This article was originally published by Coda’s editorial partner EurasiaNet.

Last summer, Crimean Tatar political activist Ilmi Umerov was receiving treatment for high blood pressure in a Simferopol hospital when FSB officers showed up one day and hauled him off to a psychiatric facility for an evaluation.

Umerov, a former deputy chairman of the Mejlis, the Crimean Tatar representative body, had been a vocal critic of Russia’s annexation of Crimea. In May 2016, the FSB charged him with criminal separatism after he declared, in Tatar: “We must force Russia to withdraw from Crimea.”

At the psychiatric facility, a doctor quickly let him know that he would be punished, not treated. “You just need to admit that you’re wrong, and everybody will stop bothering you,” Umerov, in an interview with Euromaidan Press, quoted the doctor as saying. “Simple as that.”

When Umerov would not make a deal, he was detained at the facility. The conditions he endured were appalling. According to his lawyers, he was kept in an overcrowded room with severely mentally ill patients, denied access to his heart and diabetes medications, and forced to go long stretches of time without food.

At the psychiatric facility, a doctor quickly let him know that he would be punished, not treated. “You just need to admit that you’re wrong, and everybody will stop bothering you,”

Umerov was released three weeks later, but he remained subject to criminal prosecution. His trial commenced in June.

Human rights activists point to Umerov’s case as an indicator of a troubling resurgence of punitive psychiatry in the former Soviet space. The practice of using psychiatry to punish religious and political dissidents, including many well-known writers and artists, became notorious during the late Soviet era. The method was reportedly the brainchild of then-KGB Chairman Yuri Andropov, who saw psychiatry as a tool of systematic political repression: victims would be released only after retracting “wrong ideas” that the authorities deemed dangerous to Kremlin rule.

Discarded after the Soviet collapse, punitive psychiatry has reappeared again in Russia under President Vladimir Putin, as well as in some neighboring states.

Over the past five years across the former Soviet Union, more than 30 similar instances have been documented in which activists and journalists have been improperly detained in psychiatric institutions, sometimes for as long as 10 years, reports the Federation Global Initiative on Psychiatry (FGIP), a human rights watchdog. Experts say the real number of victims could be considerably higher.

They include teenagers as well as adults. In May 2016, 16-year-old Gleb Astafyev was confined to a psychiatric institution for 15 days after staging a solitary picket in Kurgan, Russia. He had been demonstrating in support of the dissident performance artist Pyotr Pavlensky, who himself had spent a month in a mental hospital earlier that year.

Astafyev says that his hospital stay included five days in the special ward for the most mentally ill, some of whom yelled and pounded their fists at night. “Every morning we were given pills to take, but I managed to spit them out. I don’t know what the medication was — it seemed to turn people into vegetables,” he told EurasiaNet.org in an interview.

The irony is that people often develop mental health issues precisely because of the conditions in the psychiatric hospitals, and the forced drugging, says Robert van Voren, the head of FGIP.

“Every morning we were given pills to take, but I managed to spit them out. I don’t know what the medication was — it seemed to turn people into vegetables,” he told EurasiaNet.org in an interview.

A case in point is the Chelyabinsk activist Alexei Moroshkin, forced to spend 18 months in a psychiatric clinic until his release this June. He was reportedly given high doses of neuroleptics and developed depression, a condition he had not previously had.

Moroshkin was arrested in 2015 for promoting separatism on social media, where he lauded Ural nationalism and criticized central authority. A criminal court ruled that he be institutionalized as a “danger to society.”

This allegation bears particular weight in Russia and other post-Soviet societies, where mental health problems are still stigmatized. Today, as in Soviet times, psychiatric imprisonment of activists is preventative as well as punitive. In addition to sending a warning to politically active citizens, the stigma of mental illness tacitly undermines the credibility of confined individual in the public eye.

The misuse of psychiatry is making a comeback in Central Asia too. The most prominent recent case in the region is that of the Jamshid Karimov, an Uzbek independent journalist and a strident critic of the late President Islam Karimov who was also his uncle.

In 2006, Jamshid Karimov disappeared and was later found to have been forcibly hospitalized in Samarkand. Although initially ordered by a criminal court to undergo six months of treatment, Karimov was in fact not released until late 2011 – only to be readmitted for another five years shortly thereafter.

Karimov attributes his ultimate release, this past March, to his uncle’s death in 2016 after 27 years in power. Since Karimov’s death, Uzbekistan’s new leadership appears to be pursuing a cautious thaw.

“I was hospitalized for so long because I was a personal enemy,” he said in an interview with Eurasianet.org. “I was kept in a dark room with bars on the windows and forced to take psychotropic drugs. There was always a guard watching me during visits from my family.”

His chief psychiatrist repeatedly urged him to disassociate himself “from bad, evil people,” he adds. He believes this was a reference to his colleague Ulugbek Khaidarov, another journalist who was arrested and found guilty of treason in 2006.

If post-Soviet governments had designed punitive psychiatry to enforce political conformity, then the method cannot be considered entirely successful. Activists and their supporters have often reacted to the treatment by redoubling their efforts.

A year on, the teenage Russian protester Astafyev reflects on the picket that led to his hospitalization: “The point was to show how Russian authorities react to opponents who are not afraid of expressing their views. The fact that I was put into a psychiatric facility showed their misunderstanding and blind condemnation of people who are different in society.”


Need support

Jun 13, 2007

Positive since 2001 with CD 500+ and VL <500. I'm currently on Trizivir and is doing well physically and staying active. Lately even my spouse notice that my mood is running everywhere. At times I'll have emotion outburst. It's freightening my spouse and my kids. I saw psychiatrists before, but they seemed to be little help. What else could I do? I'm afraid that I might slip into depression.

Response from Dr. Horwath

You should consult with a mental health professional, such as a psychiatrist or psychologist, to be evaluated. I don't know why it wasn't helpful in the past. Perhaps you didn't see the right person. In any case, it's worth another try because the mood lability and emotional outbursts need to be evaluated and treated before they do more harm. This problem has already frightened your family and should be treated before it gets worse.

This forum is designed for educational purposes only, and experts are not rendering medical, mental health, legal or other professional advice or services. If you have or suspect you may have a medical, mental health, legal or other problem that requires advice, consult your own caregiver, attorney or other qualified professional.

Experts appearing on this page are independent and are solely responsible for editing and fact-checking their material. Neither TheBody.com nor any advertiser is the publisher or speaker of posted visitors' questions or the experts' material.

The Body is a service of Remedy Health Media, LLC, 750 3rd Avenue, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10017. The Body and its logos are trademarks of Remedy Health Media, LLC, and its subsidiaries, which owns the copyright of The Body's homepage, topic pages, page designs and HTML code. General Disclaimer: The Body is designed for educational purposes only and is not engaged in rendering medical advice or professional services. The information provided through The Body should not be used for diagnosing or treating a health problem or a disease. It is not a substitute for professional care. If you have or suspect you may have a health problem, consult your health care provider.


