I'm already feeling salty about her fear of daycare, since my mom is an ECE professional. In a good center, kids definitely bond with their caregivers, and teachers are, you know, also child care professionals. And testing his limits and being more independent MIGHT have actually helped him.
Plus, working and being solidly middle class sounds like it would have afforded her the opportunity to pay for more therapy or enrichment that could benefit him.
Plus, I think not taking assistance is a stubborn pride issue, not a virtue. I get why some people don't do it, but I don't think she should have argued that. And if her kid really had these special needs that were actually diagnosed that precluded her putting him in care, it seems like she could have applied as a full time or part time caregiver and gotten SS (or money through other programs?) to allow her to do that. But, you know, you'd have to prove that was a need, not just the choice of helicopter parents.
I'm sympathetic, in that I think what she did is relatively fine. It's a parenting choice she made and she's allowed to do so. I can't say what I would have done. But her assertion that she MADE THE RIGHT CHOICE is grating. From my limited perspective, there were several paths here, and they were actually probably equally as good. Her argument is offensive to people who wouldn't make the same decision, but are still doing what is right for their family.
Post by sparkythelawyer on Jan 29, 2015 13:25:02 GMT -5
I think she sounds precious as fuck.
I think that its fine if she wants to stay home, but stfu about being so much better than everyone.
Hell, I'm currently pricing daycares and holy shit is it expensive to get some place that doesn't leave us living on ramen at the end of the month. So if she'd said she couldn't really clear expenses after Daycare costs, *maybe* I'd have given her a pass. But this crap? Damn.
Post by pinkdutchtulips on Jan 29, 2015 13:26:33 GMT -5
I did ALOT of eyerolling ... as a single parent who does NOT receive any child support. yeah daycare !!!!
I think the mom has put a lot of her issues on her son w/ disastrous results. I'm dealing w/ issues w/ dd that stem from my separation from xh but these are issues that stem from HER not me projecting things onto her. dd has had to deal w/ some fairly traumatic events stemming from xh's drug use but I'm not going to protect her from the outside world bc of it. we'll work on it AND she'll learn how to cope in the outside work.
dc would do both the parent and child a world of good ......
I honestly cannot see how the solution to having a child who is scared to be out of your presence is to keep them in your presence at all times. Developing relationships with other people, building trust, and letting your child spend time away from you in increasing amounts would have done him a world of good.
And look, you can pay daycare for that.
Amazing.
The more I think about this article, the more annoyed I become.
The intro to this story is kind of misleading. If her kid hadn't been hurt, then the whole story sucks. But I get where she is coming from and I understand why she kept her son at home as long as possible. All the poverty stuff is stupid. She kept him home because she thought he had a special need that could be met better by staying home. At least, that's how I am choosing to view this story because otherwise, it's dumb.
If he actually had a special need, I could sort of get on board with it. But I am not convinced his "special need" isn't something entirely of her own creation and/or imagination.
I will join the Mom Has Issues brigade. Because I was that Mom and my kid had/has issues.
DD2 broke her face in a playground accident when she was about 18 months old. Our babysitter and her little sister took them to the playground while my son was taking a nap. The rule for play had always been "no merry-go-round" but I didn't remind them that day, thinking "well, they know better." Younger sister (12) went on the carousel and was holding her in her lap. They "weren't going very fast" when DD2 got scared and flung herself out of the girl's arms and went flying from the carousel, landing face first on the hard dirt (and maybe a rock from what they said), cracking her skull from eye socket to upper jaw (back molars), side of her nose to maxilla (mid-molar) and side of her nostril to her maxilla (behind the second incisor/canine). It pushed all the upper teeth from their positions to the roof of her mouth. Every time she so much as stubbed her toe or pricked a finger after that, my first response was "let me look at your teeth! Open your mouth!" By the time she was three, she was "I hurt myself. Look at my mouth." I taught her to fear simply by being fearful myself. Thankfully, we got over that hurdle when I finally started realizing her mouth wouldn't break every time she was jostled.
So, if the kid was bitten as an infant and was still fearful five years later...there's some stuff that mom has been doing wrong.
So she was clearly dealing with some bugger issues even before having a child. The dog incident seems to have just given her a coincidental opportunity to project onto her child. I can't help but feel like if it wasn't the dog it would have been something else...
Post by UMaineTeach on Jan 29, 2015 22:31:37 GMT -5
I don't know much about anxiety disorders but one thing I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that the dog attack lead to a generalized anxiety about everyone other than mom.
Fear of dogs - that's logical Unless something else happened around the dog (Dad laughed at your pain, so you fear men -- Grandma was supposed to be watching you that day, so you fear old people -- the dog attacked you at Uncle's house, so you hate that house) I just can't follow that a trauma caused by a dog creates fear of everyone. Unless mom is projecting or maybe she was supposed to be watching him when he got hurt and she feels guilty (even though it was an accident) and needs to overcompensate for the perceived failure.
