Today Sparky got a bad splinter. He made a great commotion over getting it out. Bhaer was meant to do it, cause his eyesight is better, but he was too tenderhearted and was taking too long with no success so I had to step in, hold Sparky down and quickly though I'm sure painfully scratch it out. Sparky thanked me immediately though when he realised that I had got it out in a couple of seconds, which was good after all the screaming.
I felt terrible. But it had to be done. And done quickly. I also felt bad because I lost my temper in the middle of it all and told my frightened child off.
What a terrible tightrope we walk as parents, doing things for a child's good that are painful at the time (shades of Hebrews 12:11) and having to work out when that discipline is warranted and when not, and how we should go about it. Sometimes we will make good decisions (like getting the splinter out) and sometimes bad(like losing my temper). Sometimes we will fail our children by being too indulgent or inconsistent, and at other times we will fail them by being overly rigid or unfair. Parenting requires the patience of Job and the wisdom of Solomon. Though I do recall that Job did do some complaining and Solomon did some foolish things.
And all I can do is keep trying to love as much as I can, apologise whenever I need to, and pray. hard.
Showing posts with label parenting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label parenting. Show all posts
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Equal Parenting?
I was intrigued to read an article recently about a couple who advocate a strict form of equal parenting, called Equally Shared Parenting. In this model, parents do the same amount of childcare, same amount of house tasks, and same hours at work.
Already, it sounds very inflexible doesn't it? It seems to me only some couples would have the ability to choose exactly equal hours at work - and in the present economic climate, employees will be grateful for retaining their job, even if it isn't exactly the right number of hours. Different jobs have a different degree of flexibility, too.
For us, my work is more flexible than my husband's work. I have also wanted to breastfeed, and with both sons was unable to pump. I have been blessed however, that Bhaer's work isn't high powered overtime kinda work, and so he has been working around a 4 day week while the kids are little, while I have worked a roughly 2.5 day week (20 hours), from 3 months old with both boys, including being able to do some of that work at home. So, because he works more hours at a paid job than myself, and also for 2 years was studying (both of us agreed it was the right time for him to do this) I have taken up more of the childcare and housework. This, I think, is a fair enough way to do things in the present state of society, and shouldn't be made to look like it somehow suppresses me as a woman (though you may argue that society as a whole should be more supportive of all parents!), or shortchanges our children.
Yet that said, when out of curiosity I went to their website, I found their approach did have something going for it. I used their toolbox, which enables you to calculate how many tasks of childcare, paid work, housework and recreation you each take on. The idea is that you try to even this out, which I don't think is necessary or always achievable.
Yet it was worthwhile to look at how we divide things.
I found that while I do do more housework, when all tasks are taken into consideration such as paying bills, or arranging house maintenance, Bhaer is doing more than I gave him credit for, especially given he does do more paid work. Perhaps then, if I am dissatisfied with this, it is that I want to share tasks rather then divide them up. It might be fairer then for me to say I could take on for instance some bill paying, if he does some more dishwashing, rather than make it sound like he does nothing. Or to acknowledge what he does, but admit that I need a bit more help (i.e. my needs, rather than his slackness being the issue).
I also discovered that neither of us gets much recreation. As a couple then, we need to help each other both do this, rather than sit around feeling pity for ourselves.
The area of real inequity (rather than just perceived) was strangely, in tasks to do with the children. It was not only that I did more childcare generally, which is how our arrangement works and was OK with me, but that I took on every child related task - some were shared, and many were just me, and there was only one task really that he did rather than me. Tasks included, for instance, buying pressies for kids' friends, managing the kids' wardrobes, packing the bag to go out. This has several consequences. Firstly, it is a hidden source of stress and work for me. This revealed why I felt overworked. It also meant that while I spend time with the kids doing tasks, when Bhaer is with them it can be more about fun. So it was unfair on me and the kids. But it was also unfair I think, for Bhaer. I then am perceived by the children as the one who gets things done and knows what's what. It is not that Bhaer refuses to do these things - it is just that he doesn't even think about them needing to be done. And I don't tell him. So, it told me that these tasks must also be considered when we review our schedules.
I guess where I come to after all that, is not to say we all should be splitting everything down the middle. That's not how life works (breastfeeding for instance, is hard to share equally.....). Rather, that however we decide to split things up, it can be helpful to do so in detail taking into account ALL the tasks of family life. That way, we can make informed decisions about how our family works, rather than falling into patterns that we may/may not be happy with, and may/may not work.
