Posted on 01/08/2018 7:36:17 AM PST by Diana in Wisconsin
In the latest overly empathetic attempt at shielding young people from the harsh realities of life, a shrink wonders if schools should ban children from having — wait for it — best friends.
Writing in US News, child and family psychologist Dr. Barbara Greenberg says “there is something dreadfully exclusionary” about the concept of a “best friend,” and notes some American and European schools already forbid kids from having them.
Greenberg realizes that many will scoff at the notion based on “real life” expectations (“perhaps there is some truth to that,” she says), but she is focused on the “bigger picture”– that is, the distress of rejection associated with having a close confidante.
“I am a huge fan of social inclusion,” Greenberg writes. “The phrase best friend is inherently exclusionary. Among children and even teens, best friends shift rapidly. These shifts lead to emotional distress and would be significantly less likely if our kids spoke of close or even good friends rather than best friends.
“And, if kids have best friends, does that also imply that they have ‘worst friends?'”
From the article:
A focus on having best friends certainly indicates there’s an unspoken ranking system; and where there is a ranking system, there are problems. I see kids who are never labeled best friends, and sadly, they sit alone at lunch tables and often in their homes while others are with their best friends.
My hope is that if we encourage our kids to broaden their social circles, they will be more inclusive and less judgmental. The word “best” encourages judgment and promotes exclusion.
I am not, however, an advocate of encouraging kids to have huge groups of friends. What I would like to see instead is children having a smaller group of close friends. In fact, there is research suggesting that adolescents who have a small group of close friends fare better emotionally than those who are part of a larger social circle. Perhaps those who are part of a large group lack closeness and are socializing primarily with acquaintances.
Greenberg says parents should not forbid their kid from “having contact” with a best friend, nor “march into [their] child’s school” to make sure there’s no prohibition on having best friends.
“Instead,” she says, “consider making a bit of a shift to your vocabulary and talk to your children about the importance of having close friends. Put less emphasis on popularity and having best friends.”
She concludes: “Think of all the wonderful opportunities you may have missed if you socialized exclusively with only one friend.”
Liberals: At constant war with what is normal.
Madness... madness...
Liberals are no longer liberal; they’re totalitarian...
Mentally ill psychologist: Having best friends should be banned because it’s ‘exclusionary’
No more BFFs?
Maybe some people actually do make better friends than others. And maybe, just maybe, there are some rotten people that you don’t even want to be friends with. Does this sound harsh?
P2: Psychologists are usually crazy and all of the crazy ones need to be banned.
Perhaps the good doctor would like to assign people you must talk to today and how much time you must spend with them?
“The disciple whom Jesus loved”.
Liberals: in constant dialogue with Satan, who is in constant war with God’s normal
Do we really have to listen to these bat guano crazy liberals any more?
I would really like to see how these fascist schools enforce this.
Interpretation: this guy had no friends growing up and has none now. So good friendships are bad and nobody should be permitted to have them.
First the Left attacks the family unit. The natural support system for the individual which provides love and nurture, and food and shelter. Now it attacks friendship. The next line of support for an individual. And while this dingbat of an expert indicates that it is not totally wrong to have friends, she looks at it with deep suspicion. The Left also attacks the Church, which is also in the line of support for the individual. What is left but the government to care for the emotional and physical needs of the individual?
Apparently there is a perfect number of friends, too few is bad, too many is bad. Could it be that different people have different needs and preferences?
It’s like saying, “don’t look for someone special for a spouse”. It’s exclusionary.
How ridiculous can liberals get???
How do you “ban” something like having a friend???
These people are laughable....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.