« April 22, 2007 - April 28, 2007 |
Main
| May 13, 2007 - May 19, 2007 »
May 10, 2007
You've probably seen bumper stickers that read, "My honor student loves me."
Patty Konjoian of Andover and Gina Gallagher of Marlborough offer an alternative: "My bipolar kid loves me and hates me."
If that strikes a chord, their book is for you, "Shut up about...your perfect kid!' (Gallagher & Konjoian, 2006).
In a culture where so many parents strive for perfection, Konjoian and Gallagher, who are sisters, are raising children with disabilities. Konjoian's 13-year-old daughter has bipolar disorder and Gallagher's 11-year-old has Asperger's syndrome. One way they hold themselves and their families together is by using humor. With so many very serious and hefty books available for parents of children with disabilities, this one's a refreshing change.
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 07:36 PM
May 10, 2007
The Tufts University Festschrift last night was just what my unabridged dictionary says it is: "A miscellaneous volume of writing from several hands for a celebration." The celebration was to honor retiring professor, author and child development luminary David Elkind and the writings were delivered orally by a who's who of some of the field's best minds:
Barbara Bowman, a founder of Erikson Institute who is currently working with the Chicago public schools and is a pioneer in access for minority children to quality early childhood education;
Robert Selman, of Harvard and Judge Baker Children's Center, who is best known for his work on children's social competency;
Sharon Lynn Kagan, of Teachers College Columbia University and Yale, internationally recognized for her work on family policy.
Elkind may be the best known of the faculty at Tufts' Eliot-Pearson Department of Child Development, but he's not by any means the only luminary. Also on hand were colleagues George Scarlett, Robert Sternberg, Fred Rothbaum, David Feldman, Fran Jacobs, Donald Wertlieb, Janet Zeller, and rising star Marina Bers.
Speakers over and over again lauded Elkind for his incredible contributions in many areas of child development but the true highlights of the evening came from two of his three sons, one of whom composed a Dr. Seuss-esque poem in his honor, and from Elkind himself, who is known for his modesty. "I'm always learning something new," he said at the end of the five-hour event., "including something I've learned late in the game about psychology. I raised three sons but now I have three granddaughters and little girls are different from little boys. The adage that little girls are made of sugar and spice is also true, but I have to add this amendment: some of the time."
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 10:56 AM
May 10, 2007
If I could have a do-over as a parent, here's one thing I would do differently: I would have a mother-son book group.
I've been annoyed with myself about that ever since the day in 2004 when I was invited to Lexington to observe a mother-son book group in action. These moms began when their sons were in sixth grade and the group continued until the boys graduated high school. Even though the friendships among the boys shifted over the years, they always enjoyed getting together to talk books.
The cause for my runimation is a new book, "The Kids' Book Club Book," by Judy Gelman and Vicki Levy Krupp (Tarcher/Penguin). It's full of insights in how to organize all kinds of groups, including those with or without adult/child pairings. The best part, is that is has some great book suggestions at a range of reading levels, and activities to go with some of the books.
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 08:55 AM
May 9, 2007
Despite the American Academy of Pediatrics' recommendation that parents not allow children under 2 years to watch tv, a new study this week (scroll down for a posting on it) shows that 40 percent of 3-month olds in the US do watch.
Is your baby among them?
If you're interested in sharing your thoughts on TV viewing for young children -- what do you feel safe allowing your baby to watch? under what circumstances do you let them watch? -- please contact me at meltz@globe.com.
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 02:09 PM
May 9, 2007
OK, so what do you think this is?
Yes, yes, that's a baby, but those disembodied hands are pillows that are flying off the shelves in -- where else? -- Manhattan. At least, that's what is being reported in Babble, an online magazine that I have to admit is one of my favorite sites. The idea is that the pillow hands, known as the Zaky Infant Pillow, comfort your baby when you can't be there. It's recommended that you wear the hands around your neck for a few hours before you use them with your baby. You know, so it picks up your scent.
I knew at first sight that I would have bought this; my baby had colic, I would have tried anything. In fact, the Zaky pillow was initially developed for hospitalized preemies whose parents couldn't be with them all the time. I totally get that. On second thought, though, it strikes me as, well, more unnecessary stuff. Oh yeah -- it sells for $50.
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 11:57 AM
May 8, 2007
As hard as it is to believe, my son's freshman year in college is over. In four days, we go to pick him up.
