As I've already written in a previous post (see 'open letter to a troll'), I was pounced on recently by a couple of neo-conservatives in an online debate on a friend's Facebook page. Statistics were on my side, and I thought I'd made a clear articulation of my views, yet I was the one who had to turn away from it.
It started when I wrote that I had time with our Liberal candidate and found her accessible. In my second post I pointed out that Ontario class sizes had decreased since Harris, and that hospital wait times had improved. (both statistically true.)
In the end, a mere two posts later, I gave up. It would have taken me months on a PhD-thesis-sized document to dig my way out of the web of tangled misnomers, attacks, slights, prods, and false accusations that were thrown at me in such a short time. Even after I withdrew, saying that I couldn't continue after it got so personal, they continued arguing, as if the sheer volume of their words made what they were saying true.
So like the true geek and societal-interaction wonk that I am, I analyzed the pattern of their argument and have come up with a few rules on how to argue like a Conservative.
1. Attack.
Within two posts they had written that: a) I am biased because I am in a union. (everyone has bias, get over it.) b) that I am a Liberal supporter, and so this is the only reason why our candidate spoke to me (she didn't even know who I was at the time) c) that I couldn't possibly have been a Liberal supporter for twenty years, but only recently supported our local candidate. (it didn't occur to them that I lived in other cities), d) that McGuinty broke promises about not raising taxes (which is true) e) that my Union's pension and benefit plan are paid for by their taxes (false), and f) that my Union is "in bed" with the Liberals, (also false) and g) my Union is "elitist." (I'm still not sure how guys making $18-$26 an hour building roads can be seen as elitist. Really I don't even think, with his chosen party's stance on corporate taxes, and use of our military jets, he knows what 'elitist' means ... maybe another post someday on definitions...)
2. Pretend it's not personal. Feign shock at the offended person, as if attacking their character wouldn't cross your mind. It leaves you open to get all kinds of other jabs in, and puts you in the position to be condescending.
The attacks themselves were harmless. I've been called worse. It was that it was so personal so quickly, without provocation. This seems to be the pattern Conservative mantra though, if you don't agree, you're either misled or part of a special interest group that nullifies your opinion. One just needs to look at Harper and Hudak's televised ads to see that it actually works.
3. Ignore statistics.
When I posted two official websites about class size and hospital wait times, I was told it was 'propaganda', and that it 'didn't matter'. One of them apparently has a buddy who knows someone who is in a class right now and it's no different from under Harris. Pffft, statistics. Who needs them anyway?
4. Use the terms 'Liberal' and 'Socialist' as if they are lower than dirt. Call them 'fiberals', and 'pinkos'. In fact, the more ridicule you can direct at someone, the more likely they are to give up, and make it look like you won.
Another post will soon be coming about why 'socialist' and 'liberal' have become bad words in North American society, even though socialism is the only reason we have a middle class, healthcare, forty hour work week, minimum wage, etc.
5. Pretend to speak for the majority. Even though Conservatives have seldom, if ever, enjoyed near 50% popularity, pretend you are speaking for a 'silent' majority, that liberalism is just an abberration, created by special interest groups. In fact, blame special interest groups for everything that goes wrong, like the economy.
Conservatives are outnumbered two-to-one in Canada. Hell, 27% of working people work in a Union setting, and Tim Hudak still insists he is trying to support working families. If he did, he'd support collective bargaining. It's the only thing protecting our middle class.
6. Keep up the myth that Conservatives are good with our money. It's the only thing older voters believe, that tax cuts are coming because Conservatives are frugal.
The past four Conservative Prime Ministers have also coincidentally been the four largest spenders, accounting for more than 85% of our country's debt. Two of the Liberal PM's actually ran budget surpluses, while bailing out our social safety network.
7. Don't be afraid to contradict yourself. One response in the aforementioned argument was: "class sizes haven't changed at all since Harris. Well, maybe in elementary school but for high school kids are on their own." So, have class sizes changed? What does "on their own" mean? Even in admitting that the core of my argument was correct, he has still made it look as if he's right. Well played.
