WASH (or Watsan, WaSH) is an acronym that stands for "water, sanitation and hygiene". It is used widely by non-governmental organizations and aid agencies in developing countries. The purposes of providing access to WASH services include achieving public health gains, improving human dignity in the case of sanitation, implementing the human right to water and sanitation, reducing the burden of collecting drinking water for women, reducing risks of violence against women, improving education and health outcomes at schools and health facilities, and reducing water pollution. Access to WASH services is also an important component of water security. Universal, affordable and sustainable access to WASH is a key issue within international development and is the focus of the first two targets of Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6). Targets 6.1 and 6.2 aim at equitable and accessible water and sanitation for all. In 2017, it was estimated that 2.3 billion people live without basic sanitation facilities and 844 million people live without access to safe and clean drinking water.

The WASH-attributable burden of disease and injuries has been studied in depth. Typical diseases and conditions associated with lack of WASH include diarrhea, malnutrition and stunting, in addition to neglected tropical diseases. Lack of WASH poses additional health risks for women, for example during pregnancy, or in connection with menstrual hygiene management. Chronic diarrhea can have long-term negative effects on children, in terms of both physical and cognitive development. Still, collecting precise scientific evidence regarding health outcomes that result from improved access to WASH is difficult due to a range of complicating factors. Scholars suggest a need for longer-term studies of technology efficacy, greater analysis of sanitation interventions, and studies of combined effects from multiple interventions in order to better analyze WASH health outcomes.

Access to WASH needs to be provided at the household level but also in non-household settings like schools, healthcare facilities, workplaces (including prisons), temporary use settings, mass gatherings, and for dislocated populations. In schools, group handwashing facilities and behaviors are a promising approach to improve hygiene. Lack of WASH facilities at schools can prevent students (especially girls) from attending school, reducing their educational achievements and future work productivity.

Challenges for providing WASH services include providing services to urban slums, failures of WASH systems (e.g. leaking water distribution systems), water pollution and the impacts of climate change. Planning approaches for better, more reliable and equitable access to WASH include: National WASH plans and monitoring (including gender mainstreaming), integrated water resources management (IWRM) and, more recently, improving climate resilience of WASH services. Adaptive capacity in water management systems can help to absorb some of the impacts of climate-related events and increase climate resilience. Stakeholders at various scales, i.e. from small urban utilities to national governments, need to have access to reliable information about the regional climate and any expected changes due to global climate change.

Components
The concept of WASH groups together water supply (access to drinking water services), sanitation, and hygiene because the impact of deficiencies in each area overlap strongly (WASH is an acronym that uses the first letters of "water, sanitation and hygiene"). WASH consists of access to drinking water services, sanitation services and hygiene.

Drinking water services

A "safely managed drinking water service" is "one located on premises, available when needed and free from contamination". The terms '"improved water source" and "unimproved water source" were coined in 2002 as a drinking water monitoring tool by the JMP of UNICEF and WHO. The term "improved water source" refers to "piped water on premises (piped household water connection located inside the user's dwelling, plot or yard), and other improved drinking water sources (public taps or standpipes, tube wells or boreholes, protected dug wells, protected springs, and rainwater collection)".

Access to drinking water is included in Target 6.1 of Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6), which states: "By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all". This target has one indicator: Indicator 6.1.1 is the "Proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services". In 2017, 844 million people still lacked even a basic drinking water service. In 2019 it was reported that 435 million people used unimproved sources for their drinking water, and 144 million still used surface waters, such as lakes and streams.

Drinking water can be sourced from the following water sources: surface water, groundwater or rainwater, in each case after collection, treatment and distribution. Desalinated seawater is another potential source for drinking water.

People without access to safe, reliable domestic water supplies face lower water security at specific times throughout the year due to cyclical changes in water quantity or quality. For example, where access to water on-premises is not available, drinking water quality at the point of use (PoU) can be much worse compared to the quality at the point of collection (PoC). Correct household practices around hygiene, storage and treatment are therefore important. There are interactions between weather, water source and management, and these in turn impact on drinking water safety.

Groundwater

Groundwater provides critical freshwater supply, particularly in dry regions where surface water availability is limited. Globally, more than one-third of the water used originates from underground. In the mid-latitude arid and semi-arid regions lacking sufficient surface water supply from rivers and reservoirs, groundwater is critical for sustaining global ecology and meeting societal needs of drinking water and food production. The demand for groundwater is rapidly increasing with population growth, while climate change is imposing additional stress on water resources and raising the probability of severe drought occurrence.

The anthropogenic effects on groundwater resources are mainly due to groundwater pumping and the indirect effects of irrigation and land use changes.

Groundwater plays a central role in sustaining water supplies and livelihoods in sub-Saharan Africa. In some cases, groundwater is an additional water source that was not used previously.

Reliance on groundwater is increasing in Sub-Saharan Africa as development programs work towards improving water access and strengthening resilience to climate change. In lower-income areas, groundwater supplies are typically installed without water quality treatment infrastructure or services. This practice is underpinned by an assumption that untreated groundwater is typically suitable for drinking due to the relative microbiological safety of groundwater compared to surface water; however, chemistry risks are largely disregarded. Chemical contaminants occur widely in groundwaters that are used for drinking but are not regularly monitored. Example priority parameters are fluoride, arsenic, nitrate, or salinity.

Sanitation services

Sanitation systems are grouped into several types: The ladder of sanitation services includes (from lowest to highest): open defecation, unimproved, limited, basic, safely managed. A distinction is made between sanitation facilities that are shared between two or more households (a "limited service") and those that are not shared (a "basic service"). The definition of improved sanitation facilities is: Those facilities designed to hygienically separate excreta from human contact.

With regards to toilets, improved sanitation includes the following kind of toilets: Flush toilet, connection to a piped sewer system, connection to a septic system, flush or pour-flush to a pit latrine, pit latrine with slab, ventilated improved pit latrine, composting toilet.

Access to sanitation services is included in Target 6.2 of Sustainable Development Goal 6 which is: "By 2030, achieve access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all and end open defecation, paying special attention to the needs of women and girls and those in vulnerable situations." This target has one indicator: Indicator 6.2.1 is the "Proportion of population using (a) safely managed sanitation services and (b) a hand-washing facility with soap and water".

In 2017, 4.5 billion people did not have toilets at home that can safely manage waste despite improvements in access to sanitation over the past decades. Approximately 600 million people share a toilet or latrine with other households and 892 million people practice open defecation.

There are many barriers that make it difficult to achieve "sanitation for all". These include social, institutional, technical and environmental challenges. Therefore, the problem of providing access to sanitation services cannot be solved by focusing on technology alone. Instead, it requires an integrated perspective that includes planning, using economic opportunities (e.g. from reuse of excreta), and behavior change interventions.

Fecal sludge management and sanitation workers

Sanitation services would not be complete without safe fecal sludge management (FSM), which is the storage, collection, transport, treatment, and safe end use or disposal of fecal sludge. Fecal sludge is defined very broadly as what accumulates in onsite sanitation systems (e.g. pit latrines, septic tanks and container-based solutions) and specifically is not transported through a sewer. Sanitation workers are the people needed for cleaning, maintaining, operating, or emptying a sanitation technology at any step of the sanitation chain.

Hygiene

Hygiene is a broad concept. "Hygiene refers to conditions and practices that help to maintain health and prevent the spread of diseases." Hygiene is can comprise many behaviors, including handwashing, menstrual hygiene and food hygiene. In the context of WASH, handwashing with soap and water is regarded as a top priority in all settings, and has been chosen as an indicator for national and global monitoring of hygiene access. "Basic hygiene facilities" are those were people have a handwashing facility with soap and water available on their premises. Handwashing facilities can consist of a sink with tap water, buckets with taps, tippy-taps and portable basins.

In the context of SDG 6, hygiene is included in the indicator for Target 6.2: "Proportion of population using [...] (b) a hand-washing facility with soap and water"

In 2017, the global situation was reported as follows: Only 1 in 4 people in low-income countries had handwashing facilities with soap and water at home; only 14% of people in Sub-Saharan Africa have handwashing facilities. Worldwide, at least 500 million women and girls lack adequate, safe, and private facilities for managing menstrual hygiene.

Approximately 40% of the world's population live without basic hand washing facilities with soap and water at home.

Purposes
The purposes of providing access to WASH services include achieving public health gains, improving human dignity in the case of sanitation, implementing the human right to water and sanitation, reducing the burden of collecting drinking water for women, reducing risks of violence against women, improving education and health outcomes at schools and health facilities, and reducing water pollution. Access to WASH services is also an important component of achieving water security.

Improving access to WASH services can improve health, life expectancy, student learning, gender equality, and other important issues of international development. It can also assist with poverty reduction and socio-economic development.

Health aspects

Categories of health impacts
Health impacts resulting from a lack of safe sanitation systems fall into three categories:

 Direct impact (infections): The direct impacts include fecal–oral infections (through the fecal–oral route), helminth infections and insect vector diseases (see also waterborne diseases, which can contaminate drinking water). For example, lack of clean water and proper sanitation can result in feces-contaminated drinking water and cause life-threatening diarrhea for infants.
 Sequelae (conditions caused by preceding infection): Conditions caused by preceding infection include stunting or growth faltering, consequences of stunting (obstructed labour, low birthweight), impaired cognitive function, pneumonia (related to repeated diarrhea in undernourished children), anemia (related to hookworm infections).
 Broader well-being: Anxiety, sexual assault (and related consequences), adverse birth outcomes as well as long-term problems such as school absence, poverty, decreased economic productivity, antimicrobial resistance.

