# 13-year-old Laura Dekker around the world



## PierreMundo (Nov 29, 2007)

The battle goes on! Laura Dekkker a Dutch 13 year old girl wants to be the youngest to sail around the world. But the Dutch government wont let her go.
It's a court-case and even the parlement is discussing her dicision.

See for more:
BBC NEWS | Europe | Dutch bid to thwart young sailor

And her own page: lauradekker.nl
LauraDekker.nl de Jongste solozeiler ter wereld!


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

Interesting.

Her age and her boat's capabilities notwithstanding, a couple of things struck me.

From a legal stand point, it's amazing to this American that a court in the Netherlands could presume to strip the parents of their guardianship and make the girl a ward of the state, all for something that has not even happened. They are simply discussing plans and taking steps which would lead to her sailing around the world solo -- is this a thought crime in the Netherlands now??

There is no mention of any prior history of parental abuse. Unless they allege that her prior seven-week solo trip, which was successfully completed with no harm coming to the child, amounts to abuse and or neglect? If so, that is an extraordinary leap. What next? Was I abusing my children by letting them solo sail our dinghy when they were 5 years old?

And why is it that parents must get the permission of the State to withdraw their children from the school system? Have the European governments really intruded this much into their citizen's private lives? Here in the U.S., no such "permission" is required. Parents have the final say on their children's educational pursuits.

Couldn't her parents simply travel with her to another country and have her depart from there? Or will the State actually block their right to travel, as well?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Bad idea.

Some guy on SA nailed it when he posted the "news" story of the first fetus planning to circumnavigate in 2012. It's turned into a real debate.

Stop the madness.


----------



## PierreMundo (Nov 29, 2007)

Without making any judgements if it is good for this little girl or not. In the Netherlands all kids 16 and under must go to school by law. Education duty. You need a permit for every day off. If not you risk a fine and even an arrest as a parrent.


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

PierreMundo said:


> Without making any judgements if it is good for this little girl or not. In the Netherlands all kids 16 and under must go to school by law. Education duty. You need a permit for every day off. If not you risk a fine and even an arrest as a parrent.


"Education duty"!?!?

When the government usurped the fundamental rights of parents, was there not even a whimper of dissent, much less a revolution? 

P.S. I agree, there are two discussions here, and I am focussing only on one side of it for present.


----------



## k1vsk (Jul 16, 2001)

JohnRPollard said:


> "Education duty"!?!?
> 
> When the government usurped the fundamental rights of parents, was there not even a whimper of dissent, much less a revolution?
> 
> P.S. I agree, there are two discussions here, and I am focussing only on one side of it for present.


What you describe as "fundamental rights" of parents is the real issue here. I suspect the majority of us (parents) would consider the safety and welfare of a child as a predominant responsibility parents have.

It makes no difference whatsoever if this child can sail.

the responsibility of a parent is to ensure the well-being of their children.

How some idiot can think sending their 13 year old girl off on any boat and have here survive not only the ocean but the people she will meet in port who could easily threaten the safety of a child alone is a "fundamental right" which should be questioned.

On it's face, these parents shouldn't be allowed any rights if this is an indication of their judgment.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

First of all, I cannot imagine letting my son do that. 

However, why is it that modern society views maturity by years of age and not by how they act? Some of the most immature people I know are well over 21. In fact, I have one at 29 that I know personally that my 9 yo is more mature than.

My grandmother was married and had her first child at 14. Yes, 14. I did not miss-type. Do a little history and you will see that many of the officers on the old wooden boats were well under the age of 18. They started them young and based their decisions on their suitability by their child and not so much his age. I think Master and Commander did a good job at presenting this. If I recall, I believe they had to be 13 or 14 to serve and they often lied about their ages. And read back to some of the history of the US and the old west and the ages of children when they were out trapping and building homesites. It is eye-opening. What about the kids who in Congo and other parts of Africa are handed a rifle at age 9 yo's and told to fight or die? 

I realize the difference between serving in the military and taking a choice-trip around the world is very different. But I would not say that serving on a British Man of War was any less dangerous and maybe more dangerous. Being a child in Africa is certainly no less dangerous. 

All that said, I cannot see me doing sending my kids around the world on some publicity stunt. What is the point? Is it for the child or a 30 minute claim-to-fame? I know John would not do it either. 

My only frustration is that I hate the way our society has cataloged each of us based upon the number of years we have on the planet versus who we are. And I especially hate the way governments (ours or others) have unilaterally taken over from the parents as knowing what is best for children. These same governements not a hundred years ago were sticking their kids on frigates and sending them to war. It's still happening in Africa. And given the same circumstances, I would not be surprised to see them do it again for their own personal agendas or for what they feel is best for their country. Double standard if yiou ask me.

- CD


----------



## k1vsk (Jul 16, 2001)

This is one of those issues where some consider government should not be involved in parenting as a matter of principle.
Sometimes common sense has to over-ride principle and this seems like a great example.


----------



## JomsViking (Apr 28, 2007)

Just heard that Laura (her parents, actually) won the case. She is allowed to go, according to the popular press...


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

JomsViking said:


> Just heard that Laura (her parents, actually) won the case. She is allowed to go, according to the popular press...


Okay, that's a relief. Now we can discuss whether she SHOULD go, which is an entirely different question from whether she is ALLOWED to go, or whether the State should be taking custody of a child because her parents choose to raise her in an unconventional way that potentially loosens the grip of the State's stranglehold on her education....

I went to her website, but for some reason I only got the front page and couldn't enter beyond. The article linked above indicates she will be sailing in an 8.3M yacht ("Guppy"). Beyond that I don't know much about her boat, equipment, preparations, planned route, etc.

Although, she was born aboard and cruised with her parents during the first seven years of her life. And she has completed a seven-week solo trip. That puts her well beyond the vast majority of sailors as far as experience goes. Sounds like she has salt in her veins.

So until I hear compelling evidence that she is not adequately prepared or equipped for this voyage, or that her parents are pressuring her to make it, I will reserve further judgement and only wish her "godspeed."


----------



## PierreMundo (Nov 29, 2007)

Her webpage is open now!


----------



## casioqv (Jun 15, 2009)

Cruisingdad said:


> My only frustration is that I hate the way our society has cataloged each of us based upon the number of years we have on the planet versus who we are. And I especially hate the way governments (ours or others) have unilaterally taken over from the parents as knowing what is best for children.


I couldn't agree more. Laws about what somebody can and cannot do based on age are simply age discrimination. While people do generally become more experienced and responsible as they get older, the variation between different people is often greater than the change an individual makes with age.

A good example is the driving age- it's absurdly easy to get a drivers license once you are of legal age, but impossible before that. Just a few seconds of driving on the road here in Los Angeles will prove that simply being of legal age fails to provide people with the ability to drive safely. I am certain there are people much younger than 16 that are capable of driving safer than many adults, and would be able to pass a much more rigorous drive test than is currently given.


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

PierreMundo said:


> Her webpage is open now!


Okay, thanks. Looks like the english-language version will be up soon too.

In the meanwhile, for those of you who like me are Dutch-challenged, her boat is a 1996 Hurley 800, new to her (but secondhand new). Here's a link to Hurley's website:

Hurley 800

and here are her vitals:

Net zoals Laura's vorige boot is dit ook weer een S-spant:

Lengte over alles: 8,30 m (LOA 8.3M)
Breedte : 2,75 m (Beam 2.75M)
Diepte: 1,40 m (Draft 1.4 M)
Waterverplaatsing: 3200 kg (Displacement 3200 kg)
Ballast: 1600 kg (Ballast 1600 kg)
Doorvaarthoogte: 12,50 m (met antenne) (Bridge clearance with antenna 12.5 M)
Watertank: 120 liter
Bouwjaar: 1996 (Build Year 1996)
Bouwnummer: 357 (Hull Number 357)
Stahoogte:1.80 m (Standinghead room 1.8M)
Motor: Vetus Diesel (16 pk)


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

*Reisplan*

And here is her intended route. It appears she is planning a two year circumnavigation, with stops, via the Panama and Suez canals, and the Med:

Reisplan

Het is moeilijk om precies aan te geven hoe de reis van Laura zal verlopen. Toch heeft ze al een voorlopig schema opgesteld:

2009 
September: Vertrek Nederland
December: Vertrek Canarische Eilanden

2010
Januari: Aankomst Cariben
Mei: Panama
November: Aankomst Australië
December: Darwin

2011 
Februari: Sri Lanka
April: Begin rode zee
Juli: Middellandse zee 
Augustus: Gibraltar
September: Nederland


----------



## PierreMundo (Nov 29, 2007)

Verdict in court-case is Friday August 28 at 10.00 AM local time.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

To this Colonial there is nothing amazing about it. Sending a 13-year old alone and unsupervised around the world, presumably for a year on her own? Would qualify the family for legal intervention in the US as well. AFAIK most or all US "child welfare" agencies, in all states, would call the abandonment and lack of supervision and they'd seize the child, make her a ward of the state, and bring charges against the parents.

Whether that's right or wrong...that's what many modern protectionist (ahem, Socialist) states do, and have done for some long time now. Nothing amazing here, or there.

Since she is a minor, there's also a question of how she would enter various nations in transit--again, alone and unsupervised. Some may not allow a minor unaccompanied. Others will have a problem that she cannot make any legal contract, so who carries her insurance liability for marina? And so on.

It has been a long time since "child kings" were sitting on the throne of most nations, and these days a 13-year old is only an adult in places like the African bush.

Of course, if the parents are serious, they'll understand why they are wrong under Dutch (and many other) laws, emigrate quickly to someplace where their actions are legal and acceptable, and abandon their child from there. It's a quick and simple solution, isn't it?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Good point hello. I hadn't thought about it that way.

This better than summer camp for parents! Toss your kid onto a sailboat, push it away from the dock toward Panama, wave goodbye, and party for 2 years! Just like being 20 again!

Nice.


----------



## jskrypek (Sep 19, 2008)

I've raised three kids and coached many 13 year old teams. I don't care how responsible or knowledgeable or mature she is. Any parent letting her go on a trip like that is a few bricks short of a load.


----------



## GreatWhite (Jan 30, 2007)

Girl's mature faster than boys. I don't recall anyone making a fuss about Zac's trip (I believe he was just 15 when he left.) 

I sense a double standard.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Double standard? 

I don't see that. I see one case (Zac's) where no one raised a point about his age, versus a second case (Holland) where the thread only was started BECAUSE "the state" was raising the point.

Hey, replacement kids are cheap, the Chinese export 'em by the boatload and in many parts of the world you can buy them for a lot less than the Chinese charge. The great (cough cough) concern and sanctity for each life is very much a luxury of recent Western European Civilization. There are parts of the world where breaking your baby's legs is a GOOD THING because it ensures they can have a job as a beggar.

No double standards, just different considerations in different venues. I suspect "Whoa! Dude!" plays differently in Dutch.


----------



## PierreMundo (Nov 29, 2007)

According to the Dutch Telegraaf (biggest newspaper) Laura was taken in custody in a Childhouse earlier this year by the British Authorities. She sailed to England by her own and the Authorities helt her because they found it to dangerous for her to sail home alone at sea. 
The reason she was sent to a Childhome was because her father refused to pick her up in England. Later he came and sent her home by her own boat. 
The British contacted the Dutch Police and the Youthcare organization.

Her Mother isn't happy with the plans. But she will let her go, because she don't like to lose the contact with Laura. Her parents are divorced.

This Tread wasn't ment to discuss the legal side, but to inform you that there are big dreams even by youngsters. Time will tell the future about this story.

Whole story n Dutch.
Laura zat even in kindertehuis
De 13-jarige Laura Dekker, die in haar eentje rond de wereld wil zeilen, is dit voorjaar in Engeland door de politie tegengehouden. 
Ze was naar Engeland gezeild, maar de autoriteiten vonden het te gevaarlijk om haar alleen op zee terug te laten varen. Omdat haar vader aanvankelijk niet naar Engeland wilde komen om haar op te halen, werd ze tijdelijk in een kindertehuis geplaatst. Dat zei haar advocaat Peter de Lange donderdag naar aanleiding van berichtgeving in de Volkskrant. 

Daarop besloot vader Dick toch maar naar Engeland af te reizen. Maar eenmaal op de kade aangekomen negeerde hij de Britten en lioet Laura toch in haar eentje terug naar Nederland terugvaren. „Dat is ook helemaal niet strafbaar, niet van hem en niet van haar”, aldus De Lange, die niet uitsluit dat Laura werd tegengehouden na een tip uit Nederland. 

De Britten schakelden vervolgens de Nederlandse politie en Bureau Jeugdzorg in. 

De Lange benadrukt dat Laura eerder door de autoriteiten is tegengehouden, toen zij alleen op bijvoorbeeld het IJsselmeer of langs de Nederlandse kust zeilde. „Maar dat leverde nooit een probleem op, want het is niet illegaal.” 

De kinderrechter in Utrecht beslist vrijdag of de ouders van Laura worden beperkt in het gezag over hun dochter. Ze wil alleen de wereld rondzeilen. Haar ouders steunen de plannen voor de twee jaar durende reis. 

Laura's ouders zijn gescheiden en de moeder van de havo-scholiere zou niet staan te springen bij de plannen van haar dochter. Ze zou het echter toelaten omdat ze het contact met Laura niet wil verliezen.


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

PierreMundo said:


> Her Mother isn't happy with the plans. But she will let her go, because she don't like to lose the contact with Laura. Her parents are divorced.


Thanks for that additional insight, Pierre. Also, for your earlier post that seems to indicate that the court case has not yet been resolved.

This is a different scenario from what I originally supposed. It's not a case of the parents being united on what is best for their child and the government interfering. Apparently the parents are somewhat at odds with one another.

It sounds like the father has custody. The trip seems to be happening against the wishes of her mother, and at the encouragement if not prodding of her father. Not good.

Maybe the courts should shift custody to the mother.


----------



## GreatWhite (Jan 30, 2007)

Age record set by British sailor - The Globe and Mail

Zak's record has fallen already!!!

Notice how this young British sailor's Dad followed him (without providing assistance.) Maybe the young girl's father will do the same? If so, I'd say he's a GREAT dad.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Cool that Mike made it. I've followed that story off and on but hadn't heard lately.

And I agree with you GW that if the girl's dad follows - it's cool. Very cool. Otherwise, it's freakin' creepy.


----------



## sgilder (Jul 26, 2009)

Most (if not all) states in the US require a child to attend some form of school until a certain age. Where I grew up you had to attend school until the age of 16. After that you could drop out if you wanted to. The State freaking out about her missing 2 years of compulsory school is not a uniquely Dutch concern. You can't do it here, either.

Also, I agree that kids can dream big, but they don't temper those dreams with reality. My little boy would probably think it'd be the coolest thing in the world to circumnavigate, but he probably won't consider any of the potential problems that come along with that sort of trip (like being away from mom and dad for 2 years!) That's my job. That is part of a parent's responsibility.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

Been there done that with the school when my daughter was in the ballet company between 14 and 17 years old 

Everbody pitched a fit ,I sad F_OFF and did some internet school with her NOW she has a degree from SUNY Buffalo and is starting her MSW at SUNY Stonybrook next week 

In fact the ballet deal has opened a LOT of doors for her because it has proven how hard she is willing to work to reach a goal 


Normal high school is HIGHLY overrated and does not send a child into the world prepared for much of anything BUT more school


----------



## artbyjody (Jan 4, 2008)

*We are all fools no matter what age*

If she has the blessings of the parents and she willingly and truly wants to do it... History - Christopher Columbus as an example..Nothing should get in her way if she has the knowledge, ambition,courage and resources. Promblem with our society we set age limits instead of competency ones.


----------



## flitemdic (Aug 22, 2009)

tommays said:


> Been there done that with the school when my daughter was in the ballet company between 14 and 17 years old
> 
> Everbody pitched a fit ,I sad F_OFF and did some internet school with her NOW she has a degree from SUNY Buffalo and is starting her MSW at SUNY Stonybrook next week
> 
> ...


Kudos to your daughter, but- and with all due respect- traveling with a ballet company, in a group, supervised, is an entirely different experience from circumnavigating the globe alone.

At any age.

No 13 year old- any nation, any creed- is mature enough to handle the psychological stresses of a circumnavigation. The physical challenges, maybe, but the stressors of single handed life for 2 years? No.

Hey, I'm all about government staying out of our lives, but it's parental decision making like this that allows them to get involved in the first place.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

How soon they forget.

Jessica Dubroff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sending minors solo onto the sea in order to "set records" is the stuff of stunts, not sailing. By definition, a child cannot give informed consent, so she can "agree" to go all she wants...it's meaningless.


----------



## Bene505 (Jul 31, 2008)

Valiente said:


> How soon they forget.
> 
> Jessica Dubroff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Sending minors solo onto the sea in order to "set records" is the stuff of stunts, not sailing. By definition, a child cannot give informed consent, so she can "agree" to go all she wants...it's meaningless.


IIRC, Jessica was killed by her flight instructor allowing heavy camera equipment into the back of the plane, both making the plane overweight and putting the center of gravity too far aft. That last part is difficult to do when a 200 pound adult is sitting next to the instructor, and easy when it's a lightweight child sitting there instead.

The comparison here isn't that easy, more like Laura Dekkker having an adult on board that decided to open all the seacocks and hatches in a storm, and take out the reefs and furl out more genny to boot, all while pouring seawater into the diesel tank and unscrewing the keel bolts. Jessica would have been better off by herself than with that hack of an instructor that ended up killing them both.

Not saying anything about Laura with the above, just setting the record straight on Jessica. When the weather is nice, a thoroughly trained 9 year old can fly planes all day safely.

As for Laura, it's the land-based dangers that might be worse than the dangers at sea. If dad met her in every port and helped her with basic protection against bad guys, provisioning, weather windows and other planning, that would be a big improvement. Following her would be even better.


----------



## PierreMundo (Nov 29, 2007)

For the moment Laura is not alowed to go! 
The authority of the parents is limited by court. At this way they try to prevent Laura leaving The Netherlands. She can live with her father at home. The Judge emphasized that the father isn't a bad father. 
Supervision by Youthcare is for 2 months. Meanwhile they will research if Laura can handle the psychic pressure of the planned trip and if she is able to home-school herself for 3rd and 4th grade. 
So, if nothing special happens in between we have to waite 2 more months.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Pierre - do you think she should go? I'm kind of interested in your perspective since this is happening in your backyard. We Yanks always are quick with an opinion - but it's from our cultural viewpoint, not yours.

