"lack of discipline" thread now titled "OT Essays and Rants" - Page 7

[eminer]

Originally Posted by annakiss

Are you suggesting that there's a middle ground (of sorts) wherein we might (routinely) follow the needs and demands of this life in this culture, within our social framework and communities?

I think so -- that sounds good. :-) I liked when you used the word "interpret" in talking about how you relate to TCC. I think the details of adapting have to be worked out in the middle ground, from some core conception or really relationship (with your child, in this case). Questions like, "Are routines good?" or "Is CIA ok?" don't mean very much except in the real context where you can intuit what is going on. But there is necessarily something informing your intuition.

[eminer]

Originally Posted by Devi

I'm not sure if your portion about a "simple life" is about my post or not, but I will respond as I believe it is, though I know other mamas have touched on the same issue?

Actually, I was mainly responding to what Sandra said about TCC. I was just saying that indigenous Amazonians have plenty to keep them from sleeping, too. :-)

My child also responds very differently depending upon her environment. Obviously we all do or camping would not be an enjoyable passtime.

Well, camping is NOT an enjoyable passtime [sic] :-P for me! The relaxing nature of nature comes at least partly from its cultural meanings (e.g. idyllic, untouched, benign) and our vantage point (usually recreation rather than survival). Stimulation is a complicated subject. I readily acknowledge that your dd is highly sensitive and applaud you for being responsive to that, but I wonder if she would have been highly sensitive in a different cultural setting (one with different music, for example), too. With school, I get the idea that part of the problem is that your dd is not free to regulate her own intake, e.g. by going off by herself or following her physical impulses? I agree that school is not a natural environment... Do you think that many other unnatural environments, or unnatural phenomena that are hard for us to adapt to, exist in our cultural setting?

I guess that my perspective partly comes from the fact that where and how I live, it would be virtually impossible to stay home all the time (and follow an at-home nap routine). People adapt to that. For example, most city babies and toddlers have no trouble napping in their strollers and the stroller functions as a "comfort zone". My dd has always used my body to avoid overstimulation. And of course, if we as adults are listening to our bodies and feelings, we give ourselves rest spaces in the day, whether at home or somewhere else, and we can adjust the amount of rest space to accomodate an easily overstimulated family member. Given all of this, my impression is that the vast majority of kids (yes, we are all neurologically different, so not all!) can adapt to often being around a lot of people and noise and other stimuli -- i.e. adapt to the real world in which their parents live -- without becoming sleep-deprived maniacs. Experience plays a role, influences what we tune out and how much certain stimuli impress themselves upon us.

I'm not personally entirely privy to the continuim concept, as I felt the claims that a child that never cries if one does XYZ, were not very realistic? Perhaps in a tribal "outdoor" setting this is possible? Or perhaps I misunderstood the claims of the book.

Almost never, but of course, "if one does XYZ" is the sticking point. We tend to encounter various issues having to do with our more sedentary lifestyle, lack of support (no "tribe"), ingrained expectations, etc. Also, diet and physical problems can cause a baby to be distressed. And then as the baby becomes older and assimilates his culture more, self-expression gets more culturally specific. Most of us at MDC agree that all-out crying is a (late-ish) distress sign. One idea in The Continuum Concept is that for a baby, it generally *is possible* to eliminate virtually all distress by being meeting fairly simple (ha - the word!), if not always easy -- in our cultural setting -- to meet, needs. The myth of the fall weighs very heavily on the author, and so this is supposed to be a big illumination: happiness is possible if we trust human nature! The interpretation and adaptation process tends to become a lifelong process, though. :-)

[eminer]

And about spelling: I used to have trouble understanding how fairly literate people could confuse there and their and they're. Until I got on the internet. Now I do it ALL THE TIME without even noticing. Stream-of-consciousness typing and good spelling don't mix!

[Devi]

Originally Posted by eminer

Actually, I was mainly responding to what Sandra said about TCC. I was just saying that indigenous Amazonians have plenty to keep them from sleeping, too. :-)

Sorry for responding to your response to another person. :

The song "your so vein" comes to mind:

"Your so vein, I bet you think this post is about you ..." ... it's an old song by Carly Simon about James Taylor for those not familiar.

I originally had a much more long winded reply further explaining my views, but decided instead to post this short quote:

You intuitively know how best to raise your child. If it doesn't feel right in your soul, dismiss it- for such things are true. ~ Jane Leidloff

While I haven't read the book she wrote, I do believe this is the key.

We all know our children if we are attached and we are "hopefully" making the decisions that are best for "them" and our familes in general.

[eminer]

I was the one who went on and on without specifying to whom!

[Devi]

Originally Posted by eminer

I was the one who went on and on without specifying to whom!

