
Is the Drive for Success Making Our Children Sick? - kornish
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/03/opinion/sunday/is-the-drive-for-success-making-our-children-sick.html
======
analog31
Many of the posts have to do with the expectations of business, society, etc.
Maybe we parents have something to do with it too.

I should be happy. I'm educated, have interesting and rewarding work to do,
have a roof over my head, and get to play music on the side. I've got two
great kids, who are both smarter than me. What's wrong with that? Why should I
be neurotic about success? Why should push myself and my kids harder than I
was pushed? And make no mistake, I was pushed.

Because I can see that my class -- the middle class -- is vanishing, so the
expectations of my generation are no longer valid. Get an OK degree in
_something worthwhile_ and work hard. Gone. I literally followed exactly the
same education and career path as my father. That's gone.

We don't know what the future expectations will be, so we aim as high as
possible. I don't know if this is a good thing, but it seems like what's
happening. Not to mention, I grew up in a family culture that held education
to be one of the highest values, so we were inclined to be demanding about
education even before all hell broke loose.

Another thing I've noticed is that the school curriculum is more intensive and
consuming, but not necessarily more advanced. My kids are ahead of where I was
at the same age, in terms of simplistic milestones like Algebra. They have
perfect GPA's. I sure as hell didn't. But the curriculum is more superficial
and more based on drill work, worksheets, and computer busywork. They write
more papers. That's good. Their papers are written to fill out a thing called
a _rubric_ , which is a glorified worksheet. That's bad. I recently found a
copy of my 12th grade public school math textbook. More than half of the
problems are proofs. Today there are no proofs. The proliferation of homework
merely gives the _illusion_ of a rigorous curriculum, and robs kids of the
time that they could spend learning interesting things or just having fun. I
learned things like programming and electronics while in high school, _during
the time when I was not doing homework._

</rant>

~~~
hguant
I nearly failed out of high school and college because I spent my time on
things I found more interesting that classes - computers and journalism for
the most part. The skills I learned outside of my studies have been more
useful by far than anything I learned in a classroom. I feel like we've pushed
people away from the kinds of self directed learning that really stick with a
student towards the easily quantifiable "no student left behind" style of
learning.

~~~
IndianAstronaut
I very clearly see this with 2 nephews of mine, both 14. One is in a highly
competitive school district in the bay area, the other in a relaxed Texan
school. One has no free time and is pushed into this or that class or activity
all the time. The other has quite a bit of free time. The second nephew is
very creative, street smart and communicative. He also managed to teach
himself how to program and make games. The first nephew simply lacks that
creativity.

~~~
hguant
I experienced this in my Bot Scout troop of all places - people, kids
especially, need room to fail. Having a structured environment, having every
day planned out with something new and enriching is great and all - but it
doesn't give you room to stretch your own brain. You're stuck following
someone else's plan. One could argue this is a major failing of our education
system.

(Apologies for the late response)

------
icanhackit
_Expectations surrounding education have spun out of control. On top of a
seven-hour school day, our kids march through hours of nightly homework, daily
sports practices and band rehearsals, and weekend-consuming assignments and
tournaments. Each activity is seen as a step on the ladder to a top college,
an enviable job and a successful life._

Small-print: Successful life not guaranteed. Neither is happiness but we
didn't specifically mention that.

For me the depression stemmed from existential nihilism paired with a lack of
control of what I had to participate in. It taught me, once I was fully in
control of my own time and energy, to be careful with who I spent time with
and what I was doing with my time. Not in the _Get-Shit-Done_ sense, more in
the _Will This Shit Affect My Zen-State_. Often the answer is _Yes_ so instead
I play games, drink beer, read, hang out with my partner and friends and
occasionally make cool things.

I won't be remembered in 200 years, few people will, but at least my time was
mine.

~~~
meric
Read HN. Write code. Play games. Eat with family & friends. Repeat. Thank you,
universe.

~~~
Jordrok
This also describes my current situation almost exactly, and generally I am
pretty happy with things. I know that these are the things that make me happy
and I try to keep them in balance.

Sometimes though there are some nagging doubts that creep in. I worry that the
balance I'm comfortable with doesn't quite line up with what society seems to
expect, or at least idealize. Sometimes I feel like I "should" be doing more,
but whenever I try to push myself harder I just end up expending a lot of
energy spinning my wheels. I worry that something unforeseen and external
could pop up and disrupt my current situation, or at least make it
unmaintainable. I guess that's life though - adapt and enjoy.

