Radical Unschooling and Self-Regulation for 3yo - Page 2

[4evermom]

Some of the issues are why is the child's priority less important than the parent's? Why is having ice cream less important than having a gallon of milk or a chicken? My ds is a vegetarian. He sees no reason for us to buy meat. He doesn't drink milk, either, though he might eat a little ice cream from time to time. He'd rather money be spent on other things than clothes (beyond a set to wear and a set to wash). He has his priorities that have as much worth as mine and dh's. We find a compromise.

Another issue is sibling harmony, as another poster pointed out. You don't want to set up kids so one has power over the other by possessing something rare (the last popsicle). If one child likes popsicles less, why does she get as many as the one who likes them more? I'm not saying the one who delays gratification and saves doesn't like the popsicles as much, but surely that is sometimes the case. Then there is the developmental place of each child. Some come to the ability to delay gratification at a later age. Is it right to let that child be miserable because they don't have the same maturity as their sibling?

I think that feeling that life is full of scarcity is a mindset for most people. It's like whether you think of your cup being half empty or half full. And, yes, we're a low income family barely scraping by. So I'm not saying that coming from a place of financial comfort, lol. I'd like to do what I can so that ds values what he has rather than thinks about what he doesn't have. If it is as simple as buying ice cream instead of chicken thighs or making home made popsicles, I'll do it. If he has more complicated wants, I can help him learn to be resourceful and make them happen in other ways without just saying "No, we can't afford it." At the very least, he feels he is respected and his values are not ridiculed or considered worthless.

[TzippityDoulah]

for the record i just don't agree. regardless of the label you give it, i think the logic is seriously flawed as far as the ice cream/scarcity issue. and I will leave it at that. that just isn't my impression of RU or any of my RU friends.
but a any rate I'll keep my opinions to myself on the subject just b/c i realize the poster wanted RU opinions and not non-RU opinions. I would hate it if a public schooler gave me homeschool advise. (even if she was right lol) so I'll leave it at that )

(as for 4evermom, thank you SO much for your unschooling help!! please don't take my opinion to mean I am not grateful or appreciative, b/c I truly am!! )

[4evermom]

It's fine, no offense taken. Unschooling has such a broad range and I'm sure my ds's particular temperament has strongly influenced my parenting and led me towards the more RU end of the spectrum. I don't kid myself that I'd do things the same way if he were less challenging. I meant to add to my last post that another issue is avoiding power struggles. I have a ds where everything and anything can become a power struggle at the drop of a hat. It's best for our relationship to not worry about the more minor issues. From a good solid relationship built on respect, everything else flows.

[SagMom]

Originally Posted by HennyPenny

it seems like by trying to stop her tantrum by offering her more of what she wants you're not helping, you're interfering with the natural way we learn. if you have no more ice cream and no more money to buy ice cream, what is the point in scrapping more money together just to stop her from being angry?.

In my mind, RU is about learning through real life experience, but it's also about questioning things and finding creative solutions. It's not "just to stop her from crying," it's to show that there are multiple solutions to problems and that we often don't have to just suffer through but can change things so that everyone is happy.

Originally Posted by HennyPenny

you don't always get things just b/c you want them.

I've heard this argument before, but I just don't understand it. I think it would be great if everyone could get what they want. (I'm not just talking about material things.) I don't see any harm at all in trying for that. There are plenty of times when things are out of our control (we want someone else to act a certain way, or we want it to stop raining or whatever) but I think that brainstorming and problem solving skills are really good things to have. Maybe it starts with solving the "we're out of ice cream" problem but it can go on to the "I hate my job" problem.

I've seen too many people sit around being miserable without even TRYING to make changes that would bring them joy.

[mammal_mama]

Originally Posted by SagMom

In my mind, RU is about learning through real life experience, but it's also about questioning things and finding creative solutions. It's not "just to stop her from crying," it's to show that there are multiple solutions to problems and that we often don't have to just suffer through but can change things so that everyone is happy.

Yes, that's how I see it, too!

[mammal_mama]

Originally Posted by 4evermom

Is it right to let that child be miserable because they don't have the same maturity as their sibling?

Great point!

I think that feeling that life is full of scarcity is a mindset for most people.

Yes, and I think growing up with this feeling can often lead to a person going to one of 2 extremes: either becoming a hoarder, or going through everything as fast as you get it, 'cause you never know when you'll get more, so you might as well have fun now.

