# I Want To Clarify Some Things



## Pearson796

This is in response to another thread:

Seems like several people over here don't think that "poor" people should be raising their children on boats.

My wife and I traveled in an RV for several years in California and Arizona. Our oldest daughter who is 17 and graduated early was completely home schooled. She was in the K-12 program for several years and then transferred to Connections Academy when In 2010 I took a job in Iowa and we sold the RV and relocated to a house there.

We love to travel and aren't much into "stability". After, once again, failing to fall into the 9-5 home life of having a house, we bought a boat.

I spent a couple of months looking at boats and dreaming in the winter of 2012 and spring of 2013. Then we decided to actually do it. Buy Oct 2013, I had a deposit down and paid cash for it when I picked it up on the first of Nov, 2013.

We don't have a lot of money and live off of a very small budget. We have always been the poorest of all of our friends when we RV'd and been criticized for not being "stable" and having children.

In the USA, people consider it child neglect if you are poor can't give your children much. We have always been very mindful of making sure there is food to eat, clean clothes to wear, and regular bathing. Even through all that, we had been under scrutiny at one point in California for our lifestyle choice.

Our oldest is now no longer a child and our baby is 7 years old. We live in fear that some "do-gooder" is going to think they know what is best for our daughter and report us to Child Protective Services.

A post in another thread made me realize how blown out of proportion that "the facts" can be.

1. We have no "running water". We have a pump system.
2. We don't put toilet paper down the head, we put it in a waste basket next to the head.
3. We have no built in heat. We use a electric space heater at the dock and a My Buddy Propane heater at anchor.
4. We have no shower on the boat, we have to rely on marina showers or solar showers.
5. We have very little food on the boat because of storage restrictions and can only keep some much meat at a time because we have an Ice Box and no ability to freeze anything.

So, as you can see from the facts the media pointed out, they might have been technically right about everything they wrote in that article.

Our boat is old. It's 30' and feels more like a 22' Mini Winnie Motorhome. There is not a lot of living space in the cabin. But, each of the two girls have their own sleeping area and we sleep in the V-Berth.

How do you explain to the ignorant that mold/mildew are realities on a boat when everyone sees that sort of thing a health hazard and consider it unsafe.

The media and "do-gooders" can twist things anyway they want. While they may be technically correct in their statements, they may also be way out of context.

We aren't rich people. We enjoy mobility, adventure, and being on the move.

So, If you are like us and want to include your children in your cruising adventure, beware that some ******* is going to think they know how to raise your kids better than you.

We don't live on a derelict boat, by any stretch of the imagination. But, we also don't have the amenities of a Grand Banks. We make due with what we have and can afford.

My oldest daughter plainly states that we aren't white trash, we are white clutter.


----------



## bens4lsu

What promoted this post? Who's the ******* who is telling you how to raise your children?


----------



## Pearson796

bens4lsu said:


> What promoted this post? Who's the ******* who is telling you how to raise your children?


Seems like several people over here don't think that "poor" people should be raising their children on boats.

The thread went from a clear case of child neglect to delusional greenhorns who include their children in their dream to sail and cruise.


----------



## night0wl

Very interesting perspective...and is changing my opinion on all these efforts to clean out homeless from the streets and/or derelicts from anchorages.


----------



## Pearson796

night0wl said:


> Very interesting perspective...and is changing my opinion on all these efforts to clean out homeless from the streets and/or derelicts from anchorages.


People talk about cleaning the homeless off the streets. Where do people think they go? The term should be "chasing them off". They don't magically decide to get a house because laws are made to prevent them from sleeping on the street.

I never meant to imply that derelict boats should be overlooked either. I think boats should have the same requirements as cars. They should have to be registered and insured. If they meet those two requirements, then that's a start. The problem comes in lack of ability to enforce those laws.

I think homelessness is a social issue that needs to be addressed in a humane way. Chasing people off and into hiding isn't addressing the issue.


----------



## bljones

Pearson, hold on.
Before you get too defensive,and before this blows up into a far far bigger issue than the non-issue it actually is... no one is lumping you in with the example shown. You're on a dock, on shore power, you have heat, your kids are apparently happy, clean, no one is going hungry, and you all regularly leave the boat, AND you are on good relations with the marina and those around you.
On the other hand, the boat that started this is 28' long, apparently unable to move under it's own power, at anchor, occupied by three adults, two teen boys and two dogs. There is no way for the crew to get to shore, no way for the dogs to get to shore, no heat, and with two dogs on a boat for a sustained period of time i can imagine what the deck of that boat looked like. they refused coast guard assistance after having to be rescued once before. 
They ain't you... but they are a a hell of a cautionary tale.


