When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged • Hacker News Board

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#201

Post by slibhb » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 2:46 PM UTC

hef19898 wrote: post #189

slibhb wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’ll even give that in some cases there is just some condition that makes a kid incredibly out of despite actual loving supporting parents, but I would wager you can find environmental causes in most cases. It seems wrong to single out environmental causes as dominant. There are parents with multiple children who all did fine except one. Anyway, we know it's a complicated mix of genetics and environment and either…

>> There are parents with multiple children who all did fine except one. Isn't that highly subjective? I know of cases in which children literally broke with their parents. Two siblings turned out "fine" (social and parents definition), the one that broke with them didn't (parents' definition again). turned out the "troubled" one finished school on top of class (not that I would take that a true measure so) after lea…

It's not subjective to say drug addicts, criminals, or people who died in drunk driving accidents didn't turn out well.

I think parents should implement "tough love" themselves as necessary and sending your child to one of these programs is, in general, a failure of parenting.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#202

Post by denton-scratch » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 2:58 PM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #180

denton-scratch wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a tendency to explain away behaviour as being the result of a person being "bad". It's a lazy way out. > healthy teeth So "cannot be reasoned with" seems to mean "refuses to accept that I'm right". If you have charge of an unruly kid, I hope you aren't focusing mainly on their dental hygiene. > These kids are labeled troubled because they are. Gosh, that sounds rather black-and-white - they're "bad" because t…

> So "cannot be reasoned with" seems to mean "refuses to accept that I'm right". That's unnecessarily combative. Are you arguing that refusing to brush your teeth is a reasonable position? > I hope you aren't focusing mainly on their dental hygiene. Dental hygiene was OP's example. > a lot/all of the time, what's being referred to as "troubled" is really "traumatised". I agree that most of the "troubled" kids I've kn…

> Are you arguing that refusing to brush your teeth is a reasonable position?

No, I'm not. I'm arguing that poor dental hygiene isn't in the same universe as getting drunk, stealing your parent's car, and wrapping it round a tree. Or beating up small kids at school.

It seems an awfully trivial misdemeanour to bring up, in a discussion of "troubled" kids and abusive incarceration.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#203

Post by treis » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 2:59 PM UTC

thrashh wrote: post #56

unityByFreedom wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author writes, > I was reckless, taking my mom’s car out for joy rides without permission, skipping class That may be after 16 years of doing outrageous things to get attention at home. Some psychologists in the 1950s [1] suggested kids will do whatever gets them attention while striving for a way to participate in the family. That can include bad behavior. If they don't receive attention for good behavior, then…

One thing I’ve learned at this point is that almost l no kid or adult is actually irrational. If someone seems irrational, it’s because their shoes are so different from any that you’ve been in. You simply have never experienced anything like their life (because if you did, you’d be like them). And you can’t actually ask someone to explain their own behavior because everyone only lives one life and they rarely know i…

>If someone seems irrational, it’s because their shoes are so different from any that you’ve been in. You simply have never experienced anything like their life (because if you did, you’d be like them).

I disagree with this. As an example, a video came out the other day of a Chicago Transit Authority employee getting into an altercation with some guy. "Some guy" pushed him to the ground and walked away. The employee very slowly (he was quite obese) rose to his feet, pulled a gun, walked after the guy, and then shot 14 times hitting him 3 times. In short, he murdered the guy on video in the middle of a crowded station. There's no way that's not irrational behavior.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#204

Post by hef19898 » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 3:03 PM UTC

Clubber wrote: post #197

hef19898 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Most of the time people are harmed, not just the troubled individual but the family of 4 they crash into and kill on a drunken joyride. What tools do parents have to prevent that? That's the whole point of the discussion. Answer: None. Because it can happen, all the time. Whether those kids are 16, 18, 25 or 53. Also, it is a pretty specific example... EDIT: Just because it hits home, genetic prevalence of cancer…

>Just because it hits home, genetic prevalence of cancer is something completely different from behavior and how people work in a society. >You know who else tried to predict future compatibility of certain people based on genetics? Both can be predicted genetically. You insinuated predicting outcomes in genetics was bad somehow because Hitler did it. It wasn't a great argument, you should just own up to it. ≥Don't e…

For risking a pointless dispute on forum, I'll comment one more time. No, I didn't make a Hitler comparison. Owning up to it? Sure, look up the history eugenics, its use through history and you'll find that the Nazi's use of it was the worst but by no means the only or first occasion where this approach (it doesn't matter that we can analyze genomes now) utterly failed.

