[HSList] Myth of Self-Esteem

[b...@webtv.net]

Tim,
I don't pay any attention to these types of studies, they change too
much and too fast. Years ago, studies supposedly proved that if you held
your young baby, you would spoil him/her. Studies today now prove
otherwise. So what does this exactly mean for you and me? Absolutely
nothing. I'm still going to go ahead and try and be the best parent I
can be, regardless of any study. I'm still going to try and instill in
my girls that they have great self-esteem. Maybe I'm wrong, and maybe
I'm not. As long as I try, who cares about studies that change as fast
as fads.

Zehra

[b...@webtv.net]

Tim,
What I meant, is that children today aren't learning in schools the way
they should be learning. There are many jobs out there, but
unfortunately, many people graduating high school do not have the
qualifications for even entry level. This I read in Newsweek awhile
back. Not exactly when.

Zehra

[TIMB...@aol.com]

In a message dated 5/19/98 11:15:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
dho...@Moneynet.COM writes:

<< children need not stuggle with self-doubt or over inflated egos if we do
our job right as parents. >>

Of course, we all should and most of us wish to do these things. However, the
secular humanist crowd has created a false scientific parenting culture here
in America. I am refering to the inaccuracies and unproven statements made by
certain professions which undermine the parenting of many of us today. Study
of what these people, the psychology, therapy and sociology establishment,
tell parents and study of the actual research and examination of the gap
between what practitioners say and write and what the researchers find and
write indicate that many practitioners express primarily personal opinion for
proven fact. When this disparity is examined, one can clearly see that most of
the professions which deal with children and families are political first and
child professional second.
The fact remains that no field of scholarship has even begun to prove
that such a thing as self-esteem exists. If it does exist, it is not
scientifically defined and no where has anyone explained scientifically that a
status called self-esteem causes anything. There is considerable evidence from
the psychological research profession that many high performing adults suffer
from serious self-doubt. There is considerable biographical evidence that many
of the most talented and famous people of history suffered emensely from self-
doubt and poor self-image. It is also a specialty in psychology and biography
to investigate the link between creativity and serious problems with
depression. It could very well be that what is being called poor self-image is
really a symptom of depression. Many excellent studies have been done on
depression, by bio-based psychiatrists and by psychologists, which strongly
indicate that depression is a biological problem. As such, depression may well
be genetic based. In identical twin studies, a major test for genetic caused
disease, if one twin suffers from clinical depression, the other twin has an
over 75% probability of suffering from clinical depression, even among twins
who were reared apart and had no contact. 75% is significantly above random or
chance. Schizophrenia is a genetic disease. In twin studies, 70 to 75% is the
probabilty of the other twin having schizophrenia. By the way, Attention
Deficit Disorder appears 85% of the time in the other twin, in twin studies.
To raise questions about "self-esteem" theory is not the same as to
question whether or not parents should be kind to their children. It does
raise serious questions about the reverse logic that goes on much too often,
namely therapists claiming that adults with poor self-esteem must have been
mistreated by their parents.
Ultimately, parents are not responsible for their adult children's
feelings of happiness or their success. Parents are responsible for what they
have always been responsible for -- making sure that they do their job the
best they can. No one ever had a perfect parent and neither you nor I will be
a perfect parent. Fortunately, it is not necessary to be a child psychologist
in order to be a good enough parent. Yet, most of us have let the secular
humanist, so-called liberal establishment psychologize parenting. My point is
that psychologized parenting keeps coming up short. The two famous gears of
our time, Benjamin Spock and Bettleheim did not prove or have evidence for any
major criticism or advice they gave. This is not surprising when we realize
that Spock was a physician with no training in either psychology or psychiatry
and Bettleheim was a complete fraud and con man.
If we want some solid practical scientific advice about children, we may
want to turn to a pediatrician who is a major leader in the new infant mental
health movement, Dr. T. Berry Brazelton. Brazelton's advice is based on
excellent scientific evidence.
The overwhelming majority of child therapy and psychology parent advice
and work is based on two discredited systems of thought, behaviorism (children
are more than dogs to be shaped into behaviors) and psychoanalysis. Most
child professionals today work from a behavior modification approach.
What ever self-esteem is and if it exists it is doubtful whether parents
are any more responsible for it than they are for a child who is an academic
genius. We would never try to take full responsibility for every good thing
our children do. It is time that the good people of this country stop
allowing politicized child professionals to hold them responsible for every
bad thing one of their children may choose to do...Or so it seems to me...
Tim B.

[Dan Holsopple]

TIMB...@aol.com wrote:

> Of course, we all should and most of us wish to do these things. However, the
> secular humanist crowd has created a false scientific parenting culture here
> in America.

Who are we listening to....Good question! If we don't go to the right
Source, we will end up with the advice of "Mr. Worldy Wiseman".

> The fact remains that no field of scholarship has even begun to prove
> that such a thing as self-esteem exists.

There is a thing called self perception...Rom 12:3 For thru the grace
given
to me I say to every man amoung you not to think more highly of himself
than
he ought to think, but to think as to have sound judgement....
Since this is an exhortation, we have a part to play in how we perceive
ourselves
and it does impact how we function and treat others.

...But a feel-good-about-yourself perception is foolishness.

> Ultimately, parents are not responsible for their adult children's
> feelings of happiness or their success. Parents are responsible for what they
> have always been responsible for -- making sure that they do their job the
> best they can. No one ever had a perfect parent and neither you nor I will be
> a perfect parent. Fortunately, it is not necessary to be a child psychologist
> in order to be a good enough parent.

It is necessary to learn the wisdom of God. Many parents are not willing
to
educate themselves in God's wisdom. Just doing the best you can while
not seeking
sound wisdom not good enough. Children will suffer for our lack of
wisdom. Children
gain information for perceiving themselves by the way we treat them.

The parent's impact on children cannot be understated but it is not
deterministic.
Parents can do everything right, but apart from God working in the soul
of the
child, the child will be lost. Conversely parents can screw up royaly
and God can
rescue the child. God is in control of the outcome, but He will judge
our stewardship
as well.

> If we want some solid practical scientific advice about children, we may
> want to turn to a pediatrician who is a major leader in the new infant mental
> health movement, Dr. T. Berry Brazelton. Brazelton's advice is based on
> excellent scientific evidence.

My observation is that science is limited in measuring issues of the
soul and establishing cause and
effect relationships. There are always presuppositions(many unsoken)
which are unverifiable, and or
unfounded. This effects the interpretation of evidence and applications
remedial.

The tendancy of this type of study is to reduce man to an emination of
chemical processes. If you cannot
measure it, it does not exist. Can you measure a relationship to God!
Can you measure the Holy Spirit?
Can you measure a harassing spirit?(eg King Saul). Can you quantify the
weight of sin?

Science can be useful when an issue is of biological origin, but it ends
up trying the same tools on other
problems which it has no power to solve. Jesus knew how to handle
deamons. Sadly the church in general today
does not.

For the record, when the Designer has left us an User's Guide, we had
better judge ALL advice in its light.

I case you haven't checked lately, there is an incredible amount of
wisdom in the
book of Proverbs. Scan thru for advice on discipline of children, a
father guiding
his son thru issues of life, and development of value judgements and
social relationsips,
as well as self perception.

In His Grace,
Dan