Dear Editor,
Neil Adams’ in his letter captioned ‘Training today has taken on a whole new meaning‘ published in the Stabroek News on May 30 charged that comments made in my letter published in SN two days prior, were in direct reference to a letter he penned in the Chronicle.
While I would have loved to read Mr Adams’ letter, I must admit that I do not know not what he is referring to; I simply did not have the good fortune to read the particular missive to which he made reference. It is true that I did not mention the author of the Chronicle article I referred to, but I will now state that it was to an article written by one Mr Ronald Hudson, former self-identified candidate for Mayor of Georgetown. In 2008, while I was at a function at the Grand Coastal Hotel, Mr Hudson proudly presented me with a copy of his article in which he seems to conclude that single-parent families in Guyana are responsible for the crimes in the society.
Having scanned through the article I quickly rejected Mr Hudson’s notion and asked what kind of research he had done to draw such a bizarre conclusion. I also bemoaned the fact that such a negative and highly stereotyped articled could have had been allotted almost the complete middle page of the government-owned newspaper. What was worse was that the article showed no evidence of scientific research, but yet seemed to relegate a sizeable proportion of Guyanese families as nothing but “breeding grounds“ for criminals. Too often the single parent-family receives criticism from people who, clearly, did not bother to take the time to research this type of family which is found in most of the English-speaking Caribbean. It is true that many single parent families experience many challenges which may affect the children, but to claim that they are the ‘crime birthers’ of the Guyanese society is abominable, to say the least. I hope that those charged with the nation’s business do not share this outrageous view.
If Mr Adams did write an article similar to that of Mr Hudson, my sentiments towards it would not be different. Nevertheless, I am grateful that he decided to pen his views on the important subject of teen violence in Guyana; it underscores the point that there is need for a national debate on the subject. I will, however, add that it is views like his which make it imperative that careful research be conducted into this phenomenon. His letter did exactly what I spoke of, and proffered all kinds of self-righteous reasons why young people engage in violence, and seemed to support a view which says research on this issue is useless.
His decision to take us down the lane of nostalgia will not help if we continue to sit and simply talk about what worked in the good old days, and fail to take action that is relevant to address the problem today. It is necessary that those of us who understand the impact of single parent families on children challenge ourselves to do more for our children. Further, any society which truly prides itself on the development of its people, and hopes to give full meaning to the obligations of its judicial system to protect the welfare of its children, owes it to those children to do everything in its power to protect and safeguard their well-being. Conducting scientific research into the spate of youth violence is a sensible, practical and enlightened way of starting to combat a grave societal problem from its base.
As I said before, while we can reminisce and indulge in those pleasurable nostalgic moments on what was and what should be, it should not serve as an excuse to ignore the current situation, but rather it should propel us to act. In my letter I challenged all of us to play our part, and for those of us who seem to think that we are immune to the consequences of teen violence, I say let us rethink our position. Let us not continue to take the easy way out by simply attributing blame and concluding that the problem is that of the parents, only. We with our ‘good old time training’ seem to think that we should not be concerned because our children are already acting right. However, I believe that we should be less reluctant to reach out and help, or support initiatives to help struggling teens.
It was Herman Melville who wrote, “We cannot live for ourselves alone. Our lives are connected by a thousand invisible threads, and along these sympathetic fibers, our actions run as causes and return to us as results.” So whether or not we like it, the actions of our youth will undoubtedly affect us. Hillary Clinton in her book It takes a Village had this to say: “Whether or not you are a parent, what happens to America’s children affects your present and your future.” I wish to borrow her words and substitute “Guyana’s” for “America’s”. The onus is, therefore, on all of us to make that effort to reach out. Parents are of course critical to this process, unlike what Mr Adams thinks is my position. I have not hinted or intimated that the family is not critical to aiding the moral and spiritual development of the child. It is because of my recognition of this fact that I have challenged us to provide this critical support for children whose parents might be failing, for whatever reason. We as members of society also have a moral responsibility to help in this regard.
Mr Adams seems to suggest that something is wrong with me calling on the government, religious society and members of the community to come to the rescue of our children. His posture appears to be one which says, ‘let their family try with them.’ The fact is that his position has been operating for the longest while and the consequences of it have been yielding negative results. I say it is time for us to find solutions to a problem eating away at the core of our nation; the ‘guesstimation’ period is over and it is time to do research. The consequences of teen violence know no boundary, racial group, social class or other characteristic which may distinguish us one from the other. I wrote previously of a woman who believed that her family, particularly her son, was immune from the horrors of the death squad era of 2000-2006, unfortunately the hard reality came home to her when her own son’s bullet-ridden body turned up on a public highway. Since her personal loss I cannot remember her being absent one day from the protest line when we marched day and night against former Home Affairs Minister Ronald Gajraj and the death squad. So let us not wait until our house is on fire to throw water; it might be too late. We have to recognize that we are part of the ‘sporting arena’ and cannot be mere spectators.
I am aware that there are many people in our society who go the extra mile to help a child in need, but I am sure that more of us can help. There are also those young people who are making the effort daily to beat their challenges and stay on the right course. But there are too many more who for various reasons are falling prey to teen violence. It is time for collective effort to combat this broad social problem. Let us understand that providing counselling services to a teen in need is not a modern-day theory, but is necessary to aid in returning stability to a teen’s life. There are many children all over Guyana who have had the unfortunate experience of seeing a loved one gunned down whether by the phantom gang, the massacre gang or vicious criminals, and to date we have not given them the kind of counselling they need, but just expect them to get over their trauma and pain. Over the years I visited many of these children and have penned my concerns before; these children continue to live in fear of the police and harbour much hate for law enforcers. Others still ask why, and resent many people who seem to view them as the enemy. The fact is that many of these children of that dangerously criminalized period are now teenagers or young adults, who have not yet been healed emotionally. Let us approach this issue of teen violence with a broader perspective, with the view of arriving at real solutions. Time for research!
Yours faithfully,
Lurlene Nestor
