RE: DSM: Is not the goal of Sudbury FREEDOM?

From: Peter Shier (
Date: Sun Feb 03 2002 - 01:06:08 EST

Well said Travis and I think that is also my point. No one gives total
freedom to their children.

Regardless of what you might say Ardeshir, if your kids were snorting
cocaine at age 6 I believe you would have intervened. If you had a
daughter who was sleeping with boys at age 10 I believe you would have
intervened. And the list goes on. As parents, we all ultimately have our
limits which means that we all have a specific curriculum. Some are just
more extensive than others. We all play captain of our ships at some
point and clearly state that this is our home and we require X and we
will not tolerate Y.

Now, what is the difference between saying that you can't snort coke at
age 6 and you must learn to read at age 7? Some may argue that one is
protecting the child while the other is coercing him to do something he
could survive (and even thrive) without. Well, Sudburists may interpret
it that way but traditionalists will say that learning to read at age 7
is protecting the child from future doom much the same as most of us
would feel about cocaine for a 6 year old.


-----Original Message-----
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: DSM: Is not the goal of Sudbury FREEDOM?

> If I give you freedom, you are being "educated," in so many
> ways. There is no getting around that.


If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO (do NOT reply to the mailing list) with the following
phrase in the BODY (not the subject) of the message, replacing
"email@host.dom" with the email address that you subscribed under:

unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model email@host.dom

If you are interested in the subject, but the volume of mail sent is too much,
you may wish to consider unsubscribing from this list and subscribing to

This mailing list is archived at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Mar 27 2002 - 19:39:49 EST