It drives me crazy. How can I get her to back off without hurting her feelings?

The question

My mother’s driving me crazy with her criticism of my parenting.

She’s always saying we spoil our children, going on and on about how she did it in her day, and so on.

I actually blew up at her on Mother’s Day and I feel incredibly guilty. I love her to death, but it makes me crazy when she criticizes me about my kids. I think I’m doing a good job. How can I get her to back off without hurting her feelings?

The answer

Well, on the one hand, don’t even get me started about how annoying unsolicited parenting advice can be.

For years I was a stay-at-home dad.

Moms complain about all the unsolicited advice they get from random busybodies, sanctimonious babushkas and Nosy Parkers on the street.

But imagine, ladies, when they got a load of me!

A huge, stubbled, confused-looking man pulling a bottle of “express milk” out of the cargo pocket of his army pants and jamming it in the craw of his screaming, tomato-faced kid, trying to shut him up.

The babushka would freeze, her hump tingling with anticipation. Her whole life - all 176 years of it - was a preparation for this moment. Throwing herself in the path of my stroller, she would point an ancient, crooked finger like a gnarly old oak twig at my then-infant son, Nicholas (who’s now a brilliant, beautiful, eminently sensible and exquisitely sensitive 11-year-old, by the way, babushkas of the world), and croak out her edict: “Your baby cold! Needs another layer!”

Or - and this one would always kill me - “He needs his mommy!”

That line was like a knife in my heart, would make me want to drop to my knees, clutch the hem of the babushka’s traditional mourning garment and sob: “No, babushka, no … don’t say … that …”

But all I ever did was smile and say: “Thank you for your input. You’ve certainly given me something to think about.” And roll Nick away with a frozen rictus of faux gratitude affixed to my kisser.

Why? Because, ladies, that became, in time, my policy.

At first, I would bristle and argue; but I came to realize there was no point, it was a fruitless waste of energy. People who love giving free, unsolicited advice are not going to change their ways just because you act haughty and say something frosty. All you do is create friction and bad blood.

And sometimes, horribly, the busybodies actually have a point. If you drop the bristling and listen, from time to time you can get good advice, even in this unsolicited, off-the-street format.

It can be tough to implement this “smile and say thanks” policy, I know - especially, I found, in the face of parenting wisdom from people who don’t actually have kids themselves.

And FYI, having “nieces and nephews” does not confer expert parenting status on you, people. Anyone can be an uncle. You come in, distribute a few presents, a toy or two, some loose change, maybe bust a couple of magic tricks, then leave on a high note, bidding adieu, pressing your bunched fingers to your lips.

Trust me, there are times we parents would also like to leave on a high note, bidding adieu, pressing our fingers to our lips. But we don’t have that option.

Unlike various aunts and uncles, though, your mother does have a lot of direct parenting experience - from raising you.

Second, parenting has changed unbelievably since her day. And sometimes (like when I go to a restaurant where someone has brought their kids) I think parents of previous generations have a point when they say our kids are spoiled, undisciplined and obnoxious, and we’re too precious with them.

I think of my kids as reasonably well-behaved, but after a weekend in the care of my wife’s parents, I’m amazed at the transformation: When we arrive back home, they file out of the kitchen, in single file, hair parted neatly on one side, seen but not heard, practically addressing my wife, Pam, and I as “Sir” and “Madam.”

Of course, it only lasts until the grandparents’ car disappears down the street, but sometimes one can’t help but wonder: What if they were like that all the time?

Now I’m not qualified to say what way of bringing up kids is better or worse. All children are different and so are all parents. Suffice it to say you could probably learn a lot from your mother if you stopped bristling and being defensive.

But you’re responsible for how your kids turn out. Therefore you have the final say in how to handle them. There is such a thing as being polite yet firm, of saying something such as: “Thanks, Mom, I appreciate it, but I prefer to do it this way.”

Still, you owe her an apology. She gave birth to you in pain and suffering. She had horrible nights and frustrating days with you, as you now know. She compromised her dreams, ideals, figure, social life, rest, independence and so much else to protect you and keep you warm, dry and happy, as you now know.

She’s owed at least one day on which she is honoured with unstinting patience and tolerance. Since you ruined that with your outburst, why not make it up with a bunch of flowers, maybe a nice dinner and a card that reads: “Mom, I appreciate everything you’ve done for me, including and especially bestowing upon me the gift of life.”

Because hey: If she hadn’t done that, you wouldn’t be around to feel irritated, now, would you?

Source: Globe and Mail, Canada
http://tinyurl.com/4ga7bo

A new generation of NSW children is being mollycoddled by their fearful parents, with many children reporting they can no longer ride their bikes.

NSW Commissioner for Children and Young People Gillian Calvert warned that fears over traffic and stranger danger have meant children are missing out on basic life skills and simple pleasures.

