(2) Oregon Shootings & God: Supplement
no...@juno.com
(copy)
Editor
Letters
THE POST-CRESCENT
PCN...@Athenet.Net
INFORMATIONAL SUPPLEMENT TO LETTER OF MAY 24, 1998.
A LEAFLET OBVIOUSLY AUTHORED BY A PRECOCIOUS ADOLESCENT
WHO IS ENGAGED IN THE "CHILDREN'S LIBERATION MOVEMENT,"
A MOVEMENT DESIGNED TO LIBERATE CHILDREN FROM THE AUTHORITY
OF THEIR PARENTS.
-----------------------------
Kids!
Call 911!
If your parent or guardian ever so much as dares lay a hand on you or even
yell at you to the point of distressing you, that's child abuse under
Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 948, Crimes against Children.
Just call 911, cry "abuse," and the Law will make your parent grovel for
trying to discipline you and give you direction. It's the Law in Wisconsin!
Kids, you're in charge thanks to the ...
Wisconsin State Legislature.
-----------------------------
Kids, Know Your Rights!
The Wisconsin State Legislature says no adult, including your parents, can
lay a hand on you to make you do anything or restrain you, if you don't want
them to. (Cops are the only exception.)
No matter what dumb, ugly, vicious thing you do, if an adult retaliates
causing you any physical or mental pain, you're a victim of abuse! You need
protection and your friendly and sympathetic Wisconsin legislature provides
it!
Read inside for the full, fun story of how the Law enables you to get the
upper hand over any adult if you're under 18.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------- * * * Kids, you no longer have to obey your parents
or fear any adult. Wisconsin Law in Chapter 948, Crimes Against Children,
says that if an adult strikes you ("Bodily Harm," 939.22(4)) or otherwise
forces his/her will on you to the point where you're angry or unhappy about
it ("Mental Harm," 948.01(2)), that adult is guilty of a Class D felony. Your
parent has to pay lawyers to defend against a fine of up to $10,000 and
imprisonment not to exceed 5 years for child abuse.
If you tell a cop, a teacher, or a social worker that your mom, dad, or
babysitter has abused you by striking you, yelling at you or even by shoving
or pulling you in some direction against your will, the cop, the teacher,
the social worker has to report this under section 948.03(4)(b) of Wisconsin
Statutes. The police and District Attorney must then haul your parents into
court and charge them with a felony. If they don't do this, the law says
they themselves must be charged with a Class D felony.
If your parents strike you on the butt, they have struck an "intimate part"
and can be charged with sexual abuse, especially if you're a girl and your
dad strikes your butt. Wisconsin Law really makes it illegal for your
parents to force you to do anything you don't want to do. And if they kick
you out, they can be charged with abandoning, neglecting, or failing to
support you under Chapter 948.20-23, Crimes Against Children.
So if you want to tell your parents to buzz off and be free to do whatever
you want without getting any static, getting hit, or getting thrown out,
call the cops or your county Department of Social Services (numbers in
government section of phone book). Tell them, sobbing if possible, that you
are the victim of child abuse. They believe children are pure and never lie
and will probably jump on your parents with glee (that's their tax-supported
job), but if they don't, tell them that you are going to make your complaint
to the District Attorney of the County and that they are committing a felony
under Wisconsin Statutes, 943.03(4)(b) by not taking action to defend you
against your parents. That ought to get your parents punished for trying to
impose their wills on you.
If the Local County D.A. refuses to act, contact the State of Wisconsin
Office of Child Abuse and Neglect at (608) 266-3036 or the Attorney General
of the State of Wisconsin at (608) 266-1221. In the unlikely case that these
calls don't cause the authorities to charge your parents with child abuse,
call the Child Abuse Prevention Exchange Center in Madison at (608)
241-3434. They all get federal and state tax dollars to combat child abuse
and are likely to know further steps that can be taken to make sure that
your parents will never again use any sort of force to make you do anything
you don't want to do. You just don't have to obey your parents at all if you
don't want to! Wisconsin State Law makes your parents helpless to discipline
you. If they try to confine you, break out. If they tell you you can't have
something, take it anyway. Your parents cannot lay a hand on you or even
shout enough to make you upset without committing a felony under Wisconsin
Statutes.
In fact, you don't have to fear any adult. Imagine this. It's mid-winter,
below zero, and the wind is blowing like hell. The cops are busy with
fender- benders, and you decide you are going to break all of the windows in
the house of someone you don't like. If he or a parent comes out and
physically tries to keep you from destroying those windows against your
will, he's guilty of child abuse. He's got to wait until a cop is available
to stop you! No one, except a cop, can lay a hand on you!!! You're always a
defenseless victim in the eyes of the Wisconsin State Legislature and Wis.
Statute 948.
End
Robert E. Nordlander
no...@juno.com
333 Lopas Street
Menasha, WI 54952
Telephone: 920 725 1864
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Posted by Robert E. Nordlander no...@juno.com, no...@aol.com
To: alt.parenting.solutions, alt.support.step-parents,
alt.support.single-parents, wi.general
May 25, 1998
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
S. Murray
(snip)
You know, the really sickening thing about this post is that it just about
reality! You cant yell at your kids or swat them on the butt or even look
at them cross-eyed without someone, even the children themselves calling
Child Protective Services.
When I was growing up (I'm 29) I had the utmost respect for my elders,
especially my mother because I knew that if I back-talked, or did something
that I wasn't supposed to do, I would get the sh*t knocked out of me. In
fact, I can safely say that I probably still would. Call it fear if you
will, but it is my FIRM OPINION that if a few more parents would take an
interest in disciplining their children, and a few more people would just
worry about raising their own children and stop worrying about how others
are raising theirs, things would go alot smoother.
Shannon
Rodney J Schey
I'm just "praying" after all that has happened with kids that someone
says hey...maybe its time we revert to the old ways of discipline.
My dad use to "talk" about the belt...never saw it and never wanted to
and I think I turned out pretty normal.
P
Rodney J Schey
no...@juno.com wrote:
>
> (copy)
>
> Editor
> Letters
> THE POST-CRESCENT
> PCN...@Athenet.Net
>
> INFORMATIONAL SUPPLEMENT TO LETTER OF MAY 24, 1998.
>
> A LEAFLET OBVIOUSLY AUTHORED BY A PRECOCIOUS ADOLESCENT
> WHO IS ENGAGED IN THE "CHILDREN'S LIBERATION MOVEMENT,"
> A MOVEMENT DESIGNED TO LIBERATE CHILDREN FROM THE AUTHORITY
> OF THEIR PARENTS.
>
her?
I think this becomes ajudgement call by the cop or whomever gets called
after all. We reported things to the department of child welfare, etc.
and yes they knew of physical fights between her and her mother but
they didn't arrest or charge the mother with anything.
In regard to this letter if any kid really pulled this I think they'd be
having a CHIPS petition signed by the parents because no way would
anyone
allow this to happen!!
P
sco...@my-dejanews.com
In article <3569c...@news.softcom.net>,
Shannon,
Sorry but I do worry about how other people are raising their children.
I put a great deal of time into raising my kids. I value them, their
ideas, thoughts, and feelings. I believe my job is to teach my children
how to behave and act properly, not beat them into submission. As hard
as I work to love and respect my children there is always the possibility
that someday my children will run into the other side of the coin. The
child who has been neglected and abused. We all know what an angry
resentful child can do. That is why it is mine and every other parents
business how others are raising their children. We as adults all have
the resposnibility to protect children.
By the way, my parents *disciplined* a lot like yours. I'm a few years
older than you and although I recognize their methods were the only way
they knew I am still some what resentful.
Kse63
Scout Wrote:
<<Sorry but I do worry about how other people are raising their children.
I put a great deal of time into raising my kids. I value them, their
ideas, thoughts, and feelings. I believe my job is to teach my children
how to behave and act properly, not beat them into submission. >>
Very well put!!
<<By the way, my parents *disciplined* a lot like yours. I'm a few years
older than you and although I recognize their methods were the only way
they knew I am still some what resentful.>>
My mother was to be "feared" when we were growing up. I learned nothing from
this except that I never wanted my kids to obey me out of fear, but out of
respect. I want them to do the right thing because they choose to, and because
they know the consequences if they don't (which is not beating the living crap
out of them).