Hmm, what do I call that? Thoughtful, considered parenting perhaps?
Already, it sounds very inflexible doesn't it? It seems to me only some couples would have the ability to choose exactly equal hours at work - and in the present economic climate, employees will be grateful for retaining their job, even if it isn't exactly the right number of hours. Different jobs have a different degree of flexibility, too.
For us, my work is more flexible than my husband's work. I have also wanted to breastfeed, and with both sons was unable to pump. I have been blessed however, that Bhaer's work isn't high powered overtime kinda work, and so he has been working around a 4 day week while the kids are little, while I have worked a roughly 2.5 day week (20 hours), from 3 months old with both boys, including being able to do some of that work at home. So, because he works more hours at a paid job than myself, and also for 2 years was studying (both of us agreed it was the right time for him to do this) I have taken up more of the childcare and housework. This, I think, is a fair enough way to do things in the present state of society, and shouldn't be made to look like it somehow suppresses me as a woman (though you may argue that society as a whole should be more supportive of all parents!), or shortchanges our children.
Yet that said, when out of curiosity I went to their website, I found their approach did have something going for it. I used their toolbox, which enables you to calculate how many tasks of childcare, paid work, housework and recreation you each take on. The idea is that you try to even this out, which I don't think is necessary or always achievable.
Yet it was worthwhile to look at how we divide things.
I found that while I do do more housework, when all tasks are taken into consideration such as paying bills, or arranging house maintenance, Bhaer is doing more than I gave him credit for, especially given he does do more paid work. Perhaps then, if I am dissatisfied with this, it is that I want to share tasks rather then divide them up. It might be fairer then for me to say I could take on for instance some bill paying, if he does some more dishwashing, rather than make it sound like he does nothing. Or to acknowledge what he does, but admit that I need a bit more help (i.e. my needs, rather than his slackness being the issue).
I also discovered that neither of us gets much recreation. As a couple then, we need to help each other both do this, rather than sit around feeling pity for ourselves.
The area of real inequity (rather than just perceived) was strangely, in tasks to do with the children. It was not only that I did more childcare generally, which is how our arrangement works and was OK with me, but that I took on every child related task - some were shared, and many were just me, and there was only one task really that he did rather than me. Tasks included, for instance, buying pressies for kids' friends, managing the kids' wardrobes, packing the bag to go out. This has several consequences. Firstly, it is a hidden source of stress and work for me. This revealed why I felt overworked. It also meant that while I spend time with the kids doing tasks, when Bhaer is with them it can be more about fun. So it was unfair on me and the kids. But it was also unfair I think, for Bhaer. I then am perceived by the children as the one who gets things done and knows what's what. It is not that Bhaer refuses to do these things - it is just that he doesn't even think about them needing to be done. And I don't tell him. So, it told me that these tasks must also be considered when we review our schedules.
I guess where I come to after all that, is not to say we all should be splitting everything down the middle. That's not how life works (breastfeeding for instance, is hard to share equally.....). Rather, that however we decide to split things up, it can be helpful to do so in detail taking into account ALL the tasks of family life. That way, we can make informed decisions about how our family works, rather than falling into patterns that we may/may not be happy with, and may/may not work.
Hmm, what do I call that? Thoughtful, considered parenting perhaps?
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Raising children in community
I've blogged about this topic before, but it hit me again this week to wonder how much more stressed women are in childrearing since the advent of the nuclear family and women being isolated at home all day with young kids.
It came to mind because I spent Tuesday this week at my cousin's house, tag team childcare, as she and I had various things we had to get done during that day and so we pooled our resources and I stayed at her place for the day (Thanks R!) At times, both of us were there - sharing looking after the kids and working on our computers. The kids always had one of us ready to pay attention to them, if not both of us. I really enjoyed the day - being able to chat occasionally and share the duties. It brought to mind other days where I have spent the day with other women and their children, and we have commented that the day seems easier and faster when you do it together. Now, it isn't always convenient or desirable to do this, but I think such a model reflects older cultural village style society, and I reckon this is how we are intended to do it. If only we didn't think that this means we are failing, and that going it alone is some kind of test of motherhood!
By the way if you were wondering why I haven't blogged for a while - it was my birthday a week ago, my husband's been away, and my mum is in hospital, among just some of the things going on.........