All kidding aside, it's about time we broke down the myths about the Conservative party that keep them getting into power, when they are not fiscally responsible, and gut our core services and accountability in office whenever elected.
How do we change this? Vote. Get other people to vote. Get informed. Read about the actual policies the parties propose, and make sure you know what you'll be getting if you vote them in. As people get older they realize how important politics are. As parents, also, it's never to early to teach your kids politics, especially the basics of democracy.
I put a quote up on my twitter, and it was retweeted many times, but I think it would serve well here. "If under 45 year old people voted with the same regularity as over 45 year old people, we would at present have an NDP minority government in Canada, and a stable Liberal majority in Ontario."
The real 'silent majority' are young people who don't believe politics is important. We are better than this. If all eligible voters actually made it to the polls, we wouldn't have this Conservative debate. It is only through apathy they get into power. The true test of our system will not be Liberal vs. Conservative. It will be if we have a system at all. If people lose enough faith, and the majority don't vote, then we truly will get exactly what we deserve.
My wife, Jennifer's, blog can be found here:
Cleverly Disguised as Cake
A teaser chapter for my current novel is now up!
Seven Gates
And my first novel, squeakyclean, here:
eBook, pdf, mobi, epub, rtf, lrf, palm, txt
Kindle US
Kindle UK
Kindle Germany
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Semi armoured?
Okay, another naming dilemma.
I recently admired my friend JP's wrist ... thingy ... online. I believe my comment on his picture was: 'want'
I didn't know what to call it. Bracelet sounded too ... unmanly. Wristband, not really right because it's not a band. Lucky me, he asked my wrist size, and less than a week later, there was a package in the mail for me. At first, he called it a "custom survival paracord bracelet" which I thought was apt. It's made with 18 feet of 550lb (load strength) parachute cord, which can be unwoven in case of an emergency in the bush (like fashioning a fire starting bow, tying up a lean-to tent, or I don't know ... survivally stuff.) In its core, I also found out, is a filament that can be used for catching fish (hook not included). Apparrently I was going to feel the need to "kill and grill small furry things, while smoking cigars! :)"
Just the thing I need for the new property, camping, and teaching the kids those skills when they're ready.
The naming still didn't sit well with me. JP's wife pointed out it's not a 'friendship bracelet', but a 'tactical friendship bracelet'. Then JP added to the picture that I posted on Facebook that it's a super tactical full-choke, multi space-age semi armoured, ninja decoder bracelet
All I know is, only a great guy like JP could send a handmade supercool wristband across the continent for a friend. Much appreciated. :D
My wife, Jennifer's, blog can be found here:
Cleverly Disguised as Cake
A teaser chapter for my current novel is now up!
Seven Gates
And my first novel, squeakyclean, here:
eBook, pdf, mobi, epub, rtf, lrf, palm, txt
Kindle US
Kindle UK
Kindle Germany
I recently admired my friend JP's wrist ... thingy ... online. I believe my comment on his picture was: 'want'
Just the thing I need for the new property, camping, and teaching the kids those skills when they're ready.
The naming still didn't sit well with me. JP's wife pointed out it's not a 'friendship bracelet', but a 'tactical friendship bracelet'. Then JP added to the picture that I posted on Facebook that it's a super tactical full-choke, multi space-age semi armoured, ninja decoder bracelet
All I know is, only a great guy like JP could send a handmade supercool wristband across the continent for a friend. Much appreciated. :D
My wife, Jennifer's, blog can be found here:
Cleverly Disguised as Cake
A teaser chapter for my current novel is now up!
Seven Gates
And my first novel, squeakyclean, here:
eBook, pdf, mobi, epub, rtf, lrf, palm, txt
Kindle US
Kindle UK
Kindle Germany
Open letter to a troll
Oops I did it again. I got into it about politics with a troll on someone else's Facebook page. Now what?
