Tanya

I agree . I think it is stressful enough just being a child learning how to
grow up. Children can learn to deal with stress by talking to their parents
& observing how their parents deal with stress. The mental muscles are
exercised by using your brain. Usually through reading, mentally challenging
games, learning new things, etc. This is a study that *was* done to show the
things that kept a persons brain active as they age. Stress causes bad
effects to your brain chemistry. Children exposed to stress early have shown
to have the same problematic brain patterns as adults in high stress jobs.

Tanya

Sarah

"Eileen M." wrote:

> We have 'mental muscles' that need a certain amount of
> exercise, just like our physical muscles do, or they
> will atrophy. Children need a certain amount of
> stress, or their ability to deal with the natural
> stresses of life as adults will atrophy.

Is this a fact? If it is, I am sure children get just the right amount
of stress that they need. It is pretty stressful to have to ask for
everything: a glass of water, help in the bathroom, a ride, permission,
etc.

> Our jobs as
> parents is to make sure that their voices are heard in
> the setting of reasonable boundaries, and that they do
> not doubt our love and support while they are facing
> the natural stressors of life (including bumping up
> against those boundaries and getting frustrated with
> them).

Are you saying it is a parental duty to impose boundaries so that a
child receives enough stress so their brain muscles do not atrophy? If
so, I would love to hear one source stating this fact. No one needs to
have stress imposed on them, particularly by a trusted advisor, namely
their parent.

> If they do not experience a certain amount of
> frustration, pain, and stress during their
> childhood... the time in which you can model
> identification of more painful/intense emotions,
> stress-reducing, problem solving and empathy processes
> for them so that they can learn how to effectively
> deal with these inevitable experiences... they will be
> left vulnerable and helpless when they leave home as
> adults.

Are you saying this as fact? I am flabbergasted. I am sure pain and
stress is unavoidable, but I will be doing my damnedest to make sure my
child has at least one supportive person in her life. I hope to be the
least stressful person in her life, the person who helps her achieve her
dreams, not the person inflicting stress so she is adequately prepared
to enter a harsh world in umpteen years.

> It is painful for any loving parent to see
> their child experience pain and even suffering, and
> certainly we don't want our children to experience
> more pain than they can
> (developmentally/personality-wise) handle, but the
> best favor we can do them is teaching them effective
> skills for *handling* those experiences, not
> protecting them from ever experiencing them at all!

Why? Why can't we talk about the best possible situations for our
children? Why can't we, as aware and kind parents, tell our children
about a potentially harmful situation? If they still choose that
situation, why isn't it our duty to be there to make it the best
possible experience?

Are you an unschooling/deschooling/free learning? If so, why? To
protect your child or children from unnecessary stress? To give them
the best possible start? To be with them? To help them? To ensure
that their ability to trust, exhibit kindness, and focus on love does
not atrophy?

Sarah Anderson-Thimmes

Eileen M.

--- Sarah <sld29@...> wrote:

> Is this a fact? If it is, I am sure children get
> just the right amount
> of stress that they need. It is pretty stressful to
> have to ask for
> everything: a glass of water, help in the bathroom,
> a ride, permission,
> etc.

Goodness, if that is as much stress as kids can
handle, and in order to be happy and healthy they must
be protected from experiencing anything more
difficult, most of them are in for a rather miserable
life.
>
> > Our jobs as
> > parents is to make sure that their voices are
> heard in
> > the setting of reasonable boundaries, and that
> they do
> > not doubt our love and support while they are
> facing
> > the natural stressors of life (including bumping
> up
> > against those boundaries and getting frustrated
> with
> > them).
>
> Are you saying it is a parental duty to impose
> boundaries so that a
> child receives enough stress so their brain muscles
> do not atrophy?

I am saying that it is a parental duty to impose
boundaries. When we say 'do not touch the element
coils on the stove, because it is hot and will burn
you', that is a boundary. When we say 'you may play
with your friend for two hours, and then we must go to
the store to get food for dinner', that is a boundary.
Often children find these boundaries frustrating and
unpleasant, but for their own good and the good of our
families, it is important to help our kids learn to
tolerate a certain amount of frustration, anger, hurt,
etc.

If
> so, I would love to hear one source stating this
> fact. No one needs to
> have stress imposed on them, particularly by a
> trusted advisor, namely
> their parent.
>
Yes, they do. Otherwise the world imposes an
unnecessary amount of stress on them later in the form
of burns, social ostracism, inability to deal with
grief, etc. I am obviously not speaking of abuse...
see that above I specifically mentioned 'reasonable
boundaries' and 'natural stressors', the first of
which are *best* set by loving parents rather than
uncaring outsiders and the second of which are imposed
by life (death of loved ones, accidents, illness,
etc).

> > If they do not experience a certain amount of
> > frustration, pain, and stress during their
> > childhood... the time in which you can model
> > identification of more painful/intense emotions,
> > stress-reducing, problem solving and empathy
> processes
> > for them so that they can learn how to effectively
> > deal with these inevitable experiences... they
> will be
> > left vulnerable and helpless when they leave home
> as
> > adults.
>
> Are you saying this as fact? I am flabbergasted.

Yes, I am saying this as fact. Many studies have been
done (in the US and in the Netherlands, particularly)
on prosocial behavior, depression and anxiety, and
abusive/aggressive personalities, all of which have
shown that children who are overprotected from
experiencing a certain amount of stress grow up
without being given the chance to learn (primarily
through parental role modeling and parental behavioral
training/counseling) valuable skills in dealing with
stress, adverse behavior of others, frustration,
anger, compromise and negotiation, prosocial behavior,
etc.

I hope to be the
> least stressful person in her life, the person who
> helps her achieve her
> dreams, not the person inflicting stress so she is
> adequately prepared
> to enter a harsh world in umpteen years.
>
You believe that you cannot be supportive *and* set
boundaries/inflict a certain amount of stress? My
son, for instance, finds it extremely stressful to
talk about or deal with learning social skills such as
meeting people's eyes, dealing with bullies, making
friendly advances to people, etc... but if I indulge
him in his avoidant behavior he will not learn these
things, and without them he is vulnerable to a variety
of abuses from others. I might look like a bad guy
for a little while to him... as I did when I did
holding therapy with him as a toddler... but in the
long run he will benefit and it will make our
relationship stronger (as the holding therapy did,
although at the time it was *very* stressful and
unpleasant).

> > It is painful for any loving parent to see
> > their child experience pain and even suffering,
> and
> > certainly we don't want our children to experience
> > more pain than they can
> > (developmentally/personality-wise) handle, but the
> > best favor we can do them is teaching them
> effective
> > skills for *handling* those experiences, not
> > protecting them from ever experiencing them at
> all!
>
> Why? Why can't we talk about the best possible
> situations for our
> children?

I believe I am.

Why can't we, as aware and kind parents,
> tell our children
> about a potentially harmful situation? If they
> still choose that
> situation, why isn't it our duty to be there to make
> it the best
> possible experience?

Why are you assuming that this is not what I am
espousing? Why is setting reasonable boundaries not a
part of our duties to make life a 'best possible
experience'? Lots of studies show that children feel
frustrated and angry with boundaries when they are
inconvenient to temporary urges, but long-term are
more secure and better able to deal with the
vicissitudes of life. What's so bad about that?
>
> Are you an unschooling/deschooling/free learning?
> If so, why? To
> protect your child or children from unnecessary
> stress? To give them
> the best possible start? To be with them? To help
> them? To ensure
> that their ability to trust, exhibit kindness, and
> focus on love does
> not atrophy?
>
I find that the school system available to us is not
aimed to provide a 'reasonable' amount of stress for a
child of my particular child's combination of needs
and personality traits... the amount of stress caused
by the sexual harassment and physical abuse he is
experiencing there goes beyond his ability to cope. I
could, of course, be wrong. I hope not.

