text:
Adult

An adult is a human or other animal that has reached full growth. The biological definition of the word means an animal reaching sexual maturity and thus capable of reproduction. In the human context, the term adult has meanings associated with social and legal concepts. In contrast to a non-adult or "minor", a legal adult is a person who has attained the age of majority and is therefore regarded as independent, self-sufficient, and responsible. They may also be regarded as "majors". The typical age of attaining legal adulthood is 18, although definition may vary by legal rights, country, and psychological development.

Human adulthood encompasses psychological adult development. Definitions of adulthood are often inconsistent and contradictory; a person may be biologically an adult, and have adult behavior, but still be treated as a child if they are under the legal age of majority. Conversely, one may legally be an adult but possess none of the maturity and responsibility that may define an adult character.

In different cultures, there are events that relate passing from being a child to becoming an adult or coming of age. This often encompasses passing a series of tests to demonstrate that a person is prepared for adulthood, or reaching a specified age, sometimes in conjunction with demonstrating preparation. Most modern societies determine legal adulthood based on reaching a legally specified age without requiring a demonstration of physical maturity or preparation for adulthood.

Biological adulthood
Historically and cross-culturally, adulthood has been determined primarily by the start of puberty (the appearance of secondary sex characteristics such as menstruation and the development of breasts in women, ejaculation, the development of facial hair, and a deeper voice in men, and pubic hair in both sexes). In the past, a person usually moved from the status of child directly to the status of adult, often with this shift being marked by some type of coming-of-age test or ceremony. During the Industrial Revolution, children went to work as soon as they could in order to help provide for their family. There was not a huge emphasis on school or education in general. Many children could get a job and were not required to have experience as adults are nowadays. Adulthood, in more recent years, as it has been studied has developed a characteristic list, that goes far beyond just ones physical maturity. These markers for a full, mentally developed, adult include traits of personal responsibilities in multiple aspects of life.

Although few or no established dictionaries provide a definition for the two-word term biological adult, the first definition of adult in multiple dictionaries includes "the stage of the life cycle of an animal after reproductive capacity has been attained". Thus, the base definition of the word adult is the period beginning at physical sexual maturity, which occurs sometime after the onset of puberty. Although this is the primary definition of the base word "adult", the term is also frequently used to refer to social adults. The two-word term biological adult stresses or clarifies that the original definition, based on physical maturity (i.e. having reached reproductive competency), is being used.

The time of puberty varies from child to child, but usually begins between 10 and 12 years old. Girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12. Girls generally complete puberty by 15–17, and boys by age 16 or 17. Nutrition, genetics and environment also usually play a part in the onset of puberty. Girls will go through a growth spurt and gain weight in several areas of their body. Boys will go through similar spurts in growth, though it is usually not in a similar style or time frame. This is due to the natural processes of puberty, but genetics also plays a part in how much weight they gain or how much taller they get.

One recent area of debate within the science of brain development is the most likely chronological age for full mental maturity, or indeed, if such an age even exists. Common claims repeated in the media since 2005 (based upon interpretations of imaging data) have commonly suggested an "end-point" of 25, referring to the prefrontal cortex as one area that is not yet fully mature at the age of 18. However, this is based on an interpretation of a brain imaging study by Jay Giedd, dating back to 2004 or 2005, where the only participants were aged up to 21 years, and Giedd assumed this maturing process would be done by the age of 25 years, whereas more recent studies show prefrontal cortex maturation continuing well past the age of 30 years, marking this interpretation as incorrect and outdated.

Legal adulthood
Legally, adulthood typically means that one has reached the age of majority – when parents lose parental rights and responsibilities regarding the person concerned. Depending on one's jurisdiction, the age of majority may or may not be set independently of and should not be confused with the minimum ages applicable to other activities, such as engaging in a contract, marriage, voting, having a job, serving in the military, buying/possessing firearms, driving, traveling abroad, involvement with alcoholic beverages, smoking, sexual activity, gambling, being a model or actor in pornography, running for president, etc. Admission of a young person to a place may be restricted because of danger for that person, concern that the place may lead the person to immoral behavior, or because of the risk that the young person causes damage (for example, at an exhibition of fragile items).

One can distinguish the legality of acts of a young person, or of enabling a young person to carry out that act, by selling, renting out, showing, permitting entrance, allowing participation, etc. There may be distinction between commercially and socially enabling. Sometimes there is the requirement of supervision by a legal guardian, or just by an adult. Sometimes there is no requirement, but rather a recommendation.

Using the example of pornography, one can distinguish between:
 * being allowed inside an adult establishment
 * being allowed to purchase pornography
 * being allowed to possess pornography
 * another person being allowed to sell, rent out, or show the young person pornography, see disseminating pornography to a minor
 * being a pornographic actor: rules for the young person, and for other people, regarding production, possession, etc. (see child pornography)

With regard to films with violence, etc.:
 * another person being allowed to sell, rent out, or show the young person a film; a cinema being allowed to let a young person enter

The age of majority ranges internationally from ages 15 to 21, with 18 being the most common age. Nigeria, Mali, Democratic Republic of Congo and Cameroon define adulthood at age 15, but marriage of girls at an earlier age is common.

In most of the world, the legal adult age is 18 for most purposes, with some notable exceptions:

 * 1) The legal age of adulthood in British Columbia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia, Nunavut, and Yukon in Canada is 19 (though there are some exceptions in which Canadians may be considered legal adults in certain situations like sexual consent, which is age 16, and criminal law, federal elections and the military, which is at 18);
 * 2) The legal age of adulthood in Nebraska and Alabama in the United States is 19.
 * 3) The legal age of adulthood in South Korea is 19.
 * 4) The legal age of adulthood in Mississippi and Puerto Rico in the U.S. is 21.

Prior to the 1970s, young people were not classed as adults until 21 in most western nations. For example, in the United States, young citizens could not vote in many elections until 21 until July 1971 when the 26th Amendment passed mandating that the right to vote cannot be abridged for anyone 18 or older. The voting age was lowered in response to the fact that young men between the ages of 18 and 21 were drafted into the army to fight in the Vietnam War, hence the popular slogan "old enough to fight, old enough to vote"

Young people under 21 in the US could also not purchase alcohol, purchase handguns, sign a binding contract, or marry without permission from parents. After the voting age was lowered, many states also moved to lower the drinking age (with most states having a minimum age of 18 or 19) and also to lower the age of legal majority (adulthood) to 18. However, there are legal activities where 18 is not the default age of adulthood. There are still some exceptions where 21 (or even higher) is still the benchmark for certain rights or responsibilities. To name a couple examples, for most states in the US a person is not allowed to rent a vehicle unless they are 25. In the US the Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibits those under 21 from purchasing a handgun from a federally licensed dealer (although federal law makes an exception for individuals between the ages of 18 and 20 to obtain one from a private dealer if state law permits.)

As of July 1984, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act mandated that all states raise their respective drinking ages to 21 to create a uniform standard for legally purchasing, drinking, or publicly possessing alcohol with exceptions made for consumption only in private residences under parental supervision and permission. This was done in response to reducing the number of drunk driving fatalities prevalent among young drivers. States that choose not to comply can lose up to 10% of highway funding.

The Credit Card Act of 2009 imposed tougher safeguards for young adults between the ages of 18 and 20 obtaining a credit card. Young adults under the age of 21 must either have a co-signer 21 or older or show proof (usually a source of income) that they can repay their credit card balance. Unless that requirement is met, one must wait until 21 to be approved for a credit card on their own.

The Affordable Care Act of 2010 expands the age that young adults can remain on their parent's health insurance plan up to age 26.

, the federal government raised the legal age to purchase tobacco and vaping products from 18 to 21. In states where recreational marijuana is legalized, the default age is also 21, though those younger may be able to obtain medical marijuana prescriptions or cards upon seeing a physician.

Gambling also varies from 18 to 21 depending on the state and many rental car companies do not rent cars to those under 21 and have surcharges for drivers under 25 (although this is not codified, and is company policy).

