Coming to terms with my own experience as gifted - Page 3

[clickclackmoo]

This thread is an interesting read.  Not much to add, except that I too have a lot of heartache from my childhood, a lot to do with being gifted + mismatch of parenting and education.  The way I see it, intelligence is just one tool in our metaphorical toolboxes.  Giftedness is like having a big heavy saw or something (whereas the other kids have a childsized one, perhaps), and I want to teach my child to do woodwork with it, saw down a tree if she wants to, or at the very least not drop it on her foot and get hurt.  Good looks are similar, I would say.  DD is a striking child and I do worry about it, whether looks are ultimately as big a part of one's life as intelligence or not.  The reason I worry about it is that she doesn't really enjoy people's attention, doesn't know what to do with it, and she's a girl.  Down the road aways, she will have to deal with this.  I have to think about how to help her be a strong woman, comfortable in her own skin.  

[EdnaMarie]

I have disdain for the notion that having a talent is having a huge burden.

Parenting isn't a walk in the park, period.  All children have to come to grips with their limitations and their talents at some point.  I truly think that being above-average and even exceptional in at least something is better than not being exceptional in anything, so I guess I do think that it's more a parent's baggage, than an objective difficulty children have to face.

I mean... isn't part of parenting teaching kids to go beyond what other people think?  Regardless of whether that's intelligence, glasses, shortness, tallness, red hair, acne, beauty, a foreign accent... or whatever?

It's something all kids have to learn.  The OP's dad never learned that lesson himself, sadly, and put his own bizarre set of values and judgment on her, and that was wrong.  So I can understand that she has to come to terms with this and I'm not belittling her personal experience, which sounds very traumatic.  I can't imagine rejection by a parent.  :(  However, I do not think that it's a COMPLICATED answer, or something that requires extensive navel-gazing for every parent of a gifted child.

Also, I sense disdain here for the very idea that giftedness is sometimes difficult for parent and child. I'm bothered by that. I don't go around telling myself that having a gifted child is like having a child with a terrible chronic illness, but it's not all a walk in the park, either.

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by loraxc On the subject of "Don't emphasize the smarts--emphasize doing good for the world." I agree and I disagree. I think some (many?) gifted kids are going to grow up to want to do things that are pretty much purely intellectual without much do-good application--maybe they are really into physics or linguistics or theoretical math.

yeah. my DH is the gifted one in our little deal, and he's an exec at an aerospace firm. He is totally living his Dharma. People have different roles to play, and his involves generating work and making work happen that supports the economy, that is to say, what he does helps other people have living wages and dental insurance! He also treats the people under him with respect, as true human beings. He's a good guy. But it wouldn't be obvious that what he is doing is "good for the world."

One of our kids is both on the autism spectrum and gifted. I've no idea what she'll end up doing, but I'm sure it won't be something that is obviously a life a service. She has real gifts to bring the world, but extreme limitations in interacting with others.

So yes, I believe that how we treat other people is the highest question as to how we've lived our life, but I don't think that means that our primary *work* must relate to service.

[joensally]

Originally Posted by EdnaMarie 

I have disdain for the notion that having a talent is having a huge burden.

Parenting isn't a walk in the park, period.  All children have to come to grips with their limitations and their talents at some point.  I truly think that being above-average and even exceptional in at least something is better than not being exceptional in anything, so I guess I do think that it's more a parent's baggage, than an objective difficulty children have to face.

I mean... isn't part of parenting teaching kids to go beyond what other people think?  Regardless of whether that's intelligence, glasses, shortness, tallness, red hair, acne, beauty, a foreign accent... or whatever?

It's something all kids have to learn.  The OP's dad never learned that lesson himself, sadly, and put his own bizarre set of values and judgment on her, and that was wrong.  So I can understand that she has to come to terms with this and I'm not belittling her personal experience, which sounds very traumatic.  I can't imagine rejection by a parent.  :(  However, I do not think that it's a COMPLICATED answer, or something that requires extensive navel-gazing for every parent of a gifted child.