I am also not entirely unschooling my child, in the
pure sense of the word. I am adjusting the process to
fit my and my child's needs as best I can... we will
have a certain amount of housework scheduled in, for
instance, although I know my child will find this
stressful and unpleasant to some degree. Tough. I
find it unpleasant, too, to a much greater degree
(because it is physically painful for me), but it
needs to be done, and as part of the family unit he
has the responsibility (IMO as his parent) to
participate in the necessary processes of upkeeping
the family's quality of life. I can empathize with
his frustration, I can help him problem solve to make
it as easy to tolerate as possible... that will
hopefully give him some useful coping skills to use in
the future. But he still needs to deal with it, like
it or not, and I will be inflicting stress... and
believe that it will be good for him. Same goes for
the social training. I think in the end it is more
important for me to be his parent than to be his
friend, when I have to choose between one and the
other... I believe that in doing so I am being more
truly his friend in the long run.

AND I think he will still manage to find me a
supportive person in the fulfillment of his dreams...

Eileen

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

Eileen M.

Perhaps we should be more specific about level of
stress. That study was talking about a level of
stress that went beyond what I would consider falls
under my 'reasonable stress' categorization.

Eileen


--- Tanya <tanyab2@...> wrote:
> I agree . I think it is stressful enough just being
> a child learning how to
> grow up. Children can learn to deal with stress by
> talking to their parents
> & observing how their parents deal with stress. The
> mental muscles are
> exercised by using your brain. Usually through
> reading, mentally challenging
> games, learning new things, etc. This is a study
> that *was* done to show the
> things that kept a persons brain active as they age.
> Stress causes bad
> effects to your brain chemistry. Children exposed to
> stress early have shown
> to have the same problematic brain patterns as
> adults in high stress jobs.
>
> Tanya
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

Sarah

"Eileen M." wrote:

> Goodness, if that is as much stress as kids can
> handle, and in order to be happy and healthy they must
> be protected from experiencing anything more
> difficult, most of them are in for a rather miserable
> life.

I am not saying that is as much as they can handle. I am saying that
children get a pretty incredible amount of stress naturally. Nobody
needs to impose it upon them. I also think it is a sad statement to say
that a child is in for a miserable life if they have a happy childhood.
My definition of happy childhood=adult helpers showing children how to
avoid stress, not run right into it.

> I am saying that it is a parental duty to impose
> boundaries. When we say 'do not touch the element
> coils on the stove, because it is hot and will burn
> you', that is a boundary. When we say 'you may play
> with your friend for two hours, and then we must

must?

> go to
> the store to get food for dinner', that is a boundary.

In our house, we would try to find a better solution. I might suggest
that the child could stay with the friend while I went to the grocery
store, or wait until Dad got home, or hire a sitter, or wait until the
morning when the child wants to go to the store. I might suggest we
order pizza or eat *gasp* spaghettios.

> Often children find these boundaries frustrating and
> unpleasant, but for their own good and the good of our
> families,

How is this good for the family? I have never seen a family that is
happy at the expense of someone else's happiness.

> it is important to help our kids learn to
> tolerate a certain amount of frustration, anger, hurt,
> etc.

Perhaps a parent could help the child learn to experience anger. A
parent need not inflict this frustration or hurt in order to help a
child. The child will get plenty in due time.

> If
> > so, I would love to hear one source stating this
> > fact. No one needs to
> > have stress imposed on them, particularly by a
> > trusted advisor, namely
> > their parent.
> >
> Yes, they do.

Ummm, nah.

> Otherwise the world imposes an
> unnecessary amount of stress on them later in the form
> of burns, social ostracism, inability to deal with
> grief, etc.

How do you know this? When I hear of grown unschoolers, free schoolers,
and adults with relatively easy childhoods, I hear of people who seem
happy and fulfilled. These are the people who are not focusing on the
horrors of the world. These are the people that bounce back from the
burns and social ostracism because these are the people with high self
esteems, people with unconditional love backing them, people who trust
the world because, at least, they could trust their parents as toddlers
and young children, and even teens. These are the people who can handle
challenges because boundaries weren't arbitrarily crammed down their
throats.

I am also wondering what your world view is? Is there not some reason
to expect that the world will dish your son a big plate of happiness?
If the world gives your son a lovely ride, will this anger boot camp be
in vein?

> I am obviously not speaking of abuse...
> see that above I specifically mentioned 'reasonable
> boundaries' and 'natural stressors', the first of
> which are *best* set by loving parents rather than
> uncaring outsiders and the second of which are imposed
> by life (death of loved ones, accidents, illness,
> etc).
>
> Yes, I am saying this as fact. Many studies have been
> done (in the US and in the Netherlands, particularly)
> on prosocial behavior, depression and anxiety, and
> abusive/aggressive personalities, all of which have
> shown that children who are overprotected from
> experiencing a certain amount of stress grow up
> without being given the chance to learn (primarily
> through parental role modeling and parental behavioral
> training/counseling) valuable skills in dealing with
> stress, adverse behavior of others, frustration,
> anger, compromise and negotiation, prosocial behavior,
> etc.

Could you please give me the source, link, reference? I'd really love
to read these numerous studies.

> You believe that you cannot be supportive *and* set
> boundaries/inflict a certain amount of stress?

I believe I am a helper. And yes, I avoid causing her stress.
Sometimes I f*** up, and in that situation, I am the first to tell her,
and I am the first to apologize. Purposely inflicting anything on
anyone seems very wrong.

> My
> son, for instance, finds it extremely stressful to
> talk about or deal with learning social skills such as
> meeting people's eyes, dealing with bullies, making
> friendly advances to people, etc... but if I indulge
> him in his avoidant behavior he will not learn these
> things,

Or maybe, just like talking or walking, he would learn these things on
his own, when he felt ready. "Sorry, Johnny, I know you can't swim and
you are very afraid of the water, but lets just start you right here in
the cold deep end, shall we?"

> and without them he is vulnerable to a variety
> of abuses from others. I might look like a bad guy
> for a little while to him... as I did when I did
> holding therapy with him as a toddler

Again, I mention the method used in Son-Rise.
http://www.option.org/index.html

> ... but in the
> long run he will benefit and it will make our
> relationship stronger (as the holding therapy did,
> although at the time it was *very* stressful and
> unpleasant).

How do you know it will make your relationship stronger. Do you feel
especially tight with those who have imposed their will on you? Do you
think, "Thank God you knowingly inflicted stress on me, I feel honored,
and now we're just as tight as we can be."

> > > It is painful for any loving parent to see
> > > their child experience pain and even suffering,
> > and
> > > certainly we don't want our children to experience
> > > more pain than they can
> > > (developmentally/personality-wise) handle, but the
> > > best favor we can do them is teaching them
> > effective
> > > skills for *handling* those experiences, not
> > > protecting them from ever experiencing them at
> > all!
> >
> > Why? Why can't we talk about the best possible
> > situations for our
> > children?
>
> I believe I am.

How is it the best thing to inflict stress? I suppose you felt it was
just jim dandy when Dad said you had to go to bed now even though you
weren't tired? Or Mom pestered you thirty times a day to say please, as
if you weren't smart enough to figure it out?

> Why are you assuming that this is not what I am
> espousing? Why is setting reasonable boundaries not a
> part of our duties to make life a 'best possible
> experience'?

Who decides what "reasonable" boundaries are?

> Lots of studies show that children feel
> frustrated and angry with boundaries when they are
> inconvenient to temporary urges, but long-term are
> more secure and better able to deal with the
> vicissitudes of life. What's so bad about that?

How can a study show that a child is more secure when his trusted
helpers are voluntarily and methodically planting known stressors in his
path? I do not see how a study could use this kind of reasoning.
Again, I beg to read these many studies.

> I find that the school system available to us is not
> aimed to provide a 'reasonable' amount of stress for a
> child of my particular child's combination of needs
> and personality traits... the amount of stress caused
> by the sexual harassment and physical abuse he is
> experiencing there goes beyond his ability to cope. I
> could, of course, be wrong. I hope not.
>

I'm sure he is better off at home.

> I am also not entirely unschooling my child, in the
> pure sense of the word. I am adjusting the process to
> fit my and my child's needs as best I can... we will
> have a certain amount of housework scheduled in, for
> instance, although I know my child will find this
> stressful and unpleasant to some degree. Tough. Ifind it unpleasant,
> too, to a much greater degree

I understand that you are ill, and I am sorry, but how do you know that
you find it more unpleasant? And if it is so unpleasant, maybe you
could brainstorm for some better options.

