I read exerpts of the book and was also struck by the lack of criticism of his father for the very thing he seemed to criticize his mother for. I thought that some of his criticism wasn't necessarily directed at his mother's career (most was), but also that his mother seemed cold.

But then again, the issues of the rich and famous don't necessarily inform the discussion of "balance" really. It's hard to feel sorry for this guy and he does seem to be a "success" as a person so his parents must have done something right.

From reading your review, it sounds like Dickerson's problem with his mother stemmed not so much from her having a career, but fron her not being fuzzy-wuzzy and involved in every aspect of her children's lives. What's to say things would have been any different if she'd been a stay at home mom? In fact, things could have been way, way worse, with an added layer of maternal resentment at her thwarted ambitions added in.

And not to sound cold, but nothing described in your review sounds like a terrible crime. It's not as if Dickerson were emotionally abusive; it just sounds like she wasn't the June Cleaver her son was hoping for.

"John Dickerson, the youngest of Nancy Dickerson's three stepdaughters and two sons, does a good job of showing life from a lonely kid's perspective, written by a man who still seems to nurse a few grudges against Mom. Dickerson notes that despite her demanding career she took him to the doctor and attended all school functions, but that this attention just made him feel more "broken.""

This is so ridiculous. It sounds to me like if John felt "broken," it was his own problem, not his mother's. I was struck by the fact that he was a youngest child--perhaps his loneliness was the result of being the baby of the family, always left behind while sisters and brothers went off to exciting things. Or perhaps he had a bottomless need for maternal love that no mother, regardless of how June Cleaver she was, could meet. Children are all different; they bring different issues to a family. And while parents do their very best--and it sounds like Nancy did well by John, what with the school functions and doctors--ultimately, as a child grows up, it's his or her own responsibility to become a whole person and heal the scars.

To be honest, it seems like blaming your parents is an American past time. Is this a recent trend or has it always existed? At some point, you need to move on from your childhood. Unless you were abused, I think you should pull up your socks and learn to deal with the past. Take the good things from your childhood and repeat them, actively don't do the bad things, and ignore a lot of the stuff in between. Why do Americans spend so much time worrying about what didn't happen and just start focusing on what they can do today?

I agree with all of the above. The following statement is just ridiculous:

"Dickerson notes that despite her demanding career she took him to the doctor and attended all school functions, but that this attention just made him feel more "broken""

So despite doing what moms are supposed to do, he feels "broken". Oh geez, get a life.

I agree with foamgnome above - way too much of the "abuse excuse" going on. There are many more people who have been abandoned and abused who have made it than there are those who whine about it and use it as an excuse for bad behavior or unfulfilled lives. I am not saying there aren't scars, issues but get some help dealing with them and move on.

No matter what his mother did, it likely wouldn't have been enough. Instead of glorifying his writings, or worse, using it to self-flagellate, we should ignore it and go forward. We do what we can with what are given. It isn't his mother's fault...it is his own.

This kind of pap is maddening.

FWIW -- I read the Washington Post review of the article ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/17/AR2006101701393.html ) and it seemed to have a more nuanced analysis of the book (I haven't personally read the book). I would recommend checking it out before villianizing John too much.

I agree that people should take responsibility for their own emotions, but that doesn't negate the fact that the earliest years are the most formative in child development. Children have an innate desire for good parents. That's not being greedy or needy, it's the way we are.

From the review: "The childhood dramas, however, are the driving force of this book, whether intentional or not. Dickerson cautions that he's not trying to weigh in on working mothers; he provides enough examples to suggest that, job or no job, his mother may not have had the DNA to be a nurturing parent. When her stepdaughter asked if she could have a silver dish that had belonged to her dead mother, Nancy hid it. To her older son, Michael, who was struggling with acne, she'd often say, "Your face looks awful."

And remember the context. This happened when it was the norm for moms to be home. being 'different' has always been a problem for kids, whether the difference may be perceived as good or not.

Please read the review and not just what Leslie wrote before commenting.

Got one word for this guy: whatever.

No one has a perfect childhood. Everyone has issues with their parents, all of whom are trying to reconcile being a parent with being a person (and sometimes that person is a flawed person).

Yes, adult understanding doesn't remove the scars of childhood. But it should make you less likely to show those scars off as scars of valor (or to try and take money off them!)

I am SO tired of these books - I call it "My, didn't I turn out to be a better person than my parent" genre. Life is what happens when you make plans, and sometimes you don't make the right choices at the right times. I would be interested to know from anyone who read the book whether or not Mr. Dickerson looked more closely at how his mother impacted his own career choice. Because doesn't it strike anyone else as odd that he hated his mother so much but went into her profession?

foamgnome,
I see this guy as an example of "blame-anyone-but-myself." I don't know whether this is an americanism or not. I know Australia is that way too. I believe it is a sign of social immaturity. Look at your average toddler..

Regarding the broken comment, reading some of the book reviews yields a little more clarity:

According to John, his mother seemed disinterested in the every day mundane schedules of her children. It was only when a problem occurred, much like the car getting a flat, that she appeared to pay attention and become involved. This is the context for the 'broken' reference -- John's difficulty was that his primary involvement with his mother was for specific episodes in which she believed he needed to be 'fixed'.

Not to agree or disagree with his point, just to note that it is a bit more nuanced.

Yesterday, someone mentioned having a blog regarding WOHM vs SAHM from the child's perspective.

When my mom returned to full-time work when I was in elementary school, I too felt like she was neglecting me- which is perfectly natural for a little kid who thinks, as little kids do, that she is the center of the universe. I got over it. Looking back, I remember all the things I did to try to make her feel guilty about "leaving" me- and feel glad that my mom was wise enough not to indulge me.

Single Gal,
Unfortunately, each child's definition/perception of 'good parents' is different (well maybe all small children want Santa/Mrs. Claus as their parents so they can get presents every day or something). Not all children want June Cleaver. I had June Cleaver for a mother and it wasn't a good match for me. The kicker is noone knows what each child's definition/perception will be until they are adults. Parents are in a bind...the only way out of the catch-22 situation is just do the best job they can at the time. No parent can do better than their own definition of 'best.'

I did read Leslie's review before commenting, and I just didn't see anything resembling abuse or neglect. So his mom wasn't exactly a model of maternal compassion. Neither of the examples Leslie gives are compelling evidence of abuse.

Here's the quote from the review on the "broken" comment. Definitely a lot more nuanced, I can see his point.

--"But there's a difference between working to solve a child's problems and connecting with that child," explains Dickerson. "She did all the right things from the outside but none of it brought us closer together on the inside." Instead, he writes, all the extra doctor and teacher visits made him feel "broken." What was missing were the kinds of moments Dickerson says he has with his own children, when a parent conveys through his availability that what's important to the child is important to him. "Mom's schedule never had a window large enough for such natural moments. It didn't have that window because she didn't schedule them," he writes. "She didn't know about the rest of her children's lives because it was like a dog's whistle to her. She couldn't hear it. If we weren't on her list or it wasn't the approved together-time between when she came home and when the servants took us for our baths, she wasn't hungering to connect with our world."--

Dotted,

Sure, each parent and each child may have variations on what a precise ideal of "good parents" are. But, I think it would be wrong to assume we don't all have some huge generalizations in common. Time, attention, number of cookies baked, money and amount of "stuff" may vary - but everyone (I think it's safe to say) wants parents who help instill self worth.

Like "A Dad" pointed out, a child who only receives attention from his mom when he's doing something wrong or in crisis is going to have a warped sense of self for a while.

There are personality traits that are inherant, but much is still shaped by parenting and environment.