Inhibition of Nicotine Dependence by Curcuminoid Is Associated with Reduced Acetylcholinesterase Activity in the Mouse Brain.
Nicotine is a stimulatory component in tobacco that activates the central nervous system reward pathway and causes nicotine dependence. We found that the anti-inflammatory agent, curcuminoid, prevents nicotine dependence and relapse, as assessed by the conditioned placed preference test. Curcuminoid (1, 3.2, and 10 mg·kg-1, oral) dose-dependently inhibited nicotine dependence and enhanced nicotine extinction when administrated 30 min prior to nicotine administration (0.5 mg·kg-1, i.p.) for 7 days. In addition, curcuminoid significantly suppressed the priming effects of nicotine and inhibited acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity. Taken together, curcuminoid ameliorates nicotine dependence and relapse, in part via the inhibition of the AChE activity in the brain.


DVDActive uses cookies to remember your actions, such as your answer in the poll. Cookies are
also used by third-parties for statistics, social media and advertising. By using this website, it is
assumed that you agree to this.

Halloween: 25 Years of Terror (US - DVD R1)

It's a great time to be a Halloween fan. All eight films of the franchise have found their way to DVD with four of them getting due treatment. On top of that, it's recently been announced that audiences will be getting a Rob Zombie written and directed re-imagining of the original, good news to this reviewer. Amid all the excitement, Anchor Bay Entertainment is releasing what I'd call the Halloween fan's wet dream: an extensive documentary covering the entire series coupled with a disc of bonus materials totalling over six hours of content.

Feature In 1978, filmmaker John Carpenter made a landmark motion picture that brought forth an entirely new sub-genre of (often really bad) horror film: the slasher flick. The film was Halloween, and not only was it the first of it's kind, it was the best. The crucial element that has kept the film terrifying audiences even still today is that the villain wasn't a fictitious monster, but rather a man as mortal as the victims he would claim. Another smart move was setting the story in a quiet suburban town, a community too peaceful for evil to rear its ugly head, right? Halloween went on to spawn seven sequels, a number of novels, and a line of comic books. 25 Years of Terror examines the production of each film in the series and their subsequent public responses. It also tackles an issue that's plagued these films; do violent films inspire violence in audience members?

When I look at 25 Years of Terror, I don't see a documentary per se, but rather a massive collection of segments that tell the story of the franchise. The entire release is, in a word, exhaustive, in terms of information given. It is in two words, wonderfully exhaustive, in that fans can't ask for much more*. This is the ultimate companion piece to the series. The backdrop for 25 Years of Terror was the 'Halloween Returns to Haddonfield' convention held in Pasadena, California back in October, 2003. The event boasted a massive gathering of series alumni, and a hefty amount of the interviews seen here are from this convention. Narrated by actress P.J. Soles of the original, this is an absolute treat for any fan of the first great horror movie slasher.

Leaving no stone unturned (even giving the much under-appreciated Season of the Witch due love), 25 Years of Terror begins by discussing the cinematic climate that the original was birthed into and then follows each sequel up until the most recent flop Halloween Resurrection. Heck, it even covers the Hellraiser crossover that nearly went down with an enthusiastic Clive Barker giving viewers the story. The cover artwork boasts the set to be a revealing look at the series, and that it is.

The greatest strength of the documentary is that it knows who its audience is, much unlike the eighty-seven minute documentary Anchor Bay produced for the original's 25h Anniversary Divimax release. Instead of telling us what we already know and padding it together with long film clips, we're given a fast-paced product, chock full of new information. No doubt, this documentary is made for the fan who thinks they know it all. Even so, it doesn't assume it's viewer knows anything about Halloween, which means anyone can follow it. Be warned however, the endings to every film are revealed as are many of the death scenes.

I have to applaud any documentary based on a film franchise that isn't afraid to say which entries sucked and which entries didn't. The filmmakers are far from hesitant to tell the camera why each subsequent instalment succeeded or didn't, bringing to light several backstage issues that before now, were unclear to fans. Find out why John Carpenter left and never returned from the man himself, among other seldom-spoken of behind the scenes disputes. It all comes down to a product that's brutally honest with its audience, something I very much appreciated.

Horror auteurs Rob Zombie and Clive Barker are interviewed for the set and have several fascinating viewpoints to share. It's no surprise that Barker brings great insight to the documentary; the man is very knowledgeable on horror as we've seen in several other documentaries. Zombie's thoughts on why the original worked (and the sequels didn't) should ease the fan's minds weary of his upcoming film. The man knows his Halloween well, and this interview is supposedly before he signed on.

As a sign that I'm not just a rabid fan obligatorily praising a two-disc set devoted to his favourite franchise (even though, I am), there was at least one thing that I didn't care for. Numerous works of fan-art are thrown into the documentary in-between footage and interviews where they have no place. Don't show me a 2006 artist's rendering of a scene from Halloween III: Season of the Witch during that segment because the flick was made in 1982; making it irrelevant. Let's leave the fan-art in the gallery on disc two where it belongs.

For this fan, the most enjoyable moments of 25 Years of Terror were those in which new or rare footage was shown. Seeing the late great Donald Pleasence discussing his role on the set of the original (below screenshot) is a delight, the man is a fantastic actor. We get to watch little Danielle Harris terrorize Halloween 5's crew while wearing her uncle's mask, and are even treated to several costume tests done for part seven (below). In this way, the documentary is a treasure trove of home video moments from the past twenty-five years of Halloween.

That's all I can say for the feature presentation itself as this type of documentary doesn't lend itself easily to plot description. Bottom line, it's a highly detailed look at a great horror franchise nearly thirty years old. Likewise, it's somewhat immune to the level of critique I usually hit DVDs with because it's made for a very specific audience; and to that purpose, it's highly satisfying. It's also worth mentioning that almost every feature on this two-disc features closed-captioning, something I really have come to appreciate on DVD releases and I'm sure others will too.

*Sure you could ask for your ultimate cut of II, producer's cut of Curse and extended editions of both H20 and Resurrection, but those decisions are in the hands of Universal and Miramax, not Anchor Bay. While you're asking for those, go ahead and ask for decent theatrical editions of parts two, three, six and seven because little ole Anchor Bay is seriously upstaging the other, much larger distributors.

Video 25 Years of Terror is presented in it's native 1:33:1 full screen ratio, although many clips and interviews are presented in letterboxed widescreen format. Since the documentary contains footage gathered from a variety of sources, the quality is understandably varied. Footage of screen tests are very poor, but considering the source, we can't blame anyone. On-set video from the later films is somewhat better, although clearly still shot on VHS tape. Interviews and convention material look the best, appearing to have been shot digitally. Chances are, you won't much care about the inconsistent quality as things probably look as good as they possibly can.

Audio The disc is outfitted with a Dolby Digital 2.0 track, and we can't reasonably ask for anything more. It should go without saying that the audio of older clips and interviews isn't nearly as pleasing as those taken at the convention, so again quality varies, although not as much as video. If anyone goes into this set hinging their opinion of it around the disc's technical presentation, they're going into it all wrong. I can easily hear what's being said on-screen, and that's enough to satisfy me.

