Julie Myerson - why am I not surprised that a book has materialised concerning her own son's drug issues?

[glasjam]

Read this is in today's Observer www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/mar/01/julie-myerson-novel-drug-addiction

Does anyone else have the uncomfortable feeling that I have on learning that she is writing about her son's drug problems? I know that writers often mine their own personal experiences for material but I think she's putting her literary endeavours ahead of her son here. From what I can gather, he is still young, his drug issues are ongoing, and although he is out of the family home, surely this is risking any possible future reconcilliation? I also baulk at the way she "weaves historical research about Yelloly with her disturbing account of her son's ejection from the family home" It just smacks of middle-class-writer angst.

My cynicism is further fuelled by my very strong suspicion that Julie Myerson is the author of Living with Teenagers - but that's another story...

theyoungvisiter, this is going off on a bit of a tangent, but I think on Facebook you are in control of what you post, but people don't always have the maturity to realise what is and isn't appropriate. When I have seen Facebook pages of people in their late teens and early 20s I've been shocked at what they have put in the public domain, where it can be seen by parents, employers, teachers etc. E.g. young women with profile pics in their underwear etc.

Which I suppose just underlines the point that Jake M. is young and immature, but Julie M. really should know better. I completely agree with your post of 20:28. I'm afraid Julie M. just comes across as totally self-centred.

With regard to LWT, I think this goes back to the spoilt middle class kid phenomenon. I meet a lot of young adults like this, and the problem often seems to be that they have never been given any boundaries, and have been repeatedly told by parents and teachers that they are fantastic and special, but without having to take much responsibility for anything. Unsurprisingly they struggle a bit when they are out in the world.

dustbuster I quite agree that people and teenagers have a naive attitude to facebook and the like, but this is in a different league.

If I saw pictures of a teenage girl in her underwear posted on facebook I would think "hmm, silly girl". If I saw the same pictures posted by her dad I would be horrified.

Not sure if this is any less humiliating and soul-destroying for the child involved.

As you say - all comes back to the fact that the parent should know better.

Quite so, theyoungvisitor. One of the most yucky things in LWT was when she wrote about her younger son's pubic hair (or should that be public hair?) emerging, and how he had four pubic hairs. He wrote an article about how his friends were all reading it behind his back for ages, and when he found out about it his nickname in school was "four hairs". Poor poor sod.

The thing that used to really shock me about the LWT column was the the level of physical and verbal confrontation going on in the house over really small things. The swearing and insults and fights were everyday fare (or at least that was how it came across) and the parents only ever seemed to come up with really feeble reactions.

If I came in and found a full-scale physical fight going on between dd1 and ds, I would categorically not be dicking around going, 'look darling, is it really worth it?'

The kids in LWT seemed to be very indulged and very under-demanded in terms of expectations of behaviour and maturity. The amount of time the author seemed to spend trying to please the kids while they appeared to treat the parents with complete contempt was scary. I actually couldn't read the column after a while, it wound me up so mch. Dd1 (nearly 14) was hooked on it, though. It was the first thing she'd read out of the saturday guardian, and would sit there muttering 'FGS woman, grow a spine'. Occasionally she'd say, 'Mum, get this' and read a bit out to me. Tbh that about summed up how weedy and immature the author came across.

Ooh Dittany I just ready that LWT you linked to and it brought back how much I hated that column. Just appalling. She comes across as a real woman-hater in that piece, and as in every LWT, only concerned for herself and how awful it is for her, with not a thought for what her children might need from their parent.

If JM is the author, which it seems she may well be - I really think the whole drugs aspect of the current debacle is a red herring. Her appalling relationship with her son and his pretty bad behaviour towards her is far more likely a function of her massive narcissism, and the fact that she's brought them up with this enormous burden of emotional blackmail, so that whatever they do meets with her panic, her soul-searching, her tears - instead of an adult, consistent response. I'm not saying bringing up teenagers is easy and I admit I have no experience of doing it, but I do think she sounds like the type of mother to drive any normal teen to distraction, and make normal teen problems far worse.

Re the drugs themselves, I think a saner and calmer attitude could have avoided a whole lot of shit. She is crying "addict", calling the police and tearing her hair out over a cannabis habit? I smoked dope on and off from 16 to 28, and I also tried several other, more hardcore drugs on occasion. I'm not saying it was good, but it sure as hell was normal, and it certainly wasn't a life-ruining disaster. During that time I completed A-levels, did my degree at Oxford, got a great job which I still have, and settled down with the partner I still have. I gave up dope in the end because it wasn't doing much for me and I saw it as a thing for your teens/20s and not something I wanted to be doing when I was settled and starting a family. Around the same time I cut down on drinking as well, just grew up a bit. I know many, many other people who have followed a similar pattern. I know many more who still do drugs in their 30s and 40s.

I don't actually think drugs are a good thing, but they are a very common feature of our society and acting as if someone has gone right off the rails because they smoke dope is just silly, and I'm sure fuelled the fire of this fallout.

agree Dittany / frogs / the young etc. etc. i.e. everyone

Julie Myerson did NOT write Living With Teenagers.

By beanorox on Sat 07-Mar-09 19:13:39
I happen to know for a fact that she did write the LWT column. Cannot divulge how I know but take it from me that I do. She did.

By TheDullWitch on Sun 08-Mar-09 21:15:57
Julie Myerson did NOT write Living With Teenagers.

?????

