Friday, May 10, 2013

Public Safety Officer Says Not Her Job To Open Roosevelt Island Tram Gate Entrance For Dad With Daughter and Stroller Despite RIOC Policy That Says It Is Her Job

A Roosevelt Island Dad reports on the ongoing difficulties of parents with baby strollers at the Roosevelt Island Tram gate entrance. According to the Dad:

On or about 815am on Wednesday morning, May 9, 2013, I approached the tram with my daughter as we do each morning as I take her to preschool in Manhattan as I go to work. That morning, like many mornings, there was no attendant stationed at the booth to open the security gate for parents who have young children with strollers.

That morning, there was a female Public Safety Officer stationed in the booth.... I swiped my card and I asked the Officer if she would open the gate so I could enter with the stroller. My daughter wanted to go in to be with her friends who were waiting for the tram with their mother and she also wanted me to come with her.

The Officer said it was not her job to open the gate. I then asked her if she would contact someone who would and she refused to do that. Meanwhile my daughter was getting anxious to enter to be with her friends and asking me to come.

 I told the Officer that other Public Safety Officers open the gate when the tram employees are not around but she still refused and became very un professional and hostile towards me. My daughter started to cry and panic reacting to the Officer’s un professional conduct and temper.

Finally the tram came and the operator opened the gate but the Officer continued her hostility towards me and my poor daughter cried all the way over on the tram. The Officer blamed me for causing my daughter to cry when in fact it was her misconduct which created the situation. Public Safety is to assist the public. It is not their job to treat us like thugs or criminals but to help us. 
Last month, Roosevelt Island Residents Association (RIRA) Common Council Member Eva Bosbach sent the following letter to the Roosevelt Island Operating Corp (RIOC)
A few months ago on behalf of the Roosevelt Island Parents Network and the RIRA Island Services Committee I brought up the problem of the access to the Tram boarding area for parents with strollers, which also affects people in wheelchairs and bikers.

Parents with strollers have to wait until someone from the Tram personnel, usually the Tram conductor, comes to open the gate for them. While the cabins are not in the station, all other passengers can go through the turnstiles and pre-load. Especially during long winter months like this year, this can affect the health of the residents and their babies. For example, mothers who just gave birth and their newborns have to wait in the cold in front of the gate and cannot get to the heaters of the pre-boarding area. But even in warmer times, the current situation is unfair and affects timing: Especially in rush hour a parent or another care-giver can miss the Tram even though she or he was the first one at the station – but had to wait for the gate to be opened while everybody else pre-loaded – causing the parent to be late for work or another appointment.

We suggested a number of solutions to RIOC and we are very pleased to have received a positive progress report last week by RIOCʼs Community Relations Specialist Erica Spencer-El. As a short-term solution, an additional staffer has been assigned who should now assist with opening the gate during rush hours. Unfortunately there is still feed-back from parents that this is not always the case. In the long run the plan is to hire an extra person designated to opening the gate and supervising the whole area permanently. We hope this can happen as soon as possible. On behalf of the many parents who live on Roosevelt Island or visit it, as well as the wheelchair- users and bikers we would like to thank RIOC for the progress already made and for further acting on this issue!
The issue of Baby Stroller access to the Roosevelt Island Tram entrance gate


was discussed during the February 13 RIOC Operations Committee meeting. RIOC Director Michael Shinozaki said:
... all Public Safety Officers should be instructed to assist parents, when feasible, with opening the Tram Station Entrance Gate door when the Public Safety Officer is stationed in the area....


Apparently the message has not been received by all of the Public Safety Officers as discovered by the Roosevelt Island Dad last Wednesday morning.

Here's the full RIOC Operations Committee discussion of the Roosevelt Island Tram Gate Entrance Baby Stroller Issue.

67 comments:

Westviewer said...

Typical "public safety" behavior. You are lucky she didn't arrest you.

YetAnotherRIer said...

I raised multiple children here (during the old AND new tram times) and the tram and its gates were never any issue (neither was open vs folded strollers on the red bus). Why are there so many whiny parents on Roosevelt Island nowadays?

"Meanwhile my daughter was getting anxious to enter to be with her friends and asking me to come."



Well, I guess that explains it all. Parents don't have the balls anymore to tell their kids that it is okay not to get everything every time they want something. The kids learn in school all the time that "you get what you get and you don't get upset" but that is hardly reinforced at home.


Or, I assume this is the more plausible explanation, the dad just used his kid as an excuse but actually he is just upset that he had to wait for the tram to arrive so he can get in.

Ratso123 said...

I guarantee that there will be no reprimand or apology. The joke of this issue is that we are told that safety officers are not like police because they deal with quality of life situations and blah blah blah. What is the officer's excuse? Was she on break, or on the phone, or just too lazy to do what she is assigned to do and what she gets paid to do.?

