Re: Digest Number 290
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/10/99 11:51:24 AM, [email protected]
writes:
<<It sounds like they didn't want to admit this could be a problem!
Reminds me of the one this past summer (was it a book?) that found peers
to be a greater influence than parents. Gee, could this be because
children enrolled in school and numerous activities rarely see their
parents?>>
The book is called The Nurture Assumption, by Judith Rich Harris. I got it
from the library. It's fascinating, because I hate her conclusions, but the
research she bases it on seems pretty valid.
I believe that homeschooling families will not have the same results and will
not raise peer-dependent kids.
Betsy
writes:
<<It sounds like they didn't want to admit this could be a problem!
Reminds me of the one this past summer (was it a book?) that found peers
to be a greater influence than parents. Gee, could this be because
children enrolled in school and numerous activities rarely see their
parents?>>
The book is called The Nurture Assumption, by Judith Rich Harris. I got it
from the library. It's fascinating, because I hate her conclusions, but the
research she bases it on seems pretty valid.
I believe that homeschooling families will not have the same results and will
not raise peer-dependent kids.
Betsy
Joel Hawthorne
I am currently taking a weekly (8 weeks) course with my wife from Gordon
Neufeld. I am absolutely fascinated by his developmental approach with an
emphasis on attachment. He makes it very clear how behaviourism has damaged our
approach to children.
Peer identified children are also inevitably "defended" children who have
armoured themselves, are insatiable and for whom "cool" and the appearance of
invulnerability is the ultimate value.
I repeatedly am lobbying Dr. Neufeld to get a web site up and get his material
out there. His approach has provided an almost immediate improvement in my
childrearing focus.
He has commented on how having an underlying consistent philosophy is of great
importance... techniques divorced from an embracing philosophy results in
distortions and does not work.
Meandering on about this whole thing..... it is clearer to me how we have a
tendency to use the dependence and attachment of our children to manipulate their
behaviour for short term results. The long term results which often emerge in the
teen years are rebellion, anger, alienation and peer identification in spades.
The power we have as parents is enormous but to use it to manipulate children is
the epitome of penny wise pound foolish.
ECSamHill@... wrote:
best wishes
Joel
For a wonderful gift possibility and to support a great cause check out:
http://www.naturalchild.com/calendar_pictures.html
All children behave as well as they are treated. The Natural Child
Project http://naturalchild.com/home/
Neufeld. I am absolutely fascinated by his developmental approach with an
emphasis on attachment. He makes it very clear how behaviourism has damaged our
approach to children.
Peer identified children are also inevitably "defended" children who have
armoured themselves, are insatiable and for whom "cool" and the appearance of
invulnerability is the ultimate value.
I repeatedly am lobbying Dr. Neufeld to get a web site up and get his material
out there. His approach has provided an almost immediate improvement in my
childrearing focus.
He has commented on how having an underlying consistent philosophy is of great
importance... techniques divorced from an embracing philosophy results in
distortions and does not work.
Meandering on about this whole thing..... it is clearer to me how we have a
tendency to use the dependence and attachment of our children to manipulate their
behaviour for short term results. The long term results which often emerge in the
teen years are rebellion, anger, alienation and peer identification in spades.
The power we have as parents is enormous but to use it to manipulate children is
the epitome of penny wise pound foolish.
ECSamHill@... wrote:
> From: ECSamHill@...--
>
> In a message dated 11/10/99 11:51:24 AM, [email protected]
> writes:
>
> <<It sounds like they didn't want to admit this could be a problem!
>
> Reminds me of the one this past summer (was it a book?) that found peers
>
> to be a greater influence than parents. Gee, could this be because
>
> children enrolled in school and numerous activities rarely see their
>
> parents?>>
>
> The book is called The Nurture Assumption, by Judith Rich Harris. I got it
> from the library. It's fascinating, because I hate her conclusions, but the
> research she bases it on seems pretty valid.
>
> I believe that homeschooling families will not have the same results and will
> not raise peer-dependent kids.
>
> Betsy
>
> > Check it out!
> http://www.unschooling.com
best wishes
Joel
For a wonderful gift possibility and to support a great cause check out:
http://www.naturalchild.com/calendar_pictures.html
All children behave as well as they are treated. The Natural Child
Project http://naturalchild.com/home/
[email protected]
Joel wrote:
<< He has commented on how having an underlying consistent philosophy is of
great
importance... techniques divorced from an embracing philosophy results in
distortions and does not work. >>
Joel, is there a place where I can find copies of Neufeld's theories to read
and ponder?
I really like what you say here, and have been caught up in thinking lately
that that's exactly where my partner and I fall short with our parenting. We
don't seem to have ever identified our philosophies of child-raising, so we
tend to flip-flop using techniques that aren't really suited to what we
believe.
I think that we truly do have a philosophy: I just don't think we've spent
enough time realizing the importance of cementing this before we work on
individual behavior problems in our children.
Thanks once again for a thought-provoking post.
