There are three briefer stories that will be covered in this article
WOOD BURNING RESTRICTIONS APPROVED
On Monday, the Natural Resources Commission drafted an ordinance on wood-burning stoves. It was not a complete ban that the city is moving towards. However, it would implement no-burn days when atmospheric conditions and the winds are insufficient to disperse the smoke. Even on those days when would could be burned, it would be limited to six hours per day.
The effects would take place on March 1, 2010. The city would study Davis’ air quality to determine the impact of no-burn days and the impact a more stringent ban would take place.
The council will take up this issue on December 16, 2008.
I fully understand the reasoning of waiting on restrictions. I also understand why they did not want to undertake an outright ban. That said, I do not think a March 1 start date makes any sense. Why wait until the end of winter to start the ban? What practical sense does that make? What value is that for conducting a study. It essentially means that we are waiting for the 2010-11 winter to get real data on the impact. That is fine, but if that is the case, why not begin the ban on September 1, 2010?
Second point, and maybe someone knows who attended the meeting, but did they put an exemption in for lower income people? Especially if you are not banning wood burning, it makes sense to exempt low income people who use the fireplace as their primary means for heat.
At some point this is going to become like a smoking ban, incrementally it will get tougher and tougher and people realize exposure to even small amounts of particulate matter in the air is unhealthy, particularly for a broad range of sensitive people. (A number that likely exceeds the number of people who burn wood on a regular basis).
SAFE HARBOR LAW AND DAVIS TEEN
Good article in the Sacramento Bee this morning describing the incident and the conditions that led a Davis woman to leave her 14 year old son in a hospital in rural Nebraska.
I suppose not yet being a parent myself, I do not have standing to admonish this woman, since I do not know what she’s been through. Taking that chance, I would offer that my first response to hearing this was this was a despicable act by an irresponsible person who should now lose custody of her other two children. Harsh? Perhaps. Let’s take a look at what happened.
But on the other hand, it seems that authorities share some of the responsibility here for failing to assist her calls for help. Do we not have a system set up to help people such as her so that she does not have to take drastic steps such as drive 1600 to Nebraska. A few years ago, I did that drive, you can drive from Western Nebraska to Davis in about 18 or 19 hours of driving if you take minimal rest stops.
The Sacramento Bee article seems a bit less judgmental of her situation than I did, running through exactly what the problem was and how she tried to get help.
Fortunately, Nebraska wisely closed the loophole that was supposed to be for infants to prevent infanticide by desperate mothers who are overwhelmed by the prospect of suddenly having to care for a young baby.
As the Sacramento Bee describes, help is hard to find:
” For parents of such problem teens, there is a network of resources available through schools and mental health providers. But there are cracks in the system, and the frustrations of dealing with a patchwork of services.
When authorities declined to intervene after her son raised a knife against the family, she said, her only option was to abandon him in a state that would accept him.
Her son was the last of three dozen older children abandoned in Nebraska in recent months before the state’s Legislature closed a loophole in its new safe haven law. Now, only newborns can be dropped off without legal liability there.”
According to the article, start with the child’s school and school psychologists. However, they warn that students who *only* have substance abuse problems may not qualify for special education.
“His mother, who works as a custodian, makes about $2,000 a month and lives in a modest house, said she was able to get him into a residential treatment program in Sonoma. He seemed to be improving, she said.
But then he started acting out and getting into trouble. It was the same behavior – defiance and aggression, drugs, drinking and smoking – that had caused such trouble at home, she said.”
The woman told the Bee that she adopted the son when he was four and he was aggressive toward all his family members–verbally and physically abusive.
“After the latest knife-waving incident, the woman said, she called police, who did little to help.
Police in Davis and Sacramento said such situations are handled on a case-by-case basis, with the officer assessing the nature of the threat and the likelihood of violence.
“There’s no formula,” said Steve Pierce, assistant chief of Davis police. He said he did not know the details of the particular case, but confirmed police had gone to the house a number of times.”
She also called Yolo County Child Welfare Services, according to the Bee, they could only protect abused children, not parents.
Nebraska has sent the child back to Yolo County, now he will be placed in foster care, and a court will decide his fate.
Okay, I still blame the mother after all of this, but I can partially understand her actions. But what really seems amiss is the system. And the worst part is that our social services simply do not have the resources to help in this matter. Nor do we have the systems and protocols laid out. So what does a working class woman who makes a fairly low salary and is apparently a single-mother with other children going to do when these problems arise? She went to the system multiple times and the system failed her?
So at the end of this analysis, I still do not agree with the safe harbor strategy and dumping him on someone else, which she has essentially and completely done, he is now going into a foster care system which is equally overwhelmed and unable to attend to his needs. This is an exceedingly sad case and this boy will likely live a very tough life unless he ends up in a home that will have the resources and patience to make a difference in his life.
DEMOCRAT WILL WIN AD 10 ELECTION
In an open race that featured Democrat Alyson Huber and Republican Jack Sieglock, for most of the post-election period Huber had been trailing her opponent by over 1000 votes. This was one of the very few competitive races.
While we have not discussed this race, it is race that I am familiar with and know quite a few people who spent hours working to get Alyson Huber elected to the Assembly.
Well the news came last night that based on the counting of several thousand ballots from Sacramento County, Alyson Huber has surged to a 531 vote lead. She had a net gain of over 900 votes when they completed counting Sacramento County.
There are a couple of hundred ballots outstanding in El Dorado County, and a few in Sacramento and San Joaquin Counties, but not enough to overturn the election. The counties must certify their results by December 2.
At this point barring an unexpected change it looks like Huber will win and bring the Democrats to 51 seats in the Assembly next session. It’s not the two-thirds the Democrats were aiming for and not enough to forestall another budget lock-down; however, Democrats will be happy to have 51 seats in the Assembly.
The two sides could not even agree on a package of cuts and taxes to reduce the $17 billion budget deficit for the next two years. Republicans refused to budge apparently on new revenues. The Republicans argued that the plan lacked a spending cap, economic stimulus, and did not contain enough cuts.
At some point perhaps we will realize that we have enough checks and balances already in place that requiring a two-thirds vote makes it impossible to have real changes. Simple majority approval by the legislature and the governor’s acceptance are all the checks and balances we really need to do something, but the current 2/3 system does not permit that.
Happy Thanksgiving all! Remember, December 2 is the Virtual Town hall Meeting. Big issues are coming up in Davis in December – that is for sure – and the Vanguard will be there to bring you the most up-to-date information and happenings in Davis. See you again on December 1st!
—David M. Greenwald reporting
It will be interesting to find out if Davis decide that poor people’s smoke doesn’t stink… But wait, what about poor sensitive people forced to live next to poor insensitive people!! Oh my!
Ahhh the Social Justice goofballs must be gnashing their teeth at the prospects of this debate!
Have a great thanksgiving.
It will be interesting to find out if Davis decide that poor people’s smoke doesn’t stink… But wait, what about poor sensitive people forced to live next to poor insensitive people!! Oh my!
Ahhh the Social Justice goofballs must be gnashing their teeth at the prospects of this debate!
Have a great thanksgiving.
It will be interesting to find out if Davis decide that poor people’s smoke doesn’t stink… But wait, what about poor sensitive people forced to live next to poor insensitive people!! Oh my!
Ahhh the Social Justice goofballs must be gnashing their teeth at the prospects of this debate!
Have a great thanksgiving.
It will be interesting to find out if Davis decide that poor people’s smoke doesn’t stink… But wait, what about poor sensitive people forced to live next to poor insensitive people!! Oh my!
Ahhh the Social Justice goofballs must be gnashing their teeth at the prospects of this debate!
Have a great thanksgiving.
I don’t think it’s that poor people’s smoke doesn’t stink, it’s a question of whether you can cut out enough smoke without a ban that impacts lower income people.
I don’t think it’s that poor people’s smoke doesn’t stink, it’s a question of whether you can cut out enough smoke without a ban that impacts lower income people.
I don’t think it’s that poor people’s smoke doesn’t stink, it’s a question of whether you can cut out enough smoke without a ban that impacts lower income people.
I don’t think it’s that poor people’s smoke doesn’t stink, it’s a question of whether you can cut out enough smoke without a ban that impacts lower income people.
The Davis teen in Nebraska story also shows up in today’s Enterprise, available online with subscription and password.
The Davis teen in Nebraska story also shows up in today’s Enterprise, available online with subscription and password.
The Davis teen in Nebraska story also shows up in today’s Enterprise, available online with subscription and password.
The Davis teen in Nebraska story also shows up in today’s Enterprise, available online with subscription and password.
The whole rich/poor thing is so silly… Rich people use kiln-dried oak, split and aged to a delicate perfection to use in their EPA tier-III approved fireplaces to add a touch of ambiance to a festive gathering. Their neighbors have sealed houses and aren’t really going to notice or care.
The poor are burning newspapers, plywood scraps and wet logs as a primary form of heating. Their neighbors live in poorly insulated homes that allow them to smell their neighbors breakfast in the morning.
As I said, this is a social justice free-for-all in the making…
Can’t wait! 8)
The whole rich/poor thing is so silly… Rich people use kiln-dried oak, split and aged to a delicate perfection to use in their EPA tier-III approved fireplaces to add a touch of ambiance to a festive gathering. Their neighbors have sealed houses and aren’t really going to notice or care.
The poor are burning newspapers, plywood scraps and wet logs as a primary form of heating. Their neighbors live in poorly insulated homes that allow them to smell their neighbors breakfast in the morning.
As I said, this is a social justice free-for-all in the making…
Can’t wait! 8)
The whole rich/poor thing is so silly… Rich people use kiln-dried oak, split and aged to a delicate perfection to use in their EPA tier-III approved fireplaces to add a touch of ambiance to a festive gathering. Their neighbors have sealed houses and aren’t really going to notice or care.
The poor are burning newspapers, plywood scraps and wet logs as a primary form of heating. Their neighbors live in poorly insulated homes that allow them to smell their neighbors breakfast in the morning.
