6 ms·

You guys in the States have it bad. I hear terrible stories about the fear that now surrounds any kind of freedom for kids. Over here in the UK we’re a bit bett

• jamisteven 7y ago
  This, having recently moved from the states to Switzerland I can say with confidence that this phenomenon is primarily a US one.
• exhaze 7y ago
  Why don't you just find a WFH job where you don't make so little money that you consider yourself "poor"? I appreciate the sentiment of wanting to spend time with your kids, and I know life is about trade-offs, but it seems a bit extreme to decide that the only way to spend quality time with your kids is to move to a remote village, completely sacrifice earning ability, and reject smartphone technology (I have a smartphone and I have no problem not using it at all during dinner time or when I'm hanging out with friends).
  • pjc50 7y ago
    "Why don't you just" is always a stupid thing to say to someone when you don't know about their life, because chances are they're a smart person, have thought of that, and have reasons for not doing it, which they are not obliged to tell you. > move to a remote village This wasn't mentioned.
  • afarrell 7y ago
    > I have a smartphone and I have no problem not using it at all during dinner time or when I’m hanging out with friends Could you clarify what point you are making by bringing up your lack of a problem? Does this relate to the way that the parent solves a problem he’s experienced?
• Crinus 7y ago
  > a large part of this has been about not being constantly distracted when I’m with other people I do not understand this, why would a smartphone distract you if you do not set it up to distract you? Can't you just not install all the distracting software and turn all notifications off? This is how i have my phone (i do not have any "social" app installed, do not allow any notifications and have it in almost constant silent mode - though that last bit is to avoid telemarketers who are an annoyance around here) and sometimes i even forget it exists to the point where the battery runs out :-P
  • heavenlyblue 7y ago
    Yeah. And I can always pick up my phone to actually show something I recently liked in the gallery or as a product. Also a phone is a great way to tell a story when you also have pictures of something you’d like to share in person.
  • dmje 7y ago
    Lots of things, but studies like this as one example: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/08/a-sitting-phone-gathers-brain-dross/535476/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/08/a-sit... I still do have a SIM-less smartphone at home for banking / 2FA / etc but the winner for me has been not having it when out and about. I don't want to be taking a photo, I want to be looking at the actual view. I don't want to be looking things up, I want to be chewing through what we think. It's incredibly easy to think your phone is there as a positive reinforcement but in my personal experience, life is better without, especially when it comes down to giving kids your full attention.
• safgasCVS 7y ago
  Doesn’t sound you’re poor at all
• wastedhours 7y ago
  > be there: work less, hangout more I keep running across this sentiment, and although I don't have kids yet, is one I intend to take to heart. "Quality time" is largely BS - making time for a piano recital is pointless and can barely make up for the time if you miss the fun and general bonding the rest of the time. I remember the times sat eating dinner on the sofa in front the TV having a laugh with my parents more than the "hero" events like sports days or plays. If you care about your kids and you're pretty stable (obviously, if you don't have money for clothes and food things will be different), just be there.
  • winchling 7y ago
    Agreed. One suspects the concept of quality time came in with the rising incidence of divorce. Where quality time implies some kind of performance or role, which is stressful, hanging out with one's children is wonderful. I find that the compensations more than make up for the difficulties. I enjoy the company of people who are totally open and forgiving. I get the profound satisfaction of watching them learn. I re-experience and understand anew certain aspects of my own childhood. Yes, there's work involved, but children like helping too, and can actually help significantly as they get older. Yet society seems to have things the wrong way around. The zeitgeist has it that marriage and children are something to be put off until one is ready to 'settle down'. Children are an inconvenience and a financial burden which interfere with socialising and career advancement. For example: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/cs072c/having_kids_makes_you_happier_but_only_when_they/ https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/cs072c/having_kids...
    • cwal37 7y ago
      Divorce rates in the US have been declining for decades. Unless you're referring to a different area or timeframe?
      • YinglingLight 7y ago
        They're children born out of wedlock now.
      • 7y ago
• Zenst 7y ago
  Even in the UK many things have changed. Can't leave child unattended rules, what they can and can't do. Lack of spaces to hangout and play. What do they have now, no spaces in many parts and if they go out and chat together on a corner some paranoid adult will phone the police saying there is a gang of youths looking menacing - happens more than people appreciate alas. Then drugs, many area's parents won't allow their children out to play due to fear of drug addicts (heroin/crack abusers) and paraphernalia they litter about. This with the whole social housing mess of almost litterly allocating one hard core addict per 10 normal people often see's those 10 peoples live and associated offspring blighted by some "but there a victim" mentality played out by those obfuscated from the reality of the impact such abusers bring to the area. You read about county lines and how `vulnerable addicts` are victims, yet you never hear about the impact they have upon all the other neibours. I know this, I've suffered this and more so, still suffer from this and the police etc are beyond useless. Seen parents take the law into their own hands with one case of some addicts doing crack cocaine in a car in his driveway - police called and effectively unwilling to do anything beyond take license plate so they could flag upon their `intelligence` system. SO the parent baseball batted their car, junkies called police who responded instantly and he ended up in jail. So when you have that kind of environment, kinda hard upon the children to actually go out and play when it's not safe. But many activities kids enjoyed as social freedoms out playing yesterday are not their today and makes you ponder what they will have tomorrow. Hence many kids embrace the internet as it is the wild west of freedom for them to explore, a freedom that the real World outside has lost due to all the warning and keep out signs placed due to `smothering`.
• microcolonel 7y ago
  > You guys in the States have it bad. I hear terrible stories about the fear that now surrounds any kind of freedom for kids. Over here in the UK we’re a bit better, but the “give them exams ALL the time” and schools being on their knees, financially, are all too familiar Of course, this is all because of lies and locked-in unintended consequences. The schools have no practical reason to be on their knees financially, they are that way because of the politics of employing teachers. There are school districts in the U.S. where it costs in excess of half a million dollars to successfully fire a provably-incompetent teacher or administrator. It is so expensive that many schools continue to pay full salary to teachers and administrators who only come in to work to prevent their firing. Some of these teachers and administrators are so useless or counter-productive that they are physically separated from the productive parts of the school. The fact is that school funding has increased dramatically, considerably faster than the real costs of running a school; and the schools which receive the most funding are often near the bottom in performance. Every time we see a school that actually works, people instantly jump to find some moralistic or social justice narrative to explain why we shouldn't make more schools like that. When charter schools do well, the public school unions and other fearmongers come out to complain that the executives live well, or that the students are cherry-picked (even when admissions are done by raffle!). They often do not qualify for the same compensation, and yet tend to greatly outperform public schools in the same jurisdictions. A major problem in U.S. schools seems to be a lack of standards. They allow troublemakers to drag down entire classes, for fear that they may be seen as "excluding" that student. Meanwhile, a whole generation of otherwise-promising youth are increasingly illiterate, unfamiliar with civics, and generally incapable of living life in any productive capacity. Here in Canada, there's been a similar depressing turn for the worse, though in slower motion (as is often the case with things like this). I personally think the U.S. and Canada have altogether too much childhood. Dating girls my age or younger (being in my early twenties), I often find myself cringing when I realize that the person I'm meeting has never done anything productive before, often never even one household chore, aside from their own laundry. I've been paying net taxes since the age of 17. It is fine and in fact good to be attached to your family; but by the time you're free to agree to contracts, vote, and make other unilateral decisions for yourself, you should have had the experience of needing to do something productive, to take care of yourself or someone you love, or to make a decision with real consequences.