|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Helicopter parents
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
A university student is an adult. The university needs to treat them like an adult. How they get on with their parents is none of the university's business. If the parents don't trust their daughter to use the money they give her, well, they have the option of not giving it. But the university's relationship is with the student, not with whoever is funding them.
Unless things have changed drastically since I last filled out these, the standard financial aid form for people of usual university age REQUIRES parental financial info as well as student data, unless you are either married or fall into rare legal circumstances. And the data is then processed to yield two numbers, an expected student contribution and an expected parental/family contribution. This amount of tuition etc is withheld from the amount you can receive need based grant money for ( if you are lucky) because theoretically you should be able to cough it up without grave difficulty.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Oops, posted too soon ...
You can see that in general they are treating the student as a minor for financial purposes regardless of adult legal age, and there is no easy way of opting out of this. If your parent/s refuse to disclose financial data, you the theoretically adult child are SOL unless you can find a way to alter your filing status. Believe me, divorce and child support fights makes this likely.) And even if the parents cough up all the very intrusive data, you will still be responsible for paying " their share" if for any reason they do not/ cannot. Which amount is normally larger than your own number, for which you are still responsible at the same time.
So financially you are still treated as a minor until marriage or a certain age, 26 I think it was in my time. Parents are not " giving" the money diectly to their children ( or not, as they see best). They are having it extracted from them ( slight hyperbole, not much) because the financial aid people will not do business in any other way. Therefore the widespread heavy loans.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bostonman
Shipmate
# 17108
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
They in turn claim she has mental problems (despite being on the dean's list)
We haven't talked much about the mental health issue so far.
The parents' level of involvement is absurd (especially with the details—24-hour Skype, and so on), clearly. But I can certainly sympathize with the desire, on a smaller scale. There are a number of mental health issues (anxiety, eating disorders, self-harm, alcohol/drug problems, take your pick) that can—and, especially among young college-aged women in very-high-pressure environments, often do—go along with very high functioning. It would not at all be surprising for her to be both on the dean's list and severely bulimic, for example; in fact, many of the traits that lead to the positive side also lead to the negative (e.g., perfectionism). Furthermore, many of these (bulimia, self-harm, addiction) are behaviors that are very painful both to the ill person and their loved ones. Controlling and attempting to stop every instance of the behaviors in the short term does not help and often hinders long-term recovery, but you can certainly understand the desire to prevent your daughter from throwing up everything she's eaten or from cutting herself. Clearly these parents (if the alleged mental health problems are even real) took it way too far, and (as I said above) are hurting their daughter's chance of recovery. But I can understand what's going on.
Posts: 424 | From: USA | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SyNoddy
Shipmate
# 17009
|
Posted
My understanding of the term 'helicopter parents' includes the type of over protective behaviour typified by seeking to rescue kids from assorted situations and circumstances that the kid really ought to be encouraged to deal with themselves.
I'm thinking of occasions where a 'light touch' approach of parental support and advice is advisable but the over protective parent attempts to helicopter assistance into, or seeks to rescue the kid by helicopting them out of, the situation. I'd crawl through fire for my kids but there are times where their best interests are served by my leaving them to sort out whatever issues they have for themselves.
The leaving home to go to university is a huge learning curve for child and parent both. I've been on the end of the phone whenever needed this last year and at times have had to gently refuse the odd call for help to resolve issues with housemates or even faculties. I handled these calls for help by being a sounding board and talking through possible strategies rather than issuing commands or offering to get involved directly. I see my role as encourager in chief and an empower of a emergent adult. Seems to me that most of the learning going on at Uni doesn't always happen in the lecture theatre.
Posts: 53 | From: Somewhere near the Middle | Registered: Mar 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fool on the hill
Shipmate
# 9428
|
Posted
omg, sorry so long!
Here's a story of a "helicopter parent", the learning curve in regards to college and parent's role in college. (USA)
I was definitly accused of being a helicopter parent. I don't really care. I did what I thought I needed to do.
I have a son who has experienced learning differences and challenges for his entire life in school. He is very artistic and talented and extremely capable in many many ways. Verbal tasks are not one of them. If it involved language and/or something that he didn't find intrinsically motivating, he didn't do well without ALOT of help.
He excelled in the visual arts program at his HS. So, when it came to finding post HS education, I thought that a college that has a large comprehensive learning disability department that had a program for film would be perfect. He agreed. (So, this was a collaborative decision).
He took his SAT's without accommodations because of the utter failure of his HS to do what was neccesary for these accommodations. Don't even get me started, but you can believe that it was their utter failure. He got a semi decent score (not utterly terrible) that got him into a liberal arts college with a program for low SAT scorers that show promise in some way. He fits this profile extremely well.
He was happy and excited to go. He went off. I worried incessantly but refrained from "hovering" other than utterly stalking his facebook and trying to determine how he was doing. There were some signs that all was not well. But I fell into the trap of not wanting to be a helicopter parent.
The college even failed to follow up on a request of ours for him to be placed in their most stringent learning disability program. I tried to argue my way into the program after they failed to follow up, but it was too late. I should have followed up rather than being afraid of too much hovering.
So, at the end of the semester, he was utterly kicked out. Oh, why? Oh, NOW they'll tell me. They told me that he stopped going to classes completely (except for theater). He handed in no homework, attended no tutoring sessions, never entered the ld department for help. He essentially shut down completely. He is a wonderful young man and he wasn't partying too much (though just a little) but he spent his time composing music, writing scripts, making videos and getting an A in theater. But he completely dropped out otherwise.
