Let's Debate Over-Protecting Our Kids

[Wishing on a star]

I am a Girl Scout leader and I recently had to tell some of the mothers not to clean up after their daughters on a camping trip.

My son is a Scout.
Our ScoutMaster is really, really, big on this kind of stuff.
Nope - they don't "Eat pop-tarts for breakfast and then run around/hang out while the adults clean up." Every event is a full-on exercise in personal responsibility.

My husband says he thinks it is clear that this must be the first time that many of these boys/young men have had this kind of expectation/direction.


On the other hand, there are the parent-bashers...
I was once accused of being an overinvolved/helicopter parent because, after being asked, I gave some information and input to the teacher, after being ASKED, about my son's, serious and not common/understood learning disabilities. The thing was - I thought that this was very funny, coming from somebody at the school who had their two kids right there, at their side, 24/7, every single day.

 

[ccgirl]

ccgirl, I read that whole thing and left wondering, what did you dd do to get recess taken away?

She exhaled loudly in the dismissal line and it came out as a whistle. They are not to talk in the hallways ever. I thought that was a little excessive, so I met with the teacher to get her side of things.

 

[LuvsDragonflies]

That's just silly to me.

 

[kellyg403]

Thank you for offering that voice of reason.

It is not uncommon for folks to use that argument....overprotect them now and they will go wild as soon as their able. But I am an example of just the opposite. My parents had rules but they trusted me....perhaps alittle too much. I was a good student, I had 'nice' friends, I didn't get into a trouble....why wouldn't they. Of course on weekends we'd climb on top of a friends car and hang onto the roof rack while they sped down the street (that, at 16/17). We'd skip school and forge parent excuses for the absence. We'd drink and smoke pot whenever we could get away with it. And then we went to college....................and we just turned it up a notch.

My friend had one of the most lenient households I knew. Her parents trusted her too. She ended up pregnant her first year in college.

We all have stories. None of them prove anything really. There is no magic recipe.

Exactly. If my mother even knew half the carp I was doing at 16 I wouldn't be posting on the Dis today. But, I was a responsible kid etc etc. My brother, the youngest of 5, was not one to use his moral compass, maturity to make good decisions. Same house, different outcomes. Depends on the kid and how they utilize the information they have been given. Even in my own 6 children there were a few that really just fly under the radar, getting into situations they aren't comfortable with just isn't something they want to deal with..one not so much. I could have over parented her easily..she needed direct parental involvement every step of the way. Definitely a follower not a leader. But, eventually it worked out and she is a great adult. I don't think free range is for all kids, I don't think those mom's doing everything for their kids is always a good thing depending on the kid, but sometimes maybe its for the best. Honestly, the truth is I had 6 children and the selfish part of me needed some time, they had to be a bit more independent because I 'needed' them to be. I didn't want to do everything for them because I needed time to recharge.

Maybe if I had fewer children or an only,, I would have been a totally different parent. I try to keep that in mind when I am wondering why some parents do what they do. I raised them with love and support, but definitely able to make decisions and reap the consequences of such. Maybe I would be less inclined to worry about 'later' if there were fewer.

Kelly

 

[ccgirl]

That's just silly to me.

It's a very strict private school. I thought the exhaling loudly thing went too far. The teacher was actually very nice. She apologized to me, and more importantly, to my DD. This is her first year at the school so I think she was trying to make a good impression as well. She let me know that my DD has never been disrespectful so I was happy for that. I thanked her for her time and said that we all have bad days. They also have silent lunches that I am (as well as other parents) working toward eliminating. But, that's another story.

As with everything, I think it comes in moderation. Too far on one end or the other isn't a good thing IMHO. Am I willing to go to school and "fight" for my DD, absolutely. But, for the most part I have DD do it herself.

 

[pacrosby]

Sorry, but a pre teen who believes in Santa, has nothing to do with that same pre teen getting pregnant. That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Maybe this is why teens, cant' function is todays society, parents are looking for any excuse as to why these teen screw up..

(referring to the bolded)

A bigger problem that I see is that too many people have been led to believe there is this recipe for success. They use this way of thinking to criticize others and solve society's problems yes, but they also use it when making decisions re: how to raise their own kids. They bury their heads in how-to books from the time their child is conceived. If I do 'this', then 'this will happen. If I don't do 'this', then 'this' will happen. And then if I'mi wrong, and my kid screws up, I can blame the experts.

