[peaceful_mama]

So I've been reading ScreamFree parenting

And I was reading this little clip today where he talks about working with parents of high school seniors.

One example he used of parents "letting go" of the child was giving an extension of curfew.

Which gave me a real flash of "insight" on what I'd like my kids' future to look like.

I was 18 by the time I was a senior. Certainly, if I've done my job, I would think that my 17-18 year old child could be curfew-free.

By this, I mean, I hope that I would not feel the need to put this "control" on them because I trust they are not out breaking laws.

I hope that by then I've raised them to have enough common sense to realize that if they are out with friends, studying or otherwise, on a school night, that they will come home at a decent hour to do what they'd like to do at home, sleep, and not feel like crap the next day and get to school on time in the morning. (and well, if they choose to stay out too late, then they experience and learn from the consequences.)

I know some cities, like the one I live in, have curfew for under 18--yes, they would have to follow THAT or experience the consequences, just like any other law.

But in general, by the time they are close to the age where they might move out, I want to be done being the one to make the rules for them. NOT because I am done being a parent, but because I have raised children who are able to take responsibility for their own actions and "police themselves."

thoughts?

 

[GoBecGo]

By the time i was 15 my parents were allowing me to go to clubs (for 18+ adults) where there was alcohol. My dad would drop me off (in plain view, thus if we were knocked back for being underage (and none of us had fake ID, we just chanced our luck) that was our own problem - he never "hid" to make it easier) and pick us up at a pre-arranged time. We had an agreement about alcohol (i.e. under 16 i wasn't allowed to drink any at all, once i was 16 i was allowed to have one drink) and i NVER broke those rules. My friends and i really enjoyed getting dressed up and dancing. We were not out talking to men, getting drunk or anything else. They trusted me to make sensible decisions and behave responsibly and i did.

My brotheron the other hand, raised the same, was terrible. He drank to the point of unconsciousness on several occasions. He drank enough to come home vomiting frequently (almost weekly). He left school because a teacher had annoyed him, signed up for a college course he neer attended and got a student loan in order to pay hand ver fist for a car that he never managed to get running. He never behaved responsibly. He's 32 now and still wacky, but he lives alone and deals with his own messes now.

So i guess i'm going to wait and see how my kids are when they're that age. I would hope DD has the same attitude i had, but you never can tell. I do think that responsibility and self-regulation are part learned skills (which obviously need practice) and part inherent developmental stage. So if my 17 year old is still making and expecting me to clean up messes as if they were 12 i'll probably go on inflicting the same limitations on them until i can see they're ready for more responsibility.

 

[ann_of_loxley]

Because discipline means 'to teach' and children, being human naturally!, learn by being social (as in learning how to 'behave' in the society that we live in by seeing and doing : we do decend from monkeys

hehe) - meaning that 'modeling behaviour' is a pretty big thing = therefore I am teaching (disciplining) my child by doing...

I sum it up as:

I want my son to do the right thing for the right reasons.

I parent consensually because I feel then that my sons actions are done for the right reason (such as: he is not acting to avoid a punishment - we don't use punishments. If I punished him to get him to behave a certain way, I am teaching him to do the right thing or else I will do something unpleasant to him. Not my goal. He is not acting to gain something selfishly for himself - we don't use rewards/manipulative praise. If I rewarded/praised him for behaving a certain way, I am teaching him to do the right thing to gain something of himself. Not my goal. He is not acting manipulative or coercive himself - because we do not treat him that way either. etc etc) ...All of these things teach a child to do the right thing, for the wrong reasons. They may gain instant 'good behaviour' but what about when you are not there? You know, how you said...when they are an 'adult' - ready to move out of the house. My son (even now at 3.5) does the right thing for the right reasons even when I am not there (I mean, hes not perfect - but neither am I...just go with me on this

...) because just as when I am there, he is not behaving out of me doing something to him - instead I work with him. Now I choose to parent consensually for more than that reason of course - there are the emotional side of life, the parent child connection side of life, etc etc...But when it comes to basic 'discipline' - thats it for me.

 

[GuildJenn]

I agree with you, but I think the point at which it happens is different for each kid.

I NEVER had a curfew that was overriding; we always talked about each situation differently.