Treat kids as equals to adults or no?

Great Debates
1

I’m separating this out of the spanking thread going in this forum, because that thread has become quite long, and this isn’t just about spanking. Also, that thread seemed to evolve into “here’s what happened to me” rather than a back-and-forth debate. (I’m as guilty of that crime in GD as anybody; don’t get me wrong.)

Lately I’ve been reexamining my thinking on how to treat and interact with children as you are raising them. (This is all hypothetical in my case, as I am currently single and childless. Would like to be a Dad someday, though.)

For many years, I have felt disdain for the parents you see who seem to talk to and otherwise treat their small children as friends and equals. I was of the probably more traditional camp that of course children are equals as human beings, but they are also lesser, in that their childhood is the time period in which they are taught lessens that eventually allow them to be treated as equals with adults. Be their parent, not their pal – that type of thing.

Corporal punishment is most definitely a part of this equation. We’ve all seen the 4-year-old in the store, shrieking and incessantly misbehaving, as the mother speaks to him like he’s a co-worker or something, “Now, you know you dissappoint me and hurt my feelings when you act like that…” and the kid just continues.

My point always was, no, the kid doesn’t know that. He doesn’t think, communicate, process information like an adult, because he’s not one. He shouldn’t think like an adult when he’s a kid. I can’t imagine that’s a good thing.

Teaching a child that bad act = stinging butt seems a quicker and more effective route to get them to cease those behaviors. And as the child’s thinking becomes more adult-like, they have a head-start on knowing certain things are wrong and shouldn’t be done.

But beyond corporal punishment, just in daily interaction with children, should parents and other adults include them and communicate with them as equals? Does anybody else remember the old days of “respecting your elders,” which usually meant not regularly piping in during adult conversations, not calling adults by their first names, etc.

Again, the philosophy seeming to be that the kids aren’t ready for that yet, need to develop more to get to the point where that is appropriate.

As I said, I’ve been re-examining this, and kind of wavering, actually. Are children in some ways lesser than adults, and should they be treated as such and act as such accordingly?

2

Childhood is such a precious time, I hate to see children rushed into adulthood. I agree, Milo, children need to be treated as children, they need to be spoken to on their level, they need to understand that they do not posess the life skills nor the mentality to make certain decisions. They need to be tought right and wrong, good, bad, hell, everything. It is a fine line a parent walks between Dictator and Confidant(sp?), to cross over too far either way could be harmful to the child. I think you will make a great dad, as you seem to have the fundamental idea close at heart. Parents second-guess everything, it’s part of the job.

3

I pretty much agree with the OP. Children should not be “talked down to” (meaning, treating them like they are idiots) but should be talked to on their level. And treated on their level. Hell, we all have levels.

And kids do not have the capacity to understand certain things yet, or take on certain responsibilities. It’s because they are KIDS.

4

I won’t spank my son for two reasons: 1) Most things I have read indicate it’s not a terribly effective way to influence behavior; 2) I just couldn’t bring myself to. I don’t necessarily villify those who do resort to some level of corporal punishment (my parents did, and I love them). I believe there are good, loving parents who whack their kids on the bottom. I do, however, hold that they are “good” in spite of this behavior.

Your primary question is tough to answer. There is a fine line to walk. I don’t subscribe to the camp that holds, always, “Because I said so, and that’s all the explanation you need.” Children deserve our respect and sometimes an explanation as to why we set limits is more important than the limit set.

But the fact is that my first job–even when it’s not pleasant–is to be a parent, which means to provide love and guidance, to set limits and protect. I’ve seen many examples of parents who don’t understand this and the results are often tragic. Regardless of how much fun it is to pal around with my boy, on the occasions when it conflicts with something more important, I have to do my job. Despite what I said earlier, I do on occasion tell my son (after the 50th “But why do I have to, Dad?” when it’s clear I can’t get him to understand) that like it or not, my job is to determine what’s best for him and right now he doesn’t get to decide.

Don’t forget that setting limits for kids tells them they are valuable. In my experience, kids who don’t have limits set for them typically develop real self-esteem problems. So don’t do your kids any “favors” by treating them as adults in this regard.

