next »

[zuzu_]

10AM-11AM Eastern 

On Point with Tom Ashbrook

Live stream here: http://www.wbur.org/listen

[betty_p]

I caught most of this show on the replay at 7PM on WBUR. Nothing here we didn't know. Did you notice how none of the callers were actual helicopter parents? Maybe (dare I say it) this is a trend that is going to pass?

The terms "crispies" and "teacups" were new to me. I've never met a crispy student (so burnt out by HS activities that they are completely fried by the time they get to college). I have met some teacups (fragile from overprotection), and I kind of like that term better than "snowflake." A snowflake melts and is lost forever. At least you can work to repair a teacup, given enough glue.

[toothpaste]

I read these terms in the cover story on Time this week:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1940395,00.html

(I think! I'm a little fuzzy and under the weather--I did the reading at the doctor's office, so it might not actually be in this article, which is nonetheless interesting).

[betty_p]

Yeah. The author of the Time article was the guest, so she brought these terms with her. Anybody else familiar with these terms?

[mountainguy]

I've never heard of crispies or teacups either, although I like the terms.

I was almost a crispy. During my sophomore and junior year of high school, I took 4 AP/honors classes each year on top of being actively involved with the school debate team and student newspaper. My grades started to slip my junior year, my sleep patterns suffered, and according to my parents being around me was like walking on egg shells. My senior year, my parents made the decision to pull me out of AP classes because they felt that extracurricular activities would ultimately give me better life skills (I was editor of the newspaper and captain of the debate team). Time proved them right, but my high school guidance counselor flipped out. I suspect that crispies may be hard to spot at the college level, since they tend to blend into the background and might not stand out from run-of-the-mill slackers.

Ultimately, I tend to buy into Madeline Levine's argument that this type of parenting is the result of socioeconomic anxieties.

[rowan1]

I thought the show said a bunch of nothing - but then I find Tom Ashbrook to be a rather insipid interviewer - no surprises, nothing we aren't seeing, nothing that hasn't been discussed.

Although I think it is a sad commentary on contemporary American Families and society that we have people who are hired to tell parents how to parent.  Kind of like a life coach.  Not a shrink but almost.

[tee_bee]

I think this may be a function of socioeconomic status. Wealthy families can afford to pay to live vicariously through their kids. Working families are too busy earning a living. Gross overgeneralization, probably, but I don't know of anyone in my solidly middle class (yes, around median family income from my area) neighborhood signing up their kids for Suzuki or 5-year old soccer travelling teams.

[kaysixteen]

Define 'middle class'.  It ain't the same as having the  median family income for any given community.

[tee_bee]

True. I qualified the word because Americans define "middle class" really broadly, including a congresscritter who defined middle class as encompassing an income of $350k a year. That's a bit far from the third quintile of income distribution in the United States, obviously. Of course, this is dangerous ground to tread, lest I be accused of "class warfare."

My point is that I think a lot of this overplanning of kids' time is a function of well-to-do parents who trade time--their work time, and time they'd spend with kids--for money, which is then spent to make the kids feel like they're "cared about." Again, I am painting with a broad brush, and the Time magazine article quoted someone who said that this phenomenon spans all income ranges, but, still, I know what I see in my neighborhood compared with the McMansion neighborhood three miles away. 

[outlier]

I thought the show was pretty good; basic for academics, who see and think about these things a lot, but useful for people who may not have thought about the effects of overparenting.

One of the results of kids hearing "good job" for everything is that they begin to confound performance and identity, so that they think that how they do at anything is a reflection of their innate talent and worth rather than a reflection of the time, effort, and in-depth study and practice they've put in. Research on the effects of feedback on performance indicates that telling someone, for example, "Good job. You're so smart" --making the feedback about the person-- has negative effects on performance. That kind of feedback fosters an "ego orientation." On the other hand, focusing on what is good or needs correction in how the person has done the task has positive effects on performance, fostering a "task orientation."

The children of helicopter parents might need some instruction on the difference between ego-oriented feedback and task-oriented feedback before they can even begin to hear feedback that is not full of praise for how good and great they are.

I hate it that people think they have to parent this way in order to give their own kids an advantage in a hypercompetitive economy at the expense of everyone else. I think it's sad that we accept that model instead of organizing to create a more functional society and economy.

[kaysixteen]

I ain't at all sure most choppers feel that they have to parent this way for the future economic welfare of their sprites.  Many of these parents have been self-centered egomaniacal boors since they were themselves children, and they see their own children as merely extensions of themselves, to be spoiled and lived through.  Many parents will interpret a B on a test, or a word of rebuke from a teacher, no matter how mild and richly deserved, as a personal insult worthy of personal retaliation, etc.

[yemaya]

I ain't at all sure most choppers feel that they have to parent this way for the future economic welfare of their sprites.  Many of these parents have been self-centered egomaniacal boors since they were themselves children, and they see their own children as merely extensions of themselves, to be spoiled and lived through.  Many parents will interpret a B on a test, or a word of rebuke from a teacher, no matter how mild and richly deserved, as a personal insult worthy of personal retaliation, etc.

I think that K16 has nailed it.  A number of these parents do see their children as reflection of themselves and anything that's less than perfection is also a reflection of them.  If this is the case, it's a completely unhealthy and unfair attitude to take toward one's kid.  In addition to the enormous pressure on the child, s/he will never develop the self-confidence one earns from making mistakes and living to tell the tale.  They will also get the message of "you can't handle it" and never learn to do/try things on their own.  (I think this is why we see students who fall apart at the smallest obstacle.)  As a new parent, I'm keenly aware of fears that a child may come to harm, but I think that some of this goes beyond merely wanting to protect the child. 

[toothpaste]

I think that this article makes a useful distinction between the "crispies" and the "teacups," but failed to explore the implications. It seems to me that there is a difference between the helicopter parents of "crispies" who push their children to success/wealth/status, and those who want to protect their children from physical danger (and possibly social disappointment).

I think that the motivations and consequent behaviors are quite different. I personally abjure the first category but do very much want to protect my children to an extent new in this generation (having been a latchkey kid myself), but in my family we are carefully not raising our children with material, academic, and professional success with as a central goal.

[tee_bee]

I ain't at all sure most choppers feel that they have to parent this way for the future economic welfare of their sprites.  Many of these parents have been self-centered egomaniacal boors since they were themselves children, and they see their own children as merely extensions of themselves, to be spoiled and lived through.  Many parents will interpret a B on a test, or a word of rebuke from a teacher, no matter how mild and richly deserved, as a personal insult worthy of personal retaliation, etc.

I see you've met my sister? I thank god--for my niece's sake, and for her professors'--that my niece went to college 1500 miles from home.

[ucprof]

We had an incident with a parent of an incoming PhD student (yes you read that right) who wanted to know if
we had student housing where the parent could move in with the student.  And no this was not an unusually young student - fairly normal age for PhD student.  This was about the worst I've seen for helicopter parenting.