I witnessed something very disturbing today (long)

[Wishing on a star]

ITA. I'm none of my DD's best friends - I am their mother. I set the boundaries. They are consistent - they know this.

I just choose not to hit.


It's not the fact of how far it was - who cares. It's the fact that it was done.

Very well said.


There is just a HUGE divide here.

Either outspoken non-spankers are automatically labeled as bad parents who do not discipline their children. Or, those who may have used an occasional swat on the legs/butt are labeled as child abusers.

Neither one of these assumptions are true.


I do know that there are people who are proud of the fact that they physically discipline their children. Personally, I feel that anyone who feels that they are obligated to do this, as a consistant means of discipline, and who can defend it, must have some real psychological issues.

I met one lady, Beth, who I thought that we could perhaps become good friends. (son's the same age, a LOT in common, etc....) Well, I went to one of her church Ladies' Afternoon Get-togethers. These ladies all proceeded to go on about how they purposefully spanked (physically put their children over their legs and struck them) and that they did this because they felt God told them to do so. One actually told their kid as they were spanking them that this was what God wanted. (Way to bring a child to Christ!!!!! ) That afternoon almost physically disgusted me. Beth made additional comments to me after this time re: about how we should not spare the rod and spoil the child... etc... Apparantly this was an issue for her that she could not let go. so, needless to say, we did NOT become friends and I no longer visited her Church.

Interestingly enough, these woman also used words like 'train' 'obey' etc... I just sat there thinking, OMG, my son is a child, not a dog!!!

 

[DaParkers]

Sorry, a child is not a dog and should never be "trained." I prefer to use the term TEACH or LEARN rather than train. As in... People do not TEACH their children how to behave in public anymore.

It says a lot about how you view small children based upon your choice of words.

You've got to be kidding. You can't possibly be serious. Do you also get offended when people speak of training our troops? What about firefighters? And police? They all have TRAINING! Have you ever heard: You can't TEACH an old dog new tricks? The word you use is irrevelant. They both mean the same.

 

[nicolemomof4cuties]

Sorry, a child is not a dog and should never be "trained." I prefer to use the term TEACH or LEARN rather than train. As in... People do not TEACH their children how to behave in public anymore.

It says a lot about how you view small children based upon your choice of words.

In Proverbs 22:6 it says" Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old he shall not depart from it." Obviously, if I have 4 children and work with small children I have a love in my heart for them so your post makes absolutely no sense.

 

[Wishing on a star]

I would never question your love for children!!!

This is something entirely different.
You can play semantics all you want... But, yes words, and they way they are used, do mean things.

The people that I have heard use these words do, in fact, use them in the same way that one would with a dog.

I am a spiritual Christian.... And I still would never use those words with my son, or take the attitude that a human child should be 'trained' like a circus animal.

There is no similarity at all in my mind with caring for and teaching children, and what might called occupational training for adults.

This is the way I feel.
This will not change.
If you think that using semantics and Bible quotes which use antiquated words and translations will make any difference, you would be mistaken.

PS: There are a lot of Bible quotes which have been twisted and used to justify terrible things!!!

 

[Minniemouse07]

In Proverbs 22:6 it says" Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old he shall not depart from it." Obviously, if I have 4 children and work with small children I have a love in my heart for them so your post makes absolutely no sense.

Quoting the bible doesn't work when looking at very specific wording... the document has been translated multiple times so the wording depends on which translation you happen to be reading at the time. The original intent could have easily meant "teach"... but we will never know what they truely meant.

A love in your heart is all well and good...but it is how you put it in practice that matters. When you talk about "retraining" children... it sounds like they are dogs or circus animals.

I base my expectations of the behavior of my two children upon their development. The expectations of a 1yo are very different than a 3yo or a 6yo. I would NEVER expect a child under the age of 3yo to sit still for "several hours" (except if sleeping!). They aren't developmentally ready for that at all. I would expect that of my 6yo, but I would most definitely bring something quiet for them to do if what they were sitting through wasn't for them (ie, waiting at a drs office, etc.). "I" wouldn't sit in a dr's office for several hours w/o doing something to pass the time and I wouldn't expect that of my children.

And although I'm not a current student of child development... I do have a degree in elementary education which not only includes CD classes, but also HOW a child learns and HOW to TEACH them on their level.

