You are the Captain... 02

[Nerys Myk]

TOS Enterprise I don't think visited Earth of their time, just in the past. And for the purposes of this question, what do they need explorers within Federation space for?

IIRC, the Enterprise in TNG was supposed to be out there in unexplored space and rarely in UFP territory. But that faded away pretty quickly. By "Naked Now" they were already doing welfare checks on Federation outposts.

OTOH, part the TOS Enterprise remit was doing welfare checks, playing space cop and defending the Federation.

 

[Oddish]

Honestly, I relate great with children. It's adults I can't deal with. So the only way I'd make captain is in a solitary research position, assuming Starfleet even has blueshirts with four pips on their collar.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Honestly, I relate great with children. It's adults I can't deal with. So the only way I'd make captain is in a solitary research position, assuming Starfleet even has blueshirts with four pips on their collar.

They made Bev a ship's captain in an alternate reality. And there was a blue shirt at Kirk's court martial. Una's too, IIRC. Of course you can get four pips without being an CO, too.

 

[Farscape One]

Every week, I will present a challenging situation that you, as a Starfleet captain, might have to deal with. If you like, keep track of your answers. Over time, your command style will be revealed.

Today's question:

Starfleet has offered you a new posting to captain a Vesta-class multi-mission explorer, which will begin a new five-year mission in deep space. Your full complement will be over 1,200 men, women, and children. Due to the length of the mission, the massive starship has been outfitted to accommodate crew member families with children. Are you the type of captain who would be comfortable with children on board and the additional responsibilities for their safety, possibly affecting your decision-making process?

Do you accept this commission or remain in your current assignment?

An interesting question.

I've never liked the idea of children on starships because of the inherent dangers of space travel. It's one thing to commit yourself to that life and potential danger, but I don't think a parent should be knowingly putting their kids in that kind of situation. Never mind the physical dangers... there's potential for a LOT of psychological issues.

TNG, for instance... there are a number of situations that happened to everyone that must have been even more horrible for the kids. Some examples...

"The Naked Now" - kids are seeing their parents and crew losing all inhibitions, and quite likely many of the kids are, too.

"Night Terrors" - not only are adults not sleeping and slowly going cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs, but imagine the kids and what's happening to them, not old enough to be able to handle even some of that.

"Conundrum" - the memory of all personal stuff is blocked, but skills remained. How skilled is a kid on a starship? Imagine yourself as a kid, with no memory of who you are or who anyone around you is. That's got to be terrifying.

"Cause And Effect" - imagine kids finding out they died... repeatedly.

"Schisms" - crewmen were being abducted and experimented on. How do we know for sure they didn't take some kids, too?

"Genesis" - the whole crew got devolved. How the hell did the kids cope with that AND re-evolving back into their old selves?


Any one of these things would be enough to make a lot of children damaged mentally. Even worse if it's more than one of these happening to them. Never mind the physical dangers from attacks by aliens, spatial anomalies, and other things that can go wrong on a ship.

So my answer? It's a no, I wouldn't take the command. I just don't think I'd be as effective a leader as necessary because command does require some risk taking for a greater good, and that means risking some lives under your command. Officers chose that lifestyle and understand the risks that come with the uniform... children didn't have that choice. I would likely play it FAR too safely because kids were aboard... so safely that it might actually cause MORE problems. Kids are a more treasured resource than starships.

 

[Oddish]

I think that kids on a starship works... if the starship's mission is primarily research, science, and diplomacy. Ships intended for exploration of unknown systems and escort ships should be child-free.

One thing that I considered when I created my "Roads Not Taken" timeline (which features a generational Voyager) was that if the captain has children on board, they might be more conservative in the threats they face, more ruthless in their defense, and less likely to follow the "the Prime Directive is more important than our lives" doctrine.

 

[somebuddyX]

I just pilot a workbee man, so no thanks. Boss is up my ass about getting a scratch on Spacedock with my ride. Don't think he's going to let me take off and run a ship with 1200 people after that. And I'm a robot.

 

[Trek Writers Room]

An interesting question.

I've never liked the idea of children on starships because of the inherent dangers of space travel. It's one thing to commit yourself to that life and potential danger, but I don't think a parent should be knowingly putting their kids in that kind of situation. Never mind the physical dangers... there's potential for a LOT of psychological issues.

TNG, for instance... there are a number of situations that happened to everyone that must have been even more horrible for the kids. Some examples...

"The Naked Now" - kids are seeing their parents and crew losing all inhibitions, and quite likely many of the kids are, too.

"Night Terrors" - not only are adults not sleeping and slowly going cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs, but imagine the kids and what's happening to them, not old enough to be able to handle even some of that.

"Conundrum" - the memory of all personal stuff is blocked, but skills remained. How skilled is a kid on a starship? Imagine yourself as a kid, with no memory of who you are or who anyone around you is. That's got to be terrifying.

"Cause And Effect" - imagine kids finding out they died... repeatedly.

"Schisms" - crewmen were being abducted and experimented on. How do we know for sure they didn't take some kids, too?

"Genesis" - the whole crew got devolved. How the hell did the kids cope with that AND re-evolving back into their old selves?


Any one of these things would be enough to make a lot of children damaged mentally. Even worse if it's more than one of these happening to them. Never mind the physical dangers from attacks by aliens, spatial anomalies, and other things that can go wrong on a ship.