It came to mind because I spent Tuesday this week at my cousin's house, tag team childcare, as she and I had various things we had to get done during that day and so we pooled our resources and I stayed at her place for the day (Thanks R!) At times, both of us were there - sharing looking after the kids and working on our computers. The kids always had one of us ready to pay attention to them, if not both of us. I really enjoyed the day - being able to chat occasionally and share the duties. It brought to mind other days where I have spent the day with other women and their children, and we have commented that the day seems easier and faster when you do it together. Now, it isn't always convenient or desirable to do this, but I think such a model reflects older cultural village style society, and I reckon this is how we are intended to do it. If only we didn't think that this means we are failing, and that going it alone is some kind of test of motherhood!
By the way if you were wondering why I haven't blogged for a while - it was my birthday a week ago, my husband's been away, and my mum is in hospital, among just some of the things going on.........
Saturday, January 19, 2008
I've been reading
Some very quick book reviews.
I've recently read 2 books by Sheri Tepper - sci fi - quite similar to each other - called the companions and the margarets. Both look at an overpopulated Earth interacting with aliens. I enjoyed them because she always does interesting alien cultures. What intrigued me about both these is that in both, humans have been interfered with by malign aliens at an early stage, and this explains why humans have both the capacity for great good (as they were meant to be) and great evil (as a result of the change). As a Christian, this is quite similar in some ways to the biblical view of humans. Except that the Bible says that humans are culpable for moving away from their intended selves, but then tells of forgiveness and a way out. It made me think that this ambiguous and ambivalent nature of humanity is one of the questions that this world sets us. Why are we like this? and is there a solution? I wasn't sure about Tepper's answers, but was very interested in the process of exploring them anyway.
On a different note, I just read the Memory Keeper's daughter (get this! the local library was selling books for a dollar a pop and this was one - I bought 6). A blogging friend recently reviewed this - see here. 2 things that struck me - the destructive nature of secrets, and the importance of every single person. As a twin, this book really got me in - I couldn't even imagine growing up without my twin, as happens to Paul in this book, when his twin sister with down syndrome is sent away. There are all sorts of ethical questions with this book, but in the end it is a book about treasuring people for who they are in their uniqueness. It made me resolve to bring up 2 boys who are radiantly secure in my love, that do not feel that they have to achieve something or be something other than they are. Before I was a parent I thought this was easy to do - but now I know how easy it is as a parent to unwittingly weigh your kids down with your dreams for them.
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
playing favourites
I just finished reading Jodi Picoult's my sister's keeper. Not my favourite author, but she does write about gripping issues. It is about a girl conceived by her parents and chosen out of several embryos to save the life of her sister who has leukemia, and the consequences for her and the entire family. While about a specific medical ethical conundrum, which was of interest in itself (I end up having problems with throwing away the other embryos, but can understand the motivation of the parents), it raises questions more generally for me about how we balance the needs of the different children in the family. Obviously, if one child is ill or has some other special need, that will affect the others greatly. But in any family, I think, this balancing act occurs. For us at the moment, Sparky our eldest, often has to be aware of the needs of the younger Owl (for instance by being quiet when he sleeps). How much of this is good for a child, as it teaches being other centred, and when does it start to affect the child negatively, for example unwittingly telling a child they are less important than the other?
Sunday, November 4, 2007
internalising
Sparky is having one of those developmental change periods...we had a difficult morning this morning, because Bhaer and I were both busy and Sparky likes lots of attention - anyway he followed me around most of the time talking non stop (NOT an exaggeration) and it was wearing, and so I got irritable with him. Eventually he went off to do something by himself, and proudly showed me what he had done - create an interesting pattern on his playdough ------with his jumper. I didn't get him in trouble, since he didn't know he shouldn't do this, but told him not to do it again. I changed his jumper, because he was just about to go out. I came back and he was now creating patterns with something I had said was Ok, but still making a huge mess, including on the new jumper, and we were less than 5 mins off going out, so I said it was time to put the playdough away. He was very upset, and I explained he wasnt in trouble but that no he couldnt have it back, and why. Next thing I know, I find him standing face against a wall, and he says mum I'm here. I'm like yes I can see that... and then he says "I'm having time out". He had put himself into time out! So then I gave him lots of cuddles and tried to explain again that he wasn't in trouble. Then I had very mixed feelings about this: 1) was very impressed that he seemed to be internalising discipline. Becuase of course our hope is that he develops internal values and self control, rather than being reliant on being externally controlled. There have been other signs of this lately, and I'm really pleased about that.