The shootings this past year are disturbing, but not out of the ordinary by any
means. It's been happening in the inner city for years. The only reason people
are enraged today is because it seems to be happening to "regular people". What
are those single parents in the inner city?? Irregular people? no - BUT because
they're society's outcasts due to financial status...it's ok? Nope.....it's
always bothered me to see situations where you have a dozen or so schools,
placed around the "city" (using Toledo, OH as a rough example) - they have
little funding, little tax base, etc...and as a result, those kids don't have
the same tools my kids, living in the suburbs (and going to private school when
we lived there) had. Obviously, if you pay for private school, you expect
more...but not in the public system itself.
Where we fail kids is at the base line. WHY should one school have NO computers
at all - not even the office - and the school 10 miles down the road have 50?
WHY should one school have textbooks from 1969 and another have three sets of
8th grade science books alone? When someone can give me a GOOD reason for
this....then I think we can talk. It's got nothing to do with G*d.....
As for the parental role.....there are always parents who are neglecting their
kids. Those kids are then social outcasts in school. The other kids know...it's
sad. Sooo do you allow your child to come home day after day and talk about how
he and his friends didn't let Billy play because he wasn't wearing Nikes, or do
you ask your child to imagine being Billy and encourage him to let the child
play? We all know *who* those kids are....why do we allow our children to treat
them as the rest of society sees them? It's perpetuating a bad thing....
My 5 year old asked me the other day if she would "turn brown" when she grew
up. She doesn't know terms like "negro" or "african american" she only sees the
skin color as difference. She calls people of color (any ethnic group) "brown
people". She sees them as equals to her...and is just curious about why they
look different. I told her that no, she wouldn't turn "brown" but would remain
the same, and explained to her, with eggs, that the difference was on the
surface only (use brown eggs and white - show them from the outside, then crack
them.....same thing inside). ONLY when we can teach our kids to view ALL other
kids (poor, rich, Indian, Native American, African American, Asian, etc) as
equals, we will have *started* to fight the fight.
Now that I'm off my soapbox about that...let me say that I don't think peer
pressure, G*d, etc had anything to do with that child in Oregon going off. I
think he was troubled. I think his signs were being ignored...and his behavior
- was not seen as an alarm, but as something that only needed punishment. This
kid needed help - psyciatric help. His parents HAD disciplined him for some
behavior or another - he'd been grounded for the summer for something or
another. The problem was that they didn't seek the answers to explain his
far-reaching outbursts. If one of my kids started threatening people with guns,
I'd begin to wonder why in a big hurry! I'd get that kid any kind of help I
could and I wouldn't stop at grounding, or church!
K
"Never above you. Never below you. Always beside you."
---Walter Winchell
scout
From: Rodney J Schey <roa...@execpc.com>
Lucky you. My dad also threatened to use his belt. The only problem was he
did follow through quite often.
I am sickened by all the posts singing the praises of *good old fashioned
discipline.*
I can't believe anyone would think the way to help a child in trouble and in
conflict with his parents would be to impose harsher treatment.
Scout
Mary Jo Sterns
Or maybe its time we realized the importance of building self esteem in our
children. Maybe its time we started to have more respect for our children
and how we treat them.
Maybe we should talk to our kids about more than the belt.
MJ
Rodney J Schey <roa...@execpc.com> wrote in article
<6kfack$d...@newsops.execpc.com>...
Angelk40
>I'm just "praying" after all that has happened with kids that someone
>says hey...maybe its time we revert to the old ways of discipline.
>
>My dad use to "talk" about the belt...never saw it and never wanted to
>and I think I turned out pretty normal.
If the "old ways of discipline" work so well, then why do such
organziations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and
such notables as Dr. T. Berry Brazelton and Dr. Penelope Leach
constantly, vocally and loudly speak out against corporal punishment
and children?
Again, spanking is not discipline...it is punishment. Discipline is
the act of teaching or training so that one has the discernment in
order to avoid a situation that would require punishment as the
consequence.
Besides, what proof is there that any of the kids involved in some
of the tragic actions of this past year involving shooting sprees in
schools we not spanked at all as young children? Usually they are
ascribed to Satanic cults, mental illness signs that were ignored
and such things.
karla
Mom to James (8) and Micah (6)
"He's gonna read you the riot act...I all ready read it myself and didn't
like it. I found it was wordy and poorly written." George Carlin
Bill
> I'm just "praying" after all that has happened with kids that someone
> says hey...maybe its time we revert to the old ways of discipline.
>
> My dad use to "talk" about the belt...never saw it and never wanted to
> and I think I turned out pretty normal.
>
> P
There isn't much to revert to. 90% of American parents still spank. In
the South and in rural areas, fairly severe corporal punishment is still
quite acceptable. The fact is that we know very little about the family
lives and discipline histories of the boys in question.
One has to start with the idea that a decline in spanking is at the root
of our society's ills in order to be able to jump to the conclusion that
the boys in question weren't hit by their parents.
As for your Dad, my Mom not only talked about "the belt"; she actually
used it once in a while. I don't resent what she did, but I don't think
it had much to do with the way I turned out. My successes in life come
from the positive support and affirmation she gave me, and the way she set
positive limits and enforced them. All parents could do that without
hitting or threatening to hit.
Bill
janelaw
oh please. this leaflet was obviously authored by you
janelaw
S. Murray wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
>
> When I was growing up (I'm 29) I had the utmost respect for my elders,
> especially my mother because I knew that if I back-talked, or did something
> that I wasn't supposed to do, I would get the sh*t knocked out of me.
if this is the basis of your respect for your mother, i pity you
both
janelaw
I couldn't agree more.
Mary Jo Sterns wrote:
>
> Or maybe its time we realized the importance of building self esteem in our
> children. Maybe its time we started to have more respect for our children
> and how we treat them.
> Maybe we should talk to our kids about more than the belt.
> MJ
>
> Rodney J Schey <roa...@execpc.com> wrote in article
> <6kfack$d...@newsops.execpc.com>...
Rodney J Schey
> Keep in mind that the vast majority of kids turn out "normal."
> After all, that's part of the meaning of the word. Anecdotal
> evidence as to who did and didn't use the belt or "good
> old-fashioned discipline" doesn't really tell us much.
>
> One thing we do know is that child abusers tend to produce child
> abusers. Another thing we know is that a greater percentage of
> the prison population had been spanked as youngsters than had the
> general population.
>
> None of this proves much.
>
> But one thing for sure, if guns weren't available, guns couldn't
> be used for these shootings.
>
> Don
Guns aren't the only thing used...how about knives and the ability to
build a bomb through the internet? From the reports I have heard on
this case this kids parents had him in counseling and were trying to get
things together...what happened? Were they living in fear or were they
trying to prevent what happened. I don't think their logic of buying him
a gun was to wise but....we'll never know why they did. What really
scares me is that these kids involved in this violence seem to be having
trouble dealing with changes, rejection or some other event that happens
throughout life. Maybe we need classes in dealing with these issues and
maybe show what everyone in the past has gone through.
People also need to pay attention to what their kids are watching, doing
and saying. We have also become a society of placing the blame on
eveyone else and not taking any of it ourselves. Maybe if everyone was
more accountable for their actions some of this stuff wouldn't be
happening.
So lets see who or what do we blame this all on? After all it can't be
us...it must be the water.
P
Susan Cohen
no...@juno.com wrote:
a lot of alarmist stuff, snipped
Geez, you're just *everywhere* aren't you? Confirms my suspicion that you're paid
to do this stuff.
You people should see the lovely things he sends to soc.culture.jewish. <sarcasm>
Susan Cohen
Angelk40
>You people should see the lovely things he sends to soc.culture.jewish.
><sarcasm>
That's where I saw the name before!!!! OK...it wasn't me.
I feel so much better now. (I stopped reading soc.culture.jewish
because flame wars here look like friendly exchanges compared
to some of the stuff that breaks out over there!)
Kse63
Don M Wrote:
>Societies where children are treated with respect generally turn
>out children who are respectful to adults. But even this isn't a
>sure thing. Some children have problems which cannot be solved
>with any particular kind of discipline or level of respectful
>treatment.
>
>
Unfortunately, you're right....and society lets these kids down. Because they
can't be "reasoned with" or "talked to" to "straighten them out" we give up,
rather than look at the root cause of their behavior.
>One thing for sure, if guns were not available, guns couldn't be
>used as weapons to kill.
You got it!!
Did you hear the one on the news yesterday about some State Senator or
Congressman (can't remember the state - southern state I believe) (I had to
give up The Today Show for Life With Louie) - anyway - this guy thinks that if
we arm teachers with guns, the students will be less inclined to bring guns to
school.
