Fat is Out, Thin Healthy is In

Fat is Out, Thin Healthy is In

How does it feel to be called fat or obese? I’m guessing at this point you’re not really happy. Why would anybody be happy to be called fat or obese. Now, how does it feel to be living in one of the fattest countries in the world? According to www.Forbes.com we are the ninth fattest country in the world.

Childhood obesity is a growing problem and has been for the last 20 years. Childhood obesity This strikes me as a huge national epidemic. In 1997 the World Health Organization, or the WHO, formally recognized obesity as a global epidemic. According to an article written by Pam Belluck in the New York Times,” the rapid rise n childhood obesity, if left unchecked, could shorten life spans by as much as five years”(“Children’s Life Expectancy”). In the same article Belluck states that “obesity is already shortening average life spans by a greater rate than accidents, homicides and suicides combined”(“Children’s Life Expectancy”). Childhood obesity has several short term as well as long term effects such as: low self-esteem, diabetes, heart disease, gastrointestinal, endocrine or certain orthopedic problems. With obesity being such a growing problem, I believe it is everyone’s responsibility to step in and try to fix this issue. Being a chef, I love using the freshest ingredients, and trying to use what’s seasonal. My goal in life is eventually to open a catering business that also gives cooking lessons to families and kids, and teach families that cooking is fun and healthier. Cooking using fresh ingredients and getting away from processed foods is to me, the best way to conquer childhood obesity.

Your basic box of Kraft macaroni and cheese consists of ten ingredients that I can’t even pronounce, and something called cheese culture. When I think of macaroni and cheese, I think the three most important ingredients are milk, cheese, and pasta. The last two ingredients in Kraft macaroni and cheese are powdered milk and the cheese culture. Cheese culture is the yellow powder cheese product in the box of macaroni. In doing research on cheese culture, I could not find any ingredients as to what is in the powder. Everywhere I looked, the websites would tell me that Kraft keeps this one of their many corporate secrets. Cheese that has a shelf life of a few years, in my opinion, is not something I want to be eating.

How often do you randomly stick something into your mouth, not knowing anything about what you’re eating?  Everyday people are eating things that would make my dog cringe, and she licks her own butt. Processed foods are a staple in almost every household. Processed foods are not all necessarily bad for you. Several foods, like milk, are processed so that they are healthier for the public as a whole. But most processed foods contain a high number of food additives. The use of preservatives in food, which are added to sustain a longer shelf life, have been shown to cause severe health issues. Much of the processed food school cafeterias use to serve school lunches is processed because it is cheap to make and buy. I am not the only person who believes that school cafeterias need an overhaul. The most current campaign to change and reform school cafeterias is being lead by Jamie Oliver.

Jamie Oliver is a British chef who is trying to start a nation wide food revolution in the United States. His philosophy is that every child has the right to a healthy school lunch, which is full of unneeded sugars and chemicals. He is trying to urge the FDA to change their regulations on school lunches. The focus on school lunches has never had so much attention with new organizations and nation wide programs that intend to change the ways schools look at food.

In “Cultivating Failure” in the Atlantic, Caitlin Flanagan talks about how schools that have introduced school gardens are actually ruining children and making them concentrate on other fields outside of reading, writing and arithmetic. After reading her article, you can tell she did a lot of research, but I argue with her expertise in children and students learning habits. I am an elementary education major and know the importance of challenging children’s minds with hands on activities and changing their surroundings. Students, especially young students, need different teaching styles because not all students learn the same. Some students are primarily auditory learners, some are visual, and some are didactic learners. Not only do you learn important lessons in horticulture, but science teachers also can talk about cellular growth, health teachers can talk about the nutritional value of fresh vegetables, and history teachers can teach about how we went from small local farms to huge mass producing farms.

My thought on fixing the obesity problem in America starts at home. Schools that are pushing for fresh, non-processed foods is a huge start to fixing the problem, but how many meals do children eat at home? A majority of meals that kids eat are eaten elsewhere. Parents need to start doing their part in fixing the obesity problem.  Parents need to get away from convenience and processed just to get some food on the table and learn that even a fresh healthy meal doesn’t take that much time to make. Parents alone can not fix the problem but with the help of schools showing the children how to eat fresh, children might actually make a great decision when it comes to eating junk or something healthy.

