Education or Exploitation?

Outside of a religious context, the act of being lawfully married to more than one person at a time, otherwise known as bigamy, is illegal and punishable by Utah law by up to five years in prison. Constitutional amendments allow for freedom of religion and freedom of expression. The problem lies when nationally broadcasting such religious beliefs like polygamy that align so closely with breaking the law. The practice of polygamy in Western families was founded on religious terms but I think over the years those terms and beliefs have been stretched to more selfish reasons.

TLC has recently launched a new series titled “Sister Wives” which depicts the life of a polygamist family that includes one husband, three wives, and 13 children. Following the release of the series, an investigation of the family was launched by Utah officials. Legally the husband, Kody Brown, is only married to one spouse but he also refers to his other two partners as his wives. Under Utah law, bigamy is not only limited to marriage but the charge also extends to cohabitation.

In 2001 the state of Utah prosecuted polygamist Tom Green under bigamy charges after “promoting his lifestyle on national TV talk shows.” Green was convicted on criminal nonsupport, child rape and bigamy charges. After 6 years in prison he was released. The Brown family saw the TLC program as a form of educating the public about their lifestyle but that resulted in a criminal investigation that not only affects the parents but the 13 children involved.

Investigating and prosecuting polygamist families is not aggressive unless abuse, sexual assault or fraud is suspected. Similar to same sex marriages, plural families are still very taboo in our society. With such a sensitive topic why subject the children involved to such attention?

Educating others about alternate religious beliefs or alternate lifestyles in general promotes tolerance but where do we draw the line between education and exploitation?

Sue.Me.


Commentary by Kendra Mells

Who Will Be Next?

Polygamy and polygamous families are very “touchy” subjects in general, but once again, the ever-so-popular debate over morals and politics blows everything out of proportion. One may ask, “is this education or exploitation” when dealing with children from a polygamous family, but do they ask that same question when dealing with children from divorced families? Or children from homosexual or bisexual families? Children of swingers? Children of mixed race families? Children with incarcerated parents? Or maybe even children with disabilities or children raised by people with disabilities?

The point that I’m trying to make is that at some point, we must draw the line. America was built as a place of refuge and on a platform of acceptance, yet we continue to poke and prod things at extreme levels so as to not allow anything outside of our “norm” become an acceptable part of society. Polygamous family living is outside of the “American” norm, we all recognize this as true, but it will not become a part of the norm until we learn to leave it alone, and as stated above, Kody Brown is legally married to only one of his “wives”. The entire thing is blown out of proportion- no one ever claimed The Brady Bunch was a sector of child exploitation! Until society stops poking and prodding, we will forever be in disdain….and think about it…for the kids that are members of Brown’s family, the impending investigation and public criticism of their family is possibly the most demeaning exploitation that they have experienced thus far. How would you feel if an entire country was attempting to tear your family apart?

I Will Beat the Skin Off Of You

Imagine coming home from a hot, long and tiring day of work only to find that your son is running around the house like a savage beast, smashing every piece of glass in his way and drawing on every wall in the house with permanent marker. Is it safe to assume that your son, whom you may love with all of your heart and would give the world to, deserves to get a spanking? 

In a society that is so concerned with child abuse and child safety, parents are often times forced to walk a fine line between what's socially accepted as disciplining your child and what is seen as child abuse. Some parents often times wonder if I spank my child with my hand, is that abuse because I am physically stronger than my child; or if I spank my child with a belt, is someone going to say I am physically abusing my child and potentially call child services to report me?

If people were not as consumed with the flaws someone else or what they were doing with their children then parents would be able to prevent many of the unfortunate situations that occur daily within American society. As children get older and mature, disciplinary actions that once worked when they were infants and adolescents no longer give parents the desired outcome and subsequently parents must adjust and develop new actions. But too many times parents are forced to hear the infamous line from Tyler Perry's Madea's Family Reunion, "if you touch me I'm gonna call 911" because children learn early on that all they have to do is tell an authority figure that their parents are abusing them and parents instantly transform into babysitters.

