Quality Time Vs. Quantity of Time
Amanda's Shoebox
A few years ago I saw a researcher or psychologist on the news who I believe was the person who coined the phrase that went something like... "It's the quality of time you spend with your children, not the quantity of time that counts".
She was coming out to say that she had been wrong previously and that the quantity of time you spend with your children actually does matter.
Does anyone know the name of this woman? I've been trying to find information about her and her research online, but haven't had any luck.
Thank you,
~ Amanda
She was coming out to say that she had been wrong previously and that the quantity of time you spend with your children actually does matter.
Does anyone know the name of this woman? I've been trying to find information about her and her research online, but haven't had any luck.
Thank you,
~ Amanda
Sandra Dodd
-=-A few years ago I saw a researcher or psychologist on the news who
I believe was the person who coined the phrase that went something
like... "It's the quality of time you spend with your children, not
the quantity of time that counts". -=-
I don't think that's a phrase a person could "coin," but there was a
term used in and around divorce and custody discussions, the concept
of "quality time." People gained and lost visitation right over the
"quality" of the time they were spending with their kids.
A few years after that was the One Big Thing, studies showed that
people needed some time to just be in the same place, without
frantically *doing* all the time, but I'd bet money that the "quality
time" days added to the continuing flurry of classes, workshops,
sports/dance/arts/theatre/music classes that so many kids are
subjected to.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I believe was the person who coined the phrase that went something
like... "It's the quality of time you spend with your children, not
the quantity of time that counts". -=-
I don't think that's a phrase a person could "coin," but there was a
term used in and around divorce and custody discussions, the concept
of "quality time." People gained and lost visitation right over the
"quality" of the time they were spending with their kids.
A few years after that was the One Big Thing, studies showed that
people needed some time to just be in the same place, without
frantically *doing* all the time, but I'd bet money that the "quality
time" days added to the continuing flurry of classes, workshops,
sports/dance/arts/theatre/music classes that so many kids are
subjected to.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
keetry
I remember quality time being in terms of how you spent time with your family. It was better to spend just a little time doing something special together than to spend the whole day just being in the same place. I always thought it was to make working parents feel better about being away from their kids for 10 hours a day. That was all ok if you spent 15 minutes reading a book at bedtime. Quality time at dinner was a big thing. There are still commercials about how teenagers who eat dinner with their families regularly are less likely to use drugs. I thought that was meant to be in comparison to families who ate dinner while watching TV or didn't make their teenagers come home for dinner.
Alysia
Alysia
Rebecca M.
--- In [email protected], "Amanda's Shoebox" <amandasshoebox@...> wrote:
""A woman's right and responsibility is to be self fulfilling," she said. She gives "quality time" rather than "quantity time" to each task, whether it be writing, cleaning the house or tending the children.'"
Of course, when I was tripping around looking for this (to satisfy my own curiosity), I bumped into that lovely (<-- sarcasm) term "helicopter parenting". I suspect my extended family silently (for which I'm thankful) thinks this is what we do (although I don't believe it is). I came across a couple of other interesting terms. The first is curling parenting (Scandinavia... curling, as in the winter sport, where every obstacle is swept out of a child's way). And the other one is "Lawnmower Parents" for parents who continue to intervene for their kids when they are young adults (often used by those folks at post-secondary institutions).
I know that there are parents who go overboard and try to live their children's lives for them (or it appears that way) for whatever reason (like parents who have their children's whole academic and career futures mapped out for them at the age of 5, maybe); however, it also seems to me that society is quite ready to label even healthily supportive parents with negative terms, simply because they give their children a high priority in their lives.
My mom-in-law, who I actually like, told me, when my son was just a babe-in-arms, that there was no "s" at the beginning of "mother". (We were doing all that "attachment" stuff that she didn't do with her kids.)
When there's quantity, there's bound to be more opportunity for quality... authentic quality (not squished-into-my-busy-calendar forced "quality).
- Rebecca
> **A few years ago I saw a researcher or psychologist on the news who I believe was the person who coined the phrase that went something like... "It's the quality of time you spend with your children, not the quantity of time that counts". **Amanda, I can't find this person (I'd love to know who it is). I could only find a reference to a feminist in the 1970's (a Ms. Burton) who used it in terms of "how to be liberated". As per wikipedia:
>
""A woman's right and responsibility is to be self fulfilling," she said. She gives "quality time" rather than "quantity time" to each task, whether it be writing, cleaning the house or tending the children.'"