--Jeremy Martin

Should Foreign Adoption be Banned?

Should adoption from Russia be banned from Americans? I believe not. Americans are capable of loving a child. There might be a few situations where the American was unable to handle the child, but that does not necessarily mean that all Americans would be unable to handle it. Adoptive parents need to be ready to give up their own activities for months, or even possibly years. In doing this, the adoptive parents needs to show love, affection, and care towards the child. Americans are somewhat selfish people, and not all realize what it takes to adopt of child of a different way of life. But to argue my case, I do believe that Americans are more than capable to adopt children from Russia and raise the child in a positive environment.

The article or blog by KJ Dell’Antonia, which is called I Did Not Love My Adopted Child, is about the woman from Tennessee who adopted a child from Russia and decided she no longer wished to parent this child. Torry Hansen, the mother of the child, ended up putting her seven-year-old adopted son on a plane by himself back to Russia. In another article from New York Times, Shipping an Adopted Son Back to Russia by Lisa Belkin, Hansen sent the little boy back to Russia with a letter of explanation saying this,

This child is mentally unstable. He is violent and has severe psychopathic issues. I was lied to and misled by the Russian Orphanage workers and director regarding his mental stability and other issues. … After giving my best to this child, I am sorry to say that for the safety of my family, friends, and myself, I no longer wish to parent this child.

I believe that the articles makes several good points; it is very hard to adopt children from different parts of the world. But on the other hand, I don’t think it should forbid other Americans from adopting children from Russia. I Did Not Love My Adopted Child had a lot of information from other cases other than the adoption from Russia that related how it is not always easy to raise a child who doesn’t have any love for you. People who wish to adopt children from different parts of the world, especially Russia who has some of the hardest children to adapt to the American way of life, need to make sure they are able to handle whatever the child throws at them. Not all Americans are unworthy or unable to care for an unloving child. But at the same time not every children from Russia is going to unloving. I do believe if someone from the United States wish to adopt from a different country, mainly Russia, they should try to adopt the child as a baby or before the age of 3. Most children adapt to the parents lifestyle at early ages of their lifetime. If the child is accustomed to the Russia way of life, it will be a challenge to raise this child but it is possible.

Russia Seeks Ways to Keep Its Children, a New York Times article that also relates to the adoption from Russia, written by Clifford J. Levy talks about how Russia wishes to not fully forbid adoption of the children from the people of the United States. I do believe that it shouldn’t be fully forbidden but that some things need to be changed between the processes of the adoption. In the New York Times blog they interviewed a man and he stated that,

Mr. Astakhov emphasized that he did not favor a permanent adoption ban, acknowledging that there were simply not enough Russian families who want to adopt children. But he suggested that more restrictions, combined with strenuous efforts to help Russian parents and to encourage adoptions inside the country, would sharply reduce the number of children sent abroad. 

After doing research you will find that over two hundred and fifty American families are almost near the end of the procedure of adopting Russian children. After the recent incident with the seven year old boy being sent back to Russia, Russia officials have said that those cases will be at a halt until the new regulations are approved. Overall Russian feels like the vast majority of adoptions have turned out well in past, but recent decades. Further research will tell you that even though there as been an overall positive feel about the adoptions new rules for the adoption must be made because considering the fact that fourteen Russian children adopted by Americans have died since 1996, and the cause of their death was due to abuse. To conclude the New York Times report by Clifford J. Levy says, “Mr. Astakhov said he realized that Americans seeking to adopt Russians would be upset. But he said changes were needed. “Adoptions will continue,” he said. “We only want guarantees for the lives and the safety of our children abroad. Because we are giving to American families the most precious thing for us: our children.” 

All in all, Americans are very capable of raising children who are very likely to a chronic behavior. Along certain regulations that should be underway the process is very likely to become for strict. With saying this, I believe it will be harder for Americans to prove they are emotionally, financially, and physical stable to take on what might be a challenge, but it will be possible for Americans to continue to raise children from Russia in a happily loving household.