Eva B. said...

A clarification: RIOC’s Community Relations Specialist Erica Spencer-El mentioned in her call to me last March that the discussed solution of instructing all Public Safety Officers would not work because of a conflict with the unions and the impossibility to add anything to the job description of the Public Safety Officers. But she also announced that there now is a person permanently stationed to open the gate during rush hours, which obviously and sadly, backed-up by many reports from other parents, is not the case. We will be back to RIOC with those reports and hope for a better working solution soon.

Ratso123 said...

I apologize for my prior post concerning the opening of the Tram gate. My comments were based on the misinformation that this task was part of the Officer,s job. If it is not, then she shouldn't be put in a position to go out of the parameters of her job..

Anonymous said...

Magnificent beat ! I wish to apprentice while you amend your site, how
can i subscribe for a blog web site? The account aided me a acceptable deal.
I had been a little bit acquainted of this your broadcast offered bright clear concept

Feel free to visit my web-site: gsa search engine ranker

Janet Falk said...

Please do not focus on parents and babysitters with kids in strollers. Bicyclists and people in wheelchairs also must wait for the gate to be opened.

My neighbor sometimes rides a bike and takes the F from 14th Street. There is no attendant; people pay the fare and open the emergency gate to walk the bike in.

There is no emergency gate at the tram; we must rely on polite employees of RIOC to do their job and courteously open the door to help passengers enter the tram platform after paying their fare.

Neighbors should be equally respectful.

CheshireKitty said...

To me, this rigid mentality - instead of a common-sense approach of simply being helpful - pervades PSD management, and the union. The PSOs shouldn't have to get the OK from their reps or PSD Director to help people at the tram station with the door. It is unbelievable that "it isn't in my job description" trumps common-sense helpfulness. I hope Indelicato looks into this problem and updates the job description as necessary.

CheshireKitty said...

I disagree. The Office should open the door for wheelchair, stroller, and bike customers if there is no tram employee around to do it. If necessary, the job description should be updated to reflect this.

Resche 47 said...

It's not the Pubic Safety Officers Union with the issue, it's the Tram Worker's Union. They don't want anyone else doing their job. Plus, the Public Safety Officers are not there to work the gate. They are there to look for suspicious packages and make sure people pay their fare. I see many residents with strollers, bicycles and wheelchairs not paying the fare while waiting for the Tram attendant - with no issues. The attendant comes over and helps them swipe before letting them in. Some people just want what they want when they want it. You can blame the PSD Director all you want Kitty, but it's the Tram folks you should have the issue with. They are supposed to have someone there to do that.

CheshireKitty said...

Maybe they should restore the token booth so the permanent person the Tram is supposed to supply to operate the gate (customer service rep) has someplace to sit, and is not exposed to the elements when it's cold.

Frank Farance said...

If PSD were pushing the child then, under "Aided (EMS/ Transport Cases)", they'd be able to open up the tram gate, with no union issues. But if PSD officers don't frame it as a log-able incident, then they don't want to do the (courtesy) work, i.e., they opt for the negative of Courtesy, Professionalism, and Respect.

The unions concern is baloney (as explained above on existing PSD actions), and both entities work for RIOC and the issue can be resolved directly internal within RIOC. Also, I can't imagine a grievance filed against a Public Safety officer over operating a gate.

As for why there are more complainers? The bus loop is much longer since Octagon service was added and, thus, there are more glitches in providing consistent/regular service, for which all the complaints about crowding, strollers, etc. are just compounded.

YetAnotherRIer, nice that you find it acceptable to speculate what others are thinking. My sense is: transfer points are an important coordination point and a safety point for parents with young children. Over time, the children become more adapt, whether it's learning to get on/off the escalator safely, or the bus, or the tram, or the subway ... and so on. Unlike one's own car where you control the tempo, the tempo of the other modes is external to your control, so this requires preparation by the parent to minimize disruption for their passengers' ride. So getting through the gates without a hassle just makes sense and that is what a parent strives for: i.e., it's not about whining, it's about the collectively working to make the transportation system transport passengers better. (Just like doctors want the children not to cry over getting shots: it's merely about the setup that makes them better patients.)



In other words, it not about parenting and telling children to Toughen Up (or Caregiver's telling Seniors to Toughen Up), it's about accommodating the collective and diverse needs at several points in this system (this point: fare collection).

Stephanie said...

I totally agree with this. A child not being able to join friends immediately is hardly a crisis.

mpresident said...

AND a child who is old enough to want to be with their friends is old enough to walk and doesn't need a stroller.

