# Ugly Side of Liveaboards: Sailboat vs. Doublewide or Homeless Shelter



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

Here is a news article on the ugly side of liveaboards:

Anne Arundel County: Family found living on boat | WJLA.com

Children are alleged to be abused and neglected by parents who apparently live on a boat due to financial circumstances.

Would be nice if some of the members of this forum started considering whether the advice encouraging all to become liveaboards is really justified by the circumstances if children are involved.

Some of us repeatedly encourage novices to start by buying a small daysailor or weekender, learning and moving up, instead of buying a liveaboard. This assumes the person has a place to live. If the person has children and cannot afford a place to rent, perhaps he or she should not be buying a boat.

I would also add that some of the novice forum posts involving living aboard or circumnavigating strike me as reflecting some degree of grandiose or delusional thinking. A little tough love with some realistic criticism of the plans may be in order.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

So what if they were living on a boat?

People do this all the time, only replace "boat" with "car/SUV/dumpster/highway overpass". It doesn't reflect poorly on the liveaboard community. These people are not sailors, they're homeless. Only the venue changes.

We do get WAY too many threads from new subscribers who are not interested in sailing, they're only interested in beating the "rent game". We would do well to make this distinction when discussing articles like this, with our non-sailing friends.


----------



## Tim R. (Mar 23, 2003)

Has nothing to do with living on a boat. This would happen with these parents no matter where they lived.

Advice to "go for it" obviously assumes some level of maturity and the ability to make rational decisions.

I do not think I have ever had anyone come here or anywhere else and say some thing like this: I am really irresponsible and cannot manage my life very well, should I move aboard?

As successful professionals living aboard, we constantly battle the stereotype of the rent beater. Luckily, in Maine there are not too many derelict LAs.

_"I can't imagine living in a sailboat and not seeking help from neighbors or anyone," says Tina Robbins.
_
Obviously someone who has no clue. It is possible to live on a 28ft. sailboat comfortably if you know what you are doing. These folks were using the sailboat as a substitution for a cardboard box under the interstate.

BTW, I agree with tough love but usually get flamed when doling it out.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Well, as usual, the "news" report is pretty useless; just a bunch of streeter interviews with uniformed people. But clearly the issues here are only peripherally related to living on a sailboat. The report says they've lived in multiple states, under multiple names. And the children are in protective custody, with parents being charged with abuse. Again, the liveaboard aspect is clearly not the key, or even the consequential, aspect of this case.

One thing that did amuse me though was the reference to "no running water, no electricity, no heat, living in a 9'x10' space." Many well-found boats could fit that description. A composting head, or even a standard holding tank, could meet the description of having "human waste in bags and bottles" on board. 

Looks to me like this is more a typical case of media sensationalism than a lesson for potential liveaboards. I do agree with your comments about newbies getting poor advice sometimes, but we all know what the value of free advice .


----------



## remetau (Jan 27, 2009)

jameswilson29 said:


> Children are alleged to be abused and neglected by parents who apparently live on a boat due to financial circumstances.


So if they weren't living on a boat, do you really think it would be any different?


----------



## denverd0n (Jun 20, 2008)

Tim R. said:


> Advice to "go for it" obviously assumes some level of maturity and the ability to make rational decisions.


I'm not so sure. Haven't we all seen postings from people that clearly know nothing about the sea, nothing about sailing, nothing about boats (in fact, they'll often proudly proclaim that they know nothing about these things), but they are absolutely certain that 6 months from now they are going to begin a circumnavigation in a MacGregor 26 that is sitting on a trailer down at a local boatyard, and all they really need to know is what kind of antenna they need, to be able to get wifi when they're out in the middle of the ocean?

That might be a slight exaggeration, but only very slight. Yet no matter how ill-informed or delusional these people are, you can always bet that someone will post that they should just "go for it." And if someone else posts that maybe they should slow down and learn a little bit before they start making grandiose plans, then sure as shootin' someone will say that they're just naysayers who want to destroy everyone else's dreams.

I can't even count how many times I've seen that scenario play out on this forum over the years that I've been here. There are some people out there who desperately NEED to hear someone say "nay!" So, no, I have to say that I do not think your assumption is correct.


----------



## Tim R. (Mar 23, 2003)

denverd0n said:


> I'm not so sure. Haven't we all seen postings from people that clearly know nothing about the sea, nothing about sailing, nothing about boats (in fact, they'll often proudly proclaim that they know nothing about these things), but they are absolutely certain that 6 months from now they are going to begin a circumnavigation in a MacGregor 26 that is sitting on a trailer down at a local boatyard, and all they really need to know is what kind of antenna they need, to be able to get wifi when they're out in the middle of the ocean?
> 
> That might be a slight exaggeration, but only very slight. Yet no matter how ill-informed or delusional these people are, you can always bet that someone will post that they should just "go for it." And if someone else posts that maybe they should slow down and learn a little bit before they start making grandiose plans, then sure as shootin' someone will say that they're just naysayers who want to destroy everyone else's dreams.
> 
> I can't even count how many times I've seen that scenario play out on this forum over the several years that I've been here. There are some people out there who desperately NEED to hear someone say "nay!" So, no, I have to say that I do not think your assumption is correct.


Agreed but I am talking about most of the posts, not all of them. Lets be honest, the folks who come here to ask this advice usually have already made up their minds and are looking for confirmation. 100 responses could say "no, no, no" but if just one says "go for it" then they are good.


----------



## CalebD (Jan 11, 2008)

Remember the guy posting from Florida who was really a fugitive from Arizona, or some such? He was getting ready to sail away from his past but they found him before he could cast off. He asked a bunch of questions here before he was incarcerated but he never told anyone here that he was running away from the "law".

Thanks to BLJones: http://www.sailnet.com/forums/cruising-liveaboard-forum/102628-getting-bahamas-se-florida-noobs.html

the follow up: http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gener...related/103092-fugitives-sailing-bahamas.html

I think that the "www" stands for wide world of whackos.
You are all axe murderers in my mind until proven otherwise.


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

A little more detail here: Family found on decrepit boat with no heat, little food | Anne Arundel County News - WBAL Home

Actually sounds like a few of the characters we have seen come and go here, after asking for advice and getting answers they didn't like.