 

[babieemelly]

I am also a Childhood development Major that carried a 4.0 and I disagree. I expect my children and children that I care for to obey. I do bring books with me to entertain them when I can but if they are not available I expect my chilren to be well-behaved. Belive it or not my children will sit quietly during church for several hours and not act like heathen. Children do what is expected of them and what they are trained to do. People do not train their children anymore. Children do not need 24/7 entertinment that is part of the problem with todays society. Alot of the children that I get in today think that they need to be enetertained-I have to retrain them to entertain them self. To learn how to play and have imagainations. We do not allow toys with batteries for children under the age of 7 here for just that reason. No video games, period. I must truly be an abusive caregiver and parent .

I'm not sure what Child Development classes you took, but everything we've worked on has been the complete opposite. Children are children and they should be allowed to act as so. Kids shouldn't be "trained" to just "sit down and shut up" as was expected in the original situation. Kids need to be entertained, especially at such a young age. And, as you said, there's nothing wrong with kids entertaining themselves, but in a situation where that isn't possible (such as at a Dr.'s office), it's the parent's responsibility to keep the child from getting bored. Kids should be taught the difference between right and wrong, but they shouldn't be "trained" to be mini-adults, because that's exactly what they're not. Of course they should behave and be well-mannered, but they should also be allowed to have fun and do something to keep themselves active in stifling situations.

And a lot of research has been done that prove that video games and battery-operated toys are effective in a child's development, not only for eye-hand coordination but also for problem solving and creative decision making, but that's a whole other topic!

 

[Minniemouse07]

I'm not sure what Child Development classes you took, but everything we've worked on has been the complete opposite. Children are children and they should be allowed to act as so. Kids shouldn't be "trained" to just "sit down and shut up" as was expected in the original situation. Kids need to be entertained, especially at such a young age. And, as you said, there's nothing wrong with kids entertaining themselves, but in a situation where that isn't possible (such as at a Dr.'s office), it's the parent's responsibility to keep the child from getting bored. Kids should be taught the difference between right and wrong, but they shouldn't be "trained" to be mini-adults, because that's exactly what they're not. Of course they should behave and be well-mannered, but they should also be allowed to have fun and do something to keep themselves active in stifling situations.

And a lot of research has been done that prove that video games and battery-operated toys are effective in a child's development, not only for eye-hand coordination but also for problem solving and creative decision making, but that's a whole other topic!

Well said... and in a much better way than I did!!

 

[bluefairy13]

The word "train" is used by lots of experts and I'm sure none of them are thinking of it as being the same as training a dog.

I am old school and believe teaching kids to sit still and that they must know how to entertain themselves is a good thing, but I see there are plenty that disagree with that.

I don't know if Nicole and I would agree on everything (and we don't have to) but I'm pretty sure she's not the whip cracker some of you are making her out to be. You "train" a child by teaching them very methodically and with consistency, that's all.

 

[Wishing on a star]

The word "train" is used by lots of experts and I'm sure none of them are thinking of it as being the same as training a dog.

I am old school and believe teaching kids to sit still and that they must know how to entertain themselves is a good thing, but I see there are plenty that disagree with that.

I don't know if Nicole and I would agree on everything (and we don't have to) but I'm pretty sure she's not the whip cracker some of you are making her out to be. You "train" a child by teaching them very methodically and with consistency, that's all.

Well, that may sound all well and good.
But there is NOTHING methodic or consistant about a 2 year old!!!

They are active, they do not have control of their emotions, heck many don't even have good control of their bodily functions, they can barely express themselves verbally, they learn by actively touching and doing and verbalizing.....

It has nothing to do with having to 'entertain' a small child . It has everything to do with a toddlers natural energy and curiosity, etc... They are not looking to be sit and be entertained. They are looking to play and explore and learn and grow. It has everything to do with allowing them to occupy themselves in a positive, age-appropriate manner. (Which the parents in the OP did not seem to be doing.)

So, to anybody who thinks that a 2 year old should sit and be quiet and be 'trained' to do so in a 'methodic and consistant' manner. I say that I would have to strongly disagree. I think that this belief is based on many parents wishful thinking ( ex. "I wish that for one minute that he/she would just sit down and be quiet!!!") and NOT the reality and common knowledge of child development.

