Newton's Third Law of Physics - It isn't just about Physics!

Today we had to drive north to the Lao border for me to report into the Thai Immigration Police as I am required to do every 90 days.

As far as the Thai government is concerned I do not "live" in Thailand - I "stay" in Thailand. I have a Non-Immigrant Visa that allows me to remain in Thailand for one year. Each year I must apply to extend the Visa for one additional year. I received my Non-Immigrant Visa -"Retirement" last June after submitting the paperwork for it in Los Angeles at the Thai Consulate. Since I was over 50 years old and had a certain amount of money available to support myself in Thailand, I could apply for a A-O "Retirement" Visa. It was a rather direct and simple process to obtain the Visa. I had to complete two forms, submit two photographs, submit a medical certificate, obtain a police report from my place of residence in the USA, submit my passport that was good for at least 18 months, and submit some bank statements verifying the funds available to me.

I submitted my paperwork and it was reviewed by a clerk in the waiting room. I had followed California law in that I did not make a copy of my notarized police report. The Thai Consulate needed two copies of the document and told me of a copy service across the street. I obtained two copies and returned to the Consulate. I then submitted my paperwork and fees to an official behind a glass partition. She reviewed the documents and told me to return the next morning to pick up my passport with the Thai Visa in it.

Each 90 days that I am in Thailand I must report to the Immigration Police my intention to remain in Thailand longer than 90 days. This could be done by mail but I prefer to drive one hour up to Nong Khai and handle it personally. I do not like the idea of having my passport travelling back and forth in the mail.

This reporting requirement is similar to when I was younger and each January the US government advised all "aliens" that they needed to register each year.

I have made a decision to "stay" in Thailand and I accept that I am responsible to comply with the rules as well as regulations associated with the privilege to remain in Thailand for a year. I understand that I am a guest and that I need to be a good guest in the land that I have chosen to stay. I do not have a right to be here. In Thailand there are some expats that complain about how they are treated. One complaint deals with having to report every 90 days. The other common complaint is the fee charged for Visas, Re-Entry Permit, etc. Some falangs complain about being stopped at road blocks by Police.

I have lived in Thailand for almost three years and have no complaints. Already this year, I have been stopped at road blocks twice - along with the Thai drivers around me. I was treated with respect and after showing my Thai driver's licence along with the required vehicle documentation, I was sent off on my way. Police checks are more frequent here than in the USA but then again this is not the USA. I suspect that some people would complain about anything anywhere that they happened to be.

I am hopeful that before I started to complain where I am a guest I would just leave. I know that I expect guests in my country to behave the same way.

Newton's Third Law of Physics states "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction". This law which so far has not been proven incorrect in the scientific world also applies to other aspects of our world - your world as well as "Allen's World".

I was extremely fortunate to be raised with the idea that I needed to be responsible and hold myself accountable for my actions. This philosophy has given me freedom to live my life happily and to a high degree of potential. This philosophy also is analogous to the Third law of Physics - to paraphrase somewhat - "Our actions and in-actions have consequences"

I attribute much of my satisfaction and contentment to the fact that I have always considered the consequences of my actions or in-action and assessing my willingness to accept them prior to making my decisions.

Today, Fox News was after Nadya Suleman, the 33 year old, unmarried, unemployed mother of 6 children, three of whom have special needs, who recently gave birth octuplets following IVF procedure. I have mixed feelings about her. I will start by writing that my opinion is that criticizing her is somewhat akin to treating the symptoms of a disease without eliminating the cause of the disease. I do not approve of her actions. The consequence of her actions are now well known to the world.

The adverse reactions to her deliberate actions is manifestation of Third Law of Physics applied to human behavior.

It is important to understand that up to this point, Nadya Suleman and her doctor have not been accused of breaking any laws. They may have exercised poor judgement or conducted themselves in what could be judged as reckless behavior. But no one has identified a law that has been broken. This is not to condone their behaviors, judgements, or decisions but my point is to put what happened into terms of a symptom rather than a cause.

As a society we, Americans, tend to not want to become involved in the intimate details of each other's lives. It has been written that people don't want to determine or be involved in how many children a person decides to have. I support that philosophy. It is none of society's business. It is none of society's business as long as IT REMAINS NONE OF SOCIETY'S BUSINESS.

When public funds are spent due to a person's actions, it becomes society's business.

We are all very familiar and to a large extent very proud of the advances of modern medical science.

At the time that medical science has been advancing, there has been an absence of national discussion or debate regarding the ethics as to how or when this technology should be applied. These are uncomfortable and unsettling topics that because they have not been addressed, situations such as an unmarried and unemployed 33 year old woman of 6 children can give birth to 8 more children due to IVF procedure can occur.

If a person in Nadya Suleman's situation was able to pay all their expenses and be able to support their family without society's assistance, we could accept but not necessarily agree with their actions. Basically their decision would have minimal consequences for society.

However in her case, the hospital is already seeking funds from the state of California and federal government for the extraordinary costs associated with the birth of her 8 children.

It is alleged that three of her previous 6 children have special needs and receive money from the federal government. According to a report in the Huffington Post one son is autistic.

Court cases have determined that all children are entitled to an education at tax payer expense. This has resulted in some children going to high cost private intuitions because their special needs can no where be addressed in a public school environment.

In the case of autism, local school boards have been forced to spend in excess of $100,000 a year for an autistic student's education. Education which is experimental and has no guarantee of success in enabling a person to avoid future dependence upon society for support. At the same time programs for other "special needs" students, those with above average abilities are reduced or eliminated.

Again this is not a reflection upon Nadya Suleman or her doctor. They apparently have not committed any crime. They have taken advantage of the "opportunities" that current American society allows them and all others in the USA.

However when public money is used to support and subsidize a person's actions and questionable decisions, society should and must be involved.

A consequence of Nadya Suleman actions is the current firestorm of personal criticism.

A consequence of society's failure to discuss, debate, and resolve the ethics of modern medical technology is the current Suleman situation and the possibility if not the probability of many others to come.

In the back of my mind I also wonder that if Suleman's doctor had refused to comply with her wishes would he had been sued or accused perhaps of "discrimination"

Ignoring the consequences does not prevent history from being repeated nor does it make the cause of a problem go away.

Where is that old time religion of accountability and responsibility?