Our Thorns and our Gifts

We just read The Case of the Deadly Desperados for my daughter’s book club. In the book, the narrator, P.K., is a “half breed” child living in the Old West. After his foster parents are murdered, he is chased around Virginia City by the killers, who want a letter that he has in his possession.

Deadly DesperadosThe most interesting thing about the book was the author’s choice to endow the narrator with what his foster mother called his “Gift” and his “Thorn.” The reader learns from P.K. that his Thorn is that he cannot show or recognize emotions, and that his Gift is his extraordinary memory and ability to do math in his head. Though child readers didn’t really notice it, P.K. is clearly portrayed to be autistic in a time when autism wasn’t recognized.

P.K.’s physical journey in the book is his attempt to keep one step ahead of his pursuers. His emotional journey, however, is one in which he learns to understand both his Gift and his Thorn and how to use them to his advantage.

I was reminded of his Thorn today, when my Thorn (or perhaps, one of many!) reached out and pricked my daughter as she tried to follow directions to make a handmade book. First we had to take apart and restaple the pages that I had put together wrong. Then we had to do it again, because I was distracted and did it wrong in another way. Then, finally, we got it (sort of) right.

Then as she glued down the end papers to the boards that would serve as her hardcover, she said, “Wait. Don’t I have to put down the fabric first?”

Well, yes. That would be the way it’s supposed to be done. But somehow I always find myself reversed: Other people decide on a career to pursue and take the steps to get there. I take a bunch of wild and seemingly random steps, turn around, and find a career behind me. Other people follow recipes when they are cooking and then start to improvise. I have scores of favorite recipes that I have never actually made exactly according to the recipe—the very first time, I found a reason to change it. (Usually because I didn’t read it closely enough and was missing an ingredient!)

I love the message of Deadly Desperados, that we all have Gifts and Thorns, and that we can learn to recognize them and use that recognition to improve our lives. However, living backwards as I seem to do, I find that whenever I turn around to look at my Thorn and consider how it could be used to my advantage, it turns out to be behind me again.

It reminds me of a young poet I once knew who told me that she figured that if the Buddhists were right and there was reincarnation, every other human on the planet had done it scores of times before and knew how to get it right. But she knew she must be on her first life, because she was so bad at it!

It’s a question to ponder: How do we help our children identify their Gifts and Thorns, and how do we help them learn to use that information without being paralyzed by it? How can we both recognize that we can’t do everything and that we can do anything we want? How can we learn to accept our Thorns without labeling ourselves and giving in, and how can we learn to treasure our Gifts without thinking that our Gift allows us to stop trying harder to reach the next step? How can we turn around to see what is always behind us? How can we know when to stop and enjoy what is in front of us?

Using the G-word with kids

This post was inspired by taking part in Natural Parents Network’s Carnival of Natural Parenting: Tough Conversations.

One of the recurring themes that parents of gifted children hash and rehash is the question of whether we used the G-word (gifted) with our kids. It’s hard enough for parents to start using the words in their heads, and then with their friends and adult family members, and especially with their children’s teachers. I’ve never met a parent who likes the word itself, with its connotation of value judgment and ranking. But we use it when we have to in order to get certain things to happen: Understanding from friends and family; better educational practices at school.

Using it with your child, however, is another thing altogether. Unless your child is in a GATE program and knows that she has been designated “gifted and talented,” she is unlikely to run into a need for the word in her daily life. More and more gifted children are being homeschooled, and in case, there seems even less reason to use the word.

Surprisingly, however, parents seem to be split on this issue.

Research has shown that gifted kids generally know that they are different, and that having a word to put to their difference can be easier than living with silence, as if their difference is something shameful. But on the other hand, society is not kind to people who use the G-word. Every so often the gifted community passes around yet another blog written by an irate parent or sometimes teacher about how parents of gifted kids think that their kids are “better,” vilifying the use of a word that we didn’t make up and that causes us discomfort. These pieces tend to follow similar themes: that parents of gifted kids are “bragging,” that gifted kids aren’t different, and most damaging, that gifted kids will “grow out of it,” so why treat them differently now? Parents of gifted kids react by pulling back into our little community, mostly online, of people who understand what a double-edged sword our kids’ “gifts” are.

And yet again, a parent asks timidly on an e-mail list, “So should I tell my kids they’re gifted?” And the conversation goes on.

In my own home, we don’t use the term much. This may surprise people who know me primarily through my writing about gifted children. But in our daily lives, we don’t find much use for it. Since my kids are homeschooled, we don’t take part in a GATE program. And the other homeschooled kids they play and work with straddle the full spectrum of humanity – some of them way more advanced than my kids; some struggling with basic skills.