It's been a terrific year for him -- and for my husband and me. (I know those of you with high school seniors find that hard to believe. A year ago, I did, too. All I can say is, anticipation is worse than the reality).
It was, however, with anticipation in mind that a year ago I wrote a column about what it's like for parents and student when the rising sophomore comes home for the summer. In the column, I quote Hingham mother Sue Ritchie: ''All of a sudden, there's chaos. The house is a mess, there's no food in the refrigerator, their schedule is so bizarre, kids are coming and going, the phones are all ringing. . ." Ritchie catches her breath. ''And we're confused. Are we supposed to relate to them as parents, or as adults?"
That's the very question on my mind. I'm re-reading the column, and forwarding it to my husband.
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 03:56 PM
May 8, 2007
David Elkin became a household name in 1981 when he wrote the ground-breaking book, "The Hurried Child, Growing Up Too Fast Too Soon." Elkind was the first to identify the so-called "forced blooming" of a generation of children who were being pressured to achieve more, sooner, faster. Unfortunately, the trend continues.
Elkind's newest book, published earlier this year, "The Power of Play, How Sponatenous, Imaginative Activities Lead to Happier, Healthier Children," is a return to that earlier theme. He argues that the pressure to achieve is now robbing our children of the best teacher of all, free play.
Elkind is officially retiring today from Tufts University, where he has served on the faculty of the Eliot-Pearson Department of Child Development since 1979. In the years for which his books stand as bookends (he wrote many others inbetween), parenting has become a huge consumer industry. Elkind didn't just getting on the bandwagon; he created it. He enabled us to look at childhood through a new lens and with new insight. Parents today who are wise enough to worry about the stress children are under and who work hard to keep the "hood" in childhood may not realize it, but they have Elkind to thank.
There's a celebration in his honor at Tufts today with educational researcher Sharon Lynn Kagan giving the keynote. The title of her talk says it all: "David Elkind: Right Then, Right Now, Right Always"
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 03:06 PM
May 8, 2007
The newest study on children and television viewing not only reinforces what we already know -- that parents are widely ignoring the advice from the American Academy of Pediatrics to keep chidlren under age 2 away from TV and other screens -- but also shows what we had only suspected: that as many as 40 percent of 3-month-olds are regular viewers. The study, by researchers at the University of Washington and Seattle Children’s Hospital Research Institute, is published in this month's Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.
There are many reasons why parents feel comfortable ignoring the warning to keep young chidren away from screens, but evidence points to the influence of marketing as a powerful culprit. If you aren't convinced, here's a reminder why Baby Einstein et al is not in your baby's best interest; and why the best learning for young children comes from interaction with real people, not screens.
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 02:06 PM
May 8, 2007
Bake a pie, stop the war? Stranger things have happened. Actually, it's not as strange as you may think. Mother's Day has its roots in war. The first observation, in 1872, was organized by Julia Ward Howe and was dedicated to peace, as a way to heal the country after the Civil War.
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 12:49 PM
May 8, 2007
If you've ever struggled to answer one of your child's brilliant questions ("What do the goldfish do all day long?" "Do trees have feelings?" "Can my baby sister go away now?"), you'll enjoy this new book by Mallika Chopra, "100 Questions from My Child" (Rodalel Press, May 2007; $18). (Yes, there is a relationship to Deepak Chopra; he's Mallika's dad and he writes the book's foreward.)
I've long thought that how we respond to our children's questions is something we don't give enough thought to; our answers, after all, contribute greatly to how children frame their view of the world, not to mention their relationship with us. The more dismissive we are ("Oh honey, you don't need to worry about that!"), the less likely over time that they will keep coming to us with their thoughts and questions.
Chopra's answers are both beautiful, simple and developmentally on the nose. (I particularly like the one she gives to the question, "When will I meeet God?") The book is not intended for readers to mimic verbatim, of course, but to be a source of inspiration for us to find our own answers.
Meanwhile, for a decidedly more how-to approach to anwering your children's questions, here's an exerpt from a Child Caring column from 2002:
"Why?" is one of the first questions children form. Why? For one thing, it's an easy word to pronounce; preschoolers use it even when they want to know what, where, or when.
It also gets them interesting results.
