Article that might be interesting

[toto]

Given the threads about the safety of certain things and
comments from one parent to another on what is safe
and what is not, I thought this article might be of interest.
It was posted on the teacher group for comments, but
no one has responded yet. I think people here might have
something to say on the topic. Excerpts below. It's a long
article and raises an awful lot of different points.

http://cms.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20041112-000010.html

Maybe it's the cyclist in the park, trim under his sleek metallic blue
helmet, cruising along the dirt path...at three miles an hour. On his
tricycle.

Or perhaps it's today's playground, all-rubber-cushioned surface
where kids used to skin their knees. And...wait a minute...those
aren't little kids playing. Their mommies--and especially their
daddies--are in there with them, coplaying or play-by-play
coaching. Few take it half-easy on the perimeter benches, as
parents used to do, letting the kids figure things out for
themselves.

Then there are the sanitizing gels, with which over a third of
parents now send their kids to school, according to a recent
survey. Presumably, parents now worry that school bathrooms
are not good enough for their children.

**********************

Behold the wholly sanitized childhood, without skinned knees
or the occasional C in history. "Kids need to feel badly
sometimes," says child psychologist David Elkind, professor
at Tufts University. "We learn through experience and we
learn through bad experiences. Through failure we learn how
to cope."

Messing up, however, even in the playground, is wildly out of
style. Although error and experimentation are the true mothers
of success, parents are taking pains to remove failure from the
equation.

"Life is planned out for us," says Elise Kramer, a Cornell
University junior. "But we don't know what to want." As Elkind
puts it, "Parents and schools are no longer geared toward
child development, they're geared to academic achievement."

************************

College, it seems, is where the fragility factor is now making
its greatest mark. It's where intellectual and developmental
tracks converge as the emotional training wheels come off.
By all accounts, psychological distress is rampant on college
campuses. It takes a variety of forms, including anxiety and
depression--which are increasingly regarded as two faces
of the same coin--binge drinking and substance abuse,
self-mutilation and other forms of disconnection. The mental
state of students is now so precarious for so many that, says
Steven Hyman, provost of Harvard University and former
director of the National Institute of Mental Health, "it is
interfering with the core mission of the university."

The severity of student mental health problems has been
rising since 1988, according to an annual survey of counseling
center directors. Through 1996, the most common problems
raised by students were relationship issues. That is
developmentally appropriate, reports Sherry Benton, assistant
director of counseling at Kansas State University. But in 1996,
anxiety overtook relationship concerns and has remained the
major problem. The University of Michigan Depression Center,
the nation's first, estimates that 15 percent of college students
nationwide are suffering from that disorder alone.

********************

Talk to a college president or administrator and you're almost
certainly bound to hear tales of the parents who call at 2 a.m. to
protest Branden's C in economics because it's going to damage
his shot at grad school.

(Do parents *really* do this - I would have been embarrassed
if my parents called to complain about my grades to anyone but
me even in high school).

*******************

It's bad enough that today's children are raised in a psychological
hothouse where they are overmonitored and oversheltered. But
that hothouse no longer has geographical or temporal boundaries.
For that you can thank the cell phone. Even in college--or perhaps
especially at college--students are typically in contact with their
parents several times a day, reporting every flicker of experience.
One long-distance call overheard on a recent cross-campus walk:
"Hi, Mom. I just got an ice-cream cone; can you believe they put
sprinkles on the bottom as well as on top?"

"Kids are constantly talking to parents," laments Cornell student
Kramer, which makes them perpetually homesick. Of course,
they're not telling the folks everything, notes Portmann. "They're
not calling their parents to say, 'I really went wild last Friday at
the frat house and now I might have chlamydia. Should I go to
the student health center?'"

The perpetual access to parents infantilizes the young, keeping
them in a permanent state of dependency. Whenever the
slightest difficulty arises, "they're constantly referring to their
parents for guidance," reports Kramer. They're not learning
how to manage for themselves.

Think of the cell phone as the eternal umbilicus. One of the ways
we grow up is by internalizing an image of Mom and Dad and the
values and advice they imparted over the early years. Then,
whenever we find ourselves faced with uncertainty or difficulty,
we call on that internalized image. We become, in a way, all the
wise adults we've had the privilege to know. "But cell phones
keep kids from figuring out what to do," says Anderegg. "They've
never internalized any images; all they've internalized is 'call Mom
or Dad.'"

************************

The end result of cheating childhood is to extend it forever.
Despite all the parental pressure, and probably because of it,
kids are pushing back--in their own way. They're taking longer
to grow up.

Adulthood no longer begins when adolescence ends, according
to a recent report by University of Pennsylvania sociologist Frank
F. Furstenberg and colleagues. There is, instead, a growing
no-man's-land of postadolescence from 20 to 30, which they
dub "early adulthood." Those in it look like adults but "haven't
become fully adult yet--traditionally defined as finishing school,
landing a job with benefits, marrying and parenting--because
they are not ready or perhaps not permitted to do so."

Using the classic benchmarks of adulthood, 65 percent of males
had reached adulthood by the age of 30 in 1960. By contrast, in
2000, only 31 percent had. Among women, 77 percent met the
benchmarks of adulthood by age 30 in 1960. By 2000, the
number had fallen to 46 percent.


..


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

[bizby40]

"toto" > wrote in message
...
> Given the threads about the safety of certain things and
> comments from one parent to another on what is safe
> and what is not, I thought this article might be of interest.
> It was posted on the teacher group for comments, but
> no one has responded yet. I think people here might have
> something to say on the topic. Excerpts below. It's a long
> article and raises an awful lot of different points.
>
> http://cms.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20041112-000010.html
>
> Maybe it's the cyclist in the park, trim under his sleek metallic blue
> helmet, cruising along the dirt path...at three miles an hour. On his
> tricycle.
>
> Or perhaps it's today's playground, all-rubber-cushioned surface
> where kids used to skin their knees. And...wait a minute...those
> aren't little kids playing. Their mommies--and especially their
> daddies--are in there with them, coplaying or play-by-play
> coaching. Few take it half-easy on the perimeter benches, as
> parents used to do, letting the kids figure things out for
> themselves.

Forget skinned knees, I've been rather surprised at how many broken
bones occur at the playgrounds at my kids' schools.

> Then there are the sanitizing gels, with which over a third of
> parents now send their kids to school, according to a recent
> survey. Presumably, parents now worry that school bathrooms
> are not good enough for their children.

We were required to send in hand-sanitizer. It was on the list. I
think they're trying to stem the tide of winter colds.

As for the rest of this article, it's really scarey. I can only hope
that since I don't sound like the parents described, that my kids
won't turn out like th kids they described.

Bizby

> **********************
>
> Behold the wholly sanitized childhood, without skinned knees
> or the occasional C in history. "Kids need to feel badly
> sometimes," says child psychologist David Elkind, professor
> at Tufts University. "We learn through experience and we
> learn through bad experiences. Through failure we learn how
> to cope."
>
> Messing up, however, even in the playground, is wildly out of
> style. Although error and experimentation are the true mothers
> of success, parents are taking pains to remove failure from the
> equation.