So my answer? It's a no, I wouldn't take the command. I just don't think I'd be as effective a leader as necessary because command does require some risk taking for a greater good, and that means risking some lives under your command. Officers chose that lifestyle and understand the risks that come with the uniform... children didn't have that choice. I would likely play it FAR too safely because kids were aboard... so safely that it might actually cause MORE problems. Kids are a more treasured resource than starships.

Hi Farscape! As always you always provide thoughtful insight into you replies. Thanks.

 

[Trek Writers Room]

I’m kind of surprised Starfleet would allow us to choose on that basis. My impression was that any Starfleet ship in the TNG era might have at least the occasional family aboard, even if not as many as a Galaxy-class.

Starfleet may not particularly care about your reasons to accept or pass on the promotion. This would just be one of the factors involved in your decision. Thanks!

 

[Jedi Marso]

I agree with every argument against having families (especially children) aboard starships on dangerous deep space assignments.

That said, I probably wouldn't turn down the command. Unless I was already captain of a ship and happy where I was at. As a first command opportunity, I would probably jump at it. As large an organization as Starfleet is, I wouldn't assume a 'Riker-like' scenario in which such an opportunity would be offered over and over again. To paraphrase the admiral in BOBW, there are always a lot of up and comers and if you wait too long it looks like you're standing still.

Would it affect my command style and decision making? Almost certainly. In a good way, I would hope, but anyone who says they wouldn't do ANYTHING differently with children and other dependents aboard their ship is a damn liar.

 

[BillJ]

Families on a Starship was never the brightest of ideas.

Not sure the difference between families on a starship vs. families on a starbase? In a starship, you at lease have possibilities of getting families out alive.

I would take the command, in a heartbeat.

 

[Will_Carter]

I wouldn't assume a 'Riker-like' scenario in which such an opportunity would be offered over and over again.

And that is a reasonable stance to take. Riker was very... VERY clearly hoping to get the Enterprise, however. In this instance it is likely the admiralty would understand 'you' would more likely take a command that doesn't have civilians.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Not sure the difference between families on a starship vs. families on a starbase? In a starship, you at lease have possibilities of getting families out alive.

I would take the command, in a heartbeat.

I grew up on military bases. Some overseas. They were pretty safe from danger. I imagine most star bases are the same, especially those in Federation territory.

 

[Jedi Marso]

I grew up on military bases. Some overseas. They were pretty safe from danger. I imagine most star bases are the same, especially those in Federation territory.

There are military bases, and military bases. Would you put your family on a base in Iraq, or say at the base in Kandahar back in the day?

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Unless you're fighting in a known war zone during a known war, how dangerous is it compared to wartime?

 

[Nerys Myk]

There are military bases, and military bases. Would you put your family on a base in Iraq, or say at the base in Kandahar back in the day?

Well no. But Kandahar was an active war zone in a foreign country. Most Starbases are in Federation territory, so the equivalent of US bases in the States.

My situation was closer to DS9. I lived in Japan. More or less spitting distance from the USSR, China and North Korea. Had the Cold War turned hot, I imagine things might have gotten dicey.

Placing dependents (as we were called) on base depended on the base location and mission. We we were all over Europe and Asia, but not in places like Vietnam.

 

[Jedi Marso]

Well no. But Kandahar was an active war zone in a foreign country. Most Starbases are in Federation territory, so the equivalent of US bases in the States.

My situation was closer to DS9. I lived in Japan. More or less spitting distance from the USSR, China and North Korea. Had the Cold War turned hot, I imagine things might have gotten dicey.

Placing dependents (as we were called) on base depended on the base location and mission. We we were all over Europe and Asia, but not in places like Vietnam.

I get it; I was looking for you to qualify your statement. I lived on NAVCOMMSTA Harold E. Holt in Western Australia when I was a kid. (That base no longer exists)

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Not sure the difference between families on a starship vs. families on a starbase?

Because starbases don't move. The enemy has to come looking for YOU. And the territory around a starbase will be well-known and well-defended.

On a starship, there's no telling what you might stumble across. Hostiles could appear at any moment.

 

[Nerys Myk]

This thread sparked a TNG story idea. One of our heroes finds themselves in an alternate reality where Picard died on the Stargazer and Jack Crusher is the Captain of the Enterprise. To make it interesting, our hero is either Bev or Wes. They're in universe with a Jack Crusher who lived. Would they want to go home? Of course this Jack is hiding the trauma and pain of losing his best friend.

 

[FederationHistorian]

Accept the commission.

For one, to be given a ship like this with its advancements in technology, suggests a high level of trust from Starfleet that it will be used responsibly. It’s the luxury of the Ent-D with a bit more advancements than the Ent-E without the same level of pressure that comes with being the flagship.

And second, the families on board are not a big deal. They have a right to explore too, and the ship is generally a safe environment. Whatever danger they are exposed to over the multiyear mission, the families already signed up knowing the risks.

What do officers on ships not equipped for families do when they have a child? Do they just leave the ship when it pulls into the nearest Federation starbase? What if the ship is in a situation like Voyager where they can’t? Do they decide to become a generation ship? And how does having growing families on ships not equipped for that situation affect the command styles of the captains of those ships? At least the Vesta class is equipped for such a scenario and the captain is already mentally conditioned to accept the responsibility that comes with the assignment ahead of time.

 

[Nerys Myk]

What do officers on ships not equipped for families do when they have a child? Do they just leave the ship when it pulls into the nearest Federation starbase?

Probably explain why they missed their contraception dose.

More than likely they transfer off the ship for a base assignment before the child is born. One parent might stay at the base while another is on ship duty. My father did short TDY assignments away from home throughout my childhood.