inwardly. As they say, “pay it forward,” although a note of gratitude is nice.
Seventh, loving others, so long as one also cares for the self and its limits both physical and psychological, is associated with self-reported physical health”
Read more:
*Kamran Mofid, “Opening Remarks: In Gratitude for your Friendship and Support”
*Kamran Mofid, “Why Love, Trust, Respect and Gratitude Trumps Economics”
http://www.gcgi.info/blog/177-why-love-trust-respect-and-gratitude-trumps-economics
Stephen Post, “How Does Love of Others Change Us?”
https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/how-does-love-others-change-us
Press Release: Volunteering Reduces Risk of Hypertension In Older Adults, Carnegie Mellon Research Shows (Thursday, June 13, 2013)
http://www.cmu.edu/news/stories/archives/2013/june/june13_volunteeringhypertension.html
- Details
- Written by: Kamran Mofid
- Hits: 8488
“Massive cuts to social safety nets have led to "destitution, hardship and hunger on a large scale" in Britain, with more than half a million people now forced to rely on food banks for sustenance, key poverty charities have warned in a report…
"The shocking reality is that hundreds of thousands of people in the UK are turning to food aid," said Mark Goldring, Oxfam's chief executive. "Cuts to social safety nets have gone too far, leading to destitution, hardship and hunger on a large scale. It is unacceptable that this is happening in the seventh wealthiest nation on the planet."
The report, Walking the Breadline, is backed by the Trussell Trust, the UK's biggest provider of food banks. It blames the increasing pressure on food banks on far-reaching changes to the benefits system, as well as on unemployment, increased underemployment, low and falling incomes and rising food and fuel prices.”…
And now, lest we forget:- Details
- Written by: Kamran Mofid
- Hits: 3274
Photo:fmacskasy.com
“Court staff are the foot-soldiers of judicial independence, and even a fool could grasp the imperative to protect their impartiality.”
“Why sell and fragment a service that has met or exceeded its targets? The only reason must be money and ideology.”
"We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right" (Clause 39 Magna Carta, 1215)
'Privatising the courts system: the public are not customers, they are citizens'
An article by Sarah Vine who is a criminal barrister at 2 Pump Court Chambers (www.2pumpcourt.co.uk)
“The tide of privatisation inches closer to the heart of our justice system by the day. Security, probation, transport and interpretation services are long gone. G4S provide child-abuse investigators and rape recovery suites, for profit. Legally-aided representation is in the MoJ's cross-hairs. If Grayling has his way, the only heads left above the corporate water will be the judges. For a while, at least.”
“On Tuesday, in response to public alarm at the leaked plans to privatise the courts service, the Ministry of Justice issued one of its increasingly familiar, and decreasingly plausible, reassurances. In terms of impression management, it was the ministerial equivalent of "I'm not a racist, but…". The MoJ stated that the proposals were not for the "wholesale" privatisation of Her Majesty's Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS).
The MoJ did not define what it meant by "wholesale", but it probably matters little. The justice secretary is a huge fan of outsourcing, and has a talent for ignoring troublesome evidence, however compelling. He also regards anything which smacks of rights – constitutional or human – as an irritant, an outmoded obstacle to thrusting reform, and to be dispatched as swiftly as possible. Certainly an 800-year-old prohibition on the sale of "justice or right" is not going to stand in his way. Not when there is money to be made by big business.
In a new spin on the process by which public services are "outsourced", it is proposed that HMCTS be offered both to the lowest bidder (for the provision of staff and buildings), and also to the highest, by charging wealthy litigants fees, over and above their legal costs, for using the courts' service. In this way, Grayling seeks to transform it into a profitable enterprise, offering "attractive returns" to investors.
But HMCTS is not an enterprise, designed for the pursuit of profit or growth. The very idea is repugnant. The public are not "customers". They are citizens, and are entitled to public, accountable justice, administered without fear or favour; no sale of justice or right. If the insertion of private interests into the administration of justice did not offend against that principle, it would have been achieved by now.
Court staff are a close-mouthed breed. Most people who come into contact with them will report that they are courteous, approachable and helpful. They deal, routinely, with people who are having the worst day of their life. They are also incredibly, almost pathologically, discreet. They see and hear information which could prove the undoing of a case, a litigant, a juror, a witness or (whisper it) a judge. They are often responsible for when a case is heard, and which judge hears it. Court staff are the foot-soldiers of judicial independence, and even a fool could grasp the imperative to protect their impartiality.
But pay people less, erode their job security, and ask them to serve two masters, and you cannot be surprised if they choose the one holding the purse-strings. Litigants paying over the odds for their chance to litigate in the UK will be expecting some kind of preferential treatment. It will start with queue-jumping, and judge selection. And perhaps the contract-winning companies (don't make me say G4S) will be more than happy to instruct their staff to oblige. Of course, the contract winners themselves will also be litigants, perhaps defendants in health and safety prosecutions, or being sued by relatives of someone like Jimmy Mubenga.
When a trial takes place, objections can be taken to jurors, judges and even court locations if there is a real possibility that their involvement may damage the integrity of the trial process. What conceivable protection will be afforded any opponent of the contract winners, or those wealthy litigants, when the entire court system is run by those in their pay? Outsourcing will have relieved the justice secretary of responsibility for such "operational matters". In place of a sacred constitutional principle, Mr Grayling proposes a royal charter, the ministerial equivalent of "some of my best friends are black".
The tide of privatisation inches closer to the heart of our justice system by the day. Security, probation, transport and interpretation services are long gone. G4S provide child-abuse investigators and rape recovery suites, for profit. Legally-aided representation is in the MoJ's cross-hairs. If Grayling has his way, the only heads left above the corporate water will be the judges. For a while, at least.”
Original source: Privatising the courts system: the public are not customers, they are citizens
Read more: Chris Grayling's worst failure? Not transport: the probation services