----------



## guitarguy56 (Oct 10, 2012)

Agree... many want to beat the game of renting by living as cheap as possible but in the end it does not work out this way and we end up with derelict boats up and down the coasts causing laws to be written by non sailors/boaters to rid the ugly sight away from normal civilization... yet why is it ok then to have 3 people with one being a child is such a tiny abodes as this and on national TV? This home is much smaller than many cruising boats, where is the outrage here from child protective services here (although nicely furnished... it is nothing but a shed)... but I guess it needs one faction of abuse, neglect, etc. for it to be validated for them.

Meet the Tiny House Family Who Built an Amazing Mini Home for Just $12,000 Tiny House Family on Anderson Cooper - Gallery Page 2 ? Inhabitat - Sustainable Design Innovation, Eco Architecture, Green Building


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

Guitar guy, the boat in question was moored, and their dinghy was holed, and they were surrounded by ice, and there was no way to cook,no way to get to shore, apparently a non functioning head and no heat.

They weren't living aboard, they were barely subsisting aboard.


----------



## guitarguy56 (Oct 10, 2012)

Absolutely... I didn't get a chance to read the article in its entirety but agree they had very little to make ends meet. The parent in me just shakes my head when I see other parents subjecting their children to derelict situations but many sometimes have no way out. Problem is many of the situations are happening everywhere and under the radar until another caring boater calls it in or breaks down and helps out. It's unfortunate and while I would do what I could to help sometimes we don't know it's going on.


----------



## Seaduction (Oct 24, 2011)

Too bad the US has no social welfare programs.


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

jameswilson29 said:


> Here is a news article on the ugly side of liveaboards:
> 
> Anne Arundel County: Family found living on boat | WJLA.com
> 
> ...


This story is nothing about living aboard, it is about child neglect. This would be happening no matter where they lived. Not because they are on a boat, but because they are incapable of providing a safe home for there children. Lots of folks raise healthy smart well adjusted kids on boats, look at our own cruising dad here on the forum. Do you think he is being abusive to his children because he is subjecting them to life on a boat?



guitarguy56 said:


> Agree... many want to beat the game of renting by living as cheap as possible but in the end it does not work out this way and we end up with derelict boats up and down the coasts causing laws to be written by non sailors/boaters to rid the ugly sight away from normal civilization... yet why is it ok then to have 3 people with one being a child is such a tiny abodes as this and on national TV? This home is much smaller than many cruising boats, where is the outrage here from child protective services here (although nicely furnished... it is nothing but a shed)... but I guess it needs one faction of abuse, neglect, etc. for it to be validated for them.
> 
> Meet the Tiny House Family Who Built an Amazing Mini Home for Just $12,000 Tiny House Family on Anderson Cooper - Gallery Page 2 ? Inhabitat - Sustainable Design Innovation, Eco Architecture, Green Building


The tiny house movement is not about beating the high cost of living, it is choice made to make a smaller footprint on the environment. I have considered one, but am choosing a boat instead. Actually had a lot picked out, but the state of New York will not allow for such a small building. Many of them are really nicely made. Due to building codes requiring rooms to be bigger than the whole house in many cases they have to be made as trailers or other methods of getting around building permits.

As for the family on the boat, I think they would wind up living like that no matter where they lived. I used to work in an apartment complex and we would fix up apartments, and within a few months some people would have them trashed. Holes in the walls, toilets pulled off the floor, just amazing the damage in a few months. One someone had thrown chicken bones on top of the cabinets. I have seen it done to houses to, even ones that were owned by the people who destroyed them. I just bought a house last year and looked for a year and a half before buying. It is just the way some people are. It is a shame. While in that same apartment complex I lived in three different apartments and left each of them all in better shape, mostly just looking for projects to do. But then again I have been a home owner, so I could not just let a faucet drip, and fixed it, got tired of cleaning the painted wall behind the stove so I found some tile on sale and put in a back-splash.

So it turned out worse because they were on a boat, but had someone given them a nice home, they likely would not have paid the electric and water bills and wound up in the same shape. Not cleaning is not because you are broke, it is because you are dirty. It is a shame but some people just need more help than others. It does tend to give liveaboards a bad rap.

One does wonder if it was someone who posted on this site.



> Police said they interviewed a previous roommate of the Kelly family, who said the parents expressed a strong hatred for the U.S. government and that they acted as if they were hiding from government officials. The man said both parents are mentally unstable and that he was concerned for the children.





> Investigators determined that the boys' parents had multiple aliases and dates of birth with no fixed address.


So it sounds like they likely would have felt at home on the off topic here! But it does not sound like the issues they had were related to living aboard, but to perhaps mental illness.


----------



## fryewe (Dec 4, 2004)

Hungry is hard. Hungry and cold is harder.

Sailboat or shanty or single wide or double wide or log cabin...makes no difference if you're cold and hungry.

Seventy five years ago most of rural America had no indoor plumbing nor electricity nor Wally World and Dollar General on the corner for instant food...and with no refrigeration sometimes only a small amount of food was kept. Many distrusted government.

A tough life but most made do.

Reports on this family are sketchy. Perhaps they were abusive of their teenage children in some fashion. Perhaps their indoor toilet practices were foul (at least they didn't discharge into the river and creek...choosing to live with it instead).

What laws did they break? Being hungry or stupid or cold isn't against the law.

Under some circumstances some of us might choose to sit cuddled topside in a blanket on a cold day or night with a close acquaintance enjoying the scenery and each other...

Just saying'...


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Must say that I too fail to get the link between this and Liveaboard as a general rule. No matter where these poor souls were living they would be way up the proverbial creek without an oar.


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

fryewe said:


> Being hungry or stupid or cold isn't against the law.


Actually, it is, when you are stupid and make your KIDS go hungry and cold.... with no foreseeable change in that circumstance. It's child abuse.


