Sign in or 
Share this
A new generation
p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }a:link { }
Killing Our Children With Foam Padding
A look into the way we have begun to view the raising of our children, and how responsibility has been shifted from the shoulders of the parents, to the shoulders of society.
Introduction
Let me state right from the beginning, for those that would try to discredit my thoughts; I am NOT a doctor. Nor am I a Professor, Psychiatrist, or even an Anthropologist. I am simply a normal, moderately educated father, who is very disturbed by the trend being followed regarding the raising of our children. These are my thoughts and views, and in no way are meant to be reflected on the facts or polls that I have used to show my point.
Oddly enough this came about one late night after a Facebook post that led to an all night discussion, and the suggestion by a friend that I put my thoughts into a book. So here we are. There was one of those copy/paste statuses that float around daily. It was about some children that had killed themselves because they were being “bullied” (we used to call it picked on). It was meant to instill sadness for those that were lost, and anger towards those that had bullied them. I couldn't help but to ask myself “what kind of coping skills did these kids lack, that they could do something so permanent and awful to themselves?” I in no way condone bullying, or targeting the meeker children or peers. This is not intended to defend any actions along those lines. This is just simply a look at how we got here, and how we may be able to stem the flow of violence and catastrophe I feel we are certainly headed for.
That bully post prompted me to post that “I think my generation may be the last of the tough-guys.” There was more to it, but for our purposes that will suffice. The reaction that statement caused was a bit surprising. I hope that if you read this; you find it entertaining, and maybe a bit insightful. I believe very strongly in the potential of our children, and I fear that we are failing them miserably. There is still time, and hope. It is my hope that through my efforts and the efforts of those who see this also; we can remedy this situation, and cease the downward spiral that is our future. Thank you.
Chapter 1: From me to you.
There is a concept used by the military, and adapted for the corporate world. It is called “build, break, build”. What it means is: in order to be constructive, you must project something positive about the person or thing you are criticizing, then your negative view or assessment, and finally something else that is positive. It has worked for centuries in battle, and so I believe it can work on a controversial idea. I will attempt throughout my writing, to follow this formula, but I fear I will run out of positive things to say before I reach the end. I suppose we will see together.
If I can validate the feelings of one parent who has been questioning recent developments with our children, I will feel I have accomplished something with this. If I can change one persons' mind, I will be completely shocked and ecstatic.
Like most world problems, we can begin at home. Baby proofing is a necessary action, and I do not mean to imply that it is good for our children to stick their fingers in outlets, and fall down stairs. It's called common sense, and should be a prerequisite to having babies. Unfortunately it is not. Baby proofing is a simple task that any parents can do with a few dollars, some common sense and sometimes a little ingenuity. If they can eat it, move it; if they can knock it down, brace it; and if it can hurt them, block it off. Simple. At least it used to be.
In 1982 the first Baby Proofing company was established in San Fransisco. It mainly catered to high class, upper crust people with more money than sense, and doting parents with disposable income. It was a niche market, and a novelty.
In 1987 there were over twelve thousand baby proofing professionals entering new parents homes' plugging the outlets, and installing baby gates. This was no longer a novelty, it was a profitable respectable business; and it caught the attention of various manufacturing companies across the country.
By 1993 enough parents have been guilt-ed into thinking they couldn't possibly be smart enough to protect their own children from their own home, to support over 100,000 baby proofing companies in the U.S. alone.
To put that in perspective: have you ever noticed your child can now reach an end table, so you moved the items on it back further from the edge? That's baby proofing, and people are getting paid a lot of money to do it. In and of itself this is not a bad thing. Showing concern for your children is never a bad thing. Coddling them on the other hand is a different matter. I only brought up the baby proofing because it started the way of thinking that has gotten us into trouble.
The group of parents that I am talking about in this section have been convinced through programs like this, their peers, and the media; that they are not capable of properly raising their children or keeping them safe. This is a dangerous mindset, and leaves you open to any and all who have an opinion on your household. Not only has this baby proofing now been widely accepted, it is nearly required. For example: I have a young daughter (less than a year old) there are programs that she is eligible for. I want to take advantage of them for her. Not because I feel she is behind, or that we need help; but because if in the future there is a problem (god forbid) we will be in a position to spot it early. These people come into your home, and instead of their being interested in the child, they want a tour of the house. Our house is safe, and fine, that is not the issue.
The issue is: what right do they have to pass judgment on the way we live, and how we take care of our daughter? The answer is : the government said they have that right if we want any help.