There does seem to be a lot of the "abuse excuse" mentioned above; however, it also seems natural that adult children become more critical of their parents once they have children of their own. It's far easier to recognize aspects of one's childhood that were less than ideal when one is trying to orchestrate the best environment for one's own child or children. My dad pushed us hard when it came to sports - not necessarily a bad thing but not one that I repeat with my kids. My husband looks back at his childhood and is shocked that he was left to get himself up, dressed, fed and to kindergarten by himself. He is also affected still by the fact that his older brother was left in charge at a young age and physcially abused him for years with his parents not intervening and still unable to acknowledge that there was anything wrong. It seems natural that Mr. Dickerson question his childhood experiences now that he has children. I do wonder what effect his criticism of his working mother has on his wife and his expectations of her.

Yesterday, someone mentioned having a blog regarding WOHM vs SAHM from the child's perspective

Yes, ask a five year old if they want their mom and they will say yes. BUT

Ask them when they are 25 and they will say thanks for working mom.

This reminds me of a thought that my husband and I go back and forth on from time to time.....

Which parent has more of an impact on a child?

Ie, if you are raised only by one, what problems have developed because of the absence of the other?

Or if your relationship was poor with one or the other-how has this affected you and do you think it is more detrimental being a rift with your father or mother??

A wise woman at a party once said to me "our parents give us our life's work". She was explaining that no matter what we do as parents, we're going to miss something in the menu of all-things-needed-for-a-perfect-upbringing. And this is absolutely natural.

For example: If we're introverted, we probably aren't the best role models for the lesson called 'how to make friends with ease'. If we're extroverts, we may be imperfect at modeling 'how to gain peace from within'. But the flip side of each of these IS our gift to our children - extroverts model getting out there in the world and introverts model the value of quiet solitude. Most of us aren't both.

So for every missing wish in John's childhood (e.g., a mom who was devoted to him more), there is a flip-side gift (e.g., perhaps a mom who showed him that she - and therefore he - was worth pursuing her dreams?). It is okay for us to leave a lot of lessons to our children to learn on their own - this is how they make them theirs for real. We do our best, and our children hopefully grow to appreciate our strengths.

That said, it is hard for me to remember this when I'm critical of my parenting on a given day. Maybe writing it out today will help me do so.

I'm 40 and the youngest of 4 children and all 4 of us are glad our mother stayed home. We had our best conversations right after we got off the bus...sitting on the kitchen counter while she cooked dinner. Not all 25 year olds wished their mother had worked. Stop making such broad generalizations.

How the heck can parents instil a sense of self-worth? This is way too close to haveing the child believe s/he is the center of the universe. Nah, I don't believe in generalizations...or that instilling self-worth is one of them.

And in this case, this guys mother was giving him attention...after all, she went and supported his extracurriculars.

I'm sure I read an excerpt from this book sometime this year. I'm thinking it was The Washingtonian. I remember thinking that his life sounded a bit like those Victorian novels where "mummy" breezes into the nursery to kiss the children before rushing off to her social event or charity ball or whatever. And I remember thinking that it sounded like lots of his issues had more to do with being raised with great wealth -- than they necessarily did with whether or not his mom worked.

What I picked up on overall was his sense that his mother LOVED her work, LIVED for it, found interviewing famous politicians and researching issues FASCINATING -- and being a mom, less so. I'm sure that's a sentiment that some of us today can also identify with. He clearly resented coming in second to her great passion, which was work. (That's an altogether different sentiment than 'you missed my soccer game because you had a business trip' -- if you see my point.)

What I do find strange though is his complaint that "she wasn't involved enough his my world, she didn't hunger to know it." It's my understanding that at the time he was growing up, even stay-at-home moms weren't "involved in their children's worlds" in the sense of knowing all the words to the Teletubbies song or how many points each Pokemon card is worth. They just weren't enmeshed with their kids in that way -- I thought that was a 2000's phenomenon, and a not altogether healthy one at that.

I remember having this conversation with my husband awhile ago about how for some women it's like they're in love with their work and having an affair with their families -- whereas for others, it's the opposite. That's what I've always meant by balance -- where you put your psychic energy as well as your resources. does that make sense?

"She did all the right things from the outside but none of it brought us closer together on the inside.

"Mom's schedule never had a window large enough for such natural moments."

These quotes struck me because the first one describes my mother perfectly. But she was a SAHM, so there were plenty of "windows" of time for us to connect, but it never happened. She was there all the time but we were never "close".

So I personally wouldn't say that John's mother's career was to blame. He may *think* so, but it probably would have been the same if she had not worked at all. As in my case.

Also, although I hate to read things like a mom making fun of her son's acne, I also know that if strangers judged every little thing I ever did or said to my daughter, I might not come off so great either. Even though I love her more than life itself and try with all my heart to be a good mom, I am not perfect. None of us are.

"Well, the fact that, 40 years later, men and women are now both wrestling with these issues and getting it all wrong is great progress."

In short, career-obsessed people make lousy parents regardless of their sex.

Also in the news, grass is green.

very thought-provoking post...

What you wrote did make sense...especially the 'coming in second' feeling.

" Stop making such broad generalizations"

You should do the same thing not eveyone wants a happy homemaker for a mother.

Everything I am today I owe to my mother.

I wonder if part of the story is the social expectations of the era -- do we know if his mother actually wanted to be a mother, or did so because that is what was expected, or because she didn't have access to birth control, etc.? It seems like until recently, most women simply presumed that they would have kids, without analyzing it like we tend to do nowadays. In many cases they didn't have access to birth control in the first place, but even if they did, having kids was just What Was Done.

I also don't think this is a WOHM/SAHM thing. I think we all know of WOH parents who don't really focus on their kids (my dad was kinda like that, where even when he was home, he was watching golf, reading the paper, playing golf, working in the shop -- the kids were kind of just there, unless we acted up and he had to pay attention to us). But I think there are also SAH parents who are the same way -- remember the whole martini/valium mom thing in the 50s? I can't imagine that "mother's little helper" really helps you focus on your kid. Fact is, if you want to connect with your kids, you will find a way, whether you WOH or not. And if you don't want to, you will find a way to escape, whether you SAH or not.

And society has changed, too. Seems like for a long time, society didn't expect you to focus on your kids; if you were poor, they worked on the farm or in a factory; if you were rich, they were sent off with a governess or to boarding school; if you were in-between, you sent them off to entertain themselves. Kids were to be seen and not heard and all that. I remember as a kid in the 70s going to visit my parents' friends and seeing their babies sitting in playpens for hours at a time, while the grownups talked and we ran around by ourselves -- it was just kind of what people did. Heck, even June Cleaver, uber-mom, wasn't down on the floor playing Candyland with Wally and the Beav -- she was off doing her adult job of cooking food and maintaining the house, giving the kids a pat on the head and a smile before sending them off to entertain themselves.

I don't want to imply that everyone used to be cold or disconnected from their kids -- my grandmother was very child-oriented and was very good at really focusing on and connecting with kids. The point is just that the author's mom just doesn't seem that out of step with society's expectations for parents at the time. But those expectations have changed drastically since the 60s and 70s -- heck, today, June Cleaver might be criticized for not spending more time with her kids (what? no flashcards??)! Why? I suspect because a lot of baby boomers resented the way in which they were raised, and determined to listen to their kids more, pay more attention to their kids, build that one-on-one connection they didn't have. Kind of like the author.

" Stop making such broad generalizations"

You should do the same thing not eveyone wants a happy homemaker for a mother.

I commented on my situation and no one elses.

Everything I am today I owe to what I did with, and in spite of, my innate talents.

Parents/teachers/grandparents fertilize your soil. Unfortunately, noone knows what kind of tree you are, with corresponding fertilization needs, until you are grown up. Therefore, it is your innate characteristics determining what you do with your fertilizer.