----------



## guitarguy56 (Oct 10, 2012)

miatapaul said:


> This story is nothing about living aboard, it is about child neglect. This would be happening no matter where they lived. Not because they are on a boat, but because they are incapable of providing a safe home for there children. Lots of folks raise healthy smart well adjusted kids on boats, look at our own cruising dad here on the forum. Do you think he is being abusive to his children because he is subjecting them to life on a boat?
> 
> So it turned out worse because they were on a boat, but had someone given them a nice home, they likely would not have paid the electric and water bills and wound up in the same shape. Not cleaning is not because you are broke, it is because you are dirty. It is a shame but some people just need more help than others. It does tend to give liveaboards a bad rap.
> 
> So it sounds like they likely would have felt at home on the off topic here! But it does not sound like the issues they had were related to living aboard, but to perhaps mental illness.


No questions about it... many cruisers have sane minds and can cruise with children and live normal lives sometimes better than some living on land... I truly understand CD not leaving his area while his children play with and surround themselves with other other kids their age... I have done similar where I've traveled for years and never pulled my children from their home, friends, or surroundings... so we have a home base and I travel to my work sites.

You are correct that these people would do the same no matter what their lifestyle... but the article does not say whether these people had a home/apartment previously and lost it all due to unemployment or money issues and perhaps they owned a boat for weekend pleasure and saw this as an alternative to living under a bridge... but reality is they had children that needed some sort of structure with school, food and medical needs, a warm bed to sleep on, and these parents were not supplying those needs. Could be any of us, any day should the situation arise. By the way these are not the folks in the $500/month club at all... not for a minute. To be honest I hope it was a fellow cruiser that turned them in... it's what I would have done if they didn't improve their situation.

Miatapaul... the reference to the tiny house is many are also trying to beat the money game by going insanely small... we all want to have small footprint but it has done to living in truly ridiculous living situations.


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

bljones said:


> Actually, it is, when you are stupid and make your KIDS go hungry and cold.... with no foreseeable change in that circumstance. It's child abuse.


That, and not educating your children. Either send them to school or home school them. It does not sound like they were in a position to home school them, or send them.

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

guitarguy56 said:


> No questions about it... many cruisers have sane minds and can cruise with children and live normal lives sometimes better than some living on land... I truly understand CD not leaving his area while his children play with and surround themselves with other other kids their age... I have done similar where I've traveled for years and never pulled my children from their home, friends, or surroundings... so we have a home base and I travel to my work sites.
> 
> You are correct that these people would do the same no matter what their lifestyle... but the article does not say whether these people had a home/apartment previously and lost it all due to unemployment or money issues and perhaps they owned a boat for weekend pleasure and saw this as an alternative to living under a bridge... but reality is they had children that needed some sort of structure with school, food and medical needs, a warm bed to sleep on, and these parents were not supplying those needs. Could be any of us, any day should the situation arise. By the way these are not the folks in the $500/month club at all... not for a minute. To be honest I hope it was a fellow cruiser that turned them in... it's what I would have done if they didn't improve their situation.
> 
> Miatapaul... the reference to the tiny house is many are also trying to beat the money game by going insanely small... we all want to small footprint but it has done to living in truly ridiculous living situations.


Hey that is a deluxe house, it has a front suspension on it! I was looking to keep my place under 110 sq feet. In NY you need 120 sq feet to be considered a room to get a building permit, won't issue one for a 0 room house. I just don't need more room than that. But my kids live with there mother in the house we purchased and I refurbished for them. The lot was about a tenth of a mile down the road from there house, on a nice stream. They are almost in college now so it is time for me to fly to coop so to speak.


----------



## Pearson796 (Dec 21, 2013)

MikeOReilly said:


> Well, as usual, the "news" report is pretty useless; just a bunch of streeter interviews with uniformed people. But clearly the issues here are only peripherally related to living on a sailboat. The report says they've lived in multiple states, under multiple names. And the children are in protective custody, with parents being charged with abuse. Again, the liveaboard aspect is clearly not the key, or even the consequential, aspect of this case.
> 
> One thing that did amuse me though was the reference to "no running water, no electricity, no heat, living in a 9'x10' space." Many well-found boats could fit that description. A composting head, or even a standard holding tank, could meet the description of having "human waste in bags and bottles" on board.
> 
> Looks to me like this is more a typical case of media sensationalism than a lesson for potential liveaboards. I do agree with your comments about newbies getting poor advice sometimes, but we all know what the value of free advice .


I completely agree!

That being said, there is no excuse for no heat. A propane My Buddy Heater is less than $100 and it will run on low for about 4 days and keep the temps in an uninsulated boat fairly comfortable.

So, for a cost of about $100 a month at most, you can stay warm.

Come on, they were in a fairly "Metro" area. They could go hold out a sign and get that.


----------



## Pearson796 (Dec 21, 2013)

Seaduction said:


> Too bad the US has no social welfare programs.


Too much money being spent on corporate welfare. The US can't afford to take care of it's poor. The US will give cash to poor people for 2 years and then tell them no more.

So no, there isn't much help. The economy sucks, food banks are over burdened and SNAP benefits don't go very far when all you have is an Ice Box.

Yeah, I sound like a bleeding heart liberal.


----------



## Rhapsody-NS27 (Apr 8, 2012)

miatapaul said:


> The tiny house movement is not about beating the high cost of living, it is choice made to make a smaller footprint on the environment. I have considered one, but am choosing a boat instead. Actually had a lot picked out, but the state of New York will not allow for such a small building.


I actually bought some plans for a trailer built tiny-house. I thought it would be a fun project to build one. I still have the plans but don't think I'll actually build it.

Regarding the situation of this family, I agree that it could still happen regardless of the location. I have family members myself who live in conditions that could almost be seen on the TV show Hoarders. I grew up in conditions like that and sometimes it doesn't matter if they move to a new house, it'll end up the same as before.


----------



## -OvO- (Dec 31, 2011)

Sometimes I think I'm about *that* far from ending up living in a box myself. Just one deep funk that ends up too deep to climb out of. I'll bet that just three or four days in a row of deciding "phuck it, I don't want to get out of bed," and then the consequences start piling on top of each other. Not too hard to imagine.


----------



## fryewe (Dec 4, 2004)

bljones said:


> Actually, it is, *when you are stupid and make your KIDS go hungry and cold*.... with no foreseeable change in that circumstance. It's child abuse.


So it's a two-parter...you have to couple stupid with some other egregious conduct and THEN it's against the law.

