I am in unique position as a parent. We have a 26 year old, 8 year old and 3 year old. We never tried to stop having kids, but all of the sudden we found ourselves pregnant when the oldest was 18. Then, a complete surprise when the last one came along.
When the 26 year old was born I was hyperfocused on getting her involved in everything. We signed her up for tons of stuff, exposed her to many things and we were continually going. I coached her in soccer and basketball, my wife taught her things like sewing and home maintenance. She's now an RN and working in a hospital.
Sounds good, right?
In our rush to expose her to so much, we overlooked the simple premise that she should do what interests her. She didn't graduate from college until 25 due to her inability to stick with things. I am so proud of her since she is the most caring person I know, but part of me knows we failed her by forcing her into so many different activities through her childhood. She felt she could try something and quit, try something else, quit. Rinse. Repeat.
Our youngest 2 kids aren't forced to do things they don't want to do. We ask them if there is interest and if there is we sign them up. If not, we don't. We've eliminated TV and limit kindle screen time and spend so much more time with them than we did the oldest. Honestly, I don't know if there are differences yet, but I do know the younger kids seem to find more things to do on their own.
Part of me thinks it might depend on the kid, but I am convinced parents forcing their children into so many activities hinders them in the long run.
I also suffer from an inability to stick with things, but that has nothing to do with being overexposed. We were poor, so I did very few activities. It's entirely possible it's nothing to do with you, but just her personality.
> If you don't start playing soccer really young, you will never be able to catch up to someone who did.
And if your child hates soccer? Their ability will only really matter if they want to turn it into a career.
> A child can easily become fluent in two languages if they're immersed from a young age.
Which, if not used, is lost to the years. My mother could speak Serbian when she was young, because she was exposed to it. She can't anymore; hasn't been able to for years. I learned German when I was young, but don't recall a single thing now. Again, unless you want to live in a country where that language is prevalent, the long term value is rather low.
> It would be shame to waste potential.
IMO, it would be a greater shame to shape the child in your image for them, instead of into the person they want to become.
In my experience, social skills, a good sense of self, and a broad educational background have served me better in adulthood than my years spent swimming ever did. If anything, my parents focus on me being a swimmer (which provided a social venue for them) held me back from developing more skills I could have used once I became an adult.
>If you don't start playing soccer really young, you will never be able to catch up to someone who did.
Oh, the humanity. They would then grow on to be adults who can't play soccer well, and that's like a career suicide. /s
Young kids also have another immense advantage that they'll quickly lose: being kids. Burdening with tons of BS activities and responsibilities will steal time from their childhood and playing, and wont even let them discover the activities and things they do like for themselves.
> If you don't start playing soccer really young, you will never be able to catch up to someone who did.
Why would they need to catch up to anyone? I'd rather have my child love the game or hobby than cram every waking moment into some activity. The ability to hear yourself think and actively listen to others is more important imho. There is so much noise in US culture telling kids who they should measure up to. As a parent I feel I need to be the counter balance to those messages.
There are also plenty of examples of professional sports players who started in their teens. "Google <sports league> late start."
> If you don't start playing soccer really young, you will never be able to catch up to someone who did.
I went to a school that had two hours of compulsory sport five days a week.
The end result of this was that it taught me to loathe and avoid sport, exercise and most forms of competition, which has resulted in health and social issues I've been having to cope with for the rest of my life.
I think the key is critically examining the modern claim that doing anything less than 3 activities and 2 foreign languages is "wasted potential". Maybe to spend a childhood so focused on pursuit and less on the journey is the waste?
I recently listened to a Freakonomics podcast called "how to become great at anything". They actually contradict what you are saying.
With the right training you can become really good, of course natural talent adds an edge...
They took some middle aged psychologist who dreamed about signing liked Adel, she was horrible!
The she got a teacher that gave her singing lessons. After one year she was singing like Adel. She released singles that gained some traction as well.
The important point was how you learn. Good teachers and techniques and not only 10,000 hours.
You make some valid points but there is only so many things you can do with a kid. How do you know they will become the next Pele? Sure you can send them to soccer at age 3 but then what if they could become the next Frank Sinatra ? Oh, fine lets get them enrolled in music. See the pattern ? By the time they have 5-6 activities that they are forced into, you don't necessarily know what they actually want and perhaps they don't want any of it. At what point do you stop ? That is the dilemma of fast parenting.
Learning a second language once you're past 20 is hard.
I don't buy this, at least in terms of kids "learn faster".
Adults have the benefit of both motivation and 20 (or more) years of communication experience, same as how a senior programmer with 20 years under their belt wouldn't find it hard to add another ML-dialect to their tool-belt vs a high-school grad who is learning their first functional language. If anything is "hard" about learning a language as an adult it's the time and priority shift required for immersion.
