Why Affluent Parents Put So Much Pressure on Their Kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like OP misread the article. Plus, it's Hanna Rosin, who is not high up on my list of most reliable narrators as an author.

ooh, when truth hurts, definitely take a potshot at the writer. your evidence for her unreliability would be??? i've read extensively about what's happening at those high schools in Silicon Valley and can find nothing wrong with her narrative.

I grew up there. I didn't go to Gunn, but I went to a high school that's close to Gunn. I have several friends who went to Gunn. My mom still works at a different high school that's also not far from Gunn, has worked there for more than 20 years, and regularly interacts with their administration and staff. So, yes, I'm going to take my extensive personal experience over your "I've read some articles."

Haven't you ever read anything by Hanna Rosin? Why do accept what she writes as gospel truth? It should be obvious to anybody who reads more than a few things that she's written that she's great at putting together a narrative, just not an overly accurate one.

Why so defensive? Does this my post mess with a rigid narrative you want to tell yourself?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like OP misread the article. Plus, it's Hanna Rosin, who is not high up on my list of most reliable narrators as an author.

ooh, when truth hurts, definitely take a potshot at the writer. your evidence for her unreliability would be??? i've read extensively about what's happening at those high schools in Silicon Valley and can find nothing wrong with her narrative.

I grew up there. I didn't go to Gunn, but I went to a high school that's close to Gunn. I have several friends who went to Gunn. My mom still works at a different high school that's also not far from Gunn, has worked there for more than 20 years, and regularly interacts with their administration and staff. So, yes, I'm going to take my extensive personal experience over your "I've read some articles."

Haven't you ever read anything by Hanna Rosin? Why do accept what she writes as gospel truth? It should be obvious to anybody who reads more than a few things that she's written that she's great at putting together a narrative, just not an overly accurate one.

Why so defensive? Does this my post mess with a rigid narrative you want to tell yourself?

I am no the PP but I have to wonder if you actually read the article? I also wonder if your bias is clouding your judgement.
It is not her narrative I give credence to, but the research she cites. And the feelings of the children she interviewed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Wow! So many of you have drunk the 'competitive' Kool-aid. My job is to help my kids find their passion and ensure they're educated - and education isn't just found in school. I have no doubt my kids will be successful at whatever they decide to pursue. They may not be the best but they'll be happy.


I am the above "poverty poster." It has nothing to with "drinking the koolaid" and everything to do with facing reality. I don't care where my kids go to college or what career path they choose. I do care that they do not squander their high school years and close off their options before they are mature enough to even realize that they have options. They have plenty of time for extracurriculars of their choice and plenty of down time, but screwing around and closing doors by not doing their best academically (and that is different for each of my kids based upon their abilities) is not an option. Neither DH nor I had a safety net. Had we not be motivated to do our best as kids, we should still be ultra poor like our families. My kids can chose that life after they leave our home, but we are not choosing it for them by allowing them to close doors before they have ever had a chance to be opened. If you think it is easy to make a life correction then you are the one drinking the koolaid.

You've not only drunk the Kool-aid but also have poverty anxiety. You think things kids do or don't do in high school will limit their opportunities forever. I get your fear but your perception is warped and unhealthy.

Not warped and not-unhealthy. Good study habits, good work ethic and responsible behavior does indeed lead to success. Can someone overcome a bad start? Of course. Is or easy to overcome a crappy high school record leading to crappy college or no college admission. Of course not--particularly since it generally reflects poor study habits, poor work ethic and irresponsible behavior. People can change but generally don't fundamentally change. I have no poverty anxiety. I have lived it. I have escaped it. I could live it again if necessary. Do I want my children to potentially lock themselves into a particular economic class before their lives even start? Of course not. You make a lot of accusations and assumptions about someone who does not share your narrow world view. As the saying goes...walk a mile in my shoes--or in the case of my childhood--holey shoes. As I previously stated, the only reason DH and I escaped the poverty of our prior generations is because we prioritized education and worked our asses off. Perhaps, we should just give our kids a big trust old fund and not worry about them achieving their own success (as they eventually define the word) in life. I prefer to think they are better off using their own gifts and talents and become their own people and that starts either education.

Irresponsible behavior from children?!.!? I can not believe it. I am sure that doesn't happen in Lake Wobegon.

It can also indicate an unstable, chaotic, abusive home life.

Exactly. Will children occasionally be irresponsible? Of course. However, chronic irresponsibility is a product of something like unstable home life, substance abuse, social isolation or difficulties, detached parents, poor role models, anger, depression or emotional problems, etc. Chronic teenage irresponsibility is never indicative of a child in a positive and healthy environment.

Did you learn that while earning your graduate degree in child development or psychology?

