The Digital Family-How Digital Technology Hurts the Family

barna.org

Technology has become a part of modern life and is deeply embedded in today’s families. Yet, the challenges brought on by technology in the home are not all created by teens. Parents are becoming just as dependent on digital tools.


According to a new report co-released by Barna Group and Orange, most Americans have welcomed digital technologies like computers and smart phones into their lives with open arms. In fact, most parents believe that, on balance, technology has been a positive influence in their lives by making communication more convenient.

Yet, there is no question that technology has also increased conflict within families. Parents complain that technology wastes time, creates diversions from homework, allows students to maintain a private, exclusive relational life, and distracts from family conversations.

Interestingly, the research pointed out that most parents are just as dependent on digital tools; they use the Internet and mobile phones nearly as much as their own children. Teenagers also complain about a double standard with regard to technology, noting that their parents bring home too much work and that it makes it hard to have conversations. Recent writing from Barna Group founder, George Barna, raises the possibility that technology has become America’s new addiction.

The Barna report gives clues as to how church communities can help families navigate the digital world by helping to reimagine the role of sabbatical living (i.e., taking meaningful, consistent breaks from technology) and by adding technology to discussions of stewardship.

Gingrich group digs up McCain's anti-Romney ad from 2008

Read the Story Here

Colleen McCain Nelson: Rick Perry, Please Come Home

Colleen McCain Nelson
 Rick Perry’s presidential campaign has been defined by bloopers. After tripping over himself and torpedoing his own prospects, our gaffe-prone governor now has a chance to do one thing gracefully: exit.

Call a halt to this clumsy campaign. Cancel the ego trip to South Carolina. Use the money left in the bank to repay Texas taxpayers for their trouble. Get back to the business of governing this state.

dallasmorningnews

Perry appeared poised to do the right thing Tuesday night in Iowa. He emerged from the caucuses as an also-ran and an afterthought. He spent millions to amass a paltry 12,604 votes, and an emotional Perry wisely said he was heading home to reassess his political future.

That’s candidate-speak for “I’m outta here.”

But 12 hours and one tweet later, Perry was back in. That was news to a number of Perry aides, who learned of their boss’ decision from Twitter and perplexed reporters. At this point, it’s par for the course in Perry’s maladroit operation.

Clearly, the governor is at a loss after suffering his first-ever election loss. He mistakenly believes that he can catapult from fifth to serious contender and become the anti-Romney candidate of choice. But Rick Santorum already has dibs on that role, and Newt Gingrich is available as backup. Both left Iowa with more momentum and better prospects than Perry.

Now, the Texas governor is buoyed only by the fact that he still has campaign funds available, but Perry should not confuse cash with credibility.

He has fallen from first to among the worst. The best move Perry can make to salvage some of his political legacy is to return to the comfy confines of Texas.

Tell the rest of the country that the Lone Star State needs its governor. Quickly demonstrate that lessons have been learned from this madcap misadventure on the big stage.

Perry has at least three years left at the helm of state government. (I always allow for the possibility that he could be governor forever.) If he wants to make them count, he should start now.

First, become a Texas resident again. Perry’s been absent for some or all of 105 days since August. Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst has been busy with his own campaign for the U.S. Senate and has taken a few trips as well.

For 15 days, Texas has been governed by Mike Jackson.

Who?

I’m sure that the semi-obscure state senator from the Houston area is a swell guy, but voters didn’t elect him to lead our state. Jackson is also pretty busy with his own construction company.

Texas could use a full-time governor. Perry is being paid to do the job anyway, so it would be nice if he’d show up.

Next, get serious about a policy agenda. The big leagues exposed Perry as awfully short on details and possessing only a shallow understanding of complex issues.

This year affords him the opportunity to develop a legislative to-do list for 2013 and to immerse himself in the intricacies of policies.

Finally, pay Texas back. Perry’s presidential bid has been a pricey proposition for taxpayers.

His state-provided security detail has cost as much as $400,000 per month as he’s crisscrossed the country. Perry could rebuild some goodwill by reimbursing this cash-strapped state instead of pouring more money into a losing effort in South Carolina.

Perry always has portrayed himself as a somewhat reluctant presidential aspirant. He said Tuesday night that this was not a lifelong ambition but simply a response to the fact that the country was in trouble.

Voters sent a clear message to the top Texan: He’s not the guy to fix it.

