General discussion - Mom and Dad Esq.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Oliver_Wendell_Ramone
I was informed this week that Mickey and Minnie Mouse have moved in with us. At first, I understood that they were just visiting. But it is apparently a permanent move.

I have also recently been shown several "animals" whose names I can't really pronounce, much less spell. One of them spends a lot of time in our wine rack, hopefully not sampling the product.

Well, that settles it, then. Ghosts I can believe in, but talking animals? Poppycock.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
I forgot to muse: I wonder if it runs in families. I never had one, but my wife did. Not indigenous American, though. Totally Anglo: "Susan Collins." Of course, my wife grew up in a part of the country where there were several additional centuries in which a little Susan Collins might have lived and died nearby, so you never know . . . .

I never had one, nor did the missus. But our oldest, at 2, would talk to Jo-gi for hours. i'm not sure if i live in a part of the country where a Jo-gi might have lived........Oldest is now a soccer referee*.

* this is a Politics board reference.

[SlaveNoMore]

dtb
HAD, not have... HAD!!

Unfortunately (well, I don't think it's unfortunate, but others may disagree...), the ginormity is no longer. The five sizes (that's right, FIVE freakin' sizes...) that I inflated are long gone.

Jesus wept.

[Note: I will not make a habit of posting here. I assure all of you]

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
My 2.5 year old was telling me the other night about his imaginary friend, Hanu (or Hanoo; obviously it's difficult to get accurate spelling). When I asked him questions about who Hanu was, he could tell me only that (1) "Hanu is not a monster" and (2) "Hanu is not a skeleton." There weren't a lot of other available details; he changes the subject a lot. So I'm left to ponder the significance of the fact that these particular details were offered, as if to disprove the alternatives.

This being a post "Sixth Sense" world, I am now entertaining myself with the notion that my son is communing with an actual dead person, possibly a child, possibly an indigenous American (in this case, Ohlone or Costanoan, based on our geography).

Anyone else have kids with invisible friends, or have invisible friends (other than FBI agents posing as sexual predators in chat rooms, of course)?

The Wonk Princess had a number of imaginary friends when she was younger. There were Ronald and Mercy Mercy Me, both ducks who visited her on rainy days. There was a cat named Glagla, who often incited her into mischief. In addition, on occasion, our dog Max taught her inappropriate vocabulary words.

The Wonk Monster did not have any imaginary friends. His imagination and creativity are about equal to his older sister, though. I don't attribute the difference to anything more than kids are individuals. Unfortunately, it seems to be a trait they lose as they get older.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Jesus wept.

[Note: I will not make a habit of posting here. I assure all of you]

Your time shall come.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
[Note: I will not make a habit of posting here. I assure all of you]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Your time shall come.

Please. Dad just pretends he doesn't know any of us. But Mom says that I look just like him, and he always sends me a birthday card with a five dollar bill.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Well, that settles it, then. Ghosts I can believe in, but talking animals? Poppycock.

Have you told the little grinch about your imaginary friends?

[dtb]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch

Anyone else have kids with invisible friends, or have invisible friends (other than FBI agents posing as sexual predators in chat rooms, of course)?

My friends' daughter had TWO imaginary friends (for the life of me I can't remember their names -- oh wait, one was "Ginger" and I believe the other one was "Mary" -- rather random I suppose...)

Anyway, Ginger was her "bad" friend -- the one who spilled the milk, who made messes in the kitchen, etc.

Mary was the "good" friend who helped Alison (friends' daughter's name) and was generally just a swell pal. Alison had these friends from about age 3.5 to age 5 (more or less). She's 7 now, and I haven't heard about Ginger or Mary in a long time.

Don't know if this situation's already been resolved or not, but fwiw, I think you should give her fair warning as another poster suggested, i.e., get more interactive or you're gone in two weeks. It gives her an opportunity to get motivated, solves your notice problem, and gives you time to interview other nannies just in case. I wouldn't worry about her working during that time since Nanny loves VietBaby. Reliability and trust are not the issue, she's just not an outgoing and creative caregiver.

Hope you find (or already found) a good solution.

Ally

Originally posted by viet_mom
Hmmn. I do agree this is definitely not a horror story. That's why I'm struggling with the firing. I'm a real pushover and if I sensed she wanted this job I'd probably keep her just for that.

But...she has made clear that while she likes us, she is not happy what she is doing and is only with us because she doesn't have another job. Before she was with us, she was at a factory job that paid her less and worked her more. She was thrilled to be in a climate controlled place she could do her own wash and she said her coworkers annoyed her and she didn't want to have to deal with coworkers. I think the novelty wore off. She's bored out of her mind.

I've done everything I can to give her ideas what to do with the day. :poke: But...bottom line is she worked 8 hours today, 3 of them Vietbabe slept. I'd have gone shopping or hung out at the cool cafes in town with the Babe - some fine java and pastry :yum: charged to the house account of the Babe's Mom and chatted with the fine townsfolk. Instead, she stayed in and moped.

Well, I'm glad I wrote. I'm sensing here that I need to bite the bullet and shell out the $1,000 and do the icky deed. :uzi2:

I'm paying taxes on her (but only on $200 of it - she said she only wants it to show she's making that much so she pays less income tax) . Maybe she is waiting to reach the minimum amount of time you have to be working at a job to collect unemployment (don't know what that is) and then she'll bolt? This kind of sucks trying to figure this all out. But I assume it's sane not to want someone caring for your child after you fire them (in other words, I pay her the two weeks pay and she doesn't work during the two weeks).


