The Bible of Parent Blame: "Your Kids Are Your Own Fault" by Larry Winget
Friday, December 10, 2010 
Last year Meagan Francis from The Happiest Mom received a press release about a horrible book and called it out on twitter. I had just started writing on a blog called I Blame The Mother and it seemed like a great venue to write about this book. So I wrote a post called Like beating yourself up? This book may be for you. Today, a press release for the same book landed in my inbox. The title is still the same, but they have toned down the parent blame a little bit in the press release. I'm still not rushing out to buy it though.
Here is what I wrote on I Blame the Mother last year:
Do you like having people tell you how horrible your kids are?
Do you enjoy being told that you are a bad parent?
If that is your idea of a good time, this book by Larry Winget may be for you. It reads like the bible of motherblame. From the press release:ABOUT “YOUR KIDS ARE YOUR OWN FAULT” (Gotham Books; January 2010; Hardcover; $26.00).
This is not a fix-your-kid book. It’s a fix-the-way-you parent book. You owe it to your kids to parent with a plan. As Larry explains, “Why am I writing this book? Look around. Our kids are a mess! They are overmedicated, over-indulged, over-fed, over-weight, over-entertained, under-educated, under-achieving, under-disciplined, disrespectful, illiterate brats with a sense of entitlement that is crippling our society. And it has to change!”
Along with in-depth research and experience from raising his own kids, Winget makes sure you “don’t expect to change your kids’ behavior, unless you are willing to change your own.” He uses the same tough love approach that has made him a bestseller to make sure you are teaching your kids the right values to become productive adults and live a successful life.
WINGET tells you things you don’t necessarily want to hear or admit to, such as:
–You tell your kids they’re special. They’re not!
–You make your kids the most important thing in life. They’re not!
–You turn to medicine to fix everything. Don’t be lazy!
–You set a bad example. Your kids follow it.
Winget forces parents to take a good look at their own behaviors and make a change. He offers five basic principles but suggests it isn’t a matter of just doing them; it is how well you do them that counts.
This Winget guy sounds like a wing nut to me. On his website (not deserving of a link…look him up if you want) he calls himself the “pitbull of personal development” (FWIW I don’t like pitbulls). His other book is called “No Time For Tact”, which he very obviously demonstrated by bringing out this parentblame book. It sounds like it breaks all of the rules of appropriate parenting advice by trying to shame people into whipping their kids into shape. He is also on twitter and predictably is not following anyone and doesn’t reply to anyone…all one way communication. Just the guy I want to teach me to be a good person and a good parent.
I’d love to take my copy of The Nurture Assumption by Judith Rich Harris, which concludes “as for what’s wrong with you: don’t blame it on your parents” and whack him with it.
So today, I received a press release from the publisher of the book that reads:
LARRY WINGET, The Pitbull of Personal Development® and New York Times bestseller is back with YOUR KIDS ARE YOUR OWN FAULT: A Guide for Raising Responsible, Productive Adults (Gotham Books; January 2011; Paperback; $16.00).
I know what you are thinking. Why is Larry Winget writing a book about kids? As Larry explains, “Why am I writing this book? Look around. Our kids are a mess! They are overmedicated, over-indulged, over-fed, over-weight, over-entertained, under-educated, under-achieving, under-disciplined, disrespectful, illiterate brats with a sense of entitlement that is crippling our society. And it has to change!”
Along with in-depth research and experience from raising his own kids, Winget makes sure you “don’t expect to change your kids’ behavior, unless you are willing to change your own.” He uses the same tough love approach that has made him a bestselling author to make sure you are teaching your kids the right values to become productive adults and live a successful life.
Winget forces parents to take a good look at their own behavior and make a change. He offers five basic principles but maintains that it isn’t a matter of just doing them; it is how well you do them that counts.
Ø Communication is the backbone of civilization and kids will learn to communicate with the world based on how they learn to communicate within their own family.
Ø Involvement is crucial. Know your child’s friends and teachers. Know what your kids are doing and who they are doing it with.
Ø Education is the responsibility of the parent. It’s not up to the school system to make sure your kid learns what they need to in order to be successful, healthy and prosperous. It’s up to you!
Ø Discipline is a code of conduct by which you live. You will be challenged every step of the way – that’s what kids do.
Ø Punishment and confrontation is something most parents dread but it is a necessary part of parenting.
Winget touches upon all of life’s lessons from being responsible with money, to discipline, to dealing with your child as a dating teenager. YOUR KIDS ARE YOUR OWN FAULT is the ideal guide for any parent navigating the intricate road of parenthood. I’d be happy send you a review copy today!
So, it seems Meagan got the hard core YOU SUCK AS A PARENT press release for the hardcover book and I got the slightly softened you suck as a parent press release for the paperback book.
In any case, I replied to the e-mail that I received and said:
Hi [redacted],
I actually wrote about this book on another blog that I contribute to last year:
http://iblamethemother.wordpress.com/2009/09/16/like-beating-yourself-up-this-book-may-be-for-you/
Your e-mail has prompted me to repost it on my blog.
Thanks,
Annie
www.phdinparenting.com
The reply I got...
Fantastic! Thanks, Annie!
Fantastic indeed...
Image credit: f_mafra on flickr
Reader Comments (252)
I just recently found a great book on parenting..kind of the best of the best all in one.
http://parentinpeace.com
My children are actually into it and it is working.. kudos cause my teens were driving me crazy with their teen attitudes. Now we are all communicating better and on the same team. It works like a game and they like it- plus it helps me out around the house.