Because there have been so many parents who do not take care of those things, that they have now passed legislation on it....but that is for another section. When asked if you have hired someone to make your house safe, you are expected to say “yes”. Do you believe this was the accepted scenario in 1978, when I was born? I obviously made it, as did my parents, and every other Oakland through our history, and I can guarantee you none have paid a company to make sure Jr. didn't bump his head.
Now after having this company come in, and make your home fit for a baby, the responsibility is no longer yours to bear in that department is it? These people are professionals, and have experience with this. Surely they wouldn't have overlooked anything. It should be perfectly fine to put Jr. on the floor, and go make dinner with the radio on, right? Get serious. The baby proofing company is a guy (or gal) with a screw gun, and some outlet covers.
You still need to be a parent, and be present and attentive. Sadly, many feel that they have done the right thing by hiring a “professional” and have purchased the right to be worry-free. This by itself is simply substandard parenting, and that has also happened through the ages, it's the thought process that has branched off from this that has become so dangerous. Starting from here, we have continued to pass the responsibility of our children on to others. Don't agree? Keep reading, you may be surprised how it all ties in.
Television has been mainstream since the '40s, and was entirely safe all the time. Broadcasts were limited, and our sensibilities were a lot different. Everything was family friendly, and there were no sets in the childrens' rooms.
In 1972 the cable industry became deregulated, and formed its' own original programming. Some people had t.v.s in their rooms, and there were programs that should not be viewed by children. Parents were parents, and they had control of what their children were doing. There was no public outcry when there was a swimsuit broadcast at 10p.m., because those who were not supposed to see it, did not see it. Had there been an outcry, it would have fallen on deaf ears. There was no legislation to allow for any action to be taken over bad parenting skills. They simply would have been asked “why did you allow your child to see that if you don't approve?”
Enter 1981. HBO now broadcasts 24 hours a day. There is a lot more adult content on the airwaves after 11p.m. Is there outcry? If so, then surely HBO would have ceased to air such programming. If there is no demand for a product, then why provide it? HBO has obviously thrived. Again, when parents are shocked to find their children watching inappropriate programming, it falls on deaf ears. “Why did you allow your child to see that, if you don't approve?” There is an obvious trend to this point. Parents take personal responsibility for their children. There is no legal recourse for waiving responsibilities, and it is socially unacceptable to do so. If your child does something you don't approve of, you correct it. If they are exposed to something you don't approve of, you be more vigilant so it doesn't continue to happen.
Parenting is an “in-house” matter, as it should be. Television is an American household staple, and it has been since the early 50's. For almost fifty years, with regards to t.v., parents have been responsible for what their children are watching.
1999 the V-chip was put into full scale production in the U.S. Most know that the V-chip is a module that allows t.v. owners to block certain programming at certain times or all together. Every program in existence is now rated on a scale to determine the age group it is fit for exposure to. Now parents don't have to monitor what their child is watching, because there is a tool that will do it for them. In one short year the V-chip went from an option to a requirement.
In 2000 all televisions sold in the United States were required to have a V-chip installed in them. Technology is now officially responsible for what our children are watching. This makes the parents no longer responsible, and holds the television programming accountable for what a child sees. Parents have electronic babysitters. Put a kid in front of a “G” rated channel and go on about your day. Ever complain about your programs being censored and bleeped? This is why.
An “R” rating is the devil to daytime programming. Nobody with an active V-chip will be watching it, and to allow an “R” rated program to slip through the V-chip would require parents to once again monitor the time their child is spending in front of it. So a black bar, or a dub-over changes that “R” rating to a “PG-13” rating.
If t.v. Says it's fit for a thirteen year old, then it must be so. Ever wonder why your child has asked you why the pregnant 12 year old on t.v. Is smoking? This is also why. In an age where so much information, both appropriate, and inappropriate, this is a bad start.
At any given moment our children can see whatever they choose on the internet. Parents don't monitor computer time at all because there is a filter in place to prevent them from looking up certain inappropriate sites.
Firstly, this will not prevent your child from viewing what they want. Technologically, our children are smarter than a lot of us. Information is more readily available than at any other point in time in our history. A simple Google search for how to get around a parental filter, and they're watching whatever it is you were blocking.
Secondly, even if the block works; it's not going to prevent conversations, only words. For example, your child is in a chat room, the filter will not allow them to say “sh*t”, and that's fantastic. It will however allow them to say.... I don't know...”***-guzzling, ball licker”. Is that in any way better? The filter thinks so. That filter is not going to prevent your child from setting up a meeting with a “friend” they met on the internet. Nor is it preventing them from posting adult appropriate statuses and comments.
