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)
Scatteredmom:
Thank you so much for sharing your story. I think it demonstrates clearly both the fact that kids are not always their parents' fault and also that the judgment of people who assume that they are can be extremely hurtful and dangerous. People deserve compassion and that includes both children and parents who are doing their very best.
Sarah @ BecomingSarah.com:
I do receive a lot of pitches. If they simply don't interest me, they just get archived. This one, however, I found offensive and inappropriate, and I thought it was worth speaking out for that reason. I was writing the post before the PR fail component happened, but that just added a comical icing to the cake.
I appreciate your feedback on this post as I appreciate the feedback of all of my readers. I have, however, come to the realization that not everything I write is going to appeal to everyone who reads me. My reader survey was a real eye-opener from that perspective. There were lots of people who said I *love* 95% of what you write, but this other 5% really gets me upset or bores me to tears. However, it was never the same 5%. The things that some people hated, were the things that other people pointed out as being their absolute favourite posts.
That said, I have now set up a blog on postereus that I plan to use more to post off-the-cuff observations about things that either interest me or piss me off. That way I won't clutter up this blog, which is really intended to be about parenting issues, with that type of thing. That said, even with the postereus blog in place, I may still have chosen to write about this on my main blog because I do think that the whole http://www.phdinparenting.com/2009/06/06/typology-of-the-bad-mother/" rel="nofollow">"bad mother" and "parent blame" culture that exists in our society is unfair and destructive. I write a lot about research and ideas on how to be a better parent, but I do not think it is appropriate in any circumstance to tell people that everything that is wrong with their kid is their fault and to tell parents as a societal group that everything that is wrong with society is their fault.
Megan:
I'm working on another post on the nature vs. nurture issue. I didn't want to get into that in detail in the comments on this post because I think it deserves a post of its own. This post was intended to be about (a) the inappropriateness of parent blame and (b) [as a bonus] the PR fail.
Personal responsibility and being part of society are entirely compatible. In fact preferred.
However, I cannot agree with the idea that parents are the ONLY socialising factor in the younger generation. And I also cannot agree with a position that says that parenting is the ONLY factor in how children will 'turn out'. How to respond to values in a society that are not in line with your family values is part of the art of parenting, IMO anyway.
Parenting is certainly important. I would not be investing so much of my time and energy in being the best parent I can be if it were not. But I also know that there are things that I cannot control.
I look forward to your thoughts on this topic
Well put Amber. I think we've all strayed from the point, and emotions are running a little high. Giving criticism on a press release is not the same as giving criticism on the book itself, and perhaps we can all agree on that.
It is really a funny story on someone not following up entirely on a response to their press release.
Channa (and everyone else)
Winget's style is abrasive...he even states that right up front on each of the books of his that I've read. Can he be offensive...depends on whether the reader is a thin-skinned easily offended. One of the reviews on his book "It's called work for a reason" states the following:
"Thin-skinned? No sense of humor? Don't read this book!..."
My husband & I happened upon Larry's books because I am always looking for new ideas on many things. I love his no-nonsense (abrasive) tone. He lays it out on the line...if you don't have cash in your wallet because you keep buying shoes, it's YOUR fault (paraphrased from his "You're broke becauseyou want to be" book). Guess what, the same is true if your kids are brats. I take responsibility for my son. Whether he's being "good" or acting "bad", *I'm* the one who raised him. *I'm* the one who let him get away with stuff when he was younger. *I'm* the one who now "suffers" with his attitude problem and lack of self-discipline.
Some people need an in your face approach. Why do you think his books sell, Nanny-911 & SuperNanny are watched regularly and people are begging for the Nanny to see them, and Hoarders is such a popular show? Heck, just this last week I found another "reality" tv show called "Fairy Jobmother" where a British woman goes to unemployed people's homes and tells them what they're doing wrong in their job search or tells them they obviously are just lazy people who don't want to get off their arse to earn a living.
Guess what??? "It's called WORK for a reason!" (yet another of Larry's books)
No matter their status in life, everyone has something they can be productive at.
Are you questioning whether a disabled person can hold a job? I know plenty of people who have Down Syndrome or other disabilities who hold full-time jobs...some are actors, some work as cashiers, and some of the hardest workers I've ever met were night stockers at the grocery store.
Who says the elderly aren't productive? Many elderly work somewhere (wal-mart, k-mart, grocery stores, run their own companies) Others knit or crochet blankets, caps, & scarves for the military. Others help take care of their grand-babies.