In Quebec, Canada the Quebec legislature in 2020 raised the age one could purchase recreational marijuana from 18 to 21 stepping out of line with most of the country that set a minimum age of 19 (except Alberta, which is 18.) The Quebec government cited the risk that marijuana poses to the brain development of people under 21 as justification for the age raise.

In March 2021, the state of Washington in a 5–4 decision, justices in the Supreme Court of the State of Washington tossed the life without parole sentences of a 19-year-old and a 20-year-old convicted in separate cases of first-degree aggravated murder decades ago, saying, as with juveniles, the court must first consider the age of those under 21 before sentencing them to die behind bars. This comes at a time where there are ongoing debates about whether those between 18 and 20 should be exempted from the death penalty.

In Germany, courts largely sentence defendants under the age of 21 according to juvenile law in a bid to help them reintegrate into society and mete out punishments that fit the crime as well as the offender.

In May 2021, the state of Texas raised the age that one can be an exotic dancer and work and patronize sexually oriented businesses from 18 to 21.

In the UK, there have been many proposals to raise the age that one can buy tobacco from 18 to 21 in an attempt to curb teen and young adult use to get to a "smoke-free" UK by 2030. All of these laws made over the years reflect the growing awareness that young adults, while not children, are still in a transitional stage between adolescence and full adulthood and that there should be policy adjustments or restrictions where necessary, especially where it pertains to activities that carry certain degrees of risk or harm to themselves or others.

At the same time, however, even though the generally accepted age of majority is 18 in most nations, there are rights or privileges afforded to adolescents who have not yet reached legal adulthood. In the United States, youth are able to get a part-time job at 14 provided they have a work permit. At 16, one is able to obtain a driver's permit or license depending on state laws and is able to work most jobs (except ones requiring heavy machinery) and consent to sexual activity (depending on the state). At 17, one is able to enlist in the armed forces with parental consent although they cannot be deployed to be in combat roles until age 18.

The voting age for local elections in most American cities is 18. But in five localities nationwide — four of which are in Maryland — 16 and 17-year-olds are eligible to vote. The cities are Takoma Park, Riverdale, Greenbelt, and Hyattsville.

In 2020, students 16 or older in Oakland, California gained the right to vote in school board elections. There is a growing movement to lower the voting age in the US and many other countries from 18 to 16 in hopes of engaging the youth vote and encouraging greater electoral participation. Some countries already have a voting age of 16 which include Austria, Scotland, Argentina, Brazil, Wales, Cuba, and Ecuador.

In Germany, one can purchase beer and wine at the age of 16 although they cannot purchase spirits or hard liquor until 18. The age of consent in Germany is 14 if both partners are under 18 but at least 14. Sexual activity with a person under 18 is punishable if the adult is a person of authority over the minor in upbringing, education, care, or employment.

Social construction of adulthood
In contrast to biological perspectives of aging and adulthood, social scientists conceptualize adulthood as socially constructed. While aging is an established biological process, the attainment of adulthood is social in its criteria. In contrast to other perspectives that conceptualize aging and the attainment of adulthood as a largely universal development, regardless of context, nation, generation, gender, race, or social class. Social scientists regard these aspects as paramount in cultural definitions of adulthood.

Further evidence of adulthood as a social construction is illustrated by the changing criteria of adulthood over time. Historically, adulthood in the U.S. has rested on completing one's education, moving away from the family of origin, and beginning one's career. Other key historical criteria include entering a marriage and becoming a parent. These criteria are social and subjective; they are organized by gender, race, ethnicity, and social class, among other key identity markers. As a result, particular populations feel adult earlier in the life course than do others.

Contemporary experiences of and research on young adults today substitute more seemingly subjective criteria for adulthood which resonate more soundly with young adults' experiences of aging. The criteria are marked by a growing "importance of individualistic criteria and the irrelevance of the demographic markers of normative conceptions of adulthood." In particular, younger cohorts' attainment of adulthood centers on three criteria: gaining a sense of responsibility, independent decision-making, and financial independence.

Jeffrey Arnett, a psychologist and professor at Clark University in Massachusetts, studied the development of adults and argues that there is a new and distinct period of development in between adolescence and adulthood. This stage, which he calls "emerging adulthood", occurs between the ages of 18 and 25. Arnett describes these individuals as able to take some responsibility for their lives, but still not completely feeling like an adult. Arnett articulates five distinct features that are unique to this period of development: identity exploration, feeling in between, instability, self-focus, and having possibilities. Arnett makes it clear that these 5 aspects of emerging adulthood are only relevant during the life stage of emerging adulthood.

The first feature, identity exploration, describes emerging adults making decisions for themselves about their career, education, and love life. This is a time of life when a young person has yet to finalize these decisions but are pondering them, making them feel somewhere in between adolescent and adult. This leads into a second feature of this phase of life—feeling in between. Emerging adults feel that they are taking on responsibilities but do not feel like a 'full' adult quite yet. Next, the instability feature notes that emerging adults often move around after their high school years whether that is to college, friends' houses, or living with a romantic partner, as well as moving back home with their parents/guardians for a time.This moving around often ends once the individual's family and career have been set. Tagging along with the instability feature is having self-focus. Emerging adults, being away from their parental and societal routines, are now able to do what they want when they want and where they want before they are put back into a routine when they start a marriage, family, and career. Arnett's last feature of emerging adulthood, an age of possibilities, characterizes this stage as one where "optimism reigns". These individuals believe they have a good chance of turning out better than their parents did.

Religion
According to Jewish tradition, adulthood is reached at age 13 for Jewish boys and 12 for Jewish girls in accordance with the Bar or Bat Mitzvah; they are expected to demonstrate preparation for adulthood by learning the Torah and other Jewish practices. The Christian Bible and Jewish scripture contain no age requirement for adulthood or marrying, which includes engaging in sexual activity.

The 1983 Code of Canon Law states, "A man before he has completed his sixteenth year of age, and likewise a woman before she has completed her fourteenth year of age, cannot enter a valid marriage". According to The Disappearance of Childhood by Neil Postman, the Christian Church of the Middle Ages considered the age of accountability, when a person could be tried and even executed as an adult, to be age 7. While certain religions have their guidelines on what it means to be an adult, generally speaking, there are trends that occur regarding religiosity as individuals transition from adolescence to adulthood. The role of religion in one's life can impact development during adolescence. The National Library of Medicine (NCBI) highlights some studies that show rates of religiosity declining as people move out of the house and live on their own. Oftentimes when people live on their own, they change their life goals and religion tends to be less important as they discover who they are. Other studies from the NCBI show that as adults get married and have children they settle down, and as they do, there tends to be an increase in religiosity. Everyone's level of religiosity builds at a different pace, meaning that religion relative to adult development varies across cultures and time.

title: Adult


text:
Abdication of Edward VIII

In early December 1936, a constitutional crisis in the British Empire arose when King Edward VIII proposed to marry Wallis Simpson, an American socialite who was divorced from her first husband and was in the process of divorcing her second.

The marriage was opposed by the governments of the United Kingdom and the Dominions of the British Commonwealth. Religious, legal, political, and moral objections were raised. As the British monarch, Edward was the nominal head of the Church of England, which at this time did not allow divorced people to remarry in church if their ex-spouses were still alive. For this reason, it was widely believed that Edward could not marry Simpson and remain on the throne. As a twice-divorced woman, Simpson was perceived to be politically, morally and socially unsuitable as a prospective queen consort. It was widely assumed by the Establishment that she was driven by love of money or position rather than love for the King. Despite the opposition, Edward declared that he loved Simpson and intended to marry her as soon as her second divorce was finalised.

The widespread unwillingness to accept Simpson as the King's consort and Edward's refusal to give her up led to his abdication in December 1936. He was succeeded by his brother Albert, who became George VI. Edward was given the title of Duke of Windsor, and styled Royal Highness, following his abdication, and he married Simpson the following year. They remained married until his death 35 years later.