In our “real life,” I think that experiencing this spectrum is good for my kids – they know that they will be judged by their achievements and by the kind of people they are, not by a number or a label. But twice the conversation has come up, and each time it reflected my children’s personalities and self-awareness.

The first time, I had just started to write about giftedness. My older child, who was in school, came across the book that started my foray into the gifted world, A Parent’s Guide to Gifted Children. Looking at the cover, he asked, “What what IS gifted?” I gave him a basic rundown: “Gifted children are those who show advanced abilities or potential in some areas. Sometimes their advanced ability are accompanied by challenges in social and emotional skills. It’s not a word I like, because it makes it sound like people are saying that gifted children are better than other kids, but it’s the term that people use.”

My son pondered that information.

“Do you know anyone who fits that description?” I asked.

“Well… my sister, for one. And my friend who is years ahead in math.”

And there I was stuck with the question: Do I tell him that he, too, qualified as gifted, even though he wasn’t advanced in math like his friend? Or just leave it hanging?

“You’ve probably noticed that school is much easier for you than some of your classmates,” I said. He agreed. “Though you’re very different from your sister, you are also a gifted learner.”

And that was it. He pretty much shrugged off the information, which told him nothing new. Any child can tell you who the fastest learners in a classroom are, and if that information is presented simply as part of “we are all different and have different strengths,” that’s as far as it needs to go.

My daughter took much longer to come around to the question. She knows about my writing career, of course, and knows what my book is called. But perhaps, because the structured classroom can be so difficult for her, she had never made much of a connection between herself and what she had probably learned as the stereotypical gifted child.

But one day she and I were talking about something completely unrelated to giftedness or learning, and she just out and asked the question: “Am I ‘gifted’?” True to her rather strong interest in sarcasm, the word was positively dripping with meaning.

The question that came to me was, what meaning did “gifted” have to her?

“Well, what do you think? Part of giftedness is the ability to learn more quickly than average. Does that description fit you?”

In her case, the question probably brought up much more history than it did for my son. She had had a terrible time in preschool, couldn’t make it in a kindergarten classroom, and once we started homeschooling, had needed her mother beside her as an unofficial aide for a few years during any structured activity.

“I hate studying,” she said. “But I can pretty much learn anything I want to learn very quickly. So I guess it does.”

Yes, I explained to her, she did learn quickly. But like many children who fit the “gifted” label, she also had some significant challenges that we were working on. I didn’t need to mention what those are: the years of therapy and mommy-as-classroom-aide and visits to yet another professional in yet another field of care made it all clear enough.

The one thing I needed to add for her, which I knew that her more socially savvy brother, who’d also spent 6 years in school, didn’t need to have explained, was the information about how using the word made others feel.

“The word ‘gifted’ sometimes makes other people feel uncomfortable, so we don’t use it when we talk to people who might not understand what we mean. You can just say ‘quick learner’ if you need to explain that you’ve already learned something and are ready to move on. Mostly I have used the word to find information that would help us help you be able to do all the things you want to do.”

And as in any conversation, years of background passed between us: how she hadn’t been able to handle a gymnastics class, out on the floor alone, at the age of 5 but was now happily attending a class that I don’t even drive her to. How at the age of six she’d loved her science class and was annoyed that I needed to be there, but now is excelling in a class where I drop her off and go to work in a cafe. How our household, turned upside down by the arrival of a child with special needs, has become – if not calm – somewhat normal in the amount of turbulence we experience on a typical day.

All parents of children who differ from the norm have to face this conversation. Our choice was to wait until our kids were ready for, and asked for, the information. We may have to have the conversation again for each child, but at the moment, they have the information they need and know that if they need more, their parents are there to help.

Dear 20-year-old self,

Dear 20-year-old self,

I remember the day you knocked on the door of the artist. You were a college student, and you were taking a child language acquisition course. When the professor had given the assignment to find a child to observe, you asked, “How do I find a child?” The people you knew were little older than children themselves, and you didn’t know anything about your professors’ private lives. Your linguistics professor hooked you up with a family visiting from Great Britain, a psychologist, his artist wife, and their baby.

Portrait
Portrait of a Contemporary Young Person by Robin Richmond

You were uncomfortable meeting new people. You never told anyone that—it seemed so stupid that even having to make a phone call to a stranger made you break out in a cold sweat. You’d never learned how to ask for help, and always felt like there were rules that you didn’t understand.

In response to this disconnected feeling you had, you armed yourself against the world. You wore unconventional clothing and got “half a haircut”—long on one side, short on the other. You conveyed a clear message that you were angry, unapproachable. After you broke up with a boyfriend, he told you never to stop being disgusted with the way things are—that, he said, is your best quality. (Good job breaking up with him, by the way!)

