Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
el_loco_avs
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:14 pm UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby el_loco_avs » Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:04 am UTC

Delass wrote:As far as the court cases, the dutch probably just lost a world record, a ton of potential patriotism, and three really rich taxpayers. gg.


And our nation is just heartbroken, shedding patriotic tears.
Seriously? That's what's important? patriotism and money?



She can still do it if the investigation rules her capable. If not, gee... it'll just suck to have to do it when she's older.
You go your way.
I'll go your way too.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Telchar » Sat Aug 29, 2009 5:26 pm UTC

Delass wrote:And nothing is wrong with not cliffdiving, not skydiving, or not sailing around the world. However to argue that one can't put oneself in danger to further fulfill life is just as absurd. To restrict their quality of life based on your own standards is prickish.


Except I'm not saying life can't be fulfilled if you don't take large ammounts of risks. You did, which is absurd.

I really wasn't trying to insult anyone. But I do wonder if people who havent done anything well, awesome and dangerous, would be able to relate to and understand the people who do have a drive, urge, even need to do something amazing. If you can't relate to that desire, then that would effect how you feel about it? Its like a person who never gets horny and sex. They probably think its gross, and no one should do it because of unwanted diseases and pregnancy.


Speaking as a 24 yr old who enjoys base jumping I don't think that people who havn't experienced base jumping have no ability to judge whether or not a 13 yr old girl should (which, btw, I would be against.)

As far as the court cases, the dutch probably just lost a world record, a ton of potential patriotism, and three really rich taxpayers. gg.


Yeah, who are they to throw away money and notereity for protecting a little girl! FOR SHAME!
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
Delass
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:45 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Delass » Sat Aug 29, 2009 6:14 pm UTC

Telchar wrote:
Delass wrote:And nothing is wrong with not cliffdiving, not skydiving, or not sailing around the world. However to argue that one can't put oneself in danger to further fulfill life is just as absurd. To restrict their quality of life based on your own standards is prickish.


Except I'm not saying life can't be fulfilled if you don't take large ammounts of risks. You did, which is absurd.


I said further fulfill. Some people arent content to sit in a grade school classroom or office. Saying that you must do so to have a fulfilling life is what's absurd.

Telchar wrote:
I really wasn't trying to insult anyone. But I do wonder if people who havent done anything well, awesome and dangerous, would be able to relate to and understand the people who do have a drive, urge, even need to do something amazing. If you can't relate to that desire, then that would effect how you feel about it? Its like a person who never gets horny and sex. They probably think its gross, and no one should do it because of unwanted diseases and pregnancy.

Speaking as a 24 yr old who enjoys base jumping I don't think that people who havn't experienced base jumping have no ability to judge whether or not a 13 yr old girl should (which, btw, I would be against.)


I didnt mean familiar with the specific sport or activity, I meant the motivation. Like what motivated Usain Bolt to be the fastest man in the world, or what motivated Michael Phelps to be the greatest swimmer, who was 15 at his first olympics.
Or Dimitrios Loundras, who won a bronze medal when he was 10. Nap time and coloring or parallel bars? Oh, and he later became an admiral in the greek navy, so obviously whatever he missed while winning olympic medals didnt stop him from having a successful life.

Telchar wrote:
As far as the court cases, the dutch probably just lost a world record, a ton of potential patriotism, and three really rich taxpayers. gg.


Yeah, who are they to throw away money and notereity for protecting a little girl! FOR SHAME!

el_loco_avs wrote:And our nation is just heartbroken, shedding patriotic tears.
Seriously? That's what's important? patriotism and money?
She can still do it if the investigation rules her capable. If not, gee... it'll just suck to have to do it when she's older.

shes adolescent, not exactly a little girl.

And protecting? Like the asimov story where the robots were protecting the humans by locking them in their houses and killing the ones who didnt comply? "We're protecting you by taking away your freedom!" Seriously? Did you guys forget about Locke? Jefferson?

My point was that it was ironic and funny that the government was trying to fuck with her life and probably just hurt themselves.

User avatar
Psycho Goose
Posts: 173
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 5:41 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Psycho Goose » Sat Aug 29, 2009 6:37 pm UTC

Delass wrote:And protecting? Like the asimov story where the robots were protecting the humans by locking them in their houses and killing the ones who didnt comply? "We're protecting you by taking away your freedom!" Seriously? Did you guys forget about Locke? Jefferson?

My point was that it was ironic and funny that the government was trying to fuck with her life and probably just hurt themselves.
Hate to nitpick here, but I don't think that was an Asimov story. I think that was the movie I, Robot, which was loosely based on some of his ideas, but kinda butchered them -- he has voiced his (negative) opinion about the whole "evil robot" thing. But I'm not the biggest Asimov expert, so I may be wrong.

