Tag Archives: freedom

What Is Our Future?

When I look at what is happening within the United States over the past few years, combined with the conduct and verbiage of political figures and citizens, I believe it won’t be long before this country finds itself in the midst of a civil war.

Civil war includes conflicts over government control and may involve military coups, insurgents from within the government, and challengers from outside the established government. Civil wars also include ethnic conflict and aspirations for social transformation.

Why do I believe we are headed into a full-blown war within our country? Look around you; there is hostility and violence everywhere. People within the government no longer believe in the very foundation this country was built on. Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence, “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their Powers from the Consent of the Governed.”

Part of allowing the governed to determine rights was placing control of elections on the states. It also prevented many citizens from being able to exercise that right. Initially, only white men who owned property could vote. Over the years, amendments expanded rights to blacks and other minorities, including women and non-property owners.

Leading up to and following the presidential election of 2020, we saw many things this country’s citizens fought hard to overcome come back to fruition. A desire to overturn the government and eliminate our freedoms began when the President of the United States began putting into his followers’ minds the belief that the election process is unfair. That the election was stolen.

How can an election be fair only if you win but not if you lose? That was his way of thinking, and people believed him. Now other republican candidates are following his example and have said they will only agree with election results if they are the winner.

Has anyone given consideration to what Trump’s claims of a false election cost the taxpayers?

When Trump refused to accept his loss and filed 62 lawsuits in federal and state courts attempting to overturn the election of Biden to the presidency. Trump was defeated in 61 cases. The only “win” was in Pennsylvania, where a Judge ruled that voters cannot go back and “cure” their ballot after failing to provide proper identification within three days of the election. This ruling didn’t change the outcome of the election.

As of February 2021, Trump’s election fraud lawsuits cost taxpayers more than $519 million. That is money out of your pocket to subsidize his refusal to recognize the will of the people.

Trump’s refusal to accept election results caused violence at the Capitol on January 6t. The main goal was to prevent the reading of the electoral votes to officially declare Joe Biden the winner of the presidential election. That was a direct attack on our government. Trump’s goal was to remain in office, thereby destroying the very basis on which this country was founded in 1776. Had they been successful, the freedoms you know today would no longer exist.

Trump’s rhetoric about a false election still rings out today, with other republican candidates saying they will only believe the election results if they win but not if they lose. You can’t have it both ways. Either we have a good election system, or we don’t. It can’t be fair “only when I win.”

That isn’t to say a candidate cannot question election results. It has been done many times in the past by both parties. The difference is whether the losing candidate accepts the findings or whether they refuse to accept defeat and continues fighting.

Social media hostility has become a very real problem in this country.

Studies and interviews with policy experts, activities, and social media industry professionals show that platforms such as YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook do not cause political polarization, but they do exacerbate it. When people view political content on social media, it makes them more upset and angry, causing them to develop stronger support for their own position.

In 2018 there was a major overhaul of Facebook’s recommendation algorithm. As a result, Facebook became an angrier place. The new algorithm prioritizes controversial content, resulting in otherwise peaceful people becoming trolls because of social media interactions.  

In addition to making people angrier than normal, those angry people are more likely to believe false information on social media. Hostile people in political discussions share misinformation. This doesn’t mean they believe what they share, but rather they refuse to admit their original belief was wrong. This behavior contributes to a disproportionate amount of misinformation, toxicity, and violent content because it is easier to inspire anger than positive emotions.

Studies in the United States and Denmark reveal that people who behave like jerks online are also jerks in person. People obsessed with politics are often frustrated, offensive, and angry, ranting about politics in person and online. The majority of these political posters are status seekers who crave a higher social status. Their main goal is to intimidate others into recognizing them, which serves their own personal agenda.

Discrimination Still Exists

The country has come a long way from the days of slavery, but discrimination still exists against people because of race, gender, religion, and for being LBGTQ. Violence against Jews in the U.S. has been the highest since the 1970s, with 2,107 incidents of harassment, vandalism, and violence against Jews in 2019.

