Sandra Dodd

I returned the post when it was coming directly from the mom, with a note that because it was about something illegal, it wasn't a good thing to send to 3000 strangers, and that because the kid is 21, it's not really an unschooling matter at this point.

Still, the questions and ideas might be worth discussing.
Let's not get all hot and argumentative, if possible. I know there will be mixed emotions. That's another good reason to separate it from the original poster (who is NOT a regular on this list; just joined).
=========================================================

I really need help here. I don't know what to do. My son (always unschooled) is 21 and living at home. He has always been such a joy but he smokes pot. I've talked to him about it several times. Sometimes he says he thinks he needs help but doesn't know how to get it. I've sent him to an M.D. for depression, he says he feels depressed, he didn't want to take the medication to help him. Which is fine, I understand that. He doesn't want to go to counseling. I can't force him to go. 99 percent of the time he seems really happy, loves his new job. I personally think that he just like to get high with his friends.

I've taken his car away several times because I know that he has been high while driving it.

Well, he came home today and it was obvious he has smoked earlier, I looked in his car and sure enough he had a pipe. I took his keys. Everything in my gut tells me not to let him have his car back. It's still in our name but he does have insc. in his name.

Now that I've thought about it, I know he shouldn't have a car if he is going to do that. But if he can't get to his job that he loves, he will lose it. If he can't pay his insc. they will drop him and then he will never be able to afford it. Plus I think they might suspend his permit if he goes without insc. not really sure. I've tried telling him that he could use the car for work but then to bring home right after, well, that never works, he will come late at night. I really don't know what to do. Overall he is a really good kid, I'm so torn up about this. Any and all sincere advice would be greatly appreciated.
=========================================================

Let's be vague,too, in responses, as much as possible, please. Don't be identifying, confessing, outing anyone.

Sandra



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

Sandra Dodd

-=-He has always been such a joy but he smokes pot. I've talked to him about it several times. Sometimes he says he thinks he needs help but doesn't know how to get it. I've sent him to an M.D. for depression, he says he feels depressed, he didn't want to take the medication to help him. Which is fine, I understand that. He doesn't want to go to counseling.-=-

I am socially and geographically in a place where smoking pot isn't such a big deal.

Medication from an MD for depression isn't going to do ANYthing without counselling to change thought and behavior, so I think that was a bad move (sending someone to a regular doctor for depression).

But if this is true, he's not depressed anyway: "99 percent of the time he seems really happy, loves his new job. "

I'm wondering if your "I've talked to him about it several times" involved suggesting to him that he wouldn't smoke pot if he wasn't depressed.

He has a job he likes.
He's happy 99 percent of the time.

I would, if it were me, stop treating him like a child.

When the term "permit" was used, I'm assuming that meant driver's license.

-=-I've taken his car away several times because I know that he has been high while driving it.
-=-Well, he came home today and it was obvious he has smoked earlier, I looked in his car and sure enough he had a pipe. I took his keys. Everything in my gut tells me not to let him have his car back. It's still in our name but he does have insc. in his name. -=-

I've asked the original author not to participate in this exchange, so I'm not asking for clarification, but I'm pointing out some confusion.

I understand a car kind of belonging to someone, and kind of not. Marty's jeep is in his name and mine, so we could buy it all in one day and get a loan from the credit union. And he hasn't fully paid for it. Still, I wouldn't take his keys away from him or take his car away.

His girlfriend is older than he is. She bought a car on her own, entirely, while living away from home. She moved back home at some point, and because she came in late one night, her dad took the keys away from her and wouldn't let her drive her own car. It never WAS his; he didn't help her buy it.

Parents can go too far. If you allow a 21 year old to live at home (I have two kids at home at 20 and 23, and my other one moved out just as he turned 21), you can't really continue to treat them as children.

I see no advantage whatsoever in even considering doing something that would keep him (or any child, or any housemate) from getting to work.

-=- I've tried telling him that he could use the car for work but then to bring home right after, well, that never works, he will come late at night. I really don't know what to do. Overall he is a really good kid, I'm so torn up about this.-=-

I don't think being torn up about it is an appropriate or useful response.

I wouldn't tell a 21 year old to come home right after work.

It seems like too much control to me.

He's three years past compulsory education age in any state, too, so it's not really an unschooling question. I don't mind discussing it. And I'm not sure where a better place to discuss it would be, but I'm a little uncomfortable with it. It doesn't sound like a solid, respectful relationship.

But more controls, shaming, threats, rules, curfews, punishments.... I don't see how those can be part of any good unschooling-family discussion.

Sandra

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

Marina DeLuca-Howard

Well, it depends on where you live. In some places pot can be available by
prescription, so if he is using it to medicate himself and would like to do
so legally.

Ask a doctor about how that works in your state or do a google search.
Think about it the way you would beer. Unless its stopping him from working
or not a social thing it may be okay.

Are you worried about him breaking other laws? One of the problems with
what is termed cannabis prohibition by some is that it makes a drug illegal
that was once legal, and also is legal in many places in the world.

You need to identify what scares you. Driving under the influence. Going
to prison if caught. Addiction.

Marina

On 12 May 2012 21:02, Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> I returned the post when it was coming directly from the mom, with a note
> that because it was about something illegal, it wasn't a good thing to send
> to 3000 strangers, and that because the kid is 21, it's not really an
> unschooling matter at this point.
>
> Still, the questions and ideas might be worth discussing.
> Let's not get all hot and argumentative, if possible. I know there will be
> mixed emotions. That's another good reason to separate it from the original
> poster (who is NOT a regular on this list; just joined).
> =========================================================
>
> I really need help here. I don't know what to do. My son (always
> unschooled) is 21 and living at home. He has always been such a joy but he
> smokes pot. I've talked to him about it several times. Sometimes he says he
> thinks he needs help but doesn't know how to get it. I've sent him to an
> M.D. for depression, he says he feels depressed, he didn't want to take the
> medication to help him. Which is fine, I understand that. He doesn't want
> to go to counseling. I can't force him to go. 99 percent of the time he
> seems really happy, loves his new job. I personally think that he just like
> to get high with his friends.
>
> I've taken his car away several times because I know that he has been high
> while driving it.
>
> Well, he came home today and it was obvious he has smoked earlier, I
> looked in his car and sure enough he had a pipe. I took his keys.
> Everything in my gut tells me not to let him have his car back. It's still
> in our name but he does have insc. in his name.
>
> Now that I've thought about it, I know he shouldn't have a car if he is
> going to do that. But if he can't get to his job that he loves, he will
> lose it. If he can't pay his insc. they will drop him and then he will
> never be able to afford it. Plus I think they might suspend his permit if
> he goes without insc. not really sure. I've tried telling him that he could
> use the car for work but then to bring home right after, well, that never
> works, he will come late at night. I really don't know what to do. Overall
> he is a really good kid, I'm so torn up about this. Any and all sincere
> advice would be greatly appreciated.
> =========================================================
>
> Let's be vague,too, in responses, as much as possible, please. Don't be
> identifying, confessing, outing anyone.
>
> Sandra
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



--
Bread and Roses
http://breadandrosescentennial.org/

Trust, Equality and Goodwill

It's not just that the ends do not justify the means (though they don't),
you will never achieve the ends at all unless the means are themselves a
model for the world you wish to create. .*David Graeber*


