Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
eavesdropper
Participant[quote=walterwhite]My kid took an ap human geography class last year. I don’t remember that being offered in my youth. Some kids today know a he’ll of a lot of geography by hs. I learned a bit studying w him in starbucks for the ap test. Interesting. Human geography. Have your high schooler check it out. We got a four on the ap test. Well I guess technically he got a four.[/quote]
Scaredy, do you have one of those “My kid is an honor student at XXX School” bumper stickers on your car? He sounds awesome….or, at the least, that he could have the potential to be self-supporting as an adult.
Incidentally, a significant accomplishment AND source of parental pride these days.
Participant[quote=briansd1]Very interesting opinion in WaPo about the future of education.
Since education is getting so expensive, maybe we can cut the cost of education by using the Internet to distribute and replay content.
Today, the Khan Academy Web site boasts 2,300 separate math tutorials, from simple addition to vector calculus, that have been viewed more than 50 million times by more than 2 million students and are in active use in more than a thousand classrooms across the country.
[/quote]
I do agree that we need to seriously assess the way in which we are providing education to our students. In reality, the age-old “learn from reading a book” method has really not changed at all, despite the massive changes in media and communication methods. There has always been a reluctance on the part of people (students and adult workers) to read, and their skills in this area have progressively worsened to the point that a significant number of *college* graduates are leaving school with marked literacy deficits.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/24/AR2005122400701.html
http://www.10news.com/news/15274005/detail.html
What we’ve done is to simply reduce the level of difficulty of the material we are teaching, and, when that isn’t enough, we “adjust” students’ grades to mask the lack of achievement.
The second article I linked to above is about a teacher who managed to mask his illiteracy for many years. He was a successful teacher because he took the time to create a visual and oral learning environment. I don’t endorse his deceptions, but I admire what came out of it. While reading is extremely important, all learning in school should not be based on it. I don’t say this because I think that we have to make things easier for students but because I believe that we could successfully teach so much more information to so many more students. And teach them in a way that would stay with them, and help them add to their existing body of knowledge when they were away from the classroom. The fact that we are still limiting our teaching largely to “read it/memorize it” is staggering to me, especially in light of the technology that has already been developed and is readily available.
However, an ESSENTIAL aspect of education that has been largely ignored is parental involvement. If parents don’t involve themselves in their child’s education by enforcing study and homework completion, by meeting with his/her teachers, and, most important, raising their children to be well-behaved and respectful in the classroom environment, no technology change will help. Education should be a privilege, not an automatic right, and way too many parents are using the schools as a babysitter, expecting the staff to teach a child that the parents, themselves, can’t control. If their parents don’t give a damn, the students won’t either.
Participant[quote=briansd1]Very interesting opinion in WaPo about the future of education.
Since education is getting so expensive, maybe we can cut the cost of education by using the Internet to distribute and replay content.
Today, the Khan Academy Web site boasts 2,300 separate math tutorials, from simple addition to vector calculus, that have been viewed more than 50 million times by more than 2 million students and are in active use in more than a thousand classrooms across the country.
[/quote]
I do agree that we need to seriously assess the way in which we are providing education to our students. In reality, the age-old “learn from reading a book” method has really not changed at all, despite the massive changes in media and communication methods. There has always been a reluctance on the part of people (students and adult workers) to read, and their skills in this area have progressively worsened to the point that a significant number of *college* graduates are leaving school with marked literacy deficits.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/24/AR2005122400701.html
http://www.10news.com/news/15274005/detail.html
What we’ve done is to simply reduce the level of difficulty of the material we are teaching, and, when that isn’t enough, we “adjust” students’ grades to mask the lack of achievement.
The second article I linked to above is about a teacher who managed to mask his illiteracy for many years. He was a successful teacher because he took the time to create a visual and oral learning environment. I don’t endorse his deceptions, but I admire what came out of it. While reading is extremely important, all learning in school should not be based on it. I don’t say this because I think that we have to make things easier for students but because I believe that we could successfully teach so much more information to so many more students. And teach them in a way that would stay with them, and help them add to their existing body of knowledge when they were away from the classroom. The fact that we are still limiting our teaching largely to “read it/memorize it” is staggering to me, especially in light of the technology that has already been developed and is readily available.
