I've mentioned that I love working at CityWalk@Akard. The diversity is amazing. To me, CityWalk is an ideal community because of it's diversity...something the large majority of communities don't have.
Ethnicities ranging from White to Black to Asian to African to Hispanic? Check.
Education levels from low adult literacy levels to college degrees? Check.
Talents from musicians to engineers to aspiring attorneys to nurses? Check.
Multiple socioeconomic levels...and multiple stages of life? Check.
Older, retired and/or disabled as well as young kids? Check.
It's a neat community to meet and connect with people. Every person I have met so far is trying to do better...no matter what their situation. They're trying to help out, earn more money, manage what they have, get involved, build their community...
Yet, the part I hear a lot of people focus on most is, "So there are homeless people?" Sometimes it is said with the best of intentions. The person saying it seems to be excited that there are homeless people that can be "helped." Other times, it is a frustration by someone who maybe has moved into the building unaware that there are "homeless" people who also live there.
First of all, let's get one thing straight...
Someone who has a home is no longer called "homeless!"
Second of all...
"Homeless" does not equal "dumb," "irresponsible," "addict," "crazy." Homeless is just that... HOME-LESS..."One without a home."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A person who was teaching one of our classes the other day made a statement that truly bothered me. The person seems to be a truly wonderful person...and has done a great job with the class. As the class got started, the instructor explained to a new observer of the class, "These people are really smart!" and went on to say, "I don't know why they live here." More than a little offended at a comment that seemed to imply they didn't think the participants would be that smart and shouldn't have to live in a place like CityWalk if they were, I quickly responded with, "Because they want to!" Now, I know that this person did not intend any harm in that statement. In fact, this same person had even expressed the desire to move into the apartments themselves (I assume they were serious).
So how can I explain what we have at CityWalk and in many of our low-income communities?? Allow me to try...
Yes, some of the people who live at CityWalk are fighting addictions. Some are working on stabilizing their mental illness (which is fine once they can access and stay on the right kind of medication). Some are trying to overcome debt that has accumulated over the years. Some have health problems that exacerbated when they were on the street...or in an apartment that cost way more than they could afford because of their small income and, therefore, their health care took the cut instead.
I can't understand why these things are met with paternalism, condescension, or stigma. Yes, sometimes people have messed up. Other times...and for some people, that messing up has been entirely out of their control. CityWalk is and should be a place where anyone can come and be around "family" no matter what their situation.
I know rich people who have mental illnesses. The only difference is that they have a support system around them to help them take their medications on time and ensure they are as well as can be.
I know people of all ethnicities and socioeconomic levels who don't manage their money well and would be better off having taken our YWCA Financial Education class.
I know stubborn people of all sectors who refuse to see doctors when they should...and sometimes make things worse as a result. The only difference is that they have the insurance and money to pay for the care once they get to that point.
I know people in my own family who have used drugs and even got busted. They, too, had some tough life situations that led them down that path. The ultimate difference? They had a family structure with enough connections and credibility to keep them out of jail and help them feel loved and supported until they could turn their situation around.
The people at CityWalk are no different than any other place!
The only difference is that at CityWalk we are working to create a community and help build a support system for anyone who lives there. Oh wait...there is one other difference. The other difference is that at CityWalk, life is more visible. People are willing to admit that they need help...or maybe they're just not willing to cover up something that we've always tried to tuck away so that no one sees (like mental illness...like drug addiction...like financial insecurities). And it's a vertical community so it's kinda hard to enjoy a few beers on your front porch without it getting attention. People see and hear everything you do because you are in a vertical apartment complex.
My frustration with the comments and the stigma people place on CityWalk is that there are still people who live in CityWalk who aren't willing to be vulnerable yet. They are trying to overcome different situations. They may not be as secure about who they are and where they are in life. They do not want or need any more stigma on their life. They have endured enough. They deserve that space...and they deserve the dignity and respect of others who don't patronize or talk down to them...which makes it much harder to suck up that pride.
It is for them that I ask people to please stop stigmatizing!! Please stop referring to people with homes as "homeless." Please stop snidely talking about those with drug addictions and, instead, talk with them (you'll find that they have similar interests and ambitions as you do!). Please stop rolling your eyes at and being scared of people who talk to themselves and, instead, learn more about their illness...do some research...attend some workshops...and learn how you can support the numerous people in our communities who are affected by these illnesses.