The point is that children are not adults, and they should not be required to act as such. It is too much pressure for high school students to hear from you-the rest of your life depends on the decisions you make right now. Of course, we should lead them and guide them, but we should also be teaching them that mistakes happen and it is what you do next that counts. Affluence does not immunize your children against the troubles of adolescence. The article: Silicon Valley Suicides in the Atlantic explains:


The rich middle- and high-school kids Luthar and her collaborators have studied show higher rates of alcohol and drug abuse on average than poor kids, and much higher rates than the national norm. They report clinically significant depression or anxiety or delinquent behaviors at a rate two to three times the national average. Starting in seventh grade, the rich cohort includes just as many kids who display troubling levels of delinquency as the poor cohort, although the rule-breaking takes different forms. The poor kids, for example, fight and carry weapons more frequently, which Luthar explains as possibly self-protective. The rich kids, meanwhile, report higher levels of lying, cheating, and theft.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/12/the-silicon-valley-suicides/413140/

I did not say that children should act as adults. Neither did I say that my kids never make mistakes or that they are not guided on how to manage and learn from mistakes. I do take issue with those who assert that children should not be expected to be developmentally responsible or strive to utilize their gifts and talents. My children do not go to school in the area referenced and extrapolating those children's experience to other children of affluence is short-sighted and disingenuous. Assuming all children of affluence, all children whose parents teach (and show by example) that working to the best of your ability creates alcohol addicted, stressed out liars and cheaters simply seems a way to further your need to justify your different way of parenting your children. Sadly, there are messed up kids whose parents push them too hard, but here are also mess up kids whose parents expect little of them or do not help them see they are capable success. I have seen both side of the equation and know that it isn't an all or nothing proposition. It seems as if you are doing an awful lot of projecting here. It is indeed possible to teach your children to strive for excellence, to be responsible and to keep numerous options open to themselves without creating anxious, stress out, miserable kids. My children are emotionally healthy, honest, responsible, compassionate, kind kids who also excel in school and the extracurriculars of their choice (and they are very different based upon the interests of the child). By all accounts, and not just mine, they are happy, successful kids. I am sorry if that threatens you in some way, but by their own actions they will have options in life. How they ultimately chose to utilize those options will be up to them. Making sure that they doesn't squander their gifts during their development years or fail to see that they are capable of doing well is my responsibility. Of course, you are free to disagree and raise your children according to your philosophy. I feel comfortable that my children appreciate the support, guidance and reassurance they need to know that they can achieve great things (as they ultimately define greatness) in their life. How much could we all achieve if someone believed in us and helped us to believe in ourselves?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like OP misread the article. Plus, it's Hanna Rosin, who is not high up on my list of most reliable narrators as an author.

ooh, when truth hurts, definitely take a potshot at the writer. your evidence for her unreliability would be??? i've read extensively about what's happening at those high schools in Silicon Valley and can find nothing wrong with her narrative.

I grew up there. I didn't go to Gunn, but I went to a high school that's close to Gunn. I have several friends who went to Gunn. My mom still works at a different high school that's also not far from Gunn, has worked there for more than 20 years, and regularly interacts with their administration and staff. So, yes, I'm going to take my extensive personal experience over your "I've read some articles."

Haven't you ever read anything by Hanna Rosin? Why do accept what she writes as gospel truth? It should be obvious to anybody who reads more than a few things that she's written that she's great at putting together a narrative, just not an overly accurate one.

Why so defensive? Does this my post mess with a rigid narrative you want to tell yourself?

I am no the PP but I have to wonder if you actually read the article? I also wonder if your bias is clouding your judgement.
It is not her narrative I give credence to, but the research she cites. And the feelings of the children she interviewed.

What I'm saying is that I don't trust her description of the research she cites, nor do I trust the accuracy of her interviews. Look, I am not sure why somebody saying "Hey. Hold up. Don't assume this is gospel truth" is so threatening. I'm not saying you should throw everything out. I am saying that you should think critically and not take this as unvarnished truth.

Also, her characterization of research and interviews aside, she missed a lot of information about Gunn. First, it's always been a pressure cooker. It was a pressure cooker when I was a kid, and I've heard from parents of my peers who grew up here that it was a pressure cooker back in the day. There has always been a significant focus on achievement at the school. I remember hearing about kids using drugs in high school so they could stay up later to study when I was a teenager. She doesn't even touch on this historical reality, I suspect in part because it weakens her narrative. Maybe there is something new about the pressure, I don't know, but she should have had some awareness of the history of the high school.

Secondly, she also missed something entirely that people who grew up in Palo Alto know: that Gunn is an unusually transient high school for a school with its demographics. The kids of temporary faculty who go to Stanford tend to live in Gunn's boundaries because that's where the faculty housing sits. That is something that has changed since I was a kid; there's a lot more transience in academia then when I grew up. What that means is that there's a lot of kids who show up to Gunn who don't have deep roots. I have always thought that it made the population at Gunn vulnerable to risk-taking behaviors.

