Is it a thing where you guys buy group birthday gifts at work? Like, everyone chips in to get one big present?
That’s how it works at my company. And look, I don't have an issue with the concept itself. BUT... there are about seven of us in the office. It's fine if we all chip in for a little something for each other and split the cost. The problem is management is pushing this idea—and I can tell my coworkers aren't complaining, so they probably agree—that we should be buying gifts for everyone in the entire operation. That means all our drivers and the warehouse staff too. Of course, it's totally one-sided. The bosses don't even acknowledge our birthdays, let alone buy us anything. Not that I care much since we aren't exactly close, and they don't even know when our birthdays are. No one is forcing them to do anything, yet somehow, it's our job to track everyone's birthdays and make sure the drivers and warehouse crew get gifts.
It feels stupid and unfair. Why am I expected to keep track of their birthdays when it isn't reciprocated?
Am I losing my mind here, or is this actually messed up?
If I actually speak up, I'll just end up being the only one complaining.
I could get behind the idea, provided that to offset the extra expense, we start buying those gifts through Amazon😁
The way you’ve described things just screams mediocrity to me. It honestly feels like that’s exactly where you’ve stalled out—stuck in this middle ground because you're clearly uncomfortable there. You seem to be searching for something, though you can't quite put your finger on what it is, and you're waiting for someone to just hand it to you like a finished product. But life doesn't really work like a vending machine. It sounds to me like you might have grown up in a bit of a bubble, shielded from how things actually function out here.
Look, you don't need to overhaul your entire personality. But you also shouldn't sit around expecting the rest of the world to bend itself to fit your specific mold.
Carol Turner3 said:It’s always a good idea to actually read something with a bit of comprehension before you start typing away...
Going through your sentences one by one to argue is just pointless, because honestly, it feels like your mind is already made up and nothing I say is going to change it...
You’re actually spot on regarding my opinion—it isn't going to budge. You read the situation perfectly, though, since it wasn't really my intention to get into a deep debate here, especially knowing how fixed your stance is. To be honest, I was more curious to see how you’d react to the specific approach suggested by the other Mao.😁 So, you aren't stupid, which is a decent starting point at least.
The reason I phrased things that way... well, I still remember your last thread where you quite clearly stated that you weren't looking for constructive input, so I decided to just stay out of it entirely. There were plenty of helpful suggestions offered back then, anyway. And what ended up happening? After a while—I can't quite remember if it was a few months or maybe even a year—here you are again, facing the exact same hurdles and airing the exact same grievances.
If your ultimate goal is just to wander through these forums fishing for sympathy or a pat on the head, well, you're doing a great job, so keep at it if that's what makes you happy. There will always be someone willing to play along with that need for validation. But if you actually want to move the needle in your life, you've already been given more than enough advice; you might just need to step away from the screen and focus on your actual day-to-day reality. Then again, people have already told you that too, so... o&o 👋
There aren't any shackles holding you back here, other than your own lack of initiative and a certain streak of laziness. Where exactly do you think you'd expand to? If someone were to hand you a cushy, high-paying office job that didn't actually require much effort, would you take it? Well, look, to get a gig like that, you usually need some heavy-duty connections within a major government agency or a massive corporation, and it's pretty obvious you don't have those, sorry.
The environment around you? You finished some college degree—or at least got halfway there if you could have managed it. And you actually have the nerve to claim you have absolutely zero support from those closest to you? I mean, whose food are you eating right now, where are you living, who’s covering the utilities, and are you walking around without shoes on your feet? That is support. At 26 years old, demanding more than that instead of actually putting in the work is—well, it's just disrespectful.
Employers? Sure, they don't want to pay someone who clearly doesn't want to be there. You have a right to feel that way, go ahead and feel it. But maybe try changing your attitude.
The average salary? Honestly, you aren't the average. You're talking about jobs that require zero qualifications, yet you expect an average salary because you technically attended some college? Though, let's be real, you wouldn't even do those jobs because they'd be "too hard." Then again, you wouldn't do the other jobs either, because even there, you'd have to put in some effort—even if it was just using different parts of your body.