So what happens when a teacher has a rough day - principal got on her case for
reading Catcher In The Rye and she's had it. She pulls out her trusty kids&guns
deterrent and blows away the principal. NOW, you've got to arm the principals
so the teachers don't hurt them. BUT, Johnny didn't like it when the principal
yelled at him for using bad language, so Johnny's Dad calls and complains. Mr.
Principal blows away Dad. NOW, Dad and Mom have to have a gun so that they can
defend themselves against Mr. Principal....and so on and so on and so on......
Do you get the picture???? yeah - I thought it was ridiculous also!!
(shhh - don't tell the NRA)
Mary Jo Sterns
I have always been horrified by the "apparently" easy access to guns in
the States.
Is it really that easy? Is the "right to bear arms" really believed by the
majority?
Is it a State by State situation?
Living in Canada, it is different. I am curious as to how different.
Just this afternoon I met my daugther at school and hung out at the
playground for awhile. I watched a young child with a toy gun, pretend to
shoot his friends and walk up to his caregiver and pretend to shoot her in
the head.
The picture turned my stomach. Toy guns are the 1 thing (and anything with
Bart Simpson!) that I have never allowed. That included any friends or
relatives that came over... no gun stuff. People of course have laughed at
me and called me ridiculous. But gosh it makes me so uncomfortable to see
these children "swinging around their weapons".
Perhaps I am foolish.... but it is how I feel.
MJ
Kse63 <ks...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199805271857...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
Kse63
MJ Wrote:
>Just this afternoon I met my daugther at school and hung out at the
>playground for awhile. I watched a young child with a toy gun, pretend to
>shoot his friends and walk up to his caregiver and pretend to shoot her in
>the head.
We had neighbors at my old house who were from Iran. In fact, the man who owned
the house "smuggled" his sister, mother, brother-in-law, and nephew out of Iran
and brought them here. The little boy was around 3 - which was Ryan's age at
the time. This little boy crawled around in the grass all the time with a toy
rifle shooting at the sky. It made me want to cry - the fact that this was that
child's reality!! I wonder often what became of him.
>Toy guns are the 1 thing (and anything with
>Bart Simpson!) that I have never allowed. That included any friends or
>relatives that came over... no gun stuff.
ME too......we allowed squirt guns, of course....but even that is something I
wish they would make in a different shape!!
>People of course have laughed at
>me and called me ridiculous. But gosh it makes me so uncomfortable to see
>these children "swinging around their weapons".
>Perhaps I am foolish.... but it is how I feel.
Yeah - the "how can you NOT allow your boy to play with guns" mentality? Been
there done that......Of course, then there's the boy in Arkansas now sitting in
jail who sported his rifle in his two-year old pictres....talk about turn my
stomach!!
Terri
Don M. wrote:
> On Tue, 26 May 1998 17:03:43 -0700, Rodney J Schey
> <roa...@execpc.com> wrote:
>
> I had written:
> >> But one thing for sure, if guns weren't available, guns couldn't
> >> be used for these shootings.
> >>
> >> Don
>
> Rodney responds:
> >Guns aren't the only thing used...how about knives and the ability to
> >build a bomb through the internet?
>
> Right, guns aren't the only things, but guns sure make such
> violence as the lunchroom shootings one heck of a lot easier than
> knives or baseball bats do.
>
> >From the reports I have heard on
> >this case this kids parents had him in counseling and were trying to get
> >things together...what happened? Were they living in fear or were they
> >trying to prevent what happened. I don't think their logic of buying him
> >a gun was to wise but....we'll never know why they did. What really
> >scares me is that these kids involved in this violence seem to be having
> >trouble dealing with changes, rejection or some other event that happens
> >throughout life. Maybe we need classes in dealing with these issues and
> >maybe show what everyone in the past has gone through.
>
> There are some kids who are antisocial, period. No amount of
> attention, training, classes, or what-have-you will correct their
> antisocial behavior.
>
> >People also need to pay attention to what their kids are watching, doing
> >and saying. We have also become a society of placing the blame on
> >eveyone else and not taking any of it ourselves. Maybe if everyone was
> >more accountable for their actions some of this stuff wouldn't be
> >happening.
>
> Tragedies such as the school shootings get our attention. Nearly
> everyone hopes that there will be a solution, but the
> "maybe-if-we-do-this" solutions don't recognize that some kids
> are going to be antisocial regardless of what we do. And
> regardless of what we do with or for them, something needs to be
> done to protect others from these antisocial individuals.
>
> >So lets see who or what do we blame this all on? After all it can't be
> >us...it must be the water.
> >
> >P
>
> Instead of worrying about what and/or who is to blame, why not
> work on ways to effectively preclude most such tragedies? Sooner
> or later it may occur to a sufficient number of people that, in
> spite of our alleged right to bear arms as part of a militia,
> effective gun control would certainly reduce the number of deaths
> by gun.
>
Amen!!!
Terri
> Don
>
> To send me an e-mail, replace AT with the normal @ symbol:
> Don M. <jqr345ATusa.net>
Hamilton
In article <01bd8cb1$6003be40$ee95...@maryjos.carlson-marketing.ca>,
"Mary Jo Sterns" <mjst...@istar.ca> wrote:
> Kendra
> I do agree that there seems to be a lack of discipline with our kids. And
> yes it is the responsibility of the home. But I do beleive that it all
> relates to self esteem. Yes I hope that most schools are promoting self
> esteem. But how many of those kids were having their self esteem promoted
> the day they were born? I think thats when it must start.
> If we as parents , even while, our children are growing inside of us, we
> must respect them. The moment that child is born, he/or she is learning.
> They must learn they are worthy. I think as children are young we do not
> realize how much they learn from what we say , our body language etc.
> I think self-esteem is a huge problem with our kids.
> MJ
One of the sources of self esteem is competence and self control.
Bullies have lots of self esteem. [that is actually well documented
in research -- the old view that they struck at people out of
low self esteem turns out not to be true -- they are usually
aggressive kids who think well of themselves but who have little
to be proud of in the way of achievement - besides their physical
aggression]
One of the problems with parents and schools now is that they
think self esteem can be detached from achievement. People feel
good about themselves partly because they are proud of what'
they can do -- and there are many different areas to star --
Parents who want kids with high self esteem would do well to
find out what they do well and like to do and encourage that
so they can win praise for accomplishments. The hollow praise
soon is recognized by most kids as hollow praise. The 'everyone
gets a prize' mentality doesn't fool kids for long. Schools would
do well to make sure kids can read, etc etc as part of the
plan to raise esteem -- rather than take the view as is common
particularly in middle schools that 'anything you do is just
great' and ' all you can do is your best' which in some schools
literally translates into 'what ever low level of effort you
expend is fine with us' I actually know of a school that accepts
school work that is just the kids name on the top of the page
'if that is the best you can do.' Kids are systematically taught
in that school that low effort IS the best they can do.
Of course kids deserve the unconditional love of their parents
and schools should embrace diversity -- but that doesn't
divorce working hard and becoming competent as central to
self esteem. The fact that American kids are #1 in thinking
they are 'good at math' and way down the list in actually
doing it is indicative of the fact that our problem isn't lack
of self esteem, but lack of something to be proud about.
Kse63
angelb wrote:
<<Also, as a teacher, I think self-esteem is promoted every day at schools.
I don't think most of our kids lack self-esteem--they lack discipline. >>
I strongly disagree here. I have a position at the elementary school
(volunteer) where I come in contact with EVERY child (except the kindergarten).
I also work closely with the guidance counselor and principal.
Maybe at your school, most kids have self-esteem, but not here. I see LOTS of
kids with self-esteem issues, and the guidance counselor forms several groups
to target and work with these kids.
<<AND I don't think it is the
school's reponsibility to teach this and morals and values--BUT a vast
majority of parents choose not to teach this and who is left to do it but
schools (and tv, music, etc.)?>>
I think, unfortunately, it has to happen more and more at school because
parents are doing less and less. Our school started offering "Parenting Skills"
meetings where they are making an attempt to teach parents the skills THEY need
to help their kids in these areas. Unfortunately, when we become parents, we're
not given an instruction manual. There's no training that comes along to show
you how to help your child develop self esteem or self worth or self
confidence. NObody shows us how. Some of us were raised with those skills and
some weren't.
The principal at the elementary school read me a portion of an article she
wrote recently where she said (paraphrase) "Raising a child is the most
important thing we do in life - and there is NO training for it. We have to
take a test to drive. We have to go to college to be a 'professional' in the
work force. But to be a parent, there is nothing out there."
