Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Parent Support Forums
General Parenting
difficult child doing debate
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Marguerite" data-source="post: 83918" data-attributes="member: 1991"><p>Don't fret about the maturity thing - I was doing the survey last night on difficult child 1, had to really think about where he is now and where he's come from, and maturity is something that has been very much delayed but is rapidly catching up now he's in his 20s.</p><p></p><p>The debating thing - it is actually BETTER to get the side you privately disagree with, because you already KNOW the arguments the other side are likely to use and this gives you a head start in finding ways to counter those arguments. If there's ANY Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) in your son (and as you know, I think there could be) then he will have difficulty in saying things he doesn't believe in. OK, they CAN try to say LESS when trying to cover up a misdemeanour, but they HATE trying to invent anything they feel is not true, it really grates internally. But there are ways of saying it, such as "People feel internet filters will keep their children safer, but do t hey really? Children these days are often far more technologically skilled than their parents and can beat these filters often without parents realising - surely a better way of ensuring a child's safe internet use is personal supervision? Having the computer kept and used in a common area, rather than a child's bedroom? Filters can give parents a false sense of security, make them feel their children are invulnerable when in fact they very well may not be."</p><p></p><p>An argument like this would not go against his own personal views, but would still be a strong argument for the negative side. And by twisting the debate around this way, he would be getting it to where HE wants it, still in agreement but also pointing out the flaws we all know still exist in filters. It would be a harder argument to counter, than the often naive debating technique of "It IS!" "It ISN'T!"</p><p>He can also raise the personal rights and freedoms angle, along the lines of, "Where will it end, if we continue to increase this level of monitoring? WHy not, instead, try to clean up the 'Net?"</p><p>By phrasing it as a question, again he doesn't have to make his own personal statement which might jar with his own preference for always being truthful.</p><p></p><p>I know I keep insisting that Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) kids (and others sufficiently similar) are really lousy at not telling the truth, but there are still ways to tell the truth (or at least, not lie in any complex manner) and still apparently say the opposite thing. Knowing how their heads work here gives you an advantage when trying to find out what really happens in an event, by careful questioning to avoid any attempts by the child to mislead. So often on this site I've read where a parent gets upset because "He lied to me!" when if you really dig deep, the child didn't lie, but simply left out information. Or in fact, believed what they were saying even though it wasn't a reflection of true events (for example, "some kids tripped me over," when he may have only THOUGHT they had.)</p><p>And, of course, some kids really CAN lie, in great vivid detail. I pity those parents, the mind games they have to play to find out the facts are so much tougher.</p><p></p><p>But give my congrats to difficult child on getting into the debating team.</p><p></p><p>Marg</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Marguerite, post: 83918, member: 1991"] Don't fret about the maturity thing - I was doing the survey last night on difficult child 1, had to really think about where he is now and where he's come from, and maturity is something that has been very much delayed but is rapidly catching up now he's in his 20s. The debating thing - it is actually BETTER to get the side you privately disagree with, because you already KNOW the arguments the other side are likely to use and this gives you a head start in finding ways to counter those arguments. If there's ANY Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) in your son (and as you know, I think there could be) then he will have difficulty in saying things he doesn't believe in. OK, they CAN try to say LESS when trying to cover up a misdemeanour, but they HATE trying to invent anything they feel is not true, it really grates internally. But there are ways of saying it, such as "People feel internet filters will keep their children safer, but do t hey really? Children these days are often far more technologically skilled than their parents and can beat these filters often without parents realising - surely a better way of ensuring a child's safe internet use is personal supervision? Having the computer kept and used in a common area, rather than a child's bedroom? Filters can give parents a false sense of security, make them feel their children are invulnerable when in fact they very well may not be." An argument like this would not go against his own personal views, but would still be a strong argument for the negative side. And by twisting the debate around this way, he would be getting it to where HE wants it, still in agreement but also pointing out the flaws we all know still exist in filters. It would be a harder argument to counter, than the often naive debating technique of "It IS!" "It ISN'T!" He can also raise the personal rights and freedoms angle, along the lines of, "Where will it end, if we continue to increase this level of monitoring? WHy not, instead, try to clean up the 'Net?" By phrasing it as a question, again he doesn't have to make his own personal statement which might jar with his own preference for always being truthful. I know I keep insisting that Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) kids (and others sufficiently similar) are really lousy at not telling the truth, but there are still ways to tell the truth (or at least, not lie in any complex manner) and still apparently say the opposite thing. Knowing how their heads work here gives you an advantage when trying to find out what really happens in an event, by careful questioning to avoid any attempts by the child to mislead. So often on this site I've read where a parent gets upset because "He lied to me!" when if you really dig deep, the child didn't lie, but simply left out information. Or in fact, believed what they were saying even though it wasn't a reflection of true events (for example, "some kids tripped me over," when he may have only THOUGHT they had.) And, of course, some kids really CAN lie, in great vivid detail. I pity those parents, the mind games they have to play to find out the facts are so much tougher. But give my congrats to difficult child on getting into the debating team. Marg [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Parent Support Forums
General Parenting
difficult child doing debate
Top