Children learn early that by asking "why" they can buy themselves time, as in, "Why do I have to clean up now?" They learn that it's a way to keep a conversation going: Often what makes a child happy is not so much what you answer but that you continue to answer at all. For toddlers, a why question is almost always an egocentric one: "Why does that machine make so much noise?" can be safely translated to, "Are you sure that isn't going to hurt me?" Asking "why" can be a plea for reassurance, as in, "Why do I have to get a shot?" or an expression of astonishment, as in, "Why is the sky so blue?"
Every now and then, of course, "why" actually means what we adults expect it to mean: a request for information. Before you try to answer a child's why, here are some things to keep in mind:
Find out first what your child already knows. There's nothing more frustrating for her or you when the answer isn't satisfying to the asker. That usually happens simply because a child isn't always able to frame the question to get the information he's seeking. So before you answer his question, ask him one in return: "What do you think?" When you still aren't sure what he's asking, pose a question that guesses at it: "Squirrels sleep in nests. Is that what you want to know?"
Be truthful. Even though you may have honorable intentions, giving inaccurate information has a way of coming back to haunt you (my 15-year-old son still chides me for once telling him that maple seedlings were weeds) and, down the line, can cause a child to wonder: "Can I trust mom's answer? How do I know she's telling me the truth this time?" That doesn't mean preschoolers need the whole truth, however; offer it up in age-appropriate sound bites. If a 3-year-old asks, "Why do things fall?" a good answer might be, "The Earth pulls them. You just can't see the Earth doing it. There's even a special name for it: gravity."
It's OK to say you don't know, especially if you tell him you'll find out, and then you do.
Don't cut off a child's questions. No matter how frustrated a string of "Why's" makes you, saying "Your questions are driving me crazy!" sends a message that asking questions isn't a good thing, which, of course, it really is. Try, instead, to postpone the question ("Can you ask me later? Right now, I have to concentrate on driving."). Turn it into a conversation ("Talking about cars makes me think about trucks, because they have wheels, too. What else has wheels?"), or turn it into a game ("You be the mommy and I'll be the child who doesn't want to wear the seat belt."). Maybe you'll learn something from her answers to your "why." Whenever possible, humor is always a good deflector.
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 12:01 PM
May 8, 2007
Already attracting viewers in record numbers, "Spider-Man 3" is bound to be a movie children of all ages will want to see. It's PG-13 rating is there for a reason, though. Movie Mom Nell Minnow rates it only a B-.
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 10:39 AM
May 7, 2007
Too bad there isn't a way to chart the influence -- for once, in a good way -- of celebrity behavior. There's been growing acceptance of breastfeeding in recent years, even including acceptance of long-term nursing, but I bet it's going to sky-rocket now that actress Maggie Gyllenhaal has been photographed breastfeeding in public.
Celebrity Baby Blog appears to have this scoop of a photo (scroll down, it's at the bottom of the posting), and it raises the question of whether the photographer who snapped it ought to be criticized for invading Gyllenhaal's privacy, or lauded for getting Maggie in the act of "doing something completely normal and natural." The website also reports, "Just a few people were bothered that Maggie didn't cover up more. The majority of feedback we've received on this photo is wonderfully positive."
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 03:50 PM
May 7, 2007
Coming back to the office after a vacation there's usually a period of transition before my work-juices get flowing, so I don't know if I should thank Wild Planet Toys or be angry with them. Among the loot awaiting my return were these two toys, front and center on my desk:
This is Wild Planet's Pirate Bomb Blast. Here's what the packaging says: "Pass the bomb before the time runs out! Fuse lights up & hisses so you can play in the dark! Turn it ion...pass the bomb...KA-BOOOM! If you're holding it, you're out!"
This is the Waterball Pirate Cannon," whose packaging boasts, "Launches 100 mini cannonballs of water per tank!"
That I really don't like toys of weaponry is only half of what got my blood boiling this morning. Here's the other half: The toys are being pitched to children as young as 4-years-old.
Given the hype and excitement that continues to accompany the popularity of "Pirates of the Caribbean" (it's the rage even on the other side of the pond, I noticed on my vacation), I can just hear all the preschool boys clammoring for these toys. Believe me, I am sympathetic to their moms and dads; I wasn't immune to this kind of marketing when my son was young. But I learned that a boy with an imagination can have just as much fun pretending to be a pirate without owning toys that concidentally glamorize violence and cruelty.
