Letters to Editors

Re: "Parents must be there for their teenage children" (October 7, 2009)

Re: "Are they parents or breeders? - September 30, 2009 ?" Joseph Holley is right on target in this column. The youth he describes (and these include both male and female teens) are frequently out of touch with their feelings, all except the anger that covers their fear and their sadness at being separated from their parents.

Without parental involvement and guidance these young people look to their peers for connection and safety. Unfortunately, the rest of their crowd is just as lost and just as immature. Gordon Neufeld, a developmental psychologist in Vancouver, argues that it is never too late for parents who want to reclaim their children. His book, Hold On to Your Kids: Why Parents Need to Matter More than Peers, provides both guidance and hope for those who really care.


Re: Full-day kindergarten (June 16, 2009)

The greatest cost of implementing the Pascal/McGuinty proposals may well be emotional, not financial. Jonas Himmelstrand, addressing the Swedish Parliament in December, 2008 commented that "Swedish family policies during the last 30 years have resulted in insecure children and youth, stressed adults and lower quality parenthood. As security in children is a strong social legacy, it is a negative spiral." Providing kindergarten and day-care "opportunities" for young children will do absolutely nothing to improve children's social skills, mental health or academic performance. What does make a difference is cultivating a context for the child to become attached to a parent, caregiver, teacher, educational assistant or child-care worker. Attachment requires that the adult in the equation be willing and able to attend to and to protect the child; to help the child to feel that s/he is safe and accepted - no matter what. Providing the school system with more well-educated teachers is not the same as providing teachers who understand the developmental needs of their charges and who are willing to become emotionally involved with them. The law refers to educators as operating in loco parentis. Teachers need to be trained to be good "foster" parents while in school with our children.

Re: When your children say "No!" (March 29, 2009)

Perhaps Drew Edwards' column referring to the "Terrible Twos? That's when kids 'no' more" seems to be written from a somewhat harassed parent and is apparently intended to illuminate, or perhaps to entertain. My response is intended to both support and inform those who care for our toddlers. As parents, grandparents and child care providers, we must think very carefully about how to interpret and then respond to a two-year old who says "no". On the one hand, children need us to script the rules in order to be safe. On the other hand, when a child says "no" this is part of early brain development and is absolutely necessary to counter feelings of being pressured or tricked into doing something which is directed by someone else's will. Saying "no" serves a very important developmental purpose. Growing one's own will is a great resource for living. Being able to stand up for oneself, having both the passion to know what one wants in life and the drive to go for it are wired within the developing brain. It's not that the child is "strong-willed" or that the Free Will switch has been activated. It actually takes a life-time to develop a strong will and children are at the very beginning of the process. Hearing "no" from a child can give us hope that s/he is developing as nature intended. It can also be a warning sign that we have some work to do inside the relationship. Understanding the developing brain of your immature child will help you to parent from a place of confidence and competence. Your journey has just begun! May you cultivate a rich relationship with your child so that s/he can reach his/her full human potential. For more insights on parenting, I refer you to Dr. Gordon Neufeld's book: Hold On To Your Kids.


"Bullies and relationships" (May 10, 2008)

A response to Don Drone's Opinion Editorial. One of the biggest factors for someone to break out of taboo behaviours is that they have a nurturing environment in which to mature. Suspensions or separation, restorative justice or shame-based discipline don't work. They ignore whether a child has developed a connected relationship with a responsible adult. Troubled kids or kids who are at risk don't listen to adults. As a community, we need to be cultivating caring, safe relationships with responsible adults both in the school and in the home. Bullies are made and can be unmade.

Re: "Bullies" (May 30, 2008)

Your recent article "Battle against bullies rages on" is another reflection of why bullying programs fail to curb bad behaviour. Until we can see that bullies are the most vulnerable among us, we will continue to fight instead of understanding their behaviour. Bullies are made and can be unmade.

Re: "Kids are away, teachers don't play" (December 6, 2008)

As a speaker at the Wellington Catholic District School Board professional development day on Friday December 5, I would like to thank both the Guelph Mercury and the School Board for seeing the pivotal position adults have in the lives of our most stuck kids. Until relatively recently teachers were able to ride on the coattails of the strong adult orientations created and supported by culture and society. That was then, this is now. The problem we now face with regard to the education of our children is not something money can fix, curriculum can address or technology can remedy. The teachability of any particular student is the outcome of many factors. As Brenda Kenyon said in her letter to the editor on Tuesday December 9th, a great deal can be done to help children. Teachability requires a connection with the teacher, learning requires a relationship with a responsible adult whom the child looks up to, reaching full human potential requires a place in which a child can mature. Responsible adults have a powerful part to play in creating safe environments in which kids can thrive.