Reflection 4.2

This was the best experience I have had in revision throughout this entire semester. The peer revision really helped so much. The criticism became much more than words on a paper. Hearing what my peers had to say about my work was really helpful. This topic is so important to me so I'm glad that this was the essay I got workshopped. I am really proud of my final draft. This revision in particular showed me the importance of making first drafts separate from final drafts because my paper really has become so much better since revising it. I hope that I took my peer criticism and applied it to my paper efficiently because I got really helpful comments. This was probably my favorite essay to write because it covered a topic that is so prevalent in my life and being able to share that with my peers and hearing what they have to say is really great.

Essay 4.2: There's a Future for Foster Kids

When I met my first foster sibling, Summer, I was taken aback by our first interaction. I was 14 years old and the only thing I knew about foster children at this point was that they lived a different life than I had. I would soon find out that this different life was much more complicated than I thought. I tried to be open-minded when I first met Summer, but I was very skeptical after observing her that day. She did not act the way I would expect a “normal” 8-year-old to act. She was unaware of the Kool-Aid stains food and smeared on her face. She seemed disinterested in touring the house, but rather more interested in keeping her box of cookies safe, which she clenched so tightly that her knuckles began to turn white. I had never met anyone so outside the realm of what I believed to be was normal. I doubted that living in our home would be able to benefit her in any way, but I was wrong.

As I got to know Summer, I realized that she is one of the sweetest, kindest people I have met. She wants what everyone wants-- love and stability. Unfortunately, Summer never saw those basic foundations of family from her original home. Right away, I realized the importance of my role in her life. I was someone she could look up to and that came to mean so much to me. Being the youngest in my family, I had always wanted a younger sibling, but Summer quickly became much more than that. Knowing that an 8-year-old girl can emerge resilient and even optimistic coming from the abusive life she faced is truly inspiring. I learned so much from Summer and she has grown so much since entering my house. In just a few months, she was transferred out of her remedial classroom. She became more trusting and every time my mom left the house, the look of terror on her face came less and less often; unlike her biological mom, she knew mine would always return. Most importantly, she realized that when her mom willingly gave up her parental rights, the hope for a family didn’t end; instead the likeliness of this hope grew when she saw that her mother’s abandonment actually set her free from an unfair life of abuse and neglect.

It was in the spring of 2006 when my mother decided to become a foster parent. At the time I was not sure what this would truly mean for the kids who would enter my home and I did not even contemplate the influence each child would have on my own life. As a foster parent, one provides the physical and emotional care a child needs after he or she separated from the biological family for whatever reason. The main idea of foster parenting is that it is a temporary situation (which can last from a few days to a few years) until ultimately the child can reunite with their family after conflicts are resolved, or until a child gets adopted (National Voice of Foster Parents). The main goal is to provide a child with a sense of care and security that they undeniably deserve.

My mom became affiliated with what is called a therapeutic foster care agency, meaning that the children who were under their care were troubled, to say the least. The likeliness of any of them getting adopted was very small. Many faced depression or bipolar disorder and came from families with extremely abusive family members and very dangerous living situations. Most of them were abandoned and/or abused by their biological parents or relatives. It's hard to live a normal life after once being subjected to such an unjust childhood. It’s impossible to ignore the suffering they must have endured in such unfair family situations.

Unfortunately, according to Enhanced Services and Stipends for Foster Parents: Effects on Retention Rates and Outcomes for Children, “While the availability of foster homes is shrinking… more children and adolescents who have more complex problems are entering the system” (Chamberlain 388). Although more is being done to improve the lives of foster children, there are many that do not get placed in a home and never get to experience any form of stability in life. Since there are not enough people willing to step up and become foster parents, many children in foster care must live in a group home with other foster children. The family atmosphere is non-existent in these group homes, which are supposed to be a mere placeholder for children before they can find a family to take them in.

Linda Lopez, spokeswoman for the California Department of Social Services notes, “about 13% of the 67,253 children in California's foster care system [are] living in group homes instead of preferred family environments” (Kendall, par. 5). It is shocking that in California barely one quarter of the children in foster care are able to experience the life-changing influence of healthy familial relationships. Unfortunately, this pattern is seen throughout the entire United States (Kendall). The presence of a loving home and family in a neglected child's life is indispensable when it comes to working to better the life of a foster child. Before building irreplaceable relationships with my foster siblings, I, like many other people today, was not aware of the irrevocable influence a foster family could have on a foster child's life, and vice versa.

In the summer of 2007, I met Charlie Gilleo. He would be my second foster sibling and my first foster brother. His story has been the most moving and has helped me to realize the true importance of foster parenting. Without the support and love from my family, I honestly don’t know where he would be today. He came into my home when he was 13 years old, and I was 15 at the time. The first time I saw him he was wearing a dirtied white tank top, jeans that were too big for him and a gold chain. He spoke quietly and used very few words. I was a little worried about this new foster sibling. I knew we wouldn’t have an immediate connection like I did with Summer, but after a few weeks I was pleasantly surprised when Charlie began to loosen up. We both found a common interest in my guilty pleasure of South Park and as we spent every Sunday night at 10pm laughing at the new episode, we formed an unexpectedly strong bond. Things looked better for Charlie but what he would soon endure would be a test of not only his own strength, but of the strength of my family in supporting him through what may be the hardest time he will ever face in his life.

It was only a year after coming into our home when Charlie’s father got arrested and was being tried for murder in the first degree. He was absolutely crushed. I was puzzled that he cared so much about a man who was never really there. Charlie never really had a relationship with his father. He would send him birthday cards, make a day visit every so often, but his father’s main concern in life was when he would be able to shoot up with heroin next. One thing I have noticed about foster kids is that they hold onto the family they have left and want so desperately to forgive and forget the mistakes of the family members who have abused them. I think that part of this innate forgiveness comes from the desire to just be a normal kid and live with their biological family without any complications of foster parents, social workers, supervised visits with family, and so on. They think they can work past the struggles of abuse and neglect, but they don’t know that they deserve so much better. Although it may take time, a loving and responsible family can show them this.

To say Charlie had an anger problem would be an understatement as he was being treated for bipolar disorder. The arrest of Charlie’s father was a major story in my town. Given the fact that Charlie was named after his father, the name "Charlie Gilleo," which was synonymous in my town for murder, was not only connected to Charlie Gilleo Senior (his father) but also Charlie Gilleo Junior (my foster brother). The name was in the paper every day. Everyone in town and school knew about his father. Even worse for Charlie, everyone undoubtedly believed in his father's guilt.

The weeks leading up to Charlie's dad's trial were tense to say the least. We all had to watch what we said around the house. Understandably, it was a sensitive and tense time for Charlie. I wished I knew what advice to give to him. But it’s hard to relate to someone whose father he hoped he would once be able to live with may be sentenced to life in prison. In my experience, most foster children hold onto the hope that they will one day be able to live with their family again, and this will somehow make them feel whole. But with this arrest, that hope was completely crushed for Charlie.

