agree to disagree? gray areas everywhere

[Mouse House Mama]

So if you have someone who, starting at eighteen, has a child every five years (extreme but not impossible), she could conceivably not be scheduled for thirty years?

Are there really that many people in the US that actually do that? I would be willing to excuse the very few who do since I doubt they are doing it just to get out of jury duty and if they are then they have much bigger issues.

It's a lot easier to set up a playdate where your child takes the bus to a friend's house for three hours after school than to set up care for an infant from 7 - 5 in your home. While my daughter is in school from 8 - 3 (includes bus time), that's seven fewer hours I need to find coverage for her. I don't think the PP meant that the child in school changes jury duty, but it does change the childcare coverage a parent needs.

Exactly! Having most of the day covered is a lot easier than having someone here all day. Even if that means they have to stay past 5pm at least they were not here from 5am.

I'm one who has mentioned the idea of a deferral-the way I think it should work is, if a caretaker of a young child (or disabled or elderly person) REQUESTS a deferral, it be granted, maybe for 3 years or such. I don't think it should be automatic, not every SAHM would need to request it (like I posted, I was a SAHM during one time I was called and my dad helped me out so I didn't consider deferring at that time). It should just be an option that a caretaker (not just SAHM's, could be a mom who works outside the home, or a child caring for an elderly parent) could request if needed. I have enough faith in the American public that I would assume that the vast majority of people who would claim this need, would actually need it.

This.

 

[punkin]

I think nursing mothers should be excused, but I draw the line at excusing cats. http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO133130/ They have a constitutional duty after all.

 

[lindsmom]

I think nursing mothers should be excused, but I draw the line at excusing cats. http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO133130/ They have a constitutional duty after all.

Imagine the poor mouse defendant... that would NOT be a jury of peers!

 

[barkley]

i think it's great if someone has a friend whose willing to host their child as a playdate after school while they are doing jury duty, but if that's not the case (at least where we have lived)-after school care for a child who would'nt be enrolled on a long term basis ran MUCH higher than f/t care (at the centers near our former home they were considered "drop in" kids and the rate 5 years ago was $12.50 and hour). in home providers would'nt give up a slot without a month long committment minimum (and even then they were'nt keen for short term when they could get a kiddo for the full school year).

i also don't know what time jury duty runs in other parts of the country, but when i've been called we had to report (be checked in through security) before 8 so that meant getting to the parking lot no later than 7:15, and there was no guarantee you were out before 6 p.m. (out as in done, by the time you got outside it could be 6:30).


i want to suggest that if childcare is an issue utilize the deferral mechanism but MAKE SURE YOU USE THAT TIME TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. the reality is because more and more people try to avoid jury duty judges are being less willing to excuse people. just ask a friend of mine-he was the sole income for his family running a one man buisness (wife was a sahm). despite showing compelling information about the economic hardship his serving would cause he was seated on a trail that lasted over 6 months. 6 months with almost no income which forced the sahm to find work creating more expenses due to childcare. their buisness never entirely recovered and they came close to losing their home.

the judge in part was unmoved by the situation b/c he had been called at an earlier date, requested a deferral-and made no plans for when the deferral period was up. he, like too many people who ask for a deferral view it just as a way to delay serving, not for it's intent-a period of time to make arrangements in order to serve (which he could have by schedualing his buisness obligations outside the court hours-which the judge did not hesitate to point out to him).

 

[ccgirl]

I hope that everyone realizes that just because someone's life is different from yours does not make thier life any easier... yes, I choose to work, therefore, I already have child care (its called school) however, yes I would still have to make arrangements for the after care because normally I am there to get them straight from school. also, lots (and this number is growing!) of moms work from home (its called telecommuting) so those working mothers would possibly NOT already have day care arrangements made so in addition to potentially losing money for not working, they would also have the task and expense of finding qualified child care.

as far as the argument that there are only a few years a SAHM can't serve so why not postpone them having to serve until they are past that period... how would that work? Do we have to say this the age bracket you can have kids if you don't want to hassle with child care arrangements and jury duty? do we have everyone submit a card to whatever entity is actually responsible for assigning jury duty to let them know that we are now a parent and therefore to start the deferral period. oh and what about the parents that share custody of the kids.. how do you handle thier deferral???? not to mention the LENGHT of deferral.. several SAHM's have mentioned a 5 year or so period of deferral...well yes, if they ONLY have a child or two. My SIL is a SAHM and has 4 kids... 10, 6, 3 and 6 months. So TECHNICALLY, she has not been able to serve for 10 years already and won't for another 5 at least and that's assuming she does not have any more kids, which she has not ruled out. Did I mention that one of her kids is special needs and that they are a military family and therefore get transfered all over the nation and don't have close family or long term friends around. and we haven't even touched the other end of the spectrum of the adults that are now providing care to thier parents etc that can't be left alone...thier needs are no less important the the needs of the SAHM who doesn't have anyone they could "trust" with thier baby.