The poor...Just because someone was born "poor" doesn't mean they aren't productive...check the education records of a "poor" kid who doesn't want to be "poor" his/her whole life.
When it comes to the "sick", to say that a "sick" person can't be productive is equating them to an infant. Maybe while they are recovering from whatever illness they had, they aren't working, but they are being productive at getting better.
Finally, the infirm...Just because a person is infirm (feeble, weak in body or mind) doesn't mean they can't be productive.
I've worked in the health care field and I've seen people who other's just "wrote off" as too sick or too infirm or too disabled or too elderly to do anything, once given a chance...become the most productive people around.
Productivity is different for each person within their abilities, but if you limit someone's potential...by telling them they are worthless or old or weak or whatever, then you limit their productivity.
So the theory behind his book is parents need to take personal responsibility, fault, etc. etc. for their children.
But when does that child have to take responsibility for his or her OWN actions & behaviors? When do parents get to step away & say, hey, my child made that decision; they own that? Are we just always at fault forever for everything our children do, and if so, then aren't we off the hook for our own parenting "failures" because, obviously our OWN parents failed, too?
You give the example of a child lacking self-discipline. But if you've always taken the blame for everything your child does or doesn't do, if you're always taking sole responsibility for your child's behavior, when does your child get to DEVELOP that self-discipline?
The whole blame game just doesn't work. If we're all blaming our parents for our failures, where's the motivation for "fixing" ourselves, for bettering our methods, for self disciplining? It doesn't add up.
I see myself as my children's guide, not task master, not owner. I lead and teach through example. I encourage them to try new things, even if they may fail. I allow them to experience some small setbacks where they pick themselves back up and fix their own problem - a problem that is their fault, but also that has a solution which is their responsibility.
I don't believe children need shame or punishment or external rewards to shape their behaviors to what works for me. It isn't about me. It's about them learning to figure out the world for themselves, with me as their (very temporary) guide. I don't own them - they are their own people, and I'm just here to help them navigate, with compassion, empathy, and gentle guidance. In hopes that they learn to take responsibility for themselves. Just as I do for my own self.
Megan, this is one of the things I was trying to say with my comment!
Even bad PR is still PR ;)
I have read a majority of the comments, but not all. Did anyone else bring up this finding that got a lot of press in '07? This could be an argument for homeschooling, I suppose:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1549711/Children-learn-most-from-peers-not-parents.html
Oh, Jim.... "Lost in the discussion is this: HAVING children is choice."
Love, you have opened up a WHOLE NEW can of worms...
This comment thread has gotten ridiculous enough as it is, especially with the #readingcomprehensionFAILS happening all over the place, so I'm not going to address the naivete of your comment because, honestly, I'm afraid of what would happen. I just was not physically able to NOT say something.
(Now, some of you may live in places where "abstinence-only" is not the law of the land, but I live in good ol' Texas, USA. #nuffsaid)
This whole thread has gotten way to serious and gone too far. Yeah, I wouldn't read this book, doesn't seem to jive with my parenting style the way that Babywise and The Ferber Method don't jive with my parenting style, but the guy's not Hitler.
The whole press release should be in a humor blog. To call yourself the "Pitbull of Parenting" = hilarious. The pr wonks response = super hilarious. The fact that the author is mad that we judged the book BASED on the press release = SUPER DUPER HILARIOUS.
EXACTLY!
P.S. No one said he is Hitler.
OMG, Emily, YES. Thank you. I have to admit I was kind of freaked out by the descent of the author's fan base on this site seemingly out of nowhere (I assume Facebook). I'm always freaked out when a product is discussed on a specific site, critiqued, and then the site is invaded by "fans" of the product. This happened to once on another parenting site I frequent when we were discussing cloth diapers. A poster commented that she didn't like Diaper Brand A, casually in the midst of general discussions of what worked and didn't work for us, and then suddenly the site was flooded with random people exhorting us that we should LOVE Diaper Brand A and we were WRONG not to love it. We were like WTF? we're not promoting or dissing brands here, but having a casual conversation about what worked or didn't work for us. And in case people object to my analogy, it should be remember that a parenting book is a PRODUCT, and the author is a BRAND, actively involved in the process of BRANDING HIMSELF (in addition to and separate from being a human being). As potential consumers of his product, we are all entitled to a) not like it; b) not be interested in it; or c) make snarky comments about it. (I am also entitled to not like Lysol or a specific toy, even to make snarky comments about them, without the creators of said products haranguing me about why I have no right to my opinion and how I've hurt their feelings. It's possible that the people of Lysol really do LOVE CHILDREN AND CARE ABOUT THEIR HEALTH, but this is not going to make me buy their products and use them in my home.) This is not the same as making snarky comments about author-as-human-being, since we do not know him, even if snarky comments include plays on his name.