I don't pretend to know what's causing the suicides, but I think it's more complicated than what's put forth here. That's all I'm saying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like OP misread the article. Plus, it's Hanna Rosin, who is not high up on my list of most reliable narrators as an author.

ooh, when truth hurts, definitely take a potshot at the writer. your evidence for her unreliability would be??? i've read extensively about what's happening at those high schools in Silicon Valley and can find nothing wrong with her narrative.

I grew up there. I didn't go to Gunn, but I went to a high school that's close to Gunn. I have several friends who went to Gunn. My mom still works at a different high school that's also not far from Gunn, has worked there for more than 20 years, and regularly interacts with their administration and staff. So, yes, I'm going to take my extensive personal experience over your "I've read some articles."

Haven't you ever read anything by Hanna Rosin? Why do accept what she writes as gospel truth? It should be obvious to anybody who reads more than a few things that she's written that she's great at putting together a narrative, just not an overly accurate one.

Why so defensive? Does this my post mess with a rigid narrative you want to tell yourself?

I am no the PP but I have to wonder if you actually read the article? I also wonder if your bias is clouding your judgement.
It is not her narrative I give credence to, but the research she cites. And the feelings of the children she interviewed.

What I'm saying is that I don't trust her description of the research she cites, nor do I trust the accuracy of her interviews. Look, I am not sure why somebody saying "Hey. Hold up. Don't assume this is gospel truth" is so threatening. I'm not saying you should throw everything out. I am saying that you should think critically and not take this as unvarnished truth.

Also, her characterization of research and interviews aside, she missed a lot of information about Gunn. First, it's always been a pressure cooker. It was a pressure cooker when I was a kid, and I've heard from parents of my peers who grew up here that it was a pressure cooker back in the day. There has always been a significant focus on achievement at the school. I remember hearing about kids using drugs in high school so they could stay up later to study when I was a teenager. She doesn't even touch on this historical reality, I suspect in part because it weakens her narrative. Maybe there is something new about the pressure, I don't know, but she should have had some awareness of the history of the high school.

Secondly, she also missed something entirely that people who grew up in Palo Alto know: that Gunn is an unusually transient high school for a school with its demographics. The kids of temporary faculty who go to Stanford tend to live in Gunn's boundaries because that's where the faculty housing sits. That is something that has changed since I was a kid; there's a lot more transience in academia then when I grew up. What that means is that there's a lot of kids who show up to Gunn who don't have deep roots. I have always thought that it made the population at Gunn vulnerable to risk-taking behaviors.

I don't pretend to know what's causing the suicides, but I think it's more complicated than what's put forth here. That's all I'm saying.

The problem with this entire thread starts in the title and snowballs from there. People are extrapolating what happens at Gunn to all affluent parents and their children. That is a very broad brush stroke and incredibly misleading and inaccurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Wow! So many of you have drunk the 'competitive' Kool-aid. My job is to help my kids find their passion and ensure they're educated - and education isn't just found in school. I have no doubt my kids will be successful at whatever they decide to pursue. They may not be the best but they'll be happy.


I am the above "poverty poster." It has nothing to with "drinking the koolaid" and everything to do with facing reality. I don't care where my kids go to college or what career path they choose. I do care that they do not squander their high school years and close off their options before they are mature enough to even realize that they have options. They have plenty of time for extracurriculars of their choice and plenty of down time, but screwing around and closing doors by not doing their best academically (and that is different for each of my kids based upon their abilities) is not an option. Neither DH nor I had a safety net. Had we not be motivated to do our best as kids, we should still be ultra poor like our families. My kids can chose that life after they leave our home, but we are not choosing it for them by allowing them to close doors before they have ever had a chance to be opened. If you think it is easy to make a life correction then you are the one drinking the koolaid.

You've not only drunk the Kool-aid but also have poverty anxiety. You think things kids do or don't do in high school will limit their opportunities forever. I get your fear but your perception is warped and unhealthy.

Not warped and not-unhealthy. Good study habits, good work ethic and responsible behavior does indeed lead to success. Can someone overcome a bad start? Of course. Is or easy to overcome a crappy high school record leading to crappy college or no college admission. Of course not--particularly since it generally reflects poor study habits, poor work ethic and irresponsible behavior. People can change but generally don't fundamentally change. I have no poverty anxiety. I have lived it. I have escaped it. I could live it again if necessary. Do I want my children to potentially lock themselves into a particular economic class before their lives even start? Of course not. You make a lot of accusations and assumptions about someone who does not share your narrow world view. As the saying goes...walk a mile in my shoes--or in the case of my childhood--holey shoes. As I previously stated, the only reason DH and I escaped the poverty of our prior generations is because we prioritized education and worked our asses off. Perhaps, we should just give our kids a big trust old fund and not worry about them achieving their own success (as they eventually define the word) in life. I prefer to think they are better off using their own gifts and talents and become their own people and that starts either education.