As I said, this is a social justice free-for-all in the making…
Can’t wait! 8)
The whole rich/poor thing is so silly… Rich people use kiln-dried oak, split and aged to a delicate perfection to use in their EPA tier-III approved fireplaces to add a touch of ambiance to a festive gathering. Their neighbors have sealed houses and aren’t really going to notice or care.
The poor are burning newspapers, plywood scraps and wet logs as a primary form of heating. Their neighbors live in poorly insulated homes that allow them to smell their neighbors breakfast in the morning.
As I said, this is a social justice free-for-all in the making…
Can’t wait! 8)
Point being most people do not rely on wood burning as the exclusive means to heat their homes due to economic necessity. If you can eliminate most burning and allow exemptions, it will solve the problem without burdening the poor. Why is this problematic to you?
Point being most people do not rely on wood burning as the exclusive means to heat their homes due to economic necessity. If you can eliminate most burning and allow exemptions, it will solve the problem without burdening the poor. Why is this problematic to you?
Point being most people do not rely on wood burning as the exclusive means to heat their homes due to economic necessity. If you can eliminate most burning and allow exemptions, it will solve the problem without burdening the poor. Why is this problematic to you?
Point being most people do not rely on wood burning as the exclusive means to heat their homes due to economic necessity. If you can eliminate most burning and allow exemptions, it will solve the problem without burdening the poor. Why is this problematic to you?
I think the point is that while the economic support for lower income people is a sound goal, it is precisely that type of dynamic where wood-burning would cause higher emissions. The EPA certified burners are much more efficient because they use a sealed firebox and burn hotter. That being said, there are very few poor people in Davis, so focusing on the exemption part is overkill anyhow.
Has there actually been any evidence of a particulate problem from wood-burning in Davis? In a small city with no industry, this seems (as one councilman stated for another issue) a solution seeking a problem. I think comparing this to cigarette smoking in terms of health hazard is substantial hyperbole.
I think the point is that while the economic support for lower income people is a sound goal, it is precisely that type of dynamic where wood-burning would cause higher emissions. The EPA certified burners are much more efficient because they use a sealed firebox and burn hotter. That being said, there are very few poor people in Davis, so focusing on the exemption part is overkill anyhow.
Has there actually been any evidence of a particulate problem from wood-burning in Davis? In a small city with no industry, this seems (as one councilman stated for another issue) a solution seeking a problem. I think comparing this to cigarette smoking in terms of health hazard is substantial hyperbole.
I think the point is that while the economic support for lower income people is a sound goal, it is precisely that type of dynamic where wood-burning would cause higher emissions. The EPA certified burners are much more efficient because they use a sealed firebox and burn hotter. That being said, there are very few poor people in Davis, so focusing on the exemption part is overkill anyhow.
Has there actually been any evidence of a particulate problem from wood-burning in Davis? In a small city with no industry, this seems (as one councilman stated for another issue) a solution seeking a problem. I think comparing this to cigarette smoking in terms of health hazard is substantial hyperbole.
I think the point is that while the economic support for lower income people is a sound goal, it is precisely that type of dynamic where wood-burning would cause higher emissions. The EPA certified burners are much more efficient because they use a sealed firebox and burn hotter. That being said, there are very few poor people in Davis, so focusing on the exemption part is overkill anyhow.
Has there actually been any evidence of a particulate problem from wood-burning in Davis? In a small city with no industry, this seems (as one councilman stated for another issue) a solution seeking a problem. I think comparing this to cigarette smoking in terms of health hazard is substantial hyperbole.
“Has there actually been any evidence of a particulate problem from wood-burning in Davis? “
Yes, the initial issue arose because Davis is not meeting state regulations.
Here is the article that lays it all out:
July Wood Burning Article
“Has there actually been any evidence of a particulate problem from wood-burning in Davis? “
Yes, the initial issue arose because Davis is not meeting state regulations.
Here is the article that lays it all out:
July Wood Burning Article
“Has there actually been any evidence of a particulate problem from wood-burning in Davis? “
Yes, the initial issue arose because Davis is not meeting state regulations.
Here is the article that lays it all out:
July Wood Burning Article
“Has there actually been any evidence of a particulate problem from wood-burning in Davis? “
Yes, the initial issue arose because Davis is not meeting state regulations.
Here is the article that lays it all out:
July Wood Burning Article
How is the ban going to be enforced and paid for? Are we going to have to install timers to shut off our stoves after 6 hours?
How is the ban going to be enforced and paid for? Are we going to have to install timers to shut off our stoves after 6 hours?
How is the ban going to be enforced and paid for? Are we going to have to install timers to shut off our stoves after 6 hours?
How is the ban going to be enforced and paid for? Are we going to have to install timers to shut off our stoves after 6 hours?
David,
Thanks. I saw that already though. There is no actual data in that article or on the Yolo Clean Air website, it’s all theoretical. I’m still left wondering if this is really a problem or just a political move.
David,
Thanks. I saw that already though. There is no actual data in that article or on the Yolo Clean Air website, it’s all theoretical. I’m still left wondering if this is really a problem or just a political move.
David,
Thanks. I saw that already though. There is no actual data in that article or on the Yolo Clean Air website, it’s all theoretical. I’m still left wondering if this is really a problem or just a political move.
David,
Thanks. I saw that already though. There is no actual data in that article or on the Yolo Clean Air website, it’s all theoretical. I’m still left wondering if this is really a problem or just a political move.
Poor air quality is an issue in Davis and I thank you for covering this David.
Poor air quality is an issue in Davis and I thank you for covering this David.
Poor air quality is an issue in Davis and I thank you for covering this David.
Poor air quality is an issue in Davis and I thank you for covering this David.
David
You’re right. You have no experience that allows you to relate to or judge that mother’s actions in dumping her son in Nebraska. She embraced a loaded gun when she adopted a 4-year-old with behavioral problems. There was NO other option available to her and it’s obvious she wasn’t giving him the help he needed. I think she should be congratulated for trying to get help for him in a legal fashion, instead of what might have happened had he been allowed to continue living in her home. Despite all the rhetoric by CPS, some kids have been so mistreated by the time they make it to the foster care system that their lives will inevitably be spent in custody of one sort or another. She made the best decision for the rest of her family, any of whom he may have eventually killed by this kid.
Please stick to topics you can speak intelligently about. This woman was obviously determined to save the rest of her family, no matter what it took.
David
You’re right. You have no experience that allows you to relate to or judge that mother’s actions in dumping her son in Nebraska. She embraced a loaded gun when she adopted a 4-year-old with behavioral problems. There was NO other option available to her and it’s obvious she wasn’t giving him the help he needed. I think she should be congratulated for trying to get help for him in a legal fashion, instead of what might have happened had he been allowed to continue living in her home. Despite all the rhetoric by CPS, some kids have been so mistreated by the time they make it to the foster care system that their lives will inevitably be spent in custody of one sort or another. She made the best decision for the rest of her family, any of whom he may have eventually killed by this kid.
Please stick to topics you can speak intelligently about. This woman was obviously determined to save the rest of her family, no matter what it took.
David
You’re right. You have no experience that allows you to relate to or judge that mother’s actions in dumping her son in Nebraska. She embraced a loaded gun when she adopted a 4-year-old with behavioral problems. There was NO other option available to her and it’s obvious she wasn’t giving him the help he needed. I think she should be congratulated for trying to get help for him in a legal fashion, instead of what might have happened had he been allowed to continue living in her home. Despite all the rhetoric by CPS, some kids have been so mistreated by the time they make it to the foster care system that their lives will inevitably be spent in custody of one sort or another. She made the best decision for the rest of her family, any of whom he may have eventually killed by this kid.
Please stick to topics you can speak intelligently about. This woman was obviously determined to save the rest of her family, no matter what it took.
David
You’re right. You have no experience that allows you to relate to or judge that mother’s actions in dumping her son in Nebraska. She embraced a loaded gun when she adopted a 4-year-old with behavioral problems. There was NO other option available to her and it’s obvious she wasn’t giving him the help he needed. I think she should be congratulated for trying to get help for him in a legal fashion, instead of what might have happened had he been allowed to continue living in her home. Despite all the rhetoric by CPS, some kids have been so mistreated by the time they make it to the foster care system that their lives will inevitably be spent in custody of one sort or another. She made the best decision for the rest of her family, any of whom he may have eventually killed by this kid.
Please stick to topics you can speak intelligently about. This woman was obviously determined to save the rest of her family, no matter what it took.
Well that’s a nice insulting response. Since I have kids, I agree with David. So what do you have to say to that?
Well that’s a nice insulting response. Since I have kids, I agree with David. So what do you have to say to that?
Well that’s a nice insulting response. Since I have kids, I agree with David. So what do you have to say to that?
Well that’s a nice insulting response. Since I have kids, I agree with David. So what do you have to say to that?
To A Father Said,
The kid is available for foster care. Why don’t you take him? Just make sure to lock up the knives and sleep with one eye open.
To A Father Said,
The kid is available for foster care. Why don’t you take him? Just make sure to lock up the knives and sleep with one eye open.
To A Father Said,
The kid is available for foster care. Why don’t you take him? Just make sure to lock up the knives and sleep with one eye open.
To A Father Said,
The kid is available for foster care. Why don’t you take him? Just make sure to lock up the knives and sleep with one eye open.
I lost a lung to cancer 14 years ago and usually get along just fine with the remaining one. However, during the winter, often I cannot even walk to my mailbox here in West Davis without breathing problems. The smoke hangs from inversion and constricts my air passageways. If you have ever had difficulty breathing or been at an oxygen deficit (such as in sports), you know the feeling. It is not pleasant, in fact its scary. Even on days with modest breeze,out walking I pass through a plume from a chimney, and my airway constricts. The effects last much longer than the exposure. Many homes in Village Homes heat with wood in the winter (I don’t believe there are any poor people in Village Homes) and air pollution in the Village Homes/West Manor area is a serious problem. Any citizen with asthma or any other breathing impairment knows this and is seriously affected by the area’s winter air quality. It is simply a health issue. We all should be able to go outside, walk, breathe, and not be exposed to carcinogenic toxins and other health problems so someone can have their “ambience”. You can no longer live in the 1800’s when you have 21st century population proximity.