I try always to remember what I’m trying to accomplish in a given situation. Sometimes–say when I’m fixing a flat tire on the interstate and my son wants to wander from the car–my objective is immediate and critical and we’re not going to discuss it. “Get back in the car. NOW.”

Other times–say when I’m trying to help him understand the importance of developing good study habits and working hard–the “you’ll study because I’m telling you to study” approach is way too short-sighted. Perhaps he’s not an adult, but he won’t ever be a mature one if he’s not given the opportunity to understand the reasons behind certain things.

This may not really answer the question. I guess, to some extent, I saying it’s not universally answerable (but it’s absolutely worth asking and discussing!).

5

It sometimes is, and sometimes isn’t. It depends on so many different factors, because just like adults, all kids are different.

Using spanking first is not my style. Doing that serves only to teach a child that violence first, without thinking through, is okay, and IMHO, that is not good. I am not anti-spanking, though. I have occassionally swatted my daughter once or twice on the butt, open-handed, while she’s wearing her pull-up pants. While that doesn’t physically hurt her, it does serve to let her know that mom means business. When I’ve done this, it’s also after I’ve tried saying “no” many, many times at several different volume levels, and also removed her from the situation. When nothing else has worked, one swat on the behind usually does the trick.

I haven’t had to do this in a while now, though. She’s at an age where after I’ve already done everything but swat, if I simply say “if you don’t stop that, you will get a swat,” she stops. She’s also reached the age and comprehension level that I can begin to explain things to her, like why her behavior is unacceptable, and she’s beginning to understand. This is good.

Yep. My daughter has had her little fits in public. My reaction? Tell her that if she doesn’t stop now, we’re going home. If she doesn’t stop, we go home. I have done this. One thing that is so important when it comes to discipline is to actually do what you say you’re going to do. This also applies to rewards, too. If you promise a child something special for good behavior, give them that something if they are good. If you promise discipline for bad behavior, carry it out, as soon as possible.

Children are not for the faint of heart. Even though they are small, they are loud and they can be very intimidating. But if you let them get their way simply because they scream, they will grow up thinking that if they scream a lot, they’ll always get their way, and that is just not the way the world works.

Reward and punishment helps to teach a child how to function in society. And if it’s done correctly (mostly, anyway–no parent is perfect, no matter how hard we try), it also teaches them that they can’t *always[/i[ have their way, but if they just try, life will be pretty okay most of the time. Not always roses, but not too bad.

6

As I pointed out on the spanking thread, there are things that simply can’t be explained to kids. For example, you may not want your daughter to spend the night at Suzy’s house becaue you have a deep intuition that her dad is a creep, or that her mother is unlikely to supervise the two of them properly. Not having any evidence about these things, you just have to say “No, I’m the parent, that’s why”, because you certainly don’t want your daughter going to school explaining to everyone what you explanined to her!

I think that the pattern that “Sometimes adulcts know better than kids” is a good one to set before you enter the teenage years. Because adults often do–that is the benefit of experience. If you set up the paradigm that “yopu have to obey mommy and daddy because and only because you understand thier reasoning”, well, that is just asking for trouble when they turn fifteen and nothing the parent thinks seems reasonable. “Well, I dont understand why my parents don’t want me to have more than 6 people in my civic, so pile in!” My parents explained things to us some of the times, but other times they had to resort to “You’ll understand when you are older”. Because they didn’t use this too often, or too arbitrarily, when they did I was willing to concede that there was at least some possibilty that they knew what they were talking about, and that I should take a “wait and see policy.”

I also think that it is a child’s right not to have to make too many earth shattering descions (there is a thread about this, too “Our Low opinions of Kids. . .”). Decision making can be very stressful. If you bring a ten year old in on the decision to move, say, and the move turns out to be miserable for the whole family, he is likely to feel like it is his fault. Obviously, a child should have his opinions heard, but ultimilty it is the parent’s lot to shoulder responsibility. (Obviously, the abilty to make meaningful decisions should be gradually increased with age.)

7

I think that, ideally, a parent should be able to relate to their kid as both a parent and as a friend/confidant–as circumstances dictate, IMHO.

My son understands when I’m being a buddy as opposed to when I have the ::: Dad hat on :::. When we’re in the pool laughing and splashing, then it’s buddy time. When I say it’s time to go, it’s Dad time.