We've all been sucked into arguments that have no benefit. Dialogue is the essence of society. It is how things are done. In a democratic society, the way we manage everything is by discourse with each other. When we read something untrue about an issue close to us, or we feel maligned due to our profession or our location, we feel compelled to post back, to correct the wrong. So how do we avoid getting sucked into cyclical arguments that drain us and give us nothing?
First, understand that there are good arguments and bad arguments.
Good arguments help us grow. No two people have the same point of view, and it is our differences help us to understand issues better. In a good argument you can have opposite points of view and still respect each other. I have Conservative friends whose input I find essential to my political life, because they broaden my view of the Canadian system. Not many, but I have them.
Bad arguments are the ones that make us shrink to our pettiest instincts, like online survival mode. They jump from point to point without settling on anything, and become a contest of who can pummel the other into looking like an ass faster. Chances are if someone is arguing back to you but doesn't listen or acknowledge your point of view, assumes to know how you think, and won't nail down to an actual point to argue, then the argument isn't going to go anywhere.
I live by a few simple rules that keep me from death-match UFC dragdown online arguments.
1. I know how much I'm willing to invest. When it gets heated, I prefer to think of how much time I'm wasting. If I'm sitting red-faced at the computer while the kids play in the back yard on a Sunday afternoon, it's not worth it.
2 I try to know my stuff. When talking about stats, it helps to put links to those stats. Similarly, specific events can be linked to as well.Yesterday, I was told by a self-employed business owner that (among other things) his taxes paid for my Union's "exorbinant" benefits and pension, and that school class sizes hadn't changed in Ontario in ten years, both of which are completely untrue.(The Union benefits are self-funded through the negotiated wages, and class sizes have shrunk from 35+ to near 23 in primary school) If you don't know, don't argue it. There's no harm in saying you don't know something.
3. I try to keep it objective. Calling people's perspective a 'bias' is belittling, and lets face it, who doesn't have some sort of bias? Judge the people's actions, not the person. If you don't know them, don't assume their standpoint. Let them flesh it out, and if you see inconsistency, point it out. Tell them what you think, not what they think.
4. I acknowledge when someone else is right, or when I am wrong. I can tell right away when someone is just trolling for the sake of an argument when they can't acknowledge they are wrong when it's pointed out. If I'm wrong or out of line, I say so. No biggie.
5. I never think of it as winning or losing. If you do that, you've already lost. In terms of politics and religion, corporal punishment, and war, and so many others, nobody wins these arguments anyway. The undercurrents are thousands of years old, and your lifetime of arguing will not change that. Change happens generationally.
6. Speaking of change, my father always said "You can't change others, you can only change yourself." That's about a zen as I get in this life.
7. I know when to call it quits. If it's not helping anyone, cut it off. There is no harm in saying "this is neither the time nor the place" and extricating yourself. It doesn't mean you lose, it just means you don't want to get into it with a stranger. Would you stand in a parking lot yelling at someone about a tax increase while your kids waited? Why do that online?
8. I try not to picture the other person's tone. It's so easy when arguing to picture the person on the other side as being angry and yelling at us, when in fact, they are sitting at a computer just like we are. This keeps it civil.
9. Above all, don't say anything online that you wouldn't say to someone's face. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.
What are your thoughts on trolling? Have you ever gotten into it and regretted it? How do you avoid these arguments ... or if you don't avoid them, why not?
My wife, Jennifer's, blog can be found here:
Cleverly Disguised as Cake
A teaser chapter for my current novel is now up!
Seven Gates
And my first novel, squeakyclean, here:
eBook, pdf, mobi, epub, rtf, lrf, palm, txt
Kindle US
Kindle UK
Kindle Germany
We've all been sucked into arguments that have no benefit. Dialogue is the essence of society. It is how things are done. In a democratic society, the way we manage everything is by discourse with each other. When we read something untrue about an issue close to us, or we feel maligned due to our profession or our location, we feel compelled to post back, to correct the wrong. So how do we avoid getting sucked into cyclical arguments that drain us and give us nothing?
First, understand that there are good arguments and bad arguments.