I lost a lung to cancer 14 years ago and usually get along just fine with the remaining one. However, during the winter, often I cannot even walk to my mailbox here in West Davis without breathing problems. The smoke hangs from inversion and constricts my air passageways. If you have ever had difficulty breathing or been at an oxygen deficit (such as in sports), you know the feeling. It is not pleasant, in fact its scary. Even on days with modest breeze,out walking I pass through a plume from a chimney, and my airway constricts. The effects last much longer than the exposure. Many homes in Village Homes heat with wood in the winter (I don’t believe there are any poor people in Village Homes) and air pollution in the Village Homes/West Manor area is a serious problem. Any citizen with asthma or any other breathing impairment knows this and is seriously affected by the area’s winter air quality. It is simply a health issue. We all should be able to go outside, walk, breathe, and not be exposed to carcinogenic toxins and other health problems so someone can have their “ambience”. You can no longer live in the 1800’s when you have 21st century population proximity.
I lost a lung to cancer 14 years ago and usually get along just fine with the remaining one. However, during the winter, often I cannot even walk to my mailbox here in West Davis without breathing problems. The smoke hangs from inversion and constricts my air passageways. If you have ever had difficulty breathing or been at an oxygen deficit (such as in sports), you know the feeling. It is not pleasant, in fact its scary. Even on days with modest breeze,out walking I pass through a plume from a chimney, and my airway constricts. The effects last much longer than the exposure. Many homes in Village Homes heat with wood in the winter (I don’t believe there are any poor people in Village Homes) and air pollution in the Village Homes/West Manor area is a serious problem. Any citizen with asthma or any other breathing impairment knows this and is seriously affected by the area’s winter air quality. It is simply a health issue. We all should be able to go outside, walk, breathe, and not be exposed to carcinogenic toxins and other health problems so someone can have their “ambience”. You can no longer live in the 1800’s when you have 21st century population proximity.
I lost a lung to cancer 14 years ago and usually get along just fine with the remaining one. However, during the winter, often I cannot even walk to my mailbox here in West Davis without breathing problems. The smoke hangs from inversion and constricts my air passageways. If you have ever had difficulty breathing or been at an oxygen deficit (such as in sports), you know the feeling. It is not pleasant, in fact its scary. Even on days with modest breeze,out walking I pass through a plume from a chimney, and my airway constricts. The effects last much longer than the exposure. Many homes in Village Homes heat with wood in the winter (I don’t believe there are any poor people in Village Homes) and air pollution in the Village Homes/West Manor area is a serious problem. Any citizen with asthma or any other breathing impairment knows this and is seriously affected by the area’s winter air quality. It is simply a health issue. We all should be able to go outside, walk, breathe, and not be exposed to carcinogenic toxins and other health problems so someone can have their “ambience”. You can no longer live in the 1800’s when you have 21st century population proximity.
“Well that’s a nice insulting response. Since I have kids, I agree with David. So what do you have to say to that?”
My first reaction was also to find the woman’s response a little extreme to drive to Nebraska for that.
But the mother does have some responsibility to provide a safe environment for her other kids.
She is to be commended for agreeing to parent a kid that she didn’t have the responsibility of creating.
“Well that’s a nice insulting response. Since I have kids, I agree with David. So what do you have to say to that?”
My first reaction was also to find the woman’s response a little extreme to drive to Nebraska for that.
But the mother does have some responsibility to provide a safe environment for her other kids.
She is to be commended for agreeing to parent a kid that she didn’t have the responsibility of creating.
“Well that’s a nice insulting response. Since I have kids, I agree with David. So what do you have to say to that?”
My first reaction was also to find the woman’s response a little extreme to drive to Nebraska for that.
But the mother does have some responsibility to provide a safe environment for her other kids.
She is to be commended for agreeing to parent a kid that she didn’t have the responsibility of creating.
“Well that’s a nice insulting response. Since I have kids, I agree with David. So what do you have to say to that?”
My first reaction was also to find the woman’s response a little extreme to drive to Nebraska for that.
But the mother does have some responsibility to provide a safe environment for her other kids.
She is to be commended for agreeing to parent a kid that she didn’t have the responsibility of creating.
I have great sympathy for the mother in this situation. The son was adopted at age 4 and who knows what kind of abuse he went through before that. He is clearly an extremely troubled young man who needs more help than she seems to be able to get for him.
The Bee articles indicated he has been acting out very seriously – violence, drinking, drug use, etc. She managed to get him into residential treatment in Sonoma and he ended up getting kicked out of there for sexual offenses. He has threatened family members with a butcher knife and the mother is particularly fearful for the son two years younger. He was abusive toward that child to the point that she sent the younger one to another family to stay when the older one came home.
What is she supposed to do? She has to protect the other children in the family. She is low income and cannot afford a high cost residential treatment place. She tried getting help from CPS and the police but neither one helped her very much.
This case just shines a light on the fact that there is a limit to what services are available and it is quite possible for a family with few supports but a very troubled child to find themselves at the end of their rope.
I have great sympathy for the mother in this situation. The son was adopted at age 4 and who knows what kind of abuse he went through before that. He is clearly an extremely troubled young man who needs more help than she seems to be able to get for him.
The Bee articles indicated he has been acting out very seriously – violence, drinking, drug use, etc. She managed to get him into residential treatment in Sonoma and he ended up getting kicked out of there for sexual offenses. He has threatened family members with a butcher knife and the mother is particularly fearful for the son two years younger. He was abusive toward that child to the point that she sent the younger one to another family to stay when the older one came home.
What is she supposed to do? She has to protect the other children in the family. She is low income and cannot afford a high cost residential treatment place. She tried getting help from CPS and the police but neither one helped her very much.
This case just shines a light on the fact that there is a limit to what services are available and it is quite possible for a family with few supports but a very troubled child to find themselves at the end of their rope.
I have great sympathy for the mother in this situation. The son was adopted at age 4 and who knows what kind of abuse he went through before that. He is clearly an extremely troubled young man who needs more help than she seems to be able to get for him.
The Bee articles indicated he has been acting out very seriously – violence, drinking, drug use, etc. She managed to get him into residential treatment in Sonoma and he ended up getting kicked out of there for sexual offenses. He has threatened family members with a butcher knife and the mother is particularly fearful for the son two years younger. He was abusive toward that child to the point that she sent the younger one to another family to stay when the older one came home.
What is she supposed to do? She has to protect the other children in the family. She is low income and cannot afford a high cost residential treatment place. She tried getting help from CPS and the police but neither one helped her very much.
This case just shines a light on the fact that there is a limit to what services are available and it is quite possible for a family with few supports but a very troubled child to find themselves at the end of their rope.
I have great sympathy for the mother in this situation. The son was adopted at age 4 and who knows what kind of abuse he went through before that. He is clearly an extremely troubled young man who needs more help than she seems to be able to get for him.
The Bee articles indicated he has been acting out very seriously – violence, drinking, drug use, etc. She managed to get him into residential treatment in Sonoma and he ended up getting kicked out of there for sexual offenses. He has threatened family members with a butcher knife and the mother is particularly fearful for the son two years younger. He was abusive toward that child to the point that she sent the younger one to another family to stay when the older one came home.
What is she supposed to do? She has to protect the other children in the family. She is low income and cannot afford a high cost residential treatment place. She tried getting help from CPS and the police but neither one helped her very much.
This case just shines a light on the fact that there is a limit to what services are available and it is quite possible for a family with few supports but a very troubled child to find themselves at the end of their rope.
Just to clarify on the proposed wood burning ordinance that the NRC is sending to council: What it would actually do is to ban wood burning in open hearth fireplaces and non-EPA approved inserts and wood stoves beginning March 1, 2010. After that date, wood burning would take place only in EPA-certified Phase II inserts and stoves. The ordinance would also implement no-burn days in any type of fireplace or stove when wind speed is below 5 miles per hour or average regional pm 2.5 concentrations are higher than 25ug/m3. The no-burn part of the ordinance will begin January 1, 2009.
The ban on burning in all but EPA certified appliances was pushed back to March 2010 to allow more time for people to decide what to do with their open hearth fireplaces and non-certified stoves and to make changes. This will give them essentially 2 years to make the changes, since if a ban on non-EPA appliances is implemented March 1, 2010 and no burning generally begins until around October or November, we are two years out from a ban now.
There is substantial evidence of a particulate matter problem from wood burning in Davis. Under certain conditions, particulate matter from wood burning accumulates at the neigborhood level in amounts that far exceed federal standards. Experts from UC have reviewed the evidence and feel the science is there to support a ban on burning wood in open hearth fireplaces and non-EPA certified devices.
It is going to be difficult to enforce the 6 hour rule. I don’t know how that will be handled.
Just to clarify on the proposed wood burning ordinance that the NRC is sending to council: What it would actually do is to ban wood burning in open hearth fireplaces and non-EPA approved inserts and wood stoves beginning March 1, 2010. After that date, wood burning would take place only in EPA-certified Phase II inserts and stoves. The ordinance would also implement no-burn days in any type of fireplace or stove when wind speed is below 5 miles per hour or average regional pm 2.5 concentrations are higher than 25ug/m3. The no-burn part of the ordinance will begin January 1, 2009.
The ban on burning in all but EPA certified appliances was pushed back to March 2010 to allow more time for people to decide what to do with their open hearth fireplaces and non-certified stoves and to make changes. This will give them essentially 2 years to make the changes, since if a ban on non-EPA appliances is implemented March 1, 2010 and no burning generally begins until around October or November, we are two years out from a ban now.
There is substantial evidence of a particulate matter problem from wood burning in Davis. Under certain conditions, particulate matter from wood burning accumulates at the neigborhood level in amounts that far exceed federal standards. Experts from UC have reviewed the evidence and feel the science is there to support a ban on burning wood in open hearth fireplaces and non-EPA certified devices.
It is going to be difficult to enforce the 6 hour rule. I don’t know how that will be handled.
