Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
millions of children's families are in the armed forces, these kids move every few years. travel and seeing how other people live is a huge education and privilege.
I'm not sure why folks think bringing in the military kids is good for the discussion given how many of them are dysfunctional/emotional train wrecks.
I'm not suggesting the child make the decision. I know of families that move out of area permanently that leave children behind to finish the last year of school so as to not be so disruptive to the child. This is a temporary move. I don't see any advantage to anyone in the family for this limited move based on the little information given. I wonder if there would be the same interest in the same move to Mobile Alabama.
most kids that stay behind I would guess to be older. 12 is very young to be away from family for a year. life can be and is disruptive, kids adapt just as we all do. lol not many people care about moving to Mobile and can't be compared to a possible Hawaii move. something more comparable would be an offer to move to a foreign country, Brazil, London. coincidentally I did move to a foreign country, Germany at 12. I hated to leave my friends. I did make new friends. the experience enriched my life. In this day and age a child can face chat, and be on social media keeping in touch with friends. it's only a year.
I grew up a military kid we moved every 3 to 4 years. many many children thrive on change and new experience. I met kids like that on every move we made. as I said in another post, life itself can be disrupted. different personalities are going to handle moving differently. doesn't make it a bad thing.
After reading the article, your synopsis comes off to me as being short sighted and dismissive of the primary ingredients to their very generalized "conclusions".
A parents ability/willingness to raise children that develop productive, reflective, and intelligent skills to deal with adversity, will always weigh more influence than the degree of stimuli that elicits a response. (In my opinion and experience, of course.)
Again, after reading the article, my take is that the "study" draws far reaching generalizations, with out elucidating the magnitude of minutiae, that contributes to any one child's manifestations of the dynamics they live with, learn from, reflect on, etc.
Again, after reading the article, my take is that the "study" draws far reaching generalizations, with outelucidating the magnitude of minutiae, that contributes to any one child's manifestations of the dynamics they live with, learn from, reflect on, etc.
What does this psychobabble even mean? Could you say it again in laymen's terms?
No wait...never mind, I don't care enough to bother. Thanks.
Again, after reading the article, my take is that the "study" draws far reaching generalizations, with out elucidating the magnitude of minutiae, that contributes to any one child's manifestations of the dynamics they live with, learn from, reflect on, etc.
My opinion is that kids with stability do much better than kids who are uprooted.
My opinion is that people who move around a lot should put off having kids. My opinion is to many people have kids and didn't think out very well what that and don't put kids first.
I see zero upside to moving kids around and lots of potential downside.
And I think way too many military families have way too many kids
What does this psychobabble even mean? Could you say it again in laymen's terms?
No wait...never mind, I don't care enough to bother. Thanks.
Haha!... Wow, bro...I know I can be verbose (use a lot of big words), but it mostly is an attempt to not be misinterpretated (people think you mean something you don't).
I certainly don't mean to offend, though! But, your response did make me literally laugh out loud, so thank you for that!
My opinion is that kids with stability do much better than kids who are uprooted.
My opinion is that people who move around a lot should put off having kids. My opinion is to many people have kids and didn't think out very well what that and don't put kids first.
I see zero upside to moving kids around and lots of potential downside.
And I think way too many military families have way too many kids
I agree with what your saying, mostly. Especially the part that people don't think beyond "having kids".
But, I think the points you make are more derivative of our culture. The general feeling I get, is that our culture supports a position that external entities are more responsible for raising children than parents are. Even though "we" don't say, or admit to, or perhaps even recognize, it.
I can't comment on the military families and numbers of children, as I have no real firsthand experience or insight to that "issue?".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Could you say it again in laymen's terms?
Thanks.
