by Debbie Gray, Executive Vice President, Boys & Girls Clubs of Chattanooga
posted October 31, 2008
The crises facing America’s children know no political party. They affect everyone, and the statistics are staggering:
30 percent of this year’s freshmen class will drop out of high school.
The obesity rate for kids has tripled since 1980.
Teenagers account for more than 20 percent of violent crime in the U.S.
This generation will one day lead our nation. Right now, they’re not being equipped to meet the challenges posed by a complex world.
Yet it’s a real problem that we have not addressed, a situation that should concern any American with an eye on the future. And it’s an issue that should be as much part of this election as any – if not more.
It is daunting to think about solving such a widespread crisis, but those of us in youth organizations, such as the Boys & Girls Club of Chattanooga, where I work, have seen it is possible to turn things around and help young people earn their high school diplomas, live healthy lifestyles and become effective community leaders.
By working with government officials, schools, community leaders and parents, we foster a supportive environment that puts the needs of children first. These partnerships create a seamless network of support – providing everything from homework help to leadership development programs to fitness and financial literacy.
Consider what we have underway here in Chattanooga, where our Boys & Girls Club works closely with our local schools, UNUM, Kastle Instructional Recovery and private schools in the area, just to name a few, to provide valuable educational help opportunities for our members such as homework help, tutoring, technology assistance and working with members one-on-one to prepare them for not only graduating high school but to continue to post secondary education.
The value of such a network has been proven time and again. A national Harris survey found 90 percent of Boys & Girls Club alumni graduate from high school or obtain a GED. In fact, 92 percent of Club alumni said helping others in the community is a priority. Another 85 percent said Club staff helped them understand the difference between right and wrong.
With Election Day fast approaching, the time to act is now. Ask candidates what they’re doing to help today’s young people become tomorrow’s leaders. Tell them that you’re holding them accountable – because every community’s future is at risk.
If each of us takes an active role in advocating for our children, elected officials might just take action. With your support, America’s next generation can be filled with hope – and opportunity.
Debbie Gray
* * *
A couple of weeks ago a friend was having trouble with a cough and cold, said the stuff the doc had given him just wasn't doing the trick. I asked if he had ever tried Granny's honey and whiskey cough remedy. He hadn't. Neither did he have any of the ingredients. So, being the honey snob I am, I took part of a jar of junk honey that had started to sugar and started out the door to the liquor store for some Old Crow or other cheap booze. But it was Sunday, so I had to dig into my stash of the good stuff and the next day my buddy said he was stepping so high it was hard to keep from knocking his head on the ceiling.
I hated mixing good cognac with junk honey and lemon juice but we treated the symptoms of what ailed him. He felt better. Did we cure what had him down? No, but he felt better.
Ms. Gray states "30 percent of this year’s freshmen class will drop out of high school. The obesity rate for kids has tripled since 1980. Teenagers account for more than 20 percent of violent crime in the U.S." She further suggests that additional government intervention will be the cure for these problems.
Perhaps it's time for a full disclosure statement before I go any further with this. As a lowly engineer, salesman, and small business owner I have no credentials in child rearing other than having three children of my own and having had to watch them grow up as children of divorce. Neither do I have credentials in social engineering. I studied electronics and physics. I like women, like 'em a lot, even though there are those who would disagree, but with whom there have been, from time to time, some philosophical differences over the years.
I believe Ms. Gray's figures are a tad off. I've seen estimates recently that the national high school dropout rate is closer to 40%, and trending higher. That 20% of violent crime number is probably a might shy, too. With a waistline like mine, I'll not go anywhere near the obesity issue. As far as they go, Ms. Gray's numbers don't bode well for our society with respect to our children. However, here are some statistics that should cause all of us to drop our teeth in our iced tea:
63% of youth suicides
70% of juveniles in State Institutions
71% of teen pregnancies
71% of High School dropouts
75% of children in chemical abuse centers
80% of adolescents in psychiatric hospitals
85% of youth sitting in prisons
85% of children with behavioral problems
90% of homeless and runaway children
What do these figures, these percentages, represent? They're percentages of children in these situations who come from fatherless homes ... who suffer from DNA, "Daddy Not Around" and not deoxyribonucleic acid (thank you Wikipedia because it's much easier to cut and paste that puppy than to copy from my 1972 dictionary). As always, references provided upon request.
Ms. Gray seems to advocate additional tax dollars be spent for programs which encourage continuation of behaviors that have gotten us, as a society, to this point in the first place. It's okay to have a bunch of children, because the rest of society will help us pay the cost to raise them. The rest of society will tend to our young'uns so we can go out and play. It's okay to get neked and make babies with some man, or men, we have no intention of spending more than a little bit of time with, because we won't have to suffer any negative consequences for our behavior.