Hmmm.  What about the literature that indicates higher incidence of certain things in gifted kids  (intensity, anxiety, sleep issues, hypoglycemia), or that indicates that asynchrony is the norm for gifted kids to a much greater degree than other populations (assuming that asynchrony is problematic)?

I'm genuinely interested in your perspective on this.  I'm struggling with this notion as the intensity, anxiety and sleeplessness of my kids has me on the brink of late and I know that my friends are not dealing with this at near the same level with their kids.  I don't know to what degree it's giftedness or their personalities or environment or what. I struggle with this notion of "the nature of giftedness" I read about in various books on giftedness - is it about being gifted, or just being out of norm, or just odd, or just being human??  Is this "nature of giftedness" simply a construct or can it be objectively described and identified?

I do see it as an objective difficulty that my child faces when her intensity overwhelms her.  Or that she hates school a lot of the time.  Or that she literally can't get to sleep until the wee hours.  Where the line is between this being particular to giftedness or just one variation of the complexity of connected parenting, I don't know.  Not crying in my cups by any means, but some days are pretty hard.

ETA: Mods, lest it be interpreted that I'm debating the definition of giftedness, against forum guidelines, I'm trying to discuss if there is anything inherently different in parenting a gifted child.  Not to create controversy or dissent, but rather as inquiry in pursuit of better understanding to aid my own parenting.
 

Originally Posted by loraxc 

Interesting thread. I am grappling with whether to put DD in a gifted school, and this reminds me of some of my concerns.

On the subject of "Don't emphasize the smarts--emphasize doing good for the world." I agree and I disagree. I think some (many?) gifted kids are going to grow up to want to do things that are pretty much purely intellectual without much do-good application--maybe they are really into physics or linguistics or theoretical math. There isn't much of a service element there, if any. But I would never want to discourage my child from going in that direction. We aren't all naturally inclined towards helping or service, and that's fine, IMO. I mean, of course it's very important to me that my kids be kind and caring, but if that is not their career focus, I'm okay with that. I don't want to devalue intellectual pursuits.

Re-reading my post I think I was over-literal.  I happen to find service to others rewarding, but I don't expect it of my kids professionally.  I do want to raise them with a philosophy that emphasizes connection to others (both at an individual level and as members of the species/culture/community).  Viewing themselves as part of a continuum of humanity to avoid disconnection, despair or alienation.  Interestingly, it's my intellect that I employ in service of others, so I've got it both ways .

[widemouthedfrog]

Yes, not work for work's sake but focusing in support of a personal passion - that's something that we can all get into, no matter what our level of giftedness might be.
That's hard work, but not just jumping-through-hoops hard. It's as hard and as in depth as you want to make it.

Originally Posted by mambera 

Why would you assume we are suggesting work for work's sake?  Obviously the child should be able to choose activities that he/she finds fulfilling.  It is simply a fact that when children are reinforced for their innate intelligence rather than for results that they consciously, intentionally strove to achieve, insecurity is fostered.

http://nymag.com/news/features/27840/

Originally Posted by PreggieUBA2C 

I personally think it is a disservice to a gifted child to require that s/he undertake activities that require trying hard for the sake of requiring him/her to try hard: for what?

[loraxc]

I do wonder if some gifted people are more "the type" to experience issues related to giftedness than others. I have two kids; one has been IDed as gifted and the other is too young to test, but seems very sharp as well. However, the older manifests a LOT of the stereotypical gifted issues and the younger does not. She has a low "emotional IQ" and his is, I think, unusually high (I'm not the only one to think this), which I'm sure contributes, but I don't think that's all of it. If I just had him, I might think that all the "problems of giftedness" stuff was sort of a crock, but I don't have just him.

I was really at my wits' end about DD before figuring out that giftedness was probably contributing to a lot of what was going on with her. When she was 3 and in preschool, the directors requested a conference to suggest that we have her IQ tested to see if it might explain some of her issues. The other possibilities we were looking at at the time were ASD or some kind of emotional disturbance. I'm not at all the only person in this forum to have gone though something like this.

It was such a relief to recognize my child in the descriptions I read, and I still go back to them and reread when feeling worried about her.She is really textbook. I have no idea why DS doesn't manifest the same way. He may be less gifted, but if so, I doubt the difference is dramatic.