Oh, and as far as the actual subject of this topic is concerned -- apparently they have a psychologist or something to assess whether or not he (or she, of course) thinks the girl is mature enough to handle it. Which, if it's true and I didn't simply misread, would be a great way of handling it, as the maturity of 13-year-olds can vary wildly.

National pride, or lack thereof, shouldn't (and, I think, doesn't) have anything to do with it.
Mother Superior wrote:Go to Checkov's guns on fifth. But be careful, any gun he shows you is liable to go off at some point while you're in the store.

User avatar
Delass
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:45 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Delass » Sat Aug 29, 2009 7:14 pm UTC

My mistake, I was under the impression I robot was a film adaptation of one of Asimov's stories. Regardless, the point still stands. protection=/=taking away freedom.

User avatar
Psycho Goose
Posts: 173
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 5:41 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Psycho Goose » Sat Aug 29, 2009 7:18 pm UTC

Delass wrote:My mistake, I was under the impression I robot was a film adaptation of one of Asimov's stories. Regardless, the point still stands. protection=/=taking away freedom.
I think it was Benjamin Franklin who said it first: "Those who sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve neither."

Of course, we don't know that a 13-year-old is mature enough to assess the risks involved with this kind of thing. So I'm not sure.
But how can one measure her maturity?
Mother Superior wrote:Go to Checkov's guns on fifth. But be careful, any gun he shows you is liable to go off at some point while you're in the store.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Vaniver » Sat Aug 29, 2009 7:21 pm UTC

Psycho Goose wrote:Hate to nitpick here, but I don't think that was an Asimov story. I think that was the movie I, Robot, which was loosely based on some of his ideas, but kinda butchered them -- he has voiced his (negative) opinion about the whole "evil robot" thing. But I'm not the biggest Asimov expert, so I may be wrong.
If you hate to nitpick, I suggest not nitpicking. The story is called The Evitable Conflict, and is in the anthology I, Robot.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
Delass
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:45 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Delass » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:03 pm UTC

Psycho Goose wrote:
Delass wrote:My mistake, I was under the impression I robot was a film adaptation of one of Asimov's stories. Regardless, the point still stands. protection=/=taking away freedom.
I think it was Benjamin Franklin who said it first: "Those who sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve neither."

Of course, we don't know that a 13-year-old is mature enough to assess the risks involved with this kind of thing. So I'm not sure.
But how can one measure her maturity?

"...and will lose both" Ok, Franklin too!

Should it be up to anyone but her and her parents to measure her maturity or ability to assess the risks?

Sailing around the world isn't exactly something you do on a whim, either. During the planning stages im willing to bet her and her parents assessed and reassessed the risks various times.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Telchar » Sun Aug 30, 2009 5:48 pm UTC

It's ironic that you invoke a philosopher like Locke, who helped develop the term "Social Contract" to describe how the government does in fact take some rights away from you to protect you. Weird.

In any case, your arguement here is hyperbolic and bizzare. Are you arguing that there shouldn't be laws against child abuse/neglect because that would be infringing on a parents right to privacy? Is that really the stance you want to take? Or are you making some bizzare "Thomas Jefferson wants 13yr olds to have liberty too!" arguement, which is just as warped.
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
Delass
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:45 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Delass » Sun Aug 30, 2009 7:38 pm UTC

Telchar wrote:It's ironic that you invoke a philosopher like Locke, who helped develop the term "Social Contract" to describe how the government does in fact take some rights away from you to protect you. Weird.

Yes, a social contract allows a government to take away the legality of some acts to protect society. Like murder, stealing, etc. There are obvious and vast differences between murder and sailing, but in short murder hurts society and infringes on others rights--most importantly the right to life-- and sailing does not. The other part of social contract is the governments agreement to not excessively take away rights. Like owning property, looking up porn on the internet or whatever else the internet is used for, or in this case sailing.

Telchar wrote:In any case, your arguement here is hyperbolic and bizzare. Are you arguing that there shouldn't be laws against child abuse/neglect because that would be infringing on a parents right to privacy? Is that really the stance you want to take?
obvious strawman is obvious. sailing around the world is not child abuse or neglect. Especially when the 13 year old wants to do it, and has wanted to do it for years.

Telchar wrote: Or are you making some bizzare "Thomas Jefferson wants 13yr olds to have liberty too!" arguement, which is just as warped.


What? I am not making an argument about 13 year olds being able to do whatever they want, as no one is talking about that. This issue isn't that a 13 year old wants to sail around the world but can't because her parents wont let her. That would be a case between the child and the parents, and then we would be debating emancipation. In this case the entire family is unified in their decision, and the government is attempting to strip them of their rights.

This is like a government mandating that parents can't raise a child who despises meat as a vegan. Or that parents can't raise a child who has no interest in modern technology as amish. Or that parents can't raise a child who worships Christ as a Christian.

