公诉人莫利斯·戴维斯上校称辩护律师可能已违背军法中关于禁止军官对主席或者高级官员使用侮辱性词语的条例。而莫里少校针对该起诉也提出了一项反向指控，认为起诉意在胁迫他。现在人们不会再听到类似这样的传闻，因为看上去面色苍白、精神颓废的希克斯先生已经承认了关于“给恐怖主义提供重要支持”的指控。法庭已经放弃了关于“违背战争法而谋杀未遂”一案的审理。当经济学家发刊时，军事法庭一定会听到更多他的抗辩之词和宣判细节，人们认为希克斯先生将会在澳大利亚服刑。他的父亲特里·希克斯声称其子自从在阿富汗被捕以来经历了五年地狱般的生活，遭受了殴打、强奸和强迫注射等——尽管这些指控已被五角大楼驳回。希克斯先生的父亲说承认有罪只不过是一种得以回家的方法罢了。

在澳大利亚，很多人认为希克斯先生更像一个丧失灵魂的人而并非危险的恐怖分子。确实，指控记录中他被描述成一个基地组织的普通步兵，一个可怜的小角色。同9月份从中情局秘密监狱转到关塔那摩的14名具有极高价值的囚犯相比，希克斯的圣战履历看起来非常令人同情。前者包括基地组织首领哈立德·谢赫·穆罕默德，在本月一个对其是否是敌对战斗人员身份的封闭听讼会中，他自夸他从头到尾策划了911袭击和30个其他秘密计划。与此同时，分别来自坦桑尼亚和也门的艾哈迈德·盖凡·盖拉尼和瓦立德·本阿塔什也承认曾为1998年肯尼亚和坦桑尼亚引爆美国大使馆的恐怖分子提供了相应设备。

这些鼎鼎大名的恐怖分子将面临审判，而且可能被判死刑。但是军事法庭目前只打算审判380多名被关押在关塔那摩囚犯中的60～80名囚犯。几年来，囚犯中已有上百人被遣送回了自己的国家，他们有的被继续监禁，而大多数则被释放——不过有时又被重新逮捕。布什政府宣称有必要逐渐减少囚犯并最终关闭这个监狱。但很难在几年内做到这一点，一方面是因为缺乏起诉这些囚犯的证据（即使是在不够严谨的军法框架下），另一方面则是因为这些囚犯所属的国家事实上并不愿意他们被遣回本国。





Unit 68


Technology is a two-edged sword．Rarely is this as clear as it is in the realm of health care．Technology allows doctors to test their patients for genetic defects—and then to turn around and spread the results throughout the world via the Internet．For someone in need of treatment，that's good news．But for someone in search of a job or an insurance policy，the tidings can be all bad.

Last week President Bill Clinton proposed a corollary to the patients’ bill of rights now before Congress: a right to medical privacy．Beginning in 2002，under rules set to become law in February，patients would be able to stipulate the conditions under which their personal medical data could be divulged．They would be able to examine their records and make corrections．They could learn who else had seen the information．Improper use of records by a caregiver or insurer could result in both civil and criminal penalties．The plan was，said Clinton，“an unprecedented step toward putting Americans back in control of their own medical records.”

While the administration billed the rules as an attempt to strike a balance between the needs of consumers and those of the health-care industry，neither doctors nor insurance companies were happy．The doctors said the rules could actually erode privacy，pointing to a provision allowing managed-care plans to use personal information without consent if the purpose was“health-care operations.” That，physicians said，was a loophole through which HMOs and other insurers could pry into the doctor-patient relationship，in the name of assessing the quality of care．Meanwhile，the insurers protested that the rules would make them vulnerable to lawsuits．They were especially disturbed by a provision holding them liable for privacy breaches by“business partners” such as lawyers and accountants．Both groups agreed that privacy protections would drive up the cost of health care by at least an additional $3.8 billion，and maybe much more，over the next five years．They also complained about the increased level of federal scrutiny required by the new rules’ enforcement provisions.

One aim of the rules is to reassure patients about confidentiality，thereby encouraging them to be open with their doctors．Today various cancers and sexually transmitted diseases can go untreated because patients are afraid of embarrassment or of losing insurance coverage．The fear is real: Clinton aides noted that a January poll by Princeton Survey Research Associates found that one in six U.S．adults had at some time done something unusual to conceal medical information，such as paying cash for services.


注（1）：本文选自Newsweek；

注（2）：本文习题命题模仿对象为2003年真题Text 2。



1．The author begins his article with“technology is a two-edged sword”（Line 1，Paragraph 1）to ______.

