I started this discussion trying to communicate a message to you about
parenting.
What I have been dealing with is the article that you posted to me, and my thoughts on it. That's all. Not some grand parenting message, but just the article. I said I didn't think that what he said was good parenting, because he made no distinction between unusual choices by a child and outright evil choices by a child, but implied (IMO) that he would support his child no matter what choices he made.
I think we're agreed on the main point: that a good parent supports his child's right to make certain choices even if the parent, had he or she full control, would have preferred that the child choose some other path. Better to be a happy bricklayer than an unhappy doctor, was your example. I agree, but with reservations, in that I want to make sure the child really IS a happy bricklayer, and isn't just choosing bricklaying over doctoring because the child has a fear of failure that the parent can help them overcome. Sometimes a child needs to be encouraged or helped to take risks which the child is afraid to take.
But I think there are three areas of choices. One that the child makes and the parent fully approves of and therefore supports easily. Two, that the child makes and the parent wishes the child wouldn't have made but will support the child if the child really does want to make the choice. But I'll get back to this in a moment. Three, that the child makes and the parent can't and shouldn't support. I put the choice to be a serial rapist in this category. You said you thought the father in the article would also put this choice in an "I don't accept" category, though the article didn't say that and IMO implied otherwise.
But so far I think you and I are together.
There are two points to make about this.
one: where do you draw the line between set two and set three? That's the hard one, IMO.
two: to what degree does the parent have the right or obligation to use his or position, money, influence, or otherwise to try to prevent the child from making what the parent thinks is a bad choice.
There are lots of examples I could bring up here. Off the cuff, a few.
The 15 year old daughter wants to go out to a frat house party with a 18year old college freshman who has a very bad reputation in town, who is known to use drugs and drink heavily, and at a frat house which has an "Animal House" reputation. The daughter says "it's my life, I want to go, why don't you trust me." Cajoling, talking, have all turned out useless. Do you let the daughter go and celebrate her making a choice of partying to a different drummer? Do you tell her about condoms and let her go? Do you make sure she's on the pill before you let her go? What does a "good" parent do??
The 17 year old daughter is pregnant by a guy who is, in your opinion, a loser who will never amount to anything. He's been in and out of juvie detention, has beaten up several other girlfriends, has no job, dropped out of school after the 9th grade, deals drugs to get by, etc. She wants to marry him; she loves him and she can reform him and turn him around with her love. Since she isn't yet 18, she needs your permission in this state to marry. She can marry with your permission, not without it. Do you give her the permission and support her choice even though you think it's a prescription for disaster?
IMO, these "choices" by the child are less life-changing than turning into a duck, which the article said the father would support. They are also real life situations which parents face regularly. In fact, one of them is taken almost precisely from a situation one of my clients faced and consulted me about. |
