How To Become Better At Parenting => Helping Escapists version 1.0

[JoJo]

I'm sorry. I forgot to put up the sarcasm tags on the first part of my comment. And I also forgot the one thing my wife tells me about regularly. Not everyone is as strong as I am. Not physically, but emotionally and mentally. So, disregard my post. I am apparently not included in the people who were spanked but didn't turn out the way the studies say children will turn out.

Fair enough about the sarcasm, but I don't understand the rest of your post. Of course not everyone has the same mental strength, that's evident, otherwise people wouldn't often react differently to the same type of event. You can't expect everyone to be the same as you. The issue I have with the pro-spanking side is that they seem to rely solely of anecdotal evidence, despite a number of heated debates I've never seen a pro-spanker present any actual peer reviewed studies in support of their views yet.

 

[Dastardly]

The last link is the best and also adds that there are additional negative effects if the child is above 5 or 6 and/or the parent seems cold or distant while they are disciplining.

That's not entirely true. These sources indicate there are believed to be links between certain types of punishment and certain negative childhood outcomes, and that while attempts are made to account for cultural or situational differences, you cannot clearly state a cause/effect relationship.

In my childhood, spankings/etc. were used primarily to keep us from harmful behaviors before we were old enough to understand the risks. For instance, maybe I was moving to touch a hot iron while my mom's back was turned. First, I'm told, "No!" But I continue trying. She could:

1. Just move the iron... which doesn't prevent me from remaining curious. It also teaches me, indirectly, that anything within my reach is fair game. It's only a no-no when it's out of reach.

2. Explain to me that the iron is hot, and touchi.... blah blah, where's my toy? There it is! Dum de dum dum, hey look! An iron!

3. Pop my hand and say, "No!." Which stings. But not as much as the iron would, that's for sure. I now know, "Try to touch the iron, and your hand will hurt." I additionally learn the word, "No," is serious business.

In the future, not only will I not try to touch the iron, I'll also respond more urgently to the word, "No!" Later in my life, I could be reasoned with and told why touching it was a bad idea. But in the meantime, it was a quick, effective way to stop a potential harmful behavior.

Where spanking goes wrong:

1. When parents do it out of anger or frustration. Big problem there. Even the right thing for the wrong reasons is the wrong thing.

2. When it's the only thing they do. Spanking should always be accompanied by some instruction -- even if it's just "No!" for our non-verbal kids. It should be understood as a consequence for choosing not to behave. And it's not always the best tool for the job -- a hammer is not a screwdriver, a screwdriver is not a saw.

3. When the child has not yet been taught that there are some things adults can do that children cannot. This was one of the most important things drilled into me as a child, and it has saved me a world of grief... but kids aren't being taught that anymore.

- I can have fruit punch in the living room, but you cannot. Because I'm a grown-up.
- I can punish you for misbehavior, but you cannot punish others. Because I'm a grown-up.
- I can stay up later than you. Because I'm a grown-up.
- I can use the table saw without supervision or permission. Because I'm a grown-up.
- I can have coffee/beer even though you're not allowed to. Because I'm a grown-up.

When parenting became a partnership, I know we noticed a massive difference in behavior at school. Parenting, especially up to high school age, needs to be a "benevolent dictatorship." You're teaching your child how to behave, and at the same time you're making sure it gets done. Just because your child gets old enough to have opinions doesn't mean they're old enough to "know what's good for them."

 

[Esotera]

Spoiler: This be the word

They fuck you up, your mum and dad.
They may not mean to, but they do.
They fill you with the faults they had
And add some extra, just for you.

But they were fucked up in their turn
By fools in old-style hats and coats,
Who half the time were soppy-stern
And half at one another's throats.

Man hands on misery to man.
It deepens like a coastal shelf.
Get out as early as you can,
And don't have any kids yourself.

Phillip Larkins

Thought it was vaguely appropriate.

OT: It all depends on the age of the teenager, I'd say if they're 17+ I'd be ok with them going to parties, as long as they're acting responsibly. If they're younger than that, then they would have no allowance and a list of several chores to complete, and rewards for when they behave well. Parenting just seems like a mix of negative & positive reinforcement, on a really annoying creature which you can't escape from.

 

[artanis_neravar]

Assumption:
A teenager went to a party late at night without the consent of his/her parents. Unfortunately not only didn't they forbid him/her to go, but they found out, drove to the party and brought him/her back home.

Now, we already discussed http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/113714-Force-A-Teen-Girl-To-Swordfight-Go-To-Jail that beating the shit out of you with wooden sword (among other things) doesn't seem "appropriate".

What kind of parenting tactic or disciplinary action is appropriate in your eyes?