A) show that doctor's improper use of technology can end up in bad results

B) call on people's attention to the potential danger technology can bring to us

C) warn of the harm patients are prone to suffer

D) show the advantages and disadvantages of technology

2．According to the proposal made by President Clinton，patients will be able to do the following EXCEPT ______.

A) enjoy more rights to their medical records

B) be open with their doctors

C) decide how to use their medical information

D) sue their insurers for improper use of their medical records

3．Doctors tend to think that the rules ______.

A) may ruin doctor-patient relationship

B) can do more harm than good

C) will prevent doctors from doing medical research

D) will end up in more health care cost and poorer medical service

4．The example of the January poll by Princeton Survey Research Associates is used to show that ______.

A) American patients’ concealment of their medical information has become a big concern

B) a large portion of patients would rather leave their diseases untreated

C) concealing medical information is widespread in the U.S.

D) paying cash for medical service is a common practice among American patients

5．From the article we can learn that ______.

A) American government will tighten its control over the use of patients’ personal information

B) doctors and insurers are both against the rules for the same reasons

C) patients are entitled to have complete control of their medical information

D) the new rules put insurers in a very disadvantageous position





篇章剖析


本文主要讲述了病人医疗隐私权立法及其引发的争议，采用的是提出问题——分析问题的模式。作者首先说明了病人医疗隐私泄露可能带来的问题；接着谈了提议中的病人医疗隐私权法案的内容；第三段作者说明了反对该法案一方的观点；最后一段则强调了新法规的宗旨和不立法可能造成的不良后果。





词汇注释


tidings /ˈtaɪdɪŋz/ n. 消息

corollary /kəˈrɒləri/ n. 必然的结果；推论

bill /bɪl/ v. 宣布，宣告

stipulate /ˈstɪpjʊleɪt/ v. 规定，保证

divulge /daɪˈvʌldʒ/ v. 泄露，暴露

managed-care plan 管理式医疗保健计划

loophole /ˈluːphəʊl/ n. 漏洞

HMO 医疗保健机构（Health Maintenance Organization）

pry /praɪ/ v. 探查，侦查，窥探

provision /prəˈvɪʒ(ə)n/ n. 规定

liable /ˈlaɪəb(ə)l/ adj. 有责任的

breach /briːtʃ/ n. 违背；不履行





难句突破


The doctors said the rules could actually erode privacy，pointing to a provision allowing managed-care plans to use personal information without consent if the purpose was“health-care operations.”

主体句式：The doctors said...

结构分析：本句中pointing to 这个伴随状语中又包含了一个介词without引出的方式状语和由if引导的条件状语从句，使得句子的结构变得较为复杂。

句子译文：医生认为这些法规实际上是在破坏隐私权，因为其中一条规定允许管理式医疗保健计划（managed-care plan）在“开展医疗保健工作”时可以不经许可使用个人信息。





题目分析


1．A 语义题。文章以医生利用先进的互联网技术传播病人医疗信息会有助于治疗某些病人的疾病，但同时又给一些病人在就业和购买保险方面带来困难为例说明保护病人医疗信息的重要性，以及不当使用技术可能带来的不良后果。

2．B 细节题。“be open with their doctors”只是这项法规试图达到的效果，并不是该法规赋予病人的权利。因此答案应该是B。

3．B 细节题。文章引用医生的观点认为新法规不但不利于保护病人的隐私，反而会actually erode privacy，由此可见答案应该是B。

4．A 推理题。前文讲到了病人因为羞于启齿或者担心失去保险赔付而隐瞒病情，使疾病得不到治疗；然后说“The fear is real”，继而引用普利斯顿调查研究协会的调查结果，意在说明这一问题的严重性。

5．D 推理题。文章中提到保险公司的反对意见时，引用了保险公司的说法：“the rules would make them vulnerable to lawsuits”，由此可见答案应该是D。A项中提出的政府加强对病人私人信息的控制的说法是不正确的，因为保险公司抗议的是政府要加强对法规实施情况的审查（the increased level of federal scrutiny required by the new rules' enforcement provisions）。





参考译文



技术是一把双刃剑。这一点在医疗保健领域尤为明显。借助技术，医生可以测试病人的遗传缺陷——并通过互联网很快将结果传遍全世界。对于那些需要治疗的人来说，这是好消息；但对于那些正在找工作，或者想要买一份保险的人来说，这样的消息可能非常糟糕。

