The Mothers (And Fathers) Of Prevention
A guy named Jim read my LA Times op-ed and sent me this posting from straightdope.com, from a certain Mrs. Zappa, whose daughter threw a tantrum in the grocery store. Mrs. Z could teach all those "go right ahead" mommying practitioners dashing off nasty e-mails to me a thing or two. Mrs. Z writes about her daughter:
I got her home, by which time she had started to calm down. We canceled her birthday party (scheduled for 2 days later) but could not reach all the attendees because some had not RSVP'ed so they showed up anyway, that was pretty mortifying. I still get sick to my stomach thinking about that whole scenario.The one funny thing about it: A few months later, she came to me with a very serious, sad expression on her face and said, with GREAT pathos, "It really hurt my feelings when you cancelled my birthday party". A Good Mommy would surely respond to that with sympathy and sorry and hugs, right? She surely had every right to expect that, right? HAH!! I said "Good!". In utter shock, she said "You're glad you hurt my feelings?". I said "I'm *glad* you were upset. That was a punishment for your really horrible behavior. If you weren't upset, it didn't teach you anything. Misbehaving causes you to lose good things".
Moon Unit's daddy writes:
We tried calling all the guests who RSVP'ed, but a few did not get the word about the cancellation. When kids came to the door, I got down to their level and explained that Moon Unit was being punished, and there would be no party. I gave them their goody bag, thanked them for coming, and was treated to the most amazing look of "ZOMG! Parents can do *THAT*!!! " as the kids and parents left.I punish my kids so hard it improves other kids' behavior!! <- Evil Daddy Grin (tm)
Interesting. Somehow I manage to discipline my kids and keep them well behaved and still show a measure of sympathy and caring for their hurt feelings. But I guess that's just the kind of crappy mom I am!
Julie at November 25, 2009 12:22 AM
As if naming her "Moon Unit" was sufficiently punishing? I mean, he gets a nice, ordinary name like "Frank," and what does he do? Names his children "Dweezil" and "Moon Unit." I always got a chuckle out of the name Dweezil. I had a history teacher in high school, before I had ever heard of Dweezil Zappa, who used to jokingly refer to the students as "dweezils," or "dweebs."
When I first heard the name "Moon Unit," I thought it sounded like a valley girl expression.
"The girl's a total moon unit, ya know?"
"Oh, fer sher. She just makes me, like, oh, so furioso."
"Totally, she's like the biggest space cadet. She's a total moon unit."
Aside from the atrocious job they did of naming their children, sounds like Dweezil and Moon Unit have good parents.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 12:26 AM
For the record, I don't think these are the actual Zappas, as he died 12 years before the posting date. Besides, Moon is the eldest child, a few years older than Dweezil, not the other way 'round.
And while I loved him madly, I don't know exactly how much instruction you'd want to take from from FZ's parenting, or how much he would offer... He talked about it in the book a little, but with some humility.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at November 25, 2009 12:34 AM
"still show a measure of sympathy and caring for their hurt feelings."
I followed the link, the mother was saying that it was a blatant dig for sympathy, the kind that only kids can pull :-D
If she apologized for hurting her daughter's feelings by canceling the party, that immediately negates a good bit of the benefit the child got from it.
crella at November 25, 2009 2:48 AM
I'm wondering what birthday we were on when the party got canceled. Moon Unit was still young enough to throw a tantrum, but old enough to confront her mother with her hurt feelings. I'm guessing three or four, possibly five.
In any case, that makes throwing the tantrum even more punishable. Tantrums are more understandable when the child lacks communication skills. But if you're old enough to have a discussion with your mother about how your feelings were hurt, then you're old enough to express your displeasure without making a total jackass of yourself in public by having a tantrum.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 4:35 AM
You know - I totally don't believe all of these "I was a perfect child who never disobeyed my parents" stories. I think it's a severe case of cognitive dissonance!! My grandfather always moaned "back in my days, we showed RESPECT for our elders". He was talking about MY generation!! And here is MY generation talking about how "we NEVER disobeyed OUR parents". Um. Yes we did. We were also whiny, bratty annoying little punks that bothered people outside of the home. Why do you think so many of our generation don't want kids?!?! I distinctly remembered bus drivers who would not pick up kids at our school because the students were too loud and disturbing. The drivers would just coast by if there were too many kids at the stop.
So - should kids who are having meltdowns be thrown off the plane? Yes. Should crybabies and whiners get the boot? No. That's just kids being kids and they are all annoying. ALL OF THEM!!! If you know a kid that isn't annoying then you need to spend more time with them!! If you know a perfectly well behaved kid, then obviously you don't live with them. Every kid has shitty moods that leads to crying, whining and basically bad behavior. They simply don't have the emotional stability to identify and deal with their own stress/moodiness. Tantrums are not caused by a lack of discipline. They are caused by children who have not learned basic emotional controls. Think of the guy who is yelling at a flight attendant because the plane is late and he has a big meeting and BLAH BLAH. Take those exact emotions and put them in a child and voila. You will see a temper tantrum. The parents have not instilled in the child a means to control and voice their emotions properly. Or the child is having a hard time learning this concept. In the example above - the threat of cancelling the birthday party during the meltdown obviously did not STOP the meltdown!! And kids don't learn that fast!! There were more tantrums in Ms Zappas life, I am sure of it! And as for the kids who left the birthday party? Do you think the kids learned from Mr. Zappas lesson? FUCK NO!!! That is just plain naive!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA "I punish my kids so hard it improves other kids' behavior!! " HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA WHAT A JOKE!
Karen at November 25, 2009 5:40 AM
Been doing this with my girls for years, now. Last week, #2 lost the privilege of going to the homecoming dance this year (she's a freshman, and I really wanted her to go, it's kind of like a rite of passage and she's in the high school band) because of her fresh mouth and lousy report card. At first I thought things would be okay, because #1 had decided she wasn't going, anyway. But then she changed her mind, and #2 was chomping at the bit to go. I kept her home. She was pretty upset, and it hurt me to see it, but I stuck to my guns over this, especially because of her crappy grades. This week, she has shown some improvement (90% on a math test, and completed and graded B+ projects in English and science), and I have a parent-teacher meeting next Monday morning. (I'm hoping for the best. She also apologized for her mouthiness, so maybe that hope is justified. We'll see.)
Flynne at November 25, 2009 5:40 AM
If she's younger that about 5, the lesson won't be remembered long-term, so you ruined a birthday for nothing. If she's older than 5 and tantruming, you have bigger issues. And anyone who names their kid moon unit has issues anyway.
We canceled a trip to sea world once because of behavior, but it wasn't punishing a lot of other kids as well. I can''t agree with what they did. If you can't find a better way to discipline your kids than ruining a birthday of which they don't have that many at the age where parties are a huge big deal, then your parenting bag is rather small.
A freshman, on the other hand, has 3 other chances at homecoming, so that I can get behind. A freshman is also old enough to actually ruin her life with bad grades and bad behavior, so you really need to make an impression.
momof4 at November 25, 2009 5:49 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1678929">comment from FlynneGood for you, Flynne. My neighbor also shows her kids, gently but firmly, that there are consequences for bad behavior. They are taught to think about other people. This means they do this voluntarily. The little boy, one morning, asked me what my favorite colors are. When he got home from school, he made me one of those...dreamcatchers, I think they're called...out of popsicle sticks and yarn. Not a school assignment. They'd learned to make them in school and he thought he'd make me one. It hangs in my kitchen. The little girl will just come up and hug me. These kids are kind, loving, other-concerned kids because that is how they are raise.
Oh, and when they get noisy on the side of my house when I'm writing or about to nap, I just ask them to play in their yard. And then, because they're considerate of me, when I leave the house, I go back to their house and tell them they can play alongside my house without bothering me.
Amy Alkon at November 25, 2009 6:01 AM
Momof4 writes: If she's younger that about 5, the lesson won't be remembered long-term,
Bullshit.
Anyway, I think the point of the account is not to establish that once in her life, Mrs. Zappa turned into the Wicked Witch of the Worst Kind who ruined poor Moon Unit's birthday party. It was to establish a pattern of discipline. (And Mrs. Zappa did not ruin the child's birthday party. The child did.)
That aside, I think children should have it communicated that their actions carry consequences and if they're operating under the assumption that certain special occasions are "off-limits," they are mistaken and should be corrected. If the situation warrants, you should cancel Christmas.
Karen: There were more tantrums in Ms Zappas life, I am sure of it! And as for the kids who left the birthday party? Do you think the kids learned from Mr. Zappas lesson? FUCK NO!!! That is just plain naive!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA "I punish my kids so hard it improves other kids' behavior!! " HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA WHAT A JOKE!
Karen, you sound rather hysterical. If this is meant to convince us all that Mrs. Zappa's methods weren't effective, you failed miserably. You simply don't know what went on in their lives, or how much influence it had on other kids' behavior. And pretending you do only makes you look ridiculous.
For all you know, those children did indeed leave with a sense of apprehension that their birthday parties could be taken away. And I'd be willing to bet that her children thought twice before resorting that measure.
I don't care how old the child is: a tantrum is voluntary. Will children get upset? Of course. Will they cry when they get upset? Yes. Loud? Sometimes. I think children should be allowed to cry when they get upset. You take them outside and try to calm them until the crying abates. "If you don't stop that crying, I'll give you something to cry about..." is really, really bad parenting. Will they kick, throw things, hit things? Only if you've made it clear that they can get away with it. That should be punished. They can't well control what is and isn't going to upset them, and keeping the tears in check is decidedly an adult skill. But they can control how they express it. Tantrums are a choice.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 6:28 AM
"Momof4 writes: If she's younger that about 5, the lesson won't be remembered long-term,"
Really? Do you remember your 4th b-day? Your 3rd? Not the pics of it, not the stories, but you actually being there? I doubt it, since when memory reorganizes itself we lose access to most of what happens prior to age 5ish.
So, I repeat. When she's 12 and really wanting to sneak somewhere she's not supposed to go, she is not going to say hey, I remember my whack-job hippie parents cancelling my party, I better not sneak off!