And no, future compatibility with society cannot be judged on genetics, hell we have hard times predicting stuff like cancer and other diseases based on genetics. And those are much more driven by genetics than behavior. Using proven things like cancer to justify BS theories like "eugenics" is, IMHO, unacceptable.

I have no emotional block whatsoever, at least none that I'm diagnosed with. Drunk driving happens, reckless driving happens, people die in accidents. The solution there is driver training, strict rules around legal alcohol and drug limits. None of these will prevent those accidents from happening. Because you don't have to be "troubled" (how I hate that attribute...) to drive drunk and kill a family of 4 (or whatever number you can think of). One bad decision is enough.

Generally speaking so, if Hitler thought something is a good idea I think it is fair to assume it wasn't until deliberate analysis showed otherwise.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#205

Post by unityByFreedom » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 3:06 PM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #194

unityByFreedom wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your solution sounds like we should try nothing, > There are kids who cannot be reasoned with. Are you familiar with an approach that can help? The approach I mention has been around for over 70 years.

I have seen limited success of real mental health institutions (nothing like the camps in TFA, obviously). I have also seen rehab work pretty well when substance abuse is involved. The most effective method, though, is time. The author of the article is one example, and there are many more in these comments. Eventually, the teenage brain becomes an adult brain and a lot of the rage, impulsiveness, and destructive beh…

> The most effective method, though, is time.

Rather than waiting I'd suggest families try to find a therapist they can all visit for counseling together. There may be a broken relationship in a kid's past that can be mended, and that won't happen without understanding where the problem began. The kid isn't going to be able to tell you offhand where he went off the rails. It takes time to build a trusting relationship and share traumatizing stories.

> The author of the article is one example

It seems presumptuous to conclude the author never went to therapy or did not have further discussions with his parents that helped him move past the trauma. Maybe he says more in his book [1].

> there are many more in these comments

I haven't seen any suggest that waiting for time to pass is a solution for years of feeling "a blur of misanthropy".

> The key is to try to limit the damage of the "troubled" phase. If you end up going to jail in your teenage years because you act out, you're going to have a much harder time building a life for yourself later on.

It almost sounds like you would suggest parents bail their kids out of trouble so the system doesn't mark them as "bad". Maybe you're not saying that (if not, how would you "limit the damage"?). Anyway, I think parents covering up their kids' behavior, thinking it's just a phase, is exactly what gets kids into this pattern. People don't grow out of habits, they grow into them.

[1] https://bookshop.org/a/18622/9781542007887

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#206

Post by denton-scratch » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 3:10 PM UTC

rajin444 wrote: post #182

hef19898 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know who else tried to predict future compatibility of certain people based on genetics? We are as much a product of our genes as we are of our environment. Nothing justifies any of those measures described in the NYYT article and by others in this thread. Nothing, period. If people commit crimes, we have a justice system (no matter how fucked up those can be, not even talking about prisons). For those truly havi…

> We are as much a product of our genes as we are of our environment Don’t our genes dictate how we respond to our environment?

> Don’t our genes dictate how we respond to our environment?

"Dictate" is much too strong. Genetics and environment interact in complex ways, that aren't well understood.

I detest the idea that some people are just bad, and were always going to be bad. It seems to be an idea that attracts religious fundamentalists. I struggle with the idea that literally all psychological problems are the result of trauma; but I do think most of them are.

Some kids seem to be able to largely shake off trauma on their own; others need help. My guess is that it's much harder to help a 30-year-old deal with childhood trauma than it is a 12-year-old. But that doesn't mean the 30-year-old is "bad to the bone".

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#207

Post by hef19898 » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 3:11 PM UTC

unityByFreedom wrote: post #195

hef19898 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough! Positive Discipline wouldn't be my go-to approach (no formalized, available in book form would be by the way), so. I stick with Space Cowboys: "Lord, don't let us screw up." Not screwing up your kids is already high enough a bar. if they come out on the other end as decent human beings able to live their own lives that's all I can hope for. So far so good, but then the rough teenage years are still ahead…

Ah, I love the books. Dreikurs made a career out of interviewing kids and training teachers, so I feel like I experience a lifetime of wisdom while reading his books. That said there is no substitute for thinking on your feet.