My son has never pitched a tantrum in a store or had a screaming fit on the playground when it’s time to leave because he learned at home that it doesn’t work, and it didn’t take spanking him to teach him that.

I’m not saying he never cried when his desire for something was unmet. Of course he has. I didn’t, though, sit down in the middle of the aisle at Target and try to negotiate with him in order to get him to stop crying. Neither did I try explaining to him that payday was two days away and the checkbook was nearly empty. I put the hat on; he accepted it (grudgingly, at times).

Maybe I’m just lucky.

8

The wise parent will realize when their child is becoming competent to make his or her own decisions, especially on the basis of the child’s trustworthiness in the past, and accord him or her freedom accordingly.

My mother was wise. My father was unwise. This is why I moved out two months after turning 18.

9

That’s true enough, but you don’t have to be as specific as to say you have these intuitions. You could simply explain that you don’t know her parents well enough. That makes a lot more sense to a kid than “Because I said so” . If they get “No” and “because I said so” to staying at Suzy’s house, and “yes” to staying at Mary’s house,they will never figure out that Suzy gets a no because you don’t know or trust her parents and Mary gets a yes because she’s been your best friend since high school. Eventually ,if you explain, they will figure out it’s not even worth asking to stay at Christina’s because you’ve never met her parents.

I don’t think anyone (here,anyway) is talking about setting up a situation where the child is given the impression that he/she doesn’t need to obey if they don’t understand the reasoning. It’s more like “You can’t have more than five people in the car because there are only five seatbelts” .Actually, if you’ve been explaining your reasons all along, I doubt you’ll end up with a teenager who doesn’t understand such a limit ( although they may still defy it, of course)

10

This reminds me of somethign I saw today at work (Kmart)…
This little girl was SCREAMING and hitting and smacking out at the merchandise (socks) her parents wanted her to pick out, and they kept going, “Well, do you wnat this then?”
If I had done that, my dad would’ve hefted me up, slung me over his shoulder, and walked out the door. Then we’d go home and he’d drop me off in my room and simply leave.
IGNORING tantrums are what works-not, “Oh, well, honey, please don’t cry, what can I do to make you happy?”

11

I forget the source and it was some time ago that I saw some report about parenting. A few things stuck in my mind:

  • Women seemed to think more along the lines of “talking and reasoning with children” than men.
  • They were also more likely to spank (probably when the “talking and reasoning” part didn’t work as they expected).
  • Children were more likely to throw tantrums with their mothers. The fathers seemed to have more “authority” in spite of less spanking.
  • Spanking done when the parent is exasperated and loses control was most damaging to the child who, more than anything else, works at an emotional level rather than a rational or intelectual level. The best adjusted kids were those whose parents were level and firm. The ocassional swat was not harmful if the parent remains firm and calm. Children were reassured by their parent’s being in control. The worst thing is the feeling that their parents are out of control.
12

I am a MS and a HS band director. The advantage of this lies in the fact that every single day I see 6th 7th and 8th graders…and then I move on to 9-12th graders. Viewing children that span these ages every single day gives one a very good idea about behavior in children.

You can quote me on this for children of all ages…

Say what you are going to do and then follow through…even if it ruins the rest of your day full of errands or your schedule for the class you are trying to teach. if you say one more time and I’ll “>>>” then you better “>>>” if it happens again.

13

If at all possible, could you find a source for this? Just curious, really, because this isn’t the way it is in my house. I know, these are generalized statements and they’re probably true in most cases. I would like to compare them to what goes on in my house, though, just to see how everyone else does it.

My daughter has a tendency to throw her tantrums with her father, and he tries to reason with her more often. The reason? He gets very easily frustrated, and has a tendency to give in to her. Until very recently, actual reasoning with her did not work. Now that her comprehension skills are improving, explaining things to her has begun to be far more effective than a simple “no,” or a swat (it’s been probably 2-3 months since my daughter has been swatted). My daughter knew there was stuff she could get away with around Daddy that she didn’t even think about with me. My husband is getting better about it, though, and so is my daughter.

14

My girlfriend’s son is a sweet little boy, aged 10. However, I’m afraid a damaging precedent has been set by the father (who has custody).

