Do Kids Sometimes Need To Hate Their Parents?
That's what a panel written about in The Atlantic says.
Children need nurturing, but they also need "something to bump up against."
My column criticizing kid-coddling and the pressure to engage in it is here:
You're supposed to be your kids' mom, not their full-time birthday clown. This means meeting their needs, as opposed to falling prey to their ransom demands......Saying no to your kids will not turn them into meth-smoking, liquor store-robbing carjackers. Actually, throwing up a few boundaries might even serve to prevent this -- and less dire but extremely annoying outcomes (just what society needs, another 35-year-old snot who was denied nothing during childhood). Kids need to feel loved and secure -- and that doesn't take hours of mommy-and-me Lego. In fact, psychologist Judith Rich Harris writes that "anthropological data suggest...there may be something a little unnatural about adults playing with children." Anthropologist David F. Lancy notes that, beyond Western society, one "rarely" sees it. Regarding this apparent lack of a parental instinct for parent-child play, Harris writes, "This implies that children do not require play with an adult in order to develop normally."
I know, I know, that's not what The Cult Of The Child tells you -- when its proponents aren't too busy checking Amazon to see whether anybody's published "The Seven Habits Of Highly Effective Children." The reality is, your family is better served by a stay-at-home mother than a stay-at-home martyr. Take the advice of the late British pediatrician Donald Winnicott, and avoid trying to be the perfect mother -- micromanaging your little darlings' every move ("Harvard or bust!") -- and just be a "good enough mother." Your kids can entertain themselves -- and will, if you suggest they do.
Via Lenona, this piece by Elizabeth Kolbert in The New Yorker, "Why Are American Kids So Spoiled?":
"Parents want their kids' approval, a reversal of the past ideal of children striving for their parents' approval," Jean Twenge and W. Keith Campbell, both professors of psychology, have written. In many middle-class families, children have one, two, sometimes three adults at their beck and call. This is a social experiment on a grand scale, and a growing number of adults fear that it isn't working out so well: according to one poll, commissioned by Time and CNN, two-thirds of American parents think that their children are spoiled.The notion that we may be raising a generation of kids who can't, or at least won't, tie their own shoes has given rise to a new genre of parenting books. Their titles tend to be either dolorous ("The Price of Privilege") or downright hostile ("The Narcissism Epidemic," "Mean Moms Rule," "A Nation of Wimps"). The books are less how-to guides than how-not-to's: how not to give in to your toddler, how not to intervene whenever your teen-ager looks bored, how not to spend two hundred thousand dollars on tuition only to find your twenty-something graduate back at home, drinking all your beer.
Your thoughts?
TRUST-- It's something evolutionary-- that kids will shit-test their parents as a way to see how they'd handle a genuine threat from outside. If parents are submissive to a kid, what'll they do when a real TSA agent appears?
The same happens to hold true with women, Godblessem. "Trust" means knowing your man won't submit you to to some other man, because he won't just roll over for you, either. Google "Women Shit Tests" and see how this translates into adult life. It ain't pretty. It makes me doubt my relationship when a grown woman pulls this on me.
jefe at July 5, 2012 11:00 PM
YMMV - there are all kinds of parents. That said,an increasing (or increasingly visible?) number of parents treat their kids as "special snowflakes" who mustn't suffer any disappointments in life.
Part of parenting is setting limits, which can lead to a certain degree of strife in the family. "Why can't I say out till 1:00am?????" "Because you have school tomorrow." If parents aren't willing to set - and enforce - limits, they are not parenting.
Not unrelated: when kids run into limits outside the family (like getting an "F" because they don't hand in their homework"), it is the job of parents to make the kids see where they went wrong. Demanding accommodation from the teacher for the "special snowflake" is not parenting, but appeasement.
a_random_guy at July 5, 2012 11:15 PM
My girls are pretty much grown up now (yay! I survived!) and while I can honestly say that materially, they were better off than me because I made more money coming out of college than my dad did after 20 yrs on his union scale job, but what they got they had to earn thru chores, saving b-day, holliday cash, selling items they made at craft faires, etc. This did not involve them "hating" me, in fact they loved learning how to sew and make jewelry and things to sell. We would design costumes and they learned some small budgetting skills along with the crafting.
As for their behavior, I never accepted anything less than total respect, begining with *ABSOLUTELY* no lying. It wasn't if I caught them, it was when, and when I did and then they were in bigger trouble than if they had come clean in the first place.