“Over the past 10 years we have seen a real reduction in the range at which children can leave their family home and move freely,” Ms Calvert told News Limited.

“Kids tell us they can’t ride their bikes around streets anymore.”

Basic skills such as climbing trees, bike riding and crossing the road are in danger of being lost.

Sports Medicine Unit director Dr Carolyn Broderick said fundamental motor skills were developed through play, as well as balance, co-ordination and strength.

“Children now have a fear that wasn’t there in the past,” she said.

The research showed a significant reduction in free playtime among children, Dr Broderick said.

She said a quarter of parents were actually discouraging their children from playing sport because they were worried about injury.

Source: The Australian, Australia
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23712382-12377,00.html

Don Katz has a vision for the kids of America: He wants to take the technology that brings the Jonas Brothers to their ears and use it to deliver the Brothers Grimm.

Nearly a third of children ages 6 to 10 are regular users of digital audio players, according to market research firm the NPD Group. And thanks to entrepreneurs like Katz, they now can use them to listen to bedtime stories.

In March, the Audible.com founder launched AudibleKids.com, where children can download books directly onto their digital audio players.

“I hear lots of people talking, saying that when they put their kids to bed, they put them down with an audiobook,” said Audio Publishers Association president Michele Cobb.

Kids’ and teens’ books accounted for 13 percent of national audiobook sales in 2007, according to the Audio Publishers Association. That’s a relatively small number, but it’s nearly double the 7 percent that was estimated by the group in 2004.

AudibleKids, which offers books for preschoolers on up, aims to stoke their interest further by offering a social networking community where they can talk about books with each other and with parents, teachers and even authors such as R.L. Stine of Goosebumps fame.

Random House’s Listening Library has been producing audiobooks for kids for more than 50 years. What’s new is the digital technology — companies such as Fisher-Price and Disney now sell kid-friendly digital audio players for children as young as 2.

Katz believes that reaching kids through digital media may inspire them to have a lifelong love of books — even the old-fashioned printed kind.

“The world of reluctant readers is huge,” he said. For many children, Katz said, “reading outcomes tend to fall apart around third grade,” which is often the same time that parents stop reading to their kids.

Digital audiobooks, especially those narrated by talented artists, can “extend the pleasure of being read to by your parents into fifth, sixth, seventh grades,” he said. And talented artists are lining up to narrate — Macmillan Audio launched a children’s list this spring with narrations by Gwyneth Paltrow and Tony Shaloub.

“Listening is a powerful method to retain the meaning of the story and to turn people on to the concept of well-chosen words,” Katz said. “The interpretation of the reader, that adds layers to it. If you ever enjoyed Charlotte’s Web , to hear Edmund Wilson read it is a transcendent experience.”

For some moms and dads, the idea of kids chatting online about Holden Caulfield instead of Hannah Montana is pretty compelling. But for those who spent their own childhood summers reveling in the crisp pages of paperbacks, there are real concerns about what may be lost if their offspring tackle a summer reading list via MP3.

Even among today’s multitasking teens, listening instead of reading might cause them to lose focus as they half-listen while attempting to reach the next level of Halo 3 and text messaging a friend.

Katz said he isn’t aiming to discourage parents from reading to their children. But with kids so fully embracing the digital age, he believes it’s the best way to reach them.

Source: The Courier News, IL
http://tinyurl.com/6ko9qj

Ten years ago they were as rare as hen’s teeth. Today, go to any local playgroup across Wales and you’ll find at least one stay-at-home dad, playing happily with his kids before heading off to do the shopping and a spot of housework. Sarah Manners looks at what’s going on behind this social revolution

IN 1983 a pre-Batman Michael Keaton starred in “Mr Mom”, a US comedy about a hapless father forced by circumstance to become a stay-at-home dad.

It raised a few laughs, but not much interest apart from that. Or so it seemed.

For deep within that decade, the cracks of truly seismic social changes were beginning to appear – leading to a phenomenon that is now rapidly edging towards some kind of norm, as well as spawning its own burgeoning industry.

For as Margaret Thatcher plotted to take on Britain’s miners, sounding the death-knell of traditional heavy industry in the UK, unbeknown to her the Iron Lady’s actions were also laying the foundations for another social revolution, perhaps even more far reaching.

Because as the economy swung towards women at work and men at home, suddenly men discovered that – shock, horror – they could look after their children just as well as their partners could.

A decade later, and it was choice and not just circumstance that was seeing more and more men kiss goodbye to the morning commute in favour of nappies, playgroup, the school run and housework.

Now stay-at-home dads are everywhere – and increasingly vocal.

Since records of the trend began in 1993, the number of full-time stay-at-home dads has doubled to more than 200,000 UK-wide.

At the same time, the number of stay-at-home mums has fallen by a quarter.