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

Renee McGraw

=========================================================
>
> I've talked to him about it several times. Sometimes he says he thinks he
needs help but doesn't know how to get it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Does he say he thinks he needs help because he feels that's what you want
him to say? He obviously didn't want prescription meds for depression, so
maybe he feels that he doesn't have a problem.
Clearly express your concerns, being arrested, losing his license and job
and whatever else you may be concerned about this activity. Maybe let him
know that you don't approve of this activity, but your main priority is his
safety. Let him know it's okay to call you for a ride or support if he
finds himself in a situation where doing that is the safest choice for
him. When/if he did decide to do this, do your part to get him home
without lectures or extensive questioning. My mind goes to the "taboo"
things in kids lives. If they feel that they can't be honest and open or
if something is off limits they want to try it. Both of my adult kids, now
24 and 21, were told that if they ever felt like they wanted to try it then
they could let me know and I would help them, if they wanted, to be safe.
Both have expiremented with it, but now don't use it at all. I feel that
is mostly because we de-mystified the subject, examined both positive and
negative and never condemned or punished their choices. You can express
concern without laying guilt or coersion into it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> 99 percent of the time he seems really happy, loves his new job. I
personally think that he just like to get high with his friends.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
99% happy doesn't really sound depressed :-)
Were his friends unschooled? Do they or have they ever experienced the
option of honest dialogue with their loved ones about the subject?
Possibly, but probably not. With the taking of his car and such he may be
identifying more with his friends experience with their feelings of having
to conceal their activities from their parents.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>
> I've taken his car away several times because I know that he has been
high while driving it.
>
> Well, he came home today and it was obvious he has smoked earlier, I
looked in his car and sure enough he had a pipe. I took his keys.
Everything in my gut tells me not to let him have his car back. It's still
in our name but he does have insc. in his name.
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Is it possible to transfer ownership of the vehicle to your son? He's 21
and carries his own ins, so that would remove legal responsibility from
you. Just another option to discuss with him.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> Now that I've thought about it, I know he shouldn't have a car if he is
going to do that. But if he can't get to his job that he loves, he will
lose it. If he can't pay his insc. they will drop him and then he will
never be able to afford it.
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@ 21, I don't think taking his car is a productive way to maintain a
trusting open relationship. It could lead to a break down of the trust
you've worked so hard to nurture his always unschooled years. Also, at the
age of 21, with a job and responsibilities he does need a car. If you are
adament about taking his car you may want to consider making arrangements
to make sure he has a ride to and from work.

Renee ========================================================


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

Joyce Fetteroll

> He has always been such a joy but he smokes pot.
> I've talked to him about it several times.

What is it about smoking pot that bothers you? Whatever it is you're talking about doesn't sound like a problem to him. He's just making appeasing noises to shut you up. Which sounds like it's more of a problem for you than it is for him.

> I personally think that he just like to get high with his friends.

Sometimes people have a drink with friends to relax, to be sociable. Ignoring legalities, how is this different?

If it's entirely about legalities, then confine your discussions to that real ways to be safer rather than imposing solutions on him like not smoking at all.

> I've taken his car away several times because I know that he has been high while driving it.

If you keep taking the car away and he continues to drive while high, it's not working.

> I've tried telling him that he could use the car for work but then to
> bring home right after, well, that never works, he will come late at night

What if he were living away from home? He'd get to do whatever he wanted without you hovering over him, taking his keys away.

Which is why it works better to focus on principles rather than "Do what mom thinks is right." Principles like safety and making thoughtful decisions.

I'd suggest you read Parent/Teen Breakthrough: the relationship approach by Mira Kirchenbaum.

http://tinyurl.com/3mnbf52

Joyce




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

Kimberly Sims

~"> I've tried telling him that he could use the car for work but then to
> bring home right after, well, that never works, he will come late at night

What if he were living away from home? He'd get to do whatever he wanted without
you hovering over him, taking his keys away. "~

I have a 21 year old step daughter. She moved to San Francisco, over 2,000 miles
away from us, with her boyfriend while he finishes his degree in art therapy.
Pot is legal by prescription there (and *very* easy to get). In fact she tells
us you see people everywhere smoking it, eating it, it is even in suckers.


When I first read this post even though it was mentioned "always unschooled" it
didn't sound to me like the relationship was one of a radical unschooler.When
you are your child's partner you need to examine your own fears of what bothers
you so you can be able to help your children live and learn about life an keep
an open mind about it.

I liked the comparison of drinking. Would you rather he sneaked around and
smoked it behind your back and then get in trouble? Be honest and up front with
him about your fears, not in a I'm right your wrong way but more in a I love you
and am scared because ......, kind of way.

Kim




 


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

Miliana

Could you put the car in his name? He can buy the car from you (with a loan from you), paying you monthly as he would pay off a bank loan (better yet, maybe he can get a bank loan). Then it's his car, his life, his issues and you can address this as a partner without worrying about your liability.

Many people try pot at this age. Some go on to be president, some are now total potheads, some smoke socially and some just drop it. It's not as addicting as cigarettes or alcohol but it does kill brain cells and impair driving (though not as much as alcohol).

Consider keeping quiet 'til you've researched the legal issues in your area and the truth about what pot does to a person.

If he insists on smoking ask him to stay put until the effects wear off or volunteer to pick him up.And if he likes his job he may quickly figure out how to manage his recreational activities around that.

Aloha,
Miliana

Sent from my iPhone; please excuse typos and auto corrections.

Lyla Wolfenstein

i wouldn't even assume it "kills brain cells and impairs driving" - i've
seen conflicting studies/info about both of those things, as well.
lyla

> Many people try pot at this age. Some go on to be president, some are now
> total potheads, some smoke socially and some just drop it. It's not as
> addicting as cigarettes or alcohol but it does kill brain cells and impair
> driving (though not as much as alcohol).
>
>


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

cherylj30

I'm a lurker online but radical unschooler to 22yo & 16yo(never been to any school). I have some experience with people having similar issues (take that with a grain of salt i guess).

First let me acknowledge that I'm in total agreement with the others who have pointed out that marijuana use is not *necessarily* dangerous and in some states not illegal in some circumstances. On-going dialogue with this kid is desirable and many parents find agreements with more or less marijuana use.

--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
> -=-He has always been such a joy but he smokes pot. I've talked to him about it several times. Sometimes he says he thinks he needs help but doesn't know how to get it. I've sent him to an M.D. for depression, he says he feels depressed, he didn't want to take the medication to help him. Which is fine, I understand that. He doesn't want to go to counseling.-=-
>
> I am socially and geographically in a place where smoking pot isn't such a big deal.
>
> Medication from an MD for depression isn't going to do ANYthing without counselling to change thought and behavior, so I think that was a bad move (sending someone to a regular doctor for depression).
>

This is *not* true. Medication from an MD *can* be helpful even without counselling. (though coercion to accept mediation is not desirable). I think you absolutely did the correct thing to take your child to the regular doctor 1st and get referal if needed to other resourses. If a person says they feel depressed you would be negligent not to have it evaluated by others(I'm not advocating any particular profession). I'm assuming that your son was in cooperation with this dr visit as he is 21 and could refuse to go. So, I would take that to mean he is also concerned and your offering, arranging, and taking him shows him that you are paying attention and take his concerns seriously and that you are someone he can trust and depend on.
Medication can be helpful even if counseling is refused, because sometimes one might need to feel a little better before getting to the point of accepting counseling. Of course I know medication has its dangers but being prejudicial or close-minded to medication is irrational. I would rather make an informed decision than rejecting it outright.

Provide as many options and resources as you can. There's no single answer for every person.


> But if this is true, he's not depressed anyway: "99 percent of the time he seems really happy, loves his new job. "
>

This is not necessarily true either. Depression is not always situational and often is hormonal or chemical or organic. A person could appear "really happy" for 99% of their day, week, month, whatever and still have lows that are extremely low and potential dangerous.