This is one of those things that should not be decided by government, but by the family. If the 13 year old was forced to attempt to sail around the world, yes, it would be different. However the family is clearly unified in their decision.

Put it this way. Should a neighbor have any legal control over the decision of this family to allow their 13 year old to sail around the world?

User avatar
Psycho Goose
Posts: 173
Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 5:41 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Psycho Goose » Sun Aug 30, 2009 7:51 pm UTC

Delass wrote:This is like a government mandating that parents can't raise a child who despises meat as a vegan. Or that parents can't raise a child who has no interest in modern technology as amish. Or that parents can't raise a child who worships Christ as a Christian.
Not really. Those are ideological decisions. I don't think that her religion or any other form of ideology she believes in mandates her to sail around the world at 13 years old.

But... huh. If her beliefs did mandate that, would that change things?
Mother Superior wrote:Go to Checkov's guns on fifth. But be careful, any gun he shows you is liable to go off at some point while you're in the store.

User avatar
Delass
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:45 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Delass » Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:19 pm UTC

Psycho Goose wrote:
Delass wrote:This is like a government mandating that parents can't raise a child who despises meat as a vegan. Or that parents can't raise a child who has no interest in modern technology as amish. Or that parents can't raise a child who worships Christ as a Christian.
Not really. Those are ideological decisions. I don't think that her religion or any other form of ideology she believes in mandates her to sail around the world at 13 years old.

But... huh. If her beliefs did mandate that, would that change things?

What? They do. She has reasons to sail just as a vegan has reasons to not eat meat or an amish person has reasons to abandon most modern technology. I suppose a better example would be the 13 year old training for the olympics. Not the governments place to say "you cant swim for 10 hours a day" and he has reasons to want to swim that hard just like she has reasons to want to sail.

User avatar
el_loco_avs
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:14 pm UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby el_loco_avs » Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:04 pm UTC

Actually government would interfere with people taking their kids out of school to do sports all day here.
You go your way.
I'll go your way too.

User avatar
Arancaytar
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:54 am UTC
Location: 52.44°N, 13.55°E
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Arancaytar » Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:36 pm UTC

Delass wrote:My mistake, I was under the impression I robot was a film adaptation of one of Asimov's stories. Regardless, the point still stands. protection=/=taking away freedom.


It's an easy misconception to make because it was indeed named after an Asimov story. That's really as far as the similarities go.

I hope she does get to make the trip. High-seas sailing is difficult and dangerous, but apparently she knows that. Life should be an adventure.
"You cannot dual-wield the sharks. One is enough." -Our DM.
Image

User avatar
Delass
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:45 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Delass » Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:53 pm UTC

el_loco_avs wrote:Actually government would interfere with people taking their kids out of school to do sports all day here.

/facepalm Are you guys serious or just playing neocon devils advocate?

Except shes not ignoring her studies. Attempting education is mandatory, education in a classroom is not. Are you not familiar with homeschooling, in which the child or teenager still learns stuff, just at home? Well, obviously she can do that. With the internet and computers. Or she could bring textbooks with her on the boat!

"BUT WAIT THE BOAT ISNT HER HOME SO THAT DOESNT COUNT"

While the boat is not a formal house, according to the plan she will still be living on it for two years, so the effect is the same. It doesn't matter anyway because home school is really just a name to describe common situations, not a rule.

SanderJK
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:11 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby SanderJK » Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:21 am UTC

Dutch law is not american law in this case. Dutch law requires a child of up to 16 to have about 2000 contact hours, at an institution that's surveyable by the Ministry of Education. I'm pretty positive this is physical presence only. This is the responsibility of the parents, and because they actively searched for ways to dodge it, child protection agencies stepped in, culminating in the news and having it end up in court.

I was surprised by the court ruling, to be honest. I was fairly convinced that the schooling laws would trump any desire or such. But apparently the judge thinks there is room within the law for this.

About the situation, I'm not sure the government should actively prevent a 13 year old girl from doing this, as long as it is within the law, but I'm certainly against it. It seems unwise to have a girl solo on the ocean, mostly devoid of direct human contact, in a critical phase of her development. There are reasons why the law only considers you adult at eighteen, and no mature how "mature" you are or appear at thirteen, both your body and your brain are still rapidly changing at that age, and the ability to deal with longterm consequences is one of the last things to fully develop.

User avatar
BlackSails
Posts: 5315
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:48 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby BlackSails » Mon Aug 31, 2009 2:33 am UTC

My question before remains unanswered.

Why should a 13 year old be allowed to sail around the world, but not enlist in the navy, and sail around the world?

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5940
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Angua » Mon Aug 31, 2009 2:51 am UTC

One thing that I've been thinking about...