> "Life is planned out for us," says Elise Kramer, a Cornell
> University junior. "But we don't know what to want." As Elkind
> puts it, "Parents and schools are no longer geared toward
> child development, they're geared to academic achievement."
>
> ************************
>
> College, it seems, is where the fragility factor is now making
> its greatest mark. It's where intellectual and developmental
> tracks converge as the emotional training wheels come off.
> By all accounts, psychological distress is rampant on college
> campuses. It takes a variety of forms, including anxiety and
> depression--which are increasingly regarded as two faces
> of the same coin--binge drinking and substance abuse,
> self-mutilation and other forms of disconnection. The mental
> state of students is now so precarious for so many that, says
> Steven Hyman, provost of Harvard University and former
> director of the National Institute of Mental Health, "it is
> interfering with the core mission of the university."
>
> The severity of student mental health problems has been
> rising since 1988, according to an annual survey of counseling
> center directors. Through 1996, the most common problems
> raised by students were relationship issues. That is
> developmentally appropriate, reports Sherry Benton, assistant
> director of counseling at Kansas State University. But in 1996,
> anxiety overtook relationship concerns and has remained the
> major problem. The University of Michigan Depression Center,
> the nation's first, estimates that 15 percent of college students
> nationwide are suffering from that disorder alone.
>
> ********************
>
> Talk to a college president or administrator and you're almost
> certainly bound to hear tales of the parents who call at 2 a.m. to
> protest Branden's C in economics because it's going to damage
> his shot at grad school.
>
> (Do parents *really* do this - I would have been embarrassed
> if my parents called to complain about my grades to anyone but
> me even in high school).
>
> *******************
>
> It's bad enough that today's children are raised in a psychological
> hothouse where they are overmonitored and oversheltered. But
> that hothouse no longer has geographical or temporal boundaries.
> For that you can thank the cell phone. Even in college--or perhaps
> especially at college--students are typically in contact with their
> parents several times a day, reporting every flicker of experience.
> One long-distance call overheard on a recent cross-campus walk:
> "Hi, Mom. I just got an ice-cream cone; can you believe they put
> sprinkles on the bottom as well as on top?"
>
> "Kids are constantly talking to parents," laments Cornell student
> Kramer, which makes them perpetually homesick. Of course,
> they're not telling the folks everything, notes Portmann. "They're
> not calling their parents to say, 'I really went wild last Friday at
> the frat house and now I might have chlamydia. Should I go to
> the student health center?'"
>
> The perpetual access to parents infantilizes the young, keeping
> them in a permanent state of dependency. Whenever the
> slightest difficulty arises, "they're constantly referring to their
> parents for guidance," reports Kramer. They're not learning
> how to manage for themselves.
>
> Think of the cell phone as the eternal umbilicus. One of the ways
> we grow up is by internalizing an image of Mom and Dad and the
> values and advice they imparted over the early years. Then,
> whenever we find ourselves faced with uncertainty or difficulty,
> we call on that internalized image. We become, in a way, all the
> wise adults we've had the privilege to know. "But cell phones
> keep kids from figuring out what to do," says Anderegg. "They've
> never internalized any images; all they've internalized is 'call Mom
> or Dad.'"
>
> ************************
>
> The end result of cheating childhood is to extend it forever.
> Despite all the parental pressure, and probably because of it,
> kids are pushing back--in their own way. They're taking longer
> to grow up.
>
> Adulthood no longer begins when adolescence ends, according
> to a recent report by University of Pennsylvania sociologist Frank
> F. Furstenberg and colleagues. There is, instead, a growing
> no-man's-land of postadolescence from 20 to 30, which they
> dub "early adulthood." Those in it look like adults but "haven't
> become fully adult yet--traditionally defined as finishing school,
> landing a job with benefits, marrying and parenting--because
> they are not ready or perhaps not permitted to do so."
>
> Using the classic benchmarks of adulthood, 65 percent of males
> had reached adulthood by the age of 30 in 1960. By contrast, in
> 2000, only 31 percent had. Among women, 77 percent met the
> benchmarks of adulthood by age 30 in 1960. By 2000, the
> number had fallen to 46 percent.
>
>
> .
>
>
> --
> Dorothy
>
> There is no sound, no cry in all the world
> that can be heard unless someone listens ..
>
> The Outer Limits

[Banty]

In article >, toto says...
>

>
>The end result of cheating childhood is to extend it forever.
>Despite all the parental pressure, and probably because of it,
>kids are pushing back--in their own way. They're taking longer
>to grow up.
>
>Adulthood no longer begins when adolescence ends, according
>to a recent report by University of Pennsylvania sociologist Frank
>F. Furstenberg and colleagues. There is, instead, a growing
>no-man's-land of postadolescence from 20 to 30, which they
>dub "early adulthood." Those in it look like adults but "haven't
>become fully adult yet--traditionally defined as finishing school,
>landing a job with benefits, marrying and parenting--because
>they are not ready or perhaps not permitted to do so."
>
>Using the classic benchmarks of adulthood, 65 percent of males
>had reached adulthood by the age of 30 in 1960. By contrast, in
>2000, only 31 percent had. Among women, 77 percent met the
>benchmarks of adulthood by age 30 in 1960. By 2000, the
>number had fallen to 46 percent.

I don't think adolescence should be extended, indeed I think part of the cure
(as much as there could be one for physiological reasons) for adolscent angst
and problems are giving adolescents a useful place in society.

However, frankly I never put much stock in Psychology Today except that it's an
entertaining airport-wait read. According to this article, heck, I'm not an
adult at nearly 50. Because I didn't 'reach' one of the 'classic benchmarks'.

Banty

[dragonlady]

In article >,
toto > wrote:

> Those in it look like adults but "haven't
> become fully adult yet--traditionally defined as finishing school,
> landing a job with benefits, marrying and parenting--because
> they are not ready or perhaps not permitted to do so."
>
> Using the classic benchmarks of adulthood, 65 percent of males
> had reached adulthood by the age of 30 in 1960. By contrast, in
> 2000, only 31 percent had. Among women, 77 percent met the
> benchmarks of adulthood by age 30 in 1960. By 2000, the
> number had fallen to 46 percent.

Using THESE benchmarks, neither DH nor I were "adults" until we were 30.
I was self supporting from the age of 19 (got an occassional $20 from my
parents, but that's all the financial support they could offer), had
held several part time jobs while I put myself through college, held a
couple of full time jobs, went back and got my MBA, married at 27, and
was working full time -- but did not have my first child until I was 30.
DH had not been dependent upon his parents for support from about 22,
was 25 when we got married, but, other than Teaching Assistantships and
Research Assistantships, he did not have a job until he finished his PhD
when he was 30. (It was a pretty brutal program.) However, we were
completely financially self-supporting, on my income.

I remember getting VERY angry when my aunt explained to me that HER
daughter was a grownup, because she was married and had a baby, but,
since I wasn't married, I wasn't yet. Mind you, my 2 year younger
cousin married right out of high school and was on welfare, while I was
fully financially independent and had finished college -- but somehow I
wasn't a real grownup yet.

Hmmmm -- looking back over this, I think you pushed an old ****ed off
button........
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

[Sue]

Another thing that I found out what is new for parents is a little black box
you can put in your car and it has a computer chip in it and you can see if
your teenager is speeding, going off the course that the teen was supposed
to be going and how long time was spent at the destination. There were other
features to this black box. Seems over the top to me, but there ya go.
--
Sue (mom to three girls)

[dragonlady]

In article >,
"Sue" > wrote:

> Another thing that I found out what is new for parents is a little black box
> you can put in your car and it has a computer chip in it and you can see if
> your teenager is speeding, going off the course that the teen was supposed
> to be going and how long time was spent at the destination. There were other
> features to this black box. Seems over the top to me, but there ya go.

I can see using something like this as a consequence of behavior that
was already a problem: if a child has gotten into trouble over issues
with the car -- speeding, going where they weren't supposed to, lying
about where they were -- you might take the keys away for a time, and
then give them back WITH the black box and a clear statement that if
they speed or go where they aren't supposed to go, you will keep the
keys for even longer. I would only use something like this with a kid
who had proven themselves untrustworthy -- someone who consistently lied
AND who had other major issues.

However, I think parents who use things like this for ordinary kids with
ordinary issues are overcontrolling.
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

[Stephanie]

"Banty" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, toto says...
> >
>
> >
> >The end result of cheating childhood is to extend it forever.
> >Despite all the parental pressure, and probably because of it,
> >kids are pushing back--in their own way. They're taking longer
> >to grow up.
> >
> >Adulthood no longer begins when adolescence ends, according
> >to a recent report by University of Pennsylvania sociologist Frank
> >F. Furstenberg and colleagues. There is, instead, a growing
> >no-man's-land of postadolescence from 20 to 30, which they
> >dub "early adulthood." Those in it look like adults but "haven't
> >become fully adult yet--traditionally defined as finishing school,
> >landing a job with benefits, marrying and parenting--because
> >they are not ready or perhaps not permitted to do so."
> >
> >Using the classic benchmarks of adulthood, 65 percent of males
> >had reached adulthood by the age of 30 in 1960. By contrast, in
> >2000, only 31 percent had. Among women, 77 percent met the
> >benchmarks of adulthood by age 30 in 1960. By 2000, the
> >number had fallen to 46 percent.
>
> I don't think adolescence should be extended, indeed I think part of the
cure
> (as much as there could be one for physiological reasons) for adolscent
angst
> and problems are giving adolescents a useful place in society.
>

What do you mean give adolescents a useful place in society? I do not
understand.