Prelude

Edward had been introduced to Wallis Simpson, an American citizen and wife of British shipping executive Ernest Aldrich Simpson, by Lady Furness on 10 January 1931, when Edward was Prince of Wales. Ernest Simpson was Wallis's second husband; her first marriage, to U.S. Navy pilot Win Spencer, had ended in divorce in 1927. It is generally accepted that Wallis Simpson and Edward became lovers in 1934, while Lady Furness (who was also in a relationship with the prince) was visiting relatives in the United States. However, Edward adamantly insisted to his father, King George V, that he was not physically intimate with Simpson and that it was inappropriate to describe her as his mistress. Edward's relationship with Simpson further weakened his poor relationship with his parents. Although King George and Queen Mary met Simpson at Buckingham Palace in 1935, they later refused to receive her. Edward and Simpson were secretly followed by members of the Metropolitan Police Special Branch, who produced reports on the nature of their relationship and their investigations into Wallis Simpson's private life that included the "pursuit of vicious gossip" and the identification of a "secret lover". The prospect of having an American divorcée with a questionable past having such sway over the heir apparent led to anxiety among government and establishment figures.

Edward VIII succeeded his father on 20 January 1936, after which Simpson attended more official functions as the King's guest. Despite her name appearing regularly in the Court Circular, the name of her husband was conspicuously absent. In the summer of that year, the King eschewed the traditional prolonged stay at Balmoral in favour of a holiday with Simpson in the eastern Mediterranean that was widely covered in the American and continental European press, but not by the British press, which maintained a self-imposed silence. Nevertheless, Canadians and expatriate Britons, who had access to the foreign reports, were largely scandalised by the coverage.

By October, it was rumoured in high society and abroad that Edward intended to marry Simpson as soon as she was free to do so. At the end of that month, the crisis came to a head when she filed for divorce and the American press announced that marriage between her and the King was imminent. The King's private secretary, Alec Hardinge, wrote to him on 13 November, warning: "The silence in the British Press on the subject of Your Majesty's friendship with Mrs Simpson is not going to be maintained ... Judging by the letters from British subjects living in foreign countries where the Press has been outspoken, the effect will be calamitous." Senior British ministers knew that Hardinge had written to the King and may have helped him draft the letter.

The King invited Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin to Buckingham Palace the following Monday (16 November) and informed him that he intended to marry Simpson. Baldwin replied that such a marriage would not be acceptable to the people, stating: "... the Queen becomes the Queen of the country. Therefore in the choice of a Queen the voice of the people must be heard". Baldwin's view was shared by the Australian High Commissioner in London, Stanley Bruce, who was also a former prime minister of Australia. On the same day that Hardinge wrote to the King, Bruce met Hardinge and then wrote to Baldwin, expressing horror at the idea of a marriage between the King and Simpson.

Nevertheless, the British press remained quiet on the subject until Alfred Blunt, Bishop of Bradford, gave a speech to his diocesan conference on 1 December, which alluded to the King's need of divine grace: "We hope that he is aware of his need. Some of us wish that he gave more positive signs of his awareness." The press took this for the first public comment by a notable person on the crisis and it became front-page news on 3 December. When asked about it later, however, the bishop claimed he had not heard of Simpson at the time he wrote the speech, and that it was an expression of disappointment at the King's conspicuous failure to attend church services regularly. Acting on the advice of Edward's staff, Simpson left Britain for the south of France two days later in an attempt to escape intense press attention. Both she and the King were devastated by the separation. At a tearful departure, the King told her, "I shall never give you up."

Opposition
Opposition to the King and his marriage came from several directions. Edward's desire to modernise the monarchy and make it more accessible, though appreciated by many of the public, was distrusted by the British Establishment. Edward upset the aristocracy by treating their traditions and ceremonies with disdain, and many were offended by his abandonment of accepted social norms and mores.

Social and moral
Government ministers and the royal family found Wallis Simpson's background and behaviour unacceptable for a potential queen. Rumours and innuendo about her circulated in society. The King's mother, Queen Mary, was even told that Simpson might have held some sort of sexual control over Edward, as she had released him from an undefined sexual dysfunction through practices learnt in a Chinese brothel. This view was partially shared by Alan Don, Chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who wrote that he suspected the King "is sexually abnormal which may account for the hold Mrs S. has over him". Even Edward VIII's official biographer, Philip Ziegler, noted that: "There must have been some sort of sadomasochistic relationship ... [Edward] relished the contempt and bullying she bestowed on him."

Police detectives following Simpson reported back that, while involved with Edward, she was also involved with a married car mechanic and salesman named Guy Trundle. This may well have been passed on to senior figures in the establishment, including members of the royal family. Joseph Kennedy, the American ambassador, described her as a "tart", and his wife, Rose, refused to dine with her.

Wallis was perceived to be pursuing Edward for his money; his equerry wrote that she would eventually leave him, "having secured the cash". The future prime minister Neville Chamberlain (then Chancellor of the Exchequer) wrote in his diary that she was "an entirely unscrupulous woman who is not in love with the King but is exploiting him for her own purposes. She has already ruined him in money and jewels ..."

Relations between the United Kingdom and the United States were strained during the inter-war years and the majority of Britons were reluctant to accept an American as queen consort. At the time, some members of the British upper class looked down on Americans with disdain and considered them socially inferior. In contrast, the American public was clearly in favour of the marriage, as was most of the American press.

Religious and legal
In Edward's lifetime, the Church of England forbade the remarriage of divorced people in church while a former spouse was still living. The monarch was required by law to be in communion with the Church of England, and was its nominal head or Supreme Governor. In 1935 the Church of England reaffirmed that, "in no circumstances can Christian men or women re-marry during the lifetime of a wife or a husband". The archbishop of Canterbury, Cosmo Gordon Lang, held that the king, as the head of the Church of England, could not marry a divorcée. If Edward married Wallis Simpson, a divorcée who would soon have two living ex-husbands, in a civil ceremony, it would directly conflict with Church teaching and his role as the Church's ex officio head.

Wallis's first divorce (in the United States on the grounds of "emotional incompatibility") was not recognised by the Church of England and, if challenged in the English courts, might not have been recognised under English law. At that time, the Church and English law considered adultery to be the only grounds for divorce. Consequently, under this argument, her second marriage, as well as her marriage to Edward, would be considered bigamous and invalid. The Matrimonial Causes Act 1937, which was passed shortly after Edward and Wallis's marriage, would allow for numerous other grounds for divorce.

Political

When Edward visited depressed mining villages in Wales, his comment that "something must be done" led to concerns among elected politicians that he would interfere in political matters, traditionally avoided by constitutional monarchs. Ramsay MacDonald, Lord President of the Council, wrote of the King's comments: "These escapades should be limited. They are an invasion into the field of politics and should be watched constitutionally." Although Edward's comments had made him popular in Wales, he became extremely unpopular with the public in Scotland following his refusal to open a new wing of Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, saying he could not do so because he was in mourning for his father and delegated the task to his brother Albert despite the logical inconsistency in doing so since it was less than a year since the death of their father, George V. The day after the opening, he was pictured in newspapers on holiday: he had turned down the public event in favour of meeting Simpson.

As Prince of Wales, Edward had publicly referred to Labour county councillors as "cranks" and made speeches counter to government policy. During his reign as king, his refusal to accept the advice of ministers continued: he opposed the imposition of sanctions on Italy after its invasion of Ethiopia, refused to receive the deposed Emperor of Ethiopia, and would not support a strengthening of the League of Nations.

Members of the British government became further dismayed by the proposed marriage after being told that Wallis Simpson was an agent of Nazi Germany. The Foreign Office obtained leaked dispatches from the German Reich's Ambassador to the United Kingdom, Joachim von Ribbentrop, which revealed his strong view that opposition to the marriage was motivated by the wish "to defeat those Germanophile forces which had been working through Mrs Simpson". It was rumoured that Simpson had access to confidential government papers sent to Edward, which he left unguarded at his Fort Belvedere residence. While Edward was abdicating, the personal protection officers guarding Simpson in exile in France sent reports to Downing Street suggesting that she might "flit to Germany".