Carol from WI
<< He has commented on how having an underlying consistent philosophy is of
great
importance... techniques divorced from an embracing philosophy results in
distortions and does not work. >>
Joel, is there a place where I can find copies of Neufeld's theories to read
and ponder?
I really like what you say here, and have been caught up in thinking lately
that that's exactly where my partner and I fall short with our parenting. We
don't seem to have ever identified our philosophies of child-raising, so we
tend to flip-flop using techniques that aren't really suited to what we
believe.
I think that we truly do have a philosophy: I just don't think we've spent
enough time realizing the importance of cementing this before we work on
individual behavior problems in our children.
Thanks once again for a thought-provoking post.
Carol from WI
Joel Hawthorne
Gordon Neufeld took a sabbatical this last year in part for the purpose of
writing. I figure the guy has a best selling book in him. I have even
suggested a title to him. At this point he has only the notes he has
handed out in his courses. I will talk to him yet again about how much he
needs to get a website and archive his materials. He is very busy and in
addition tries to be a real parent to his kids.
I understand the philosophy problem well. I have been eclectic in just
about everything I have ever done. A kind of utilitarian pastiche. However
I really tend to agree with Gordon's belief that a without a unifying
philosophy difficulty looms. I really have an intuitive sense that trying
behaviourist "techniques" is mutually exclusive with an attachment based
developmental point of view. You can manipulate behaviour but always at a
cost to relationship. Relationship is the real force in raising children as
people.
I'll keep everyone posted as to any developments or availability of
materials.
-----Original Message-----
From: Burkfamily@... <Burkfamily@...>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Date: November 13, 1999 5:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Digest Number 290
writing. I figure the guy has a best selling book in him. I have even
suggested a title to him. At this point he has only the notes he has
handed out in his courses. I will talk to him yet again about how much he
needs to get a website and archive his materials. He is very busy and in
addition tries to be a real parent to his kids.
I understand the philosophy problem well. I have been eclectic in just
about everything I have ever done. A kind of utilitarian pastiche. However
I really tend to agree with Gordon's belief that a without a unifying
philosophy difficulty looms. I really have an intuitive sense that trying
behaviourist "techniques" is mutually exclusive with an attachment based
developmental point of view. You can manipulate behaviour but always at a
cost to relationship. Relationship is the real force in raising children as
people.
I'll keep everyone posted as to any developments or availability of
materials.
-----Original Message-----
From: Burkfamily@... <Burkfamily@...>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Date: November 13, 1999 5:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Digest Number 290
>From: Burkfamily@...read
>
>Joel wrote:
><< He has commented on how having an underlying consistent philosophy is of
>great
> importance... techniques divorced from an embracing philosophy results in
> distortions and does not work. >>
>
>Joel, is there a place where I can find copies of Neufeld's theories to
>and ponder?We
>
>I really like what you say here, and have been caught up in thinking lately
>that that's exactly where my partner and I fall short with our parenting.
>don't seem to have ever identified our philosophies of child-raising, so we
>tend to flip-flop using techniques that aren't really suited to what we
>believe.
>I think that we truly do have a philosophy: I just don't think we've spent
>enough time realizing the importance of cementing this before we work on
>individual behavior problems in our children.
>Thanks once again for a thought-provoking post.
>Carol from WI
>
>>Check it out!
>http://www.unschooling.com
>
[email protected]
Joel wrote:
<< I really have an intuitive sense that trying
behaviourist "techniques" is mutually exclusive with an attachment based
developmental point of view. You can manipulate behaviour but always at a
cost to relationship. Relationship is the real force in raising children as
people.
or to you, but this is another gem. I almost yelped YES, YES, YES when I
read it.
This is what I'm always trying to tell my dh...but in much more simplistic
terms. It always feels like I have this intuitive sense as you put it, of
what's right...but when it comes to actual practice, I have such a hard time
applying this sense to real life situations.
Many times when I'm confused about how to respond to my children in
particular, I try to think of how I define healthy relationships in my own
life and I try to think about how I would like to be responded to in a
similar situation. But, I'm still really short on patience and that hurts my
attempts!
Sorry if this isn't completely coherent; my thinking process right now is
definitely a work in progress.
Thanks again, Joel.
Carol from WI
<< I really have an intuitive sense that trying
behaviourist "techniques" is mutually exclusive with an attachment based
developmental point of view. You can manipulate behaviour but always at a
cost to relationship. Relationship is the real force in raising children as
people.
>>Gee, Joel, I'm way behind on e-mail and haven't gotten back to this thread
or to you, but this is another gem. I almost yelped YES, YES, YES when I
read it.
This is what I'm always trying to tell my dh...but in much more simplistic
terms. It always feels like I have this intuitive sense as you put it, of
what's right...but when it comes to actual practice, I have such a hard time
applying this sense to real life situations.
Many times when I'm confused about how to respond to my children in
particular, I try to think of how I define healthy relationships in my own
life and I try to think about how I would like to be responded to in a
similar situation. But, I'm still really short on patience and that hurts my
attempts!
Sorry if this isn't completely coherent; my thinking process right now is
definitely a work in progress.
Thanks again, Joel.
Carol from WI