--Alison Harpenau

Unschooling

There is a new method of teaching that is storming the nation. We all are familiar with the public school system that sets children on a set curriculum that teaches everyone basically the same skills. If you’re not into the laid back style of public schools you have the option to enroll your children in a private school that will be more structured. If all else fail and you want to take matters into your own hands, turn to home schooling. Home schooling has the same curriculum as a public school except the child loses all social life. The new things among parents who are not happy with theses more traditional methods of education and want their children to think outside the box and get a different kind of education is Unschooling. Wikipedia defines Unschooling as “a range of educational philosophies and practices centered on allowing children to learn through their natural life experiences”. Unschooling has no curriculum base at all. To me unschoooling’s only slight advantage is that the parent and child bond, and even then this might be too much.  These children are not tested on their skills and they do not get a formal education consisting of the materials that they will need to do well in college. True, not everyone is cut out or intends on going to college but shouldn’t these children have the chance? I believe that a child needs to learn the fundamentals such as math and grammar. True, in Unschooling the child is exposed to some math through activities such as quilting and carpentry, but how will that get a child prepared for college?  The child is able to make his or her own choices as to what they want to learn and basically get to explore the world around them. I’m not saying by any means that this is not a positive experience for a child, because it is. Unschooling sounds like a great way to spend your summer with your child, going to museums and having your own little book club is nice and I think would be a growing opportunity for every child.  If anything I think this method of teaching is wrong because the child has no social life, not a normal one anyway.

Fellow blogger, Ann Zeise, has made it clear in her blog that he is 100% for unschooling; she has been practicing this with her son and is enjoying it very much. You can read her experience as this hyperlink Curriculum to Unschooling. Zeise has done away with traditional curriculum and created her own that she has adapted to fit her sons interest. This is all fine and dandy in my opinion, why shouldn’t every child get to learn in his or her own way?  But there is no structure to this child’s education; he is allowed to do as he whatever he wants as long as his parents think he’s learned a lesson. The activities that he engages in are not preparing him for his future, if they were why do we even have schools anymore? Everyone could just live their lives and do as the please and we would come up with doctors and lawyers and scientists.

Now I understand that all children learn differently, but society today is harsh and is not accepting of having to adapt to different methods of teaching. Kristi Walker, another blogger and a homeschooling mother, agrees that unschooling is a joke, She comments that there are no “uncolleges” nor are there “unjobs” for these children to attend or apply for.  She is completely right in my opinion, without structure and no real expectations being asked of the unschooled, how will they be able to function when the real world asks something of them?

This also brings up another point, the parents. For unschooling to even have the slightest chance of working the parent has to be the child’s main guide.  As Walker mentions in her blog that most parents don’t even know where to start. You can’t just bring your child to the museum and read a few information cards and decide that your child now must know the history of the Aztec people. Unschooling has a demand for parents who are willing to spend a great deal of time with their children and help them discover meaning and understanding of the world around them, unfortunately there are lazy parents out there who will not take the time to do so, these are the children I feel for the most. They have no chance and will have no motivation to do anything, and why would they? They have no competition or peers to learn from they have nothing to challenge them. In schools there is a sense of competition that motivates most students to do well, and without this there is no drive to succeed.

Over all I guess in trying to say that unschooling is a nice pass time, good for summer vacation, and an all around good chance to bond with your child. But without formal education, motivation, some competition, peers and structure you are setting your child up for failure. Don’t let me be the judge here though, to find out more information visit any of the hyper links or click here.