Of course, when I was tripping around looking for this (to satisfy my own curiosity), I bumped into that lovely (<-- sarcasm) term "helicopter parenting". I suspect my extended family silently (for which I'm thankful) thinks this is what we do (although I don't believe it is). I came across a couple of other interesting terms. The first is curling parenting (Scandinavia... curling, as in the winter sport, where every obstacle is swept out of a child's way). And the other one is "Lawnmower Parents" for parents who continue to intervene for their kids when they are young adults (often used by those folks at post-secondary institutions).
I know that there are parents who go overboard and try to live their children's lives for them (or it appears that way) for whatever reason (like parents who have their children's whole academic and career futures mapped out for them at the age of 5, maybe); however, it also seems to me that society is quite ready to label even healthily supportive parents with negative terms, simply because they give their children a high priority in their lives.
My mom-in-law, who I actually like, told me, when my son was just a babe-in-arms, that there was no "s" at the beginning of "mother". (We were doing all that "attachment" stuff that she didn't do with her kids.)
When there's quantity, there's bound to be more opportunity for quality... authentic quality (not squished-into-my-busy-calendar forced "quality).
- Rebecca
Pam Sorooshian
On 4/27/2010 11:06 AM, Sandra Dodd wrote:
not have to spent a lot of time with their children, they could go off
and fulfill themselves in their work, and the children would be fine as
long as they got "quality time."
Here is a British site that mentions the origin of the term:
<http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/297250.html>
Interesting comment about it being no surprise that this is an American
term.
*******
Quality time
Meaning
Time in which individual attention is given to an otherwise neglected
child or partner.
Origin
It will come as no surprise to read that this is an American phrase. It
dates from the 1970s, the time when the notion that parents could 'have
it all', i.e. a successful career and a happy home life, was gaining
popularity.
The first use of the phrase that I've found is from the Maryland
newspaper /The Capital/, January 1973, in a piece headed 'How To Be
Liberated':
The major goal of each of these role changes is to give a woman time
to herself, Ms. Burton explained."A woman's right and responsibility
is to be self fulfilling," she said. She gives "quality time" rather
than "quantity time" to each task, whether it be writing, cleaning
the house or tending the children.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> I don't think that's a phrase a person could "coin," but there was aIt was part of the women's liberation movement - the idea that moms did
> term used in and around divorce and custody discussions, the concept
> of "quality time." People gained and lost visitation right over the
> "quality" of the time they were spending with their kids.
not have to spent a lot of time with their children, they could go off
and fulfill themselves in their work, and the children would be fine as
long as they got "quality time."
Here is a British site that mentions the origin of the term:
<http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/297250.html>
Interesting comment about it being no surprise that this is an American
term.
*******
Quality time
Meaning
Time in which individual attention is given to an otherwise neglected
child or partner.
Origin
It will come as no surprise to read that this is an American phrase. It
dates from the 1970s, the time when the notion that parents could 'have
it all', i.e. a successful career and a happy home life, was gaining
popularity.
The first use of the phrase that I've found is from the Maryland
newspaper /The Capital/, January 1973, in a piece headed 'How To Be
Liberated':
The major goal of each of these role changes is to give a woman time
to herself, Ms. Burton explained."A woman's right and responsibility
is to be self fulfilling," she said. She gives "quality time" rather
than "quantity time" to each task, whether it be writing, cleaning
the house or tending the children.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
keetry
> When there's quantity, there's bound to be more opportunity for quality... authentic quality (not squished-into-my-busy-calendar forced "quality).I like that, authentic quality.
>
Alysia
Pam Sorooshian
On 4/28/2010 8:02 AM, keetry wrote:
Even people who spend all their time with their kids can miss out on
quality time, quantity doesn't automatically lead to good quality. I
knew a mom who "brushed off" her youngest child - whenever he wanted
anything she would literally sort of wave her hand at him, dismissively.
And when he'd tug on her pants legs, she wouldn't even look down, but
just put her hand down and sort of separate him from her. He would try
to get her attention, Mommy, Mommy, Mommy, Mommy....over and
over...while she ignored him and then, when she finally turned to him it
was with impatience for him nagging her like that. "What do you want?"
she'd say, in an irritated voice. She did lots of things for him, but
not in response to him. She decided what he needed/wanted and decided
when to include him in some activity that she came up with for him.
