Home The Book Dr Articles Products Message Boards Journal Articles Search Our Surveys Surgery ESWT Dr Messages Find Good Drs video

Food for thought

Posted by Julie on 12/18/02 at 00:46 (103457)

A friend in New York sent me the following. I thought you might enjoy it - even if you don't belong to 'our' (ancient) generation

You lived as a child in the 40's and 50's.

Looking back, it's hard to believe that we have lived as long as we have...

As children we would ride in cars with no seat belts or airbags. Riding in the back of a pickup truck on a warm day was always a special treat.

Our baby cribs were covered with bright colored lead based paint.

We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors, or cabinets, and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets. (Not to mention hitchhiking to town as a young kid!) (Some of us had more lenghy hitchhiking experiences.)

We drank water from the garden hose and not from a bottle. Horrors.

We would spend hours building co-garts out of scraps of then
rode down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times we learned to solve the problem.

We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as were back when the streetlights came on. No one was able to reach us all day. No cellphones. Unthinkable.

We played dodgeball and sometimes the ball would really hurt. We got cut and broke bones and broke teeth and there were no law suits from these accidents. They were accidents. No one was to blame but us.

Remember accidents? We had fights and punched each other and got black and blue and learned to get over it. We ate cupcakes,
bread and butter, and drank sugar soda but we were never overweight .......we were always outside playing.

We shared one grape soda with four friends, from one bottle and no one died from this.

We did not have Playstations, Nintendo 64, X Boxes, video games at all, 99 channels on cable. video tape movies, surround sound, personal cellular phones, Personal Computers, Internet chat rooms...we had friends. We went outside and found them. We rode bikes or walked to a friends home and knocked on the door, or rung the bell or just walked in and talked to them.

Imagine such a thing. Without asking a parent! By ourselves! Out
there in the cold cruel world! Without a guardian. How did we do it?

We made up games with sticks and tennis balls and ate worms and although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes, nor did the worms live inside us forever.

Little league had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those
who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointments.... Some students weren't as smart as others so they failed a grade and were held back to repeat the same grade... Horrors. Tests were not adjusted for any reason.

Our actions were our own. Consequences were expected. No one to hide behind. The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke a law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law, imagine that!!

This generation has produced some of the best risk-takers and problem solvers and inventors, ever. The past 50 years has been an explosion of innovation and new ideas. We had freedom, failure,
success and responsibility, and we learned how to deal with it all.
And you're one of them.

Congratulations! Please pass this to others who have had the luck to grow up as kids, before lawyers and government began to regulate our lives and before the entertainment industry redefined parenting,for our own good. (?)

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/18/02 at 05:52 (103460)

Julie--

This article makes so many good points. I was born in 1971, but even so, I can relate to a lot of things on the list. We didn't have cable TV until I was in high school, so we had to make do with the four major networks of the time--which is probably why I became a great reader. My parents certainly would have sided with the law if I'd done anything stupid. I remember when we got our Atari 2600 and the whole family started to get addicted to the games, including my parents. I certainly agree about accidents, too.

I wonder now about the kids I teach, who have grown up around all the things you mention above (and in my Tech and Society course, one of their first homework assignments was to give up just two technologies for the weekend, from a list, and I found it interesting to see that the ones who gave up TV spent more time with their friends--isn't that how it should be??).

That said, I would not go anywhere anymore without my cellphone--not for others' convenience, but for my own safety. My previous car broke down almost two years ago when the alternator died--fortunately, I realized something was wrong in time to turn around and get most of the way home. I was close enough to walk back to my place, but I've always wondered what would have happened if I hadn't been, because I hadn't taken my cellphone with me. I only turn it on if I'm expecting a call or need to call someone else--so I still choose when to be reachable and when not to. Most of my friends don't even have that number, and probably would never think to call me there anyway. (My kids in class, on the other hand, can't imagine how anyone ever managed to get together to do things before cellphones!)

Re: Re: Food for thought

Kathy G on 12/18/02 at 07:54 (103464)

Interesting reading, Julie! I was born in 1949 so I'm in between you and Nancy. I cetainly agree about the fact that if you didn't make the team, get a good grade, etc.; you just dealt with it. One of the hardest things I had to teach my children was to take responisibility for their own actions and face the consequences. It often made them 'different' from their peers but so far, I believe I was right and they are better people for it.

I certainly could identify with the section about going places alone, as a kid. Between the ages of eight and sixteen, I was fortunate to live in a very small town in Connecticut. One of my fondest winter memories was going out into the pasture behind our house and sliding down a steep hill that seemed to go on for about a mile. I could start at the top, where it was steep, go really fast and then ease into the bottom of the hill which was more rolling. I don't know how long it was exactly, probably not as long as it seems in my mind's eye, but none of my friends were willing to trudge back up the hill so I always went alone. There I was, out in the middle of nowhere, at least 1/4 mile from my house and no one thought anything of it. I didn't wear a watch; I judged by how dark it was when it was time to go home. My mother never worried about me and I always got back to the house just about time for supper. I never could have let my children do that, even in this small town in NH! My, how times have changed!

And the part about going out to play. I was fortunate that my children couldn't wait to go out and play after school. I had to argue to get them to take the time to change into their play clothes. My sister, whose son is 12, has to make him go out and play! She allows him to play with his computer games for one hour and then he has to go out. One of his friends goes home to play with his computer games, rather than play outside! It's something I can't imagine but it's a rather sad commentary on today's youth.

Interesting and thought-provoking little article. Were we better off? Is today's generation better off? Who knows? It's that timeless debate that has gone on for centuries. One thing's for sure, as Bill Cosby said, my kids didn't have to walk to school every single day like I did. And it was uphill both ways! :)

Re: I made an error!

Kathy G on 12/18/02 at 07:55 (103465)

I'm much closer to Julie than I am to Nancy N. Heck, Nancy, you're only three years older than my son!!!

Re: Food for thought

wendyn on 12/18/02 at 08:24 (103469)

Julie - we have a ridiculous law called the 'Young Offenders Act'. It prevents things like publishing the name of any young offender who commits a crime (under the age of 18). Including murder. It also means that you can't charge kids for a number of serious crimes. There was a case several years ago, where an 11 year old boy stole a car and led police on a chase. They were explaining the limitations of this law on the news, and how it prevented police from charging the child.

My son (10 at the time) - was shocked and said 'You mean, if I stole a car - there's nothing the police could do to me?!'. I looked at him dead serious and said 'If you stole a car - there would be NOTHING left of you for the police'.

I was born in 68 - and my childhood was more similar to yours than it is to my son's. We didn't have cable, vcr's, or video games - and I never remember being afraid to wander all over the place even after dark.

Re: Food for thought

Richard, C.Ped on 12/18/02 at 08:38 (103470)

This is so weird. I went to my mother's house Monday to pick up my daughter and I was thinking about things like this from my childhood. I can relate to almost everything you mentioned (born in 1968) except the worm thing........well..as far as I know. haha

We used to ride our bikes all over that neighborhood. The only care we had was to avoid the local bully's street, that is unless we were dared..or even double dog dared to walk our bikes slowly down his street.

My elementary school is only about 1/2 mile from my parents house. During the weekend or even the summer time, we would ride our bikes to the school. The school was spread out in many buildings. We had these breezeways with covers over them to keep you from getting wet when it rained (the wind always blew the rain on you anyway...or the bully would push you in the rain..haha).

Somehow someway...we would get our bikes on top of those covers and ride around on the school's roof. I can't believe I remembered that!

Richard, C.Ped

Re: Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/18/02 at 10:44 (103477)

No contest, Kathy - I think we were definitely better off. When I was growing up in the streets of the South Bronx, I was never indoors after school (except to do my homework, of course!) I couldn't wait to get outside, and all the kids on the block were always out playing games and running around until dark or even later. And our parents never worried about us - at least I don't think they did.

I can't offhand remember eating a worm, but everything else rings true!

I worry about children today. They're so over-protected that they never get the chance to learn first-hand about risks (and I think it's debatable whether the dangers they're being protected from are as great as they're blown up to be). And what with being driven to school (standard here in England, I don't know about the States) and TV and computer games, most get hardly any exercise, so they get fat. Your children and your sister's and Wendy's seem to be lucky exceptions.

I'm not in the least nostalgic for my childhood, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like to be a child today.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/18/02 at 11:04 (103481)

Wendy: We have a very similar law in this country concerning youthful offenders.

Re: Re: Food for thought

Sharon W on 12/18/02 at 12:06 (103483)

Kathy,

I was born in 1956 and one of my favorite childhood memories was a birthday party. We rode in the back of somebody's pickup till we got up into the snowy hills, then 'sledded' down a long slope using cardboard and inner tubes. A couple of kids got bruises crashing into trees or got scraped on rocks, but those were just considered the hazards of having so much fun. Nothing was broken, and the injured kids eagerly picked themselves up and walked back up the hill for another go! When we got cold there were hot dogs cooked on sharpened sticks over an open fire, and s'mores made with marshmallows we toasted ourselves, and steaming mugs of hot chocolate. YUM!

Sharon

Re: Food for thought

Necee on 12/18/02 at 12:12 (103484)

I'm 47, and can certainly relate to what everyone is saying here.

When I was about 5 we were living in Dallas, there was a circle at the end of our neighborhood street, and right next to that circle was a creek. Every Saturday morning after breakfast, my brother and I would leave the house and head to the circle, we spent all day long there playing baseball with the other neighborhood kids, after ball we headed for the creek, walking barefoot in ankle and kneehigh water, we would travel for at least a mile up and down stream searching for crawdads, and whatever else caught our eyes. After a day of fun, games and adventures, we finally headed home at dark. Our parents never once worried about us.

A few years later we moved out to the farm. Living in the country provided me with miles and miles of rolling hills and pastures for riding horses. I would sometimes jump on my horse bareback and take off, not once did I ever worry about something happening. Nowdays is a different story.

The really sad thing is, in todays world, you can drive through neighborhoods on bright, sunny summer days, and never see any children outside playing. I often wonder what todays kids would do if all of their computer games, and videos were taken away.

I'm so thankful that I was raised in simpler times, where games were made up of using an imagination, and where kids actually interacted, and learned from eachother. My brother and I had chores and responsibilities, I certainly didn't realize it back then, but those were some of the most valuable lessons in my life.

Happy trails...

Necee

Re: Food for thought

JudyS on 12/18/02 at 14:06 (103491)

This is so reminiscent Julie - thanks for sharing it with us - it brings back great memories. I especially like the one where we left the house right after breakfast (on a summer day) and didn't return 'til dinner-time. And I think the boy next door and I actually constructed the very first skateboard....we made it out of a 2 x 6 scrap of wood and, of course, wheels taken off someone's roller skates!