In my mind, what makes an ideal community ideal is when all of God's people...with all of our perfections, flaws, talents, and idiosyncracies...are all in one place and we love each other because of and in spite of them. That is CityWalk!
Showing posts with label stereotypes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stereotypes. Show all posts
Monday, May 02, 2011
Sunday, November 01, 2009
Creating a Single Story
I often wonder why terrorists who fly planes through the Twin Towers cause us to hate and become skeptical of Muslims, but why two White men in the Oklahoma City bombing become two anti-government individuals that have never defined White America.
Listen to Chimamanda Adichie(below) as she describes what hearing a "single story" affected the way she saw her own life...and then her realization of how she looked at others.
Listen to Chimamanda Adichie(below) as she describes what hearing a "single story" affected the way she saw her own life...and then her realization of how she looked at others.
Sunday, August 03, 2008
Is segregation natural?
Urban Experience is a program designed for suburban youth groups. The students are almost always all white.
Each session I invite several teenagers I know well to participate. They are mostly black...sometimes Hispanic.
My goal with the Urban Experience program is to create awareness...to create new understanding...to help suburban teenagers challenge some of their preconceived (and, often, unconscious) notions about the inner city. I include our teenagers so there is real interaction and engagement with people on an equal level instead of always interacting with inner city residents on a "charity" or "service" level.
I have high hopes that once people begin to see--whether black or white, poor or wealthy, gay or straight, Christian or Muslim--that everyone has goals and dreams...everyone wants to be treated with dignity. I want them to talk to each other so they can understand someone else's definition of dignity and respect. I want them to listen to and learn from each other. I try to challenge participants by initiating conversations (and requiring every teenager from both groups to participate) about racism, socioeconomic status, neighborhoods, and talking about themselves.
This year I began to regret my decision to include my teenagers from Dallas.
As my teenagers talked to me after they had spent their days going into different urban neighborhoods with the group, I felt like I had perpetuated the very stereotypes that I sought to counter.
Though I tried to put teenagers on an equal level, the "poor, black, inner city resident" stereotype, and the assumptions that go along with it, remained. Though it may not have been intentional or obvious to the suburban participants, it was strongly felt by the teenagers I had asked to participate. The absolute last thing I wanted was to hurt the teenagers I interact with on a regular basis.
After contemplating much of this in my own mind, one of the speakers (before his presentation) randomly asked me, "Is segregation natural?"
As I looked across the room, I thought back to the beginning of each week of Urban Experience. Each week, students came in and sat down--whites on one side, blacks on the other. Each time, I made everyone "move around" and "mix it up." By the end of each week, some would gravitate back toward the people with whom they were comfortable (i.e. people of their own ethnicity...people they had known for a while). By the end of the week, however, I only had to give a "look" and people would begin to switch seats and move so that they were sitting between and conversing with new and less familiar friends. As the group would leave on Friday, many exchanged phone numbers, facebook, and myspace pages.
I don't expect that one week fixes everything. In fact, some participants left and did not like or necessarily agree with the approach. However, by creating honest (and uncomfortable) conversations, I have hope that it has challenged people to think about and talk about segregation, assumptions, what led us to this point, and what we can do to reverse it....with others who look like them as well as continuing and seeking out conversation with those who don't. I have hope that as we get to know each other and "see beyond the surface," we will do more to value and respect each other for who we each are...not overlooking people's differences, but celebrating them and learning from them.
As I look back on the three weeks of Urban Experience groups, I reflected on the speaker's question:
Is segregation "natural?" (i.e. innate)
No.
Is segregation "natural?" (i.e. normal...instinctive)
Yes...but only because we have made it that way, make excuses as to why "it's not my fault," and, thus, allow it to continue.
By purposefully and intentionally getting involved with each other, with an openness to learning something from the other, maybe we can change that.
Each session I invite several teenagers I know well to participate. They are mostly black...sometimes Hispanic.
My goal with the Urban Experience program is to create awareness...to create new understanding...to help suburban teenagers challenge some of their preconceived (and, often, unconscious) notions about the inner city. I include our teenagers so there is real interaction and engagement with people on an equal level instead of always interacting with inner city residents on a "charity" or "service" level.
