PLEASE DO FIGHT WITH YOUR TEEN-AGERS

PLEASE DO FIGHT WITH YOUR TEEN-AGERS

By Andrew Malekoff© 2011

Teen-agers enjoy a good “fight” with adults who do not feel a need to dominate and are willing to listen. As children progress from the “earthbound” quality of concrete thinking to the “intergalactic” quality of complex thinking, they become capable of formulating contrary-to-fact-hypotheses, of leaping with their minds here, there and everywhere. Herein lays the source of teen-agers’ growing ability and fervor for challenging others’ ideas, beliefs and values and for engaging in furious debate, often to the dismay of parents, teachers and other adults.

One day when my son Jamie was 14, he told me that he was thrown out of class. He had argued with his Spanish teacher about how she had graded a test. One of the questions had a visual component. The class was asked to write, in Spanish, a sentence describing what they had observed in a drawing that depicted two women who were simultaneously holding a gift-wrapped package. Jamie told me that his answer was, “Una mujer está recibiendo un regalo” (A woman is receiving a gift). When the test was returned his answer was marked wrong and points were deducted. The correct answer, the teacher said, was, “A woman is giving a gift.”

He argued that the drawing could be interpreted both ways, giving or receiving. The debate was heated. The teacher was flustered. Jamie pressed on, continuing to argue his point until he was silenced by the teacher

He told me that he then raised his hand. The teacher ignored him at first. Nevertheless, his long outstretched arm became an exclamation point, punctuating the space in the classroom.

“JAMIE WHAT IS IT?” she shouted. He responded, “I just like to hear the sound of my voice.” His enraged teacher then banished him.

British educator Janet Batsleer has spoken eloquently about the hostilities and complicities that young people have experienced in schools. She refers to “Those people who have ‘spoken out of turn,’ or who have not spoken ‘properly,’ or who have learned carefully exactly when to speak in order to please the teacher, or who have become afraid to speak for fear of being spoken about as a problem or in even more hostile ways.”

We should welcome debate from young people. Reasoned arguments gradually replace simple reliance on authoritative pronouncements by grown-ups.

As a child’s brain develops, opposites such as good and bad, or black and white, or yes and no, can be held in one’s mind simultaneously, enabling an individual to examine subtle shadings of disparate ideas and to tolerate the ambiguities that are generated by thoughtful debate. This “quantum leap” in thinking enables one to consider many viewpoints at once, use inductive and deductive thinking to reason and test reality by challenging contradictions and inconsistencies.

Young adolescents find that they can begin to argue for argument’s sake—for the fun of it. When we engage with them in spirited debate we help them to cultivate critical thinking, which is essential in order for a young person to become an active citizen in community affairs; to learn when to stand up and speak out.

So, please do fight with the teen-agers in your life. Fight with them to help them to flex their cognitive muscles and fight with them for fun. If you can avoid becoming defensive or intimidated, you might be pleased to discover that from the same source of adolescent combativeness and intellectual intransigence spring the seeds of inspiration and idealism.

To be published in the Long Island, NY Anton Newspapers in November, 2011.

FRIENDLY FIRE?

Friendly Fire?

Andrew Malekoff©

Mary Tillman is the mother of Army Ranger Pat Tillman, who was killed in Afghanistan. She wrote the book Boots on the Ground by Dusk, which detailed her attempt to find out the truth about her son’s death and exposed a cover-up by the Pentagon and the White House. Mary Tillman dedicated the book to “all military families, who are seeking to understand the sacrifices their sons and daughters have made. They too are entitled to the truth from their government.”

Pat Tillman was arguably the most famous soldier serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. He was an outstanding professional football player with the Arizona Cardinals, who passed up a multi-million dollar contract to join the U.S. Army in 2002. Tillman’s family had a legacy of military service and he felt compelled to fall in step after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack against America.

Tillman had movie-star good looks and an incisive and curious mind. He was a free spirit and a risk-taker. He did not subscribe to any religion, yet he was deeply spiritual. He was married to his high school sweetheart, Marie, and, with her support, enlisted in the Army, along with his younger brother, Kevin. Her two eldest sons advised their mom of their decision on Mother’s Day, May 9, 2002.

When the United States invaded Afghanistan in 2002, Pat Tillman said, regarding his decision to enlist, "Sports embodied many of the qualities I deem meaningful. However, these last few years, and especially after recent events, I've come to appreciate just how shallow and insignificant my role is . . . It's no longer important."

