My son was prescribed augmentin

4 weeks ago I went to urgent care for a severe sinus infection - diagnosed with acute pansinusitis and an ear infection. 6 days of Prednisone and 10 days of augmentin. Felt relief - but 2 days after dropping the augmentin...symptoms returned. Opted to go to the ENT instead of back to urgent care - he did a nasal scope and swab - confirmed bacterial infection - and put on 10 days of clindamycin.
I've since wrapped that up - but one side of my nose/sinus cavity remains completely blocked. He didn't see sign of infection at my visit this morning and has recommended a CT due to him not wanting to keep prescribing meds without knowing what the cause was (which I appreciate).
While I wait for that (scheduled for Monday) - he recommends continued saline rinse and Flonase.
My real question is on the saline rinse/irrigation. I have never had luck with the netipot. I invested in a Navage with the first round of sinus infection - and have found the water just doesn't go anywhere. Either nostril.
Is the NeilMed better? Could there be something with my nasal anatomy that would make a typical sinus rinse not beneficial. I am using just a saline spray (nasal mist) to keep things moisturized as I continue to find a true nasal rinse/irrigation that works for me.

Age: 35 Sex: female Height: 5'4" Weight: 230lb Race: White Primary Complaint: concerns of pneumonia During: 3 days No existing medical issues Adderall 30mg and Sertraline 100mg daily Occasional drinker Non smoker No recreational drug use I have not been outside of the country recently
Sunday, on mothers day, I started to feel malaise. Throat hurt too, fever started around 8pm. Continued into Monday, I was convinced it was viral as my kids just had gotten over a throat infection (herpangina) and I thought it was probably that. On and off all day Monday I was fevering with a sore throat. I decided to get a good look at my throat and behind one of my tonsils I saw white patches, so Tuesday morning I went to med express. They swabbed me, positive for strep throat and prescribed augmentin. My kids were swabbed last week but negative for strep. My issue is, I’m worried I waited too long and it’s progressed into something uglier? My lungs apparently sounded fine yesterday and oxygen levels were good at the doctors but I am finding it hard to breathe in deep and it hurts. My chest and back mainly, I can’t tell if its muscular as I also have an intense and productive cough. It’s worse when I lay down. I’m getting sweaty easily too. No fever though. Does this sound like pneumonia?

Introduction

In this post, we'll be discussing something called "Virtue Ethics." This is a normative theory of ethics that's most associated with Aristotle, though has in recent times experienced a resurgence of sorts from modern philosophers, some of whom have tweaked and modified it, and in doing so have created different branches on this tree of moral theory. We will be comparing these different flavors of Virtue Ethics to that of the New Testament's, pointing out where they're similar, as well as highlighting where the NT differs (and is actually superior) from the heathens' views.
I want to preface all this with a verse and a warning:

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."-Colossians 2:8

The entire Bible, over and over again, warns against syncretism. It's a running theme throughout to condemn the practice, with this verse being one of the more explicit ones to do so.
Mapping the ideas of Pagans (and especially Greek philosophers) onto the Scriptures has always resulted in people severely misinterpreting the Bible, as looking at the Word of God through a Hellenistic lens is and always has been extremely innapropiate to the author's original intent.
Whenever Greek philosophy or ideas are referenced, they're always portrayed in a bad light or otherwise used to make a point. Examples of the latter could be found in the apostle Paul's writings, as he was a fully educated Roman citizen of his day, and so he made use of known Hellenestic philosophy and literature (that he would have been familiar with) by redefining their terms and ideas in a way that would be consistent with the theology of his own religion. The apostle Peter did the same within his own epistles whenever he mentioned "Tartarus," the abyss/prison for certain disobedient angels that rebelled against God, despite the fact that the word has its roots in Greek mythology and not Hebrew religion (though, the belief that there were a group of spiritual beings that rebelled against the highest authority in the heavens was one technically shared between the two ancient cultures; even if the parties involved were vastly different, as well as the contexts of the rebellion itself).
The affect Hellenstic philosophy has had on the way people think (even subconsciously) can still be felt to this day, and can be seen in the confusion modern "Christianity" has brought on through its adoption of Gnostic teachings such as Dualism or the inherently fatalistic views that many unknowingly hold due to the error of Classical Theism.
While yes, I will be commending the heathen (unbeliever) whenever they are right with their ideas as pertaining to this subject, I will also show where they are wrong.
Let's begin.

"What Is Virtue Ethics?"

First, we need to define some terms and point out the differences between this view and others within the larger debate of normative ethics.
There are three major approaches in normative ethics, those being: Consequentalism, Deontology, and Virtue Ethics. The following are definitions of the terms:
Consequentialism – a class of normative, teleological ethical theories that holds that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for judgement about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct.
Deontology – theories where an action is considered morally good because of some characteristic of the action itself, not because the product of the action is good. Deontological ethics holds that at least some acts are morally obligatory regardless of their consequences for human welfare.
Virtue Ethics – theories that emphasize the role of character and virtue in moral philosophy rather than either doing one’s duty or acting in order to bring about good consequences. The virtue ethicist would argue that actions themselves, while important, aren't as important as the character behind them. To the virtue ethicist, consequences are also important, but they would say that good consequences ultimately flow from a virtuous character who has made virtuous decisions. Theories of virtue ethics do not aim primarily to identify universal principles that can be applied in any moral situation, instead teaching that the best decisions can vary based on context, and that there are only some actions that would be universally evil, only because those actions could never flow from a virtuous character in the first place (e.g., rape).
Aristotle's idea of ethics is in an important respect different from most people's, especially today. Heirs as we are to Kant’s idea of duty – there is a right thing that one ought to do, as rational beings who respect other persons – and to Mill’s idea of utility – the right thing to do is that which produces the greatest good for the greatest number – most of us see ethics as concerned with actions. "The function of ethics is to help me see what I ought to do in a given situation," the modern says. Aristotle’s approach was different. His ethic is not so much concerned about helping us to see what we ought to do, as about what sort of person we ought to be.
Aristotle was concerned with character, and with the things that go to make up good and bad character; virtues and vices. His sort of ethic does not look at our action to see if it fulfils our duty, or produces a certain outcome, such as the greatest good of the greatest number, and therefore merits approval. Instead, it looks at us; at the character behind the actions, to see whether we merit approval.
Comparing Virtue Ethics with philosophies such as Deontology and Consequentialism, we are able to divide ethical theories into two kinds; act-centered theories and agent-centered theories. Kant’s (Deontological) and Mill’s (Utilitarian) approaches are act-centered, because they concern themselves with our actions, whilst Aristotle’s is agent-centered because it concerns itself with the character of a person, which in his view was ourselves and our own dispositions that prompt our actions.
Both approaches have ardent present-day advocates, and so both are alive and well. Virtue Ethicists are dissatisfied with the answers ‘modern’ act-centered philosophy offers, and look for a more flexible, person-centered approach that takes more account of the subtle varieties of human motivation. Those in this camp see ethics as being about people – moral agents – rather than merely about actions. Of course, your actions matter. But, for Aristotle and his present day advocates alike, they matter as expressions of the kind of person you are. They indicate such qualities as kindness, fairness, compassion, and so on, and it is these qualities and their corresponding vices that it is the business of ethics to approve or disapprove.
All this seems simple and uncontroversial; there are two ways of looking at an action to evaluate it morally. You can take the action in isolation and judge it, or take the agent and judge him or her.
Virtue ethicists argue that act-centered ethics are narrow and bloodless. What is needed is a richer moral vocabulary than just ‘right and wrong’. There are subtle but important differences between actions that are good because they are kind and those that are good because they are generous, and those that are good because they are just. Likewise, there are subtle but important differences between actions that are bad because they are selfish and those that are bad because they are cruel and those that are bad because they are unfair. These, and many other, distinctions are lost when we talk simply about doing one’s duty, or promoting utility. Questions of motive and of character are lost, in these asceptic terms. Modern moral philosophy won’t do: it is cold, technical and insensitive to the many kinds and degrees of value expressed in human actions. Ethics is more than just thought experiments and hypotheticals about what would be the right course of action to take in any given situation we might conjure up from the comfort of our armchair. Ethics is about doing, and about context and character.

The Different Kinds of "Virtue Ethics"

Virtue Ethics has has been developed in two main directions: Eudaimonism, and agent-based theories.
Eudaimonism (Aristotle's view) bases virtues in human flourishing, where flourishing is equated with performing one’s distinctive function well. In the case of humans, Aristotle argued that our distinctive function is reasoning, and so the life “worth living” is one which we reason well. He also believed that only free men in the upper classes of society (i.e., the aristocrats) could excel in virtue and eschew vice, being that such men had greater access to the means in accomplishing this task as they had the wealth and resources to better perform their distinctive function of 'reasoning,' and thus "live well." For the Eudaimonian, inner dispositions are what one ought to focus on in order to cultivate virtuous traits, and thus a virtuous character.
In contrast, an agent-based theory emphasizes that virtues are determined by common-sense intuitions that we as observers judge to be admirable traits in other people. There are a variety of human traits that we find admirable, such as benevolence, kindness, compassion, etc., and we can identify these by looking at the people we admire, our moral exemplars. Agent-based theories also state that the motivations and intentions behind an action are ultimately what determine whether or not said action is actually virtuous. Whereas Eudaimonism understands the moral life in terms of inner dispositions or proclivities to act in certain ways (whether righteous or wicked, just or unjust, kind or cruel, etc.), agent-based theories are more radical in that their evaluation of actions is dependent on ethical judgments about the inner life of the agents who perform those actions, that is, what the motivations and intents are of a person.
[Note: While both Eudaimonism and agent-based theories are both agent-centered, Eudaimonism is not to be confused with an agent-based theory. Both branches concern themselves more with agents rather than acts themselves, but Eudamonism focuses on the self to improve whereas the agent-based theory focuses on others to improve.]

Common Critcisims Toward Secular Forms of Virtue Ethics

Firstly, Eudaimonism provides a self-centered conception of ethics because "human flourishing" (here defined as simply fulfilling our base function as humans, which is "reason" according to this view) is seen as an end in itself and does not sufficiently consider the extent to which our actions affect other people. Morality requires us to consider others for their own sake and not because they may benefit us. There seems to be something wrong with aiming to behave compassionately, kindly, and honestly merely because this will make oneself happier or "reason well."
Secondly, both Eudaimonism and agent-based theories also don't provide guidance on how we should act, as there are no clear principles for guiding action other than “act as a virtuous person would act given the situation.” Who is a virtuous person? Who is the first or universal exemplar?
Lastly, the ability to cultivate the right virtues will be affected by a number of different factors beyond a person’s control due to education, society, friends and family. If moral character is so reliant on luck, what role does this leave for appropriate praise and blame of the person? For the Eudaimonian, one ought to be born into a status of privilege if they wish to excel in being virtuous. For the proponent of an agent-based theory, one ought to be born into a society or family with good role models and preferably be raised by such, else they have no moral exemplars to emulate.

