My Two Geniuses & One Not-So-Smart DogSince every time I read a new study it basically tells me what I'm doing wrong as a parent, imagine my relief when I stumbled upon The Daily Beast article, "15 Signs You'll Raise a Genius." It appears, based on this article, that my kids are totally going to be geniuses. My work here is done. Moving on! Next stop, raising kids who never get allergies, cancer, or put their foot in their mouth. Surely there's a list for those things that I could simply check off and move along to that Pilates class I've always been meaning to take but don't have enough time given the focus on my children.
Just so I know what kind of company I'm in here, are you doing all of these things to make sure your child is a genius?
Does your home contain 500 books or more? Did you breastfeed "consistently" for one year? (Note to self: Do I knock off IQ points for every month shy of a year? Or just believe that four months and no TV in the nursery have me covered?) I totally didn't use cocaine while pregnant or nursing, did you? No? Then you're off to the right start -- kid genius-wise. You're also following up your child's day in pre-school with mommy and me yoga classes, right? Great. That's absolutely on par with not doing cocaine. Good job!
Now let's talk about your husband/partner. Was he 20 years old when your baby was born? What? Your pregnancy was planned? Whoopsie! Let's all just hope that our 30-year-old men didn't damage our baby's brain cells too much. Also, let's make sure you're not on welfare since your 20-year-old husband may have been too busy to finish college or trade school. Because that is a negative for your child's brain.
All of this is to say, what the hell? No one can possibly hit all 15 of these "signs" to make sure they are a genius. And if they do, but their child got the "dumb" genes in the family, then you're still out of luck.
Listen, I know the goal isn't to find a 19-year-old to impregnate you, or to quit your job so you can exclusively nurse for one year. These are simply signs that your child could have an advantage in the genius department. So, okay. I took the quiz and we're doing pretty well. I mean, seriously, I didn't do cocaine once during my pregnancy.
How did you do with these 15 signs?
This Hot Dad Wants to Do Your Ironing
KStew Refuses to Shower
This Hot Dad Wants to Cook You Dinner
This Hot Dad Cooks AND Does the Dishes
Comments 34
What that article fails to point out is that the choices parents make in regards to raising their children will naturally affect their intelligence. I don't have 500 plus books in my house, I've had to have welfare due to disability, I did not breastfeed due to medications, my child doesn't play an instrument, we don't do mommy and me anything, and she has her own TV that I allow her to watch for several hours. I also have a really intelligent 4 year old. She's reading early reader books and writing sentences. She's adding and subtracting. She understands a lot more than anyone would expect from a child of her age. My child is this intelligent, because I've made sure she would be. I was a gifted child and I just knew I would raise a gifted child. The TV shows I allow are the kind of shows that teach her something. We may not have a lot of books, but the ones we have are enough, because I actually read to her. I chose one of the best preschools in the city because I want her to learn as opposed to play all day. Statistics are a funny thing. They don't tell the whole story. They can't tell any story, because they're just numbers. Nothing is set in stone. All a parent has to do is make an effort to change the outcome of the situation.
article was stupid....I have a 2.5 year old who yes watches tv...both her dad and I work, but its not enough so we use food stamps. and she is really smart for her age..the local preschool said since she knew her abcs...and was counting, trying to write(still not down, she writes an a good...) and since we worked with her just keep doing that... so in my opinon this article was not helpful, and stupid
I think that whoever compiled these studies may have missed the point about correlation not being equal to causation. Especially when they cite things like attending preschool leading to a higher level of high school graduation.... could it not be an underlying figure, like affluent parents paying for preschool, that underlies both factors?
People who comment on articles like this frantically defending their child's intelligence and how the article is "stupid" because it mentions different choices than yours are missing the point. The original, linked article is simply a collection of studies showing some things that are thought to raise IQ. Of course breastfeeding is not a guaranteed smart pill - what if I had a child with Down's Syndrome that was breastfed and given no other food for 20 years? I breastfeed my children for many reasons, but I'm still saving for my retirement instead of hoping I'll be the mother of the next Steve Jobs. Lastly, I agree with Freela. The way scientific studies are often presented makes us think that "if you do this, you will get this" when in fact, unless you read the entire study, you're missing all the other factors. Like she said, does going to a good preschool mean that the preschool made you intelligent, or were your intelligent parents (genetics, home environment) the ones who were able and motivated to send you there? The world is not black and white, people, and if you're relying on "The Stir" alone to help you make parenting decisions or to hear the news or scientific information, that's one more indication of your child's possible IQ.
My kids will be geniuses for sure... lots of books, check, no drugs during pregnancy, check, husband in his 20's, check (ok so he was 24 for one and 26 for the other, that still counts right?), breastfed for a year, check, mommy and me yoga... hmmmm do we count wrestling kids in and out of the tub, clothes, car seats, high chairs, back packs, front packs, slings and a variety of other odd positions?
My first child was conceived when my husband and I were both 19. We were married and NOT on welfare. ACTUALLY, we were both serving in the military. My husband was a US Marine at the time and I was in the Navy. Maybe I needed more coffee before reading this so I wouldn't take it personally but I did. Not every young parent is on welfare or can't take care of their children. My husband and I are now 26 and have three amazing kids. We don't use any form of government assistance, even WIC although most in our economic bracket do). I've been a SAHM for 6 years and we learned how to stretch that dollar so that our children can have everything they need and a lot of what they want. I'm just sick of everyone knocking young parents.
Wow, either many people didn't bother to read the linked article or completely missed the entire point of said article. There's no need to get upset and start defending your child and choices in life. All the article stated was the results of several different studies that have shown object A has a direct correlation to object B. If you sit on your ass all day staring at the tv and playing video games you are more likely to be obese, and less likely to do well in literacy tests. Why? Because you're not interacting with your environment and learning necessary language skills. If there are no books in your house many many studies have shown your children will be at a greater risk to develop poor reading and studying skills. If your child can't read and doesn't know how to properly study this will effect their views on school. If they view school negatively they are less likely to attend college, which is optional not mandatory. No, you don't necessarily need 500 books for your child to be 'smart', and that's not what the article is saying. It's saying children who have access to books, and a wide variety at that, are more likely to succeed in reading and in school in general, both mandatory and optional schooling. I would presume students who don't have books at home, but are given access to a library, fare in between those with 500 books and those with none.