--Susan Dixon

Privacy on Facebook

Facebook plays an active part in many Americans life today. With Facebook you can post just about anything from where you’re eating tonight, what you’re going to wear, who you’re going with and your favorite quotes, etcetera. Facebook also allows you to post pictures and messages and just about anything you would like as long as you’re not threatening another user. However, Derek Thompson makes a very valid point in his blog titled “Facebook Does Not Understand the Meaning of Privacy.” (Facebook Privacy) When using Facebook or any site over the internet where you post where you’re going, pictures and etcetera, privacy is a very important issue. Thompson finds it humoring to hear CEO Mark Zuckerberg brag about the “psychic mastery” of users’ privacy through Facebook. (Thompson)  Thompson argues that people do enjoy publically sharing information over the internet; however, the information that was thought to be private is “suddenly being upchucked onto the World Wide Web in one messy and meaningless purge of regional networks.”(Facebook Privacy)  I do agree that we tend to share many things on Facebook to our “friends” but are not things that you would want others seeing. However my belief on the matter is you shouldn’t make anything public if you wouldn’t want everyone around you seeing it. You may think that it is going to stay private but you can’t be that certain especially with all the hackers these days. Even I have experienced a Facebook hacker at one time. The hacker had accessed my account and sent out a message to all my friends with a video to watch and when they would try and open the video it would infect their computer with a virus allowing the hacker into their system as well.

Thompson also argues that “Privacy is about control, and when Facebook changes its privacy control rules every six months, its users lose both control and privacy.” (Facebook Privacy) I do agree that it’s hard to understand rules and policies if they are continually changing. Zuckerberg justifies this issue with saying they “view it as their role in the system to constantly be innovating and be updating what our system is to reflect what the current social norms are.” (Facebook Privacy) I understand that most anything must change to stay “up to date”; however there are some things that just shouldn’t change unless it’s to better protect you. One of these being privacy controls for anything that you post your own private information over the internet. There are many people using Facebook including young children. It is very important to teach our children the importance of internet safety and that’s hard to do when the safety policies continually change.

The only conclusion is to make sure your one hundred percent safe from this issue is to not put anything on the internet that you wouldn’t want the whole world to see. I really like the way Derek Thompson states his opinion on the matter in his article “Don’t Blame Facebook for the Erosion of Online Privacy,” saying “I’m not blaming people whose Social Security numbers are lifted from Facebook via criminal cryptologist. That is, by definition, a crime. I’m only suggesting that we offer information online by choice, not by fiat. Occasionally Facebook screws up. But mostly, we sacrifice our privacy online for the human instinct to share and feel connected. If you want somebody to blame, look in the mirror.” (Don’t Blame Facebook) This is very true; the only fault I find in Facebook is changing the policy so frequently. Another quote I find extremely true on the issue of internet safety is the advice of Jon Kleinberg of Cornell University: “When you’re doing stuff online, you should behave as if you’re doing it in public—because increasingly, it is.” (Kleinberg, Jon)

However I do understand Facebook has many good sides as well. It lets you keep in touch with many distant friends and family members easier than most other means of communication. So, if you absolutely still “have” to have a Facebook I would encourage a few simple means of safety to help keep your information as private as possible. First, I would only allow close family or friends, that you have known for a very long time, to be your “friends” on Facebook. Second, I would set your profile to private so not just anyone can access your personal comments and photos.  Lastly, do not ever post anything that you wouldn’t want anyone other than your “friends” to see because, it is not always promised that whatever you post will be for your eyes only!

--Amanda Barnett

Immigrants and America

Immigrants today aren’t really different from those of America’s past, they still come from all over the world to try and find a better place to live and raise a family. And just like in the past, we aren’t handling these prospective Americans, both illegal and legal, in the best of ways. Sure we aren’t completely banning all immigration from Mexico like we did with the Chinese, but we are still punishing those who come here legally. When someone mentions immigration to you, you probably think of illegal’s crossing our southern border and all the noise raised over our almost open policy of hiring said illegal’s. Americans tend to ignore our law abiding immigrants or just lump them in with those pouring in from Mexico. Those that come here legally should be entitled to all the protection and rights offered to every American citizen. In our nations past the equal treatment of legal immigrants hasn’t always been a top priority for us or our government. Most Americans fail to realize the pressures we put on legal immigrants and the amount of stress put on our government agencies by the problems this focus on the illegal immigrants has caused. I’m not saying illegal immigration isn’t a problem, it definitely is and its costing this nation a lot of money. What I’m saying is, we’re making the legally immigrating peoples pay for it.