2) I did feel that this was the result of a whole morning of me being irritable with him - after all talking non stop isn't exactly naughty (though I did tell him to be quieter a couple of times when I was on the phone), just tiring. So it isn't good that at the end of the morning he feels like a bad boy. This links into my previous post about needing to be aware of the interplay of his extraversion with my intraversion.
So, so pleased that he is developing a moral sense, but wondering how to teach him the fine balance between being himself in all his chatty, friendly gorgeousness, whilst respecting other's boundaries and need for space - we had this issue a while ago with him hugging people too much, and he finally learnt that not everybody wants a hug all the time, especially not 20 in a row.
In other Sparky news, he came up with his first joke (very proud parents!)
When does a truck run over your toe? when it is a tow truck!
and today managed to kiss several little girls at Koorong (Christian book store) - most of whom looked pleased, but the girls' mums looked even more charmed.
2) I did feel that this was the result of a whole morning of me being irritable with him - after all talking non stop isn't exactly naughty (though I did tell him to be quieter a couple of times when I was on the phone), just tiring. So it isn't good that at the end of the morning he feels like a bad boy. This links into my previous post about needing to be aware of the interplay of his extraversion with my intraversion.
So, so pleased that he is developing a moral sense, but wondering how to teach him the fine balance between being himself in all his chatty, friendly gorgeousness, whilst respecting other's boundaries and need for space - we had this issue a while ago with him hugging people too much, and he finally learnt that not everybody wants a hug all the time, especially not 20 in a row.
In other Sparky news, he came up with his first joke (very proud parents!)
When does a truck run over your toe? when it is a tow truck!
and today managed to kiss several little girls at Koorong (Christian book store) - most of whom looked pleased, but the girls' mums looked even more charmed.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
how a child survives
as I said I might, I thought I would write my impressions of the book Borderliners by Peter Hoeg - see previous post. Sadly I got a whole post ready in my head in the shower but by the time I got a chance to write this post a lot of those eloquent musings have vanished.
Beware - if you plan to read the book there are some spoilers ahead. In the book 3 children all damaged by life in some way try to cope with the environment of a very structured (most notably with time and assessment), rigid boarding school. One child has been horribly abused by his parents - and revenged himself on them by murdering them - another (Peter the protagonist - also Peter Hoeg though supposedly not autobiographical) has been orphaned since a baby and been brought up in institutions, another has had both parents die, her mother first and then her father by suicide. The school is a celebrated one - its structured system, a form of darwinism , means that those who cope with it end up highly successful - but those who fail to do so breakdown. A microcosm of the world really.
The school has taken on these borderline cases, because it believes it can save them. Of course the school has overlooked a crucial foundation for resilience - children need to have not only discipline but also love. The children who cope with the demands of this school environment come from stable family backgrounds. So these 3 have little chance of survival. Only one of them does - not Katarina, the girl who had had a loving family - well at least she doesn't seem to have (she is missing in action at the end) - but Peter the institutionalised one. The abused boy has no chance - the love shown him by Peter is too little too late - although it does seem to prevent him murdering again. Katarina perhaps, has a question mark over her survival, because her father did not love her enough to stay around. The difference for Peter is that he has known not only love but known the redemptive power of self sacrificial love. A pivotal scene is based around the love - grace really - shown him by an older child in one of the institutions - the children are washed by being processed through three showers - one warm, 2 cold, one after another. There is no time to stay in the warm shower, as you must move on as the one ahead of you becomes free - and no-one wants to stay for long in the cold ones. The warm shower is one of the few moments of comfort in their bleak existence. This older child, Humlum, stays in the cold shower until his body cannot take it any longer - and this is in Denmark folks - so that Peter coming up behind him can have a warm shower for as long as possible. This for Peter, encapsulated love. HUmlum's ghostlike presence (Humlum dies earlier) keeps him going.
Humlum is thus the quintessential Christ figure. The sad thing though is that in the book Jesus is equated not with the grace of Humlum but with the rigid legalism of the school authorities who profess to be Christians.
Thus this book has something to say not only to child development but more broadly to what is needed for survival in this world. Depressingly, too often Christians do not provide those moments of grace to others that can make all the difference between being lifted up or being crushed. Here's to a God that lifts up.
