I'm not sure it's a bad idea. They should probably start younger. If these problems can be nipped in the bud, it may save a number of kids from jail or a life of drunken brawling. We teach children social etiquette, so why not anger management and coping skills? What is the negative side?

Suicidal Writer: What is the negative side?

It happened in the NANNY STATE. Don't you get it? The NANNY STATE. NANNY STATE is funny. It's piss-your-pants funny, the sort of funny that should be repeated every single goddamn time a Daily Mail article becomes available. In fact, it shouldn't even be necessary to write headlines for them. You should just write NANNY STATE and submit the article and then every post should just say NANNY STATE and NANNY STATE and NANNY STATE! THIS! over and over. And every other headline after that should just say NANNY STATE with NANNY STATE posts and we should all change our logins to NANNY STATE 1 and NANNY STATE 2 because it's so goddamn funny and clever and you just can't find wit like that anymore. NANNY STATE.

My first NANNY STATE impression was NANNY STATE that NANNY STATE it really wasn't NANNY STATE an obviously NANNY STATE silly idea NANNY STATE, really NANNY STATE NANNY NANNY NANNY STATE.

NANNY STATEgrrbl.

Nanny State Nanny State Nanny State Nanny State Nanny State Nanny State Nanny State Nanny State.
Nanny State Nanny State Nanny State?
Nanny State!!!
Nanny State Nanny State Nanny State!
Nanny State Nanny State Nanny State. Nanny State.
Nanny State Nanny State?
Nanny State.
Nanny State!

Heh, awesome colective mental breakdown at how unfunny that farkism is.

Great stuff.

Oh, and fark the Daily Mail.

What's so terribly wrong about parents handling this?

/inquiring minds want to know

Suicidal Writer: What is the negative side?

It removes parental responsibility from the equation. Care to take a wild guess who else liked to control children?

Damn you, gimme back my pencil or so help me, I'll slap you silly

want to see a magic trick?

GaryPDX: It removes parental responsibility from the equation. Care to take a wild guess who else liked to control children?

That can be said about compulsory schooling, period. It all depends on where one draws the line. The state has a responsibility to oversee the welfare of children. Education standards are a part of that equation, and anger management, like sex education and lifeskills (credit management, etc), is a part of that.

Education in life and living to produce better adjusted citizens is not really a negative thing.

Suicidal Writer: That can be said about compulsory schooling, period

I do say the same about compulsory schooling.

I don't really like the idea of the government having the wide-reaching power to "educate" children however they see fit. That gives them way too much control.

GaryPDX What's so terribly wrong about parents handling this?

Nothing. The problem is that most of them don't seem to care.

Glasgowsfinest: GaryPDX What's so terribly wrong about parents handling this?

Nothing. The problem is that most of them don't seem to care.

That, as far as I can tell, started in the 50-60's. We have 2-3 generations of parents not giving a shiat. That's still not good enough reason for the state to take over raising children. I'd rather see parents more directly motivated to be parents.

GaryPDX: I'd rather see parents more directly motivated to be parents.

I've made suggestions, but apparently none of them are legal.

GaryPDX: Suicidal Writer: What is the negative side?

It removes parental responsibility from the equation. Care to take a wild guess who else liked to control children?

Mary Poppins? Kids are assholes and parents don't control them. People grow up and act the same exact way.

Subby youre headline seems to have hit a nerve in some snowflakes who like gummint up their arse and around the corner.

As my name implies, I have anger issues myself. When I started taking anger management and dialectic courses to gain more control of myself, I found myself wondering how different my life would have been had I learned and applied these basic principles as a child. I am an advocate for this.

As for parental responsibility.... eh... TV.

We're about 10 years away from the mandatory administering of drugs to all students for behavior modification.

How do we get parents to act responsibly?

GoodasGold: We're about 10 years away from the mandatory administering of drugs to all students for behavior modification.

Go Nanny! We will make these bastards compliant one way or another!

GoodasGold: We're about 10 years away from the mandatory administering of drugs to all students for behavior modification.

That seems to be one of the few areas where parents are ahead of the game.