> However, frankly I never put much stock in Psychology Today except that
it's an
> entertaining airport-wait read. According to this article, heck, I'm not
an
> adult at nearly 50. Because I didn't 'reach' one of the 'classic
benchmarks'.
>
> Banty
>

[Banty]

In article >, Stephanie says...
>
>
>"Banty" > wrote in message
...
>> In article >, toto says...
>> >
>>
>> >
>> >The end result of cheating childhood is to extend it forever.
>> >Despite all the parental pressure, and probably because of it,
>> >kids are pushing back--in their own way. They're taking longer
>> >to grow up.
>> >
>> >Adulthood no longer begins when adolescence ends, according
>> >to a recent report by University of Pennsylvania sociologist Frank
>> >F. Furstenberg and colleagues. There is, instead, a growing
>> >no-man's-land of postadolescence from 20 to 30, which they
>> >dub "early adulthood." Those in it look like adults but "haven't
>> >become fully adult yet--traditionally defined as finishing school,
>> >landing a job with benefits, marrying and parenting--because
>> >they are not ready or perhaps not permitted to do so."
>> >
>> >Using the classic benchmarks of adulthood, 65 percent of males
>> >had reached adulthood by the age of 30 in 1960. By contrast, in
>> >2000, only 31 percent had. Among women, 77 percent met the
>> >benchmarks of adulthood by age 30 in 1960. By 2000, the
>> >number had fallen to 46 percent.
>>
>> I don't think adolescence should be extended, indeed I think part of the
>cure
>> (as much as there could be one for physiological reasons) for adolscent
>angst
>> and problems are giving adolescents a useful place in society.
>>
>
>What do you mean give adolescents a useful place in society? I do not
>understand.
>

I mean some part of adult role and responsibility extended to younger ages.
Family and apprenticeships have long started long before the 18 or upwards that
we expect things to hold off to today. So adolescents are expected to can their
feelings and impulses, study, and have 'clean fun'. It doesn't work.

I admit that I'm not full of ideas as to exactly how to implement this in our
current society.

Banty

[Stephanie]

"Banty" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Stephanie says...
> >
> >
> >"Banty" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> In article >, toto says...
> >> >
> >>
> >> >
> >> >The end result of cheating childhood is to extend it forever.
> >> >Despite all the parental pressure, and probably because of it,
> >> >kids are pushing back--in their own way. They're taking longer
> >> >to grow up.
> >> >
> >> >Adulthood no longer begins when adolescence ends, according
> >> >to a recent report by University of Pennsylvania sociologist Frank
> >> >F. Furstenberg and colleagues. There is, instead, a growing
> >> >no-man's-land of postadolescence from 20 to 30, which they
> >> >dub "early adulthood." Those in it look like adults but "haven't
> >> >become fully adult yet--traditionally defined as finishing school,
> >> >landing a job with benefits, marrying and parenting--because
> >> >they are not ready or perhaps not permitted to do so."
> >> >
> >> >Using the classic benchmarks of adulthood, 65 percent of males
> >> >had reached adulthood by the age of 30 in 1960. By contrast, in
> >> >2000, only 31 percent had. Among women, 77 percent met the
> >> >benchmarks of adulthood by age 30 in 1960. By 2000, the
> >> >number had fallen to 46 percent.
> >>
> >> I don't think adolescence should be extended, indeed I think part of
the
> >cure
> >> (as much as there could be one for physiological reasons) for adolscent
> >angst
> >> and problems are giving adolescents a useful place in society.
> >>
> >
> >What do you mean give adolescents a useful place in society? I do not
> >understand.
> >
>
> I mean some part of adult role and responsibility extended to younger
ages.
> Family and apprenticeships have long started long before the 18 or upwards
that
> we expect things to hold off to today. So adolescents are expected to can
their
> feelings and impulses, study, and have 'clean fun'. It doesn't work.
>
> I admit that I'm not full of ideas as to exactly how to implement this in
our
> current society.
>
> Banty
>

There was a move a while back where I used to live to increase the age at
which a person could get a driver's license to 18 because of the numbers of
accidents young drivers had. I thought, at the time, what is the purpose of
that? What is going to be different at 18 than at 16? What was needed was a
decent driver's ed program. The one I went through was a joke. What was
needed was experience and practice. The places which have instituted
strenuous programs with driving simulators and such have shown marked
decrease in accidents among the newly licensed. Don't ask me to cite. I
heard it on the radio and cannot remember where it occured.

My point is that the passage of time alone has a limited ability to aid the
maturation process. There has to be experience, mistakes made, etc..

I think I am agreeing with you, basically.

Stephanie

[toto]

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 13:46:36 -0500, "Stephanie"
> wrote:

>What do you mean give adolescents a useful place in society?
>I do not understand.

It used to be true that adolescents were working at *real* jobs
(even if they stayed in school). Often this involved working on
the family farm or in a family business, not necessarily working
in a factory or being paid wages.

In that situation, they felt grown up. They knew that their work
was valued by the community. They were expected to take
responsibility for their actions, now we don't even give them
the responsibility for their grades. It's always the school's
fault or the teacher's fault or the parent's fault if they are not
learning and not getting the grades they want.

There is a long lag between the time young people hit puberty
and the time they are assigned adult status. In modern society,
this gap is widening significantly: Kids are hitting puberty at
earlier ages than ever before, yet they are being treated as
children at ages that would have been considered grown-up
only a few decades ago.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

[Ericka Kammerer]

Banty wrote:

> I mean some part of adult role and responsibility extended to younger ages.
> Family and apprenticeships have long started long before the 18 or upwards that
> we expect things to hold off to today. So adolescents are expected to can their
> feelings and impulses, study, and have 'clean fun'. It doesn't work.
>
> I admit that I'm not full of ideas as to exactly how to implement this in our
> current society.

Having some responsibility to others by helping out in the
family, community, church, or whatever other organization is pretty
easy to do, assuming there's time. It's a valuable contribution to the
family for the child to have chores or even just to pitch in on a
regular basis even if there aren't specific assigned chores. Teens
can mentor younger students through school, community, or religious
groups. Goodness knows there are lots of charity opportunities.
It's true that these things don't usually come with monetary rewards,
but then again, neither did apprenticeships. It seems like teens
often *do* respond to the sense of being responsible to their
community, and to get some feelings of worth and usefulness from
using their skills to help others.

Best wishes,
Ericka

[toto]

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 15:24:00 -0500, Ericka Kammerer >
wrote:

> It seems like teens often *do* respond to the sense of
> being responsible to their community, and to get some
> feelings of worth and usefulness from using their skills to
> help others.

I agree that they do, but what happens when we slam the kids
with a lawsuit for doing something nice for the neighbors as
that Colorado woman did? Luckily from what I understand
the teenagers are still attempting to do what they intended
which was simply to give cookies to the neighbors. They did
change their procedure so they now leave their names and
don't ring the doorbell later in the evening. In this case, why
was a *lawsuit* called for instead of simply talking to the parents
and asking the girls not to do this so late in the evening and to
only do it for people who knew who they were?


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

[Stephanie]

"toto" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 13:46:36 -0500, "Stephanie"
> > wrote:
>
> >What do you mean give adolescents a useful place in society?
> >I do not understand.
>
> It used to be true that adolescents were working at *real* jobs
> (even if they stayed in school). Often this involved working on
> the family farm or in a family business, not necessarily working
> in a factory or being paid wages.

I had a job from 11 yo (paper route) to today. I wanted to make sure I
understood what *Banty* meant before replying.


>
> In that situation, they felt grown up. They knew that their work
> was valued by the community. They were expected to take
> responsibility for their actions, now we don't even give them
> the responsibility for their grades. It's always the school's
> fault or the teacher's fault or the parent's fault if they are not
> learning and not getting the grades they want.
>

In addition to "feeling grown up" they had actions and consequences which
were closer to being grown up. If you have a job, you have to be there.
Inevitably there are circumstances in which you have to choose between going
to work and not losing your job and going to play or whatever. For us, our
jobs were our pocket money, our clothes beyond the bare basics, etc..

Experience is the best thing for maturation, I think. As I say in another
thread, time passage by itself does little to aid maturation.