And according to a TUC report on changing work habits, between 2004 and 2006 1.2 million men asked their employer if they could work flexibly – 60% had their request accepted.

Even City high fliers with their six-figure salaries are kissing goodbye to the bonuses instead of their still-sleeping kids at unearthly hours of the morning before returning at night to kiss their once again sleeping children goodnight, without having spoken to them in the hours in between.

More and more of them are on the so-called “daddy track”, combining their career with spending more time at home during the working week with their children.

In recent years a whopping one in 10 working men in the UK has increased the amount of time he spends at home.

All this adds up to a significant shift in attitudes to parenting in the UK, even if we’ve a long way to go to catch up with Sweden, where parents get – steady now – 480 days off after the birth of a child, paid at between 80% and 90% of normal pay, valid until the child is eight years old.

That noise you can hear as you read this is the sound of thousands of fathers across Wales sighing as they wish they could do something similar, if not the same.

One Welsh father who is in the vanguard of this revolution is Duncan Fisher.

Co-founder of fatherhood information website www.dad.info, Duncan, 46, says it is economics pure and simple which is behind the rise of the stay-at-home dad, and flexible-working dad.

“The average wage of a man in the UK is £29,000, and yet your average British household depends on at least £34,000 coming into it to pay for the basics every year. This has completely changed the equation when it comes to mothers working,” said Duncan, who lives with his two daughters aged seven and 11 in Crickhowell, Mid Wales.

“Now it is the norm for women to work at least part-time and therefore fathers are finding themselves pulled into the childcare equation more than ever before.

“And at the same time women’s earning power is rising fast. In 20% of families in the UK, women now earn more than men.

“So it makes sense in those families for the higher earner to go back to work, when the time comes. Stay-at-home fathers are not the norm, but they are becoming more usual.

“But then, stay-at-home mothers are not the norm any more either. I guess, if there is a norm then it is for both parents to work in some combination. How they make it work is up to them.”

Source: ic Wales, United Kingdom
http://tinyurl.com/4ojz34

Young children whose parents read aloud to them have better language and literacy skills when they go to school, according to a review published online ahead of print in the Archives of Disease in Childhood.

Children who have been read aloud to are also more likely to develop a love of reading, which can be even more important than the head start in language and literacy. And the advantages they gain persist, with children who start out as poor readers in their first year of school likely to remain so.

The authors explain that the style of reading has more impact on children’s early language and literacy development than the frequency of reading aloud. Middle class parents tend to use a more interactive style, making connections to the child’s own experience or real world, explaining new words and the motivations of the characters, while working class parents tend to focus more on labelling and describing pictures. These differences in reading styles can impact on children’s development of language and literacy-related skills.

The Reach Out and Read programme in Boston has improved the language skills of children in low income families by increasing the proportion of parents reading to their children.

The programme provides books and advice to the parents about the importance of reading aloud. Parents who have been given books were four times more likely to say they had looked at books with their children or that looking at books was one of their child’s favourite activities, and twice as likely to read aloud to their children at least three times a week.

Source: Science Daily
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080512191126.htm

Recently a friend dropped off an Education Commentary from the Times Union newspaper that presented some relevant data on schools. The author wrote: “the qualities of the families from which children come to school matter much more than money as predictors of schools’ effectiveness.”

The research tells us that there are two prime factors in a child’s education: the teacher and the parents. Individually each has an impact on student success in school. The possibilities when a child has both - probably much greater.

So what’s a parent to do? Glad you asked.

Learning begins at a young age. Simply by reading to your child at a young age begins to help students learn about language and communication. Children mimic parents and will “read” the pages to them.

Get them to school. I suspect there are only a few who are self-motivated or disciplined. Successful students have parents who make sure they get out of bed each morning and get them to school on time. Successful students have parents who understand that getting up for school is not always fun but their parents push them anyway.

The nice thing about these expectations is they do not cost anything. They do require some persistence and patience. For some parents the challenge is more difficult. And yet, if you want your child to succeed in school you are the partner in learning that your child needs.

Parents: I know you care that your child succeeds in school. Too often I do not get to talk to parents until the child is in trouble. Yet, when I do, I hear the same message: parents care about their children; they want them to succeed; they know that education is important. To those of you struggling, hang in there and do not give up.

Our goal is for every child to graduate. Working without the help of parents we will not reach that goal. With parent help we will all succeed!

Source: Marion Star, OH
http://tinyurl.com/54g3pj

Be it the growing power of rights over duties, feminism over traditionalism, or simply a society that makes it economically feasible to parent as a never-married woman, there is hope that the trend is turning around

It was a symposium on same-sex marriage that cold January day in Vermont, but on the subject of marriage generally, Patrick Fagan’s power-point presentation went much further. There, on a large screen, a bar graph demonstrated how for psychological health, wealth and other optimal outcomes for children, a biological mom and a dad in an intact marriage did the best job.