The New Testament's Virtue Ethic

The New Testament authors didn’t sit down and do a self-consciously philosophical exercise, for this was not what they were concerned with. They were concerned with giving practical instruction to disciples of the faith, and merely trying to express the ethical implications of their spiritual experience. That being said, we know the apostle Paul was familiar with the writings of Aristotle. We can actually identify places where Paul displays knowledge of Aristotle and incorporates some of the philosopher's ideas into his own epistles. Before we do this, however, it's important we refute common misnomers about what the Bible teaches concerning ethics in general.
You probably have heard many attack the ethics of the New Testament as being primitive and simplistic. "God dictates universal commands to follow: 'do not lie,' do 'not divorce,' 'do not insult.' And the only motivating factor is escaping hellfire and obtaining the reward of eternal pleasure." But in reality, this is a gross misrepresentation of the ethics laid out in the NT. I will argue the NT advocates for a form of virtue ethics, instead of claiming the NT contains a form of deontic ethics, as it is so often assumed.
Elizabeth Anscombe was one of the most influential virtue ethicists of the 20th century. Her work helped to revive virtue ethics in the modern era, however she also criticized the ethics of the Bible for promoting a form of ethics different than what Aristotle promoted:
"...between aristotle and us came Christianity, with its law conception of ethics. For Christianity derived its ethical notions from the Torah. (One might be inclined to think that a law conception of ethics could arise only among people who accepted an allegedly divine positive law..." (Modern Moral Philosophy, vol. 33, no. 124, 1-19)
We've already dealt with the issue of the Torah in another post. The Torah is not laying down moral laws, but describing justice in the form of ancient Near Eastern wisdom literature. But does the New Testament teach a deontic form of ethics? Anscombe might appear justified in her claim, as some "Christian" theologians have explicitly taught the ethics of the NT is deontic.
However, other theologians have argued the ethics of the NT is best characterized as a form of virtue ethics. In a study of the NT, we'll support this notion. As noted earlier, one of the central features of this approach to ethics is that the aim of ethics should be on living a virtuous life. Other forms of ethics focus on directing actions when confronted with a moral dilemma, but for virtue ethics every action is a moral or immoral action because all of our actions contribute or do not contribute to living a virtuous life. In other words, for a virtue ethicist, everything we do will contribute to living a fulfilled life. Now, the NT promotes a similar idea with a slight modification. The NT changes the distinctictive function and purpose for man in Eudaimonism from "reasoning" to loving God and others instead, and thus "living well" is changed from self-centered 'flourshing' (as defined by Aristotle) to glorifying God instead. The apostles taught everything we do contributes to living a life that glorifies God:

"Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God."-1 Corinthians 10:31
"And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him."-Colossians 3:17

So we see the same idea in Paul, that everything we do can be seen as a moral or immoral action. Everything we do should be seen as contributing to living a life that glorifies god or not. As a believer, the aim is not just doing good actions to avoid punishments, but to see everything we do as glorifying God. On secular virtue ethics, all our actions are either advancing a good life or not: nourishing your body contributes to living a good life. In a Biblical context: taking the time to properly dress contributes to living a good life, and not giving into the sin of sloth. So all our actions can be moral actions in this context, and so likewise for Paul and Jesus, all we do can contribute to living a life that glorifies God.
Since God made our bodies to thrive and enjoy life, we should nourish our bodies so we can thrive as God intended for our bodies to do, thus ultimately glorifying Him. Since we were created to experience and feel enjoyment, laughing and enjoying things throughout life glorifies God as well since we're experiencing emotions that God created to be experienced. Everything we do should be to glorify God, and often all that is is living our lives in the way that they were intended to be lived. Biblical ethics is very much more than merely performing right actions, but living a virtuous life that brings glory to God.
As Jesus said:

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind."-Matthew 22:37b

It is also important to focus on what it means to love, which is an important aspect of what it means to be a believer. Paul makes the radical claim that to love is the entirety of the law of God:

"For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."-Galatians 5:14

Jesus also taught that to love God and love others were the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-31, Matt. 22:34-40). He also extends the commandment to love beyond one's brethren, and to love our enemies (Matt. 5:44). Loving those around us is central to what it means to be a believer (John 13:34; 15:12-17, Rom. 12:10; 13:8, 1 Cor. 13:1-8; 16:14, 2 Cor. 8:8, Eph. 4:2; 5:2, Phili. 1:9, Heb. 10:24, Jam. 2:8, 1 Pet. 1:22, 1 John 2:10; 3:23).
One might suggest this is no different than the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do to you," or a Kantian rule: "I ought never to act except in such a way that I could also will that my maxim should become a universal law." In other words, "to live well is to perform good deeds or actions and nothing more." But an important point about loving someone is it cannot be done through actions alone. For example, one could buy a gift for their spouse to cheer them up. However, one could perform this action merely because they value performing right actions without any love for the person. One could donate to charity because it is the right thing to do, and not because she cares for the people who would benefit. In such scenarios, they can be seen as idolizing moral laws, not necessarily caring about helping others.
But to love someone requires more than merely performing right actions. You cannot love someone and not care about who they are as a person and where they are heading in life. To love is to will the good of the other. Jesus chastised the Pharisees of his day for only performing right actions, but not loving their brethren in their hearts. His criticism follows Matthew chapter 22, where Jesus says the greatest commandments are to love. The implication is the Pharisees perform proper actions, but have the wrong motivations for doing so. James Keenan puts it like this:
"Essential to understanding this command is that we love our neighbors not as objects of our devotion, but rather as subjects; that is, as persons. Thus, we cannot love others only because God wants us to do so, since then we would love them as means or as objects and not as persons. We can only love one another as subjects, just as God loves us." (Jesus and Virtue Ethics: Building Bridges Between New Testament Studies and Moral Theology, pg. 86)
A critic may bring up that verses of the NT are still phrased as commands, and therefore the structure implies duties were the central aspect of Christian ethics. But the importance of duties is not foreign to Virtue Ethics. Instead of being central to the ethical framework, duties flow from a virtuous character. Virtues are active and have certain demands for which a person must fulfill in their active behavior.
According to Aristotle, knowledge of the virtues gives us practical wisdom in how to properly act. Duties flow from the understanding of the demands of virtues. To put it another way, for virtues to manifest in persons, they have certain demands that must be fulfilled. For the believer, the command of love flows from being virtuous and aligning oneself with the character of God. Commitment to the character of Christ, who perfectly carried out the will of the Father, allows us to perform right and proper actions.
The NT also contains lists of virtues the believer ought to emulate, the most famous of these is in Galatians chapter 5:
"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law." (vss. 22-23)
Now, the connection with Aristotle cannot be more pronounced. The Greek phrase "against such there is no law" is almost identical to what we find in Aristotle's politics (3.13.1284a). It seems clear Paul is teaching a similar ethical framework to what Aristotle advocated for. Paul is teaching that the believing community ought to be persons who display key virtues, and that their conduct would not need to be regulated by a law. Instead, their character should be the standard others can measure themselves by. Romans chapter 2 is also a place we see references to Aristotle, where Paul notes that when Gentiles do what the law requires, they are "a law unto themselves" (vss. 14-15). In other words, they do not need to be told to act a certain way. They have the proper virtuous character that directs their actions, to do the good the law requires. Paul is advocating in Galatians that believers should think in a similar way.
So in Galatians 5, we have affinity with the teachings of Aristotle, and in other lists of virtues throughout the NT we see a similar idea, which is that Christians were meant to display virtues primarily (Rom. 5:3-5, 1 Cor. 13:1-8, Col. 3:12-17, 1 Tim. 3:2-3; 4:7-8, Jam. 3:17-18, 2 Pet. 1:5-8). From that, good deeds will properly manifest in our actions.
Anscombe made a great point on what the focus of ethics should be:
"It would be a great improvement if, instead of 'morally wrong', one always named a genus such as 'untruthful', 'unchaste', 'unjust'. We should no longer ask whether doing something was 'wrong', passing directly from some description of an action to this notion; we should ask whether, e.g., it was unjust; and the answer would sometimes be clear at once." (Modern Moral Philosophy, vol. 33, no. 124, 1-19)
Interestingly enough, Paul lays out a similar idea in explaining Christian ethics:

"Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you."-Philippians 4:8-9

In other words, the central aspect on living a Christian life was on what is virtuous, not on what is lawfully right or wrong. Right actions flow from whatever is honorable, true, and pure. Correlating with this is how Paul responds to the Corinthians who claimed that "all was lawful." Paul reminded them the emphasis is not on what is lawful, but on what is good for building a virtuous character:

"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not."-1 Corinthians 10:23

One's main focus ought to be on what is good, not on laws that dictate behavior.
One of the key aspects of Virtue Ethics is the idea we ought to learn from virtuous teachers and imitate them. A virtuous character is obtained by imitating what a virtuous person does. This parallels a key aspect of Christian ethics. Imitating Christ was (and still is) crucial to living a virtuous life:

"For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:"-1 Peter 2:21

Paul says in Romans 8:29 that Christians were predestined "to be conformed to the image of his Son." Jesus often taught his followers to do as he does (Matt. 16:24, Mark 8:34, Luke 6:40; 9:23, John 13:15, 34). Paul says in 1st Corinthians 11: Be ye followers [i.e., imitators] of me, even as I also am of Christ" (vs. 1). Hebrews 13:7 says to imitate the faith of the patriarchs. 1st Thessalonians 2:14 says to imitate each other. And jesus taught to imitate the good Samaritan from his parable (Luke 10:37). Imitating virtuous teachers was key for Christian ethics.
Aristotle tended to compare acquiring virtues with that of learning a practical skill, like playing an instrument or learning how to become a builder. Such practical skills are best picked up when trained by a master of that particular skill, because a teacher can always provide more insight through lessons they learn from experience. For example, an expert salesman can provide examples from his experience of what works with specific customers that a sales textbook could never provide. Many professions today require on-the-job training or experience before even hiring an applicant. The reason is: experience is key to learning a profession. Merely acquiring knowledge from a textbook or an instruction manual is often insufficient to master a skill, so why would mastering the skill of virtue be any different?
In the NT, a believer is to see the world through the eyes of Christ and to love as he loved. One cannot learn how to be a virtuous person without knowing what that life would look like. A key component of Christian theology is that the Messiah perfectly represented the Father and His will on earth, to show us how to properly live as God intended for man. This central tenet of the NT aligns well with agent-based theories of Virtue Ethics, and modifies it so that the person of Jesus Christ is the universal exemplar that one is meant to emulate. We are called to imitate him through our actions, thoughts, and desires, and to conform ourselves to the way he lived. As Paul said:

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."-Galatians 2:20

If learning from Christ is key, we should briefly take a look at the Sermon on the Mount, which is said to be one of Jesus' most important series of teachings. Daniel Harrington notes:
"The sermon begins with nine 'beatitudes' (see 5:3–12) in which Jesus declares as 'happy' or 'blessed' those who practice certain virtues, and promises them an eternal reward and the fullness of God's kingdom." (Jesus and Virtue Ethics: Building Bridges Between New Testament Studies and Moral Theology, pg. 62)
Jesus laid out what a life for those that follow him look like in detail. One ought to be merciful, pure in heart, a peacemaker, thirst for righteousness, etcetera (Matt. 5:2-10). The Sermon does not merely include what right actions are, but includes sections on proper desires. Not only is it wrong to murder, but it is wrong to desire to murder or wish ill on someone (Matt. 5:22). Avoiding adultery is good, but one also should not covet after another man's woman in their heart (Matt. 5:28). In other words, merely avoiding immoral actions is not enough. One must also not desire vices. A believer is called to desire what is good.
The Sermon is not necessarily laying down universal moral commands. For example, Matthew 5:9 says, "Blessed are the peacemakers," but this doesn't imply absolute Pacifism, as it would contradict passages in the Old Testament where it explicitly says there is a time for war (Ecc. 3:8). The point of the Sermon is to teach what a virtuous life ought to look like. A follower of Christ ought to use reason to know what is proper to do in various circumstances. For example, in Matthew chapter 6, Jesus offers guidance on how one ought to pray by presenting the Lord's prayer (vss. 9-15). This is a model of how to pray. It's not a command for followers to always pray in this exact way.
In reality, the Sermon on the Mount mixes in exhortations, parables, hyperbole, declarations, commands, etc. It is best understood as displaying what a virtuous life ought to look like. It's not a law code. Building on this, it's important to understand a proper action is context sensitive. Under Virtue Ethics, one should not necessarily apply a universal maxim to every situation. Sometimes the proper action will depend on what is at stake, who is involved, what is the background, etc. Aristotle advocated against the idea there were fixed universal laws that dictate actions, and instead he argued the right action would depend on the circumstances one finds themselves in. Although the ethics of the NT may be a bit more strict, it still places an emphasis on being sensitive to the context of situations.
In 1st Corinthians chapter 8, Paul lays out instructions on how to deal with meat that has been sacrificed to Pagan idols. Instead of stating an absolute prohibition against meat sacrificed to idols, Paul instructed Christians to use reason to come to the proper ethical decision based on context. In other words, the right action is not determined only by a law. Instead, the Christian had to make the proper decision based on the context: if eating caused another to stumble, then you ought to abstain; if not, then there's no harm done. The value of the action depends on the context.
A Deontologist might reply that there's still a universal law given here: that one should always abstain if it's going to cause another to stumble. This objection can be addressed by asking: how are we to know if eating the meat will cause another believer to stumble? To answer such a question, one must be sensitive to the context, which in this case would be knowledge of the fellow believer and your relation to him. It is the context that determines the right action, not a universal law. Moreover, Paul states that the primary goal for the believer should be to love (1 Cor. 13). The first consideration is once again not the rightness of action, but having love for one another. From this, knowledge of the proper action will follow.
Paul often explains that living a proper life as a believer will take work and practice. He reminded Timothy to attend readings, practice what these things mean, and keep a close watch on himself (1 Tim. 4:13-14). Elsewhere, he directs that all believers must work on their faith (Phili. 2:12). Beyond this, he also noted that not all Christians would have the same gifts, and to accept that this was normal (1 Cor. 12). For some, certain things may be a hindrance, whereas for others it is acceptable (Rom. 14:2-4). What matters is that we love and build one another up (1 Thess. 5:11). Right actions flow from love and knowledge of virtue. Rules are not the primary motives that dictate our actions; rules are secondary in this regard.
An interesting case can be studied with regards to divorce in the Gospels. Jesus preaches against divorce (Mark 10:7-9) and it is often interpreted to mean "divorce is always wrong, regardless of circumstances." However, it should be noted the prohibition on divorce is not a universal law. The context can affect whether or not a divorce is permissible. Jesus says that one can divorce over sexual immorality. Paul also has a situation where divorce is permissible, namely if one spouse is an unbeliever and wishes to leave (1 Cor. 7:15). The implication one can derive is divorce is not ideal, but there are circumstances where it may be the proper action to take. Given the other features of Christian Virtue Ethics we already covered, the proper action to take will depend on the circumstances and what the virtuous agent thinks is the most loving thing to do. A universal prohibition on divorce is not a Christian ethic. Instead, one ought to discern the proper action from circumstances. However, it's clear in most cases divorce would not be the virtuous thing to do.
Building on this, it's important to note that within NT ethics, certain acts are always wrong. For example, idolatry and sexual immorality are always wrong (1 Cor. 10:14, Col. 3:15, 1 Pet. 4:13). There are no possible scenarios where it would be okay to rape, because such an act would never flow from a virtuous character. But this concept is not foreign to theories of Virtue Ethics. Aristotle noted that for some actions, no qualifications could make them virtuous. Actions such as rape or murder are always wrong, because they would never flow from a virtuous character. So it's not as if a Virtue Ethicist cannot claim that some actions are always wrong. They simply are qualified as being unable to flow from virtue, whereas actions like lying or waging war could be considered virtuous for the right reason.
Now, despite Christian Virtue Ethics having many similarities with Eudaimonism (Aristotelian ethics), there are also numerous differences beyond what we've already noted. One of the deficiencies of how Aristotle lays out his ethical theory is that it is essentially an all-boys club. Aristotle writes mainly to aristocratic men, excluding women and slaves. In his view, women were inferior to men and slaves lacked the necessary rational faculty. But the Christians rejected this mentality, as the teachings of Christ and the apostles were available to all (Matt. 28:19). Paul said, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:28). Peter wrote that all Christians were part of the priesthood of Christ (1 Pet. 2:5). Jesus had women followers (Luke 8:2-3), and they were entrusted with delivering revelation (Mark 15:40–16:8). What we find throughout the NT is a radical change to how women were viewed in the ancient world. Paul is also likely building on Aristotle's household structure and refining it. David deSilva says the household codes of the NT are "...following the pairs laid out as early as Aristotle to such a degree as to suggest that these were standard topics in ethical instruction" (Honor, Patronage, Kinship & Purity, pg. 231). But Paul adds an important preface: submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ (Eph. 5:20-21). DeSilva says:
"...husbands, we cannot then ignore the distinctively Christian addition they bring to this arrangement; husbands are to be subject to their wives as well." (Honor, Patronage, Kinship & Purity, pg. 233)
Thus Paul doesn't break down the traditional perspective on the structure of the family, but he does add the idea that we all must submit to each other in reverence, love, unity, and cooperation because all are equal before God. There is no explicit mention in the NT calling for the abolishment of slavery, but it should be noted that Paul taught that slaves should be seen as equals. In the letter to Philemon, Paul is clear that his slave is no longer "as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved" (vs. 16). Thus, within Christian ethics class distinctions were supposed to evaporate. All were brothers and sisters of one family.
An important aspect of Christian ethics is that it wasn't a standalone ethical theory. It's embedded in the larger Christian worldview. The ethical framework is dependent on Christian doctrines. For Aristotle, his ethical theory is for men who were raised well. This is why these specific men desire to be virtuous and perform right actions. As for why the believer does good and desires to be virtuous, it's not because one was raised well, but because they have been activated by the power of God's Spirit (John 3:6, 1 Cor. 12:13). For believers, the reason as to why we desire to be good and virtuous is because the Spirit of God has regenerated us. He loves us so we can love others (1 John 4:19). One is meant to look to the life of Christ and what he has done by dying on the cross, to know that we are loved and forgiven. This in turn is meant to activate a good life, having seen what we have gained and been forgiven of. He calls and activates us to do similar to those around us. This is a more open system for people of all groups and classes. One only has to call upon the name of the Lord to be included. It does not require a specific gender or to be raised a certain way.
The goal of Aristotelian ethics is to achieve 'eudaimonia.' However, within the Bible the goal is as the Westminster Shorter Catechism puts it: "Man's chief end is to glorify God, and enjoy Him forever." Since the central aspect of Biblical Eschatology is that humans will continue on forever in resurrected bodies, the aim of ethics is more than living a good life presently. Living a good life now is important, but it was only one aspect in the Christian worldview. Humans are meant to live beyond this life, so the aim is also about building virtuous souls that will continue on. The importance of this is more crucial than it may seem at first. Paul said that we must all appear before judgment, so that "every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad" (2 Cor. 15:10).
Being a virtuous person requires integrity, because one will still have to answer to God after death. If one can commit an evil act and no one finds out, then from the outside perspective he or she may still appear virtuous. Culturally speaking, the ancient world was very different from our own. All wrongdoings centered around public honor and shame. One did good to receive public honor, and one did not do what was bad to receive public shame. Right and wrong were connected to one's public honor and shame in the ancient Greco-Roman world. Thus good and evil were public ideas, not personal ideas. Ethical demands were grounded in the community in one's public appearance
The Biblical idea of an omniscient God who cared about our ethical status laid a foundation for integrity and personal guilt to emerge. Now one ought to do good because he is beholden to God, not just the community. Believers are to remain focused on God's approval and on the actions that lead them, regardless of the world's response. This lays down fertile ground for integrity to emerge. So the Biblical worldview has another important element built in that encourages ethical behavior, regardless of the honor it brings. One ought to do good because of a commitment to God not, because it might bring honor to one's name publicly.

Implications for Preterists

Paul believed that the Second Coming would happen in his generation, and prescribed certain things in the NT on the basis of that belief. An example of an exhortation that would no longer apppy to us today would be 1st Corinthians 7:24-29, where Paul argues that the times him and his fellow Christians were in called for celibacy, being that the Lord was fast approaching. It wasn't a sin if you did get married, of course; it was just harder to serve the Lord in this context if you had a family to worry about. Thus, Paul encouraged being single.
So, we need to be careful when reading the NT and determining what prohibitions or exhortations are still applicable to us today. Context is key.