Once again responsibility has been shifted to the internet providers instead of the parents.”Surely if I install this new parent blocker internet tool, my child will be safe from internet predators, and adult content.” Our children are not monitored. A child that thinks their parents could at any moment walk in the room to check on them, is not going to risk looking up internet porn. No chip is going to provide you that protection. The chip and the filter are not the parents, and do not make a good replacement for them.
20 years ago, leaving your child unattended with so much information would have been completely unheard of. Doubt it? Why then in the video stores is the porn section in a different room? Why can't a ten year old go to the movies and see a slasher flick without his/her parents? I feel that with the advocation of the V-chip, and the amount of parents who want to make others responsible for anything bad that may happen to their child, this was made allowable.
The popular thinking right now seems to be: “if I'm not the one responsible, then when it all goes wrong, I can point the finger. Instead of being a bad parent, I am a victim.” This mindset continues throughout almost everything I have to say.
The baby proofers, v-chip, and internet filters did not bring about any problems. When used in conjunction with parents they are great tools, but they should only ever be just that: tools. They should never be the stand alone barrier between your child and harm, you should. Instead of filing lawsuits against a service provider, perhaps you should be taking personal responsibility for your child's access to information. Whether it is t.v., internet, or texting.
For example: don't sue Sprint because your 12 year old sent a naked text of themselves, instead wonder why a 12 year old needs to continue to have access to a cell phone.
In an age full of nany-cams, and Dr. Phil; surely you have all the tools at your disposal to take the initiative to look out for your child. When I see a 10 year old girl running around the mall with her ass cheeks hanging out the bottom of her shorts, and a belly shirt; I guarantee you that hers' are the parents filing the lawsuits. “Well they were in the juniors section, so I thought it was appropriate for my child. If it's not then it is Wal*Marts' fault for having those clothes in the children's section, certainly not mine for allowing her to wear them.”
There is a saying, which has even been written into laws: “ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it”. Have we become so ignorant that we allow fashion trends, Wal*Mart, and Facebook dictate to us what is right for our children? I know it sounds ridiculous when it is worded like that, but I assure you that that is
what has happened. Not because anyone is really that stupid, but because it is easier to cast off the responsibility of dictating what is acceptable to our kids, onto society instead of in the home.
I bet that if you look around, even for a short time, you can see at least one example of everything I have mentioned thus far. I know I am using generalizations, and that not every parent functions this way. There are enough that do, however, to make them the majority. These are the parents that have complained loudly enough, and taken advantage long enough, to get the government involved in how our children are raised.
Do you believe that a politician who makes $150,000+ a year is really qualified to tell me all the things I need to do to ensure my child is healthy on my $15,000-$20,000 a year income? I doubt it. The next time you drive down a pothole ridden road, only to sit in construction traffic while they re-pave the part that wasn't messed up; you tell me with a straight face that they should be running my household also.
It has gotten to the point where the parents who are trying to do the right thing for their kids' are being hindered by those who would have us (as society) raise theirs, and then ***** about the results. “The t.v. Made my child learn to swear.” No, it didn't. The culprit is most likely a live person they heard while they were at the mall unsupervised, because it's mall securities job to make sure your child is safe, not yours any longer. Right? This also sounds ridiculous when worded plainly, but the next time you're at the mall count how many groups of pre-teens are wandering around unattended.
Killing Our Children With Foam Padding
A look into the way we have begun to view the raising of our children, and how responsibility has been shifted from the shoulders of the parents, to the shoulders of society.
Introduction
Let me state right from the beginning, for those that would try to discredit my thoughts; I am NOT a doctor. Nor am I a Professor, Psychiatrist, or even an Anthropologist. I am simply a normal, moderately educated father, who is very disturbed by the trend being followed regarding the raising of our children. These are my thoughts and views, and in no way are meant to be reflected on the facts or polls that I have used to show my point.
Oddly enough this came about one late night after a Facebook post that led to an all night discussion, and the suggestion by a friend that I put my thoughts into a book. So here we are. There was one of those copy/paste statuses that float around daily. It was about some children that had killed themselves because they were being “bullied” (we used to call it picked on). It was meant to instill sadness for those that were lost, and anger towards those that had bullied them. I couldn't help but to ask myself “what kind of coping skills did these kids lack, that they could do something so permanent and awful to themselves?” I in no way condone bullying, or targeting the meeker children or peers. This is not intended to defend any actions along those lines. This is just simply a look at how we got here, and how we may be able to stem the flow of violence and catastrophe I feel we are certainly headed for.