At the time of the trial, my mom and I were driving in the car on our way home. It was then when my mom got the call: Charlie's dad was found guilty for murder. Charlie's father's guilt or innocence was beside the point that this was the news we dreaded hearing. We knew this would change Charlie forever; this would shatter him and nothing would ever be able to fully put him back together. My mom then pressed on the gas a little more and sped home, knowing the situation we would walk into would not be pretty. We had been working through Charlie’s temper problem, but this verdict would send all of that progress down the drain. When we entered the house we saw two holes in the wall, broken glass, and drips of blood on the floor. My older sister who was supposed to be looking after Charlie looked baffled and didn’t know what to do. Her only words, "He locked himself in the bathroom and won't come out." I was afraid. I was afraid of what this damage of the holes in the wall and broken glass meant for him-- a reflection of the damage inside himself.

My mom begged Charlie to open up the door but didn't hear anything. We both thought the worst and were overcome with panic. Finally after anxiously pounding on the door for five more minutes till my palms turned red with numbness, Charlie opened the door. He looked my mom in the eyes, didn’t say a word, and fell into her arms sobbing. He had broken his hand that night from punching holes in the wall so we had to take him to the emergency room. A cast fixed his hand, but wouldn't come even close to fixing the damage he would suffer from this verdict.

It took a while for Charlie to be able to work through this. It breaks my heart when I think of how unfair it is that a child has to go through this. Charlie did nothing wrong. Yet, he had to pay for the neglectful and abusive acts of his parents. I don’t know if I would ever have the strength to face Charlie’s challenges and still persevere. But he didn’t have to do so alone. We have been there for him like a real family. I like to think that we have filled a missing part of Charlie’s life; and Charlie, along with my other foster siblings have filled a hole in my life that I didn’t even know existed before I met them. Today Charlie, Summer and my other foster siblings are facing a brighter future. No matter what they go through, they know that they will always have a family there through thick and thin. Especially after the abandonment they have faced, that idea of loyalty and support is truly empowering.

Charlie was lucky enough to have a strong, faithful support system there for him at such a tough time in his life. No child should have to face such challenges alone. What is so discouraging is that there are so many foster children out there not living in foster home. According to Kathy Rampert, executive director of the Pennsylvania State Resource Family Association, “In Pennsylvania, there are about 20,000 children in foster care and about 9,000 foster homes” (Kendall, par. 6). Again, not even half of the children in foster care are able to know what it is really like to be in a healthy family, and that scares me for their future.

The presence of a foster family in an abandoned and abused child’s life can give them a better future. These children can now feel a sense of safety and security. Often, many of these kids are ill-clothed, malnourished, and have rarely ever been to the doctor. Placement in a foster home guarantees that these vital physical necessities be met. They can focus on being kids; they don’t need to worry about hiding from abuse, if they have a place to sleep, food to eat, and so on. Foster care provides children with the opportunity to experience things they never got to do in their original home such as going on trips, vacations, participating extracurricular activities, and most importantly being part of a loving family. Foster care gives children the chance to live a life full of satisfaction and happiness that they are irrefutably entitled to.

Works Cited

Chamberlain, Patricia, Sandra Moreland, and Kathleen Reid. "Enhanced Services and Stipends for Foster Parents: Effects on Retention Rates and Outcomes for Children."Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care. Child Welfare League of America, n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 201

Kendall, Marisa. "Shortage of Foster Parents Seen as U.S. Trend." Www.USAtoday.com. USA Today, 22 Sept. 2010. Web. 03 May 2011.

"The National Voice of Foster Parents." www.nfpainc.org. National Foster Parent Association, n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2011.

Reflection 4.1

This essay was much harder to write than I thought. I have all the stories and experiences in my head, but it's really hard to take everything I've learned and put it into an essay for others to understand. I didn't realize how hard and extensive it would be to explain my foster sibling's back stories and map out their change. I may have used too many details, but not enough narrative technique. I definitely think I have a lot of revising to do with this essay. Even though we read plenty of narrative essays in class, it has helped more to read my classmate's papers and witness the peer revisions. I can take a lot of the constructive criticism they got and use that to better my own paper because I have realized I made a lot of the same mistakes. I think I need to also work on the overall flow of this essay as well. Also, it was much harder than I thought it would be to find good evidence to back up my claim. I spent a very good amount of time looking for the right sources to support the fact that more people should take on foster parenting. However, I found a lot of evidence that shows the problems foster children face in their future. I want to convey the opposite idea though- that the presence of a foster family can prevent this negative fate. Hopefully I'll find a jackpot source with more research and then I'll be able to incorporate that evidence in my essay to help convey the claim with more fluidity.

Essay 4.1 Works Cited

I don't know why but the indentation was off when I copied and pasted my works cited into the previous blog, so hopefully this one works out better.

Works Cited
Chamberlain, Patricia, Sandra Moreland, and Kathleen Reid. "Enhanced Services and Stipends for Foster Parents: Effects on Retention Rates and Outcomes for Children."Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care. Child Welfare League of America, n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 201


"Foster Care Independence Act of 1999." www.cwla.org. Child Welfare League of America, n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2011. 


"The National Voice of Foster Parents." www.nfpainc.org. National Foster Parent Association, n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2011.

Essay 4.1: There's a Future for Foster Kids

When I met my first foster sibling, Summer, I realized the importance of my role in her life. I was someone she could look up to and that came to mean so much to me. Being the youngest in my family, I had always wanted a younger sibling, but Summer quickly became much more than that. Knowing that an 8-year-old girl can emerge resilient and even optimistic coming from the abusive life she faced is truly inspiring. Frankly, I was taken aback by our first interaction. I tried to be open minded, but I was very skeptical after observing her that day. She did not act the way I would expect a “normal” 8-year-old to act. She was unaware of the food smeared on her face and seemed disinterested in touring the house, but rather more interested in keeping her box of cookies safe, which she clenched so tightly that her knuckles began to turn white. I had never met anyone so outside the realm of what I believed to be was normal. I doubted that living in our home would be able to benefit her in any way, but I was wrong.

As I got to know Summer, I realized that she is one of the sweetest, kindest people I have met. She wants what everyone wants- love and stability. Unfortunately, Summer never saw those basic foundations of family from her original home. As I heard more and more about where she came from and the struggles she inevitably had yet to face in life, my heart broke. I learned so much from Summer and she has grown so much since entering my house. In just a few months, she was transferred out of her remedial classroom. She became more trusting and every time my mom left the house, the look of terror on her face came less and less often; Unlike her biological mom, she knew mine would always return. Most importantly, she realized that when her mom willingly gave up her parental rights, the hope for a family didn’t end; instead the likeliness of this hope grew when she saw that her mother’s abandonment actually set her free from an unfair life of abuse and neglect.

Family is one of the most significant factors in shaping a child’s future. Through establishing close relationships with my many foster siblings over the past few years, I have seen the true importance of family in one’s life. For those children who come from abusive and destructive families, the influence of healthy familial relationships is life-changing.