It's not the stupidity that's against the law...not enough jails (or gaols) to accommodate those of us who have exhibited that trait (hopefully temporarily).

I agree that it takes a miserable soul to MAKE your kids go hungry and cold...but do we know they MADE them go hungry and cold? Perhaps they were doing the best they can do.

If so - are they breaking the law by just doing the best they can and no better? Those with highly developed analytical skills and logical thought processes are prone to think that everybody has those skills. But we know many don't.

Doesn't make them evil people. Just different from those that do have.


----------



## Pearson796 (Dec 21, 2013)

-OvO- said:


> Sometimes I think I'm about *that* far from ending up living in a box myself. Just one deep funk that ends up too deep to climb out of. I'll bet that just three or four days in a row of deciding "phuck it, I don't want to get out of bed," and then the consequences start piling on top of each other. Not too hard to imagine.


I would never suggest that someone without some source of income try to own a boat they intend to live on.

Boats are not a cheap alternative to living in your van down by the river.

I don't think that anyone would argue that boats require constant maintenance. When you consider that more and more towns are outlawing "Free" floating, it's getting to the point that you either have to live in a marina or you have to live so far from society that provisions are a pain to obtain.

Stories like this are common in many coastal areas up and down the west coast and the Keys.

That being said... I think the quality of the boat says a lot about the person living on it. If you can't afford to maintain your boat, you shouldn't own it, let alone live on it.


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

fryewe said:


> So it's a two-parter...you have to couple stupid with some other egregious conduct and THEN it's against the law.
> 
> It's not the stupidity that's against the law...not enough jails (or gaols) to accommodate those of us who have exhibited that trait (hopefully temporarily).
> 
> ...


Well no one said they were evil people, I actually said mentally ill. But it makes them more than just "different" it makes them unfit parents. If they want to sit and freeze to death because they hate the government, that is fine, but don't drag children into it.


----------



## SimonV (Jul 6, 2006)

There is a big difference between bum boats and Cruisers. Same as RV's and trailer trash. You are still going to get people so down and out that they have no where to, it maybe the boat was the last resort to keep the family together. I don't think I seen anyone here say go ahead live like a bum on a small broken down boat.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

I agree with James. You can tell the too poor or crazy or just dead beat poster. And then comes the bad advice. Essentially a sailboat is a vulnerable delicate dangerous expensive crammed trailer with no yard for them. It must have been freezing. God forbid a kid fell into the water! Thankfully, a neighbor called the cops. 

Everyone just brings their own issues into it. I'm no different. My take is - when my kids were little I would do anything to improve my family's standard of living and comfort. We were lucky that we lived the American dream and then some. I think a house with a yard and neighborhood and stability is what kids need. Although some cruising families do great and have wonderful kids....but these people were just insane. The phrase "anti government" told me what they were like. 

My impression was James wasn't criticizing live aboards , he was criticizing bad advice. A little thoughtfulness of reply some day might save a kid out there at the mercy of stupid people.


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

Exactly my point. CD is an example of an exemplary loving parent who provides his kids with a great life on a boat. His children are getting an excellent education. I have nothing against being a liveaboard or a liveaboard parent with kids. You can provide your kids with an upbringing that is enriching and different.

My point is we see these characters seeking advice on the forum. They are clearly delusional. They talk about being "beyond the law." With no experience, they want to circumnavigate the world, and to start next week. If they have children, that changes everything and the advice we should be providing to them. Some of you may be inadvertently feeding their delusions and encouraging them in this unhealthy lifestyle of fantasy sailing.

The boat is part of the equation because the boat is an escape from reality, a symbol of freedom and accomplishment, a romantic fantasy that allows them to avoid the reality of their situation - that they should be seeking help for their children (and themselves).

If you are a parent, and you cannot provide your children with the basics of warm shelter, food, sanitary conditions, and an education, then you need to seek assistance from others or the state to meet your parental obligations.


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

jameswilson29 said:


> Here is a news article on the ugly side of liveaboards:
> 
> Anne Arundel County: Family found living on boat | WJLA.com
> 
> ...


I think the average person has no idea how many children are living in much worse conditions than these, on land. Or how often, child welfare services will return children to parents who abuse and neglect them, as a policy.

What difference does it make where it happens? The problem is that it happens at all, not the location.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

Re-reading the article, and the new posts in this thread has caused me to re-think my position a little bit, or consider a new angle on the cruiser/liveaboard issue.

As Tim says, we've seen a lot of new posters jump on here, asking questions about living aboard, who are obviously just trying to beat the rent game. Tim says "tough love" is needed sometimes, and I'm inclined to agree.

If we as a group, keep telling these people to "go for it", then we are simply contributing to our own image as "boat bums" anchoring our derelict vessels in coves, and creating all the problems that seem to lead to the elimination of anchorages and the creation of paid mooring fields.

Look, we all want to "grow the sport", and introduce people to sailing, but when one of these knuckleheads show up, and it's OBVIOUS that they have no intention of ever leaving the dock, we should be united in our attempts to dissuade them, especially when people talk about living on a small boat, with children. 

Non-sailors already have a pretty misinformed concept of what liveaboard life is like, even on larger boats! 

We shouldn't encourage boat bums, just because we so desperately want to expand sailing. We're hurting ourselves.


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

Yes, I agree, fortunately, the average person may not understand these abuse and neglect cases. Most people are good and caring parents to their children.

As a family law lawyer, I deal with these issues frequently: parental fitness, best interests of the child, social services, termination of parental rights, etc.

The goal of the state is the return of the child to the parents, after appropriate intervention and education, unless the parent is so unfit that the child must be placed permanently in foster care.

Apparently, some of you still do not see the obvious connection here between forum discussions with people suffering from mental health issues and the escape to being a liveaboard.

There is a world of difference between responsible people who are interested in sailing, and unrealistic, delusional parents, often sailing novices, who receive unconditional support here for their "dreams" because some members believe we are the ambassadors of sailing, who must encourage all in this wonderful sport, hobby or passtime.

Again, how about a little realism and tough love?

Here are some easy rules: 

1. A novice who has children should be discouraged from buying a liveaboard boat.

2. Any one who introduces themselves with a dream to circumnavigate with little or no experience sailing might have some mental problems. If they have children, parental fitness might be or become an issue.

