Raising Generations of Wimps

Listening to the radio last evening on the way home I was incredibly frustrated. The topic was Abby Sunderland, the 16 year old girl who was attempted to follow in her older brother's wake and sail around the world, solo. Reflecting the incredibly over protective society and culture that we have created, mother's were calling in chastising Sunderland's parents, ascribing motives, stating as fact the level of intelligence and maturity the sixteen year old Sunderland must have because they have a sixteen year old girl.

Thank goodness for the Abby Sunderland's of the world. Young people who have a dream, have acquired skills and who are fortunate to have parents who support their dreams and help build their skills. The Abby Sunderland's of our nation are getting to be fewer and farther between as our Nanny State culture and sociology not only prevent the ability of an Abby to develop, but if and when she does descends on the parents of such a remarkable young women with threats of taking away other children and prosecution for child endangerment.

To recap, Sunderland set off from Marina Del Rey with the goal of sailing around the world in her boat "Wild Eyes." Her brother had accomplished the feat a few years ago and at the time set the record for youngest solo circumnavigator, since broken. She grew up on the water and sailing in small and big boats. Earlier this month a rescue signal was sent from her boat in the middle of the Indian Ocean. Having survived a big storm, Abby was below deck repairing her engine (yes a sixteen year old girl repairing a marine engine) when a rogue wave rolled her boat. It rolled completely, broke her mast, damaged much of her electronic gear and also knocked Abby out for a time according to her account. A few days after her disabling she was rescued by a French ship that was a few hundred miles away--close in the Indian Ocean. Yesterday Abby's mother gave birth to either her seventh or eighth child, a boy named after the captain of the French vessel that rescued Abby.

Before she took off the Helicopter Moms and Dads were out in force trying to get the State of California from preventing Abby from setting sail. Because their own children are coddled, wrapped and taken everywhere in their Navigators or Escalades they feel every child must be like their own. Unfortunately more and more are becoming unable to fend for themselves, or even make breakfast, as parents tend to more and more of their needs. On the other end of the spectrum are more and more children who are ignored by their young parent(s) and raised by grandparents. A gulf is forming between the entitled and pampered and the destitute and ignored among our children. Abby, who is neither, provides hope that once again our nation can raise children who are able to learn skills, focus and apply them to create adventure, conquer goals and challenge themselves and others.

I have a friend who works in a Southern California high school in an urban setting. She is an administrator and over the years her job has evolved so that her primary duties are to work with pregnant students. Keep them in school through their pregnancies and then after delivery getting them back to school. Special classes have to be set up, there are enough pregnancies to have their own teachers. Should not this situation, in just one high school but no doubt reflective of many in our region, be of greater concern than another sixteen year old girl sailing a boat by herself?

This weekend another teenager, a fifteen year old, was shot and killed in Long Beach. Police say he was a gang member, one of tens of thousands of fifteen year olds in the region in gangs. One of hundreds of young teenagers killed in gang violence of the past several years, his murder merits a column on the front page and soon will be forgotten by all but a few. Shouldn't the condition that allows families to raise multiple generations of gang bangers be a bigger concern and issue than parents who have given their children the skills, physical, emotional and intellectual, to sail a high tech boat with the goal of circumnavigation?

On the one end of the spectrum we have the throw-away children the state and local governments feel can be treated with more and more money and programs that have proven do not work as they try not to caste judgement on the parents, but rather want to feel good about how they are trying to tackle the problem. They may feel good about the programs they have developed that continue to fail, but their failure is costing lives and creating future failures as the problems grow. Afraid to look judgemental they cannot come to castigate young, unemployed or still in high school, poor women having babies with absent dads (often thankfully), often more than one baby with more than one dad. These children are on the road to gang membership because there is no family to raise them, but rather a public sector that employs no consequences for the mother, or the father, or the grandmother or grandfather who enabled their teenage children to become parents. But ask their opinion of Abby Sunderland and her parents and the judgements are easy to come by.

Go by any elementary school on a school day and count how many children are walking or riding their bikes to school compared to how many are being dropped off by moms in huge SUVs slurping on a Starbucks or Big Gulp as they drop off their kids then speed off at 35 MPH in the school zone talking on the phone. Go to any sports practice and see how many kids from the neighborhood have walked or rode their bike to the practice compared to how many are not only driven but their parents are sit and watch everything Salem or Montana do.

Our school has a Talent Show and some parents are upset because the kids are judged and winners are announced. Uh-oh! You know what that means? If there is a winner their must be a loser. Yes, I'm sorry but Jennifer or Jose did not sing or dance as well as the other kid--evidently you are the only who could not see it. Do you think Abby Sunderland's parents lamented awards being handed out in school for performance, achievement, success? Probably not, but then their kids probably were and are kicking every other kid's butt.

Drive around neighborhoods on weekends or after school, how many kids do you see out playing in the yards and streets? Was it like this when you were growing up? Our kids are padded from knees, to wrists, to elbows to heads to ride a push scooter. The state has mandated that they be strapped into special car seats until they are practically having their first periods or "night time discharges" and my guess is that by the time my kids reach sixteen the minimum driving age will have moved to eighteen, or maybe twenty-one.

I am not sure what is worse for the future of current generations, the single moms having kids in gang infested communities destined to repopulate the gangs, or the Helicopter Parents who hover over every little move and activity of precious Tonya or Austin. These parents never leave their children, at birthday parties you need food and beverage for each kid and at least one parent, at rehearsals or practices, at school field trips, one wonders if the kids must leave the door open when using the bathroom.

