..to think that having a child who is average is fine. And that having a child who is advanced does not actually reflect upon anyone

[pagwatch]

...I have a staggeringly bright boy. i have another boy who has severe SN. I have a DD who is so far so average.
trhey are nice people. they are well mannered and very kind to each other. Loving, polite and affectionate.
I am not responsible for their IQ's - that is down to god the universe and genes .
The bright boy is not nicer than the boy with SN. My gorgeous average little DD is not of less worth than her more able brother.

Why are we all so obsessed with our kids 'smarts as if that is some holy grail bestowing health wealth and happiness.
And why do some of us seem to want to derive some vicarious kudos from the talents that their kids got from god knows where?

When did that start ?
AIBU that a whole generation of parents are going to be looking at their offspring in 20 years time wondering why they are just as averagly happy as everyone else ?

In our state primary all the kids know their place in the class in maths & literacy

and higher is viewed as better

they are not ranked on anything else eg being a good friend, behaving well in class etc

it makes me barf

Oh Xenia really

How about the WOHM who is so completely unfocused on her children that they wouldn't get any opportunities in life apart from school if it was up to her? There's one in our lives (you know who I mean ).

well for what it is worth ( and as it was my op ) this was never ever about how parents spend their days. It is not a WOHM/SAHM thread.
I don't actually see how that is anything to do with this at all. Unless you really want it to be - in a freakishly obsessed type way.

macdoodle on Fri 23-May-08 08:20:09
"why do we slag off anyone who comes her to brag about their bright/achieving kids (in whatever field)... will I teach them good manners... one does not mean you cannot have the other..."

Macdoodle, in my day bragging was considered bad manners. So not an example one would want to set one's children.

but Darth, in DS's class (Yr 1) the person who is the most popular - the boy that everyone wants to be close to - is not the smartest. What he is good at is being cool and also devising fun games. Being a "baby" and not being strong (like wearing glasses) is far worse than being slow at reading and maths. Being smart doesn't get you much in boy-land.

florenceuk
I actually think the kids themselves are sometimes better at forming assessments of their peers.
My concern is that the adult world seems increasingly determined to judge their offspring purely in academic terms.

DS1 was doing all sorts of stuff in PHSE recently and the teacher was talking aboutthe difference between peer pressure and support. He asked the boys who they would confide in if they had a problem or were worried- who would respect their privacy and support them. half a dozen boys said DS1.
Now that I was really proud of. And so was he

It's presumably because of the growth of materialism and death of religion.

But I doubt it's any worse or better than it ever was. I bet in 1920 parents wanted their children to do well and the country was probably full of Victorian fathers caning their sons because they were second not first in the class. Some parents have always been like that.

Average is exactly that - in the middle. Many will be below average and as many above (or is that the median?).

I do want the children to find paid work when the older 3 leave university so to that extent I have some hopes/expectations for them. I am glad the girls have made career decisions now because I think they are happier knowing what they are going to be doing but I don't have a set view on what those decisions ought to be. Although I was interested in my reaction to daughter 2 s decision in the last fortnight, pleased she'd picked something of a suitable status, not because I have a shopping list of careers they might do which will reflect well on me (like the Asian parents at careers evenings who drag their daughters to the law, accountancy and medicine stands only) but because something intellectual interesting and challenging with high pay and status probably would make her happier than manning the tills in tesco or a factory production line.

I was a SAHM when until my youngest was 8 and I only worked part time until she was at high school.
I think it is impmportant to be ther for your chuldren if you are able to.
I was able to go to all school events and I took my children on outings. But I didn't only focus on the children. While they were at school and nuery I went on diferent courses. Took my English GCSE and did city and Guild maths as well as other things.
DH and I just want our children to do thier best according to thier ability.

"Although I was interested in my reaction to daughter 2 s decision in the last fortnight, pleased she'd picked something of a suitable status, not because I have a shopping list of careers they might do which will reflect well on me (like the Asian parents at careers evenings who drag their daughters to the law, accountancy and medicine stands only) but because something intellectual interesting and challenging with high pay and status probably would make her happier than manning the tills in tesco or a factory production line. " Really Xenia, but how do you know??? Sometimes women or men for that matter, are quite happy to do a job that simply pays the bills, yeah it might be a bit boring and low paid, but they leave at five and forget about it, there is minimal stress and pressure. Someone in a high power, high status job is certainly going to be prone to more work related stresses. I actually know (not very well) two guys, no connection, who worked the stock market - thought, fuck this, and started doing gardening! Some people live to work, some people work to live! Why can't you accept this.

Academia is a highly intellectual career - but i don't think you could fund a sports car driving, beach hut owning, flash lifestyle with the financial rewards. You have to battle for a career in academia and once you have one, it is very tentative. What about these people Xenia? Are they not up to your standard because it is not high status enough for you? I mean, what if your daughter wants to go and research a slime mould or spend the next ten years of her life counting flies in order to isolate a gene involved in a disease process? Because if she does, she may well be battling to pay the mortgage - but she will at least be doing something worthwhile!!

Not all of us give a shit what car we drive, what neighbourhood we live in. What we have does not define who we are...............

Sorry pagwatch,i hate hijacked threads, but you know how it is..............