> I'm wondering if your "I've talked to him about it several times" involved suggesting to him that he wouldn't smoke pot if he wasn't depressed.
>

It would be a good question to ask if he feels motivated to smoke when feeling 'depressed'. Helping him identify when and why he is smoking would be good, of course it has to be appreciated or desired by the other party. Did you mean to say "I've talked *with* him..."? As long as he's open to conversation about the subject it can be an opportunity for both of you to explore the pros and cons and other options. I would guess that you have as little or less information than he has.


>
> I would, if it were me, stop treating him like a child.
>

I heard nothing that indicates this parent is treating him like a child. I would be just as concerned about my spouse if they were behaving the way he is and it wouldn't be "(s)mothering" if I were to question his motives, behavior, options, and resources and offer assistance. And, if my husband was driving under the influence, I would take great measures to prevent it if he was not cooperative.


> When the term "permit" was used, I'm assuming that meant driver's license.
>
> -=-I've taken his car away several times because I know that he has been high while driving it.
> -=-Well, he came home today and it was obvious he has smoked earlier, I looked in his car and sure enough he had a pipe. I took his keys. Everything in my gut tells me not to let him have his car back. It's still in our name but he does have insc. in his name. -=-
>
> I've asked the original author not to participate in this exchange, so I'm not asking for clarification, but I'm pointing out some confusion.
>
> I understand a car kind of belonging to someone, and kind of not. Marty's jeep is in his name and mine, so we could buy it all in one day and get a loan from the credit union. And he hasn't fully paid for it. Still, I wouldn't take his keys away from him or take his car away.
>

There are legal issues involved here. Even if the driver is insured, the owner of the car can be (and will be) named in a lawsuit if there are damages or injuries.
If you *own* the car you have a legal responsibility to not allow it to be driven by someone under the influence. The law/court does not care that you only put it in your name and he is "really" the owner.

> His girlfriend is older than he is. She bought a car on her own, entirely, while living away from home. She moved back home at some point, and because she came in late one night, her dad took the keys away from her and wouldn't let her drive her own car. It never WAS his; he didn't help her buy it.
>

While wrong & atrocious, this is not on level with restricting someones driving *while under the influence*. He's shown that he will or has driven while being compromised and I don't think that taking his keys is the same as punishment. But, call it what you will, it would be tragic if you let him and he killed or injured himself or others.

> Parents can go too far. If you allow a 21 year old to live at home (I have two kids at home at 20 and 23, and my other one moved out just as he turned 21), you can't really continue to treat them as children.
>

True but there is a balance and a continuum from "childhood" to "adulthood". Its obvious that this kid is not behaving like an adult and his judgement does not appear to be good right now.

> I see no advantage whatsoever in even considering doing something that would keep him (or any child, or any housemate) from getting to work.
>
> -=- I've tried telling him that he could use the car for work but then to bring home right after, well, that never works, he will come late at night. I really don't know what to do. Overall he is a really good kid, I'm so torn up about this.-=-
>
> I don't think being torn up about it is an appropriate or useful response.
>
> I wouldn't tell a 21 year old to come home right after work.
>
> It seems like too much control to me.
>

Yes, this kind of "controlling behavior" might backfire but it might make an impression and maybe it will be short-lived and convey our outrage at dui.

If you remove the car, you should probably offer to drive him or obtain transport by bus, cab, or friend (not the smoking ones). If he quits his job due to not being able to drive a car, that is not your responsibility, it is his. Millions of people work without a car.

I'm sure that overall your assessment that he's a good kid is accurate. Making a mistake in judgement or having an addition problem does not negate his good qualities.

> He's three years past compulsory education age in any state, too, so it's not really an unschooling question. I don't mind discussing it. And I'm not sure where a better place to discuss it would be, but I'm a little uncomfortable with it. <

I think it *is* appropriate here and I really appreciate your consideration. I think it could be very helpful to many families. Especially to this mother who seems to share unschooling values & experiences and is reaching out for help. As long as a parent is still parenting, then does it really matter how many years he is past compulsory education age. As unschoolers, we know that chronological age and grades are irrelevant. This kid is still living at home, behaves as a teenager, and the mother is behaving in the mother role. Some kids need this longer than others.


> It doesn't sound like a solid, respectful relationship.
>
> But more controls, shaming, threats, rules, curfews, punishments.... I don't see how those can be part of any good unschooling-family discussion.
>

It does not sound like a solid respectful relationship but this could be due to drug abuse or compromised thought process. Respectful relationships as adults are a two-way street. This mother obviously is searching for a respectful relationship. This man/child is not being respectful and that should be expected for anyone living in someones house.

Shaming, threats, controls, are not desirable. However, sometimes people are irrationally behaving in ways that are harmful or potentially dangerous and need swift intervention. Relationship repair might have to wait a bit. But, its a delicate balance.

However, marijuana use can be for many reasons (including to have fun with friends) and I would think its a fair question to ask or explore with him. If he wants to use recreationally or occasionally, appropriate compromise might be more desirable. He might need direction to medical marijuana if that's an option. The danger of marijuana is the fact that its illegal and procuring it can sometimes be dangerous or involve potentially sketchy characters. These are all things that could be negotiated.

*However, restriction or agreement to not drive a vehicle while high is paramount.*

~Cheryl

Joyce Fetteroll

On May 14, 2012, at 2:13 AM, cherylj30 wrote:

> I think it *is* appropriate here

It's Sandra's list. She gets to decide what's appropriate and what isn't. But she said "it's not really an unschooling question". It's not that some good stuff can't come from the discussion. It's that increasingly less good stuff *for a list focused on unschooling ideas* can come from discussing problems the further removed they are from kids who are of compulsory school age.


> But, call it what you will, it would be tragic if you let him and he killed or injured himself or others.

The problem, though, is that control tends to shut down communication. And it causes people to sneak and lie if what's being controlled is important enough to them. If control worked, alcoholism wouldn't be a problem. Control won't keep someone from making dangerous choices.

Whether he's smoking for social reasons, to unwind, to escape, as an act of defiance towards control, it's a response to a situation in his life. Control doesn't make the situation go away. Control just cuts off something he found soothed the situation.

If his mom can talk less about her fears of pot and listen more about his thoughts on his feelings and what the pot does for him she can be more helpful. And discuss other options and ways he can do this safely, she'll be helping him open doors rather than trying to get him to shut the one door.


> True but there is a balance and a continuum from "childhood" to "adulthood".
> Its obvious that this kid is not behaving like an adult and his judgement does
> not appear to be good right now.

And imposing mom's right thinking isn't likely to make judgement better whether someone's 6 or 21. Helping them think about situations from different angles, think about other options and think through consequences and ways to avoid them, that will help make more thoughtful decisions.

Talking *to* him, *repeatedly* talking to him, taking the keys away, setting curfews none of those give people better tools and they tear at relationships. If this is how their relationship has been for 21 years, it's not a dynamic that helps someone become thoughtful about their choices.

While parents will justify such responses in order to control kids until they learn how to make the "right", e.g., the parents', decisions, it doesn't work as well as people wish it would! Kids can learn to act a certain way around parents to shut them up and then act entirely differently when parents aren't around. Kids can come to believe they aren't competent enough to make good decisions. Kids grow and see the world differently so that choices that seemed nonsensical at 6 can make sense at 12, but it's age that changed them not the control.

While that controlling behavior is labeled "treating him like a child", even children don't like or respond well to it. At 21 he legally gets to say "No more. I'm leaving." And then the mother has lost her opportunity to be a sounding board and an influence.

Joyce





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

Marina DeLuca-Howard

During a routine conversation my son, 16, casually mentioned that at his
friend's house someone was using a bong one day. My husband smiled and
asked our son if he had tried it--my son replied in the same tone and said
he didn't see the point of being giddy and didn't find the idea of inhaling
smoke appealing. He also asks my husband on occasion why he smokes
cigerettes--genuinely curious.

