July 30th, 2008
DEAR STRAIGHT TALK: I was shocked at your advice to “Jason’s mom” (June 18) whose 17-year-old son informed her he was going to text and drive after the California cell phone ban took effect. You basically told her to get him a Bluetooth! Parents have a responsibility to expect their kids to follow the law, not help them break it! Jason’s mom should tell Jason to follow the law or be prepared to have his car taken away. Surely a 17-year-old relies on some financial assistance in owning a car, and therein lies the leverage for getting him to comply with the law. You have undermined my ability as a parent with this advice.
Thanks for nothing
Brittney, 20:
It certainly is safer “politically” to tell your child to follow the rules or lose the car, but most teens engage in restricted activities if they think they can get away with it. With a Bluetooth there is a better chance they won’t text, which is the main cause of accidents. I agree, the advice sounds “off,” but it’s better to be safer in the true sense of the word, rather than politically safe.
Farren, 20:
I’m appalled that teens like “Jason” disrespect their fellow drivers with something as dangerous as texting and driving. However, this law prohibiting drivers under 18 from using their phone is really dumb. And allowing texting for those over 18 is even dumber. As a parent, it is your job to protect your child. If you think your child is going to text anyway, get him a Bluetooth and insist he use Jott (www.jott.com), which lets you send text messages via voice.
Laura, 21:
If your priority is to force your child to toe the line, by all means, give ultimatums. It won’t work, but if it keeps your conscience clean, go ahead. However, if your priority is to keep your child safe, you will take a less dogmatic approach. I cannot overemphasize the importance of trust and cooperation between parents and teens. If you start threatening and using “leverage” against your kids, I guarantee a backlash. At the very least, they will be evasive and dishonest with you. Parents who listen to their child with an open mind, and approach something like the cell phone ban practically and flexibly have the best chance of getting their teen to comply with their wishes.
Ashley, 20:
A 17-year-old should pay for his own legal mistakes. At this age, take it out of the parent’s hand and give it to the law’s.
Lennon, 21:
Whoa! If you remove your child’s driving privileges, you end up being the chauffeur — either that or he’ll ride with friends (who likely text or talk while driving). If you want teens to be safer while driving, get them cars with automatic transmissions (which frees up a hand) and insist they use a Bluetooth.
DEAR THANKS: Consensual sex is illegal in California, too, for those under 18, and we know how well abstinence-only education worked. It didn’t. Correct me if I’m wrong, but today’s teens seem to enjoy their cell phones more than sex. For that reason, the abstinence-only law for cell phones behind the wheel of drivers under 18 makes me highly uncomfortable. For those who missed the original column, “Jason” and his friends planned to text on their knees out of sight of the cops as a way to beat the law. This mentality — combined with the fact that most families lack the infrastructure and fortitude to enforce the consequences you refer to — is why I will continue to advise parents to realistically size-up their cell-phone-addicted juvenile drivers, and if they think they are capable of similar hazardous cell phone use, compromise by getting them a Bluetooth or other hands-free device so the roads are safer for everyone.
Comment on this column »
June 18th, 2008
DEAR STRAIGHT TALK: My son is 17. Starting July 1, he will be banned from using a cell phone while driving until he is 18. Today he informed me that he won’t talk on his cell after the law goes into effect. He will TEXT! He says all his under-18 friends plan to do more texting because they can do it on their knee out of sight of the cops. He says he’s just telling me the truth whereas his friends will lie about it. He works, pays certain bills, gets good grades, plays sports. I can’t follow him around and be his private policeman. But texting is so much more dangerous than talking that I’m flipping out! What should I do? If I threaten consequences, I’m afraid he will just lie about it. Please help.
Jason’s mom
Mariah, 16:
Tell your son that a senior in my high school just died while texting. Her mom texted her and when she texted back she ran off the road and was killed. Another senior ran a stop sign while texting and killed an elderly man.
Geoff, 22
Get him a Bluetooth. These wireless, hands-free, ear pieces will be hard for police to see. It’s MUCH safer than texting.
Katie, 15
I start driving in December. I probably will text at red lights and possibly use a voice-activated phone. A voice-activated, hands-free device should be allowed for everyone, no matter the age.
Laura, 21
It is no more dangerous to hold a cell phone to your ear than to eat while you drive. This law will only cause people, especially teens, to find sneakier (and more hazardous) ways to use their phones.
Nicole, 18
I don’t plan to abide by the new law. Convince your son to talk instead of text, it’s much safer.
Ashley, 20
People do stupid things while on their cell phones, so I think it’s a good law. I almost never text while driving and I have a Bluetooth — but getting it set up while driving can be dangerous, too.
