I remember once when my mother asked me to pass around radishes with butter, I balked and hissed under my breath that I was nobody's servant, and anyway, nobody likes radishes, and stomped off. But justice was swift. My mother sent my grandmother after me. In no uncertain terms she said, "Elizabeth, that was rude." She didn't say, Honey, I understand that sometimes we don't want to pass the plate of radishes. She didn't say, I'll go around with you and help you pass out the radishes, O.K.? Nope.

If that's her idea of "justice," maybe she was a little spoiled herself as a child. That is not "justice." That was a mild reprimand. Justice would have included punishment for rude behavior in front of guests and disobeying her mother.

But perhaps mother doled out the punishment later, rather than assigning it to grandmother. But that would not mean "Justice was swift." Ordinarily, I would also fault Elizabeth's mother for sending Grandma to chide Elizabeth, but she probably didn't want to leave her guests while she dealt with her bratty child.

She's right about one thing, though. Who the hell likes radishes with butter? Bleah.

That aside, it reminds me of the time my brother and his then-wife visited my mother and me while we were living in Maine. He brought his two boys with them. My mother set up the guest room complete with double bed. My brother and his wife slept on the floor while two boys, aged six and four, slept in the bed!

I'm cheering for the places that want to go kid free. But really the problem isn't the kids, it's the lack of parenting.

I have the bad habit of being a smoker. A number of years ago we were at my lady's grandkid's birthday party. It was a nice summer day and being held in their backyard. We were sitting in chairs away from the crowd watching the kids play soccer. A seven year old plops down next to us. His comment was "I have asthma and people don't smoke around me." My reply was "That's fine." and I continued to smoke. It took all my will not to chew him out and make a scene.

Remembering that has not helped me get any closer to anyone's crotch spawn.

I have to say, I don't quite understand the idea of inviting more guests than the number of chairs you have!

But yes, it would be great if people would realize that kids are just as happy - if not more so - when they're made to revolve around adults and adult tastes instead of the other way around. Sandra Boynton's musical CDs sell very well to families, since she was already very famous as an author for preschoolers, but I'm sure her musical success is also due to her philosophy that "if it isn't good enough for adults, it isn't good enough for children." (That is, yes, her music IS good enough for adults!)

And, as Garrison Keillor said of his childhood:

“You were free........but you knew how to behave. You didn’t smart off to your elders, and if a lady you didn’t know came by and told you to blow your nose, you blew it. Your parents sent you off to school with lunch money and told you to be polite and do what the teacher said, and if there was a problem at school, it was most likely your fault and not the school’s. Your parents were large and slow afoot and they did not read books about parenting, and when they gathered with other adults, at church suppers or family get-togethers, they did not talk about schools or about prevailing theories of child development. They did not weave their lives around yours. They had their own lives, which were mysterious to you.”

And finally, in 2000, Dr. Laura had a hissy fit because HER mantra is "I am my kids' mom" and it never occurred to her, apparently, that there's such a thing as taking that too far, whether you're liberal or conservative. That is, she got furious at Dr. John Rosemond for the following exchange with a reader:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=799&dat=20000816&id=ZpY1AAAAIBAJ&sjid=u04DAAAAIBAJ&pg=3432,5628169

Q: Of the 40 mothers represented in my 4-year-old son's pre-K program, I am one of only 3 who work outside the home. I do so not for economic reasons, but simply because I enjoy it. My son knows his after-school situation (the school runs a small after school program) is unique, and he makes it clear, almost daily, that he wants me to stop working so he can come directly home at the end of the regular school day. I've explained over and over again why I work, and I give him more than enough of my time in the evenings and on weekends, but nothing short of my quitting my job will satisfy him. Is there something else I can do, something I'm missing, that will help him adjust positively to his situation?

A: Yes, you can stop talking about it with him. Letting children express their feelings freely has its place, but letting a child express the same feeling over and over again, especially when nothing is going to change, is not in the child's best interest. For one thing, allowing a child to "beat a dead horse" in this manner creates a soap opera within which the child begins to perceive himself as a victim.

Your son is not a victim. There is nothing "wrong" with the decision you have made in that it does not compromise your son's development in any way, shape, or form. The more you explain yourself, the more it appears that you are pleading with him to understand and forgive. The fact is, you do not need forgiveness, and he will not understand the whys and wherefores of your decision until he is much older.

