Critique this scenario, please - Page 4

[thismama]

Originally Posted by Attila the Honey

"Hey, looks like we have two hungry kids and one piece of cheese - do you want to split it in half, dc1, or do you need me to help?" If dc complained that he was hungry and wanted the whole thing I'd say something like, "how about you both eat the cheese and if you still need a snack we will find something for the both of you." Even if I had to buy more cheese, I'd still be sure dc shared the first piece.

I really like this.

[The4OfUs]

Originally Posted by rmzbm

"Just a peice of cheese" to YOU. Could be the WORLD to a child, at that moment. Worth reflecting on.

Agreed. But as I said, I'm trying to teach perspective...so empathizing, and talking and discussing would come in. And then helping him move on. I do note that I said I would not just rip the cheese out of his hands, I would talk to him about it, first.

While I wholeheartedly embrace validating all of a child's feelings and emotions, I think that sometimes it can be taken to an extreme, and that being able to get over disappointments and learning perspective is important. It's clear that this is the point on which we disagree, and will likely have to agree to disagree.

[rmzbm]

The meal scenario was meant to show that is is no more OK to rip a meal away from someone as it is the peice of cheese. In both cases permission was not gotten & the person having the food was not given final say. It is really no different...just portion wise.

[thismama]

Originally Posted by WuWei

Ok, folks, the OP is IN THE GROCERY STORE!! I imagine that there is some way to get another piece of cheese. : One can even pay for the cheese before dd eats the cheese, or cookies, or crackers, or cake, or donut, or apple, or banana, or carrots, or candy, or marshmallows, or water, or juice or or or or or...whatever dd wants. *Sharing* isn't the issue, the underlying need is for something fun, extra, snacky to consume, it appears. (I agree with intercepting food before it is handed to children by strangers, in general also.)

But this is crazy, IMO. The OP is in the grocery store. Exactly. Trying to grocery shop! Talk about letting the kiddo take over... you don't want to share with your crying sibling, so mama is going to curtail her whole plan to find another snack for the little one, lug both kids thru the checkout with one screaming and the other gleefully eating his cheese. Because mama doesn't want to be 'ungentle' by removing the cheese and ripping a piece off?

Nuts! I would go absolutely freaking nuts if I expected that of myself in my parenting. And I would feel like my kid would be learning that they ruled me and made the rules.

[The4OfUs]

Originally Posted by WuWei

.)

There are many possibilities that do not include sharing the cheese.

Pat

ITA, you're right. I got caught up focusing on the "imagine I couldn't get another piece of cheese" part, and saying that I would enforce the cheese sharing, as gently as possible.

[rmzbm]

Originally Posted by WuWei

Ok, folks, the OP is IN THE GROCERY STORE!! I imagine that there is some way to get another piece of cheese. : One can even pay for the cheese before dd eats the cheese, or cookies, or crackers, or cake, or donut, or apple, or banana, or carrots, or candy, or marshmallows, or water, or juice or or or or or...whatever dd wants. *Sharing* isn't the issue, the underlying need is for something fun, extra, snacky to consume, it appears. (I agree with intercepting food before it is handed to children by strangers, in general also.)

There are many possibilities that do not include sharing the cheese.

Pat

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!
Forced sharing is not only not the way to go, it's really unnecassary!

[The4OfUs]

Originally Posted by rmzbm

The meal scenario was meant to show that is is no more OK to rip a meal away from someone as it is the peice of cheese. In both cases permission was not gotten & the person having the food was not given final say. It is really no different...just portion wise.

Yeah, that's where our disconnect between us is - I do see it as really different, moreso than just portion wise.

[thismama]

I just really wouldn't be okay with my child making decisions that upset people (sibling) and inconvenience people (mama) to such a great degree. I think it is just fine for mama to step in and have a little backbone in some situations.

[rmzbm]

Originally Posted by thismama

I just really wouldn't be okay with my child making decisions that upset people (sibling) and inconvenience people (mama) to such a great degree. I think it is just fine for mama to step in and have a little backbone in some situations.

But why is it OK for mama to make a decision that upsets the child? How is it different?

[DevaMajka]

Originally Posted by thismama

But this is crazy, IMO. The OP is in the grocery store. Exactly. Trying to grocery shop! Talk about letting the kiddo take over... you don't want to share with your crying sibling, so mama is going to curtail her whole plan to find another snack for the little one, lug both kids thru the checkout with one screaming and the other gleefully eating his cheese. Because mama doesn't want to be 'ungentle' by removing the cheese and ripping a piece off?

Wow- you make it sound so much more difficult than walking down a certain aisle and picking up a box an opening it! lol

[thismama]

Originally Posted by rmzbm

But why is it OK for mama to make a decision that upsets the child? How is it different?

I da mama. That is the difference.

