On Behalf Of The Staff And Adults Who Kindly Supported: Fill & Download for Free

I think part of the process of "taking back", for some like me, involves a period during which one shifts from "maybe it's okay to tell someone" through to "it doesn't matter who knows".I began telling my own story as I entered my teenage years- initially, simply admitting to myself that something had gone wrong, and alluding even more briefly to it in those silly "write about your life to date" essays which some teachers seem to like. At fifteen, I posted most of what I could recall, along with rather adolescent poetry and some reflections on the nature of abuse and such-like, on a wordpress blog; that was when I realized I didn't have an awful secret, that if anything they won if I tried to keep it quiet instead of speaking out on behalf of other child-on-child sexual abuse survivors.I felt this urgent need to talk about it, shout it from the rooftops, fill this huge void of silence when the statistics told me I was not alone and yet it seemed that I was. I've always been the kind of person who learns best by explaining, who stumbles across new concepts in the process of talking about related subjects with others.Thus, a major part of my healing came from talking about my past: briefly alluding to it (in the form of "I have PTSD", which, when coming from a teenager with very obvious triggers, tends to be as telling as a more explicit description) when necessary to teaching staff at my various schools and institutions without shame; disclosing the details to the person who is now my long-term partner and finally being able to cry about it; sharing my experience via support blogs on Tumblr and posts like this one; writing essays exploring queerness, sex-positivity, the nature of consent, and the awkward interaction between involuntary childhood sexual exposure and adult sexuality, feeling no need to either shoehorn my backstory in or be ashamed of it.Words are powerful - not just for the listener, for they also profoundly change the one who is delivering them. Words brought me recovery, and I can't be the only one.

Let’s start by going through what is actually known about all of this. (For the sake of not having to keep repeating footnotes throughout the whole thing, I’m just going to put them all here:) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12][13] [14]The Clinton campaign and the DNC retained the law firm Perkins Coie for the 2016 election. It is normal to have lawyers specializing in election law working in conjunction with a campaign for a variety of reasons, including campaign finance compliance and preparing for possible litigation around election irregularities.Fusion GPS was started in 2011 as a commercial research and strategic intelligence firm. Glenn Simpson, Peter Fritsch, and Thomas Catan, three former journalists for the Wall Street Journal, founded the company. It does expert research and analysis, often for law firms in litigation. This is legal.Fusion GPS is not a branch of the U.S. government nor any other government. It is a private intelligence-gathering and analysis business. They cultivate sources around the world and hire experts for their business. Again, this is legal.Fusion GPS explicitly uses only publicly available information and does not obtain information from sources such as government operatives or intelligence agencies.Fusion GPS was well-known for this kind of work. The firm conducted opposition research into Mitt Romney in 2012. The firm also investigated undercover videos of Planned Parenthood and determined them to be heavily edited.Fusion GPS originally started doing opposition research into Trump in October of 2015, when the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative publication, hired them for this purpose. When Trump secured the nomination in early May of 2016, the Free Beacon gave up on this.The Free Beacon’s opposition research was largely funded by a couple of wealthy Republican donors and the Rubio campaign.In March of 2016, Fusion GPS approached Marc Elias about continuing to fund the opposition research into Trump when it became apparent that the Free Beacon and Republican sources were likely to stop as Trump gained ground and would secure the Republican nomination. Elias and Perkins Coie agreed to fund the research in April 2016 on behalf of the Clinton campaign and DNC. The campaign and DNC did not direct Elias or Perkins Coie to do this.Perkins Coie did not know what sources Fusion GPS would use to get information, nor directed them to use any particular sources.The Clinton Campaign and DNC did not know what sources Perkins Coie or Fusion GPS would use to get information.In June 2016, Fusion GPS hired the United Kingdom company Orbis Business Intelligence to help conduct this research. Orbis subcontracted the work to one of its co-founders, Christopher Steele, a former UK intelligence agent now working in the private sector.Steele is not the agent of a foreign nation and does not work on behalf of a foreign nation. He is a private citizen.Steele had worked with Fusion GPS previously and was (and still is) considered a fairly reliable and respectable source.Steele did not know who had hired Fusion GPS for this research, who paid for it, or even for what purpose he was gathering this information.In June 2016, the DNC’s email system was hacked by what would turn out to be a Russian-connected operative using the handle Guccifer 2.0. These documents were released through Wikileaks under the direction of Julian Assange with the intent to disrupt the 2016 election.Assange was also given other detrimental materials about various governments, including Russia, which he did not publish.According to the Mueller Report, Assange knowingly worked with the Russians because he did not like Hillary Clinton personally. He purposefully aided Guccifer 2.0 in hacking the DNC.