Craphead (aka Mommy)

I read an article not too long ago about a homeschooling couple and how people made all these assumptions about why they homeschooled. One point of the article was that there is a short answer and a long answer to all the assumptions and questions about why they homeschooled. 

Well, tonight I am thinking of that article because I feel very frustrated that so few people in my life know me well enough to know that almost all of my decisions are well thought out and researched (sometimes I tend to research things to death, partly as procrastination and partly out of fear of doing something new). Anyway, there is a short answer and a long answer for everything we do.

Why did we move from Phoenix to Illinois? 

Short answer: To be closer to family.

Long answer: To give our kids the family we had when we were growing up - that extended family where you spend lots of time with your grandparents and know your cousins and aunts and uncles. We wanted to be able to leave our kids with people who love them and people that we trust. We had a babysitter in Phoenix, but it was very hard to find one that we trusted and that was good. It made life difficult and made errands difficult. Perhaps we could have tried harder to find a good babysitter. Maybe we could have been less picky (HAH, did you read the rest of the post??). Even now that we have family to watch the kids, we hardly ever leave them with anyone. That’s another question and answer, though! There are other reasons we moved. We were tired of Phoenix (pollution, unsustainability, suburban life, our particular neighborhood). We wanted to live somewhere where we would have some privacy, be able to have our own chickens and other livestock, be able to grow our own food, and to have a place to build or own eco-friendly home. The question to why we want to do those things also have short and long answers, so you can see that this one question could start a long conversation about all kinds of things. 

Why don’t we vaccinate our children?

Short answer: We are not that worried about most of the diseases being vaccinated against, and don’t want to inject our children with chemicals that seem unnecessary.

Long answer: The first vaccine in the hospital would have been for Hepatitis B. This is a disease spread by bodily fluids, such as blood from IV drug users or sexual contact. We didn’t think that our newborn was going to be exposed to any of those things anytime soon, so we decided against that vaccine. Then we read up on the others and decided on each one on a case by case basis. Either the diseases were not that worrisome because a) they are so rare (such as polio), b) not that serious (chickenpox), c) there are risks and side effects of vaccines. Some diseases can be quite serious, such as measles, but the chance of catching them seem low (thank you to herd immunity, I guess!). Measles itself is not that dangerous. It used to be a normal childhood illness. That’s not to say that some people didn’t get really sick or die. Of course they did. But today the risk is more that doctors wouldn’t know what measles looks like so they wouldn’t treat it properly. Either way, it doesn’t matter because the chances are quite slim. It seems almost impossible to catch chickenpox these days, let alone measles. Rubella is a disease that is dangerous to pregnant women more than it is to children. I think that when Mo is of childbearing age I will talk to her about this vaccine. If they don’t ever get chickenpox, we might consider that vaccine when they are older.

Most of the illnesses that vaccines are intended to prevent can be prevented in other ways and can be treated naturally. This is especially true for people who have access to nutritious food and good healthcare. In our case, both kids were/are breastfed and did not go to daycare. We are very proactive in trying to prevent illness and we have good health care. The kids do not have any other serious health problems that would make some vaccines a good idea. In other words, they are not in a high-risk group and their immune systems work just fine, so why mess with a good thing? 

However, just because we do not vaccinate does not mean it is the right decision for everyone. I really think that everyone should inform themselves about each vaccine and make up their own minds. I believe in choice and I want mine to be respected and protected, just like the choice to vaccinate is (to be fair, in some circles it is not respected if you vaccinate, but I don’t agree with that either).

Why do our kids sleep in our bed?

Short answer: Because they feel safe and snuggled all night long.

