If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Bipolar or just undisciplined?
"Stephanie" wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... On Nov 2, 5:54 am, enigma wrote: snip For those who wonder why I harp on him, it's because he's more liberal than some would believe. Examples: He's said more than once that Dr. Spock got an bad rap, because Spock said "trust your instincts" and not "trust your stupid instincts." Therefore, it was unfair to blame bad or wimpy parenting on Spock. Also, in 2000, Rosemond made Dr. Laura furious when he told the mother of a four-year-old to stop her son from complaining about Mom's working outside the home and his being in an after-school program, unlike the other neighborhood kids. (Rosemond feels 3 is quite old enough for kids to start catering to parents.) "Catering to?" I wonder if you meant that particular phrase? He added that even if she WERE a stay-at-home mom, the boy should revolve around her, not the other way around. (Not exactly in line with Dr. Laura's mantra "I am my kid's mom"!) Thats' horrible! Not to say that Mom should "cater to" a child, but I definitely don't think that that means a child should "cater to" or "revolve around" a Mom. I think the needs and wants of both people need to be addressed. And in that way you teach a child how to address the needs and wants of another human, by seeing your needs met and by contributing to someone else's needs being met. Give and take. Teamwork. Yadda yadda. I'm sorry, but I disagree. Not that the child should 'revolve around' or cater to the mom, but that mom's need to take their own comfort and needs more seriously and not always put what they want last. It's not good for a child to get everything that they want, or to have grown-ups jump to their cries all the time. Whether 3 is a good time to start this or not might be up for discussion. It isn't necessary to let a child CIO or something like that so that the mom doesn't have to get out of bed, but the give and take thing probably works better in print than in reality. In short, he reminds me of the old-fashioned liberal parents who didn't divide chores by gender or act shocked when their kids say they don't plan to go to college or have children (he's cool with all of the above) but at the same time, never allowed their kids to address parents or adults by first names without permission, yell at parents, or wear white shoes after Labor Day. Though he'd never call himself a liberal. Thank God! Because he sure has never seemed so to me. Is that liberal? Because that's the way my parents were, and I tried to follow in their footsteps as much as possible. Except maybe for the white shoes after Labor Day. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Bipolar or just undisciplined?
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Bipolar or just undisciplined?
"Rosalie B." wrote in message ... "Stephanie" wrote: wrote in message roups.com... On Nov 2, 5:54 am, enigma wrote: snip For those who wonder why I harp on him, it's because he's more liberal than some would believe. Examples: He's said more than once that Dr. Spock got an bad rap, because Spock said "trust your instincts" and not "trust your stupid instincts." Therefore, it was unfair to blame bad or wimpy parenting on Spock. Also, in 2000, Rosemond made Dr. Laura furious when he told the mother of a four-year-old to stop her son from complaining about Mom's working outside the home and his being in an after-school program, unlike the other neighborhood kids. (Rosemond feels 3 is quite old enough for kids to start catering to parents.) "Catering to?" I wonder if you meant that particular phrase? He added that even if she WERE a stay-at-home mom, the boy should revolve around her, not the other way around. (Not exactly in line with Dr. Laura's mantra "I am my kid's mom"!) Thats' horrible! Not to say that Mom should "cater to" a child, but I definitely don't think that that means a child should "cater to" or "revolve around" a Mom. I think the needs and wants of both people need to be addressed. And in that way you teach a child how to address the needs and wants of another human, by seeing your needs met and by contributing to someone else's needs being met. Give and take. Teamwork. Yadda yadda. I'm sorry, but I disagree. Not that the child should 'revolve around' or cater to the mom, but that mom's need to take their own comfort and needs more seriously and not always put what they want last. I agree completely. But nor should they put the child's needs last as the tenor of cater to implies. It's not good for a child to get everything that they want, or to have grown-ups jump to their cries all the time. Whether 3 is a good time to start this or not might be up for discussion. It isn't necessary to let a child CIO or something like that so that the mom doesn't have to get out of bed, but the give and take thing probably works better in print than in reality. In short, he reminds me of the old-fashioned liberal parents who didn't divide chores by gender or act shocked when their kids say they don't plan to go to college or have children (he's cool with all of the above) but at the same time, never allowed their kids to address parents or adults by first names without permission, yell at parents, or wear white shoes after Labor Day. Though he'd never call himself a liberal. Thank God! Because he sure has never seemed so to me. Is that liberal? Because that's the way my parents were, and I tried to follow in their footsteps as much as possible. Except maybe for the white shoes after Labor Day. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Bipolar or just undisciplined?
