- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
My ds14 came home with a copy of this talk: http://lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/courageous-parenting?lang=eng On the back is the instruction to read and discuss the talk as parents and child and there is a place to sign and date the page. The students are to return it signed to the seminary teacher. The seminary teacher told the students that they may have some new rules after reading the talk with their parents.
Will someone please explain to me why I’m so ticked off by this? The talk has some good parenting tips, thoughts and opinions. I don’t like how simplistic some of his stories are for example how he infers that gaming will lead to a loss of spirit and disaffection from the church, his is encouragement of NO SLEEP OVERS as they lead to pornography addiction, molestation and breaking of the WOW, and if parents do the 5 big fundamental actions of LDS parents all will be well and the youth will be invincible like Helaman’s warriors. But overall good things to think about as parents of teenagers.
Am I ticked because I feel like the teacher is meddling in my family affairs? Am I upset over being made to be accountable to a seminary teacher? Probably both and more because the tone of the talk bugs me too.
I’m not sure I can cope with seminary. This is not an isolated event, my ds comes home at least once a week with something I need to reframe for him and it usually isn’t doctrinal stuff, more teenage life advice stuff. I’m not sure they are even being taught scripture anymore.
Thoughts, advice?
My personal guess is the emotions you are feeling from this “assignment” are probably coming from a combination of the other things you have seen coming from seminary. Reading the talk I don’t take it as quite so pointed. It could be me, I see the usual words of caution. I took the reference to sleepovers as “parents be aware, kids spending extended time together need to be supervised.” I didn’t take it personally as making all sleepover situations taboo. What are scout camping trips if not another form of sleepover? Maybe it’s just because I have thought about some of those things myself, so when he brings up the topic I’m half tuned out thinking that I already know what he’s going to say. Don’t know. Try to “take it with a grain of salt.” If there are other more extreme attitudes coming home from seminary I would definitely have a talk about individual interpretation – how some people are more “enthused” [fanatical] about certain topics than others – and ultimately “you need to make your own decisions, learning how to exercise wisdom.” Nobody is right all of the time.
1) If it’s just a signed note saying they showed it to (and/or read it with) their parents, I’m not too concerned about it, generically speaking. I probably would sign it as having been presented to me and let go – unless there’s more to it than that. As it stands, I don’t think it is anywhere close to imporant enough to make an issue out of it. 2) Having said that, it’s not the place of a Seminary teacher to be dictating what things parents talk about with their children. It also isn’t the place of the teacher to be providing material like this that isn’t tied in with the actual lesson material.
3) By saying they might have some new rules after talking about it with their parents, I assume he meant that the parents might create new rules – not that the Seminary teacher will impose new rules. If that was the message, he’s probably right. There MIGHT be some new rules some parents MIGHT create. You probably won’t. Big deal. If he or she meant there might be new rules in Seminary, I have no idea what that might mean. Doesn’t make much sense to me, given the actual talk.
4) Summary: Sounds like a teacher over-stepping bounds a bit but in an effort to be helpful – and your kids are going to have to accept and deal with that for their entire lives, both inside and outside the Church. I would advise you not to make a big deal out of it – unless the teacher tries to impose rules that you believe are out of line and harmful.
I might have been ticked about the seminary teacher sending it home and expecting me to go over with my kids. I don’t need that from any member. However, the talk itself, is not offensive to me at all. It’s about teaching and watching over our kids, which is what I think the applied gospel should be all about. I think it has some good points and valid information that directly relates to my family and their well-being, and I wish we would have more talks like it rather than what we experienced in October. FWIW, I am a big believer in the “five fundamentals” and I do practice them in my home, and however else I might disagree with the church, I think they got that part right. But yes, it does come across as “simplistic” in the talk.
Quote:Am I ticked because I feel like the teacher is meddling in my family affairs?
YES. I do agree with Orson that you can take it with a grain of salt. Some seminary teachers fancy themselves quite the guardians of the teens they teach, wanting to interfere to make sure they are getting the right parenting to stay on the straight & narrow, which is largely unnecessary because these kids are already attending extra religion classes daily, for crying out loud, not out smoking crack and so forth. *sigh* I’d just blow it off. Most seminary teachers are not old enough to have their own teens at home, so they don’t really know how to parent a teen, just how to teach seminary.
I read the article top to bottom — the article is targeted toward parents, in my view. So, I agree that it’s overstepping the bounds of the seminary teacher to insist the parents sign it and return it — the seminary teachers’ role is to teach seminary, not to teach parenting skills. Like others, I would try to just brush this off. My only concern is that you say this is a pattern for this particular seminary teacher, so perhaps being proactive is in order if this is constant.
You have a few options:
1. Stop signing and returning the pages if they aren’t going to hurt your son’s credits/points/success in graduating.
2. Speak to the seminary teacher about it — express your concerns kindly. Perhaps indicate something else you do that represents proactive parenting, thus deeming the send-homes unnecessary.