I don't know, perhaps it's simply too scary to accept the true complexity of it all.

 

[kellyg403]

(referring to the bolded)

A bigger problem that I see is that too many people have been led to believe there is this recipe for success. They use this way of thinking to criticize others and solve society's problems yes, but they also use it when making decisions re: how to raise their own kids. They bury their heads in how-to books from the time their child is conceived. If I do 'this', then 'this will happen. If I don't do 'this', then 'this' will happen. And then if I'mi wrong, and my kid screws up, I can blame the experts.

I don't know, perhaps it's simply too scary to accept the true complexity of it all.

I agree. I will never forget when I had my first son. I read every book out there. Did every little thing it said. He must be on a feeding schedule, he must poop 4 times a day or there is something seriously wrong, his room has to be in the right colors so he developes correctly. When eventually I was crying mess and calling my mother, she reminded me the only people not reading baby books, are well, babies. They are individual people. Years later when the study came out that babies who listen to Mozart as newborns/infants they were much smarter later in life as it uses some other part of the brain, I had an instant moment of guilt I didn't know this before..till I realized...every child is different, studies come and go and this one did just like the others.

It is scary to accept the complexity of parenting, especially if you are expecting every thing to be by what a book says. I try hard not to say anything to new or young mothers at all. I have a girl at work who even in pregnancy did not eat itrates and watched this and watched that and didn't do this and didn't do that because it would affect the baby. I wonder how pregnant mothers in the 70's and 80's even had babies. I ate my weight in taco bell with one of them, I mean I was eating for 2! It just goes further now with all the self help books, sometimes common sense doesn't have role in some things. In the end, all good things in moderation comes to mind!

Kelly

 

[spacemountainmom]

There are some people who've replied and said there is literally no transportation available. Okie.

More though, have said that there is public transit, but it takes longer than driving someplace.

Well... duh?

When I said get a bus to the mall, I didn't think people would assume I meant walk down and get a direct bus right to the mall that takes about the same time as driving.

Yes, you might have to change buses! Yes, it takes longer. That doesn't mean it's not usable or that kids shouldn't "have" to use it. Kids here would get to school much quicker if someone drove them in a car, and yet they get on the train (and switch trains) or take the bus to the train to the other train, or etc. Plenty of kids spend 1-2 hours each way to get to school on public transit, because... that's where school is and either there is no car or no one is getting up to take the car and drive the kid to school (and then the kid would have to take public transit home anyway, because school lets out at like 3) just so they get there faster - because everyone's life doesn't revolve around the snowflakes to that point.

I have zero belief that everyone lives the way I do - I said most suburbs have transit. The posts in response haven't convinced me otherwise, as many people said well yes there is but it's not as convenient as hopping in the car so thus it's somehow not a viable alternative. Yes, it might take an hour to get to the mall on the bus when you could drive there in 15 minutes.... so? Kid can take the bus (and yes, change buses) if they want to go to the mall.

There are outliers where there's no transit, or where it's extreme, but... that the bus doesn't go in a direct shot and takes longer isn't exactly, to me, an argument that would mean taking the bus isn't an option - that's coddling to me.

I am going to have to agree to disagree. I don't coddle my kids. DD16 walks to school and many other places. DS12 rides the bus. I also drive them places when needed. The kids both have chores and responsibilites around the house. They both can cook enough to keep themselves fed and can do laundry.

Last weekend she and a friend needed something from the mall which is about a 15 minute drive from my house. I took them, we went straight to the store, bought needed item and were home in under 45 minutes. They could have taken the bus, but it would have taken them at least an hour to get there. I don't see why they should waste over two hours of time when it wasn't an issue for me to take them. If dd had her license, I would have sent them off alone. If that's coddling, I am guilty.

 

[badblackpug]

I agree with your mom, but I totally disagree that all kids will go crazy if restricted.

I was very restricted, as my dad had anxiety and worry, and I am still the same level-headed, mature and responsible person now at my age, as when I was 10 years old.

It depends upon the person - I never went crazy at all, and freedom was literally dumped in my lap. Why? Because I was mature and responsible from a young age. You need to know your kids and how teen brains work. Some will go crazy, and some won't, but there are so many other factors that come into play.

Perhaps most or many teens will go crazy and this might backfire, but I am here to assure you that there are many of us who do not.