Post by anastasia517 on Jan 29, 2015 23:20:35 GMT -5
I think you don't actually start forming long-term memories until something like age 3, so I am highly skeptical that he was so traumatized by the dog incident. It sounds like he was under a year old at the time, so he would have no memory of it. The only way that his intense fear even makes remote sense is if mom is unintentionally conditioning him to fear everybody else by dubbing them "not safe".
I had a pretty serious injury at 22 months and I'm sure that there are plenty of people who experience an serious injury as an infant or toddler because kids are clumsy as fuck. It just seems like there should be a lot more traumatized people if it had a lasting impact.
I wish the article was more specific about when the child was bitten, and how long afterwards she got divorced, and how long she chose not to work.
A few things she said really rubbed me the wrong way though. Like "Why do we find it more acceptable for a parent to be emotionally unavailable to their son or daughter than we do for a parent to choose to live below the poverty line?"
I don't think that working means you are emotionally unavailable to your children. Or that anyone is accepting of parents who are 'emotionally unavailable'.
Maybe she handled things in the right way since she seems to have had the approval of a counselor. But I'd be worried that her efforts to increase his self confidence, really increased his total dependence on her, at least in the short term. Maybe it would have been healthier to foster his independence and teach him that bad things don't happen whenever his mother's not there, and that he can rely on other people and on himself, as well as his mother.
I wish the article was more specific about when the child was bitten, and how long afterwards she got divorced, and how long she chose not to work.
A few things she said really rubbed me the wrong way though. Like "Why do we find it more acceptable for a parent to be emotionally unavailable to their son or daughter than we do for a parent to choose to live below the poverty line?"
I don't think that working means you are emotionally unavailable to your children. Or that anyone is accepting of parents who are 'emotionally unavailable'.
Maybe she handled things in the right way since she seems to have had the approval of a counselor. But I'd be worried that her efforts to increase his self confidence, really increased his total dependence on her, at least in the short term. Maybe it would have been healthier to foster his independence and teach him that bad things don't happen whenever his mother's not there, and that he can rely on other people and on himself, as well as his mother.
The boy was bitten at seven months old and they divorced when he was five years old (she said this in another blog post).
I wonder why she didn't put that in her article....
I don't know much about anxiety disorders but one thing I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that the dog attack lead to a generalized anxiety about everyone other than mom.
Fear of dogs - that's logical Unless something else happened around the dog (Dad laughed at your pain, so you fear men -- Grandma was supposed to be watching you that day, so you fear old people -- the dog attacked you at Uncle's house, so you hate that house) I just can't follow that a trauma caused by a dog creates fear of everyone. Unless mom is projecting or maybe she was supposed to be watching him when he got hurt and she feels guilty (even though it was an accident) and needs to overcompensate for the perceived failure.
It probably started as initially (like most kids) he was hurting and Mom made him feel safe/better so he connected Mom to safety/comfort then at 9ish months he hit the normal sep. anxiety phase and Mom built that up into
"Oh Noes he needs me and just me to feel safe"
My kid definitely defaults to me when hurt/sick because I'm the one who kisses the booboos/gives her medicine/etc that makes her feel better so in her head Mom=the fixer of things. I also don't play that up and encourage DH to step in when he is around though.
I wish the article was more specific about when the child was bitten, and how long afterwards she got divorced, and how long she chose not to work.
A few things she said really rubbed me the wrong way though. Like "Why do we find it more acceptable for a parent to be emotionally unavailable to their son or daughter than we do for a parent to choose to live below the poverty line?"
I don't think that working means you are emotionally unavailable to your children. Or that anyone is accepting of parents who are 'emotionally unavailable'.
Maybe she handled things in the right way since she seems to have had the approval of a counselor. But I'd be worried that her efforts to increase his self confidence, really increased his total dependence on her, at least in the short term. Maybe it would have been healthier to foster his independence and teach him that bad things don't happen whenever his mother's not there, and that he can rely on other people and on himself, as well as his mother.
The boy was bitten at seven months old and they divorced when he was five years old (she said this in another blog post).
I wonder why she didn't put that in her article....
LOL, I think we can guess - it counters her assertion that the only way he could heal was if he were only with her all the time.
I think you don't actually start forming long-term memories until something like age 3, so I am highly skeptical that he was so traumatized by the dog incident. It sounds like he was under a year old at the time, so he would have no memory of it. The only way that his intense fear even makes remote sense is if mom is unintentionally conditioning him to fear everybody else by dubbing them "not safe".
I had a pretty serious injury at 22 months and I'm sure that there are plenty of people who experience an serious injury as an infant or toddler because kids are clumsy as fuck. It just seems like there should be a lot more traumatized people if it had a lasting impact.
I don't think this is entirely accurate. I would suggest you talk to your mama because while no, at 12, you don't have a first person memory of what happened to you at 22 months, I would imagine you remembered it at 24 months. I mean I have three kids and my two year olds have always been able to tell stories about what happened to them a few months ago.
But I do agree that an effect felt years later is more about the parents' response in the years following than anything a child organically feels but is well managed.