Extras First things first, as I open the case I find a comic book titled Halloween Autopsis. I haven't followed the Halloween comic series too closely, but if they're anything like Autopsis then they're worth checking out. Also included is a fold-out insert, host to a chapter listing and heart-felt message from set producer Anthony Masi about the convention, documentary, and tragic loss of series producer (more like father) Moustapha Akkad.

'Horror's Hallowed Grounds' is a seventeen minute look at locations used throughout the first film, hosted by Sean Clark of Dread Central. Clark has really done his homework with some great archival coverage of the Myers house done here. Actress P.J. Soles puts in an appearance, adding to this 'totally' great feature. I'd be very interested to see more of this show, if only I got the Horror Channel.

Next up are extended interviews for films two and three, which collectively feature ten people spread over twenty-five minutes of interview time. These are all fun thanks to participant enthusiasm, but were all a little too specific to be featured in the documentary. Extended celebrity interviews run thirty-six minutes and feature Charles Cyphers, Dick Warlock, P.J. Soles, Alan Howarth, Greg Nicotero, John Carl Buechler and a slew of other folks. Very enjoyable, these extended interviews almost feel like an excised portion of the documentary itself. Almost...

' Halloween 5 On-Set Footage' contains seven minutes of promotional material for those who didn't give their part five fix from the main feature. You can also find this footage of Anchor Bay's Halloween 5 Divimax Special Edition DVD. Following that is a three minute bit ' Halloween 9 Contest', which awards one lucky fan a cameo in the next Halloween. Moving along, we have a four minute convention montage set to a very fast-pace. If you didn't get to attend the celebration, this feature will make you hate yourself. Rounding out disc one is an eight minute 'Fans of Halloween segment, which is scarier than all eight films combined. I found myself pausing and rewinding this feature quite a bit, as I frequently laughed too hard to catch it all on the first run.

Starting off disc two, we have panel discussions for films one, two, and six. I dare not use the word 'family' in describing the filmmaker/fan relationship of the series, but it's something like that and these discussions show it. If fans are too rabid on a franchise, it can scare away the people who made it ( Star Wars, Star Trek, etc.) but there's a fine balance here. On top of the informative nature of these discussions, they had me howling with laughter. Convention attendees ask some great questions and occasionally request the performers to recite lines/monologues, something to make any fan squeal with joy. Together, they run an hour and some change.

What could be next? More discussion panels, of course! Actress Ellie Cornell has a fifteen minute panel where she speaks of her involvement in films four and five. The lovely Ms. Cornell is both easy on the eyes and ears making her panel a treat. The next is nearly half an hour in length and features the actors who played Michael Myers from all eight films together on one stage, an awesome sight. Sadly absent is Nick Castle who did most of the Myers part in the original. Taking his place is Jim Winburn, responsible for the balcony stunt in part one, so it's not so bad. Do I really need to evaluate this feature? A must-watch, period.

A panel of particular interest to me (and all of these are) is the twenty-five minute discussion with cinematographer Dean Cundey. The man is a legend of cinema and he gives a great account of his involvement in telling the visual story of the original. This is something any fan of filmmaking can appreciate. The final panel is a twenty-two minute chat with original producer Irwin Yablans and series producer Moustapha Akkad. Akkad is a gentle soul and loves his fan-base, something clearly evidenced here. This would have been one of his final public appearances (if not his last), making this a special segment. There you have it; over two and a half hours of panel discussion footage on disc two alone.

Next up is a large location stills gallery showcasing areas filmed in the first, third, and seventh entries of the series. Following that is an original artwork gallery filled with fantastic pieces, some serious, some spoof. The final and largest gallery on the disc is a convention behind the scenes gallery, which further fuels my self-hatred for not attending the convention. Concluding the extras on disc two is a song 'Pure Evil' by Vicious Disorder, a rock and roll version of Carpenter's classic theme. It's not half bad...

Overall For casual and hardcore fans, this set is a must-own and it's because of this that I'm beginning to question why I'm reviewing it at all. Won't everyone prone to buy this documentary already have done so or made plans to? Regardless, I'm willing to claim that 25 Years of Terror may be the most extensive look at any film franchise outside of those containing the word Star in their title. You did good, Anchor Bay... very good.

Advertisements

Comments

Reply

Message

Enter the message here then press submit. The username, password and message are required. Please make the message constructive, you are fully responsible for the legality of anything you contribute. Terms & conditions apply.

The shoot was pretty much straight forward for H20 and the only alternate footage is available as a bootleg. There's only minor changes like a name here and a movie on TV there. Otherwise, it was never filmed.

As for the H4 screener, it's just a promotional tape. I really wanted it, but I'm burnt out and have been for a long time and don't even pay attention to the screeners I have.

Disciple, don't mean to be disagreeable but I've heard from sources that scene was *written* but not shot. Dimension does have quite a handful of deleted scenes for H20 though.

Franchise, what's this about an H4 screener? We talking alternate cut or just promotional tape?... was it legit? We know they've held out on H5 deleted scenes, thanks to Fangoria's onset coverage from the 80s.

There are a lot of scenes that are mistakenly thought that are filmed but are not. I've been wrong before (who'd have known there was an H4 screener when no one's ever seen one when one popped up on eBay last week?), but I think we'd have some kind of information on anything filmed later in the series considering they've kept almost all the footage they've filmed.

H20 did ignore the storyline of Halloween 4-6 in the final cut. But if i'm not mistaken I think they actually did shoot a scene that was supposed to bring all the films together. That's why Laurie Strode is in the witness protecion program under another name. They faked her death. I think they explained that she died in a car crash before the events of Halloween 4.

Anyway, this is a great documentary, although it's a bit short in my opinion. It should've been at least two hours.

It's a pity there weren't more people from H20 and Resurrection availible for the convention, I would've loved to see panels for those films. But I guess people like Michelle Williams, Josh Hartnett, LL Cool J and Busta Rhymes think too highly of themselves these days.

I of course own this wonderful DVD along with all the films in all releases...

I bought this DVD the first day it came out. I have all of the Halloween films on DVD and I just had to get this one also to complete my collection. The documentary (what I have watched so far) is very cool. It is well worth the $14.99 price at Best Buy. That is a great price considering it is 2 discs.

Naturally the original is the best; but I'm quite fond of the sequels. They all have qualities that I really dig, the worst being five and eight. I really enjoyed four and my favorite sequel, H20. I know most hate it, but I really appreciate the dramatics of the story (it actually had a story!). It was about not being afraid anymore, it was about not running any longer.... the hunter becoming the hunted.

I really hate that I missed the 25th Convention. I will not miss the next one. I was all set to attend the Jaws convention in Martha's Vinyard last year as well and of course, one of my buds decides to get married that weekend.

Should've gone to the convention... because unlike the marriage, we'll still have Jaws in another five years.

I bought it day 1. I just wish I read your review about H5 having the same extras that are on the H25. I was mad because I could not attened the H25 convention (maybe there will be a H30 Convention) I could tell everyone one there from the fans to the actors and producers all had a good time!

Great review. I think you hit the nail on the head with it considering you've raised a lot of points that people at the board have come onto as well. I plan on getting this one day, but I'm fairly burnt out on Halloween at this moment and couldn't bear to sit down and watch 2 discs at almost 4 hours. It'll be bad enough when I finally break open my copies of the Divimax 4 and 5.

