ok i know this sounds really weird coming from some one who is still in high school, but, start with the basics, and ask around. go at the speed of your child (or children) and try to put a good back ground in spelling and multiplication. so good luck with homeschooling----Utsi15
The one-on-one nature of homeschooling is very attractive. Clearly, the home teacher considers his/her one student to be the most important student in the world. All resources are devoted to this one learner. This often produces remarkable and spectacular results.
However…
There is one salient fact that hasn’t been mentioned. The public school must take everyone who shows up. That would be great if they all were well-fed, had supportive homes, were motivated internally and externally, and had involved parents. Sadly, that’s not the case. School’s don’t send kids home because they might be tough to teach. We get 'em all. We don’t pick the kids. If we could weed out just the unmovitated or special-needs kids (not that we should), public school’s results would be incredibly spectacular. When you compare public schools to private schools and homeschooling, you must remember that public schools don’t pick the kids. EVERYONE ELSE DOES!
Now, with homeschooling, you take motivated kids and motivated parents out of the public school. Imagine if those homeschooling families pooled their resources and attention on the public school. Volunteer. Get involved in your child’s classroom. Know the teacher. Even the poor teachers have good points. Use all of that considerable energy to try to improve the existing schools. With the energy of the parents and the (somewhat) deeper financial resources that a public school can bring to bear, I assure you that great results will be achieved.
Look at successful schools (of any type) and you will see what makes them successful: students ready to learn, involved families, committed professional teachers, a solid support staff, and a real committment from the community to see their schools succeed.
Instead of pulling the best kids out of school, put them and YOURSELF in.
AAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!
Drum God, now I’ve let fly with my gut reaction to your incredibly simplistic approach to why some parents pull their kids out of school… I’m invested in my children. I’m not invested in the public school system. The public school system has let my kid down very badly once but seems to be doing better this time around. I can’t fix the public school system in my spare time as a parent of a child with extraordinary needs. Some of those needs can be met in a school which is prepared to be flexible. A lot of schools are not prepared to be flexible and thus the parents make the choice for the benefit of their individual child. IMO it is immoral to sacrifice my child for the good of the whole.
I know many many dedicated parents who are homeschooling gifted kids. Why? Because they did what Drum God suggested and it didn’t work for their child. Parents can’t fix the schools unless the schools and the community are willing to change. What I see as being wrong for my child in a school environment wouldn’t be an issue for my next door neightbour. I don’t believe that schools are the best environment for all children. My kid’s back in school by his own choice as a trial. I don’t expect he’ll be there full time for the rest of his school career because if he is given a poor teacher, I’m not gonna be looking for good points ;). As it is, I think his teacher is doing damage to him but he’s committed to this trial so ::shrug::
DG, I appreciate your point. And that approach is precisely what my wife and I intended doing, for exactly the reasons you mention. We’ve been preaching the gospel of parental involvement for years, and have spent the last few years trying to convince others in our neighborhood that by getting involved in the local schools we can make them better for all of us, instead of just moving even farther out into the suburbs as so many families in our neighborhood do when their kids reach school age. Unfortunately, it’s been made very clear to us and to numerous other parents in our neighborhood that the principal of our local elementary school DOES NOT WANT any degree of parental involvement – at least not from the more affluent families in the area. She’s been nearly as blunt as coming right out and saying it. Her attitude is that she needs to devote all her attention to the more disadvantaged, transient kids among the population, and the more affluent kids are going to do well anyway.
It’s truly bizarre the lengths this woman will go to to alienate neighborhood parents. One of my neighbors is involved with a charitable program that works through the schools to identify kids in need and provide them with clothing, school supplies, etc. This principal refuses to allow her school to have anything to do with this program (while other principals are practically beating down my neighbor’s door to participate). I’m not sure why she won’t even allow parents to be involved in helping the population she claims to be so concerned about, though several anecdotes about her have given me the impression that she wants parents and others she perceives as “outsiders” to have as little direct involvement and opportunity to observe what happens in the school as possible. I’m beginning to believe, though I’d rather not, that the transient nature of so many of the kids provides her with a convenient excuse for not being more successful at improving the school, and that extensive parental involvement would mean she’d have to work harder than she’s willing to do.