The education system in this country (this country being USA where I live,
which is the only country I can speak to). I am not precisely sure what it
is. Is it possible to expect responsibility from your kids while the school
system is trying to make you responsible for their every move, even if you
are not the kind of parent to pester the teacher about your kid's poor
grades?

My Dh and MIL both tell me this story with Horror... DH had a teacher who
made him do 10 problems a night, and show his work, when he clearly
understood the concept. I asked if all the kids had to do these problems.
Yes. ... I could not see the problem. That teacher had it in for DH for
making him do these problems and show the work. Even if I thought that, I
would *not* lightly be coming down in conflict with the teacher in front of
my child. In my book, the child gets the grade. The teacher is the one who
is the adminstrator of the scoring. I am sure there is some extenuating
circumstance which I will see things differently, but that is my base
starting point.


> There is a long lag between the time young people hit puberty
> and the time they are assigned adult status.


There was a time when the status was not assigned, it was necessary. In
times when being responsible is a matter of familial or individual life or
death, it is just done.


> In modern society,
> this gap is widening significantly: Kids are hitting puberty at
> earlier ages than ever before, yet they are being treated as
> children at ages that would have been considered grown-up
> only a few decades ago.
>
>
> --
> Dorothy
>
> There is no sound, no cry in all the world
> that can be heard unless someone listens ..
>
> The Outer Limits

[Stephanie]

"toto" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 15:24:00 -0500, Ericka Kammerer >
> wrote:
>
> > It seems like teens often *do* respond to the sense of
> > being responsible to their community, and to get some
> > feelings of worth and usefulness from using their skills to
> > help others.
>
> I agree that they do, but what happens when we slam the kids
> with a lawsuit for doing something nice for the neighbors as
> that Colorado woman did? Luckily from what I understand
> the teenagers are still attempting to do what they intended
> which was simply to give cookies to the neighbors. They did
> change their procedure so they now leave their names and
> don't ring the doorbell later in the evening. In this case, why
> was a *lawsuit* called for instead of simply talking to the parents
> and asking the girls not to do this so late in the evening and to
> only do it for people who knew who they were?
>
>

Wow. That's horrifying.

> --
> Dorothy
>
> There is no sound, no cry in all the world
> that can be heard unless someone listens ..
>
> The Outer Limits

[Banty]

In article >, Ericka Kammerer says...
>
>Banty wrote:
>
>> I mean some part of adult role and responsibility extended to younger ages.
>>Family and apprenticeships have long started long before the 18 or upwards that
>>we expect things to hold off to today. So adolescents are expected to can their
>> feelings and impulses, study, and have 'clean fun'. It doesn't work.
>>
>> I admit that I'm not full of ideas as to exactly how to implement this in our
>> current society.
>
> Having some responsibility to others by helping out in the
>family, community, church, or whatever other organization is pretty
>easy to do, assuming there's time. It's a valuable contribution to the
>family for the child to have chores or even just to pitch in on a
>regular basis even if there aren't specific assigned chores. Teens
>can mentor younger students through school, community, or religious
>groups. Goodness knows there are lots of charity opportunities.
>It's true that these things don't usually come with monetary rewards,
>but then again, neither did apprenticeships. It seems like teens
>often *do* respond to the sense of being responsible to their
>community, and to get some feelings of worth and usefulness from
>using their skills to help others.

( As an aside apprenticeships often came with room and board, so yes there were
'monetary' rewards.)

There are *opportunities* to do all sorts of things, but that's not quite what I
mean by adolescents having a role in society. Sure, the really motivated ones,
usually from famlies that do this kind of thing more than other families to
begin wiht, can go out and find Stuff To Do. What I'm talking about would be
more along the lines of it being part of normal growing up, that at a certain
point certain responsibilities would *commonly be expected*, just as 30 year
olds are expected to be holding down productive jobs and are looked to for input
on the political system, etc.

If I designed society ("Banty-soc"), learning would be such a normally
*lifetime* thing that work, employment, would be starting earlier without
impacting learning overall, because education extends longer (and never stops).
And/or social organizations would organize around certain tasks like the charity
ones you refer to are *usually* done by adolescent members of the community.
Youths in past times were well into apprenticeships, family occupations a couple
of generations ago depended on the youth's contributions, certain religious
groups (like Latter Day Saints) routinely have service as part of growing up
(not that worldwide proseltyzing is what I actually advocate..).

Basically, there would be a transition into adulthood. Instead of expecting
near-adults to just can it until they're 18 or 22 or even older. A period of
youth.

Now that's not to say youths are the *same* as adults, as there still are
physiological maturing processes still going on, in the body (esp. for boys as
they take longer) but also notably in the brain. But I do think we've slid into
infantilization for too long of the maturation process.

Banty

[bizby40]

"toto" > wrote in message
...

[snip]

> In that situation, they felt grown up. They knew that their work
> was valued by the community. They were expected to take
> responsibility for their actions, now we don't even give them
> the responsibility for their grades. It's always the school's
> fault or the teacher's fault or the parent's fault if they are not
> learning and not getting the grades they want.

[snip]

> --
> Dorothy

Just today DD came home really upset that she got a "U" on
an assignment. She didn't realize part of what she was supposed
to do, so she didn't do it. When I mentioned it to a friend she
said, "Did you talk to the teacher?" I said, "No, I'm just going
to have her complete the assignment and turn it in." She said,
"Sometimes you have to go to bat for them." I said, "Maybe,
but not this time." She said, "But if DD didn't understand, the
teacher might not have explained it well enough." I said, "It's
more likely that the teacher explained it just fine, and DD wasn't
paying attention.

LOL. No wonder some kids don't learn personal responsibility.

Bizby

[Ericka Kammerer]

toto wrote:

> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 15:24:00 -0500, Ericka Kammerer >
> wrote:
>
>
>>It seems like teens often *do* respond to the sense of
>>being responsible to their community, and to get some
>>feelings of worth and usefulness from using their skills to
>>help others.
>
>
> I agree that they do, but what happens when we slam the kids
> with a lawsuit for doing something nice for the neighbors as
> that Colorado woman did? Luckily from what I understand
> the teenagers are still attempting to do what they intended
> which was simply to give cookies to the neighbors. They did
> change their procedure so they now leave their names and
> don't ring the doorbell later in the evening. In this case, why
> was a *lawsuit* called for instead of simply talking to the parents
> and asking the girls not to do this so late in the evening and to
> only do it for people who knew who they were?

I agree that lawsuit was silly (well, worse than
that, actually), but even if that's
a concern, that wouldn't prohibit teens from engaging in
the overwhelming majority of organized helping-others
activities at home, school, community, or church. It
just might discourage them from freelancing ;-)

Best wishes,
Ericka

[Ericka Kammerer]

Banty wrote:

> In article >, Ericka Kammerer says...

>> Having some responsibility to others by helping out in the
>>family, community, church, or whatever other organization is pretty
>>easy to do, assuming there's time. It's a valuable contribution to the
>>family for the child to have chores or even just to pitch in on a
>>regular basis even if there aren't specific assigned chores. Teens
>>can mentor younger students through school, community, or religious
>>groups. Goodness knows there are lots of charity opportunities.
>>It's true that these things don't usually come with monetary rewards,
>>but then again, neither did apprenticeships. It seems like teens
>>often *do* respond to the sense of being responsible to their
>>community, and to get some feelings of worth and usefulness from
>>using their skills to help others.
>
>
> ( As an aside apprenticeships often came with room and board, so yes there were
> 'monetary' rewards.)

Well...so does living in a family ;-)

> There are *opportunities* to do all sorts of things, but that's not quite what I
> mean by adolescents having a role in society. Sure, the really motivated ones,
> usually from famlies that do this kind of thing more than other families to
> begin wiht, can go out and find Stuff To Do. What I'm talking about would be
> more along the lines of it being part of normal growing up, that at a certain
> point certain responsibilities would *commonly be expected*, just as 30 year
> olds are expected to be holding down productive jobs and are looked to for input
> on the political system, etc.

While I agree that it would be fabulous to have more societal
reinforcement for this sort of thing, I also think that one can set
a lot of these expectations within the family. In other words, I
don't think it's difficult to achieve this in any family that *wants*
to, though the social pressure isn't there to encourage families who
aren't interested.