If nothing else, how can a kid home-school herself? That sounds weird.


----------



## k1vsk (Jul 16, 2001)

the fundamental question remains - should a court impose common sense on a parent who apparently has none?


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

My daughter home-school here self with and internet based school program we payed for that included grading and while she had a host family It was here and the 3 roommates that rasied each other

Oak Meadow: Homeschooling Curriculum, Resources, and Support

It must of worked because when she moved to a different company in Carlisle PA she had no problem being placed into the 12th grade and getting a REAL diploma in one year 

And getting into collage RIGHT after that

I get a bit extra pisssed about the whole thing because i went the trade school route in 1973 and got SH?? about back then and the know it alls have pretty much destroyed the trade programs NOW in this area ,By making it more and more diffcult to learn a trade and get a diploma which was the norm in the past

Your also deluding yourself about"happy home life" and what a kid can do i had two handicapped brothers and two parents with drinking problems and was the adult pretty dam early in life


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Wow Tom, congrats to your daughter. That's cool. She was in ballet right?

My wife is homeschooling our kids and they are loving it. It just seemed weird to me to think about a kid doing it him/herself based on my own dislike for school when I was a kid. Had it been up to me, I would have seriously blown it all off!!


----------



## PierreMundo (Nov 29, 2007)

Hi smackdaddy,

Thanks for asking. Raised in the Netherlands, traveled around the world in North-, Central- and South America, Europe, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, China, Australia and big parts of Africa and living in the Dutch Antilles for almost 15 years were we got our kids 6 and 8 years old I’m still Dutch but at a distant. I followed Zac from the beginning and like to see many more youngsters doing things we perhaps also liked when we were young. When I heart of Laura I also followed this story. Because it got so much media attention already in the Netherlands Authorities had to do something. We have laws for school going kids, and as I read the posts here, there are laws and rules in the USA as well. Perhaps even more. But different countries with different rules with same intentions. Even New Zeeland probably won’t let her go.
Holland is a very small country and we are not used to home-schooling. I heart of home-schooling on Dutch cruisers around the world, but than with parents on board. My opinion on this is that a girl with so many tasks to do, she has no time for doing home-schooling. Internet at sea? And then the physical part. Is she strong enough? And can she do the many technical parts. She has been held in England. How will other countries (Authorities) react and will she not been abused by rough harbour people, Fishermen at sea etc. with the wrong intentions.

Nature can be harsh and people violent especially for a lonely 13 year old girl without supervision. The world isn’t (always) nice. 

If it was my girl I say NO. Not for the honour to be the first and youngest. If she likes the sailing and adventure, then why not with her father?

I like to see her go. But she has to follow the rules and mostly I like to see her safe!


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Sounds very reasonable to me Pierre. I'm with you.

I think it was CD who asked if there was a double standard here in comparing the hesitancy to let her do this with the general support of Zac's trip. And I'll be honest...I do think letting this young girl go is far worse because of all the reasons you mention above. It's not the worst of nature that scares me, it's the worst of men.

Maybe that is a double standard - maybe Zac could have suffered the same potential atrocities - but I honestly don't think so. And especially after so much global attention - I think it's insane to send this girl off now. It's like chumming the water then sending your kind in to swim.

The downsides of press and sponsorship I guess.


----------



## Boasun (Feb 10, 2007)

Gesh... If she went, the parents would have to set up a world wide net of care givers to assume custody until she clears customs and is headed out to the next port.
If the Boy started at fifteen then she could wait a couple of years and then see if the desire to sail the world is still there. And if that desire is still there then she could try then. But the key issue would be the Care givers in various ports that would see to her and the boat's need.


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

sgilder said:


> Most (if not all) states in the US require a child to attend some form of school until a certain age. Where I grew up you had to attend school until the age of 16. After that you could drop out if you wanted to. The State freaking out about her missing 2 years of compulsory school is not a uniquely Dutch concern. You can't do it here, either...


I'm going to respectfully disagree.

I'm not aware of a single State in the U.S. that doesn't allow home-schooling. And it is not something that requires the permission of the state or local government, either. If any communication with the government is required at all, it is merely to inform them that your child won't be attending their local school system. It's certainly not to ask permission.

As far as the curriculum, home schooled kids can have as structured or unstructured a program as their parents want. Hell, some parents embrace a philosophy called "unschooling" where the kids follow no curriculum whatsoever. Instead they learn by doing/experience. No academics whatsoever.

Bottom line: Attending the government's school system is not compulsory in the United States, as it appears to be in Holland.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

John

Having done it in Ny your required to have the SCHOOL approve and monitor your home school program which is WHY i had to use she does not live in Ny anymore F-OFF plan 

It was intresting and made the papers at the time as great neck schools had done a program to allow Sarah Hughes to school while doing the Olympics and they got the seat time ISSUE waved 


Commack schools were i live would not do anything as despite having compleatly wired class rooms that allowed you be in class from anyplace the teachers contract did not require them to use it OR do e-mail  and they stayed hung up on the required seat time


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

tommays said:


> John
> 
> Having done it in Ny your required to have the SCHOOL approve and monitor your home school program which is WHY i had to use she does not live in Ny anymore F-OFF plan
> 
> ...


Tommays,

I understand that some jurisdictions have such rules in place to oversee curriculum. But that is not the same as you having to receive permission to homeschool your kids. You are in fact ALLOWED to homeschool your kids, the only constraint in your particular jurisdiction being that they must approve the curriculum. That is very different from Holland where attending the state school system is apparently compulsory.


----------



## denverd0n (Jun 20, 2008)

JohnRPollard said:


> I'm going to respectfully disagree.
> 
> As far as the curriculum, home schooled kids can have as structured or unstructured a program as their parents want.


I am also going to have to respectfully disagree. Yes, you can choose to home-school your children in all 50 states. There are, however, only 10 states that leave homeschooling essentially unregulated--where "unschooling" would be an option. In all the other 40 states (and in DC) you are required to answer to the authorities in some manner as regards the curriculum you are using, the hours of education your child is receiving, your methods for grading, and so on.

As specifically regards the Dekker girl, I think she is too young. There is a world of difference between the average 15 year old and even the most mature of 13 year olds (and I think 15 is too young, too!). My daughter was extremely mature for her age at 13. Showed much better judgment and independence than any other 13 year old I have known. She still was not mature enough for something like this.

And I have to agree that I just don't see anyway that she can homeschool herself while at the same time single-handing a boat around the world. At least not and be able to do it to any sort of acceptable standard.

Yes, it would be a tremendous experience for her, at least if she lives through it. That alone, however, doesn't even come close to being a justification for letting her go.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

Again the two school years your talking about are highly overrated ,my daughter had a marginal formal education for two years and was able to step right back in to the 12th grade and excel because it easy compared to the rigors of training full time 

Not that i am against school my wife has and MBA the son has one year left in law school and the daughter two for her MSW 

I just went to grease monkey school and paid for everything but its a high tech world and there's no life if you DON'T learn just how we THINK you should


----------



## billyruffn (Sep 21, 2004)

Hmmmm.....my grandson is now 4. If I work with him over the next 3-4 years maybe by the time he's 7 or 8 I can turn him loose on Billy Ruff'n to go after the record. 

I know he'd be game, he loves Grandpa's "Big Boat". Now all I have to do is talk his mother into it.


----------



## sgilder (Jul 26, 2009)

I guess I should have been more specific in my original post. Obviously homeschooling counts as a form of education, along with trade schools, or any other non-traditional forms of school. My point was that in most states, if not all, parents are required to provide for the education of their children up to a certain age. Failing to do so will almost guarantee a visit from a social worker. A parent deciding to pull their kid out of school for two years regardless of the reason should probably expect some grief for it. Heck, parents of student athletes or performers (musicians, actors, etc) deal with this all the time and their kids don't miss nearly that much school.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

I should add surprisingly my daughter had no problems getting a job in the eating disorder research lab at SUNY Buffalo because of what she learned in the dance world and it was also a BIG help getting into SUNY Stonybrook as she had something a bit different to bring to the program


----------



## fullkeel7 (Apr 16, 2008)

Awl come on you naysayers. Where there's a will... Their government is against it, the school's against it and although it's probably divorce sour grapes, Mom's against it. 

So where is a loving, concerned dad with custody turn, to live out a dream that he is well past the age limit and probably doesn't have the nads for it anyway? "Oh sweetie, wanna go sailing"?

TOO YOUNG? Nah. A few cycles in a commercial washer will get her into the motion and psychologically prepare her for the rigors of off shore sailing. They say girls mature faster and she'll have two whole years to do that. I mean jeez, where do these countries get these child protection laws? 

PREPARATION: Maybe he should pack her up and move to India where they don't bother with this kind of crap. While in training, to help defray the cost of her steroid treatments (to make up for her small stature and to build upper body strength), she could roll bidis cigarettes to also develope finger/hand dexterity. If she rolls for 18 hours a day, she may be able to send mommy a few of daddy's alimony payments as well.

EDGE-MA-CATION? Heck, what for? Just build an onboard shelf for a few McGuffey Readers and turn her loose. After all the steriod treatments she's going to sound much like Barry White and probably make a fortune making R & B CDs for the lovelorn, so why go to the expense? Daddy could use the extra cash for a receational couple of hours in one of India's fine opium pits so he can actually see his own thought processes go up in smoke.

PERSONAL SAFTY: I'm not going back to recall the brand of boat for her intended use, but as I recall, it surely invoked a sense of security and safety. Good nuff. By the time she leaves for her little walk about and with proper small arms weapons trainning, she'll be able to handle an AK-47 better than most adults. Ya just can't beat the quick reflexes of a juiced up 13 yo!
Of course she'll have to surrender all weapons at some of her stops. Although she probably won't be green, that Lou Ferrigno look should deter any unwanted criminal activity.

I'm sure that I may have miss some secondary preparation, but I'll wager the father of this kid won't. After all...it is for a RECORD!


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

fullkeel7 said:


> After all...it is for a RECORD!


That, right there is the sickness of it all.

This is where we tie into the Vick thread. As long as it's for the win - it's all good. BS.

Good post keel.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

smackdaddy said:


> My wife is homeschooling our kids and they are loving it. It just seemed weird to me to think about a kid doing it him/herself based on my own dislike for school when I was a kid. Had it been up to me, I would have seriously blown it all off!!


Different kids different attitudes. We home schooled our daughter through 11th grade. 
She would read a giant unabridged Shakespeare book we had for hours and hours completely on her own laughing hysterically at the funny parts of the comedies.
She was definitely capable of home-schooling herself from the age of about 10 up. 
Some argue that the situation in school where the classroom work is either too easy, too hard, restricted to memorizing stuff for a standard test, waiting for other students to be disciplined and all the other bad stuff that happens in some classrooms is the reason many students blow off learning.

So now my daughter has just finished her teacher certification classes and just has to do the student teaching for a couple of semesters and she will be looking for a job in her chosen profession. 
*Grade school teacher.*

Go figure Kids huh!!!


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Heh-heh. Thank your daughter for making me look like a total chump!


----------



## GreatWhite (Jan 30, 2007)

I think it is possible that the dad was just SUPPORTING his daughter's dream. The court said NO but stood by him as a dad. I am sorry but I do/will stand my kids. If they said they could do something great and I could stand behind them and believe in them that is a great thing. 

I disagree with the fascination and focus on how the dad is probably nuts...we need to stand by our kids more and that is what I believe could be the theme of this story... although I have no idea what the situation really is, and how could I through a couple of media reports. 

Oh and yes, homeschooling can be awesome, I have met MANY well balanced well educated kids who were home-schooled.


----------



## RandyBC (Mar 2, 2008)

Children are not the property of their parents. They do not have absolute rights over them, nor should they. They are entrusted to look after their best interests and to keep them safe above all else. Parental rights are not limitless in any society that I am aware of although I'm sure there are exceptions. We don't let kids smoke or drink alcohol legally despite what parents have to say. Even in the US, are parental rights limited when such questions arise. I would propose that sailing solo around the world is likely more hazardous to the health, or at least potentially so, than either smoking or drinking. When it looks like parents may not be fulfilling their obligations to the child to keep them safe, I think that is perfectly within the rights of the state to intervene. In this case the Dutch court has not said "no", they have said "whoa...lets take a step back and review the situation". They are acting more as advocates for a child that may not have the maturity or judgement to advocate for herself..or maybe she does, that is what the court is trying to determine. It would be difficult to advocate once this girl is already alone on the high seas. 
Somebody else brought up another good point, the seas are only one danger, what about the ports that this girl will visit? How safe are they?
It seems to me as well that there are definite cultural views that color how one views this situation. Americans as a whole seem to be a lot more sensitive to governments infringing on what they perceive as rights and freedoms. That is not intended as a criticism , just an observation. Those of us that live in "socialist" countries like Canada  seem much more willing to accept limits to certain freedoms if it is for the perceived "greater good". Gun control is one example of that (not to open another debate).
Just my $0.02...its worth what you paid for it 
Respect to all....


----------



## SSBN506 (Apr 18, 2008)

I have to agree with RandyBC. You don't make rules that are geared to only the exceptional people. Jut because one 13 year old girl may be able to do it shouldn't mean all should be allowed. I know know one has suggested all should be lowed but rules have to do their best to support the majority not the minority.

I know the slippery slope argument is a bad one but what if the girl really wanted to go into prostitution and here dad supported it. If the government intervened would we be crying for her freedom or here parents rights to do with their kids as they pleas. I don't think so. 

Rules are intended to serve the collective greater good. They fail all the time but the alternative is much worse. We just have strike a fare balance. That tends to change country to country and person to person.

"Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried."

Winston Churchill


----------



## lporcano (Feb 20, 2003)

seeyahttp://35knots.com


----------



## ericread (Feb 23, 2009)

Sorry, but I just don't get it. What price do you put on fleeting fame? Any 13 year old is still a child. Given good weather I believe just about any 13 year old with the proper sailing training could make a go at this. But this isn't about good weather. This is about a 13 year old child handling worst case scenarios at sea and in port. As for sexism, I believe it is as irresponsible for a parent to let any child, boy or girl, take that kind of life-threatening risk. 

For those that suggest that children be able to make such decisions, do you anticipate 13 year old fire fighters? They probably have the ability to drive a truck, and they really, really want to be a fire-person! A single-hander at sea has all of the risks a firefighter has, only without the support of their fellow firefighters.

Heck, let's put children back in factorys. They could earn records for being the youngest kids in heavy manufacturing. So we lose some children from time to time, that's just the cost of setting records isn't is?

Like I said, it just doesn't make sense to me....


----------



## k1vsk (Jul 16, 2001)

Too many people here seem to have a wanton careless attitude about child care predicated upon the old argument about government intervention and some perception a parent knows how to bring up their kids. BS!

There are the same helpless irresponsible parents who depend on laws to prevent their kids from driving a car, buying alcohol or cigarettes, etc.
because the parents are incapable of doing their job.
There are far too many parents who shouldn't be!

Until these people can effectively nurture their children, someone else will have to do it. Any rightfully so.


----------



## RandyBC (Mar 2, 2008)

Precisely....governments have a right to intervene on behalf of a child whose parents wont.


----------



## JimHawkins (Aug 25, 2006)

My 13 yr old daughter saw this story and asked some good questions:
Can her parents visit her in ports along the way?
Will she have a radio to call for help with?
Can she quit if she wants to?
If something breaks and she doesn't know how to fix it, can she radio for help fixing it?
How long is the longest passage between ports?
What's the longest passage she has done already?
and a few others.

Her bottom line was "I wouldn't want to, but if she knows what she's getting into and wants to go, they should let her." She also pointed out that many kids' lifestyles contain more real dangers than Laura will likely face. Personally I think some 13 yr olds have a lot more sense than a lot of adults I know.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"Until these people can effectively nurture their children, someone else will have to do it. "

Very kind to the children, but a bit cruel to the gene pool, isn't that?

You're sure it is a good idea to put an end to Darwinian evolution and replace it with "survival of all" ? And everything that comes with "all" running things?


----------



## k1vsk (Jul 16, 2001)

JimHawkins said:


> Her bottom line was "I wouldn't want to, but if she knows what she's getting into and wants to go, they should let her." Personally I think some 13 yr olds have a lot more sense than a lot of adults I know.


The bigger bottom line is she, being 13, can't conceivably "know what she is getting into" and at least one of her parents apparently realizes that.

No matter how much "sense" a child may have, he/she is still a child. When many otherwise intelligent and ostensibly experienced adults can't do this, thinking ANY child can is simply delusional.


----------



## lporcano (Feb 20, 2003)

seeyahttp://35knots.com


----------



## Sailormon6 (May 9, 2002)

k1vsk said:


> Too many people here seem to have a wanton careless attitude about child care predicated upon the old argument about government intervention and some perception a parent knows how to bring up their kids. BS!


There's nothing outdated about the notion that government is a miserable substitute for a loving parent. Parents are in a position to know how their child feels and thinks about things, and their maturity, or lack thereof, and they are in a position to know the extent of the child's sailing knowledge and skill. A judge knows absolutely nothing about the child, but relies on the testimony of a social worker or psychologist with minimal credentials who has talked with the child for a grand total of an hour or less. The judge probably has no experience sailing, so must rely on the testimony of a sailor to inform him of the challenges involved in a circumnavigation. Because there are no accepted standards of expertise for sailors, the sailor might or might not be sufficiently experienced to express meaningful opinions. Worse yet, the judge might be one of the many ill-informed people who harbors an unexpressed bias against anyone who goes to sea in a small boat, thinking that they must be either crazy or suicidal. Important decisions that will affect your child's life for many years rely upon such a shallow basis. This judge, upon whom you are so ready to rely for a thoughtful decision, might well be the same person who couldn't figure out what to do with an abused child, and so he returned the child to the custody of his abuser, with a stern admonition to not do that anymore.

I spent a career working with judges, and they are generally nice, well-intentioned folks, but a judge doesn't love your child, or know your child, or understand your child, and often doesn't have a very solid grasp of your familial relationship. A judge is the absolute last place you should go for an important decision affecting the life of your child, and then only after all other alternatives have failed. In that case, you might or might not get a sound decision, but at least you'll get a decision.


----------



## SSBN506 (Apr 18, 2008)

hellosailor said:


> "
> You're sure it is a good idea to put an end to Darwinian evolution and replace it with "survival of all" ? And everything that comes with "all" running things?


You say something very interesting. In a lot of hard core conservative views I see undertones of this statement and always wonder if this is what they are really getting at.

Do we build a society where the strong support the weak or where the strong crush the weak.