Good arguments help us grow. No two people have the same point of view, and it is our differences help us to understand issues better. In a good argument you can have opposite points of view and still respect each other. I have Conservative friends whose input I find essential to my political life, because they broaden my view of the Canadian system. Not many, but I have them.
Bad arguments are the ones that make us shrink to our pettiest instincts, like online survival mode. They jump from point to point without settling on anything, and become a contest of who can pummel the other into looking like an ass faster. Chances are if someone is arguing back to you but doesn't listen or acknowledge your point of view, assumes to know how you think, and won't nail down to an actual point to argue, then the argument isn't going to go anywhere.
I live by a few simple rules that keep me from death-match UFC dragdown online arguments.
1. I know how much I'm willing to invest. When it gets heated, I prefer to think of how much time I'm wasting. If I'm sitting red-faced at the computer while the kids play in the back yard on a Sunday afternoon, it's not worth it.
2 I try to know my stuff. When talking about stats, it helps to put links to those stats. Similarly, specific events can be linked to as well.Yesterday, I was told by a self-employed business owner that (among other things) his taxes paid for my Union's "exorbinant" benefits and pension, and that school class sizes hadn't changed in Ontario in ten years, both of which are completely untrue.(The Union benefits are self-funded through the negotiated wages, and class sizes have shrunk from 35+ to near 23 in primary school) If you don't know, don't argue it. There's no harm in saying you don't know something.
3. I try to keep it objective. Calling people's perspective a 'bias' is belittling, and lets face it, who doesn't have some sort of bias? Judge the people's actions, not the person. If you don't know them, don't assume their standpoint. Let them flesh it out, and if you see inconsistency, point it out. Tell them what you think, not what they think.
4. I acknowledge when someone else is right, or when I am wrong. I can tell right away when someone is just trolling for the sake of an argument when they can't acknowledge they are wrong when it's pointed out. If I'm wrong or out of line, I say so. No biggie.
5. I never think of it as winning or losing. If you do that, you've already lost. In terms of politics and religion, corporal punishment, and war, and so many others, nobody wins these arguments anyway. The undercurrents are thousands of years old, and your lifetime of arguing will not change that. Change happens generationally.
6. Speaking of change, my father always said "You can't change others, you can only change yourself." That's about a zen as I get in this life.
7. I know when to call it quits. If it's not helping anyone, cut it off. There is no harm in saying "this is neither the time nor the place" and extricating yourself. It doesn't mean you lose, it just means you don't want to get into it with a stranger. Would you stand in a parking lot yelling at someone about a tax increase while your kids waited? Why do that online?
8. I try not to picture the other person's tone. It's so easy when arguing to picture the person on the other side as being angry and yelling at us, when in fact, they are sitting at a computer just like we are. This keeps it civil.
9. Above all, don't say anything online that you wouldn't say to someone's face. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.
What are your thoughts on trolling? Have you ever gotten into it and regretted it? How do you avoid these arguments ... or if you don't avoid them, why not?
My wife, Jennifer's, blog can be found here:
Cleverly Disguised as Cake
A teaser chapter for my current novel is now up!
Seven Gates
And my first novel, squeakyclean, here:
eBook, pdf, mobi, epub, rtf, lrf, palm, txt
Kindle US
Kindle UK
Kindle Germany
Friday, September 23, 2011
What is normal?
I am no expert. Let us get that straight right from the start. I am trying to deepen my understanding of genetics, and here is where my thought process lies ... follow along if you like.
Long ago, I had written in my journal that I did not agree with the way science, or perhaps the media reporting on science, portrayed genetics as a code passed down with complete perfection from one generation to the next. Variations were only caused by the combining of two sets, and any other variations were diseases. It was portrayed that a complete set of chromosomes was perfectly natural.
Normal, one would say.
I rejected this. I thought that during our lifetime, our genes could be affected by who we are, what we do, and how we survive in the world. Perhaps I am wrong. It was just a theory. The problem is in the mechanism. How do genes actually change ... is it at the moment egg meets sperm, and at no other moment, or can changes happen within a person's lifetime to their genetic makeup?
