Seriously?

I took Emma to the pediatrician for her 18 month check-up today. After the usual questioning regarding my beliefs on vaccinations, and have I changed my mind yet (read: come to my senses regarding allowing her to be vaccinated against Hep A), the doctor informs me that she was turned down by my insurance company for the Synagis vaccine. Now this vaccine is - as has been explained to me - critical for infants, especially preemies, during the winter months. It protects them from complications of RSV. In babies with compromised pulmonary function, it is especially crucial. It is extremely expensive. But the alternative - hospitalization - is more expensive.

The irony of this situation is, when Emma was still in the NICU, I expressed my concerns about introducing vaccines into her body when 1. she was just recovering from NEC; 2. gestationally, she was technically not even at full-term yet. I was told in no uncertain terms that they would not allow me to even delay her vaccines by more than a few days, and that I was jeopardizing her health by even considering doing so. The doctors did what they wanted to regarding vaccinating her, and I was left feeling somewhere between angry and embarrassed.

Why is it alright for a third-party to decide my daughter does not receive a medication, but, when I make a decision concerning her health care, I may be threatened with social services? I am the parent. If she gets sick, it is I who must take care of her, and it is I who will take responsibility for those risks. It means nothing to the unknown individual who turned her down for the vaccine. Their decision was not born of careful consideration, education, and prayer concerning the issue. When did their decision begin to assume more weight than my own?

I have asked this question before, but it begs repeating: If public schools are so wonderful that I have to justify educating my children in another manner, why then do graduates of the public school system get treated as if they lack the mental ability to make decisions for their own family? What are we really saying about the perception of the average citizen in this country? We need others to think for us, and we can not be trusted to know what is "best" for ourselves or our families. I am so tired of being talked down to, of being told that others know my needs better than I do, and I need to ask permission to parent my own children. Emma's doctor actually used this as an opportunity to glorify the need of socialized medicine so that I needn't encounter these trials anymore. Seriously? This is all going to go away when the government does all my thinking for me? Please, it is only going to get worse. I really need to find a new pediatrician.

Bumbleheads, Dolts ... Minions, anyone?

"Any time the economy is bad and people have lost their homes, lost their

401(k)s, they take it out on the incumbents, whether that's fair or unfair."

These are the words of Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell in response to Arlen Specter losing his 30-year term in the Senate. Imagine, holding our leaders to a level of expected performance, making them accountable when the country is in trouble, when people who pay their salaries are losing their jobs, their homes, and their savings. How dare we? It is not as though a tenured Senator like Arlen Specter had any role in making legislation that resulted in some of these problems.

Once again, a politician has made a statement that leads one to believe that, although education is mandated throughout this country, and public education has billions of dollars poured down its gullet each year, apparently the populace of this fair land has nary a clue in its collective noggin when it comes time to go to the polls and voice our opinion on who shall lead us.

Ugh ...

Emma took her entire feed by mouth tonight - 19ml. It is quite an accomplishment considering she only started feeding by bottle earlier this week. I miss her. From what I have read concerning the traffic in Philly, I would probably be looking at 1-2 extra hours on the road. Plus, if there are any detours, I would just be completely lost. I have no idea how to go but one way. Ugh!!!

I know unions have their place, but I am hard pressed to feel sympathy for people who call a strike when the economy is so fragile and so many people have lost their jobs. It seems about as well thought out as the electric company's plan to raise rates 35% in January. Where is the common sense, an eye to what is moral and righteous? What sense is there is demanding more money when money is so tight for everyone? The electric company has a whole host of programs available to help those who will no longer be able to afford their electricity when the rates go up. How is that better than keeping the rates at a level we can all afford - on our own, without any government assistance? Or are we all buying into this nonsense that a government program somehow has nothing to do with the working people of this nation? The money originates with us, the taxpayers. It all means more taxes. And less money in our pockets to pay for our needs. Without government assistance. Until we can't afford to pay the taxes, and have to sell our houses to avoid the taxes, and then hope we qualify for a government program to help us secure housing. Paid for by taxes.

"We the People ..." , Revisited ...