Being a Canadian we lean toward the former at this time.


----------



## denverd0n (Jun 20, 2008)

davidpm said:


> She was definitely capable of home-schooling herself from the age of about 10 up.


I don't doubt that. I don't doubt that there are a lot of kids out there who are capable of home-schooling themselves. But can they do it at the same time that they are dealing with all of the issues associated with a solo circumnavigation? THAT, I doubt!


----------



## mdidriksen (Aug 16, 2008)

Interesting that Jessica Watson's proposed trip hasn't raised the same outcry, although there is a big difference between 14 and 16.

Jessica Watson - youngest ever to sail around the world

She's also planning on a non-stop, so I guess that means not as much worry about encountering unsavory characters in ports, but certainly more worry about encountering nasty conditions.


----------



## denverd0n (Jun 20, 2008)

JimHawkins said:


> My 13 yr old daughter saw this story and asked some good questions:
> Can her parents visit her in ports along the way?
> Will she have a radio to call for help with?
> Can she quit if she wants to?
> ...


I hope you told your daughter the appropriate answers. For instance, can she radio for help? She can try, but if she's in the middle of the ocean there is very little chance that help will get there in time to make any difference. She needs to be prepared to deal with EVERYTHING that might come up, and to deal with it entirely by herself.

And even then, she's too young.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

A lot of you are hung up that what shes misses in school is a big deal that cant be fixed later and dismiss that what she does learn will be far more inportant 

And shes allready done more solo time at sea (weeks at a time ) than 99% of the sailors in the world and seems better prepared than mosty also


----------



## PierreMundo (Nov 29, 2007)

*Mother won't let go Laura!*

FYI

For the first time Laura's Mother speaks about the plans from her daughter. (Volkskrant, Dutch Newspaper)

"If it was me, I won't let her go. Period!"
She made this decision although she knows she can loose the contact with Laura. I prefer to have a daughter alive I never see, instead of a death daughter.

She thinks Laura can handle the voyage technical. "She can sail like the devil, thats not the problem". But she sees the problems in third world harbors and the physical pressure alone at sea. "The main point is: To my opinion she isn't an adult yet."

She isn't also sure if it is a plan from Laura or from her father.

As we know. We have to wait for the outcome in 2 months. Youth-care has to make it very clear that Laura can't make the trip.

Newspaper article
Moeder wil zeilster Laura niet laten gaan
WIJK BIJ DUURSTEDE - De moeder van de 13-jarige Laura Dekker wil niet dat haar dochter op deze leeftijd solo rond de wereld zeilt. Het is de eerste keer dat de moeder van Laura zich in de media uitlaat over de voornemens van haar dochter. 
Foto: ANP 
„Als het aan mij ligt, zou ik Laura niet laten gaan. Klaar", zegt Babs Müller in de Volkskrant. „Het breekt mijn hart dat ik hierdoor misschien het contact met mijn dochter verlies. Ik heb nog nooit in mijn leven zo'n moeilijk besluit moeten nemen. Maar ik moet de gevolgen van mijn beslissing accepteren. Ik heb liever een levende dochter die ik nooit meer zie, dan een dode dochter."

Müller denkt dat haar dochter de reis technisch aankan. „Ze kan zeilen als de duivel. Dat is het probleem niet." Maar ze ziet wel problemen in de derdewereldhavens en in de psychische druk van het alleen zijn op zee. „Het belangrijkste van alles is: in mijn ogen is ze gewoon nog niet volwassen."

Ook vraagt ze zich af of de reis wel Laura's eigen plan is en niet dat van haar vader, waar Müller inmiddels van gescheiden is. „Ik heb het idee dat hij al jaren bezig is haar dit in te prenten." Laura woont sinds haar zesde niet meer bij haar moeder.

De kinderrechter stelde de puber voor een periode van twee maanden onder toezicht van jeugdzorg. De Raad voor de Kinderbescherming spande de rechtszaak aan omdat het volgens de raad onverantwoord is dat het meisje de reis van twee jaar in haar eentje maakt. De rechtbank deelt de vraagtekens bij Laura's vermogen om met extreme omstandigheden om te gaan.

Half oktober moeten enkele onderzoeken naar de situatie en naar Laura zelf zijn afgerond. De kinderbescherming moet concreet laten zien waarom Laura volgens haar de reis niet zou moeten maken. Ook heeft de kinderrechter een kinderpsycholoog aangesteld om de zeilster te onderzoeken. Op basis van die onderzoeken bepaalt de kinderrechter eind oktober of Laura langer onder toezicht van jeugdzorg blijft.


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

PierreMundo said:


> FYI
> 
> For the first time Laura's Mother speaks about the plans from her daughter. (Volkskrant, Dutch Newspaper)
> 
> ...


Thanks Pierre.

The mother's comments seem to confirm what we previously inferred -- there are legitimate questions about the father/daughter relationship and the true impetus for the voyage.

Putting aside her ability to homeschool, her sailing skills, boat choice, preparations, etc, -- it seems the mother's concerns about the safety of her minor child are being minimized or overridden by the father, from whom she's divorced. If her estranged parent's don't agree on this, it doesn't seem likely that the courts (through youth services) will allow it.


----------



## mccary (Feb 24, 2002)

*In today's NY Times*

There is an editorial in today (9/8) NY Times on this and is worth reading.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/08/opinion/08tue4.html?_r=1&th&emc=th


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

14 is too young, simple as that.

I can't believe anyone would try to take the side of allowing a 14 year old child to sail a boat around the world, that is just stupid as hell.


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

Stupid &%^$ like this is why we all have to suffer laws that protect people from themselves, because some dumbasses can't exercise a little common sense unless they're told specifically what they can and can't do.


----------



## lporcano (Feb 20, 2003)

seeyahttp://35knots.com


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

lporcano said:


> I would like to point out that your comment really contradicts itself. The point of not having laws which interfere with personal choice is that what I deem reasonable is not what you may deem reasonable. Competing in the Vendee Globe gives you a 1 in 20 chance of dieing at sea. There are many people, perhaps a majority who would say that anyone who competes in such a race is an idiot and that it should be outlawed. Heck going to sea in any small craft is inherently dangerous, and by your reasoning some people may decide to outlaw sailing altogether since "some dumbasses can't exercise a little common sense". Even when it comes to kids, high school football can be very dangerous. There is a case right now where a kid died during a rigorous practice. There are kids who have died playing lacrosse and baseball as well. At what point do we add these sports to the list of prohibited activities, since dumbasses don't know how dangerous they are. What about the risks of simply growing up in a poverty stricken area. Growing up and going to school in the inner city is dangerous. Perhaps parents who decide to have kids in the inner city should have their parental rights suspended as well. A kid growing up in the inner city is more than 10 times as likely to be murdered, than one growing up in the suburbs. What kind of parent makes a decision like that, and should we suspend their parental rights for being dumbasses? Make all kids from the inner city a ward of the state? Or is it just the line that you personally draw as to what is reasonable that the entire world should follow?
> 
> Len Porcano
> 35 KNOTS


Len I appreciate your comment.

Firstly, the difference between the Vendee Globe and this situation is that the people who participate in the Vendee Globe are adults who are old enough to make stupid decisions for themselves. I don't care if Len goes out and competes in the Vendee Globe, I would cheer you on, because you are old enough to know what you are getting into. A child, on the other hand, simply doesn't know - children aren't just small adults with all adult capabilities, not only do they not possess the life experience to make good decisions, their minds aren't even fully working on an adult level yet, they aren't even fully capable human beings yet. Yes, sometimes children think they know what they are getting into, witness young teenage mothers, they obviously have the will to direct themselves into grown-up situations. I know a 14 year old who wants to buy an old Mustang and drive it on country roads, and he's perfectly capable of driving the car, but that doesn't mean its a good decision, or that he is grown up enough to make that decision - if his parents let him then who's to blame if he kills someone, him ? Or his parents for letting him ? Sometimes you just have to be the grown-up when your kid wants something.

Secondly, you point out a lot of things that are obviously bad for children for good reason, because we'd prefer children not be subjected to dangerous situations if it can be avoided. Maybe the situation isn't something that is easily avoided (living in the city), or maybe the activity doesn't have high risks - you choose baseball and football, show me some statistics that kids have a one in ten chance of dying while playing baseball and yes we should definitely not allow children to participate anymore. None of the things you point are anywhere near as dangerous as allowing a 14 year old child to sail a boat around the earth, something that even adults don't do in great numbers because it is so dangerous and takes such a toll on the body and mind.

It is ironic that I would be the one arguing this point since I actually do support children being given more freedom - I feel the drinking age is much too high, if you're going to let a 17 year old kid fight and die he can sure as hell have a beer. I also know some very responsible children who help out on farms who should be allowed to drive the family tractor on the roads, once they get about 14 or 15 they are old enough to drive a tractor on a dirt road, that's my opinion. But driving a tractor on a dirt road isn't exactly sailing a boat around the earth alone - it's a question of degree, and of common sense.

I don't care what philosophical argument you put forth, 14 is too young. 14 years old is a 9th grader just out of middle school. I know a girl that age who is only now being allowed to go to the mall with her friends.


----------



## lporcano (Feb 20, 2003)

seeyahttp://35knots.com


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

Len, I understand what you are saying ...

Look, if she's sophisticated enough to sail around the world by herself then she should have no trouble at all talking her way out of state custody without any help. If we put your (Len's) mind into a 13 year old's body you'd have no trouble talking your way out of the jam she's in and getting underway, because you have the life experience, mental capability, etc, to put forth a convincing argument and to find a way to get what you want. If we put you in front of a judge you'd use whatever strategy necessary to be convincing, you'd be able to navigate through this entire situation, figure out what moves you need to make, etc, and eventually you'd get your way. That's what adults are capable of doing, they are able to work with what they have to get what they want, they are self-directed enough to get their way, they are smart enough and have enough life experience to know what the best way forward is. If the kid is so capable, fine, let her talk her way on to her boat and shove off, she shouldn't have any problem with that if she is resourceful enough to deal with a broken mast at sea, or patch the deck with something if it is leaking, etc. Brilliant kid like that should have been smart enough not to get put into state custody in the first place, she should have had enough wisdom to know how people were going to react to what she was doing and she should have figured out a way to deal with that without losing her liberty. If she needs mommy and daddy to save her now, won't she need them later ? You wouldn't need your mommy and daddy to come save you if your mind was in her body, you'd be able to figure out how to get what you want, why ? Because you are an *adult* who is capable of understanding the complexities involved, capable of creating promising strategies that lead to successful outcomes, etc. If the girl is relying on her parents for everything, to get her out of jams, etc, then she's got no business sailing on her own either.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

wind_magic said:


> It is ironic that I would be the one arguing this point since I actually do support children being given more freedom - I feel the drinking age is much too high, if you're going to let a 17 year old kid fight and die he can sure as hell have a beer.


At what age were young men 'drafted' into service on Men-of-War (at least up until the 1900's)? Wanna take a guess? As I said before, go watch Master and Commander which was actually fairly accurate. It was not that they could not find men to hold the officer roles, they were 'kids'. Were the 'kids' of that day more responsible than the kids of today? How many 9 yo's in Africa are holding AK-47's? Ever read any stories of the old west? When did the native Indians consider you coming of age?

Times have changed, you might say? But I cannot see sailing alone across the Atlantic with the 44 million gadgets and EPirbs being any more dangerous than serving on a frigate in her majesty's navy, and certainly not as dangerous as fighting in Africa.

My point is that governments have arbitraily set age-specific boundaries as when a person is mature enough to do 'something', whether it be drink, smoke, drive, serve in the military, or sail around the world. And yes, I also have a real problem that our government feels that you are too immature to know when to drink a beer, but you can be snatched up to Afghanistan with a machine gun and walk point in the terrorists back yard. Sorry, but what a hypocritical crock!

I have an issue, as a parent, of thinking that the government always knows what is best for us dumb citizens - or that someone else that does not even know me, knows what is best for my child. I ralize that there are some obvious examples of child abuse, I do not think this is one.

That being said, I do not support the idea of my children doing this and would not support it (at least not at this juncture in my life). I don't see the point or what there is to prove. I also feel it is a needless risk. Yet, I might say the same if they were 21. I simply would not have the option of holding them back. It all depends on them and their level of competence and WHY they are doing it. And the truth is that both sides of this argument (for and against) have made very valid reasons. I just get sick and tired of everyone else knowing what is best for everyone else.

- CD


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

CD-
'How many 9 yo's in Africa are holding AK-47's? " Perhaps you have just shot your own point down?
Everyone, most especially the older men who put those AK's in those kids' hands, knows that a 9 year old boy is putty. No morality, no fear of death, no concept of it. So they take the kids and brainwash them and make them into little murderers that no one wants to shoot at--because after all, they're just kids. [sic]
Precisely the reason that many people and governments would not allow a 13-year old to go solo around the world, much less live without adult supervision. No matter how smart or wordly they may be, they are almost universally underdeveloped, and as such usually termed "persons in need of protection". 
You want to get liberated and free from parental or other supervision at an early age? OK, maybe in Kenya you can go walkabout into the bush and do it. WTH, the lions got to eat too. But in most of the self-termed civilized world? 
Nuh-uh, that's simply not the way things are done. You want to get married and make babies at 14? Again, nuh-uh, someone goes to jail for statutory rape. (Except perhaps in Iceland, where I understand the age of consent is 11.)

I suppose that if the parents--or child--couldn't figure out that they would have to deal with their own government's laws about their own situation before they got this far, that also only goes to prove that none of them, parent or child, is outstandingly capable of dealing with the rules that go along with life. They could have avoided the whole kerfluffle with a little Proper Prior Planning, either changing venues or leaving that one quietly.


----------



## Omatako (Sep 14, 2003)

Cruisingdad said:


> At what age were young men 'drafted' into service on Men-of-War (at least up until the 1900's)? Wanna take a guess? As I said before, go watch Master and Commander which was actually fairly accurate. It was not that they could not find men to hold the officer roles, they were 'kids'. Were the 'kids' of that day more responsible than the kids of today? How many 9 yo's in Africa are holding AK-47's? Ever read any stories of the old west? When did the native Indians consider you coming of age? - CD


Hey CD I get where you're coming from and at the end of the post I see that you actually don't support the concept but just for completeness on my side lets look at the above.

Firstly it is clear that the kids in Master & Commander type situations were not alone. They had others to assist with decision making and only once they were fully conversant with what they were doing did they make decisions of their own. And if the decisions were dodgy, someone experienced would be right there to correct any potentially dangerous situations. And also, mostly these kids got the breaks not because of what they were but who they were. No commoner would be given a position of command.

Secondly there are no events on record of African 9yo's making intelligent decisions with their AK47's. They're doing what their masters tell them to. And they're anything but responsible, mostly they're wired up on dope. It's unfortunately a bad analogy.

Look at the Jessica whats-her-face thread for my opinion on this. These kids are not skilled enough to handle the stuff that open sea sailing will chuck at them. They will have serious difficulty make the correct decisions when the chips are down and they're knackered/disoriented/scared/hungry. Hell, I find that difficult as an adult with many years of sailing at sea.

Yes it's true some kids mature quicker than others but 13 years old?? No, sorry, I don't buy it. The parent who allows this should be put on notice. When things go wrong and the kid dies - you go to jail. End of story.

End of rant 

Oh and comparing the Vendee Globe with children single-handing around the world is also a little skewed. Vendee Globe sailors have extensive experience, the best kit money can buy, real-time satellite weather prediction of the best sort and teams of professionals watching their every move with the best telecoms kit available in the world.

I suspect this is not the case with these children. I stand prepared to be corrected.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Now here's a guy that even I'd listen to:

*Whitbread/Volvo veteran Andrew Cape has urged teenage sailor Jessica Watson to reconsider her solo round the world attempt.*


----------



## PCP777 (Apr 7, 2009)

It should be a decision that her parents make with her, not a decision by the government. Perhaps the caveat is, if she has to be rescued, than maybe her family should pick up the bill.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

'It should be a decision that her parents make with her, not a decision by the government."
Why? Is she the chattel goods property of her parents? Is her mother the property of her father, to be bought and sold at the market as well?

It has been said that the sign of an advanced society is how well it takes care of the elderly, the infirm, and others who cannot take care of themselves. That makes it the responsibility of society at large (the village, the government) to say "Pops, you're wrong,she can't go and if you can't take care of her, we'll do it for you."

Or, perhaps you can draw some rational line between society backing up the "supervision" of persons who need it (of any age and mental state) and the opposite approach, of saying the kids belong to the parents and can be treated like any other property. Logic must apply.


----------



## PCP777 (Apr 7, 2009)

hellosailor said:


> 'It should be a decision that her parents make with her, not a decision by the government."
> Why? Is she the chattel goods property of her parents? Is her mother the property of her father, to be bought and sold at the market as well?
> 
> It has been said that the sign of an advanced society is how well it takes care of the elderly, the infirm, and others who cannot take care of themselves. That makes it the responsibility of society at large (the village, the government) to say "Pops, you're wrong,she can't go and if you can't take care of her, we'll do it for you."
> ...


I don't consider children property to be bought and sold, but they are a parent's responsibility. Who better than the parents to know if their kid is ready to ride a bike or sail a boat at (X) age?

There are too many intrusive laws as it is.


----------



## lporcano (Feb 20, 2003)

chau


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Hey porc - my bad. I actually dropped that into the wrong thread regarding the wrong punk going for the circ. I fixed it.


----------



## PCP777 (Apr 7, 2009)

lporcano said:


> The concerns that Andrew has expressed for Jessica don't really seem applicable to Laura. One is attempting to sail non-stop unassisted, which necessarily includes a long trip through the southern ocean. Laura has a much more conservative plan, which includes multiple stops and a trip through the Panama canal. The two voyages have very little in common.
> 
> If my daughter as a teenager had planned a trip like Laura's, I believe I would have supported her. If she planned one like Laura's, I probably would have discouraged her. In either case, *I don't believe it is the government's position to usurp the parents role in making that decision.
> *
> ...


This.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

A bit confused, aren't you... 


lporcano said:


> The concerns that Andrew has expressed for Jessica don't really seem applicable to Laura. One is attempting to sail non-stop unassisted, which necessarily includes a long trip through the southern ocean. Laura has a much more conservative plan, which includes multiple stops and a trip through the Panama canal. The two voyages have very little in common.
> 
> *If my daughter as a teenager had planned a trip like Laura's, I believe I would have supported her. If she planned one like Laura's, I probably would have discouraged her.* In either case, I don't believe it is the government's position to usurp the parents role in making that decision.
> 
> ...


