Is this how to parent?

[noonereal]

Saw this in a thread over at AK and was wondering what you cerebral types though?


http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/bes...rrests.kid.cnn


Let's just say I stood alone on AK in my views.

[d-ray657]

Sorry, Noone, I think it was a creative intervention. You can't always keep harmful things away from kids. Five years old is not to old to learn about making choices. Fortunately, he did not learn the danger of fire by being injured himself, but fear can be a good teacher. From what I saw, the interaction with the deputy was not hostile, but informative. Apparently the officer explained some of the potential consequences to him. It does not seem to be done in a way that would cause him to particularly fear or disrespect law enforcement. At this point, his parents don't have to worry about him finding matches or a lighter. He knows what choice to make next time he is in that situation.

I do agree with you that some of his behavior probably stemmed from his receiving recognition for his past involvement with a fire, and I'll bet he is bright enough to now make the distinction between reporting a fire and starting one.

Regards,

D-Ray

[noonereal]

Then as you say counselor we disagree.

I can see no reason for a kid of five to have access to any kind of fire starter.

This is a case of reactionary parenting instead of simple common sense. IMHO of course. :)

[d-ray657]

Then as you say counselor we disagree.

I can see no reason for a kid of five to have access to any kind of fire starter.

This is a case of reactionary parenting instead of simple common sense. IMHO of course. :)

Shoot, I wasn't supposed to answer anyway. You wanted opinions from the cerebral types.:eek:

Regards,

D-Ray

[noonereal]

what do you think of this one?

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=300302

[merrylander]

Saw the original thread, could not get the link to work, so forgot about it.

[noonereal]

It goes like this.

A five year old sees a fire and runs to tell people. He is made a hero by the community afterword. He is given an award, he gets a tour and ride on the fire truck etc.

So the same 5 year old now continually attempts to set fire in his room. (wanting a repeat of the adulation he received the first time he reported fire)

His mom comes up with an idea to "teach" the kid. She has a sheriff come to the home and mock arrest him. Handcuffs, back seat of the cops car and all.

A neighbor sees this and snaps a photo feeling this may not be the best way to handle this situation.

So now the discussion is was this a wise approach?

Overwhelmingly folks think this is a great idea and that the neighbor should not have butted in.

My opinion is that the parent simply needed to keep fire starters out of the reach of the 5 year old and all this drama would have been avoided.

[JJIII]

My opinion is that the parent simply needed to keep fire starters out of the reach of the 5 year old and all this drama would have been avoided.

And then he goes to a neighbor's house and finds a lighter or matches.....

The "visit" from the Officer will probably stick with him for a while, maybe long enough for him to develop better judgement.

(The neighbor with the camera needs to kind her own business.)

[d-ray657]

what do you think of this one?

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=300302

Don't agree with all of the hard-liners there, but I do believe that the daughter should have complied with the request to turn the music down. She should have learned that by example, a simple matter of common courtesy. I also have no problem in providing offspring with the reasoning for a decision when they ask. They need to learn to make decisions, and explaining the decision making process gives them an example - even if they don't agree with the reasons.

Regards,

D-Ray

[epifanatic]

I wholeheartedly agree with mom.

[noonereal]

Don't agree with all of the hard-liners there, but I do believe that the daughter should have complied with the request to turn the music down. She should have learned that by example, a simple matter of common courtesy. I also have no problem in providing offspring with the reasoning for a decision when they ask. They need to learn to make decisions, and explaining the decision making process gives them an example - even if they don't agree with the reasons.

Regards,

D-Ray

here is my theory, the child would instinctively turn down the music if asked rather than be combative if we parent properly from the time the child is small

[epifanatic]

Then as you say counselor we disagree.

I can see no reason for a kid of five to have access to any kind of fire starter.

This is a case of reactionary parenting instead of simple common sense. IMHO of course. :)
Don't take this the wrong way but, do you have kids?

[noonereal]

Don't take this the wrong way but, do you have kids?

Sure do. Never hit a one and my youngest told me that she was perceived by her friends as having the toughest father of all.

It's about teaching, setting expectations and making the rewards and consequences clear. (and not after the fact)

Nothing makes my kids feel worse than if they feel they disappointed me and in truth they never do. Sure they make mistakes and that's when they think they disappointed me but really they haven't, we all make mistakes.

[merrylander]

I had my own time raising my son, how other people raise their is their problem. Other than what I observed from my own parent I figure that most of us get lucky since as parents we represent unskilled labour.:rolleyes:

[Charles]

From what I've seen, some children are a joy, and some, well, not so much so. What works on one doesn't work on another.

