ubercat wrote:Generally I'd start to argue for Summary Execution in situations like this, but I'm just too worn out from reading that hell.

The on-scene investigators showed remarkable restraint.

***Hypothetical - no dad in this story to be the source of anguish:

Well, so you put a bullet in the head of mom. Then dad, who is an abusive motherfucker, and the real source of the problem, shows up. Sure you can put one in his head too, but then do you just apologize to mom's corpse, or what?

Incidentally, if anyone reading this thread thought the kinda awkwardly-spliced quote attributed to me earlier indicated that I was originally trying to make the funny, I wasn't.

John George Peppers wrote:Her mother should be thrown in a similar closet filled with roaches, lice, and her own feces.

What good does that do?

ubercat wrote:Generally I'd start to argue for Summary Execution in situations like this, but I'm just too worn out from reading that hell.

Same question.

JamLifeIntoDeath wrote:So. The fact that Dani could have grown up without all the problems she has is clearly tragic. This absolutely could have been avoided (although, with two older brothers with IQs of 50 and a mom in the 70s, she very likely would still have had serious handicaps). However, at this point, done is done. May and could and maybe and might are wonderful hopeful words to use to describe such a sad story, but what about kids all over the fucking world whose futures, if they were given into a household like that of Dani's foster parents, could shine (relatively speaking) like the sun to Dani's candle?

This issue has bothered me since high school. What say you?[/b]

I have recently been flopping on the issue. I believed nurture trumped nature by such a margin that nature hardly needed to be considered, but I keep seeing evidence (anecdotal obviously, I do not study this as a discipline) that nature runs the show.

I believe a bright child can be brought down low, and a poorly conceived child can reach great heights, but the effort involved will not be proportionate. All of human history has a few outstanding individuals jumping forward over their humble beginnings, regardless of how stupid their parents might have been. That is their nature. A little conversation on the internet will produce scores of functional adults who are ridiculously naive, and cannot grasp simple concepts.

Basically I believe that the people who can shine like the sun, are going to if there is not a concerted effort to beat them down. Most of us will be the average because that is how the average is determined. And some people will be somewhat less than that.

You ever talk to someone whose IQ was tested in the 70s? It is an exercise in frustration. You just can't believe that they don't understand how they are getting themselves into trouble. Effort does not seem to be the problem, since they want better, know there is better out there. I don't have any idea what could have made a difference for those people.

The whole business has really affected the way my wife and I are raising our child.

Johnny 13 wrote:All of human history has a few outstanding individuals jumping forward over their humble beginnings, regardless of how stupid their parents might have been. That is their nature.

Hmm... not sure I agree with you there. I think it's easy to lump "nature" as in genetic or instinctual predisposition together with "nature" as in "personality" which I think contains a great deal of free will.

Johnny 13 wrote:The whole business has really affected the way my wife and I are raising our child.

As someone who might be a parent someday and someone whose curiosity is easily sparked, would you please elaborate?

JamLifeIntoDeath wrote:

Ruffian wrote:http://www.feralchildren.com/en/showchild.php?ch=kaspar

In 1828 a boy named Kaspar Hauser was found in Germany. He was seventeen and had been confined from early childhood, locked up and fed only bread and water. He could speak one sentence but couldn't comprehend any questions or communicate with people. But he made a lot of progress, to the point where he was able to read, write, and even work. I think "Dani" will probably come a long way.

The wiki on him suggests that he wasn't who he claimed to be.

I think that this Kaspar guy sounds like a compulsive liar or something. Fishy as hell. Either way, completely different than Dani's situation.

yeah, i read about this story somewhere recently and it does sound very fishy...they have a statue of him in nuremburg or wherever...

JamLifeIntoDeath wrote:As someone who might be a parent someday and someone whose curiosity is easily sparked, would you please elaborate?

I see my role as being different than I imagined. The whole subject is a minefield of contradictory ideas, and potential hurt feelings. We had discussed and decided certain things before my daughter was born, and this had to do with a nurture gambit, based on the fact that we don't like the local schools, or the goals of schools in general.

Being around children quickly changed our minds on certain aspects, and whatever desire I had to raise her to intentionally be smart sort of gave way to a desire to let her be who she is going to be. We see our role as being facilitators who provide encounters that can provide educational opportunity, rather than lesson plans. We are fairly relaxed about all this, and intend to become even more relaxed once we get past the stages of explosive brain development. We have staked out a couple of focal points that may give an outward appearance of pushing in a certain direction, but our reasoning is pretty specific. We started with sign language when she was very small because it is supposed to build neural pathways that making additional language learning easier when the person gets older. A side benefit was an elimination of the 'terrible 2s' stage as all the literature promises.

Soon it will be time for her to be guiding her education, and our primary role will be to assist with her learning how to learn on her own. Once that is mastered, the content of her knowledge is not all that important. There is a certain amount of cultural literacy, and basic verbal and math skills that everyone should know, but most people get by on not very much when you think about it. Before she was born I saw my role as being to teach, and now it is more about getting her where she needs to be.

