Dave Land wrote:
>Anyway, I had time to read the full NYMag article this evening, and the
>author is very aware of the fact that it's not a simple matter of
>"pleasurable activities" vs. parenting:
> "I think this boils down to a philosophical question, rather
> than a psychological one," says Gilovich. "Should you value
> moment-to-moment happiness more than retrospective evaluations
> of your life?"
I took the time to read the article in its entirety as well. I found the
following quote to be the most telling:
"Children may provide unrivaled moments of joy. But they also provide unrivaled
moments of frustration, tedium, anxiety, heartbreak."
In my experience - especially with my eldest scion in the throes of early
adolescence and all that implies - that pair of sentences pretty much sums it
up.
In fairness to WTG, while he has his usual axes to grind, some people are
frankly not suited to parenting. And if they're aware of that and act
accordingly, it's probably a good thing. It's worse, in my mind, to see people
who clearly have no idea what they're doing attempting to raise children and
getting it repeatedly wrong.
On thing the article doesn't seem touch on, particularly in light of how it
indicates single parents are worse off, is how much children can be a source of
friction in their parents' relationship. It can be hard to be on the same page
vis a vis the rules and regulations of your household at all times, and *that*
can create some unforeseen problems, IMO. For example, I wish I'd had a camera
to take a picture of my wife's face when my aforementioned eldest asked if she
could get her hair dyed purple and I said "I don't see why not." I believe in
picking my battles. :-)
Jim Sharkey
Will you please stop bothering your sister Maru
_______________________________________________
http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
