I Speak of Dreams

Teaching is Dangerous

A veteran teacher suffered a violent attack from a student and the student's mother.  The teacher, Felecia Williams, had the student,  Sequita Thornton, in her video broadcasting class.  Evidently Ms. Thornton was in the habit of skipping class, and as a consequence, her grades suffered.  Ms. Williams had met previously with the elder Thorton to  discuss  Ms. Thornton's attendance and grades, with a school police officer present. 

The day of the attack,  the elder Thornton accompanied her daughter to school, and walked into Ms. William's first period class.  In front of the students in the class, the Thorntons assaulted Ms. Williams.

Here is the elder Thornton's justifications for her brutality:

"That teacher, she had it in for my daughter," Thornton said. "I raised my daughter not to disrespect adults, so I took care of this situation. Yes, I hit her. I do what I have to do to protect my child at all costs."

With a mother like that, what chance does Sequita Thornton have to develop into a responsible, law-abiding adult?

Further Developments: Lori Drew's Moral Bankruptcy

Update: it turns out the blog Karoli was referring to, Meganhaditcoming, was NOT written by Lori Drew. Karoli writes, Mea culpa, mea culpa. 

Although I did disclaim my last post on Lori Drew with the caveat that the MeganHadItComing blog could be an invention, I wrote as if it were truly from Lori Drew.

So it wasn't Lori Drew writing.  Somebody could think and write in that tone.  It's still sick.

You must read Karoli's further account of Lori Drew's sociopath-like behavior, and danah boyd's essay.

Karoli puts Lori Drew's self-serving words into real language

Permit me to paraphrase in real language: That bitch attacked my precious, and I want to beat the shit out of her in person. Or her parents. But since that wasn’t an option, I came up with a plan…

 

danah:

Deceiving children is problematic to begin with, but doing so by tapping into their emotional weaknesses is outright deadly. At a gut level, Lori knew that she could capture Megan's attention by creating a male character that showed interest. In other words, Lori knew how to manipulate Megan's attention and emotions. She capitalized on that knowledge, self-justifying it as responsible parenting. She knew how to have the "perfect" relationship with Megan, to gain her trust. This is knowledge that adults have because we've had our mistakes and learned how to negotiate social interactions. The reason that Megan's relationships were so fraught was probably not because she was evil but because she and her peers were struggling with how to appropriately interact with one another. It's clear from Megan's reaction to Josh that she was fully capable of positive interactions in a social context not strife with miscommunication and the confusion of school status. If she were truly as messed up as Lori assumed her to be, she would not be capable of this.

In my opinion, by choosing to "teach her a lesson," Lori acted in a manner that was both ethically and morally inappropriate. Revenge is foolish in every context, but adults should never take revenge on children, regardless of how much those children upset them. This is an abuse of power. Furthermore, it signals to Lori's daughter that revenge is an OK response to being hurt. Whatever happened to "turn the other cheek"? For a Christian society, we don't do a good job of upholding basic Christian values.

First post here

A Disgusting Mother: Lori Drew

Update 12/06/07:  you must read Karoli's further account of Lori Drew's sociopath-like behavior, and danah boyd's essay.

Karoli puts Lori Drew's self-serving words into real language

Permit me to paraphrase in real language: That bitch attacked my precious, and I want to beat the shit out of her in person. Or her parents. But since that wasn’t an option, I came up with a plan…

 

danah:

Deceiving children is problematic to begin with, but doing so by tapping into their emotional weaknesses is outright deadly. At a gut level, Lori knew that she could capture Megan's attention by creating a male character that showed interest. In other words, Lori knew how to manipulate Megan's attention and emotions. She capitalized on that knowledge, self-justifying it as responsible parenting. She knew how to have the "perfect" relationship with Megan, to gain her trust. This is knowledge that adults have because we've had our mistakes and learned how to negotiate social interactions. The reason that Megan's relationships were so fraught was probably not because she was evil but because she and her peers were struggling with how to appropriately interact with one another. It's clear from Megan's reaction to Josh that she was fully capable of positive interactions in a social context not strife with miscommunication and the confusion of school status. If she were truly as messed up as Lori assumed her to be, she would not be capable of this.

