--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > <snip> > > > > A 14-year-old is basically an immature adult. BIIIG difference > > > > between 14 and, say, 4. If you deal with a 4 year old as though > > > > they're an adult, they may well not have a clue what you're > > > > talking about, NOT because they don't have the life-experiences > > > > to related, but because they don't have the processing ability > > > > to grasp the concepts. > > > > > > Right. Suppose you told your 4-year-old child that > > > one day you would die, and they would never see you > > > again? And you added that while this probably > > > wouldn't happen for many years, it very well could > > > happen tomorrow? > > > > > > That would certainly be "the truth," but telling your > > > child this "truth" would be very likely to do them > > > some serious psychological damage. > > > > Or it might just enable the child to grow up with > > a realistic approach to death and dying, as opposed > > to the fantasyland of the Western approach to dying. > > > > What you described is the way that Tibetans I knew > > in Santa Fe raised their kids. Those kids were among > > the happiest and most well-adjusted I've ever met. > > Might work in that cultural context, depending > on exactly how it was done. In the Western > cultural context, and phrased as I did above, > it would be a disaster.
That's certainly a story you tell yourself. Is it true? What might happen if the parents simply talked to the child as if there were an immortal being dwelling in that child's body, one that had lived and died tens of thousands of times, and thus might not have a big problem with the reality of death? If I get the gist of what you're saying, you would never in a million years try such an approach, because *you* are convinced that the Western child couldn't handle it. It is *your* fears driving the situation, not the child's. > Giving the child a realistic approach to death and > dying, moreover, is not necessarily something that > can only be successfully accomplished if you start > at the age of 4. That's the story you tell yourself. I have seen evidence to the contrary. I had probably the best discussion in my *life* on the nature of death and dying with a four- year-old. She grew up to be a rather balanced and successful young woman. I made the decision to talk to her as if there was an eternal being inside her, one who could be talked to as an equal about a friend's death that upset us both. She proved more than deserving of my trust. > (Also, I wouldn't automatically take your word for > it that the Tibetan children were all that happy > or well adjusted.) I think we've established that you wouldn't take my word for it if I said the Earth revolved around the Sun. You'd assume I was lying. :-) That's another of the stories you tell yourself. :-) > But Lawson's point had to do with a child's > neurological development, not just with psychology. > I don't know the exact cutoff point of the Piagetian > stages of development, but there are certain concepts > a child is literally incapable of dealing with, no > matter how intelligent the child or how sensitively > conveyed, before certain neurological hookups in the > brain have been completed. That a story that scientists tell to gullible people. :-) To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