Options considered
As a result of these rumours and arguments, the belief strengthened among the British establishment that Simpson could not become a royal consort. The British prime minister, Stanley Baldwin, explicitly advised Edward that the majority of people would be opposed to his marrying Simpson, indicating that if he did, in direct contravention of his ministers' advice, the government would resign en masse. The King responded, according to his own later account, "I intend to marry Mrs Simpson as soon as she is free to marry ... if the Government opposed the marriage, as the Prime Minister had given me reason to believe it would, then I was prepared to go." Under pressure from the King, and "startled" at the suggested abdication, Baldwin agreed to take further soundings on three options:

 * 1) Edward and Simpson marry and she become queen (a royal marriage);
 * 2) Edward and Simpson marry, but she not become queen, instead receiving some courtesy title (a morganatic marriage); or
 * 3) Abdication for Edward and any potential heirs he might father, allowing him to make any marital decisions without further constitutional implications.

The second option had European precedents, including Edward's own great-grandfather, Duke Alexander of Württemberg, but it had no parallel in British constitutional history. The prime ministers of the five Dominions (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, and the Irish Free State) were consulted, and the majority agreed that there was "no alternative to course (3)". William Lyon Mackenzie King (Prime Minister of Canada), Joseph Lyons (Prime Minister of Australia), and J. B. M. Hertzog (Prime Minister of South Africa) opposed options 1 and 2. Mackenzie King told Edward to do "what he believed in his own heart was right" and the Canadian government appealed to the King to put his duty before his feelings for Simpson. Governor General of Canada Lord Tweedsmuir told Buckingham Palace and Baldwin that Canadians held deep affection for the King, but also that Canadian public opinion would be outraged if Edward married a divorcée. Michael Joseph Savage (Prime Minister of New Zealand) rejected option 1 and thought that option 2 "might be possible ... if some solution along these lines were found to be practicable", but "would be guided by the decision of the Home government". In communications with the British government, Éamon de Valera (President of the Executive Council of the Irish Free State) remarked that as a Roman Catholic country, the Irish Free State did not recognise divorce. He supposed that if the British people would not accept Wallis Simpson then abdication was the only possible solution. On 24 November, Baldwin consulted the three leading opposition politicians in Britain: Leader of the Opposition Clement Attlee, Liberal leader Sir Archibald Sinclair, and Winston Churchill. Sinclair and Attlee agreed that options 1 and 2 were unacceptable, and Churchill pledged to support the government.

Churchill did not support the government, however. In July, he had advised the King's legal counsel, Walter Monckton, against the divorce, but his advice was ignored. As soon as the affair became public knowledge, Churchill started to pressure Baldwin and the King to delay any decisions until parliament and the people had been consulted. In a private letter to Geoffrey Dawson, the editor of The Times newspaper, Churchill suggested that a delay would be beneficial because, given time, the King might fall out of love with Simpson. Baldwin rejected the request for delay, presumably because he preferred to resolve the crisis quickly. Supporters of the King alleged a conspiracy between Baldwin, Geoffrey Dawson, and Cosmo Gordon Lang, the archbishop of Canterbury. The royal physician Bertrand Dawson was possibly involved in a plan to force the prime minister to retire on the grounds of heart disease, but he eventually accepted, on the evidence of an early electrocardiograph, that Baldwin's heart was sound.

Political support for the King was scattered and comprised politicians alienated from the mainstream parties such as Churchill, Oswald Mosley (leader of the British Union of Fascists), and Harry Pollitt and Walton Newbold of the Communist Party of Great Britain. Former prime minister David Lloyd George also supported the King despite disliking Simpson. He was, however, unable to take any active role in the crisis because he was on holiday in Jamaica with his mistress Frances Stevenson. In early December, rumours circulated that the King's supporters would join in a "King's Party", led by Churchill. However, there was no concerted effort to form an organised movement and Churchill had no intention of leading one. Nevertheless, the rumours damaged the King and Churchill severely, as members of parliament were horrified at the idea of the King interfering in politics.

The letters and diaries of working-class people and ex-servicemen generally demonstrate support for the King, while those from the middle and upper classes tend to express indignation and distaste. The Times, The Morning Post, Daily Herald, and newspapers owned by Lord Kemsley, such as The Daily Telegraph, opposed the marriage. On the other hand, the Daily Express and the Daily Mail, owned by Lord Beaverbrook and Lord Rothermere, respectively, appeared to support a morganatic marriage. The King estimated that the newspapers in favour had a circulation of 12.5 million, and those against had 8.5 million.

On 3 December, Edward had a "tense" meeting with Baldwin. Backed by Churchill and Beaverbrook, Edward proposed to broadcast a speech via the BBC. The proposed text invoked the "ancient custom" for a King to "address his public utterances to his people". Edward proposed to remind his listeners: "I am still the same man whose motto was 'Ich Dien', I serve." In the proposed speech, Edward indicated his desire to remain on the throne or to be recalled to it if forced to abdicate, while marrying Simpson morganatically. In one section, Edward proposed to say:

"Neither Mrs Simpson nor I have ever sought to insist that she should be queen. All we desired was that our married happiness should carry with it a proper title and dignity for her, befitting my wife. Now that I have at last been able to take you into my confidence, I feel it is best to go away for a while, so that you may reflect calmly and quietly, but without undue delay, on what I have said."

Baldwin blocked the speech, saying that it would shock many people and would be a grave breach of constitutional principles. By modern convention, the sovereign could only act with the advice and counsel of ministers. In seeking the people's support against the government, Edward was opting to oppose binding ministerial advice and instead act as a private individual. Edward's British ministers felt that, in proposing the speech, Edward had revealed his disdainful attitude towards constitutional conventions and threatened the political neutrality of the Crown.

Cabinet Office files released in 2013 show that on or before 5 December 1936, the Home Secretary, Sir John Simon, had ordered the General Post Office (which controlled British telephone services) to intercept "telephone communications between Fort Belvedere and Buckingham Palace on the one hand and the continent of Europe on the other".

On 5 December, having in effect been told that he could not keep the throne and marry Simpson, and having had his request to broadcast to the Empire to explain "his side of the story" blocked on constitutional grounds, Edward chose the third option.

Legal manoeuvres
Following Simpson's divorce hearing on 27 October 1936, her solicitor, John Theodore Goddard, became concerned that there would be a "patriotic" citizen's intervention (a legal device to block the divorce), and that such an intervention would be successful. The courts could not grant a collaborative divorce (a dissolution of marriage consented to by both parties), and so the case was being handled as if it were an undefended at-fault divorce brought against Ernest Simpson, with Wallis Simpson as the innocent, injured party. The divorce action would fail if the citizen's intervention showed that the Simpsons had colluded by, for example, conniving in or staging the appearance of his adultery so that she could marry someone else. On Monday 7 December 1936, the King heard that Goddard planned to fly to the south of France to see Wallis Simpson. The King summoned him and expressly forbade him to make the journey, fearing that the visit might put doubts in Simpson's mind. Goddard went straight to Downing Street to see Baldwin, as a result of which he was provided with an aeroplane to take him directly to Cannes.

Upon his arrival, Goddard warned his client that a citizen's intervention, should it arise, was likely to succeed. It was, according to Goddard, his duty to advise her to withdraw her divorce petition. Simpson refused, but they both telephoned the King to inform him that she was willing to give him up so that he could remain king. It was, however, too late; the King had already made up his mind to go, even if he could not marry Simpson. Indeed, as the belief that the abdication was inevitable gathered strength, Goddard stated that: "[his] client was ready to do anything to ease the situation but the other end of the wicket [Edward VIII] was determined".

Goddard had a weak heart and had never flown before, so he asked his doctor, William Kirkwood, to accompany him on the trip. As Kirkwood was a resident at a maternity hospital, his presence led to false speculation that Simpson was pregnant, and even that she was having an abortion. The press excitedly reported that the solicitor had flown to Simpson accompanied by a gynaecologist and an anaesthetist (who was actually the lawyer's clerk).