I had to come to the realization that I helped place him in a place where he was completely unable to cope with the academic demands. His devastation (yea, he was surprised, can you believe that?) added to my devastation and we were.....devastated. It was very difficult. He wasted precious precious money and violated our trust by not confiding in us. But we love him so much and believe in him so much that of course we moved on, to, "now what?"
That turned out to be a stint in community college where he tried and won back our trust. However, he still did not do that well. He eventually admitted that he wanted to go to a non degree giving film/acting school. I'm not sure why he didn't tell us this before. He was told that because of his previous behavior we would not assist the funding of such a school and needed to prove it to us.
So, he attended a total of 4 short term programs at this school that ranged in time periods from one week to two months. He had to live on his own and be responsible, attend class, etc. He has shown great, great interest and participation in the program for acting, which while not degree giving, is very time consuming and rigorous. So, he is accepted into a year program. What happens after that will be decided, collaboratively, between him, my husband and I. Believe me, we will now "hover".
I think it is ridiculous, ridiculous that colleges have laws that forbid parents from knowing anything even when they are footing the bill. It makes me so angry.
Now, the OP situation, where the parents have to have her on skype or whatever, is utterly ridiculous and horrifying and not "helicopter parenting" but a humiliating way to treat your child. Also, my younger son is also now in college and there is very little hovering and his first semester grades are very good. He is also, apparently, having tons of fun. So, my hovering is not a result of my not being able to let go of my children, but my son's individual characteristics and his needs.
So, it's all a matter of individual circumstances.
[ 31. December 2012, 00:01: Message edited by: Fool on the hill ]
Posts: 792 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
There was no link in the OP, so I hunted it down: here.
The parents' actions clearly had nothing to do with their "investment" in her academic success--even if one were to accept that there was something normal and acceptable about installing monitoring software on her computer, etc., so long as that was the target (I don't, and find it extreme, even bizarre). College students are, with rare exceptions, adults. In the days of loco parentis, the age of majority in most of the US was 21, but it's been 18 in every state for over 30 years.
Having put two kids through college--they took out some loans, we took out some, roughly 50-50--I must say that I never felt like their education was in any way my property because I paid for part of it. I just felt I was passing on what my parents gave me. I certainly asked them about what and how they were doing, and they were (reasonably) forthcoming about both academic and extracurricular matters, but some things really are none of my business.
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ondergard
Shipmate
# 9324
|
Posted
All three of my kids went to University at age 18, having had a standard Comprehensive education in British State schools.
At University, each had exactly the same level of support from their parents.
We paid their annual parental tuition contribution for years two and three (and in the case of child number three, who went to a Scottish university, year four) and their maternal grandparents insisted on paying their first year's parental contribution as their contribution (they did this for all nine of their grandchildren).
Apart from child one, year one, we had at least two children at university for four years, because the middle child went on from her bachelor's degree to do a Masters/Teaching degree at Trinity Cambridge.
All of them took full advantage of the Student Loans Company, and all of them are now paying off the loans, and will be until they are at least forty. They all worked part-time whilst at Uni, which they all freely admitted was in order to provide sufficient drinking vouchers for the weekend.
They all had mobile phones, and they all knew where we lived and what our phone numbers were. Unless we had information we needed to impart (Nana's ill) we spoke to them when they wanted to speak to us, and we picked them up from railway stations or airports, or drove, on request to various Halls of Residence/Student houses at the beginning and end of academic years to deposit or collect belongings and/or their owners.
Whilst they were growing up, without telling them, we put bits and pieces of money donated by godparents, aunts and uncles and various other well-wishers into designated accounts in their names. They all went to University with a totally unexpected Post Office Savings bank book in their back pockets, which wasn't a vast sum but which, if used wisely, would have seen them through at least the first year's spending money. We never enquired whether it lasted until Christmas, but I am pretty sure that my eldest son's was gone by the end of December, that my youngest son eked his out for the whole (longer) Scottish first year, and that my daughter still had every penny in the same account when she left Uni.
My eldest decided to sell his nineteenth century Wolff Brothers violin in the Third Year, I think to fund his end-of-University all-mates-together bash in Spain. As he already owed me £200 which he had solemnly promised to repay, I had the fiddle valued, and gave him the value minus £200. The violin, whatever he has said in the intervening nine years, is MINE, I tell you, all mine!
When he expressed his shame at having to borrow money from me, I pointed out that his (maternal) uncle thirty years previously had gone up to Cambridge on a full scholarship and a full grant, and no fees, and had still needed to be bailed out in a major way by his father on three separate and very expensive occasions... and he only got a Third! It made my son (2:1) feel better - but he didn't get the violin back. His daughter might, if she asks her grandfather nicely, get a loan of it if she's interested.
When they left University, they each received a largish cheque which was one third of our then life savings, which we had been building up with legacies, savings, etc. with which to do as they wished, but which was in effect our signing-off grant - from now on, apart from emergencies, they were on their own, we had to build up our own nest-egg again, and I wanted to rejoin the Golf Club I couldn't afford whilst I was subsidising them. The eldest two were sworn to secrecy in turn as they got it - we didn't want any of them to know that that money was coming, and spend it before it hit their accounts.
They all got good degrees, they all went on to get good jobs, and as the eldest hits thirty and the youngest twenty-six they are all married, they all "own" their own homes, and two of them have a child: but it wouldn't matter if they had none of these things.
All that matters is that we did everything we possibly could to launch them into adulthood as smoothly as possible, that we loosed the arrows from the bow of our marriage and watched them fly.