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/18/02 at 15:11 (103496)

yes, many thanks for this, julie. like kathy, and i think judy?, i'm a '49er, and i remember just about everything described here. i feel those simpler ways of life taught a lot of resourcefulness, resilience, life-problems solving, and creativity. and yes, we were outdoors all the time, thinking up our own games and exploring nature in our own free ways. i'm so glad i grew up when i did (and sometimes wish i'd grown up in much earlier times) -- guess this isn't surprising from someone fooling around with and taking care of antiques for a living!

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

carynz on 12/18/02 at 15:23 (103498)

hi wendy...

how true your words are. I do know that each province is different too and now that I have the pleasure of living in 2 of them I notice many things different here in BC (not just the weather). I recall recently 3 young girls who were involved in a bullying situation with a young 14 yr old girl who ended up hanging herself while her mother/father went out to the grocery store. Only 1 of the 3 girls was actually charged and because First Nations was involved, the court judge decided that she should go before the tribal council and they would decide her fate. She will not serve any jail time but has to do community service with troubled youth for x number of hours. The other 2 girls were aquitted with a slap on the hand and told not to do it again in so many words.

How do we as parents teach our children of today that if you do something morally and legally wrong there is no punishment for your actions. As my 12 year old says for every action there is a reaction. You are so right about going out after dark and stuff. WE never thought 2x about spending 2 or 3 hours roaming the neighbourhood on Halloween night for the best candy houses, coming home dumping out the pillowcase and heading out again for another bag. How times have changed. I wish it wasn't so but all we can do is teach them right and hope that they grow up to be responsible, caring adults and then pass that onto our grandchildren some day.

p.s. only 2 more sleeps till we leave for Calgary. The roads are still fine and I'm hoping for a dry and clear drive through the mountains. Went to get a big container of windshield washer fluid this morning just in case. Looking forward to seeing you and yes I have the red wine already packed in my gift box!!!

Cheers Caryn

Re: Food for thought

Ed Davis, DPM on 12/18/02 at 15:58 (103501)

Julie:

So many excellent points. Government tries to remove as many 'risks' as possible and the trial lawyers provide the opportunity to shift repsonsibility for taking those risks to someone else. It will be interesting to see how far these trends can go.
Ed

Re: Re: Food for thought

Ed Davis, DPM on 12/18/02 at 16:03 (103502)

They are overprotected in some areas such as potential physical dangers but are overexposed to psychologic dangers -- over-isolation, violence and wrong doing without consequence in the media. Some reasonable exposure is needed to develop good judgement. TV often presents a distorted view of reality to children and fails to allow development the ability to differentiate between right and wrong.
Ed

Re: Food for thought

Suzanne D on 12/18/02 at 17:42 (103506)

Everyone in this thread has made excellent points. I was born in 1952 and remember childhood as safe and happy. I worked hard ~ in school and 4-H and helping at home, etc. - but in the summer, we played with all the neighbors until dark. No one worried about their children. We played hide-and-go-seek, rode bikes, had yard sales where we basically traded comic books and sold lemonade, had 'circuses' which our parents would pay 25 cents to come and see. We explored and read and discussed and argued and worked out our problems without running home to tattle.

Today's children are as Dr. Ed, I believe, remarked ~ on the one hand over-protected and on the other hand thrust into situations they cannot handle. It is amazing to me how many of them have never really used their imaginations until they came to school. So many have never been read to, never even know the basic nursery rhymes or fairy tales. They have sat, instead, in front of the t.v., watching (in my opinion) inappropriate shows and movies, or playing video games. I try really hard to encourage imagination and to help them enjoy being a child.

I must hurry on, but I did appreciate the thoughts in this thread.

Suzanne :-)

Re: Re: Food for thought

Sharon W on 12/18/02 at 18:00 (103507)

Dr. Ed,

I agree 100% with that! I particularly dislike all of the programming we see now glorifying crime, making it look cool or glamorous.

Sharon

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/18/02 at 19:31 (103517)

my parents made a tv rule for me and my brothers and sister, and enforced it all through our school years. we were allowed to watch one half hour of tv on school days/nights, and one hour on the weekend days/nights. the shows were subject to approval by my parents.

i wasn't happy about it at the time. i didn't have a clue who elliot ness was, for example! -- when all the kids were talking about him at school. now i thank my parents all the time for that rule. we live in a numbed-out-by-tv world.

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/19/02 at 05:37 (103526)

When I was in college, my best friend, who took Russian, had a conversation with her TA. He was from Moscow, I believe. He commented to her that 'Americans want the world made safe for them,' and I think that sums things up. And I am somewhat conflicted about that. On the one hand, I think that companies that put something dangerous on the market, out of sheer negligence, should be punished and their items recalled. That seems only reasonable to me. But on the other hand, that woman who sued McDonald's because she burned herself on their coffee?? I have never spoken to anyone who didn't think that she was just plain stoopid and that it was criminal that she won that case.

We have to be able to use our brains to protect ourselves, too. There are reasonable limits to how safe things can be made for us, as with everything else in life.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/19/02 at 09:22 (103533)

ok, i'll be that one person. i may not remember the details of the coffee lawsuit but i think it was that it was much much hotter than people usually make their coffee. i think she put it between her legs as she drove off and as it spilled she sustained seerious burns. many of us put cup between legs in car. we expect it to be normally hot. not industrially hot. if this was scenario, and i remember it that way, then she had a right to sue in my opinion. i feel that if right to sue is too minimized then industry and profit motive will eat us up and spit us out. in a minute. it barely keeps things under control as is.

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/19/02 at 10:05 (103534)

I don't remember anything about the coffee being 'hotter than usual,' whatever that might mean. Regardless of the exact temperature, coffee is going to be hot--so who with any intelligence at all is going to put a hot cup of anything between their legs as they drive? That's my problem with that suit. It's requiring a company to tell us something that should be patently obvious, and making them responsible for whatever stupid things someone might do with their product once they've bought it. I'm no fan of corporate America, but still, there are limits.

Re: Food for thought

loisw on 12/19/02 at 10:12 (103535)

Just a brief note. Read the above and wanted to add that now in the US there is a suit against Mc Donald's for causing obesity by a young women who weighs over 300 lbs. The case has gone to court. It has been the bases for many discussions. Does the fast food industry have a responsibility for what people chose to eat? I have not read the briefs but I question the merit of this suit. What could this lawyer be thinking? L

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/19/02 at 10:14 (103536)

well altho i disagree with that case i certainly agree that there have been some amazingly rediculous lawsuits and decisions. remember the guy breaking into a store to steal who fell thru the roof and sued? can't remember the verdict but there have been some stunningly stupid ones in my opinion.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/19/02 at 10:16 (103537)

i guess that blows my theory that i was someone with some intelligence.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 11:11 (103540)

don't worry, paula, you show plenty of intelligence almost every time -- just not THIS time! ;}
i agree with nancy on this one. i'm not saying i'm intelligent, though. i'm just saying i wouldn't buy an obviously hot cup of coffee, hold it between my legs while driving, and sue after i got burned. we're lucky we haven't (yet) ended up with warning labels on all cups of coffee obtained outside the home. 'caution: too hot. do not drink under any circumstances.'

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 11:18 (103542)

i also remember that ann landers discussed this in her column. she thought the woman's lawsuit was justified because her injuries were so painful and in a very sensitive place.

what did that have to do with anything?

i mean, if i buy a kitchen knife, tape it so it's pointed at my forehead, walk into a door, and stab a hole into my brain, should i sue the manufacturer? or maybe the seller? or maybe the inventor of knives?

nancy
.
sorry, that's kind of a gross example, but i get a little strident around the holidays. must be the pressure.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/19/02 at 12:16 (103545)

I of course come from a pre TV era. We did listen to a lot of radio with such programs as Intersanctum, The Shadow, Sgt Preston of the Yukon and his faithful dog King. You could really use your immagination with these programs. When TV first showed up in the Chicago area the first places to get them were the bars. As a young boy I would stand outside a bar looking through the windown watching my favorite team the Chicago Cubs on TV.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 13:58 (103548)

john, are you still a cubs fan? you must suffer at least as much as we red sox fans do. we didn't have cable tv for a long time, but we have it now just so we can watch all the games, get really excited in the spring, start to flag in the summer, and cry all fall. it's great!

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

Kathy G on 12/19/02 at 14:06 (103549)

This country has got to put a limit on lawsuits so that the legitmate ones are taken seriously and don't get stuck in backlog of nonsense cases. This whole McDonald's thing, both the coffee and the obesity, all goes to what we been saying. How can we expect our children to take consequences for their own actions if they don't see adults doing the same?

I mean, really, would you even dream of holding a cup of hot coffee between your legs? Please!!!!

Re: Food for thought

Carole C in NOLA on 12/19/02 at 14:21 (103550)

If I had stood outside a bar my mother would have been furious. My brothers and I had strict rules that while we could ramble about the neighborhood, the block with bars and girlie entertainment was off limits.

We got a TV in 1951, before anyone else that we knew got one. Being only 3, I was not particularly astounded by the wonders of TV. What really blew me away was when a second TV station began broadcasting so that we could change channels! Now THAT really freaked me out. How could there be two different things going on at the same time on TV? And what happened to Kukla, Fran, and Ollie (or whatever) when the channels were changed? It really confused my 3-year-old mind for some reason.

I loved Sgt. Preston and his Faithful Dog King, and the Lone Ranger on radio, but I think I was too young for the Shadow.

Carole C

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/19/02 at 15:14 (103553)

yeah i keep saying repeatedly that i would dream of it. and i do it. who decides what is a worthwhile lawsuit? you? me? dick cheney? ozzy osbourne? problem with a free country is that it is a free country. lots of room for what you think is stupid, what i think is stupid. ...if america isn't about the right to be stupid i just don't know what it's about anymore:)

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/19/02 at 16:23 (103557)

John, you make me weep. Inner Sanctum! The SHadow! Sgt Preston of the Yukon!

And what about The Lone Ranger (or as I used to call it The Long Ranger). Our Gal Sunday. Young Widow Brown.

Those were the days. I still like radio better than TV.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 16:31 (103558)

lol, paula! seriously, though, you have every right to be stupid whenever you want, and so do i. i'm quite sure we all do stupid things -- i KNOW i do. the difference is in whether we assume responsibility for those things or think someone else should set us up financially for life because of our own carelessness.

i guess the crucial point is where a judge decides whether a case will go forward or not. and i think a lot of them are dropping the ball and making the wrong decision. frivolity can be wonderful, but i wish some of these courts would get serious.

nancy

p.s. by the way, i despise mcdonald's and all their ilk. i'd like to see them out of business, but not by way of lawsuits (which will never do it anyway). i'd like them to die out because no one goes there anymore.
.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 16:38 (103559)

ooohhhhhh -- the Lone Ranger. one of my favorites. i still remember when he got stuck in quicksand, and Tonto finally threw him a rope, tied the other end to Silver, and had Silver pull our hero out of the muck.

but john and julie, he's the only guy i remember out of the ones you're listing! i feel so young!

i think carole mentioned kukla, fran, and ollie? i remember them and liked them a lot. and i LOVED Ding Dong School, with Miss Frances. but whenever i bring her up, people look at me like i have two heads.

