An Open Letter to a House Divided
Andrew Malekoff © October 2012
To the Nassau County Legislature and County Executive: I attended every Nassau County legislative meeting since May 2012 when funding cuts to human services were first addressed. I testified at four of the meetings. I presented illustrations of troubled children and working families and asked what the County’s backup plan was to help them after $7.3 million of tax-free, dedicated red-light camera revenues were shifted to the general fund. You offered no answers.
I provided facts and figures about the astronomical cost for incarceration in the Nassau County Correctional Facility and compared it to the relatively modest cost of preventive community-based services. I asked you where the money would come from if more kids are incarcerated or institutionalized as a result of depleted services. You offered no answers.
More than testifying, though, I listened and watched you interacting with one another and the public. To your credit, although you routinely pointed fingers at one another across the aisle, not one of you questioned the value of the services that have been held hostage for almost four months since the red-light camera funds were rescinded. If your sense of duty forbids these devastating cuts to human services, to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, then I ask you to stand by your duty, fearlessly and effectively.
In his Cooper Union address, Lincoln famously declared that, "A house divided against itself cannot stand." We know that he was referring to a troubled nation. And, although what is at stake today is vastly different than what was at stake in 1860, what is unmistakable to me, after attending the legislative meetings, is that Nassau County is a house divided against itself. And what was true 150 years ago is still true today: a house divided against itself cannot stand.
I was invited, as a guest, to a meeting of the Federalist Society in September. Although I am not a member, I was very interested in what the guest speaker, NIFA Director George Marlin, had to say. I was hopeful that his remarks might shed additional light on Nassau County’s draconian cuts to vital human services. I did not expect Mr. Marlin to be sympathetic to youth services, for example, but I thought he might help me to better understand the fiscal context and what it would take for positive change to occur.
I was left with a distinct impression that Mr. Marlin, who described himself as a “street-corner conservative,” was not pleased with the fiscal trajectory of Nassau County. Yet, referring to New York State’s challenges, he lauded Governor Andrew Cuomo’s leadership and ability to find common ground, to work capably with members of both sides of the aisle and to effectively negotiate differences in balancing the state budget.
What a novel idea, I thought: cooperation, negotiation and integrated solutions. I implore you, our Nassau County elected representatives and County Executive, to provide leadership by finding ways to work together for the benefit of all of the people of Nassau County; and, in the process, to find a way to restore the tax-free essential human services funding; and, to do it soon.
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
ASSAULT ON HUMAN SERVICES
Anton Community Newspapers • 132 East 2nd Street • Mineola, NY 11501
ASSAULT ON HUMAN SERVICES
by Andrew Malekoff© September 20, 2012
September 5, 2012 marked two months since 7.3 million dollars, earmarked to support human services, were shifted to the general fund. We were told that this was due to the Nassau County legislature’s failure to pass $41 million in bonding for property tax refunds. But, it is not that simple.
How did all of this get started? In 2009, then-County Executive Tom Suozzi "enlisted" the county's most vulnerable citizens as unpaid lobbyists to advocate for red-light cameras, cigarette taxes and traffic-violation reform. Mr. Suozzi threatened scores of agencies serving tens of thousands of youths and families that they would be closed down or crippled unless the revenue enhancers were passed through Albany.
Red-light camera legislation passed and local agencies were assured, by unanimous vote of the full Nassau County legislature, that related revenues would become a sustainable source funding for these services. Three years later, that agreement is null and void. Our young people are now the collateral damage in a political war over bonding and redistricting.
More than two months have passed since the July 5, 2012 cuts to human services, which included $1.75 million of chemical dependency treatment funding. Despite extensive testimony, protests and media coverage, not a thing has changed. Advocates, young and old, have held press conferences, prayer vigils and a symbolic funeral for youth services. On August 6, several young people and adults attended a legislative meeting symbolically bound, gagged and blindfolded to point out that youth services were being held hostage.
What is the outcome of all of this activity and attention? Democrat and Republican legislators continue to point fingers and holler at one another in front of hundreds of disbelieving youths and family members who have become regular attendees at legislative meetings as well as activists in addressing this issue.
Youth services organizations that depend almost exclusively on County funds will close in a short time. Agencies with more diversified funding may not go out of business, but will have to shutter critical services such as after-school and summer programs as well as suicide, pregnancy, gang and drug-prevention programs that keep kids safe, provide enriching activities and offer a sense of belonging and relationships with caring adults during the non-school hours.
The developmental tasks necessary for adolescents in our culture to become healthy, functioning adults require great effort and time and more than parent and school support alone. These tasks include forging relationships with peers and adults that lead to the achievement of emotional independence from parents, developing a healthy sexual identity, building a capacity for greater intimacy with peers, learning skills and selecting an economic career; also developing a moral value and an ethical system to guide one’s behavior as well as desiring and employing socially responsible behavior.
Adolescence today is an age of particular vulnerability, a time in which youngsters are experiencing the sexual awakenings of puberty earlier than ever while facing increasing social and educational demands, and experimenting with more freedom, autonomy and choice than ever before. The politically-motivated de-funding of youth services is therefore an attack on the family.
Nassau County’s broken promises and its propensity to use vulnerable young people as pawns in promoting partisan political interests represents a moral failing and a lack of leadership. Our elected representatives on both sides of the aisle should be ashamed of themselves for putting our most vulnerable young people in the political crosshairs. Who among them will stand and deliver to put an end to this madness?
**Andrew Malekoff is Executive Director / CEO, North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center
Roslyn Heights, New York 11577 and author of Group Work with Adolescents: Principles and Practice (Guilford Press), now in its second edtion. E-mail: amalekoff@northshorechildguidance.org
Sunday, September 2, 2012
PARENTS, STUDENT ATHLETES AND THE PENN STATE SCANDAL
Parenthood Plus: August 30, 2012
Written by Andrew Malekoff, Executive Director North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center Friday, 31 August 2012 00:00
Parents, Student Athletes And The Penn State Scandal
Bob, my younger brother, was a die-hard Penn State football fan going back to the early 1960s. In later years he became a college coach and athletic director. Presently, he is Chair of the Sports Studies Department at Guilford College. He has written and researched extensively on maximizing the educational value of sports participation for youths, middle and high school, and college athletes. I thought there was no one better to ask about the Penn State mess and what lessons parents could take from it? Here is what he told me:
“For the past few months, we have been inundated with news about what is now commonly known as the ‘Penn State Scandal.’ Although the focus has been on the horrific acts of Jerry Sandusky and decrying the actions – or lack thereof – of Penn State administrators and others, it may be helpful to consider what the parents of young athletes can learn from this tragic affair.