It's the thinking on your feet part that get's you in hot water as a parent. Especially when the timing is bad, your already exhausted and stressed out and should still act as the "adult".

As you said, saying you're sorry helps a lot. Not having it happen to often as well. And as long as it's not abusive (as subjective as that might be) it is, to some maybe cruel extend, part of training for life. It's also borderline bad parenting. Usually I care a lot more about results and effects then intent, when it comes to parenting and relationships in general intent plays a huge role so.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#208

Post by dahfizz » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 3:13 PM UTC

denton-scratch wrote: post #202

dahfizz wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So "cannot be reasoned with" seems to mean "refuses to accept that I'm right". That's unnecessarily combative. Are you arguing that refusing to brush your teeth is a reasonable position? > I hope you aren't focusing mainly on their dental hygiene. Dental hygiene was OP's example. > a lot/all of the time, what's being referred to as "troubled" is really "traumatised". I agree that most of the "troubled" kids I've kn…

> Are you arguing that refusing to brush your teeth is a reasonable position? No, I'm not. I'm arguing that poor dental hygiene isn't in the same universe as getting drunk, stealing your parent's car, and wrapping it round a tree. Or beating up small kids at school. It seems an awfully trivial misdemeanour to bring up, in a discussion of "troubled" kids and abusive incarceration.

I don't understand why you're so hung up on that example. It was the OP's example, and all the same logic applies to the examples you bring up here.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#209

Post by unityByFreedom » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 3:24 PM UTC

brimble wrote: post #200

unityByFreedom wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and yes, of course I do! I've learned a ton from this discipline and never need to raise my voice with my kid. When I do raise my voice, it is almost always unnecessary. I apologize in those cases because I want her to know we can recover from mistakes and that it is okay to be upset. Our relationship is stronger for it.

With one of our three kids, everything from those nicey-nice parenting books works perfectly, and always has. It goes exactly how the books say it will. It's wonderful, and so damn easy. Not so much with the other two.

Sounds like you have a typical family where each kid has found a way to get your attention. Positive Discipline suggests you likely dote on the one who is well behaved, while the other two primarily receive attention in the form of "why can't you be more like Matt?" Or, when they do improve, they don't get any attention for it because it's not up to what Matt could or would do. How accurate does that sound for your family?

The starting suggestion positive discipline might have is to block out some one-on-one time in the week, one parent with one misbehaving kid, even if it's just for an hour each. Then you are fulfilling their need for a connection in a positive way. You may see each other in a different light and even discover new strengths and contributions to the family. The idea is their need to get your attention by misbehaving will decrease over time.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#210

Post by denton-scratch » Mon, Mar 28, 2022, 3:27 PM UTC

Clubber wrote: post #171

denton-scratch wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How the heck do you try to prevent something like that when all the warning signs are there? Surely not by preemptive incarceration. GP said: > Do kids lose TV privileges for a day if they refuse to go? Then I'd say it's not abusive. I don't agree. Coercing kids into physical sports is abusive. In general, using coercion (including denial of "privileges" that non-inmates consider a right) is both abusive and probab…

>> How the heck do you try to prevent something like that when all the warning signs are there? >Surely not by preemptive incarceration. You aren't suggesting any solutions. >Coercing kids into physical sports is abusive. You shouldn't dilute the term abusive like that. >In general, using coercion (including denial of "privileges" that non-inmates consider a right) is both abusive and probably doomed. I don't think y…

> You aren't suggesting any solutions.

I'm not a child psychotherapist (but I was married to one). But I believe that in the case of children, and possibly with adults too, providing a warm, supportive environment for the subject to explore their feelings and behaviour is at least part of a solution.

> You shouldn't dilute the term abusive like that.

What's your threshold for calling something "abuse"? At my school we had to play Rugby Union. In one year, several kids in my class were hospitalised with gashes caused by metal boot-studs in the scrum. My son had flat feet; running literally caused him pain.

> I don't think you have kids

I think you think too much. I have two adult kids, and two grandchildren.

> just saying things you shouldn't do, leaving a parent with zero tools

Well, the subject is the consequences of using incarceration as your parenting tool, so that's not surprising.

I'm not suggesting that parenting is easy. And I'm certainly not going to point at some doctrine or methodology, and say "everyone should do it this way". People are people, and they're all different. There's no "right way" of dealing with people. But neglecting children, and then punishing them because they act up, is the "wrong way".