Posted on 06/14/2010 9:50:22 AM PDT by Ron C.
Here's a dose of reality.
The father of teen sailor Abby Sunderland told The NY Post that he's broke and had signed a contract to do a reality show, "Adventures in Sunderland," about his family of daredevil kids weeks after she set off on her doomed and dangerous solo sail around the globe.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
If parents attempted daring “adventures” with high degrees of risk without any plan as to how to provide for their young children should something bad happen to them, and just expect the government to look after their orphaned kids.
Then they are terrible parents and probably not even deserving of the title.
Yes, some FReepers are unfairly demeaning of this woman herself.
**********************
16 is a minor, not a ‘woman’. That aside, I do not demean her. I think her parents are either remarkably stupid or remarkably callous, however. As the father has announced the family is now bankrupt, I incline towards stupid.
The line of thought suggesting the state should take custody of the minor is wrong though. It reveals a great deal of naivete about the quality and safety of children in the care of the state.
You will have to ask Hennie Pennie. He is the one who told me about it.
Not when everyone supporting this keeps stating how "skilled" she is. Technology saved her and not "skill". And she should NOT have been on the Indian Ocean in winter. Without the high tech boat that wouldn't sink, she'd have been lost. Where's the capability or skill in that?
I suspect that Abby had a safer ship and more contact with her “crew” than Farragut ever had.
*******************
Clearly not. The PR stunt failed.
Necessities of war are also on a different scale of assessment than a reality TV headline grabber, upon which family solvency is gambled and lost.
Many drummer boys in the civil war were shot at. This is not a justification to substitute .58 cal. minieballs for paintballs, or put out random potshots at garage bands.
Your analogy, like the endeavor itself, is perfectly stupid.
She isn't a woman. She's a dreamy, romantic teenager. A kid. I won't demean her but this was foolhardy and I hold the parents in contempt.
“If 16 is too young, what is the proper age? 18, 20, 24, 26?”
Good question.
Now, how about we ask it this way: “If 16 is old enough, how young is too young? 14, 12, 10, 8?”
If the girl had not been alone she would not qualify for the “alone and under 16” award that would lead to the book, reality TV show, fame, fortune, etc etc.
Technology saved her and not “skill”.
*******************
So true. Not many years ago she would have been lost at sea.
These points are wasted though. We are debating people who believe the ‘reality’ in ‘reality tv’.
The key word there is 'forbid'.
Here we have 'conservatives' who think that there 'oughta be a law' against a (16-year old / girl / whose parents are not rich) from attempting any kind of record setting attempt.
Why not? According to the designer the boat was 'unsinkable'.
Damaged? Try GONE. And the builder, plus Ian Kiernan who has soloed the globe, and the American Sailing Association all say this was foolhardy. And so have Freepers who sail. One of which built his own boat.
I remember that tragedy very distinctly.
I was sitting in my office and it was a tad early that morning when our wonderful secretary who had been following the story as we all were came in quietly and announced the bad news. We had all been against this awful show of stupidity.
The three of us who shared the office were really angry, but that tragedy was expected believe it or not.
In the end, when the plane crashed, the little girl was not at the controls. It was her flying instructor. It was proven by the bone breakage in the hands and arms of the person who was piloting.
P.S.
To this day, I never heard any feedback from her relatives.
If you have, please share.
How many other 'adventures' where a 'rescue' was needed, have the sponsors and family of the adventurer had to bear the full financial burden?
I never read that the mast hit her. In one of the early articles from last week it said that she was knocked down and was unconscious after the wave hit that broke the mast. That's why it was an hour before she used her beacons after she lost her sat phone with the mast. And no, I don't remember which article. There was a flurry of them.
Because it sold laundry detergent. People watched TV to see the rescue attempt. The MEDIA clustered around the rescue site. It became good PR for the RESCUE TEAMS to be 'on site'.
Why do they call a fire truck to get a cat out of a tree.
Have you ever found a dead cat up in a tree?
I think they know how to get down.
And Oprah. I’m so glad that I chucked the TV!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.