Sebastopol may fine parents who sanction teen drinking

[Mitcho LeGreat]

Not to be stirring up trouble. But I am someone who has many years experince working with large numbers of teens -I oversaw several programs for teenagers for the City of San Francisco, for almost two decades, from fine art programs, special events for young folks who were doing well in school, to homeless youth programs, and at risk youth. I am puzzled by this new, conservative and counter productive plan to fine parents if their kids are dinking at home...

Teens drink.
I did. I think it is part of the growing process.

My parents were ok with myself and my 4 brothers drinking beer and watching MTV with a few of our frinds at home on a Saturday night. If we did not get messy. And if we EVER went out drinking and driving it was clear that we would, however, be in really big trouble.
But: If we ever foundurselves in a situation where we had been drinking with someone else who was driving, we could call no questions asked, at any time and be picked up. I did this once. 3 am. My Dad picked me up. No lecture, no trouble. He never said a word about it expcept that he was glad I called. I NEVER got into that situation again, I learned from his example and his openesss to conversation and education -not punishments.

None of us 5 ever got into trouble with alcohol.

In Europe, where teen alcohol abuse is less then here in Amerika, teaching your kids respect and appreciation for alcohol begins at an early age.
Telling young folks that alcohol is bad for them, while you sip your wine or beer at a Sebastopol function that celebrates the wine country - one of our biggest tourist attractions, is hypocrasy at it's finest. Did I spell that right???

While I respect the desire of Chief Weaver and others to figure out how to deal with this issue, I think EDUCATION is the key not more punishments. Negative reinforcement strategies have never been shown to be effective. All this is going to do is encourage young folks to GO OUT DRIVING TO DRINK SOMEWHERE ELSE that is not as safe as their own home. What about, in place of another step towards big brother (that I see Sebastopol toying with lately) in terms of alcohol, why don't we spend some money on monthly Clean and Sober, 18 and under (or 20 and under) dance parties at the underutilized TEEN Center - where I never see anything for teens, but see City Hall meetings and other "Adult" functions. This could be all about education and young folks helping supporting one another stay sober, in a safe and fun environment. I bet we will get better results.
-m

[Imagery]

To provide a counterpoint to your well-worded point of view:

I didn't drink when I was growing up. It wasn't that I didn't have access to alcohol, it was that I simply chose not to do it. All the guys and gals I hung around with didn't drink either. That was at least 85% or more of the graduating class - 97 in our class that year. (I'm 40 y.o. now)

I believe that Chief Weaver is right in asking for another tool to use in the struggle to curtail teenage drinking. For some reason, I don't believe that he's going to come knocking door-to-door asking if the kids are at home watching MTV enjoying a beer. However, if someone (irresponsibly) provides alcohol for friends of their child, and they hop in a car and wreck - I would most certainly want a law on the books that provides for some consequences. If no one is calling the police - because there's no disturbance, etc. - then I don't believe this law would be something worth worrying about.

[theindependenteye]

>>>I believe that Chief Weaver is right in asking for another tool to use in the struggle to curtail teenage drinking. For some reason, I don't believe that he's going to come knocking door-to-door asking if the kids are at home watching MTV enjoying a beer. However, if someone (irresponsibly) provides alcohol for friends of their child, and they hop in a car and wreck - I would most certainly want a law on the books that provides for some consequences.

I missed the first post on this thread and can't find it. But to respond to this: Are there not already laws on the books making it illegal to provide alcohol to underage kids? Is there an exemption to this if it's a parent?

Certainly, a parent who provides alcohol and allows a kid to go out thereafter should be accountable. On the other hand, do we really expect that most kids will religiously avoid alcohol until they're the legal age — and then once they're the legal age they'll know how to drink responsibly? Much better in general, I think, for them to experience its tastes and its effects in a safe home environment than in somebody's car on Saturday night.

Cheers—
Conrad

[Imagery]

>>>I believe that Chief Weaver is right in asking for another tool to use in the struggle to curtail teenage drinking. For some reason, I don't believe that he's going to come knocking door-to-door asking if the kids are at home watching MTV enjoying a beer. However, if someone (irresponsibly) provides alcohol for friends of their child, and they hop in a car and wreck - I would most certainly want a law on the books that provides for some consequences.

