How true is this?
My daughter (17) has had many days out of school with me.
I assert and always WILL assert, these days have taught her more about ‘life’ than she would ever learn in the rarefied atmosphere of any classroom.
Assuring myself that my daughter can handle herself in any situation, with many and varied people from all ‘walks of life’ has been a driving influence on the way I have chosen to bring my own children up.
Hence, her social skills etc are excellent.
Her learning skills funnily enough, are even better.
She is very good listener and deciphers pretty well what is important and what I not.
Children learn every day of their lives.
Whether it be in a classroom or in the supermarket;children learn
<until they finally realise they know it all about 16!?>
By qualification, I am a School Teacher.
Suz

Good article.

Vicarious natures will try to buy their kids this sort of thing with $20k a yr private school fees. Hoping that rubbing shoulders with the blue-bloods will make a difference. It doesnt seem to do much else than instil feelings of inadequacy and status envy for those kids of the wrong pedigree whose parents are basically scraping together that annual fee and teaching their kids how to be a pretender in this life... if you cant make it, fake it.

In the meantime the parents seem to abdicate any real sense of parental responsibility in the basics of imparting character, instead feeling as if they are unqualified and that $20k a yr will do the job.

Drive will always trump intellect. Universities are full of superior intellects enjoying the cloistered filter of beautifully manicured university grounds. Whilst the driven actually shape society thru their deeds. Those who can... do.

Back in the bad old days, parents who failed their offspring had those offspring removed, put in homes and often the children were abused.
Today's bad parents, druggies, crims,sadists,every kind of no hoper are left to bring their children up in ,sometimes, horrendous circumstances because of all the 'stolen children' affairs.
Either way the kids lost, still lose, will lose until a decent and wise way is found to give the poor children security and the sense of belonging they need.
How can a child grow up to be a good and caring parent when they do not know what good and caring means?

mickijo,
Mate is there another side to you, who can give praise, encouragement and positive comment?

Which side of the railway tracks you are born on has always, and will remain the single biggest factor in accuring wealth in monetry terms. I however teach my daughter principles, strength, confidence in herself. This way money will matter little, achievement will be the motivator, as it should be, she will grow to be a rich woman one day, perhaps living in poverty, however still rich.

Jamie Packer became in instant billionaire when father Kerry died, I feel sad for Jamie, he will never know the joy attached to a hard day's work. The achievement of a goal other than a monetry one. What a terrible legacy to leave a son.

My daughter will know the joy of saving money to buy something, instead of putting it on a card. Through adversity can come strength of character, a richness money can't buy.

A thought provoking article. My then wife and I took our two daughters out of school for six months in 1991 to travel Australia. They were in year 5 and 6 respectively.
We asked of their teachers what they needed to undertake during that period to catch up and I will always remember what the teacher advised. She said "What do you want a syllabus for, they will learn so much more out there than they will in a classroom." The following year they returned to school and resumed as though the break had hardly occured. They have grown to be wonderful people on both sides of the globe.
How much can we attribute to those months of travel and experience? I have no idea but it was no small thing to give children their parents for six months away from what we percieve important.
I always feel blessed that the long service leave I had accrued allowed me to do things that others only dream of but it does exemplify what is written in the article. The role of the parents is easily undervalued in a society that, it seems, is growing in its expectation that the parents role should be alleviated by state obligations to child fostering and childcare.

This article hit home for me. Here is a brief synopsis of my first eighteen years. Mother drug addict, child beater, with no sense of her own worth as a human being. Father convicted felon, alcoholic, racist. I went to thirteen different schools in three states. I quit school in my 11th year. There was no stability in my life, no values, beyond the selfish one of what's in it for me. I was 32yrs old when I developed a conscience. Imagine what that felt like. I am grateful for that moment. I still remember the event.

I realized I have a choice. I create my life based on the choices I make. It has been a long hard road. I'm still alive, but not for the lack of trying to die.

