Most of you know that I have 4 children, grown and out of the house. If this is the first you are learning about my family, here is the quick breakdown:
Max: 26, living and working in Kansas City
Thomas: 24, living and working in Dallas
Daniel: 21, a junior at TCU
Annabelle: 20, a sophomore at St. Andrews
This is the last known photo of us. Learn about this trip here.
They are all doing pretty dang good right now. As much as I’d like to credit my admirable mothering skills and years of selflessly doing things for their happiness, I’ve come to realize in middle age that there is more than meets the eye. After quietly pondering the last 26 years of motherhood and its highs and lows, I’d like to posit a new theory:
Less is More
Now, hear me out. I am not suggesting anyone should have fewer kids. I’m saying our kids may be better off if us moms DO less for them. Having a larger family is like orchestrating my own Longitudinal Field Study on children outcome disparities. I’m 26 years deep in my study and I’m ready to publish my observational report. I hope this helps my kids and anyone else that is starting a family.
Child #1 - The Managed Masterpiece Max
Child # 1: He never ate jarred baby food: I cooked, pureed, and froze homemade baby food made of only organic vegetables that I had to drive 25 minutes to find. I quickly signed him up for every activity I could find: Gymboree, soccer, music, gymnastics, hockey, swimming. I knew exactly what was going on and tried to manage everything, making sure that homework, tests, tutoring, laundry, friends, were all on track and taken care of. TV time was limited and only educational. I call her: psycho mom.
Child #2 - The Scaled Back Successor Thomas
Child #2: He ate a 50/50 mix of organic jarred and homemade baby food (made with pesticide-tainted vegetables). He, too, was an early adopter of too many activities, but with the focus on Child #1, he came away a little less scathed. I still tried to control a lot, but with child #3 and #4 closely following, my resources were limited. TV as a babysitter was allowed if it was PBS. I call her: tired but still trying mom.
Child #3 - The Wild Adventurer Daniel
Child #3: He ate only jarred food, but at least I bought organic jarred food. His #1 activity was watching his brothers’ games. I had to look at pictures to remember, but I found evidence of some Gymboree sessions, soccer that started at a more reasonable age, and early childhood neglect that consisted of 75’ tree climbing, sledding out our front door directly into the street, and riding a bike without a helmet. Any TV was permissible and encouraged, often with a pack of fruity snacks. I call her: worn down mom.
Child #4 - The Self-Sufficient Survivor Annabelle
Child #4: She ate only jarred food and never organic. Did it really matter? She came in the age of digital photos, so most of her childhood memories are in the cloud. She didn’t do anything outside of school organized activities. Self-feeding was supported by an easily accessible snack drawer filled with unhealthy snacks bought in bulk from Costco. I actually don’t know who raised this child. I suspect a series of babysitters. And this child did not like watching TV, which was maddening. Didn’t she know I needed her to zone out and let me get some work done? I call her: surrendered mom.
So, how did they all pan out?
To answer this, my study poses one essential question:
Which child could I toss, blindfolded, into a country they’ve never visited and whose language they don’t speak, yet still could find their way home without panicking or calling us to rescue them?
The answer to this is:
Child #4, following in sequential order: #3, #2, #1
There you have it. Less is more. All my hard, overbearing mothering didn’t match the power of a little neglect. And a whole lot of love.
Cheers to all the moms out there! However we parented, we tried our hardest.
xoxo
Lina