Are parents being judged too harshly for being... parents?

[manic_depressive13]

What is the benefit of publicising it? The punishment is already that she has to sell her phone. The only reasons to put that picture up in public is either to humiliate the girl, or attempt to win praise for being tough parents who are willing to punish their kid. Probably a bit of both, with both being really shitty reasons.

I don't think parents are being judged too harshly. I think they are finally being judged appropriately. Kids are a huge fucking responsibility. They lack empathy, they're ignorant of the world, they lack self control. Yes, it's true that there's no guidebook on how to raise children. No, people who don't have children will never fully understand how completely unbearable children can be. But that's why you have the option to not fucking have kids. If you choose to have kids, then yeah, you should be prepared for people to judge you on how you raised them.

 

[BOOM headshot65]

My obligatory Bill Engvall Vid on this subject:


I was raised with strict rules that carried strict punishment, up to and including confiscation of property and corporal punishment. And I wouldn't have it any other way, and am going to raise my kids the same way. It makes no sense how we do it today. We are so scared of making kids upset that we let them run wild and do what ever the hell they want.

 

[Tono Makt]

Everyone has different opinions on what is "right" for parenting and what isn't. That's fine, but the problem comes when other people force their opinions on what is "right" onto other people and use the "For The Children" defense.

For example, many people these days believe that physical punishment is wrong, to the point where even those who believe it is right are hesitant to use it because they don't want to get charged with child abuse. There are places where it is more leeway - if you go to a more religious area, or are part of a more religious social circle, the occasional spanking for bad behaviour is far more likely to be accepted than if you were in a more secular social circle (or a different variety of the same religion; Evangelical vs United, for example). And there are places where even raising your voice at your child may be grounds for Child Services to be called.

As it is all done for the "good of the children", it becomes far more difficult to fight back against it when it's being applied to you. When your "right parenting" is "wrong parenting" to someone else, all they have to do is to call the local Children's Aid Services or Police or whatever the local name is and your life will never be the same. You may believe that spanking is fine, if done in moderation and is controlled but if your neighbour believes that any form of physical punishment is dangerous, you aren't going to spank your child. It's not about you wanting to coddle your kids, or about not wanting to hurt their precious feelings - it's about being terrified that you're going to be labelled a child abuser because you spanked them for breaking a flowerpot through a glass table when you have told them for months not to touch either, have given them time-outs when they touched them in your sight and the moment you're out of sight for just a few minutes, they do exactly what they know they aren't supposed to do.

Mrs. Makt and I were both raised by parents who spanked us when we deserved it, and our parents were quite good about explaining to us exactly why we were being spanked and what we could do in the future to NOT be spanked. But we're also both quite secular and non-religious, so our social circle does not condone spanking nor will the public schools we will send our child to. So we aren't going to spank Lil'Makt. Not because we don't believe spanking is right, or because we just want to coddle Lil'Makt, but because the cost of spanking may be far too high for the potential reward that will come from spanking (that reward being better behaviour from Lil'Makt, when required). It's part of the reason that we waited so long to have kids - we're scared of other parents, we're scared of schools with a "Zero Tolerance" policy ("Lil'Makt has a black eye... she says she was wrestling with Daddy and got hit in the eye. But it's right there on her face, so we have no choice but to call the Police.") and we're scared that if it comes to it, we'll lose Lil'Makt because the authorities will say "Better safe than sorry." and will take Lil'Makt away.

(Much of that is buying into the Media Hype surrounding the issue, we know, and that's a big part of what allowed us to make the decision to have Lil'Makt. But the hype does have a basis in reality, unfortunately.)

 

[Kukakkau]

I really liked that idea of a punishment, it emphasizes for the child that what they did was wrong and it gives a taste of what they've been doing to others along with donating money to then prevent it.

My view on punishment of children is that since spanking children etc has become frowned upon it's a lot harder to get the message across that something is bad. Which then leads to strange ways to berate a child or even just a lack of punishment at all. In my opinion it's made future generations of kids a lot worse behaved than in the past.

My biggest concern though comes from a friend I have who was doing child care/primary teaching. They are not allowed to tell someone else's child that they are wrong or what they did is bad. So they can barely intervene if a child say pulls another's hair or hits them, only tell the parent when they come to collect their child and have them do... nothing.

It really concerns me

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

While I will say that the fact that she had to sell her iphone and give the proceeds to an anti-bullying charity was a good idea, the reddit thing definetely was not.

Involving the internet on familial judgment is a fine line to walk on at best, because you can never trust the internet to remain civil or upstanding about these matters.

