Dealing with "Flat out No!"s...

[GavinH]

Hi I completely reject any conflation between the workplace and home
Your relationship with your boss in voluntary and you can quit if you don't like it
Your relationship with your parents in non-voluntary and you cannot get a different set if you don't agree with the way they run the home

there is no such thing as a benevolent dictator

We can agree to disagree on the conflation between work and the home. I believe that the home sets the stage and should train children to become valuable members of society. Once you leave home the world is filled with things you have to do without question (many of those are at work) .... pay taxes, drive on the correct side of the road etc.

..... and there is such a entity as a benevolent dictator. I know this because I am one (and Websters definition of the words support my assertion).

 

[alter ego]

see i prefer to guide my children, rather than 'train' them, and our household is a democracy.
i beleive in bodily autonomy, and encourage my kids to respect themselves and make thier own informed decisions, rather tha* following the rules blindly

 

[parentastic]

We can agree to disagree on the conflation between work and the home. I believe that the home sets the stage and should train children to become valuable members of society. Once you leave home the world is filled with things you have to do without question (many of those are at work) .... pay taxes, drive on the correct side of the road etc.

GavinH, with all due respect, I think this reasoning is a little bit like arguing that you can teach a child to swim by throwing him into the middle of the sea.

When you swim in real life, you have to know how to maintain your head above water long enough to breath, how not breath when you are underwater, how to hold your breath for a controlled amount of time, how to float or how to move while floating. Swimming in real life is swimming in the current, amongst real waves crashing around you, in deep water, without an immediate place where you can stand.

Yet, if you would "teach" a child to swim by confronting him to "real life" conditions, your child would drawn.

The same way, I believe work is an environment where you have no safety, where you must work for survival (to earn money to eat), where you cannot afford a mistake (depending on which mistake), where the people in control have no love for you and no incentive to care for you other than to get your productivity. It's not a safe place. It's not a learning place. It's not a place where you can be yourself and learn by mistakes.

It's not a place where you can get unconditional love and acceptance.

But it's also not a place meant for children. It's a place meant for adults, with a fully grown, developed and matured brain.
Just like the sea is a place meant for fully ready swimmers who are in shape and who know already how to swim.

If you want to prepare a child for swimming, you need to build trust; prepare scaffolding (i.e., go in shallow water with your child, take it small step at a time, teach each separate component like putting your head underwater, holding your breath, moving, etc). It's also critical to teach a child to swim in a calm and non cohesive way, so that they learn to like to swim, so that they do not develop a fear of water or a distaste of it, and so that they acquire the self confidence they will need to swim easily in harsher conditions.

I believe that child rearing is like that.

IMO, Home should have <I>nothing in common</I> with a work environment.
It should be fun, safe, loving, warm, understanding, open, nurturing. It should have relationship between family members that are driven by care and love, not by interest or productivity.

 

[mom2many]

see i prefer to guide my children, rather than 'train' them, and our household is a democracy.
i beleive in bodily autonomy, and encourage my kids to respect themselves and make thier own informed decisions, rather tha* following the rules blindly

Isnt this really true of all parents?

The thing is at the end of the day, you are the parent and will make the rules accordingly. That is not a democracy because their vote, while considered is not the final vote. The parent is the only one who counts when it comes to decision making.

If children were capable of making the best choices for themselves they wouldnt be born to parents. It is our moral obligation to do what is right for them, not let them decide it for themselves.

Dont get me wrong, my children have often chnged my opinion..but again, atbthe end of the day i have final vote.



Off topic.......i HATE typing on a tablet!

 

[parentastic]

That is not a democracy because their vote, while considered is not the final vote.

I think if parents are truly and honestly considering their children's choices and would-be decisions, and they involve them in the decision making process (even if, in the end, yes, it's not a democracy) it already makes a huge difference.
I don't think all parents do this however. Many simply do not consider their children's voice at all in any decision they make.

If children were capable of making the best choices for themselves they wouldnt be born to parents. It is our moral obligation to do what is right for them, not let them decide it for themselves.

Agreed!
The paradox of course, is that the only way to learn to make good decisions is to take decisions. Hence the importance of giving them some latitude.

 

[mom2many]

Agreed!
The paradox of course, is that the only way to learn to make good decisions is to take decisions. Hence the importance of giving them some latitude.

Agreed, but the decisions they get to make are more age appropriate. "Do you want a hamburger or a hot dog?".."You don't want to wear a coat outside, it's 30 degrees out there. Okay your the one who is gonna be cold."..."NO, you may not drive the car you do not have a license"...there is still a difference. My democracy has a dictator at the end of the line

 

[singledad]

Absolutely not, I think the police, teachers and elders in general should earn the respect of citizens, students and youngers respectively. I don't respect a policeman just because he's a policeman especially if he harasses someone as I have seen happen many times, I do not want to live in a dictatorship.

