Kids "needing" Adult Attention
[email protected]
There are times when it seems that kids don't like their mom and dad having
friends and a life.
I recently met some online people in Florida. My daughter who is 12 really
resented me having fun with someone that did not directly include her. She
figures she owns me, she owns me a little more than her brother is entitled
to own me too,
I was kind of shocked at her behavior and when we were alone we talked about
it. She said she didn't mean to and knew she was being kind of condescending
and rude to her mom but she just could not stop.
I was really amazed at her reaction and when we saw them later, she was much
better about it all.
There should be a balance. The mom should have a right to talk and be among
adults and still be respected by her children. The kids do not have to be the
center piece of every conversation and discussion.
Beth
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
friends and a life.
I recently met some online people in Florida. My daughter who is 12 really
resented me having fun with someone that did not directly include her. She
figures she owns me, she owns me a little more than her brother is entitled
to own me too,
I was kind of shocked at her behavior and when we were alone we talked about
it. She said she didn't mean to and knew she was being kind of condescending
and rude to her mom but she just could not stop.
I was really amazed at her reaction and when we saw them later, she was much
better about it all.
There should be a balance. The mom should have a right to talk and be among
adults and still be respected by her children. The kids do not have to be the
center piece of every conversation and discussion.
Beth
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Fetteroll
on 12/13/02 3:54 PM, ComaCrone@... at ComaCrone@... wrote:
ideas and about the list and where trying to translate what's in our head
breaks down because of how we choose to use English.
The words above might be expressing the idea of maintaining healthy personal
boundaries in an atmosphere of mutual respect.
But the words don't say that to me. What "moms should have a right" says to
me is "I'm not giving up all my rights so the kids can have their way." It
says power struggle. It maybe even says "I didn't get rights when I was a
kid so now it's my turn and you kids can't take that away from me just
because some people on a list say I should give them away."
If I respond to what I read rather than what someone means to say, it's one
of the sources for upsetness on the list. The argument appears to be about
what is and isn't respect or unschooling but is really about word use and
the meanings they convey.
The above may not be what Beth is trying to say. But even if it isn't, it
*is* what many people hear when people talk about putting children first or
mutual respect or other words they use to get across a different way of
seeing the parent child relationship.
The idea people are trying to convey involves a paradigm shift. It's trying
to get across the idea of seeing the situation without the words that trap
us into seeing it a certain way. Drop the idea of rights and think about
needs. Drop the idea that kids have to learn to accept that somtimes someone
else's needs are more important because that's just the way things are. Drop
a lot of other things too.
*Don't* replace those with their opposites. Don't think "Those with the most
and loudest expression of needs get to win." Don't think "We need to bend
over backwards so kids never experience disappointment."
Instead of thinking or saying to kids "We all want our needs met, *but* ..."
approach it with the attitude "We all want our needs met. I'm sorry this
isn't working out. How about ...."
Here's two ways of saying something that sound like the same but send very
different messages:
"I can't read any more. We'll have to finish this in the morning."
"I'm too sleepy. We can finish this in the morning."
The first is mom saying "This is how the situation is. It can't be changed.
There's nothing you can do about it. And here's the only solution."
The second is giving information and suggesting one possible alternative.
The first is closed. The second is open to other suggestions.
What putting "needing" into quotes in the subject communicates to me is that
what are being refered to as needs really aren't. What it says to me is that
kids say through their actions that they need something but they don't
really. What they're expressing isn't as important as a need. They're making
a bigger deal out of something than it really it is.
What "The kids do not have to be the center piece of every conversation and
discussion" says is that seems to be the alternative to not being the
centerpiece. If we turn that around and have our husbands thinking that way
about things we feel are reasonable requests then we'd probably resent it!
But what people are saying is throw away references to centerpieces or any
reference that places someone in the position of winner and others in the
position of loser. There's a huge important difference between approaching
kids with the attitude that you will do what you can to help them meet their
needs and approaching them with the attitude you'll get them what they ask
for. They keep getting equated and they aren't the same at all.
IT's the difference again between being opened and closed. When we go to our
husbands for help on something they know a lot about, we'd want them to
project an attitude of "What can I do to help?" rather than an attitude of
"I might or might not help you depending on how much trouble it is." He
might not be able to help. Being ignorant of what we're asking, we might
unknowingly be asking too much. But rather than him saying no, it would be a
lot more helpful if he started helping us think of alternative ways he could
help, or how others could help or how we could get help ourselves. We'd
appreciate him helping us get our needs met.
So it is with kids. They'd like to know we're there to help them get their
needs met. When we first change our attitude, they will still hear "No,
can't do that" when we say "How about this .." But they will eventually make
the shift from feeling they're approaching us for largess and approaching us
for help with a problem.