So, Senator Arlen Spector declares his constituents basically ungrateful for his representation and switches parties, and the President - the President who said he wanted to break down the barriers between the political parties - responds, "We are happy to have you join us" (paraphrasing here). "We" and "us" must mean the Dems, right? I did not know when he said 'break down barriers' he meant that a man who was put in office based, in part, on his political party affiliation, could alienate the very people who put him in office at a time when political party affiliation is so crucial to determining the course this country will take. It continues to amaze me how little respect and sense of obligation those put in power by WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA feel toward the very people who voted for them. Perhaps it is naivete on my part ... More than that, it is the realization that we continue to allow it to happen despite it being so prevalent, most probably due to our unwillingness and our uncertainty and feelings of powerlessness to do anything about it.

The Cheeseburger Bill, Our Children, and the Threat to American Liberties ...

During our recent bout with the flu, I spent a great deal of time watching NetFlix. There are some movies available for instant viewing that I would have never seen had it not been for this terrific value in video rentals. Spellbound is one I highly recommend, and Super Size Me is another. It is this second movie that inspired this post, and many more to come, as I strive to put my thoughts on this topic together in a concise, coherent, intelligent manner.



The premise behind Super Size Me is basically an experiment conducted by one man in an attempt to either prove or disapprove the ill-effects of an all-McDonald's fast food diet for a period of one month. Now, the movie in and of itself is very interesting, and does a good job of solidifying the case against eating out as one's sole means of sustenance. But it was during the end credits that my interest was really peeked, when I saw something called "The Cheeseburger Bill". Having done a bit of research on it, I have since discovered that the Cheeseburger Bill was an attempt in Congress to protect the food industries from lawsuits that seek damages against the harmful effects eating their products may have on us, the American public. You know, the little people, the ones expected to pay their taxes and uphold the laws of this nation, the ones who do not get away with tax evasion and could never hope to get pay increases or a benefits package to rival those of our illustrious leaders. And I do not have a problem with the legislation. I actually think the same should have been done with the case against the tobacco industry, 'cause everyone knows, and has always known (read the history of the use of tobacco and the admonishments of the kings of England against the disgusting, dirty habit of smoking in the sixteenth century) that smoking is bad for you. When I see a twelve-year old step off a school bus and light up (because it is only illegal to sell cigarettes to minors, not for them to smoke), I wonder who he is going to blame his ignorance on in the future, when he is hacking up a lung.



Anyway, back to the Cheeseburger - this bill unabashedly protects the industries, not the consumers. Yet, the US Food and Drug Administration "(FDA or USFDA) is an agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services and is responsible for regulating and supervising the safety of foods, dietary supplements, drugs, vaccines, biological medical products, blood products, medical devices, radiation-emitting devices, veterinary products, and cosmetics". See some conflicts of interest here? I do. Our government is supposed to protect us from harmful foods, but our government wants a policy that stipulates, should such food harm us, we may not do anything about it.



So, where am I going with this? Well, do you know about the Parental Rights amendment? Go to ParentalRights.org and read up on it and then come back here and I will tell you where I am going with this.



PART II



Read up on ParentalRights.org? What do you think? Do you think it is a fair thing to give the parents in this country - now, I am talking about PARENTS, people who actually PARENT their children, as differentiated from the group that reproduces and then ... nothing - the right to raise their children in the manner they deem most appropriate, if they are responsible, law-abiding citizens who ask for nothing to carry out their responsibilities?







Goodness, there are so many tangents here ... including, let's start taking away rights to biological children from criminals who have never shown any responsibility, yet who are able to dictate that their children flounder in the foster care system all their childhood because they refuse to terminate their "rights". The judicial system, and the social service system has not worked on behalf of those kids, has it? No, it is actually the "right" of the criminal to keep their parental rights. How about teen-agers who reproduce - repeatedly - get all sorts of government support and have no oversight as to how "appropriate" they are in raising said child/children?







In the movie Super Size Me, the role of government and its failure to protect the interests of its citizens over big industries was discussed. This is of no surprise. But, if our government can consider The Cheeseburger Bill, in an attempt to openly protect industries that may harm its people, then how can we entrust them with the care and best interest of our children? Please sign the Parental Rights Amendment petition - life, liberty, and the pursuit of family all depend on it under the current administration. Don't let legislators that consider The Cheeseburger Bill good for the country have control over your family.