There's a difference between self worth and feeling like you're the center of the universe. I didn't think it had to be explained. Do you feel like you know who you are? If so, does that mean you think you're the center of the universe?

Self worth is knowing you're loved and understanding your talents, your strengths and feeling useful contributing to the world. It's not about the world spinning around you, it's understanding your place in the spinning.

Foamgnome - "pull up your socks" and get on with it - I love that!!!! Put a smile on my noncaffineted face this morning. Now THAT is an accomplishment!. :-)

I read the review of the book with great interest (but still have not read the book) as his mother sounds a lot like mine. My mother was not as successful, or rich but she was, and still is, at 68 very driven in her career. I too am the youngest and was left to fend for myself a lot growing up, but I loved it. I liked having the house to myself and being in charge of myself. It made me very independent and responsible. The funny thing is that now that I am a parent, I have developed resentment towards my mother for all the things that looking back, I feel she should have done, even though I don't remember being upset about those at the time. Part of this resentment stems from the fact that she still puts her work ahead of being a mother and grandmother and this infuriates me (and my sisters). And I admit, my father gets off scott free in this resentment, although he shouldn't. I have vowed to myself that as a working mother I will be more involved in my children's lives than my mother was. I have already scaled back my career to do so, something my mother does not understand or agree with. She cannot fathom why I am not more ambitious.

Adulthood/parenthood leads us all to reevaluate our own upbringings and see the flaws. I guess we can only hope that our children turn out for the best and don't become journalists!

You take your life in your own hands when you criticize any mom or women on this blog. Beware!

Me too, Chasmasaur. It is life. It is not perfect, but I think because some of us get so much so easily we think human relationships should work easily as well ( I am talking about stuff, info, that kind of thing--there is just so much AVAILABLE). I used to resent my father for not being nicer to my mom, my mom for not telling my dad to stuff it, my dad for being a moron about money and a few other things, my mom for keeping sex a big secret, and so on. I am sure Jesus could have told Mary a thing or two. My take--we are standing on their shoulders. They didn't have the tools we do. Now if you have a kid with a problem, there might be a diagnosis. ADHD, learning disability, whatever. We also have a much better vocabulary for expressing our emotions and actions. Turn on the t.v., watch Dr. Phil, Oprah, somebody. (You might hate them, but I have actually learned a few really good things from Phil, the main one being 'you have to create a haven for your kids at home".) Pick up a book. Check out a website. You can learn a lot in a very short time.

At 25, many people are just learning how to be adults. Wait until you are 40, then decide if your parents did it right! Are you still alive? Then they did. My mom HAD to go back to work full time when I was ten. The only job she could get was from 3p.m. to 11. She hated that she wasn't home for me when I came home from school, and I didn't much care for it either, but it was what we had. But she wasn't an extra curricular kind of mom, either. She never came to my softball games, played any kind of game with me, etc. She was a housewife. Watching her get ready for work, study at home in order to get a promotion and manage money (she wrote everything out on a tablet of paper--no quicken then!) gave me an example to follow. I also took on more responsibility which I loved. I really liked making dinner (nothing fancy, trust me) and taking care of things like it was my domain.

I work part-time and still love running my little domain, cooking dinner, being the go-guy for homework, problems, whatever. I don't think you need to spend ten hours a day with your kids to have a good relationship. I see my kids every day after school, but there are days I don't, and they save every little thing up to tell me at bedtime!

It sounds like John and his Mom didn't have a close emotional relationship.

Maybe he was jealous of the time she spent working or the emotional zeal she threw into her work. Plenty of non-working Moms throw themselves into a zillion other things and aren't available to their kids. I don't see what that has to do with whether she worked or not.

I'm not going to say that working mothers' don't have a monopoly on bad parenting because I'm not convinced Nancy Dickerson was a bad parent. The son appears to have become a functional adult -- what more does he want?

I think the reason this book gets so much attention is because it approaches the issue of both parents working from the child or former child's perspective. We as a society are continuously encouraged to have sympathy for the working parent, more often than not the working mother. We are supposed to feel sorry for parents who work outside the home as they go about their "harried" and "busy" lives. Our response, as a whole, is supposed to be one of providing assisstance in the form of child care or subsidized preschool to make the working parents lives easier. I am not interested in this, but rather am pulled more by the desire to help these children whose parents cannot or are not willing to spend more time with them. Many dual-career couples do not financially need to have both parents in the workforce, and books like this one, which I can personally relate to having been myself a latchkey child and teenager, show why it is better to try to have one parent available to raise the children, instead of outsourcing the raising of their children.

"Mom's schedule never had a window large enough for such natural moments."

Yeah, well, this schedule problem is not the exclusive province of working moms or dads. My SAHM's cleaning, cooking, and church service attendance schedule never had a window large enough for any natural moments with any of her four children either, except on those once-per-year family vacations.

The majority of us appreciate that being in the same residence with one or both parents, at the same moment, doesn't necessarily mean those parents are engaged with their kids or their kid's lives. Shared space, without more, doesn't make you a good parent. I'd much rather have had TV dinners (remember them?) and some of my mom's attention than have her spend 45 minutes cooking after school every day. One-on-one time, interest and attention, not whether a parent is employed outside the home, determines whether his or her kids are more likely to look up to him or her later on.

As an aside, a household involving "servants" is hardly representative of the households in which most working parents reside, and the complaints of kids raised with such extraordinary wealth don't represent the complaints of ordinary kids, if any, in two-income households.

"Well, the fact that, 40 years later, men and women are now both wrestling with these issues and getting it all wrong is great progress."

In short, career-obsessed people make lousy parents regardless of their sex.

Also in the news, grass is green."

It doesn't have to be a career. Obsession with anything can make for a lousy parent. My girlfriend's partner was obsessed with video games. He would play for several hours after work and on his days off. She couldn't even trust him to watch the kids so she could take a few hours off because he would become so engrossed he wouldn't feed them, change diapers, take them outside. If they intruded on his video world he would get angry. I wonder how many parents are actually career obsessed. I haven't met a single one who wouldn't walk away if they one the lottery (albeit a big one). They say they would do what they love--teach yoga, open a coffee shop, become a teacher, etc. Most of us are working because we have to. I genuinely enjoy my job, but if I were to get a major windfall, I would throw a party, say goodbye and good luck to my co-workers and be out of here! What would you do if you won 50 million? Would you still trudge into work everyday?

You can't have it both ways, it won't work. Never has, never will. The child/ parent, both parents, there is not a shread of evidence that women do a better job of raising children than men relationship needs time and until that fact is realized the family structure will be screwed up with the children paying the price.

His mother gave him an invaluable gift. That gift is how not to raise his child. He is now free to raise his children however he wants and correct whatever mistakes (perceived, real or unreal) he feels his mom made.

I haven't read the book or any review other than Leslie's. But, it seems to me that most of us probably can say that our mothers and/or fathers didn't do the best for us all of the time. That's because we're all distinct individuals and even the best intentioned parent can't satisfy all of a child's needs. We're talking personalities, here.

My mother is a wonderful person but she and I never really connected. She and my sister connected and to this day are sympatico in a way my mother and I never will be. On the other hand, I was really close to her mother (my grandmother). My mother once commented that she and her mother never really connected.

I think that's okay; we just absorbed the reality and carried on with our lives. Which, outside of writing about a broken life, Dickerson seems to be doing. He's got children of his own and he's doing the best that he can.

Now I have four children, and I know that I did better by some than others while my husband and I were raising them (they're all college age +). I know that one daughter and I love each other but don't connect; that I have an intellectual connection with one son - he's the one who reads for reading's sake; that one son and I share a certain zest for exploring; and that one daughter and I share what I'll call a spirituality.

