Third Party & Independents: Archives

I disagree. I believe there is reason to fear here.

During the 1950’s, there was concern about the effect violence on TV would have on Children in that era. The TV People and Doctors said to wait until they had data. Well? After 50 Years, they found out that there IS an effect watching violence on Children. Watching the Three Stooges and those endless Westerns have made the Adults of today far more destructive than their earlier contemporaries.

The Video Game problem today is not limited to violence unfortunately. It also demeans Authority, the Rule of Law and even degrades women. Can you imagine the present 8 year old growing up with that?

I agree that there are more immediate problems. However, like the Cowboys and Indians in the 50’s, you don’t notice it until decades have past.

Lisa Renee,

Thank you. I agree with you 100%. I want to know what exact is supposed to be accomplished by a Federal investigation? A lot of these video games are bought by parents either for themselves or for their children. Parents of this country need to wake up and take care of their kids. As the mother of three (step-mom to one) young children I also have the audacity to tell my kids to turn off the videos (we don’t have cable or anything of the sort) and go outside and play. My kids aren’t old enough for the rest, but when it comes time I’ll be right there, active as always.

It’s fun to agree! Yay!

No, seriously, I think the investigation is pretty frivolous, too.

Let’s all hug and enjoy this momentary accord.

Aldous,

I did not say the games were not harmless, but that the real answer was parents not the FTC.

Given GTA and those like it are not meant for children the problem is adults allowing children access to them.

Same theory on violent television shows. It should not be up to the government to regulate our children’s tv or video game playing.

That was my focus as I have a problem with this type of “Don’t worry, we’ll take care of you” mentality from the Government.

I do agree that parents should take responsibility and monitor what their children do. But, the sad fact is that many do not or do not think that violence, etc. is anything to worry about, citing that they are exposed to it “anyway”. Some even make the claim that they played such games, watched such shows, etc. and that they turned out “okay”!
I recently stayed with a 14 yr. old while his adoptive parents went away. They not only bought and allowed him to play Grand Theft Auto (San Andreas), but also allowed him to watch nudity on cable. NOT on my watch! I spoke to the parents when they returned and was accused of being a prude.
Then, there are the kids who basically raise and monitor themselves. The parents both work and don’t have/make the time to see what their kids are up to. Should they be more responsible? YES! But the fact remains that many are NOT!
All the investigations, regulations by govt., etc. will not change this.
Parents are key, but no one will ever be able to enforce or tell them how they should raise their children.
An AO rating will make the kids strive to aquire the games, music, etc. even more. They consider it a challenge and even when parents refuse to let them have these things, their friend’s parents may or not monitor what goes on. And…bootlegging is alive and well.

Video games & TV may play a part in today’s youth. Parental control of the children is also a large problem, but who has taken the controls away from the parents? If a 10-year-old calls social services to complain they are being corrected (by whatever means) by their parents, social services takes the child & it is up to the parent to prove otherwise. I know this happens for a fact. Then add to that the humanistic theology taught to children in the public school system. An ideology of “if it feels good, do it”. I know this thinking brings a myriad of angry responses from the left.

So this is where we stand:
1.) Parents do not have the same authority to correct their children as they did 40 + years ago, (do to government intervention)
2.) Schools are hamstrung when it comes to correcting an unruly child, as they did 40 + years ago, (again, do to government intervention.
3.) The children know the school’s & parent’s limitations.
4.) Add to that, the humanistic “no absolutes” of right or wrong taught in the schools & the result is disastous.
5.) Now we act shocked when a child goes off the deep end.

Perplexed

Perplexed, thank you for bringing that up. The removal or constraints on corporal punishment is not the real problem. In my opinion it was the lack of an alternative being consistently used. Why did it work? Wrong behavior, consequence. There still can be consequences to wrong behavior, corporal punishment is just one small facet of discipline and developing authority. Too many parents are not consistent, they make threats then do not follow thru which teaches the child that the “bad” behavior doesn’t have to change. It’s a very simple, action, consequence, reward theory that can be as effective as using corporal punishment.

If you tell your child “do that one more time and I am sending you to your room” and you do not follow thru continually the child learns these are empty threats. If proper respect of authority and discipline was instilled before the child entered school the majority of the problems the schools experience would not exist. Parents also play a role in their children’s education now. Or at least should. Rather than “no my child he/she would never do that” the Parent should support the teacher/administration in dealing with whatever the infraction was. Also important is reward, not to the point I see some parents but if you make it a point to reinforce desired behavior it helps reduce some of the typical looking for attention behavior. A simple acknowledgement of something the child has done well and a thank you, or a hug reinforces that you as a parent are paying attention. Especially when they are young and it feels like you are constantly saying “No”.