The negative attitude about people who are not white dates back to the original days of voting, when only white male property owners could cast their votes. Some of this hatred has been invoked by our former POTUS blasting discriminatory comments about Mexican immigrants being criminals and rapists, proposing a ban on Muslims trying to enter the U.S., suggesting a Judge recuse themselves because of their Mexican heritage, joking about the Trail of Tears, pandering white supremacists at a Virginia rally, and claiming Kamala Harris doesn’t meet V.P. requirements because of her black heritage.

This kind of behavior should never be tolerated by anyone in this country. Trump claims he is “the least racist person” in the country, but his behavior says otherwise. The real danger is when he makes racially discriminatory remarks, his words impact those who follow him and negatively impact their behavior. Even though he no longer leads this country, his base follows his every command, which is dangerous.

This country was built on free-thinking people. If people do not think for themselves and follow one person’s commands, freedom will cease to exist, and the United States will become a dictatorship.

The Border Crisis is Real

There is no denying the high number of undocumented people crossing into our country. However, one must consider the failures of the prior administration regarding our border.

Before his 2016 election, Trump claimed he would build a border wall, securing our borders at less cost. That was a false claim and ended up costing taxpayers more money than ever before. Trump stifled competition among would-be builders, resulting in the wall costing five times more during the Trump administration than during the 16 years of the Bush and Obama administrations.

The reason for such as substantial cost increase? No bid contracts were awarded to a small group of pre-selected construction firms owned by donators to either Trump or other republican campaigns. Had contracts been submitted for competitive bids, costs to taxpayers would have been substantially less.

  • 2007 to 2015 (Obama Administration)—the government spent $2.4 billion to build 653 miles of the border fence, including gates, roads, lighting, and other infrastructure
  • By October 2020, the Trump administration spent $15 billion in contracts to build 738 miles of the border fence—$20 million per mile. This is contracts paid, not fence built
  • As of October 2020, the Trump administration completed repairs to 360 miles of fence in California and Arizona—no new fence was built

The biggest immigration problem is in Texas, where drugs and immigrants cross the 1,200-mile border along the Rio Grande.

When Trump was unsuccessful in using proper channels through congress to fund his wall, he declared a state of emergency, shifted billions of dollars from the Department of Defense and Treasury Department, then waived 10 federal contracting laws when attempting to fulfill his campaign promise. Oh, and Mexico hasn’t spent so much as a penny on it.

Destruction of Public Lands and Depletion of Water

The majority of the Arizona-Mexico border is on public lands the government set aside for special protection because of ecological value. This includes the San Bernadino National Wildlife Refuge, Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, San Pedro National Riparian Conservation Area, and the Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument.

Construction crews for Trump’s border wall spent months dynamiting, drilling, pumping, clear-cutting, and excavating public lands in numerous spots, including Guadalupe Canyon in Arizona. This was only to build roads for construction equipment. The beautiful Saguaros of the Sonoran Desert, protected by law, were lying in heaps next to construction areas. The damage is permanent. Natural migration of javelina, deer, bobcat, mountain lion, and bighorn sheep, and access to their natural water supply is impacted by steel beams installed along main migration corridors.

Natural water supplies are depleted because of border wall construction. This includes the Quitobaquito, a rare desert spring in Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument. Between February 2020 and February 2021, 45 million gallons of water were withdrawn. Artesian-fed wetlands and springs in the San Bernadino National Wildlife Refuge were losing about 700,000 gallons per day as of February 2021 due to construction pumping.

This is only just a touch of how much damage to our water supply and natural wildlife this wall has caused. If you haven’t seen the beautiful national parks along our southern border, it’s too late. Trump destroyed them.