However, an ESSENTIAL aspect of education that has been largely ignored is parental involvement. If parents don’t involve themselves in their child’s education by enforcing study and homework completion, by meeting with his/her teachers, and, most important, raising their children to be well-behaved and respectful in the classroom environment, no technology change will help. Education should be a privilege, not an automatic right, and way too many parents are using the schools as a babysitter, expecting the staff to teach a child that the parents, themselves, can’t control. If their parents don’t give a damn, the students won’t either.
Participant[quote=briansd1]Very interesting opinion in WaPo about the future of education.
Since education is getting so expensive, maybe we can cut the cost of education by using the Internet to distribute and replay content.
Today, the Khan Academy Web site boasts 2,300 separate math tutorials, from simple addition to vector calculus, that have been viewed more than 50 million times by more than 2 million students and are in active use in more than a thousand classrooms across the country.
[/quote]
I do agree that we need to seriously assess the way in which we are providing education to our students. In reality, the age-old “learn from reading a book” method has really not changed at all, despite the massive changes in media and communication methods. There has always been a reluctance on the part of people (students and adult workers) to read, and their skills in this area have progressively worsened to the point that a significant number of *college* graduates are leaving school with marked literacy deficits.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/24/AR2005122400701.html
http://www.10news.com/news/15274005/detail.html
What we’ve done is to simply reduce the level of difficulty of the material we are teaching, and, when that isn’t enough, we “adjust” students’ grades to mask the lack of achievement.
The second article I linked to above is about a teacher who managed to mask his illiteracy for many years. He was a successful teacher because he took the time to create a visual and oral learning environment. I don’t endorse his deceptions, but I admire what came out of it. While reading is extremely important, all learning in school should not be based on it. I don’t say this because I think that we have to make things easier for students but because I believe that we could successfully teach so much more information to so many more students. And teach them in a way that would stay with them, and help them add to their existing body of knowledge when they were away from the classroom. The fact that we are still limiting our teaching largely to “read it/memorize it” is staggering to me, especially in light of the technology that has already been developed and is readily available.
However, an ESSENTIAL aspect of education that has been largely ignored is parental involvement. If parents don’t involve themselves in their child’s education by enforcing study and homework completion, by meeting with his/her teachers, and, most important, raising their children to be well-behaved and respectful in the classroom environment, no technology change will help. Education should be a privilege, not an automatic right, and way too many parents are using the schools as a babysitter, expecting the staff to teach a child that the parents, themselves, can’t control. If their parents don’t give a damn, the students won’t either.
Participant[quote=briansd1]Very interesting opinion in WaPo about the future of education.
Since education is getting so expensive, maybe we can cut the cost of education by using the Internet to distribute and replay content.
Today, the Khan Academy Web site boasts 2,300 separate math tutorials, from simple addition to vector calculus, that have been viewed more than 50 million times by more than 2 million students and are in active use in more than a thousand classrooms across the country.
[/quote]
I do agree that we need to seriously assess the way in which we are providing education to our students. In reality, the age-old “learn from reading a book” method has really not changed at all, despite the massive changes in media and communication methods. There has always been a reluctance on the part of people (students and adult workers) to read, and their skills in this area have progressively worsened to the point that a significant number of *college* graduates are leaving school with marked literacy deficits.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/24/AR2005122400701.html
http://www.10news.com/news/15274005/detail.html
What we’ve done is to simply reduce the level of difficulty of the material we are teaching, and, when that isn’t enough, we “adjust” students’ grades to mask the lack of achievement.
The second article I linked to above is about a teacher who managed to mask his illiteracy for many years. He was a successful teacher because he took the time to create a visual and oral learning environment. I don’t endorse his deceptions, but I admire what came out of it. While reading is extremely important, all learning in school should not be based on it. I don’t say this because I think that we have to make things easier for students but because I believe that we could successfully teach so much more information to so many more students. And teach them in a way that would stay with them, and help them add to their existing body of knowledge when they were away from the classroom. The fact that we are still limiting our teaching largely to “read it/memorize it” is staggering to me, especially in light of the technology that has already been developed and is readily available.