He was with her constantly - HUGE amounts of quantity. Little to no
quality, as far as I could see.
I think my point is that we who do "stay home" with our kids shouldn't
be too self-congratulatory. Just that, in and of itself, doesn't
guarantee anything. My mom worked full time, and yet I think back on my
childhood and teenage-hood as having been spent largely with my mom.
How's that possible? She didn't have any other focus in her life - her
kids were what she did. There were an awful lot of evenings and weekends
and vacations and we spent them together and, I think the most important
thing, she was really fully present when we were together - she wasn't
wishing she was doing her own thing, wishing she wasn't tied down by us,
etc. That we were what was most important to her was very very evident.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > When there's quantity, there's bound to be more opportunity for"Quality" implies "good" quality.
> quality... authentic quality (not squished-into-my-busy-calendar
> forced "quality).
> >
>
> I like that, authentic quality.
Even people who spend all their time with their kids can miss out on
quality time, quantity doesn't automatically lead to good quality. I
knew a mom who "brushed off" her youngest child - whenever he wanted
anything she would literally sort of wave her hand at him, dismissively.
And when he'd tug on her pants legs, she wouldn't even look down, but
just put her hand down and sort of separate him from her. He would try
to get her attention, Mommy, Mommy, Mommy, Mommy....over and
over...while she ignored him and then, when she finally turned to him it
was with impatience for him nagging her like that. "What do you want?"
she'd say, in an irritated voice. She did lots of things for him, but
not in response to him. She decided what he needed/wanted and decided
when to include him in some activity that she came up with for him.
He was with her constantly - HUGE amounts of quantity. Little to no
quality, as far as I could see.
I think my point is that we who do "stay home" with our kids shouldn't
be too self-congratulatory. Just that, in and of itself, doesn't
guarantee anything. My mom worked full time, and yet I think back on my
childhood and teenage-hood as having been spent largely with my mom.
How's that possible? She didn't have any other focus in her life - her
kids were what she did. There were an awful lot of evenings and weekends
and vacations and we spent them together and, I think the most important
thing, she was really fully present when we were together - she wasn't
wishing she was doing her own thing, wishing she wasn't tied down by us,
etc. That we were what was most important to her was very very evident.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Amanda's Shoebox
In my search, I keep coming across this study:
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2007/DoParentsSpendEnoughTimeWithTheirChildren.aspx
They talk about the number of hours spent in "child care" by both working and non-working parents. It's so frustrating because they are totally missing the value of being there for those 30 seconds where your child has a brilliant idea they want to share or for those 5 seconds where they just need a hug.
I think maybe feminism went a little too far. Yes, we should have equal rights, equal access to educational institutions (if that's what we want), the chance to work in positions that we are qualified for, and we really don't need a man to be happy or fulfilled... but I think somehow we got so caught up in the rights of women, that we completely forgot about the rights of children.
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2007/DoParentsSpendEnoughTimeWithTheirChildren.aspx
They talk about the number of hours spent in "child care" by both working and non-working parents. It's so frustrating because they are totally missing the value of being there for those 30 seconds where your child has a brilliant idea they want to share or for those 5 seconds where they just need a hug.
I think maybe feminism went a little too far. Yes, we should have equal rights, equal access to educational institutions (if that's what we want), the chance to work in positions that we are qualified for, and we really don't need a man to be happy or fulfilled... but I think somehow we got so caught up in the rights of women, that we completely forgot about the rights of children.
Sandra Dodd
-=-I like that, authentic quality. -=-
You like that? Two words to create a term for just decently being
with kids?
I'm partly teasing you, and partly shuddering, again, at "authentic."
My assumption of the people who are understanding or starting to
understand radical unschooling is that they are being themselves and
moving toward more awareness and directness and clarity as they can.
I don't thin there is inauthentic clarity.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
You like that? Two words to create a term for just decently being
with kids?
I'm partly teasing you, and partly shuddering, again, at "authentic."
My assumption of the people who are understanding or starting to
understand radical unschooling is that they are being themselves and
moving toward more awareness and directness and clarity as they can.
I don't thin there is inauthentic clarity.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
K, please:
I don't thin there is inauthentic clarity.
