Emily Troper

Thanks so much for the feedback about this, and for helping me to
clarify what I think.

>Another way to be unhealthy is to claim one's family is totally
>democratic, equals, all have an equal voice, etc. That doesn't make
>any sense either. Those who know the most and can do the most need
>to DO IT! More like communism, maybe. Socialism. <bwg> Those who
>have the ability to maintain cars and mow lawns and mend clothing
>really ought to do it cheerfully for the group, for the team! And
>those whose abilities are just growing will WANT to do what looks
>fun, and they will desire to be like the parents, if the parents keep
>themselves interesting and kind and supportive.


Thank you for writing this Sandra, this is the distinction that I
think a lot of parents in my area are having trouble with. I like
being a kind, loving, attached, confident parent who takes care of
the lawn and the clothing and the cars cheerfully! :) Our local
freeschool has some amazing caring people on staff who share our
value of freedom for children, but they have recently instituted a
Judicial System due to kids hurting other kids (instead of addressing
the underlying needs), and now the kids are stressed about deciding
about "consequences" for other children, and about how to budget
appropriately so the electric bill gets paid.


>I think that he is acknowledging that the relationship is natural
that children depend on their
>parents, and that that precious relationship must be carefully and
respectfully maintained in
>a connected and positive way--not exploited by an abusive or
dysfunctional parent. A
>parent (or other adult as the case may be) that is in that position
must tread very carefully
>and sensitively because they are in a unique position to have even
more power to wound than
>anyone else. That loving bond is what protects children and allows
for confident exploring of
>their world as they grow and strengthen their sense of self.

Yeah, thanks for this summary - this was my take on it too Joanna,
and his book/talk caused me to un-enroll my children in the
freeschool (where they were attending 1-2 half days each week since
September) and renew my commitment to total unschooling - they
weren't attached in a healthy way to any adults there, and we also
left due to the reasons I mentioned above (I do NOT want my kids to
be punished, even by other children, by vote!).

Dr. Neufeld was able to articulate things in a way that explains, for
me, the reasons behind things which I have felt intuitively but was
unable to fully understand. Of course he's not the "expert" and I
get SO much from talking with other experienced parents and my lists,
and reading, but I do like some of what he has to offer, and in my
role in my community (as a parent educator/child advocate) I am
always looking for additional research/support for respectful
parenting and unschooling.

So, the things that were clarified for me:

--when the attachment is intact, parenting is comparatively easy; ie
your child "follows" you (given that there are no medical or other
health problems, or external trauma)
--that it's not about what to do/say but how to be with your children
--a very positive view of parent's "power" and "hierarchy" that is
based on attachment and connection, and impossible through coercion
--why contact with lots of other children is *not* neccessarily what
our children need and how it differs from continuum-intact cultures
where children spend lots of time together in healthy ways
--why a child who is "bored" and begging for a playmate may need
something else entirely (connection with you!) and why sending them
to friends
instead may be harmful
--why it's SO important to invite our children to be dependent on us
and why they need this until they become adults, not just as infants
--why I unschool, why I don't encourage weaning, why I sometimes do
things for my children that they can do for themselves
--the importance of "collecting" or gathering and orienting our
children to us
-why to give to a child, especially a needy or "clingy" child, when
they aren't asking, not just answering when they ask
--why being "clingy" in certain situations is very healthy and how
outwardly "independent" confident children may be suffering from a
lack of close attachment

Dr. Neufeld doesn't give a lot of practical parenting tools, he's
more about the theory, which I like. I did get to hear some of his
real life examples after the lecture, though, and they really
resonated with me, and I like that he said publicly that none of his
5 (now adult) children have ever been punished or "consequenced".

Some people may have a hard time with the "honoring our instincts"
theory about parenting, especially when they were raised in a
dysfunctional or abusive environment, so those instincts might
include things that don't really feel like the "wisdom of elders".
Being someone who was abused for years, much of my parenting was
conscious override, until I settled into my real instincts. AP in the
early years felt like an easy choice, but honoring feelings, giving
empathy, unschooling, etc. with older kids, were more "learned arts"
for me.

