We'll probably all experience at least a bout of survival parenting sometime. I mean those times when you're just barely keeping your head above water. Times when - if a visitor pops in unannounced - there is the distinct possibility that they will find a wet patch on one of your dining chairs (which you desperately hope was spilt from a drink of water, and not something else). Times when the phrase "you could just..." strike you with both guilt and rage in equal measure. Guilt that you're not doing what you could, and rage that others have no idea that you really couldn't just.
I've had some extended periods of survival parenting, when life's circumstances conspired together to make me feel like I was drowning in my own life. One of those times was when I was up night after night for hours on end with Angelina screaming in pain. I was pregnant with Chatterbox. And then we all got a terrible gastro bug - while living for several weeks in a one bedroom "unit" with a bathroom that was a metre wide (no bath, of course) and a kitchen approximately the size of a single bed (no oven, of course).
I did what many, many desperate mothers have done before and since. Morning and afternoon, I turned on Playschool. (Don't worry, this is not going to turn into a rant against Playschool - bear with me.) At first, my children didn't know that television existed apart from Playschool. The TV would go off faithfully the moment it was finished. Then, I started turning it on a liiiiitttle bit before Playschool started, and left it on for that teeny little program after Playschool. And then I thought that one program was so teeny tiny, it wouldn't hurt to leave it on for the next one as well.
Then something happened. I woke up. My children were starting to simply exist. They lived for when the TV was on. They started to chuck hissy fits when I turned it off. I suddenly realised that putting the kids in front of the TV wasn't helping me keep my head above water, it was dragging me under. I'll come back to that.
Survival parenting is hard, by it's very nature. But. It doesn't have to be bad. In fact, smart survival parenting can be very, very good. As I have learned through several episodes of st#p*d (stupid is a dirty word in our house) survival parenting.
Here are some of the best lessons I've learned through my survival parenting experiences. They're not rules, and they may not fit your circumstances, but maybe there's something in my journey that will resonate with you.
1) Whenever possible, spare some of your energy for setting up systems to help your kids become independent and even helpful. If you have zero energy, but help is available, you might suggest to your helpers that they teach your kids to make a sandwich or a salad or sushi... Or you could ask them (if you're very brave) - or do this yourself - to rearrange your kitchen so plates and utensils are within easy reach of the children (if they're old enough to be trusted not to impale themselves on a butter knife).
2) Encourage reading. Once one child is able to read well enough to follow directions, you can give them a recipe or write out a set of jobs for them to do, or let them learn through independent reading. This has been a huge help for me.
3) Recognize strengths - and learn to use them! I've learnt that Angelina is the best at hearing me call out - if I have a message to deliver, but am sick in bed, she's the one I call. (I rarely bother to call Miss Curie - it takes less energy to go and find her and rouse her from whatever daydream she happens to be in the midst of :).) If I want a job done without complaining, I ask Miss Curie. If I want help with cooking, I ask Chatterbox.
4) Invest in discipline. And I don't mean punishment, necessarily, although I do believe it is called for at times. When you're barely surviving it is incredibly hard to put the necessary work into teaching children strong values, but it is soooo much better to force yourself to deal with issues such as meanness and lying straight away - to set the standard and stick to it doggedly - than to let things slide for a time. I've done it both ways, and I'm slowly learning that it is better for us to miss a meal than to "miss" an issue.
5) Following on from that: Expect everyone to contribute. Don't make clean up optional - for example teach your kids (if you possibly can) how to wash dishes or load the dishwasher and set the expectation that it gets done after every meal (there are still some "gentle" reminders that have to happen in our house!).
6) Let go of stuff that doesn't matter. For example cloth nappies don't get folded here, they get shoved in a box (I appreciate that for some folding may be necessary where there is limited storage space). I also hang them up just by a corner (I know this wouldn't work in really damp climates). (Again, these aren't rules, just examples of how I survive.) Nor do I make any particular effort to remove stains from nappies - after all, they're just going back on a bottom!
7) On the other hand, hang on to the stuff that does matter. First, most important thing here is Bible reading. Yes, I'm human and get slack sometimes, but I really try to cling to this one and make sure I read (or discuss) Bible with the girls each and every day, regardless of what else is happening.
8) Be efficient and try to take small steps forward rather than procrastinating. On those days when I feel like hibernating for several years, I try to choose one small thing to do. That might be taking the bottle of (environmentally friendly, of course ;)) toilet cleaner in to the toilet with me so I clean the toilet after I've used it. It might be wiping the bathroom sink after I've brushed my hair... I often find once I've taken that one small step past total paralysis, the rest get easier.
