I have three kids. They are all still in the house, but my wife and I have put a lot of effort into understanding how we make "successful" children. After a lot of reading, reminiscing and thinking about it I have come to three conclusions about how to have successful kids.
1. Don't be poor. Statistically, those who are under or near the poverty line have exponentially worse outcomes than those who are even slightly above it. This will get them at least 50% of the way there.
2. Don't be abusive. Either physical, emotional or sexual abuse will destroy and poison a child. While it may seem obvious, some people don't realize that they are doing it because that is what they were brought up with. This gets them another 20% of the way.
3. Be part of the right social groups. Social mobility is huge for being in "the right place at the right time" or in other words "being lucky." This will get the kid into 80% territory.
The last 20% is a crap shoot that is largely dependent on a mix of external factors and individual actions past peak parenting age.
edit: By the way, notice how the families in the article hit all my points. No poor, abused or outcast people in that group.
I'm not a fan of negativity in hn comments, but some things just have to be said: You and your wife put in "a lot of effort" into understanding how to raise successful children and all you came up with was these three platitudes? "Be rich, well connected and don't beat them". What would you have come up with if you had put in only a little effort? "Don't kill them"?
You have to have learned more from your analysis. Everything you said was clearly correct, and the obvious does need to be stated from time to time. But is there anything else you've learned in your years of experience, something that wasn't evident in the article? How involved should you be in their lives, how do you make the tough calls between extracurriculars, what is the right amount of "balance"? Of all the books and blogs you read, what ideas seemed on target and which were dangerously misleading? Is there a well known parenting role model you've tried to be like? Not expecting answers to these questions, but maybe something closer to this level of specificity.
Wealthy, well connected parents aren't the ones who need help. It's the rest of us with modest incomes and friends in low places who need the tricks and tips. "Don't be poor and be in the right social groups" is the best advice you could give to a startup founder or an aspiring actress or to anyone trying to do anything, and I understand that having the right resources before you begin an endeavor is at least 80% of success. But at least 80% of people don't have access to the right resources and have to make do with what they have, and I was hoping for advice that could be more helpful to them.
I'm with AndrewKemendo honestly. Making sure your kids are set financially and make connections will set them up for success. I find that I'm almost never enforcing behavior with my kids. They already act like me and wife because that's genetics. Which brings up one more thing which is to marry well. 90% of child rearing is preparation.
"They already act like me and wife because that's genetics."
Don't underestimate B.F Skinner and Behaviorism?
As to "marry well"--let's see how that one pans out. I know
what you mean, but true love is blind. Growing up in Marin County; I found it hard to love the rich ones. I tried many a times, but they were different, and I could never
just overlook my lack of love for money. I actually was always drawn to the middle and poor class? I used to think
it was envy, or I assumed rich kids were shallow? I don't know why I couldn't marry for money, but their was something
they(wealthy kids) all lacked, and to this day I'm not sure
exactly what it is?
I don't just mean to marry someone rich. I mean, marry someone who you trust to provide 50% of your child's DNA. If you marry someone attractive and dumb, you're going to get dumb kids. If you marry someone with a history of mental illness, expect your kids to be at risk for the same. If you marry a jerk because they're rich, your kids will be rich jerks too.
I wouldn't so readily dismiss attractiveness and outcomes:
In support of implicit personality theory, attractive individuals were found to fare better than unattractive individuals in terms of a number of such outcomes
The good thing about a lot of study and thinking is that if you do it correctly, sometimes the results are strikingly simple when explained. There is also quite a bit of simplification there, if only just to make the point easier.
The reason I came away with those three things is that for the most part when you dissect a lot of case studies what you find is that parental involvement isn't actually that impactful so long as those three guidelines hold.
Yes more involvement with your children is better, as we see with studies about language acquisition. In those cases however what was found was that the reason that parents were talking to their infants and toddlers more was because they had the time to and were not working or putting them in front of a television (in some cases bordering on neglect). The same held true for physical ailments like later in life issues with hypertension and diabetes from low nutritional diets. All of their root causes were poverty and almost always related was poor maternal education.
The simple answer to your question though is, the rest of those things don't make nearly as much impact, by magnitudes as the big three. So focusing on getting those things right is really crucial. The rest are just kind of window dressing and honestly, largely just make parents feel like they are having a big impact.
