We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Sunday, July 9. 2006
When I read this piece at And Rightly So, I thought it sounded like a pretty good list of reasonable family advice from a "school health teacher" - whatever that is.
Then I looked back and saw that it was her list of signs of "dysfunctional families."
See if you agree.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Looks like a decent list really.
Certainly we dont want people repressing emotions to the point where they explode later.
Just because someone is old does not mean that they deserve respect (and, as a corollary, just because someone is young does not mean that they do not deserve respect).
And so on.
The only one I see as questionable really is the, 'obeying the parents one'. But, with the explanitory text, it looks like they are trying to say that children should be allowed to make their own mistakes, at least sometimes, which is true.
What exactly are your issues with it? Why would you want these things to be true?
I find this handout to be very subversive. Not as much as to what it says but who it is given to. I happen to think all families are dysfunctional. If we want ourselves or 9 graders to think they are from a dysfunctional family it is easy to do. Poor you, you come from a dysfunctional family. Poor me, I come from a dysfunctional family.
What amazes me is how sucessfull children can be inspite of this, until we give ourseves and them excuses for for failure (living).
Is this what this dysfunctional health teacher is doing?
These dysfunctions might define parents that would most likely be involved with their childrens education. The ones that might know what is going on with their childrens education and perhaps "get involved". We certainly would not want that.
My daughter had hearing problems due to infections. We had a good very good Doctor for her. We took her to some of the best people in the sate of Oregon for hearing problems and learning diabilities in the state of Oregon. We had a game plane which included some things the school should do for her. Sitting with her bad ear toward the wall was one of them. They had all the reports from the experts in her file. 1. She was never sitting in the proper position in a class room. We brought this up to avail. 2. Every time they gave her hearing test we would recieve nasty letters from the school saying they would do something if we didn't. They never read her paperwork.
Due to being premature and someother factors my daughter was on low side of her age group. This concerned us very much. At the end of the second grade I suggested it might be a good time to hold her. With assurances from the school they thought she would do just fine. At then end of the third grade her scores were less than they were at the end of second grade. Two are three times a day they would take her out of her classes for special "education", inspite of her lack of self confidence. By the end of third grade she no longer wanted to go to school. One of the things the school had decided to due was to tearch how to use her finges to count.
When she failed in all her classes, I gues they don't like using such words, they passed her on to the forth grade. I came unglued. I headed the school. The principle called the teacher in and she said she was undermotivated. I didn't say what I thought but I wish I had. What in the hell is your job!!!!!!!!! When I heard label my daughter I knew I had to take action. Some private schools and eventually I home schooled her. I taught her math. She did not need to use her fingers. She passed three out of the ged's on the first round. The fourth not long after. It took some more work and she finally passed the math test. She now works as cashier, loves to read, and she would be my call a friend if it had anything to do with movies.
Who were the dysfunctionals. Her parents or her school?
This has gotten a little longer than I intended, but I would like to make one more observation. When I went to school there were very few who were labled dysfuntional. We took my daughter to a learnign specialist who travels or least did around the US to work with parents and children. He happened to involved in one of the first progrems in public shools to provide education to special children. He was involved in getting the fist sate laws that would require schools to develope programs for individual students.
He told us that it had a very negative consequence. The schools told the legislators that they would need more money to handle the special need. Sounds good. And they got what they requested. The negative consequence? The schools starte labeling more and more students. It has become a revenue path for public schools. And any many cases they putting special ed students in a class room enviroment that will not lead anyone getting an education. They are monitored by teachers aids. Poor pair, probably little advanced education and overworked. My current wife worked as a teachers aid. She refused to go into some of the special ed clases, she was literly and physically scared to death. More revenue. At one time less than 5 percent were labled. I don't know that exact figures now but I have heard number in the 50 to 60+ percentages now. More revenue.
I wonder if the dysfunctional family is just another way to label more children, to gain more revenue.
I do get a little upset overit.
I beg to respectfully differ with you, #1. Here's why:
There is no relationship between control of emotional expression and bad behavior. Quite the opposite.
Second, I think kids should obey their parents. Disobediant and defiant young kids just end up making their parents dislike having them around.
Rules #1, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8 apply to my household in slightly less exagerated forms.
I don't care if my kids repress their emotions or not. They will learn self control.
This is what you said:
"There is no relationship between control of emotional expression and bad behavior"
This is what the article said:
“Boys shouldn’t cry. (they should be like diminutive adult males, independent, self contained, and tough. they should bear pain and hurt with a kind of stoicism and emotional flatness exemplified by rugged males in cigarette commercials and by romantic depictions of fighters and the wild, wild west.)"
This is what I said:
"Certainly we dont want people repressing emotions to the point where they explode later."
Control of emotional expression is a good skill to learn. Of course this also means that sometimes it is ok to let these feelings out. Training young boys that showing any sort of emotion is an Incredibly Bad Thing (tm).
Pushing all emotions inwards can lead to aggression later in life. When you feel that there is no outlet for your frustrations, and yet they keep building up, something is going to break eventually. Some people break down, others explode violenty, and some find vents for their feelings.
Why push people into such a bad spot on purpose?
This is what you said:
"Second, I think kids should obey their parents. Disobediant and defiant young kids just end up making their parents dislike having them around."
This is what the article said:
“Children should always obey their parents. (And it’s the parents job to see that their children make the RIGHT decisions — the decisions the parents want. Then when the child reaches the magic age of emancipation — 18 or 21 — the Good Decision Fairy will plink the child on the skull with a charmed wand and make the child a full-fledged adult who always makes Good Decisions.)"
This is what I said:
"The only one I see as questionable really is the, 'obeying the parents one'. But, with the explanitory text, it looks like they are trying to say that children should be allowed to make their own mistakes, at least sometimes, which is true."
I would have to say that your response has little to nothing to do with what I said or what the article said.
In any event, 'not liking to have them around' is going to happen sometimes, one way or the other, but teaching children how to interact with their world is good. Occasionally they have to be allowed to make their own choices, sometimes those choices will be good and sometimes bad, they may even get burned.
If a child is always told what to do and is never allowed to make their own decissions (or never does because they are always obedient) then it would seem to me that such a child would be in a much worse position once they are 'required' to make their own decissions. They may not be emotionally prepared for such an occurance and this could lead to more very bad things.
Perhaps you are sticking too much to the one liners and not reading enough into the explanitory text? It seems that the articles one liners were picked fairly poorly but the thoughts behind them are sound.