OT-Letting them marry?
Wildflower Car
What is your opinion on marriage under age 18. I believe the legal marriage
age varies from 14-18 across the country. Would you sign a release fro your
child to get married before 18? I had this question asked to me recently and
wanted to hear from you guys. It was related to unschooling by letting them
make their own choices when the question was posed to me.
Wildflower
_________________________________________________________________
Get Hilary Duff�s homepage with her photos, music, and more.
http://celebrities.live.com
age varies from 14-18 across the country. Would you sign a release fro your
child to get married before 18? I had this question asked to me recently and
wanted to hear from you guys. It was related to unschooling by letting them
make their own choices when the question was posed to me.
Wildflower
_________________________________________________________________
Get Hilary Duff�s homepage with her photos, music, and more.
http://celebrities.live.com
Sandra Dodd
-=- Would you sign a release fro your
child to get married before 18?-=-
It would depend. For me to say "I absolutely would" would be as
arbitrary as for me to say "I absolutely wouldn't."
child to get married before 18?-=-
It would depend. For me to say "I absolutely would" would be as
arbitrary as for me to say "I absolutely wouldn't."
Therese Franklin
Hi everyone,
I am a 29 year old play-at-home mama in CA. I have two girls; ages 3 and 10
months. I am married to my nerdy engineer hubby for 5 years now. Our girls
are young yet, but we are very interested in homeschooling and unschooling.
I think it feels like the natural thing to move into from Attachment
Parenting. I also had a great homebirth last year and I would like to teach
child-birth education one day. I am a sponge for any information about
birth and breastfeeding. I also love to cloth diaper and wear my baby in a
sling. I am also a bible-loving Christian. I am online frequently at
www.gentlechristianmothers.com <http://www.gentlechristianmothers.com/> as
"BornFreeBaby". There is a great homeschooling/ unschooling forum there
that has inspired me. I have been reading some of John Holt, John Taylor
Gatto as well as Alfie Kohn. I hope to learn as much as I can from all of
you.
Thanks!
Therese
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I am a 29 year old play-at-home mama in CA. I have two girls; ages 3 and 10
months. I am married to my nerdy engineer hubby for 5 years now. Our girls
are young yet, but we are very interested in homeschooling and unschooling.
I think it feels like the natural thing to move into from Attachment
Parenting. I also had a great homebirth last year and I would like to teach
child-birth education one day. I am a sponge for any information about
birth and breastfeeding. I also love to cloth diaper and wear my baby in a
sling. I am also a bible-loving Christian. I am online frequently at
www.gentlechristianmothers.com <http://www.gentlechristianmothers.com/> as
"BornFreeBaby". There is a great homeschooling/ unschooling forum there
that has inspired me. I have been reading some of John Holt, John Taylor
Gatto as well as Alfie Kohn. I hope to learn as much as I can from all of
you.
Thanks!
Therese
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
Quoting Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>:
parents provide all this freedom in his life, and yet consider resorting to
arranged marriages :) So yeah, I think under certain circumstances, I could be
convinced :)
~diana :)
> -=- Would you sign a release fro yourI had a riotous conversation with a life-long unschooler, who lamented his
> child to get married before 18?-=-
>
> It would depend. For me to say "I absolutely would" would be as
> arbitrary as for me to say "I absolutely wouldn't."
>
parents provide all this freedom in his life, and yet consider resorting to
arranged marriages :) So yeah, I think under certain circumstances, I could be
convinced :)
~diana :)
Sandra Dodd
-=-> It would depend. For me to say "I absolutely would" would be as
lamented his
parents provide all this freedom in his life, and yet consider
resorting to
arranged marriages :) So yeah, I think under certain circumstances, I
could be
convinced :) -=-
The whole question had never occurred to me, but two of mine are 18
and haven't wanted to get married. The other is 15 and hasn't even
been on a date.
I suppose if the law said I had to sign for someone under 18, then
they would (legally) need my permission.
But I can't imagine my kids would get married or even serious about
someone without us having discussed it several different ways, and so
it would never be an out-of-the-blue question.
Let me use the exact situation I actually have. I have a 15 year old
daughter.
If Holly were pregnant in a year or two, and she trusted the guy to
take care of her and the baby, and if Keith and I didn't consider him
to be an oily run-away creep, and if Holly wanted to get married,
that would be fine.
In a non-emergency scenario:
If Holly were madly in love with someone who seemed sincerely madly
in love with her and they both thought for some reason that getting
married would be a good thing, we would be cruel to say simply "No,
wait for the next one because you're not 18."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> arbitrary as for me to say "I absolutely wouldn't."I had a riotous conversation with a life-long unschooler, who
>
lamented his
parents provide all this freedom in his life, and yet consider
resorting to
arranged marriages :) So yeah, I think under certain circumstances, I
could be
convinced :) -=-
The whole question had never occurred to me, but two of mine are 18
and haven't wanted to get married. The other is 15 and hasn't even
been on a date.
I suppose if the law said I had to sign for someone under 18, then
they would (legally) need my permission.
But I can't imagine my kids would get married or even serious about
someone without us having discussed it several different ways, and so
it would never be an out-of-the-blue question.
Let me use the exact situation I actually have. I have a 15 year old
daughter.
If Holly were pregnant in a year or two, and she trusted the guy to
take care of her and the baby, and if Keith and I didn't consider him
to be an oily run-away creep, and if Holly wanted to get married,
that would be fine.
In a non-emergency scenario:
If Holly were madly in love with someone who seemed sincerely madly
in love with her and they both thought for some reason that getting
married would be a good thing, we would be cruel to say simply "No,
wait for the next one because you're not 18."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Therese Franklin
Just some streaming thoughts; I think it would depend on my kid and how
mature they are and if they feel they are ready. I'm assuming that if they
were both young, like 15 or 16, I would have to support them and they would
have to live at our house still. I would rather that my kids grow their own
wings and live on their own, so it would be better if they had jobs and
could pay rent to live in an apartment.. not that I wouldn't let my kids
live with me.. But it still seems like an awkward situation..
_____
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Sandra Dodd
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 1:38 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] OT-Letting them marry?
-=-> It would depend. For me to say "I absolutely would" would be as
lamented his
parents provide all this freedom in his life, and yet consider
resorting to
arranged marriages :) So yeah, I think under certain circumstances, I
could be
convinced :) -=-
The whole question had never occurred to me, but two of mine are 18
and haven't wanted to get married. The other is 15 and hasn't even
been on a date.
I suppose if the law said I had to sign for someone under 18, then
they would (legally) need my permission.
But I can't imagine my kids would get married or even serious about
someone without us having discussed it several different ways, and so
it would never be an out-of-the-blue question.
Let me use the exact situation I actually have. I have a 15 year old
daughter.
If Holly were pregnant in a year or two, and she trusted the guy to
take care of her and the baby, and if Keith and I didn't consider him
to be an oily run-away creep, and if Holly wanted to get married,
that would be fine.
In a non-emergency scenario:
If Holly were madly in love with someone who seemed sincerely madly
in love with her and they both thought for some reason that getting
married would be a good thing, we would be cruel to say simply "No,
wait for the next one because you're not 18."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
mature they are and if they feel they are ready. I'm assuming that if they
were both young, like 15 or 16, I would have to support them and they would
have to live at our house still. I would rather that my kids grow their own
wings and live on their own, so it would be better if they had jobs and
could pay rent to live in an apartment.. not that I wouldn't let my kids
live with me.. But it still seems like an awkward situation..
_____
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Sandra Dodd
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 1:38 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] OT-Letting them marry?
-=-> It would depend. For me to say "I absolutely would" would be as
> arbitrary as for me to say "I absolutely wouldn't."I had a riotous conversation with a life-long unschooler, who
>
lamented his
parents provide all this freedom in his life, and yet consider
resorting to
arranged marriages :) So yeah, I think under certain circumstances, I
could be
convinced :) -=-
The whole question had never occurred to me, but two of mine are 18
and haven't wanted to get married. The other is 15 and hasn't even
been on a date.
I suppose if the law said I had to sign for someone under 18, then
they would (legally) need my permission.
But I can't imagine my kids would get married or even serious about
someone without us having discussed it several different ways, and so
it would never be an out-of-the-blue question.
Let me use the exact situation I actually have. I have a 15 year old
daughter.
If Holly were pregnant in a year or two, and she trusted the guy to
take care of her and the baby, and if Keith and I didn't consider him
to be an oily run-away creep, and if Holly wanted to get married,
that would be fine.
In a non-emergency scenario:
If Holly were madly in love with someone who seemed sincerely madly
in love with her and they both thought for some reason that getting
married would be a good thing, we would be cruel to say simply "No,
wait for the next one because you're not 18."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
JENNIFER MARTIN
well I think the whole marriage thing comes to the whole if you marry early you are more likely to get divorced early in the marriage and more likely to to have to live with family or friends to make it and in my thought of marriage its a very adult thing to do and if you are an adult then you should be able to offer my daughter a places to live of thier own and be able to keep her at the up keep level that I keep her at.....meaning......if I pay for her nails to be done every other week then you should be able too...if I pay for her to have contacts then you should be able too....... and yes I know that the first years of marriage is hard and most people make it through great and with a new look on life but you should be able to do it on your own. IT drives me crazy when you see a married couple living with their mommy and daddy saying they are saving money for thier own place and all you see is them spending and always being broke. BUT if they were in love and and
seemed like the real deal and then I think they would be able to wait until they are adults to do a very adult thing. I got pregnant when I was 17 and we waited to get married until I was 18 so that I could make this my dicesion and not me begging my parents to sign for me and then My new husband asked my parents if I could stay there until he got us a house and about a week and a half we had a house and I moved out and he never stayed there. I'm going on and on but it is a very big decesion and if my child came to me and wanted to be married I would tell them that they need to save for a house and car and a wedding and in the mean time they can be getting a good job or go to college and then when they were 18 then they would be ready to be men and take care of their wife.
----- Original Message ----
From: Wildflower Car <unschoolfool@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 12:28:06 AM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] OT-Letting them marry?
What is your opinion on marriage under age 18. I believe the legal marriage
age varies from 14-18 across the country. Would you sign a release fro your
child to get married before 18? I had this question asked to me recently and
wanted to hear from you guys. It was related to unschooling by letting them
make their own choices when the question was posed to me.
Wildflower
_________________________________________________________________
Get Hilary Duffs homepage with her photos, music, and more.
http://celebrities.live.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
____________________________________________________________________________________
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
seemed like the real deal and then I think they would be able to wait until they are adults to do a very adult thing. I got pregnant when I was 17 and we waited to get married until I was 18 so that I could make this my dicesion and not me begging my parents to sign for me and then My new husband asked my parents if I could stay there until he got us a house and about a week and a half we had a house and I moved out and he never stayed there. I'm going on and on but it is a very big decesion and if my child came to me and wanted to be married I would tell them that they need to save for a house and car and a wedding and in the mean time they can be getting a good job or go to college and then when they were 18 then they would be ready to be men and take care of their wife.
----- Original Message ----
From: Wildflower Car <unschoolfool@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 12:28:06 AM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] OT-Letting them marry?
What is your opinion on marriage under age 18. I believe the legal marriage
age varies from 14-18 across the country. Would you sign a release fro your
child to get married before 18? I had this question asked to me recently and
wanted to hear from you guys. It was related to unschooling by letting them
make their own choices when the question was posed to me.