It's easy to get lost in this thread :LOL

[annakiss]

Originally Posted by eminer

I think so -- that sounds good. :-) I liked when you used the word "interpret" in talking about how you relate to TCC. I think the details of adapting have to be worked out in the middle ground, from some core conception or really relationship (with your child, in this case). Questions like, "Are routines good?" or "Is CIA ok?" don't mean very much except in the real context where you can intuit what is going on. But there is necessarily something informing your intuition.

Absolutely - parenting in large part is intuiting what is right for our children and our families. I can tell what my child needs even if he can't tell me in words. I can tell when the cries are fearful or needy or simply angry. That is because I know my child. It is a hard line to walk as a parent when we need to be both objective and subjective at times to see if an idea that we come across is appropriate for our children - to gauge who they are and what they need and if perhaps annoying behaviors aren't symptoms of something wrong, or simply age-appropriate responses to varying stimuli yet not illness or anxiety.

[LizD]

Well, back to the OP, a case in point- I was at a funeral last night. It was for the husband of a midwife, so babies were obviously welcome. I didn't bring my ten year old since she didn't want to go. Anyone younger I would have found childcare for, since it is so hard for small children to be still and quiet. Long story short, once the ceremony began, most parents took their kids to them and kept them quiet. When a baby called out too loudly, the parent would take them out, obviously. So the lobby had a few people walking their babies and still listening quietly to the prayers- I was one of these folks at one time. But one woman had her four year old out there, and that child was stamping around with her hard shoes on the tile floor, and having a really loud conversation with her friend!! And her mother did not say *one word* to her!! So that, I think, is what the OP was getting at. This child attends the coop preschool I mentioned where a lot of the parents treat their kids this way. I don't think she should have been punished or anything of the sort. Her mother didn't even need to be stern, but why could she say nothing at all, just grin goofily?! Not even aware her kid was causing all the noise and those of us in the lobby couldn't even hear the rabbi. There is nothing wrong with telling your child to be quiet or that s/he has to stay home because it's a special occasion that requires a certain level of decorum. That's what seems to be the difference between "gentle discipline" and "I'm too frightened of my child to guide their behaviour."

[sunnmama]

Originally Posted by LizD

Not even aware her kid was causing all the noise and those of us in the lobby couldn't even hear the rabbi.

Did you mention the problem to the mother or the child? Maybe she really was unaware that it was a problem?

[LizD]

Originally Posted by sunnmama

Did you mention the problem to the mother or the child? Maybe she really was unaware that it was a problem?

Yes, people tried to shush her child and she remained blank and beaming, ever delighted in her darling. It was a very small lobby and it is impossible for her not to have realized her child was the only person making noise. Even if they hadn't said anything, I'm sorry, that's inexcusably rude.

[Devi]

Originally Posted by LizD

Yes, people tried to shush her child and she remained blank and beaming, ever delighted in her darling. It was a very small lobby and it is impossible for her not to have realized her child was the only person making noise. Even if they hadn't said anything, I'm sorry, that's inexcusably rude.

We don't know if the Mother you mention used "GD" as and "excuse not to discipline, do we?"

While I would have taken my child to another room, I don't know this Mothers rationale for not doing so.

Perhaps the Mother was a harsh disciplinarian and wasn't comfortable "striking" her child in a crowd? Or perhaps as you say she was a GD/AP Mom who felt that her dd's behavior was totally appropriate for a 4 year old and that others should accept that? My guess is that she was ignorant to the fact that it was troubling people?

I'm not defending the lack of action on the part of the Mother, nor am I criticizing her. I just think that we all view things a bit differently, and we don't know her motives?

And, I still fail to see how some of the examples given have diddly to do with the subject matter? :

[chfriend]

"I'm too frightened of my child to guide their behaviour." [/QUOTE]

LizD: I find it interesting that you think this mother was frightened of her child. What makes you think this? Was the child in some way scary?

[LizD]

I happen to know this woman and yes, she thinks "gentle discipline" means never saying no to your child. I can't help but think "was the child in some way scary?" is a dig at my comment. No, the child wasn't scary, duh. The mother is spineless and couldn't leave her home for a funeral, nor could she tell her to be quiet, because everything every child does is normal and appropriate and wonderful. It's back to parents who are too lazy to deal with their children's inevitable protests when prevented from doing something they want to do. As far as it having to do with the subject matter, I thought the OP was venting about obnoxious people who don't discipline their children in even the gentlest ways because they somehow feel unable to, and think that everything kids do should be welcome everywhere, at all times. Even indigenous cultures have ceremonies inappropriate for children.

Maybe people who talk and answer the phone during movies don't realize they're causing a problem, but they should know better, just as this woman should. Come on.