For the record I do not have any trauma related disorders, personality disorders, or mental disorders other than MDD and severe anxiety. That being said I truly share symptoms across a lot of different disorders which confuses the hell out of me.
I had a normal childhood until about middle school. There I experienced a moderate amount of social isolations but still managed to make friends. A few of these friends tended to mess with me and try to make me feel as if I was lesser. I know I am not overreacting because other people have told me this and they act differently toward others. I think this was due to my appearance at a younger age and my anxiety. I cut them off because I realized they didn’t keep me around for other then making themselves feel good. I kept a few friends that I never Really considered close but largely I feel didn’t want to hangout with me lying about reasons not being able to hangout. I caught them in lies multiple times posting stories being somewhere when they said they were too tired to do anything or had a family event. I wantd to do something maybe once every two weeks and when they were busy maybe once a month but they managed to hangout with other people every weekend. High school I isolated myself and experimented with different personalities to try to make friends but nothing really worked that well. In my Highschool friend group I eventually had enough and argued with them over something relatively unimportant and they stopped associating with me after that with no more than a text asking if I was ok after being hospitalized a few days after. I had a bad reaction to prescribed medication that wasn't my fault. Never talked to a few of them after that in person and till this day and they think I am crazy. One said I don’t have it that bad when I tried explaining why I was so upset and how I struggled with a lot of things because a family member had an autistic son and I could never have it that bad. I was forced to go into group therapy in h s as well because of a screw up with the school and long story short my parents agreed it would be best to pull me out for a bit. I was by far the most emotionally stable person in each group I was put in no matter which person it was. I was also the only male except for a couple younger guys that were there for ASPD or OCD. I hate that I actually enjoyed being around all of the people in there. I still hate how I wish I never met any of these people because I think about them way to often and it hurts me. I felt too much in common with girls that had PTSD, BPD, and severe childhood trauma. I know that sounds awful but I truly wish I could switch lives with them because of the true horrors many of these kids experienced. the main reason I am even religious is because I do not know how a human being could torture another human soul so badly without remorse or reason without being influenced by true evil/demon/possession. I will not go into any detail because I do not feel it is my story to tell. All I will say is the light seemed dull in many children's eyes in that place. The only reason I have cried in the past like 8 months is because I remember the stories these people have told me. I hate how the closest I have every felt to a human being was with a girl that had BPD who I barely know and I felt was kind to me with no reason. I hate how I see these people around my city without it actually being them. I hate how I stay up at night thinking about our conversations. I hate how I feel they did not like me because I was even in there. I felt annoying and disrespectful without trying and I felt everything I said was stupid and came off weird or wrong. I hate how no one understands me as well as some of these girls did. Like why am I actively having good conversations with someone who seems to feel the same emotions I am feeling do not wish to have children because of the way I feel and the risk associated with them experiencing something horrible. I have also never seen myself living super long due to me being high stress and the fact I just have too much weird situations happen to me. I feel every major goal of mine has been ruined by things outside of my control I only have happiness in fleeting moments but I have experienced pure joy in a handful of moments in my life. My baseline is depressed and anxious but manageable. I feel I am lucky enough to not experience true trauma but unlucky enough to keep having bullshit mess with my life plans and happiness. There is more stuff I intentional left out because its too specific and I don't like talking bout them.
Symptoms list:
Mind racing, hypervigilance, feeling everyone is against me without proof, paranoid or more so anxious bad things will happen to me, always on guard in public; feels like people are making fun of me, intense anger toward others the world and myself, sensitive to specific words and topics, intense sensation of hollowness, backseat driveidentity issues [really only preset during extreme bouts of physical and mental stress such as not sleeping, eating or illness], I don't ever get headaches unless I am insanely stressed or depressed, sharp disconnect between myself and my feelings or feeling is should feel, I imagine crazy unrealistic but statistically probable dangerous situations happening to me when I am in public, have an intense almost idiotic need to prove my toughness and would rather die than back down to someone
My doctors have never thought I have autism and the only reason I have ever looked into that is social difficulties and when I am sleep deprived or under extreme stress/ anxiety I am not good in social situations. This has gotten better as I have gotten older though.
I do not have OCD even though I have a borderline extreme obsession with my chosen sport to the point I have to stop myself from talking about it all the time.
I don't hallucinate or have overly grandiose ideas/delusions
Don't fit criteria for PTSD as my symptoms are manageable enough to function at a high level and I have not really hit any of the trauma criteria under the DSM-5
Bipolar out of the question as I only ever experience manic symptoms when I am sick and cant get enough sleep and my mood is relatively stable. My psych told me to stop telling my therapist I have experienced mania because he believes its only due to sleep related insomnia. Even though they did say it is possible its not likely.
bipolar same with schizophrenia don't even come close to this one
Personality disorder I have no immediate family that has any of these and I did not have an exceptionally hard childhood. No severe trauma to cause this plus my mood is to stable and antidepressants help me regulate for the most part also antipsychotic actually make me worse even atypical ones suck.
My docs and therapist just say I am really unlucky and have MDD severe anxiety and to get over my past but I feel as if it is apart of me and if I let go of it that all my pain was meant for nothing. I don't know why but I would rather go a lifetime of suffering because I feel that is a better alternative for me personally and is more honorable to society than the alternative. I Truly for some reason don't have a quitting bone in my body and sometimes wish this wasn't the case. I think this is party due to spite and hate and the fact I cant believe all this was meant for nothing.

This is long so please forgive me in advance. I just had my second baby, a son, 8 weeks ago. When he was about 2 weeks old we starting noticing signs of reflux, sounds of acid coming up his throat, slight spitting up, and nonstop crying. He would start crying at about 6pm and would not be soothed until 1 or 2 in the morning. After bringing this up to his pediatrician she was not convinced he had reflux because he was still gaining weight 🙃 we pushed and she prescribed him Pepcid and that seemed to slightly help along with switching him to a hypoallergenic formula but we were only allowed a 30 day supply of Pepcid so that’s gone now.
He still cries all the time. His pediatrician has just put it down to colic and said that he’ll eventually grow out of it. If he’s awake, he’s crying/screaming. We can still hear acid coming up his throat and he screams and writhes like he’s in pain constantly.
And at night we don’t know what to do. We bought a bassinet that tilts up for reflux babies and even added extra padding under the mattress to give a little bit of extra height. He will not sleep in it. We can’t get him to sleep anywhere but on us or his bouncer. I know this is not ideal but the only way me and my husband can get any sleep is by letting him sleep in his bouncer. We have it reclined as much as it will go so his head does not fall forward or anything so still not ideal but we’re desperate. He will not sleep on his back for anything. He can be dead asleep and limp and if we sit him in his bassinet he will wake up within a few minutes every single time with what sounds like reflux again.
We don’t know what to do at this point, whether that’s pushing for a new medicine to try and help or just wait it out. My first never had this problem. I go back to work in a few days and I don’t know how I’m going to be able to do it without him sleeping safely.

I am seeking advice on identifying eczema trigger, keeping inflammation/itchiness at bay, or even just positive stories on how your LO overcame eczema to give this FTM some hope.
My son is 3.5mo and EBF. His eczema first popped up a month ago around 2.5 months. He’s responding to hydrocortisone 2.5% well. It will clear up his eczema in about 2 days but it always comes back in about another 2-3 days. It’s not the worst eczema I have seen (mainly just gets red; no weeping), but it is bad enough where the itchiness is starting to disrupt his sleep and general well being.
While doctor has said it’s okay to use the 2.5% in bursts, I am concerned it’s going to make his skin worse long term. But if I don’t, he doesn’t get relief.
So far, we have tried:

1. Tubby Todd (eczema version), Eucerin, Aveeno baby overnight balm, Cerave baby, aquaphor, Vaseline - none has really been enough to keep the inflammation away. He’s just greasy all the time.
   
2. We bathe him 1x/week using cerave baby soap only on hands, armpit, feet, and a little bit of neck. Is this too infrequent? I worry his skin can’t breathe from all the product build up.
   
3. I have started to avoid eggs in my diet. Still observing but so far I don’t feel like it’s making a difference. Will probably move onto dairy, nuts, or soy based on doctor’s advice.
   
4. We have used air purifier but doesn’t appear to be making a difference.
   
5. Doctor says it’s too young for him to prescribe anything for the itchiness, and too young to do any allergy tests.
   
6. I have asked about probiotics but doctor doesn’t think it’s beneficial.
   

This has been an emotional roller coaster. Every time it clears, I get my hopes up that maybe it’ll stay clear, only for spots to pop up a few days later. Last night it bothered him so much at one point he wouldn’t stop crying. I ended up holding him asleep for 4 hours because I wanted him to be off his back, which was inflamed.
My boy is such a sweet, chill guy and is generally a great sleeper…seeing him itchy and not get restful sleep is killing me.

Got prescribed augmentin for a bad sinus infection today. I’ll be 12 weeks tomorrow and am so nervous to take any medications even though I was told by the np and pharmacist that it’s safe. If you ever took it and your baby is healthy can you please share. I never took any medications while pregnant with my first baby so I’m hoping everything will be good with baby #2.

I am seeking advice on identifying triggers, keeping inflammation/itchiness at bay, or even just positive stories on how your LO overcame eczema to give this FTM some hope.
My son is 3.5mo and EBF. His eczema first popped up a month ago around 2.5 months. He’s responding to hydrocortisone 2.5% well. It will clear up his eczema in about 2 days but it always comes back in about another 2-3 days. It’s not the worst eczema I have seen (mainly just gets red; no weeping), but the itchiness is starting to disrupt his sleep.
While doctor has said it’s okay to use the 2.5% in bursts, I am so scared it’s going to make his skin worse long term. I am mainly using it on really inflamed areas or if he’s really itchy.
So far, we have tried:

1. Tubby Todd (eczema version), Eucerib baby Eczema cream, Aveeno baby overnight balm, Cerave baby, aquaphor, Vaseline - none has really been enough to keep the inflammation away. Aveeno seems to be the best so far, but I think it burns him. I am also waiting for the original Tubby Todd to get delivered. I moisturize him pretty much every wake window and he’s constantly greasy already.
2. We shower 1x/week using cerave baby soap only on hands, armpit, feet, and a little bit of neck. Is this too little? I worry his skin can’t breathe from all the product build up
3. I have started to avoid eggs in my diet. Still observing but so far I don’t feel like it’s making a difference.
4. We have used air purifier but doesn’t appear to be making a difference.
5. Doctor says it’s too young for him to prescribe anything for the itchiness, and too young to do any allergy tests.

This has been an emotional roller coaster. Every time it clears, I get my hopes up that maybe it’ll stay clear, only for spots to pop up a few days later. Last night it bothered him so much at one point he wouldn’t stop crying. I ended up holding him asleep for 4 hours because I wanted him to be off his back, which seems to be what was bothering him.

I have been prescribed for 10 years now going on 11 and was switched to Alvogen in November of 2023. I haven't been picky with what I can get due to the seemingly never ending shortage, but I am desperate to switch generics at this point. It has been 6 months and I've gained 15 lbs, have been struggling with excessive fatigue, and my moods are all over the place. I am running a full time business from home and lost my sons father to covid, so I have a lot on my plate this year especially. My medication being ineffective is making my life so hard.
Does anyone have any suggestions or know of a pharmacy in the Houston area that has IR ADHD generics in stock?
I have tried almost all of them since I have been prescribed a decade now, but aurobindo, malindkroft, lannett, and now Alvogen, do not work for me at all.
Anyone know who has Epic, Elite, Sandoz, ect in stock? I've called 80 pharmacies since the year began and have gotten nowhere.
I appreciate anyone who takes the time to read this and help. I am desperate. 🙏🙏🙏
Thank you!!

