So let me get this straight: the entire assertion/accusation that milroyj is a “shitty parent” is because of this:
And that means he’s an “asshole” and a “shitty parent”? That’s pretty over the top to accuse someone of that when based on such flimsy “evidence”. Especially when deliberately taken out of the context of the family health issue he was commenting on in the first place. Do anyone honestly believe that a child should have any final say in determining the ultimate decisions which can impact the health and welfare of himself, his siblings, his parents, and extended family? That’s what is absolute insanity to me.
My child has pink eye… he is miserable. He didnt want to go to the doctor. He doesnt like his medicine it stings. He still gets it. So I am an asshole… but the big question Alereon Whats it to you?
Well, if milroyj was saying, “I don’t care if the kid doesn’t like blue, he’s going to wear nothing but blue!” or “So what if he’s scared? I’m taking my three year old to see Horror Fest III: Bucket O’ Blood!”, THEN you can say well, maybe you should listen to your child’s wants.
However, when it comes to things like safety, medical care, schooling, etc, it should NOT be up to a fucking five year old.
Weirddave: I think my post made it clear that I don’t agree with the TCS style of parenting. However, as a parent you NEED to take into account your child’s wants and desires. Do they count as much when the kid is in preschool and wants icecream for dinner as when they’re twelve and don’t want to take piano lessons anymore? Of course not. But they DO matter, and you DO have to address them.
milroyj: There’s a world of difference between knowing that your child has to go to the dentist even though they don’t want to and believing that what the child wants doesn’t matter. One’s job as a parent includes overruling what your child wants, when necessary. It’s the “when necessary” part that’s important.
If you meant by your comment “in the case if health and safety concerns, a child’s preferences must take a back seat to what the parent knows needs to happen,” that’s fine, I’ll agree with you, and I apologize for the misunderstanding. I can’t, of course, accept your statement as written.
Krisfer the Cat: Read my post again until you get the point. Listening to what your child wants AND doing what’s best for them no matter what are not mutually exclusive.
In case there is anyone here who would be interested in discussing what TCS actually advocates instead of a lot of complete and utter bullspit written by people purporting to know about TCS but who clearly don’t have a clue, the TCS web site is here:
Not wanting to spoil your fun or anything, but in case anyone reading this gives a fuck, TCS is not about asking not telling, nor is it about kids ruling the parents, nor is it touchy-feely permissive parenting, and nor is it negligent. They do NOT assume that kids need no guidance, and no, the whole family does NOT get lice, and no, it is not about leaving kids unprotected from dangers. And no, they don’t say coercion is always wrong, and no, TCS is not a “strategy” or a “method”.
I think maybe they’re just confused. Coercion is always bad, but coercion is defined (libertarianly) as the initiation of force or fraud against rights bearing entities. Consent is the absolute essence of libertarianism, and children are not capable of giving meaningful consent.
Oh, well. I stand beside you in utter shock at these people, whatever they call themselves.
Well, I think kids should be taken seriously. I remember when I was twelve and witnessed first hand the arrival of Martians in a flying saucer. But did anybody take me seriously? noooo, and next thing you know the all the townspeople are under mind control. The Army had to sort the thing out.
I remember another time, I was about 16, and I rolled into town on my motorcycle. I said, “hey daddy-O, there’s this really freaky alien that eats people! It’s got no shape, ya dig, yet it oozes all around” Nobody took me seriously then either.
I thought I was fairly clear, but I’ll reiterate. I make every effort to take my son’s desires into consideration, but the ultimate decision is mine. As long as it’s reasonable, I acomodate him, but I’m not, for example, going to buy shrimp for dinner just because he wants it if the budget is tight. He’ll have hamburgers and like them or go hungry.
I do not have kids. However, from what experience I’ve had with little kids (including my brother, who is eight years younger), it’s called PICK YOUR BATTLES. Not just cede them all to the child! “Do you want to wear the blue shorts or the green ones?” or “Do you want an apple or a banana?” are reasonable questions, even for a little one. Even the idea of not getting the child to the doctor because they don’t want to go gives me the creeps – the lice thing is just plain flat out stupidity on the part of the parents. Some things are not negotiable. Many are.
Guinastasia (and indeed, others), I am not led to believe (by the many posts of yours that I have seen previously) that you are prone to knee-jerk reactions or casual oversight, but in your link did you not also read
where the demonised Sarah Fitz-Claridge argues against such rediculous “hands off”, laissez-faire* attitudes?
I think that the idea would be to engage your child, and let them understand that the sting is not nice but is necessary for them to be cured of their “pink eye”, or whatever. No-one here (nor I suspect at TCS (cite me otherwise if I am wrong)) advocates neglect of one’s child’s health because the child is uncomfortable or fearful of the immediate experiences.
The casual or cavalier dismissal of a child’s wishes is sick (even if those wishes conflit with the childs best interests) and will not lead to well-adjusted individuals.
==============================================
Y’all (and y’all know who y’all are),
Your mileage may fucking vary, but this thread stinks of the most narrow-minded ignorance I have seen on these boards, charitably, I am tempted to ascribe your posts to a momentary lapse of reason, uncharitably, I’m tempted to say Sure, your parents didn’t practice “non-coercive parenting” and it never did you any harm. Look in the fucking mirror, tossers.
See, that’s precisely where you are wrong. It is the parents’ responsibility to make decisions that are in the best interest of their children. Dismissal of the child’s contrary wishes is not sick, but proper.
Some kids need a lot of law-laying, and some don’t. I think my mother was spanked about once, ever.
Her four boys, however, needed quite a bit more. Even with that, there was still the fire setting, the pool ball through the window, the school slacking, the teasing, etc, and we were considered by many adults to be something like model kids. What would it have been without the rules? My second brother in particular would have gone off the deep end, I think.
Some kids are governable with just words and logic, and some aren’t. Go look for that thread about things your mother still doesn’t know about.
GreatUnwashed, you probably need to join the mailing list to get the full glory of the TCS approach. It’s not the case that you do simply give the medicine if the child doesn’t agree. It’s your role as a non-coercive parent to share your theory with your kid that the medicine is a Good Thing. If your theory is right after all, the kid will take the medicine. If they don’t then you need to find a way to make it OK. Different flavourings, different ways of giving the medicine, whatever. Until you and the child share the theory.
I see that a TCS’er has joined us. I’m predicting that he/she will announce that I don’t understand the philosophy ;).
The worst situation I ever came across was with a person (who then formed a splinter email group about not coercing toddlers) where she was passionately advocating not getting therapy for kids with Tourette’s or autism as the behaviour must be serving a purpose and/or giving the child pleasure, otherwise they would just stop it or choose different behaviours.
These TCS people must not be familiar with the psychological studies done on overly-lenient parenting. They’ve probably heard of the damage overly-strict parenting can do and assume doing the absolute opposite would be ideal. Very wrong. Overly-lenient parenting has also been linked to children becoming maladjusted (fewer goals, less motivation, more neurotic disorders, bigger lack of direction, etc.). Think about it. Children model themselves after their parents, and learn how to behave by being told how to behave (at least until they are mentally capable of higher ethical thinking states). If they parents never say no the kid won’t have a proper grasp of the boundaries of reality or have any idea what’s really expected of them.