On Nov 2, 5:23 pm, Rosalie B. wrote:
He added that even if she WERE a stay-at-home mom, the boy should revolve around her, not the other way around. (Not exactly in line with Dr. Laura's mantra "I am my kid's mom"!) Thats' horrible! Not to say that Mom should "cater to" a child, but I definitely don't think that that means a child should "cater to" or "revolve around" a Mom. I think the needs and wants of both people need to be addressed. And in that way you teach a child how to address the needs and wants of another human, by seeing your needs met and by contributing to someone else's needs being met. Give and take. Teamwork. Yadda yadda. I'm sorry, but I disagree. Not that the child should 'revolve around' or cater to the mom, but that mom's need to take their own comfort and needs more seriously and not always put what they want last. It's not good for a child to get everything that they want, or to have grown-ups jump to their cries all the time. Whether 3 is a good time to start this or not might be up for discussion. Thanks for that. As he once said, "the modern woman wouldn't dream of making her husband a sandwich on command, but she'll jump up and draw a glass of water for an able-bodied four-year-old." Here's a link to the letter that got DL so mad, if you like: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.o...e7658d415d0f0f Last paragraph: He needs to see that outside of your job, you are not a one- dimensional cardboard cut-out with a sign reading "What can I do for you?" hung about your neck. Rather you are an interesting person with a variety of interests and responsibilities, of which he is one. An important one, yes, but not the only one. It isn't necessary to let a child CIO or something like that so that the mom doesn't have to get out of bed, but the give and take thing probably works better in print than in reality. Mainly because adults and children should not think of each other as equals, of course. In short, he reminds me of the old-fashioned liberal parents who didn't divide chores by gender or act shocked when their kids say they don't plan to go to college or have children (he's cool with all of the above) but at the same time, never allowed their kids to address parents or adults by first names without permission, yell at parents, or wear white shoes after Labor Day. Though he'd never call himself a liberal. Thank God! Because he sure has never seemed so to me. Is that liberal? Because that's the way my parents were, and I tried to follow in their footsteps as much as possible. I should have said simply "old-fashioned liberals." A breed you don't see much anymore, I guess. Anyway, my mother was like that too, and she's as politically left-wing as they get, but obviously she was never a hippie. (She can't even stand to see a white SHIRT after Labor Day.) Another way in which Rosemond may be too liberal for some is that he once said that if a 12-year-old doesn't want to work at a summer job, that doesn't mean he's lazy or going to be good for nothing. I'm guessing he said that simply because so many kids that age these days DON'T work in the summer. Lenona. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Bipolar or just undisciplined?
And you conveniently left out all the areas in which I disagree with
him, such as on religion and his refusal to talk about the need for kids to learn how to stand up to bullying teachers and other adults. Yes, he can be smug, but he's not a hothead like so many conservatives. He's also pretty polite, as this article demonstrates (it's about getting kids to eat what they're served without complaint): http://www.azcentral.com/families/ar...nting0222.html And I admit, from reading it, that I didn't use the word "cater" in my post in the sense that it should be used. Lenona. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Bipolar or just undisciplined?
Another way in which Rosemond may be too liberal for some is that he
once said that if a 12-year-old doesn't want to work at a summer job, that doesn't mean he's lazy or going to be good for nothing. I'm guessing he said that simply because so many kids that age these days DON'T work in the summer. Lenona. I'm 54, and when I was 12 almost none of my peers had summer jobs, unless you mean the odd job babysitting or mowing a lawn. Who the heck was going to hire a 12-year-old? Well, now that you mention it, my husband (in Ohio) did farm labor at that age, for $1/hour (for someone other than his parents - they didn't pay him.) Clisby Well, I think in the case I mentioned the boy was being asked to work for the family business, but I can't be sure and I can't look it up. However, DR did say that if the boy wants more money than his current allowance, he should be told to work for it. Lenona. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Bipolar or just undisciplined?
