Anthony Frattalone: My son saved my life: a cautionary boating tale

posted in: News | 0

I’ve been venturing out on boats in the land of 10,000 lakes since I was 4 or 5 years old. It started with fishing, tubing, and waterskiing. Then, in 2010, at the age of 31, I discovered my love for sailing. My wife and I have owned several sailboats and taken higher-level courses from the American Sailing Association and completed multi-day cruises on Lake Superior and the Caribbean.  As a teenager, I became an Eagle Scout and completed aquatic lifesaving courses. I am strong swimmer and certified scuba diver. I considered myself savvy in the ways of the water.

That changed this spring while out with my 11-year-old son and his friend at our cabin on Slim Lake, in northern Wisconsin. We departed at around 4 p.m. to cruise on our new-to-us pontoon and planned on catching some crappies for dinner. The weather had been variable earlier in the day with some rain and high winds, but conditions seemed to have settled down. It was chilly enough that I wore thick canvas pants and a long-sleeved shirt in addition to my stylish “Crocs with Socks” look that so many dads out there have perfected. The water temperature was still chilly but warm enough that the bravest souls had already done their ceremonial jumps from the dock, lasting only a few seconds before running inside to warm up.

The day prior, I had showed my son the basics of operating the pontoon, such as accelerating and steering.

Our peaceful cruise was interrupted by a series of beeps from the Mercury outboard, signaling an oil pressure problem and leading me to investigate by removing the plastic engine cover. To my surprise, this turned out to need an easy fix of tightening a cap on the oil reservoir. Relieved, I decided it would be sensible to leave the cowling off and set it on a cushion for the remainder of the evening to monitor for oil leakage while we continued with our voyage.

We took off again, with visions of catching large spawning crappies for dinner. I thought, “Wow Tony, what a great day to be out with your son,” feeling grateful for the experience.

About a minute later, the plastic cowling bounced off the rear of the boat, splashing into the lake. No big deal, I thought, I will just loop around and grab it. As with any part of a boat, I assumed it would cost a small fortune to replace the piece, so I felt compelled to try to retrieve it before it sank for good. After coming around next to it, I noticed it was about halfway submerged already. It was about 2 feet from the boat, just bobbing along. This was in about 25 feet of water, in the middle of the lake.

I reasoned that if I could just get it secured to the side of the boat with a rope, I could hoist it up and save myself quite a bit of trouble. I kicked off my Crocs, set my phone and wallet on the table, and jumped in the water next to it.  In the water, I tugged on the large plastic piece and realized that it wasn’t going to budge. It was a lost cause.

That is when things turned from bad to horrifying.

I looked up toward the pontoon, which had been blown by a strong gust of wind and was moving away from me very quickly. I swam as hard as possible for a couple of minutes but was not making progress toward the boat. It was only getting farther away. I looked all around, hoping I was close to land or another boater, but to my dismay, there was nothing but open water all directions. The water’s frigid temperature really started to affect me at that point, depleting me of energy faster than I could ever have imagined.  The thick canvas pants that were so warm earlier now were an octopus’s clinging tentacles, pulling me below. I took a big breath of air, drifting under for several seconds as I fumbled to remove my belt and pants, releasing them into the dark water below.

From quite a distance, I could still barely make out the frightened expression and sounds of my son and his friend. With what little breath I had left, I shrieked, “Start the motor and come to me!” I could see that they were struggling to get the motor started, but by that time, they couldn’t hear me anymore. The wind had picked up again, and waves were pummeling me every couple of seconds, making it impossible to find a sustainable swim stroke. I was swallowing large amounts of water repeatedly. Not only that, but my muscles were cramping up from cold and exhaustion. I remember the moment it occurred to me that I could very well die like this and that my son may never get over it, that he would blame himself for my stupid actions.

As an ICU physician, I have seen people die from every imaginable ailment and accident. Most drownings I’ve seen were due to bad decisions, such as an intoxicated person diving into a shallow pool, or inexperience, such as a child wandering away from their parents and falling in a river. I wasn’t supposed to die like this, I thought. I can swim! But all the swim lessons in the world couldn’t prepare me for depleting effects of the frigid water and waves.