Irresponsible behavior from children?!.!? I can not believe it. I am sure that doesn't happen in Lake Wobegon.

It can also indicate an unstable, chaotic, abusive home life.

Exactly. Will children occasionally be irresponsible? Of course. However, chronic irresponsibility is a product of something like unstable home life, substance abuse, social isolation or difficulties, detached parents, poor role models, anger, depression or emotional problems, etc. Chronic teenage irresponsibility is never indicative of a child in a positive and healthy environment.

Did you learn that while earning your graduate degree in child development or psychology?

The point is that children are not adults, and they should not be required to act as such. It is too much pressure for high school students to hear from you-the rest of your life depends on the decisions you make right now. Of course, we should lead them and guide them, but we should also be teaching them that mistakes happen and it is what you do next that counts. Affluence does not immunize your children against the troubles of adolescence. The article: Silicon Valley Suicides in the Atlantic explains:


The rich middle- and high-school kids Luthar and her collaborators have studied show higher rates of alcohol and drug abuse on average than poor kids, and much higher rates than the national norm. They report clinically significant depression or anxiety or delinquent behaviors at a rate two to three times the national average. Starting in seventh grade, the rich cohort includes just as many kids who display troubling levels of delinquency as the poor cohort, although the rule-breaking takes different forms. The poor kids, for example, fight and carry weapons more frequently, which Luthar explains as possibly self-protective. The rich kids, meanwhile, report higher levels of lying, cheating, and theft.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/12/the-silicon-valley-suicides/413140/

I did not say that children should act as adults. Neither did I say that my kids never make mistakes or that they are not guided on how to manage and learn from mistakes. I do take issue with those who assert that children should not be expected to be developmentally responsible or strive to utilize their gifts and talents. My children do not go to school in the area referenced and extrapolating those children's experience to other children of affluence is short-sighted and disingenuous. Assuming all children of affluence, all children whose parents teach (and show by example) that working to the best of your ability creates alcohol addicted, stressed out liars and cheaters simply seems a way to further your need to justify your different way of parenting your children. Sadly, there are messed up kids whose parents push them too hard, but here are also mess up kids whose parents expect little of them or do not help them see they are capable success. I have seen both side of the equation and know that it isn't an all or nothing proposition. It seems as if you are doing an awful lot of projecting here. It is indeed possible to teach your children to strive for excellence, to be responsible and to keep numerous options open to themselves without creating anxious, stress out, miserable kids. My children are emotionally healthy, honest, responsible, compassionate, kind kids who also excel in school and the extracurriculars of their choice (and they are very different based upon the interests of the child). By all accounts, and not just mine, they are happy, successful kids. I am sorry if that threatens you in some way, but by their own actions they will have options in life. How they ultimately chose to utilize those options will be up to them. Making sure that they doesn't squander their gifts during their development years or fail to see that they are capable of doing well is my responsibility. Of course, you are free to disagree and raise your children according to your philosophy. I feel comfortable that my children appreciate the support, guidance and reassurance they need to know that they can achieve great things (as they ultimately define greatness) in their life. How much could we all achieve if someone believed in us and helped us to believe in ourselves?

It was a discussion. The fact that you don't think it applies to your life or the lives of your children is great. But parents of children who commit suicide are usually shocked. And teens who seemingly have everything going for them kill themselves. It is a discussion worth having.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Wow! So many of you have drunk the 'competitive' Kool-aid. My job is to help my kids find their passion and ensure they're educated - and education isn't just found in school. I have no doubt my kids will be successful at whatever they decide to pursue. They may not be the best but they'll be happy.


I am the above "poverty poster." It has nothing to with "drinking the koolaid" and everything to do with facing reality. I don't care where my kids go to college or what career path they choose. I do care that they do not squander their high school years and close off their options before they are mature enough to even realize that they have options. They have plenty of time for extracurriculars of their choice and plenty of down time, but screwing around and closing doors by not doing their best academically (and that is different for each of my kids based upon their abilities) is not an option. Neither DH nor I had a safety net. Had we not be motivated to do our best as kids, we should still be ultra poor like our families. My kids can chose that life after they leave our home, but we are not choosing it for them by allowing them to close doors before they have ever had a chance to be opened. If you think it is easy to make a life correction then you are the one drinking the koolaid.