I love and respect each of my children, have from the day they were born, but I'm sure that, if you ask them, they'll be able to point out where I failed them. I know, for example, that one of my sons was always happiest when I was at home when he got home from school. Of course, I worked and that didn't happen very often. The other three children didn't seem to care one way or the other.

So, ultimately, it comes down to personalities and, as someone said earlier, the gift our parents give us. They give us the gift of being able to deal with people and personalities, with all their strenghts, weaknesses and flaws.

"Many dual-career couples do not financially need to have both parents in the workforce, and books like this one, which I can personally relate to having been myself a latchkey child and teenager, show why it is better to try to have one parent available to raise the children, instead of outsourcing the raising of their children."

Geez, more of this judgement "outsourcing" of childcare garbage. That's your opinion. And a very limited one at that.

I was brought up by a stay at home mother. She was not a warm, involved mother. So she was "there" when we got home from school. She spent time reading while we entertained ourselves. She "really really" wanted children but didn't really really connect with us. I was ashamed that despite being smart that she didn't go to college or have a career and instead got married out of high school. She has been critical of my choices and in a moment of forgetting herself has admitted jealousy. Do I think I had a bad mother? No, she did the best that she could and she was a product of her times. I felt that I was given all the material things I needed and that both my parents cared. I don't expect perfection.

I have a career and great kids. I have had nannies too, but neither I nor my kids would call that "outsourcing". Both my husband and I are way more involved in our kid's lives than my parents were. My kids are well adjusted and happy. Neither would ask me to stay at home and my oldest has told me that he likes to brag about what I do. In fact, both of my kids want to do what I do when they grow up.

So cut the judgemental attitude and open your mind to other possibilities.

pATRICK- As for criticizing mothers - Not necessarily. So far everyone agrees that there are good and bad mothers and everything in between. Whether or not this author is justified in complaining about his is another question.

"Everything I am today I owe to my mother."

That is a choice. There are many people who have less than perfect, some actually horrific, childhoods, and somehow, they grow up to be pefectly fine, well-adjusted human beings. There are others who grow up with warm, loving parents and who still end up being unhappy, miserable human beings. You cannot spend your adult life blaming your parents for your unhappiness. At some point, your childhood is over, and then it becomes your responsibility to take charge of your life and find some happiness. That is called growing up. People who insist on blaming their parents for their problems are denying themselves the opportunity to take control of their situation and heal it. If your childhood was lousy, it may have been your parents' fault, but if your adulthood also sucks, you need to look at yourself and make some changes. Blaming your parents is not going to fix anything by the time you are an adult.

"To be honest, it seems like blaming your parents is an American past time. Is this a recent trend or has it always existed? At some point, you need to move on from your childhood. Unless you were abused, I think you should pull up your socks and learn to deal with the past."

Foamgnome,

Granted, Dickerson's book is a very public way to work out childhood issues. Nevertheless, for many adults who struggle with problems of self-esteem and self-concept, childhood is where the answers are to be found.

If a person doesn't like things about himself, a careful examination of his early life can help him to understand why he is the way he is...and maybe help him to change. A good therapist will help him discover what hurts from his childhood and why -- and will also help him to decide how to deal with it.

The "pull up your socks and learn to deal with the past" attitude isn't helpful, because the very people who need to explore their pasts can't "learn" to do it in a vacuum.

Adults who are more resilient (like you, perhaps?) are often not sensitive to the emotional struggles of others. We're all made differently, and some of us need help more than others.

Outsourcing?

Please. I hope the people who say this "if you work, you're 'outsourcing' the raising of your children" garbage also:

-Home school their kids instead of 'outsourcing' their education to the state
-Teach all their kids music lessons and coach all their sports skills instead of 'outsourcing'
-Administer all medical care instead of 'outsourcing' this critical function to a paid professional

You get the idea.

And why is it only a problem that the MOTHER works? If the father works, is he 'outsourcing' also? Sounds like the "right" thing to do is for neither parent to work.

Seems there are two different ways of looking back at childhood. One, blame parents for everything that has gone wrong or will go wrong with your adult life. Two, recognize that your parents did the best they could and you do/will do the best you can with your children. But, each family makes their own choices and does their best to make it work. I'd guess even John Dickerson's mom never set out to make him miserable. She did the best she could for her family *and* herself. Perhaps this is the issue - blame a woman for not sacrificing everything for her family. Hindsight being what it is, it's easy to second guess her choices just as some of this blog's participants second guess and judge everyone else's choices. Dickerson's mom tried to find balance - just as all of us are trying to do - and her children can criticize her or choose to look for things she did right. Perhaps his children will write books criticizing him for hovering or for some other perceived failure.

On outsourcing: To (no name)

So, if you think it's somebody's else's job to educate, coach, teach, raise and care for your kids, what exactly do you think the parents are responsible for?

YES to everyone making the point against the stereotypes: a SAHM can be a failure and a working mom can be a warm and wonderful mother. I agree that Nancy Dickerson sounds like the type who would have wreaked even more havoc if she'd stayed home. She was just one of those remarkably career-driven people. She HAD to work, despite incredible obstacles. I have a lot of respect for what she accomplished. And I have a lot of sympathy for John in terms of what she failed to give him as a mom.

"Well, the fact that, 40 years later, men and women are now both wrestling with these issues and getting it all wrong is great progress."

"all wrong"? What does that mean? Maybe the people in his milieu are getting it all wrong, but all my firends and family seem to be really doing a great job at focusing on making time to really be with the kids. If you total up the time really spent on undivided, one-on-one, parent to child time that has actually increased over what it was back in the day when dads didn't spend much time at all with their kids. Families having fewer kids are part of the reason, but all the extra conveniences of modern life also add up. And people do things more often as a family rather than as couples and hiring a babysitter.

Anyway, my litle boy has always preferred such time with his dad over his mommy! Just this morning he suddenly announced "I love daddy so much!" I, unwisely, asked how he felt about mommy "I don't like you." Hopefully that was just his way of saying "I love you so much I feel comfortable enough telling you that I don't like you so that I can find out what your reaction will be."

Any advice on how to handle his announcement? Ignore it? Cry? I said "I love you anyway" and then he left the room because daddy was downstairs and he wanted to great him with a big hug and kiss.

I think the criticisms of the author are a bit harsh. Why is it difficult to have compassion for someone who has indeed gone on to have a good life but admits that he wishes things had been different in his childhood? It's not like he's out robbing banks and blaming it on his mother. He just wishes she could have shown her love more clearly to him.

And for all those people who say that we need to remember our parents "did their best" -- do you really forgive yourselves your own bad parenting moments so easily? Really, I have a hard time thinking that after I yell, etc. at my son or husband that oh well, I "did my best".

Not all parents did (or are doing) their best! It always annoys me when people say that. Some parents could really use a kick in the pants or a reminder that their child should be more important (working or not, I mean more important in terms of time and emotional connection). What might be more apt to say about a regrettable childhood is "It was what it was; you are right to have feelings of anger and sadness, but don't let it stop your life or your compassion for your parents."

"Seems there are two different ways of looking back at childhood. One, blame parents for everything that has gone wrong or will go wrong with your adult life. Two, recognize that your parents did the best they could and you do/will do the best you can with your children."

Stacey, I think this is a really good point. Understanding the impact that others may have had on your emotional development is not the same as blaming them; in fact, what I have seen in watching my own mother go through therapy and deal with some issues with her mother is a lot of understanding and forgiveness that has allowed my mother to move forward, let go of her hurts, and develop better ways of reaction and coping with certain situations. I can only speak as an observer, but to me it's been pretty amazing to watch.

PS - Stacey, how was skiing over Thanksgiving?

Should be "greet" not "great" although I'm sure such treatment does indeed make daddy feel "great"!