I find that a lot of what Dr. Neufeld talks about syncs up well with
The Continuum Concept and The Law of Attraction - i.e. expecting that
(when kids are well-connected) they will follow your lead, and do
their best to live up to your expectations, and according to other
parenting theories (Patty Wipfler and NVC), if they don't "follow"
there is an unmet need or hurt somewhere that needs to be addressed,
or it may just be a lack of connection in the first place. I worry
that people will confuse the natural authority that GN talks about
with authoritarian parenting, or that they will confuse firm
expectations with consequences. I love the idea of being a confident
leader, not begging and pleading with my children to do what I want
them to do, or explaining all my reasons, etc, but just to matter-of-
factly expect that they want do the right thing, etc. and then when
they don't - go back and re-connect and continue assuming positive
intent.

I found "special time" to be almost like magic with my kids - when I
am able to REALLY do and get into it, on a regular basis, parenting
really IS easy, the power struggles fall away, even with my most
spirited and challenging of children.

Some examples from the last two days - this morning Seth (8.5) came
up and said "I really want to spend some time with you" and I was on
the phone and folding laundry so I told him "later, I'm busy" and 10
minutes later his sister Sara was screaming because Seth sprayed her
with water.

Morgan (16) was wanting to go to breakfast with me sometime, so we
planned a time on Monday morning - he was so anxious that it wasn't
going to work out (that Jake, my toddler, wasn't going to go for
staying with dad because he's been sick) that he started to get
really grouchy and "rude". I was so tempted to say "You know, I don't
feel like going to breakfast with you when you treat me like that",
but I held my tongue and took him to breakfast (theorizing to my
skeptical husband that he needed it EVEN more because he was acting
like this) and as usual he turned back into his loving, sweet,
cooperative self within 10 minutes and just that one breakfast time
together will probably last us about a week - before I will have to
again find a way to reach out and "collect" him.

I am so grateful to be here among you wise parents, and really
appreciate if you took the time to read all of this!! I highly value
any input, reflections, or criticisms.


Emily

http://myspace.com/memssj

in Portland, Oregon
with dh Michael
ds Morgan (12/91)
ds Seth (8/99)
dd Sara Kate (7/01)
and ds Jacob (12/04)






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Pamela Sorooshian

On Mar 26, 2008, at 11:10 AM, Emily Troper wrote:

> Our local
> freeschool has some amazing caring people on staff who share our
> value of freedom for children, but they have recently instituted a
> Judicial System due to kids hurting other kids (instead of addressing
> the underlying needs), and now the kids are stressed about deciding
> about "consequences" for other children, and about how to budget
> appropriately so the electric bill gets paid.


If you read much about Summerhill, a big focus was on this issue -
everyone, kids and adults, together deciding what the rules would be
and also acting as judges when someone broke the rules. It causes more
problems than it solves to have a system in which everyone is
considered "equal" in all abilities, wisdom, intelligences, skills,
and talents. A system built on such a contradiction of reality is
guaranteed to be unwieldy and difficult and not to result in "fair"
outcomes. "Fair" doesn't mean "equal."

-pam

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Pamela Sorooshian

On Mar 26, 2008, at 11:10 AM, Emily Troper wrote:

> I am
> always looking for additional research/support for respectful
> parenting and unschooling.

I didn't read his book (because it was expensive), and didn't hear any
presentation of actual research in the parts of his talk that I heard.

IS there actual research involved, or is he presenting his ideas based
on his years of experience?

Research - I'm always interested (I read it critically, but I enjoy
reading it).

Expert opinion? Not so much anymore. I used to read a lot of it, but
now that unschoolers have been online for so long, there is such an
accumulated body of wisdom that I find the ideas of experts are kind
of -- well, the word that comes to mind is "puny" -- in comparison.

-pam

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]