To make things more more informative and more interesting you could state your age (teenager opionion vs. adult opinion) and if you have kids yourself.

So I'm 31 years old, I don't have kids yet (I plan to have someday) and (as a parent) if that was my child I would have some harsh but strictly non physical violent form of penalty in my mind. (Which I will disclose to you at a latter point - first I want your ideas)

While they are away at the part take everything but the bare essentials from their room. Leave the bed pillows, sheets etc. but take any TV's game systems, board games, phones and anything along those lines. When they come back do not cave stay true to the punishment. And if they threaten to runaway, let them, and if they do you don't go after them, you call the police and have them pick up your kid. Running away is actually a crime in America, so is harboring a runaway. Let the kid spend a night in jail and decide which one they prefer. To quote Dr. Phil (and this is the only time I will ever quote this guy) "You want to avoid confrontations with your kids as much as possible, but why you do get in one you always win."

 

[JoJo]

That's not entirely true. These sources indicate there are believed to be links between certain types of punishment and certain negative childhood outcomes, and that while attempts are made to account for cultural or situational differences, you cannot clearly state a cause/effect relationship.

In my childhood, spankings/etc. were used primarily to keep us from harmful behaviors before we were old enough to understand the risks. For instance, maybe I was moving to touch a hot iron while my mom's back was turned. First, I'm told, "No!" But I continue trying. She could:

1. Just move the iron... which doesn't prevent me from remaining curious. It also teaches me, indirectly, that anything within my reach is fair game. It's only a no-no when it's out of reach.

2. Explain to me that the iron is hot, and touchi.... blah blah, where's my toy? There it is! Dum de dum dum, hey look! An iron!

3. Pop my hand and say, "No!." Which stings. But not as much as the iron would, that's for sure. I now know, "Try to touch the iron, and your hand will hurt." I additionally learn the word, "No," is serious business.

In the future, not only will I not try to touch the iron, I'll also respond more urgently to the word, "No!" Later in my life, I could be reasoned with and told why touching it was a bad idea. But in the meantime, it was a quick, effective way to stop a potential harmful behavior.

Your example is a false choice though, because those aren't the only options. Unless the child is pre-verbal, in which case they shouldn't be allowed near hot irons without supervision full stop, then it's possible to give out other punishments they'll understand. E.g. "Go near the iron again and you won't be allowed to watch TV this afternoon". As long as you actually stick to the punishment and don't give in later, then that sort of punishment is just as effective.

Where spanking goes wrong:

1. When parents do it out of anger or frustration. Big problem there. Even the right thing for the wrong reasons is the wrong thing.

2. When it's the only thing they do. Spanking should always be accompanied by some instruction -- even if it's just "No!" for our non-verbal kids. It should be understood as a consequence for choosing not to behave. And it's not always the best tool for the job -- a hammer is not a screwdriver, a screwdriver is not a saw.

No arguments with this, my own mother spanked me out of anger and it wasn't pleasant and didn't make me behave better, if anything it made me feel rebellious against her.

3. When the child has not yet been taught that there are some things adults can do that children cannot. This was one of the most important things drilled into me as a child, and it has saved me a world of grief... but kids aren't being taught that anymore.

- I can have fruit punch in the living room, but you cannot. Because I'm a grown-up.
- I can punish you for misbehavior, but you cannot punish others. Because I'm a grown-up.
- I can stay up later than you. Because I'm a grown-up.
- I can use the table saw without supervision or permission. Because I'm a grown-up.
- I can have coffee/beer even though you're not allowed to. Because I'm a grown-up.

When parenting became a partnership, I know we noticed a massive difference in behavior at school. Parenting, especially up to high school age, needs to be a "benevolent dictatorship." You're teaching your child how to behave, and at the same time you're making sure it gets done.

I haven't seen any evidence that children aren't being taught that adults can do things they can't, however I mostly agree with the "benevolent dictatorship" analogy with one disclaimer: children should be allowed to voice their views, though the adult's word is final, i.e the authoritative parenting model. Authoritarian parents (sounds similar but are different) who don't let their kids speak their own views on matters usually lead to adults who are less independent where-as permissive parents who don't set boundaries for their kids lead to adults who find it difficult to follow rules and function in society. Evidently, the middle ground of authoritative is the best.

Just because your child gets old enough to have opinions doesn't mean they're old enough to "know what's good for them."

This I find a frankly bizarre statement in what was otherwise the best written pro-spanking argument I've ever read. I haven't stated anywhere on this thread or otherwise that I believe that children who are old enough to have opinions are old enough to know what's good for them. Just because I oppose physical discipline doesn't mean I oppose all discipline and the statement above perhaps reveals a little of your own bias on this issue, since it hasn't come from anything I've written.