Cheryl
mom of 3
Perfectly said, Arwyn.
When I quit believing in guilt and shame, they lost their power over me. Guilt and shame are *taught*. The dissidence between what you feel and what someone wants you to do, regardless of your feelings, is where that power lies.
Depends on who "owns" how you feel. As a child, you don't have the power. Correct that, I believe children are powerful beings. We are *taught* that we are not powerful. We learn to believe that others have the authority to tell us how to feel. Thus the tools of guilt and shame pressure us to do things that do not feel in alignment with our Self. We act as we are taught (ie. "You know better!"; "You should be ashamed"; "Shame on you") in order to avoid the load of guilt or shame we are handed.
I just don't choose to carry the guilt or shame others hand out. Anymore.
This is very different than regret or remorse. Regret focuses on the past (longingly from a sense of lack) without awareness of the value the past offers the present moment. (We can only act in the Now.)
However, remorse can be focused on the present impact of our actions and we can *choose* to act on our sadness about our part of that. The locus of control with remorse is inside us. Guilt and shame are external of us. Regret, like worry, are focused on the past and future (respectively), rather than the Present. I believe that remorse can be an empowered feeling. We can act on it in alignment.
Worry and fear take us out of being present in the moment. We teach this to children. Or we can model living joyfully and creating solutions which consider the people affected by our choices.
Guilt and shame are tools of power, power over. I'd rather focus on power *with*: partnering and nurturing without coercion. I choose to model love, instead of using fear, shame and blame to bully others.
Pat
Tracy,
Which of those books above have you read, enjoyed and would recommend?
Pat
WOW - I did some reading too:
This is off the "PhD in Parenting" page - "about this blog page"
"Disclaimer: The posts on this blog are the opinion of the author..." "The author does not have an actual PhD in Parenting."
You don't hold a PhD???? Are you kidding...
One thing I do teach my kids is not to misrepresent themselves. NICE! ; (
Tracy:
Let me know if you find a school that offers a PhD in Parenting program. So far the only one I've found is the school of life. I don't claim to have a PhD in Parenting, I say I am working on my proverbial PhD in Parenting.
I don't want to waste too much time here- it's obvious that most people have their minds made up, but like Larry, this is a topic so central to my being that I felt compelled to weigh in.
First, in the spirit of full disclosure: I have had Larry Winget as a guest on my podcast show and have debated him on this and other issues, including civility and respect in our society. He also endorsed my second book, "Think Like a Black Belt," which will not likely win me many friends in this circle, but I say this for a particular reason.
The reason is: reason!
I am quite sure from our conversations that Larry did not agree with everything I wrote in my book. While we share very similar views on substantive issues, particularly ethics and personal responsibility, we also differ in many regards. When we differ, the conversation can be passionate, but is always respectful and enjoyable.
Larry is a very knowledgeable, informed, passionate and caring human being who is extremely considerate of another person's point of view- whether he agrees or not (and you will know either way.)
Part of what is abrasive about Larry and his excellent book is honesty. He does not hide behind politically correct platitudes- he calls it as he sees it. If you can do the same, you'll enjoy any exchange with him. Honesty is often biting- and that's the case with Larry's book.
I'll grant that many of you are probably good parents. Having read most of the comments here, I'd say that had you read "Your Kids Are Your Fault" most of you would agree with most of what Larry is talking about in his book.
Larry reacted to the lack of civility in the original post and comment thread. Although I haven't talked to him about this particular thread, I can tell you from personal experience that had you attacked his reasoning, logic or debated him point by point on any idea he puts forward in the book you would have had a reasonable, if challenging exchange of ideas.
Attacking his children was wrong- period.
A press release is meant to instigate interest and conversation- grow up.
Your kids aren't special (to anyone but you) which is the point Larry clearly makes in the book.
If you're not responsible for the major share your child's upbringing than who is?
I have no children of my own which no doubt will disqualify my opinion to many of you. I've worked with children as a professional martial arts instructor and educator for more than 20 years which gives me a perspective that no current parent can share.
I'll openly debate Larry and anyone else on one of the contentious points in this discussion- there are bad children; I've seen some. I've seen bad kids develop despite good parenting and nurturing home and school environments. Granted in these cases there were psychological and biological factors- but I've met kids from good parents commit heinous acts of violence and social atrocities. (And yes, I do know that the parents in some of those cases were not just hiding some dark secrets.)
Fortunately, this is the extreme exception to the rule. In most cases, the behavior of the child is directly reflective of parenting, especially until they reach ages where peer group influence becomes a dominant factor.
How do I know this? I've done the study and research as well- and I keep on top of latest developments. All this academia does little but validate what I see on a daily basis in my martial arts programs. Kids that are labeled as behavior problems usually perform very well in my program. They act respectfully, they follow the rules and they get along well with others. At the same time kids enrolled in my programs do better in school, act better at home and in school and become leaders and less susceptible to peer pressure.
Most of all, they become happier people. Why?
Because I emphasize the same characteristics and values Larry shares in his book. I've also learned over time that when a parent has behavioral issues with a child, I ask that parent to take a close look at their own behaviors. By the way- this works with children diagnosed with ADD and on the autism spectrum as well.
There are conditions and circumstances beyond your control as a parent. You can always control your response to those circumstances and conditions- and that's the personal responsibility theme Larry is preaching.
It's been my experience that the parents who are most challenged when I start questioning parenting technique or behavior in the home respond in much the same way some parents on this thread have responded to just the title, press release and critique of Larry- I can't say to the book as it's obvious very few if any of the people involved in this discussion have read it.