I missed the first post on this thread and can't find it. But to respond to this: Are there not already laws on the books making it illegal to provide alcohol to underage kids? Is there an exemption to this if it's a parent?

Certainly, a parent who provides alcohol and allows a kid to go out thereafter should be accountable. On the other hand, do we really expect that most kids will religiously avoid alcohol until they're the legal age — and then once they're the legal age they'll know how to drink responsibly? Much better in general, I think, for them to experience its tastes and its effects in a safe home environment than in somebody's car on Saturday night.

Cheers—
Conrad

The point I'm trying to make is that there is a difference between a parent providing some beer or wine to their child - while supervised in their own household setting, and parents buying a few kegs, a couple of fifths, some margarita mix and leaving the house to the teenagers for the night.

The former: teaching responsible alcohol use in a controlled environment/situation.

The latter: complete irresponsibility

I believe giving the police an additional tool in order to hold the PARENTS responsible if they fall into the latter category, something that contributes to the costs of having to clean up the mess that the parents create, is what Chief Weaver is after.

[Mitcho LeGreat]

But also, I think you are missing my main point, which was about the negativity of this strategy. There are beter ways to try and deal with underage drinking. And I am not only raising this issue, I think I had a pretty good suggestion to boot. Reward with fun - in a safe, educational way that encourages young folks to support one another -not just another punishment or threat. I thkn yogn folks are getting pretty tired of those - as there seem to be more and more of them then when I was younger.

[LenInSebastopol]

But also, I think you are missing my main point, which was about the negativity of this strategy. There are beter ways to try and deal with underage drinking. And I am not only raising this issue, I think I had a pretty good suggestion to boot. Reward with fun - in a safe, educational way that encourages young folks to support one another -not just another punishment or threat. I thkn yogn folks are getting pretty tired of those - as there seem to be more and more of them then when I was younger.

He may be missing your point, as you seem to miss his (two ships passing in the night?). You both have some validity to your respective sides, but they are not oppositional as I read them.
He seems to be a bit existential in that he is "here and now", and something happens on a single Saturday night. Now what?
You, OTOH, are taking the grand view of HOW to treat the issue in a long social view on how to deal with stuff in the Grand Scheme of Things.
For my money, and until your view comes down to earth.........I vote for the Chief and it IS too bad. I'll bet you don't have kids either.

[scamperwillow]

You are talking as if this is the ONLY approach being taken - not at all. I was at the meeting last night and heard presentations about all the many programs that are working to educate kids about alcohol. Including student programs, every 15 minutes and so on. The police are not going to go door to door interrupting family dinners. This is for big parties where parents irresponsibly allow (or provide) alcohol to the point a complaint comes in. This gives the police a tool to give some consequences to these irresponsible parents. Sounds good to me.



But also, I think you are missing my main point, which was about the negativity of this strategy. There are beter ways to try and deal with underage drinking. And I am not only raising this issue, I think I had a pretty good suggestion to boot. Reward with fun - in a safe, educational way that encourages young folks to support one another -not just another punishment or threat. I thkn yogn folks are getting pretty tired of those - as there seem to be more and more of them then when I was younger.

[ceni]

Was there opposition to this proposal last night? (I work and was unable to attend.) Was it heard? Or was the vote decided in advance and, on the typical lines of, "What the Chief says is good enough for me"?

The Analy students' concerns were well-worded and thoughtful. Are we not listening to our kids?

The board needs to reconsider this heavy-handed approach as I feel the public was not given ample time to respond to this. Why the rush? And who asked for this 'tool' in the first place? I am a parent and do not need this crutch to effectively teach my children. I can parent without the help of the police.

I'm with mitcho and the point made by theindependenteye was very well taken, *when and where* do we teach alcohol responsibility if not in the home under safe conditions?

I feel this is yet another intrusion of law enforcement into our private lives.

This is not San Diego or Dublin. Is Sebastopol truly unable to conjure up progressive alternatives to teen drinking or just going along with the heavy-handed, punitive solutions promoted by those who, to all problems, the hammer is the only solution?

[scamperwillow]

Oh please. If you are a responsible parent you won't need to worry about this. This is for IRresponsible parents who leave big stashes of alcohol out and then leave the kids to party.

There is nothing heavy-handed about it. If the police are called to a large rowdy party with lots of drunk teenagers, shouldn't they be able to deliver some consequences?

