Sorry for the long delay, friends!
This is something I can’t pass up posting about: Ford MyKey. It eerily reminds me of the GPS tracking devices that came out a couple of years ago—black boxes installed in a teen’s car—to monitor the speed, seat belt usage, and yes, even a curfew.
Ford MyKey, which will be equipped on a certain number of select models in 2010, allows parents to program a teen’s key to not only monitor but prevent the teen from driving above 80 mph, chime when the teen drives above 45, 55, and 65 mph, and it even offers a noise level control to prevent the teen from increasing the volume past a certain point.
I can’t help but echo the following from an interviewee in the article: “If your parents are holding your hand, you’re never going to learn.” But that could be because of how I was raised, and maybe because someday I’ll raise my children with a little more room for a trusting relationship to grow between us.
What I really want to ask is: Does this really protect teens? Does loud music make teens more prone to accidents? What about texting while driving? Do most accidents involving teens occur when a teen is driving in excess of 80 mph? If not, then why have the limit at all? It seems like a gimmick with a false sense of safety to me.
Consider the following. According to AP, “Ford's research shows that parents would be more likely to let teens use their vehicles with the system, Sherwood said, and if it gets them the car more often, the number of teens objecting [MyKey] drops by nearly half.” More teens out driving because of this system than there otherwise would’ve been in its absence? Isn’t that even more dangerous? The likelihood of dying or getting injured in a car accident is one of the greatest risks we face on a daily basis. And to play a little Devil’s Advocate here, what about increased traffic congestion and the accompanying dreaded pollution emissions?
I’m thinking this could be very nonplatinum, but who knows what the results will be for sure. Thoughts?
Posts
2 comments:
Nice post Tina.
By not having kids as well, I feel it to be an extra-comparative advantage to some degree (extra as in out-of). It’s easy to say we want to let freedom reign when we don't actually have kids, but it might be a whole different kind of ballgame when we see those little tater-tots of our own flesh and blood bouncing around like monkeys.
I don't like the idea this new ford system is marginally contracting out the child's judgment. To that respect it really is hodgepodge of paternalism. Well I say claptrap! I say lets install some market principles into the munchkins. For starters how 'bout property rights. You want a kid who doesn't speed, make them pay for their own car/insurance. Then just let the virtues of our free society direct their actions. We're talking rule of law (highway patrol), comparative advantage (don't have your kid suck at driving). Let the kids know what’s at stake, (their life). I realize that perspective may change dramatically when I become king of a household...
If it's voluntary, I have a hard time complaining. It's definitely paternalistic, but who better to behave that way than parents?
Post a Comment