Ironically- I'm usually face to face challenging a parent on a specific issue or responding to a call for help. I know the people I'm dealing with- Larry does not pretend to know any of you and yet many here have been threatened by what they THINK are his ideas; not even by a direct attack from him, which would not likely happen at any rate whether he knew you personally or not.
@PhDInParenting- this is your blog- your real estate and you're free to post anything you want. I appreciate the opportunity to weigh in and I'm very glad you kept Larry's responses posted. For those who are reading this thread rationally you can see that he responded directly, honestly and with civility. He is brutally honest and intentionally provocative- both qualities I admire greatly. Considering some of the irrational discourse I read in this thread, this is a testimony to the person he is.
Best thoughts to all!
Jim
Integrity! No wonder you don't like his books.
I don't see why Annie needs to read a book that is not written to appeal to her values in order to critique a press release and the author's parenting values, as represented in his publicity.
Larry is ultimately responsible for his publicity and his press release. Clearly it was written to elicit a reaction but when you compare it to the excerpts available on Google the tone and message are the same. This tone and message are again reflected in Larry's comments here. He mentions what he would not "allow" in his family, on his blog - which doesn't seem to be about learning personal responsibility at all but more about authoritarianism.
While it seems to be a driver for Larry I don't sense that having our children turn out to be "productive" members of society is a common primary goal. Either way, it seems clear to me that no one here thinks we don't have responsibility to parent our children but the difference is Larry and his supporters don't recognize that parenting is not the be all and end all in determining how our children turn out. So we all do the best we can and hope that our parenting, in combination with our circumstances, the ups and downs of life and our children's inherent personalities (because we each have a unique personality, thank goodness) will result in happy, healthy people who respect themselves and treat others well.
Finally, anyone who doesn't recognize the impact of social structures, poverty, racism etc is woefully ignorant of reality and would do well to learn more about privilege.
I can see from Larry's comments and the excerpt Annie posted that he has boldly and swiftly disregarded the impact of society and institutions upon individuals. And as a sociologist, I find that appalling considering the research showing strong correlations between family and child earnings across parenting styles. The emphasis on the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" philosophy is antithetical to reality for most people and discounts the role of social, economic and cultural capital on which our society is founded and functions.
To be frank, it's cold and unfeeling, which is the exact opposite of the kind of parenting I and many of Annie's readers strive to practice.
And the idea that this is all about political correctness is so utterly cliche. The excerpt Annie posted suggests racism is a result of bad parenting, but would you have said the same thing 100 years ago when institutions still blatantly discriminated against those of minority races? And also, newsflash, this still happens today. Is it that everyone was a bad parent then or because now it's more accepted to lash out against racism so it's a convenient way for you to blame parents in one more way?
I think what many of us are reacting to is the "look at me, I'm being controversial" tone of what's being said when really what's being promoted is an even more individualistic society than we currently have. And from where I'm standing, that's a downgrade.
Yes! What a thoughtful, well-constructed response. I wholeheartedly agree.
Tracy,
Do you really believe that anyone (or an institution) could have the "authority" to convey upon another a "PhD in Parenting"?
Of course a "PhD in Parenting" is tongue-in-cheek, lol. The school of life learning grants us all the authority for our own life, without blame upon another for our experience. Not everyone ascribes to "personal accountability" however and choose to declare "Your Kids Are Your Own Fault”, instead.
No, I don't believe Wingets' books are aligned with parenting in partnership. The blame/fault paradigm alienates individuals, rather than models working together toward solutions. Instead, we could model awareness of the impact of our actions upon another, without bullying the children into following our prescribed "ethics". I trust that children are inherently moral beings and able to 'learn what they live'. When children learn/live bullying (blame and shame) at the hands of a parent and are forced/shamed into complying with the parents' beliefs, we create children who use *power over* to get their way in the world.
We work to create mutually agreeable solutions, instead. Depends if you believe that others' actions are your "responsibility" to control, or if you trust that others can learn self-control through our own modeling of *self* control. Our actions speak louder than words, ime.
Take wonderful care,
Pat
I personally never assumed PhD in Parenting referred to a literal PhD. I also don't need a disclaimer to realize Dr Dre, Dr Pepper, & Dr Feelgood do not have actual medical licenses.
I managed approximately 300 volunteers, from teens to seniors. Prior to that, I worked exclusively with these "entitled" generation Y-ers.
People keep saying you don't have to read the book to understand what Larry is saying, and yet keep responding with statements like: "the difference is Larry and his supporters don't recognize that parenting is not the be all and end all..."
He actually does address circumstances and conditions beyond your control- but again, and where I specifically agree with him; no matter what cards we're dealt it's our own responsibility to play our hand the best we can.
Ultimately, what does social structure, poverty and racism have to do with the direct relationship between a parent and a child? Are all children born into poverty simply doomed by social conditions? Are all minority children destined to be anti-social?
The argument looks ridiculous when framed in those terms, doesn't it?
The number one factor in developing great kids is great parenting. That's what Larry is saying in his book and what I'm trying to teach on a daily basis.
Every year I have parents bring me kids and ask me to "straighten them out." Some of these kids do come from conditions of poverty and have been exposed to racism or other forms of bigotry. Some are born to privilege.
Almost universally when I'm asked to help "fix" a problem child, the cause of the problem is bad parenting- or simply a lack of knowledge for how to parent effectively.