My son admitted to being fascinated by his peers usage and subsequent silly
behaviour. He is also confused why his dad smokes cigerettes. John has
quit cigerettes repeatedly over the years, but always re-started. Not that
Rowan is a serious kid or judgemental--he has a witty sense of humour but
is extremely logical and curious.

My husband was surprized. He told me later as a teen he would have gone
along with his friends without question and it wouldn't have been a topic
of family conversation. All John's friend's kids drink alcholol and smoke
pot and occasionally one gets caught shoplifting. One of John's friends
said we should expect our kids to do these things because everyone does it
and if we don't know our son is doing it we are obviously "stupid".

To John's friends who were the "controlling types" Rowan was spoiled at age
two, smothered at age six for still nursing, rescued from natural
consequences, given too much freedom, and talked to as if he were as
"adult" and his ideas were equally important to me at too young an age.
Obvously, we are in for the "consequences" of my "bad" parenting choices.
Now we are being "stupid" because we believe our son doesn't smoke pot,
drink or shoplift and we support his playing "too" many video games and buy
them for him. The question of why our son would lie is one that in their
world can't be asked. Kids always lie to parents--they lied and their kids
lie. One guy said obviously our son has problems: our son is immersed in
role playing games with his on line friends and that's like drugs and
shoplifing. Are we going to help him shoplift and shoot heroine?

When you judge your kids behaviour on those sorts of spectrums how can they
possibly trust you? Also the nature of the activity--cutting, reckless
driving, suicide attempts all seems so different to drinking socially,
potsmoking with friends, and other social activities that seem to have
blurry lines.

Why, Rowan wonders, if the point of parenting is helping the child to
learn to identify what he needs, how to have fun, to learn to be with other
people, learn how to be safe and to make choices would I be surprized that
he can do these things?

As a partner and friend to my child I always let him know he was loved,
that there were choices I wanted for him, the reasons for those choices
etc...But if he made his own choices and if it didn't work out I always
wanted to help and to talk and let him figure out things.

I am not sure what the future holds. We said if he did try anything in
future and felt scared/worried or was in trouble to please let us know and
we would help. He replied that putting himself in a situation where he
wasn't in control wasn't appealing. I don't always agree with his choices
but he always listens to my reasons. Now, he doesn't always agree with his
friends choices, nor his parent's choices, but he has learned to think for
himself and make his own choices without making others feel bad about their
choices. The choices are getting more "serious" and our ability to control
him less--so Rowan tells us he feels good about his ability to make choices.

I know a woman who unschooled who said her daughter tried pot socially. It
didn't seem to have ruined her health or her life. She works and she's a
perfectly lovely young woman.

I don't know what the answer it about pot smoking and twenty-one year
olds,or depression but I do know that talking to kids, trusting them and
helping them creates happy, healthy adults who make choices we agree with
and disagree with on occasion. But we can feel secure about trusting them
to ask for help.

I also really enjoyed the Rat Park article AND addiction theory.

http://globalizationofaddiction.ca/articles-speeches/148-addiction-the-view-from-rat-park.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park

http://www.psychedelic-library.org/davies/myth_of_addiction.htm
"Because the basic decision to take drugs, notwithstanding the consequences
of excessive use, is fundamentally non-pathological, much of the research
into 'addictions' which seeks a better understanding of why people drink
too much, smoke too much, or take drugs, is in reality a search for why
people decide to do, commit themselves to, or dedicate themselves to,
anything. Insofar as the search is for an understanding of the whole of
human 'choice' behaviour, one can expect that no sudden breakthrough will
occur; the search can go on more or less indefinitely. Furthermore, from
some perspectives the problem appears to confound alternative metaphysical
(i.e. free will) and materialist (i.e. determinist) propositions which can
never be explained under a common rubric. In other words, the underlying
philosophy is flawed."

*http://tinyurl.com/75dhhdk*

" Psychology is not just the study of disease, weakness and damage; it also
is the study of strength and virtue. Treatment is not just fixing what is
wrong; it also is building what is right. Psychology is not just about
illness or health; it also is about work, education, insight, love, growth
and play. And in this quest for what is best, positive psychology does not
rely on wishful thinking, self-deception, or hand waving; instead, it tries
to adapt what is best in the scientific method to the unique problems that
human behaviour presents in all its complexity."

Marina


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

Sandra Dodd

-=-One guy said obviously our son has problems: our son is immersed in
role playing games with his on line friends and that's like drugs and
shoplifing. Are we going to help him shoplift and shoot heroine?-=-

What a lot of sad noise. :-/
Inside his head are all those voice talking to him about self-deprivation and self-control and the dangers of fun and joy.

-=-I don't know what the answer it about pot smoking and twenty-one year
olds,or depression but I do know that talking to kids, trusting them and
helping them creates happy, healthy adults who make choices we agree with
and disagree with on occasion. But we can feel secure about trusting them
to ask for help.-=-

Of my three (now grown) one didn't want to try smoking pot, hasn't, but he will drink to inebriation (and then stay where he is and come home the next day).

The other two have smoked pot, but because of our long years of sharing, trust and lack of bullshit on the parents' part, we know about it, and they're not hiding things. They know about social and legal and personal dangers, and are making informed choices.

There are millions of kids without any ability to make any choices, informed or otherwise, in the eyes of their parents. There is a RIGHT answer, and there is WRONG. And so WRONG is kept secret.

Much of the driving under the influence that happens in kids happens because of strict curfews and punishments. The parents say you HAVE TO BE HOME at 11:00, and so they don't have the option to sober up or come home later, because they're afraid of being shamed, grounded, deprived, and so they take that risk, because of an arbitrary parental rule.

Sandra

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

Marina DeLuca-Howard

On 14 May 2012 11:35, Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:

> **
>
> What a lot of sad noise. :-/
> Inside his head are all those voice talking to him about self-deprivation
> and self-control and the dangers of fun and joy.
>

I am worried that those voices are influencing the original poster and that
they are driving a wedge between her and her child-that this is about all
or nothing. Seeing pot smoking on a mental health spectrum or as
self-destructive doesn't help her see strength, responsibility or growth.
Psychologists aren't all on the same page on drug use or depression or
mental health.

"Overall he is a really good kid, I'm so torn up about this."

The sentence really struck me. How can one be torn up over a kid being
overall good? In context of his life it sounds like this kid has a lot of
rules--be home early, and only use the car for work. Go to the doctor if
mom thinks you are sick.

So, if he smokes or drinks or smokes pot with friends he needs to hurry
home. Hurrying home sounds like the issue here. If the kid is depressed
maybe its having his behaviour pathologised or his mom's rules that make
him doubt himself or maybe he can't please his mother? Its hard to think
for yourself and make choices under conditions of trust for some people,
but knowing that your mother will search out evidence to prove you are
"rule breaking" without thinking that her principles and rules may not
mesh. Absolutes don't work.

I think that in Sandra's children's stories there is trust and work and
thought which helps further understanding. In this case if the mom is
searching the car for evidence of drug use something is definitely
wrong--start first with lack of conversation and trust before thinking
about mental health or addiction or danger.

What would the mother do if she trusted her son? It is clear there is no
faith or trust here, but demands aplenty.

It sounds as if the mom has pathologised the drug use somehow, but set up
the conditions for him to need to hide his usage. For people who have drug
or alcohol issues due to past problems in their families even a good kid,
being responsible isn't good enough.

Is it possible this isn't about the son but about someone else in the
mother's life? Friend, parent or her own problems?