People who actually make it in life generally don't sit around waiting for someone to hand them an opportunity on a silver platter; they build their own opportunities. It's the exact same thing with luck.
Yes, there is a tiny, microscopic percentage of people who are born with a silver spoon in their mouths and live a completely different reality from day one. You aren't one of them, so grow up and come to terms with that.
Bungee jumping? You'd jump, right, just like that? If someone walked up to you with a Bungee jumping setup and paid for every single expense, I bet you'd still find some excuse not to do it.
We all deal with fear, but honestly, sometimes we just use our anxieties as a convenient excuse to avoid actually living our lives. If you keep running from it, this is exactly how things play out:
Patrick Reyes5 said:I’m 31. Or at least, I will be in a few months. Currently, I’m unemployed. I have some experience—temp work through the court system—which is my only official employment history. I’ve passed my professional certification exam, too. It’s not the work itself I dread; I just don’t want to spend the rest of my life scrubbing floors or cleaning hotel rooms (though I do currently clean under the table to get by).
And honestly? I’m terrified. I’m scared my mother is right when she says my career ceiling is a janitorial position. I’m scared it’s too late to ditch this dead-end path everyone keeps preaching about and actually enroll in a program I care about, like studying English Literature. I’m scared it’s too late to master the languages that actually interest me: French, Russian, and Turkish. I’m scared I’ll never get to spend a weekend in New York City, which is a massive dream of mine. I’m scared I won't master English well enough to pass an Oxford proficiency exam. I’m scared I’ll lose the few real friends I have left. I’m scared I won't be able to pick up video editing, even though I love the idea. I’m scared I’ll be the only one in my social circle with just a vocational degree, and people will assume I’m not as bright as them. I’m scared I’ll never land a job because I don’t have the right connections. I’m scared I’ll never find a partner or have children, especially since people keep telling me I'm "running out of time." I’m scared to cut my hair short; I’m tired of managing long hair just because I can tie it in a ponytail. I’m scared I won't have enough money and will always rely on my father, when I should be the one helping him. I’m scared to call the registrar at St. Louis to ask about transferring. I’m scared to call the gym and ask if they charge for demonstrating proper form like a private trainer would. I’m scared I’ll never learn to dance the tango. I’m scared I’ll never learn to sew my own clothes, since shopping isn't really my thing. I’m scared I’ll never find a chemical peel that helps with a small scar I have. I’m scared the marks from my skin-picking disorder will never fade. I’m scared I’ll never find the right skincare for my face. I’m even scared that I’ll never learn how to express myself better.
I am afraid that I will stay stuck exactly where I am forever, with nothing ever changing.
Most of all, I fear waking up one day to realize my life has passed me by while I was still sitting in this same spot—never having moved away, never having found a job (even on Mars), never having had kids, and never having accomplished a single thing I actually planned.
I’m scared there isn't enough time left to fix anything. I’m scared of how people will react if I try. I’m scared of everything.
How do I stop being afraid?
The reality is that life doesn't just shift gears on its own; you have to be the one to drive the change. You can't just tread water and complain about the current; you have to start moving. Start with the tiny, almost insignificant things. Pick something trivial and ask yourself, "What’s the absolute worst-case scenario here?" Like, go see a stylist at a salon in downtown Chicago this Wednesday and get a haircut. What could possibly happen? Maybe you won't love the style? It’s just hair—it grows back. But regardless, you win because you finally broke the inertia and moved from a standstill.
Before you can tackle the massive shifts, you really need to pull yourself together and find some clarity. Looking at what you wrote, those aren't actual plans; they're just a collection of scattered thoughts. It feels to me like you don't even know what your end goal is yet, let alone how to build a financial foundation to support it. And you have to accept that there might be certain things that simply aren't within reach right now. Figure out what your true priorities are and start there. That would be an actual plan, rather than the list of uncertainties you've presented.
If you decide to run tests right at the start of the school year and again once everything wraps up at the end of each grade, you basically end up with a complete set of both baseline and final data points for every single academic year.