Being a parent is difficult at times, however we do still have numerous options to us that do not involve us having Children Protective Services beating down our door. My children’s ages to show you the years I have been successful at this are 10, 16, 17, 20 and 22. It does work and can work well.

Lisa Renee—

I agree with you; the real silent epidemic is the lack of parenting skills in American homes. I have four children and one grandchild, and my children would agree that I am tough, but fair. My home is mine, not theirs to do with as they please. I make the rule and I do not solicit input from third parties under eighteen. As a result my children know the boundaries, though they are not above testing them, to their own chagrin. My children are not my friends, they are my children and I treat them as such. I do not try and curry their favor; it is the other way around as it should be.

I am applauded at some of the things children get away with these days. One only has to observe the average American family in public to see what I mean. Yes the real epidemic lies not in violent video games, but in the stupid parent that allow them into their homes!

Lisa Renee,
Why don’t you just give up? Hey…the government’s made sure that “it takes a village” to raise your children. So why are you trying? Who, you may ask, is in this village? Let’s see who just some of these villagers raising your children are, shall we?

1.) The babysitter that has sex with her boyfriend instead of watching your kid.

2.) The television that teaches your children it’s much better to kill people than to have sex with them (except in the daytime and then it’s the other way around).

3.) The Department of Human Services that swears by all that is holy that if you punish your child (except in the government approved fashion) that you will have your children snatched from you and you’ll never see them again…unless you are a “crack whore” who “found God” and then you’ll get ‘em back right away.

4.) The psychiatrist that feeds your kid psychotropic mood altering drugs so they won’t act up in class and the teacher won’t have to assert their authority (it’s such a hassle to make a kid behave, isn’t it?).

5.) The people on the internet that teach your kid that he (or she) can do millions and millions of dollars of damage to companies worldwide and won’t get punished for it.

6.) The 46 year-old-guys on the internet that convince your 13 year old daughter that they are also 13 and they should meet them in the local park.

Yeah, with this sort of “village” raising our children, it is truly a wonder that the human race in America continues to reproduce.

Lisa:

I have grandchildren as old as your children. I raised my children according to the biblical principle of “spare the rod, spoil the child”. That is how my parents raised me. My siblings & I were never disrespectful & neither were my children, however, I see in my grandchildren a difference simply because some received idle threats & the others corrective action. I agree that the parent’s responsibility is to train preschool children, but we live in an age where both parents work & there is a certain amount of guilt on the part of the parents. Guilt of sending them to a childcare center causes the parents to have a lack of discipline. The problem begins when a child enters school with no previous guidance & is subjected to an ideology of “situation ethics”.

Perplexed

The old theory that if you do not want to watch something on television or, have your kids do so, “just turn the knob to off” is in a practical sense no longer an effective control. Kids will watch TV somehow and somewhere over which you have no control.

The same thing applies to video games.

Talk about disaster portrayed as matter of fact :

A Wolf chasing a Roadrunner plummets 5000 feet off a cliff, lays flattened for a moment and then gets up and continues on.

Elmer Fudd runs all around the countryside firing a shotgun at a rabbit.

A man puts on a funny looking outfit and flies off a rooftop to save someone.

Any number of video games portray such incredible violence it’s sickening even for some adults.

Computer mavens are now offering downloads to convert a shoot em up video game into pornography.

To make these things unavailable or, less available to kids we turn to parental controls, they don’t work either because you can’t put them on every TV in the neighborhood or the store in the mall.

These things are wanted by the kids as much for the fact that we don’t want them to have them as they are to use for enjoyment.

The need in many families for both parents to work feeds the problem. An older child, possibly a teenager is happy watching the kids after school as long as they don’t interrupt their phone or computer use. What the kids are doing is OK as long as silence prevails.

IMO this is a problem that has no realistic permanent solution save some very stringent state and/or federal regulations that will bring out every free speech advocate in the interplanetary galaxy to protest freedom deprivation.

Family values for TV, but, not for Video Games. I love this dichotomy which makes no sense unless one factors the political angle in.

David, I understand this is an attempt to appear more to the right by Senator Clinton. It wouldn’t have mattered who brought it up as far as me having a problem with it, because most of them have an agenda behind this type of investigation demand. I was careful to qualify I didn’t disagree with her on everything in an attempt to not make this a bash Hillary post.

For me its the deeper “We know what’s good for you now shut up and let us take care of you” that bothers me. Then the real issue of parents not parenting.