**allegedly; this is still under indictment.Throughout the 2016 election cycle, beginning in late 2015 and continuing up to the election, an arm of the Russian military intelligence agency known as the Internet Research Agency created thousands of fake social media accounts purporting to be Americans.These accounts were used to distribute disinformation and literal fake news stories and sow distrust and discord into the campaign.The goal of this effort was to boost support for Donald Trump and discourage likely Clinton voters. It also targeted disaffected Bernie Sanders supporters through bolstering the narrative that Clinton had “stolen” the Democratic nomination through party chicanery in an attempt to discourage those voters from remaining with Clinton, either by not voting or voting third-party.Several U.S. allies reported this interference to the U.S., but the U.S. intelligence agencies were slow to respond due to the fact that it is actually quite difficult by law to surveil U.S. citizens with warrants, and they are not that easy to get. It was not until late August of 2016 that intelligence agencies briefed Congress on these developments.Between June and December of 2016, Steele compiled a number of memoranda and gave them to Fusion GPS explicitly as raw, unconfirmed intelligence requiring further analysis and corroboration, and maybe 80% accurate. This is not out of the ordinary for raw, un-analyzed, unvetted intelligence.Fusion GPS turned this information over to Marc Elias, the head election lawyer in Perkins Coie. Elias was deeply alarmed by the allegations in the memoranda. He immediately turned the information over to the FBI. He did not forward the information to the DNC or Clinton campaign.Additionally, Steele himself was so alarmed by some of what he discovered that he personally turned his research over to British and American intelligence agencies. This information was delivered to the FBI for follow-up.The FBI was deeply alarmed by some of what Steele discovered because it corroborated things they were already investigating before Steele had even started his research.Two individuals under surveillance previously were Carter Page and George Papadopoulos.Papadopoulos was under investigation after a tip from the Australian government because Papadopoulos, while drinking heavily, told the Australian High Commissioner to the UK that he knew that Russia had dirt on Clinton.This is because several weeks before, Papadopoulos had been contacted by a Russian operative who stated that the Russian government had incriminating emails about Clinton.Papadopoulos was asked about this contact by federal investigators and lied about it. This is what he pleaded guilty to.Neither Papadopoulos, nor anyone in the Trump campaign, ever alerted any authorities that Papadopoulos had been contacted by a Russian operative.Page had been under surveillance previously due to suspicion that he was being groomed by Russian intelligence operatives as an unknowing asset. Steele’s research suggested much the same thing. The FBI obtained an additional FISA warrant to follow up on this and determine whether Page was still being groomed or being actively used by the Russian government as an asset.Another individual already under investigation was Trump’s campaign manager at the time, Paul Manafort. Steele’s research also suggested that Manafort may have been involved in setting up connections with the Russian government.Manafort would later be indicted and convicted in connection with failure to register as a foreign agent and had substantial connections with the Russian government and pro-Russian Ukrainian individuals.Steele was a well-known source for the FBI, and they considered him to have been reliable in previous matters. This was all disclosed to the FISA court, along with the unverified nature of what Steele had found.At the time of the election, the existence of this dossier of memos was still just rumor. Journalistic outlets were scrambling to confirm their existence.Importantly to note, then, neither the Clinton campaign nor the DNC attempted to use the allegations in the memo or release any of the information publicly. Everyone along the chain of custody of this information had turned that information over to the appropriate authorities instead.After the election, the late Senator John McCain, a Republican representing Arizona, was able to receive a copy of Steele’s work through a colleague and former State Department employee. He was so alarmed by the content that he went to James Comey at the FBI with it, not knowing that the FBI already had this information.The existence of Steele’s