Frank Farance said...

mrpresident: You misunderstand the purpose of strollers, which are to transport children. Using a stroller does not imply the child can't walk, using a stroller usually means: given all the things a parent is responsible for transporting (children, diapers, packages, food, drink, etc.), a stroller might be the best and safest option to navigate the multiple modes of transportation during the journey.


Do you really want to NOT have a stroller: a parent whose hands are full, not holding the child, and coaxing the child to board the tram with all its distractions, and (not to mention) the larger footprint of the parent (holding/dropping bags) and child, and the longer boarding time? Operationally, typically, a stroller is an optimum device for improving transportation efficiency.

YetAnotherRIer said...

As I said, the PSD officer should have handled it differently. No argument from here. That dad's complaint, though, reeks of "I had a bad day and I will let my anger out on somebody who didn't help me". But of course anything bad about the PSD nowadays is welcome news and how dare I actually ignore that part and focus on the bogus complaint (which if you take your bias out of this you will notice).

YetAnotherRIer said...

We want parents who tell their children "no" once in a while when in a public setting.

Frank Farance said...

YetAnotherRIer, I can see your point, but I don't want bogus PSD complaints amp-ed up, they just take away from real problems with PSD.

I don't fall for every emotional whim, my response was to the unreasonableness of those minimizing the concerns: either they haven't been parents or have forgotten the parenting years.

As for Donald Norman, he's a pretty good read and he provided fresh insight on "affordances", e.g., why there is no confusion about operating a push-bar emergency exit because the interaction with the door only "affords" a pushing interaction. Or maybe you've been to one of those fancy European hotels he writes about where aesthetics prevail and, thus, the shower looks beautiful but you don't know how to turn it on (because there are no affordances).


A funny aside: When I first read his book it was called The Psychology Of Everyday Things, but Norman learned something about humans when his book was getting shelved in the wrong areas in bookstores (in the Psychology department rather than the Design department), so he was forced to re-title his own book for better "usability".


Maybe you'll see some of the indicators of bad human-machine interfaces, such as the hand-written notes attached to machines (e.g., when buying a stamp at a some postal machines, if you put in $20, then machine does NOT give change). Anyway, it's a serious book and I hope you do read it.

CheshireKitty said...

A propos of nothing, anybody remember the old TA slogan: "Little enough to ride for free, little enough to ride your knee" which was meant to encourage parents of small children to hold kids on their laps instead of giving subway seats to kids. Kids had to pay a fare when they became taller than the turnstile. I remember being "encouraged" to "shrink" myself at bit at the train station when I was a kid, so I could still get to ride for free with my mom...LOL.

CheshireKitty said...

That's the ethos of today but who's to say it is or isn't the better way? Anybody who is at all "strict" with their kids is viewed askance. The favorite technique to enforce good behavior in my household was the guilt trip, starting from babyhood: If you misbehaved, then you were a bad boy or bad girl. The tone of voice was enough to get the message across that to earn praise, you had to do things the way the care-giver wanted. Does it work? People from my particular background, which was somewhat insular/closed, are known to have one of the lowest rates of divorce, a ridiculously low crime rate, a high rate of starting businesses, as well as a very high rate of earning secondary and post-secondary degrees and subsequent entry into professions.

mpresident said...

I'm going to say something vey obvious: parenting isn't easy.

If you want to raise a child who is both active and engaged in their environment, they need to walk and be actively participating in their day. A 3-year old can carry a back pack with their things and the parent can carry a back pack with the rest. You don't need a supermarket of groceries to get through the day (eating should happen at seated meal and snack times only). The perception that you need to carry the world with you is only perpetuated by television (0 hours recommended under 2, <2hours recommended after) - so watch less tv, carry less stuff, put down the cell phone and engage with your child.

YetAnotherRIer said...

Well, the jury is still pretty much out on the TV thing but I agree with the rest you said. Parents nowadays (again, I am a parent so I am allowed to have a critical opinion about them) seem to think they are entitled on making the world around them to work for them. Many parents seem that having children does not have to come with inconveniences and trade-offs.

mpresident said...

The jury isn't out on the TV thing - the AAP (American Academy of Pediatrics) reccomends no TV under 2 and as little as possible after:

http://www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-policy/aap-health-initiatives/Pages/Media-and-Children.aspx?nfstatus=401&nftoken=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000&nfstatusdescription=ERROR%3a+No+local+token

(but thank you for agreeing with me otherwise :)

mpresident said...

Did they have to stop using that slogan around the same time that you had to start saying "little person" instead of midget or dwarf? Do little people get to ride for free?

YetAnotherRIer said...

Right, I am aware of the AAP's suggestions but, unfortunately, they are not based on any significant research. I have been following this debate for more than a decade and there has been no conclusive results either way. So, for me, the jury is still out on that one.

