A somewhat different SOTW 1 question.

[IceFairy]

We are starting SOTW 1 next week. In the Introduction the activity focuses on family history. My kids have ZERO contact with their father and have not in over 1 1/2 years. I am not keen on dredging it all up....so do you think its OK to just skip the Intro? Or would you gloss over it and just omit the family history page with the parents marriage info, etc?

[BugsMama]

Skip that part. :) We did for a very similar reason....

[Mom2TheTeam]

I don't like talking much about my side of the family history...it gets messy and my kids are too young for it....I read that section even though we don't do SOTW. I would just talk about what history is and skip over the part about family. We have skipped family tree activities that have come up thus far. Save that discussion for when it's age appropriate. :)

[Walking-Iris]

I don't have the same situation as my dh is with us. But I do have a very difficult time explaining "my side" to my kids. They know that I had to have come from somewhere and it gets confusing at times to explain why a grandmother and aunts and cousins are not a part of their lives. They can understand that my father died before they were born, but they don't understand the missing grandmother situation. Especially when they talk about their nana and pappa being Daddy's mom and dad, and then look at me like I must have fallen of the moon.

 

I did the intro of SOTW because I have a very in depth genealogy and pictures from the 1900s on my father's side. But the tangled mess that is my mother's side is too painful to bring up. I have to wait until they are much older and more mature to really get into it. So I just covered what I was comfortable covering. Mainly focusing on family members that are a part of their lives rather than those that are not.

 

I would just skip those parts that are too difficult right now.

[mo2]

Skip it. You won't be missing anything.

[boscopup]

You don't have to do any activities. Pick the ones that work for you, and skip the rest.

[unfrumpable.]

I'd just skip it.

[LEK]

I did a different activity. My girls made a timeline of their own lives using photos. I made a timeline up which was 1 year per page, printed the relevant number of pages and handed them a heap of pics. They had a blast looking at how they have grown and changed over the years

[ScoutTN]

I did a different activity. My girls made a timeline of their own lives using photos. I made a timeline up which was 1 year per page, printed the relevant number of pages and handed them a heap of pics. They had a blast looking at how they have grown and changed over the years

 

 

 

We did this and it was fun! We did ours on one piece of posterboard per child. Simple.

[Walking-Iris]

I did a different activity. My girls made a timeline of their own lives using photos. I made a timeline up which was 1 year per page, printed the relevant number of pages and handed them a heap of pics. They had a blast looking at how they have grown and changed over the years

 

 

Yes there's that activity instead! Intro to the timeline. And I think the main point of that first SOTW lesson is just to emphasize our place in history.

[Ecclecticmum]

I just vaguely mentioned a few generations back, and two 'famous' people we were related to, which led to mini unit studies on both of them, and their 'world'. So one was back right at the beginning of the convicts in Aus, so we spoke about that, and another went all the way back to england in the 1500's, so the kids looked at life in court, the fashion, and that sort of thing.

 

I just glossed over people I didn't want to mention, either omitting them entirely, or saying their name along with several others. I mostly concentrated on my side of the family, as I don't know DH's family history (whereas a few years back, my grandmother researched into our family history).

[nomadgirl]

Skip it! I we did. He knows what a family tree is and such but, we didn't do ours.

[HS Mom in NC]

Skip it. It's antiquated and not constructive in your situation. Mine too.

 

My family is so complicated on my side it takes a diagram and lots of patience to explain it all. It requires abstract thinking that isn't characteristic of young elementary aged kids who are the target audience in SOTW 1. I had to do that with my teens when my mystery step-sister (abducted by her mother in a custodial interference situation) on one side resurfaced shortly after two former step-siblings (from my father's 3rd marriage) resurfaced from the other side and resumed contact with me a couple of years ago. I also consider my step-dad who married my mother when I was 3 just as much my father as my biological father who had regular, enthusiastic visitation with my bio brother and I every other weekend. I have 2 dads and that doesn't usually work in family trees. I also consider his sons that I was raised with to be my brothers.

 

My kids still get some of them mixed up, so we have to revisit the diagram sometimes to prep the teens before a family function. My 7 year old wouldn't be able to follow it, so she just goes with it. She's adopted from S. Korea, so her family tree is unknown to us, and while we would be glad to put her in mine 1. that tree has waaay too many gnarled branches to follow without tedious footnotes about some rather unpleasant folks and 2. I think a family tree is intended to be about physical ancestry so it's not useful or meaningful in my family.

 

My family isn't about DNA, so instead of a traditional family tree, we have more of a contemporary family patchwork quilt.

[Walking-Iris]

 

 

My family isn't about DNA, so instead of a traditional family tree, we have more of a contemporary family patchwork quilt.

 

 

 

Love that. My dh's family is a straight, perfectly symmetrical sturdy oak tree. I have the patchwork quilt, with some pieces hopelessly missing or lost. ;)