However, an ESSENTIAL aspect of education that has been largely ignored is parental involvement. If parents don’t involve themselves in their child’s education by enforcing study and homework completion, by meeting with his/her teachers, and, most important, raising their children to be well-behaved and respectful in the classroom environment, no technology change will help. Education should be a privilege, not an automatic right, and way too many parents are using the schools as a babysitter, expecting the staff to teach a child that the parents, themselves, can’t control. If their parents don’t give a damn, the students won’t either.
Participant[quote=briansd1]Very interesting opinion in WaPo about the future of education.
Since education is getting so expensive, maybe we can cut the cost of education by using the Internet to distribute and replay content.
Today, the Khan Academy Web site boasts 2,300 separate math tutorials, from simple addition to vector calculus, that have been viewed more than 50 million times by more than 2 million students and are in active use in more than a thousand classrooms across the country.
[/quote]
I do agree that we need to seriously assess the way in which we are providing education to our students. In reality, the age-old “learn from reading a book” method has really not changed at all, despite the massive changes in media and communication methods. There has always been a reluctance on the part of people (students and adult workers) to read, and their skills in this area have progressively worsened to the point that a significant number of *college* graduates are leaving school with marked literacy deficits.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/24/AR2005122400701.html
http://www.10news.com/news/15274005/detail.html
What we’ve done is to simply reduce the level of difficulty of the material we are teaching, and, when that isn’t enough, we “adjust” students’ grades to mask the lack of achievement.
The second article I linked to above is about a teacher who managed to mask his illiteracy for many years. He was a successful teacher because he took the time to create a visual and oral learning environment. I don’t endorse his deceptions, but I admire what came out of it. While reading is extremely important, all learning in school should not be based on it. I don’t say this because I think that we have to make things easier for students but because I believe that we could successfully teach so much more information to so many more students. And teach them in a way that would stay with them, and help them add to their existing body of knowledge when they were away from the classroom. The fact that we are still limiting our teaching largely to “read it/memorize it” is staggering to me, especially in light of the technology that has already been developed and is readily available.
However, an ESSENTIAL aspect of education that has been largely ignored is parental involvement. If parents don’t involve themselves in their child’s education by enforcing study and homework completion, by meeting with his/her teachers, and, most important, raising their children to be well-behaved and respectful in the classroom environment, no technology change will help. Education should be a privilege, not an automatic right, and way too many parents are using the schools as a babysitter, expecting the staff to teach a child that the parents, themselves, can’t control. If their parents don’t give a damn, the students won’t either.
Participant[quote=briansd1]That’s exactly how I feel, Gandalf.
The Democrats and Republicans are the establishment. The establishment failed us.
But still within the establishment, there’s proportional guilt; and, for sure, the largest share of guilt belongs to the Republicans.[/quote]
It would appear that your assessment of proportional wrongdoing is accurate, Brian. But does it really matter when you examine the situation in terms of magnitude of wrongdoing.
What I mean is that, for years, the Republicans have made no secret of their role as friends of the wealthy and powerful (what they’ve done in recent years is to successfully convince their loyal lower middle class following that, if not for some bad luck and liberal socialistic Democrat policies, they would be part of that wealthy and powerful constituency). On the other hand, the Democrats have consistently condemned the Repubs for “working for the rich” while trumpeting their own role as a friend to the middle class.
I, for one, can see no difference (aside from a few renegade Congressmen and Senators) between the parties. While I cannot endorse the actions of the Republicans, I am truly sickened by the hypocrisy of the Democrats. You can say that you’re a friend of the less fortunate all you want, but if those words are not put into action, they mean nothing. Since the financial meltdown, there have been no indictments of the principals involved, nor prosecutions or prison sentences. There have been no policy changes: it’s business as usual on Wall Street and in the banks and major investment houses. There is still no oversight. And, aside from what Elizabeth Warren is doing, there is no consumer protection reform.
Corporate CEOs and CFOs are coming to Congress demanding bailout cash (and getting it!), and then telling Congress in the same breath that no restrictions can be placed on how they spend it. Allan posted a link (above) about the government approving astronomical compensation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac execs, and the payment of AIG bonuses is old news that still packs a wallop to taxpayers.