Mike Kohary
Hamilton wrote:
>
> One of the sources of self esteem is competence and self control.
> Bullies have lots of self esteem. [that is actually well documented
> in research -- the old view that they struck at people out of
> low self esteem turns out not to be true -- they are usually
> aggressive kids who think well of themselves but who have little
> to be proud of in the way of achievement - besides their physical
> aggression]
Confidence and self-esteem are different things, but many people lump
them into one category. You are correct in that bullies often have high
self-esteem (think highly of themselves, often in a self-superior way),
but they often lack confidence in their ability to do things.
(snip)
> Of course kids deserve the unconditional love of their parents
> and schools should embrace diversity -- but that doesn't
> divorce working hard and becoming competent as central to
> self esteem. The fact that American kids are #1 in thinking
> they are 'good at math' and way down the list in actually
> doing it is indicative of the fact that our problem isn't lack
> of self esteem, but lack of something to be proud about.
Excellent post; I think you make many good points. It is important to
not praise underacheivment, simply for the sake of "making the child
feel good". As you say, it is a hollow praise, and is soon recognized
as such. (On the other hand, it is also important not to push too
hard. The best way to do this is identifying what the child has natural
tendencies for, and then supporting those activities, since they should
have a high rate of success in those fields of interest). Your math
remark is right on the button, and very telling of the value of the
"feel-good" movement.
Mike
--
From Seattle, WA - Seahawks, cinema, science
and more at http://kohary.simplenet.com
---------------------------------------
Seahawks: http://kohary.simplenet.com/hawks.htm
Cinema: http://kohary.simplenet.com/movies.htm
Science: http://kohary.simplenet.com/science.htm
Mary Jo Sterns
You raise some interesting points. I have not read anything about bullies
actually having lots of self esteem.... can you give me an idea of
something to read about this?
Perhaps we have a confusion about Self Esteem and Self Confidence. I see
self esteem about your opinion of ones self. ie i am a good person or I am
a loser. I see Self confidence about being confident in that you can do
something. I am not explaining this very well... I hope some one can jump
in and clarify. So a bully, as an example, will be confident he can beat
some one up but could have a low opinion of himself. Does this make sense?
But Hamilton brings up a valid point. Where is the line with all the
positive reinforcement? WHen do you help a kid realize what his/hers
limitations are? Not everyone is a star. Yes we are proud of you, but dont
you think you could have pushed harder?
Are the schools willing to accept mediocrity and push kids thru the school
system? Feel good about yourself but recognize that you will always be a C
student.
I have a nephew who is not strong academically. But is a fabulous hockey
player. He also is so skilled with his hands... he can take apart anything
and put it back together... no manual required. And can probably find a
better way for it to work! I find that so amazing.. its a skill I do not
have.
Your comment about American Kids believing that they are # 1 in Math. Why
would they think that? It is sad to look at other countries levels and
realize that here in North America we do have an education problem.
Gosh we have just now started a whole other thread!
MJ
Hamilton wrote in article <>...
> One of the sources of self esteem is competence and self control.
> Bullies have lots of self esteem. [that is actually well documented
> in research -- the old view that they struck at people out of
> low self esteem turns out not to be true -- they are usually
> aggressive kids who think well of themselves but who have little
> to be proud of in the way of achievement - besides their physical
> aggression]
>
> One of the problems with parents and schools now is that they
> think self esteem can be detached from achievement. People feel
> good about themselves partly because they are proud of what'
> they can do -- and there are many different areas to star --
> Parents who want kids with high self esteem would do well to
> find out what they do well and like to do and encourage that
> so they can win praise for accomplishments. The hollow praise
> soon is recognized by most kids as hollow praise. The 'everyone
> gets a prize' mentality doesn't fool kids for long. Schools would
> do well to make sure kids can read, etc etc as part of the
> plan to raise esteem -- rather than take the view as is common
> particularly in middle schools that 'anything you do is just
> great' and ' all you can do is your best' which in some schools
> literally translates into 'what ever low level of effort you
> expend is fine with us' I actually know of a school that accepts
> school work that is just the kids name on the top of the page
> 'if that is the best you can do.' Kids are systematically taught
> in that school that low effort IS the best they can do.
>
Kse63
Mike Wrote:
<<ang...@netins.net wrote:
>
> How sad. Nothing succeeds like prayer. Two slogans to consider: "Pray
> first, plan later" (for advanced prayers) and "when all else fails, pray"
> (for beginners). Maybe if we all prayed together, some of societies
> problems could be solveable.
:) And those of us who are not religious, what should we do?
> Only something like 20% of kids have a
> strong religious background and the values they learn at home are often
> questionable.
I also object to this, as it implies the very famous myth that you must
be religious in order to be moral. Of course, this is not true - I have
known many "religious" people who are pathetically immoral, and many
non-religious people who are exceedingly moral (one of them, almost to a
fault).
All I mean is some friendly bantering, just to show there's another
side. I agree with your points about self-discipline, and the general
lack of morality in our society is at times appalling. However, ethical
values can be taught without religion, as well as with.>>
Mike, I agree.....my oldest two went to a catholic school (not so much because
of the religious value issue, but because the school district we lived in was
terrible). They had church once a week, and religion class every day.
My youngest two are attending public school. We aren't "religious" in that we
don't attend church every week. During the summer, the kids do the
"neighborhood bible study" thing - and they also have friends who are VERY
religiously centered - they learn about G*d and religion through that - which I
realize isn't much.
My point is that all 4 of my kids have the same value system - not because of
the presence of lack of religion, but because of the values my ex and I have
given them.
Kse63
MJ Wrote:
<<You raise some interesting points. I have not read anything about bullies
actually having lots of self esteem.... can you give me an idea of
something to read about this?
Perhaps we have a confusion about Self Esteem and Self Confidence. I see
self esteem about your opinion of ones self. ie i am a good person or I am
a loser. I see Self confidence about being confident in that you can do
something. I am not explaining this very well... I hope some one can jump
in and clarify. So a bully, as an example, will be confident he can beat
some one up but could have a low opinion of himself. Does this make sense?>>
I started to reply to this one way back, then decided to read the responses.
You said exactly what I had said - that self-confidence and self-esteem are
being mixed together here.
I also have never heard that bullies have high self-esteem. Low self esteem
signals INCLUDE putting others down among other things. It is an attempt to
make others feel as "small" as the bully does. I agree that it takes confidence
to say "I'm gonna kick your ass" but it does't take self-esteem. And I think
it's confidence based on physical strentgh, not intelligence!!
<<But Hamilton brings up a valid point. Where is the line with all the
positive reinforcement? WHen do you help a kid realize what his/hers
limitations are? Not everyone is a star. Yes we are proud of you, but dont
you think you could have pushed harder?>>
MJ, I agree - when schools start saying - "putting your name on your paper
showed effort - good work Jimmy" - I'm gonna home school!!
Where's Wanda - she could speak to this one!! Wanda - Yoooo hoooo -
The elementary school my kids go to has this program (the one I do) where the
kids are given the opportunity to explore "new things" - like basketball,
karate, swimming, different art mediums. We also provide many programs in basic
skills like math, science, and reading. This program formally asks the question
"It's not how smart are you, but how are you smart?" It's based on the seven
multiple intelligences, and assumes that kids have different strengths in the
areas of math, music, interpersonal, intrapersonal, etc. We propose the classes
in categories (we also offer definitions of what those intelligences include)
so that parents can see what their child "needs" to grow further. The entire
school is based on these multiple intelligences, and all areas of learning are
developed around these principals. Kids ARE expected to try. They are
encouraged to try new things.
I guess this district is known as being "experimental" and I suppose after
reading angelb's post, I'm glad my kids are in it!!
Dididiaz31
I have to agree with Mary Jo on some points here. there is most definitely a
difference between self confidence and self esteem although generally, one who
has self esteem is self confident as well.......
The school bully does not have self esteem. People who have to hurt or
otherise put people down do so to try to prove to themselves and others that
they are important and to make themselves feel better. Someone who has self
esteem would not need to do this. A bully, however, may feel very confident
because he can "kick ass" but underlying there has to be a feeling of
worthlessness.....unless he is an antisocial/sociopath which brings on a whole
separate thread.
