Originally Posted by lach
What I bolded is a very good point. The 8 year old was already upset, and her claim of being "ignored" might very well have been QUITE different from a reasonable description of what had happened at the table. We already know that she is in an inappropriately emotional state: she was crying over being bored. Over a doll. At age eight.
We don't know any of that. We know that she was crying, but we don't know that it was because of boredom or the doll - it may have been because
she was being ignored. And, we also don't know that she's 8. The OP was guessing at her age. Honestly, I would have guessed younger than that, simply because nobody I know would use the term "dolly" when talking to a child of eight. Around here, that's more-or-less baby talk.
[quote]But that's why it's also the age where they do need to learn to keep some of the over-emotional reactions about things that are just not that big a deal in check. They need to learn to manage life's little disappointments now (the exciting adventure in a grown up restaurant was not as interesting as she had expected)...[quote]
Interesting. I didn't see anywhere in the OP that the child knew she was going to an adult restaurant, or that she thought it would be an adventure. I'm not sure where you're getting any of that. I also take issue with other people deciding what's a big deal for someone else...even a child.
|And it sounds like the mother was working through that with the DD in the most appropriate manner: she took her outside to calm her down, was speaking to her calmly (not yelling or swearing or hitting), was talking her through the whole situation... outlining what had led them up to this point and what her expectations were from then on.
I don't think we read the same OP. If there was any outlining of what led up to this point (beyond "you decided to leave your dolly in the car"), I missed it completely.
|Obviously, it's impossible for us to know what had already happened, both before the restaurant and at the restaurant. But from what was outlined here, it all sounds like a normal, if annoying, parenting situation that was handled well. I'm sure the mother really didn't enjoy interrupting her meal to take her daughter outside, but she was handling it calmly and doing what needed to be done.
To each their own. I see no evidence that it "needed to be done". We don't know anywhere near enough about what actually happened, but based on the snippet the OP provided, there's no evidence that the mother was doing anything but "teaching" an arbitrary "lesson" that may have had nothing to do with anything. I know I'd be pretty upset if someone answered my complaint that "there's nothing to do and you're ignoring me" with "well, that's what happens in this kind of place - deal".
I'm basing my responses on what the little girl said
. Her mother (again, based on the OP) didn't argue those points. She didn't say, "we're not ignoring you", so I have no reason to jump to the conclusion that the girl is overstating it. She didn't say, "I warned you there wouldn't be anything to do", so I have no evidence that this was discussed ahead of time. I'm basing this on the discussion recounted in the OP
, not on any thoughts about what might have happened prior to said discussion.