Mothering Forum banner

Grr... your punishment just crushed MY kid!

10K views 194 replies 71 participants last post by  rabbitmum 
#1 ·
OK, I just need to vent.

Ds and his best friend go to different schools. Due to a host of factors, they don't see each other that often, and the last 2 playdates have had to be canceled because we've been sick.

Sunday was ds' birthday party. He'd planned it for over a month. His best friend (plus 6 other kids) was invited. His friend's mom (who is a friend of ours too) was going to come early to help us set up (we were at a local rec center for a party/swimming). So, 15 minutes before the party, the mom shows up, without her son.

Turns out her son had "lost his privilege" of coming to ds' birthday party. Ds was in tears.


I get that they were really upset with their son (age 6) -- he had gone over to a neighbor's house without permission and didn't come back when asked to. Instead, he ran the other direction when the parents came to find him. It took them nearly an hour to find him/bring him home. He did this twice in one week. Once, Wed and then again on Friday.

I don't know if I'm more ticked about the ineffectual punishment, the fact that it really did put a cloud on ds' party OR that they didn't tell us AHEAD of time. They knew Friday evening that their son wasn't coming to our party. I could have at least prepared him for the fact that his best friend wasn't going to be there.

Ok, end of vent.

Now a question: What can these parents do to keep their 6 yo from taking off like this?

What can I give the parents to read to help them? They are well meaning, but not terribly effective at discipline. (Too harsh on some little things like snacks, and a bit oblivious to other things until they've become a BIG problem (ignoring chasing the cat until he's cornered her and she feels threatened). I know they've tried "Love & Logic" (they were our introduction to the program, which my dh declared "needs a lot more love and less logic"!) But as dh describes it, their basic instincts are just plain off much of the time. (Things escalate to a power struggle a lot.)
 
See less See more
1
#28 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by TortelliniMama View Post
So, it was thoughtful of the mom to not disappoint the OP, but it's okay that she disappointed the OP's son? I'm really surprised at how unimportant the OP's ds is seen in this scenario. For a child, this is equivalent to his best man not showing up at his wedding.

I'm also going to guess that if the party in question had been for the other child's grandmother, he would have gotten to go, even if he would have enjoyed spending time with his cousins or whatever, because the disappointment of his grandmother (an adult) would have been seen as outweighing the "need" for this particular punishment.
Well if your bestman runs from the police ..... he will likely miss your wedding as well.
 
#29 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by TortelliniMama View Post
So, it was thoughtful of the mom to not disappoint the OP, but it's okay that she disappointed the OP's son? I'm really surprised at how unimportant the OP's ds is seen in this scenario. For a child, this is equivalent to his best man not showing up at his wedding.
.
I don't feel that the mom disapointed the OP's son. Her son proved untrustworthy out of the house....so he disapointed his friend all on his own.
 
#30 ·
It sounds like they reacted just fine. A six year old running in the other direction and disappearing twice for over an hour is a big deal to most families even if they do practice gentle discipline, it is called gentle discipline not no discipline and there are a lot of terrible things that can happen to kids on their own especially at this age. It sucks that they didn't tell you about it ahead of time but since he has shown that he is not trustworthy out of the house he should not be allowed out of the house. There is no way I would leave the house with my dd at five if she had a habit of running off and disappearing and I can't imagine changing my opinion about that once she is six.
 
#31 ·
If the punishment was going to be missing the party then he should have been the one to call on Friday and explain to his friend why he wouldn't be at the party the next day. He should have had first hand experience of his friend's disappointment rather than getting the message from mom later.

The underlying message in this scenario is that your actions effect other people: parents worry about you when you run away, your friends are disappointed when you end up missing their parties because you aren't following basic safety rules. This boy needs to really see the consequence of his running away, not just the punishment. This is about safety and respect and about being a considerate person. Ds needs to see how his behavior is inconsiderate to people who care about him.

The only problem is that the punishment for his inconsiderate behavior (running from mom) is more inconsiderate behavior (hurting his friend) which doesn't make a lot of sense. I agree that having restrictions placed on privileges following a display of irresponsibility makes sense, but really, one should try to find a way to do that without punishing/hurting other uninvolved kids.
 
#32 ·
We don't do punishments...and fortunately haven't run into this sort of thing in our friends either. I'm really sorry it screwed up your son's party. I'd have been hurt at not being able to get my kid ready for it as well.

Of course, my suggestion at the went to the other house and ran away would be to sit down with my kid, explain how upsetting this was and find out what was going on with her when it happened.

But then, I believe a kid that is behaving in difficult ways is trying to explain something to difficult for them to put into words.

Also, I don't think of celebrating with friends as a privilege. I think of it as one of life's great joys. I always find that construction the privilege of "....." a little odd.
 
#33 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta View Post
I avoid consequences that end up hurting other kids or inconveniencing other parents for this exact reason. I really hate it when I'm canceled on for playdates and the like because the other kid is in trouble. After all, I've usually arranged my schedule to accomodate, told my child and he's looking forward to it, etc. I understand if the other kid is sick or what have you, of course those things can't be helped. But I know I'd feel pretty inconsiderate if I canceled plans or commitments because my child misbehaved.

Natural consequences sometimes affect others - and that is the natural consequence!!!

If my son invites a friend over to play with a new toy, and then breaks that toy before the friend gets to see it -- that will deeply disappoint the friend!

Should I go out and buy a new one because the friend will be sad? My DS has tried to take that tactic -- "I promised Bobby I would bring my new car! I can't go without the car! We have to get a new one!" Nope. Bobby will suffer the disappointment, and you'll remember not to drive any future cars off the top of your bunk bed.
 
#34 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by LynnS6 View Post

What can I give the parents to read to help them? They are well meaning, but not terribly effective at discipline. (Too harsh on some little things like snacks, and a bit oblivious to other things until they've become a BIG problem (ignoring chasing the cat until he's cornered her and she feels threatened). I know they've tried "Love & Logic" (they were our introduction to the program, which my dh declared "needs a lot more love and less logic"!) But as dh describes it, their basic instincts are just plain off much of the time. (Things escalate to a power struggle a lot.)
This is really not appropriate. It is not your job to help them be better parents. If she asks for help/advice that is one thing, but to just volunteer it is off base.

It was rude that she didn't let you know the change in plans in a timely fashion but it does sound like she had a lot on her mind.
 
#35 ·
OP yes it really bugs me too when people stop their child going to something as a punishment. In my case I ran a children's group (think scout type set up with weekly meetings). When we were doing group work or projects over a couple of weeks it made a lot more work for me.

I'm surprised to hear so many people feel that keeping a child form an already made commitment is the right thing to do.
 
#36 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by chfriend View Post
We don't do punishments...and fortunately haven't run into this sort of thing in our friends either. I'm really sorry it screwed up your son's party. I'd have been hurt at not being able to get my kid ready for it as well.

Of course, my suggestion at the went to the other house and ran away would be to sit down with my kid, explain how upsetting this was and find out what was going on with her when it happened.

But then, I believe a kid that is behaving in difficult ways is trying to explain something to difficult for them to put into words.

Also, I don't think of celebrating with friends as a privilege. I think of it as one of life's great joys. I always find that construction the privilege of "....." a little odd.
yet, after a child runs away, it is not always a good 'teaching moment" The parent may have to calm down, the kid will, and everybody will most likely be upset. The kid won't like being caught, and you most likely won't like having to run after them.

I believe that kids act defiantly for lots of reasons. Not nessecarily to try to explain deep feelings. It might just be fun. It's fun to disobey sometimes. To test limits. To see if your parents will notice enough to come get you maybe?
 
#37 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by kungfu_barbi View Post
i am absolutely fascinated by the initial replies on this thread and the (almost) consensus that the punishment described makes any sense at all. i had to double check to make sure i hadn't accidently logged onto a mainstream parenting board!

: I'm not into punishments like this either.
 
#38 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by chfriend View Post
We don't do punishments...and fortunately haven't run into this sort of thing in our friends either. I'm really sorry it screwed up your son's party. I'd have been hurt at not being able to get my kid ready for it as well.

Of course, my suggestion at the went to the other house and ran away would be to sit down with my kid, explain how upsetting this was and find out what was going on with her when it happened.

But then, I believe a kid that is behaving in difficult ways is trying to explain something to difficult for them to put into words.

Also, I don't think of celebrating with friends as a privilege. I think of it as one of life's great joys. I always find that construction the privilege of "....." a little odd.
ITA To me a natural consequence happens naturally. If ds1 leaves his toys out and ds3 brakes them that's a natural consequence, if ds1 leaves his toys out and I take them away because I told him not to that is a parent imposed consequence.
Regardless of what we think of the punishment, it would have been nice for the op to get some warning in order to prepare her ds.
 
#39 ·
IMO I think the child should have been able to go, to me birthdays are a celebration of life, and if it is his best friends life then he should have gone. A child behaves a certain way for a reason, and I think our jobs as parents are to find out why they are behaving that way. If a kid is running away from their home which is sposed to be a place of love and comfort, not a place the child wants to run from then somthing needs to be changed.
 
#40 ·
I'm so confused!

To me (newbie):
punishment would have been something like no phone for a week or no tv for a week or no new toys for x amount of time (loss of privilege unrelated to the "crime")
natural consequences would be no going out of the house if he is not trustworthy to stay with mom and dad (which unfortunately, means no attending friends' birthday parties)
gentle discipline would be explaining how the behavior affects you, trying to problem solve together a system that works for both the child and parent (cooperation), give a choice, etc.

Why is this punishment?
 
#41 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by TortelliniMama View Post
So, it was thoughtful of the mom to not disappoint the OP, but it's okay that she disappointed the OP's son? I'm really surprised at how unimportant the OP's ds is seen in this scenario. For a child, this is equivalent to his best man not showing up at his wedding.
I'm going to give the mother the benefit of the doubt and say although she should have called the night before maybe in her household things were pretty stressful and she was just doing the best she could.

I'm sure she wasn't intending to disappoint the OP's son. Why is everyone making it out to be so malicious? Geez, I think she had her hands full. She did show up to help still, as promised.
 
#44 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by savithny View Post
Natural consequences sometimes affect others - and that is the natural consequence!!!
Yes, natural consequences do sometimes affect others. However, I think it helps to clarify what we mean by "a natural consequence"... in this case it would be that he fell down running and got hurt, or hid and missed dinner...something that happens if no one interferes. Anything the parent has to come up with is not a natural consequence. It may make sense in the context of what happened, but an imposed consequence is not a natural consequence.

I can understand not wanting to take a runner to a birthday party, I do! I avoided playgrounds as much as possible all last summer because I just didn't want to spend all day chasing my son. BUT to frame it in the context of "you lose your privileges!" takes it out of that arena and throws it in the punishment

Lost my train of thought, kitchen situation...

Ugh. For instance. My son was just in the sugar. And the rice. The natural consequence is that he is covered in sugar. The logical consequence would be that I have him help me clean it up. Punishment would be a spanking or a time out, or not being allowed to go to a birthday party.
 
#45 ·
OK, I've calmed down a bit and am no longer threatening to nominate them for worst parents of the year. They did royally screw up by not informing us ahead of time. And I like the idea of him calling my ds to tell him why.

I also don't feel out of line soliciting suggestions for them because they are friends of ours and the mom said to me "what else can we do?" They're open to suggestions. I don't think their son needs more freedom - he could go over to his friends' house if he let them know, and they'll even let him walk around the block by himself, IF they know where he is. The problem was that he took off without them knowing, and then wouldn't come back when they did find him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrsfatty View Post
I'm so confused!

To me (newbie):
punishment would have been something like no phone for a week or no tv for a week or no new toys for x amount of time (loss of privilege unrelated to the "crime")
natural consequences would be no going out of the house if he is not trustworthy to stay with mom and dad (which unfortunately, means no attending friends' birthday parties)

No, see, that's a LOGICAL consequence. The 'natural consequence' of running off is that you might get lost and that your parents get really worried. Natural consequences are different from logical consequences. So, if my dd goes out without shoes on (happens a lot), her tights get wet if it's rainy. She HATES wet tights. But I didn't intervene to do this.
I see what ds' friend's parents did as punishment because it was loss of a privilege unrelated to his crime. Not going to a birthday party has zilch to do with running away from mom and dad.

Quote:
gentle discipline would be explaining how the behavior affects you, trying to problem solve together a system that works for both the child and parent (cooperation), give a choice, etc.
Well, in my book it can also involve natural/logical consequences. I got tired of telling dd to put her shoes on, so I quit. Her tights got wet. She got frustrated. She started wearing shoes!

I also do logical consequences - my kids are fighting over a box. Problem solving is getting no where. (Refuse to take turns, refuse to try another game with the same box, have no ideas of their own other than to stand there and scream at brother/sister to get out of "their" box.) Box goes in garage until everyone has calmed down and mom can stand it again. My removing the box isn't necessarily punishment, but it's only tangentially related to the real problem.

But I still don't get what good grounding does. Really. I don't.
 
#46 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by mrsfatty View Post
I'm so confused!

To me (newbie):
punishment would have been something like no phone for a week or no tv for a week or no new toys for x amount of time (loss of privilege unrelated to the "crime")
natural consequences would be no going out of the house if he is not trustworthy to stay with mom and dad (which unfortunately, means no attending friends' birthday parties)
gentle discipline would be explaining how the behavior affects you, trying to problem solve together a system that works for both the child and parent (cooperation), give a choice, etc.

Why is this punishment?
Hiya!
Natural consequences is something that happens *naturally* as a result of the actions. If a child throws his toy, it breaks, and that is the natural consequence. It is what happens IF YOU DO NOT INTERVENE.
Logical consequences are something that the parent comes up with that is related to the "wrongdoing" in a way that makes sense. (For breaking a favorite vase, losing television privileges would not be a logical consequence.) Logical consequences can be a punishment to make the child "regret that he did it", or it can be a way of helping a truly remorseful child make amends.
Gentle discipline is first and foremost parenting without smacking, spanking, or hitting. And it is what you mentioned as well - explaining, talking, cooperation, problem solving.
Punishment is any pain, suffering, or loss inflicted on a person because of a crime or offense. The goal of punishment is generally to get the child to feel bad, and the "worse" the offense, the more the child is supposed to suffer.

What the mother imposed was a punishment, and possibly a logical consequence, and it seems like it was gentle discipline. Does this make sense?
 
#47 ·
A natural consequence is something that happens naturally - the parent doesn't have to do anything. It just happens.

If the parent creates a consequence, such as not allowing a child to go somewhere because he/she feels the child isn't trustworthy, that is a punishment. A consequence the parent makes happen in an effort to punish a child is a punishment. So "logical consequences" are a kind of punishment. People use that word often for more gentle punishments that are logically related to whatever the child is being punished for. Child makes mess and parent makes child clean up mess before doing anything else = logical consequence. Child makes mess and parent takes away new toy = non-logical consequence.

Gentle discipline is defined by different people in different ways, but for me it means discipline that is not physical and does not involve shame or humiliation. I don't personally punish but IMO there are many kinds of punishments that are gentle discipline techniques.
 
#48 ·
Okay,
So no one has mentioned (maybe they did and I missed it) that "Natural Consequences" in this situation could involve getting kidnapped or hit by a car.

Why is it So awful to have parent imposed consequences in situations like this?

A PP mentioned letting a child learn the natural consequences of not wearing shoes by letting dd go shoeless and learn that her tights will get wet. That is teaching through natural consequences.

I don't really see how, in the OP's situation, you teach through natural consequences. You can't just say "Okay, take off on your own. You will learn once you get hit by a car"...yk?

I think that there are times for parent imposed consequences.
And this was one of those times. Maybe she could have chosen a better consequence, but I really don't understand how this child can safely learn through completely "natural consequences" in this situation.

Should there have just not been a consequence?

And how would putting locks on the doors be a "natural consequence" (by definition) but keeping him home from a party is not?

Both of those things seem parent imposed to me. Neither of those things just happens on their own.

I am getting really confused on this thread and I am VERY into GD.

I really feel like some of the responses here are coming from the more wishy washy side of GD...I am sorry but I don't have a nicer way to put that. I am not trying to hurt anyone's feelings.


This thread just has me a little
:
 
#49 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by chfriend View Post
We don't do punishments...

Also, I don't think of celebrating with friends as a privilege. I think of it as one of life's great joys. I always find that construction the privilege of "....." a little odd.
Me too! As if children have no rights, only "privileges".
:

I think stopping him from going to his friend's birthday party was an extremely harsh punishment. To call it a "consequence" doesn't change anything. The parents understood that this birthday party was a thing that they could really hurt him by taking from him. The fact that his mother went without him makes it even worse, I think.
 
#50 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by dubfam View Post
Should there have just not been a consequence?

And how would putting locks on the doors be a "natural consequence" (by definition) but keeping him home from a party is not?

I don't think a punishment is called for in this situation at all. The consequence of what happened was that the parents got upset, and they should of course tell him that.

The difference between putting locks on the doors and keeping him home from the party is that putting locks on the doors will actually prevent him from running out on his own again, while keeping him home from the party is done only to hurt him and thereby scare him from disobeying again: "This is what happens when you don't do as we say."

Although I don't think putting locks on the doors is a "natural" consequence, rather a "logical" one. While keeping him home from the party is just punishment.
 
#51 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by rabbitmum View Post
I don't think a punishment is called for in this situation at all. The consequence of what happened was that the parents got upset, and they should of course tell him that.

The difference between putting locks on the doors and keeping him home from the party is that putting locks on the doors will actually prevent him from running out on his own again, while keeping him home from the party is done only to hurt him and thereby scare him from disobeying again: "This is what happens when you don't do as we say."
It will also prevent him from escaping a fire, or getting out in an emergency. In many states this is illegal.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top