3. Any parent who is interested in becoming a liveaboard due to financial concerns should be discouraged. Help and supervision are readily available ashore and not so readily available on a transient boat.

If you claim not to have ever read these kinds of threads from potential liveaboard parents, you need to start reading the "Introduce Yourself" subforum more frequently. I would not be surprised if the subject of this intervention in Maryland previously posted on here.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

I haven't really posted about this but I am on the board of my town waterfront park. I designed and worked on the construction contracts for a new launch, floating dock system, 900' deep water bulkhead and deepwater commercial dock on pilings - all pro bono.

We are trying to recapture our maritme heritage. Our waterfront sees cruising boats from all over the country but there are a ton of nay sayers in town who for political purposes would make the waterfront development an issue. Even after the 8 years I have spent working on the waterfront, I am hesitant to bring my idea of a mooring field and/or anchorage to the town board. I have to try and win board members over one at a time and they are skeptical. 

Imagine just one boat load of idiots like this shows up? There goes my idea of anchorage and/or mooring balls!! 

Now, what's the cost to a cruiser if the town refuses to let sailboats anchor or moor there?


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

People breaking the law should be dealt with for breaking the law. 

But, if all they are doing is offending our delicate sensibilities, I'm not on board with being the Emily Post of boating.


----------



## remetau (Jan 27, 2009)

jameswilson29 said:


> Here are some easy rules:
> 
> 1. A novice who has children should be discouraged from buying a liveaboard boat.
> 
> ...


Wow that is some high horse you have.


----------



## Pearson796 (Dec 21, 2013)

I can't believe how many of you are sounding like boat snobs. When we traveled in our RV, we dealt with assholes who treated us like trash because we didn't own a million dollar RV.

So now I am seeing that we are going to have to deal with assholes who treat us like trash because we don't have a million dollar boat?

No, I didn't have a trashy RV, I kept it clean inside and out and still got treated like ****. We dealt with snobs for the week we were at Green Turtle Bay because we didn't fit in with that crowd.

I see exactly how it is now.

There is an expectation to be a certain type of person with a certain type of boat and god forbid you show up someplace where you don't fit in and cause a blight on the water with your little bitty sailboat.

Yes, the people in this news article were clearly ****** in the head and had some questionable issues.

But what if we showed up in someone's town with our two kids and two dogs on our 30' boat, how bad would we get snubbed? Well, actually only one kid, our oldest isn't a kid.

Yeah, we live in tight quarters, but we keep it clean and maintained. So where's the gray line between trash and not trash?

You people are snobs who are turning a clear case of child neglect by mentally ill people with government paranoia into a different topic of "those people who aren't like us".

Shame on you, I'm not sure this forum is for me.


----------



## Pearson796 (Dec 21, 2013)

remetau said:


> Wow that is some high horse you have.


No ****, I'm seriously offended.


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

BubbleheadMd said:


> If we as a group, keep telling these people to "go for it", then we are simply contributing to our own image as "boat bums" anchoring our derelict vessels in coves, and creating all the problems that seem to lead to the elimination of anchorages and the creation of paid mooring fields.


Bubbles, I don't think we as a group have ever said "don't take care of your boat, pile crap everywhere and neglect regular maintenance."

One thing i have liked here over the last few years is the growing inclusivity of the advice, the idea that anyone CAN "go for it"... but "go for it right". 
I think the tone has been pretty consistent here that the boat is just the cost of entry, you need to maintain it, etc.

That is one unspoken reason i always recommend getting a survey to a potential low-buck liveaboard/cruiser- it gauges whether someone has the pockets and the attitude to cruise successfully. If you're a greenhorn who can't afford a survey, you can't afford to cruise.

Why do i get the feeling the owners of the boat under discussion fall firmly in the "survey? I don't need a survey it just costs money to tell me something i can find out myself and i don't trust surveyors anyway" camp?

Hey, here's a thought, if you're a future cruiser who is all anti-government, master of your domain, throwing off the ties of tyranny of the NWO and keeping an eye out for black helicopters from the cockpit...

...keep your damn boat clean. If you want to fly under the radar and be left alone, don't make yourself a target.

Maybe we need to start a thread on mooring boatkeeping etiquette: "You know they treat their boat like a single-wide when..."
...there are chickens laying eggs in the flemish coils on deck.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

Pump the brakes, shipmate.

There's a huge gap between "million dollar boats" and the derelict, floating homeless, that we're discussing in this thread.

You are seeking offense, where none is being offered. Calm down.

Do you bag your feces and leave it laying around the boat?
Do you have used toilet paper, laying around the boat?
Are you pumping waste overboard, and discharging oily waste?
Have you removed your children from the public school system, and are not home-schooling them?

Of course you're not.

My boat is a 42 year old Pearson 30 with chalky gelcoat and worn sails. I'm not some million dollar boat. James sails a Pearson 28. No one here, is trying to be a boat snob.

We're talking about people who want to scrape by, by anchoring out on derelict boats with no auxiliary, violating environmental laws. The "floating homeless".


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

jameswilson29 said:


> There is a world of difference between responsible people who are interested in sailing, and unrealistic, delusional parents, often sailing novices, who receive unconditional support here for their "dreams" because some members believe we are the ambassadors of sailing, who must encourage all in this wonderful sport, hobby or passtime.


James, you've been around here a lot longer than I, but your characterization of SN does not fit my experience. If there are those who always give the "_go for it kid_" message, there are as many, or more, who are quick to toss the cold water. And as much of a socialist that I am, I'm not in favour of you, me, or anyone on an online forum being in a position of diagnosing psychosis from afar.

The biggest problem I see on forums like this are the people who have a strong and loud opinion on everything, whether they actually have experience on that question or not. And then there are those who are unable to see a world outside of their reality; whose only advice is, "_my way is the only way!_" I realize people can only speak from their own perspective, but I'd appreciate a little more humility and awareness that it's a big world out there, and there is rarely just one right answer to most of life's problems.

Do we get delusional or sick people here? No doubt. Do we get lots of dreamers. Absolutely! Do we have a ton of people somewhere in the middle -- yup. I'm glad you can tell us all apart (and I fear where you'd put me). I am not so confident, nor would I like to see anyone granted such level of power.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

BL,

You and I are largely in agreement, we simply have different views on how to gauge whether someone should be attempting the liveaboard life.

