Susan

Throughout the spring and summer of 2020, across the U.S. and the world, millions of quarantined citizens appeared nightly at their windows and balconies, offering thanks to the healthcare workers whose lives were dedicated to saving theirs. In my little corner of Silver Lake, 7 p.m. commenced a daily cacophonous communal concert of pots and pans banging, trombones and trumpets blaring, dogs and coyotes howling: a grateful group roar. I was 67 with a history of respiratory illness: extra high risk. My younger neighbors, knowing this, grocery-shopped for me, sweetening my mornings with fresh milk and fruit during those long, grim days.

“Sacrament” is Susan Straight’s homage to a small fictional band of ICU nurses battling the 2020 COVID-19 surge at a San Bernardino hospital. Her 10th novel follows the beat she’s been covering, and living, since her first. “Aquaboogie,” her 1990 debut, was set in Rio Seco, a fictional stand-in for Riverside, where Straight grew up and still lives. The first in her bloodline to graduate high school, Straight earned an MFA at the University of Massachusetts and brought it home to UC Riverside, where she’s been teaching creative writing since 1988. Her twin passions for her homeland and lyrical artistry bloom on every page. “All summer, there had been fewer cars on the road in Southern California, and everyone remarked on how with no smog, the sunsets weren’t deep, heated crimson. Just quiet slipping into darkness.”

The Los Angeles Times dubbed Straight the “bard of overlooked California,” and “Sacrament” proves the praise. Straight’s African American ex-husband and three daughters; her Latino, Filipino, white, Native and mixed-race neighbors; and her immersion in overlooked California bring new meaning to the advice “write what you know.” Straight’s personal and literary missions extend to who she knows.

In “Sacrament,” Straight turns her singular focus to a handful of nurses camping in a wagon train of funky, sweltering trailers near the hospital they call Our Lady. Separated from their spouses and kids — “Six feet apart or six feet under,” Larette’s son Joey chants — Larette, Cherrise, Marisol and their colleagues are themselves underprotected from the virus, which they eventually contract, and from the domestic dramas that seep from home into their pressure-cooker days. Fearful that her mom will die, Cherrise’s teenage daughter, Raquel, convinces Joey to drive her to the hospital from the date farm where Raquel has been deposited into her Auntie Lolo’s care. The drive should take two hours, but the teens are MIA for two nightmare days. Having narrowly escaped a would-be captor, Raquel remains haunted by her near fate. “The fingers in her hair pulling so hard her scalp felt like it had tiny bubbles under the skin. Wait till I pull your hair for real, bitch. She heard him even now.”

Diving deeper than the quotidian insults of her characters’ loneliness, poverty and fear, Straight brings us inside their exhausted minds. Attempting a nap, Larette lies on the break room cot, eyes closed, to no avail. “Ghost fingers in her left palm. Her right hand holding the phone on FaceTime for the wives. The husbands. The children who were grown,” she writes. “All their faces. Stoic. Weeping. Biting their lips so hard.” Later, Larette tells her husband, “Everyone you see on TV, banging pots and pans, everyone doing parades, it’s so nice. But then I have to be all alone with — their breath. Their breath just — it slows down and it’s terrifying every time.”

Perhaps most painful among the nurses’ many miseries is their isolation: the secrets they keep in hopes of sparing their loved ones an iota of extra suffering. “None of us are telling anyone we love about anything, Larette thought. She hadn’t told [her husband] anything true in weeks.”

As Straight’s work invariably does, “Sacrament” challenges the prevailing notion that the overlooked Californians she centers in her work and in her life are less worthy, less interesting, less human than their wealthier, whiter, more visible urban counterparts. Programmed to equate “rugged independence” with success, many advantaged Americans first appreciated human interdependence (berries in our cereal, test kits on our porches) in lockdown. In Straight’s world, raising each other’s kids, feeding each other’s elders, keeping each other’s secrets, mourning the dead and fighting like hell for the living is not called exigence. It’s called life.

“Sacrament” broadens the reader’s understanding of community beyond flesh-and-blood friends, family and neighbors. The love and care that flow within her community of characters draws the reader into their bright, tight circle, making the characters’ loved ones and troubles feel like the reader’s own.