On a final note, Dustin, if you're interested in something fairly rare, e-mail me for a copy of it at franchise@ohmb.net.

I have only viewed the second disk of this set so far. Have to say that the second disk is a bit of a let down. The panel discussions are OK, but there is really no deep questions asked. A lot of it is rehash of things the hardcore fan would know. Not to say it isn't worth having, because it is, just don't expect the panels on the 2nd disk to enlighten you much. It is great to see the casts and their absolute suprise there are so many folks that give a damn about the movies.

I can't wait to watch the first disk as I know that is where this set truly earns its purchase.

Bradavon, I have to agree with you. I absolutely love the first movie. The second one was a fitting finish and then after that, everything else has been overkill. As much as I enjoyed H2O, it still left felt like overkill. Atleast with Halloween 3 they tried to explore a different story. I actually would have prefered they go down that road, exploring different evils that are connected with Halloween. But unfortunately the major hardcore fans all they want is more Michael. I hated the whole occult subplot that 5 and 6 introduced. H2O was forgiveable because it atleast ignored the c**p 4 through 6 introduced, but with Resurrection the franchise totally lost my respect. I just hope Zombie can breath real life back into the franchise.

I'd not heard of this disc so thanks for reviewing it. I've seen the original and few of the sequels over the years, the trouble is "only" the original is any good. The rest take the slasher element and remove all of the clever camera angles, the dark settings, the scary music. What we're left with is very little.

This was recommended by a horror fan so i'll seek this out for a rental, though maybe I should actually watch Halloween first, i've gone this long without watching it, may as well finally take a stab at it....... *shakes head in shame*

As huge music fan Rob Zombie's work as suffered in the years following the demise of White Zombie with a number of rather bland and calculated recordings of industrial metal which pale in comparison to his earlier outings.

However, House of the 1000 Corpses was pure brilliance in an otherwise stagnant killing spree genre of horror. The Devil's Rejects was good but lacked the originality of his debut.

Therefore, I have some reservations about Mr. Zombie's tackling of an American horror classic. Rob has an extensive horror collection and hopefully he can cull out from the many influences to produce a worthy Halloween film. He is taking a different approach and not remaking the genius that Carpenter created which is a relief to say the least. It will be interesting to view this approach when it finally comes out and I hope that Rob and his film making do not suffer the same fate as his music career and that this challenge will result in a similar favorable result as House of 1K Corpses and his early White Zombie work.


ST GEORGE Illawarra fans were daring to dream, but their hopes of reaching a preliminary final were shattered by, not one, but three field goals from Souths halfback Adam Reynolds on Saturday night. The Rabbitohs 13-12 win came after a stunning final 10 minutes that saw the lead change three times all on the back of one-on-one strips. Ben Hunt fired the first shot, shanking an attempt at field goal with 12 minutes left. It gave up a seven-tackle set with Adam Reynolds making no mistake with his shot at a one-pointer at the other end, giving his side an 11-10 lead with 10 minutes to play. It looked like it wouldn't be the Dragons’night when Cam McInnes was pinged for a crucial penalty for passing the ball into a grounded Cameron Murray, deliberately in the opinion of referee Gerard Sutton. The Rabbitohs couldn't make them pay and when Tyson Frizell stripped Campbell Graham of the ball one-on-on 10 metres out from the Rabbitohs line, the game looked to be theirs again. Cody Walker was penalised for hanging on to long in the ensuing tackle, with Zac Lomax stepping up and nailing the biggest two points of his young career to re-take the lead five minutes from fulltime. The drama didn't end there, with Leeson Ah Mau incredibly also stripped of the ball by Murray, with Reynolds nailing his second field goal of the match to again lock the scores. The match looked destined to golden point before the Dragons inexplicably didn't get to their kick on their final set, handing the ball over on halfway and allowing the Rabbitohs to march up the park and let Reynolds jag his third field goal, this one the match-winner. Coach Paul McGregor admitted it was a hollow feeling, but still one preferable to previous seasons watching sides go round in September. “It stings. We had it, we lost it, we had it, it came down to a field goal the difference in the end,” McGregor said. “For me [in the sheds] it was about the year that was. It's been our most successful year since 2011. We came into the final series not in the best form or shape with a few injuries, and went up and put a nice score on Brisbane. “Tonight, it came down to a field goal in the end so, as a coach, it's a great character building experience for a lot of people. Today's an opportunity lost, definitely, but [we've made] bounds forward not steps. “I'm very proud of the performance they've put in the last two weeks given how much everyone thought we were outsiders. We are busted, there's a lot of guys who got needles, there's a lot of guys who didn't even train through the week. “We needed to finish the game with 17 fit men and I thought the real turning point in the game was when Tariq [Sims] went off [injured] on that left edge which put some changes there and possession swung away from us. “I'm super impressed with the attitude and that little bit of arrogance. When good teams are playing well they've got that arrogance about them and we got a bit of that back the last couple of weeks which is really important going forward.” It came after the Dragons led 8-2 at halftime on the back of a brilliant solo try from Hunt five minutes before halftime, a four-pointer that even brought neutrals to their feet given the roller coaster he's endured this season. Unfortunately, he'll likely cop the flak for the final play that turned possession over in the aftermath, particularly against the ruthlessness shown by his opposing No. 7 to ice the game. “You can break the game down a fair bit if you like but that's not for this press conference,” McGregor said when asked about his side's final four minutes. “I'm not going to turn it on a player who didn't make the right decision or anything like that. That's not for now. "Going forward it's great experience for those guys to make sure next time we get that opportunity we make it right.” Reynolds opened the scoring with a ninth-minute penalty goal after Ah Mau collected Sutton high, one of five straight penalties to start the game. Lomax leveled up with a goal of his own 12 minutes later, locking at the match at two apiece 17 minutes before the break. Hunt crossed for the first try of the match four minutes before halftime, burning Sam Burgess for pace to score, with Lomax nailing the conversion for an 8-2 lead. Sims limped off with an injured knee three minutes after the resumption before Lomax grabbed his second penalty goal to push the margin out beyond a converted try at 10-2 with 25 minutes to play. It didn't last long with Reynolds putting Angus Crichton through a hole and backing up to score under the posts to cut the margin back to two in the next set. He too control from there steering his side through the chaotic finals stages to seal the deal late and finish with all his side's points in the 13-12 win.

Saints go marching out of NRL finals

ST GEORGE Illawarra fans were daring to dream, but their hopes of reaching a preliminary final were shattered by, not one, but three field goals from Souths halfback Adam Reynolds on Saturday night.

The Rabbitohs 13-12 win came after a stunning final 10 minutes that saw the lead change three times all on the back of one-on-one strips. Ben Hunt fired the first shot, shanking an attempt at field goal with 12 minutes left.

It gave up a seven-tackle set with Adam Reynolds making no mistake with his shot at a one-pointer at the other end, giving his side an 11-10 lead with 10 minutes to play.

It looked like it wouldn't be the Dragons’night when Cam McInnes was pinged for a crucial penalty for passing the ball into a grounded Cameron Murray, deliberately in the opinion of referee Gerard Sutton.