It's interesting to me that the first thing that came to my mind as I read this article was a contrast to the recent piece in the Post on a single mom serving in Iraq ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/23/AR2006112301236.html ) and the fact that today there are over 16,000 single mothers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. The conflicting duties for them seem so much more real -- and unlike Dickerson to be endured without the advantage of housekeepers and nannies.

I love my children. My wife knows I love my children. My job often takes me away from them -- but when it does and I call from the road and talk to them on the phone, I believe I hear in their voices that *they* know I love them. I suppose in the end only time will tell.

CC:

I thought your comment was really interesting. My mother was a real career person and always seemed a little too focussed on it (my dad left, and she had no choice) but like you, I loved it at the time of growing up, but then did resent it when my kids were little. Now she is 80 and she still works full time (she started her own business in retirement), and I love it again! I have so many friends who are now having trouble with their parents (because they are having medical problems or demand a lot of attention, etc.). My mom is very independent and busy and interested in things and keeps herself healthy. And is now more attentive to my kids - my sense is that she just is not a super "little kid" person - but she is great when you're an adult. So, your feelings may change.

I'm a big proponent of personal responsibility, but it is true that people handle things differently, even in trying to take responsibility for thier lives. While some may see on their own that problems in their childhood lead to problems they currently have and are strong enough to do what they need to do to overcome these challenges, many people need more of a support system, whether it be friends, a therapist, their spouse or whatever. I think what truly frees us of the problems from our past is forgiveness and responsibility. You forgive your parents (or whoever) for the ways you feel they wronged you, not for them necessarily but to allow yourself to let go of it (if you can't let go of these things will only fester), and then you take the responsibility upon yourself to make your life be what you want and to not pass on those same mistakes. For Mr. Dickenson, maybe this book is just his way of accepting his childhood and moving past it.

On outsourcing: To (no name)

So, if you think it's somebody's else's job to educate, coach, teach, raise and care for your kids, what exactly do you think the parents are responsible for?

Well, to work to make the money to pay for all that, of course!

Am I a sucker for thinking that most of the time (not all, obviously), but mostly parents are doing the best they think they can?
I disagree with a lot of parenting choices other people make, but even then, I realize that they are doing what they think is right (please don't bother to raise an example of: some people hit their kids and they think it's right - is that ok, too? I'm not talking about violence in any manner - emotional, physical, etc.).

Single Gal,
My point was that parents, very often, take your advice to instill self-worth, and end up creating center-of-the-universe children.
And your question re: parental responsibility has too many interpretations to reply.

"When my mom returned to full-time work when I was in elementary school, I too felt like she was neglecting me- which is perfectly natural for a little kid who thinks, as little kids do, that she is the center of the universe."

I think it's a mistake to equate our "natural" childhood responses with those of children born to narcissistic celebrities. The grandiosity of these people can push their kids right off the page. The kids' "stuff" is never as important as the celebrity parent's "stuff."

My mother was a SAHM and brought up three children. When I had my own daughter about 4 yrs ago, the emotions uppermost were wonder and gratitude towards here. I sometimes wish she could have done somethings differently, but hey, that's my opinion, not the reflection on her mothering capabilities. I firmly believe she did her best and I also firmly believe I am doing best for my daughter. Like the earlier poster said nobody can do better than their best.

I'm so annoyed that he absolves his father but lambastes his mother...for doing exactly the same thing. Why aren't men expected to do the same amount of parenting as the mother? It's one thing if the mother is a SAHM. It's quite another if they both work full-time. People should try to be fair and equal. Having a father in your life is just as important as having a mother. And paycheck does not equal father, by the way.

I'm also annoyed by the fact that he felt "broken" despite his mother's consistent attendance at his functions, doctor's appointments, etc. He should consider himself lucky that his mother even bothered to show up. There are many, many kids who would love to take ballet, martial arts, or join a sports team but whose parents either can't afford it, or refuse to allow their children to participate because they'd have to miss "The Amazing Race" in order to drive the kid to practice.

"So, if you think it's somebody's else's job to educate, coach, teach, raise and care for your kids, what exactly do you think the parents are responsible for?"

It's my job to be the parent. It's my daughter's dance teacher's job to teach her dance. My daughter enjoys it, but I don't know how to dance, so I hired someone to teach her. Oooh, how awful am I?!

I am not very good at math either, so I am happy to pay school teachers (via taxes) to teach her math and other subjects. Bad mommy!

My younger one loves her preschool, where she gets to paint, sing songs, and play with a bunch of other kids every day. Of course, if I were a GOOD mother, I'd make her stay home and play with me all day instead of her little friends. No fingerpainting except with mommy!

But would you believe, in spite of how much I have outsourced the raising of my children, these kids keep calling me "mommy" and when I say I love you they reply I love you too? I'm amazed they even know who I am, what with spending so many hours a day in preschool and school, away from me. It's a miracle, I tell you! A miracle!

But I'm sure you're own children are luckier, given that you spend 24 hours a day with them, 7 days a week. I'll bet those are some happy, well-adjusted kids there. Good for you.

I take issue with the title today. I don't believe the mom was a failure. The title itself feeds neuroses (plural of neurosis) and doesn't help us move forward.

I also don't see this guy writing as some cathartic effort. I see it as a way to make money.

to anon at 11:12

I'm laughing....!!! You have a good sense of humour.

I think some kids connect with some parents better than others, and vice versa. It's a personality thing. I'd love to know what Dickerson's siblings think!

"Am I a sucker for thinking that most of the time (not all, obviously), but mostly parents are doing the best they think they can?"

I don't think so. I think most of us are. That doesn't necessarily absolve us from responsibility when we really muck something up, or mean that we shouldn't be continually trying to improve things that we know we don't do well, but I do think it calls for a little compassion for ourselves, our parents, and other parents.

In response to the "outsourcing" comment: why is it always presumed that being home full-time with a parent is best for the kids? I know it's not for my daughter. Not from the "a happy mother makes a happy family" perspective (tho I believe that, too). But my daughter is an extreme extrovert who loves an audience, loves structure and order and discipline, loves gymnastics and dance and art and music -- she needs to be with other kids like I need air. I am very introverted, struggle with structure and order (ok, rebel against it -- had an overly organized and efficient mom), am completely incompetent in anything that requires artistic talent.

If my daughter stayed home, and if I were to try to provide the best environment for her to learn and thrive, I would have to somehow change my entire personality and become this organized, efficient, disciplined person, who joined lots of groups and went lots of places to give my daughter the interaction and experiences she needs (don't know how I'd learn to teach dance or gymnastics, but I gather some "outsourcing" is still socially acceptable). As much as I love her, I don't know how I could fundamentally change my personality like that. So for her, daycare/preschool is fantastic, because they already know how to do structure and rules, they have people who have actually studied early childhood education, she learns dance and gymnastics and Spanish from people who actually know how to do those things, she gets to do crafts and projects with people who actually like those kinds of things and know what things are appropriate for her age and development level, etc. etc. etc. To me, that was a no-brainer.

I'm NOT saying this is the same for all kids -- my son is very different, so maybe he will be one of those kids who would be happier at home with me. What I AM saying is that it's pretty presumptuous for anyone to conclude that one particular type of situation will work best for every family. Every person in this world has a different set of strengths and weaknesses and personality quirks. As a parent, your job is to figure out your child's, and then provide the best environment to meet your child's psychological needs. And sometimes, someone else may be better at some things than I am. I know that no one in the world will ever love my kids as much as I do. But I also know that she doesn't need to be with me 24/7 to be secure in that love.

I think the author of this book will be in for a big surprise someday, when his own children decide he did the parenting thing "wrong" too. I hope one of them writes a book, too, so he can see how it feels to be on the receiving end.

