Santa's Watching

The joy of Christmas.
The joy of the "Santa Claus" mystique.
The childhood illusion of what we come to expect this time of year annually has been passed from generation to generation to generation.
It's not just a part of our childhood (and later parenthood), it's one hell of an effective behavior modification tool.
Our three-year-old daughter is really into Christmas this year.  So much so that she understands the whole "Santa's watching" concept.
And we do exploit that.
My wife Margie recently bought one of those "Elf on a Shelf" dolls.  You put them in a different place each day and out of the child's reach.  So they know that Santa (in this case, his designee) is always watching.
Always.
ALWAYS.
ALWAYS.
To encourage Savannah that she had an important role in this elf's existence in the house, we asked her to pick a name for the elf.
"Rachel".
We were a little surprised by that one.  But hey, who said elves have to be male, right?
So our elf became Rachel.
Not that our daughter is a problem child by any means, but at any time she would act out of the boundaries we set for her, we would tell her "Rachel's watching".
It worked.  To her, Rachel was a papal bull.
The presence of presents is all contingent on her good behavior.
Of course, we try to emphasize to her the real reason behind the season.
The season of giving.
The generosity of spirit, not just material possessions.
And may we all learn a lesson from it this time of year.
And year-round.



"Old School Dad" will be on hiatus until Sunday, January 6th.

Silent Night

As last week's column might have suggested, I had planned to write about the mystique of Santa and the importance of being good...for goodness' sake.
But those plans were quickly shoved to the back burner as I read with horror at the tragedy that happened at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut this past Friday.
Simply put, it made Columbine almost seem like a playground fight, as a lone gunman opened fire on twenty students...twelve girls and eight boys, all of whom were either six or seven years of age.  Six adults also died in the massacre before the suspected gunman, a twenty-year-old man named Adam Lanza, turned the gun on himself.
For me personally, it's heartbreaking to know that not only were these young innocent lives taken, but those of whom were protecting them.  If the protectors are removed, then there's nothing more to protect the child.
No one takes my life without me fighting for it first, and I would have used every ounce of my strength to try and disarm this sick individual.
This massacre is being touted as the second-deadliest school shooting in American history, right behind the 2007 shooting spree that left 32 people dead at Virginia Tech.
Since then, the questions have been non-stop.  Why?  And how could it have been allowed to happen?
As for the why, that's a question that must remain unanswered, for Lanza removed any possible answer when he pulled the trigger that took his own life after his rampage had stopped.
Yet as I plunged further into the depths of this case, there's many signs of what may have not sparked, but certainly didn't help, in what had happened here.
Nancy Lanza, who was a victim to her younger son's actions, was an avid gun collector, and among her 'collectibles' was a semiautomatic .223 Bushmaster rifle.  That and two pistols were found next to Adam's body after he turned the gun on himself.  All three weapons belonged to his mother.
One of the pistols was a Glock.  For those of you not familiar, a Glock is a semi-automatic pistol that is the premier brand choice for law enforcement sidearms.
I am a Second Amendment advocate and a member of the National Rifle Association.  I am a firm believer in firearms and your right to defend your home, family and property against others.
Outside of game hunting and self-defense in the home, I see no real reason to own a gun.  I own a 20-gauge pump action shotgun that is intended to be used for deer hunting.  Although I don't have time for hunting like I used to, it's still there, and it's ready to be used in the event someone breaks into my home and threatens my family.
That's the only gun I own.
My three-year-old daughter doesn't know I have it.  That's how often I handle it.  If she has to, my wife knows how to fire it and where the bullets are kept.  The gun is always unloaded and the ammunition stored separately from it.
Unless you live or work in a notoriously bad neighborhood, or work in law enforcement, I see no need to conceal and carry.
I don't go looking for trouble.  I don't frequent establishments that are breeding grounds for conflict.  And I certainly don't pull a weapon out of hammerspace because I don't agree with someone.  If I don't agree with someone, I walk away.  I don't try to hurt them.
Except if you're unwelcome and in my house.  Then your backside is mine and you can kiss it goodbye.
So my question is, why did Nancy Lanza need this cache of guns?  Especially a semi-automatic rifle?  And around a young man who frequently exhibited signs of social awkardness and possibly a deeper-rooted problem such as a behavioral disorder?
And did Nancy Lanza explain to her son why she had the need for these weapons?  Did she pay attention to the possibility that he might be capable of doing something like this?  Did she try to get him help?
We still don't have all the answers and likely will not for some time.
But you can be vigilant against acts like these.  You don't have to be a parent, teacher, or relative.
All you have do is this:
SOMETHING.
Look at the signs.  Do you see an individual mentioning anything about killing or hurting someone, or many someones, for that matter?
Don't ignore them.
And if you have a kid, don't ignore the signs.  If they won't talk to you, make them talk.  You do this by searching their bedrooms.  Monitor their online activities including emails and social media.  Yes, it's invading their privacy.  But they need to know that privacy is a privilege, not a right.
And if they get confrontational with you, don't be afraid to resort to getting physical with them.
You can put them through college or put them through a wall.  Leave that choice up to them.  After a few times, they'll choose the former.
My kudos to the producers of Saturday Night Live, who last night, opened the show with the New York Children's Chorus singing "Silent Night".  After their performance ended, the screen silently faded to black.  Then the fade reversed with the kids saying in unison "Live from New York, it's Saturday Night!"  The show went on business-as-usual from there.
Thank you, Lorne Michaels.  Above and beyond the call of duty on this one.
Please pause for a moment to think of the families affected by this senseless tragedy this holiday season, as it will not be a Merry Christmas for them.  They will never see this holiday in the same light again and their lives will forever be changed.
And think of yourselves.  How we can be better people and be more proactive in recognizing 'the signs' so that future events like this can be prevented from ever happening again.