Frank Farance said...

mpresident: Nice to hear righteous parenting, as if your way is the only correct way. You wouldn't pass the babysitter test because any parent of a 3-year-old would remind you that 3-year-olds don't have the stamina of adults, they need at least one or two naps a day, and that they don't have the adult discipline of eating at scheduled meal times.

Your approach sounds like: let your child walk, and when they poop out for a nap, stop what you're doing sit down for an hour or two, and don't even think of using the stroller to carry the napping child.

So when a parent of a 3-year-old is "walking and actively participating in their day" by saying Hello to everyone on the tram platform, and taking their time to get on the tram, which is significantly delaying the closing of the doors and departure of the tram, yet the parent whose hands are full is all smiles because they're not using a stroller ... at that point others (including parents) might think: if the child were in a stroller, the tram would have departed already.

My take (because I'm considerate of others) is: for my children operating in an adult environment, they need to operate within the parameters of that environment. So the stroller might be the best option for boarding and riding the tram, even the children are able to walk. It has nothing to do with how much exercise or interaction I desire, in certain scenarios (such as mass transit), the adult parameters prevail. Thus, a stroller is necessary at times.

Sounds like you haven't had to care for a 3-year old. Or maybe you don't believe there is a diversity of needs for children that requires accommodation.

Ryan said...

I keep getting blown away when I hear stories of people, neighbors, who have nothing to lose and everything to gain by simply using their good judgment and common sense to help out a fellow human being, choose to do the opposite. Anyone who needs help getting through the door at the tram station, whether they be disabled, biking, transporting a child, or just plain carrying too much stuff, should expect that someone with the time and authority would help them. Why? Because they would do the same for anyone else in that situation. I for one believe that inherent in your "job description" as a human being, is the responsibility to help each other live better, more meaningful and less stressful lives (especially when you can do so with minimal effort!). I have seen situations when the tram attendant or PSD officer at the station has helped people in, and it was great to see. I think we just need to make an effort to close the gap and have it be the case 100 percent of the time,... because why not?

Frank Farance said...

mpresident: Too bad, you give lousy advice, you're unable to think creatively that a stroller might be an option to accommodate the needs of children (which include the tasks that need to get done, and getting done safer), and you're so rigid in your thinking. You can't seem to think that the use of the stroller might be the tool to optimize for time or safety ... it's not about avoiding work on the part of the parents, it's about using the time wisely and safely.

Yes, my children are out of strollers, but that doesn't mean their father is free from Roadie Duties (band instruments), or Car Service duties (friends, sports, etc.). It is my pleasure to do it for them.

However, just because my kids don't need strollers, it doesn't mean I can't point out the rigid and unreasonable griping by people like you.

mpresident said...

I saw this and thought of you:


http://toobigforstroller.tumblr.com/

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/WellnessNews/big-stroller-carting-big-kids-bad/story?id=13597874#.UZLVkStASzE

More scholaraly article here: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/120/Supplement_4/S164.full

YetAnotherRIer said...

His advice is just as lousy as yours. Or his advice is just as interesting as yours.

YetAnotherRIer said...

I cannot wait for Frank's rebuttal on this. You gave him fodder!

RooseveltIslander said...

From another parent



"My grandmother helps take care of my young son and like so many other moms has been the first one to arrive at the tram and due to having to wait until someone opens the gate has subsequently missed the tram and had to wait for the next one.

This happens quiet frequently and they don’t miss appointments only because my grandma has come to expect to always miss the tram due to this situation and therefore leaves 15-20 minutes earlier than she normally would for any appointment times."

The reader was having problems posting comment so I did it for her.

CheshireKitty said...

If they're little enough - maybe. Don't we see them happily scampering under the turnstiles all the time? ;-P

Anonymous said...

Hey! I simply noticed another message in another weblog that looked like this.
How have you learnt all these items? That’s one cool post.


my web blog ... having trouble getting pregnant after a miscarriage

Frank Farance said...

mpresident: You're a pediatrician, don't listen to the child/parent, but (regardless) you have a strong prescription (yet inconsistent with your referenced article), and for the wrong age. Wow!

In response to using strollers because they might optimize for time or safety or better napping, your response is to recommend a different approach, i.e., "Expert Committee Recommendations Regarding the Prevention, Assessment, and Treatment of Child and Adolescent Overweight and Obesity". There was no mention of obesity, but in your (not-so-scientific) pediatric mind, you're already advising (as part of your daily advice to parents) on treatments (obesity management) that are unrelated to the condition at hand. (As for my kids, they've always had an active lifestyle, even with stroller usage.)