To everyone, I apologize if I came across as some type of super mom, because I’m not perfect. I know how difficult it was for us to make the financial sacrifices for me to stay home. I also realize some families have no choice at all, some do but prefer a higher lifestyle to what we chose.

I think our children will pay the price for that though as we have a great deal of them that were not raised in any consistent manner whether it be from parents or day care. That could end up causing alot more problems than video games or television.

When comparing the behavior of their peers from the time span between my oldest and my youngest, behavior has gotten worse. To many of these children at age ten still think temper tantrums are appropriate because they work. What are some of these parents waiting for? I shudder to think what some of them will be like in high school since they are barely controllable now.

Lisa Renee,

I was supporting your entire article, not just your admirable decision to actively raise your children.

When you said, “We know what’s good for you now shut up and let us take care of you” that bothers me. I have to disagree a little. While that does bother me a lot (as if the children of politicians, including our current President and Chelsea Clinton, grow up to be such model citizens without experiencing some harsh growing pains after becoming adults), it’s not what bothers me most.

What bothers me most is this notion that we have to go out and investigate something to prove the obvious. Why does the government (and scientists for that matter) insist on proving what they already know. They waste a lot of time, money and other resources to prove what we already know. The mentality that bothers me the most is this: “Violent videos games “seem” like a problem, so let’s go out and research it to death so we can ignore it for a while longer.”

What ever happened to reading a book?

Rocky,

It requires to much concentration, earnest thought, and reflection; we can’t have that!!

Lisa, I think what is missing from your analysis is the immense obstacles facing government regulation of entertainment and free speech, and for good reason, of course.

But the point is, IF violent and sexually oriented games are being peddaled to our youth, to overcome those hurdles, sound and defensible evidence must be established and presented before Congress before it can act to regulate the private industry in this regard. It is not enough to go before Congress and say, let’s dispense with free enterprise and speech in this one situation because I as a mother know this stuff is bad for kids. It just won’t fly.

Clinton is taking the concrete steps necessary to try to address the issue.

When I was a kid, we played war in the woods.
We had plastic pistols and rifles and grenades.
Did that make us killers? No. Not a one of us.

But, parents shouldn’t let their kids play video games too much for other reasons. It’s unhealthy. They need to get some exercise and socialize with others. Too much of anything can become a bad thing.

Video games are not the problem.
What about the violence in movies, television, books, magazines, paint ball guns, boxing, toy guns, war, terrorism, etc. ?
It’s really too simplistic to blame video games.

People that commit crimes of violence are often disaffected, don’t feel like they belong anywhere, don’t have a healthy self-esteem, are often lazy, were victims of constant bullying in schools, or victims of crimes, were persecuted by cliquish and clannish groups, don’t have parents that care or help teach them how to cope, any many other factors, etc.
There are many more important causal factors that create criminals than violent video games.

What the parents do has a whole lot to do with how children develop. I rarely see children of good parents turn out really bad. I often see children with parents that don’t care and aren’t paying attention, turn out bad.

Similarly:

Wealth doesn’t harm people.
Guns don’t harm people.
Religions don’t harm people.
Video games don’t harm people.

Some people harm people.

It seems to me that violent video games would be more of a problem for suburban kids. I agree that most of the problem is in the parenting and raising of kids, but there is also a societal responsibility.

There are a great many homeless children in this country as well as those on the edge every month for various reasons. Missing a parent in many homes, many others with un or underemployed caregivers and a general sense that those who are poor are trash.

It is not the games that lead to violence in my opinion, it is a larger sense of hopelessness that makes people believe they are out of options. Can games cause problems and influence kids? Yes. But going after just one symptom won’t fix the overall illness.

d.a.n, I think the major issue is young impressionable youth vs. the gigantic and powerful marketing and advertising corporations who will use every psychological and sociological ploy in the book to seek sales from that youth with NO regard for the products suitability to their impressionable age and growth.

There is a reason America has laws about youth under 18 not being legally permitted to sign contracts. They are not capable of understanding and weighing all of the ramifications of doing so, nor can they be expected to be responsible for living up to those contractual obligations. Yet, our society gives pretty free rein to marketing and advertising powerhouses to shape the consumer behavior of our youth.

This is an important issue, and it is much bigger than a single video game. Clinton wrote a book, It Takes a Village to Raise a Child. That is where she is coming from. We, as a society have to take some responsibility in helping nuclear parents raise their children, since the society at large intrudes upon and influences their growth and development in tremendously significant ways.