So, please explain to me - if a policeman (whom you have never met before in your life, so you have no idea if he is a good cop or not) pulls you off the road, do you obey? Do you treat him with respect? Or do you treat him like dirt until he has earned your respect? If you drive on the road among perfect strangers, do you cut them off, because they haven't had a chance to earn their respect? I seriously hope I misunderstood this bit.

 

[Mom2all]

Choices... this is where I think parents differ the most.

I am the law at my house. What I say goes. They have no choices in the rules that I have set for the home. We all have rules for a reason. There are rules in life you must follow and those who don't usually end up in jail.

Do my children have the chance to make decisions? Sure. Do they get the opportunity to think on how they want to do things? Yep. But its the things that are age appropriate for them.

Katherine, at 15, chooses what style she wants her hair and the type of clothes she likes to wear. (Skimpy sexy things are removed from her options)
Andrew, at 6, could start picking out what lunch he wanted to pack. ( I gave him the options and he could choose which one)
Jessica chose what sport she wanted to play.
Adam chose to play guitar.
Jonathan chose to listen to rap music.
Sean chooses to be a chef one day.

They chose the design and color of their room. Which clubs in school to join and what classes they want to try.

But when I say come, I expect them to respect enough to come. When I say no, I expect them to understand I have a reason for it and not to argue. When I ask them to do something, I expect them to do it. You can not think that a 3 year old has the intellect to make decisions on when to come to dinner or what she'd like to eat. She'd eat cupcakes at 2, 4, 6, and 10 if it were her choice. You can't let a teenager pick his own curfew. They may never come home.

Its the same concept as learning a subject in school. No 1st grader learns to read by simply being allowed to pick up a book. She starts with her ABC's. A 4th grader is not ready for drivers ed. You start with the basics and work your way up. Why should learning <I>life</I> be any different?

 

[bssage]

So, please explain to me - if a policeman (whom you have never met before in your life, so you have no idea if he is a good cop or not) pulls you off the road, do you obey? Do you treat him with respect? Or do you treat him like dirt until he has earned your respect? If you drive on the road among perfect strangers, do you cut them off, because they haven't had a chance to earn their respect? I seriously hope I misunderstood this bit.

I understand you point SD.

But I think (at least for me) Because I respect the law (sometimes). I tolerate a police officer who has not (and does not have to) have my personal respect. I respect his title, the job. Not always the person. The same can be said for a teacher, boss, ect

 

[IADad]

I think part of the discussion here, is how many things we take into consideration in making rules. I know one son really really does not like mushrooms. So, do I make a rule he has to eat mushrooms? Of course not, that' would almost be mean. No, it would be mean. So, I make an effort to keep mushrooms out of his food, but he also knows that sometimes life gives you mushrooms and you have to pick around them...

So, just because we make rules doesn't mean we're unreasonable about them.

 

[mom2many]

I think part of the discussion here, is how many things we take into consideration in making rules. I know one son really really does not like mushrooms. So, do I make a rule he has to eat mushrooms? Of course not, that' would almost be mean. No, it would be mean. So, I make an effort to keep mushrooms out of his food, but he also knows that sometimes life gives you mushrooms and you have to pick around them...

So, just because we make rules doesn't mean we're unreasonable about them.

You just described Lupan...and he picks around them.

 

[singledad]

I understand you point SD.

But I think (at least for me) Because I respect the law (sometimes). I tolerate a police officer who has not (and does not have to) have my personal respect. I respect his title, the job. Not always the person. The same can be said for a teacher, boss, ect

I agree with you about respecting the law (mostly). I was asking the question to PianoLover directly, because his statement about not respecting a cop just because his a cop, as a response to my statement about respecting the cop's authority, regardless of the person, made me wonder how he would treat a cop, a teacher, boss, stranger, anyone who hasn't had the time or the opportunity to earn his respect as a person.

Unfortunately, it looks like he/she opened a bunch of debates and then disappeared. Very trollish behaviour, IMO...

 

[Mom2all]

Its completely off the subject here.. but I have to say it.oliceman:

I work for the Police/fire/EMS system. It always amazes me that people will say they don't deserve respect. Its funny that those same people have no problem calling us when they need us. And then want our immediate response, compassion,protection, and a willingness from that complete stranger to risk his safety for them. It really is sad that so many people feel that way.

 

[Incogneato]

I will not tolerate an openly obvious, flagrant "no", just to be contrary.

The cool thing about respect is, that it goes both ways...kids need to show respect to us and we need to show respect to them. If they want to be openly disrespectful by saying "no" just because they can, then I am way less likely to be receptive to whatever reason they said no for.