I now know, (with a nod to the program 'Weird or What') that it is possible for one person to have two different sets of genes in the same body. There was an instance of a woman in New Mexico who tested a negative match to her own child. This was shocking to her, to say the least, as she had birthed him in a modern hospital all on the record. It turns out that part of her body shared his genetics, and another part didn't.
So this begs the question, if our genes change during our lifetime, how do they change throughout the body? If they change only at conception, how is it we pass on certain things? Nurture rather than nature? There is an entire lifetime profession of possibilities. The study of these questions is part of a new field called Epigenetics.
Bear with me.
The other day when we were driving, Cole said that he would be nice to Owen because he is not 'normal', and would treat him normal so he will feel included. I was proud and a little dismayed at the same time.
Proud because he was being a great big brother, showing a resolve that Owen should feel comfortable and accepted. But I was also dismayed because for all intents and purposes, Owen IS normal. If Cole was to know all the 'adult' issues with other people who are close to him, he would find a soup containing borderline personality disorder, Fragile X, chronic depression, autism, dwarfism, and fetal alcohol syndrome.
All this without mentioning a father who has the exact same genetic anomaly as his brother, and a 50/50 possibility that Cole himself has the same anomaly. In fact, he has an entire family of people with odd sensory issues, and yet he perceives Owen as abnormal, simply because Jennifer and I talk (perhaps too openly) about the challenges.
We decided not to talk about Owen's issues when kids are listening, and it brings up questions about the consequences of our actions. One just has to google "killed" and "bully" to bring up frightening realities for kids who are different, even here in our Canadian schools. This is what we want to avoid, is a situation where chatty Cole talks about his younger brother and inadvertently sets in motion a chain of events that leaves Owen outcast, or at worst could have other consequences.
The problem is in the label. Normal. It screams of a majority group of us who are perfectly well-adjusted, with clean DNA, no problems at home, and a background that allows judgment from a morally superior perch.
Here is the reality. Nobody is normal. Not even you. Social skills and history aside, even genetically everyone has small additions and deletions. They are common, one could even say rampant, because that is how we evolve. These variations are called traits. Everyone has a soup of them, all within the bounds of normal, that we have learned to either suppress or exploit to get along in the world.
So when it comes to Owen, and all of us for that matter, when does a "trait" become a "disorder?
Genetic testing would say, and actually did say in Owen's case, that when a variation is under a certain level of genes affected, it is a 'normal family variant'. In that way, they can state that genetics do not cause clinically observed abnormalities. The researcher in Italy, even, was uninterested until she found that I had the same genetic variation as well, AND had issues as a child. What they were doing was counting the size of the variation, and the genes affected, and simply reporting on that.
I think that's rather narrow and overly scientific.
In my mind, it works like code in a computer. You can change all kinds of things and have no effect, but if you start randomly cutting and pasting, you eventually see all kinds of problems. It all depends on WHICH code you replace, not how much. Even the smallest could cause the blue screen of death.
In people, I believe small duplications and deletions can have big impact, and larger sequences a smaller impact, based on their location.
The benchmark should be a better merging between the clinically observed and the genetic analysis. This is happening, but it could take a long time. It requires the merging of the social, or 'soft' sciences of medicine, with the 'hard' science. Both are equally necessary for the patient experience, and in this case, neither are lacking, it is the one-two punch that is disorganized.
For now, I think we should hold off trying to actually diagnose things through genetics, unless the results are proven. Some things can already be diagnosed, others, not. In the meantime I don't believe we should be stating that the variations are 'normal' if the testing hasn't beyond a doubt proven the theory. If even small variations can cause disorders or even discomforts, or can lead to a mis-diagnosis, then we need to know which ones are linked before giving any results.
In the meantime, I think the information should flow the other way. We should be collecting data on which variations go with which symptoms, and through the cataloging and collective data-gathering, determine which genes affect which people in which ways.
All that said, genetics is in its infancy. I can't wait to see what happens with it in the next ten years.
My wife, Jennifer's, blog can be found here:
Cleverly Disguised as Cake
A teaser chapter for my current novel is now up!