After struggling to keep my head above water for another couple of minutes, I had very little energy remaining. I lay on my back, kicking sporadically, unable to tell which direction I was moving. I no longer had any energy to survey the area or think about anything other than trying to breathe. Then, my level of consciousness began to wane. The water started to feel almost warm, and I experienced a somewhat euphoric feeling, as if I was falling asleep in a waterbed. Panic was replaced with tranquility. I knew from my experience as a physician that this meant I was close to death.

As I drifted into the abyss, I began to hear the faint sound of a motor running in the water. A tiny hum that was gradually growing louder. I didn’t have the ability to think clearly. I remember thinking, “Oh, what a funny sound.” My next memory was opening my eyes and seeing the pontoon gliding alongside me, as if a veteran boater was operating it. Through blurry eyes, I could now see the angelic faces of my son and his friend. They threw me two life jackets. I grabbed them, relieved, but still unsure how we were going to get my 190-pound exhausted body out of the water. I didn’t want them to enter the frigid lake no matter what.

I maneuvered myself slowly, using all my remaining energy, over to the ladder, barely able to hoist myself out of the water. I couldn’t stand and instead collapsed on the floor of the pontoon. My son and his friend covered me with blankets. I knew that I should remove my wet shirt too, but I couldn’t muster the strength. In hindsight, removing all wet items of clothing would have been extremely beneficial.

Next, I heard our neighbors pull up next to us with their boat and tie onto our pontoon. My son had called them using the cell phone I left onboard when I made my fateful jump into the lake. Everyone helped to warm me up and comforted me.  After several minutes simply trying to slow my breathing, the shivering and shaking really kicked in again. My breathing was labored, my muscles were cramping and jerking. I could speak using only one word at a time. My mouth felt like sandpaper, which I thought was odd considering the massive volumes of lake water I had swallowed just minutes earlier.

Finally, we made it back to the cabin’s dock, where I had to lie out on the pontoon wrapped in blankets for quite a while before I managed to stagger inside, holding onto my neighbors for support. I laid there under quilts shivering for several hours before I started to feel a little more like myself.

That night, at about 10 p.m., I started to contemplate the miraculous chain of events that occurred. My first and most persevering thought was that I was a complete idiot and that I should have known better. The second thought was that my son, the sweet 11-year-old boy, had saved my life! It turned out that I never explained to him that the motor needed to be in neutral to start and that it was difficult to tell when it was in neutral, but he had figured it out. He also knew to call a neighbor with a boat first rather than calling the police because the police would take far too long to arrive in our rural location.

As I sit here, still shaken but relieved, I feel an immense sense of gratitude for having survived this ordeal, in addition to an overwhelming sense of humility. The neighbors who came to our rescue said that everything happens for a reason, and who am I to argue with that?

So, why did this happen?

It happened because I jumped in cold water without a life jacket and without an experienced adult crew on board who could help me. It occurred because I put my concerns about losing an expensive boat part above safety. It also happened because I didn’t know the vessel well enough to realize how fast a pontoon can drift away with wind. And it happened because I didn’t have a lifeline with a rescue device rigged up and ready to be thrown.

And if this could happen to me, perhaps it could happen to other less experienced boaters out there too. I questioned whether I should give up aspirations for more boating and stick with the landlubbers. Someone could reasonably reach that conclusion, and I wouldn’t fault them for it.

Instead, what I have decided to do is to share this uncomfortable story with others and heed the lessons it gives, and let it serve as a reminder that whatever can go wrong on the water, probably will.

On the water, safety must trump all other concerns. My experience operating more complicated and larger vessels had lulled me into a false sense of security while out on a small lake on a pontoon. There is no such thing as a safe boat – a boat is only as safe as its skipper and crew. Layers of safety must be put in place in advance and overlapped so that one is not solely dependent on one tactic for survival. Without stringent safety practices in place, a seemingly minor mishap can endanger the lives of all onboard.

As for my son and his friend, those boys now have a profound respect for the dangers of the water and the feeling of satisfaction that comes from helping others. They also know that when life calls for action, they have a well of strength to draw on that is deeper than they realized.  While these are priceless lessons, I regretfully paid a large price to impart them.

Dr. Anthony Frattalone, West Lakeland Township, works as a physician in the intensive care unit at Regions Hospital.