work was only finally truly confirmed by really anyone in mid-January of 2017 when the U.S. intelligence agencies released a summary of the memoranda along with their report on Russian cyberattacks with the 2016 election.Shortly after President Trump was inaugurated and began assembling his cabinet, a number of appointees failed to report contacts with Russian individuals, including then-Senator Jeff Sessions, who was being tapped for Attorney General, and retired general Mike Flynn, who was being brought on as National Security Advisor.Acting Attorney General Sally Yates specifically warned then White House Counsel Don McGahn that there was evidence that Flynn was possibly subject to blackmail by Russians and was not truthful with federal agents on his SF86 security clearance form and subsequent interview about contacts with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak. It is a felony to lie on these applications.Flynn also lied to Vice-President Pence about these contacts. Shortly after this was made public, Flynn resigned. He later pleaded guilty to lying to federal investigators and has not yet been sentenced.The reason that anyone knew that Flynn and others were lying about contacts with Russians is because of the investigation into the election interference and subsequent surveillance of contacts with Russian agents and officials.In early May of 2017, President Trump fired FBI director James Comey after Comey refused to cease investigating the possibility of Russian interference into the 2016 election and whether Americans might have conspired with the Russian government in that process.Trump surrogates and advisors initially tried to claim that Comey was fired for mishandling the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server during her time as Secretary of State.Trump then went on nationally broadcast television and undermined his staff’s explanation, stating that he fired Comey because of “that Russia thing.”Trump also told Russian ambassador Kislyak that Comey was a “nut job” and that he fired Comey to relieve political pressure from the investigation.This set off a firestorm of bipartisan criticism leading to the appointment of a special counsel, former FBI director Robert Mueller, to investigate Russian interference into the 2016 election, whether any Americans might have conspired if such interference existed, and whether Trump may have obstructed the already present investigation into these matters.For the next two years, Trump will refer to this repeatedly as a “witch hunt,” and claim that he is being harassed. He repeatedly publicly implies that he might fire the special counsel, and tried to have his staff move to do so several times in private.As part of his narrative, Trump repeatedly claims that the sole origin of this investigation was the Steele dossier and that it was solicited and paid for by the Clinton campaign and DNC to attack him.In late January 2018, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Cal) authors a House Intelligence Committee memorandum alleging abuses of the FISA process and claiming that Steele’s dossier was the sole basis of the investigations. After a week or so of speculation, this memo is partially declassified and released.Nunes’ own memo turns out to actually confirm the sequence of events above with Papadopoulos and that the FBI had disclosed any reliance on Steele’s work to the FISA court, contrary to Nunes’ accusations of FISA abuse to harass or spy on the campaign.In May of 2019, the Mueller Report and subsequent final press conference by the special counsel’s office conclusively and categorically state that the Russian government intentionally interfered with the 2016 election to sow as much discord as possible and undermine confidence in the election, and to elect Trump in that process.This is part of what Steele suggested was happening in his memoranda as of June through the fall of 2016.As of June 13, 2019, nothing in Steele’s work has yet been affirmatively proved to be untrue. Much of it remains unconfirmed. At least seven allegations raised by Steele’s research have been verified to be true. At least eight allegations are partially or somewhat supported. Most of it simply has no evidence either for or against it.Again, Steele himself stated that this was purely raw intelligence and was probably at best 80% accurate.With all of that factually established, did the DNC listen to dirt from the Steele dossier on Trump?No.Neither the DNC nor the Clinton campaign ever used the opposition research conducted by Elias and Perkins Coie, did not directly solicit it, and all individuals involved turned the alarming evidence of illegality over to the appropriate authorities. Neither the DNC nor the Clinton campaign published or sought this information. That’s enough to conclusively say that they did not listen to dirt from the Steele dossier on Trump.So, how is that situation different from what Trump said in his ABC interview?Trump said that he might not turn over that kind of information to the appropriate authorities, or even report the contacts with a foreign government offering to provide it.Trump said, "I think you might want to listen, there isn't anything wrong with listening. . . . If somebody called from a country, Norway, [and said] ‘we have information on your opponent' -- oh, I think I'd want to hear it."It is illegal to solicit or accept anything of value from a foreign country as part of a campaign.