At the opposite, bottom end of the graph, well past the married stepfamilies, the divorced single parents and the co-habiting couples, was the never-married single mother, whose grim prospects included grinding poverty, little hope of a future marriage and children with behavioural problems that too often led to a life of crime and yet more unwed pregnancy.

The debate among top American academics is over, the distinguished psychologist, one-time presidential appointee on the family and now a Senior Fellow at the Family Research Council in Washington, later told me in a telephone conversation. Though if any doubt remains about the importance of an intact family in a child’s development, a study undertaken by Swedish social scientists and published by Acta Paediatrica in March buries it once and for all. Their systematic review of fathers’ involvement with children from the time they are newborn to the time they are young adults spanned 24 papers from 16 different longitudinal studies from a variety of countries. It concludes that “father engagement reduces the frequency of behavioural problems in boys and psychological problems in young women; it also enhances cognitive development while decreasing criminality and economic disadvantage in low (socio-economic status) families.”

If the United States more generally represents the traditional family and Sweden less-traditional families, the debate about the arrangement that best meets the needs of children would indeed appear to be over: kids need both mothers and fathers. But can the developments of the past half-century be reversed? In that time, the never-married single mother has been Canada’s fastest-rising parenting demographic. And why did these developments occur in the first place?

There was a time when an unwed pregnancy meant a shotgun wedding. It wasn’t the best start to a marriage, but it secured social and other obligations for the child from his parents. It also provided him with a sense of his genetic and social origins — that is, a sense of his identity — and clear role models upon which to build his future behaviour.

The existence of shotgun weddings didn’t preclude what sociologists and Statistics Canada now call lone-parent or one-parent families. These have been an established feature of Canadian familyhood for some time and have included widows, the divorced or separated, as well as never-married mothers. In 1951, for instance, 13.9 per cent of families were lone parents, a figure not far removed from 2006 figures at 15.6 per cent, although, significantly, they fell to 8 per cent between 1951 and 1966.

The difference between then and now is the altered composition of the lone-parent cohort. In 1951, only 1.5 per cent of lone parents were never-married, whereas 30 per cent were divorced or separated and 66.5 per cent were widowed. By 2006, and despite the availability of birth control, abortion and adoption services, the proportion of never-married, at 29.5 per cent, and divorced or separated, at 49.5 per cent, had increased dramatically.

Why?

Conventional wisdom says poverty is the primary cause of never-married mothering, but increasingly evidence suggests both poverty and never-married mothering are symptoms of a deeper problem.

“Although there are many exceptions,” writes Anne-Marie Ambert in a 2006 paper on one-parent families for The Vanier Institute of the Family, “over half of women who bear children alone not only create poverty … but come from poverty.”

The professor emeritus of sociology at York University adds that, in any case, “less than 50 years ago, the poor were not so likely to produce as many one-parent families as is now the case.” And even today, the poor do not uniformly inhabit one-parent families, while the rich do produce one-parent families via divorce and occasionally through intentional single motherhood.

Values, beliefs and morality are also factors, she says, beginning with an ethos of individualism that emphasizes rights rather than duties. This, coupled with an ideology of gratification, particularly sexual and psychological, meant procreation became increasingly separated from marriage even as women, often conspicuously unprepared for motherhood, were encouraged to keep and to bond with their newborns as a “right.”

Add impoverishment, and such adolescents may feel they have little to lose and even something to gain by engaging in unprotected sex.

In 1999, similar views were expressed by Maggie Gallagher, an American author and president of the Institute of Marriage and Public Policy. “What has changed most in recent decades is not who gets pregnant, but who gets married,” she wrote in The Age of Unwed Mothers. If a good marriage is unlikely and if marriage isn’t an essential support to motherhood anyway, she argues, it is hardly surprising adolescent girls decide to become pregnant. “If it is not marriage that confers special meaning to the sexual act, then perhaps it is her giving the gift of unprotected sex, or making a baby.”

British journalist Melanie Phillips agrees that the collapse of marriage is behind today’s changing family fortunes, but she blames “gender” feminism as its primary cause. By viewing marriage as the principle instrument of oppression by males of females, she says, gender feminism marginalized men from their roles as husbands and fathers while its radical agenda has become the stuff of public policy. Meanwhile, fear of appearing judgmental about its consequences has led to moral paralysis on the subject.

Her book, The Sex-Change Society: Feminised Britain and the Neutered Male, argues that any explanation based on economics — for instance, that a lack of jobs makes young men unmarriageable or that too much welfare makes it too easy for young women to be single mothers — is only a small part of the puzzle. The missing piece is the change in girls’ sexual behaviour and the collapse of social stigma. “The legalizing of abortion and the availability of contraception, along with the changes in social attitudes, brought about the end of ’shot-gun’ marriages by which unmarried sexual incontinence had previously been regulated,” Phillips says.