Related Articles

Opinion |


Your Money: Is your asset allocation applicable to today’s markets?

Opinion |


Working Strategies: Land or Launch: Should 20 somethings be living at home?

Opinion |


Joe Soucheray: Fraud after fraud, precious millions flushed, and precious little accountability in Minnesota

Opinion |


Raihala: Lori and Julia made magic together on radio and they will be missed

Opinion |


Real World Economics: The social Darwinism of climate change

 

 

 

 

Your Money: Is your asset allocation applicable to today’s markets?

posted in: All news | 0

Bruce Helmer and Peg Webb

Asset allocation is the process of dividing your investment dollars among various asset categories, typically stocks, bonds, and cash.

Generally, the more tolerant you are of risk, the more you may be able to invest in stocks. Risk-averse investors, on the other hand, may want to invest a larger portion of their portfolio in conservative investments, such as high-grade bonds or cash.

Your time horizon will also help you determine your risk tolerance and asset allocation. If you’re a young investor, you might choose an allocation with a high concentration of stocks because you may be able to ride out short-term swings in the value of your portfolio.

But if retirement is less than 10 years away, your allocation might lean more toward bonds and cash investments.

Limitations of a traditional 60/40 portfolio

The traditional “balanced” portfolio of 60% stocks (intended to provide growth potential) and 40% bonds (to generate income and dampen overall portfolio volatility) has been a long-respected “guidepost” for a moderate-risk investor. It’s also a core offering in many retirement plans.

Over the past decade or so, a 60/40 portfolio, supported by stocks marching to new highs and interest rates dropping to new lows, met lots of investors’ return expectations. That’s because, historically, stocks and bonds have a negative correlation, meaning they rarely move in lockstep. When bonds do poorly, so the theory goes, stocks advance — a perfect illustration of the benefits of diversification.

If stocks do better than bonds, a 60/40 portfolio may begin to look more like 70/30 or 80/20 — at which time a sensible investor rebalances by selling appreciated stocks and buying depreciated bonds at a discount.

During the decade between January 2011 and December 2021, a 60/40 portfolio generated an average annual return of about 11% (9% after inflation) — impressively higher than the longer-term average of 6.1%. But in 2022, stocks and bonds fell deeply in the red, and a U.S.-only 60/40 portfolio lost 16.1%, according to Vanguard. Beginning years before this, some analysts and academic researchers, including members of the Investment team at Wealth Enhancement Group, suggested it was time to rethink the 60/40 allocation.

And what our researchers concluded was that what worked in the past may not work in the future. Traditional approaches to diversification tend to focus on broad asset classes (e.g., stocks, bonds, and cash). But they don’t necessarily offer meaningful or “effective” diversification. In our definition, effective diversification considers a particular asset’s underlying source of risk, which may include one or more of the following factors:

• Company risk — the risk that a company could lose money or go bankrupt

• Interest rate risk — the risk that higher borrowing costs could render a company uncompetitive

• Purchasing power risk — the risk that a company cannot maintain economies of scale

• Manager skill risk — the risk that company leaders make poor decisions about how they invest their capital

The other wild card is inflation, which if it lasts could take a big bite out of the purchasing power of your returns (if not returns themselves). During periods of unexpected inflation, stocks and bonds may both lose money, and these effects may be even more magnified in volatile markets.

While no one can reliably predict where the market will go in the near term, the presence of higher-than-average market volatility, such as we’ve experienced over the past several years, means that balanced portfolios are likely to generate uneven returns, and even sometimes negative.

Possible tweaks to consider

We aren’t opposed to the traditional balanced portfolio as a starting point. But we think investors need to take additional steps — using Effective Diversification — to guard against what we see as a looming low-return, potentially high-inflation investment market over the near- to intermediate-term.

Diversifying with non-traditional or alternative assets such as real assets or commodities can be a central element of effective diversification — under the right circumstances and for the right investor. Our investment team has developed strategies to meet the current market environment:

• An Inflation Protection sleeve, which is geared to portfolios that are skewed more heavily to fixed income (that is, those with more than half of invested assets in bonds) and

• A Low Correlation sleeve, which seeks to dampen equity volatility. (Not without risk, this strategy may give up some positive upside during stronger markets, and so it may be appropriate for investors who are more risk averse.)