In my opinion, by choosing to "teach her a lesson," Lori acted in a manner that was both ethically and morally inappropriate. Revenge is foolish in every context, but adults should never take revenge on children, regardless of how much those children upset them. This is an abuse of power. Furthermore, it signals to Lori's daughter that revenge is an OK response to being hurt. Whatever happened to "turn the other cheek"? For a Christian society, we don't do a good job of upholding basic Christian values.

I first heard about Lori Drew from Nordette, who asked, When Should Cyberbullying Be Considered A Crime?  Nordette didn't use her name, but the commenters did.

Why is Drew a disgusting mother?  She set up a fake account on Myspace, pretended to be a  "cute guy", and went after  her neighbor's 13 year-old daughter,  Megan Meier.  Drew posted to Megan's account, causing Megan to believed  to believe that the cute guy was attracted to her.  Drew then posted a hateful, hurtful rejection.

Megan Meier committed suicide minutes after reading the rejection.  Drew felt little remorse.

Drew stated she knew “arguments” had broken out between Megan and others on “my space”. Drew felt this incident contributed to Megan’s suicide but she did not feel “as guilty” because at the funeral she found out “Megan had tried to commit suicide before.”

Karoli posted a passionate denunciation of Drew's actions: Charge Lori Drew With Child Abuse.

[Cyberbullying] is intolerable when it’s done by peers, but the real crime here is that it was an adult, fully 35 years her senior who was aware of her depression and ADHD and took advantage of her anyway.

Here’s a news flash for Lori Drew:  Megan’s final words to her mother were this: “You’re supposed to be my mom!  You’re supposed to be on my side!”  Those words could just as easily be applied to you, Lori Drew.  “You’re supposed to be an adult!  You’re supposed to protect kids, not abuse them online or otherwise.” 

Impersonating, stalking and bullying a child online is child abuse.

As I was reading, I was thinking about my blog-friend Terrance's list of poisonous parents, and his what kind of community he wants to live in.  Terrance wrote:

We create families, create communities, and make our contributions daily, in hopes of making those communities better for our families and the families who share them with us.

Drew surely qualifies as a poisonous parent -- but what are we to do?

There's a vigil for Megan tonight in her home town.  As you read this, think about what you can do to have a virtual, daily vigil.  Think about what you can do to keep the children in your life safe--not just your kids, but all the kids you come in contact with.  Think what you can do to put a stop to cyberbullying and face-to-face bullying.

You Don't Want to Vex Karoli: The Nate Fisher Case

My pal Karoli alerted me to the wrongful termination of Nate Fisher (my post, which mostly links to her post).  Now she takes masterfully takes the parents to task,:

I felt sorry for you when I first wrote; now your hypocrisy makes me sick. The only one worth even an ounce of sympathy is your daughter, who I’m sure is dying a thousand deaths inside as a result of your campaign. Go read Rick Green’s column for a reality check. How did it make you feel?

Link: odd time signatures » Blog Archive » To Mystery Dad, Mommy Danielle, USRNGRX, and Thomas A Forcella.

Personally, I think the parents in this case are hysterical, over-reacting idiots.

Frank thinks that it was all a put-up job on the part of the parents:

If I were a heads-up insurance fraud investigator I would look at a case like this and salivate at the opportunity to question witnesses, examine phone records, time-date stamps, family relationships, due process violations, and so on. Fisher never knew what hit him nor did the school but we're much closer to knowing that now and it isn't pretty.

Below the fold: what Nate Fisher's students think of him, and other parents enthusiastic endorsement of his skills as a teacher.

Teachers in Danger: The Vendetta Against Nate Fisher

Karoli at DrumsNWhistles has a great post outlining the harm that was done to a young teacher, Nate Fisher, by a student's parents.

First the girl refused to do an assignment (the parents didn't insist that she do it).  Fisher then gave her an alternate assignment, to read an illustrated book.  The parents found "suspicious". 

I could not imagine what this teacher had in mind with my daughter by giving her this comic. I was fearful that I knew what might be on his mind!

Fearful parenting, indeed.  I hope Mr. Fisher is reinstated.