> (because it is physically painful for me), but it
> needs to be done, and as part of the family unit he
> has the responsibility (IMO as his parent) to
> participate in the necessary processes of upkeeping
> the family's quality of life.

Is quality of life synonymous with a clean house? Is quality of life
synonymous with stress? Is quality of life synonymous with imposing
one's will upon another being?

> I can empathize with
> his frustration, I can help him problem solve to make
> it as easy to tolerate as possible... that will
> hopefully give him some useful coping skills to use in
> the future.

I agree.

> But he still needs to deal with it, like
> it or not, and I will be inflicting stress... and
> believe that it will be good for him. Same goes for
> the social training.

Some people like to be alone. Social training, for them, would be
synonymous to forced basketball practice for someone who loathes sports.

> I think in the end it is more
> important for me to be his parent than to be his
> friend, when I have to choose between one and the
> other... I believe that in doing so I am being more
> truly his friend in the long run.
>

What is your distinction between parent and friend?

>
> AND I think he will still manage to find me a
> supportive person in the fulfillment of his dreams...

I hope he does.

Sarah Anderson-Thimmes

Tami Labig-Duquette

Now I read this original post and deleted because, well I just did not have
the words. Then I have read a couple more and I didnt not have the words.
You however did an excellent job of saying what I felt!
I agree 100%!! Thanks Sarah:)
Tami


>From: Sarah <sld29@...>
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Brain atrophy (Eileen)
>Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:31:50 -0700
>
>
>
>"Eileen M." wrote:
>
> > Goodness, if that is as much stress as kids can
> > handle, and in order to be happy and healthy they must
> > be protected from experiencing anything more
> > difficult, most of them are in for a rather miserable
> > life.
>
>I am not saying that is as much as they can handle. I am saying that
>children get a pretty incredible amount of stress naturally. Nobody
>needs to impose it upon them. I also think it is a sad statement to say
>that a child is in for a miserable life if they have a happy childhood.
>My definition of happy childhood=adult helpers showing children how to
>avoid stress, not run right into it.
>
> > I am saying that it is a parental duty to impose
> > boundaries. When we say 'do not touch the element
> > coils on the stove, because it is hot and will burn
> > you', that is a boundary. When we say 'you may play
> > with your friend for two hours, and then we must
>
>must?
>
> > go to
> > the store to get food for dinner', that is a boundary.
>
>In our house, we would try to find a better solution. I might suggest
>that the child could stay with the friend while I went to the grocery
>store, or wait until Dad got home, or hire a sitter, or wait until the
>morning when the child wants to go to the store. I might suggest we
>order pizza or eat *gasp* spaghettios.
>
> > Often children find these boundaries frustrating and
> > unpleasant, but for their own good and the good of our
> > families,
>
>How is this good for the family? I have never seen a family that is
>happy at the expense of someone else's happiness.
>
> > it is important to help our kids learn to
> > tolerate a certain amount of frustration, anger, hurt,
> > etc.
>
>Perhaps a parent could help the child learn to experience anger. A
>parent need not inflict this frustration or hurt in order to help a
>child. The child will get plenty in due time.
>
> > If
> > > so, I would love to hear one source stating this
> > > fact. No one needs to
> > > have stress imposed on them, particularly by a
> > > trusted advisor, namely
> > > their parent.
> > >
> > Yes, they do.
>
>Ummm, nah.
>
> > Otherwise the world imposes an
> > unnecessary amount of stress on them later in the form
> > of burns, social ostracism, inability to deal with
> > grief, etc.
>
>How do you know this? When I hear of grown unschoolers, free schoolers,
>and adults with relatively easy childhoods, I hear of people who seem
>happy and fulfilled. These are the people who are not focusing on the
>horrors of the world. These are the people that bounce back from the
>burns and social ostracism because these are the people with high self
>esteems, people with unconditional love backing them, people who trust
>the world because, at least, they could trust their parents as toddlers
>and young children, and even teens. These are the people who can handle
>challenges because boundaries weren't arbitrarily crammed down their
>throats.
>
>I am also wondering what your world view is? Is there not some reason
>to expect that the world will dish your son a big plate of happiness?
>If the world gives your son a lovely ride, will this anger boot camp be
>in vein?
>
> > I am obviously not speaking of abuse...
> > see that above I specifically mentioned 'reasonable
> > boundaries' and 'natural stressors', the first of
> > which are *best* set by loving parents rather than
> > uncaring outsiders and the second of which are imposed
> > by life (death of loved ones, accidents, illness,
> > etc).
> >
> > Yes, I am saying this as fact. Many studies have been
> > done (in the US and in the Netherlands, particularly)
> > on prosocial behavior, depression and anxiety, and
> > abusive/aggressive personalities, all of which have
> > shown that children who are overprotected from
> > experiencing a certain amount of stress grow up
> > without being given the chance to learn (primarily
> > through parental role modeling and parental behavioral
> > training/counseling) valuable skills in dealing with
> > stress, adverse behavior of others, frustration,
> > anger, compromise and negotiation, prosocial behavior,
> > etc.
>
>Could you please give me the source, link, reference? I'd really love
>to read these numerous studies.
>
> > You believe that you cannot be supportive *and* set
> > boundaries/inflict a certain amount of stress?
>
>I believe I am a helper. And yes, I avoid causing her stress.
>Sometimes I f*** up, and in that situation, I am the first to tell her,
>and I am the first to apologize. Purposely inflicting anything on
>anyone seems very wrong.
>
> > My
> > son, for instance, finds it extremely stressful to
> > talk about or deal with learning social skills such as
> > meeting people's eyes, dealing with bullies, making
> > friendly advances to people, etc... but if I indulge
> > him in his avoidant behavior he will not learn these
> > things,
>
>Or maybe, just like talking or walking, he would learn these things on
>his own, when he felt ready. "Sorry, Johnny, I know you can't swim and
>you are very afraid of the water, but lets just start you right here in
>the cold deep end, shall we?"
>
> > and without them he is vulnerable to a variety
> > of abuses from others. I might look like a bad guy
> > for a little while to him... as I did when I did
> > holding therapy with him as a toddler
>
>Again, I mention the method used in Son-Rise.
>http://www.option.org/index.html
>
> > ... but in the
> > long run he will benefit and it will make our
> > relationship stronger (as the holding therapy did,
> > although at the time it was *very* stressful and
> > unpleasant).
>
>How do you know it will make your relationship stronger. Do you feel
>especially tight with those who have imposed their will on you? Do you
>think, "Thank God you knowingly inflicted stress on me, I feel honored,
>and now we're just as tight as we can be."
>
> > > > It is painful for any loving parent to see
> > > > their child experience pain and even suffering,
> > > and
> > > > certainly we don't want our children to experience
> > > > more pain than they can
> > > > (developmentally/personality-wise) handle, but the
> > > > best favor we can do them is teaching them
> > > effective
> > > > skills for *handling* those experiences, not
> > > > protecting them from ever experiencing them at
> > > all!
> > >
> > > Why? Why can't we talk about the best possible
> > > situations for our
> > > children?
> >
> > I believe I am.
>
>How is it the best thing to inflict stress? I suppose you felt it was
>just jim dandy when Dad said you had to go to bed now even though you
>weren't tired? Or Mom pestered you thirty times a day to say please, as
>if you weren't smart enough to figure it out?
>
> > Why are you assuming that this is not what I am
> > espousing? Why is setting reasonable boundaries not a
> > part of our duties to make life a 'best possible
> > experience'?
>
>Who decides what "reasonable" boundaries are?
>
> > Lots of studies show that children feel
> > frustrated and angry with boundaries when they are
> > inconvenient to temporary urges, but long-term are
> > more secure and better able to deal with the
> > vicissitudes of life. What's so bad about that?
>
>How can a study show that a child is more secure when his trusted
>helpers are voluntarily and methodically planting known stressors in his
>path? I do not see how a study could use this kind of reasoning.
>Again, I beg to read these many studies.
>
> > I find that the school system available to us is not
> > aimed to provide a 'reasonable' amount of stress for a
> > child of my particular child's combination of needs
> > and personality traits... the amount of stress caused
> > by the sexual harassment and physical abuse he is
> > experiencing there goes beyond his ability to cope. I
> > could, of course, be wrong. I hope not.
> >
>
>I'm sure he is better off at home.
>
> > I am also not entirely unschooling my child, in the
> > pure sense of the word. I am adjusting the process to
> > fit my and my child's needs as best I can... we will
> > have a certain amount of housework scheduled in, for
> > instance, although I know my child will find this
> > stressful and unpleasant to some degree. Tough. Ifind it unpleasant,
> > too, to a much greater degree
>
>I understand that you are ill, and I am sorry, but how do you know that
>you find it more unpleasant? And if it is so unpleasant, maybe you
>could brainstorm for some better options.
>
> > (because it is physically painful for me), but it
> > needs to be done, and as part of the family unit he
> > has the responsibility (IMO as his parent) to
> > participate in the necessary processes of upkeeping
> > the family's quality of life.
>
>Is quality of life synonymous with a clean house? Is quality of life
>synonymous with stress? Is quality of life synonymous with imposing
>one's will upon another being?
>
> > I can empathize with
> > his frustration, I can help him problem solve to make
> > it as easy to tolerate as possible... that will
> > hopefully give him some useful coping skills to use in
> > the future.
>
>I agree.
>
> > But he still needs to deal with it, like
> > it or not, and I will be inflicting stress... and
> > believe that it will be good for him. Same goes for
> > the social training.
>
>Some people like to be alone. Social training, for them, would be
>synonymous to forced basketball practice for someone who loathes sports.
>
> > I think in the end it is more
> > important for me to be his parent than to be his
> > friend, when I have to choose between one and the
> > other... I believe that in doing so I am being more
> > truly his friend in the long run.
> >
>
>What is your distinction between parent and friend?
>
> >
> > AND I think he will still manage to find me a
> > supportive person in the fulfillment of his dreams...
>
>I hope he does.
>
>Sarah Anderson-Thimmes
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