I think we did okay: the measure of which is that, as adults, I wouldn't hesitate to ask any of them their advice, or their help, and I know I would get it. That's about the best you can do - okay. The rest is up to them: and I think that's true of whatever system.
Whilst we might never stop being concerned for our children, we have no right to attempt any form of coercion, no matter how we've supported them. Our kids don't owe us anything, they didn't make the decision to be conceived or born to us: the trick is not to owe them anything either, because that way cross-generational relationships are co-equal rather than co-dependent.
Posts: 276 | From: Essex | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I was surprised to see the OP was abt parents and an adult child of this age. Around here helicopter parents is those who drive their kids to school versus letting them walk, think that public transit is either dangerous or for the poor and unwashed, monitor everything the kids do in and outside, praise everything the kids do even when not good etc. The kids end up with unrealistic expectations, inability to trust themselves, and otherwise fail to grow up. Entitled, complainative and annoying. If an adult other than a parent attempts to fail, discipline or direct such a child, the parents tend to over defend the child in inappropriate ways. when grown, the children often fail to launch, though that depends on how closely the heli-parents hover.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure:
There was no link in the OP, so I hunted it down: here.
The parents' actions clearly had nothing to do with their "investment" in her academic success--even if one were to accept that there was something normal and acceptable about installing monitoring software on her computer, etc., so long as that was the target (I don't, and find it extreme, even bizarre).
Yes, this parent appears to be acting absurdly. The problem I have with the OP is that these stories about the occasional crazy are used in an incredibly manipulative way by the educational establishment. They trot them out at orientation to say, in essense, "If you dare contact us for any reason except to provide money, you are being like this." It is foul in the extreme, and frankly exactly the kind of manipulative excess that I have come to expect from those in higher education. They have been over the top for so very long in this country that they think their excess is somehow the new normal. I think they've just spent so long surrounded by adolescents that they simply no longer know what adult behavior is.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
FotH, as the sister of an exceedingly smart boy with a learning disability, I want to say I don't think that you sound like a helicopter parent at all. If your elder son were nt, maybe your behavior would be helicoptering, but as it is, you are supporting him in a way other children would not need, it sounds to me. You mention that your older son is very talented in certain areas. That too may add to the perception that you are helping him too much. See, how well he is doing? Clearly his parents are just being obnoxious and he could handle whatever. Doesn't mean they are right, so yeah I definitely don't think you are helicoptering.
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fool on the hill
Shipmate
# 9428
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
FotH, as the sister of an exceedingly smart boy with a learning disability, I want to say I don't think that you sound like a helicopter parent at all. If your elder son were nt, maybe your behavior would be helicoptering, but as it is, you are supporting him in a way other children would not need, it sounds to me. You mention that your older son is very talented in certain areas. That too may add to the perception that you are helping him too much. See, how well he is doing? Clearly his parents are just being obnoxious and he could handle whatever. Doesn't mean they are right, so yeah I definitely don't think you are helicoptering.
Thanks!
Posts: 792 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl:
The parents in this case installed monitoring software on the daughter's computer and phone. I'd have cut off all communication as well as filed a restraining order if my parents had done that. They also required her to keep her skype connected to them every minute she was in her dorm room. They even watched her all night long! They've accused her of mental illness without evidence and promiscuity. (How she could possibly have a relationship of any kind under the circumstances. These parents went WAY over the line. The judge agreed and the university also gave the daughter a full ride for her senior year.
If that poor girl IS mentally ill, I think I know who caused it....
I wonder how other cultures manage the transition? I was aware at son the younger's university that the all-women accommodation was almost entirely taken by young muslim women whose parents didn't want them sharing with men. But am not sure if they tried to intervene in other ways.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lothiriel
Shipmate
# 15561
|
Posted
From what I've seen, helicoptering begins long before the child goes off to college/uni/school (whatever you want to call it).
My children are 23 and 21. My husband and I have always had a deliberate policy of letting the kids be their own people -- making age-appropriate decisions, making and hopefully learning from mistakes, choosing their friends, interests, and pursuits, doing their homework on their own, and so on. I learned early on that they weren't extensions of me and my interests. I would guide them, but not attempt to mold them into something they weren't.
But we saw other parents from the moment of their child's birth through their teenage years and beyond doing everything for them, supervising every minute of their lives, making all their choices for them. We saw people pushing their children in directions that were quite unsuitable for them, like forcing them to play certain sports when they were clearly hating every minute. By the time she was a teenager, the child of the most helicopterish parents I knew --they intensely pushed her to succeed in activities they chose for her-- was harming herself and getting into trouble with the police.
Our daughter, happy, well-adjusted, and full of ambition, has finished university and a one-year post-grad community college program, with her tuition fully paid by us. She chose to attend a university in another city, so she had to cover a good chunk of her living expenses herself. We paid her tuition not because we expected some sort of return on investment, but as a gift to her, as part of our parental duty to provide for her to the best of our ability. We didn't inquire into her grades, since that was her own business. We knew she was committed to succeeding in school, and she knew that poor grades would keep her from achieving her goals.
Our son is a different creature altogether. He is not at all suited to academic study, has a slight learning disability, and barely made it through high school. He is, however, a gifted musician. He's reasonably happy now, working, writing and producing music, and planning to travel. If we had pushed him to try to get to university, he would by now be bitter, angry, likely on drugs (he smoked both tobacco and pot for a while -- the pot has largely stopped, and with our support, he stopped tobacco as well), possibly suicidal, and certainly hating us. Any attempts to improve his prospects by pushing him in a direction he wasn't suited for would have had the opposite effect. We're willing to make him the same sort of educational gift as we did his sister, if and when he's ready for that, as long as it's something he has a realistic expectation of succeeding in.