I love my girls more than my own life, and I'm glad that they love me too, but I demand their respect. I don't have a lot of rules, but the ones I do are pretty much set in stone, and carry set consequenses if they are broken. Everyone knows up front what is acceptable, what is not, and how much pain will result . It could be anything from a "Aw geebus, Baby, I'm really disappointed in your performance in that class, I know you are a girl genious and can do better than that." to a full out "ok, you're grounded. ". I stay consistent, and really pay attention so that I can catch them doing things right and make a fuss over that, as well. Praise the good and you get more, amirite? Again, no hate, my girls felt guilty because they had disapointed me, we would talk out how the mistake had been made, what could have been done to prevent it, they would tell me the lesson they had learned, and that was it. We'd never speak of it again, over, done with, gone.
Kat at July 5, 2012 11:40 PM
Okay, maybe I am taking it past the logical, but as Hillary Clinton might say, it takes a village. That's a village of people not coddling kids or afraid of them.
That doesn't mean beating them up or abusing them, but it does mean a village of women and men not afraid of parents, police, lawyers, and psychologists and thereby letting your kids run wild.
I wonder how many kids that now get suspended for a week or more or even kicked out of school entirely, might not have preferred a gym coach or principal that had a paddle hanging on a wall.
(One day I hope to have to answer pirates. Pirates are cool.)
jerry at July 6, 2012 1:56 AM
@Kat: "We'd never speak of it again, over, done with, gone."
Good point, that's really important. Holding grudges or staying mad is really counterproductive. Sometimes it's hard to avoid, if the kids have done something outstandingly stupid (I remember a couple of incidents with my boys). Lay down the law, hand out the punishment, and it's over. Fresh start, and let's not go there again.
a_random_guy at July 6, 2012 1:57 AM
You think parents are bad, go to a dog park and watch the people.
My 14 pound min pin tried to take a ball away from a 120 pound Doberman today and got warned off.
That's how she learns, but some of the other people freaked out.
Terry at July 6, 2012 2:37 AM
Forget all that; the kids' proximity to my lawn concerns me.
Spartee at July 6, 2012 5:40 AM
Heh. I don't need my kids' approval, they need mine. Yes, you want your kids to love you, of course. But if your kid doesn't tell you at least once that they hate you for not letting them do something (and that "something" is usually something that you would hope other parents wouldn't let their kids do, but someone, somewhere, is), then you're not doing it right. You're the parent, you're the one they look to (or should look to) for keeping them safe until they reach the age where they are legally responsible for themselves. It's a lot of trial and error, and you want to err on the side of caution most times, but this Lay down the law, hand out the punishment, and it's over. Fresh start, and let's not go there again. is most important. Because you're the parent, YOU are the one to set the boundaries. And those boundaries WILL be pushed. How far you let them be pushed is the question. And the answer should be: NOT far. But you have to be fair. And so do your kids. Pushing too far isn't fair on their part, and they need to be told, and shown, that.
Flynne at July 6, 2012 6:14 AM
I had 3 and did it mostly alone. In some ways it made us closer and while I have guilt that they didn't have the traditional two parent white picket fence kind of house, I don't see a lot of that even in the two parent homes with a white picket fence.
I was more like Kat. I'm not a big rules person but the rules I had were set in stone. Treating people with courtesy and respect and not acting like spoiled entitled brats was something that I modeled every day and they learned it that way. Its much more effective than acting like a spoiled entitled adult but setting strict rules for the kids. I see that A LOT!
Btw, I have 3 kids that are far from perfect. We're in the mid to end teen range and we've definitely had our issues but overall, my kids are the kind of people I'd meet in the world and want to be friends with. The nicest proof of that is all of the calls I get from other parents who all want to compliment my children after they've been to their homes.
Kristen at July 6, 2012 6:16 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/07/06/do_kids_sometim.html#comment-3254994">comment from a_random_guyYMMV - there are all kinds of parents. That said,an increasing (or increasingly visible?) number of parents treat their kids as "special snowflakes" who mustn't suffer any disappointments in life.
My parents favored the realism model.
Also, I got much more freedom than my sisters did because I understood what could be called the parental social contract. I could be home at 1 a.m. if I told them I was coming home at 1 a.m. and actually got home then or before. I always did.
I also got to skip much of my senior year of high school because I had an internship at a local TV station three days a week. Teachers weren't quite clear when I was supposed to be there, but I seemed like such a goody-goody -- I got to skip school in a way the truants never did. Of course, I usually spent the day off reading, nerd that I am.
Amy Alkon at July 6, 2012 6:24 AM
"I got to skip school in a way the truants never did. Of course, I usually spent the day off reading, nerd that I am."