Spoiler alert: The nurses’ sacrifices, strengths and foibles; their families, robbed not only of their moms and wives and daughters but also of any shred of safety; and their patients — who have tubes stuffed into their urethras and down their throats, blinking their desperate last moments of life into iPads as they take their final breaths — will likely make the reader see and respect and love not only these characters, but the consistently brilliant author who gave them life on the page of this, her finest book.

Maran, author of “The New Old Me” and other books, lives in a Silver Lake bungalow that’s even older than she is.

Ajike “AJ” Owens was a dedicated 35-year-old mother of four when she was shot and killed by her 58-year-old neighbor, Susan Lorincz, in June 2023. The tragedy, which rocked the otherwise peaceful, tight-knit community of Ocala, Fla., followed years of Lorincz making habitual calls to the police to report neighborhood kids, including Owens’, for playing in a vacant lot next to her home. Lorincz, who is white, claimed that the children — most of whom are Black and were under 12 — were a threat, citing one of the nation’s many “stand your ground” laws, which allow individuals to use deadly force to protect themselves if they feel their life is in danger.

Now award-winning filmmaker Geeta Gandbhir, with the support of producer-husband Nikon Kwantu and such nonfiction luminaries as Sam Pollard and Soledad O’Brien, has chronicled the two years leading up to Owens’ death in “The Perfect Neighbor,” premiering Friday on Netflix after an Oscar-qualifying theatrical run. Composed almost entirely of police body camera footage, the moving and powerful verité documentary uses the case to depict the perils of such laws, which are all too easily misused or abused in a society where not every claim of self-defense is treated equally.

A jury convicted Lorincz of manslaughter in August 2024, but the repercussions of her erratic and violent behavior continue to impact the Owens family and their neighbors. Gandbhir, whose sister-in-law was a close friend of Owens, hopes “The Perfect Neighbor” will honor Owens’ memory while showing how our nation’s growing fear of “the other” and the proliferation of “stand your ground” laws are a deadly combination.

Initially, you weren’t planning on making a film about this tragic killing, but you were documenting the aftermath of the crime. Why?

We got a call the night Ajike was killed, and we immediately jumped into action to try to help the family. We stepped in to be the media liaisons. They looked to us to try to keep the story alive in the media, just because they were worried [it would be overlooked]. This is Ocala, Fla., the heart of where “stand your ground” was born. Susan wasn’t arrested for four days because they were doing a “stand your ground” investigation. We were not thinking about making a doc, really. We were just terrified that there would be no justice.

That’s happened before …

Yes, Trayvon Martin’s case being the most notorious.

But in Ajike’s case, there’s reams of footage and audio recordings that captured what happened. How were you able to obtain so much of that material from the police department?

Anthony Thomas, who works with [civil rights attorney] Benjamin Crump, had sued the police department through the Freedom of Information Act and got them to release all of the material that they had pertaining to the case. That’s how we got the footage. What came to us was the police body camera footage, detective interviews, Ring camera footage and cellphone footage. There was also all the audio calls that Susan had made to the police, and then after the night of the [killing], the calls the community had made. There was basically a plethora of stuff that we were handed, in a jumble, and Anthony was like, “Sort this out. See if you can find anything that makes sense for the news, like snippets we can share.”

I was surprised at how much material there was, and I’m just talking about what made it into the film.

It speaks to how much Susan called the police. Basically, the body cam footage [was a result of those calls]. What’s interesting is the reaction when we screened the film for the community. They agreed to be part of this so we wanted to show them before it came out. We’re very concerned with participant care and the ethics of this. They said that they didn’t think that we had everything, because Susan [allegedly] called the police sometimes, like, 10 times a day. They [said they] think the police gave us maybe what they could organize, where they don’t look terrible. But they don’t think that that’s everything.

Ajike’s mother, Pamela Dias, has been a major force in keeping her daughter’s memory alive — and seeking justice. How did she feel about you making this film?

I went to Pamela and said I could make a movie and maybe we could make a change. It’s quite an endeavor to try to change gun laws or the “stand your ground” law, but maybe we can reach people. She said yes. This is a woman who by her own admission was blinded by grief [when Ajike was killed], who said she couldn’t see two feet in front of her. But she knew even then that her daughter’s story had to be told. She said her daughter died standing up for her kids, and she felt it was her turn to stand up.