----------



## Pearson796

bljones said:


> Pearson, hold on.
> Before you get too defensive,and before this blows up into a far far bigger issue than the non-issue it actually is... no one is lumping you in with the example shown. You're on a dock, on shore power, you have heat, your kids are apparently happy, clean, no one is going hungry, and you all regularly leave the boat, AND you are on good relations with the marina and those around you.
> On the other hand, the boat that started this is 28' long, apparently unable to move under it's own power, at anchor, occupied by three adults, two teen boys and two dogs. There is no way for the crew to get to shore, no way for the dogs to get to shore, no heat, and with two dogs on a boat for a sustained period of time i can imagine what the deck of that boat looked like. they refused coast guard assistance after having to be rescued once before.
> They ain't you... but they are a a hell of a cautionary tale.


It is a very sensitive issue with us. We are not at the dock forever.

I see what marinas cost on the east coast and we'll be anchoring out a lot. This is the main reason we are staying here. It is cheap and will give us the chance to make upgrades to the boat and better prepare ourselves for when we can no longer afford a marina.

It concerns us greatly how people see us. We just want to be left alone and allowed to raise our children and live our lives the way we see fit without interference from "do-gooders".

That whole situation in Maryland started because a "do-gooder" saw a child on deck bundled up in a blanket. It didn't start because someone saw the condition of the boat.

What if someone called CPS on us because they didn't like something they saw or didn't agree with. Now all of a sudden we are under a microscope with some government agency telling us to live our life different.

What if CPS thinks a solar shower isn't good enough when we are anchored out because we can't afford $50 a night an east coast marina?

Things can snowball in a hurry when you aren't rich and can't defend yourself against people who are nosy and start making telephone calls.


----------



## bljones

Pearson, something tells me there is more to this story, and that it wasn't just seeing a child bundled up on deck. In fact reading the articles, this wasn't a swoop and grab by CPS.


----------



## night0wl

This points to the perils of regulating things...and regulation in general. Most bad laws start with good intentions. Just think of the ramifications of people being able to swoop aboard your boat...even if it is poop stained. When I'm away from my boat, the birds get me good. Does that mean that its a derelict? What if I wash that bird poop overboard...am I now polluting the waterways? Can they confiscate my boat now? 

Better to have STRONG COMMUNITIES and systems (neighbors, churches, etc) handle situations like this than the government.


----------



## Group9

Pearson796 said:


> People talk about cleaning the homeless off the streets. Where do people think they go? The term should be "chasing them off". They don't magically decide to get a house because laws are made to prevent them from sleeping on the street.
> 
> I never meant to imply that derelict boats should be overlooked either. I think boats should have the same requirements as cars. They should have to be registered and insured. If they meet those two requirements, then that's a start. The problem comes in lack of ability to enforce those laws.
> 
> I think homelessness is a social issue that needs to be addressed in a humane way. Chasing people off and into hiding isn't addressing the issue.


Exactly. Many people equate moving homeless people out of their sight, with having solved the problem. On land and on water.


----------



## kd3pc

Pearson796 said:


> It concerns us greatly how people see us. We just want to be left alone and allowed to raise our children and live our lives the way we see fit without interference from "do-gooders".
> 
> That whole situation in Maryland started because a "do-gooder" saw a child on deck bundled up in a blanket. It didn't start because someone saw the condition of the boat.
> 
> Things can snowball in a hurry when you aren't rich and can't defend yourself against people who are nosy and start making telephone calls.


MD is the epitome of "nanny states". The gov't there, as well as many of their citizens, feel the need to "get involved" in every aspect of a life.

The rub comes in, where your life style is not one that is socially acceptable by that state's regs and rules. They will not hesitate to get involved and since they own the water right up to my water line in VA - they are able to actually dictate what two states do on the water.

As the do-gooders do more, and make their case - the more you will see interference in those life styles that are not socially acceptable. Yours would not be overly popular in MD. They want conformists, who question nothing, do what the gov't and their minions dictate.