Joyce
> There should be a balance. The mom should have a right to talk and be amongAs Betsy said she appreciated Sandra saying: This isn't about Beth but about
> adults and still be respected by her children. The kids do not have to be the
> center piece of every conversation and discussion.
ideas and about the list and where trying to translate what's in our head
breaks down because of how we choose to use English.
The words above might be expressing the idea of maintaining healthy personal
boundaries in an atmosphere of mutual respect.
But the words don't say that to me. What "moms should have a right" says to
me is "I'm not giving up all my rights so the kids can have their way." It
says power struggle. It maybe even says "I didn't get rights when I was a
kid so now it's my turn and you kids can't take that away from me just
because some people on a list say I should give them away."
If I respond to what I read rather than what someone means to say, it's one
of the sources for upsetness on the list. The argument appears to be about
what is and isn't respect or unschooling but is really about word use and
the meanings they convey.
The above may not be what Beth is trying to say. But even if it isn't, it
*is* what many people hear when people talk about putting children first or
mutual respect or other words they use to get across a different way of
seeing the parent child relationship.
The idea people are trying to convey involves a paradigm shift. It's trying
to get across the idea of seeing the situation without the words that trap
us into seeing it a certain way. Drop the idea of rights and think about
needs. Drop the idea that kids have to learn to accept that somtimes someone
else's needs are more important because that's just the way things are. Drop
a lot of other things too.
*Don't* replace those with their opposites. Don't think "Those with the most
and loudest expression of needs get to win." Don't think "We need to bend
over backwards so kids never experience disappointment."
Instead of thinking or saying to kids "We all want our needs met, *but* ..."
approach it with the attitude "We all want our needs met. I'm sorry this
isn't working out. How about ...."
Here's two ways of saying something that sound like the same but send very
different messages:
"I can't read any more. We'll have to finish this in the morning."
"I'm too sleepy. We can finish this in the morning."
The first is mom saying "This is how the situation is. It can't be changed.
There's nothing you can do about it. And here's the only solution."
The second is giving information and suggesting one possible alternative.
The first is closed. The second is open to other suggestions.
What putting "needing" into quotes in the subject communicates to me is that
what are being refered to as needs really aren't. What it says to me is that
kids say through their actions that they need something but they don't
really. What they're expressing isn't as important as a need. They're making
a bigger deal out of something than it really it is.
What "The kids do not have to be the center piece of every conversation and
discussion" says is that seems to be the alternative to not being the
centerpiece. If we turn that around and have our husbands thinking that way
about things we feel are reasonable requests then we'd probably resent it!
But what people are saying is throw away references to centerpieces or any
reference that places someone in the position of winner and others in the
position of loser. There's a huge important difference between approaching
kids with the attitude that you will do what you can to help them meet their
needs and approaching them with the attitude you'll get them what they ask
for. They keep getting equated and they aren't the same at all.
IT's the difference again between being opened and closed. When we go to our
husbands for help on something they know a lot about, we'd want them to
project an attitude of "What can I do to help?" rather than an attitude of
"I might or might not help you depending on how much trouble it is." He
might not be able to help. Being ignorant of what we're asking, we might
unknowingly be asking too much. But rather than him saying no, it would be a
lot more helpful if he started helping us think of alternative ways he could
help, or how others could help or how we could get help ourselves. We'd
appreciate him helping us get our needs met.
So it is with kids. They'd like to know we're there to help them get their
needs met. When we first change our attitude, they will still hear "No,
can't do that" when we say "How about this .." But they will eventually make
the shift from feeling they're approaching us for largess and approaching us
for help with a problem.
Joyce
[email protected]
In a message dated 12/14/2002 9:37:50 AM Central Standard Time,
fetteroll@... writes:
context of what I know about Beth and her kids, I know she didn't mean what
you said above.
I think what she was trying to say is that her kids have reached the point
where they are quite capable of waiting their turn in the conversation. I
can see, though, how her words looked the way you described them, when
they're out of context.
So, I get you, Joyce, and understand what you're getting at, and believe it.
But I also don't want Beth to be maligned in the process. I know she
respects her kids.
Tuck
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
fetteroll@... writes:
> But the words don't say that to me. What "moms should have a right" says toI've known Beth for many years. I know a lot about her kids. From the
> me is "I'm not giving up all my rights so the kids can have their way." It
> says power struggle. It maybe even says "I didn't get rights when I was a
> kid so now it's my turn and you kids can't take that away from me just
> because some people on a list say I should give them away."