 

[Dastardly]

Unless the child is pre-verbal, in which case they shouldn't be allowed near hot irons without supervision full stop,

Clearly you've never seen how fast a child can move. It is impossible to have 100% supervision without tying the child to a chair. Occasionally, we have to blink or turn our heads away from the child. While it is possible to make sure the child is always at least 20 feet away from a hot iron, that isn't helpful to anyone.

It's better for the child to learn that some objects can be touched and some cannot, than to alter the child's reality such that the only objects in it are those that they can touch (which, in effect, teaches them they can touch everything...) But back to topic:

E.g. "Go near the iron again and you won't be allowed to watch TV this afternoon". As long as you actually stick to the punishment and don't give in later, then that sort of punishment is just as effective.

Too much distance between the infraction and the consequence. They'll associate that punishment with you being mean, rather than with the action and "No" -- and that's more counter-productive than the slap on the hand. Children that are just learning to draw these cause-effect relationships need the two to be as chronologically close as possible. A child may be fully verbal, but still not have a firm grasp on cause-effect like that -- it's a wholly separate cognitive skill.

I haven't seen any evidence that children aren't being taught that adults can do things they can't, however I mostly agree with the "benevolent dictatorship" analogy with one disclaimer: children should be allowed to voice their views, though the adult's word is final, i.e the authoritative parenting model.

I see frequent evidence that children no longer understand the, "Because an adult said so." This is particularly evident in schools, when those kids come to school and don't understand it. We don't have the time to explain each and every rule each and every time... and in fact, students would simply use that as a stall tactic. Instead, the parents should have instilled (by middle school) a sense that you follow the instructions of the adult in charge. Explanations come later.

But I agree completely on allowing children to express the views. It's simply about making sure the child understands they don't necessarily have a vote -- you can feel however you want about the task, but you still have to do it.

I haven't stated anywhere on this thread or otherwise that I believe that children who are old enough to have opinions are old enough to know what's good for them. Just because I oppose physical discipline doesn't mean I oppose all discipline and the statement above perhaps reveals a little of your own bias on this issue, since it hasn't come from anything I've written.

That statement wasn't addressed toward you specifically, or meant to address anything that you wrote -- it was more an extension of the previously-mentioned problem: parenting is not a partnership or democracy. A lot of people have problems with spanking because they believe it is somehow "teaching kids that it's okay to hit," and that is only true if they are failing to teach the child that sometimes adults can do things kids can't -- and usually they're failing to do that because they're treating parenting like the aforementioned "equal partnership."

I realize that tie-in was unclear and a bit far-removed from the immediate topic, for which I apologize.

 

[Palademon]

Teenager here.

To that situation I'd probably have me taking them away as an embarassing enough punishment and threaten to do something worse next time they disobey something serious, and try to be specific about it, just so they can understand the direct action I'm taking.

My thoughts on other situations:
I don't plan to cater to every whim, but from what I've seen of women shouting at their upset toddlers to be quiet on the bus, I've decided I'll try to promote being more calm by saying "Shhh", and then hugging them or rocking them or something.

I'll try to be a more loving parent, although I do understand having to be mean to teach children things, because they're too young to understand certain things unless you give them a direct order, although I'd try to avoid it, because I hate the idea of deliberately teaching my children wrong things because they don't understand anything but the narrow view.

And no, this is not because I was yelled at a lot. After a point I was actually a child who understood doing bad things. And being bullied makes you understand being nice. My parents never really punished me, so I'm a bit more sheltered than other teenagers, but it's not like I've abused that. It's not like I learnt to act badly because I thought I could get away with it. I could imagine that if I ended up with a child of a disasterous mindset then I'd probably find it impossible to teach them anything.

Yep, I'm going to be an awful parent...
There's so much oppurtunity for them to turn out bad, and then...is it all my fault?
Can't I just leave behind a clone of myself when I die?
At least then I know I'm leaving behind a prick.

 

[FamoFunk]

Yes, helpless, soft and wimpy parents, the bane of everyone. Most likely societies' greatest threat. Maybe the truest form of prime evils in this side of the galaxy. I can't agree more.
So let's help them, make the world better dear escapists, one parent at a time...

How about we leave parenting to parents because they're the people who are actively involved, get down off our high horses build of hindsight and start sorting out the problems in our own lives?

[small]This is going to be a full night of quoting each other ;D[/small]

That, 100% ^

And to you, OP - eh, what's the point of thinking about it, really? No one knows how they'll react until they have children and they are at a certain age certain stuff happens.