~~~
meric
_I worry that something unforeseen and external could pop up and disrupt my
current situation_

When the situation changes, I'll live as the situation has changed.

I know one day it will happen, that is why _now is the time_ to live life _as
it is now_ , or later I'll regret why I didn't take the time to enjoy what I
have now.

------
atomicfiredoll
I can't help but feel like this is the inevitable conclusion for a society
that's obsessed with working and financial success. It could be an interesting
premise to explore.

When a number of employers and the government don't value ensuring a healthy
work/life balance, or even employee's health, how do you keep that same
behavior out of the minds of people running school systems and classrooms? How
do you ensure you create a school environment where children and adolescents
don't experience burn out when the working world they are prepped for embraces
and/or encourages it?

It seems to me that the more we ask employees to work long hours or in crunch
mode, the more we're asking our children to do the same... just indirectly.

~~~
branchless
The reason the system wants you to work hard is because they get a share of
your labour for every part you are successful above subsistence.

They get this through debt issuance, primarily via land prices. Fiat money
costs absolutely zero to produce, they give it out freely and in return you
pledge to give part of your labour for 30 years.

If land prices were far lower we'd all be working 3 or 4 days a week.
Employers wouldn't have enough workers. They'd be paying you most of the value
you produce as they bid for you against other firms. And you might not work
for them because you no longer have to spend most of your labour on banker
tribute for the right to exist.

 __Land value tax __is the answer. It would replace income tax, removing the
regressive tax on labour and punishing economic rentiers.

I hope for the sake of my kids we can win this one.

[http://www.henrygeorge.org/pcontents.htm](http://www.henrygeorge.org/pcontents.htm)

When people hear about LVT their immediate reaction is "another tax". Realise
that it would replace income tax (or at least significantly reduce it at the
lower end) and also it would reduce the massive tax via land price ramping.

Right now the banks are getting our tax instead of it being ploughed back into
the state, via debt issuance. And producing _nothing_ of value for it.

~~~
narrator
The land thing is crazy. Buying at the right time means you get paid to live
in your house. Then when you sell, they charge you capital gains so you can't
buy the same house back with the money you just got.

The other thing that's crazy is how ridiculously cheap the same stuff is in
countries with lower land prices, like South East Asia. A nice apartment with
a pool on the beach is 1/10 the price of San Francisco. The food is cheaper,
services are cheaper, etc ,etc. Meanwhile, people living in South Eat Asia
running online businesses can make the same amount of money in the American
economy. The manufacturing thing is even more mind blowing. The cost to
manufacture in a developed country vs China is on the order of 20x cheaper.
When Big Box stores like Ikea open in China they struggle because they can't
charge western premiums for the stuff they're selling because of domestic
competition and they have to lower prices by 50%[1]. That would be totally
impossible in a developed countries!

Someone should go through the whole cost structure of a developing country
manufacturing operation and figure out the reason they are so cheap. My hunch
is it would come down to incredibly cheap food, provided by incredibly cheap
land prices forming a foundation for incredibly cheap everything else. Garlic
growers in the California central valley say that the price that the Garlic
gets delivered packed and shipped at the grocery store from China is less than
what it costs them to grow it before harvesting.[2]

[1].[http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1300942/ikea-last-
cra...](http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1300942/ikea-last-cracks-china-
market-success-has-meant-adapting-local-ways?page=all)
[2].[http://www.wbur.org/npr/11613477](http://www.wbur.org/npr/11613477)

~~~
branchless
Prices are set by credit. When productivity rises in these countries
significantly above subsistence level the bankers will come in to claim the
productivity gains.

You can't steal from people on the breadline. Once they are above this you can
by selling their own futures back to them (and dismantling the future for
their kids).

Prices are set by credit. It's the banks.

------
xkcd-sucks
Based on experiences with highschool reunions and with hard-drug dealers, I
feel like children whose lives are "optimized for success" often end up
pissing away their "potential," while the second-tier/nice-but-dull children
end up having personally fulfilling, materially successful lives. Probably
this observation reflects nothing more than a bunch of named fallacies.

