Of course. It would be uncomfortable. What's more, it would be the sort of "forced lesson" that I referenced elsewhere. That's exactly the problem that I've id

Of course. It would be uncomfortable. What's more, it would be the sort of "forced lesson" that I referenced elsewhere. That's exactly the problem that I've identified with my education: the goal shouldn't be "show children that their parents have flaws," but "expose children to material where people challenge the views of authority." The former caused me to approach things in terms of defending my own view of the world, while the latter would have had me examining it. Framing the conversation is important. If you go too far with it, you breed resistance to learning. If you don't go far enough, all you're really risking is that someone might take the "wrong" lesson away from it. Personally, I'd rather have someone who has more fully absorbed the material take away the wrong lesson than someone say the right things about it while never truly examining the work. In that case, at least they will have a broader base of knowledge and experiences to draw from later in life if and when their worldview changes.