I need to write down my friend Kenna's explanation of the nature of parenthood before I forget. She shared this with me last night.
Parenting means you give and you give and you give and you give. And when you have given all you can give, your kid walks up to you and says, "Can I have that?" and you think to yourself wow, I didn't even know I had that. I really could have used it. And then you turn to your child and say, "here you go."
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Monday, October 19, 2009
Outcome Based Parenting
To some extent we all parent with the outcome in mind. We'd be all Lord of the Flies about parenting if we weren't. We want our kids to be free thinkers, strong, independent, happy, smart about money, responsible, kind, empathetic, and on and on and on. In other words, we want them to be everything and in perfect quantities of it all.
Most parents realize that that particular goal is ridiculous and we're setting ourselves and our children up for many issues if we keep holding to that ideal. But still, there is a part of many of us and a huge part of some of us who want to, for better or worse, tie our parenting prowess and skill in to how our children behave and what they become.
A big issue with this is that you people just don't know what you're doing! To raise money smart kids, you should give them an allowance to manage. No, wait. You should make them earn that money through chores. Wait, chores are part of being a family so you should only have them earn it through extra chores and not regular ones. Wait, no, there are kids as young as 5 picking cocoa beans somewhere out there so if Junior wants a new pack of Pokemon cards, he better get to work.
See what I mean? So many ways to get to the same outcome and yet we stress and debate and weigh our options as though one of those ways is the best (one clue, it isn't the last option I presented). Demand respect and your children will respect you. Wait, no, respect your children and they will respect you. Make them say I'm sorry so they'll learn humility. No, wait, model apologies and they'll learn sincerity. Wait, have them beat the crap out of each other and let the conch sort it out. Oops, sorry. Lord of the Flies moment.
Besides there not being one agreed upon and proven method to get from point A to point B, there are a few dangers of letting outcome based parenting take over. The major one is that it takes your child clear out of the equation. If you are respectful, gentle and kind, then your child will always behave respectfully, gently and kindly. Period. End of story. The child and the child's strengths, weaknesses, personality and own life experiences are meaningless for you ARE the perfect parent. That's pretty much the opposite of the outcome we want, isn't it? To render our children meaningless in our quest for perfection in our parenting would be missing the mark <--- understatement of the year.
Another danger is that we then take the "outcome" and turn it to judge the parenting. You know, I've been trying to find a way to say this but your child wouldn't hit if you were stricter/less demanding/gentler/more-like-me. You know who you are. Ok, you caught me. I was totally talking to myself on that one. Children who are energetic and not always aware of their surroundings are obviously parented incorrectly. They are wild, out of control, rude, pushy. Children who are calm and gentle and compliant are parented well. No matter what the parenting philosophy -- authoritarian or laissez-faire or somewhere in between -- these judgments are the same. The only difference is what "you" are doing wrong to cause the issue in the eyes of the outcome based parent watching you.
Another danger is that we take the "outcome" and turn it to judge ourselves. We usually call it "mommy guilt." I did it when Xander first presented his delays. I clearly didn't talk to him enough, engage him enough, read to him enough, etc. At the time I didn't know it but I was presuming that I had some type of control over autism. I was assuming I had control over his brain. How about Dennis for a more universal parenting dilemma. He wouldn't ever talk back if I modeled proper communication better. Or he wouldn't talk back if he knew I was boss. Those are all judgments I could turn on myself when the fact is he wouldn't talk back if he wasn't 10. Dear heavens, give me the strength to make it through his teen years. Some days I just wish he'd start his period and get it over with. But I digress.
This isn't to say that when our children talk back we should say, "oh, well. He's just being himself." Or that when our child has delays that we shouldn't seek therapies. Or that when we screw up as a parent that we just chalk it up to our child's personality. There are learning moments and times for reflection and an opportunity to correct our course if things don't seem to be working. Those are all very important and where outcomes actually do help us.