Isaiah 42:3
a bruised reed he will not break,
and a dimly burning wick he will not quench;
he will faithfully bring forth justice.
Beware - if you plan to read the book there are some spoilers ahead. In the book 3 children all damaged by life in some way try to cope with the environment of a very structured (most notably with time and assessment), rigid boarding school. One child has been horribly abused by his parents - and revenged himself on them by murdering them - another (Peter the protagonist - also Peter Hoeg though supposedly not autobiographical) has been orphaned since a baby and been brought up in institutions, another has had both parents die, her mother first and then her father by suicide. The school is a celebrated one - its structured system, a form of darwinism , means that those who cope with it end up highly successful - but those who fail to do so breakdown. A microcosm of the world really.
The school has taken on these borderline cases, because it believes it can save them. Of course the school has overlooked a crucial foundation for resilience - children need to have not only discipline but also love. The children who cope with the demands of this school environment come from stable family backgrounds. So these 3 have little chance of survival. Only one of them does - not Katarina, the girl who had had a loving family - well at least she doesn't seem to have (she is missing in action at the end) - but Peter the institutionalised one. The abused boy has no chance - the love shown him by Peter is too little too late - although it does seem to prevent him murdering again. Katarina perhaps, has a question mark over her survival, because her father did not love her enough to stay around. The difference for Peter is that he has known not only love but known the redemptive power of self sacrificial love. A pivotal scene is based around the love - grace really - shown him by an older child in one of the institutions - the children are washed by being processed through three showers - one warm, 2 cold, one after another. There is no time to stay in the warm shower, as you must move on as the one ahead of you becomes free - and no-one wants to stay for long in the cold ones. The warm shower is one of the few moments of comfort in their bleak existence. This older child, Humlum, stays in the cold shower until his body cannot take it any longer - and this is in Denmark folks - so that Peter coming up behind him can have a warm shower for as long as possible. This for Peter, encapsulated love. HUmlum's ghostlike presence (Humlum dies earlier) keeps him going.
Humlum is thus the quintessential Christ figure. The sad thing though is that in the book Jesus is equated not with the grace of Humlum but with the rigid legalism of the school authorities who profess to be Christians.
Thus this book has something to say not only to child development but more broadly to what is needed for survival in this world. Depressingly, too often Christians do not provide those moments of grace to others that can make all the difference between being lifted up or being crushed. Here's to a God that lifts up.
Isaiah 42:3
a bruised reed he will not break,
and a dimly burning wick he will not quench;
he will faithfully bring forth justice.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
security and competency
I have been thinking about and struggling with the issue of developing both security and competency in my children. This is a similar issue to how you balance love and discipline with children, but I guess a slightly different perspective.
It has been on my mind a bit recently due not only to the constant work of parenting, but also because I have been reading about a book that we bought from a fete - a novel - about 3 damaged children at an experimental school - more about that when I finish it perhaps (if you are interested, it is Borderliners by Peter Hoeg).
I want my kids to feel that I love and am interested in them no matter what. Pretty fundamental for happiness and peace in this world. I want them to be secure. But I also want children who can cope with this world. I want them to be competent. So, for instance, when one of my kids hurts himself (btw not gender exclusive, just I only have boys!), how much sympathy do you show? He needs to know that I care when he is hurt, but also that he is able to pick himself up and keep on going.
Lately I have been a bit draconian about cup spills with Sparky - we had trouble changing him over to a non lidded cup because he just would not take responsibility for it. He could use it, but he wouldnt keep aware of where it was, so would knock it over. Eventually I did 2 things - 1- introduced negative consequences for spills due to carelessness (not genuine accidents) 2 - stopped giving him lidded cups. 1 - had some effect but 2 - was the most effective.
Was it important that he use a non lidded cup? probably not in and of itself, although now Owl is using a cup, good not to get them confused for hygiene.
Rather, it became symbolic of something larger for me - that I needed to teach him responsibility and self control - if he was able to do something, then I wanted him to do it. I dont require for instance that he dress himself, but I currently do require that he undress himself except for tops - which I give some help with.
I have noticed that I tend on the whole to require more competency than others - though not as much as some!