Seven Gates
And my first novel, squeakyclean, here:
eBook, pdf, mobi, epub, rtf, lrf, palm, txt
Kindle US
Kindle UK
Kindle Germany
Long ago, I had written in my journal that I did not agree with the way science, or perhaps the media reporting on science, portrayed genetics as a code passed down with complete perfection from one generation to the next. Variations were only caused by the combining of two sets, and any other variations were diseases. It was portrayed that a complete set of chromosomes was perfectly natural.
Normal, one would say.
 |
| Since we're labelling ... Normal. |
 |
| Not (?) normal. |
So this begs the question, if our genes change during our lifetime, how do they change throughout the body? If they change only at conception, how is it we pass on certain things? Nurture rather than nature? There is an entire lifetime profession of possibilities. The study of these questions is part of a new field called Epigenetics.
 |
| Normal? |
Bear with me.
The other day when we were driving, Cole said that he would be nice to Owen because he is not 'normal', and would treat him normal so he will feel included. I was proud and a little dismayed at the same time.
Proud because he was being a great big brother, showing a resolve that Owen should feel comfortable and accepted. But I was also dismayed because for all intents and purposes, Owen IS normal. If Cole was to know all the 'adult' issues with other people who are close to him, he would find a soup containing borderline personality disorder, Fragile X, chronic depression, autism, dwarfism, and fetal alcohol syndrome.
All this without mentioning a father who has the exact same genetic anomaly as his brother, and a 50/50 possibility that Cole himself has the same anomaly. In fact, he has an entire family of people with odd sensory issues, and yet he perceives Owen as abnormal, simply because Jennifer and I talk (perhaps too openly) about the challenges.
 |
| Normal? Or not? |
We decided not to talk about Owen's issues when kids are listening, and it brings up questions about the consequences of our actions. One just has to google "killed" and "bully" to bring up frightening realities for kids who are different, even here in our Canadian schools. This is what we want to avoid, is a situation where chatty Cole talks about his younger brother and inadvertently sets in motion a chain of events that leaves Owen outcast, or at worst could have other consequences.
The problem is in the label. Normal. It screams of a majority group of us who are perfectly well-adjusted, with clean DNA, no problems at home, and a background that allows judgment from a morally superior perch.
Here is the reality. Nobody is normal. Not even you. Social skills and history aside, even genetically everyone has small additions and deletions. They are common, one could even say rampant, because that is how we evolve. These variations are called traits. Everyone has a soup of them, all within the bounds of normal, that we have learned to either suppress or exploit to get along in the world.
So when it comes to Owen, and all of us for that matter, when does a "trait" become a "disorder?
Genetic testing would say, and actually did say in Owen's case, that when a variation is under a certain level of genes affected, it is a 'normal family variant'. In that way, they can state that genetics do not cause clinically observed abnormalities. The researcher in Italy, even, was uninterested until she found that I had the same genetic variation as well, AND had issues as a child. What they were doing was counting the size of the variation, and the genes affected, and simply reporting on that.
I think that's rather narrow and overly scientific.
In my mind, it works like code in a computer. You can change all kinds of things and have no effect, but if you start randomly cutting and pasting, you eventually see all kinds of problems. It all depends on WHICH code you replace, not how much. Even the smallest could cause the blue screen of death.
 |
| Normal. |
The benchmark should be a better merging between the clinically observed and the genetic analysis. This is happening, but it could take a long time. It requires the merging of the social, or 'soft' sciences of medicine, with the 'hard' science. Both are equally necessary for the patient experience, and in this case, neither are lacking, it is the one-two punch that is disorganized.
For now, I think we should hold off trying to actually diagnose things through genetics, unless the results are proven. Some things can already be diagnosed, others, not. In the meantime I don't believe we should be stating that the variations are 'normal' if the testing hasn't beyond a doubt proven the theory. If even small variations can cause disorders or even discomforts, or can lead to a mis-diagnosis, then we need to know which ones are linked before giving any results.
 |
| Not normal. |
All that said, genetics is in its infancy. I can't wait to see what happens with it in the next ten years.