David, I did not provide that type of analysis because I do not believe the government needs to step into to this private industry. There are ratings for games right now today. I did link the ratings information on my initial post so anyone who was curious could see what is currently being done. Consumers have the tools right now at their fingertips when they pick up a video game. They know if that game is appropriate or inappropriate for their child.

If there was not a rating system and the companies who made these games refused to create one of their own then yes, it would be appropriate for government to step in. The difference here is Senator Clinton wanting this game to be listed as AO, Adults Only rather than MA Mature Audience, a difference of 17 year olds versus 18 year olds.

My opinion on this is we do not need more governmental control, in this situation we need more parental control.

David,
I won’t argue with that. There should be outrage, and criticism.

But, like you, I would ban not the games.

However, perhaps there should be age ratings enforced that restrict sales to minors. Don’t they already have those?

Just like the age limits for movies (e.g. PG-13, etc.), purchasing cigarettes (age 18), and liquor (age 21) ?

Of course, you’ll never get 100% compliance with any of those.

Personally, I think the biggest epidemic with children these days, is their uncaring parents (generally speaking).

You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to see which kids go bad, and which do not.

And, that may be systemic of a even larger societal problem.

Complacency, apathy, laziness, futility, irresponsible, unaccountable, and dishonest government.

d.a.n, I can’t say for sure, but, I suspect that is exactly where Clinton is going with the investigation. Regulation, not censorship, age requirements, not banning.

Although, games which promote criminal activity create a new genre of entertainment aimed at youth that may require modified approaches.

d.a.n., there are guidelines for purchasing games but they are not followed. A recent survey of several locations where a 13 year old was sent into to several stores to puchase an MA game ended up with every store out of the 6 selected selling it to him, but one. The one store that refused with out identification that he was 17? Wal-Mart.

That is an area that could be dealt with from a legislative point of view that I would more than likely support.

David, if that is her intent, that was not the impression given from the several sources I read in deciding I wanted to write about this.

One of the articles I read:

A statement distributed by the Senator’s office this afternoon sets the scene, stating that “following recent reports revealing that the video game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas has graphic pornographic content which may be unlocked by following instructions on the Internet, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will hold a press conference to discuss legislative solutions to keep inappropriate video game content out of the hands of young people.” The statement makes no mention of asking the FTC to step in, but sources tell GameSpot that this request will be the centerpiece of the Senator’s plea tomorrow.

Which is why I focused on the parental aspect of this because this particular game should not be in the hands of anyone under 17 if the rating system was followed by parents.

I am not trying to bash Senator Clinton, I am trying to point out that the ultimate responsibilty should lie first with parents, and if that were being done? This would be unnecessary.

Violent video games and movies are not the direct cause of violence. Removing violent video games and movies from children are not going to keep them from being violent. Environmental conditions such as the relationship the child has with their parents, the relationship between the parents, and the stability/instability of the child’s community all play infinitely larger roles than media.

The only reason video games are being targetted is because they are easier targets. Which is easier for over-active Senators to rail against, inanimate, consumable objects or the broken homes and communities many of our youth live in?

All new parents should have to watch Nanny 911.
Have you seen some of these parents?
You wouldn’t believe it.

Yes, I agree 1000% with Lisa Renee Ward.
The biggest problem is the parents.
Sometimes, it’s just ignorance.
But, if you have children, ignorance is not a valid excuse.
Thus, it boils down to the fact that too many parents don’t care.

I’m a parent. You’ve got to learn to be tough, and you can’t be afraid if they get mad at you. You can’t give them too much, especially when they start to show signs of selfishly taking it for granted. You’ve got to make them work for things. I gave my son jobs to do at home, until he could drive, and chose to get a job elsewhere. Then, he had to pay for one third of the cost of the car (some buy-in; i.e. a stake in it is important). There was always a list on the refrigerator of things that needed to be done (e.g. mow the lawn, wash dishes, unload the dish washer, vacuuming, dusting, fence repairs, etc.), and each task paid a certain $amount.
It was interesting, because some things had to be incented a little more, and some a little less. It’s not an original idea. That’s the way it was when I was growing up.
But, it’s a great way to give kids a sense of value, work for money, learn to spend and save, rather than having them ask for money all the time. Just givin’ money when ever they ask for it is one way to spoil them rotten fast, but I see it all the time. And some parents keep bailing their kids out of trouble, time after time. The parents are enablers, but refuse to see it.

And parents need to provide a united front.
Kids will quickly take advantage of any situation where the parents do not present a united front.