In the spring of 2006 my mother decided to become a foster parent. At the time I was not sure what this would truly mean for the kids who would enter my home; and I did not even contemplate the influence each child would have on my own life. As a foster parent, one provides the physical and emotional care a child needs after he or she separated from the biological family for whatever reason. The main idea of foster parenting is that it is a temporary situation (which can last from a few days to a few years) until ultimately the child can reunite with their family after conflicts are resolved, or until a child gets adopted (National). The main goal is to provide a child with a sense of care and security that they undeniably deserve.

My mom became affiliated with what is called a therapeutic foster care agency, meaning that the children who were under their care were troubled, to say the least. The likeliness of any of them getting adopted was very small. Many faced depression or bipolar disorder and came from families with extremely abusive family members and very dangerous living situations. Most of them were abandoned and/or abused by their biological parents or relatives. It's hard to live a normal life after once being subjected to such an unjust childhood. It’s impossible to ignore the suffering they must have endured in such unfair family situations, but our goal became to show these kids that they deserve much more.

Unfortunately, according to Enhanced Services and Stipends for Foster Parents: Effects on Retention Rates and Outcomes for Children, “While the availability of foster homes is shrinking… more children and adolescents who have more complex problems are entering the system” (Chamberlain, 388). Although more is being done to improve the lives of foster children, there are many that do not get placed in a home and never get to experience any form of stability in life. Thanks to the Chaffee Foster Care to Independence Act, the futures for foster children are looking better (Foster Care). However, the shortage of foster parents is truly detrimental to the cause. The presence of a loving home and family in a neglected child's life is indispensable when it comes to working to better the life of a foster child. Before building irreplaceable relationships with my foster siblings, I was not aware of what an inrrevocalbe influence a foster family could have on a foster child's life, and vice versa.

It was in the summer of 2007 when I met Charlie Gilleo. He would be my second foster sibling and my first foster brother. His story has been the most moving and has helped me to realize the true importance of foster parenting. Without the support and love from my family, I honestly don’t know where he would be today. He came into my home when he was 13 years old. The first time I saw him he was wearing a dirtied white tank top, jeans that were too big for him and a gold chain. He talked quietly and used very few words. He seemed guarded, yet polite; the few words he did mutter were “thank you” and “please”. I was a little worried about this new foster sibling. I knew we wouldn’t have an immediate connection like I did with Summer. The one thing I noticed about him in the first week of living with us is his thankfulness. His courtesy was actually surprising. I understand now why he was so afraid of making mistakes and seeming unappreciative; he came from a home where any small mistake would end in him being beaten. After a few weeks, I was pleasantly surprised when Charlie began to loosen up. What he would soon endure, however, would be a test of not only his own strength, but of the strength of my family in supporting him through what may be the hardest time he will ever face in his life.

Charlie never really had a relationship with his father. He would send him birthday cards, make a day visit every so often, but his father’s main concern in life was when he would be able to shoot up with heroin next. Growing up, Charlie lived with his drug-addicted mother and his younger half-siblings, all from different fathers. One thing I have noticed about foster kids is that they hold onto the family they have left and want so desperately to forgive and forget the mistakes of the family members who have abused them. I think that part of this innate forgiveness comes from the desire to just be a normal kid and live with their biological family without any complications of foster parents, social workers, supervised visits with family, and so on. They think they can work past the struggles of abuse and neglect, but they don’t know that they deserve so much better. When Charlie heard that his father got arrested and was being tried for murder in the first degree, he flew off the handle. I was puzzled that he cared so much about a man who was never really there. To say Charlie had an anger problem would be an understatement as he was being treated for bipolar disorder. 

The arrest of Charlie’s father was a major story in my town. Given the fact that Charlie was named after his father, the name "Charlie Gilleo," which was synonymous in my town for murder, was not only connected to Charlie Gilleo Sr, (his father) but also Charlie Gilleo Jr (my foster brother). Everyone in school knew about his father. And worse for him, everyone in school believed in his father's guilt. The weeks leading up to Charlie's dad's trial were tense to say the least. We all had to watch what we said around the house. Understandably, it was a sensitive and tense time for Charlie. I wished I knew what advice to give to him. But it’s hard to relate to someone whose father he hoped he would once be able to live with may be sentenced to life in prison. In my experience, most foster children hold onto the hope that they will one day be able to live with their family again, and this will somehow make them feel whole. But with this arrest, that hope was completely crushed for Charlie. His dad's name was in the paper every day. Thankfully, Charlie was a big kid for his age so no one said anything hurtful to his face about his father. His intimidating demeanor kept him safe from explicit mocking. However, what may have hurt even more to Charlie was the inevitable whispering when he walked to the halls and the silence he endured when he entered a room, fully aware they were just talking about his father.

At the time of the trial, my mom and I were driving in the car on our way home. It was then when my mom got the call: Charlie's dad was found guilty for murder. Charlie's father's guilt or innocence was beside the point that this was the news she dreaded haring. She knew this would change Charlie forever; this would shatter him and nothing would ever be able to fully put him back together. My mom then pressed on the gas a little more and sped home, knowing the situation we would walk into would not be pretty. We had been working through Charlie’s temper problem, but this verdict would send all of that progress down the drain. When we entered the house we saw two holes in the wall, broken glass, and drips of blood on the floor. My sister looked baffled and didn’t know what to do. Her only words, "He locked himself in the bathroom and won't come out." I was afraid. I was afraid of what this damage of the holes in the wall and broken glass meant for him- a reflection of the damage inside himself. My mom begged Charlie to open up the door but didn't hear anything. We both thought the worst and were overcome with panic. Finally after anxiously pounding on the door for five more minutes, Charlie opened the door, looked my mom in the eyes, and fell into her arms sobbing. He had broken his hand that night from punching in the wall so we had to take him to the emergency room. A cast fixed his hand, but wouldn't come even close to fixing the damage he would endure from this verdict.

It took a while for Charlie to be able to work through this. It breaks my heart when I think of how unfair it is that a child has to go through this. Charlie did nothing wrong. Yet, he paid for the neglectful and abusive acts of his parents. I don’t know if I would ever have the strength to face Charlie’s challenges and still persevere. We have been there for him like a real family. I like to think that we have filled a missing part of Charlie’s life; and Charlie, among my other foster siblings have filled a hole in my life that I didn’t even know existed. Charlie was lucky enough to have a strong, faithful support system there for him at such a tough time in his life. No child should have to face such challenges alone. What is so discouraging is that there are so many foster children out there not living in foster homes. They may not know what it is really like to be in a healthy family, and that scares me for their future.

The presence of a foster family in an abandoned and abused child’s life can give them a better future. These children can now feel a sense of safety and security. Often, many of these kids are ill-clothed, malnourished, and have rarely ever been to the doctor. Placement in a foster home guarantees that these vital physical necessities be met. They can focus on being kids; they don’t need to worry about hiding from abuse, if they have a place to sleep, food to eat, and so on. Foster care provides children with the opportunity to experience things they never got to do in their original home such as going on trips, vacations, joining a club, and most importantly being part of a loving family. Foster care gives children the chance to live a life full of satisfaction and happiness they are justified to.