 

[Freyja]

I'm not sure what Child Development classes you took, but everything we've worked on has been the complete opposite. Children are children and they should be allowed to act as so. Kids shouldn't be "trained" to just "sit down and shut up" as was expected in the original situation. Kids need to be entertained, especially at such a young age. And, as you said, there's nothing wrong with kids entertaining themselves, but in a situation where that isn't possible (such as at a Dr.'s office), it's the parent's responsibility to keep the child from getting bored. Kids should be taught the difference between right and wrong, but they shouldn't be "trained" to be mini-adults, because that's exactly what they're not. Of course they should behave and be well-mannered, but they should also be allowed to have fun and do something to keep themselves active in stifling situations.

And a lot of research has been done that prove that video games and battery-operated toys are effective in a child's development, not only for eye-hand coordination but also for problem solving and creative decision making, but that's a whole other topic!

Very well said.

 

[Wishing on a star]

I just wanted to add one more thing.

Many of you know that my son does have a disability.

He is very well behaved!!!
He is the child who would sit in his stroller, or wherever, and just be quiet and sit, etc....

You know what... I now know that this was red-flag number one that my son was NOT NEUROTYPICAL.

 

[bluefairy13]

Well, that may sound all well and good.
But there is NOTHING methodic or consistant about a 2 year old!!!

They are active, they do not have control of their emotions, heck many don't even have good control of their bodily functions, they can barely express themselves verbally, they learn by actively touching and doing and verbalizing.....

It has nothing to do with having to 'entertain' a small child . It has everything to do with a toddlers natural energy and curiosity, etc... They are not looking to be sit and be entertained. They are looking to play and explore and learn and grow. It has everything to do with allowing them to occupy themselves in a positive, age-appropriate manner. (Which the parents in the OP did not seem to be doing.)

So, to anybody who thinks that a 2 year old should sit and be quiet and be 'trained' to do so in a 'methodic and consistant' manner. I say that I would have to strongly disagree. I think that this belief is based on many parents wishful thinking ( ex. "I wish that for one minute that he/she would just sit down and be quiet!!!") and NOT the reality and common knowledge of child development.

For heaven's sake, who has said that 2 year olds should be little soldiers 24/7? Not me, that's for sure.

I've just always been of the opinion that people don't give 2 year olds enough credit. They are not "incapable" of sitting still. They are not incapable of understanding what you want from them.

Will they lapse and go wild? Of course they will. Mine did. That's where the teaching and training comes in. I'm in the nonspanking camp so I say that you just have to tell them 1,000,000,000 times infinity what you expect from them, until they get it.

A 2 year old running wild in a doctor's office? So what's new? Of course a 2 year old can and will do that. But if you say you have no control over that, I say you aren't giving your child the credit they deserve.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Remember, I am NOT necessarily in the pro-spanking camp. Quite the opposit!

1. The child in question was not running wild in the Dr.s office

2. Nobody said that parents have no control (quite the opposit)

3. There are many ways to handle a two year old... I simply believe that the expectations and the method that the father used to 'control' the child were inappropriate and WAY WAY WAY out of line.


You are making a blanket statement that two years olds are capable... I very very strongly disagree. Some may be more capable than others, but the expectation that any two year old is capable at any time is just plain wrong.

As respectfully as possible, I continue to disagree with your views.

 

[Hannathy]

Wow I'm wondering when this evolutionary change took place, I guess the same one that says kids can't be expected to be toilet trained by 2 took place. Why is it that 2-3 yr olds where expected and DID have control of them selves to stay still and quiet if needed 20, 50, 100 yrs ago? To follow directions. My DD was taking dance classes at 2 1/2 and she somehow was able to control herself and follow directions for 30 minutes. Same as toilet training 25 yrs ago and before 2 was the upper age to be trained now it's who knows.

Kids haven't changed, just the parents and expectations.

 

[connorlevismom]

Wow I'm wondering when this evolutionary change took place, I guess the same one that says kids can't be expected to be toilet trained by 2 took place. Why is it that 2-3 yr olds where expected and DID have control of them selves to stay still and quiet if needed 20, 50, 100 yrs ago? To follow directions. My DD was taking dance classes at 2 1/2 and she somehow was able to control herself and follow directions for 30 minutes. Same as toilet training 25 yrs ago and before 2 was the upper age to be trained now it's who knows.