I agree lucyellensmum.I work to live. I have a job that I find interesting and useful to society, I am not interested in it being high earning and I couldn't care less about status symbols. Working in something like investment banking would bore me rigid. Luckily we are not all the same. One is not superior to another. I want my DCs to earn their own living in something that they enjoy. My eldest DS has a job that gives him travel and plenty of free time to pursue his interests, middle DS is after making his fortune and he does like status symbols, youngest is artistic and will want a job to express it. I am not defined by my work.

Yes, aworthwhile job isn't necessarily a well-paid one...but wouldn't you push your kids just a bit further than factory/till work...
You can't say 'oh but they pay the bills and you don't get stress or pressure, and you get to go home at five'. It's just not true. How many factory workers do you know that go home at 5? How many till workers do you know that have weekends off (you know, so they see their kids when they aren't at school?).

You push your kids to get the best qualifications they can so that they have the biggest possible choice. However, everyone's choices are going to be different.

abbey this is what i used to tell DD when i pushed her, i rather wish i didnt though (push)

Push is the wrong word, more encourage. I think that you have to do a certain amount of encouraging, take an interest, create an environment where it is possible and lead by example.There is no point in pushing beyond that-for example if you organise all their homework, rigidly police revision etc they are completely lost when they go to university and are on their own. I always supported them in what they wanted to do, e.g transporting to football matches and watching for the sidelines,even though I hated it! Paying for music lessons etc but only if they wanted to do it, not because I thought it was good for them. (with the exception of swimming-an essential skill that might save their life one day).

Completely agree Abbey- after all it is our duty to introduce them to new things and encourage them to do/complete that we as adults know will be crucial (such as swimming, gaining literacy and numeracy etc). Totally different matter when it comes to voluntary activities that are for their own personal development and should follow their interests rather than their parents'.

I think the danger comes when you try and live your own life through them. I remember one thread on here where the poster's DH had decided which schools his DS was going to, which subjects he would study and which University he was going attend to study medicine-the DS was a baby!!! Even if the father accepts that medicine is not the career, the pressure on that poor boy is going to be tremendous.

""but Darth, in DS's class (Yr 1) the person who is the most popular - the boy that everyone wants to be close to - is not the smartest. What he is good at is being cool and also devising fun games. Being a "baby" and not being strong (like wearing glasses) is far worse than being slow at reading and maths. Being smart doesn't get you much in boy-land.""

Can I just ask what is wrong with glasses??? APologies if I've misunderstood this, but you seem to be saying that firstly wearing glasses is a sign of not being strong (?) - er, no, it's a sign that their eye is slightly the wrong shape - and secondly the implication that this would affect their 'likeability' in the class.

If this IS what you're saying, then it's really wrong! It's not even how people are perceived in class - one of the most popular boys in ds1's Y1 class wore glasses. Dd has just got glasses, and she is as strong and healthy as they come, AND she has lots of friends AND, more tellingly, ds1 is VERY jealous and wants some glasses because, in his words, they are 'SO COOL'.

I really hope I did misunderstand your post, as I was very worried about dd getting her glasses because of being teased, but so far all has been well.

It is all down to personality-wearing glasses is not important.

See I knew that glasses comment was going to be a thing.

I had to have a long chat with DD when ( aged 4) she told me that she couldn't possibly be friends with Charlotte "because she has curly hair" .

I did think it could have been worse

Tortoiseshell. My friends DD wear glasses and is sweet and hugely popular. She had a great appt recently but burst into tears when she came out because she was afraid she would not have her glasses anymore. She loves them and sees them as part of who she is.

Interesting thread. I think we all want our dc to fulfil their potential - or even to supersede it and surprise us. A sense of achievement is one route to happiness. Underachievement often leads to problems.

People who think that only those in the professions can be happy in their work are wrong and. I had a long chat recently with the woman who came to alter my gas meter (or was it the electric?). She was doing a skilled job that she obviously enjoyed, but I don't suppose she was being paid very much. However, she was probably solvent, fulfilled and had a sense of helping people so her job was rewarding.

I would like my dc to lead happy, rewarding lives. I would like them to make the best of themselves and to be themselves; to enjoy life without shame or guilt so that they can like themselves.

I agree with what you say Abbey and pagwatch - I was really staggered by what florenceuk wrote (quoted above) - surely people don't still think that wearing glasses negatively affects your popularity? And if it does, then we should all be re-educating our children!!! And dd only just got hers - does that suddenly 'lower her status in the class'?

I was staggered with the glasses, I have worn them since I was 12-they have never had any bearing on popularity! Neither has wearing a brace on your teeth. Children are not so superficial.

Wow...if you don't think kids are that superficial, you were VERY lucky at school!

It depends on the personality of the child. One of the nicest children I ever taught had been born with a hare lip and cleft palate, his speech was very difficult to understand (although the other children could translate), his coordination was dreadful and he was so thin he looked as if a strong wind would knock him over! All the children loved him, they wouldn't pick him last for a team game even though they had no chance of winning with him on their side. They liked him because he was so friendly and would talk to anyone-it would have been like kicking a labrador puppy not to be friendly back. I also taught a girl with quite severe disabilities but she tried everything and never asked for special treatment-the children respected that and she was very popular.