From: jimc@cobabe.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Jim Cobabe)
Subject: Re: kids and morals
Reply-To: jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph 
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 16:37:46 GMT

In article <4386.29E26797@umagic.FIDONET.ORG>, Christian.Walters@umagic.FIDONET.ORG (Christian Walters) writes:
(stuff deleted)
|> What I'm seeking is ANYTHING that will help out when parents screw up.
|> And I'm not talking about just maybe being too harsh or too conservative
|> or anything else that would make kids less like me :) I'm not completely
|> enamored of a social program for several reasons: by whose criteria
|> should we pick which parents need help, for example.

Yes, this is one of my objections to increasing government involvement in
_anything_.  We already have major problems with conflict between bureacratic
social welfare institutions and parents.   Bureaucratic organizations have a
specific mission that does not necessarily complement the goals of all parents. 

For instance, a mother I know had her children taken away from her because
she "neglected" them.  She customarily left the childen without adult supervision
while shopping, etc.  Perhaps the children _were_ being neglected.  Maybe
they were in some real danger while they were left on their own.  But not
according to the mother.  She believed that the oldest child was responsible
enough to take care of his younger siblings in her brief absences.

One of their neighbors took note of this situation, and complained to the
bureaucratic department responsible for this concern.  While the mother
was away one day, the sheriff arrived at her home and forcibly removed
the children.

The oldest child refused to open the door for the sheriff.  He had been
well taught not to open the door for strangers.  So they broke the door
down.  Like something out of a t.v. crime drama -- armed cops batter
the door down and storm into the house.

When the mother returned home, she found the house empty.  She called
the police, and eventually was informed that her children had been removed
"for their own protection".

I didn't mean to make a long sermon out of this, but I hear credible stories like
this with alarming frequency.  It is hard for me to see how anyone was better
off after going though some such terrifying experience.

|> Not to mention the
|> fact that government intervention doesn't have a sterling record for
|> making things easier.

In fact, the record is just plain miserable.  Proof of their fitness for the job.
 
|> I would love it if we could just leave it all to the parents and not
|> worry about it. But we've been doing that for a long long time, and it
|> doesn't look like it's working anymore. Maybe I'm just an idealist, but
|> I can picture a world without date rape and street gangs. :)

Yes.  How about using the government to promote parental responsibilities.
I don't mean interference.  I am thinking about things like spreading information
and ideas, sponsoring grass roots community groups, dispensing propaganda,
etc?  Government organizations can be effective in causes such as these.
The government could take more responsibility for support of parents in
their parenting role, instead of trying to usurp this responsibilty.

|> >What matters more is that _something_ is taught at the appropriate
|> >time.  Where people apparently run into problems is if the critical
|> >period for teacing is missed.
|>  
|> Exactly. So what do we do if this period is missed, and the child
|> doesn't develop socially? (I see another problem with a social program -
|> by the time all the paperwork was filled out, lost, and filled out again
|> the problem kid would have outgrown his impressionable stage.)
|>  
|> Do we agree on the problem here? To me, it seems like all the problems
|> associated with children and teenagers (and therefore eventually adults)
|> are getting worse. When I left Huntsville for school 5 1/2 years ago,
|> there weren't any street gangs - at least none worthy of getting news
|> coverage.
|>  
|> But you want to leave it all up to the parents, which will not make the
|> problems go away. They will continue at the present rate, until
|> something is done. I don't know what should be done. A social program
|> might not do any good, but there should be SOMETHING. Just because I
|> know everything about religion doesn't make me an expert in politics :)

Well, I know that it is easier to build something right than it is to fix it later.
I suspect that any measures we attempt after the damage is done will prove
to be less effective.  I agree that something constructive could be done here,
but have to admit that I have no original or innovative ideas about what to
do.  Perhaps we will just have to learn to be more tolerant. :-)

*****************************************************************
| Jim Cobabe                   |  uunet!ingr!b11!cobabe!jimc    |
| Software Consultant          |  jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com      |
| System Utilities Group       | Just My Own Bigoted Opinions |
| Mail Stop: CR1104            |  phone: (205) 730-5625         |
| Intergraph Corporation       |    fax: (205) 730-6011         |
| Huntsville, AL  35894-0001   |                                |
*****************************************************************