What would have happened if the parents had let her do this, the government hadn't stepped in and we didn't hear about it until a terrible accident happened at sea? Would as many people still be defending this? Would her parents have been charged with neglect?

I realise that it is probably not very useful arguing what-ifs as they could be countered by many other things, including her doing it and setting the world record with no problem, but I think that this is the worst possible outcome, and might bear some thought. Feel free to ignore this if you don't think that it's helpful.
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

User avatar
Elvish Pillager
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Elvish Pillager » Mon Aug 31, 2009 3:24 am UTC

I see only one argument against allowing her to go on this trip that has anything to do with the fact that she's 13. If you're going to put yourself in the business of telling other people that they can't choose risks for themselves - then you should damn well do it for anyone of any age who is less emotionally mature than Laura is. (As far as I can tell from the article, that covers most people living.)

The one argument that makes any sense to me is "Social development at that age is important" -

Well, tell me - did you know what you wanted to do with your life, when you were 13?

Did you?

She does.

I'm not one to snatch away someone's dreams, to tell a mature, self-assured person that I know better than they do what is good for them. Nor do I wish to take away the chance, for everyone who will ever meet her, to interact with someone who has had truly, profoundly different experiences. The XKCD comic pertinent to this situation is not 308, but 137.
Also known as Eli Dupree. Check out elidupree.com for my comics, games, and other work.

GENERATION A(g64, g64): Social experiment. Take the busy beaver function of the generation number and add it to your signature.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Xeio » Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:00 am UTC

Elvish Pillager wrote:I see only one argument against allowing her to go on this trip that has anything to do with the fact that she's 13. If you're going to put yourself in the business of telling other people that they can't choose risks for themselves - then you should damn well do it for anyone of any age who is less emotionally mature than Laura is. (As far as I can tell from the article, that covers most people living.)

The one argument that makes any sense to me is "Social development at that age is important" -

Well, tell me - did you know what you wanted to do with your life, when you were 13?

Did you?
I thought I did. Hell, I can go around to any elementary school and ask the kids what they want to be when they grow up and they'll probably have a more definite answer than I have even now, and I'm in my senior year of college. :shock:

If your primary argument is that "it's an adventure she really wants to go on", it's not much to say that's a good enough reason to allow it. It's hard to say if anyone that age can be fully prepared for something like this, and sure, you can say that she seems mature enough (which she may be), but the reason the laws exist is to protect her until it is reasonably sure that she can make these decisions full well knowing the risks. It seems the government is at least looking into it though, rather than flat out saying no, which seems like a decent enough compromise.
Elvish Pillager wrote:I'm not one to snatch away someone's dreams, to tell a mature, self-assured person that I know better than they do what is good for them. Nor do I wish to take away the chance, for everyone who will ever meet her, to interact with someone who has had truly, profoundly different experiences. The XKCD comic pertinent to this situation is not 308, but 137.
What you would do, and what the government is required to do are two entirely different things.

User avatar
Delass
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:45 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Delass » Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:18 am UTC

BlackSails wrote:My question before remains unanswered.

Why should a 13 year old be allowed to sail around the world, but not enlist in the navy, and sail around the world?


Again, there are quite a few OBVIOUS DIFFERENCES between recreational sailing and warfare. The primary difference is in one you may be in a situation where you are forced to kill or be killed, regardless of rating.

SanderJK wrote:Dutch law is not american law in this case. Dutch law requires a child of up to 16 to have about 2000 contact hours, at an institution that's surveyable by the Ministry of Education. I'm pretty positive this is physical presence only. This is the responsibility of the parents, and because they actively searched for ways to dodge it, child protection agencies stepped in, culminating in the news and having it end up in court.

I was surprised by the court ruling, to be honest. I was fairly convinced that the schooling laws would trump any desire or such. But apparently the judge thinks there is room within the law for this.

About the situation, I'm not sure the government should actively prevent a 13 year old girl from doing this, as long as it is within the law, but I'm certainly against it. It seems unwise to have a girl solo on the ocean, mostly devoid of direct human contact, in a critical phase of her development. There are reasons why the law only considers you adult at eighteen, and no mature how "mature" you are or appear at thirteen, both your body and your brain are still rapidly changing at that age, and the ability to deal with longterm consequences is one of the last things to fully develop.

mmm. I'm not trying to say no one here can be personally against it, as long as they recognize the difference between "the government must stop them!" and "oh, that seems like a bad idea." It seems like quite a few fall into the former group =/

I didn't base the homeschool argument on american law. I googled it first :P While homeschool isn't common there, it does happen.


Angua wrote:One thing that I've been thinking about...

What would have happened if the parents had let her do this, the government hadn't stepped in and we didn't hear about it until a terrible accident happened at sea? Would as many people still be defending this? Would her parents have been charged with neglect?

