Parenting

Subterms

    Latest story

    100 Shares179 Views

    Is Paying Kids to Read a Wise Strategy?

    by

    More from our inbox:Trump and the Psychiatrists: Is He Unfit to Serve?The Folly of a Second DebateA Heartwarming Story of Immigrants in the Heartland Tara BoothTo the Editor:Re “To Persuade a Reluctant Tween to Read, Try Cash,” by Mireille Silcoff (Opinion guest essay, Sept. 8):While I appreciate Ms. Silcoff’s desire to have her daughter experience the joys of reading, I seriously doubt that paying her daughter to read “worked.” While the monetary reward persuaded her daughter to read the book in the short term, it was unlikely to facilitate the motivation to read, which must feel like a choice and unpressured.Decades of research have shown that paying people to do things they love undermines their subsequent motivation, and paying them to complete tasks they do not enjoy keeps the motivation tied to rewards so that they are less likely to value the activity and choose to engage in it on their own.The belief in rewards as an effective motivator is a myth; other strategies are more likely to facilitate long-term motivation. Rewards are a simple fix that is likely to backfire.Wendy S. GrolnickLongmeadow, Mass.The writer is professor emeritus of psychology at Clark University and co-author of “Motivation Myth Busters: Science-Based Strategies to Boost Motivation in Yourself and Others.”To the Editor:I loved this guest essay because that’s precisely what I did 20 years ago when my husband and I traveled for our yearly two-week vacation to the beach with my daughter, two nephews and three other children who often vacationed with us.I offered each child a new book of their choice and $20 if they finished it before the trip was over. All of the kids got the $20 to use during two hours on their own at souvenir shops, and this reading challenge became a standard of our summer vacations.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Sean Combs and the Limits of the ‘Family Man’ Defense

      by

      On Monday, Sean Combs was arrested in Manhattan on racketeering and sex trafficking charges. If he’s convicted of the racketeering charge, it could potentially land him a life sentence. His legal team defended him that day with references to his role as a father. “Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs is a music icon, self-made entrepreneur, loving family man and proven philanthropist who has spent the last 30 years building an empire, adoring his children and working to uplift the Black community,” they said in a statement. “He is an imperfect person, but he is not a criminal.”Combs has pleaded not guilty to these charges. Last year, after being accused of sexual assault in four separate lawsuits, Combs defended himself in part by invoking his family: “Let me be absolutely clear: I did not do any of the awful things being alleged. I will fight for my name, my family and for the truth.”The latest charges are vile, describing years of sexual and physical abuse, enabled by Combs’s vast fortune and the pull of his celebrity. The government outlines the way Combs and his staff allegedly used their power to “intimidate, threaten and lure female victims into Combs’s orbit, often under the pretense of a romantic relationship. Combs then used force, threats of force and coercion to cause victims to engage in extended sex acts with male commercial sex workers.”Combs was denied bail on Tuesday. His lawyers tried to appeal the decision with a letter to the judge. In this missive, Combs’s lawyers paint “victim 1” as simply a jilted, lonely lover. “That one person was an adult woman who lived alone, who never lived with Sean Combs. She had her own friends, she had her own life, as adults tend to do. Mr. Combs and this person were very much in love for a long time,” the letter states. “This one person often expressed anger and jealousy because Mr. Combs had another girlfriend, as will be testified to by many witnesses and as the written communications show.”Despite the fact that the world has seen video evidence of Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, his lawyers seem to believe that pitting Combs, a “loving family man,” against an “adult woman who lived alone” would be an effective defense.They’re trying it because, to some extent, we still assign a positive moral value to getting married and having children. It’s why Republicans keep using Kamala Harris’s lack of biological children to attack her character. Combs’s lawyers are also likely playing on built in prejudices against Black women in particular, who have always had a harder time being seen as respectable, aspirational or worthy of protection in the public eye.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Sarah Huckabee Sanders Jabs at Harris for Not Having Biological Children