Tillman expected to serve in Afghanistan, but did not anticipate the war in Iraq, where he spent his first tour of duty, although he was uneasy about fighting in what he considered to be an illegal war. Sometime later, while in a canyon in Afghanistan, he was killed by gunfire. His death on April 22, 2004 was first attributed to an ambush by enemy forces. A nationally televised memorial service was then held to honor him on May 3, 2004.

As more details became known regarding the circumstances of his death, it was clear that he was not ambushed by the enemy but was killed by “friendly fire” - fratricide. Official documents later revealed that the Army withheld this information from the public and the family until sometime after the memorial service.

In the intervening years Pat’s mom, doggedly searched through thousands of pages of heavily redacted testimony in order to get to the truth. Regarding her tireless search, she observed, "This isn't about Pat, this is about what they did to Pat and what they did to a nation. By making up these false stories, you're diminishing their true heroism. [The truth] may not be pretty, but that's not what war is all about. It's ugly, it's bloody, it's painful. And to write these glorious tales is really a disservice to the nation."

Although the Tillman Story was more well-publicized than many other accounts of war, in the days and months to come more and more soldiers will be returning home to Long Island. Sadly, some families will be left with only emptiness and grief. According to the Veteran’s Health Alliance of Long Island (VHALI), of the 1,000,000 veterans who live in New York State, 174,000 of them live on Long Island. In fact, Long Island is second only to San Diego in the percentage of veterans among its citizens.

In all cases we owe veterans and their families our understanding and support.

This column will be published in the Anton Newspapers, Long Island, NY in October 2010.

LOST LOVE

LOST LOVE

By Andrew Malekoff© 2010

Last past spring brought the tragic news of the death of Yeardley Love, a member of the University of Virginia women’s lacrosse team, allegedly at the hands of her boyfriend, a UVA men’s lacrosse team player, in an alcohol-fueled fit of rage. Both teams competed in NCAA championship tournaments after Love was buried.

News of the tragedy and the school’s subsequent decision to play on, led me to wonder about how Love’s surviving teammates and friends coped with their emotional turmoil. Being a student-athlete requires a difficult balancing act. Yet there can be no preparation for sudden, inexplicable and violent death.

To explore this further, I interviewed Bob Malekoff, professor of sports studies at Guilford College in Greensboro, N.C., and former men’s lacrosse and women’s soccer coach at Princeton University. Bob is also my younger brother and the author of the critically acclaimed book, On the Mark: Putting the Student Back in Student-Athlete.

Andy: What do you think about the decision of the UVA teams to play after Love’s death?

Bob: While the two coaches were likely consulted, the ultimate decision would lie with the athletic director and senior university administration - including the president. Although cancellation may have been a wise course of action, there was a great deal of discussion about honoring the wishes of the Love family, which were for both teams to compete in the tournament.

Andy: How do intercollegiate athletics fare when it comes to monitoring off-field behavior?

Bob: Competitive success typically trumps behavioral conduct. This can be seen at all levels from youth sports through professional ranks and, certainly, in intercollegiate athletics. As interest in the game of lacrosse has grown, there is increasing pressure on coaches to win championships. This might lead to less vigilance regarding the off-field behavioral issues of some athletes.

Andy: How does the culture of intercollegiate athletics affect young people just out of high school?

Bob: This depends on the coach and administration. There are coaches who focus on the whole person. Others focus almost exclusively on winning. The shame in the latter is that it doesn't have to be an either-or proposition. Although some conveniently blame coaches, they ought to look, as well, at college leaders who reward competitive success and little else. Coaches who consistently make values-based decisions should be supported and lauded.

Andy: Some reports suggest that, prior to Love’s death, there were signs of violence by her boyfriend.

Bob: No one can blame Yeardley Love’s teammates or members of the men’s lacrosse team for this tragedy. However, there is no doubt that they are now far more aware of what a lethal combination unchecked anger and alcohol can be and how they can contribute to domestic violence.

At UVA’s graduation in May, Yeardley Love received a posthumous bachelor’s degree. In his final speech before retiring, University President John Casteen III recalled some things he would never forget about the school: "The sounds of children on the lawn during Halloween. The chapel's bells. The cheers at games... And the name of Yeardley Love."

Published in 18 Anton Newspapers on Long Island, NY, the week of July 26, 2010.

Homer Simpson on Health Insurance

Homer Simpson on Health Insurance

Andrew Malekoff© June 2010

We are all familiar with stories about the ineptitude of government officials and regulators in protecting the public. At the SEC, they fell asleep at the wheel as Bernie Madoff made off with billions. In its eagerness to put more low-income families into its own homes, HUD failed to rein in Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae from saddling borrowers with mortgages they could not afford. So, it comes as no surprise to me that I cannot get a straight answer about who regulates the commercial insurance industry in New York State.