I don't thinK there is inauthentic clarity.
Too many words get in the way of clear thought. What we're writing
about here involves babies, young children, tired mothers, and we
don't need a set of jargon or technical terms to discuss it. We can
use the plain words.
It's nice when I can spell the plain words. Sorry.
I'm old enough to have read it back with a Ricky Ricardo accent,
because he's one of the many characters in my head. :-)
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I don't thin there is inauthentic clarity.
I don't thinK there is inauthentic clarity.
Too many words get in the way of clear thought. What we're writing
about here involves babies, young children, tired mothers, and we
don't need a set of jargon or technical terms to discuss it. We can
use the plain words.
It's nice when I can spell the plain words. Sorry.
I'm old enough to have read it back with a Ricky Ricardo accent,
because he's one of the many characters in my head. :-)
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Rebecca M.
> **"Quality" implies "good" quality.**But not in the context of the term "Quality Time" as per the original post.
Quality Time, in the context of "not readily available" parenting, is usually about an adult agenda (and also about guilt) rather than meeting a child's need for connection. As Pam wrote, "She decided what he needed/wanted and decided when to include him in some activity that she came up with for him." This is the type of parenting that "Quality Time" has inspired. This is not the same thing as a parent who works and still makes her kids her priority when she's not at work.
It's often the byproduct of full-to-bursting lifestyles that are all about reaching some sort of status quo goal, whether that's producing über children or having the nicest house on the block or...
"Authentic" can also mean genuine or real. It's not necessarily a measure of "goodness" but certainly is a measure of whether or not something is really what it says it is. I realize it's an often misused term, appropriated for flaky type things, and that some people are allergic to it <g>; however, that's not how I meant to use it.
Pam has a good point. Quantity can never replace attentive, mindful parenting... even for home learning families. And *most* parents, who are willing to spend time with their children and make them a priority in their lives, are also willing to have solid chunks of time of "good quality" that are more substantive than the adult-oriented bread crumbs usually alloted through fleeting moments of "Quality Time".
- Rebecca
Joyce Fetteroll
On Apr 28, 2010, at 2:44 PM, Rebecca M. wrote:
could twist that into something else?
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Quality Time, in the context of "not readily available" parenting,Maybe connected time gets more to the intention. I wonder if people
> is usually about an adult agenda
could twist that into something else?
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
keetry
> -=-I like that, authentic quality. -=-In comparison to the idea of staging quality time like forcing your kids to be home every night at 6 for dinner regardless of what else they might have going on because it's supposed to keep them from using drugs. It's not quality time if everyone is angry about having to be there. Authentic quality time would be when the family wants to eat dinner together because they enjoy the company and the conversations that might go along with that. If I decide that Friday night is family movie or game night and make everyone participate, it's not good, quality time if someone doesn't want to be there doing that.
>
> You like that? Two words to create a term for just decently being
> with kids?
My mom used to make me go boating with her. She thought it was a great activity for the family to do together. I was deathly afraid of being on a tiny Sunfish or tipsy canoe in the middle of a lake but that didn't matter. We were doing something as a family. My fears were silly. Then she would get angry that I did everything I could to make the experience miserable for everyone. She would also take me skiing even though I hated cold weather and was miserable. I'm always colder than she is. She'd blow me off. Tell me I was being ridiculous. I didn't like being there with my toes frozen. It was quality time to her, though, because we were all there as a family. She never once did anything with me that I wanted to do because she didn't think the things I liked had any worth. So although we did a lot of things together as a family I wouldn't consider any of them quality.
I also agree that quantity does not necessarily equal quality. It's better to spend the 15 minutes you have after dinner and homework and before bedtime doing something enjoyable with your kids than spending all day in the same house ignoring them.
Alysia
Rebecca M.
Alysia wrote:
My sister has a bit of a martyr complex about it now (reminds me of that "no matter how amazing I am as a mother, my son makes up his own movies about his childhood" comment in N. Aldort's booK), but I can totally see it as I'm closer in age to my nephew than I am my sister. She was a loving and kind parent to her kids, but she just didn't get that there was more to it than showing up at bedtime for some 1:1 time.