Abdication

At Fort Belvedere, on 10 December, Edward signed his written abdication notices, witnessed by his three younger brothers: Prince Albert, Duke of York (who succeeded Edward as George VI); Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester; and Prince George, Duke of Kent. The following day, it was given effect by Act of Parliament: His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act 1936.

Under changes introduced by the Statute of Westminster in 1931, a single Crown for the entire empire had been replaced by multiple crowns, one for each Dominion, worn by a single monarch in an organisation then-known as the British Commonwealth. Though the British government, hoping for expediency and to avoid embarrassment, wished the Dominions to accept the actions of the "home" government, the Dominions held that Edward's abdication required the consent of each Commonwealth state. According to the Statute of Westminster, the act passed by the UK parliament could become law in other Dominions at their request. This was duly given by the Parliament of Australia, which was at the time in session, and by the governments of Canada, South Africa, and New Zealand, whose parliaments were in recess.

Before the crisis had become public, Sir Maurice Gwyer, the British parliamentary counsel and one of the principal framers of the Statute of Westminster, expressed to Attorney-General Donald Somervell on 23 November 1936 the concern that the Irish Free State might refuse to either give its request and consent to British legislation or to pass its own. Legal experts discussed whether an abdication would have force in the Irish Free State, regardless, or if Edward VIII might remain king of that country while George VI reigned elsewhere. In the end, it was the possibility of the latter, and, consequently, Simpson becoming Queen of the Irish Free State, that was used to push the Oireachtas to legislate. The government of the Irish Free State, taking the opportunity presented by the crisis and in a major step towards its eventual transition to a republic, passed an amendment to its constitution on 11 December to remove references to the Crown and abolish the office of Governor-General of the Irish Free State; the King's abdication was recognised a day later in the External Relations Act, leading to a 24-hour period wherein Edward was king in the Irish Free State and his brother was king of the UK and other Dominions. In Canada, the Succession to the Throne Act 1937 symbolically confirmed the abdication. South Africa passed His Majesty King Edward the Eighth's Abdication Act 1937, which declared that the abdication took effect there on 10 December, meaning abdications took place on three separate dates across the Commonwealth.

Edward's supporters felt that he had "been hounded from the throne by that arch humbug Baldwin", but many members of the establishment were relieved by Edward's departure. Mackenzie King wrote in his diary on 8 December 1936 that Edward's "sense of right or wrong has been largely obliterated by the jazz of life he has led for years" and, upon receiving news of Edward's final decision to abdicate, "if that is the kind of man he is it is better he should not be longer on the Throne." Edward's own Assistant Private Secretary, Alan Lascelles, had told Baldwin as early as 1927: "I can't help thinking that the best thing that could happen to him, and to the country, would be for him to break his neck." Lascelles resigned in 1929 "in despair".

On 11 December 1936, Edward made a BBC radio broadcast from Windsor Castle; having abdicated, he was introduced by Sir John Reith as "His Royal Highness Prince Edward". The official address had been polished by Churchill and was moderate in tone, speaking about Edward's inability to do his job "as would have wished to do" without the support of "the woman I love". Edward's reign had lasted 327 days, the shortest of any monarch in Britain since the disputed reign of Lady Jane Grey over 380 years earlier. The day following the broadcast he left Britain for Austria.

Post-abdication

George VI granted his elder brother the title of Duke of Windsor with the style His Royal Highness on 12 December 1936. On 3 May the following year, the Simpsons' divorce was made final. The case was handled quietly and it barely featured in some newspapers. The Times printed a single sentence below a separate, and seemingly unconnected, report announcing the Duke's departure from Austria.

Edward married Wallis in France on 3 June 1937. She became the Duchess of Windsor, but, much to Edward's disgust, George VI issued letters patent that denied her the style of Her Royal Highness. The couple settled in France, and the Duke received a tax-free allowance from his brother, which Edward supplemented by writing his memoirs and by illegal currency trading. He also profited from the sale of Balmoral Castle and Sandringham House to George VI, for a "colossal sum" according to Alan Lascelles. Both estates are private property and not part of the Royal Estate, and were therefore inherited and owned by Edward, regardless of the abdication.

In October 1937, the Duke and Duchess visited Germany, against the advice of the British government, and met Hitler at his Obersalzberg retreat. The visit was much publicised by the German media. During the visit the Duke gave full Nazi salutes. In an article for the New York Daily News and Chicago Tribune of 13 December 1966 the Duke wrote that in 1937 Hitler persuaded him "it was in Britain's interest and in Europe's too, that Germany be encouraged to strike east and smash Communism forever ... I thought the rest of us could be fence-sitters while the Nazis and the Reds slogged it out."

After the outbreak of the Second World War in September 1939, Edward was assigned to the British Military Mission in France. In February 1940, the German ambassador in The Hague, Count Julius von Zech-Burkersroda, claimed that Edward had leaked the Allied war plans for the defence of Belgium. When Germany invaded the north of France in May 1940, the Duke and Duchess fled to Lisbon.

Under the code name Operation Willi, Nazi agents, principally Walter Schellenberg, plotted unsuccessfully to persuade the Duke to leave Portugal, and contemplated kidnapping him. Lord Caldecote warned Churchill that the Duke "is well-known to be pro-Nazi and he may become a centre of intrigue". Churchill threatened the Duke with a court-martial if he did not return to British soil.

In July 1940, Edward was appointed Governor of the Bahamas. Edward reportedly told an acquaintance, "After the war is over and Hitler will crush the Americans ... we'll take over ... They [the British] don't want me as their king, but I'll be back as their leader." He was reported as saying that "it would be a tragic thing for the world if Hitler was overthrown". Comments like these reinforced the belief that the Duke and Duchess held Nazi sympathies and the effect of the abdication crisis of 1936 was to force off the throne a man with extreme political opinions. Claims that Edward would have been a threat or that he was removed by a political conspiracy to dethrone him remain speculative and "persist largely because since 1936 the contemporary public considerations have lost most of their force and so seem, wrongly, to provide insufficient explanation for the King's departure".

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Abdication of Edward VIII


text:
Demetrius I of Bactria

Demetrius I Anicetus (Δημήτριος Ἀνίκητος, "Demetrius the unconquered"), also called Damaytra was a Greco-Bactrian and later Indo-Greek king (Yona in Pali language, "Yavana" in Sanskrit) (reigned c. 200–167 BC), who ruled areas from Bactria to ancient northwestern India. He was the son of the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom's ruler Euthydemus I and succeeded him around 200 BC, after which he conquered extensive areas in what is now southern Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan and India.

He was never defeated in battle and was posthumously referred to as "the Unconquered" (Aniketos) on the pedigree coins of his successor Agathocles. Demetrius I may have been the initiator of the Yavana era, starting in 186–185 BC, which was used for several centuries thereafter.

"Demetrius" was the name of at least two and probably three Bactrian kings. The much debated Demetrius II was a possible relative, whereas Demetrius III (c. 100 BC), is known only from numismatic evidence.

Encounter with Antiochus III
The father of Demetrius, Euthydemus, was attacked by the Seleucid ruler Antiochus III around 210 BC. Although he commanded 10,000 horsemen, Euthydemus initially lost a battle on the Arius and had to retreat. He then successfully resisted a three-year siege in the fortified city of Bactra, before Antiochus finally decided to recognize the new ruler.

The final negotiations were made between Antiochus III and Demetrius. Antiochus III was reportedly highly impressed by the demeanour of the young prince, and offered him one of his daughters in marriage, around 206 BC:

 * "And after several journeys of Teleas to and fro between the two, Euthydemus at last sent his son Demetrius to confirm the terms of the treaty. Antiochus received the young prince; and judging from his appearance, conversation, and the dignity of his manners that he was worthy of royal power, he first promised to give him one of his own daughters, and secondly conceded the royal title to his father." Polybius 11.34

The term used for "young prince" is neaniskos (νεανίσκος), suggesting an age around 16, which in turn gives a birth date for Demetrius around 222 BC.