Cancelling the celebration of the birth of christ? I think not, there are better ways to parent. But please, keep enlightening us, oh wise childless-babysitting one! We bow to the fount of your knowledge garnered by years of watching others do what you -biologocally-never can.
momof4 at November 25, 2009 6:37 AM
Oh, and forcing yourself to cry at the top of your lungs for HOURS is a decidedly preschool skill, and at some point consequences to it need to be put in place. So yes, "If you don't stop that crying, ____ will happen" is really good parenting, which parents know. Something you-oh right-aren't.
momof4 at November 25, 2009 6:39 AM
Which stories are those, again?
For the record, I was an awful child, willfully disobedient into my teens.
Pseudonym at November 25, 2009 6:41 AM
I just read the link that Amy posted. The child in question (not the Moon Unit Zappa we know, since Moon Unit is older than Dweezil) was "about six," started screaming when she was told it was her brother's turn in the truck-shaped shopping cart.
The incident that prompted the party cancellation was caused by her fussing over being paired with someone she didn't like during an event at Brownie Camp. When her mother said that she needed to settle down or they'd leave, she didn't, and mother made good on her threat, and Moon Unit resisted, even biting her mother.
Under those circumstances, I would say canceling the party was mandatory. So, put me down under the "You go, girl!" category. I am firmly with the mother on this one.
In fact, though I am against spanking, a situation like that would be the best argument I could be presented with in favor of spanking. It is, after all, a life lesson. If you hurt someone (such as Moon Unit did by biting her mother), they're going to hurt you back. The laws of the land say they have the right to hurt you back in self-defense. You could argue, I suppose, that a good paddling serves to illustrate this point.
Notice, I am still against spanking. It is never a good idea. It blurs the line between teaching a child that their actions are unacceptable vs. teaching them that the child is unacceptable. Spanking tells a child that he's unacceptable, that might makes right, and that violence is how you get others to do what you want. I'm merely saying that would be the best argument for spanking.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 6:52 AM
Good parenting requires following through with your threats or promises. I never used corporal punishment with my kids which demanded a large time investment. My kids tell me now that my cool down time, the time to chill before punishment is handed out, was always proportional to the crime.
Roger at November 25, 2009 6:58 AM
They may not remember the specific details of the incident, but they learn in their little hearts that mom and dad are in charge and misbehaving isn't worth it. As to being old enough to try manipulation, I once ran across my daughter, not yet old enough to walk, looking in the closet door mirror, alternately practicing crying and coughing. It went on for several minutes, and was really funny and instructive.
Robin at November 25, 2009 7:27 AM
I just read the story at the link, and yes, this punishment was totally appropriate, and I'm guessing long overdue. Any six-year-old who acts like that must have been getting away with horrible behavior for years. Good for the mom for putting her foot down!
KarenW at November 25, 2009 7:46 AM
I am not hysterical Amy, no need to be that way simply because I don't agree with you. I find your methods of making a point rather rude, to be honest. Why is it that you feel the need to insult me? I find you are often this way in your opinions. Anyone who doesn't agree with you is "naive" or "foolish" or "ridiculous". For a woman who uses the words "asshat" and "moron" to describe people she finds particularly annoying, you sure are quick to throw around words like "hysterical" and "ridiculous" to other people.
You feel that I look "ridiculous" for thinking that the kids invited to the party probably weren't influenced at all by Mr. Zappas punishment...as I understand it, you feel I do not have enough information to make this type of call. So - based on your very own logic, Mr. Zappas claim that his punishment "improves other kids' behavior" would be equally ridiculous for the same reasons you state.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
Karen at November 25, 2009 7:47 AM
Um, other Karen, why are you yelling at Amy for Patrick's comments?
KarenW at November 25, 2009 7:54 AM
Yeah, I was trying to figure out why she was yelling at Amy, too.
Robin at November 25, 2009 7:58 AM
She probably mistook Patrick's comments for Amy's. And she's cited wikipedia here for a definition of "cognitive dissonance", probably not realizing that one could just google her, and find the same thing.
Flynne at November 25, 2009 8:03 AM
This is a great example of the need for fathers, often a calming influence in the home, to be around. Nuclear is not always the best first option. The mother sounds like a controlling, vindictive bitch to me.
Remember, their little brains are still developing. It's like expecting a diabetic to "just get over it".
Eric at November 25, 2009 8:08 AM
What a great idea!
Friend of mine's rather excitable 8 year old nephew broke one of his things one day. Not exactly a toy, but something he'd cared about. He just looked right at the kid and said, "OK, that means I get to break one of your toys the next time I come over your house." That same open-mouthed shock... but the kid didn't break any of our stuff after that.
"I said "I'm *glad* you were upset. That was a punishment for your really horrible behavior. If you weren't upset, it didn't teach you anything."
I'm going to put that on my wall. That approach works on adults too. The book "How to Talk so Kids Will Listen/And Listen So Kids Will Talk" had a lot of similar stuff.
"You know - I totally don't believe all of these 'I was a perfect child who never disobeyed my parents' stories."
My mother used to regale me with tales of the toddler misdeeds of my older siblings. Burnt rubber duckies on the stove, flooded bathtubs, that sort of thing. I asked her what bad things I did at age 2 and she said Nothing! I was good as gold, she said. I was soooo disappointed and actually felt there was something wrong with me - maybe I was repressed?
But then I thought, No, I made up for it in my teens but I was good at not getting caught.
vi at November 25, 2009 8:23 AM
>> A Good Mommy would surely respond to that with sympathy and sorry and hugs, right?
No, a Good Mommy would have explained the punishment and what the intended outcome would be, and then maybe given her something (like an upcoming holiday) to look forward to. Instead, she left her child (who is trying to reason out why her birthday party was taken away) with a petty response. What lesson do you think this child will really have taken away from this experience- responsibility or resentment?
Eric again at November 25, 2009 8:28 AM
Momof4 wrote: "Really? Do you remember your 4th b-day? Your 3rd? Not the pics of it, not the stories, but you actually being there? I doubt it, since when memory reorganizes itself we lose access to most of what happens prior to age 5ish."
I don't remember everything from when I was 4, but I have a LOT of very clear memories from that point of my life. One of which involves a punishment - we were getting ready to move from San Antonio to Las Vegas and my mom kept packing my little suitcase, and I (having a tantrum) kept opening the suitcase and throwing the clothes out. About the third time this happened, my mom told me I could re-pack the suitcase myself. I was pretty shocked - that's not how that was supposed to go! So I told her I couldn't - I didn't know how. And she cold-heartedly told me I should have thought about that before throwing a fit. I could tell you about 20 other things from that age, and some from when I was three. So yeah, kids remember things if it makes enough of an impression.
Anne at November 25, 2009 8:29 AM
Patrick wrote: "Spanking tells a child that he's unacceptable, that might makes right, and that violence is how you get others to do what you want."
Really? Well, shit. I was spanked as a child and never learned any of those things. I guess my parents failed in teaching me those lessons :eye roll:
Anne at November 25, 2009 8:33 AM
Man, these parenting skills "debates" are hilarious.
I'll have to tell my in-laws about it tomorrow. My husband comes from a family of eleven kids, five boys and six girls, all alive and well.
And guess what? They all get along. When my MIL died, (FIL died a couple of years earlier)the lawyer was amazed at the lack of infighting. And they weren't exactly the Walton's, (for those old enough to get the reference). When they start telling childhood stories, it's...quite memorable.
Interestingly, the few who have kids of their own have no more than two.
Pricklypear at November 25, 2009 8:38 AM
Eric again writes: No, a Good Mommy would have explained the punishment and what the intended outcome would be, and then maybe given her something (like an upcoming holiday) to look forward to. Instead, she left her child (who is trying to reason out why her birthday party was taken away) with a petty response. What lesson do you think this child will really have taken away from this experience- responsibility or resentment?
On the contrary, she told her daughter exactly why her party was taken away. She told her that her daughter had committed some pretty horrible behavior, and that her party being taken away was punishment.
And considering the punishment followed the crime, I think a six-year-old can figure out that it was done because she refused to settle down when directed to, had to be forcibly dragged instead of coming when she was told, bit her mother and climbed on the car. Since the party was only two days after the incident, it's reasonable to expect that they were placing their "party is canceled" calls within a reasonable length of time after the offense.
I would have a hard time believing that Moon Unit didn't know exactly why her party was canceled.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 8:38 AM
Anne writes: Really? Well, shit. I was spanked as a child and never learned any of those things.
Bullshit.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 8:40 AM
"Interesting. Somehow I manage to discipline my kids and keep them well behaved and still show a measure of sympathy and caring for their hurt feelings. But I guess that's just the kind of crappy mom I am!"
I'm with you on this. I believe in punishment, and with a 6 yr old, it's far better if it's SWIFT and IMMEDIATE, like standing in a corner, or a time out, or taking a toy or privilege away right after the incident. Not cancelling a party days away when there's disconnect between behavior and punishment.
The thing is, I deal with a lot of parents whose "discipline" is borderline sadistic. They claim they're disciplining - spouting spare the rod, spoil the child kind of rhetoric, as I often read here - but there is a fine line between discipline and emotional abuse. Canceling a young child's birthday party cuts awfully close to that, in my opinion.
What puts it over the edge is grown adults celebrating such a cruel move done to a child when there are far better and more effective ways to discipline. A parent can discipline in a manner that does not cause lasting effects on the relationship with the child. Hopefully, as mom of four points out, the child won't remember this because, if she does - and continues to employ such needlessly cruel punishments - I'd expect the mother/child relationship to be pretty difficult in the years ahead.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 8:41 AM
Patrick - sooo - you know me, and my thought processes? Really? Do tell.
Anne at November 25, 2009 8:42 AM
Loveysoul, I could not disagree more. This child, if what the mom wrote is true, was OUT OF CONTROL. Something drastic needed to be done. As if the mom didn't already try time-outs! Can you imagine this girl at age 10 or 13 if her behavior was allowed to continue? She was six, not two, and obviously was pushing her mom as far as she could. She knew her birthday was only two days away, and still thought that she could act that way! I've never had to cancel a party or other huge event with my kids, but I sure threatened to do so and they shaped up quick. And if they didn't, hell yes I would have followed through.
KarenW at November 25, 2009 9:02 AM
Not to quibble momof4 but christ wasnt bor in december, the only reason we even have christmas is as a hold over form the catholics PR campigain to convert the few germanic tribes they hadnt slaughtered to the point of extinction.