WASH-attributable burden of diseases and injuries
The WHO has investigated which proportion of death and disease worldwide can be attributed to insufficient WASH services. In their analysis they focus on the following four health outcomes: diarrhea, acute respiratory infections, undernutrition, and soil-transmitted helminthiases (STHs). These health outcomes are also included as an indicator for achieving Sustainable Development Goal 3 ("Good Health and Wellbeing"): Indicator 3.9.2 reports on the "mortality rate attributed to unsafe water, sanitation, and lack of hygiene".

In 2023, WHO summarized the available data with the following key findings: "In 2019, use of safe WASH services could have prevented the loss of at least 1.4 million lives and 74 million disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) from four health outcomes. This represents 2.5% of all deaths and 2.9% of all DALYs globally." Of the four health outcomes studied, it was diarrheal disease that had the most striking correlation, namely the highest number of "attributable burden of disease": over 1 million deaths and 55 million DALYs from diarrheal diseases was linked with lack of WASH. Of these deaths, 564,000 deaths were linked to unsafe sanitation in particular.

Acute respiratory infections was the second largest cause of WASH-attributable burden of disease in 2019, followed by undernutrition and soil-transmitted helminthiases. The latter does not lead to such high death numbers (in comparison) but is fully connected to unsafe WASH: its "population-attributable fraction" is estimated to be 100%.

The connection between lack of WASH and burden of disease is primarily one of poverty and poor access in developing countries: "the WASH-attributable mortality rates were 42, 30, 4.4 and 3.7 deaths per 100 000 population in low-income, lower-middle income, upper-middle income and high-income countries, respectively." The regions most affected are in the WHO Africa and South-East Asia regions. Here, between 66 to 76% of the diarrheal disease burden could be prevented if access to safe WASH services was provided.

Most of the diseases resulting from lack of sanitation have a direct relation to poverty. For example, open defecation – which is the most extreme form of "lack of sanitation" – is a major factor in causing various diseases, most notably diarrhea and intestinal worm infections.

An earlier report by World Health Organization which analyzed data up to 2016 had found higher values: "The WASH-attributable disease burden amounts to 3.3% of global deaths and 4.6% of global DALYs. Among children under 5 years, WASH-attributable deaths represent 13% of deaths and 12% of DALYs. Worldwide, 1.9 million deaths and 123 million DALYs could have been prevented in 2016 with adequate WASH." An even earlier study from 2002 had estimated even higher values, namely that up to 5 million people die each year from preventable waterborne diseases. These changes in the estimates of death and disease can partly be explained by the progress that has been achieved in some countries in improving access to WASH. For example several large Asian countries (China, India, Indonesia) have managed to increase the "safely managed sanitation services" in their country from the year 2015 to 2020 by more than 10 percentage points.

List of diseases

There are at least the following twelve diseases which are more likely to occur when WASH services are inadequate:

 Diarrheal diseases
 Respiratory infections
 Soil-transmitted helminth infections
 Malaria
 Trachoma
 Schistosomiasis
 Lymphatic filariasis
 Onchocerciasis
 Dengue
 Japanese encephalitis
 Protein–energy malnutrition
 Drowning

There are also other diseases where adverse health outcomes are likely to be linked to inadequate WASH but which are not yet quantified. These include for example:

 Arsenicosis
 Fluorosis
 Legionellosis
 Leptospirosis
 Hepatitis A and Hepatitis E
 Cyanobacterial toxins
 Lead poisoning
 Scabies
 Spinal injury
 Poliomyelitis
 Neonatal conditions (see also infant mortality) and maternal outcomes (such as maternal deaths)
 Other diseases, e.g. most neglected tropical diseases

Diarrhea, malnutrition and stunting

Diarrhea is primarily transmitted through fecal–oral routes. In 2011, infectious diarrhea resulted in about 0.7 million deaths in children under five years old and 250 million lost school days. This equates to about 2000 child deaths per day. Children suffering from diarrhea are more vulnerable to become underweight (due to stunted growth). This makes them more vulnerable to other diseases such as acute respiratory infections and malaria. Chronic diarrhea can have a negative effect on child development (both physical and cognitive).

Numerous studies have shown that improvements in drinking water and sanitation (WASH) lead to decreased risks of diarrhea. Such improvements might include for example use of water filters, provision of high-quality piped water and sewer connections. Diarrhea can be prevented - and the lives of 525,000 children annually be saved (estimate for 2017) - by improved sanitation, clean drinking water, and hand washing with soap. In 2008 the same figure was estimated as 1.5 million children.

The combination of direct and indirect deaths from malnutrition caused by unsafe water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) practices was estimated by the World Health Organization in 2008 to lead to 860,000 deaths per year in children under five years of age. The multiple interdependencies between malnutrition and infectious diseases make it very difficult to quantify the portion of malnutrition that is caused by infectious diseases which are in turn caused by unsafe WASH practices. Based on expert opinions and a literature survey, researchers at WHO arrived at the conclusion that approximately half of all cases of malnutrition (which often leads to stunting) in children under five is associated with repeated diarrhea or intestinal worm infections as a result of unsafe water, inadequate sanitation or insufficient hygiene.

Neglected tropical diseases

Water, sanitation and hygiene interventions help to prevent many neglected tropical diseases (NTDs), for example soil-transmitted helminthiasis. Approximately two billion people are infected with soil-transmitted helminths worldwide. This type of intestinal worm infection is transmitted via worm eggs in feces which in turn contaminate soil in areas where sanitation is poor. An integrated approach to NTDs and WASH benefits both sectors and the communities they are aiming to serve. This is especially true in areas that are endemic with more than one NTD.

Since 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) has a global strategy and action plan to integrate WASH with other public health interventions in order to accelerate elimination of NTDs. The plan aimed to intensify control or eliminate certain NTDs in specific regions by 2020. It refers to the NTD roadmap milestones that included for example eradication of dracunculiasis by 2015 and of yaws by 2020, elimination of trachoma and lymphatic filariasis as public health problems by 2020, intensified control of dengue, schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminthiases. The plan consists of four strategic objectives: improving awareness of benefits of joint WASH and NTD actions; monitoring WASH and NTD actions to track progress; strengthening evidence of how to deliver effective WASH interventions; and planning, delivering and evaluating WASH and NTD programs with involvement of all stakeholders.

Additional health risks for women

Women tend to face a higher risk of diseases and illness due to limited WASH access. Heavily pregnant women face severe hardship walking to and from a water collection site. The consumption of unclean water leading to infection in the fetus accounts for 15% of deaths for women during pregnancy globally. Illnesses and diseases that can come from poor menstrual hygiene management become more likely when clean water and toilets are unavailable. In Bangladesh and India, women rely on old cloths to absorb menstrual blood and use water to clean and reuse them. Without access to clean water and hygiene, these women my experience unnecessary health problems in connection with their periods.

Health risks for sanitation workers

Effects of climate change on health risks
Global climate change can increase the health risks for some of the infectious diseases mentioned above, see below in the section on negative impacts of climate change.

In non-household settings
Non-household settings for WASH include the following six types: schools, health care facilities, workplaces (including prisons), temporary use settings, mass gatherings, and dislocated populations.

In schools

More than half of all primary schools in the developing countries with available data do not have adequate water facilities and nearly two thirds lack adequate sanitation. Even where facilities exist, they are often in poor condition. Children are able to more fully participate in school when there is improved access to water.

Lack of WASH facilities can prevent students from attending school, particularly female students. Strong cultural taboos around menstruation, which are present in many societies, coupled with a lack of Menstrual Hygiene Management services in schools, results in girls staying away from school during menstruation.

Reasons for missing or poorly maintained water and sanitation facilities at schools in developing countries include lacking inter-sectoral collaboration; lacking cooperation between schools, communities and different levels of government; as well as a lack in leadership and accountability.

Outcomes from improved WASH at schools
WASH in schools, sometimes called SWASH or WinS, significantly reduces hygiene-related disease, increases student attendance and contributes to dignity and gender equality. WASH in schools contributes to healthy, safe and secure school environments. It can also lead to children becoming agents of change for improving water, sanitation and hygiene practices in their families and communities.

For example, data from over 10,000 schools in Zambia was analyzed in 2017 and confirmed that improved sanitation provision in schools was correlated with high female-to-male enrolment ratios, and reduced repetition and drop-out ratios, especially for girls.

Methods to improve WASH in schools
Methods to improve the situation of WASH infrastructure at schools include on a policy level: broadening the focus of the education sector, establishing a systematic quality assurance system, distributing and using funds wisely. Other practical recommendations include: have a clear and systematic mobilization strategy, support the education sector to strengthen intersectoral partnerships, establish a constant monitoring system which is located within the education sector, educate the educators and partner with the school management.

The support provided by development agencies to the government at national, state and district levels is helpful to gradually create what is commonly referred to as an enabling environment for WASH in schools.

Success also hinges on local-level leadership and a genuine collective commitment of school stakeholders towards school development. This applies to students and their representative clubs, headmaster, teachers and parents. Furthermore, other stakeholders have to be engaged in their direct sphere of influence, such as: community members, community-based organizations, educations official, local authorities.

Group handwashing

Supervised daily group handwashing in schools is an effective strategy for building good hygiene habits, with the potential to lead to positive health and education outcomes for children. This has for example been implemented in the "Essential Health Care Program" by the Department of Education in the Philippines. Mass deworming twice a year, supplemented by washing hands daily with soap and brushing teeth daily with fluoride, is at the core of this national program. It has also been successfully implemented in Indonesia.

In healthcare facilities

The provision of adequate water, sanitation and hygiene is an essential part of providing basic health services in healthcare facilities. WASH in healthcare facilities aids in preventing the spread of infectious diseases as well as protects staff and patients. WASH services in health facilities in developing countries are currently often lacking.