I told her the material was graphic. But Pam was inspired by Emmett Till and how his mother had an open-casket funeral and told the photographers to take pictures because she wanted the world to know what had happened to her baby. Plus, we thought about George Floyd and [how footage of his killing] sparked a movement. It is a terrible thing to bear witness, but if we let these things continue to happen in the shadows, then they will happen forever. It’s only by bearing witness that things might change.

What about your own emotional well-being while making this film?

See all my gray hair? [Laughs.] I realized later it was grief work for me, because I needed to know what happened. I had to know what happened. I couldn’t understand how someone could pick up a gun and kill their neighbor over children playing nearby. How did we get here? So many questions were just eating me, so the work was in some ways cathartic. Then once we had it all strung out and I thought it was a film, I brought on Viridiana Lieberman, who’s our editor. We had a similar sensibility about what we wanted this to be and we really committed to living in the body camera footage.

Why not use narration?

I worked for 12 years in narratives and scripted before I segued into documentary. I learned that the best vérité documentaries are show and not tell. If you tell people what they’re seeing, there’s some room for doubt or for your bias or some questioning around it. But to me, this footage plays like vérité. There’s no reporter on the ground. There’s no one influencing what’s happening in the neighborhood, other than the police who are coming in and asking questions. I felt that made the footage and the story undeniable. No one could say that we were down there asking provocative questions. And the body camera footage is so incredibly immersive, I wanted people to have the experience of what the community experienced.

How would you describe what they went through?

Their experience felt a bit like a horror film. You have this beautiful, diverse community living together with a strong social network, taking care of each other and each other’s kids. What was so powerful to me in the body camera footage is you really got to see this community as they were before [the tragedy], and you never get that. There’s horrible shootings all the time, and we see the aftermath, right? We see the grieving family, we see the funeral. We have to re-create what their lives were like before. And in this, you see this beautiful community thriving and living together, and that was so profound. I wanted to rebuild their world so everyone could see the damage done by one outlier with a gun. How she was the only one who was repeatedly calling the police and seeing threats where there were none.

We’re used to seeing police body cam footage used as evidence following a police brutality incident, or as entertainment in true crime shows. It’s used to tell a very different story in your film.

I wanted to subvert the use of body cam footage. Body camera footage is a violent tool of the state. It’s often used to criminalize us, particularly people of color. It’s used to dehumanize us, to surveil us, to protect the police. What I wanted to do with this material was flip that narrative and use it to humanize this community.

Why do you think that Susan was not seen as a threat by the police?

She’s a middle-aged white lady. She weaponized her race, her status, and she kept trying to weaponize the police against the community. The fact that she was using hate speech against children [she allegedly called them the N-word]. She was filming them. She was throwing things at them. She was cursing at them. But the police didn’t flag her as more than just a nuisance…. After the third time she called and it was unfounded and not about an actual crime, there should have been some measure taken to reprimand her. They didn’t tell the community that they could file charges against her: “She’s harassing you all. She’s harassing your children.” It was systemic neglect. And honestly, should the police be a catch-all for everything? Probably not. But they were not equipped. They didn’t take the necessary steps and the worst outcomes happened, which is that we lost Ajike, and Susan is in prison for the rest of her life. I’m sure that’s not the outcome she wanted.

There’s a moment in the film where a policeman knocks on Susan’s sliding glass door. She doesn’t know it’s a cop. She opens the curtain and screams at him in a terrifying, almost demonic voice. It’s quite a switch from her nervous, genial 911 calls.

Yeah, the jump scare. That was one of the moments where I was like, “Oh, there she is.” And the 911 call, after she shot Ajike. She was hysterical. Then her voice changes when she says, “They keep bothering me and bothering me, and they won’t f— stop.” I felt my heart clench, because it’s like, “Oh, there she really is.” She has this way of going between victim and aggressor. A little Jekyll and Hyde. It’s frightening.

The victim/aggressor dynamic is part of what makes “stand your ground” laws so dangerous. They can be weaponized.

“Stand your ground” policy was born in Ocala and now it’s in around 38 states, in different forms. It’s a law that emboldens people to pick up a gun to solve a dispute. If you can other-ize your neighbor to the extent of [killing] them, the question is, what else will you do? What else will we tolerate? As human beings, how we show up in our communities is a reflection of how we show up in the world. This film takes place on this tiny street, but it is a microcosm of what is happening today. Susan represented the dangers, and that little community represented the best of what’s under threat.