Joshua Patel6 said:The fundamental issue here is that we are expecting a transformation from someone who feels they have very legitimate reasons to be concerned. She has real doubts about their relationship, which has fundamentally shifted over the years; there is a palpable lack of communication, intimacy, and tenderness. So, how is it that *she* is suddenly the one tasked with changing and building up her self-esteem? If those basic emotional needs were being met, she wouldn't be struggling with her confidence in the first place. When someone is struggling, it might actually stem from objective circumstances rather than an internal flaw within the person themselves. For instance, if your spouse simply doesn't love you anymore, or you sense something is deeply wrong and you can't tell if you're just imagining it or if it's the cold, hard truth... What does that have to do with self-confidence? Isn't it perfectly normal to feel somewhat unhappy when you aren't receiving what you fundamentally need from a relationship?
I don't think anyone is actually demanding that the author change; rather, it was offered as advice because, honestly, that's often the only way out of a situation that simply isn't working anymore. It's like a loop where a husband could try to reassure her eight hundred times that her suspicions are irrational, but as long as she lacks that core confidence, she’ll find herself searching for validation an eight hundred and first time, until eventually, he reaches his breaking point, if he hasn't already.
And when you look at confidence, it doesn't really depend heavily on your surroundings; it's more like something you either possess or you don't. When you do have it, both you and the world around you react to everything in a completely different way. I get the sense that the author understands this nuance; she just needs to figure out how to build it up.
We should probably clarify that confident people aren't immune to doubt or sadness. They still feel those things, but they tend to be a little less taxing on themselves and everyone else around them.
Joshua Patel6 said:Unbelievable... It is always the exact same narrative. It’s always the woman who is supposedly "wrong," the one who needs to evolve, and the one tasked with making everyone else happy. Honestly, what a collection of tired clichés you just tossed out there, specifically 🙄 In any healthy dynamic, people need to cooperate and put in mutual effort to sustain their connection. Suggesting that everything hinges on just one person—most often the woman—is nothing short of a massive 👎
What kind of environment is she supposed to be "fixing" here? From what I can see, she's the only unhappy person in this entire scenario.
What Jeremy Fowler45 wrote isn't just empty platitudes; it’s actually based on life experience, which seems to be something you haven't quite encountered yet. If the author manages to build up her own self-confidence, she’ll start by helping herself first, and once that happens, the people around her will naturally react differently to her presence.
And as for whether she lacks confidence because of how her husband acts, or if he acts that way because she lacks confidence... well, that's a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation that could go on forever.
He isn't going to be the one to fix your insecurities or soothe your frustrations. Honestly, that’s just not his job to carry, and it shouldn't be. You have to navigate those feelings on your own.
It really doesn't matter how you two acted when you were both floating around in that honeymoon phase—we all tend to act a little differently when we're caught up in that chemical rush. Real life actually begins once you finally drift out of that cloud. As long as you can accept the other person for who they truly are, regardless of how much your personalities might clash, then everything will be fine. Trying to reshape someone else into what you want them to be... well, it's neither possible nor fair. But I get it, that's exactly what you're aiming for.
Tyler Ruiz502 said:I’ve already pointed this out a few times now in this thread—whether we delay things or not, it feels like it doesn't even matter. It all leads to the same place anyway.
Well, I don't think it works quite like that. A single request for a delay is pretty much a non-issue on its own, but the real trouble seems to be that these requests are becoming increasingly common. And the underlying issue is that these delays often seem to go hand-in-hand with helicopter parenting or parents having overly lofty ambitions for their kids. You constantly hear people complaining about children who are "too hyperactive." But honestly, what should seven-year-olds be like if they aren't energetic, full of life, and completely uninterested in sitting still for obligations? If we have to wait until they stop being spirited, until they can sit quietly in a desk for hours on end from day one and master everything their parents expect, then we might as well just wait a few more years and enroll thirty-year-olds in first grade. And even then, I bet you'd still find some worried parent making a fuss...
