The death of Jacintha Saldanha at the virtual hands of Mel Grieg and Michael Christian

Australian DJs, Mel Grieg and Michael Christian should be considered murderers. They are the pranksters who called the King Edward VII hospital, impersonating the Queen and Prince Charles, seeking private information, on the health of the Duchess of Cambridge, Kate. The nurse, Jacintha Saldanha, who first took that call and put it through, has been found dead. The implication is, of course, that she committed suicide, although no details have yet been released.

I realize that the law is silent on this kind of situation. I view it in moral terms. Mel Grieg and Michael Christian, committed an immoral act – that of impersonating the Queen and Prince Charles, to gain access to private information about a public figure and member of the Royal household. That is clearly wrong in so many ways. They knew this when they planned it and carried it out. They saw this as a “joke”, something to be laughed at – but it has had the consequence of the death of a well-regarded nurse. Since the nurse’s death is a direct consequence of their actions, I feel they should be charged with some variety of murder, however such things are framed in Australian law. They should pay for their moral crime, with a real prison sentence – anything less would, itself, be immoral, for it would say that it is OK to shame someone to death – which is what they did to this nurse.

Mel Grieg and Michael Christian acted without forethought as to the consequences of their act – but nevertheless, they should have to pay for those consequences.

Were it my decision to make, I would have Mel Grieg and Michael Christian charged with murder, or manslaughter and prosecuted.

I expect, however, that they will get away with a period of public shame (ironically) followed by a resumption of their show (which has been taken off the air, at present). As for that – it is clear that they should never be allowed to be on air, again – for being a broadcaster of any kind is a responsibility they are not fit for.

I would also welcome a civil case for damages from Jacintha Saldanha’s family against Mel Grieg and Michael Christian. Perhaps while mulling their loss of personal fortune, along with personal freedom, behind bars, Grieg and Christian (whose behaviour wasn’t very Christian at all), might come to understand the reasons why moral conduct is considered preferable and how much harm immoral conduct can do.

Posted by Valentine Cawley

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.html and here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here:http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at:http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is athttp://www.genghiscan.com/This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.) 

Prince Charles on Human Achievement.

In 2004, Prince Charles commented on the aspirations of young people today. His comments were widely reported and were critically attacked. Many people thought he was trying to say that people shouldn't try to rise above their station, in life. They thought he was being, in some way, feudal. However, I don't think he really intended that. Let us look at what he is quoted to have said:

"What is wrong with everyone nowadays? Why do they all seem to think they are qualified to do things far beyond their technical capabilities? This is to do with the learning culture in schools as a consequence of child-centred system which admits no failure. People think they can all be pop stars, High Court judges, brilliant TV personalities or infinitely more competent heads of state without ever putting in the necessary work or having natural ability. This is the result of social utopianism which believes humanity can be genetically and socially engineered to contradict the lessons of history."

He is observing what is evident in young people in the Western world (and perhaps elsewhere, too): they seem to think they are going to be great. By this, I mean, that a typical teenager believes he or she is going to be one of the things that Prince Charles refers to: a pop star, a TV personality, a High Court Judge, a Head of State. One could extend the categories: a film star, a footballer, a millionaire (a billionaire), a model...etc, etc...Young people of today think their success is assured. They think that they stand above others now and ever will in the future. From the perspective of an experienced adult, who has actually seen the world in action, such an abundance of exuberant ambition is sobering to witness. It is sobering precisely because it is unrealistic.

What Prince Charles was grappling with is the simple fact that all of these aspirations that the children hold, require something most of the children will not have: natural ability, for one, and often a degree of willingness to work hard towards one's goals. For instance, any child can kick a ball. Many a child can dream of being the next David Beckham - but how many of those children actually have a significant athletic ability? How many of them have signicantly greater an athletic ability than their fellow children? How many of them, furthermore, are willing to hone their skills and their bodies through long years of training? Very, very few, indeed, I expect. They see the glamourous end: the famous footballer jetting about the world, from game to game, enchanted fans in hot pursuit. What they don't see is what that footballer had to go through to get there. They are able to envisage the beautiful life they would have, as a famous footballer, but not the life that is actually led to reach those goals.