You may as well celebrate the aniversery of the creation of the spanish inquisition
lujlp at November 25, 2009 9:06 AM
Anne: Patrick - sooo - you know me, and my thought processes? Really? Do tell.
No. I just know a few things about human nature. Not that I'm an expert, but certain things are fairly obvious.
I am not a violent person, but for sake of illustrating the point without using something really awkward like "Person A" and "Person B," say I walked up to someone and punched him in the face. What is the message I'm sending?
"I punched you in the face because I found your actions unacceptable." Yeah, right. If I punched someone in the face, I'm telling them I find them personally unacceptable. Even hateful to me. Communicated: "You're unacceptable. So unacceptable, I'm willing to hurt you.
I'm also communicating that regardless of the issue we're in contention over, the fact that I can punch him in the face is me communicating to him that I'm right. And unless he can hit me back harder, as far as I'm concerned, that means I'm right. Ethics, morals, legalities, etc. of whatever it is we're disputing, none of that matters one iota the Neanderthal I'm acting like in this hypothetical situation. I'm bigger and stronger, therefore I'm right. Communicated: MIght makes right.
(Man, I sound like such an asshole, don't I?)
And, in logical progression from this point, I've communicated that I can end his opposition to mine (on whatever point of contention) just because I can punch him in the face. Communicated: Violence is how you get others to do what you want.
I'm not saying you were seriously scarred over this necessarily (although that's a distinct possibility), and I'm not saying that this horrible message to send to a child wasn't somewhat mitigated by your parents' subsequent behavior. They might have been very nice and loving afterward, to somewhat negate the message that spanking sent. But you can't tell me -- after you ran to your bedroom, red in face, shrieking, with tears flowing, after having just been paddled -- that your child's brain didn't entertain the idea that your parents hit you because they didn't love you, that they thought you personally were unacceptable, that you were a horrible person, that you thought that they were being unfair but were allowed to be unfair because they were bigger and stronger than you and that beating was a pretty damned good way to get someone else to do what they wanted.
Go ahead. Tell me you never once entertained those thoughts after a nice heavy paddling. I could use a good hearty laugh on this miserable rainy day.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 9:06 AM
lujlp wrote: Not to quibble momof4 but christ wasnt bor in december, the only reason we even have christmas is as a hold over form the catholics PR campigain to convert the few germanic tribes they hadnt slaughtered to the point of extinction.
You may as well celebrate the aniversery of the creation of the spanish inquisition
Word!
Patrick at November 25, 2009 9:10 AM
Actually, Patrick, I always knew my parents loved me. About the closest I came to the feelings you're talking about was the rebellious thought of "I somehow doubt that" when Daddy would trot out the tired "This is going to hurt me more than it hurts you." That aside, no, I never felt that *I* was unacceptable, or that my parents didn't love me. Out of curiosity, were you spanked growing up? I suspect that if someone is spanked wrong, they could have those feelings. But I was always spanked with a CLEAR understanding of why and what the punishment was. I would no more have those thoughts you talk about than if some other form of punishment was meted out.
Honestly, if you're correct, I should be some alcoholic or drug user, to get over my thoughts of being unacceptable, and I should regularly slap people in the face if I don't agree with them. I don't do either, surprisingly enough by your logic.
Anne at November 25, 2009 9:16 AM
Well, KarenW, if you're going to threaten a punishment, you have to follow through. But I don't think that should've been the threat. Would she cancel Christmas too...for a 6 yr old?
There are other ways to discipline, and if the child's behavior was that out of control, it's more likely that the mom had not been effectively using those methods. She overshot to make up for previous lapses.
In my experience, and contrary to what Amy may believe, parents who take this kind of hard line approach in early childhood end up with the MOST unruly children in the teen years, not the least. It does not result in the kind of pleasant, obedient older children that one might presume. Often, it seriously damages the parent/child relationship.
Besides, there's really no connection between a 6 yr old throwing a tantrum and/or testing boundaries and what sort of older child he/she will become. That is the presumption that annoys me. It's like you all think this typical developmental stage will inevitably lead to a juvenile delinquent. It does not. In fact, it is far more likely that a child who has been harshly and overly punished, starting at a very early age, will become the rebellious juvenile delinquent.
Look, the goal is to teach consequences, not traumatize your child. And what bothers me is the parent patting herself on the back - and getting cudos - for this. Punishment is not something a good parent celebrates with glee. If you're doing a victory dance for canceling your young child's birthday party, there's something wrong.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 9:22 AM
"Not to quibble momof4 but christ wasnt bor in december, "
Yes yes Looj, again with the anti-christian rhetoric. I have no idea when Christ was born. The 25th is the day chosen to celebrate it. Works for me.
Cause yeah, christians are the ONLY people in history who have slaughtered other groups, right? yep, only people. No atheists, no muslims, no hindus (caste system has killed millions), just christians. You got it! Bravo!
"after you ran to your bedroom, red in face, shrieking, with tears flowing, after having just been paddled -- that your child's brain didn't entertain the idea that your parents hit you because they didn't love you, that they thought you personally were unacceptable, that you were a horrible person, that you thought that they were being unfair but were allowed to be unfair because they were bigger and stronger than you and that beating was a pretty damned good way to get someone else to do what they wanted."
I can tell you I never felt that. Upset that I got spanked, sure, punishments upset people, but never that I wasn't loved. No more upset, and certainly less unloved, than a little girl with no birthday party.
momof4 at November 25, 2009 9:22 AM
Would I cancel Christmas? No. We would still go to church, have a big dinner, etc. Would I take at least some presents away? Yes. Again, it's never had to come to that with me, and I imagine not with most families. I've cancelled small things because of misbehavior, like a trip to McDonald's or going to the movies. My kids see that there are consequences and they aren't going to take their chances on getting a birthday or Christmas cancelled. Oh and by the way, the mom did not LIKE canceling the party! If she is happy about it now, it's because it was effective - it obviously made a difference in her daughter's behavior. If it didn't work, why would she be bragging about it now?
KarenW at November 25, 2009 9:36 AM
A child's conclusion about whether the punishment is attributable to them or their behavior is based on what the adult tells them, not the method of punishment.
If you tell a child "I am punishing you because you did wrong thing X," that's what they'll believe. If you say "I am punishing you because you are bad," that's what they'll believe. The method of punishment is irrelevant.
Different children react to different methods of punishment differently, and to raise a child well one must find a method of punishment that constitutes actual negative reinforcement. When the principal paddled me in the third grade, he hit so softly that I almost laughed; that was not an effective punishment. Similarly, some kids don't respond to time-outs or loss of privileges.
Sometimes spanking is sufficiently negative to affect a child's behavior. When that's the case, it is acceptable to use as part of a fair, consistent program of discipline, since spanking is not abuse.
As we know, abuse can be emotional and verbal as well as physical. Attempting to decrease abuse by decreasing spanking is like trying to decrease murder by decreasing guns: it doesn't work, because abusers don't care about the rules.
Pseudonym at November 25, 2009 10:09 AM
Momof4: Yes yes Looj, again with the anti-christian rhetoric. I have no idea when Christ was born. The 25th is the day chosen to celebrate it. Works for me.
Cause yeah, christians are the ONLY people in history who have slaughtered other groups, right? yep, only people. No atheists, no muslims, no hindus (caste system has killed millions), just christians. You got it! Bravo!
It didn't sound to me like lujlp was saying anything like that. But regardless, it was accurate. I don't dispute that other religions, or even non-religious types, have done some pretty atrocious things, but I'm not going to pretend that Christianity doesn't have some serious black marks in its past.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 10:10 AM
My apologies to Amy for misreading the order of the posts. Also - using the word "yelling" at at someone for post on a blog says more about your mood while reading it than my mood while writing)
I address the following comments to "patrick" in place (repost from above). Sorry again Amy!
I am not hysterical Patrick, no need to be that way simply because I don't agree with you. I find your methods of making a point rather rude, to be honest. Why is it that you feel the need to insult me? I find you are often this way in your opinions. Anyone who doesn't agree with you is "naive" or "foolish" or "ridiculous". For a woman who uses the words "asshat" and "moron" to describe people she finds particularly annoying, you sure are quick to throw around words like "hysterical" and "ridiculous" to other people. (still relevant after reading Patricks posts)
You feel that I look "ridiculous" for thinking that the kids invited to the party probably weren't influenced at all by Mr. Zappas punishment...as I understand it, you feel I do not have enough information to make this type of call. So - based on your very own logic, Mr. Zappas claim that his punishment "improves other kids' behavior" would be equally ridiculous for the same reasons you state.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
Karen at November 25, 2009 10:28 AM
The thing is, I deal with a lot of parents whose "discipline" is borderline sadistic. They claim they're disciplining - spouting spare the rod, spoil the child kind of rhetoric, as I often read here - but there is a fine line between discipline and emotional abuse. Canceling a young child's birthday party cuts awfully close to that, in my opinion.
I remember my 5th birthday party. I've always had food issues, some things I just couldn't eat (and still can't) eat without vomiting. My mother fixed something for dinner that I just couldn't eat. I can't remember what it was, I just remember sitting in the kitchen, by myself with the lights out crying because I wanted to finish my dinner but couldn't. My parents insisted that I wouldn't get any presents or cake if I didn't 'clean my plate'. I just couldn't make myself do it. So, instead of cake and presents, I got a vigorous spanking and was sent to bed. I still don't know what happened to my presents.
I admire the mom for sticking to her guns, and my crime was obviously less significant that that little girl's crime was, but I wonder what this mom is going to do when the really big issues come down the pipe.
As for me, I wasn't a very rebellious kid. The worst thing I did was smoke a few cigarettes at school dances. I never drank, never snuck out of the house, never mouthed off. Then when I went away to college I just quit coming home. It is amazing the freedom when you realize that DNA doesn't make family.
-Julie
JulieW at November 25, 2009 10:32 AM
When I worked in a public library, I got to see various examples of parenthood.
One young woman used to come in with her children, and occasionally with her husband. She was beautiful and serene, and it seemed that she was always pregnant or had just had another baby. I remember she kept her hair in a turban and wore long, colorful skirts.