In fact, even Wild Planet apparently knows that. It's also marketing a pirate toy that has nothing to do with violence.
This is the "Pocket Watch," that's "a watch, a compass and message revealer!"
For more on war toys, read this column I wrote in 1999.
THURSDAY, May 20, 1999
CHILD CARING
By Barbara F. Meltz, Globe Staff
SHOULD BOYS HAVE WAR TOYS?
Jonah Gorski of Newton was 10 when he got his first toy gun, a plastic pistol that shot rubber-tipped darts. As toy guns go, he thought it was pretty innocuous. But after a lifetime of hearing about why war toys are bad for kids, Jonah figured his father would throw it out, and he did. He also expected his dad to dispose of the Laser Challenge gun game he got for his birthday that same year, but he didn't.
It's a lapse Peter Gorski regrets.
A pediatrician and the president of the Massachusetts Caring for Children Foundation, Gorski says, ``It's the only toy gun I ever let into our house, a gift from a friend whose parents I didn't know. I wasn't bold enough to impose my convictions on them.''
As it turns out, that one lapse may have been instructive.
Jonah, now 12, was quick to agree to the rules his parents imposed for Laser Challenge, for instance, playing no more than 20 minutes at a time. Before long, though, he gave it up and not because of his parents' obvious unhappiness.
``It got boring,'' says Jonah. ``I have a lot of other things I like to do that are a lot more fun.''
Those words are music to Peter Gorski's ears, and they ought to embolden other parents, too, as we struggle with a new round of ``Star Wars'' toys and a new summer's worth of souped-up squirt guns, both set against our heightened sensitivity to gun play in the wake of Littleton.
Is it harmful for children to play with war toys? Even among those who dislike them, there is a range of opinion.
Harvard University developmental psychologist Ron Slaby rails against any toy with a violent theme, including toy guns; action figures (even the good guys) who use violence; video and computer games like Nintendo; and any game that uses shooting, even if it's only paint.
``They are all rehearsal for real-life violence,'' he says.
Daphne White, a Bethesda, Md., mother and director of the Lion & Lamb Project, a national grass-roots organization that provides support for parents on this issue, was determined that her son, David, would have no war toys. That takes conviction, as well as a deaf ear: You have to be able to tolerate cries of ``You're a terrible mother!'' and ``But all my friends have one!''
She admits it wasn't easy, but she held on to her mantra, which she shared with David: ``Violence is not OK under any circumstances.'' Nonetheless, she worried peers might exclude him. They never did.
``He always had games and activities no one else had, so kids loved playing at our house,'' she says.
For parents who want to take the no-guns-at-all route, educational psychologist Doris Bergen recommends banding together with like-minded parents. ``It's ideal if they are the parents of your son's playmates, but even if they aren't, at least he won't feel alone in the world on this,'' she says.
Early childhood educator Diane Levin of Wheelock College is one of the nation's most outspoken critics of toys with violent messages. But her research also shows the importance of parents staying connected to children.
``If a rigid position cuts you off from your son and makes him feel isolated from his friends and angry at you as a result, you leave the lessons he learns more open to the influence of others,'' she says.
For parents like her, the trick is to find a position that feels comfortable in principle and practice. This can be hardest when our sons are in preschool, the age when they are most insistent about wanting war toys. There are two reasons why:
- They are working out what it means to be male. ``They are very concrete thinkers, so, as they struggle with gender identification, they latch on to salient features,'' says Levin. Because adult as well as children's culture is rife with images of men engaged in war, violence, and toughness, these are the behaviors boys identify with maleness and try on for size, through mimickry.
- They are working out how to control impulses and anger, and how to conquer certain fears such as separation from parents. ``Playing good guys vs. bad makes them feel powerful and helps resolve internal conflicts: They symbolically project their fear or anger onto the bad guy,'' says early childhood educator Nancy Carlsson-Paige of Lesley College. She is coauthor with Levin of several books, including ``Who's Calling the Shots? How to Respond Effectively to Children's Fascination with War Play, War Toys and Violent TV'' (NAEYC Press).
Unfortunately, these two developmental needs can feed off each other, so that it's difficult to untangle what issue a child is working on. ``The more violence they see, the more they not only want to play it out but actually need to, to master the experience,'' says Bergen, who teaches at Miami University in Ohio. Even if you don't allow a child this age to play with war toys, she says, he'll likely take almost any object, from a stick to a piece of toast, and pretend it's a gun or sword.
