and the sins of the mothers shall be visited upon the Little Leaguers
By raincoaster
A picture of someone who DID show up for her shift
I’ve got to call this one for the coach.
Here’s the scoop: Jodie Hooper, mom of a 7-year-old Little Leaguer, promised to work in the concession stand, as all LL parents must do at least once in that league. She bailed, without finding a replacement.
Her son is benched for two games.
“We are not here to have kids sit benches. We want kids to be playing, but we need people to help us out,” Brouillette said.
About 370 kids play at the field. The fields are run almost exclusively by volunteers. Each parent is expected to help out at least one night.
“Is it fair if you know about it in advance and you are told? It’s one of the rules, otherwise we wouldn’t have concession stands,” parent Rebecca Diaz said…
Hooper said that she had things to do at work and that is why she could not work the stand…
“It’s a tough rule to have to enforce, because everybody has things to do,” League President Dave Brouillette said.
Yes, yes we do.
By now you all know what a hardass I am; it’s impossible to bench or otherwise punish a mother, grownups are supposed to be responsible for their commitments, the kid will get over it, he WILL be ashamed of his mother, this is a good thing. If Mommy is so indispensable at work, Mommy can damn well hire a teenager to take her place.
Thoughts?
May 18th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
Yup. Yup. Yup. I am completely supportive of the League’s decision. It’s good to see groups who actually enforce rules and policies.
May 19th, 2008 at 3:18 am
If she couldn’t pick her kid up from school, would she have made sure someone would? If she couldn’t get to work, would she make sure she contacted her employer? She gave her word of honor knowing the penality would be against her child then broke it. Now if she offered to double her committment, maybe the kid could slide. If her excuse was dire (i.e. death, medical emergency, etc…) then there should be some leeway. Another case of blame someone else, not my fault.
May 19th, 2008 at 10:37 am
It sucks that mom blew off her commitment, but I don’t believe in punishing a second party on behalf of the guilty party. “Sins of the father” is a bogus concept, and if I were the kid I’d probably quit the league.
Yes, I’d be ashamed of and mad at my mom, but I’d also be super ticked off at the coaches for punishing ME for something I didn’t do. Why should the kid be responsible for another’s crime?
Fine the mother, and leave the poor kid alone.
May 19th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Good for them for enforcing a punishment. There are so many parents who are willing to blow things off and let other people take care of things, I know because there were a bunch in my son’s LL this year. So, if they feel they can not honor their commitments and get away with it, they won’t.
Most likely there was something in writing that she signed, agreeing to the punishment. If her son bears the brunt of the punishment, then she will be sure not to do it again.
Agree with Jennie on the doubling of the commitment and the medical/emergency issue, though.
May 19th, 2008 at 11:35 am
I don’t necessarily agree that she won’t do it again because they punished her son on her behalf.
After all, she was already the kind of person who blew off a responsibility she more than likely knew would have direct consequences for her offspring!
May 19th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
I love it! In my business, I deal with kids and their parents. The kids are almost never a problem. But some parents… the sense of entitlement is astounding. Their kids must have the best! They just don’t want to pay for it, they don’t want to abide by the same rules as any other parents, and they certainly don’t want to commit to anything. The poor kid has probably been in three schools already because mommy dearest has issues with all of them. Punishing him is difficult, but it sends the message that certain behavior is unacceptable. Clearly he isn’t learning that message from mom.
May 19th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
I whole-heartedly support this idea. Yes, it’s a tremendous bummer for the kid, but one can only hope that his disappointment caused his mother to realize how important the whole experience is to him, and thus to their family - participation isn’t just a ‘kid’ thing. I used to coach youth swimming, and still volunteer as an official - it takes an absurd amount of volunteers (parents) to run a single meet (something in excess of 30), and it’s always so glaringly obvious when there are families where neither parent can be bothered to pitch in. I remember one swim meet where my dad and I were officiating, my little brother was timing, and my mom was working the concession stand - resulting in no one from our family getting to cheer on my baby sister, who was the only competitor from our family! Youth sports provide incalculable benefits to kids who participate in them, whether their parents can be bothered to notice or not - I fully agree with the ‘reality check’ employed by the Little League to get everyone pitching in and supporting the kids equally!
May 19th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Agree, agree, agree. We all have consequences. She has to be responsible to someone who matters. I’m sure the mother could care less that she let down the league, but hopefully she’ll think twice before she lets down her kid again. How do you teach your kid responsibility if you make commitments you don’t keep?
May 19th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Apparently the kid had no particular issue with this and neither did his teammates, because everyone knew it wasn’t his fault. He brought colouring books and played in the sand during the games.
Mom won’t do it again because she’s now known worldwide as a deadbeat.
As for fining her, that sets up a two-tiered system I’m not fond of (the rich just pay the fines and the poor have to actually work) and how are you going to make her pay up, anyway? You’d probably spend twice the fine in sending her dunning notices and besides, you’d need a volunteer to type up the letters.