I'm going to agree with Tande on the fact that any "emotional trauma" the kids have been left with from this incident
should be totally fucking insignificant. They'll undoubtedly be put into counseling and spend years being told what an awful, wretched husk of a woman their mother is, though.
However, I'm not sure that the whole spoiled-rich-kid situation really applies here. During the nineties, my dad had a lucrative trading job, my mother was a high-strung socialite and we lived in a series of huge houses in Chicago's north shore suburbs. From about the age of six onwards, I walked to a state school a few blocks away every morning. My most exciting birthday presents were clothes and books. Television and games were a strictly weekend-only affair. If I broke something or cocked up my parents' social gatherings or suchlike, you'd better believe I was made well-aware of my errors.
The point I'm trying to make (which, intentionally or not, seems to also be echoed in the article given how rife it is with references to the family's affluence) is that people
can be well-off without overindulging their kids. What we've got here is tough love taken slightly too far. Opinions aside, though, this "news" item is just sensationalist tripe. I mean, look at the counterpoint presented by another local mother they interviewed:
|
Quote:
"I used to pull over and make the kids change seats. Also, I make sure the kids have their iPods and their games. And I have a minivan, so they're not up my neck all the time.
|
Holy shit. They're actually trying to portray this other soccer-mom dingbat's parenting in a good light! "
Well, I don't know what this bitch could possibly be doing wrong! I make sure my children are distracted at all times by never letting them go without entertainment for even a single second. Otherwise they're too difficult to raise!"
Jam it back in, in the dark.