And yes, there were kids there ASKING for this.


Was there opposition to this proposal last night? (I work and was unable to attend.) Was it heard? Or was the vote decided in advance and, on the typical lines of, "What the Chief says is good enough for me"?

The Analy students' concerns were well-worded and thoughtful. Are we not listening to our kids?

The board needs to reconsider this heavy-handed approach as I feel the public was not given ample time to respond to this. Why the rush? And who asked for this 'tool' in the first place? I am a parent and do not need this crutch to effectively teach my children. I can parent without the help of the police.

I'm with mitcho and the point made by theindependenteye was very well taken, *when and where* do we teach alcohol responsibility if not in the home under safe conditions?

I feel this is yet another intrusion of law enforcement into our private lives.

This is not San Diego or Dublin. Is Sebastopol truly unable to conjure up progressive alternatives to teen drinking or just going along with the heavy-handed, punitive solutions promoted by those who, to all problems, the hammer is the only solution?

[theindependenteye]

And yes, there were kids there ASKING for this.[/quote]

I was at the meeting, and I left with a heavy heart. Not because of the council's decision, but because of what wasn't really heard. A passionate and articulate young man said (paraphrasing here), " . . . you're going to be killing my friends, because they WILL find another place, nothing is going to stop this."

No Merry Prankster here, no Let the Good Times Roll. It was said in anger and sorrow. What I heard below the surface was, it's more painkiller than fun. And nobody was addressing that.

Sure, we do live in paradise here, and a lot of good stuff happens, and people care. But what about being in school and seeing that there are no jobs out there, not just for you, but for the folks of a lot of your friends? What about seeing your favorite teachers laid off, and classes dropped? What about seeing PG&E roll right over everybody with their almighty smart meters, no choice here, because corporations are people too (except with a whole lot more money)? What about not really trusting your school lunch, because GMO and Factory Farming rule? And most of all, what about the fact that the only thing with an unlimited claim on this country's resources is the military, with endless war their game plan?

(OK, that's just my own litany, yours may vary. But the generic drumbeat of the news is, It's all hopeless, it's all pointless. Fill in your own blanks.)

So hey, I'd want to get blasted too, maybe. Unless I saw people doing whatever they can, here and now, every day, to make a difference. Every person who spoke, pro or con, sounded to me like they really cared and were willing to take responsibility. And then, after the break, 22 people stood right up on their hind legs and spoke truth to the PG&E pair (boy, I wouldn't have enjoyed being in their shoes last night).

But here's the hard part. It's not what we SAY, it's what we DO, and do tomorrow, and do the next day and the day after that. It's what we're gonna dream up and get together to put into action. It's about not giving in to despair at the sleazy shenanigans in Washington and Sacramento. Yes, it does affect all of us, but we don't live there. We live here. At the heart of the good Quaker principle of Witness is the concept of doing what you are able to do for those who are closest to you.

Chief Weaver has done his part. The City Council has done its part. Now it's for every person reading this to figure out their own answer to this:

What can I do? And who will do it with me?

Thinking hard -- Elizabeth Fuller

[Bird Watcher]

Yes, the daily news is bad, but I believe that it doesn't necessarily drive teens to drink. (Sometimes, it's simple boredom.)

Families can (and do) take responsibility to show other ways to deal with the travails of the modern world. They can set the good example, talk out current events at dinner each night, direct their kids to other productive outlets such as sports, music, etc. Teachers often inspire such activities.

To legally hold the irresponsible parents accountable is, IMO, a good thing, because those irresponsible parents do exist, even in this wonderful community. Toddlers need limits and it does not go away with teens. Boundaries are what define society.

[Peace Voyager]

And yes, there were kids there ASKING for this.

I listened to all the comments at the meeting and spoke myself. I was dismayed at the either-or, attitude. All efforts are needed to stop underage access to alcohol.

I do know of local parents who have enabled underage drinking with the notion of "they are going to do it anyway - it's safer if we keep it close to home". Some of these parents are alcoholics, some are not.

I did not get help from my son's high school when he tried to link a school project to a video of teen drinking he made, (they were not acting) and mistakenly allowed me to find.