Kuliab inscription
In an inscription found in the Kuliab area of Tajikistan, in western Greco-Bactria, and dated to 200-195 BC, a Greek by the name of Heliodotos, dedicating a fire altar to Hestia, mentions Euthydemus and Demetrius:

Invasion of India
Demetrius started the invasion of northwestern India in 186 BC, following the destruction of the Mauryan dynasty by the general Pushyamitra Shunga, who then founded the new Indian Shunga dynasty (180–78 BC). Sri Lankan monks state that Brihadratha, the last Mauryan Emperor, married a daughter of Demetrius, Berenice. The Greco-Bactrians might have invaded the Indus Valley to protect Greek expatriates in the Indian Subcontinent. Also, the Mauryans had had diplomatic alliances with the Greeks, and they may have been considered as allies by the Greco-Bactrians.

Demetrius may have first started to recover the province of Arachosia, an area south of the Hindu Kush already inhabited by many Greeks but ruled by the Mauryas since the annexation of the territory by Chandragupta from Seleucus. In his Parthian stations, Isidorus of Charax mentions a colony named Demetrias, supposedly founded by Demetrius himself:

 * "Beyond is Arachosia. And the Parthians call this White India; there are the city of Biyt and the city of Pharsana and the city of Chorochoad and the city of Demetrias; then Alexandropolis, the metropolis of Arachosia; it is Greek, and by it flows the river Arachotus. As far as this place the land is under the rule of the Parthians." "Parthians stations", 1st century BC

The Greek campaigns may have gone as far as the capital Pataliputra in eastern India (today Patna):
 * "Those who came after Alexander went to the Ganges and Pataliputra" (Strabo, XV.698)

 * "The Greeks who caused Bactria to revolt grew so powerful on account of the fertility of the country that they became masters, not only of Ariana, but also of India, as Apollodorus of Artemita says: and more tribes were subdued by them than by Alexander — by Menander in particular (at least if he actually crossed the Hypanis towards the east and advanced as far as the Imaüs), for some were subdued by him personally and others by Demetrius, the son of Euthydemus the king of the Bactrians." (Strabo 11.11.1 )

It is generally considered that Demetrius ruled in Taxila (where many of his coins were found in the archaeological site of Sirkap). The Indian records also describes Greek attacks on Saketa, Panchala, Mathura and Pataliputra (Gargi-Samhita, Yuga Purana chapter). However, the campaigns to Pataliputra are generally attested to the later king Menander I and Demetrius I probably only invaded areas in Pakistan. Other kings may have expanded the territory as well. By c. 175 BC, the Indo-Greeks ruled parts of northwestern India, while the Shungas remained in the Gangetic, Central, and Eastern India.

The Hathigumpha inscription of the Kalinga king Kharavela mentions that fearing him, a Yavana (Greek) king or general retreated to Mathura with his demoralized army. The name of the Yavana king is not clear, but it contains three letters, and the middle letter can be read as ma or mi. Some historians, such as R. D. Banerji and K.P. Jayaswal reconstructed the name of the Yavana king as "Dimita", and identified him with Demetrius. However, several other historians, such as Ramaprasad Chanda, Sailendra Nath Sen and P.L. Gupta disagree with this interpretation.

Aftermath
Demetrius I died of unknown reasons, and the date 180 BC is merely a suggestion aimed to allow suitable regnal periods for subsequent kings, of which there were several. Even if some of them were co-regents, civil wars and temporary divisions of the empire are most likely.

The kings Pantaleon, Antimachus, Agathocles and possibly Euthydemus II ruled after Demetrius I, and theories about their origin include all of them being relatives of Demetrius I, or only Antimachus. Eventually, the kingdom of Bactria fell to the able newcomer Eucratides.

Demetrius II was a later king, possibly a son or nephew of his namesake, and he ruled in India only. Justin mentions him being defeated by the Bactrian king Eucratides, an event which took place at the end of the latter's reign, possibly around 150 BC. Demetrius II left behind his generals Apollodotus and Menander, who in turn became kings of India and rulers of the Indo-Greek Kingdom following his death.

According to Ptolemy, a Demetriapolis was founded in Arachosia.

Geoffrey Chaucer names Demetrius among the combatants at a tournament held in Athens by Theseus: The grete Emetreus, the kyng of Inde, Upon a steede bay trapped in steel, Covered in clooth of gold, dyapred weel, Cam ridynge lyk the God of armes, Mars.

— Geoffrey Chaucer The Knight's Tale, ll. 2156-2159

Coinage
The coins of Demetrius are of five types. One bilingual type with Greek and Kharoshthi legends exists; it is naturally associated with the Indian Demetrius II. A series with the king in diadem are likely to be early issues of Demetrius I.

There is also one series representing a Gorgon shield on the obverse and a trident on the reverse. There are also three types depicting elephants. The first type shows Demetrius (I) with elephant-crown, a well-known symbol of India, which simply denotes his conquests in India, as Alexander the Great had also done on his coinage before. One type represents an elephant with Nike on the other side holding a wreath of victory. This sort of symbolism can be seen on the reverse of the coins of Antialcidas in which Nike (supported by Zeus) directly hands the victory wreath to the elephant on the same coin face.

Indian coinage in Gandhara (after 185 BC)
The year 186 BC, with the invasion of the Greco-Bactrians into India, marks an evolution in the design of single-die cast coins in the coinage of Gandhara, as deities and realistic animals were introduced. At the same time coinage technology also evolved, as double-die coins (engraved on both sides, obverse and reverse) started to appear. The archaeological excavations of coins have shown that these coins, as well as the new double die coins, were contemporary with those of the Indo-Greeks. According to Osmund Bopearachchi these coins, and particularly those depicting the goddess Lakshmi, were probably minted by Demetrius I following his invasion of Gandhara.

Buddhism
Buddhism flourished under the Indo-Greek kings, and it has been suggested by W. W. Tarn that their invasion of India was intended to show their support for the Mauryan empire in reaction to the persecution by the Sungas against Buddhism. However, that persecution in turn is debatable, with contemporary historians such as Romila Thapar suggesting that some of the accounts might be the product of exaggeration from Buddhist missionaries. Thapar attributes purely economic motivations to the Indo-Greek invasion of Southern Asia.

Elephant with the caduceus coinage
One of Demetrius' "elephant" types represents a rejoicing elephant, depicted on the front on the coin and surrounded by the royal bead-and-reel decoration, and therefore treated on the same level as a King. The elephant, one of the symbols of Buddhism and Gautama Buddha, possibly represents the victory of Buddhism brought about by Demetrius. Alternatively, though, the elephant has been described as a possible symbol of the Indian capital of Taxila (Tarn), or as a symbol of India as a whole.

The reverse of the coin depicts the caduceus, symbol of reconciliation between two fighting serpents, which is possibly a representation of peace between the Greeks and the Shungas, and likewise between Buddhism and Hinduism (the caduceus also appears as a symbol of the punch-marked coins of the Maurya Empire in India, in the 3rd-2nd century BC).

Unambiguous Buddhist symbols are found on later Greek coins of Menander I or Menander II, but the conquests of Demetrius I did influence the Buddhist religion in India.

title: Demetrius I of Bactria


text:
Ward

Ward may refer to:

Division or unit

 * Hospital ward, a hospital division, floor, or room set aside for a particular class or group of patients, for example the psychiatric ward
 * Prison ward, a division of a penal institution such as a prison
 * Ward (electoral subdivision), electoral district or unit of local government
 * Ward (fortification), part of a castle
 * Ward (LDS Church), a local congregation of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
 * Ward (Vietnam), a type of third-tier subdivision of Vietnam

Businesses and organizations

 * WARD (FM), a radio station (91.9 FM) licensed to serve New Paris, Ohio, United States; see List of radio stations in Ohio
 * WOUF (AM), a radio station (750 AM) licensed to serve Petoskey, Michigan, United States, which held the call sign WARD from 2008 to 2021
 * Warring Adolescents Revenge Division (WARD), organization in The Hardy Boys graphic novels

 * Ward Body Works, a school bus manufacturer, now IC Bus
 * Ward's, a publisher of Ward's AutoWorld and Ward's Dealer Business
 * Wards Brewing Company, a former English brewery, now a brand operated by Double Maxim Beer Company