Like many 20-year-olds, you had spent your last few years at war with your own body. You knew you could never measure up. Other girls responded with anorexia or bullying other girls; you responded with an avoidance of anything that could be called “pretty.”

Though many other experiences have faded from your memory, the time you spent at the artist’s house with her baby has not. The little girl was adorable. Her favorite word was “PUSH!”, which she would say with great relish when she opened a door.

At one of your visits, you wore a ripped t-shirt that said “Bauhaus,” the name of your favorite band. The artist asked if she could paint your portrait wearing that shirt. She was probably intrigued with the ironic juxtaposition between the art movement and the modern angry girl. You thought that sitting for an artist would be a weird thing to do, and you were interested in collecting weird experiences.

That portrait ended up capturing you in greater detail than any of the photographs of that time possibly could. Not just the visible details are there, but the stubborn, set look on the face, the tense hand, the makeup like armor.

Oh, 20-year-old self, I wish I could go back and answer the questions you never knew to ask. I wish I could tell you that it would all come out OK in the end. You’d learn that life happens easier when you approach new experiences with a smile. You’d learn that your physical self was just about as perfect as it would ever get, so you should enjoy it while it lasts. You’d learn to treasure kindness as an attribute both to nurture in yourself and to seek in friends.

Of course, I know that even if I had a time machine and could go back and say these things, there’s no knowing if you’d listen, or more importantly, understand. We live in a culture that worships youth, but I have to admit that if I had to stick at one age forever, I’d choose now over then. I have in no way achieved the perfection that you thought you could force yourself into, but that doesn’t matter anymore.

After all that effort, I just had to give up and be myself, for better and for worse.

Pesticides and child development

Smart Kids with Learning Disabilities is an excellent free newsletter aimed at parents of kids with learning disabilities and ADHD. I have generally found it to be a good resource. In this issue, they linked to an article about pesticides and children.

Did you know that every human tested now has pesticides in their body fat? This is an area of huge concern that, because of the extent of exposure, is almost impossible to test reliably. Because everyone is being exposed, it is our “new normal”—we can’t know what the effects are because we don’t have enough data on unexposed people.

This problem was explained well in the chapter on lung cancer in the very excellent (but big bummer) book Emperor of All Maladies, which is a “biography” of cancer and its treatment. When the first doctors tried to study whether smoking causes lung cancer, they both thought it was a ridiculous idea. Their reasoning was that pretty much everyone smoked at that time, so it couldn’t be smoking causing lung cancer. They had trouble searching out non-smokers for the study, but after a few years as the numbers came pouring in, they were astounded. What everyone thought was an inevitable part of human existence turned out to be largely caused by a common habit. One of the doctors who did the study was a heavy smoker, and he quit the day they started to see the results of their data. He died of lung cancer soon after.

That story is instructive now as we ask the obvious question: Do we have so many kids now being diagnosed with learning disabilities, ADHD, and even things like autism simply because we’re diagnosing more often and more carefully? Were kids always like this, but we didn’t notice? Or are there multiple factors—one of them our exposure to pesticides—causing these disorders to rise in our current population?

The American Academy of Pediatrics is putting their vote on the latter. In their most recent issue of Pediatrics, the AAP has sounded the alarm, stating that “Prenatal and early childhood exposure to pesticides is associated with pediatric cancers, decreased cognitive function and behavioral problems.”

Of course, the first question every parent asks is, “What can I do? Pesticides are everywhere.” In fact, modern humans simply can’t escape pesticides: they are in our water, our air, and even in much of our organically grown food. But we can try to minimize our risks. “Smart Kids” links helpfully to a chapter of Simplifying the Pesticide Risk Equation: The Organic Solution which helpfully explains which fruits and vegetables carry the highest pesticide load at different times of the year. The tables are clearly laid out and easy to post on your refrigerator (or stick in your smartphone, if you’re like me!).

We can’t get rid of pesticides in our daily lives unless our entire nation goes along with the idea, and we know how well such debates are going over in Congress these days. But we can do easy things that may help keep our kids safer.

 

Highly inappropriate, then and now

“That song is definitely not appropriate for children,” my ten-year-old daughter said to me the other day, hearing a song being played in a store.

*

My husband and I have been talking about the books we read as kids. Brave New World. 1984. Of Mice and Men. Great books, all about sex, much of it deviant or definitely-out-of-wedlock sex.

And those were the books we were assigned in school. On our own time, we read anything we could get our hands on. My husband says he read his parents’ pulp novels that they left lying around. I read Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret in the third grade. I’d worked my way up from the “third grade shelf” in my school library, and no one thought to tell me that might not be a good idea. From there, I went to Wifey, Judy Blume’s highly inappropriate book…written for adults.