As I think I mentioned, my wife taught for several years at the elementary level. Most of that time was at a school that was very similar in many respects to our local school. The population was about one-third kids from affluent, well-established neighborhoods, about one-third black kids bused in from other parts of Atlanta, and about one-third kids from immigrant families (Hispanic and Asian, mostly) who lived in cheap apartment complexes nearby. That school did two things right, IMHO: it embraced the affluent neighborhood parents and did everything possible to keep them involved and invested in the school, and it turned the diverse nature of the student body into an asset, arranging to be designated as the Atlanta Public School System’s “international” elementary school and creating special programs centered around that. The other two-thirds of the parents might not have done much, but the neighborhood parents made sure that the school never lacked volunteers or funds. Because they were so deeply involved, and because the principal sought out the opinions of parents whenever possible, the neighborhood parents felt a strong proprietary interest in the school, and it remains a very strong school today.
Unless there’s a change in the principal’s office of our local public school in the next year or so, we’re going to have to think long and hard about whether to send our son to a private school or homeschool, not because we’re opposed to public education or because we’re religious zealots but because it may present the only affordable alternative to an unacceptable situation in our local school – a situation that we aren’t able to change through involvement, since our involvement is rejected. We have hope, since there’s a persistent rumor that this prinicipal is on the verge of retiring, but nothing’s happened yet. If it does, we’ll be at the new principal’s door right away to try again.
Whoa. Not what I’d call a great marketing campaign for homeschooling.
Very interesting topic, but I think it would be a better fit in the “Great Debates” forum at this point. So here it goes. - Jill
[Edited by JillGat on 07-08-2001 at 12:33 AM]
Primaflora: You are certainly correct that I made a simplistic statement about why people take kids out of the public school. Each family must make the best decision they can for their situation. There would certainly be a variety of reasons for making that decision. I simply want to encourage people to stay involved in their local schools rather than write them off.
Of course, rackensack points out that this involvement is not always welcomed by school officials. That is tragic. As a teacher, I cannot imagine working with a principal that instructs me to avoid contacting my greatest resource. How frustrating that must be.
I can only imagine that your principal is a control-freak. Some people cannot stand to allow people to work together without constantly involving themselves. While every group requires a leader, that leader should allow everyone on the team (teachers, parents, students, aides, etc.) to work to their best ability. Your principal is working against the very population she has pleged to serve.
Have you tried working up the chain-of-command? Principal’s have bosses, too. Try her supervisor. Go to school board meetings. Be the squeeky wheel.
**
As if kids don’t have a life outside of school? There are plenty of other places to meet people your age outside of school.
**
Well let’s face it those with any real knowledge wouldn’t waste their time as teachers. Oops, that was a complete generalization wasn’t it?
**
We could make similiar arguements against public schools. Sure they learn how to use condoms and that drugs are bad. But do they really learn history, social science (whatever that is), chemistry, algebra, and geometry?
That being said I’m not really a big fan of home schooling. The area I lived in would have to have a pretty piss poor public school system and no private schools before I’d consider it. I’d probably try to move to another school district before I home schooled.
Marc
And yet there are quite a few people who aren’t plumbers, electricians, or carpenters who do this sort of thing. I’m not a plumber but I replaced my own water heater in the garage. I didn’t know how when I started but I got a book and figured it out.
Marc
Home schooling is as selfish as it gets.
There is a whole world out there. This world exists beyond your living room. It exists beyond your pristine children. It exists beyond the white picket fence you would like to build around them.
There is a world of children who don’t have their own beds to sleep in. There are children who are held back grades because their parents can’t get them to school on time. There are children whoes parents see no value in education. There are children who come to school hungry- who steal from others to quite their growling stomachs. This sounds rather melodramic. Indeed, it is. But it is not an exaggeration. I went to school with these children. At times, I was one.
I grew up in a public houseing project in a neighborhood where property values were dropping almost as the crime rate was rising. I was poor. Not quite destitute, but poor enough to know what a food stamp looks like and understand that the American-dream world shown on TV didn’t apply to us. I was also a gifted student. My mom was going to send me to a private school, but she decided not to after she relized that I would always feel the sting of poverty there.
Instead she sent me off to the dreaded public school- where I lived a life blissfully ignorant of the fact that I was poor. My friends were the same people I lived around- Polish and Vietnamese immigrints, African-Americans, white trash and all combinations thereof. When I went off to college, it was the shock of my life. Suddenly everyone around me was white, everyone had scads of money, and nobody knew even the simplest things like how to ride a bus! Meanwhile, all the rich white college students around me were having trouble copeing with the fact that there is a world that exists outside of the affluent monotone that they knew. I can leave you to guess who was better prepared for the world outside of our parents’ houses.