The boy is doing his best to please his mom, and life his life, and he is
under stress. He is torn between his job, his friends and his curfew and
upsetting his mother:(

Marina


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

cherylj30

--- In [email protected], Joyce Fetteroll <jfetteroll@...> wrote:
>
>
> On May 14, 2012, at 2:13 AM, cherylj30 wrote:
>
> > I think it *is* appropriate here
>
> It's Sandra's list. She gets to decide what's appropriate and what isn't. But she said "it's not really an unschooling question". <

I know its her list. Its just my opinion that these are unschooling issues and that unschooling does not stop at at chronological age of 18. (If you want to debate this issue, I think it has a place here too.) I appreciate Sandra's choice to bring it to this list even though she seems to have apprehension.

Its hard for unschooling parents to loose their community because their kid is over 18. Sandra surely hasn't stopped discussing her children and their relationships just because they are all over 18. Maybe someone will be inspired to start a group for grown unschooling families. Our lifestyle is not relatable to the mainstream so there's very little support or resources to support an on-going unschooling relationship beyond "school" years.
Eitherway, this case seems to lean more towards unschooling and less towards mature independent adult relationships, making it a valuable discussion on this list.


>It's not that some good stuff can't come from the discussion. It's that increasingly less good stuff *for a list focused on unschooling ideas* can come from discussing problems the further removed they are from kids who are of compulsory school age.
>


Less / More whatever. How (why) prejudge that? Why not let it evolve and see what the group thinks. It seems that many have already related it to their own experiences. It may be "less good stuff" for you but it seems to be good enough stuff for others. And more importantly it is *more* good stuff for a mom in crisis who turned to this list. Dont turn her away because that would definately lead to "less good stuff".

>
> > But, call it what you will, it would be tragic if you let him and he killed or injured himself or others.
>
> The problem, though, is that control tends to shut down communication. And it causes people to sneak and lie if what's being controlled is important enough to them. If control worked, alcoholism wouldn't be a problem. Control won't keep someone from making dangerous choices.
>


Of course. And I didn't suggest control. I suggested lots of open communication and offering him resources. Control=bad. Okay.
There were lots of relationship - communication suggestions but no one pointed out the legal and ethical consequences of driving while under the influence of pot.
These legal and ethical consequences are significant and *may* need to override the desire to stick to a pure theory.
We strive for healthy noncoercive open supportive relationships but when someone is going to immediately drive under the influence, taking the keys away in the moment is the responsible and loving action. Work on unschooling relationship in the morning or later when the kid is not stoned.



> Whether he's smoking for social reasons, to unwind, to escape, as an act of defiance towards control, it's a response to a situation in his life. Control doesn't make the situation go away. Control just cuts off something he found soothed the situation.
>
> If his mom can talk less about her fears of pot and listen more about his thoughts on his feelings and what the pot does for him she can be more helpful. And discuss other options and ways he can do this safely, she'll be helping him open doors rather than trying to get him to shut the one door.
>

I didn't suggest taking his pot away. I suggested taking the keys to the car. And furthermore, a car that she has legal responsibility for.

This mom should talk about her fears until she can identify the source of the fears and evaluate their truth vs myth. Expressing her fears to her son offers him the opportunity to be a partner in the resolution. It might be helpful for them to work thru irrational ideas or fear together.

Another reason why this discussion is helpful/useful here is that it brings to light that these issues might be better explored before age 21. These values/priciples should be discussed from an early age. If it has, this mom can appeal to the son's ultimate desire to maintain principles he had adopted/accepted when not stoned.


>
> > True but there is a balance and a continuum from "childhood" to "adulthood".
> > Its obvious that this kid is not behaving like an adult and his judgement does
> > not appear to be good right now.
>
> And imposing mom's right thinking isn't likely to make judgement better whether someone's 6 or 21. Helping them think about situations from different angles, think about other options and think through consequences and ways to avoid them, that will help make more thoughtful decisions.
>

Yes, yes, absolutely.
Again, thats why this situation offers an excellent example to unschooling parents. Many are going to deal with this same situation with kids under 18.

I'm an advocate for legalizing marijuana. I don't think forbidding it would be helpful at all. I think this mom has a wonderful opportunity to help guide her kid/adult to rational healthy choices. She's concerned that his use may be more than just recreational or exploration. It should be pointed out that some people do get "addicted" to pot so it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. She's also concerned that he's using to self-medicate and may have some level of disfunctional thinking (ie depression). This is common too and should be further explored.

Good unschooling families deal with these type of issues. A heathy unschooling relationship does not always prevent drug use/abuse or other negative life choices. Too many caring unschooling parents are hesitant to bring up these type issue because they fear judgement by their peers (other unschoolers) and they fear they are the only good unschooling family dealing with this and no one will be able to relate. To stifle this conversation has the potential to continue to send that message to young unschooling parents.

I encourage her to continue seeking assistance, advice, guidance, etc. I admire her dedication to a kid who's beyond 18.
Again, I thank Sandra for bring this issue to this list.

Sandra Dodd

-=-I'm a lurker online but radical unschooler to 22yo & 16yo(never been to any school). I have some experience with people having similar issues (take that with a grain of salt i guess).-=-

You're also pretty new to this list. It is not "online" in general. It is the Always Learning discussion in particular, and has its own history and traditions.

-=-*However, restriction or agreement to not drive a vehicle while high is paramount.*
-=-

It can be paramount in your life, but you can't declare it to be paramount in everyone's life, or even in this discussion.

It is a consideration.

Some people are worse drivers sober and at their best than others might be when impaired (high, tipsy, sleepy, angry, distracted).

We're sharing ideas, not making demands. The tone of the post was too harsh and argumentative.

Sandra

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

dezignarob

==== What is it about smoking pot that bothers you? Whatever it is you're talking about doesn't sound like a problem to him. He's just making appeasing noises to shut you up. Which sounds like it's more of a problem for you than it is for him. ====

Maybe I'm wrong, but from my point of view, the problem is not that he is smoking pot, but that he is doing it stupidly.

Having drug paraphernalia in his car, where if Mom could find it, so could the police on a traffic stop, is stupid.

Driving while loaded is stupid. It is even more stupid when the driver is young.

I think the taking keys might be part of the "friends don't let friends drive...." idea, but removing them after the fact is pointless and becomes punishment. All it will do is foster resentment, and remind him that his Mom believes that he is too immature to be trusted. Is Mom afraid that her son will decide he doesn't want to hear a lecture when he has just gotten home stoned, and go out again?

People often make stupid choices when they feel backed into a corner.

I don't know whether using pot is a symptom of depression, or a reaction to it, or completely unconnected. I don't know whether this particular person is depressed or has a problem with addiction. But if he does (or even if he doesn't but just wants to), he will find a way to get high regardless of anything or anyone. If he really is an addict, if he really is depressed, forcing him into the shadows with punishments will not help.

If Mom is asking him if he feels depressed on the morning after, he might agree. But feeling a bit anxious and shaky the morning after a..er...night out, is kinda what can happen normally. I say give him a nice healthy breakfast with plenty of protein and juice, then ask him how he feels.

I think jumping to the worst case scenario with labels and diagnoses FIRST before considering other reasons for any behavior is detrimental to unschooling and clear logical thinking. It doesn't mean those worst cases don't exist, but logically they are not the most likely situation.

I'm getting that he is going directly from work to his socializing, so offering him some money for a cab may not work, but it might. He might feel better going out unencumbered by his car, but also feels like he won't be "allowed" to go out, at least not without a lecture, if he drops his car off at home first. Obviously having the car with him is not working as the deterrent I suspect his Mom may have hoped it would.