Now soccer, yea I'll give you that one. Or Piano, or whatever other skill where the compound benefit of repeated fine-motor skill practice often pays off.
My wife and I argue over this all the time. She wants the kids to enroll in soccer, swimming and what not, all at the ripe age of 2+. I have been like "whats the hurry. Let them grow up naturally and we can always do those things". I guess it is a difficult topic but there is never really a right answer.
I put swimming lessons in a different category than other activities, because being able to swim can save you from drowning. (Whether 2 is the right age for your kid, I don't know. But I'd like to see all kids get them at some point. I got them in elementary school, during the school day, and I think that was a fantastic use of tax dollars and school time.)
My wife and I were not big activity pushers. Besides the swimming lessons that I insisted on for safety reasons, our kid did some gymnastics, and some music lessons. Didn't really like either, and we let her stop doing both.
My wife is the same way, and so the agreement we have is only a single activity/class/camp at a time. You can play soccer in spring, but not baseball, for example. The child gets to pick which activity they choose. For our younger child the conversations are simpler "would you like to take an art class or a dancing class" but still let the kid pick.
Moreover what your full-grown kid would do at school, if you already taught him reading, counting, talking in foreign languages, practicing yoga and kung fu and playing the violin?
My uni physics professor had similar fears about his child, so he didn't teach him as much as he could have. I'm curious to hear from other parents on HN about this. It seems like a valid concern. At the same time, I didn't enjoy the traditional school system at all, and I'm glad that there are alternative schools where a child can learn at the speed he wants, whether fast or slow.
I have two children and I am now a grandparent. I have to agree that there is no hurry. Too often parents get caught up in comparing their children to the "Norm". Truth is that they all have their own schedule, and they are all different. In my opinion, you and your children will lead a much happier, more well adjusted life, if you let your kids set their own pace. Enjoy every moment and step along the way, don't try to make it go faster, childhood is very fleeting.
I have always viewed my role as a parent as setting the boundaries of behavior, and providing a nourishing environment, within which the child could grow and develop on their own, slow or fast, with subtle guidance by me.
Exactly this. Teach them so that they can become a productive, self-sufficient individual. Let them make (many) mistakes that won't ruin their life (heroin, prego at 14, etc.) Encourage them to try new things and they'll find their own passions. Hold them accountable to be the best version of themselves. Teach them empathy and the power of perspective and the rest will be okay.
I've always felt that 4 hours of a nose in a book every day is just as bad as 4 hours of TV/electronics every day is just as bad as 4 hours of sports/clubs/music every day. Kids need down time, time to explore, interactions with other, time to imagine. Less is more.
I grew in a rural setting, my dad always likened our upbringing to driving down an old country road. He would say, "I just tried to keep you out of the bar ditch".
Just became a parent a month ago, and yeah, I am struggling to balance what my aspirations are for my daughter with what will would give her the best childhood she could have. Not and easy line to walk.
Congratulations. As a parent of 2 toddlers, here is what I suggest:
Don't think too much. Spend as much time as possible with your kid. Give them a hug, make them laugh, always be around them if possible. Rest is all details that can always be worked out. Don't try to join the rat race of doing too many things.
Don't plan too much. Kids will spoil it anyway. Trust me. Been there and still doing it. So enjoy the journey.
Don't focus too much on "what are my aspirations for my kid". Instead, let them be. You know what kids really want and look up to ? Their parents/caregivers who are around them to listen to them and play with them. That is all they care about. Yes, activities are important but only a side effect.
My daughter is about to turn 1 and I agree there is a ton of pressure to make sure your kid has a good start.
But try to just let your child be a child. There's a decent bit of psychology research out there now that everyone must experience all stages of growth. Stages like Baby, Toddler, Terrible 2s and 3s, Rebellious teen, unconstrained 20-something, etc. There are countless examples of people who were forced to skip some stages (often through external circumstances) who then seem to regress for a bit to "catch up" on the stages of growth they missed.
I'm afraid that this push to make sure your child is "advanced" will only cause a ton of pain and learning further down the road that didn't have to happen (also, if you want a solid, stable job forever, psychiatry and psychology are looking like good fields).
Our plan is to let our daughter simply be herself. Encourage when she's trying to learn. Help when she needs help, but don't push her to do anything she doesn't want to do. We've got ~20 years to help them become adults. They'll get there, there's no need to rush.
Having just hit the one-year mark myself: default to happiness. Children don't need to be pushed to grow and learn. They do it readily all on their own. What's important is guiding them, and to not push them too hard, lest they learn to hate learning. You'll see it. They are not black holes. They provide plenty of feedback.
