Hoarders can tell us about less intense love affairs with stuff?

I’ve finished Kimberly Rae Miller’s Coming Clean: A Memoir, a well-written book about her unusual childhood spent with father with a serious hoarding problem and a mother with a related compulsive shopping problem. I have never seen any of the TV shows about this lifestyle so it was a shock to find out how bad it can get:

The third upstairs room was by all accounts the master bedroom; it was the largest in the house, but my parents had moved out of it when I was born, taking over a downstairs bedroom closer to my room. The only things that lived there now were a bed frame, a broken mirror, some newspapers from before I was born, and cat feces. It was the cleanest room in our house.

Shortly after we moved into the new house, my parents stopped sharing a bedroom. My father took over the guest room, where he slept on a trundle bed. Because of his piles of paper, the trundle bed could only half extend. He slept on that lower bed, with papers on the floor piled to upper-mattress level and surrounding him on all sides. The upper mattress became a desk of sorts, with its own stash of newspapers, catalogs, and documents preserved above the tides of trash. My mother stayed in the master bedroom, and checking in with her was my first stop each morning. “Morning, honey. Come sit down,” my mom said. She seemed far more upbeat than was normal for a postfight morning.

The downstairs had become a relative swamp ground. It never seemed to dry out from the flooding, so when we did walk through it, the inches of trash would squish beneath our feet, creating an unsteady terrain.

We gave up the kitchen and survived solely on fast food and hermetically sealed snacks we could keep in our bedrooms.

My parents’ home is something else entirely. The papers are the easy part, but once they’re bagged and off to the dump, next comes the stuff. They have so much stuff. My father loves electronics, the more broken and useless the better. And office supplies. Bundles of Post-it notes, pens, pencils, scientific calculators, hole punchers, and staplers can be found in every room. While my mother’s postsurgical depression has certainly lessened over the years, her compulsive shopping for things they do not need with money they do not have did not. She will never admit that she is part of the problem now, insisting that she will return most of what she buys. But things don’t get sent back; they have a habit of being engulfed by the stuff surrounding them. Each new box added to the house becomes a new surface to put things on.

[being away at college] felt like my reward for the years of shame I’d logged. No one there knew about the hate-fueled letters our neighbors left in our mailbox. They didn’t know how much I appreciated cafeteria food after having spent most of my teenage years eating hermetically sealed, chemically laden foods, because our kitchen had been left to rot under cobwebs and maggots. I no longer had to plan meetings with friends so they wouldn’t know where I lived.

When I returned to New York [from college], the things that had been so normal to me before—the rats, the sludge, the ubiquitous smell of mildew, the feeling that this was my home—were glaringly wrong. I couldn’t get used to them again.

Can people who can live for decades amid clutter and filth teach us anything about relatively normal lives? Miller pokes around in the academic literature to figure out why her parents might have hoarded:

In my reading I found that many hoarders have similar stories to my dad. Maybe they weren’t the children of abusive alcoholics, but they were emotionally neglected at some point in their development. One of the more popular theories behind the triggers for hoarding indicates that people who were neglected emotionally as children learn to form attachments to objects instead of people. When they do connect with others, they then keep any object that reminds them of that person as a way of holding on to those attachments.

In going through some of the people I know, the ones who had the happiest childhoods, with the best connections to their families, seem to be those who have spent the lowest percent of their income on stuff. By contrast, those whose parents separated or whose parents were prone to heavy drinking and other irresponsible behavior, are more likely to be shopaholics. The divorce litigators that we’ve interviewed for our forthcoming book relate experiences consistent with the psychology research reviewed by Miller. Divorce plaintiffs who came from the lowest social class and most dysfunctional families were the ones most motivated by money as litigants. Compared to people from middle-class and upper-class families, people whose own childhood was spent living on welfare and/or who were themselves children of divorce were more likely to insist that they couldn’t survive without designer clothing, imported German cars, and deluxe housing and pushed cases through to trial in hopes of squeezing the last dollar out of their former romantic relationship and their children.