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/19/02 at 16:40 (103560)

This is a bit off topic, but it concerns litigation. A woman in England has just been reported as having been awarded record compensation of some ?350,000 for a mistake made by her local hospital. A tissue sample from a breast lump was mixed up with another woman's, she was wrongly diagnosed with breast cancer, and had a mastectomy. The mistake was picked up almost immediately afterwards, so she was spared chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Her counsel argued that she had not been able to work since the surgery, three years ago, and had been damaged, both physically and psychologically, so badly that she is unlikely ever to work again.

A (current) photograph of her in the paper showed a happy looking, smiling, attractive woman - one you'd guess perfectly capable of picking herself up, dusting herself down, and getting on with life despite the admittedly horrid experience. Of course it was a terrible mistake, and of course she is entitled to compensation. But she has been marginalised, encouraged to think of herself as a basket case, and, apparently, turned into one - for the sake of maximum compensation.

The culture of litigation is making steady progress here.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/19/02 at 17:06 (103561)

i'd have given her a whole lot more than that amount.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/19/02 at 18:22 (103565)

Julie: I had totally forgot about 'Our Gal Sunday'. the answer to todays soaps. As I recall she was married to Englands most handsome Lord Henry (Brentwood?). Cannot believe I got caught up with that.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/19/02 at 18:24 (103566)

Yes Nancy I am a Cubs fan for life. We never give up. We just signed one of your Red Sox players (O'Leary).

Re: Re: Food for thought

Leon S. on 12/19/02 at 18:55 (103568)

In regard to your comments about the car breaking down, those were the days when, if your car did have a problem a regular mechanic could lift the hood and fix it without hooking it up to a diagnostic computer first. You could also look under the hood and actually see the ground underneath the car...and change your own oil if you wanted to.

Re: Food for thought

Leon S. on 12/19/02 at 19:01 (103569)

My brother's first job was working for Mutual Radio in the mailroom and he would come home with the original radio scripts from the Shodow and I would follow along as I listened on the radio...My favorite sport then was stickball. I don't think anyone plays that anymore.

Re: Food for thought

Sharon W on 12/19/02 at 19:12 (103570)

So would most American courts, I fear.

Medical personnel ARE human, and they do make mistakes.

Sharon

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 19:53 (103572)

ah yes, troy o'leary! he wasn't with the sox this past year. i didn't know where he landed. now i guess it's from the frying pan into the fire, poor guy. oh well. i was sad to see him go. nice person.

we're pretty excited up here. the portland sea dogs, double-A farm team for the florida marlins, were recently switched to the red sox. we used to go to sea dogs games and then see certain players move on up to the majors with the marlins, and then out from there: charles johnson, luvan hernandez, and edgar renteria were a few. now we'll see them before they head for the red sox and then keep on watching them! i'll be going to the ballpark more often, i think. for my birthday my husband gave me a sea dogs sweater with the new red sox colors -- navy blue with red & white logo.

john, maybe you could manage to get excited about a team closer to home. there's nothing like watching games live at the ballpark. i'm sure you know this.

how did we get going on this on a 'food for thought' thread? julie might be feeling like giving us a swat about now....

nancy
.

Re: How about Lassie, Rin Tin Tin, I love Lucy, etc.....

Necee on 12/19/02 at 23:52 (103579)

Sky King, those wonderful variety shows like, The Red Skelton Show, and The Carole Burnett Show. Roy Rogers and Dale Evans.....I could go on forever!!

Happy trails...

Necee

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 01:21 (103582)

Paula, you've missed my point. Yes, of course she deserved to be compensated for the horrendous mistake that was made. But what happened, and what I found so sad, was that she was encouraged by her counsel to regard herself as a permanent invalid, and that she complied with that, for the sake of getting maximum compensation. (?350,000, that's pounds sterling, not dollars) is huge compensation here, though I realise it probably isn't in the States).

I would have hoped that she could put the mishap behind her, take control of her life and take responsibility for her future. Instead she has forever defined herself as an invalid, a person to whom something happened that she can never get over. I think that is very sad. A missing breast is certainly unfortunate, but it is not the worst thing that can happen (after all, she didn't have cancer) and - unlike foot pain - it is not debilitating.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 01:26 (103583)

You ARE young, Nancy.

I remember that quick-sand episode! I used to fantasise that I was Silver, pulling The Lone Ranger out. (I loved horses.) But when you heard it, it must have been a repeat, because if you were, say, eight, I would have been 22, a bit old to fantasise about being a horse.

John, I didn't expect you to remember Our Gal Sunday. That was girl's stuff. It's the only one I can remember out of a whole hour of girl's soaps. But maybe the old search engine in my brain will come up with a few more later.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/20/02 at 08:57 (103588)

wow! you remember that very episode, julie? i saw it on tv. i was probably about 4. was 18 too old for you to be fantasizing about being a horse?

a girl on our block not only fantasized about being a horse but acted out being a horse. she trotted, galloped, jumped fences, and so on. she also gave the rest of us horse lessons. we all became horses. i was sure she'd spend the rest of her life being a horse, and i bet she still is one today.

her name was joanie stevenson. in case anyone ever meets a horse by that name, you'll have some history on her, from right here on the heelspurs.com social board. where else?

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 09:40 (103591)

anyone remember the little house on the prairie episode when pa creates, in his woodshop, an orthotic for a girl who has beeen crippled for ten years? pa and laura figure out the foot problem.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 09:43 (103592)

No, Nancy, I heard it on the radio years earlier, Long Before There Was TV.(Believe it or not.) The TV version must have been an adaptation.

I was exactly the same as Joanie Stevenson, horse-fantasy-wise, except that I didn't give horse lessons, probably because it never occurred to me. The greatest pleasures of my childhood were two summers at Camp Manumit, where riding was one of the activities, and of course my favourite.

I'll look out for Joanie, and if we ever meet, I'll make sure to acknowledge my sources.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 09:45 (103594)

Paula, I'm sure you're making that up! :)

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 09:51 (103595)

julie, i think i got your point but had a different view. on the other hand my view has been called stupid so much on this thread (not by you)that maybe i did not get your point and am too stupid to know it. i think the lawyer took that route as a way to get max $ for her. we don't know her real attitude. but there may be some who argue that having a breast lopped off for no reason is worse than plantar fasciitis. at any rate i'd have a hard time just moving on from such a medical betrayal. i'd be sad and bitter. hell, i'm sad and bitter now from what these medical turkies have done to me.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 10:04 (103597)

oh-my-god. i hope the above does not start a flurry of apologies and hurt feelings. i don't care if folks think what i do or what i say is stupid and no one really called my view stupid (directly, except nancy s who is in my clique and is therefore really saying that my view was genius, in our secret code. :) :) :)

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 10:06 (103599)

actually, since i make so much up, i now must say that one was real!!

Re: How about Lassie, Rin Tin Tin, I love Lucy, etc.....

john h on 12/20/02 at 10:11 (103601)

And the very popular Ed Sullivan show.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 10:13 (103602)

Nancy: We have the Arkansas Travelers (Double A) in Little Rock. They were a long time associate of the Cardinals but last year affiliated with Oakland. Once a Cub fan always a Cub fan. Even in Vienam I would climb to altitude and on occasion able to pickup a Cubs game on high frequency radio.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 10:20 (103603)

Leon: I grew up on stickball. You could sure learn to hit a fast ball playing stickball. I think we were probably thowing from about 30-40' with a small ball and a stick. Playing baseball in high school they could get a curve ball by me but not a fastball. Stickball i think is pretty much a city kids game although we played it in the burbs. When I was in the Air Force three of my buddies and I were talking about stickball (a Dentist,Priest, and another Pilot) and we decided to have a contest with the losers throwing a party for the familes. I was matched up with the Dentist who absolutely could not hit so they walked me every time and we lost and I had the big dinner party. The Priest had obviously played a lot of stickball in his day. He could also hang with us when we had a few drinks.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 11:27 (103605)

I'm in your klikue too, Paula, and I don't think you're stupid, and there are no hurt feelings.

I've had both: a breast off and PF, and I can tell you that the pain of PF lasts a whole lot longer. For me, the loss of a breast was no big deal (I know different people respond differently). Having cancer and learning to deal with an uncertain future was a big deal (but what I learned from the experience certainly helped me to deal with PF.)

The woman I wrote about escaped having to deal with cancer. Yes, she had all the initial anxiety, and yes, it was a terrible boob (pun unintentional, but I'll let is stand in case it strikes your funny bone). And yes, I'm sure her lawyers were trying to do their best for her. What I don't like is the way they did it. From her own comments on the judgement and on her situation it was clear that she bought into it and regards herself as an irrevocably damaged invalid - when, actually, she has lost nothing but a bit of flesh. If she had had cancer, or if the mistake hadn't been discovered in time, and she had had to have chemotherapy, there would have been a good chance of her being unable to have children. Now that would have been a serious loss.

The irony is that although the compensation was record, it's scarcely enough to compensate for a whole working life, even monetarily. I hope she takes control and gets some sort of life back.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 11:28 (103606)

How amazing.

Re: How about Lassie, Rin Tin Tin, I love Lucy, etc.....

Julie on 12/20/02 at 11:29 (103607)

Milton Berle.

Re: How about Lassie, Rin Tin Tin, I love Lucy, etc.....

Necee on 12/20/02 at 11:42 (103611)

Wow, those were the good old days! We all know that those shows wouldn't make it in todays world, what a shame.

Happy trails....

Necee

Re: How about Lassie, Rin Tin Tin, I love Lucy, etc.....

Necee on 12/20/02 at 11:54 (103612)

Oh my, how could I ever forget..... The Waltons! I loved that show, and never missed an episode.

Happy trails...

Necee

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/20/02 at 13:42 (103618)

Hey wait a minute, I thought I was in your Clique, too! Have I been disbarred (jeez, I must be tired, I almost said dismembered!)

Re: Food for thought

wendyn on 12/20/02 at 13:47 (103620)

I have stuck a hot cup of coffee between my legs. I have burned myself...and I had no one but myself to blame. (Just cause you guys are wondering who is stupid enough.....)!

Do none of you drive standard automobiles? Do none of you understand WHY the coffee would go between the legs? Do you actually have THREE arms? Do you understand the need to have cofee RIGHT THIS MOMENT!?! (I am a recovering caffiene addict)

I don't think that woman's lawsuit was valid, but I can see how the accident itself could happen.