Thanks again all, Happy New Year and have a great weekend!!:band:

[bilmore]

Originally posted by dtb
My friends' daughter had TWO imaginary friends

My early-to-mid-teen has an imaginary friend, apparently.

When ALL of the food in the house gets snuck into his bedroom right before bedtime, and when all of my good shirts (that now fit him) end up in his closet, and when the good, no-kids stereo is magically set on his station, and when little bro's underwear is hanging from the top of the chimney, and HE DIDN'T DO ANY OF THAT, and when girls he SWEARS he doesn't know call here all evening long, well, all I can figure is, he's got an imaginary friend.

A real hell-raising imaginary friend, too. I pity his parents.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

L'il Ty, who is three, got The_Lorax for Xmas, and we have read it most days since then. We got it for him because he liked The_Grinch so much. The last few days, he shows off by reciting the first page -- At the far end of town, where the Grickle Grass grows, etc.

So yesterday, he recites the whole thing. I'm not going to tell you that he did it perfectly, but Oh. My. God. I can't believe he can do this. Is this normal?

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
So yesterday, he recites the whole thing. I'm not going to tell you that he did it perfectly, but Oh. My. God. I can't believe he can do this. Is this normal?

When I was in school I took child psych for four weeks. The only thing I remember from it is that an astonishing number of preliterate kids have photographic memories. I don't remember the exact figures, but maybe one in twenty or so. From an evolutionary standpoint, this makes sense --- such people would have been extremely useful and powerful in pre-literacy days, and we shouldn't be astonished that every town had a person who could recite "The Odyssey" from memory after hearing it a few times. Now, we find this stunning, but back then it was just something that some people could do.

However, the skill impedes reading development, because you need to "clear" each letter or word from your memory as you comprehend it, or the pictures all start to overlap. Very few people retain photographic memory skill after learning to read; those who do call it more of a curse than a blessing, because a true photographic memory means you're not able to let bad memories go or fade, ever, as most of us do.

Try showing lil' Ty pictures, then take each one away and ask questions about what he saw. It helps if you lay the photos flat on the table; many kids with this ability say that they can "see" the picture on the table even though you removed it, and they have to mentally "splash" or "shatter" the picture on the floor by "pushing" it over the table edge.

ETA: Apparently, calling it "photographic memory" is discouraged. The preferred term is "eidetic imagery." A college paper on eidetic imagery, which reports the incidence between 2% and 15% of elementary age children.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
When I was in school I took child psych for four weeks. The only thing I remember from it is that an astonishing number of preliterate kids have photographic memories. I don't remember the exact figures, but maybe one in twenty or so. From an evolutionary standpoint, this makes sense --- such people would have been extremely useful and powerful in pre-literacy days, and we shouldn't be astonished that every town had a person who could recite "The Odyssey" from memory after hearing it a few times. Now, we find this stunning, but back then it was just something that some people could do.

However, the skill impedes reading development, because you need to "clear" each letter or word from your memory as you comprehend it, or the pictures all start to overlap. Very few people retain photographic memory skill after learning to read; those who do call it more of a curse than a blessing, because a true photographic memory means you're not able to let bad memories go or fade, ever, as most of us do.

Try showing lil' Ty pictures, then take each one away and ask questions about what he saw. It helps if you lay the photos flat on the table; many kids with this ability say that they can "see" the picture on the table even though you removed it, and they have to mentally "splash" or "shatter" the picture on the floor by "pushing" it over the table edge.

ETA: Apparently, calling it "photographic memory" is discouraged. The preferred term is "eidetic imagery." A college paper on eidetic imagery, which reports the incidence between 2% and 15% of elementary age children.

Interesting, but also remember that part of Seuss' charm is the cadence, the rhyme, etc., which would aid in retention. (Gatti Jr. does this with pieces of "Oh, the Places You'll Go.") So, what Ty's describing might be the result of eidetic imagery, but it might also be aural.

Regardless, it's sometimes startling to experience your kid doing that.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Lot's of stuff Atticus learned in the first four weeks of class (before he left and the Prof. said, OK, now that we know what people USED to think...)

The memorization is quite common, but I don't think the length of the book is.

You are now about to face a very tough decision: do you focus on developing these natural talents, and help your child along with their oral skills (a lot of poetry, a lot of "told" rather than "read" stories) or do you try to force reading, probably breaking down some of these skills in the process? I think Atticus is right that when it comes to actually reading you'll see some of these skills broken down by that process - but the question is, when do you start pushing reading.

There is a hot debate about whether letting kids fully develop oral skills before forcing them to read will ultimately benefit their ability to think and to comprehend what they read. My experience says its a good thing, and really celebrating this stage in their lives before moving on both will be a pleasure and will pay off.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Interesting, but also remember that part of Seuss' charm is the cadence, the rhyme, etc., which would aid in retention. (Gatti Jr. does this with pieces of "Oh, the Places You'll Go.") So, what Ty's describing might be the result of eidetic imagery, but it might also be aural.

Regardless, it's sometimes startling to experience your kid doing that.

And also remember, the Seuss partisans are the currently out-of-favor "whole language" school.