So save your breath. It's time you stopped being mealy-mouthed and started acting like an authority figure who has confidence in her own decisions.

At the next opportunity, sit down with him and say, "We have talked about my job enough. You've obviously said all you have to say, and I've said all I have to say. I know how you feel, and you know how I feel. So, I've decided we're not going to talk about it any more. From now on, when you want to talk to me about my work, I'm simply going to tell you to find something to do. If I see that you need some help to stop thinking about it, I'm going to have you do some work for me like clean your room or police the yard. Got it?"

Then, the next time he brings up the subject of your job, simply look at him and say, "I'm not going to talk about it. Have you got something to do, or do I need to find something for you to do?" And say it with a stern, "I mean business" tone in your voice. And if he needs some help disengaging, provide it! Prove to him, in no uncertain terms, that you will no longer tolerate attempts on his part to beat the expired equine.

The next step in your rehabilitation will be to stop giving so much of yourself to him during the evenings and on weekends. Like a typical well-intentioned working parent, you're putting your son at the center of your attention entirely too much.

He needs to see that outside of your job, you are not a one-dimensional cardboard cut-out with a sign reading "What can I do for you?" hung about your neck. Rather you are an interesting person with a variety of interests and responsibilities, of which he is one. An important one, yes, but not the only one.

(end)

For the record, HIS mantra is "Want your kids to be really happy and independent? Put your marriage first - or, if single, put your adult life first."

I like Dr. Rosemond's advice. And I'm sure Dr. Laura, the working mother who thinks working mothers are horrible people, did have a hissy fit.

As long as she's certain there isn't something her child isn't telling her -- like a bully at school that he wouldn't otherwise encounter if he came home directly from school. Or perhaps he doesn't have enough time to do his homework.

I'm pretty sure kids that age don't have homework!

Oh, you're right, lenona. Thanks. I had forgotten the part about this child being four-years-old and in a Pre-K program.

I'm cheering for the places that want to go kid free. But really the problem isn't the kids, it's the lack of parenting.

Posted by: Jim P. at August 11, 2013 5:26 AM
_____________________________________

(Before I begin, I'll say I'd love to know how that kid responded when you didn't stop smoking.)

While many businesses report that they get MORE customers once they start limiting the hours when kids are welcome - or when they quietly remove things like crayons and high chairs, thus driving away some of their worst customers - that still leaves the problem of how to teach PARENTS what they should be teaching their kids. Kids don't magically learn how to behave at age ten if they've never been taught not to yell or swear before then. Segregation alone doesn't teach them any lessons for later, adult life.

(And, just as a reminder, if you can't teach little kids not to run or scream at home at dinnertime, don't think for a minute that taking them to a restaurant will make them change their attitude. They don't care about your eardrums - unless you punish them for yelling - and they care even less about strangers' eardrums. Strangers don't deserve that.)

And speaking of parents who can't grasp that there are WRONG times and places for everything:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shannon-sutherland/dont-shhh-my-daughter_b_3668447.html

What is the MATTER with some parents? Have they no understanding of boundaries? After all, if the mother had had a splitting headache, she'd likely have gently but firmly made the toddler quiet down, so why should dozens of strangers, trapped on the train with her, get any less consideration, when half of them have probably had a very bad day and need some peace and quiet?

Of two minds on this one.

Kids need boundaries and discipline, and will misbehave to get it.

Parents need to be parents, and teach their children how to behave in public. And what the hell happened to spanking? If that were me with the radishes, my grandma woulda paddled my butt with a fly swatter!

On the other hand, if you really don't like kids, why make a party kid friendly, or go to a business that is kid friendly in the first place? You are under no obligation to tolerate other people's children, therefore why put yourself in the position where you have to?

It's different if you're going to a fancy french restaurant, or a library. But at the mall, kids are gonna misbehave.

And Jim, why on earth would you smoke at a kids party, #1, and #2, why did you go to a kids party in the first place? I smoke too, but I don't smoke in the house or around my children, and if I whipped out a cigarette even outside at a children's party, my children would instantly be made outcasts.

The chair thing seemed weird to me, too. I can see expecting the children to sit on the floor while playing/talking or watching a cartoon while the adults sit in the chairs, but expecting kids---including three year olds---to eat on someone else's floor is problematic. Most young children still spill their food and make messes sometimes. If this happens on a table cloth or a folding card table (my obvious "kids table" for large gatherings) no biggie. If it happens on the carpet, it's a pretty big deal. The parents would kind of *have* to hover in order to promptly clean up (or remind the preschooler to clean up) the inevitable mess before it got tracked all over the house. Eesh, just set up a kiddie table if you're having a kid friendly meal. Anyone who is old enough to eat neatly on the floor is also old enough to be insulted at being expected to eat on the floor.