Early intervention, perhaps a mentor, or a teacher, anyone who cared may have made a difference. I now have a value system that I never had before. I wanted better for myself. I didn't settle for things that I was told like how I was no good, that I'd never amount to anything, that everything that happened to me was all my fault. The beatings, the sexual abuse, the abandonment. I learned to recognize what I am responsible for and let go of what is not my fault. I'm lucky I don't have police record like my father, I'm lucky I'm not a drug addict, and I'm grateful that I recognized that I had choices.

Ultimately it is the individual themselves that makes the difference in their own life. They must at some point ask themselves the question, what do you value?

"Which side of the railway tracks you are born on has always, and will remain the single biggest factor in accuring wealth in monetry terms"

Life is 10% what happens, 90% how you deal with it. Those that are going to make it in life will make it no matter where they are from. they have extra motivation and often over achieve, rather than the above implication.

Its the vulnerable who suffer. Most choose the easy road, using the problems in their life as excuses.

It is a distinct advantage for many coming from the wrong side of the tracks. They know both the S&*Thouse and the penthouse, and that holds them in good stead to be able to succeed with unique insight. Use negatives as fuel on the fire, the reason you must succeed, dont let your children suffer in mediocrity, allow them to think big and encourage them to do it.

Parents are very important in the direction of their child. None at all can provide greater opportunities than many kids with well wishing parents who subconciously hold kids back, who dont believe they can escape their current place in society.

Give them a go, without money to begin with Education and surrounding yourself with the right people are the key. People will believe in your kids, and they will be provided with the pathway. Its amazing how many kids from the wrong side of the tracks are at the top, and kids like yours will have an advantage once they get to sitting in front of them.

Good luck

Realist,
I don't agree with your formula 10% what happens to you 90% how you deal with it, however I do take your opinion on board, and agree mostly.

Some of us will work hard all our lives and make what to others may seem very modest achievements, I am teaching my daughter to be her own woman, set her own goals, not to limit those goals, or allow her economic disadvantages to restrict her. She is bright and learns easily.

We all should give our children as much of two basic commodities as possible, encouragement, and ourselves.

Shonga you can give your child everything you can but eventually your child will leave you behind and all you can do is pray.
I know children from good families who have hit the skids, it is not up to the parents . The young people will stick with their peer group come hell or high water.
I am not sorry for Jamie Packer. By all accounts ,he had a good father .
The old adage that money doesn't buy happiness is true, but it sure allows you to be miserable in comfort.

Question A. Would you rather be poverty stricken miserable
or
Question b. Would you rather be miserable in total, scrumptious luxury.

Thank you for your article Nicholas.

Great posts from Suz T, SHONGA, Craig and Patty.

SHONGA your daughter will be very grateful to you. Good on you.

Patty, congratulations on your deserved success in ridding yourself of the demons of your lousy childhood.

Cheers all
Kay

Great Article.

I wonder if a child can have a bad parent but still be influenced by someone else's good parent, at say a sleepover?

It would also be interesting to find out whether childhood peer group also affects a person's success.

Thank you Kalweb. I accept your praise. I want to believe that by sharing my story, I can help someone else understand that blaming other people for our misfortune does not help anyone. The more people in this world that understand the power they have in their own lives through their choices, the better world we will have.

Those foeti aborting themselves en masse are already choosing their parents wisely. It is another mystery of nature that those coming to term have selected to do so because at least one parent is good. If the deadbeat parent does not improve in a timely and acceptable manner, children have the additional ability to influence divorce, then remain with the one good parent.

I don’t see how social scientists, politicians or policy administrators can improve on this process. If they were to intervene in early childhood development, they could just be interfering with the child’s right to choose. Exposing those rare errors of choice does nothing for the child, and may even upset the mother thereby making him or her dependant on the state.

Another fascinating article Nicholas, I enjoyed reading it.

Kay/Patty,

Kay thank you for your praise it is appreciated, I consider you to be a wise lady, even if I occassionally disagree with you on an issue.

Patty, I apologise for grouping you in with Bush, on earlier posts, I think the thing you must understand is that some people can, others are unable to have an awakening at 32y.o. some never encounter the experience, although I am pleased for everyone who has including you, great story, congratulations. And please have understanding for those unable to have your experience.

mickj, I know you won't believe this mate, however I just want to be me. I would very much like to posess the capacity to once again enter the workforce{a pipe dream} other than that I have come to grips with who I am, what I am, what my priorities are etc. Your two questions I am unable to answer, as given a choice I would love to be a worker in a field I was interested in, with enough money to live, instead of survive, luxury to me is being able to talk to you, and people in general.