Wildflower
_________________________________________________________________
Get Hilary Duffs homepage with her photos, music, and more.
http://celebrities.live.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
____________________________________________________________________________________
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-I'm assuming that if they
were both young, like 15 or 16, I would have to support them and they
would
have to live at our house still. -=-
I was assuming one was older than that. <g>
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
were both young, like 15 or 16, I would have to support them and they
would
have to live at our house still. -=-
I was assuming one was older than that. <g>
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-well I think the whole marriage thing comes to the whole if you
marry early you are more likely to get divorced early in the marriage
and more likely to to have to live with family or friends to make it
and in my thought of marriage its a very adult thing to do and if you
are an adult then you should be able to offer my daughter a places to
live of thier own and be able to keep her at the up keep level that I
keep her at.....meaning......-=-
WHOA!!!!
Please read your posts before mailing them. When a post is one long
sentence, it's very difficult for others to read or understand.
If someone is prevented from marrying someone she really loved, she
can live with that pain for the rest of her life.
If someone is treated as inconsequential by her mother, ditto.
If someone is treated as a statistic by her mother, ditto.
I have not, to this point, spoken in terms of what is "an adult
thing to do." There are responsible things to do, and important
things, and sometimes children do responsible and important things.
Sometimes adults do very irresponsible and unimportant things.
Helping children grow up learning to make choices from the time
they're little results in a different kind of teen than comes from
parents making decisions FOR their children.
-=-and be able to keep her at the up keep level that I keep her
at.....meaning......if I pay for her nails to be done every other
week then you should be able too...if I pay for her to have contacts
then you should be able too....... -=-
Why would that be the mother's call?
If your daughter would rather go without manicures or fake nails, and
rather wear glasses, or get a job and get her OWN contacts and nails
done, so what?
To "require" that a young adult support his spouse in the fashion
that someone who's been working 20 years supports his daughter isn't
fair or right.
Jennifer Martin, how old are your children?
Is this all entirely hypothetical, or a kneejerk reaction to your own
teen pregnancy?
Living a reactionary life, and worse yet, pressing a child into the
mold of parental reaction, is damaging for the parent and the child
both. Maybe deal with your own personal issues internally and
separate from your daughter.
-=-I got pregnant when I was 17 and we waited to get married until I
was 18 so that I could make this my dicesion and not me begging my
parents to sign for me and then My new husband asked my parents if I
could stay there until he got us a house and about a week and a half
we had a house and I moved out and he never stayed there. -=-
??
He never stayed where?
Did your parents talk with you about birth control?
Were you being sneaky, having sex with your boyfriend, or were you in
good communication with your mom?
It might be that the situation you're talking about isn't very likely
to happen in a family in which sexuality is open to discussion and
parents have tried to be sure their children are informed about
options and protections.
-=-. I'm going on and on but it is a very big decesion and if my
child came to me and wanted to be married I would tell them that they
need to save for a house and car and a wedding and in the mean time
they can be getting a good job or go to college and then when they
were 18 then they would be ready to be men and take care of their
wife.-=-
People can't do all that before they're 18.
Nobody needs to save for a wedding to get married. If being married
is what they want (or, in the case of pregnancy, NEED), then to tell
them to save for a house and a wedding seems sadistic to me.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
marry early you are more likely to get divorced early in the marriage
and more likely to to have to live with family or friends to make it
and in my thought of marriage its a very adult thing to do and if you
are an adult then you should be able to offer my daughter a places to
live of thier own and be able to keep her at the up keep level that I
keep her at.....meaning......-=-
WHOA!!!!
Please read your posts before mailing them. When a post is one long
sentence, it's very difficult for others to read or understand.
If someone is prevented from marrying someone she really loved, she
can live with that pain for the rest of her life.
If someone is treated as inconsequential by her mother, ditto.
If someone is treated as a statistic by her mother, ditto.
I have not, to this point, spoken in terms of what is "an adult
thing to do." There are responsible things to do, and important
things, and sometimes children do responsible and important things.
Sometimes adults do very irresponsible and unimportant things.
Helping children grow up learning to make choices from the time
they're little results in a different kind of teen than comes from
parents making decisions FOR their children.
-=-and be able to keep her at the up keep level that I keep her
at.....meaning......if I pay for her nails to be done every other
week then you should be able too...if I pay for her to have contacts
then you should be able too....... -=-
Why would that be the mother's call?
If your daughter would rather go without manicures or fake nails, and
rather wear glasses, or get a job and get her OWN contacts and nails
done, so what?
To "require" that a young adult support his spouse in the fashion
that someone who's been working 20 years supports his daughter isn't
fair or right.
Jennifer Martin, how old are your children?
Is this all entirely hypothetical, or a kneejerk reaction to your own
teen pregnancy?
Living a reactionary life, and worse yet, pressing a child into the
mold of parental reaction, is damaging for the parent and the child
both. Maybe deal with your own personal issues internally and
separate from your daughter.
-=-I got pregnant when I was 17 and we waited to get married until I
was 18 so that I could make this my dicesion and not me begging my
parents to sign for me and then My new husband asked my parents if I
could stay there until he got us a house and about a week and a half
we had a house and I moved out and he never stayed there. -=-
??
He never stayed where?
Did your parents talk with you about birth control?
Were you being sneaky, having sex with your boyfriend, or were you in
good communication with your mom?
It might be that the situation you're talking about isn't very likely
to happen in a family in which sexuality is open to discussion and
parents have tried to be sure their children are informed about
options and protections.
-=-. I'm going on and on but it is a very big decesion and if my
child came to me and wanted to be married I would tell them that they
need to save for a house and car and a wedding and in the mean time
they can be getting a good job or go to college and then when they
were 18 then they would be ready to be men and take care of their
wife.-=-
People can't do all that before they're 18.
Nobody needs to save for a wedding to get married. If being married
is what they want (or, in the case of pregnancy, NEED), then to tell
them to save for a house and a wedding seems sadistic to me.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Therese Franklin
Those are very good points.
Has anyone read the Teenage Liberation Handbook by Grace Llewellyn?
http://www.amazon.com/Teenage-Liberation-Handbook-School-Education/dp/096295
9170
_____
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Sandra Dodd
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 6:55 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] OT-Letting them marry?
-=-well I think the whole marriage thing comes to the whole if you
marry early you are more likely to get divorced early in the marriage
and more likely to to have to live with family or friends to make it
and in my thought of marriage its a very adult thing to do and if you
are an adult then you should be able to offer my daughter a places to
live of thier own and be able to keep her at the up keep level that I
keep her at.....meaning......-=-
WHOA!!!!
Please read your posts before mailing them. When a post is one long
sentence, it's very difficult for others to read or understand.
If someone is prevented from marrying someone she really loved, she
can live with that pain for the rest of her life.
If someone is treated as inconsequential by her mother, ditto.
If someone is treated as a statistic by her mother, ditto.
I have not, to this point, spoken in terms of what is "an adult
thing to do." There are responsible things to do, and important
things, and sometimes children do responsible and important things.
Sometimes adults do very irresponsible and unimportant things.
Helping children grow up learning to make choices from the time
they're little results in a different kind of teen than comes from
parents making decisions FOR their children.
-=-and be able to keep her at the up keep level that I keep her
at.....meaning......if I pay for her nails to be done every other
week then you should be able too...if I pay for her to have contacts
then you should be able too....... -=-
Why would that be the mother's call?
If your daughter would rather go without manicures or fake nails, and
rather wear glasses, or get a job and get her OWN contacts and nails
done, so what?
To "require" that a young adult support his spouse in the fashion
that someone who's been working 20 years supports his daughter isn't
fair or right.
Jennifer Martin, how old are your children?
Is this all entirely hypothetical, or a kneejerk reaction to your own
teen pregnancy?
Living a reactionary life, and worse yet, pressing a child into the
mold of parental reaction, is damaging for the parent and the child
both. Maybe deal with your own personal issues internally and
separate from your daughter.
-=-I got pregnant when I was 17 and we waited to get married until I
was 18 so that I could make this my dicesion and not me begging my
parents to sign for me and then My new husband asked my parents if I
could stay there until he got us a house and about a week and a half
we had a house and I moved out and he never stayed there. -=-
??
He never stayed where?
Did your parents talk with you about birth control?
Were you being sneaky, having sex with your boyfriend, or were you in
good communication with your mom?
It might be that the situation you're talking about isn't very likely
to happen in a family in which sexuality is open to discussion and
parents have tried to be sure their children are informed about
options and protections.
-=-. I'm going on and on but it is a very big decesion and if my
child came to me and wanted to be married I would tell them that they
need to save for a house and car and a wedding and in the mean time
they can be getting a good job or go to college and then when they
were 18 then they would be ready to be men and take care of their
wife.-=-
People can't do all that before they're 18.
Nobody needs to save for a wedding to get married. If being married
is what they want (or, in the case of pregnancy, NEED), then to tell
them to save for a house and a wedding seems sadistic to me.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Has anyone read the Teenage Liberation Handbook by Grace Llewellyn?
http://www.amazon.com/Teenage-Liberation-Handbook-School-Education/dp/096295
9170
_____
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Sandra Dodd
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 6:55 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] OT-Letting them marry?
-=-well I think the whole marriage thing comes to the whole if you
marry early you are more likely to get divorced early in the marriage
and more likely to to have to live with family or friends to make it
and in my thought of marriage its a very adult thing to do and if you
are an adult then you should be able to offer my daughter a places to
live of thier own and be able to keep her at the up keep level that I
keep her at.....meaning......-=-
WHOA!!!!
Please read your posts before mailing them. When a post is one long
sentence, it's very difficult for others to read or understand.
If someone is prevented from marrying someone she really loved, she
can live with that pain for the rest of her life.
If someone is treated as inconsequential by her mother, ditto.
If someone is treated as a statistic by her mother, ditto.
I have not, to this point, spoken in terms of what is "an adult
thing to do." There are responsible things to do, and important
things, and sometimes children do responsible and important things.
Sometimes adults do very irresponsible and unimportant things.
Helping children grow up learning to make choices from the time
they're little results in a different kind of teen than comes from
parents making decisions FOR their children.
-=-and be able to keep her at the up keep level that I keep her
at.....meaning......if I pay for her nails to be done every other
week then you should be able too...if I pay for her to have contacts
then you should be able too....... -=-
Why would that be the mother's call?
If your daughter would rather go without manicures or fake nails, and
rather wear glasses, or get a job and get her OWN contacts and nails
done, so what?
To "require" that a young adult support his spouse in the fashion
that someone who's been working 20 years supports his daughter isn't
fair or right.
Jennifer Martin, how old are your children?
Is this all entirely hypothetical, or a kneejerk reaction to your own
teen pregnancy?
Living a reactionary life, and worse yet, pressing a child into the
mold of parental reaction, is damaging for the parent and the child
both. Maybe deal with your own personal issues internally and
separate from your daughter.
-=-I got pregnant when I was 17 and we waited to get married until I
was 18 so that I could make this my dicesion and not me begging my
parents to sign for me and then My new husband asked my parents if I
could stay there until he got us a house and about a week and a half
we had a house and I moved out and he never stayed there. -=-
??
He never stayed where?
Did your parents talk with you about birth control?
Were you being sneaky, having sex with your boyfriend, or were you in
good communication with your mom?
It might be that the situation you're talking about isn't very likely
to happen in a family in which sexuality is open to discussion and
parents have tried to be sure their children are informed about
options and protections.
-=-. I'm going on and on but it is a very big decesion and if my
child came to me and wanted to be married I would tell them that they
need to save for a house and car and a wedding and in the mean time
they can be getting a good job or go to college and then when they
were 18 then they would be ready to be men and take care of their
wife.-=-
People can't do all that before they're 18.
Nobody needs to save for a wedding to get married. If being married
is what they want (or, in the case of pregnancy, NEED), then to tell
them to save for a house and a wedding seems sadistic to me.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Wildflower Car
Sandra,
Are you saying that in you opinion pregnant women need to get married?