The Bottom Line

The problems above and other issues, including abortion, changes in voting requirements, intimidation at voting polls, police brutality, and more, are inciting the citizens of this country. The anger that Trump incited, leading to the January 6th attack on the capitol, continues and will likely lead us into a civil war.

Look back 10-20 years and the events taking place in this country compared to now. Did you feel safer in 2010 than you do now? If so, that is an indication that the country is floundering.

I’m not going to tell you whether to vote republican or democratic. That is your choice. The proper choice is to look at each individual candidate. What do they stand for, and what are their beliefs and goals? Do they align with your desires for this country?

If the answer is yes, they are the candidate to vote for. Ignore their political alliance, and vote for the best person, not the party. That is how to maintain a politically sound, safe, and free country. That is how we prevent another civil war.

Leave a comment

Filed under border wall, Election, Life is a Melting Pot, nature, reality, Trump, Voting

Always Ask a Man

I recently came across Advice from a 1949 Singer Sewing Manual, which has been bouncing around on social media for years and has been verified as accurate. I think this speaks volumes about the era in which it was written.

Advice from a 1949 Singer Sewing Manual
Advice from a 1949 Singer Sewing Manual

How many women today would worry about having on a clean dress, their hair done, and with powder and lipstick applied for the chance encounter with a visitor stopping by while they were sewing? Even more so, the horror of horrors if their husband came home to discover they were not pristinely put together?

At the time the manual was written a woman’s position was to cater to her husband’s desires. She was to care for the home and children, and not be so forward as to pursue her own dreams or ambitions. After all, that would tax her brain beyond its perceived ability.

That got me to thinking about the 1960s and 1970s when I was growing up. Things were more forward-thinking then, or were they?

The 1960s

The 1960s were a time of change, the beginning of a revolution for women. Gone were the prim and proper dresses and pumps. Miniskirts and go-go boots were the things to be seen in. Long hair, headbands, and wild printed fabrics were in fashion.

In 1968 women protested against the Miss America Beauty Pageant, because not only was it sexist, but its core requirement was that the women be “of good health and of the white race. The requirements went on to state that Miss America was to represent what women are supposed to be, bland, apolitical, and inoffensive.

The push was on to equalize the rights of women with those of men. Women, in declaring their solidarity for equal rights, held public bra-burning events. Huge barrels labeled “freedom trash can” were available for women to toss their bras, panties, cosmetics, high heeled shoes, hair curlers, and any other possessions they considered to be “instruments of torture.”

By going braless women were gaining public attention for their cause. While many men didn’t agree with women having equal rights, they probably didn’t object to the bra-burning protests. This was the jump start for the no-bra fashion trend

The truth is, the 1960s and 1970s were an era of women striving to break out from under the control of men. They wanted recognition for their own abilities. I think one of the best attributes to the feeling of freedom for everyone was Woodstock. Three days of peace, love, and music held in August 1969.

Woodstock was not part of the women’s movement, but it was an event that rocked the nation. Over one million people made it to Woodstock, but only about half of those made it to the 3-day concert because of crowds and traffic jams.

If you don’t know what I’m referring to, it was flower children, hippies, middle class, upper class—an event all young people with an open mind and spirit wanted to be a part of. It moved people out of the restrictions of the past, away from the stress of the Vietnam War and the Civil Rights Movement, and forward into striving for newfound freedoms in the future.

I was too young to attend, but I remember seeing it on TV and my parents being disgusted at the sight of people in all modes of dress and undress, muddy, wet, sometimes naked, gathered in that huge field to listen to music and do drugs.

The 60s were just the beginning. I was surprised to learn recently how many freedoms women were denied throughout the 70s. Some had been resolved by the time I turned 18 in 1978, but it wasn’t without the tenacity of strong women pushing forward.

The 1970s

A prime example is the famous “Battle of the Sexes” which took place in 1973. Bobby Riggs was a No. 1 ranking 55-year old tennis champion. He was a male chauvinist who made a public claim that all women were inferior and that even at his age he could beat any woman in tennis.