But lately, I have been worrying again about showing more grace - the whole cup issue made sparky a bit TOO worried about accidents, and I don't want him to feel he can't mistakes.
i have a vague memory of reading an article about this by someone like stephanie dowrick - anyone recall?
then of course there is the whole issue of different personalities - Sparky is very dtermined and has drive which will help him, but he is , oddly, not very independent - he likes you doing something for him. So I feel the need to encourage independence.
Owl, seems to be less driven - much more likely to give up on mastering something, but on the otherhand more independent. I think I will need to encourage him to persist.
It has been on my mind a bit recently due not only to the constant work of parenting, but also because I have been reading about a book that we bought from a fete - a novel - about 3 damaged children at an experimental school - more about that when I finish it perhaps (if you are interested, it is Borderliners by Peter Hoeg).
I want my kids to feel that I love and am interested in them no matter what. Pretty fundamental for happiness and peace in this world. I want them to be secure. But I also want children who can cope with this world. I want them to be competent. So, for instance, when one of my kids hurts himself (btw not gender exclusive, just I only have boys!), how much sympathy do you show? He needs to know that I care when he is hurt, but also that he is able to pick himself up and keep on going.
Lately I have been a bit draconian about cup spills with Sparky - we had trouble changing him over to a non lidded cup because he just would not take responsibility for it. He could use it, but he wouldnt keep aware of where it was, so would knock it over. Eventually I did 2 things - 1- introduced negative consequences for spills due to carelessness (not genuine accidents) 2 - stopped giving him lidded cups. 1 - had some effect but 2 - was the most effective.
Was it important that he use a non lidded cup? probably not in and of itself, although now Owl is using a cup, good not to get them confused for hygiene.
Rather, it became symbolic of something larger for me - that I needed to teach him responsibility and self control - if he was able to do something, then I wanted him to do it. I dont require for instance that he dress himself, but I currently do require that he undress himself except for tops - which I give some help with.
I have noticed that I tend on the whole to require more competency than others - though not as much as some!
But lately, I have been worrying again about showing more grace - the whole cup issue made sparky a bit TOO worried about accidents, and I don't want him to feel he can't mistakes.
i have a vague memory of reading an article about this by someone like stephanie dowrick - anyone recall?
then of course there is the whole issue of different personalities - Sparky is very dtermined and has drive which will help him, but he is , oddly, not very independent - he likes you doing something for him. So I feel the need to encourage independence.
Owl, seems to be less driven - much more likely to give up on mastering something, but on the otherhand more independent. I think I will need to encourage him to persist.
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
facebook addiction
I would like to confess my new facebook addiction. Part of the addiction is that it is engineered to have things happen to you everyday or to people you know, so you feel like you should check back to find out....
But I have found facebook a good thing because:
- 1) many of my friends who are parents with small kids are on it. This time of your life can be quite isolating - this gives us some degree of community and support without leaving the house.
- 2) there are many people I know and like who I would love to spend time with or get to know better but can't because of 1) or because they live too far away. This enables me to keep some degree of friendship going until a later time when there might be more chance to catch up
- 3) it is good with church people, now I can know what is going on for them sooner - as a part time pastor this helps.
it isn't a substitute for depth interaction face-to-face or even on the phone, but it fills in the gaps until this can happen.
But I have found facebook a good thing because:
- 1) many of my friends who are parents with small kids are on it. This time of your life can be quite isolating - this gives us some degree of community and support without leaving the house.
- 2) there are many people I know and like who I would love to spend time with or get to know better but can't because of 1) or because they live too far away. This enables me to keep some degree of friendship going until a later time when there might be more chance to catch up
- 3) it is good with church people, now I can know what is going on for them sooner - as a part time pastor this helps.
it isn't a substitute for depth interaction face-to-face or even on the phone, but it fills in the gaps until this can happen.