I have high hopes that once people begin to see--whether black or white, poor or wealthy, gay or straight, Christian or Muslim--that everyone has goals and dreams...everyone wants to be treated with dignity. I want them to talk to each other so they can understand someone else's definition of dignity and respect. I want them to listen to and learn from each other. I try to challenge participants by initiating conversations (and requiring every teenager from both groups to participate) about racism, socioeconomic status, neighborhoods, and talking about themselves.
This year I began to regret my decision to include my teenagers from Dallas.
As my teenagers talked to me after they had spent their days going into different urban neighborhoods with the group, I felt like I had perpetuated the very stereotypes that I sought to counter.
Though I tried to put teenagers on an equal level, the "poor, black, inner city resident" stereotype, and the assumptions that go along with it, remained. Though it may not have been intentional or obvious to the suburban participants, it was strongly felt by the teenagers I had asked to participate. The absolute last thing I wanted was to hurt the teenagers I interact with on a regular basis.
After contemplating much of this in my own mind, one of the speakers (before his presentation) randomly asked me, "Is segregation natural?"
As I looked across the room, I thought back to the beginning of each week of Urban Experience. Each week, students came in and sat down--whites on one side, blacks on the other. Each time, I made everyone "move around" and "mix it up." By the end of each week, some would gravitate back toward the people with whom they were comfortable (i.e. people of their own ethnicity...people they had known for a while). By the end of the week, however, I only had to give a "look" and people would begin to switch seats and move so that they were sitting between and conversing with new and less familiar friends. As the group would leave on Friday, many exchanged phone numbers, facebook, and myspace pages.
I don't expect that one week fixes everything. In fact, some participants left and did not like or necessarily agree with the approach. However, by creating honest (and uncomfortable) conversations, I have hope that it has challenged people to think about and talk about segregation, assumptions, what led us to this point, and what we can do to reverse it....with others who look like them as well as continuing and seeking out conversation with those who don't. I have hope that as we get to know each other and "see beyond the surface," we will do more to value and respect each other for who we each are...not overlooking people's differences, but celebrating them and learning from them.
As I look back on the three weeks of Urban Experience groups, I reflected on the speaker's question:
Is segregation "natural?" (i.e. innate)
No.
Is segregation "natural?" (i.e. normal...instinctive)
Yes...but only because we have made it that way, make excuses as to why "it's not my fault," and, thus, allow it to continue.
By purposefully and intentionally getting involved with each other, with an openness to learning something from the other, maybe we can change that.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Should we speak out?
I had a meeting this week that I wasn't too thrilled about. A man wanted to meet with me to present some Bible curriculum they had written.
I know. You would think I would be thrilled. After all, I work for a ministry, right?
I wasn't.
It wasn't so much about someone calling to ask me to present a Bible curriculum. It was the conversation around it. "We have a curriculum that works well for inner-city children. It's not written like curriculum for other children. There are more activities so that inner city children will understand. The curriculum is written for 'unchurched' children."
I could feel my blood start to boil.
It always bothers me when people outside of our urban communities make assumptions and generalizations about what our kids are capable of and what will work for them when they've never even been to our community. It bothers me that people feel that curriculum needs to be "dumbed down" so that our urban children will understand.
I went ahead and scheduled the meeting and took Wyshina and Keilani so that they could maybe provide a more rational opinion than what I was able to give at that point.
Once I got there, looked at the curriculum, and listened to a different man present the curriculum, I began to form a different opinion. It looked well-written (more than I can say for most other Sunday School curriculums I've seen). It seemed to be an engaging curriculum that seemed to tap into multiple styles of learning, which I like. The man who presented the curriculum didn't talk about simplifying it for inner city children or anything like that...
...until the end.
"It's written for 'unchurched' children," he explained.
My temperature started rising again.
He went on to further clarify, "It doesn't assume anything about anyone's knowledge or Biblical background."
I know there are times I should probably keep my mouth shut. But there are other times I think too many people keep their mouth shut when they should speak up. This was a time I felt the need to speak up. So I did.
I explained that a curriculum that doesn't make assumptions about where someone is in their knowledge of the Bible is fine. A curriculum that has more activities and hits more multiple intelligences to engage children is fine. However, saying that it's written for "unchurched" kids who probably wouldn't understand "other" curriculum and taking it to the inner city is making a big assumption about kids in the inner city! I explained to the two men that our kids aren't "unchurched." I'd say at least 95% of our kids, or better, are children who go to church, have gone, and/or know their Bible.
