<p>Many of the problems we are discussing happen because there is only one parent present. One parent to make a living, make a good home life, attend all the school programs their children are in, transport them, and volunteer at the various schools. It’s impossible. It may barely be doable with a good (family, neighbor) support system and a father who while absent at least pays child support.</p>
<p>If we could catch these children before they have children of their own…</p>
<p>For the record, “crack babies” are a myth, in that there is nothing unique about babies born to mothers who abuse crack, that is not accounted for by birth weight, prenatal care, complications, ect. It’s not the “crack” that causes the problems.</p>
<p>I read posts like #121 and I want to SCREAM!! I’m a divorced parent. A lot of my friends and neighbors are single parents and our kids are doing just fine, thank you very much. </p>
<p>We all agree that one of the biggest problems we had was adults who assumed that ANY problem our kids had was because they came from single-parent families. (The mom of one of my kid’s classmates listed her husband’s name in the school directory. He’d actually left when her only child was about 3 months old and hadn’t been seen or heard from since.That way, she felt that other parents and teachers wouldn’t prejudge her kid. )</p>
<p>Seriously, as a group, the children of single parents from my neighborhood are doing every bit as well as the kids from two-parent families.</p>
<p>If the only good objection to school vouchers is that dysfunctional families will fail to utilize them (leaving the worst schools populated with only the neediest families), then why not build a no-cost bridge into the system? </p>
<p>Force home schools to provide a yearly list of private and public schools with openings to every student’s residence. That list should include performance statistics on every school, as well as the home school. Require every classroom teacher to gather an official decision from a parent or legal guardian of every child, every year. What this could do is guarantee that an adult in charge of each student, however dysfunctional, has a few moments to consider what the best might be for that child next year. </p>
<p>At the same time that parents are signing to show that they received alternative school information, give them the option to release their child’s name and address to schools which are looking for students. New or existing schools with openings can then advertise their business directly to the students and parents.</p>
<p>I have met a lot of really messed up parents in my travels. I can’t think of many, even those who are addled with addiction, who still would not try to get their child into a better school if given the option.</p>
<p>I also want to add that it is important not to make assumptions about any group of people (and that includes single parents, married parents, gay parents, poor parents, parents who struggle with addiction, etc.). We are all individuals, and deserve a shot at approaching life and decisions without being prejudged and labeled.</p>
<p>It is a constant in educational studies that academic success if very much linked to financial influence. No it is not something that applies to individual cases, but when you get large numbers, the stats hold. </p>
<p>I know a number of families who have little money but have provided their children with rich educational lives. It happens enough that it is not a shocking thing, but given a large group of low income folk, the kids will have more issues thatn those with higher incomes. That is a statement of fact.</p>
<p>The same goes for kids with single parents, divorced parents and parents who are struggling with addiction and other stresses. Stress in a family does cause negative issues for the kids. When a family is going through these issues, it does affect the kids behaviors and performance. So, yes there is a prejudgment made when a family is in crisis whether it is monetary, legal, health, etc and those prejudgments are often made to be helpful and understanding when issues arise in these situations.</p>