The broader point is one thing---yes, parents should be able to expect good behavior and not cater to their kids 24/7. But she's really reaching if she thinks three year olds shouldn't expect help in cutting their food. Its not at all the same as her refusal (at what age?) to pass a plate at an adults' request.

Re Rosemond: I would add that, on the RARE occasions that many people disagree with an individual column of his, they express clear-cut, valid reasons as to why they disagree with him (unfortunately, he almost never admits to making mistakes). Whereas whenever some journalist - or colleague of his - condemns his books in GENERAL, that critic is always suspiciously vague and refuses to quote from specific columns. I suspect that child psychologists, in particular, are simply afraid of losing their clients to him, since he gives all that free advice in his column.

Lisa Belkin was one such critic, last October - the Huffington Post article was titled "'Parent-Babble': What John Rosemond Doesn't Understand About Raising Kids Today."

Two big fat flaws in her vague "argument":

She accused Rosemond of having a flawed memory because he makes his childhood sound very much like "Leave it to Beaver" and hers was nothing like that. She conveniently ignores the fact that she and he are hardly from the same generation - he was born in 1947; she was born in 1960. So their experiences could easily have been very different.

And Belkin's argument that some things change and there's nothing you can do about it is hardly true. I know two kids (11 & 7) whose parents firmly restrict their TV time - and other screen time, I suspect - and the kids are more delightfully outgoing, polite, and well-read than any others I know. Keeping up with the Joneses, technology-wise, can often do more harm than good, so why do some do it? Because wimpy parents won't stand up to peer pressure, of course.

(Also, aside from those items parents don't want their kids to have at all, what's WRONG with saying "you can have luxury X when you pay for it yourself"? That would stop even toddlers from yelling "buy me that" in a hurry! Parents have every right to be generous only when it's THEIR idea first.)

From his most recent column:

http://www.buffalonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130810/REFRESH/130819924/1057

(last paragraphs)

.........“I’m a member of the last generation of American children whose parents, especially mothers, did not worry about us almost constantly.” It has got to be a burden on a child to be the object of lots of parental concern. I have to wonder if parental concern isn’t eventually self-fulfilling; as in, if you are concerned, then your child will give you something to be concerned about.

“I’m a member of the last generation of American children to lie in the beds we made and stew in our own juices.” We were taught to take responsibility for our actions. When we did something wrong or failed to do our best in school, we had no excuses.

The good news is that more and more of today’s parents are getting it. They’re raising their kids pretty much the same way kids were raised 50-plus years ago, with no cellphones, video games or junk food. Their kids eat what’s put in front of them, sleep in their own beds, do their own homework, entertain themselves, have no excuses, and see, on a daily basis, what a real marriage looks like.

(end)

Whereas whenever some journalist - or colleague of his - condemns his books in GENERAL, that critic is always suspiciously vague and refuses to quote from specific columns.
___________________________

Correction - that should read more like "refuses to cite specific questions and answers in Rosemond's column and why any of his specific advice is wrong, even for that individual."

On the other hand, if you really don't like kids, why make a party kid friendly, or go to a business that is kid friendly in the first place? You are under no obligation to tolerate other people's children, therefore why put yourself in the position where you have to?
____________________________

Maybe the host didn't KNOW in advance just how wimpy the parents were going to be? Or that they weren't the types to make ANY adult conversation when their kids were there, "needing" to be catered to?

Oh, and where did you get the idea it was at a MALL? It was at the hostess' APARTMENT! All the more reason to expect good manners.

But Jenny Had A Chance made some very good points too.

Read again Lenona...

I said that if you're at a mall, you should expect bratty kids.

This is actually some pretty poor hostessing. A lot of her complaints could have been nipped in the bud or mitigated with a little more forethought. This was maybe a "children reluctantly allowed" event but it certainly wasn't "child friendly."

Of *course* the children sat in the chairs. Adults have the dexterity to eat off plates while they stand, small children generally do not. And without a defined area for corralling the children (such as the kids table or picnic blanket), guests are left to their own devices to minimize the havoc that their kids create. Putting the kids in the chair and telling them "don't move" is a good step.