Amy, I think you touched on another aspect. I believe that modeling is a great thing, but there are some kids who just seem to be born responsible and wanting to do good things. I have a son who went to school every day, was an honor student, but also could regularly be found finding the most creative ways to get into trouble. Thankfully he was more mischief than actual trouble and never disrespectful, but in comparison my daughter missed a lot of school but still got great grades and would rather sit somewhere and read and write than find trouble. She steered away from it and was very selective in her friendships.
I won't say I was the same exact parent to each kid because I wasn't. My three were all very different and required different actions and reactions. What worked for one did not work for another. My son who loves trouble is probably the most adaptive. He is extremely creative, intelligent and has amazing skills. But he's the one that is making me old.
It isn't always about the material either. I have wealthy friends who spoil the shit out of their kids but have raised very generous and respectful kids. Its an attitude of entitlement that makes spoiled people, not the amount of things.
Kristen at July 6, 2012 6:36 AM
Forget all that; the kids' proximity to my lawn concerns me.
This. I don't even have a lawn, and I want them off it.
I got to skip school in a way the truants never did.
I've tried to make my younger cousins and friends' kids understand that if you develop a reputation as a good kid, you can get away with just about anything.
I don't remember my parents every playing with me, not for any real length of time. My toys were for me and my friends. We used to play cards, but that was when I was old enough to understand the rules. I played their games with them. They didn't play my games with me. It never occurred to me to be upset about that,
MonicaP at July 6, 2012 6:38 AM
Parents should be like gravity. Without an over reaching force to strain against kids will never grow properly
lujlp at July 6, 2012 7:53 AM
I agree that kids with a reputation for being "good" can get away with a lot. I swear I managed to have some sort of special exception to just about every rule. I even got a laminated hall pass my senior year of high school ... one that let me through ANY hall (even closed ones) ANY time during school. This wasn't some policy, it was made special for me :)
That said, when I got really sick and missed two weeks of school (and spent the next month only going to school and sleeping), I made all the make-up arrangements with my teachers myself.
The only time, to my knowledge, my parents got involved on my behalf was (and I just learned about this a couple years ago) when in junior high. If you missed so many days, they automatically sent home a letter to the parents saying basically that attendance is important and your kid'd get bad grades if you didn't get them to school more. My mom met with the principle and told him it was a load of crap, since I had all A's. She chewed him out for having a stupid automatic system.
Shannon M. Howell at July 6, 2012 7:59 AM
One problem with kids' NOT hating their parents and their rules (at least sometimes) is that the kids have no incentive to move out at 20.
From therapist John Rosemond:
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/1995/nov/06/children-need-learning-not-relationships/
"Speaking in Nashville recently, I asked the 500-plus people in the audience to raise their hands if they truly liked their parents. Maybe 10 hands went up, which didn’t surprise me, because I didn’t like my parents that much. I wouldn’t, for example, have chosen them as friends. They annoyed me, inconvenienced me and made me angry. Then I asked this same audience for a show of hands if they loved their parents. There may have been a few who sat with both hands in their laps, but I couldn’t locate them. Yes, I too loved my annoying, frustrating parents. But I couldn’t wait to leave home, which simply means they did a good job. They convinced me I could make a better life for myself than they were willing to make for me. And, by gosh, I did!"
(Check out the rest - it's great.)
lenona at July 6, 2012 9:10 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/07/06/do_kids_sometim.html#comment-3255177">comment from lenonaI couldn't wait to be independent -- and to not only get out of my parents' house but the entire state of Michigan. I wrote an ad and won a scholarship and used it to leave a really good school (the University of Michigan) and do my last year at a comparatively mediocre school (NYU) so I could be in NYC.
Amy Alkon at July 6, 2012 10:12 AM
One thing I didn't get to say earlier (I had to deal with a tantrum). I DO think it is important to teach kids that not ALL boundaries are written in stone. If I use the "or else" voice, they'd better listen, but I do want them to not be a pushover for, just as an example, TSA.
Let me be clear that this is not letting them be boundary-less or me being a pushover. I'm just adding to that sometimes it pays to let them "win." A hypothetical example:
Child: Can we get ice cream from the ice cream truck?
Me: No.
Child: Why not?
Me: Because it's overpriced and I'm saving my cash for XYZ (coffee, trip to the movies, whatever).
Child: Can I get ice cream if I use my own money?
Me: If I say yes, you won't have that money for something else.
Child: I know. So, can I?