Just to clarify on the proposed wood burning ordinance that the NRC is sending to council: What it would actually do is to ban wood burning in open hearth fireplaces and non-EPA approved inserts and wood stoves beginning March 1, 2010. After that date, wood burning would take place only in EPA-certified Phase II inserts and stoves. The ordinance would also implement no-burn days in any type of fireplace or stove when wind speed is below 5 miles per hour or average regional pm 2.5 concentrations are higher than 25ug/m3. The no-burn part of the ordinance will begin January 1, 2009.
The ban on burning in all but EPA certified appliances was pushed back to March 2010 to allow more time for people to decide what to do with their open hearth fireplaces and non-certified stoves and to make changes. This will give them essentially 2 years to make the changes, since if a ban on non-EPA appliances is implemented March 1, 2010 and no burning generally begins until around October or November, we are two years out from a ban now.
There is substantial evidence of a particulate matter problem from wood burning in Davis. Under certain conditions, particulate matter from wood burning accumulates at the neigborhood level in amounts that far exceed federal standards. Experts from UC have reviewed the evidence and feel the science is there to support a ban on burning wood in open hearth fireplaces and non-EPA certified devices.
It is going to be difficult to enforce the 6 hour rule. I don’t know how that will be handled.
Just to clarify on the proposed wood burning ordinance that the NRC is sending to council: What it would actually do is to ban wood burning in open hearth fireplaces and non-EPA approved inserts and wood stoves beginning March 1, 2010. After that date, wood burning would take place only in EPA-certified Phase II inserts and stoves. The ordinance would also implement no-burn days in any type of fireplace or stove when wind speed is below 5 miles per hour or average regional pm 2.5 concentrations are higher than 25ug/m3. The no-burn part of the ordinance will begin January 1, 2009.
The ban on burning in all but EPA certified appliances was pushed back to March 2010 to allow more time for people to decide what to do with their open hearth fireplaces and non-certified stoves and to make changes. This will give them essentially 2 years to make the changes, since if a ban on non-EPA appliances is implemented March 1, 2010 and no burning generally begins until around October or November, we are two years out from a ban now.
There is substantial evidence of a particulate matter problem from wood burning in Davis. Under certain conditions, particulate matter from wood burning accumulates at the neigborhood level in amounts that far exceed federal standards. Experts from UC have reviewed the evidence and feel the science is there to support a ban on burning wood in open hearth fireplaces and non-EPA certified devices.
It is going to be difficult to enforce the 6 hour rule. I don’t know how that will be handled.
After reading a few responses, I wonder if people actually read the entire portion of the article.
I start out with my initial reaction:
“I suppose not yet being a parent myself, I do not have standing to admonish this woman, since I do not know what she’s been through. Taking that chance, I would offer that my first response to hearing this was this was a despicable act by an irresponsible person who should now lose custody of her other two children. Harsh? Perhaps. Let’s take a look at what happened.”
Afterwards my reaction was:
“Okay, I still blame the mother after all of this, but I can partially understand her actions. But what really seems amiss is the system.”
Someone asked what was she supposed to do? I don’t know is the answer. I really don’t. What I dont think the right response was, was to dump her problem on someone else.
However, I really blame our system for this.
“So what does a working class woman who makes a fairly low salary and is apparently a single-mother with other children going to do when these problems arise? She went to the system multiple times and the system failed her?
So at the end of this analysis, I still do not agree with the safe harbor strategy and dumping him on someone else, which she has essentially and completely done, he is now going into a foster care system which is equally overwhelmed and unable to attend to his needs. This is an exceedingly sad case and this boy will likely live a very tough life unless he ends up in a home that will have the resources and patience to make a difference in his life.”
So why is my view on this objectionable? This is essentially the same place that others wound up at with the benefit of kids.
After reading a few responses, I wonder if people actually read the entire portion of the article.
I start out with my initial reaction:
“I suppose not yet being a parent myself, I do not have standing to admonish this woman, since I do not know what she’s been through. Taking that chance, I would offer that my first response to hearing this was this was a despicable act by an irresponsible person who should now lose custody of her other two children. Harsh? Perhaps. Let’s take a look at what happened.”
Afterwards my reaction was:
“Okay, I still blame the mother after all of this, but I can partially understand her actions. But what really seems amiss is the system.”
Someone asked what was she supposed to do? I don’t know is the answer. I really don’t. What I dont think the right response was, was to dump her problem on someone else.
However, I really blame our system for this.
“So what does a working class woman who makes a fairly low salary and is apparently a single-mother with other children going to do when these problems arise? She went to the system multiple times and the system failed her?
So at the end of this analysis, I still do not agree with the safe harbor strategy and dumping him on someone else, which she has essentially and completely done, he is now going into a foster care system which is equally overwhelmed and unable to attend to his needs. This is an exceedingly sad case and this boy will likely live a very tough life unless he ends up in a home that will have the resources and patience to make a difference in his life.”
So why is my view on this objectionable? This is essentially the same place that others wound up at with the benefit of kids.
After reading a few responses, I wonder if people actually read the entire portion of the article.
I start out with my initial reaction:
“I suppose not yet being a parent myself, I do not have standing to admonish this woman, since I do not know what she’s been through. Taking that chance, I would offer that my first response to hearing this was this was a despicable act by an irresponsible person who should now lose custody of her other two children. Harsh? Perhaps. Let’s take a look at what happened.”
Afterwards my reaction was:
“Okay, I still blame the mother after all of this, but I can partially understand her actions. But what really seems amiss is the system.”
Someone asked what was she supposed to do? I don’t know is the answer. I really don’t. What I dont think the right response was, was to dump her problem on someone else.
However, I really blame our system for this.
“So what does a working class woman who makes a fairly low salary and is apparently a single-mother with other children going to do when these problems arise? She went to the system multiple times and the system failed her?
So at the end of this analysis, I still do not agree with the safe harbor strategy and dumping him on someone else, which she has essentially and completely done, he is now going into a foster care system which is equally overwhelmed and unable to attend to his needs. This is an exceedingly sad case and this boy will likely live a very tough life unless he ends up in a home that will have the resources and patience to make a difference in his life.”
So why is my view on this objectionable? This is essentially the same place that others wound up at with the benefit of kids.
After reading a few responses, I wonder if people actually read the entire portion of the article.
I start out with my initial reaction:
“I suppose not yet being a parent myself, I do not have standing to admonish this woman, since I do not know what she’s been through. Taking that chance, I would offer that my first response to hearing this was this was a despicable act by an irresponsible person who should now lose custody of her other two children. Harsh? Perhaps. Let’s take a look at what happened.”
Afterwards my reaction was:
“Okay, I still blame the mother after all of this, but I can partially understand her actions. But what really seems amiss is the system.”
Someone asked what was she supposed to do? I don’t know is the answer. I really don’t. What I dont think the right response was, was to dump her problem on someone else.
However, I really blame our system for this.
“So what does a working class woman who makes a fairly low salary and is apparently a single-mother with other children going to do when these problems arise? She went to the system multiple times and the system failed her?
So at the end of this analysis, I still do not agree with the safe harbor strategy and dumping him on someone else, which she has essentially and completely done, he is now going into a foster care system which is equally overwhelmed and unable to attend to his needs. This is an exceedingly sad case and this boy will likely live a very tough life unless he ends up in a home that will have the resources and patience to make a difference in his life.”
So why is my view on this objectionable? This is essentially the same place that others wound up at with the benefit of kids.
BTW The Sac Bee has called it for Huber:
” Democrat Alyson Huber has beaten Jack Sieglock for the 10th Assembly District seat after a last-minute spike in ballot counting, according to a check of election offices.
Sieglock said Wednesday that he was very disappointed, but that barring “divine intervention” he can’t overtake Huber.
“I don’t believe, mathematically, that the numbers are there,” Sieglock said.
Huber will assume the seat of Republican Alan Nakanishi, a Lodi Republican who will be termed out when the session officially ends Sunday.
Huber overtook her Republican opponent Tuesday night and held a 507-vote lead Wednesday morning, more than three weeks after Election Day.”
BTW The Sac Bee has called it for Huber:
” Democrat Alyson Huber has beaten Jack Sieglock for the 10th Assembly District seat after a last-minute spike in ballot counting, according to a check of election offices.
Sieglock said Wednesday that he was very disappointed, but that barring “divine intervention” he can’t overtake Huber.
“I don’t believe, mathematically, that the numbers are there,” Sieglock said.
Huber will assume the seat of Republican Alan Nakanishi, a Lodi Republican who will be termed out when the session officially ends Sunday.
Huber overtook her Republican opponent Tuesday night and held a 507-vote lead Wednesday morning, more than three weeks after Election Day.”
BTW The Sac Bee has called it for Huber:
” Democrat Alyson Huber has beaten Jack Sieglock for the 10th Assembly District seat after a last-minute spike in ballot counting, according to a check of election offices.
Sieglock said Wednesday that he was very disappointed, but that barring “divine intervention” he can’t overtake Huber.
“I don’t believe, mathematically, that the numbers are there,” Sieglock said.
Huber will assume the seat of Republican Alan Nakanishi, a Lodi Republican who will be termed out when the session officially ends Sunday.
Huber overtook her Republican opponent Tuesday night and held a 507-vote lead Wednesday morning, more than three weeks after Election Day.”
BTW The Sac Bee has called it for Huber:
” Democrat Alyson Huber has beaten Jack Sieglock for the 10th Assembly District seat after a last-minute spike in ballot counting, according to a check of election offices.
Sieglock said Wednesday that he was very disappointed, but that barring “divine intervention” he can’t overtake Huber.
“I don’t believe, mathematically, that the numbers are there,” Sieglock said.
Huber will assume the seat of Republican Alan Nakanishi, a Lodi Republican who will be termed out when the session officially ends Sunday.
Huber overtook her Republican opponent Tuesday night and held a 507-vote lead Wednesday morning, more than three weeks after Election Day.”
“What I dont think the right response was, was to dump her problem on someone else.”
I see it more as trying to get help for her son in the only way that was available when she can see that she cannot give him what he needs. She tried all the available services and none of them was sufficient.
I agree with you that it is a failure of the system, which does not have adequate resources to help a family who are in deep need of therapy and services for a child who likely has Reactive Attachment Disorder.