And, of course you have to love them, and always be willing to help them, if they’re willing to try to help themselves.
And, sometimes, you have to let them learn the hard way.
And, you have to be fair, consistent, ensure there are consequences for unacceptable behavior, and try to set a good example (that might be the hardest part).

What is Nanny 911 and why would anybody need to watch it to be a good parent? (And does it come in a variety of languages for the numerous parents in America that don’t speak the dominant language here?)

As for the rest of your comment, your right. Perhaps a solution to the greater problem would be to hold parents AND children responsible for a child’s behavior. That way if the child becomes a criminal (while under 18 years of age) the parent is held partly responsible for the criminal act. And I’m not just talking about paying a fine.

Nanny 911 is a television show that teaches parents how to be better parents.

But, it’s also amazing to see how badly some parents need some training. It’s no wonder so many kids are screwed up. They’re programmed to be that way. The show really is quite educational. That’s why I said a lot of parents ought to watch it and learn something.

Watch is sometime, and you’ll see what I mean.

Regarding the illegal acts of children, in many states, the parents are held legally responsible for damages, but no state puts the parent in jail. Is that what you’re advocating? That is, put the parents in jail when the child (under 18) breaks the law? That wouldn’t work. The children, when they’re angry, will go break the law, just so their parent has to go to jail.

It’s a given that there are video games whose nature requires their circulation be restricted to mature audiences. The problem is not that these games are made. To deny them that much would be a violation of our first amendment rights. The problem is in the enforcement of laws governing their sale and distribution. After the point of purchase, neither the vendor nor the publisher of the game are liable to irresponsibility. Granted, ESRB has a long way to go before parents will realize that they can’t just buy any old game for their kids anymore, but they have come a long way since Senator Lieberman’s reforms a couple years ago. If the industry is responsible, and if vendors are responsible, and if government is responsible, none are left accountable but ourselves.

I don’t have cable. We have a very simple antenna. It brings in CBS, and that’s it. My children watch Saturday morning cartoons. We watch news when it worth while. Presidential elections. We turned the t.v. on when my friend called to say 9/11 happened. Other than that, we don’t watch t.v. We watch videos, because we can control what comes into our home.

So, sorry. Can’t watch it.

I have watched Nanny 9/11, while I realize they pick the worst possible parents and children in the end it usually boils down to the parents either not being a united front or not knowing how to set limits.

It’d be nice to think those types of parents only existed on tv, but we see them in the real world as well.

and thanks d.a.n. you made some very valid comments about how our children respect things more when they help to earn them rather than just being given them, especially when it does come to being able to drive. I agree.

I have an antenna too Stephanie, no cable, we get the local channels and two PBS channels, one of those good old fashion rabbit ears type things.

Thanks Daniel, that is the main basis of this, in the end it is up to us.

David, I understand this is an attempt to appear more to the right by Senator Clinton.

Haha! That’s funny. Who forced the video game industry to start rating games: Senator Lieberman. Who forced the music industry to start rating music: Al and Tipper Gore. Who keeps pumping out the sex and violence: the Republicans in the boardroom who are making gobs of money by pushing the limits of decency. It’s the free market at work, baby.

…but we live in an age where both parents work & there is a certain amount of guilt on the part of the parents.

That’s the root of the problem, Perplexed. If you work full-time, you should be able to support and raise your family. Unfortunately, business thrives on cheap labor, and union-busting, deregulating, Republicans have insured that labor can be bought cheaper than ever before. So in most households, both parents must work to keep a roof over their heads and food in the fridge.

BTW, ask your Republican representatives why they’re not cracking down on businesses that hire illegal immigrants. (I’ll give you a hint: cheap labor.)

Daniel, but, the makers and distributor’s ARE responsible for whom they target their marketing and advertising to. BINGO! Responsibility does extend beyond us after the product is sold.

Lisa Renee, I can’t think of a more ingenious marketing and advertising technique aimed at youth than to see a game with cryptic puzzle inside which, if you connect to the right places on the internet unlocks content your parents would not want you to see. And nowhere in the sales package Mom or Pop buys, is this marketing and advertising technique advertised. No, it is advertised on the internet game sites which are aimed at youth.

I could go on and explain in detail how this technique piques youth interest, encourages them to deceive their parents into buying it for the restricted coded content, etc., but, you get the picture. Big, Huge money goes into these kinds of psychological marketing and advertising techniques which are now multimedia and cross media linked. Very sophisticated stuff designed and targeted toward teens.

Alas my point was missed, it is not the ability of some extra mod to be downloaded in some attempt to thwart parents.

It was the point that this game was rated MA, so no child under the age of 17 should even have access to it.