Kids haven't changed, just the parents and expectations.

Well, I am very happy to know that your kids are little soldiers. Your expectations of children make my head want to explode, quite frankly. Your the same person who thought my three year old son should have been thrown out of Sunday school because he did not want to color for an hour.

I don't believe that we need to force our kids to do things by a certain age. For what? To have bragging rights? Like I said, I am glad your kids are soldiers.

Kristine

 

[bluefairy13]

Remember, I am NOT necessarily in the pro-spanking camp. Quite the opposit!

1. The child in question was not running wild in the Dr.s office

2. Nobody said that parents have no control (quite the opposit)

3. There are many ways to handle a two year old... I simply believe that the expectations and the method that the father used to 'control' the child were inappropriate and WAY WAY WAY out of line.


You are making a blanket statement that two years olds are capable... I very very strongly disagree. Some may be more capable than others, but the expectation that any two year old is capable at any time is just plain wrong.

As respectfully as possible, I continue to disagree with your views.

Did I say "at any time"? I think you are the one who is making the blanket statements. And I'm not sure who you are even arguing with, because I don't think that even you and I are that far off. We agree the dad used too much force.

I think some parents use too little, though. I have no idea what you do. You probably do just fine. We all know that 2 year olds can be unpredictable. I think 2 year olds are not too young to expect them to try to sit still. I don't think you disagree with that, do you? I'm not exactly advocating whipping them for getting out of their seats, just soft reminders of what the expectation is.

I think I'm lost, and I don't even really understand your point.

 

[Freyja]

Well, I am very happy to know that your kids are little soldiers. Your expectations of children make my head want to explode, quite frankly. Your the same person who thought my three year old son should have been thrown out of Sunday school because he did not want to color for an hour.

I don't believe that we need to force our kids to do things by a certain age. For what? To have bragging rights? Like I said, I am glad your kids are soldiers.

Kristine

Wow, that was harsh.

I am a firm believer that all kids are different. I have 4 children and they have almost nothing in common in terms of when they were potty trained, could sit still, keep quiet for long periods of time, etc.

I have no idea whether her kids are little soldiers or not. I do know however that 2 of my kids were potty trained before 2 and were perfectly able to follow instructions and concentrate for longer periods of time when they were 2 1/2 and two of them were not. None of them were spanked.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Well. I suppose my point is that the belief the 'two year olds CAN be expected to ....." is most probably the exact same belief that the father in the OP would use to defend his actions.

I respectfully disagree that most 2 year olds can or should be expected ( or 'trained' to sit still and be quiet like little adults. IMHO, this is not realistic, it is not good for the child, etc....

To the poster who says that her child went thru dance lessons, I think that this is NOT a comparison at all. Dance lessons is a positive fun physical activity. Quite the opposit of expecting a two year old to sit still and be quiet for what may have been a LOT longer than 30 minutes.

 

[connorlevismom]

Wow, that was harsh.

I am a firm believer that all kids are different. I have 4 children and they have almost nothing in common in terms of when they were potty trained, could sit still, keep quiet for long periods of time, etc.

I have no idea whether her kids are little soldiers or not. I do know however that 2 of my kids were potty trained before 2 and were perfectly able to follow instructions and concentrate for longer periods of time when they were 2 1/2 and two of them were not. None of them were spanked.

Why is it harsh? She is always talking about how her kids did this and this at this age. Obviously she expects that because her kids did it, that everyone else's should too. If they don't, there is something wrong with them.

Kristine

 

[babieemelly]

A 2 year old running wild in a doctor's office? So what's new? Of course a 2 year old can and will do that. But if you say you have no control over that, I say you aren't giving your child the credit they deserve.

Of course you have control over it! And the control you have is bringing something for the child to play with during a long appointment or doctor's visit. It think it's completely unrealistic to expect a 2-year old to just sit there and stare into space for ANY amount of time. And yes, at 2 children SHOULD be running around and exploring and wanting to keep themselves engaged. So training them not to do is is only stifling their development.