I no longer live there, for these reasons and many more, but my family struggles with the constant intrusion of the state in to their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.


----------



## zeehag

seems in usa one is negligent if one has children and no job... my son went thru having his daughter stolen from him by his derelict dad spouse abusing father....and CPSSTOOD WITH THe derelict dad spouse abusing JERK WHO PUSHED MY SON OUT OF A VEHICLE IN FRONT OF A HOMELESS SHELTER AND STOLE HIS DAUGHTER. 
ok....i have worked in hospitals and respect social services. HOWEVER there is a LOT wrong with cps. i have found they will in the name of family unity, leave abused kids with the abusers. yet when .....gggrrrr..is not sensible and will never make any sense.
yes . 
folks without money in usa are disrespected in and from many aspects of their lifestyles.


----------



## Pearson796

kd3pc said:


> MD is the epitome of "nanny states". The gov't there, as well as many of their citizens, feel the need to "get involved" in every aspect of a life.
> 
> The rub comes in, where your life style is not one that is socially acceptable by that state's regs and rules. They will not hesitate to get involved and since they own the water right up to my water line in VA - they are able to actually dictate what two states do on the water.
> 
> As the do-gooders do more, and make their case - the more you will see interference in those life styles that are not socially acceptable. Yours would not be overly popular in MD. They want conformists, who question nothing, do what the gov't and their minions dictate.
> 
> I no longer live there, for these reasons and many more, but my family struggles with the constant intrusion of the state in to their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.


I agree! That's why doing anything other than waking up, going to work, and dying before you can collect retirement is considered a threat and "they" want to stop that.

This is my concern. We are living outside the norm.


----------



## Group9

kd3pc said:


> MD is the epitome of "nanny states". The gov't there, as well as many of their citizens, feel the need to "get involved" in every aspect of a life.
> 
> The rub comes in, where your life style is not one that is socially acceptable by that state's regs and rules. They will not hesitate to get involved and since they own the water right up to my water line in VA - they are able to actually dictate what two states do on the water.
> 
> As the do-gooders do more, and make their case - the more you will see interference in those life styles that are not socially acceptable. Yours would not be overly popular in MD. They want conformists, who question nothing, do what the gov't and their minions dictate.
> 
> I no longer live there, for these reasons and many more, but my family struggles with the constant intrusion of the state in to their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.


I have a brother who has a cabin in Alaska. A large percentage of homes out of the cities in Alaska don't have bathrooms and still use outhouses. Many don't have piped in water and use cisterns. Many are off the electrical grid and have to make their own electricity. They are all self-sufficient people to the max.

That and a lot of other things that they do there, would make the average Marylander go catatonic (I lived for five years in Maryland).

He told me a good story from the other day. He had someone up from the states helping him on a construction project who became upset when he saw the 12 gauge shotgun mounted in a rack behind a bulldozer (for bears). Especially when he found it was loaded and wasn't even locked. He was even more surprised to find it had been like that for five years and that none of the people who lived there and saw it were upset.

Imagine the grief if you did something like that in Maryland. You would never get out of jail,except to be sued by someone.


----------



## Pearson796

zeehag said:


> seems in usa one is negligent if one has children and no job... my son went thru having his daughter stolen from him by his derelict dad spouse abusing father....and CPSSTOOD WITH THe derelict dad spouse abusing JERK WHO PUSHED MY SON OUT OF A VEHICLE IN FRONT OF A HOMELESS SHELTER AND STOLE HIS DAUGHTER.
> ok....i have worked in hospitals and respect social services. HOWEVER there is a LOT wrong with cps. i have found they will in the name of family unity, leave abused kids with the abusers. yet when .....gggrrrr..is not sensible and will never make any sense.
> yes .
> folks without money in usa are disrespected in and from many aspects of their lifestyles.


CPS is responsible for the death of a lot of children in the US. Foster children are killed by foster parents on a regular basis here. The "steal kids and adopt them out" racket is big business in America.


----------



## Pearson796

Group9 said:


> I have a brother who has a cabin in Alaska. A large percentage of homes out of the cities in Alaska don't have bathrooms and still use outhouses. Many don't have piped in water and use cisterns. Many are off the electrical grid and have to make their own electricity. They are all self-sufficient people to the max.
> 
> That and a lot of other things that they do there, would make the average Marylander go catatonic (I lived for five years in Maryland).
> 
> He told me a good story from the other day. He had someone up from the states helping him on a construction project who became upset when he saw the 12 gauge shotgun mounted in a rack behind a bulldozer (for bears). Especially when he found it was loaded and wasn't even locked. He was even more surprised to find it had been like that for five years and that none of the people who lived there and saw it were upset.
> 
> Imagine the grief if you did something like that in Maryland. You would never get out of jail,except to be sued by someone.


