or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Why Is It Hypocrisy To Have Different Rules For Adults Than Children??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why Is It Hypocrisy To Have Different Rules For Adults Than Children?? - Page 5

post #81 of 125
*
post #82 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yooper View Post
I had a friend in the second grade that needed stitches after puncturing herself with a pencil. Should we ban pencils? Do not get me started on scissors.....

It is my belief that helping my child explore these things when she is interested and still OK with close supervision can only be a good thing. Besides, I like the help cutting stuff in the kitchen
Yes, I think we cal all agree that many things can be dangerous. But I'm asking back to the basic question of my OP, since we've got a bit of a tangent going....why/how is it harmful to a child to have some rules, some boundaries, and some guidelines.

Clearly we all agree (I think) that a child is not the same as an adult so how is it "unfair" to a child to give them a slightly different set of rules, and how would that be hypocritical??

I'm still not seeing an answer....
post #83 of 125
I have no problem setting rules that prevent my children (or my nieces or nephew) for engaging in certain activities that my husband and I are free to pursue. Is this hypocrisy? I don't think so.

For example, we have an unspoken rule in our household: "Everyone with bowel and bladder control is expected to use the toilet when they have to go to the bathroom". It's never been discussed, but it's key to the quality of life here. My 6-month old twins have no control, so it is diapers for them. Another rule: "Only those people who can appreciate how hot a stove can get and could be relied upon to put out a kitchen fire are allowed to use it". Tough luck, babies. And tough luck to my nieces and nephew when they were younger. As for alcohol: "Only those people who can fully grasp the negative consequences of alchohol use (physically, socially, developmentally, etc) and will be accountable for their actions (to the law, the in-laws, the grandparents, etc) are allowed to consume alcohol and such consumption must be moderate". Sorry, teenage nieces, but I would be held responsible by your parents and grandparents - it's been proven that they know where I live and how to make my life a holy heck - so no alcohol for you while you are here (which is easy to enforce as all we have is banana liquor for making desserts...and not even a reckless teenager would willingly consume an entire glass of banana liquor).

Some rules prevent certain folks for doing certain things. That's fine with me. And if they are not fine with that, that is fine with me too.
post #84 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by karina5 View Post
Yes, I think we cal all agree that many things can be dangerous. But I'm asking back to the basic question of my OP, since we've got a bit of a tangent going....why/how is it harmful to a child to have some rules, some boundaries, and some guidelines.

Clearly we all agree (I think) that a child is not the same as an adult so how is it "unfair" to a child to give them a slightly different set of rules, and how would that be hypocritical??

I'm still not seeing an answer....
Well, I do think it is hypocritical for adults to have different "rule". Boundaries based on size, maturity, health, safety, etc are different. My dd does have boundaries. She knows she can not walk out of the house and down to the store alone. However, she *can* ask me to walk with her, let her make the decisions of what route and when to cross, all with me there as a back-up if needed. Or some other variation of that theme that gets her what she wants yet still keeps her safe. There is no "rule" that she cannot go to the store, just like there is no "rule" that I cannot go. That is a safety issue and I think we can all agree that different parents are going to have different thresholds for where that boundary line needs to be made.

What I see here that i do think is hypocritical is eating french fries in front of your kids and saying it is only a "rule" that they cannot have it while it is not a "rule" for the adults. If it is not a safety or serious health (like allergies or, depending on your opinions on alcohol, etc....), I think it is pretty unfair to ask kids to do as you say and not what you do. It is hypocritcal to say it is "unhealthy" to the kids but not also acknowledge that it is unhealthy for the adults.

Getting beyond that into things like sleep times and hygiene is difficult since most parents believe children are incapable of making these decisions themselves. i am not one of those people and therefore feel it would be hypocritic for me to impose rules around my child's body that differ from mine. But we will not get concensus on this board on that matter because of very basic philosophical differences. Going back to the table knife. I feel my dd IS capable of learning how to use one safely and some others feel that children are NOT capable of that until varying ages. Rules come from those philosophies which is why some people are going to say it is hypocracy and others will say it is not.
post #85 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by karina5 View Post
DANG People! What has happened to my thread?? I was trying to bring up a general question about how is it bad for kids to have some rules that adults might not have, and people are focusing on french fries and wine!!!!
I liked your original question - it was interesting. I'm sorry it has been highjacked.
post #86 of 125
I drink Mt. Dew, and I will tell anyone that it is unhealthy. And I do not let my children drink soda. The difference is I am at an age to fully understand the consquences of my actions - my children are not.

I need to quit though -I've reformed 95% of my diet, but I'm hanging onto my Dew. My mother drank Pepsi ever since I can remember and despite never being allowed to drink soda as a child, I drink it as an adult. I don't really feel I can blame my choice to drink soda on my mom though, since I started the habit in college.
post #87 of 125
I think the most important thing with food and alchohol is to get the BIG PICTURE right. Food is not merely a health issue, it should also be a social and cultural issue. It's not the single french fry that's making America fat, it's the mentality of eating 'on-the-go,' meals from a box and drive-thru that's making America fat. Now I'm not saying go home and make your baby southern fried chicken...obviously WHAT you eat is important, but the parent's attitude and approaches toward food are equally important and often left out of the debate.