Rights, Requirements, and Just Who Is In Charge Here ...

Someone asked me if I "had"to do this blog thing for homeschooling - like a state requirement or something. The answer is a resounding "NO". Yes, there are requirements for homeschooling in my state - and I adhere to them. For the most part, they are not arduous, just tedious. They tend to detract from my desire to go with the flow, follow the child's interest at the moment you see that spark that indicates they are interested. I do love lesson planning, dreaming about all the interesting things we will study -and how we will capture that interesting thing in a way that proves we studied it.

But, aside from the fact that the portfolio requirement is really not that burdensome, there is the deeper, meatier, gnawing feeling that it is not right. That I should not have to answer to the school district, the legislature, the anyone about what I am doing with my children - unless, somewhere, at sometime, I have done something to them, or to someone else, that has made my character questionable in terms of fitness to parent them. Let's face it - public school is not a perfect, infallible institution. It suffers more than its fair share of failures each year. And, if one were to study what children knew upon entering university at the earlier part of the 20th Century with what they know now, one might question if public school hasn't failed us all. Before this turns in to a diatribe against the public school system, let me stay the course by just pointing out, America begins and ends with its taxpayers. We - the people - make the money that pays the salaries of everyone who has a government job. The man who is waving the flag to indicate roadwork ahead? He works for you. The woman behind the counter in the post office? Yup, you are her employer. The administrators of the school district? Believe it or not, they are being paid by you. All the way up to the President of the United States, anyone who holds a title of office under the auspices of the Government of the United States is technically an employee of the people of the United States. And they should be working for us. So, when they question my right and my ability to educate my own children, I would like to ask them to answer this question - Did the public school system, of which I am a product, educate me in such a way that I am able to parent, educate, and edify my children? Because, if their answer is no, it will help to strengthen the very reason I am educating my own children.

As I re-read my post, I realized I left it dangling in such way that almost feels like I am advocating anarchy. But I am not. I am a big believer in rules, and order, and control. Just ask my husband. And, while I believe government to be a necessary evil, I have also realized that policies as of late seem aimed at the very segment of the population that does behave, and does contribute, and does ... all that is expected of them. I can't help but be troubled by the article last year on the woman who demanded the school district take special action for her deeply troubled, school-phobic daughter - and received in excess of $45,000 over a period of three years to send said daughter to modeling classes and private school, and - believe it or not - board her dogs while she visited said daughter, by limo, at the expense of the school district. I have trouble following the rules of the very district that allowed such nonsense to happen, with no one questioning the bills this woman was presenting, and no one asking why her daughter - her 17 year-old daughter -was not able to do more than fourth-grade math with all that money at her disposal for private tutors and such. I pay my taxes, and I homeschool at my own expense. So, really the school district has extra money to use because my kids are not there taking up any room, any time, anything from them. If I need to purchase something for school, I need to make room in my budget, I need to plan better, or cut some expense somewhere else. In other words, I need to be a good steward of my money. And should I expect less than that of the school district, or the government at any level, when it is really not their money to begin with, but money entrusted to them by the citizens of their district, or their country? Should I not expect to have a bit more responsibility and faith entrusted to me by my government than, say, people who are imprisoned for their actions? If so, then why do prisoners with no hope of parole, who have committed heinous crimes against others, why do they get to remain in charge of their children, dictate their futures, remain pivotal in deciding their fates? Think about it - there are millions of children in foster care in this nation, unable to be adopted by willing families because their biological parents - who have never parented them in their lives - retain the right to control them from behind bars. Research sometime exactly what it takes for someone to lose their parental rights - and then ask me if I believe it is fair to have the state or the school district or the teacher's union tell me that I better ask them for their permission to homeschool my children. And then, take a trip over to the HSLDA web-site, an organization dedicated to protecting the hard-won right of parents in this country to homeschool, and read about the numerous - NUMEROUS - threats levied against upstanding, law-abiding, tax-paying, citizens in this country, simply because they choose to homeschool.

Proud to Be an American ...