You've not only drunk the Kool-aid but also have poverty anxiety. You think things kids do or don't do in high school will limit their opportunities forever. I get your fear but your perception is warped and unhealthy.

Not warped and not-unhealthy. Good study habits, good work ethic and responsible behavior does indeed lead to success. Can someone overcome a bad start? Of course. Is or easy to overcome a crappy high school record leading to crappy college or no college admission. Of course not--particularly since it generally reflects poor study habits, poor work ethic and irresponsible behavior. People can change but generally don't fundamentally change. I have no poverty anxiety. I have lived it. I have escaped it. I could live it again if necessary. Do I want my children to potentially lock themselves into a particular economic class before their lives even start? Of course not. You make a lot of accusations and assumptions about someone who does not share your narrow world view. As the saying goes...walk a mile in my shoes--or in the case of my childhood--holey shoes. As I previously stated, the only reason DH and I escaped the poverty of our prior generations is because we prioritized education and worked our asses off. Perhaps, we should just give our kids a big trust old fund and not worry about them achieving their own success (as they eventually define the word) in life. I prefer to think they are better off using their own gifts and talents and become their own people and that starts either education.

Irresponsible behavior from children?!.!? I can not believe it. I am sure that doesn't happen in Lake Wobegon.

It can also indicate an unstable, chaotic, abusive home life.

Exactly. Will children occasionally be irresponsible? Of course. However, chronic irresponsibility is a product of something like unstable home life, substance abuse, social isolation or difficulties, detached parents, poor role models, anger, depression or emotional problems, etc. Chronic teenage irresponsibility is never indicative of a child in a positive and healthy environment.

Did you learn that while earning your graduate degree in child development or psychology?

The point is that children are not adults, and they should not be required to act as such. It is too much pressure for high school students to hear from you-the rest of your life depends on the decisions you make right now. Of course, we should lead them and guide them, but we should also be teaching them that mistakes happen and it is what you do next that counts. Affluence does not immunize your children against the troubles of adolescence. The article: Silicon Valley Suicides in the Atlantic explains:


The rich middle- and high-school kids Luthar and her collaborators have studied show higher rates of alcohol and drug abuse on average than poor kids, and much higher rates than the national norm. They report clinically significant depression or anxiety or delinquent behaviors at a rate two to three times the national average. Starting in seventh grade, the rich cohort includes just as many kids who display troubling levels of delinquency as the poor cohort, although the rule-breaking takes different forms. The poor kids, for example, fight and carry weapons more frequently, which Luthar explains as possibly self-protective. The rich kids, meanwhile, report higher levels of lying, cheating, and theft.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/12/the-silicon-valley-suicides/413140/

I did not say that children should act as adults. Neither did I say that my kids never make mistakes or that they are not guided on how to manage and learn from mistakes. I do take issue with those who assert that children should not be expected to be developmentally responsible or strive to utilize their gifts and talents. My children do not go to school in the area referenced and extrapolating those children's experience to other children of affluence is short-sighted and disingenuous. Assuming all children of affluence, all children whose parents teach (and show by example) that working to the best of your ability creates alcohol addicted, stressed out liars and cheaters simply seems a way to further your need to justify your different way of parenting your children. Sadly, there are messed up kids whose parents push them too hard, but here are also mess up kids whose parents expect little of them or do not help them see they are capable success. I have seen both side of the equation and know that it isn't an all or nothing proposition. It seems as if you are doing an awful lot of projecting here. It is indeed possible to teach your children to strive for excellence, to be responsible and to keep numerous options open to themselves without creating anxious, stress out, miserable kids. My children are emotionally healthy, honest, responsible, compassionate, kind kids who also excel in school and the extracurriculars of their choice (and they are very different based upon the interests of the child). By all accounts, and not just mine, they are happy, successful kids. I am sorry if that threatens you in some way, but by their own actions they will have options in life. How they ultimately chose to utilize those options will be up to them. Making sure that they doesn't squander their gifts during their development years or fail to see that they are capable of doing well is my responsibility. Of course, you are free to disagree and raise your children according to your philosophy. I feel comfortable that my children appreciate the support, guidance and reassurance they need to know that they can achieve great things (as they ultimately define greatness) in their life. How much could we all achieve if someone believed in us and helped us to believe in ourselves?

It was a discussion. The fact that you don't think it applies to your life or the lives of your children is great. But parents of children who commit suicide are usually shocked. And teens who seemingly have everything going for them kill themselves. It is a discussion worth having.

No, it was not a "discussion." It was a snotty, dismissive post putting down those who parent differently than you with the implied assertion that kids who do well academically (particularly if their parents are god forbid 'affluent") are messed up, addicted or on their way to suicide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Wow! So many of you have drunk the 'competitive' Kool-aid. My job is to help my kids find their passion and ensure they're educated - and education isn't just found in school. I have no doubt my kids will be successful at whatever they decide to pursue. They may not be the best but they'll be happy.