Hypocrisy gets a bad rap. Sometimes your beliefs are ahead of your behavior. If you discredit everyone and everything that appears hyprocritical (i.e. Al Gore lives in a mansion so I'm not going to take An Inconvenient Truth seriously) you will find yourself doing nothing and believing in nothing to avoid being characterized as a hypocrite.

I'm not saying "lie to your children but teach them not to lie" - obviously you're undermining your own message. However, teaching ideals that you can't always live up to yourself...still worthwhile.

My child will have different rules than I do. We plan to limit TV. Right now her limit is none. We've all read the research about babies' brains and TV. I used to work in the TV industry. Is this hypocritical? Sure. Am I going to risk my baby's brain development? No way.
post #88 of 125
Thread Starter 
Yooper, You said, "Boundaries based on size, maturity, health, safety, etc are different." (Ya know, I can't do the darn Quote thing and have it work for just a partial quote)...

***************
Anyway, this does not seem to be any different. Call it a "boundary" or call it a "rule." Having the "boundary" be based on size, maturity, etc... means that you are taking into consideration that a child DOES have less maturity....

So, my point is, you can call it what you want, but you still have "rules" (aka boundaries) based on what a child can do.

Now......here's what I don't get. Why would that be a bad thing?
post #89 of 125
Perhaps it is the word "rules" that I have an issue with. I think of rules as - if you break them, you will be punished. I am more comfortable with boundaries. Boundaries seem like more of a natural consequence of our abilities and behaviours.

For example. 1000 years ago, I think it would be pretty safe to say that people believed it was a rule that you couldn't fly to the moon. As we've evolved we now have the technology to do so. Now there are boundaries that make it unlikely that you can fly to the moon. (Because you don't have the training, the skills, the $ etc.)

I would parallel this with rules and boundaries for children. Rules are something that there is no way you can do, and boundaries are something you're not able to do because of a set of circumstances.

(My grammar is all wacky in this, but I think you'll know what I mean).
post #90 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2bluefish View Post
My mother drank Pepsi ever since I can remember and despite never being allowed to drink soda as a child, I drink it as an adult. I don't really feel I can blame my choice to drink soda on my mom though, since I started the habit in college.
See, this is the place I come from. I had rules and "do as I say" rules. I went wild in my 20s with food, and to a certain extent, alcohol. It took me until I was 30 to be able to self-regulate my diet.

I am hoping that by letting my child have chocolate (or french fries etc.), and discussing its effects on his body - does it make you excited, give you a stomach ache, a head ache? - that he will know and be able to make his own choices about what is good for his body.
post #91 of 125
That sounds like a good plan BD. DD is under 3, so I don't think she is old enough to understand that the reason she's still awake at 11:30 pm is because she was stealing sips of mommy's soda! But eventually I do want her to have the ability to self regulate.

Soda is a feel good for me. I know that it is a "soothie" for me, and I have yet to find an adequate replacement. I enjoy the entire experience of having a soda. I can have that experience in the midst of a stressful situation. I've done EFT - but tapping on my head is not nearly as fun as a soda. Mom would say I should pray - but praying is not nearly as fun as a soda. I don't know the answer, but I'm at least working on limiting my intake. That's better than nothing!
post #92 of 125
Thread Starter 
LOL that the word "rules" might be what people have a problem with.



I just don't believe in pussyfooting around with wording like that.

And....fwiw....I don't think ALL rules are "bad."
post #93 of 125
Quote:
So, my point is, you can call it what you want, but you still have "rules" (aka boundaries) based on what a child can do.

Now......here's what I don't get. Why would that be a bad thing?
It is not.

it allows the child to grow and progress -- earning bigger boundaires as they can handle them -- in a natural and even way. so teh child feels safe and is mostly safe.

the bounds, or rules, fit their responiblity level, their ablity level and their personal maturity level --- i do not like things based only on age, i believe in Min age -- but not that things are automatice at that age. My son will NOT drive before 16, however he may not drive at 16 either based on him.....

Aimee
post #94 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yooper View Post
I do allow my dd to have a sip of beer or wine. If she was really interested, I would be happy to offer her diluted wine. Dd was not interested in sips at 1.5 yo. Had she been, I would have allowed it. We talk all about what alcohol is, why it is legally only for adults, what it does to small (and big) bodies.
Am I reading this correctly? Do you really give your child alcohol and then tell her that you're willingly breaking the law by doing so? I understand some people don't care for "rules", but isn't that teaching your child it's ok to break the law?

K.
post #95 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by karina5 View Post
LOL that the word "rules" might be what people have a problem with.



I just don't believe in pussyfooting around with wording like that.

And....fwiw....I don't think ALL rules are "bad."

OK, let me reword. I do believe that we have "limitations" that vary from person to person and are not *imposed* by others. They are the rules of nature. Like I have some limitations. I get sick when I drink a whole bottle of wine, I feel best when I have 10 hours of sleep, and I am highly suseptable to cavities if I do not brush. I also have some limitations in common with my dd. we would probably hurt ourselves badly or even die if we jumped off the roof, we can not fly under our own power, and we cannot fit into a shoebox no matter how hard we try. None of those are imposed by another person. My dd has some limitations that I do not share with her. She does not know all of the rules about road safety, she has trouble using scissors, and she melts down after eating too much sugar. She can still cross the road and use scissors (with help) and she can still eat sugar knowing sull well what the consequenses will be. I do not impose "rules" but there are inherant limitations.

So yes, I do think it is hypocritical, and therefore something I would not want to do to munch on french fries in front of my dd then tell her it is a "rule" that she cannot have any.
post #96 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by TabbyK View Post
Am I reading this correctly? Do you really give your child alcohol and then tell her that you're willingly breaking the law by doing so? I understand some people don't care for "rules", but isn't that teaching your child it's ok to break the law?

K.

Well, I do not really have a problem with breaking the law in some cases. And I have no problem explaining my opinion on the matter with dd. Of course, I would also explain the potential consequences of breaking the law.

But that is a moot point since the law, in my state anyway, allows parents to give their children alcohol.
post #97 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by karina5 View Post
This may sound old-fashioned, and I hope not, b/c I don't think I am in most ways, but when I see posts that say this, I usually think, "what's so hypocritical?"

For example....this is something I have a bit of guilt about, but once in a while I have some McDonald's French Fries (guilty indulgence). Someone said to me once, "Oh, *YOU* have them, but you don't allow your son (he is not yet 2) to have them. How hypocritical of you!"

I felt, "No, he is a child, and I am an adult. If I choose to put crappy processed food w/ 0 nutrients in my body, then that's my choice. Meanwhile, he is thriving on his organic apples, veggie burgers, etc..." (By the way, I don't eat the french fries in front of him).

Also, he doesn't drink coffee or wine. I do. He doesn't get to watch violent movies. I just saw The Departed.

kwim??? I just don't feel that different rules for an adult automatically = hypocrisy.
I'm quoting because I'm trying to remember the original question.

IMO it is absolutely hypocritical to tell a child that they can't have french fries when you eat them if the reasoning is that they are unhealthy (which presumably it is). I wouldn't call it hypocritical to eat french fries and deny them to your child if he/she was deathly allergic to potatoes.

Just because you are able to make the distinction between healthy and unhealthy and your child is not doesn't change the fact that you are deciding that a universally unhealthy thing is okay for you to eat and not your child. To me, that is hypocrisy. If something is unhealthy and shouldn't be eaten then it shouldn't be eaten by anybody.

Now, I will say that I do eat french fries and I do not eat them in front of my children. I will also say that it is completely hypocritical of me to do so.
post #98 of 125
I have noticed that a lot of people don't like to impose "rules" on their children, because it is like saying "no". I have no problem with either, because I firmly believe little ones need and want our protection and guidance and that includes "rules" and "no"s. They trust us to do so, and if we don't, we are letting them down. They are not ready to make all the decisions that adults are, no matter how we want to believe it. It may sound silly, but if children were emotionally, mentally and physically equiped to be "equal" (don't like that word, but can't think of another one at this moment) with adults, they would be born as adults, not helpless babies that don't really mature fully until 18 or so. Biologically, I believe there is a reason babies are born to adults rather than hatched in the woods and left to fend for themselves.
post #99 of 125
Holy hijack, Batman! Yowza. :

To the OP, I can't answer the question at all because it's insanely confusing to me, too. There is no way rules and expectations are the same for kids and adults in our family! The rules among the children aren't even the same.

Furthermore, some of the rules for our children exist for no other reason except the convenience of the adults in the house. For instance, if you're not old enough to vote, you have to be in your bed by 8:30 pm. DD11 and DS13 can read and listen to music on their headphones as long as they like, but still they must be in bed. They don't need to be there (DD especially could get by just fine if she went to bed at 10:00), but we need them to be there. DH and I need some time to be married adults. DH, my sister (who lives with us), and I go to bed when we get tired, whether that happens at 8 pm or 3 am. No, my kids don't like it. They're offended that they don't get to go to bed whenever they want, and I wish they could understand it and therefore accept it, but IME parenting just doesn't work that way some of the time.

Adults in our house can eat or drink whatever we want in the living room. Kids must keep all food and drinks, except water in a covered container, in the kitchen. When they are as good as me at getting spaghetti out of the carpet, they'll be allowed to eat in the living room, too.

What else? Lots of things, I know. We eat things they can't, watch things they're not allowed to see, read books that they can't, go places they're not allowed to go, have conversations we won't let them participate in, etc., etc., etc...

Of course it's not all draconian. My older kids have earned many privileges in the past few years, though they will always have to tell me exactly where they are going, and with whom, even though I can go wherever I want without giving notice to anyone. It's not hypocritical; it's parenting.

This isn't always a popular position here, but we really believe in firm, consistent, loving discipline. I believe it is my job to set a good example for my children; I do not believe that I need to make my kids feel like everything is fair.
post #100 of 125
Uptownzoo ~ what a breath of fresh air to read your post! All I have to say is "ditto"!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Why Is It Hypocrisy To Have Different Rules For Adults Than Children??