We teach birth control in our schools, everything except the fact the best method is 2 aspirins ... held tightly between the knees. Neither do we teach that the child who may be the product of that union will very likely be hindered growing up suffering from DNA. Will there be mistakes? You bet your sweet bippy there will be, and one has been very prominent in the news recently. I know several men and women who've made mistakes of this nature. Should they spend their entire lives suffering for one mistake? Certainly not, especially when they own up to having made it and accept responsibility for their actions without looking to the rest of us to pick up the tab. We also must remember that once is a mistake, twice is questionable, but with three times we need to cut off the cash if they're on the public dole.
Violence and drugs run rampant in "the projects," projects similar to those in which Sen. Obama's aunt lives, and are extending out to the rest of our community. Could it be because those who live there have too much ready cash, too much time on their hands, don't have to do a lot in order to support themselves, and children who suffer from DNA? I submit these are some of the primary causes.
And still, there are those who advocate throwing more and more government money, our tax dollars, at the problem.
Time and time again it's been shown empirically that having a Daddy around is beneficial for a child. Study after study has shown that with a father in the home:
Children are less likely to live in poverty
Children are less likely to be involved in drugs
Children are less likely to practice violent behaviors
Children are more likely to be self confident
Children are more likely to be self disciplined
Children are more likely to finish high school
Children are more likely to be economically self sufficient
Children are more likely to develop strong personal relationships
And yet, almost to a one, each and every government program encourages, some even mandate, father absence ... DNA.
Nationally, 36.9% of all births were to unmarried women aged 15 to 44 in 2005, up from 18.4% in 1980. Here at home in Tennessee the rate was 40.2%. This is to all women in that age group, with some population demographics experiencing higher percentages as well as higher increases in the rate. These are the latest figures available. I suspect more current figures may be even higher.
Anyone who has spent time in the military, been a member of a marching band, or, as back in the old days, learned to march in school or scouting, understands the term "mark time." For those who do not, this is a command given to march in place at the standard 120 paces per minute but with no movement either forward, backward, or to the side.
To continue as we have, throwing taxpayer dollars at a problem with no significant return, is nothing more than marking time. Under the present circumstances, with ever worsening statistics the more money is thrown at the problems, we're actually marching in reverse.
In terms of real dollars, we have spent more on the welfare system since Lyndon Johnson implemented his "Great Society" programs than the amount of our national debt. If we factor in lost productivity this figure is going to be substantially higher. And for all this cash what have we, as a society, received? I believe there's a breakfast cereal by that name, Nut'n Honey.
There are plenty of programs available to address the issues surrounding "poverty." But does poverty mean that we don't have cable television? Does it mean that we have no cell phone? Does it mean that we have to drive a set of wheels that's 10 years old? Does it mean that we only have one (1) TV set? I was 20 years old and married before I got my first color TV set, while my parents still only had black and white, and used a major portion of my reenlistment bonus to buy that first new car. Not a complaint, just the way it was. I also remember working for a buck and a half an hour, and a single mother who was raising two children earning 350 bucks a month.
Each and every working, tax paying, responsible citizen is subject to having to go whiz in a bottle at random and it doesn't matter if we're in Chattaboogie, Atlanta, Charlotte, Savannah, Memphis, Denver, Detroit, or out in the middle of BuFu Nowhere. Why shouldn't the same hold true down at the welfare office?
We have programs intended to help with early childhood development, and they're a dismal failure. We have programs intended to take tax payer dollars and use government to replace Daddy, which are also a dismal failure. Concerning all of this I will quote the philosopher George Bernard Shaw, "a government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." But when we support Paul, when he's perfectly able to get up every morning to go to work and support himself, we do nothing more than make him a pet.
A friend recently sent a link to a young man's tirade, a musician, on YouTube,
There are those who claim to be "progressive," but they'll be the first to demand taxpayer funding of their feel-good programs while refusing to devote any of their personal resources to those programs. This begs the question, do we want to be truly progressive or do we want to keep and maintain a social class of pets ... pets without Daddies.
Success? How can pointing to one "success" while concurrently ignoring 10 program failures, and 25 who the system has failed, be in any way, shape, or fashion termed a success? There was a time I was quite adept at the game of Bravo Sierra Poker. I call Bravo Sierra on this.
We'll all be better off when those who advocate more and more tax payer funding stop asking for more money for fluff, and start dedicating resources to the root of the problem. "Who's ya daddy?" It certainly is not some government program.
Pets ... The Girls are kvetching that they haven't had a steak in a couple of weeks. It looks like we're off to the grocery.
Royce E. Burrage Jr.
Royce@OfficiallyChapped.org
| Dining Out | Business | Movies | Focus | About Us |
| Church | Living Well | Memories | Outdoors | Real Estate | Student Scene | Travel |