I also agree that, unfortunately, schools and teahers are being expected to
take the majority of the responsibility for building kids' confidence and
teaching discipline. Do I think that that is right --NO WAY!! I am appalled
at the attitude of parents today when it comes to raising kids -- not all, but
many. As K has said, there is no instructional manual for raising kids, but
there never has been, so what makes this generation of parents think that we
need one in order to do our job effectively? A recent incident comes to
mind....As I have written in the past, my daughter is an active Little League
ball player. There is a little boy on her team who has yet to have a parental
figure there to cheer him on. He is afraid of the ball and trembles when he
gets up to bat. I am the official scorekeeper for our team, and so I have
taken it upon myself to work with him, give him support, and cheer him on.
Yesterday, we had a game. His parents were not there at the beginning of the
game as they were attending a "party". I cheered him on every time at bat.
Once he grounded out (the first time that he has made contact with the ball all
season). His second at bat, he grounded out but got 2 RBI's -- 1 on an error.
When I looked at the sidelines....there was his dad, but when the child looked
for congratulations and support, he came to me. I found this to be incredibly
sad.
In addition, however, schools are not necessarily what you would expect,
either. Recently I had the experience of seeing a young patient everyday at
lunchtime to hang an IV for him at a very prestigious Chicago magnet school. I
was there everyday for 4 weeks. I was appalled at the way that I heard several
of the teachers talking to, yelling at, criticizing, etc. the students. One
teacher actually had a bull horn so that her verbal obscentities could be heard
louder -- indoors. Now, again, I realize that teachers have their work cut out
for them -- AND that there are many more wonderful teachers than there are bad
ones (my children have been fortunate to have excellent teachers), but children
have a rough road out there, and self esteem is so precious a gift.........
As for religion....please don't open that thread again.....
Didi, single mother to Caitlin, 8, Patrick, 6, and Meagan, 4.
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against
it."
G.K. Chesterton
cindy inness
" AND I don't think it is the
school's reponsibility to teach this and morals and values--BUT a vast
majority of parents choose not to teach this and who is left to do it but
strong religious background and the values"
Kendra, I believe that you can have a strong moral compass without
religion, god, etc..coming into it..We are a very philosophically ,
morally solid family but we do not go to church, read about Jesus,
nothing..I agree there is not enough self-discipline in young people
today, but the Church does not need enter inot it all the time..Cheers, C
Mary Jo Sterns
Had to change that subject header!
K.. what are the 7 multiple intelligences. So are the classes not by grade?
If you have the time I'd be interested more info about this system.
MJ
Kse63 <ks...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199805311852...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
Kse63
MJ - Will post 7 intelligences in another thread....
The kids are in grades, and there are also mixed classes - or splits. 1/2
split, 3/4 split, etc....
You don't have to be in a split....and if parents expresss real concern, their
child is put in a "regular" class.....the splits work well because the kids get
teachers for more than one year, and studies are starting to show that this
enables teachers to better target problems kids have in school, and things like
seasonal depression. My son did a split his first year. The kids are expected
to work in groups, and individually, as well as taking responsibility for their
own time. It really makes the kids responsible for themselves and is a good
system if managed correctly.
janelaw
Hamilton wrote:
>
>
> Bullies have lots of self esteem. [that is actually well documented
> in research -- the old view that they struck at people out of
> low self esteem turns out not to be true -- they are usually
> aggressive kids who think well of themselves but who have little
> to be proud of in the way of achievement - besides their physical
> aggression]
I have not found this to be true. Could you please cite sources
for this?
>
> One of the problems with parents and schools now is that they
> think self esteem can be detached from achievement.
This is correct. Self-esteem must be distinct from tangible
achievement. People need to respect and appreciate what they
ARE, not what they have done.
Otherwise failure will undermine self esteem. Certainly you
agree that we all fail?
> snip
> Parents who want kids with high self esteem would do well to
> find out what they do well and like to do and encourage that
> so they can win praise for accomplishments...<snip> Schools would
> do well to make sure kids can read, etc etc as part of the
> plan to raise esteem -- rather than take the view as is common
> particularly in middle schools that 'anything you do is just
> great' and ' all you can do is your best' which in some schools
> literally translates into 'what ever low level of effort you
> expend is fine with us'
I find this argument internally inconsistent. You advocate
sticking to what a child is good at, yet forcing her to excel at
reading whether she has aptitude or not. How are these two
positions reconcilable?
Also, if children do not feel free to explore every aspect of
the world around them, how can they ever find what they do excel
at?
janelaw
Terri wrote:
> >
> > Hamilton wrote:
> > >
> > > One of the problems with parents and schools now is that they
> > > think self esteem can be detached from achievement.
> >> janelaw wrote:
> > This is correct. Self-esteem must be distinct from tangible
> > achievement. People need to respect and appreciate what they
> > ARE, not what they have done.
>
> This is the kind of argument that makes no sense to me. I used to hear
> that one should love the misbehaving child but not the behavior. For a
> time I would say that to one or another of my children when they were
> young. My son at age 5 told me that in that case I should figure out a
> way to give the behavior a time out (sitting on the third step) without
> involving him. Otherwise it was very obvious (to him) that I was angry
> with him *and* his behavior and was punishing him *for* his behavior. The
> concept had never made a lot of sense to me and I realized at that point
> that he was absolutely right. It was pure nonsense.
>
Well, sure, it's easy to lose your perspective and become angry
in the heat of the moment. But you don't equate your child with
his inappropriate behavior. Telling kids that THEY are bad
never gets you anywhere. It takes away their belief that they
CAN do the right thing. Do you see what I mean? If the child
believes he is bad, then all he can do is bad things. In
addition, it removes their responsibility for their own
actions. A "bad" child can no more "be good" than a blind child
can see. A "good" child can accept responsibility for her
mistakes, learn from them, and do better the next time.
Each child should have a picture of herself as a truly wonderful
person, because each of them IS truly wonderful. When children
do something "wrong," we adults must point out that this
behavior is inconsistent with the good and wonderful people they
are. Similarly, whenever they do the right thing, we have to
reinforce that by pointing out that it is what we expect of
great people like them. We want them pursuing an ideal, not
running from a spectre.
Children learn who they are from the world around them. They
learn that they are lazy, stupid, boring, and bad the same way
they learn they are red-haired, short, blue-eyed, and freckled.
Once a characteristic is part of you, you can't do anything
about it. Of course you can't understand math if you are
stupid. But if you are the kind of person who TRIES hard when
things are difficult, then you can get it in the end.
Which brings me (finally) to what upset me so much about
Hamilton's post:
> > > Parents who want kids with high self esteem would do well to
> > > find out what they do well and like to do and encourage that
> > > so they can win praise for accomplishments.
This is exactly the WRONG thing to do. Praise is most important
for effort where we do not have aptitude. Our entire lives are
spent doing things we do not excel at. By definition excellence
is rare. Even if we do surpass all others in one area, we still
have to function in innumerable other areas in which our very
best efforts will be mediocre. Besides, except for the occasion
freak, we do not excel in our first attempts at anything. If we
do not praise sincere effort, even if the end result is poor,
then how do we encourage our children to keep trying? That's
all there is to life - trying to do your best.
Pleiades
Hamilton wrote:
>
> One of the sources of self esteem is competence and self control.
> Bullies have lots of self esteem. [that is actually well documented
> in research -- the old view that they struck at people out of
> low self esteem turns out not to be true -- they are usually
> aggressive kids who think well of themselves but who have little
> to be proud of in the way of achievement - besides their physical
> aggression]
Like some other posters here, I just can't go with the "Bullies have
high self-esteem" idea, no matter how well you can document it. I've
dealt with a lot of bullies in both elementary and middle schools, and
I have yet to meet one who really feels good about himself or herself.
And after all, isn't that what good self-esteem is, feeling good about
yourself. Of course you're right in saying that self-esteem is related
to achievement, but the ability to beat the crap out of someone, anyone,
is not generally a trait that is valued by society at large.
> One of the problems with parents and schools now is that they
> think self esteem can be detached from achievement. People feel
> good about themselves partly because they are proud of what'
> they can do -- and there are many different areas to star --
> Parents who want kids with high self esteem would do well to
> find out what they do well and like to do and encourage that
> so they can win praise for accomplishments.
Exactly. And I'd add the proviso that this should be something that the
child is really interested in and can do well at, not just something
that the parent thinks the child should do.
> The hollow praise
> soon is recognized by most kids as hollow praise. The 'everyone
> gets a prize' mentality doesn't fool kids for long.