I’m no fan of the Republicans who are currently in office, and many of those who held political positions in the last 25 years. They were extremely limited and shortsighted in their formulation of policy change, and we are now attempting to deal with the resulting devastation. But the Democrats’ tacit approval of many of these changes, plus some reformulation of their own, most assuredly compounded the problem. Unless I see many more Democrats come out and actively show support for the poor and middle class they claim to represent, I can’t support them either. Their failure to do so is morally reprehensible. Yes, they are not the party currently in power. But even when they were, they were astoundingly out-of-touch with the realities facing everyday Americans, and staggeringly impotent in ridding America of the corporate parasites who brought us to the precipice of destruction 3 years ago (and who are sure to do so again).
Participant[quote=briansd1]That’s exactly how I feel, Gandalf.
The Democrats and Republicans are the establishment. The establishment failed us.
But still within the establishment, there’s proportional guilt; and, for sure, the largest share of guilt belongs to the Republicans.[/quote]
It would appear that your assessment of proportional wrongdoing is accurate, Brian. But does it really matter when you examine the situation in terms of magnitude of wrongdoing.
What I mean is that, for years, the Republicans have made no secret of their role as friends of the wealthy and powerful (what they’ve done in recent years is to successfully convince their loyal lower middle class following that, if not for some bad luck and liberal socialistic Democrat policies, they would be part of that wealthy and powerful constituency). On the other hand, the Democrats have consistently condemned the Repubs for “working for the rich” while trumpeting their own role as a friend to the middle class.
I, for one, can see no difference (aside from a few renegade Congressmen and Senators) between the parties. While I cannot endorse the actions of the Republicans, I am truly sickened by the hypocrisy of the Democrats. You can say that you’re a friend of the less fortunate all you want, but if those words are not put into action, they mean nothing. Since the financial meltdown, there have been no indictments of the principals involved, nor prosecutions or prison sentences. There have been no policy changes: it’s business as usual on Wall Street and in the banks and major investment houses. There is still no oversight. And, aside from what Elizabeth Warren is doing, there is no consumer protection reform.
Corporate CEOs and CFOs are coming to Congress demanding bailout cash (and getting it!), and then telling Congress in the same breath that no restrictions can be placed on how they spend it. Allan posted a link (above) about the government approving astronomical compensation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac execs, and the payment of AIG bonuses is old news that still packs a wallop to taxpayers.
I’m no fan of the Republicans who are currently in office, and many of those who held political positions in the last 25 years. They were extremely limited and shortsighted in their formulation of policy change, and we are now attempting to deal with the resulting devastation. But the Democrats’ tacit approval of many of these changes, plus some reformulation of their own, most assuredly compounded the problem. Unless I see many more Democrats come out and actively show support for the poor and middle class they claim to represent, I can’t support them either. Their failure to do so is morally reprehensible. Yes, they are not the party currently in power. But even when they were, they were astoundingly out-of-touch with the realities facing everyday Americans, and staggeringly impotent in ridding America of the corporate parasites who brought us to the precipice of destruction 3 years ago (and who are sure to do so again).
Participant[quote=briansd1]That’s exactly how I feel, Gandalf.
The Democrats and Republicans are the establishment. The establishment failed us.
But still within the establishment, there’s proportional guilt; and, for sure, the largest share of guilt belongs to the Republicans.[/quote]
It would appear that your assessment of proportional wrongdoing is accurate, Brian. But does it really matter when you examine the situation in terms of magnitude of wrongdoing.
What I mean is that, for years, the Republicans have made no secret of their role as friends of the wealthy and powerful (what they’ve done in recent years is to successfully convince their loyal lower middle class following that, if not for some bad luck and liberal socialistic Democrat policies, they would be part of that wealthy and powerful constituency). On the other hand, the Democrats have consistently condemned the Repubs for “working for the rich” while trumpeting their own role as a friend to the middle class.
I, for one, can see no difference (aside from a few renegade Congressmen and Senators) between the parties. While I cannot endorse the actions of the Republicans, I am truly sickened by the hypocrisy of the Democrats. You can say that you’re a friend of the less fortunate all you want, but if those words are not put into action, they mean nothing. Since the financial meltdown, there have been no indictments of the principals involved, nor prosecutions or prison sentences. There have been no policy changes: it’s business as usual on Wall Street and in the banks and major investment houses. There is still no oversight. And, aside from what Elizabeth Warren is doing, there is no consumer protection reform.