[15]FBI director Christopher Wray (appointed by Trump) has stated that going to the authorities with this kind of stuff is precisely what someone ought to do. When George Stephanopoulos pointed out that statement to Trump, Trump replied, “The FBI director is wrong, because frankly it doesn't happen like that in life. . . . Now maybe it will start happening, maybe today you'd think differently."Trump disputed the idea that a foreign government offering damaging information to one candidate is even interference in the election in the first place.This is not taken out of context. ABC released a transcript of the full, unedited interview.[16] Trump doubled down on the statement this morning, claiming that he talks with foreign leaders all the time and doesn’t call the FBI, and blaming the media.The President of the United States said in an open interview that he would at least consider breaking federal law so long as it benefited him, because he thinks it is not foreign intervention in an election to do so.These are the times we live in where that statement alone would not be sufficient to warrant immediate impeachment.How is all of this different from the DNC’s involvement in the 2016 election?First, when faced with evidence of illegal conduct, everyone involved in the Steele research turned their evidence over to the proper authorities. Immediately. Without waffling about it. Without wondering if it would be better to hold on to it to damage an opponent.Second, even if the Clinton campaign had directly hired Fusion GPS for this research (which they didn’t, but let’s just even say that for the sake of argument,) nobody was soliciting or accepting information from agents of foreign governments. Fusion GPS is very specific about using only publicly available information or publicly available sources. It does not use government intelligence agencies or agents or individuals who are working in close connection to governments, foreign or domestic, for its work.In contrast, Trump stated that even if he knew that it was directly coming from a foreign and potentially hostile government, he would still take it.Third, the DNC and Clinton campaigns, Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS, and Steele himself have been consistent throughout this whole process, and their story has been backed up repeatedly by disclosures from government agencies reviewing and investigating these events.In contrast, the Trump campaign first denied that the Trump Tower meeting ever happened. Then, when it became abundantly clear that it had happened, they claimed that it was about adoption only and that Clinton never came up. Then, when it became abundantly clear that the reason for the meeting was dirt on Clinton and adoption was what Vesilnitskya actually wanted to talk about, the Trump campaign switched it up to say, “Well, yeah… but… I mean… that’s okay. People get dirt all the time!”The actions of the DNC, Clinton campaign, and even Perkins Coie are substantially different from Trump’s suggestion that he would at least consider accepting damaging information about an opponent from a potentially hostile foreign power and not even reporting the contact.This was long and at best depressing, if not outright horrifying. Here, calm down with a kitten hanging out with some baby ducks.Mostly Standard Addendum and Disclaimer: read this before you comment.I welcome rational, reasoned debate on the merits with reliable, credible sources.But coming on here and calling me names, pissing and moaning about how biased I am, et cetera and BNBR violation and so forth, will result in a swift one-way frogmarch out the airlock. Doing the same to others will result in the same treatment.Essentially, act like an adult and don’t be a dick about it.Getting cute with me about my commenting rules and how my answer doesn’t follow my rules and blah, blah, whine, blah is getting old. Stay on topic or you’ll get to watch the debate from the outside.If you want to argue and you’re not sure how to not be a dick about it, just post a picture of a cute baby animal instead, all right? Your displeasure and disagreement will be duly noted. Pinkie swear.Because of the nature of this one, I will probably be quicker to just shut down the comments on this one entirely if it gets out of control.If you have to consider whether or not you’re over the line, the answer is most likely yes. I’ll just delete your comment and probably block you, and frankly, I won’t lose a minute of sleep over it.Debate responsibly.Footnotes[1] How a Sensational, Unverified Dossier Became a Crisis for Donald Trump[2] The Trump Dossier: What We Know and Who Paid for It[3] What You Need To Know About The Russia Investigations: The Dossier[4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/24/what-steele-dossier-said-vs-what-mueller-report-said/[5] https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf[6] https://www.justice.gov/file/1007346/download[7] Full text: Nunes memo on FBI surveillance[8] Nunes Memo: What's In It And What's Not[9] Watch Lester Holt's Extended Interview With President Trump[10] British spies were first to spot Trump team's links with Russia[11] A timeline of Yates' warnings to the White House about Mike Flynn[12] Report: Trump Told Russians He Fired 'Nut Job' Comey Because Of Investigation[13] Wikileaks' Julian Assange reportedly turned down a trove of documents related to the Russian government[14] WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential Campaign[15] Who can and can't contribute - FEC.gov[16] ABC News' Oval Office interview with President Trump

