|
|
|
do you think that your kids were affected by all this? Just an honest question. It seems so long ago now. I always thought you quite a sussed person, and probably had things right at the time - usually used your own sense to good outcome. Do you feel things should have been different? Does it matter now? An honest question from an old friend, whatever you may say, and whatever your judgement on this. Cheers, Anthony.
|
|
|
|
do you think that your kids were affected by all this? Well, I don't think they were fundamentally affected by Rawat's indoctrination as I was (pretty much) always a Mum before I was a premie. OTOH, their lives would have been different if I had not 'met' Rawat - as I indicated, they would not have been subjected to schooling aged 5. (Though, I can't say I would never have sent them to school). Just an honest question. It seems so long ago now. Yeh - a long time ago. But the formative years of kids are, just that, formative. Premie's children cannot not (sorry for double negative) have been affected by Rawat. I always thought you quite a sussed person, and probably had things right at the time - usually used your own sense to good outcome. Maybe (and thanks for compliments)- but it did feel like a kinda betrayal (of Rawat) to use your own good sense. Do you feel things should have been different? Yep, if I hadn't fallen for the K-trap Does it matter now? In the 'great scheme of things', maybe not. My kids survived schooling. They are leading productive and happy lives. It matters now, in the main, as a story about how one can loose one's intuitive (not to mention intellectual) bearings when one is in a cult. An honest question from an old friend, whatever you may say, and whatever your judgement on this. Hope that answers some of your questions old friend
|
|
|
|
So why haven't you picked up the phone to ring, as you said? Fuck it - just ring and say hello. Glad to hear the girls are doing well.
|
|
|
|
well I've lost your phone no! Better stop this OT stuff  Email
Modified by moley at Sat, Feb 11, 2006, 17:42:36
|
|
|
|
I didn't hear about the "look normal" part being implemented on parents. What while Rawat sprays us with the Holi water? I think the one best thing I did get out of my cult years was all the time with the "alterna" mammas. I am sorry if they smelled like sour milk and embarrassed Rawat with being the foremothers of what is now called "lactivism" but I think that was one thing the cult did have right. As I have said before I am a labor and delivery nurse and I credit exposure to all the home birth and breastfeeding moms with developing my interest in what I really love doing for a living. My feelings about home birth have changed over the years but I still really carry a lot of those roots into what I do in a very positive way. I wish so much that the moms I work with could have seen what I saw as a young teen, all those boobs flopping out to feed hungry babies in a sort of who cares I am feeding my baby fashion. I really believe a lot of breastfeeding failure comes from teens developing an "eeew gross" attitude that they can't seem to shake even if they rationally know breastfeeding is healthiest. I don't remember ever seeing a baby bottlefed as a teen. I think it really helped me. Almost everyone I work with tries to breastfeed and my pet theory of why so many really fail and give up is that they just haven't seen it done. Maybe its a big part of how we learn? My feelings about childbirth I suppose have changed from "natural" is best to whatever is safe and the woman chooses is best. I have a fairly young child and when he was born I still did the natural birth stuff ( though in the hospital ) and I would again despite how truly painful it is! But I think it is quite reasonable that most moms choose epidurals these days and totally the choice of the person who has to endure the pain. And again, it looks like our premie mom friends were ahead of the curve with homeschooling too. I know so many successful homeschoolers. It really stinks if you were talked out of it by some initiator! Even if your kids wouldn't have been a bit smarter you might have enjoyed the closeness and experience of that in your life. I can understand why it would still make you mad. I saw some very good premie parents. Some of them really helped me a lot when I had my first baby too. I knew quite a few that sort of dabbled in the cult, maybe they had left the ashram at some point and hung on for social reasons I dont know. But I knew a lot who did not seem to drag kids to festivals and really put the kids first. Sadly, there were quite a few who didn't. We all saw the sort of neglect going on with some of the kids. I sometimes found it really heartbreaking. And Rawat really could have and should have put an end to that. All he had to do was say the premie babies came first, and parents first obligation was to the babies. When you compared the neglect some of the children endured compared to the charmed lives of his own kids its especially sickening. Didn't one of the posters here talk about her mom sewing doll clothes for the Rawat kids at the very age she herself would have enjoyed them for her dolls? And not one dime should have been accepted by Rawat ( or the initiators or whoever) from the parents many of whom lived in poverty. That sort of thing angers me to this day. Sort of the best and worst of the cult for me all revolved around children's issues. I really have never quite been able to get over the hypocrisy of someone who appeared to be so protective of his own kids not stopping Jagdeo from hurting the premie kids. I still believe Rawat knew at least by 1977.
|
|
|
|
| The Sunday Times - Britain |
|  | 
| The Sunday Times | February 12, 2006 |
Child guru says nurseries harm small childrenSian Griffiths
|
| | ONE of the world’s most popular parenting gurus is to warn that placing children younger than three in nurseries risks damaging their development. Steve Biddulph, whose books have sold more than 4m copies worldwide, says that instead of subsidising nurseries, which do a “second-rate” job, the government should put in place policies to enable mothers to stay at home with their babies. The advice signals a reversal of views for Biddulph, an Australian with more than 20 years’ experience as a therapist, whose previous bestsellers
include Raising Boys and Raising Girls. In his new book Biddulph will admit he has changed his mind because of growing evidence of increased aggression, antisocial behaviour and other problems among children who have spent a large part of their infancy being cared for away from home. He argues that such children may have problems developing close relationships later. |
|
|
|
Modified by Jim at Sun, Feb 12, 2006, 13:45:36
|
|
|
|
>because of growing evidence of increased aggression, antisocial behaviour and other problems among children who have spent a large part of their infancy being cared for away from home< What's the problem ? this exactly describes the 'Public School' system that underwrote the British Empire - and a large fraction of the UK ashram population was ex Public School - a home from home for many of them. No send the child away - don't let it back till it can behave like an adult ! - albeit an emotionally crippled one. N
|
|
|
|
Nik, The joke was in the headline, that's all.
|
|
|
|
The gist was, "The English are strange people. They keep the dogs at home and send their children to a kennel." Neville B, boarding school victim
|
|
|