In the New York times editorial “A Commitment to Citizenship” this problem is highlighted perfectly. The United States citizenship agency is struggling to keep up with its budget, because it has to pay for itself. No government help for the agency dealing with those who choose to come here the legal way. The agency makes the majority of its money from naturalization fees, the fee a prospective citizen must pay to be eligible for citizenship. Two years ago its cost was 400 dollars, today its 675 dollars. This raise in cost combined with the recent global economic slump has lead to a sharp decrease in the amount of legal immigration this country is seeing. If we were to relax our currently semi-strict process to enter this country it could do several things that might help in raising our legal immigrations and lowering our illegal ones. I have to admit an article by Bryan Pick had some really good ideas on how to ease our immigration problems. Just the easing of the strict policies would help, it would allow a freer of those coming here legally and it might make it easier to spot those coming here illegally with bad intent, aka terrorist and drug runners, according to Pick and I‘d have to whole heartedly agree. One of his best points is that we could offer voucher forms for language education as well as civic adult education, I happen to really like this one. I have no problem with others from another country, but I think you should at least be able to speak and read in the language of the country you plan on staying in.

On the illegal side of things government is being given out like proverbial candy on Halloween. In his blog Bryan Pick shows exactly where most of this money of going. Many people would think we are practically throwing at illegals once they are in our country and for the most part that’s untrue. As in Pick’s article illegal immigrants actually wait longer to use the healthcare system than almost all other Americans. However there is a place money is being thrown and that’s our school systems, according to Pick. There are over 1.6 million illegal immigrants under the age of 18 in the U.S., and the majority of those in California with its failing government budget. Here’s where the main problem starts, and Pick has a solution. In a normal public school environment the child would have to show a marked increase in his or her ability to speak English, the savings alone on not having to have bilingual teachers or books would go a long way to help with school budgets. Also pick goes on to state that we should actually do something about illegals who commit crimes in our country, instead of letting them stay until they’ve done major or done it repeatedly, we should deport them to their country of origin as swiftly as possible. When I say swiftly as possible it ties in with another problem that costing us money, the expensive prisons we house illegal immigrants in before deporting them back to their home countries, if we stopped doing this and instead just got them out of here it would end up saving us another nice chunk of change.

For all this nations short comings we are handling things better than we have, although in some cases we are facing problems we just didn’t see in the past. We aren’t banning them all as we did with the Asians, we aren’t sending them off to our wars like we did with the Irish in the Civil War, and we aren’t enslaving like we did with the Africans. Instead all things considered I think we’re doing ok, not great or how good we should be doing, but a resounding mediocre. Unless we’re the state of Arizona and then we might be taking it to far beyond the constitution, by giving our law enforcement the ability to stop and check the papers of anyone who appears to be of a Mexican decent. If only we could actually make up minds and make our politicians do something to stem the free flow of our money and efforts on this subject. We are a country founded by immigrants, our forefathers from Europe and those of the Indians who, according to what book you read, crossed over from the Mongolian steppes to get here. We’ll continue to be a country made up of immigrants until we cease to be a country, so hopefully our nation will atleast be dealing with this problem for many years to come.

-- Josh Cherry

A country in transit

Every once in a while, there comes a point in the American culture where the country faces a difficult choice about its transportation issues. Does it need to move forward or is it content with the system that it already has in place? And if it is to move forward, the question then becomes what exactly does that forward motion entail? In the United States, the rail system for the large part has dominated American history as an important part of industrial growth. Children grow up in elementary schools learning about the transcontinental railroad and how America was the first to create such an incredible system of transportation for both commercial and personal travel. Amtrak, one of the largest rail companies in the United States, boasts what it considers impressive statistics, with over 21,000 miles of tracks and over 300 trains in operation per day. Although these are impressive numbers, the development of rail technology in the United States is largely inferior to the rest of the world, having put more focus on commercial air travel and interstate highway travel than on rail systems.