It is not fair of him to berate his mother in public for not being a perfect person. Nobody is perfect. If he needs therapy to get over it, he should have kept it private.

No matter what you do, your kids will never think you did everything right. That's normal. The author should shut up, get over it, and be a little more humble about his own personal limitations as a parent.

'I'm so annoyed that he absolves his father but lambastes his mother...for doing exactly the same thing'

I didn't actually read the book. Since the book is about his mother, I am curious...did he actually absolve his father or just not lambast him? Maybe the issues with his father weren't addressed because the book was about his mother?

Due to the high cost of living and falling wages, most people have to work -- whether they want to or not. Many moms (and dads) do not have the luxury of staying home. Why begrudge them a job they enjoy?

Megan - skiing was wonderful. My daughter will be 5 on Friday and it was a blast to watch her master the mountain. She's getting hard to keep up with, and it's a joy to see her face light up when she does something well and hear her singing her way down the slopes. Lots more snow happening now, yes?

Sorry for the aside, but it does relate to today's discussion somewhat. We do make an effort to spend time (a lot of time) with our children because we both work. They have asked for a family trip (skiing again) in lieu of gifts for the holidays. As a parent, I love the idea of spending extra time with them this way. We know we're not perfect and yes, we do the best we can. We watch our children rather anxiously to evaluate that they are happy and well-adjusted. It seems so now - they do well in school, are kind and caring, and well behaved. They seem happy. We have fun as a family. Will they still have issues and find fault with what we do? Absolutely! But, we are also raising children who think and evaluate things and I kind of hope they will look back at their childhood and make choices with their own children to do some things the same and others differently. I hope their big complaint is that we didn't have more time to spend together - it's my biggest complaint too. To answer a previous post that inquired about the effect of winning the lottery - I'd cut back dramatically but I doubt I'd quit my job. I would love to spend more time with my family but I'd go nuts during the day when they are all at school. But the liberty to take all school vacations off too - now we're talking.

dc mom --

Yes, I have advice from personal experience.

When I was seven, a similar thing happened to me. Unwisely, I made a silly comment about wishing my mother's friend was my mom. Not because I didn't love my mom (I truly did) but because, at that particular moment, the other lady was more fun to be around.

The comment got back to my mom, and she had a meltdown. Sobbed, took to her bed, wouldn't talk to me, etc. My entire world collapsed for a brief period of time, because I thought that I'd done something so unforgiveable that I'd lost my mother's love forever.

I'm nearly 50 now, and it's only been in the past year that I've related this incident in therapy and come to understand that it was a huge part of the attachment problems I've struggled with all my life.

My mom should have treated my stupid comment with the attention it deserved -- none. Instead, by making it a huge, dramatic scene, she ensured that I'd always carry it with me, a permanent catalyst for guilt and self-loathing.

So, in answer to your question, I would recommend doing exactly what you did. You did the best thing possible when you said, "Love you anyway" and let him leave the room. Your insight about his feeling comfortable enough in your affection to test you is right on target. If my mom had understood this, I might have spent less time hating myself over the past 43 years.

You sound like a wonderful mother; your son is very lucky.

"Not all parents did (or are doing) their best! It always annoys me when people say that. Some parents could really use a kick in the pants or a reminder that their child should be more important (working or not, I mean more important in terms of time and emotional connection). What might be more apt to say about a regrettable childhood is "It was what it was; you are right to have feelings of anger and sadness, but don't let it stop your life or your compassion for your parents."

Posted by: Rebecca | November 29, 2006 10:56 AM

No kidding! I really WISH all parents were doing their best. It is amazing to me the verbal and emotional abuse I see dished out to kids by their parents, IN PUBLIC! The grocery store is a big one and the mall, too. One parent I know said to me and several other parents that his young (11) son was a huge disappointment as well as other equally hideous things. I see stressed out parents yelling at their kids, dragging them by the arm, etc. I have relatives of my own, I am sorry to say, that have physically abused their children. We all have our moments. I am certainly not perfect and find myself apologizing for undeserved harshness at times.

As far as outsourcing, I was a huge advocate of homeschooling until I tried it (luckily when my child was not yet in kindergarten). I read tons on the subject, took CLASSES for pete's sake, and that kid was no more interested in my teaching her how to read than she was in eating lima beans. It wasn't pretty. On the other hand, she was inclined to learn from other people--just not me. I guess I was just too familiar to her. I opted to outsource and bond with her in other ways. We scrapbook together, for example, while she and her dad golf together.

To "the original just a thought":

It may be the case that most parents did or are doing the best that they can. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that someone "did their best" is meaningless. For some parents, if their efforts are really the best that they could offer, then they really,really shouldn't have become parents. And I don't think it's wrong to judge a parent harshly for being a bad parent, despite their claims that they "did their best."

FWIW, my mother was a bad parent (both physically and emotionally abusive). She should never have had children. And yet she often bemoans the fact that we're not close now, and her excuse when I tell her why is "Well, I did the best that I could." Sorry, that excuse cuts no ice when part of "doing your best" is, for example, telling your five-year-old that mommy and daddy are getting a divorce, and that she has to choose right now who she wants to live with (my parents never did get divorced, but my mom played that particular game on a regular basis).

More on the perspective from a child of the WOHM vs. SAHM:

My mom never worked outside the home when I was growing up, and still doesn't. All my friends' moms who didn't already work full time went back to college or worked part time by the time their kids were teenagers. I think my mom was just afraid to go back after being out of the working world for 20 years.

Once I entered the working world, I found that I could not find common ground talking to my mother about my job. That's when I turned to my dad.

To DC Mom: He didn't mean it. Remember, children don't have the skills to always communicate exactly what they mean, so don't take it literally.

I know it hurts though. Both my husband and I have been on the receiving end of a cold shoulder from the rugrats at different times. I don't make a big deal of it in front of them, but oh how it hurts to be rejected, even if 10 minutes later they love you again. We draw the line at any disrepectful comments toward mom or dad, but you're not required to say you like or love us.

Do people read entire comments on this blog or just pick phrases? To Rebecca, uyts and NewSAHM, I said at the end of my comment that I specifically was NOT REFERRING TO PHYSICAL OR EMOTIONAL ABUSE. If you are verbally abusing your child in public - that's emotional abuse and I wasn't including that in "trying their best." And NewSAHM, I'm so sorry you had to deal with a mother who shouldn't have had kids - but telling your kids they're going to have to pick which parent to live with because their folks are getting divorced would also qualify as emotional abuse, which would not fall under my previously specified "parents doing their best."
To review: "I disagree with a lot of parenting choices other people make, but even then, I realize that they are doing what they think is right (please don't bother to raise an example of: some people hit their kids and they think it's right - is that ok, too? I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT VIOLENCE IN ANY MANNER - EMOTIONAL, PHYSICAL, ETC.)
For crying out loud, this guy's mom showed up to his activities! My grandparents (and my grandma was SAHM), never went to my dad's activities.

My question is why does this guy have to write a book slamming his mother to the world? She's not alive to defend herself. It is so selfish on his part. Ok, he didn't have an ideal childhood. Most of us can look back and find things to complain about. So, do that complaining with friends, spouses, therapists, etc. What purpose does he serve to attack her in a book? He could have written a book on the notion of working moms in general, or of working moms in the 1960's vs. today. It seems like he wants a quick buck and will cash in on his famous mother.

To Name Withheld - your mom sounded a lot like mine who would blow things way out of proportion. It is one reason why I don't always handle crises situations very well - the role model I had was not the best.

But for a short time when my dd was very little I joined a local "Mom's Club". It turned out to be very cliquish and if you weren't a SAHM you were barely acknowledged. One thing I noticed is that they couldn't wait to get away from their kids for "Mom's Night Out", etc. and I on the other hand since I worked full-time wanted to do things with my child. But the glee with which they would plan those outings (no I'm not exagerating) always amazed me.