Re: Food for thought

Carole C in NOLA on 12/20/02 at 14:04 (103624)

My car's automatic, and it has not one but two cupholders right by the shift lever.

People do have stick shifts, and I even had one a long time ago. I don't think I could have put coffee between my legs with it, though, because I was always pushing the clutch or accelerator. I probably held the coffee and the steering wheel both with my left hand while shifting, and then took the coffee with my right hand between shifts. Or maybe I didn't drive with coffee. I just don't remember...

They make cupholders that will sit stably on your seat for a few bucks, if you don't have one. I didn't have one but they seem like a smart thing to get.

Carole C

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/20/02 at 14:15 (103626)

I drive stick/standard. Made sure I had a cup holder in my last car, and I have room for two in my new one. It's a necessity for me, because I am not comfortable driving a car that requires the use of BOTH feet and trying to keep something on the seat of the car. Just seems like a recipe for disaster to me.

But, I should also note that I almost always have something COLD in the cup holder, because I don't do caffeine. Only the occasional Starbucks Gingerbread Latte Decaf for this girl.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 15:18 (103630)

oh no. trouble in cliqueville. come, gather round and let us do our clique dance of bonding. i am going to get the underwear and put int on my head now.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 15:19 (103631)

COFFE BETWEEN LEGS, UNDERWEAR ON HEAD. This is my motto.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 15:21 (103632)

for years humanity, in utter confusion, has reversed it ; feeding coffee to the head, underwear down below. now i have straightened it out. and they call me stupid.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 15:29 (103635)

The coffee and the underwear have both gone to my head, so I am going to bed. Goodnight all.

Paula, how did this under-wear-on-the-head business start? Could you remind me please?

Re: Food for thought

Leon S. on 12/20/02 at 16:02 (103637)

John, Did you pitch to a box on a wall or did you play in the street with a catcher and a fielder? I only played one on one, pitching to a box on the wall with certain landmarks in the field designating doubles, triples and homers. I loved that game. I had a friend in Brookyln who introduced me to another version called 'half-ball'. You cut a rubber ball or a tennis ball in half and used that. Obviously, you couldn't throw a straight pitch and it kept the field of play very small but it was fun.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 17:14 (103643)

i tried to develop a meaningful ritual for the clique so that we could all bond in a ritual with deep archetypal resonance.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/20/02 at 17:23 (103644)

paula, i know you need no explanation but please indulge me, i feel i must explain! i don't THINK i called you stupid, but if i did i assure you it was in jest. i remember putting a crooked smiley on one of my first posts to you in this thread; i don't do that often; it was just for YOU, just in case!

i do many 'stupid' things -- or let's just call them 'not sensible' -- and i'm absolutely positive i put a cup of hot coffee between my legs when i drove a pickup, probably more than once. but really the only thing i think is stupid is for a person to sue after doing what she had the freedom and made the choice to do. you haven't sued over such a thing, right? therefore, you're absolutely correct, i think you're a genius, and i'm most honored that you still consider me a member of your kleeque.

nancy
.
p.s. but i'm afraid to put underwear on my head. i'm marginal enough around here as it is.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/20/02 at 17:30 (103645)

i don't remember that 'little house' episode, and i thought i'd seen them all. we should make a mass request for the re-run.

pa and laura always got it right. pa was sensible through the entirety of every episode, and laura got sensible by the last ten minutes.

i always envied them their house on the prairie. i think i could've handled it, since i like tent camping without any extra amenities. does anyone else think they would've done better in an earlier time?

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 17:31 (103646)

ok nancy. thanks for explanation. at any rate i am impossible to insult. always have been. i go for the joke so often that i really need to never be defensive. . i appreciate your sweetness and the sweetness of the others here. yes, i most certainly am a genius but i forgot what the secret kleeque code really means by that term. of course you are still in the kleeque. but i think you have all formed a private clique behind my back, one in which all the members never sue over hot coffee and so i have also formed one and am hunting down that woman who sued to see if she will join.:)

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/20/02 at 17:32 (103647)

you mean they repeated radio episodes for later tv episodes? julie, i'm so disappointed. i thought that quicksand one was an original.

i'm trying to picture you as a horse. it's not coming in clearly. but i think it's worthy of your resume.

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/20/02 at 18:12 (103653)

it's true, there is a clique that never sues over hot coffee. i think i read about it in Mad magazine. i am a member of that no-sue-hot-coffee clique; have been for two decades. in fact, i wear a badge.

if you can find that woman, paula, you'll have a successful yes-sue-hot-coffee clique. if ann landers weren't dead she could be a member too. then there'd be three of you and you'd rule the world!

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/20/02 at 18:16 (103654)

Ann Landers is dead? Boy, I must really by out of touch...

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 18:43 (103659)

shhh. the revolutionary cows who escaped the cattle truck and liberated my house are bent on world dominion and will get agitated if there is any talk about my ruling the world. the leader, moo tse tung and her sister in revolution, fidel cowstro are not bovines to take lightly, i assure you.

Re: Food for thought

Carole C in NOLA on 12/20/02 at 18:43 (103660)

Dismembered? On this board that's a Freudian slip. I'll bet we've all wished that we could just CUT OUR FEET OFF to stop the pain, just for a little while when down in the dumps at the worst of PF.

Carole C

Re: Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 18:45 (103661)

Leon: Just an old inline 6 cylinder with a single carb. No PS,PB,PW,blah blah blah. We could all get those babies going. Get two or three of us behind it and we could push start it.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 18:50 (103662)

I know Nancy N drives a stick shift. I think Judy drove one in her little recemtly departed RX.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 18:53 (103663)

For pure excitement as a teenager drop a lighted firecracker between your legs in your car while driving and throwing them at people. You will learn the meaning of 'quick reflexes'. In the old days we did not have those wimpy fire crackers you have today. We had 'Zebras' and some that were like dynomite. Yes I did that and yes I got that baby out of the car just in time. My buddy next to me was already in the back seat.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 18:57 (103664)

Leon: for the most part we pitched to a box we marked off on the wall.as it was mostly a two man game. There came a time when we did use a catcher on occasion but that slowed the game down. We used various types of balls over the years including some small ones and even tennis balls. I got to believe from the short distance we were throwing the ball must have been getting up there near 90mph. When you got hit in the head it actually hurt.

Re: Gaunch-head and other ponderings

wendyn on 12/20/02 at 21:06 (103670)

Julie - the underwear on the head started as a common bond amongst the marginally sane board members.

Underwear on the head Tuesday....Commando (no underwear at all) on Wednesday). GET with the program.

I highly recommend it. It is hard to take life (or yourself) too seriously with a pair of Fruit-of-the-Looms draped over your noggin. Especially at work.

Coworkers don't always understand the symbolic gesture, even when you stare wide eyed (through the leg holes) and say 'Well it IS Tuesday!' as an explanation.

Believe me, it sure changes the tone of those boring strategic planning sessions when you lift up a waist band to take a sip of your coffee (which you've been hiding betwen your legs along with a danish).

Then you offer the explanation 'Hey - I'm not going to sue anyone - so it's NONE of your business WHAT I put between my legs!!! OKAY!?'

Believe me.....brings the whole conversation to a screeching halt. No one thinks that the year end deadlines are quite so riviting.

At this point - an explanation that you won't be needing the underwear on your head tomorrow - because you don't wear underwear on Wednesdays - should result in assuring everyone that you are completely off your rocker.

No extra work for me - I mean you - after that little tirade.

Maybe a nice long weekend.

Re: Food for thought

wendyn on 12/20/02 at 21:07 (103671)

My suggestion.... A new Scott Dancing Video - but Scott must dance with his underwear on his head. Same music.

Re: Food for thought

wendyn on 12/20/02 at 21:08 (103672)

Thankfully for me (and my crotch) I have a cup holder now.

Re: Gaunch-head and other ponderings

pala on 12/20/02 at 21:22 (103673)

lol

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/21/02 at 03:46 (103678)

i've been wondering what happened to moo tse-tung and fidel cowstro, not to mention the whole band of rogue bovines. now i know, and i think i'm better off for it. thanks.

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

Sheila S on 12/21/02 at 06:49 (103680)

well....I'm just wayyyy late in reading this - and that's too bad cuz I missed a wonderful opportunity to jump WAY up on that soapbox....darn.

But you got on the topic of lawsuits (and you all KNOW I've mentioned the McDonalds-coffee-drinker a couple of times in relation to other issues)... I ran across a law suit in one of my industry magazines yesterday.

A man's 5 year son was hit by a car and killed while they were visiting family at an apartment complex; he is suing the apartment complex, management company and personnel for 4 Million dollars. Apparently the boy was outside playing and went to a field to see some ducks, ran to the edge of the property, at a highway, and ran out in the highway. The father is suing the apartment complex for 1)not having a fence around the pond because they should know the ducks will attract children and 2) for having bushes at the road that were too big for the traffic to see the 5-year old.

Comments? My first thought was the father should have been WATCHING his 5-year old. HE was slack in his responsibility as a parent and the management company will have to pay for it.

I agree with the majority of all of you on the Coffee issue and the McDonalds Obesity issue. People must take responsibility for their own actions, their own involvement in occurrences and stop trying to blame everyone else and fatten their pockets at everyone else's expense. But, really, who's to blame? The so-called injured person? The lawyer? The Judge? Our Legal system? She gets oodles of money for being stupid enough to put coffee in her lap and drive; I get a ticket for passing a 'stopped school bus' that was NOT stopped when I passed, and have to spend days doing research to try to prove that I am innocent and show with logistics that in all probability the buses could NOT have been stopped. I was supposed to be innocent until proven guilty - but that's not the way it was; I had to try to prove my innocence and that I was telling the truth. (I won, by the way).

Lawyers are ruining our country. Not all lawyers, but the 'Ambulance Chasers'. I can't let a little kid ride his bike on my property for fear of a suit; I can't let a little kid ride on one of my horses for fear of suit...and on and on. I was thinking the other day, I've got a bunch of trees on my property that I want cut and I could let it go for free firewood 'you cut and haul'...then thought, No Way!! Someone would cut their own foot off with their own chainsaw while getting free firewood for their own house, and sue me for more than I ever dreamed of owning. I guess we'll let the wood rot.

.....I could sit here all day on this subject... LOL best get busy....

S

Re: Little House on the Prairie

Kathy G on 12/22/02 at 09:59 (103735)

Kind of a late post but I just had to get in my two-cents worth....

