For those of you with 'bright' children, do you take the credit for it ....

[sandyballs]

..... or believe it's pot luck. I'm sick of hearing about a friend's 'genius' child and how it is all down to her parenting.

I know we can help by encouraging reading, blah blah, not constant screens etc, but it is pot luck isn't it really. If it's not how do you explain very different siblings, some who struggle, some who thrive academically yet have been brought up in the same way. This kid is an only btw.

I know it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things but she winds me up and I'm curious as to what MN think.

I was classed as bright, reading early, postgrad, totally abysmal at sports though etc etc. DH didnt do as well academically, was and is naturally good at sports.
Althought it is probably pot luck we can see this reflected in our DD's.
Dd1, despite my efforts from birth that she would be the brightest child known to man, is very average and struggles with school, apart from sports and arts.
Dd2 - basically ignored and schlepped about, no flash cards in sight. She is much brighter than her sister at her age, already picking up reading, loves puzzles, talking fluently etc. am not sure how this will translate in school yet though.

Dating sites aside, If you need to ascertain somebody's educational qualifications before you can tell whether you might like to have a relationship with them, I am thinking a high IQ might not be your main problem.

Dh and I and all our joint dc are graduates as are 4/5 of our dc dps. We have 1 autistic dgc and 8 others. Not sure the graduate parents have much to do with it though.

I think Laura is getting an unfairly hard time for pointing out the manifestly obvious.

I could never date a man less smart than me. That obviously isn't the same as requiring certain qualifications. However, I would find it unsustainable to have to keep dumbing down my vocabulary and the references in my speech with my partner. I need to feel secure with a partner - and I associate security with intelligence. Even things like Sahm etc - it's much more painful if you and your partner have very different earning power - so that one of you is 'forced' to be the main earner.

Ergo - two kids that met in top-set maths class have spawned two kids that sit at top-table maths. FWIW - my parents also met in a university physics tutorial. And their parents were engineers/doctors/scientists (men and women). Generation after generation - it's just who we are .

P.s. and I think I will soon try to get my DC assessed for ASD. But - again - these are very stable family traits running back generations. I don't see the slightly weird social skills and obsessive interests as a disability - because I have so many beloved role models for these same traits. For better for worse - it's who we are - and I think I am well placed to support my DC in growing up with these inherited traits.

My parents met at university even, never mind this generation.
I have dated some very bright men who left school at 15 but then became leaders in industry nad did very well so it is not as if I like some Indian matchmakers do have a list with "must have MBA" or whatever on it. it is just that I am attractive to fast brains. However as someone said above not everyone bright is fast with good verbal skills. I remember meeting one chap at London hotel bar - at that rather nice hotel at the top of Oxford street. He was very clever, a scientist etc etc but he was the only man in the bar I did not find attractive and he had the personal skills of the newt really as well as looking really scruffy. He was rather like some of the quite bright computer programmers I've worked with over the years so yes I agree you can be bright in certain senses and still not got that speed of speaking and swift brain and great verbal skills which is the kind of intelligence I like.

DH and I are both science nerds, and he'll sometimes give me a nudge at parties to remind me that most people don't use words like "isomorphic" or "orthogonal" in casual conversation. . Maybe 'intelligence' is too crude a description. I have certain interests - and I find it easiest to spend time with people with whom I can share those interests. I (privately), find (for example) economists to be full of sht, however 'intelligent' they are - but can always have a nice conversation with someone who - say - knows about space physics, or literature. My DC? Know a lot* about space physics and literature, without any conscious 'pushing' on our part.

It's not really that different from two musicians getting on well, and then raising precociously musically talented offspring. Or two sportspeople. I have every respect for athletes - but all that faffing with protein shakes and training regimes would drive me spare.

My parents were as wc as it gets-miner and factory worker, I was the first on either side of the family to go to Grammar School, to become a teacher then get a degree. Dh[father of my dc] had a teacher grandma and a railway worker grandad-he went on to take a First in Ehnglis, to do a Masters and to become a university lecturer.Our dc are graduates, married to graduates etc - a long way from the coal face.

Just say oh yes, your DC must be just like Roald Dahl's Matilda.

But that says nothing about their intelligence, greylady.

DHs family were also in the coal industry from Wales. But his Dad was very, very smart. He just channelled it into his off-hours, and long conversations. He never really had a chance to develop his academic potential, but he was very like (3 degree) DH in his outlook and intellect.

To start understanding whether innate talent is a myth, try reading Matthew Syed's "Bounce: Mozart, Federer, Picasso, Beckham, and the Science of Success" it should hearten those who secretly know their DC is a bit dim. Proud parents, I can't help feeling that a lot of these posts are stealth boasting under the guise of objective analysis ("....Although my first child is an absolute genius, my next one is only on the borderline of genius, while my youngest is merely very much above average")....we don't care how clever or thick your DCs are, we don't know who you are; so come on someone admit to having a thicko DC I dare you

The average IQ is 100 so plenty will have less clever children.
Syed thinks putting a lot of hard work into something like table tennis can make you good at it and he's right. It's why I say things are 50/50 - genes and environment. The things I've put 10,000 hours into not surprisingly are those at which I excel. That does not however mean that the genes side of things plays no part. If your genes meant you were born without hands then you're not likely to be good at table tennis.

re: partner choices, I think some posters here are confusing "similar level of education" and "similar interests" with "similar intelligence".

I can't really admit to having a thicko child since dd is 3 months old, but my husband and I would agree that he's quite a bit less academically clever than I am. He's also much more socially intelligent than me, has an innate sense of people, relationship and business that I tend to lack. So, going back to the "what is intelligence" question...

I have only skimmed the thread but it struck a chord because DC1 came home from school with a letter inviting him to join its enrichment programme. DH claimed DC gets his brains and looks from him, I claimed likewise, but the (church) school identified it as fulfilling his God given potential. That shut us both up