Well, it's always the mother's fault isn't it? I remember reading some of Christopher Kennedy Lawford's autobiography that came across my desk a year or so ago and he blamed his substance abuse problem on the fact that his mother never breasfed him. Granted, growing up in the dysfunctional Kennedy household must have been difficult, but I hardly think lack of breastfeeding was to blame.

I did read your entire comment. My point was simply that there are people who honestly believe that they are doing their best while actually screwing up badly, and that their belief shouldn't mean they get cut a lot of slack. The screw-ups need not rise to the level of abuse to inflict real harm, and I don't think all kids should necessarily dismiss those mistake just because mom or dad was doing their best.

My question is why does this guy have to write a book slamming his mother to the world?

Because he's looking for pity from a wider audience than just his spouse, friends, and therapist. Wants the whole world to feel sorry for him.

I agree it's despicable to tear apart a person who isn't alive to defend herself. He could have at least written it as fiction, changing names and identifying details. It still would have been therapeutic. I guess he wanted to use her name to get the most money possible out of his sob story.

Thank you so much for your advice and support! It is really something to think about.

I also realized that I should model for him the way I would like him to react if someone said that to him. Kids can be so mean and I constantly hear "You're not my friend!" on the playground. I'd love if he'd return "Well, you are still my friend" and just let it drop. Not as mellifluous as "sticks and stones . . ." but probably more effective!

When I was 8 years old, I was the fattest kid in my elementary school. Everybody made fun of me. . When I entered the 3rd grade, I began to lose weight., about 50 pounds in 3 months. I became so weak, I couldn't walk up a flight of stairs without resting.

The worst part though, was that I was constantly thirsty. Parched! And to make matters worse, my teacher only let us get up for a drink and go to the bathroom twice a day. that's when I learned to drink directly from the bathroom sink instead of using the water fountain, because the water fountain took too long and all the kids behind me would start up with the complaining and teasing.

Then I started wetting my bed. My parents made it a rule not to let me drink at night. So I would wait for hours in my bed until everybody fell asleep and then I would sneak into the bathroom for a drink. then I got caught and was spanked with a leather gbelt in the middle of the night for breaking the rule.

then I began urinating blood. I was afraid to tell anybody for fear that I would have to suffer more physical abuse for having something else wrong with me.

Sensing that there was something seriously wrong though, I did let my mother know about the bright red urine and she called the doctor and took me to the hospital. I was immediately diagnosed with juvinile diabetes. I was told I would never be able to eat anything with sugar again and have to take shots everyday. I wanted to die.

I have a difficult time understanding how my parents could possibly let me get so sick, especially after having 4 kids of my own. What the hell were they thinking??? to this day, I don't think I've forgiven them for what they did to me as a child.

so when you get home from work this evening, greet your family with delight, ask them how they are doing, and give them a big hug.

And if I ever catch one of you denying a simple drink of water to a child, I'll freak, and when Father of 4 freaks, it makes for a very, very disturbing sceen.

NewSAHM -"I don't think ALL [emphasis added] kids should necessarily dismiss those mistake just because mom or dad was doing their best."
What I wrote: "Am I a sucker for thinking that MOST [emphasis added] of the time (NOT ALL [emphasis added], obviously), but MOSTLY parents are doing the best they think they can?
When did "all kids" become equivalent to "most," "NOT all," and "mostly?"

NewSAHM,

As I see it, it is not about cutting bad parents slack. If you can accept and forgive it, it'll be an immense relief to the constant resentment you may feel for the parents. It is about you feeling whole, not condoning them.

'As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.' Abuse and neglect during the first formative years will, indeed leave scars for the rest of your life. Even rich people can be abused and neglected. You can't just 'pull up your socks and get on with life.' Check out 'Reactive Attachment Disorder' where mothers fail to bond with their children so the kids attach to inappropriate people or things. A lot of adopted and foster children have this, as well as kids raised by non-English-speaking housekeepers/nannies/au pairs/babysitters (they're all the same thing). Also, what about those guys who claim they were abused by perverted Catholic priests? All those legal claims would be thrown out if everybody could just 'pull up their socks.' It isn't that easy.

FO4,
I feel for you. I want to ask, however, how your parents could possibly have known your particular symptoms without/before you telling them? You were in upper elementary school. They weren't in the bathroom with you anymore. The only things they saw were bedwetting and weight loss. Bedwetting, back in the 60s when I was a kid, was believed to done intentionally...thus, the corporal punishment. The weight loss may have been seen with relief that you weren't going to be teased anymore. Finally, they may have just not wanted to believe anything could be wrong with their son.

I'm not absolving them, just wondering how/what they could have done things differently. What is the essential clue telling me they were 'bad?'

Ok, ok. I shouldn't have used the word "all." I'm sorry. :-)

And, for the record, I do think most parents are doing the best that they can for their kids. I even think that most parents I know are doing an acceptible to great job raising their children (at least, as far as I can tell from the outside) However, I stand by my opinion that good intentions can be meaningless in the face of some of the mistakes parents make.

To pittypat: I did not mean to be insensitive. But there is a difference between abusive childhoods and every day unhappiness about your child rearing. I think everyone can say there were things that were not ideal about their pasts. But more self reliant people, learn to deal with it by the age of 30. It is also entirely different to discuss issues in your childhood with a therapist, family, friends etc versus writing a book that does nothing but slam your parent. A parent who was visible to the outside world. If I wrote a book slamming my parents, no one would care because my parents are not famous. As far as slamming someone who is dead. In some cases I think that is OK. Like Joan Crawfords daughter wrote a book. But she was actually abused. And I think a bunch of adults that knew them agreed that she was abused. I think it was kind of good that she wrote that book. I mean, it would be very hard to take hearing only the Hollywood version of your mother when in reality she was a nightmare. But that is different then this book. This guy did not claim abuse. What he seems to be saying is that my mother was cold and basically disinterested in child rearing. That was probably true. But what is the point of writing a book about it? She is dead and can't even apoplogize for it now. The time to talk about it was when she was alive.

Leslie, have you considered a "book club" feature for the blog? Based on the comments from those who have read other reviews about Dickerson's complaints being more nuanced, I think this discussion would benefit if more people who had read the book could join in.

From the excerpt I read, I got the impression that Dickerson didn't credit his mother with his success because he didn't see her as a role model in a lot of respects. For instance, he seemed to very strongly disapprove of how closely she cultivated friendships with the subject of her stories: perhaps not surprising, if he saw her pursuit of those contacts as more time taken from him.

There but for the Grace of God go I.

I am not a Christian, but this is a phrase that resonates often in my mind, and it seems like something we could all stand to remember when criticizing others' parenting. I too have been appalled at some of the things I have seen other parents do, and I would never excuse their behavior; there is no excuse for abuse of any kind. But I also know that when I am stressed and exhausted I have had moments where I have come too close to yelling something horrible or otherwise exploding. And I also know that the stressors that I face are nothing compared to those that other people face - as so many posters are quick to harp on on this blog, my life is way easier than those with fewer resources and advantages.

My point isn't that what abusive or even just plain rotten parents do to their children is ok; my point is that it is worthwhile to remember that we are all susceptible to such human failings and that trying to understand why it happens and where it comes from is not only compassionate to another, but also helps us guide our own choices and behavior in a better way.

Ok, agreed :-) not a problem - you're right - my aunt is a loony and has abused my cousin for years and it drives me nuts when my dad says "she's doing the best she can." On the flip side, I truly believe my own folks have done the best they could, although their choices drive me crazy sometimes. :-) At least you seem thoughtful - I don't think you're kids will be writing something like this about you.