Next month will be 5 years that I have been a Registered Nurse.
In honor of that, I’d like to share one (of many I have had) career defining moments…my first patient code.
I had been a RN for maybe 6 months and was working overnights from 7pm to 7:30am. I had just come on to shift and received report for my patients when the son of one of them called and asked to speak with me.
He goes on to explain that he’s concerned for his Mom because she hadn’t had much to eat or drink in the couple days she had been a patient with us. He was also concerned about her ability to communicate with staff effectively as she was older and had multiple strokes that left her forgetting a lot of her English. Instead, she tended to mumble in her native language…Polish.
After speaking with him, I immediately looked up key words in Polish I knew I would need if I was going to be able to connect with her the same way I do all my other patients.
I looked up the Polish word for nurse. Pielęgniarka.
Next, I looked up the word for pain. Ból.
Medicine. Medycyna.
Potato. Ziemniak.
Water. Woda.
Potato seems random, but in my conversation with her son, he said her favorite food was mashed potatoes (mine too!) and that’s what she had ordered for dinner earlier that was still sitting on her table to eat.
When the time came and I entered her room, I found her lying in bed, seemingly bored, but curious as to who I was. I introduced myself as her nurse using the word I had just looked up and she greeted me with a smile.
The next 10-15 minutes after had her and I laughing together as I haphazardly tried communicating with her using broken Polish and hand gestures. You could tell there was a language barrier, but it didn’t stop either of us from getting our point across, and the giggling from us both lightened the mood.
I remember feeding her the mashed potatoes and hearing her go, “Mmmmmmm” as she swallowed them.
I remember her declining the “woda” I kept offering.
Then I remember her clutching at her hip and writhing in pain. That wasn’t a shock considering she was there with a broken hip awaiting surgery, but had to be off her regularly prescribed blood thinners for a while first. I asked if she had pain and she nodded yes. I asked if she wanted pain medicine and she said yes. I gave it to her and watched her settle back down until she began itching her arms motioning to me that she was uncomfortable. I massaged lotion into both of her arms as she sighed of relief and said, “Very good! Very good” taking both of my hands into hers to thank me.
I smiled back and said that she was welcome. Knowing she was feeling better, I went to round on other patients, occasionally peeking in to see how she was doing. After an hour or so, I went back in her room and saw that she had fallen asleep. I fixed her nasal cannula as it had fallen down from her ears and I checked her foley to make sure the tubing wasn’t getting kinked. I made sure she was covered with her blanket so she wouldn’t be cold. Hospitals are always so cold…
I went to another patient’s room. 2 minutes later, one my CNA’s came to me saying they just went in her room and she wasn’t breathing.
What? How?
I just came from there and she had been sleeping peacefully. There were no signs of distress.
What do you mean she isn’t breathing?
I ran to her room. I checked for a pulse. No pulse.
Panic set in. I quickly confirm she’s a full code and my staff and I jumped into action.
One of us got the crash cart. One of us paged for a code. One of us started compressions while the other ambu bagged her.
Suddenly a bunch of staff are at my side as we all fall into our assigned roles.
I remember those compressions I did on her. No one ever talks about the trauma that CPR does to a person’s body…
How the ribs crack like uncooked pasta underneath your hands.
After rounds of CPR, we managed to get a pulse back and transferred her straight to the ICU where she coded again.
We resumed our roles. We must have tried for over 30 minutes.
She wasn’t coming back.
The family (her son and daughter) had been contacted and the doctor called it.
The rest of that night was a blur to me. I had other patients to take care of, so I went back to my unit until the family had arrived and asked to speak with me.
I told them everything that happened from the first moment I walked in to her room. I showed them my chicken scratch notes of the polish words I looked up. I explained that I had no explanation for what could have happened as I saw no signs that she was in danger. And then I broke down crying apologizing profusely feeling like I had completely failed her and them.
Suddenly the son hugged me, then the daughter. They both thanked me for doing what I did for their mother, stating that most people wouldn’t have even taken the time to look up Polish words. Then he said something I’ll never forget. He said she knew her time was coming as earlier that day she mentioned to them both that she would be going “home” soon.
To this day I wish I knew what happened. To this day I try to think about what signs I could have missed. To this day I wonder if I could have done anything differently.
I’ll never forget her, and I think of her often hoping her last moments here provided some bit of love and comfort.

Me and the wife of 23 years married,and even more as friends. HS sweethearts and welcomed our first child in 2017.Just an amazing Mother and could not ask for better.(like at all).She's THAT mom.took a year off work to be with our new born,until her job gave her a fat raise ,basically begging for her to come back.worked at the same company for 10+years,in child care with 1 year olds, became lead teacher and one point the face of the company t.v ad.
The kid never had a wet diaper for more than 2 minutes. I was just a follower now and just obeyed the process.I was to only work,and when home,wait for instruction(when it came to the child). Which I did so in compliance.The kid had started flash cards in their crib at 3 months. Never had bottled food or cereal as I was instructed to cook chicken,sweet potato,carrots and onions then blend it for their meals.And when it was time for bed ,we'd be sleeping together. All 3 of us, leaving no room or time for intimacy. Before the kid we were like rabbits on an island who didn't even bother to get dressed. But now it's just dirty and ick while the kid takes up our day and energy,as it should in my opinion. (Or groomed opinion).
She returned back to work,even got a sweet deal for our son even to go there. It was a much needed chapter for us,as it was all she talked about was having a kid.Mind you were this far now and haven't had any sex,and I just brush it off cause I kinda like catering to the kid and her. Then the unfortunate happens,she had a stroke in early 2023 that just crushed our world and took a devastating blow to us and our little "juice box" Kid's nickname.
It's been a year now since the stroke,and of course I'm not gonna even bring up sex.how dare I? Our insurance sucks, do all the care us left to me,and family. Family being the ones who stay with her when I'm at work.they just watch, they don't cook,or change her,move her.All physical,nutritional,medical needs are done by me,while also making sure the kid is well and cared for .it's been almost 3 years now,and never understood the "blue balls" theory until now.only problem is, I have like purple,and it's smooth at the bottom.wtf? I'm no scientist or physician,but NO dude has smooooth balls.i swear, if they get any smoother,the hairs will start self plucking at root.
I scheduled my first appointment ever with my pcp,and hope she can prescribe me with something because what's after purple? I didn't feel any pain or anything .but I need to seek a specialist or something,because some months to a year ago I had something very very weird happen to where I thought we were getting it on,only to have woke up,and realized it was just me and a morning mess.
I need help.tommorow is my scheduled doc visit.and I don't want to bring it up to the wife,as I needn't more stress on her.and I can't find any forums or FAQ of such. Has anyone had this smooth purple tadpole pouch before?

When I was 16 years old, my mom kicked me out. Recently I found out she told everyone I ran away. At the time I was a straight a student, did my chores, held down a full-time job, ran track cross country and played volleyball. I wasn’t a bad kid. I’m 20 years old now. And I’m currently housing my 17-year-old brother. Just for reference, my brother had a car accident at 90 mph and received a major concussion and a broken shoulder. A week after the accident. My mom’s boyfriend of two years got into a physical altercation with him resulting in my brother is already concussed head getting hit on the door frame. He reacted and screamed. Your boyfriend just assaulted me. In the end, a span of a span of 20 minutes not even 20 minutes my mother chose her boyfriend over her 17 year old son. For context, I haven’t talk to my mother in years. Recently, my grandmother, who lives with my mom had a heart attack. Due to feelings of guilt because of her condition, I begin contact with my family again. For the past 11 years, my mother has been an alcoholic, who is also prescribed Xanax. Other than the obvious reason you’re not supposed to mix the two, she never has to deal with the pain she causes, because simply she doesn’t remember it. She is consistently chose alcohol over her family and her friends and her children. Which is why I remain no contact. Recently, my 17-year-old brother has been suffering from severe vomiting since the incident with Mom’s boyfriend. I had to beg her to take him to the hospital. It was my finals week, he’s a minor, and my name was not on the insurance card. She decided to convince the doctor that my brother was addicted to marijuana, and that was the cause for his symptoms. She brought him a folder “proving her case“. End result, my brother was discharged, and she felt validated for kicking out her 17-year-old son. Over the next few days, she spammed mine and my brother’s phone trying to prove to me that that was the problem and that he is manipulative and playing me. It was so severe. He had to block her number, and which she just made a new one to contact him. Resulting in him, making a new number to get away. Just recently she reached out to me looking for sympathy. Just recently she got diagnosed with sub ventricle tachycardia. Originally I ignored her, but then she sent the text again. I did do my own research on the topic, and while it is a health condition, you could be born with. It is triggered by alcohol, caffeine, and stress. This was our conversation AITAH?

Moved here from the states over a year ago with my now almost 2 year old and 4 year old. Having a real hard go of it… my older son has autism and I’ve just been paying out of pocket for speech therapy or else he’d probably get nothing!! I have him on the list for an assessment in a couple months which im also paying out of pocket for.
I’ve never been able to get him into any doctor and now need to for the peds referral for the assessment. In the past I tried 811, walk in clinics with no success at all. I’ve taken him in for vaccinations also but that’s about it. We’re all on the waitlist for a fam doc.
I’m new to this system and worried about my kids. I’ve asked around about telehealth but I’m so confused… the links suggested to me one had no appts at all and the other was just a question forum (can’t refer or prescribe etc). I don’t have Tellus
How do you guys live here? Serious question lol aside from the autism care I’m concerned I won’t even have someone to take them to for check ups and when sick etc. should I just move again? :( help

Endo prescribed Anastrozole to my 13 y/o son at 1mg daily.
My son has been falling off the growth chart the last few years and is “the small guy” on all his sports teams and peer groups.
Sleep, fitness and diet are all good so we decided to take him into the endo.
I have some experience with this medication due to my trt usage - but I was under the impression, and it’s been my experience that 1mg daily would obliterate estrogen in the male body.
I’m aware that estrogen is the primary driver of puberty ending - so the goal of this treatment is to prevent a puberty ending estrogen spike so as to extend his growing window.
Can anyone give some context to this drug as to its use for this purpose and if it’s a sound course of treatment.
He will also be taking a test soon to see if there is a high deficiency and if so we will try to treat with that but it is very expensive.

Let me just start with, this sub has helped me so much through the years with dealing and not dealing with my JNMIL's racism, narcissism, and controlling spirit. It's has also helped me, help DH with shining up his spine. If you were here anywhere from 5 to about 8 years ago, my JNMIL was Cuntrol Freak and I'm the DIL that stole her precious son with my pussy made of gold and cocoa butter (DH and I are an interracial couple). My previous post have either been archived or deleted at this point, because I was so scared of getting found out, I was making and deleting accounts almost every month. I'm going to try and keep this as short and condense as much as I can so that I solely stick to where JNMIL plays a hand in this.
So safe to say we've had our issues off and on through the 9 years DH and I have been together, but why I'm here now finally takes the fucking cake. I just need to get this out and wash my hands of this situation now that I've fully processed, had a full emotional and mental cleanse of the familial relationship. Plus DH truly seems to be done.
Title confusion: in 2021 JNMIL got fed up after 35 years and finally decided to divorce JNFIL one night after he got too drunk and threatened to unalive her, JYGMIL and BIL2. I ended 2 years of NC and DH & I made sure we surrounded her with love, and during this time, JNMIL leaned on me a lot. We talked all the time and seemed as though we turned a corner. Everything was good for the next few years. Relationships were much better across the board. JNMIL & I were in a good position, JNFIL had gotten clean and was doing better and him and JNMIL seemed to like each other... But I wouldn't be here if any of that actually lasted.
End of January 2024: JNMIL comes over one day practically begging one of her boys to take in JNFIL as he's basically on his death bed, and she doesn't want him dying at the homeless shelter. According to her, he had heart disease, nodules on his lungs (which became the throat when she brought it up a few days later), and major weight loss. I hadn't seen him since Thanksgiving, but DH & BIL1 both agreed that he had lost an alarming amount of weight so we didn't give it a second thought. Long story short, DH & I squeeze LO's entire bedroom into ours and move JNFIL into our home. Only to discover he isn't on his death bed. He's gone back to drinking, and is going through withdrawals.
February: We find out JNMIL knew. Not only did she know, and said nothing, she decided to come up with all those ailments he was having on her own! According to her, "it wasn't her lie to tell," but she had no problem coming up with her own lies to make his lies seem more believable. DH & I decided that JNFIL had to leave and that we needed to take a long break from JNMIL due to them both lying and she absolutely lost her mind. Although DH & I make every marital-related decision together, of course, this was all my fault, because how dare I find out she was involved in making our home unsafe. She also cursed my mother because we all know with a narcissist, it's always everyone else and never them and she assumes because it's my JYM's house, she was involved in the decision. (She wasn't. My JYM's favorite line is "You both are adults. As long as y'all pay the bills, y'all's business is yours and mine is mine, until y'all say you need me).
-- Somewhere in between all of this JNMIL reads the text I sent to BIL2 (he's still on her phone plan) to let him know what's going on and that we won't be going out to JNMIL's house for a while, because he lives with her, and we always give each other a heads up when one of us does something that is going to piss off JNMIL. Gave BIL1 a heads up as well.
DH is at work when JNMIL just starts berating him over texts about picking up the title to an old car that DH & his father have been working on at least since before I met them, and we've been together 10 years. The car was supposed to be a gift to DH, but because it was never signed over to him, JNMIL decides she suddenly wants to facilitate a sale for it, because she'll be damned if we make JNFIL a homeless alcoholic again. They go back and forth until DH mentions that I'm furious with her, and he's trying to save her from me, so BIL2 should be the one to come pick up the title, and holy mother of an extinction burst...
\Take into account this all happens on the weekend that DH and I are celebrating 9 years together, so I'm convinced she's been keeping track of our anniversary and lighting black candles every year, hoping he'd see the light and leave me which is why according to her, DH has been missing for 9 years.*