You use the survey method (which is a good way).

I tend to read the totality of their posts, and how they react to people who try to teach them to do it the "right way".

Come on now, you know I'm not a boat snob. My boat is ancient and small, but clean and well-kept. P769 is absolutely wrong if he thinks that we're lumping him in with these "waterborne preppers".

I totally agree with your statement about flying under the radar by being clean and low-profile, if you want to be free from governmental intervention.

Just because someone is of modest means, does NOT mean that they have to be stupid, or ignorant, or slovenly. Barefootnavigator is ultra-frugal, but he's obviously a tidy sailor. He's following the example you state.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)




----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

BubbleheadMd said:


> BL,
> 
> You and I are largely in agreement,


As we usually are. I wanted to expand on your point on the advice we give to greenhorns.
I didn't think you were necessarily wrong, just maybe not entirely right, either.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

LOL, I'm rarely "entirely" right...or even "mostly". I'm just opining.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

What's missing in all this outrage - - is the kids were probably in severe danger. That goes beyond cleanliness, politeness or someone being offended about boat snobbery. After all, is it egalitarian to let kids feeeze on an icy river with no food, lying in filth? Of course not.


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

Sal Paradise said:


> What's missing in all this outrage - - is the kids were probably in severe danger. That goes beyond cleanliness, politeness or someone being offended about boat snobbery. After all, is it egalitarian to let kids feeeze on an icy river with no food, lying in filth? Of course not.


That is the whole point of the thread.

This is not about boat snobbery, it is about taking care of your children, and discouraging novices on the forum from including their children in their sailing-related delusions.

Oh, and yes, I have experience in the field with mental health issues. In addition to the normal legal capacity issues in ordinary family and estate practice, I have represented dozens of patients in involuntary commitment proceedings by the state. I am familiar with the DSM manuals and recognize delusional thinking fairly easily.

The actions contemplated by some on the forums are literally and objectively crazy, especially if they have children, and the unrealistic nature of their plans should be pointed out to these posters clearly and directly, in no uncertain terms, even if it hurts their "feelings". You are not doing them any favors by encouraging delusional thinking. I am always surprised by people who have no experience in the mental health field who think you have to play along with people's delusions, the false reality they create for themselves.


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

five of the seven voices in my head agree with jameswilson.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

jameswilson29 said:


> Oh, and yes, I have experience in the field with mental health issues. In addition to the normal legal capacity issues in ordinary family and estate practice, I have represented dozens of patients in involuntary commitment proceedings by the state. I am familiar with the DSM manuals and recognize delusional thinking fairly easily.


That's good, because you know what's delusional? Someone claiming they can diagnose a mental health issue using a few forum posts -- now THAT'S crazy :laugher.


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

remetau said:


> Wow that is some high horse you have.


I agree and it is typical for him.



jameswilson29 said:


> That is the whole point of the thread.
> 
> This is not about boat snobbery, it is about taking care of your children, and discouraging novices on the forum from including their children in their sailing-related delusions.
> 
> ...


Well if the issue is not boat snobbery and is about children then you got the post off to the wrong start with your post title. You chose to use the condescending title of "Ugly Side of Liveaboards: Sailboat vs. Doublewide or Homeless Shelter" and your post in general are very condescending. If you can't do it to your standard then you are doing it wrong. You clearly imply that living in a double-wide and a sailboat are equivalent to living in a homeless shelter. I know many people who do, or have lived in mobile homes and several are far better people than you could ever hope to be, and are excellent parents. Same with people living on boats.


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

Sal Paradise said:


> I haven't really posted about this but I am on the board of my town waterfront park. I designed and worked on the construction contracts for a new launch, floating dock system, 900' deep water bulkhead and deepwater commercial dock on pilings - all pro bono.
> 
> We are trying to recapture our maritme heritage. Our waterfront sees cruising boats from all over the country but there are a ton of nay sayers in town who for political purposes would make the waterfront development an issue. Even after the 8 years I have spent working on the waterfront, I am hesitant to bring my idea of a mooring field and/or anchorage to the town board. I have to try and win board members over one at a time and they are skeptical.
> 
> ...


If you are talking about the waterfront, good job on what has been done so far! Hope to see more happen there. With the walkway over the Hudson, it really is a nice spot to encourage people to visit. There is certianlly more to do there as well than just a day stop, so I could see it becoming a nice place for "Loopers" and those coming from and going to the canals to stop for extended stays. Get some sort of regional shuttle to move people into town, and even up to New Palz and other points of interest.


----------



## guitarguy56 (Oct 10, 2012)

There are no winners here... the parents lost their children for now, the state lost since they now have two children in custody whether the parents get them back or not, and boaters loose as laws may be passed over these situations... the losers are the children who by no fault of their own were subjected to substandard conditions and whose lives will be changed by this ordeal.

This really has nothing to do with liveaboards and whether they are raising their children in a responsible way... these people committed a violation of the law and they were dealt with... what violation? Child Endangerment... pure an simple... there is no law against the way they were living as long as they were home schooled (you need to be certified by the school system to do that in most states/counties), only the aspect of the children they had onboard and the living conditions and whether they were in violation of the Maryland child abuse laws.

See here:

https://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/define.pdf#Page=2&view=Fit


----------



## smackdaddy (Aug 13, 2008)

jameswilson29 said:


> The actions contemplated by some on the forums are literally and objectively crazy, especially if they have children, and the unrealistic nature of their plans should be pointed out to these posters clearly and directly, in no uncertain terms, even if it hurts their "feelings". You are not doing them any favors by encouraging delusional thinking. I am always surprised by people who have no experience in the mental health field who think you have to play along with people's delusions, the false reality they create for themselves.


Cool. So can I now freely diagnose people on the forums?

"Yo, poverty-addled-live-aboard-dreamer-dude, you are a complete nutjob with a malignant personality, brought on by paraneoplastic limbic encephalitis...or moldy peanut butter!"

Heh-heh.