But at least 80% of people don't have access to the right resources and have to make do with what they have, and I was hoping for advice that could be more helpful to them.
I think the right advice is do whatever it takes to get out of poverty and into a more traditionally successful "class" without beating your kids along the way. If you had a modest income then start networking with chamber of commerce members and other community leaders. Attend hackathons to expose your kids to people who are going to be successful etc... It's not that obtuse of a thing to figure out how to apply I don't think.
I have to comment. I came from a family that qualified for foodstamps, in a small midwest town (not well connected). My mother divorced my dad when I was 9 because he was abusive, largely towards to me. The tipping point (I later found out) was when she had to sneak the car keys to get me the doctor, as he had broken my hand during a beating with a log.
So pretty much a complete contradiction to "No poor, abused or outcast people in that group."
I'm the not most successful person I know, but I've done okay. I'm middle-aged, happily married with a good family. I earn high six-figures to low seven (depends on variance in our stock price).
I would hear a lot of stats growing up. When I had subpar results, there were people ready to defend me, given various odds where stacked against me.
I would periodically try these on my mom. Nothing would drive her in a greater rage. I was expected to do two thing: work hard & take school seriously. I could get away with a lot of things (stupid pranks, sometimes ditching), but if my grades fell, I know their would hell to pay.
At the end of the day, I chalk up any success I've had to that. Deliberate or not, she made sure I had a good education & knew the importance of working hard.
In some ways, maybe it was too extreme. I didn't travel outside the country or take what would be consider a "real" vacation (i.e., more than a trip home, or a 3-4 day get away) until I was 29. I didn't date seriously until well in my 20s. At the same time, she broke the cycle of poverty.
I empathize my wife and I are great examples of outliers also. There were periods growing up that we were homeless and both parents were totally bankrupt. My wife has similar stories to yours about a broken leg from a drunken anger fueled argument.
Kind of proves my point though, your mom (like mine) busted her ass to push you out of the things that define poverty - namely bad education and surroundings.
Outliers exist, but this is not a reliable and dependable method for success - which is exactly what we are talking about. HN is not a representative sample of the population, generally if you post here there is a higher likelihood than not that you are or will be successful.
I grew up upper-middle class and didn't realize it. Looking back, I wanted for nothing. Now, in my late 20s, I don't have much of a passion for anything. No passion, no real drive. I think if I wanted for more when I was younger (like my father and my uncle, both of whom turned out successful) I would have a lot more fire in my belly. I feel apathetic and listless with no real motivation.
Can you elaborate on wanting for nothing? As in were you spoiled and got everything you want? Or you didn't want to do anything?
I grew up poor. I learned to hear "no." The concept of an allowance was completely foreign. I am a better person for it. I learned to appreciate what I have and I learned creative thinking to invent things to do when I didn't have toys to play with.
I see a lot of people I know now who grew up with everything they wanted- they can seem very empty inside...
Not OP but my best friend in High School was basically OP. My family was "house broke" and I never had allowance, everything was "no" (literally everything) and I learned early that I had to make for myself. Worked through High School, saved up for the gadgets I wanted, etc.
Best Friend came from a wealthy doctor's family. Large house. Every game console, new computers/cameras/etc basically every 10mo. He isn't passionate. He never had to work to put two and two together. It was a credit card away. He got whatever he wanted whenever he wanted (I wouldn't call it spoiled, just more so "available"). He just doesn't have drive because he never _had_ to. It's like the quote "If you can, give your kids enough to do something, but don't give them enough to do nothing."
That's a pretty "successful" position to be in honestly. Maybe I am reading into this too much but to have the time to be self aware enough to know you aren't driven is a luxury that a poor person doesn't have.
Where's the kid - or the parent - in all your conclusions?
(On a side note, not all the families in the article hit all the points. The first family was a Peruvian immigrant couple, cleaning office buildings and carrying mail. The third's dropped out of Cornell to become a professional cook. The second-to-last left Vietnam during the fall of Saigon with nothing and worked a series of low-wage jobs.)
Not euphemisms. If your friends own businesses, are military or political leaders or are VPs/Presidents/CEOs that makes it easier for your kids to have the contacts needed to get into the "right" schools and get internships and jobs.