Agreed- we can all play a role in the inexorably slow process of correcting social ills, but improving parenting produces an immediate impact for that child and future generations.
I wasn't going to bring it up, but since Larry brought up "Bad grammar? Bad parenting", the can of worms has been opened.
" Its' ", Larry? ITS'???
First of all, there are TWO choices. Its' -- I-T-S-apostrophe -- is NOT one of them.
It's either "it's" (I-T-apostrophe-S), a contraction of "it is": "It is cold today" > "It's cold today"; or "its" (I-T-S), the third person neuter possessive pronoun: "The dog does not want to wear its sweater today."
There is no I-T-S-apostrophe.
Yet you used it TWICE in your first comment here.
HOW SUCKY WERE *YOUR* PARENTS???
Brittany- Respectfully, it seems you're confusing "blame" with "responsibility." It doesn't matter who or what is to blame for a specific child's behavior- the responsibility to teach, model and correct behavior lies first and foremost with the parent. It is the parent, after all, who chose to produce that child!
As I stated earlier, I have no children of my own though I'm very blessed to work with the kids in my program. At the same time, I cannot help but deal with the consequences of behavior which more often than not results from inadequate or inept parenting.
When I'm eating in a nice restaurant and a child is going from table to table to pluck food off other diner's plates, who is responsible for that child's behavior? (True story, by the way.)
When I go into my lobby and see a child with clenched fist (not my student- but a sibling of one of my students) striking her younger brother in the head while the mother pleaded ineffectively addressing the offending child in the third person- who is responsible for that behavior? (Another true story and I did in fact intervene.)
When a child is throwing expensive items from a store shelf while a young mom asks the offending child if he would like it if the store people came to his room and threw his things about- without removing the child even from arm's length of the shelf never mind from the store, who is responsible for that behavior? (Yes, another true story.)
OK- when a kid in one of my "kids at risk" groups describes to me in great detail his admiration for Adolf Hitler with graphic examples supporting his point of view- who is responsible for THAT behavior? (Yes- again true.) In THIS case I'll grant some social issues were in play- this kid was born into some degree of poverty; however, his parents chose to have children without perhaps having the means or know how to raise them "properly."
There is, however, a noticeable and important distinction you make in your last paragraph. Please correct me if I'm off-base, but you seem to infer that a more "individualistic" society would cause more problems. My contention is that individualism, particularly when expressed as personal responsibility is the solution- not a contributing factor in the decay of civility and appropriate social behavior.
In your argument you seem to indicate that racism is not a result of bad parenting. I'll take the bait- yes, in many if not most cases racism is absolutely the result of bad parenting. More to the point, good parenting, mentoring and teaching is what has helped us overcome racism to a large degree- I doubt we'll ever eradicate it.
When I was young I was taught by my mother that racism was wrong. My friends from other races, even those who were the targets of racism on a regular basis, were also taught that racism was wrong. That's why we've worked together to at least make it illegal to discriminate despite the reality that we cannot outlaw prejudice, ignorance and racism.
Are you implying that the solution lies in the collective? Isn't that a dangerous proposition? Is racism, poverty or ignorance a lesser issue in collective societies?
In my opinion, we've become too dependent as a society on the society as a collective. Meaning: we've come to expect that "society" is responsible for nearly all our problems, "society" is to blame for our shortcomings and "society" is the answer to our challenges.
Society only works when individuals are willing to do the heavy lifting. When we teach young people to be more independent they are much more likely, in my experience, to become more compassionate and charitable. The more someone accepts personal responsibility, the more responsive that person becomes in helping those with AUTHENTIC need.
I respect your point of view but disagree with all my heart. Strong and productive individuals are those that contribute to the greatest extent to the welfare of others. There are those, like myself, who strongly believe this is a role for the individual or local community (even extended to a state level) rather than that of the federal government, but that's another argument. It's only tied as we continually attempt to "mandate" charity and social responsibility through federal law and taxation, which does in many cases abdicate personal responsibility.
Finally on the point of productivity. Again I find myself, having read Larry's book, defending his statement in this area.
I have NEVER met a happy person who does not consider himself or herself to be productive. Productivity is the basis for self-worth. I've met countless unhappy people, and they nearly always lack some sense of purpose or self-value. That was my greatest personal challenge.
I became a happy person once I started to recognize my value in the lives of others. Productivity does not necessarily relate to finance- but it certainly should to some degree! How can we eradicate poverty- an issue cited by several on this thread as a contributing factor in childhood problems, if we're not productive?
How is any individual going to feel needed, purposeful or self-sufficient if that person is not productive?
That argument always caves in on itself. We want people to contribute and help, yet we balk at words like "productivity" and "profit." It is from profit that all charity is obtained. You can only give from surplus, whether that be in time or resources. If you're sacrificing necessities you're not solving the problem; you're becoming part of it.
Maybe there is a firm ideological split between those who believe the individual is the answer and those who believe society is the answer. If so; I'm fully on the side of the individual- that's the only answer that protects and defines personal freedom.
Well!
Thanks for the provocative discussion. If nothing else, hopefully we're all learning a bit more about this issue and as individuals, hopefully we're all going out to be part of the solution!
Best thoughts,
Jim
"You don’t hold a PhD???? Are you kidding…"
I really don't have words... are you serious?? You really, honestly, thought there existed on this planet a DOCTORATE PROGRAM in PARENTING?
I... wow. No words.
None.
Lucie,
You are a victim and you give people a license to play the victim.