Fewer men wanted to marry women who, they felt, brought their pregnancy on themselves, while women who did want to marry and have children “found their bargaining position had been undermined since men could go elsewhere for sex without responsibility.” And while men seek sexual favours, it is women who — unless they are being coerced — have the power of selection.

To be sure, mistakes are a factor — but abortion and adoption services exist to address these. Coercion is also a factor in very disadvantaged groups, as is a hyper-sexualized media and celebrity culture that feeds peer pressure and promotes sexual activity.

If women were engaging in more-adventurous sexual behaviours, does that mean men were feckless cads? Not entirely, says Phillips. “All societies struggle with the problem of attaching men to their children,” she writes. “This is almost always solved through marriage and legitimacy, which is very important in establishing paternal certainty, the most important precondition for paternal investment.” Moreover, she says, family life socializes young men, who must get jobs and settle down. It also contributes to the development of kinship, the primary structure that supports individuals.

But now, “marriage has been weakened, divorce has got easier and no stigma is any longer attached to children born outside of wedlock. The result has been a snapping of the bonds that have tied men into family life.”

In Canada, as elsewhere, liberalized divorce laws were adopted by the end of the 1960s. In Britain, says Phillips, they turned marriage into an institution of contempt and “just a piece of paper.” Divorce produced “damaged children (who) grew up into embittered adults incapable of lasting attachments and deeply mistrustful of the institution whose failure had let them down so badly.” The non-existent or low-commitment requirements of lone parenting or co-habitation became a better option than a perceived “bad” marriage while “no-fault” divorce laws that also gave women custody of the children and most of the family assets bestowed “the seal of social approval upon families constructed around the absence of the father.”

In a recent blog item on The Spectator’s website, Phillips discusses the murder of a 15-year-old and the life of her mother and others with several children by several men. An affluent, complacent and materialistic Britain has created an underclass, she writes, “where successive generations of women have never known what it is to be loved and cherished by both their parents … How can such women know how to parent their own children?”

Similarly, and in the U.S., where 37 per cent of pregnancies are those of unwed, mostly black and Hispanic mothers, commentators describe a de facto caste system based on the marriage gap. In Canada, the proportion of Aboriginal single mother families is twice as high as other Canadian families.

Yet reasons for hope persist. According to “Crime, Drugs, Welfare — And Other Good News,” published in last December’s edition of Commentary magazine, American college graduates are marrying and staying married for the sake of the children, while the number of Canadian fathers who have joint custody of theirs now rivals the never-married mother as Canada’s fastest rising parenting demographic. Abortion and fertility rates among the young are declining.

Many lessons, too, are emerging from the trials and triumphs of the sexual revolution, among them that if feminism’s biggest mistake was the marginalization of men, so, too, has it given women greater control of their sexuality. And that means tremendous power to re-order their lives, the lives of their families and to turn the situation around.

Source: Canada.com, Canada
http://tinyurl.com/5uo7oe

Pity the mother of Mother’s Day.

“I wanted it to be a day of sentiment, not profit,” Jarvis complained, dismissing greeting cards as “a poor excuse for the letter you are too lazy to write.”

Anna Jarvis wasn’t too lazy to write letters. They were the greatest weapon in her campaign to create Mother’s Day.

According to Katharine Antolini, historian and board member at the International Mother’s Day Shrine in Grafton, West Virginia - site of the first ceremony in 1908 - legend has it that a 12-year-old Anna overheard her mother, Ann Reeves Jarvis, tell her Sunday school class of her wish for a day to commemorate mothers for their contribution to all fields of life. The elder Jarvis was well-known in Grafton for her charity work with local mothers and her efforts to use motherhood as a healing tool for the community divided by the Civil War.

When Ann Reeves Jarvis died in 1905, Anna began her campaign for a Mother’s Day, tirelessly writing letters to politicians, businessmen and religious leaders. She even enlisted the backing of retail giant John Wanamaker, who financially supported her campaign.

By 1908 she had succeeded in arranging two ceremonies for Mother’s Day: a large one in the auditorium of Wanamaker’s Philadelphia store, at which she spoke, and another one at her mother’s church in Grafton. She sent 500 white carnations to be distributed to mothers in the congregation.

The idea became a movement, and the following year, Mother’s Day services were held in 45 American states and Canada and Mexico, the symbol of the white carnation already entrenched.

Still, Jarvis wanted more: she wanted a national proclamation. She continued her lobbying, sending letters year after year to the governors of every state reminding them to make the proclamation.

Unusual for a middle-class woman at the turn of the last century, Jarvis had worked in the advertising department of a life insurance company and “she knew a thing or two about marketing and copyright,” says Antolini, who is writing her PhD dissertation on Anna Jarvis.