wrote in message oups.com... On Nov 2, 5:23 pm, Rosalie B. wrote: He added that even if she WERE a stay-at-home mom, the boy should revolve around her, not the other way around. (Not exactly in line with Dr. Laura's mantra "I am my kid's mom"!) Thats' horrible! Not to say that Mom should "cater to" a child, but I definitely don't think that that means a child should "cater to" or "revolve around" a Mom. I think the needs and wants of both people need to be addressed. And in that way you teach a child how to address the needs and wants of another human, by seeing your needs met and by contributing to someone else's needs being met. Give and take. Teamwork. Yadda yadda. I'm sorry, but I disagree. Not that the child should 'revolve around' or cater to the mom, but that mom's need to take their own comfort and needs more seriously and not always put what they want last. It's not good for a child to get everything that they want, or to have grown-ups jump to their cries all the time. Whether 3 is a good time to start this or not might be up for discussion. Thanks for that. As he once said, "the modern woman wouldn't dream of making her husband a sandwich on command, but she'll jump up and draw a glass of water for an able-bodied four-year-old." Why would a modern or any other man COMMAND?!? I certainly will hop up an dget a beverage for my love on request. Actually just delivered him his favorite beverage to him while he puts the stove pipe up. But if he were to command me, he could kiss my lilly white butt cheeks! Here's a link to the letter that got DL so mad, if you like: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.o...e7658d415d0f0f Last paragraph: He needs to see that outside of your job, you are not a one- dimensional cardboard cut-out with a sign reading "What can I do for you?" hung about your neck. Rather you are an interesting person with a variety of interests and responsibilities, of which he is one. An important one, yes, but not the only one. It isn't necessary to let a child CIO or something like that so that the mom doesn't have to get out of bed, but the give and take thing probably works better in print than in reality. Mainly because adults and children should not think of each other as equals, of course. In some respects they *are* equal. They are certainly not equal in their judgement, experience and ability. They are not the same in their responsibility. But they are equal in their human dignity. I worry that the conversation has to be framed in a manner of to whom the "catering" is done. It seems to me that no one is to be catered to. I owe my children an upbringing, education, discipline. I give them from my heart love, caring, kisses all better. They give me love, kisses all better, love, limit testing and the things that are *their* responsibility. But no one caters to anyone else. In short, he reminds me of the old-fashioned liberal parents who didn't divide chores by gender or act shocked when their kids say they don't plan to go to college or have children (he's cool with all of the above) but at the same time, never allowed their kids to address parents or adults by first names without permission, yell at parents, or wear white shoes after Labor Day. Though he'd never call himself a liberal. Thank God! Because he sure has never seemed so to me. Is that liberal? Because that's the way my parents were, and I tried to follow in their footsteps as much as possible. I should have said simply "old-fashioned liberals." A breed you don't see much anymore, I guess. Anyway, my mother was like that too, and she's as politically left-wing as they get, but obviously she was never a hippie. (She can't even stand to see a white SHIRT after Labor Day.) Another way in which Rosemond may be too liberal for some is that he once said that if a 12-year-old doesn't want to work at a summer job, that doesn't mean he's lazy or going to be good for nothing. I'm guessing he said that simply because so many kids that age these days DON'T work in the summer. Lenona. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Bipolar or just undisciplined?
wrote:
He's also pretty polite, as this article demonstrates (it's about getting kids to eat what they're served without complaint): http://www.azcentral.com/families/ar...nting0222.html I agree that children need to learn not to *complain* about food that's been made for them - there are politer and more pleasant ways of expressing a desire to eat something else. But this just sounds like a power struggle. Sure, if you leave a child hungry until he takes a token bite of green bean, he *might* find out that green beans don't taste as bad as he thought. Or maybe he'll find out that they taste just as bad. Or worse. One thing he'll definitely find out is that his parents aren't interested in his opinions on what he eats, but just want to force him to do things their way. And, while I completely agree that children are much better off for learning manners that will allow them to eat in the homes of others without upsetting those others or embarrassing themselves, I think it's every bit as important for children to learn consideration for others - and that's something they learn largely by example. Would you serve something to your husband that you know he hates, and then insist that he eats it? If not, why would you treat your child that way? I don't think parents should be expected to be short-order cooks catering to everyone's whims, but there's a middle ground. I think it perfectly reasonable to make sure everyone gets something for dinner that they don't dislike, and to allow anyone *not* to eat those items on the table that they don't like. All the best, Sarah -- http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com "That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be" - P. C. Hodgell |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bipolar drug Lamictal tied to birth defects when used by expectant mothers | Ilena Rose | Kids Health | 0 | October 3rd 06 04:44 AM |
Bipolar Disorder | [email protected] | Kids Health | 1 | December 14th 05 09:39 PM |
Migraine after childbirth (also: Altered taste and an epilepsy/bipolar/migraine/obesity drug) | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | July 10th 03 12:31 AM |