I overheard someone say "most of the problems that we have today is because parents don't discipline their children." If parents are forced to discipline their kids with empty threats because society doesn't think it's acceptable to spank children; or because children are to easily allowed to scream abuse and be taken away from their home, then high crime rates and poor test grades in school should be expected. So the next time someone says "she or he's a 'bad parent' because their child runs wild," think from the perspective of a parent that is a virtual puppet because society confines them to certain methods for disciplining their child.

There is a thin line between discipline and child abuse. Many parents and gaurdians blur this line and the result ends up being that the child's safety and well being are in danger. The definition of discipline may vary from person to person from one extreme to another but instead of resorting to capital punishment there are other alternatives. Spanking your child could become dangerous especially if the parent is angry while doing so.

Discipline doesn’t mean that you have to beat your child black and blue to get your point across. Simply using a time-out method, where you isolate the child for their wrong doing is an effective method. Parents should also consider the future effects of physically punishing their children. Some children grow up to resent their parents for the methods of discipline that have been used on them.

Sue.Me.

The Sound of Music

Imagine this: You’re sitting in class and your professor gives out some vital information, but you just couldn’t quite catch exactly what he/she was saying, so, you lean over to your neighbor to ask for clarification, but your neighbor cannot decipher what your professor stated either. You then lean over to your other neighbor, whom also is clueless, as is the rest of your teenage class… So what are your options? What strange epidemic has caused the loss of hearing in the 20+ students enrolled in your class?

As unfortunate as this event may sound, it is actually happening in schools and colleges across the nation. Hearing loss has increased roughly 30% since 2006, according to a recent study by researcher Gary C. Curhan MD, ScD, associate professor of medicine and epidemiology at Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health. Also unfortunate is the source of this hearing loss amongst American teens- technology.

It is not uncommon to travel around town and see children as young as age ten blasting music in their ears; we are, in fact, a technology-driven society. Furthermore, the damage is now beginning to surface before the affected even reach their teen years. That being said, we must note that children of even younger ages than ten are gaining access to these hearing-damaging devices, and it is also pertinent that we examine even the mediums with the best intentions that deliver exposure to the sources. For example: parents.

Adolescents- teens and children, especially, gain access to these devices through their parents. After all, eight-year-old mike has no way of earning the $200 he needs to buy the new iPod touch- of course he’s gaining access to it from his parents, so while some may argue that iPod should take responsibility for damage incurred by its devices, parents should, in fact, take responsibility for furnishing the devices which are ruining the hearing of their children.

Adolescents in today’s era are deemed the “iPod Generation”. “Hours after hours of iPod, television, and radio use seem to be the source of all the hearing loss ‘hoopla’”, said the Boston Herald. “No more than an hour of listening is recommended per day, over-the-ear headphones should be used, and turning down the volume will help keep listeners safe from harmful decibel levels. Over 28 million Americans suffer from hearing loss, and nearly half are younger than 65.”

If this abuse of technology and irresponsibility of its users continues, who knows what the future for the “iPod Generation” holds? Regardless of the paths we take in life, hearing is an important aspect of any state-of-being. So the next time Miley Cyrus wants you to “put your hands up”, make sure you turn the volume down...or you just might miss out on that “Party in the USA”.

Sources:
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=118997
http://media.barometer.orst.edu/media/storage/paper854/news/2007/05/16/News/Loud-Listening.Ipods.Causing.Hearing.Loss-2904296.shtml
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67H0CJ20100818

Commentary By: Khyajuanna Cooksey

Though the thought of hearing loss has been on the rise since 2006, the issue at hand cannot be blamed on just one party alone. After all, aren't we the ones that chose to place the volume as high as it could go; and aren't companies such as Apple partially to blame as well? It is illogical to only blame parents for the increase of hearing loss because they account for only one portion of the equation and equally so, companies that produce such devices cannot take full responsibility because they give their consumers volumes that they are able to adjust either higher or lower. Though they are not the ones to be blamed, mainstream media does nothing to advocate for people that suffer from hearing loss due to continual use of such loud devices!