If he presses on, Perry risks adding to his cringe-worthy reel of Saturday Night Live spoofs. If he bows out now, he has a chance to put his political career back together in the state where he remains undefeated.

Governor, exit stage right and come home to Texas.

Original Story Here

TWR Quote for the Day

Quote of the Day…

“Remember those terrible days of the Imperial Presidency, when George W. Bush made several "recess appointments" to overcome Senate opposition? Well, Czar George II never did attempt what President Obama did yesterday in making recess appointments when Congress isn't even on recess.”- The Editorial Board in the Wall Street Journal (1/5) 

EEOC: High school diploma requirement might violate Americans with Disabilities Act

By Dave Boyer

Employers are facing more uncertainty in the wake of a letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission warning them that requiring a high school diploma from a job applicant might violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The development also has some wondering whether the agency’s advice will result in an educational backlash by creating less of an incentive for some high school students to graduate.

The “informal discussion letter” from the EEOC said an employer’s requirement of a high school diploma, long a standard criterion for screening potential employees, must be “job-related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity.” The letter was posted on the commission’s website on Dec. 2.

Employers could run afoul of the ADA if their requirement of a high school diploma “‘screens out’ an individual who is unable to graduate because of a learning disability that meets the ADA’s definition of ‘disability,’” theEEOC explained.

The commission’s advice, which does not carry the force of law, is raising alarms among employment-law professionals, who say it could carry far-reaching implications for businesses.

Maria Greco Danaher, a lawyer with the labor and employment law firmOgletree Deakins, said the EEOC letter means that employers must determine whether job applicants whose learning disabilities kept them from obtaining diplomas can perform the essential job functions, with or without reasonable accommodation. She said the development is “worthy of notice” for employers.

“While an employer is not required to ‘prefer’ a learning-disabled applicant over other applicants with more extensive qualifications, it is clear that theEEOC is informing employers that disabled individuals cannot be excluded from consideration for employment based upon artificial barriers in the form of inflexible qualification standards,” she wrote in a blog post.

Mary Theresa Metzler, a lawyer with Ballard Spahr in Philadelphia, said there may be an “unintended and unfortunate” repercussion of theEEOC’s discussion: “There will be less incentive for the general public to obtain a high school diploma if many employers eliminate that requirement for job applicants in their workplace.”

Officials at the EEOC said the letter in question addressed “a particular inquiry” and disputed that it would have repercussions in secondary education.

“No, we don’t think the regulation would discourage people from obtaining high school diplomas,” said Peggy Mastroianni, legal counsel for theEEOC. “People are aware that they need all the education they can get.”

She said the letter does not offer a new interpretation of the ADA.

Jeanne Goldberg, a senior lawyer/adviser at the agency, said the issue would come up only when high school graduation standards are not related to a specific job.

“This would never arise when the high school diploma is in fact necessary to do a job,” she said.

Ms. Metzler said the policy could lead the EEOC to bring claims against employers or encourage applicants who have failed to gain employment to raise the issue.

“The EEOC may be inclined to test its view on the high school diploma requirement and its impact on the disabled in a court case,” said Ms. Metzler, who is advising clients to “review their job descriptions to determine if a high school degree is truly necessary, or would aid the employee in performing the essential functions of the particular job.

“While such a requirement is routinely included by many employers, a deeper analysis may demonstrate that a lesser educational requirement might suffice,” she said.

Some worry that the EEOC’s letter could place less emphasis on a diploma in the workplace, but the push in Congress has been in the opposite direction. House Republicans sought late last year to reform the federal unemployment-benefit system by requiring recipients of aid who do not have high school degrees to be “enrolled and making satisfactory progress in classes” toward a General Education Development certificate or equivalent.

That proposal was not part of the final deal that Congress approved to extend a payroll-tax holiday for two months, but Republicans say they intend to renew their call for the reform this year.

Some corporate counsels are advising clients to adjust the way they approach the hiring process.

“Employers are wise to evaluate whether a high school diploma really is necessary to perform the essential functions of any job for which it is being required,” the Employer Law Report advised in a blog post by Lisa Whittaker, a lawyer with the Porter Wright firm, which has represented business clients for more than 150 years.

“Even in those situations where the high school diploma requirement can be justified, employers will still need to consider” whether a “reasonable accommodation” could be provided to allow a disabled person without a diploma to perform a given job.

© Copyright 2012 The WashingtonTimes, LLC.