I appreciate everything I was able to procure before my second nervous breakdown took my health, I seek nothing more than I already have, a lovely wife, a beautiful daughter, a roof over my head, no mortgage, no debt other than rates, electricity, and Telstra. We lead a simple life, a humble satisfying life. I repeat wealth will always greatly depend on what side of the tracks you are born, out of the multitude the occasional one will make it! However for the great majority of us "live within your means" would be a suitable old phrase to quote.

SHONGA

At the young age of 58 years, I am currently writing a "Thank You For My Memeories" book for my mother. I am also illustrating it.

Here are some examples: thank you for teaching me how to knit when I had the mumps when I was four years of age; thank you for teaching me to respect you and Dad, and other older people; thank you for sitting with me every evening when I did my homework; thank you for the only pair of shoes I had when I entered high school; thank you for not having television (except when you hired it during our school holidays); thank you for teaching me how to appreciate nature, human nature, and animals.

I love you Mum
Cheers to all
Kay

I have seen many instances of children with very ordinary up-bringings becoming extra-ordinary people.

'No matter where a seed is planted it will always grow towards the sunlight'. This is a philosophy used during the emergance of humanist psychology. This is how I see the students I teach.

I don't think that they all have perfect parents but I believe in the unlimited capabilities of all of them.

"Ultimately it is the individual themselves that makes the difference in their own life".

Couldn't agree more, Patty. Liberation and success occurs only when you realise this truth. I remember when I was a kid at primary school, I'd see the children with no lunches and tattered, 'hand-me-down' uniforms, neglectful parents who couldn't be bothered picking them up at the end of the day.

These kids would show up grubby, have black rings under their eyes, no shoes, hair knotted and messy. Some of them accepted this fate. Others now live off huge salaries and lead fulfilling, successful lives.

Shonga - Kerry Packer means nothing to me. He is a greedy man who had too much money. Most people know this. Focus on what you are good at mate, and be proud of who you are.

At what point does wanting to become more affluent become greed and is it a good thing or a bad thing? Is there a cut-off point? It seems to me that we are sending mixed messages to our children.

Great article underlining the period of early childhood's importance. It is unfortunate that this period sometimes coincides with a lack of maturity, stability and skills in the parent. Is this where society should assist the less fortunate? Are we doing enough of that? Would we rather let poorly raised children turn into criminals and then demand tough law and order to punish them? Is the law and order approach over a crime prevention/early intervention effort the best economic decision let alone the best decision for producing a relatively low-crime, secure and successful Australian society? In our demands for lower taxes that lead to a lack of government resources to properly tackle early childhood support, are we just being short-sightedly selfish?

In Britain there is a survey of over 11,000 people all born in one week in 1958 and surveyed regularly ever since (Australia unfortunately has nothing like it). A few years ago I analysed this extraordinary data set to identify which factors in childhood had most impact on job success by age 33. The answer, in a nutshell, was: intellectual ability explains 17% of success; motivation and ambition (the things Nick Gruen is talking about) explains 5%; school and post-school qualifications 6%; parental interest in the child's education when growing up 3%; the parents' social class ("which side of the tracks you are born on") 3%; parents' aspirations for the child 1%. But 65% of success is unexplained by any measurable factor. Conclusion: Your intellectual ability is key, early intervention can probably have some small, marginal impact by raising motivation, but the future is wide open and your life is what you make it.

Interesting info, Peter Saunders. Don't know about your conclusion though. Given that in 65% of cases in the study you quoted could not be explained, shouldn't the conclusion be: 'que sera, sera'; 'pot luck'; or even, 'what the...?'

I think Peter Saunders’ conclusion is that there is no significant payback in throwing money at bad parents.

If only our nanny state and Family Law would acknowledge such things … children may finally get their choice of better parents.

Actually, it's mostly genetics.

