PLEASE HURRY AND ANSWER 1.The guest in the video argues that the government should allow women to stay at home with their children for the first three years. What does she argue the government should do? Do you agree or disagree? Why?

2.Why does the guest speaker argue that children are suffering in day care situations? Do you agree or disagree? Why or why not?

3.What can working mothers do to reduce the problems, according to the guest speaker?

4.What struggles do women face between children and work?

5.Do you think you would stay home with your child for the first three years of their life? Why or why not? What would be the advantages and disadvantages of this?

these are the answers i used

Explanation:

1. She argues that the government should allow women to stay at home with their children for the first three years. I agree because women need to make a relationship with their child and make sure the child feels comfortable with their own mom.

2.The guest speaker argues that children are suffering in day care situations because they need to be with their parents the first couple years instead of being raised and watched by strangers. I agree with the speaker.

3.Make friends with other moms, be a part of support groups.

4.They face the struggle of trying to balance work and family.

5.I would definitely try my best to stay with my child for at least the first 3 years. I feel it is important to build that relaiption at the start of their life. An advantage would be they would become very trusting and comfortable with me. A disadvantage would be they might get really attached to me so going back to work after 3 years would be hard.

to prevent people from getting the ebola virus, countries around the world paid to doctors develop a new vaccine. now that the vaccine has been made, doctors will need to experiment on a large number of people to find out if it works safely.

what is the greatest limitation that scientists are dealing with as they try to figure out how to experiment with the ebola vaccine?

meditation is a practice of sitting still and quiet for minutes or even hours. it has been practiced for thousands of years and is even a part of religious practices for some people. carefully controlled, repeated measurements of brain activity have shown that meditation does increase certain chemicals in the brain and even grows the part of the brain that people connect with their current surroundings and activities.

are claims about the effects of meditation most likely scientific or pseudoscientific?

not pseudoscientific, because people have made claims about it but scientific observations have not been made