That is an extreme genereralization. Will some kids run off and get pregnant after they were not allowed to date until an older age? Sure. Will some kids crack up the car? Sure. Will some kids get way too drunk and pass out in college? Sure.

Not sure how much of that can be related to an absence of freedom or restrictions while growing up, as it is also related to lack of good judgment and lack of self-control. Those two things are part of gaining maturity, but they are not all of it.

Many adults I see have lack of good judgment and very little self-control, and yet some of them are twice my age, and so I don't think they were driven to school, nor to the mall, as those didn't exist back then.

There is lots going on in this thread that is so interesting. What is coddling to one, is not to another. And honestly, driving kids to school is not a big deal at all. To say that driving kids to school is going to make them get pregnant or become non-productive adults is hilarious, as I know some kids who are driven, and they are doing missionary work in Africa, student body president and going to university a year earlier due to seriously high grades and cognitive levels.

There is so much more than goes on with kids that determines their levels of maturity and response to their world than driving to school or having "overprotective" parents, IMHO. Will it have an effect on how kids respond and grow up? Yes, but there is more at play here than just having a mom who follows the school bus...

Tiger

I've chaperoned all my kids class trips and they are happy with that. I don't see where that makes them less independent, they look forward to spending a school day event with me.

I've also been class mom every year for at least one of them until this year. I toss my name in the hat, this year dd12 doesn't have "class moms" and there were 8 people in dd10's class, they decided to let "everyone" that wanted to be a class mom be one. I left them to it .

I prefer to be class mom on my own (which has happened a couple times, awesome!) but certainly not more than three moms (or dads, tho I've never had a class dad in my group), gets too convoluted. I'll just sit by and wait till they need something and volunteer to help with it.

Thank you for offering that voice of reason.

It is not uncommon for folks to use that argument....overprotect them now (whatever that means) and they will go wild as soon as they are able. But I just happen to be an example of just the opposite. My parents had rules but they trusted me....perhaps alittle too much. I was a good student, I had 'nice' friends, I didn't get into a trouble....why wouldn't they trust me? Of course on weekends we'd climb on top of a friends car and hang onto the roof rack while they sped down the street (that, at 16/17). We'd skip school and forge parent excuses for the absence (16/17/18). We'd drink and smoke pot whenever we could get away with it (16/17/18). And then we went to college....................and we just turned it up a notch.

My friend had one of the most lenient households. She was a good student too. Her parents trusted her. She had lots of boyfriends in high school. "Nice boys". She ended up pregnant her first year in college.

Dating, on the other hand, was the one area where my Dad was quite strict and yet somehow I managed to get to college as pure as the driven snow. And my first boyfriend? Ended up being my first true love, and a relationship that lasted over 4 years.

As far as driving, I didn't get my license until 18 and never have had anything more than a fender bender. My brother got his at 16 and totaled 4 cars by his 20th birthday. So much for getting better with experience LOL

We all have stories. None of them prove anything really. There is no magic recipe.

I don't know why there are all the generalizations? I never said this was true of ALL over-protected kids. I gave an example of ONE, and how she felt about her mother's involvement. SHE felt her mother hovered too much, she wanted space to spread her wings. You know there are children out there who resent parents who are too involved, and I truly believe it is possible to be too involved.

...and no one said that driving your kids to school is coddling. It was an example in my OP of something that I thought was over the top over-protectiveness, suggesting that it was unsafe for 2 14 year olds to walk 75 yards, in a school zone, to boot.

I think, in my case, the fact that the majority of children get driven to school is ridiculous. We live in a ridiculously small town (1 mile square) and a lot of these children live within blocks of the school, and I did mention they were junior high school children.

However, another poster suggested kids should take public transportation to the mall. Guess what? It's not gonna happen. My daughter would have to transfer buses in Camden (for those of you not familiar http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6555449...en-nj-named-most-dangerous-city/#.ToMtUdSvtrk

My OP was really just a jumping off point... no need to be so literal.

 

[pacrosby]

I don't know why there are all the generalizations? I never said this was true of ALL over-protected kids. I gave an example of ONE, and how she felt about her mother's involvement. SHE felt her mother hovered too much, she wanted space to spread her wings. You know there are children out there who resent parents who are too involved, and I truly believe it is possible to be too involved.

