Does the punishment fit the "crime"?

[Eeyore5]

Your punishment sounds appropriate to me. I think it is great that you checked before putting things back that hit the floor. I would guess there is a health regulation that doesn't allow them to sell things that were on the floor. You set a good example by being honest and not covering up his mistake (putting back the crushed bread). I am an early childhood special education teacher. I think parenting is a tough job. Sounds like you are doing well.

 

[Acklander]

Seems fair and natural consequences so he can connect the action and reaction together. Since he bought the bread, maybe he could help you make the stuffing now

 

[shortbun]

A tad harsh but I think it was natural consequence-spoil the bread, pay for it. He'll be fine.

 

[*BTMRR*]

Funny, just TODAY I knocked a bag of Hawaiian rolls off the low shelf by the deli counter. It fell to the floor. I picked it up and put it back. I don't think anyone saw me...will they review the security tapes tonight and see that that bag is tainted and has to be thrown away?

I'm guessing the loaves in the OP must not have been sealed (maybe like baguettes that come in open brown bags?). In that case I can see why they might need to be thrown out. I don't think the punishment is unreasonable for a 6-year-old.

 

[Suellen]

Grrr I typed out a response and my laptop shutdown.

Not a punishment I would have chosen (I don't give my girls an allowance so they have no money) but not a bad one either.

I'm curious too why the bread had to be thrown out.

 

[Anne34]

Basically they were all ruined, even though they weren't all damaged, since the store had to throw them away.

I guess I am just having second thoughts... oh, well.... no one said parenting was easy, right?

I've seen people knock over the bread in front of the deli cases often -- they just pick them up & put them back up. they are still in the plastic bag -- they are fine. I think your punishment was a little harsh for a little guy.

 

[tonilea]

A little OT, but...

If I am picturing it correctly, I am visualizing a metal rack with King's Hawaiian Sweet Rolls (in plastic bags and/or plastic packaging) on it. Am I correct?

You pictured it exactly right.

 

[AKL_Megs]

You pictured it exactly right.

Hmm. I just don't understand WHY they needed to be disposed of? It sounds like a bunch of bull to me.

If food is deemed "tainted", it needs to be destroyed, NOT sold to customers. It sounds to me like you got taken, I am sorry. The USDA would be all over that in a heartbeat! Honestly, if they found out that they sold you tainted food, they would be fined.

I would NOT have paid for them, and if I were you, I'd take them back. If they are too damaged to be sold, why did they sell them to YOU?

You weren't in the "china shop"... You were in Walmart (okay, so MAYBE you were SORT OF in a China shop ), and they can afford $10 worth of fallen bread, trust me. I wouldn't have felt bad. BUT, I would have found a punishment for climbing that rack!

 

[Handbag Lady]

I think your punishment is dead-on correct. I'm sure he didn't check to see first if there was bread there or glasses or eggs or what have you.

He caused damage. It doesn't matter if it was done out of curiosity or not.

 

[Wishing on a star]

He is six, but very bright and intuitive. Plus, he is an only child.... so he talks "big" for his age... I think sometimes, I might expect more of him than I would another child.

ETA: He is normally very well behaved. I asked him if he would have rather I gave him a different punishment like losing tv time. In a very miserable little voice he said, "No, I just wish I hadn't done it at all!"

Thanks!
Based in this, I think I would have, in this instance, shown some leniency.

But, again, no flames or judgments here!

 

[Hannathy]

Ok that Deli lady is full of her own boloney! if it was sealed in a plastic bag it didn't need to be thrown away. You should only have had to buy the crushed one. do you know how many times those bags have been on the floor before they are sold? no? well guess what either do they! and also those shelves are not "clean" or the transport carts, etc. That is why they are wrapped! they have been shipped wrapped to protect them from exactly what happened, them falling on the floor.

I think your little guy should only have to pay for the one he stepped on and the other ones you never should have had to buy.

 

[Imzadi]

I also fail to understand why the other loaves of bread couldn't have simply been put back on the shelves? Heck, I've had many items fall off store shelves when I just walk by. I swear some of them jump, attempting suicide. I didn't know I was supposed to pay for all of them. I just put them back up on the shelves.

Were the loaves so dented that that they ended up in nearly the same condition as the one DS smashed under his feet? If they weren't I have to doubt what the clerk had said. Unless, he too, was trying to teach DS a point.

I'm not saying that he didn't say it. But, sometimes people have to be careful when they ask a sales clerks a question. Some sales clerks really don't really know the answer, but feel compelled to give an answer, even make up one that sounds good, but is really not right. Some really don't know the answer or aren't going to be accurate with a response. They are trying to be helpful, hoping saying anything is better than nothing or "I don't know." If you hadn't have asked, they probably would have simply put the bread back on the shelves. Your DS should have done that actually.