~~~
swiley
I had to become a failure in the eyes of my parents before I ever started to
succeed.

------
littletimmy
It is not just the drive for success; it is the entire culture in general. The
system is built to reduce happiness, because a happy and content person has
less impetus to contribute to the economy. This is actually very intentional;
see for example Alan Greenspan's speech to Congress: when he was questioned
about job insecurity among the population, he replied that it was a good thing
because it made people work harder.

On the other hand, the ideal person for the economy (on average, forgetting
outliers like inventors) is a psychopath with a penchant for conspicuous
consumption. Such a person is geographically mobile, able to dedicate his life
to attaining wealth and power, and is also incapable of happiness. The normal
among us, unfortunately, have to try live up to that ideal. Therefore, you see
people spending very little time with their families, trying to earn more and
more just to satisfy their need to consume. That is stressful! This is a form
of mental sickness.

YES. The system we live in is sick.

------
danharaj
Well, gee, I don't know! What part of "sit in this room for 8 hours a day
until we cut the umbilical cord, then get a job and contribute to society so
that you can afford to live and maybe retire one day. because otherwise you
are human garbage." sounds like it supports mental health? How many people
will quickly blame social media, or _adults paying too much attention to
children 's emotional needs_ for ruining our children when it's our toxic
social structures that are doing it?

Oh, oh! I know. These kids are just _too coddled_ these days. If they would
just grow _thicker skin_ they wouldn't be so _severely depressed and
constantly anxious_. It's not as if what ails society hurts the most
vulnerable and malleable of us first and most.

The way society treats children like raw materials pushed through a factory
until they can be extruded as adults is horrifying.

~~~
logicchains
>What part of "sit in this room for 8 hours a day until we cut the umbilical
cord, then get a job and contribute to society so that you can afford to live
and maybe retire one day. because otherwise you are human garbage."

I think the expectation that "people should be good to me just because I was
born" lies at the root of much distress. Reality can be harsh: if you don't
have anything to offer them, most people don't care much about you.

Maybe this is a terrible failing on the part of society, but from a pragmatic
perspective it's much easier to change one's viewpoint than to change society.
It can be surprisingly liberating to not expect anything from the world.

~~~
danharaj
> I think the expectation that "people should be good to me just because I was
> born" lies at the root of much distress. Reality can be harsh: if you don't
> have anything to offer them, most people don't care much about you.

I think your first sentence is either logically vacuous or a sneaky way to
disregard someone's emotions: Either you are stating that "feeling mistreated
is the same as existing and feeling mistreated" or your clause "just because I
was born" is putting words in this abstract person's mouth: "I feel mistreated
but I am unjustified in feeling mistreated."

Like, your ideas are logically consistent: If you don't feel mistreated then
you don't feel mistreated. If you can just stop feeling mistreated then you
will be liberated from feeling mistreated. It completely sidesteps the issue:
People feel mistreated for a reason.

Why not apply this logic to everything? "Just because I was born, people
shouldn't saw off my leg at the knee". The gall of such entitlement! If only
one adjusted to the viewpoint that their leg should be sawed off at the knee,
they would have a much easier time! Does it sound absurd because I am
exaggerating? I'm not really exaggerating that much: depression and anxiety
can hurt so much that they drive people to _kill themselves_. How could such
illness be anything but agonizing?