I don't think either extreme is healthy -- I'm a rapid consumer, who can easily go through a bag of chips or a carton of ice cream in one day, and I know that's not healthy.

Also, even though I've seen at least one hoarder who managed to accumulate quite a bit of wealth in her lifetime, hoarding doesn't seem healthy, either, because I've yet to see a hoarder who was able to avoid the pitfall of critiquing and badmouthing others who aren't as self-controlled with their money and other resources.

It seems like many (though probably not all) hoarders get their pleasure from having more than everyone else ... i.e. making your ice cream cone last longer than everyone else's, so that you've still got a ton after your younger siblings have all spilled or finished theirs, and then you can finish as they all hungrily watch.

And I didn't grow up in a poor family! We always had enough to eat: My mother just didn't think it was appropriate to have treats on hand for everyday use. We got chips or sweets on special occasions only.

So whenever I got some junk food, I'd literally gorge myself. And I was pretty obnoxious about begging for junk food when I saw it in my friends' homes.

When I started getting my own spending money, guess where it all went? When I got cash for babysitting on a weekend, I'd usually gone through it in a day or so, buying chips or reeses peanut butter cups to eat as I walked home from school the following week.

I want something better for my kids -- better than gorging themselves when they have the chance, 'cause they never know when they'll get more, and also better than hoarding it all up, so that they can bring it out and enjoy it in front of everyone else after they've used theirs up.

I will say that even though my 8yo gets pleasure out of saving things up, she certainly isn't intentionally enjoying her "stash" at others' expense. She enjoys her stash privately -- unless she has enough to share, and wants to share.

So it looks like we're avoiding the hoarding-extreme, at least.

[SundayCrepes]

I've only read some of the replies, so sorry if this is repeat info.

I grew up in a house with unlimited junk food and indulged non-stop. I still fight this issue constantly. So, always having treats in the house can be problematic,

As far as making your own treats. Did anyone suggest yogurt popsicles?
i buy fruit sweetened yogurt in big tubs. I don't care how many he eats because it's reasonably healthy.

[catballou24]

we make smoothie popsycles out of frozen organic fruit, organic yogurt, hemp protien powder, powdered greens, flax seed oil and almond milk. the girls can't get enough of them and i feel totally happy letting them indulge because i know they aren't getting any hfcs, tons of refined sugar, etc...we are on a very limited budget, get food stamps, etc...

just another suggestion..

[SundayCrepes]

Reading more replies. Interesting thread. However, my 8 week old wants to play, so no time for philosophy, just a suggestion.

How about asking the 8 year old for solutions. The three year old is probably too young for that, but maybe the 8 year old can come up with an idea. It seems the problem is not about scarcity but about sharing in the long-term versus breaking the popsicle in 2 and eating both pieces now. Maybe she (I think she) would prefer a different treat that is less appealing to the 3 year old. One box ice cream for 3 year old, one box of something else for 8 year old. Or whatever an 8 year old can think of.

By the way, have you ever had chocolate yogurt? Since chocolate seems to be a theme here, I'd say give it a try. I don't buy it because it tastes too good and, as I said in prior post, I still have trouble with food stuff. But I bet chocolate yogurt popsicles would be pretty dang good. And if you get the small popsicle makers at the dollar store, there is a bit of "portion-control."

[mammal_mama]

Originally Posted by mybabysmama

By the way, have you ever had chocolate yogurt? Since chocolate seems to be a theme here, I'd say give it a try. I don't buy it because it tastes too good and, as I said in prior post, I still have trouble with food stuff. But I bet chocolate yogurt popsicles would be pretty dang good. And if you get the small popsicle makers at the dollar store, there is a bit of "portion-control."

Great idea! I think we'll do that. I also like the idea of getting ideas from my 8yo!

Thanks, everyone!

[SundayCrepes]

Now that both kids are asleep I've read the thread and can play philosophy.

I think I define RU a bit differently than others. I think unschooling is a lifestyle that is in place 24/7. So to say that RU is about more than schooling doesn't make sense to me since that's what I think unschooling is about in general.

I think I define RU as how far you take the child-led scenario.

I believe that my four plus decades of living have taught me a few things more than my kids. Sometimes I can see the choices they're making aren't going anywhere pretty, so I put artificial rules in place so they can learn the lessons I want them to learn.

For example, we gave the older batch of kids an allowance. (They're 17 and 19 now.) We made them put half into long-term savings. The rest they could do whatever they wanted with. Now, long-term money could be spent on pretty much anything, but they had to plan it for awhile. We wanted them to learn there were times that spontaneous spending was fine, but we also wanted them to learn about saving for a rainy day.