      by

      Introducing former President Donald J. Trump at a town-hall event in Michigan on Tuesday, Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders of Arkansas extolled the virtue of humility in politics with an amusing story: She once teared up while watching her daughter get ready for a father-daughter dance, and her daughter said, “It’s OK, Mommy, one day you can be pretty too.”“So my kids keep me humble,” Ms. Sanders said. Then, mispronouncing Vice President Kamala Harris’s name, she added, “Unfortunately, Kamala Harris doesn’t have anything keeping her humble.”The comment was widely interpreted as a reference to Ms. Harris not having biological children; she has two stepchildren. Coming from a surrogate for a campaign whose vice-presidential nominee, Senator JD Vance of Ohio, has been criticized for his past description of Democratic leadership as “childless cat ladies,” Ms. Sanders’s remark quickly prompted bipartisan backlash, including from Bryan Lanza, a senior adviser to the Trump campaign.Mr. Lanza said on CNN that the remark was “actually offensive” and that he was “disappointed in Sarah.”Several Democratic-aligned groups highlighted the remark on social media, including the super PAC American Bridge 21st Century, Young Democrats of America and Republican Voters Against Trump. So did TV commentators.“Whoa,” Mika Brzezinski said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Wednesday. “What is their obsession with women without children of their biological connection?” A spokeswoman for Ms. Sanders did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Neither did Ms. Harris’s campaign.Kerstin Emhoff — the ex-wife of Ms. Harris’s husband, Doug Emhoff, and the mother of Ms. Harris’s stepchildren — defended Ms. Harris.“Cole and Ella keep us inspired to make the world a better place,” she said in a social media post, referring to her children. “I do it through storytelling. Kamala Harris has spent her entire career working for the people, ALL families. That keeps you pretty humble.”Mr. Vance has raised eyebrows on the matter of parenting before. In 2021, he said that perhaps parents “should have more of an ability to speak your voice in our democratic republic than people who don’t have kids,” a suggestion that he later said was a “thought experiment” and not serious.He has also said he wasn’t disparaging women without children, while doubling down on describing Democrats as “anti-family.”His “childless cat ladies” remark has become something of a cultural phenomenon among supporters of Ms. Harris. In one sign of its continuing resonance, Taylor Swift used it to sign off her endorsement of Ms. Harris last week. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      How Does Pregnancy Change the Brain? Clues Are Emerging.

      by

      As hormones surge, some brain areas shrink in what scientists say may be a fine-tuning that helps mothers bond with and care for their babies.Research is revealing intriguing clues about how pregnancy changes the brain. Studies scanning women’s brains before and after pregnancy have found that certain brain networks, especially those involved in social and emotional processing, shrink during pregnancy, possibly undergoing a fine-tuning process in preparation for parenting. Such changes correspond with surges in pregnancy hormones, especially estrogen, and some last at least two years after childbirth, researchers have found.A new study, published Monday in the journal Nature Neuroscience, adds to the picture by documenting with M.R.I.s brain changes throughout one woman’s pregnancy. It confirms previous results and adds detail, including that white matter fibers showed greater ability to efficiently transmit signals between brain cells, a change that evaporated once the baby was born.“What’s very interesting about this current study is that it provides such a detailed mapping,” said Elseline Hoekzema, a neuroscientist who heads the Pregnancy and the Brain Lab at Amsterdam University Medical Center and has helped lead studies analyzing brain scans of more than 100 women before and after pregnancy.Dr. Hoekzema, who was not involved in the new study, said it showed that along with previously documented “longer-lasting changes in brain structure and function, more subtle, transient changes also occur.”Dr. Ronald Dahl, director of the Institute of Human Development at the University of California, Berkeley, who was not involved in the new study, said the emerging research reflected the key role of hormones in transitions like puberty and pregnancy, guiding neurological shifts in priorities and motivations.“There is that sense that it’s affecting so many of these systems,” he said. The study participant, Elizabeth Chrastil, is a neuroscientist at the University of California, Irvine. She became pregnant in 2019, at 38, after in vitro fertilization. That allowed precise tracking of her pregnancy from the start.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump to Speak at Moms for Liberty Convention

      by

      Last year, the former president told the group it was time to “liberate our children from the Marxist lunatics and perverts” in education. Does that message still resonate with voters?Former President Donald J. Trump is set to speak Friday evening to a gathering of Moms for Liberty, a conservative activist group whose priorities mirror much of his own education platform.Like Mr. Trump, they have called for stricter classroom discipline and vouchers for private school tuition and home-schooling costs. They want to ban certain books and cut funding to schools that embrace progressive ideas on gender and race, while slimming down or even closing the federal Department of Education.But as his presidential campaign leans heavily on cultural divides over gender, parenting and education, there have been signs of voter weariness, and questions over whether social issues in schools are still energizing voters.“Is this a wave that’s on the decline?” asked Julie Marsh, a professor at the University of Southern California who has studied school board elections. “We’re perhaps seeing signs of parents being turned off by some of this.”Mr. Trump’s appearance in Washington, D.C., is his second time speaking at the annual convention of Moms for Liberty, which was founded in 2021. He has embraced the group’s rhetoric, telling convention attendees last year that he would “liberate our children from the Marxist lunatics and perverts who have infested our educational system.”In the past several months, Mr. Trump has floated provocative ideas like allowing parents to elect principals and creating an alternative credentialing body for teachers who embrace “patriotic values.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      5 Things School Nurses Say Parents Are Doing Wrong

      by

      The stalwarts of children’s health shared their tips and gripes.Carren Teitelbaum, a school nurse in Ramapo, N.Y., once had a student stumble into her office with a 102 degree fever. Mrs. Teitelbaum called his mother, who said she’d given her son Tylenol that had likely worn off and that she could come give him more.“That kind of thing is extremely frustrating,” Mrs. Teitelbaum said. “And it’s not an isolated incident.”Most parents are aware that fevers are a symptom of communicable viruses, and it’s best to keep their children home when they have one. But on short notice, many parents can’t stay home from work, leaving school nurses to care for sick and contagious children.Sending feverish kids to school is just one miscalculation school nurses say parents make. The New York Times spoke with 14 school nurses across the United States who shared other common mistakes. “Some of these things are common sense,” said Mrs. Teitelbaum, “but I find that what makes sense for me may not make sense for somebody else.”They leave the school nurse in the dark.Parents might inform a new teacher about their child’s health but many forget to tell the school nurse, Mrs. Teitelbaum said.Last year, a student with a bad headache visited Anna Etlinger, a school nurse in Cook County, Ill. After calling the boy’s mother, Mrs. Etlinger learned he experiences migraines that cause vomiting without medicine. But public school nurses generally can’t administer most medications without parental consent and permission from a licensed health care provider.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Texas Parents Fed Smoothies to Sick Daughter Who Later Died, Police Say

      by

      Miranda Sipps, 12, suffered for four days before dying while her mother and stepfather failed to seek medical treatment for her, the authorities said. Both are charged with a felony.A Texas mother and stepfather failed to seek medical assistance for their sick daughter and instead fed her smoothies as she battled life-threatening injuries for four days before she died on Monday, according to the Atascosa County Sheriff’s Office.The parents, Denise Balbaneda, 36, and Gerald Gonzales, 40, of Christine, Texas, “basically confessed” by telling the authorities how their daughter, Miranda Sipps, 12, was injured and that they had failed to act, Sheriff David Soward said at a news conference Wednesday. They were both arrested and charged with causing serious injury to a child by omission, a first-degree felony, the sheriff’s office said in a news release.“They thought they could nurse her back to health,” Sheriff Soward said Wednesday. “We do not think they wanted the attention that this would draw to them if the little girl was injured — which is strangely ironic.”For four days, the injuries that Miranda suffered left her unconscious and she was able only to “flutter her eyes and move her hands a little bit,” Sheriff Soward said. Instead of seeking medical attention, Ms. Balbaneda and Mr. Gonzales had her lie “on a pallet” and tried to feed her smoothies which she could not swallow, Sheriff Soward added.Miranda did not have any broken bones but authorities would not provide details about how the girl was injured or the nature of her injuries. Sheriff Soward said that the charges could change as more information is revealed.Efforts to reach Ms. Balbaneda and Mr. Gonzales for comment on Thursday were unsuccessful and it was unclear if they had legal representation.At around 8 p.m. Monday, Ms. Balbaneda, who was in a vehicle with her daughter, called 9-1-1 and was met by dispatchers on the side of a highway in Atascosa County near their family’s home in Christine, about 45 miles south of San Antonio, according to the sheriff’s office. The child was alive but unconscious and died in the hospital two hours later, it said.Sheriff Soward, who confirmed there had been “calls for service” to the couple’s home in the past, said that he felt that the couple did not want the police coming to their home. He described the home as “untidy, unkept, sort of dirty.”Monday was the first day of school for the Jourdanton Independent School District, where Miranda attended junior high school and was a cheerleader.“The Jourdanton ISD is currently dealing with the tragic loss of one of our Jr. High students,” the district said in a statement. “In our Junior High library, we made counselors available for anyone who may need or want help or assistance.”A GoFundMe post apparently from Miranda’s aunt, Pricilla Chapa, has raised about $2,000 for her funeral.“She was taken from us far too soon in an unexpected way,” the post read, “leaving behind a legacy of love, laughter, and memories that we will cherish forever.” More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      ‘I Was a Childless Cat Lady’: Women Respond to JD Vance

      by

      More from our inbox:Clearing Homeless EncampmentsFood and Gas PricesThe Roger Maris FireThe selection of Senator JD Vance of Ohio as former President Donald J. Trump’s running mate was supposed to appeal to women, voters of color and blue-collar voters, but a stream of years-old comments has threatened to undermine that.Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Past Comments Fluster Vance as Democrats Go on Offense” (front page, July 29):JD Vance, the Republican vice-presidential nominee, said in 2021, “We’re effectively run, in this country, via the Democrats, via our corporate oligarchs, by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made, and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable, too.”I would say this to Mr. Vance:I was a childless cat lady: three cats, no kids.I thought fertility was a given. There was no medical reason I couldn’t have children. Yet it did not happen. Three cats. A great career. No kids.I was, in effect at 38, a “childless cat lady.”I pursued fertility treatments. Treatments that many Republicans want to ban.I had painful tests, surgeries, running to the lab — five vials of blood drawn every day at 6 a.m. — then rushing to work for a minimum 12-hour day.Childless cat lady lawyer. Meow.I had one fabulous child at 38 with I.V.F. She was a triplet, but I lost my daughter’s siblings.I was pregnant three other times. I lost two other babies at four months. I needed a D and C: same procedure as an abortion. If I didn’t have the surgery, I would have died.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Fewer U.S. Adults Say They Will Have Children, Study Finds

      by

      A new study breaks down the reasons more U.S. adults say they are unlikely to have children.When Jurnee McKay, 25, imagines having children, a series of scary scenarios pop into her mind: the “horrors” of childbirth, risks associated with pregnancy, a flighty potential partner, exorbitant child care costs.Abortion care restrictions are also on her list of fears. So Ms. McKay, a nursing student in Orlando, decided to eliminate the possibility of an accidental pregnancy. But the first doctor she consulted refused to remove her fallopian tubes, she said, insisting that she might change her mind after meeting her “soul mate.”“For some reason,” she said, “society looks at women who choose not to make life harder for themselves as crazy.”Next week, she will speak with another doctor about sterilization.Like Ms. McKay, a growing number of U.S. adults say they are unlikely to raise children, according to a study released on Thursday by the Pew Research Center. When the survey was conducted in 2023, 47 percent of those younger than 50 without children said they were unlikely ever to have children, an increase of 10 percentage points since 2018.When asked why kids were not in their future, 57 percent said they simply didn’t want to have them. Women were more likely to respond this way than men (64 percent vs. 50 percent). Further reasons included the desire to focus on other things, like their career or interests; concerns about the state of the world; worries about the costs involved in raising a child; concerns about the environment, including climate change; and not having found the right partner.The results echo a 2023 Pew study that found that only 26 percent of adults said having children was extremely or very important to live a fulfilling life. The U.S. fertility rate has been falling over the last decade, dipping to about 1.6 births per woman in 2023. This is the lowest number on record, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And it is less than what would be required for the population to replace itself from one generation to the next.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More