kate mcdaniel

Sarah,
Just on a curiousity level, are you implying that we should not set
standards for our children?
Are you saying, for example, don't teach them the proper way to brush their
teeth....who then deals with the pain of tooth decay? The parent or the
child? Isn't it our responsibility as parents to teach them the correct
method so that the child has a reduced chance of pain from tooth decay and
the parent less cost in fixing damaged teeth?
Or, don't teach them the proper way to drive (setting boundries), let them
learn by their own interest,experiences....please try to explain that to a
police officer or to the person your child damaged by their lack of
boundries.

Kate
On Tue, 15 May 2001 23:31:50 -0700, [email protected]
wrote:

>
>
> "Eileen M." wrote:
>
> > Goodness, if that is as much stress as kids can
> > handle, and in order to be happy and healthy they must
> > be protected from experiencing anything more
> > difficult, most of them are in for a rather miserable
> > life.
>
> I am not saying that is as much as they can handle. I am saying that
> children get a pretty incredible amount of stress naturally. Nobody
> needs to impose it upon them. I also think it is a sad statement to say
> that a child is in for a miserable life if they have a happy childhood.
> My definition of happy childhood=adult helpers showing children how to
> avoid stress, not run right into it.
>
> > I am saying that it is a parental duty to impose
> > boundaries. When we say 'do not touch the element
> > coils on the stove, because it is hot and will burn
> > you', that is a boundary. When we say 'you may play
> > with your friend for two hours, and then we must
>
> must?
>
> > go to
> > the store to get food for dinner', that is a boundary.
>
> In our house, we would try to find a better solution. I might suggest
> that the child could stay with the friend while I went to the grocery
> store, or wait until Dad got home, or hire a sitter, or wait until the
> morning when the child wants to go to the store. I might suggest we
> order pizza or eat *gasp* spaghettios.
>
> > Often children find these boundaries frustrating and
> > unpleasant, but for their own good and the good of our
> > families,
>
> How is this good for the family? I have never seen a family that is
> happy at the expense of someone else's happiness.
>
> > it is important to help our kids learn to
> > tolerate a certain amount of frustration, anger, hurt,
> > etc.
>
> Perhaps a parent could help the child learn to experience anger. A
> parent need not inflict this frustration or hurt in order to help a
> child. The child will get plenty in due time.
>
> > If
> > > so, I would love to hear one source stating this
> > > fact. No one needs to
> > > have stress imposed on them, particularly by a
> > > trusted advisor, namely
> > > their parent.
> > >
> > Yes, they do.
>
> Ummm, nah.
>
> > Otherwise the world imposes an
> > unnecessary amount of stress on them later in the form
> > of burns, social ostracism, inability to deal with
> > grief, etc.
>
> How do you know this? When I hear of grown unschoolers, free schoolers,
> and adults with relatively easy childhoods, I hear of people who seem
> happy and fulfilled. These are the people who are not focusing on the
> horrors of the world. These are the people that bounce back from the
> burns and social ostracism because these are the people with high self
> esteems, people with unconditional love backing them, people who trust
> the world because, at least, they could trust their parents as toddlers
> and young children, and even teens. These are the people who can handle
> challenges because boundaries weren't arbitrarily crammed down their
> throats.
>
> I am also wondering what your world view is? Is there not some reason
> to expect that the world will dish your son a big plate of happiness?
> If the world gives your son a lovely ride, will this anger boot camp be
> in vein?
>
> > I am obviously not speaking of abuse...
> > see that above I specifically mentioned 'reasonable
> > boundaries' and 'natural stressors', the first of
> > which are *best* set by loving parents rather than
> > uncaring outsiders and the second of which are imposed
> > by life (death of loved ones, accidents, illness,
> > etc).
> >
> > Yes, I am saying this as fact. Many studies have been
> > done (in the US and in the Netherlands, particularly)
> > on prosocial behavior, depression and anxiety, and
> > abusive/aggressive personalities, all of which have
> > shown that children who are overprotected from
> > experiencing a certain amount of stress grow up
> > without being given the chance to learn (primarily
> > through parental role modeling and parental behavioral
> > training/counseling) valuable skills in dealing with
> > stress, adverse behavior of others, frustration,
> > anger, compromise and negotiation, prosocial behavior,
> > etc.
>
> Could you please give me the source, link, reference? I'd really love
> to read these numerous studies.
>
> > You believe that you cannot be supportive *and* set
> > boundaries/inflict a certain amount of stress?
>
> I believe I am a helper. And yes, I avoid causing her stress.
> Sometimes I f*** up, and in that situation, I am the first to tell her,
> and I am the first to apologize. Purposely inflicting anything on
> anyone seems very wrong.
>
> > My
> > son, for instance, finds it extremely stressful to
> > talk about or deal with learning social skills such as
> > meeting people's eyes, dealing with bullies, making
> > friendly advances to people, etc... but if I indulge
> > him in his avoidant behavior he will not learn these
> > things,
>
> Or maybe, just like talking or walking, he would learn these things on
> his own, when he felt ready. "Sorry, Johnny, I know you can't swim and
> you are very afraid of the water, but lets just start you right here in
> the cold deep end, shall we?"
>
> > and without them he is vulnerable to a variety
> > of abuses from others. I might look like a bad guy
> > for a little while to him... as I did when I did
> > holding therapy with him as a toddler
>
> Again, I mention the method used in Son-Rise.
> http://www.option.org/index.html
>
> > ... but in the
> > long run he will benefit and it will make our
> > relationship stronger (as the holding therapy did,
> > although at the time it was *very* stressful and
> > unpleasant).
>
> How do you know it will make your relationship stronger. Do you feel
> especially tight with those who have imposed their will on you? Do you
> think, "Thank God you knowingly inflicted stress on me, I feel honored,
> and now we're just as tight as we can be."
>
> > > > It is painful for any loving parent to see
> > > > their child experience pain and even suffering,
> > > and
> > > > certainly we don't want our children to experience
> > > > more pain than they can
> > > > (developmentally/personality-wise) handle, but the
> > > > best favor we can do them is teaching them
> > > effective
> > > > skills for *handling* those experiences, not
> > > > protecting them from ever experiencing them at
> > > all!
> > >
> > > Why? Why can't we talk about the best possible
> > > situations for our
> > > children?
> >
> > I believe I am.
>
> How is it the best thing to inflict stress? I suppose you felt it was
> just jim dandy when Dad said you had to go to bed now even though you
> weren't tired? Or Mom pestered you thirty times a day to say please, as
> if you weren't smart enough to figure it out?
>
> > Why are you assuming that this is not what I am
> > espousing? Why is setting reasonable boundaries not a
> > part of our duties to make life a 'best possible
> > experience'?
>
> Who decides what "reasonable" boundaries are?
>
> > Lots of studies show that children feel
> > frustrated and angry with boundaries when they are
> > inconvenient to temporary urges, but long-term are
> > more secure and better able to deal with the
> > vicissitudes of life. What's so bad about that?
>
> How can a study show that a child is more secure when his trusted
> helpers are voluntarily and methodically planting known stressors in his
> path? I do not see how a study could use this kind of reasoning.
> Again, I beg to read these many studies.
>
> > I find that the school system available to us is not
> > aimed to provide a 'reasonable' amount of stress for a
> > child of my particular child's combination of needs
> > and personality traits... the amount of stress caused
> > by the sexual harassment and physical abuse he is
> > experiencing there goes beyond his ability to cope. I
> > could, of course, be wrong. I hope not.
> >
>
> I'm sure he is better off at home.
>
> > I am also not entirely unschooling my child, in the
> > pure sense of the word. I am adjusting the process to
> > fit my and my child's needs as best I can... we will
> > have a certain amount of housework scheduled in, for
> > instance, although I know my child will find this
> > stressful and unpleasant to some degree. Tough. Ifind it unpleasant,
> > too, to a much greater degree
>
> I understand that you are ill, and I am sorry, but how do you know that
> you find it more unpleasant? And if it is so unpleasant, maybe you
> could brainstorm for some better options.
>
> > (because it is physically painful for me), but it
> > needs to be done, and as part of the family unit he
> > has the responsibility (IMO as his parent) to
> > participate in the necessary processes of upkeeping
> > the family's quality of life.
>
> Is quality of life synonymous with a clean house? Is quality of life
> synonymous with stress? Is quality of life synonymous with imposing
> one's will upon another being?
>
> > I can empathize with
> > his frustration, I can help him problem solve to make
> > it as easy to tolerate as possible... that will
> > hopefully give him some useful coping skills to use in
> > the future.
>
> I agree.
>
> > But he still needs to deal with it, like
> > it or not, and I will be inflicting stress... and
> > believe that it will be good for him. Same goes for
> > the social training.
>
> Some people like to be alone. Social training, for them, would be
> synonymous to forced basketball practice for someone who loathes sports.
>
> > I think in the end it is more
> > important for me to be his parent than to be his
> > friend, when I have to choose between one and the
> > other... I believe that in doing so I am being more
> > truly his friend in the long run.
> >
>
> What is your distinction between parent and friend?
>
> >
> > AND I think he will still manage to find me a
> > supportive person in the fulfillment of his dreams...
>
> I hope he does.
>
> Sarah Anderson-Thimmes
>