- Rebecca
>** She never once did anything with me that I wanted to do because she didn't think the things I liked had any worth. So although we did a lot of things together as a family I wouldn't consider any of them quality.**My sister is 17 years older than me. Her adult son was almost estranged from his parents for several years because he had unspoken resentments. When he finally decided to come clean, it was exactly this reason: they had never found out what he valued and did those things together as a family. He was one of those "easy" kids and was sandwiched between two demanding sisters. He really put up with a lot and didn't get much attention.
My sister has a bit of a martyr complex about it now (reminds me of that "no matter how amazing I am as a mother, my son makes up his own movies about his childhood" comment in N. Aldort's booK), but I can totally see it as I'm closer in age to my nephew than I am my sister. She was a loving and kind parent to her kids, but she just didn't get that there was more to it than showing up at bedtime for some 1:1 time.
- Rebecca
Sandra Dodd
-=-My sister has a bit of a martyr complex about it now (reminds me of
that "no matter how amazing I am as a mother, my son makes up his own
movies about his childhood" comment in N. Aldort's booK), but I can
totally see it as I'm closer in age to my nephew than I am my sister.
She was a loving and kind parent to her kids, but she just didn't get
that there was more to it than showing up at bedtime for some 1:1
time.-=-
So again we see another aspect of the depth of *doing* in unschooling,
rather than just the lack of school.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
that "no matter how amazing I am as a mother, my son makes up his own
movies about his childhood" comment in N. Aldort's booK), but I can
totally see it as I'm closer in age to my nephew than I am my sister.
She was a loving and kind parent to her kids, but she just didn't get
that there was more to it than showing up at bedtime for some 1:1
time.-=-
So again we see another aspect of the depth of *doing* in unschooling,
rather than just the lack of school.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bun
That's been my interpretation of "quality time," the time you spend connecting with others, esp your loved ones.
--- In [email protected], Joyce Fetteroll <jfetteroll@...> wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 28, 2010, at 2:44 PM, Rebecca M. wrote:
>
> > Quality Time, in the context of "not readily available" parenting,
> > is usually about an adult agenda
>
> Maybe connected time gets more to the intention. I wonder if people
> could twist that into something else?
>
> Joyce
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Rebecca M.
--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
But this was all stuff that they gave but never checked in about. I'm sure my nephew was glad for all of the above "perks". But it wasn't enough. Or it wasn't the right stuff.
He wanted to be "seen". He didn't want to live on the surface of their relationship. He wanted his parents to know him, really know him, and respond accordingly. When they didn't, he felt angry, and my sister avoids strong feelings like the plague.
I suspect this is part of the reason I dislike the term "Quality Time". Who is defining what quality is in that relationship? My sister thought they were offering it according to her idea of what quality is. Her son, on the other hand, never felt it was quality.
When my son was born, I asked him what he would have wanted to happen differently in his childhood. He said, I wanted them to sit down and play a game with me - a game I wanted to play. I wanted them to know that I love hiking and to choose to go hiking with me. I wanted them to talk with me about what I wanted for my life, not what they wanted me to do.
All small things that would have probably made a huge difference.
- Rebecca
> **So again we see another aspect of the depth of *doing* in unschooling,By societal standards, my sister and her husband are great parents. Besides being loving and kind, they were heavily "involved" in their kids lives. When this issued came up, my sister listed all the things the did "for" their son: attended his basket ball games, took him and his sisters to Hawaii and Europe (on more than one occasion), took him waterskiing every summer, lived in the country in a big house with an indoor pool, gave him music lessons, spent time talking with him at the end of the day (1:1 at bedtime).
> rather than just the lack of school.**
But this was all stuff that they gave but never checked in about. I'm sure my nephew was glad for all of the above "perks". But it wasn't enough. Or it wasn't the right stuff.
He wanted to be "seen". He didn't want to live on the surface of their relationship. He wanted his parents to know him, really know him, and respond accordingly. When they didn't, he felt angry, and my sister avoids strong feelings like the plague.
I suspect this is part of the reason I dislike the term "Quality Time". Who is defining what quality is in that relationship? My sister thought they were offering it according to her idea of what quality is. Her son, on the other hand, never felt it was quality.
When my son was born, I asked him what he would have wanted to happen differently in his childhood. He said, I wanted them to sit down and play a game with me - a game I wanted to play. I wanted them to know that I love hiking and to choose to go hiking with me. I wanted them to talk with me about what I wanted for my life, not what they wanted me to do.
All small things that would have probably made a huge difference.
- Rebecca