If these delays are truly happening as often as people say, we are essentially raising generations of people who lack basic competence—not because they are incapable, but because their own parents unintentionally stifle them by never actually trusting in their abilities. It feels like a broken system, coupled with that unfortunate social worker mentioned in the earlier posts, is working overtime to ensure that happens.
At the end of the day, the more of these unjustified delays we allow, the more we're actually depriving the children who truly, desperately need that extra time.
I honestly can’t wrap my head around this whole idea that you lose a best friend just because they aren't religious. When I sit back and actually look at my own life, most of the friends I grew up with were believers, and whether it was because of my family's values or theirs, it never once put our bond in jeopardy. Even looking at my young child right now—who is a believer—they have a best friend who doesn't participate in any religious studies at all.
The other thing to consider is that we are talking about seven-year-olds here, and let's be honest, friendships at that age are incredibly fragile. These little bonds tend to fracture over all sorts of trivial nonsense, and if you ask me, religion shouldn't be the catalyst for some massive drama. It’s all very much the same whether they are bickering over someone being a little chubby, wearing glasses, rocking certain designer sneakers, or debating religious education. What they really need is for us to explain that judging someone like that isn't okay, and that a friend who evaluates you based on those things isn't truly a friend, even if they were your absolute best friend just yesterday.
Patrick Harris5 said:If you're suggesting I should just be a conformist too—just bow my head and do whatever the big church corporation tells me to do—well, it's not happening. Nothing is going to be forced on my kid. They're doing okay for now, along with plenty of other kids, but let's not pretend that makes the situation right.
It’s the exact same thing as if the roles were reversed. Imagine if there was some mandatory hour in the middle of the school day where they taught that God doesn't exist, and suddenly those "other" kids are being pulled away from their classmates... to me, that sounds like an absolute disaster.
When a bunch of fearful adults take this conformist approach, all they're really doing is handing more power to these special interest groups. You know the ones—the groups profiting massively from this, claiming that religious education belongs in public schools. They only look at the numbers to suit their own agenda, painting a picture that everyone is desperate to attend because Americans are such deeply devoted believers! They ignore the fact that many of those people are probably only there so they don't stand out or get labeled. They're just there to question things, or maybe learn something...
Someone who is truly religious—someone who sincerely believes in the Catholic God or any other God—will find enough time outside of school activities to introduce their children to those beliefs and pass on that sense of "unconditional love."
In a country where only about 20% of people who claim to be religious actually show up to church (and even that number is probably inflated), everything else is just pure conformity. It's just avoiding responsibility, both for yourself and for your child.
I’m not making any specific proposals here, nor am I trying to dive into the deep end regarding how anyone else's child is being looked after. It was clearly phrased a bit clumsily; I was speaking in general terms.
What I would say is that parish-based religious education—the kind held at the church to prepare for sacraments—is intended for believers. As for the school version? Honestly, I can't see why someone wouldn't enroll if they wanted to probe deeper into certain topics or learn something fresh.
And finally—expecting conformists to suddenly stop being conformists is just beating a dead horse. That expectation certainly isn't going to move the needle. But hey, the rhino gave some excellent advice👍. We should print it all out on flyers and hand them out in front of the schools during enrollment season.😁
Patrick Harris5 said:Honestly, looking through all these forum comments, it feels like there’s this massive wave of conformity among Americans when it comes to religious education in schools..
Everyone’s acting like they aren't religious, or they don't step foot in a church, or they're totally against organized religion—but then they still insist their kid takes the religious studies class just so they don't stand out. They don't want the kid left alone in the hallway or teased by classmates for being different, right?
And that just ends up giving more wind to the sails of the church corporation and its special interest groups. It lets them claim that "the numbers don't lie"—that most kids attend because both the children and parents genuinely want them to, which they then use as leverage to argue that religious ed belongs in the public school system..
If every major industry in America collapsed tomorrow, at least we'd still have the local sheep shearing business to fall back on. That much is certain..