Chas

[noonereal]

the one's that are a joy tend to be a joy because they are secure and happy


ever see that show with the mexican guy who goes to peoples homes and corrects the behavior of dogs that are misbehaving? he pretty much teachers the owner what to do to get the desired response

[Boreas]

Overwhelmingly folks think this is a great idea and that the neighbor should not have butted in.

My opinion is that the parent simply needed to keep fire starters out of the reach of the 5 year old and all this drama would have been avoided.

Frustrating an urge or a need in a child isn't the same thing as teaching the child that the way in which he or she attempts to satisfy it is wrong.

John

[d-ray657]

From my observations, from my conversations with other parents, and from what I have read there are particular aspects of parenting that almost always have positive results. First, kids want limits, even when they whine about them. They are not ready to set their own boundaries, and they gain a sense of comfort when parents set them for them.

Kids who have super-lenient parents seem less happy and alienated from their folks. I could often tell when one of the boys was acting aloof - avoiding parental contact - that something was bothering them. When we had an opportunity to resolve the situation, even when it involved discipline, we had a period of extremely open communication and closeness - like they had been relieved of a terrible burden.

Kids need experiences at making choices very early on. As parents, we obviously limit the choices, but still give them the opportunity to make a choice. Sometimes it is a Hobson's choice, but nevertheless a choice. The more practice they have making decisions, the better they will become with it. If there are positive results from good choices and consequences of bad choices, they learn the thought process. We were sometimes pleased to learn that even when other parents would allow something at their house that we did not allow at ours, the kids would choose to follow our rules (PG-13 and R-Rated movies being one example.) If they had not had experience at making decisions before they were in that situation, they might not have had the confidence to make the choice not to do that.

Finally, "quality time" is not a substitute for quantity time. The more parents participate in the lives of their kids, the more opportunity there is for "learning opportunities" for communication and for guidance. Of course, there has to be a balance. We had to trust our kids to spend time with other families, with other friends, in organizations, etc., but we would do what we could to support activities they choose to participate in. I spent many an hour in the dugout, on the bench, in a tent, in a pew, in the backyard playing catch or looking at stars, and in their bedrooms talking or reading. As a parent, you never know when you are going to learn something from those experiences. Even though they are now in college, I still find opportunities now and again to have a parenting moment. I wouldn't trade the experience for anything.

Regards,

D-Ray

[noonereal]

From my observations, from my conversations with other parents, and from what I have read there are particular aspects of parenting that almost always have positive results. First, kids want limits, even when they whine about them. They are not ready to set their own boundaries, and they gain a sense of comfort when parents set them for them.

exactly

Kids who have super-lenient parents seem less happy and alienated from their folks.

Do you think I am an advocate of leniency?
I am the very opposite.

I could often tell when one of the boys was acting aloof - avoiding parental contact - that something was bothering them. When we had an opportunity to resolve the situation, even when it involved discipline, we had a period of extremely open communication and closeness - like they had been relieved of a terrible burden.

Good job!

Kids need experiences at making choices very early on. As parents, we obviously limit the choices, but still give them the opportunity to make a choice. Sometimes it is a Hobson's choice, but nevertheless a choice. The more practice they have making decisions, the better they will become with it. If there are positive results from good choices and consequences of bad choices, they learn the thought process. We were sometimes pleased to learn that even when other parents would allow something at their house that we did not allow at ours, the kids would choose to follow our rules (PG-13 and R-Rated movies being one example.) If they had not had experience at making decisions before they were in that situation, they might not have had the confidence to make the choice not to do that.

more good stuff

Finally, "quality time" is not a substitute for quantity time. The more parents participate in the lives of their kids, the more opportunity there is for "learning opportunities" for communication and for guidance. Of course, there has to be a balance. We had to trust our kids to spend time with other families, with other friends, in organizations, etc., but we would do what we could to support activities they choose to participate in. I spent many an hour in the dugout, on the bench, in a tent, in a pew, in the backyard playing catch or looking at stars, and in their bedrooms talking or reading. As a parent, you never know when you are going to learn something from those experiences. Even though they are now in college, I still find opportunities now and again to have a parenting moment. I wouldn't trade the experience for anything.



After reading this post I am shocked you think traumatizing a 5 year old instead of parenting a 5 year old is preferable.

Go figure.

IMO, the worse parents (besides derelicts/seriously troubled parents) are the super-lenient parents. AS you said they offer no structure which leads to insecurity.

[d-ray657]

Noone, I wasn't suggesting at all that you are a too-lenient parent. I was making general observations. Even now, it is surprising when the boys tell us that they appreciate the discipline that they had growing up, because they have seen friends and acquaintances making all sort of damaging choices.