--------------------
If you want to build a ship, don't drum up the men to gather wood, divide the work and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea. St-Exupery
my blog
Posts: 538 | From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
As self-congradulatory as this thread has become, I would suggest that in my experience, it's not as simple as just "giving them wings". Although the extremes of either helicoptering or neglect are apt to not end up well, you can still do everything right and have things go terribly, horribly wrong. Parenting is not for sissies, but is very much for people of prayer.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lothiriel
Shipmate
# 15561
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
As self-congradulatory as this thread has become, I would suggest that in my experience, it's not as simple as just "giving them wings". Although the extremes of either helicoptering or neglect are apt to not end up well, you can still do everything right and have things go terribly, horribly wrong. Parenting is not for sissies, but is very much for people of prayer.
I agree entirely. For the purposes of this thread, I (and probably others) have focused on our children's successes that we've contributed to in one way or another without being overly protective, or described how certain individuals do need extra help and support, within appropriate limits. But my son's struggles have given me many sleepless nights (he could so easily have slipped into a destructive lifestyle, and he's still vulnerable and rather fragile) and I've cried rivers over both my kids, especially when they were having their teenage angst and acting out. And I by no means have always been a good parent, having my own struggles with depression and such. I'm quite astonished that my children have turned out as well as they have -- it's very much "there but for the grace of God" in my mind.
--------------------
If you want to build a ship, don't drum up the men to gather wood, divide the work and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea. St-Exupery
my blog
Posts: 538 | From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ondergard
Shipmate
# 9324
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
As self-congradulatory as this thread has become, I would suggest that in my experience, it's not as simple as just "giving them wings". Although the extremes of either helicoptering or neglect are apt to not end up well, you can still do everything right and have things go terribly, horribly wrong. Parenting is not for sissies, but is very much for people of prayer.
I'm sorry if that's how my post came over. It wasn't meant to be self-congratulatory at all. I was trying to make the point that children "succeed" more because of their own efforts, and "fail" more if parents are too directive, rather than merely being as supportive as possible within their means. That's all. If that came across as complacent, I'm sorry it wasn't intended to be.
I too remember many anxious moments about my children throughout their childhood and adolescence. I still worry abrupt them now, when they are all adults: but I would ne'er have, in the past, felt I had the right to demand a "return on my investment" or that my children owed me anything at any stages of their lives (unless they'd actually borrowed actual money) .
Posts: 276 | From: Essex | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ondergard:
but I would ne'er have, in the past, felt I had the right to demand a "return on my investment" or that my children owed me anything at any stages of their lives (unless they'd actually borrowed actual money) .
A number of people have said something more or less like this in this thread. The noton that a parent expects nothing from their children is either massively unaware or dishonest beyond measure. Come on, folks, there is absolutely nothing virtuous in the kind of isolationism implied by that nonsense. Stop trying to sound virtuous, and consider what you actually expect of your progeny. The obligations and expectations of family go in every direction, as they should.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ondergard
Shipmate
# 9324
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
. The noton that a parent expects nothing from their children is either massively unaware or dishonest beyond measure.
Sorry, Tom, but you have no right to say this - you can't possibly know everyone who has replied.
I maintain, without being "unaware" as you so patronisingly put it, that my children owe me nothing, and I expect nothing from them in terms of an entitlement in return for an investment made by me as a parent.
As a member of the same family group who love each other, we might all feel that we might expect love and support however that comes, but whatever you say I do not regard my children or theirs as some kind of investment from which I ought to be feel entitled to expect a return, or some kind of insurance against my old age, or against loneliness.
Posts: 276 | From: Essex | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jon in the Nati
Shipmate
# 15849
|
Posted
quote:
Stop trying to sound virtuous, and consider what you actually expect of your progeny. The obligations and expectations of family go in every direction, as they should.
I'm a parent of a young child, so I'll readily admit I haven't had much of a chance to think about this from that angle. I will say that my own parents had both the ability and the inclination to pay for most of my higher education (not including seminary), either through their personal funds or through loans they took so I would not have to. I am extraordinarily fortunate in that regard, but it also meant that I was accountable to them in a very real and direct way all through school, and rightfully so.
If I had screwed up in a major way, and squandered the chances they gave me, I believe they might have sought repayment, and they would have been right to do so. This does not address the specific issues of the young lady in the OP; we can't know specifically what the story is there. But as a general matter, I agree with TClune.
--------------------
Homer: Aww, this isn't about Jesus, is it?
Lovejoy: All things are about Jesus, Homer. Except this.
Posts: 773 | From: Region formerly known as the Biretta Belt | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ondergard:
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
. The noton that a parent expects nothing from their children is either massively unaware or dishonest beyond measure.
Sorry, Tom, but you have no right to say this - you can't possibly know everyone who has replied.
Right you are. Some of them may breathe through their gills and eat granite for their nourishment, too. My bad.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
Tom, you seem to think there's a pretty broadly accepted view of what children owe their parents - one common enough that denying its existance is foolish or dishonest.
Would you care to give some examples of what you think those obligations are?
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
Tom, you seem to think there's a pretty broadly accepted view of what children owe their parents - one common enough that denying its existance is foolish or dishonest.