Oct. 11 (UPI) — Maine Gov. Janet Mills is expected to launch a campaign on Tuesday to unseat longtime U.S. Susan Collins, R-ME, according to internal campaign documents and a now-deleted social media post.

According to a campaign document first reported by Axios and since confirmed by several other news organizations, Mills plans to join the Democrat primary field for Collins’ seat next year, as she is term-limited and cannot run for re-election as governor.

Democrats have been recruiting Mills to run against the five-term Sen. Collins, who is thought by party leaders to be vulnerable based on her low approval ratings, the Portland Press Herald reported.

A video launching the campaign was also briefly posted to Mills’ X account, which directed viewers to an ActBlue web page for donations, Fox News reported on Friday evening.

According to Fox, Mills said she is “running to flip Maine’s seat blue” because Collins has “sold out Maine and bowed down to special interests and to Donald Trump, but that ends now.”

Mills has gained national attention after breaking publicly with President Donald Trump at a White House event when he pushed to exclude transgender women and girls from female sports.

Although the five-term incumbent Collins is regarded as a moderate and has broken with Trump, as well as her party, in the past, the Democratic Senatorial Committee has made the Maine seat a priority, CBS News reported, and Fox noted that Mills is favored for the seat by Sen. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY.

Collins in 2020 beat Democrat nominee Sara Gideon by nearly 9 points even though Gideon spent nearly twice on her campaign as Collins, $62.9 million compared with $29.6 million.

Before Mills can face off with Collins, however, she will have to wade through the Democratic primary, which already features the Sen. Bernie Sanders-endorsed progressive oyster farmer Graham Platner, former End Citizens United vice president Jordan Wood and brewery owner Dan Kleban.

PORTLAND, Maine — Maine’s two-term Democratic Gov. Janet Mills will run for the U.S. Senate seat held by veteran Republican Sen. Susan Collins next year, two people familiar with Mills’ plans said Friday.

The development sets up a potential showdown between the parties’ best-known figures in a state where Democrats see a chance to gain a seat in their uphill quest for the Senate majority.

Mills is tentatively expected to announce her candidacy Tuesday, according to the people, who insisted on anonymity to discuss plans they were not authorized to share publicly.

Mills was the top choice of national Democrats who have long tried to unseat Collins, who has held the seat since 1997. She was urged to run by party leaders including New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader. And though she met only once with Schumer to discuss the race early this year, her decision is viewed as a recruiting win for Democrats, who also have well-known figures with statewide experience running for seats held by Republicans in North Carolina and Ohio.

Democrats see the Maine seat as especially important, considering it is the only one on the 2026 Senate election calendar where Republicans are defending an incumbent in a state carried last year by Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris.

Still, a Democratic majority in the 100-member Senate remains a difficult proposition.

The party would need to gain a net of four seats, while most of the states with Senate elections next year are places where Republican Donald Trump beat Harris. Maine is an exception, while in North Carolina, where Trump narrowly won, Democratic former Gov. Roy Cooper is viewed as a contender, and Democratic former Sen. Sherrod Brown is running in Ohio, where Trump won comfortably and Brown was defeated in November.

Mills gained national attention in February during a White House meeting of governors with Trump when she announced to him, “We’ll see you in court,” over her opposition to his call for denying states federal funding over transgender rights.

In April, Maine officials sued the Trump administration in an effort to stop the federal government from freezing federal funding to the state in light of its decision to defy a federal ban on allowing transgender students to participate in sports.

Mills stoked Democratic enthusiasm in April when she said of the lawsuit, “I’ve spent the better part of my career listening to loud men talk tough to disguise their weaknesses.”

Mills, 77, is a former state attorney general who won the governorship in 2018 and again in 2022. Maine governors are barred from seeking a third term and, while Mills early this year seemed to dismiss a Senate campaign, she said she had rethought the notion and was “seriously considering” running.

She had set a November deadline for making a decision, though as of mid-September, she was interviewing prospective senior campaign staffers.

A campaign against Collins would pit her against a senator who has built a reputation as a moderate but who was a key supporter of Trump’s Cabinet and judicial nominations. A spokesperson for Collins declined to comment on the expected upcoming Mills announcement.