Corporate CEOs and CFOs are coming to Congress demanding bailout cash (and getting it!), and then telling Congress in the same breath that no restrictions can be placed on how they spend it. Allan posted a link (above) about the government approving astronomical compensation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac execs, and the payment of AIG bonuses is old news that still packs a wallop to taxpayers.
I’m no fan of the Republicans who are currently in office, and many of those who held political positions in the last 25 years. They were extremely limited and shortsighted in their formulation of policy change, and we are now attempting to deal with the resulting devastation. But the Democrats’ tacit approval of many of these changes, plus some reformulation of their own, most assuredly compounded the problem. Unless I see many more Democrats come out and actively show support for the poor and middle class they claim to represent, I can’t support them either. Their failure to do so is morally reprehensible. Yes, they are not the party currently in power. But even when they were, they were astoundingly out-of-touch with the realities facing everyday Americans, and staggeringly impotent in ridding America of the corporate parasites who brought us to the precipice of destruction 3 years ago (and who are sure to do so again).
Participant[quote=briansd1]That’s exactly how I feel, Gandalf.
The Democrats and Republicans are the establishment. The establishment failed us.
But still within the establishment, there’s proportional guilt; and, for sure, the largest share of guilt belongs to the Republicans.[/quote]
It would appear that your assessment of proportional wrongdoing is accurate, Brian. But does it really matter when you examine the situation in terms of magnitude of wrongdoing.
What I mean is that, for years, the Republicans have made no secret of their role as friends of the wealthy and powerful (what they’ve done in recent years is to successfully convince their loyal lower middle class following that, if not for some bad luck and liberal socialistic Democrat policies, they would be part of that wealthy and powerful constituency). On the other hand, the Democrats have consistently condemned the Repubs for “working for the rich” while trumpeting their own role as a friend to the middle class.
I, for one, can see no difference (aside from a few renegade Congressmen and Senators) between the parties. While I cannot endorse the actions of the Republicans, I am truly sickened by the hypocrisy of the Democrats. You can say that you’re a friend of the less fortunate all you want, but if those words are not put into action, they mean nothing. Since the financial meltdown, there have been no indictments of the principals involved, nor prosecutions or prison sentences. There have been no policy changes: it’s business as usual on Wall Street and in the banks and major investment houses. There is still no oversight. And, aside from what Elizabeth Warren is doing, there is no consumer protection reform.
Corporate CEOs and CFOs are coming to Congress demanding bailout cash (and getting it!), and then telling Congress in the same breath that no restrictions can be placed on how they spend it. Allan posted a link (above) about the government approving astronomical compensation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac execs, and the payment of AIG bonuses is old news that still packs a wallop to taxpayers.
I’m no fan of the Republicans who are currently in office, and many of those who held political positions in the last 25 years. They were extremely limited and shortsighted in their formulation of policy change, and we are now attempting to deal with the resulting devastation. But the Democrats’ tacit approval of many of these changes, plus some reformulation of their own, most assuredly compounded the problem. Unless I see many more Democrats come out and actively show support for the poor and middle class they claim to represent, I can’t support them either. Their failure to do so is morally reprehensible. Yes, they are not the party currently in power. But even when they were, they were astoundingly out-of-touch with the realities facing everyday Americans, and staggeringly impotent in ridding America of the corporate parasites who brought us to the precipice of destruction 3 years ago (and who are sure to do so again).
Participant[quote=briansd1]That’s exactly how I feel, Gandalf.
The Democrats and Republicans are the establishment. The establishment failed us.
But still within the establishment, there’s proportional guilt; and, for sure, the largest share of guilt belongs to the Republicans.[/quote]
It would appear that your assessment of proportional wrongdoing is accurate, Brian. But does it really matter when you examine the situation in terms of magnitude of wrongdoing.
What I mean is that, for years, the Republicans have made no secret of their role as friends of the wealthy and powerful (what they’ve done in recent years is to successfully convince their loyal lower middle class following that, if not for some bad luck and liberal socialistic Democrat policies, they would be part of that wealthy and powerful constituency). On the other hand, the Democrats have consistently condemned the Repubs for “working for the rich” while trumpeting their own role as a friend to the middle class.