“Many parents have paused and asked themselves, ‘What do I really know about the people coaching my children?’ First, the overwhelming majority of youth and high school coaches are solid citizens who have the best interests of your child in mind. But it would be naïve to think that there are not exceptions. Many states have laws requiring youth sport organizations and public schools to run background checks on coaches. Whether or not this is the case for your community, you can speak to the appropriate authorities about conducting these checks and implementing training programs that address how coaches can help young athletes to have a positive and safe experience.
“Parents need to understand that it is the coach’s job to manage the team and, for the most part, you should not interfere. However, you should be aware of the kind of experience that your child is having and you should feel free to ask questions. We sometimes tend to assign positive personal characteristics to coaches, whether deserved or not. This is particularly so in the case of winning programs; even at youth, and middle and high school levels. But winning championships doesn’t necessarily make someone a good person or role model. And, there is no question that it is difficult to challenge the coach who is competitively successful and has strong support from team parents and in the community. With unconditional support, less sensitive coaches can feel empowered to do as they please, especially if they are oblivious to how youngsters might be adversely impacted by their actions.
“Finally, you should strive to help your children keep sports in perspective. This starts with you, as a parent, doing the same.
“An appropriate level of perspective doesn’t mean that your child should not be competitive or do his or her best to excel on the field or court, or should not show respect for coaches and teammates. It does mean that when faced with a coach who behaves inappropriately or a teammate who bullies other children, your child should be encouraged to share what is going on, as opposed to subscribing to the idea that a good team member never questions a coach’s authority, even if it is used to exploit or harm others.
“The great majority of coaches care deeply about the long-term development of the children under their supervision, but parents of young athletes are wise to bear in mind an adage that was lost on a number of people involved in the Penn State tragedy: ‘Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.’”
Written by Andrew Malekoff, Executive Director North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center Friday, 31 August 2012 00:00
Parents, Student Athletes And The Penn State Scandal
Bob, my younger brother, was a die-hard Penn State football fan going back to the early 1960s. In later years he became a college coach and athletic director. Presently, he is Chair of the Sports Studies Department at Guilford College. He has written and researched extensively on maximizing the educational value of sports participation for youths, middle and high school, and college athletes. I thought there was no one better to ask about the Penn State mess and what lessons parents could take from it? Here is what he told me:
“For the past few months, we have been inundated with news about what is now commonly known as the ‘Penn State Scandal.’ Although the focus has been on the horrific acts of Jerry Sandusky and decrying the actions – or lack thereof – of Penn State administrators and others, it may be helpful to consider what the parents of young athletes can learn from this tragic affair.
“Many parents have paused and asked themselves, ‘What do I really know about the people coaching my children?’ First, the overwhelming majority of youth and high school coaches are solid citizens who have the best interests of your child in mind. But it would be naïve to think that there are not exceptions. Many states have laws requiring youth sport organizations and public schools to run background checks on coaches. Whether or not this is the case for your community, you can speak to the appropriate authorities about conducting these checks and implementing training programs that address how coaches can help young athletes to have a positive and safe experience.
“Parents need to understand that it is the coach’s job to manage the team and, for the most part, you should not interfere. However, you should be aware of the kind of experience that your child is having and you should feel free to ask questions. We sometimes tend to assign positive personal characteristics to coaches, whether deserved or not. This is particularly so in the case of winning programs; even at youth, and middle and high school levels. But winning championships doesn’t necessarily make someone a good person or role model. And, there is no question that it is difficult to challenge the coach who is competitively successful and has strong support from team parents and in the community. With unconditional support, less sensitive coaches can feel empowered to do as they please, especially if they are oblivious to how youngsters might be adversely impacted by their actions.
“Finally, you should strive to help your children keep sports in perspective. This starts with you, as a parent, doing the same.
“An appropriate level of perspective doesn’t mean that your child should not be competitive or do his or her best to excel on the field or court, or should not show respect for coaches and teammates. It does mean that when faced with a coach who behaves inappropriately or a teammate who bullies other children, your child should be encouraged to share what is going on, as opposed to subscribing to the idea that a good team member never questions a coach’s authority, even if it is used to exploit or harm others.
“The great majority of coaches care deeply about the long-term development of the children under their supervision, but parents of young athletes are wise to bear in mind an adage that was lost on a number of people involved in the Penn State tragedy: ‘Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.’”
Friday, August 24, 2012
HATEFUL MESSAGES ADD TO SORROW
HATEFUL MESSAGES ADD TO SORROW
Three children die - and some readers' depraved responses to the tragedy create an evil all their own
by ANDREW MALEKOFF* (originally published on March 3, 2008)
I made a disturbing discovery the Sunday afternoon of Feb. 24 when the murder of three innocent children, the youngest named Innocent, allegedly at the hands of their profoundly troubled mother, was first
reported on Newsday's Web site. Few details were available at the time.
The headline on the Web site read: "Sources: Mom Kills Three Kids in New Cassel." My stomach dropped. I couldn't recall a story quite like this since I moved to Long Island in the late 1970s.
When I scrolled to the end of the story, there was a place to click to "Read all 40 comments." This link, which appears in many online stories in Newsday and other newspapers, takes you to a "Forum," a place for the public to comment.
I clicked into the forum, and amid readers' expressions of shock, dismay, sadness and sympathy, I found a significant stream of depravity. The forum, for the most part, consists of anonymous writers who tag their reflections with a range of nicknames. Here is a sample, exactly as the notes appeared:
Typical wrote: "The savages at it again ... "
The Pusher wrote: "New Cassel should be nuked."
Shoot Me Twice wrote: "The kids didn't put on a convincing performance at the Department of Social Services for mommy to get more free goodies. Maybe Tom Suozzi can use them as extra help at his mansion on the North Shore."
Senseless wrote: "Where O Where could my Daddy be? In jail most probably . . . planning to get out and commit the next robbery."
Booker wrote: ". . . These are unstable people with weak genes, she did society a favor. Animals kill their young when they know they are too weak to make a go of it, why are we so different?"
Comments like these continued throughout the week. On Feb. 27 someone identifying himself as Bruce wrote of the murdered children: "three less drains on society. good riddance."
Sprinkled in were a number of counter-responses like this one by Disgusted, I am sickened by this sad story and sickened again by all of these disgusting comments ... it's really pathetic that some of you have nothing to do but spew hatred."