Friday, July 27, 2007
parenting a multi person job
My husband has been away for a week - gets back today. So been me and the boys, with some hands on help from grandparents, and some phone support from friends. I really feel for single parents - it is very hard to do it by yourself - very tempting to let things slip too. Though I don't agree its a 2 person job, parenting - more like a 10 person job!!!! Welcome home, my partner in parenting.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
transitions and personal change
sorry btw for lack of capitals typing one handed with sick baby on lap - we are the house of virus at moment.
i mentioned i was spiritually flabby with 2 kids now, impatient and cranky -on another's blog - and a friend mentioned that i was always that way- but now noticing it under stress. which was 2 minds thinking alike as i had just been thinking of blogging that. though here i am thinking noone outside my own family noticed this about me ;)
actually every life change seems to uncover more layers of sin - marriage, one kid, 2 kids.....each time you realise you aint as nice as you thought. which is worth knowing, but hard all the same.
and with kids, you want them to grow up with you as a model, not an anti-model.
much more understanding of my own parents now
i mentioned i was spiritually flabby with 2 kids now, impatient and cranky -on another's blog - and a friend mentioned that i was always that way- but now noticing it under stress. which was 2 minds thinking alike as i had just been thinking of blogging that. though here i am thinking noone outside my own family noticed this about me ;)
actually every life change seems to uncover more layers of sin - marriage, one kid, 2 kids.....each time you realise you aint as nice as you thought. which is worth knowing, but hard all the same.
and with kids, you want them to grow up with you as a model, not an anti-model.
much more understanding of my own parents now
Sunday, April 1, 2007
theology and kids
Story one: we read a book on Easter at playgroup and I asked Sparky about it later that day. That book was about Jesus mummy, not Easter. Easter is about Jesus I reply. Gales of laughter from Sparky. No mummy, Easter is about Eggs. Ok I may be a pastor, but how do you teach a 2 year old about the cross?
Story two: Last night, I was singing Jesus loves the little children to Sparky before bed. This always ends up with multiple verses Jesus loves all the Sparkys, Owls, Daddies and Mummies, at Sparky's urging. I wasn't feeling in charity with my family, the world or God really. As I sung each verse, I realised the simple truth of this song "they are precious in his sight" and my failure to live by it. I had been disciplining Sparky all day - necessary, but how could I try to bring in more grace with the truth I had been giving him? (see Cloud and Townsend Raising Great Kids :parenting with Grace and Truth, and Kimmel's Grace based parenting) . I was running out of patience with Owl, who is a bad sleeper, losing sight of how all this would fade in memory as he grew. I was taking out my frustration on my husband - thinking cynical thoughts about men generally. Forgetting that he was my ally in this difficult business of bringing up children. And I had certainly forgotten Jesus loved me, feeling like a grit your teeth hopeless unappreciated drudge. It occurred to me society doesn't appreciate mummies enough, but Jesus does - the Jesus that cared for his mother even as he died. I think I need to go back to Sunday School.
Story two: Last night, I was singing Jesus loves the little children to Sparky before bed. This always ends up with multiple verses Jesus loves all the Sparkys, Owls, Daddies and Mummies, at Sparky's urging. I wasn't feeling in charity with my family, the world or God really. As I sung each verse, I realised the simple truth of this song "they are precious in his sight" and my failure to live by it. I had been disciplining Sparky all day - necessary, but how could I try to bring in more grace with the truth I had been giving him? (see Cloud and Townsend Raising Great Kids :parenting with Grace and Truth, and Kimmel's Grace based parenting) . I was running out of patience with Owl, who is a bad sleeper, losing sight of how all this would fade in memory as he grew. I was taking out my frustration on my husband - thinking cynical thoughts about men generally. Forgetting that he was my ally in this difficult business of bringing up children. And I had certainly forgotten Jesus loved me, feeling like a grit your teeth hopeless unappreciated drudge. It occurred to me society doesn't appreciate mummies enough, but Jesus does - the Jesus that cared for his mother even as he died. I think I need to go back to Sunday School.
Sunday, March 11, 2007
boys, balls and ballet
It looks likely I will be the mum of boys only (considering due to medical reasons we are stopping now). I never imagined this would be the case - I always thought that I would have one of each, or maybe just girls. I was a very girly girl growing up, all pink, barbies, ballet and fairies. The comment we keep getting is: now you can have your own footie team. I don't think there is a comparable comment for multiple girls. So, there is this masculine ideal for all boy families - this idea that now I am fated to be a soccer mum. I really can't see me as that kind of boys' mum - all sensible hair and tracksuits. Anyway, I would rather have an all boy family like one I knew grewing up - each one of 4 sons grew up to be successful (using the term in a fulfilled rather than worldly sense) in very different ways - they were all allowed to be themselves - no matter whether that fulfilled stereotypes or not. Perhaps having all one gender is liberating in a way - as we don't have both genders we can't influence the girls to be all girly and the boys boyish - we can treat each child as a person, not a gender.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