According to the World Health Organization, data from 54 countries in low and middle income settings representing 66,101 health facilities show that 38% of health care facilities lack improved water sources, 19% lack improved sanitation while 35% lack access to water and soap for handwashing. The absence of basic WASH amenities compromises the ability to provide routine services and hinders the ability to prevent and control infections. The provision of water in health facilities was the lowest in Africa, where 42% of healthcare facilities lack an improved source of water on-site or nearby. The provision of sanitation is lowest in the Americas with 43% of health care facilities lacking adequate services.

In 2019, WHO estimated that: "One in four health care facilities lack basic water services, and one in five have no sanitation service – impacting 2.0 and 1.5 billion people, respectively." Furthermore, it is estimated that "health care facilities in low-income countries are at least three times as likely to have no water service as facilities in higher resource settings". This is thought to contribute to the fact that maternal sepsis is twice as great in developing countries as it is in high income countries.

Barriers to providing WASH in health care facilities include: Incomplete standards, inadequate monitoring, disease-specific budgeting, disempowered workforce, poor WASH infrastructure.

The improvement of WASH standards within health facilities needs to be guided by national policies and standards as well as an allocated budget to improve and maintain services. A number of solutions exist that can considerably improve the health and safety of both patients and service providers at health facilities:

 Availability of safe water for drinking but also for use in surgery and deliveries, food preparation, bathing and showering: There is a need for improved water pump systems within health facilities.
 Improved handwashing practices among healthcare staff must be implemented. This requires functional hand washing stations at strategic points of care within the health facilities, i.e. at points of care and at toilets.
 Waste system management: Proper health care waste management and the safe disposal of excreta and waste water is crucial to preventing the spread of disease.
 Hygiene promotion for patients, visitors and staff.
 Accessible and clean toilets, separated by gender, in sufficient numbers for staff, patients and visitors.
Improving access to hand washing and sanitation facilities in healthcare settings will significantly reduce infection and mortality rates, particularly in maternal and child health.

In prisons
In developing countries, prison buildings are very often overcrowded and dilapidated. A report by ICRC states that "Measures depriving persons of their freedom must in no way, whatever the circumstances, be made more severe by treatment or material conditions of detention which undermine the dignity and the rights of the individual.".The water supply systems and sanitary facilities in prisons are often insufficient to meet the needs of the prison population in cases where the number of detainees exceeds a prison's capacity. Overuse of the facilities results in rapid deterioration.

The budget allocated by the State for prisons is often insufficient to cover the detainees' needs in terms of food and medical care, let alone upkeep of water and sanitation facilities. Nevertheless, even with limited funds, it is possible to maintain or renovate decaying infrastructure with the right planning approaches and suitable low-cost water supply and sanitation options.

Impacts on women
Impacts on women and girls that come from lack of proper facilities include the burden of time required to collect water from distant water sources when there is no water access on the premises - as well as specific hygiene and privacy needs related to urination, menstruation, pregnancy, and birth. There are also restrictive gender norms for water-related occupations. Violence against women is another problem that can come from the fact that to access water or toilets women might have to leave the premises and travel some distances, often alone or in the dark.

Time required to collect water
The lack of accessible, sufficient, clean and affordable water supply has adverse impacts specifically related to women in developing nations. It is estimated that 263 million people worldwide spent over 30 minutes per round trip to collect water from an improved source. In sub-Saharan Africa, women and girls carry water containers for an average of three miles each day, spending 40 billion hours per year on water collection (walking to the water source, waiting in line, walking back). The time to collect water can come at the expense of education, income generating activities, cultural and political involvement, and rest and recreation. For example, in low-income areas of Nairobi, women carry 44 pound containers of water back to their homes, taking anywhere between an hour and several hours to wait and collect the water.

In many places of the world, getting and providing water is considered "women's work," so gender and water access are intricately linked. Water gathering and supply to family units remains primarily a woman's task in less developed countries where water gathering is considered a main chore. This water work is also largely unpaid household work based on patriarchal gender norms and often related to domestic work, such as laundry, cooking and childcare. Areas that rely on women to primarily collect water include countries in Africa, South Asia and in the Middle East.

Gender norms for occupations
Gender norms can negatively affect how men and women access water through such behavior expectations along gender lines—for example, when water collection is a woman's chore, men who collect water may face discrimination for performing perceived women's work. Women are likely to be deterred from entering water utilities in developing countries because "social norms prescribe that it is an area of work that is not suitable for them or that they are incapable of performing well". Nevertheless, a study by World Bank in 2019 has found that the proportion of female water professionals has grown in the past few years.

In many societies, the task of cleaning toilets falls to women or children, which can increase their exposure to disease.

Violence against women
Women and girls usually bear the responsibility for collecting water, which is often very time-consuming and arduous, and can also be dangerous for them. Women and girls who collect water may also face physical assault and sexual assault along the way (violence against women). This includes vulnerability to rape when collecting water from distant areas, domestic violence over the amount of water collected, and fights over scarce water supply. A study in India, for example, found that women felt intense fear of sexual violence when accessing water and sanitation services. A similar study in Uganda also found that women reported to feel a danger for their security whilst journeying to toilets particularly at night.

Challenges

Equitable access to drinking water supply
There are inequalities in access to water, sanitation and hygiene services. Such inequalities are for example related to income level and gender. In 2019 in 24 countries where disaggregated data was available, basic water coverage among the richest wealth quintile was at least twice as high as coverage among the poorest quintile. For example, in Bangladesh, minority ethnic groups have lower levels of access to WASH than the rest of the Bengali population. This is due to "structural racial discrimination" in Bangladesh.

Access to WASH services also varies internally within nations depending on socio-economic status, political power, and level of urbanization. In 2004 it was found that urban households are 30% and 135% more likely to have access to improved water sources and sanitation respectively, as compared to rural areas.

The human rights to water and sanitation prohibit discrimination on the grounds of "race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, disability or other status". These are all dimensions of inequality in WASH services.

Urban low income areas
There are three main barriers to improvement of urban services in slum areas: Firstly, insufficient supply, especially of networked services. Secondly, there are usually demand constraints that limit people's access to these services (for example due to low willingness to pay). Thirdly, there are institutional constraints that prevent the poor from accessing adequate urban services.

Water pollution

Water supply sources include surface water and groundwater. These important water resources are often at risk of being polluted or overused.

Failures of WASH systems

The failures of water supply systems (including water points, wells and boreholes) and sanitation systems have been well documented.  This has been attributed to financial costs, inadequate technical training for operations and maintenance, poor use of new facilities and taught behaviors, and a lack of community participation and ownership. The poorest populations often cannot afford fees required for operation and maintenance of WASH infrastructure, preventing them from benefitting even when systems do exist.

Contamination of water in distribution systems is a challenge and can contribute to the spread of waterborne diseases.

Working conditions of sanitation workers

Effectiveness of WASH interventions on health outcomes
There is debate in the academic literature about the effectiveness on health outcomes when implementing WASH programs in low- and middle-income countries. Many studies provide poor quality evidence on the causal impact of WASH programs on health outcomes of interest. The nature of WASH interventions is such that high quality trials, such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs), are expensive, difficult and in many cases not ethical. Causal impact from such studies are thus prone to being biased due to residual confounding. Blind studies of WASH interventions also pose ethical challenges and difficulties associated with implementing new technologies or behavioral changes without participant's knowledge. Moreover, scholars suggest a need for longer-term studies of technology efficacy, greater analysis of sanitation interventions, and studies of combined effects from multiple interventions in order to more sufficiently gauge WASH health outcomes.

Many scholars have attempted to summarize the evidence of WASH interventions from the limited number of high quality studies. Hygiene interventions, in particular those focusing on the promotion of handwashing, appear to be especially effective in reducing morbidity. A meta-analysis of the literature found that handwashing interventions reduced the relative risk of diarrhea by approximately 40%. Similarly, handwashing promotion has been found to be associated with a 47% decrease in morbidity. However, a challenge with WASH behavioral intervention studies is an inability to ensure compliance with such interventions, especially when studies rely on self-reporting of disease rates. This prevents researchers from concluding a causal relationship between decreased morbidity and the intervention. For example, researchers may conclude that educating communities about handwashing is effective at reducing disease, but cannot conclude that handwashing reduces disease. Point-of-use water supply and point-of-use water quality interventions also show similar effectiveness to handwashing, with those that include provision of safe storage containers demonstrating increased disease reduction in infants.

Specific types of water quality improvement projects can have a protective effect on morbidity and mortality. A randomized control trial in India concluded that the provision of chlorine tablets for improving water quality led to a 75% decrease in incidences of cholera among the study population. A quasi-randomized study on historical data from the United States also found that the introduction of clean water technologies in major cities was responsible for close to half the reduction in total mortality and over three-quarters of the reduction in infant mortality. Distributing chlorine products, or other water disinfectants, for use in the home may reduce instances of diarrhea. However, most studies on water quality improvement interventions suffer from residual confounding or poor adherence to the mechanism being studied. For instance, a study conducted in Nepal found that adherence to the use of chlorine tablets or chlorine solution to purify water was as low as 18.5% among program households. A study on a water well chlorination program in Guinea-Bissau in 2008 reported that families stopped treating water within their households because of the program which consequently increased their risk of cholera. It was concluded that well chlorination without proper promotion and education led to a false sense of security.

Studies on the effect of sanitation interventions alone on health are rare. When studies do evaluate sanitation measures, they are mostly included as part of a package of different interventions. A pooled analysis of the limited number of studies on sanitation interventions suggest that improving sanitation has a protective effect on health. A UNICEF funded sanitation intervention (packaged into a broader WASH intervention) was also found to have a protective effect on under-five diarrhea incidence but not on household diarrhea incidence.