My dad was telling me about a situation in his town, which happens to be
the town where I grew up. The Little League there, instead of having an
all-stars team like they used to, now has an all-star team for
9-year-olds, an all-star team for 10-year-olds, an all-star team for
11-year-olds, etc. It's a small enough town that almost every kid ends
up being an "all-star." Of course, this was done in response to
parental complaints when their kid did not make all-stars. But I wonder
how many of these parents had, at the root of their complaints, concern
for their children's self-esteem. I think they're misguided, though, in
devaluing the accomplishments of those who truly excelled at the sport.
> Schools would
> do well to make sure kids can read, etc etc as part of the
> plan to raise esteem -- rather than take the view as is common
> particularly in middle schools that 'anything you do is just
> great' and ' all you can do is your best' which in some schools
> literally translates into 'what ever low level of effort you
> expend is fine with us' I actually know of a school that accepts
> school work that is just the kids name on the top of the page
> 'if that is the best you can do.' Kids are systematically taught
> in that school that low effort IS the best they can do.
Well, what bull!! Middle school students, as other students, will rise
or fall to meet the expectations. If I went into my English classes
everyday and made it clear that I considered putting a heading on the
paper to be A+ work, then I'd have a room full of instant honor roll
students. But I don't think that would help those students, and I don't
think it would do anything for their self-esteem other than damaging it
and warping them. Thirteen and fourteen-year-olds, unfortunately, are
often at a stage where their interests are not centered on school, but
they can still do it if it's expected of them. Shoot, I expect my
students to read and understand Shakespeare, to produce a five-page
typewritten research paper with bibliography, etc., etc., etc., and they
all do it - not always cheerfully, but they do it. And when they
finish, they're really proud of themselves. So you're right.
Self-esteem comes from accomplishment, not from hollow praise. And I
think kids see through that kind of false praise easily. When you
compliment a kid, you have to be sincere and honest.
> Of course kids deserve the unconditional love of their parents
> and schools should embrace diversity -- but that doesn't
> divorce working hard and becoming competent as central to
> self esteem. The fact that American kids are #1 in thinking
> they are 'good at math' and way down the list in actually
> doing it is indicative of the fact that our problem isn't lack
> of self esteem, but lack of something to be proud about.
My friend who's an excellent algebra teacher has lots of info on this,
but I don't have enough information to argue persuasively on this
issue. She insists that the base groups who are being tested vary
tremendously from country to country and that while Americans test all
students, other than special ed, that other countries have by that point
weeded out the non-achievers so that they're not tested. I dunno... I
do know that the high-ability students are taking algebra at a younger
age than most of my generation did.
Wanda
Pleiades
Mary Jo Sterns wrote:
<snip>
> But Hamilton brings up a valid point. Where is the line with all the
> positive reinforcement? WHen do you help a kid realize what his/hers
> limitations are? Not everyone is a star. Yes we are proud of you, but dont
> you think you could have pushed harder?
Just one little point I want to address here. I think a kid will, with
time, realize his own limitations. God knows that adolescents are
terribly aware of any minor imperfection, even if it's perceived by no
one but themselves. Sometimes we may need to step in and help them
segue into a new idea about what they can do with their interests. For
example, my older son lives and breaths basketball and dreams about
being an NBA star - like about a million other 13-year-olds. On the
rare days when he's not planning his future in the NBA, he's instead
planning on being the next Tiger Woods. I know that he'll never be an
NBA player, and he's probably aware of that too. OTOH, he's a wonderful
writer, and who's to say that he can't combine his interest in sports
and writing into a career. So I encourage his basketball talent. He
WAS a starter on his middle school team last year, and he does have some
talent. But I also encourage him to keep up the writing, and he's just
been chosen to be on the school annual staff next year.
Pushing this kid harder has never been a problem because he's one of
those kids who pushes himself harder than anyone else ever could.
> Are the schools willing to accept mediocrity and push kids thru the school
> system? Feel good about yourself but recognize that you will always be a C
> student.
No, they're not!!! At least, not in my experience. I did have one
female student this past year that I passed with a 70 even though she
had failed. Here's why I passed her. She's a fourteen-year-old mother.
She will only qualify for the alternative high school which will provide
child care as well as more flexible hours and self-paced study IF SHE IS
IN HIGH SCHOOL. As long as she's in middle school, she can't get into
that program. I didn't see that her needs were being served at all by
keeping her in middle school, and I could see that she'd have a chance
once she got into the alternative program.
Wanda
Pleiades
Dididiaz31 wrote:
>
<snip>
> In addition, however, schools are not necessarily what you would expect,
> either. Recently I had the experience of seeing a young patient everyday at
> lunchtime to hang an IV for him at a very prestigious Chicago magnet school. I
> was there everyday for 4 weeks. I was appalled at the way that I heard several
> of the teachers talking to, yelling at, criticizing, etc. the students. One
> teacher actually had a bull horn so that her verbal obscentities could be heard
> louder -- indoors. Now, again, I realize that teachers have their work cut out
> for them -- AND that there are many more wonderful teachers than there are bad
> ones (my children have been fortunate to have excellent teachers), but children
> have a rough road out there, and self esteem is so precious a gift.........
Man, I hate to hear stories like that, even though I've witnessed them
and know that they sometimes happen. Teachers who are there to degrade
kids have no business in the profession. Believe me, the kids can spot
them from a mile away and know exactly which ones they are. The ones
that I particularly dislike are the ones who have one routine for the
*parents* but another routine altogether in their classroom.
Wanda
Pleiades
Kse63 wrote:
<snip>
> MJ, I agree - when schools start saying - "putting your name on your paper
> showed effort - good work Jimmy" - I'm gonna home school!!
> Where's Wanda - she could speak to this one!! Wanda - Yoooo hoooo -
Answered in another post. But again, all I can say is, "What bull!"
Any school, any teacher that would do that is a very ineffective teacher
creating a very ineffective learning environment. And if I'm ever in a
school like that, I agree to join you in home schooling.
Wanda
Kse63
Wanda Wrote: (after Hamilton)
<<> Of course kids deserve the unconditional love of their parents
> and schools should embrace diversity -- but that doesn't
> divorce working hard and becoming competent as central to
> self esteem. The fact that American kids are #1 in thinking
> they are 'good at math' and way down the list in actually
> doing it is indicative of the fact that our problem isn't lack
> of self esteem, but lack of something to be proud about.
My friend who's an excellent algebra teacher has lots of info on this,
but I don't have enough information to argue persuasively on this
issue. She insists that the base groups who are being tested vary
tremendously from country to country and that while Americans test all
students, other than special ed, that other countries have by that point
weeded out the non-achievers so that they're not tested. I dunno... I
do know that the high-ability students are taking algebra at a younger
age than most of my generation did. >>
A group of 5-6 5th graders at my kids elementary school came home today third
place winners in the WORLD Odessy of the Mind competition in Orlando
Florida....WORLD - there were 77 countries participating!! When those kids got
to school today, they had found a roll of red wall paper and rolled it out for
those kids to walk on - they are SOoo proud of their accomplishments!! What an
opportunity - and yet we're what? Behind???
Naaaaaa
Kse63
Wanda Wrote:
<<Kse63 wrote:
And you spoke to it very well!! Bravo - I enjoyed all of your input!!
Mary Jo Sterns
Good for you Wanda... I am glad to hear that each individual is looked
at.... not the masses in a large system. Glad you cared enough. I often
fear that some of our teachers dont care. You have probably made a huge
difference in her life.
I came across this awhile ago. Its lengthy, but I thought it made a
wonderful point.
MJ
Jean Thompson stood in front of her fifth-grade class on the very
first day of school in the fall and told the children a lie. Like most
teachers, she looked at her pupils and said that she loved them
all the same, that she would treat them all alike. And that was
impossible because there in front of her, slumped in his seat on
the third row, was a little boy named Teddy Stoddard.
Mrs. Thompson had watched Teddy the year before and noticed
he didn't play well with the other children, that his clothes were
unkempt and that he constantly needed a bath. And Teddy was
unpleasant. It got to the point during the first few months that she
would actually take delight in marking his papers with a broad red
pen, making bold X's and then marking the F at the top of the
paper biggest of all.
Because Teddy was a sullen little boy, no one else seemed to
enjoy him, either. At the school where Mrs. Thompson taught,
she was required to review each child's records and put Teddy's
off until last. When she opened his file, she was in for a surprise.
His first-grade teacher wrote, "Teddy is a bright, inquisitive child
with a ready laugh. He does his work neatly and has good
manners...he is a joy to be around."
His second-grade teacher wrote, "Teddy is an excellent student
well-liked by his classmates, but he is troubled because his
mother has a terminal illness and life at home must be a struggle."