The father is only interested in playing computer games and watching TV and doing other “fun” things with the boy. The father himself is a severe case of arrested development. He’d play video games all day even without a son.

The kid doesn’t do homework, he is not encouraged to read, to explore interesting things. Dad is content to ask the boy what he wants to do and go with that. Friends, you see. Not a parent asserting authority. What kid, given the choice, would rather do homework than play computer games?

Another thing. The kid has gained a lot of weight since the divorce (I’ve seen several pre-divorce pictures). He’s gotten to be a real chunk. Why? Because daddy asks the kid what he wants to eat. Surprise surprise, fast food and junk tops the list.

My girlfriend just got through the two weeks of visitation she was able to swing. I did my best to encourage the boy to explore fun things that would enable him to learn something. I read some of the Narnia books to him; got him some other stuff from the library, took him to World of Science in the mall to maybe pick out something neato. I turned on the Discovery Channel to watch some nature shows. Stuff like that.

They key was, I didn’t give the kid an option. “Would you rather watch the Cartoon Network, or a nature show?” He gets too much of that. Mom is in a difficult position. Having only a short visitation time, she is reluctant to assert her parental authority. She doesn’t want to be perceived as the “bad” parent when Dad lets him do just about anything. I mean, the kid doesn’t even have a bedtime. He gets to choose when he goes to bed.

His response to basic instruction (like, “It’s time to take a bath,” or “Please turn the TV off, we’re ready for dinner”) is to question and argue. Not in the normal manner of a child, but as one who is incredulous that he doesn’t have the deciding vote. He’s so used to being befriended that he doesn’t even understand that parents are supposed to be the boss.

Like I said, the boy really is a sweet kid. However, he does not know basic manners like please and thank you. I really fear for what he will be like once the hormones start kicking in. If he doesn’t accept parents as authority figures now; I"m sure nothing short of a miracle will enable him to exhibit proper behaviors as a teenager and on into adulthood.

If you’ve seen a couple of threads I’ve started about my girlfriend’s situation, one of the things we both see a desperate need for is for her to regain custody of her son before it is too late and she has a horror on her hands (more than the usual surly or rebellious teenager) where a sweet boy used to be.

15

Children who are talked to and reasoned with grow up to be more thoughtful reasoning people. They have better verbal skills.

Spanking teaches children to not get caught.

Who would you rather know as an adult?

Yes, I try to reason with my children and I find that when reason breaks down there is, ahem, a reason. They are tired, hungry, bored, excited, I have been tuning them out. Should I continue to turn my back on them without telling them why? Sure, I get frustrated, but so do they. And I get frustrated with my spouse, mother, peers, dog…

wrt temper tantrums in public- why do they bother innocent bystanders? Sure, they can be loud, but presumably you’ll pay and leave momentarily, or continue on your way shopping. On occasion, I have found that I can engage the child in conversation momentarily and defuse the tantrum. Families have their own little histories and sometimes having a stranger help them step outside of that can help change the interaction. I find that to be a lot more effective than getting annoyed at the child or the parents. Works when a parent is abusing a child too, but that’s a different thread.

16

Kate (may I call you Kate?) said:

Uh, why do you think? They’re loud, they’re shrill, they’re instrusive and they can be, I guess, emotionally disturbing. Do you get annoyed when someone with a loud car stereo pulls up next to you? Do you dislike it when you have to drive by a jackhammer on the street?

My point is this: I don’t like* your kids. I don’t think they’re cute. I definitely don’t want to listen to them scream and demand things, or roll around on the floor as if their in pain.

17

Do you spend a lot of time with children? I spend a fair amount of time with my friend’s kids who range between 3 and 6 years of age. Children do not have the life experience or the mental capability to understand the world around them. It would be just plain silly to treat them as equals.

Marc

18

It seems to me that far too often debates on this issue focus on the one-time payoff; i.e., getting out of a nasty temper tantrum. Centering parenting around such decisions makes no more sense than centering driving school around the sort of steering you do when your car is in a skid on ice.

When I see parents who respond to their children’s tantrums by hitting or bribing, I figure I’m not seeing hundreds of other daily instances of neglect, unreason, lack of consideration or (as with the Nintendo-playing father) laziness.