JNMIL: Put the title in his hands today. I could care less about her or her mother fucking feelings. God damn fuck her and her childish feelings. It's already been told ya'll won't be coming to my house anytime soon. All because I didn't tell someone else's business. Same as BIL2 when he kept his nose on his own face. Wasn't my place to tell anything yet your wife thinks someone owes her something. I think you need to be more concerned with how furious I am. You've taken my granddaughter from me for the last mother fucking time. You've all got the demon to deal with now. Gonna find out soon enough what happens when you fuck with someone with nothing to loose. Choke on that. JNMIL: Put your father in the street because that is what makes her happy. I wish I could have put my mother on the street for falling off the wagon, hiding her alcoholic behavior. Oh.. yeah! She should have been at the mission a long time ago. Difference between me and you and people that live with you. So be it. You can have her. JNMIL: I don't know you and don't want to know you. Where is my mother fucking son? [DH's Full Name]. He's been missing for 9 years. If you see him tell him his mother loves him in-spite of his choices. Because that is a paren't love. JNMIL: You let HER take my granddaughter from me that last mother fucking time. Fuck that. Fuck her. JNMIL: Even [JYGMIL] doesn't know what the fuck is wrong with you. JNMIL: Save me from [OP]! Hahahahahahaha You must have forgotten who the fuck I am!

That was 2 months ago and she has since ignored me, DH, BIL1, SIL1 and our kids because she'd rather go nuclear than own up, and admit she was wrong for not telling us we were moving a fresh alcoholic into our home. I mean, she had no problem telling me to hide the hydrocodone I was prescribed after I had LO from JNFIL 9 years ago, so how is this any different? Not to mention how dare you be upset with DH for kicking out the same man you kicked out for being drunk and threatening to kill you, your mother and one of your sons just 3 years prior.
I'm pretty sure if there was a ceremony for the delusional, my JNMIL would win every award, and all the statues they handed out would be made in her likeness.
*edited to add: someone in the comments asked why no one suggested SHE take FIL in… DH did, but she completely ignored the suggestion. So it is now May, JNFIL is still alive and kicking at homeless shelter and the old car she wanted to sell so bad is still sitting in her driveway according to BIL2, so they did this for absolutely nothing.

13 yr old (M). Previously diagnosed and treated for lymphatic malformation at age 2. Diagnosed ADHD. Prescribed Focalin XR 20mg.
My son woke up a few weeks ago with two swollen lymph nodes at the top of his back. Each just above his scapula and about an inch from his spine. This past Saturday another lymph node around half an inch in size appeared directly behind the middle of his ear. Not below it next to the jaw, but directly behind the middle portion of his ear. He hasn’t been sick, ran fever or been around any animals. No other symptoms except for being tired.
We saw a pediatrician today, it wasn’t his normal pediatrician bc he is out of office until Wednesday. Bloodwork has been ordered for full panel. Depending on bloodwork they may biopsy the two on his back. The Dr we saw today said he wasn’t too concerned about the one behind his ear, but was more concerned for the ones on his back. They are movable/palpable. How common is it for lymph nodes to suddenly swell when no infection is present? I know they are looking at his white blood count on the CBC that was ordered, but what else could we be dealing with?

By Protopresbyter Dr. George D. Dragas

1. The Pentecostal Period

The word, Pentecost means “the fiftieth” and is used to designate the great event of the Outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Epiphoitesis) upon the Apostles and the Church on the 50th day after the Resurrection of Christ, just ten days after His Ascension into Heaven.
Before His Passion, the Lord spoke to his Disciples about the gift of the Holy Spirit, which they were to receive after the Ascension. The details are preserved in the Gospel of Saint John: “I will ask the Father to send you the Holy Spirit who will defend you and always be with you” (14:16). He also said, “The Holy Spirit can not come to defend you until I leave. But after I am gone, I will send the Spirit to you” (16:7). After His Resurrection, the Lord appeared to the Disciples, and He said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit” (20:22). This was a foretaste of the Outpouring (Epiphoitesis) on Pentecost Sunday.
Near the end of Saint Luke’s Gospel, Christ tells His Disciples, “I will send you the One My Father has promised, but you must stay in the city until you are given power from above” (24:49). It is in the Acts of the Apostles, however, that Saint Luke speaks of the fulfillment of this promise: “On the day of Pentecost, all the Lord’s followers were together in one place. Suddenly, there was a noise from heaven like the sound of a mighty wind. It filled the house where they were meeting. Then they saw what looked like fiery tongues moving in all directions, and a tongue came and settled on each person there. The Holy Spirit took control of everyone, and they began speaking whatever language the Spirit let them speak” (2:1-4).
Since ancient times, the 50-day period from Pascha to Pentecost has been called Pentecost because what began with the Lord breathing the Holy Spirit on His Disciples was consummated with the full descent of the Spirit upon the Disciples and the whole Church. Thus, the Church was fully born and began to grow.
During this period, all kneeling is prohibited as a tangible confession of the Resurrection of Christ. It is only on the actual day of Pentecost that kneeling is resumed, and is connected with a special kneeling ceremony (akolouthia gonyklesias), which consists of prayers for the gift of the Holy Spirit, hence the name, “Kneeling Day” (tes gonatistes) for Pentecost.
Later on, another week was added to these 50 days in order to celebrate the post-feast (metheorta) of the Feast of Pentecost. Thus, today the period of movable Feasts after Pascha spans eight weeks, to include the Sunday of All Saints (Agion Panton), and is divided into three parts: 1) The 40 post-festal days of Pascha, 2) The Feast of the Ascension, together with its post-festal period, and 3) The Feast of Pentecost together with its own post-festal period. The hymns of this period are contained in the special Pentecostal book, the Pentecostarion.

1. Sunday of the Myrrh-bearing Women

We have already spoken about the New Week (Diakainesimos) and the Sunday of Saint Thomas (the first Sunday after Pascha). The second Sunday after Pascha is called the Sunday of the Myrrh-Bearing Women (Kyriake ton Myroforon). It is dedicated to the women who brought myrrh to the tomb of Christ. It is also dedicated to the secret disciples of the Lord, Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, who arranged for and assisted in the Lord’s burial. This is clearly commemorated in the Gospel lesson for the day (Mark 15.43-16.8).
The Myrrh-Bearing Women we can identify from the Holy Gospels are Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, (a.k.a., Mary of Clopas, Joanna the wife of Huza, a guardian of Herod Antipas, Salome the mother of the sons of Zebedee, and Sozanna).
Joseph of Arimathea (a city of Judaea) was a rich nobleman and a member of the Sanhedrin (a council deputy in Jerusalem). He was the one who did not agree with the council’s decision against Christ. He was also the one who bravely asked Pontius Pilate for the body of Christ (Matthew 27.57-60, Mark 15.42-47, Luke 23.50-56, John 19.38-42). Nicodemus was a Jewish leader, a Pharisee, who was well read in the Scriptures and visited Christ by night (John 3.1-21 and 19.39-42).
All these sacred persons clearly demonstrate to us that people from all walks of life can be disciples of the Lord and enjoy the privilege of taking care of His body and become primary witnesses of the Lord’s mighty Resurrection.

1. Sundays of the Paralytic, The Samaritan Woman, and the Man Born Blind

The following three Sundays are known, in order, as the Sunday of the Paralytic, the Sunday of the Samaritan Woman, and the Sunday of the Man Born Blind, because of the Gospel readings and the hymns prescribed for them. The incidents commemorated in these feasts all demonstrate the divine authority, identity and power of Christ, which were then fully revealed by his Resurrection.
The healing of the paralytic at the pool of Bethesda or Bethsaida (John 5.1-18) shows Christ’s authority over the Sabbath because it was on the Sabbath day that He healed the paralytic.
The conversation of the Lord with the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well near Sychar (John 4.3-42) reaches its high point when the Lord discloses his identity: “I am the One [the Christ] Who is speaking to you now” (4:26). At the end of the story, the Samaritans openly declare, “We are certain that He is the Savior of the world" (4:42).
Finally, the healing of the blind man (John 9:1-41) demonstrates the divine power of Christ and the fact that He came from God: “This is the first time in history that anyone has ever given sight to someone born blind. Jesus could not do anything unless He came from God” (9:32).

1. Mid-Pentecost

The Wednesday after the Sunday of the Paralytic falls exactly in the middle of the 50 days of the period of Pentecost and is consequently called Mid-Pentecost (Mesopentekoste). It is a Festal Day, and according to ancient custom, it draws its meaning from the Gospel prescribed for it (John 7.14-30). This Gospel lesson contains the speech of the Lord made in the Temple, in the middle of the feast of the Tabernacles (Skenopegias), which explains His authority over the Sabbath in terms of the divine origin of both His teaching and His existence. Central to this are the Lord’s words to the people of Jerusalem: “I did not come on My own. The One Who sent Me is truthful, and you do not know Him. But I know the One Who sent Me, because I came from Him” (7:28). Also central are the words the Lord uttered on the last day of the Feast which anticipate the Outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost: “If you are thirsty, come to Me and drink! Have faith in Me, and you will have life-giving water flowing from deep inside you” (7:37). The hymns of this Feast recall the miracles of the Lord, which demonstrate His Godhead, and admonish the Christians “to keep steadfastly the commandments of the Lord in order to become worthy to celebrate his Ascension and to participate in the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Doxastikon ton Ainon).

1. The Return of Pascha

On the Wednesday after the Sunday of the Man Born Blind (the 6th Sunday after Pascha), we celebrate the Return (apodosis), or completion, of the post-festal period of Pascha. The services of the day, which include a paschal liturgy, are sung in a manner identical to that of the New Week. This is actually the 39th day after Pascha, the eve of the Ascension Day, when we sing the Resurrection Hymn, Christos Anesti, and exchange the Resurrection greeting for the last time.