...and no one said that driving your kids to school is coddling. It was an example in my OP of something that I thought was over the top over-protectiveness, suggesting that it was unsafe for 2 14 year olds to walk 75 yards, in a school zone, to boot.

I think, in my case, the fact that the majority of children get driven to school is ridiculous. We live in a ridiculously small town (1 mile square) and a lot of these children live within blocks of the school, and I did mention they were junior high school children.

However, another poster suggested kids should take public transportation to the mall. Guess what? It's not gonna happen. My daughter would have to transfer buses in Camden (for those of you not familiar http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6555449...en-nj-named-most-dangerous-city/#.ToMtUdSvtrk

My OP was really just a jumping off point... no need to be so literal.

I don't know that it's a matter of being literal. When you say something on the DIS, you are generally going to be expected to own it You 'said' this child was overprotected and provided the following examples of overprotection: mom chaperoned school events and dances, didn't allow sleepovers, didn't allow her to stay alone until high school. You then went on to say it 'backfired' because she went to school and become a wild drunk. The implication was that the parent's behavior which you defined as 'overprotection' somehow led to the child's irresponsible behavior as a college student.

I can only speak for myself, but I was just using your last post as a jumping off point because it seemed to fit the example of yet another poster who seemed to define 'overprotection' in an overly broad manner and then used it as a reason, wth examples, that children are ill-prepared for life as a young adult.

This whole discussion centers around the topic of overprotective parents and how they are doing their children a disservice. Do I disagree? No and I'm betting that most probably don't. The problem comes when people use such a broad brush to define overprotectiveness (i.e. driving a child to the mall). And make connections between things that have nothing to do with one another (i.e. the belief in Santa at 11 and sexual activity at 15).
i
And really what does it all boils down to? Nothing more than some people wanting to 1) criticize others for not following their blueprint for success and 2)wanting to blame society's ills on everybody else's inability to 'see the light'. What else is new?

 

[IUTBAM]

I always wonder that they trust me to watch their children and know what to do in an emergency, however, not to walk a very easy and safe walk back home.

It's not that they don't trust YOU...they are concerned for your safety. I used to be a parole analyst for the State of Texas, and the cases I've read and things I've seen...horrifying. I would not allow my DD to walk home alone by herself at that age, and we have always lived in good neighborhoods. Predators can be anywhere. No, you can't live your life in fear, but you do have to use common sense. I would also make the same offer to drive a babysitter home at night.

 

[badblackpug]

I don't know that it's a matter of being literal. When you say something on the DIS, you are generally going to be expected to own it You 'said' this child was overprotected and provided the following examples of overprotection: mom chaperoned school events and dances, didn't allow sleepovers, didn't allow her to stay alone until high school. You then went on to say it 'backfired' because she went to school and become a wild drunk. The implication was that the parent's behavior which you defined as 'overprotection' somehow led to the child's irresponsible behavior as a college student.

I can only speak for myself, but I was just using your last post as a jumping off point because it seemed to fit the example of yet another poster who seemed to define 'overprotection' in an overly broad manner and then used it as a reason, wth examples, that children are ill-prepared for life as a young adult.

This whole discussion centers around the topic of overprotective parents and how they are doing their children a disservice. Do I disagree? No and I'm betting that most probably don't. The problem comes when people use such a ridiculously broad brush to define overprotectiveness (i.e. driving a child to the mall). And make ridiculous connections between things that have nothing to do with one another (i.e. the belief in Santa at 11 and sexual activity at 15).
i
And really what does it all boils down to? Nothing more than some people wanting to 1) criticize others for not following their blueprint for success and 2)wanting to blame society's ills on everybody else's inability to 'see the light'. What else is new?

Actually, in this case, her mother's overprotectiveness absolutely did cause he to do the things she did. She will be the 1st to admit it. She said it was the 1st time in her life that someone wasn't hovering over her monitoring her every move. She went off the deep end, she didn't know how to set reasonable limits or make choices because it was something she never got to try out. She didn't like her mother being at everything. At the time she did not see it as a mother who was interested, she saw it as a mother who was intrusive.

...but, just because this was the case in this instance, does not mean it is the case in every instance, and I never said it was.

I'm not sure, why in most cases you feel the need to be argumentative. In the long run each of us will choose to raise our children in our own manner, and little that anyone says on a message board will probably sway that.