Would you care to give some examples of what you think those obligations are?
Basically the same sort of thing that the parents owe their children. For the most part, financial resources are not the main issue. Most parents have been able to establish themselves in that way long before their children reached a point of being able to contribute. Although, in cases of extreme financial reversal, it would be reasonable to expect a child to pitch in if possible.
In the event of long-term health issues, it often becomes an issue that the child[ren] must deal with. Failure to do so is, in essense, a breach of the social contract. I seem to recall an injunction from somewhere that you must honor your father and mother that your days may be long on the earth, but that was probably from some idiosyncratic source that is not reflective of general human values.
To a larger extent than parents are often willing to express, there is a real expectation that their children will reproduce. Of course, there is many a slip... But the biggest way that children pay forward their debt to their parents is by giving them grand children.
This is hardly an exhaustive list, but should give some idea of the far-reaching web of interconnections that bind the generations together. I'm kind of shocked that such things don't go without saying.
--Tom Clune
[ 02. January 2013, 19:31: Message edited by: tclune ]
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
chive
Ship's nude
# 208
|
Posted
I find that really odd tclune, to be honest. Maybe it's because I've lived independently from my parents from a young age but the idea that a child is indebted to their parents seems to me to be a very selfish view of parenting.
I don't have children and, being in my late thirties and single, it is highly unlikely that I ever will have children. Am I somehow breaking this unwritten contract with my parents? The world is massively overpopulated as it is without their being an expectation that everyone has children.
As to looking after them financially, why should I? I have not taken a penny from my parents since I was ten years old, not a single penny. Why should I pay for them. They made their decisions about finances and part of that is to make responsible decisions for the future. I wouldn't see my parents on the street but I certainly wouldn't have them moving into the spare room.
I wasn't aware when I was born that I had signed up to some sort of contract with the people who gave birth to me that meant I was contractually obliged to do certain things for them. I may have a moral obligation but I certainly don't think I owe them anything purely because they happened to give birth to me
--------------------
'Edward was the kind of man who thought there was no such thing as a lesbian, just a woman who hadn't done one-to-one Bible study with him.' Catherine Fox, Love to the Lost
Posts: 3542 | From: the cupboard under the stairs | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
Yeah, definitely not universal. I certainly don't expect my children to have children. I suspect I hope they eventually will, but I certainly think that decision is all theirs, and that I would have no right to expect them to do anything except wait until they are self-supporting. Similarly I'd be outraged if my parents implied that I owed it to them to have kids.
I agree that I owe it to my parents to keep them off the street if I have any choice, but they make their own decisions, and depending on what one of them does, I might not have any choice. Certainly, Even the parent I am very close to, I feel equal obligations to my younger sister who obviously didn't raise me or spend money on me.
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
I'm kind of shocked that such things don't go without saying.
Well, get used to it. Lots of people have different ideas.
I don't think I owe my parents grandchildren. I find it a bit nuts to think I should have had children just so my parents could have grandchildren, given that I never had the least bit of interest in being a mother. Not everyone is cut out to be a parent, and if it's the sole reason you're having kids, providing your parents with grandchildren is a really bad reason to have kids.
I think what people owe their parents emotionally depends on what they got emotionally. This is pretty much just natural payback. If parents fostered warm and loving relationships with their kids since childhood, they should be able to expect those relationships to be maintained into their kids' adulthood. But if they weren't loving, they can hardly expect much more than common courtesy from their kids later in life.
It's reasonable that ideas of what people owe their parents financially would vary tremendously, depending not only on personal finances but also what the cultural norms are -- some cultures put the support of elderly people entirely on their offspring, while others have substantial government benefits and thus make the support of the elderly a society-wide responsibility. The US doesn't seem to have a lot of consensus on this.
When my parents paid for my college education, I felt a responsibility to take it seriously, but I didn't feel that I had to make other choices to make them happy -- I chose a major according to my interests, not theirs. Shelling out a lot of money for your kids' education is a bit of a leap of faith in them -- a huge leap these days, actually, given the costs of education -- and parents who don't trust their kids to behave responsibly with large sums of money shouldn't make those gifts. At the same time, I think it's terribly unfair that schools treat students as adults for privacy purposes but as minors when dealing with money.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ondergard:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
As self-congradulatory as this thread has become, I would suggest that in my experience, it's not as simple as just "giving them wings". Although the extremes of either helicoptering or neglect are apt to not end up well, you can still do everything right and have things go terribly, horribly wrong. Parenting is not for sissies, but is very much for people of prayer.
I'm sorry if that's how my post came over. It wasn't meant to be self-congratulatory at all. I was trying to make the point that children "succeed" more because of their own efforts, and "fail" more if parents are too directive, rather than merely being as supportive as possible within their means. That's all. If that came across as complacent, I'm sorry it wasn't intended to be.
I really wasn't trying to call out any one poster, rather the general tone of the thread-- there were several "here's how I did it right" type posts-- all of which quite true, but also perhaps a bit lacking in the humility of recognizing that, if it turned out well, some of that is sheer dumb luck for which we should be eternally grateful.
I don't agree that kids-- or anyone else for that matter-- succeed or fail entirely on their own. Raising responsible and self-sufficient young adults really does take a village-- none of us make it alone.