上周，比尔·克林顿总统向国会提交了一份病人权利法案的推论：医疗隐私权。从2002年开始，根据2月即将生效的法规，病人将有权规定透露其个人医疗资料的条件。他们可以检查自己的病历并进行更正，也可以了解哪些人曾看过他们的信息。医护人员或者保险公司对病历使用不当将会导致民事或者刑事处罚。克林顿说，这一提案“在促使美国人重新获得对自己的病历控制权方面迈出了极其重要的一步。”

虽然政府称这些法规旨在平衡消费者和医疗保健行业的需求，但医生和保险公司对此都颇有微词。医生认为这些法规实际上是在破坏隐私权，因为其中一条规定允许管理式医疗保健计划（managed-care plan）在“开展医疗保健工作”时可以不经许可使用个人信息。医生们称其为一个漏洞，它使得医疗保健机构（HMO）和其他保险公司可以打着评估医疗保健质量的旗号窥探医患关系。同时，保险公司也对这些法规持反对意见，他们认为这些法规很容易让他们惹上官司。其中一条法规令他们尤为不满，该法规规定：保险公司对律师和会计这样的“商业伙伴”的侵犯隐私行为负责。这两个群体都一致认为，保护隐私会使医疗保健成本至少增加38亿美元，在接下来的五年里也许还会增加更多。根据新法规的执行条例，联邦政府将加大对医疗保健行业的审查力度，他们对此也表示不满。

新法规的目标之一就是要让病人不再担心自己的隐私被泄漏，从而鼓励他们对医生坦诚相告。今天各种各样的癌症和性病可能会因为病人羞于启齿或者担心失去保险赔付而得不到治疗。这种担心并非无中生有：克林顿的助手补充说，由普林斯顿调查研究协会在一月份进行的一项民意测试显示：在美国，每六个成年人中就有一个曾经做过刻意隐瞒医疗信息的事情，比如用现金支付服务费。





Unit 69


When Gina Garro and Brian Duplisea adopted 4-month-old Andres from Colombia last month，they were determined to take time off from work to care for him．Six years ago，after their daughter，Melina，was born，the family scraped by on Duplisea's $36,000 salary as a construction worker so Garro，a special-education teacher，could stay home．Now，since Garro's job furnishes the family health insurance，she’ll head back to work this fall while Duplisea juggles diapers and baby bottles．His boss agreed to the time off—but he will have to forgo his $18-an-hour pay．It won’t be easy．Though Garro's $40,000 salary will cover their mortgage，the couple will have to freeze their retirement accounts，scale back on Melina's after-school activities—and pray that nothing goes wrong with the car．“It takes away from your cushion and your security,” says Garro．“Things will be tight.”

The 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act was supposed to help families like Garro’s，offering a safety net to employees who want to take time off to nurture newborns，tend to their own major illnesses or care for sick relatives. But while the law guarantees that workers won’t lose their jobs，it doesn’t cover their paychecks．One survey last year showed that while 24 million Americans had taken leaves since 1999，2.7 million more wanted to，but couldn’t afford it．That may change soon．In response to increasing demands from voters，at least 25 states are now exploring new ways to offer paid leave．One possibility: tapping state disability funds．A handful of states—New York，New Jersey，California，Rhode Island and Hawaii—already dip into disability money to offer partial pay for women on maternity leave．But that doesn’t help dads or people caring for elderly parents．New Jersey and New York may soon expand disability programs to cover leave for fathers and other caretakers．Thirteen states，including Arizona，Illinois and Florida，have proposed using unemployment funds to pay for leave.

Massachusetts has been especially creative．When the state's acting governor，Jane Swift，gave birth to twin daughters in May，she drew attention to the issue with her own“working maternity leave”: she telecommuted part-time but earned her usual full-time salary．Even before Swift returned to work last week，the state Senate unanimously passed a pilot plan that would use surplus funds from a health-insurance program for the unemployed to give new parents 12 weeks off at half pay．Another plan，proposed in the House，would require employers to kick in $20 per worker to set up a“New Families Trust Fund.” Businesses would get tax credits in return．This week Swift is expected to announce her own paid-leave plan for lower-income mothers and fathers．Polls show widespread public support—another reason Swift and other politicians across the country have embraced the issue.

Still，not everyone's wild about the idea．People without children question why new parents—the first group to get paid leave under many of the proposed plans—should get more government perks than they do．Business groups are resistant to proposals that would raid unemployment funds; several have already filed suit to block them．As the economy slows，many companies say they can’t afford to contribute to proposed new benefit funds either．Business lobbyists say too many employees already abuse existing federal family-leave laws by taking time off for dubious reasons or in tiny time increments．The proposed laws，they say，would only make matters worse.