Climate change aspects

Greenhouse gas emissions

Water and sanitation services contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. These emissions are grouped into three scopes in the international greenhouse gas protocol: direct emissions, as well as two types of indirect emissions (see below).

Direct emissions (Scope 1)
Scope 1 includes "direct emissions resulting directly from the activity". In the WASH sector, this is methane and nitrous oxide emissions during wastewater and sewage sludge treatment. Sanitation services produce about 2–6% of global human-caused methane emissions. Septic tanks, pit latrines, anaerobic lagoons, anaerobic digesters are all anaerobic treatment processes that emit methane which may or may not be captured (in the case of septic tanks it is usually not captured).

It has been estimated, using data from 2012 and 2013, that "wastewater treatment in centralized facilities contributes alone some 3% of global nitrous oxide emissions and 7% of anthropogenic methane emissions". Data from 2023 from centralized sewage treatment plants in the United States indicate that methane emissions are about twice the estimates provided by IPCC in 2019, i.e. 10.9 ± 7.0 compared to 4.3-6.1 MMT (million metric tons) CO2-eq/yr.

Current methods for estimating sanitation emissions underestimate the significance of methane emissions from non-sewered sanitation systems (NSSS). This is despite the fact that such sanitation systems are prevalent in many countries. NSSS play a vital role in the safe management of fecal sludge and account for approximately half of all existing sanitation provisions. The global methane emissions from NSSS in 2020 was estimated to be 377 Mt CO2e/year or 4.7% of global anthropogenic methane emissions. This is comparable to the greenhouse gas emissions from conventional wastewater treatment plants. Therefore, the GHG emissions from the non-sewered sanitation systems are a non-negligible source. India and China contribute extensively to methane emissions of NSSS because of their large populations and NSSS utilization.

Indirect emissions associated with the energy required (Scope 2)
Scope 2 includes "indirect emissions associated with the energy required by the activity". Companies that deal with water and wastewater services need energy for various processes. They use the energy mix that is available in the country. The higher the proportion of fossil fuels in the energy mix is, the higher the GHG emissions under Scope 2 will be high too. The processes that need energy include: water abstraction (e.g. groundwater pumping), drinking water storage, water conveyance, water treatment, water distribution, treatment of wastewater, water end use (e.g. water heating), desalination and wastewater reuse. For example, electrical energy is needed for pumping of sewage and for mechanical aeration in activated sludge treatment plants.

When looking at the emissions from the sanitation and wastewater sector most people focus on treatment systems, particularly treatment plants. This is because treatment plants require considerable energy input and are estimated to account for 3% of global electricity consumption.  This makes sense for high-income countries, where wastewater treatment is the biggest energy consumer compared to other activities of the water sector. The aeration processes that are used in many secondary treatment processes are particularly energy intensive (using about 50% of the total energy required for treatment). The amount of energy needed to treat wastewater depends on several factors: wastewater quantity and quality (i.e. how much and how polluted is it), treatment level required which in turn influences the type of treatment process that gets selected. The energy efficiency of the treatment process is another factor.

Indirect emissions related to the activity but caused by other organizations (Scope 3)
Scope 3 includes "indirect emissions related to the activity but caused by other organizations". The indirect emissions under Scope 3 are difficult to assess in a standardized way. They include for example emissions from constructing infrastructure, from the manufacture of chemicals that are needed in the treatment process and from the management of the by-product sewage sludge.

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions
Solutions exist to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of water and sanitation services. These solutions into three categories which partly overlap: Firstly "reducing water and energy consumption through lean and efficient approaches"; secondly "embracing circular economy to produce energy and valuable products"; and thirdly by "planning to reduce GHG emissions through strategic decisions". The mentioned lean and efficient approaches include for example finding ways to reduce water loss from water networks and to reduce infiltration of rainwater or groundwater into sewers. Also, incentives can to encourage households and industries to reduce their water consumption and their energy requirements for water heating. There is another method to reduce the energy requirements for the treatment of raw water to make drinking water out of it: protecting the quality of the source water better.

Methods that fall into the category of circular economy include: Reusing water, nutrients and materials; Low-carbon energy production (e.g. solar power on roofs of utility buildings, recovery of waste heat from wastewater, producing hydro-electricity by installing micro-turbines, producing energy from biosolids and sewage sludge. Strategic decisions around reducing GHG emissions include: awareness raising and education, governance that supports changing practices, providing economic incentive to conserve water and reduce consumption, and finally choosing low-carbon energy and supplies.

Negative impacts of climate change

The effects of climate change can have negative impacts on existing sanitation services in several ways, for example by damage and loss of services from floods and reduced carrying capacity of waters receiving wastewater. The weather and climate-related aspects (variability, seasonality and extreme weather events) have always had an impact on the delivery of sanitation services. But now, extreme weather events, such as floods and droughts, are generally increasing in frequency and intensity due to climate change in many regions. They affect the operation of water supply, storm drainage and sewerage infrastructure, and wastewater treatment plants.

Changes in the frequency and intensity of climate extremes could compound current challenges as water availability becomes more uncertain, and health risks increase due to contaminated water sources. The effects of climate change can result in a decrease of water availability, an increase of water necessity, damage to WASH facilities, and increased water contamination from pollutants. Due to these impacts, climate change can "exacerbate many WASH-related risks and diseases".

Climate change poses increased risks to WASH systems, particular in Sub-Saharan Africa where access to safely managed basic sanitation is low. In that region, it is the poorly managed WASH systems, for example in informal settlements, which make people more vulnerable to the effects of climate change than people elsewhere.

In terms of the water cycle, climate change can affect the amounts of soil infiltration, deeper percolation, and hence groundwater recharge. Also, rising temperature increases evaporative demand over land, which limits the amount of water to replenish groundwater.

Influence of climate change on waterborne diseases

Climate change adaptation

Adaptation efforts in the WASH sector include for example protection of local water resources (as these resources become source water for drinking water supply) and investigating improvements to the water supply and storage strategy. It might also be necessary to adjust the utility's planning and operation. Climate change adaptation policies need to consider the risks from extreme weather events. The required adaptation measures need to consider measures for droughts and those for floods. Adaptation measures for droughts include for example: reduce leakages in a pro-active manner, communicate restrictions on water use to consumers. Adaptation measures for floods include for example: Review the siting of the water and wastewater treatment plants in floodplains, minimize the impact of floodwater on operational equipment.

Nature-based solutions (NbS) can play an important role for climate change adaptation approaches of water and sanitation services. This includes ecological restoration (which can improve infiltration and thus reduce flooding), ecological engineering for wastewater treatment, green infrastructure for stormwater management, and measures for natural water retention.

Most National Adaptation Plans published by the UN Framework Convention for Climate Change include measures to improve sanitation and hygiene.

Engineers and planners need to adapt design standards for water and sanitation systems to account for the changing climate conditions. Otherwise these infrastructure systems will be more and more vulnerable in future. The same applies for other key infrastructure systems such as transport, energy and communications.

Improving climate resilience

Climate-resilient water services (or climate-resilient WASH) are services that provide access to high quality drinking water during all seasons and even during extreme weather events. Climate resilience in general is the ability to recover from, or to mitigate vulnerability to, climate-related shocks such as floods and droughts. Climate resilient development has become the new paradigm for sustainable development. This concept thus influences theory and practice across all sectors globally. This is particularly true in the water sector, since water security is closely connected to climate change. On every continent, governments are now adopting policies for climate resilient economies. International frameworks such as the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals are drivers for such initiatives.

Several activities can improve water security and increase resilience to climate risks: Carrying out a detailed analysis of climate risk to make climate information relevant to specific users; developing metrics for monitoring climate resilience in water systems (this will help to track progress and guide investments for water security); and using new institutional models that improve water security.

Climate resilient policies can be useful for allocating water, keeping in mind that less water may be available in future. This requires a good understanding of the current and future hydroclimatic situation. For example, a better understanding of future changes in climate variability leads to a better response to their possible impacts.

To build climate resilience into water systems, people need to have access to climate information that is appropriate for their local context. Climate information products are useful if they cover a wide range of temporal and spatial scales, and provide information on regional water-related climate risks. For example, government staff need easy access to climate information to achieve better water management.

Four important activities to achieve climate resilient WASH services include: First, a risk analysis is performed to look at possible implications of extreme weather events as well as preventive actions. Such preventive actions can include for example elevating the infrastructure to be above expected flood levels. Secondly, managers assess the scope for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and put in place suitable options, e.g. using more renewable energy sources. Thirdly, the water utilities ensure that water sources and sanitation services are reliable at all times during the year, also during times of droughts and floods. Finally, the management and service delivery models are strengthened so that they can withstand a crisis.

To put climate resilience into practice and to engage better with politicians, the following guide questions are useful: "resilience of what, to what, for whom, over what time frame, by whom and at what scale?". For example, "resilience of what?" means thinking beyond infrastructure but to also include resilience of water resources, local institutions and water users. Another example is that "resilience for whom?" speaks about reducing vulnerability and preventing negative developments: Some top-down interventions that work around power and politics may undermine indigenous knowledge and compromise community resilience.

Adaptive capacity for climate resilience
Adaptive capacity in water management systems can help to absorb some of the impacts of climate-related events and increase climate resilience. Stakeholders at various scales, i.e. from small urban utilities to national governments, need to have access to reliable information which details regional climate and climate change. For example, context-specific climate tools can help national policy makers and sub-national practitioners to make informed decisions to improve climate resilience. A global research program called REACH (led by the University of Oxford and funded by the UK Government's Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office) is developing and using such climate tools for Kenya, Ethiopia and Bangladesh during 2015 to 2024.

