Whatever happened to parenting?

[mnealtx 0]

I told my kids I was gonna change my name to "shit"... and they knew they'd get their mouth washed out if they swore!!

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[windcatcher 0]

First off, too much tv, porn, violence, etc : If the parents themselves are doing it, they are condoning it and are only setting examples for their kids.

Also, both parents having to work in order to have bigger and better? Don't people realize that their kids will cherish a RELATIONSHIP with their parents, more than toys? You can't buy love.

I find it very sad that many people are having children, only to pass them off onto babysitters and nannies and not even raise them.

Mother to the cutest little thing in the world...

[Rebecca 0]

I realize you're differentiating between those parents who choose luxury spending and those who can barely make ends meet so their kids have a shot at college, but your wording is a little black-n-white.

you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?

[LisaM 0]

I think God messed up and people should have to take a test before being fertile.

*yes, I am going to hell*

~ Lisa
~ Do you Rigminder?

[LisaM 0]

The parents that want to be friends, IMO, are the divorced parents.... or the two household families. Those parents feel guilty (as they should) for messing up their kid's happy home.

~ Lisa
~ Do you Rigminder?

[LisaM 0]

We had to ban that game in our house. My hubby gloats too much!

~ Lisa
~ Do you Rigminder?

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

We had to ban that game in our house. My hubby gloats too much!

as does my child....the Slum Lord.

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

First off, too much tv, porn, violence, etc : If the parents themselves are doing it, they are condoning it and are only setting examples for their kids.

Agreed. Well, most small kids aren't exposed to porn, but I watched a lot of violence on TV as a kid. Once my wife and I had kids of our own, we didn't let the kids watch violence on shows while they were still little. No cop shows, war films, etc. on TV unless the kids weren't around. We were even selective about which cartoons they watched; we felt that some of the "action" variety were too violent for small kids.

Quote

Also, both parents having to work in order to have bigger and better? Don't people realize that their kids will cherish a RELATIONSHIP with their parents, more than toys? You can't buy love.

The post-WW2 days when it only took Dad's income to get a moderately-sized house in a decent school district and send 2 or 3 kids to college are a relic. Unless there's 1 very large income, in many families it now takes 2 incomes to do that, and still maintain a modest (not extravagant or luxurious) "middle-middle-class" lifestyle. There's nothing mercenary about it; it's just the economic reality.

Quote

I find it very sad that many people are having children, only to pass them off onto babysitters and nannies and not even raise them.

I won't get into a long argument over this, but it really is a myth that 2-career parents "don't raise their own kids".
People (and I don't necessarily mean you) sometimes seem to have a natural tendency to be defensive about their own choice of lifestyle by being critical about lifestyles that are different from their own.

[wmw999 2,589]

There are lots and lots of smaller communities (yes, including trailer parks) where one income can still get a home and maintain a family.

You don't have a big-screen TV, or a new car, or probably a lot of new clothes. On the other hand, there are lots and lots of good garage sales and used clothing stores out there.

We've gotten used to the thought that we should start off at the level that our parents live at, forgetting that our parents took 20+ years to get to that level of comfort.

That said, we were a 2-job family
Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

First off, too much tv, porn, violence, etc : If the parents themselves are doing it, they are condoning it and are only setting examples for their kids.

Also, both parents having to work in order to have bigger and better? Don't people realize that their kids will cherish a RELATIONSHIP with their parents, more than toys? You can't buy love.

I find it very sad that many people are having children, only to pass them off onto babysitters and nannies and not even raise them.

That is some skewed thinking right there. You're categorizing people who choose to work outside the home as uninvolved parents???? Not raising their kids??? That's some powerful blindness creeping in.

Not working outside the home doesn't make one an involved or effective parent either. In fact, I think a lot of parents who don't work are just lazy....and that laziness bleeds over into their parenting. Of course, I don't think that applies to ALL stay-at-home parents, but there seems to be a trend....

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

We've gotten used to the thought that we should start off at the level that our parents live at, forgetting that our parents took 20+ years to get to that level of comfort.