If parents continue to not parent and allow their children access to games they should not be able to own in the first place than to me the additional download of some silly mod that adds a sexual aspect to the violence means nothing.

Those of you who want to wait the years necessary for Senator Clinton to create some kind of action in response to this behavior? Sorry, but I choose to say it is up to parents to act NOW.

American Pundit:

I grew up in a household were only one parent worked & it was the same way with almost all of my friends. We had a roof over our heads, & food on the table, but we only had one car in the driveway. We only had one TV. Do you think we are more materialistic today? People could live on a lot less in the past, but during the 60’s things began to change. Today we have a higher standard of living & for the working person that means 2 or 3 jobs or both parents working. As a result, the parents feel guilty about not being there for the kids & have a tendency to spoil them by giving material things instead of their time.

You can’t blame cheap labor or wages on only republicans. There were many democrats in the congress that supported NAFTA. In fact, it was Clinton who signed it into law, over the objections of the unions. Business has their hooks in the representatives of both parties. Because of some of the events surrounding Tom Delay, statistics have come out showing more democrats than republicans receiving paid trips by big business & special interest groups. Illegal immigrants, used as cheap labor are crossing the southern borders & neither party is doing anything about it. The democrats control California & yet nothing is being done in that state. New Mexico has a problem & a democratic governor; nothing is being done in that state. Arizona has a moderate senator (McCain), who has been set on a pedestal by the left. He has completely ignored the problem.

I have been a union member for almost 40 years & we have been shafted just as much by the democrats as the republicans. Unless you can tell me you have been a union member for a longer period of time, I believe I have more experience than you. The purpose of this post was to deal with children, not politicians. If we call for more regulation, then we are calling for more government intervention in our lives. I believe as others, parents have to take responsibility; we already have enough government intervention.

Perplexed

How exactly is anyone going to make parents take responsibility? The only thing we can do here to prevent children from being exposed to violence and inappropriate scenes is government regulation. If there is practical way to educate the millions of parents out there I’d like to see it. So far the best option provided is increasing the wages of parents so only one needs to work and the other stays at home; thus, preventing any sense of guilt that comes with sending the children off to childcare.

You cannot “MAKE” parents take responsibility any more than you can expect an economy to survive if the government dictates the wages. Let’s face the facts, both parents are not working for their children, they are working for material possessions. Instead of a $300,000 home, live in a $150,000 home. Instead of 2 or 3 cars, get by with 1, instead of 5 TV’s with DVD players, have 1, and so on. Concerning regulations: there are already laws on the books & they are not being enforced. So new laws will accomplish nothing but put us under more control of the government. We live in a capitalistic society & supply & demand dictate prices & wages. In our area of the country, RN’s get a $10,000 signing bonus & free house payment for up to 2 years, plus good wages. That is because we have a shortage of qualified nurses. On the other hand, there are other parts of the country that may not offer these benefits & some parts may offer better benefits. Same with schoolteachers, but what if the government made a blanket law for the whole country on teachers or nurses wages. Some schools & hospitals could pay & some would shut down. I am perplexed that everything on the left boils down more government regulations & more blame being put on republicans.

Perplexed

In my area there are some very nice organizations that strive to teach parents how to parent. One of the ones I participate in is called Mentoring Moms. My mentor is a mom who’s kids are grown. She uses her experience to help me cope and teaches me tricks that worked for her. I highly recommend it.

However, the other one that I’m most familiar with is a different matter. One of the teachers is a woman who is pregnant out of wedlock (again) and gets out of domestic abuse charges because she is oh so familiar with the laws about such things. The fact that people listen to her about how to be a better parent amazes and frightens me.

You can’t MAKE parents be better parents. You CAN educate parents on how to be better parents, but you HAVE to know who you’re hiring so you don’t end up looking like hypocrits.

What ever happened to learning from your parents how to raise children. My grandparents were to busy farming to worry about child rearing classes. Oh, there weren’t any classes!!

Perplexed

Perplexed,

A lot of the young people, like myself, who are becoming new parents were raised in dual-income households. Their parents weren’t there to teach them, so they never learned how to be parents. The damage is already done. Now, we have to go back and fix it.

My parents weren’t very active in my life, though they did try. I want better for my children, so I went out and actively sought information on how to become a better parent. Now I am frequently complimented and encouraged by my children’s teachers, therapists and administrators for being active in my children’s lives. This troubles me, because I am not doing anything extraordinary, and yet it is extra-ordinary because I am the exception instead of the rule.