Planning approaches

National WASH plans and monitoring
UN-Water carries out the Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water (GLAAS) initiative. This work examines the "extent to which countries develop and implement national policies and plans for WASH, conduct regular monitoring, regulate and take corrective action as needed, and coordinate these parallel processes with sufficient financial resources and support from strong national institutions."

Many countries' WASH plans are not supported by the necessary financial and human resources. This hinders their implementation and intended outcomes for WASH service delivery.

As of 2022, it is becoming more common for countries to include "climate change preparedness approaches" in their national WASH plans. Preparedness in this context means working on mitigation, adaptation and resilience of WASH systems. Still, most national policies on WASH services do not set out how to address climate risks and how to increase the resilience of infrastructure and management.

Gender mainstreaming
The Dublin Statement on Water and Sustainable Development in 1992 included "Women Play a central part in the provision management and safeguarding of water" as one of four principles. In 1996, Worldbank published a Toolkit on Gender in Water and Sanitation. Gender-sensitive approaches to water and sanitation have proven to be cost effective. Water supply schemes in developing nations have shown higher success when planned and run with full participation of women in the affected communities.

The United Nations Interagency Network on Women and Gender Equality (IANWGE) established the Gender and Water Task Force in 2003. The Task Force became a UN-Water Task Force and took responsibility for the gender component of International Water for Life Decade (2005-1015). The task force's mandate ended in 2015.

History

The history of water supply and sanitation is the topic of a separate article.

The abbreviation WASH was used from the year 1988 onwards as an acronym for the Water and Sanitation for Health Project of the United States Agency for International Development. At that time, the letter "H" stood for health, not hygiene. Similarly, in Zambia the term WASHE was used in a report in 1987 and stood for Water Sanitation Health Education. An even older USAID WASH project report dates back to as early as 1981.

From about 2001 onwards, international organizations active in the area of water supply and sanitation advocacy, such as the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council and the International Water and Sanitation Centre (IRC) in the Netherlands began to use WASH as an umbrella term for water, sanitation and hygiene. WASH has since then been broadly adopted as a handy acronym for water, sanitation and hygiene in the international development context. The term WatSan was also used for a while, especially in the emergency response sector such as with IFRC and UNHCR, but has not proven as popular as WASH.

Society and culture

Global goals

Since 1990, the Joint Monitoring Program for Water Supply and Sanitation (JMP) of WHO and UNICEF has regularly produced estimates of global WASH progress. The JMP was already responsible for monitoring the UN's Millennium Development Goal (MDG) Target 7.C, which aimed to "halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation". This has been replaced in 2015 by the Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6), which is to "ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all" by 2030. To establish a reference point from which progress toward achieving the SDGs could be monitored, the JMP produced "Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene: 2017 Update and SDG Baselines".

Expanding WASH coverage and monitoring in non-household settings such as schools, healthcare facilities, and work places, is included in Sustainable Development Goal 6.

WaterAid International is a non-governmental organization (NGO) that works on improving the availability of safe drinking water in some the world's poorest countries.

Sanitation and Water for All is a partnership that brings together national governments, donors, UN agencies, NGOs and other development partners. They work to improve sustainable access to sanitation and water supply. In 2014, 77 countries had already met the MDG sanitation target, 29 were on track and, 79 were not on-track.

Awards
Important awards for individuals or organizations working on WASH include for example the Stockholm Water Prize since 1991 and the Sarphati Sanitation Awards since 2013, for sanitation entrepreneurship.

United Nations organs

 UNICEF - UNICEF's declared strategy is "to achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all". UNICEF includes WASH initiatives in their work with schools in over 30 countries.
UN-Water - an interagency mechanism which "coordinates the efforts of UN entities and international organizations working on water and sanitation issues".

Awareness raising through observance days
The United Nation's International Year of Sanitation in 2008 helped to increase attention for funding of sanitation in WASH programs of many donors. For example, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has increased their funding for sanitation projects since 2009, with a strong focus on reuse of excreta.

Awareness raising for the importance of WASH takes place through several United Nations international observance days, namely World Water Day, Menstrual Hygiene Day, World Toilet Day and Global Handwashing Day.

By country

See also

Human right to water and sanitation
Water issues in developing countries
Global Water Security & Sanitation Partnership
Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council
Sustainable Sanitation Alliance

References

External links
 Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) - UNHCR website
 Global Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Home - Healthy Water - Centres for Disease Control and Prevention website
Rural Water Supply Network (RWSN)

Drinking water
Sanitation
Water supply and sanitation by country
Water supply
Gender equality
Toilets
Hygiene
Articles containing video clips

WASH


A suspect is a person believed to have done something wrong, committed a crime or caused something bad to happen. In criminal law a person who is under suspicion or under investigation by law enforcement is considered a suspect. A prime suspect is believed by police to be the suspect who most probably committed a crime. A formal suspect may be arrested when the facts and circumstances would lead a reasonable person to believe a suspect may have committed a crime or is about to. In common law countries a suspect may have a defense attorney present while being questioned. The attorney may advise his or her client (the suspect) how to answer questions. Once a suspect is charged with a crime he or she becomes a defendant.

Questioning a suspect

Common law countries
In the past in common law countries, a suspect could not be questioned against their will. In the United Kingdom, under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, police can require suspects to be questioned. Suspects are now required to listen to all questions, but may legally refuse to answer a question. In the UK once a suspect has been formally charged, no questions may be asked. In France, however, a suspect may still be questioned after being charged. The suspect may still legally refuse to answer any question. In the United States, once a suspect becomes the prime suspect, they must be advised of their Miranda rights before they can be questioned. Then they may be formally questioned, with a defence attorney present if the suspect requests one.

Civil law countries
In civil law countries a suspect may be questioned by police and the judiciary. This is to decide if there is enough evidence against a subject to bring the suspect to trial. There are three phases to the investigation. The first phase is a suspect is questioned by police. In the second phase the suspect is questioned by a magistrate (called a juge d'instruction in France). The third phase is the trial conducted by a state prosecutor in front of a panel of judges or magistrates. Then, if the investigation trial shows a case is strong enough, it is brought before a tribunal for trial.

Terms confused with suspect

Person of interest
A person of interest is a non-legal term for someone police may be interested in. In some cases a person of interest may simply be someone who has information related to an investigation or could be a witness. Police may be suspicious of someone, but do not have enough evidence to justify calling them a suspect. Sometimes police also misuse the term 'person of interest' to mean the suspect. Another use of the term is by writers meaning simply an interesting person.

Perpetrator
Police and reporters sometimes misuse the term suspect to mean the perpetrator. A suspect is someone suspected of committing a crime. A perpetrator (slang perp) is a person who actually committed a crime. Good police work will eliminate suspects until they find the perpetrator (also called a culprit).

In the US and England, police have broad powers to arrest and detain suspects. In Canada police supposedly do not have that power. In a crime that gets a lot of publicity, police will sometimes detain a suspect for a period of time, then release them with no charges filed. Somehow the news media is informed of the release and a swarm of reporters and paparazzi are there to take pictures for next day's tabloids. Generally this is for a day or two in England. In the US it can be up to 72 hours. This process encourages the public to think of suspects as guilty, trusting the police would not arrest innocent people. This is sometimes called "rounding up the usual suspects". Sometimes police will call a suspect a perpetrator or person of interest and question them without giving a Miranda warning. This is a technicality since in the US police are required to give a Miranda warning if arresting a suspect. If after arresting and then questioning a suspect, police may decide they have the perpetrator. Then they will hand the case over to the district attorney.

References

Other websites
 How the World Treats Terrorist Suspects, National Geographic
 What are Miranda rights in other countries? Quora
 Is torture ever justified?
Criminal justice

Suspect


Dickinson Dam is a dam in Stark County, North Dakota, one and a half miles west of the town of Dickinson.

The earthen dam was completed by the United States Bureau of Reclamation in May 1950, impounding the Heart River.  The dam has a structural height of 65 feet and is 2275 feet along its crest.  The dam was expanded in 1981, and an auxiliary spillway with bascule gates added.

The dam creates the Dickinson Reservoir, renamed Edward Arthur Patterson Lake in 1959.  The reservoir holds 8612 acre-feet of water, used for agricultural irrigation, flood control, and for Dickinson's municipal needs.  No hydroelectric power is generated here.  The lake covers about 1,190 surface acres and 22 miles of shoreline.  Recreation available at the lake includes camping, fishing and boating.

References

Dams in North Dakota
Reservoirs in North Dakota
United States Bureau of Reclamation dams
Buildings and structures in Stark County, North Dakota
Bodies of water of Stark County, North Dakota
Dams completed in 1950

Dickinson Dam


Tempest and Sunshine is a 1910 American silent short drama produced by the Thanhouser Company. The film is an adaptation of Mary Jane Holmes's 1854 novel Tempest and Sunshine, and features the deceptive Tempest and the benevolent Sunshine being wooed by a Dr. Lacey. Tempest and Bill Jeffreys conspire against Sunshine. By intercepting the lovers' letters the doctor instead decides to marry Tempest, but Jeffreys interrupts the ceremony to reveal the conspiracy. The doctor and Sunshine are reunited. The novel was a popular subject of plays and vaudeville, but the Thanhouser adaptation appears to be the first film version for it predates the adaptations in The Complete Index to Literary Sources in Film. Released on June 28, 1910, the production received a favorable review in The Moving Picture News. The film is presumed lost.