That bully post prompted me to post that “I think my generation may be the last of the tough-guys.” There was more to it, but for our purposes that will suffice. The reaction that statement caused was a bit surprising. I hope that if you read this; you find it entertaining, and maybe a bit insightful. I believe very strongly in the potential of our children, and I fear that we are failing them miserably. There is still time, and hope. It is my hope that through my efforts and the efforts of those who see this also; we can remedy this situation, and cease the downward spiral that is our future. Thank you.
Chapter 1: From me to you.
There is a concept used by the military, and adapted for the corporate world. It is called “build, break, build”. What it means is: in order to be constructive, you must project something positive about the person or thing you are criticizing, then your negative view or assessment, and finally something else that is positive. It has worked for centuries in battle, and so I believe it can work on a controversial idea. I will attempt throughout my writing, to follow this formula, but I fear I will run out of positive things to say before I reach the end. I suppose we will see together.
If I can validate the feelings of one parent who has been questioning recent developments with our children, I will feel I have accomplished something with this. If I can change one persons' mind, I will be completely shocked and ecstatic.
Like most world problems, we can begin at home. Baby proofing is a necessary action, and I do not mean to imply that it is good for our children to stick their fingers in outlets, and fall down stairs. It's called common sense, and should be a prerequisite to having babies. Unfortunately it is not. Baby proofing is a simple task that any parents can do with a few dollars, some common sense and sometimes a little ingenuity. If they can eat it, move it; if they can knock it down, brace it; and if it can hurt them, block it off. Simple. At least it used to be.
In 1982 the first Baby Proofing company was established in San Fransisco. It mainly catered to high class, upper crust people with more money than sense, and doting parents with disposable income. It was a niche market, and a novelty.
In 1987 there were over twelve thousand baby proofing professionals entering new parents homes' plugging the outlets, and installing baby gates. This was no longer a novelty, it was a profitable respectable business; and it caught the attention of various manufacturing companies across the country.
By 1993 enough parents have been guilt-ed into thinking they couldn't possibly be smart enough to protect their own children from their own home, to support over 100,000 baby proofing companies in the U.S. alone.
To put that in perspective: have you ever noticed your child can now reach an end table, so you moved the items on it back further from the edge? That's baby proofing, and people are getting paid a lot of money to do it. In and of itself this is not a bad thing. Showing concern for your children is never a bad thing. Coddling them on the other hand is a different matter. I only brought up the baby proofing because it started the way of thinking that has gotten us into trouble.
The group of parents that I am talking about in this section have been convinced through programs like this, their peers, and the media; that they are not capable of properly raising their children or keeping them safe. This is a dangerous mindset, and leaves you open to any and all who have an opinion on your household. Not only has this baby proofing now been widely accepted, it is nearly required. For example: I have a young daughter (less than a year old) there are programs that she is eligible for. I want to take advantage of them for her. Not because I feel she is behind, or that we need help; but because if in the future there is a problem (god forbid) we will be in a position to spot it early. These people come into your home, and instead of their being interested in the child, they want a tour of the house. Our house is safe, and fine, that is not the issue.
The issue is: what right do they have to pass judgment on the way we live, and how we take care of our daughter? The answer is : the government said they have that right if we want any help.
Because there have been so many parents who do not take care of those things, that they have now passed legislation on it....but that is for another section. When asked if you have hired someone to make your house safe, you are expected to say “yes”. Do you believe this was the accepted scenario in 1978, when I was born? I obviously made it, as did my parents, and every other Oakland through our history, and I can guarantee you none have paid a company to make sure Jr. didn't bump his head.
Now after having this company come in, and make your home fit for a baby, the responsibility is no longer yours to bear in that department is it? These people are professionals, and have experience with this. Surely they wouldn't have overlooked anything. It should be perfectly fine to put Jr. on the floor, and go make dinner with the radio on, right? Get serious. The baby proofing company is a guy (or gal) with a screw gun, and some outlet covers.
You still need to be a parent, and be present and attentive. Sadly, many feel that they have done the right thing by hiring a “professional” and have purchased the right to be worry-free. This by itself is simply substandard parenting, and that has also happened through the ages, it's the thought process that has branched off from this that has become so dangerous. Starting from here, we have continued to pass the responsibility of our children on to others. Don't agree? Keep reading, you may be surprised how it all ties in.