“What I dont think the right response was, was to dump her problem on someone else.”
I see it more as trying to get help for her son in the only way that was available when she can see that she cannot give him what he needs. She tried all the available services and none of them was sufficient.
I agree with you that it is a failure of the system, which does not have adequate resources to help a family who are in deep need of therapy and services for a child who likely has Reactive Attachment Disorder.
“What I dont think the right response was, was to dump her problem on someone else.”
I see it more as trying to get help for her son in the only way that was available when she can see that she cannot give him what he needs. She tried all the available services and none of them was sufficient.
I agree with you that it is a failure of the system, which does not have adequate resources to help a family who are in deep need of therapy and services for a child who likely has Reactive Attachment Disorder.
“What I dont think the right response was, was to dump her problem on someone else.”
I see it more as trying to get help for her son in the only way that was available when she can see that she cannot give him what he needs. She tried all the available services and none of them was sufficient.
I agree with you that it is a failure of the system, which does not have adequate resources to help a family who are in deep need of therapy and services for a child who likely has Reactive Attachment Disorder.
Everything said by the mother may be true. However, we have only heard one side of the story. I wonder what the child has to say.
Everything said by the mother may be true. However, we have only heard one side of the story. I wonder what the child has to say.
Everything said by the mother may be true. However, we have only heard one side of the story. I wonder what the child has to say.
Everything said by the mother may be true. However, we have only heard one side of the story. I wonder what the child has to say.
DPD, Cecilia, and all who come here: Happy Thanksgiving! Be safe!
DPD, Cecilia, and all who come here: Happy Thanksgiving! Be safe!
DPD, Cecilia, and all who come here: Happy Thanksgiving! Be safe!
DPD, Cecilia, and all who come here: Happy Thanksgiving! Be safe!
David Greenwald is correct when he says there is something amiss in the system. There’s billions spent on a war, monthly, and a lot less spent on social problems.
This kid, according to reports, is a violent,dangerous,alcohol drinking, social psychopath and should be euthanized for the good of society. That solution will save one,or more persons lives down the road. Follow this one David and tell us whats amiss in the Social Services system.
You have a good Thanksgiving too Mike.
David Greenwald is correct when he says there is something amiss in the system. There’s billions spent on a war, monthly, and a lot less spent on social problems.
This kid, according to reports, is a violent,dangerous,alcohol drinking, social psychopath and should be euthanized for the good of society. That solution will save one,or more persons lives down the road. Follow this one David and tell us whats amiss in the Social Services system.
You have a good Thanksgiving too Mike.
David Greenwald is correct when he says there is something amiss in the system. There’s billions spent on a war, monthly, and a lot less spent on social problems.
This kid, according to reports, is a violent,dangerous,alcohol drinking, social psychopath and should be euthanized for the good of society. That solution will save one,or more persons lives down the road. Follow this one David and tell us whats amiss in the Social Services system.
You have a good Thanksgiving too Mike.
David Greenwald is correct when he says there is something amiss in the system. There’s billions spent on a war, monthly, and a lot less spent on social problems.
This kid, according to reports, is a violent,dangerous,alcohol drinking, social psychopath and should be euthanized for the good of society. That solution will save one,or more persons lives down the road. Follow this one David and tell us whats amiss in the Social Services system.
You have a good Thanksgiving too Mike.
I am delighted to read that the Natural Resources Commission has finally issued its wood-burning report, but I fear that much of the harm of this committee has already been done. For months, the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District has had a program to replace old, smoky, wood stoves and fireplace inserts with clean, EPA approved stoves by offering rebates to those who swap out an old inefficient stove for an EPA approved one. Unfortunately the commission has effectively eviscerated this program in Davis by threatening to ban all wood burning within six years. (No rational person is going to pay several thousand dollars for a stove they can use only six years.) How many of these old smoke belchers are now running full-bore because of the well intentioned but counterproductive actions of the commission, we will never know. The final report, though less draconian than the commission’s earlier recommendations, still seeks to compete with, rather than cooperate with, the Yolo Solano Air Quality Management District. Please urge the city council to adopt the well-drafted staff recommendation.
I am delighted to read that the Natural Resources Commission has finally issued its wood-burning report, but I fear that much of the harm of this committee has already been done. For months, the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District has had a program to replace old, smoky, wood stoves and fireplace inserts with clean, EPA approved stoves by offering rebates to those who swap out an old inefficient stove for an EPA approved one. Unfortunately the commission has effectively eviscerated this program in Davis by threatening to ban all wood burning within six years. (No rational person is going to pay several thousand dollars for a stove they can use only six years.) How many of these old smoke belchers are now running full-bore because of the well intentioned but counterproductive actions of the commission, we will never know. The final report, though less draconian than the commission’s earlier recommendations, still seeks to compete with, rather than cooperate with, the Yolo Solano Air Quality Management District. Please urge the city council to adopt the well-drafted staff recommendation.
I am delighted to read that the Natural Resources Commission has finally issued its wood-burning report, but I fear that much of the harm of this committee has already been done. For months, the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District has had a program to replace old, smoky, wood stoves and fireplace inserts with clean, EPA approved stoves by offering rebates to those who swap out an old inefficient stove for an EPA approved one. Unfortunately the commission has effectively eviscerated this program in Davis by threatening to ban all wood burning within six years. (No rational person is going to pay several thousand dollars for a stove they can use only six years.) How many of these old smoke belchers are now running full-bore because of the well intentioned but counterproductive actions of the commission, we will never know. The final report, though less draconian than the commission’s earlier recommendations, still seeks to compete with, rather than cooperate with, the Yolo Solano Air Quality Management District. Please urge the city council to adopt the well-drafted staff recommendation.
I am delighted to read that the Natural Resources Commission has finally issued its wood-burning report, but I fear that much of the harm of this committee has already been done. For months, the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District has had a program to replace old, smoky, wood stoves and fireplace inserts with clean, EPA approved stoves by offering rebates to those who swap out an old inefficient stove for an EPA approved one. Unfortunately the commission has effectively eviscerated this program in Davis by threatening to ban all wood burning within six years. (No rational person is going to pay several thousand dollars for a stove they can use only six years.) How many of these old smoke belchers are now running full-bore because of the well intentioned but counterproductive actions of the commission, we will never know. The final report, though less draconian than the commission’s earlier recommendations, still seeks to compete with, rather than cooperate with, the Yolo Solano Air Quality Management District. Please urge the city council to adopt the well-drafted staff recommendation.
There’s billions spent on a war, monthly, and a lot less spent on social problems.
Amount Iraq War per month: $9 billion.
HHS budget/month: $60 billion.
There’s billions spent on a war, monthly, and a lot less spent on social problems.
Amount Iraq War per month: $9 billion.
HHS budget/month: $60 billion.
There’s billions spent on a war, monthly, and a lot less spent on social problems.
Amount Iraq War per month: $9 billion.
HHS budget/month: $60 billion.
There’s billions spent on a war, monthly, and a lot less spent on social problems.
Amount Iraq War per month: $9 billion.
HHS budget/month: $60 billion.
“euthanized”
Might want to read up on the legacy of eugenics, that’s what you are advocating.
“euthanized”
Might want to read up on the legacy of eugenics, that’s what you are advocating.
“euthanized”
Might want to read up on the legacy of eugenics, that’s what you are advocating.
“euthanized”
Might want to read up on the legacy of eugenics, that’s what you are advocating.
I think it is interesting that it even occurred to anyone to blame the mother. Driving all the way to Nebraska shows a level of caring that exceeds what most people would be willing to do. There are literally thousands of ‘throwaway’ kids in this country, whose parents just tossed them out when they were 14 or even younger. Some seek help in runaway shelters, others end up on the street, using drugs and prostituting themselves. She could have taken him to San Francisco and sold him to someone who would make money off his body.
If this boy has substance abuse problems, reasoning with him, or using other good parenting and communication skills is not going to work.
And for those who want to hear the boy’s side of the story, if you have any experience working with drug abusers, you know are not going to hear anything that doesn’t somehow enable him to continue his behavior. If his drug problem is not addressed, none of the rest of his problems will be resolved because the substance abuse will obstruct all efforts to help him.
If she was just a mean, uncommunicative mom, she would not have taken him all that way, and her older sons would not have helped her.
I think people need to quit blaming parents for everything.
I think it is interesting that it even occurred to anyone to blame the mother. Driving all the way to Nebraska shows a level of caring that exceeds what most people would be willing to do. There are literally thousands of ‘throwaway’ kids in this country, whose parents just tossed them out when they were 14 or even younger. Some seek help in runaway shelters, others end up on the street, using drugs and prostituting themselves. She could have taken him to San Francisco and sold him to someone who would make money off his body.
If this boy has substance abuse problems, reasoning with him, or using other good parenting and communication skills is not going to work.
And for those who want to hear the boy’s side of the story, if you have any experience working with drug abusers, you know are not going to hear anything that doesn’t somehow enable him to continue his behavior. If his drug problem is not addressed, none of the rest of his problems will be resolved because the substance abuse will obstruct all efforts to help him.
If she was just a mean, uncommunicative mom, she would not have taken him all that way, and her older sons would not have helped her.
I think people need to quit blaming parents for everything.
I think it is interesting that it even occurred to anyone to blame the mother. Driving all the way to Nebraska shows a level of caring that exceeds what most people would be willing to do. There are literally thousands of ‘throwaway’ kids in this country, whose parents just tossed them out when they were 14 or even younger. Some seek help in runaway shelters, others end up on the street, using drugs and prostituting themselves. She could have taken him to San Francisco and sold him to someone who would make money off his body.
If this boy has substance abuse problems, reasoning with him, or using other good parenting and communication skills is not going to work.
And for those who want to hear the boy’s side of the story, if you have any experience working with drug abusers, you know are not going to hear anything that doesn’t somehow enable him to continue his behavior. If his drug problem is not addressed, none of the rest of his problems will be resolved because the substance abuse will obstruct all efforts to help him.
If she was just a mean, uncommunicative mom, she would not have taken him all that way, and her older sons would not have helped her.
I think people need to quit blaming parents for everything.