In 1912, Jarvis incorporated her own association, trademarked the white carnation and the phrases “second Sunday in May” and “Mother’s Day”. She was specific about the location of the apostrophe; it was to be a singular possessive, for each family to honour their mother, not a plural possessive commemorating all mothers in the world.

Finally, in 1914, U.S. President Woodrow Wilson issued a proclamation calling for the observance of Mother’s Day. Other countries followed, including Canada, which made it official the following year.

It was quickly apparent to Jarvis that she had created a monster. Greeting cards became a popular way to say thank you to Mother, photographers advertised Mother’s Day portraits and sales of chocolates and candies spiked every year in May.

You might think it would be enough to make her weep, but Anna Jarvis was made of sterner stuff. She threatened to sue.

“How many of these suits made it into court, we don’t know,” says Antolini. “But she was fearless. She would write letters to anyone she felt was misusing Mother’s Day and remind them that she owned the copyright.”

She nursed long-running feuds about who was the true founder of Mother’s Day, and was criticized for ignoring the work of poet Julia Ward Howe, who had instigated a Mother’s Day for Peace, observed in June, decades before Jarvis began her campaign. She would protest wherever she felt wronged, even in the store belonging to John Wanamaker, who had been so crucial to the success of her crusade.

An assistant told a story about going to the tea room at Wanamaker’s store one year at Mother’s Day. When Jarvis noticed a ‘Mother’s Day Salad’ on the menu, “she ordered it, dumped it on the floor, got up and left,” says Antolini.

In 1923, Jarvis threatened to sue New York Governor Al Smith over his plans for a large Mother’s Day celebration. She clashed with the American War Mothers Association over their use of Mother’s Day in their fundraising campaigns, so they dropped the apostrophe.

She even attacked Eleanor Roosevelt in 1935, accusing the First Lady of “crafty plotting” to abuse Mother’s Day by using it in fundraising material for charities trying to combat high maternal and infant mortality rates, “the expectant mother racket,” as Jarvis called them.

This is where her own mother would have disagreed with Anna Jarvis’s vision of Mother’s Day, says Antolini.

“Anna, who was never a mother, saw motherhood through the eyes of a child - she celebrated the reigning force in the household, the one who gave life and was the centre of your world as a kid.

“Her mother envisioned motherhood beyond the traditional sphere, and wanted it honoured for the way mothers improved the community.

“Anna had her vision, her mother had another, the florists and the politicians had another,” says Antolini. “Perhaps it’s so successful because it’s open to continual reinterpretation. I think that’s the beauty of it, although Anna is probably spinning in her grave at that thought.”

Indeed, Jarvis spent her considerable inheritance and the rest of her life fighting the commercialization of “her” holiday. It was a losing battle. Anna Jarvis died in 1948, bitter, blind, partially deaf and completely penniless in a Pennsylvania mental institution.

So on this Mother’s Day, 100 years after it all began, think of the Jarvis women. Think of Anna, and make a donation in your mother’s name to an organization that supports mothers in all their endeavours.

Or give Anna Jarvis what she fought so hard to create - a day with no shopping, no donations, no greeting cards. Sit down with a pen and a piece of paper, and write a love letter to your mother. Tell her what she means to you, what you love about her. Don’t fret if words aren’t really your thing - she already knows that, and will value the effort all the more.

If it’s too late - if the brunch is done and the shrink-wrap is already off the patio furniture - write the letter anyway.

Which do you think your mother will treasure for the rest of her days? It won’t be the patio furniture.

Source: Vancouver Sun, Canada
http://tinyurl.com/3n8eyn

In a world of feminism and women’s rights, mothers are devalued and underappreciated. With the feminist movement, we as women have demanded equal (but favored) rights, control over our bodies and careers, and have learned a profound revulsion at becoming a mother. Feminism tells us to take reproduction into our own hands - i.e., prevent it - because it will ruin our goals.

Major landmarks in the feminist movement include the legalization of birth control and abortion - both devaluing human life and our own sexuality. The exclusive clique of feminists denounce women who choose to hold their sexuality sacred and do not define “sexual liberation” as women finally being able to sleep with as many men as they want with as little emotion as possible.

In America, the ability to prevent pregnancy has overwhelmed society, so much that women who choose to have more than two children become stigmatized and outcast as religious fanatics. Women who choose to have children in their 20s are deemed unmotivated and intellectually worthless.

The society feminism has created hurts women. It has brought women into a further double bind - working women are selfish and bad mothers; stay-at-home moms are unmotivated and anti-feminism.

I thought feminism was about choice. No, in a feminist world, you don’t get to choose.

Feminism denies the right of a woman to actually have a child and have as many as she wants. In China, where abortion and population control are widespread, women fight for their right to bear children and be mothers. So why in this “modern” country, where women supposedly have freedom, do we continue to dictate what we, as women, must be in order to be a complete woman?