[Roar]

Originally Posted by loraxc 
I think some (many?) gifted kids are going to grow up to want to do things that are pretty much purely intellectual without much do-good application--maybe they are really into physics or linguistics or theoretical math. There isn't much of a service element there, if any. But I would never want to discourage my child from going in that direction. We aren't all naturally inclined towards helping or service, and that's fine, IMO. I mean, of course it's very important to me that my kids be kind and caring, but if that is not their career focus, I'm okay with that. I don't want to devalue intellectual pursuits.

I agree and was just about to post something similar. Of course you don't want to raise a kid who is rude or litters or something like that, but it is a perfectly acceptable thing to be a person who likes ideas for the sake of ideas and thinking for the sake of thinking. Our child hears very often from people that he should do something like medical research. Sure, he's really smart, but that doesn't make it something he's interested in and it doesn't make it his idea. He doesn't need to be getting a guilt trip because he's rather focus his energy elsewhere.

[Roar]

Originally Posted by EdnaMarie 

I have disdain for the notion that having a talent is having a huge burden.

If that's what you are hearing the concern about gifted kids to be about I think you are missing the point.

I don't consider it a negative thing or a burden to have a gifted kid. I consider it a gift, as I'm sure I would to parent any other kid. What I recognize though is that ALL kids need to have their different needs identified, recognized, acknowledged and accommodated. If I had a kid who was seven foot tall I wouldn't consider it a burden. I would however consider it vital information to have when picking out clothes and furniture.

[captain optimism]

I can't say whether I was as gifted as some other people on this board, but my family and my teachers identified me that way, and it was not fun. Instead of being interested in what I found interesting and wanting to join me in my world, there was this whole element of distancing. I still sometimes experience it today.

I'm not sure whether everyone finds my son "gifted." I have had parents and teachers say that he is, to me, and this makes me nervous. I am delighted that they see his outrageous, playful creativity and his general thoughtfulness as assets. I don't want these things to turn into a reason to have high expectations of his achievement and to put down what he actually does. Also I want other people to join me in entering into his ideas and interests and not to view him from some kind of remove, as I often felt they viewed me.

So maybe not precisely the same set of issues as the OP. I do agree with the people who are citing the work of Carol Dweck about praising effort vs. inherent intelligence. It's worth reading about her work, for example the summary here.

[MittensKittens]

Originally Posted by Roar 

Originally Posted by EdnaMarie 

I have disdain for the notion that having a talent is having a huge burden.

If that's what you are hearing the concern about gifted kids to be about I think you are missing the point.

I don't consider it a negative thing or a burden to have a gifted kid. I consider it a gift, as I'm sure I would to parent any other kid. What I recognize though is that ALL kids need to have their different needs identified, recognized, acknowledged and accommodated. If I had a kid who was seven foot tall I wouldn't consider it a burden. I would however consider it vital information to have when picking out clothes and furniture.

I agree with you. It's fine to have disdain for the notion that having a talent is a burden. I certainly don't see being the parent of gifted children (not tested yet) as a burden, but I most definitely experienced being a gifted kid as a burden. Not because of having a talent, but because of not being accepted by my peers or by adults, because of having interests (in my case politics and social change) that were not "acceptable" for a young child, and because of feeling inferior. I have no hang-ups about my IQ, but being gifted is about so much more than your IQ, and I think being gifted (really the wrong word!) is "special needs" just as much as being deaf, for instance. Gifted kids deserve to have their needs met just as much as anyone else, and no, I don't subscribe to the notion that everything can be solved with a positive attitude. The school system in no way met my intellectual OR social needs, and I grew up feeling isolated, weird, and inferior  - not superior and talented. Teachers often thought there was something wrong with me, even that I was autistic, and my needs were left unmet. It was only after I finished school that I found out what was "wrong" with me, and that was a huge relief. I don't want that experience for my own children, or for any child. All children deserve to have their needs met. And like you say, all kids deserve to have their needs acknowledged, and also to be accepted for who they are.

I know that is not going to happen in the school system (we live in a post-communist country with a one-size fits all approach), so we're homeschooling.

