Brundtland’s definition of sustainability is the ability to “meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs” (IISD, 2021). But what if there are no future generations? Social sustainability, the sector of sustainability that foregrounds the well-being and livelihoods of people (and thereby continuation of humanity), is included in definitions within the sustainability field, but less developed in sustainability practice. In an effort to bridge this gap of knowledge, 14 U.S. cities and over 100 sustainability policies were analyzed for their social sustainability performance. An eight-item analytical framework that deals with differing areas of social equity guided the analysis. Results found that most cities’ sustainability departments fell short of truly addressing social sustainability concerns. Out of the eight items, the most frequently addressed were housing security and racial and gender equality whereas few, if any, cities addressed the more specific social concerns of immigration, technology and media, or arts/cultural preservation. Future research is recommended to gain a better understanding of the ways existing cities can improve in this area.

Ankle monitors are not the bright, kind alternative to incarceration that they are made to be. Advocates propose them as a solution to overcrowded carceral sites and excessive federal expenditure on public corrections agencies. Their logic being we can release certain incarcerated people to reduce prison, jail, and detention center populations and require them to pay for their monitoring to reduce prison expenditures. While there is potential for ankle monitors to achieve these aspirations, it is necessary to recognize how and where they can produce harm. Rather than being an alternative to incarceration, ankle monitors are a method of incarceration. They serve the same functions and hold the same power as prisons and jails with a more elusive form. In the current implementation of ankle monitors, we see individual bodies being transformed into sources of data to be capitalized upon by the government and private companies. Along with this, there is a shift of the financial burden of incarceration from prisons to the person being punished. This acts to further perpetuate the cycles of poverty and financial oppression that are seen within traditional forms of incarceration. Ankle monitor advocates also claim ankle monitors allow incarcerated people to enjoy freedom beyond prison walls and reintegrate into society. In reality, this is an oversimplification of freedom. Individuals with ankle monitors find themselves to be limited in their freedoms by restricted movement and stigmatization. They are unable to live a “normal” life because their ankle monitors prevent them from doing so. These people cannot move as they please, they cannot find and hold employment, and they cannot interact with people like they normally would. Ankle monitor usage must be critically examined and altered if it is to be considered a meaningful, gentle alternative to incarceration.

Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome (MRKH) is a congenital disease that affects the female reproductive organs, causing them to be either malformed or completely absent. Much of the research regarding MRKH primarily focuses on the biological aspects of the disease and ignores the social impacts of the disease. I have conducted research to assess three of the underlying factors affecting women with the disease and gained a better understanding of how this disease affects these individuals and creates new obstacles for them throughout their lives. I found that for many women with MRKH, the decision to pursue treatment is greatly influenced by their environments and communities. Treatments range from something minor like vaginal dilation to much more controversial and riskier experimental treatments like uterine transplant surgery to experience pregnancy. Patients often experience “gender role insecurity” based on the cultural norms of their society. Gender role insecurity is the concern that gender norms may go unfulfilled, and even affects the relationships between women with MRKH and those who do not have the disease. This is a concern that women feel due to social pressures and standards. Gender role insecurity is important because it lets us understand what women with MRKH feel they lack in terms of their femininity and why medical intervention is so highly prioritized. Some societies and cultures with a more traditional background have a greater influence regarding the treatment options that MRKH women pursue. By analyzing support groups and online message boards, it seems that these support groups give women with MRKH the support and freedom to explore a range of treatment options, away from significant social pressures.

This study looked at student’s perceptions of COVID-19 and differences in how universities handled COVID-19. It aimed to assess what measures made students feel safe and were the most effective in lessening spread. A risk-perception survey scored feelings of safety/risk, and semi-structured interviews provided context. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis showed mixed opinions on university measures, and interviews identified wearing masks, social distancing, isolating, and limiting social contacts as measures that were effective in curbing spread.

Developing a vaccine during the midst of a pandemic requires a careful balance between <br/>speed, safety, and efficacy. For the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. implemented Operation Warp Speed to accelerate the timeline for vaccine development. The FDA also imposed specific guidelines for granting Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). As of April 1st, 2021, Operation Warp Speed resulted in three different vaccines receiving EUA, all of which are currently being administered to the public. However, the rapid production and changes in the approval process intensified public scrutiny on the safety and efficacy of the vaccine. This thesis analyzes the differences in fast-tracking a vaccine, which consolidated the authorization process into months rather than years, and delineates the main concerns of the public regarding the COVID-19 vaccine through a media analysis. Although the EUA raised questions about the safety of the vaccine, polls indicate that most Americans would still be willing to receive the vaccine.

This podcast highlights the voices of organizers and activists across the nation. Representatives from various organizations and individual activists provide their experiences in working within reproductive health activist spaces. By listening to their stories and expertise, the hope is for listeners to center Reproductive Justice as a point of view. The goal is to encourage the audience to join an organization, support their local organizations, or at the very least, learn about resources provided to them by local and national organizations.