I went on to explain that our After-School Academy offers programs like ballet, chess, science, digital photography, etc., because our kids are perfectly capable of doing things just like "other" kids, given the opportunity. We don't have to change the curriculum for them. We just have to offer it, expose them to it, and teach it. If we do our job of teaching it well, they catch on to it just fine.
Years of watching volunteers come in for a day or a week to "evangelize" or "educate" or "do good" without even getting to know anything about the community except what they have seen on the news or read in the paper...and then never coming back after they've "evangelized" our neighborhood really bothers me. Using our urban neighborhoods and the people in them as "service projects" makes my temperature rise.
I have to give him credit. Whether or not he noticed my irritation, at the end of our meeting the man thanked me for making the comments. He was kind about it and seemed open to the critique. I'm not sure how he will proceed, but I do know he listened and heard what we were saying.
I am working on maintaining my cool in these situations so that I can explain how demeaning their words are in a way that they hear without tuning out. As I work on myself and my own approach, I have realized a couple of things. 1) Most times the people who are making the comments have never even thought about how those words would sound if they were the ones living in the inner city and someone was talking about them. 2) People who make those comments are often people who do not look like people in the neighborhood and they are often selling their idea to other people who look like them. Their "pitch" changes when they have to sell their idea directly to someone in the neighborhood. 3) Comments that assume something about people and/or a community perpetuate to others a stereotype that doesn't come from first-hand knowledge of the community. 4) The only way people from outside of the neighborhood are going to learn the impact of their comments is if someone points out the offensiveness of their comments. People don't have a reason to change until someone challenges their assumptions and stereotypes.
Besides, staying silent tells them we agree. Our silence says their assumptions must be right.
I know. You would think I would be thrilled. After all, I work for a ministry, right?
I wasn't.
It wasn't so much about someone calling to ask me to present a Bible curriculum. It was the conversation around it. "We have a curriculum that works well for inner-city children. It's not written like curriculum for other children. There are more activities so that inner city children will understand. The curriculum is written for 'unchurched' children."
I could feel my blood start to boil.
It always bothers me when people outside of our urban communities make assumptions and generalizations about what our kids are capable of and what will work for them when they've never even been to our community. It bothers me that people feel that curriculum needs to be "dumbed down" so that our urban children will understand.
I went ahead and scheduled the meeting and took Wyshina and Keilani so that they could maybe provide a more rational opinion than what I was able to give at that point.
Once I got there, looked at the curriculum, and listened to a different man present the curriculum, I began to form a different opinion. It looked well-written (more than I can say for most other Sunday School curriculums I've seen). It seemed to be an engaging curriculum that seemed to tap into multiple styles of learning, which I like. The man who presented the curriculum didn't talk about simplifying it for inner city children or anything like that...
...until the end.
"It's written for 'unchurched' children," he explained.
My temperature started rising again.
He went on to further clarify, "It doesn't assume anything about anyone's knowledge or Biblical background."
I know there are times I should probably keep my mouth shut. But there are other times I think too many people keep their mouth shut when they should speak up. This was a time I felt the need to speak up. So I did.
I explained that a curriculum that doesn't make assumptions about where someone is in their knowledge of the Bible is fine. A curriculum that has more activities and hits more multiple intelligences to engage children is fine. However, saying that it's written for "unchurched" kids who probably wouldn't understand "other" curriculum and taking it to the inner city is making a big assumption about kids in the inner city! I explained to the two men that our kids aren't "unchurched." I'd say at least 95% of our kids, or better, are children who go to church, have gone, and/or know their Bible.
I went on to explain that our After-School Academy offers programs like ballet, chess, science, digital photography, etc., because our kids are perfectly capable of doing things just like "other" kids, given the opportunity. We don't have to change the curriculum for them. We just have to offer it, expose them to it, and teach it. If we do our job of teaching it well, they catch on to it just fine.
Years of watching volunteers come in for a day or a week to "evangelize" or "educate" or "do good" without even getting to know anything about the community except what they have seen on the news or read in the paper...and then never coming back after they've "evangelized" our neighborhood really bothers me. Using our urban neighborhoods and the people in them as "service projects" makes my temperature rise.