Billie Jean King was a 29-year old female tennis player. She took Bobby Riggs up on his challenge. A tennis match between a male and female was unheard of, and hence the “Battle of the Sexes” name was born. The match was held on September 20, 1973.

Billie Jean beat Bobby 6-4, 6-3, 6-3.  It would still be many years before women were recognized as equals in sports, but winning that match established women as professional athletes. It was also a huge victory for women’s rights.

Always Ask A Man

I remember when I was around 14-15 years old my mother gave me a book written in 1965. The book was Always Ask A Man: Arlene Dahl’s Key to Femininity. I don’t remember a lot about the book, but the title gives a pretty good indication of how non-forward thinking it was.

Always Ask a Man - The Key to Femininity
Always Ask a Man – The Key to Femininity

There is one section that still stands out in my mind. It appalled me as a teenager. The topic dealth with shopping for clothes.

If your husband or father went shopping with you, you should try on every outfit you are considering and model it for them. If they don’t like it, you don’t buy it. If the man does not go shopping with you, then upon your return home you model each outfit for them. If they don’t like it, you return it to the store.

I remember thinking “no way!” If I go shopping and like an outfit, I am buying it and wearing it. I am not submitting to some man’s ideas about my clothes. I don’t think I ever finished the book. Once I got to that point, I was done.

A few years later I read The Hite Report: A National Study of Female Sexuality, written by Shere Hite, published in 1976. I was probably around 16-18 years old when I read it. Shere Hite asked a lot of women intimate questions about their sexuality. The results were published in a 600-page book. My mother never said much about it, but I doubt she was pleased to see me reading it.

Moving Forward

A popular singer of the time, Helen Reddy, had a very popular song, I am Woman, which was released in 1971. It spoke to the fight for equal rights, one portion of the lyrics saying:

I am woman, hear me roar
in numbers too big to ignore
and I know too much to go back an’ pretend
‘Cause I’ve heard it all before
And I’ve been down there on the floor
No one’s ever gonna keep me down again

Even as laws changed, discrimination against women still took place in many areas. It was in the early to mid-1980s when applying for a job that I was asked 1) if I was married, 2) if I was pregnant, and 3) whether or not I planned to become pregnant.

It was illegal for the company owner to be asking those questions, and he knew it because he acknowledged it. He knew he had the upper hand, because I would be concerned about being denied employment if I refused to answer.

What did I do?  I danced around the question. I was off the pill, but when asked about plans for pregnancy I replied, “if it happens it happens.”  It happened.

Women’s clothing took on a very masculine look. If a woman wanted to make it in a man’s business world, they needed to dress like a man. Women wore pants suits with non-feminine blouses. That was the way to climb the corporate ladder.

Working Mother was a magazine launched in 1978 and written for women such as myself who were juggling full-time work with young children. Men were not adapted to this lifestyle and we were juggling daycare, household care, and full-time work. 

On top of that, there was a division between the stay-at-home mom and the working mom. Those who did not work outside the home were looked down on. It was a common phrase to hear “oh, you only stay home, you don’t work?” It was because of this attitude that the term “Domestic Engineer” was developed by stay-at-home mothers.

Things have improved, but gender based discrimination still exists today. If you are curious about how far we’ve come, check out the list of Discrimination and Lack of Rights in the 1970s below.

Please leave me your comments below. Were you discriminated against? Did you participate in any of the women’s rights movements?

Discrimination and Lack of Rights in the 1970s

Financial

  • Have credit cards in their own name—Women needed their husbands signature, and if unmarried a father or brother had to sign the application; banks could deny applications based on gender until the Equal Credit Opportunity Act passed in 1974
  • Could Not Open a Bank Account—Women were not allowed to open a bank account without their husband’s permission; men did not believe women could handle finances.

