feelslikeitshould Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 I see the fact the bikers and sidecar riders went around the schools in the courier again, complete with pictures. I don't see the problem with having the riders going in to the school and showing the kids their bikes, getting them interested in the sport and talking to them about safety. There are a couple of things that I don't understand regarding the problem others have with it, firstly, what are you going to do? Sit down with your kids and say "Remember that nice man with the bike that came into your school last week? Well, he's dead, sorry son." There's no need, why would you tell them that? And what'd the chances of a young child learning that themselves? They never make a sudden, unexpected announcement that someone has been killed on the course so if you learn of an accident and you're that bothered about what your child might hear, turn the radio off! And do you keep you're children away from elderly relatives in case they die while your child is still young? They met these men for an hour at the most, they probably wouldn't have remembered their names for longer than a week, if that. Children generally aren't that bothered if it doesn't affect them directly or if they are unable to empathise. A couple of years ago, a child at my sons school lost their mother, he was upset by thinking how he would feel if it was me or his dad who had died but he was over it by the next day. I think that would be more traumatic to a small child than finding out that a man they'd seen and probably wouldn't remember had died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keyboarder Posted June 21, 2007 Author Share Posted June 21, 2007 I see the fact the bikers and sidecar riders went around the schools in the courier again, complete with pictures. I don't see the problem with having the riders going in to the school and showing the kids their bikes, getting them interested in the sport and talking to them about safety. There are a couple of things that I don't understand regarding the problem others have with it, firstly, what are you going to do? Sit down with your kids and say "Remember that nice man with the bike that came into your school last week? Well, he's dead, sorry son." There's no need, why would you tell them that? And what'd the chances of a young child learning that themselves? They never make a sudden, unexpected announcement that someone has been killed on the course so if you learn of an accident and you're that bothered about what your child might hear, turn the radio off! And do you keep you're children away from elderly relatives in case they die while your child is still young? They met these men for an hour at the most, they probably wouldn't have remembered their names for longer than a week, if that. Children generally aren't that bothered if it doesn't affect them directly or if they are unable to empathise. A couple of years ago, a child at my sons school lost their mother, he was upset by thinking how he would feel if it was me or his dad who had died but he was over it by the next day. I think that would be more traumatic to a small child than finding out that a man they'd seen and probably wouldn't remember had died. Ah, the good old ostrich approach. As long as we don't talk about it, we can pretend nothing's happened. Plus ca change, lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 ............. what are you going to do? Sit down with your kids and say "Remember that nice man with the bike that came into your school last week? Well, he's dead, sorry son." There's no need, why would you tell them that? And what'd the chances of a young child learning that themselves? They never make a sudden, unexpected announcement that someone has been killed on the course so if you learn of an accident and you're that bothered about what your child might hear, turn the radio off! If you think that is how they might find out then you are very very wrong.... nope they found out in school where lots of other kids were upset about it in a parentally uncontrolled environment... again a choice removed from me. Children generally aren't that bothered if it doesn't affect them directly or if they are unable to empathise. I can assure you that my kids were bothered and they were upset and they are also well capable of empathising... but then, as their parent, I would be one of few people in a position to observe and therefore comment on that wouldn't I? People being individuals and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feelslikeitshould Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 Not at all, I just don't see why it would come up. It's not about pretending nothing happened but if there are people so bothered about their children being exposed to possible deaths, in the event of happening why tell them? Unless they ask of course but I think that's more unlikely than one of the 2 riders visiting the school dying. Kids of that age (4 - 7) feel sad when someone dies because everyone else is sad. They have no concept of suffering unless they can empathise and they don't miss someone they hardly don't know, so I really don't see how a young child can be traumatised by the death of a relative stranger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 I haven't ever said that they were traumatised, I have merely said that it it something, given the choice, I would have preferred not to happen. I know people die and that they must learn about it, I don't dispute that but I would have liked to have been around for their (well not all of them but one of them) first exposure which is the case when a hamster, grandparent or whatever dies. To take up a point mentioned above, my kids do know about the food chain and I'm sure Jamie Oliver is talking chiefly about food... well correct me if I'm wrong but we don't eat dead TT riders.... lol..lol...lol... to coin the keyboarders phrase! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 Not at all, I just don't see why it would come up. It's not about pretending nothing happened but if there are people so bothered about their children being exposed to possible deaths, in the event of happening why tell them? Are you seriously suggesting that parents can protect their kids from finding out by not telling them? They're kids, in a school with other kids. As soon as one finds out (or the older brother of one finds out) they all find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feelslikeitshould Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 I wasn't suggesting anything, I don't think they need protecting because I don't think it would come up, unless you choose to tell them. I also don't believe that children in the age range I was referring to talk about dead bikers in the playground. My eldest knows a bike crashed on senior race day because I told him, he didn't ask at any point if anyone had died or if the rider was one of the people who came to his school, he just shrugged and carried on doing what he was doing. They were trying to promote awareness of the TT by bringing these guys in to talk about it, to show the kids the bikes. Children are more interested when there's props involved, that's what they want to see, they don't want to hear some bloke talk about how many laps he does or how fast he goes, they want to see a real TT bike and a real TT rider. I don't think it's irresponsible to introduce the kids to something that is part of the islands heritage. I'm sure plenty of people took their children to watch a lap or see the purple helmets without wondering if there child would be affected if something went wrong while they were watching. To kids it's just bikes, I don't think introducing them to the riders necessarily makes it more real to them if one was to die, it just makes them take more of an interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 Believe me... it comes up... case in point :- "My daughter, aged 5, was most pleased to meet a biker, equipped with bike, at her school. Said biker was a very very nice chap and she and others were very taken with him. Aforementioned biker was killed very shortly after... did I tell her about it you ask?? Well, NooOooo....... it was talked about at school unbeknownst to me and she was very upset" It happened.... have I got to drag you onto Jerry Springer to explain it or summat?????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feelslikeitshould Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 It happened.... have I got to drag you onto Jerry Springer to explain it or summat?????? Please don't.... Children are all very different, as we know. That is why I have no problem with it, I know my children and most of the children they are friends with would either be totally oblivious or not really that bothered unless it was someone they were close to. Like others have said, children are very resilient and it's often the reactions to events of those around them that makes them upset, not the actual event. Heh, maybe we're just made of sterner stuff up North Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 I'm glad you took the Springer remark well... I wondered about that as I sauntered off to make my hot chocolate! The mental image was amusing for me... up the stakes... take it off the board... heh! Anyway, yeah maybe we westerners are soft.... however having recently moved to the North.... (Watch this space) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 For as long as I'm responsible for them I'll try and make sure unnecessary 'shit' doesn't happen to them... that's my job... they'll have long enough for shit to happen to them in their grown up lives. Having said that, I do try to prepare and teach them how to deal with it through the benefit of watching the endless crap I and others close to them have no choice but to wade through, combined with guidance on their own first hand experiences. Bargain basement cotton wool if you like.... I agree, any reasonable and responsible parent would. But shit by its very nature is unavoidable and try as we might, we cannot exclude it all from our children. However, the important thing is to guide a child through the unavoidable, not try to exclude all possiblities, thinking that we are doing a great job in cocooning them from all of life's harsh realities. But what we are doing is denying them the greatest teacher and that is guided life experience itself. I suspect, in reality, we are not too far apart on this one, Observer. But to object to a visit to a school by a TT rider because he may be killed competing is taking responsible parenting too far. It is denying the child the opportunity of seeing something or someone of interest, that is a positive experience in itself. If the rider then is killed, then that is not an experience we would knowingly put our children through but, nevertheless, it is an experience from which the child will learn. It will not be pleasant, but with skillful parenting, it needn't be a trauma and could be a useful preparation for when an event happens closer to home. None of us want to see our children upset, disappointed or negatively affected in some other way, but these are things that we all have to learn to cope with and the best way is to guide a child through those times, not deny them exposure to positive things in the fear that there may be a negative lurking in the background. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 I agree, any reasonable and responsible parent would. But shit by its very nature is unavoidable....... Not according to the new Pampers advert! It absorbs all pooh! What I want to know is a) when did they start actually saying "pooh" out loud on the television and b ) "pooh" by it's very nature is a solid matter and generally not absorbable... it must be superdooper scientific material that nukes it first and then sucks it up! Anyway I digress :-)..... and try as we might, we cannot exclude it all from our children. However, the important thing is to guide a child through the unavoidable, not try to exclude all possiblities, thinking that we are doing a great job in cocooning them from all of life's harsh realities. But what we are doing is denying them the greatest teacher and that is guided life experience itself. I do agree with a lot, if not quite all of what you have just said in theory. However, as I went off to make my hot chocolate mulling over my quirky Springer remark and hoping it was taken in the manner it was delivered, it struck me that the opinion I would really rather value (not that I don't value any already made of course... quick disclaimer!) would be the opinions of the teachers at the school having had the teaching experience with the kids first hand. I wondered if any of them felt it was a regretable turn of events and I would be really keen to know if it would be something they would repeat. I know that they haven't to date. I think it would be very interesting to hear from them (i.e. the school that the visit/death occurred... not just a teacher opinion in general.) I might ask if I get the chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 Yes, a teacher's perspective would be interesting. But whilst on the subject of schools, what I really object to is the teaching of religion. Quite happy for moral values and social awareness/conscience to be taught, but the religion thing does wind me up a little. I have posted before about a long conversation I had with my, then, 7 year old son about the world being created in 7 days and was that true? I explained as best I could that most people believe the universe was created by the big bang, but some people believe in how it is written in the Bible. So you don't believe in God, came the reply. And I felt I was put in such a difficult position because on the one hand I do not want to directly contradict what he is taught at school (you know, if the creationist theory is bunkum, then so is long division). But on the other, I don't believe in the unproven and don't think children ought to be taught it as fact. Much better, that they teach them the stories and give the historical social context of how these stories arose. Let's face it though, there are some cracking stories in the Bible and I am quite happy for them to be taught to children, providing they are presented as just that; ripping yarns Anyway, I ended the conversation by explaining that some people do believe in creationism, but although I don't you should still be tolerant of other people's views (except Copycat's). It really was hard work, when all I wanted to do is say, its just a story, lad, just a story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 I have no problem with religion being taught in schools. In fact I would expect it to be taught as I think that in todays world it might be important to understand the history and make up of the worlds major religions. What I have a problem is the "practising" of christianity in schools, unless they are private faith based schools. I appreciate we are or were a christian based country, and I would expect the meaning of Easter etc to be taiught, but I do not see why every child should be made to sing songs in praise of God/Jesus, say prayers etc etc whether or not they are "believers" This ties in with the TT debate, although I thought your comments about death were crass, I would have understood them better if the argument was then when talking about the TT this subject was raised as part of it. The initial debate was about TT pushers in school and my argument was not that they should have not been taught about the TT but that it apperared to be done as a cheerleading exercise with none of the "yes the TT is great but unfortunately there is danger and risk involved". As in "practicing" religion in school my argument is not that Religion or the TT should not be taught but that they should not be pushed from any particular view point. The way my child came back from school it appeared that the TT was and it consequently could have made it much more difficult to explain to her if a tradgedy had occured. It is a similar argument to sex education schools. It is an education about it, the mechanics, the biology, risks fro diseases etc. It is not about "the lovers guide" which I feel the TT in school almost was But whilst on the subject of schools, what I really object to is the teaching of religion. Quite happy for moral values and social awareness/conscience to be taught, but the religion thing does wind me up a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Yes, a teacher's perspective would be interesting. But whilst on the subject of schools, what I really object to is the teaching of religion. Quite happy for moral values and social awareness/conscience to be taught, but the religion thing does wind me up a little. I have posted before about a long conversation I had with my, then, 7 year old son about the world being created in 7 days and was that true? I explained as best I could that most people believe the universe was created by the big bang, but some people believe in how it is written in the Bible. So you don't believe in God, came the reply. And I felt I was put in such a difficult position because on the one hand I do not want to directly contradict what he is taught at school (you know, if the creationist theory is bunkum, then so is long division). But on the other, I don't believe in the unproven and don't think children ought to be taught it as fact. Much better, that they teach them the stories and give the historical social context of how these stories arose. Let's face it though, there are some cracking stories in the Bible and I am quite happy for them to be taught to children, providing they are presented as just that; ripping yarns Anyway, I ended the conversation by explaining that some people do believe in creationism, but although I don't you should still be tolerant of other people's views (except Copycat's). It really was hard work, when all I wanted to do is say, its just a story, lad, just a story. So Gladys, What do you tell your 7 year old about Father Christmas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.