I, for one, can see no difference (aside from a few renegade Congressmen and Senators) between the parties. While I cannot endorse the actions of the Republicans, I am truly sickened by the hypocrisy of the Democrats. You can say that you’re a friend of the less fortunate all you want, but if those words are not put into action, they mean nothing. Since the financial meltdown, there have been no indictments of the principals involved, nor prosecutions or prison sentences. There have been no policy changes: it’s business as usual on Wall Street and in the banks and major investment houses. There is still no oversight. And, aside from what Elizabeth Warren is doing, there is no consumer protection reform.
Corporate CEOs and CFOs are coming to Congress demanding bailout cash (and getting it!), and then telling Congress in the same breath that no restrictions can be placed on how they spend it. Allan posted a link (above) about the government approving astronomical compensation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac execs, and the payment of AIG bonuses is old news that still packs a wallop to taxpayers.
I’m no fan of the Republicans who are currently in office, and many of those who held political positions in the last 25 years. They were extremely limited and shortsighted in their formulation of policy change, and we are now attempting to deal with the resulting devastation. But the Democrats’ tacit approval of many of these changes, plus some reformulation of their own, most assuredly compounded the problem. Unless I see many more Democrats come out and actively show support for the poor and middle class they claim to represent, I can’t support them either. Their failure to do so is morally reprehensible. Yes, they are not the party currently in power. But even when they were, they were astoundingly out-of-touch with the realities facing everyday Americans, and staggeringly impotent in ridding America of the corporate parasites who brought us to the precipice of destruction 3 years ago (and who are sure to do so again).
Participant[quote=CA renter]IMHO, there is a very simple solution to the “adult kids living at home (and not paying for it) syndrome: charge rent, and refuse to do any of their chores for them.
Maybe my parents were messed-up, but we were required to pay rent/utililties as soon as we were able to get our work permits. It was a small amount, about $100-$150/mo, but we also bought our own food, clothing, cars, gas, insurance, etc. If we didn’t pay rent, we paid the utility bills. If we ever borrowed money from our parents, we had to pay it back **with interest.** We were doing our own laundry when we were around 10 years old (washing, folding, putting away), and were expected to clean up after ourselves, as well as do general household cleaning, for as long as I can remember. Heck, my own kids (9,8, and 5) are expected to put their own laundry away, clean up their own messes, and help change their bedding, etc.
Oddly enough, I never resented my parents for any of this. It gave me a tremendous sense of independence and the feeling that I could always take care of myself (however true or untrue it might have been at the time). I believe that the stage is set from a very early age, and that parents who expect their kids to fully participate in the household community will generally have kids who are competent and able to take care of themselves when they are adults.
Do these indulgent parents actually think they are doing their kids a favor by never expecting them to contribute anything to their own care?[/quote]
CAR, many of them are trying to buy their kids’ love. What they don’t realize is that, as far as the kids are concerned, there isn’t anything to be grateful for. Because the kids are never made to do anything for themselves, they grow up with a fully-developed sense of entitlement. They truly believe that it’s their parents’ obligation to pay for everything indefinitely. I don’t blame the kids ( a very loose term, since many are well into their 30s). If a sense of self-responsibility is not instilled in a child, exactly what is going to make them decide that they have to get up at 6 in the morning to go to work at a boring low-paying job (which, for most of them, is 99.9% of available employment)?
Many of the sentiments in your post echo those of a post I left yesterday, CAR. You and I had very similar experiences growing up, and while it wasn’t always an easy or pleasant existence, I reached the age of 18 fully prepared to go out and make my way in the world. I knew how to do most things for myself, and I was able to figure out how to handle unfamiliar situations and problems when I encountered them. More important: I was not only able, but *willing* to tackle obstacles, and not simply crumple up into a pile of sniveling self-pity.
My husband and I, who are extremely well-suited to each other and who have a very loving and close relationship, have almost reached the point of separation over his unwillingness to parent his 15-year-old. He was quite good about it until she reached her teens, and then, suddenly, virtually total abdication from responsibility!! He deludes himself into thinking that everything is wonderful, accomplishing this by not asking questions about the child’s after-school whereabouts or social plans, avoiding conversations about school, neglecting to attend parent-teacher meetings (the stepmother – me – attends them), and pointedly ignoring broken rules and curfews. He and her mother (equally clueless) are engaged in this fantasy that their child will be going off to college in a couple years where she will excel in some major that will result in multiple high-paying job offers that will enable her to move into a gorgeous high-end home immediately following graduation. Of course, this requires that they suspend all belief in the reality that she’s unable to spell, punctuate, and write a cohesive sentence, still cannot perform basic multiplication and division without a calculator, and is entirely bewildered by anything concerning fractions (including the basic definition). I’m finding it increasingly difficult to maintain respect (previously at a very high level) for my husband since his extreme reluctance to exert parental responsibilities not only implies that he can’t stand up to his teenage child, but will also result in lifetime handicaps for her. To me, that is just like withholding food from your child.