"Honey, why is 3 year old Junior running around?"
"Beats me. I'll go grab the Ritalin"

John Dewey: How do we get parents to act responsibly?

Change the definition of "parents", "responsibly", or both.

John Dewey: How do we get parents to act responsibly?

Start being one, when you have children. It's gonna take a generation or two to correct the problem. However, the state sees little tax paying worker bees. Keep them sedated from cradle to grave, and poof! all the government control problems are a lot easier.

GaryPDX: That, as far as I can tell, started in the 50-60's. We have 2-3 generations of parents not giving a shiat. That's still not good enough reason for the state to take over raising children. I'd rather see parents more directly motivated to be parents.

I think nearly everyone, myself included, would like to see parent's become more involved with raising their children. However, just pining over the "good old days" and wishing things to get better isn't going to solve anything. If parent's aren't stepping up, then maybe it's time for the schools to become a bit more involved.

Can we please stop calling the UK the "nanny state"?

It's really farking stupid.

/Yeah, yeah, "welcome to fark" graphic, etc.

GaryPDX: Start being one, when you have children. It's gonna take a generation or two to correct the problem. However, the state sees little tax paying worker bees. Keep them sedated from cradle to grave, and poof! all the government control problems are a lot easier.

What's the impetus for this change?

Hypergeek_1984: If parent's aren't stepping up, then maybe it's time for the schools to become a bit more involved.

If we're going to go this route, then parents also cannot get upset when the schools teach them something they don't necessarily want their children learning.

GaryPDX: That, as far as I can tell, started in the 50-60's.

And why did it happen then?

John Dewey: GaryPDX: Start being one, when you have children. It's gonna take a generation or two to correct the problem. However, the state sees little tax paying worker bees. Keep them sedated from cradle to grave, and poof! all the government control problems are a lot easier.

What's the impetus for this change?

I'm not sure I understand the question. I raise my kids, I don't off them to the state. I'm not a socialist either. It's a choice I guess, at least there is still a choice here.

GaryPDX: I'm not sure I understand the question

What is the impetus for everyone else to change? You've made it clear that most of this country is doing it wrong, in your eyes, but you also said that it can change in 1-2 generations.

So, here's my 2 questions:

1. What caused it to go wonky in the first place?
2. What's going to cause it to go unwonky in 1-2 generations?

Certainly You Jest: Can we please stop calling the UK the "nanny state"?

Yes. And we will. Just as soon as the UK quits acting as a Nanny State.

John Dewey: GaryPDX: That, as far as I can tell, started in the 50-60's.

And why did it happen then?

There reality isn't a central cause but the hippy commune 60's played a big part. It's morphed into some perception that once the kid pops out, it's not the parents responsibility anymore, it's the state. That's just a crazy notion, but prevalent these days.

/I disagree with that ideology

John Dewey: GaryPDX: I'm not sure I understand the question

What is the impetus for everyone else to change? You've made it clear that most of this country is doing it wrong, in your eyes, but you also said that it can change in 1-2 generations.

So, here's my 2 questions:

1. What caused it to go wonky in the first place?
2. What's going to cause it to go unwonky in 1-2 generations?

It has to start taking place in the home, each and every person needs to understand that when they become a parent, it's at least an 18 year obligation, personal responsibility.

Look at it this way, you should teach your kids right and be good to them because one day they will pick your nursing home. Ponder that one a while.

GaryPDX: There reality isn't a central cause but the hippy commune 60's played a big part. It's morphed into some perception that once the kid pops out, it's not the parents responsibility anymore, it's the state. That's just a crazy notion, but prevalent these days.

I'm going to disagree with this. I think you are grossly oversimplifying it.

GaryPDX: It has to start taking place in the home, each and every person needs to understand that when they become a parent, it's at least an 18 year obligation, personal responsibility.

And if there's no one to tell them/show them this, how is it going to change?

Children are most impressionable when they are 8-10 years old, so 4th grade is the prime age group to target at-risk youth to create permanent behavioral changes.