But my real point (I swear I have one) is that when we see children fall short of our lofty ideals, we need to take a step back and see the whole picture. We need to be kinder in our evaluations of other parents. We need to be kinder to ourselves. We need to own what is ours to own and ignore the judgments of others and, yes, of ourselves. We need to just list all the ways our parents screwed up with us, realize that we still turned out pretty awesome and start enjoying parenting again.
Most parents realize that that particular goal is ridiculous and we're setting ourselves and our children up for many issues if we keep holding to that ideal. But still, there is a part of many of us and a huge part of some of us who want to, for better or worse, tie our parenting prowess and skill in to how our children behave and what they become.
A big issue with this is that you people just don't know what you're doing! To raise money smart kids, you should give them an allowance to manage. No, wait. You should make them earn that money through chores. Wait, chores are part of being a family so you should only have them earn it through extra chores and not regular ones. Wait, no, there are kids as young as 5 picking cocoa beans somewhere out there so if Junior wants a new pack of Pokemon cards, he better get to work.
See what I mean? So many ways to get to the same outcome and yet we stress and debate and weigh our options as though one of those ways is the best (one clue, it isn't the last option I presented). Demand respect and your children will respect you. Wait, no, respect your children and they will respect you. Make them say I'm sorry so they'll learn humility. No, wait, model apologies and they'll learn sincerity. Wait, have them beat the crap out of each other and let the conch sort it out. Oops, sorry. Lord of the Flies moment.
Besides there not being one agreed upon and proven method to get from point A to point B, there are a few dangers of letting outcome based parenting take over. The major one is that it takes your child clear out of the equation. If you are respectful, gentle and kind, then your child will always behave respectfully, gently and kindly. Period. End of story. The child and the child's strengths, weaknesses, personality and own life experiences are meaningless for you ARE the perfect parent. That's pretty much the opposite of the outcome we want, isn't it? To render our children meaningless in our quest for perfection in our parenting would be missing the mark <--- understatement of the year.
Another danger is that we then take the "outcome" and turn it to judge the parenting. You know, I've been trying to find a way to say this but your child wouldn't hit if you were stricter/less demanding/gentler/more-like-me. You know who you are. Ok, you caught me. I was totally talking to myself on that one. Children who are energetic and not always aware of their surroundings are obviously parented incorrectly. They are wild, out of control, rude, pushy. Children who are calm and gentle and compliant are parented well. No matter what the parenting philosophy -- authoritarian or laissez-faire or somewhere in between -- these judgments are the same. The only difference is what "you" are doing wrong to cause the issue in the eyes of the outcome based parent watching you.
Another danger is that we take the "outcome" and turn it to judge ourselves. We usually call it "mommy guilt." I did it when Xander first presented his delays. I clearly didn't talk to him enough, engage him enough, read to him enough, etc. At the time I didn't know it but I was presuming that I had some type of control over autism. I was assuming I had control over his brain. How about Dennis for a more universal parenting dilemma. He wouldn't ever talk back if I modeled proper communication better. Or he wouldn't talk back if he knew I was boss. Those are all judgments I could turn on myself when the fact is he wouldn't talk back if he wasn't 10. Dear heavens, give me the strength to make it through his teen years. Some days I just wish he'd start his period and get it over with. But I digress.
This isn't to say that when our children talk back we should say, "oh, well. He's just being himself." Or that when our child has delays that we shouldn't seek therapies. Or that when we screw up as a parent that we just chalk it up to our child's personality. There are learning moments and times for reflection and an opportunity to correct our course if things don't seem to be working. Those are all very important and where outcomes actually do help us.