Wildflower
If being married
Turn searches into helpful donations. Make your search count.
http://click4thecause.live.com/search/charity/default.aspx?source=hmemtagline_donation&FORM=WLMTAG
Are you saying that in you opinion pregnant women need to get married?
Wildflower
If being married
>is what they want (or, in the case of pregnancy, NEED), then to tell_________________________________________________________________
>them to save for a house and a wedding seems sadistic to me.
>
>Sandra
>
>
Turn searches into helpful donations. Make your search count.
http://click4thecause.live.com/search/charity/default.aspx?source=hmemtagline_donation&FORM=WLMTAG
Sandra Dodd
-=-Are you saying that in you opinion pregnant women need to get
married?-=-
If my daughter were pregnant and the father was willing to marry her,
and she wanted that, I think it would be a need and not a fleeting
desire.
In my opinion, a child should have both parents if that's a
reasonable option.
And there's a greater NEED to marry if there's a baby coming than if
the kid just think it would be fun to live together separate from any
parents (which is why many people get married).
If a parent has left a child uninformed of the possible result of pre-
marital sex, how does that recommend the parent's qualifications to
advise her on anything else?
To tell a pregnant girl and a soon-to-be-father that the child must
be born outside a marriage because the mom (who's already shown some
failure to pay attention) chooses that goes against my experience and
belief.
I thought the question was about experience and belief, and what
anyone who wanted to respond thought she would do and why.
-=-Are you saying that in you opinion pregnant women need to get
married?-=-
It depends on the pregnant woman and who the father is. Is the
father already married? Is he a relative or a minister or some other
child abuser who shouldn't have been with the girl in the first place?
A simple answer to a complex question is probably a bad answer.
A question about a hypothetical situation can only be well answered
with "it depends."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
married?-=-
If my daughter were pregnant and the father was willing to marry her,
and she wanted that, I think it would be a need and not a fleeting
desire.
In my opinion, a child should have both parents if that's a
reasonable option.
And there's a greater NEED to marry if there's a baby coming than if
the kid just think it would be fun to live together separate from any
parents (which is why many people get married).
If a parent has left a child uninformed of the possible result of pre-
marital sex, how does that recommend the parent's qualifications to
advise her on anything else?
To tell a pregnant girl and a soon-to-be-father that the child must
be born outside a marriage because the mom (who's already shown some
failure to pay attention) chooses that goes against my experience and
belief.
I thought the question was about experience and belief, and what
anyone who wanted to respond thought she would do and why.
-=-Are you saying that in you opinion pregnant women need to get
married?-=-
It depends on the pregnant woman and who the father is. Is the
father already married? Is he a relative or a minister or some other
child abuser who shouldn't have been with the girl in the first place?
A simple answer to a complex question is probably a bad answer.
A question about a hypothetical situation can only be well answered
with "it depends."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
My rambly thoughts that were sparked by your post:
Sandra Dodd wrote:
of the word "need"! My opinion is that marriage is not really ever a
NEED (even for adults), but always a DESIRE.
But desire is not a negative thing!....and just because something is a
desire, it doesn't mean it is a "fleeting" desire,kwim?
I do agree though, that many parents treat teens patronizingly, and act
as if a their desires are fleeting desires simply because of their age.
children as they see fit...but unfortunately, and as you point out, the
way that they see fit is not always in the best interest of ,or
respectful towards, their child.
But I do want to point out that its a presumption to automatically
assume that if a teen is pregnant, then her parents must have left her
uninformed of the possible result of premarital sex.
That is most definitely not always the case!
And even in this day and age, there are girls who feel that if they are
pregnant they "should" marry the father - even if they aren't really
sure that it would be the best thing for them relationally. I think its
part of that societal "thing" that women deal with -"do whats right",
"make others happy"
IMO,a parent would be correct in advising the girl to be sure that she
really wants to marry the boy and is not wanting to simply because she
is pregnant.
A child can have both parents in their lives in an active,involved way -
even if the parents in question are not married. Its definitely harder,
but it is possible. If my teen dd were pregnant, I'd counsel her and
her bf to make sure that marriage is what they really wanted - if it
was, then I'd support their decision.
in that particular case - but again, I don't believe that one can
always say with certainty that if a teen is pregnant, then the mother
has shown failure to pay attention.
I understand your point, because often that IS the case, but not always.
~jennifer c
Sandra Dodd wrote:
> If my daughter were pregnant and the father was willing to marry her,I see your point, but I guess it boils sown to what is the definition
> and she wanted that, I think it would be a need and not a fleeting
> desire.
>
of the word "need"! My opinion is that marriage is not really ever a
NEED (even for adults), but always a DESIRE.
But desire is not a negative thing!....and just because something is a
desire, it doesn't mean it is a "fleeting" desire,kwim?
I do agree though, that many parents treat teens patronizingly, and act
as if a their desires are fleeting desires simply because of their age.
> If a parent has left a child uninformed of the possible result of pre-You are right, it doesn't. Parents do have a right to advise their
> marital sex, how does that recommend the parent's qualifications to
> advise her on anything else?
children as they see fit...but unfortunately, and as you point out, the
way that they see fit is not always in the best interest of ,or
respectful towards, their child.
But I do want to point out that its a presumption to automatically
assume that if a teen is pregnant, then her parents must have left her
uninformed of the possible result of premarital sex.
That is most definitely not always the case!
And even in this day and age, there are girls who feel that if they are
pregnant they "should" marry the father - even if they aren't really
sure that it would be the best thing for them relationally. I think its
part of that societal "thing" that women deal with -"do whats right",
"make others happy"
IMO,a parent would be correct in advising the girl to be sure that she
really wants to marry the boy and is not wanting to simply because she
is pregnant.
A child can have both parents in their lives in an active,involved way -
even if the parents in question are not married. Its definitely harder,
but it is possible. If my teen dd were pregnant, I'd counsel her and
her bf to make sure that marriage is what they really wanted - if it
was, then I'd support their decision.
> To tell a pregnant girl and a soon-to-be-father that the child mustI definitely get the scenario you are describing, and I agree with you
> be born outside a marriage because the mom (who's already shown some
> failure to pay attention) chooses that goes against my experience and
> belief.
in that particular case - but again, I don't believe that one can
always say with certainty that if a teen is pregnant, then the mother
has shown failure to pay attention.
I understand your point, because often that IS the case, but not always.
~jennifer c
> -
>
Sandra Dodd
-=-I see your point, but I guess it boils sown to what is the definition
of the word "need"!-=-
I will not declare to Holly the difference between her needs and
desires. If she feels she needs something, for some reason, and she
seems really to have thought about it, I will respect that.
-=-My opinion is that marriage is not really ever a
NEED (even for adults), but always a DESIRE.
But desire is not a negative thing!....and just because something is a
desire, it doesn't mean it is a "fleeting" desire,kwim?-=-
If a person feels that she would be being dishonest, immoral or
unfair in a situation, and decides she needs (for the maintenance of
her integrity and inner peace) to do something, then that is a need.
-=-But I do want to point out that its a presumption to automatically
assume that if a teen is pregnant, then her parents must have left her
uninformed of the possible result of premarital sex.-=-
Did I automatically assume that?
I could name names and tell stories of women who grew up woefully
ignorant, or lied to, and had not the faintest CLUE how a person got
pregnant or what it was, the one thing boys allegedly only wanted.
-=-And even in this day and age, there are girls who feel that if
they are
pregnant they "should" marry the father - even if they aren't really
sure that it would be the best thing for them relationally.-=-
For WHO "relationally"? The child? The couple?
-=-I think its
part of that societal "thing" that women deal with -"do whats right",
"make others happy"-=-
I have two sons of impregnating and marriageable age. I expect them
to do what's right and make others happy.
I expect any mother who has chosen to unschool her children to do
what's right and make others happy.
I advise any woman who's sworn marriage vows in public to do her
best to do what's right and make her husband happy.
That's not "that societal 'thing,'" that's responsibility, integrity,
morality, compassion and selflessness.
-=-IMO,a parent would be correct in advising the girl to be sure that
she
really wants to marry the boy and is not wanting to simply because she
is pregnant.-=-
Did anyone in this thread recommend advising a girl to marry a boy
she didn't want to marry?
-=-A child can have both parents in their lives in an active,involved
way -
even if the parents in question are not married. Its definitely harder,
but it is possible.-=-
It's possible to do it to the parent's guilt-reducing satisfaction,
but it will never be the same for the child to have one parent at a
time instead of, ever, both at once.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
of the word "need"!-=-
I will not declare to Holly the difference between her needs and
desires. If she feels she needs something, for some reason, and she
seems really to have thought about it, I will respect that.
-=-My opinion is that marriage is not really ever a
NEED (even for adults), but always a DESIRE.
But desire is not a negative thing!....and just because something is a
desire, it doesn't mean it is a "fleeting" desire,kwim?-=-
If a person feels that she would be being dishonest, immoral or
unfair in a situation, and decides she needs (for the maintenance of
her integrity and inner peace) to do something, then that is a need.
-=-But I do want to point out that its a presumption to automatically
assume that if a teen is pregnant, then her parents must have left her
uninformed of the possible result of premarital sex.-=-
Did I automatically assume that?
I could name names and tell stories of women who grew up woefully
ignorant, or lied to, and had not the faintest CLUE how a person got
pregnant or what it was, the one thing boys allegedly only wanted.
-=-And even in this day and age, there are girls who feel that if
they are
pregnant they "should" marry the father - even if they aren't really
sure that it would be the best thing for them relationally.-=-
For WHO "relationally"? The child? The couple?
-=-I think its
part of that societal "thing" that women deal with -"do whats right",
"make others happy"-=-
I have two sons of impregnating and marriageable age. I expect them
to do what's right and make others happy.
I expect any mother who has chosen to unschool her children to do
what's right and make others happy.
I advise any woman who's sworn marriage vows in public to do her
best to do what's right and make her husband happy.
That's not "that societal 'thing,'" that's responsibility, integrity,
morality, compassion and selflessness.
-=-IMO,a parent would be correct in advising the girl to be sure that
she
really wants to marry the boy and is not wanting to simply because she
is pregnant.-=-
Did anyone in this thread recommend advising a girl to marry a boy
she didn't want to marry?
-=-A child can have both parents in their lives in an active,involved
way -
even if the parents in question are not married. Its definitely harder,
but it is possible.-=-
It's possible to do it to the parent's guilt-reducing satisfaction,
but it will never be the same for the child to have one parent at a
time instead of, ever, both at once.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
queenjane555
One of the conversations my son and i have had about teen pregnancy,
is the likelihood, because he is a boy, of not being able to be
involved in a way he'd like, if he were to get a girl pregnant.
I've told him that the reality is, that whatever child results from
such a situation will essentially "belong" to that girl and her
family, and we'd get little say in how that child is raised. This
came up because he was saying how any children he'd have in the
future, he'd want them to unschool. I told him he'd better be
careful who he is with then, because teenaged boys generally don't
get to tell their teenage girlfriends that they need to homebirth,
breastfeed, cosleep, not circumsize, or homeschool. Not that adult
men can "tell" the mother of their kids to do that either, but i
guess its a question of influence...just a different situation when
a girl is living with her mother/family and they are still raising
HER. The likelihood, IF he were to get a girl pg when he was a teen,
of her having a family that is pro-all-the-ways-we-think-a-child-
should-be-raised is pretty small so that alone should be a big
deterrant to unprotected teen sex.
Anyway, he's only 10, but my hope is talking about these things in a
conversational way while he is young will help him make informed
choices when he is older. As it stands, he says he's never getting
married and only wants to adopt kids.