People always talk about how this will lead to laziness and other horrible things, but I have not seen that happening to other children brought up this way. They are engaged in a way that I envy. This method also provides many opportunities than are fairly unique. I have the same kind of hopes that other parents do, and want her to be an astronaut, but I think it will be pretty cool if she becomes a baker, or ends up filing all day long. If I could bet, I am guessing she will be a pretty interested and interesting adult.

The Dani story is frankly heartbreaking but hopeful. No matter what the IQ of her or her family matters. She has the right to a chance.

What brave people. I'm not sure I could do that. I'm pretty sure I couldn't.

Johnny 13 wrote:

JamLifeIntoDeath wrote:As someone who might be a parent someday and someone whose curiosity is easily sparked, would you please elaborate?

I see my role as being different than I imagined. The whole subject is a minefield of contradictory ideas, and potential hurt feelings. We had discussed and decided certain things before my daughter was born, and this had to do with a nurture gambit, based on the fact that we don't like the local schools, or the goals of schools in general.

Being around children quickly changed our minds on certain aspects, and whatever desire I had to raise her to intentionally be smart sort of gave way to a desire to let her be who she is going to be. We see our role as being facilitators who provide encounters that can provide educational opportunity, rather than lesson plans. We are fairly relaxed about all this, and intend to become even more relaxed once we get past the stages of explosive brain development. We have staked out a couple of focal points that may give an outward appearance of pushing in a certain direction, but our reasoning is pretty specific. We started with sign language when she was very small because it is supposed to build neural pathways that making additional language learning easier when the person gets older. A side benefit was an elimination of the 'terrible 2s' stage as all the literature promises.

Soon it will be time for her to be guiding her education, and our primary role will be to assist with her learning how to learn on her own. Once that is mastered, the content of her knowledge is not all that important. There is a certain amount of cultural literacy, and basic verbal and math skills that everyone should know, but most people get by on not very much when you think about it. Before she was born I saw my role as being to teach, and now it is more about getting her where she needs to be.

People always talk about how this will lead to laziness and other horrible things, but I have not seen that happening to other children brought up this way. They are engaged in a way that I envy. This method also provides many opportunities than are fairly unique. I have the same kind of hopes that other parents do, and want her to be an astronaut, but I think it will be pretty cool if she becomes a baker, or ends up filing all day long. If I could bet, I am guessing she will be a pretty interested and interesting adult.

All that I can say to this is wow, that was wondeful to read. That articulated beautifully, and in a way that I've never considered, my parents' approach to raising my siblings and I. I think you're on the right track and a pretty outstanding person to have thought this out as well as you have. I'll definitely keep this in mind when considering having children of my own. Wow.

Johnny 13 wrote:our primary role will be to assist with her learning how to learn on her own.

are you talking about teaching her to read, but not telling her what to read? in general, how do kids under the age of 17 respond to unstructred education? i still have to go through periods where sometimes the thing i want to do is not the thing i should be doing.

JamLifeIntoDeath wrote:

Johnny 13 wrote:

JamLifeIntoDeath wrote:As someone who might be a parent someday and someone whose curiosity is easily sparked, would you please elaborate?

I see my role as being different than I imagined. The whole subject is a minefield of contradictory ideas, and potential hurt feelings. We had discussed and decided certain things before my daughter was born, and this had to do with a nurture gambit, based on the fact that we don't like the local schools, or the goals of schools in general.

Being around children quickly changed our minds on certain aspects, and whatever desire I had to raise her to intentionally be smart sort of gave way to a desire to let her be who she is going to be. We see our role as being facilitators who provide encounters that can provide educational opportunity, rather than lesson plans. We are fairly relaxed about all this, and intend to become even more relaxed once we get past the stages of explosive brain development. We have staked out a couple of focal points that may give an outward appearance of pushing in a certain direction, but our reasoning is pretty specific. We started with sign language when she was very small because it is supposed to build neural pathways that making additional language learning easier when the person gets older. A side benefit was an elimination of the 'terrible 2s' stage as all the literature promises.

Soon it will be time for her to be guiding her education, and our primary role will be to assist with her learning how to learn on her own. Once that is mastered, the content of her knowledge is not all that important. There is a certain amount of cultural literacy, and basic verbal and math skills that everyone should know, but most people get by on not very much when you think about it. Before she was born I saw my role as being to teach, and now it is more about getting her where she needs to be.

People always talk about how this will lead to laziness and other horrible things, but I have not seen that happening to other children brought up this way. They are engaged in a way that I envy. This method also provides many opportunities than are fairly unique. I have the same kind of hopes that other parents do, and want her to be an astronaut, but I think it will be pretty cool if she becomes a baker, or ends up filing all day long. If I could bet, I am guessing she will be a pretty interested and interesting adult.

All that I can say to this is wow, that was wondeful to read. That articulated beautifully, and in a way that I've never considered, my parents' approach to raising my siblings and I. I think you're on the right track and a pretty outstanding person to have thought this out as well as you have. I'll definitely keep this in mind when considering having children of my own. Wow.

+1

much like my parents. got to be a smart kid, but above all just got to be a kid.