I am the above "poverty poster." It has nothing to with "drinking the koolaid" and everything to do with facing reality. I don't care where my kids go to college or what career path they choose. I do care that they do not squander their high school years and close off their options before they are mature enough to even realize that they have options. They have plenty of time for extracurriculars of their choice and plenty of down time, but screwing around and closing doors by not doing their best academically (and that is different for each of my kids based upon their abilities) is not an option. Neither DH nor I had a safety net. Had we not be motivated to do our best as kids, we should still be ultra poor like our families. My kids can chose that life after they leave our home, but we are not choosing it for them by allowing them to close doors before they have ever had a chance to be opened. If you think it is easy to make a life correction then you are the one drinking the koolaid.

You've not only drunk the Kool-aid but also have poverty anxiety. You think things kids do or don't do in high school will limit their opportunities forever. I get your fear but your perception is warped and unhealthy.

Not warped and not-unhealthy. Good study habits, good work ethic and responsible behavior does indeed lead to success. Can someone overcome a bad start? Of course. Is or easy to overcome a crappy high school record leading to crappy college or no college admission. Of course not--particularly since it generally reflects poor study habits, poor work ethic and irresponsible behavior. People can change but generally don't fundamentally change. I have no poverty anxiety. I have lived it. I have escaped it. I could live it again if necessary. Do I want my children to potentially lock themselves into a particular economic class before their lives even start? Of course not. You make a lot of accusations and assumptions about someone who does not share your narrow world view. As the saying goes...walk a mile in my shoes--or in the case of my childhood--holey shoes. As I previously stated, the only reason DH and I escaped the poverty of our prior generations is because we prioritized education and worked our asses off. Perhaps, we should just give our kids a big trust old fund and not worry about them achieving their own success (as they eventually define the word) in life. I prefer to think they are better off using their own gifts and talents and become their own people and that starts either education.

Irresponsible behavior from children?!.!? I can not believe it. I am sure that doesn't happen in Lake Wobegon.

It can also indicate an unstable, chaotic, abusive home life.

Exactly. Will children occasionally be irresponsible? Of course. However, chronic irresponsibility is a product of something like unstable home life, substance abuse, social isolation or difficulties, detached parents, poor role models, anger, depression or emotional problems, etc. Chronic teenage irresponsibility is never indicative of a child in a positive and healthy environment.

Did you learn that while earning your graduate degree in child development or psychology?

The point is that children are not adults, and they should not be required to act as such. It is too much pressure for high school students to hear from you-the rest of your life depends on the decisions you make right now. Of course, we should lead them and guide them, but we should also be teaching them that mistakes happen and it is what you do next that counts. Affluence does not immunize your children against the troubles of adolescence. The article: Silicon Valley Suicides in the Atlantic explains:


The rich middle- and high-school kids Luthar and her collaborators have studied show higher rates of alcohol and drug abuse on average than poor kids, and much higher rates than the national norm. They report clinically significant depression or anxiety or delinquent behaviors at a rate two to three times the national average. Starting in seventh grade, the rich cohort includes just as many kids who display troubling levels of delinquency as the poor cohort, although the rule-breaking takes different forms. The poor kids, for example, fight and carry weapons more frequently, which Luthar explains as possibly self-protective. The rich kids, meanwhile, report higher levels of lying, cheating, and theft.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/12/the-silicon-valley-suicides/413140/

I did not say that children should act as adults. Neither did I say that my kids never make mistakes or that they are not guided on how to manage and learn from mistakes. I do take issue with those who assert that children should not be expected to be developmentally responsible or strive to utilize their gifts and talents. My children do not go to school in the area referenced and extrapolating those children's experience to other children of affluence is short-sighted and disingenuous. Assuming all children of affluence, all children whose parents teach (and show by example) that working to the best of your ability creates alcohol addicted, stressed out liars and cheaters simply seems a way to further your need to justify your different way of parenting your children. Sadly, there are messed up kids whose parents push them too hard, but here are also mess up kids whose parents expect little of them or do not help them see they are capable success. I have seen both side of the equation and know that it isn't an all or nothing proposition. It seems as if you are doing an awful lot of projecting here. It is indeed possible to teach your children to strive for excellence, to be responsible and to keep numerous options open to themselves without creating anxious, stress out, miserable kids. My children are emotionally healthy, honest, responsible, compassionate, kind kids who also excel in school and the extracurriculars of their choice (and they are very different based upon the interests of the child). By all accounts, and not just mine, they are happy, successful kids. I am sorry if that threatens you in some way, but by their own actions they will have options in life. How they ultimately chose to utilize those options will be up to them. Making sure that they doesn't squander their gifts during their development years or fail to see that they are capable of doing well is my responsibility. Of course, you are free to disagree and raise your children according to your philosophy. I feel comfortable that my children appreciate the support, guidance and reassurance they need to know that they can achieve great things (as they ultimately define greatness) in their life. How much could we all achieve if someone believed in us and helped us to believe in ourselves?