> If I designed society ("Banty-soc"), learning would be such a normally
> *lifetime* thing that work, employment, would be starting earlier without
> impacting learning overall, because education extends longer (and never stops).
> And/or social organizations would organize around certain tasks like the charity
> ones you refer to are *usually* done by adolescent members of the community.
> Youths in past times were well into apprenticeships, family occupations a couple
> of generations ago depended on the youth's contributions, certain religious
> groups (like Latter Day Saints) routinely have service as part of growing up
> (not that worldwide proseltyzing is what I actually advocate..).
>
> Basically, there would be a transition into adulthood. Instead of expecting
> near-adults to just can it until they're 18 or 22 or even older. A period of
> youth.
>
> Now that's not to say youths are the *same* as adults, as there still are
> physiological maturing processes still going on, in the body (esp. for boys as
> they take longer) but also notably in the brain. But I do think we've slid into
> infantilization for too long of the maturation process.

I agree, and society could do more to provide opportunities
and expectations. I also agree that we as a society have created a
bit of rock and a hard place by creating an educational system that
expects complete focus through more and more years of college (to
the exclusion of Getting a Real Life) and then wonders why grads
don't have any common sense when they get out. There's a lot of
room for change. I would just argue that if it's something you
*want* for your children, there are ways to set up that expectation
and enable it despite society's lack of active support.

Best wishes,
Ericka

[Banty]

In article >, Ericka Kammerer says...
>
>Banty wrote:
>
>> In article >, Ericka Kammerer says...
>
>>> Having some responsibility to others by helping out in the
>>>family, community, church, or whatever other organization is pretty
>>>easy to do, assuming there's time. It's a valuable contribution to the
>>>family for the child to have chores or even just to pitch in on a
>>>regular basis even if there aren't specific assigned chores. Teens
>>>can mentor younger students through school, community, or religious
>>>groups. Goodness knows there are lots of charity opportunities.
>>>It's true that these things don't usually come with monetary rewards,
>>>but then again, neither did apprenticeships. It seems like teens
>>>often *do* respond to the sense of being responsible to their
>>>community, and to get some feelings of worth and usefulness from
>>>using their skills to help others.
>>
>>
>>( As an aside apprenticeships often came with room and board, so yes there were
>> 'monetary' rewards.)
>
> Well...so does living in a family ;-)

Well, OK :-)

But I'm talking about a recognized role outside the family.

>
>>There are *opportunities* to do all sorts of things, but that's not quite what I
>>mean by adolescents having a role in society. Sure, the really motivated ones,
>> usually from famlies that do this kind of thing more than other families to
>> begin wiht, can go out and find Stuff To Do. What I'm talking about would be
>> more along the lines of it being part of normal growing up, that at a certain
>> point certain responsibilities would *commonly be expected*, just as 30 year
>>olds are expected to be holding down productive jobs and are looked to for input
>> on the political system, etc.
>
> While I agree that it would be fabulous to have more societal
>reinforcement for this sort of thing, I also think that one can set
>a lot of these expectations within the family. In other words, I
>don't think it's difficult to achieve this in any family that *wants*
>to, though the social pressure isn't there to encourage families who
>aren't interested.

Well, sure things can occur within the family. But it generally stays there.
The family will support, will or may not spoil and coddle, or be overly driving,
but that's about family. Anyway you cut it, it's the nest. It's practice, at
best. Mom and Dad may be proud, but it isn't a role in wider society.

>
>> If I designed society ("Banty-soc"), learning would be such a normally
>> *lifetime* thing that work, employment, would be starting earlier without
>>impacting learning overall, because education extends longer (and never stops).
>>And/or social organizations would organize around certain tasks like the charity
>> ones you refer to are *usually* done by adolescent members of the community.
>>Youths in past times were well into apprenticeships, family occupations a couple
>> of generations ago depended on the youth's contributions, certain religious
>> groups (like Latter Day Saints) routinely have service as part of growing up
>> (not that worldwide proseltyzing is what I actually advocate..).
>>
>> Basically, there would be a transition into adulthood. Instead of expecting
>> near-adults to just can it until they're 18 or 22 or even older. A period of
>> youth.
>>
>> Now that's not to say youths are the *same* as adults, as there still are
>>physiological maturing processes still going on, in the body (esp. for boys as
>>they take longer) but also notably in the brain. But I do think we've slid into
>> infantilization for too long of the maturation process.
>
> I agree, and society could do more to provide opportunities
>and expectations. I also agree that we as a society have created a
>bit of rock and a hard place by creating an educational system that
>expects complete focus through more and more years of college (to
>the exclusion of Getting a Real Life) and then wonders why grads
>don't have any common sense when they get out. There's a lot of
>room for change. I would just argue that if it's something you
>*want* for your children, there are ways to set up that expectation
>and enable it despite society's lack of active support.

OK. But that only goes so far.

Banty

[shinypenny]

Stephanie wrote:
> There was a move a while back where I used to live to increase the
age at
> which a person could get a driver's license to 18 because of the
numbers of
> accidents young drivers had. I thought, at the time, what is the
purpose of
> that? What is going to be different at 18 than at 16? What was needed
was a
> decent driver's ed program. The one I went through was a joke. What
was
> needed was experience and practice. The places which have instituted
> strenuous programs with driving simulators and such have shown marked
> decrease in accidents among the newly licensed. Don't ask me to cite.
I
> heard it on the radio and cannot remember where it occured.
>
> My point is that the passage of time alone has a limited ability to
aid the
> maturation process. There has to be experience, mistakes made, etc..


Well, there's a lot of new research about how the brain develops in
adolescence. The good news is, by age 16 most teens are well on their
way through the process. The bad news is, enough teens don't complete
the process until closer to age 18, and some not until as late as 21.
The research seems to indicate to me that it may not be such a bad
thing to hold off giving kids car keys until 18.

Mind you, this is not necessarily about maturity, but rather about the
way the brain is wired that can affect not only judgement but reaction
times, memory recall, and things like that that happen to be good if
you're going to get behind the wheel of a car.

The research also convinced me that nobody should drink alcohol until
age 21. Alcohol - even small amounts - can have adverse effects on the
developing teen brain. I told my DD's this the other day, that even if
I *thought* they were mature enough to handle a sip of alcohol now and
then, it was better to hold off until 21 to be absolutely sure their
brain was all done growing. Just to be safe!

jen

[P. Tierney]

"toto" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 15:24:00 -0500, Ericka Kammerer >
> wrote:
>
>> It seems like teens often *do* respond to the sense of
>> being responsible to their community, and to get some
>> feelings of worth and usefulness from using their skills to
>> help others.
>
> I agree that they do, but what happens when we slam the kids
> with a lawsuit for doing something nice for the neighbors as
> that Colorado woman did?

I would say that was a bizarre exception and that we
shouldn't change our behaviour or create new rules based
upon the bizarre exceptions.

If we did, we would become so wrapped up in
apprehensions that we wouldn't be able to move.


P. Tierney

[Irene]

dragonlady wrote:
> In article >,
> toto > wrote:
>
> > Those in it look like adults but "haven't
> > become fully adult yet--traditionally defined as finishing school,
> > landing a job with benefits, marrying and parenting--because
> > they are not ready or perhaps not permitted to do so."
> >
> > Using the classic benchmarks of adulthood, 65 percent of males
> > had reached adulthood by the age of 30 in 1960. By contrast, in
> > 2000, only 31 percent had. Among women, 77 percent met the
> > benchmarks of adulthood by age 30 in 1960. By 2000, the
> > number had fallen to 46 percent.
>
> Using THESE benchmarks, neither DH nor I were "adults" until we were
30.
> I was self supporting from the age of 19 (got an occassional $20 from
my
> parents, but that's all the financial support they could offer), had
> held several part time jobs while I put myself through college, held
a
> couple of full time jobs, went back and got my MBA, married at 27,
and
> was working full time -- but did not have my first child until I was
30.
> DH had not been dependent upon his parents for support from about 22,

> was 25 when we got married, but, other than Teaching Assistantships
and
> Research Assistantships, he did not have a job until he finished his
PhD
> when he was 30. (It was a pretty brutal program.) However, we were
> completely financially self-supporting, on my income.
>
> I remember getting VERY angry when my aunt explained to me that HER
> daughter was a grownup, because she was married and had a baby, but,
> since I wasn't married, I wasn't yet. Mind you, my 2 year younger
> cousin married right out of high school and was on welfare, while I
was
> fully financially independent and had finished college -- but somehow
I
> wasn't a real grownup yet.
>
> Hmmmm -- looking back over this, I think you pushed an old ****ed off

> button........
> --

A few thoughts -

I recently saw an article (I forget where, possibly the Utne Reader)
about this 20-30 age thing. I remember that when I turned 25, it was
much more traumatic than turning 30. At 25, I was finishing up grad
school, wasn't dating anyone, much less married with kids, and while I
was employed, I didn't know where I was going to work once I was done
with school. I definitely had the feeling that I should be further on
my life plan by the big age of 25!