This is also probably why the adults didn't spend much time mingling. Goodness knows I'd be preoccupied with making sure my toddler doesn't spread strawberries all over my hostesses furniture and carpet. Throwing on some cartoons in the bedroom and laying a platic tablecloth over the bed probably would have facilitated more adult interaction.

Of *course* parents hovered around and fussed over their kids' eating. You ever see a three year old eat? It's not pretty. They do need food they can easily manipulate with their fingers, so cut it into small pieces.

And of *course* small children aren't going to like Gruyere cheese strata. One, it's kind of a strong cheese and small children generally dislike strong flavors. Two, lots of small children have texture issues with food. A good hostess makes sure all of her guests have something to eat - whether it's kale salad for the vegan or chicken nuggets and a bowl of goldfish for the wee ones.

She's a hostess, not their parents. It's their job to fight food battles. It's her job to make *all* of her guests feel welcome.
----

I guess it's just that people of her generation have completely forgotten the manners of hostessing. It really is a lost art. Why, my mother would have been all over this and when I asked why we needed to provide for a bunch of kids who should be seen and not heard she sent my grandmother for swift justice. And my grandmother gave me a lolly and explained that children are people too.

The world is truly going to hell.

Unless there was more at the link, I didn't anything to suggest that ALL the kids were preschoolers. Maybe they really were getting more help than they needed.

"Unless there was more at the link, I didn't anything to suggest that ALL the kids were preschoolers."

The article only mentions three year olds so that's why I assumed all children in attendance were in that rough age range.

My New York in-laws have always remarked on what lovely manners my kids have. When they were little, when they were in grade school and now as adults. The cousins (all boys) are socially immature, eat like wolves (the outcast members of the pack) and are really not fun to be around. (Okay, there's one who's a nice kid.) What my relatives seem to forget was how much time my husband and I spend correcting them, hushing them, showing them how to do things. Nice manners aren't genetically related. It's work.

A brunch with Gruyere cheese strata and mimosas is not compatible with small children capable of independent motion unless there is a babysitter in a room next door overseeing the kids while their parents eat. If I had been invited to that brunch and found that there was no childcare on offer (and, to be clear, I DO NOT believe it is the responsibility of hosts to provide child care), I would have hired a babysitter and left my kids at home. The only small child who would have been happy at her brunch would be a three-month-old in a sling happy to look around and occasionally nurse.

Yes, children today are often under-disciplined and over-parented. And yes, children desperately need boundaries and guidance. But no matter how well-parented, virtually no *three*-year-old is going to prefer Gruyere cheese strata over goldfish and/or going to be able to sit still quietly for long while adults talk. Given that the author doesn't seem to understand this, I'm not really confident in her assessment of her friends' parenting skills. (Especially given that modern parents are made to feel as though their kids will choke at the drop of a hat. I feed my toddlers whole strawberries, but I feel more confident in assessing the recommendations of various expert groups and modifying them as appropriate than many other parents, in my experience.) If she had told a three-year-old to sit down and let her mother talk, you know what would have happened? Nothing. Three-year-olds are not all that good with impulse control under the best of circumstances. Wise parents avoid putting them in those circumstances.

It's very possible that her friends are terrible parents. But it's also possible that they felt pressured to attend her brunch and bring their kids, and this was the result. I've thrown many social events with kids that have gone well, and I've thrown social events without kids that have also been successful. The key is to know what is possible with both, and tailor them accordingly. She didn't do that, her party was a failure, and now she's trying to blame everyone *except* for herself for that.

I said that if you're at a mall, you should expect bratty kids.

Posted by: wtf at August 11, 2013 9:09 AM
_____________________________

Why mention malls at all?

Some kids are more dextrous than others. I know some who could eat just about anything as neatly as an adult by 18 months. This child was just as likely (or not) to choke on food as an adult. I also know kids who regularly seem to swallow the wrong way at age 6.

This is, again, more people coming down on parents no matter which way they go. If you don't hover, you aren't teaching your child respect for other people's things (because little Susie will spill and not clean up or dash off and color the walls with sticky fingerprints). If you DO hover, you are "over parenting" (what the heck does THAT mean anyway??). While I agree that there's a lack of standards and discipline, I also think that if people weren't so quick to tell parents that whatever they are doing is wrong, people might just relax a little and things would be a bit easier.