Women’s studies teachers, who often don’t have any children, have informed me time and time again that being a good mother is simply impossible. They even admit that this society drives women to be bad mothers. Their reasoning, however, is flawed. Society sets standards too high and makes it inevitable that women will fail as mothers, they say. But if women failed so often as mothers, why would we be aghast at the mothers who kill their children? Why would that be so rare? Ask almost anyone to describe the perfect mother and they will give you the characteristics of their own mother - not exactly a failure. Ask daughters who was the most influential person in their life and they more often than not will say their mothers.

A high standard of mothering was not created arbitrarily as feminists think. It was created out of experiencing that kind of motherhood. It’s the discouragement of feminists that encourages women to detest something that truly makes women special - the ability to nurture and carry human life within us. Feminists then must hate Mother’s Day.

Source: Cincinnati Enquirer, OH
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080511/EDIT02/805110375/1090

“Boring” sums up Josh Bullock’s entire high school experience. The 17-year-old got in trouble and recalls spending time in in-school suspension, a practice he said confined him to a small room with no windows where he was supposed to do his schoolwork without any interaction.

He eventually dropped out.

“I’m intelligent,” he said, leaning forward then slumping back again, tapping his foot and moving his hand. He can’t sit still.

Neither can state officials who want to find a way to keep kids in school.

Mississippi’s dropout rate is 24.1 percent - similar to the rest of the nation. On average, only 70 percent of American students will graduate from high school. In Mississippi, only 63 percent will. State officials are determined to reduce the rate by 50 percent in five years.

Gov. Haley Barbour and State Superintendent of Education Hank Bounds agree that high school dropouts pose an economic development hurdle for Mississippi.

“They are not going to have the same opportunities,” Bounds said. “They are more likely to get engaged with illegal activity. Dropouts are more likely to have children who will drop out.”

The economic reality of an undereducated class is staggering.

# Dropouts from the Class of 2007 will cost Mississippi almost $3.9 billion in lost wages and taxes over their lifetime, according to the Alliance for Excellent Education, a national policy and advocacy organization based in Washington.

# Dropouts cost Mississippi $458 million each year, Bounds said. The number comes from money spent on social services, including medical care and prison. It also figures in lost revenue in taxes based on what all those dropouts might have made in income had they completed high school.

# More than 13,000 students drop out every year in Mississippi, according to the Mississippi Department of Education.

# The dropout rate for black and Hispanic students is close to 50 percent nationwide, according to the America’s Promise Alliance, a Washington-based nonprofit collaborative chaired by Alma Powell and founded by her husband, Gen.Colin Powell. In Mississippi, about 57 percent of blacks graduate compared to 71 percent of whites.

# Dropouts earn about $9,200 less per year than high school graduates.

‘Moral obligation’

The state’s new focus has not come about because things are suddenly worse in Mississippi.

“The graduation rate is probably better than it’s ever been,” Bounds said.

And it’s not that Mississippi is worse than any other state. Nationwide, dropout rates are similar to the state’s numbers.

The problem is more complicated than dropping out of high school, though. High school itself just isn’t enough anymore to make it in a global economy based on high technology and ever-evolving transformations.

“Now that we are really understanding this issue, we can understand and see what the real problem looks like,” Bounds said. “I just think I have a moral obligation to make this a focus of the state, to wage this war.”

While politicians, educators, pundits and other adults debate how to solve the dropout crisis, the kids are angry.

“Teachers actually say ‘They don’t pay me enough to do this.’ They don’t want to be there,” said Adam Dearman, 17, who dropped out of Seminary High School earlier this year.

Cameron Clark, 16, wanted to move on with her life. She wants to be an embalmer and plans to attend junior college to meet that goal. Forrest County Agricultural High School already taught her everything it could, she said, and she left school this year.

“I don’t count myself as a dropout. I withdrew from school - I didn’t drop out.”

But Mississippi does count her as a dropout.

High school obsolete

A Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation-funded study that explored why kids drop out found 47 percent of dropouts said classes were not interesting and 69 percent said they were not motivated.

Gates got the shocked attention of the nation’s governors in 2005 when he told a gathering of them that high school was obsolete.

Students are not learning what they need to learn to work for international companies immersed in high technology, he said. The problem goes beyond secondary school - more Americans need to finish college and engage in intellectual challenges to propel the nation into the future.

But before that need can be addressed, more kids must finish 12th grade, experts say. To keep them engaged and make them marketable, a major overhaul is needed. American high schools need updating - call it High School 2.0.

Mississippi is in the middle of a high school redesign. Bounds said it is a move that will make high school relevant.

“There will be lots of strands that look alike - what we do with technology, what we teach teachers to counsel students and explain opportunities,” Bounds said.

Some things will vary for each school district. Schools are different sizes and different regions in the state have their own needs. For example, Lamar County schools are incorporating economics into the curriculum at every level to help students make better choices.