At 30, I felt much more like an adult - I had my architecture license,
I was about to be married (6 weeks later), I had a house, and df and I
had our own architecture practice.

I definitely think the delayed growing up bit is a valid point. Tho
I'm not entirely sure it's a bad thing - I certainly enjoyed a lot of
my 20's!

As for perceptions - one of my college professors didn't marry until
relatively late in life (while she was my prof) - I think she was
either late 40's or early 50's, tho I'm not sure. She said her family
didn't treat her as being grown-up until she got married.

As for how kids are being affected nowadays - one thing I've seen
mentioned in articles (again, I forget where, sorry!) is that kids are
being taught so much about how to be cooperative that they don't learn
how to be leaders. So, they can follow directions, but don't
necessarily have much initiative.

Ramblingly,

Irene

[Penny Gaines]

Ericka Kammerer wrote:

> I agree that lawsuit was silly (well, worse than
> that, actually), but even if that's
> a concern, that wouldn't prohibit teens from engaging in
> the overwhelming majority of organized helping-others
> activities at home, school, community, or church. It
> just might discourage them from freelancing ;-)

Isn't that what Toto's article was talking about though? That
teenagers are incapable of doing good things without some special
program, presumably supervised by proper grown-ups? And then
would their good deeds be measured and evaluated, rather then coming
from the heart?

--
Penny Gaines
UK mum to three

[Ericka Kammerer]

Penny Gaines wrote:

> Ericka Kammerer wrote:
>
>
>>I agree that lawsuit was silly (well, worse than
>>that, actually), but even if that's
>>a concern, that wouldn't prohibit teens from engaging in
>>the overwhelming majority of organized helping-others
>>activities at home, school, community, or church. It
>>just might discourage them from freelancing ;-)
>
>
> Isn't that what Toto's article was talking about though? That
> teenagers are incapable of doing good things without some special
> program, presumably supervised by proper grown-ups? And then
> would their good deeds be measured and evaluated, rather then coming
> from the heart?

I think if the goal is for teens to take responsibility
for something outside of their own individual lives and pursuits,
it is not *necessary* for them to do it all by themselves to own
it. The teen who puts in time with Habitat for Humanity is
working for an organization, but is still taking on some part
of adult roles and responsibilities. I mean, you don't have
to start your own business to take on the adult responsibility
of providing for one's family. The teen who volunteers to
tutor other students through a school program isn't having
his or her efforts invalidated just because there it's being
done through an organized program.

Best wishes,
Ericka

[Barbara Bomberger]

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 17:08:40 +0000, Penny Gaines
> wrote:

>Ericka Kammerer wrote:
>
>> I agree that lawsuit was silly (well, worse than
>> that, actually), but even if that's
>> a concern, that wouldn't prohibit teens from engaging in
>> the overwhelming majority of organized helping-others
>> activities at home, school, community, or church. It
>> just might discourage them from freelancing ;-)
>
>Isn't that what Toto's article was talking about though? That
>teenagers are incapable of doing good things without some special
>program, presumably supervised by proper grown-ups? And then
>would their good deeds be measured and evaluated, rather then coming
>from the heart?

As a parent of children who are activie in both scouting and church,
Im not sure that because children do "good things as part of aprogram,
that those deeds don't come from the heart.

My children certainly as part of the organizations they are in choose
the kind of outreach and volunteer things they choose to do. An adult
doesnt say "well, lets do your good deed for the day and help a little
old lady across the street"

My children chose between a variety of projects as part of their youth
group, on thier own.

And if nothing else, being part of an organization that teaches
volunteerism is setting a good example and hopefully teaching habits
and attitudes for a life time.

Just as they teach many other values

[Barbara Bomberger]

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 06:40:26 GMT, "P. Tierney"
> wrote:

>
>"toto" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 15:24:00 -0500, Ericka Kammerer >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> It seems like teens often *do* respond to the sense of
>>> being responsible to their community, and to get some
>>> feelings of worth and usefulness from using their skills to
>>> help others.
>>
>> I agree that they do, but what happens when we slam the kids
>> with a lawsuit for doing something nice for the neighbors as
>> that Colorado woman did?
>
> I would say that was a bizarre exception and that we
>shouldn't change our behaviour or create new rules based
>upon the bizarre exceptions.

FWIW, although I think the kids did a "good thing" and I think that
the neighbor overreactted, I think the kid and or the parents lost
track of common sense guidelines

Heck, Im in bed with the lights of at nine or nine thirty. Should my
dog start barking, although I would not react in such a manner, I
certainly might be wary.

While ten pm may not be too late for a young person to be out, it is
in my opinion too late to be knocking on doors, even for a "good
reason", just as it is to late to make phone calls.

Barb
>
> If we did, we would become so wrapped up in
>apprehensions that we wouldn't be able to move.
>
>
> P. Tierney
>

[toto]

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 21:58:54 +0100, Barbara Bomberger
> wrote:

>As a parent of children who are activie in both scouting and church,
>Im not sure that because children do "good things as part of aprogram,
>that those deeds don't come from the heart.

I am sure these good things do come from their hearts,
but what the article talks about is doing things without so
much adult supervision, good or bad.

Kids need both kinds of experiences, imo.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

[toto]

On 3 Mar 2005 08:10:00 -0800, "Irene" > wrote:

>As for how kids are being affected nowadays - one thing I've seen
>mentioned in articles (again, I forget where, sorry!) is that kids are
>being taught so much about how to be cooperative that they don't learn
>how to be leaders. So, they can follow directions, but don't
>necessarily have much initiative.

Cooperation, however, does require kids to exercise both leadership
and following directions type skills. If they are to learn how to be
on a team, they have to learn to take responsibility for contributing
their best work.

Most don't learn that, however, because cooperation is defined as
cooperating with the authority that tells them what to do, not
actually working with a team (sports can help, but we need to extend
the team to academic learning too).


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

[Nikki]

toto wrote:

> http://cms.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20041112-000010.html
>
> Maybe it's the cyclist in the park, trim under his sleek metallic blue
> helmet, cruising along the dirt path...at three miles an hour. On his
> tricycle.

Lol. That makes me a little nuts too. Our kids have helmets of course. Dh
is a little over the top with them. For instance I don't think they need to
wear them unless we are going on a real bike ride. He puts them on them in
the driveway :-P. Luke has training wheels on his bike and doesn't really
need one but it is 'setting the precedent' so to speak :-)

> Or perhaps it's today's playground, all-rubber-cushioned surface
> where kids used to skin their knees.

I think they are overdoing their point a bit. Sand, woodchips, rubber
surface prevents broken bones, not skinned knees. That seems to be a good
thing to me. All our school yard equipment was above black top. There were
many a broken bone.

And...wait a minute...those
> aren't little kids playing. Their mommies--and especially their
> daddies--are in there with them, coplaying or play-by-play
> coaching.

That is a little annoying, lol.

> Then there are the sanitizing gels, with which over a third of
> parents now send their kids to school, according to a recent
> survey. Presumably, parents now worry that school bathrooms
> are not good enough for their children.

Presumably - I don't know a thing about this one!

> Although error and experimentation are the true mothers
> of success, parents are taking pains to remove failure from the
> equation.

This is a good point.

> "Parents and schools are no longer geared toward
> child development, they're geared to academic achievement."

That is sad.


> (Do parents *really* do this - I would have been embarrassed
> if my parents called to complain about my grades to anyone but
> me even in high school).