And for the record I have nothing against SAHM's. I am glad when families find the solutions that work for them. I just resent when because I made the choices that I made that are different then choices you made, its assumed that my life is easier when disruptive things occur. It is no less disruptive or financially impactive on me than someone else.

I just had to say; this is very well put. I'm still wondering where the work outside of the home parent is? I realize some may not be able to take the day off to provide the backup care for the children. However, I have a suspicion some are just using that as an excuse.

 

[ccgirl]

I guess I'm spoiled - and I'm not being sarcastic AT ALL - by the jury system in Massachusetts. We get plenty of notice, it's one day/one trial, and once you've served one or the other you're exempt for three years from ALL jury duty.

This.....

I see people not even giving it a chance. Not even trying to find arrangements for one day. I understand, federal may be longer. But, District should only be for 1 day. The last time I was called to jury duty I was given a number to call the night before. However, I was given ample warning of this date. I then found childcare arrangements for that day. I called the night before and was informed not to come in. Apparently, I was way down the list and they didn't need that many people. Anyway, because I had arranged the alternate childcare, and taken a day off work, I still had to pay the childcare. It is a hardship for the majority of America. Unfortunately, so many people are trying to get excused out of it; they (the judges) are less and less apt to excuse people. So, people who keep trying to get excused only have themselves to blame.

 

[Michelle and crew]

Really? Where are you getting your information regarding people trying to get out of it? Just this thread? Because it doesn't prove true in our local court. I am there fairly often. Most people serve when asked. Most parents find childcare. Some don't want to, of course. Just as some business people try to get out of it by saying they are too important to be gone.

 

[clanmcculloch]

Have you ever known anyone to do that? If someone is that crazy all the more power to them. If you want to do so, have at it. We can play the pretend game until we are blue in the face. But in reality most people are serving, and the court systems are getting by.

My best friend in high school's family was exactly like this. She had 2 older brothers and 1 younger brother. There were 5 years between each child. That means her mother would have been exempt for 20 years.

Just because you don't know people in this situation doesn't mean it doesn't exist and isn't somewhat common. Isn't that what you keep saying to everybody?

i want to suggest that if childcare is an issue utilize the deferral mechanism but MAKE SURE YOU USE THAT TIME TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. the reality is because more and more people try to avoid jury duty judges are being less willing to excuse people. just ask a friend of mine-he was the sole income for his family running a one man buisness (wife was a sahm). despite showing compelling information about the economic hardship his serving would cause he was seated on a trail that lasted over 6 months. 6 months with almost no income which forced the sahm to find work creating more expenses due to childcare. their buisness never entirely recovered and they came close to losing their home.

the judge in part was unmoved by the situation b/c he had been called at an earlier date, requested a deferral-and made no plans for when the deferral period was up. he, like too many people who ask for a deferral view it just as a way to delay serving, not for it's intent-a period of time to make arrangements in order to serve (which he could have by schedualing his buisness obligations outside the court hours-which the judge did not hesitate to point out to him).

I think this is the thing that's getting to most people here. Many of the SAHMs that are saying that they can't get childcare aren't saying that they'll make arrangements if they have more time (some are but not most on this thread). Why not? Why can't they take that time to do the interviews or make further connections or even work with their church (or other local organization) to help create some kind of emergency drop in care? I'm sure these communities that don't have this sort of thing could really use a not-for-profit center like this. Maybe work with the United Way or Red Cross or church other charitable organization to set something like this up. You've gotten your deferment, so USE IT to effect change. Become part of your community and make a difference. You can't be the only person in your community with this kind of need but if nobody stands up and gets involved then nobody will ever find a solution.

I live in a town of 34000 people. DH is a SAHD. When DH has had medical problems I've either taken a vacation day or worked from home. I'm lucky that I have this luxury. When we first moved here, I checked into what would happen if neither of us could care for our kids and I found nearby hospitals that have emergency day care centers. They don't require that a caregiver be a patient at the hospital. We never had to use it, but we could have if we needed to. I believe that the United Way center in a nearby town also has emergency drop in child care but I didn't look into that one carefully because I knew of the closer option at the hospital.