We are living high on the hog in this boat compared to the way the settlers lived. But as the "standard of living" goes up, so does the expectation of how people should live and are expected to live.

All of a sudden, what was good for Grandpa when he was a child is no longer good enough for your children. Give them a laptop and an Ipod or they'll call CPS on you.


----------



## bljones

Okay, here's soem more info:
Parents charged after children found in dirty, unheated sailboat - baltimoresun.com

According to court records, officials found the adults, two children and two dogs living in a 10-foot by 9-foot area with two small makeshift mattresses. There was no running water, heat or electricity in the boat, and family members were urinating into plastic bottles, said Candus Thomson, a Natural Resources Police spokeswoman.
The boys, believed to be 13 and 14 years old, said they had not been to school since last year, Thomson said. One boy had no socks and shoes several sizes too large.
The children and the dogs went with Anne Arundel County's Child Protective Services and eventually were sent to live with a relative in Florida. A 22-year-old man, believed to be the son of at least one of the Kellys, was not charged and is believed to be headed to Florida also, Thomson said.
The Kellys first came to the attention of authorities on Jan. 28, when they called the Coast Guard for help from their sailboat that was iced in near Poplar Island in the Chesapeake Bay, Thomson said. The Coast Guard noted conditions on the boat when they rescued the family and took them to shore to meet a relative.
Then on Feb. 9, Natural Resources Police got a call from someone concerned about a family living aboard a sailboat in Cypress Creek, Thomson said. Police visited to the sailboat, but they declined assistance.
Natural Resources Police returned to the boat on Feb. 12 to warn the family of an impending snowstorm, Thomson said. Police learned that the Kellys were the same family rescued by the Coast Guard weeks earlier, and made a plan to return to the boat two days later with the Coast Guard and Child Protective Services.

Look at the timeline.
Look at the conditions.
Anybody still feel that a) CPS swooped in unnecessarily wiht no warning and b) the parents were actually doing their damn job as parents?

Holy crap, they had almost two weeks from first contact to clean up their act, solve the problem, get the kids fed warm and happy...
and they didn't do it.

Don't even try to defend their "right to parent." You don't have to be rich be responsible. You just have to care about your kids more than yourself.
They apparently didn't.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

Just before the peanut gallery slags me off for saying un-American things, i can tell you its just as stupid in many other countries.
I had to laugh about the "no running water", "no heating" stuff. How the Aboriginals survived I'm stuffed if I know! How my grandparents survived is equally miraculous! Even my dad would come home and turn off all the heaters and tell us kids to put warmer clothes on and tell mum to go keep warm in the kitchen.
When I was a real little kid we had a bath once per week wether we needed it or not, and I dont think my friends had more. If it was good enough for us in the 1960's its good enough for the new generation.

By todays weirdo standards I would be in some foster home and my parents jailed.


----------



## bljones

and look at how well-adjusted you turned out.


----------



## Pearson796

MarkofSeaLife said:


> Just before the peanut gallery slags me off for saying un-American things, i can tell you its just as stupid in many other countries.
> I had to laugh about the "no running water", "no heating" stuff. How the Aboriginals survived I'm stuffed if I know! How my grandparents survived is equally miraculous! Even my dad would come home and turn off all the heaters and tell us kids to put warmer clothes on and tell mum to go keep warm in the kitchen.
> When I was a real little kid we had a bath once per week wether we needed it or not, and I dont think my friends had more. If it was good enough for us in the 1960's its good enough for the new generation.
> 
> By todays weirdo standards I would be in some foster home and my parents jailed.


LOL, I used to have to take a bath every Saturday night so I would be clean for church. But, as a child, I rarely remember taking baths more frequently than that.

It wasn't until high school that I started showering everyday.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife

bljones said:


> Look at the conditions.
> Anybody still feel that a) CPS swooped in unnecessarily wiht no warning and b) the parents were actually doing their damn job as parents?