Her children were well-behaved. They were quiet,(for little kids anyway) but they seemed happy, and didn't appear to be afraid of their parents at all. Believe me, we staff members were always checking them out because it was so unusual.
On one occasion, one of the boys started protesting about one of the other kids, and mom just looked at him. Didn't say a word, just looked at him, without a smile. He shut up.
That was that. I will never forget it.
I think there were five of them, the oldest one no more then ten. Nicely dressed, clean, loved their books. Mom came in with them and stayed with them. Amazing in itself.
I don't know how she did it, but it worked. Maybe at home it was a different story, but at the library, it was just impressive.
Pricklypear at November 25, 2009 10:59 AM
JulieW, I got paddled one time for not eating canned peaches. I remember sitting at the table with those soggy, gooey things looking at me, and being told I couldn't leave the table until I ate them. My bright idea was to wait until everyone was gone, then quietly slip them down into the sink. I was smart enough to not run the garbage disposal, but of course they were still visible in there, below the little rubber flaps. I got my ass paddled, for lying, and sent to bed. I still felt like I'd rather get a spanking than eat those awful peaches, but it sure seemed like I couldn't win. My parents weren't into "picking their battles." Obedience was required in every situation, regardless of how trivial it was, and I became a lot more rebellious than you as a teenager. I am glad I don't have kids, and will not have to face those issues a second time.
Pirate Jo at November 25, 2009 11:06 AM
"As for me, I wasn't a very rebellious kid. The worst thing I did was smoke a few cigarettes at school dances. I never drank, never snuck out of the house, never mouthed off. Then when I went away to college I just quit coming home."
That's pretty rebellious, just delayed rebellion. You clearly didn't have a good relationship with your parents (and I believe you've shared stories of their abuse in previous posts, so it's understandable).
My point is that kids who are too harshly or excessively disciplined, especially starting when they are very young, often end up being more difficult rather than less.
I see no reason to applaud this mother's actions. She did something that many of us do - she responded too harshly to overcompensate for previous lapses or ineffective methods.
If they're honest, almost every parent will admit to having been too lax at some moment or another -usually when we're tired or distracted - and we let it slide when a child is testing the boundaries, as children will do. Then, when the child tests us again, because, hey, it worked last time, we angrily and reflexively respond with a punishment that's WAY too extreme.
The anger is really at ourselves - for failing before. We feel helpless to think of a proper way to address the situation. But the child pays for it with some outlandish punishment.
As for what you went through, in recent years, parents have been advised not to force a clean plate. It was a misguided standard that has no bearing on how a child will grow or eat later. Kids will not starve. Your parents were wrong, but they were following a traditional practice at the time. Still, it scarred you enough that you remember your 5th brirthday, so I kind of fear this little girl will remember NOT having hers.
Looking back, I don't think this will be her mom's proudest parental moment.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 11:07 AM
Julie, that sounds awful. Food was practically the only thing my family didn't fight over, but using food as a means of control is totally inhumane. Withholding food is cruel, but forcing someone to eat noxious substances isn't much better.
Karen: I also disagree with the name-calling on this blog, which Amy participates in as well. Ironic for someone who wrote a book about rude people. But yes, it's just a blog. Some of these topics are highly relevant, and some of the posters do stay away from the insults and have really insightful things to say.
Pseudonym: "If you say "I am punishing you because you are bad," that's what they'll believe. The method of punishment is irrelevant."
This is exactly the type of punishment I got as a kid, and you are right. It sucks and it doesn't teach anything except distrust.
vi at November 25, 2009 11:09 AM
Excellent post, Pseudonym. Also, Patrick, I did some thinking over lunch. Your argument that spanking teaches "Might makes right" is really flawed. It can be applied to ANY punishment - only change the word "might" for "power". I read in another post of yours on another thread that when you'd babysit you'd force the child into a corner and if they got up, you'd pick them up and put them back in the corner. How is that any different than spanking? How is any punishment not teaching that power controls? Restrictions, grounding, etc. - all teach that the person who has the power can hand out the punishments. And truthfully, that's a valid lesson for kids. When we are grown, the system is much more complicated - as children, the parents are the legislative, judicial, and executive branches of our "government" - but as adults, we see the same things in play. If we break the law (rules), then someone will determine a punishment and mete it out.
In my opinion it's not as important how a parent punishes as much as that the punishment is consistent and that the child understands why he is being punished. ANY punishment, without those distinctions, can possibly be abusive and will probably be ineffective. Aside from that, though, I think that what a parent chooses to do regarding a particular infraction is largely up to them and their knowledge of their child.
Anne at November 25, 2009 11:21 AM
My parents weren't into "picking their battles." Obedience was required in every situation, regardless of how trivial it was, and I became a lot more rebellious than you as a teenager.
Yup, I was required to follow all rules absolutely, no matter how stupid they were. I was a very well behaved kid, but there was a seething anger under the surface. I didn't even realize it at the time I'm sure it is a very difficult balance to find...not being too permissive, but not hammering on little kids until they rebel.
That's pretty rebellious, just delayed rebellion. You clearly didn't have a good relationship with your parents (and I believe you've shared stories of their abuse in previous posts, so it's understandable).
Yes, but I am an odd combination of a very rebellious and yet very compliant person. If I can help someone out or do a good dead, I will do it without complaint. I show up to work, dress appropriately, do all of those things that adults are expected to do. But I have this little kernel of rebellion that people just don't see coming.
It was a misguided standard that has no bearing on how a child will grow or eat later...Your parents were wrong, but they were following a traditional practice at the time. Still, it scarred you enough that you remember your 5th brirthday,
And my parents were (and probably still are) rather sadistic and controlling. This was a single isolated incident in a childhood of hell. I brought it up to remind us as we discuss this that kids will often remember things you don't realize and the repercussions and results might come years later. I don't see this young girl separating from her parents because she wasn't allowed a 6th birthday party, but if this is a pattern, the mom might have consequences coming to her as well.
-Julie
JulieW at November 25, 2009 11:33 AM
"I see no reason to applaud this mother's actions. She did something that many of us do - she responded too harshly to overcompensate for previous lapses or ineffective methods."
Excellent point. It kind of makes you wonder why the 6-year-old ever got to the point where she behaved so badly in the first place.
Pirate Jo at November 25, 2009 11:34 AM
I think cancelling birthday parties or other celebrations is a wonderful strategy for any child who is truly out of control. I did it once myself. I can't understand how some people on this board seem to think it is tantamount to emotional and physical abuse. I think modern American society has gone way overboard in rewarding adults and children for just being alive and breathing. Good examples of this are trophies for everyone on the bottom soccer team in the league, Kindergarten and 6th grade graduations, complete with caps and gowns, 100k weddings with 10k dresses hosted by working class families and a host of other examples. Children and adults in this country can no longer determine when they have done something exceptionally bad or exceptionally good. We need to regain our sense of proportionality. For Christ sakes, it is a child's birthday party, not 6 months in the penitentiary. If you want a child to grow up to be a successful and responsible adult, teach them that their parents for the most part are going to be their least harsh critics. If you don't learn some cause and effect from them, where the heck are you going to learn it? Isabel
Isabel1130 at November 25, 2009 11:37 AM
I don't think you should cancel a small child's birthday. They look forward to them so much. It's a magical time for a child. There are other ways to address the bad behavior.
I've done many things I've regretted as a parent. You look back and realize that so much of what you thought was important at the time, wasn't. In retrospect, I was too harsh with my son because, as a new mom, I had the attitude that many here have that punishing a 3 or 6 yr old is so important and effective in determining who they eventually will become. It isn't. They don't retain it (unless it's traumatic).
Kind of like potty training. You can yell and fuss and punish all you want. A wise mom once told me, "You can start at 12 months and be done at 24 months, or you can start at 22 months and be done at 24 months. Either way, eventually, they'll stop pooping their pants. Relax!"
I look at my kids now and see that they have basically become who they were always meant to become - who they were inside anyway. Making my son stand in a corner or endure a spanking at age 3 because he didn't pick up his toys did nothing to influence this long-term. Teaching my children respect, by showing them respect, was by far the more lasting lesson.
I'm glad that, no matter what issues there were, I always managed to have us come together as a family and celebrate milestones, like birthdays, Thanksgiving, and Christmas. They have nothing but good memories associated with these events...which is maybe why my son is coming home tomorrow, though he's working all day, must drive 3 hrs to get here, and can only stay a few hours. I'm grateful he still wants to come home.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 12:32 PM
I think in this case that the cancellation of the child's birthday party was absolutely appropriate. She refused to settle down when told to. She had to removed from the event by force, and she bit her mother's thumb so hard that it hurt for a week and the mother had thought at first that it was broken, and she was climbing on the car instead of entering it.
That is not just misbehaving. That is quite over the top. Moon Unit needed to be told that her behavior was not just unacceptable, it was extremely unacceptable. And the punishment was more than immediate enough for a six year old. Her birthday was two days away, and doubtless the calls to cancel the party took place that very day. Quite frankly, I don't think she went far enough.
A time out doesn't begin to cover that girl's misbehavior. She wasn't being naughty-naughty. She was being malicious and violent.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 1:02 PM
Unless you're a masochist, you do not believe that the person loves you while he's hitting you.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 1:03 PM
"Excellent point. It kind of makes you wonder why the 6-year-old ever got to the point where she behaved so badly in the first place."
The poor woman was probably reading too many parenting books. That is my guess anyway. :-) Isabel
Isabel1130 at November 25, 2009 1:04 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I love the way certain topics draw an order of magnitude more messages than others. Not to mention the level of emotion in the replies.
Amy's finger has unerring aim, and must be ice-cold, considering the reaction it spurs when she pokes sensitive area.
Vinnie Bartilucci at November 25, 2009 1:23 PM
Patrick - still curious. Were you spanked as a child? You honestly sound like someone who is applying adult thoughts to something - not child thoughts. As a child, I had the same thoughts regarding being spanked as I did any other punishment my parents handed out - whether it was being sent to my room, given restriction, etc. Did you believe that your parents loved you even when they told you that your phone privileges were taken away for a week?
Anne at November 25, 2009 1:24 PM
You know, I'm looking at this from the perspective shared by only a few here - having raised a child all the way to adulthood.
And I guarantee you this: Someday that mother will look back, and she won't remember the brownie meeting or the bad behavior or what the issues were that day. She'll only remember that her daughter was six years old, and it was a slip of time she can never get back.