Look, nobody's saying that there's never a valid reason for a SAHM to be exempted. People are just frustrated with the blanket statements where SAHMs say they can't and won't serve when their kids are young and won't do anything to make it workable. In a small subset of the SAHMs who've posted, yes it does seem as though it really would be a hardship, but for many it's coming across as mere entitlement when the parent WON'T try to do anything at all to see if she can make it work.

 

[Michelle and crew]

No, you are right, lol. That means they had wee ones for all of those years. That takes far more energy than showing up for court. At that point, jury duty would be a break, haha.

 

[bartleby1]

This.....

I see people not even giving it a chance. Not even trying to find arrangements for one day. I understand, federal may be longer. But, District should only be for 1 day. The last time I was called to jury duty I was given a number to call the night before. However, I was given ample warning of this date. I then found childcare arrangements for that day. I called the night before and was informed not to come in. Apparently, I was way down the list and they didn't need that many people. Anyway, because I had arranged the alternate childcare, and taken a day off work, I still had to pay the childcare. It is a hardship for the majority of America. Unfortunately, so many people are trying to get excused out of it; they (the judges) are less and less apt to excuse people. So, people who keep trying to get excused only have themselves to blame.

Not every district court uses the one day system.

The last time I served in our county, it was not just one day. ALL jurors below a certain number (you had to call Sunday night to find out the cut off number, but it is usually in the 600's) were required in our county at that time to stay for the entire week, even if no cases were called. Last time I served, I sat for the entire week with hundreds of other people in a room and not a single case was called, yet we all had to be there every day. The next county over always had the jurors show up on Monday and assign cases that day. If you didn't get assigned, you could go home, which sounds much more reasonable.

 

[JB2K]

So you leave your young children with people you've never met? As my signature says, I wouldn't even to that with my dog. He is a snowflake.

Quite frankly, if there were unusual circumstances that dictated (and I had no other options, whatsoever), I most certainly would.

As you can see by my avatar, I'm a little patriotic like that. You know, the "service before self" thing...

You're getting a little out there with your "So you leave your young children with people you've never met?" statement - I am not speaking of some fly-by-night Craigslist-type operation run out of someone's home -- I was speaking of fully-licensed (and well-run) child care operations which exist in our nation's federal facilities who more than capable to watch our children when the need arises.

Frankly, I think you and OP both need to spend more time researching your real-world options outside of the budget board...

 

[ccgirl]

Really? Where are you getting your information regarding people trying to get out of it? Just this thread? Because it doesn't prove true in our local court. I am there fairly often. Most people serve when asked. Most parents find childcare. Some don't want to, of course. Just as some business people try to get out of it by saying they are too important to be gone.

I have family that work in both District and Superior court. I hear all sorts of stories of people trying to get out of it. I am told about the people that put up quite a commotion when they aren't let out of serving. I will omit the stories so I don't offend anyone here. But, safe to say I am not just basing my opinion on this board.

 

[Michelle and crew]

What works for you doesn't work for me. If you don't care who is watching your kids it only becomes my problem when they turn up in my office having been assaulted. Call yourself a patriot all you like. Military gals are one of my prime concerns. They are the ones moving into town most often who have no connections. We work hard to change that. Lol, but I'd never suggest to one if them that they leave their little ones with strangers, even govt. Sanctioned strangers either.

You, of course, feel free to do so. I just don't expect it of people. Thankfully, it isn't an option here. So the courts don't either.

 

[Ava]

I hope that everyone realizes that just because someone's life is different from yours does not make thier life any easier... yes, I choose to work, therefore, I already have child care (its called school) however, yes I would still have to make arrangements for the after care because normally I am there to get them straight from school. also, lots (and this number is growing!) of moms work from home (its called telecommuting) so those working mothers would possibly NOT already have day care arrangements made so in addition to potentially losing money for not working, they would also have the task and expense of finding qualified child care.