But my real point (I swear I have one) is that when we see children fall short of our lofty ideals, we need to take a step back and see the whole picture. We need to be kinder in our evaluations of other parents. We need to be kinder to ourselves. We need to own what is ours to own and ignore the judgments of others and, yes, of ourselves. We need to just list all the ways our parents screwed up with us, realize that we still turned out pretty awesome and start enjoying parenting again.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
The Well Beaten Path
We like to travel. A lot. With 4 kids, it's generally too expensive to fly everywhere we want to go so we road trip. My husband and I missed our callings as long haul truckers. This year, we've traveled to Tulsa (we have family there), Omaha, New Orleans, St. Louis and Devil's Den State Park in Arkansas. I am committed to no more traveling for a few months because we need to save up for a big trip in February -- The Unschoolers Winter Waterpark Gathering so I can hear John Taylor Gatto speak and we can meet other autodidactic homeschoolers AND we can party at a waterpark for a week at awesome rates.
It's very popular to travel and even more popular to want to travel. And it is very trendy to look for out-of-the-way places and the "road less traveled." That's cool and all if that's your "thing" but, I've got to say, the road well traveled is pretty damn awesome.
We went to Denmark a year and a half ago. We went to Den Gamle By and Legoland Billund. When we went to DC, we walked the National Mall. In New Orleans, hold on to your hats, we ate lunch at Masperos, dessert at Cafe Du Monde and, if that wasn't enough, we also went to Jackson Square and saw the St. Louis Cathedral. In Omaha, we went to the zoo and in southern Connecticut we went to Silver Sands and the Peabody Museum of Natural History. And Chicago? Sears Tower. Upstate NY? Niagara. St Louis? The Arch. Memphis? Graceland.
On the horizon? Newport mansions, Statue of Liberty, Liberty Bell, Grand Canyon, Mt Rushmore, the Redwood Forests and every other tourist attraction you can find on this continent.
I like the well beaten path. It's well beaten for a reason. These things are worth seeing and experiencing. When Lars and I retire and decide to "travel" I suspect we will have seen enough of the well beaten path to be ready for some out-of-the way gems. We'll be watching PBS to find every kitschy artist along I-70. But for now, there are too many must-sees that we haven't seen yet.
It's very popular to travel and even more popular to want to travel. And it is very trendy to look for out-of-the-way places and the "road less traveled." That's cool and all if that's your "thing" but, I've got to say, the road well traveled is pretty damn awesome.
We went to Denmark a year and a half ago. We went to Den Gamle By and Legoland Billund. When we went to DC, we walked the National Mall. In New Orleans, hold on to your hats, we ate lunch at Masperos, dessert at Cafe Du Monde and, if that wasn't enough, we also went to Jackson Square and saw the St. Louis Cathedral. In Omaha, we went to the zoo and in southern Connecticut we went to Silver Sands and the Peabody Museum of Natural History. And Chicago? Sears Tower. Upstate NY? Niagara. St Louis? The Arch. Memphis? Graceland.
On the horizon? Newport mansions, Statue of Liberty, Liberty Bell, Grand Canyon, Mt Rushmore, the Redwood Forests and every other tourist attraction you can find on this continent.
I like the well beaten path. It's well beaten for a reason. These things are worth seeing and experiencing. When Lars and I retire and decide to "travel" I suspect we will have seen enough of the well beaten path to be ready for some out-of-the way gems. We'll be watching PBS to find every kitschy artist along I-70. But for now, there are too many must-sees that we haven't seen yet.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Obama wha?
Like most people, I was surprised and even confused by the Nobel Peace Prize going to Barack Obama. Then I exercised a few brain cells, googled Alfred Nobel and the Nobel Peace Prize and realized that my surprise and confusion was based on the simple fact that I had no real idea of the concept of the Nobel Peace Prize.
This isn't the People's Choice Awards. This award is decided by a committee based on Alfred Nobel's vision of what a peace award should focus on. What you or I think the award criteria should be means abso-freaking-lutely nothing. It is what it is and you have to judge it in that light.