Perplexed, of course you cannot “make” or force anyone to be a good parent. However, we can quit pretending that it is television or video game violence when the real cause of children playing or watching things that are not age appropriate is lack of parental control.

We can quit promoting the idea that removing/limiting corporal punishment has something to do with causing some of the problem children today when discipline/authority can be established without it.

We can find a way to help parents, or we can continue to blame things like GTA when that is not the real problem.

Stephanie and Perplexed,

To understand today’s parenting issues today one has to bear in mind the changes that have taken place.

First, 60 years ago, parents had large families, and older siblings help raise younger siblings. That is not true today. With so many families having only one or two children, youth do not grow up with the experience of helping raise younger siblings.

Second, there is a cognitive gap. Let me give you an example. A chemical engineer does a lot of work at home. His two children are around observing him while he works on a host of occasions as they are growing up. Now, when his children are 10 or 12, having observed him working on chemical engineering problems will have taught them nothing about chemical engineering. Why? Because they had not the cognitive and educational foundations for understanding what he was doing when observing him.

The same is true of child rearing. Children mimic, but, without understanding why the behaviors of a parent are appropriate in one situation and inappropriate in another. In other words, young children learn very little about parenting when they are young. Now, if as teen agers, they acquire experience babysitting or receive a new addition to the family, their cognitive development will be sufficient to problem solve and analyze both the young childs needs and behaviors as well as make sense of their parents interaction with the young sibling.

However, today, more and more families have 1,2, or 3 children spaced little more than 2 years apart, which means far, far fewer adolescents experience parenting of small children.

So there is an educational gap occuring in good parenting skills. I was pleased to see our school district reintroduce parenting classes for high school kids. And I have noticed that our free university offers them as well. This is very much needed and these kinds of programs need to be promoted, advertised, and made far more pervasively available if our culture is to improve instead of decline though better parenting.

Love and affection for a child may have innate underpinnings, but good parenting is learned, and it is learned by children old enough to understand the lessons taught. Young children do not learn parenting by osmosis, which some would argue. There is ample research in this area to support that good parenting involves self-discipline, a wide array of techniques from which to choose, and a dedication to critical analysis of the child’s needs in order to fulfill those needs, especially as children interface more independently with society, which is very confusing and too often overwhelming for young people.

An interesting statistic I saw once, was an increase in young adult suicide as a society’s become more complex and sophisticated. Amazonian tribes have no incidence of suicide, and the correlation holds fast through the spectrum to where some N. European societies and the U.S. have among the highest rates. Obviously, parenting in a complex society requires much more than tradition which appears to be sufficient for Amazonian tribal children.

We can find a way to help parents, or we can continue to blame things like GTA when that is not the real problem.

Damned straight. It’s just so wacked that Republicans get outraged by the so-called “liberal” media. You guys get yourselves all riled up and march on Hollywood with your pitchforks and torches… and, by God, you cut their taxes! That’s really stickin’ it to ‘em. Bravo!

I agree with Hillary that..”It takes a village to raise an idiot”.

I agree with Renee, It takes parents to raise a child.
The damn “PC” crowd that wants more laws to blame something, or someone, for everything that goes wrong, are the same ones that whine if a judge trys to enforce a damn law. Whats up with that?

Bugs bunny, elmer fudd, and Bonaza are likely the cause of all the violence today. Wasn’t that the time all the school shootings started?
It couldn’t be guns, everyone had them back then, and hunting was quite popular?
Growing up I don’t think I ever saw a boy that didn’t get a BB gun on, or before their 12th birthday.

I saw something really strange on my computer the other day. They have a feature called “parental controls”, whats up with that?
Has anyone else ever seen that on theirs?
I hear they also have something like that for TV’s also, even the cable,Sat. box has them ?

Oh well, the Republicans that were in Hollywood in the 50-60’s are gone now, disipline, morals, and dress codes have been purged from the schools,it seems things can do nothing but get better now.
Just a few more toothless laws and we’ll all be on easy street.

Beagle, your comments are well directed. I don’t have a problem with laws that work to improve and benefit the rights proferred by the Constitution and solve social problems.

Where I totally agree with you is that we have a host of laws which utterly fail in their attempts. They need to be removed, rethought, and reimplemented if appropriate in ways that will be effective and efficient. If they don’t hold that promise of effective or efficient, they should not be reinstated.