Maybe everyone will be happier if he moved out to an apartment close to his job and his friends, and could smoke at home in relative safety. Please note I am NOT suggesting that the Mom host this in her house.

(But as a thought exercise, what if he were free to smoke at home?)

For some people, pot's like a weekend relaxation treat. For others, it appears to sap the motivation to do anything other than sit around getting high, and life can get sordid. I suspect the latter is what the Mom fears. But I also suspect that is the much less common situation, more of a media fueled stereotype, that what really happens most of the time.

Either it's his car or it's not. If he is the only person using the car, sign it over to him, unless maybe that makes the insurance too expensive. Wouldn't that be a vote of confidence? Maybe it would make him more responsible with it, since he would have the true sense of ownership.

Robyn L. Coburn
www.iggyjingles.blogspot.com
www.allthingsdoll.blogspot.com
www.robyncoburn.blogspot.com

Sandra Dodd

-=-I know its her list. Its just my opinion that these are unschooling issues and that unschooling does not stop at at chronological age of 18. (If you want to debate this issue, I think it has a place here too.) -=-

Joyce wasn't wanting "to debate" the issue.
Argument for the sake of argument is verbal jackoff, and I much prefer for this list to be solidly, and always, about unschooling.
If you want to create a yahoo group to argue for fun, go ahead and you can announce it here. Maybe some people will want to go over there. If you want to use the 3000 members we already have to argue for fun, that will be a trapdoor situation.

-=->It's not that some good stuff can't come from the discussion. It's that increasingly less good stuff *for a list focused on unschooling ideas* can come from discussing problems the further removed they are from kids who are of compulsory school age.
>

-=-Less / More whatever. How (why) prejudge that? Why not let it evolve and see what the group thinks-=-

Don't ever say "whatever" to Joyce Fetteroll again in this discussion.
Joyce's opinion is more important to me than yours or what the group thinks.

But honestly, the group doesn't think.

-=-Our lifestyle is not relatable to the mainstream ...
-=-We strive for healthy noncoercive open supportive relationships but ...

Too much "our" and "we." Bring your ideas from yourself, and keep them no bigger than that. Sweeping speeches trying to sway large groups are better for rallies. Speaking for a large group is better for political conventions.

There's no purpose to waiting to see "what the group thinks."
What I think, and it's my party, is that Always Learning exists "for the examination of the philosophy of unschooling and attentive parenting and a place for sharing examined lives based on the principles underlying unschooling."

Sandra




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

Sandra Dodd

-=-I think jumping to the worst case scenario with labels and diagnoses FIRST before considering other reasons for any behavior is detrimental to unschooling and clear logical thinking. It doesn't mean those worst cases don't exist, but logically they are not the most likely situation.-=-

I agree with Robin.

The business about depressing before was alarmist and strident.

Eveyone had a range of emotion. Someone who can become giddy with excitement will have a corresponding low. Someone who has no idea what a suicidal feeling is like probably has also never had joy so big it hurt to breathe. Those things are part of a personality, part of an individual's biochemistry. Those with extreme ranges do better to learn to recognize it and deal with it than to take anti-depressants without changing behavior.

-=-Depression is not always situational and often is hormonal or chemical or organic.-=-

Hormonal, chemical and organic aren't three different things.
No matter what is causing depressing, thoughts and actions can make it worse, and thoughts and actions can make it better.
But someone claiming depression in someone else who is happy 99% of the time is just fishin' for trouble, and looking for negativity in the happy life of a young adult who likes his job.

Taking an anti-depressant can give someone the opportunity to re-establish a better flow of thoughts, but without new, improved thoughts and some clarity and some direction and goals, the thoughts can stay in the confused hole they were in before, and the brain chemistry can sludge right back up, negating the benefit of the anti-depressants. Quicker synapses without happier thoughts will not lead to mental health.

Sandra

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

Deb Lewis

***Well, he came home today and it was obvious he has smoked earlier, I looked in his car and sure enough he had a pipe. I took his keys. Everything in my gut tells me not to let him have his car back. ***

Taking the car won’t stop him from smoking and driving. It will only stop him from driving *that* car. He could get another car, he could drive a friend’s car. If you take the car then it’s punishment for not doing things your way or it’s protecting your investment (the car) or it’s an attempt to limit your legal responsibility if he’s busted. You can do that, I guess, but don’t deceive yourself that you’re doing it to protect or change him. You’d be doing it for you.

I’m just guessing but maybe the one percent of the time he seems depressed it’s because you’re talking too much about him smoking pot. I don’t think you can use his mental health as an argument for him to quit. I think he’s probably fine.

If this is about pot smoking then, if you can, help him move out, sign the car over to him and get off his back.

If it’s about his well being then cultivate the kind of relationship that will let you help him stay safe. Stop hounding him. Coach him about keeping his pipe out of sight, offer to pick him up if he’s been smoking.

You can’t control him, you can’t stop him, you can make things at home better or worse and making them worse for him won’t be any kind of motivation for him to be more careful or considerate of you.

Deb Lewis













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

Meredith

"dezignarob" <dezignarob@...> wrote:
>> Maybe I'm wrong, but from my point of view, the problem is not that he is smoking pot, but that he is doing it stupidly.
********************

I think that's a much harder subject to address when it's something the parents don't do and don't really understand or have a context for. It could help if the parents know some adult who smokes and is otherwise normal and respectable - it could help the parents gain a bit of perspective, or that person could act as a kind of resource, the way some kids find it easier to talk to a family friend about sex and sexuality than to mom and dad. That's the sort of thing which would have been better a few years ago, though - 21 is leaving things a little late in that regard.

---Meredith

cherylj30

Wow. You completely misunderstood me.
I was only intending to say that *I* see how this situation relates to my unschooling life and that I appreciate your generosity to offer this topic even when you have legitimate concerns about its relevance to radical unschooling.

--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
> -=-I know its her list. Its just my opinion that these are unschooling issues and that unschooling does not stop at at chronological age of 18. (If you want to debate this issue, I think it has a place here too.) -=-
>
> Joyce wasn't wanting "to debate" the issue.
> Argument for the sake of argument is verbal jackoff, and I much prefer for this list to be solidly, and always, about unschooling.
> If you want to create a yahoo group to argue for fun, go ahead and you can announce it here. Maybe some people will want to go over there. If you want to use the 3000 members we already have to argue for fun, that will be a trapdoor situation.
>

Joyce continue discussion about relevance and I sincerely meant that I think it might be good to explore (separate from this issue of marijuana use). I wasn't making a veiled dig or implying that she was "debating". Maybe the use of the word debate pushed some buttons but I meant "discuss".
We digress again.

I think this topic of marijuana use in this mom's situation would be a valuable discussion as so many of us are now have "grown" unschoolers. If there are no other voices wanting to discuss grown unschoolers here, Or if you, Sandra, decide that you don't want grown unschooler discussion then the discussion ends and is over here.

I'm sensing hostility and defensive jabs so I assume that I've hurt someones feelings and it wasn't my intention. I will tiptoe more. I took the original topic seriously and I think you are interpreting my intentions very negatively and for that I'm sorry because that was not my intention.


> -=->It's not that some good stuff can't come from the discussion. It's that increasingly less good stuff *for a list focused on unschooling ideas* can come from discussing problems the further removed they are from kids who are of compulsory school age.
> >
>
> -=-Less / More whatever. How (why) prejudge that? Why not let it evolve and see what the group thinks-=-
>
> Don't ever say "whatever" to Joyce Fetteroll again in this discussion.
> Joyce's opinion is more important to me than yours or what the group thinks.
>

Whoa. I didn't mean the "whatever" to be condesending in any manner and I'm sorry if thats how it came across. I meant - "please don't prejudge the less or more right now, it might be helpful to see if the topic shows itself to be valuable by the other member/participants responses."