----------



## lporcano (Feb 20, 2003)

*chau*


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

" Who better than the parents "
Ah, the same parents who won't use car seats or seat belts or bike helmets even after they've been ticketed for not doing so?
Unfortunately "parents" and "governments" are neither necessarily intelligent beings capable of protecting those who need protection.
When I was a kid there were no seaet belts and we could ride on the rear package shelf of the car on long trips to amuse ourselves. Hey, it was normal.
Today I see mothers heaving the baby stroller out into traffic at the crosswalk--before they look or step past the curb line themselves. You could swear they were trying to throw the kid under a car. Or wait, isn't that another news story, "Mom drowns three in car". "Child left in car, dies of heat". "Oh, I went it to work and forgot I had the kid in the back seat."

While I'm also vehemently against intrusive government, as far as I can tell, the only requirement for "parenting" is that something stayed in one place long enough to get pregnant. These days even five gallon buckets come with mandatory warning labels, because enough parents have allowed or encouraged their baby to play with the partly full bucket, unsupervised, and the kid toppled in and drowned. NO JOKE.

So, do the parents know if this kid is mature enough to circumnavigate? Maybe, but I'd rather see some objective board put her through, say, two weeks of Outward Bound solo screening to see another opinion. Or an eight hour test suite, or SOMETHING besides the "I can always hatch a couple more" opinion.

Heck, with only one crew on board, the USCG could turn her back as "manifestly unsafe and unfit" simply for not being able to keep a proper watch, in conformation with US & international law alike.


----------



## zeehag (Nov 16, 2008)

how do we know if the 9-12 yr olds in other countries who are married and pregnant are able to stand up to the rigors of motherhood or fatherhood........are we her judge and jury? do we actually have a basis for our opinions?? will anyone take us seriously?/ why d o we impose our opinions and beliefs on other cultures?? we are raised differently than others are---even within our own boundaries....there is a lot for everyone to learn---even the kids sailing--look at the jessica girl in the pink boat---cannot set her alarms before going below to sleep even in the face of approaching ship traffic.....go figger-----sailing around the world is a great opportunity as well as a great danger. she can learn a lot from her trip --more than is offered in school.....is up to her to figger that out......and up to her parents to figger out if she is "mature enough" to live through it....we can make popcorn and watch with or without bated breath......halleluliah, she is not forbidden to be able to do this by her government-----


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

*Sometimes you need to be a parent*

Honestly I don't think it's about her ability to home school herself. I think that is the least of the argument. And I wonder if this is really about the father trying to be the "cool dad" in a divorce. Something we've all seen.

*But when dealing with a 13 year old sometimes you need to be a parent.* You could still encourage her independence on week long sailing trips -- let her take the lead, make the decisions, but be there as a safety net when she makes mistakes.

As for 13 year olds going to sea in the Royal Navy it was a different time. Life was shorter and on land or sea there were many ways to die. Many of those young officers were buried at sea. It was a time when it was understood many children would not see adulthood. It was a fact of life.

Look, every year experienced adult sailors leave port and are never heard from again. The sea has no care for the fact she is thirteen. Nor do the scum who would do unspeakable things to her. Is there a double standard for girls and boys. You bet there is -- because they are different.

The real question is are you willing to let your 13 yr old daughter die at sea?

Regardless of the logic I think most societies today would question the fitness of a parent who says yes.

Just my 2 cents,
Jim


----------



## PCP777 (Apr 7, 2009)

Jim, I wouldn't even let my 15 YO out of the slip.

I would imagine that the parents and everyone in her immediate family would be aware of the risks. If they all think she's competent and they are willing to let her risk her life than God Speed to them. As long as this action doesn't unreasonably put others in danger I have no problem with it.


----------



## lporcano (Feb 20, 2003)

chau


----------



## Omatako (Sep 14, 2003)

Life is inherently dangerous, no doubt about that.

But the responsible parent lets a kid ride a skatebord in a skate park and when very brave, along the pavement. This girl is effectively skateboarding down the highway.

Why is she not doing a local 1000 mile test voyage? Because she has to go now before someone else does it and before she'e a year older.

It's been said many times on this board - a sailing boat is no place for a schedule. Laura Dekker is a schedule of the worst possible kind.

Anyway, I've already expressed my opinions on these voyages - nufsed.


----------



## tager (Nov 21, 2008)

Bugger all this safety crap! Safety is stupid. If she wants to do it, and her dad says go, then it is none of anyone else's business, including governments!


----------



## bb74 (Feb 11, 2009)

The only record I expect either to set is the yougest, most foolhardy "sailor" to die on a single handed circumnavigation effort. There it is in the raw. Maybe this will upset some but it doesn't matter as the odds are stacked against both, and it is their respective faults for it. 

The constant "first to do something" just to get the aura and $$$ of being that one has gone to unreasonable extremes. The parents in both cases are clearly too caught up with the hype and projections of $$$ and fame. It's disgusting as a parent.

The ocean is a heartless place and it can wear on you under the best of times. Sending out your own children alone into this is inexplicable. I hope both make it home safely but when and if they don't I'll say it now, any of the apologists who will say "they died doing what they loved" are full of crap!


----------



## St Anna (Mar 15, 2003)

When you are the skipper and your families life is dependant on your decisions, it does weigh on your mind when as Oma says., "it turns to custard" So, as we all, or maybe only some of us know, the decisions made on passage can be very hard to digest and are difficult to materialise. Only some of us can appreciate then, the thoughts which will go through this child's mind as she sees white water on a lee shore or a howling, breaking swell in a gale or listening to the sounds of the boat in a gale when down below.

As the father of a young teenager (who may be as able or more so, than this Laura) to cope with a solo passage, I feel the fear of every parent for this child.

Some people sail with the luck of the Gods. I hope she does.


----------



## noreault (May 14, 2008)

I do find it difficult to say that the parent has an absolute right to make decisions for their child. Surely there is some boundary at which the society has the right to step in and override the parent. Personally I find the idea of sending a 13 year old to sea by hereself, well over that boundary. BTW, the Royal Navy did not send a ship of children off, much less solo. They sent them on ships with experienced sailors to gain experience.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

lporcano said:


> Not to nitpick, but when you are dealing with a 13 year old, you always have to be a parent. The government has no business taking that role, you assumed it when you decided to have children.


Unfortunately there is no competency test to be a parent. Cockroaches can figure out how to reproduce, it doesn't make them fit parents.



lporcano said:


> Life is inherently dangerous. The question is not whether you should allow your kids do something that puts their lives at risk, we all do that every day. Driving cars, sending them to school, and even feeding them carries some degree of risk. The question is not whether or not parents should allow kids to be exposed to risk, since that is unavoidable. The question is what degree of risk is acceptable. I am very uncomfortable with the idea of some government board deciding the answer to that question. They do not have any skin in the game, and their motives are not the motives of a real parent.


Look I don't want some safety nazi telling me what to do either, but then I'm an adult. I say let adults take whatever risk they want. * Everybody out of the shallow end of the gene pool !!!!  *

If a five year old was wandering into traffic would you stand on the sidewalk or would grab the child and pull them to safety? What rational person would say they don't want to interfere with a parent's right to let the child wander into traffic?

Take whatever risk you want with your own life. But societies have a responsibility to intervene when someone's irresponsibility, for whatever reason, threatens the life of another. In this case it's hard to argue the girl's life wouldn't be at risk. Exactly where those lines are drawn is determined over time on a case-by-case basis by the courts.

Why not wait a few years? She will be older, more experienced, and able to make an informed decision on her own. The only reason to go now is to try and break a record.

Just my two cents,
Jim


----------



## SSBN506 (Apr 18, 2008)

tager said:


> Bugger all this safety crap! Safety is stupid. If she wants to do it, and her dad says go, then it is none of anyone else's business, including governments!


I am not mocking you just trying to understand where you stand.

If here dream was to be the youngest girl to have a hard core porn site and the government intervened would you say. "none of anyone else's business, including governments"

where is your line where the government or state should back of and where is you line where they should step in?


----------



## lporcano (Feb 20, 2003)

chau
http://35knots.com


----------



## Boasun (Feb 10, 2007)

I would raither have her solo around the world then hang out on the streets doing drugs, etc., and end doing porn.... 
Out there far away from the modern world would be a safe place for today's youths.


----------



## jjf82usa (May 15, 2009)

Guys this is the age of freeze dried food GPS and Sat phones. If I could only get my dog to watch a chartplotter I wouldnt need an autopilot. The big question is this girl going away from her friends for 2 yrs on her dreams or Mom and Dads?

Who wants to bet the phone bills going to cost more than the boat?


----------



## GreatWhite (Jan 30, 2007)

I was originally in favour of letting young kids attempt these record breaking trips... 

I think that the truth of the matter is that these are commercial endeavors... kids shouldn;t have to go out and make money at this age.

If this keeps up one of these kids will die.

I know the streets are dangerous but trying to break records on the ocean is much more dangerous. 

Whether the government outlaws this or not is not the question...I suggest that we as community should not support this.


----------



## bb74 (Feb 11, 2009)

Boasun said:


> I would raither have her solo around the world then hang out on the streets doing drugs, etc., and end doing porn....
> Out there far away from the modern world would be a safe place for today's youths.


Ummm..... how about a middle ground there...? It's not black and white and if your kid is doing the things you stated above it's because you've failed miserably as a parent and "opting" for a life threatening trip isn't the most logical option.

The point is a healthy, apparently stable kid is being sent (let go) out onto the ocean, alone, for nearly a year because she has apparently convinced herself she needs to do it first. Why? Who knows... but any parent that would willingly send their kids on this type of trip with the KNOWN dangers involved really needs to get their head examined. This has nothing at all to do with discovery, self reflection, nor adventure - it's about becoming a "star". That's entirely the wrong way to go about it at that age because the kid doesn't have enough indepdence (emotionally, materially) to make her own mind once things are put in motion.


----------



## bb74 (Feb 11, 2009)

And lastly whether I think it is a good idea or folks on sailnet think it is a good idea, or the government thinks it's a good idea, should not matter a lick whether or not she proceeds. It should be whether she and her parent's think it is a good idea. There has to be a pretty remarkable reason to usurp parental responsibility, and treating a remarkably capable 14 year old as if she is a remarkably capable 14 year old does not come close to giving the government cause to intervene.

Len Porcano
35 KNOTS[/QUOTE]

Your last comment holds in the event that both the parents and the child have retained a modicum of lucidity - in this case it is crystal clear that they have not because you DO NOT send a child out there, no matter how responsible they may be, when there is a 1 in 3 chance they die alone.

Flip a coin to see if your own kid dies tomorrow because as a parent you've created this project that has taken over her young life....

Heads or Tails?


----------



## Dirtboy (Jul 13, 2009)

Let's look at another sport; motorcycle racing. They typically start racing at 4 or 5 and the good ones are racing in the top classes by their 20's, the exceptional ones in their early teens. There is even a new class of road racing where 12 year olds can compete. When Freddy Spencer (one of our best) was a young road racer he always started at the back of the grid, no matter where he qulaified in practice. Why? 'Cause he couldn't hold the motorcycle up, he was too small, his dad had to stand on the grid and hold the bike up for him at the start, so he always started in the back ..... usually won anyway .... racing against men not other kids.

Some people think this is wrong. One Massachusetts offical even sent the cops out to a motocross track and they threatened to arrest any parent who allowed their child (under 16) to race. They eventually lost the lawsuit but they did stop the race.

Other's see this as the natural breeding grounds for future champions.

This girl's young life seems to be a breeding ground for a champion sailor. She's probably better equiped (mentaly and physicaly) than most.

1 in 3 chance she'll die?????? Where'd you get that?

DB


----------



## lporcano (Feb 20, 2003)

chau
http://35knots.com


----------



## Boasun (Feb 10, 2007)

bb74 said:


> Ummm..... how about a middle ground there...? It's not black and white and if your kid is doing the things you stated above it's because you've failed miserably as a parent and "opting" for a life threatening trip isn't the most logical option.
> 
> The point is a healthy, apparently stable kid is being sent (let go) out onto the ocean, alone, for nearly a year because she has apparently convinced herself she needs to do it first. Why? Who knows... but any parent that would willingly send their kids on this type of trip with the KNOWN dangers involved really needs to get their head examined. This has nothing at all to do with discovery, self reflection, nor adventure - it's about becoming a "star". That's entirely the wrong way to go about it at that age because the kid doesn't have enough indepdence (emotionally, materially) to make her own mind once things are put in motion.


I have worked on the Ocean all of my adult life. Never have considered it to be a life threatening vocation. Going solo these days around the world with the quality of the boats and the on board equipage today isn't very life threatening. Now if it was in the days of the nineteenth century then I would worry for her.
The problem with today's society is that they want to wrap you in cotton wool and bubble wrap and not allow you to do anything that the cowardly worrywarts consider dangerous. Those government officals have and will not ever do anything that might cause them to break a finger nail let alone skateboard in the park.


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

Boasun said:


> I have worked on the Ocean all of my adult life. Never have considered it to be a life threatening vocation. Going solo these days around the world with the quality of the boats and the on board equipage today isn't very life threatening. Now if it was in the days of the nineteenth century then I would worry for her.
> The problem with today's society is that they want to wrap you in cotton wool and bubble wrap and not allow you to do anything that the cowardly worrywarts consider dangerous. Those government officals have and will not ever do anything that might cause them to break a finger nail let alone skateboard in the park.


I'm surprised to read this, Boasun. I respect your opinion, and I would fully expect you to say that society is too soft, but I'm surprised to hear you say that the ocean isn't that dangerous.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Boasun said:


> I have worked on the Ocean all of my adult life. Never have considered it to be a life threatening vocation. Going solo these days around the world with the quality of the boats and the on board equipage today isn't very life threatening. Now if it was in the days of the nineteenth century then I would worry for her.
> The problem with today's society is that they want to wrap you in cotton wool and bubble wrap and not allow you to do anything that the cowardly worrywarts consider dangerous. Those government officals have and will not ever do anything that might cause them to break a finger nail let alone skateboard in the park.


Boasun, dude, you skate?!?! Righteous!!


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

On the topic of government involvement in people's lives, I totally agree that the government is overly involved in people's lives and that people should just be left alone. But in my opinion, a 13 year old kid sailing alone around the world is not the right poster child to choose if you want to argue for liberty, because it is patently absurd. I guess it wouldn't be the first time that people who favor liberty would choose an absurd situation to make a point, they did take the rights of a pornographer to the supreme court, and they took the rights of nazi's to protest in a jewish neighborhood to court too, both of which were distasteful to the public. I admit, I'm on the side of thinking that its all non-sense and that the girl's life is being put in jeopardy, but that doesn't mean I think the government should stop her - I think her parents should!


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

Danger is a POV thing after i finish typing this i have to go down and keep fixing leaking high pressure steam pipes and while the section being repaired is locked OUT 

It is seriously more dangerous than anything i have ever done on a boat 


I tell you another funny thing when i was 40 i had a freak mountain bike accident that jacked me up for a year + 

After that happened all my sons friends who we use to take were NOT allowed to go to the mountain bike area AGAIN


----------



## markpillow (Dec 2, 2007)

*hypocracy??*

when i was eight i used to hunt water moccasins with a rock or stick, becuase i didn't have a b-b gun. Was i safer without a gun? When i was in the seventh grade the coaches wanted me join the football team. I didn't. But the first game I went to i watched a friend become paralyzed for life. Did any of you warn your children what could happen to them? Did you not warn them for thier glory or for your own? do all of you refuse to text while driving, or do you just risk the lives of the children on public streets. Have you ever let somebody who was drunk drive? Another way to throw a childs life to the fates. A glorious life is a dangerous one, and the safest people in America are deathrow inmates. So yes she may die.....whether she goes or not!


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

"It's all relative" (relativism) argues that a 13 year old is in danger no matter what the situation so she might as well be allowed to sail around the world alone. After all, none of us is ever truly safe, there is risk whenever you walk out the front door, playing sports, driving a car, being exposed to the flu, and in any number of other circumstances, even playing with poisonous snakes! This point of view is very common in the United States and around the English speaking world, that one thing is true relative to another thing, that there really isn't any absolute truth at all, because there is nothing that can be said or thought by a human being that something cannot be said to refute it. Why bother being safe at all, we are all going to die anyway, "Nobody makes it out alive" says the bumper sticker.

Yet when you take it to extremes the tension builds, We might as well all just jump off a cliff, right ? No, something in the mind says, "no, not really", despite the "fact" that it really doesn't matter one way or the other. If you allow that the tension might be an intuitive indicator that points you towards an absolute truth you start to think - hmm, maybe jumping off a cliff isn't the same as dying of old age, and maybe taking necessary chances like driving a car to work to avoid starving to death isn't the same thing as the totally unnecessary risk of crossing a glacier alone. And maybe sailing around the world at the age of 13 isn't anything like the risks associated with riding a bicycle down the sidewalk. Maybe Guatemala is more dangerous than Texas, maybe statistics on crime and murder rates actually mean something ? No, of course not, if we accepted that then there might actually be some absolute truth out there, and we can't have that! If there is absolute truth then people wouldn't be able to justify whatever bull&%^ they wanted to say by just making up some absurd counter-argument, we might actually have to incorporate reality into our discussions!


----------



## PCP777 (Apr 7, 2009)

I don't know much about the background of the parents or the girl so I looked it up:



> Laura Dekker
> 
> 13 year old Laura Dekker is!
> Laura Dekker is a Dutch teen who aspires to sail around the world alone in the 26-foot boat.
> ...


So, it looks she has quite a bit of sailing experience. If you were going to have a young sailor embark on a trip like this, she probably makes a good choice Looks like Dad has a lot to lose to make this happen. Interesting that his ex, Laura's mom, has agreed to the trip as well. Single handing at 6? Wow! Sailing to England singlehanded at 10?

Who are we, or any government, to judge her capability and chances of surviving? I think her and her family is the best judge.


----------



## bb74 (Feb 11, 2009)

Boasun said:


> I have worked on the Ocean all of my adult life. Never have considered it to be a life threatening vocation. Going solo these days around the world with the quality of the boats and the on board equipage today isn't very life threatening. Now if it was in the days of the nineteenth century then I would worry for her.
> The problem with today's society is that they want to wrap you in cotton wool and bubble wrap and not allow you to do anything that the cowardly worrywarts consider dangerous. Those government officals have and will not ever do anything that might cause them to break a finger nail let alone skateboard in the park.