Television has been mainstream since the '40s, and was entirely safe all the time. Broadcasts were limited, and our sensibilities were a lot different. Everything was family friendly, and there were no sets in the childrens' rooms.
In 1972 the cable industry became deregulated, and formed its' own original programming. Some people had t.v.s in their rooms, and there were programs that should not be viewed by children. Parents were parents, and they had control of what their children were doing. There was no public outcry when there was a swimsuit broadcast at 10p.m., because those who were not supposed to see it, did not see it. Had there been an outcry, it would have fallen on deaf ears. There was no legislation to allow for any action to be taken over bad parenting skills. They simply would have been asked “why did you allow your child to see that if you don't approve?”
Enter 1981. HBO now broadcasts 24 hours a day. There is a lot more adult content on the airwaves after 11p.m. Is there outcry? If so, then surely HBO would have ceased to air such programming. If there is no demand for a product, then why provide it? HBO has obviously thrived. Again, when parents are shocked to find their children watching inappropriate programming, it falls on deaf ears. “Why did you allow your child to see that, if you don't approve?” There is an obvious trend to this point. Parents take personal responsibility for their children. There is no legal recourse for waiving responsibilities, and it is socially unacceptable to do so. If your child does something you don't approve of, you correct it. If they are exposed to something you don't approve of, you be more vigilant so it doesn't continue to happen.
Parenting is an “in-house” matter, as it should be. Television is an American household staple, and it has been since the early 50's. For almost fifty years, with regards to t.v., parents have been responsible for what their children are watching.
1999 the V-chip was put into full scale production in the U.S. Most know that the V-chip is a module that allows t.v. owners to block certain programming at certain times or all together. Every program in existence is now rated on a scale to determine the age group it is fit for exposure to. Now parents don't have to monitor what their child is watching, because there is a tool that will do it for them. In one short year the V-chip went from an option to a requirement.
In 2000 all televisions sold in the United States were required to have a V-chip installed in them. Technology is now officially responsible for what our children are watching. This makes the parents no longer responsible, and holds the television programming accountable for what a child sees. Parents have electronic babysitters. Put a kid in front of a “G” rated channel and go on about your day. Ever complain about your programs being censored and bleeped? This is why.
An “R” rating is the devil to daytime programming. Nobody with an active V-chip will be watching it, and to allow an “R” rated program to slip through the V-chip would require parents to once again monitor the time their child is spending in front of it. So a black bar, or a dub-over changes that “R” rating to a “PG-13” rating.
If t.v. Says it's fit for a thirteen year old, then it must be so. Ever wonder why your child has asked you why the pregnant 12 year old on t.v. Is smoking? This is also why. In an age where so much information, both appropriate, and inappropriate, this is a bad start.
At any given moment our children can see whatever they choose on the internet. Parents don't monitor computer time at all because there is a filter in place to prevent them from looking up certain inappropriate sites.
Firstly, this will not prevent your child from viewing what they want. Technologically, our children are smarter than a lot of us. Information is more readily available than at any other point in time in our history. A simple Google search for how to get around a parental filter, and they're watching whatever it is you were blocking.
Secondly, even if the block works; it's not going to prevent conversations, only words. For example, your child is in a chat room, the filter will not allow them to say “sh*t”, and that's fantastic. It will however allow them to say.... I don't know...”***-guzzling, ball licker”. Is that in any way better? The filter thinks so. That filter is not going to prevent your child from setting up a meeting with a “friend” they met on the internet. Nor is it preventing them from posting adult appropriate statuses and comments.
Once again responsibility has been shifted to the internet providers instead of the parents.”Surely if I install this new parent blocker internet tool, my child will be safe from internet predators, and adult content.” Our children are not monitored. A child that thinks their parents could at any moment walk in the room to check on them, is not going to risk looking up internet porn. No chip is going to provide you that protection. The chip and the filter are not the parents, and do not make a good replacement for them.
20 years ago, leaving your child unattended with so much information would have been completely unheard of. Doubt it? Why then in the video stores is the porn section in a different room? Why can't a ten year old go to the movies and see a slasher flick without his/her parents? I feel that with the advocation of the V-chip, and the amount of parents who want to make others responsible for anything bad that may happen to their child, this was made allowable.
The popular thinking right now seems to be: “if I'm not the one responsible, then when it all goes wrong, I can point the finger. Instead of being a bad parent, I am a victim.” This mindset continues throughout almost everything I have to say.