The experts

Part of the redesign has to include more guidance for students, even building it into the required curriculum, national experts say.

Effective comprehensive guidance has three components, said Norman Gysbers, an expert in the field and a professor at the University of Missouri.

First, the curriculum should include knowledge about career opportunities. Second, the school should work with each student and his parents to develop a personal plan of study in middle school. Third, the school should provide special help when it’s needed on a short-term basis.

“The focus is on a living plan initiated in high school,” Gysbers said.

An example is Navigation 101, a program in the state of Washington that has had great success. A program of comprehensive guidance should be an ongoing quest, not a one-time determination, Gysbers said.

“Plans change,” he said. Guidance should never lock students into only one option they can’t escape. Kids have to feel as if school matters in their life and actually makes a difference, Gysbers said.

“If students feel connected to school, they are going to do better,” he said.

Different programs and curricula are available based on the research of Gysbers and others who have examined the need for decades. An example is the extensive yet intuitive Career Choices course used in many schools across the nation, but not in Mississippi because strict state guidelines don’t leave room for a new subject. Career Choices incorporates English and math skills with “life planning.” That program promotes the idea of a 10-year plan starting around eighth grade with dreams and visions and morphing into a strategy for the next phase of learning after high school. By contrast, many existing programs just concentrate on getting through the four years of high school.

The challenge is getting comprehensive guidance implemented into the curriculum.

“If we have to concentrate on basics, how do we get extras in?” Gysbers asked. He said that is a common concern of school administrators already loaded with heavy state and federal requirements.

Ideally, the developmental process begins in elementary school.

“It’s really too late by high school,” Gysbers said. “That kind of effort takes a lot of time and resources.”

Other experts agree. It takes parents as well as teachers and schools that care about the individual kid.

“When you connect a student to an adult, it builds relationships, it helps him build goals,” said Gene Bottoms of Atlanta, senior vice president of Southern Regional Education Board and founding director of High Schools That Work.

Any dropout prevention plan has to be more than about holding more students in school, but at the same time that is one of the obstacles.

“You can’t do much to get them engaged if they aren’t in school,” Bottoms said.

“We have a very high failure rate in grade nine,” he said, adding that part of this is because of a high student-to-teacher ratio and part of it is because it’s often teachers with the least experience who teach freshmen high school classes.

The more experienced teachers often teach Advanced Placement classes to smaller classes in higher grades. Bottoms wants to turn the whole system around.

He thinks one reason for the dropout rate and the ninth-grade failures is because current high school requirements load up on academics in the ninth grade. Some students have to take two math classes, for example. One is remedial if their math scores are too low and one is required for them not to get left behind.

Keeping boys interested is another large problem, Bottoms said.

“We’re losing male students at a higher rate than young ladies,” he said.

Schools need to change the experience for teenagers. In the ninth grade, there should a practical class with hands-on applications, either in fine arts or technology that allows kids to get up out of their seats and interact as they put academic skills to work. That’s one idea.

Another idea Bottoms has is to offer catch-up classes so students have another opportunity to pick up a required class without becoming so hopelessly behind they don’t choose to stay.

Hattiesburg High is considering something along these lines with online courses that could meet the need.

“We have got to redesign the curriculum in ninth grade,” Bottoms said. “Do less tracking and sorting. Enroll more kids in AP classes. Don’t wait until 11th grade to start tech classes. Improving the high school completion rate is as much about changing adult behavior as it is about changing student behavior.”

Bottoms describes a high school in San Antonio, Texas, that had bullet holes in the walls and looked and felt like a prison. The school administrators eventually turned to Boys Town, a Nebraska-based nonprofit organization, for help.

“They did a 180-degree turnaround,” Bottoms said. The difference? Treating the students as individuals.

“They don’t sense adults respect them,” Bottoms said.

Schools that want to change need a district that supports them. Mississippi’s dropout prevention program is a step in the right direction, Bottoms said.

“Hank (Bounds) has a handle on things. Accountability has to give as much importance to completion as to achievement.”

Where are parents?

A lack of parental involvement is at the root of many dropout stories.

“Parents do not get involved,” Bottoms said. “And there’s not very good mechanisms for poor parents to get involved. Better-off parents who are educated know how to work the system.”

It’s not only one thing that needs fixing. It’s many things. Bottoms suggests leadership training for principals and teachers to start.

“This will cost some money,” Bottoms said. “Look at your prison costs. You are either going to make your investment now or pay for it later.”

Josh Bullock, meanwhile, is still angry but not unmotivated. The former Oak Grove student is getting his GED, looking for a part-time job and planning to attend junior college to study computer science, maybe something in game design.

School just got in the way of his plans.

Source: Hattiesburg American, MS
http://tinyurl.com/6mot7g