Most of the criticism I have heard is that Obama hasn't actually accomplished anything. That's a fair point. I mean, Tibet is free and all. Wait, what? It isn't? Oh, well at least we have peace in the Middle East. And impoverished single women are now able to find respectable work easily in their patriarchal societies. And climate change, if not reversed, has surely slowed. Huh? What was that you said? NONE of that has been accomplished? Surely, you must be joking since people have won the Nobel Peace Prize for all of these things.
Turns out the Nobel Peace Prize isn't for accomplishments. Who knew? Well, other than people who know about the Nobel Peace Prize. It's for efforts towards peace. Things like, say, closing Guantanamo Bay, ending torture-as-interrogation, pushing for diplomacy before weapons, fighting the cycle of poverty through education and health care and appointing special advisers to come up with an exit plan from Iraq. Stuff like that.
And it isn't as though he nominated himself. He was nominated and then judged by the criteria of the Nobel Peace Prize committee -- meaning it isn't about what he has done but more what he is doing.
So c'mon, people. Quit going all Kanye West on Obama's moment.
This isn't the People's Choice Awards. This award is decided by a committee based on Alfred Nobel's vision of what a peace award should focus on. What you or I think the award criteria should be means abso-freaking-lutely nothing. It is what it is and you have to judge it in that light.
Most of the criticism I have heard is that Obama hasn't actually accomplished anything. That's a fair point. I mean, Tibet is free and all. Wait, what? It isn't? Oh, well at least we have peace in the Middle East. And impoverished single women are now able to find respectable work easily in their patriarchal societies. And climate change, if not reversed, has surely slowed. Huh? What was that you said? NONE of that has been accomplished? Surely, you must be joking since people have won the Nobel Peace Prize for all of these things.
Turns out the Nobel Peace Prize isn't for accomplishments. Who knew? Well, other than people who know about the Nobel Peace Prize. It's for efforts towards peace. Things like, say, closing Guantanamo Bay, ending torture-as-interrogation, pushing for diplomacy before weapons, fighting the cycle of poverty through education and health care and appointing special advisers to come up with an exit plan from Iraq. Stuff like that.
And it isn't as though he nominated himself. He was nominated and then judged by the criteria of the Nobel Peace Prize committee -- meaning it isn't about what he has done but more what he is doing.
So c'mon, people. Quit going all Kanye West on Obama's moment.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
I am my own worst critic
I'm not my worst critic. Not by a mile. I actually think I do well with parenting and homeschooling. I may not do everything right and I may not have all the answers, but no one does so as long as I do the best I can with what I have, I'm doing just fine.
Honestly, I think my worst critics are other parents.
So, I have come to the conclusion that I have self-confidence with a twist of a persecution complex.
And that is my random thought of the day.
Honestly, I think my worst critics are other parents.
So, I have come to the conclusion that I have self-confidence with a twist of a persecution complex.
And that is my random thought of the day.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Must write down so I don't forget
The kids love the story Tiki Tiki Tembo. Eli just told me he wants to listen to it before bed. Eden called out, "Yay! I yuv Titty Titty Bimbo!"
Indeed.
Indeed.
The finest edumacation is at home
Today we finished up reading Feather and Fur, What Makes Cats Purr. One of the kids randomly grabbed it off a library shelf and we've had some fun reading and discussing the different bits of information. Anyway, today we had the following conversation:
Me: Do you remember what a 'herbivore' is?
Dennis: Yes! A vegetarian. And carnivores are meatatarians and animals that eat both are omnisauruses!
Me: ...
Now that's some fancy book learnin' for ya.
Off topic sidenote: Eden wanted to watch a movie on this rainy day and she chose Murder By Death. I love that girl.
Me: Do you remember what a 'herbivore' is?
Dennis: Yes! A vegetarian. And carnivores are meatatarians and animals that eat both are omnisauruses!
Me: ...
Now that's some fancy book learnin' for ya.
Off topic sidenote: Eden wanted to watch a movie on this rainy day and she chose Murder By Death. I love that girl.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