These strategies may include the use of alternative investments such as commodities, hedge funds, derivatives or real estate. If you decide to invest in these asset classes, you need to evaluate their appropriateness in the context of your individual circumstances, as well as their greater complexity, research intensity, risks, and costs. A good question to ask yourself or your adviser is, “What role does an effectively diversified portfolio, balanced across multiple asset classes, play in helping me pursue my goals?” — in keeping with your time horizon and risk tolerance.

The 60/40 balanced portfolio is really a shorthanded way of identifying your strategic asset allocation. Some investors may be less aggressive and will want to set an allocation that’s less geared to stocks, such as 30% stocks/70% bonds — especially if they are more conservative or approaching retirement. Others with a longer-term horizon and more risk tolerance may be happier with a 70/30 or 80/20 stock/bond allocation — and may include an optional 10% allocation to alternatives (80%/10%/10%).

Investing over the long haul requires patience and discipline. For the vast majority of investors, we believe that sticking to a strategic allocation to the right asset classes and maintaining effective diversification that considers the underlying sources of risk in asset classes are sensible approaches when navigating today’s markets.

Related Articles

Business |


Your Money: How the financial adviser’s role has evolved

Business |


Your Money: Women and wealth: a values-based approach to planning

Business |


Your Money: Don’t treat your 401(k) like an ATM

Business |


Your Money: Train your brain to make better money decisions

Business |


Your Money: Squaring values with your investments

The opinions voiced in this material are for general information only and are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual. 

Bruce Helmer and Peg Webb are financial advisers at Wealth Enhancement Group and co-hosts of “Your Money” on WCCO 830 AM on Sunday mornings. Email Bruce and Peg at yourmoney@wealthenhancement.com. Securities offered through LPL Financial, member FINRA/SIPC. Advisory services offered through Wealth Enhancement Advisory Services, LLC, a registered investment advisor. Wealth Enhancement Group and Wealth Enhancement Advisory Services are separate entities from LPL Financial.

 

Late home run dooms Twins in loss to Athletics

posted in: News | 0

OAKLAND — The Twins had the matchup they were looking for with Jhoan Duran on the mound. Rocco Baldelli turned to his closer in the eighth inning earlier to face a more challenging part of Oakland’s lineup.

It just didn’t work out as they had envisioned.

The Oakland Athletics punched back last in a back-and-forth game on Friday when Shea Langeliers blasted the first pitch he saw from Duran for a two-run home run that lifted the Athletics to a 6-5 win over the Twins in the series opener at the Oakland Coliseum.

“That one was in the middle,” Duran said. “It wasn’t moving at all. … He’s a good hitter and he has power, so he took that pitch and he got a homer.”

It was also a splinker thrown at 93.7 mph, much slower than the 96.9 mph he averages with that pitch. Duran said he felt good physically but didn’t want to sacrifice control for velocity.

It came an inning after Willi Castro’s three-run home run had given the Twins (41-35) the lead, and a half inning after Austin Martin made an out on the base paths, denying Castro the chance to finish his at-bat with a runner in scoring position.

“I gave him the green light. He took the green light, which is — I want him to try to be aggressive and make a play if he thinks he’s got it,” manager Rocco Baldelli said. “And sometimes they pick when that happens. … Willi’s been swinging a good bat, and we just ended up making an out on the bases.”

The Twins had fallen behind in the fifth inning when Chris Paddack — who wasn’t his sharpest and said after the game that he was dealing with a bit of dead arm — left after allowing a pair of singles.

Both of those runers came around to score when Kody Funderburk, called up from Triple-A on Friday, allowed a double to fellow lefty Tyler Soderstrom, the first batter he faced. Langeliers followed that up with a single, pushing the Athletics’ (29-49) lead out to three at the time.

The Twins’ comeback started with Royce Lewis — who else? — hitting his 10th home run of the season in the sixth inning. He reached that number in just 16 games, becoming the fastest Twin to reach 10 home runs in a season in club history.

Castro’s home run pulled the team out of the hole and gave the Twins some new life, but their lead was short-lived, as was their first lead of the game, which came in the top of the first inning and disappeared in the bottom of the first.

The loss is the team’s third straight after winning six in a row last week. All three of those losses were one-run defeats.