I realise that it is probably not very useful arguing what-ifs as they could be countered by many other things, including her doing it and setting the world record with no problem, but I think that this is the worst possible outcome, and might bear some thought. Feel free to ignore this if you don't think that it's helpful.
I think theres only a few people defending this, which scares me, especially so on this forum.

IF that happened, I suppose I would feel the same way I felt about a local (same division, our school played theirs) HS football player who went into a coma. (I dont know if he got better or not). Its a tragedy, but you can't live your life in fear. If you have goals, try to achieve them. If they are risky, don't ignore the danger but do your best to manage it.

Should the government have tried to stop Amelia Earhart? No. She knew how to fly and knew the dangers of flying yet attempted it anyway for the same reasons she did her atlantic flight.

Xeio wrote:If your primary argument is that "it's an adventure she really wants to go on", it's not much to say that's a good enough reason to allow it. It's hard to say if anyone that age can be fully prepared for something like this, and sure, you can say that she seems mature enough (which she may be), but the reason the laws exist is to protect her until it is reasonably sure that she can make these decisions full well knowing the risks. It seems the government is at least looking into it though, rather than flat out saying no, which seems like a decent enough compromise.
Elvish Pillager wrote:I'm not one to snatch away someone's dreams, to tell a mature, self-assured person that I know better than they do what is good for them. Nor do I wish to take away the chance, for everyone who will ever meet her, to interact with someone who has had truly, profoundly different experiences. The XKCD comic pertinent to this situation is not 308, but 137.
What you would do, and what the government is required to do are two entirely different things.

It doesnt matter why she wants to, its her life and her parents support her. The only questions that matter are "does she want to?" It seems she does, and isnt being forced to at gunpoint. "Is this going to inflict on the rights of others" Sorry, but you(plural, not necessarily you you) actually dont have the right to control other peoples lives based on your halfinformed opinions! No other reason or motivation matters, because its her life.
"The Dutch Child Protection Agency had requested Miss Dekker be made a ward of court because, it said, it was "irresponsible for such a young girl to make a two-year solo trip around the world"." That is not a fact, it is an opinion. What next, will the government decide digg or twitter or facebook use is irresponsible and shut down the websites? Will they decide wasting time on highschool and little league athletics is irresponsible and ban those? Will they decide watching cartoons is irresponsible and stop people from doing that? If anyone wants to live in a world where bureaucrats control your lives, then fuck that shit and you can enjoy that hell.

User avatar
BlackSails
Posts: 5315
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:48 am UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby BlackSails » Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:11 am UTC

Delass wrote:
BlackSails wrote:My question before remains unanswered.

Why should a 13 year old be allowed to sail around the world, but not enlist in the navy, and sail around the world?


Again, there are quite a few OBVIOUS DIFFERENCES between recreational sailing and warfare. The primary difference is in one you may be in a situation where you are forced to kill or be killed, regardless of rating.\


Do people not die sailing, particularly sailing alone?

User avatar
Gelsamel
Lame and emo
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:49 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Gelsamel » Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:54 am UTC

BlackSails wrote:
Delass wrote:
BlackSails wrote:My question before remains unanswered.

Why should a 13 year old be allowed to sail around the world, but not enlist in the navy, and sail around the world?


Again, there are quite a few OBVIOUS DIFFERENCES between recreational sailing and warfare. The primary difference is in one you may be in a situation where you are forced to kill or be killed, regardless of rating.\


Do people not die sailing, particularly sailing alone?


They also die going to school, riding bikes, staying over a friend's etc.

Anyway Delass, did say "Kill or be killed" but their point wasn't that 'she might be killed' in the Navy but that she would be -forced- to kill lest she forfeit her own life. So no... I don't think you can compare beating the world record to taking the life of another human being.
"Give up here?"
- > No
"Do you accept defeat?"
- > No
"Do you think games are silly little things?"
- > No
"Is it all pointless?"
- > No
"Do you admit there is no meaning to this world?"
- > No

User avatar
el_loco_avs
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:14 pm UTC

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby el_loco_avs » Mon Aug 31, 2009 9:17 am UTC

Delass wrote:IF that happened, I suppose I would feel the same way I felt about a local (same division, our school played theirs) HS football player who went into a coma. (I dont know if he got better or not). Its a tragedy, but you can't live your life in fear. If you have goals, try to achieve them. If they are risky, don't ignore the danger but do your best to manage it.

Should the government have tried to stop Amelia Earhart? No. She knew how to fly and knew the dangers of flying yet attempted it anyway for the same reasons she did her atlantic flight.

Amelia was an adult, fully aware that she might die. She was 39 years old when she disappeared, literally 3 times older than Laura. She was 34 when she did her solo transatlantic flight.


And the risk of serious injury is not very comparable to the risks one faces sailing around the world alone, I think. If she goes overboard during rough weather she's as good as dead.
You go your way.
I'll go your way too.