As a univ. prof. (and parent) I definitely see the perils of helicoptering and how it holds young adults back (and irritates administrators). But I also see the reverse-- how difficult it is for those who launch into young adulthood w/o any support whatsoever. This is particularly true in the US for "aged out" foster kids, who often turn 18 and are kicked out of the nest with no safety net whatsoever. The tenor of this thread would seem to suggest they would learn resilience and be launched into a successful career. While there are a few notable example of this, more often they end up floundering-- often even homeless. Because we really do need the support of family in moving from adolescence to adulthood. Young adulthood is the time for taking chances, for exploring the world, and for taking risks-- and with that there will be inevitably, quite a few failures. Learning to navigate all those milestones of young adulthood-- finding a job, renting an apartment, balancing a checkbook-- are all learned through trial AND error. Without SOME backup the "error" part of the equation can be epic.
All of which just to reiterate that it is a delicate balance, one we enter into as parents fearfully and prayerfully.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
To Timothy: Thank you for posting the link.
I think Cliffdweller's comment sums up the matter well.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Hedgehog
Ship's Shortstop
# 14125
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
My son owes me grandchildren? Really? Now that's just plain weird!
Tell him to pay up! With interest! Like, maybe get a dog, too, so you can have a "grandpuppy."
Yes, that is way over the top.
It is a more debatable question of whether children "owe" it to their parents to look after them in their old age. I know, growing up, my mother always insisted that we (my brothers and I) were not to bother ourselves with her--just place her in a nursing home and be done with it. But, when the time came, we refused to do that until her health deteriorated so badly that having 24-hour nursing care was a necessity. And even then we refused to "be done with it"--but kept coming to visit and holding countless family conferences as to finances and medical decisions.
I don't mean that to come across self-congratulatory. The point is that, from my mother's point of view, we most certainly did NOT owe it to her to take care of her. From her children's point of view, we most certainly DID.
And my attitude is similar. I believe I did owe it to my parents to look after them as they aged. After all, I loved them. I'd look after anybody I love. But, on the other hand, I don't believe that anybody owes it to me to look after me as I age. My problem and it should not be anybody else's burden. Certainly it is not a burden that those I love should be saddled with. Why would I? After all, I love them.
It is, I guess, a contradiction that I cannot explain rationally but I suspect that I am not the only person who feels that way.
--------------------
"We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it."--Pope Francis, Laudato Si'
Posts: 2740 | From: Delaware, USA | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
I believe I did owe it to my parents to look after them as they aged. After all, I loved them. I'd look after anybody I love. But, on the other hand, I don't believe that anybody owes it to me to look after me as I age. My problem and it should not be anybody else's burden. Certainly it is not a burden that those I love should be saddled with. Why would I? After all, I love them.
It is, I guess, a contradiction that I cannot explain rationally but I suspect that I am not the only person who feels that way.
Perhaps the point is that in our culture, there's no right or wrong answer - we as individuals simply do what feels best to us, and hope that our families will agree, or at least tolerate our choices without making too much fuss.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
the giant cheeseburger
Shipmate
# 10942
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
I believe I did owe it to my parents to look after them as they aged. After all, I loved them. I'd look after anybody I love. But, on the other hand, I don't believe that anybody owes it to me to look after me as I age. My problem and it should not be anybody else's burden. Certainly it is not a burden that those I love should be saddled with. Why would I? After all, I love them.
It is, I guess, a contradiction that I cannot explain rationally but I suspect that I am not the only person who feels that way.
Perhaps the point is that in our culture, there's no right or wrong answer - we as individuals simply do what feels best to us, and hope that our families will agree, or at least tolerate our choices without making too much fuss.
I understand that contradiction completely - it's about always making sure your expectation of what you're entitled to receive is always far less than what you feel required to give.
I have this kind of relationship with my grandparents now I'm in my late 20's, which is really cool. They know I don't expect to receive a gift from them on my birthday, but they put effort into finding a thoughtful gift each time. Likewise, they appreciate the way that I call them to see how they're doing on hot days like this (40.5°C and 6% relative humidity, and it's still not even midday yet) and that I still come around to see them even though they've told me on the phone that they are fine and that yes they are using the air conditioner.
I'm also aware that this understanding of generosity is not universal, and that it's a product of my upbringing that's come from my family and my church. One of the people I share a house with at the moment is a student from China whose father is a wealthy industrialist. This young guy has been brought up to understand nothing can ever be given or accepted freely, and that friendship is only about drawing mutual advantage out of a series of transactions. I find it ridiculous, if I offer him so much as a slice or two of a pizza he insists on finding out the cost of the pizza and paying me the exact value of how much he got.
--------------------
If I give a homeopathy advocate a really huge punch in the face, can the injury be cured by giving them another really small punch in the face?
Posts: 4834 | From: Adelaide, South Australia. | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
I certainly didn't intend to be congratulating myself. They both graduated, and are now struggling to different degrees (the daughter is the more energetic and enterprising one--we're trying to shove the son out of the nest for the second time). There were discussions about whether our money was being well spent at various times, and suggestions that if he wasn't ready to get the most out of his education, he might take a break to reconsider his goals (which he did). But it was never a matter of being paid back--it's about paying it forward.
As for grandchildren--it's not a big issue for me, though I think it would be a waste of good DNA if they didn't reproduce. My wife probably has different feelings.
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
It is, I guess, a contradiction that I cannot explain rationally but I suspect that I am not the only person who feels that way.
I feel that way. I gave my Mum care way beyond most people's endurance. But I'd hate my kids to do that for me.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
Hey Tom I don't want grandchildren. Does your system allow me to ask for a Play Station 3 instead?
My system is pretty simple: "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, who am I?" If you think that's about PlayStations, knock yourself out.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
Hey Tom I don't want grandchildren. Does your system allow me to ask for a Play Station 3 instead?