For Garro and Duplisea，though，the new laws could make all the difference．As Melina fixes a peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwich，Duplisea hugs a snoozing Andres against his T T-shirt．“We’re trying to do the right thing by two kids，and we have to sacrifice,” Duplisea says．In Massachusetts and plenty of other states，help may be on the way.


注（1）：本文选自Newsweek；

注（2）：本文习题命题模仿对象：第1、2、4、5、3题分别模仿2013年真题Text 2第1、3、2、5题和Text 3 第1题。



1．From the first paragraph，we learn that ______.

A) Garro and Duplisea used to live a comfortable and easy life

B) Duplisea's boss is so considerate as to allow him to keep his job

C) Garro can earn more money so she should go back to work

D) the couple have made a lot of sacrifices to take care of their children

2．When Garro says“It takes away from your cushion and your security”（Lines 8～9，Paragraph 1），she means ______.

A) it exhausts her family savings

B) it plunges her family into financial trouble

C) it deprives her children of health insurance

D) it makes her feel insecure

3．If Garro lives in Massachusetts，she will ______.

A) have 12 weeks off at half pay

B) telecommute part-time but earn full-time salary

C) leave her job without pay to take care of her kids

D) get $20 from her employer for her leave

4．The word“perk”（Line 2，Paragraph 4）most probably means ______.

A) grant

B) policy

C) encouragement

D) reward

5．The author's attitude towards paid leave seems to be that of ______.

A) opposition

B) suspicion

C) approval

D) indifference





篇章剖析


本文为说明文，主要介绍带薪请假政策的起因、制定过程和实施情况，以及所面临的问题和反对意见。文章首先以加罗一家的经历说明停薪请假的人所面临的经济困难；然后在第二、三段介绍了各州针对这一问题的解决方案。第四段介绍了反对者的态度和看法，最后一段再次以加罗一家的情况来说明带薪请假政策可能带来的积极变化，并且呼应了文章开头部分，以此作为结尾，使得全文层次分明，结构完整。





词汇注释


scrape /skreɪp/ v. （常与along，by，through连用）勉强维持生计；勉强通过

furnish /ˈfəːnɪʃ/ v. 供应，提供

juggle /ˈdʒʌg(ə)l/ v. 耍，弄

diaper /ˈdaɪəpə(r)/ n. 尿布

forgo /fɔːˈgəʊ/ v. 抛弃；放弃

cushion /kuʃən/ n. 缓冲，缓和不利后果的东西

tap /tæp/ v. 开发；利用

maternity /məˈtəːnɪti/ adj. 母性的，孕妇的；适合于孕妇的

telecommute /ˌtelɪkəˈmjuːt/ v. （在家里通过使用与工作单位连接的计算机终端）远距离工作

pilot plan 试点方案

kick in 参与提供资金和其他帮助的活动

tax credit 税金免除

perk /pɜːk/ n. （= perquisite）额外津贴

raid /reɪd/ v. 侵吞

lobbyist /ˈlɒbiɪst/ n. 院外活动集团成员；说客

increment /ˈɪnkrɪmənt/ n. 增加，增量





难句突破


The 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act was supposed to help families like Garro's，offering a safety net to employees who want to take time off to nurture newborns，tend to their own major illnesses or care for sick relatives.

主体句式：The Act was supposed to help...

结构分析：本句是一个复杂句，既包括从句，也包括分词结构。Be supposed to do something 表示“应该做某事”，通常强调义务、责任等。Safety net 原意是防止坠落受伤的“安全网”，在此引申为“安全保障”。

句子译文：1993年颁布的《家庭医疗休假法》本来应该帮助像加罗这样的家庭，为那些请假照顾新生儿、治疗重病或者照顾患病亲人的员工提供一个安全保障。





题目分析


1．D 推理题。从第一段的内容来看，为了照顾两个孩子，这一对夫妇做出了许多选择。这些选择大都意味着做出一定牺牲，比如请假在家照顾孩子，收入减少，冻结退休金账户，减少孩子课外活动开支等。

2．B 语义题。从第一段列举的事实来看，加罗夫妇不得不冻结退休金账户，减少梅丽娜的课后活动开支——还要祷告汽车别出问题。可见请假照顾孩子给他们带来了严重的经济问题。答案B正确。