His third-grade teacher wrote, "Teddy continues to work hard but
his mother's death has been hard on him. He tries to do his best
but his father doesn't show much interest and his home life will
soon affect him if some steps aren't taken."
Teddy's fourth-grade teacher wrote, "Teddy is withdrawn and doesn't
show much interest in school. He doesn't have many friends and
sometimes sleeps in class. He is tardy and could become a problem."
By now Mrs. Thompson realized the problem but Christmas was coming
fast. It was all she could do, with the school play and all, until the day
before the holidays began and she was suddenly forced to focus on
Teddy Stoddard.
Her children brought her presents, all in beautiful ribbon and bright
paper,
except for Teddy's, which was clumsily wrapped in the heavy, brown
paper of a scissored grocery bag. Mrs. Thompson took pains to open it
in the middle of the other presents. Some of the children started to laugh
when she found a rhinestone bracelet with some of the stones missing,
and a bottle that was one-quarter full of cologne. She stifled the
children's
laughter when she exclaimed how pretty the bracelet was, putting it on,
and dabbing some of the perfume behind the other wrist. Teddy Stoddard
stayed behind just long enough to say, "Mrs. Thompson, today you smelled
just like my mom used to." After the children left she cried for at least
an
hour.
On that very day, she quit teaching reading, and writing, and speaking.
Instead, she began to teach children. Jean Thompson paid particular
attention to one they all called "Teddy." As she worked with him, his mind
seemed to come alive. The more she encouraged him, the faster he responded.
On days there would be an important test, Mrs. Thompson would remember
that cologne. By the end of the year he had become one of the smartest
children in the class and... well, he had also become the "pet" of the
teacher
who had once vowed to love all of her children exactly the same.
A year later she found a note under her door, from Teddy, telling her that
of all the teachers he'd had in elementary school, she was his favorite.
Six years went by before she got another note from Teddy. He then wrote
that he had finished high school, third in his class, and she was still his
favorite teacher of all time. Four years after that, she got another
letter,
saying that while things had been tough at times, he'd stayed in school,
had stuck with it, and would graduate from college with the highest of
honors. He assured Mrs. Thompson she was still his favorite teacher.
Then, four more years passed and yet another letter came. This time he
explained that after he got his bachelor's degree, he decided to go a
little
further. The letter explained that she was still his favorite teacher but
that
now his name was a little longer. The letter was signed, Theodore F.
Stoddard, MD.
The story doesn't end there. You see there was yet another letter that
Spring. Teddy said he'd met this girl and was to be married. He explained
that his father had died a couple of years ago and he was wondering...
well, if Mrs. Thompson might agree to sit in the pew usually reserved for
the mother of the groom.
And guess what, she wore that bracelet, the one with several rhinestones
missing. And I bet on that special day, Jean Thompson smelled just like...
well, just like the way Teddy remembered his mother smelling on their
last Christmas together.
Note: We never can tell what type of impact we may make on another's life
by our actions or lack of action.
Pleiades
janelaw wrote:
<snip>
> > One of the problems with parents and schools now is that they
> > think self esteem can be detached from achievement.
>
> This is correct. Self-esteem must be distinct from tangible
> achievement. People need to respect and appreciate what they
> ARE, not what they have done.
> Otherwise failure will undermine self esteem. Certainly you
> agree that we all fail?
Of course, we do. And the ones with a healthy self-esteem, or at least
a growing self-esteem, will learn from that failure rather than defining
themselves by the failure.
Wanda
Pleiades
Mary Jo Sterns wrote:
<snip Teddy Stoddard story>
> Note: We never can tell what type of impact we may make on another's life
> by our actions or lack of action.
<trying to type through the tears> I've seen that story a number of
times over the years, and it always makes me cry. And your note at the
end is so true. Especially teaching middle school students, most of
whom are way too cool to let a teacher know that they have been touched
in some way, I constantly have to remind myself of that. I can't even
begin to tell you how it feels when you do get a card or a letter
several years after the student has gone on to bigger and better things.
Wanda
Kse63
From MJ
Oh my - what a way to start the morning - crying....how lovely!!
Terri
janelaw wrote:
> Hamilton wrote:
> >
> >
> > Bullies have lots of self esteem. [that is actually well documented
> > in research -- the old view that they struck at people out of
> > low self esteem turns out not to be true -- they are usually
> > aggressive kids who think well of themselves but who have little
> > to be proud of in the way of achievement - besides their physical
> > aggression]
>
> I have not found this to be true. Could you please cite sources
> for this?
> >
> > One of the problems with parents and schools now is that they
> > think self esteem can be detached from achievement.
>
> This is correct. Self-esteem must be distinct from tangible
> achievement. People need to respect and appreciate what they
> ARE, not what they have done.
This is the kind of argument that makes no sense to me. I used to hear
that one should love the misbehaving child but not the behavior. For a
time I would say that to one or another of my children when they were
young. My son at age 5 told me that in that case I should figure out a
way to give the behavior a time out (sitting on the third step) without
involving him. Otherwise it was very obvious (to him) that I was angry
with him *and* his behavior and was punishing him *for* his behavior. The
concept had never made a lot of sense to me and I realized at that point
that he was absolutely right. It was pure nonsense.
> Otherwise failure will undermine self esteem. Certainly you
> agree that we all fail?
>
>
If failure stimulates attempts to try harder, as it usually does if the
child is encouraged to try again/try harder/persevere, failure is a good
thing. Learning to cope with it is essential to successful adult life.
But if children are praised for any attempt and the rewards are provided
regardless of the result, then we take that motivation away from the
child. And teach him poor coping skills.
> > snip
> > Parents who want kids with high self esteem would do well to
> > find out what they do well and like to do and encourage that
> > so they can win praise for accomplishments...<snip> Schools would
> > do well to make sure kids can read, etc etc as part of the
> > plan to raise esteem -- rather than take the view as is common
> > particularly in middle schools that 'anything you do is just
> > great' and ' all you can do is your best' which in some schools
> > literally translates into 'what ever low level of effort you
> > expend is fine with us'
>
> I find this argument internally inconsistent. You advocate
> sticking to what a child is good at, yet forcing her to excel at
> reading whether she has aptitude or not.
Because a child who cannot read has been set up for failure. If there is
no encouragement to learn such a basic essential skill, how can the child
possibly have any self-esteem worthy of the name. "Everybody knows how to
read but me" wails the child. How should the parent respond? "That's
okay, dear, you know how to (insert whatever you like)?" Or "reading is
the single most important thing you will ever learn how to do so let's
find a tutor/ class/ whatever it's going to take so you will know how to
read?"
> How are these two
> positions reconcilable?
>
> Also, if children do not feel free to explore every aspect of
> the world around them, how can they ever find what they do excel
> at?
Children should be free to explore all aspects of their world and I saw
nothing in Hamilton's post that said otherwise. I had a problem with my
son being unable/unwilling to apparently feel any compassion for/
interest in children who lacked his academic skills. Since we did not
want to raise a self-satisfied sef-righteous prig who looked down on
others who were different from himself, we put him into guitar lessons,
assuming that like his tone-deaf parents, he would find this difficult,
frustrating and learn that there were things he could not do as well as
others could no matter how hard he tried. That was a bust - he became the
best guitar player in the group very quickly. So we then put him into
soccer where, despite his best attempts, he was a very mediocre player
who needed to defer to those who were far more skilled and more talented
and more capable than he was. It was a sobering lesson for him, and one
which he now says (he's 25) has stood him in good stead many times when
he is tempted to judge others by his own abilities.
Terri
Kse63
Terri Wrote:
<<janelaw wrote:
I'm lost....how do you give consequences for the behavior without involving the
child? The child IS responsible for the behavior. That is the message they need
to learn - that things they do have consequences, positive and negative. If
they stive for positive consequences, they will be rewarded....negative actions
will beget negataive consequences, and they learn from that. I don't think the
child should see your anger - but your disappointment in their choice. I think
it was Buzz (or gonzo - sorry guys - I forget) who said he shows his girls
disappointment and sadness in their choices. This does affect the child more
than anger. Anger to them is just us being unreasonable. Feeling sad and
disappointed is not only showing them *how* to feel, but reminding them that
*we* as parents have feelings also!!
<<> Otherwise failure will undermine self esteem. Certainly you
> agree that we all fail?
>
>
If failure stimulates attempts to try harder, as it usually does if the
child is encouraged to try again/try harder/persevere, failure is a good
thing. Learning to cope with it is essential to successful adult life.
