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.
As I said up thread, different kids are going to have different responses. I think your example is valid. I also think the people on this thread who have lost parents as children or whose children have lost a parent saying no name change is needed also have valid responses.
And most of the time you step on a rust nail you WON'T get tetanus. But we still get the shot as a precaution to avoid it. We can change names to be more inclusive and if it saves only a handful of kids some heartache WHAT IS THE COST?
So what if some people don't care, does that mean we are only sensitive to the lowest common denominator?
And most of the time you step on a rust nail you WON'T get tetanus. But we still get the shot as a precaution to avoid it. We can change names to be more inclusive and if it saves only a handful of kids some heartache WHAT IS THE COST?
So what if some people don't care, does that mean we are only sensitive to the lowest common denominator?
I thought several posters articulated quite nicely that the hurt is there on a daily basis regardless of the name of the event (and that changing the name doesn't mean they don't feel the absence of the parent at the event), that there is something to be gained by children learning that all families are different, that there comes a point where there can be no events lest someone feels not included when in actuality the inclusiveness can come regardless of the title of an event, depending on how it is handled. I would also add that I think accepting, acknowledging, educating about and coping with differences as opposed to ignoring them or smoothing them over is always preferable. Don't get me wrong, I am not virulently opposed to generically named events. However, I think it doesn't actually solve much and that the issue is being blown out of proportion by well-intentioned adults. This is not sensitivity vs. callousness issue for most of us, no matter how much one might try to frame it that way, which I also raised up thread.
Last edited by eastwesteastagain; 09-22-2012 at 07:20 PM..
I thought several posters articulated quite nicely that the hurt is there on a daily basis regardless of the name of the event (and that changing the name doesn't mean they don't feel the absence of the parent at the event), that there is something to be gained by children learning that all families are different, that there comes a point where there can be no events lest someone feels not included when in actuality the inclusiveness can come regardless of the title of an event, depending on how it is handled. I would also add that I think accepting, acknowledging, educating about and coping with differences as opposed to ignoring them or smoothing them over is always preferable. Don't get me wrong, I am not virulently opposed to generically named events. However, I think it doesn't actually solve much and that the issue is being blown out of proportion by well-intentioned adults. This is not sensitivity vs. callousness issue for most of us, no matter how much one might try to frame it that way, which I also raised up thread.
Ok so the multiple people on this thread who stated that the exclusivity of these events hurt them, and my own students LIED. Got it.
And you continue to ignore the fact that it doesn't really matter if it has zero effect positive or negative on 99 out of a hundred children, if calling it a more inclusive name spares that one child some pain, just change the stupid name.
As I said up thread, different kids are going to have different responses. I think your example is valid. I also think the people on this thread who have lost parents as children or whose children have lost a parent saying no name change is needed also have valid responses.
Ok so the multiple people on this thread who stated that the exclusivity of these events hurt them, and my own students LIED. Got it.
And you continue to ignore the fact that it doesn't really matter if it has zero effect positive or negative on 99 out of a hundred children, if calling it a more inclusive name spares that one child some pain, just change the stupid name.
I said nothing of the sort. I am looking at ALL of the responses, not just the ones that support my viewpoint. You seem to be ignoring that changing the name in the interest of noble inclusion of all children doesn't actually solve anything, particularly if functionally someone other than the "designated relative" is able to attend. IMO this is another example of adults trying to be overly PC and pat themselves on the back for being so very sensitive when it is a meaningless gesture. As I said earlier, if you want to make the meaningless gesture, knock yourself out, I'm not going down to my school district to oppose it, but there is no need to be so snarky and dismissive of those who think it is silly and overblown. Change the name for the 1/100 children, but let's not make it sound like some fabulous crusade with far-reaching emotional impact. And please spare me the "you must not care about the poor children" spiel.
Last edited by eastwesteastagain; 09-23-2012 at 07:13 AM..
Just a note I did not read all of the comments but I did want to say something, my father passed away when I was 6, and while I never begrudged the other kids who got to go to the father daughter dances it was difficult as a child to constantly hear about them, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with them but it is hard on the children who ahave lost a parent, especially if it is a recent loss.