No, actually, people ARE victims of broken systems, and there's no playing involved when it is a struggle just to get through daily life - unhungry, healthy, or even alive.
To pretend like poverty and violence and hunger and racism and classism exist only because people "allow themselves to play the victim" is sticking your privaledged head in the sand.
I have spent the last 20 minutes or so trying to read (and absorb) every word that each person wrote, unfortunately, I had to skim through some of the posts because they were just ridiculous. Even the author of this blog has contradicted herself in her comments. I'll stick with reading books by Larry and am now going to request Jim Bouchard's books as well. Both seem to be intelligent writers and while not every word will resonate in my life, I'm sure I will glean valuable information from each of them.
Blogs are personal opinions. Everyone needs to remember and recognize that tidbit. What I write on my blog, Larry writes on his, or phdinparenting writes in hers, may not necessarily reflect the thoughts and opinions of the readers. You don't have to read the blogs...which means you don't have to reply to them either.
I, for one, am going to read Larry's book. It's on hold at the library right now. My kid is my fault. I raised him. No one else did. He's a great kid. He's well-mannered, respectful, and funny...while out in town. Now, at home, he's moody, temperamental, whiny, and at times, disrespectful. Guess what, both traits are a direct result of my parenting...when he was younger and now as he's getting older. Did I mention that he's 15yo???
Good luck with everything everyone.
Hey Annie, nice fireworks! I always enjoy stopping by your comments section when it gets hot and spicy!
I haven't read Winget's book beyond the excerpts on google books, so I cannot comment at all on the content of the book or of any of his other books. However, just from the press release and especially from the excerpt, I do feel equipped to comment on his style. And, honestly, I think that's all that Annie and the other folks here have been commenting on.
Winget's style is abrasive and in-your-face. And that works for some people - apparently for a lot of people, seeing as he's published bestsellers. I'm assuming those are the same people who like to hire personal trainers who scream at them to help them get into shape - for some people, that sort of thing gets them going.
For me personally, I find that kind of tone offensive. I don't need some random guy I don't know yelling at me that I suck. And either do a lot of the regular commenters on this blog.
But apparently that tone sells books. In Winget's responses here he was measured and not at all nasty, and people who've met him say he's very reasonable to talk to. So clearly the tone he uses in his books is an act, because it sells books.
And even though I can't say anything certain about the content, having not read the whole book (and being unwilling to do so because I find the tone odious), I wouldn't be surprised if it has nothing unique to say. The pages on the google books preview said nothing you couldn't find in your average milk-toast parenting magazine ("set limits for your kids"; "think about how to prepare your kids for the real world" etc); the only thing that was new was the tone in which it was said.
Reading comprehension fail. Not sure where you are getting that I don't have confidence in my parenting in my comment. It's actually because I am confident and using my intuition in how I parent that I won't bother reading Larry's "advice".
He's so contradictory in his own book:
"ALL societal problems could pretty much be prevented....."
then:
"There are always exceptions."
How did this make it through editing and publishing?
Okay, I REALLY want a "like" button on this thread!
"Productivity is the basis for self-worth."
Wow, what about those who are disabled, elderly, the poor, the sick, the infirmed?
Pat
Pat -
If you actually read the book you'll see that Larry is VERY focused on NOW - who are kids being - respeosible, being respectful, doing the right thing in each situation.
Being happy, well adjusted, confident, and bale to communicate as things arise.
AS well as becoming individuals who make a difference in the world and do what they want to do in the world that contriubutes to society.
Larry says clearly that he is NOT an expert. He simply shares what he personally think we need to be TEACHING out children to change some horrific statistic in the world - like pregnancy, drug, smoking stats...
@Tammy- 15 years old; he sounds pretty normal to me!
@Pat Robinson- EVERYONE can be productive in some way. In fact, for the people you mention one of the key factors in healing, or trying to assure the best quality of life is find ways for people to feel productive, needed and valuable.
In my martial arts program we welcome the so-called "disabled." In fact, I teach an entire system of self-defense and exercise using a cane. It's amazing to see the transformation when someone enters a session "disabled" and leaves empowered.
Part of the reason people with the challenges you mention feel low-self worth is that they don't feel productive- they don't feel as if they're contributing anything useful to those around them. In fact, they often feel as if they're just a burden.
Find something productive for them to do and their self-perception changes drastically. It works for people in poverty, out of work and for people suffering from other conditions, losses and adversities too.
I believe it was John P. Kotter after one of his exhaustive studies that demonstrated the the number one motivating factor in human life is a sense of purpose. Even a small contribution makes a significant impact in one's self-worth.
I see it in practice every single day of my life.
Best thoughts!
Jim
BTW- My mother on her death bed and suffering with cancer was still dispensing counselling and sage advise to a group of young women from her workplace.
I doubt she would have had it any other way!
She's my example for the importance of being productive!
Just to correct you... Larry is NOT privileged...
He came from poor farming breakground - and owned ONE pair of jeans. Being insulted made him want to change his life. He read everything he could, and did everything he could to transform his life. He created himself from nothing.
Having worked as a child therapist and coach to parents - I find it takes both PAIN and PLEASURE to change. Some folks work better with PAIN and others are more motivated by PLEASURE.
Those who work best with PAIN would respond well to Larry's wake up call of "YOU SUCK!" Some people are being so irresponsible that it takes a message of saying "that your child is rude, uneducated, and in debt is YOUR fault - YOU didn't teach him how to plan, communicate or learn." Maybe that's what it takes - rather than pussy footing around and sweetly suggesting changes. Some people do need a kick up the arse. Larry does that well.
