Respondent, James V: Fill & Download for Free

If the heir to the British throne is born with cerebtal palsy or down syndrome, how do you think the royal family would respond in the present era?If this Heir Apparent actually becomes the Sovereign, he/she will still be the Sovereign, but a permanent, rather than temporary, Regency would be created.A Regency was established for Mary Queen of Scots, daughter of James V, who died just days after she was bornA Regency was established for the son of Mary Queen of Scots, James VI of Scotland when his mother was removed from the throne of Scotland and he became king at about one years old.When a Regency is established, the Regent reigns for the Monarch who is not capable of reigning due to age or incapacity, or because they are physically out of the country. The Regent does not become the Monarch, but does perform The Monarch’s duties.If the Regent is also the Heir Apparent they are Prince regent - Wikipedia :Prince regentGeorge IV of the United Kingdom, who was prince regent while his father was mentally incapable between 1811 and 1820A prince regent, or prince-regent, is a prince who rules a monarchy as regent instead of a monarch, e.g., as a result of the Sovereign's incapacity (minority or illness) or absence (remoteness, such as exile or long voyage, or simply no incumbent).I imagine the Heir Apparent or Monarch with cerebral palsy would be cared for out of the public eye in a manner appropriate to their Rank. It would probably be similar to howPrince John of the United Kingdom - Wikipedia was handled as youngest son of George V and Queen Mary.One hopes this situation would be handled even more graciously as the current view held on debilitating illness and mental illness is far more different with this generation of Royals especially William and Henry due to their experiences with their mother. Many Royals, like William and Henry, are patrons of charities that serve those afflicted by debilitating conditions both physical and mental.As this child ages, maybe one would see them less and less in public. But, as a child, I fully expect that family members, and especially the Regent, to honor this child publicly as Monarch and treat the child with the same love and affection due all children - Royal or not! Public opinions have changed and this would no longer be some deep, dark secret!Thank you for the A2A, Justin Mihalick!

No, you can't. Courts don't hear abstract cases. They hear actual cases that represent real-world controversies between litigants.Obergefell v. Hodges was the name of the case the Supreme Court just decided. Those are actual human beings. Lead plaintiff James Obergefell lives in Cincinnati, Ohio. He married his late husband in Maryland, where it was legal, but the state of Ohio refused to list him as surviving spouse on the death certificate. The respondent, Richard Hodges, the Director of the Ohio Department of Health, was the state official responsible for death certificates. Obergefell felt his civil rights were violated by Ohio's refusal to recognize him as surviving spouse, and the case arose from that actual controversy.So... for you to be able to do this, you'd have to identify how one or more of your legal rights was somehow impinged by the marriage of two men or two women. I can't imagine what kind of claim you'd be able to come up with, seriously.Obergefell v. HodgesLet it go.

The real import of Chernobyl is that with 50 tons of reactor material blown up to 6 miles into the air, or moved across the landscape as smoke, the death toll was about the same as the Pulse Nightclub shooting, or the Lac-Mégantic derailment in Quebec. Almost all of them were first- responders. This poor safety design reactor, in a worst case operator error, in 25 years resulted in just 9 deaths from cancer, all thyroid cancer. All of those were from kids who had consumed milk from cows grazed on contaminated land in the first 90 days. (Really, it’s the first month that did most of it.)If every reactor on earth was a Chernobyl design, and one of them blew up like Chernobyl every year, nuclear would still be better than coal.There is no reason for concern about mutations. That’s an old Hollywood myth that has no basis in facts. At high dose, and low dose, there is no found effect.“…After the atomic bombs dropped on Japan the first surprise to the Manhattan Project physicists was that so many people survived intense radiation exposure. So right after the war, a 51 year study was started. The study ran from 1946-1997 and included over 31,000 children of survivors of irradiation at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This study shows that the mutation doubling dose of radiation is at least 2 Gy and is probably 4 Gy or higher(216). Even for women who were pregnant when they survived exposure to near fatal doses of radiation, no significant effect was seen. No effect on children was seen after 62 years for either cancer or genetic disease(222).A similar result was seen at Chernobyl. The children of Chernobyl workers who were exposed to high levels of radiation while cleaning up the plant and survived did not show more mutations than normal(223).On a much smaller scale, the squad of American soldiers that marched to ground zero right after one of the Manhattan Project tower tests showed the same thing. Although they all died of cancer within 30 years, their children were fine.”216. James V. Neel. Genetic studies at the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission – Radiation Effects Research Foundation: 1946–1997. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 1998;95:5432-5436 Genetic studies at the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission-Radiation Effects Research Foundation: 1946-1997.222. E. J. Grant, K. Furukawa, R. Sakata, H. Sugiyama, A. Sadakane, I. Takahashi, et al. Risk of death among children of atomic bomb survivors after 62 years of follow-up: a cohort study. Lancet Oncol 2015;16(13):1316-23. Risk of death among children of atomic bomb survivors after 62 years of follow-up: a cohort study223. L. A. Livshits, S. G. Malyarchuk, E. M. Lukyanova, Y. G. Antipkin, L. P. Arabskaya, S. A. Kravchenko, et al. Children of Chernobyl Cleanup Workers do not Show Elevated Rates of Mutations in Minisatellite Alleles. Radiation Research 2001;155(1):74-80 Children of chernobyl cleanup workers do not show elevated rates of mutations in minisatellite alleles..