Not that my schools were okay. I can honestly say that I learned nothing at all in my four years of high school, except for pottery. I dealt with huge classes, incompetent teachers, clubs and classes with no funding whatsoever, and every single one of the terrors are spashed up on the news screen.
Mom devoted as much energy as she could to helping. She volunteered in my schools teaching reading to kids who were behind. It was a thankless job, considering that many of these kids had home lives too horror filled to allow them any chance at sucess. She would take me, and my friends to museums and cultural events. She would sit outside in our houseing project with art books and teach the neighborhood about Da Vinci. Later on, in high school, I tried to follow her lead. I helped found a literary magazine, and found out that a lot of these “ghetto kids” were amazeing writers. I tried to bring art, a long abondon concept in most public schools, to the forfront. This sounds a lot like “whitey bring Shakespeare to the Ghetto”, which is an attitude I hate. But I did what I could, and I like to think that I managed to improve the lives of others while improving my own, just like my mom helped educate a whole neighborhood while educating her daughter.
I can’t thank my mom enough for her decision to “abandon” me to the worst public schools in my city. I learned some lessons that can be learned no other way. I learned racial harmony by actually living with others. I learned social justice by looking around me and seeing with my own eyes what our current system has created. I learned hard work by actually having to work hard and take initiative instead of having things handed to me. Most of all, I learned to see beyond the “American Dream” by seeing where it has failed, and what can be done to improve that.
There are things to be learned by taking the road less traveled. There is a lot to gain by venturing out beyond the insular womb of your own family. And there is a lot to give, as well. Our talents are wasted when we share them with only our children. Our gifts are selfishly used when we concern ourselves solely with that which benefits us. There are a lot of things wrong with public schools, and a lot of those problems go back to economics. But, abandoning them is not the answer. It is cowardly to run away from the messes we have created. It is selfish to appoint our own children as “golden ones” who recieve the best in everything and to ignore the rest of America’s children. Ultimately, it is a disservice to your kids as well.
I am not saying anyone is personally bad, I am just railing against an phenomenon that I find short-sighted and self-serveing. I am sure that everything has it’s exceptions, and every individual has good reasons for their acts. Just remember that every individual that has allowed injustice to continue has good personal reasons, but that never helped the world. There is a world that is far more important than personal reasons, no matter how justified.
Even Sven
I know you put it out there as a general comment on people who choose homeschooling 
but as a person who did/will choose it again if I need to, can I just say that everyone who chooses it has ‘pristine children’ or white picket fences? I respect your mother’s choices but I also respect those of us who have to make other choices. I wasn’t a happy homeschooler by any means but it was the best choice for my kid’s welfare at that point in time. A suicidal 5 yo is not a pretty sight. The ‘selfish’ choice would have been to send him to school and insist that he cope. Even with my involvement in the school, his coping was not going to happen.
I maintain that my primary duty is to my child and my child’s well being. If 4 psychologists and several school principals tell me he is better served at home (except the principal who wanted to accelerate him 3 years so he finished school at 12) then I need to make my decisions based on his well being. There’s lots of people in the community who don’t contribute to the schools. Why just because of a demographic do I owe more to the school system? I won’t sacrifice my kid’s well being for the good of other kids. This is mostly because I don’t actually feel it should be necessary for any kid to suffer in any school but I don’t think making my kid suffer in the particular is a solution. I don’t think that putting my child’s welfare first over and above what I personally would prefer to be doing is a selfish choice. Sending him to school without even considering what is best for him is selfish.
Another point is that it is costing the state a lot of money for my child’s place at school. When he was homeschooled, I bore the costs directly. I’m wondering if by placing that burden back on the schools I am doing the schools a service 
Of course I do realise that my case is not a standard run of the mill choice to homeschool but then most of the people I know who have made this choice with forethought could put a similar case.
I’m trying to figure how with homeschooling being a minority choice, sending your kid to school can possibly be seen as the road less taken… I’ve gathered the impression that most people do automatically choose to send their kids to school…
I was homeschooled in fifth grade. I hated it. I have to admit, I learned more that year than any other in elementary school, while doing less work. Instead of all that mindless busywork and repitition I read textbooks and my father taught me about three years’ worth of math. But then, I wasn’t not your typical kid. I learned quickly, and my dad was currently in college so this stuff was fresh in his mind.