My wife, Jennifer's, blog can be found here:
Cleverly Disguised as Cake
A teaser chapter for my current novel is now up!
Seven Gates
And my first novel, squeakyclean, here:
eBook, pdf, mobi, epub, rtf, lrf, palm, txt
Kindle US
Kindle UK
Kindle Germany
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Owen's first day of school
So with the cooling of evenings, and the tomato plants withering on the vine comes the inevitable trip to pick up pencils, backpacks, new shoes, and binders. Yes. School.
I used to dread September. It was the end of freedom, when I would have to face all the other kids again.
Being the parent, it's very different. This year Jennifer and I had a whole bunch of anxiety about Owen going to school. It's like one of those milestones where they take a farther step away from home and toward independence, and for any parent that's terrifying.
Cole is old hat to this school thing, and wouldn't show excitement if I paid him.
Me: "You all ready?" Cole: "Yep."
"You excited?" "Nope."
He's already jaded (it happens so fast) seeing it as an encroachment on his unlimited play time. I guess it's not going to hurt to point out that he was already getting bored with summer, but he will I'm sure remember it in fond, shining glory, too bright in his mind, like Nirvana. *sigh*
Owen, however, stood the night before at the door in his underwear for over an hour, with his crocs, backpack, sunglasses, and a Bob the Builder construction helmet. I guess he figured that's what he needed to be prepared. He didn't even want to go to bed. I think he would've sat on the steps and waited if we'd let him.
Jenn and I were also not ready for Owen to go to school. . Our main concerns were: toileting, his tendency to overheat, special food needs, and whether or not they would be able to understand his speech.
Let me say that the school has been very good at the preparation for Owen's arrival. They not only were interested in his specific learning needs and his quirks, but have come up with plans for many of the things that could go wrong on the first day and thereafter. Maybe it helps that the Principal has her degree in Special Education, or maybe it is because he's just darned cute....
They could have done this by a written questionnaire, the likes of which we'd seen before from various support groups, but no, they met with Jenn and I, and we went over the concerns one by one. Major win for the school board! From this meeting came several plans that are going to make his days easier, and will get him the best experience possible. If this means he will eventually enjoy school and not have such a hard time, then even better.
He was supposed to be on a special bus that picked him up at our door and took him to the school, and back. Now because I wanted to make sure Owen's busing went well, like any good parent I drove to the school for 9am to watch as he got off the bus. I was going to just make sure there were no glitches, and not get involved.
I am so glad I did.
I met his EA on the front steps, who was equally as confused as I was when the bus drove past, Owen's little hand out the window waving to his school.
She nervously laughed, and said "I'm sure they're just going to another school first."
When it drove past a second time, and didn't stop, she and I both got worried. I began texting Jenn to tell her what was going on, and the EA tried to radio the bus. When that failed, she went inside to call the busing company.
Shortly after, they got through, and the bus came, and Owen ended up ten minutes late for class. First day glitch, I figured.
The next day, however, as he got on, the driver asked Jenn for a daily schedule, which we thought was odd, since working for the school you'd think they had one. By the time he was due home, Jenn waited, schedule in hand, at the end of the driveway. Ten minutes, twenty, then a half hour. Finally the call came through from the school. The bus driver had left Owen behind.
I could see leaving him on a day she didn't know she had to pick him up, but she was the one who drove him there in the morning!!!!
We were furious. We picked up Owen, and spent the next day on the phone. The school referred us to the transportation planning service who plan all of the busing in the area. They referred us to the bus company, who then said they have a contract to be at certain stops at certain times, and are penalized for not making their contract obligations. It turns out that they are contracted to drop Owen off before there is staff there to receive him, and to pick him up twenty minutes before school even lets out.
So who did we have to call? The planning company. They pawned us off earlier in the day without talking to us, and that was probably a mistake. Jennifer left such an interesting message, quoting Section 1 of the Ontario Human Rights Code that they had to consult with their legal department before calling us back.