Also, if you read your articles you'll see their no-stroller advice is for ages 4-5, not a 3 year-old. So as a pediatrician, you'll be giving a toddler the teenager dose for medicine because matching

ages is outside your skill set, right?

You're disconnected from the advice in the article, here's an excerpt of your reference:

"When is a stroller appropriate? For infants and toddlers three and younger who don't have the stamina or strength to walk, especially long distances, or the ability to follow directions and stick by their parent's side, strollers are very useful, Brown and Shu say. Even into age four and five, strollers are appropriate in certain circumstances, such as on public transit or in very crowded areas where it may be hard to keep track of a child."

Which is consistent with my points about using a stroller in mass transit.

And you map your own circumstances (having "cared for 2 boys under 4 for 4 years, one of which wore corrective orthotic devices for a muscular disorder, with only using a stroller once") and presume they can apply to every parenting situation. Yes, if parents can afford a caregiver to give their children a lazy day with all the time in the world to stop for "sleepy legs" and enrich every moment with a learning experience, that's wonderful. But that's not the case for many (if not most) parents on this Island where half to two thirds of the population is Section 8 or affordable housing and (thus) can't afford to pay for such luxuries.

In other words, parents are juggling a lot of priorities, including a lack of time/resources to do all the things they want to do, so they strike a balance.



In summary, you've got your own STRONG advice (obesity management) that is disconnected with the circumstances of the child and parent, your advice is inconsistent with the article you reference. Sounds like you have an unscientific mind and lack critical thinking skills ... not a good match for a science intensive profession like pediatrics.


However, there is an important positive result: I can point RIOC and PSD to *your* article on why they should be accommodating to strollers on public transit (tram, bus). Thanks for the tips!

mpresident said...

Requesting that this comment be removed by the blog administrator as Frank states that I am a bad provider in a public setting without proof or justification, therefore possibly impacting on practice, and possibly falling under the constructs of libel law.

CheshireKitty said...

Maybe but no-one knows who you are - so how could his comments possible impact your practice?

Frank Farance said...

mpresident: I am entitled to my opinions, the opinions are based upon your statements you have provided in public, and you're an anonymous person. If you're really worried about your practice, then don't say dumb things publicly. Otherwise, expect to be held accountable to your statements.

YetAnotherRIer said...

And he did not disappoint!

RooseveltIslander said...

Besides you not being identified by your real name, the comment is not close to being libelous.

I am sorry, but will not remove it.

CheshireKitty said...

That's a sly putdown coming from you, Yet - gleefully licking your chops no doubt. He's usually right and can also out-argue most of us. You won't admit it but it's true. It's now Mpresident's turn to reply to his comment - instead of calling for its removal!

mpresident said...

He is not usually right, though he is inordinately argumentative, He also seems to have an amazing amount of free time on his hands, all spent at a computer - perhaps he should heed the expert committee's advice and work on some obesity prevention tactics... like exercising something besides his fingers.

mpresident said...

Actually I j found your first paragraph to be personally insulting on first read, rather than objectively argumentative. I would be happy to respond if you would phrase your argument as less of a personal attack. If you do that, then I will refrain from insulting your parenting skills and the outcomes seen in your children.

YetAnotherRIer said...

I learned to enjoy your and Frank's comments and reactions. They are good entertainment.

Frank Farance said...

mpresident: Did you think it might affect your practice calling the amputee in front 10 River Road a cockroach ("She is like a cockroach", 2012-06-08)? Or your disdain for those less fortunate ("I wonder if anyone will use the outdoor seating if it means sharing your meal with no legs lady", 2013-03-26), or your ongoing name-calling ("No legs lady seems to be able to afford the new buffet, so it can't be too expensive...", 2013-03-24).

You whine about your own exercise ("I'm pretty sure that Manhattan Park lost its "relaxing atmosphere" they day I had to take the stairs up to my apartment", 2012-09-09), or whine about walking an extra block or two ("Coming home from work at 1am this morning, I had to exit the garage, walk down to the school and back around to my building, all to avoid the giant moat.", 2012-09-22).

And maybe you don't really like children ("... the kids playing in the hallway, the baby strollers parked in the hallway, and the students holding meetings in the hallway are all really annoying. I pay way too much to live in a college dorm (populated by children).", 2013-02-01), e.g., all that interaction you supposedly advocate for, you don't actually like.

And when those kids are out of their strollers you complain to management ("I have complained to management, to no avail. ... Appropriately enough, the screamer child has thrown himself on the floor in front of the elevator and is yelling on the top of his lungs right at this moment (hence his name "the screamer", 2013-02-01). Maybe had the child been in a stroller and not force-walked with "sleepy legs", he/she might not be so cranky? :-)

So your prior posts seem to show a lack of concern about your pediatric practice, so why the fuss now?

