I've been thinking lately that I'm not a very good writer. When placed against the average human being, even average college graduate, I sneak ahead to the area called "above average," or more commonly called "pretty good." I am not a great writer. There is nothing in the fiction that comes from my brain that is ground-breaking or awe-inspiring. Lately I have not been moved by the spirits to write much. In fact, I may just terminate the "novel" I have been working on for the past few months. My diction and vocabulary have suffered due to the particulary demands of my job. As a result, my writing has suffered to the point that I no longer pursue it with much vigor. Several months ago I felt confidant that if I wrote enough material there would be enough quality stories to get published. It seems more an impossibility now. I read Dan's creative work and am blown away by its sophistication. It's really much better than mine. I'm left with the shambles of numerous stories, mostly unfinished, that will likely die in the nether-regions of my subconscious.

Lately I have become quite interested in how the family courts place kids from troubled homes. I have students being taken away from their parents, students with no parents, students with parents in jail, students in jail with kids themselves. It seems that in all cases courts determine that the best place for a child is in the custody of his/her birth-parents. How many cases have been in the news in the past few years about kids being kept with abusive parents who later seriously harm or kill the kids? Shouldn't we say that the best place for a child is in a "stable" home with caring, open people who DON'T hit their kids or give them drugs or do drugs in front of them? I taught at a school a few years ago with a student who had a baby. Both of the parents were in jail so he/she lived with another family relative, with the baby, until he/she ran away, without the baby. Later he/she was found under the influence of several hard drugs, a violation of his/her parole, landing him/her in jail. The baby was taken way. However, he/she went to rehab, and, if he/she had done well, would have had an opportunity to regain the child. He/she was under 15. How can any judge think that this person could provide for a baby? What am I missing? I know it is very difficult to strip a parent of total parental rights, but perhaps we should redefine what it is to be a parent. Just because one creates a child does not mean that that person is a "parent." Parental rights should have to be earned to be kept, not handed over and considered some type of unalienable right. What kind of chance does a kid have to be kept with parents who show themselves to be of questionable character, morals, and ethics?

It's a good thing I don't hold a position of political power.