I will go even further . Not to alarm you, but while menstration (periods) in the first year after you start them can be erractic, after that they should be rather regular. The number one reason for missing periods is pregnancy. Yes, it has been longer than that, but you could have missed four months, then who knows. It would help to have more info. Are you sexually active? Do you use birth control? If so, what kind.You do have rights over your body and your health. You can go to any physician, and I recommend that you do. It would be confidential unless they needed to intervene in some way. However, if they felt it was expedient, they could ask one of your guardians, parents, to give consent. If they don’t, my sense is they would involve social services. If only to get permission. Of course, the best course would be for the provider to reach the parent and to have them come down. The mere fact that their daughter were that worried should go a long way.She could also ask a friend to talk to their parents confidentially. One things as adults, adults tend to know the options better than teenagers.YOU NEED HEALTHCARE. At the very least, walk right into an emergency room and tell them your story. They can’t turn you away. They know the laws. And, they should work to resolve it.Meanwhile get a pregnancy test from the drug store. If you have been sexually active with or without birth control over the past six to nine months.I wanted to add some information for you as I am very concerned about your health and well-being. The following is based on Maine state law and is directly edited by my attorney as I see this type of thing about four times per year. I will highlight important sections as not all of it will apply. Certainly, you are not talking about becoming emancipated, but attaining healthcare as a minor is a lot a like. Also, the word “incompetent” in the law is not calling you imcompetent, it is just a legal term for this statute.1) If a 16 year old were emancipated by court order would she be able to come to office appointments by herself without parental permission? Yes.2) If a 16 year old is not yet emancipated by court order, is she able to come to the appointment by herself without parental permission? Answer: No, unless: (i) she is a pregnant minor contemplating whether to continue or terminate a pregnancy, in which case she is authorized to receive information and counseling concerning public and private agencies available to provide birth control information and services, or (ii) she is a minor who may be treated as an adult on the basis that she has been living separately from her parents or legal guardian for at least 60 days and is independent of parental support.3) If the 16 year old is able to come to the appointment, is she authorized to start birth control without parental authorization? Answer: No, unless she is a minor who may be treated as an adult. In this case, only if: (i) she is emancipated by court order (which doesn’t appear to be the case), or (ii) she is a minor who may be treated as an adult on the basis that she has been living separately from her parents or legal guardian for at least 60 days and is independent of parental support.Keep in mind, that if you were to show up at my office, my staff would hopefully pick up on the fact that you were a minor. I would then note that I could not treat you without consent of a guardian (parent if that is the case). But, that does NOT mean I would say to you, “I can’t treat you. Bye.” I would then be faced with a medical situation that I would deem requires some type of intervention. Whether that means speaking with your parents or hopefully having them come to the office, I would like do that. My number one concern would be that you left and were lost to follow-up. At that point, I would feel completely responsible for your health and well-being. While a minor is considered unable to make prudent decisions for their healthcare, they are also by the same token, considered not to know when the lack of healthcare is not safe. One good thing about a solo physician is he or she will know the family. I would know your mom and how she would deal with this issue.BackgroundIn Maine, the person legally authorized to provide consent to treat a minor varies according to the minor’s legal status, the type of treatment or health care service being provided to the minor, and, in certain circumstances, the age of the minor. A minor is defined as any person less than 18 years of age.Generally, minors are presumed to be legally incompetent to provide informed consent for medical treatment or health care services. Accordingly, unless otherwise indicated, informed consent must be obtained from the minor’s parent or guardian.However, there