Law and law enforcement

 * Ward (law), someone placed under the protection of a legal guardian
 * Watchman (law enforcement), a security guard
 * Ward (feudal)
 * Justice Ward (disambiguation)

Names

 * Ward (surname)
 * Ward (given name)
 * Ward, short form of the given names:
 * Edward
 * Howard
 * Hereward

Places

 * The Ward, Toronto, neighbourhood in central Toronto
 * Ward, Castleknock, Ireland
 * Ward, New Zealand

United States

 * Ward, Alabama
 * Ward, Arkansas
 * Ward, Colorado
 * Ward, Indiana
 * Ward, New York
 * Ward, South Carolina
 * Ward, South Dakota
 * Ward, Washington
 * Ward, West Virginia
 * Ward Reservation, Massachusetts
 * Ward Township, Todd County, Minnesota
 * Ward Township, Hocking County, Ohio
 * Ward Township, Pennsylvania

Vessels

 * USS Aaron Ward, various United States Navy destroyers
 * USS Ward (DD-139), a U.S. Navy destroyer

Other

 * Ward (magic), a word or symbol supposedly embued with protective magic
 * Ward (fencing), defensive position in the sport of fencing
 * Ward (locks), an obstruction preventing the opening of a warded lock
 * The Ward (disambiguation)
 * Ward County (disambiguation)
 * "Ward", by C418 from Minecraft - Volume Beta, 2013

title: Ward


text:
Head transplant

A head transplant or full body transplant is an experimental surgical operation involving the grafting of one organism's head onto the body of another. In many experiments, the recipient's head has not been removed, but in others it has been. Experimentation in animals began in the early 1900s. , no lasting successes have been achieved.

Medical challenges
There are three main technical challenges. As with any organ transplant, managing the immune response to avoid transplant rejection is necessary. Also, the brain is highly dependent on continuous flow of blood to provide oxygen and nutrients and remove waste products, with damage setting in quickly at normal temperatures when blood flow is cut off. Finally, managing the nervous systems in both the body and the head is essential, in several ways. The autonomic nervous system controls essential functions like breathing and the heart beating and is governed largely by the brain stem; if the recipient body's head is removed this can no longer function. Additionally each nerve coming out of the head via the spinal cord needs to be connected to the putatively corresponding nerve in the recipient body's spinal cord in order for the brain to control movement and receive sensory information. Finally, the risk of systematic neuropathic pain is high and had largely been unaddressed in research.

Of these challenges, dealing with blood supply and transplant rejection have been addressed in the field of transplant medicine generally, making transplantation of several types of organs fairly routine; however in a field as common as liver transplantation around a quarter of organs are rejected within the first year and overall mortality is still much higher than the general population. The challenge of grafting the nervous system remained in early stages of research.

History

Alexis Carrel was a French surgeon who had developed improved surgical methods to connect blood vessels in the context of organ transplantation. In 1908 he collaborated with the American Charles Claude Guthrie to attempt to graft the head of one dog on an intact second dog; the grafted head showed some reflexes early on but deteriorated quickly and the animal was killed after a few hours. Carrel's work on organ transplantation later earned a Nobel Prize; Guthrie was probably excluded because of this controversial work on head transplantation.

In 1954, Vladimir Demikhov, a Soviet surgeon who had done important work to improve coronary bypass surgery, performed an experiment in which he grafted a dog's head and upper body including the front legs, onto another dog; the effort was focused on how to provide blood supply to the donor head and upper body and not on grafting the nervous systems. The dogs generally survived a few days; one survived 29 days. The grafted body parts were able to move and react to stimulus. The animals died due to transplant rejection.

In the 1950s and '60s, immunosuppressive drugs and organ transplantation techniques were developed that eventually made transplantation of kidneys, livers, and other organs standard medical procedures.

In 1965, Robert J. White did a series of experiments in which he attempted to graft only the vascular system of isolated dog brains onto existing dogs, to learn how to manage this challenge. He monitored brain activity with EEG and also monitored metabolism, and showed that he could maintain high levels of brain activity and metabolism by avoiding any break in the blood supply. The animals survived between 6 hours and 2 days. In 1970, he did four experiments in which he cut the head off of a monkey and connected the blood vessels of another monkey head to it; he did not attempt to connect the nervous systems. White used deep hypothermia to protect the brains during the times when they were cut off from blood during procedure. The recipient bodies had to be kept alive with mechanical ventilation and drugs to stimulate the heart. The grafted heads were able to function - the eyes tracked moving objects and it could chew and swallow. There were problems with the grafting of blood vessels that led to blood clots forming, and White used high doses of immunosuppressive drugs that had severe side effects; the animals died between 6 hours and 3 days after the heads were engrafted. These experiments were reported and criticized in the media and were considered barbaric by animal rights activists. There were few animal experiments on head transplantation for many years after this.

In 2012, Xiaoping Ren published work in which he grafted the head of a mouse onto another mouse's body; again the focus was on how to avoid harm from the loss of blood supply; with his protocol the grafted heads survived up to six months.

In 2013, Sergio Canavero published a protocol that he said would make human head transplantation possible. In 2016, he announced his plans to do the procedure on Valeriy Spiridonov, a disabled Russian software engineer suffering from spinal muscular atrophy, who volunteered for the surgery. Canavero claimed that there is a 90% chance of success. However, Spiridonov later cancelled his participation after falling in love with a woman.

In 2015, Ren published work in which he cut off the heads of mice but left the brain stem in place, and then connected the vasculature of the donor head to the recipient body; this work was an effort to address whether it was possible to keep the body of the recipient animal alive without life support. All prior experimental work that involved removing the recipient body's head had cut the head off lower down, just below the second bone in the spinal column. Ren also used moderate hypothermia to protect the brains during the procedure.

In 2016, Ren and Canavero published a review of attempted as well as possible neuroprotection strategies that they said should be researched for potential use in a head transplantation procedure; they discussed various protocols for connecting the vasculature, the use of various levels of hypothermia, the use of blood substitutes, and the possibility of using hydrogen sulfide as a neuroprotective agent.

Ethics and popular opinion
Arthur Caplan, a bioethicist, has written "Head transplants are fake news. Those who promote such claims and who would subject any human being to unproven cruel surgery merit not headlines but only contempt and condemnation."

Robert J. White became a target for protestors because of his head transplantation experiments. One interrupted a banquet in his honor by offering him a bloody replica of a human head. Others called his house asking for "Dr. Butcher". When White testified in a civil hearing about Sam Sheppard's murder case, lawyer Terry Gilbert compared White to Dr. Frankenstein. The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals described White's experiments as "epitomizing the crude, cruel vivisection industry".

In general, the field of transplantation medicine has been met with resistance and alarm from some quarters as advances have been made; Joseph Murray, who performed the first kidney transplant in 1954, was described as doing something unnatural or as playing God. These continued as other organs were transplanted, but perhaps became the most sharp as hand transplants and face transplants emerged in 1998 and 2005, as each of these are visible, personal, and social in ways that internal organs are not. The medical ethics of each of these procedures was extensively discussed and worked out before clinical experimental and regular usage began.

With regard to head transplantation, there had been little formal ethical discussion published in the literature and little dialogue among stakeholders ; the plans of Canavero were running well ahead of society's and the medical establishment's readiness or acceptance. There was no accepted protocol for conducting the procedure to justify the risk to the people involved, methods of obtaining informed consent were unclear, especially for the person whose body would be used; issues of desperation render the truly informed consent of a head donor questionable. With regard to societal costs, the body of a person willing to be an organ donor can save the lives of many people, and, the supply of tissues and organs from people willing to be organ donors did not meet the medical need of recipients; the notion of an entire donor body going to one other person was difficult to justify at that time. Basic legal issues were also unclear with regard to whether only one or both of the people involved in a head transplantation would have any legal rights in the post-procedure person.

The most appropriate initial form of the procedure was unclear. Because grafting the head onto the spinal cord was not possible at that time, the only feasible procedure would be one where the head was only connected to the blood supply of the donor body, leaving the person completely paralyzed, with the accompanying limited quality of life and high societal cost to maintain.