Long answer: We didn’t exactly plan on having a family bed, but when Chico Habib was a baby, he wasn’t happy to sleep alone. Also, it made night feedings so much easier for both of us, once we got down the nursing-while-lying-down techniques. He slept better and so did I. There’s all kinds of research to back up family beds, too. People used to have family beds because that was all they could afford. Even when the older kids left the parent’s bed, they often shared a bed with their siblings. There’s an idea that the stereotypical caveman parent would have slept with the kids because of the threat of wild animals. There’s evidence that crib mattresses give of noxious fumes and that contributes to/causes SIDS. Also, it’s cheaper to have a family bed, especially if you consider the cost of a crib, the mattress, and all the other stuff that goes with having a crib. There are a ton of reasons to have a family bed, so who can pick just one reason? We never even bought a crib, but instead had a co-sleeper that would attach to the side of our bed. Now that the kids are older, we still have a family bed because the kids are not ready to leave our bed. They will leave it when they are good and ready and I see no reason to force the issue. I am warm and snuggled all night long. I wake up to my kids loving me, hugging me, snuggling me, and telling me they love me. Why would I choose differently? And if people are really asking because they want to know how, exactly, we have sex with a the kids right there? Well that’s what their bedrooms are for. DUH.

Why did we breastfeed and why am I breastfeeding an almost 4 year old?

Short answer: Breastmilk is best. Even Nestle agrees (even if it is only a marketing gimmick and because they have to say it!) 

Long answer: I only planned on trying to breastfeed. Once Chico Habib was here, though, I was determined to breastfeed. It was very, very hard at the beginning. We had to supplement. I had to pump. My milk came in late. I had very little to no support at the hospital (thankfully I wasn’t there very long).  Then I planned to breastfeed for 6 months. Then somehow I realized that at 6 months I’d have to switch to formula anyway (see how I decided something without even know what the fuck I was talking about? This is why I don’t do that anymore!), so why not breastfeed for a year? Then we got to a year and it seemed silly to wean abruptly because of some arbitrary reason (a birthday? Ok, kiddo time to give up the boob!). Then I read about how it is perfectly normal for kids to breastfeed for a few years, that even the World Health Organization recommends exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months and breastfeeding in addition to food for two years of age or beyond, that toddlers benefit greatly from nursing, including a benefit to their immune system, which works nicely when you choose to not vaccinate, and that extended breastfeeding also reduces the risk of breast cancer for the mother. 

Now Mo is almost 4 and I am letting her wean on her own. That does not mean she gets to nurse whenever and wherever. It just means that I’m not weaning her just because she reached some magical age where she should no longer have breastmilk. We do have limits and I will sometimes offer her other things, like a snuggle or food or water or whatever else I think might meet that same need. Sometimes it is draining and sometimes it is wonderful. It is what is it is. I have no regrets, but at the same time I do not think I will miss nursing once we are done. Some people do miss it. Some feel bittersweet when it ends. I get that and I would have felt that way myself but at this point I have been pregnant and/or nursing for almost 7 years. So, for me, I am happy with this decision. I am especially happy when Mo has a cold and I know the breastmilk helps her immune system.  

Why are my kids naked and/or barefoot so much?

Short answer: Because they want to be.

Long answer: Part of this answer is an extension of the short answer because for some people kids don’t get to make their own decisions and so that is another whole discussion about the personhood of children. The other part of the answer is that their feet get hot when they wear shoes. Their feet are tough and things like rocks don’t bother them. They like to be barefoot. They don’t want to take the time to put on shoes. Going barefoot is good for your feet, for your circulation, sensitivity, posture, balance, etc. My chiropractor told me that and I believe her. Some grown ups don’t like shoes. They wear flops until they absolutely have to put on some other kind of shoe (unless they live in Phoenix and can get away with flops year round!). I can get the kids to wear flops most of the time, but they kick them off as soon as they can: under tables, on the airplane, in the car. They don’t like shoes. That’s all there is to it. I personally think they are smart for this and I so wish that my feet were not so sensitive so I could go barefoot, too. Somehow I think the people at the grocery store would really have a fit with me going barefoot, which is totally a social class thing. The only people who don’t wear shoes are people who can’t afford them, right? It’s a social class bias to require shoes. Don’t be fooled. It is not about public safety or health. The fact that so many places require shoes is more a fear of lawsuits than because of any health hazard or danger to going barefoot. 