are exceptions to the general consent rule for minors. Some minors have the same rights as adult patients to consent to medical treatment. Other minors have a limited right to consent to specific medical and mental health treatment services, depending on the type of care rendered, the circumstances in which care is provided, and, in some instances, upon the age of the minor. In all cases, the authority of the minor to consent is predicated upon the treating healthcare provider’s determination that the minor possesses decisional capacity to provide informed consent to treatment.1. Minors Who May Be Treated as Adults: The following minors are legally authorized to provide consent to all health care services:a. Minors who have been living separately from their parents or legal guardians for at least 60 days and are independent of parental support.b. Minors who are or have been legally married.c. Minors who are or who have been members of the U.S. Armed Forces.d. Minors who have been emancipated by court order.e. Minors who are residing in a correctional facility pursuant to a conviction as an adult.A treating healthcare provider should request appropriate documentation of the above circumstances (e.g. marriage license, Armed Service ID, emancipation order, etc.) prior to providing treatment to the minor.2. Minors Authorized to Provide Consent Under Certain Circumstances: A minor is authorized to consent to the following healthcare services:a. Treatment for Alcohol Abuseb. Treatment for Drug Abusec. Treatment for Emotional or Psychological Problemsd. Spiritual Treatmente. Organ Donationf. Sexual Assault Forensic Examinationg. Birth Control Information: A pregnant minor contemplating whether to continue or terminate a pregnancy is authorized to receive information and counseling concerning public and private agencies available to provide birth control information and services.h. Family Planning Services: The following minors are authorized to provide consent to receive family planning services:(i) Minors who are parents;(ii) Minors who are married;(iii) Minors who have the consent of their parent or legal guardian to receive family planning services; and(iv) Minors who, in the professional judgment of a physician, may suffer probable health hazards if family planning services are not provided.Family planning services include: ·Counseling with trained personnel regarding family planning, contraceptive procedures and the treatment of infertility;·Distribution of literature relating to family planning, contraceptive procedures and the treatment of infertility; and·Referral of patients to physicians or health agencies for consultation, examination, tests, medical treatment and prescription for the purposes of family planning, contraceptive procedures and treatment of infertility and provision of contraceptive procedures and supplies.i. Minors Who are Parents: A minor who is a parent is generally entitled to provide consent to health care services on behalf of his or her child in the absence of a guardianship, custody order, or other limitation on the minor’s parental rights, even though the minor may lack the authority to consent to the same healthcare services on behalf of his- or herself.A minor authorized to consent to a specific type of medical treatment or health care service is also authorized to refuse that same treatment or service.A minor who consents on his or her own behalf to healthcare services is responsible for the costs of such services, unless the minor’s parent or guardian has expressly agreed to assume full or partial responsibility.First, cost would not be an issue. As a minor, you would not likely be held responsible for cost, and hospitals would work with you anyway. For me, I would never turn away a patient for healthcare costs.Just like anything, things are not written in stone. If a minor shows up in an emergency room for an ear infection, they will not be treated without consent. But, if they show up with a major concussion, etc., they will receive a Cat Scan of the brain, because the physician will deem it emergent. He/She will try to get hold of your mother or father or other guardian, but they won’t wait longer than five to ten minutes.Keep in mind the following: The decision of whether or not you can give consent as a minor and be treated by a healthcare provider, is completely up to the provider. If I see an 11 yo walk in with a cold, I will not treat (although I would likely call social services to find out why an 11 yo is by himself. But, if I feel that by not treating you, your health is at risk, I can treat you, and if there is any legal recourse, it will be on me.The very fact that in your question you state 254 days and not a year reveals the level of concern you have. As a 16 yo, I am very proud of you for coming on Quora with this question. Ultimately, you are the one who has to advocate for yourself. I should say, knowing only half the story, that your mother THINKS she is doing the right thing. I would start with your FP or your pediatrician. You can always call them confidentially and see what they say. If you parents have any questions, let me know, and I will give you my phone number so I can help.Good luck. Please comment back if you need more info.