I've never heard of it but then the kids probably aren't broadcasting it
either :-/

> The perpetual access to parents infantilizes the young, keeping
> them in a permanent state of dependency. Whenever the
> slightest difficulty arises, "they're constantly referring to their
> parents for guidance," reports Kramer. They're not learning
> how to manage for themselves.

I find that hard to believe - that teens and young adults constantly refer
to their parents for guidance. Do parents of older kids find that to be
true?? It seems to me that the opposite would be more of a problem.

> Think of the cell phone as the eternal umbilicus.

I've never thought of cell phones in this matter but cell phones do drive me
a bit crazy. The constant availability, the calling for ridiculous stuff.
It prevents people from fully living in the moment they are in...and the
constant ringing of a cell phone or with one attached to your ear prevents
for everyone around you too. No one needs to call someone that often or be
that available...and if they do need it...they need to address that!

I do think cell phones are great in many ways but there seems to be no
boundaries with the darn things. I'm not a big fan of talking on the
regular phone either so maybe I'm just a crab, lol.

> Using the classic benchmarks of adulthood, 65 percent of males
> had reached adulthood by the age of 30 in 1960. By contrast, in
> 2000, only 31 percent had.

I think they need to change the classic benchmarks of adulthood then. I
don't see any greater value in having kids at 20 then at 30 or even 40.
Actually there is a lot to be said for waiting. Some people never get
married or have kids. I would think true adulthood is when you move out of
your parents home and take care of your emotional and financial needs either
on your own or with other adult relationships.


--
Nikki

[enigma]

wrote in
:

> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 09:00:55 -0600, toto
> > wrote:
>
>>Given the threads about the safety of certain things and
>>comments from one parent to another on what is safe
>>and what is not, I thought this article might be of
>>interest. It was posted on the teacher group for comments,
>>but no one has responded yet. I think people here might
>>have something to say on the topic. Excerpts below. It's
>>a long article and raises an awful lot of different points.
>>
>>http://cms.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20041112-000010.
>>html
>>
>>Maybe it's the cyclist in the park, trim under his sleek
>>metallic blue helmet, cruising along the dirt path...at
>>three miles an hour. On his tricycle.
>
> Are helmets required for tricycles? Or is is something his
> parents are trying to get him used to wearing.

depends on the state. 17 states have bicycle helmet laws, NY
& MA exempt kids under one year, the rest require them at
least until age 12, but most until 16 with a few until 18.
http://www.gwrra.org/helmetlaws.html

as with the seatbelts, i think they are a good idea but i
don't want the gub'mint nanny telling me i *have* to have one
or put one on my kid. i *can* figure things like that out for
myself thank you very much. besides, 90% of kids bicycle
helmets aren't fitted or worn properly & are pretty useless.
>
>>Or perhaps it's today's playground, all-rubber-cushioned
>>surface where kids used to skin their knees. And...wait a
>>minute...those aren't little kids playing. Their
>>mommies--and especially their daddies--are in there with
>>them,
>
> If their mommies and daddies are playing too they probably
> need the rubber cushioned surfaces. It's not for the kids,
> its for the adults who don't want skinned knees or broken
> hips.

no, it's because the town doesn't want to get sued if junior
breaks a leg. i don't quite understand why states can't just
legislate that one can't sue for accidental injury (much like
NH has laws to protect riding stables from lawsuits due to
injury or death... the sport is inherently dangerous: you
ride, you accept the risk).
then again, i don't understand why parents run to sue if/when
junior does hurt himself... kids have accidents. it's part of
life.
>
>>Then there are the sanitizing gels, with which over a third
>>of parents now send their kids to school, according to a
>>recent survey. Presumably, parents now worry that school
>>bathrooms are not good enough for their children.
>
> Hype from the sellers of the stuff. It is easier and more
> profitable to spray than to wash. But parents don't like
> for their kids to get sick so they do what they can.

since most schools don't have soap in thier washrooms anymore
(the kids "waste" it), maybe parents think that something a
bit stronger than plain water (usually cold at that) would
help cut down on the number of colds junior brings home? kids
are a disease vector :)
oh, & most schools have 'hand sanitizer' on thier list of
school supplies that kids are *supposed* to bring in.
>
>>Behold the wholly sanitized childhood, without skinned
>>knees or the occasional C in history. "Kids need to feel
>>badly sometimes," says child psychologist David Elkind,
>>professor at Tufts University. "We learn through experience
>>and we learn through bad experiences. Through failure we
>>learn how to cope."
>
> Good point but he might have more credibility if he knew
> the difference between feeling bad and feeling badly.

heh heh.
>
>>
>>Messing up, however, even in the playground, is wildly out
>>of style. Although error and experimentation are the true
>>mothers of success, parents are taking pains to remove
>>failure from the equation.
>
> Aren't they doing it because the psychologists and
> counselors tell them they should.

not really. most parents i know that micromanage to that
extent were either raised by micromanaging parents or feel
that thier own childhood was somehow 'deficent' & want to make
sure *thier* kid has every advantage...
personally, i'd rather let my kid out the backdoor to splash
in puddles than drag him to T-ball. i do feel somewhat badly
that there are no other kids nearby, but not badly enough that
i'm going to attempt to find him playdates or enroll him in
activities. he can play with the dog, cats, goats or llamas.
he sees other kids at school, so he gets social interaction.
<shrug>
lee

[Hillary Israeli]

In >,
enigma > wrote:

wrote in
:
*
*> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 09:00:55 -0600, toto
*> > wrote:
*>
*>>Given the threads about the safety of certain things and
*>>comments from one parent to another on what is safe
*>>and what is not, I thought this article might be of
*>>interest. It was posted on the teacher group for comments,
*>>but no one has responded yet. I think people here might
*>>have something to say on the topic. Excerpts below. It's
*>>a long article and raises an awful lot of different points.
*>>
*>>http://cms.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20041112-000010.
*>>html
*>>
*>>Maybe it's the cyclist in the park, trim under his sleek
*>>metallic blue helmet, cruising along the dirt path...at
*>>three miles an hour. On his tricycle.
*>
*> Are helmets required for tricycles? Or is is something his
*> parents are trying to get him used to wearing.
*
* depends on the state. 17 states have bicycle helmet laws, NY

Yes, but do they have tricycle helmet laws? After all, a trike is pretty
stable relative to a bike. You don't get a lot of tricycle crashes.

That said, I do put a helmet on my kids to ride a trike - just so they get
used to wearing one, as previously suggested.


h.

--
Hillary Israeli, VMD
Lafayette Hill/PA/USA/Earth
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it is
too dark to read." --Groucho Marx

[Jeff]

"Hillary Israeli" > wrote in message
...
> In >,
> enigma > wrote:

>(,,,)

> Yes, but do they have tricycle helmet laws? After all, a trike is pretty
> stable relative to a bike. You don't get a lot of tricycle crashes.
>
> That said, I do put a helmet on my kids to ride a trike - just so they get
> used to wearing one, as previously suggested.

Kids who use trikes are also able to go down hills faster than they want
because they don't have experience or power to stop a trike once it goes
going and may not remember to put their feet down to slow down the trike and
might also end up going down stairs by mistake as well.

I bet that kids on trikes are less likely to get into crashes that cause
head injuries than those who use bikes, but I would also bet that some head
injuries occur and that these head injuries are preventable by wearing
helmets.

Jeff

>
>
> h.
>
> --
> Hillary Israeli, VMD
> Lafayette Hill/PA/USA/Earth
> "Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it is
> too dark to read." --Groucho Marx
>
>
>

[Irene]

enigma wrote:
> wrote in
> :
>
> > On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 09:00:55 -0600, toto
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>Given the threads about the safety of certain things and
> >>comments from one parent to another on what is safe
> >>and what is not, I thought this article might be of
> >>interest. It was posted on the teacher group for comments,
> >>but no one has responded yet. I think people here might
> >>have something to say on the topic. Excerpts below. It's
> >>a long article and raises an awful lot of different points.
> >>
> >>http://cms.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20041112-000010.
> >>html
> >>
> >>Maybe it's the cyclist in the park, trim under his sleek
> >>metallic blue helmet, cruising along the dirt path...at
> >>three miles an hour. On his tricycle.
> >
> > Are helmets required for tricycles? Or is is something his
> > parents are trying to get him used to wearing.
>
> depends on the state. 17 states have bicycle helmet laws, NY
> & MA exempt kids under one year, the rest require them at
> least until age 12, but most until 16 with a few until 18.
> http://www.gwrra.org/helmetlaws.html
>
> as with the seatbelts, i think they are a good idea but i
> don't want the gub'mint nanny telling me i *have* to have one
> or put one on my kid. i *can* figure things like that out for
> myself thank you very much. besides, 90% of kids bicycle
> helmets aren't fitted or worn properly & are pretty useless.
> >
I have to admit, last year ds (3 yo) scared me a few times on his
tricycle on some of the slopes - coming close to falling on his head.
I finally found one that fit him and he liked about a month ago, so it
hasn't been road-tested yet. But, since this summer he'll be getting
either a bigger trike or a small bike, I'm glad to have it - he's a bit
of a daredevil. ;-) Now we have to see if he'll actually wear it...