Other people need a gentle kind supportive approach - focusing on the pleasure and joys. Larry's book won't do this! Many others will!
We need MANY different ideas in our tool box as educators. Larry's book is great for a certain niche of people.
The last time I checked, there were 130 comments about this blog post. The high from the previous eight blogs was 83, and a couple had 9 and 12 responses. So at least the phdinparenting - Winget controversy has sparked a great deal of conversation, and I hope, thought. We've proven that the sensational inspires interest and engagement in a discussion, and isn't that at least part of the point - to get people actively thinking about being a better parent? To that end, Winget's book title and the "You Suck" graphic are two examples of writers using sensationalism to spur interest.
To Brittany, I too am trained as a sociologist and psychologist. I also spent nine years working in mental health facilities - the last five as a senior administrator of a residential treatment facility for children and adolescents. I saw the impact of society on young lives every day. And, I was raised by two parents who grew up barely completing high school because of the depression. There are those today who would say that I was raised economically disadvantaged, but I was never poor because my parents instilled in me the notion that I am as good as but no better than anyone else regardless of my current position. And, the gave me the confidence that I could achieve success on my terms - which when you think about it is what being productive is all about. I was taught that racism was wrong even though I had relatives who were clearly racist. I was taught that education was important, even though my brother and I were the first two to receive college degrees. I was taught to keep my mind and body healthy, even though there were examples of obesity, alcohol abuse, and poor health maintenance in easy view. So I guess you can say that I was able to overcome my sociologic circumstances because of good parenting, community role models who took an interest in me, and probably a measure of good fortune.
Did my parents practice AP? No one called it that, but there was a lot of love and affirmation. Did they teach me that my results were my own "fault" or doing? Absolutely. There wasn't a lot of talk about "partnering with me," but there was never a doubt that they were on my side without ever allowing me to shirk my responsibility.
After reading every one of these posts, I am reminded that to allow perceptions about the meaning of words to obstruct an effort to understand another's meaning ends up convinciing no one.
@Randy...Amen! :)
Really - wow I must be stupid... thanks for pointing that out with multiple paragraphs. Come on... Somehow I don't believe there is enough of a sense of humor to be tongue and cheek - your literal translation of "fault" proves that. Good luck having a "mutually agreeable solution" with your child on touching a hot stove or running in the street.
Let me make clear that I don't humiliate, shame or bully my children. I don't have to because they trust that there will be an appropriate reaction and consequence to inappropriate behavior so we have little if any issues. They trust me to do this as they would trust me to put their lives ahead of mine - be calm in the face of an emergency or danger and make sure that they come first. They don't want a "mutual agreement" on how to get out of the house if it is on fire... They know they do not live in a democracy. There is absolutely no reason to debate if they can smoke pot. Extreme - yes but if you think you are going to give your kids license to have a say in their actions when they are 6 wait until they are 16. Rules should be rules at 6 - 16 or until they are out on their own. I am filling their tool box (it's not really a box - are you going to point that out to me too) and they will get to pick and choose as to what they are going to take from that later. Their foundation is my job and I take great pride in my responsibility for it. Again... read more than the title and the next time you are trying to get help in a store and the teenager behind the counter is texting and ignoring you - you might just want to offer to buy their parents the book. (give the kid "It's Called Work For a Reason" while your at it)
Kids need love and love means involvement, discipline and direction.
As I read PHDINPARENTING's comments regarding Winget's book the first thing that came to mind was the following video . . . you of course are the guy on the couch; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhlWddAXSRA
The fact is, and as referenced by one of the many articles I have posted since, "Antipsychotic Prescriptions . . . for Children: Is the Medicaid Story Today’s Version of Go Ask Alice?," parents such as the quoted Evelyn Torres are rapidly becoming the norm. Here is the link to the article: http://wp.me/pydAP-En
Children of course learn by what they see as much as by what they hear. This means that when you have an increasingly large percentage of adults themselves running for mother's little helper while championing an entitlement mindset, society requires a collective kick in the pants. Love him or hate him, Winget provides that much needed hoof.
Wake up North America!
I'd like to say that I had no bias on you based on your book -- I figured bad press release and a very different opinion than many of the commenters/followers of this blog, myself included.
However, your comments here are extremely off-putting, and your own fault, and I don't think you've won anyone over my repeatedly telling them that everything -- including the genetic predispositions of their children! -- can be controlled by their parenting, and that anything else is just shirking their duties.
I should have read this before I commented! <3
I agree with your first sentence, but can't say I agree with rest.
I think it's more accurate, at this point, to say that we're judging Mr. Wignet by his behavior and that of the people he led here, presumably (if I can gather the context from the comments between him, and PHD) from his Facebook page.
As far as I can tell, Mr. Winget is doing a fair amount of his own "spreading accusations and misguiding judgments."
JLP -
You know you can't spell 'assumptions' without . . . oh, never mind.
I am a white, straight, able bodied woman. I am also an attorney with a husband who is a PhD. My comment did not apply to me, it just shows I have two qualities you might need brushing up on - compassion and an understanding of how history plays out in the present.
Oh, and class. Let's not forget that.
You may not agree with it PHDINPARENTING, but the Go Ask Alice article reflects hard data versus opinion.
When children between the ages of 3 and 17 are being diagnosed with bipolar disorder and are prescribed powerful anti psychotic drugs at an alarming rate - according to 2006 data (the last year for which the information is available), prescriptions for anti psychotic drugs was the single largest Medicaid expense totaling $7.9 billion - something is terribly wring. Especially since these drugs lead to secondary and tertiary chronic illnesses.