If this ordinance had been countywide then, we may have had more sober students, and fewer underage drunk driving casualties. My son would have had fewer parties to take advantage of alcohol; something that many of his family members have been addicted to, so I have an extra concern of a possible genetic predisposition to addiction to it.

Although I am a very moderate drinker now (maybe 3-6 bottles of wine/beer per year), I started drinking at 14 and did not learn to be responsible about it until I reached my 20's. I'm lucky I didn't develop an addiction. I really did not want my child's brain and body to have to deal with alcohol until he was a legal adult. I do resent the adults who provided the opportunity prematurely, outright, or by turning their backs.

I would like to see the teens who said the ordinance would do more harm than good, re-direct their passion to really helping their friends - by working stop all underage drinking, rather than working against holding enabling adults accountable.

In peace,

Colleen

[Magick]

I was at the meeting and spoke out against it as did some teens and other adults putting forth similar ideas like your own. I offered quotes from Time Magazine about the European approach as well.
This is yet another attempt to use laws where guidance, education and healing are needed, just like the War on Drugs.
The I Ching thousands of years ago said that laws were not meant to be punishment and other methods that change behavior were what actually succeeded.
This law could be misused to ruin the reputation of an individual with headlines like "City Council Member cited by police for supplying alcohol to minors". This kind of thing has been done before.
One Council member asked the chief if he and his officers would use discretion, well, even if he and his current officers did not abuse this law it is now on the books and can easily be abused to invade privacy, disrupt a healthy approach to educating minors about the use of alcohol, and defamation of character.
When will we learn? Yours in truth, Magick



Not to be stirring up trouble. But I am someone who has many years experince working with large numbers of teens -I oversaw several programs for teenagers for the City of San Francisco, for almost two decades, from fine art programs, special events for young folks who were doing well in school, to homeless youth programs, and at risk youth. I am puzzled by this new, conservative and counter productive plan to fine parents if their kids are dinking at home...

Teens drink.
I did. I think it is part of the growing process.

My parents were ok with myself and my 4 brothers drinking beer and watching MTV with a few of our frinds at home on a Saturday night. If we did not get messy. And if we EVER went out drinking and driving it was clear that we would, however, be in really big trouble.
But: If we ever foundurselves in a situation where we had been drinking with someone else who was driving, we could call no questions asked, at any time and be picked up. I did this once. 3 am. My Dad picked me up. No lecture, no trouble. He never said a word about it expcept that he was glad I called. I NEVER got into that situation again, I learned from his example and his openesss to conversation and education -not punishments.

None of us 5 ever got into trouble with alcohol.

In Europe, where teen alcohol abuse is less then here in Amerika, teaching your kids respect and appreciation for alcohol begins at an early age.
Telling young folks that alcohol is bad for them, while you sip your wine or beer at a Sebastopol function that celebrates the wine country - one of our biggest tourist attractions, is hypocrasy at it's finest. Did I spell that right???

While I respect the desire of Chief Weaver and others to figure out how to deal with this issue, I think EDUCATION is the key not more punishments. Negative reinforcement strategies have never been shown to be effective. All this is going to do is encourage young folks to GO OUT DRIVING TO DRINK SOMEWHERE ELSE that is not as safe as their own home. What about, in place of another step towards big brother (that I see Sebastopol toying with lately) in terms of alcohol, why don't we spend some money on monthly Clean and Sober, 18 and under (or 20 and under) dance parties at the underutilized TEEN Center - where I never see anything for teens, but see City Hall meetings and other "Adult" functions. This could be all about education and young folks helping supporting one another stay sober, in a safe and fun environment. I bet we will get better results.
-m

[Barry]

I posted my comments about the teen drinking fine in a blog post here:

https://www.waccobb.net/forums/general-community/63386-barrys-blog-law-enforcement-new-post.html

[justme]

Tough issue..... I never drank alcohol until my early 20's. My parents had their Fri, nite cocktail parties, but it was never a big deal. The desire to drink at a young age has a wide range of influences. Boredom, pressure from friends, etc. My father let me have a sip of beer when I was about 12 or so...Thought it was pretty nasty tasting. LOL...

My point I guess is look at the teens that want to drink at a young age and those that don't. Ask them questions, be honest with them. I truly feel that there may be some very common traits between those teens in each group.

Ironically I did try smoking grass when I was 14...:hmmm: That was in '67... Go figure!!!