Separate identical twins at birth, and adopt them to random parents, locate them whan they are adults and their IQ almost identical... genetics is 80% of IQ.

Social learning is about having a curious mind and an engaging personaility. Social learning is also largely genetic. Tall parents normally have tall kids... curious and engaging parents have curious and engaging kids.

What does impress me is how hard researchers look for obscure explainations to obscure and deny the bleeding obvious...

READ MY LIPS It's genetics

Seeker, another conclusion could be that in the unexplained 65% of cases there must indeed be an explanantion and we just haven't found it yet but if we do we might be able to make great progress in achieving our individual and collective potentials. A case for a 'seeker' perhaps?

While it sounds somewhat true, it's muddy at best. If children had access to in the order of one hundred thousand dollars to several million dollars inheritance, that is one or more business ventures right there paid up front, with bank confidence at the highest of levels. Now if another group of children had nothing, their chances of starting similar business would fall to one to three percent, or thereabouts, and even bar access to certain business ventures. Investing the money alone would grant some very tidy returns, whereas for the latter group, they are blocked from the same lucrative and successful avenues.

Gee, thanks Nicholas. You've ruined my day. It's bad enough for those of us with high IQs and the people skills of a 3B pencil to know how little our intelligence counts for. And we do, believe me. But to now learn that, from too much early contact with us, our children are likewise doomed to relative failure while the likes of Eddie McGuire prosper, is too bitter a pill altogether. Thanks. Thanks a lot.

tubley you are making some incredibly ignorant assertions. Foremost is the mistake that every child is 'created' equal and has equal opportunities. This is supported by your utopian metaphors and ideals. Success is not simply a choice. Psychology is not simply a choice. Individuals are composed of hugely complex inputs and outputs, for example, life experiences, ego, talent, chemical neurology, genetics etc. If you believe it is within every person's ability to be wealthy through robotic choices, you are an ignorant fool.

Annoyer-me, you must come from a well funded mental institution, perhaps The ABC. Your Elitist ridicule is becoming irritating.
If you were half as smart and intellectual as you claim, then your commentary would reflect the superior knowledge instead of castigating others with pathological and poisonous venom. Please go back to your spider web and eat buggs.
Or contribute something other than your hatred.

Annoying you, my dear -all, is precisely my intention. You are more than pleased to spew venomous (and illiterate, and illogical) abuse at, just off the top of my head, Bushbred, Scout, and Shonga, yet whine most piteously when someone takes your paranoid rantings to task. And sorry to disappoint you, but I'm self-employed, and reasonably lucratively so. No taxpayer funds my income. Another silly insult, and wrong yet again.

By the way, next time, try posting your rejoinder on a thread in which I've attacked you. It makes ever so much more sense.

Annoying me again,
It may not have occurred to you that the insults you refer are in a jocular context, we all cop it at some time or another. The names you refer have offered different views and volunteered their back ground. And Give it as good as they get. We all have our moments. But as you stated- yours is an attack.
By the way , I am not Jim Ball .
Self Employed hay, hmmmm. Have a nice day.

P S.
The reason why I did not respond on that thread to you, Craig B had a great idea and a post, there was a need to preserve it and not steal his thunder. I hope you would understand Annoying-me.

“That’s why you are on an invalid pension Shonga and Scout is a Bureaucrat. Just recipients of others hard work”. “I note you gloating about Graduating on an earlier thread. That is obvious; you rant and rave on like a 22 year old Lobotomized socialist”.

Just a couple of your “jocular” comments, -all. Every bit as amusing as typhoid. I doubt Bushbred’s response on the Palestine thread will give you any cause to think they’re taken in the spirit in which you claim they’re intended.

And also just a couple of questions: would you mind clarifying your rather opaque reference to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion – preferably on the Palestine thread, where you originally made it? Equally interestingly – if you’re not Jim Ball, why are you claiming his homepage is yours, and why are you appropriating the commercial radio talkback jock style? Is Mr Ball aware you’re giving others the distinct impression you are he? Very odd indeed.

When are you going to give a grateful world your considered views on the illuminati? I await your exposition of the machinations of the Bilderberg Group with a certain morbid interest. Will inter-dimensional lizards be a feature?