I expect obedience since I always have the best interest of my child in mind. However I do not expect them to show blind obedience to everyone immediately.. and that is what I'm there for as a parent...to explain to them what is a reasonable request from a person in an authority position and what is not. I will explain when they need to be suspicious of requests and when it's okay to say no to someone in authority.

 

[IADad]

Its completely off the subject here.. but I have to say it.oliceman:

I work for the Police/fire/EMS system. It always amazes me that people will say they don't deserve respect. Its funny that those same people have no problem calling us when they need us. And then want our immediate response, compassion,protection, and a willingness from that complete stranger to risk his safety for them. It really is sad that so many people feel that way.

Well said. I think the people who do respect the job public servants do aren't probably very vocal about our support. The one thing I will say about the profession, is that it doesn't seem to have a very good track record of policing itself. It's a profession, where unfortunately one bad apple really hurts the view of the whole bunch. I think everyone who has worked in or near law enforcement knows at least one person who is in the job for all the wrong reasons and shouldn't be there. (i.e. they get off on the power etc.) and it seems those guys never get weeded out until something really bad goes down. Sure, it's unfair that the profession is under such scrutiny, there are bad apples in every workplace. Unfortunately when the public safety is at hand we don't give very much latitude for the loss of the public trust. it's a burden.

 

[PianoLover]

Great podcast, 15 mins worth 30 hours of most online stuff

great podcast http://media.freedomainradio.com/feed//FDR_1571_philosophical_parenting_part_2.mp3[/URL]

 

[Mom2all]

Great podcast, 15 mins worth 30 hours of most online stuff

He praises his child and seems to adore her. I appreciate that.
BUT, Stephen Molynuex liberal parenting pod cast, where he actually uses the term, "his experiment in parenting" and says his theory is that believes discipline is not needed, makes me wonder how much he'll be proud later or if he'll regret it. She is after all still a baby.

Somethings I have issues with...He was proud that when he tells her to come, she chooses not to come. When he tries to lead her, she sometimes drops to her bum and he's loves her determination not to do what she want she doesn't want to do. When he tries to take away something from her, she won't stop trying to keep it. He loves her drive to try and assert herself. If she is unhappy, its his fault. She is there to teach him. He says he is not going to try and modify her behavior, but look at his own problems with her behavior. Punishment= lower IQ's? He needs more humility? Wow.

The two things I agreed with that he said,
If there is a problem, it begins with him and we should base our belief on evidence and not opinion.

I feel really sad for him and his child for the trials that are to come for them both.

I raise mine based on the evidence that what my father did worked for me as a child and is working as I teach my own. Again, I just need to point out, I have children who are in the honor society, play sports, play guitar and sing, volunteer, and mind manners. My oldest shows no sign of lower intellect proven by yesterdays college professor keeping her after class for 2 hours to try and convince her that she is destined to greatness and she needs to continue on in college. ( Bragging entered there) Most of them have have never done anything to disappoint me greatly. The two oldest boys test my patience from time to time. But even they respect and love me. And the oldest boy, was 2 points from having a genius level IQ. I really could go on and on.

I apologize Pianolover, for the earlier dig at you not being a parent. IAdad corrected me on that. I know now you have a young child. Can I ask how many and how old your children are and how they are doing with a liberal approach? Your opinion does create a good debate.

 

[PianoLover]

He praises his child and seems to adore her. I appreciate that.
BUT, Stephen Molynuex liberal parenting pod cast, where he actually uses the term, "his experiment in parenting" and says his theory is that believes discipline is not needed, makes me wonder how much he'll be proud later or if he'll regret it. She is after all still a baby.

Hello thanks for taking the time to listen and comment!
First of all I think by his experiment what should be understood is that Stefan researched and talked about progressive approaches to childrearing BEFORE he was a father so by experiment he only means putting the principles he developed into practice

We'll see how it goes, so far his child is between 3 and 4 and he has never had to shout at her or punish her physically to gain compliance. They have a good relationship and, as I believe, that is the basis of gaining compliance without resorting to using force. I see this principle at work all the time when I'm teaching, if you build up emotional colateral with your students they respond to instructions out of respect and are able to be open/forthright in the rare instance when they might <I>not</I> want to do something, you can reason with them.

I apologize Pianolover, for the earlier dig at you not being a parent. IAdad corrected me on that. I know now you have a young child. Can I ask how many and how old your children are and how they are doing with a liberal approach? Your opinion does create a good debate.