<p>Many stereotypes are true, which is why they are stereotypes. Though I have learned from my years to keep my comments in group situations so that they do not hurt any who may be in a turmoil at the time, I also make sure that if I know that I am with someone in a certain situation not to make an insensitive remark. If you know someone is struggling mightily with financials, you do not make certain comments. The same for someone who is fighting an addiction, someone who is undergoing a divorce, etc. You do tailor your comments accordingly. </p>
<p>There are families that neglect their kids. Whether it is addiction, psychosis, they don’t care, laziness, criminal, or whatever reason,they do not take care of their kids and don’t want to bother dealing with their school situation. There may not even be a reason. They are not necessarily low income or have a lot of problems comparatively, either. I sadly know some women who just have given up on taking interest in their kids’ education for a variety of reasons or nonreasons. </p>
<p>I worked at a school where so many of the parents were that way. Getting forms, papers, anything from them was a big problem. The kids came to school unprepared physically, mentally, and materially. Attendance was a big problem. Getting hold of the parents was difficult. THe families were all low income. Everyone was eligible for the lunch program. I check on it once in a while as there have been some big changes in that city’s schools. But this school is one that got left behind.</p>
<p>jonri–I apologize. As I was writing my post I was thinking I sure hope this doesn’t offend all those hard-working single parents out there, because that is NOT who I was thinking of! And there are two-parent families with the same problems…no money, no time, no incentive or ambition, no interest.</p>
<p>I know it takes a village, because I have been both on the helping and the receiving end at times. It’s just when the village is composed almost entirely of slackers that it doesn’t work.</p>
<p>shrinkrap–even if the “crack” itself doesn’t damage a baby, don’t you think there are bad effects from being on drugs? It is known that the mother’s poor nutrition affects the baby, resulting in low birth weight, prematurity, and related complications. All of which affect the developing brain.</p>
<p>I have been told that in many of the the public schools in our city (the ones I never sent my kids to b/c we moved to the better school district for just these reasons) the kids are almost never assigned homework. In most of the schools the teachers have faced the sad fact that the homework just won’t get done and there is no point in assigning it. I found that appalling but very revealing.</p>
<p>?shrinkrap–even if the “crack” itself doesn’t damage a baby, don’t you think there are bad effects from being on drugs?"</p>
<p>I know “crackbabies” who would be doomed, if they, or the people who cared for them, believed they were doomed, but they where not. I just hate that word. Like most “pop psychology”. "Oooo! She’s a “crackbaby”. Of course being a slave to “drugs” is bad. ANY drug. Not especially THIS drug, which happens to be associated with the poor. Being “poor”, and poor prenatal care, might be more relevant.</p>
<p>[FAIR</a> Blog Blog Archive The Crack Baby Myth: Now They Tell Us](<a href=“http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/01/30/the-crack-baby-myth-now-they-tell-us/]FAIR”>The Crack Baby Myth: Now They Tell Us - FAIR)</p>
<p>The Epidemic That Wasn’t
<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/health/27coca.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/health/27coca.html</a></p>
<p>"…He added that factors like poor parenting, poverty and stresses like exposure to violence were far more likely to damage a child’s intellectual and emotional development — and by the same token, growing up in a stable household, with parents who do not abuse alcohol or drugs, can do much to ease any harmful effects of prenatal drug exposure.</p>
<p>Possession of crack cocaine, the form of the drug that was widely sold in inner-city, predominantly black neighborhoods, has long been punished with tougher sentences than possession of powdered cocaine, although both forms are identically metabolized by the body and have the same pharmacological effects.</p>
<p>Dr. Frank, the pediatrician in Boston, says cocaine-exposed children are often teased or stigmatized if others are aware of their exposure. …"</p>
<p>
So this is the Board of Ed’s solution for placating the angry parents? To offer placement in gifted & talented programs?