I was particularly confused since the author himself in his last (?) post clarifies that the *entire purpose of the press release* was to "create controversy", and the entire purpose of the controversy was to sell books, and that by posting a negative review, Annie had in fact helped him in his ultimate goal - ie, to sell a product. And yet everyone who negatively responded to the controversial press release was decried by the author's fans as an ignorant, judgmental jerkface - even though it's *actually the purpose of a controversial press release* to make people angry and get their backs up. If the author and his publishing firm wished to reach out to all parents in a reasonable and non-judgmental way, they would have done so. That's not what they wanted, so they chose a style that would make people react passionately (positively AND negatively). While that's not an approach that I'm that keen on, I understand its purpose. So if you love the author, his brand, and his book, that's great. But if someone else is turned off by the style of the press release/ author's brand, that's a) their RIGHT as an individual and a consumer; and b) partially a response that was deliberately generated by the author's brand/publishing house. Advertising tries to get us interested in a product. So let's not pretend that the publishing house/ author's brand were sitting out there innocently just trying to help parents be better parents to make the world a better place. While that might be part of the author's intention (as a person and an author), he's also clearly a BRAND looking for a MARKET. If we are not interested in a product, we should not be harangued, mocked, or pressured into liking it, no matter how great a guy the author might be IRL or how much Person X loved his book. For many readers of this blog, the press release was an ADVERTISING FAIL that made us NOT want to look more closely at the book or to buy it. That's the way the dice roll, folks. The controversial press release and its in-your-face style didn't work for some of us. And it's weird especially when the author/brand who authorized the press release for the purpose of being controversial for the purpose of selling books then becomes himself outraged when people react negatively. But we're to blame for not having "open minds", not the approach for being emotionally manipulative and possibly exploitative? Um, okay.
(I apologize, Annie, if I've double posted - the internet crashed as I was trying to submit this.)
AHA! I remember when this came out and was thinking of it as I read through this whole chain, but couldn't remember enough of the details to find it. I'm going to hang onto this for future use...
Thanks, Alan!
Every breeder thinks their ickle darling is ~~~special~~~.
Larry, see, you've run afoul of the "hip mamas" of the blogosphere. They all their that children are darling little angels who can do no wrong, and to impose any limits on them at all is "abusive." Also, any criticism of parents or children is "misogynist," because women still do most of the child-raising.
IOW, if someone's ill-mannered little spawn is racing around in a supermarket, knocking shit off shelves and screaming at the top of its lungs, being annoyed by that is "misogynist," because you're suggesting that its soi-disant "parents" could have done a better job with it. Also, it's "child-hating," because the precious angels are **designed** to run around and scream etc., and how dare we stifle their natural impulses?
These are also the brainwaves that bring their kids to bars or restaurants or movies late at night. Bedtime is the oppression of the child class, and it's oppressive too to want to enjoy the atmosphere that you've paid for.
I wish I were joking.
Yes, you CAN control your kid. It's called discipline. They act up, you remove them from the scene and punish them in an effective way.
Then again, anybody with a blog with a name like "Code Name: Mama" probably thinks it's adorable when her brats act up in public.
"I agree that all kids are good kids."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
She meant *women as a class*, not some parents who happen to be women. Are mommies now supposed to be free of any criticism?
This is an awesome comment. I'm rather surprised that nobody has attacked it.
Godwin Fail.
LOL, Alfie Kohn. Any sort of punishment of children is "abusive," according to Kohn. So is any sort of control of children. Homework is bad too. He's a caricature.
"I trust that children are inherently moral beings..."
Anyone who thinks that humans in general are "inherently moral beings" is risible. And children are little savages until they're civilized, regardless of what hip mommies and daddies think.
"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.)"
Aw, Jim, the little angel is just showing his or her delight in cuisine! Who are you to crush their spirit by making them sit down and behave themselves?! If they ended up eating nothing but McNuggets anymore, it'd be all your fault!!