Emily, 15
Being a responsible driver means following the law which I will do. Tell your son how you feel, but don’t force anything or he will just lie to you. Don’t get mad at him for telling the truth or he won’t be honest again.
Farren, 20
When I first started driving, I looked down to push in a CD and drove into oncoming traffic. Since then, I have respect for distractions. I don’t text unless I’m stopped. When I’m moving, I use Bluetooth and speed dial. If you must text, a free, super-easy, voice-activated service called Jott converts voice into text. The website is www.jott.com. Unfortunately, sometimes it takes a mistake to wake someone up.
DEAR JASON’S MOM: Yes, and it is these distracted-driver mistakes that the new California law is trying to prevent. Starting July 1, the law bans all but 911-emergency use of cell phones while driving for those under 18. Those over 18 must use a hands-free system and dialing/texting is allowed but discouraged. Your son’s honesty around texting is worth gold. I asked around and many teens have the same misguided plan. I advise parents to have an honest conversation with their under-18 drivers. Is your kid the type that will put his phone away while driving? Or is he the “invincible rebel” who will use the phone in an even more dangerous manner? The spirit of the law is to save lives. It’s a slippery slope to tell your kid to abide by the law while handing him or her a Bluetooth (or less expensive corded earpiece), but texting while driving is so flat-out dangerous that if my kid was like yours, I would do just that. Details of the new law can be found at: www.chp.ca.gov/pdf/media/cell_phone_faq.pdf.
Participate in this discussion »
May 21st, 2008
DEAR READERS: As some of you know, I lost my beautiful son, Jarrad, in a motorcycle accident last August. We all lost him. May is Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month. It also marks the beginning of the motorcycle sales season. Popularity of high-performance “sport bikes” has skyrocketed, especially among 18- to 29-year-olds, and rider deaths are at record highs.
My brother, Tom, is dedicated to changing the way motorcycle permits are issued. Below is a speech he gave to the Redding, California chapter of MADD last week.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: My 18-year-old nephew had a fatal motorcycle accident last summer. You may be thinking this accident was due to alcohol. It was not. It was, I believe, due to two things: 1) he was on a sport bike; 2) current licensing rules award motorcycle permits with only a written test.
Who in the audience has noticed sport bikes on the roads? I don’t think this type of motorcycle belongs in traffic, but this is America, sport bikes are legal, and it’s my guess they are here to stay.
The current US motorcycle permit process is deadly. Jarrad’s accident is a textbook example of why our country needs to adopt the “graduated licensing system” proven in other parts of the world to reduce accidents and save lives.
Jarrad Cole was a star basketball player at his high school and was starting college at California Maritime Academy in just two weeks. Jarrad had no motorcycle riding experience. He went to the DMV, took a written test, and was given a motorcycle permit. He then purchased a used 2003 Suzuki GSXR 750. This is an extreme sports bike. It weighs 366 pounds, producing 141 horsepower. In comparison, the 2006 Harley Davidson UCEG weighs 788 pounds and produces 65 horsepower.
Jarrad had the sport bike for 30 minutes; he was practicing in front of his father’s home and was simply shifting from first to second gear. When the clutch released, the bike reared up throwing him into a retaining wall.
Jarrad never regained consciousness. An ambulance rushed him to the hospital where he died minutes later of internal injuries. Jarrad was wearing a helmet at the time of the accident.
The performance of the current generation of sport bikes is completely insane for street use. I remember when I got my learner’s permit at age 15, my Kawasaki 125 made 24 horsepower and weighed 250 pounds. I thought it was pretty fast and I rode it hard. Had it been a 141 horsepower GXSR 750, I’d be long gone. Experienced riders find this bike pretty frightening in performance, and that’s with years of experience.
These bikes are not designed for learning. But because the law allows it, many new riders assume they can handle sport bikes and Jarrad found himself totally unprepared on a machine that accelerates faster than an Enzo Ferrari.
I hope Jarrad’s accident can save lives. Many people want a graduated licensing system, as used in England, making it illegal for new riders to ride powerful sport bikes until first proving themselves, in steps, on lower horsepower bikes.
I appealed to the Yamaha and Kawasaki dealerships in Redding and to Wayne Curtain at Harley Davidson headquarters about supporting a law change. Everyone is very sorry, but no one wishes to get involved. So, here I am talking to you. I hope you can help.
Tom Forcella, Redding CA
Dear Readers: The next step for my brother is MADD national headquarters. As we all know, when MADD gets mad, things happen. If you are a parent like me, who never wants (or wanted) to see my kid on a motorcycle, I hope you will take the time to support the “graduated licensing system” by posting a comment on our website or writing to our mailing address.
Participate in this discussion »