I do like the bit that the girl was taught that her actions have consequences, a lot of teenagers just seem to forget that because they either have neglectful or lack-a-daisy parents, which ends up in them doing stupid things or potentially harmful things.

(God do I sometimes dislike being grouped with the stereotype of "Millenials")

Modern parenting does tend to be laissez-faire a bit too often though, I can't help think that those cyber-bullying stories could've been avoided if the parents were more involved with their own kids, far too often it seems like they just dont talk to their kids and that is a shame: if they could it can help them with a lot of problems because the teenage years are those awkward years where hormones are douchebags and can throw your emotions out of whack, and you react more sensitively to things than you would as an adult.

Being able to talk about it with someone you trust helps, I don't but that is because of secondary school fucking me up a bit in the way that I trust people, so I usually tend to keep my problems to myself, but that's something else entirely that I do not want to get into right now.

In conclusion: modern parenting is a bit too lax, kids should learn to take responsibility for their actions and parents should be more involved in their own children's lives.

 

[Parasondox]

I miss the time when you could just beat sense into some brat for grossly misbehaving...

I've seen plenty of kids that have been raised in "modern" ways. They're usually either complete retards, antisocial or borderline psychotic. The parents defend them as being "lively" or "anti-authoritarian", blaming those who have to endure the ways of their offspring. The fact that kids up to a certain age (14 in Germany) have absolute legal immunity in most european countries doesn't make it better. They can steal, vandalize and injure people as they please and all that happens is that their incompetent parents have to pick them up from the police station.

I'm sick of all these social workers and pedagogues that condemn all the established methods to experiment with minors.

You know as soon as you said all of that, a local story came to mind. During the London summer riots back in 2011, many people, who I will call "fools" went out to cause trouble and after that day, the government went rough on anyone involved. One case was about an 18 who went out to cause trouble and she was caught on CCTV. Her mother found out what she was up too via footage on the news. Next thing you know, she rang the police on her own daughter and she was sent away by police. Many people were shocked that she called the police on her own daughter but you know what, I am glad she did. Some parents need to stop protecting their children that cause trouble that may harm others and not suffer the consequences. If that was me, my mother and father would do exactly what that mother did. Those few nights were just hell where I lived and idiots like them should be punished and this 18 year old was a youth ambassador for a borough in East London.

 

[Someone Depressing]

Teaching a child how to behave in society and get along in life = parenting.

The above is equally interchangeable with, punishing a child for their wrongdoings and teaching them a lesson.

Making someone do the right thing isn't bullying.

 

[Mersadeon]

Ok, an opinion from Germany here, and it's specific to this place I think.

Apart from the parents, the Office of Youth is always criticised - either because they have "wrongfully" taken away a child even though the parents were trying to get better (this is especially often shown in bad TV-shows aimed at stay-at-home-mothers) or they didn't do enough and should have been more restrictive. Then there's the people saying they should have their budget cut because of all the times they have fucked up. These people are stupid. All those mistakes come from a lack of budget - employees of the Office of Youth simply do not have enough time each day to actually check on all the kids that have been put on their schedule. They can't. I just wish people would understand that "revenge funding cutting" isn't the way to go here.


But on parents being judged: Some parts are overly sensitive. Kids don't have to be watched 24/7, even when they're relatively young. A lack of trust in your kids will do more harm. But as soon as you let your kid out of your eyes, those bored middle-class idiots scream and whine about "child abuse" and that you should watch your kid all the time. Jesus Christ, kids need independence and parents need a bit of time away from their children. The kid is a block away playing with his friends, no need to sit next to him. And the whole "PAEDOPHILES WILL STEAL YOUR CHILD" argument is so god damn stupid anyway, I could rant about it a lot longer.

 

[Relish in Chaos]

My stance has always been: if you can?t handle your child, you shouldn?t have had them in the first place, and don?t expect the government to parent them either.

Public humiliation is unacceptable as a form of punishment for a child. That?s basically bullying, if you ask me. I don?t give a shit how bad the thing that the kid did was; shame should never be used as a weapon. Not to mention, studies have shown that corporal punishment doesn?t actually teach the child that what they?re doing is wrong; it just makes them confused, angry, and teaches them that violence is a good way to get someone to stop doing something you don?t want them to do.

Trust me, I?d love to slap the shit out of some kid that was crying and pissing me off by not doing what they?re told. But that?s why I don?t have kids. Because I?d be a horrible bastard to them. I don?t have any ill feelings towards my mum now, but I remember at the time, I?d be scared shitless when my mum walked off to get the belt if I was doing poor in my homework.