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/04/obama.transcript/index.html

His campaign left me angry and disturbed, planning my move to another country. Cries of racisim on the part of our state's elected officials towards anyone who did not agree with their candidate inflamed me. President-elect Obama's victory speech, however, moves me, not for its eloquence, but for its humility. He realizes not all of America is taken in by outward appearances and smooth talking, by the promise of government hand-outs and less need to do for ourselves. For some of us, leadership is not a role we put lightly in the hands of others. Rather, it is a privilege, and a job, and a position directly under the auspices of a higher office - that of God. I am very pleased to see that he gave thanks where thanks was due.

What Would YOU Do?

Today, I took my children and my baby nephew shopping for a birthday present for a playmate. While in the store, one mother, in particular, caught my attention. She was shopping with her two little girls, and her husband. They were in the toy section, and the mother was pointing out toys for the girls to look at. The littlest girl reached out to touch the toy, the mother screamed, "No!", grabbed the girl's arm, and smacked her hand so hard I flinched. Then she led them down the next aisle, pointed out yet another pretty item to admire, and, as I walked quickly away, not wanting to witness her idea of "parenting", I - as well as the rest of the store - could hear that poor child being screamed at.



What is the "right" thing to do in these situations? I have too often witnessed these displays of "discipline" that make me ill. But it always occurs to me that a parent that treats their child this way, openly and without restraint, in view of witnesses, might very well be further angered by any intervention on the part of a stranger. What might he or she do when they get home? The poor child might bear the brunt of good intentions. Attempts to pass legislation against disciplining children is not going to do anything to stop those who beat and abuse children. This woman and others like her need to be taught that children who live with such malice towards them grow up with malice towards others. If only there was a means, when witness to such occurrences, to report them immediately, and have steps taken to protect the child at once. But I guess that would be tantamount to a police-state. And, of course, I do not want to live in a police-state. However, anyone who brazenly abuses their offspring in public, with nary a concern about what he or she is doing to the child, with lack of concern for all those who are witness to the abuse, deserves punishment. The only thing worse than a closet abuser of children is one who flaunts it as though they are immune to punishment.

Divided we fall ...

I frequently read the boards at http://welltrainedmind.com/ . It is predominantly a homeschooling forum, although there are a number of after-schoolers, tutors, and others who post. It is a wealth of information for the classical homeschooler, which is what I would label myself, if I had to characterize my "style"or approach to academics. (Actually, I am a classical, Charlotte Mason-inspired, eclectic homeschooler, striving to keep to the tenets of the Latin-Centered Curriculum. There. I think I got them all in.) During the past few months, however, discussions on the general board have turned repeatedly to the world of politics. This is an election year, and we are facing many troubling situations in our world. So it is not surprising that these discussions get heated. But, what does surprise me - and saddens me - is how ugly they can get. If I have to fault our leaders for one particular thing, it would not be their poor management of the money that actually belongs to the people of this country. And it would not be the war on terror, which, I believe, was long over-due. Rather, it would be their failure to unite the people of this country. The divisiveness is crippling us. We need a srong leader who seeks to bring the people of this country together on the issues, not confound us. I am not troubled by the presidential candidates because of the color of one or the age of the other. I am troubled by the lack of clear, concise answers to the issues that need to be addressed now. I am so tired of political grand-standing, the pointing of fingers, and the lack of maturity. We should not have to guess about who represents the best leadership this country has to offer. It should be a goal we all aspire to - including the d$mn media - to find the single most qualified person, who encompasses all the characteristics our previously great leaders demonstrated. We have the benefit of hindsight. We can look back at leaders like George Washington & George Bush, and all those in between, and find what they did right -and remember what went wrong. This election should not be a cr%p-shoot - "let's hope the best man wins, 'cuz there ain't that much to choose from". Unfortunately, this seems to be the opinion of far too many people. And I can not say I am surprised. It is hard to make a decision based on "facts" when facts are few & far between. Or "facts" differ from one news channel to another, or one paper to another. Our history lesson the other day focused on the beginnings of the Associated Press in this country. It related how the newsmen of the day prided themselves on honesty and integrity - oh, how I long for that in today's world of sensationalistic journalism! My father loves the New York Post, which I find rather distasteful due to the sheer number of nearly-nude woman that grace many a page. If you have to turn the newspaper over so the little ones don't see it, it should not be called news - and it should be sold enclosed in a plain brown wrapper!