NEXT WEEK:  Back on Track

One and Fun

It never ceases to amaze me.
No matter how much our society has progressed, there's still the very vocal minority that insists that it's their way or the highway, because they're the world's foremost authority on everything.
Get Professor Irwin Corey on the phone.  I think he'd have a strong argument for copyright infringement.
I was reading an article in Parenting Magazine a couple weeks ago called "One and Done", taking a closer look at why an increasing number of parents are opting to have an only child.
According to the National Center for Health Statistics, single child families have almost doubled since the 1960s, to about one in five.
One in five.  That's 20 percent.
And I'm proud to say I'm one of them.
But nonetheless, some feel that they have to offer input insofar as having more.
They run the gamut.
"You don't want them growing up spoiled, do you?"  "They need a playmate."  "They'll grow up to be selfish", "They won't be socially adept."
I can disprove every one of these.
Why?  Because I grew up with a brother two and a half years younger than me.  So here's how I can refute all of those claims.
"I know plenty of only children who were not spoiled", "Our daughter has playmates at daycare and goes on playdates".  As for the last two, those were my own handicaps growing up with another sibling in the house, so your so-called theories are bunk.
You can have a house full of kids and they'll grow tired of each other after awhile and want you to play with them.  Even if you adopted their best friend as one of your own, this would still hold true.
My wife and I have had our daughter in daycare since she was about 14 weeks old.  And we haven't regretted it one bit.
I applaud those who have only children.  Because they're most likely letting common sense guide them into a charted path for their child's future and a desire to help them be the most they can be.
Don't get me wrong.  I don't condemn those who choose to have bigger families.  However, I do condemn those who have them for the wrong reasons.
Like sheer vanity.  "I came from a big family, so I want one too."  Ability to financially sustain them be damned...so public assistance (funded by our tax dollars) comes into play here.
Or, if you've had two girls already, "I'm not stopping until I get a son."
I like that one...where it's all about the family name and nothing else.
If you're able to financially (and independently) provide for a large number of children, God bless you for having the talents and the means at hand to do it.  Not everyone has this luxury.
But if you have the means, I hope you have all the love needed for such a large brood.
And a strong eye for the future.
We're facing a crisis in this country.
A broken pension system.  Not enough jobs for those who want them.  Enormous bankruptcy filings by parents who lose their jobs and then their overpriced and underwater homes.  And as technology progresses, those without a strong educational foundation will be left far behind.
No Child Left Behind is one thing.  No Adult Left Behind is another matter altogether.
And speaking of which, take a closer look at that.  What does this country have to offer those we leave behind after we've gone?
Only as much as they themselves have to offer.
And it don't come cheap.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, a middle-class family can expect to pay more than a quarter of million dollars to raise a child to 17 years of age.
We didn't pay that much for our house.
Yeah, it's a lot of money, isn't it?
Now multiply that by the number of children you expect to have.
While, at the same time, planning your own retirement.
Gets tricky, doesn't it?
Did I mention that quarter-million-dollar figure does NOT, repeat, NOT, include a college education?
Your child will need one.  Or at least a substantial trade.
Big families need advance planning.  Lots of it.  Employers don't often pay more money to a prospective employee because they have a lot of kids.  In virtually every case, it has no bearing whatsoever.
It can even be a handicap to some.  Employers may be reluctant to hire someone with a lot of kids because of their obligations to their families.
Oh, and you're probably wondering...what is defined as a 'lot' of kids?
I see it as four or more.
Anyway, some questions to ask yourself when planning for your family:
What kind of house do you want to live in?  Small one or a big one?  More importantly, what kind of house can you afford to live in?  What kind of car will you need?  How much do you plan to spend on groceries each month?  How much will you need for clothes?  Baby needs?  Will you be able to plan your retirement? Is there room for 'little extras'?
It means sacrifice.  Pure and simple.  Giving up for yourself for the sake of your child.  Not everybody can do it...at least willingly.
And the more kids you have, the greater the sacrifices you will need to make.
Putting aside your own needs for theirs.  It takes a lot.  If you can't do this, you're not ready.
My wife and I have one child.  Call us selfish.  Think less of us.  I don't care.
Don't be quick to judge only-child parents as self-indulgent materialists.  It is so not the case.
We prefer to use our resources to give our child the means to a better future.  Being able to afford extracurricular activities such as athletics, music lessons, (and college, that's a given) or the like to help her grow into a successful adult far outweighs a detached emotional need to procreate.
One and Done?
No...I don't think so.
I can still come home from work each night and have just enough energy left to spend on the little moppet clinging to my leg and yelling "DADDY!!!" just before giving her a bath, reading her two stories, and tucking her into bed.
One and Done...or One and FUN?
Definitely the latter.