[MittensKittens]

Originally Posted by clickclackmoo 
 I have to think about how to help her be a strong woman, comfortable in her own skin.  

This!

[EdnaMarie]

If that's what you are hearing the concern about gifted kids to be about I think you are missing the point.

That's what I thought *this thread* was about.

I thought *this thread* was about the value she put on herself, how she was able to make decisions and career choices, and so on.  About what kind of person she became, despite the way her dad treated her, basically as a vehicle for her intellect, which was just wrong.

I didn't think this was about how to find the right school or education, because the right school or challenges are not what is going to help this child be comfortable with herself.  Being comfortable with yourself does not come from being intellectually, physically, or otherwise challenged, and developing self-esteem.  It comes from being part of a community, being needed and having a strong set of values that you know how to implement.

Everything else just sort of hangs on that.  Yes, I was mildly resentful for being held back, and yes, I wanted to go to private school.  Do I feel traumatized by the fact that I didn't get to be challenged intellectually all the time?

NO.

Why?  Because my identity rests on my place in society, knowing that the fact that I didn't get to take the test to get into private school (my mom didn't know about it), that I was discouraged from applying to private colleges (stupid counselor), really was not the end of society.  Because I am able to accept the fact that *it's really not all about me and that's actually a very good thing*.  Because I have been able to achieve a lot for other people, that I might not have been able to otherwise, say, if I'd been enrolled in a PhD program instead of being in the Peace Corps.

And because I am happy with who I am, I don't find it at all agonizing deciding whether or not to go back to school.  Putting it off another year, or not.  My self-worth does not rest on that.

If you keep coming back to how being gifted somehow needs to shape a child's self-image, that it's just so important, I think you are missing the point.  The vital thing is, no single characteristic or talent should be shaping a child's self-image.  They should be focused on what they do on a daily basis, namely for other people, and maintaining a respectful relationship with others.  Not thinking of how they can maximize brain power.  What a shallow existence that would be!

[loraxc]

They should be focused on what they do on a daily basis, namely for other people, and maintaining a respectful relationship with others.  Not thinking of how they can maximize brain power.  What a shallow existence that would be!

You seem to be suggesting a very narrow focus as well. 

I don't expect DD's main daily focus to be what she does for other people. She's 6. Her job is to explore the world and learn and grow. Caring for others is certainly part of what I want her to learn, but the main focus? No. That's a lot to put on the shoulders of a small child.
 

[PreggieUBA2C]

I have often wondered in what way an issue can be distinctly about parenting when considering a gifted child, because every issue *I* personally experience is a gifted issue, even when it's also a parenting one. I think that is largely to do with my own experience being an integrated, whole person with a consistent philosophical underpinning. In this discussion, though, there are multiple integrated, whole people with differing philosophies, and because there are many people involved, I think this actually is distinctly a parenting issue that supercedes the consideration of giftedness (although giftedness obviously affects both the experiences and conclusions of each individual).

There is the philosophical position that requires personal sacrifice for the betterment of all: the greater good. Within this idea of personal sacrifice there is altruism: identified by acts of personal sacrifice that are deemed to be beneficial to others, and while the affect on the individual or group acting altruistically may be considered, it is certainly of lesser value and concern than the "good" accomplished by doing it (back to the greater concept- the greater good).

There are other positions too, one of which is my own, that a person must hold his/her life as the highest value in order to properly order his/her other values. Life is the standard by which all else can be gauged. I value a lot of things, but pertinent (and least complicated) to this discussion, I think, is the value of happiness (not "feeling good" as in hedonism, but rational happiness derived of the pride of accomplishment of one's own work in whatever form, according to one's rationally chosen values). If the pursuit of happiness includes acts of service then, they are good, imo. If those acts are of lower value to me than other values, and I sacrifice my higher values for lower ones, then I not only will not be happy, but I will have missed an obvious reality: I can do everything I want and need to do in my life without sacrifice at all. There simply is no real conflict between needs, and rationally chosen values. I do not sacrifice and require no sacrifice of others. If acts of service are of low value to me, then to replace higher values with acts of service would be very bad, even if others benefit from them.