When our daughter was 7 or so she said she wanted to go into a store and buy something. We asked her what. She didn't know. She just wanted to buy something. That doesn't work for us. I know some here will disagree. This is why I am saying we are not RU. Our rule for her, and her alone, changed. She could spend her short-term allowance on anything after a 2 day wait. We told her we would take her back to any store to buy anything she wanted if she asked us again in 2 days. In all the years we did this, she only asked twice. Given how freely my husband's ex-wife spent money (and went into debt,) we wanted our daughter to learn a different lesson than what she saw at the other house.

So, we are unschooling 24/7, but we are not radical unschooling because we put more limits and give more guidance than I think most RU families do.

And now the 2 year old and 8 week old are both awake and my philosophising must wait.

[PreggieUBA2C]

Originally Posted by 4evermom

Some of the issues are why is the child's priority less important than the parent's? Why is having ice cream less important than having a gallon of milk or a chicken?

This is an interesting concept. It does really come down to values, doesn't it? If we accept all values as equal, then this poses a dilemma most especially for the poor. I value the chicken over the ice cream because it actually nourishes, and while I also think food should be enjoyable, and even frivolous at times, when I only have $10 to spend, I choose nourishment over frivolity. This is tied to my understanding of how the human body works and the respective results of eating either roast chicken or ice cream for dinner. When there is no possibility of choosing both, how does one decide which is most beneficial? Is it acceptable to weigh the possible outcomes associated with each option? Does this method have to be agreed upon? What about the rest of the family? If we buy the ice cream, both me and the baby won't have enough to eat because I cannot eat that and will not feed that to an infant.

Our very impulsive, live-in-the-moment (which is beautiful) ds2 would choose the ice cream and not even be able to process the consequences even if they were clearly explained- he is highly sensory oriented- but ds1 would and would be very upset about ds2's choice. Here is where ru becomes very difficult for me. If I did have a larger food budget, I would have no problem sharing the decision-making with our dc, because regardless of what they choose, I would still be able to prepare healthy meals from at least what I chose, and there cannot be compromises with what I buy now because I buy the most basic, whole, unprocessed foods available and any switch means not making the food stretch to the next shopping trip. I do share non-judgmental information about how food is brought to the table, and all three of our more conversational boys (read: not the baby), choose organic, local, pastured, raw, and naturally sweetened foods on their own most times. They have had the experience of eating whatever they want at potlucks and parties, and at least ds1 has felt the effects severely, which has informed his ability to regulate himself.

I think RU+poverty+many children= unique challenges and compromises of over-arching values at least at times and seasons. I do want to confidently hand over the control I have over food selection at present, but to do so would mean fasting unintentionally, and our dc are too young to cope/benefit from fasting, and I am nursing an infant, so food-fasting is out.

My hope is that both issues are resolved over time- both the scarcity of resources for food (we hope to grow most of our own and barter with local farmers for the rest, beginning to phase this in next growing season) and the, imo, preferable method of decision-making that would allow for compromise while still meeting everyone's needs.

If he has more complicated wants, I can help him learn to be resourceful and make them happen in other ways without just saying "No, we can't afford it." At the very least, he feels he is respected and his values are not ridiculed or considered worthless.

I absolutely do this. I don't tell them that their desires are less valued than mine. I patiently explain most of my reasons (not the poverty part), and it has been extremely rare for them to insist upon something else; however, the reality is that regardless of how willing they end up being after discussion, I would not be willing to buy ice cream instead of a chicken. I think they probably know this, even though I've never had to be explicit about that (children understand so much of what isn't said).

So in honesty, I am not agreeing to accepting their values as equal to mine in this area of our life. Now if the decision involved where we go for leisure, which physical activity they want to participate in, which sweatshirt they prefer, which toy or which treat we would buy, then I would have no issue with total consensual decision-making, even where I do have an interest and it isn't just token decisions just so they'll feel important (they catch onto that sort of manipulation; I've seen them become very upset about others trying to pass that over on them before).

Anyway, I do think that RU or CL in our home is somewhat distorted from our goal right now, and it is in large part to do with the size of our family in relation to our financial resources to meet the basic needs of everyone in our home. I feel better about this when I think of the majority of families around the world not having the privilege of deciding which is more important- chicken or ice cream, and how that decision might be made. I am very grateful for what we have, and feel very privileged to be able to explain to my dc why I chose to serve an organic, pastured chicken tonight for dinner, as autocratic as that decision was. That's as good as it gets for now.