Educational

  • No Admittance to Military Academy—Women were denied admission because men believed women would not be able to make it through the academy; West Point admitted their first female in 1976 and four years later 61 females graduated from a military academy.
  • Could Not Receive Equal Education—Men felt that women could not handle the challenges of higher education, that they weren’t smart enough, and that they belonged in the kitchen, not school.
  • Could Not Attend Ivy League College—It was considered more important to educate males than females; Yale admitted its first woman in 1969, other ivy league colleges began to follow suit, but Columbia did not allow in a female until 1983.

Employment

  • Could Get Fired for Being Pregnant—The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 prevented this, but employers could give any other reason for their firing
  • No Paid Maternity Leave—Paid maternity leave first made news in 1969 when five states agreed women should be allowed to take time off around the time of birth, resulting in the Temporary Disability Insurance Act; today there are still hundreds of businesses that do not pay women for maternity leave.
  • No Protection for Sexual Harassment—It was not until 1977 that the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington DC ruled that a woman could not be fired for refusing to provide sexual favors to her boss; the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission established a definition for sexual harassment in 1980 and it was 1986 when the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with that definition.
  • Could Not Apply for Any Job—Despite the 1964 Civil Rights Act, women could not find jobs beyond secretary or teacher before the 1970s; employers would find excuses other than gender to reject women applicants
  • Could Not Own a Bank—It was 1975 when the First Women’s Bank opened, becoming the first bank owned and operated by a female. The law did not initially accept the bank, but it was a milestone in the 1970s women’s rights movement.
  • Could Not Be Astronauts—NASA did not ban women, they simply did not allow them to interview, mainly because they only accepted military applications and the military did not accept women; In 1979 NASA began hiring women to train as astronauts and in 1983 Sally Ride was the first female to go up in space.
  • Could Not Be CEO of Fortune 500 Company—It was 1972 when Katharine Graham became the first female CEO of a Fortune 500 Company when she took the position at The Washington Post.
  • Could Not Be a Lawyer—There were a few women attorneys and judges, but it was not until the late 1960s and early 1970s they began being accepted into law schools more frequently; a study conducted at Cornell University found 90% of law firms refused to interview women applicants and most law schools would not admit women into their law programs.
  • Could Not Be A Judge—Some states had women judges prior to the 1970s, but it was rare and they were not paid at the standard rate; it was in the 1970s that the majority of the states began allowing women to serve as judges.
  • Serve on the Supreme Court—It was not until 1981 when Sandra Day O’Connor was seated on the Supreme Court that this 100% male dominated area was broken; other than that only three other women have served: Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Elena Kagan.

Medical

  • Get an abortion—in1970 Jane Roe claiming she had a right to abortion filed a lawsuit against Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade in the Texas Federal Court; Roe won her case in 1973 when the Supreme Court deemed the banning of abortion unconstitutional
  • Receive the Morning After Pill—This was first available in the 1970s but difficult to obtain; it was not until 2006 that the FDA approved it for non-prescription behind-the-counter sales.
  • Receive the Birth Control Pill—The pill became available in the 1960s, but many states did not allow doctors to prescribe the pill, a woman was arrested for selling them which resulted in the 1965 Supreme Court decision that married women could receive birth control pills, but some states still did not allow their doctors to prescribe it until the 1970s.
  • Could Not Receive A Direct Medical Consultation—Rather than giving women a direct consultation on their health the doctor would speak to their husband because it was believed that the wife could not comprehend the doctor’s diagnosis and/or recommendations.

Relationships and Marriage

  • Refuse Sex from Husband—Women received very little protection from any type of spousal abuse; it was not until the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 that a woman received protection against any violent act from her husband, including rape and physical assault.
  • Could Not Divorce Because of Domestic Violence—The No-Fault Divorce Act of 1969 allowed women to request a divorce without proving wrongdoing of their husband; prior to that time women had to prove their husband was at fault, adultery being an acceptable reason, spousal abuse was not.
  • Interracial Marriage—This was illegal in most states until Loving v. Virginia in 1967 made it to the Supreme Court where it was ordered that denying couples interracial marriage was a violation of the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
  • Living Together—Many states had laws against living together prior to marriage, and it was not until 2013 that all 50 states adopted laws allowing couples to legally reside together without being married
  • Could Not Adopt if Single—To adopt a baby a woman was required to have a male partner, even if the woman was wealthy, healthy, and could provide the child with a home, she was not allowed to adopt without a husband.