As for whether the punishment fit DS's crime. Yes, I think so. You are trying to teach him to think ahead of taking actions. That all actions have consequences and some have unintended, negative ones.

He knocked over bread. It could have been bottles instead, that broke, causing a real mess and you wouldn't have been able to take them home. If you both had been in an antique shop and he wanted to climb up to see a glittering ornament better and knocked over expensive, fragile items, the consequences could have been far worse, economically, and the items would have been irreplaceable.

So, yes, as far as you & the clerk teaching him a lesson about his actions, having to pay for all the items he toppled, was the right thing.

 

[tonilea]

Hmm. I just don't understand WHY they needed to be disposed of? It sounds like a bunch of bull to me.

If food is deemed "tainted", it needs to be destroyed, NOT sold to customers. It sounds to me like you got taken, I am sorry. The USDA would be all over that in a heartbeat! Honestly, if they found out that they sold you tainted food, they would be fined.

I would NOT have paid for them, and if I were you, I'd take them back. If they are too damaged to be sold, why did they sell them to YOU?

You weren't in the "china shop"... You were in Walmart (okay, so MAYBE you were SORT OF in a China shop ), and they can afford $10 worth of fallen bread, trust me. I wouldn't have felt bad. BUT, I would have found a punishment for climbing that rack!

It isn't really about what Wal-Mart can "afford". It is about personal responsibility and doing the right thing.

 

[tonilea]

I also fail to understand why the other loaves of bread couldn't have simply been put back on the shelves? Heck, I've had many items fall off store shelves when I just walk by. I swear some of them jump, attempting suicide. I didn't know I was supposed to pay for all of them. I just put them back up on the shelves.

Were the loaves so dented that that they ended up in nearly the same condition as the one DS smashed under his feet? If they weren't I have to doubt what the clerk had said. Unless, he too, was trying to teach DS a point.

I'm not saying that he didn't say it. But, sometimes people have to be careful when they ask a sales clerks a question. Some sales clerks really don't really know the answer, but feel compelled to give an answer, even make up one that sounds good, but is really not right. Some really don't know the answer or aren't going to be accurate with a response. They are trying to be helpful, hoping saying anything is better than nothing or "I don't know." If you hadn't have asked, they probably would have simply put the bread back on the shelves. Your DS should have done that actually.

I asked the clerk (a woman) if the other bags of bread were damaged and she said it didn't really matter, she would have to throw them away. That may or may not have been store policy, but that was all the information I had to go on....

Funny thing about the bread, I *SAW* one of DS's feet smash the heck out of one of the bags of bread, but I cannot figure out which one it was now! The all look perfect!

 

[AKL_Megs]

It isn't really about what Wal-Mart can "afford". It is about personal responsibility and doing the right thing.

I get that.

But his "personal responsibility" was paying for the loaf of bread he damaged by climbing on the rack, and learning that you don't climb on things, because things get broken, like the loaf of bread.

If he had climbed on a magazine rack, and five magazines fell, and only one ripped, would you make him pay for all five simply because they FELL? NO, you'd make him pay for the one he ripped, you'd have him put the other four back, and you'd find some sort of punishment for his inappropriate climbing. It's the same thing.

Why you thought you HAD to pay for the other loaves is beyond me. You took care of your personal responsibility. It was for Walmart to decide what to do with the other fallen yet undamaged loaves.

 

[mrsstats]

I am happy to see a parent who actually cares what their child does in a store. Once you have given the punishment you must stick with it, even if afterwards you think it was too harsh.

 

[kellyg403]

I don't think too harsh and I am quite sure your little guy will live to tell the story. Like you said, you will be making some bread pudding with the bread you now own. 2 lessons taught, personal responsiblity and making lemonade out of a lemon of a situation.

No flames from me OP, even if I would have done it differently.


Kelly

 

[NHdisneylover]

Nice job mom

I think it is the absolutely perfect natural consequence for the action and his age. The only place I think you messed up was in asking him if he wanted another "punishment." Since he was not intentionally acting up this is not a punishment--it is just being responsible; when you damage something (even by accident) you make it right--and that often means by paying for it. This is the lesson you taught today and it is a REALLY good one that many people seem not to have learned recently.

IF he had a habit of climbing things in the store and knew it was not okay, or intentionally stomped on the bread, or what have you THEN I would have added an actual punishment to go along with doing the responsible things and paying for the bread.

The bread is his now and you can also work on teaching about silver linings and making the most of the situation by giving him the option of helping you make bread pudding with it or whatever else he wants to do with his purchases.