Put educational and physical things in the child's environment. They are going to absorb information from their environment anyway, so you might as well make what they will absorb useful.
The problem with the lazy parenting that others in this thread advocate is that when everybody does it, you end up with a society that is obsessed with trivial entertainment, retarding scientific advancement; and you will live a shorter life and have less time with your kid as a result.
As a current parent the problem with this is that you'd need to get every other parent to agree with it for it to work well, especially in sports.
Let me give an example. At 4/5 kids can start playing baseball, mine started at 5. He played during spring and summer for two years. Sessions were 10 weeks, with 1 practice and 1 game, and we played catch some at home. He really enjoyed it.
But now, by age 8, he has a decision to make (and I do to as a parent). He can stay with "Rec level" which is just kids having fun (as slow parenting would imply). Or, he can join the "intermediate team". What does that entail? 4 practices per week plus 1 game, and significant travel to weekend tournaments. The team website also specifies the only times of year you can take vacation. If he doesn't join this team, he is at age 8 effectively giving up any chance of playing baseball in high school. If he does play on the team however, he's giving up on other activities, and we give up our freedom to not have vacation schedules dictated to us.
So, I guess if every other parent in the world agreed not to push kids like this it would work, for now it can leave kids behind.
That's a great point. Thanks for articulating that. This is a contrast I have been seeing with my step daughter but I had not been able to put my finger on it.
My child did start speaking 2 languages (French and English) since she is 3 (she is now 6).
She is in an environment where she is motivated to move forward and learn (a good school).
But I am very careful to monitor her happiness and want to make sure she enjoy learning for herself...
[+] [-] pgrote|9 years ago|reply
When the 26 year old was born I was hyperfocused on getting her involved in everything. We signed her up for tons of stuff, exposed her to many things and we were continually going. I coached her in soccer and basketball, my wife taught her things like sewing and home maintenance. She's now an RN and working in a hospital.
Sounds good, right?
In our rush to expose her to so much, we overlooked the simple premise that she should do what interests her. She didn't graduate from college until 25 due to her inability to stick with things. I am so proud of her since she is the most caring person I know, but part of me knows we failed her by forcing her into so many different activities through her childhood. She felt she could try something and quit, try something else, quit. Rinse. Repeat.
Our youngest 2 kids aren't forced to do things they don't want to do. We ask them if there is interest and if there is we sign them up. If not, we don't. We've eliminated TV and limit kindle screen time and spend so much more time with them than we did the oldest. Honestly, I don't know if there are differences yet, but I do know the younger kids seem to find more things to do on their own.
Part of me thinks it might depend on the kid, but I am convinced parents forcing their children into so many activities hinders them in the long run.
[+] [-] stinkytaco|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] DanGackle|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] rand_r|9 years ago|reply
A couple of examples:
If you don't start playing soccer really young, you will never be able to catch up to someone who did.
A child can easily become fluent in two languages if they're immersed from a young age. Learning a second language once you're past 20 is hard.
It would be shame to waste potential.
[+] [-] falcolas|9 years ago|reply
And if your child hates soccer? Their ability will only really matter if they want to turn it into a career.
> A child can easily become fluent in two languages if they're immersed from a young age.
Which, if not used, is lost to the years. My mother could speak Serbian when she was young, because she was exposed to it. She can't anymore; hasn't been able to for years. I learned German when I was young, but don't recall a single thing now. Again, unless you want to live in a country where that language is prevalent, the long term value is rather low.
> It would be shame to waste potential.
IMO, it would be a greater shame to shape the child in your image for them, instead of into the person they want to become.
In my experience, social skills, a good sense of self, and a broad educational background have served me better in adulthood than my years spent swimming ever did. If anything, my parents focus on me being a swimmer (which provided a social venue for them) held me back from developing more skills I could have used once I became an adult.
[+] [-] coldtea|9 years ago|reply
Oh, the humanity. They would then grow on to be adults who can't play soccer well, and that's like a career suicide. /s
Young kids also have another immense advantage that they'll quickly lose: being kids. Burdening with tons of BS activities and responsibilities will steal time from their childhood and playing, and wont even let them discover the activities and things they do like for themselves.
[+] [-] jlj|9 years ago|reply
Why would they need to catch up to anyone? I'd rather have my child love the game or hobby than cram every waking moment into some activity. The ability to hear yourself think and actively listen to others is more important imho. There is so much noise in US culture telling kids who they should measure up to. As a parent I feel I need to be the counter balance to those messages.
There are also plenty of examples of professional sports players who started in their teens. "Google <sports league> late start."