Honestly though, I think it would be very hard to be a human being, let alone a happy one, with no values pertaining to acts of service- especially as a parent! BUT, I still do not sacrifice and require no sacrifice of my children, and yet we all act lovingly and serve one another enthusiastically because we do it by our own volition, according to our values, and not instead of things we value more, and certainly not instead of supporting our individual needs for healthy life. Acts of service certainly do factor greatly into my life, but they do not supercede my own life, and I do them with true gladness because they accord with my values.

I do not hold that others are ipso facto entitled to my intellect, talents, or acts of whatever sort. These are mine to use as I will. The reality that I am in possession of uncommon intellect, talents, and abilities to act in certain capacities also, does not implicitly demand that I do, neither for my own sake, nor for that of others. I do not have to offer my gifts and nor is anyone entitled to them. It happens that to do so is enjoyable, and life-enhancing to me, so I choose to do so, in ways that accord with my values.

This is the reason why I encourage rationally choosing one's values, and emphasizing the importance of personal integrity (that underlying philosophically-sound structure of values that supports the whole person) while finding no real merit or reason for separating the necessity for effort from the necessity for work from the achievement of goals derived of values. The process of composing "if/then" corollaries solves the problem of improperly taking each step as though it could exist independent of the others, when the focus is on acting according to one's values.

So, to reiterate, this is not really a giftedness issue, but a philosophical one, applied through parenting.

Of course, everyone is free to think and act as s/he chooses (insofar as nobody is coerced or forced, of course), but it is unlikely that the disagreements present in this discussion are going to be resolved without a complete overhaul of the choices of philosophy of each individual. EdnaMarie clearly advocates for personal sacrifice for the greater good- altruism, and has been consistent in accordance with her admitted underlying philosophy/beliefs. Others have expressed that they value personal satisfaction with one's life over, or more than personal sacrifice, and are also presumably consistent in accordance with their philosophy/beliefs. These are fundamentally opposite perspectives and conclusions with wildly different value-ordering, and they cannot be reconciled without significant dis-integration of philosophical understandings and beliefs.

I don't mean to discourage the discussion, but it seems to me that we are at an impasse. There's is just no way that I could be convinced of the merit of self-sacrifice, and likely others have the same conviction about their conclusions- that's why we hold them, right? I can be convinced of something better than what I think through reason, but not likely through disagreements about behaviours, since those are dependent upon philosophical perspectives and I already have one from which to draw, and those philosophies which I have already determined to be unconducive to the formation of correct conclusions are obviously not going to convince me either. If I've already determined the supremacy of my philosophy, there would have to be a very cogent, comprehensive argument to convince me to adopt a different one.

This reminds me of a time when an acquaintance "accused" me of thinking that my conclusion was correct, to which I replied, "Don't you also? Would you hold a conclusion you thought was incorrect?".  Of course, I was and remain open to revision, refinement and all other disciplines of the mind for the sake of personal improvement, and acknowledge when I am unsure of things. But given that I do hold the perspective that I can know things, I do think my perceptions/perspectives are accurate and that the conclusions I draw from them, are correct. Sometimes I am wrong, and when I become aware of that, I align my thoughts with reality, but I do preeminently consider what I conclude to be true, given that I make every attempt to use my perceptive abilities as well as I am able. Many people whole-heartedly disagree with my conclusions given that they do not hold the same perspective, and sometimes they do, but come to different conclusions (and this is an interesting problem for another discussion). And many of them are parenting as well-- children of myriad abilities, capacities, dispositions, etc....

So, how do we, given our various and differing philosophies, raise healthy children, also in consideration of their giftedness? Given that this is a forum for those who accept that definitions inclusive of various expressions of giftedness will not be debated, but supported by those who participate, there must be a way to make this discussion beneficial to each participant in his/her life. I have enjoyed it at the very least. :)

[EdnaMarie]

Quote:Originally Posted by loraxc 

You seem to be suggesting a very narrow focus as well. 

I don't expect DD's main daily focus to be what she does for other people. She's 6. Her job is to explore the world and learn and grow. Caring for others is certainly part of what I want her to learn, but the main focus? No. That's a lot to put on the shoulders of a small child.