Other

  • Not Acknowledged for Running Boston Marathon—Katherine Switzer was the first woman to run in the marathon in 1967 for which she was spat on, taunted, and attacked; it was not until 1972 when Nina Kuscsik was one of the first women acknowledged for running.
  • Could Not Serve on Jury—Women on juries prior to 1970 was rare, and many states did not allow women jurors until 1973 when all 50 states ruled that females be allowed to serve as jurors.
  • Could Not Purchase Athletic Shoes—Women who desired athletic shoes had to purchase men’s shoes until the late 1970s and early 1980s; when women began to be recognized in the sports world female shoes became available.
  • No Voice in Their Work or Homelife—Men did not have to listen to what women had to say about their employment, civil rights, household matters, or their own bodies; women were expected to listen to their husband on how he wanted things done at home until sometime during the 1970s.
  • Unable to Participate in All Olympic Games—Women’s ability to participate began in the early 1900s but it was very limited; in 1976 ice dancing, basketball, rowing, and a few other events for women were added, in 2012 women’s boxing was added.
  • Discuss Sex—It was considered inappropriate and socially unacceptable for a woman to discuss sex prior to the 1970s; a book by Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique is believed to be a trendsetter in changing women’s behavior on this tabu subject.
  • Breastfeed in Public—This was not just controversial, it was not allowed; congress finally passed a law saying that a public place could not discriminate against women for breastfeeding because it was a violation of their equal rights

Leave a comment

Filed under Life is a Melting Pot

First Day of Freedom

Imagine six years of life where your movements are controlled, where you have no privacy, where you can make phone calls out but no one can call you, your mail is read prior to you receiving it, where you can never go visit, but must wait for people to visit you.   That is the life my son led from the time he was 24 years old until he was 30.

When he received notice in December that he had received parole he began counting down the days.  March 20th seemed like it was in the distant future for him.  For me it went fast.  I was trying to get things done prior to his release, and of course I made the six hour drive to pick him up.

Patrick was released from Newberry Correctional Facility in Michigan’s upper peninsula at 8:00 am March 20, 2018.  Although he is on a tether for the first six months of his two year parole, and he must abide by curfews that in the beginning are tight, it is considerably better than the spot he was at.  So how did Patrick spend his first day of freedom?

I picked him up at the correctional facility, we loaded his belongings into the car and than took our last two prison photos, a “selfie” of the two of us, and then one of him in front of the facility.  Every time I (and my now deceased husband) visited we paid to have photos taken of us together and one of Patrick alone, so this was our last prison photo shoot.

Our first stop was a gas station/McDonald’s combination where he got a McGriddle sandwich — also one of my favorites.  When he asked if he could have bacon added to the sandwich the girl responded “you can have whatever you want” and Patrick responded “those are words I’m not used to hearing.”

I had purchased him a cell phone, but phones have advanced considerably in the past six years.  He was on the phone talking as we were crossing the Mackinac Bridge and I heard him say that the water looked really cool with the ice on it and “if I wasn’t on the phone talking to you I could take a picture.”  He got instructions on how to stay on the phone and take a photo at the same time.

Two years ago my husband/Patrick’s father passed away, and I had obtained permission from the parole agent to make a few stops, Great Lakes National Cemetery in Holly being one, where Patrick saw his father’s grave-site for the first time.

We then headed to Fort Gratiot, he did not have to check in with the parole agent until the next morning, and we had permission to go shopping at Kohls to get him some clothes and then out to dinner.  We ended up spending about three hours in Kohls.