>
>
context of what I know about Beth and her kids, I know she didn't mean what
you said above.
I think what she was trying to say is that her kids have reached the point
where they are quite capable of waiting their turn in the conversation. I
can see, though, how her words looked the way you described them, when
they're out of context.
So, I get you, Joyce, and understand what you're getting at, and believe it.
But I also don't want Beth to be maligned in the process. I know she
respects her kids.
Tuck
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
In a message dated 12/14/02 8:37:51 AM, fetteroll@... writes:
<< But they will eventually make
the shift from feeling they're approaching us for largess and approaching us
for help with a problem. >>
And also maybe go from being supplicants to a frightening higher power, and
going to their supportive teammate.
(Same thing Joyce said, probably, but maybe stronger.)
If there is an "us vs. them" thought in the mother's head, then it's a
reality.
Sandra
<< But they will eventually make
the shift from feeling they're approaching us for largess and approaching us
for help with a problem. >>
And also maybe go from being supplicants to a frightening higher power, and
going to their supportive teammate.
(Same thing Joyce said, probably, but maybe stronger.)
If there is an "us vs. them" thought in the mother's head, then it's a
reality.
Sandra
[email protected]
-=-Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Kids "needing" Adult Attention-=-
No matter who knows who, to put "needing" in quotation marks that way says
"not really needing."
Sandra
No matter who knows who, to put "needing" in quotation marks that way says
"not really needing."
Sandra
Kelli Traaseth
Thank you Joyce,
this was what I was kind-of trying to say earlier, but probably got too many ideas going. You're a great conveyer of thoughts and ideas, very precise.
As others would say, this is another for the book of Joyce!
Kelli
Fetteroll <fetteroll@...> wrote:on 12/13/02 3:54 PM, ComaCrone@... at ComaCrone@... wrote:
ideas and about the list and where trying to translate what's in our head
breaks down because of how we choose to use English.
The words above might be expressing the idea of maintaining healthy personal
boundaries in an atmosphere of mutual respect.
But the words don't say that to me. What "moms should have a right" says to
me is "I'm not giving up all my rights so the kids can have their way." It
says power struggle. It maybe even says "I didn't get rights when I was a
kid so now it's my turn and you kids can't take that away from me just
because some people on a list say I should give them away."
If I respond to what I read rather than what someone means to say, it's one
of the sources for upsetness on the list. The argument appears to be about
what is and isn't respect or unschooling but is really about word use and
the meanings they convey.
The above may not be what Beth is trying to say. But even if it isn't, it
*is* what many people hear when people talk about putting children first or
mutual respect or other words they use to get across a different way of
seeing the parent child relationship.
The idea people are trying to convey involves a paradigm shift. It's trying
to get across the idea of seeing the situation without the words that trap
us into seeing it a certain way. Drop the idea of rights and think about
needs. Drop the idea that kids have to learn to accept that somtimes someone
else's needs are more important because that's just the way things are. Drop
a lot of other things too.
*Don't* replace those with their opposites. Don't think "Those with the most
and loudest expression of needs get to win." Don't think "We need to bend
over backwards so kids never experience disappointment."
Instead of thinking or saying to kids "We all want our needs met, *but* ..."
approach it with the attitude "We all want our needs met. I'm sorry this
isn't working out. How about ...."
Here's two ways of saying something that sound like the same but send very
different messages:
"I can't read any more. We'll have to finish this in the morning."
"I'm too sleepy. We can finish this in the morning."
The first is mom saying "This is how the situation is. It can't be changed.
There's nothing you can do about it. And here's the only solution."
The second is giving information and suggesting one possible alternative.
The first is closed. The second is open to other suggestions.
What putting "needing" into quotes in the subject communicates to me is that
what are being refered to as needs really aren't. What it says to me is that
kids say through their actions that they need something but they don't
really. What they're expressing isn't as important as a need. They're making
a bigger deal out of something than it really it is.
What "The kids do not have to be the center piece of every conversation and
discussion" says is that seems to be the alternative to not being the
centerpiece. If we turn that around and have our husbands thinking that way
about things we feel are reasonable requests then we'd probably resent it!
But what people are saying is throw away references to centerpieces or any
reference that places someone in the position of winner and others in the
position of loser. There's a huge important difference between approaching
kids with the attitude that you will do what you can to help them meet their
needs and approaching them with the attitude you'll get them what they ask
for. They keep getting equated and they aren't the same at all.