The psychological results of the procedure were unclear as well. While concerns were raised about whether recipients of a face transplant and their social circle would have difficulty adjusting, studies had found that disruptions had been minimal. But no transplant had ever been performed where the entire body of an individual is unfamiliar at the conclusion of the procedure, and one of the few documents discussing the ethics in the biomedical literature, a letter to the editor of a journal published in 2015, foresaw a high risk of insanity as a result of the procedure.

Popular opinion about Canavero's plans for head transplantation had been generally negative. Many of these criticisms focus on the state of technology and the timeframe in which Canavero says he will be able to successfully conduct the procedure.

Popular culture
Literature
 * Professor Dowell's Head (1925), science-fiction novel by Alexander Belyaev, a mad scientist performs head transplants on bodies stolen from the morgue, and reanimates the bodies.
 * Arthur Nagan or "Gorilla-Man", Marvel Comics scientist character whose head was transplanted onto a gorilla's body.
 * JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (1987), Dio Brando, the main antagonist of Phantom Blood and Stardust Crusaders, transplanted his head on Jonathan Joestar's body, the main protagonist of Phantom Blood.
 * NOGGIN (2014) by John Corey Whaley; Travis Coates wakes up after undergoing a head transplant after five years of being cryogenically frozen.

Film and television
 * The Brain That Wouldn't Die (1962), science-fiction/horror film
 * The Incredible Two-Headed Transplant (1971), science fiction/horror film
 * The Thing with Two Heads (1972), science fiction film
 * Professor Dowell's Testament (1984), Soviet film based on the A. Belyaev story mentioned above
 * "Donor" (1999), an episode of The Outer Limits
 * The X-Files: I Want to Believe (2008), science fiction film
 * In May 2024, a realistically animated rendition of a head transplant became a viral video on social media

Video games
 * B.J. Blazkowicz, protagonist of the Wolfenstein series, has his head transplanted on to a genetically engineered body in Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus (2017).

title: Head transplant


text:
Talk:Politics of Dominica

Untitled
Hi Vera!

Way back in the long-ago discussions of the Wikipedia Countries Project, we discussed whether the location of the embassies of the US, and to the US, were of sufficient interest for an international encyclopedia. It was decided that they were not. As a result, we've been slowly but systematically removing those addresses from the "Politics of..." pages. Is there a particular reason you think that information should remain? -- April 22:06 Jan 9, 2003 (UTC)

Yes, all embassies should be listed. Removing is the wrong way to do this, you should be adding.

 * Adding every address of every embassy in Dominica, plus every address of every embassy from Domica in another country? And then repeat for all the world's countries? That would be a mammoth project, and considering how rapidly that information could change, I don't think a very useful one. -- April 22:10 Jan 9, 2003 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a mammoth project. I don't think thats a very good argument against doing something. Also, nobody is asking you to do the project. But why destroy the beginnings of it? We have US embassies for every country int he world noted, now add Canada or Dominca or whatever, but dont delete what we have done. Vera Cruz

 * The ones that are currently added are added only because the person pasting them in--me--didn't realize that he was unintentionally biasing the 'pedia towards a U.S. point of view, which has been much lamented since and generally agreed was the wrong way to go. KQ

 * While I agree on the former, these embassies are currently only there because we copied in information from the CIA World Factbook, wholesale, without editing. We have since been going through and editing that information to keep only what is useful for the general reader. Most people do not need to know the addresses of every embassy in the world to and from a country when they're looking up the politics of that country!  If you really, really want to undertake such a project, I'd recommend adding an extra link like "Dominica Embassies" onto the main Dominica page. But since ambassadors to/from the US, at least, are changed every few years, and embassy addresses are also subject to frequent changes, it'll be very hard to keep such a thing up to date.

Meanwhile, if we leave in only the US Embassy information - and adding all the other nations is not practical at this time - we create more of a "US bias" in Wikipedia. Since so many of the contributors here are US residents, this is already a continuing issue; better that we should crop the US embassy info unless and until we're ready to do it for the Whole World. Even if that were not the case, it's really not "encyclopedic" information; it only happens to be there because the CIA figured it'd be useful for US citizens to have in their Factbook. We have different aims, and for our aims, that information isn't really useful. -- April 22:19 Jan 9, 2003 (UTC)

No we do not create a US bias-if most of the users are from the US it stands to reason that most of them will write about what they know about. Having the US embassies will encourage others to add embassies. It most certainly is "encyclopedic". Cropping information is wasteful and destructive.

Just cut and paste them into US Embassies. Vera Cruz

 * Um, as a blanket statement, that seems a little... unsafe. I mean, if I were to put in the addresses of all my relatives, would you then argue that this is "encyclopedic", because everyone else is free to put in the addresses of their relatives? I wouldn't think so.

 * Ergo, we do make quality decisions on information. We remove things that violate the NPOV, but we also remove things that most readers will not find useful and on-topic for a particular article. It is not our ambition at this time to have an entry for every human being who ever lived; or to have the address of every important building in the world. Exercising that judgement, then, the group of us conferring on countries decided that the addresses of embassies was non-essential information.  If a large chunk of Wikipedians stand up and say they disagree, that consensus may change; but until then, since 90% of the embassies have been edited out by now... I'll continue to remove the other 10%.  After all, if we do decide to include this after all, might as well do it systematically, with current (not 2-year-old) information, separate links (so those interested in politics needn't deal with 'em) and all nations included. :) -- April

Important notice
The government section of the "Outline of Dominica" needs to be checked, corrected, and completed -- especially the subsections for the government branches.

When the country outlines were created, temporary data (that matched most of the countries but not all) was used to speed up the process. Those countries for which the temporary data does not match must be replaced with the correct information.

Please check that this country's outline is not in error.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact The Transhumanist.

Thank you.

title: Talk:Politics of Dominica


text:
Talk:Finger

Weird Grammar in one of the sections
In the section Regrowth of the Fingertips, there is a grammar mistake that makes the part sound kind of weird. I request that this is fixed.

Fingertips, after having been torn off ‘’’children’’’, have been observed to regrow in less than 8 weeks.[22] However, these fingertips do not look the same, although they do look more appealing than a skin graft or a sewn fingertip. No healing occurs if the tear happens below the nail. This works because the distal phalanges are regenerative in youth, and stem cells in the nails create new tissue that ends up as the fingertip. 2600:1005:B0B7:2C4C:A03E:F153:294F:A14E (talk) 17:05, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

 * The OP doesn't specify exactly what change is desired. Naturally, it should be: "Children's fingertips, after having been torn off, have been observed ..."  Actually the rest of that paragraph is terribly written as well.  I suggest: "This works because the distal phalanges are regenerative in youth, and stem cells near the nails create new tissue that ends up as the fingertip.  Thus, fingertips are not regenerated if the injury destroys the nail bed.  These regrown tips look different but are preferable to skin grafts or surgical reattachment. [22][23] 172.75.77.7 (talk) 03:25, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Why locked?
The top of this talk page invites users to improve the article: "If you can improve it, please do." But the article is locked to prevent edits. One would expect there to at least be some discussion or reason for this lock given in the talk section, but no such reason is given. So much for Wikipedia being "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit" (the official description on the main page) when someone can lock people out of doing so without even providing a reason. 172.75.77.7 (talk) 02:49, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

 * The article has been indefinitely semi-protected since 2015 when it was frequently being vandalized. I will ask the admin to unprotect it, and we'll see how it goes. Zefr (talk) 03:16, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ and opened for editing by admin, JBW. Zefr (talk) 14:21, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Subject/verb number agreement
Affect, not affects: "Raynaud's phenomenon and Paroxysmal hand hematoma are neurovascular disorders that affect s the fingers." (This would be a simple edit if the article weren't locked. Not sure why someone locks a C-class article that obviously needs much improvement.) 172.75.77.7 (talk) 02:57, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

 * ✅ - thanks. Zefr (talk) 03:14, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Finger