What if you think you might be at risk of falling too deeply in love with stuff? Miller’s family experience suggests sticking with the smallest possible apartment:

“My parents never threw anything out,” my mother later confessed on the train ride back. “They had someone in regularly to clean, but there was always stuff everywhere. I remember thinking how great it was that they had a room reserved for junk.” “Your parents were hoarders?” I was trying to wrap my head around the fact that my family tree was messy down to the roots. “I grew up with it,” she said. “I guess that’s why I didn’t see it in your father until it was so out of hand.” “Was Daddy always like this?” “Oh, no. When we first moved in together, long before you were born, he was the complete opposite. We had this light green carpet that he obsessed over keeping clean. If anyone stepped on it with shoes on, he was there with a sponge, washing up their footsteps.” “When did he start collecting things?” I wondered how different my life would have been if my father was still obsessed with keeping things clean. “When we left the Bronx,” she told me. “It was like he had too much space.

What do readers think? What kind of person is most likely to become a hoarder? And is buying a lot of stuff on Amazon good clean American fun or does it place on the “hoarding spectrum”? And what is the best way to push back against the temptation to hoard?

The book also contains some pretty horrifying medical stuff. The mother was a victim of scoliosis starting in childhood. She endures crazy amounts of surgery that is of no value:

All the tests my mom had taken hadn’t revealed to the doctors that her spine had started to fuse to itself where her curvature was most acute. Putting the rods in would have pulled her vertebrae apart, potentially paralyzing her. “Come on,” he said. “The anesthesia should wear off soon. Let’s go wait for Mom to wake up.” There was nothing else to be done. My mother would be sent home in a few days to heal. Her abdominal muscles had been cut open during the first surgery and she could no longer walk on her own—she would spend the summer in bed, and then the fall, winter, and following spring. Her body was fitted for a plastic brace that would be used in the few instances she needed to be wheeled outside of the house. The brace would do the heavy lifting of keeping her upright until her own body was once again capable. The government job she’d had for years didn’t wait for her to recover; she lost her job while her body struggled to once again become functional.

Then she needs a relatively routine gall bladder operation but it goes awry and she is nearly killed.

The surgery, Dr. Abdallah explained, took a turn for the worse when he accidentally severed the vein going to her liver. Since the surgery was laparoscopic, using small incisions for minimum invasion, they couldn’t find the source of the bleeding quickly enough to prevent massive blood loss. In searching for the vein, they had ended up destroying her bile ducts. The lack of blood had caused her kidneys to go into distress. “Is she going to die?” Apparently this was the only question I was capable of asking anyone, first my father and then the doctor. It’s the only thing I cared about. “She’s not out of the woods yet. We’ll know more in the next forty-eight hours.” Dr. Abdallah looked as rattled as we did. He did these types of surgeries all the time. They weren’t supposed to end like this.

(Mom recovers but it takes about a year.)

The family has to move to hide from social services agencies that might have removed Miller from her parents’ care:

The kids were different in Grandma’s neighborhood. They seemed to be a little bit older than their seven or eight years. I was one of only two white kids in my class, a stark difference from my almost exclusively white classmates on Long Island. It never occurred to me that I didn’t fit in, and I felt the salutation of “new white girl” was as apt a description as any. There were no carpools or play dates to dodge—kids walked home after school and played with whomever they could find loitering the hallways of their building. During lunch they traded war stories in the cafeteria, stories about mothers leaving them with their grandparents and not coming back or cousins who had been killed. I didn’t talk about my dad because I had promised not to, and I doubted many of my classmates would understand what it was like to have too much, but for the first time my secret felt like a good thing. I fit in with these kids and their unfair lives.

Miller takes her own unfair life and, without self-pity, makes it an interesting and thought-provoking story even for those of us who’ve had reasonably fair lives.

More: Read the book.