3. Sign and return them and just brush it off as a well-meaning seminary teacher; don’t personalize it or magnify it as typifying the seminary program. Keep the baby in spite of the bathwater.
My two cent advice.
The other thing — I liked the content of the article. My daughter was allowed to go on a sleepover a while ago and came home telling me it was co-ed. She was 11 at the time and there were 12 to 14 year old boys sleeping over. The parents weren’t even there for part of the evening. So, I like the advice in the article — I’ve seen firsthand how good decent people can have radically different ideas of what is safe for children.
Ray, I believe he meant that the parents might begin to enforce some new rules after reading the talk. cwald, yes the 5 fundamentals are good things and my family does most of them consistently. My concern is with the assurance the talk gives that if we faithfully do those 5 things our kids will be invincible. It seems to take out the role of agency, repentance, and the atonement. I can’t remember hearing a talk about how parents can help their children when they make mistakes. That seems like a more useful topic but I agree that generally the points of the talk are good if not my style particularly.
hawkgirl, this seminary teacher is a little younger than me but without children. Hmmmmm…….LOL
SD, yes I think I will choose door #3. My dh and I are on the same page regarding the talk itself so we’ve decided to go through it with ds express our concerns, thoughts etc sign and send back without any notes. It will be a good opportunity to let him know why we do what we do.
Orson yes in our talk we will talk about the many different opinions we hear in life and how we really need to hone our own voice and follow our intuitions.
Thanks for calming me down. Onward and upward.
Just read the responses on NOM. Wow, what a difference – in the approach and tone. I’m not sure what else to say, good luck.
Quote:hawkgirl, this seminary teacher is a little younger than me but without children. Hmmmmm…….LOL
I knew it! Too funny . . .
Well this just in…….ds tells me that the talk must be signed and handed in by tomorrow and it is worth 10% of his grade. So while I was fine with SD’s choice #3 now I’m feeling like I should at least express my concern over the mandatory nature of the assignment. Ds also told me that his seminary teacher told the class that a few parents loved the talk so much they requested that once the teacher say the signature that their child bring it back to them to keep. AHHHH yes do they not get the ENSIGN or know it is available on lds.org. I guess not. I’m realizing more and more that I am very much a stage 4 citizen and just plain mad. I told my son that we would discuss the talk tonight and that I didn’t think the talk was that great and I would explain to him my reasoning at that time. DH looked like he was bracing himself for a hurricane:) Quote:I don’t like how simplistic some of his stories are for example how he infers that gaming will lead to a loss of spirit and disaffection from the church, his is encouragement of NO SLEEP OVERS as they lead to pornography addiction, molestation and breaking of the WOW,
Sorry, but this hoodoo (I wanted to use another term, but it’s not appropriate).
I think *excessive* game playing is bad – for the mind and body, and kids should be kicked outside to climb trees and scratch their knees… as for the other kind of “gaming”, gambling, a definite no-no. But will it make you drift away from goodness – only as a symptom, not a disease IMHO.
I suppose sleepovers could encourage “molestation”, but then again, the same could be argued about scouting, boarding schools, junior choirs, music lessons… erm, you name it.
If a child is going to get into porn and substance abuse, they’re as likely to do it outside of someone’s home as in it. In the school grounds, behind the bus station, bike shelters, in the park… or wherever.
My dh and I had a great discussion with ds regarding the talk last night. I felt able to be myself and let my feelings out while we had a great exchange of ideas. When we were discussing the paragraph about how if parents follow the 5 fundamentals of LDS parenting, family prayer, scripture study etc their children will be invincible, he said, “mom, where is agency in that, he’s talking like its all on the parents heads and I can’t be trusted to make good choices.” I had a stunned look on my face and he asked me if I thought he was wrong. I told him not at all just that I totally agreed with him and I was just a little shocked that he saw it as well.
So really I should write the seminary teacher and thank him for the opportunity to have a great discussion about an oversimplistic talk on parenting with my teenage son. We were able to explain to him why we do what we do as parents and how seriously we take the responsibility of being his parents. We also were able to express our trust and confidence in his abilities to make good choices and invited him to come to us if he ever made a mistake he might need help remedying. All in all good experience.
Dh would like me to let it be now. I will. Thanks for all the advice and thoughts. So helpful.
CANADA
Just read this thread and your follow-up, and wow, what a smart kid you have! Sounds like you don’t need any parenting tips. 🙂 I don’t have any children myself as of yet, but I would have been annoyed, too. But I’m Canadian as well, so perhaps it’s in my nature.
cg, I’m so glad you had that experience. It’s a great illustration of what can happen in MANY situations – taking something about which we might react emotionally at first and using our own agency to make it a good experience. Great comment from your son. He’s got a solid foundation. Encourage the critical thinking, but also encourage him to not be a cynic. There’s a huge difference, and you need to model that for him – as it appears you are doing very well.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.