9) Get rid of junk. Nowadays, if I find a toy (as long as it's not something really special such as the doll quilts made by my cousin and aunt) left out by one of the bigger kids, I chuck it or op shop it. Ditto if I discover trinkets that have lived at the back of a drawer for several years, unless I have a use for them straight away. Ditto if I don't like the way an item of clothing fits and it's not practical to adjust it. Ditto if a toy hasn't been played with in forEVER (we're members of the toy library, so we can always borrow something similar). This includes lollies that we're given that I don't want my kids to eat. I just throw them away now. It is SO not worth letting stuff drain your precious energy.
10) Now that I've made it all the way to nine points, I feel like I should have a tenth. Here we go. Don't let yourself get weighed down with other people's expectations - including the expectation to have exactly ten tips on any given subject.
One last suggestion - try not to depend on one child as your helper. If there is one kid in the house who is always helpful and agreeable, it's easy to place unreasonable burdens on them - don't let this happen - make sure everyone pulls their weight in whatever ways they can. (It's nerve-wracking, now that we have a tiled kitchen floor, but I even get Baby to help load/unload the dishwasher sometimes.)
Don't be afraid of survival parenting - the experience can be one of incredibly positive growth and strengthening relationships for the whole family. The trick is, whoever you are, whatever your circumstances, search out ways to be smart about it. If it's important, it's possible. If it's impossible, it's not important.
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
There's a Better Way to Do This
Often when I write, I add a lot of qualifiers - "if", "perhaps", "maybe"... Not today. I'm just going to say it right out: there's a better way to do this.
By "this" I mean health. I've had some ups and downs with my health recently, as has the Raamonster. Doctors have a very one-eyed view of miscellaneous aches and pains and fatigue. They tend to do a lot of tests and then say something along the lines of: "eat less, exercise more, and take these drugs." Just to emphasis the point, Specialists like to send you a very large bill for the privelege of receiving this advice from a professional.
I'm all for plenty of exercise and a healthy diet. I'm troubled by what gets defined as a healthy diet (or, in fact, a healthy body) when you delve a little deeper. I'm particularly troubled that (supposedly) health-promoting organizations get paid for their endorsements of foods. Surely it is a conflict of interest for medical research to be funded by food companies??
So, I want to cut through all the confusion about what's healthy and what's not. I'm not completely unqualified to voice my opinion on this - I majored in Biochemistry not so many years ago.
It is really very, very simple. Real food and real life are good for you. Fake food and fake life are not. Seriously. Let me explain.
God put Adam and Eve in the garden and told them that every green thing was theirs for food. Yes, some plants are poisonous, but with very few exceptions if something tastes good, comes from a plant and is recognisable - it is good to eat. Sugar tastes good, it comes from a plant, and it looks nothing like the original product. (I'm not saying I don't eat sugar, but I'm really, really trying to cut down.) Sugar is not good for you.
Let me add another guideline - the amount you eat of any food should be inversely proportional to the effort (whether yours or someone else's) required to get it into your mouth. That sounds really complicated, but it's not. If we had to pick and shell our own macadamias, we wouldn't eat many, would we? If we had to pick, shell, blanch and grind by hand the almonds in a yummy cake (not to mention extract the sugar), we would probably make a slice last more than thirty seconds... And we would probably eat it approximately once a year.
And here's another suggestion - if I can't make a food easily at home myself, then it's probably not really edible. I'm not sure how the oil is extracted from canola, but I'm pretty sure I couldn't make my own press and then whip up a batch of margarine. If I could, the results would probably be so revolting that I would never ever eat it again.
Here's another principle: If God says it's good to eat, then it's good to eat. If God says it's not good to eat, then it's not. I'm not sure why we're so distrusting of God's guidance on this point, considering He made both us and our food. "A land flowing with milk and honey," was God's promise to Israel, ergo, milk and honey aren't inherently evil. Jesus Christ called Himself the Bread of Life - so it is downright insulting to God to insist that grain products are inherently evil unhealthy.
On the other hand, God said not to eat certain animals (He even used the word "abomination", which is also the word used for behaviours so vile they are unmentionable in a public blog.) So I don't eat them. I don't need scientific proof that pork or shark or squid are bad for me. God tells me not to eat them. Done.
OK, there is a problem here. The reality is that there are people with serious allergies or intolerances to real foods. Unfortunately a large proportion of our food supply has been seriously adulterated in the quest to "improve" yields, or flavour, or just to make a whole lot more money.
So sometimes even "real" foods aren't the best to eat, but we can at least use some common sense to choose the best alternative (e.g. soy milk loaded with canola and sugar is hardly the ideal dairy replacement).