As parents purchase ipods and or mp3 players it is your job to  look at the benefits and risks that associate with each product and decide if you are going to purchase such products. With that being said, as a producer of such devices I have to ensure my consumers quality as well as safety. I cannot create such problems and adopt the attitude "I can't be blamed because you chose to use my product, it's right here in my contract!" It's almost as if they were tobacco companies and the consumers were people that suffered from all types of diseases and disorders because of the product!

Such a topic really causes one to think. As a parent, am I to blame for my child's or my own hearing loss because I decided to purchase this device and not make sure that little Mike didn't have it on the highest volume setting? Or as the company that produces these ipods and mp3 players, am I the one to be blamed because I created a product knowing that if a child used my product on the highest volume setting, it could possibly cause damage to his or her hearing? This question cannot be easily answered nor can the problem be easily solved by blaming the entire issue only on one factor of the equation!

Crazy On The Clock

Have you ever been having an amazing day? Then as soon as you turn on the television and get stuck on the news there is some depressing report that just deflates your “good day” bubble? One of the many trends of violence that continues to be broadcasted is violence amongst co workers in the workplace.

In the same way that schools offer open counseling to their students, employers should also consider this option. We are all aware that there are people in our society that may not be as stable as they should. Unfortunately, it is sometimes hard to point out those who are liable to snap from those who aren’t. Even so, everyone would still want security even in the workplace. Over the course of the year there have been several incidents plastered over the news from all over the country concerning violence in the workplace.
In March, an Ohio State University Janitor opened fire on two coworkers killing one and injuring the other and then turned the gun on himself following a bad evaluation report. In April a woman in Tarpon Springs, FL, shot and killed her co worker while he sat in his car after he filed reports against her for working off the clock and threatening him. Although the family of the victim denies this, the suspect’s family claims she was taunted and teased by the victim about her perfectionist work habits. In early August an employee at a Connecticut beer distribution company fatally shot 8 of his co workers before taking his own life after leaving a disciplinary meeting in which his supervisors provided video surveillance of him stealing kegs of beer. In late August a Dallas woman fatally shot her male co worker in the chest who she said was her “closest friend” claiming it was a “sign from god” that told her to do it.

“According to U.S. Labor Statistics the number of workplace homicides decreased by little more than half from 1994, when they were 1,080 to 2008 when they were 517.” (Farlow). Conflict is in human nature but conflict resolution can be learned. Even though the numbers in this area of violence has decreased you can never be too safe. More need to be done to help those who need it and save future victims.

By: Sue.Me.





Commentary by Kendra Mells


When Will We Draw the Line?


Last Thursday, little Mary ate so many Twix bars that her stomach hurt. As a result, she felt ill the next morning and stayed home from school. Now although Mary realized the consequences of her actions as she was filling up on Twix bars, her school thought "hmmm....Mary is not to blame- instead we should sue Twix for her absence"...

Sound fallacious? It should- but virtually the same thing is happening in corporate offices all over America. "Workplace Violence" [as it has been deemed] is "violence or the threat of violence against workers both inside and outside of the workplace (OSHA*)", and while acts of violence are clearly the actions of individuals, businesses are now being held responsible for the actions of employees.

Many argue that employers should offer counseling to their employees to reduce the risk of Workplace Violence, but it seems, rather, that society has just become too comfortable with allowing others to take responsibility for individual actions. At what point will the blame be placed on the acting individual rather than an outside source? It is true that many jobs evoke stress in employees, but in truth, life is stressful in itself.

People are all different and react differently to varying situations, but at some point, someone has to stand up and say "It is my fault and I am taking responsibility". Until that happens, regardless of counseling or any other alternatives to dealing with stress, society will continue to have problems with people committing acts of violence because there is no one to answer to and no responsibility to be taken.

Mary may have eaten herself into illness, but she is less likely to do it again if her school holds her accountable for her actions, rather than twix.



*http://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/data_General_Facts/factsheet-workplace-violence.pdf