Add into the equation that pharmaceutical companies such as Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca and GlaxoSmithKline have all been charged (and fined 100's of millions of dollars) for promoting their off-label use, something is terribly wrong.
In case your sensibilities are not yet riled, children who's parents are in the lower socio-economic classification are 4 time (that's right 4 times) more likely to be prescribed an anti psychotic drug.
Are you suggesting that this huge percentage of children are inherently ill, or that maybe there is something wrong with the parenting. How do you explain the above within the context of your position?
Okay, so right here he calls parents stupid, and their kids stupid by association.*
But that alone -- how is it arguable that this book isn't insulting? When people read this book, do they assume that someone else is the "stupid parent," and they just need a little bit of work not to become one?
* (And if this is in terms of intelligence -- how do we account for families with kids of different IQ/intelligence levels, or even who demonstrate different styles of intelligence despite getting the same parenting?)
The author said in an earlier comment that his goal was to shame parents. There's no assumption or guessing, that's straight from the source.
It totally made my day that someone thought there was a real PhD in parenting. Beautiful!
(I'd at least have a master's degree by now, I think.)
Thanks for the obvious. I would think someone touting parenting advice and using PhD in the title of their blog would have more than 6 years on the job training with their own toddlers. Phycologist, licensed teacher, heck... a baby sitting certificate from middle school perhaps. Dr. Feelgood isn't spewing advice and making a living selling advertising through a blog site either.
Ooh ooh....I have the babysitting certificate. :P
Just to clarify, you're railing against the way we're choosing to interpret the word "fault," but are going to quibble over the title of a blog that doesn't really give advice so much as talk about parenting issues. (Not to say I haven't learned things, just that I never interpreted it as such.)
Oooh, I missed all this.
I think my favourite part is how the author is claiming that the content of the press release has absolutely no relation to what's in the book. Well, then, you'd better hire a new PR company, Larry!
Larry and all,
Larry - I'm glad to see you post here. While there is nothing to "defend" I do think it's important you speak out, as your book is truly a gift to parents. What I love about you and this book is that VERY strong MALE voice. Many men have written parenting books – though they have a gentle, feminine tone. I love your book being a masculine, in your face, audacious energy. It’s the perfect gift for men who wouldn’t normally read a parenting book, but NEED sound advice on how to wake up to being a good father. Just this month I’ve had people complain to me about the absent fathers who don’t teach or live the right values, and Larry’s book fills a gap for this niche. It would be fine to judge the book from within that environment, but to judge it as horrible from the outside is wrong. It’s like telling an apple how awful it is because it isn’t a pear.
In terms of judging Larry’s character, his children, and his parents? Wow! Come on people?! Is this what you teach your kids? This is SO out of character for attachment parenting specialists! If you don’t like the look of someone you criticise them, their parents, and their friends? Really? From my attachment parenting classes I say “invite the kid home, bring the bully in show THEM some love and they tend to melt and learn new ways of being.” I’m surprised to read the attacking tone, high-horse judgements and lack of respect.
I have never met Larry - tho one of the people I respect and love most in the world has. They have been friends for years. He recommended I read Larry's book when it came out. He knows that I read and study a lot of things around personal development for my life and for the folks I work with. I have a degree in Psychology, a masters in Integral Theory, worked as a therapist to teens, run parenting classes and done family therapy with people in crisis. Many of the 90 kids I worked with a week would not have been in therapy had their parents read this book. It's a wake up call to all parents to address THEMSELVES and become the best we can be, so we create responsible children with integrity and confidence to achieve their dreams and make a difference. To question if Larry’s kids are in therapy is weird for me. How can anyone as an empathic, aware parent begin to point fingers and judge WITHOUT reading the book, or even knowing the kids and Larry?
In terms of his personality - I find it shocking to see people judging him when they have never met him or had nothing to do with him. To call him HITLER on a Parenting Site? When someone does not know him? Wow! This a sad day when you come on an attachment parenting board to find this lack of understanding, lack of care, and lack of reflection. To judge a book by it's character, the author, his family? I am shocked. I know for a fact that he is a good man with a responsible and big heart. As do my kids. My 9 year old daughter just asked what I was writing... and I told her that people were judging Larry's book without reading it. She said "tell them they are wrong, while I haven't read it, I know he's a beautiful man." (I laughed at her telling others they are wrong for judging something THEY haven’t read when SHE hasn’t read it!) That said, how does she know that others may be wrong judging the book? She listens to his CD's with me when we drive. How has this influenced my children? My 6 year old son asked me to stop the CD one day. He said "Mom, after listening to Larry I know the next thing we need to do is be generous and give some money away. Who do we know that needs more money?" So we came home to look on those Give a Goat or Chicken websites - and they each chose something to gift away Christmas so others receive more. They both have high regard for him, and like listening to him. Yes it is true that Larry is a Pitbull: relentlessly committed to making the Earth a good place to live, and improve the standards we expect from our kids and ourselves. Is that something bad to fixate on? I personally think that's a positive and important stance to take. To say he’s Hitler when he’s about making people’s lives BETTER is unfair, untrue, a complete defamation of character. I know this from personal experience with him...