You call it reality, but it is not indifferent and impersonal like disease or
a storm that sweeps one's home away: We are talking about people. People are
intelligible to people. People are answerable people. People interacting with
people changes the way people interact with people.

~~~
logicchains
>Like, your ideas are logically consistent: If you don't feel mistreated then
you don't feel mistreated. If you can just stop feeling mistreated then you
will be liberated from feeling mistreated. It completely sidesteps the issue:
People feel mistreated for a reason.

Feeling mistreated isn't a feeling; feeling bad is a feeling. We feel bad when
we perceive something we interpret as bad happening to us. If we didn't
perceive that action as bad, as "mistreating", then we wouldn't feel bad about
it.

This is hardly a new idea; philosophical traditions like Buddhism and Stoicism
are bad around the idea what what causes suffering is our perceptions of the
world, and by changing how we perceive things (making fewer value judgements)
we can increase our happiness with the world.

>You call it reality, but it is not indifferent and impersonal like disease or
a storm that sweeps one's home away: We are talking about people. People are
intelligible to people. People are answerable people. People interacting with
people changes the way people interact with people.

It doesn't matter whether it's a natural disaster or people causing the issue:
the point is that if it's not something that can easily be changed, getting
emotional about changing it won't lead to a happy state of mind.

>Why not apply this logic to everything? "Just because I was born, people
shouldn't saw off my leg at the knee". The gall of such entitlement.

If someone saws your leg off at the knee and there's nothing you can do about
it, you'll have a less miserable time if you just accept it and move on than
if you remain bitter about it.

------
akhilcacharya
I've been reading these sorts of articles for nearly 10 or 11 years now, and
it's always been from the same people - the NBC, NPR, NYTimes reading upper-
middle class LAC graduates who send their kids to top universities. These
sorts of attitudes were unheard of when I was in middle and elementary school,
and existed but shunned in my high school. Granted, I did not go to the most
competitive high school in the state, but I do often wonder how well these
sorts of articles actually translate to the vast majority of students and
families who go to places like NC State, where you do not need any real
extracurricular involvement to get in.

------
fiatmoney
The word "Asian" does not appear in the article.

The subtext is that the elite is concerned that traditional selection measures
like grades & test scores have become totally game-able via a combination of
sheer hourly input & collusion / cheating amongst certain subpopulations. This
causes their kids to be outcompeted for very limited slots at elite
institutions (even more limited due to massive subsidies to push people into
the higher ed system, general population growth, and a desire to limit
enrolment to preserve the social capital benefits of truly elite
institutions).

Naturally there is pressure for those measures to be changed. Whether their
characterisation of what's happening is correct is debatable, but that's where
a good amount the pressure comes from.

~~~
danharaj
> We think of this as a problem only of the urban and suburban elite, but in
> traveling the country to report on this issue, I have seen that this stress
> has a powerful effect on children across the socioeconomic spectrum.

I didn't read your subtext in the article. I'm not convinced it accounts for
very much. Also, Asian Americans make up 5% of the population. What do you
think "Asian" has to do with the topic of this text?

~~~
fiatmoney
If it were explicit, it wouldn't be "sub" text. You really do need to know a
bit of context about the state of high school & higher ed admissions before
the phenomenon they talk about makes sense. The NYT is kind of notorious for
running editorials that only make sense as far as why they would be running,
and at this particular time, if you have these pieces of information.

Stanford is 1/4 Asian, plus another 9% "international". UC Berkeley is about
40%, plus another 10% international. And as I said, it's about competition for
the elite slots at those and similar places. Look at, eg, the student body
composition at very "hardcore", high stress schools like Thomas Jefferson HS,
or Gunn HS (recent subject of [http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Why-are-
Palo-Alto-s-ki...](http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Why-are-Palo-Alto-s-
kids-killing-themselves-6270854.php) ).

The parents of students in that kind of environment are the intended target of
this editorial. It provides them with a coordination point.

~~~
PhasmaFelis
I'm not sure what you're trying to imply, speaking of subtext. Are you saying
that Asians ("certain subpopulations") actually are helping each other cheat?
Or just that the elites think Asians are cheating? And, in either case, the
elites want to address the problem of Asian working harder than their kids by
encouraging all kids, presumably including their own, to work less?

Either way, I don't see an argument against the article's main thrust, namely
"working children into depression, anxiety, and burnout is bad."

~~~
beccasanchez
the answer to your questions:

yes, yes, and yes.

but there is one more factor:

Asians have way higher IQs than whites.

~~~
PhasmaFelis
Okay. So your root argument is...completely incoherent? Whatever works for
you, I guess.