As far as clothing, my kids are naked most of the time that they are home. They also tend to strip down as soon as they are at either grandmother’s house. They know they have to wear clothes in public. They get that, but it’s hard to tell them why they have to wear clothes at home, isn’t it? But what about when people are visiting? Well sometimes I will tell them who is coming and that they might want to put on clothes. I might mention to them that someone is uncomfortable with their nudity if that is the case. Sometimes the person will mention it to them. Chico Habib once wanted to wrestle with our cousin (my cousin, their second cousin or whatever) and my cousin said he would, but he wanted Chico Habib to put on some shorts. Done. It was that easy and free of conflict or bad feelings. Now, apparently many of the adults we know are very concerned about the kids being naked around other people. My response to that is also a long answer, but I’ll try to keep it short. One, I am not worried about anyone calling DCFS/CPS. Two, I know who has seen my kids naked and I am not worried. Three, being uncomfortable with children being naked is really an issue with our culture and our own neuroses more than a problem with children being naked. Nudity is neither bad nor good. It’s our judgment of it that makes it bad or good. There’s a sociological theory about that, but it doesn’t matter what the theory is. Nudity is nudity. Having a problem with it is cultural or personal baggage. Besides, I don’t leave them with strangers when they are naked, now do I? 

Why do our kids not go to school?

Short answer: This one is probably the hardest to answer quickly. There are so many reasons that I pick one based on who I am talking to. Sometimes I talk about school culture. Sometimes I say I want the kids with me. Sometimes I say that I don’t think Chico Habib’s temperament is suited for public schooling. It just depends.

Long answer: We want our kids with us. I do not want to send them away for nearly 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. I don’t want their lives to be so structured and inflexible. I don’t want them to wake up, get dressed, get their things ready, grab their lunch, catch a bus, go to school, come home and do homework, play for an hour (if they are lucky), eat dinner, bathe, read books, go to bed. It’s fine for adults to have that kind of schedule and lack of free time, if they so choose, but it’s not what I want for my kids. School is like a full-time job. Kindergarteners have homework and get demerits. The focus is almost exclusively on reading, with other subjects going by the wayside. The curriculum is set by a board rather than by each teacher for that particular class. The teachers are almost forced to teach to a test rather than to teach to interests or to age-appropriate topics.There are bullies, there are too many students for each teacher in many schools, the school food sucks, there are chemicals used for cleaning, including bleach, there are silly rules to follow, decision making is not encouraged. There are zero-tolerance/zero-discretion laws. I think that schools are institutions that are really good at teaching kids how to live and work in other institutions, such as schools, hospitals, corporations, the government, and prisons. They are not good at teaching kids to be artists, inventors, free-thinkers. I’m sure there is more I could say about my objections to school culture, but that’s probably sufficient. In short, learning is not fun for most kids and I am sure that Chico Habib, in particular, would hate school. 

I think that if Chico Habib were in school, he would get into trouble because he would want to talk. He would want to give answers and ask questions. He would hate the busywork of worksheets. He would hate having to raise his hand, he would hate being told he couldn’t go to the bathroom. He would hate the singing and dancing. I’ve taken him to the library for things like that and he hates it. Waiting in line is not fun (and only something you have to do in an institutional setting, it seems). I would probably be told that he was dyslexic and has ADHD. Who knows. I don’t know for sure, but I do know my child and I know that school is not right for him.

I also want my kids close to me. I want them attached to us, oriented to us. I don’t want them affected by peer culture and peer pressure. I want to hold onto my kids. This can be done when they are in school. It’s true because I see my sister-in-law do it. She is quite attached to her kids and in tune with them. I just don’t think that it would be easy for us to stay connected as a family if the kids were in school. This is not to say that I don’t want my kids to have playmates. I do want that, but I also want them to look to us, their parents, when they are uncertain of what to do or how to behave. That would be much better than their classmates for so many reasons. 

