Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Age or Ability Specific Forums Pre-school Am I "hothousing" my DD?

Hothousing would be you pushing the child to do the work, right? You'd have to bribe, convince, and the child doesn't really want to, but will because you have to push them to do it.

Where as for gifted/talented kids, they practically drive you crazy if you don't give them some challenging things to do -- they pull you along. They want to do the math, or write stories after stories, etc etc etc etc

I suppose the above is a simple black/white version. There are many shades of grey.

Thank you all for your responses. Yes, I have always just done things to keep her entertained and to do things to get her thinking. She loves reading and doing "science" and playing with numbers. She does so much better when there is structure to our day.

Well.... I differ, I guess. Sorta.

I decided to look up the term. Most definitions stick to something along the lines of 'an environment conducive to rapid growth and development'. One site (dictionary.reference.com) gave "overprotected, artificial, or unnaturally delicate."

If hothousing means I am creating an environment conducive to rapid growth and development, then maybe many of us *are* hothousing. I mean that in a good way.

Granted, most people are thinking of negative connotations. Unhealthy focus on certain skills to the exclusion of the best interests of the whole child. I can give my tomatoes lots of sunshine and warmth, but if I don't give them the right amount of water, no amount of hothousing is going to help them grow to be good healthy tomatoes. Perhaps some hothouse orchids require a more delicate environment, but if they are given those wonderful conditions, they will thrive into beautiful flowers. Put 'em outside in the "natural" outdoors, and, well, you just might not get nice healthy orchids - or tomatoes, if you live in a colder climate.

So, are we 'hot-housing' our children by providing the extra enrichment? IMO, we are. I am also of the opinion that for many of our children the alternative would not be healthy.

Sadly, people associate the term 'hot housing' with imposed, parent-led learning, imposed on a child in the hopes of creating something different from what the child's natural tendencies would produce. By this definition - no, you are not hothousing your child.

I think that the term "hothousing" is usually meant to indicate an environment that is conducive to unnaturally rapid growth. If it were just rapid growth, that'd be fine, but I think the implication that the growth is unnatural is inherent in the meaning of "hothousing."

Now, if you're thinking of plants, most people would agree that there's nothing cruel or morally wrong with making them grow faster than they would do naturally. But when the word is applied to children, I think it has to be a negative thing.

I agree, no5no5. Common usage holds that hothousing is NOT desirable when it comes to children. I think that saying "our kids are all hothoused" is wrong-headed.

I'm also reminded of the term "hothouse flowers," which means flowers that are weak and unable to survive outside of an artificially warm environment, ill-adapted for life where they're planted. So even in the botanical sense, hothousing isn't necessarily a positive thing. Not immoral, certainly, but not a great thing to do if one wants healthy plants.

Well what are plants if they aren't hothoused? Do good roses with wonderful scents, and great tomatoes with deep flavor grow out in a rough field with caterpillars and grasshoppers?

Good soil, warm summer sun, some weeding, some watering. All provided by a gardener that fusses and hovers.

The oppposite of hothousing is still in the category of gardening.

And lets get off this silly analogy anyways -- plants don't have parental care.

Polly

The opposite of hothousing would be just letting the weeds (and occasional wildflowers) grow, I think. I was the opposite of a hothouser to my yard for a few months this winter, until the landlady drove by and saw the results.

But yes, of course you're right that the whole analogy is ridiculous. The word seems to have been applied to children for the sole purpose of making gifted kids seem unnatural and the result of inappropriate parenting. But as we all know, our kids may be unusual, but that doesn't make them unnatural and their gifts are not the result of our (widely varied) parenting styles.

It's almost as if the analogy itself has created a generation of insecurity.

So true! I was the opposite, I was totally clueless regarding DS for years, so he was out in the paddock amongst the weeds , but hey he's still gifted.

I do think real damage can be done by pushing a kid to learn things they're not ready to learn. That it gets applied to gifted kids who are pushing their parents (instead of the other way around) is, of course, regrettable. But people trying to make their infants read by withholding food unless they perform is NOT okay in my book.

Sorry, but I really believe the term "hothousing" exists for a reason. Some people do this sort of craziness to their kids.