And when she looks through the family photo albums, there won't be any photos of that day.
I'm willing to bet you that she won't feel proud of herself then. She'll probably cry as I'm crying for her now.
You're only six years old ONCE. One day, she'll give anything to have that moment in time back...and get a re-do of this event.
None of this was worth what she basically took from herself. It was a tantrum. So what? Six year olds have tantrums. Someday, 6 yrs will seem very young to her...because it is. She'll wonder why she was expecting such maturity at that age, and she'll see that her daughter grew up eventually anyway.
The details won't be important even a year from now, much less 20 years. But, trust me, this isn't her shining parental moment.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 1:26 PM
Vinnie, you should see it when she brings up gay marriage. I guarantee you that the non-gays will quite forget the standards they're applying to "not a dad Patrick." Many have implied and one or two have outright said, that my opinions are less valid because I'm not a dad. Strangely, this standard flies when it comes to the topic of gay rights.
Anne, whether or not I was punished as a child has nothing to do with anything. I will not answer that.
lovelysoul, I truly doubt this woman will be in tears over the loss of a sixth birthday party. Especially when she realizes that she made a teachable moment out of some truly over-the-top misbehavior, especially when she sees the fine woman that her daughter was on the way to becoming. I can't imagine any parent regretting having disciplined a child in such a way when the offense clearly merited it.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 1:33 PM
Anne asks: Your argument that spanking teaches "Might makes right" is really flawed. It can be applied to ANY punishment - only change the word "might" for "power". I read in another post of yours on another thread that when you'd babysit you'd force the child into a corner and if they got up, you'd pick them up and put them back in the corner. How is that any different than spanking? How is any punishment not teaching that power controls?
This I will answer. It's a useful lesson in life. It simulates exactly what happens as adults. You misbehave as an adult, you are taken by force somewhere against your will and placed in a spot where you can't leave. It has the two fold purpose of punishment and protecting society from the deviant. I almost never babysat one at a time. One one child got placed in what Supernanny now calls "The Naughty Point," it was also to protect the other child.
Unless you live in Singapore, misbehaving as an adult will not result in a paddling.
Also, I maintain that it's impossible for a child to believe that he is loved while the person who professes to love him is deliberately inflicting pain. My method allows a child free reign to consider his actions. Raising blisters on the child's bottom, by contrast, doesn't allow him to think about anything but "This HURTS!" If he WANTS to be hysterical about it, that's his prerogative, but I'm compelling this hysteria by inflicting pain.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 1:43 PM
Patrick wrote: "Anne, whether or not I was punished as a child has nothing to do with anything. I will not answer that."
Actually, Patrick, yes, it has quite a bit to do with it. If you weren't spanked as a child then you have ZERO idea how a child being spanked would feel about it. All of your thoughts about the matter are pure subjection. Assuming that you weren't spanked (and you don't seem as if you were), I find it rather ironic that you pretend to KNOW how I and every other person who was spanked as a child felt about the matter.
Anne at November 25, 2009 1:48 PM
Anne writes: Actually, Patrick, yes, it has quite a bit to do with it. If you weren't spanked as a child then you have ZERO idea how a child being spanked would feel about it. All of your thoughts about the matter are pure subjection. Assuming that you weren't spanked (and you don't seem as if you were), I find it rather ironic that you pretend to KNOW how I and every other person who was spanked as a child felt about the matter.
This is hilarious. Not only can you not comment on parenting unless you are one, but you can't comment on how spanking affects a child unless you've actually been spanked.
That is so...inane, that it doesn't merit the comment I've already given it.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 2:04 PM
Pretty much. You can THEORIZE, but you can't actually know. I can theorize all I like about what Paris is like in the spring. Having never been to Paris, though, I doubt that my conjectures would be 100% accurate.
I'm certainly not trying to tell you that you can't comment on either parenting or spanking, I'm just saying that unless you have actual experience, don't presume that your theories are necessarily correct. I certainly would advise against telling someone who HAS had those experiences that they're full of shit, as you have done.
Anne at November 25, 2009 2:13 PM
Who needs experience being spanked to understand it? Almost all of us, particularly men, have been hit at some time in life. I think they can imagine what it would feel like if their parents were doing it.
Numerous studies link spanking to more aggressive behavior and anxiety. Here's just one:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/11/051114110820.htm
I spanked sometimes, but thankfully, it was infrequent. I don't believe it did any good - and like canceling a child's birthday party - I'm sure I could've found a better, more effective way of disciplining. It's the quick, lazy method -the equivalent of fast food.
I hate to say it, but Patrick sounds more evolved as a parent than many parents here.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 2:20 PM
lovelysoul writes: I hate to say it, but Patrick sounds more evolved as a parent than many parents here.
Wow.
In related events, hell froze over.
Thank you, by the way.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 2:26 PM
I don't think spanking is any more lazy than any other parenting method if done correctly. Honest to god - we're not talking about just reaching out and smacking a kid.
When I was a kid the first time I did something wrong, I'd get a lecture and I'd also be told what the punishment for future infractions would be. Example:
"Alice Anne, you realize if you tell a lie that people won't trust you, right? :insert more lecture about why you shouldn't lie and why it's wrong:"
"Yes, daddy."
"All right. Well, if you lie to me again, your punishment is going to be ________."
And then, lo and behold, if 6 months later I did whatever, he'd say
"Alice Anne, what did I tell you would happen the last time you did ______?" "I'd get a spanking (grounded, restriction, etc.)". "That's right. I don't want to do this, but you knew the rules and you broke them anyway."
I'm pretty sure my dad wasn't a lazy parent, and honestly I'm pretty ticked that someone would just immediately say that he was. The funny thing, for people "imagining" that they know what a spanked kid goes through - I vaguely remember punishments as a kid. What I remember crystal-clearly is my dad giving me piggy-back rides, letting me put red, pink, yellow and blue animal-shaped barrettes in his hair, putting a Barbie house together for me at Christmas when I was four, etc. No, my dad was not a lazy parent, and trust me, I never once thought he didn't love me.
And Lovelysoul, I don't so much have an issue with Patrick having an opinion about spanking as I do about him saying that I'm full of shit because I don't fit his notion of what spanking is like and how it makes kids feel.
Anne at November 25, 2009 2:34 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679069">comment from AnnePretty much. You can THEORIZE, but you can't actually know. I can theorize all I like about what Paris is like in the spring. Having never been to Paris, though, I doubt that my conjectures would be 100% accurate. I'm certainly not trying to tell you that you can't comment on either parenting or spanking, I'm just saying that unless you have actual experience, don't presume that your theories are necessarily correct. I certainly would advise against telling someone who HAS had those experiences that they're full of shit, as you have done
Silly. Teaching children discipline is like teaching a dog to behave or setting boundaries so you aren't taken advantage of all the time. No, I have never excreted a child from my body, but I read (and hear presented) actual research of experts in the field, from John Gottmann and Peter Gray to Judith Rich Harris and others. I would venture that I know far more about child psychology than many or most parents.
By the way, for new parents, I highly recommend John Gottman's program, Bringing Baby Home, which I saw presented at the Evolution of Psychotherapy conference a few years back. Many of the coordinators will give scholarships to couples without money, as the local one did for a young guy who works at my favorite coffee shop (with a young wife and a brand new baby), after I asked.
Amy Alkon at November 25, 2009 2:36 PM
Again, Amy, I'm not saying you can't have an opinion. I have opinions, too, about child-rearing, and I'm not a parent. Take my example of spring in Paris, though. If I read 10 books about Paris in spring-time and viewed lots of photos and paintings, and then said "Gosh, Paris in the spring must be like _______." to you, and then you said "Actually, it's a bit more _________." So far so good, right? Now, when I tell you that you're full of shit because the books say blah blah blah, you're going to think I'm a dumbass because you've been there and I haven't, right? You wouldn't think that just because I've never been and am offering my opinion, I'd wager, you'd think that (rightfully) because I'm refusing to take the word of someone who has been in there because I have imagined it in my head differently. That's all I'm saying.
Anne at November 25, 2009 2:44 PM
Is calling someone's comment "bullshit" the same as saying their full of shit? It isn't what I mean to say. If I say something is bullshit, I mean that that particular statement is bullshit. If I say someone is full of shit, I mean to imply that most, if not all, of what they say is bullshit.
In any case, Anne, I'm sorry I offended you. I should not have dismissed your opinions so contemptuously.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 2:48 PM
"One implication of our findings is the need for caution in making recommendations about parenting practices across different cultural groups,"
The above is a direct quote from the study LS posted. It also says physical punishment (rather broad there, could be anything physical) is associated with aggressiveness in kids. Doesn't mention-much less prove-causality. Maybe aggressive kids are spanked more because they are aggressive. Daycare is proven to cause aggression in kids, do we do away with it? Personally, I think we should, people who can't be bothered to raise their kids probably shouldn't have any. That's my opinion, but it doesn't mean other's can't use daycare. Just like you can have your opinion on spanking, but you can't tell others not to.
momof4 at November 25, 2009 2:59 PM
That's okay, Patrick, and thank you for the apology. I suspect that you're right about the majority of kids who are spanked, too, for what it's worth. But really, I chalk that up to lazy parents, regardless of the punishment they use. "Spanking" is probably the easiest to be lazy with, though. Just reach out and "BAP!" - punishment meted, whereas other forms of discipline might take a bit more work. I do think that my dad's method was pretty effective, though, and will probably use it with my own kids.
Honestly, though, he had a pretty wide repertoire of punishments and they were, mostly, pretty cause-and-effect. He was also a believer in "No means no, yes means yes, maybe is maybe, and whining will get you nowhere." Case in point, as a kid I asked for a toy at the mall once. I forget why we were there, but it was shopping, and I saw something shiny and asked for it, and daddy said "Maybe. We'll see when we're ready to leave." I started whining and begging, at which point he firmly told me "No. I said maybe and you chose to whine. I've now decided no because of that, and if you don't stop with the whining, you'll wish you had." "Wish you had or hadn't" was pretty much his last warning on stuff :-p And yeah, he was strict in some respects, but nearly always fair. It was also pretty clear our house was not a democracy and his word was law, though he was happy to discuss things.