Reflection 3.2

The revision process for this essay was not as drastic as my previous changes in my earlier papers. The revision seemed more natural this time. Since the changes were less drastic it seemed like I was just tweaking my first draft rather than completely going through the process of editing and revising. I added one more scholarly source, so I have two scholarly sources now (along with a few other secondary sources) which definitely strengthens my argument I think. I broke up a few of my paragraphs into smaller sections, and that actually helped me elaborate on certain ideas in each of those smaller paragraphs. One part that I elaborated on a lot was the compromise. I added a source to support the compromise which really took it to a new level. Another major change I made was I delayed explicitly stating my claim to be more Rogerian. However, after I stated common ground in the beginning of my paper , my following paragraphs definitely show what side I take on this topic (even though I didn't outwardly state what I believe). I waited until the last few paragraphs to actually state my side, so I hope that change conveys a more Rogerian technique.  I'm very happy with the outcome of this paper.The National Youth Rights Association encourages people to post letters on their site arguing or supporting their cause to lower the drinking age so maybe I can bring this essay to them.

Essay 3.2: 21 Works

To the National Youth Rights Association:

I am writing this letter in response to your statements and actions reflecting the belief to lower the minimum drinking age in the U.S. from 21 years old to 18 years old. I think we both agree that this issue is one of great importance and the factors regarding it should be carefully considered from both sides.

Let me start off by saying I wholeheartedly believe in what you stand for as an organization. The power of the younger generations is vital to the well-being of our nation and the rest of the world.  You provide the type of vigor and inspiration the youth of our country needs to take pride in our future. Not only does this type of support motivate the youth to care about issues affecting them, but it is also necessary to catapult the generation’s presence into impending conflicts affecting different types of people all over the world; your powerful influence does just this.

Being 19 years old, I am part of a younger generation of voters. It’s thrilling to know that our democracy allows us to have a say in the governing process. I hope I’m not making a vast assumption when I say that many young people tend to focus on the issues that only affect them currently. (I, for one am not too concerned with social security rights at the moment.) However, it is safe to say that this issue is extremely significant to discuss because it reaches deeper than only affecting those in the range between the current minimum drinking age and your desired minimum drinking age. You state, “The National Youth Rights Association does not feel this is an issue primarily about alcohol; rather it is an issue about equality, honesty, respect, discrimination and freedom” (Frequently, par. 9). I could not agree more with this statement. This issue generates not only a question of how old one needs to be to consume alcohol, but it brings to mind these imminent conflicts of equality, honesty, respect, discrimination and freedom. Before I go on, I would like to first thank you for making so many young people aware of impending conflicts; because without a sense of awareness, we would lose a lot of our generation in the ongoing fight for a better future.

It is very important for me to mention that I completely understand where you are coming from. I acknowledge that it does not seem fair that an 18-year-old can vote, serve on a jury, fight for his or her country, pay taxes and so on, but they are not able to consume alcohol. I am constantly hearing my peers express their frustration about how it isn't fair that the drinking age is 21 and not 18, like it was when their parents were that age. However, what many of them don't acknowledge, or don't even realize, is that it is far too dangerous to allow eighteen-year-olds to access alcohol for a variety of reasons. I think we can both agree that The National Minimum Drinking Age Act has taken a major influence on the lives of America’s youth since it was signed into law on July 17, 1984. You mention, “While the 21-year-old drinking age seems imbedded in American society, it is only a recent innovation” (Koroknay, par. 1). Yes, this raise in the minimum drinking age is recent in retrospect, but more important to realize is that it was changed for a reason. The 18 drinking age was not working for many reasons.

 As part of the war protests of the 1960’s, youths started urging a lowered drinking age. The 26^th amendment was soon after adopted in 1971 and many states reduced the drinking age to 18, while some reduced it to 19 or 20. Soon after, these states started seeing a drastic increase in the number of alcohol-related injuries and fatalities among teens; most frequent among these were traffic injuries and fatalities. During this time, the problem of “blood borders” resulted in teens getting injured or dying in car accidents while travelling between their home states to neighboring states that had lower drinking ages. (Arnold-Burger, par. 4) According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, during the years where the states had lower drinking ages “the lives of 555 youths per year would have been saved if the drinking age had been 21 in all states of the U.S” (Saffer, par. 1). The studies performed by NBER also reveal that “the death rate of 18 through 20 year olds is inversely related to the minimum legal age for the purchase of beer” (Saffer, par. 1). Meaning, the higher the legal drinking age, the lower the alcohol-related death rate is for 18-20 year olds. It’s safe to say that the lower drinking age did not work. I don’t think we disagree on the fact that saving lives and preventing suffering among a generation which holds the fate of our nation is a good thing. Clearly, the current drinking age has proved to save lives. It’s such a shame that so many lives had to be lost before we realized that the lower drinking age was not working. However, this only strengthens the resolve today to keep fighting for what’s really important- which is protecting the lives of our youth. It's more important to be alive then to be entitled to get drunk.

In lowering the drinking age to 18, even more high school students and middle school students will be able to access alcohol more easily. This introduces the conflicts of the “forbidden fruit” versus the “low-hanging fruit.” (Arnold-Burger, par. 8) A lot of the allure of alcohol is believed to originate with the idea of the forbidden fruit. Kids know they are not allowed to drink alcohol, which makes them want to try it out even more. However, lowering the drinking age will replace this concept with the threat that more of these curious students will enlist the help of their 18-year-old friend or sibling to provide them with alcohol. Although many kids get access to alcohol through 21-year-olds now, the opportunity to obtain alcohol will be easier with more contacts closer in age. Also, these younger teens seeing even more 18-year-olds drinking will have an inevitably stronger influence to experiment with alcohol as well. The 1978 National Study of Adolescent Drinking Behavior found discouraging information:

“10^th – 12^th graders in states with lower drinking ages drank significantly more, were drunk more often, and were less likely to abstain from alcohol. Additionally, national data show that high school seniors who could not legally drink until age 21 drank less before age 21 and between ages 21 – 25 than did students in states with lower drinking ages” (Arnold-Burger, par. 8).

In relation to this threat, another conflict is introduced with the concern of future effects alcohol has on one’s adult life if alcohol is familiarized earlier in life. With the vast amount of alcoholics in our nation, it is unfortunately easy to admit that dependence on alcohol is not too hard to become succumbed to. Even more vulnerable to alcoholism are those who are introduced to alcohol at a young age. The assistant professor of psychiatry at Washington University School of Medicine, Arpana Agrawa, Ph.D. says “From a biological perspective, early AFD [a.k.a age at first drink] may induce changes in the highly sensitive adolescent brain, which may also modify an individual’s subsequent genetic vulnerability to AD [a.k.a alcohol dependence]” (Early, par. 3). Seemingly, the relationship between an early age at first drink and a vulnerability to alcohol dependence shows a strong connection. “We know that alcohol use affects an adolescent brain differently than it does an adult. We know that because of this addiction, onset can occur much sooner in a teenager (6-18 months) than an adult (5 years)” (Arnold-Burger, par. 7) Therefore, the longer we delay the onset of drinking of teens, the easier we can avoid their vulnerability to alcohol dependency. Alcoholism is a serious issue effecting both young and old. Unfortunately, vulnerability to alcohol dependency is not ideally controlled today. However, it is imperative that we help more members of the younger generation avoid such a fate by delaying their introduction to frequent use of alcohol.