The Rabbitohs couldn't make them pay and when Tyson Frizell stripped Campbell Graham of the ball one-on-on 10 metres out from the Rabbitohs line, the game looked to be theirs again.

Cody Walker was penalised for hanging on to long in the ensuing tackle, with Zac Lomax stepping up and nailing the biggest two points of his young career to re-take the lead five minutes from fulltime.

The drama didn't end there, with Leeson Ah Mau incredibly also stripped of the ball by Murray, with Reynolds nailing his second field goal of the match to again lock the scores.

The match looked destined to golden point before the Dragons inexplicably didn't get to their kick on their final set, handing the ball over on halfway and allowing the Rabbitohs to march up the park and let Reynolds jag his third field goal, this one the match-winner.

Coach Paul McGregor admitted it was a hollow feeling, but still one preferable to previous seasons watching sides go round in September.

“It stings. We had it, we lost it, we had it, it came down to a field goal the difference in the end,” McGregor said.

“For me [in the sheds] it was about the year that was. It's been our most successful year since 2011. We came into the final series not in the best form or shape with a few injuries, and went up and put a nice score on Brisbane.

“Tonight, it came down to a field goal in the end so, as a coach, it's a great character building experience for a lot of people. Today's an opportunity lost, definitely, but [we've made] bounds forward not steps.

“I'm very proud of the performance they've put in the last two weeks given how much everyone thought we were outsiders. We are busted, there's a lot of guys who got needles, there's a lot of guys who didn't even train through the week.

“We needed to finish the game with 17 fit men and I thought the real turning point in the game was when Tariq [Sims] went off [injured] on that left edge which put some changes there and possession swung away from us.

“I'm super impressed with the attitude and that little bit of arrogance. When good teams are playing well they've got that arrogance about them and we got a bit of that back the last couple of weeks which is really important going forward.”

It came after the Dragons led 8-2 at halftime on the back of a brilliant solo try from Hunt five minutes before halftime, a four-pointer that even brought neutrals to their feet given the roller coaster he's endured this season.

Unfortunately, he'll likely cop the flak for the final play that turned possession over in the aftermath, particularly against the ruthlessness shown by his opposing No. 7 to ice the game.

“You can break the game down a fair bit if you like but that's not for this press conference,” McGregor said when asked about his side's final four minutes.

“I'm not going to turn it on a player who didn't make the right decision or anything like that. That's not for now.

"Going forward it's great experience for those guys to make sure next time we get that opportunity we make it right.”

Reynolds opened the scoring with a ninth-minute penalty goal after Ah Mau collected Sutton high, one of five straight penalties to start the game. Lomax leveled up with a goal of his own 12 minutes later, locking at the match at two apiece 17 minutes before the break.

Hunt crossed for the first try of the match four minutes before halftime, burning Sam Burgess for pace to score, with Lomax nailing the conversion for an 8-2 lead.

Sims limped off with an injured knee three minutes after the resumption before Lomax grabbed his second penalty goal to push the margin out beyond a converted try at 10-2 with 25 minutes to play.

It didn't last long with Reynolds putting Angus Crichton through a hole and backing up to score under the posts to cut the margin back to two in the next set.

He too control from there steering his side through the chaotic finals stages to seal the deal late and finish with all his side's points in the 13-12 win.


Q:

Blank image in Gallery view – Android

I know about gallery view is outdated, but i still need it.
I've tested it on Nexus 7, Samsung S4, LG phones and it works fine, but on HTC phone I got blank place instead some images in Gallery, like this:

Here is a sample of code:
<Gallery
            android:layout_marginTop="5dp"
            android:id="@+id/gallery1"
            android:layout_width="match_parent"
            android:layout_height="350dp" />

class ImageAdapter extends BaseAdapter {
    @Override
    public int getCount() {
        return images.size();
    }

    @Override
    public Object getItem(int arg0) {

        return null;
    }

    @Override
    public long getItemId(int arg0) {
        return 0;
    }

    @Override
    public View getView(int position, View view, ViewGroup vg) {
        ImageView image = new ImageView(getApplicationContext());
        image.setImageResource(images.get(position));
        image.setPadding(20, 20, 20, 20);
        image.setLayoutParams(new Gallery.LayoutParams(550, 450));
        image.setScaleType(ImageView.ScaleType.FIT_XY);
        return image;
    }
}

what is wrong with it?

A:

I have used the article and it works for me now.
public static Bitmap decodeSampledBitmapFromResource(Resources res, int resId,
    int reqWidth, int reqHeight) {

// First decode with inJustDecodeBounds=true to check dimensions
final BitmapFactory.Options options = new BitmapFactory.Options();
options.inJustDecodeBounds = true;
BitmapFactory.decodeResource(res, resId, options);

// Calculate inSampleSize
options.inSampleSize = calculateInSampleSize(options, reqWidth, reqHeight);

// Decode bitmap with inSampleSize set
options.inJustDecodeBounds = false;
return BitmapFactory.decodeResource(res, resId, options);

}


You are here

EAST BURKE, VT - On the same day that two other local controversial wind projects were front and center in the media statewide, a small ceremony marked the installation of a 123-foot tall wind turbine at the top of Burke Mountain.There were no protesters, although a Caledonia County Sheriff’s Deputy was on the scene. About 25 people made up the crowd and the Tamarack Grill from Burke served hot cocoa, brownies and cookies.About a dozen kids from Miller's Run School, who had originally planned on going for an afternoon hike, “stumbled upon the event,” according to their chaperone Annie Gibavic, and they joined in the celebration.Governor Peter Shumlin and his entourage of three state troopers, Secretary of Administration Jeb Spaulding, and Public Service Board Commissioner Elizabeth Miller were also on hand for the ribbon cutting, following another ribbon cutting earlier in the day at the Sheffield wind project.AJ Siebel, a full time employee at Burke Mountain who manages the ski shop during the winter and runs the campground in the summer, came to witness the event with his wife and two young children. He said the tower will be a great “green” asset for Burke and another reason for people to visit the mountain. The turbine was designed and manufactured by Northern Power Systems based in Barre, VT, and installed by Alteris Renewables from Waitsfield. Royal Electric from Woodsville, NH, completed the electric work for the turbine and transmission line."The overall project cost for the wind turbine were just under $900,000 and, as you know, we received some low interest loans from ARRA funds as well as a grant," said Tim McGuire, vice president and general manager of Burke Mountain Operating company. Many local contractors were used to complete the project.Governor Peter Shumlin told the crowd that he has seen wind towers around the world but this turbine was much more reliable and quieter then most. “The only noise you hear now is from the door to the base being open, much like the wind hums when it passes over a bottle or can. When that door is closed, you won’t hear a thing,” said the Governor.The tower is located at the top of Burke Mountain and skiers will be able to get a closer look this winter since it is only a short distance away from the new quad chairlift being installed. The ski slope passes less than about 75 yards away. The blades are 35 feet long and the 100 kilowatt turbine is projected to produce nearly 20 percent of Burke Mountains electrical usage. It only needs 8 mph of wind to start turning, and the annual average wind speed at the summit of Burke is over 19 mph. This is the fourth turbine installed at a ski area in the United States and the first wind turbine constructed on Vermont State Forest Parks and Recreation land.Funding for the project was partially provided by a grant from VEDA (Vermont Economic Development Authority). According to their website: “$500,000 to Burke Mountain Corporation as part of a $973,157 project to install a wind turbine, de-icing system, and transformer at the mountain. Through installing the wind turbine system and connecting to the utility grid, Burke hopes to reduce operating costs and ensure energy sustainability at the mountain.”