Of course the authorities acted necessarily, as far as we know the facts to be facts.
Its the same in every western country. They either act too soon, too late, at all or never. They are damned in much that they do.

Mark


----------



## MikeOReilly

I'm not sure if I should cross-post this, but here's what I said over in the original thread:

Come on Pearson796, I don't appreciate some of the broad stokes being applied here (and have said so). And I too pointed out that the various damning accusations could easily apply to many small cruising boats. That said, I think you've left the rails. This is not about you. 

Yes, there are valid concerns about how state power is used to hammer any square pegs that don't fit into the prescribed round holes of our society. We see shades of this all the time here, in complaints about restricted anchoring to unfair application of residency laws. That said, the state does need to intervene in cases of neglect and abuse, especially of children. This appears to be one of those cases. It will be interesting to follow the outcome (although the "news" media almost never follows up on this sort of stuff -- not sensational enough).

So yes, it is difficult to be off the beaten path. "They" will always try to pull you back, b/c if there's one thing our society's hate, it is real freedom. But you already know that. So take a deep breath, keep doing right by you and yours. Maybe others will learn by your example.


----------



## eherlihy

The bottom line on the referenced story is that someone made a judgement call regarding the family in Maryland. Unless someone here has first hand knowledge of that particular situation, no one here is in a position to second guess either the family, or the authorities (CPS / Coast Guard / Local LEO). From the reported story, this vessel would not pass any USCG inspection, and the CG has the right to remove the passengers of the vessel.

Regarding Pearson796's situation, it sounds as if the '796 family has it together, and is living a "rustic," but maintainable life style. I have not read where CPS or any LEO is looking closely at them, and get the impression that their vessel would pass a random USCG inspection for safety, and compliance (which the USCG has the express right to do at any time). If not, then perhaps this is the time to make repairs / modifications to make sure that you do.


----------



## night0wl

eherlihy said:


> The bottom line on the referenced story is that someone made a judgement call regarding the family in Maryland. Unless someone here has first hand knowledge of that particular situation, no one here is in a position to second guess either the family, or the authorities (CPS / Coast Guard / Local LEO). From the reported story, this vessel would not pass any USCG inspection, and the CG has the right to remove the passengers of the vessel.
> 
> Regarding Pearson796's situation, it sounds as if the '796 family has it together, and is living a "rustic," but maintainable life style. I have not read where CPS or any LEO is looking closely at them, and get the impression that their vessel would pass a random USCG inspection for safety, and compliance (which the USCG has the express right to do at any time). If not, then perhaps this is the time to make repairs / modifications to make sure that you do.


Uh...what? USCG can inspect my vessel, and if its underway, they can even ticket me for not having equipment aboard. But when do they have the right to remove me from my vessel?


----------



## eherlihy

night0wl said:


> Uh...what? USCG can inspect my vessel, and if its underway, they can even ticket me for not having equipment aboard. But when do they have the right to remove me from my vessel?


Coast Guard Boarding Policy:



> To enforce these laws, *the Coast Guard is empowered to
> board and inspect vessels.* Many of the laws can be
> successfully enforced only by boarding a vessel while it is
> underway. Boardings are not necessarily based on
> suspicion that a violation already exists aboard the vessel.
> Their purpose is to prevent violations. The courts have
> consistently upheld this authority. *All Coast Guard officers
> and petty officers are Federal law enforcement officers and
> they may board any United States vessel anywhere*.


----------



## eherlihy

You may want to read this; Coast Guard Boardings and Your Fourth Amendment Rights, Part 1 | Sailfeed


----------



## Pearson796

eherlihy said:


> The bottom line on the referenced story is that someone made a judgement call regarding the family in Maryland. Unless someone here has first hand knowledge of that particular situation, no one here is in a position to second guess either the family, or the authorities (CPS / Coast Guard / Local LEO). From the reported story, this vessel would not pass any USCG inspection, and the CG has the right to remove the passengers of the vessel.
> 
> Regarding Pearson796's situation, it sounds as if the '796 family has it together, and is living a "rustic," but maintainable life style. I have not read where CPS or any LEO is looking closely at them, and get the impression that their vessel would pass a random USCG inspection for safety, and compliance (which the USCG has the express right to do at any time). If not, then perhaps this is the time to make repairs / modifications to make sure that you do.


I'm not defending those people.