CAR, I fully agree with your opinion that childhood participation in and contributions to the household community will result in more competent and self-sufficient adults. And I will go further, and venture that this competence and self-sufficiency results in much better mental health in these individuals, in both childhood and adult years. Life is scary, from the moment you are born to the day you die. Imagine how much more frightening it is if you don’t feel like you have the skills to handle even a minor setback.
Participant[quote=CA renter]IMHO, there is a very simple solution to the “adult kids living at home (and not paying for it) syndrome: charge rent, and refuse to do any of their chores for them.
Maybe my parents were messed-up, but we were required to pay rent/utililties as soon as we were able to get our work permits. It was a small amount, about $100-$150/mo, but we also bought our own food, clothing, cars, gas, insurance, etc. If we didn’t pay rent, we paid the utility bills. If we ever borrowed money from our parents, we had to pay it back **with interest.** We were doing our own laundry when we were around 10 years old (washing, folding, putting away), and were expected to clean up after ourselves, as well as do general household cleaning, for as long as I can remember. Heck, my own kids (9,8, and 5) are expected to put their own laundry away, clean up their own messes, and help change their bedding, etc.
Oddly enough, I never resented my parents for any of this. It gave me a tremendous sense of independence and the feeling that I could always take care of myself (however true or untrue it might have been at the time). I believe that the stage is set from a very early age, and that parents who expect their kids to fully participate in the household community will generally have kids who are competent and able to take care of themselves when they are adults.
Do these indulgent parents actually think they are doing their kids a favor by never expecting them to contribute anything to their own care?[/quote]
CAR, many of them are trying to buy their kids’ love. What they don’t realize is that, as far as the kids are concerned, there isn’t anything to be grateful for. Because the kids are never made to do anything for themselves, they grow up with a fully-developed sense of entitlement. They truly believe that it’s their parents’ obligation to pay for everything indefinitely. I don’t blame the kids ( a very loose term, since many are well into their 30s). If a sense of self-responsibility is not instilled in a child, exactly what is going to make them decide that they have to get up at 6 in the morning to go to work at a boring low-paying job (which, for most of them, is 99.9% of available employment)?
Many of the sentiments in your post echo those of a post I left yesterday, CAR. You and I had very similar experiences growing up, and while it wasn’t always an easy or pleasant existence, I reached the age of 18 fully prepared to go out and make my way in the world. I knew how to do most things for myself, and I was able to figure out how to handle unfamiliar situations and problems when I encountered them. More important: I was not only able, but *willing* to tackle obstacles, and not simply crumple up into a pile of sniveling self-pity.
My husband and I, who are extremely well-suited to each other and who have a very loving and close relationship, have almost reached the point of separation over his unwillingness to parent his 15-year-old. He was quite good about it until she reached her teens, and then, suddenly, virtually total abdication from responsibility!! He deludes himself into thinking that everything is wonderful, accomplishing this by not asking questions about the child’s after-school whereabouts or social plans, avoiding conversations about school, neglecting to attend parent-teacher meetings (the stepmother – me – attends them), and pointedly ignoring broken rules and curfews. He and her mother (equally clueless) are engaged in this fantasy that their child will be going off to college in a couple years where she will excel in some major that will result in multiple high-paying job offers that will enable her to move into a gorgeous high-end home immediately following graduation. Of course, this requires that they suspend all belief in the reality that she’s unable to spell, punctuate, and write a cohesive sentence, still cannot perform basic multiplication and division without a calculator, and is entirely bewildered by anything concerning fractions (including the basic definition). I’m finding it increasingly difficult to maintain respect (previously at a very high level) for my husband since his extreme reluctance to exert parental responsibilities not only implies that he can’t stand up to his teenage child, but will also result in lifetime handicaps for her. To me, that is just like withholding food from your child.