----------



## gbgreen59 (Aug 20, 2013)

jameswilson29 said:


> I would also add that some of the novice forum posts involving living aboard or circumnavigating strike me as reflecting some degree of grandiose or delusional thinking. A little tough love with some realistic criticism of the plans may be in order.


Wow, I feel like this was directed at me....as I don't have any sailing experience yet I plan to circumnavigate.


----------



## Pearson796 (Dec 21, 2013)

gbgreen59 said:


> Wow, I feel like this was directed at me....as I don't have any sailing experience yet I plan t circumnavigate.


Yup, sure is a lot of boater snob in these posts. Apparently people who suffer from mental illness and/or have children shouldn't have the right to own a boat or live on a boat and dreaming is completely out of the question.


----------



## gbgreen59 (Aug 20, 2013)

jameswilson29 said:


> 2. Any one who introduces themselves with a dream to circumnavigate with little or no experience sailing might have some mental problems.


Me again....


----------



## Pearson796 (Dec 21, 2013)

guitarguy56 said:


> There are no winners here... the parents lost their children for now, the state lost since they now have two children in custody whether the parents get them back or not, and boaters loose as laws may be passed over these situations... the losers are the children who by no fault of their own were subjected to substandard conditions and whose lives will be changed by this ordeal.
> 
> This really has nothing to do with liveaboards and whether they are raising their children in a responsible way... these people committed a violation of the law and they were dealt with... what violation? Child Endangerment... pure an simple... there is no law against the way they were living as long as they were home schooled (you need to be certified by the school system to do that in most states/counties), only the aspect of the children they had onboard and the living conditions and whether they were in violation of the Maryland child abuse laws.
> 
> ...


By this definition of neglect, being poor and unable to provide for your children is a crime. What a shame that all those government programs meant to help with SNAP and AFDC have been cut so the wealthy can get more tax breaks and corporate welfare.

Looks to me that the government is creating criminals of the poor.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

Pearson796 said:


> Yup, sure is a lot of boater snob in these posts. Apparently people who suffer from mental illness and/or have children shouldn't have the right to own a boat or live on a boat and dreaming is completely out of the question.


You're really overreacting.
Please be careful not to smack your thumb with your hammer, while you're so busy building that martyr's cross.


----------



## gbgreen59 (Aug 20, 2013)

bljones said:


> One thing i have liked here over the last few years is the growing inclusivity of the advice, the idea that anyone CAN "go for it"... but "go for it right".
> 
> I think the tone has been pretty consistent here that the boat is just the cost of entry, you need to maintain it, etc.
> 
> That is one unspoken reason i always recommend getting a survey to a potential low-buck liveaboard/cruiser- it gauges whether someone has the pockets and the attitude to cruise successfully. If you're a greenhorn who can't afford a survey, you can't afford to cruise.


Thanks....I feel better...I hope


----------



## Pearson796 (Dec 21, 2013)

BubbleheadMd said:


> You're really overreacting.
> Please be careful not to smack your thumb with your hammer, while you're so busy building that martyr's cross.


I'm just pointing out that this thread went from a clear case of a tea party nut job living on a boat and neglecting his children to delusional nut jobs with dreams shouldn't involve their children.

Well, I'm a delusional nut job who has involved my daughter in my dream to do the loop and to sail up the Atlantic Coast and cruise the islands off Maine.

I don't know anything about sailing or boating, and I bought a boat to learn and live my dream with my family. Apparently that somehow makes me an unfit parent because I am subjecting my daughter to conditions that are less than ideal compared to living in a house and slowly dying doing the 9-5.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

Well, if you "do it right" as BLJones says, you won't be a nutjob.

You keep thinking that this thread is directed at you, but it isn't.

Do you plan on keeping your daughter from receiving an education?
Do you plan on pumping and dumping waste into inshore waterways?
Do you plan on starving or freezing your family?
Are you going to live in your own filth, in unsanitary conditions?
Do you plan on endangering those around you with crappy ground tackle, in adverse weather?

If the answer is "no" to these, then we're not talking to you. Carry on smartly.

Don't torture or endanger your family, don't be an undue burden to your hosts and fellow travelers in the regions where you travel, and no one will give a rat's tinkle what you're doing.


----------



## Coquina (Dec 27, 2012)

Take a major chill.
You COULD be a delusional nut. Like the guy we found trying to ROW in inflatable ashore from the middle of the Bay near Norfolk at sunset with a battery in it. His boat had a dead battery so he decided to row east with it and get it charged. He was going to:
1. Row about 10 miles.
2. Land in the dark in a swampy area MILES from civilization.
3. Somehow get his battery charged 
4. Row 10 miles back to his drifting boat in the dark and somehow find it.

We kind of *strongly* insisted he not do this, towed him back to his boat, and got his engine going for him. I guess we cheated Darwin 

OR.........

You could take a couple basic boating classes, get a few books, go out for a few sails on other people's boats, take your daughter for a few short sails, learn some things, sail some more, read some more, learn more things, and end up in Maine having a drink at sunset and enjoying life 

I have no way of telling from one post where you fall on the spectrum. I have done some of what you want to do though, so I have free advice worth every penny 



Pearson796 said:


> I'm just pointing out that this thread went from a clear case of a tea party nut job living on a boat and neglecting his children to delusional nut jobs with dreams shouldn't involve their children.
> 
> Well, I'm a delusional nut job who has involved my daughter in my dream to do the loop and to sail up the Atlantic Coast and cruise the islands off Maine.
> 
> I don't know anything about sailing or boating, and I bought a boat to learn and live my dream with my family. Apparently that somehow makes me an unfit parent because I am subjecting my daughter to conditions that are less than ideal compared to living in a house and slowly dying doing the 9-5.


----------



## NCC320 (Dec 23, 2008)

Pearson 796,

So the family is a "tea party" nut job. Not just a nut job, but one of those "tea party" people. Aren't you making exactly the kind of assumption that you accuse others of doing? There is nothing to suggest they are members of the "tea party". And while you might feel otherwise, there is nothing bad about being a member of the tea party movement. They are everyday people, some well off, some not. Some a little more radical in their views, other less so. But their common thread is that they tend to be conservative in their views and believe their lives should have less government involvement. Others feel differently.