But, new blood in Washington has begun cautiously, if not hesitantly, making pledges about improving the condition of the high-speed rail system in the United States. President Obama, at a meeting in 2009, discussed the implications of improving rail systems in other countries and how America should take the charge and lead the world in improving rail systems. At this same meeting he pointed out that “In France, high-speed rail has pulled regions from isolation, ignited growth, remade quiet towns into thriving tourist destinations.  In Spain, a high-speed line between Madrid and Seville is so successful that more people travel between those cities by rail than by car and airplane combined.” He goes on to discuss that “There's no reason why the future of travel should lie somewhere else beyond our borders.  Building a new system of high-speed rail in America will be faster, cheaper and easier than building more freeways or adding to an already overburdened aviation system –- and everybody stands to benefit” (Obama). It seems as though this would be a major point of interest to the Obama administration to look into. After all, the economy is in terrible shape. The Bureau of Labor Statistics recently released its consumer price index summary which showed a drastic rise in the price for fuel in the United States. It could then be inferred by a person absorbing all this information that the government would want to put a good deal of effort into improving the situation of efficient and cost-saving rail travel.

Sadly, it does not seem to be the case. Adie Tomer of The New Republic points out in an article from 2009 that while the revival in interest in rail travel is beneficial to the overall program, the propositions that are already being made lack in some fundamental areas. The plans call for new rail lines to be built between some large cities, but leave out large sections of the more mountainous terrain between California and Missouri. The plans also leave out some important connections between several large cities as well as connections that would make logical sense to be built. “There is no connection between Southern California and Phoenix or Tucson. Buffalo and Detroit are connected to the east and west, respectively, but don’t maintain connections to the Toronto metropolis. Jacksonville (FL) is connected to the north, but doesn’t maintain a connection to Orlando or the rest of Florida. And why are Dallas and Houston unconnected?” (Tomer). And on top of all of the rest of the problems in the plans, the plans themselves are outdated. Little to no revision has gone into the plans since 2000. If the government is adamant about making high-speed rail travel an integral and important part of the way Americans travel, then it would make sense that more would already be in the works to improving this system.

But the idea that improved rail travel is purely for economic benefits would be leaving out about half of the total idea. While economics can make or break whether or not a rail system gets off the ground in the first place, it falls to the side of social acceptance to keep the system afloat. Even if the United States had the ability to put in a fully-furnished high-speed rail system tomorrow with all of the latest technology and the best possible system of organization, it would not be enough in and of itself to keep it up and running. In other countries, rail is successful for a handful of reasons. An obvious one is the economic benefits, but the other is social integration. In Japan, high-speed rail is an integral part of life. People crowd onto trains that travel at incredible speeds and arrive at their destinations in a relatively short amount of time. And with the options of quick transportation from even the train station to another destination, travel becomes not a question of what is the fastest and easiest way, but rather a question of what way might be the more interesting today.

--John Lehman

Be a Bully or Get Bullied

In elementary school and even up to the 10^th grade I was teased about my last name. I was called Lemony, Lemon Head, Lemony Fresh, Lemonade and many other names. Although these names were harmless, it really hurt my feelings and it made me very self conscious about my name. I hated my teachers to call my name out loud or at assemblies I always hoped that I wouldn’t be winning an award just because I didn’t want them to call out my last name and me have to sit and listen to the other kids snicker at me. I did grow out of hating my name and the other kids eventually stopped picking on me for my last name but I will never forget the way it felt. I love my last name now and I honestly can’t imagine having any other name. It made me stronger as a person to be picked on and now I can take a little tough love from others.

To be an American you have to be tough, hard-working, motivated, and you have to be able to take care of yourself. Perhaps we pick on each other as children to develop “tough skin” and people always tell us to be strong and to not wear our heart on our sleeve. We were taught never to tattle and to take what life throws at us as a challenge to make us stronger. Most of us heard the quote, “What doesn’t kill you can only make you stronger”, so some would argue that bullying is just teasing but, how do we know when the teasing has gone way too far?