I think if you read all of my posts, you will see that it's not very narrow.  I'm talking about raising ethical people that are not self-centered, but rather, other-centered, community-centered.  I do not think that that means thinking about it all day long, but that it requires inculcating a values system that does not allow for navel-gazing about one or another physical trait.

I don't think raising an ethical child at all interferes with exploration of the world.  On the contrary, they are intertwined.  I can't imagine trying to explore the world while my parent was focused primarily on my own intellectual abilities and personal needs.  Part of exploration involves taking responsibility for my part in this world and learning to manage it, does it not?

I guess I see the original post as about a traumatic experience that the OP had, and her difficulty in coming to terms with it and what it meant about her as a person.  And I sympathize with her, because it would have been incredibly hard to go through that, especially when you've been taught your whole life that *your value rests in how others perceive you, and how you measure up to others on one or another test of the intellect*.  And even though you may know, as the OP did, that this is not right (kudos to her for overcoming that in such a brave way, at that age it really is brave), it can be hard to wrap your head around all the implications of what you believe because it's just coming out and you're just kind of learning it.

Whereas her question seems to imply that this is something that stemmed not from her dad's value system, of conditional love and putting an emphasis on appearances, but from her intelligence.

And what I am saying is, re-frame the question.  Regardless of your disability or special ability or super power, if your self-worth rests ultimately in your behavior, in the way you behave towards others with love and respect, and if your family loves you unconditionally because they have the same value system, then this is not something you face.  It is hard to appreciate if you haven't had that kind of upbringing, and God knows we all have our issues and so do our parents, but nothing beats unconditional parental love and a strong values system when it comes to self-satisfaction.  (Ironic, isn't it, that so much of self-satisfaction comes from our relationship with and to others?)

And I find it fascinating that the people who are most insecure about their own upbringing as a gifted child, or unhappy, shall we saw, are the ones advocating for this or that educational system (in general, a few exceptions on this thread, obviously) or approach to giftedness.  Like, my parents pressured me so I will homeschool.

Whereas people who are generally happy with their upbringing all seem to be saying more or less the same thing: love your kid no matter what, teach them to follow their bliss and be kind to others, and it will all work out in the end.  Really.  Even if they don't get into Harvard, and even if they do.  Because unlike what some believe, it's just not about that. <---upon reading this appears to be directed at posters in this thread, and that is not what I intended, I was more thinking of people like the OP's dad...

because of not being accepted by my peers or by adults, because of having interests (in my case politics and social change) that were not "acceptable" for a young child, and because of feeling inferior.

If your parents accepted you for who you were, did you think they were wrong and your teachers were right?  If they listened to you, why did they keep you in that school?

What I'm hearing is not that school, ultimately, was your problem.  What your problem was, was that your parents did not listen to you and either actively or passively reinforced negative judgments of you as a person.  Did your parents ask about your friends?  I know my mom always worried about whether I had friends, to the point that it embarrassed me.  LOL

When I was little, I told people I wanted to be an astronomer.  Without fail, they would smile knowingly.  "An astrologer?  And what sign do you think *I* am?"  And my mom, who cared about me as a person and listened to me and stood up for me, said, "She said ASTRONOMER.  Like a physicist that studies the stars.  She loves to watch Nova."  And they would say, "Oh, wow, good for you."  Then in the eleventh grade I had a teacher that said girls couldn't do science, and I thought, "Screw science, if it doesn't need me, I don't need it," and went in another direction entirely, and my mom said, "I'm so proud of you, that you're doing something for others."  I guess some people would say, she should have sued the school system.  Well, she was a single mom and I didn't tell her about that, and also, she wanted me to make my own decisions.

Because for all her faults, my mom is awesome.  She listened to the books that said not to skip me, but because she did it out of love, it's not a problem between us.  Really.  I can DEAL with that, LOL.  My life is what it is.