NEXT WEEK:  So be Good...for Goodness' Sake

The Lighter Side

Our daughter will be four in July.  Since just before her third birthday, she's been afraid of the dark.
The baby monitor, which sufficed while she was still...well, a baby...is no longer doing the job.
It's one of those kind with a built-in night light, by the way.
This isn't doing the job not because it's broken, but something more simple, yet so complex.
It doesn't throw enough light.
She began to insist on sleeping with the lights on.
We ruled out the ceiling fan in her room.  There was no way she was going to get to sleep with that much light being thrown all about.
The compromise was her little lamp on the bookshelf.
I begrudgingly allowed it.
Very begrudgingly, I might add.
I can't force my daughter to sleep in total darkness.  That's just fodder for her to go on a tabloid talk show and talk about her new book that she wrote on how a cruel parent I was.
But I can do this.
Change the size of the light bulb.
I noticed that the lamp had a 40-watt incandescent bulb in it.
So I went to the store the next day and got a 25-watt bulb.
Not too bright, but not too dim, either.
And she didn't appear to notice.
After a couple months of this, I decided to take it a step further.
We went down to a 15-watt bulb.  The dimmest one I was able to find.
This is the kind you usually find in refrigerators and conventional ovens.
Now she did notice this one.
"It's not bright", she complained.
Mmmm...how does one handle this?
Then I remembered what Fred Rogers (yes, THAT Fred Rogers) had to say on the matter many years ago.  Why I remembered it at that precise moment, I'll never know.
I patiently explained to her that a light that was too bright might make it hard for her to sleep at night, and the importance of a good night's sleep.  So that we'd have enough energy to do all the things we want the next day.
"You want to play with the other kids at daycare, don't you?" I said.
She did seem to understand this, albeit with some reluctance.
So she still sleeps with the lamp on, but at 15 watts, we can live with it.
I know many adults who, even in their advancing years, still sleep with a night-light on.
There's no shame in that.
As a parent, I've learned over the past couple years that no matter how 'old school' you are, in many ways, you learn the benefits of compromise.
And the benefits of watching Mister Rogers' Neighborhood as a child.
Though he's been gone for several years now, he won't be forgotten anytime soon.
Because you never know when the spirit of Fred is nearby to help you.
But he was there with me that night.
Thanks, Fred.


NEXT WEEK:  One and Done