Q:

Jade(PUG) to Handlebars, Helper function for loading SVG image Issue

I am converting a pug project to handlebars.
The problem is, it loads markup text instead of the image. But this works fine with pug(jade).
I wrote the helper function inside my helper.js file as follows.
const fs = require('fs');
exports.icon = (name) => fs.readFileSync(`./public/images/icons/${name}.svg`);

I am calling this function inside main.hbs file
 {{icon 'logo'}}

How to solve this problem and render the image to the DOM instead of markup text?

A:

Try to use "triple-stash" {{{icon 'logo'}}}. See https://handlebarsjs.com/#html-escaping


Professional cricketers' perceptions of the importance of antecedents influencing repeatable good performance.
This study examined whether there is overall agreement amongst professional cricketers on the factors which are most important for the occurrence of repeatable good performances in the sport. Also, the consistency of the rank-order of such variables was investigated across individuals and roles within the same sport. A total of 198 cricketers (100 batters and 98 bowlers) who play or have played first class cricket in the English County Championship completed a rank-order task, which enabled them to use their experiences to judge the importance of 15 selected performance-influencing variables. Cultural consensus analysis indicated that no one factor for either batters or bowlers was significantly more important, despite many batters and bowlers ranking the need for 'total self-confidence' highest. Whilst no over-all agreement was found for batters and bowlers in their ranking of variables, a group of similar 'core elements', e.g., total self-confidence, following a set prematch routine, set performance plans, optimal arousal, and using mental rehearsal, were highly ranked by both groups, which may be an important consideration for practitioners endeavoring to produce strategies that encourage more consistent and higher performance for cricketers.


Should the Bay Area Be Concerned That WonderCon Is Foresaking Frisco for Anaheim?

It's the rumor that makes the rounds every summer. That Comic-Con is soon going to abandon San Diego for some other convention-friendly city like Las Vegas or Anaheim.

The only problem with this rumor is (at least for the timing being) is that it can't possibly be true. Given that -- back in September of 2010 -- Comic-Con International (i.e. the parent company of this pop culture phenomenon) signed a deal with the San Diego Convention Center which then ties this event to that waterfront venue through 2015.

Mind you, this hasn't stopped the comic book community from spinning out entirely new conspiracy theories about this organization. Take -- for example -- Comic-Con International's recent decision to move WonderCon from its usual home in San Francisco's Moscone Center down to the Anaheim Convention Center. There are those that will tell you that this was kind of a consolation prize for the Anaheim city council. That -- because they ultimately weren't able to persuade SDCC management to relocate their biggest con down to Orange County -- Anaheim opted to go after Comic-Con's little brother (i.e. WonderCon) instead.

According to David Glanzer (i.e. Comic-Con International's director of marketing and public relations), that isn't what happened at all. To hear David tell the story, the real reason that WonderCon isn't being held in San Francisco this year is because of all the work which is still being done in and around that city's principal convention center.

"The Moscone has almost completed its two year-long expansion & renovation program. This $250 million project will not only upgrade this building's facilities, it will also double the amount of show floor and meeting space that this convention center previously had available," Glanzer explained. "The only problem was -- what with all of the finish work which still needs to done -- there just wasn't going to be enough space available for us inside of that building to properly present WonderCon. Not this year, anyway."

So with the Moscone temporarily out of the picture for the first half of 2012, David and his team carefully considered their options. If they decided to postpone and/or cancel WonderCon outright this year ... Well, that might then have some unfortunate blowback on this 26 year-old Bay Area event. Which had been held in Oakland, CA. until just ten years ago. Which was when Comic-Con International then decided to shift WonderCon across the Bay to San Francisco.

"More to the point, we have publishers -- both big & small -- as well as writers and artists who really count on this show as a way to get the public excited about their upcoming projects. And if we were to cancel WonderCon, even for just a single year, that decision would then really hurt a lot of people. Not mention disappointing the tens of thousands of comic book & pop culture fans who annually attend this event," Glanzer explained.

So since cancellation and/or postponing this show no longer seemed like viable options, David & Co. then began exploring other ideas. Like temporarily shifting this San Francisco-based con to some other city's convention center.

"But when you're talking about an event the size of WonderCon, not just any convention center will do. Last year, we had 50,000 people come through the Moscone's doors over of the course of this three day-long show. And to properly handle & support a crowd of that size, you need lots of hotel rooms. Not to mention plenty of onsite parking. Plus the hundreds of volunteers that you need to properly man & staff a show like this size," Glanzer continued.

Luckily, thanks to its proximity to the Disneyland Resort, Anaheim had hundreds of hotel rooms available for rental around that city's convention center. And what with offering discounted parking to those people who were willing to leave their cars at Angel Stadium and then take a free shuttle bus over to the venue, WonderCon found a pretty eco-friendly way to deal with this event's potential parking problem.

"The people that we've been dealing with in Anaheim have just been terrific. They've risen to every challenge that we've tossed their way. Which is why I'm hoping that this weekend's show really goes smoothly," David said.

And what will the crowds who actually come out to the Anaheim Convention Center see at WonderCon 2012? Plenty of celebrities, for starters. Take -- for example -- Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill. Who will be appearing in this venue's Ballroom on Friday afternoon to promote their just-opened big screen remake of that 1980s cop show, "21 Jump Street."

And Channing and Jonah aren't the only film stars who'd be schlepping on down to Anaheim to help hype their latest projects. Over the course of the next three days, select members of the cast & crew from "The Amazing Spider-Man," "Battleship," "Snow White and the Huntsman" and "Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter" will be appearing at the convention center to talk up these big spring / summer releases to film fans.

"Me personally, I'm most looking forward to Sir Ridley Scott's appearance at Fox's 'Prometheus' panel on Saturday afternoon. I've long been an admirer of Scott's work as a filmmaker. And I'm intrigued to see how he and Damon Lindelof have linked 'Prometheus' in with the rest of the 'Alien' film series mythology," Glanzer stated.

Here's hoping that David actually gets the chance to attend a panel or two over the course of this coming weekend. Or -- for that matter -- doesn't have to deal with having to temporarily relocate any other Comic-Con International shows anytime soon.

Which isn't to say that Glanzer will actually have any say in this matter. Especially since the San Diego city council -- in an effort to make sure that their city can hang onto mega-conventions like Comic-Con -- approved the basic funding scheme for a $500 million expansion of the San Diego Convention Center back in January.

And given that a construction project of that size might then make San Diego's convention center temporarily unavailable for Comic-Con ... Well, how does David feel about possibly having to find a new city and/or facility that is capable of handling the 130,000 people who annually attend this 4 1/2 day-long pop culture event?