1. The Ascension

On the following day, which is the 40th day after Pascha, the Ascension of the Lord into Heaven is commemorated. The feast of the Ascension (Analipseos) is explicitly mentioned in the fourth century, but its origins most probably go back to the preceding centuries. The ancient church manual, Apostolic Constitutions, makes the following comment about it: “Again counting 40 days after the first Sunday, you must celebrate from Sunday until Thursday the feast of the Ascension of the Lord, in which He fulfilled the whole economy and design of our salvation, ascended to God the Father, Who had sent Him, and sat at the right hand of the Power to wait until His enemies are placed under his feet” (Book V, chapter 20).
The feast of the Ascension, then, marks the end and the sealing of the work of the Lord on Earth, as well as the Ascension of human nature to heaven and consequently foreshadows the forthcoming Gift of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. It is celebrated until the Friday of the following week, when it is returned (and therefore closed).
The meaning of the Lord’s Ascension is also connected with His eternal priesthood. The Epistle to the Hebrews sums it up as follows: “We have a Great High Priest Who has gone into Heaven, Jesus the Son of God” (4:14)... Jesus has gone there (behind the curtain and into the most holy place) ahead of us, and He is our High Priest forever, just like Melchizedek (6:20)... Jesus will never die, and so He will be a Priest forever. He is forever able to save the people He leads to God because He always lives to speak to God for them. Jesus is the High Priest we need (7:24-26)... He is the perfect High Priest forever (7:28)... who sits at the right side of God’s great throne in heaven (8:1).”

1. Sunday of the Holy Fathers

The Sunday, which falls in the middle of the festal period of the Ascension (the 7th Sunday after Pascha), is dedicated to the 318 Holy Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea (325 AD) and is consequently known as the Sunday of the Holy Fathers (Ton Pateron).
The Gospel of this day comes from the Lord’s High Priestly Prayer for the unity of Christians found in John 17:1-13. The Church ordered the commemoration of the Fathers on this particular Sunday because the Eparchial Synods, which were summoned for the purpose of dealing with various local matters, usually met during the Pentecostal period.
Successors of the Apostles, the Fathers, have kept the apostolic faith through their teachings. The Kontakion of the Feast puts this most eloquently and clearly: “The preaching of the Apostles and the dogmas of the Fathers sealed one faith for the Church which, wearing the garment of truth waved with theology from above, rightly dispenses and glorifies the great mystery of piety.”
The Saturday before Pentecost is a Saturday of the Souls (Psychosabbaton), and prayers are offered for those who fell asleep that they, too, may become worthy through our prayers of the Pentecostal gift, which is commemorated the next day.

1. Pentecost Sunday

The Christian feast of Pentecost corresponds to the Hebrew feast which bears the same name, and in which the first fruits of Israel’s new crops were offered to God (Protogennemata).
The Christian feast commemorates the first fruits of the preaching of the Apostles, which followed the descent of the Holy Spirit upon them on the day of Pentecost, and on account of which the first Christian Church was born and established with three thousand souls. Ever since Pentecost, the Spirit abides in the Church and regulates the Church’s life and growth. The Spirit brings the entire constitution of the Church together as the Body of Christ. As the Comforter (Parakletos), He is the pledge of Christ’s return and final victory with the entire body of the Church.
The celebration of this feast goes back to apostolic times. According to ancient custom, catechumens were baptized on this occasion and therefore, even today, no Trisagion is sung during the Liturgy. Instead, the hymn “Those baptized into Christ, have put on Christ,” is sung. The vespers of this day, following immediately after the Divine Liturgy, is especially notable because of the long kneeling supplication, which is offered after the Entrance. This supplication is the first of several which follow after the feast, having been previously suspended during the Pentecostal Period.
Pentecost is celebrated throughout the week and is returned on the following Saturday. The Monday of the post-festal period is distinguished from the other post-festal days because it is dedicated to the Holy Spirit (Deftera tou Agiou Pneumatos). The services of the day follow the pattern of the preceding Pentecostal Sunday. Fasting is not observed during the week of (after) Pentecost.
The Doxastikon hymn of the day is the well known prayer with which most Church services begin and which is used by many Orthodox Christians as a first Prayer of each day: “Heavenly King, Comforter, Spirit of Truth, present everywhere and filling all things, come and abide in us; cleanse us from every stain and save our souls Gracious Lord.”

1. Sunday of All-Saints

The Sunday after Pentecost is known as the Sunday of All Saints. It is a very ancient feast mentioned at the end of the fourth century and seems to have been initially instituted as a feast in honor of all the Martyrs.
The Church always honored the Martyrs. Since honoring the Martyrs was originally a local affair, however, many of the Martyrs were unknown, and it is probably for this reason that such a feast was instituted to honor all Martyrs, known and unknown. This feast was placed very appropriately after Pentecost because the Church was watered and increased through the witness and blood of the Martyrs. Later, when the Church honored others as Saints besides the Martyrs, the moveable feast after Pascha acquired a more general character and was changed into a feast in honor of all the Saints.

1. The Feast of the Holy Apostles

On the Monday after the Sunday of All Saints, a fast is observed for the Feast of the Holy Apostles. Originally, this was a weekly fast as it is explicitly stated in the Apostolic Constitutions (Book V, chapter 20). Later on, it was connected with the feast of the Holy Apostles (June 29-30) and was extended to the whole period from the Monday after the Sunday of All Saints to the 28th of June.
Source

By Protopresbyter Dr. George D. Dragas

1. The Pentecostal Period

The word, Pentecost means “the fiftieth” and is used to designate the great event of the Outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Epiphoitesis) upon the Apostles and the Church on the 50th day after the Resurrection of Christ, just ten days after His Ascension into Heaven.
Before His Passion, the Lord spoke to his Disciples about the gift of the Holy Spirit, which they were to receive after the Ascension. The details are preserved in the Gospel of Saint John: “I will ask the Father to send you the Holy Spirit who will defend you and always be with you” (14:16). He also said, “The Holy Spirit can not come to defend you until I leave. But after I am gone, I will send the Spirit to you” (16:7). After His Resurrection, the Lord appeared to the Disciples, and He said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit” (20:22). This was a foretaste of the Outpouring (Epiphoitesis) on Pentecost Sunday.
Near the end of Saint Luke’s Gospel, Christ tells His Disciples, “I will send you the One My Father has promised, but you must stay in the city until you are given power from above” (24:49). It is in the Acts of the Apostles, however, that Saint Luke speaks of the fulfillment of this promise: “On the day of Pentecost, all the Lord’s followers were together in one place. Suddenly, there was a noise from heaven like the sound of a mighty wind. It filled the house where they were meeting. Then they saw what looked like fiery tongues moving in all directions, and a tongue came and settled on each person there. The Holy Spirit took control of everyone, and they began speaking whatever language the Spirit let them speak” (2:1-4).
Since ancient times, the 50-day period from Pascha to Pentecost has been called Pentecost because what began with the Lord breathing the Holy Spirit on His Disciples was consummated with the full descent of the Spirit upon the Disciples and the whole Church. Thus, the Church was fully born and began to grow.
During this period, all kneeling is prohibited as a tangible confession of the Resurrection of Christ. It is only on the actual day of Pentecost that kneeling is resumed, and is connected with a special kneeling ceremony (akolouthia gonyklesias), which consists of prayers for the gift of the Holy Spirit, hence the name, “Kneeling Day” (tes gonatistes) for Pentecost.
Later on, another week was added to these 50 days in order to celebrate the post-feast (metheorta) of the Feast of Pentecost. Thus, today the period of movable Feasts after Pascha spans eight weeks, to include the Sunday of All Saints (Agion Panton), and is divided into three parts: 1) The 40 post-festal days of Pascha, 2) The Feast of the Ascension, together with its post-festal period, and 3) The Feast of Pentecost together with its own post-festal period. The hymns of this period are contained in the special Pentecostal book, the Pentecostarion.

1. Sunday of the Myrrh-bearing Women

We have already spoken about the New Week (Diakainesimos) and the Sunday of Saint Thomas (the first Sunday after Pascha). The second Sunday after Pascha is called the Sunday of the Myrrh-Bearing Women (Kyriake ton Myroforon). It is dedicated to the women who brought myrrh to the tomb of Christ. It is also dedicated to the secret disciples of the Lord, Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, who arranged for and assisted in the Lord’s burial. This is clearly commemorated in the Gospel lesson for the day (Mark 15.43-16.8).
The Myrrh-Bearing Women we can identify from the Holy Gospels are Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, (a.k.a., Mary of Clopas, Joanna the wife of Huza, a guardian of Herod Antipas, Salome the mother of the sons of Zebedee, and Sozanna).
Joseph of Arimathea (a city of Judaea) was a rich nobleman and a member of the Sanhedrin (a council deputy in Jerusalem). He was the one who did not agree with the council’s decision against Christ. He was also the one who bravely asked Pontius Pilate for the body of Christ (Matthew 27.57-60, Mark 15.42-47, Luke 23.50-56, John 19.38-42). Nicodemus was a Jewish leader, a Pharisee, who was well read in the Scriptures and visited Christ by night (John 3.1-21 and 19.39-42).
All these sacred persons clearly demonstrate to us that people from all walks of life can be disciples of the Lord and enjoy the privilege of taking care of His body and become primary witnesses of the Lord’s mighty Resurrection.

1. Sundays of the Paralytic, The Samaritan Woman, and the Man Born Blind

The following three Sundays are known, in order, as the Sunday of the Paralytic, the Sunday of the Samaritan Woman, and the Sunday of the Man Born Blind, because of the Gospel readings and the hymns prescribed for them. The incidents commemorated in these feasts all demonstrate the divine authority, identity and power of Christ, which were then fully revealed by his Resurrection.
The healing of the paralytic at the pool of Bethesda or Bethsaida (John 5.1-18) shows Christ’s authority over the Sabbath because it was on the Sabbath day that He healed the paralytic.
The conversation of the Lord with the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well near Sychar (John 4.3-42) reaches its high point when the Lord discloses his identity: “I am the One [the Christ] Who is speaking to you now” (4:26). At the end of the story, the Samaritans openly declare, “We are certain that He is the Savior of the world" (4:42).
Finally, the healing of the blind man (John 9:1-41) demonstrates the divine power of Christ and the fact that He came from God: “This is the first time in history that anyone has ever given sight to someone born blind. Jesus could not do anything unless He came from God” (9:32).

1. Mid-Pentecost

The Wednesday after the Sunday of the Paralytic falls exactly in the middle of the 50 days of the period of Pentecost and is consequently called Mid-Pentecost (Mesopentekoste). It is a Festal Day, and according to ancient custom, it draws its meaning from the Gospel prescribed for it (John 7.14-30). This Gospel lesson contains the speech of the Lord made in the Temple, in the middle of the feast of the Tabernacles (Skenopegias), which explains His authority over the Sabbath in terms of the divine origin of both His teaching and His existence. Central to this are the Lord’s words to the people of Jerusalem: “I did not come on My own. The One Who sent Me is truthful, and you do not know Him. But I know the One Who sent Me, because I came from Him” (7:28). Also central are the words the Lord uttered on the last day of the Feast which anticipate the Outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost: “If you are thirsty, come to Me and drink! Have faith in Me, and you will have life-giving water flowing from deep inside you” (7:37). The hymns of this Feast recall the miracles of the Lord, which demonstrate His Godhead, and admonish the Christians “to keep steadfastly the commandments of the Lord in order to become worthy to celebrate his Ascension and to participate in the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Doxastikon ton Ainon).