On a 34 footer? I don't consider myself a coward, nor a worrywart, but hey, maybe I don't fit your rule of a sailor. I've been on the water since I was 10 - that's 25 years ago and in conditions where I've been uncomfortable for my own well being, and moreso for the well-being of my shipmates. I don't really care about the idealogical arguments of the pro or anti "state" crowd here. It all comes down to a very young girl setting out to do something that no-one in the right mind would agree was of her doing - you do not see 10 year olds, no matter how mature, deciding to start planning for a solo, round the world, southern sea passage with limited experience and perspective. And NO, a Dutch / UK single handed passage does NOT equate to the Southern Seas - gimme a friggen break on that one.

The arguments of relativism that the many kids around the world that are impoverished and have no chance to succeed somehow justifies the paush of a lucky child into the wolfs den is preposterous. That's akin to saying that you can buy a hit in Sao Paolo for 1$ so why not do it anywhere else in the world and feel good about it. Again, those that espouse this "world" would piss their pants if they had to live in it but it is somehow "sexy" to espouse nonetheless because it makes you fit into the "rage against he machine" mold....

My argument is really simple. You take your own child at the age of 10 and start exchanging ideas about being the youngest to circumnavigate ALONE, non-stop - does anyone in their right mind find this normal??? Then at 13 you set them up with a boat that they never had to "earn" and some training "that they were conditioned to go on" and send them off into the wild blue yonder with sponsors and PR "which a 13 year old is going to feel compelled to comply to", and hope for the best... good luck to those that want to give it a shot but it's assinine.


----------



## JimMcGee (Jun 23, 2005)

Hmm, at 13 she has been planning her solo circumnavigation for three years. 

Well at 13 I was pretty well convinced that I would be playing in the NHL in a few years, and I'd been planning out my career for at least that long. This wasn't because I was an unusually unrealistic kid -- IT'S BECAUSE I WAS A KID. Kids do not have the decision capabilities of adults. 

I've taken some pretty wild risks in my life. My justification has always been "what doesn't kill you will make a good bar story."

I've never suggested coddling children, actually just the opposite. Ask my son (now in his 30's).

"Anti-government" is a popular sentiment in the US right now, though no society without a strong central government has ever survived. But I'll leave that debate for another thread as I really don't think that's what this is about anyway.

This thread has wandered.

In my opinion, as an adult you should be able to take any crazy, foolish, wild risk you want -- right up to the point where it endangers someone else. At that point society in one form or another steps in to, at minimum, take a look at what you're doing. That includes cases where the person you're endangering is your child. And that is exactly what happened here. Someone said this is way outside normal boundries, so maybe we should take a look at it.

My two cents,
Jim


----------



## ericread (Feb 23, 2009)

Boasun said:


> I have worked on the Ocean all of my adult life. Never have considered it to be a life threatening vocation. Going solo these days around the world with the quality of the boats and the on board equipage today isn't very life threatening. Now if it was in the days of the nineteenth century then I would worry for her.
> The problem with today's society is that they want to wrap you in cotton wool and bubble wrap and not allow you to do anything that the cowardly worrywarts consider dangerous. Those government officals have and will not ever do anything that might cause them to break a finger nail let alone skateboard in the park.


I am more than a little dissapointed that such a distinguished sailer would utter such a comment. Since offshore sailing is no longer dangerous, maybe you can explain the following:

=====================================
The decision of whether to abandon a boat that is in peril but not sinking is one of the most gut-wrenching a sailor can face-not because he or she loves their boat, though that can be a factor, but because the wrong choice can be fatal.

You won't find a more compelling insight into the pain of making that choice than the story of a man who last August abandoned the boat he had built himself, had owned for more than 30 years and had just sailed to victory in the Singlehanded Transpac Race.

The man was Skip Allen, at 60 years old an elite offshore sailor who earned that distinction with tens of thousands of miles of ocean passaging, much of it in races, crewed and singlehanded. That's important to the story because a number of abandon-ship dramas have involved sailors whose inexperience contributed to their plight. Skip, who is, in fact, a survivor of the tragic 1979 Fastnet race, was as well-prepared as anyone to deal with life-threatening ocean conditions. He knew exactly what he was doing when he stepped off of his boat 250 miles west of San Francisco.

Skip was returning from Hawaii following the Singlehanded Transpac alone on Wildflower, the modified Wylie 27 he built in 1975. If you think a 27-footer is a small boat to sail 2,500 miles to Hawaii, well, it is, but it's an even smaller boat to sail back to the mainland in conditions that are nothing like the downwind sleigh ride to the islands. Wildflower had made the trip five times before.

The gale strengthened. Under bare poles, Wildflower was assaulted by ever building seas. During the third night of the gale, Skip stayed below as "breaking crests would poop the boat about every five minutes, filling the cockpit and surging against the companionway hatch board. Even though I had gone to lengths for many years to ensure firehose watertight integrity of the companionway hatch, I found the power of the breaking wave crests slamming the boat would cause water to forcefully spray around the edges of the hatchboards and into the cabin."

His biggest fear was that the exposed autopilot steering the boat with the tiller, "buffeted and drenched by every boarding wave," would fail or be washed off its mount. The electronic tiller pilot had so far worked flawlessly. (Traditionalists take note: He found his backup wind vane autopilot to be utterly useless.) But anyone who has seen the demands on an electronic pilot steering in storm conditions, going through motions so extreme it would seem the machine has to wear out at some point, should be able to understand Skip's fears.

"There was no doubt that if Wildflower's tiller pilot was lost we would round up and be at the mercy of these breaking waves, some of which I estimated to be in the vicinity of 25 to 35 feet, as big as I had seen since the '79 Fastnet race storm on Imp."

The confident mariner who had seen just about everything in sailing adventures that began in childhood (he sailed his first Transpac at 16) started to wonder if he would survive. "The anxiety and stress of this night with the whine of the wind in the rigging, the wave crests slamming into the hatch boards and the 70-degree knockdowns that would launch me across the cabin created serious doubts that we could continue this for another night, much less the three to four days the conditions were expected to continue."

He spent the next hour debating with himself about whether to leave the boat he described as "my home, consort and magic carpet that I had built 34 years ago. I cried, pounded my fist, looked out through the hatch numerous times at the wave mountains, remembered all the good times I had shared with Wildflower, and came to a decision."

Joe Buck had learned that no Coast Guard or military ships or helicopters were within range of Wildflower, but a freighter was heading in the general direction of the boat. At Skip's request, Joe asked San Francisco Coast Guard Search and Rescue to arrange for assistance from the 1,065-foot containership Toronto.

Six or seven hours later, in a display of sterling seamanship, the Toronto, in waves so extreme her massive bow bulb rose 20 feet out of the sea, maneuvered alongside of Wildflower, creating a lee that allowed Skip to jump from the deck of his boat to a jacob's ladder hanging down the ship's hull. Safe on board, Skip watched Wildflower "bang and scrape her way down the aft quarter of the ship and disappear under the stern. I watched, but could barely see through my tears."

The tears are understandable, but this is not a sad story. A boat was lost, but a sailor survived. And unlike so many rescues of yachtsmen in distress, this one put no rescuers' lives at risk and spent no taxpayers' money. Nor will Wildflower exact any costs as a derelict menace to shipping. As his final act before leaving her, Skip disconnected the hose from the engine seawater intake, allowing the boat to sink.

If there is such a thing as a class act in abandoning ship, this was it.
======================================

Would a 13 year old or a 15 year old know when to make such a decision? Would you allow your 13 year old out in such a situation? Or was Skip Allen such a poor sailor that he simply misunderstood that the ocean wasn't dangerous?

Eric Read

Sailing Magazine | Abandoning ship: gut-wrenching, perilous, sometimes right


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Okay - here's what needs to happen. Let Laura and Jessica race each other. Head to head, full contact sailing. Kind of like a global catfight. The first one back to the slip gets all the glory and makeup they want. The other gets tossed aside on the trash heap of history. That's life.

Eric - the Skip Allan story was one of the first BFS stories I posted. I admire the dude. It was definitely a tough call.


----------



## SundancerKid (Dec 21, 2008)

PCP777 said:


> Interesting that his ex, Laura's mom, has agreed to the trip as well.


Actually, that's not quite right. She said she originally decided not to intervene for fear of losing contact with her daughter. But she is happy that the government has intervened on the basis that she would prefer a live daughter that she doesn't talk to than a dead one.

Or words to that effect.

EDIT: Check this article from a leading newspaper as an example - Mother against 13-year-old's solo adventure


----------



## Dirtboy (Jul 13, 2009)

So ....... what's the magic number, folks? On the stroke of midnight on which birthday is it "okay" for someone to be responsible for themselves? BTW, the age on consent is 13 in some places.

Freedom is the freedom to be stupid if so desired. I practice that one alot!

DB


----------



## MarioG (Sep 6, 2009)

Hey CD if you take the "age" factor to the maturity aspect and that this 13 yr old teethed on life lines and has already done more then most will ever whats the big deal let her go, I would like to think she has a good safety net set up incase of any problems. Yes I could see were a government would step in if this was her first time sailing off the lake but its not

So is there any point in making such a big hype about this either, I don't see it, after 15 minutes of fame is over is she going to have a normal life?
... is the normal education more importaint? And what are the perents thinking I would never get away with grounding my 15 yr old daughter if I would have let her do something like that...

I'll be more impressed when I do it even with the wife ,,,lol


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

lporcano said:


> That is far different than the government protecting kids from abuse or neglect, which it should do.


Ahh, but that's the rub here isn't it? I think it would be pretty easy to argue "neglect" in this situation. She's completely on her own for a year or more...and in an inarguably hostile environment to boot. Then throw in a storm or two, and "abuse", if not "death by negligence" is not far behind.

So, now all you're left with the Dirt's question...what is "kid"?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

In terms of neglect, I'm not talking about past or present, I'm talking about future. In other words, what care and supervision will her parents be offering her during her passage? Virtually none. She's on her own - and on her own in a hostile environment. That can easily be deemed neglect/abuse. No doubt about it.

This has nothing to do with disagreeing with a decision. It's simply a legal viewpoint of what broadly defines "neglect" and "abuse".

So, I'm not trying to make decisions for her or her parents. But you yourself have just stumbled on the very reason this has become a legal issue. In fact, in your statement, you just called on the government to do it's job of protecting children from neglect and abuse.

So, really, it all boils down to Dirt's question. What's the "cut-off" in terms of age? When can a parent send their child off to completely live on their own in a hostile environment and that becomes cool?


----------



## Boasun (Feb 10, 2007)

Hostile enviroment... Have you ever been in a Chicago High School?? Or any other High School of Today's world?? The peer pressure is horrindous in those schools.


----------



## Capt.Fred (Oct 17, 2004)

In one of our science and math schools, our kids are much further advanced than just solo circumnavigating. We have a contest for the kid that builds the first solo rocket to the moon. This kidde prize will be a blue ribbon and a box of cookies. Oh, brother! ... .. .


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

lporcano said:


> There is lots of doubt. I don't see how you could possibly proclaim that allowing her to sail alone for several weeks at a time, all while being in constant contact with home, is neglect.
> 
> You aren't even talking about an overly broad definition of abuse or neglect, but an absurdly broad definition of possible future neglect. I have seen victims of real abuse, kids who were beaten or burned with cigarettes. To compare that kind of abuse with sailing, even if alone for several weeks, is absurd. Sailing is not child abuse.
> 
> ...


Okay, here are your premises as I understand them:

1. She'll only be alone for several weeks at a time.

In terms of _parental care_, is this true? Are they going to be at each port around the world? (I honestly don't know, I haven't read all the press). But, assuming no, then she's going to be alone for far longer than a few weeks - dealing with a lot of strangers on which she'll have to trust and rely heavily for assistance - some of it which will directly affect her chances of survival.

And in any case, are you saying that it's "okay" for a parent to leave a child alone as long as it's only for weeks at a time?

2. She'll be in constant contact with home.

Maybe. I've always heard that communications at sea can be pretty sketchy - especially in times of real need. Regardless, in terms of "neglect", communication, even if constant, is not the equivalent of care and supervision. Is it "okay" for a parent to go on a 6-week business trip and leave their minor child at home alone as long as they call every other day?

If she is deemed a minor, and she pushes away from that dock - one could make an immediate case for parental neglect based on the above. It's not "possible neglect", it IS neglect at that point.

3. Sailing is not child abuse.

This is true - right up to the point that an unsupervised child sailor is drowned. Then, when the lawyers get involved and suits start flying, talk to me then. The real issue is that it's just not yet happened - at least on this scale. Furthermore, one could argue that drowning is easily as bad as burns and beatings. As a matter of fact, the outcome of the former is quite a bit worse than the latter.

Look, in my opinion, you're on a very slippery slope with your arguments. The premises don't hold up.

IF a 13-year-old (or 14, 15, whatever) is deemed a "child", a minor, by law, then your call on the government to protect her stands. If a 13-year-old (or 12, 11, whatever) is deemed an adult (by whatever government you want to discuss), then there's no argument at all. (Well, that is until you start bringing into it the laws of the many countries she'll be trying to enter - then it's anybody's guess. But that's already been pointed out in this thread.)

This is why Dirt's question is so critical. Because, whatever the legal definition of that limit is is what it's all about. The rest is just talk about whether you like or agree with that limit. The real problem is that since the inherent slide in this whole thing is toward younger and younger, a stop has to be placed by someone. As you said above, some regulatory body will HAVE to "stick its nose" in to provide the protection you acknowledge needs to be provided.

Just so you know, here's where I come down personally. As a parent, there's no way I'll let my children do anything like this while they're under my care. My kids started sailing at 4 and 7. I could see someday trying a circ together - but I wouldn't let my kids try it alone. No way.

BECAUSE this is for a "record" - this rush for fame will keep pushing younger and younger kids (and their parents) to take more and more chances. I personally think this path is insane. Bad things are going to happen. Without a doubt, a line will have to be drawn somewhere. And precisely BECAUSE you've seen the kind of neglect and abuse you mention from actual parents - you can rest assured there will always be parents who do not have the best intentions. So someone else, unfortunately, will have to draw that line.

And this brings in law; and Dirt's question upon which it will all hinge. For me personally, from a US perspective, I'd use the draft age. 18. That makes the most sense to me. Now that may be an outrageous standpoint politically, but I'm not trying to get elected. So what do I care?

PS - Boasun, everyone knows that Chicago High Schools are FAR more dangerous than the Southern Ocean.


----------



## PCP777 (Apr 7, 2009)

> Just so you know, here's where I come down personally. As a parent, there's no way I'll let my children do anything like this while they're under my care. My kids started sailing at 4 and 7. I could see someday trying a circ together - but I wouldn't let my kids try it alone. No way.


But you see, you ARE their PARENT and therefore that is your judgment and choice. Both of Laura's parents, who are very experienced sailors and know her better than any government body, have decided that she can indeed make this trip.



> Both her parents who are currently divorced gave her consent to set sail on a 2 year trip around the globe when the judges decided to intervene. Neither her mother nor father will be allowed to make any decision about her for the next two months. She currently lives with her father, where she will continue to stay with frequent checkups by child care officials.


Someone here mentioned that she would be sailing through the Southern Ocean, I would doubt that but where can we find information about her route?

If you have the right boat, with an experienced sailor, with a well planned route, good weather forecasts, with stops all along the way, I don't see what the big deal is. Yes, there IS danger at sea. There's way more danger riding in a car.

But you only live once, right? What's so wrong with trying to break a record? Why not get 15 minutes of fame? The worst thing that could happen is that she is lost and dies at sea? Who will be the most impacted? HER PARENTS.

If she wants to do it and she has her parents blessing than so be it.


----------



## ericread (Feb 23, 2009)

Boasun said:


> Hostile enviroment... Have you ever been in a Chicago High School?? Or any other High School of Today's world?? The peer pressure is horrindous in those schools.


Even I won't disagree with you on that point!

Eric


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

I will say this again as someone who let there daughter leave home at 14 to join the ballet for 3 years 

I had big grief with the host families the first and third years the best year was the second at 15 were she and another 18 year old in the company shared and apartment.

So its now she did this with 5 girls who are lifetime friends all went back and got 4 year degrees and my daughter and most of the others are getting masters degrees 

The fact that she TOOK this path has turned from the scorn we had in the past to something that makes all the girls stand out and opens a lot of doors.

We might have all been arrested if it was now  


This stuff is done all the time to produce are Olympic team and the girls finish the deal pretty banged up with a gold or nothing but a life time of physical pain


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

PCP777 said:


> But you see, you ARE their PARENT and therefore that is your judgment and choice. Both of Laura's parents, who are very experienced sailors and know her better than any government body, have decided that she can indeed make this trip.


No, I get that PCP. But even though I am my kids' parent and can raise them pretty much any way I want, I'm still beholden to that law that protects them as minors. That's my point.

It's not JUST about my judgement as a parent. It's about the law. If I'm making decisions that put them in real danger, someone needs to step in (okay - that's a whole other thread, but let's stay focused here).

Don't get me wrong, I don't really give much of a damn about government personally. And the less I have to deal with it the better. BUT, I also appreciate that laws are necessary things. Porc rightly pointed that out.

If parents are making good decisions regarding the welfare of their children, the law isn't needed. But that's not always the case. And that's why it's there.

And I think that's why the government stepped in in this case. It seems to me they have to...by law.

So again...what is the answer Dirt's question?

PS - Tom, the big difference I see personally is that your daughter was not alone - nor are the young gymnasts. They have adult supervision to whatever level. That's not solo - and it's not, I don't think, as life-or-death as a circ.


----------



## PCP777 (Apr 7, 2009)

ericread said:


> Even I won't disagree with you on that point!
> 
> Eric


If need I can drop in a video of Darrian Albert, an honor student being beat to death walking home from his Chicago High School.

You guys want to see how dangerous this country is for teenagers? Check out MyDeathSpace.com and click on the top left on current articles.

By far the most common killer of kids are car accidents, then drugs. After that it's probably suicide.


----------



## PCP777 (Apr 7, 2009)

lporcano said:


> Yes, that is true. I think most of the folks commenting on this really have no idea what the planned voyage is, and are making comments based on false assumptions.
> 
> As far as the rest of the post, she is 14 not 7. Sailing alone at 14 is not child abuse, that is just ridiculous.


I tired to find info on her route and failed, can you help us out?


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

So her parents will be at each stop? I guess that helps. But it doesn't address the other issues.