Collins, 72, has won all of her four reelection campaigns by double-digit percentages, except in 2020.

That year, Collins defeated Democratic challenger Sara Gideon, the former speaker of the Maine House of Representatives, by more than 8 percentage points in a race Democrats felt confident could help them gain a seat in the Senate. Collins won in a year Democrats gained a net of three seats in the chamber. She won despite Trump losing Maine to Democrat Joe Biden by 9 percentage points.

Like Collins, Mills was born in rural Maine. She became Maine’s first female criminal prosecutor in the mid-1970s, and she would later become the state’s first elected female district attorney as well as its first female attorney general and governor. She served as attorney general twice, from 2009 to 2011 and from 2013 to 2019.

A few other challengers have declared candidacies for the Democratic nomination, including oyster farmer Graham Platner, who has launched an aggressive social media campaign. Platner has the backing of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who posted on social media on Thursday that Platner is “a great working class candidate for Senate in Maine who will defeat Susan Collins” and that it’s “disappointing that some Democratic leaders are urging Gov. Mills to run.”

Whittle and Beaumont write for the Associated Press and reported from Portland and Des Moines, respectively. AP writer Seung Min Kim in Washington contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — America’s public health system is headed to a “very dangerous place” with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his team of anti-vaccine advisors in charge, fired Centers for Disease Control and Prevention chief Susan Monarez warned senators on Wednesday.

Describing extraordinary turmoil inside the nation’s health agencies, Monarez and former CDC Chief Medical Officer Debra Houry described exchanges in which Kennedy or political advisors rebuffed data supporting the safety and efficacy of vaccines.

Monarez, who was fired after just 29 days on the job following disagreements with Kennedy, told senators deadly diseases like polio and whooping cough, long contained, are poised to make a comeback in the U.S.

“I believe preventable diseases will return, and I believe we will have our children harmed by things they don’t need to be harmed by,” Monarez said before the Senate health committee.

Monarez describes her firing by RFK Jr.

Monarez said she was ordered by Kennedy to resign if she did not sign off on new vaccine recommendations, which are expected to be released later this week by an advisory panel that Kennedy has stocked with medical experts and vaccine skeptics. She said that when she asked for data or science to back up Kennedy’s request to change the childhood vaccination schedule, he offered none.

She added that Kennedy told her “he spoke to the president every day about changing the childhood vaccination schedule.”

Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a physician who chairs the powerful health committee, listened intently as Monarez and Houry described conversations with Kennedy and his advisers.

“To be clear, he said there was not science or data, but he still expected you to change schedule?” Cassidy asked.

Cassidy carefully praised President Trump for his commitment to promoting health policies but made it clear he was concerned about the circumstances surrounding Monarez’s removal.

Houry, meanwhile, described similar exchanges with Kennedy’s political advisors, who took an unprecedented role in preparing materials for meetings of the CDC’s advisory vaccine panel.

Ahead of this week’s meeting of the panel, Houry offered to include data around the hepatitis B shot that is administered to newborns to prevent spread of the deadly disease from the mother. She said a Kennedy advisor dismissed the data as biased because it might support keeping the shots on the schedule.

“You’re suggesting that they wanted to move away from the birth dose, but they were afraid that your data would say that they should retain it?” Cassidy asked.

Critical vaccine decisions are ahead

During the Senate hearing, Democrats, all of whom opposed Monarez’s nomination, also questioned Kennedy’s motives for firing Monarez, who was approved for the job unanimously by Republicans.

“Frankly, she stood up for protecting the well-being of the American people, and for that reason she was fired,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who caucuses with Democrats.

Monarez said it was both her refusal to sign off on new vaccination recommendations without scientific evidence and her unwillingness to fire high-ranking career CDC officials without cause that led to her ousting.

Kennedy has denied Monarez’s accusations that he ordered “rubber-stamped” vaccine recommendations but has acknowledged he demanded firings. He has described Monarez as admitting to him that she is “untrustworthy,” a claim Monarez has denied through her attorney.

While Senate Republicans have been mostly loath to challenge Trump or even Kennedy, many of them have expressed concerns about the lack of availability of COVID-19 vaccines and the health department’s decisions to scale back some childhood vaccines.