Instead of stewing during her brunch, the author could have seen things weren't going as planned and gotten out some pen & paper, turned on the TV, or gotten a blanket and told the kids to have a picnic. In short, SHE could have politely re-directed her guests.

Instead of going off on the hostess, who clearly doesn't have wee-ones, people could take a lesson from this and say to themselves, "You know, next time somebody invites me to something 'child friendly' I think I'll make sure to get some more details so I can decide if it's friendly for my child." By this, I mean decide if they should go, get a sitter, etc.

I know people who don't take their 4-6 year olds to "adult, but kids are okay" events because of strong food allergies. When planning with adults in mind, most don't account for food allergies... and the fact that kids can get into stuff not knowing there's a peanut in the brownies.

If I might say just one more thing about Rosemond's enemies: They NEVER seem to find any young adults whose parents raised them according to Rosemond and say "see? Their parents ruined their lives/psyches/etc - all because of HIS books."

Since Rosemond's been writing and lecturing since the 1980s or even earlier, you'd think that if he were doing any real damage, we'd have proof of it by now.

After all, to take another example, Dr. Spock said "trust your instincts." What he didn't say was "trust your STUPID instincts, like letting your preschoolers watch TV or play video games for 12 hours straight just because you want to get chores done in a hurry - never mind that they need to learn to do chores themselves."

I think Rosemond's enemies are misreading him in the same way. (BTW, Rosemond also thinks Spock got a bad rap.)

"Why mention malls at all?"

As in, if you're in a fancy restaurant, and for some idiotic reason a couple brings a child, you should reasonably be able to expect decent behavior from said child.

If however, you go to the mall, expect bratty kids screaming at the top of their lungs. See people of Walmart, for example.

As with real estate, realistic expectations of children's behavior is all about location, location, location.

As I said.

I had to perform the Heimlich-several times before it was successful-on my 4 year old at the pool back in June, for a half a strawberry that was killing him.

I can understand why the moms hovered: she has no kids. They don't want THEIR kids ruining her house. The only way to ensure that, at ages 4 and below, is to be on them like hawks. And yeah, I'm putting my kid at the table before I'm giving them crackers and juice on someone's flooring. And who the HELL prepares cheese strata to feed kids? If you WANT an adult gathering, have one!

My mom would have smacked the tar out of me for that radishes comment. As I would smack mine.

There is a resxtaurant here in Austin called Catfish parlour. There's a thing going around FB right now about boycotting them because the managers asked a group of people including a (apparently) very loud and disruptive mentally disabled person to quiet down or leave. I've gotten lots of indignant replies to my "if someone can't behave in an acceptable manner for the location they should have to leave, whatever the age or ability" comments. I've taken my kids out of a restaurant before. We left a Santa breakfast one time due to behavior. My neighbors' son has Downs, I take him palces with my kids. And we often have to leave that place when he decides to make it unpleasant for others. So what? I'm having lunch at Catfish Parlour tomorrow.

What Jenny said.

Most little kids can't stand up and hold a plate and eat. They don't have the coordination to do so. Not having enough seats and also surfaces is a mistake I've made, too. I'd far rather the kids sit down than drop their plates and make a mess.

Not sure what the LW was envisioning... the kids run around and play games and don't eat? The kids stand there like statues?

Next time s/he could have a kid's table that they can sit at, and then the grown-ups can eat at the chairs and not dismay him/her.

I understand wanting adult conversation, but there needs to be some other activity the kids can do alone. That activity can be eating, if easy-to-eat foods and a place to eat them are provided. Or TV. Or games.

I think Rosemond is a smug prick I would never want to meet. My kids are teenagers now. I almost always agree with his logic, but not the zero-tolerance, cryogenic tone he advocates.

It IS annoying the way he almost never admits to making mistakes....

But if your logic was almost always better than most other columnists, you'd be smug too.

I'm guessing the cryogenic tone comes simply from being male. (But I've noticed that MIss Manners is also often distinctly less compassionate than, say, Dear Abby.)

But as he pointed out in one column, it's better to be a little too strict than a little too lenient, if only so a parent won't have to repeat a particular, harsh punishment for the same crime.

http://m.spokesman.com/stories/1996/nov/25/punishment-really-a-favor-in-disguise/

Quote:

“What’s worse?” I ask. “Imposing a supposedly unreasonable punishment one time and one time only, or fighting the same battle day after day after day after day - chastising, yelling, criticizing, complaining, threatening and yelling some more?”

