Trial talk: tricky and testing

WENDY LEECE

We tend to be more upset by the news than the kids are. It depends on

the children’s age. They may not even ask. We can give very simple

answers. The news is not very good for kids to watch. Maybe parents

should watch the 10 p.m. news and not the 5 p.m. news or use the

remote to mute inappropriate parts.

It’s sad we have to anticipate our children may be molested in

spite of our best efforts to protect them. We have to prepare them

early, in a loving way, that a bad person may try to touch them. We

have to keep an ongoing dialogue as they grow up. Role playing, even

with teens, about possible scenarios makes them think about what they

might do in a certain situation.

Predators use pornography to entice children, so kids need to

learn that reading pornography is not right and is harmful. The

Internet exposes kids to pornography and online predators, so

constant monitoring of their online time is now a duty.

The Megan’s Law website shows pictures of convicted of sex

criminals who may live nearby. The Parents Television Network, Enough

is Enough and Concerned Women for America are organizations which

help parents stay alert to the dangers.

We need to make sure authority figures do not take advantage of

kids or teach ideas which says sex with kids is all right. It’s

shocking that there is an organization that promotes this idea.

The Greg Haidl trial scenario makes us ask, “Why didn’t one of the

boys say, ‘This is wrong, we need to stop’?” These kids did not have

a moral compass nor the courage or conscience to stop the alleged

rape. They are growing up in a culture where there is no moral

censure on sexual practices once regarded as perverse. The adults in

their lives, including any sex education teachers, failed to teach

them virtue and respect for women. Their behavior, and Michael

Jackson’s as well, is the end result of moral mayhem due to

relativism. We have sown the wind and are reaping the whirlwind.

* WENDY LEECE is a parent who lives in Costa Mesa and is a former

Newport-Mesa school board member.

The response to that question varies greatly depending on the ages

of the kids and parents’ individual preferences. For very young kids,

it’s probably best to try to insulate them to some degree from all

the bad news and bad behavior. They’ll get more than their fill

throughout life, so postponing it a bit by changing the channel or

the subject seems to help preserve the blissful ignorance of

childhood. Most young kids really don’t pay close attention to that

type of news, simply because it’s uninteresting to them. But if asked

directly, it’s usually best for parents to answer honestly and use

the opportunity to teach a lesson.

It’s a tougher call for older kids, in the 9- to 14-year-old

range, for example. They may pay closer attention and ask difficult

questions. Parental preferences vary, but I always believed in

providing a complete answer when asked a serious question by the

kids. The answer includes an explanation of why the stupidity or

horror or criminality in question is wrong and some words of wisdom

about how to avoid it. It’s still useful at this stage to move on

after answering. Most 9- to 14-year-olds still have pretty short

attention spans, and they still find this type of news mostly

uninteresting.

For older teens, honest discussion is the only appropriate

response. Regardless of the eventual outcomes of their trials, both

Haidl and Michael Jackson are unquestionably guilty of being idiotic

in the basic handling of their fortunate lives. That’s usually good

fodder for some life-lesson discussions, though Haidl’s dragging of

standards to new lows can sometimes be a problem. Even the dumbest of

teen tricks can now be defended with, “I may be pretty crazy, but at

least I’m not as bad as Haidl.”

* MARK GLEASON is a parent who lives in Costa Mesa.