When people post that they try to explain their reasoning to their children, everyone jumps in saying “that won’t work” – that is to say, the tantrum won’t stop. But I’ve seen successful cases of children who rarely get to the tantrum stage because their parents involve their kids in choices about their own lives all the time, including letting their children see the consequences of their actions. The choices are simple, short-term and immediate, but they are choices. From this children learn to make decisions about their behavior.

Of course children shouldn’t be forced to make massive or complex decisions (“Should daddy take this new job?”), but they should be given, over and over, clear demonstrations of the actual consequences of their actions (and not artificial consequences, i.e. spanking). Do that over and over consistently for 16 years or so and your odds are good for a good kid.

19

Ooh, another topic I’ve spent a great deal of time thinking about…

I am not at all comfortable with the strict authoritarian model. I don’t want my children to simply do as any adult tells them to without thought. They will, if I yell, “Stop!” freeze in their tracks. But they will also expect to hear a reason. On the other hand, our family is not a democracy. It is a benevolent dictatorship.

It is indeed a fine line that requires almost constant adjustment. My hope is that, when my children are grown, we will be friends. I intend to earn their respect as adults by protecting them and respecting them as children.

My husband recalls fondly the family get-togethers that occurred during his childhood. As a young boy, he was expected to play either quietly or away from the conversing adults. As he got older and more interested in the conversations, he was welcome to sit with them so long as he did so politely. He was also welcome, (and as he got older, encouraged,) to participate in those conversations. Because his parents, and their friends, did not consider the thoughts and opinions of a child to be less important than their own he was encouraged to learn the social skills necessary to hold an interesting and informed conversation. It is important, though, that he was expected to behave as an adult when he wanted to participate. He was not allowed to disrupt with loud antics or showing off. And he was given the freedom to go back and forth between the “adult” and “childish” activities at these events as he chose. The key here, as I see it, is that he was respected but not indulged. It is a model I have attempted to follow.

20

argybarg wrote: It seems to me that far too often debates on this issue focus on the one-time payoff; i.e., getting out of a nasty temper tantrum. Centering parenting around such decisions makes no more sense than centering driving school around the sort of steering you do when your car is in a skid on ice.

Very well put; I wholly agree.

People often seem so terrified of temper tantrums. I have come to the conclusion that, though a necessary evil, they do not have to happen frequently or for very long, and can be pretty much confined to the home.

I think they are necessary in that it is important for children to experience fully the entire range of their emotions in a safe place. If you watch a young child in the throes of a tantrum, you will often see that the original reason for the anger or frustration is quickly bypassed. The tantrum continues on its own steam, partly because the fury is selfperpetuating, and also because it is frightening. A child in a tantrum is out of control, and that is a very scary place to be. He has to learn that he can come down from the heights of his anger on his own and that nothing disastrous will have happened simply because he was angry. In this way, he learns that he controls his anger, rather than the other way around.

Yelling and arguing with a tantruming child is almost always completely ineffective. If you do succeed in shocking a child out of his fit with your own anger you may lead him to believe that his anger is dangerous and must be stopped, and perhaps can only be stopped by you. It is my theory that a child who is prevented from having tantrums (who is forced, perhaps through spanking, to “get himself under control” prematurely, will continue to have those tantrums because he is driven to explore those feelings.) On the other hand, completely ignoring the child may lead him to feel abandoned and unprotected. When my children (I have 4) each began the tantrum stage, (somewhere between 12 and 24 months) I would adopt a calm, unruffled attitude. I appreciated their frustration, but the fact remained that they couldn’t have/do whatever it was. I stood firm, but remained available for comfort when it was time.

My experience has been that children who are allowed to learn, through experience, that tantrums, (and strong feelings in general) are controllable and also not effective in getting what one wants will move on to more reasonable ways of expressing themselves pretty quickly. My 2 year old has been having them more frequently lately, mostly over her inability to do everything her older siblings do, but they almost exclusively occur at home. Children who pitch the “I want that candy and I will scream and flail about until I get it” kind of fit have almost assuredly been indulged by weary parents who did not take the time to think far enough ahead. (Or perhaps gave in under the pressure of disapproving stares from other shoppers.) When my kids start to whine or tease for something I can (and do) look them in the eyes and ask, “Has that ever worked?” And they can only admit that it has not.