_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/

Lynda

Can you explain what stress they are getting naturally if you are removing
all boundaries and believe that simple lessons in living in the real world
shouldn't be taught? What, "he took my toy" or "waaaa, my Barbie broke?"

As to being sent to bed when a parent determined the time, there are more
than one type of doing this. The arbitrary, "it is 9 p.m., you will go to
bed" and the parent who is aware of a child who gets beyond the point of
knowing their are tired and keeps going like they are in a race with the
Energizer bunny. I have one of those and I send her to bed. The minute her
head hits the pillow she is out. If you don't send her to bed, she gets
physically ill. I'm thinking the "stress" of being sent to bed is better
for her than the "stress" of vomiting and spending a day in bed with a
fever.

And, children do not "naturally" use phrases such as "please" and "thank
you." Quite frankly, without any of the very minimal boundaries talked
about, I'm not thinking the child is going to grow up to be a very "nice"
person.

Part of the problem, IMHO, with the world today is that society is too
narcistic. Parents who lived through WWII went out of their way to give,
give, give to their kids and now we seeing a whole load of folks that are so
materialistic that, quite frankly, it sucks! And their kids are spoiled
brats that no one wants to be around.

Living in a group and learning give and take is not going to rob any child
of their childhood or happiness. Learning to share is not a detrimental
stress.

I wouln't go so far as to say a spoiled brat is in for a miserable life, but
they sure are in for a rude awakening because the rest of the world isn't
going to cater to their unrealistic expectations of being catered to.

It seems cruel to cater to a child's every whim and then expect them to be
able to handle real life. The real world isn't going to run around finding
other options for something as simple as "it's time to go shopping, get your
shoes on." The rest of the world isn't going to say,"oh, I'm sorry this
doesn't suit your needs, I'll pospone the family's needs or make alternate
arrangements so that I don't inconvenience your play time."

I have met quite a few unschoolers, several of whom are currently attending
college. All had some basic social boundaries taught and were expected to
be contributing members of the family unit. They don't consider that to be
a contributing factor to any childhood unhappiness. In fact, when I asked a
friend's daughter (she is now 22 and attending Stanford), she looked at me
like I had a screw loose, "Yeah, we had one of *those" in my freshman class,
he lasted about 3 months and dropped out."

Lynda
----- Original Message -----
> >From: Sarah <sld29@...>
> >
> >I am not saying that is as much as they can handle. I am saying that
> >children get a pretty incredible amount of stress naturally. Nobody
> >needs to impose it upon them. I also think it is a sad statement to say
> >that a child is in for a miserable life if they have a happy childhood.
> >My definition of happy childhood=adult helpers showing children how to
> >avoid stress, not run right into it.
> >
> >must?
> >
> >In our house, we would try to find a better solution. I might suggest
> >that the child could stay with the friend while I went to the grocery
> >store, or wait until Dad got home, or hire a sitter, or wait until the
> >morning when the child wants to go to the store. I might suggest we
> >order pizza or eat *gasp* spaghettios.
> >
> >How is this good for the family? I have never seen a family that is
> >happy at the expense of someone else's happiness.
> >
> >Perhaps a parent could help the child learn to experience anger. A
> >parent need not inflict this frustration or hurt in order to help a
> >child. The child will get plenty in due time.
> >
> >Ummm, nah.
> >
> >How do you know this? When I hear of grown unschoolers, free schoolers,
> >and adults with relatively easy childhoods, I hear of people who seem
> >happy and fulfilled. These are the people who are not focusing on the
> >horrors of the world. These are the people that bounce back from the
> >burns and social ostracism because these are the people with high self
> >esteems, people with unconditional love backing them, people who trust
> >the world because, at least, they could trust their parents as toddlers
> >and young children, and even teens. These are the people who can handle
> >challenges because boundaries weren't arbitrarily crammed down their
> >throats.
> >
> >I am also wondering what your world view is? Is there not some reason
> >to expect that the world will dish your son a big plate of happiness?
> >If the world gives your son a lovely ride, will this anger boot camp be
> >in vein?
> >
> >Could you please give me the source, link, reference? I'd really love
> >to read these numerous studies.
> >
> >I believe I am a helper. And yes, I avoid causing her stress.
> >Sometimes I f*** up, and in that situation, I am the first to tell her,
> >and I am the first to apologize. Purposely inflicting anything on
> >anyone seems very wrong.
> >
> >Or maybe, just like talking or walking, he would learn these things on
> >his own, when he felt ready. "Sorry, Johnny, I know you can't swim and
> >you are very afraid of the water, but lets just start you right here in
> >the cold deep end, shall we?"
> >
> >Again, I mention the method used in Son-Rise.
> >http://www.option.org/index.html
> >
> >How do you know it will make your relationship stronger. Do you feel
> >especially tight with those who have imposed their will on you? Do you
> >think, "Thank God you knowingly inflicted stress on me, I feel honored,
> >and now we're just as tight as we can be."
> >
> >How is it the best thing to inflict stress? I suppose you felt it was
> >just jim dandy when Dad said you had to go to bed now even though you
> >weren't tired? Or Mom pestered you thirty times a day to say please, as
> >if you weren't smart enough to figure it out?
> >
> >Who decides what "reasonable" boundaries are?
> >
> >How can a study show that a child is more secure when his trusted
> >helpers are voluntarily and methodically planting known stressors in his
> >path? I do not see how a study could use this kind of reasoning.
> >Again, I beg to read these many studies.
> >
> >I'm sure he is better off at home.
> >
> >I understand that you are ill, and I am sorry, but how do you know that
> >you find it more unpleasant? And if it is so unpleasant, maybe you
> >could brainstorm for some better options.
> >
> >Is quality of life synonymous with a clean house? Is quality of life
> >synonymous with stress? Is quality of life synonymous with imposing
> >one's will upon another being?
>
> >I agree.
> >
> >Some people like to be alone. Social training, for them, would be
> >synonymous to forced basketball practice for someone who loathes sports.
> >
> >What is your distinction between parent and friend?
> >
> >I hope he does.
> >
> >Sarah Anderson-Thimmes
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
> http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
> Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
> http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