Given how much conformity we run into in our day-to-day lives across America, I’m not entirely sure why it surprises you to see it surfacing in a topic like this. And really, it isn't strictly about just following the crowd. It’s more complicated than that. You can't simply leave a seven-year-old unsupervised for two hours every week; while you're busy fighting against social conformity, you might have one kid sitting lonely in a hallway and another wandering off somewhere entirely unexpected...
coppermarlin14 said:Is this really what people think about yoga? 😂 I was honestly stunned when a friend of mine—someone I thought was a pretty progressive, modern young woman—started spouting some absolute nonsense regarding yoga. I mean, seriously, I’m still trying to process it... she goes to church and is a believer, yet she actually had the nerve to ask me if I was worried about someone casting a hex or a curse on me just by buying secondhand clothes online. I couldn't believe my ears. It was just... well, it was ridiculous. 😂
It’s the same story with the local parish. Ever since the kids reached third grade, it’s been constant involvement in church activities... especially from the mid-year onwards. They hold these meetings for the parents that drag on for at least an hour and a half—honestly, longer than most parent-teacher conferences at the local elementary school. And do you know what they spend all that time debating? How to raise children. You have priests and nuns showing up and telling *me* how I should be raising my own kids... I never actually attended those meetings myself; I just sent my husband because he wanted to participate in the religious education programs. I told him, "Fine, you go, I'm staying home." The pressure on the kids is relentless, too. They’re constantly being threatened that if they don't show up for Mass or the religious classes, they won't be allowed to receive Communion, or they might even be kicked out of the program entirely. And apparently, if you want them to take their First Communion, they have to be enrolled in those religious studies at both school and the church for two full years beforehand.
Now, I’m not a believer myself, but I do understand the significance of Mass within a faith community. That’s why it really gets under my skin when I hear people complaining about having to take their child to Mass. If a child is preparing for First Communion or Confirmation, Sunday Mass should naturally become a part of their life. If attending Mass is such a monumental burden in your household, why on earth are you signing them up for these sacraments in the first place? We should probably take a moment to reflect on our own stances and consider what kind of example we are setting for our children. Any bad influence they encounter in a religious ed class can be corrected later, but the negative lessons they learn from us tend to take much deeper root..
swiftstag14 said:This is my first time posting here, and I honestly wasn't sure if I should even 😁 My son is starting first grade, and during enrollment, they asked about religious education. Should we say yes or no? We chose yes, but even now—just like so many times before—I find myself questioning if we made the right call. To give some context, I am an atheist, while my husband is a believer (not particularly observant, but he does have faith). Our son hasn't stepped foot in a church, nor does he know any prayers, as we don't pray at home. He is prepared for the curriculum, though; he knows Mom isn't religious, Dad is, and Dad has expressed interest in attending. Truthfully, I'm not even sure he fully grasps these concepts of God and faith yet; he’s mostly just picked up terms like "Sunday school" or "First Communion" from his older friends, and it seems to have sparked a curiosity in him. I would really appreciate hearing from anyone else navigating a similar dynamic in their household.
In our house, we hadn't planned on enrolling our kids in religious education at all, so when that form came across my desk, I circled "no" without a second thought. In fact, I have to admit I didn't even bother asking my son what he thought, mostly because I didn't imagine it would carry much weight for him at that age. However, throughout the summer, he became so incredibly persistent about wanting to take those classes that we eventually decided that letting him attend was probably the lesser of two evils. He’s always known where we stand on these things; we tend to be quite open and communicative in our family. It actually caught me off guard how little it bothered him that what he hears at school differs from what he hears at the dinner table. He cruised through elementary school, and once he hit middle school, he chose ethics classes entirely on his own without us hovering over him. When I finally asked him later on if he considered himself a believer, he simply told me he hadn't made up his mind yet😁.
I can't quite pin down what's weighing on you in all of this. I'm not entirely sure why, given your specific situation, you're even considering signing him up. It seems unlikely that those couple of hours a week are going to radically pivot the entire trajectory of his life, whether he spends them in a classroom or tucked away in a library. Then again, I suppose one has to wonder what lasting impact those lessons will have if you aren't ultimately expecting him to follow a path of active faith
nimblelynx7 said:I don't think April 6th is the issue here. The real problem is March 29th. Like I already pointed out, how does a kid born on March 29th this year end up in the exact same school grade as a kid born on March 29th last year?