Homeschooling, per se, does not solve anything.  A kid could just as easily come here and say, "I felt my parents could never keep up with me.  I felt so weird compared to the other kids in school that were skipping grades and doing these team things.  I wish I could have been left to explore more in the world rather than being under their wings for so long, secluded."  (And yes, I know you go to the museum and have social activities... a kid still might feel that way, there are no guarantees in parenting.)

I just think the focus here is on some magic solution to self-esteem when you feel different, or bored.  Whereas self-esteem and joie de vivre do not come from some tool or method that focuses on a particular part of a child, the Intellect, the Beauty, the Asperger's, the wheelchair, the Down's Syndrome, the Label.  They come from being a whole person in a loving community, no matter who you are.

NOW!!!!  If the OP had asked, "You know, I really always wished I'd finished my PhD, but I didn't because I never learned study skills," my answer would be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

But she didn't.  She was talking about her self-worth because of how her dad treated her, like a way to boost his own ego by winning prizes for him, and when she didn't do that, she felt rejected.  She wondered for a long time what her place was in the world, if she wasn't excelling intellectually.  She had to find her own basis for self-acceptance.

So that is why my answer is what it is.  :shrug

That is not a question about specifically, how to educate a gifted child.  It's a question about how to raise a child that has a robust sense of self-worth and feels confident in her place in the world.

[loraxc]

  Regardless of your disability or special ability or super power, if your self-worth rests ultimately in your behavior, in the way you behave towards others with love and respect, and if your family loves you unconditionally because they have the same value system, then this is not something you face.  It is hard to appreciate if you haven't had that kind of upbringing, and God knows we all have our issues and so do our parents, but nothing beats unconditional parental love and a strong values system when it comes to self-satisfaction.  (

But I'm not sure it's possible to create, through my parenting, a child whose self-worth rests in the way she behaves towards others.  I don't believe it's my job to mold my children so thoroughly that I choose and determine the basis of their self-worth. Moreover, I'm not sure I want to.

I do a lot of things that serve the world myself, but the deepest element of my own core identity is my creative identity, which does not particularly serve the world, especially since much of my art is seen only by me or a few other people. But if we want to talk about where I get self-satisfaction--sure, I got some from organizing a yard sale for charity recently, but that was nothing like the deep creative bliss I recently felt from writing a poem I thought was excellent.

[EVC]

This thread has caused me to do a bit of soul searching... 

First, I went to a gifted school from grades 4 - 12. It was an excellent environment, pretty much ideal--there was no shortage of challenge and a lot freedom to choose courses you were interested in. There was also a wide range of gifted: you had to test at a minimum IQ of 132 to get in, but certainly there were some kids well beyond that. And it was, as I said, a very good environment for gifted kids with high standards and high expectation (the school's motto is "A Tradition of Excellence" and that's what they believed in). Thanks to Facebook, I've been able to catch up with many of my former classmates, and you know what? VERY few have "big, impressive jobs." They're not all doctors, lawyers, and academics. Far from it. Many now hold quite mundane jobs, but are more or less happy in their lives. It's interesting, though--maybe not what one might expect. A number of my friends attended "big, important universities" and some just burned out on it. For some, college became a "reality check"--they realized they weren't all that special and unique after all (and the "special, unique" message had been constant at our school). It was a disappointment that suddenly they weren't by far and away the BEST, the SMARTEST. There saw that there were actually a number of other students who just as smart, talented, and some cases, more gifted and skilled. And some of my friends never recovered from having their egos bruised. 

I had a somewhat different experience. In high school I learned "the game" of education. I learned to play the game well, very well. I went to college, was in the honors program, got numerous awards, scholarships, was a Rhodes Scholarship finalist at one point, and graduated magna cum laude. Not because I was the best and brightest, but because I had learned to play the game. Success came easily for me at college. I could write a paper half asleep and know with compete certainty that I would get an A, if not an A+. I could take an exam without studying, and the same. It was easy. Too easy. And it left me feeling utterly empty. Success without work is a hollow success at best. This is what caused my crisis. I felt like a fraud and intellectual charlatan.