 

[pacrosby]

Actually, in this case, her mother's overprotectiveness absolutely did cause he to do the things she did. She will be the 1st to admit it. She said it was the 1st time in her life that someone wasn't hovering over her monitoring her every move. She went off the deep end, she didn't know how to set reasonable limits or make choices because it was something she never got to try out. She didn't like her mother being at everything. At the time she did not see it as a mother who was interested, she saw it as a mother who was intrusive.

...but, just because this was the case in this instance, does not mean it is the case in every instance, and I never said it was.

I'm not sure, why in most cases you feel the need to be argumentative. In the long run each of us will choose to raise our children in our own manner, and little that anyone says on a message board will probably sway that.

First off, with regard to the bolded....

but, unless I'm mistaken, you've never once suggested that it wasn't. And therein lies the problem. You've only relayed the story of a child you feel has been babied and overprotected and went on to demonstrate poor decision making. You implied direct causality. Why else choose to share the story unless you believed it added credence to your overall point of view?



Honestly, I'm not trying to be argumentative. Issue was taken with a number of posters (including myself) who questioned your line of thinking so I provided some clarification. It's not argumentative to point out what I believe to be a flaw in someone's reasoning.

And when I used the term 'own it', I wasn't being nasty. I meant it. I've had to own plenty of things I've said too. We can't throw stuff out there and then get all angry when people hold you to it. If you didn't mean to imply what others thought you were implying, just try reexplaining your position. Please don't get all mad because they misunderstood.

I'm going to go back and check a couple of things and then edit this post for further clarification. I'll be back

ETA: OK...you are actually the OP! (And you referenced that silly stroller thread? ) I am sorry then but I feel I must stand by my statements. You actually did accuse people of babying their kids using broad based examples (and didn't appear all that interested in publicly embracing any of the reasonable explanations as to why it may not indeed be babying). And then implied that these parental behaviors are directly responsible for irresponsible young adults (and didn't appear all that interested in publicly embracing any of the reasonable examples that make the connections less clear). This thread was started knowing full well that it would likely end up in a bit of a ruckus. You could not possibly have thought that you were only going to attract DISSERS who agreed with you so that you could all commisserate about all these coddling parents and their immature children......or did you?


ETA: and in reading this over I can see how it might appear I am standing her yelling at you, my little finger in your face but....I'm not. Really, I'm not.

 

[ccgirl]

I believe the title is "Let's Debate Over-Protecting Our Kids". A debate involves two sides so I suspect she was actually expecting people to disagree with her as well. I do feel the examples she gave were codding. Sorry, driving a 14 year old 5 houses while being able to see the school door and the house the whole time?? However, it's entirely someone else's right to view that as "normal". I find threads go south when someone resorts to name calling or saying someone else is wrong.

 

[NotUrsula]

I just had a similar discussion about soccer with a mom this weekend. Our league is trying out 4 on 4 playing- vs. full teams. So that 2 games of one team will be going on at the same time- So that ALL The kids get to play as opposed to having to sub in and out.

When asked why they went to this I replied because we are raising a generation of snowflakes. People are afraid to let their kids lose. They want little susie to score a goal vs. actually learning to play soccer. And the other mother was horrified. She thought is was a wonderful idea, her daughter got to play the entire time. And wasn't that more important?

Nope. Not to me.

In life there are winners and losers. We all don't feel special every day. Life has disappointments. Learning how to deal with them as a child is how you will succeed as an adult.

I probably err on the side of overprotecting generally. But my 14 year old would have been allowed to do exactly what you let your daughter do.

Eh, when it comes to non-school sports teams I think that it is an issue of why the kids are playing in the first place. If the idea is to promote physical fitness and have them learn sportsmanship and how to be part of a team, then yes, the 4 on 4 model would better further those goals.

If the reason that they are playing is to win, then traditional team structure makes more sense. If that's the case, then it should be a team that requires tryouts -- if you don't meet a minimum skill level, then you should not be placed on the team just so that you can warm the bench all year. You won't learn much from that other than how to tolerate boredom.

 

[pacrosby]

I believe the title is "Let's Debate Over-Protecting Our Kids". A debate involves two sides so I suspect she was actually expecting people to disagree with her as well. I do feel the examples she gave were codding. Sorry, driving a 14 year old 5 houses while being able to see the school door and the house the whole time?? However, it's entirely someone else's right to view that as "normal". I find threads go south when someone resorts to name calling or saying someone else is wrong.