[Devi]

Originally Posted by LizD

I happen to know this woman and yes, she thinks "gentle discipline" means never saying no to your child. I can't help but think "was the child in some way scary?" is a dig at my comment. No, the child wasn't scary, duh. The mother is spineless and couldn't leave her home for a funeral, nor could she tell her to be quiet, because everything every child does is normal and appropriate and wonderful. It's back to parents who are too lazy to deal with their children's inevitable protests when prevented from doing something they want to do. As far as it having to do with the subject matter, I thought the OP was venting about obnoxious people who don't discipline their children in even the gentlest ways because they somehow feel unable to, and think that everything kids do should be welcome everywhere, at all times. Even indigenous cultures have ceremonies inappropriate for children.

Maybe people who talk and answer the phone during movies don't realize they're causing a problem, but they should know better, just as this woman should. Come on.

Some of you people sure run into alot of Moms who are "lazy, afraid, spineless, and obnoxious ... "

I'm starting to rethink my previous notion that AP Moms are open and respectful of choice/perspective. I'd like to thank many of you for enlightening me to the fact that some AP moms are as judgemental and rigid as the mainstream armchair parents I had hoped to find refuge from.

[chfriend]

LizD, no it wasn't a dig at you. It was a serious question. You have described this woman as afraid of her child. I see that you have clarified that you don't believe that she is frightened but rather that she is spineless, lazy and obnoxious. I understand now. It was merely your dig at the woman whose child's behavior you found difficult at a funeral.

[sunnmama]

Elizabeth--
I think you are saying a lot of different things, and not all of them may be true.

1. She thinks "everything every child does is normal and appropriate and wonderful".

2. She is "too lazy to deal with their children's inevitable protests when prevented from doing something they want to do."

3. And she is afraid of her child's reactions (temper tantrums?). Afraid is very different from lazy.

I think any one of these *may* be true, but all 3 are unlikely to exist together.

I mean, if the first is true, then the others probably are not: she just has a higher tolerance for childish behavior, and maybe she herself has some rough social edges, and she does not realize the behavior is bothering others. That isn't laziness or fear. In fact, she *did* bring the child into the lobby--so she took some action. Maybe she thought that was enough? That the lobby was an ok place for her child to play?

Laziness speaks for itself.

Fearfulness--well, I *have* been fearful of my dd's reactions. Afraid as in "OMG there is something wrong with my dd" and as in "Omg, I am alone in the middle of the supermarket and she is working up to an explosion and how the hell am I going to get her out of here before she blows?!" That is not a happy place That is not a mama who is beaming and happy. That is a mama who is desperate and in dire need of support and *help*.

I think clear communication would be very helpful in the first 2 scenarios (especially the first--where the parent is happily oblivious). "Friend, I am having difficulty hearing the Rabbi over the playful stomping. Could you help me?"

[Devi]

Originally Posted by sunnmama

Elizabeth--
I think you are saying a lot of different things, and not all of them may be true.

1. She thinks "everything every child does is normal and appropriate and wonderful".

2. She is "too lazy to deal with their children's inevitable protests when prevented from doing something they want to do."

3. And she is afraid of her child's reactions (temper tantrums?). Afraid is very different from lazy.

I think any one of these *may* be true, but all 3 are unlikely to exist together.

I mean, if the first is true, then the others probably are not: she just has a higher tolerance for childish behavior, and maybe she herself has some rough social edges, and she does not realize the behavior is bothering others. That isn't laziness or fear. In fact, she *did* bring the child into the lobby--so she took some action. Maybe she thought that was enough? That the lobby was an ok place for her child to play?

Laziness speaks for itself.

Fearfulness--well, I *have* been fearful of my dd's reactions. Afraid as in "OMG there is something wrong with my dd" and as in "Omg, I am alone in the middle of the supermarket and she is working up to an explosion and how the hell am I going to get her out of here before she blows?!" That is not a happy place That is not a mama who is beaming and happy. That is a mama who is desperate and in dire need of support and *help*.

I think clear communication would be very helpful in the first 2 scenarios (especially the first--where the parent is happily oblivious). "Friend, I am having difficulty hearing the Rabbi over the playful stomping. Could you help me?"

[warriorprincess]

my point is you can't really compare our children to simpler societies unless you have made a point to stick close to home base, respect your childs schedule, and leave them alone enough to find it.

This is the area where I have run into judgement from "non-coersive" parents. I do have a busy lifestyle- I classicly homeschool my kids, they are both in activities, plus I work part time ( at church), often taking them with me. If dh is not home when I have to take dd to dance class, the boys have to get ready to go too ( this year dh can usually stay with them, but I don't know how it will work next year.) And while they do tend to sleep til they wake up 5-6 days a week, on Sunday mornings, they do have to get up, and be ready to go with me.
And they have adapted well to it. It may not be "natural", but by being conssitent they ( the older two at least) are at apoint where if we send them for a bath at 7:30 ish, then have them get into bed with a book, they turn off their light by 8:30-9. (Not so we can have "adult time", but because dh and I are both completely ready to drop by then).

I know some parents have looked at my life and feel it is to "inflexible", but I think we are doing the best we can to meet the needs of 5 very different people.