It essentially boils down to one parent asking for a delay while the other is pushing for an early enrollment😁.
Brian Jones8 said:Look, northerncobra27, I’ve just got one question for you: do you actually know what the legal requirements are if you want to delay a kid starting school for another year of preschool?
The whole "letting them play for one more year" thing is really only an option for parents whose kids aren't legally required to enroll yet—like if they were born in, say, April. In that case, you can send them to school or keep them home, and it's totally up to you. But let’s be clear: this isn't something a dad just decides on a whim!
It’s quite a mountain of steps, really; you’re looking at a full medical evaluation through the school district, sitting down for consultations with the school's specialist team—psychologists, speech therapists, all that—and then eventually dealing with all the paperwork at some local municipal or county office, I suppose?
In this case, saying "let them play for another year" is something only a parent can decide if their child isn't technically required to start kindergarten yet—like if they were born around April 6th, for instance—so they have the choice to enroll them early or just hold off. it can't just be the dad making the call on his own!
You make a good point there; I went back to check the thread, and it wasn't actually the father who wrote that, it was the mother after all😁. She mentioned the child's own readiness as one of those two main deciding factors 👏 that tipped the scales for them.
If a kid was born on April 6th, they aren't legally required to be in school yet, though if I understood your date correctly, you might actually be able to request an early enrollment instead.
Susan James said:It's because if a boy starts first grade at 6.5 while a girl starts at 7.5, she's going to be older than him. And she might be taller too. She might be smarter. And probably more independent and mature.
Of course, it isn't strictly about birthdays or numbers, but adults tend to obsess over dates and statistics.
No one just decides to skip a grade or delay enrollment on a whim; you need official confirmation that the child isn't ready. Usually, that involves passing through a school pediatrician, a school counselor, or a preschool specialist—and sometimes even other medical institutions where the child has been receiving diagnostics or ongoing treatment.
I honestly doubt this is just parents acting on whims or wanting an extra year of carefree playtime in preschool.
When a professional suggests a child might not be ready for school yet, and that child happens to be right on the age cutoff, a parent might weigh those factors alongside things like a longer summer vacation, easier childcare, or smoother travel schedules. To me, I don't see anything wrong with that. Even if it goes the other way—where the specialists don't find any reason to delay—a parent who feels strongly about it can always seek a third opinion. That doesn't guarantee a delay if there truly isn't a valid reason, though.
I'm not saying every expert is perfect—I know testing can sometimes be superficial or even biased—but looking at the overall number of delays, it seems to me that most of them are actually quite rare. And the vast majority of these delays make total sense.
At the same time, there are still many kids who *should* have had their enrollment delayed but didn't. Those are the kids I worry about... It’s hard for me to watch a parent refuse to accept that their child needs more time, only realizing it halfway through the school year when it's already far too late. (Especially when they use excuses like "everyone else in the group is going, so they should too," or "they need to toughen up," or "we all started early 30 years ago, so why change now?" To me, that sounds like following outdated trends, and I'm generally against following trends just for the sake of it.)
I wish things worked exactly the way you described, but my impression remains different. I realize the final call rests with the experts, but in various parts of our system, boundaries seem to shift under parental pressure. I suspect this situation isn't an exception to that rule.
Pushing a child into school against a professional assessment is just the flip side of the same coin.
I believe most parents are acting with the best intentions. Unfortunately, good intentions don't always lead to the best path.
Brian Jones8 said:🤦 Maybe try reading the post again? Honestly, everyone is so rushed to jump in with their opinions that nobody actually takes a second to process the facts.
Look, no parent makes these kinds of calls in a vacuum. You don't just decide on your own; you rely on professional guidance and ultimately follow the recommendation of a board or a committee.
And why on earth do you think a child being unable to recount their own experience isn't a valid reason? Of course it is. That’s never going to be the sole issue, but it’s part of the bigger picture. Finally, why do you care so much if your kids are already grown and ready for the world? Do we really need to push our unprepared kids into things just so yours can look more "ready" by comparison???