14 may not be 7, but it's not 18 either. Again, if the law deems 14 to be a minor, agree with or not, your call on the government to protect that child stands. That's all I'm saying. The planned voyage has no bearing on that whatsoever.

I just looked at her website (link on page 1). Her proposed route is taking her through the canals, not around the horns. However, my Dutch is a bit rusty, so I didn't see where her parent(s) are going to be at the various ports. Maybe it's there. I don't know.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

At the end of the day, the point of view I take most seriously in all this is the OP's, PeirreMundo. The dude is, after all, Dutch.



PierreMundo said:


> Hi smackdaddy,
> 
> Thanks for asking. Raised in the Netherlands, traveled around the world in North-, Central- and South America, Europe, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, China, Australia and big parts of Africa and living in the Dutch Antilles for almost 15 years were we got our kids 6 and 8 years old I'm still Dutch but at a distant. I followed Zac from the beginning and like to see many more youngsters doing things we perhaps also liked when we were young. When I heart of Laura I also followed this story. Because it got so much media attention already in the Netherlands Authorities had to do something. We have laws for school going kids, and as I read the posts here, there are laws and rules in the USA as well. Perhaps even more. But different countries with different rules with same intentions. Even New Zeeland probably won't let her go.
> Holland is a very small country and we are not used to home-schooling. I heart of home-schooling on Dutch cruisers around the world, but than with parents on board. My opinion on this is that a girl with so many tasks to do, she has no time for doing home-schooling. Internet at sea? And then the physical part. Is she strong enough? And can she do the many technical parts. She has been held in England. How will other countries (Authorities) react and will she not been abused by rough harbour people, Fishermen at sea etc. with the wrong intentions.
> ...


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Okay - so I looked at the plan. She'll be completely on her own for a great deal of this passage - thousands of miles. So I think the "neglect" problem stands.

Furthermore, she has Option 1, which takes her through the Gulf of Aden and gives her two family visits over 8-10K miles of sailing. And this is a pretty dangerous route as we all know.

Or Option 2 around the Cape, with one family visit over 10-12K miles of sailing. And this is also a pretty dangerous route as we all know.

So, now that I'm more informed Porc, I still don't see your point.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

I do totally agree with you that it is, without question, a huge accomplishment for ANYONE to solo circ. That's some hairy stuff.

I also completely agree with your earlier statement that governments need to protect minor children when parents don't.

So, see, we're not too far apart.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

I hope you guys never go to a family farm as on my cousins side they had 800 acres in lower Delaware and you would have had a stroke when we use to help out at the sawmill


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Heh-heh. Do you guys still have all your appendages?


----------



## SundancerKid (Dec 21, 2008)

PCP777 said:


> Both of Laura's parents, who are very experienced sailors and know her better than any government body, have decided that she can indeed make this trip.


Mate, you keep saying that but it isn't so. Only her *father* has so decided. Her mother would prefer for her to stay home. Trouble seems to be that the father has custody.


----------



## Dirtboy (Jul 13, 2009)

Hey Smack,

The reason no one want's to answer my question is .......... the answer is way too obvious. 

The answer is ......... one size doesn't fit all. It comes down to the individual in question. There are probably a dozen people (maybe three or four dozen) who know this girl well enough to make an informed decision. The rest of us are just full of it, including the Dutch government.

So, Smack, I understand why you picked 18; age of consent in your state. If you lived in Deleware would you have chosen 13? Also must consider age of consent is about sex and marrage. Why not go with the legal age to drink; 21 in most states. Hey, let's go with that.

Note to USCG; Arrest all teen age sailors!

Now all our kids are safe!

DB


----------



## MarioG (Sep 6, 2009)

They just arrested a father for child endangerment here in NC USA for leaving his 2 children alone 6 days when he went out of town. kids were fine and they know this isn't the first time he has done it. So I agree lock up all the little brats till there 21. then military school. Yes I have kids...lol


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

smackdaddy said:


> I also completely agree with your earlier statement that governments need to protect minor children when parents don't.


Like, say, raising a baby in a tent or on a boat in danger of sinking with a leaky transom ... (?)

Oh but that was different I guess, ...


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Oh now wind, nice try. But of course that was different. In that case, you guys were judging living _conditions_ for an entire family - conditions they were actually trying to improve and which, though not the safest/best, weren't illegal in the first place. That has nothing to do with neglect and abuse of a minor as determined by law. Sorry dude, completely different kettle of monkeys.

What those guys (I edited "you guys" because I'm not sure if you were in on the battle royal) did to that woman was ridiculous no matter how you want to try to frame it.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Dirtboy said:


> Hey Smack,
> 
> The reason no one want's to answer my question is .......... the answer is way too obvious.
> 
> ...


No I actually picked 18 because, if I'm not mistaken, it's the draft age in the US. It's not a state thing. I figure if you're old enough to go to battle, you're old enough to solo-circ. Keeps things simple.

As for it coming down to the individual in question - it doesn't. That's why the law is there. And, in cases where, as porc mentioned, parents are burning kids with cigarettes, I doubt you'd want to use this same argument. I would imagine that you would be pretty ticked if a regulatory body didn't step in and do something...which requires the law.

I'm just saying you can't have it both ways. You have to find that age that most people agree on - make it the standard, and live with the consequences. Or you let parents beat their kids with pipes because that's how they choose to raise them.


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

smackdaddy said:


> Oh now wind, nice try. But of course that was different. In that case, you guys were judging living _conditions_ for an entire family - conditions they were actually trying to improve and which, though not the safest/best, weren't illegal in the first place. That has nothing to do with neglect and abuse of a minor as determined by law. Sorry dude, completely different kettle of monkeys.
> 
> What those guys (I edited "you guys" because I'm not sure if you were in on the battle royal) did to that woman was ridiculous no matter how you want to try to frame it.


It's only different because you are saying it is different my friend, it is all fun and games until child protective services shows up at the dock and asks you what the hell you think you are doing ...


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Very true. So in terms of the debate we're having in this thread, you've proven my point on both counts.


----------



## Dirtboy (Jul 13, 2009)

smackdaddy said:


> No I actually picked 18 because, if I'm not mistaken, it's the draft age in the US. It's not a state thing. I figure if you're old enough to go to battle, you're old enough to solo-circ. Keeps things simple.
> 
> As for it coming down to the individual in question - it doesn't. That's why the law is there. And, in cases where, as porc mentioned, parents are burning kids with cigarettes, I doubt you'd want to use this same argument. I would imagine that you would be pretty ticked if a regulatory body didn't step in and do something...which requires the law.
> 
> I'm just saying you can't have it both ways. You have to find that age that most people agree on - make it the standard, and live with the consequences. Or you let parents beat their kids with pipes because that's how they choose to raise them.


I agree, I'd be pretty ticked it parents were burning their kids with cigarettes. And, I also agree that government does have a duty to protect those who can't protect themselves (at any age.)

But, there are exceptional people in this world. People who end up accomplishing much more than anyone imagined was possible. They are frequently, as may or may not be happening in this case, held back by well meaning but mis-guided individuals. Do I think most 13 year olds could do this, NO WAY. Can She? Looks like we'll never know.

Are 100% of 13 year olds not equiped to do this, or could it be 99.9999999999%? Of all the millions of girls who have been 13, are 13 or will be 13, not one could?

But laws are "one size fits all."

I just don't think any of us really knows if she could do it. Maybe if we had known her for the last 12 years we'd think differently ........... maybe not.

DB


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

Dirtboy said:


> Are 100% of 13 year olds not equiped to do this, or could it be 99.9999999999%? Of all the millions of girls who have been 13, are 13 or will be 13, not one could?


See that's been my argument all along.

If the girl is mature enough to handle problems at sea, to fix the boat when it needs maintenance, to deal with bad weather, etc, then handling the authorities shouldn't be any problem for her at all.

Or maybe she's just a child and needs an adult to work it all out for her.


----------



## Dirtboy (Jul 13, 2009)

Look what I found in just a few minutes, a 10 YO girl, college grad and practicing vet:

Courtney Oliver: 10-Year-Old College Graduate and Vet--Backseat Cuddler

11 YO boy just graduated college; astrophysics:

11-Year-Old Graduates College With Degree in Astrophysics - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News - FOXNews.com

There are more, many more.

I better stop this, starting to realize just how "slow" I am! LOL

DB


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

lporcano said:


> I can not see how navigating the legal system in any way relates to sailing skills. Adults generally rely on attorneys for such things, and then your success is largely dependent on the quality of attorney you can buy.35 KNOTS


Right, see, you just created a strategy to reach a favorable conclusion without any help from anyone. That's what adults do. You would leverage whatever you had to do whatever you needed to do to move towards whatever it is that you want. That's what makes good sailors. If the girl is so capable, she shouldn't need your help, mine, or anybody else's to see her way clear of these problems. You could were you in her situation.


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

lporcano said:


> That is really a bit of a stretch. Success is dependent on other folks, how much money you have, and the whims of a judge, not your own skills or preparation. It is about as different from sailing as you can get. Slocum would likely have failed miserably at dealing with the legal system.
> 
> Len Porcano
> 35 KNOTS


You're missing my point, but since you seem to be intentionally missing it, I'm just going to stop trying to make it.


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

lporcano said:


> I don't think I am missing it, I just don't agree. I don't see resourcefulness in navigating courts as having anything to do with resourcefulness navigating an ocean.


Like I said, you missed my point.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

I think the only debate strategy you guys have left at this point is the rhetorical coup de grâce:

"I know you are...what am I?"


----------



## Johnthebowman (Oct 18, 2009)

I read two newspaper website quotes from Mrs Dekker; Lauras mother.

1) "Laura will be able to keep up with her school work whilst at sea through emails"

2) "Sailing round the world is just like a day sail followed by another day sail the next day and then another one etc"

If these quotes are accurate and there is no explanation for them. Then it is clear to me that Mrs Dekker has not much of an idea of the challenges faced by any singlehanded sailor crossing the worlds oceans. 

Having said that, I also read that Laura has crossed the North Sea single handed which is an achievement that I think she has a right to be proud of.

I wish Laura all the best of luck with her future challenges.


----------



## PCP777 (Apr 7, 2009)

SundancerKid said:


> Mate, you keep saying that but it isn't so. Only her *father* has so decided. Her mother would prefer for her to stay home. Trouble seems to be that the father has custody.


Ah, yes, now I found a news article that supports this. I stand corrected.

News update:



> AMSTERDAM 26 Oct 2009 Dutch authorities to say if 13-year-old can sail solo around world
> 
> The Dutch child protection agency, evaluating the physical and mental fitness of 13-year-old Laura Dekker to sail solo around the world, is expected to announced its decision. She had planned to set out on Sep 1 on her 26-foot yacht in an attempt to break a world record. A Dutch court ruled on Aug 28 that she is too young and ordered the evaluation. Officials argue that isolation, sleep deprivation, weather hazards and danger in foreign ports would be too much for a 13-year-old.
> 
> ...


----------



## bb74 (Feb 11, 2009)

She isn't going until August at the earliest - been announced by the authorities.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

So does that mean that they are considering 15 to be the limit for "legally adult"?


----------



## PierreMundo (Nov 29, 2007)

Haven't seen the details yet in the papers, but in the news was told by the judge that she will be under supervision till next summer. Father says she is ready, but everybody, including Laura, say she has to do more preparation. She needs to prepare her boat, healthcare, etc. Laura wants to end this school-year. And the weather window is out now in winter.


----------



## joethecobbler (Apr 10, 2007)

I have yet to hear anything about Zac's younger sisters plans to circumnavigate eclipsing big brothers record. 
Somewhere along the way, I mentioned to my 5 year old Daughter that she had but 4 or 5 years at the most to learn to singlehand and navigate solo around the world. She scowled at me in ponderance and replied with first a question and then a statement, she said ; "is Mommy going ?" which is her first concern no-matter what I suggest. to which I responded- No , solo means going alone. 
To which she replied- "Daddy, YOU don't get to decide what I want to be when I grow up, I get to decide that."
So, I told her maybe we'll just all have to go together. She said that might be OK as long as Mommy goes too.
Darn, I was ready to start looking for corporate sponsors and everything ! I thought maybe the makers of Barby and toys r us would jump aboard. Oh well !
I guess I'm sentenced to singlehanding with a (sometimes reluctant)family/galley cook and occasional helmsman assistent.
Apparently not everyone has the drive/interest and unrelenting curiosity to see the world from the deck of a small sailing craft.
But speaking for those of us who do (if I may be so bold) Please, don't put any more obsticles in our way than what already exist.
It's bad enough that I was born 2-300 years after my time !


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

I hate half measures. The solution is to genetically engineer a sailor corp. What we need is a few hundred young women physically fit with an athletic background, sailors get a bonus payment, willing to become impregnated by known circumnavigators. The resulting children will be born aboard special birth ships I will have arranged for the purpose.
These babies will never leave the boat but from birth they will learn the ropes. If we genetically engineer about 200 children in this way I expect that in 10 years we should have about 3 percent or 6 children that will be specially adapted to this contest. Of these 6 we will probably lose about 4 due to accident etc but we will have two that should be able to circumnavigate at 8 years old.

We are looking for sponsors, and birth mothers.
We have 9 months to prepare the birthing yachts.

If you are going to do something, please put in the effort to do it right.:hothead


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Lots of interesting tidbits in this London Times story from October...



> She was born on a boat, the child of sailors, but a teenager's hopes of becoming the youngest person to sail around the world solo capsized yesterday.
> 
> A Dutch judge told Laura Dekker, 14, that she must put her ambitions on hold until July next year after a two-month investigation cast doubt on her ability to safely cope with the rigours of a journey that could last two years.
> 
> ...


----------



## PCP777 (Apr 7, 2009)

Let her go for it.


----------



## Jasper Windvane (Mar 2, 2006)

This is as stupid now as it was when Robin Graham [ I think that is his name ]
did this back in the 1960's. A 13 year old girl? Alone? And what happens when she is captured and raped? What will the parents say when their little girl is doing tricks to stay alive? Will someone please go over and beat the living xxxx out of the parents for me..


----------



## Garffin (Oct 22, 2009)

*Youngest Person to Top Mount Everest is a Girl*

Youngest Person to Top Mount Everest is a Girl
Posted by: gretchen on May 21, 2007 in Yes She Can! Last week, Samantha Larson became the youngest person on record to climb to the summit of Mount Everest. Samantha, who climbed the peak with her father as part of the "Seven summits challenge" has now officially beat the challenge record set last year by 20 year old Rhys Miles Jones. Samantha has been climbing since she was a kid and has reached the peaks of mountains such Aconcagua in South America at the age of 13 and Mount Kilimanjaro in Africa at the age of 14.
After having spent a good deal of time on rivers and creeks all over the south east and having been involved with teaching a few people how to kayak/creeking. I have noticed that the younger the person the easiser it is for them to pick it up and to go with the flow so to speak. I think she will be able to do it if she has the money to back it up with. I am glad for her and hope the best for her. Go for it girl. Dan


----------



## Jasper Windvane (Mar 2, 2006)

I was thinking about this nonsense last night.. Sailing around the world. 
First off, why go off sailing around the world and never stopping? The idea is to enjoy the journey, isn't it? The reward for going out on the water, to cruise, is to arrive at a safe port, to meet new friends, to learn about different cultures, to understand the human experience. Even a summer cruise is like this. When you are telling your friends about your cruise, you don't go on and on about the water, the waves, you speak about the beautiful harbors, the interesting folks you met. Stepping on a boat, and then 27,000 miles later, stepping off. So What ? Who cares.


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

lporcano said:


> As far as the danger of getting raped, the danger of that is far greater in the average American HS than it is on the open ocean.
> 
> I think that a good deal of the public criticism of this, is no different than the kid who doesn't want to see his parents open the closet door because of the monster inside. People are taking all their own insecurities and fears, both for themselves and their children, and projecting them onto a girl, family, and voyage, that they no very little about.


Len, I think Jasper was talking about some of the ports she'd be visiting. Some ports definitely are more dangerous than any HS in the U.S., no doubt about it. That said, if her parents are there then that part isn't quite as much of a concern. I still think she's too young though.


----------



## Jasper Windvane (Mar 2, 2006)

Iporcano . . do you remember the young girl who was flying across the USA, she was supposed to set some sort of record because of her age and all? What happened? The plane crashed, she died. Her parents didn't feel too good after that, did they? Or, the nut in Colorado with the balloon? The kid is 13 years old. She isn't even old enough to be in high school ! 13 .. hello? This has nothing to do with the girl, this is all about M O N E Y. Money, and I book deal, and tv, and reality tv, and on and on. And where on earth are you coming up with the rape/high school danger comment. I am in and out of high schools, have been for the last few years. You do not know what the heck you are talking about.. This kind of stuff drives me crazy. And what is worse? Adults who think it is ok, until the kid is dead.. then it is someone elses fault.


----------



## dongreerps (May 14, 2007)

I note news reports that Laura is missing, though her boat is still in it's slip. Anyone know any further information?


----------



## Garffin (Oct 22, 2009)

Preemptive pirate attack???


----------



## lbdavis (Apr 23, 2007)

There was a report she withdrew $5K two days ago.


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

Here's an article:

Dutch Police: Young Sailor Laura Dekker Disappears


----------



## 2Gringos (Jan 4, 2008)

I hope she makes it to someplace where she's not under house arrest.


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

If she gets out of this jam and gets underway she will have won me over. 

I've said she is too young, but I also said ...



wind_magic said:


> Len, I understand what you are saying ...
> 
> Look, if she's sophisticated enough to sail around the world by herself then she should have no trouble at all talking her way out of state custody without any help. If we put your (Len's) mind into a 13 year old's body you'd have no trouble talking your way out of the jam she's in and getting underway, because you have the life experience, mental capability, etc, to put forth a convincing argument and to find a way to get what you want. If we put you in front of a judge you'd use whatever strategy necessary to be convincing, you'd be able to navigate through this entire situation, figure out what moves you need to make, etc, and eventually you'd get your way. That's what adults are capable of doing, they are able to work with what they have to get what they want, they are self-directed enough to get their way, they are smart enough and have enough life experience to know what the best way forward is. If the kid is so capable, fine, let her talk her way on to her boat and shove off, she shouldn't have any problem with that if she is resourceful enough to deal with a broken mast at sea, or patch the deck with something if it is leaking, etc. Brilliant kid like that should have been smart enough not to get put into state custody in the first place, she should have had enough wisdom to know how people were going to react to what she was doing and she should have figured out a way to deal with that without losing her liberty. If she needs mommy and daddy to save her now, won't she need them later ? You wouldn't need your mommy and daddy to come save you if your mind was in her body, you'd be able to figure out how to get what you want, why ? Because you are an *adult* who is capable of understanding the complexities involved, capable of creating promising strategies that lead to successful outcomes, etc. If the girl is relying on her parents for everything, to get her out of jams, etc, then she's got no business sailing on her own either.