Beagle,

Parental controls on the computer, tv, cable, ect. can and are overcome by innovative children. From stories I’ve heard, it’s (sometimes) the child who has to teach the parent how to use such controls. Controls like that will only work if the child is either willing to obey the parents’ wishes (don’t be shocked, it does happen occasionally) or the parents are watching and paying attention to ensure their rules are followed. As for my family, the only “parental controls” we use are to ensure pornography doesn’t “accidently” pop up on our computer screen (I was getting rather sick of that) whenever we did a search that involved the word “woman” or “women”.

We watch what our kids watch. We’re right there by their side whenever they are on the internet. We keep any objectionable material from entering our home or out of reach. My kids are still young and our strategies will have to change as they age, but relying on “parental controls” that an innovative child can overcome without much difficulty will never be part of my own parenting strategy.

Stephanie,

I think you totally missed my point.

The point was, “parental control”.

It really didn’t have much to do with who programs the vcr,dvd,cable,or sat. box.

If the kids are more skilled at setting things up, thats great!
If the parents taught them well, they will hand you the remote after they program it and say; “here, all you have to do is punch in the secret pin # and its all set to go.”

At that point you can check to be sure the things you wanted blocked, really are!

Then take em fishing or out for pizza!

Yes, Beagle. I missed your (serious) point buried in the layers of sarcasm. My point is the child who hands the remote control so complacently is now a rarity. Those are also the children who need the “parental control” features in place the least. Parents who’ve missed their chance to teach their children obedience need to be extra-vigilant. And those who haven’t are (or should be) already vigilant anyway.

I’m not sure, but I don’t think we’re disagreeing here.

Stephanie,

I didn’t think my “sarc” buryed the point very deep, but perhaps it did.

I just don’t think we can ban everything to keep it away from children.
Another rating system for games or movies will do nothing. Its just “feel good” legisation that distracts from Renee’s very valid point that parents need to tend to their children more.

And I have said that I agree with Lisa Renee completely on this issue, with only a slightly different emphasis. Where Lisa Renee seems most concerned that the Government seems to want parents to become even more complacent, so it can “take care of everything.” That is not my biggest concern, though it does bother me quite a bit. The notion that the Government can “take care of everything” by studying a problem to death to “prove” the obvious, waste months, years or decades in the process, then come back and try to tell parents, “Well, you’re doing everything wrong, just like we thought,” is what I consider to be the worst aspect of it.

Parents can and should RAISE their kids. While our end seemed to be the same, the way you refered to parental control features… I took your sarcasm to mean “Why don’t people use what’s already available?” Instead of parent’s taking real control of the situation, which is what most people here (myself included) are advocating.

Lisa:
Never thought I’d see the day that you and I agreed on anything.

Every day I wait for Children Protective Services to knock on my door for these above mentioned atrocities and because I refused to let my 16 year old have a tattoo or her tongue pierced because “everybody has one”. I have yet to meet these “everybodies” since it appears all of her friends are tattoo free, and the numbers with tongue piercing could be counted on one hand.
Lisa Renee Ward

Bravo, finally a parent with common sense! Hats Off To Lisa!! I mean that. It is about time that parents risk the love of a child, instead of caving in the to the cravings of an underage teenager.

I as a 42 year old adult with many tattoos took my (then) 17 year God Daughter with me to get my latest tattoo(Jun04). Just so she could watch me writhe in pain, I did that because I wanted her to know…It is “FOR LIFE” and “OH, BTW it ALSO Hurts Like an SOB”, From that day until now We haven’t heard word one about tattoos from her. So much for her, 1 down 3 sisters to go. The 16 year olds best friend just came back from Mexico, with a “Star” just above the bikini line, She has to have one now, I told her “Why don’t you speak to my Tattoo Artist before you decide on anything, I set up an Appointment with her for my god daughter, Well my tattoo artist laid out the rules for her. No 1. No one under 18 can be Tattooed in the state of California, no matter WHO SIGNS FOR YOU! Well, after showing her some pictures of some infected tattoos gone bad, Now she’s off the tattoo thing but what lies ahead?

Obviously, I am able to make decisions for myself. And for those that “by law” have no say, The sick, the young, the DRUNK, etc…. You are protected, By Law…..From yourselves.

Just Passing Gas:

As Always,
Wayne

This is a dead-end issue. There is no way that Hillary would gain enough support to take on the gaming industry.

Thanks Wayne, my son when he turned 18 went and got the desired tattoo. When my younger ones become legal adults, that is of course an option.

As an update, The Entertainment Software Rating Board has changed GTA to an AO (Adults Only) Rating, while the game manufacturer is re-issuing the game to meet the MA (Mature Audiences) rating again, this time without the added mod sex scene.

Doesn’t change the fact that in reality no one under 17 should have been playing the original, but wanted to give an update.