Judie C. Rall

>
> Studies *consistently* find that Authoritative
> parenting, which involves a setting of reasonable
> boundaries combined with a warm, responsive and
> democratic parenting style, leads to the best results
> in terms of self concept, prosocial behavior,
> achievement, coping skills, etc. In other words, in
> parenting, as in much of the rest of life, moderation
> is the best course.
>
> Eileen

I think we need to realize, though, that the people doing these
studies have a different opinion about what kind of "achievement" is
important, and what kind of "coping skills" are best. I do not agree
that achievement is important, nor that the typical coping skills are
necessarily healthy (and I have been trained as a psychological
counselor). Therefore, I cannot look to these studies to tell me
what is best for my child, because the parameters of the study will
only give the researches the answer to the questions they
asked....and I believe they are asking the wrong questions,
therefore getting the wrong answers.

Authoritarian parenting is not good, we agree on that. But I don't
believe authoritative is any better. I believe there is a kind of
parenting that is not measured by any study, and has yet to be
labeled because so few parents use it, and so few researchers
understand it. I personally would call it "intuitive parenting". All the
other labels...authoritarian, permissive, etc....focus on the parents
disciplinary style. But I don't believe you have to focus on that.
That's focusing on externals....behavior. I believe we need to focus
on what's inside....thoughts, feelings, and perceptions, which is
what makes people behave the way they do. I don't think the
studies focus on that type of parenting, and therefore I personally
don't put much faith in those traditional, mainstream type of studies.


Judie C. Rall

Find out how I developed financial freedom at:
http://www.angelfire.com/biz3/gatheringplace/financialcassette.html

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/16/01 8:55:50 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
lurine@... writes:

<<
And, children do not "naturally" use phrases such as "please" and "thank
you." >>

I just had to jump in on this one. All three of my children were eager to say
please and thank you when they were just little toddlers. Its what we
modeled to them and they enjoyed responding in the same manner. Our
family still says please and thank you all the time. I think it is very
natural
to imitate your parents. Just like cleaning up the house. They don't mind
cleaning, but dislike picking up, exactly how I am and what I model despite
my best attempts to do what I say and not what I do LOL.
Kathy

Eileen M.

There seems to be a problem here in coping with a
world that isn't black and white... in this specific
case, in discriminating between Authoritative and
Authoritarian styles of parenting. Sarah makes a
huge, and IMO unwarranted, leap from 'reasonable
boundaries' and 'natural stressors' to 'inflicting
hurt' and having boundaries 'arbitrarily crammed down
their throats'. She equates having boundaries to
having a miserable childhood.

There is little doubt that Authoritarian parenting is
the worst style in terms of outcome for the child,if
one looks at the studies. Permissive parenting (of
the warm/responsive type rather than the neglectful
type... I give Sarah a benefit of the doubt that she
does not afford me in assuming that she is speaking of
the *best* form of this style of parenting rather than
the *worst*) does give the child an initial base of
self esteem and trust in the world from which to work.

But studies *also* show that permissive parenting
often leads to immaturity, lack of impulse control,
lack of independence and self reliance, lack of social
responsibility; correlational studies establish a
relationship between permissive parenting styles and
procrastination, lowered achievement motivation, goal
avoidance, lowered self esteem, dysfunctional/avoidant
coping skills, as well as a dysfunctional ability to
assess the reasons for low achievement and frustration
(external assessment, leading to goal avoidance and
feelings of helplessness and anger).

Anyone interested can start out with:

Baumrind (various)
Ferrari (various)
Rothblum (various)
Glasgow, Dornbusch, Troyer, Steinberg & Ritter
Crown, Conn, Marlowe & Edwards
Dornbusch, Ritter, Leiderman, Roberts & Fraleigh
Effert & Ferrari
Maccoby & Martin
Lamborn, Mounts, Steinberg & Dornbusch
Beswick, Rothblum & Mann

Recently there has also been a study that links
permissive parenting style with children's sleep
disorders, which have been linked by various studies
to long-term health, behavioral and achievement
problems. (look it up for yourself if you are
interested, search under 'permissive parenting and
sleep')

Studies *consistently* find that Authoritative
parenting, which involves a setting of reasonable
boundaries combined with a warm, responsive and
democratic parenting style, leads to the best results
in terms of self concept, prosocial behavior,
achievement, coping skills, etc. In other words, in
parenting, as in much of the rest of life, moderation
is the best course.

Eileen


--- kate mcdaniel <K8MCD@...> wrote:
> Sarah,
> Just on a curiousity level, are you implying that
> we should not set
> standards for our children?
> Are you saying, for example, don't teach them the
> proper way to brush their
> teeth....who then deals with the pain of tooth
> decay? The parent or the
> child? Isn't it our responsibility as parents to
> teach them the correct
> method so that the child has a reduced chance of
> pain from tooth decay and
> the parent less cost in fixing damaged teeth?
> Or, don't teach them the proper way to drive
> (setting boundries), let them
> learn by their own interest,experiences....please
> try to explain that to a
> police officer or to the person your child damaged
> by their lack of
> boundries.
>
> Kate
> On Tue, 15 May 2001 23:31:50 -0700,
> [email protected]
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > "Eileen M." wrote:
> >
> > > Goodness, if that is as much stress as kids can
> > > handle, and in order to be happy and healthy
> they must
> > > be protected from experiencing anything more
> > > difficult, most of them are in for a rather
> miserable
> > > life.
> >
> > I am not saying that is as much as they can
> handle. I am saying that
> > children get a pretty incredible amount of stress
> naturally. Nobody
> > needs to impose it upon them. I also think it is
> a sad statement to say
> > that a child is in for a miserable life if they
> have a happy childhood.
> > My definition of happy childhood=adult helpers
> showing children how to
> > avoid stress, not run right into it.
> >
> > > I am saying that it is a parental duty to
> impose
> > > boundaries. When we say 'do not touch the
> element
> > > coils on the stove, because it is hot and will
> burn
> > > you', that is a boundary. When we say 'you may
> play
> > > with your friend for two hours, and then we
> must
> >
> > must?
> >
> > > go to
> > > the store to get food for dinner', that is a
> boundary.
> >
> > In our house, we would try to find a better
> solution. I might suggest
> > that the child could stay with the friend while I
> went to the grocery
> > store, or wait until Dad got home, or hire a
> sitter, or wait until the
> > morning when the child wants to go to the store.
> I might suggest we
> > order pizza or eat *gasp* spaghettios.
> >
> > > Often children find these boundaries
> frustrating and
> > > unpleasant, but for their own good and the good
> of our
> > > families,
> >
> > How is this good for the family? I have never
> seen a family that is
> > happy at the expense of someone else's happiness.
> >
> > > it is important to help our kids learn to
> > > tolerate a certain amount of frustration,
> anger, hurt,
> > > etc.
> >
> > Perhaps a parent could help the child learn to
> experience anger. A
> > parent need not inflict this frustration or hurt
> in order to help a
> > child. The child will get plenty in due time.
> >
> > > If
> > > > so, I would love to hear one source stating
> this
> > > > fact. No one needs to
> > > > have stress imposed on them, particularly by
> a
> > > > trusted advisor, namely
> > > > their parent.
<snip remainder for sake of mailbox limits>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

Betsy Hill

>> Studies *consistently* find that Authoritative
>> parenting, which involves a setting of reasonable
>> boundaries combined with a warm, responsive and
>> democratic parenting style, leads to the best results
>> in terms of self concept, prosocial behavior,
>> achievement, coping skills, etc. In other words, in
>> parenting, as in much of the rest of life, moderation
>> is the best course.
>>
>> Eileen

I've been wanting to dig up and read the details of at least one of these
studies. I know that one of the first was done by a researcher named
Baumrind (Diana?) at UC Berkeley, but when I searched the net a few days
ago, I struck out. Has anyone ever found any formal parenting studies
printed on line? I'd be interested in following up the links.