User avatar
Elvish Pillager
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Elvish Pillager » Mon Aug 31, 2009 1:54 pm UTC

Xeio wrote:
Elvish Pillager wrote:Well, tell me - did you know what you wanted to do with your life, when you were 13?

Did you?
I thought I did. Hell, I can go around to any elementary school and ask the kids what they want to be when they grow up and they'll probably have a more definite answer than I have even now, and I'm in my senior year of college. :shock:

"what do you want to be when you grow up" is a completely different thing - not only is it a question about the vague future instead of the definite future, it also only demands that they be reactive, not proactive. Laura is pursuing this dream:
- proactively
- for herself, not for a nebulous future self
- in the face of a court.

If you can say you did all that (or even two of those) when you were 13, and that you now believe that it was ill-thought-out, then you have an argument. Until then, you don't.

Xeio wrote:If your primary argument is that "it's an adventure she really wants to go on", it's not much to say that's a good enough reason to allow it. It's hard to say if anyone that age can be fully prepared for something like this,

This is another argument that tries to be age-specific when it is not. I can't disagree with what you say, because it's hard to say if anyone of any age can be fully prepared for something like this. Actually, correction - it's not hard to say that - I can quite confidently state that no one of any age is ever fully prepared for something like this. (I think full preparations would have to come up little short of omnipotence.)

It's a huge decision. To be frank, going to school with a bunch of landlubbers is not going to help you make this kind of decision.

Xeio wrote:and sure, you can say that she seems mature enough (which she may be), but the reason the laws exist is to protect her until it is reasonably sure that she can make these decisions full well knowing the risks.

Sure to whom? Once again, I'm never reasonably sure that anyone can full well know the risks of anything they do - I'm reasonably sure that they can't. That's not a reason to deny everyone their right to ever make decisions.

On top of that, you can't delay a dream for five years, and denying it could harm someone's development every bit as much as having reduced social interaction for two years.
Also known as Eli Dupree. Check out elidupree.com for my comics, games, and other work.

GENERATION A(g64, g64): Social experiment. Take the busy beaver function of the generation number and add it to your signature.

Chen
Posts: 5579
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Chen » Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:11 pm UTC

Arnt there laws that prevent kids from say moving out of their parents' house before a certain age, even if both they and the parents agree? Or is this just some sort of misconception I have?

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Xeio » Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:19 pm UTC

Elvish Pillager wrote:"what do you want to be when you grow up" is a completely different thing - not only is it a question about the vague future instead of the definite future, it also only demands that they be reactive, not proactive. Laura is pursuing this dream:
- proactively
- for herself, not for a nebulous future self
- in the face of a court.

If you can say you did all that (or even two of those) when you were 13, and that you now believe that it was ill-thought-out, then you have an argument. Until then, you don't.
Fighting against a court does not immediately legitimize what you are trying to do. Also, sorry that my goals in life only required me to be proactive by attending school and getting good grades, guess I should have been more extreme. You probably have something about the future self comment, but then what someone wants right now doesn't always (rarely) lines up exactly with what they'll want a year later.
Elvish Pillager wrote:This is another argument that tries to be age-specific when it is not. I can't disagree with what you say, because it's hard to say if anyone of any age can be fully prepared for something like this. Actually, correction - it's not hard to say that - I can quite confidently state that no one of any age is ever fully prepared for something like this. (I think full preparations would have to come up little short of omnipotence.)

It's a huge decision. To be frank, going to school with a bunch of landlubbers is not going to help you make this kind of decision.
I think you're taking the "fully prepared" comment a bit too far, obviously you can't prepare for being attacked by a kraken (or some realistic but equally contrived act of nature), but there is a reasonable lower limit of preparedness you should have. Now, I'm not an expert sailor, so I dont know if a 13 year old can meet this requirement, and if it's possible, I'd still need to know more information to judge if this specific 13 year old was ready to take on this kind of risk. I don't think just because she is pursuing this goal with confidence, and has some experience sailing (I'll assume it's at least comparable to the 17 year olds that previously attempted this?) that she is entirely ready.
Elvish Pillager wrote:Sure to whom? Once again, I'm never reasonably sure that anyone can full well know the risks of anything they do - I'm reasonably sure that they can't. That's not a reason to deny everyone their right to ever make decisions.
'
On top of that, you can't delay a dream for five years, and denying it could harm someone's development every bit as much as having reduced social interaction for two years.
Most governments have an age cutoff for 'reasonably' sure that you are mature enough to make decisions for yourself (18 in the US). Is there leeway there? Yes. But unless specific circumstances are taken into account, it is considered the default stance (which, I may add again, they seem to be taking into account the circumstance before they make their final ruling). Also, what exactly leads you to believe delaying someone's dream does as much damage as little to no social interaction for 2 years? *Gasp* She might have to put her adventure off a few years until she is older, the horror (oh wait, it's a world record she is after and she's running out of time, guess we have to let her go?).