Katherine
is the likelihood, because he is a boy, of not being able to be
involved in a way he'd like, if he were to get a girl pregnant.
I've told him that the reality is, that whatever child results from
such a situation will essentially "belong" to that girl and her
family, and we'd get little say in how that child is raised. This
came up because he was saying how any children he'd have in the
future, he'd want them to unschool. I told him he'd better be
careful who he is with then, because teenaged boys generally don't
get to tell their teenage girlfriends that they need to homebirth,
breastfeed, cosleep, not circumsize, or homeschool. Not that adult
men can "tell" the mother of their kids to do that either, but i
guess its a question of influence...just a different situation when
a girl is living with her mother/family and they are still raising
HER. The likelihood, IF he were to get a girl pg when he was a teen,
of her having a family that is pro-all-the-ways-we-think-a-child-
should-be-raised is pretty small so that alone should be a big
deterrant to unprotected teen sex.
Anyway, he's only 10, but my hope is talking about these things in a
conversational way while he is young will help him make informed
choices when he is older. As it stands, he says he's never getting
married and only wants to adopt kids.
Katherine
[email protected]
The lack of this kind of conversations... or should I say the lack of knowledge
on *how to* have this kind of conversation has sparked my Fireside Chat at the
Live and Learn Conference to be divided into two sections: those who are
unschooled and those who are the "coaches."
I hope Seamus comes, to pipe up about how his mom handles *the sex talk* in his
world :) I'll be sure to share your wisdom when talking to the older folks --
or better yet, *you* can come share with the group ::bg::
It's always amazing to me that parents in this day and age *don't* have these
kinds of matter-of-fact conversations about sex. When I'm talking to a group of
moms and it comes up (invariably from me!), they'll shush me and look sheepishly
around, hoping their kids didn't hear that wacko mention the *S* word! Few
things make my skin crawl the same way!
Hayden is present for so much of my life, he's heard me advise a couple on what
to do with an inintended pregnancy and my frequent conversations with/reminders
to our soon 19 year old cousin on how to protect himself from that situation and
now he's hearing a lot about my 24 year old cousin's pregnancy. Not as separate
and different from real life, as Part and Parcel thereof.
~diana :)
Quoting queenjane555 <queenjane555@...>:
on *how to* have this kind of conversation has sparked my Fireside Chat at the
Live and Learn Conference to be divided into two sections: those who are
unschooled and those who are the "coaches."
I hope Seamus comes, to pipe up about how his mom handles *the sex talk* in his
world :) I'll be sure to share your wisdom when talking to the older folks --
or better yet, *you* can come share with the group ::bg::
It's always amazing to me that parents in this day and age *don't* have these
kinds of matter-of-fact conversations about sex. When I'm talking to a group of
moms and it comes up (invariably from me!), they'll shush me and look sheepishly
around, hoping their kids didn't hear that wacko mention the *S* word! Few
things make my skin crawl the same way!
Hayden is present for so much of my life, he's heard me advise a couple on what
to do with an inintended pregnancy and my frequent conversations with/reminders
to our soon 19 year old cousin on how to protect himself from that situation and
now he's hearing a lot about my 24 year old cousin's pregnancy. Not as separate
and different from real life, as Part and Parcel thereof.
~diana :)
Quoting queenjane555 <queenjane555@...>:
> One of the conversations my son and i have had about teen pregnancy,
> is the likelihood, because he is a boy, of not being able to be
> involved in a way he'd like, if he were to get a girl pregnant.
>
> I've told him that the reality is, that whatever child results from
> such a situation will essentially "belong" to that girl and her
> family, and we'd get little say in how that child is raised. This
> came up because he was saying how any children he'd have in the
> future, he'd want them to unschool. I told him he'd better be
> careful who he is with then, because teenaged boys generally don't
> get to tell their teenage girlfriends that they need to homebirth,
> breastfeed, cosleep, not circumsize, or homeschool. Not that adult
> men can "tell" the mother of their kids to do that either, but i
> guess its a question of influence...just a different situation when
> a girl is living with her mother/family and they are still raising
> HER. The likelihood, IF he were to get a girl pg when he was a teen,
> of her having a family that is pro-all-the-ways-we-think-a-child-
> should-be-raised is pretty small so that alone should be a big
> deterrant to unprotected teen sex.
>
> Anyway, he's only 10, but my hope is talking about these things in a
> conversational way while he is young will help him make informed
> choices when he is older. As it stands, he says he's never getting
> married and only wants to adopt kids.
>
>
> Katherine
>
>
[email protected]
Sorry for all the snipping, but I wanted to be clear and address all of
the questions you asked me :-)
myself well. I wasn't AT ALL saying that I expected anyone to declare to
their child the difference between their wants and their needs in the
event that they were pregnant or wanted to marry (or in any event
really) I was responding to your words.....you said ,or implied, that
if there was a pregnancy, there was a NEED for marriage. In an almost
tangental point I was expressing my thoughts on wants v/s needs. Maybe
this was an inappropriate venue for that?
I'm not arguing with you on a personal level at all!. I'm just
discussing the topic in general and your post brought up some points
that I wanted to discuss in a general way.
I totally support your validating your daughters desires/needs, I do
that as well!.....however; I was simply saying that ,semantically
speaking, we humans often refer to our desires as needs.I guess I was
being overly semantic!
need anyway you want to (or need to!LOL!) I think we actually agree on
the issue of respecting our children . I have many strong desires that
in some ways are actually needs in terms of my sanity and well being -
I totally get your point. I don't think you are getting my point
though. I wasn't disagreeing with you on the importance of validating
our children's desires/needs, I was simply, in my logical sequential
manner, defining the word "need".... I guess the idea of someone NEEDing
to get married brought a different mental picture to mind. I pictured
someone feeling like they needed to simply because "thats what people do
when they are pregnant" you know, the whole shotgun wedding
mentality....whether they really WANTED to marry the person or not. It
seems as if you were coming from the viewpoint that the kids really
WANTED to marry...wanted to so much in fact that it can(and should) be
construed as a NEED. I agree with you!Are you seeing where I was
coming from more clearly now?
:-) I was just responding to what you wrote.
point and agree with it. But I was making a different point one sparked
by the idea that if a teen were pregnant, then her parents somehow where
uninvolved or didn't give her information or not paying attention.(which
is what you wrote in your post)
I know people who got pregnant as a teen who's parents were involved in
their lives in a respectful,supportive manner (much like many of the
mom's on this list) and who did give their dd information about the
consequences of sex and info on birth control. Things happen..if 2
people are having sex, no matter how well aware they are of the possible
consequences, even if they are using birth control, pregnancy can happen
that I know people who got married just because they were under the
impression(or told that) thats just what you do when you're pregnant.
They didn't realize that they had the choice to NOT marry the boy if
that was what they (the pregnant girl and/or the boy) felt was best for
them. As I said in my previous post - it IS possible for both parents
to be actively a part of the baby's life even if they are not
married...not easy, but possible.
If the couple marry and the didn't really want to,and are constantly
angry and miserable,how is that best for the baby?
right" was to send my kids to school, in the first homeschool group I
joined "whats right" was deemed to mean school-at-home. I didn't do
"whats right" by their definition, thats the point I was trying to
make. I was trying to say that some girls marry because it is "whats
right" by someone else's definition. My hope was that an involved parent
would help the girl realize she had to do "whats right" for herself, the
baby, and her partner.
again, I obviously didn't make my point clearly in my last post. I
definitely expect my children to "do whats right" in the sense that I
want them to care about others and do things that are
lawful,moral/ethical and respectful- even if it's the hard thing to
do.....although I don't think that others feelings are their
responsibility.
I expect them to be respectful and supportive of others feelings,to care
about others happiness, to want the people that they are in relationship
to be happy, to do things that lead to their partners happiness even if
it can be a bit of a sacrifice for them....BUT ultimately each person is
responsible for their own feelings.
I wouldn't want my children to do or be something that is not in their
best interest ,or that is not true to their own nature just to make
their significant other or friends "happy"
I'm thinking about how women have historically been taught to feel that
others happiness is more important than their own
Gavin DeBecker touches on this in his book Protecting the gift. women
are taught not to make waves,to smile and make nice, to do what is
expected of them, often to the detriment of their own safety ....Things
are changing (thankfully) but it is still prevalent in society
So I wasn't implying that I wouldn't want my children to be nice people
or care about others feelings or that I wouldn't want them to do whats
right. I was trying to say that I wouldn't want them to marry simply
because they thought that it was expected of them.
people marry because they are pregnant - whether they really want to or not.
I also said that I think its appropriate if the parent lets the child
know that she is accepted whether or not she chooses to marry and that
she only has to marry if she truly wants to.
So to clarify, I wasn't responding to anyone in this thread, I was
making my own point....not an accusatory point directed to anyone in
this thread, but a general point that was simply sharing my feelings on
the subject ...a point that I honestly felt the majority probably shared
given the nature of the group. I had no idea that you would take it
so... I dunno, defensively?
-=-A child can have both parents in their lives in an active,involved
way -
even if the parents in question are not married. Its definitely harder,
but it is possible.-=-
It's possible to do it to the parent's guilt-reducing satisfaction,
but it will never be the same for the child to have one parent at a
time instead of, ever, both at once.
And thats exactly what I meant. It IS possible, but much harder - for
all involved. I feel the same way about breastfeeding and positive
discipline lol!! Those are things that would be best for the child,their
birthright even - but unfortunately not everyone will do them ( I
understand that there are valid reasons some people can't breastfeed - I
was referring to those who don't breastfeed because its"icky" or they
want their figure back or its just too hard,etc...)
And as far as the parents guilt-reducing satisfaction, you have a point,
but there are many situations where its just as guilt reducing and
parent centered to marry if the parents don't really want to be married
or are abusive or neglectful....
I think we are all in agreement that happily married,loving,respectful
parents are the ideal foundation for a happy child. But having both
parents at once does not always mean that the child will be
happy,safe,or satisfied. I can speak to that from my own growing up.
Having miserably unhappily married parents or a two parent, yet unsafe,
household is not going to be any more ideal than two non married parents
working hard to let their child know that they are loved and both of
those parents being an active, loving , involved part of the child's life.
I don't know that I am articulating myself well here. Again, I feel that
- for the most part- we are in agreement! especially on the importance
of respecting our children and validating their needs and feelings.
Sorry if I stepped on any toes, but I was just trying to share my
thoughts ,in a general way ,on an interesting topic.
~jennifer c
the questions you asked me :-)
>I think you are misunderstanding me...or maybe I'm not expressing
> I will not declare to Holly the difference between her needs and
> desires. If she feels she needs something, for some reason, and she
> seems really to have thought about it, I will respect that.
myself well. I wasn't AT ALL saying that I expected anyone to declare to
their child the difference between their wants and their needs in the
event that they were pregnant or wanted to marry (or in any event
really) I was responding to your words.....you said ,or implied, that
if there was a pregnancy, there was a NEED for marriage. In an almost
tangental point I was expressing my thoughts on wants v/s needs. Maybe
this was an inappropriate venue for that?
I'm not arguing with you on a personal level at all!. I'm just
discussing the topic in general and your post brought up some points
that I wanted to discuss in a general way.
I totally support your validating your daughters desires/needs, I do
that as well!.....however; I was simply saying that ,semantically
speaking, we humans often refer to our desires as needs.I guess I was
being overly semantic!