My system is pretty simple: "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? If I am only for myself, who am I?" If you think that's about PlayStations, knock yourself out.
--Tom Clune
I think that buying a Playstation "because it will please somebody else" is by far less a potentially devastatingly bad idea than having a child "because it will please somebody else".
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
I think that buying a Playstation "because it will please somebody else" is by far less a potentially devastatingly bad idea than having a child "because it will please somebody else".
Enjoy your toy.
--Tom Clune
[ 04. January 2013, 12:45: Message edited by: tclune ]
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
I think that buying a Playstation "because it will please somebody else" is by far less a potentially devastatingly bad idea than having a child "because it will please somebody else".
Enjoy your toy.
--Tom Clune
That's just it. When you suggest that children are owed you make them sound like comoditys.
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
That's just it. When you suggest that children are owed you make them sound like commodities.
Well, I assume that the reason people have so aggressively misinterpreted what I had to say because it rubs too close to the bone. What I said was that there are obligations in family relationships. In truth, there are obligations in virtually every relationship (sorry if that seems radical).
One of the things that is true of humanity is that we very often fail to live up to our obligations for one reason or another. Sometimes, as when we default on our home mortgage, it may be because we lost our job and are unable to pay. That doesn't mean that we don't have an obligation to pay -- it just means that we can't always fulfill our obligations.
Sometimes, we choose not to fulfill our obligations. When we are mistakenly given an extra dollar at the check-out counter, we are obligated to return it if we notice. We may not do that, and it is to our shame if we don't.
Sometimes, we are so emotionally damaged that we just don't have it in us to live up to our responsibilities. I will let you fill in the example of your choosing for this.
But the point is that we have obligations all over the place. It may be our delight to fulfill some of them -- the fact that we may enjoy sex with our spouse does not mean that we have no marital obligation on that score.
And one may have children without giving any thought to the generations that preceeded us. But that does not change the obligations we are under. I cannot imagine a greater obligation than continuing the line of my ancestors. They sacrificed mightily, at least in part so that I might have life. In return, I owe them another generation.
There are many reasons why that obligation may be left unfulfilled. I'm sure it can be painful for some folks to think about that obligation and the fact that it has been left unfulfilled. I am not indifferent to the pain that some folks may have on this score. But the fact that a truth is at times unpleasant is not enough to make it no longer true.
--Tom Clune
[ 04. January 2013, 13:43: Message edited by: tclune ]
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
Except for the fact that Earth is so massively overpopulated. Wonderful if you want kids - no obligation whatever if you don't imo.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mere Nick
Shipmate
# 11827
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
not many children are able to borrow $140-200 K without at least a parental co-sign, and not very many parents have the credit for that without putting their house up for collateral.
I'm in for over $200k in PLUS loans. If it was only $20k I'd feel like I had a bit of a problem, if you know what I mean.
--------------------
"Well that's it, boys. I've been redeemed. The preacher's done warshed away all my sins and transgressions. It's the straight and narrow from here on out, and heaven everlasting's my reward."
Delmar O'Donnell
Posts: 2797 | From: West Carolina | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
That's just it. When you suggest that children are owed you make them sound like commodities.
Well, I assume that the reason people have so aggressively misinterpreted what I had to say because it rubs too close to the bone.
Well, I suppose that's one possibility! quote:
I cannot imagine a greater obligation than continuing the line of my ancestors.
Are you heir to some title of nobility, or one in a long line of only sons? Because otherwise this sounds a little grandiose. quote:
They sacrificed mightily, at least in part so that I might have life.
Are you sure about that? You've met a number of people here who don't seem to share your view of the chain of obligations - what makes you think your ancestors saw things then the way you do now?
Maybe they just sacrificed on behalf of their own children, individuals with whom they had an intimate, personal connection, and didn't really give much thought to people they'd never know who would eventually call them "ancestors".
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leaf
Shipmate
# 14169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Well, I assume that the reason people have so aggressively misinterpreted what I had to say because it rubs too close to the bone.
Your assumption accords yourself the great honour of being uniquely honest, insightful, and non-defensive in this discussion. I do not think your assumption is warranted.
quote:
What I said was that there are obligations in family relationships. In truth, there are obligations in virtually every relationship
True, but there are different concepts of those obligations. Yours are not universal (sorry if that seems radical). I can honestly say that it had never, ever occurred to me that I was owed grandchildren by my offspring. But I was not raised with any sort of dynastic expectations.
quote:
I cannot imagine a greater obligation than continuing the line of my ancestors. They sacrificed mightily, at least in part so that I might have life. In return, I owe them another generation.
There are many reasons why that obligation may be left unfulfilled. I'm sure it can be painful for some folks to think about that obligation and the fact that it has been left unfulfilled. I am not indifferent to the pain that some folks may have on this score. But the fact that a truth is at times unpleasant is not enough to make it no longer true.
--Tom Clune
And yet in fact it is not true. It is yet another assumption you have made. It is slightly surprising to me that you do not genuinely see that Measures Vary about this.
Your sense of debt to your ancestors is admirable and probably shared by other posters. Your belief that the proper way to pay that debt/fulfill that obligation is continued biological reproduction does not appear to be shared. Not out of a sense of dishonesty or emotional pain, but a really different sense of what is owed and how it ought to be paid.
For example, I think it important to reproduce intangible values of my ancestors*: faith, compassion, endurance, stress on education, etc. I believe it's important to appreciate their struggles and learn from them. Make biological copies of them? No, not really important.
