or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › parenting, to each their own or up for debate?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

parenting, to each their own or up for debate? - Page 6

Poll Results: check all options that you think SHOULD be acceptable to comment on.

This is a multiple choice poll
  • 10% (74)
    Breast feeding
  • 5% (42)
    Co sleeping
  • 6% (44)
    baby wearing
  • 17% (129)
    CIO
  • 20% (151)
    Spanking
  • 10% (74)
    introducing Solids
  • 6% (44)
    eating habits post weaning
  • 5% (37)
    Vaccinations (others shouldn't do it)
  • 4% (33)
    Vaccinations (others should do it)
  • 14% (103)
    these and others should be open to discussion. no one has a right to be eternally unchallenged.
731 Total Votes  
post #101 of 204
I am more likely to want to help a good friend then to look the other way. If I felt a friend was hurting their child and I kindly tried to help them find another way I they continued I think the friendship would probably end if they ever hurt their child in my presence. I might be more likely to continue to help a stranger. I know that might not sound right, I just know my limits and it would hurt me too much to watch a child I knew personally being abused.
post #102 of 204
After an internal struggle between the "Live and let live" and "I should be able to speak up if I think your doing something harmful" sides of my brain... I chose the last one. While I don't think we should continually push people to do things a certain way. I don't think any one has a right to go unchallenged. Being challanged in our views does one of two things, we either become more solid in what we believe or upon questioning what we are doing realize our own errors and hopefully try to change them.

That being said, I only challenge someones thinking if it's the time and place to do so and only once unless they continue to bring up the subject themselves.

Without challenge we never see where we can improve or how strong our convictions truely are.
post #103 of 204
Thread Starter 
OK musiciandad you said it one paragraph what i have been trying to say for umm... 6 pages. i absolutely believe you should only speak up if it is the time and the place. i also absolutely believe that no one has the right to go unchallenged ever.

it was all the times i explained to people who questioned me why i believe what i do that convinced me i am absolutely doing the right thing. if no one's beliefs are ever challenged people never have to explain their actions/opinions etc. without that questioning people never have to answer to anyone but themselves... and it is much easier to lie to yourself then to someone else. it is easier to pretend you know why you believe something if you never actually have to explain it so someone who disagrees.

does any of that makes sense?
post #104 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by MusicianDad View Post
After an internal struggle between the "Live and let live" and "I should be able to speak up if I think your doing something harmful" sides of my brain... I chose the last one. While I don't think we should continually push people to do things a certain way. I don't think any one has a right to go unchallenged. Being challanged in our views does one of two things, we either become more solid in what we believe or upon questioning what we are doing realize our own errors and hopefully try to change them.

That being said, I only challenge someones thinking if it's the time and place to do so and only once unless they continue to bring up the subject themselves.

Without challenge we never see where we can improve or how strong our convictions truly are.
nicely said
post #105 of 204
For those of us who are American we should remember also that if we had just "lived and let live" instead of "challenged what we didn't believe in" (as Musician's Dad put it) we wouldnt even BE American. It's people who speak up against the things they dont believe in that bring about change.

While this country was built with freedom in mind, the whole point of that freedom was so that people could be treated well. It wasn't just "lets be free to do whatever we want and treat people poorly" the freedom was to enable us to be treated well by our gov't and at the same time protect us from eachother. Children are not protected and never will be if everyone just looks the other way because "its a parents right" to treat the child that way. To pretend its okay for a parent to hit a child just because you woulndn't like it is someone ragged on your for extended breastfeeding. One thing reasearch shows is healthy to do and the other it is known is damaging. Also, its about WILL. If a parent was FORCING a child to breastfeed yes that would be bad, but thats not the case with extended breastfeeding for most people. When it comes to hitting a child though, it's not something they would want unless emotionall abused into consenting to it.
post #106 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4inMyHeart3inArms View Post
Also, its about WILL. If a parent was FORCING a child to breastfeed yes that would be bad, but thats not the case with extended breastfeeding for most people. When it comes to hitting a child though, it's not something they would want unless emotionall abused into consenting to it.
The problem I have with this is that in general people don't apply it across the board. Most people I know would not willingly consent to say working 65 hrs a week and being cursed at during that time, yet they have no choice but to stay in a position like that due to finances and the depression and no one would ever dream of saying something to the company about it for example. There are lot's of things that go on that aren't really the person's choice, things that people are pushed into tolerating under duress, that people let slide or don't want to get involved or speak up about. While certainly children are one of the more vulnerable groups of our society and should be protected, I think that if you feel it's ok to get involved like that then you should be willing to stand up for what you think is right in every situation where you feel someone is being mistreated.
post #107 of 204
SunshineJ - I am wolling to stand up when I think things are wrong.

I just think if we say "okay its not okay to hit other people, its not okay to hit animals, its no okay to hit this race, and its not okay to hit women" then we should extend that to children as well. I am not saying these things enver happen, but the law doesnt protect you from them. The law does protect you from being harassed at work. While someone may not feel comfortable addressing the issue, at least our society as a while recognizes that it is wrong to cursed at and mistreated on the job. That is what I am talking about when I say we need to speak up if we want to see change. Children deserve to be treated humanely just as much as women and men and dogs and cats and adults of every color deserve. But for some reason the children were skipped over when they were considering which beings were human enough to deserve humane treatment.
post #108 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by LavenderMae View Post
Well, my approach with discussing circumcision has helped one mom I know leave her son intact even though she always thought she would (even well into her pregnancy) circumcise, helped a mom with two circumcised boys to educate herself and as a result she left her 3rd son intact, pionted another mom in the right direction for info to change her dh's mind (it did), and those are just the effects I can remember off the top of my head. And it is wrong to surgically remove a healthy, integral and sexual part of someone else's body and I have no desire to sugar coat that. Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's ethical or right.
I am however not heart less and realize we all make mistakes, I've made my share for sure. I know mamas that fully regret circumcising their sons and I offer them nothing but my deepest sympathy and support.

I have no doubt that in the future the way I feel about circumcision will be the mainstream view it will become a dark part of our countries past that generations from now will be looked back on as unbelievable (can you believe people used to do this here). Hopefully that's not just wishful thinking. Maybe spanking and CIO will be the same, that would be lovely.
I agree that legal does not necessarily mean right, but this is still your opinion. And even though I agree, it's still an opinion, and there are many people I know who would disagree with my choice not to circ. And when they say something (and they do, lol), I just thank them for their opinion and move on.
post #109 of 204
Um, okay. So this thread has no morphed into a "If you say live and let live you are unpatriotic and you would just stand by and let someone beat the crap out of their kids and abuse them?"

That's ridiculous.

I'm sorry, but the POLL talks about things like when to introduce solids, babywearing, ect. The only abusive choice I see is spanking and CIO (but then again, definition of 'CIO' are important).

I have been an emergency placement foster parent. I've worked in the social services field. I believe that I have done a lot of standing in the gap and helping children who needed protection and shelter from abuse and neglect.

I still feel that when it comes to PARENTING issues, vs. abuse issues, having seen genuine abuse and other unmentionable things I am MORE likely now to be able to hold my tongue and not turn every little pet issue into a hill to die on.

I've directly intervened in parking lots, schools, ect to prevent a child being hit. And yet I STILL SAY that when it comes to run of the mill parenting issues most of the time it's not worth confronting and preaching at people. And I think people who turn every thing into a Huge Honkin' Deal are making a big mistake.
post #110 of 204
and once it was the opinion that black people should be slaves. once it was someones opinion that men should be allowed to hit their wives. I think when we are talking about physically harming another persons body against their that the laws should be applied across the board. Not "its not okay to treat a human or animal this way - UNLESS they are under 18" I mean WTH is that about, really?
post #111 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4inmyheart3inarms View Post
and once it was the opinion that black people should be slaves. Once it was someones opinion that men should be allowed to hit their wives. I think when we are talking about physically harming another persons body against their that the laws should be applied across the board. Not "its not okay to treat a human or animal this way - unless they are under 18" i mean wth is that about, really?
amen.
post #112 of 204
I was the one who brought up the patriotic thing and if you read my other posts the only things I consider abusive are neglectful forms of CIO and spanking. Yes I do think its unpatriotic to say "lets just look the other way, its their right to hurt that person". If we had done that years ago then women would still be hit by their husbands and there would still be slaves. Somehow animals rights are more valuable then childrens though. Again, its not a parents right to spank being executed. It's a childs right to be treated human that is being violated.
post #113 of 204
I have no problem discussing any of these with anyone. I think its all how you say it, rather than judging but listening and trying to give your information about the topic. I don't agree with spanking or CIO at all (CIO being leaving baby/toddler alone crying in their room to fall asleep, or just left alone crying) but I can only give my opinion and offer some information about it. At the end of the day the mother/father is going to do what they think what is best for them. If a child is in danger of bad parenting, then I'll speak more about it to them and if need be I will contact proper authorities.
post #114 of 204
Thats aweome Jenn. I wish more people would. My neighbors did CIO with their daughter (this was before I met them) at a very early age and she died in the night because she choked on her own vomit and was too young to roll over. They thought she had just falled asleep. Not all people practice CIO that way (I would hope most don't) but some people cross the line into neglect and something does need to be said.
post #115 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4inMyHeart3inArms View Post
Thats aweome Jenn. I wish more people would. My neighbors did CIO with their daughter (this was before I met them) at a very early age and she died in the night because she choked on her own vomit and was too young to roll over. They thought she had just falled asleep. Not all people practice CIO that way (I would hope most don't) but some people cross the line into neglect and something does need to be said.
Oh no, that is so horrible
My mom does daycare, and a long time ago there was a baby who came there and her parents did CIO, and she would vomit in her crib and be lying there in it. The worse part was the father was a police officer. They would also leave her in her crib and go bike riding in the evening. My mom contacted social services, but we don't know what ever happened to them. They stopped coming and moved. That is one major reason I didn't ever want to do CIO, not only is it annoying to just leave a baby to cry, but its just so cruel. I can't imagine just leaving a baby in his/her crib and walking away. I've heard other parents telling new moms to just ignore it or listen to some music. I will never understand that mentality, but I'm sure they don't understand mine either.
post #116 of 204
I think it takes a fair amount of arrogance to assume that you are right about something and other people just need to be educated.... and if only they were educated, they would do things your way.

That is the belief we all seem to secretly hold, but it's not true.

There are EXTREMELY few situations where parenting is either RIGHT or WRONG. It sure seems that way when you think that you're right and the other person is wrong, but it's simply not the case. Parenting is not an absolute and making parenting decisions requires careful examination and treatment of subjects that frequently do not have clear cut answers.

I strongly support breastfeeding - VERY strongly. And have always been a passionate advocate for it (well, always meaning since I had a baby). However, there are moms who share their stories and technically (by our definition) "chose" to formula feed, but given their circumstances (which can really be extenuating) that really did seem to be the best option for them.

The same applies to so many other parenting decisions.

Part 2 is this - let's say there was a right and wrong for every parent no matter what. You have to also believe that it is your job to educate and correct the world. I disagree with that being the case. I cannot imagine it really accomplishing much unless it's done in a pretty careful and respectful way. Pointing out to other people where they've gone wrong is a very common thing and it mainly serves to validate our own existence and distract us from the real problem - ourselves. We all have things we could focus on and do so much better and instead of preaching to people who may not be receptive to your message, instead you can look at ways you can improve and all you have to do is be receptive to that message.

I suppose I agree that intervening in others' lives, with the idea that we know what's best for them, is very patriotic, in the sense that it seems to be a very American attitude. I disagree that it is a good one however.
post #117 of 204
In my opinion you should only comment if it is unsafe or neglect. Usually I dont comment at all but lots of my friends had kids after me and ask me ?'s and I take that as a chance to help educate them to make more informed choices about what is right for their family.
post #118 of 204
so its a bad attitude that people spoke up to stop slavery and stop men from hitting their wives? I guess I definitely disagree then! I think that is an excellent attitude, and I am only speaking of speaking up on things along that playing feild. I am not saying that it would be patriotic to tell someone what color car to drive or how to tie their shoes - but if we make a law that no one can take their hand, lift it, bring it down in connection with another person, with the intent of inflicting pain or otherwise, without the other person consent (consent that is gained without emotional manipulation) then that law should apply to ALL people. At one time it only applied to white men. Then only men. Then only adults. Now its adults and animals... it's wrong to want to speak up so that eventually the idea of humane treatment extends to children as well? Thats a bad attitude to have? Guess I have a bad attitude then. I suppose some people think Rosa Parks had a bad attitude as well. I bet a lot of women got hit back in the day for the same kind of bad attitude. I mean really, how dare someone have the audactiy to suggest that another human deserves to be treated without physical threat? (sarcasm of course, well coming from me anyway it is, apparently other people think this way in all seriousness)
post #119 of 204
It's not just my opinion it's how boys are born for crying out loud. It's not just my opinion that circumcision removes a part of the penis which is the male sex organ. It's not just my opinion that boys are born with foreskins and it serves a purpose. It's not just my opinion that circumcising a baby 100% of the time is done with out the baby's consent. Is it just my opinion that removing a part of a girls vulva is unnecessary and sexually altering?

The onus is on those who insist on removing functioning and healthy parts of someone else's genitalia not on us who don't.
post #120 of 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4inMyHeart3inArms View Post
so its a bad attitude that people spoke up to stop slavery and stop men from hitting their wives? I guess I definitely disagree then! I think that is an excellent attitude, and I am only speaking of speaking up on things along that playing feild. I am not saying that it would be patriotic to tell someone what color car to drive or how to tie their shoes - but if we make a law that no one can take their hand, lift it, bring it down in connection with another person, with the intent of inflicting pain or otherwise, without the other person consent (consent that is gained without emotional manipulation) then that law should apply to ALL people. At one time it only applied to white men. Then only men. Then only adults. Now its adults and animals... it's wrong to want to speak up so that eventually the idea of humane treatment extends to children as well? Thats a bad attitude to have? Guess I have a bad attitude then. I suppose some people think Rosa Parks had a bad attitude as well. I bet a lot of women got hit back in the day for the same kind of bad attitude. I mean really, how dare someone have the audactiy to suggest that another human deserves to be treated without physical threat? (sarcasm of course, well coming from me anyway it is, apparently other people think this way in all seriousness)
What in the world does this have anything to do with whether or not you tell people that when they should feed solids to their children or vaccinate them?

How are you getting that people are saying that slavery and domestic violence is okay because they don't feel the compulsion to offer unsolicited parenting advice to everyone?

I think I'm bugging out of this thread, this has veered a little too much into extremeland for me. I still think that fighting and debating with people over their parenting is likely to be counterproductive than anything else. This does not mean I condone violence or slavery, because I don't. If it's dangerous, then call the cops or CPS or intervene directly yourself. If it's perhaps not "best" but isn't abuse or neglect (like formula feeding), then if you don't call everyone out who isn't doing everything exactly to your standards, it doesn't mean that you condone domestic violence and would prefer to still be living under Jim Crow.

Seriously WTF?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › parenting, to each their own or up for debate?