Anne at November 25, 2009 3:09 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679076">comment from AnneTake my example of spring in Paris, though.
Actually, your example is not serving you well. Spring in a place in a certain placement on the globe with a certain type of weather - well, it's not that hard to figure out.
Likewise, there are human behavioral universals -- how women, around the globe, seek providers while men place emphasis on appearance when seeking a partner. There are even similarities in how dogs and children will behave -- and how adults will behave. If you are dating someone new, you send a message that anything goes if you seem to have no boundaries.
Children aren't like Martians. They're just underdeveloped people. Unfortunately, more and more, and in many ways, it seems they're being left that way.
Amy Alkon at November 25, 2009 3:12 PM
Amy wrote: "Actually, your example is not serving you well. Spring in a place in a certain placement on the globe with a certain type of weather - well, it's not that hard to figure out."
Pretty sure you get my point, though.
Amy wrote: "here are even similarities in how dogs and children will behave -- and how adults will behave."
I agree 100%. I'm not sure what we're arguing about, honestly. As far as child-theory goes, I think kids are perfectly capable of behaving in public provided that their parents make the effort to instill and enforce some rules.
Anne at November 25, 2009 3:25 PM
With all due respect, Anne is right. Reading books about Paris is not the same as being there. And merely reading about child psychology is never going to give you the same perspective and understanding of a parent.
For instance, you can read about autism, but that doesn't mean you can say to Sergeant Heather that you know exactly what if feels like to be the parent of an autistic child because you don't. You're not responsible for that child. You can play with him and write to him, but unless you know the weight of being completely responsible for that individual, meeting all his needs, physically and emotionally, you can't fully identify with it.
I mean, I can read romance novels, but if I've never actually had a real boyfriend, I can't actually claim to understand relationships.
I appreciate the viewpoint of those who aren't parents, and I'm not saying anyone shouldn't comment, but what's often missing is some humility - some acknowlegement that, although you have an opinion, you really haven't walked in our shoes, and so maybe you don't know everything.
You demean parenthood by saying, "I've never spit a kid out of my vagina..." like it's...I don't know...something ugly and insignificant. I try not to take offense, but honestly, sometimes, it's hard.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 3:50 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679080">comment from AnneAs far as child-theory goes, I think kids are perfectly capable of behaving in public provided that their parents make the effort to instill and enforce some rules.
That is what it comes down to. And I don't have to have a child to know that.
Amy Alkon at November 25, 2009 3:56 PM
lovelysoul writes: And merely reading about child psychology is never going to give you the same perspective and understanding of a parent.
Being a parent doesn't give you "the same perspective and understanding of a parent."
Just because you've reproduced, tragically, it does not confer some kind of special perspective that the rest of us poor mortals cannot comprehend. I know grandparents who basically became parents all over again, because their own kids weren't interested, forcing the grandparents to take over. I know people who have never had children who would be better parents than that.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 4:05 PM
Of course, kids can learn to behave in public, but while they're learning, they cannot be expected to do it perfectly every time.
You may come upon a child who is having a bad day - who has an ear infection, or missed his lunch because of a doctor's appt, or needs a nap. Yesterday, he/she may have behaved beautifully in public, but today, not so much.
Yet, you'll judge that parent on that one moment in time - "bad parent, not parenting well". I'm here to tell you that ALL parents have those moments because kids don't learn in a straight sequence, and they're not always developmentally ready to be completely consistent with what they're learning. It's often one step up, two steps back.
Just quit being so quick to judge. You don't know what's going on with that child, and they aren't always perfect. Even with the best parenting and discipline, that's an unreasonable expectation.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 4:06 PM
"Just because you've reproduced, tragically, it does not confer some kind of special perspective that the rest of us poor mortals cannot comprehend."
Oh, Patrick, we were getting along so well. Why do you have to say "tragically". My beautiful son just arrived here early from college, and he'd make any mom proud. I've done a good job.
But parenting was nothing like I thought it would be from reading books. I'll admit I was a smug, insuffereable, self-righteous know-it-all about parenting BEFORE I had children. I knew how to do it, and how everyone else should do it. That's why I recognize this smugness.
You think it's easy? Try it. There's a whole lot of gray areas not covered in books. Your kids will have problems and issues they never cover in books. Plus, you're doing it day in and day out - not just babysitting. It's easy to calmly assess what to do when you're not exhausted.
I think it sounds like you're a great uncle and have the makings of a great father, but until you've actually done it, you can't completely understand what it's like.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 4:23 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679090">comment from lovelysouluntil you've actually done it, you can't completely understand what it's like.
I really don't care how hard it is; I just want you to do it, and if you're bad at it, take classes and read books and learn to do it better. If your children are "not ready for prime time," leave them home. My friend Hillary, who I write about in my book, did until her son could behave in public without bothering others. She just considered it the right thing to do.
Amy Alkon at November 25, 2009 4:29 PM
Unfortunately, parents with kids still need to go out in public sometimes. We must take our kids to the doctor, on airplanes, on busses, to the store, and maybe run in someplace and grab a sandwich. I'm sure Sergeant Heather didn't completely keep her son from ever going out around people. Adult social events are one thing, but it's unrealistic to expect that children can even learn to behave in public if you never take them out in public.
My kids always went to restaurants, starting as infants, and they were almost always well-behaved. If not, I took them outside. But probably not before someone judged me for being a bad parent because my kid briefly made a sound.
But, most times, I got raves at how great our kids were, how well-behaved. That's because we were teaching them how to behave in public.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 4:42 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679102">comment from lovelysoulit's unrealistic to expect that children can even learn to behave in public if you never take them out in public.
Again, I write about this in my book. My neighbors, for example, take their kids to loud restaurants at kid dining hour so others will not be disturbed. Their children are now 5 and 9 and have lovely manners. Sergeant Heather threw her son's birthday party (just a family dinner, plus me and Mexican grandma and American grandma) at the Brentwood Cheesecake Factory and had them seat the family in the loudest part of the restaurant. Her son is a darling boy and her family is so brilliantly worked out -- she has the older kids see it as just part of the family to take care of the little boy. At dinner, the very handsome 16-year-old son, unprompted by Heather or her husband, told the little boy it was time to go to the bathroom, and took him there. This is an example of BRILLIANT parenting.
Amy Alkon at November 25, 2009 6:22 PM
Sounds like it. Sergeant Heather is a very admirable mom. But, I bet if you ask her, she can tell you she's had a few embarrassing moments, where her family didn't appear quite so perfect. That's probably why she's learned to go to loud restaurants. Anyone who might've caught her or her son in one of those moments might not really see the whole picture of what a great job she is doing. They might not realize he has autism, and his behavior is no reflection on his parenting.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 6:46 PM
Amy, I just mean that it seems having a friend like Sergeant Heather, with a special needs child, should make you less judgemental of other parents, rather than more.
My son has Aspergers, which, as I'm sure you know, is a milder form of autism. He appears fine, especially now that he's older, but at certain times during his youth, his condition caused him to behave in ways that a casual observer might've questioned. He wasn't usually disruptive, just different, but I'm sure some might've even presumed I was a bad parent.
When you have a special needs child, you really appreciate people who aren't so quick to judge, and will take the time to fully understand what's really going on with you and your family.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 7:16 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679114">comment from lovelysoulI love how people are bringing the special needs child thing up. There was no mention of this woman's child having some serious problem - and if the kid did, she shouldn't be bringing him on planes, where people will be trapped with whatever his behavior is for hours.
Most children in the world are not autistic or somehow seriously impaired. Sergeant Heather didn't "learn" to go to loud restaurants any more than my neighbors did. It's spelled like this:
C-O-N-S-I-D-E-R-A-T-I-O-N
It's called parenting. My parents, likewise, did not "learn" to take us to loud restaurants -- they made it clear we were expected to be civilized in public, and we were...at adult restaurants. It's a privilege to go out to dinner at places grownups go. I always saw it that way, and I bet my sisters did, too.
It's stunning how determined people are to make excuses for lax parenting, and how determined people are to demand that others put up with their life choices. If you have a child who's likely to scream, don't bring him to adult places. I got interviewed by a reporter today, at my favorite cafe. I had to pick up a chair and move it. I pointed out to her that the chairs are wrought iron and the floor is tile. I always pick the chair up so it doesn't make that horrible metal on tile sound and disturb people.
Consideration.
Amy Alkon at November 25, 2009 7:50 PM
I'd take it even one step farther than that: experience with one's own kids does not confer expertise with kids that have other personality types. Kids can behave very differently from each other, and what works with one personality type frequently does not work with another.
Pseudonym at November 25, 2009 8:09 PM
I'm not making excuses for lax parenting. I'm just asking how you can know? How can you make such a snap judgment just observing a parent and child for a few minutes?
Having Aspergers, my son was easy to take out. They are like "little professors", talking to adults, using advanced vocabulary. He didn't disrupt. People were charmed by him. They thought, "What a bright, inquisitive, mature little boy."
It was only when he was older that his behavior might *sometimes* be unusual or possibly disruptive. I was always considerate of others, but if my son had an issue, which was rare, it was so much better when people were understanding, not condeming.
You can't look at him and tell he has Aspergers. It isn't apparent. Just like an illness or an ear infection, or any number of issues that a child might have, but still also need to go out in public sometimes.
I think it's just as insensitive to judge parents and children you don't know and label them bad children or bad parents. I think it's wrong to suggest that they can't ever have a meal out, except at a "Chucky Cheese" or some other loud restaurant.
As long as a parent responds quickly to a disruption, and tries, within the limits of the situation (airplane, bus) to be as non-disruptive as possible, I cut them slack. Adults can be far more disruptive for even less cause.
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 8:11 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679117">comment from lovelysoulI think it's just as insensitive to judge parents and children you don't know and label them bad children or bad parents.
They are bad parents and rude people if they are inconsiderate enough to think they can bring a child who is a screamer to a restaurant that is not Chuck E. Cheese. They are bad parents if they don't teach their children how to be civilized beings?
I'm reminded of something my late friend Cathy Seipp said when somebody criticized her for making "value judgments": "I have values, therefore I make judgments."
Amy Alkon at November 25, 2009 8:18 PM
"a child who is a screamer"
That's rarely an official label for a child. I agree if you have a child that does nothing but scream all the time, but typically, that's not how it is.