Me: OK
Negotiation is a lost skill, and while this does create more headaches for me (they will try to negotiate anything if I forget to set the rules of engagement before hand), it has increased their problem solving AND they are starting to figure out why the rules I set exist and are important.
Also, this has resulted in my kids occasionally thinking of a way to make something happen that I just didn't see. E.g., if we do the errands in a different order, we'll end up near the park and might have time to stop there.
Of course, you can't do this until you've stopped fretting about pleasing your kids. Sometimes the answer will still be no (like when they've already had ice cream).
Shannon M. Howell at July 6, 2012 10:12 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/07/06/do_kids_sometim.html#comment-3255192">comment from Shannon M. HowellThis is great, Shannon. If really annoying while you're engaged in it, I'm sure.
Amy Alkon at July 6, 2012 10:37 AM
The hardest time to be a mom is in public, when you really don't want the kid's outbursts disturbing everyone. I just had a really hard "vacation" where there was no downtime. No safe place to just let her run around, even the hotel park was on a hill next to a fairly busy drive way so I had to be constantly watching her. Not to mention being in the same room for sleeping. So I was already high strung and very paranoid about people's reactions to her running around, or fussing, or anything.
It was too much, we should have stayed home, but that aside, we do have to be out in public sometimes and that is when its the hardest.
(I'm very strung out and sleep dep as I write this)
NicoleK at July 6, 2012 11:04 AM
"but that aside, we do have to be out in public sometimes and that is when its the hardest."
Nicole, you made me crack up! I remember the toddler years. My boys were 2 years apart and very active. Sometimes going out was hard and I will never claim that I had perfect kids who never did anything wrong because they had moments that took years to laugh about but like you, when they had those moments I was always concerned with who they were bothering and tried to limit it as much as humanly possible.
Kristen at July 6, 2012 11:45 AM
Yeah, I haven't mastered the whole not caving in public yet still managing not to bother people thing.
NicoleK at July 6, 2012 11:50 AM
If really annoying while you're engaged in it, I'm sure.
At least so far, more cute than anything with us.
I DO think it is important to teach kids that not ALL boundaries are written in stone. If I use the "or else" voice, they'd better listen,
I'm working on that. It's also important to let them learn that _they_ have some control, say, and ability to change things.
My first is 2 1/2 and she's just getting to the stage of being able to figure things out.
2 nights ago, she brought me a book, after she had her pre-night milk and said "No go night night, you read". Ok, One book. And I read it, and she hopped up and ran to bed. She was happy, and had I just put her to bed, the tantrum would have lasted at least an hour. But she's learning that sometimes she can come up with alternatives. I also try and give her options when she's locking down. "Do you want to take the bear or the puppy to bed?" - that makes her stop, make a choice, but _towards the goal_.
So far, so good.
Unix-Jedi at July 6, 2012 12:07 PM
Yes, Amy, it is really annoying at times. However, they are already well prepped for degrees in law....
Shannon M. Howell at July 6, 2012 2:43 PM
I also try and give her options when she's locking down. "Do you want to take the bear or the puppy to bed?" - that makes her stop, make a choice, but _towards the goal_.
My friends' 3-year-old thought his way out of this one. They wanted him to stop fussing and get dressed, so they said, "Do you want the red pants or the blue pants?" He responded, "No pants!" I think he's on to them.
MonicaP at July 6, 2012 3:22 PM
The whole point is grow someone with enough independent spirit that they'll want to get the Hell out after twenty years anyway, right?
"Hate" is probably not the worst word for it... To a teenager seeking relief, the dislike is intensely personal. That doesn't necessarily mean things are going wrong.
Also, I think mothers/daughters is a vibe unseen anywhere else in the natural world. They will, in some very subtle (and sometimes literal) ways, take each other by the throat and just stand there and howl, eyes wide open. It's weird.
Men and young men don't do that, not with any of their relationships. Whether it's Dad or whatever, eventually they just say "done" and turn away. Sometimes they turn away THEN say "done". Sometimes they just turn and walk.
Of all the bonds in life, mothers and daughters seem most compelled to make some rhetorical point on the way out the door.
One of the best single mom/gorgeous daughter combos I ever met had apparently
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at July 6, 2012 3:27 PM
(whoops, more)
One of the best single mom/gorgeous daughter combos I ever met had apparently done so much howling that the daughter had to move out for a few months in high school. Ten years later, they seemed so wonderfully well-adjusted and fond of each other...
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at July 6, 2012 3:29 PM
"I'm your mommy, not your playmate." - the phrase often repeated in our house.