[SagMom]

I think I define RU a bit differently than others. I think unschooling is a lifestyle that is in place 24/7. So to say that RU is about more than schooling doesn't make sense to me since that's what I think unschooling is about in general.

I do agree with you that unschooling is a lifestyle. I don't separate our unschooling from the rest of how we live.

Originally Posted by mybabysmama

I believe that my four plus decades of living have taught me a few things more than my kids. Sometimes I can see the choices they're making aren't going anywhere pretty, so I put artificial rules in place so they can learn the lessons I want them to learn.

We differ here. While I've lived longer and had more experiences, they don't always apply to my children's lives because my children are not me. Something that *I* think is dangerous might not be for them because they have different abiltities. Something that I think is going to end badly might be worth the experience to them, or they might not define "badly" the same way I do. I do still share my opinions with them, and they consider my ideas though. Sometimes they change course because of what I've said, other times they go ahead with their plans.

My oldest two will sometimes give me advice (which I'm free to take or leave, as they're not out to try and teach me a lesson) and it's interesting when the tables are turned.

[4evermom]

Originally Posted by PreggieUBA2C

This is an interesting concept. It does really come down to values, doesn't it? If we accept all values as equal, then this poses a dilemma most especially for the poor. I value the chicken over the ice cream because it actually nourishes

But ice cream is high in protein, low glycemic index, has the fat and calories a growing child needs, and doesn't involve killing!

Originally Posted by PreggieUBA2C

If we buy the ice cream, both me and the baby won't have enough to eat because I cannot eat that and will not feed that to an infant.

And if I buy chicken over ice cream, I have something ds can not and will not eat. Hard to explain to someone who is a vegetarian why meat should be a priority over ice cream.

So we compromise. I get the small amount of meat that I stretch in meals for dh, feed ds what he finds acceptable (vegetarian with sensory issues) while encouraging him to try new things when he is is a good mood for that. And I eat whatever I eat (leftovers, the piece of fruit everyone is avoiding because it has a spot, etc).

[OrganicSister]

Originally Posted by mybabysmama

So, we are unschooling 24/7, but we are not radical unschooling because we put more limits and give more guidance than I think most RU families do.

This statement sorta bothers me. I think it feeds a stereotype that's out there. I don't think any RU aren't giving guidance. I think from outside of our house it may seem that way. But in fact RU are usually guiding much more than most other parents. (Of course there are always exceptions.)

I may not have limits, but guidance is abundant. However, I don't guide someone down a path by pushing them. I walk and allow them to follow...or sometimes not.

Our relationship with our son is based on mutual trust. We discuss and problem-solve and question each other; we give advice and model. What is lacking and why many people say RU don't give guidance is the lack of coercion. In the end (unless he is infringing on the rights of others) he may take our view and his view and others view and decide for himself the right way to go for him.

For example: When it comes to his allowance, that is *his* money. I would be infringing on his rights if I told him how he could or couldn't manage it. I do however, share my philosophies, discuss the benefits and model what I believe to be healthy and balanced actions in regards to money.

At 9 years old, he now has a very healthy view of it. He's learned early thru trial and error at a young age (when the consequences are very minimal) that spending it all at once really sucks when you see something you want later. Currently he's got $120 and is working to save up over $100 more for something we can't afford to buy ourselves (Nintendo Wii).

If we had put limits on how he can and can't spend, he never would have come to truly understand budgeting and saving. Instead it would have been a forced limitation that could have potentially led to disasterous results when he got out on his own and no longer had arbitrary rules holding him in bounds.

I'm using allowance as the example but my point is, I have no more right to infringe on his will than he has to infringe on another person's will. I think that teaches him to use his power over someone smaller than him.

That doesn't mean we lack guidance. We just lack the coercion people seem to think accompanies (or should accompany) it.

[caspian's mama]

Originally Posted by 4evermom

But ice cream is high in protein, low glycemic index, has the fat and calories a growing child needs, and doesn't involve killing!

today's hippy propaganda brought to you by 4evermom.

[PreggieUBA2C]

Originally Posted by 4evermom

But ice cream is high in protein, low glycemic index, has the fat and calories a growing child needs, and doesn't involve killing!

I have never seen ice cream with a low glycemic index from a store- ever- unless it is artificially sweetened with something even worse than refined sugar such as sucralose or aspartame. It also usually contains loads of preservatives, artificial flavouring, colours, modified milk ingredients, etc... (none of which does my organic chicken contain).