Sometimes one response would specifically engage another. Right after the children's funerals, I found: Tookie (Huntington Station): "da lil nappi headed **** are in heaven now!"
To which SadSadness AOL responded: ". . . heartless cold person, 3 innocent children were killed regardless of race. If your not feeling sad over this your an evil person. those children did nothing wrong and def did not deserve that, May they Rest in peace respectfully."
It's one of the great benefits of the Internet to offer instant access to news, along with a chance for the audience to instantly share comments about it. But in this situation, even with certain incendiary remarks slapped right down, this seemed like a mixed blessing.
Newsday, like many media sites, has guidelines to try to keep the online conversation civil and constructive. Yet, after reading messages on the murder of three small children, I am discovering feelings of sorrow that I did not think I would ever experience for the mother who is alleged to have carried out the horror of all horrors, killing her own. Strangely, and I am sure unforgivably to some, I find myself feeling more of a human connection to Leatrice Brewer than to Typical, The Pusher, Booker, Shoot Me Twice, Senseless and their gang.
*Andrew Malekoff is executive director of the North Shore Child & Family Guidance Center in Roslyn Heights.
Newsday link to article: http://www.newsday.com/opinion/hateful-messages-add-to-sorrow-1.597624
Sunday, August 5, 2012
SAVE OUR SERVICES
SAVE OUR SERVICES
The Olympic games in London have inspired us with the fetes of 15-year-old swimming sensation Katie Ledecky and the diminutive dynamo of gymnastics, 17-year-old Gaby Douglas. At the same time, in Nassau County, there is a game of political cat-and-mouse being played by our elected officials who have put tens of thousands of vulnerable young people in the legislative crosshairs.
The July 6th funding cuts to essential human services provide a chilling insight into the insidious nature of Nassau County politics. The Democratic minority on the Nassau County Legislature chose not to authorize $41 million in borrowing for tax refunds. Republicans claim that the democrats are withholding their votes as a ploy to get new election districts redrawn. Democrats state that the funding cut is a policy decision by Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano.
In an attempt to draw wider attention about the impact of the budget cuts, STRONG Youth, Inc., a gang-prevention program in Hempstead that lost all of its county funding, staged a symbolic funeral for youth services at the Hempstead Pentecostal Church on August 2nd. I attended the funeral and participated in the processional motorcade led by two hearses that traveled past the legislative building in Mineola and concluded in a press conference on the steps of the Supreme Court.
Some critics accused STRONG of being too extreme. Others called the symbolic funeral disrespectful of the dead. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The funeral, procession and press conference were impeccably organized in less than a week by STRONG social workers and volunteers, young and old, who galvanized a complex network of children, teenagers, parents (including parents of murdered children), crime victims, clergy, colleagues, community leaders and local businesses.
The only thing extreme about the “funeral” was in the exceptional orchestration and staging of an event aimed at exposing the gap between what we know and what we are told by government officials. The skills used to organize this event are the same ones that are used by professional social workers to develop and implement an exemplary gang prevention program that aims to engage young people to become successful students and active citizens in community affairs. Nassau County should not be eliminating programs like STRONG, they should be celebrating and promoting it as a best practice in gang prevention.
One of the speakers at the press conference was a young woman, Amory Sepúlveda, who testified, “When I was 19-years-old I was the innocent victim of a drive-by shooting that resulted in [my] never being able to walk again. I was hurt physically, emotionally and thought my life was over. With the help of county youth services I am now a college graduate in pursuit of a master’s degree [in social work]. I’ve shared my story, changing the lives of thousands of youth in Nassau County.”
The shame of Nassau County and its loss of humanity are evident in our elected representatives’ failure to value, respect, uplift, defend and safeguard all of the County's children when having the power to do so. Our elected officials have demonstrated, notwithstanding their ever-present availability for photo ops designed to depict a contrary impression, that they have little respect for our most vulnerable citizens.
When our elected representatives implement politically-motivated cost cutting they miss the human toll and they miss the fiscal consequences of their decisions. Our elected representatives miss that they are cutting cost-effective services that keep people out of jail, emergency rooms and costly psychiatric institutions.
During harsh economic times when all of our best efforts are needed to preserve families and save lives, the recent cuts to human services will not only destroy families but increase the long term burden to the taxpayer. And, it will bear an even greater cost in lives lost, kids plucked from their homes and families splintered and destroyed.
Andrew Malekoff, Long Beach
The author is executive director of North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center in Roslyn Heights.
The Olympic games in London have inspired us with the fetes of 15-year-old swimming sensation Katie Ledecky and the diminutive dynamo of gymnastics, 17-year-old Gaby Douglas. At the same time, in Nassau County, there is a game of political cat-and-mouse being played by our elected officials who have put tens of thousands of vulnerable young people in the legislative crosshairs.
The July 6th funding cuts to essential human services provide a chilling insight into the insidious nature of Nassau County politics. The Democratic minority on the Nassau County Legislature chose not to authorize $41 million in borrowing for tax refunds. Republicans claim that the democrats are withholding their votes as a ploy to get new election districts redrawn. Democrats state that the funding cut is a policy decision by Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano.
In an attempt to draw wider attention about the impact of the budget cuts, STRONG Youth, Inc., a gang-prevention program in Hempstead that lost all of its county funding, staged a symbolic funeral for youth services at the Hempstead Pentecostal Church on August 2nd. I attended the funeral and participated in the processional motorcade led by two hearses that traveled past the legislative building in Mineola and concluded in a press conference on the steps of the Supreme Court.
Some critics accused STRONG of being too extreme. Others called the symbolic funeral disrespectful of the dead. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The funeral, procession and press conference were impeccably organized in less than a week by STRONG social workers and volunteers, young and old, who galvanized a complex network of children, teenagers, parents (including parents of murdered children), crime victims, clergy, colleagues, community leaders and local businesses.
The only thing extreme about the “funeral” was in the exceptional orchestration and staging of an event aimed at exposing the gap between what we know and what we are told by government officials. The skills used to organize this event are the same ones that are used by professional social workers to develop and implement an exemplary gang prevention program that aims to engage young people to become successful students and active citizens in community affairs. Nassau County should not be eliminating programs like STRONG, they should be celebrating and promoting it as a best practice in gang prevention.
One of the speakers at the press conference was a young woman, Amory Sepúlveda, who testified, “When I was 19-years-old I was the innocent victim of a drive-by shooting that resulted in [my] never being able to walk again. I was hurt physically, emotionally and thought my life was over. With the help of county youth services I am now a college graduate in pursuit of a master’s degree [in social work]. I’ve shared my story, changing the lives of thousands of youth in Nassau County.”
The shame of Nassau County and its loss of humanity are evident in our elected representatives’ failure to value, respect, uplift, defend and safeguard all of the County's children when having the power to do so. Our elected officials have demonstrated, notwithstanding their ever-present availability for photo ops designed to depict a contrary impression, that they have little respect for our most vulnerable citizens.
When our elected representatives implement politically-motivated cost cutting they miss the human toll and they miss the fiscal consequences of their decisions. Our elected representatives miss that they are cutting cost-effective services that keep people out of jail, emergency rooms and costly psychiatric institutions.
During harsh economic times when all of our best efforts are needed to preserve families and save lives, the recent cuts to human services will not only destroy families but increase the long term burden to the taxpayer. And, it will bear an even greater cost in lives lost, kids plucked from their homes and families splintered and destroyed.
Andrew Malekoff, Long Beach
The author is executive director of North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center in Roslyn Heights.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH
Andrew Malekoff
Submitted to Long Island Newsday on July 16, 2012
The recent spate of politically-motivated funding cuts to essential human services and the ritual recruitment of our neediest citizens as unpaid lobbyists offers a chilling insight into how far Nassau County leadership has fallen.
The Democratic minority on the Nassau County Legislature voted four times against authorizing $41 million in borrowing for tax refunds. Republicans claimed that the Democrats are using their voting leverage to get new election districts redrawn. Democrats asserted that the cuts represented a policy decision by Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano.
In 2009, then-County Executive Tom Suozzi, whose motto for human services was "No Wrong Door," cut funding from 43 agencies serving over 60,000 people. In so doing, he "enlisted" the county's most vulnerable citizens to become his unpaid lobbyists to advocate for red-light cameras, cigarette taxes and traffic violation reform.
Red-light camera legislation was approved in Albany and local agencies were given bi-partisan assurance of restored and sustainable funding. That “reserved” fund was taken off the table by County Executive Ed Mangano as a consequence of the county legislature’s failure to pass the bonding.
When our elected representatives implement politically-motivated cost cutting they demonstrate a loss of empathy. What’s worse, is that they lose all reason. They miss the human toll and they miss the fiscal consequences of their decisions. They are relegated to finger-pointing, tantruming two-year olds hell-bent on getting what they want at any cost.
Our elected representatives miss that they are cutting cost-effective services that keep people out of jail, emergency rooms and costly addictions and mental health institutions. They discount the lives that will be saved by preventing suicide and drug overdoses. They ignore the human and fiscal benefits that quality services bring in effectively addressing homelessness, hunger, runaways, gangs, unemployment, family crises, eating disorders, sexual abuse, teen pregnancy and much more.
Our elected officials have demonstrated, notwithstanding their ever-present availability for photo ops designed to depict a contrary impression, that they have little respect for our most vulnerable citizens. Too harsh an assessment? Let’s face it, behavior talks.
Our services are referred to as “discretionary,” connoting that they are dispensable; which, we have learned, they surely are. We are reminded of this on a regular basis when our funds are slashed and our people are taken hostage to lobby for bonding or red-light cameras and, I am sure, in time, for gambling.
Moody’s Investors Service offers an opinion about the county’s general creditworthiness, or expected loss. I wonder how Nassau County would stack up if there was Moody’s Vulnerable Citizens Service that judged how we treat our most at-risk teenagers or seniors.
During harsh economic times when all of our best efforts are needed to preserve families, the recent cuts to human services will increase the long term burden to the taxpayer. And, it will bear an even greater cost in lives lost, kids plucked from their homes and families splintered and destroyed.
It is time for the people who we elected to represent us to get real.
Andrew Malekoff
Mr. Malekoff is executive director and chief executive for North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center in Roslyn Heights, New York
Andrew Malekoff
Submitted to Long Island Newsday on July 16, 2012
The recent spate of politically-motivated funding cuts to essential human services and the ritual recruitment of our neediest citizens as unpaid lobbyists offers a chilling insight into how far Nassau County leadership has fallen.
The Democratic minority on the Nassau County Legislature voted four times against authorizing $41 million in borrowing for tax refunds. Republicans claimed that the Democrats are using their voting leverage to get new election districts redrawn. Democrats asserted that the cuts represented a policy decision by Nassau County Executive Edward Mangano.
In 2009, then-County Executive Tom Suozzi, whose motto for human services was "No Wrong Door," cut funding from 43 agencies serving over 60,000 people. In so doing, he "enlisted" the county's most vulnerable citizens to become his unpaid lobbyists to advocate for red-light cameras, cigarette taxes and traffic violation reform.
Red-light camera legislation was approved in Albany and local agencies were given bi-partisan assurance of restored and sustainable funding. That “reserved” fund was taken off the table by County Executive Ed Mangano as a consequence of the county legislature’s failure to pass the bonding.
When our elected representatives implement politically-motivated cost cutting they demonstrate a loss of empathy. What’s worse, is that they lose all reason. They miss the human toll and they miss the fiscal consequences of their decisions. They are relegated to finger-pointing, tantruming two-year olds hell-bent on getting what they want at any cost.
Our elected representatives miss that they are cutting cost-effective services that keep people out of jail, emergency rooms and costly addictions and mental health institutions. They discount the lives that will be saved by preventing suicide and drug overdoses. They ignore the human and fiscal benefits that quality services bring in effectively addressing homelessness, hunger, runaways, gangs, unemployment, family crises, eating disorders, sexual abuse, teen pregnancy and much more.
Our elected officials have demonstrated, notwithstanding their ever-present availability for photo ops designed to depict a contrary impression, that they have little respect for our most vulnerable citizens. Too harsh an assessment? Let’s face it, behavior talks.
Our services are referred to as “discretionary,” connoting that they are dispensable; which, we have learned, they surely are. We are reminded of this on a regular basis when our funds are slashed and our people are taken hostage to lobby for bonding or red-light cameras and, I am sure, in time, for gambling.
Moody’s Investors Service offers an opinion about the county’s general creditworthiness, or expected loss. I wonder how Nassau County would stack up if there was Moody’s Vulnerable Citizens Service that judged how we treat our most at-risk teenagers or seniors.
During harsh economic times when all of our best efforts are needed to preserve families, the recent cuts to human services will increase the long term burden to the taxpayer. And, it will bear an even greater cost in lives lost, kids plucked from their homes and families splintered and destroyed.
It is time for the people who we elected to represent us to get real.
Andrew Malekoff
Mr. Malekoff is executive director and chief executive for North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center in Roslyn Heights, New York
Thursday, June 7, 2012
When Parents Drink and Drug
Anton Community Newspapers •
132 East 2nd StreetMineola , NY 11501
132 East 2nd Street
When Parents Drink and Drug
by Andrew Malekoff © advance proof June 2012
The problematic use of alcohol, drugs and tobacco is unquestionably the nation’s number one health problem. While all segments of society are affected, the future of young people is most severely compromised by this epidemic.
There has been increased media exposure and public education on the rise of young people’s abuse of pharmaceuticals – prescription drugs – that often leads to heroin use and addiction.
Parents have been alerted to the fact that the most likely source of prescription drugs is the medicine cabinets of friends and family, where the pharmaceuticals can be easily attained at no cost; and, that the cost for a bag of heroin is less than that for a six-pack of beer.
Despite enhanced media coverage on these drugs, what the public hardly hears about anymore is the fact that there are millions of children who grow up in homes with parents who are addicted to alcohol and other drugs.
It has been estimated that approximately one in four children in the US
Children who grow up in families with alcohol and drug addiction learn to distrust to survive. They learn how to walk on eggshells. The behavior and attitude of the addict and the related emotional tone in the home is a day-to-day mystery. When unpredictability dominates a child’s life, they are likely to be perpetually wary, always sensing disappointment or danger lurking nearby.
Children who grow up in addicted families become uncomfortably accustomed to living with chaos, uncertainty, unpredictability and inconsistency. These children have no idea what is normal. They live vastly different internal lives than their peers from homes where coping with addiction in the family is not a daily challenge.
Denial and secrecy are common for children who live in alcoholic or addicted families. Their lives are organized around concealing the truth. Asking for help is out of the question as that would trigger exposure to the outside world, disloyalty inside the family and it would evoke intense feelings of embarrassment and shame.
In an addicted family there is an ongoing and, most often, unspoken agreement to hide the problem to prevent exposure that will erode the image of a “perfect family.” Children may avoid bringing friends home and cringe at the thought of having the family secret revealed. Their own needs and desires take a back seat to fronting for their family and preserving the image that belies the reality.
It is hard to be a child in an alcoholic or addicted family. It takes a lot of energy just to get through the day. Growing up in such a family leaves children with little hope that things will ever change. Children who live in these homes often feel trapped, depressed, alone and desperate.
There are no simple answers, but there is help. Family members, friends, pediatricians and school personnel who are attuned to this problem can help to break the conspiracy of silence. Understanding the barriers, gently inviting trust and seeking professional support is the first step to overcome the problems involved. If you need guidance about how to proceed, call Tyrone Anthony , coordinator of chemical dependency services at the Leeds Place, a branch of North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center
Andrew Malekoff is Executive Director, North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center, Roslyn Heights, New York 11577
amalekoff@northshorechildguidance.org
Andrew Malekoff is Executive Director, North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center, Roslyn Heights, New York 11577
amalekoff@northshorechildguidance.org
Friday, May 4, 2012
HUMAN SERVICES HUNGER GAMES
Human Services Hunger Games
by Andrew Malekoff © 2012
I am gradually losing step with the pop culture juggernaut. By the way, juggernaut refers to a relentless force, movement or object that trounces whatever is in its path. The term originated from the Unstoppable Juggernaut, a fictional character who first appeared in Marvel Comics’ X-Men. I share this only to establish that I do have some pop culture street- cred.
Nevertheless, I thought Hunger Games was an eating competition until I discovered that it was a post-apocalyptic science fiction novel written by Suzanne Collins. The book features 16-year-old Katniss Everdeen who volunteers to take her younger sister Prim’s place, after Prim is chosen by lottery to participate in a government-mandated, nationally-broadcast, fight-to-the-death battle among 24 teens and pre-teen “tributes” living in 12 districts of the nation of Panem. The goal of the games is to be the last one standing.
I read Hunger Games with a dual consciousness. I was absorbed in the fabulous and chilling story and I was tuned in to the story as a metaphor. The last-man-standing theme reminded me of the struggle for survival that community-based mental health agencies in Nassau County face. I have addressed this extensively in my published commentary and testimony before legislative bodies for years. For instance, in a 2009 piece that appeared in the Albany Times Union I wrote, “More low- and middle-income families than ever are in need of low-cost, high-quality community-based mental health care. Yet, the state Office of Mental Health, along with the state Health Department, is aggressively pursuing a "reform" plan that will assure continued access to care only to children and families with Medicaid fee-for-service insurance coverage. This will leave a significant number of children and adults in the lurch.”
Just to show that I wasn’t “blowing smoke,” if you fast-forward to 2012 you will find that there are community-based outpatient mental health providers in our backyard that closed their doors, were taken over by larger corporate entities with no community roots, transformed their operations into per diem factories with little capacity for dealing with complex or crisis situations or restricted their clientele to a residual population of Medicaid-insurance carriers.
Others are working diligently to preserve the integrity, character and culture of non-restrictive, universal community-based care. When our children, and their families, face the worst of times they need a place to go that is easily accessible and available to respond to emergencies, offers a continuum of care and feels like home and not like a factory.
For many community-based mental health centers, from a family’s first contact to their last, the work requires collaboration, most of which is not fee-producing, with a variety of service providers. Hours are spent with school personnel, hospital-discharge staff, probation officers, preventive workers, case managers, family advocates and child-protective service workers, to name a few.
The children at highest risk need a continuum of outpatient-based triage and emergency services that allow for seamless, timely and successful discharges from hospital to community. Experience has shown that hospitals will often not discharge children to private practitioners. Families, particularly those with children who have serious emotional disturbances or are in psychiatric crisis, require more assistance than can be provided by private practitioners.
To continue to provide these vital services and keep children from needing higher and costlier levels of care, many local agencies have been making every effort to streamline service delivery while maintaining the best standards of care.
Although it is an uphill battle, it is a fight that we must continue and, hopefully, with a different outcome than the Hunger Games; one where we all remain standing and the character and culture of true community-based mental health centers remains strong.
Published on May 31, 2012 in the Anton News chain of 18 Long Island newpapers.
by Andrew Malekoff © 2012
I am gradually losing step with the pop culture juggernaut. By the way, juggernaut refers to a relentless force, movement or object that trounces whatever is in its path. The term originated from the Unstoppable Juggernaut, a fictional character who first appeared in Marvel Comics’ X-Men. I share this only to establish that I do have some pop culture street- cred.
Nevertheless, I thought Hunger Games was an eating competition until I discovered that it was a post-apocalyptic science fiction novel written by Suzanne Collins. The book features 16-year-old Katniss Everdeen who volunteers to take her younger sister Prim’s place, after Prim is chosen by lottery to participate in a government-mandated, nationally-broadcast, fight-to-the-death battle among 24 teens and pre-teen “tributes” living in 12 districts of the nation of Panem. The goal of the games is to be the last one standing.
I read Hunger Games with a dual consciousness. I was absorbed in the fabulous and chilling story and I was tuned in to the story as a metaphor. The last-man-standing theme reminded me of the struggle for survival that community-based mental health agencies in Nassau County face. I have addressed this extensively in my published commentary and testimony before legislative bodies for years. For instance, in a 2009 piece that appeared in the Albany Times Union I wrote, “More low- and middle-income families than ever are in need of low-cost, high-quality community-based mental health care. Yet, the state Office of Mental Health, along with the state Health Department, is aggressively pursuing a "reform" plan that will assure continued access to care only to children and families with Medicaid fee-for-service insurance coverage. This will leave a significant number of children and adults in the lurch.”
Just to show that I wasn’t “blowing smoke,” if you fast-forward to 2012 you will find that there are community-based outpatient mental health providers in our backyard that closed their doors, were taken over by larger corporate entities with no community roots, transformed their operations into per diem factories with little capacity for dealing with complex or crisis situations or restricted their clientele to a residual population of Medicaid-insurance carriers.
Others are working diligently to preserve the integrity, character and culture of non-restrictive, universal community-based care. When our children, and their families, face the worst of times they need a place to go that is easily accessible and available to respond to emergencies, offers a continuum of care and feels like home and not like a factory.
For many community-based mental health centers, from a family’s first contact to their last, the work requires collaboration, most of which is not fee-producing, with a variety of service providers. Hours are spent with school personnel, hospital-discharge staff, probation officers, preventive workers, case managers, family advocates and child-protective service workers, to name a few.
The children at highest risk need a continuum of outpatient-based triage and emergency services that allow for seamless, timely and successful discharges from hospital to community. Experience has shown that hospitals will often not discharge children to private practitioners. Families, particularly those with children who have serious emotional disturbances or are in psychiatric crisis, require more assistance than can be provided by private practitioners.
To continue to provide these vital services and keep children from needing higher and costlier levels of care, many local agencies have been making every effort to streamline service delivery while maintaining the best standards of care.
Although it is an uphill battle, it is a fight that we must continue and, hopefully, with a different outcome than the Hunger Games; one where we all remain standing and the character and culture of true community-based mental health centers remains strong.
Published on May 31, 2012 in the Anton News chain of 18 Long Island newpapers.
Sunday, April 29, 2012
A CINEMATIC TAKE ON BULLY CULTURE
A Cinematic Take On Bully Culture
By Andrew Malekoff, April 27, 2012
Like many film-goers I have my list of favorites. Some are hilarious (Airplane), some are gripping (Wages of Fear), some are masterpieces (Godfather) and some are timeless classics (Wizard of Oz). And, then there are those that are so haunting that I cannot seem to shake loose of them. The darkly disturbing 2009 Austrian-German film, The White Ribbon, is one of the more haunting ones. Filmed beautifully in black and white with subtitles,
The White Ribbon portrays the residents of a northern German village, dominated by a baron, sometime before World War I. Inhabitants of this village appear to be sliding down a slippery slope of moral depravity. Men in positions of power - a doctor and a clergyman, for example – routinely mistreat women and children. Among the most brutal scenes is one where the town’s widowed physician verbally degrades a kind woman who had faithfully served as his caretaker and mistress.
Although it is only suggested, a number of the older children appear to have perpetrated despicable acts. Crops are destroyed, animals are killed, adults are injured and children are abused, including a child with Down syndrome. We bring our own meanings to films and modify our interpretations as time passes. After I thought about The White Ribbon for a while, I came to the conclusion that it contained a strong message about the devastating consequences that a culture of bullying can bring about.
Sometime after viewing the film, I thought more deeply about the children living in that German village. I realized that they would soon become young adults during the rise of Hitler. These children lived in an incubator in which the cruelty that they experienced, they perpetrated against unsuspecting and helpless victims. Their circumstances were such that they appeared to have been unwittingly primed to perpetrate the atrocities that would come to characterize the Third Reich.
In his 2009 commentary on the White Ribbon, for the San Francisco Chronicle, film reviewer Mike Lasalle noted that the idea of the film was “that the parenting and education German children received in the early years of the 20th century made them morally susceptible to Nazism…No child is trained to become a martinet, and no one says anything about a master race. Rather, the kids, from their elders, get quiet lessons in moral absolutism, sternness, emotional violence and heartlessness.”
Seeing this film led me to wonder about the early years of the 21st century when bullying has become such a prominent thread in the fabric of our culture. And the Internet and all of its gadgets have become the tools with which people of all ages systematically degrade others. But tools are tools. A hammer can be used to build a house or to crush someone’s skull. The Internet and modern technology are not inherently evil, but are tools that can be utilized for evil ends.
Although I do not know the answers to some of the questions that The White Ribbon has posed to me; the film, coupled with an acute awareness of the times we live in, brought these disturbing questions to mind: Have our children become susceptible to something ominous that we cannot yet fathom? If so, what is driving them? And, what are the times we are living in a prequel for?
This column first appeared in the Anton News, a chain of 18 Long Island, NY newpapers.
By Andrew Malekoff, April 27, 2012
Like many film-goers I have my list of favorites. Some are hilarious (Airplane), some are gripping (Wages of Fear), some are masterpieces (Godfather) and some are timeless classics (Wizard of Oz). And, then there are those that are so haunting that I cannot seem to shake loose of them. The darkly disturbing 2009 Austrian-German film, The White Ribbon, is one of the more haunting ones. Filmed beautifully in black and white with subtitles,
The White Ribbon portrays the residents of a northern German village, dominated by a baron, sometime before World War I. Inhabitants of this village appear to be sliding down a slippery slope of moral depravity. Men in positions of power - a doctor and a clergyman, for example – routinely mistreat women and children. Among the most brutal scenes is one where the town’s widowed physician verbally degrades a kind woman who had faithfully served as his caretaker and mistress.
Although it is only suggested, a number of the older children appear to have perpetrated despicable acts. Crops are destroyed, animals are killed, adults are injured and children are abused, including a child with Down syndrome. We bring our own meanings to films and modify our interpretations as time passes. After I thought about The White Ribbon for a while, I came to the conclusion that it contained a strong message about the devastating consequences that a culture of bullying can bring about.
Sometime after viewing the film, I thought more deeply about the children living in that German village. I realized that they would soon become young adults during the rise of Hitler. These children lived in an incubator in which the cruelty that they experienced, they perpetrated against unsuspecting and helpless victims. Their circumstances were such that they appeared to have been unwittingly primed to perpetrate the atrocities that would come to characterize the Third Reich.
In his 2009 commentary on the White Ribbon, for the San Francisco Chronicle, film reviewer Mike Lasalle noted that the idea of the film was “that the parenting and education German children received in the early years of the 20th century made them morally susceptible to Nazism…No child is trained to become a martinet, and no one says anything about a master race. Rather, the kids, from their elders, get quiet lessons in moral absolutism, sternness, emotional violence and heartlessness.”
Seeing this film led me to wonder about the early years of the 21st century when bullying has become such a prominent thread in the fabric of our culture. And the Internet and all of its gadgets have become the tools with which people of all ages systematically degrade others. But tools are tools. A hammer can be used to build a house or to crush someone’s skull. The Internet and modern technology are not inherently evil, but are tools that can be utilized for evil ends.
Although I do not know the answers to some of the questions that The White Ribbon has posed to me; the film, coupled with an acute awareness of the times we live in, brought these disturbing questions to mind: Have our children become susceptible to something ominous that we cannot yet fathom? If so, what is driving them? And, what are the times we are living in a prequel for?
This column first appeared in the Anton News, a chain of 18 Long Island, NY newpapers.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
"TODAY'S WORK AT YESTERDAY'S PRICES"
“Today’s work at yesterday’s prices”
by Andrew Malekoff © 2012
One of the oldest, largest and most well-respected community-based human service agencies closed on January 27, 2012. Some 300 employees at Chicago’s Jane Addams Hull House Association were handed layoff notices and final paychecks and were notified of the immediate discontinuation of their health care benefits. This is a tragedy and an ominous sign.
Hull House was founded in 1889 by social worker and Nobel Peace Prize winner Jane Addams and her lifetime friend and community-activist Ellen Gates Starr. Hull House began as a home for disenfranchised citizens. The organization’s mission was “neighbors helping neighbors.” In its early years Hull House was organized to help immigrants to learn English and the principles of democratic citizenship and to improve the lives and working conditions of many of those living on the west side of Chicago. In recent years Hull House’s focus was on foster care, child care, domestic violence counseling and job training.
Hull House was a beacon for social justice. It was guided by three basic principles: (1) active and side-by-side participation with community residents in addressing local issues, (2) respect for the dignity of all individuals regardless of ethnic background, socioeconomic status, gender or age and (3) belief that poverty and lack of opportunity breed ignorance, crime and disease that are the result of financial desperation and not due to a flaw in moral character.
Hull House’s demise was the result of its over-reliance on government financing. Margaret Berglind, president of Child Care Association of Illinois, commented that “The government is asking you to do today's work at yesterday's prices." I agree.
At North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center we have not seen an increase in our government contracts for a quarter-of-a-century. We are not alone. As with Jane Addams over 100 years ago, we depend on private citizens to invest in our mission - to restore and strengthen the emotional well-being of children and families. Our donors understand what is at stake. They are more than do-gooders, despite the good that they do. They understand that what we do is cost effective, saving tens of millions of taxpayer dollars by keeping troubled young people at home and out of emergency rooms and costly institutional settings.
I have reported extensively on what I believed would be the devastating outcome of New York State’s plan to restructure the financing of outpatient community-based mental health centers. Although I agreed that the over-reliance on Medicaid financing had to change, I strongly disagreed with the planners’ neglecting to provide reasonable local assistance for underinsured middle class and working poor children. State officials told me that that these families could seek help privately. My argument, based on first-hand experience, was that private practitioners would turn away troubled children that only a community-based agency had the culture, resources and wherewithal to serve effectively.
We are beginning to see the consequences of clinic reform on Long Island. In recent years several major community-based mental health clinics have either closed their doors, been taken over by New York City-based conglomerates with no community roots or transformed their outpatient operations into per-diem factories with no salaried employees. Much of this has happened under the radar.
Was it the intention of the New York State Office of Mental Health to shrink the system of care? Although it is not their job to keep providers in business, it is their responsibility to ensure ample access and consumer choice and to make sure our most vulnerable citizens - our children - get care, regardless of their family's economic status.
I am certain that Jane Addams would have agreed.
To be published in the Anton chain of 18 Long Island, NY newspapers in February 2012.
by Andrew Malekoff © 2012
One of the oldest, largest and most well-respected community-based human service agencies closed on January 27, 2012. Some 300 employees at Chicago’s Jane Addams Hull House Association were handed layoff notices and final paychecks and were notified of the immediate discontinuation of their health care benefits. This is a tragedy and an ominous sign.
Hull House was founded in 1889 by social worker and Nobel Peace Prize winner Jane Addams and her lifetime friend and community-activist Ellen Gates Starr. Hull House began as a home for disenfranchised citizens. The organization’s mission was “neighbors helping neighbors.” In its early years Hull House was organized to help immigrants to learn English and the principles of democratic citizenship and to improve the lives and working conditions of many of those living on the west side of Chicago. In recent years Hull House’s focus was on foster care, child care, domestic violence counseling and job training.
Hull House was a beacon for social justice. It was guided by three basic principles: (1) active and side-by-side participation with community residents in addressing local issues, (2) respect for the dignity of all individuals regardless of ethnic background, socioeconomic status, gender or age and (3) belief that poverty and lack of opportunity breed ignorance, crime and disease that are the result of financial desperation and not due to a flaw in moral character.
Hull House’s demise was the result of its over-reliance on government financing. Margaret Berglind, president of Child Care Association of Illinois, commented that “The government is asking you to do today's work at yesterday's prices." I agree.
At North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center we have not seen an increase in our government contracts for a quarter-of-a-century. We are not alone. As with Jane Addams over 100 years ago, we depend on private citizens to invest in our mission - to restore and strengthen the emotional well-being of children and families. Our donors understand what is at stake. They are more than do-gooders, despite the good that they do. They understand that what we do is cost effective, saving tens of millions of taxpayer dollars by keeping troubled young people at home and out of emergency rooms and costly institutional settings.
I have reported extensively on what I believed would be the devastating outcome of New York State’s plan to restructure the financing of outpatient community-based mental health centers. Although I agreed that the over-reliance on Medicaid financing had to change, I strongly disagreed with the planners’ neglecting to provide reasonable local assistance for underinsured middle class and working poor children. State officials told me that that these families could seek help privately. My argument, based on first-hand experience, was that private practitioners would turn away troubled children that only a community-based agency had the culture, resources and wherewithal to serve effectively.
We are beginning to see the consequences of clinic reform on Long Island. In recent years several major community-based mental health clinics have either closed their doors, been taken over by New York City-based conglomerates with no community roots or transformed their outpatient operations into per-diem factories with no salaried employees. Much of this has happened under the radar.
Was it the intention of the New York State Office of Mental Health to shrink the system of care? Although it is not their job to keep providers in business, it is their responsibility to ensure ample access and consumer choice and to make sure our most vulnerable citizens - our children - get care, regardless of their family's economic status.
I am certain that Jane Addams would have agreed.
To be published in the Anton chain of 18 Long Island, NY newspapers in February 2012.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
OCCUPY THE BOYS' ROOM
OCCUPY THE BOYS’ ROOM
By Andrew Malekoff © 2012
The “Occupy Movement” has been greeted with mixed sentiment ranging from admiration to revulsion. On the plus side, the movement shows young people that folks of any age can come together around their own vision of the world they want. However, one does not have to attain revolutionary goals to work toward social change, as I learned some years ago when I was working with a group of troubled boys.
At the time, I was involved in developing an innovative school-based mental health program. I was filling in at the school, for a few weeks, for one of the social workers who had taken a leave. I agreed to work with her boys’ group. The boys in the group were teenagers with significant emotional difficulties, ranging from depression to explosive behavior.
In my first meeting with the boys, the discussion took an interesting turn. They complained that there were no doors on the boys’ bathroom stalls and that there was yellow soap in the dispensers. It was a bit of a detour, but I encouraged them to say more about their objections.
As I recall, Keith was the first to speak out: “Do you think they have any idea how humiliating it is to go to the bathroom with no doors on the stalls? There’s no privacy; it’s embarrassing. It’s like they don’t trust us; they’re treating us like little boys.”
Sam added, “It’s disrespectful, that’s what it is – it’s disrespectful.”
And then Kurt, getting back to basics, pointed out, “Man, it’s a lot of pressure when you gotta go badly and you know you can’t.”
Benji added “It says ‘Boys’ Room’ on the bathroom door! We’re men! Dammit! What kind of crap is this anyway!”
A little later, another group member, Rob, asked the others if it was true that kids peed into the soap dispenser. Jay said that he saw someone do it but no one could really tell until it was too late because the soap was yellow. To which one of the group members declared, “We have to get them to put pink soap in the dispensers! Then we’ll know if anyone pees in there. Then we’ll know.”
Being heard and really listened to was a rare experience for the dozen boys who comprised the group. They knew about what being misunderstood, rejected and isolated was all about; but not in this group where they felt connected to one another. They were angry and united – outraged.
In time their social worker rejoined the group. I filled her in about the boys’ quest for improved bathroom conditions. She then guided them to develop a list of bathroom improvements that would be presented to the principal. She led them through an exercise in which they rehearsed presenting their grievances. Then she urged them to request a meeting with the principal to present their case.
Many weeks later, I came to the high school after the dismissal hour and headed down a long vacant hallway to attend an administrative meeting. I pushed open the “Boys’ Room” door and was pleasantly surprised to find pink soap in the dispensers and doors on the stalls.
This story affirms that, working towards change does not require revolutionary goals. Supporting young people in taking action against social injustices – big and small – is a great way to help them to think critically, take a stand and prepare to become active citizens in community affairs.
To be published in the Long Island, NY Anton chain of 18 newspapers in March 2012.
By Andrew Malekoff © 2012
The “Occupy Movement” has been greeted with mixed sentiment ranging from admiration to revulsion. On the plus side, the movement shows young people that folks of any age can come together around their own vision of the world they want. However, one does not have to attain revolutionary goals to work toward social change, as I learned some years ago when I was working with a group of troubled boys.
At the time, I was involved in developing an innovative school-based mental health program. I was filling in at the school, for a few weeks, for one of the social workers who had taken a leave. I agreed to work with her boys’ group. The boys in the group were teenagers with significant emotional difficulties, ranging from depression to explosive behavior.
In my first meeting with the boys, the discussion took an interesting turn. They complained that there were no doors on the boys’ bathroom stalls and that there was yellow soap in the dispensers. It was a bit of a detour, but I encouraged them to say more about their objections.
As I recall, Keith was the first to speak out: “Do you think they have any idea how humiliating it is to go to the bathroom with no doors on the stalls? There’s no privacy; it’s embarrassing. It’s like they don’t trust us; they’re treating us like little boys.”
Sam added, “It’s disrespectful, that’s what it is – it’s disrespectful.”
And then Kurt, getting back to basics, pointed out, “Man, it’s a lot of pressure when you gotta go badly and you know you can’t.”
Benji added “It says ‘Boys’ Room’ on the bathroom door! We’re men! Dammit! What kind of crap is this anyway!”
A little later, another group member, Rob, asked the others if it was true that kids peed into the soap dispenser. Jay said that he saw someone do it but no one could really tell until it was too late because the soap was yellow. To which one of the group members declared, “We have to get them to put pink soap in the dispensers! Then we’ll know if anyone pees in there. Then we’ll know.”
Being heard and really listened to was a rare experience for the dozen boys who comprised the group. They knew about what being misunderstood, rejected and isolated was all about; but not in this group where they felt connected to one another. They were angry and united – outraged.
In time their social worker rejoined the group. I filled her in about the boys’ quest for improved bathroom conditions. She then guided them to develop a list of bathroom improvements that would be presented to the principal. She led them through an exercise in which they rehearsed presenting their grievances. Then she urged them to request a meeting with the principal to present their case.
Many weeks later, I came to the high school after the dismissal hour and headed down a long vacant hallway to attend an administrative meeting. I pushed open the “Boys’ Room” door and was pleasantly surprised to find pink soap in the dispensers and doors on the stalls.
This story affirms that, working towards change does not require revolutionary goals. Supporting young people in taking action against social injustices – big and small – is a great way to help them to think critically, take a stand and prepare to become active citizens in community affairs.
To be published in the Long Island, NY Anton chain of 18 newspapers in March 2012.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)