Oh, fun: a childfree troll. What sewer did you crawl out of, hurk? And when will you and your kind learn that you are evolutionary missteps, genetic dead-ends? Or is it the fact that you do already realise it that is to account for your sunny dispositions? LOL
The appearance of obedience doesn't equal effective parenting. There's way more to parenting than getting your kids to follow instructions.
[...] writing my last post, I had a lot of interesting side discussions about the old nature versus nurture debate. Some of [...]
I have learned that there is one word (okay maybe more than one) for people who make a snap judgment about myself and my child based on a single interaction.
Asshole. They have no clue about him, his disability, the pain we've all been through, and for them to sit there and make themselves judge and jury on something they know precious little about, says more about them than it does about me.
And while back then I may have crumbled and been hurt, if anyone should get in my face about my son now, they will face the wrath of a Mama Bear. People wonder why parents of special needs kids are so touchy, but you explained it perfectly-we are too busy slogging through the trolls instead of really finding the support.
LOL! I too get a lot of publicist pitches in my inbox, and it is the rare one which seems well aimed.
Interestingly, Wendy Mogels books (Blessing of a Skinned Knee and Blessing of a B-) are about reforming parents' attitudes to help raise healthier children. But Mogel does this with such amazing empathy that it works.
Thank you for sharing this. As a parent of an 18 and 21 year old, I have spent my fair share of time second guessing past parenting decisions. And guess what? It's no good and only causes me anxiety. Anyone who reading your blog including myself is a pretty self-aware parent and the last thing we need is some guy telling us it's our fault. I love it that the publicist never even read your post!
[...] likes to get involved in in-depth discussions on the blog. She has been very engaged on topics like parent-blame authors, religion, high-fructose corn syrup bloggers, epidurals and [...]
I see it's been awhile since comments have been posted; perhaps someone will still see this. Though I am just beginning to read Larry's book, I've read enough to concur with his wake-up call. The following are two real-life examples of what I believe Larry is trying to address.
(1) I used to substitute teach in the public schools. This particular incident happened many years ago, so the fine details might be hazy, but generally it went like this: I was subbing two days in a row for the same teacher. One male student got into a snit about something and simply walked out of class; I tried to remedy the situation. Well, the next day, his mama came to school and told me off, declaring, "If my son wants to walk out of class, he can walk out of class." Anybody care to speculate on what's happening with her son these days--and who facilitated it?
(2) We just returned from a weekend at a motel/waterpark. In a snack/lounge area, a group of young adults was congregated around a table, talking and having a good time. The preschool son of one of the young men had crawled onto a nearby tabletop and was lying there watching the lounge TV. His daddy came over to the table and said, in effect, "Johnny, come on and get off the table; you shouldn't be up there." Johnny gave his daddy a glance but otherwise ignored him. Daddy neither said anything more, nor reached to move his son. Instead, Daddy soon moved away from "Johnny" and back to his adult group; and Johnny contentedly remained on the tabletop. Anybody care to speculate on what will be happening with "Johnny's" life when he reaches adulthood--and who is facilitating it?
Do I know anything further about the two above-mentioned families? No; but I suspect that those incidents are representative of their default parenting "styles." I actually think that parents today are afraid of their children--and the children know it. But it's more face-saving for a parent to say "I parent this way because I love my child," rather than, "I can't bear the thought of engaging in--and losing--a confrontation with my child." So the parent stifles the (common) sense that something's not right and instead pretends that what is obvious to everyone watching isn't really happening.
How many times have you heard a parent say, "Susie, stop that. Susie! I said stop it. All right--One! ... Two! (pause...) Susie! I said Stop It!" And you're holding your breath, because you know how it's going to go: The dreaded Number Three somehow just can't make its way past the lips of that parent, who feels helpless to actually bring successful closure to even a tiny conflict. And you know very well whom you want to just go over and shake: the parent--not the child.
Moushie, I pretty much agree with what you posted. But that seems not quite the same as the tack Larry has been taking, which I find offensive.
"And you know very well whom you want to just go over and shake: the parent–not the child."
Actually, Moushie, if I feel the desire to shake anyone, it's YOU.
(1) Really?? In this story, the problem is the parent... not the school administrators who (a) do not have a code of conduct and discipline plan in place to deal with students who walk out of class -- which is a safety issue for the school -- and (b) allow a parent to confront a teacher, or, worse, a sub, instead of talking to the students' counselor or principal about the discipline issue?