"Please. One show at a time," Glanzer laughed. "Right now, all I'm really concerned about is how I'm going to carve out enough free time over the course of this weekend so that I can then leave WonderCon, go across the street and check out Disneyland."

Jim Hill is an award-winning entertainment writer who lives in New Boston, N.H. Over the past 30 years, he has interviewed hundreds of veterans of the animation and themed entertainment industry and written extensively about the Walt Disney Company.

Jim is currently working on a behind-the-scenes history of the development and construction of Disneyland. For his more immediate musings on movies, TV shows, books and theme parks, please check out his blog, jimhillmedia.com.


Q:

Hide collectionView content when collectionView is collapsed

I have a collectionView with expandable and collapsible sections. When I collapsed the sections, the content inside of the table View is still present. I was wondering if anyone knew how to change this? I have a UicollectionViewCell in which I create the views programmatically. However, I was thinking that my issues arrises because I'm not creating the views inside of the cellForItemAt. I will leave my code below please let me know what you think.
// this is how I create the sectionHeaders and register the collectionViewCell.
override func collectionView(_ collectionView: UICollectionView, viewForSupplementaryElementOfKind kind: String, at indexPath: IndexPath) -> UICollectionReusableView {

    var reusableview = UICollectionReusableView()
    if (kind == UICollectionView.elementKindSectionHeader) {
        let section = indexPath.section
        switch (section) {
        case 0:
            let headerView = collectionView.dequeueReusableSupplementaryView(ofKind: kind, withReuseIdentifier: headerIdentifier, for: indexPath) as? userProfileHeader
                        if let user = self.user {
                                headerView?.myUser = user
                            } else if let userToLoad = self.userToLoad {
                                headerView?.myUser  = userToLoad
                            }
            reusableview = headerView!

        case 1:
            let sectionViews = collectionView.dequeueReusableSupplementaryView(ofKind: kind, withReuseIdentifier: skillsSection, for: indexPath) as? skillsprefSection
            sectionViews?.downArrowBtn.addTarget(self, action: #selector(showCells), for: .touchUpInside)
            sectionViews?.headerLabel.text = "Skills & Preferences"

            if expandedRow == false {
                sectionViews?.contentView.isHidden = true
            }

            reusableview = sectionViews!

        case 2:
            let bioSectionThing = collectionView.dequeueReusableSupplementaryView(ofKind: kind, withReuseIdentifier: bioSectionHeader, for: indexPath) as? bioSection
                bioSectionThing?.downArrowBtn.addTarget(self, action: #selector(showCells), for: .touchUpInside)
                bioSectionThing?.headerLabel.text = "Bio"
                reusableview = bioSectionThing!

        case 3:
            let reviewSectionThing = collectionView.dequeueReusableSupplementaryView(ofKind: kind, withReuseIdentifier: reviewSectionHeader, for: indexPath) as? reviewSection
                reviewSectionThing?.downArrowBtn.addTarget(self, action: #selector(showCells), for: .touchUpInside)
                reviewSectionThing?.headerLabel.text = "Reviews"
                reusableview = reviewSectionThing!

         case 4:
                  let recentSectionThing = collectionView.dequeueReusableSupplementaryView(ofKind: kind, withReuseIdentifier: recentSectionHeader, for: indexPath) as? recentSection
                    recentSectionThing?.downArrowBtn.addTarget(self, action: #selector(showCells), for: .touchUpInside)
                      recentSectionThing?.headerLabel.text = "Recent"
                      reusableview = recentSectionThing!
                default:
            return reusableview

        }
    }
    return reusableview

}

// this is how I expand/contract the sections
func collectionView(_ collectionView: UICollectionView, layout collectionViewLayout: UICollectionViewLayout, referenceSizeForHeaderInSection section: Int) -> CGSize {

    if(section==0) {
        return .init(width: view.frame.width, height: 340)

    } else if (section==1) {
        if expandedRow == true {
               return .init(width: view.frame.width, height: 450)
           } else {
               return .init(width: view.frame.width, height: 133)
           }

    } else if (section==2) {
         if expandedRow == true {
        return .init(width: view.frame.width, height: 400)
        } else {
        return .init(width: view.frame.width, height: 133)
        }

    } else if (section==3) {
    if expandedRow == true {
    return .init(width: view.frame.width, height: 400)
    } else {
    return .init(width: view.frame.width, height: 133)
    }

    } else if (section==4) {
        if expandedRow == true {
        return .init(width: view.frame.width, height: 400)
        } else {
        return .init(width: view.frame.width, height: 133)
    }

    } else {
        return .init(width: view.frame.width, height: 100)
    }

}

this is how the image looks when collapsed.

and this is how the section looks when expanded.
Thanks for any and all help. My goal is for when the section is collapsed, to hide all of the content associated with that section. and show it when the section is expanded.

A:

Your collection view cell out of bound just set as follow
cell.contentView.clipsToBounds = true
cell.clipsToBounds = true


852 A.2d 584 (2004)
2004 VT 40
In re K.F., Juvenile.
No. 03-477.
Supreme Court of Vermont.
April 28, 2004.
*585 Present: DOOLEY, JOHNSON, SKOGLUND and REIBER, JJ., and GIBSON, J. (Ret.), Specially Assigned.