Full post, including comments

Extreme Photography Instruction

A friend turned me onto this blog by a photography student. It works best if you go to the oldest posting in the archive and then read the newer ones in chronological order. Or start on the last page and keep clicking “previous page.” Here are a few samples of quotes from the professor:

The camera in your hand is not a passport for you to be a moron…

You can never ever “capture” anything in a photo. You haven’t captured a person in your photo because they’re not arrested there. All you can do is merely pause a real life situation. So don’t even think about saying capture and photograph in the same sentence or I will behead you.

Student: Do you have a fondest memory? Roma: Yes. It was the minute before I had to walk in here and talk to you. [This kind of student question does not typically arise in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.]

Full post, including comments

Why you don’t want to be a political activist

My parents still live in my home town of Bethesda, Maryland and still get the paper newspaper. Mom sent me a clipping from the Washington Post in the U.S. Mail (she will be their last retail customer!), an obituary of David L. Levy. After spending the family savings on a custody lawsuit under Maryland’s “pick one parent” system in 1985 he started a group to advocate for shared parenting, thus lobbying against the interests of the $50 billion/year divorce litigation industry. As my blog posting on Maryland’s new custody law shows, in 30 years he made zero headway (though the organization he founded does have a nice web site; Guidestar shows that they operate on a budget of less than $200,000 per year (i.e., one lawyer in one custody lawsuit makes more than this advocacy group has at its disposal)). Maryland continues to operate a winner-take-all system, soon to be under new rules drafted by people who get paid to appear in court during custody disputes, and parents continue to pour what would have been the children’s college savings into trying not to be the loser.

[His death before achieving any change shows that Marylanders who don’t like the winner-take-all system would do better by moving to an adjacent state than lobbying against one of America’s most successful industries. Child support guideline numbers are lower in Virginia (though still profitable over Bill Comanor’s actual cost numbers), thus giving plaintiffs less of a financial incentive to seek sole custody of children. Virginia’s guidelines also cover unlimited amounts of income, at a straight 2.6 percent of gross income rate for one child (compare to about 11 percent in Massachusetts when judges extrapolate and about 6 percent in California) after a defendant earns more than $35,000 per month. This certainty reduces the chance that a case will go to trial. Someone who lives in western Maryland could move across the border into West Virginia where child support revenue that can be spent by a successful custody plaintiff is capped at about 5X the basic cost of a child (additional amounts are obtainable through litigation but must be placed in trust for the child). Do parents also seek sole custody for non-financial reasons? “You also see it where a parent has few friends or is jealous of the child’s bond with the other parent. Seeking primary custody is typically done for the parent’s gain, not out of concern for the child,” said a litigator just over the border into Pennsylvania. In those cases that are not financially motivated moving to Virginia wouldn’t be helpful, but Marylanders who live near the Delaware or Pennsylvania borders can move across to those states, where 50/50 shared parent tends to prevail by guideline (DE) or custom (PA, even in the rural areas).]

Coincidentally, right about the same time that this came in, a friend told me “Deval Patrick [the governor of Massachusetts at time], is so cozy with David Lee [$800-per-hour divorce litigator] that he agreed to serve as the officiant at the wedding of Lee’s associate, Claire Forkner.” (A quick Google search brought up this act of the Rhode Island legislature, enabling Patrick to marry ” Claire Elise Koehler and Adam Hale Forkner in marriage within the City of Newport, Rhode Island, on or about September 21, 2013,” confirming the story.)

Full post, including comments

Web publishers can delete stuff from archive.org

I don’t think of New Yorker magazine as a technical references, but “The Cobweb” by Jill Lepore explains archive.org remarkably well and also helps to explain the many gaps in archive.org. It turns out to be trivial to remove stuff from the archive:

The Wayback Machine collects every Web page it can find, unless that page is blocked; blocking a Web crawler requires adding only a simple text file, “robots.txt,” to the root of a Web site. The Wayback Machine will honor that file and not crawl that site, and it will also, when it comes across a robots.txt, remove all past versions of that site. When the Conservative Party in Britain deleted ten years’ worth of speeches from its Web site, it also added a robots.txt, which meant that, the next time the Wayback Machine tried to crawl the site, all its captures of those speeches went away, too.