Mamas are responsible for balancing all the needs of the family. Including our own. Mamas are older, wiser, and we wipe their bums and clean up their vomit. We are their guides, their protectors. We need to teach them good values, make sure nobody in the family is on the receiving end of unnecessary suffering or unfairness, keep ourselves sane, and get some supper bought without getting sucked into a tear-your-hair-out public drama at the hands of a preschooler.

That is the difference.

[thismama]

Originally Posted by Deva33mommy

Wow- you make it sound so much more difficult than walking down a certain aisle and picking up a box an opening it! lol

Well it is different. One child is tantrumming, the other child refusing. Mama doesn't want to traumatize anyone. So I'm gonna go out of my way to find a snack. Pay for said snack, or rip it open without paying for it in the middle of the grocery store. It always takes 5 minutes minimum to go thru the check out lines. :

I'd be like, "Dude. You are sharing the cheese." End of drama.

[sunnysideup]

Originally Posted by thismama

But this is crazy, IMO. The OP is in the grocery store. Exactly. Trying to grocery shop! Talk about letting the kiddo take over... you don't want to share with your crying sibling, so mama is going to curtail her whole plan to find another snack for the little one, lug both kids thru the checkout with one screaming and the other gleefully eating his cheese. Because mama doesn't want to be 'ungentle' by removing the cheese and ripping a piece off?

Nuts! I would go absolutely freaking nuts if I expected that of myself in my parenting. And I would feel like my kid would be learning that they ruled me and made the rules.

I'm picturing my grocery store. They have the snacks right accross from the deli, so it'd be easy to give the sibling a cracker or two. Not a big deal at all. I guess I would give my child the benefit of good intentions--if they don't want to share they must be really hungry.

When you worry about showing "who makes the rules" it becomes a power and control issue.

[rmzbm]

Originally Posted by thismama

I da mama. That is the difference.

Mamas are responsible for balancing all the needs of the family. Including our own. Mamas are older, wiser, and we wipe their bums and clean up their vomit. We are their guides, their protectors. We need to teach them good values, make sure nobody in the family is on the receiving end of unnecessary suffering or unfairness, keep ourselves sane, and get some supper bought without getting sucked into a tear-your-hair-out public drama at the hands of a preschooler.

That is the difference.

thismama~ I hope we don't become "un-friends" over this thread, as I really do like you. But, honestly, I cannot believe you just said that.

[thismama]

Originally Posted by rmzbm

thismama~ I hope we don't become "un-friends" over this thread, as I really do like you. But, honestly, I cannot believe you just said that.

I like you too.

I don't see how what I've said is so crazy tho.

[WuWei]

Originally Posted by thismama

I da mama. That is the difference.

Mamas are responsible for balancing all the needs of the family. Including our own. Mamas are older, wiser, and we wipe their bums and clean up their vomit. We are their guides, their protectors. We need to teach them good values, make sure nobody in the family is on the receiving end of unnecessary suffering or unfairness, keep ourselves sane, and get some supper bought without getting sucked into a tear-your-hair-out public drama at the hands of a preschooler.

That is the difference.

Wow! Your description of parenting a preschooler sounds very draining. We find the partnership approach is so much easier.

Pat

[thismama]

Originally Posted by WuWei

Wow! Your description of parenting a preschooler sounds very draining. We find the partnership approach is so much easier.

Pat

Well it sure can be draining, especially if you get caught up in a million little dramas like this one. Is how I see it.

I don't get how seeing relationships with our children as full-on partnerships is accurate. So, like do you pay the rent and the toddler does the utilities and groceries? You work days, they work nights?

It is not a partnership. It is a parent-child relationship.

[The4OfUs]

Originally Posted by WuWei

Wow! Your description of parenting a preschooler sounds very draining. We find the partnership approach is so much easier.

Pat

You know, I feel like I'm stuck somewhere in the middle - we're way more partnership than we were before, and it's great, but I think my basic philosophy about children and their development d my own experience with my child) prevents me from being a complete partnership....it feels so weird to be in the place I'm in, because I don't quite seem to completely agree with either "side" in this kind of discussion ...and I feel weird being able to agree with both sides at the same time.


Just a random thought from me out to cyberspace.....

[rmzbm]

Originally Posted by thismama

I like you too.

I don't see how what I've said is so crazy tho.

Well, to be fair, I just reread it & it wasn't as bad as the 1st time, LOL, originally I read it as "I wipe your butt - so I own you" which, clearly, you didn't mean. For that, I apologize.

But, yeah, as wuwei said - trying to be their partner as opposed to a "higher up" will always get better results. I mean, you say it's your job to balance everyone's needs...but you seemingly have little regard for the child who just had something taken with no say in the matter.

[rmzbm]

thismama,

By that line of thinking DH & I are not partners either then, he earns the money & pays all bills. Is he the "boss" then?

Yes, it is a parent-child relationship...but can't you both STILL be equals? Noone in the family unit should be more or less than another member.