Everyone agrees. The latter is far worse. Over time, the day-after-day stuff takes a huge toll on parent, child, family and marriage.

(end)

MY main problems with him are:

1) His belief that all families should be Jewish or Christian,

2) his refusal to talk about a child's need for physical affection - e.g., many of us have heard of teen girls, who had boyfriends too early and got pregnant because they were starved for physical parental affection,

3) his refusal to talk about how to teach kids to stand up to adults who happen to be emotional bullies, whether they're teachers, nasty store managers, or older relatives whom the parents tend to defer to. (My guess is he thinks too many modern parents act like their kids' lawyers anyway, so the kids don't need extra ammunition.)

And speaking of Garrison Keillor-types and refusing to revolve around children's idea of "fun":

http://living.msn.com/life-inspired/escape-from-candy-land-2

By Hugh O'Neill.

Excerpts:

"......if you're like me and you start to feel like a Sartre character the instant you lie on your tummy in the living room and flick the Strawberry Shortcake game spinner, do not feel compelled to do it. You don't have to be Robin Williams. You can still be John Wayne. And know this: You are not alone! You are part of a great brotherhood. And most important, remember that you are of no use to anyone—your kids, your wife, your country—if you go slowly insane.......

"............Of course, you can't disappear. If you're as good a man as I think you are, your kids will benefit from time with you. They need your presence in their lives. And moreover, Mom needs help. They're not exactly a perfect match with her, either. But rather than cramming your swaggering self into your kids' little world, sweep them into your roomier one. Take fewer trips to the playground and more to the hardware store. Surely you could use an apprentice for that drywall job. Somebody has to hand you the nails. And don't take them to Chuck E. Cheese's, but on a hike to Havasu Falls. Include them in the things you enjoy. Let them be part of your man's world, rather than shrinking yourself to their size.

"I was a child a long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away. And, to be sure, the gender landscape of family life was different then. But I still remember the impression my father made on me. He was warm and affectionate and plenty willing when time allowed to toss the football around. But my father didn't do games and he didn't do pretend, and he had no patience for the goofiness of kids, and he didn't apologize for wanting to be left alone from time to time. He was a man. He had a man's concerns, a man's plans, a man's demons. He took us camping and bought us dogs and filled our youth with his energy. But he had no interest in childish things. And yet nobody in our family ever doubted, not for a moment, his love for them. His passion for his kids was man-size.........

"............So, if you want to play patty-cake with your kids, go right ahead. Whatever works for you is good by me. But just don't do it because they say you should. Your chances of enjoying fatherhood will double the instant you realize that you don't have to."

(I only wish he'd talked about the fact that WOMEN, too, shouldn't feel compelled to play boring games constantly with kids over 3 - kids that old can and should entertain themselves when Mama is busy and playmates just aren't available that day. Of course, some women ONLY like playing with little kids and dislike older ones, unlike many men, but plenty of mothers are only playing Candy Land because they've been brainwashed into believing that kids somehow need more time with their parents than it takes to do chores together and read good books. Kids need time to play with PEERS. Period.)

I'll admit that it can be hard to know how to host kids if you don't have any. However, if you are having kids over, you have to expect to make at least some type of accomodation for them.

And yes, they need a place to eat, whether it's a "picnic blanket" or a kid's table.

Kids choke on food. If your guest asks for a cutting board so she can chop up Paisley's strawberry, just accomodate your guest instead of bitching about it. Seriously. It it that hard to be a gracious hostess? Are the little brats you invited RUINING your perfect princess grownup brunch? Jeeezus!

If you don't have kids, but will be having them over, you need: some hot wheels, plastic cups, and wet-ones. Otherwise, it's just like any other party: Make sure there's toilet paper and turn on the music before people start showing up. It's really not that difficult if you're not a tight-ass about it. Parties don't always go smoothly even when you only have adult guests.

Of course, it's really easy to have a family-friendly party when you have kids anyway. There's a room full of toys down the hallway- you just send the rugrats down there. Plus you have a bunch of Disney movies if you need them, and you have goldfish and pirates booty and baby carrots.

Bleah, kids today. Imagine the nerve of going to a party you were invited to, seeing a chair, and sitting in that chair. What entitled monsters we're raising today. When I was a kid I ate all my brunches outside, in mud puddles. And I liked it!