So then why accuse someone of being 'argumentative' if you were looking for debate.

I actually don't have a problem questioning a parent who felt the need to drive a child 5 houses but I also don't know that parent and what was going on in her head/in her life when she decided to drive them. I also don't know if there are loads of other things she does that might be viewed as overprotective or if this is somewhat out of character. I'm not all that comfortable with people bashing someone who's not even here to defend themselves. To be honest, any thread that centers around inflammatory accusations tends to push my buttons.



I think a lot of people on the DIS feel they have a right to say anything they want without ever having it challenged. To them challenging is simply rude because it's implying you disagree which by definition means you think they are wrong. I just don't get. Challenging another point of view is precisely what debate is all about. As long as the challenge is based on reason (or indisputable facts, as in the case of the poster who used her belief that only the most rural of areas of this country had no public transportation in an effort to support her opinion), it's not rude.

And, where was the name-calling? Did I name call? If I did I'd like to apologize. I must've lost my head.

 

[cornflake]

I am going to have to agree to disagree. I don't coddle my kids. DD16 walks to school and many other places. DS12 rides the bus. I also drive them places when needed. The kids both have chores and responsibilites around the house. They both can cook enough to keep themselves fed and can do laundry.

Last weekend she and a friend needed something from the mall which is about a 15 minute drive from my house. I took them, we went straight to the store, bought needed item and were home in under 45 minutes. They could have taken the bus, but it would have taken them at least an hour to get there. I don't see why they should waste over two hours of time when it wasn't an issue for me to take them. If dd had her license, I would have sent them off alone. If that's coddling, I am guilty.

I don't think you are disagreeing, actually, heh. They walk places in general, you don't ferry them around so they never have to wait for anything or get anyplace by themselves, they have responsibilities, etc.

Someone here might toss a kid cab fare to get to school one day if they were up late and whatever whatever so they'd get there on time.

I didn't mean coddling meant, to me, that one never does anything nice or convenient for the other person, just that it's not the default setting to make sure they never have to go out of their way, that things are done and taken care of and scheduled and etc., for them all the time, to their convenience and bubble-wrapped life, but to no one else's.

 

[ccgirl]

So then why accuse someone of being 'argumentative' if you were looking for debate.

I actually don't have a problem questioning a parent who felt the need to drive a child 5 houses but I also don't know that parent and what was going on in her head/in her life when she decided to drive them. I also don't know if there are loads of other things she does that might be viewed as overprotective or if this is somewhat out of character. I'm not all that comfortable with people bashing someone who's not even here to defend themselves. To be honest, any thread that centers around inflammatory accusations tends to push my buttons.



I think a lot of people on the DIS feel they have a right to say anything they want without ever having it challenged. To them challenging is simply rude because it's implying you disagree which by definition means you think they are wrong. I just don't get. Challenging another point of view is precisely what debate is all about. As long as the challenge is based on reason (or indisputable facts, as in the case of the poster who used her belief that only the most rural of areas of this country had no public transportation in an effort to support her opinion), it's not rude.

And, where was the name-calling? Did I name call? If I did I'd like to apologize. I must've lost my head.

If I read the post correctly, it was the OP's DD and her friend who were driven home by another girls mother. The other girls mother said she thought the OP would never allow her DD to walk home. I think that was intrusive. No name calling yet. I have seen a civilized debate thus far.

 

[Aisling]

My mother said if you don't give kids some independence not only does it stunt their emotional growth but it also sends the message to them that they aren't trustworthy or capable.

With my kids, the only negative message they got was that their mother was a PITA.

 

[badblackpug]

With my kids, the only negative message they got was that their mother was a PITA.

Actually I had to LOL at your post. I got a visual in my mind of my 14 year old daughter, and we know 14 year olds can be dramatic, of trying to crawl under the bus seat all the while rolling her eyes and puffing and sighing and acting like she was going to die when she saw my car behind the bus.

A little OT, but it reminded me of this summer on the boardwalk when she was constantly begging to get her belly button pierced and the ensuring sighing and eye rolling when she was told no. At one point I got so tired of hearing it that I told her if she wanted to get it pierced I would, too, and then I would walk around with my belly out to show it off. I illustrated this point by tying up my shirt (not a pretty sight, trust me) from the way she acted you would have thought I was streaking on the boardwalk!

...but she didn't ask again!