I strongly believe that the minimum drinking age should stay at the current age of 21 years. Although I probably can’t change your opinion in just one letter, I hope that you keep in mind the dangers lowering the drinking age can bring. I think we both can unequivocally agree that knowledge of alcohol and its effects should be taught to kids at a young age. I think that this knowledge should be introduced to students in high school and even in middle school when alcohol is often first introduced. Perhaps if alcohol education is incorporated into the curriculum more heavily, then these threats of misuse at a young age will not pose a danger to those who are aware of alcohol’s consequences. I will not deny that alcohol is frequently used by those who are underage. However, because of the current minimum drinking age, underage offenders are forced to be more careful where and when they consume alcohol. Lowering the drinking age will break any sense of control these teens have, causing even more danger than what ensued in the 70’s. I would hope that eventually, a new generation will be able to understand the true repercussions of misuse of alcohol, but unfortunately I strongly believe that the current youth does not.

When I think of the alcohol education I received in middle school and high school, I do not feel satisfied. There could have been so much more effort put into making kids aware of the consequences of alcohol. Instead, an apathetic and dispirited effort was placed on the topic and the students lost a valuable education in the dangers of alcohol. Perhaps educators believe that it is an unwinnable battle and that it is unavoidable that kids will experiment with alcohol at a young age; but the current inadequacy of alcohol education in schools could be partly responsible for this too-frequent alcohol abuse our youth fall victim to. According to a study by the American Psychological Association, “the most promising route to effective strategies for the prevention of adolescent alcohol and other drug problems is through a risk-focused approach” (Hawkins, par. 2). This risk-focused curriculum would make kids aware of the negative effects of alcohol, creating a building block for their responsibility so that sometime in the future we won’t have to worry about the risks the youth face in drinking alcohol.

The truth is that alcohol has too many negative consequences that are hidden behind its allure. You have so much influence on our future generation as an organization. My request is that you take the immense power you are using to motivate a younger drinking age and instead focus that energy on educating youth on the dangers of alcohol. This paves the path to a better future so that eventually teens will be knowledgeable enough to take responsibility in alcohol consumption at younger ages.

The current drinking age was put into law for many reasons. Whether it’s to save lives, or to avoid early access to alcohol and a fate of alcoholism, the reasons behind the law are extremely valid. The drinking age of 21 is established to protect America’s youth. We can both agree that the younger generation controls the future. That idea of power amongst my generation is truly empowering. I would not want to give that up just so that teens from the ages of 18-20 can legally have a drink, risking a demise of such hope in the youth. In the 1970’s when the legal drinking age was 18, we saw what destruction was caused in emotional damage and in losing lives and a successful future. Like I said before, I truly respect the cause of your organization. I know your actions come from a root of morality and justice. So, I beg you to channel that foundation and ask yourself, are we really willing to risk the future of our youth for this?

Thank you for considering my position and thank you for continuing to do your influential and inspiring work.

Sincerely, 

Molly Podell

Works Cited

Arnold-Burger, Karen. "The Top Five Reasons We Should Keep the Drinking Age at 21." 

4prevention.wordpress.com. Regional Prevention Center, 06 Aug. 2008. Web. 29 Mar. 2011.

"Early Age At First Drink May Modify Tween/Teen Risk For Alcohol Dependence." 

Www.medicalnewstoday.com. Medical News Today, 21 Sept. 2009. Web. 29 Mar. 2011.

"Frequently Asked Questions." Www.youthrights.org. National Youth Rights Association. Web. 29 Mar. 2011.

Hawkins, David J., Richard F. Catalano, and Janet Y. Miller. "PsycINFO Database Record." PsycNET.apa.org. American Psychological Association, 2010. Web. 14 Apr. 2011.

Koroknay, Alex. "Legislative Analysis of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act." 

Www.youthrights.org. National Youth Rights Association. Web. 29 Mar. 2011.

Saffer, Henry, and Henry Grossman. "Beer Taxes, the Legal Drinking Age, and Youth Motor Vehicle Fatalities." Www.nber.org. The National Bureau of Economic Research, June 1987. Web. 29 Mar. 2011.

Prewriting 4.2

(I will mention this earlier in the paper: The biological father of my foster brother, Charlie was arrested for murder. It was a major story in my town. Given the fact that Charlie was named after his father, the name "Charlie Gilleo," which was synonymous in my town for murder, was not only connected to Charlie Gilleo Sr, but also Charlie Gilleo Jr, my foster brother. Everyone in school knew about his father. And worse for him, everyone in school believed in his father's guilt.) The time leading up to Charlie's dad's trial was tense to say the least. We all had to watch what we said around the house. It was a sensitive and tense time for Charlie. His dad's name was in the paper every day. It was a huge story in Hyde Park. Thankfully, Charlie was a big kid for his age so no one said anything hurtful to his face about his father. His intimidating demeanor kept him safe from explicit mocking. However, what may have hurt even more to Charlie was the inevitable whispering when he walked to the halls and of course the silence he endured when he entered a room, fully aware they were just talking about his father. On the day of the trial, my mom and I were driving back from a doctor's appointment. It was then when my mom got the call: Charlie's dad was found guilty for murder. Charlie's father's guilt or innocence was beside the point that this was the news she dreaded haring. She knew this would change Charlie forever; this would shatter him. And nothing would ever be able to fully put him back together. My mom then pressed on the gas a little more and sped home, knowing the situation we would walk into would not be pretty. Charlie always had a temper problem. We were working through it, but this verdict would send all of that progress down the drain. When we entered the house we saw two holes in the wall, broken glass, and drips of blood on the floor. My sister looked baffled, not knowing what to do. Her only words, "He locked himself in the bathroom and won't come out." I was afraid. I know he would never hurt me, but I was more afraid of what this damage meant for him- a reflection of the damage of himself. My mom begged Charlie to open up the door but didn't hear anything. She thought the worst. Finally after pounding on the door for ten more minutes, Charlie opened the door, looked my mom in the eyes, and fell into her arms sobbing. He had broken his hand that night from punching in the wall so we had to take him to the emergency room. A cast fixed his hand, but wouldn't come even close to fixing the damage he would endure from this verdict.

Prewriting Essay 4

The main purpose I want my essay to accomplish is to promote foster parenting. Throughout high school, I had numerous foster siblings come in and out of my home. I saw their pain and struggle and had difficulty imagining the situations they came from. However, I know that the support and love given to them from my family really helped not only them, but me as well, to see more to life. They went through a lot of changes while living at my house and I hope that they are only better off from those changes. Most of them were abandoned and or abused by their biological parents or relatives. It's hard to live a normal life after once being subjected to such an unjust childhood. However, I think that the presence of foster families really helps this kids to accept those old situations and know that they never have to face that again. I will most likely focus on two foster siblings of mine: Summer and Charlie, who came from terrible places, but whose futures are looking brighter. They have changed a lot over the few years of entering and leaving my house and their stories will stick with me forever. As for statistics, I want to focus on the repercussions of the feelings of abandonment foster kids face. Also, I want to bring about the statistics of how many foster children are not living in a home with a family. Hopefully I can find some scholarly articles focusing on the psychology of this issue as well as concrete statistics of the future careers and family life of these children.