> If a person feels that she would be being dishonest, immoral oragain, I agree with your point, and you have a right to define the word
> unfair in a situation, and decides she needs (for the maintenance of
> her integrity and inner peace) to do something, then that is a need.
need anyway you want to (or need to!LOL!) I think we actually agree on
the issue of respecting our children . I have many strong desires that
in some ways are actually needs in terms of my sanity and well being -
I totally get your point. I don't think you are getting my point
though. I wasn't disagreeing with you on the importance of validating
our children's desires/needs, I was simply, in my logical sequential
manner, defining the word "need".... I guess the idea of someone NEEDing
to get married brought a different mental picture to mind. I pictured
someone feeling like they needed to simply because "thats what people do
when they are pregnant" you know, the whole shotgun wedding
mentality....whether they really WANTED to marry the person or not. It
seems as if you were coming from the viewpoint that the kids really
WANTED to marry...wanted to so much in fact that it can(and should) be
construed as a NEED. I agree with you!Are you seeing where I was
coming from more clearly now?
> =-But I do want to point out that its a presumption to automaticallywell,.yes...or at least it sure sounded like it in your previous post!
> assume that if a teen is pregnant, then her parents must have left her
> uninformed of the possible result of premarital sex.-=-
>
> Did I automatically assume that?
:-) I was just responding to what you wrote.
> I could name names and tell stories of women who grew up woefullyI agree with you 100% I could name many as well! I totally get your
> ignorant, or lied to, and had not the faintest CLUE how a person got
> pregnant or what it was, the one thing boys allegedly only wanted.
point and agree with it. But I was making a different point one sparked
by the idea that if a teen were pregnant, then her parents somehow where
uninvolved or didn't give her information or not paying attention.(which
is what you wrote in your post)
I know people who got pregnant as a teen who's parents were involved in
their lives in a respectful,supportive manner (much like many of the
mom's on this list) and who did give their dd information about the
consequences of sex and info on birth control. Things happen..if 2
people are having sex, no matter how well aware they are of the possible
consequences, even if they are using birth control, pregnancy can happen
> -=-And even in this day and age, there are girls who feel that iffor the pregnant girl and her partner. My horribly articulated point was
> they are
> pregnant they "should" marry the father - even if they aren't really
> sure that it would be the best thing for them relationally.
> -=-
>
>
> For WHO "relationally"? The child? The couple?
>
that I know people who got married just because they were under the
impression(or told that) thats just what you do when you're pregnant.
They didn't realize that they had the choice to NOT marry the boy if
that was what they (the pregnant girl and/or the boy) felt was best for
them. As I said in my previous post - it IS possible for both parents
to be actively a part of the baby's life even if they are not
married...not easy, but possible.
If the couple marry and the didn't really want to,and are constantly
angry and miserable,how is that best for the baby?
> =-I think its"whats right" as defined by whom? My extended family felt that "whats
> part of that societal "thing" that women deal with -"do whats right",
> "make others happy"-=-
>
> I have two sons of impregnating and marriageable age. I expect them
> to do what's right and make others happy.
> I expect any mother who has chosen to unschool her children to do
> what's right and make others happy.
> I advise any woman who's sworn marriage vows in public to do her
> best to do what's right and make her husband happy.
right" was to send my kids to school, in the first homeschool group I
joined "whats right" was deemed to mean school-at-home. I didn't do
"whats right" by their definition, thats the point I was trying to
make. I was trying to say that some girls marry because it is "whats
right" by someone else's definition. My hope was that an involved parent
would help the girl realize she had to do "whats right" for herself, the
baby, and her partner.
again, I obviously didn't make my point clearly in my last post. I
definitely expect my children to "do whats right" in the sense that I
want them to care about others and do things that are
lawful,moral/ethical and respectful- even if it's the hard thing to
do.....although I don't think that others feelings are their
responsibility.
I expect them to be respectful and supportive of others feelings,to care
about others happiness, to want the people that they are in relationship
to be happy, to do things that lead to their partners happiness even if
it can be a bit of a sacrifice for them....BUT ultimately each person is
responsible for their own feelings.
I wouldn't want my children to do or be something that is not in their
best interest ,or that is not true to their own nature just to make
their significant other or friends "happy"
I'm thinking about how women have historically been taught to feel that
others happiness is more important than their own
Gavin DeBecker touches on this in his book Protecting the gift. women
are taught not to make waves,to smile and make nice, to do what is
expected of them, often to the detriment of their own safety ....Things
are changing (thankfully) but it is still prevalent in society
So I wasn't implying that I wouldn't want my children to be nice people
or care about others feelings or that I wouldn't want them to do whats
right. I was trying to say that I wouldn't want them to marry simply
because they thought that it was expected of them.
>no, but someone in this thread (me) said that she is aware that some
> Did anyone in this thread recommend advising a girl to marry a boy
> she didn't want to marry?
people marry because they are pregnant - whether they really want to or not.
I also said that I think its appropriate if the parent lets the child
know that she is accepted whether or not she chooses to marry and that
she only has to marry if she truly wants to.
So to clarify, I wasn't responding to anyone in this thread, I was
making my own point....not an accusatory point directed to anyone in
this thread, but a general point that was simply sharing my feelings on
the subject ...a point that I honestly felt the majority probably shared
given the nature of the group. I had no idea that you would take it
so... I dunno, defensively?
-=-A child can have both parents in their lives in an active,involved
way -
even if the parents in question are not married. Its definitely harder,
but it is possible.-=-
It's possible to do it to the parent's guilt-reducing satisfaction,
but it will never be the same for the child to have one parent at a
time instead of, ever, both at once.
And thats exactly what I meant. It IS possible, but much harder - for
all involved. I feel the same way about breastfeeding and positive
discipline lol!! Those are things that would be best for the child,their
birthright even - but unfortunately not everyone will do them ( I
understand that there are valid reasons some people can't breastfeed - I
was referring to those who don't breastfeed because its"icky" or they
want their figure back or its just too hard,etc...)
And as far as the parents guilt-reducing satisfaction, you have a point,
but there are many situations where its just as guilt reducing and
parent centered to marry if the parents don't really want to be married
or are abusive or neglectful....
I think we are all in agreement that happily married,loving,respectful
parents are the ideal foundation for a happy child. But having both
parents at once does not always mean that the child will be
happy,safe,or satisfied. I can speak to that from my own growing up.
Having miserably unhappily married parents or a two parent, yet unsafe,
household is not going to be any more ideal than two non married parents
working hard to let their child know that they are loved and both of
those parents being an active, loving , involved part of the child's life.
I don't know that I am articulating myself well here. Again, I feel that
- for the most part- we are in agreement! especially on the importance
of respecting our children and validating their needs and feelings.
Sorry if I stepped on any toes, but I was just trying to share my
thoughts ,in a general way ,on an interesting topic.
~jennifer c
Sandra Dodd
-=-In an almost
tangental point I was expressing my thoughts on wants v/s needs. Maybe
this was an inappropriate venue for that?-=-
It's okay if someone doesn't understand someone else on this list.
Lots of people are reading. There have been 22 new members in the
past week and even if the hundreds of people on the list were all
reading everything (which they're not), each would take something
different from each post, because that's how people learn--they add
to what they already know, and spark up at what is new or interesting.
-=-however; I was simply saying that ,semantically
speaking, we humans often refer to our desires as needs.I guess I was
being overly semantic!-=-
Not overly semantic. I don't like the "just semantics" argument. I
consider it invalid. English has many words because we have
different meanings and nuances and connotations for all of them.
For a long time, longer than any of us could find or prove, adults
have told children "You don't NEED that," about things from toys to
food to peace and safety. I don't want to encourage any mother to
pooh-pooh any child's perceived need.
-=-> If a person feels that she would be being dishonest, immoral or
word
need anyway you want to-=-
That wasn't me defining the word. That was me using the word and
explaining why I thought there could be a need to maintain integrity
and peace.
-=-I don't think you are getting my point
though. I wasn't disagreeing with you on the importance of validating
our children's desires/needs, I was simply, in my logical sequential
manner, defining the word "need".... -=-
I missed the logical sequential part, but it seems you're implying I
was being neither.
It's okay (really! it's great!) to proofread your posts and clarify
them before sending them.
It's better for everyone.
-=-I pictured
someone feeling like they needed to simply because "thats what people do
when they are pregnant" you know, the whole shotgun wedding
mentality....whether they really WANTED to marry the person or not.-=-
If you pictured that, it wasn't from the original question nor from
what I wrote, because I said from the beginning it would depend on
all kinds of factors.
-=-Are you seeing where I was coming from more clearly now?-=-
Doesn't matter. Be as clear as you can be each time you post, and
don't try to insist that anyone agree or accept or affirm it.
-=-I know people who got pregnant as a teen who's parents were
involved in their lives in a respectful,supportive manner (much like
many of the mom's on this list)-=-
I've never known one yet, in my life. What's theoretical, or what
makes an argument sound good isn't as good as real personal
information. The list never does well with "what if" or "I heard"
or "oh sure, lots."
The original question was theoretical and philosophical, and my
response was "it depends." The other points were discussion of
discussion, and of why, and of the what-ifs.
-=-"whats right" as defined by whom? My extended family felt that "whats
right" was to send my kids to school-=-
Was it your family's decision, or did you, as the mom, do what you
thought was right?
If my daughter gets pregnant, if she's old enough to get pregnant
(I'm not talking rape of a little girl, I'm talking consensual sex,
which she's not having anyway, so this is still hypothetical), then
SHE, the mother of that unborn baby, will be the one to do what she
thinks is right. She would ask for advice; she always has. She
would ask people besides me; she usually does. I would advise her to
ask particular others who had had such experiences.
-=-I was trying to say that some girls marry because it is "whats
right" by someone else's definition.-=-
I was writing about my family and my daughter, as that's what the
question was.
Some families force a girl to have a baby even if she wants an
abortion. Some families force an abortion when a girl wants the
baby, or an adoption when the girl wants the baby.
We don't need to talk about that here, do we?
Let's talk about unschoolers we know personally whenever possible.
People won't join this list to hear mainstream advice and arguments.
-=-BUT ultimately each person is
responsible for their own feelings.-=-
Is an infant responsible for his own feelings?
Is a five year old responsible for his own feelings?
Is a frightened, pregnant 16 year old responsible for her own feelings?
I don't mind a BIT giving more to my children than I get back.
I don't mind giving them more than I had.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
tangental point I was expressing my thoughts on wants v/s needs. Maybe
this was an inappropriate venue for that?-=-
It's okay if someone doesn't understand someone else on this list.
Lots of people are reading. There have been 22 new members in the
past week and even if the hundreds of people on the list were all
reading everything (which they're not), each would take something
different from each post, because that's how people learn--they add
to what they already know, and spark up at what is new or interesting.
-=-however; I was simply saying that ,semantically
speaking, we humans often refer to our desires as needs.I guess I was
being overly semantic!-=-
Not overly semantic. I don't like the "just semantics" argument. I
consider it invalid. English has many words because we have
different meanings and nuances and connotations for all of them.
For a long time, longer than any of us could find or prove, adults
have told children "You don't NEED that," about things from toys to
food to peace and safety. I don't want to encourage any mother to
pooh-pooh any child's perceived need.
-=-> If a person feels that she would be being dishonest, immoral or
> unfair in a situation, and decides she needs (for the maintenance of-=-again, I agree with your point, and you have a right to define the
> her integrity and inner peace) to do something, then that is a need.
word
need anyway you want to-=-
That wasn't me defining the word. That was me using the word and
explaining why I thought there could be a need to maintain integrity
and peace.
-=-I don't think you are getting my point
though. I wasn't disagreeing with you on the importance of validating
our children's desires/needs, I was simply, in my logical sequential
manner, defining the word "need".... -=-
I missed the logical sequential part, but it seems you're implying I
was being neither.