We should not necessarily stop him from doing that: How a child plays is more important than what he plays with, according to developmentalists like Bergen, Levin, and Carlsson-Paige.
Of course, some children get more caught up in war play and action heroes than others, a result of temperament, a reaction to what is happening in their lives, or both. Carlsson-Paige tells of two brothers whose parents were going through divorce. ``The 2-year-old put on his Superman cape, a red towel, every day when he woke up and kept it on all day. He was Superman. It empowered him; it was how he learned to cope,'' she says. The older brother read books.
Whether the aggressive play involves toast chewed into the shape of a gun or a toy sword, our job is to pay close attention to the play and be prepared to intervene.
``If two preschool boys play the same game over and over so that it looks scripted; if the play is very aggressive and imitates the show's shooting, karate chops and the like; if the toys are highly realistic replicas of what they see on the screen; and if the play at the end of the day looks exactly the same as it did in the morning, that's not good,'' says Levin.
She suggests finding ways to break its scripted nature and get them to use their imagination: ``Your Star Wars action figures look really dirty. I wonder if they'd like a bath?'' and offer to fill the tub. Or, ``They must be starving,'' and suggest making Play-Doh food or mud pies.
It's less problematic if a child's play is more creative from the get-go, even if he's pretending the paper towel tube is a gun. ``If it's a gun one day and a telescope the next, and if they were fighting aliens in the morning and wild animals in the afternoon, you know there's creativity at work. This child is working on his own issues, not issues dictated to him by a TV script,'' says Levin. ``That's healthy.''
With either child, however, if you see play that's too aggressive, repetitive, or mean-sounding, say so. Levin suggests doing it in a way that keeps you connected: ``I know you like to pretend you're Darth Maul [a new evil `Star Wars' character] but you were so mean, it felt like you really were him. I was worried! I want to make sure you know you're still my little boy!'' ' Or: ``When the two of you get worked up, I worry you'll get hurt. What can we do to make sure no one does?''
Developmentally, boys lose interest in war play in the late elementary school years. But, says Bergen, ``Because violence dominates video play and because there are more sophisticated gun toys geared to the older child, kids stay with it.'' That increases the likelihood that they will buy into the violent message and highlights the need for parents to remain vigiliant, she says.
Gorski has consistently told Jonah and his younger son, Matt, that video games are bad for the brain: ``They help you to grow stupid.'' White lets her son have Nintendo, but only the sport games. Levin's son has had two toy guns in his life, a cowboy gun at 5 (the result of a trade he negotiated) and a giant squirt gun as a preteen, but only after he agreed it would be used in a specific part of the yard, never out in the neighborhood, and would never be squirted randomly, only at people who had agreed to play.
Like Jonah, these children are well aware of their parents' objections and have not always been happy with them.
``I know I'm different from a lot of kids,'' says Jonah. ``Sometimes I wish I could be like them, but then it crosses my mind that I'm proud of my parents for standing up for something. It hasn't stopped me from having friends. Friends like me for who I am, not for the toys I have.''
SIDEBAR
WHAT TO SAY TO CHILDREN
- Telling a preschooler, ``You can't have a toy gun because a real gun can kill someone,'' doesn't compute for him because he can't make the leap from concrete to abstract. Say instead, ``Kids get hurt from pretend play with guns because they get so wild, even when they don't mean to''; or, ``Real shooting can hurt. Even pretending it is mean and not nice.''
- Tell an older child, ``Guns are serious things. Even seeing a toy gun reminds me of all the real accidents from real guns.''
- Teach even a preschooler: If you find a gun you think is real, never touch it, and tell an adult right away.
- Research shows that school-age boys who engage in lots of war play, including video games with guns, are most at risk for not being able to distinguish between real and fantasy violence and for becoming increasingly aggressive because they think they can never be strong or tough enough.
- Boys who don't like war play and/or violent video games may feel ashamed for not being like other boys. They need lots of support for the activities they do enjoy.
- The Lion & Lamb Project can help you talk to your children about war toys and has Parent Action Kits available. Call toll-free 888-708-4201 or go to the Web site http//:www.lionlamb.org.
Posted by Barbara Meltz at 11:57 AM
|
