Responsibility
I have had cause to think about this word and it’s meaning quite a bit lately. As a parent this word and all its undertones and meanings hits home from the moment that baby is placed in your arms for the first time. I know that many of the decisions Mark and I made as parents (both good and bad ones) were done with that word “responsibility” floating around our heads. Even now as my children have come into adulthood I still feel their actions reflect back on me and as a result I feel responsible. This very notion used to drive me crazy when my mother would act as if something I did had caused her embarrassment; however, I have to reluctantly admit I now know what she was talking about.
Lately as I think about responsibility I have cause to reflect about how this concept differs from one generation to the next. When I was younger the concept of responsibility was communicated as “the right thing to do” or “your obligation”. Sunday school teachers reinforced the notion of responsibility with stories of “The Good Samaritan”; parents and teachers told children of the Boy Scout motto to “do a good turn daily” and “be prepared”. We grew up believing that we had a moral obligation to be responsible.
Currently on my nightstand is the latest book by one of baseball’s all-time great players, Cal Ripken, Jr.
I have had cause to think about this word and it’s meaning quite a bit lately. As a parent this word and all its undertones and meanings hits home from the moment that baby is placed in your arms for the first time. I know that many of the decisions Mark and I made as parents (both good and bad ones) were done with that word “responsibility” floating around our heads. Even now as my children have come into adulthood I still feel their actions reflect back on me and as a result I feel responsible. This very notion used to drive me crazy when my mother would act as if something I did had caused her embarrassment; however, I have to reluctantly admit I now know what she was talking about.
Lately as I think about responsibility I have cause to reflect about how this concept differs from one generation to the next. When I was younger the concept of responsibility was communicated as “the right thing to do” or “your obligation”. Sunday school teachers reinforced the notion of responsibility with stories of “The Good Samaritan”; parents and teachers told children of the Boy Scout motto to “do a good turn daily” and “be prepared”. We grew up believing that we had a moral obligation to be responsible.
Currently on my nightstand is the latest book by one of baseball’s all-time great players, Cal Ripken, Jr.
Although I greatly admire the baseball accomplishments of Ripken, I probably would not have read this book had it not been for my friend Susie and her job with Warwick’s Books in La Jolla. 
Thanks, Susie for a great afternoon! In his book, Ripken gives much of the credit for his work ethic to his parents, particularly his father who taught him at a very young age about the notion of responsibility. At times Ripken notes that this notion of doing the right thing and obligation are out dated among today’s youth. This got me to thinking “why”? Do we not all hope that our family, friends, co-workers, neighbors and members of society as a whole would follow Ripken’s lead and want to always do the best at what we do because it is the right thing to do? Is this not our responsibility as good citizens, parents, friends, etc.? And, when did this notion go out of style?All of this leads me to one of the most bizarre events I have witnessed lately. A perfect example of individuals trying to do the right thing but alas, it went so very wrong.
I work in a multi-story building which has an elevator. Currently the elevator is broken and repairs have taken much longer than anticipated. Apparently the postal carriers have decided that because the elevator does not work they will not deliver mail to the upper floors. Okay, now don’t get me started on how these few extra steps are not going to hurt them physically because I am going to be the bigger person and acquiesce and say that on any given day the mail deliveries can be rather large and to haul these up stairs would be above and beyond the call of duty (not to mention that the extra time would cause others on the route to have delays). HOWEVER, let’s throw in that notion about “doing the right thing” and see how this plays out.
The postal carrier agreed to deliver all of the mail to the first floor and then have the tenants in the upper floors come down to claim their mail. This was met with scores of objections from the upper floor tenants about how they should not have to go down the stairs to get their mail. Again, not going to enter into the area of how a trip or two up and down the stairs would probably benefit these people more than they know.
As a compromise, the building supervisor offered to collect everyone’s mail from the upper floors and deliver it to them in their offices himself. Things were going along nicely for several days of mail deliveries with no complaints from tenants. One can only assume that our building supervisor was enjoying the added benefits of his extra exercise and at the same time everyone was commenting on what a nice guy he was to step up and do the right ting for the folks on the upper floors. Alas peace in our time was not be once someone in the upper echelon of the post office found out that someone who was not one of their employees was (aghast!) walking up stairs to deliver mail! Apparently the postal service has a problem with anyone stepping in and “doing the right thing”. The postal service has now informed the tenants on the upper floors that all of their mail will not be delivered unless someone comes to meet the postal carrier on the first floor to claim it. No one other than a postal service employee is allowed to deliver mail. When someone pointed out that the postal carrier is not asking for identification from the person claiming the mail the postal service indicated that it was not their “responsibility” to obtain this from people collecting the mail for delivery. If this was the case then why was the building supervisor not allowed to collect the mail? The postal response was not that he couldn’t collect the mail but that he could not then take the mail and walk up the stairs because after all, who would be responsible if he fell? When it was pointed out to the postal service that this is why employers (such as our building's management company) carry disability insurance the response from the postal service was that they did not want to be held “responsible” should any disability occur.
To this reaction by the postal service I am left to conclude that my government in it’s infinite wisdom is RESPONSIBLE for society’s total abandonment of responsibility.
The postal carrier agreed to deliver all of the mail to the first floor and then have the tenants in the upper floors come down to claim their mail. This was met with scores of objections from the upper floor tenants about how they should not have to go down the stairs to get their mail. Again, not going to enter into the area of how a trip or two up and down the stairs would probably benefit these people more than they know.
As a compromise, the building supervisor offered to collect everyone’s mail from the upper floors and deliver it to them in their offices himself. Things were going along nicely for several days of mail deliveries with no complaints from tenants. One can only assume that our building supervisor was enjoying the added benefits of his extra exercise and at the same time everyone was commenting on what a nice guy he was to step up and do the right ting for the folks on the upper floors. Alas peace in our time was not be once someone in the upper echelon of the post office found out that someone who was not one of their employees was (aghast!) walking up stairs to deliver mail! Apparently the postal service has a problem with anyone stepping in and “doing the right thing”. The postal service has now informed the tenants on the upper floors that all of their mail will not be delivered unless someone comes to meet the postal carrier on the first floor to claim it. No one other than a postal service employee is allowed to deliver mail. When someone pointed out that the postal carrier is not asking for identification from the person claiming the mail the postal service indicated that it was not their “responsibility” to obtain this from people collecting the mail for delivery. If this was the case then why was the building supervisor not allowed to collect the mail? The postal response was not that he couldn’t collect the mail but that he could not then take the mail and walk up the stairs because after all, who would be responsible if he fell? When it was pointed out to the postal service that this is why employers (such as our building's management company) carry disability insurance the response from the postal service was that they did not want to be held “responsible” should any disability occur.
To this reaction by the postal service I am left to conclude that my government in it’s infinite wisdom is RESPONSIBLE for society’s total abandonment of responsibility.