This family was stranded in ice with no means to get to shore. No heat in severe winter conditions. Living with dirty toilet paper and waste in their living room (probably due to the ice conditions). They needed help.

And the publicity from this situation does not enhance the public opinion of live aboards, no matter where on the economic scale one fits. It would be far better for a family in their situation to be living on shore. At least the dirty toilet paper could be taken out. And maybe a campfire could be made to heat the food. And they would be in a position to seek help.


----------



## Coquina (Dec 27, 2012)

The nut job in question specifically said he was a "Constitutionalist" and a "sovereign individual". This is a bit farther out there than the Tea Party. or more than bit for this guy 



NCC320 said:


> Pearson 796,
> 
> So the family is a "tea party" nut job. Not just a nut job, but one of those "tea party" people. Aren't you making exactly the kind of assumption that you accuse others of doing? There is nothing to suggest they are members of the "tea party". And while you might feel otherwise, there is nothing bad about being a member of the tea party movement. They are everyday people, some well off, some not. Some a little more radical in there views, other less so. But their common thread is that they tend to be conservative in their views and believe their lives should have less government involvement. Others feel different.
> 
> ...


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

> * Originally Posted by Pearson796 *
> I'm just pointing out that this thread went from a clear case of a tea party nut job living on a boat and neglecting his children to delusional nut jobs with dreams shouldn't involve their children.


Maybe, I'm slow. But, what does a conservative political party that advocates responsible spending and fiscal policy by the federal government have to do with living on a small sailboat?

I consider myself a TEA Party member and donate to TEA Party candidates so I have a little idea what the TEA party is about, that didn't come from mailings from the DNC or from watching Rachel Maddow.

Where are you gettting your information to equate someone who is living on a small sailboat with the TEA Party? Or is this just something liberals say because they think it makes other liberals laugh?


----------



## Pearson796 (Dec 21, 2013)

Coquina said:


> The nut job in question specifically said he was a "Constitutionalist" and a "sovereign individual". This is a bit farther out there than the Tea Party. or more than bit for this guy


Tea Party and Constitutionalists equate to extremism and they do and say crazy stuff.

When someone admits to being either one of these things, it immediately tells me they are a nut job and possibly a danger to society.

But, this isn't why CPS was called on them to begin with. CPS was called because someone saw a child on deck in a blanket.

It was only afterwards that the actual living conditions were discovered.


----------



## Pearson796 (Dec 21, 2013)

Group9 said:


> Maybe, I'm slow. But, what does a conservative political party that advocates responsible spending and fiscal policy by the federal government have to do with living on a small sailboat?
> 
> I consider myself a TEA Party member and donate to TEA Party candidates so I have a little idea what the TEA party is about, that didn't come from mailings from the DNC or from watching Rachel Maddow.
> 
> Where are you gettting your information to equate someone who is living on a small sailboat with the TEA Party? Or is this just something liberals say because they think it makes other liberals laugh?


This is edging too close to politics... You are obviously free to believe and vote how you choose.

I'm not into debating politics on a sailing forum.


----------



## Donna_F (Nov 7, 2005)

Er, hopefully I won't be accused of being "heavyhanded," but this thread is starting to move into the realm of political affiliations and that never ends well...


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

When CPS shows up, they are looking for five things- food, water , heat, cleanliness, smiles on kids faces. 
if they don't find four out of the five, they will follow up. if they don't find THREE out of the five, now there is a problem...
and there should be.


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

Pearson796 said:


> This is edging too close to politics... You are obviously free to believe and vote how you choose.
> 
> I'm not into debating politics on a sailing forum.


You started it. You threw a rock and then you ran. And, now you've been called on it. And, you don't like it.

Fine. Keep your mouth shut about it then.


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

More detail: Parents charged after children found in dirty, unheated sailboat - baltimoresun.com

From the article:

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


----------



## Group9 (Oct 3, 2010)

bljones said:


> More detail: Parents charged after children found in dirty, unheated sailboat - baltimoresun.com
> 
> From the article:
> 
> ...


CPS should have done something. I'm glad they did.

I wish they had been that diligent when we doing drug warrants in Baltimore and saw stuff like that ever day and couldn't even get them to drive out and look.


----------



## Coquina (Dec 27, 2012)

When you do it in front of expensive waterfront property it gets noticed


----------



## Pearson796 (Dec 21, 2013)

Coquina said:


> When you do it in front of expensive waterfront property it gets noticed


When the wealthy complain about beautiful sailboats against a nice sunset blocking their "scenery", you know they are going to complain about a boat like that one seemed to have been.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

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

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

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


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

I have never seen so many people subconsciously projecting _their own problems and hang ups_ into a discussion. Wow!! A learning experience for sure.

Here - lets see who will claim this is about them....


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

Hey you are slandering everyone who has ever carried a piece of wood! You boat snob, how dare you, judging me because I like wood!


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Pearson796 said:


> When the wealthy complain about beautiful sailboats against a nice sunset blocking their "scenery", you know they are going to complain about a boat like that one seemed to have been.
> 
> View attachment 20154


I live less than a mile from where the boat was. Nothing personal, but really you haven't a clue. 
This is not a wealthy area. The call was made to DNR not to beatify the sunset but because people on shore saw shivering children sitting on the deck of a boat surrounded by ice.

I've got two dozen plus mooring balls visible from my front porch, most empty in winter - most full in summer including one college age couple playing house on a 400 dollar Pearson 26. All are welcome neighbors. I even extend pier privileges to most of them.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

WOW some of the posts on this thread are hard to believe 

BTW - other than there is a boat involved in this story, the whole thing isn't a boating issue and the thread title is even more "out there"


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Well, the boat being icebound and feces being found on the floor in the cabin just MIGHT have concerned the authorities more than "boat" did.

Child protective services, or child welfare services, or whatever they're called in any state, tends to get upset about feces in the living spaces. Being icebound with no heat AND no transportation (bum dink) would pretty much end the discussion about where the kids were going to spend the night, given the way extreme cold has been hitting the east coast.


----------



## davidpm (Oct 22, 2007)

I stopped reading this thread about half way through.
I'm going to clean up my desk. Slippery slope you know.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

I just wish rockdawg was still around. *He* would have gotten that boat _moving_....


----------