To kf: I know you were being sarcastic, but that reminds me of why some BOYS - in one fictional series by Ethelyn Parkinson, anyway - dislike parties. (They were all aged 11 and 12 - and living in 1950s Wisconsin.)

(Upon getting an invitation to Opal's surprise birthday party from Annabelle, in the summer)

"At vacation time! Was I mad! 'Now, Annabelle!' I said. 'Vacation is
for fun - not for going to parties or the dentist, or-' 'Rupert Piper,'
said my mom, 'you be a gentleman!' Mom smiled at Annabelle. 'Rupert will be delighted to attend, dear.' "

(And, regarding Rupert's own birthday party, to which his mother is forcing him to invite girls as well as boys)

"Well," Clayte said, "it could be worse. What are having to eat?"

"Dear, dear ladies food," I said. "We have to eat out of a dish, with a fork and spoon. We have to wipe our faces on our dainty napkins and say 'No, thank you,' if we are offered more."

I'm late to the party, but there were good answers and there were ones that were full of crap.

First of all it is a parents job to ensure a child's safety and well-being. Preschoolers should not be fed food unsupervised or that us a choking hazard! Yes, it us not likely that they will choke and die every time, but like looking both ways before crossing the street, they certainly improve their odds of survival. PS . My son choked past preschool, when he was out of the danger zone. It was quick and it was silent. Thank God that we were right there.

As for calling a child a brat and puffing away near an asthmatic child, well that is clearly abusive. Our youngest was diagnosed with reactive airways, which is similar to, but not as severe as asthma, which is chronic and life threatening. (Yes, I personally knew a 19 year old who died.) The doctor told is that if we allowed him around smokers, he would call CPS and have him removed from our care. I was never diagnosed with such as a child, but had a smoker for a dad and chronic bronchitis. As a result, I lost 20% of my lung function by the time I was in my 20s. My doctor says that I now have COPD resulting from second-hand smoke. I'm proud of that boy for advocating for himself.

John Rosemond is such an ass. He is proud of giving his 6 and 9 year olds the bulk of the housework. I'm sure that he would deny it, however, I'm using figures from Don Aslett, who is a cleaning expert. He took over the household chores and studied them. He estimates 20 hours of maintenance housekeeping for a family of 4. Don Aslett was shocked. like most people who have not done the bulk of hpusekeepng, he grossly underestimated the effort required. Even if Rosemond and his wife did laundry and yard work, I estimate that two jobs as less than 8 hours for those two chores, so his children are tackling 12 hours worth of adult work per week in addition to school, homework, and any athletics. I also estimate that it takes a 6 year old twice as long to competently finish an adult job, so they may be working 24 hours to his 4.

I don't like little brats, but big selfish, soul crushing, life endangering ones are much worse!

I'm proud of that boy for advocating for himself. -- Jen at August 13, 2013 6:19 AM

The yard was somewhere around 50' wide by 75' long with very little cover. We were on the far side of the yard ("field"), away from the house, when he came up next to us while we were already smoking. That is not advocating for himself, that is effectively bullying.

(Before I begin, I'll say I'd love to know how that kid responded when you didn't stop smoking.) -- lenona at August 11, 2013 6:34 AM

I said something along the lines of "That's fine." He just sat next to us for about three-five minutes then finally went somewhere else.

Poor Jim. Are you okay after that bully picked on you? We all view things from our own lens. I hate that I had to move away from smokers three times this past week and find just the right spot so that I would be less affected by the smoke. I was at least 50 feet away. I'm sure that weren't aware if my and didn't know that I existed or had to keep changing locations to avoid drifting smoke. It's not convenient and you don't get to go wherever you want. It can even be isolating.

I especially loved the gauntlette of smoke right outside the education building. Do I go a couple of blocks out often way to avoid it or do I try to take a deep breath before I open the door and hold it while I walk through. I usually tried the latter and usually made it. I didn't a few times and coughed until I wet my pants or wheezed through class feeling dizzy. How could I say anything? They were outside. And oh yes, I can't breathe well enough to talk through a haze of smoke.

Have you ever been smoking and had someone start coughing and wheezing disgustingly in your face. Then chewed them out for going around sick? Yes, I've had people chew Me out for having the nerve to be sickened by Them.

I have no idea just how many hours Rosemond's kids were putting into chores - or how old the younger one was by the the time the two were doing MOST of the chores - she almost certainly wasn't six by that point!