Others have backed up Kennedy’s distrust of the nation’s health agencies.

Kansas Republican Sen. Roger Marshall, a doctor, aggressively questioned Monarez about her “philosophy” on vaccines as she explained that her decisions were based on science. Alabama GOP Sen. Tommy Tuberville said Trump was elected to make change and suggested Monarez’s job was to be loyal to Kennedy.

“America needs better than this,” Tuberville said.

The Senate hearing was taking place just a day before the vaccine panel starts its two-day session in Atlanta to discuss shots against COVID-19, hepatitis B and chickenpox. It’s unclear how the panel might vote on the recommendations, though members have raised doubts about whether hepatitis B shots administered to newborns are necessary and have suggested COVID-19 recommendations should be more restricted.

The CDC director must endorse those recommendations before they become official. Health and Human Services Deputy Secretary Jim O’Neill, now serving as the CDC’s acting director, will be responsible for that.

“I’m very nervous about it,” Monarez said of the meeting.

Seitz and Jalonick write for the Associated Press. AP writers Mike Stobbe in New York and Lauran Neergaard in Washington contributed to this report.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., seen here at a hearing at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. in September. He allegedly pushed now-former Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC, Director Susan Monarez to resign only a month after she was given the job. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo

Sept. 10 (UPI) — Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Susan Monarez will testify before the Senate about the organization she briefly ran.

Monarez will appear on Sept. 17 before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, along with Deb Houry, the former Chief Medical Officer and Deputy Director for Program and Science at CDC. Houry resigned her position to protest Monarez’s termination.

The two are slated to discuss their time at the CDC to offer testimony regarding their take on the state of the agency.

“To protect children’s health, Americans need to know what has happened and is happening at the CDC,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., chairperson of the HELP Committee, in a press release Tuesday. “They need to be reassured that their child’s health is given priority. Radical transparency is the only way to do that.”

“[Susan Monarez] is a public health expert with unimpeachable scientific credentials,” Kennedy had said of her at the beginning of August after she was sworn into her role. “I have full confidence in her ability to restore the [CDC’s] role as the most trusted authority in public health and to strengthen our nation’s readiness to confront infectious diseases and biosecurity threats.”

However, Monarez only held her position at the CDC for about four weeks, before allegedly being pushed out because she wouldn’t echo the agenda of U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. or remove scientists from the agency because of his plans.

She was fired after refusing to resign.

“Susan Monarez is not aligned with the president’s agenda of Making America Healthy Again,” White House spokesperson Kush Desai said in a statement to media in regard to her being axed.

“Since Susan Monarez refused to resign despite informing HHS leadership of her intent to do so, the White House has terminated Monarez from her position with the CDC,” he added.

“Parents deserve a CDC they can trust to put children above politics, evidence above ideology and facts above fear,” wrote Monarez in an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal last week. “I was fired for holding that line.”

Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, who formerly led the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, and Dr. Daniel Jernigan, who headed the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, also quit the CDC as Kennedy has worked to reshape the vaccine advisory panel to meet his own vaccine policies.

Kennedy, who cancelled approximately $500 million in contracts for mRNA vaccines last month, changed the recommendations for healthy children and pregnant women to receive COVID-19 vaccinations and led the reduction of approval for updated COVID shots this fall to only cover people over 65, or younger Americans with underlying conditions, via the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA.

Aug. 27 (UPI) — The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention left after less than one month on the job, and four top officials with the agencies resigned.

Susan Monarez, 50, the first non-physician to lead the agency in more than 50 years, was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on July 29 in a 51-47 vote and sworn in on July 31. She served as acting director when Donald Trump became president again on Jan. 20 and was nominated for the top job on March 24. Dave Weldon‘s nomination was withdrawn because of the former U.S. House member’s questioning of vaccine safety.

For two years, she was deputy director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health, where she applied artificial intelligence and machine learning to health matters.

“Susan Monarez is no longer director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,” a post on the Department of Health and Human Services’ X account said. “We thank her for her dedicated service to the American people.”

The post also said Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy has “full confidence in his team at @CDCgov who will continue to be vigilant in protecting Americans against infectious diseases at home and abroad.”