Supercheeks: Children are most impressionable when they are 8-10 years old

I would disagree with that as well.

GoodasGold: We're about 10 years away from the mandatory administering of drugs to all students for behavior modification.

Bzzzzzzt! Fail.

The powers that be are well ahead of you, or do you think you're really in full control of your actions?

John Dewey: GaryPDX: There reality isn't a central cause but the hippy commune 60's played a big part. It's morphed into some perception that once the kid pops out, it's not the parents responsibility anymore, it's the state. That's just a crazy notion, but prevalent these days.

I'm going to disagree with this. I think you are grossly oversimplifying it.

Isn't it true people immediate look to the government to solve their problems? It's a pretty simple conscious distinction. They don't look to their parents because their parent did the same thing..look to the government to solve their problems.

Why didn't they turn to family?....hmmmmmm

GaryPDX: Suicidal Writer: What is the negative side?

It removes parental responsibility from the equation. Care to take a wild guess who else liked to control children?

Hmm, you've obviously never taught kids before. Sometimes you have to teach them what their parents might not be teaching them at home.

amo: Hypergeek_1984: If parent's aren't stepping up, then maybe it's time for the schools to become a bit more involved.

If we're going to go this route, then parents also cannot get upset when the schools teach them something they don't necessarily want their children learning.

As a teacher, and a parent...pretty much THIS.

You can't get it both ways: you can't expect me to teach your child the cirriculum I'm hired to teach (whether that be state or private) without also allowing me to teach the child appropriate behaviors to deal with that. I really, really shouldn't HAVE to do that, that should be done at home...but whatever. I have to in order to maintain a learning environment.

Parents are trying to get all of the good stuff without any of the bad stuff. If your child is being disruptive, rude, aggressive, violent or bullying in class...then I expect your support. If yuo're not going to give me that support...then i don't want your kid in my class. It's absolutely that simple.

No other professional occupation deals with as much 'outsider' interference as teaching. A patient can choose to remove themselves from a doctor's care...they CANNOT demand that a doctor provide care to others according to their ideology. A person can choose to avoid engineering that they feel is unsafe, unsound, or otherwise unwise...but they cannot compel the engineers to build bridges according to the publics whim. To suggest either of those things is absolutely absurd. But it happens EVERY SINGLE DAY to teachers.

You don't think teachers deserve the same sort of respect or courtesy as doctors or engineers? Wonderful, I respect your feelings. And I will also point out that there are a wide variety of options for schooling your child outside of the school system. Please avail yourself of them. Because if you want to put a child in my school...then I expect your support.

/rant

coco ebert: GaryPDX: Suicidal Writer: What is the negative side?

It removes parental responsibility from the equation. Care to take a wild guess who else liked to control children?

Hmm, you've obviously never taught kids before. Sometimes you have to teach them what their parents might not be teaching them at home.

I have two great teenage sons. I think I have a level of credibility.

Isn't it true people immediate look to the government to solve their problems?

No. I think parents face several problems, but looking to the government to solve them isn't one of them.

I think parents have been going through an identity crisis since the 60's. I won't disagree with you on the starting point. But I don't think it's because of the hippies. And I don't think it's because they look to the government.

I think it's because they have not prioritized their life properly around their children. On that point, I believe we are in agreement. They focus on living in the "right" neighborhood, finding the "right" school, making sure their child watches the "right" amount of television. In short, they're focused on side issues and environment. They don't spend as much time with their kids as they should, so they mollify themselves by saying, "At least we don't live in xyz part of town."

I also think they look for quick/easy fixes. Or they find it easier to let THAT particular infraction go because they feel guilty about not spending enough time with the child, why fight/argue/work at it? In other words, it's a short-term view that ends up with long-term problems.

I will admit that I, too, am oversimplifying things here. I could go on much longer, but this is an internet forum and soundbites work so much better.

My other question, which I'll assume you are getting to, still stands. If the new parents have only seen how to parent from the current parents, how are they going to learn there's another way? Are they going to magically be endowed with this knowledge or the determination to change?