 

Prejudiced Parents, College Dorm Assignments, and Social Networking

This is one of a series of posts on the meme of  "Helicopter Parenting and the College-Bound Child: A Meaningful National Problem?"

The story opens thusly:

As housing officials at colleges around the country send out roommate assignments to freshmen this summer, a growing number of schools say they're getting more requests for changes — from parents who don't like the roommates' Facebook profiles.

Marianne Richmond wrote a post at Blogher the Helicopter Parents and Facebook, which lead me to to Anastasia Goodstein's similar entry at the Huffington Post.

The gist of both posts: there are Helicopter Parents who look at their child's prospective roommates' listings on FB, and object to the assignment based on the roommates' religion, race or sexual orientation.

I agree with Marianne and Anastasia that parents who interfere with housing office as to roommate assignments are infantilizing their college-age children.  I also agree that parents meddling because of concerns about said prospective roommates' sexual orientation or race or religion is despicable. I just wonder (a) is this a new phenomenon and (b) how much of a trend is it?

Parents of Current College Students and Changes in Communication Habits

This is one of a series of posts on the meme of  "Helicopter Parenting and the College-Bound Child: A Meaningful National Problem"

My previous post, GASP! Overinvolved Parents! National Emergency! NOT! looked at some evidence for parental under-involvement being the real problem.  This post looks at some aspects in the change of our communication patterns as they pertain to students in college who don't live at home.

 

GASP! Overinvolved Parents! National Emergency! NOT

This is the first of a series of posts on meme of  "Helicopter Parenting and the College-Bound Child: A Meaningful National Problem".  These are being written, and posted, in series, so some links to be added later.

The college admissions season is over, so a pause in the stories with the themes of  "it is so hard to get into college" and "parents/students  are cheating to get into college".  Now it is the season for breathless stories of Helicopter Parents and the Millennial Generation.

True to form: Duke Magazine in January/February;  Why Helicopter? from the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier July 14 2007; Helicopter Horror Stories from the Times Herald-Record July 15 2007;   Beyond Helicopter into Tank Parenting at the University of Virginia July 23, 2007; Helicopter Parents Use Facebook to Screen Their Childrens' Roommates August 8, 2007 in USA Today and ABC; Helicopter Parents and the Transition to Work August 10 2007 in the Bend Weekly; Learn How To Let Go  July 29, 2007 in the Louisville Courier; The Dangers of Helicopter Parents July 24 2007 in the Statesman Journal.

I'm sure there will be more.  But really now.  Marianne Richmond, in a post responding to the USA Today-ABC story, wrote

From being buckled into car seats and bike helmets, to scheduled play dates, the Millenials have been constantly supervised and instead of feeling smothered, they apparently report that they feel very close to their parents.

Uhm.  That would be middle-class (and above) children, mostly white.

"The major problem nationally is underinvolved parents," said psychologist Michael Thompson, co-author of "The Pressured Child: Helping Your Child Find Success in School and Life." "But in affluent suburban neighborhoods, you get a lot of parents who are way overinvolved.

Bad Judgment

Nefiteria Burrell (27) has a three year old daughter and a  6 year-old daughter with diabetes.  Burrell was taken to jail on December 23, telling the arresting officer that her boyfriend,  John Frank Evans (28), would be arriving shortly to look after her girls. 

Police conducted a criminal history check on Evans, 28, making sure he did not have outstanding warrants or was listed in the sex offender registry.  Evans showed up, and spoke by telephone to Burrell once.

When Burrell was released from jail on the 26th, she found her 3 year old unfed and the six year old in a diabetic coma.  Evans was nowhere to be found.  He evidently left the apartment later in the day on the 23rd.

As of last night, the six year old was in critical condition, and the police are looking for Evans.

Affluenza

This is more of a quick note than a reasoned post.  I've had the feeling for years that parenting among the well-to-do is unhealthy--too much focus on coddling and packaging kids, not enough human connection, not enough failure.

There's a new book by Madeline Levine, The Price of Privilege that addresses these issues.  Here's an interview with her in the Washington Post.  Here's a review of studies published in 2005 in Psychology Today.