I'm just saying that sometimes CPS goes in gun blazing with the attitude of kill them all, let god sort them out.

Those people were obviously not responsible human beings, let alone responsible parents.

What I am saying is that when one is not living a life inside the box, all of a sudden judgement calls become very subjective.

Then a parent is put in the position of justifying their lives or lifestyle and proving that it isn't detrimental to a child. It should be innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent.

With CPS is it always guilty until proven innocent and they are immune from being sued and are never they held accountable for lies or fabrications on reports.

They can say and do anything they want without fear of repercussion.


----------



## Pearson796

night0wl said:


> Uh...what? USCG can inspect my vessel, and if its underway, they can even ticket me for not having equipment aboard. But when do they have the right to remove me from my vessel?


This has already been answered, but in a nutshell, YES.

I was inspected on Lake Michigan and given a warning for having out of date flares. He could have easily given me a ticket but didn't.

I have no problem with the USCG inspecting me.


----------



## night0wl

Again, USCG can BOARD...but they cant remove my vessel or remove me from my vessel unless I'm doing something illegal


----------



## Pearson796

eherlihy said:


> You may want to read this; Coast Guard Boardings and Your Fourth Amendment Rights, Part 1 | Sailfeed


It's a little unsettling to think that the Coast Guard can swarm a marina in the middle of the night and start searching boats for no other reason than they are bored.


----------



## boatpoker

Pearson you can raise your kids as you like. It's none of my business but don't spread myths like ....

mold/mildew are realities on a boat when everyone sees that sort of thing a health hazard and consider it unsafe. 

We lived aboard for almost 20 years and my wife has life threatening allergies. Mold was simply not acceptable and we never once had any on our boat. There are threads on almost every boating forum about how to avoid mold.


----------



## bljones

Pearson796 said:


> Then a parent is put in the position of justifying their lives or lifestyle and proving that it isn't detrimental to a child. It should be innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent.


Welcome to the real world. That is exactly how it works, no matter whether you make your home outside the box on the water or inside the box on the dirt. Don't make this bigger than it has to be, or bigger than it actually is. 
It's really simple to keep off the radar. Keep your kids happy, warm, fed and clean, and don't do anything that puts your kids in jeopardy- in other words, always put your kids first, and you have nothing to worry about from anybody anywhere, because you're doing your job as a parent.


----------



## rgscpat

The US Coast Guard isn't a social service agency, but it can terminate a "manifestly unsafe voyage". So, living conditions might not be a justification for their intervention, but someone trying to move a boat that is unsafe would be within their orbit. Presumably, even if a boat is anchored or moored, they could still act against an unsafe boat to prevent it from going anywhere.

http://www.uscg.mil/d1/prevention/NavInfo/navinfo/documents/Enforcement.PDF

TERMINATION OF USE 
A Coast Guard boarding officer who observes a boat being 
operated in an UNSAFE CONDITION, specifically defined 
by law or regulation, and who determines that an 
ESPECIALLY HAZARDOUS CONDITION exists, may 
direct the operator to take immediate steps to correct the 
condition, including returning to port. Termination of 
unsafe conditions may be imposed for: 
ÿ Insufficient number of CG Approved Personal 
Flotation Devices (PFDs) 
ÿ Insufficient fire extinguishers 
ÿ Overloading condition 
ÿ Improper navigation light display 
ÿ Fuel leakage 
ÿ Fuel in bilge's 
ÿ Improper ventilation 
ÿ Improper backfire flame control 
ÿ Manifestly unsafe voyage 
An operator who refuses to terminate the unsafe use of a 
boat can be cited for failure to comply with the directions of 
the Coast Guard boarding officer, as well as for the specific 
violations, which are the basis for the termination order.

And another source for what basis can be used by the Coast Guard: 
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...rgn=div5&view=text&node=33:2.0.1.8.42&idno=33

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=43ef2cbea35583fae0c6ca8c9825e1d2&rgn=div5&view=text&node=33:2.0.1.8.42&idno=33


----------



## fryewe

Just when you thought this thread was dead NY state officials make Pearson's comments more reasonable than some may have given him credit for:



> "Not only would parents have to attend" if they want their kid to pass sixth grade, notes Walter Olson at Cato, "but for good measure the bill would require employers to bestow a paid day off each year for employees who are parents to do so." Sounds good to some New Yorkers, as you're about to see.
> 
> Here's the bill, which you can read in 30 seconds. The state would put together workshops on 12 different subjects with parents required to attend four, one of which must be a workshop on sexual abuse. That's the bill's saving grace potentially; even Democrats who might otherwise balk at forcing parents to take state instruction on caring for their kids (are there any Democrats like that left?) will think twice before opposing a law that seeks to prevent child abuse. And for the ones who won't balk, this makes for a nice foothold for future expansions of state oversight into largely private matters. Bloomberg's much-mocked Big Gulp ban operated the same way. It was a small inconvenience in practice, but the principle is significant. That's why it was worth his time.