However, I DO know that Rosemond does not believe in letting a kid have more than one extracurricular activity, since it usually takes time away from family (and schoolwork), and yes, doing chores together counts as quality time. (He once said, in effect, that if parents are so intent on teaching kids the importance of teamwork, chores will do that just as well as sports, if taught right. Not to mention that there's far less chance for corruption of any kind or any chance of a kid getting a swelled ego!) My point is that the kids likely had quite a bit of leisure time.

But also, Rosemond has pointed out, time and again, that one great effect of being just a little "too strict" or giving kids "too much" responsibility is that it makes kids all the more determined to leave home for good and make a better life for themselves than what they're getting - long before, say, turning 25! (Of course, the parents have to communicate that they will NOT pay any of the young adult's bills or let them return home.) Which is not to say there aren't happy families with multiple generations living together indefinitely, but parents have the right NOT to have that arrangement if they so wish - and it can be difficult to endorse that if they've been lenient parents surrounded by other lenient parents.

Poor Jim. Are you okay after that bully picked on you? We all view things from our own lens. I hate that I had to move away from smokers three times this past week and find just the right spot so that I would be less affected by the smoke. I was at least 50 feet away. I'm sure that weren't aware if my and didn't know that I existed or had to keep changing locations to avoid drifting smoke. It's not convenient and you don't get to go wherever you want. It can even be isolating. -- Jen at August 13, 2013 7:04 AM

Poor Jen. You had to move away for your own health. That means that you are aware of your issues and don't want to impose your limitations on the smokers. You aren't moving into the smokers range and telling them they are wrong.

Think of it this way. Someone is in a park, using the grill that is there, from the state, with wood to cook up some meat. Would you say they are wrong to cook there?

My argument is that moving into the local space and then saying I have no rights, or your rights are more than mine is not equality.

My local example that I always use is that suburbanites moved out into the local rural area. One of the laws they had passed is that any pool over 2' tall needed a fence around it. Sounds great doesn't it. Meanwhile the 12' deep pond less than 400 feet away from the swimming pool didn't need a fence.

You do not have the right to impose your issues on everyone.

"You do not have the right to impose your issues on everyone."

Exactly!

So what were you doing imposing your smoking habit on kids?

There is more than just the health risk to be considered when discussing smoking and children.

Children see, children do. Because you are a smoker, because you were outside, does not entitle you to light up at a party dedicated to children.

I'm surprised your date didn't break her foot off in your ass.

So what were you doing imposing your smoking habit on kids?

We were across the yard and not anywhere near the children, or other adult non-smokers. We were downwind from them

I'm surprised your date didn't break her foot off in your ass. -- wtf at August 13, 2013 9:24 PM

My "date" was the maternal grandmother and was also a smoker. The paternal grandmother is also a smoker.

"So what were you doing imposing your smoking habit on kids?"

From what I understand, the child walked up, from 50 feet away, to sit there and say "I can't be around smokers". That's a power play if I've ever seen one. A lot of kids are brought up to just butt into adult conversations uninvited.

If you have allergies, at some point I think the person with allergies has responsibility as well, to avoid the allergen. You walked away from the smokers, jen. That was the smart thing to do. To walk over a distance to announce that you can't be around smoke is just bad manners. I think the point of the whole story is that some kids have no manners.

From what I understand, the child walked up, from 50 feet away, to sit there and say "I can't be around smokers". That's a power play if I've ever seen one. A lot of kids are brought up to just butt into adult conversations uninvited. -- crella at August 15, 2013 2:21 AM

crella,

You got it in one. Thanks. I guess I wasn't clear enough.

My "date" was the maternal grandmother and was also a smoker. The paternal grandmother is also a smoker.

So that makes it all better?!?!?!

So that makes it all better?!?!?! -- wtf at August 16, 2013 5:10 PM

Again -- we were outside of everyone's orbit where we were. The child came into our range.

And what do you say when your coddled little child when they see someone smoking? "Go up to them and bother them." I know for sure that I'm not the only adult that lights up in public.

Again, I am not responsible for your rugrat. If your crotch spawn approaches me that is your and their decision.

If it is an emergency, I will do my best to not let them die. Outside of dire circumstances I want to be as far away from your problems as possible.

And if your juvenile delinquent takes up smoking at 16 because they saw me doing it when they were 7, that says something about the role models in between.