It’s no wonder, with “solutions” like this, that there is no faith in any schools outside of the “desirable” ones. It only reinforces the inequity of the situation for ALL children while pretending it doesn’t reek of hypocricy. What a moral cop-out.</p>
<p>It only serves to reinforce the “us” vs. “them” attitudes, the sensationalized stories, the generalizing and demonizing. Yes, there are bad kids in every school, but the difference is that in the “good” schools, they are seen as the exception, whereas in the poor performing schools (whatever that means), they are used as justification for all kinds of blanket judgments about THOSE children, about poor children in general, “crack babies”, inner-city children of single mothers, etc etc.</p>
<p>And here’s a purely anecdotal observation (I have absolutely no independent proof of this, as I’m betting most of the observations on this thread don’t either). My children, one who attended public for all 13 years and one who attended private from 6th grade on tell me that there are more drugs in the privileged private schools than in public schools. And this is getting off topic but just to bust another assumption (and justification for white flight), my freshman D, who attends a private, liberal arts, predominantly white college says she sees more drugs at her midwestern school than she ever saw in her NYC high school. </p>
<p>And here’s more anecdotal “evidence”: the only parents who I’ve known personally who I would characterize as truly negligent were affluent people who were so self involved they couldn’t see the real trouble their HS kids were getting into. (and by real trouble I mean drunken brawling and passing out on the street, one suicide, anorexia to the point of hospitalization). Are parents who leave their 15 year old alone all weekend so they can go to their country house in peace negiligent?</p>
<p>I mention these anecdotes as examples of meaningless information. They might make for ear-pricking stories, but would you not send your child to a NYC private school as a result of hearing these? Would you extrapolate the problems of a few families to the entire school?</p>
<p>As for the bad schools, I say the problem is not with the children but with the administration. And some of the teachers. These are systemic problems that have nothing to do with rampaging 6th graders or crack babies. (But those kids–and by extension, their do nothing parents-- sure do make handy scapegoats.)</p>
<p>There is a lot of statistical evidence that suicide rates are much higher in affluent area adolescents. And, yes, many wealthy suburban high schools are absolutely FULL of hard drugs. It’s true. So, explain how come these kids make it to college in higher numbers percentage-wise. I really wonder about that, myself.</p>
<p>Well, our suburban HS is not FULL of “hard drugs.” I hear there are drugs available, but what the HS is full of is hard-working, sports-playing, volunteering, high-achieving kids. </p>
<p>I would venture a guess that it’s easier to be any of the above in a well-to-do suburban setting, and more difficult to be any of the above in a poor urban setting.</p>
<p>Edit: I would say poor rural setting, but I just can’t see as many problems there. Lack of access to some amenities, but certainly no gangs & the accompanying violence.</p>
<p>Yeah. I know these schools are full of hard working, high achieving kids. We live here for a reason. But, I’ve been stunned by the amount of hard drugs, cocaine, prescriptions out of mom and dad’s medicine cabinet, that these kids can get ahold of. Really shocked. And the suicides are really brutal. Every year. I’m just trying to ascertain WHY these kids, exposed to the same factors, achieve so much more. I mean, if money isn’t a factor?</p>
<p>In d class last year, the WORST hard nose drinkers/partiers were the teachers pets/high achievers/volunteers/club/class presidents. They were able to pull snow jobs on their parents/teachers.</p>
<p>yep. Just like wall street!</p>
<p>I am always puzzled when people say how much drinking/drugs is going on among otherwise excellent students. Without meaning to brag about my kids, I have to say they all (and we’re down to #4 going through this HS) have had good friends about whom I have never had to worry what they were doing, where they were going, or when they would be back. Maybe they found the truly “smart” kids and not just the smart-talking snow job ones. </p>
<p>And yes, some of them were just plain nerdy. :)</p>
<p>I think it is also grade specific. D grade that were the partiers, parents were complicit/ignored/indulged their “greatness”, it was evident even in elementary with this bunch. Now the current class of seniors is NOT like this. I don’t see this as being as big of a problem with 14 year olds class/grade either.</p>
<p>Yeah–I have a scholar-type, nicknamed professor by her friends and a nationally ranked athlete, so we don’t have this going on in our house, either. But, and this is a strong caveat, I’m not always sure you see it coming. I’ve known more than one parent of an exceptional______________ who was blindsided by the kid getting into incredible trouble. Even good kids and smart kids do stupid things when they are teenagers. So, I’m just wondering, is it that there are more safety-nets in wealthier areas? Certainly the latest drug kid is not the drug kid necessarily, next year, and the kid who does poorly in school one year may end up doing quite well the next. The downward spirals, except in extreme cases, seem to be intervened, and not just by the parents. I personally was involved in getting a kid who’d gone Waayyyy off track, who had once been a friend of oldest, back on track by letting her parent’s know what was really going on. It’s not always easy to see with high achievers, and an earlier intervention is better. And, i just wonder, if that isn’t one of the reasons kids can get back on track in moneyed areas and have a more difficult time in places where there is less. I’m wondering if this “contributes” to the systemic issues in schools and if there is something that can actually be done about it.</p>