She's working a strategy that could work - get free, get boat, get gone, and not letting challenges get in your way is adult type thinking, the kind of thinking I think you need to make a trip like hers. Good for her. I was totally against her going, but not letting people get her way is winning her a convert here, that's the kind of attitude that deals logically with emergencies in the middle of the ocean be it a 13 year old or a 50 year old.

If she's resourceful enough to get herself out of this jam and not let circumstances stand in her way I think she might have what it takes to make the trip. She's working a strategy that could work, if she can get out of those waters and get to a more friendly place then maybe she can have her boat moved to where ever she is and take off. So long as it is her making these decisions I'm all for her going, if it is her parents helping her then that is another thing entirely. If it is just her then she is showing some real spark in my opinion, because what are the Dutch going to do, chase her down and shoot her ?


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"because what are the Dutch going to do, chase her down and shoot her ? "

No, but if someone her age has access to a bank account and can withdraw $5,000 (or euros or whatever) from it...in many places a prosecutor would go after the parents on contempt or conspiracy or other related criminal charges, and getting that news THAT could really put a crimp in her plans.

Slipping out the back door might be effective--but only if it was very carefully planned to prevent collateral damage. And then when she tries to clear into her first stop, well, someone might match up her name on a list and send her home under arrest anyway, leaving her new boat hanging on an impound dock someplace as well.

Not knowing the details...we can only guess that her memoirs will fetch a better price as the story gets more complicated.


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

hellosailor said:


> "because what are the Dutch going to do, chase her down and shoot her ? "
> 
> No, but if someone her age has access to a bank account and can withdraw $5,000 (or euros or whatever) from it...in many places a prosecutor would go after the parents on contempt or conspiracy or other related criminal charges, and getting that news THAT could really put a crimp in her plans.
> 
> ...


That's my thinking too. If it is her making these moves, fine, more power to her, let a girl do whatever a girl can do. But if it is her father making these moves, suggesting she do this or that, making sure she has money, etc, and he is the resourceful one then he is the one who should be sailing around the world, not her. If it is her father that is providing the direction then I hope he really sits back and reflects on all of this before she leaves, is it really her wish to leave and sail around the world, or his ? If she really is self-directed enough to go whether he wants her to or not, fine, let her go, but if he is the one making the subtle suggestions, framing the dream in her mind, working behind the scenes to make it all work out for her, etc, then that's just wrong, that's putting a kid's life in danger, putting fancy dreams in her head and then not being there to make it all work out like he (presumably) always has. There are kids who are self-directed enough to do things like this, the kid that jumped in an airplane and flew it around then landed it comes to mind, now that was a resourceful kid.


----------



## bb74 (Feb 11, 2009)

Glorifying a 14 year old who has taken 5K from her parents and disappeared is assinine. I really don't get some on here and have to think that a few too many drinks are affecting reason. This is neither the behaviour of someone stable and able to take on this task, nor is it any indication whatsoever that her parents have any notion of raising children.

Resourceful behaviour... I have a hard time believing some use this as the definition of what's going on...


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

bb74 said:


> Glorifying a 14 year old who has taken 5K from her parents and disappeared is assinine. I really don't get some on here and have to think that a few too many drinks are affecting reason. This is neither the behaviour of someone stable and able to take on this task, nor is it any indication whatsoever that her parents have any notion of raising children.
> 
> Resourceful behaviour... I have a hard time believing some use this as the definition of what's going on...


You assumed that it was her parent's money, I didn't. Obviously stealing is wrong, but I didn't hear anyone accuse her of stealing.

Edit, okay, I can see why you would have thought she had stolen it from her parents, the actual newspaper text says ...



> Jens would not comment on a report in Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant that Dekker withdrew $5,000 from her bank account a few days ago.


I had read that to say that Jens (the mother ?) was saying that Laura Dekker had taken 5k from her (her own - Laura's) account a few days ago, but I can see how you could read that and think that she was saying that Laura Dekker had taken 5k from her (the mother - Len's) account a few days ago.

Yeah, if the kid is stealing then I wouldn't call that resourceful, but are you sure she took the money from her parents ? How did she do that, can kids just walk into a Dutch bank and take 5K out of their parents' accounts ? That's not exactly the kind of money you're going to get at an ATM machine. I just assumed the kid was using her own money.


----------



## NorthUp (Sep 14, 2008)

*Found*

in the Dutch Antilles-

BBC News - Missing girl sailor Laura Dekker found safe in Antilles

Missing girl sailor Laura Dekker found safe in Antilles

Laura Dekker began sailing solo when she was 10 years old 
A Dutch teenager barred from sailing solo around the world because of her age has been found on a Caribbean island after disappearing, police say.

Laura Dekker, 14, is in police custody on the Dutch Antilles island of St Maarten, three days after relatives in the Netherlands reported her missing.

A Dutch police spokesman said the girl had been found "safe and sound".

Miss Dekker has been under supervision since a court blocked her bid to be the youngest person to sail the globe solo.

When did she leave the Netherlands? Why? How did she get to St Maarten? Did somebody help her and was she alone?

Bernhard Jens 
police spokesman 
Police said earlier they did not suspect any crime had been committed.

The court order in the city of Utrecht placed Miss Dekker under state supervision, while living with her father, until the end of her school year in July 2010.

After she vanished on Friday, her boat was found moored at its berth and she appears to have left her father's home on her own.

An unconfirmed Dutch newspaper report said she had withdrawn 3,500 euros ($5,000) from her bank account.

Questions

Utrecht police spokesman Bernhard Jens said the girl had been recognised by a woman living on the island who had been alerted to her disappearance by media coverage.

"We have lots more questions," he told AFP news agency.

"When did she leave the Netherlands? Why? How did she get to St Maarten? Did somebody help her and was she alone?"

At the time of the much-publicised court ruling in October, Miss Dekker's spokeswoman said she was disappointed but that the teenager could still set the record if she were to sail next year.

Miss Dekker is a seasoned sailor who was born on a yacht off the coast of New Zealand during a seven-year world trip.

She had a yacht by the age of six and began sailing solo when she was 10.

Her father, Dick Dekker, supports her attempt at the record, while her mother has expressed some concerns.

Miss Dekker had planned to spend about two years aboard her 8-m (26-ft) boat, Guppy, to break the record set in August by a 17-year-old UK boy.

Mike Perham tackled 50ft waves, gale force winds and technical problems during the 45,000-km (28,000-mile) circumnavigation, which took him nine months


----------



## poopdeckpappy (Jul 25, 2006)

Me thinks had they not gone looking for the publicity, this whole government intervention into their personal & private business could have been avoided.

Oh well, lesson learned


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

I think that's where a lot of these characters go wrong... like that goofball with the "Tin Can" homemade Tri that couldn't do 200 ocean miles before falling apart after months of publicity..

The Tin Can Blog - David Vann's Epic Journey Around the World - Esquire

It seems anyone who pre-publicizes these kinds of efforts generally set themselves up for spectacular, very public failure or notoriety (Zac Sutherland an exception here).

Two other notable voyages were undertaken with little or no publicity, one (Kimchow) ultimately was unsuccessful and that was really too bad, the other was by Tony Gooch of Victoria BC (non-stop singlehanded circumnavigation) who didn't even contact the media until he was within a day's sail of completion. (Both Canadians, btw!!)

Kim Chow Around the World Circumnavigation

TAONUI.COM

A couple of very different approaches... makes you wonder about the real motivations, doesn't it?


----------



## ROSA (Oct 22, 2009)

We all have way too much government in our lives!


----------



## Starlyte (Sep 27, 2009)

Tinkerbelle, by Robert Manry : from Cleveland Memory


----------



## kd3pc (Oct 19, 2006)

to all

Jens is the police spokesman....

just read the news reports..it was her money...contrary to popular opinion - some 14 year olds do have their own stuff, and their own mind...and are capable and mature


----------



## lporcano (Feb 20, 2003)

chau


----------



## Jasper Windvane (Mar 2, 2006)

Iporcano .. I work around teens, and in and out of high schools. You really have not idea what you are talking about. Sorry. 
"Society has no business second guessing motivations." Really? So, if she wants to go become a hooker for her next school paper, that is ok? 
Society has every right to control certain behavior. Drinking? Age restriction. 
Smoking? Drug use? In most states, a 14 year old can not work in many jobs because of age. Bars? Dangerous machinery. We don't allow 14 year olds to vote. A 14 year old can not run for office, sign contracts, borrow money. A 14 year old can not drive an automobile. 
But you think it is ok for this kid to take a boat around the world? 

Please, I realize you are trying to be a devil's advocate, but do not make a total fool of yourself in the process.


----------



## 2Gringos (Jan 4, 2008)

Its a freaking boat. Thats all. Can she sail it one mile? yeah? How about twenty miles? Okay?

Can she sail it a hundred miles?
And again tomorrow?
And again the next day?

Nothing to do with drugs, prostitution, drinking, driving automobiles, running for office, signing contracts, or borrowing money.

This is the typical way people like you want to think. You are trying to use a bunch of totally non related things to justify your position.

Taken to its extreme....since she cannot legally vote, can she be allowed to walk to the school bus unaccompanied?

Let me guess...not if you are in the business of selling supervision.


----------



## Undine (Jan 26, 2008)

For the record, if an adult wants to single-hand it is their choice as long as they do not endanger others.

We are talking about solo circumnavigation by a minor not taking her best friend to the Mall up the road. There is a big difference. Even driving cross country, to use that example, she would have help nearby, repair services available, and safe places to wait for weather or get some rest. 

We are talking sailing 24/7, alone, for how long? And for what? It won't guarantee her a happy life, or cure cancer. A line in a record book, until a kid with parents more irresponsible than her's allows their child to beat it.

This latest stunt strikes me as one of two possibilities:
A) an impulsive act by an immature person which was doomed from the start.
B) a coordinated act with multiple enablers and an unknown organizer.


----------



## Jasper Windvane (Mar 2, 2006)

2gringos ... what happens if she runs the boat into your boat? 
She can't legally be held accountable, because of her age. 

Are you going to say "no problem". 

Why doesn't her dad go with her on this sail? Because there is no 
money in that.. 

I am losing it !!


----------



## kd3pc (Oct 19, 2006)

J windvane, and the others...

Perhaps this is what is wrong with America and our kids...they WILL live down to our expectations, how ever absurd they may be...and that if people like you prevail..many kids will never leave the front porch or experience life.

We, collectively, individually, or in any group or label you want to apply have no say so in how this kid is raised and what she "should" be allowed to do...

Had some overprotective know it all not gotten involved in the first place, she would be well on her way and NEWS FLASH - either succeeded or failed.

I have a son who when he was 13-14 was far more mature, and had a better head on his shoulders than many 30 somethings. Age has nothing to do with ability (or inability for that matter).

Why is it that every "expert" has to jump in on every situation and offer their one and only analysis to the perceived problem. I would suggest that many of you experts do not have kids, or if you do they are an aside.

Weird how she, at 14 made it to the Dutch Antilles...where were all your "protections" then...certainly SOMEONE should have done something..and yes - bad stuff happens all the time, to good people. I am living proof of that. 

She has every right to do what she wishes, she has yet to blame or incriminate any one else...this should be between her and her custodian or parent, wherever or whoever they are.

Let the kid go...she will find out soon enough what life is all about.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

kd3pc said:


> Why is it that every "expert" has to jump in on every situation and offer their one and only analysis to the perceived problem.


Because it's fun!

Seriously, analyses=opinions. Different ways to look at things. That's what a forum is about - and what keeps things spicy.

I mean, you just offered your analysis. So it's all good.

BTW - My expert analysis is that these people should TAKE their young kids on a circ - not push them away from the dock and party for a year while their "mature"-yet-very-minor spawn battle the elements alone. Convenient for the partying parent? Sure. Responsible, mature custodianship? Not so much. (At least that's what the "experts" in the Dutch courts said).


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

I dont know what the right thing is BUT the 14 year old seems to have the best skills and the most real boat time of the current crop


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

I read in the paper this morning that Laura was found in St. Maarten. No word in the short article if she was alone, or what she was supposedly doing there.


----------



## Superpickle (Oct 17, 2009)

It scares me that the fact is, that Governments have takin over wiping our kids asses and we still pay the bills.. We have had our Parenting takin away , unless we do it the STATE Way..
An American lady visiting england a while ago , had a child throwing a temper tantrum.. so she whack it on the butt ,, the public assholes went into a frenzy and attacked the lady and TOOK her child, and the Court and the Ghestopo backed them up.. WHO Tramatized the child, it wasnt MOM.
What a bunch of CRAPP.. we have NO rights in this world beyond what BIG BROTHER allows us to retain and that is fewer and fewer every day.. 

:hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead 

as far as the Kid goes,, Hell, if she Dies out there its Natural Selection.. 


A friend after one of those POSTAL things , told me she could NOT se HOW a person could Do such a thing.. I thought for 1/634th of a Second and said,, "I CAN" :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead :hothead 

 yes, i am Scary


----------



## SailKing1 (Feb 20, 2002)

Just came accross this update.

Dutch police seek to explain young sailor's trip - Yahoo! News


----------



## bb74 (Feb 11, 2009)

Cry me a friggin river... a 14 year old empties her bank account (and as you can't work at that age in NL, that was someone else's money), bails on her family, friends, relations and decides to start anew with a guitar and suncream...??? Her "dream" has been shattered. Oh my, what is one to do! Suck it up and move on - that's life. Everything is a concession to something or someone.

14, alone, flying half way across the world is not your stable, grounded reaction to this. It'll be nice in a few days when the parent's begin to get a stench around them and are finally shown for what they really are - manipulative, glory seeking, societal rejects that don't have the balls to live their own adventure but try to do it as a surrogate with their own kid. If it was a "dream", don't ya think she could wait a couple of years?


----------



## kd3pc (Oct 19, 2006)

BB and the group

It certainly may be the parents dream, but don't be too quick to say it ain't a normal reaction...I knew many girls way back, that much to their parents shagrin, that "ran away" when they were early teens, some from abusive family and fathers, some from Boys, some from problems...may be not the best solution, but it works for many

but I do have to give her credit...collected the money from the bank (hers or not...got an airplane ticket, got through security at the airport with a guitar and gear, made at least the one flight, likely two flights to get the islands, all this without "help"...

Whether it is "riding across the USA on a Harley", roadtrip, working the fishing boats, hiking the appalachian trail or what ever the dream of youth was for you....this girl did it... SHe appears happy in the pictures, so very little traumatization, no lack of self-confidence, 

perhaps a "normal" 14 year old with a pretty deep bag of skills, that has been set aside, and in her world no one has "explained" why she CAN'T go...this is a kid that has been on the go without restrictions for some time..

I wish her happiness and success in her search...


----------



## Superpickle (Oct 17, 2009)

bb74 said:


> Cry me a friggin river... a 14 year old empties her bank account (and as you can't work at that age in NL, that was someone else's money), bails on her family, friends, relations and decides to start anew with a guitar and suncream...??? Her "dream" has been shattered. Oh my, what is one to do! Suck it up and move on - that's life. Everything is a concession to something or someone.
> 
> 14, alone, flying half way across the world is not your stable, grounded reaction to this. It'll be nice in a few days when the parent's begin to get a stench around them and are finally shown for what they really are - manipulative, glory seeking, societal rejects that don't have the balls to live their own adventure but try to do it as a surrogate with their own kid. If it was a "dream", don't ya think she could wait a couple of years?


When "THEY" cook up a reason to Take YOUR child, you will see it from the Proper prospective..


----------



## bb74 (Feb 11, 2009)

Superpickle said:


> When "THEY" cook up a reason to Take YOUR child, you will see it from the Proper prospective..


Ummm..... yeah, I guess I'll have to point to webcam at my driveway entrance to make sure THE MAN  ain't coming to get me. Ever think of counseling?


----------



## bb74 (Feb 11, 2009)

kd3pc said:


> BB and the group
> 
> It certainly may be the parents dream, but don't be too quick to say it ain't a normal reaction...I knew many girls way back, that much to their parents shagrin, that "ran away" when they were early teens, some from abusive family and fathers, some from Boys, some from problems...may be not the best solution, but it works for many
> 
> ...


I too wish her happiness, and hope one day she can do her trip and enjoy it. The "dream" thing doesn't change because of a launch date - it's not like she has cancer or something and has 6 months to live and NEEDS to do it now. The only reason for the "now" is because she feels ready and it's the only way to be famous (which is clearly the underlying "dream" of this whole thing). Maybe I'm coming across as a scrooge, I don't really mind.

Oh, and you have to wonder why, if she is so capable and stable, that the British authorities put her under protective custody when she did her trans-channel crossing. I don't know about you, but I could get into just about any port without question or query, but somehow they decided it was in her best interest to be protected.... just another example of how this is wrong from day one...


----------



## bb74 (Feb 11, 2009)

lporcano said:


> You do realize that her parents already did do it. In fact she was born in NZ during a circumnavigation. Folks really need to stop projecting all of their own issues on this family and young lady. At 14, she is likely a better sailor than nearly everyone who posts here.
> 
> If I were to guess, I might think that the idea of a 14 year old living out something that most of us here dream about, makes some people feel really crappy about why they have not been able to live out their own dreams. So rather than figure out how to live out their dream, they look to explain why other folks are wrong for living out theirs.
> 
> The final line of yours really says it all. I would ask if it is a dream, then why wait until tomorrow. Living out your dreams is the best thing you can do, both for yourself and society. If you keep pushing your dreams off because their are too many obstacles or risks, you risk ending up a bitter person who spends their time trying to make sure other folks don't succeed where you failed, so they can be equally miserable.


uke

I don't have much else to say really.... IF her "dream" is about circumnavigating solo, there's no rush - the oceans will still be there in 24 months...I really fail to see what another year or even decade will do to this "dream". IF her dream is about being "famous", then yes, this is a hitch in her plans. Don't you think that is the underlying issue here? If you haven't read between the lines and see this as a black and white societal and control issue, then I'm not sure there's much point continuing here.


----------



## Superpickle (Oct 17, 2009)

bb74 said:


> Ummm..... yeah, I guess I'll have to point to webcam at my driveway entrance to make sure THE MAN  ain't coming to get me. Ever think of counseling?