When I reached out to Larry via facebook in a time of crisis he was kind, supportive and strong. Yes he was VERY in my face about where I was letting myself down and opened me to new perspectives of how to take responsibility and bring my life on track to my purpose. I felt very challenged by his stance, yet I felt his genuine kindness. I argued with him as our perspectives jarred at times – but he continued to engage with my firey, needy and unfairly demanding emails from someone he didn’t know AT ALL. He has NEVER met me, does not know me, and has no relationship with me personally. He simply responded to my emails about a severely tricky and challenging situation. Every day for many weeks he “listened” to the update of what was going on and responded. I went through all the emotional stages of denial, anger, bagaining, depression, and expressed my wild frustration to him. Often being totally out of order. Yet he had and has the magnanomous depth and geneoristy of heart to stand in all of that and relate to me through it. How many best selling authors with NO agenda but to serve would take the time he did? Even now I burst into tears at his presence at that time. He was a good man. He had nothing to gain out of responding to me on facebook. He did so out of courtesy and a big heart. So I feel strongly affronted when I see people judging his character when they don’t know him.
To call him Hitler STUNS me. There were times I was highly reactive and emotional and regardless of how I was he STILL responded to me with strength and guided me how to shift things for the better. He could have called me a psychotic, crazy maniac – he guided me in how I could use the anger to create something better for myself. I feel tremendously grateful to him his time, generosity, and belief in my ability to grow. He may hate this – he was like a father to me. He showed me the gift of a father that I didn’t have: always present, always big hearted, always there with sound advice, always believing in my ability to get through, always challenging me to reach for my potential and not waste the talents I have. ALL that considering I have NEVER met, NEVER had a private conversation with him, NEVER seen him in a public seminar... And I’m not a friend. Just someone who asked to be his friend on facebook and them promptly offloaded the challenges in my life in an undignified dumping fashion with relentless consistency until the situation changed. It takes a LOT of patience, kindness, and good-hearted nature to care about a stranger like he did to me. He has asked no one to post here. I happened to see the blog and was surprised. Having had personal contact with him – I wanted to put the record straight of who he is. A good man. Truly loved by many friends, his wife of 28 years (saw it on fb last week), and his boys - who post of facebook now and then. He STILL hangs out with them and has an amazing friendship with them judging by their posts and photo's away. Most fathers do not have this depth of connection outside the attachment parenting world. Please practice what you preach. Live your ideals - of being loving, welcoming, warm and wonderful!
He’s a solid good bloke, teaching the BASICS to people who missed out on learning RIGHT from WRONG, GOOD from BAD, and the essentials of what responsible people on Earth need for us all to get along. There’s nothing in the book that doesn’t make sense... When you read the book you can understand the theory behind his suggestions and understand his stance.
I can honestly say that if people READ the book they would be blown away by Larry's forthright and caring stance. I found myself in tears at a story he shares about his father’s depth, and kindness. His father had said that he should always call if he was in trouble. One night he couldn’t start the car when he was out on a date with a girl. He called his father near midnight– his father came out immediately. There was no problem with the car at all, Larry just had it in the wrong gear. His father did not humiliate Larry EVEN tho he’d got him out and was LATE home. He opened the hood of the car and fiddled about while whispering quietly to Larry that he'd put the gears into DRIVE, so Larry wouldn’t lose face in front of the girl. How many parents would gift that dignity to a kid? I know for a fact that my parents would NEVER have done this – I would have been publicly raked in embarrassment for decades. Reading about the parenting HE received I can see why he’s become so confident, courteous, clear and healthy in his life. He’s VERY real, very honest and very authentic – his parents showed him how to be a genuine, well-rounded member of society being through their example.
He showed me who I wanted my boy to become: confident, independent, and a unique individual. I wish I could have a godfather for my boy like Larry – to show him the gaps in my parenting so he becomes a sound contributor to the planet. Otherwise my son would grow up with only ONE perspective (of empathic, attachment styles – which MOST of the world simply does not live!). Having Larry’s very different approach to life (on CD) gifts my son choices, confidence to be his own person, and to live a bold life independent of my philosophy. For example I had strong Vegan beliefs – until my son would try to put legs of lamb in the trolley from when he could walk – not even knowing what it was!!! He needed it intuitively – and maybe was lacking in his diet with being breastfed until over 2! That meat craving/insistence made me realise there are things I cannot offer my son from my soft, loving, gentle approach. I adapted to honour my boy and quit being so anal, and opened to new ways of being. Larry offers a balance. Yes, he’s a unique man with a unique approach– and someone I NEVER imagined I’d read. My general focus was William Sears, The Continuum Concept, Attachment Parenting, How to Talk so Yours Kids will Listen, Siblings without Rivalry... as I was training to be a Le Leche Leader etc. Yet having a boy – I realised that I wanted him ALSO to have a stronger energy than I was supplying as a single mother and empathic, intuitive therapist. While I gift him emotional intelligence I also want him to be a man – protective, productive, providing, passionate, purposeful, prosperous and playful. I highly recommend you read Larry’s book. Yes it’s not for everybody but it is for “everyman” who may have grown up without a father, looking for good, grounded, well-thought out, respectful guidance to bring up Individuals that we need in the world.
I dare you... You could even learn something on how YOU can improve... rather than ignorantly attack!
I think what is interesting zchamu is that no one has answered the question regarding the 300 lb gorilla (or elephant if you prefer) in the room, re the data revealing the rapidly growing frequency in which children between the ages of 3 and 17 are being prescribed anti psychotic drugs.
So here it is again . . . are you suggesting that this huge percentage of children being prescribed anti psychotic drugs are inherently ill, or that maybe there is something wrong with the parenting. How do you explain the above within the context of this discussion?