A couple of those kids, however, are ones that were never given the opportunity to make choices. Their parents dictated all choices and were strict to the point of stifling them. Just like the kids who had little discipline, these kids have difficulty making choices once they are on their own. Having not had the opportunity to rebel a bit and start breaking the bonds in the teenage years, they tried to make up for lost time when they got to college.

Bottom line - parenting is more of an art than a science, but just like art, there are methods that provide form and guidance.

As far as the kid in the video, the handcuffs were probably over the top, and I might have had a different idea, but I can't fault the mom for seeking some intervention that was going to the the point across. You can't expect to keep all sorts of danger away from kids, they need to learn how to avoid it on their own too. Once this little boy was bitten by the bug, he was going to find a way to play with fire. Fortunately his consequence was talking to a cop rather than recovering from serious burns. At least the mom was engaged enough that she didn't just give up.

Regards,

D-Ray

[noonereal]

Noone, I wasn't suggesting at all that you are a too-lenient parent. I was making general observations. Even now, it is surprising when the boys tell us that they appreciate the discipline that they had growing up, because they have seen friends and acquaintances making all sort of damaging choices.

A couple of those kids, however, are ones that were never given the opportunity to make choices. Their parents dictated all choices and were strict to the point of stifling them. Just like the kids who had little discipline, these kids have difficulty making choices once they are on their own. Having not had the opportunity to rebel a bit and start breaking the bonds in the teenage years, they tried to make up for lost time when they got to college.

Bottom line - parenting is more of an art than a science, but just like art, there are methods that provide form and guidance.

As far as the kid in the video, the handcuffs were probably over the top, and I might have had a different idea, but I can't fault the mom for seeking some intervention that was going to the the point across. You can't expect to keep all sorts of danger away from kids, they need to learn how to avoid it on their own too. Once this little boy was bitten by the bug, he was going to find a way to play with fire. Fortunately his consequence was talking to a cop rather than recovering from serious burns. At least the mom was engaged enough that she didn't just give up.

Regards,

D-Ray

The kid is 5. You know how long the attention span of a 5 year old is?

That aside I could not agree with you more. I always like to make my kids part of the decision making process.
When they understand that their opinion is valued they are both confident and secure. When they are respected they respect. That's the trick to raising kids. You can't teach a kid respect by force.

[JCricket]

Well, I kind of see this a little different. The question was asked if this was a good idea, good parenting. My answer - NO!

This kid just had his behavior reinforced. He did something and now he gets attention for it. Also, this screams to me that the parents have real issues. One, how is the kid getting a hold of this stuff? Two, why is he attention starved to where he needs to do this? This is not a normal kid behavior.

Answer those questions and you will likely find the real way to parent that child. I am not saying there shouldn't be consequences, there should be. But grandiose explosions only teach a child how to survive in unpredictable siutations. What the kid needs is a some real attention and consistency. Some praise for good stuff. And direct and immidate intervention for the unacceptable behavior(consequences inlcuded).
The consequences should also fit the crime. And, if you are a parent and wait until things get too far, then it is your own fault, and you should be punished as well, and more severely than the child.

My $20.00 worth!

[d-ray657]

Well, I kind of see this a little different. The question was asked if this was a good idea, good parenting. My answer - NO!

This kid just had his behavior reinforced. He did something and now he gets attention for it. Also, this screams to me that the parents have real issues. One, how is the kid getting a hold of this stuff? Two, why is he attention starved to where he needs to do this? This is not a normal kid behavior.

Answer those questions and you will likely find the real way to parent that child. I am not saying there shouldn't be consequences, there should be. But grandiose explosions only teach a child how to survive in unpredictable siutations. What the kid needs is a some real attention and consistency. Some praise for good stuff. And direct and immidate intervention for the unacceptable behavior(consequences inlcuded).
The consequences should also fit the crime. And, if you are a parent and wait until things get too far, then it is your own fault, and you should be punished as well, and more severely than the child.

My $20.00 worth!

A couple of other factors to take into consideration here - First, the background, the kid had already learned that his involvement with a fire got him loads of attention - the positive kind because he had reported a fire and got all sorts of perks from the fire station; second, that parent had tried other interventions first - she had given him time out, and she had taken his toys away, both as a result of his playing with fire. Third, it is not clear how he got access to matches, but kids can be very resourceful; his fascination with fire would make it very difficult to insure that he never had access to some sort of fire-starter. I think he was fortunate to get a message that made an impression on him without having it be burned into him.

I just wouldn't be so quick to judge a mother who was obviously actively engaged in in raising the child and was attempting to resolve a difficult situation without violence to him. I would not call a mother that would take those steps a failure as a parent.