Reflection 3.1

I think this essay is the longest out of any of my other ones for this course. I really loved writing in a Rogerian style. I'm not a very argumentative or aggressive person, so I feel like I felt way more comfortable arguing through Rogerian technique. Also, I enjoyed writing this paper because since we were able to pick our own topic, I could easily incorporate my voice as a writer into this piece. I learned a lot in researching not only my side, but researching the side of my opposing view. I wrote a letter to the National Youth Rights Association and learned a lot about their organization. Although I do not agree with them on their stance at lowering the drinking age to 18, I found that what they stand for is truly empowering and inspirational. I was happy that I found legitimate common ground and I didn't have to fake that part of the letter, like I thought may be the case. Overall, I think this paper is probably too long so I can stand to take out or condense a lot. Also, I may have relied a little too much on one of my sources. I think I need to incorporate my other sources more because I have some strong ones that I only used a few times. I still have a lot to do but I am proud of this first draft.

Essay 3.1: 21 Works

To the National Youth Rights Association:

I am writing this letter in response to your statements and actions reflecting the belief to lower the minimum drinking age in the U.S. from 21 years old to 18 years old. I strongly believe that the minimum drinking age should stay at the current age of 21 years. I think we both agree that this issue is one of great importance and the factors regarding it should be carefully considered from both sides.

Let me start off by saying I wholeheartedly believe in what you stand for as an organization. The power of the younger generations is vital to the well-being of our nation and the rest of the world.  You provide the type of vigor and inspiration the youth of our country needs to take pride in our future. Not only does this type of support motivate the youth to care about issues affecting them, but it is also necessary to catapult the generation’s presence into impending conflicts affecting different types of people all over the world; your powerful influence does just this.

Being 19 years old, I am part of a younger generation of voters. It’s thrilling to know that our democracy allows us to have a say in the governing process. I hope I’m not making a vast assumption when I say that many young people tend to focus on the issues that only affect them currently. (I, for one am not too concerned with social security rights.) However, it is safe to say that this issue is extremely significant to discuss because it reaches deeper than only affecting those in the range between the current minimum drinking age and your desired minimum drinking age. You state, “The National Youth Rights Association does not feel this is an issue primarily about alcohol; rather it is an issue about equality, honesty, respect, discrimination and freedom” (Frequently, par. 9). I could not agree more with this statement. This issue generates not only a question of how old one needs to be to consume alcohol, but it brings to mind these imminent conflicts of equality, honesty, respect, discrimination and freedom. Before I go on, I would like to first thank you for making so many young people aware of impending conflicts; because without a sense of awareness, we would lose a lot of our generation in the ongoing fight for a better future.

It is very important for me to mention that I completely understand where you are coming from. I acknowledge that it does not seem fair that an 18-year-old can vote, serve on a jury, fight for his or her country, pay taxes and so on, but they are not able to consume alcohol. I am constantly hearing my peers whine about how it isn't fair that the drinking age is 21 and not 18, like it was when their parents were that age. What many of them don't acknowledge, or don't even realize, is that it is far too dangerous to allow eighteen-year-olds to access alcohol for a variety of reasons. I think we can both agree that The National Minimum Drinking Age Act has taken a major influence on the lives of America’s youth since it was signed into law on July 17, 1984. You mention, “While the 21-year-old drinking age seems imbedded in American society, it is only a recent innovation” (Legislative, par. 1). Yes, this raise in the minimum drinking age is recent in retrospect, but more important to realize is that it was changed for a reason. The 18 drinking age was not working for many reasons.

 As part of the war protests of the 1960’s, youths started urging a lowered drinking age. The 26^th amendment was soon after adopted in 1971 and many states reduced the drinking age to 18, while some reduced it to 19 or 20. Soon after, these states started seeing a drastic increase in the number of alcohol-related injuries and fatalities among teens; most frequent among these were traffic injuries and fatalities. During this time, the problem of “blood borders” resulted in teens getting injured or dying in car accidents while travelling between their home states to neighboring states that had lower drinking ages. (Top, par. 4) According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, during the years where the states had lower drinking ages “the lives of 555 youths per year would have been saved if the drinking age had been 21 in all states of the U.S” (Beer, par. 1). The studies performed by NBER reveal that “the death rate of 18 through 20 year olds is inversely related to the minimum legal age for the purchase of beer” (Beer, par. 1). It’s safe to say that the lower drinking age did not work. I don’t think we disagree on the fact that saving lives and preventing suffering among a generation which holds the fate of our nation is a good thing. Clearly, the current drinking age has proved to save lives. It’s such a shame that so many lives had to be lost before we realized that the lower drinking age was not working. However, this only strengthens the resolve today to keep fighting for what’s really important- which is protecting the lives of our youth. It's more important to be alive then to be entitled to get drunk.

In lowering the drinking age to 18, even more high school students and middle school students will be able to access alcohol more easily. This introduces the conflicts of the “forbidden fruit” versus the “low-hanging fruit.” (Top, par. 8). A lot of the allure of alcohol is believed to originate with the idea of the forbidden fruit. Kids know they are not allowed to drink alcohol, which makes them want to try it out even more. However, lowering the drinking age will replace this concept with the threat that more of these curious students will enlist the help of their 18-year-old friend or sibling to provide them with alcohol. Although many kids get access to alcohol through 21-year-olds now, the opportunity to obtain alcohol will be easier with more contacts closer in age. Also, these younger teens seeing even more 18-year-olds drinking will have the inevitable influence to experiment with alcohol as well. The 1978 National Study of Adolescent Drinking Behavior found discouraging information:

“10^th – 12^th graders in states with lower drinking ages drank significantly more, were drunk more often, and were less likely to abstain from alcohol. Additionally, national data show that high school seniors who could not legally drink until age 21 drank less before age 21 and between ages 21 – 25 than did students in states with lower drinking ages” (Top, par. 8).

In relation to this threat, another conflict is introduced with the concern of future effects alcohol has on one’s adult life if alcohol is familiarized earlier in life. With the vast amount of alcoholics in our nation, it is unfortunately easy to admit that dependence on alcohol is not too hard to become succumbed to. Even more vulnerable to alcoholism are those who are introduced to alcohol at a young age. The assistant professor of psychiatry at Washington University School of Medicine, Arpana Agrawa, Ph.D. says “From a biological perspective, early AFD [a.k.a age at first drink] may induce changes in the highly sensitive adolescent brain, which may also modify an individual’s subsequent genetic vulnerability to AD [a.k.a alcohol dependence]” (Early, par. 3). Seemingly, the relationship between an early age at first drink and a vulnerability to alcohol dependence shows a strong connection. “We know that alcohol use affects an adolescent brain differently than it does an adult. We know that because of this addiction, onset can occur much sooner in a teenager (6-18 months) than an adult (5 years)” (Top, par. 7) Therefore, the longer we delay the onset of drinking of teens, the easier we can avoid their vulnerability to alcohol dependency. Alcoholism is a serious issue effecting both young and old. Unfortunately, vulnerability to alcohol dependency is not ideally controlled today. However, it is imperative that we help more members of the younger generation avoid such a fate by delaying their introduction to casual use of alcohol.