So it’s an archive only of stuff that publishers want archived…

Even if you already knew the above, I recommend Lepore’s article for the quality of the writing.

Full post, including comments

Maybe Obama was right for trying to kill 529 Plans?

I spent last night reading Coming Clean: A Memoir. The author comes from a middle-class family with a lot of challenges. Emerson College here in Boston extracts every possible dollar that she and her family can come up with:

In mid-July, a letter came from the Emerson financial aid department. I had a small trust in my name from an accident I’d had as a child that was set up so that I wouldn’t be able to access the funds until I was twenty-one. But because that trust existed, the school decided that I no longer qualified for financial aid. Without financial aid, I couldn’t go back to Emerson. I couldn’t take out the kinds of loans necessary to pay for the pricey private school. I was majoring in theater, and even at eighteen, I knew that I would never be able to pay back that kind of debt on a waitress’s salary. I called the school and tried to explain, but the financial aid officer professed that until those funds were utilized they wouldn’t be required to give me any need-based aid. But I wouldn’t be able to touch that money until halfway through my senior year of college.

(Translate “financial aid” to “discount off an insanely high list price.”)

It seems that Obama has given up a plan to kill off the 529 college savings plans (nytimes). Aside from further plunging Americans into a tangle of paperwork and government-approved vendors (not just anyone can offer a 529 plan! It has to be a financial institution that is somehow a crony of a state government), I wonder if 529 plans actually help anyone other than colleges. If parents on average save more for college because the government encourages them to set up 529 plans, won’t colleges just raise their prices to absorb the newly available funds?

One of our students at MIT this week provided an illustration of this. He was in a one-year MBA program at MIT. Over the lunch break I said “That’s great compared to the two-year program since you’ll be saving $50,000.” [The real number is $63,750 per year for tuition.] He responded “Actually the price is about the same as for a two-year MBA program.” In other words, the price has no relationship to marginal cost and instead MIT can charge whatever it is worth to the customer (monopoly pricing power ). This led to a group discussion about how a lot of people might be willing to pay the full cost of a two-year MBA program for a two-week MBA and imagine what kinds of profits could be earned from that.

So while it is painful to pay taxes on savings (which is why we should spend all of our money on McMansions and SUVs and let the Chinese do the saving for us), I think Obama may have been on the right track. American’s university system does not need new sources of easy money. Unless we think that the U.S. is spending too little on its higher education system, why does putting money aside to save for college get more favorable tax treatment than putting money aside to save for an investment in a business?

Full post, including comments

Good free tools for running a virtual class? (Google Drive and Hangouts are not sufficient)

Folks:

Our three-day RDBMS programming class at MIT got snowed out today. We were already using Google Drive for collaboration with a shared workspace Doc into which everyone could paste a solution. So we decided to hold the class virtually using Drive and Google Hangouts.

It should have worked great. All that we had to do was tell folks via audio and in the chat window alongside the Google Doc to start working on Problem N. Then they could ask questions in the chat window or by pasting stuff into the Doc.

We ran into the following problems:

  • a Google Hangout won’t allow 30 people to join as contributors; we resorted to a feature in which the teachers were in the Hangout and students could watch a broadcast version on YouTube (delayed about 20 seconds)
  • a teacher with a MacBook Pro introduced a horrific echo any time that his microphone was not muted
  • there was no way for us teachers to tell what the students were doing or to require each student to participate in any way
  • not too many students posted questions or solutions voluntarily (shy about having the wrong answer?)