Regards,

D-Ray

[JCricket]

A couple of other factors to take into consideration here - First, the background, the kid had already learned that his involvement with a fire got him loads of attention - the positive kind because he had reported a fire and got all sorts of perks from the fire station; second, that parent had tried other interventions first - she had given him time out, and she had taken his toys away, both as a result of his playing with fire. Third, it is not clear how he got access to matches, but kids can be very resourceful; his fascination with fire would make it very difficult to insure that he never had access to some sort of fire-starter. I think he was fortunate to get a message that made an impression on him without having it be burned into him.

I just wouldn't be so quick to judge a mother who was obviously actively engaged in in raising the child and was attempting to resolve a difficult situation without violence to him. I would not call a mother that would take those steps a failure as a parent.

Regards,

D-Ray


Yeah, I am harsh on this one. My issue, they are not addressing the root of the problem - IMnotsoHO of course. Maybe they can't.

I'd bet money that she did give him time outs when he set fires. But, I'd also bet there were times he was caught with matches and wasn't given the time out. Obviously speculative. However, it is very rare for a kid to get a hold of matches(or do anything else wrong) and get caught every time they have them.

So now I wonder how much trust that child has in his mother? I think mom broke a sacred trust - kids believe they will always be protected from other people by their parents. I wonder how this kid feels now. Cna he trust mommy to be there for him? Should he talk to here now?

My mind just goes, and goes, and goes on this one. It is rare I feel so intuitivley strong against something - but this just feels like she added fuel to the problem.

Hope I am wrong!

[d-ray657]

Hope I am wrong!

Me too, but not for the sake of winning an argument.

Regards,

D-Ray

[JCricket]

D-ray,
I have yet to see you try and win an "arguement". Make a point and back it up - soundly and solidly you have. Argue for the sake of argueing - nope.
I wish the twangfest were more than a day!

[noonereal]

D-ray,
I have yet to see you try and win an "arguement". Make a point and back it up - soundly and solidly you have. Argue for the sake of argueing - nope.
I wish the twangfest were more than a day!

Tell D you want laws passed so that politicians and news outlets face consequences when they knowingly betray the public trust by deliberatly lieing to promote an agenda and see. :D

[noonereal]

Well, I kind of see this a little different. The question was asked if this was a good idea, good parenting. My answer - NO!



You may want to rethink your position, you are the first person that has agreed with me on this!:eek:

On a serious note, to me I find it interesting how deep rooted accepted practice (as it were) is as opposed to objective analysis,
this is equally obvious in folks political beliefs.

Gun laws, legalizing drugs, even healthcare reform
Interesting species us humans.

[merrylander]

Tell D you want laws passed so that politicians and news outlets face consequences when they knowingly betray the public trust by deliberatly lieing to promote an agenda and see. :D

If lieing were to become a crime 90% of the country would be incarcerated.:rolleyes:

[JCricket]

If lieing were to become a crime 90% of the country would be incarcerated.:rolleyes:

So what you are saying is that only 10% of us are skilled enough at it to get away withit?:);)

Hey D-ray, time to start another thread about outlawing lying!
Can't wait to DISCUSS this with you.
Mark

[JCricket]

You may want to rethink your position, you are the first person that has agreed with me on this!:eek:

On a serious note, to me I find it interesting how deep rooted accepted practice (as it were) is as opposed to objective analysis,
this is equally obvious in folks political beliefs.

Gun laws, legalizing drugs, even healthcare reform
Interesting species us humans.

We are creatures of habit and tradition - good, bad or other.

I think mom here is trying and means well, but I think she completely missed the mark.

Mark

[noonereal]

easy to understand why

it's in our DNA.

A child replicates the behavior of it's parents just like cells replicate themselves

[d-ray657]

Maybe I was traumatized as a child when my third grade teacher sent me to the principal's office because my handwriting was so bad. He gave me a stern talking to, and then told my mom not to worry about it because I would have a secretary to take care of that someday. None of us had a clue what would happen in the future with word processing.

Regards,

D-Ray

[piece-itpete]

....

I just wouldn't be so quick to judge a mother who was obviously actively engaged in in raising the child and was attempting to resolve a difficult situation without violence to him. I would not call a mother that would take those steps a failure as a parent.

Regards,

D-Ray

I agree. Even if one disagrees with the mother's actions it's still 8 thousand times better than screaming at him as many do.

It seems very similar to a kid being busted shoplifting - give him/her a good scare. Of course the consequences of fires are far worse.

If lieing were to become a crime 90% of the country would be incarcerated.:rolleyes:

Hear hear!

Pete

[d-ray657]

When one of our sons was close to kindergarten age, he stuck a pack of gum in his pocket. My wife discovered it in the car, and made him come with her and made him tell the grocery store manager what he had done. She said the store manager played it very well, and gave the situation just the right amount of seriousness before thanking him for doing the right thing by bringing it back.

Regards,

D-Ray