I learned a lot, but I hated it. I was bored. There was nothing to do all day but fight with my brothers, watch TV, and read books. I lived in a small town, so there weren’t any other homeschoolers nearby to scoialize with. The only time I saw other kids was at Girl Scouts meetings once a week. So I was bored and lonely. Still, I can see why my parents did it. I’d gone to the local elementary school for two years, and the classes were crowded and almost no one was on grade level. A lot of the kids were migrant farmworkers who missed a lot of school to work in the fields. My parents wanted me to get an education.
My cousins were also homeschooled, but for different reasons and with different results. They were homeschooled because their parents are fundies who don’t trust the public school system. They live in an upper-middle class suburban neighborhood, and my cousins had friends from church, many homeschooled I think, who they played with a lot. At about the age of fifteen they would take the test to get a GED (which they had no problems passing, so I’m assuming their education was adequate), then went to city college for a few years before transferring to a university. One has graduated from Christian college, another is doing well at UC Davis and planning to go to med school, and another is sixteen and doing well at city college. They seem well-adjusted enough, if a bit sheltered.
So, based on this limited experience with home-schooling, my opinion is that it isn’t for everyone, and I’m sure there are plenty of parents who aren’t educated enough to teach their children adequately, but it seems to work for some people. I don’t think I would choose it for my own kids if I ever have any, but it isn’t all bad if it’s done right and the kids are happy with it.
The above paragraph expresses exactly what I was trying to communicate earlier. Even sven, however, expresses it so much better. Eariler, Primaflora said “IMO it is immoral to sacrifice my child for the good of the whole.” This seems to directly contradict Sven’s point of view.
It is everyone’s obligation to sacrifice for the good of the whole. We do it all the time. We obey speed limits for the good of the whole, even when speeding will get us to work on time. We pay taxes, even when the money could be selfishly spent better. We die in war, even when living is the much more selfish choice. IMO, it is immoral not to sacrifice for the good of the whole. Do not run from the problems. Instead, seek solutions.
By the way, in my classes, I occassionally have a homeschooled child move in. While I am generalizing, they tend to be quite bright and eager to learn. They often, however, have trouble coping with a larger environment. They struggle to learn in a room with other students, some of whom cause distractions. They sometimes resent not having the teacher’s undivided attention. Again, these are general statements, but they tend to be true, in my experience, anyway.
Well Drum God… you are seriously saying that it is selfish of me to do what is best for my child and it is morally right to send the child to school on the premise that this might benefit the community.
Wow.
You’re more of an altruistic fellow than I am then. ;). Could it be that you are arguing ideas and I am arguing a reality which I live every day? You may note that I cheerfully pay taxes for the benefit of children who attend school and get not a cent back for the education of my own child. I don’t whine about the people who don’t contribute to my local schools with their time or energy but somehow because I make a decision about my individual child that makes me selfish? Who’s to say that parents who don’t homeschool automatically contribute to the schools anyway? I guess if it were a situation where all parents as part of their commitment to the school signed up for 10 hours a week to volunteer, then my devotion to my kids might be viewed as selfish. However most parents don’t, most parents work outside the home. I know that with my kid in school, it freed me up to go back to full time study with the interesting side effect of having very little time to contribute to the classroom. I’m sure I’m not the only parent in that situation.
I think it’s selfish to require children to be sacrificed to the theoretical general good of the community.
This is a true statement. I am fortunate that my children attend (and I work in) a well-respected, effective school district. I have not had to face the choices you discuss.
I hope you understand that mine is a respectful disagreement. Were I actually faced with your situation, I may feel differently. I still urge you and others to work with schools rather than against them.
In the above post, I meant to take out “You’re more of an altruistic fellow than I am then.” from Primaflora’s quote. The statement I agree with is “Could it be that you are arguing ideas and I am arguing a reality which I live every day?” I am not claiming to be any more or less altruistic than Primaflora.
Just don’t want any misunderstanding. Thanks.
Homeschooling is just another example of how people in our society would rather run and hide in their own little fantasy world than actually work to make their community a better place. Like gated communities designed to keep “undesireables” out or private schools that give their students a false sense of "eliteness’, homeschooling just insulates kids from the realities of the world.