I have a sneaking suspicion I'm a permissive parent, and I'd like to figure
out what makes these authoritative parents so fabulous. I might steal a
few ideas from them, if I was convinced it was worth it.

Likely, all the kids in these studies went to school and were exposed to
substantial peer pressure. Possibly a super-indulged unschooled kid, (like
mine), might be less likely to drive drunk or treat sex as a competitive
sport?

I'm guessing here, as I have no idea how the studies decided which kids had
good outcomes and which didn't. Income level? Finishing college? Getting
and staying married? Not getting caught with any dire consequences of
pre-marital sex? (Would anyone believe that survey responses about sex and
drug use would be anywhere close to 100% accurate? I have to think that
it's awfully easy for people to lie or misremember, and I mean regular
people, not just elected officials. <g>)

Betsy

Betsy Hill

>correlational studies establish a
>relationship between permissive parenting styles and
>procrastination, lowered achievement motivation, goal
>avoidance, lowered self esteem, dysfunctional/avoidant
>coping skills, as well as a dysfunctional ability to
>assess the reasons for low achievement and frustration
>(external assessment, leading to goal avoidance and
>feelings of helplessness and anger).

My husband shows a lot of this behavior, but I blame it on "learned
helplessness" caused by being trapped in miserable public schools for 12
years.

Wish someone would study that! :-)

Betsy

Diana Tashjian

I think one thing that's hard about descriptions like this is that everyone has a different idea of what the words mean. Like exactly what defines "authoritative"? "responsive"? "reasonable boundaries"? and how can one be both authoritative and democratic?

Diana Tashjian
>> Studies *consistently* find that Authoritative
>> parenting, which involves a setting of reasonable
>> boundaries combined with a warm, responsive and
>> democratic parenting style, leads to the best results
>> in terms of self concept, prosocial behavior,
>> achievement, coping skills, etc. In other words, in
>> parenting, as in much of the rest of life, moderation
>> is the best course.
<snip>


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

[email protected]

<<I am also not entirely unschooling my child, in the
pure sense of the word. I am adjusting the process to
fit my and my child's needs as best I can... we will
have a certain amount of housework scheduled in>>

"We will have..." indicates to me that you haven't started unschooling yet.
It's okay not to have unschooled yet, but to preach to an unschooling list
when it's theoretical to you and not practice is something to which I object.

<< I can empathize with
his frustration, I can help him problem solve to make
it as easy to tolerate as possible... >>

Ah. And you have one child, who is young, and although you already said
"Tough" you claim you will empathize.

I will venture that this is not something you've thought out fully, let alone
tried out, and so please qualify your statements in the future with "I think"
or "it seems" or "I plan to try" instead of "LOTS of studies," or "IT IS."

<<I think in the end it is more
important for me to be his parent than to be his
friend, when I have to choose between one and the
other... I believe that in doing so I am being more
truly his friend in the long run.>>

You need to be yourself, and deal with him himself, not as a teacher or
friend or parent, but as a compassionate human. that's where it will be
real, and not role-playing.

<<And, children do not "naturally" use phrases such as "please" and "thank
you." >>

Mine do, because all the adults around them do. Mine share, because we share
with them--clothes, money, time, toys--when I've had a toy or game or
curiosity or tool I thought my kids might break, I kept it up or hidden until
they were old enough to use it, and when they were older I brought it down
and shared. I share the computer. I share the phone. Not just with my
kids, for show, but with anyone--friends, houseguests--who's over and needs
them.

<<The real world isn't going to run around finding
other options for something as simple as "it's time to go shopping, get your
shoes on." >>

Of course there are options, always. If a restaurant requires shoes, you
can't go in without shoes. Whether a child was raised one way or another,
he's going to wear shoes to restaurants. When people are late, there are
consequences, whether or not their parents are still alive.

<<The rest of the world isn't going to say,"oh, I'm sorry this
doesn't suit your needs, I'll pospone the family's needs or make alternate
arrangements so that I don't inconvenience your play time."
>>

Some parts of the world will and some parts won't. Some people get friends
for whom punctuality isn't a requirement.

What was that about puking from staying up?
If staying up too late made me puke, I wouldn't do it anymore.

My kids don't have bedtimes, and not one has ever puked from being tired,
just from maybe having flu. When they have the flu they 1) sleep A LOT, and
2) very occasionally puke. Hmmm.... no correlation whatsoever with staying
up late when they're not sick.

I have known kids (and adults) to puke from fear and stress. I wish not to
add fear and stress purposely to anyone's life.

<<I didn't mean to ramble but I get so SICK of one study after another been
sited to show us all what a lousy life we are living or how we'd better
change quick or we are going to ruin our health, children, finances, etc. >>

Me too.

Many of the "studies" we've been shown over the years by people who want to
defend their right to be authoritarian parents comes from Christian groups
trying to gather money either for goods (curricular materials or books) or
just plain "send us money to do God's work." I have no interest in
Christian studies which back up Biblical education or whacking children with
dowels. I don't know if those are that sort of study or not. Gags me,
though, when I see those.

<<Permissive parenting is not Doing Nothing... there are
two styles of permissive parenting; in several of the
studies these two permissive styles were examined as
seperate, though related, styles. >>

YEEK. There are not "TWO STYLES OF PERMISSIVE PARENTING."
All parenting falls along a continuum. Perhaps for the purposes of a study
you read there were two categories used, but that doesn't equal "two styles"
which are distinct. They were defined for purposes of statistical analysis.
Don't confuse "studies" and statistics with the real world. They built a
model to make a point, they weren't describing the world in objective terms.

<<According to the descriptions in the studies, all
three parenting styles >>

There are more than three parenting styles. I would hope that the studies
you read weren't all based on the same models.

<<I go by the definitions in the studies (this seems
reasonable, as they coined the prases in the first
place), and by your descriptions of what you would do
in the particular instances cited. By their
definition, what you describe is permissive parenting.>>

Ah, definitely confusing words with reality.

<< Let us also throw out
all definitions of words and terms, because they are
simply semantics rather than Truths.>>

No, let us see that "Truths" are not easily defined in studies, and that one
language defines things that another language can't even name.

<< Let us assume
that those who disagree with us fall into the extreme
end of a range of behavior and demonize them, so that
we do not have to listen to what they say.>>

Is that what those studies were doing? That's what it seemed some of the
posters here in the last couple of days were doing.

Sandra (wondering if those researchers have even ever heard of "aware"
parenting as it has been discussed among unschoolers in the past few years)

Kim

I agree, I hate to do the dishes and so do my DD's! Children learn from the influences they have around them. Which is why we don't send them to ps! When we show our children respect, that is what they learn. Ironically, my father gave me this poem when my first DD was born 15 years ago, let me see if I can find it. I say ironically, because I don't believe my parents raised me this way, except for maybe the first part of the poem! I had to learn a lot of this stuff on my own after I grew up. Here it is:

Children Learn What They Live

If a child lives with criticism, he learns to condemn.

If a child lives with hostility, he learns to fight.

If a child lives with ridicule, he learns to be shy.

If a child lives with shame, he learns to feel guilty.

If a child lives with tolerance, he learns to be patient.

If a child lives with encouragement, he learns confidence.

If a child lives with praise, he learns to appreciate.

If a child lives with fairness, he learns justice.

If a child lives with security, he learns to have faith.

If a child lives with approval, he learns to like himself.

If a child lives with acceptance and friendship, he learns to find love in the world.