> >>Or perhaps it's today's playground, all-rubber-cushioned
> >>surface where kids used to skin their knees. And...wait a
> >>minute...those aren't little kids playing. Their
> >>mommies--and especially their daddies--are in there with
> >>them,
> >
> > If their mommies and daddies are playing too they probably
> > need the rubber cushioned surfaces. It's not for the kids,
> > its for the adults who don't want skinned knees or broken
> > hips.
>
We had wood chips on our playgrounds growing up, actually, circa
1970's. I'd hate to have asphalt!

Irene

[dragonlady]

In article >,
"Nikki" > wrote:

>
> > The perpetual access to parents infantilizes the young, keeping
> > them in a permanent state of dependency. Whenever the
> > slightest difficulty arises, "they're constantly referring to their
> > parents for guidance," reports Kramer. They're not learning
> > how to manage for themselves.
>
> I find that hard to believe - that teens and young adults constantly refer
> to their parents for guidance. Do parents of older kids find that to be
> true?? It seems to me that the opposite would be more of a problem.

The short answer is "yes" -- but I don't think they do it any more or
less than *I* did.

I might call home to ask anything from a specific recipe to how to
handle a problem with my landlord -- something I'd never done, nor
watched my parents do since we'd owned a house.

I valued my parents' advice (which is not to say I always took it).
Come to think of it, I STILL do. I'm 53, and will still talk over
problems with my Mom and Dad; they often have great insight.

So I don't feel like my kids are being immature if they call and and ask
for information or advice.

As long as they don't call and ask me to "fix" their problems, we're OK.
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

[dragonlady]

In article >,
enigma > wrote:

> >>Then there are the sanitizing gels, with which over a third
> >>of parents now send their kids to school, according to a
> >>recent survey. Presumably, parents now worry that school
> >>bathrooms are not good enough for their children.
> >
> > Hype from the sellers of the stuff. It is easier and more
> > profitable to spray than to wash. But parents don't like
> > for their kids to get sick so they do what they can.
>
> since most schools don't have soap in thier washrooms anymore
> (the kids "waste" it), maybe parents think that something a
> bit stronger than plain water (usually cold at that) would
> help cut down on the number of colds junior brings home? kids
> are a disease vector :)
> oh, & most schools have 'hand sanitizer' on thier list of
> school supplies that kids are *supposed* to bring in.

Plus at most schools there isn't time for a "bathroom break" for
handwashing before meals.

I've taken to carrying them and use them after I cough into my hand, or
if I've been shaking a lot of hands during cold and flu season.

I carry them in the car, especially if we're going to do a "picnic
lunch" while we're on the road, and may be stopping at "unimproved" rest
areas. (Or slightly improved: there are areas that still have plain
outhouses.)
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

[Hillary Israeli]

In >,
Jeff > wrote:

*
*"Hillary Israeli" > wrote in message
...
*> In >,
*> enigma > wrote:
*
*>(,,,)
*
*> Yes, but do they have tricycle helmet laws? After all, a trike is pretty
*> stable relative to a bike. You don't get a lot of tricycle crashes.
*>
*> That said, I do put a helmet on my kids to ride a trike - just so they get
*> used to wearing one, as previously suggested.
*
*Kids who use trikes are also able to go down hills faster than they want
*because they don't have experience or power to stop a trike once it goes
*going and may not remember to put their feet down to slow down the trike and
*might also end up going down stairs by mistake as well.

Well, sure. But I guess I was thinking of the way my kids ride trikes - on
extremely wide, flat, low-traffic, suburban sidewalks :)

In any case, I'm curious as to whether bike helmet laws are really also
trike helmet laws. It makes no practical difference to me, I just wonder.


--
Hillary Israeli, VMD
Lafayette Hill/PA/USA/Earth
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it is
too dark to read." --Groucho Marx

[Nikki]

dragonlady wrote:

> So I don't feel like my kids are being immature if they call and and
> ask for information or advice.


I don't think it is immaturity either, especially of the advice variety. I
just didn't realize it happened much, lol.

My mom passed away a long time ago so maybe I'd have had a different
relationship with her. I can't remember when the last time I had a
conversation like that with my dad. Not that I don't think he's a smart
guy, I just don't do that :-) I think the last time was when I purchased my
first house. He was helpful :-)
--
Nikki

[Rosalie B.]

"Nikki" > wrote:

>dragonlady wrote:
>
>> So I don't feel like my kids are being immature if they call and and
>> ask for information or advice.
>
>I don't think it is immaturity either, especially of the advice variety. I
>just didn't realize it happened much, lol.
>
>My mom passed away a long time ago so maybe I'd have had a different
>relationship with her. I can't remember when the last time I had a
>conversation like that with my dad. Not that I don't think he's a smart
>guy, I just don't do that :-) I think the last time was when I purchased my
>first house. He was helpful :-)

My dad has passed away, but my mom used to say that when we called and
asked "Is Dad there?" that she knew it was something serious. My mom
is still alive, and I have gotten to be in the position of her asking
me for advice in lieu of my Dad being there to ask (and he died 32
years ago).

My kids call my dh for advice all the time. Ranges all the way from
ds calling to ask him how to cook pot roast to dd#3 emailing to ask
him what kind of nail gun and compressor to buy.

I guess they ask me for advice too, but they also GIVE me advice (as
my mom does and so does dh).

DH is currently coughing a lot and is very congested, and dd#1 tells
me that he might have pneumonia or bronchitis and I should get him to
the doctor. But we are traveling and that's hard to do even if he
thought he should go, which he does not.

Plus I'm also coughing and congested - just less so. In my case I
know it is because of post nasal drip and probably an allergy as I'm
allergic to just about everything, but dh doesn't usually have as much
problem with those things.


grandma Rosalie

[toto]

On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:48:16 -0600, "Nikki" > wrote:

>dragonlady wrote:
>
>> So I don't feel like my kids are being immature if they call and and
>> ask for information or advice.
>
>
>I don't think it is immaturity either, especially of the advice variety. I
>just didn't realize it happened much, lol.
>
I think it depends on *what* they are asking advice about. Some
things should be handled independently.

Of course, asking for *advice* doesn't mean you have to follow it
either, but the problem seems to be expecting parents to step in
when anything goes wrong nowadays.

>My mom passed away a long time ago so maybe I'd have had a different
>relationship with her. I can't remember when the last time I had a
>conversation like that with my dad. Not that I don't think he's a smart
>guy, I just don't do that :-) I think the last time was when I purchased my
>first house. He was helpful :-)


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

[Penny Gaines]

toto wrote:

> On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 19:48:16 -0600, "Nikki" > wrote:
[snip]
> I think it depends on *what* they are asking advice about. Some
> things should be handled independently.
>
> Of course, asking for *advice* doesn't mean you have to follow it
> either, but the problem seems to be expecting parents to step in
> when anything goes wrong nowadays.
[snip]

I was listening to a radio program yesterday, that discussed people's
perceived "locus of control" - ie whether they thought things such
as grades at school and world hunger were within their control or
controlled by other people or luck.

Apparently, when they compare results from teenagers in the '60s to
teenagers today, there has been a huge shift towards an external
locus of control. These days teenagers (and older adults) are more
likely to think that there is little within their control.

This has an effect on the way they behave: if you think that your
marks at school are based on luck, there is no point in studying,
so you work less hard.

In the context of Toto's comment, if a 20-something thinks they can't
control a problem, they are much less likely to act independantly, and
much more likely to turn to their parents.

--
Penny Gaines
UK mum to three