New York State is on the verge of implementing a plan for restructuring the financing of community-based mental health clinics. The plan discriminates against the underinsured middle class and working poor and is scheduled to commence on October 1. It represents a dramatic shift away from universal mental health care and towards care for families with Medicaid insurance only.

Those who have Medicaid are able to easily access community-based mental health services. Otherwise, you will soon be out of luck. When a family cannot get essential community-based mental health services that is what is known, in insurance industry parlance, as an inadequate network of care. Network adequacy has to be monitored and enforced.

In an attempt to get some straight answers, I contacted nuclear power plant safety inspector Homer Simpson, who was recently quoted as saying, “America's health care system is second only to Japan, Canada, Sweden, Great Britain; well, all of Europe. But you can thank your lucky stars we don't live in Paraguay!”

Andrew Malekoff: It is great to see you Mr. Simpson. You are looking dapper as ever.
Homer Simpson: D’OH!
AM: I know, I know, enough small talk. So, let’s get down to business. As someone with quality assurance experience, do you have any insights into who is overseeing the commercial insurance industry in New York State?
HS: D’OH!
AM: Are you expressing astonishment at my question, or are your referring to the D.O.H. - the New York State Department of Health?
HS: D’OH!
AM: A state official told me that this was the State Insurance Department’s (SID) jurisdiction.
HS: D’OH!
AM: Okay, okay, take it easy. I contacted a senior examiner at SID and she told me that they (SID) had regulatory authority over all licensed insurance companies and that they did enforce the insurance laws and all policy provisions but, she was quick to add, “We do not get involved in the network adequacy issue.” She said that that was the Department of Health’s job. I take it that you concur?
HS: D’OH!
AM: As I am sure you know, the commercial insurance industry uses managed-care companies to hold down costs. They decide, usually from hundreds of miles away, who gets what kind of mental health care, for how long and at what rate of reimbursement. In other words, they don’t really manage care, they manage cost and sometimes they even mangle care - at a nice profit.
HS: D’OH!
AM: According to Patrick Gauthier from Advocates for Human Potential Healthcare Solutions, “Despite the deepest and most enduring recession in 70 years…the five largest health-insurance companies in the nation disclosed combined profits of $12.2 billion last year — a 56 percent increase over the previous recessionary year. They managed this feat even though they experienced a combined loss of nearly two-million members to unemployment.”
HS: D’OH!
AM: My sentiments exactly! I am not sure that families know what to do if they cannot find a provider in the advertised network of care available to them via their health plan. May I ask you one final question, Mr. Simpson?
HS: D’OH!
AM: It will be quick. I promise. I raised the issue of network adequacy with the network manager for a well-known insurance company. She said to me, “We have a large volume of therapists within a five-mile radius of your agency that see young children which supports that our network needs are being met. What brings clients to your agency rather than an individual clinician's office?” How do you think I should answer her?
HS: First of all, Marge and I want to thank the Guidance Center for helping our family. Here is what I recommend you say in response to the network manager’s question: “The kind of comprehensive service that a community-based provider offers cannot be duplicated by any private practitioner in your network. For example, at North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center, the wrap-around services, for which they are not reimbursed by you or any commercial insurer, are by no means unnecessary frills or perks. They are essential services for working with a growing population of families in emergent crisis and in need of a community-based agency approach that is designed for this population, versus an individual private practitioner with limited availability, time and resources.” That should set her straight. Now I have to leave before happy-hour is over at Moe’s.
AM: D’OH!

To learn more about your rights as a health care consumer go to the following website: http://www.ins.state.ny.us/hrights.htm.

Published in the Anton chain of 18 newspapers, Long Island, New York in June 2010

MAKING ROUNDS

MAKING ROUNDS

by Andrew Malekoff © 2010

I have been writing this column since February 2007. Although I try to make points to be helpful to parents and other community members that care about kids, sometimes I think what I make are “rounds” that are less hard-edged and softer than points.

My reflections in this month’s column don’t unfold in a straight line, rather in a circular and pattern. I do not think that my memories are remarkable. They are made up of a combination of milestones, transitions and random, mundane associations. I am not sure if they will have universal appeal. I will leave that for you to decide.

I was born in Newark, New Jersey on May 14, 1951. In my early years I grew up in a second floor flat in the same neighborhood where author Philip Roth once lived. The best thing about where I lived was that there were stores around the corner. Among my favorites were a bakery, candy store, luncheonette and a burger joint with a pinball machine.

My grandfather Joe was a carpenter who emigrated from Russia. He lived with us for a few months. He lost an eye in an on-the-job accident. It was replaced with a glass eye that he removed from time to time to show to me. He once mistook a box of Spic ‘n Span, a cleaning product, for a box of Wheatena oatmeal. The boxes were similar in size, rectangular shape and orange color. As a result of the mix-up, a pot of boiling water and cleaning powder overflowed and flooded the kitchen with soap suds.

My other grandfather Harry was a tavern owner who came to the U.S. from Poland. He had diabetes and two prosthetic legs that I once saw him take off and put on. I often wondered what fake parts I would have when I got older.

My aunt Rose, my dad’s younger sister, told me a story about when my mom and dad first met. The two families planned a get together at my mom’s house. I found out that my dad’s family was worried because Grandpa Joe slurped his soup. Aunt Rose told me that, although they were poor, they did not want to appear to be low class. When the soup was served they held their breath waiting for Grandpa Harry to start. He slurped too. Everyone was relieved and, well, the rest is history.

We moved to a suburb of Newark called Maplewood when I was 10-years-old. It happened fast and without any warning. There was a moving truck one day and the next day my younger brother and I were sleeping in a new bedroom where we heard crickets outside the window. No one consulted me about moving. I left all of my friends behind and had to make new friends.


In the suburbs I rode my bike everywhere since there were no stores around the corner. My father, Izzy, took over the tavern after Grandpa Harry died. The tavern was called the P.O.N. which stands for the Pride of Newark. One day someone set the P.O.N. on fire. Some years later there were race riots in Newark. I did not see my dad that much in those days.

My mother, Evelyn, started her own business when I was in junior high school. I didn’t understand. I later learned that it was to help pay the bills. She was an antiques dealer. In time she opened her own store. The sign on the store read: Antique Evelyn. That is what she was known by for the rest of her years.

My parents died in the 1990’s after at least a decade of serious health problems.
My father had multiple myeloma and my mother had heart disease. During my earlier childhood years my parents each smoked three packs of Camels every day. Sometimes they sent me to the store to buy them for twenty-five-cents a pack.

One day in the early 1990’s, when her health was failing and she was living alone, my mother fell. She called me from a hospital in Newark. The call came at two-in-the-morning. She sounded groggy when she asked me to bring her a box of tooth powder. By this time I was living on Long Island. I drove to the hospital. Her face was bruised and swollen from the fall. She wanted the tooth powder to hold her dentures in place so that she would look good. I stayed with her for a little while and then drove home and went to work.

My father died in the same hospital where I was born. I slept in my dad’s hospital room for several days before I watched him take his last breath on a late Sunday afternoon in May. And, then I drove back to Long Island, to a neighborhood where there are stores that I can walk to, just around the corner from where I live.

Published in the Long Island based Anton Newspapers in April / May 2010.

“Will all parenting experts please leave the room!”

“Will all parenting experts please leave the room!”
By Andrew Malekoff © 2010

“We have a new word in our lexicon – parenting. The word refers to what I call the technology of being a parent. The increased usage of the term is most unfortunate, and I avoid it wherever possible.” So says La Jolla, California psychologist Richard Farson in his new book, “Will all Parenting Experts Please Leave the Room!” (Western Behavioral Sciences Institute: http://www.wbsi.org/farson/books.htm).

In my unvarnished view of parenthood, it is less a well-posed, still-life portrait and more a roller-coaster ride; harrowing yet fun, with unexpected twists and turns, ascents and descents. You experience anxious anticipation and vertigo-inducing surround-sound. Sometimes, however, it is not so exciting - more like a crawling commute in rush- hour traffic, enervating, meandering, puzzling and endless.

As many of us know, parenthood can bring confusion, misunderstanding and doubt. This is an inescapable reality for most parents. Parenthood is rarely neat. It is more abstract than still life, more jazz than classical. Yet, according to Richard Farson, there is a myth that one can learn parenting techniques and all will be good.

Many times parents feel helpless because their kids make noise and move about, laugh and have fun at what feel like the most inopportune times. Raw parenthood looks like it just crawled out of bed; it is a half-eaten slice of pizza, a shirt hanging out, a chair leaning back, a runny nose, mismatched socks and a dripping ice cream cone. And there are moments when it can also be compared to a sunset. Parenthood is an adventure.

At times, parents feel ashamed and apologetic; and yet, the unspoken message from the “experts,” according to Farson, is that “somewhere there exists a person, an expert, who has it all figured out and knows how [be a perfect parent]. No wonder parents feel vaguely incompetent at the very time they think they are acquiring helpful information.” Farson offers readers a fresh, if controversial, view on the absurdities and paradoxes of parenthood, in the face of a consistent downpour of advice on what has come to be known as “parenting.” For example, he says, “Most parents love their children. Most would die for them. Paradoxically, however, as a society we do not honor or respect or even like our children. We indoctrinate, patronize, ignore, mistreat, segregate, dominate, prohibit, compel and incarcerate them.”

Among his riffs is one on the myth of quality time and the belief that how much time we spend with our children is less important than how the time is spent.

Farson reasons that genuine quality time should not be measured in discrete bursts of undivided attention. Quite the contrary he says, “It is the time when you don’t have to do anything with your child, when the child simply knows that you are around and available. It is taking comfort in the simple awareness of each other’s presence. It is allowing yourself to be angry with your child, in the knowledge that there will be time to get over it and make up.”

His advice about the myriad of books on how to have quality time with your children is to ignore them. My advice: don’t ignore Farson’s book. It will make you scratch your head. It may even make your head hurt and make you feel angry. At just 107 pages, and, with such chapter headings as “Parenting is Impossible” and “Don’t Pity the Latchkey Children,” this anti-parenting parenthood book is a must read.

And, if you are really looking for a headache, you can then read Farson's “Will All Marriage Experts Please Leave the Room!”

To be published in the Long Island based Anton Newspapers in May 2010.

IF YOUR CHILD IS NOT HEALTHY, MY CHILD IS NOT SAFE

IF YOUR CHILD IS NOT HEALTHY, MY CHILD IS NOT SAFE

Andrew Malekoff © 2010

Gladys Carrión, Commissioner of the New York State Office of Children & Family Services, oversees 26 juvenile detention facilities that hold close to 2,000 kids under 16 who have committed criminal acts. In a 2008 interview with New York Daily News, she stated that over 80% of the adolescents in this system have serious mental health problems that go untreated. Carrión described the network of juvenile facilities as a “pipeline to prison.” The system damages children and families and fails to make our neighborhoods safer.

Sara Montalbano, a social worker at North Shore Child and Family Guidance Center, who specializes in mental health counseling for delinquents and juvenile offenders and their families, has worked with a wide range of adolescents. “On one end of the spectrum,” she explains, “there are kids who were arrested for punching a hole in the wall at home. On the other end, there are kids who set fires and committed assaults and murders.” Montalbano asserted that, “There are not adequate resources to help these children and families on either end of the continuum.”

In an exposé by New York magazine (Feb. 10, 2010), it was reported that a US Department of Justice investigation found that employees in several New York State juvenile detention facilities were “restraining kids so often and with so much force that kids had endured concussions, broken teeth and broken bones.”

Since her appointment in 2007, Commissioner Carrión has closed 9 juvenile residential facilities. This has been replaced, in part, with alternatives-to-prison prevention programs that include psychiatric support and family therapy. However, historically elected officials have hesitated to support “pay now or pay later” prevention programs.

“The fundamental problem with elected officials,” according to Lee Staples, clinical professor at the University of Boston School of Social Work, “is that they almost always choose to ‘pay later’ because when the bill comes due, they frequently are no longer in the same office. They are resistant to ‘paying now’ for fear of losing the immediate votes of angry taxpayers.” This is a structural problem that works against almost all preventive programs. Add in “the paradox of prevention,” whereby the general public no longer sees a pressing problem when social programs are successful, and those same programs suddenly are at risk.

According to Dr. Staples, “We saw the phenomenon clearly in the city of Boston when gang violence spiked more than a decade ago. Some very effective preventive programs were put in place, violent crime statistics dropped dramatically, the programs were cut and the statistics almost immediately shot back up. It is not so much that politicians cannot learn that prevention really saves money but, rather, they see an imperative to act based on short-term electoral self-interest and immediate budgetary constraints – which, of course, is always present in an underdeveloped social welfare system.”

Closer to home, in 2009, then Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi threatened to shut down 43 community-based youth services that served over 60,000 children and families across Nassau County, to help close a reported $130-million dollar county budget deficit. The impact of eliminating critical prevention services would have resulted in a greater cost to taxpayers - $200,000 per year to lock-up a juvenile in a state residential facility. And, the return on the investment is poor, as almost 90% of those locked up in these settings engage in ongoing criminal activity.

The citizens that fought back to preserve youth services in Nassau County were operating at a higher moral standard than those who were counting votes. Morality aside, though, advocates for youth services have a visceral understanding about the real consequences of not supporting prevention. They are not, as the old insult goes, “bleeding hearts.” If a person supports prevention it does not mean that they excuse criminal behavior.

It does not take a bleeding heart, only a rationale mind, to know that if your child is not healthy, my child is not safe.

This Parenting Plus column by Andrew Malekoff was first published in the Anton Newspapers chain of Long Island on March 25, 2010.