Oh god dustbuster, it gets worse! I didn't see that one, it must have been after I too stopped reading LWT because despite the fascination with how awful it was, I couldn't bear it. How truly grim. If she could do that to him, I think LWT woman (JM if it is she) has actually got some kind of personality problem - not to be able to even care about the very worst kind of humiliation she could put her child through. Publicising private, intimate details about his sexual development at puberty for his peers to read - it is actually horrifying.

Just imagine if a male writer wrote that about his female child. He'd (rightly) be vilified by everyone.

I have brought up teens. She and her husband have to take responsibility for the way her child has turned out. He started smoking dope/skunk whatever at 13 ffs. It is ridiculous. What the hell were her and husband doing when he was out doing this???? Writing her fool column for the Guardian and having 'me' time no doubt.

I am sorry for being so judgemental but i got severely told off at the very beginning of this thread for suggesting he was the product of his upbringing. Well, he certainly is. Teenagers don't have to be vile. They are certainly 'challenging' etc. Mine are certainly no angels and we have had many horrible times but you don't abandon them and you don't spend your whole time thinking about me, me ,me. It is pathetic, narcisstic and bloody stupid.

*narcisisstic I mean. Apologies for spelling. Am so cross and sick of this. No doubt she'll be on Richard and Judy or Breakfast tv tomorrow with Richard or whatever being 'understanding' tomorrow. Aaaaargh

What a ghastly thing to do to her son.

Dittany, I've read all of this thread - it's utterly fascinating. I am not a Guardian reader so not familiar with LWT. Can I ask you why you 'lost sympathy' particularly with JM after the standing on the hair episode? I read the link BTW. I agree it makes uncomfortable reading but as the mother of a 16 and 14 year old I have to admit that off the top of my head I'm not sure how I would have dealt with the situation any better. Admittedly my children (for now at least) seem rather less obnoxious and self-absorbed than hers,(I am delighted to be able to say that, because generally I think they are a pain the arse and a complete disappointment ) but just trying to diffuse things at all without any bloodshed is usually the aim, rather than to diffuse it in the perfect intelligent way, and to everyone's satisfaction. May I ask how old your children are? I'm genuinely interested to know whether the people who have been so critical of her have actually had experience of difficult teenagers or whether they are still imagining how they would react to similar situations come the time?

I have very mixed emotions about this whole thing, BTW, and I am on no-one's side. They both sound rather spoilt and self-important, TBH! I must admit I identified very much with her column where she talked of how, when they are toddlers you never really envisage losing control to quite the extent that you do, and so soon....or at least, you know it's inevitable but you somehow hope you will have been such an inspirational parent that you can afford to let go and yet never be disappointed or unduly challenged by your children's choices. And the column that centred around her conversation with 'Eddie' over clean underpants sounds pretty much like a typical day in my life. Though my children would NEVER swear at me quite so blatantly. I do the most of the swearing.

Just want to add, it sounds as if I'm condoning/ignoring the violence between sinblings - I am absolutely not, just that in my experience it can take so long to work out who wound up who, and who first hit who, and who was being sanctimonious twit/drama queen/obnoxious bully that you can easily lose the will to live!

I don't think she's an airhead and occasionally she writes a good(ish) book. But she is selfish in the way that writers can be and writing about her son shows that. He's hit back in interviews though. Says that his parents are insane.

At the end of the day, people will do anything for money.

It's very sad the the whole thing has been hijacked/exploited to a level which they will find it very hard to come back from. We all say spiteful things in haste and anger but when it is documented it must be so much harder to withdraw/forget.

"By TiggyR on Sun 08-Mar-09 22:21:03
It's very sad the the whole thing has been hijacked/exploited to a level which they will find it very hard to come back from."

But SHE is the one who's done the documenting/exploiting - that's what's so bizarre. For once I don't think the press are one iota to blame for this. All they've done is enabled the son to tell his side of the story rather than just having to accept what's written about him in silence.

I know, it's quite bizarre. I suppose with writers there is a fine balance between taking inspiration from what you know and being completely mercenary with your own family. It seems harmless enough to share your parental angst with the world (that's what we all do on here, no?) but she seems to have crossed too many boundaries and betrayed too many home truths. Her kids must feel like Truman in The Truman show

I don't like her patronising comments about his recent talking to the media either - saying things like he will be misquoted, doesn't know how to handle it etc. He might be better able to deal with the media than she is. Teenagers need parents who will be their champions, who they know will support them come what may. I am sure I was not a perfect parent with my 3 when they were teenagers and there isn't one right way to do it and what one parent will tolerate ( I mentioned my son and his friends getting drunk in our house above etc) others wouldn't but there is something about how she writes and describes it which makes me attribute more blame to the parents than I otherwise might have done.

TiggyR I have had teens, still have one. I have read the Living with Teenagers column. I know what it is like to live with teenagers. They can be horrible, obnoxious, all kinds of things but they are still your children, as I am sure you will agree.

I completely agree with Xenia's earlier posts. You have to see it through. They do come out of it.

When my children were younger, I too could not envisage them being like JM's son. I would have been completely on her side as far as the throwing out etc. BEFORE I had teens. As far as I am concerned, most teen behaviour is set well before they actually get to late teens. If you have a reasonable relationship with them, however horrible they are, you will get through it, because you still love them, despite their behaviour. His dope smoking started when he was very young, far too young to make informed choices as to whether it is a good thing or not. I neither condone nor condemn taking drugs, but he really should not have been in the position to start taking them at 13 or whatever. By the time he is 17 its too late to do anything about it I am afraid.