BellaOnline Forums News and Politics Missing & Exploited Children Helicopter Parents = Are Modern Kids Too Coddled?

Jan:

Please see my post, Is a degree really required? in the Colleges forum.

Well, frankly, i think kids need and deserve to be coddled more and longer. I wouldn't call it coddling, but since that was the word originally I'll use it.

Today kids are shipped away from home as soon as they can walk, or earlier. Daycare, preschool, school, sports, camps, college. When does the child get to stop and enjoy being coddled? Kids are sent away before they are able to form their own attachments and personalities, before they know what is right from wrong.

I think we're forgetting about all the kids who aren't coddled because they don't have parents who are home or care enough to coddle them. When you send your child away you lose that control, plain and simple. There is no such thing as weekend parenting.

A person can complain that today is so much worse than 50 yrs ago as much as they want, but that isn't the problem and doesn't matter because it's NOT 50 yrs ago. It comes down to lousy parenting, from the over-coddling to the negligent, it works both ways.

Meg

By the time an individual reaches the age of legal majority--the age at which he/she can legally vote, sign contracts, serve in the military, and some places drink--and likely even a bit before this time, parents need to step back and realize that their "child" may still be "their child," but is no longer "a child." Young adults are fully capable--or would be if their parents allowed--of making their own decisions and mistakes.

Growing up with one or more parents at home, or a "soccer mom", or a nuclear family unit does not guarantee a satisfactory environment for a child. Neither does growing up in a single-parent household, or with parents who can't be involved in everything, or a non-traditional household mean that a child is automatically set up for failure.

Sure, let "kids" be kids. But, please, let your young adults be adults!

There has to be a balance. Sometimes you have to care enough to say no too.

As for the whole "culture of poverty" concept, which boils down to an elitist belief that people are poor because they are poor and an individual who grows up in a culture of poverty is destined for a life of poverty unless something rather dramatic takes place--I throw my lot in with with Julius Wilson. This "explanation" of poverty, especially in urban areas, is too simplistic; and is countered by the multitudinous examples of successes arising from urban poverty.

If you tell a child "you can" and you provide them with examples, demonstrate a moral life, give them love, feed their hopes and dreams, then that which is imagined can become reality. We have too many students holding back because some authority figure somewhere, who sat in on a "culture of poverty" training to better "understand" what life is like for the urban poor, told them they'd have a very difficult time succeeding or too many hurdles to overcome to ever be successful.

Tell kids they can and they will.

You're forgetting, however, how many actually graduate HIGH SCHOOL? That has to be looked at before you figure how many are completing then going to college.

NPR reported recently that 30% of White kids, 40% of Latinos and 70% of Blacks are not even graduating high school now. I'm not sure if that's broken down by gender, this may only refer to boys.

Now. My father rose from urban poverty. Of course, his entire family worked to put him and his brother through medical school. No effort was given to the women, because in Latin families, the man is the primary focus of a parent as far as career. (Yep, we're the babymakers, ugh.) But, my aunt ended up marrying a man who worked his way from owning a tiny diner in New York City to being the biggest car dealership in Puerto Rico. He has millions now. It was, and is, still possible to break the cycle of poverty.

And breaking that cycle has to do with education and a supportive family who encourages and shows you the way. It is up to the parent to help and teach the child, and to show them the difference between low-skill jobs and higher ones and the ramifications.

It's not even necessarily college, but a skilled trade, such as electrician, plumbing. I think more vocational schools post-high school is a good thing too, for the kids who don't have the impetus to achieve a 4 (took me 5) year degree.

My mother was a hovering mom. She forced, cajoled, finally paid for my college. And I'm glad she did. I make way more than my contemporaries who do not have such a degree, and it has been easier to find a job too.

I will help my stepson realize his choices. He has the choice of technical school too. It is my job to help him not be a wage-earner, but a man happy in a career.

If anything, children today are not only not coddled, but they are not being raised with the values our parents were - hard work and education.

"And breaking that cycle has to do with education and a supportive family who encourages and shows you the way. It is up to the parent to help and teach the child, and to show them the difference between low-skill jobs and higher ones and the ramifications."

Exactly my point, Darling!

The "culture of poverty" theory is ridiculous as the basic tenets are that you can't shake the cycle unless something dramatic happens to you. That's simply not true! Nothing "dramatic" has to take place.

I posted an item about a school in Baltimore that succeeded because they didn't buy into the whole "culture" bit. They provided a solid 3-R education, with qualified teachers, common sense, and support. These kids are successes because of it.

The problem in our town is that the girls are expected to have babies (plural) in high school. The boys won't date the girls unless they are NOT taking birth control. My husband who teaches sees it everyday and all the qualified teachers aren't going to help when you have no common sense taught or support being given at home too. Having a baby in high school makes things hard, but many of these girls are having 2 or 3. Some cases 4. How do you get kids to want more than this "cycle" when it is all they see at home and at school?

BTW- my husband teaches 13- 18 year old 9th graders many with 1-4 babies.

Why is there the assumption there is no support at home? Why is there even the assumption that home is the only place that can provide support and encouragement? Why is there an assumption that these kids won't succeed?

Are the schools (admin and teachers) keeping expectations high or are they lowering the bar because they expect these kids to have a super hard time overcoming obstacles?

I work with teens every day that come from very poor areas, who have 2+ children and they still are expected to attend school everyday, perform well academically, graduate from high school, and either enter the workforce or some sort of training/higher ed. program.

We assume there is no support at home because of the 120 kids he has in class, only about 20 people show up for parent night and it is always the same parents. These are not based on rich/ poverty line. There seems to be a lack of support across the board in our town. I understand some work, but these are the same people who will fill up a football stadium tonight, but won't come to see a teacher when they call them. Many provide false numbers or will not provide a number so they can't be bothered at home by the school.

Also I am not saying that other places can not provide support(I know church was always great growing up) or that they can not succeed (I got out). But how do you reach a child who feels hopeless and can't see past the negative? My husband will not lower his standards in class for any student, but how do you get kids who refuse to work to work? I believe it is never hopeless unless you give up. Your program seems to be a good one if your teen moms are showing up and moving on. Can you give us tips to help the kids here in our town?