----------



## kd3pc

fryewe said:


> Just when you thought this thread was dead NY state officials make Pearson's comments more reasonable than some may have given him credit for:


NY in a tie with MD for the most "nannied" bunch of ...never mind

never underestimate the power of stupid...


----------



## bljones

link?

wait, found it myself: Coming soon to New York: Mandatory state-run parenting classes? « Hot Air

ah, it is a bill that was sent to committee a month ago...where it will die. This is this weeks "personal freedom crisis-of-week", replacing last weeks 'personal freedom crisis-of-the-week" which was the FCC plan to survey newsrooms on their reportage... a plan which quietly died.

I don't think parents of 6th graders in NY really have much to worry about.


----------



## JonEisberg

bljones said:


> link?
> 
> wait, found it myself: Coming soon to New York: Mandatory state-run parenting classes? « Hot Air
> 
> ah, it is a bill that was sent to committee a month ago...where it will die. This is this weeks "personal freedom crisis-of-week", replacing last weeks 'personal freedom crisis-of-the-week" which was the FCC plan to survey newsrooms on their reportage... a plan which quietly died.
> 
> I don't think parents of 6th graders in NY really have much to worry about.


Yup, and in addition, things are not always necessarily what they may seem... Who'd a thunk the chief sponsor of such Nanny State Nonsense would be...

wait for it...

...a staunch _Evangelical and Social Conservative_... )

Omitted from the original cite:



> Interesting tidbit about the chief sponsor, Ruben Diaz Sr.: *He is indeed a Democrat but he's also (somewhat notoriously in a very blue city) a Pentecostal minister and social conservative. He's pro-life and voted against legalizing gay marriage more than once as a state senator.* If anyone can build some bipartisan support for this in the legislature, he might be the guy.


----------



## miatapaul

boatpoker said:


> Pearson you can raise your kids as you like. It's none of my business but don't spread myths like ....
> 
> mold/mildew are realities on a boat when everyone sees that sort of thing a health hazard and consider it unsafe.
> 
> We lived aboard for almost 20 years and my wife has life threatening allergies. Mold was simply not acceptable and we never once had any on our boat. There are threads on almost every boating forum about how to avoid mold.


I was very tempted to say the same thing. Mold is not a "reality" and is quite unhealthy. You need to work on reducing the moisture in your boat and get rid of it.

Otherwise, I don't think you really have much to worry about. As long as you are supporting yourselves, educating your children and not doing any harm to others then go ahead and live your lives as you want. I don't really understand why you felt threatened by the other thread, unless there is something we are not aware of. I will say doing a good job of home schooling is hard. My wife and my daughters are both in education and neither would consider home schooling, but it can be done, it is just a lot of work.


----------



## fryewe

JonEisberg said:


> Yup, and in addition, things are not always necessarily what they may seem... Who'd a thunk the chief sponsor of such Nanny State Nonsense would be...
> 
> wait for it...
> 
> ...a staunch _Evangelical and Social Conservative_... )
> 
> Omitted from the original cite:


Nonsense comes from all points of the compass.

Sometimes it doesn't matter what nugget has the "good idea", if it only takes one bureaucrat...or Executive with a pen...to implement the idea.

Of course that could never happen in Maryland...or New York.


----------



## caberg

If you feel threatened by CPS or its equivalent (here it is DCF), then maybe it's time to do _something_ about it other than complaining to strangers on an internet forum.

Either change your way of life or go advocate for changes in the way CPS operates.

Sorry, but you won't ever find me skating along on some fine line where I felt threatened that the state might swoop in and take my kid. That, to me, is unjustifiable and reckless.


----------



## Ajax_MD

I just found this discussion. (I wish I hadn't)

P796 has basically brought his baggage from his RV days into this forum.