I think it is interesting that it even occurred to anyone to blame the mother. Driving all the way to Nebraska shows a level of caring that exceeds what most people would be willing to do. There are literally thousands of ‘throwaway’ kids in this country, whose parents just tossed them out when they were 14 or even younger. Some seek help in runaway shelters, others end up on the street, using drugs and prostituting themselves. She could have taken him to San Francisco and sold him to someone who would make money off his body.
If this boy has substance abuse problems, reasoning with him, or using other good parenting and communication skills is not going to work.
And for those who want to hear the boy’s side of the story, if you have any experience working with drug abusers, you know are not going to hear anything that doesn’t somehow enable him to continue his behavior. If his drug problem is not addressed, none of the rest of his problems will be resolved because the substance abuse will obstruct all efforts to help him.
If she was just a mean, uncommunicative mom, she would not have taken him all that way, and her older sons would not have helped her.
I think people need to quit blaming parents for everything.
I feel for the mother and her other children who did not feel safe in their home, slept at friends houses to feel safe, were at risk of being removed from the home because of the danger that their brother created, etc.
It was an act of desperation to drop him off at a hospital. I wouldn’t say that it was despicable.
I feel for the mother and her other children who did not feel safe in their home, slept at friends houses to feel safe, were at risk of being removed from the home because of the danger that their brother created, etc.
It was an act of desperation to drop him off at a hospital. I wouldn’t say that it was despicable.
I feel for the mother and her other children who did not feel safe in their home, slept at friends houses to feel safe, were at risk of being removed from the home because of the danger that their brother created, etc.
It was an act of desperation to drop him off at a hospital. I wouldn’t say that it was despicable.
I feel for the mother and her other children who did not feel safe in their home, slept at friends houses to feel safe, were at risk of being removed from the home because of the danger that their brother created, etc.
It was an act of desperation to drop him off at a hospital. I wouldn’t say that it was despicable.
In fairness, David said that was his first response, not his final verdict.
I think he has a point though, she couldn’t handle hm, so she left him with someone else to handle him. Yes it was desperation, but at the same time, she was indeed trying to make him someone else’s problem. How does that help the kid? How does that help society? It seems that she and her kids were the only ones who were helped by it. It’s tragic, that’s for sure, but are you going to tell me she did the right thing?
In fairness, David said that was his first response, not his final verdict.
I think he has a point though, she couldn’t handle hm, so she left him with someone else to handle him. Yes it was desperation, but at the same time, she was indeed trying to make him someone else’s problem. How does that help the kid? How does that help society? It seems that she and her kids were the only ones who were helped by it. It’s tragic, that’s for sure, but are you going to tell me she did the right thing?
In fairness, David said that was his first response, not his final verdict.
I think he has a point though, she couldn’t handle hm, so she left him with someone else to handle him. Yes it was desperation, but at the same time, she was indeed trying to make him someone else’s problem. How does that help the kid? How does that help society? It seems that she and her kids were the only ones who were helped by it. It’s tragic, that’s for sure, but are you going to tell me she did the right thing?
In fairness, David said that was his first response, not his final verdict.
I think he has a point though, she couldn’t handle hm, so she left him with someone else to handle him. Yes it was desperation, but at the same time, she was indeed trying to make him someone else’s problem. How does that help the kid? How does that help society? It seems that she and her kids were the only ones who were helped by it. It’s tragic, that’s for sure, but are you going to tell me she did the right thing?
It sure got everyone’s attention. Until now it appears like the mom has been on her own in dealing with the boy.
She adopted the troubled boy at age 4 after serving as his foster parent. I’d say that she has been doing the community a huge favor for 10 years now.
It sure got everyone’s attention. Until now it appears like the mom has been on her own in dealing with the boy.
She adopted the troubled boy at age 4 after serving as his foster parent. I’d say that she has been doing the community a huge favor for 10 years now.
It sure got everyone’s attention. Until now it appears like the mom has been on her own in dealing with the boy.
She adopted the troubled boy at age 4 after serving as his foster parent. I’d say that she has been doing the community a huge favor for 10 years now.
It sure got everyone’s attention. Until now it appears like the mom has been on her own in dealing with the boy.
She adopted the troubled boy at age 4 after serving as his foster parent. I’d say that she has been doing the community a huge favor for 10 years now.
She didn’t serve as a foster parent, she adopted the kid. When she did, she wasn’t doing society a favor, she was taking on a responsibility. Now it appears she has dumped her responsibility on someone else. I feel for her, but how does this help the kid or society?
She didn’t serve as a foster parent, she adopted the kid. When she did, she wasn’t doing society a favor, she was taking on a responsibility. Now it appears she has dumped her responsibility on someone else. I feel for her, but how does this help the kid or society?
She didn’t serve as a foster parent, she adopted the kid. When she did, she wasn’t doing society a favor, she was taking on a responsibility. Now it appears she has dumped her responsibility on someone else. I feel for her, but how does this help the kid or society?
She didn’t serve as a foster parent, she adopted the kid. When she did, she wasn’t doing society a favor, she was taking on a responsibility. Now it appears she has dumped her responsibility on someone else. I feel for her, but how does this help the kid or society?
“I feel for her, but how does this help the kid or society?”
It protected her family, and it puts the young man in the hands of people who have more resources than she does. I won’t second-guess her decision.
Friends of mine had a teen boy who was violent and had similar problems as those described. They called the police. He ultimately got “raised” by CYA.
“I feel for her, but how does this help the kid or society?”
It protected her family, and it puts the young man in the hands of people who have more resources than she does. I won’t second-guess her decision.
Friends of mine had a teen boy who was violent and had similar problems as those described. They called the police. He ultimately got “raised” by CYA.
“I feel for her, but how does this help the kid or society?”
It protected her family, and it puts the young man in the hands of people who have more resources than she does. I won’t second-guess her decision.
Friends of mine had a teen boy who was violent and had similar problems as those described. They called the police. He ultimately got “raised” by CYA.
“I feel for her, but how does this help the kid or society?”
It protected her family, and it puts the young man in the hands of people who have more resources than she does. I won’t second-guess her decision.
Friends of mine had a teen boy who was violent and had similar problems as those described. They called the police. He ultimately got “raised” by CYA.
The boy started out living with the woman as a foster child and was eventually adopted by her. He is now back in the foster system where there are more resources available toward helping the boy.
The boy started out living with the woman as a foster child and was eventually adopted by her. He is now back in the foster system where there are more resources available toward helping the boy.
The boy started out living with the woman as a foster child and was eventually adopted by her. He is now back in the foster system where there are more resources available toward helping the boy.
The boy started out living with the woman as a foster child and was eventually adopted by her. He is now back in the foster system where there are more resources available toward helping the boy.
Actually the foster system has very very few resources, kids get shuffled around, and problem kids become far larger problems. I know, I’m a social worker who works with a lot of these kids. You guys are fooling yourselves if you think he is getting more help now than before.
Actually the foster system has very very few resources, kids get shuffled around, and problem kids become far larger problems. I know, I’m a social worker who works with a lot of these kids. You guys are fooling yourselves if you think he is getting more help now than before.
Actually the foster system has very very few resources, kids get shuffled around, and problem kids become far larger problems. I know, I’m a social worker who works with a lot of these kids. You guys are fooling yourselves if you think he is getting more help now than before.
Actually the foster system has very very few resources, kids get shuffled around, and problem kids become far larger problems. I know, I’m a social worker who works with a lot of these kids. You guys are fooling yourselves if you think he is getting more help now than before.
Friends of mine had a teen boy who was violent and had similar problems as those described.
This boy probably has the evil gene. Only thing we will do is wait until he kills someone before we lock him up.
Friends of mine had a teen boy who was violent and had similar problems as those described.
This boy probably has the evil gene. Only thing we will do is wait until he kills someone before we lock him up.
Friends of mine had a teen boy who was violent and had similar problems as those described.
This boy probably has the evil gene. Only thing we will do is wait until he kills someone before we lock him up.
Friends of mine had a teen boy who was violent and had similar problems as those described.
This boy probably has the evil gene. Only thing we will do is wait until he kills someone before we lock him up.
Some kids do change for the better at some point along the way; of course some do not. But it’s premature to condemn someone this early in his life.
Maybe medicine in the future will develop a remedy that will bring out a constructive empathy in individuals who lack it. That is one reason (lack of empathy) for aberrant behavior.
Some kids do change for the better at some point along the way; of course some do not. But it’s premature to condemn someone this early in his life.
Maybe medicine in the future will develop a remedy that will bring out a constructive empathy in individuals who lack it. That is one reason (lack of empathy) for aberrant behavior.
Some kids do change for the better at some point along the way; of course some do not. But it’s premature to condemn someone this early in his life.
Maybe medicine in the future will develop a remedy that will bring out a constructive empathy in individuals who lack it. That is one reason (lack of empathy) for aberrant behavior.
Some kids do change for the better at some point along the way; of course some do not. But it’s premature to condemn someone this early in his life.
Maybe medicine in the future will develop a remedy that will bring out a constructive empathy in individuals who lack it. That is one reason (lack of empathy) for aberrant behavior.
Let’s see David makes a statement against the mother, someone else calls for euphanasia for the kid, who gets more flack on here?
Let’s see David makes a statement against the mother, someone else calls for euphanasia for the kid, who gets more flack on here?
Let’s see David makes a statement against the mother, someone else calls for euphanasia for the kid, who gets more flack on here?
Let’s see David makes a statement against the mother, someone else calls for euphanasia for the kid, who gets more flack on here?
someone else calls for euphanasia for the kid, who gets more flack on here?
The genius who can’t spell euthanasia?
someone else calls for euphanasia for the kid, who gets more flack on here?
The genius who can’t spell euthanasia?
someone else calls for euphanasia for the kid, who gets more flack on here?
The genius who can’t spell euthanasia?
someone else calls for euphanasia for the kid, who gets more flack on here?
The genius who can’t spell euthanasia?
Youth in Asia!
Youth in Asia!
Youth in Asia!
Youth in Asia!
When I was a kid, that’s what I thought it was. I didn’t understand what was wrong with the youth in Asia that it was a special issue. LOL.