“It wasn’t a smooth game,” Baldelli said. “We kind of had to fight through so many different innings both when we were in the field and offensively, too. Nothing really came easy today and we ended up just a run behind.”

Working Strategies: Land or Launch: Should 20 somethings be living at home?

posted in: News | 0

Amy Lindgren

Here’s a hot potato topic for your next dinner party: Should adult “kids” land back in their parents’ home in their 20s, or should they launch into living independently?

The statistics are a bit gummy, but most data indicate that about half of America’s 18-29-year-olds live in the family home, with another 11% of 29-34-year-olds still harboring in their childhood bedrooms. Depending on the data set, these numbers are the highest in 70 years, meaning that we could be seeing an evolution rather than a short-term trend.

So, what do you think: Good or bad idea to house these young adults in the family nest? Here are arguments for both sides.

Positive aspects of housing adult “kids”

Cost savings is the point most often raised in favor of young adults landing back at home. I’ve written more than once of a young client who lived at home and managed a fast-food restaurant for two years after graduation, completely erasing her $30,000 student loan. That early sacrifice let her then pursue her chosen field while still moving out on her own.

Depending on their goals, working adults living rent-free can save a chunk for retirement, put together a decent down payment for a house, pay cash for a car …the possibilities are nearly endless, assuming (a) the young adult is working and (b) he or she is actively saving the income.

Another positive aspect of living at home can be the sharing of responsibilities that parents would otherwise shoulder alone. With the young adult home, the parents can more freely go on vacations, for example. Or, adult children might babysit their younger siblings. In some families, the young adults contribute to expenses, easing the parents’ financial load.

One person who has been particularly vocal in her advocacy for adult kids living at home is Michelle Singletary, who writes about financial advice for the Washington Post. Here’s one that’s pertinent, but you may find yourself behind a paywall.

Unintended consequences of housing adult “kids”

It’s nearly impossible to counter the financial benefits of this arrangement — at least on paper. If the theory becomes reality and the young adults do work, do save their money, and do ease their parents’ burden, it truly is an ideal arrangement.

But this is a situation where the ideal might not happen very frequently, leading to unintended consequences. First, in order for the 20-somethings to best leverage the situation, expectations must be made clear — something that is quite difficult for some parents to do. Then, the rules must be followed and enforced — again, not easy.

So what happens when there are no expectations or they’re not followed? Pretty much what you’d expect: Kids who don’t get or keep jobs, because they don’t need the money; kids who do keep jobs but use their income for fun instead of goals; kids who become depressed and isolated because they’re not building professional relationships in the outside world.

The parents aren’t always faring well either. Some studies show 50% or more reporting financial struggles because they are supporting their adult children. These parents may forgo their own goals for retiring or downsizing a costly home, or may be dealing with the bad habits and overnight guests of their offspring.

Not surprisingly, the internet holds a number of conversation threads bemoaning the downsides of this arrangement. Click here for one that provides more space than most for individuals to describe their experiences.

And here’s what I think…

While acknowledging that this situation could work, I don’t see that as often as I’d like. In my career counseling, I’m frequently talking with parents who feel trapped by their adult kids’ continued presence in the family home. I also see young adults who struggle with their stay-at-home situation, sometimes from a lack of personal agency.

Understanding that families and individuals are different, my default setting is still going to be “launch.” If the young adult lives with roommates, uses an income-dependent loan repayment program (for student debt) and works full-time, in most cases they’ll be just fine. Truly, I promise you. And if not? Then they can move back home.

For those who need convincing, running the numbers might help. Rent is doable when split with others. And a modest income of even $10 an hour can be enough for basic expenses. This isn’t luxurious but that’s not the goal. In the end, there’s really no substitute for what can be gained in living as an adult, not as an adult “kid.”

Related Articles

Business |


Working Strategies: Next steps for ‘non-trad’ grads

Business |


Working Strategies: Launching your career-change job search

Business |


Working Strategies: College is over, graduation over, what next?

Business |


Working Strategies: Avoiding the ‘Tell us about yourself’ trap

Business |


Working Strategies: No, ‘working vacation’ is not an oxymoron

Amy Lindgren owns a career consulting firm in St. Paul. She can be reached at alindgren@prototypecareerservice.com.