I wouldn't let my daughter watch much TV but she just loved the repeats of Little House on the Prairie. They were on at 9AM when she was at school so I used to set the VCR and tape them for her. It worked out really well because I could dictate when she watched them. My father had watched the show when it was on but I had never seen it and I was blown away by what good stories they were. I mean, yeah, the cynics could make fun of it but 'Paw' and 'Half-Pint' had a great relationship and it wasn't supposed to be real, it was TV and it made you feel good.

What was really neat about it was that my daughter then went on to read every book in the series as well as biographies of Laura Ingalls Wilder.

In my house, though, we don't call it Little House on the Prairie, we call it LHOP because that's what I used to label the tapes!

While everyone's talking about their favorite shows, I have to say that I just loved Captain Kangaroo when I was a little girl. My mother would braid my hair each day before school while I watched it.

Re: Little House on the Prairie

pala on 12/22/02 at 10:45 (103746)

when i was a young pretentious intellectual with far more neurons than i posess today, a freind insisted i read the little house series. i was insulted. to think, a genius like myself would read children's literature! but she shoved them in my hand. i loved them. a few decades later an a cross counry trip with larry, i read them all to him as he drove. while getting lost in missouri we saw a sign that said laura ingalls wilder museum so we visited her preserved homesite and saw laura's childhood quilt work and pa's fiddle among other treasures.

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/18/02 at 05:52 (103460)

Julie--

This article makes so many good points. I was born in 1971, but even so, I can relate to a lot of things on the list. We didn't have cable TV until I was in high school, so we had to make do with the four major networks of the time--which is probably why I became a great reader. My parents certainly would have sided with the law if I'd done anything stupid. I remember when we got our Atari 2600 and the whole family started to get addicted to the games, including my parents. I certainly agree about accidents, too.

I wonder now about the kids I teach, who have grown up around all the things you mention above (and in my Tech and Society course, one of their first homework assignments was to give up just two technologies for the weekend, from a list, and I found it interesting to see that the ones who gave up TV spent more time with their friends--isn't that how it should be??).

That said, I would not go anywhere anymore without my cellphone--not for others' convenience, but for my own safety. My previous car broke down almost two years ago when the alternator died--fortunately, I realized something was wrong in time to turn around and get most of the way home. I was close enough to walk back to my place, but I've always wondered what would have happened if I hadn't been, because I hadn't taken my cellphone with me. I only turn it on if I'm expecting a call or need to call someone else--so I still choose when to be reachable and when not to. Most of my friends don't even have that number, and probably would never think to call me there anyway. (My kids in class, on the other hand, can't imagine how anyone ever managed to get together to do things before cellphones!)

Re: Re: Food for thought

Kathy G on 12/18/02 at 07:54 (103464)

Interesting reading, Julie! I was born in 1949 so I'm in between you and Nancy. I cetainly agree about the fact that if you didn't make the team, get a good grade, etc.; you just dealt with it. One of the hardest things I had to teach my children was to take responisibility for their own actions and face the consequences. It often made them 'different' from their peers but so far, I believe I was right and they are better people for it.

I certainly could identify with the section about going places alone, as a kid. Between the ages of eight and sixteen, I was fortunate to live in a very small town in Connecticut. One of my fondest winter memories was going out into the pasture behind our house and sliding down a steep hill that seemed to go on for about a mile. I could start at the top, where it was steep, go really fast and then ease into the bottom of the hill which was more rolling. I don't know how long it was exactly, probably not as long as it seems in my mind's eye, but none of my friends were willing to trudge back up the hill so I always went alone. There I was, out in the middle of nowhere, at least 1/4 mile from my house and no one thought anything of it. I didn't wear a watch; I judged by how dark it was when it was time to go home. My mother never worried about me and I always got back to the house just about time for supper. I never could have let my children do that, even in this small town in NH! My, how times have changed!

And the part about going out to play. I was fortunate that my children couldn't wait to go out and play after school. I had to argue to get them to take the time to change into their play clothes. My sister, whose son is 12, has to make him go out and play! She allows him to play with his computer games for one hour and then he has to go out. One of his friends goes home to play with his computer games, rather than play outside! It's something I can't imagine but it's a rather sad commentary on today's youth.

Interesting and thought-provoking little article. Were we better off? Is today's generation better off? Who knows? It's that timeless debate that has gone on for centuries. One thing's for sure, as Bill Cosby said, my kids didn't have to walk to school every single day like I did. And it was uphill both ways! :)

Re: I made an error!

Kathy G on 12/18/02 at 07:55 (103465)

I'm much closer to Julie than I am to Nancy N. Heck, Nancy, you're only three years older than my son!!!

Re: Food for thought

wendyn on 12/18/02 at 08:24 (103469)

Julie - we have a ridiculous law called the 'Young Offenders Act'. It prevents things like publishing the name of any young offender who commits a crime (under the age of 18). Including murder. It also means that you can't charge kids for a number of serious crimes. There was a case several years ago, where an 11 year old boy stole a car and led police on a chase. They were explaining the limitations of this law on the news, and how it prevented police from charging the child.

My son (10 at the time) - was shocked and said 'You mean, if I stole a car - there's nothing the police could do to me?!'. I looked at him dead serious and said 'If you stole a car - there would be NOTHING left of you for the police'.

I was born in 68 - and my childhood was more similar to yours than it is to my son's. We didn't have cable, vcr's, or video games - and I never remember being afraid to wander all over the place even after dark.

Re: Food for thought

Richard, C.Ped on 12/18/02 at 08:38 (103470)

This is so weird. I went to my mother's house Monday to pick up my daughter and I was thinking about things like this from my childhood. I can relate to almost everything you mentioned (born in 1968) except the worm thing........well..as far as I know. haha

We used to ride our bikes all over that neighborhood. The only care we had was to avoid the local bully's street, that is unless we were dared..or even double dog dared to walk our bikes slowly down his street.

My elementary school is only about 1/2 mile from my parents house. During the weekend or even the summer time, we would ride our bikes to the school. The school was spread out in many buildings. We had these breezeways with covers over them to keep you from getting wet when it rained (the wind always blew the rain on you anyway...or the bully would push you in the rain..haha).

Somehow someway...we would get our bikes on top of those covers and ride around on the school's roof. I can't believe I remembered that!

Richard, C.Ped

Re: Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/18/02 at 10:44 (103477)

No contest, Kathy - I think we were definitely better off. When I was growing up in the streets of the South Bronx, I was never indoors after school (except to do my homework, of course!) I couldn't wait to get outside, and all the kids on the block were always out playing games and running around until dark or even later. And our parents never worried about us - at least I don't think they did.

I can't offhand remember eating a worm, but everything else rings true!

I worry about children today. They're so over-protected that they never get the chance to learn first-hand about risks (and I think it's debatable whether the dangers they're being protected from are as great as they're blown up to be). And what with being driven to school (standard here in England, I don't know about the States) and TV and computer games, most get hardly any exercise, so they get fat. Your children and your sister's and Wendy's seem to be lucky exceptions.

I'm not in the least nostalgic for my childhood, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like to be a child today.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/18/02 at 11:04 (103481)

Wendy: We have a very similar law in this country concerning youthful offenders.

Re: Re: Food for thought

Sharon W on 12/18/02 at 12:06 (103483)

Kathy,

I was born in 1956 and one of my favorite childhood memories was a birthday party. We rode in the back of somebody's pickup till we got up into the snowy hills, then 'sledded' down a long slope using cardboard and inner tubes. A couple of kids got bruises crashing into trees or got scraped on rocks, but those were just considered the hazards of having so much fun. Nothing was broken, and the injured kids eagerly picked themselves up and walked back up the hill for another go! When we got cold there were hot dogs cooked on sharpened sticks over an open fire, and s'mores made with marshmallows we toasted ourselves, and steaming mugs of hot chocolate. YUM!

Sharon

Re: Food for thought

Necee on 12/18/02 at 12:12 (103484)

I'm 47, and can certainly relate to what everyone is saying here.

When I was about 5 we were living in Dallas, there was a circle at the end of our neighborhood street, and right next to that circle was a creek. Every Saturday morning after breakfast, my brother and I would leave the house and head to the circle, we spent all day long there playing baseball with the other neighborhood kids, after ball we headed for the creek, walking barefoot in ankle and kneehigh water, we would travel for at least a mile up and down stream searching for crawdads, and whatever else caught our eyes. After a day of fun, games and adventures, we finally headed home at dark. Our parents never once worried about us.

A few years later we moved out to the farm. Living in the country provided me with miles and miles of rolling hills and pastures for riding horses. I would sometimes jump on my horse bareback and take off, not once did I ever worry about something happening. Nowdays is a different story.

The really sad thing is, in todays world, you can drive through neighborhoods on bright, sunny summer days, and never see any children outside playing. I often wonder what todays kids would do if all of their computer games, and videos were taken away.

I'm so thankful that I was raised in simpler times, where games were made up of using an imagination, and where kids actually interacted, and learned from eachother. My brother and I had chores and responsibilities, I certainly didn't realize it back then, but those were some of the most valuable lessons in my life.

Happy trails...

Necee

Re: Food for thought

JudyS on 12/18/02 at 14:06 (103491)

This is so reminiscent Julie - thanks for sharing it with us - it brings back great memories. I especially like the one where we left the house right after breakfast (on a summer day) and didn't return 'til dinner-time. And I think the boy next door and I actually constructed the very first skateboard....we made it out of a 2 x 6 scrap of wood and, of course, wheels taken off someone's roller skates!

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/18/02 at 15:11 (103496)

yes, many thanks for this, julie. like kathy, and i think judy?, i'm a '49er, and i remember just about everything described here. i feel those simpler ways of life taught a lot of resourcefulness, resilience, life-problems solving, and creativity. and yes, we were outdoors all the time, thinking up our own games and exploring nature in our own free ways. i'm so glad i grew up when i did (and sometimes wish i'd grown up in much earlier times) -- guess this isn't surprising from someone fooling around with and taking care of antiques for a living!

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

carynz on 12/18/02 at 15:23 (103498)

hi wendy...

how true your words are. I do know that each province is different too and now that I have the pleasure of living in 2 of them I notice many things different here in BC (not just the weather). I recall recently 3 young girls who were involved in a bullying situation with a young 14 yr old girl who ended up hanging herself while her mother/father went out to the grocery store. Only 1 of the 3 girls was actually charged and because First Nations was involved, the court judge decided that she should go before the tribal council and they would decide her fate. She will not serve any jail time but has to do community service with troubled youth for x number of hours. The other 2 girls were aquitted with a slap on the hand and told not to do it again in so many words.