We are raising two types of children, those with no hope because they are born into the high crime, low parental touch, community or they are born into the high touch, afraid to let you fail and learn community. In the meantime Abby Sunderland and her family is criticized because she is neither. God forbid some more children in our society are raised to achieve success on their own, or learn how to cope with failure when they don't.

Ask the mom of the fifteen year old shot down this weekend if she would rather her son met the fate he met, or had the chance to sail around the world with the risk he may die that way. Abby knows the answer.

Abby Sunderland's news conference, does this sound like teenagers you encounter?

Abby Sunderland's web page

DCS06302010

"The Nanny" Starring California

nan-ny: noun, : a child's nurse or caregiver

We think of nannies as individuals charged to care for and protect the children of others--for a fee. I grew up with some two wonderful nannies: Maria and Mary Poppins, okay they both happened to be Julie Andrews. While my nannies were fictional my mom was real, a strong and intelligent woman who had a wonderful sense of humor and raised my sister, brother and I to be respectful, courteous, kind and thoughtful. Our dad travelled quite a bit for his career so many of the trials and tribulations of growing up led to mom, putting on band-aids, resovling disputes, helping with school projects, car pooling to football or ballet. For us nannies were fictional characters plopped into households with disinterested or distracted parents who did not have the time to raise their children so they paid someone to do it for them.

Starting today, July 1st, California has some new laws taking effect meant to protect us, the citizens of California. Most notable of these laws are those meant to protect me, and more importantly my children, from getting fat or obsese; taking the responsibility for good nutrition and dietary habits away from the family and giving it to the state and those who provide food for us. Starting today restaurants must post the calories of every serving--because I really had no idea that a dinner of a bacon-avocado cheeseburger, fries and chocolate-coconut cheesecake was probably higher in calories than the grilled chicken salad with vinagrette on the side. Starting today high schools will no longer be able to sell sodas to students--because they will not go off campus to get sodas anyway and the net result will be a loss in revenue for clubs and student organizations. Starting today all schools in the state can no longer use those nasty transfats--margarine, shortening or oils that contain trans-fats; since the schools are already providing free lunches to much of the population they want to make sure they are somewhat not unhealthy. Okay, I'll give them this one, while still overly intrusive to me--I think local districts should be working with parents and the local community to develop healthy breakfasts and lunches using non-fried foods, preservatives or colorings as much as possible. So one out of three new laws, actually not a bad record for our state goverment.

On top of previous laws passed, over one thousand per year in California the past several years, the state has intruded more and more into our lives and what should be our responsibilities. While you cannot legislate against stupidity you can legislate stupidly and that is what California's lawmakers have tried to do and done the past decade or more. Law after law after law is passed that is intendend to "protect" the people of California, as if the Legislature can supercede God and prevent death. One tragic accident happens and someone dies as a result and the lawmakers go into full nanny mode and legislation begins to pour out of Sacramento to prevent such a tragedy again. From what we can do in our cars, to where people can smoke, to building standards against the one in a thousand years earthquake, California lawmakers have spent hours and days and weeks crafting legislation that is meant to save us from ourselves.

A child's nurse or caregiver, for a fee. While California lawmakers have played nanny to the citizens of the state, their main charges as nannies have not been the ordinary citizens of their districts however, the main role of protection and nurturing and care giving has been those who pay the fees for their services. If the Legislature is the Nanny, the citizens are the step-children in the relationship and the real children are the public employees--by far the biggest benefactors in the nanny state. As the annual budget deficits and debates occur in Sacramento the biggest piece of our budget--salaries and benefits--are rarely a part of any discussions. Until now.

The nannies in the Democratic majority in the Assembly and Senate are circling their prams as it is evident that their charges are going to have to pay some of the price to achieve a balanced budget. This week Governor Schwarzenegger stated he wants a two-tiered pension system for public employees, the existing tier affect the 200,000 plus employees and a new tier for everyone hired from today forward. The nannies are in an uproar trying to protect employees who have not yet been hired yet. Why? Because they are in office almost exclusively because of the funding their campaigns have received from the public employee unions. Changing benefits and retirement for future employees changes the funds flowing through the unions, and that is not good for future campaign donations.

For the past decade the nannies have pushed through budgets, with some Republicans signing off on them and Republican Governor(s) signing the budgets, that have increased the number of state employees--increasing the size of the public employee unions, increasing their dues revenue, increasing their political contributions and increasing the campaign donations given to elect and re-elect the lawmakers. A very nice relationship that has been incredibly beneficial to both sides has resulted in a Legislature with too much time spent passing laws impacting the rest of the state and protecting the workers for the state.

Gabriella Holt, who ran for Assembly in Long Beach and lost to a Democrat with full backing from state employee union, has started a group that is on the right track. Citizens for California Reform is committed to changing the structure of California's government, mainly by returning our Legislature to a part-time position. Holt argues, rightfully I feel, that our state elected officials are over-paid and by being full time have too much time when they are not governing and therefore are able to meddle. A full time legislature that year after year cannot follow the state constitution, missing annual budget deadlines every year. So what are they doing all year if they are not addressing and working on the number one issue in the state? Banning sodas, counting your calories, increasing taxes, hiring more workers and adding to the expenses for the state today and for decades to come.

A nanny is paid to take care of someone else's children. If California is a Nanny State, who are the children that are the primary focus of the nannies' care, you or the state workers? With the economic situation the way it is, let's cut back expenses and cut our nanny to part-time.