The Trickling Down of Irresponsibility

As a sixth-grade teacher in the Inglewood Unified School District, one of the classes I teach is entitled “Family Life Planning.” A central theme of this course is that each person must take responsibility for their actions. This year, while preparing my plans, I was hard-pressed to find many solid examples of good old-fashioned responsibility. My usual sources just didn’t seem appropriate.

It would have been nice to be able to present our President and other politicians as models of responsibility. Unfortunately, even my 12-year-olds have now become cynical and disillusioned by their growing perception that this government, “of the people, by the people and for the people” is not really for them. These children need not look far to substantiate those perceptions. Undoubtedly, there have always been problems and inequities inherent in our system, especially in regard to the poor and minorities. What makes the present government and its system so perverse is their obvious, total disregard for the needless pain and suffering so many of their people are experiencing. They see their responsibilities, and, having the power to carry them out successfully choose instead to do absolutely nothing. This is indeed the pinnacle of irresponsibility!

Our former President Reagan introduced an economic concept known as the “trickle-down theory.” The idea being that the rich get richer and those riches “trickle down” to others. His theory was correct, but in regard to morality and responsibility, rather than economics. If our President and other politicians cannot be held accountable for their actions, can we really expect others, like our police, to display higher standards? Anyone who lives in L.A., or owns a TV, has seen disturbing evidence of what happens when the enforcers of law are permitted to commit immoral and irresponsible acts because they are “legal.” The very fact that these actions are legal in our court of law only exemplifies the degree to which entire segments of our population have been ignored and denied access to “the system.” Laws are not changed unless someone speaks out. The poor and uneducated have neither the strength nor the resources to “change from within.” Is it really so strange that they become frustrated, lose control, and riot?

Which brings us to the final figure in the “trickle down” theory: the children. In my 13 years of teaching, I have watched with apprehension the dramatic increase in single-parent families. I have seen what it has done to most of the children. The breakdown of the family unit is perhaps our most urgent issue. Yet, our Vice President Quayle flippantly states that these changes in the family structure can be attributed to a breakdown in values. Such an explanation is indicative of how far out of touch with the common man the present Administration is, and how shallow and hypocritical such a government can be. Are there people who really believe families choose to become dysfunctional? Most single-parent families are a result of a myriad of socioeconomic and cultural factors, and to dismiss them as a personal moral breakdown is both prejudiced and extremely naive. A responsible government would be too busy finding ways to solve such problems, such as federally assisted child care, to resort to such name-calling. If course, that is one of the signs of irresponsibility. Ask any child whose fault it is and watch the finger point to everyone but them.

So today, when I teach my class of sixth-graders, I have to search a bit harder to find those role models. The politician whose record speaks louder than his sound bite. The police who really are there to protect and serve. The single parent who spends that extra hour helping with their child’s homework. These are the responsible people. These are the people who give us hope. With all of the unrest and turmoil of modern day life, it is easy to overlook them. I am trying to teach my children to emulate them instead.

WILLIAM C. SLAYBACK, Hawthorne