CAR, I fully agree with your opinion that childhood participation in and contributions to the household community will result in more competent and self-sufficient adults. And I will go further, and venture that this competence and self-sufficiency results in much better mental health in these individuals, in both childhood and adult years. Life is scary, from the moment you are born to the day you die. Imagine how much more frightening it is if you don’t feel like you have the skills to handle even a minor setback.
Participant[quote=CA renter]IMHO, there is a very simple solution to the “adult kids living at home (and not paying for it) syndrome: charge rent, and refuse to do any of their chores for them.
Maybe my parents were messed-up, but we were required to pay rent/utililties as soon as we were able to get our work permits. It was a small amount, about $100-$150/mo, but we also bought our own food, clothing, cars, gas, insurance, etc. If we didn’t pay rent, we paid the utility bills. If we ever borrowed money from our parents, we had to pay it back **with interest.** We were doing our own laundry when we were around 10 years old (washing, folding, putting away), and were expected to clean up after ourselves, as well as do general household cleaning, for as long as I can remember. Heck, my own kids (9,8, and 5) are expected to put their own laundry away, clean up their own messes, and help change their bedding, etc.
Oddly enough, I never resented my parents for any of this. It gave me a tremendous sense of independence and the feeling that I could always take care of myself (however true or untrue it might have been at the time). I believe that the stage is set from a very early age, and that parents who expect their kids to fully participate in the household community will generally have kids who are competent and able to take care of themselves when they are adults.
Do these indulgent parents actually think they are doing their kids a favor by never expecting them to contribute anything to their own care?[/quote]
CAR, many of them are trying to buy their kids’ love. What they don’t realize is that, as far as the kids are concerned, there isn’t anything to be grateful for. Because the kids are never made to do anything for themselves, they grow up with a fully-developed sense of entitlement. They truly believe that it’s their parents’ obligation to pay for everything indefinitely. I don’t blame the kids ( a very loose term, since many are well into their 30s). If a sense of self-responsibility is not instilled in a child, exactly what is going to make them decide that they have to get up at 6 in the morning to go to work at a boring low-paying job (which, for most of them, is 99.9% of available employment)?
Many of the sentiments in your post echo those of a post I left yesterday, CAR. You and I had very similar experiences growing up, and while it wasn’t always an easy or pleasant existence, I reached the age of 18 fully prepared to go out and make my way in the world. I knew how to do most things for myself, and I was able to figure out how to handle unfamiliar situations and problems when I encountered them. More important: I was not only able, but *willing* to tackle obstacles, and not simply crumple up into a pile of sniveling self-pity.
My husband and I, who are extremely well-suited to each other and who have a very loving and close relationship, have almost reached the point of separation over his unwillingness to parent his 15-year-old. He was quite good about it until she reached her teens, and then, suddenly, virtually total abdication from responsibility!! He deludes himself into thinking that everything is wonderful, accomplishing this by not asking questions about the child’s after-school whereabouts or social plans, avoiding conversations about school, neglecting to attend parent-teacher meetings (the stepmother – me – attends them), and pointedly ignoring broken rules and curfews. He and her mother (equally clueless) are engaged in this fantasy that their child will be going off to college in a couple years where she will excel in some major that will result in multiple high-paying job offers that will enable her to move into a gorgeous high-end home immediately following graduation. Of course, this requires that they suspend all belief in the reality that she’s unable to spell, punctuate, and write a cohesive sentence, still cannot perform basic multiplication and division without a calculator, and is entirely bewildered by anything concerning fractions (including the basic definition). I’m finding it increasingly difficult to maintain respect (previously at a very high level) for my husband since his extreme reluctance to exert parental responsibilities not only implies that he can’t stand up to his teenage child, but will also result in lifetime handicaps for her. To me, that is just like withholding food from your child.
CAR, I fully agree with your opinion that childhood participation in and contributions to the household community will result in more competent and self-sufficient adults. And I will go further, and venture that this competence and self-sufficiency results in much better mental health in these individuals, in both childhood and adult years. Life is scary, from the moment you are born to the day you die. Imagine how much more frightening it is if you don’t feel like you have the skills to handle even a minor setback.
-
AuthorPosts