Lastly you have no counter arguments to my response, which means you've lost the argument when you're reduced to You Use The Computer Too Much.

mpresident said...

If I didn't know for a fact that you were an ~60 year old man, I would swear you were my teenage brother. Life. You. Now. Go find one.

YetAnotherRIer said...

Frank, you really are proving many of mrpresident's points he made about you right.

CheshireKitty said...

We can disagree on approach but in terms of marshaling info to support his point of view, he is usually right. Of course we can have differences of opinion; the world would be a dull place if we didn't. It's neither here nor there to snipe at how much time we have to go online. Like many others, I had to sit in front of a computer to work before I was laid off. You can say my work might have resulted in obesity - in fact, many of my co-workers were overweight. Personally, I didn't become obese, although I easily could have especially once I was laid off, since I restrict my caloric intake to probably half of what most people take in, or maybe even less than that if most adults consume maybe up to 3K per day. Everyone should exercise more, or at least walk, but the key to obesity control is limiting caloric intake IMO.

CheshireKitty said...

I don't agree - I thought that was a devastating comment. And it doesn't take someone with tons of time to look back to find the quotes just click on the the activity button for the dIsqus account of the person you want to quote and scroll down.


It is amazing that the pediatrician voiced criticism of the kids in her building. I moved from a building that had many kids to one where there are less. I still miss seeing kids around since they're so cute.


Of course, no-one "likes" screaming of any sort, can you imagine though how much more distressing it must be for the kid that's screaming? They have no other way to express what they want so we have to be patient etc.


Anyway, having said all that, I wouldn't take seriously all that mpresident has written previously even if it does seem to paint a picture of an "anti-kid" person. Folks that comment here are adding complaints/thoughts that may occur to them on a given day, maybe a bad day. I'm sure the pediatrician is kind to and loves her patients and all kids.


Mpresidents comments about the legless beggar woman though weren't kind - it's too bad she feels this way about an unfortunate disabled person.

CheshireKitty said...

That's not much of a counter-argument. He read and understood the article you referred to. Why not address his comments about it?

Anonymous said...

It had been some time since I visited web site
with such high quality information. Thansk quite a bit for the helpful info

Feel free to surf to my website; how to increase chances of getting pregnant

Anonymous said...

I am not capable of view this website properly on chrome I feel there's a problem

Also visit my weblog: having trouble getting pregnant after a miscarriage

mpresident said...

Thank you kitty. I do love kids and I love my patients - I do not love being woken up in my apartment after an overnight shift by screaming in the hallway. The first few times it happened I went out to see if the kid was ok - which he was - alone, laying on the floor in front of the elevators, screaming his head off. It just seems to be a pattern (the kid is about 6 years old, and I have seen him speak, so he does have other ways of communicating).


I also probably wouldn't feel that way about the beggar in front of 10RR/Gristedes if she hadn't physically threatened me on 2 separate occasions. Clearly our disdain is mutual.

CheshireKitty said...

I'm sorry to hear that. I never had a problem with her - even give her some money occasionally. Aggressive panhandling is illegal but usually she is a distance from the door of the Gristedes and isn't aggressively panhandling. Was she right by the door when it happened?

Frank Farance said...

mpresident: As a pediatrician, you have a limited range in understanding children: "alone, laying on the floor in front of the elevators, screaming his head off. It just seems to be a pattern (the kid is about 6 years old, and I have seem him speak, so he does have other ways of communicating)".

So you look at a 6-year old on the floor screaming, and all you have to say is: He Has Other Ways Of Communicating. Maybe that line of thinking works for a 20-year old (possibly not). But a 6-year old? I think many parents would react: Gee, that child is *upset*, what might he be upset about?

So did you tell the 6-year old: "You have other ways of communicating", and what was his response? (Sounds like a Bill Cosby routine where you're the butt of his jokes about stupid parenting ideas.) You seem blind to the child's emotional/etc. needs. Do you really think that child is making a rational choice on how to communicate at that moment?

At a completely different level, some adults have the responsibility for caring for children other than their own. I'm in that category, so are school teachers and pediatricians, just to name a few. So a 6-year old is unattended by the elevator (a dangerous machine). So what happens to that child when he gets hurt? Maybe you don't have a legal responsibility, but you do have a moral responsibility. You don't have the reaction: Let's reunite that child with the parent or caregiver on your floor? (If the problem persists, then it's a managing agent problem.) It seems like you're not thinking about the child's safety at that point.

Just like your idea about strollers (which is counter to the article you cited), the ongoing pattern here I see that you don't have an intuitive feel for young children ... you seem to think they are just little adults, and that's not so. As your are a pediatrician, I'm appalled by your advice and experience.