GaryPDX: That, as far as I can tell, started in the 50-60's. We have 2-3 generations of parents not giving a shiat.

John Dewey: I think parents have been going through an identity crisis since the 60's....I think it's because they have not prioritized their life properly around their children.

Sounds like right about the time families started to need two full-time bread-winners to make ends meet.

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Sounds like right about the time families started to need two full-time bread-winners to make ends meet

I hadn't thought of that. Hmmm....

John Dewey: My other question, which I'll assume you are getting to, still stands. If the new parents have only seen how to parent from the current parents, how are they going to learn there's another way? Are they going to magically be endowed with this knowledge or the determination to change?



There's plenty of opinion debate about what a parent should, and shouldn't, do but society at large bombards them with all of this governmental intrusion crap and marketing BS as something acceptable, even expected. It comes from everywhere and at all ages. We generally agree. It is a societal problem but it's not properly solved with government playing parent. Government should educate people about being parents, not bypassing them.

It's not going to be easy and we may have to deal with very intrusive socialism until people get sick of that nonsense before positive changes can start happening.

LouDobbsAwaaaay:

Sounds like right about the time families started to need two full-time bread-winners to make ends meet.

Or to Keep Up With The Joneses...

GaryPDX: There's plenty of opinion debate about what a parent should, and shouldn't, do but society at large bombards them with all of this governmental intrusion crap and marketing BS as something acceptable, even expected.

I def. agree that the media plays a substantial role in the problems we have. I do wonder, though, what you mean by "governmental intrusion". Perhaps there is something I'm missing.

Kurohone: As a teacher, and a parent...pretty much THIS.

You can't get it both ways: you can't expect me to teach your child the cirriculum I'm hired to teach (whether that be state or private) without also allowing me to teach the child appropriate behaviors to deal with that. I really, really shouldn't HAVE to do that, that should be done at home...but whatever. I have to in order to maintain a learning environment.

Parents are trying to get all of the good stuff without any of the bad stuff. If your child is being disruptive, rude, aggressive, violent or bullying in class...then I expect your support. If yuo're not going to give me that support...then i don't want your kid in my class. It's absolutely that simple.

No other professional occupation deals with as much 'outsider' interference as teaching. A patient can choose to remove themselves from a doctor's care...they CANNOT demand that a doctor provide care to others according to their ideology. A person can choose to avoid engineering that they feel is unsafe, unsound, or otherwise unwise...but they cannot compel the engineers to build bridges according to the publics whim. To suggest either of those things is absolutely absurd. But it happens EVERY SINGLE DAY to teachers.

You don't think teachers deserve the same sort of respect or courtesy as doctors or engineers? Wonderful, I respect your feelings. And I will also point out that there are a wide variety of options for schooling your child outside of the school system. Please avail yourself of them. Because if you want to put a child in my school...then I expect your support.

/rant

You are absolutely entitled to parental support, and cooperation from both them and your students. You should absolutely be the master of your classroom, within reasonable bounds, and you should not have to teach kids the basics. They should already know how to behave when they walk in the room.

If parents choose to abdicate responsibility beyond getting their child dressed and to school, when evolution or sex ed comes up, they have lost their say in how it's taught.

John Dewey: GaryPDX: There's plenty of opinion debate about what a parent should, and shouldn't, do but society at large bombards them with all of this governmental intrusion crap and marketing BS as something acceptable, even expected.

I def. agree that the media plays a substantial role in the problems we have. I do wonder, though, what you mean by "governmental intrusion". Perhaps there is something I'm missing.

All the bleeding heart government entitlements. Oh and in the dating/marriage realm, people are just molded to think it's socially acceptable to pop out a kid, toss them on some daycare rack and go back to being like they were before. It starts at the cradle and people just think that's the way things are done..by and large.

My oldest son is 18 and my youngest is almost 17. I have just over a year before I can even begin to live my life again..that's how I look at it. My needs are way down on the priority list and has been for a long time. My perception is..it'll actually be kinda weird putting myself higher up on the priority list again. It has absolutely nothing to do with status and or keeping up with the Jones.

/I'm rambling now