It was a discussion. The fact that you don't think it applies to your life or the lives of your children is great. But parents of children who commit suicide are usually shocked. And teens who seemingly have everything going for them kill themselves. It is a discussion worth having.

+100 One wonders why a discussion is so frightening/threatening to some people. Perhaps some people need to be reminded that DCUM is not a "safe space."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Wow! So many of you have drunk the 'competitive' Kool-aid. My job is to help my kids find their passion and ensure they're educated - and education isn't just found in school. I have no doubt my kids will be successful at whatever they decide to pursue. They may not be the best but they'll be happy.


I am the above "poverty poster." It has nothing to with "drinking the koolaid" and everything to do with facing reality. I don't care where my kids go to college or what career path they choose. I do care that they do not squander their high school years and close off their options before they are mature enough to even realize that they have options. They have plenty of time for extracurriculars of their choice and plenty of down time, but screwing around and closing doors by not doing their best academically (and that is different for each of my kids based upon their abilities) is not an option. Neither DH nor I had a safety net. Had we not be motivated to do our best as kids, we should still be ultra poor like our families. My kids can chose that life after they leave our home, but we are not choosing it for them by allowing them to close doors before they have ever had a chance to be opened. If you think it is easy to make a life correction then you are the one drinking the koolaid.

You've not only drunk the Kool-aid but also have poverty anxiety. You think things kids do or don't do in high school will limit their opportunities forever. I get your fear but your perception is warped and unhealthy.

Not warped and not-unhealthy. Good study habits, good work ethic and responsible behavior does indeed lead to success. Can someone overcome a bad start? Of course. Is or easy to overcome a crappy high school record leading to crappy college or no college admission. Of course not--particularly since it generally reflects poor study habits, poor work ethic and irresponsible behavior. People can change but generally don't fundamentally change. I have no poverty anxiety. I have lived it. I have escaped it. I could live it again if necessary. Do I want my children to potentially lock themselves into a particular economic class before their lives even start? Of course not. You make a lot of accusations and assumptions about someone who does not share your narrow world view. As the saying goes...walk a mile in my shoes--or in the case of my childhood--holey shoes. As I previously stated, the only reason DH and I escaped the poverty of our prior generations is because we prioritized education and worked our asses off. Perhaps, we should just give our kids a big trust old fund and not worry about them achieving their own success (as they eventually define the word) in life. I prefer to think they are better off using their own gifts and talents and become their own people and that starts either education.

Irresponsible behavior from children?!.!? I can not believe it. I am sure that doesn't happen in Lake Wobegon.

It can also indicate an unstable, chaotic, abusive home life.

Exactly. Will children occasionally be irresponsible? Of course. However, chronic irresponsibility is a product of something like unstable home life, substance abuse, social isolation or difficulties, detached parents, poor role models, anger, depression or emotional problems, etc. Chronic teenage irresponsibility is never indicative of a child in a positive and healthy environment.

Did you learn that while earning your graduate degree in child development or psychology?

The point is that children are not adults, and they should not be required to act as such. It is too much pressure for high school students to hear from you-the rest of your life depends on the decisions you make right now. Of course, we should lead them and guide them, but we should also be teaching them that mistakes happen and it is what you do next that counts. Affluence does not immunize your children against the troubles of adolescence. The article: Silicon Valley Suicides in the Atlantic explains:


The rich middle- and high-school kids Luthar and her collaborators have studied show higher rates of alcohol and drug abuse on average than poor kids, and much higher rates than the national norm. They report clinically significant depression or anxiety or delinquent behaviors at a rate two to three times the national average. Starting in seventh grade, the rich cohort includes just as many kids who display troubling levels of delinquency as the poor cohort, although the rule-breaking takes different forms. The poor kids, for example, fight and carry weapons more frequently, which Luthar explains as possibly self-protective. The rich kids, meanwhile, report higher levels of lying, cheating, and theft.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/12/the-silicon-valley-suicides/413140/