But if children are praised for any attempt and the rewards are provided
regardless of the result, then we take that motivation away from the
child. And teach him poor coping skills.>>
In an ideal world, everyone who tries something and fails would grow from it,
but it doesn't always happen that way. If you take a child with already low
self-esteem and continue to introduce failure - they will NOT grow, but will
retreat. You have to encourage a much slower start with low self-esteem. Start
with things they do have some confidence with. For my son, it's golf. He has
had a terrible time with self-esteem and his depression issues (which travel
hand in hand). He has been taking golf lessons, and his self - esteem is
building - because his self confidence is. If he had tried golf and failed at
it - it woudn't have helped - it would have hurt. BUT I knew already that he ha
d potential in this area so it was a good place to start.
We do all fail - problems arise when self-esteem is involved. Failure is
perceived very differently between those with hi and low self esteem!! People
with low self-esteem need much more encouragement after failure....
<<> > Parents who want kids with high self esteem would do well to
> > find out what they do well and like to do and encourage that
> > so they can win praise for accomplishments...<snip> Schools would
> > do well to make sure kids can read, etc etc as part of the
> > plan to raise esteem -- rather than take the view as is common
> > particularly in middle schools that 'anything you do is just
> > great' and ' all you can do is your best' which in some schools
> > literally translates into 'what ever low level of effort you
> > expend is fine with us'
>
> I find this argument internally inconsistent. You advocate
> sticking to what a child is good at, yet forcing her to excel at
> reading whether she has aptitude or not.
Because a child who cannot read has been set up for failure. If there is
no encouragement to learn such a basic essential skill, how can the child
possibly have any self-esteem worthy of the name. "Everybody knows how to
read but me" wails the child. How should the parent respond? "That's
okay, dear, you know how to (insert whatever you like)?" Or "reading is
the single most important thing you will ever learn how to do so let's
find a tutor/ class/ whatever it's going to take so you will know how to
read?"
>>
ALL kids need to learn to read....this goes without saying. I don't think it's
the only thing they need for self esteem, tho. It's a part of the puzzle. They
also need math, spelling, and writing skills. Imagine a child who can read, but
not write...or one who knows how to read well, but hates math (as my child).
Building self-esteem in kids is a tough task....especially if there are
underlying causes behind it....like chemistry. Kids need to be able to explore
all avenues early on in life so they can learn what they do and don't like.
One of my pet peeves in life is a parent, for example, who played on the
college football team, like grandpa and great grandpa, etc...so the kid plays
football. Why? Because Dad did ..and grandpa, etc.....and what if Jr. fails?
Then dad is very disappointed and Johnny feels he's a failure at life because
he's disappointed Dad!! He can't hold up the family football tradition......
Let them explore, help them get their basic skills, and for heaven's sake,
watch for the signals.....
my $.02
Terri
janelaw wrote:
> Terri wrote:
> > >
> > > Hamilton wrote:
> > > >
> > > > One of the problems with parents and schools now is that they
> > > > think self esteem can be detached from achievement.
>
> > >> janelaw wrote:
> > > This is correct. Self-esteem must be distinct from tangible
> > > achievement. People need to respect and appreciate what they
> > > ARE, not what they have done.
> >
> > This is the kind of argument that makes no sense to me. I used to hear
> > that one should love the misbehaving child but not the behavior. For a
> > time I would say that to one or another of my children when they were
> > young. My son at age 5 told me that in that case I should figure out a
> > way to give the behavior a time out (sitting on the third step) without
> > involving him. Otherwise it was very obvious (to him) that I was angry
> > with him *and* his behavior and was punishing him *for* his behavior. The
> > concept had never made a lot of sense to me and I realized at that point
> > that he was absolutely right. It was pure nonsense.
> >
>
> Well, sure, it's easy to lose your perspective and become angry
> in the heat of the moment. But you don't equate your child with
> his inappropriate behavior. Telling kids that THEY are bad
> never gets you anywhere.
> It takes away their belief that they
> CAN do the right thing. Do you see what I mean? If the child
> believes he is bad, then all he can do is bad things.
Oh, nonsense. Children do not internalize the literal notions of good and bad
so easily. They are far more resilient (and far more clever) than you give them
credit for.
> In
> addition, it removes their responsibility for their own
> actions. A "bad" child can no more "be good" than a blind child
> can see. A "good" child can accept responsibility for her
> mistakes, learn from them, and do better the next time.
>
When you punish the perpetrator of the behavior you are sending a very clear
message that you expect better behavior and know that the child is capable of
better.
> Each child should have a picture of herself as a truly wonderful
> person, because each of them IS truly wonderful. When children
> do something "wrong," we adults must point out that this
> behavior is inconsistent with the good and wonderful people they
> are.
Again, this is nonsense. If everyone is special/wonderful, then, by definition,
no one is.
> Similarly, whenever they do the right thing, we have to
> reinforce that by pointing out that it is what we expect of
> great people like them. We want them pursuing an ideal, not
> running from a spectre.
>
Excuse me? You've lost me. What spectre?
> Children learn who they are from the world around them. They
> learn that they are lazy, stupid, boring, and bad the same way
> they learn they are red-haired, short, blue-eyed, and freckled.
> Once a characteristic is part of you, you can't do anything
> about it. Of course you can't understand math if you are
> stupid. But if you are the kind of person who TRIES hard when
> things are difficult, then you can get it in the end.
>
> Which brings me (finally) to what upset me so much about
> Hamilton's post:
>
> > > > Parents who want kids with high self esteem would do well to
> > > > find out what they do well and like to do and encourage that
> > > > so they can win praise for accomplishments.
>
> This is exactly the WRONG thing to do. Praise is most important
> for effort where we do not have aptitude. Our entire lives are
> spent doing things we do not excel at. By definition excellence
> is rare. Even if we do surpass all others in one area, we still
> have to function in innumerable other areas in which our very
> best efforts will be mediocre. Besides, except for the occasion
> freak, we do not excel in our first attempts at anything. If we
> do not praise sincere effort, even if the end result is poor,
The world will judge the end result. One might praise a child for perseverence
if failure to follow through is one of his/her problems. But to praise a poor
result is to tell the child a)that this is the best she/he can do and b) that
a substandard result is perfectly acceptable. Neither are true. One might
comfort a child who has lost a competition and encourage her/him to try again
and point out what she/he might do differently next time. My children attended
school in a district which shall remain nameless (because I know that someone
from that town posts to this group) which was very big on fostering self-esteem
in children without any achievement to back it up. Children were taught to look
at what they had done right and ignore what they had done wrong. Needless to
add, most of these children did not do well once they left the protected
sheltered environment. Mine did because I spent hours each day making sure that
they re-worked what they didn't know so they would master it.
> then how do we encourage our children to keep trying? That's
> all there is to life - trying to do your best.
Results do matter. An employer will not pay for effort - only for performance.
Terri
Mike Kohary
janelaw wrote in message <6l1e25$j...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...
>
>This is exactly the WRONG thing to do. Praise is most important
>for effort where we do not have aptitude. Our entire lives are
>spent doing things we do not excel at. By definition excellence
>is rare.
While I agree that we must all be competent at things we may not have a
natural talent for (balancing the checkbook, cooking, cleaning, etc.), I
disagree with your statement "...our entire lives are spent doing things we
do not excel at". I don't know about you, but I've found the few things at
which I excel, and those are the things that I do. Excellence *is* rare,
and that's why it's important to focus your life on those rare things. I
believe that we are all excellent at *something*, and often the trick is to
find out what that is. Many people probably do not find it. I feel
fortunate that I have.
I think that it's important to try and discover those natural talents in our
children, and to encourage them 100% in those areas, even to the exclusion
of other areas in which they show no interest and no talent. As they
acheive, they gain self esteem, and more importantly, learn confidence.
They also learn to accept failure, since they know that their next attempt
has a chance of success.
> Even if we do surpass all others in one area, we still
>have to function in innumerable other areas in which our very
>best efforts will be mediocre. Besides, except for the occasion
>freak, we do not excel in our first attempts at anything. If we
>do not praise sincere effort, even if the end result is poor,
>then how do we encourage our children to keep trying? That's
>all there is to life - trying to do your best.
I agree that it is important to praise effort - if it is a sincere effort,
it is worthy. If they make enough sincere efforts, they will find some
thing(s) that comes more easily, or that captures their undivided interest.
janelaw
that's it, then. we completely disagree about everything.