It also came from over-milked cows who are likely suffering serious and painful infections and illnesses, who are stuffed into such small quarters that they cannot help but trample one another, who are tattooed, branded, otherwise treated roughly, hooked up to machines at least twice per day while being confined to cold metal stalls, but whose milk is used anyway, and used to make ice cream.

I would think that if killing a pasture-fed, free-range, happy chicken for supper is of concern to a vegetarian, so might be the torture the cows endure to bring us ice cream, no?

Organic ice cream costs a lot more than my organic chicken, so again, it isn't an option- and it would still contain lots of sugar, albeit organic, but still empty calories.

If I made it myself, it would be goat milk or cow milk, but from my own animal, treated lovingly and respectfully, gently milked once per day, allowed to keep her calf/kid with her, etc... The Massai people do/did this, and they have/had happy, healthy cows that live/d with their respective herds, not penned on a cement floor of an over-stuffed, manure-filled barn-like building with too many lights on all day and night.

Fwiw, I ate the most delicious ice cream I've ever had while in Cuba, where the cows that were milked for it were allowed to roam vast pastures, were milked once per day, ate only grass and fed some organic grain, and the ice cream was sweetened with natural pineapple juice and milled coconut- also organic. Oh, and the cream was raw. It was soooooo yummy!

If we had access to that ice cream, then I wouldn't have a problem with serving that instead of chicken; then it really would be nourishing!

[4evermom]

Originally Posted by PreggieUBA2C

I have never seen ice cream with a low glycemic index from a store- ever- unless it is artificially sweetened with something even worse than refined sugar such as sucralose or aspartame. It also usually contains loads of preservatives, artificial flavouring, colours, modified milk ingredients, etc... (none of which does my organic chicken contain).

Regular ice cream has a glycemic index of 60 and lowfat has one of 50. 60 is "medium" and 50 is considered "low". Better than many foods and on par with most fruits, canned beans/soups, mac and cheese, etc.

My son's knowledge of animal cruelty hasn't yet expanded to how dairy animals are treated yet. I'm not going to enlighten him about it the same way I don't tell him all the gristly details of wars or local murders. If he decides to be vegan, I'll prepare him vegan foods. Or send him to eat at his vegan Grandma's, lol.

[4evermom]

Originally Posted by caspian's mama

today's hippy propaganda brought to you by 4evermom.

::
Those are from ds, except the third one.

[PreggieUBA2C]

Originally Posted by 4evermom

Regular ice cream has a glycemic index of 60 and lowfat has one of 50. 60 is "medium" and 50 is considered "low". Better than many foods and on par with most fruits, canned beans/soups, mac and cheese, etc.

Yes, and chocolate bars and potato chips are 'low' too, but generally understood, like conventional ice cream, to be of little to no nutritional value, and actually take more from the body than they add in nourishment. Glycemic index is a poor exclusive standard for choosing foods, imo. There is no way that conventional ice cream is 'on par' with any natural food such as the fruit you mentioned, unless the standard you use has nothing to do with why we eat in the first place- for nourishment. Obviously a pound of ice cream is the 'on par' with a pound of apricots, or rocks for that matter, if the standard by which they are being measured is weight; and if the standard is glycemic index, then there is no difference if you ate chocolate bars every night for supper.

In terms of what we serve for supper, though, my choices have to come with more compelling reasoning than that- mainly that with our limited budget, I must serve the most nourishing food available to us, and equally as important, lest I be considered a 'food puritan,' it must taste very yummy too- or who will eat?

I hope this isn't upsetting you; I'm enjoying the bantering. Let me know if it's not enjoyable to you; if it isn't, I am very willing to give up this line of implicit interrogation

Originally Posted by 4evermom

My son's knowledge of animal cruelty hasn't yet expanded to how dairy animals are treated yet. I'm not going to enlighten him about it the same way I don't tell him all the gristly details of wars or local murders. If he decides to be vegan, I'll prepare him vegan foods. Or send him to eat at his vegan Grandma's, lol.

I am going to guess then, that his aversion to eating animals came from the obvious- that if he's eating a chicken, it is dead, and was therefore killed.

Otherwise, because I do not have an aversion to eating humanely farmed or wild caught animal meat, I don't see the value in choosing a (far) less nutritious food simply because it didn't involve killing an animal.

Let me know if you're comfortable; I'm not intending conflict. You're son's response was