When I was a kid, that’s what I thought it was. I didn’t understand what was wrong with the youth in Asia that it was a special issue. LOL.
When I was a kid, that’s what I thought it was. I didn’t understand what was wrong with the youth in Asia that it was a special issue. LOL.
When I was a kid, that’s what I thought it was. I didn’t understand what was wrong with the youth in Asia that it was a special issue. LOL.
My heart goes out to the mom and the kid. I sincerely hope that he gets help and a loving family. Please keep us posted DPD. I would like to make a contribution to his well being.
My heart goes out to the mom and the kid. I sincerely hope that he gets help and a loving family. Please keep us posted DPD. I would like to make a contribution to his well being.
My heart goes out to the mom and the kid. I sincerely hope that he gets help and a loving family. Please keep us posted DPD. I would like to make a contribution to his well being.
My heart goes out to the mom and the kid. I sincerely hope that he gets help and a loving family. Please keep us posted DPD. I would like to make a contribution to his well being.
Yes, we don’t need more checks or balances.
Except in those instances when the other party controls the executive and legislative branches. Then the filibuster is a bedrock of our system.
In Sacramento politicians have no incentive to worry about long term costs. Commitments of higher pensions etc that don’t have bills due for a few years have no cost to the politicians who pass them. By the time the crisis hits, the cause is long forgotten, The 2/3 requirement acts as a bit of a brake, but is not a solution. It just means we are driving towards a cliff with the brakes on. Removing it will send us over at full speed.
Yes, we don’t need more checks or balances.
Except in those instances when the other party controls the executive and legislative branches. Then the filibuster is a bedrock of our system.
In Sacramento politicians have no incentive to worry about long term costs. Commitments of higher pensions etc that don’t have bills due for a few years have no cost to the politicians who pass them. By the time the crisis hits, the cause is long forgotten, The 2/3 requirement acts as a bit of a brake, but is not a solution. It just means we are driving towards a cliff with the brakes on. Removing it will send us over at full speed.
Yes, we don’t need more checks or balances.
Except in those instances when the other party controls the executive and legislative branches. Then the filibuster is a bedrock of our system.
In Sacramento politicians have no incentive to worry about long term costs. Commitments of higher pensions etc that don’t have bills due for a few years have no cost to the politicians who pass them. By the time the crisis hits, the cause is long forgotten, The 2/3 requirement acts as a bit of a brake, but is not a solution. It just means we are driving towards a cliff with the brakes on. Removing it will send us over at full speed.
Yes, we don’t need more checks or balances.
Except in those instances when the other party controls the executive and legislative branches. Then the filibuster is a bedrock of our system.
In Sacramento politicians have no incentive to worry about long term costs. Commitments of higher pensions etc that don’t have bills due for a few years have no cost to the politicians who pass them. By the time the crisis hits, the cause is long forgotten, The 2/3 requirement acts as a bit of a brake, but is not a solution. It just means we are driving towards a cliff with the brakes on. Removing it will send us over at full speed.
Can anyone link to the actual evidence? I've seen the graphs, which only address abstract, theoretical uses of wood burning devices. But does anyone have actual evidence of the situation in Davis?
Also, can anyone link to the "experts from UC Davis" who "feel the science is there" to support a ban? The only UCD scientist I've seen comment on this is Thomas Cahill (physics & atmospheric sciences), who has said that the science he's seen does not lead him to support a ban.
I’m open to being persuaded, but really need to see the actual science, and not just some self-appointed air quality experts blowing smoke.
Can anyone link to the actual evidence? I've seen the graphs, which only address abstract, theoretical uses of wood burning devices. But does anyone have actual evidence of the situation in Davis?
Also, can anyone link to the "experts from UC Davis" who "feel the science is there" to support a ban? The only UCD scientist I've seen comment on this is Thomas Cahill (physics & atmospheric sciences), who has said that the science he's seen does not lead him to support a ban.
I’m open to being persuaded, but really need to see the actual science, and not just some self-appointed air quality experts blowing smoke.
Can anyone link to the actual evidence? I've seen the graphs, which only address abstract, theoretical uses of wood burning devices. But does anyone have actual evidence of the situation in Davis?
Also, can anyone link to the "experts from UC Davis" who "feel the science is there" to support a ban? The only UCD scientist I've seen comment on this is Thomas Cahill (physics & atmospheric sciences), who has said that the science he's seen does not lead him to support a ban.
I’m open to being persuaded, but really need to see the actual science, and not just some self-appointed air quality experts blowing smoke.
Can anyone link to the actual evidence? I've seen the graphs, which only address abstract, theoretical uses of wood burning devices. But does anyone have actual evidence of the situation in Davis?
Also, can anyone link to the "experts from UC Davis" who "feel the science is there" to support a ban? The only UCD scientist I've seen comment on this is Thomas Cahill (physics & atmospheric sciences), who has said that the science he's seen does not lead him to support a ban.
I’m open to being persuaded, but really need to see the actual science, and not just some self-appointed air quality experts blowing smoke.
Back to the Kid. No one addressed the real problem here. It is the clueless dumb bastards that have kids and throw them away. Yeah, take a look around you. Stupid people having kids and not taking care of them.
Back to the Kid. No one addressed the real problem here. It is the clueless dumb bastards that have kids and throw them away. Yeah, take a look around you. Stupid people having kids and not taking care of them.
Back to the Kid. No one addressed the real problem here. It is the clueless dumb bastards that have kids and throw them away. Yeah, take a look around you. Stupid people having kids and not taking care of them.
Back to the Kid. No one addressed the real problem here. It is the clueless dumb bastards that have kids and throw them away. Yeah, take a look around you. Stupid people having kids and not taking care of them.
“Back to the Kid. No one addressed the real problem here. It is the clueless dumb bastards that have kids and throw them away. Yeah, take a look around you. Stupid people having kids and not taking care of them.”
Without your articulating a little more clearly, your comment comes off as nothing more than cheap criticism.
Who are the dumb bastards you refer to?
The adoptive mother? The kid’s biological parents?
Do you know the circumstances of the biological parents that lead to their kid going into the foster system?
“Back to the Kid. No one addressed the real problem here. It is the clueless dumb bastards that have kids and throw them away. Yeah, take a look around you. Stupid people having kids and not taking care of them.”
Without your articulating a little more clearly, your comment comes off as nothing more than cheap criticism.
Who are the dumb bastards you refer to?
The adoptive mother? The kid’s biological parents?
Do you know the circumstances of the biological parents that lead to their kid going into the foster system?
“Back to the Kid. No one addressed the real problem here. It is the clueless dumb bastards that have kids and throw them away. Yeah, take a look around you. Stupid people having kids and not taking care of them.”
Without your articulating a little more clearly, your comment comes off as nothing more than cheap criticism.
Who are the dumb bastards you refer to?
The adoptive mother? The kid’s biological parents?
Do you know the circumstances of the biological parents that lead to their kid going into the foster system?
“Back to the Kid. No one addressed the real problem here. It is the clueless dumb bastards that have kids and throw them away. Yeah, take a look around you. Stupid people having kids and not taking care of them.”
Without your articulating a little more clearly, your comment comes off as nothing more than cheap criticism.
Who are the dumb bastards you refer to?
The adoptive mother? The kid’s biological parents?
Do you know the circumstances of the biological parents that lead to their kid going into the foster system?
To A “Different View”,
Yes, I could articulate the problems. Yes,I am aware of the circumstances that happen in everyday life among the non-responsible people who bring children into the world.
I made an error by assuming that most of the people reading here were a little more intelligent than not to look at the origin of the situation.
To expand upon the statement is a waste of time and energy for people whose mind should be open to the concept,(and reality), I have put forth. However, I often forget about the Citizens of Davis not having an open mind. My apologies to you for that assumption. And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.
To A “Different View”,
Yes, I could articulate the problems. Yes,I am aware of the circumstances that happen in everyday life among the non-responsible people who bring children into the world.
I made an error by assuming that most of the people reading here were a little more intelligent than not to look at the origin of the situation.
To expand upon the statement is a waste of time and energy for people whose mind should be open to the concept,(and reality), I have put forth. However, I often forget about the Citizens of Davis not having an open mind. My apologies to you for that assumption. And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.
To A “Different View”,
Yes, I could articulate the problems. Yes,I am aware of the circumstances that happen in everyday life among the non-responsible people who bring children into the world.
I made an error by assuming that most of the people reading here were a little more intelligent than not to look at the origin of the situation.
To expand upon the statement is a waste of time and energy for people whose mind should be open to the concept,(and reality), I have put forth. However, I often forget about the Citizens of Davis not having an open mind. My apologies to you for that assumption. And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.
To A “Different View”,
Yes, I could articulate the problems. Yes,I am aware of the circumstances that happen in everyday life among the non-responsible people who bring children into the world.
I made an error by assuming that most of the people reading here were a little more intelligent than not to look at the origin of the situation.
To expand upon the statement is a waste of time and energy for people whose mind should be open to the concept,(and reality), I have put forth. However, I often forget about the Citizens of Davis not having an open mind. My apologies to you for that assumption. And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.
“And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.”
Blog administrators,
Perhaps you will delete the above comment? This is garbage that we don’t need.
“Please note that any posts that use profanity or engage in name-calling or other potentially slanderous attacks will be subject to deletion. “
“And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.”
Blog administrators,
Perhaps you will delete the above comment? This is garbage that we don’t need.
“Please note that any posts that use profanity or engage in name-calling or other potentially slanderous attacks will be subject to deletion. “
“And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.”
Blog administrators,
Perhaps you will delete the above comment? This is garbage that we don’t need.
“Please note that any posts that use profanity or engage in name-calling or other potentially slanderous attacks will be subject to deletion. “
“And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.”
Blog administrators,
Perhaps you will delete the above comment? This is garbage that we don’t need.
“Please note that any posts that use profanity or engage in name-calling or other potentially slanderous attacks will be subject to deletion. “
“Yes, I could articulate the problems. Yes,I am aware of the circumstances that happen in everyday life among the non-responsible people who bring children into the world.