It's okay (really! it's great!) to proofread your posts and clarify
them before sending them.
It's better for everyone.
-=-I pictured
someone feeling like they needed to simply because "thats what people do
when they are pregnant" you know, the whole shotgun wedding
mentality....whether they really WANTED to marry the person or not.-=-
If you pictured that, it wasn't from the original question nor from
what I wrote, because I said from the beginning it would depend on
all kinds of factors.
-=-Are you seeing where I was coming from more clearly now?-=-
Doesn't matter. Be as clear as you can be each time you post, and
don't try to insist that anyone agree or accept or affirm it.
-=-I know people who got pregnant as a teen who's parents were
involved in their lives in a respectful,supportive manner (much like
many of the mom's on this list)-=-
I've never known one yet, in my life. What's theoretical, or what
makes an argument sound good isn't as good as real personal
information. The list never does well with "what if" or "I heard"
or "oh sure, lots."
The original question was theoretical and philosophical, and my
response was "it depends." The other points were discussion of
discussion, and of why, and of the what-ifs.
-=-"whats right" as defined by whom? My extended family felt that "whats
right" was to send my kids to school-=-
Was it your family's decision, or did you, as the mom, do what you
thought was right?
If my daughter gets pregnant, if she's old enough to get pregnant
(I'm not talking rape of a little girl, I'm talking consensual sex,
which she's not having anyway, so this is still hypothetical), then
SHE, the mother of that unborn baby, will be the one to do what she
thinks is right. She would ask for advice; she always has. She
would ask people besides me; she usually does. I would advise her to
ask particular others who had had such experiences.
-=-I was trying to say that some girls marry because it is "whats
right" by someone else's definition.-=-
I was writing about my family and my daughter, as that's what the
question was.
Some families force a girl to have a baby even if she wants an
abortion. Some families force an abortion when a girl wants the
baby, or an adoption when the girl wants the baby.
We don't need to talk about that here, do we?
Let's talk about unschoolers we know personally whenever possible.
People won't join this list to hear mainstream advice and arguments.
-=-BUT ultimately each person is
responsible for their own feelings.-=-
Is an infant responsible for his own feelings?
Is a five year old responsible for his own feelings?
Is a frightened, pregnant 16 year old responsible for her own feelings?
I don't mind a BIT giving more to my children than I get back.
I don't mind giving them more than I had.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
Sandra Dodd wrote:
me..... except that in your not understanding me, you replied to direct
portions of my post and wrote things implying that I was making points
that I wasn't.
In other words, I have no problem with you (or anyone) disagreeing with
me or not understanding what I wrote. I've been unschooling for many
years and have been around on line for a long time - I have a thick
skin!lol! You responded specifically to my post and I was just
responding back.
And its because , as you said, lots of people are reading that I don't
want my words to be misconstrued...if someone is going to disagree with
me, I want it to be a disagreement with what I actually said/meant ,kwim?
I only tried to clarify later since you seemed to be so upset by my
words. I tried to clarify because you responded to me directly and I
wanted to convey to you that I was not arguing with you.
I'm sorry that you seem to have taken offense with me/my post. I don't
understand why, but then again,I don't need to understand why!
I never,EVER insinuated that a parent should tell a child that their
wants are not truly needs and are therefore not valid. I was purporting
that a parent should not present their own wants to a child as needs!
clear as mud?!
pregnancy, the NEED to get married"
Again, I was making a point in general. I get that you didn't mean it
in that way. I said what I did because -although YOU may not think of
the idea of "needing" to get married in a shotgun wedding type way,
others might.... I did!
I wasn't insinuating that you were promoting that idea.
Just as you shared YOUR feelings on the idea of letting them marry,or
their need to be married in the event of a pregnancy, I was sharing
mine. ...you seem to be upset that I disagree with you.
I have no issue with how clear I was originally. I felt that my post
was clear and made sense...I still feel that it does. I wasn't
insisting that anyone agree, Nor was I looking for or wanting
affirmation. I clarified because you asked for clarification by
questioning me. :-)
I was sharing my thoughts on the topic. For some reason you seemed to
think that by doing so, I was devaluing yours. I wasn't. Judging from
your response, it looked like you didn't understand what I had written
so I was clarifying for you.
I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but I also don't want my words
to be misconstrued. So if you or anyone else implies that what I'm
saying runs counter to what I 'm actually saying/meaning/believe then
I'm going to speak up and correct that.
information is true and not at all theoretical. Not a "what if" not a
"I heard" She was a dear friend of mine and I knew her in high school as
the event was happening. How odd that you'd imply otherwise. Her parents
were wonderful, involved,respectful. The paid attention to her and her
needs and wants and more importantly her as a person. She had lots of
information about sex and birth control. A broken condom on her first
time having sex resulted in a pregnant 17yo. (and that pregnancy
resulted in a wonderful little baby who is now 26 and has 2 children of
his own!!)
I don't think I was speaking in the abstract any more than you or
anyone else on the list was.
previous post supports that.
I never said or even implied that a parent should not try to make their
child happy. Or that a parent should force a child to navigate their
scary feelings alone. implying that I'm saying something that I'm not.
What I wrote about not being responsible for others feelings stems from
the reality that lot of times people will do things for their friends or
significant others that are not in their own best interest because they
don't want them to be unhappy or angry. And this is not hypothetical or
"what if" or "I heard". Its real. And it stems from this unschooling
moms life experience :-)
I've tried to teach my children that although they are to be respectful
of other peoples feelings, and make an effort to be kind and caring to
others and support their friends even at the cost of an occasional
sacrifice, they are not solely responsible for another persons happiness.
DD shouldn't feel that she should give up a long awaited visit with
grandma just because it would make her best friend sad or angry to be
"left alone" for the weekend. Its not dd's job to stop best friend from
being sad/angry about it.she's not responsible for her friends feelings.
It wasn't my responsibility as a battered girlfriend to make sure my ex
wasn't angry. I was not responsible for his feelings.
THAT is the point I was making. take it or leave it, agree or don't. Its
a valid point.
Peace,
jennifer c
>I agree, and It wasn't a problem for me that you didn't understood
> It's okay if someone doesn't understand someone else on this list.
> Lots of people are reading. There have been 22 new members in the
> past week and even if the hundreds of people on the list were all
> reading everything (which they're not), each would take something
> different from each post, because that's how people learn--they add
> to what they already know, and spark up at what is new or interesting.
me..... except that in your not understanding me, you replied to direct
portions of my post and wrote things implying that I was making points
that I wasn't.
In other words, I have no problem with you (or anyone) disagreeing with
me or not understanding what I wrote. I've been unschooling for many
years and have been around on line for a long time - I have a thick
skin!lol! You responded specifically to my post and I was just
responding back.
And its because , as you said, lots of people are reading that I don't
want my words to be misconstrued...if someone is going to disagree with
me, I want it to be a disagreement with what I actually said/meant ,kwim?
> It's okay (really! it's great!) to proofread your posts and clarifyI did proofread my post (really!) . I was happy with it, still am! :-)
> them before sending them.
I only tried to clarify later since you seemed to be so upset by my
words. I tried to clarify because you responded to me directly and I
wanted to convey to you that I was not arguing with you.
I'm sorry that you seem to have taken offense with me/my post. I don't
understand why, but then again,I don't need to understand why!
>Nor would I.
> For a long time, longer than any of us could find or prove, adults
> have told children "You don't NEED that," about things from toys to
> food to peace and safety. I don't want to encourage any mother to
> pooh-pooh any child's perceived need.
I never,EVER insinuated that a parent should tell a child that their
wants are not truly needs and are therefore not valid. I was purporting
that a parent should not present their own wants to a child as needs!
clear as mud?!
> If you pictured that, it wasn't from the original question nor fromActually,I pictured it from what you wrote "and in the event of a
> what I wrote, because I said from the beginning it would depend on
> all kinds of factors.
pregnancy, the NEED to get married"
Again, I was making a point in general. I get that you didn't mean it
in that way. I said what I did because -although YOU may not think of
the idea of "needing" to get married in a shotgun wedding type way,
others might.... I did!
I wasn't insinuating that you were promoting that idea.
Just as you shared YOUR feelings on the idea of letting them marry,or
their need to be married in the event of a pregnancy, I was sharing
mine. ...you seem to be upset that I disagree with you.
>ditto :-)
> -=-Are you seeing where I was coming from more clearly now?-=-
>
> Doesn't matter. Be as clear as you can be each time you post, and
> don't try to insist that anyone agree or accept or affirm it.
I have no issue with how clear I was originally. I felt that my post
was clear and made sense...I still feel that it does. I wasn't
insisting that anyone agree, Nor was I looking for or wanting
affirmation. I clarified because you asked for clarification by
questioning me. :-)
I was sharing my thoughts on the topic. For some reason you seemed to
think that by doing so, I was devaluing yours. I wasn't. Judging from
your response, it looked like you didn't understand what I had written
so I was clarifying for you.
I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but I also don't want my words
to be misconstrued. So if you or anyone else implies that what I'm
saying runs counter to what I 'm actually saying/meaning/believe then
I'm going to speak up and correct that.
> I've never known one yet, in my life. What's theoretical, or whatYou may not have known one in your life, but I do. She's very real, the
> makes an argument sound good isn't as good as real personal
> information. The list never does well with "what if" or "I heard"
> or "oh sure, lots."
information is true and not at all theoretical. Not a "what if" not a
"I heard" She was a dear friend of mine and I knew her in high school as
the event was happening. How odd that you'd imply otherwise. Her parents
were wonderful, involved,respectful. The paid attention to her and her
needs and wants and more importantly her as a person. She had lots of
information about sex and birth control. A broken condom on her first
time having sex resulted in a pregnant 17yo. (and that pregnancy
resulted in a wonderful little baby who is now 26 and has 2 children of
his own!!)
I don't think I was speaking in the abstract any more than you or
anyone else on the list was.
> I don't mind a BIT giving more to my children than I get back.Me either. I feel *exactly* the same way. And everything I wrote in my
> I don't mind giving them more than I had.
previous post supports that.
I never said or even implied that a parent should not try to make their
child happy. Or that a parent should force a child to navigate their
scary feelings alone. implying that I'm saying something that I'm not.
What I wrote about not being responsible for others feelings stems from
the reality that lot of times people will do things for their friends or
significant others that are not in their own best interest because they
don't want them to be unhappy or angry. And this is not hypothetical or
"what if" or "I heard". Its real. And it stems from this unschooling
moms life experience :-)
I've tried to teach my children that although they are to be respectful
of other peoples feelings, and make an effort to be kind and caring to
others and support their friends even at the cost of an occasional
sacrifice, they are not solely responsible for another persons happiness.
DD shouldn't feel that she should give up a long awaited visit with
grandma just because it would make her best friend sad or angry to be
"left alone" for the weekend. Its not dd's job to stop best friend from
being sad/angry about it.she's not responsible for her friends feelings.
It wasn't my responsibility as a battered girlfriend to make sure my ex
wasn't angry. I was not responsible for his feelings.
THAT is the point I was making. take it or leave it, agree or don't. Its
a valid point.
Peace,
jennifer c
Sandra Dodd
-=-Actually,I pictured it from what you wrote "and in the event of a
pregnancy, the NEED to get married"-=-
Oh. No. I would no more "make" her than prevent her, but sometimes
it's more than just a desire or a 'want.'
The question was originally asked from the point of view of rules--
what's the "rule," would we sign for an early marriage or not? I
still have no answer on whether the original questioner even had
teens, I don't think.
When living by principles, though, the answer (and the question) look
altogether different.