A book that I remember vividly—yet not at all—from my childhood.

As we talked about what we read, what occurred to us is what didn’t happen: Our parents (or any other adult) didn’t get involved. We read these books, and listened to those songs (rather less racy in our time) without parents hanging over our shoulders. Our parents didn’t ask what we were reading, and they certainly never considered reading out loud to kids who could read themselves.

In our family, however, books are for sharing. We only stopped reading out loud to our son last year, around the time he turned 13. And that has less to do with a parenting decision than with lack of time. But we still read books “together”—we suggest books for him, and talk to him about books we are reading. On top of that, I have recently started a literature discussion group for teens—including my son—that is exploring the canon of “must read before college” books—a list that includes those sex-filled books by Steinbeck, Orwell, Huxley, and more.

All of this has led me to a question: Are we more prudish than our parents, who “let” us read anything? Did they only pretend to not know what we were reading? Or did they really not care?

I don’t think it’s prudery: I don’t object to kids reading books out of some sort of “that sort of book shouldn’t be read” type of sensibility. I think it’s something else, something that my daughter hit upon when she declared a song “inappropriate” for herself and peers. Parents today are not separating themselves from kids as much as parents used to. When kids first got into rock-n-roll, parents were scandalized. These days, parents take their kids to concerts and buy albums that both they and their kids like. These days, parents are doing things like NaNoWriMo (National Novel Writing Month) with their kids, rather than hiding their writing from their kids. My husband and I were thrilled when our older child started to approach the maturity that we thought he needed to read some of our favorite books.

But I remember when—I think it was a year ago—I was looking for a good book to read out loud with my son and I grabbed 1984. Oh, I thought, he’ll love this. All the questions it brings up about freedom of thought, speech, government… and sex. That’s what I realized as I started to read it. I had pretty much forgotten everything in that book that made it, to put it mildly, “inappropriate” as a read-aloud. My husband had the same reaction when looking at Brave New World as a possible “read together” book.

Both of us realized that our pre-teen brains apparently skipped over everything that we would now deem “inappropriate.” When you are reading to yourself, in isolation, the parts that stick are the parts that resonate with you. And what resonates with a 12-year-old from Brave New World or 1984 is the incredible power that the words conveyed. The strong authorial hand that pulls us into the story. The parts that didn’t resonate with us were the parts that had nothing to do with our experience. My husband says that he didn’t even remember sex as part of Brave New World, though it turns out to figure pretty prominently in the story.

My daughter and I have been listening to an audiobook of A Tree Grows in Brooklyn in the car. This is another book that affected me deeply. I probably read it at about the same age as the protagonist as the book opens, 11. And much of it, I now realize, went right past me. I remember the tree, reading on the fire escape. I remember the pickle wrapped in paper, the stale bread, the many trips to the candy store. But when I was considering the book for our book club, I read a variety of opinions about it: “not appropriate” for younger children, so many people said, citing the alcoholic father, the lecherous store-keeper, the racism that the kids innocently take part in.

But none of this is impressing my daughter. She has been listening intently to the strange world of an early 20th century Irish-American girl, almost my daughter’s age. This girl lives to read; my daughter just today read three books. This girl just loves “Jew” pickles; my daughter loves to pull a sour pickle out of the jar and savor it. This girl adores her daddy, lives in Brooklyn, where my daughter’s daddy is from, and sees everything going on in her neighborhood.

My daughter doesn’t seem interested in the drunk father or the lecherous storekeeper. When I asked about the way the kids were talking about Jews, my daughter said, Well, they weren’t saying anything really mean.

Each age understands things in its own way. As adults, we filter what we read through the wider experiences of our lives. But kids look for the things that speak to them. Often, they ignore the things that we deem “inappropriate.”

But even more often, they simply notice them and go on.

“That song is definitely not appropriate for children,” my ten-year-old daughter said to me as we walked through a store, the song playing so quietly in the background I couldn’t pick out the words.

“Why?” I asked.

“Bad words,” my daughter said. She didn’t repeat the words or continue the conversation. She knows what our values are, and until she’s ready to question them, she’s content to know that a song is just not right for her yet. It reminds me of my childhood, when we would seek out “naughty” songs and feel so grown-up listening to them. It never would have occurred to me to talk to my mother about them. In fact, I remember a parallel situation from my teen years: My mother and I walking through the supermarket and my realizing that the Muzak playing on the speakers was “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds.”

“Do you know that this song is about LSD?”

No, I didn’t not say that to my mother. That would have been, well, highly inappropriate.

Now available