NBC reported four other top CDC officials submitted their resignations: Dr. Debra Houry, the CDC’s chief medical officer; Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases; Dr. Daniel Jernigan, the director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases; and Dr. Jen Layden, director of the Office of Public Health Data, Surveillance and Technology.

The CDC, which is part of HHS, had 12,820 employees in September 2024, but the numbers have thinned, including 600 terminated earlier this month. In March, HHS announced plans to cut 2,400 positions.

Monarez received three degrees at the University of Wisconsin: Bachelor of Science, Master of Science and a doctorate.

Just eight days after being sworn in, Monarez was thrust into a tragic situation.

On Aug. 8, a gunman shot at six buildings of the CDC’s headquarters in Atlanta, and one police officer died. The gunman, who died at the scene, had said the COVID-19 vaccine made him sick and blamed the CDC,

Members of the CDC union want lies about the COVID-19 shot’s safety to be strongly debunked.

“We know that misinformation can be dangerous,” Monarez said during a meeting, according to a transcript obtained by NBC News. “Not only to health, but to those that trust us and those we want to trust. We need to rebuild the trust together.”

She was supposed to convene a meeting with CDC staff on Monday about safety concerns and security enhancements.

“Unfortunately, we need to postpone Monday’s event for an HHS meeting that I have been asked to attend in person in DC,” Monarez wrote in an email to CDC staff seen by NBC News.

Sources told The New York Times that Monarez objected to Kennedy replacing all members of the CDC advisory committee on vaccines. He distanced the entire committee of all 17 members, and on June 11 named eight people, including prominent vaccine skeptics and pandemic response critics.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices normally includes pediatricians, geriatricians and other vaccine experts but the new panel includes a psychiatrist, neuroscientist, epidemiologist and biostatistician, and professor of operations management.

The CDC recommends the updated 2024-2025 COVID-19 vaccine for everyone 6 months and older based on age, vaccination history and immune status. Patients and their families are urged to consult with their physician.

Earlier Wednesday, the Food and Drug Administration approved the latest round of COVID-19 vaccines, but new limits were set on which Americans can get them. The agency ended its authorization for the broad use of COVID-19 shots, clearing them only for patients at higher risk of severe illness, and those age 65 and older — or younger adults with at least one underlying health condition who would qualify.

Last week, HHS confirmed Retsef Levia, a vocal COVID-19 vaccine opponent, was appointed to lead a CDC subcommittee reviewing safety of the shots.

On Aug. 5, Kennedy announced HHS will terminate 22 contracts worth $500 million to develop vaccines for respiratory viruses using mRNA technology, including COVID-19 shots, after officials determined the “technology poses more risks than benefits for these respiratory viruses.”

In this week’s newsletter, we have a chat with Susan Gubar, whose new book, “Grand Finales: The Creative Longevity of Women Artists,” profiles seven creators who found a second wind in their advancing years. We also look at recent releases reviewed in The Times. And a local bookseller tells us what’s selling right now.

Seventeen years ago, Susan Gubar was handed a death sentence. A distinguished professor emerita of English and women’s studies at Indiana University and the co-author (with Sandra M. Gilbert) of 1979’s “The Madwoman in the Attic,” a groundbreaking work of feminist literary theory, Gubar in 2008 was staring down a terminal cancer diagnosis. A clinical trial involving an experimental drug prolonged her life and gave her the impetus to tackle a new project about seven artists — George Eliot, Colette, Georgia O’Keeffe, Isak Dinesen, Marianne Moore, Louise Bourgeois, Mary Lou Williams, Gwendolyn Brooks and Katherine Dunham — who entered a new phase of creative ferment and productivity as they grew older.

I talked to Gubar about her new book, the myth of old age and the persistent stereotypes attached to female artists who may be perceived as having outlived their usefulness as creators.

(Please note: The Times may earn a commission through links to Bookshop.org, whose fees support independent bookstores.)

✍️ Author Chat

Can you talk about how the book came about?

In 2008, I was told that I had 3-5 years to live with late-stage ovarian cancer. The standard treatment was ineffectual. But then in 2012, my oncologist encouraged me to enroll in a clinical trial that was experimenting with a new drug. After nine years in the trial, she then urged me to take “a drug holiday” since long-term use of the medication could cause leukemia. I am still on that holiday. An unanticipated old age made me appreciate the wonderful gifts longevity can bestow.

In researching your subjects, what do they all share in common?

All of my subjects are artists who experienced the losses of aging. They needed canes and wheelchairs and helpers while they suffered the pains of various diseases and regimens. One coped with blindness, another with deafness and still others with the loss of intimates. Yet in the face of such deficits, they used their art to exhibit their audacity, mojo, chutzpah, bravado. They’re exemplars of Geezer Machismo.

All of your subjects are women, who have a much tougher time in terms of earning respect and attention as they age. Can you speak to the obstacles they had to overcome as they reinvented themselves as artists in their advanced years?

The stereotypical old lady is invisible or risible, but we know that many elderly women thrive. My old ladies did not approach their life stories as prime-and-decline narratives. Instead they reinvented themselves. In part, they managed to do this by changing their objectives as artists. They moved from the stage to the page or from elite to popular forms. Some of them underwent religious or political conversions that energized their last years. They fully understood the losses of old age, but they did not settle for less. Instead, they made much of less.

What’s interesting about these artists is that — contrary, I must admit, to what I thought would have been the case — these women were supported by men who became their benefactors, and helped them to negotiate their careers.

Quite a few of the women that I write about were helped by much younger men in their lives, who became facilitators. This is true for George Eliot, Colette, Georgia O’Keeffe, Louise Bourgeoise, Mary Lou Williams and others. Williams, the great jazz pianist, was helped by a Jesuit named Father O’Brien, who helped her get control of her copyrights. Georgia O’Keeffe, in contrast, has been championed by photographer Alfred Stieglitz, but she had to leave him in her midlife to establish her autonomy late in life. He was very controlling, even though he definitely established her reputation. She was aided in her later years by a man young enough to be her grandson.

You are an octogenarian, and writing a book isn’t easy, as you know. Where do you find the inspiration and the strength to keep going as a creator?

What keeps me going is what kept my subjects flourishing in their seventies, eighties or nineties. Any sort of creative activity involves expression, which is a great antidote to depression. It may take the form of sculpting, painting, playing an instrument, teaching a dance routine, making a quilt or a garden, establishing a park or a prize, you name it. Without my two current writing projects, I’d be lost. Even (or maybe especially) in our dismal political climate, ongoing creative projects make each day an adventure.

📰 The Week(s) in Books

Heather Scott Partington reviews “Fox,” Joyce Carol Oates’ mystery novel about a murdered pedophile. “Fox has the bones of a potboiler but is supported by the sinew of the author’s elegant structure and syntax,” writes Partington .

Leigh Haber weighs in on Jess Walter’s book “So Far Gone,” calling the author a “slyly adept social critic [who has] clearly invested his protagonist with all of the outrage and heartbreak he himself feels about the dark course our world has taken.”

Daniel Felsenthal thinks Geoff Dyer’s memoir “Homework” is somewhat meandering, yet “bursts with working-class pride, a fond and mournful belief in the possibility of the British welfare state.”

And Paula L. Woods talked to five mystery writers about the inspirations for their new books.

📖 Bookstore Faves

This week, we’re talking about hot books with Nat Eastman, the manager of Chevalier’s Books on Larchmont Boulevard in Hollywood, the oldest independent bookstore in Los Angeles.

What books are selling in the store right now?

We’ve been moving Percival Everett’s “James” and Ocean Vuong’s “The Emperor of Gladness” hand over fist. Thanks to BookTok, Asako Yuzuki’s “Butter” has become a mainstay on our bestseller list. We also had the honor of hosting Bryan Byrdlong for a reading from his debut poetry collection “Strange Flowers,” and we’ve been handselling it right and left ever since.

What are your perennial sellers?

Kaya Doi’s series of picture books, “Chirri and Chirra,” is a smash hit around here. Joan Didion and bell hooks are reliable customer favorites as well. As an indie shop, though, we love the deeper cuts too — whether that’s “Água Viva,” literally any Yoko Ogawa work or something from our zine collection.

Are you seeing more young people buying books?

Despite all the reports about declining literacy rates among young folk, our children’s section makes up a quarter of our sales. We really try to carve out a space for the next generation of readers with programs like storytime, a middle-grade book club and summer-reading punch cards. To us, messy shelves are annoying everywhere except the kids’ section!