If your children haven't done as well as you thought they should have -- how would you change things

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do you say that? I guess you know what will make your kids happy and others don't? What presumption. I guess with your claim of erudition you are entitled to dictate to those what will make their children happy. Are you a communist?

You're hilarious!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do you say that? I guess you know what will make your kids happy and others don't? What presumption. I guess with your claim of erudition you are entitled to dictate to those what will make their children happy. Are you a communist?

Let's see, in a communist society the government determines who will be good at what jobs, and puts kids on a life path for school and career. Oh, I get it! That makes YOU the communist!

This is so funny.

[Anonymous]

Remember there's a preachy forum pp for folks just like you with your name on it!

[Anonymous]

This is a fair discussion.

The poster doesn't like the fact that for some, ambition is into getting into an Ivy. They claim they are highly educated but their children are not and have disabilities. Presumably ambitions of getting into Ivy may understandably be more difficult for these children if they had these ambitions. But they don't and the parents believe other routes and choices will bear them happiness in life.o

They conclude that children and families with ambition to attend Ivy are not pursuing happiness (presumably even if those children have no disabilities and are profoundly gifted and talented). We should simply follow their advice and recommendations. They do not have any confidence in other parents and children who might desire to go to Ivy and can walk the talk.

Umh!!

[Anonymous]

No, PP. the issue is not with children that want to attend Ivy. No one has a problem with that. The problem is with parents that come up with a particular model for their children's future, centred on a small group of colleges grouped together for historical reasons, and then impose it on their kids whatever the cost.

That isn't the pursuit of happiness, it is snobbery, and vicarious snobbery of that. Pathetic, depressing, and probably ultimately self-defeating.

[Anonymous]

I think we should pass the hat and get the OP a Pony for Christmas. She could name it Ivy and spend years shoveling shit hoping that the pony turns into a triple crown winner.

I honestly think that if your child has not done as well as you thought they should have, you should definately change things. You should get a pony.

[Anonymous]

Nothing wrong with that either. Just as there are family legacies (generations)in the clergy, music, business, education, medicine, law, politics, sports and small businesses what's wrong with families and their children deciding on a select group of colleges or only one college for that matter? No one is talking about holding kids hostage at gun and knife point. It is not unusual for children to view their parents as their best role model and therefore to look up to them and be like them. This adoration does not have to be pathologic as you seem to suggest. Therefore many children and parents share common aspirations. This is not unusual.

While there are many pathologic and dysfunctional families. There are more families that share healthy common interests and goals being in the same household under one roof. If they choose to go to Ivy or where ever...so what?

You do not know what is necessarily good for another family group or child just as I would never presume to know what is good for your children.

[Anonymous]

agreed pp

[Anonymous]

All I want for my child is to be self-sufficient and be happy or have the ability to pursue it.

The average NFL football player has a negative net worth.

I want my child to have the ability to provide herself with food, clothing and shelter (as an adult).

If she is gay, green, orange or a republican I won't care.

(I'm actually a republican fiscally)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have 2 kids with special needs and I am proud of them every day, never disappointed in them (sometimes disappointed in all the therapy appointments and extremely unexpected high costs of said therapy). One of them could probably get into an Ivy (certainly smart enough) but I wouldn't strive for that for him (too much stress I would think) and the other will probably be able to finish some variation on high school and maybe have a career of some sort. My husband and I both have excellent educations, wonderful and nice jobs, live in a warm happy house, and would like to think we are generally very good parents (not perfect of course). They are in public school (in DCPS, shock and horrors) for the services but we assume we will have to move both of them to private schools eventually so they can continue to have their accommodations. What's my point? Neither of my children would meet the OP's definition of success and certainly wouldn't meet that of the Ivy seeker, but they meet my definition and that is all that is important. If your kids grow up happy, loving you, having friends, with a job they enjoy and a family if they want one, you have done a successful job.

Not the "this" poster, but THIS.

[Anonymous]

For the poster with special needs kids -- no one is going to put them in the same category with kids with no special needs. I know from my sister with a down's syndrome child -- her hope/worry is that the child will somehow be able to do some job someday -- that might not be possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All I want for my child is to be self-sufficient and be happy or have the ability to pursue it.

The average NFL football player has a negative net worth.

I want my child to have the ability to provide herself with food, clothing and shelter (as an adult).

If she is gay, green, orange or a republican I won't care.

(I'm actually a republican fiscally)

This. Although actually, I would be quite disappointed if they were republican. But the most important thing to me is that they are happy. And if there is any correlation between going to an Ivy and happiness, it is a small one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Remember there's a preachy forum pp for folks just like you with your name on it!

Tone deaf much?

Many of us would be happy if our kids went to Ivies. We just don't like your unhealthy obsession, that has driven you to rudeness, snarkiness, and oddly defensive posts like this one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: No one is talking about holding kids hostage at gun and knife point. It is not unusual for children to view their parents as their best role model and therefore to look up to them and be like them. This adoration does not have to be pathologic as you seem to suggest. Therefore many children and parents share common aspirations. This is not unusual.

Sure, no knives or guns. I also accept that in some families the dynamic works as you say. We have certainly modeled hard work and striving for excellence to our kids, just as we have tried to communicate our values to our kids.

The problem is, a child's "adoration" is indeed natural, and parents use this adoration to further various goals. Using your child's adoration to encourage them to succeed seems good for the kids' own sakes. But using kids' adoration to meet the parents' need to live through their kids vicariously is really crossing the line. In OP's family I doubt very much that there is a healthy dynamic, judging from her nasty posts especially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do you say that? I guess you know what will make your kids happy and others don't? What presumption. I guess with your claim of erudition you are entitled to dictate to those what will make their children happy. Are you a communist?

OK, this just proves OP is a moron. First, her fourth sentence isn't even good English but she uses big words like "erudition" in uncomfortable ways, which is a big tip-off that she's educationally insecure herself. She clearly never took a poly sci class, or she would know not to throw around words like "communist" when they have no bearing on the issue. There was no Oxford debating union for her, or Harvard debate club, because her post in 12/18 21:22 tries to prove her position with the tautology that "some people seem to know what's best for their children" -- a tautology being just a restatement of a position, in this case a position that lots of other people have already said is false, so it doesn't actually PROVE her point if you see what I mean.

So if we buy her statement that she "never set foot in a public school", then she certainly didn't attend a very good private. It must have been a bottom of the barrel private, one of those privates with open slots that takes any kid that applies.

Or, OP is just a teenager winding us up.