That's why I said "moderately-sized", "modest" and "not extravagant" in my post. The simple fact is that it really does often take 2 incomes today to live a modest, "Levittown"-style middle class lifestyle (with a young couple's first house being a small "starter home") and put a couple kids through college, whereas 30 & 40 years ago that was a lot more attainable on just 1 income. Standards of living rose through each generation up through and including ours (yours/mine), while I think it's plateaued with our kids' generation.

[wmw999 2,589]

Some parts of the country yes, others no. It's partly about where you choose to live. If I want to live in a suburb of Houston, or anything remotely resembling a desirable part, that one income had better be pretty good. But if I move to an older 2-BR frame house in an outlying community, or some outside-the-loop parts of town, it's not nearly as hard.

That's all I'm trying to say. Where our parents live is often no longer a starter location. And no, without Habitat, very few one-income families can afford a new starter home.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[billvon 3,120]

>I think God messed up and people should have to take a test before being fertile.

I don't think you even need a test. Just come up with something you have to do before you can get pregnant. Say, stand on your head or yodel or something.

Changing the current scheme of things (which is "people who can't figure out/can't be bothered with birth control or abstinence have the best chance of getting pregnant") would make all the difference, I think.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

I don't know that times have changed that much. In - what? - a generation? In the 1970's, heroin was the big scary drug. Kids saw people getting their heads blown off in Vietnam, and porn was readily available on the newsstand. Kids fell down wells, were abducted by kidnappers, and were killed in car crashes. True, a 2 year old was more likely to be killed when he got catapulted through his parent's windshield than by an online predator, but I don't think overall they were significantly more or less safe.

In 1975, teenager death rates were around 85 per 100,000 population. In 1995, that went up to about 205. Today it's around 95; not much different than in 1975.

Nowadays you are more vulnerable to people spying on you, but less likely to die in a car crash. You are more likely to have someone steal your credit cards but less likely to get emphysema from polluted air. Kids have more opportunities to get in trouble online, but are less likely to get lost, and cellphones help parents keep track of kids (and kids can use them to get out of jams.) Today students are more likely to be shot by a disturbed kid with a gun; back then they were more likey to be shot by National Guard or killed in a race riot. All in all I think it mostly balances out.

Again, *gasp* , I'm finding myself agreeing with you. Good God, what is happening here?!

Anyway, the only thing I feel to add to this is that these days, kids are, for some reason, unable to deal with stress the way older generations have. There are lots of contributors to this. Some of it is parenting, some of it is the schools, but most of it is the kids.

It's stress right? Stress to get good grades? Social stress from friends? Stress from the bully? Stress from the teachers? This generation does not own the franchise on these issues.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[livetofall 0]

Quote

There are lots and lots of smaller communities (yes, including trailer parks) where one income can still get a home and maintain a family.

You don't have a big-screen TV, or a new car, or probably a lot of new clothes. On the other hand, there are lots and lots of good garage sales and used clothing stores out there.

We've gotten used to the thought that we should start off at the level that our parents live at, forgetting that our parents took 20+ years to get to that level of comfort.

That said, we were a 2-job family
Wendy W.

those were some great points wendy, and may I add that in the 60s 70s people werent so credit crazy. When I was born(oldest) mom quit job as nurse and stayed home, dad, union pressman. We got by, one tv,small stereo, new car when i was 4, and that was the only thing on"payment" other than the house. Not to sound conspiracy theory but I have watched how credit is way more availbale than 15 yrs ago. The banks have made a way to keep up happy on lower avg wage. Hell, back then you couldnt get a creditcard on min wage. In our parents time we were the strongest manufacturing country in the world. So while it is possible to live on one income, the avg income has gone weaker wage/inflation due to overseas. Remember back in the day when the only thing you saw made in Japan was your matchbox cars?

As far as the parenting goes, I think its quite hilarious how the "experts" on parenting usually are homosexuals...like they know about parenting
well maybe how not to raise a child
Maybe i will have my dentist bore out my 350 block, hes pretty good at drilling my teeth

www.911missinglinks.com the definitive truth of 9/11..the who and why, not how

You can handle the TRUTH www.theforbiddentruth.net

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Not that I was a good parent but my parents were. Too much tv, internet , porno/violence, modern days two parents have to work to buy all the shiny things crammed down their throats by mass media/ big corps?