I have to give him credit. Whether or not he noticed my irritation, at the end of our meeting the man thanked me for making the comments. He was kind about it and seemed open to the critique. I'm not sure how he will proceed, but I do know he listened and heard what we were saying.
I am working on maintaining my cool in these situations so that I can explain how demeaning their words are in a way that they hear without tuning out. As I work on myself and my own approach, I have realized a couple of things. 1) Most times the people who are making the comments have never even thought about how those words would sound if they were the ones living in the inner city and someone was talking about them. 2) People who make those comments are often people who do not look like people in the neighborhood and they are often selling their idea to other people who look like them. Their "pitch" changes when they have to sell their idea directly to someone in the neighborhood. 3) Comments that assume something about people and/or a community perpetuate to others a stereotype that doesn't come from first-hand knowledge of the community. 4) The only way people from outside of the neighborhood are going to learn the impact of their comments is if someone points out the offensiveness of their comments. People don't have a reason to change until someone challenges their assumptions and stereotypes.
Besides, staying silent tells them we agree. Our silence says their assumptions must be right.
Friday, May 04, 2007
Strategies for poor children (?!?!)
I received the following from an educational listserv I'm on that sends out different discipline and classroom tips every week. I have gotten something out of almost every email he has sent, but I am completely offended by this one!!! Although I agree with most of the strategies he proposes at the end, he makes some awful judgment calls and assumptions that seem to be completely out of ignorance!!
I plan to respond to him...hopefully in a much cooler, calmer, and collected way...and would be very interested in some of your reactions.
1. I doubt that most of us will understand Generational Poverty….I’ve worked with it for over 20 years, I still am puzzled by the challenge of families to overcome it.
I first met generational poverty at the Nashville Union Rescue Mission. I worked and spoke with men—men were the primary homeless ones a few years ago. Now it’s entire families. Carl Resoner taught me to believe that given enough skill, training and hope, any family could pull out of poverty. I still believe that is true.
Why do the Poor Resist Change?
Generational poverty is like an old shoe. It works, feels comfortable and the fear of breaking free from the known is challenging. Even if it doesn’t exactly fit, it is a normal kind of pain. And they have done it for years.
Some Poverty Rationales:
1. If I work more, my spouse will work less. He may quit his job. Answer: Everyone should have the skills to support themselves. As you become older, you don’t know they will be there to support you.
2. The kids need me, I can’t work.
Answer: When all of your kids are in school you have about 6 hours per day when you can be away from them developing yourself—and to work.
3. My feet hurt, I can’t work.
Answer: Physical problems may limit where you can work, but there are places for almost anyone who wants to work.
4. I’m getting an education on-line.
Answer: There are some good places to get an education, but human interaction and learning to deal with all types of people is a real education. That education helps you in the workplace.
Some of the things that still puzzle me about it are:
1. The lack of skills that kids have … This year I’ve struggled with many kids with bathroom issues; Controlling and handling these problems independently. Many use these problems to gain adult attention and to find their identity.
One need of kids in families of poverty is: Healthy Attention: Getting attention for being productive. The kids follow these predictive Roles:
Sometimes that identity as a LOST CHILD; the kid that is known by simply being out there, but so quiet that no one knows they exist. They find themselves in music, books and on-line. They are simply invisible in many of our classrooms.
Sometimes it’s the Class Clown Role: Oops I’ve pooped in my pants again. OH MAN, How could I do that? I must be so silly. Well that’s just the way I am.
Then there is the Scapegoat Role: OH Man Why Are YOU blaming me? I can’t help it. Shut up and leave me alone.
Whatever the Role: Bathroom Problems on a Regular Basis can Challenge an Entire School
The Child Denies it- “No I didn’t do that”; Then the teacher demands that the child go and change their clothes or get help. Some things can be ignored, these can’t.
[Yes I am well aware that bathroom issues can be related to sexual abuse and yes you should rule that out.] But for many kids of poverty; it’s simply an issue of:
1) Lack of Training—the expectation and the skill are missing;
2) A way to keep their power—you can’t tell me what to eat, when to eat or when to eliminate. That’s my choice! Try and make me do it your way.