This is where EdnaMarie's posts really resonate with me. At my lowest point of emptiness, what reconnected and restabilized me was doing community service. My university was located near a very low income, "rough" neighbor where they needed all the community volunteers they could get. I started working with kids from a local high school, then later with a faith-based charity. And it MEANT something. It meant far more than all of the A's, and all of the praise from my professors and advisors. LOL, and like EdnaMarie, I ended up in the Peace Corps. 

After Peace Corps, I went to graduate school at a "big, impressive" university, one of the most selective, intense, competitive programs in the country. And I fell back on my old habits of "playing the game." I was still really good at it. I was awarded an MA with distinction. And I felt like a whore. Intellectually, I was. And all success now felt not only empty, but somehow tainted. 

I don't really know where I'm going with all of this. Maybe I just wanted to say that sometimes one of the problems of being gifted is that it can allow you to skate through life without as much effort. Success is often not hard won. And as a result, can leave you with a sense of emptiness. There IS something about hard word that gives far more of a sense of accomplishment than innate ability. And for gifted kids for whom school comes easily, there just has to be more. Coupling that with the experiences of my friends who became disillusioned by the fact that ultimately they weren't as special (intellectually, academically) as they had always been told--well, once again, there just has to be more. So I think I am agreeing with EdnaMarie :) 

[EVC]

Ah, one last "cheesy" moment. During college, in the depths of emptiness, I often thought of these words (from Evita--I went through a whole Broadway musical phase, but that's another story):

"High flying, adored/ I hope you come to terms with boredom/ So famous so easily, so soon It's not the wisest thing to be /You won't care if they love you /It's been done before/You'll despair if they hate you /You'll be drained of all energy/ All the young who've made it would agree"

Silly, but this is really how I felt. Everything came too easily--I took success for granted. It lost all meaning. And yet if I ever felt any failure, I would fall into the despair of an identity crisis, because who was I then? 

Anyway, I guess this is just my thinking aloud and when I come to my senses I will delete it all ;)

[mambera]

Originally Posted by EVC 

For some, college became a "reality check"--they realized they weren't all that special and unique after all (and the "special, unique" message had been constant at our school). It was a disappointment that suddenly they weren't by far and away the BEST, the SMARTEST. There saw that there were actually a number of other students who just as smart, talented, and some cases, more gifted and skilled. And some of my friends never recovered from having their egos bruised.

That's interesting.  I had the opposite experience.  It felt absolutely wonderful and freeing to me to be with intellectual peers (briefly when I attended a gifted magnet school as a child, and then again when I went to college and grad school after standard public schooling) rather than people who thought I was some kind of freak. 

 There IS something about hard word that gives far more of a sense of accomplishment than innate ability. And for gifted kids for whom school comes easily, there just has to be more. Coupling that with the experiences of my friends who became disillusioned by the fact that ultimately they weren't as special (intellectually, academically) as they had always been told--well, once again, there just has to be more. So I think I am agreeing with EdnaMarie :) 

 Interesting.  I think I actually agree with PreggieUBA2C that I don't necessarily take more pride in something I worked hard for.  I worked incredibly hard on my PhD research and it was meaningless.  I'm just bitter and angry about having wasted my time with it.  On the other hand I feel really good about my paintings and drawings, which always came quite easily and naturally to me and which never seemed like work at all.

But I do think that it is damaging to believe that innate talent is more meaningful than will, intention, and directed effort, because it leads to fearfulness and stagnation rather than exploration and creativity. 

[EVC]

I think I actually agree with PreggieUBA2C that I don't necessarily take more pride in something I worked hard for.

 

I don't know if it is even pride per se. Just a sense of accomplishment, a sense of having DONE something. Perhaps because you more acutely feel the process, rather than the result. With easy success, there is only the result. There is little if any process. When you really work hard for success, there is a process (in addition to a pleasing result). Maybe that's it. At least for me.

On the other hand I feel really good about my paintings and drawings, which always came quite easily and naturally to me and which never seemed like work at all.

Perhaps this is along the same lines, in the sense that likely you feel process (which I imagine is generally true in creative pursuits--creativity is an active process). I don't know. But I would also think that this would be like the "something more" to which I referred. You found the "something more". And I think that is key to creating balance and a sense of true worth beyond a dependency on external praise for "giftedness" and societal measures of "success."