I don't really see a problem here. The situation when two parents have to work exists in a lot of countries around the world. I was grown in Soviet Union, where all parents were working - acually it was a crime there to be unemployed unless you are disabled or retired. As kids we were taught to be responsible for our actions from the beginning. We had everything you described, and it did not really affect most of us.

In modern environment it is much easier to control all those things. For example, we do not have a broadcast or cable TV (only dvd), so it is easy to ensure the movies our daughter can see are ok. Therefore she is not TV-addicted, as none in our family is. She reads books, checks information on Internet, or plays with other children instead.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[windcatcher 0]

Please read my post again:

Quote

both parents having to work in order to have bigger and better

( read: people who try to keep up with the joneses, rather than cutting hours to spend more time with kids).

I am specifically referring to those parents who would rather have bigger and better things, working overtime instead of building relationships with their kids. I in no way classified all two-income households as having uninvolved parents.

Sadly though, I believe this IS a growing trend. People are blind if they don't think we live in a society that values with material goods over relationships.

Mother to the cutest little thing in the world...

[livetofall 0]

another great point by windcatcher! WHAT GOOD is a full house with empty souls?

www.911missinglinks.com the definitive truth of 9/11..the who and why, not how

You can handle the TRUTH www.theforbiddentruth.net

[Lindsey 0]

In my experience...and of course this is with examples of middle class folks...both parents usually choose to work because their work is fulfilling to them. Working doesn't mean their families are less important, that they are uninvolved, or that they are working in order to have bigger and better (though with 2 incomes they probably do have more). But sometimes being fulfilled makes one an even better parent. It can set a good example for children, too, imho.

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[wmw999 2,589]

Quote

But sometimes being fulfilled makes one an even better parent. It can set a good example for children, too, imho.

I couldn't agree with you more. My mother used to pounce on my father when he came home -- at last! an adult! It'd drive him nuts because he wanted to relax at the end of the day, but she was going nuts too.

Something has to give when you have kids. My schedule and job were both secondary to my son's needs; I'd work weird hours, and didn't travel, and stayed with a job that would let me leave for lunch with him and all of the school plays etc.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Something has to give when you have kids. My schedule and job were both secondary to my son's needs; I'd work weird hours, and didn't travel, and stayed with a job that would let me leave for lunch with him and all of the school plays etc.

You've just described my wife's career in a nutshell.

[misskriss 0]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my experience...and of course this is with examples of middle class folks...both parents usually choose to work because their work is fulfilling to them. Working doesn't mean their families are less important, that they are uninvolved, or that they are working in order to have bigger and better (though with 2 incomes they probably do have more). But sometimes being fulfilled makes one an even better parent. It can set a good example for children, too, imho

I completely agree with you and I'm a stay at home mom. I stay at home because I choose to. My husband actually loves the fact that I'm home with the kids. It works for our family so everyone is happy. This is fulfilling to me and my children know that. My girls know that they can do anything in the world they want. My oldest who is off to college next year doesn't want children and wants a career in finance. My 12 year old says that after college and after she gets married she would like to stay home with her children till they are schoolaged if she has them. I think it's great they can want different things and both are admirable. I don't ever get into the working-mom/ stay at home mom debate because each family is different and there is no right or wrong answer. I think people on both sides pass judgement and that's a shame. Mothers should support each other.

• Quote

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Please read my post again:

Quote

both parents having to work in order to have bigger and better

( read: people who try to keep up with the joneses, rather than cutting hours to spend more time with kids).

I am specifically referring to those parents who would rather have bigger and better things, working overtime instead of building relationships with their kids. I in no way classified all two-income households as having uninvolved parents.

Sadly though, I believe this IS a growing trend. People are blind if they don't think we live in a society that values with material goods over relationships.

I was listening to NPR this last week, and heard interviews with residents of former Yugoslavia talking about this very thing, how good interpersonal relationships have suffered under their new capitalist economy.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!