Every parent does what they believe is best for their offspring. It’s not "overprotectiveness"—it’s listening to a child's readiness and working alongside professionals who actually have the degrees and the experience to back up their advice.
Like I said before, I’m lucky enough to have a little genius at home who started school at five, so forgive me if I sound like I know what I'm talking about when I say that age can be perfect.
Like I said, I'm not concerned with how others handle their business. And truthfully, I don't know you, and I don't know your child, so I have absolutely no clue what the best path is for your specific situation. That's exactly why I tried to stay general and avoid judging individual cases, aside from that one father I brought up in my last post. I'm genuinely confused as to why you felt like I was taking a shot at you personally.☕
Procrastination isn't inherently the villain here, not really. It’s just that lately, it seems to have morphed into this complicated trend where overprotective parenting meets these sky-high expectations we place on our kids, and honestly, that intersection is a messy place for both the individual child and society at large.
If you look at it from one angle, there are parents out there who go to extreme lengths to clear every single obstacle out of their child's path, essentially allowing them to drift through life without ever grasping the reality of the world that's waiting for them once they step out from under the parental umbrella. On the flip side, there's this refusal to let a child be imperfect—to let them be mediocre at something, to stumble, or to make a mistake and then figure out how to fix it. A kid who never faces a challenge or grapples with a real problem is going to struggle to become a capable adult. Eventually, they start to realize that their parents don't actually trust them or believe in what they can do, and that realization carries a lot of weight.
To be blunt, most of the comments I'm seeing on this thread are a bit much. Someone says their kid doesn't want to go to school, so they just didn't enroll them? Or maybe a preschooler hasn't quite mastered storytelling yet, so they aren't "ready" for kindergarten? Then there's the person who just wants an extra year of carefree living—honestly, looking back through the last few pages, that feels like one of the most reasonable excuses out there 😁. (And obviously, I’m not talking about the kids who truly, legitimately need the extra time.)
I’m not trying to sit in judgment of anyone; these are your children, and you should do whatever you feel is best for them. But please don't cling to the idea that these choices don't impact me or my own child. We are all part of a larger community, and we're increasingly seeing a rise in people who lack basic competence because their parents shielded them from everything.
Before anyone starts coming after me personally, I want to be clear that I wasn't targeting any specific individual here (though that one dad asking for a delay just because his kid is reluctant to start school can probably identify himself). The reality is that everyone here has their own set of reasons and will choose what they perceive as the best path for their family. Some of you might be absolutely right. Most of you probably aren't. I'm just speaking to the broader pattern I see unfolding around me.
Karen Richardson3 said:But shouldn't every single school be offering this kind of thing? Like, having those extra activities available for any kid who wants them, can handle them, or just really needs them? I mean, we’re talking about things like competition prep, small project groups, and all that good stuff, right?
Looking back at my own experience, I went to two different elementary schools in Seattle, and both of them had these programs in place—honestly, pretty much every school I've ever come across seems to have them. 🤷
To some extent, yeah, though I suppose it depends entirely on how much a specific school actually implements it. In my oldest child’s school, there wasn't any extra help for the younger grades, and in the higher grades, it was more like those few students heading off to math competitions would get their "supplemental instruction" during regular class hours. Which, honestly, isn't a bad thing. There were a couple of students who even asked their geography teacher if she could lead them to a competition, but she just didn't have the capacity to make it happen 😵... To be perfectly honest, that whole era of my life is something I'm trying to move past as quickly as possible, so the finer details are a bit fuzzy in my mind. The school my younger child attends is a completely different universe, at least as far as what's possible within our American school system. They offer supplemental tutoring and advanced enrichment starting as early as first or second grade; they have specialized content woven into the regular curriculum for kids who show interest or a specific need—though, of course, that might depend heavily on the individual teacher—as well as those extra programs that every school ought to provide. Plus, they have a dedicated specialist team that identifies the unique challenges faced by gifted students, which is definitely a crucial part of the whole equation.