User avatar
Elvish Pillager
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Elvish Pillager » Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:41 pm UTC

Xeio wrote:Fighting against a court does not immediately legitimize what you are trying to do.

Of course not! It merely proves that you are dedicated.

Xeio wrote:I think you're taking the "fully prepared" comment a bit too far,

Deliberately so - I needed you to clarify (which you have done, thank you)

Xeio wrote:but there is a reasonable lower limit of preparedness you should have. Now, I'm not an expert sailor, so I dont know if a 13 year old can meet this requirement, and if it's possible, I'd still need to know more information to judge if this specific 13 year old was ready to take on this kind of risk.

It's sufficient to my mind that three experienced sailors believe she is ready. What higher authority do you want?

Xeio wrote:]Most governments have an age cutoff for 'reasonably' sure that you are mature enough to make decisions for yourself (18 in the US). Is there leeway there? Yes. But unless specific circumstances are taken into account, it is considered the default stance (which, I may add again, they seem to be taking into account the circumstance before they make their final ruling).

I'm aware of such laws; I'm disagreeing with them.

Xeio wrote:Also, what exactly leads you to believe delaying someone's dream does as much damage

I said that you can't delay a dream.

Dreams can't be packaged up and stored until they're convenient. If you delay for too long, then the original dream changes or goes away. You're forever stuck with a memory of something that you could have and should have done, but - for no reason that can make sense - you did not do. Some people deliberately forget, some convince themselves that their dreams were "childish" (whether or not they were)... some live the rest of their lives as could-have-beens.

Xeio wrote:as little to no social interaction for 2 years?

The RL social interaction I had when I was 13 and 14 years old was absolutely useless and undesirable, so, well...

(By the way, can we get some research in here? I don't really want to argue the "what are the relative merits of getting / not getting 2 years of social interaction" tack without having any hard evidence.)
Also known as Eli Dupree. Check out elidupree.com for my comics, games, and other work.

GENERATION A(g64, g64): Social experiment. Take the busy beaver function of the generation number and add it to your signature.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Telchar » Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:49 pm UTC

Elvish Pillager wrote:
Xeio wrote:Also, what exactly leads you to believe delaying someone's dream does as much damage

I said that you can't delay a dream.

Dreams can't be packaged up and stored until they're convenient. If you delay for too long, then the original dream changes or goes away. You're forever stuck with a memory of something that you could have and should have done, but - for no reason that can make sense - you did not do. Some people deliberately forget, some convince themselves that their dreams were "childish" (whether or not they were)... some live the rest of their lives as could-have-beens.


Do you write Disney movies for a living? Really?

Xeio wrote:as little to no social interaction for 2 years?

The RL social interaction I had when I was 13 and 14 years old was absolutely useless and undesirable, so, well...

(By the way, can we get some research in here? I don't really want to argue the "what are the relative merits of getting / not getting 2 years of social interaction" tack without having any hard evidence.)


Obviously though, we should just take your anecdotal "I didn't like it" as truth. You want evidence that depriving people going through puberty of social interaction can harm them psychologically? Really?

Also, can we please stop with the "Well, going to the gas station is dangerous" crap? I have yet to here 1 valid arguement for a 13 year old child being able to sail around the world alone except "obviously her parents weighed the risk and consented. Who are we to argue?" Well, obviously I should be able to throw a 13yr old off a building as long as a plan it for 6 months. I mean, obviously I weighed the risks.
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
Elvish Pillager
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Elvish Pillager » Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:52 pm UTC

Do you think that ridicule is a substitute for argument? Really?

Really?

Really?

:roll:
Also known as Eli Dupree. Check out elidupree.com for my comics, games, and other work.

GENERATION A(g64, g64): Social experiment. Take the busy beaver function of the generation number and add it to your signature.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Telchar » Mon Aug 31, 2009 7:57 pm UTC

What arguement? "Dreams fade" is not a counter arguement to "Parents cannot consent to extremely risky behavior."
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
Elvish Pillager
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Elvish Pillager » Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:00 pm UTC

Telchar wrote:What arguement? "Dreams fade" is not a counter arguement to "Parents cannot consent to extremely risky behavior."

Semantically, I was referring to the argument that you would have made against the post you quoted.

Substantively, if you think that "dreams fade, so let her follow her dream" is my entire argument, then you need to go back and read my posts again.
Also known as Eli Dupree. Check out elidupree.com for my comics, games, and other work.