I really appreciate that apology
I was going to respond saying I don't expect you to judge anything that I say based on <I>me</I> saying it but based on the evidence and arguments I give for it. I am not very important, but ideas can be important as they shape behaviour.
First I should make clear that I do not have children of my own, I work with children and I am a member of progressive parenting communities where there are a number of parents who put the philosophies I espouse into practice and report tremedous results, as well as wonderful relationships.
I have a several hundred hours of one-to-one experience applying these concepts to educating piano students, I have also served as a bunk councillor at summer camp where I would live with a group of children for 8 weeks, some on rotation, and coordinate activities and I am going into school.

My interest in these topics began when I read the book Summerhill by A. S. Neill and How to talk so kids will listen and listen so kids will Talk by Elaine Mazlish and Adelle Faber and I found them full of amazing insight for making sense of my own childhood which made my interest compulsive. Then I learned about the psychology that showed to what extent societies reflect the parenting styles at the time. For example The Enlightenment could only happen in Europe because parenting styles had advance beyond ambivalence, in took until then in human history and you can map the advance through all history to parenting styles.. This made me realise that politics are meaningless and the only road to peace is improving childrearing so that's what motivated me to take progressive education and childrearing as my main topic of study, trying to embody the change I would like to see in the world.

I was asking the question to PianoLover directly, because his statement about not respecting a cop just because his a cop, as a response to my statement about respecting the cop's authority, regardless of the person, made me wonder how he would treat a cop, a teacher, boss, stranger, anyone who hasn't had the time or the opportunity to earn his respect as a person.

I would say I always try to treat everyone with respect. This is dealing with two different definitions of respect, treating people with respect, and "respecting" people for their qualities. I believe teachers should respect students first, and if they do that the students will respect the teacher. I was in school, like most of us, for 13 years and I could see this play out. teachers deferring to authority and punishment to control a class were feared, not respected. Teachers who were kind to students and made classes interesting did not need to control the class, the class was motivated by the lessons. I am also an educator and have never had to punish a child, use force or the promise of a reward to gain compliance, and certainly never to gain respect (it is impossible to do! these things have the opposite effect!) and I have testimonials from delighted parents to show the success of these approaches.
If I had a problem with my boss I would ask to have a word with him or her and explain my feelings and views, if s/he took it on board and thanked me for being honest I would have a world of respect for him or her. If on the other hand my concerns were dismissed I'd start thinking of moving to another work place.

Unfortunately, it looks like he/she opened a bunch of debates and then disappeared.

I was on holiday and then I had to focus on handing in papers on time so I wasn't able to turn my attention back to the board.

 

[PianoLover]

Dear Mom 2 All I have some thoughs on one of your earlier posts I would like to share

When I say no, I expect them to understand I have a reason for it and not to argue.

But why not argue if they give a reason instead of just disobeying? They might have a good point that you hadn't thought of and give you a good rationale for changing your mind to a yes? Leaving some room for debate can help develop thinking.

When I ask them to do something, I expect them to do it.

The thing is this is not a principle that can be applied to anything a parent might ever ask a child to do, therefore I think it is right and proper for a child only to do something which he or she critically understands why and does so because it seems right. If it seems reasonable they will do it, if it doesn't seem reasonable the child knows to ask "why?" (children love asking why ) and the parent has the opportunity to make the child understand why it is reasonable. If the child doesn't see the sense in the request maybe the parent has to assess whether there is any sense in it sometimes, parents are not infallible. And then there is asking the child "well what do you propose" they might have another solution or a compromise which you both agree on. There are no absolutes of course and sometimes one may have to use force in extreme circumstances like changing a baby that doesn't want to be changed, but the older a child gets and the more developed their reason the less force is needed, also if you have always reared the child this way they are very likely to do whatever you ask them just because you have always showsn respect for their own feelings, preferences and inclinations.

You can not think that a 3 year old has the intellect to make decisions on when to come to dinner or what she'd like to eat. She'd eat cupcakes at 2, 4, 6, and 10 if it were her choice.

maybe until she ate so many cupcakes she got sick of them and never wanted to see one again but actually as a parent you are under no obligation to buy your children as many cupcakes as they want just because they want them

You can't let a teenager pick his own curfew. They may never come home.

Yes, but you can let a teenager negotiate with you on what a suitable curfew would be. Chances are they will really stick to it since they had a hand in making the decision, and you can hold them to their word!



I hope these ideas are interesting to you
much love

 

[PianoLover]

But why not argue if they give a reason instead of just disobeying? They might have a good point that you hadn't thought of and give you a good rationale for changing your mind to a yes? Leaving some room for debate can help develop thinking.

Here are some interesting articles on this point:

Why-a-teen-who-talks-back-may-have-a-bright-future:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/01/03/144495483/why-a-teen-who-talks-back-may-have-a-bright-future[/url]

Teach-a-kid-to-argue:
http://www.figarospeech.com/teach-a-kid-to-argue/