I made an error by assuming that most of the people reading here were a little more intelligent than not to look at the origin of the situation.
To expand upon the statement is a waste of time and energy for people whose mind should be open to the concept,(and reality), I have put forth. However, I often forget about the Citizens of Davis not having an open mind. My apologies to you for that assumption. And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.”
I just love the arrogance of authority from this author. Only in Davis…
“Yes, I could articulate the problems. Yes,I am aware of the circumstances that happen in everyday life among the non-responsible people who bring children into the world.
I made an error by assuming that most of the people reading here were a little more intelligent than not to look at the origin of the situation.
To expand upon the statement is a waste of time and energy for people whose mind should be open to the concept,(and reality), I have put forth. However, I often forget about the Citizens of Davis not having an open mind. My apologies to you for that assumption. And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.”
I just love the arrogance of authority from this author. Only in Davis…
“Yes, I could articulate the problems. Yes,I am aware of the circumstances that happen in everyday life among the non-responsible people who bring children into the world.
I made an error by assuming that most of the people reading here were a little more intelligent than not to look at the origin of the situation.
To expand upon the statement is a waste of time and energy for people whose mind should be open to the concept,(and reality), I have put forth. However, I often forget about the Citizens of Davis not having an open mind. My apologies to you for that assumption. And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.”
I just love the arrogance of authority from this author. Only in Davis…
“Yes, I could articulate the problems. Yes,I am aware of the circumstances that happen in everyday life among the non-responsible people who bring children into the world.
I made an error by assuming that most of the people reading here were a little more intelligent than not to look at the origin of the situation.
To expand upon the statement is a waste of time and energy for people whose mind should be open to the concept,(and reality), I have put forth. However, I often forget about the Citizens of Davis not having an open mind. My apologies to you for that assumption. And as to your question, “Who are the dumb bastards” I am referring to? It is simple, go look in the mirror.”
I just love the arrogance of authority from this author. Only in Davis…
I have nothing but sympathy for the mother of this child. With her limited resources she should never have adopted a troubled child. I believe that abandoning him at the hospital in Nebraska was far better for his safety and the safety of her family when help of local agencies is not working. I notice in Davis that money and influence gives some families more options. Alson, I think that there are very biased, judgmental attitudes towards parents especially mothers in our society. What would have happened if that boy had pulled a knife on anybody other than his family? What if he had pulled a knife on you or a teacher, counselor, police officer? How would the public discussion go as to what should be done about his behavior? Should he be taught a lesson and charged as an adult? Think about this.
I have nothing but sympathy for the mother of this child. With her limited resources she should never have adopted a troubled child. I believe that abandoning him at the hospital in Nebraska was far better for his safety and the safety of her family when help of local agencies is not working. I notice in Davis that money and influence gives some families more options. Alson, I think that there are very biased, judgmental attitudes towards parents especially mothers in our society. What would have happened if that boy had pulled a knife on anybody other than his family? What if he had pulled a knife on you or a teacher, counselor, police officer? How would the public discussion go as to what should be done about his behavior? Should he be taught a lesson and charged as an adult? Think about this.
I have nothing but sympathy for the mother of this child. With her limited resources she should never have adopted a troubled child. I believe that abandoning him at the hospital in Nebraska was far better for his safety and the safety of her family when help of local agencies is not working. I notice in Davis that money and influence gives some families more options. Alson, I think that there are very biased, judgmental attitudes towards parents especially mothers in our society. What would have happened if that boy had pulled a knife on anybody other than his family? What if he had pulled a knife on you or a teacher, counselor, police officer? How would the public discussion go as to what should be done about his behavior? Should he be taught a lesson and charged as an adult? Think about this.
I have nothing but sympathy for the mother of this child. With her limited resources she should never have adopted a troubled child. I believe that abandoning him at the hospital in Nebraska was far better for his safety and the safety of her family when help of local agencies is not working. I notice in Davis that money and influence gives some families more options. Alson, I think that there are very biased, judgmental attitudes towards parents especially mothers in our society. What would have happened if that boy had pulled a knife on anybody other than his family? What if he had pulled a knife on you or a teacher, counselor, police officer? How would the public discussion go as to what should be done about his behavior? Should he be taught a lesson and charged as an adult? Think about this.
Thank you Tansey, you have the wisdom and experience to back up what you are saying. I am very troubled when I hear people talk about the dumb, ignorant, or otherwise unqualified people who bring children into the world. When a woman has a child, she does not have crystal ball. No one can predict the future. For upper middle class people of privilege, it is easy to point fingers and play the arm chair historian when things go wrong. But no one can guarantee that the way for their own child will be smooth. One parent can die, or leave and what was a ‘perfect’ parenting scenario can fall apart pretty quickly. Women in America have a ‘choice’ about whether or not to have a child, but this freedom of choice leaves them with all the responsibility. Men who are good fathers are wonderful, but they are also making a free choice. Men who do not want to take responsibility for their children are supposed to be financially responsible, but many are not and there is not much societal pressure delivering the message that this is the right thing to do. As things stand today, if a man says he doesn’t want to have a kid, he feels entitled to walk away. We give everyone the strong message that no one should have to bear an ‘unwanted’ child, but what if you wanted the child and then things changed by the time he was 14? If you weren’t obligated to bear him before, why should you be obligated to bear him now? I guess what I’m trying to say is that we cannot sit in judgment of this woman without knowing what all the circumstances were and are, and that is something we will probably never know.
Thank you Tansey, you have the wisdom and experience to back up what you are saying. I am very troubled when I hear people talk about the dumb, ignorant, or otherwise unqualified people who bring children into the world. When a woman has a child, she does not have crystal ball. No one can predict the future. For upper middle class people of privilege, it is easy to point fingers and play the arm chair historian when things go wrong. But no one can guarantee that the way for their own child will be smooth. One parent can die, or leave and what was a ‘perfect’ parenting scenario can fall apart pretty quickly. Women in America have a ‘choice’ about whether or not to have a child, but this freedom of choice leaves them with all the responsibility. Men who are good fathers are wonderful, but they are also making a free choice. Men who do not want to take responsibility for their children are supposed to be financially responsible, but many are not and there is not much societal pressure delivering the message that this is the right thing to do. As things stand today, if a man says he doesn’t want to have a kid, he feels entitled to walk away. We give everyone the strong message that no one should have to bear an ‘unwanted’ child, but what if you wanted the child and then things changed by the time he was 14? If you weren’t obligated to bear him before, why should you be obligated to bear him now? I guess what I’m trying to say is that we cannot sit in judgment of this woman without knowing what all the circumstances were and are, and that is something we will probably never know.
Thank you Tansey, you have the wisdom and experience to back up what you are saying. I am very troubled when I hear people talk about the dumb, ignorant, or otherwise unqualified people who bring children into the world. When a woman has a child, she does not have crystal ball. No one can predict the future. For upper middle class people of privilege, it is easy to point fingers and play the arm chair historian when things go wrong. But no one can guarantee that the way for their own child will be smooth. One parent can die, or leave and what was a ‘perfect’ parenting scenario can fall apart pretty quickly. Women in America have a ‘choice’ about whether or not to have a child, but this freedom of choice leaves them with all the responsibility. Men who are good fathers are wonderful, but they are also making a free choice. Men who do not want to take responsibility for their children are supposed to be financially responsible, but many are not and there is not much societal pressure delivering the message that this is the right thing to do. As things stand today, if a man says he doesn’t want to have a kid, he feels entitled to walk away. We give everyone the strong message that no one should have to bear an ‘unwanted’ child, but what if you wanted the child and then things changed by the time he was 14? If you weren’t obligated to bear him before, why should you be obligated to bear him now? I guess what I’m trying to say is that we cannot sit in judgment of this woman without knowing what all the circumstances were and are, and that is something we will probably never know.
Thank you Tansey, you have the wisdom and experience to back up what you are saying. I am very troubled when I hear people talk about the dumb, ignorant, or otherwise unqualified people who bring children into the world. When a woman has a child, she does not have crystal ball. No one can predict the future. For upper middle class people of privilege, it is easy to point fingers and play the arm chair historian when things go wrong. But no one can guarantee that the way for their own child will be smooth. One parent can die, or leave and what was a ‘perfect’ parenting scenario can fall apart pretty quickly. Women in America have a ‘choice’ about whether or not to have a child, but this freedom of choice leaves them with all the responsibility. Men who are good fathers are wonderful, but they are also making a free choice. Men who do not want to take responsibility for their children are supposed to be financially responsible, but many are not and there is not much societal pressure delivering the message that this is the right thing to do. As things stand today, if a man says he doesn’t want to have a kid, he feels entitled to walk away. We give everyone the strong message that no one should have to bear an ‘unwanted’ child, but what if you wanted the child and then things changed by the time he was 14? If you weren’t obligated to bear him before, why should you be obligated to bear him now? I guess what I’m trying to say is that we cannot sit in judgment of this woman without knowing what all the circumstances were and are, and that is something we will probably never know.
It’s amazing both how difficult kids come out of otherwise well-adjusted families, and how occasionally brilliant kids come out of poor family conditions.
If you have kids and you can get them through school and college to well adjusted lives, you should be able to take some credit for good parenting, but you also have a lot of good fortune to consider.
Nothing is a guarantee…
It’s amazing both how difficult kids come out of otherwise well-adjusted families, and how occasionally brilliant kids come out of poor family conditions.
If you have kids and you can get them through school and college to well adjusted lives, you should be able to take some credit for good parenting, but you also have a lot of good fortune to consider.
Nothing is a guarantee…
It’s amazing both how difficult kids come out of otherwise well-adjusted families, and how occasionally brilliant kids come out of poor family conditions.
If you have kids and you can get them through school and college to well adjusted lives, you should be able to take some credit for good parenting, but you also have a lot of good fortune to consider.
Nothing is a guarantee…
It’s amazing both how difficult kids come out of otherwise well-adjusted families, and how occasionally brilliant kids come out of poor family conditions.
If you have kids and you can get them through school and college to well adjusted lives, you should be able to take some credit for good parenting, but you also have a lot of good fortune to consider.
Nothing is a guarantee…