IT's the difference again between being opened and closed. When we go to our
husbands for help on something they know a lot about, we'd want them to
project an attitude of "What can I do to help?" rather than an attitude of
"I might or might not help you depending on how much trouble it is." He
might not be able to help. Being ignorant of what we're asking, we might
unknowingly be asking too much. But rather than him saying no, it would be a
lot more helpful if he started helping us think of alternative ways he could
help, or how others could help or how we could get help ourselves. We'd
appreciate him helping us get our needs met.
So it is with kids. They'd like to know we're there to help them get their
needs met. When we first change our attitude, they will still hear "No,
can't do that" when we say "How about this .." But they will eventually make
the shift from feeling they're approaching us for largess and approaching us
for help with a problem.
Joyce
~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
this was what I was kind-of trying to say earlier, but probably got too many ideas going. You're a great conveyer of thoughts and ideas, very precise.
As others would say, this is another for the book of Joyce!
Kelli
Fetteroll <fetteroll@...> wrote:on 12/13/02 3:54 PM, ComaCrone@... at ComaCrone@... wrote:
> There should be a balance. The mom should have a right to talk and be amongAs Betsy said she appreciated Sandra saying: This isn't about Beth but about
> adults and still be respected by her children. The kids do not have to be the
> center piece of every conversation and discussion.
ideas and about the list and where trying to translate what's in our head
breaks down because of how we choose to use English.
The words above might be expressing the idea of maintaining healthy personal
boundaries in an atmosphere of mutual respect.
But the words don't say that to me. What "moms should have a right" says to
me is "I'm not giving up all my rights so the kids can have their way." It
says power struggle. It maybe even says "I didn't get rights when I was a
kid so now it's my turn and you kids can't take that away from me just
because some people on a list say I should give them away."
If I respond to what I read rather than what someone means to say, it's one
of the sources for upsetness on the list. The argument appears to be about
what is and isn't respect or unschooling but is really about word use and
the meanings they convey.
The above may not be what Beth is trying to say. But even if it isn't, it
*is* what many people hear when people talk about putting children first or
mutual respect or other words they use to get across a different way of
seeing the parent child relationship.
The idea people are trying to convey involves a paradigm shift. It's trying
to get across the idea of seeing the situation without the words that trap
us into seeing it a certain way. Drop the idea of rights and think about
needs. Drop the idea that kids have to learn to accept that somtimes someone
else's needs are more important because that's just the way things are. Drop
a lot of other things too.
*Don't* replace those with their opposites. Don't think "Those with the most
and loudest expression of needs get to win." Don't think "We need to bend
over backwards so kids never experience disappointment."
Instead of thinking or saying to kids "We all want our needs met, *but* ..."
approach it with the attitude "We all want our needs met. I'm sorry this
isn't working out. How about ...."
Here's two ways of saying something that sound like the same but send very
different messages:
"I can't read any more. We'll have to finish this in the morning."
"I'm too sleepy. We can finish this in the morning."
The first is mom saying "This is how the situation is. It can't be changed.
There's nothing you can do about it. And here's the only solution."
The second is giving information and suggesting one possible alternative.
The first is closed. The second is open to other suggestions.
What putting "needing" into quotes in the subject communicates to me is that
what are being refered to as needs really aren't. What it says to me is that
kids say through their actions that they need something but they don't
really. What they're expressing isn't as important as a need. They're making
a bigger deal out of something than it really it is.
What "The kids do not have to be the center piece of every conversation and
discussion" says is that seems to be the alternative to not being the
centerpiece. If we turn that around and have our husbands thinking that way
about things we feel are reasonable requests then we'd probably resent it!
But what people are saying is throw away references to centerpieces or any
reference that places someone in the position of winner and others in the
position of loser. There's a huge important difference between approaching
kids with the attitude that you will do what you can to help them meet their
needs and approaching them with the attitude you'll get them what they ask
for. They keep getting equated and they aren't the same at all.
IT's the difference again between being opened and closed. When we go to our
husbands for help on something they know a lot about, we'd want them to
project an attitude of "What can I do to help?" rather than an attitude of
"I might or might not help you depending on how much trouble it is." He
might not be able to help. Being ignorant of what we're asking, we might
unknowingly be asking too much. But rather than him saying no, it would be a
lot more helpful if he started helping us think of alternative ways he could
help, or how others could help or how we could get help ourselves. We'd
appreciate him helping us get our needs met.
So it is with kids. They'd like to know we're there to help them get their
needs met. When we first change our attitude, they will still hear "No,
can't do that" when we say "How about this .." But they will eventually make
the shift from feeling they're approaching us for largess and approaching us
for help with a problem.
Joyce
~~~~ Don't forget! If you change topics, change the subject line! ~~~~
If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).
To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address an email to:
[email protected]
Visit the Unschooling website: http://www.unschooling.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]