And regardless of your disdain, as a doctor calling her No Legs Lady on a public forum is very uncharitable.

I know, I have you all wrong: you want to be known as the pediatrician that is dismissive of a 6-year old's screaming (he's making a rational choice to communicate that way, I've personally witnessed him communicating differently at other times), and willing to walk away from that 6-year old near a dangerous machine (rather than address a potential safety issue and re-unite him with an adult).

mpresident said...

In the vestibule of my building the first time, in the vestibule of Gristedes the second. Public safety was called both times.

mpresident said...

1. You previously made a comment regarding that some children do not have other ways of communicating other than crying (maybe we are talking about different age groups again?), which you have since gone back into your original post and edited out. I was merely pointing out that I knew this child to be developmentally appropriate for his age, and therefore have a grasp on language, where some children with developmental disabilities would not, and often do tantrum more frequently. I was not saying that, while upset, he would be rational.

2. I did go out and see if the kid was ok, and did reunite him with his mother on more than one occasion. Further, I did assess for signs of abuse or neglect as necessary and found there to be none that would make me have reasonable suspicion to require reporting. - I'm so sorry if I left out even one detail of my very busy life, but I didn't feel that we were having a second-by-second recount of all of my life experiences on this blog.

3. In my home or on my commute, when I am not on-call, I am NOT ON CALL. My complaint stemmed from the fact that the child crying and interrupting my home life was disruptive and forced me to go back into work-mode, especially after long overnight shifts. I can't go out and attend to every screaming child I hear when I am in my home. What if I had drank alcohol or taken a sleep aid - would I still be "morally responsible" for that child, when not in a state where I would ever trust myself to take care of a patient?

3. Further - much of this is taken out of context. "And maybe you don't really like children ("... the kids playing in the hallway, the baby strollers parked in the hallway, and the students holding meetings in the hallway are all really annoying. I pay way too much to live in a college dorm (populated by children).", 2013-02-01), e.g., all that interaction you supposedly advocate for, you don't actually like." - I believe this was commenting on the notice MP had posted asking people to not have meetings or park their strollers in the hallway - something that happens quite a lot here (and is a fire hazard). The hallway is not a room for the college students to have their RA meetings (Marymount or Culinary students who actually use 10RR as a dorm) or a storage unit for strollers (I believe those are available for rent - or you can keep them in your apartment - or not use them). I don't see how that has any impact on parent-child interaction.

Unrelated grammatical error: "As your are a pediatrician" - should be "as you are." Since you go back and change your posts after the fact, perhaps you should go correct that.

Finally, I will not be responding to you again - your arguments are completely petty and off point, and frankly are a waste of my time and energy on my days off. My office and patients love me and the care I provide (and most of them ditch the stroller after 3). Frankly, Frank, your opinion or insults do not matter a damn bit.

YetAnotherRIer said...

"Finally, I will not be responding to you again"


You should have stopped long time ago. There is really no point at all to discuss anything with Frank (or convince him of anything). He and his Google searches know better than any experts and professionals.

CheshireKitty said...

I'm surprised she wasn't removed from these areas by building security (door station personnel) or Gristedes management once it became apparent she was begging. Although panhandling is permitted, aggressive panhandling is not.

Frank Farance said...

mpresident: You simply lie. I don't edit my posts to remove comments (untrue: "which you have since gone back into your original post and edited out"). Occasionally I fix a typo or remove an extraneous line break (copy-paste doesn't always work right on Discus comments).

So now you're claiming I removed text (which is impossible to prove because I never did). According to you, in our discussion of 3-year olds and 6-year olds: "You [Frank] previously made a comment regarding that some children do not have other ways of communicating other than crying ..., which you have since gone back into your original post and edited out.". Of course I never said that. Do you really think any other parents (e.g., YetAnotherRIer) would have let me get away with describing 6-year olds as: Some Children Do Not Have Other Ways Of Communicating Other Than Crying? Of course not, because it didn't happen.

You're just so confused in your own mind about children, because you can't seem to get it straight: you're telling us about your no-stroller policy for 3-year olds, you cite an article, and the article has the opposite of what you're saying.

So to recap: as a pediatrician

- you're not good with children,
- you're not good at understanding children's/parents' needs,
- you're not good at reading documents you cite,
- you believe a screaming 6-year old is making a rational choice to communicate that way (over other forms of communication), and
- when you're Off Duty you have no sense of moral obligation to children's safety

... did I get all that right?

But you pierced me through the heart with your discovery of a grammatical error (you vs. your) in one of my comments. I feel like I've been chopped at the knees ... not!

CheshireKitty said...