Most teens are picked on throughout life for something whether it’s their name, their skin color, who they are dating, what their parents do, how they dress, talk, fix their hair, or how big, tall, short, or small they are. Kids like to pick on other kids. Back in the old days of the West it was common for young boys to fight, rough house, and to pick on one another but, now days it is taken to the extremes. It wasn’t until just recently that there have been actions taken to prevent bullying in schools and communities. In the past, bullies were to be taken care of by the victim who was bullied. For example, the new hit television show, Glee. This series is all about the misfits in a High School trying to find a click that they truly belong to and trying to find a way to fit in despite being bullied constantly and pushed around. Taking care of the bullies yourself was a way for young children to learn how to cope with bullies. So, how do we know when enough is enough and is a little teasing healthy for the development of a child? There is truly no way to stop teasing completely but there is a point where the teasing crosses over into a harsher form of teasing defined as bullying.

So what can be done to stop bullying among children in school? According to Lillian Glass, a New York City psychologist, "We live in a culture where this kind of `dissing' may be considered cool or sarcastic," she then said that school officials, "ignore it. It's like nothing."(Glass, Lillian) But, how can the cruelty of children be considered nothing, especially, when many reports show that many cases of suicide stem from being bullied by other classmates. The bullying and teasing can and does often start as young as six years old. Bullies often trip their victims in the hallway, send mean notes, start harsh rumors about them and often physically hurt or mess with them.(Shear) How can this harassment be ignored by the faculty of schools?

There have been many recent cases of suicide related to bullying. One of the biggest cases right now involves a young 15 year old girl by the name of Phoebe Prince from Massachusetts. Her suicide might have been prevented if the correct actions would have been taken and if this young girl’s cry for help might have been taken a little more seriously. Holly Epstein Ojalvo, a writer for New York Times, stated in her article, “Ms. Scheibel said that Ms. Prince’s suicide came after nearly three months of severe taunting and physical threats by a cluster of fellow students.” (Ojalvo) You would think that Phoebe would still be around today if the correct actions would have been taken when she told her mother about the bullying or when the teachers at her school saw the torturing and maltreatment, you would think they would have stopped it. So, why didn’t they? At first, Ms. Prince’s mother thought that maybe it was just young teens quarreling and maybe it was just a case of the other girls being jealous. But, with Phoebe not being able to stay at school because of the other kids harassing her, her mother soon realized that this bullying was on a whole new level. Her mother then proceeded to go and talk with the school officials not only once but twice, both times no action being taken. So, who is to blame for this young girl’s death? Is it society, the school, or the bullies’ parents? In my personal opinion I believe all of these are to blame. We live in a society where bullying and taking it is almost considered a rite of passage. This cultural expectation or blind spot makes it hard for the school systems and teachers alone to stop or to catch all of the teasing and bullying that goes on around the school. Also, with the media promoting violence and death with movies and games, teachers don’t teach about bullying and why and how it is wrong. Parent’s also neglect the fact that they must teach their children at a young age that violence and harassing others is wrong.

When I was younger I was taught to have a tough skin and not run to my parents about everything. I think most of us were taught that as children as well. We were brought up knowing how to take care of ourselves and to not run and be tattle tales. If you live in the America you are considered to be tough and that you should be able to handle anything and to be able to tough out anything no matter what comes your way. Was this how Phoebe thought? Did she just want to try to be tough and not run to her mother about everything; did she just not want to be a tattle tale? We will never know because Ms. Phoebe Prince never got the chance to let everyone know how she truly felt. She couldn’t take the bullying and pressure anymore so she tragically took her own life to avoid being the center of all the other teens’ jokes.

What is considered bullying and what is not? Like I told you before I was picked on and teased because of my last name for years and it did get to me as a child but it did make me stronger now that I am older. I think this kind of teasing starts off as harmless. No one physically threatened me and no one followed me around taunting me. I think if it becomes a case of stalking and a case of physical threats or physical actions then that should be considered bullying and action should be taken immediately to avoid such cases as Ms. Prince. But, if it is harmless picking, and yes most people should be able to tell the difference, then I believe that to be healthy for the child. It does help us get a tougher skin and teasing helps us learn how to cope and deal with other and worse issues in our lives. 

--Alicia Lemons