I did not say that children should act as adults. Neither did I say that my kids never make mistakes or that they are not guided on how to manage and learn from mistakes. I do take issue with those who assert that children should not be expected to be developmentally responsible or strive to utilize their gifts and talents. My children do not go to school in the area referenced and extrapolating those children's experience to other children of affluence is short-sighted and disingenuous. Assuming all children of affluence, all children whose parents teach (and show by example) that working to the best of your ability creates alcohol addicted, stressed out liars and cheaters simply seems a way to further your need to justify your different way of parenting your children. Sadly, there are messed up kids whose parents push them too hard, but here are also mess up kids whose parents expect little of them or do not help them see they are capable success. I have seen both side of the equation and know that it isn't an all or nothing proposition. It seems as if you are doing an awful lot of projecting here. It is indeed possible to teach your children to strive for excellence, to be responsible and to keep numerous options open to themselves without creating anxious, stress out, miserable kids. My children are emotionally healthy, honest, responsible, compassionate, kind kids who also excel in school and the extracurriculars of their choice (and they are very different based upon the interests of the child). By all accounts, and not just mine, they are happy, successful kids. I am sorry if that threatens you in some way, but by their own actions they will have options in life. How they ultimately chose to utilize those options will be up to them. Making sure that they doesn't squander their gifts during their development years or fail to see that they are capable of doing well is my responsibility. Of course, you are free to disagree and raise your children according to your philosophy. I feel comfortable that my children appreciate the support, guidance and reassurance they need to know that they can achieve great things (as they ultimately define greatness) in their life. How much could we all achieve if someone believed in us and helped us to believe in ourselves?

It was a discussion. The fact that you don't think it applies to your life or the lives of your children is great. But parents of children who commit suicide are usually shocked. And teens who seemingly have everything going for them kill themselves. It is a discussion worth having.

No, it was not a "discussion." It was a snotty, dismissive post putting down those who parent differently than you with the implied assertion that kids who do well academically (particularly if their parents are god forbid 'affluent") are messed up, addicted or on their way to suicide.

I didn't read it as snotty or dismissive. You seem to be the only person being dismissive in your wholesale attack on the research by a writer of an article you don't agree with. Nor did it imply that all kids who do well academically and come from affluence are messed up -- just that the affluence/achievement bubble doesn't seem to be serving up more suicides than one would expect from a group who would seem to have it all.

I think the fact that so many commenters, both here and on other local boards, have said they can relate to the article, speaks to the parallels between the environment in Silicon Valley high schools and here. Your defensiveness says more about you.

[Anonymous]

^^ **doesn't*

[Anonymous]

You know you are talking to multiple people, right? I am the PP who is saying you should think critically rather than taking an article as gospel truth. I haven't said anything about the discussion here. There are multiple people who disagree with OPs interpretation.

I am still confused as to why it's so scary to suggest that you not assume everything an author writes is inviolate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know you are talking to multiple people, right? I am the PP who is saying you should think critically rather than taking an article as gospel truth. I haven't said anything about the discussion here. There are multiple people who disagree with OPs interpretation.

I am still confused as to why it's so scary to suggest that you not assume everything an author writes is inviolate.

I don't think people assume that *all* affluent parents are like this. But, I think there is more of this type of pressure in affluent families, and so this article should just be a warning to check yourselves. There have been, and probably will continue to be, seemingly have-it-all, high achieving children from affluent families that commit suicide due to pressure, either from parents, peers, or themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know you are talking to multiple people, right? I am the PP who is saying you should think critically rather than taking an article as gospel truth. I haven't said anything about the discussion here. There are multiple people who disagree with OPs interpretation.

I am still confused as to why it's so scary to suggest that you not assume everything an author writes is inviolate.

I don't think people assume that *all* affluent parents are like this. But, I think there is more of this type of pressure in affluent families, and so this article should just be a warning to check yourselves. There have been, and probably will continue to be, seemingly have-it-all, high achieving children from affluent families that commit suicide due to pressure, either from parents, peers, or themselves.

Yup and poor kids with disinterested parents feel hopelessness and dispair and kill themselves, too. Perhaps those parents need to "check themselves." If course, those deaths don't get as much media play...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know you are talking to multiple people, right? I am the PP who is saying you should think critically rather than taking an article as gospel truth. I haven't said anything about the discussion here. There are multiple people who disagree with OPs interpretation.

I am still confused as to why it's so scary to suggest that you not assume everything an author writes is inviolate.

I don't think people assume that *all* affluent parents are like this. But, I think there is more of this type of pressure in affluent families, and so this article should just be a warning to check yourselves. There have been, and probably will continue to be, seemingly have-it-all, high achieving children from affluent families that commit suicide due to pressure, either from parents, peers, or themselves.

Yup and poor kids with disinterested parents feel hopelessness and dispair and kill themselves, too. Perhaps those parents need to "check themselves." If course, those deaths don't get as much media play...

PP, don't be stupid. Of course, it's sad when any child commits suicide. But, this thread was specific to affluent families.

[Anonymous]

Does the PP questioning Hanna Rosin's credibility remember that she's the person who poked holes in the UVa rape story?