-=-I never said or even implied that a parent should not try to make
their
child happy. -=-
You wrote: "BUT ultimately each person is responsible for their own
feelings"
I don't think an infant is responsible for his own feelings. I think
the mom is. I think the balance changes gradually over time, but any
blanket statement without qualification can be a problem.
Later there was a qualification: "they are not solely responsible
for another persons happiness." Qualifications (not solely; I think;
it seems; generally) are really, really good things.
-=-I wouldn't want my children to do or be something that is not in
their
best interest ,or that is not true to their own nature just to make
their significant other or friends "happy"-=-
In a whole-life way I wouldn't either.
In various very-short-term ways, I would. I wouldn't put quotation
marks on "happy," but let it be REAL, acceptable happiness.
It goes against my nature to go to steak houses, but my husband
really likes them sometimes, and so if I do something that's not true
to my own nature to make him happy, it's an investment in our
relationship. Many moms come to this list and say they HATE this or
that, that their child likes. Others here try to persuade them to
reconsider, and to go against their natures to make their child
happy. It's an investment in the future of that relationship.
But if the first thing we said was "don't do what you don't want to
do; their happiness is their own responsibility," the list would be
dwindling instead of growing, and people would be giving up on
unschooling because it wouldn't work as well if people weren't
encouraging them to go TOWARD their children, to sacrifice what they
think is their right and their due (a silent TV-free house; time to
themselves; freedom from hearing about Spongebob Squarepants or
whatever it might be).
-=-I was trying to say that I wouldn't want them to marry simply
because they thought that it was expected of them.-=-
And I was saying there's no "simply."
There's no simple answer, and it would matter to me TOTALLY what my
daughter wanted to do, and why.
And if she felt she needed to get married, that would be a need, not
just a choice as any other choice.
-=-I know people who got pregnant as a teen who's parents were
involved in
their lives in a respectful,supportive manner (much like many of the
mom's on this list) and who did give their dd information about the
consequences of sex and info on birth control-=-
This turned out to be one girl, and not an unschooler.
That's important to me.
-=-. My horribly articulated point was
that I know people who got married just because they were under the
impression(or told that) thats just what you do when you're pregnant.
They didn't realize that they had the choice to NOT marry the boy if
that was what they (the pregnant girl and/or the boy) felt was best for
them. -=-
The original question was about parental permission.
In some cases (many, in the past hundreds of years), they did not
have that choice, if the parents on both sides said "You're getting
married now." The idea of giving children choices is rare. That's
why we discuss it so much. <g>
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
pregnancy, the NEED to get married"-=-
Oh. No. I would no more "make" her than prevent her, but sometimes
it's more than just a desire or a 'want.'
The question was originally asked from the point of view of rules--
what's the "rule," would we sign for an early marriage or not? I
still have no answer on whether the original questioner even had
teens, I don't think.
When living by principles, though, the answer (and the question) look
altogether different.
-=-I never said or even implied that a parent should not try to make
their
child happy. -=-
You wrote: "BUT ultimately each person is responsible for their own
feelings"
I don't think an infant is responsible for his own feelings. I think
the mom is. I think the balance changes gradually over time, but any
blanket statement without qualification can be a problem.
Later there was a qualification: "they are not solely responsible
for another persons happiness." Qualifications (not solely; I think;
it seems; generally) are really, really good things.
-=-I wouldn't want my children to do or be something that is not in
their
best interest ,or that is not true to their own nature just to make
their significant other or friends "happy"-=-
In a whole-life way I wouldn't either.
In various very-short-term ways, I would. I wouldn't put quotation
marks on "happy," but let it be REAL, acceptable happiness.
It goes against my nature to go to steak houses, but my husband
really likes them sometimes, and so if I do something that's not true
to my own nature to make him happy, it's an investment in our
relationship. Many moms come to this list and say they HATE this or
that, that their child likes. Others here try to persuade them to
reconsider, and to go against their natures to make their child
happy. It's an investment in the future of that relationship.
But if the first thing we said was "don't do what you don't want to
do; their happiness is their own responsibility," the list would be
dwindling instead of growing, and people would be giving up on
unschooling because it wouldn't work as well if people weren't
encouraging them to go TOWARD their children, to sacrifice what they
think is their right and their due (a silent TV-free house; time to
themselves; freedom from hearing about Spongebob Squarepants or
whatever it might be).
-=-I was trying to say that I wouldn't want them to marry simply
because they thought that it was expected of them.-=-
And I was saying there's no "simply."
There's no simple answer, and it would matter to me TOTALLY what my
daughter wanted to do, and why.
And if she felt she needed to get married, that would be a need, not
just a choice as any other choice.
-=-I know people who got pregnant as a teen who's parents were
involved in
their lives in a respectful,supportive manner (much like many of the
mom's on this list) and who did give their dd information about the
consequences of sex and info on birth control-=-
This turned out to be one girl, and not an unschooler.
That's important to me.
-=-. My horribly articulated point was
that I know people who got married just because they were under the
impression(or told that) thats just what you do when you're pregnant.
They didn't realize that they had the choice to NOT marry the boy if
that was what they (the pregnant girl and/or the boy) felt was best for
them. -=-
The original question was about parental permission.
In some cases (many, in the past hundreds of years), they did not
have that choice, if the parents on both sides said "You're getting
married now." The idea of giving children choices is rare. That's
why we discuss it so much. <g>
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-What is your opinion on marriage under age 18. I believe the legal
marriage
age varies from 14-18 across the country. Would you sign a release
fro your
child to get married before 18? I had this question asked to me
recently and
wanted to hear from you guys. It was related to unschooling by
letting them
make their own choices when the question was posed to me.
Wildflower-=-
AH!
The original questioner isn't even on the list.
It was totally second-hand hypothetical.
Then it doesn't matter to me anymore.
My answer is "it depends." <g>
And I guess it's "maybe."
I would be more inclined to do it if it involved pregnancy than not.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
marriage
age varies from 14-18 across the country. Would you sign a release
fro your
child to get married before 18? I had this question asked to me
recently and
wanted to hear from you guys. It was related to unschooling by
letting them
make their own choices when the question was posed to me.
Wildflower-=-
AH!
The original questioner isn't even on the list.
It was totally second-hand hypothetical.
Then it doesn't matter to me anymore.
My answer is "it depends." <g>
And I guess it's "maybe."
I would be more inclined to do it if it involved pregnancy than not.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Gold Standard
>>I've tried to teach my children that although they are to be respectfulhappiness.<<
>>of other peoples feelings, and make an effort to be kind and caring to
>>others and support their friends even at the cost of an occasional
>>sacrifice, they are not solely responsible for another persons
I don't want to dig it out now, but I really liked what Sandra said a few
posts ago about sacrificing for others.
This movement of promoting people taking care of their own needs
first...making sure their needs are met before they look at others'
needs...has always been a little disturbing to me. Not because I'm a martyr
and think we need ignore our individual desires/needs, but because the
message itself promotes selfishness, and seems to endanger the natural
desire to help others.
If people actually putting other people first regularly, I think the result
would be that more people's needs were met than if they were all thinking of
themselves first. Just a theory.
It may seem like a good thing to "teach" our children that they are not
responsible for other people's happiness, but I think it is much more
rewarding in life to see what makes another person happy, and acting on that
information. My children have given up things they wanted, like a trip to
grandma's, to make friends/siblings/pets/family happy. They made those
decisions themselves, and I'm not convinced those decisions weren't just the
perfect things at the time. It seems like amazing compassion to me!
If they were brooding around unhappy because they were just giving up
everything they wanted, that would be another thing. I don't see that, so
can't speak to it personally.
I like the model that unschooling brings of giving, giving, giving.
Jacki
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-This movement of promoting people taking care of their own needs
first...making sure their needs are met before they look at others'
needs...has always been a little disturbing to me. Not because I'm a
martyr
and think we need ignore our individual desires/needs, but because the
message itself promotes selfishness, and seems to endanger the natural
desire to help others.
-=-If people actually putting other people first regularly, I think
the result
would be that more people's needs were met than if they were all
thinking of
themselves first. Just a theory.-=-
From my experience, those people who say "I'm taking care of MY
needs" end up being alone and lonely and frustrated.
I have one friend I've known since our oldest two were babies. She's
BIG into taking care of herself, and keeps on (and on) reminding us.
So I don't feel the urge to help her, because she assures people she
doesn't need any help. But then there's no basis for the
relationship after a while. We have no ebb and flow, no favors done,
no minor indebtednesses.
She's harsher with her kids than I am with mine, and assures herself,
aloud, that it's for their own good.
They're not as open and honest with her as mine are with me.
One of the most surprising things to me about having teens is how
gentle and sweet they can be, how concerned about my feelings and
preferences. I didn't expect it, but looking back over the way they
were treated when they were younger and needier of approval and
freedom and sympathy, I see it come flooding back out of them.
I didn't "have to" be as slow and patient with them as I tried to be
(and I failed sometimes, certainly, losing my temper and being too
tired to turn and give them a big dose of attention now and then). I
didn't "have to" and nobody made me, and most of my friends and
relatives would've applauded me had I gone a more traditional route
(because it would have made them feel more comfortable about their
own choices). It was a choice, but once I knew what kind of
homelife and relationship I wanted with them, it was an easy choice.
It became a need, to maintain the environment that had grown from all
our earlier choices and actions.
Could I "choose" now to move toward a harsher and less generous
stance? Could I say, now, "You're responsible for your own
happiness"? There is an up side to that, and they all do know ways
to be more at peace and to view the world from a more positive
position. But there's a mean cutting off of people sometimes when
someone says "I'm not responsible for... "
"Responsible" means answerable. You should be required to respond
and to answer for your decisions.
If one of my children felt afraid, unhappy, insecure, unloved, would
I be "responsible"?
If I want to be a responsible person, how else could I be?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
first...making sure their needs are met before they look at others'
needs...has always been a little disturbing to me. Not because I'm a
martyr
and think we need ignore our individual desires/needs, but because the
message itself promotes selfishness, and seems to endanger the natural
desire to help others.
-=-If people actually putting other people first regularly, I think
the result
would be that more people's needs were met than if they were all
thinking of
themselves first. Just a theory.-=-
From my experience, those people who say "I'm taking care of MY
needs" end up being alone and lonely and frustrated.
I have one friend I've known since our oldest two were babies. She's
BIG into taking care of herself, and keeps on (and on) reminding us.
So I don't feel the urge to help her, because she assures people she
doesn't need any help. But then there's no basis for the
relationship after a while. We have no ebb and flow, no favors done,
no minor indebtednesses.
She's harsher with her kids than I am with mine, and assures herself,
aloud, that it's for their own good.
They're not as open and honest with her as mine are with me.
One of the most surprising things to me about having teens is how
gentle and sweet they can be, how concerned about my feelings and
preferences. I didn't expect it, but looking back over the way they
were treated when they were younger and needier of approval and
freedom and sympathy, I see it come flooding back out of them.
I didn't "have to" be as slow and patient with them as I tried to be
(and I failed sometimes, certainly, losing my temper and being too
tired to turn and give them a big dose of attention now and then). I
didn't "have to" and nobody made me, and most of my friends and
relatives would've applauded me had I gone a more traditional route
(because it would have made them feel more comfortable about their
own choices). It was a choice, but once I knew what kind of
homelife and relationship I wanted with them, it was an easy choice.
It became a need, to maintain the environment that had grown from all
our earlier choices and actions.
Could I "choose" now to move toward a harsher and less generous
stance? Could I say, now, "You're responsible for your own
happiness"? There is an up side to that, and they all do know ways
to be more at peace and to view the world from a more positive
position. But there's a mean cutting off of people sometimes when
someone says "I'm not responsible for... "
"Responsible" means answerable. You should be required to respond
and to answer for your decisions.