How do we as parents teach our children of today that if you do something morally and legally wrong there is no punishment for your actions. As my 12 year old says for every action there is a reaction. You are so right about going out after dark and stuff. WE never thought 2x about spending 2 or 3 hours roaming the neighbourhood on Halloween night for the best candy houses, coming home dumping out the pillowcase and heading out again for another bag. How times have changed. I wish it wasn't so but all we can do is teach them right and hope that they grow up to be responsible, caring adults and then pass that onto our grandchildren some day.

p.s. only 2 more sleeps till we leave for Calgary. The roads are still fine and I'm hoping for a dry and clear drive through the mountains. Went to get a big container of windshield washer fluid this morning just in case. Looking forward to seeing you and yes I have the red wine already packed in my gift box!!!

Cheers Caryn

Re: Food for thought

Ed Davis, DPM on 12/18/02 at 15:58 (103501)

Julie:

So many excellent points. Government tries to remove as many 'risks' as possible and the trial lawyers provide the opportunity to shift repsonsibility for taking those risks to someone else. It will be interesting to see how far these trends can go.
Ed

Re: Re: Food for thought

Ed Davis, DPM on 12/18/02 at 16:03 (103502)

They are overprotected in some areas such as potential physical dangers but are overexposed to psychologic dangers -- over-isolation, violence and wrong doing without consequence in the media. Some reasonable exposure is needed to develop good judgement. TV often presents a distorted view of reality to children and fails to allow development the ability to differentiate between right and wrong.
Ed

Re: Food for thought

Suzanne D on 12/18/02 at 17:42 (103506)

Everyone in this thread has made excellent points. I was born in 1952 and remember childhood as safe and happy. I worked hard ~ in school and 4-H and helping at home, etc. - but in the summer, we played with all the neighbors until dark. No one worried about their children. We played hide-and-go-seek, rode bikes, had yard sales where we basically traded comic books and sold lemonade, had 'circuses' which our parents would pay 25 cents to come and see. We explored and read and discussed and argued and worked out our problems without running home to tattle.

Today's children are as Dr. Ed, I believe, remarked ~ on the one hand over-protected and on the other hand thrust into situations they cannot handle. It is amazing to me how many of them have never really used their imaginations until they came to school. So many have never been read to, never even know the basic nursery rhymes or fairy tales. They have sat, instead, in front of the t.v., watching (in my opinion) inappropriate shows and movies, or playing video games. I try really hard to encourage imagination and to help them enjoy being a child.

I must hurry on, but I did appreciate the thoughts in this thread.

Suzanne :-)

Re: Re: Food for thought

Sharon W on 12/18/02 at 18:00 (103507)

Dr. Ed,

I agree 100% with that! I particularly dislike all of the programming we see now glorifying crime, making it look cool or glamorous.

Sharon

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/18/02 at 19:31 (103517)

my parents made a tv rule for me and my brothers and sister, and enforced it all through our school years. we were allowed to watch one half hour of tv on school days/nights, and one hour on the weekend days/nights. the shows were subject to approval by my parents.

i wasn't happy about it at the time. i didn't have a clue who elliot ness was, for example! -- when all the kids were talking about him at school. now i thank my parents all the time for that rule. we live in a numbed-out-by-tv world.

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/19/02 at 05:37 (103526)

When I was in college, my best friend, who took Russian, had a conversation with her TA. He was from Moscow, I believe. He commented to her that 'Americans want the world made safe for them,' and I think that sums things up. And I am somewhat conflicted about that. On the one hand, I think that companies that put something dangerous on the market, out of sheer negligence, should be punished and their items recalled. That seems only reasonable to me. But on the other hand, that woman who sued McDonald's because she burned herself on their coffee?? I have never spoken to anyone who didn't think that she was just plain stoopid and that it was criminal that she won that case.

We have to be able to use our brains to protect ourselves, too. There are reasonable limits to how safe things can be made for us, as with everything else in life.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/19/02 at 09:22 (103533)

ok, i'll be that one person. i may not remember the details of the coffee lawsuit but i think it was that it was much much hotter than people usually make their coffee. i think she put it between her legs as she drove off and as it spilled she sustained seerious burns. many of us put cup between legs in car. we expect it to be normally hot. not industrially hot. if this was scenario, and i remember it that way, then she had a right to sue in my opinion. i feel that if right to sue is too minimized then industry and profit motive will eat us up and spit us out. in a minute. it barely keeps things under control as is.

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/19/02 at 10:05 (103534)

I don't remember anything about the coffee being 'hotter than usual,' whatever that might mean. Regardless of the exact temperature, coffee is going to be hot--so who with any intelligence at all is going to put a hot cup of anything between their legs as they drive? That's my problem with that suit. It's requiring a company to tell us something that should be patently obvious, and making them responsible for whatever stupid things someone might do with their product once they've bought it. I'm no fan of corporate America, but still, there are limits.

Re: Food for thought

loisw on 12/19/02 at 10:12 (103535)

Just a brief note. Read the above and wanted to add that now in the US there is a suit against Mc Donald's for causing obesity by a young women who weighs over 300 lbs. The case has gone to court. It has been the bases for many discussions. Does the fast food industry have a responsibility for what people chose to eat? I have not read the briefs but I question the merit of this suit. What could this lawyer be thinking? L

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/19/02 at 10:14 (103536)

well altho i disagree with that case i certainly agree that there have been some amazingly rediculous lawsuits and decisions. remember the guy breaking into a store to steal who fell thru the roof and sued? can't remember the verdict but there have been some stunningly stupid ones in my opinion.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/19/02 at 10:16 (103537)

i guess that blows my theory that i was someone with some intelligence.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 11:11 (103540)

don't worry, paula, you show plenty of intelligence almost every time -- just not THIS time! ;}
i agree with nancy on this one. i'm not saying i'm intelligent, though. i'm just saying i wouldn't buy an obviously hot cup of coffee, hold it between my legs while driving, and sue after i got burned. we're lucky we haven't (yet) ended up with warning labels on all cups of coffee obtained outside the home. 'caution: too hot. do not drink under any circumstances.'

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 11:18 (103542)

i also remember that ann landers discussed this in her column. she thought the woman's lawsuit was justified because her injuries were so painful and in a very sensitive place.

what did that have to do with anything?

i mean, if i buy a kitchen knife, tape it so it's pointed at my forehead, walk into a door, and stab a hole into my brain, should i sue the manufacturer? or maybe the seller? or maybe the inventor of knives?

nancy
.
sorry, that's kind of a gross example, but i get a little strident around the holidays. must be the pressure.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/19/02 at 12:16 (103545)

I of course come from a pre TV era. We did listen to a lot of radio with such programs as Intersanctum, The Shadow, Sgt Preston of the Yukon and his faithful dog King. You could really use your immagination with these programs. When TV first showed up in the Chicago area the first places to get them were the bars. As a young boy I would stand outside a bar looking through the windown watching my favorite team the Chicago Cubs on TV.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 13:58 (103548)

john, are you still a cubs fan? you must suffer at least as much as we red sox fans do. we didn't have cable tv for a long time, but we have it now just so we can watch all the games, get really excited in the spring, start to flag in the summer, and cry all fall. it's great!

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

Kathy G on 12/19/02 at 14:06 (103549)

This country has got to put a limit on lawsuits so that the legitmate ones are taken seriously and don't get stuck in backlog of nonsense cases. This whole McDonald's thing, both the coffee and the obesity, all goes to what we been saying. How can we expect our children to take consequences for their own actions if they don't see adults doing the same?

I mean, really, would you even dream of holding a cup of hot coffee between your legs? Please!!!!

Re: Food for thought

Carole C in NOLA on 12/19/02 at 14:21 (103550)

If I had stood outside a bar my mother would have been furious. My brothers and I had strict rules that while we could ramble about the neighborhood, the block with bars and girlie entertainment was off limits.

We got a TV in 1951, before anyone else that we knew got one. Being only 3, I was not particularly astounded by the wonders of TV. What really blew me away was when a second TV station began broadcasting so that we could change channels! Now THAT really freaked me out. How could there be two different things going on at the same time on TV? And what happened to Kukla, Fran, and Ollie (or whatever) when the channels were changed? It really confused my 3-year-old mind for some reason.

I loved Sgt. Preston and his Faithful Dog King, and the Lone Ranger on radio, but I think I was too young for the Shadow.

Carole C

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/19/02 at 15:14 (103553)

yeah i keep saying repeatedly that i would dream of it. and i do it. who decides what is a worthwhile lawsuit? you? me? dick cheney? ozzy osbourne? problem with a free country is that it is a free country. lots of room for what you think is stupid, what i think is stupid. ...if america isn't about the right to be stupid i just don't know what it's about anymore:)

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/19/02 at 16:23 (103557)

John, you make me weep. Inner Sanctum! The SHadow! Sgt Preston of the Yukon!

And what about The Lone Ranger (or as I used to call it The Long Ranger). Our Gal Sunday. Young Widow Brown.

Those were the days. I still like radio better than TV.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 16:31 (103558)

lol, paula! seriously, though, you have every right to be stupid whenever you want, and so do i. i'm quite sure we all do stupid things -- i KNOW i do. the difference is in whether we assume responsibility for those things or think someone else should set us up financially for life because of our own carelessness.

i guess the crucial point is where a judge decides whether a case will go forward or not. and i think a lot of them are dropping the ball and making the wrong decision. frivolity can be wonderful, but i wish some of these courts would get serious.

nancy

p.s. by the way, i despise mcdonald's and all their ilk. i'd like to see them out of business, but not by way of lawsuits (which will never do it anyway). i'd like them to die out because no one goes there anymore.
.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 16:38 (103559)

ooohhhhhh -- the Lone Ranger. one of my favorites. i still remember when he got stuck in quicksand, and Tonto finally threw him a rope, tied the other end to Silver, and had Silver pull our hero out of the muck.

but john and julie, he's the only guy i remember out of the ones you're listing! i feel so young!

i think carole mentioned kukla, fran, and ollie? i remember them and liked them a lot. and i LOVED Ding Dong School, with Miss Frances. but whenever i bring her up, people look at me like i have two heads.

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/19/02 at 16:40 (103560)

This is a bit off topic, but it concerns litigation. A woman in England has just been reported as having been awarded record compensation of some ?350,000 for a mistake made by her local hospital. A tissue sample from a breast lump was mixed up with another woman's, she was wrongly diagnosed with breast cancer, and had a mastectomy. The mistake was picked up almost immediately afterwards, so she was spared chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Her counsel argued that she had not been able to work since the surgery, three years ago, and had been damaged, both physically and psychologically, so badly that she is unlikely ever to work again.

A (current) photograph of her in the paper showed a happy looking, smiling, attractive woman - one you'd guess perfectly capable of picking herself up, dusting herself down, and getting on with life despite the admittedly horrid experience. Of course it was a terrible mistake, and of course she is entitled to compensation. But she has been marginalised, encouraged to think of herself as a basket case, and, apparently, turned into one - for the sake of maximum compensation.