They are children. Most of the time, they're good. Sometimes, the scream. If you know your child is almost always well-behaved, you might dare to venture out. If it goes well, you might actually try it again and again. 9 times out of 10, the kid will be delightful. Then, one time - unfortunately the day they encounter you - there may be an issue.
I mean, where does it end? Can someone with a partner with Alzheimers never attempt to have a nice meal out? What about a mentally-challenged person? Maybe, most of the time, they're quiet and well-behaved. Can you really suggest that anyone with a possible issue that might disturb you stay home all the time?
lovelysoul at November 25, 2009 8:41 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679121">comment from lovelysoulShould my grandpa also have kept driving when he could no longer see well? Should you really have to turn down your music just because the people next door need their sleep.
No limits! Everybody do their thing!
Amy Alkon at November 25, 2009 9:08 PM
Lovely, I get what you're saying. I can say from my own point of view, though, that I've never once thought a parent was a bad parent because their kid was "acting a fool". I've thought they were a bad parent when they didn't try to do anything about it, though. In a kid acting up situation, does the parent immediately try to calm/shush/discipline the child (depending on whether they're upset, excited, or being a brat) or do they blithely carry on, totally ignoring the kid and expect everyone else to follow suit? THAT is the difference, IMO.
I was in a bookstore one day and the dad was trying to browse for books. His child would come over and try to get his attention. His way of resolving the issue so he could browse in peace? Send the kid to run and "play" in the rest of the store where he wouldn't have to deal with it. And of course their idea of playing was being loud and running. I'm glad the dad was getting some peace and quiet - nobody else was.
Anyway, to sum up: I think the point that most of us are making is that you can tell whether someone is a good parent not just by the behavior of the child, but by the behavior of the adult. Yeah, kids act up, sometimes. That can't always be helped. What can be helped is the parent's reaction.
Anne at November 25, 2009 9:09 PM
Should my grandpa also have kept driving when he could no longer see well?
That's a weak comparison. He could have killed someone, not just disturbed their quiet meal.
kishke at November 25, 2009 9:22 PM
The big issue that I have with canceling the party is that it was completely inconsiderate to all the party guests and their parents. Presumably the attendees all made room in their schedules for the party; drove to the store, picked out, purchased, and wrapped a present; and some even took a chunk of their day to actually drive to the non-existent party. I also imagine that the kids would have been excited about the party and pretty disappointed to show up and find out that it was canceled. Amy, you talk a lot about hijacking other people's time and attention: well, that's exactly what these "well-meaning" parents achieved with this inappropriate punishment. They effectively demonstrated that it's okay to inconvenience other people when it serves your own ends; great lesson, guys.
The way I see it, getting to have a party in the first place is a privilege. But once the invitations are sent out, it's an obligation. I'm sure there were plenty of alternative punishments that the parents could have selected that would provide IMMEDIATE discipline (as opposed to several days delayed) without humiliating their daughter and inconveniencing a bunch of other people.
Shannon at November 25, 2009 9:47 PM
You do make a good point, Shannon.
Anne at November 25, 2009 9:53 PM
momof4 if you were a hindu or a muslim or a wiccian I would be just as critical to you of their failings and hypocraices, but your not so the point would be lost
lujlp at November 25, 2009 9:56 PM
kishe its a great comparison, the asshole who doesnt care how his behavior affects your dinner isnt going to give a shit how it affects your health
There is a massive retirement community west of Phoenix, a few years ago there was a massive manhunt for a missing couple, seems their kids were worried and no one knew where they were.
Days later it came to light that both parents had alzhimers, long periods of dulusional thinking and apperently that day they had gone to the grocery store forgotten who and where they were and wandered off.
Given Arizonas depedance on retierment home sales and vacation travelers the fact that they dropped the stpry before telling anyone whether or not they were found alive leads me to belive they were not.
My point? These people had a car, and you dont lose that much of your mind overnight. Niether these people of their children cared enough about anyone else to make sure that no one wound up dead. Though the children apperently cared enough to send to cop out looking without bothering to tell them about the fairly obvious mental defects
What if they had had such an episode while driving? You wouldnt belive the way those morons drive around in their golf carts shooting out of blind alleys across traffic doing 30 to 50 miles and hour.
The point is consideration, and the sad fact that noone seems to care - I also notice you conveintly didnt argue with Amys second reference about noise.
lujlp at November 25, 2009 10:18 PM
Lovelysoul writes: Oh, Patrick, we were getting along so well. Why do you have to say "tragically". My beautiful son just arrived here early from college, and he'd make any mom proud. I've done a good job.
I'm sure he would and I'm sure you did. I say "tragically" because it is tragic. Yes, there are parents in the world who are great parents and it would be wonderful if reproducing conferred special understanding and parental skills. But tragically, it does not.
Suddenly becoming a parent does not mystically confer some new insight into the needs of children. It would be nice if it did.
But having children gives you a new title: parent. It does nothing else. The new title is a label and does not reflect some new advancement in wisdom. It's a statement of fact.
Like blimps. They have four distinct names (zepplin, dirigible, airship and blimp) but for all the names, they're still the same silly, good-for-nothing-but-advertising items they'd be if they only had one name.
Reminds me of women with loser boyfriends who have children thinking that having children will make their boyfriends suddenly become good dads and devoted husbands. Wrong. Their boyfriends are still the same losers and they've now inflicted their bad gamble on a new, helpless, unformed human being.
Patrick at November 25, 2009 10:33 PM
Effective parenting is actually walking the child through the reason(s) they are being disciplined - which is a crucial step in the process. If it is left out - then I do believe spanking is abuse. Period.
Likely, if you aren't lazy or abusive, I am guessing the kid is going to learn pretty quick and not do that behavior again and there isn't gonna be any lasting "psyche" damage with spanking. But then again, Patrick is making a lot of sense.... (Oy).
I believe if you are having to spank your kid over and over to teach him/her the same lesson - your parenting syle needs to be re-evaluated.
feebie at November 25, 2009 11:08 PM
First, let me reiterate my certainty that this is not the real Zappa family, but probably just a family that listens to his music.
> I'm sure there were plenty of alternative
> punishments that the parents could have
> selected that would provide IMMEDIATE
> discipline (as opposed to several days
> delayed) without humiliating their
> daughter and inconveniencing a bunch
> of other people.
It's said that the only effective punishments are swift and certain, so I see what you're getting at.
On the other hand, this child is (perhaps barely) old enough to realize that there's more to life than this moment right now: For example, there's this weekend, when she's going to have a birthday party. Not now; later.
Now, while childless, I am, personally, a former child myself. And there's this memory that it was in roughly the same zone of development that one learns that not only in there this one person, me, but there are other people too. For example, Mom, who's thumb hurts. Not me; others.
(And their feelings and thumbs mean as much to them as mine do to me.)
Other people will certainly be inconvenienced when the party is canceled. But if I remember correctly, for any gathering of more than five, a lot of mothers/parents are sort of hanging around in another room anyway. They're not planning to drop junior off for a birthday party so they can across town for a little neurosurgery.
And isn't that a good thing for other parent to know?... That the party-canceling couple can be expected to have some patience when they, in turn, are inconvenienced as the little darlings are being raised? Would those parents want to deal with their child coming home from the party with a tooth-marked thumb?
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at November 25, 2009 11:47 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679137">comment from Crid [CridComment @ gmail]And there's this memory that it was in roughly the same zone of development that one learns that not only in there this one person, me, but there are other people too.
A step so many "parents" seem to be skipping these days.
Amy Alkon at November 26, 2009 1:31 AM
I agree that parents must respond if their child becomes disruptive. I've said that repeatedly.
What I was responding to is the idea that children, and, presumably, elderly and handicapped people, shouldn't be taken out at all if they potentially *might* disrupt someone for a few moments.
Living in FL, I'm often disrupted at restaurants by older people in wheelchairs. My friends and I must stop our meal, move our seats, often being pressed tightly up against the table or wall, so the person's caretaker can squeeze them through the narrow passages of the restaurant.
I don't enjoy this - it steals a bit of my time -but I wouldn't say, "Old people in wheelchairs need to stay home! Forget your early bird specials!"
I mean, c'mon, people. It could happen to any of us, or someone we love. Isn't the essence of good manners also showing some grace, sympathy, and tolerance - not only thinking of yourself and your precious time?
My brother is mentally-challenged. We take him to restaurants. Not 5 star, but mid-scale. Sometimes, he gets a little loud or says something inappropriate. We'll ask him to lower his voice. It means so much to him to be taken out to dinner with the rest of the family.
I don't think he's ever seriously disrupted anyone's meal. My parents and I are considerate people, and we wouldn't let that happen, at least for more than a few minutes, while we got him outside.
But, just like with a child, it *might* happen, because he is much like a child. We can't guarantee that he won't cause a disruption, so is he supposed to always stay home too?
I don't think so. I think, even if it happened, most people would be compassionate, not condemning. They can see he's impaired. Just like the person in the wheelchair. Just like the child, who's underdeveloped in maturity.
As long as someone tries to limit the distruption, should it occur, I think we should all just try to be a little less judgmental and self-centered.
lovelysoul at November 26, 2009 5:23 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679156">comment from lovelysoulMy friends and I must stop our meal, move our seats, often being pressed tightly up against the table or wall, so the person's caretaker can squeeze them through the narrow passages of the restaurant.
I for sure don't mind this -- in fact, I get up from my table at my favorite cafe, run to the door, and help the little old ladies in.
Amy Alkon at November 26, 2009 7:01 AM
Lovely, I think (at least in my case) the "Well, perhaps you shouldn't take them out to restaurants" is a rebuttal to those non-parents who insist that "They're children! Running around like a hooligan is what children DOOOOOOO!" as an excuse for the fact that they're kid's being a brat and they don't care enough to stop it.
Anne at November 26, 2009 7:11 AM
Yeah, I agree children should stay seated in a restaurant. That was always our rule with our children. They were never allowed up from the table unless it was to go to the bathroom, and then, when they were small, they were escorted.
Perhaps, parents have gotten ruder in the almost 20 years since my kids were small, but I go out to eat a lot, and I rarely get disrupted by a child.