[+] [-] david-given|9 years ago|reply
I went to a school that had two hours of compulsory sport five days a week.
The end result of this was that it taught me to loathe and avoid sport, exercise and most forms of competition, which has resulted in health and social issues I've been having to cope with for the rest of my life.
[+] [-] zaroth|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] myth_drannon|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] codegeek|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kirse|9 years ago|reply
I don't buy this, at least in terms of kids "learn faster".
Adults have the benefit of both motivation and 20 (or more) years of communication experience, same as how a senior programmer with 20 years under their belt wouldn't find it hard to add another ML-dialect to their tool-belt vs a high-school grad who is learning their first functional language. If anything is "hard" about learning a language as an adult it's the time and priority shift required for immersion.
Now soccer, yea I'll give you that one. Or Piano, or whatever other skill where the compound benefit of repeated fine-motor skill practice often pays off.
[+] [-] codegeek|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dripton|9 years ago|reply
My wife and I were not big activity pushers. Besides the swimming lessons that I insisted on for safety reasons, our kid did some gymnastics, and some music lessons. Didn't really like either, and we let her stop doing both.
[+] [-] fred_is_fred|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ced|9 years ago|reply
My uni physics professor had similar fears about his child, so he didn't teach him as much as he could have. I'm curious to hear from other parents on HN about this. It seems like a valid concern. At the same time, I didn't enjoy the traditional school system at all, and I'm glad that there are alternative schools where a child can learn at the speed he wants, whether fast or slow.
http://www.etreetdevenir.com/EED.en.html#Accueil
[+] [-] timthorn|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Adutude|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] joshuaheard|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] snarf21|9 years ago|reply
I've always felt that 4 hours of a nose in a book every day is just as bad as 4 hours of TV/electronics every day is just as bad as 4 hours of sports/clubs/music every day. Kids need down time, time to explore, interactions with other, time to imagine. Less is more.
[+] [-] noddingham|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sudhirj|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] codegeek|9 years ago|reply
Don't think too much. Spend as much time as possible with your kid. Give them a hug, make them laugh, always be around them if possible. Rest is all details that can always be worked out. Don't try to join the rat race of doing too many things.
Don't plan too much. Kids will spoil it anyway. Trust me. Been there and still doing it. So enjoy the journey.
Don't focus too much on "what are my aspirations for my kid". Instead, let them be. You know what kids really want and look up to ? Their parents/caregivers who are around them to listen to them and play with them. That is all they care about. Yes, activities are important but only a side effect.
[+] [-] jameskilton|9 years ago|reply
But try to just let your child be a child. There's a decent bit of psychology research out there now that everyone must experience all stages of growth. Stages like Baby, Toddler, Terrible 2s and 3s, Rebellious teen, unconstrained 20-something, etc. There are countless examples of people who were forced to skip some stages (often through external circumstances) who then seem to regress for a bit to "catch up" on the stages of growth they missed.
I'm afraid that this push to make sure your child is "advanced" will only cause a ton of pain and learning further down the road that didn't have to happen (also, if you want a solid, stable job forever, psychiatry and psychology are looking like good fields).
Our plan is to let our daughter simply be herself. Encourage when she's trying to learn. Help when she needs help, but don't push her to do anything she doesn't want to do. We've got ~20 years to help them become adults. They'll get there, there's no need to rush.
[+] [-] moron4hire|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lern_too_spel|9 years ago|reply
The problem with the lazy parenting that others in this thread advocate is that when everybody does it, you end up with a society that is obsessed with trivial entertainment, retarding scientific advancement; and you will live a shorter life and have less time with your kid as a result.
[+] [-] fred_is_fred|9 years ago|reply
Let me give an example. At 4/5 kids can start playing baseball, mine started at 5. He played during spring and summer for two years. Sessions were 10 weeks, with 1 practice and 1 game, and we played catch some at home. He really enjoyed it.
But now, by age 8, he has a decision to make (and I do to as a parent). He can stay with "Rec level" which is just kids having fun (as slow parenting would imply). Or, he can join the "intermediate team". What does that entail? 4 practices per week plus 1 game, and significant travel to weekend tournaments. The team website also specifies the only times of year you can take vacation. If he doesn't join this team, he is at age 8 effectively giving up any chance of playing baseball in high school. If he does play on the team however, he's giving up on other activities, and we give up our freedom to not have vacation schedules dictated to us.
So, I guess if every other parent in the world agreed not to push kids like this it would work, for now it can leave kids behind.
EDIT made paragraphs
[+] [-] LeonidBugaev|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hosh|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] FraKtus|9 years ago|reply