3) An Oppositional Reaction to and adult’s demands: They try and make them, they resist.
2. I must go home now!—We always study the Payoff of the Behavior. What does the child get out of it? That is more important than what’s done. Getting to go home when they have problems is not usually a good option.
Some kids will do anything to go home, including bathroom problems.
Bumper Sticker I saw: A Bad Day at Home is Better Than a Good Day at School. Need I say more?
So the question is: What’s your response or non-response to the behavior?
1. It should be a planned, predictable response.
2. It should include everyone that deals with the child…so there is no gap in information.
3. It should include a therapeutic response—by that I mean it should make the child responsible without shaming or blaming.
Give Up ON… Knee Jerk Reactions:
1. Trying to make them go to the restroom on your schedule. Power struggle to follow, stay tuned.
2. Bribing them; This is a power issue; you’ll look weak if you bribe them.
Instead Try: Offering Choices You can Accept!
1) Making the parent accountable. They will usually dodge that role with a passion. They must provide clothes for the child; while encouraging them to stay in school.
2) Avoid any element of shame or blame for the child. Any element of shame or blame will likely stop behavioral change.
3) Show that accountability and taking charge—offers the child increased responsibility and power. Eating, sleeping and eliminating, all are power issues. Show that behavioral change equals more personal power…it’s sold. Here’s how to buy these choices.
Let the child help make the plan…with all power issues; the Child must be part of the plan from square one. You can define the boundaries, but the child must see it as his/her plan.
What are your reactions?
I plan to respond to him...hopefully in a much cooler, calmer, and collected way...and would be very interested in some of your reactions.
1. I doubt that most of us will understand Generational Poverty….I’ve worked with it for over 20 years, I still am puzzled by the challenge of families to overcome it.
I first met generational poverty at the Nashville Union Rescue Mission. I worked and spoke with men—men were the primary homeless ones a few years ago. Now it’s entire families. Carl Resoner taught me to believe that given enough skill, training and hope, any family could pull out of poverty. I still believe that is true.
Why do the Poor Resist Change?
Generational poverty is like an old shoe. It works, feels comfortable and the fear of breaking free from the known is challenging. Even if it doesn’t exactly fit, it is a normal kind of pain. And they have done it for years.
Some Poverty Rationales:
1. If I work more, my spouse will work less. He may quit his job. Answer: Everyone should have the skills to support themselves. As you become older, you don’t know they will be there to support you.
2. The kids need me, I can’t work.
Answer: When all of your kids are in school you have about 6 hours per day when you can be away from them developing yourself—and to work.
3. My feet hurt, I can’t work.
Answer: Physical problems may limit where you can work, but there are places for almost anyone who wants to work.
4. I’m getting an education on-line.
Answer: There are some good places to get an education, but human interaction and learning to deal with all types of people is a real education. That education helps you in the workplace.
Some of the things that still puzzle me about it are:
1. The lack of skills that kids have … This year I’ve struggled with many kids with bathroom issues; Controlling and handling these problems independently. Many use these problems to gain adult attention and to find their identity.
One need of kids in families of poverty is: Healthy Attention: Getting attention for being productive. The kids follow these predictive Roles:
Sometimes that identity as a LOST CHILD; the kid that is known by simply being out there, but so quiet that no one knows they exist. They find themselves in music, books and on-line. They are simply invisible in many of our classrooms.
Sometimes it’s the Class Clown Role: Oops I’ve pooped in my pants again. OH MAN, How could I do that? I must be so silly. Well that’s just the way I am.
Then there is the Scapegoat Role: OH Man Why Are YOU blaming me? I can’t help it. Shut up and leave me alone.
Whatever the Role: Bathroom Problems on a Regular Basis can Challenge an Entire School
The Child Denies it- “No I didn’t do that”; Then the teacher demands that the child go and change their clothes or get help. Some things can be ignored, these can’t.
[Yes I am well aware that bathroom issues can be related to sexual abuse and yes you should rule that out.] But for many kids of poverty; it’s simply an issue of:
1) Lack of Training—the expectation and the skill are missing;
2) A way to keep their power—you can’t tell me what to eat, when to eat or when to eliminate. That’s my choice! Try and make me do it your way.
3) An Oppositional Reaction to and adult’s demands: They try and make them, they resist.