I honestly don't understand why they can not just call them friends and family dances and baseball games, keep the title as open as possible, should there be a lawsuit over it, no but today's families are made of all different mixes and maybe it's time that was taken into consideration more.
I said nothing of the sort. I am looking at ALL of the responses, not just the ones that support my viewpoint. You seem to be ignoring that changing the name in the interest of noble inclusion of all children doesn't actually solve anything, particularly if functionally someone other than the "designated relative" is able to attend. IMO this is another example of adults trying to be overly PC and pat themselves on the back for being so very sensitive when it is a meaningless gesture. As I said earlier, if you want to make the meaningless gesture, knock yourself out, I'm not going down to my school district to oppose it, but there is no need to be so snarky and dismissive of those who think it is silly and overblown. Change the name for the 1/100 children, but let's not make it sound like some fabulous crusade with far-reaching emotional impact. And please spare me the "you must not care about the poor children" spiel.
And again, you discount students (and PEOPLE IN THIS THREAD) who have stated that what you call a meaningless gesture, made it possible for them to participate in a school event that otherwise would have been a constant reminder of their loss.
Who are YOU to tell them or anyone else that changing the name is meaningless? If it only made those two boys in my particular school feel even slightly better and no one else, ever, than it is still NOT meaningless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RebeccaLeigh
Just a note I did not read all of the comments but I did want to say something, my father passed away when I was 6, and while I never begrudged the other kids who got to go to the father daughter dances it was difficult as a child to constantly hear about them, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with them but it is hard on the children who ahave lost a parent, especially if it is a recent loss.
I honestly don't understand why they can not just call them friends and family dances and baseball games, keep the title as open as possible, should there be a lawsuit over it, no but today's families are made of all different mixes and maybe it's time that was taken into consideration more.
Another person who it wouldn't be a meaningless gesture for, to change a name.
I am literally aghast that you get to determine what is a meaningless gesture despite the numerous people on this thread who have chimed in a simple name change would mean something very real to them.
And again, you discount students (and PEOPLE IN THIS THREAD) who have stated that what you call a meaningless gesture, made it possible for them to participate in a school event that otherwise would have been a constant reminder of their loss.
Who are YOU to tell them or anyone else that changing the name is meaningless? If it only made those two boys in my particular school feel even slightly better and no one else, ever, than it is still NOT meaningless.
Another person who it wouldn't be a meaningless gesture for, to change a name.
I am literally aghast that you get to determine what is a meaningless gesture despite the numerous people on this thread who have chimed in a simple name change would mean something very real to them.
Sigh. The loss is constant, whether reminder via the title of the event or no. The same point that multiple posters have made, much more eloquently than I did.
I do not begrudge your students or posters such as Rebecca (who I repped for having a very balanced view of the issue) a name change. I take issue with the tone of your posts and your being the self-appointed arbiter of what is sensitive or not. There are ways to disagree and make one's point without claiming an emotional sensitivity high ground, condescending to or making self-righteous comments to those who disagree. Do you think the child who has lost a father feels his loss any less because it's Family Doughnut Night instead of Dad Doughnut Night? There are an equal number of posters who have lost parents who have said they do not support a name change as those who said change it, because as I said several times up thread, the reactions will be as varied as the kids. If you had read my posts (not just the cherry-picked parts), I didn't say don't change it, I said don't make it such a gigantic deal by using language like "stake through the heart."
By meaningless what I meant was "does not change the facts of the situation" - that the child does not have a "fill-in-the-blank" to bring, regardless of what you call the event. Perhaps superficial change would have been more appropriate. The loss these kids deal with is real and daily. Call the event whatever you want - they are still going to be missing the person who they want to be there but can't. I don't understand why we can't just discuss this, without the dramatic language and character aspersions.
ETA: To bring this back to the OP, I think a lawsuit or "banning" certain event names is over-the-top for what it actually achieves.
Last edited by eastwesteastagain; 09-23-2012 at 05:55 PM..
Reason: Language correction
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.