They say they're going to have it fixed part way through next week, but for now we're crossing our fingers.
A teaser chapter for my current novel is now up!
Seven Gates
My wife, Jennifer's, blog can be found here:
Cleverly Disguised as Cake
And my first novel, squeakyclean, here:
eBook, pdf, mobi, epub, rtf, lrf, palm, txt
Kindle US
Kindle UK
Kindle Germany
 |
| Next year all three will be out all day (!) |
I used to dread September. It was the end of freedom, when I would have to face all the other kids again.
Being the parent, it's very different. This year Jennifer and I had a whole bunch of anxiety about Owen going to school. It's like one of those milestones where they take a farther step away from home and toward independence, and for any parent that's terrifying.
Cole is old hat to this school thing, and wouldn't show excitement if I paid him.
Me: "You all ready?" Cole: "Yep."
"You excited?" "Nope."
He's already jaded (it happens so fast) seeing it as an encroachment on his unlimited play time. I guess it's not going to hurt to point out that he was already getting bored with summer, but he will I'm sure remember it in fond, shining glory, too bright in his mind, like Nirvana. *sigh*
Jenn and I were also not ready for Owen to go to school. . Our main concerns were: toileting, his tendency to overheat, special food needs, and whether or not they would be able to understand his speech.
Let me say that the school has been very good at the preparation for Owen's arrival. They not only were interested in his specific learning needs and his quirks, but have come up with plans for many of the things that could go wrong on the first day and thereafter. Maybe it helps that the Principal has her degree in Special Education, or maybe it is because he's just darned cute....
They could have done this by a written questionnaire, the likes of which we'd seen before from various support groups, but no, they met with Jenn and I, and we went over the concerns one by one. Major win for the school board! From this meeting came several plans that are going to make his days easier, and will get him the best experience possible. If this means he will eventually enjoy school and not have such a hard time, then even better.
He was supposed to be on a special bus that picked him up at our door and took him to the school, and back. Now because I wanted to make sure Owen's busing went well, like any good parent I drove to the school for 9am to watch as he got off the bus. I was going to just make sure there were no glitches, and not get involved.
I am so glad I did.
I met his EA on the front steps, who was equally as confused as I was when the bus drove past, Owen's little hand out the window waving to his school.
She nervously laughed, and said "I'm sure they're just going to another school first."
 |
| Other buses coming in just before his bus drove past. |
When it drove past a second time, and didn't stop, she and I both got worried. I began texting Jenn to tell her what was going on, and the EA tried to radio the bus. When that failed, she went inside to call the busing company.
Shortly after, they got through, and the bus came, and Owen ended up ten minutes late for class. First day glitch, I figured.
The next day, however, as he got on, the driver asked Jenn for a daily schedule, which we thought was odd, since working for the school you'd think they had one. By the time he was due home, Jenn waited, schedule in hand, at the end of the driveway. Ten minutes, twenty, then a half hour. Finally the call came through from the school. The bus driver had left Owen behind.
I could see leaving him on a day she didn't know she had to pick him up, but she was the one who drove him there in the morning!!!!
We were furious. We picked up Owen, and spent the next day on the phone. The school referred us to the transportation planning service who plan all of the busing in the area. They referred us to the bus company, who then said they have a contract to be at certain stops at certain times, and are penalized for not making their contract obligations. It turns out that they are contracted to drop Owen off before there is staff there to receive him, and to pick him up twenty minutes before school even lets out.
So who did we have to call? The planning company. They pawned us off earlier in the day without talking to us, and that was probably a mistake. Jennifer left such an interesting message, quoting Section 1 of the Ontario Human Rights Code that they had to consult with their legal department before calling us back.
They say they're going to have it fixed part way through next week, but for now we're crossing our fingers.
A teaser chapter for my current novel is now up!
Seven Gates
My wife, Jennifer's, blog can be found here:
Cleverly Disguised as Cake
And my first novel, squeakyclean, here:
eBook, pdf, mobi, epub, rtf, lrf, palm, txt
Kindle US
Kindle UK
Kindle Germany
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)