2. I must go home now!—We always study the Payoff of the Behavior. What does the child get out of it? That is more important than what’s done. Getting to go home when they have problems is not usually a good option.
Some kids will do anything to go home, including bathroom problems.
Bumper Sticker I saw: A Bad Day at Home is Better Than a Good Day at School. Need I say more?
So the question is: What’s your response or non-response to the behavior?
1. It should be a planned, predictable response.
2. It should include everyone that deals with the child…so there is no gap in information.
3. It should include a therapeutic response—by that I mean it should make the child responsible without shaming or blaming.
Give Up ON… Knee Jerk Reactions:
1. Trying to make them go to the restroom on your schedule. Power struggle to follow, stay tuned.
2. Bribing them; This is a power issue; you’ll look weak if you bribe them.
Instead Try: Offering Choices You can Accept!
1) Making the parent accountable. They will usually dodge that role with a passion. They must provide clothes for the child; while encouraging them to stay in school.
2) Avoid any element of shame or blame for the child. Any element of shame or blame will likely stop behavioral change.
3) Show that accountability and taking charge—offers the child increased responsibility and power. Eating, sleeping and eliminating, all are power issues. Show that behavioral change equals more personal power…it’s sold. Here’s how to buy these choices.
Let the child help make the plan…with all power issues; the Child must be part of the plan from square one. You can define the boundaries, but the child must see it as his/her plan.
What are your reactions?
Friday, September 08, 2006
Power in numbers
I met a wonderful lady in Turner Courts the other day. Our conversation was like so many others I've had with people in Turner Courts.
She has lived in Turner Courts for about 6 months now. However, she explained, the first three months she didn't physically or mentally move in. Instead, she cried every day because she had to live there. Do we actually believe that people who live in the "projects" want to be there?? I have talked to at least three other people in the last month who have said the exact same thing. People don't enjoy being "in the system" and accepting what is handed to them. She, like so many others I've gotten to know, figure out a way to "survive." They isolate themselves mentally and physically in their home in an attempt to stay away from anything bad that might happen.
What I've figured out is that there are quite a few people like the lady I met yesterday. And they are all attempting survival by doing the same thing...staying inside. As a result, they never discover the other good people in Turner Courts who are also doing the "right thing." So, all people ever see are the ones who aren't scared to go outside and start trouble, thus creating the stereotype that all people in housing developments are bad.
The people who live in the housing developments have bought into that stereotype as well. That's what causes the tears. They know they are not bad people, but society has convinced them that "bad" people live in the "projects." Thus, they figure, they are the only one living there trying to do right.
It's just not true!
One of the parents of some children at our After-School Academy told me just the other day that she would've probably never known any other adults in Turner Courts had she not enrolled her kids at the After-School Academy. She, like so many others, said she just kept to herself. She and another parent are now fast friends. I'm hoping that more parents will begin connecting and all of us can begin working toward solutions as a united front.
That is my goal for this school year.
She has lived in Turner Courts for about 6 months now. However, she explained, the first three months she didn't physically or mentally move in. Instead, she cried every day because she had to live there. Do we actually believe that people who live in the "projects" want to be there?? I have talked to at least three other people in the last month who have said the exact same thing. People don't enjoy being "in the system" and accepting what is handed to them. She, like so many others I've gotten to know, figure out a way to "survive." They isolate themselves mentally and physically in their home in an attempt to stay away from anything bad that might happen.
What I've figured out is that there are quite a few people like the lady I met yesterday. And they are all attempting survival by doing the same thing...staying inside. As a result, they never discover the other good people in Turner Courts who are also doing the "right thing." So, all people ever see are the ones who aren't scared to go outside and start trouble, thus creating the stereotype that all people in housing developments are bad.
The people who live in the housing developments have bought into that stereotype as well. That's what causes the tears. They know they are not bad people, but society has convinced them that "bad" people live in the "projects." Thus, they figure, they are the only one living there trying to do right.
It's just not true!
One of the parents of some children at our After-School Academy told me just the other day that she would've probably never known any other adults in Turner Courts had she not enrolled her kids at the After-School Academy. She, like so many others, said she just kept to herself. She and another parent are now fast friends. I'm hoping that more parents will begin connecting and all of us can begin working toward solutions as a united front.
That is my goal for this school year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)