From: Natrlmama@...
Subject: Re: Brain atrophy (Eileen)

I just had to jump in on this one. All three of my children were eager to say
please and thank you when they were just little toddlers. Its what we
modeled to them and they enjoyed responding in the same manner. Our
family still says please and thank you all the time. I think it is very
natural
to imitate your parents. Just like cleaning up the house. They don't mind
cleaning, but dislike picking up, exactly how I am and what I model despite
my best attempts to do what I say and not what I do LOL.
Kathy


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

Annette Yunker

<snip> Many of the "studies" we've been shown over the years by people who want to
defend their right to be authoritarian parents comes from Christian groups <snip>
First of all, I apologize if this topic has come up in this thread - I wanted to stay out of the cross-fire as a method of my own stress-management.
I hear many Christians and non-Christians distinguishing between and authoritarian (with negative connotation) and authoritative (with positive connotation) styles of parenting. Would most of you also object to an authoritative style as well?
Annette




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

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/17/01 2:47:07 PM, amyunker@... writes:

<< I hear many Christians and non-Christians distinguishing between and
authoritarian (with negative connotation) and authoritative (with positive
connotation) styles of parenting. Would most of you also object to an
authoritative style as well? >>

I think we're hearing Christians trying to make a distinction.
I could be wrong.

Betsy Hill

>wondering if those researchers have even ever heard of "aware"
>parenting as it has been discussed among unschoolers in the past few year

Shoot! I must have been absent <g> or unaware on the day this was covered.

I don't know what it is. (Although, if it's thoughtfully practiced by
unschoolers, I can make a pretty good guess.)

Betsy

Lynda

Well, well, would appear this list now seems to have a self-appointed rule
maker telling folks how to respond to posts "qualify your statements in the
future," then
IMHO everyone should follow the general rules of netiquette: 1) don't chop
up various and sundry posts and put them into one reply without regard to
sequence or author; 2) do not use yellow-rag journalistic practices of
cutting up posts and taking things out of context to suit the needs of a
reply; 3) those who are not in on the beginning of a thread should go back
and read all the posts before jumping in and making accusations, and 4) the
"snip" rule should be applied when chopping up posts.

----- Original Message -----
From: <SandraDodd@...>

> <<I am also not entirely unschooling my child, in the
> pure sense of the word. I am adjusting the process to
> fit my and my child's needs as best I can... we will
> have a certain amount of housework scheduled in>>
>
> "We will have..." indicates to me that you haven't started unschooling
yet.
> It's okay not to have unschooled yet, but to preach to an unschooling list
> when it's theoretical to you and not practice is something to which I
object.

***what it indicates to you is not germane. She stated that she was not
"entirely" unschooling her child. She was not preaching, she was having a
discussion about differing view points and when questioned about sources
gave the sources. In fact, the other party in the discussion was preaching
that her methods were the "only" acceptable method.

> << I can empathize with
> his frustration, I can help him problem solve to make
> it as easy to tolerate as possible... >>
>
> Ah. And you have one child, who is young, and although you already said
> "Tough" you claim you will empathize.

***Yellow-rag journalistic techniques. And, btw, taking a single word out
of a phrase and using its explative definition, not its phrase based
definition to form
the basis for an answer is a form of lying.
>
> I will venture that this is not something you've thought out fully, let
alone
> tried out, and so please qualify your statements in the future with "I
think"
> or "it seems" or "I plan to try" instead of "LOTS of studies," or "IT IS."

***Opinions are like parts of the anatomy, everyone has one. One has no way
of knowing how well thought out, fully or otherwise another's reply is.
Might the same advise be applied to this reply in that it should be prefaced
with "IMHO" even if the opinion is not "h".
>
***<snip> see above list of "rules."

> Mine do, because all the adults around them do. Mine share, because we
share
> with them--clothes, money, time, toys--when I've had a toy or game or
> curiosity or tool I thought my kids might break, I kept it up or hidden
until
> they were old enough to use it, and when they were older I brought it down
> and shared. I share the computer. I share the phone. Not just with my
> kids, for show, but with anyone--friends, houseguests--who's over and
needs
> them.

***Wouldn't hiding things be a form of lying? Wouldn't a trully honest, no
artificial barriers type of relationship allow the child to learn the
consequences of what they are or are not old enough to use?
>
> <<The real world isn't going to run around finding
> other options for something as simple as "it's time to go shopping, get
your
> shoes on." >>
>
> Of course there are options, always. If a restaurant requires shoes, you
> can't go in without shoes. Whether a child was raised one way or another,
> he's going to wear shoes to restaurants. When people are late, there are
> consequences, whether or not their parents are still alive.

***Non-responsive. The statement was in relationship to someone finding the
options, not that there weren't any options.
>
> <<The rest of the world isn't going to say,"oh, I'm sorry this
> doesn't suit your needs, I'll pospone the family's needs or make alternate
> arrangements so that I don't inconvenience your play time."
> >>
>
> Some parts of the world will and some parts won't. Some people get
friends
> for whom punctuality isn't a requirement.

***An assumption with no foundation. It would have been better to state
that some people will, not whole parts. Some people may "have" friends for
whom punctuality isn't a requirement, I seriously doubt they "get" them
because of this habit/behavior that is sometimes perceived as a character
flaw.
>
> What was that about puking from staying up?
> If staying up too late made me puke, I wouldn't do it anymore.

***Nor would I, but I am an adult and not a child who has hypoglycemia and
various renal problems which do not always allow her to act in a purely
adult rational manner at all times.
>
> My kids don't have bedtimes, and not one has ever puked from being tired,
> just from maybe having flu. When they have the flu they 1) sleep A LOT,
and
> 2) very occasionally puke. Hmmm.... no correlation whatsoever with
staying
> up late when they're not sick.

***That's nice but your limited knowledge base does not give a foundation
for making an all encompassing statement which assumes (and we know how that
is spelled) facts not in evidence.
>
> I have known kids (and adults) to puke from fear and stress. I wish not
to
> add fear and stress purposely to anyone's life.

***Good, then we agree that I should send her to bed since "we" wouldn't
wish to add to her stress by allowing her to stay up beyond the point that
her body can handle.
>
>snip >

> Ah, definitely confusing words with reality.

***This definately should have been prefaced with or followed by "IMHO"
After all, if everyone has their own "truths," then surely everyone must
have their own realities.

Lynda

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/18/01 9:20:41 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
ecsamhill@... writes:


> >wondering if those researchers have even ever heard of "aware"
> >parenting as it has been discussed among unschoolers in the past few year
>
> Shoot! I must have been absent <g> or unaware on the day this was covered.
>

<g>

I just figure ANY list of styles of parenting is arbitrary, and another
"style" could always be named and added. If our choices are authoritarian,
authoritative, or two brands of permissive, I just don't think that covers
all we've discussed just in unschooling.com!

Sandra


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

Vaughnde Edwards

Okay....I've seen the term aware parenting...can someone explain to me what it means? I've had a busy week this week, mostly staying at a friends house trying to get my car working. The carb is shot...lets hope we can get it fixed by next week. It may mean a new carburetor...but we are gonna try to see if the one on the parts car works first.

Vaughnde Edwards
Missoula, Montana
Praise the Lord, He is Risen Indeed!!

-----Original Message-----
From: SandraDodd@... <SandraDodd@...>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Date: Friday, May 18, 2001 10:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Brain atrophy (Eileen)


In a message dated 5/18/01 9:20:41 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
ecsamhill@... writes:


> >wondering if those researchers have even ever heard of "aware"
> >parenting as it has been discussed among unschoolers in the past few year
>
> Shoot! I must have been absent <g> or unaware on the day this was covered.
>

<g>

I just figure ANY list of styles of parenting is arbitrary, and another
"style" could always be named and added. If our choices are authoritarian,
authoritative, or two brands of permissive, I just don't think that covers
all we've discussed just in unschooling.com!

Sandra


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


Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com

To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
http://www.egroups.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom

Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
http://www.home-ed-magazine.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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

Betsy Hill

>I just figure ANY list of styles of parenting is arbitrary, and another
>"style" could always be named and added.

Fair enough. Sign me up for the parental sub-group "aware, tired,
indulgent and imperfect".

We can break the bonds of labling and stereotyping if we use an infinite
amount of adjectives! <g>

Betsy

P.S. (I'm relieved not to wear the scarlet P, for permissive, even if all I
did was crawl through my own semantic loophol.e)