Another reason is that I’m lazy. I’ve heard a friend make this same argument about why she doesn’t think she is suited to homeschooling. The difference is that friend is naturally outgoing and gregarious. I am not. And since I think that the key to a good public school education is for the parents to get involved, you can see how I might think that wouldn’t work well for me. For me, it would be hard to get to know the teachers, to get to know other parents, and to get involved. Or, at least it would be much harder than keeping the kids with me and organizing arts and crafts or trips to museums and the like. That, of course, is part of why we are unschooling.

What is unschooling and why are you doing it?

Short answer: Honestly, most of our family doesn’t really know this is what we are doing or at least they don’t really know the name for it. I think if people have heard of this and know me, then they get it enough to not have to ask.  The short answer is that Chico Habib only learns what he is interested in learning. Sitting down and "teaching" him doesn’t work. That is what led us to unschooling.

Long answer: Unschooling is called many other things: world schooling, whole life learning, child-led learning, among others. The point is for the child to guide the learning. This doesn’t mean the parents don’t do anything, it just means that we don’t do worksheets or curriculum (unless that it is the child’s request). What we do is facilitate. We take them places, read them books, go to libraries and museums, talk about things all the time. The whole world is full of opportunities to learn. When the kids ask questions, we answer them. We will give long or short answers, depending on how much they want to know and how interested they are. Sometimes we will volunteer relevant information, again giving as much or as little as they are interested in. The idea here is that people (not just children) learn best when they are interested. If they are not interested or their brains aren’t ready, they will not learn. It’s really quite simple! Now, some kids can do fine in school or with structure or whatever. But some don’t and unschooling works really well for them. 

For me, the biggest problem with unschooling is that it seems like you always have to "prove" that your kids are learning. To me, it’s obvious that they are learning all the time, every day from all sorts of media. But sometimes people want to know more. So we end up telling them about a conversation we just had about fractions or princesses or castles or trains. We’ll share some awesome thing one of the kids said. I hate this part. I really do because I feel scrutinized. If they were in school people would not even ask, it seems. They would take it for granted that the teachers are testing them and that if they weren’t learning (as if a test can accurately measure all that someone has learned!) we would be informed by the teacher. But when everyone in the family is a learner and a teacher, it’s enough to make some people’s heads explode, I guess. And yet, lots of people get it. Our farmer gets it. My grandpa, my sister-in-law, even people who would never choose this for their family still get it.  

Why do you want to be with your kids all the time? Why don’t you leave the with someone so you can do something fun?

Short answer: Again, this is not a question anyone really would ask. But I suspect that there are people in our family who do not understand. They don’t understand that I do not leave the kids overnight. I just don’t. I leave them with their dad, Krimboor, or a grandma for a few hours at a time. There have been occasions where I was gone for several hours, but that has only been a handful of times. The short answer is that I love my kids.

Long answer: The long answer is more complicated because everyone loves their kids. Don’t they? OK, well I assume they do and I realize that is naive on my part, but let’s go with that assumption anyway. I don’t leave them with others very often because everyone else works. My mom, my mother-in-law, my aunt, my sister-in-law all work. Everyone works, it seems. I don’t love my kids more just because I want to be with them. It’s just that I don’t want to miss things. I want to take care of them. I want to watch them learn and discover new things. I want them to know that I am there for them, to comfort them, to be their compass in life. It’s hard to be someone’s compass if you hardly ever see them. They make me laugh and we have fun together. At least we do most of the time, but no matter how hard the day might be, no matter how frustrated or tired I am, I still want to be with my kids. I do need time to myself. I do need quiet time. This is true, but if I could get that and be with my kids at the same time, I would never leave them. They are the most wonderful, beautiful creatures I have helped to create. And this answer is not nearly as long as it could be, but honestly it’s too hard to explain. Either you get it or you don’t, and if you don’t then I can’t really explain it to you.