IMG_20180320_160215167

Patrick tries on a hat at Kohs

Patrick helped me pick out short outfits for my grandchildren’s Easter baskets, then we shopped for clothing for him.  He had changed sizes while incarcerated and had to try on a few things.  A pair of tennis shoes, four pair of jeans, a pair of shorts, one shirt (couldn’t find many he liked), some boxers, and socks and we felt he had a nice start.  I had already purchased him a nice pair of fleece pants, hoodie, polo, and a v-neck t-shirt prior to picking him up.  During our shopping Patrick had to exit the building and stand in an open area of the parking lot so the satellite could take a picture of him/his location.  He was told that happens frequently in large department stores or malls if in for a while.

Next stop was Red Lobster.  Lobster Fest is going on, and we had the same meal — two different kinds of lobster and green beans with mushrooms, and of course salad and biscuits.  The place was quiet, the service was good, the food was fantastic.

IMG_20180320_173823262

Dinner at Red Lobster

We were on our way home when my daughter called and said her boyfriend had the truck torn apart and needed to pick up a hose to complete it, could I swing by, pick him up and take him around the corner to the auto store.  I went by her house, dropped off Patrick, picked up Rob and took him to the auto shop, then went back around and dropped off Rob and picked up Patrick and we came home and unloaded the car.

The evening was finished off with Caroline (my daughter) and her three kids coming over for a while, and then Patrick and I watched a bit of TV.  It was a wonderful day for me, and I’m sure a great first day of freedom for him as well.

Leave a comment

Filed under celebration, children, communication, Coping, decisions, Discoveries, events, Family, food, home, kids, Life Changing, Life is a Melting Pot, memoir, parents, travel, Upper Penninsula

Freedom on the Horizon

For the past six years my son, Patrick, has called me every week, sometimes more than once a week, and each time we engage in a 15 minute conversation.  He always calls me.  I am not allowed to call him back.  We try to exchange as much information as possible in those weekly conversations.  Things that need to be handled, questions, and some general fun information on what is going on in each other’s life.

This past week Patrick called me in the middle of the day while I was at work.  It was a very special call and he was bursting with good news.  He finally received notice on the outcome of his parole hearing, which I talked about in All We Can Do Is Wait.  He is being paroled!  On March 20, 2018 I will be picking Patrick up from the prison and driving him home.

He will be on a two-year parole and is being released on a tether.  It is a six-hour drive home and Patrick will need to report to his parole agent here in our county that same day.   He will need to get a driver’s license.  The majority of his clothes will not fit as he has gotten taller and broader in the past six years.  Patrick was twenty-four when he went in, and will be thirty when he comes out.

Patrick and Grace taken during prison visit October 30, 2017

Patrick and Grace, October 30, 2017

It is exciting to have Patrick coming home.  In the time he was incarcerated he lost two daughters (my granddaughters) to foster care/adoption.  He also missed the funeral/memorial services of one grandmother, two grandfathers, and his father (my husband).  In addition to a general loss of freedom, those who are incarcerated can lose much on a personal/emotional scale as well.

We are both looking forward to the day of Patrick’s parole with excitement, but I think also a bit of trepidation.   Neither of us are the same people we were when he was arrested all those years ago.  There will be an adjustment period as he will be living with me initially while he gets his feet under him.  My home will need to meet the requirements of his parole.   He is used to living under the constant scrutiny and control of a prison and will now have the ability to enjoy freedom within the confines of his parole requirements.    He is used to living with all men.  I am used to living alone.  It will definitely be an adjustment.

The countdown has begun.  Seventy-seven days to go, but who is counting.  Freedom is on the horizon.

 

4 Comments

Filed under anniversary, celebration, communication, Coping, decisions, Family, habit, home, impressions, Life Changing, Life is a Melting Pot, parents, reality, time