Joyce, I really apologize for the poor choice of words that might have indicated disrespect/disregard. I didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings.

>
> -=-Our lifestyle is not relatable to the mainstream ...
> -=-We strive for healthy noncoercive open supportive relationships but ...
>
> Too much "our" and "we." Bring your ideas from yourself, and keep them no bigger than that. Sweeping speeches trying to sway large groups are better for rallies. Speaking for a large group is better for political conventions.

I don't want to bicker word usage.
My family's (our) lifestyle is not often relatable to the mainstream and I have heard other unschoolers verbalize the same dilemma.
I thought that in this group we were all radical unschoolers who strive for healthy noncoercive open supportive relationships so that the terms "our" and "we" were only showing solidarity and empathic understanding.

I'm not making sweeping speeches to sway *anyone*. I'm voicing my opinion personally and my personal experiences in an invitation to others to agree/disagree/offer other opinions, etc. I value more opinions and see growth in that method. I definately support your group's purpose to stay on topic and don't intend to deflect or draw away from that. Again, I do think this is a valuable discussion for unschooling families.

>
> There's no purpose to waiting to see "what the group thinks."
> What I think, and it's my party, is that Always Learning exists "for the examination of the philosophy of unschooling and attentive parenting and a place for sharing examined lives based on the principles underlying unschooling."
>
>

Sandra, with all due respect, I do think there is positive purpose in waiting to see what others think on a subject so closely related to unschooling lifestyles. I thought you initially expressed the same by prefacing the original post with your statements.

I in no way wanted or want a "debate". I expressed my appreciation and gratefullness to you for bringing this topic forward. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear or if you suspected ulterior motives. If expressing my opinion on the topic appeared to be provocative, then I'm sorry.
My expression of my opinion on this topic was a "gift" offered with sincerity and generosity. If anyone finds that my gift was an ugly sweater that doesn't fit, then throw it away, I'm not hurt or offended.

My only hope is that this mother and others who are dealing with these tough issues "hear" that I am truly supportive and empathetic and willing to think things thru as a suggester or a sounding board. I'd hoped there were others here feeling the same way. I was not comfortable with the initial level of condemnation and blame to this mother when she's obviously a caring parent. Sitting by without offering another view feels yucky to me. She's not asking for all the reasons that she's "failed" or fallen short. She's asking for advice and suggestions that she can try or implement right now, not yesterday. She brought it here because she sees this group as most relevant to her principles and I know it took a lot of courage to strip bare in front of her most valued peers. I admire her for this. I wish I'd have seen more of this in my early unschooling years. It would've meant the world to me. And might have prevented or arrested feelings of isolation and the irrational thoughts or behaviors that can grow in isolation. Many unschoolers do not have an in-person support system or "friendship". It was a complement to the people of this group that this mother brought her issue here.

Sandra, I know its your party. If you think that these "grown" unschooling issues don't belong here, then I'll take it elsewhere, just say the word. But, I don't think it will be "a yahoo group to argue for fun". I think joiners would be serious about exploring family life as grown kids move towards independence.

Either way, please pass on my contact information to this mom if she wants. I would like to offer continued support, encouragement, or whatever I can to help her navigate this issue.

With great sincerity and highest regard,
Cheryl

cherylj30

--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
> -=-I'm a lurker online but radical unschooler to 22yo & 16yo(never been to any school). I have some experience with people having similar issues (take that with a grain of salt i guess).-=-
>
> You're also pretty new to this list. It is not "online" in general. It is the Always Learning discussion in particular, and has its own history and traditions.

I'm not "new" to this list. Although I did recently join again. I've read many times over the years. I'm very familiar with your style, history, and traditions. I have complete respect for your rights to rule this list and dont mean to undermine that.

>
> -=-*However, restriction or agreement to not drive a vehicle while high is paramount.*
> -=-
>
> It can be paramount in your life, but you can't declare it to be paramount in everyone's life, or even in this discussion.
>
> It is a consideration.
>
> Some people are worse drivers sober and at their best than others might be when impaired (high, tipsy, sleepy, angry, distracted).
>
> We're sharing ideas, not making demands. The tone of the post was too harsh and argumentative.
>
>

I'm sorry that you thought it was too harsh and argumentative.
I felt it would be neglectful to withhold my experience with law enforcement and laws around the issue of driving under the influence.

Yup, its only a consideration for some people. And some people dont value sober driving in the least. And some people say to each their own or mind your own business. And some people feel that driving safely and sober is very important and I used the word paramount to express my strong opinion that driving compromised or distracted is unethical not to mention illegal with potentially life-altering consequences. Are you arguing the truth of that?

Whether or not someone is worse driving sober than someone else is at driving under the influence or stoned is irrelavent and not a convincing argument for continued driving drunk/stoned/medicated/distracted.

I can drive better while texting than my elderly mom can drive with both hands and eyes on the road, but its still illegal, dangerous, not worth the risk, and could result in consequences that I dont intend or anticipate.

I stand by my purpose to point out the legal ramifications of letting someone drive your car while under the influence. Lets not ignore this to bicker over symantics, delivery, intent or hurt feelings. Its more important for both mom and kid to be aware of as many consequences to make the most informed choices. Surely, there are noncoercive or radical unschooling ways to have this conversation with a kid. Lets discuss them.

Sandra Dodd

-=-We digress again.-=-

You use "we" too much for my taste, and that's not just semantics.
http://sandradodd.com/semantics

-=-I'm sensing hostility and defensive jabs so I assume that I've hurt someones feelings and it wasn't my intention. I will tiptoe more.-=-

I've e-mailed you three times today and apparently you haven't seen those, so I'm leaving this note in public (unfortunate) because you show no indication of having been asked on the side to chill, to be more courteous.

-=-> Too much "our" and "we." Bring your ideas from yourself, and keep them no bigger than that. Sweeping speeches trying to sway large groups are better for rallies. Speaking for a large group is better for political conventions.

-=-I don't want to bicker word usage. -=-

To refer to my objection to your use of "our" and "we" as "BICKERING" is as rude as saying "whatever" to Joyce.
When you go to the e-mail, and when you read the recommendations for posting on this list, you might see several of the things you might have done well to have read earlier.

-=-I thought that in this group we were all radical unschoolers who strive for healthy noncoercive open supportive relationships so that the terms "our" and "we" were only showing solidarity and empathic understanding. -=-

And this is not a support group.
And this was never a support group.

It is a discussion group.

I don't want "solidarity" with people who aren't being very good parents. Sometimes I totally understand what a parent is saying and doing and have no empathy for it whatsoever.

I was not comfortable with the initial level of condemnation and blame to this mother when she's obviously a caring parent.

We don't know that she's "obviously a caring person." What I intended to do was what the list was created to do: To discuss the issues in light of unschooling principles.

"You're obviously a caring person" is this sort of communication:
http://sandradodd.com/support

-=- She's not asking for all the reasons that she's "failed" or fallen short. She's asking for advice and suggestions that she can try or implement right now, not yesterday. She brought it here because she sees this group as most relevant to her principles and I know it took a lot of courage to strip bare in front of her most valued peers.-=-

It took some lack of forethought to want to go out using her own name and saying her grown son is breaking the law. You don't know that we're "her most valued peers." She wasn't stripped very bare, since no one but me has any idea who it was (and I don't really know, either).

http://sandradodd.com/lists/alwayslearning

-=-If you think that these "grown" unschooling issues don't belong here, then I'll take it elsewhere, just say the word-=-

I'm the one who brought it here. I wasn't asking what you thought about that, but you keep on and on and on and on writing what you think about it. Please stop. I wouldn't ask in public if you had read your e-mail and slowed your advance.
I've tried all afternoon to "say the word," on the side, by e-mail.