Mpresident: I said crying kids (meaning - very small kids/infants that haven't yet mastered speech) have no other way to communicate so we must be patient. I just said that as a general comment as it applies to infants/small kids.


Incidentally, we've strayed from the point of this thread, which was a discussion of whether a parent should transport a toddler in a stroller or is it better to have the kid walk. Although I've avoided parenthood, from a common-sense standpoint, it is probably a better idea to provide a stroller for a little kid. Kids have to take so many more steps than adults to walk around - and if they get tired, then what are you going to do? What if it's not possible to take breaks? As long as they get some exercise and aren't glued to video games constantly, I don't think using a stroller until even age 4 is so bad. It's incredible that it could be a factor leading to childhood obesity since the use of strollers is so widespread yet not all kids are obese.


Of course, if a kid doesn't want to be transported around in a stroller, then that is different. If they feel they can handle walking around on an outing without having a stroller available, then simply let them walk.


Another aspect of the door controversy is, if there is no attendant to open the door, why the parent can't simply pick up the kid, fold up stroller (if it is foldable) and walk through the turnstile holding the child. It is true that it would be a juggling act with the stroller. Isn't this though the rule on the bus unless there is room for unopened strollers?

Frank Farance said...

YetAnotherRIer, Yet Another Wrong Answer. If you carefully read the comments, it was *mpresident* providing the so-called Google searches (only people out of arguments, such as yourself, complain about citations). And I happen to agree with the article *mpresident* cites, which was consistent with my points.

The problem with mpresident's comments was: they were counter to the points *she* in her cited article. To me, that's a problem with a doctor: they are providing advice based upon an article, and they're clueless about what is said in that article. Can't imagine that would reflect positively on a pediatrician's practice.

And then in response, mpresident had no substantive comments ... only to complain about age and appearance. Possibly, mpresident realized there was no way to back out of her contradiction. So shift the argument to someone's appearance (which reveals she's lost the argument).

Now YetAnotherRIer, I know you can digest comments better than this, right? So why don't you apply some of that thinking to your own posts complaining about me?

Let's look at your post 6 days ago (2013-05-16) on the topic "Riverwalk Building 5-6 Not Profitable ...". Here's your comments: "I believe this is the building where NYU bought up a bunch of apartments and sells them to its staff and faculty for a "better" price. Could be that the case why they are not listed otherwise? Maybe not. I checked the web site http://www.nyu.edu/life/living-at-nyu/faculty-housing/Homeownership-Programs/riverwalk/UnitsAvailable.html and nothing is listed there either."


You have no problem with your "Google searches", providing citations in your own comments, and (your complaint) Sounding Like An Expert, so why do you complain about me? If there were a error in my citations/comments, you'd certainly point it out, right?


Is it your complaint (simply) that your envious that I spend time getting higher quality substantiation of my points? :-) Maybe you have a better explanation of your Double Standard.

Frank Farance said...

Public Safety on Eyewitness News at 5:30 tonight.

Indelicato: This community won't trust Guerra again, there are way too many complaints against him, and the reports (including the deli videos) capture what the community can see with their own eyes. Ms. Indelicato, whether you like him or not, he won't be effective here, which means he needs to go right away. Ditto for the top PSD leadership. And ditto for a significant swath of your RIOC Board who allowed this to go on for years.

I also point out that you have contributed recently to this poor approach on Public Safety: you could have signaled a willingness to have the public and press better understand the problems (as is the case with the IRS in Cincinnati: the Federal government is not prohibiting employees from exercising their First Amendment rights, and is allowing them to talk to the press).

But you've reinforced the bunker mentality, i.e., Yes it is possible to make significant mistakes in your first week. So now Guerra comes to work in disguise: street clothes, backpack, doesn't drive his RIOC car, avoids the visibility ... and avoiding the press to interview him. And I thought Guerra, with all his Cease and Desist letters really wanted to get his version of the story out.

Guerra: Stop being a Girly-Man, Man-Up to your own stories (just like an NYPD commissioner would). What's next: the Pink Skirt and High Heels outfit to hide from the press? (Ha!)

Anyway, it would have been nice for RIOC/PSD to answer questions rather than hide in the bunker. Certainly, NYPD would have provided information, and provided it promptly. (But there's oversight at NYPD, right?)

YetAnotherRIer said...

"This community won't trust Guerra again...."


Let me fix that for you: a small part of this community won't trust Guerra again...

YetAnotherRIer said...

The world does not revolve around us parents. And rude people exist everywhere and they are not out to get you or me because we have children with us.

mpresident said...

I wish I could just hit a "like" button here.

RooseveltIslander said...

you can hit the vote up arrow on the left to express approval or vote down arrow on right for disapproval