1. The Return of Pascha

On the Wednesday after the Sunday of the Man Born Blind (the 6th Sunday after Pascha), we celebrate the Return (apodosis), or completion, of the post-festal period of Pascha. The services of the day, which include a paschal liturgy, are sung in a manner identical to that of the New Week. This is actually the 39th day after Pascha, the eve of the Ascension Day, when we sing the Resurrection Hymn, Christos Anesti, and exchange the Resurrection greeting for the last time.

1. The Ascension

On the following day, which is the 40th day after Pascha, the Ascension of the Lord into Heaven is commemorated. The feast of the Ascension (Analipseos) is explicitly mentioned in the fourth century, but its origins most probably go back to the preceding centuries. The ancient church manual, Apostolic Constitutions, makes the following comment about it: “Again counting 40 days after the first Sunday, you must celebrate from Sunday until Thursday the feast of the Ascension of the Lord, in which He fulfilled the whole economy and design of our salvation, ascended to God the Father, Who had sent Him, and sat at the right hand of the Power to wait until His enemies are placed under his feet” (Book V, chapter 20).
The feast of the Ascension, then, marks the end and the sealing of the work of the Lord on Earth, as well as the Ascension of human nature to heaven and consequently foreshadows the forthcoming Gift of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. It is celebrated until the Friday of the following week, when it is returned (and therefore closed).
The meaning of the Lord’s Ascension is also connected with His eternal priesthood. The Epistle to the Hebrews sums it up as follows: “We have a Great High Priest Who has gone into Heaven, Jesus the Son of God” (4:14)... Jesus has gone there (behind the curtain and into the most holy place) ahead of us, and He is our High Priest forever, just like Melchizedek (6:20)... Jesus will never die, and so He will be a Priest forever. He is forever able to save the people He leads to God because He always lives to speak to God for them. Jesus is the High Priest we need (7:24-26)... He is the perfect High Priest forever (7:28)... who sits at the right side of God’s great throne in heaven (8:1).”

1. Sunday of the Holy Fathers

The Sunday, which falls in the middle of the festal period of the Ascension (the 7th Sunday after Pascha), is dedicated to the 318 Holy Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea (325 AD) and is consequently known as the Sunday of the Holy Fathers (Ton Pateron).
The Gospel of this day comes from the Lord’s High Priestly Prayer for the unity of Christians found in John 17:1-13. The Church ordered the commemoration of the Fathers on this particular Sunday because the Eparchial Synods, which were summoned for the purpose of dealing with various local matters, usually met during the Pentecostal period.
Successors of the Apostles, the Fathers, have kept the apostolic faith through their teachings. The Kontakion of the Feast puts this most eloquently and clearly: “The preaching of the Apostles and the dogmas of the Fathers sealed one faith for the Church which, wearing the garment of truth waved with theology from above, rightly dispenses and glorifies the great mystery of piety.”
The Saturday before Pentecost is a Saturday of the Souls (Psychosabbaton), and prayers are offered for those who fell asleep that they, too, may become worthy through our prayers of the Pentecostal gift, which is commemorated the next day.

1. Pentecost Sunday

The Christian feast of Pentecost corresponds to the Hebrew feast which bears the same name, and in which the first fruits of Israel’s new crops were offered to God (Protogennemata).
The Christian feast commemorates the first fruits of the preaching of the Apostles, which followed the descent of the Holy Spirit upon them on the day of Pentecost, and on account of which the first Christian Church was born and established with three thousand souls. Ever since Pentecost, the Spirit abides in the Church and regulates the Church’s life and growth. The Spirit brings the entire constitution of the Church together as the Body of Christ. As the Comforter (Parakletos), He is the pledge of Christ’s return and final victory with the entire body of the Church.
The celebration of this feast goes back to apostolic times. According to ancient custom, catechumens were baptized on this occasion and therefore, even today, no Trisagion is sung during the Liturgy. Instead, the hymn “Those baptized into Christ, have put on Christ,” is sung. The vespers of this day, following immediately after the Divine Liturgy, is especially notable because of the long kneeling supplication, which is offered after the Entrance. This supplication is the first of several which follow after the feast, having been previously suspended during the Pentecostal Period.
Pentecost is celebrated throughout the week and is returned on the following Saturday. The Monday of the post-festal period is distinguished from the other post-festal days because it is dedicated to the Holy Spirit (Deftera tou Agiou Pneumatos). The services of the day follow the pattern of the preceding Pentecostal Sunday. Fasting is not observed during the week of (after) Pentecost.
The Doxastikon hymn of the day is the well known prayer with which most Church services begin and which is used by many Orthodox Christians as a first Prayer of each day: “Heavenly King, Comforter, Spirit of Truth, present everywhere and filling all things, come and abide in us; cleanse us from every stain and save our souls Gracious Lord.”

1. Sunday of All-Saints

The Sunday after Pentecost is known as the Sunday of All Saints. It is a very ancient feast mentioned at the end of the fourth century and seems to have been initially instituted as a feast in honor of all the Martyrs.
The Church always honored the Martyrs. Since honoring the Martyrs was originally a local affair, however, many of the Martyrs were unknown, and it is probably for this reason that such a feast was instituted to honor all Martyrs, known and unknown. This feast was placed very appropriately after Pentecost because the Church was watered and increased through the witness and blood of the Martyrs. Later, when the Church honored others as Saints besides the Martyrs, the moveable feast after Pascha acquired a more general character and was changed into a feast in honor of all the Saints.

1. The Feast of the Holy Apostles

On the Monday after the Sunday of All Saints, a fast is observed for the Feast of the Holy Apostles. Originally, this was a weekly fast as it is explicitly stated in the Apostolic Constitutions (Book V, chapter 20). Later on, it was connected with the feast of the Holy Apostles (June 29-30) and was extended to the whole period from the Monday after the Sunday of All Saints to the 28th of June.
Source

My girlfriend (F38) and I (M37) have been together for 3 years and have a 20 month old son together. Their motheson bond is huge, and it is quite apparent that they love each other. The two of us, as partners and parents however, are struggling.
When we met through a mutual friend in 2021 things were great. We could both say that it was the best relationship of our lives. She moved in with me 3 months after dating and was pregnant 4 months after moving in.
We both have some issues with substance use/abuse. I smoke an obscene amount of weed (legal where we live) and she likes to drink to the point where she has admitted that she struggles with alcohol addiction. (She also helped me realize that I indeed struggle with cannabis addiction myself.)
When she was pregnant in 2022 I was unable/unwilling to quit smoking. The smell bothered her greatly when she was pregnant and said that it was the cause of her unbearable heartburn. I did cut back, but not in any truly meaningful way. We had our first big fight while she was pregnant, and began fighting more and more, and in bigger ways.
She had birth complications in the hospital and the doctors trying to induce her pregnancy caused a lot of vaginal pain and trauma for her. So much so that she had to schedule a C-section. As a result of that trauma, we haven't had sex, aside from two times, since our son was conceived. (One of which was when she was freshly pregnant)
In fall of 2023 she was closing the bar she worked at and was chased to her car by a strange man. She quit working then which ended up placing a financial burden on me and our relationship.
In Spring 2024 she started a social media management company and started doing social media at a bar she used to work at.
In May 2024 we got in another huge fight and she told me that she wanted to break up. (She had said that before but this time she started looking for an apartment) I also found out that she was talking to one of her male friends who works at the bar and had developed an emotional relationship with him and were texting back and forth but assured me that it was never physically (which I do believe). When I found out I told the guy to back off or I would tell his girlfriend, and she tried to act like I didn't have a leg to stand on because we "already broke up." (She told me that she wanted to break up on a Wednesday, and on the following Saturday I found out that they had been texting about the possibility of hooking up. But the two of them had been texting about non work stuff and flirting before she actually broke up with me)
We both have traumas, her more than me. Mine are all relationship traumas from being in emotionally abusive relationships and being cheated on. Hers go deeper: her dad left the family when she was young, her late mother and her had a love/hate relationship, She was physically abused by a fiance, She was cheated on multiple times by an ex-husband, She had a traumatic birth complication, and she was assaulted (chased) by a man at night leaving work.
Because of her trauma and anxiety she talks to me in a negative and aggressive way pretty often. She always used to say "I'm from the Northeast, this is just how we talk." But I think there is unresolved trauma that makes her lash out at me. She also spends a decent amount of time out at the bar "working" but also hanging out. (I also spend my fair share of time blazing in the garage) I also think she may have General Anxiety Disorder coupled with lingering postpartum depression. She used to be prescribed adderall for ADD but stopped taking it when she got pregnant. Shortly after our son was born I found her a therapist to talk about postpartum depression, but she wouldn't follow through with making the appointment.
Since she stopped working in September 2023 (after being chased) I have gone into debt covering all of the household bills and her personal bills. I pay the mortgage, I give her money to pay bills and student loans, I buy all of the groceries, I buy her vapes, I give her a few bucks to grab a drink or a coffee when she is out, She watches our son while I am at work two days a week and my parents watch him the other 3 so she can do her social media job and project management job. I also feel like when we are home together, she is too overwhelmed and I end up being the one to take care of our son. (Oftentimes on the weekend she sleeps in while I get up with our son because she is often a grumpy/angry morning person)
It is also worth noting that I bear the brunt of her attitude. Our son gets the happiest, most engaging mother when they are interacting together. Friends and acquaintances get the cool, funny, laid back version of her (unless she is calling someone out for something social justice related)
She also doesn’t have a valid ID because she let her out of state ID lapse when we first got together, and doesn’t have her old marriage/divorce paperwork together to get a new one. Because of her anxiety, and my enabling, she hasn’t had a license for over 2 years. Furthermore, she drives my second car uninsured (sometimes after drinking)
The bottom line is that I still love her immensely and can't imagine my life with anyone else. She has expressed nothing but confusion and ambiguity for what our future holds. One minute she is talking about getting an apartment, the next she is talking about what kind of flooring we should put in the basement. She said that she doesn't want to see other people or anything, she just wants to get her life in order, and that she can't do that with me.
Has anyone else gone through anything similar? Any advice is welcomed.

5yr male 17kg 105cm NKA
I’m looking for some insight on the rash my son developed suddenly having just had a viral illness.
Cough and fever ~101.4 once daily for 5 days, days 1-4 subsiding on its own within an hour. Day 5 cough worsened significantly and fever requiring acetaminophen. Doctor prescribed steroids for croup and abx for otitis media. He was treated with steroids 2 weeks prior for a worse croup infection.
Day 6 he developed a maculopapular on his legs and arms which by evening turned into what I can best describe as a blotchy flat red ringlet type rash around elbows and thighs. It was gone by the following morning. I never noticed redness to his cheeks or face. No insect bites or itchiness.
Day 7 pediatrician requested to see him in person but the rash was gone by the time we were in the office. They gave no insight on what the rash could be and diverted questions about it. School suggests parvovirus as it has been going around.
I’m pregnant in my early second trimester and am looking for clearer insight that i could share with my OB. My OB is wanting a diagnosis before taking any precaution with me but I’m at loss.
Pics in comments. Opinions appreciated