------
11thEarlOfMar
I'm late to the discussion, but my kids go/went to Irvington.

What the article does not mention, which I feel is material to the content, is
that 70% of the students at Irvington are Asian, and most of those have
immigrant parents. The majority of those parents work in technical fields and
have advanced degrees in science and technology. This is material in my
opinion, because the demographics of Irvington do not represent the
demographics of the US, which readers may not realize.

------
StacyC
Notions of "success" often include no consideration whatsoever of happiness or
general contentment with life.

We moved to one of the top ISDs in Texas years ago, ended up pulling our kids
out and home-schooling. It was a hyper competitive, near-toxic environment. No
thanks.

I have found the recipe for well-being to be pretty simple: good health, work
I enjoy, good relationships, community, time to be quiet. Don't need much
else, imo.

------
ThomPete
I wonder if this is as causal as people might think.

The Scandinavian countries are known for their extremely lax culture
especially when it comes to child education, yet same discussions are present
there.

Being poor is also making you sick. I wonder if it's more to do with our
interpretation of sickness than with any actual change. I would still expect
our kids to grow older than we ever where, but sure it doesn't mean they will
be happy.

------
altonzheng
Success can mean different things to different people. Nowadays, most of us
just implicitly default to career as being the source of success. We should be
encouraging students to practice more self-reflection on their personal values
and what it means to be successful. Maybe it's rare that a high school student
would have that level of self-awareness, but I think relaxing the workload is
only a stop gap solution.

There will always be ways for students to stress and work hard to get a leg up
in the admission process. I think much of the stress is not from the workload,
but from comparison with peers. Most of us are taught not to compare ourselves
to others, but in todays competitive world, how can you not? I think if we
help students spend genuine time in meditation and reflecting on what's
meaningful to them, it would greatly help reduce social comparison and
consequently stress. Of course, a course like this would be difficult to
standardize...

------
jtcond13
"hours of nightly homework, daily sports practice and band rehearsal..."

Maybe adults should stop telling teenagers that their performance in these
things matters that much? Sports / Music are great if you enjoy them, and
learning the high school curriculum is important, but outside of the top 1%,
there's little reason to compete in these tournaments.

~~~
nradov
The theory is that participation in sports and music will be the crucial
factor that gets those teenagers admitted to elite colleges. There's some
truth to that, but probably not quite as much as many parents seem to think.

~~~
jonnathanson
There is a common misconception that elite schools want "well rounded"
students. In fact they want well rounded _student bodies_ , composed of
extremely lopsided students who excel in individual domains. It is far better
for your child to be a world-class swimmer, for example, than for her to be a
participant in swimming, tennis, student government, the school newspaper,
etc. Parents urge their kids to take up as many extracurriculars as possible
in the hopes of creating the impression of well-roundedness. Students resent
it, but they bear the burden because they believe their parents know what
they're talking about.

Add to this the unfortunate reality that not everyone gets to be world-class
at something. What do you do if you don't excel at any one thing? Work your
ass off to _create the impression_ of excelling at as many things as possible.
It's a shitty treadmill to run.

But what's the alternative? Excellent grades are a given; they are basically
table stakes. So above and beyond great grades, you need _some_ sort of
extracurricular presence to burnish your college applications. But your
chances of admission are basically a crapshoot at that point, so you pile on
the extracurriculars in an attempt to get more darts to throw at the board.

~~~
pizza
I couldn't have said it better myself.

------
sosuke
It makes adults sick doesn't it? Why not children?

I wonder what a society without that "drive for success" would look like. My
first thought, maybe a little sad, is if everyone else didn't have that drive
I might actually succeed.

~~~
saint_fiasco
Your sad thought is interesting because it suggests that children are being
overworked in zero-sum games, ultimately gaining nothing, because all the
other children are overworked too.

~~~
ryandrake
Similar to Prisoner's dilemma. We each can either over-work our kids or not.
If nobody over-works their kids, everyone wins (nobody has an advantage, we
create a better, less competitive society). If you over-work your kid and I
don't, then my kid loses and your kid wins. If I over-work my kid and you
don't, then my kid wins and your kid loses. Therefore, everyone chooses to
over-work their kids, and everyone loses (nobody has a relative advantage, yet
everyone's over-worked, over-competitive, and stressed to the limit).