The baby proofers, v-chip, and internet filters did not bring about any problems. When used in conjunction with parents they are great tools, but they should only ever be just that: tools. They should never be the stand alone barrier between your child and harm, you should. Instead of filing lawsuits against a service provider, perhaps you should be taking personal responsibility for your child's access to information. Whether it is t.v., internet, or texting.
For example: don't sue Sprint because your 12 year old sent a naked text of themselves, instead wonder why a 12 year old needs to continue to have access to a cell phone.
In an age full of nany-cams, and Dr. Phil; surely you have all the tools at your disposal to take the initiative to look out for your child. When I see a 10 year old girl running around the mall with her ass cheeks hanging out the bottom of her shorts, and a belly shirt; I guarantee you that hers' are the parents filing the lawsuits. “Well they were in the juniors section, so I thought it was appropriate for my child. If it's not then it is Wal*Marts' fault for having those clothes in the children's section, certainly not mine for allowing her to wear them.”
There is a saying, which has even been written into laws: “ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it”. Have we become so ignorant that we allow fashion trends, Wal*Mart, and Facebook dictate to us what is right for our children? I know it sounds ridiculous when it is worded like that, but I assure you that that is
what has happened. Not because anyone is really that stupid, but because it is easier to cast off the responsibility of dictating what is acceptable to our kids, onto society instead of in the home.
I bet that if you look around, even for a short time, you can see at least one example of everything I have mentioned thus far. I know I am using generalizations, and that not every parent functions this way. There are enough that do, however, to make them the majority. These are the parents that have complained loudly enough, and taken advantage long enough, to get the government involved in how our children are raised.
Do you believe that a politician who makes $150,000+ a year is really qualified to tell me all the things I need to do to ensure my child is healthy on my $15,000-$20,000 a year income? I doubt it. The next time you drive down a pothole ridden road, only to sit in construction traffic while they re-pave the part that wasn't messed up; you tell me with a straight face that they should be running my household also.
It has gotten to the point where the parents who are trying to do the right thing for their kids' are being hindered by those who would have us (as society) raise theirs, and then ***** about the results. “The t.v. Made my child learn to swear.” No, it didn't. The culprit is most likely a live person they heard while they were at the mall unsupervised, because it's mall securities job to make sure your child is safe, not yours any longer. Right? This also sounds ridiculous when worded plainly, but the next time you're at the mall count how many groups of pre-teens are wandering around unattended.
PedroAsani |
Latest page update: made by PedroAsani
, Nov 12 2010, 8:52 PM EST
(about this update
About This Update
Moved from: Zombie Survival & Defense Wiki
- PedroAsani
No content added or deleted. - complete history) |
|
Keyword tags:
community
no place
off subject
More Info: links to this page
|
| Started By | Thread Subject | Replies | Last Post | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andre_lobo | I am a teenager | 1 | Oct 11 2011, 10:26 PM EDT by BigLoki | ||
|
Thread started: Oct 11 2011, 10:21 PM EDT
Watch
And I agree with you in every way. You sir, have described the way 90% of my classmates were raised, and that is sad.
|
||||
| HeatherSwagga | LOVE THIS | 2 | Aug 22 2011, 8:45 AM EDT by SasquatchJim | ||
|
Thread started: Feb 22 2011, 11:36 PM EST
Watch
Absolutely loved this. I agree with you 100%. This needed to be said a thousand times over.
1
out of
2 found this valuable.
Do you?
Keyword tags:
community
no place
off subject
|
||||
| Maricely | A New Generation Thread (page: 1 2) | 23 | Dec 5 2010, 11:47 PM EST by SurvivalSniper | ||
|
Thread started: Nov 2 2010, 1:36 AM EDT
Watch
This is a great article, you should write more and share it in other places too. A lot of parents could learn from this.
I'm a very protective person, but I'm also a believer in letting kids learn from their mistakes. For example, me and my husband took our son to the park recently, and he was on the playground structure with a lot of other kids. He decided to stand on top of the ladder that they use to get on and off and stay there. I told him to get out of the way, but he didn't listen, and just then a kid came up behind him, wanting to climb down the ladder. After a few seconds of waiting for my son to move, the kid pushed past my son, who stumbled back and fell on his butt. I didn't get upset, because things like that are how kids learn what's ok and what's not. My son stood up and kept on playing, but he didn't stand in anyone's way after that. |
||||
Showing 3 of 3 threads for this page