Sandra





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

Joyce Fetteroll

On May 14, 2012, at 3:08 PM, cherylj30 wrote:

> I think it *is* appropriate here
....
> I think it has a place here too.)

I think you missed the point.

List members may find a discussion helpful or not. Sandra gets to decide what's appropriate. She gets to decide what has a place here based on what she feels might be helpful or not for the list as a whole.

> unschooling does not stop at at chronological age of 18

Legally homeschooling ends when compulsory schooling ends. It muddies the discussion to call homeschooling method and the relationship between parents and kids unschooling.

> Less / More whatever. How (why) prejudge that?

Sandra will at times make judgements before a discussion gets going in order to keep the list focused in the way she wants it focused.

I'm not judging. I'm not squashing the discussion. It's not my list. I'm just explaining why this topic is borderline for this list Sandra brought up doubts about the fit.

Everything connects to everything. Which means everything connects to unschooling. :-) But to prevent the list from being about everything, Sandra will decide where she wants the line drawn. Not everyone will agree with that line. Which is why it's useful for people to shop around lists to find a line they like (that may be looser or tighter than is drawn here.)

> These legal and ethical consequences are significant and *may* need to override the desire to stick to a pure theory.


That would be a big part of discussing ways to meet his needs safely. I'm not sure what "pure theory" would be in relation to radical unschooling.

I believe the driving after smoking is him coming home from a friend's house. So taking the keys away is after the fact. That will be a judgement call for the mom on whether he's a danger enough to take the car away. In fact it might be quite useful for them to research together and talk about. Especially useful since I doubt there's a clear cut answer.

> She's concerned that his use may be more than just recreational or exploration.


It wasn't clear from her initial post that she was worried about the extent. It sounded like she was just worried that he was smoking at all.

> when not stoned.


I think the discussion hasn't been highly focused on the dangers because the original poster never said "stoned." She did say high once but twice said smoked. So the post felt more about the mom's fears of pot than about someone who is using to the point of impairment.

Trying to figure out what she meant at this point isn't important, but the words people choose, the flavor those words give, influences how people respond to it.

> To stifle this conversation has the potential to continue to send that message to young unschooling parents.


I think you've jumped to the conclusion that the "not about unschooling" is because it's about drugs. Anyone who has been on the list for a while has seen discussions about drugs.

The relationship sounded more conventional with the mom wanting to convince her son to stop smoking pot. It may have read differently to you but it seemed most people were reading it that way based on the responses. And the child is 21 so the dynamic is different than than with a school aged child who is radically unschooled.

Joyce

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

K Pennell

In terms of legality, as a parent I wouldn't want my adult child driving my car under the influence. Either I'd turn it over to her (if I was able and didn't use it myself) or say "you are old enough to make your own choices. But this car is in my name, and I am choosing not to be held legally responsible for your illegal choices. You'll need to get your own car."

--- On Mon, 5/14/12, cherylj30 <cherylj1144@...> wrote:

From: cherylj30 <cherylj1144@...>
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Re: 21 year old son living at home... (problem brought anonymously)
To: [email protected]
Date: Monday, May 14, 2012, 7:18 PM



--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
> -=-I'm a lurker online but radical unschooler to 22yo & 16yo(never been to any school). I have some experience with people having similar issues (take that with a grain of salt i guess).-=-
>
> You're also pretty new to this list.  It is not "online" in general.  It is the Always Learning discussion in particular, and has its own history and traditions.

I'm not "new" to this list. Although I did recently join again. I've read many times over the years. I'm very familiar with your style, history, and traditions. I have complete respect for your rights to rule this list and dont mean to undermine that.

>
> -=-*However, restriction or agreement to not drive a vehicle while high is paramount.*
> -=-
>
> It can be paramount in your life, but you can't declare it to be paramount in everyone's life, or even in this discussion.
>
> It is a consideration.
>
> Some people are worse drivers sober and at their best than others might be when impaired (high, tipsy, sleepy, angry, distracted).
>
> We're sharing ideas, not making demands.  The tone of the post was too harsh and argumentative.
>
>

I'm sorry that you thought it was too harsh and argumentative.
I felt it would be neglectful to withhold my experience with law enforcement and laws around the issue of driving under the influence.

Yup, its only a consideration for some people. And some people dont value sober driving in the least. And some people say to each their own or mind your own business. And some people feel that driving safely and sober is very important and I used the word paramount to express my strong opinion that driving compromised or distracted is unethical not to mention illegal with potentially life-altering consequences. Are you arguing the truth of that?

Whether or not someone is worse driving sober than someone else is at driving under the influence or stoned is irrelavent and not a convincing argument for continued driving drunk/stoned/medicated/distracted.

I can drive better while texting than my elderly mom can drive with both hands and eyes on the road, but its still illegal, dangerous, not worth the risk, and could result in consequences that I dont intend or anticipate.

I stand by my purpose to point out the legal ramifications of letting someone drive your car while under the influence. Lets not ignore this to bicker over symantics, delivery, intent or hurt feelings. Its more important for both mom and kid to be aware of as many consequences to make the most informed choices. Surely, there are noncoercive or radical unschooling ways to have this conversation with a kid. Lets discuss them.



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





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

Joyce Fetteroll

On May 14, 2012, at 11:45 PM, K Pennell wrote:

> In terms of legality, as a parent I wouldn't want my adult child driving my car under the influence.

It's definitely okay to express personal boundaries.

Part of helping kids be in the world is exploring solutions within the boundaries of safety (including freedom from law trouble!), respect of others, reasonably doable.

Raising kids means pushing ourselves out of our comfort zone because parents are kids' power to meet their needs. It means making the trip to the game store the day the anxiously awaited new game title comes out. It means abandoning a shopping trip if they've reached their limit. It means reading the Berenstein Bears for the 50th time.

[Note for those with boundary issues who often misread pushing out of our comfort zone as pushing beyond our limits: Be reasonable about what can be accomplished in a day. Build meeting your own needs into the day.]

But it doesn't mean letting them hurt or endanger other people just because they want to do something. It doesn't mean letting them kick you. Or spit on people. Or putting you or the rest of your family in danger of legal trouble. Help them live in the world while considering other people.


> But this car is in my name, and I am choosing not to be held legally responsible for your illegal choices.

I'd express it simpler: not as what you won't do but as a reality, as an obstacle in the path. "If you're arrested for possession or driving under the influence in my car I can be held responsible." ***

[If the parental responsibility is true in your state. In MA parents are only held responsible if they "should have known." Like going away for the weekend leaving unsupervised teens at home, it's assumed the parents should know it's likely there will be a party with alcohol. In this case, since he has a pattern of smoking with friends after work, it would be easy for a lawyer to make the point the mother should have known he'd do it again if she gave him the car again.]

[*** While both statements are true, I'm failing at coming up with a succinct explanation of why the second is better for problem solving. The first comes across like drawing a line on how much you're willing to help. The second is a problem with potential solutions. It allows the *other person* to conclude that it's not reasonable to cause someone to get into legal trouble, but also opens doors to ways around it like buying the car.]

[NOTE: See the principle as providing information to help with decision making rather than explaining why they shouldn't do something.]


> You'll need to get your own car."

I'd leave that off. I find it irritating to be told what I need to do to solve a problem. Open lots of doors. Offer to drive. Offer to help him look for his own car. Offer to let him buy that one or transfer it to his name if it's essentially his. Find options. Be his partner to help him meet his needs and navigate the limitations of reality.

Joyce

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