Now I’m not advocating sending your kids to schools that are dangerous, or moving to dangerous projects if you don’t have to. But, I do think we are all responsible for the environment we live in. If you live somewhere where the school system is bad, you should try and do something about it.
thanks Drum God. If you read my posts carefully you’ll note my kid is currently back in school which means I get to spend half my life it seems in meetings with the school. Sometimes though it is simply not feasible to work with the school because there are not enough hours in the day to meet the kid’s needs and deal with bureaucracy.
I still see homeschooling as a choice which doesn’t have that much impact on the community as a whole. It’s still very much a minority choice.
Really? This is a startling claim. Let’s examine how you support it.
No support here, just an insinuation that homeschoolers are insular, overly proud of their children, and isolationist. Pure ad hominem. F
No support here, just an appeal to sympathy for the disadvantaged. Mention of the disadvantaged might conceivably have become support for the thesis, but for that to happen even sven would have had to acount for such data as: homeschoolers still pay property tax which amounts to a direct financial subsidy for children in public schools; homeschoolers reduce the burden of public schools by decreasing class size and reducing the number of textbooks, etc. She would also have had to address teh demographic breakdown of homeschoolers to public schoolchildren within each school district in order to demonstrate that a significant disparity in economic opportunity exists between the two groups. So, there was a kernel of an idea for support here, but it was never developed. D
No support here. Personal anecdote, which can be effective as a rhetorical device, but the point of the anecdote is irrelevant to the thesis. The claim was not “private schooling is as selfish as it gets”, so anecdotes relating to the choice between public and private schools are off point. I am relatively certain that homeschooled children also escape the “sting of poverty” associated with a poor child in a private school. F
More personal anecdote, still irrelevant to the thesis. Homeschoolers also would conceivably draw their friends from “the same people [they live] around”. Tiny fragment of an idea regarding socialization and community involvement has been allowed to founder undeveloped. D-
Anecdote shifts to college. Even sven basks in the superiority of not having been a rich white kid. Now, even if even sven manages to find supporting evidence for the idea that homeschoolers are predomoniately rich white kids, this would provide no support for the thesis. Unless public school make those same children less rich or less white, that is. A charitable interpretation gleans the potential for an argument based around preparation for life skills. A second look confirms no development of this idea through reason or empirical data. D-
[qoute]
Not that my schools were okay. I can honestly say that I learned nothing at all in my four years of high school, except for pottery. I dealt with huge classes, incompetent teachers, clubs and classes with no funding whatsoever, and every single one of the terrors are spashed up on the news screen.
[/quote]
Attack upon the quality of public schooling. This undermines the thesis by providing support for the idea that the “selfishness” of home schooling is actually reasoned self-interest. F.
Anecdote about saintly mother, heartwarming and moderately on point. It can’t be considered strong support, since it is anecdotal and no effort is made to tie the altruism of the mother to the educational experience of public schools. Still, it is the first hint of suport for the thesis yet uncovered. I am filled with warmth and charity. C
A nice anecdote about the daughter carrying on the attitudes she has learned from her mother. Unfortunately, it again provides no support for the thesis. No reason is given to assume that a homeschooled child of an altruistic mother would not also carry on those values. The single piece of information abuot a literary magazine suggests a possible tack toward availability of resources to allow generosity the widest possible reach, etc. That tack, unfortunately, was not taken. D
Excellent. Even sven lists several things that she learned from going to public school. This is one quarter of an argument to support the thesis. The other quarters of the argument would be: to show that homeschooled children would not have the same opportunity to learn these lessons, to show that homeschooled children do not receive a corresponding advantage in learning other important life lessons, and to show that the demonstrated disparity in life lessons increases the selfishness of the choice to homeschool. Alas, only the first quarter of the argument is present. I
A section of catch phrases and homilies, some of them argue for the OP while others are simply misplaced. For instance, public schooling can hardly be considered the “road less travelled” and the economic problems of public schools are actually ameliorated when children homeschool. No attempt is made to demonstrate that such condemnations as “solely benefitting us” apply to homeschooling. This might have been a decent summation passage for the argument if the aphorisms had been better chosen, and if the argument had ever been made. D
More condemnation of homeschooling based upon the identification of homeschooled children as a priveleged and insular group. Ad hominem capped by an appeal to the “selfishness” which the OP has attempted to condemn. F
This is the expected attempt to waffle away from the harsh criticism of the thesis, “the choice is selfish not the people!” It is followed by some unsupported assertions of moral philosophy. Had an effective argument been made, this might have be an effective passage of pure rhetoric. The argument was not, so the passage is not. C-
conclusion:
My wife and I have not yet decided whether we will homeschool our children. If we do, though, I will at least be assured that they can support an argument more effectively than even sven. Perhaps they will also manage to develop the empathy, consideration, and perspective necessary to avoid branding a choice of schooling as the ultimate in selfishness.
It seems rather ridiculous to make broad generalizations as many of the previous posters have done. However, I will say that homeschooling, if done correctly, can be a very positive thing in a child/student’s life. It is not for all children and it is not for all parents. I was homeschooled for K-4 and for the 7th and 8th grades. The reason my parents chose to homeschool me is that I was an active little kid who could in no way sit through an all-day kindergarten. Today, I would have probably been diagnosed as ADHD or something along those lines. My Mom did a good job of involving us (me & my brother & sister) to a variety of experiences and activities so that we wouldn’t grow up thinking the world revolved around us in any way. We definatly weren’t rich, so money was always an issue. I did attend public school for 5th & 6th grade because I wanted so much to try it. However, I did have a tough time socially, which I think was more of a personality issue then a social exposure issue. My highschool public school experience was far more enjoyable & I really benefited from several excellent teachers that I had & the resources the school offered. I held many leadership positions in highschool, which was very easy academically for me. So, for me, homeschooling worked well . . I’m very self-motivated & academics come easy to me. However, I know familes that have this idea that any sort of homeschool is better then public school. They would hardly do anything all year long & the parents would not push their kids to do much at all. I think it depends so much on the individuals involved, as does public school, or any kind of academic environment.
I’m sorry that my post wasn’t good enough for you, Spiritus Mundi. I thought I was writing an empassioned statement of opinon, backed up with the events in my life that led up to that opinion. Next time, give me due warning and I will produce a scholarly thesis, not a simple outpouring of thoughts.
Look, I know my views are somewhat harsh and unpopular. I am a commie for God’s sake. I don’t expect people to agree with me. I also don’t want to offend people. I really don’t think that homeschooling parents are bad people. But, as a political and philisophical concept, I find homeschooling repugnent. But, hey! My views don’t matter! Don’t worry about it if you don’t agree because I don’t forsee my being in a position of power anytime soon.
I’ve know some homeschooled kids in my life. Nice people. The reason I characterize homeschooling as insular is because in my experience it is. Almost all information that the child receives filters down through the parents. There is a reason why so many fundies homeschool. It ensures that the child is exposed to nothing that does not fit the parent’s worldview. Now, not all parents want to create a white-picket-fence world for their kids, but many will. Additionally, the idea of having an ever-present parent who is in charge of most all of your life can lead to some strange things. Once again, I am not saying that this always happens, but you can’t deny that it often does.
So why did I talk about my Childhood of Opression ™? Mostly I wanted to prove that just because you don’t give your kid the Best of Everything doesn’t mean he/she is going to grow up to be a crack-dealing ne’er do well. It takes a lot more than a bad school to bring a kid down. A bad neighborhood, maybe. A bad family, very likely. But not a bad school. So many parents see a “bad school” as leading the kid into the lions den. Honestly, a kid with a family that promotes education will make it through any school. Despite my school’s almost complete lack of resources, and indeed, it’s lack of talent at educating, I managed to get a first-class education. I am now my first (and indeed, only) choice college, and I realized yesterday that I have a darn good chance of graduating with honors (woo-hoo!). Sure, it took a little more work, and a heck of a lot more creativity than if I had the perfect education handed to me, but I did okay. I didn’t die. I didn’t become a gangster of a thug. Public schools, even the worst of them, are not a fate worse than death.
But I guess my point that homeschooling is selfish come from this: If you have the talent to teach, the talent to touch lives, the talent to share the world of knowledge with a child, why are you keeping it to yourself? Why are you lavishing this all on one child? Why not share your talents with the world? Why not contribute to society as a whole, not just your corner of it? I believe (as a commie, of course) that we have an obligation to use our skills and talents for the wider good. I believe it is our job as humans to improve our world as best we can. Raiseing a family is a noble thing. But there is a wide world outside of your family. There is a world that can use your gifts. There is life after life to touch…