The culture of litigation is making steady progress here.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/19/02 at 17:06 (103561)

i'd have given her a whole lot more than that amount.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/19/02 at 18:22 (103565)

Julie: I had totally forgot about 'Our Gal Sunday'. the answer to todays soaps. As I recall she was married to Englands most handsome Lord Henry (Brentwood?). Cannot believe I got caught up with that.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/19/02 at 18:24 (103566)

Yes Nancy I am a Cubs fan for life. We never give up. We just signed one of your Red Sox players (O'Leary).

Re: Re: Food for thought

Leon S. on 12/19/02 at 18:55 (103568)

In regard to your comments about the car breaking down, those were the days when, if your car did have a problem a regular mechanic could lift the hood and fix it without hooking it up to a diagnostic computer first. You could also look under the hood and actually see the ground underneath the car...and change your own oil if you wanted to.

Re: Food for thought

Leon S. on 12/19/02 at 19:01 (103569)

My brother's first job was working for Mutual Radio in the mailroom and he would come home with the original radio scripts from the Shodow and I would follow along as I listened on the radio...My favorite sport then was stickball. I don't think anyone plays that anymore.

Re: Food for thought

Sharon W on 12/19/02 at 19:12 (103570)

So would most American courts, I fear.

Medical personnel ARE human, and they do make mistakes.

Sharon

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/19/02 at 19:53 (103572)

ah yes, troy o'leary! he wasn't with the sox this past year. i didn't know where he landed. now i guess it's from the frying pan into the fire, poor guy. oh well. i was sad to see him go. nice person.

we're pretty excited up here. the portland sea dogs, double-A farm team for the florida marlins, were recently switched to the red sox. we used to go to sea dogs games and then see certain players move on up to the majors with the marlins, and then out from there: charles johnson, luvan hernandez, and edgar renteria were a few. now we'll see them before they head for the red sox and then keep on watching them! i'll be going to the ballpark more often, i think. for my birthday my husband gave me a sea dogs sweater with the new red sox colors -- navy blue with red & white logo.

john, maybe you could manage to get excited about a team closer to home. there's nothing like watching games live at the ballpark. i'm sure you know this.

how did we get going on this on a 'food for thought' thread? julie might be feeling like giving us a swat about now....

nancy
.

Re: How about Lassie, Rin Tin Tin, I love Lucy, etc.....

Necee on 12/19/02 at 23:52 (103579)

Sky King, those wonderful variety shows like, The Red Skelton Show, and The Carole Burnett Show. Roy Rogers and Dale Evans.....I could go on forever!!

Happy trails...

Necee

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 01:21 (103582)

Paula, you've missed my point. Yes, of course she deserved to be compensated for the horrendous mistake that was made. But what happened, and what I found so sad, was that she was encouraged by her counsel to regard herself as a permanent invalid, and that she complied with that, for the sake of getting maximum compensation. (?350,000, that's pounds sterling, not dollars) is huge compensation here, though I realise it probably isn't in the States).

I would have hoped that she could put the mishap behind her, take control of her life and take responsibility for her future. Instead she has forever defined herself as an invalid, a person to whom something happened that she can never get over. I think that is very sad. A missing breast is certainly unfortunate, but it is not the worst thing that can happen (after all, she didn't have cancer) and - unlike foot pain - it is not debilitating.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 01:26 (103583)

You ARE young, Nancy.

I remember that quick-sand episode! I used to fantasise that I was Silver, pulling The Lone Ranger out. (I loved horses.) But when you heard it, it must have been a repeat, because if you were, say, eight, I would have been 22, a bit old to fantasise about being a horse.

John, I didn't expect you to remember Our Gal Sunday. That was girl's stuff. It's the only one I can remember out of a whole hour of girl's soaps. But maybe the old search engine in my brain will come up with a few more later.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/20/02 at 08:57 (103588)

wow! you remember that very episode, julie? i saw it on tv. i was probably about 4. was 18 too old for you to be fantasizing about being a horse?

a girl on our block not only fantasized about being a horse but acted out being a horse. she trotted, galloped, jumped fences, and so on. she also gave the rest of us horse lessons. we all became horses. i was sure she'd spend the rest of her life being a horse, and i bet she still is one today.

her name was joanie stevenson. in case anyone ever meets a horse by that name, you'll have some history on her, from right here on the heelspurs.com social board. where else?

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 09:40 (103591)

anyone remember the little house on the prairie episode when pa creates, in his woodshop, an orthotic for a girl who has beeen crippled for ten years? pa and laura figure out the foot problem.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 09:43 (103592)

No, Nancy, I heard it on the radio years earlier, Long Before There Was TV.(Believe it or not.) The TV version must have been an adaptation.

I was exactly the same as Joanie Stevenson, horse-fantasy-wise, except that I didn't give horse lessons, probably because it never occurred to me. The greatest pleasures of my childhood were two summers at Camp Manumit, where riding was one of the activities, and of course my favourite.

I'll look out for Joanie, and if we ever meet, I'll make sure to acknowledge my sources.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 09:45 (103594)

Paula, I'm sure you're making that up! :)

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 09:51 (103595)

julie, i think i got your point but had a different view. on the other hand my view has been called stupid so much on this thread (not by you)that maybe i did not get your point and am too stupid to know it. i think the lawyer took that route as a way to get max $ for her. we don't know her real attitude. but there may be some who argue that having a breast lopped off for no reason is worse than plantar fasciitis. at any rate i'd have a hard time just moving on from such a medical betrayal. i'd be sad and bitter. hell, i'm sad and bitter now from what these medical turkies have done to me.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 10:04 (103597)

oh-my-god. i hope the above does not start a flurry of apologies and hurt feelings. i don't care if folks think what i do or what i say is stupid and no one really called my view stupid (directly, except nancy s who is in my clique and is therefore really saying that my view was genius, in our secret code. :) :) :)

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 10:06 (103599)

actually, since i make so much up, i now must say that one was real!!

Re: How about Lassie, Rin Tin Tin, I love Lucy, etc.....

john h on 12/20/02 at 10:11 (103601)

And the very popular Ed Sullivan show.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 10:13 (103602)

Nancy: We have the Arkansas Travelers (Double A) in Little Rock. They were a long time associate of the Cardinals but last year affiliated with Oakland. Once a Cub fan always a Cub fan. Even in Vienam I would climb to altitude and on occasion able to pickup a Cubs game on high frequency radio.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 10:20 (103603)

Leon: I grew up on stickball. You could sure learn to hit a fast ball playing stickball. I think we were probably thowing from about 30-40' with a small ball and a stick. Playing baseball in high school they could get a curve ball by me but not a fastball. Stickball i think is pretty much a city kids game although we played it in the burbs. When I was in the Air Force three of my buddies and I were talking about stickball (a Dentist,Priest, and another Pilot) and we decided to have a contest with the losers throwing a party for the familes. I was matched up with the Dentist who absolutely could not hit so they walked me every time and we lost and I had the big dinner party. The Priest had obviously played a lot of stickball in his day. He could also hang with us when we had a few drinks.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 11:27 (103605)

I'm in your klikue too, Paula, and I don't think you're stupid, and there are no hurt feelings.

I've had both: a breast off and PF, and I can tell you that the pain of PF lasts a whole lot longer. For me, the loss of a breast was no big deal (I know different people respond differently). Having cancer and learning to deal with an uncertain future was a big deal (but what I learned from the experience certainly helped me to deal with PF.)

The woman I wrote about escaped having to deal with cancer. Yes, she had all the initial anxiety, and yes, it was a terrible boob (pun unintentional, but I'll let is stand in case it strikes your funny bone). And yes, I'm sure her lawyers were trying to do their best for her. What I don't like is the way they did it. From her own comments on the judgement and on her situation it was clear that she bought into it and regards herself as an irrevocably damaged invalid - when, actually, she has lost nothing but a bit of flesh. If she had had cancer, or if the mistake hadn't been discovered in time, and she had had to have chemotherapy, there would have been a good chance of her being unable to have children. Now that would have been a serious loss.

The irony is that although the compensation was record, it's scarcely enough to compensate for a whole working life, even monetarily. I hope she takes control and gets some sort of life back.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 11:28 (103606)

How amazing.

Re: How about Lassie, Rin Tin Tin, I love Lucy, etc.....

Julie on 12/20/02 at 11:29 (103607)

Milton Berle.

Re: How about Lassie, Rin Tin Tin, I love Lucy, etc.....

Necee on 12/20/02 at 11:42 (103611)

Wow, those were the good old days! We all know that those shows wouldn't make it in todays world, what a shame.

Happy trails....

Necee

Re: How about Lassie, Rin Tin Tin, I love Lucy, etc.....

Necee on 12/20/02 at 11:54 (103612)

Oh my, how could I ever forget..... The Waltons! I loved that show, and never missed an episode.

Happy trails...

Necee

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/20/02 at 13:42 (103618)

Hey wait a minute, I thought I was in your Clique, too! Have I been disbarred (jeez, I must be tired, I almost said dismembered!)

Re: Food for thought

wendyn on 12/20/02 at 13:47 (103620)

I have stuck a hot cup of coffee between my legs. I have burned myself...and I had no one but myself to blame. (Just cause you guys are wondering who is stupid enough.....)!

Do none of you drive standard automobiles? Do none of you understand WHY the coffee would go between the legs? Do you actually have THREE arms? Do you understand the need to have cofee RIGHT THIS MOMENT!?! (I am a recovering caffiene addict)

I don't think that woman's lawsuit was valid, but I can see how the accident itself could happen.

Re: Food for thought

Carole C in NOLA on 12/20/02 at 14:04 (103624)

My car's automatic, and it has not one but two cupholders right by the shift lever.

People do have stick shifts, and I even had one a long time ago. I don't think I could have put coffee between my legs with it, though, because I was always pushing the clutch or accelerator. I probably held the coffee and the steering wheel both with my left hand while shifting, and then took the coffee with my right hand between shifts. Or maybe I didn't drive with coffee. I just don't remember...

They make cupholders that will sit stably on your seat for a few bucks, if you don't have one. I didn't have one but they seem like a smart thing to get.

Carole C

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/20/02 at 14:15 (103626)

I drive stick/standard. Made sure I had a cup holder in my last car, and I have room for two in my new one. It's a necessity for me, because I am not comfortable driving a car that requires the use of BOTH feet and trying to keep something on the seat of the car. Just seems like a recipe for disaster to me.

But, I should also note that I almost always have something COLD in the cup holder, because I don't do caffeine. Only the occasional Starbucks Gingerbread Latte Decaf for this girl.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 15:18 (103630)

oh no. trouble in cliqueville. come, gather round and let us do our clique dance of bonding. i am going to get the underwear and put int on my head now.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 15:19 (103631)

COFFE BETWEEN LEGS, UNDERWEAR ON HEAD. This is my motto.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 15:21 (103632)

for years humanity, in utter confusion, has reversed it ; feeding coffee to the head, underwear down below. now i have straightened it out. and they call me stupid.