Call it nepotism if you like but historically it has been a requirement for success.
Essentially I think this is "high society", people with respectable jobs, working for respectable companies. Not your mechanics, cleaners or factory workers who hang out at the pub every Friday, but your doctors, lawyers, programmers and suit-types that goto events, and the pub on a Friday night.
I've always heard and would agree with the phrase, "success breeds success". Surround yourself with people you consider to be successful. Same thing applies here, except your setting up play dates.
If you can stomach it? As you get older, you just might reevaluate your definitions of success? Personally, at my
age; you couldn't pay me to spend a night at the Pub surrounded by Doctors, and Lawyers? Suit-types? I won't even comment on that one, but you must be young? I can guarantee you will look back on your post and go "Wow--I was
young?" Or, maybe you won't?
I think he's talking about networking? When I was younger
people referred to it as, "That person would make a great contact!" I have a very financially successful sister running a shoe company. Yes, she is financially successful, but she can't keep a guy around, and she definetly wants a relationship. And no I don't think guys are intimidated by her financial sucess, nor is she homely(voted best looking in high school). Not sure if she
has a true friend? I get the feeling her kids just use her for money, and her mother and siblings never talk to her.
(No--I don't stay in touch with her either.) When my father passed away she manipulated him into giving her all the estate money. Yea--she is quite the achiever though, and masterful at Networking!" Sometimes--a person's success doesn't involve money, or a high paying job?
Yes, being around successful adults, people that have things show kids that things are attainable, and attainable by legal means. This can have an incredible effect on forming life expectations and goals.
Really it's scale at that point and a matter of ease. So the better you do at 1 or 3 the easier success is, but coming from success does not seem to be required for success on average.
So for example, really super rich kids can often fall into jobs at their parent's company, and many times high ranking ones. On the other end of the spectrum above poverty or lower middle class, those kids are able to start working on things they like (programming, music, sports etc...) while in high school without having to worry about helping to pay the rent. Which can lead to domain expertise. etc...
Also, rich kids tend to go to better schools, where they are less likely to be bullied or surrounded by by kids that are disruptive and dont want to learn.
good points, but "don't be abusive" doesn't quite cover it for me. while that for sure should be there, maybe there is a 2 subsection a), which is be your childs mentor. in that you need to give them the push sometimes or be a motivator to hit those stretch goals (heck, to teach them what a stretch goal is). Not doing these things is borderline abuse (the word doesnt sound right, but hopefully you get my meaning), and might lead a kid to mediocracy -- not success.
I think that comes from the right place, and I tended to agree even a few years ago, but the data doesn't bear that out.
Such pressurizing interactions end up being neutral to destructive depending on how it is implemented. Sports is a good place to look for data on this. Higher parental pressure is related to negative outcomes in sports[1]. Aside from extreme outliers like Woods et. al. at least in sports, being a motivator or putting pressure on the kid generally makes it worse.
Almost across the board with cases of where children show extreme competence, they should be supported and given room to thrive, but not pressured.
excellent, will definitely read this. However, I will caution that sports/coaching is different, and I would not jump to generalization on this. I am not a sports guy, so I can't quite relate personally, but there is a certain level of emotional investment in sports from parents that seems to get.. out of hand?
All it takes is a couple hours at a little league game to notice. It would be very interesting to see if similar data would come from something less competitive.
sports isn't much different than any extracurricular activity that parents get too involved in. Whether it's a musical instrument/talent, drama, artistic, debate; anything that a parent sees as a harbinger of their child's success can induce too much stress of the child, it's a lot to live up to.
1. Don't be poor. Statistically, those who are under or near the poverty line have exponentially worse outcomes than those who are even slightly above it. This will get them at least 50% of the way there.
2. Don't be abusive. Either physical, emotional or sexual abuse will destroy and poison a child. While it may seem obvious, some people don't realize that they are doing it because that is what they were brought up with. This gets them another 20% of the way.
3. Be part of the right social groups. Social mobility is huge for being in "the right place at the right time" or in other words "being lucky." This will get the kid into 80% territory.
The last 20% is a crap shoot that is largely dependent on a mix of external factors and individual actions past peak parenting age.
edit: By the way, notice how the families in the article hit all my points. No poor, abused or outcast people in that group.