I fully understand your attitude, Americans have always kept their collective head in the sand until something Bites them on the Butt.. :laugher :laugher

Your Programmed that way.. 
I just HOPE it never Does bite you..

Ergo Thats Exactly why this country is going down the crapper for good.

Buy buy Amereeka buy buy... 

all praise be to Allah..


----------



## SailKing1 (Feb 20, 2002)

Ironically this girl has more sailing experience sailing alone than Zac did before he embarked on his journey. As a matter of fact Zac had never sailed alone. His alone experience consisted of 4 hour watches during crossings with his parents. Laura owner her first boat at the age of 11 and spent 7 months sailing it on her own.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

SailKing - I tend to agree that there is a fair level of sexism involved here. I will confess that it is much easier for me to think of a 15-16 year old boy doing this than a 15-16 year old girl. Part of that is because I can imagine too many horrible things happening to a girl simply because most of the world through which these kids will be sailing perceives women as at least a soft target - and in some places, much, much less than that.

That's another reason I personally draw the line, in my American mind, at 18. Male or female - they're adults. Let them do whatever they want to do.


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

What Smack said is kind of my thinking, not about what gender they are, but I do have an age cut off in my mind of about 15. Like I said earlier in this thread, I just feel that below about 15 they simply aren't mature enough mentally to do something like that. I know there are people here saying otherwise but human beings develop from children into adults along a fairly predictable trajectory, as children their brains simply aren't functioning in the same way as an adult's brain is functioning, simple as that. I know the relativists are going to say (because they have) that it doesn't matter, what's the difference between 17 and 16, or 18 and 12 ? But there is a difference, 12 isn't 16, not in the same way that a 40 year old is essentially the same as a 50 year old in terms of how their mind works. These aren't just numbers that you can add and subtract, and draw relationships from, a 12 year old kid is not functioning as an adult and I don't care how much experience they have. I do realize, however, that children mature at different rates, and that is why I have been saying I think it is more about resourcefulness than about "sailing". With the proper gear you could teach a 5 year old to push the button to tack the boat, but that isn't what this is all about.

All that aside, I never said any of us had the right to stop her.


----------



## NCountry (May 25, 2006)

My boy when 13 and weighing just 113 pounds set a world record. Should he have been prevented from doing it because of his age? In retrospect it would have been a terrible thing since he now is having some health problems that will prevent him from EVER doing it again. I'm glad he did at 13!
If there are parts of the world that view women as "soft targets" then maybe we need to turn our attention to putting an end to that situation. We can live in space, put men on the moon and explore Mars but we can't make our own planet safe from the scumbags and psycho religious goat F***** morons? (yeah, I'm talking about you terrorist scum bags hiding behind some idiot fake religious conviction)
If we as humans are truly "civilized" then we need to quit holding back our kids. They're more likely to get run over and killed while walking to school under protective custody than they are doing a huge number of things when they "dare to dream of great deeds". The Netherlands choose to pick on a young girl with a dream rather than getting involved in what they really should be doing which is ridding the world of the predators that make our oceans and dry ground dangerous!
Good god! I hope I never forget what it was like to be a kid and to have dreams. If I do then may I please have the good sense to vacate the planet because I have become a waste of breathable air!


----------



## wind_magic (Jun 6, 2006)

NCountry said:


> My boy when 13 and weighing just 113 pounds set a world record. Should he have been prevented from doing it because of his age? In retrospect it would have been a terrible thing since he now is having some health problems that will prevent him from EVER doing it again. I'm glad he did at 13!
> If there are parts of the world that view women as "soft targets" then maybe we need to turn our attention to putting an end to that situation. We can live in space, put men on the moon and explore Mars but we can't make our own planet safe from the scumbags and psycho religious goat F***** morons? (yeah, I'm talking about you terrorist scum bags hiding behind some idiot fake religious conviction)
> If we as humans are truly "civilized" then we need to quit holding back our kids. They're more likely to get run over and killed while walking to school under protective custody than they are doing a huge number of things when they "dare to dream of great deeds". The Netherlands choose to pick on a young girl with a dream rather than getting involved in what they really should be doing which is ridding the world of the predators that make our oceans and dry ground dangerous!
> Good god! I hope I never forget what it was like to be a kid and to have dreams. If I do then may I please have the good sense to vacate the planet because I have become a waste of breathable air!


NCountry, at 13, did you think your son was old enough to sail around the world by himself ? You seem like a good person to ask, your son must have been very capable for his age, so all B.S. aside, was he old enough to sail around the world by himself ?


----------



## NCountry (May 25, 2006)

He didn't have quite enough sailing experience to handle the trip at the time so in that light no.
On the other hand he was old enough (and did) go out, kill a deer, blood trail it and recover it, bring it home, hang it, gut it, cut it up and freeze it after processing it himself (something, I might add, that most grown men can't do).
If he at the time had sailing experience equal to his hunting experience then yes he would have been allowed to try it. AND yes, if he had enough experience and the desire to try I would have allowed him to make the attempt. No B.S. 
In that light let me make this statement. Age alone should not be the sole reason for being entitled to do something. I know of plenty of people that while of age, have no business even driving a car or any business voting for that matter.


----------



## SailKing1 (Feb 20, 2002)

I can sympathize with the 16 or 18 year old being an acceptable age age. But even in this thread many can't agree on what that age might be. On the other hand some children mature faster than others. There are children that do things at an early age that many adults will never accomplish both mentally an physically. 

For me the determination comes down to the ability of the individual and in this case the parents to make all reasonable efforts for the child to be safe and successful if that is their collective decision. 

This little girl was burn and raised on a boat and has been sailing for longer than some in this thread. Now, maybe she ran away because SHE felt unable or scared to carry through on her dream. This would tell me that she is not ready mentally. Funny how things have a way of working out.

I guess I just believe decisions should be made by those immediately involved and not based on what i or others might feel. We as a nation have gone to the extreme of protecting our children to the point they can not even play the way you or I did when growing up for fear a knee might get skinned.


----------



## SailKing1 (Feb 20, 2002)

NCountry;553364 I know of plenty of people that while of age said:


> Isn't that the truth.


----------



## PierreMundo (Nov 29, 2007)

Is she ready for it? Read for yourself. Not third hand or after someone's opinion. Look at LauraDekker.nl de Jongste solozeiler ter wereld! - â-¦ Home â-¦ the Dutch version only.

There are too many points which prove she was not ready and still is not ready. Wouldn't it be better she and her father made plans for all (or most) points listed, in advance like good cruisers do?

Points are made by the council of child-protection and the office youth-care.

She had no plans or permission for home-school, not enough experience in solo sailing with use of new safety and navigation appliances, no or not enough healthcare experience, No plan and experience in sleep management, No complete safety-plan, No list with escape harbours, No communication plan with shore, No plan for for safety in ports of call, No secondary energy source onboard, No or not enough skills in solving problem situations, &#8230;&#8230;.

This is where it is all about!


----------



## bloodhunter (May 5, 2009)

I’ve been reading this thread almost since the beginning but this is the first time I’ve responded.. To start I obviously don’t know Laura Dekker or any of the other people involved with her. I don’t read Dutch and so can not really know what the details of the courts have said and why -- and believe me the devil is invariably in the details. Further I have no idea whether Laura Dekker is capable, physically and/or psychologically of making this trip or whether it was actually her idea or a scheme dreamed up by her father for money and publicity and sold to her.
The being said what I do wonder whether some really believe that a government has no business in regulating any aspect of the parent-child relationship. If that’s not the case, and some regulation is permissible, then where do they draw the line.
Yeah it seams incongruous that at 18 a person can vote and join the military but cannot buy a drink. Should their be a drinking age, if so what? I know why the drinking age was raised from 18 to 21 , it was the same reason that males under 25 are charged much higher rates for auto insurance. And what about the minimum smoking age? Then there’s the driving age, school requirements, vaccinations, any of the age-of-consent rules. Should the government set minimum ages for anything?. 
In addition, courts in the U.S. have consistently mandated medical care for children when their parents believed such care was against God’s will. And look at the outcry when a child is killed or severely injured because a social service agency didn’t take the child away from the parents. 
Western civilization has a long history of involvement in regulating children’s behavior. Admittedly the rules sometimes seem arbitrary and at best have a one-size-fits-all statistical basis and they are almost always judgment calls. Reasonably, the judges usually are influenced by what they think is most likely to happen. 
Are the judges experts in sailing? I doubt it. Was the ruling correct? That certainly can be argued. But when you get down to it, under the law, the judges had not only the right but the obligation to hand down a ruling – and that’s what they did.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

lporcano said:


> Of course, because the council of child protection and the office of youth care are the ultimate experts in sailing and solo circumnavigation. I have some rigging questions, and also need to settle a disagreement regarding overlap at mark roundings. I will definitely be calling them to resolve those questions.
> 
> The fact of the matter is that there are widely differing views on nearly anything involving sailing. Look at any of the threads related to something as simple as repowering, or sailing without an engine. Some folks will tell you it is a near death wish to sail without a motor, while others will say it is perfectly safe, makes you a better sailor, and is far preferable to the expense and other issues related to hauling a giant motor and fuel for it all the way around the globe. Mind you, folks have circumnavigated with and without an engine, so there really is not a right answer for everyone.
> 
> ...


C'mon porc, I think you're getting your arguments conflated here. Pierre knows that particular governmental/court system far better than you or I. It's his country. You might not like what they decide - but I for one will give his word and opinion on this particular matter a lot more credence than any of ours.

Also - they're not imposing their "will", they're imposing the "law". Big, big difference.


----------



## bloodhunter (May 5, 2009)

"That comparing a challenge like this to abuse is absurd."

I was not trying to compare abuse to sailing round the world, or any other goverment intervention. I just meant to show that in the western world governments regulate child-parent relationships under a wide variety of circumstances from abuse to drinking to toy purchases. 
My only point was that the court intervention was not out of line with accepted practice in the west; that the Dutch authorities were required by law to make a decision and they did. As I said, I have no idea whether their decision was correct, but I can understand why they ruled as they did.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

From what I see, the age of consent in The Netherlands is 16. Pierre may know otherwise.

If so, she is a minor. Your argument that "there is no law that states how old a person must be to set off on a circumnavigation" is a bit specious. Of course there isn't. But there IS a law that says that until 16 she is under the care and is the responsibility of her parents.

And if her parents want to push her out to sea alone prior to that age - the court says they can't do that because they will not be providing the care that they are required to by law.

From a legal standpoint, it's really pretty simple. That the courts are bending somewhat to let her leave prior to her 16th birthday ought to score some cred with you.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

Then the simplest answer is for everyone involved to abide by the law. Encourage her to follow her dreams. Get her as prepared as possible. Then let her go for it on her 16th birthday. Everyone is happy.

Oh, yeah, the record.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

I haven't read this entire thread, so this point may have already been made...

Had she departed as planned but with little fanfare and hooplah, and then tragically perished in the first storm she encountered, I suspect the courts and agencies would be taken to task just as vociferously for not having intervened...


----------



## Jasper Windvane (Mar 2, 2006)

As Will Rogers said, "You've got to go out on a limb sometimes, that is where the fruit is".

Was that before or after he died in a plane crash?


----------



## PierreMundo (Nov 29, 2007)

Laura is a Minor. In The Netherlands an Adult is over18 years and and completely independent at 21. (an Adult is in most law-systems action capable). School-duty ends at 18. A substitute for school-duty is possible at 14 (many laws apply). Here started the problems for Laura. What we don’t know is how Father and Laura approached the officials. I think they overlooked this traject. 

If you want to use the law you like or want it you have to be smart and watch your steps. 

All we have now are the facts we read in the paper and more important on her webpage. So we can complain about government actions in the US, Holland or name a place, I then suggest to move to the Politics/Religion/War/Government thread. 

Officials, Laura and family are now working on a complete detailed plan to make it possible for everyone that Laura sets sail. A complete detailed plan that should have been there from the beginning, that as we, as sailors, know is one of the most important things we need out of sight of land. 

If there was a good plan (not a dream) and a right approach I doubt the government was involved as it is now. 

I’m looking forward to a strong sailor-girl who is prepared.


----------



## tager (Nov 21, 2008)

The many governments of the world cannot control us all. Let the girl do as she pleases. Neither her parents nor her government can decide for her. Even though she is a "minor" it does not control her actions. It is important to know that there are consequences for any action, but that does not mean you can control the girl.


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

PierreMundo said:


> Laura is a Minor. In The Netherlands an Adult is over18 years and and completely independent at 21. (an Adult is in most law-systems action capable). School-duty ends at 18. A substitute for school-duty is possible at 14 (many laws apply). Here started the problems for Laura. What we don't know is how Father and Laura approached the officials. I think they overlooked this traject.
> 
> If you want to use the law you like or want it you have to be smart and watch your steps.
> 
> ...


+1.


----------



## duncanm (Dec 21, 2009)

Just wrote a blog post on this, my thoughts are that irrespective of what the law sees as a 'legal' adult that if they are able they should be allowed.

We live in a world which is very caught up about how we should be educated and how we should live our lives, Sir Ken Robinson gave a great talk at TED highlighting this. Everyone is different and should be able to prove themselves.

Mike Perham and his peers is great example and is beginning to show us that we need to re-think our perceptions of what kids can and cannot do..

Best of luck to her!


----------



## duncanm (Dec 21, 2009)

I was wondering if anyone would be interested in taking part in a live debate on the topic of young sailors attempting trans-atlantic and world non-stop and stopping cruises?

Ideal but not essential, you should have a relevant perspective:
-You are a young sailor
-You are the parent of a young sailor
-You are an instructor
-You have been on a round the world trip cruising/non-stop
-You have a background in child psychology


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

One of the bigger issues in the USA right now is what we get taught and it has been decided we ALL need to go to collage in my neck of the woods, as we are a high tech society.

This ignores the fact that we need a well-balanced society and it's highly unlikely the need for skilled trades is going aware soon,

This first affected me in 1973 when i went to trade school rather than collage and the end result in my area is the TWO-YEAR trade programs are pretty gutted. The continual upgrading of high school standards make it almost impossible now to get out of school and be self-supporting as the goal is to go to collage and then go to more collage and get a masters.


My friend Jim owns a pretty big dock building business and his sons went into it with him and one of the sad things i have seen is the people who think it is a shame they have to work with there hands  

All this from the people who know whats best 


And yes i pulled my daughter out of main stream high school for 3 years beteen 14 and 17 while she was in a ballet company full time and it did NOT hurt a bit as there worried about seat time for funding more than what your learning S

She will have her masters in 18 months 


Funny thing is the most lucrative thing she does is teach ballet as here training was so good


----------



## EJO (Jan 10, 2010)

*Dutch education (laws)*



JohnRPollard said:


> Interesting.
> 
> John I just noticed your comments from last fall and only want to say that it being a law to have to go to school in the Netherlands is not that bad. It results in a higher literacy, match proficiency, and all around better general educated 16 year old(10th grade) than here in the US where too large a percentage of the 10th graders can't read, write or add above an elementary (6th grade) level.


----------



## LauderBoy (Mar 15, 2010)

EJO said:


> It results in a higher literacy, match proficiency, and all around better general educated 16 year old(10th grade) than here in the US where too large a percentage of the 10th graders can't read, write or add above an elementary (6th grade) level.


The law requiring people to go to school doesn't result in that. It's that there's a better school system there than what's in the US.

Fortunately in the US parents can opt to not send their children to a public school and home school them instead.


----------



## EJO (Jan 10, 2010)

LauderBoy you are right. You did get my jest. Laura at 13 or 14 years old can with 99% certainty point on a map or chart for that matter where you live if you told her and than could figure out how long it would take in travel time using an airplane, boat, bicycle, and car traveling at determined speeds between point A, B, & C., contrary to 50% or more of her age group here in the States that can't even point out her country on a world/Europe map and think that the Netherlands is part of Scandinavia.
Yes there is no official home schooling in the Netherlands like there's here in the US and yes some parents can do a good or better job educating their children without formal public school.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Bear in mind that the US school system,. like most of the western nations, was designed not to educate but rather to produce malleable droid workers for the industrial revolution and factory laborers. Imagination was to be stifled and discipline and rote memory (and obedience) were the key goals.

Yes, this has changed somewhat, in some places, in the last 40 years, but there's still a lot of debate over what and how is taught. And one might suggest that instead of massive outcries over "How come our kids can't behave or do math?" one might suggest dropping mandatory education after grade school, so that the kids and parents who don't grasp the concept, can get a nice steady union job picking up the trash, or diging the ditches, and save the quarter to half million dollars they'd otherwise lose in upper school and college.

the dream of "educating everyone" only works if folks want to be educated, and many of them insist on remaining belligerently ignorant. OK, let them. That just means the ones who get a higher education will be able to restore their higher salaries, with less competition. Works for everyone that way, too.

But LD is not an education question. The question more topical for here, is how societies treat their "incompetents". Children, elderly, ill, who cannot speak with full competency for their selves. In some socieities we say the parents can do what they please, strating at conception. In others, we say that the parents have NO RIGHTS over the children, except the ones society allows them to have. And "persons in need of supervision" are given it, by the government, regardless of who or what their blood relatives and former guardians think. There are unfortunately a lot of poorly educated socailly unfit parents and guardians out there. "That's my kid!" doesn't mean anyone has the right to endanger it--unless their society has given it to them.

Heck, kids are cheap. Five minutes work, nine months later you pop out another one and maybe a quarter of them survive to age ten, right? [sic]


----------



## EJO (Jan 10, 2010)

HELLO sailer I like what you're saying too except regarding the higher salaries for people with higher education comment. Partially that is true, but doesn't that mean the higher the salary the more belligerently ignorant people you will be paying for indirectly.

But back to what all started this. If Laura Dekker wants to sail around the world in her Gin Fizz let her, she will get more education daily (with no time off) than going to any school could give her. It looks like she won't be un-supervised and Jessica Watson did it and received a hero's welcome in Australia.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

EJO I'm not sure but I think you totally misread me wrt salaries and educational levels. When there is a blizzard and your home heater has failed, a good plumber may be worth more than a lawyer, even if the plumber has seven years less schooling.<G> I know folks with widely varying amounts of formal education versus training or career time, and can only say the formal education mandated (or encouraged) for some is a waste.

After all, if no one took our trash away, we'd be buried and dead in it before we needed tax accountants or fancy doctors, wouldn't we? The value systems are all screwed up. For income, education, and taking care of kids, among so many other things.


----------