Prince Charles was much criticized for his views - but I don't think that people were right to do so. I think that the media, in general, failed to understand what he was trying to say. He was saying that the youth of today had aspirations beyond their ability to achieve them. They aspired to be famous film stars, when they couldn't act and were not beautiful. They aspired to be pop stars, when they could neither dance nor sing, and did not delight the eye. They aspired to be High Court judges, when their academic prowess was only mediocre at best. His view is that the children had unrealistic expectations. His view was that the school system, which never chastised the children for mediocrity, never used the word "failure" in their general direction, did not acquaint the children with the idea that failure was possible. While this is good for self-esteem, it may lead to children who have unjustifiably high self-esteem. These are children who really, really, really, believe in themselves - but who really, really, really, lack justification for that self-belief. It was Prince Charle's implicit view that this situation was not rare, but common. Most youngsters of today fell into that trap. Most of them thought of themselves as great people, for whom great success was assured. Sadly, of course, almost all of them are going to fail. Statistics alone guarantee it. If you have a nation of 60 million people of whom 20 million aspire to be film stars and that nation only has enough room for 20 such film stars in that generation...how many are going to fail in their aspiration? 999,999 out of every 1,000,000. Only one in a million will see their dream come true. It is the same for all their other aspirations. So many people will be aspiring to their positions of success than there are places in those respective realms. The result is, of course, that almost all of them are destined for failure in their primary goals. Almost all of them will have to revise their goals, along the way, and settle for something else.

This is the reality of which they are unaware that, I think, Prince Charles was trying to awaken them to. The modern media world has conditioned people to believe that great success is available to all. The modern media creates stars out of nobodies, through reality shows. The modern media creates the belief in people that celebrity and wealth and a life of ease, are available to all, when in fact that they have always been and always shall be available only to the few. This is the "lesson of history" to which I think he refers. Great success has always been a rarity and always will be.

Prince Charles is not saying that people should not rise above their station - as some media criticized him. He is saying that they should have a realistic understanding of who they are, so that they might aspire to something they can actually achieve. A life spent chasing pop stardom when one doesn't have the requisite and multiple, native abilities, is going to be a life wasted. What if that person has, instead, other skills that might be better employed as a nurse or a doctor? Then that person really should look at the medical field. It is a question of finding a good match, in terms of career, for who you are. Too many people waste their lives aspiring to dreams that have no realistic possibily of coming true, simply because the people in question lack the requisite abilities.

Thus there is wisdom, not foolishness, in Prince Charles' advice.

Aim for what is a reasonable choice, for you. Do not aim for iconic cultural roles such as footballer or film star - unless you really have what it takes to succeed in such fields.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and one month, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and six months, and Tiarnan, twenty-three months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

Tiarnan's love of nature

Now, I have heard many a curious thing in my life, but this is one of the more curious.

A couple of weeks ago, my wife was walking with Tiarnan, then fifteen months, in a park. Suddenly, he ran off across a field to where a lone tree stood. He looked up at the tree - which to him must have seemed a giant, but, as trees go, was both young and modest in size - and then he did something unaccountable: he put his arms around the tree and hugged it. He hugged it long and hard, embracing the tree as if it needed comfort. It was a long while before he released it, perhaps satisfied that he had comforted this lone tree, when it had, to him, clearly needed it.

Prince Charles would be proud of him. For those who don't know, Prince Charles won himself quite a reputation many years ago, for talking to plants. I suppose hugging them can be lumped in the same category. There is one difference, of course: Prince Charles the plant-talker was middle-aged at the time of the revelations; Tiarnan, the tree-hugger was fifteen months.

Who knows. Perhaps trees do feel a bit solitary at times. In any case, that was one tree that found itself unusually comforted by a little human, that day.

(If you would like to read more of Tiarnan, now sixteen months, or his gifted brothers, Ainan Celeste Cawley, seven years and six months, and Fintan, three, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, creatively gifted adults, gifted children and gifted adults in general. Thanks.)