i don't see why these people cannot appreciate their children without stamping them first with a label such as this so they can feel "special" about them. as if one's child were not special by definition. it is sickening.
(the label itself is new age at its worst - vague, artificial and saccharine-sweet, in a manner that is bound to give one indigestion)
what disturbs me most, i guess, is the suggestion that only indigo or crystal children should be treated as normal human beings. it is never voiced, of course, but it is there. books on the subject abound with statements like "you cannot just tell an indigo child what to do without explaining why", "their wishes and feelings must be taken into account", "they must be allowed to make their own decisions", "they already have a well-developed personality that ought to be respected", "you can be there for them and help them grow, but not force them to do what you want" and so forth. one would think this was rather self-evident in the case of any child, but apparently it is not, not for the authors of those books. it raises a lot of questions: what would these individuals consider a common and acceptable way of bringing up an "ordinary" child, whatever that word is supposed to mean? since when does one have to be "indigo" or "crystal" or some other fancy label to be treated as a person? and where does that leave other children, who obviously do not deserve this and aren't persons in the full sense of the word? finally, does one's personhood depend on special gifts or other qualities one has, rather than on the sheer fact that one is there?
this is upsetting just to think about.
these are two sides of the same (unhealthy) coin.