~~~
Sacho
Except this is not a zero-sum game. Some of the waste created by this machine
of competitiveness is our constantly improving standard of living. In fact,
I'd say that this sentiment(that all your hard work and stress leads to
nothing) pretty much exemplifies the middle class. The kids from poor families
don't want to stay at the same relative advantage, they want to do better than
you so they can lift themselves out of poverty. Perhaps what you're sensing is
the pressure from a large poor class trying to improve their living conditions
by competing with the middle class. C'est la vie.

~~~
saint_fiasco
I find it hard to believe that forcing kids into violin lessons because it
will help them get into college has any kind of positive externalities.

I think that those kind of unproductive signaling games are done more by the
middle and upper classes, always running as fast as they can to stay in the
same place.

------
thsealienbstrds
I am not a doctor but I suspect that it has a lot to do with our physical
limitations.

I think a big impacting factor from the adjustments made to the program is the
fact they created study groups.

Many students are socially isolated, that is by itself something that creates
anxiety and depression. Being in a competitive environment without social
supports doesn't help.

Human beings are social animals, we need physical touch and proximity to
survive. Even just having a conversation with friends and family is something
that generally relaxes people. Sure, it may not always be the case but if you
ask me, human beings have evolved in a way that we have become very dependent
on eachother's physical presence for our mental/physical well being.

------
ZoF
HA.

How could school not be stressful.

Same rooms. Every Day. Same kids. Same motivations. Same tapping-of-the-foot.
Same stagnation. Same restlessness. Same mockery. Same shame.

'Stupid fucking faggot retard loser fatty useless cunt.'

Try living with that cacophonous litany for 8 hours daily and not coming out a
little fucked.

Absolutely a first world problem but I would have 100% more enjoyed an
apprenticeship or something similar.

I hated myself all throughout high-school. Hated. Cogitated on my own self
termination regularly.

Today, working on my own, I feel so much better; not having to actively think
about the various groups I have to conform to or rules I have to follow...
Extremely liberating.

I just want to freelance, actively contribute, subsist, and die.

I'm not a piece of shit for wanting that.

~~~
trentmb
> Absolutely a first world problem

I don't understand this statement.

Doesn't this mean it's a problem every developing nation will eventually face?

Wouldn't it be nice to have already figured out a solution by then?

~~~
ZoF
Yeah it would be great to have nuclear fusion figured out as well wouldn't
it...?

What was your point here?

~~~
nitrogen
Probably that dismissing real problems with the pejorative "first world
problem" is counterproductive, especially when we do it to ourselves.

------
jamery
I'm a little late to this discussion, but i'm a senior at irvington right now,
and this article is bs. No teacher gives only 20 min of homework a night, and
all of my non-ap teachers have still given me homework on the weekends this
year.

------
codingdave
I'd take all this as less of an opportunity to complain about our own growth,
and more of an opportunity for everyone who has or will choose to procreate to
think deeply about raising your own children, and to do better for them than
has been done for yourself.

------
JacobAppCow
To quote Mark Twain "I would not let school interfare with my education" (pun
intended)

------
dogma1138
I wonder how this conflicts with the fact that the difficulty of studies
especially in exact science in primary education has been steadily declining
even math teachers have difficulties solving highschool math problems from the
70s these days.

~~~
saint_fiasco
The excessive breadth comes at the expense of depth.

~~~
dogma1138
Well the use of scientific and even graphical calculators didn't help for
sure. No one memorized cosin tables anymore and it's not like it was hard.
Sure it allows you to give out problems to students with wierd angles but
working at 15 deg incriments and giving harder problems like they did in the
past is far better in my mind. I did some tutoring for high school and college
students like 10 years ago, even grade a students that picked the hardest math
difficulty (you can choose 3 difficulties the hardest is pretty much a
requirement for math oriented degrees later in uni) didn't knew what a
logarithm was beyond a key on their calculator, same goes for other basic
functions like factorials. They were petty much parroting and operating a
calculator rather than doing math.

------
robg
Yes.