ENTRY ORDER
¶ 1. Father appeals from the family court's order terminating his residual parental rights over K.F. He argues that the court erred by failing to recognize that the Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services bore substantial responsibility for the circumstances alleged to support the termination order. We affirm.
¶ 2. Mother and father, who have never married, are the parents of K.F., born in October 2002. Shortly after K.F.'s birth, father was incarcerated on probation violations related to domestic violence toward mother. In December 2002, K.F. was adjudicated as a child in need of care and supervision. At that time, mother admitted that she did not possess all of the skills necessary to provide appropriate care and supervision to K.F. In December 2002, mother was accepted into the Lund Family Center's Residential Program where she was joined by K.F. for a trial reunification.
¶ 3. In January 2003, the family court held an initial disposition hearing. SRS indicated that it was seeking to assist mother in developing parenting skills so that she could live independently with K.F. SRS noted, however, that mother had demonstrated an inability to incorporate new learning into her care of K.F. and she had shown resistance to the parent education offered at Lund. Given this, and K.F.'s age and fragile stability, SRS explained *586 that it concurrently planned to seek the termination of mother and father's parental rights if significant progress was not made within two months. Father did not object to SRS's case plan. In March 2003, mother was discharged from Lund, and K.F. was placed in emergency foster care. Shortly thereafter, father was released from prison, and he contacted SRS seeking visitation with K.F. The SRS caseworker sent a letter to the court, with a copy provided to father, explaining why she did not support visitation. The caseworker stated that since his release father had been living with mother despite a no-contact order, father had not engaged in any type of parent education services since being incarcerated, and father had seen K.F. on only one occasion. Based on this information, and because SRS was filing a petition for termination of parental rights, the caseworker expressed her belief that contact between father and K.F. was not in K.F.'s best interests. In response to the letter, the family court indicated that there would be no hearing on visitation except on motion.
¶ 4. In April 2003, SRS filed a petition to terminate parental rights. In its petition, SRS stated that over the past six months mother had demonstrated her inability to parent K.F. in a consistently safe and appropriate manner and she continued to struggle with self care. SRS noted that father had been in prison from November 2002 through March 2003, and he had previously been charged with domestic assault, disorderly conduct, and numerous probation violations.
¶ 5. Two months later, at a June 2003 status conference, father's attorney asked the family court to impose visitation with K.F. "today." The court responded that, given its earlier order, father needed to file a motion to establish visitation. Father's attorney then made an oral motion for visitation, and the court stated that the matter could be set for a hearing. Father's attorney responded that he did not see the necessity for a hearing when "we're so close to a termination." It does not appear that the question of visitation was set for a separate hearing. Father returned to jail in June 2003; he remains incarcerated.
¶ 6. In August 2003, mother voluntarily relinquished her residual parental rights. After a hearing, the court terminated father's residual parental rights. The court found that father had not assumed any caretaking responsibilities for K.F. nor provided any financial or parental support after her birth. While in jail, he did not participate in any programming with the Department of Corrections, nor did he contact SRS to inquire about K.F.'s well-being or play any role in her life. When he was released from prison, he failed to keep in consistent contact with K.F.'s caseworker. Shortly after his release, he was charged with numerous violations of an abuse prevention order, and with violating probation, and he returned to jail. The court found that father had seen K.F. only twice since her birth, and that SRS had been unable to set up any consistent contact between father and K.F. due to father's frequent incarceration. The court also noted that father's parental rights had recently been terminated over another child, A.C., due in part to his substantial failure to comply with the requirements of SRS's case plan. Based on its findings, the court concluded that there was no likelihood that K.F. could be reunited with father in the foreseeable future. The court stated that father had demonstrated a pattern of unavailability due to incarceration, criminal behavior, and nonparticipation in Corrections programming, and he had not played a constructive role in K.F.'s life. The court recognized that K.F. had a need for stability, and that she was thriving *587 with her foster parents. The court thus concluded that termination of father's parental rights was in K.F.'s best interests. Father appealed.
¶ 7. On appeal, father asserts that the family court erred by failing to take into account that SRS "in substantial part engineered the circumstances alleged to support termination." Father maintains that SRS failed to shoulder its responsibility to provide services to him, and it denied him visitation with K.F. Under these circumstances, father argues, his lack of contact and his lack of a bond with K.F. cannot be held against him.
¶ 8. When the termination of parental rights is sought, the trial court must conduct a two-step analysis. In re B.W., 162 Vt. 287, 291, 648 A.2d 652, 654 (1994); 33 V.S.A. § 5532(a). The court must first find that there has been a substantial change in material circumstances; second, the court must find that termination of parental rights is in the child's best interests. In re B.W., 162 Vt. at 291, 648 A.2d at 654-55; 33 V.S.A. § 5532(a). We will uphold the trial court's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous, and we will uphold the court's conclusions of law if supported by the findings. In re D.C., 168 Vt. 1, 4, 712 A.2d 902, 904 (1998).
¶ 9. In this case, the family court did not explicitly find that there had been a material change in circumstances. Neither party argues that this requirement was not met, however, and it is evident from the record that a material change in circumstances had occurred since the initial disposition order. See In re H.A., 153 Vt. 504, 515, 572 A.2d 884, 890 (1990) ("the changed circumstances test is met when the findings in the case are replete with facts sufficient to meet the required standard") (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Since that time, mother, with whom reunification had been contemplated, had voluntarily relinquished her residual parental rights. Additionally, because father was incarcerated at the time of the initial disposition hearing, SRS did not contemplate his reunification with K.F. Father did not object to SRS's case plan, nor did he appeal the family court's initial disposition order. After father was released from prison, he attended a case plan meeting where he was informed by an SRS caseworker of minimal expectations that would facilitate his reunification with K.F., i.e., law-abiding behavior and maintaining contact with SRS. As the family court found, although father appeared to understand these requirements, he failed to meet them. Thus, the record reflects that a material change in circumstances with respect to the father had occurred since the initial disposition order.
¶ 10. When there has been a substantial change in material circumstances, the court must next assess whether termination of parental rights is in a child's best interests. To determine the best interests of the child, the court must consider four statutory factors. See 33 V.S.A. § 5540. The most important factor in the court's analysis is the likelihood that the natural parent will be able to resume his or her parental duties within a reasonable period of time. See In re B.M., 165 Vt. 331, 336, 682 A.2d 477, 480 (1996). As long as the court applied the proper standard, we will not disturb its findings on appeal unless they are clearly erroneous; we will affirm its conclusions if they are supported by the findings. In re G.S., 153 Vt. 651, 652, 572 A.2d 1350, 1351 (1990) (mem.).
¶ 11. Father essentially argues that the family court erred in concluding that termination of his residual parental rights was in K.F.'s best interests because the court's conclusion rested on factors that were beyond his control, i.e., SRS's *588 failure to provide him with services and its denial of his request for visitation with K.F. Father does not challenge any of the family court's factual findings as clearly erroneous, however, nor does he argue that the court failed to apply the proper statutory standard. Instead, he asserts that the court erred by "fail[ing] to be mindful" of SRS's substantial responsibility for the circumstances alleged to support termination of his residual rights.
¶ 12. We find father's argument without merit. The family court considered the statutory factors in arriving at its conclusion, and its findings are supported by the evidence. As the family court found, SRS was unable to set up any consistent contact between father and K.F. due to father's frequent incarceration. Father was informed by an SRS caseworker at a case plan meeting that it was essential that he keep in contact with SRS and comply with the law. Although father appeared to understand these requirements, he failed to meet them. Father has demonstrated a pattern of unavailability due to incarceration, criminal behavior, and nonparticipation in Corrections programming. He has not played a constructive role in K.F.'s life, and there is no likelihood that K.F. could be reunited with him in the foreseeable future. Father's rights over another minor child were terminated based on similar considerations. See In re A.C., Docket No. 2003-100, 829 A.2d 800 (2003) (mem.) (3-justice panel) (affirming family court's termination order based on court's findings that father had no relationship with A.C., had not played a constructive role in A.C.'s life, it was unlikely that father would be able to resume his parental duties within a reasonable time, father continued to abuse drugs, had no residence, was not employed, was unable to refrain from illegal conduct leading to imprisonment, had not completed or even engaged in domestic-violence and substance-abuse treatment or parenting education, had failed to stay in contact with SRS, and had not demonstrated an interest in A.C.'s well-being). Father has not demonstrated that the court based its conclusion on factors "beyond his control," and we thus find his reliance on In re S.R., 157 Vt. 417, 421-22, 599 A.2d 364, 367 (1991), misplaced. In this case, father bears sole responsibility for his frequent incarceration, his failure to maintain consistent contact with SRS, and his lack of a bond with K.F. Indeed, we note that father did not formally request visitation with K.F. until two months after SRS filed its termination petition. Shortly after his request was made, father returned to prison, where he remains. As the family court found, father has not been available as a parental resource to K.F. for eleven months, and he continues to be unavailable due to his incarceration. The family court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that termination of father's residual parental rights was in K.F.'s best interests.
Affirmed.