Re: Food for thought

Julie on 12/20/02 at 15:29 (103635)

The coffee and the underwear have both gone to my head, so I am going to bed. Goodnight all.

Paula, how did this under-wear-on-the-head business start? Could you remind me please?

Re: Food for thought

Leon S. on 12/20/02 at 16:02 (103637)

John, Did you pitch to a box on a wall or did you play in the street with a catcher and a fielder? I only played one on one, pitching to a box on the wall with certain landmarks in the field designating doubles, triples and homers. I loved that game. I had a friend in Brookyln who introduced me to another version called 'half-ball'. You cut a rubber ball or a tennis ball in half and used that. Obviously, you couldn't throw a straight pitch and it kept the field of play very small but it was fun.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 17:14 (103643)

i tried to develop a meaningful ritual for the clique so that we could all bond in a ritual with deep archetypal resonance.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/20/02 at 17:23 (103644)

paula, i know you need no explanation but please indulge me, i feel i must explain! i don't THINK i called you stupid, but if i did i assure you it was in jest. i remember putting a crooked smiley on one of my first posts to you in this thread; i don't do that often; it was just for YOU, just in case!

i do many 'stupid' things -- or let's just call them 'not sensible' -- and i'm absolutely positive i put a cup of hot coffee between my legs when i drove a pickup, probably more than once. but really the only thing i think is stupid is for a person to sue after doing what she had the freedom and made the choice to do. you haven't sued over such a thing, right? therefore, you're absolutely correct, i think you're a genius, and i'm most honored that you still consider me a member of your kleeque.

nancy
.
p.s. but i'm afraid to put underwear on my head. i'm marginal enough around here as it is.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/20/02 at 17:30 (103645)

i don't remember that 'little house' episode, and i thought i'd seen them all. we should make a mass request for the re-run.

pa and laura always got it right. pa was sensible through the entirety of every episode, and laura got sensible by the last ten minutes.

i always envied them their house on the prairie. i think i could've handled it, since i like tent camping without any extra amenities. does anyone else think they would've done better in an earlier time?

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 17:31 (103646)

ok nancy. thanks for explanation. at any rate i am impossible to insult. always have been. i go for the joke so often that i really need to never be defensive. . i appreciate your sweetness and the sweetness of the others here. yes, i most certainly am a genius but i forgot what the secret kleeque code really means by that term. of course you are still in the kleeque. but i think you have all formed a private clique behind my back, one in which all the members never sue over hot coffee and so i have also formed one and am hunting down that woman who sued to see if she will join.:)

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/20/02 at 17:32 (103647)

you mean they repeated radio episodes for later tv episodes? julie, i'm so disappointed. i thought that quicksand one was an original.

i'm trying to picture you as a horse. it's not coming in clearly. but i think it's worthy of your resume.

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/20/02 at 18:12 (103653)

it's true, there is a clique that never sues over hot coffee. i think i read about it in Mad magazine. i am a member of that no-sue-hot-coffee clique; have been for two decades. in fact, i wear a badge.

if you can find that woman, paula, you'll have a successful yes-sue-hot-coffee clique. if ann landers weren't dead she could be a member too. then there'd be three of you and you'd rule the world!

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

Nancy N on 12/20/02 at 18:16 (103654)

Ann Landers is dead? Boy, I must really by out of touch...

Re: Food for thought

pala on 12/20/02 at 18:43 (103659)

shhh. the revolutionary cows who escaped the cattle truck and liberated my house are bent on world dominion and will get agitated if there is any talk about my ruling the world. the leader, moo tse tung and her sister in revolution, fidel cowstro are not bovines to take lightly, i assure you.

Re: Food for thought

Carole C in NOLA on 12/20/02 at 18:43 (103660)

Dismembered? On this board that's a Freudian slip. I'll bet we've all wished that we could just CUT OUR FEET OFF to stop the pain, just for a little while when down in the dumps at the worst of PF.

Carole C

Re: Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 18:45 (103661)

Leon: Just an old inline 6 cylinder with a single carb. No PS,PB,PW,blah blah blah. We could all get those babies going. Get two or three of us behind it and we could push start it.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 18:50 (103662)

I know Nancy N drives a stick shift. I think Judy drove one in her little recemtly departed RX.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 18:53 (103663)

For pure excitement as a teenager drop a lighted firecracker between your legs in your car while driving and throwing them at people. You will learn the meaning of 'quick reflexes'. In the old days we did not have those wimpy fire crackers you have today. We had 'Zebras' and some that were like dynomite. Yes I did that and yes I got that baby out of the car just in time. My buddy next to me was already in the back seat.

Re: Food for thought

john h on 12/20/02 at 18:57 (103664)

Leon: for the most part we pitched to a box we marked off on the wall.as it was mostly a two man game. There came a time when we did use a catcher on occasion but that slowed the game down. We used various types of balls over the years including some small ones and even tennis balls. I got to believe from the short distance we were throwing the ball must have been getting up there near 90mph. When you got hit in the head it actually hurt.

Re: Gaunch-head and other ponderings

wendyn on 12/20/02 at 21:06 (103670)

Julie - the underwear on the head started as a common bond amongst the marginally sane board members.

Underwear on the head Tuesday....Commando (no underwear at all) on Wednesday). GET with the program.

I highly recommend it. It is hard to take life (or yourself) too seriously with a pair of Fruit-of-the-Looms draped over your noggin. Especially at work.

Coworkers don't always understand the symbolic gesture, even when you stare wide eyed (through the leg holes) and say 'Well it IS Tuesday!' as an explanation.

Believe me, it sure changes the tone of those boring strategic planning sessions when you lift up a waist band to take a sip of your coffee (which you've been hiding betwen your legs along with a danish).

Then you offer the explanation 'Hey - I'm not going to sue anyone - so it's NONE of your business WHAT I put between my legs!!! OKAY!?'

Believe me.....brings the whole conversation to a screeching halt. No one thinks that the year end deadlines are quite so riviting.

At this point - an explanation that you won't be needing the underwear on your head tomorrow - because you don't wear underwear on Wednesdays - should result in assuring everyone that you are completely off your rocker.

No extra work for me - I mean you - after that little tirade.

Maybe a nice long weekend.

Re: Food for thought

wendyn on 12/20/02 at 21:07 (103671)

My suggestion.... A new Scott Dancing Video - but Scott must dance with his underwear on his head. Same music.

Re: Food for thought

wendyn on 12/20/02 at 21:08 (103672)

Thankfully for me (and my crotch) I have a cup holder now.

Re: Gaunch-head and other ponderings

pala on 12/20/02 at 21:22 (103673)

lol

Re: Food for thought

nancy s. on 12/21/02 at 03:46 (103678)

i've been wondering what happened to moo tse-tung and fidel cowstro, not to mention the whole band of rogue bovines. now i know, and i think i'm better off for it. thanks.

nancy
.

Re: Food for thought

Sheila S on 12/21/02 at 06:49 (103680)

well....I'm just wayyyy late in reading this - and that's too bad cuz I missed a wonderful opportunity to jump WAY up on that soapbox....darn.

But you got on the topic of lawsuits (and you all KNOW I've mentioned the McDonalds-coffee-drinker a couple of times in relation to other issues)... I ran across a law suit in one of my industry magazines yesterday.

A man's 5 year son was hit by a car and killed while they were visiting family at an apartment complex; he is suing the apartment complex, management company and personnel for 4 Million dollars. Apparently the boy was outside playing and went to a field to see some ducks, ran to the edge of the property, at a highway, and ran out in the highway. The father is suing the apartment complex for 1)not having a fence around the pond because they should know the ducks will attract children and 2) for having bushes at the road that were too big for the traffic to see the 5-year old.

Comments? My first thought was the father should have been WATCHING his 5-year old. HE was slack in his responsibility as a parent and the management company will have to pay for it.

I agree with the majority of all of you on the Coffee issue and the McDonalds Obesity issue. People must take responsibility for their own actions, their own involvement in occurrences and stop trying to blame everyone else and fatten their pockets at everyone else's expense. But, really, who's to blame? The so-called injured person? The lawyer? The Judge? Our Legal system? She gets oodles of money for being stupid enough to put coffee in her lap and drive; I get a ticket for passing a 'stopped school bus' that was NOT stopped when I passed, and have to spend days doing research to try to prove that I am innocent and show with logistics that in all probability the buses could NOT have been stopped. I was supposed to be innocent until proven guilty - but that's not the way it was; I had to try to prove my innocence and that I was telling the truth. (I won, by the way).

Lawyers are ruining our country. Not all lawyers, but the 'Ambulance Chasers'. I can't let a little kid ride his bike on my property for fear of a suit; I can't let a little kid ride on one of my horses for fear of suit...and on and on. I was thinking the other day, I've got a bunch of trees on my property that I want cut and I could let it go for free firewood 'you cut and haul'...then thought, No Way!! Someone would cut their own foot off with their own chainsaw while getting free firewood for their own house, and sue me for more than I ever dreamed of owning. I guess we'll let the wood rot.

.....I could sit here all day on this subject... LOL best get busy....

S

Re: Little House on the Prairie

Kathy G on 12/22/02 at 09:59 (103735)

Kind of a late post but I just had to get in my two-cents worth....

I wouldn't let my daughter watch much TV but she just loved the repeats of Little House on the Prairie. They were on at 9AM when she was at school so I used to set the VCR and tape them for her. It worked out really well because I could dictate when she watched them. My father had watched the show when it was on but I had never seen it and I was blown away by what good stories they were. I mean, yeah, the cynics could make fun of it but 'Paw' and 'Half-Pint' had a great relationship and it wasn't supposed to be real, it was TV and it made you feel good.

What was really neat about it was that my daughter then went on to read every book in the series as well as biographies of Laura Ingalls Wilder.

In my house, though, we don't call it Little House on the Prairie, we call it LHOP because that's what I used to label the tapes!

While everyone's talking about their favorite shows, I have to say that I just loved Captain Kangaroo when I was a little girl. My mother would braid my hair each day before school while I watched it.

Re: Little House on the Prairie

pala on 12/22/02 at 10:45 (103746)

when i was a young pretentious intellectual with far more neurons than i posess today, a freind insisted i read the little house series. i was insulted. to think, a genius like myself would read children's literature! but she shoved them in my hand. i loved them. a few decades later an a cross counry trip with larry, i read them all to him as he drove. while getting lost in missouri we saw a sign that said laura ingalls wilder museum so we visited her preserved homesite and saw laura's childhood quilt work and pa's fiddle among other treasures.