Although I probably can’t change your opinion in just one letter, I hope that you keep in mind the dangers lowering the drinking age can bring. I think we both can agree that knowledge of alcohol and its effects should be taught to kids at a young age. I think that this knowledge should be introduced to students in high school and even in middle school when alcohol is often first introduced. Perhaps if alcohol education is incorporated into the curriculum more heavily, then these threats of misuse at a young age will not pose a danger to those who are aware of alcohol’s consequences. I will not deny that alcohol is frequently used by those who are underage. However, because of the current minimum drinking age, underage offenders are forced to be more careful where and when they consume alcohol. Lowering the drinking age will break any sense of control these teens have, causing even more danger than what ensued in the 70’s. I would hope that eventually, a new generation will be able to understand the true repercussions of misuse of alcohol, but unfortunately I strongly believe that the current youth does not. You have so much influence on our future generation as an organization. My request is that you take the immense power you are using to motivate a younger drinking age and instead focus that energy on educating youth on the dangers of alcohol. This paves the path to a better future so that eventually teens will be knowledgeable enough to take responsibility in alcohol consumption at younger ages.

There current drinking age was put into law for many reasons. Whether it’s to save lives, or to avoid early access to alcohol and a fate of alcoholism, the reasons behind the law are extremely valid. The drinking age of 21 is established to protect America’s youth. We can both agree that the younger generation controls the future. That idea of power amongst my generation is truly empowering. I would not want to give that up just so that teens from the ages of 18-20 can legally have a drink, risking a demise of such hope in the youth. In the 1970’s when the legal drinking age was 18, we saw what destruction was caused in emotional damage and in losing lives. Like I said before, I truly respect the cause of your organization. I know it comes from a root of morality and justice. So, I beg you to channel that foundation and ask yourself, are we really willing to risk the future of our youth for this?

Thank you for considering my position and thank you for continuing to do your influential and inspiring work.

Sincerely, 

Molly Podell

Works Cited

Arnold-Burger, Karen. "The Top Five Reasons We Should Keep the Drinking Age at 21." 4prevention.wordpress.com. Regional Prevention Center, 06 Aug. 2008. Web. 29 Mar. 2011.

"Early Age At First Drink May Modify Tween/Teen Risk For Alcohol Dependence." Www.medicalnewstoday.com. Medical News Today, 21 Sept. 2009. Web. 29 Mar. 2011.

"Frequently Asked Questions." Www.youthrights.org. National Youth Rights Association. Web. 29 Mar. 2011.

Koroknay, Alex. "Legislative Analysis of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act." Www.youthrights.org. National Youth Rights Association. Web. 29 Mar. 2011.

Saffer, Henry, and Henry Grossman. "Beer Taxes, the Legal Drinking Age, and Youth Motor Vehicle Fatalities." Www.nber.org. The National Bureau of Economic Research, June 1987. Web. 29 Mar. 2011.

Reflection 2.2

The revision process for this paper was very different compared to my last one. I feel like I made a lot more changes to the second draft of this paper compared to the second draft of the rhetorical analysis. Not only did I work on changes in paragraph structure, language, and other non-context related techniques, but I also developed my ideas much more in the second draft. I knew that my first draft for the rebuttal was not a strong one, so I was afraid that my second draft would reflect that. However, I think I made many necessary changes to make this paper into something I can be proud of. The conflict of freedom of speech is very important to me and I'm very glad I chose the Huck Finn paper to rebut. I think I probably could have used more concrete evidence to back up my claims such as statistics, but I hope that my arguments are strong enough to clearly convey my overall idea. It was very difficult to find recent scholarly sources for this issue but when looking through my other sources, I was very compelled in what I found. This issue of publishing a censored version of Mark Twain's work is stirring up much controversy and I see that in the many articles I found during research. I'm glad that this essay brought me aware to such an issue.

Prewriting Essay 3

I'm not quite sure what topic I want to write about. I want to pick a topic that is not only relevant to me, but relevant to my peers as well. A few hot topics among my age group is legalizing marijuana and lowering the drinking age to 18. As for the legalization of marijuana, I support it for a variety of reasons. However, I think that this topic may be a bit over-used. When it comes to lowering the drinking age to 18, I disagree with those supporting that. A few months ago, I came over an article that thoughtfully analyzes why 21 is the right minimum age to buy alcohol. It was backed up by clear, strong reasons and evidence. I do acknowledge that it does not seem fair that an 18 year old can serve on a jury, fight for his or her country, get married, and pay taxes but they are not able to buy alcohol. However, when it comes to saving lives, sometimes one has to reiterate what their parents have always told them- "sometimes, life isn't fair". It's more important to be alive then to be entitled to get drunk. I'm constantly hearing my peers whine about how it isn't fair that the drinking age is 21 and not 18, like it was when their parents were that age. What many of them don't acknowledge, or don't even realize, is that it is far too dangerous to allow eighteen-year-olds to access alcohol for a variety of reasons. Some of the reasons I will touch upon is that:
1) There is substantial evidence that shows that after the drinking age was raised back to 21 the amount of alcohol-related car accidents  and fatalities has decreased
2) When alcohol is introduced at a young age, there is more time for someone to develop a dependency on it.
3) It is proven that the brain does not fully develop until the age of 21.
4) The idea of the desire of "tasting the forbidden fruit" vs. "low-hanging fruit" (If it's there- people are going to use it, and for many, overuse it)

Essay 2.1 Works Cited

Barlow, Rich. "Removing the N-Word from Mark Twain’s Work." BU.edu. BU Today, 2 Feb. 2011. Web. 28 Feb. 2011.                         

Blum, Matt. "What the Huck?" Wired.com. 5 Jan. 2011. Web. 1 Mar. 2011. 

             Goodman, Mary E. "Evidence Concerning the Genesis of Interracial Attitudes.” OnlineLibrary. American Anthropological Association, 28 Oct. 2009. Web. 08 Mar. 2011. 

           

             "Huck Finn: Censorship? Sure, It Is, but Changes to ‘Huckleberry Finn’ Are Warranted."TheLufkinDailyNews.com. The Lufkin Daily News, 6 Jan. 2011. Web. 18 Feb. 2011.

Essay 2.1: *UCK Finn Censorship: A Rebuttal On “Huck Finn: Censorship? Sure, it is, but changes to ‘Huckleberry Finn’ are warranted”

  LINK TO EDITORIAL

In an editorial in The Lufkin Daily News, the author of “Huck Finn: Censorship? Sure, it is, but changes to ‘Huckleberry Finn’ are warranted” supports the decision to produce copies of Mark Twain’s Adventures of Huckleberry Finn that replace the N-word with the word “slave.” In sum, the author believes that censoring the works of Twain is acceptable because using a word which is associated with violence and hate will have negative results. In the editorial, this claim is not backed up with any sufficient evidence and refers to false assumptions throughout the text. After reading the editorial and taking into consideration the author’s point of view, it is still clear that censorship is without a doubt unnecessary.