Plot
The Moving Picture World synopsis states, "Planter Middleton, of Kentucky, has two beautiful daughters. One of them is known as Tempest and the other is Sunshine, because of their different dispositions. Sunshine is wooed by Bill Jeffreys, the village postmaster, whom she does not love and rejects. Later her heart is won by young Dr. Lacey from New Orleans. Soon after they become engaged, the doctor is compelled to return to his home city on business. During his absence, Tempest, who is in love with him, conspires with Bill Jeffreys to intercept the lovers' letters. They succeed in making Julia and the doctor each think the other is untrue. The doctor, in a spirit of pique, decides to marry Tempest. Sunshine remains true, and confides to no one the sorrow that she feels. Just as Tempest and the doctor are about to be married, the ceremony is interrupted by Jeffreys, who confesses the plot — having left a sick bed to do so. The guilty ones are forgiven and the lovers reunited."

Cast
The identification of the cast is uncertain, the only known credit attributed by Q. David Bowers is for Violet Heming in a leading role. According to a response in The Motion Picture Story Magazine, Anna Rosemond played the role of Tempest and Heming played the role of Sunshine. Violet Heming was the second leading lady of Thanhouser and worked for Thanhouser intermittently until her departure in the spring of 1911. Other cast members may have included the other leading players of the Thanhouser productions, possibly Frank H. Crane.

Production
The story for the production is an adaptation of Mary Jane Holmes's 1854 novel Tempest and Sunshine. The story is of two sisters, the deceitful Julia, nicknamed Tempest, and her benevolent sister Fanny, nicknamed Sunshine. The writer of the adapted scenario is unknown, but it was most likely Lloyd Lonergan. Lonergan was an experienced newspaperman employed by The New York Evening World while writing scripts for the Thanhouser productions. He was the most important script writer for Thanhouser, averaging 200 scripts a year from 1910 to 1915. The film director is unknown, but it may have been Barry O'Neil. Bowers does not attribute a cameraman for this production, but two possible candidates exist. Blair Smith was the first cameraman of the Thanhouser company, but he was soon joined by Carl Louis Gregory who had years of experience as a still and motion picture photographer. The role of the cameraman was uncredited in 1910 productions.

Release and reception
The single reel drama, approximately 1,020 feet long, was released on June 28, 1910. The Moving Picture News reviewed the film positively for its settings, photography and its acting. The reviewer added that the film is likely to please the audiences because of its happy ending with a wedding. The novel was a popular subject of stage productions; a production with Tom Lennon and his company was advertised to have broken many records in the 1909 season. Another production was put on by Gladys George and the Middle States Stock company in August 1910. The continued popularity of the novel would be evidenced by the future productions by other companies of the same subject with Independent Moving Pictures (IMP) making a two reel version in 1914. In 1915, Rialto for Gaumont Film Company produced another version of the work under the title Sunshine and Tempest. Other productions included a vaudeville team of "Sunshine and Tempest". These records make identifying the stage, vaudeville and different film showings difficult. Theaters specifically advertising the Thanhouser production included those in Kansas, and two theaters in Indiana. The work is sometimes omitted in large reference works, such as The Complete Index to Literary Sources in Film which includes the 1914 IMP production and a 1916 Dixie Film production. As a result, it appears that the Thanhouser production appears to be the earliest known film adaptation of the work, but it is presumed lost.

See also
 List of American films of 1910

References

External links

1910 films
1910 drama films
Silent American drama films
American silent short films
American black-and-white films
Thanhouser Company films
Lost American drama films
Films based on American novels
1910 lost films
American drama short films
1910s American films

Tempest and Sunshine


Rajapalaiyam taluk is a taluk of Virudhunagar district of the Indian state of Tamil Nadu. The headquarters of the taluk is the town of Rajapalaiyam.

Demographics
According to the 2011 census, the taluk of Rajapalaiyam had a population of 347,318 with 173,202  males and 174,116 females. There were 1005 women for every 1000 men. The taluk had a literacy rate of 74.84. Child population in the age group below 6 was 15,736 Males and 14,890 Females.

References

Virudhunagar district

Rajapalaiyam taluk


Kevin Basped (born May 19, 1988) is a former American football linebacker. He was signed by the New York Jets as an undrafted free agent in 2010. He played college football at Nevada.

Early years
Basped was born in Sacramento and was raised by father Frances Basped and adoptive mother Kathy Navarro. He attended Florin High School where he played football as a defensive end and tight end. As a senior in 2005, he recorded 18 tackles, 15 receptions for 259 yards, three fumble recoveries, and one blocked punt. He also competed in track & field.

College career
At the University of Nevada, Basped sat out the 2006 season as a redshirt. In 2007, he saw action in 13 games including five starts. He recorded 50 tackles, 4.0 sacks, two forced fumbles, and one fumble recovery. He ranked sixth in the Western Athletic Conference in tackles for loss with 11.5.

In 2008, Nigel Burton took over as Nevada's defensive coordinator and instituted a 4–3 scheme. The new system relied on the speed of Basped and fellow defensive lineman Dontay Moch to penetrate from the edge. That season, Basped saw action in all 13 games, where he recorded 50 tackles (35 solo and 18.5 for loss), 10.0 sacks, three broken-up passes, and three forced fumbles. Basped finished the season tied for 21st in the nation in number of quarterback sacks. The Western Athletic Conference (WAC) named him a first-team All-WAC defensive lineman.

Professional career

New York Jets
Basped was projected to be taken in the 5th–7th round in the 2010 NFL Draft. He went undrafted and signed with the New York Jets on April 27. He was waived on August 8. In the HBO reality show Hard Knocks, the Jets coaches explain to Kevin that his oft-injured knees were too much of a concern to take him on.

Spokane Shock
Basped was assigned to the Spokane Shock of the Arena Football League on December 20, 2013.

References

Living people
1988 births
Players of American football from Sacramento, California
Players of Canadian football from Sacramento, California
American football defensive ends
Canadian football defensive linemen
African-American players of American football
African-American players of Canadian football
Nevada Wolf Pack football players
New York Jets players
Omaha Nighthawks players
Hamilton Tiger-Cats players
Spokane Shock players
21st-century African-American sportspeople
20th-century African-American people

Kevin Basped


Kinship terminology is the system used in languages to refer to the persons to whom an individual is related through kinship. Different societies classify kinship relations differently and therefore use different systems of kinship terminology; for example, some languages distinguish between consanguine and affinal uncles (i.e. the brothers of one's parents and the husbands of the sisters of one's parents, respectively), whereas others have only one word to refer to both a father and his brothers. Kinship terminologies include the terms of address used in different languages or communities for different relatives and the terms of reference used to identify the relationship of these relatives to ego or to each other.

Historical view
Anthropologist Lewis Henry Morgan (1818–1881) performed the first survey of kinship terminologies in use around the world. Though much of his work is now considered dated, he argued that kinship terminologies reflect different sets of distinctions. For example, most kinship terminologies distinguish between sexes (the difference between a brother and a sister) and between generations (the difference between a child and a parent). Moreover, he argued, kinship terminologies distinguish between relatives by blood and marriage (although recently some anthropologists have argued that many societies define kinship in terms other than blood).

However, Morgan also observed that different languages (and, by extension, societies) organize these distinctions differently. He proposed to describe kinship terms and terminologies as either descriptive or classificatory. When a descriptive term is used, it can only represent one type of relationship between two people, while a classificatory term represents one of many different types of relationships. For example, the word brother in English-speaking societies indicates a son of the same parent; thus, English-speaking societies use the word brother as a descriptive term.  A person's male first cousin could be the mother's brother's son, mother's sister's son, father's brother's son, father's sister's son, and so on; English-speaking societies therefore use the word cousin as a classificatory term.

Morgan discovered that a descriptive term in one society can become a classificatory term in another society.  For example, in some societies, one would refer to many different people as "mother" (the woman who gave birth to oneself, as well as her sister and husband's sister, and also one's father's sister). Moreover, some societies do not group together relatives which the English-speaking societies classify together. For example, some languages have no one-word equivalent to cousin, because different terms refer to one's mother's sister's children and to one's father's sister's children.

Six basic patterns of kinship
Armed with these different terms, Morgan identified six basic patterns of kinship terminologies:

Hawaiian kinship
Hawaiian kinship: the most classificatory; only distinguishes between sex and generation.  Thus, siblings and cousins are not distinguished (the same terms are used for both types of relatives).

Sudanese kinship
Sudanese kinship: the most descriptive; no two types of relatives share the same term.  Siblings are distinguished from cousins, and different terms are used for each type of cousin (i.e. father's brother's children, father's sister's children, mother's sister's children and mother's brother's children).

Eskimo kinship
Eskimo kinship: has both classificatory and descriptive terms; in addition to sex and generation, it also distinguishes between lineal relatives (those related directly by a line of descent) and collateral relatives (those related by blood, but not directly in the line of descent). Lineal relatives have highly descriptive terms; collateral relatives have highly classificatory terms.  Thus, siblings are distinguished from cousins, while all types of cousins are grouped together.  The system of English-language kinship terms falls into the Eskimo type.

Iroquois kinship and its variations
Iroquois kinship: has both classificatory and descriptive terms; in addition to sex and generation, it also distinguishes between siblings of opposite sexes in the parental generation. A genealogical relationship traced through a pair of siblings of the same sex is classed as a blood relationship, but one traced though a pair of siblings of the opposite sex can be considered an in-law relationship. In other words, siblings are grouped together with parallel cousins, while separate terms are used for cross-cousins.  Also, one calls one's mother's sister "mother" and one's father's brother "father".  However, one refers to one's mother's brother and one's father's sister by separate terms (often the terms for father-in-law and mother-in-law, since cross-cousins can be preferential marriage partners).

The basic principles of Crow and Omaha terminologies are symmetrical and opposite, with Crow systems having a matrilineal emphasis and Omaha systems a patrilineal emphasis.

Crow kinship
Crow kinship: like Iroquois, but further distinguishes between one's mother's side and one's father's side. Relatives on the mother's side of the family have more descriptive terms, and relatives on the father's side have more classificatory terms.  Thus, Crow kinship is like Iroquois kinship, with the addition that a number of relatives belonging to one's father's matrilineage are grouped together, ignoring generational differences, so that the same term is used for both one's father's sister and one's father's sister's daughter, etc.

Omaha kinship
Omaha kinship: like Iroquois, but further distinguishes between one's mother's side and one's father's side. Relatives on the mother's side of the family have more classificatory terms, and relatives on the father's side have more descriptive terms.  Thus, Omaha kinship is like Iroquois, with the addition that a number of relatives belonging to one's mother's patrilineage are grouped together, ignoring generational differences, so that the same term is used for both one's mother's brother and one's mother's brother's son, etc.

Tri-relational kin-terms
A unique set of kin-terms common in some Australian Aboriginal languages are tri-relational—also called triangular, ternary, triadic and shared kin-terms—which encapsulate a set of relations between three distinct entities. Broadly, there are two kinds of tri-relational kin-terms. The more common is a Dual Propositus Tri-relational Kin-term which has one referent whose relationship is defined with respect to two anchor points (propositi) and from which the relation between the two propositi can be inferred. The less common are Tri-relational Dyadic Terms which reference a pair of related entities which (i.e., this dyad) is in some way to single propositus.

Dual Propositus Tri-relational Kin-terms

Terms of this type can be found in Murrinh-patha and Bininj Kunwok. The speaker and the addressee form two distinct propositi (P) who have unique relations to the referent (R). An example in Murrinh-patha is the term yilamarna. This term refers to the speaker's brother, who is also the uncle of the addressee; it is therefore also encoded in this term that the addressee is the child of the speaker. The term could be elaborated thus:

 The person (R)  who is my (PSpeaker) brother who is your (PAddresse) uncle by virtue of you being my child.

In Bininj Kunwok, the kin-term nakurrng can be either a regular (i.e. bi-relational) or tri-relational kin-term depending on the context. In the case in the illustration, the difference marked by the position of the possessive pronoun ke which either marks the addressee as the sole propositus or allows for a tri-relational interpretation:

 The person (R) who is your (PAddressee) maternal uncle and who is my (PSpeaker) nephew by virtue of you being my grandchild.

Tri-relational Dyadic Terms

In this kind of tri-relation, two referents (R1,R2) form a dyad via some relation (commonly marriage), and this dyad is in turn related to the speaker (the propositus) in some way. An example of a tri-relational dyadic term can be found in Gooniyandi.  Marralangi one way of referring to a husband and wife pair is specific to when either the husband or the wife is the opposite-sex sibling of the speaker. The denotation of marralangi is thus:

 Those two (R1,R2) who are a married couple wherein the husband (R1) is my (female, PSpeaker) brother.

Group/dyadic kin terms and pronouns

Dyadic Kin-terms
Australian Aboriginal languages tend to have extensive vocabularies for denoting kin-relations, including for referring to and addressing dyads and groups based on their relation to one another and/or to the speaker. For example, see below the complete inventory of group kin-terms in Bardi (some but not all of these are assessed with respect to the speaker as well and may thus be considered tri-relational dyadic terms:

The size of this dyadic kin-term inventory is not atypical of Australian languages. Though smaller, the Dyirbal dyadic kin-term inventory is also extensive (e and y stand for elder and younger):

In Murrinh-patha, nonsingular pronouns are differentiated not only by the gender makeup of the group, but also by the members' interrelation. If the members are in a sibling-like relation, a third pronoun (SIB) will be chosen distinct from the Masculine (MASC) and Feminine/Neuter (FEM).

Relative age
Some languages, such as Kannada, Telugu, Tamil, Turkish, Sinhalese, Chinese (see Chinese kinship), Japanese, Korean, Khmer, Malayalam, Vietnamese, Tagalog (Filipino), Hungarian, Bulgarian, Nepalese, and Nahuatl add another dimension to some relations: relative age. Rather than one term for "brother", there exist, for example, different words for "older brother" and "younger brother". In Tamil, an older male sibling is referred to as aṇṇā and a younger male sibling as thambi, whereas older and younger female siblings are called akkā and thangai respectively.
Languages which distinguish relative age may not have non-age relative kinship terms at all. In Vietnamese, all younger siblings are referred to with the ungendered term em, whereas older siblings are distinguished by sex: anh for males and chị for females.

Identification of alternating generations
Other languages, such as Chiricahua, use the same terms of address for alternating generations. So Chiricahua children (male or female) call their paternal grandmother -ch'iné, and likewise this grandmother will call her son's children -ch'iné. Similar features are seen also in Huichol, some descendant languages of Proto-Austronesian (e.g. Fordata, Kei, and Yamdena), Bislama, and Usarufa. Terms that recognize alternating generations and the prohibition of marriage within one's own set of alternate generation relatives (0, ±2, ±4, etc.) are common in Australian Aboriginal kinship.

The relative age and alternating-generations systems are combined in some languages.  For instance,
Tagalog borrows the relative age system of the Chinese kinship and follows the generation system of kinship. Philippine kinship distinguishes between generation, age and in some cases, gender.

Dravidian
Floyd Lounsbury described a possible seventh, Dravidian, type of terminological system; there is on-going discussion on whether this system is a sub-type of Iroquois or whether it is a distinct system that had been conflated with Iroquois in Morgan's typology of kin-term systems. Both systems distinguish relatives by marriage from relatives by descent, although both are classificatory categories rather than being based on biological descent. The basic idea is that of applying an even/odd distinction to relatives that takes into account the gender of every linking relative for ego's kin relation to any given person. A MFBD(C), for example, is a mother's father's brother's daughter's child. If each female link (M,D) is assigned a 0 and each male (F,B) a 1, the number of 1s is either even or odd; in this case, even. However, variant criteria exist. In a Dravidian system with a patrilineal modulo-2 counting system, marriage is prohibited with this relative, and a marriageable relative must be modulo-2 odd. There exists also a version of this logic with a matrilineal bias. Discoveries of systems that use modulo-2 logic, as in South Asia, Australia, and many other parts of the world, marked a major advance in the understanding of kinship terminologies that differ from kin relations and terminologies employed by Europeans.

The Dravidian kinship system involves selective cousinhood. One's father's brother's children and one's mother's sister's children are not cousins but brothers and sisters one step removed. They are considered consanguineous ( in Tamil), and marriage with them is strictly forbidden as incestuous. However, one's father's sister's children and one's mother's brother's children are considered cousins and potential mates ( in Tamil). Marriages between such cousins are allowed and encouraged. There is a clear distinction between cross cousins, who are one's true cousins and parallel cousins, who are, in fact, siblings.

Like Iroquois people, Dravidians use the same words to refer to their father's sister and mother-in-law ( in Tamil,  in Kannada, and  or  in Telugu) and their mother's brother and father-in-law ( in Tamil,  in Kannada, and  in Telugu).  In Kannada, distinction between these relationships may be made because  is added before  and  to specifically refer to one's father's sister and mother's brother respectively, although this term is not used in direct address.  In Tamil, however, only one's mother's brother is captioned with  before  because of the honor accorded this relationship.

Abbreviations for genealogical relationships
The genealogical terminology used in many genealogical charts describes relatives of the subject in question. Using the abbreviations below, genealogical relationships may be distinguished by single or compound relationships, such as BC for a brother's children, MBD for a mother's brother's daughter, and so forth.

B = Brother
C = Child(ren)
D = Daughter
F = Father
GC = Grandchild(ren)
GP = Grandparent(s)
H = Husband
LA = In-law
M = Mother
P = Parent
S = Son
SI = Siblings
SP = Spouse
W = Wife
Z = Sister
(m.s.) = male speaking
(f.s.) = female speaking

See also
Cognatic kinship
Cousin
Dyadic kinship term
Family
Fictive kinship
Genealogical numbering systems
Irish kinship
Marriage
Numerical variation in kinship terms

References

Inline citations

Sources referenced

 Murdock, G. P. (1949). Social Structure. New York: Macmillan.
 Kryukov, M. V. (1968). Historical Interpretation of Kinship Terminology. Moscow: Institute of Ethnography, USSR Academy of Sciences.
 Pasternak, B. (1976). Introduction to Kinship and Social Organization. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
 Pasternak, B., Ember, M., & Ember, C. (1997). Sex, Gender, and Kinship: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
 Saxena, R. T. (2012). A Sociolinguistic Study of Hindi and Telugu Kinship Terminology- Variations in the Number of Kinship Terms across the Languages: Linguistic, Social and Anthropological Perspectives. Germany: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing. A Sociolinguistic Study of Hindi and Telugu Kinship Terminology / 978-3-659-28451-9 / 9783659284519 / 3659284513

External links

Kin Naming Systems (part 1) and (part 2)  - from Palomar College

Family
Terminology
Anthropology

Kinship terminology


Patriots' Day (Patriot's Day in Maine) is an annual event, formalized as a legal holiday or a special observance day in six U.S. states, commemorating the battles of Lexington, Concord, and Menotomy, some of the first battles of the American Revolutionary War. The holiday occurs on the third Monday of April each year, with celebrations including battle reenactments and the Boston Marathon.

History
In 1894, the Lexington Historical Society petitioned the Massachusetts General Court to proclaim April 19 as "Lexington Day". Concord countered with "Concord Day". However, the biggest battle fought on this day was in the town of Menotomy—now Arlington, Massachusetts—on the Concord Road between Lexington and Boston. So Governor Frederic T. Greenhalge opted for a compromise: Patriots' Day.

Governor Greenhalge proclaimed Patriots' Day in Massachusetts in 1894, replacing Fast Day as a public holiday. It was established on April 19, commemorating the date of the Battles of Lexington and Concord and the larger Battle of Menotomy in 1775, and consolidating the longstanding municipal observances of Lexington Day and Concord Day. It also marked the first bloodshed of the American Civil War in the Baltimore riot of 1861. The dual commemoration, Greenhalge explained, celebrated "the anniversary of the birth of liberty and union".  It is likely that the battles that took place in Menotomy are not as well known as the smaller battles in Lexington and Concord because the town has had several names since that day in 1775. In 1938, the Massachusetts legislature passed a bill establishing the holiday "in commemoration of the opening events of the War of the Revolution".

Maine followed Massachusetts in 1907 and replaced its Fast Day with Patriot's Day.
On June 10, 2017, Governor Dannel Malloy signed a bill establishing Patriots' Day as a statewide unpaid holiday in Connecticut, and Connecticut became the fifth state to recognize the holiday on April 16, 2018. On March 19, 2019, Governor Doug Burgum signed a bill recognizing Patriots' Day in the state of North Dakota.

Description
The holiday was originally celebrated on April 19, the actual anniversary of the battles (fought in 1775). Since 1969, it has been observed on the third Monday in April in Massachusetts and in Maine (which until the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was part of Massachusetts).  The Monday holiday creates a three-day long weekend. It is also the first day of a vacation week for public schools in both states and a school holiday for many local colleges and universities, both public and private.

The day is a public school observance day in Wisconsin. Florida law also encourages people to celebrate it, though it is not treated as a legal holiday. Connecticut began observance in 2018 and North Dakota in 2019.

Observances and re-enactments of the battles occur annually at Lexington Green in Lexington, Massachusetts (around 6:00 am) and the Old North Bridge in Concord, Massachusetts (around 9:00 am) and in Arlington, Massachusetts on the Sunday before Patriot's Day. Tours are available of the Jason Russell House in Arlington, Massachusetts on Sunday and Monday. On Monday morning, mounted re-enactors with state police escorts retrace the Midnight Rides of Paul Revere and William Dawes, calling out warnings the whole way.

The most significant celebration of Patriots' Day is the Boston Marathon, which has been run every Patriots' Day since April 19, 1897 (except in 2020 and 2021) to mark the then-recently established holiday, with the race linking the Athenian and American struggles for liberty.

Sporting events
The Boston Marathon has been run on Patriots' Day every year since its inception in 1897, even during the World War years, except in 2020 and 2021. Therefore, sometimes the holiday is referred to as "Marathon Monday". However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2020 Boston Marathon was canceled, while the 2021 Boston Marathon was rescheduled to October 11.

The Boston Red Sox have been scheduled to play at home in Fenway Park on Patriots' Day every year since 1959. The game was postponed due to weather in 1959, 1961, 1965, 1967, 1984, and 2018. It was canceled in 1995 due to the baseball strike, and again in 2020 due to COVID-19. The game was played in 2013 despite the Boston Marathon bombing because it had finished before the bombs went off. From 1968 to 2006 the games started early, in the morning, around 11:00 am. The early start to these games usually resulted in the games' ending just as the runners headed through Kenmore Square. However, since 2007 the marathon has started between 9:30 am and 10:00 am, causing the racers to pass through Kenmore closer to the middle of the Red Sox game.

See also

 Bunker Hill Day
 Evacuation Day (Massachusetts)
 Minor American Revolution holidays
 Holidays of the United States

References

External links

 Patriots' Day information, via noblenet.org
 Information about Battle Reenactments, via battleroad.org
 The Battle of Menotomy via The Arlington Historical Society
 The Battle of Menotomy via historynet.com
 Massachusetts General Laws ch. 6, § 12
 The Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations General School Operations, Special observance day
 Maine Statutes Rev. 9-B, § 145

1894 establishments in Massachusetts
Recurring events established in 1894
Holidays related to the American Revolution
Massachusetts culture
April observances
State holidays in the United States
Holidays and observances by scheduling (nth weekday of the month)
Boston Marathon

Patriots' Day


This is a list of the National Register of Historic Places listings in Monroe County, Iowa.

This is intended to be a complete list of the properties and districts on the National Register of Historic Places in Monroe County, Iowa, United States.  Latitude and longitude coordinates are provided for many National Register properties and districts; these locations may be seen together in a map.

There are 11 properties and districts listed on the National Register in the county.

|}

See also

 List of National Historic Landmarks in Iowa
 National Register of Historic Places listings in Iowa
 Listings in neighboring counties: Appanoose, Lucas, Mahaska, Marion, Wapello

References

Monroe

Buildings and structures in Monroe County, Iowa


Christopher Andrew Egan (born 29 June 1984) is an Australian actor. He played Nick Smith in the Australian soap opera Home and Away from 2000 to 2003, and David Shepherd on the NBC television drama Kings. He also portrayed Alex Lannon in the Apocalyptic TV series, Dominion.

Life and career
Egan was born in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. He has appeared in several commercials and did some modelling, but his ability and ambition for acting came out when he performed in the Glen Street productions of Les Misérables and West Side Story. He also appeared in the TV soap Home and Away.

He has also been trained in gymnastics at the KICK Performance Group in Sydney. As well as competing in several eisteddfods at an early age, Egan has been able to use his gymnastics skills extensively in the thriller film Crush.

He moved to Los Angeles in 2003. In 2006, he appeared in the film adaptation of Christopher Paolini's novel Eragon. In 2007, he played a small role in Resident Evil: Extinction, the third movie in the Resident Evil series. In the summer of 2009, he shot the movie Letters to Juliet in Italy, with Amanda Seyfried, Vanessa Redgrave and Gael García Bernal.

Egan starred in Dominion, the Sci Fi supernatural action drama based on characters from the 2010 feature film Legion that starred Paul Bettany. Egan played Alex Lannon, a rebellious young soldier who discovers he is the unlikely savior of humanity.

Filmography

Film

Television

References

External links

1984 births
Living people
Australian male child actors
Australian male film actors
Australian male models
Models from Sydney
Australian male soap opera actors
Male actors from Sydney
20th-century Australian male actors
21st-century Australian male actors

Christopher Egan


Amazing America with Sarah Palin is an outdoors-themed reality television series starring Sarah Palin. Co-hosts for the first season included Jerry Carroll and actor Mark Christopher Lawrence. The show is produced by Pilgrim Films and Television. The Sportsman Channel, which aired Amazing America, bought twelve episodes for the first and second seasons. The channel said that the show had "triple-digit year-over-year growth in households and key demographics" and renewed it for 2015. The second season premiered on January 15, 2015 and wrapped up with the fifth episode on February 12.

References

External links

Sarah Palin
2014 American television series debuts
2015 American television series endings
2010s American reality television series

Amazing America with Sarah Palin


William Henry Tobey (1799 Hudson, Columbia County, New York – May 1878) was an American lawyer, banker and politician from New York.

Life
He studied law, was admitted to the bar in 1820, and practiced in New Lebanon. He was a member of the New York State Assembly (Columbia Co.) in 1838; Surrogate of Columbia County from 1841 to 1845; and a member of the New York State Senate (11th D.) in 1862 and 1863.

He was a Director of the National Bank of Kinderhook from 1839; and President of the National Union Bank of Kinderhook from 1853 until his death.

Sources
 The New York Civil List compiled by Franklin Benjamin Hough, Stephen C. Hutchins and Edgar Albert Werner (1870; pg. 265, 315 and 443)
 Biographical Sketches of the State Officers and the Members of the Legislature of the State of New York in 1862 and '63 by William D. Murphy (1863; pg. 111ff)
 The New York State Register by Roger Sherman Skinner (1830; pg. 157)
 The Village of Kinderhook by Capt. Franklin Ellis, transcribed at US Gen Net

1799 births
1878 deaths
New York (state) state senators
People from Hudson, New York
New York (state) Republicans
Members of the New York State Assembly
New York (state) Whigs
19th-century American politicians
American bankers
New York (state) state court judges
19th-century American judges
19th-century American businesspeople

William H. Tobey


Virginia Esther Hamilton (March 12, 1934 – February 19, 2002) was an African-American author of children's books. She was born and raised in Yellow Springs, Ohio.

Virginia Hamilton's mother was Etta Bella Perry Hamilton and her father was Kenneth James Hamilton. She attended Antioch College, Ohio State University, and New School for Social Research. On March 19, 1960 Hamilton married Arnold Adoff. They had two children together, Leigh Hamilton Adoff and Jamie Levi Adoff.

Virginia Hamilton wrote mainly about African American folktales and heritage.  Hamilton wrote her stories first thinking about characterization, settings, and themes, then touching on racial topics.  She also wrote about social issues, sibling rivalry, and peer pressure.

She received many awards for her writing. For M. C. Higgins, the Great, a tale of a black boy growing up poor in the South, she won the U.S. National Book Award and the Newbery Medal in 1975.  For lifetime achievement, she won the international Hans Christian Andersen Award for writing children's literature in 1992 and a Laura Ingalls Wilder Medal in 1995.  Because of the racial discrimination against African Americans during her lifetime, her achievements are especially important.

She died in Dayton, Ohio of breast cancer.

References

Wolf, Virginia L. "Hamilton, Virginia." World Book Advanced. World Book, 2015. Web. Accessed 23 Mar. 2015

1934 births
2002 deaths
African American writers
Cancer deaths in Ohio
Writers from Ohio

Virginia Hamilton