(2) I'm glad you know everything about that family just from looking at them in the snack/lounge area of a motel/waterpark. Because, clearly, that HAD to be a neurotypical child who would behave exactly like any textbook child should, according to the parenting books, as long as you apply the "right" technique. Which, lemme guess... involves "spanking" if the child doesn't listen?
Criss, Regarding:
++ "And you know very well whom you want to just go over and shake: the parent–not the child" ... I was referring to the specific "All right, Susie" type of incident. Do not spread my singular comment in that instance over anything else I pointed out.
++ My subbing incident... I never said that "THE" (as in "THE ONLY") problem in that particular school setting was the parent. Do not infer that I meant more than I said. Certainly all authority figures involved had some role or other to fulfill, myself included. I was simply focusing here on the parent's poor approach and its likely influence on the child's chosen methodology for dealing with authority figures and rules 'n regulations.
++ The snack/lounge incident... You sarcastically tell me: "I’m glad you know everything about that family just from looking at them in the snack/lounge area of a motel/waterpark." (Read, "Moushie, you DON'T know everything.") The irony is that you conclude with comments concerning applying the " 'right technique.' Which, lemme guess… involves 'spanking' if the child doesn’t listen?" Criss, I’m glad you know everything about ME, or at least enough to conclude that the only alternative I could possibly conceive of, other than daddy walking away, is "spanking." Such I-can-say-it-but-you-can't commentary is akin to the proverbial pot calling the kettle black. Don't set up a straw man just so you can have something to knock down.
Alan, is your assessment based on Larry's book itself? I'm continuing to read it and, so far, it seems to ring true and not offensive. Hard-hitting? Yes? Words to take offense over and be insulted by? No. He even rips into himself as to what a jerk he was when he was a kid, and how his mother was blinded to it.
My assessment is based on Larry's comments on this blog post, in which he came across as a blowhard jerkwad.
Criss, When one has observed enough children for a sufficient length of time, it's pretty easy to conclude that their natural state--their default--is self-focus/self-gratification. Toddlers, for example, don't scream, "Yours!" They scream, "Mine!" It's the same state that propels a child to wander from table to table in a restaurant checking out the other diners; to rifle through your briefcase or purse out of curiosity; to pick your petunias; to belch in your face; and to smack you in the keister if s/he can't successfully sideline a conversation in which you're involved. The unnatural (and unwelcomed) state is self-restraint, which is a learned behavior/response.
You said, "... if I feel the desire to shake anyone, it’s YOU." Okay, let's say that you and I were contending in person rather than over the internet. I would have no expectation that you'd actually act on your desire. That's because I assume that the difference between you and Snack-Lounge Table-Boy is that you have succeeded at learning to exercise self-restraint. And I further assume that you did not reach that state upon having been left to yourself.
Alan, you wrote: "Moushie, I pretty much agree with what you posted. But that seems not quite the same as the tack Larry has been taking, which I find offensive."
Thanks for the affirmation. I would hope, however, that your assessment of my assertions is based primarily on their substance, rather than on the benign manner in which I may have presented them. If, on the other hand, presentation (i.e., "coming across") is primary, then if I shared the same basic assertions but salted them up a whole lot more, I might expect you to rebuff those same assertions. I don't always come across as even-tempered. My guess is that neither do you, nor does any other human (especially kids--surprise, surprise...). And that includes, by his own admission, Larry. In fact, on page 152 of his book, he confesses: "I am not an easy guy to live with. I am loud, opinionated, sarcastic, argumentative and caustic." Nevertheless, we all--kids and adults alike--would hope that people don't dismiss us or our ideas out of hand because we shoot off our mouths when we get passionate about something.
So, rather than basing a blanket assessment on "... Larry’s comments on this blog post, in which he came across as a blowhard jerkwad," I encourage you to juxtapose whatever of his approach that you find distasteful, against his upbeat/sensible assertions. For example, he also posted here:
++ "I do tell you what your kid is going to need to know in order to become a successful adult: honestly, integrity, work ethic, respect, money, health, relationships, fairness, how to get along with others and more."
++ "... you must just love your kids enough to make sure they become responsible, productive adults by teaching them the things they are going to need to know be successful in all areas of life. I actually find it unkind and unloving to dump unprepared children into the world to fend for themselves..."
++ "I honestly wish you all the best with your blog."
++ "I write and speak from a position of deep research and personal experience along with some personal opinion of course."
++ "I hate lots of books that I read, but I read them before I call them names or review them. It’s called giving an educated response."