My point is, we've placed far too much trust in professionals telling us what is good for us and stopped actually thinking for ourselves about what is going into our mouths. No matter how many ticks are on a box, or what claims a producer makes about something being "natural" or "organic", there is no substitute for listening to our better judgement. If a packaged food is "convenient" then there is a good chance that there is a big compromise on the quality of calories in the product.
The last thing I'm going to say for now - simple foods can be convenient (although I know this may not be true if you have the misfortune to have coeliac disease or another food sensitivity/intolerance/allergy or metabolic disorder). For example oats or porridge and milk (we drink the closest to "real" we can get - unhomogenised "organic" milk) is just as convenient as cornflakes, and a much healthier, more filling option. Add a piece of fruit and you have a complete breakfast.
Healthy is not just a way of eating, it's a way of thinking. More to come another time...
By "this" I mean health. I've had some ups and downs with my health recently, as has the Raamonster. Doctors have a very one-eyed view of miscellaneous aches and pains and fatigue. They tend to do a lot of tests and then say something along the lines of: "eat less, exercise more, and take these drugs." Just to emphasis the point, Specialists like to send you a very large bill for the privelege of receiving this advice from a professional.
I'm all for plenty of exercise and a healthy diet. I'm troubled by what gets defined as a healthy diet (or, in fact, a healthy body) when you delve a little deeper. I'm particularly troubled that (supposedly) health-promoting organizations get paid for their endorsements of foods. Surely it is a conflict of interest for medical research to be funded by food companies??
So, I want to cut through all the confusion about what's healthy and what's not. I'm not completely unqualified to voice my opinion on this - I majored in Biochemistry not so many years ago.
It is really very, very simple. Real food and real life are good for you. Fake food and fake life are not. Seriously. Let me explain.
God put Adam and Eve in the garden and told them that every green thing was theirs for food. Yes, some plants are poisonous, but with very few exceptions if something tastes good, comes from a plant and is recognisable - it is good to eat. Sugar tastes good, it comes from a plant, and it looks nothing like the original product. (I'm not saying I don't eat sugar, but I'm really, really trying to cut down.) Sugar is not good for you.
Let me add another guideline - the amount you eat of any food should be inversely proportional to the effort (whether yours or someone else's) required to get it into your mouth. That sounds really complicated, but it's not. If we had to pick and shell our own macadamias, we wouldn't eat many, would we? If we had to pick, shell, blanch and grind by hand the almonds in a yummy cake (not to mention extract the sugar), we would probably make a slice last more than thirty seconds... And we would probably eat it approximately once a year.
And here's another suggestion - if I can't make a food easily at home myself, then it's probably not really edible. I'm not sure how the oil is extracted from canola, but I'm pretty sure I couldn't make my own press and then whip up a batch of margarine. If I could, the results would probably be so revolting that I would never ever eat it again.
Here's another principle: If God says it's good to eat, then it's good to eat. If God says it's not good to eat, then it's not. I'm not sure why we're so distrusting of God's guidance on this point, considering He made both us and our food. "A land flowing with milk and honey," was God's promise to Israel, ergo, milk and honey aren't inherently evil. Jesus Christ called Himself the Bread of Life - so it is downright insulting to God to insist that grain products are inherently evil unhealthy.
On the other hand, God said not to eat certain animals (He even used the word "abomination", which is also the word used for behaviours so vile they are unmentionable in a public blog.) So I don't eat them. I don't need scientific proof that pork or shark or squid are bad for me. God tells me not to eat them. Done.
OK, there is a problem here. The reality is that there are people with serious allergies or intolerances to real foods. Unfortunately a large proportion of our food supply has been seriously adulterated in the quest to "improve" yields, or flavour, or just to make a whole lot more money.
So sometimes even "real" foods aren't the best to eat, but we can at least use some common sense to choose the best alternative (e.g. soy milk loaded with canola and sugar is hardly the ideal dairy replacement).
My point is, we've placed far too much trust in professionals telling us what is good for us and stopped actually thinking for ourselves about what is going into our mouths. No matter how many ticks are on a box, or what claims a producer makes about something being "natural" or "organic", there is no substitute for listening to our better judgement. If a packaged food is "convenient" then there is a good chance that there is a big compromise on the quality of calories in the product.
The last thing I'm going to say for now - simple foods can be convenient (although I know this may not be true if you have the misfortune to have coeliac disease or another food sensitivity/intolerance/allergy or metabolic disorder). For example oats or porridge and milk (we drink the closest to "real" we can get - unhomogenised "organic" milk) is just as convenient as cornflakes, and a much healthier, more filling option. Add a piece of fruit and you have a complete breakfast.
Healthy is not just a way of eating, it's a way of thinking. More to come another time...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)