If one of my children felt afraid, unhappy, insecure, unloved, would
I be "responsible"?
If I want to be a responsible person, how else could I be?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
>> , if the parents on both sides said "You're getting~jennifer
>> married now." The idea of giving children choices is rare. That's
>> why we discuss it so much. <g>
>
> Yay! That, in a nutshell, is exactly what my previous posts have said
> all along!<g>
[email protected]
Gold Standard wrote:
kind of advice is all too prevalent in parenting books and even
homeschooling books and groups, yuck!
of course, thats very different than teaching our kids that its not
their job to sure no one else EVER feels sad/angry,etc....We can try to
make someone happy, we can give up our percieved needs for the sake of
someone else,we can sacrifice for the sake of building relationship, we
can put others first, we can try to help someone who is not happy be
happy - but if someone is feeling sad or angry thats ok too. our
feelings are always ok. We can support them in their sadness or
validate their anger or whatever, but its not our job to make sure no
one else *ever* feels angry or sad. We are enriched by having a full
spectrum of emotions.
Meeting others needs is such a huge component of what makes unschooling
work - wouldn't our society be awesome if everyone did that!?
What better way to teach that to our kids than to model it by validating
and meeting their needs.<g>
~jennifer
>me too! I know what you mean! It *is* disturbing. And unfortunately that
> This movement of promoting people taking care of their own needs
> first...making sure their needs are met before they look at others'
> needs...has always been a little disturbing to me.
kind of advice is all too prevalent in parenting books and even
homeschooling books and groups, yuck!
of course, thats very different than teaching our kids that its not
their job to sure no one else EVER feels sad/angry,etc....We can try to
make someone happy, we can give up our percieved needs for the sake of
someone else,we can sacrifice for the sake of building relationship, we
can put others first, we can try to help someone who is not happy be
happy - but if someone is feeling sad or angry thats ok too. our
feelings are always ok. We can support them in their sadness or
validate their anger or whatever, but its not our job to make sure no
one else *ever* feels angry or sad. We are enriched by having a full
spectrum of emotions.
> If people actually putting other people first regularly, I think theYes! I like the way you put that! I totally agree!
> result
> would be that more people's needs were met than if they were all
> thinking of
> themselves first. Just a theory.
> I like the model that unschooling brings of giving, giving, giving.
Meeting others needs is such a huge component of what makes unschooling
work - wouldn't our society be awesome if everyone did that!?
What better way to teach that to our kids than to model it by validating
and meeting their needs.<g>
~jennifer
Sandra Dodd
-=-our
feelings are always ok. We can support them in their sadness or
validate their anger or whatever, but its not our job to make sure no
one else *ever* feels angry or sad. We are enriched by having a full
spectrum of emotions.
-=-
I'm really not trying to pick on you, honestly.
But not all feelings are equally okay. Joy is better than fury.
When fury comes it's probably better (physically, emotionally and
socially) for a mom to help a child turn that to something more
positive than to validate it. Sometimes anger isn't as "valid" as
other times.
Some people can get into the habit of feeling that others SHOULD be
nicer to them, and others are MEAN and the world SUCKS, and sometimes
parents agree with them instead of saying "Let's figure out some ways
you can feel better and get along more happily.
I'm predicting an "of course that's exactly what I meant," so I'm
requesting looking at posts to make sure you wanted to state things
in such definite, inflexible, unqualified ways as "Our feelings are
always ok."
Sometimes kids have misinterpreted something horribly, or they're
feeling sick and are showing it by saying irrational things, or
they're being selfish and unreasonable about a situation and could
use going for a walk with mom (for the protection of their
relationship with a sibling, in the scenario that sprang to mind).
Letting one of them vent to me about another one of them, and
discussing what seems right and true, and what seems exaggerated and
reactionary is common. "Validate" sounds too much to me like
agreeing, condoning, supporting an emotion. Some emotions do better
NOT to be maintained for any length of time.
I agree strongly that people are enriched by having a full spectrum
of emotions. A couple of times over the years I've talked about
things like humility as an emotion modern people rarely have, and
both times moms jumped in and said they didn't want their kids to
feel humble. <g> There are emotions involving awe and wonder that
used to be covered by miracle stories in church, or other religions
experiences, and lots of families (and lots of churches) have lost
those opportunities. I think opportunities to experience all kinds
of biochemical "sets" can be illuminating and make people more whole
and aware, but I don't recommend inducing terror. Discussing it,
talking about adrenaline rushes and people being so afraid that they
die on the spot or their hair goes white... that's interesting, but
not to be exercised for practice. <bwg>
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
feelings are always ok. We can support them in their sadness or
validate their anger or whatever, but its not our job to make sure no
one else *ever* feels angry or sad. We are enriched by having a full
spectrum of emotions.
-=-
I'm really not trying to pick on you, honestly.
But not all feelings are equally okay. Joy is better than fury.
When fury comes it's probably better (physically, emotionally and
socially) for a mom to help a child turn that to something more
positive than to validate it. Sometimes anger isn't as "valid" as
other times.
Some people can get into the habit of feeling that others SHOULD be
nicer to them, and others are MEAN and the world SUCKS, and sometimes
parents agree with them instead of saying "Let's figure out some ways
you can feel better and get along more happily.
I'm predicting an "of course that's exactly what I meant," so I'm
requesting looking at posts to make sure you wanted to state things
in such definite, inflexible, unqualified ways as "Our feelings are
always ok."
Sometimes kids have misinterpreted something horribly, or they're
feeling sick and are showing it by saying irrational things, or
they're being selfish and unreasonable about a situation and could
use going for a walk with mom (for the protection of their
relationship with a sibling, in the scenario that sprang to mind).
Letting one of them vent to me about another one of them, and
discussing what seems right and true, and what seems exaggerated and
reactionary is common. "Validate" sounds too much to me like
agreeing, condoning, supporting an emotion. Some emotions do better
NOT to be maintained for any length of time.
I agree strongly that people are enriched by having a full spectrum
of emotions. A couple of times over the years I've talked about
things like humility as an emotion modern people rarely have, and
both times moms jumped in and said they didn't want their kids to
feel humble. <g> There are emotions involving awe and wonder that
used to be covered by miracle stories in church, or other religions
experiences, and lots of families (and lots of churches) have lost
those opportunities. I think opportunities to experience all kinds
of biochemical "sets" can be illuminating and make people more whole
and aware, but I don't recommend inducing terror. Discussing it,
talking about adrenaline rushes and people being so afraid that they
die on the spot or their hair goes white... that's interesting, but
not to be exercised for practice. <bwg>
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jill Parmer
<<<It's always amazing to me that parents in this day and age *don't*
have these
kinds of matter-of-fact conversations about sex.>>>
Our car conversation from the other day:
Addi (12): Mom, when I was talking with Jane*, she asked me if I had
"it" yet? She said "it" was great. And I couldn't tell if she was
talking about...
Luke (8) from the back seat: What? Her period or sex?
Addi: Yeah, that's what I was thinking, but I couldn't understand
from her excitement about how great *it* was, what she was talking
about. I asked her, but she mumbled and I couldn't hear her again.
I'm sitting there thinking that I have an 8 yo boy who knows enough
about sex and periods to talk about it with his 12 yo sister and
parents. And that he's most likely not going to be freaked out by or
ignorant of periods and other sexual matters in the future because of
these conversations.
*Jane - ficticious name of a homeschooled kid, not unschooler.
~Jill
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
have these
kinds of matter-of-fact conversations about sex.>>>
Our car conversation from the other day:
Addi (12): Mom, when I was talking with Jane*, she asked me if I had
"it" yet? She said "it" was great. And I couldn't tell if she was
talking about...
Luke (8) from the back seat: What? Her period or sex?
Addi: Yeah, that's what I was thinking, but I couldn't understand
from her excitement about how great *it* was, what she was talking
about. I asked her, but she mumbled and I couldn't hear her again.
I'm sitting there thinking that I have an 8 yo boy who knows enough
about sex and periods to talk about it with his 12 yo sister and
parents. And that he's most likely not going to be freaked out by or
ignorant of periods and other sexual matters in the future because of
these conversations.
*Jane - ficticious name of a homeschooled kid, not unschooler.
~Jill
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Gold Standard
>>of course, thats very different than teaching our kids that its notA thought about this thought above, (not about this or any other poster in
>>their job to sure no one else EVER feels sad/angry,etc<<
this thread)...
I haven't run into the situation with any of my four kids (all teenagers)
where one of them thought it was their job to assure no one else ever feels
sad, angry, etc. I'm assuming this is a hypothetical, or has this been a
problem for anyone?
It seems like that may be more likely to happen if there were adults forcing
children to think of others first, rather than children discovering what
compassion is in their lives.
Jacki
Sandra Dodd
-=-I haven't run into the situation with any of my four kids (all
teenagers)
where one of them thought it was their job to assure no one else ever
feels
sad, angry, etc. I'm assuming this is a hypothetical, or has this been a
problem for anyone?-=-
I learned last night that a friend of Kirby's had offered him free
rent, free everything, if Kirby would just come and live with him
because the guy's wife had left (Kirby was one of the groomsmen at
their wedding in May) and the guy was "afraid he'd kill himself."
That's the kind of offer I wouldn't have passed up, if I was Kirby's
age.
He hadn't even mentioned it to me.
It didn't keep him from talking to the guy by phone, and I don't know
the details of what he told him when he didn't move in with him.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
teenagers)
where one of them thought it was their job to assure no one else ever
feels
sad, angry, etc. I'm assuming this is a hypothetical, or has this been a
problem for anyone?-=-
I learned last night that a friend of Kirby's had offered him free
rent, free everything, if Kirby would just come and live with him
because the guy's wife had left (Kirby was one of the groomsmen at
their wedding in May) and the guy was "afraid he'd kill himself."
That's the kind of offer I wouldn't have passed up, if I was Kirby's
age.
He hadn't even mentioned it to me.
It didn't keep him from talking to the guy by phone, and I don't know
the details of what he told him when he didn't move in with him.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Addi (12): Mom, when I was talking with Jane*, she asked me if I had
"it" yet? She said "it" was great. And I couldn't tell if she was
talking about...
-=-Luke (8) from the back seat: What? Her period or sex?-=-
One of the funniest things I've seen for a long time is a scene in
Talladega Nights in which Michael Clarke Duncan with his manly
exterior and BIG deep voice is reading aloud, to his (likewise manly)
unconscious friend in the hospital, from Are You There God? It's Me,
Margaret by Judy Blume, a passage about the other girls starting
their periods, and how awful it will be to be the last one.
It's a pretty terrible movie, but some of the scenes are great, and
THAT one is priceless.
There's a link to an online sex ed collection here. There are other
things some people here might be curious about, or needing. I'll
just leave it here quietly, as if in the bathroom, and I'll say no more.
http://sandradodd.com/sex
Sandra
"it" yet? She said "it" was great. And I couldn't tell if she was
talking about...
-=-Luke (8) from the back seat: What? Her period or sex?-=-
One of the funniest things I've seen for a long time is a scene in
Talladega Nights in which Michael Clarke Duncan with his manly
exterior and BIG deep voice is reading aloud, to his (likewise manly)
unconscious friend in the hospital, from Are You There God? It's Me,
Margaret by Judy Blume, a passage about the other girls starting
their periods, and how awful it will be to be the last one.
It's a pretty terrible movie, but some of the scenes are great, and
THAT one is priceless.
There's a link to an online sex ed collection here. There are other
things some people here might be curious about, or needing. I'll
just leave it here quietly, as if in the bathroom, and I'll say no more.
http://sandradodd.com/sex
Sandra