I encourage you to read Larry's book itself to get a broader perspective of what he's trying to communicate. I personally find it compelling, in a good way.
++ I understood that you were referring to the "Susie" incident. I still wanted to shake YOU, the nosy know-it-all busybody relaying the incident, if I were going to shake anyone.
++ I bet if I bothered to go back and re-read your comment, I'd find the word "THE" in there. Please respect yourself enough to not back-pedal. You told that story using THE PARENT as THE PROBLEM. A big chunk of the discussion going on in these comments points out that other factors, OTHER THAN THE PARENT, affect how a child will turn out. Telling your story as you did, mentioning only THE PARENT and not any other factors, means you found THE PARENT to be THE PROBLEM.
++ Yes, you're right. I assumed. (Thanks for ignoring the actual point, by the way.) Now, how WOULD you have handled that child?
You use a lot of words here to... well, not say anything at all. And you're replying to yourself, so I'm not sure why you're addressing the comment to me.
Just as I should not ASSume about you, perhaps you should not ASSume about me. I can find quite a few people who will be happy to fill you in on whether or not I've "succeeded at learning to exercise self-restraint." (SPOILER: Outlook not so good!!)
However, you are right in that I "did not reach that state upon having been left to yourself." I had parents who came from stable, (mostly) loving households; I had teachers, I had grandparents, I had aunts and uncles, I had a nanny, I had friends and their parents... I also had TV and movies (many of which I watched at friends' houses, where my parents had no jurisdiction). I had LOADS of people who influenced how I turned out.
If anyone tries to go to my mom and tell her my shortcoming are "her fault," well... Hell hath no fury like what you'd see in that instance.
Criss, I'm noting your characterizations of me:
"... the 'right' technique. Which, lemme guess… involves 'spanking' if the child doesn’t listen?"
"You use a lot of words here to… well, not say anything at all. And you’re replying to yourself..."
"I still wanted to shake YOU, the nosy know-it-all busybody... "
Finally, you cap off your comments with what appears to be an investigative question: "Now, how WOULD you have handled that child?" Yes, the sentence follows the grammatically correct format of a question: It begins with the word "how" and ends with a question mark. But from the general tone of your comments toward me, it's apparent that it's simply one more accusation--in this instance disguised as a question. If that's true, then you're not really so interested in what I think, as much as you are in letting me know what you think.
With all that as a backdrop, I will continue to "ignore the actual point." Thus, you can consider yourself as having succeeded at letting me know what you think, as well as having had the final word. I'll leave it up to you to determine whether you're annoyed at not getting a satisfactory answer from me or delighted that I have copped out because I can't come up with anything of substance.
My kids are special bc they are unique and wonderful human beings. Maybe if everyone truly believed they were inherently valuable a lot of the things he critiques would go away?
On a side note, why the random dig against pitbulls? It added nothing to your argument. They are wonderful and amazing dogs and really don't need any more bad press either from a whack job comparing himself to imaginary characteristics of the breed or from generally awesome bloggers whose opinions carry a lot of weight. That really rubbed me the wrong way.
Wow. I'm really wasting my time making money working my tush off as a pediatric nurse, when I could really be raking it in writing self-help books about parenting. Who knew?
Larry,
I would love to get a copy of your book to read. I do believe that how you raise your children will determine how they are as adults. Regardless of the press release which doesn't really help "sell" the book, I have read some of it online and would love to read the rest of it before making a decision on whether I agree or disagree with what you have written.
Parents often talk about the younger generation as if they didn't have anything to do with it. ~Haim Ginott
As parents, we guide by our unspoken example. It is only when we're talking to them that our kids aren't listening. ~Robert Brault
Sadie,
Without a doubt Haim Ginott is my favourite child Psychologist. HE ROCKS.
Depth. humour, respect, and total awesomeness - have you seen his little video clips on TV? Search them - you really get a taste of his care!
If you read various parenting experts on attachment - Dan Seigel, Margot Sunderland, Bruce Perry, Daniel Hughes, etc etc etc.... they ALL say that bad parenting - emotional abuse and emotional neglect result in a lack of care in others. It causes people to steal, lie, rape, murder, etc etc etc....
Research study after research study go to show that kids who go through those behaviours have issues of attachment and relationship breakdown.
What Larry is saying is NOTHING new. It's EXACTLY what attachment parenting teach - have deeply involed communication, care, respect, compassion etc in your reltionship with your kids!