He automatically assumes that because people questioned his choices and lifestyle in the past, that he will encounter the same resistance here.
He admits to being sensitive about any question or criticism about his lifestyle.

As such, he has repeatedly tried to tie criticism of the homeless family in Maryland, to himself where no such criticism exists.

I'll repeat what I said in the other thread:

Dude, no one cares about what you're doing. No one thinks you're neglecting or abusing your children. Keep calm, and carry on.

The more shrilly you protest, the more you scream that you're "not like those other people", the more people will begin to question whether you might be.

You didn't need to start this thread to justify your life to the internet, or the online sailing community. Attention whoring is not exactly "keeping off the radar". Just live your life quietly, and keep your private life, "private".

Oh, that crack about mold is BS. Even if you can't dehumidify the boat, at least keep a bottle of mild bleach solution or Formula 409 on hand, and wipe the cabin interior down every few days with a green scrubbie/sponge combo.

I lived on my Pearson 30, cooked and did all the things that generate moisture in the boat. I do not own a dehumidifier, and there was no mold anywhere in my cabin.

A good friend of mine also lives aboard her own Pearson 30 with her dog, no dehumidifier, and her boat is mold-free also.

Again, the Maryland family in the other thread, drew attention to themselves, because they were immobile, incapable of caring for themselves, their children did not own properly fitting clothes, and had zero method of heating their living space. Their children had not received education OF ANY KIND for about a year.

Your domicile has heat, you have food and water, your children are educated, clean, properly clothed, and happy. 

There is no comparison here, and no one is making one. Stop dragging your personal life onto the forum for all to see. No one cares about that. We want to talk about, and help you with SAILING.


----------



## Minnewaska

Pearson, being sensitive (as I believe you called it above) to what others think of you is a self inflicted wound. Easy to prevent.

Further, if you check the demographics, roughly 50% of Americans have essentially no net financial worth. If you own your boat, you're probably better off than most people in general, maybe not most boaters.

Your moral responsibility is to protect, feed and shelter your kids. You are required to provide an education by law. None of the above have very specific standards and the ones you described would not make me believe you would be subject to enforcement.


----------



## Coquina

Whiskey tango foxtrot 
We had a family here living on a boat - barely a boat - in the coldest winter we have had in something like 30 years or 100 years, depending on who is checking the records. They had no heat, no decent clothes, no safe way off the boat, and apparently the boat was a floating [email protected]uke. And this was...wait for it...their SECOND attempt at "cruising". Attempt one ended with their boat trapped in ice with no rudder 

Maryland was NOT being a nanny state. They quite rightly got children out of a very dangerous and unsanitary situation. Good for them!

For the OP - what is going on with mold in your boat and toilet paper in a bag??? I have spend a lot of time on some minimal boats and we NEVER had either issue. If you see mold, clean it! I do a stem-to-stern bleach in a spray bottle cleaning every year and spot clean whenever there is a hint of mold. I am not sure if I even want to know about the TP collection.


----------



## Pearson796

Coquina said:


> not sure if I even want to know about the TP collection.


How to use a marine head - YouTube

Maybe this can help explain it to you so I don't have to. This thread is over. I'm done with it.

BTW, I've read several recommendations that you should never put anything you didn't eat first down a marine toilet... Obviously you've never heard this one so I thought I would post this so you would look stupid in the future.


----------



## Coquina

I have been using marine heads since 1969. You?


----------



## bobgerman

There are people out there whose opinions cover far more surface area than their life experience, and who, for reasons good or not so good, have racked up some prejudices.

Here's the thing -- if they don't apply to you, don't take them personally. If they're judging you from a distance, it can't hurt too much. It's really easy to judge from a distance. It's equally easy to shrug it off if you know better.

Of course, if you find yourself defending your lifestyle choices with social services agencies because Mr. Judgement felt the need to rat you out, that's not quite so easy to shrug off.

Eventually we all strike a balance in life. Or we haul off and kill someone.


----------



## Coquina

Is someone threatening to call social services on this guy?
Considering the number of families on a variety of boats ranging from pretty basic on up that live aboard in the Annapolis area either permanently or passing through and attract ZERO negative attention, I can't imagine* what you would have to do to be so worried about The Man coming after you.


* well besides for our intrepid recreators of Earnest Shackelton's adventures that started the whole thread


----------