If I were disrupted, for longer than 10 mins, I'd have no qualms saying something politely to the parent. I'd ask them to please take their child outside. But I don't recall ever having to do that because usually the parent is scrambling out the door pretty quickly, as I did with my children.
I think most parents still don't want their kids to bother others. If you encounter the rare rude or oblivious parent, then by all means, say something.
lovelysoul at November 26, 2009 7:21 AM
A good example just occurred to me, of the type of parent who shouldn't bring their kids out, IMO. Amy can probably correct the details, but it seems like, about a year ago, she posted about some poor guy who put a sign in his coffee shop reminding kids to use their "inside voices". He caught a LOT of flak about that - the NERVE of him, expecting kids to mind their manners! I have to wonder if these people are also outraged by "No shirt, no shoes, no service." signs.
Anne at November 26, 2009 8:33 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679176">comment from AnneIt's in my book - a Chicago coffee shop owner. The mommies went apeshit.
Amy Alkon at November 26, 2009 8:41 AM
Yep, it was in your book too - probably why I thought of it. If I recall correctly, the blog entry was a year or so back. But yeah, mommies were outraged, which, in my opinion, is ridiculous. Like I said, I wonder if they're also outraged by the No shirt, no shoes, no service signs? Crazy.
Anne at November 26, 2009 9:31 AM
Re:Spanking
Kids absoultely know the intent behind the spanking. My beloved grandfather spanked me once, and only once when I ran out into the street at the age of 3 or 4. I barely remember it, but I knew it was because I had done something wrong. I never doubted his love.
Contrast this with my mother (his daughter) who spanked me because she was in a bad mood, or she wanted to go to the mall and I didn't (read it again, people--mom wanted to go the mall and the teenage daughter didn't). And I do doubt her love, or rather her particular concept of love.
deathbysnoosnoo at November 26, 2009 9:53 AM
"Contrast this with my mother (his daughter) who spanked me because she was in a bad mood, or she wanted to go to the mall and I didn't (read it again, people--mom wanted to go the mall and the teenage daughter didn't)."
I too experienced this type parenting, same stories.
THIS is a mixed message that leaves lasting damage - "You mean I am suppose to learn that life is not "all about me" while I am always held responsible and being punished for someone else's "feelings" that I have zero control over...."
Feebie at November 26, 2009 10:13 AM
Do you believe the same about time-outs?
Pseudonym at November 26, 2009 10:42 AM
Yes, I would. It's neglect. Neglecting to explain the reasons why you are punishing a child is abuse. It's lazy parenting.
Feebie at November 26, 2009 10:49 AM
I also notice you conveintly didnt argue with Amys second reference about noise.
That's right, luj, I didn't, b/c that's a solid comparison. The other is not. So?
kishke at November 26, 2009 11:24 AM
Children use their indoor voices? What about adults? There's a guy at the gym I go to. I refer to him as "the most interesting man in the world." Not because I personally find him interesting, quite the contrary. It's because he talks so fucking loud, I assume the entire gym must be in rapt attention over every syllable that blares from his lips.
When he's in the locker room, the echoes seem to amplify the noise. I'm not sure why the aerobics class, gyrating away to some formulaic house music, needs to know that two of the twelve showers in the men's locker room are currently out of order, but damned if they didn't hear all about it!
Patrick at November 26, 2009 1:51 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/11/25/behaviors_on_th.html#comment-1679224">comment from PatrickHow awful, Patrick. I'm reminded of the quote "An empty vessel makes the most noise."
Amy Alkon at November 26, 2009 2:08 PM
Yuck. That's worse than my loud guy experience at the gym. This man would grunt LOUDLY - extremely loudly - while he was lifting weights. To my further annoyance, he'd then let the weights SLAM back down with a loud CLANK. It was horrible. I was sorely tempted to say to him "You know, you get better results if you maintain control of the weights both while lifting and while lowering them." Super snarky me wanted to say "Maybe you should consider lowering the weight you're lifting until you build up the muscle to set them back down at the end of your reps?" Speaking of rude people at the gym - what about folks who don't bring a towel and so sweat all over the machines? Gross.
Anne at November 26, 2009 2:29 PM
"If you weren't spanked as a child then you have ZERO idea how a child being spanked would feel about it. "
I think I'll go and put my hand on the hot stove, and then I'll go and poke myself in the eye with a sharp stick, who knows, my mother may have been wrong.....
"Sometimes, he gets a little loud or says something inappropriate. We'll ask him to lower his voice."
That's the whole point! If you have a child who makes noise, you say something, if your child is going through a stage where they're obstinate or can't control themselves, then you don't go to the quietest restaurant in town or to the movies. Kids can be unpredictable, though , sometimes you think they'll be okay, and the react badly to noise or some other stimulus..that's when you pick them up or take their hands an take them home.
My MIL is in Stage 5 or Alzheimer's, and she's showing hints of Stage 6 symptoms. Now she can go to a restaurant and function with prompting. I order for both of us (the same thing, as she will invariably want what I order when our meals come) and then prompt gently 'Your fork is for your salad', 'Your spoon is for your soup' and we no longer order anything 'tricky' like spaghetti as she can no longer twirl it.
On days when she has a certain look in her eye, like anger is not far below the surface, we don't go! I won't subject her to the shame of a public outburst she can't stop herself from having but will regret, and I won't have other patrons frightened by a wild-eyed granny yelling and slapping me away from her because she's been set off by the chatter and sounds of the dishes being bussed. That's what parenting is! Your needs, their needs and limitations, and other people's right to a quiet meal.
And when we get to the point where she can no longer partake of a meal in public without being disruptive (and that day will come as we advance) going to restaurants will be a thing of the past.It's only considerate to everyone else.
And it's no different with a child.
crella at November 26, 2009 4:22 PM
Crella, spanking is a lot more complicated than whether or not it hurts. It's less in line with "Most people who put their hand on a hot stove will experience pain." and more in line with someone going through basic training. I suppose, however, assuming that you've never been in the military, that you'd presume to tell someone how they felt about boot camp? After all, it was painful!
Anne at November 26, 2009 4:46 PM
I agree that it's bad, but I don't think it's bad enough to take someone's kids away like abuse is.
Pseudonym at November 26, 2009 6:59 PM
"I don't think it's bad enough to take someone's kids away like abuse is."
Agreed. But it is enough for me to say they are lazy and ineffective at parenting.
Feebie at November 26, 2009 7:53 PM
Anne writes: Yuck. That's worse than my loud guy experience at the gym. This man would grunt LOUDLY - extremely loudly - while he was lifting weights. To my further annoyance, he'd then let the weights SLAM back down with a loud CLANK. It was horrible. I was sorely tempted to say to him "You know, you get better results if you maintain control of the weights both while lifting and while lowering them." Super snarky me wanted to say "Maybe you should consider lowering the weight you're lifting until you build up the muscle to set them back down at the end of your reps?" Speaking of rude people at the gym - what about folks who don't bring a towel and so sweat all over the machines? Gross.
Oh, the sound effects? You gotta love it. Those guys (women never do this) who feel the need to make these guttural, bellowing noises as they lift? I think that's hilarious. There's no reason to do that. Making noise that sounds like you're being fed feet-first into a woodchipper does not help you lift more weight, and you're likely to do your throat some serious damage. Personally, I think it's histrionic. "Look at me, right now! See how hard I'm working out!"
And I didn't see him as lifting all that much, either. This practice has a name, by the way, but it eludes me at the moment.
Some say it's motivational. Couldn't they just listen to the Rocky theme on their ipods?
My workout partner and I were in the gym listening to someone bellowing away. "Oh, not the sound effects, please," my workout partner said to me.
After we shared a few snickers, I put on my best authoritative, pissed off voice, and yelled, "Hey, shut up over there!"
Both he and his workout partner looked up, in the wrong direction, while my workout partner and I laughed. Strangely though, it worked. He stopped yelling.
And yes, people should always bring a work out towel. Not just to wipe up your own sweat, but you don't know who's been on that machine ahead of you. There is a communicable pandemic going on. Granted, if you're over the age of 24, not pregnant and don't have a compromised immune system, all H1N1 will do to you is make you sick, and you'll recover. But who wants that?
My gym also has bottles of general purpose cleaner for the members to use on the machines.
Patrick at November 26, 2009 10:44 PM
I always thought they were showing off. Which to me is kind of oxymoronic - unless you're lifting a car, don't grunt like an ape. But too funny on your "Down in front!" story :-p
Anne at November 26, 2009 11:19 PM
KarenW said:
Oh and by the way, the mom did not LIKE canceling the party! If she is happy about it now, it's because it was effective - it obviously made a difference in her daughter's behavior. If it didn't work, why would she be bragging about it now?
__________________
Bingo!
As Dr. Rosemond has written more than once: "The only punishment that fits the crime is the one that stops the bad behavior from recurring." Also: "Which is worse? Punishing a child drastically one time only for a particular crime and never having to do it again, or giving the same wimpy punishment for that crime (accompanied by screaming and lecturing, to boot) over and over and over?"
(Every wimpy parent he asks reluctantly agrees the latter is worse.)
He also once told of a mother who was utterly shocked to hear him say that the whole POINT of punishment is to hurt a child's feelings. Otherwise, where is their sense of remorse (shame, if you will) for bad deeds going to come from? Nowhere. It just isn't that natural, if at all.
Miss Manners also has said that contrary to popular belief, kids only learn to have a sense of respect, gratitude and generosity after years of forced hypocrisies. (I.e., being forced to say please and thank you.) Not the other way around.
Ingratitude and pushiness are perfectly natural. Basic manners - such as not hitting others by age 3 - are not, which is why they have to be taught! Early!
Which brings me to another point: I'm sure cancelling the party was needed. However, why was the kid throwing a tantrum at age SIX? I go to various supermarkets and the ONLY kids I see kicking, screaming or trying to be destructive are those already strapped down safely in their cart seats. In other words, those under the age of three!
Of course, 3-year-olds will not remember any unusual punishments. They don't have to. What they will remember is that whatever mischief they want to do Will Not Be Worth It. That's why most of them DO stop throwing tantrums in public after that age - because most parents COMMUNICATE to them that they'll be really sorry if they do!
Same goes for that six-year-old.
lenona at November 27, 2009 9:27 AM
Leave a comment