I'm fortunate enough to have wonderful friends who also happen to be quite successful in their careers. We will all admit that even though we're all in our mid thirties to fourties, that we're still a bit afraid of our parents. We love our mothers and fathers, and none of us were physically abused, but we were raised in families that had rules and expectations.
A parent's job is to raise a human to be an ethical and moral functioning member of society. To do that, you have to be the Captain, not Cool Hand Luke.
UW Girl at July 6, 2012 6:04 PM
Wow reading all of this.
My parents just totally ignored me, like I didnt exist. My mom and I had almost zero conversations growing up, she never talked to me-at all. I'm not exaggerating. There were rarely fights because uhh...well nobody talked.
I did get alot of money though and zero regulation as to how I could spend it or how I could spend my time. No looking at what I was doing in school either-it was weird but I thought it was normal. I mean they rarely looked at my report card or what classes I was taking. No questions about my friends either.
Hmm...but alot of my hispanic friends who are successful experienced the same thing. Their parents actually talked to them but there was no regulations on behavior/school/etc.
Purplepen at July 7, 2012 1:22 AM
*****Okay, maybe I am taking it past the logical, but as Hillary Clinton might say, it takes a village. That's a village of people not coddling kids or afraid of them.*****
Um, no. THIS member of the village a) doesn't have kids and b) doesn't want to deal with yours.
Your choice, your problem. YOU raise it. You're doing it right if I don't have to give you the stink eye in a restaurant. And if that's the case, thank you. :D
Daghain at July 7, 2012 9:06 AM
More from the Rosemond column (last paragraphs):
"In the second place, adults are not supposed to have wonderful relationship with children. They are supposed to have wonderful relationships with OTHER ADULTS with whom they go to restaurants and movies and on adults-only vacations and on shopping sprees and so on. Likewise, children are supposed to have wonderful relationships with OTHER CHILDREN with whom they plot against adults.
"Having a 'wonderful' relationship with one’s child sounds nice, but it isn’t conducive to the child learning to respect either the parent or other authority figures, which is, in the final analysis, to the child’s infinite benefit.
"Today’s parents need desperately to realize, for their children’s sakes, that when it comes to child-rearing, what sounds good and what works are, more often than not, completely unrelated."
(end)
BTW, Rosemond also had a good column on "the village" vs. "a fortress." Namely, he pointed out that "village" used to mean a society where ALL adults, related or not, were free to scold misbehaving kids, whereas now, it means little more than "government assistance" - and, I'd add, expecting things like free babysitting from unwilling store clerks and waiters. Whereas now, parents are acting more like their kids' lawyers, lashing out at anyone who dares to complain about their behavior, hence, "the fortress."
You can read it here (about halfway down):
http://www.refugees.bratfree.com/read.php?2,153428,153848,quote=1
It's on page 2 of a thread.
lenona at July 7, 2012 9:30 AM
It isn't always about the material either. I have wealthy friends who spoil the shit out of their kids but have raised very generous and respectful kids. Its an attitude of entitlement that makes spoiled people, not the amount of things.
Posted by: Kristen at July 6, 2012 6:36 AM
____________________________
Exactly. Think of the fictional character Eustace Scrubb. He was likely being raised to be a narcissistic bully (and an atheist at that). Yet, at the beginning of the book, it's implied that his parents are anti-materialist (secular Pharisees of a sort?) and there is NEVER a mention of Eustace's owning any toys. So yes, it's all about teaching kids NOT to feel entitled to be the center of the world - which Eustace certainly considered himself to be until "his world" was turned upside down.
lenona at July 7, 2012 10:19 AM
I love Eustace Scrubb!
NicoleK at July 8, 2012 2:26 AM
Re Eustace Scrubb: Yes, it's a bit ironic that when he mends his nasty ways, we're supposed to think of his mother, Aunt Alberta, as a bad person because she says that he's now "commonplace and tiresome," but she's actually right, in a sense. That is, what exactly DOES distinguish most of Lewis' "nice" male characters from each other, anyway? Example: Peter, Edmund and Caspian are pretty interchangeable in their speech and behavior. Eustace stays different in the later books mainly because of his trivial lapses into rude behavior.
In short, Eustace may well be the only three-dimensional male human character in the series. I have to wonder if Lewis simply didn't care enough about his readers to flesh out the nice male characters better - or whether individuality or non-conformity of ANY kind was deeply troubling to him. (I suspect the latter.) Though it's certainly interesting that the young girls are pretty distinct from each other - especially when you compare, say, Polly to Susan - or even Polly and Lucy.
lenona at July 9, 2012 11:49 AM
Leave a comment