Wow, I just have to say thanks for all the food-for-thought. There's tons to think about--the pressures on women to reenter the workforce as fast as possible, the necessity to balance the actual raising of a child (aka discipline) with the love that physically and psychologically flows from us as caretakers (be we parents, relatives, close friends).
I think your point is well-taken, Misfit: Any parenting approach that's so doctrinaire as to make the Chinese Communist Party look fly-by-the-seat-of-the-pants spontaneous is not going to work. Maybe the kid does have some psyche issues. But even if that's true, inappropriate parenting and a complete lack of boundaries have done her such a massive disservice as a human being that nobody--especially those of us who may be her teachers, partners, coworkers--wins.
I think we have to understand both our own personal, deep, vital needs as people (i.e. I must have an intellectual and social life of some sort; I need a shower most days; I want to cook yummy food and exercise at least a bit) and our desire to show love and structure to kids. I think it's easy to get fixated on a certain outcome--because that's what I did for a while. You feel you MUST get your child to do something by an arbitrary deadline, and s/he just isn't there yet. Doesn't mean you never try, or never say no. In fact I've found if I keep experimenting and hanging in there, eventually, I see major movement in the direction I want to go. It's just gradual, or two steps forward one step back.
And while I don't advocate leaving a child to cry alone, at least not early on, I do think they will fuss and even cry sometimes. Once I learned that, I had a lot more freedom to balance my sanity with Bruiser's needs and wants.
So if you're headed for parenthood, or already there, I say figure out how to kindly put your vital needs first. As an IFer, I bet you already know exactly what they are--survival mode and dark times make them clear. Put on your own oxygen mask first, then baby's/babies'...
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I think this puts the finger on what I was trying to say really well. :)
I'm still horrified from Misfit's account of how her sister was raised. Unfortunately there is far too much parental submission to toddlers and adolescents' whims and it's appalling. They are creating monsters and/or sad troubled people.
I think there is a HUGE difference however in the sense of an infant's dependence on an adult, indulging in that dependence and (the extreme of) harmful permissiveness.
In the 50s babies were expected to feed according to a schedule, cry to sleep in the next room... an infant's fears and hunger pangs be damned. And whatever, it didn't kill anybody, but it probably made for a lot of miserable moms, bursting boobs, and hungry babes.
Unfortunately, I think what was a basically well-intentioned movement to adopt styles that were more nature/instinctual-based mothering or that were practiced in more "primitive" cultures has been perverted and taken to a terrible extreme (Americans tend to do that, huh? overdo on something good and screw it up big time).
Accepting an infant's dependence is not about discipline and limits. That comes later. Once the baby is able to sit up and touch stuff it can be shown limits and it must understand who is boss.
There is a huge difference in a kid crying because he is a hungry or frightened infant and one who is being a brat because he wants his way.
I think in the 50s all crying was lumped together as being a sign of a baby's selfishness and in the 80s to today all crying is a sign of "oh my god I must do something, anything to soothe poor baby Junior!" even when he is 3 and is perfectly capable of resolving a situation or big enough to face the cruel world of not being allowed to eat sweets whenever he wants.
It's not that tough to discern when the kid is being a brat and when it's a helpless infant when you know your role as a parent is NOT to be your child's best friend (which is what everyone seems to want to be). Your job is to keep your kid safe and healthy, show them the rules and limits again and again, deny them the possibility of harming others and things, and expect them to behave and be respectful and empathetic to others (helps if the parent is a good model).
I love my kids, but I will not tolerate bad behavior and I let my big teacher voice boom when there is nonsense afoot. You need to physically restrain kids and mete out appropriate punishment (time out, no more of that toy...). it takes a long time during those toddler years and it's exasperating, but we are at the end of the tunnel and it is so satisfying to see a good kid resulting from the hard work.
I can't recommend Haim Ginott's books enough. He presents what I think is the perfect balance of love and discipline (Elizabeth Pantley, too). Parents should not be slaves of their children (except when they are 11 months and younger) :)
Though I'm not a parent yet, I made my money as a young adolescent by babysitting. So, I spent years watching the result of various parenting techniques on infants/children as they grew up. What I found was that if the parents were happy and fullfilled, the kids were generally happy and fulfilled. If the parents were worrisome, fretful, hand-wringers, their kids were full of anxiety (and a bitch to take care of...). So your advice sounds pretty on target to me-- take care of yourself, know that babies cry (it's what they do) and that sometimes, as long as everyone is safe, it's okay to give them a moment's unhappy tearfulness in order for you to meet your own needs. It makes for happier parents and happier children.
Said way better than I could. I think the goal is just to deal with reality. If the world sometimes says no, then you have to too; if your parenting style prevents you from showering when you need to, you need to make adjustments.
Anyway. It seems to me all it really takes to be a good parent (of a healthy child) is some good, old-fashioned common sense. And you have plenty of that. Bruiser's gonna be just fine.
Post a Comment