*biological and spiritual; this would include, strangely enough, celibate or non-biologically-reproductive Christians of the past.
[ 04. January 2013, 15:32: Message edited by: Leaf ]
Posts: 2786 | From: the electrical field | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hedgehog
Ship's Shortstop
# 14125
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
I cannot imagine a greater obligation than continuing the line of my ancestors. They sacrificed mightily, at least in part so that I might have life. In return, I owe them another generation.
Why? I am reminded of Sidney Poitier's speech in Guess Who's Coming To Dinner. His father is expressing disapproval of Poitier's character's choice of a wife. The son's response:
quote:
You say you don't want to tell me how to live my life. So what do you think you've been doing? You tell me what rights I've got or haven't got, and what I owe to you for what you've done for me. Let me tell you something. I owe you nothing! If you carried that bag a million miles, you did what you're supposed to do! Because you brought me into this world. And from that day you owed me everything you could ever do for me like I will owe my son if I ever have another. But you don't own me!
Parents owe it to the child to look after the child and do everything they can for the child because they brought the child into this world. The child did not ask to be born. That is an obligation that the parents owe to the child. It does not create a reciprocal obligation on the part of the child to have further children. The sacrifices your ancestors made to give you life were owed to you--not a debt you have to pay. There is no unfulfilled obligation.
There is also a danger to the concept that there is an "obligation" to continue the line of one's ancestors. Because, if that is granted, it would necessarily follow that those ancestors should have control as to how that line is continued--that the son or daughter must marry a person of a genetic or social background that the ancestor deems appropriate or suitable for the continuation of the line. Admittedly, once upon the time, that was the common belief, and marriages were arranged between families because of that belief. That this is no longer commonly considered appropriate--indeed, considered inappropriate--exposes the flaw in believing that there is any moral or ethical obligation on the part of the child to continue the bloodline.
--------------------
"We must regain the conviction that we need one another, that we have a shared responsibility for others and the world, and that being good and decent are worth it."--Pope Francis, Laudato Si'
Posts: 2740 | From: Delaware, USA | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
If it was my debt to bring in a new generation, I've screwed that pooch.
Luckily my brother covered the obligation. So am I now a slave to support his genes, i.e. my niece and nephew? After all, maybe I'm bound by a geis to our branch of the gene pool. ![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
It sounds like the fallacy of Noble Blood - that there is much genetic connection between you and somebody half a dozen generations back. Go back far enough, and we're all doing it for Lucy. Try and stay in one reach of the gene pool and you end up with the Hapsburgs.
So, AFAIAC, any one of millions can carry forward my share of our common inheritance.
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ariston
Insane Unicorn
# 10894
|
Posted
I don't think I have an obligation to carry on even the ideas of my ancestors, much less their cancer/mental illness causing genes. Seriously, some of my ancestors were not good people—slave holders, racists, misogynists, warmongers . . . oh yeah, and that whole Trail of Tears thing. When you're descended from Andrew Jackson and others of his ilk, the list of "sins of the father" isn't short.
Sure, my parents are decent people. Get beyond them, and things get complicated or just plain bad. I'm not from a noble family or the Last Scion of some holy figure or other. Really, other than the fact my parents want grandkids to play with and/or complete their vision of their son having a Respectable life, the whole "I owe it to my ancestors" argument holds no water. If the ideals of my ancestors are transferred through me to the future, then I guess I owe it to the world to never even think of having kids, not ever!
Not that I believe I'd actually be transferring the hateful and appalling ideals of my ancestors to my hypothetical kids. After all, my parents aren't evil. They may have a very different vision of my future than I do (which causes problems, sure, but not "raised by racists" problems), but that's normal.
What isn't right is them forcing me to accept their vision of my future. It's taken me a long time to realize this, and I still haven't come to terms with it, but there are two very distinct halves to who I am: the respectable, restrained and very tame half that craves respectability and blending in (and spent three years in grad school studying Aquinas because of it—hard to get more respectable than that!) and the nutty chaos Muppet Circus host who likes art, language, tattoos and piercings, thinks Aquinas is the most boring thing ever but existentialism and radical philosophy actually have points, and that sculptor and Old Testament prophet actually sound like good jobs. They may not pay well, but fuck money. The first half is very definitely who my parents want me to be; it's certainly what they value, and what they think is good for someone to become. Sure, a bit of the latter is nice, but keep it under wraps. Much as the second half scares me, it scares me more to admit any of it to my parents.
So, really, what do I owe, and to whom? And to what degree to my often-present parents get to dictate and control it?
[ 04. January 2013, 17:30: Message edited by: Ariston ]
--------------------
“Therefore, let it be explained that nowhere are the proprieties quite so strictly enforced as in men’s colleges that invite young women guests, especially over-night visitors in the fraternity houses.” Emily Post, 1937.
Posts: 6849 | From: The People's Republic of Balcones | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
It would be interesting to hear some opinions from Shipmates who are closer to college age. I don't know if we have many such folk on the Ship.
I am also still curious to know opinions on this matter vary across cultural lines or, for that matter, historical lines. (Perhaps the helicopter parent phenomenon is a result of tiny nuclear family structure or of modern technology.)
It might be interesting to have a thread discussing (in a civilized fashion) the costs of higher education.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
Well Tom I had a lengthy reply planned but many others have beaten me too it so I'll just add...
My spouse has an obligation to have sex with me?
Did I just enter the good Doctors tardis and wind up in Victorian times?
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