GENERATION A(g64, g64): Social experiment. Take the busy beaver function of the generation number and add it to your signature.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Telchar » Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:16 pm UTC

You mean the arguement that you are disagreeing with established law? Okay, why? And on what grounds? Just saying you disagree, again, isn't an arguement.
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
Elvish Pillager
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Elvish Pillager » Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:26 pm UTC

No, my argument that Laura should be allowed to make her voyage, preferably without it ever coming before a court. The fact that that may be in contravention of some current laws is incidental.
Also known as Eli Dupree. Check out elidupree.com for my comics, games, and other work.

GENERATION A(g64, g64): Social experiment. Take the busy beaver function of the generation number and add it to your signature.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Telchar » Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:34 pm UTC

Except that isn't an arguement, because it has already come to court. It's pointless. The law is there for completely valid reasons and this, regardless of whether or not you like it, fits within the law as a case that should be reviewed.

Past that, your arguement that "Dreams fade it would be totally awesome for her to do this" isn't enough to offset any potential risk. I'm some 13 year olds would love PCP, and I'm sure some parents would consent, but that doesn't mean that the government is terrible, or wrong, for stepping in and saying "Whoa!"
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
Elvish Pillager
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Elvish Pillager » Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:52 pm UTC

Telchar wrote:Except that isn't an arguement, because it has already come to court. It's pointless.

So you're saying that there's never any reason to argue that anything shouldn't have happened, if it already happened?

Telchar wrote:The law is there for completely valid reasons and this, regardless of whether or not you like it, fits within the law as a case that should be reviewed.

Well, I'm not clear on the exact law, but the article says that the Child Protection Agency "says this is irresponsible and has taken them to court" - which means that in the minds of some people involved, this is not for the purpose of review but for the purpose of stopping them. So, someone thinks they should be stopped, and I disagree with that someone, and that is the gosh-darned subject of this thread, so I'll thank you to stop telling me it's pointless to argue about it.

Telchar wrote:Past that, your arguement that "Dreams fade it would be totally awesome for her to do this" isn't enough to offset any potential risk.

Hey, yeah, it isn't! Big surprise! That's why I wrote all those other things. Now go back and read them. I'm not going to repeat my argument for you.

Telchar wrote:I'm some 13 year olds would love PCP, and I'm sure some parents would consent, but that doesn't mean that the government is terrible, or wrong, for stepping in and saying "Whoa!"

It would also help if you would stop making ridiculous analogies. (If you read the rest of my argument and still don't see how this analogy is ridiculous and irrelevant, I'd be happy to dismantle it for you.)
Also known as Eli Dupree. Check out elidupree.com for my comics, games, and other work.

GENERATION A(g64, g64): Social experiment. Take the busy beaver function of the generation number and add it to your signature.

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Telchar » Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:59 pm UTC

Again, you arn't arguing anything.

"what do you want to be when you grow up" is a completely different thing - not only is it a question about the vague future instead of the definite future, it also only demands that they be reactive, not proactive. Laura is pursuing this dream:
- proactively
- for herself, not for a nebulous future self
- in the face of a court.

If you can say you did all that (or even two of those) when you were 13, and that you now believe that it was ill-thought-out, then you have an argument. Until then, you don't.


That's good. The "You havn't done it so you have no room to criticize" arguement. Extremely valid. No really, keep doing this.
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
Elvish Pillager
Posts: 1009
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere you think, nowhere you can possibly imagine.
Contact:

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Elvish Pillager » Mon Aug 31, 2009 9:16 pm UTC

What you have quoted was in direct response to another post that argued against Laura being allowed to go, apparently on the grounds that the poster believed themselves to have had misplaced beliefs at age 13.

I, on the other hand, argue that that is a difference between said poster and Laura, in a way that is pertinent to the issue, and that Laura should be allowed to go on the grounds that she is competent at what she intends to do, clear in her intent to do it, and supported by people who both know her skills and have a stake in her safety.

I hope that I have cleared that up for you; however, I will not respond to any further posts from you if they continue to contain more sarcasm than content.
Also known as Eli Dupree. Check out elidupree.com for my comics, games, and other work.

GENERATION A(g64, g64): Social experiment. Take the busy beaver function of the generation number and add it to your signature.

User avatar
Chfan
Posts: 2141
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 10:26 pm UTC
Location: American East Coast

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Chfan » Mon Aug 31, 2009 9:22 pm UTC

Can we stop it with the meta-arguing, please?
Just FYI, the guy isn't avatar isn't me. But he seems pretty cool.

Walter.Horvath
Posts: 933
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 11:33 pm UTC
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: Dutch court case to stop 13 year old's solo yacht trip

Postby Walter.Horvath » Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:14 pm UTC

Chfan wrote:Can we stop it with the meta-arguing, please?

That would imply that they are arguing about arguing, which they clearly aren't. Meta-meta arguing ftw

Yeah, and humans kill each other, too, so Will Smith should have just been passive to the Dutch Govt. VIKI.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests