[QUOTE=AngryIrishLass]
I read BBQ brush as one of the stiff white brushes you use to paint BBQ sauce on, not the metal grill cleaning brush. OP also said it was “nothing dangerous.”
I will have to say I’ve never put the metal cleaning brush in a dishwasher.
[/QUOTE]
That’s exactly what it was - it was like a paintbrush. There was nothing dangerous in the dishwasher - my MIL actually washes most of her dishes anyway, so I’m not even sure why she has a dishwasher 
.
[QUOTE=calm kiwi]
I’m 41 and have never had the need to defend myself in a physical way (I’m all mouth!), my child (who is a self proclaimed geek, he and his friends call themselves the ‘Nerd Herd’') also has never had to defend himself in any physical way.
[/QUOTE]
My husband was sent to the hospital after being jumped by a group of local kids when he was on vacation with another family. He still doesn’t remember the details, 20 years later. He just remembers the first one grabbing his shoulder and pulling him out of a phone box, and then waking up with significant injuries in the hospital. It’s not common, but it does happen. More common is the schoolyard idiot, and as every Zero Tolerance thread reveals, a lot of us were physically tormented by bullies in school (my husband, again, was one of them.)
Although you’re right - even though I’ve taught my son (and will teach my daughter, when she’s older) how and when to hit, he’s not yet needed it. I think that’s because I teach it as the final step of a process, and that process has always diffused the situation before the “Hit them” step, for which I’m very glad. But I’m also glad that he knows how and when to deliver an effective punch, should it be needed.
Well, that’s just completely illogical on so many levels, I don’t know where to begin. First of all, children don’t learn discipline by watching, no matter what the method; you could just as well say, “If time-outs worked, children would see one other child get a time-out and never misbehave again.” Second of all, no method works the first time it’s used - from smacking to removing privileges to time-outs to talking-to’s to The Look. Thirdly, yeah, smacking DOES work, for some kids, in some situations. I still don’t think it’s the ideal solution, nor do I think it’s good for every kid. But I’ve seen enough broken spirited kids with bruises to know it *does *work. It just has some pretty nasty side effects.
The question about self-defense was directed at people who are specifically *not *pacifists - people who think that it is okay, sometimes, to hit. The question is how you transition your strategy from a blanket “No Hitting” to “Only hit under these circumstances”. It’s a great question.
[QUOTE=Sleeps With Butterflies]
Seriously?
A child COULD get hit by a car when crossing the street unattended. If a 2 year old ran out in the road with no cars coming, wouldn’t you want to correct them for doing something that COULD happen to them if they did that again?
Obviously thousands of examples could be given to prove the same point.
Also, it’s not a good idea to let a small child handle things in the dishwasher. They don’t have the ability that we do to determine if the dishes are clean and cooled off, or fresh from the drying process and are still very, very hot.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah seriously. Your example is much more dangerous than what the OP described, and you’ve added “unattended” to the mix which was not the case here. Even so, using your example, I think talking and explaining the situation to the child and letting him know what *could * happen is that much more productive than the quick smack. Let’s face it, you would be smacking the child because of your emotions and imagining of what *could * have happened, all of which would be lost on the child. I think the child would be scared enough as it was, mainly based on the parent’s reaction. What lesson do you teach when you smack him on top of that?
[QUOTE=WhyNot]
The question about self-defense was directed at people who are specifically *not *pacifists - people who think that it is okay, sometimes, to hit. The question is how you transition your strategy from a blanket “No Hitting” to “Only hit under these circumstances”. It’s a great question.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah - it’s funny what 3-yr-olds learn at soccer camp. Not how to dribble or shoot, nobody really retained that.
But I know my son remembers being lined up with the other kids, shoulder to shoulder, to do some drill or another & being pushed and shoved by the little boy standing next to him.
Very puzzling – he looked over at me, sitting in the grass, to see what to do. I was puzzled, too, all I could do was shrug - the Coach was busy lining up the rest of the kids, and the pushing wasn’t exactly felonious behavior. So, my son shoved the kid back. The kid stopped messing with him. Lesson learned.
Elza, it sounds like you’re weary of this issue. I just wanted to tell you, you’re not alone.
I’ve made various adjustments in how I expose my children to other people so that they’re being raised in a manner that I think is best for them. For example, I love my FIL (and he’s a good grandfather) but we haven’t stayed at his house in a couple of years because he can’t handle the invasion - it stresses him, and brings out everyone’s worst. No sweat, let’s just not set things up that way, let’s get together in different venues.
And the once I’ve done my Mama Bear best, I let the rest go. Some of my relatives have expectations and reactions that are vastly different from mine, but I think that’s really, really good for the kids.
If one of them ever hit my kid, I’m sure I’d flip out, no doubt, it’s just One of Those Things – but I absolutely support my family’s different rules and expectations.
I cannot think of anything less effective than doing this with a 21-month old.
[QUOTE=AngryIrishLass]
Yeah seriously. Your example is much more dangerous than what the OP described, and you’ve added “unattended” to the mix which was not the case here. Even so, using your example, I think talking and explaining the situation to the child and letting him know what *could * happen is that much more productive than the quick smack.
[/quote]
You don’t have any kids, do you? Only someone who’s ever been a parent would think you can “explain” anything to a 21 month old.
I don’t have any kids, but I think many 21-month-olds are capable of understanding “No! Ouchie!” or “Icky!” And that is an explanation.
[QUOTE=AngryIrishLass]
Yeah seriously. Your example is much more dangerous than what the OP described, and you’ve added “unattended” to the mix which was not the case here. Even so, using your example, I think talking and explaining the situation to the child and letting him know what *could * happen is that much more productive than the quick smack. Let’s face it, you would be smacking the child because of your emotions and imagining of what *could * have happened, all of which would be lost on the child. I think the child would be scared enough as it was, mainly based on the parent’s reaction. What lesson do you teach when you smack him on top of that?
[/QUOTE]
By unattended, I meant without holding someone’s hand. I’ve seen parents who are assisting another child who is getting out of a car and the child already out of the car darts out into where traffic is coming (street, parking lot). That’s unattended. And no, I’m not saying the parent was bad. A parent only has so many hands. They expect their child to stay right there by the car because that’s what they’ve been taught. Kids seem to be made to do what they’re not supposed to do sometimes. That’s why it’s always so shocking when they’re doing those “Could your child be lured away by a stranger?” segments on TV. The parent says “No way! I’ve taught them not to go with strangers.” while behind them their child is being taken away to look for a nonexistent puppy.
Your comment seemed to be shocked that someone could punish a child for what could happen. Not just the situation in the OP, this is why I gave a different situation. Also, I still believe that just because it was “nothing dangerous” in the dishwasher this time, it doesn’t mean it won’t be the next time. It doesn’t have to be a knife. Dishes in the dishwasher are HOT.
You think a small smack on the hand to deter them from touching things in the dishwasher is done out of emotion and is confusing to the child. You think that a discussion with a 21 month old about why they shouldn’t touch it won’t be lost on them? Oookay! It’s your world…
[QUOTE=Sigmagirl]
I don’t have any kids, but I think many 21-month-olds are capable of understanding “No! Ouchie!” or “Icky!” And that is an explanation.
[/QUOTE]
I have two kids and another on the way, and you couldn’t be more wrong.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
You don’t have any kids, do you? Only someone who’s ever been a parent would think you can “explain” anything to a 21 month old.
[/QUOTE]
Actually I have 3 boys. Mine understood ouchie and booboo and timeout. Maybe you are just too smart for you own good.
[QUOTE=AngryIrishLass]
Actually I have 3 boys. Mine understood ouchie and booboo and timeout. Maybe you are just too smart for you own good.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah right. All your one year olds instantly obeyed you just because you said, “no,” or “ouchie.” I don’t think so. They might understand the word but that doesn’t mean they’ll respond to them. I know.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
You don’t have any kids, do you? Only someone who’s ever been a parent would think you can “explain” anything to a 21 month old.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, she’s a parent. You might remember the shitty diaper situation at McDonalds?