as far as the argument that there are only a few years a SAHM can't serve so why not postpone them having to serve until they are past that period... how would that work? Do we have to say this the age bracket you can have kids if you don't want to hassle with child care arrangements and jury duty? do we have everyone submit a card to whatever entity is actually responsible for assigning jury duty to let them know that we are now a parent and therefore to start the deferral period. oh and what about the parents that share custody of the kids.. how do you handle thier deferral???? not to mention the LENGHT of deferral.. several SAHM's have mentioned a 5 year or so period of deferral...well yes, if they ONLY have a child or two. My SIL is a SAHM and has 4 kids... 10, 6, 3 and 6 months. So TECHNICALLY, she has not been able to serve for 10 years already and won't for another 5 at least and that's assuming she does not have any more kids, which she has not ruled out. Did I mention that one of her kids is special needs and that they are a military family and therefore get transfered all over the nation and don't have close family or long term friends around. and we haven't even touched the other end of the spectrum of the adults that are now providing care to thier parents etc that can't be left alone...thier needs are no less important the the needs of the SAHM who doesn't have anyone they could "trust" with thier baby.

And for the record I have nothing against SAHM's. I am glad when families find the solutions that work for them. I just resent when because I made the choices that I made that are different then choices you made, its assumed that my life is easier when disruptive things occur. It is no less disruptive or financially impactive on me than someone else.

I don't think anyone was suggesting that a parent receive an automatic deferral for x years as soon as they have a child. That would be ridiculous.

However, I don't think it is at all unreasonable to allow a primary caregiver of a child, elderly, or disabled person to defer jury service upon request. Many states/districts already allow this. My partner was called last year when DD was an infant & she received a deferral for 5 years. I could have taken time off from work to care for DD while she served jury duty, but thankfully that wasn't necessary. I think if all courts allowed deferrals by request under certain circumstances, they'd have a much more willing jury pool.

 

[mistysue]

Regarding school aged kids- in my area it is much easier to get full day care than just a before and after school. Figuring out what to do with my 1st grader in an emergency is actually much more complicated than my 1 year old.

My daughter can't take a bus to a friend's house. She is only allowed on her bus and only allowed off at her stop. In order to arrange care I have to get somebody to either drop her off and pick her up at my house or at the school. This is unless I arrange it with the bus garage, it takes weeks to get her stops officially changed and they have to stay that way until I officially change them back. It would be much easier to just drop her off at a daycare center for the day. This is why I am glad I moved a mile away from my parents and a couple miles from my brother. When there is an emergency somebody can go get her. Local daycares start at $20/day for before and after school here- a full day is only $25.

 

[tlbwriter]

What works for you doesn't work for me. If you don't care who is watching your kids it only becomes my problem when they turn up in my office having been assaulted. Call yourself a patriot all you like. Military gals are one of my prime concerns. They are the ones moving into town most often who have no connections. We work hard to change that. Lol, but I'd never suggest to one if them that they leave their little ones with strangers, even govt. Sanctioned strangers either.

But I notice you continue to ignore the suggestion that one investigate these "government sanctioned strangers" as soon as one gets the call for jury duty. Surely, as someone so educated about assault, you are aware that most children are assaulted by people they know, not strangers (government sanctioned or otherwise).

 

[Michelle and crew]

Can you do that? I have already said we dont have it available here. We do have people in the welfare system that must babysit go their checks. I helped imprison 4 of them last year for abuse to their children and/or the children of others. I admit to a bias.

 

[Michelle and crew]

Had I ever been allowed to serve, I would have had No problem putting in extra time to help out moms and other caregivers. Unfortunately I was always called and sent home by the defense. Having workEd in this county for 25 years I know every scumball out there. Their wives and their children have been my clients.

To be clear before we head out I was called over and over, my mom or sitter watche the kids and then was sent home. ( I feel bad for those of you that have to stay!!!) my sweet husband who wants to be called has never been, despite being a driver, voter, and landowner. Crazy!

 

[Michelle and crew]

I am really blessed to live in a smallish town. I mowed one judges lawns, I babysat for him, too. Our lawyer became one of the newest additions. I am thrilled not to have to deal with close-minded black and white, good and bad thinkers. The world is filled with too many greys. It is sad that there is so little compassion for others, bit that is just a part of living in this world.

Don't forget to vote...it is even easier than jury duty, lol.

 

[tlbwriter]

I am really blessed to live in a smallish town. I mowed one judges lawns, I babysat for him, too. Our lawyer became one of the newest additions. I am thrilled not to have to deal with close-minded black and white, good and bad thinkers. The world is filled with too many greys.

Hmmm... isn't "I have no options at all for childcare" an example of black and white thinking? Look for the grey!