Since the development of language, censorship has taken a front seat in the process of communication. Many believe that censorship acts as a shield to fortify the fundamental right to be protected by dangerous words, thoughts and ideas. However, it is important to recognize that censorship is essentially the suppression of our first amendment. We don’t need to be protected by these “dangerous” words, thoughts and ideas; we can take our own meaning from them. However, in time, it has become much more than that; in the issue of censoring literature, one’s freedom of speech is not only tampered with, but so is their individuality.

            One reason why the author supports the publishing of a censored “Huckleberry Finn” is because it is now being banned or not assigned at schools because of its incorporation of the N-word. The author acknowledges the fact that Twain did not use the word to promote its use, but he reiterates that it still evokes a sense of that hatred. His assumption is that this sense of hatred evoked by the N-word (only used by Twain to stay true to Huck’s dialect and the culture of the South at that time) will either offend the readers or perhaps for some, prompt them to adopt this hateful outlook or think that using the word is acceptable. However this is a false assumption based on what the author believes can be the response to the exposure of the word. There is no mention of cases where this book was read in schools and students soon after adopted the new word into everyday use.

One reason used for censoring the books goes along with the author’s claim that that kids will start to use the word comfortably, even if warned that it is taboo to say. The author says, “The surest way to make kids use the word inappropriately is to tell them not to use it inappropriately” (Huck, par. 3). Yet, the author does not use valid evidence to back up this claim that kids in the past have begun to incorporate the word into their vocabulary after reading uncensored versions of the books. Exposing the word’s hateful origin will not make kids want to use it if the context is truly understood the students are being deprived of the raw work of a subject that they perhaps have not yet been introduced to thoroughly, such as racism. If the true meaning of these novels were understood, one would see that the context of the N-word was in fact used to show the “dirty culture of the South at the time of the story,” as the author of this editorial refers to it (Huck, par. 2). Twain used the N-word for a reason. It is a strong word, and Twain was aware of that; he did not want to sugarcoat the story because that would defeat its purpose and its effect on its readers to discourage racism.

 Showing kids the true nature of this word in context from the vile culture of the setting will make kids less likely to use it versus kids who are uneducated about it. . In his article, “What the Huck?” author Matt Blum questions “how can we expect children to learn real history if we sanitize it for them? Should we pretend the n-word never existed? Why stop there – why not pretend the KKK is and always has been fictional?” (What, par. 5). Simply telling your kids not to use a word and not giving them any more information or background will just make them more curious about it and more likely to experiment in using it around friends. It is more likely that they will not use a taboo word if they are aware of the reasons it is wrong to use- especially if that reason is attached to a story which they can connect with, such as Adventures of Huck Finn. According to American Anthropologist, Mary Ellen Goodman, “[Racial] attitudes constitute an aspect of the culture transmitted to the young during the process of socialization” (Evidence, par. 1). In other words, a lot of what a child will take out of a situation with a racial context depends on what social circumstance they are in. Just words on a paper will not create beliefs or practices. It is how the words are analyzed (and as seen in Goodman’s case study- with whom those words are analyzed) that affects their interpretation of the meaning. Thus, the N-word itself is not dangerous. In fact, its presence, such as in Huck Finn, can put a lesson on top of the word’s definition. Twain takes a word filled with hate and molds it into a meaningful message that actually condemns its common use.

This is where the action of the teachers becomes truly substantial; Huck Finn must be taught with its original intent to expose the racist culture of the South. The reaction will be to not give control to such racist power versus allowing the word to be commonly thrown around without understanding its origin; Twain has given so much significant attention to the hate from which the word originates to do just that. Laura Korobkin, a CAS associate professor of English says that the novel should “never be taught in a version that alters its text. Instead, teachers should use the occasion of reading Huck Finn to discuss the power of racist language as a dehumanizing force” (Removing, par. 5). This point is extremely valid. Instead of fearing the word and the hateful context it is associated with, teachers should embrace this effective power of its presence in the novel to influence students to avoid using this type of language.

Another claim the author of the editorial makes supporting censoring Twain is that movies are an example where censorship works. The author’s main point is that you can see the uncensored movie if you want, but if you prefer the cleaner version, you should be able to have the option to refer to that instead. "Many of us prefer the version of those movies that are edited for television. If you want all those F-bombs in you r home, you can buy the DVD” (Huck, par. 4). Sure, many movies that use F-bombs still manage to sustain their main “message” even when its profanity is censored. However, there are many movies where the incorporation of profanity and other deemed inappropriate language in fact helps convey its message. For example, in The Laramie Project, a movie that was adapted from a play, many derogatory words were used in reference to homosexuals. However, in order to comprehend the movie’s message, one needs to understand where this word is coming from. It was said by and in reference to the intolerable people against homosexuals. Without the presence of these words in The Laramie Project, the significance of the need to recognize the existence of such hatred would not be as substantial. It is important to recognize that if a subject matter is relevant and pressing, exposing all different kinds of points of view is extremely necessary to teach the theme and lessons in their entirety.

Furthermore, the author claims, "If you prefer the unpolitically correct version of 'Huckleberry Finn,' for the historical value or another reason, the original will always be there" (Huck, par. 4). Here, the author is making the assumption that the uncensored version of Twain’s books is not politically correct. The next question one should ask in this case is, “What classifies something as politically incorrect?” It is really a matter of taste, so this answer is different for everyone. What the author of the editorial considers politically incorrect may be deemed perfectly acceptable by someone else, as in this case.

Another claim the author makes in supporting censorship is that it will still keep its meaning. He refers to the fact that new releases of the Bible are published to keep up with the change in language, but the message still stays the same. However, part of the allure of Twain’s books is in the language itself. His language style is part of the literature and if that is altered then it compromises the books’ literary merit. Huck Finn is a story about a gritty boy with barely any education at all in Missouri in the late 1830s or 40’s- a setting where racism flourished. Twain purposely used Huck’s language to convey the true reality of the time period, where the N-word was commonly used. Blum mentions in his article, “It’s not only appropriate for Huck to use the word; it’s completely inappropriate for him to use any other word in its place” (What, par. 2). Part of what makes this novel so appealing and riveting is that Twain is not afraid to expose the language of the South during that time to ensure the setting’s authenticity. If he avoided using the word, he would have been cheating the readers out of completely stepping into the world of the book.

If Mark Twain were alive today, he most likely would not be happy about people messing around with his literature. He flawlessly captured the voice of Huck in his novel and the culture of the setting. Censoring certain words would defeat the whole purpose of the first-person narrative which helps the reader to truly experience the story for himself. Mark Twain consciously used the N-word, along with many other language techniques to convey the terminology of the South in the mid 1800’s. Inarguably, the effects censorship of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn would go way past the change of what words are in the book. Allowing such an effective literary work to be tampered with and altered would not only completely compromise its worth, but also instill a sense of demoralization among writers who dare to take risks. 

[SEE NEXT POST FOR WORKS CITED]