<p>I do not think CC folk are any more lenient than the general parental population. I just think they are more lenient in different ways than some of the non-CC parents! For example, some CC parents might write their kids’ essays for them … some non-CC parents might berate the teacher for giving their kid a bad grade on an essay. Either way, the kid gets the message that he is not responsible for himself. This is an oversimplification of course, but the point is that parents are over-helping their kids to the point of keeping them from growing up. This is happening everywhere. I read an article about parents of 20 & 30 something “kids” who allow these supposed adults to take their groceries home … even toilet paper! They pay the rent for their adult children, give them money for necessities … while the kids waste money on nice cars, vacations, cell phones with all the doodads, boats, etc. I cringe to think of what these young adults will do when they have their own families to care for, mom & dad aren’t able to help them, and they have to take care of themselves. I think some of them may already be in that spot … the ones who have ridiculous credit card debt and/or are in homes they can’t afford.</p>
<p>Yes, I agree with above BUT. And for me, this is a big but, and I guess I am showing my flower child nature. It is getting increasingly difficult to put together an economic life. </p>
<p>My dad had no trouble finding jobs with just a college degree. He felt like a professional; he expected to me hired and treated like one. And then his salary easily supported my family with my mom at home. Their extremely nice house in an upscale area of LI cost $24,000 in 1954.</p>
<p>Fast forward to our generation. Well, it’s a mixed bag, but that same house cost at least $350,000 when I was house hunting.</p>
<p>Now it costs $750,000, or with market “correction,” perhaps $700,000. LI kids need two healthy incomes to afford that, which involves some postgraduate school for most people.</p>
<p>And if I talk about my grandparents generation, only one of my four grandparents finished high school (they were all immigrants) and they succeeded in raising families.</p>
<p>So I do think kids need more help nowadays. And all expenses are growing because the next group of kids needs the dance lessons, etc. whatever, to get in to college.</p>
<p>So, taking home toilet paper and groceries? Okay by me. Big cars and fancy cars they can’t afford? Definitely not okay.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What could have happened, exactly? There are no allegations that the kid was driving drunk - he claims the booze was left by a passenger, a claim that his mother does not contest. The punishment here is not for driving under the influence, but for possession of alcohol.</p>
<p>So I guess he should apologize to his community, because what COULD have happened is he could have gotten a ticket or lost his license for underage possession. Horrible.</p>
<p>I don’t disagree with him losing his car; there was a clear line from action to punishment, and I don’t see that as unfair. The mother’s prancing around in the limelight at her son’s expense crosses the line.</p>
<p>My take is that the punishment was losing the car. From all accounts, the kid learned his lesson when the car was sold. The public ads, the TV spots, that’s all over-the-top embarrassment. It doesn’t constructively add to the punishment; it’s just embarrassing (it’s also a bit duplicitous, insofar as her stated consequence was “lose the car”, not “lose the car then be roundly embarrassed all over national TV”). And therefore I think it was wrong of the mother. And I think she realizes that, and that’s why she apologized. My question is why some here don’t.</p>
<p>I guess I am of the opinion that if you can’t afford it, you’ll just have to make do with less. I wore hand me downs (and I was the only girl in my family … other families gave us stuff!), we had one car & mom got a ride to work with a friend, we didn’t have a dishwasher, we didn’t go on fancy vacations (we stayed at Grandma’s), we didn’t have dance or other lessons (music lessons, yes … through our schools), my brothers played hockey on ice outdoors rather than in an expensive league, we paid for our own college (parents helped as much as they could) … you get the picture. If today’s kids “have” to have so much & more, maybe the idea that we are coddling them isn’t so far from reality.</p>
<p>FWIW, my kids must be really underprivileged by today’s standards. They get what we can afford & that’s it. They know that they have to contribute to their educational expenses, and D chose to turn down one school rather than borrow as much as it would have required. Both of my kids talk about how they will probably have to live frugally when they graduate. I don’t mean to second guess anyone else’s values, but I think there is some merit to expecting our kids to take care of themselves. </p>
<p>And I want to be sure I have some money left in my own bank account to take care of MYSELF when I’m 110! If I have to keep supporting my kids until they are my age, I won’t be able to do that.</p>
<p>Seems lots and lots of people have no problem with what she did</p>
<p>I wouldn’t have done it, but her son allowed someone to carry booze in his car…doesn’t matter if it was his or not- even a fender bender would have cost the kid his licence and the card would have been towed if the cops found the booze with minors</p>
<p>For the record I think the drinking age should be 18, however drinking and driving is a huge concern to me.</p>
<p>ps- his passenger is the one who owes the apology imo</p>