To the anonymous 12:02 poster - why does the language a care taker speaks matter? Now if the parent forbids the caretaker to talk to the child maybe, but otherwise does it matter if the expressions of affection are in English, Spanish, Swahli or something else? Especially during the early formative years when they are learning to speak - they just learn to talk in more than one language (normally considered a good thing)

Fo4,
Your story is tragic. I am so sorry. But then again, you turned out fine, perhaps better than fine, despite your childhood and clueless parents. Good for you for being a loving father and husband. Good for you for overcoming so many obstacles. And most of all, good for you for keeping your humor and sunny disposition. I do wonder if I would be able to forgive my parents in your situation. People sometimes unwittingly make awful mistakes.

I'm a 36 year old SAHM of two with a degree in International Relations. My mother had a master's degree and chose to stay home. I think she was a wonderful mother. She was available and supportive without catering to us. She cultivated independence yet attended our activites. She also made a life for herself that enriched her and the community. My mother volunteered for my school but also for our church and other community groups. My mother is now 70 years old and I have a hard time reaching her because of her various, mostly volunteer, activites.

I think she was a wonderful example of how to be a very present parent and keep a sense of self and idenity AND how to be a productive human being without generating a paycheck.

I think the societal contributions of SAHMs are often overlooked. When my children are in school full time, I don't know what I'll do but I know that following my mother's example I will do something of value that will be a positive example to my children.

Finally, just because someone works does not automatically mean they are more informed or interesting than a SAHM. A person who talks about their work all the time is no more interesting than someone who talks about the kids all the time.

Either type of mom can be a positive example. Its about how you choose to live your life.

Ah, Megan, always the voice of reason. :-)

Wow, Father of 4, I am so sorry that you suffered that way, and so impressed that you have gone on to be a wonderful father to 4 children.

My mom was at home all the time, and connected with us even though she spent most of her time doing housework. In a grownup way, not a friend way: i.e. we would talk about school, she would "pick me up" (homework drill) for my memorization tasks for the day, and (most importantly) always dropped what she was doing to explain the meaning of a word while I was reading. But I think she really missed having a career, and we could tell. I don't know that her having a career would have made us unhappy. She would have connected regardless, I think. In a way, I felt it was bad for us for her to be unhappy because it made us wary of marriage. It was probably better for us academically, though, to have her education and expertise at our constant beck and call. But was it necessary?

Father of 4

If you were beaten in the middle of the night with a leather belt, why in heaven's name did you move back in with your mother when you were married?

FS - Like the virtual book club idea. I could announce the book six weeks in advance and then on the appointed day we could all comment.

Any suggestions for books?

Fo4,
I was 20 when I developed JD - I lost 20 pounds very quickly and my friends all said how great I looked (I am female and was not overweight before), I was tired and thirsty all the time and I figured it was just allergies or a cold, I was getting up all night to pee, but that seemed natural since I was drinking so much water. Even when I started to loose my vision I just thought I needed new glasses (thank God that optomotrist knew better and probably saved my life, and my vision returned with good BG control). Please don't blame your parents for not recognizing the symptoms, I don't blame myself or anyone else.

I am glad this topic has come up on the blog, but I'd like to hear from more people who have read the book. You get a fuller appreciation of the arc of the relationship John had with his Mom, and how he was able to reconnect with her in a wonderful, compassionate and loving way.

I read this book after reading the Post book review, which to be honest I found to be a bit harsh. It's more nuanced and bittersweet that a "Mommy Dearest" rant.

Foamgnome & Pittypat -- The problem is that you can't judge what someone else feels is abusive. Sometimes mental cruelty is far more destructive (and insidious) than physical abuse. Hard to judge from the outside, hard to measure and quantify objectively.

So my question is: can't you just leave it up to the individual to discern what felt like abuse to them? This is part of being responsible for your self.

>Abuse and neglect during the first formative years will, indeed leave scars for the rest of your life. Even rich people can be abused and neglected. You can't just 'pull up your socks and get on with life.'

But was the author of this book really abused? His mother attended all his special events, saw to all his material and physical needs, but she wasn't particularly warm. That's "abuse"? My goodness. Guess I was abused, too. In fact, I'd bet a majority of the population could claim to be abused based on this definition.

>as well as kids raised by non-English-speaking housekeepers/nannies/au pairs/babysitters (they're all the same thing).

Care to back up this assertion with any data? Usually adults say outrageous things like this it's because they're uneasy that they can't understand the babysitter's other language (and there's a little racism there, too, I imagine). I speak very little Spanish, but my son has learned it easily from his sitter and I am not threatened by that. They have their songs and jokes in Spanish, and that's fine with me. (She speaks English, too, but we felt it would be an advantage for him he learn a second language.) He's appropriately attached to me and to his wonderful babysitter, thank you very much.

>Also, what about those guys who claim they were abused by perverted Catholic priests? All those legal claims would be thrown out if everybody could just 'pull up their socks.'

There is a huge difference between being sexually abused and simply having a parent who's not particularly warm and loving. By equating the two, you are trivializing the suffering of people who have genuinely been abused.

To Leslie: Of course we can leave it up to them. But we also have the right to think it wasn't abuse. Everyone is different. But if my daughter writes a tell all book about not getting the designer jeans that she wanted because she felt neglected, discarded, or abused, we would all laugh. Just as in this case, I would not laugh. But I would it hard to classify his depiction of his mother as abusive. In short, of course he is welcome to write a book. But be prepared to have your critics.

to Leslie at 12:32
Your comments are okay, but what about faulty memories, disagreements with parents, misunderstandings? This is not abuse.

by what you wrote, a kid who blames him parents for not getting him whatever he wants, could define that as abuse later on in life. He is not subject to mental cruelty...

ooops...foamgnome beat me to the submit key!

Also, what about those guys who claim they were abused by perverted Catholic priests? All those legal claims would be thrown out if everybody could just 'pull up their socks.'

Again, please read the whole post. I said Unless you were abused, .... It is entirely ridiculous to compare sexual, physical, or mental abuse with my mother was not a very loving and warm person.

Dotted;

When your kid doesn't want to go to the zoo because he says he's too tired, and its 10 o'clock in the morning... maybe there's something wrong.

If your kids fight with one another as to Not sit next to you... maybe there's something wrong.

If your kids scram out of your sight when you walk through the door after work... maybe there's something wrong.

When your kid never smiles anymore and starts crying for no apparent reason... maybe there's something wrong.

When your kid's clothes look like they are falling off him, maybe that pair of pants just stretched out an extra 5 sizes, but unless you've given him a hug in the last several months, maybe you wouldn't have noticed that he's lost a third of his weight since then.

When your kid comes home and the first thing he does is drink a half gallon of water everyday, maybe, just maybe, just possibly, the potassium in the celery he ate at lunch is making him a little more thirsty than usual...

DZ, children have an amazing capacity for forgiveness. For my own, I have no problem offering them an apology after I screw something up.

To fo4: I am really sorry for what happened to you. I think most people would have classified that situation as neglectful and maybe even abusive. But I don't think that is what Dotted is talking about.

"But more self reliant people, learn to deal with it by the age of 30."

Foamgnome,

I'm wondering where you got this statistic. Is 30 the official age of self-knowledge?

I don't disagree with everything you say here, but I think that you're probably pretty young and certainly a little inexperienced to make such claims.

Nobody's life follows a strict timeline. Human development is much more complex than that. Some people are still trying to work things out when they're over 70! Some, sadly, never do.

I think the important thing is to applaud anyone who decides to try to figure out the source(s) of their problems. It's hard work, and it's never too late to start.

Father of 4

Foregiveness is one thing, thrusting your family into a dysfunctional situation is another.

It seems to me that the mother was more neglectful and/or mentally absent than abusive.

Abuse is a term that means many