Are there any better free tools that we could have used with a little more structure? Something that would have enabled us to figure out that students were or were not paying attention? Something that would have prodded students to post progress reports? Kept track of contributions by student? Enabled anyone in a class of 25 (plus about 5 teachers) to inject some audio and video for a question? Enabled everyone to share at least one window of their screen at all times (to replace what we had available to us when we already around the classroom and could see at what stage people were with each problem)?

How does it work at University of Phoenix and similar online schools? How do the teachers know that the students are engaged?

Related: “Using Google Docs for Classroom Instruction”

Full post, including comments

Annals of gourmet cooking: the Shake Shack IPO

I don’t trade individual stocks but if I did I would be buying shares of Shack Shack (New Yorker has the history) in its upcoming IPO. A visit to Harvard Square is sufficient to show how well-managed Shack Shack is compared to the competition. Tasty Burger and Shack Shack opened up at roughly the same time. A visit to Tasty Burger involves multiple return trips to the counter so that the order can be corrected. The staff have trouble taking orders and making change. Although they are hiring from the same labor pool, Shake Shack is full of energetic workers who seem competent and, indeed, have never messed up one of my orders.

Because IPOs are nearly always overvalued due to hype I am going to predict that Shake Shack does well but not spectacularly. My guess is that an investment in Shake Shack will outperform the S&P 500, between now and January 2020, by 20 percent.

Full post, including comments

Robinson Helicopter News

I finally sorted through a stack of mail and came across the latest Robinson Helicopter newsletter. There is a good story about two Robinson owners who found and rescued a missing hunter and his dog Maggie, who kept him warm and chased away a bear (newspaper story; TV story) I found a YouTube video corresponding to the story about Paul Bissonnette having an ice bucket dumped on his head from an R44 (legality under Part 91 seems questionable since it would have been tough to avoid hitting Mr. Bissonnette with the helicopter, rather than just the ice-water, in the event of an engine failure). Taxpayers in Jordan can rest easy now that their military turbine trainers have been replaced by R44s that cost about $325/hour to run (the turbine trainers cost about $1000 per hour to run or $4000 per hour if it is U.S. tax dollars being spent (see second to last paragraph of my first Heli-Expo 2014 posting)).

Of course the coolest stuff is happening in Africa. Coena Smith and his R44 were called out to help 11 people stranded when their “safari vehicle” was swept away by a river current. Smith picked up all 11 with a tow cable (photos). (Search for “helicopter Christmas tree harvest” on YouTube if you want to see some skilled long-line work.)

Full post, including comments

Do-gooders talking to babies

“The Talking Cure” is kind of a TED talk in the form of a New Yorker article. Some folks noticed a correlation between unsuccessful children and the fact that their parents hadn’t talked to them as much as the parents of successful children. Now an army of do-gooders are fanning out into the homes of the unsuccessful trying to encourage parents to talk more to their young children.

One thing that was interesting was the ratio of praise to correction:

Among the more affluent families studied by Hart and Risley, a higher proportion of the talk directed at children was affirming, which was defined to include not just compliments like “Good job!” but also responses in which parents repeat and build on a child’s comments: “Yes, it is a bunny! It’s a bunny eating a carrot!” In those families, the average child heard thirty-two affirmations and five prohibitions (“Stop that”; “That’s the wrong way!”) per hour—a ratio of six to one. For the kids in the working-class families, the ratio was twelve affirmatives to seven prohibitions, and in the welfare families it was five affirmatives to eleven prohibitions.

There does not seem to be any attempt to figure out to what extent these differences are a consequence of the children’s natural behavior. I spend a lot of time with young children of “the more affluent.” One thing that is a constant source of wonder to me is how little correction these children need. They generally aren’t breaking things in the house, writing on the walls, hitting each other, shouting or screaming, etc. The classic summary of all of the relevant literature, The Nurture Assumption by Judith Harris, concludes that their good behavior is unlikely to be a result of something special their parents are doing in the home. The children get credit for having a good personality. I don’t get credit for not yelling at them to shut up (a classic parenting strategy from the 1970s).

Full post, including comments