I'll come back with an answer in 14ish years time.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

That, 100% ^

[small]You quote divinely! [/small]

99.5%, I should have written "built" rather than "build".

If there's one thing I've heard from EVERY parent I've ever met though it's "What did we do wrong?" in answer to the kids doing something the parents disapprove of.

To most of them I'd say "Not sit in judgement over others children and actually had a damn good try and creating a functioning human."

 

[JoJo]

Clearly you've never seen how fast a child can move.

Since I have an eight year old sister, alas yes I have. That's why I get very annoyed at people on here which ask "where were the parents?" when a child does something stupid, as if a parent could supervise their child 24/7.

It is impossible to have 100% supervision without tying the child to a chair. Occasionally, we have to blink or turn our heads away from the child. While it is possible to make sure the child is always at least 20 feet away from a hot iron, that isn't helpful to anyone.

It's better for the child to learn that some objects can be touched and some cannot, than to alter the child's reality such that the only objects in it are those that they can touch (which, in effect, teaches them they can touch everything...) But back to topic:

Too much distance between the infraction and the consequence. They'll associate that punishment with you being mean, rather than with the action and "No" -- and that's more counter-productive than the slap on the hand. Children that are just learning to draw these cause-effect relationships need the two to be as chronologically close as possible. A child may be fully verbal, but still not have a firm grasp on cause-effect like that -- it's a wholly separate cognitive skill.

While this is quite particular, why not keep the iron out of the child's reach? In my family it was always on the ironing board when in use, which would require around an age of 5 to be tall enough to touch something on it. 100% supervision is impossible but I don't see why the iron can't be kept high when being used. I don't see why there's any real difference in chronological closeness between your idea and mine, and mine could be easily changed to something more immediate such as being instantly taken out of the room to a boring room to stay there for several minutes.

I see frequent evidence that children no longer understand the, "Because an adult said so." This is particularly evident in schools, when those kids come to school and don't understand it. We don't have the time to explain each and every rule each and every time... and in fact, students would simply use that as a stall tactic. Instead, the parents should have instilled (by middle school) a sense that you follow the instructions of the adult in charge. Explanations come later.

But I agree completely on allowing children to express the views. It's simply about making sure the child understands they don't necessarily have a vote -- you can feel however you want about the task, but you still have to do it.

I can agree with you that especially older children don't always follow "because an adult said so." but did they ever? From what I've learned about the past I don't really believe there was ever a time where children did exactly as they were asked, it's simply selective memories that makes us believe that. I also don't see why physical discipline is needed to enforce the idea that a child must obey an adult, as opposed to other forms of discipline.

That statement wasn't addressed toward you specifically, or meant to address anything that you wrote -- it was more an extension of the previously-mentioned problem: parenting is not a partnership or democracy. A lot of people have problems with spanking because they believe it is somehow "teaching kids that it's okay to hit," and that is only true if they are failing to teach the child that sometimes adults can do things kids can't -- and usually they're failing to do that because they're treating parenting like the aforementioned "equal partnership."

I realize that tie-in was unclear and a bit far-removed from the immediate topic, for which I apologize.

Okay, apology accepted. I'm glad to see that you're a more rational debater, since it seems almost every pro-spanker I debate with automatically assumes that anyone who's against spanking is against all discipline, which after a while becomes hugely annoying.

 

[Dastardly]

While this is quite particular, why not keep the iron out of the child's reach? In my family it was always on the ironing board when in use, which would require around an age of 5 to be tall enough to touch something on it. 100% supervision is impossible but I don't see why the iron can't be kept high when being used. I don't see why there's any real difference in chronological closeness between your idea and mine, and mine could be easily changed to something more immediate such as being instantly taken out of the room to a boring room to stay there for several minutes.

And for me, that could work. The potential downsides, as I see them, are that you might be teaching your child that disobeying, "No," is an effective way to get your attention and pull you away from stuff like ironing (also known as "not paying attention to me")... or, more generally, your child is not learning the ever-important skill of being near something but not touching it. (More on stuff like this later)

I can agree with you that especially older children don't always follow "because an adult said so." but did they ever? From what I've learned about the past I don't really believe there was ever a time where children did exactly as they were asked, it's simply selective memories that makes us believe that.

Please don't misunderstand -- of course children have never readily accepted this, and that's not what I'm shooting for here. This can be trickier to spot, but there's a big difference between these two lines of thought:

a) "I know that my child is going to resist this idea/demand/etc. Therefore, I'm going to prepare for this resistance so as to better combat it."

b) "I know that my child is going to resist this idea/demand/etc. Therefore, I'm going to settle for less-than-complete compliance."

In both lines, we expect resistance. But in line B, we excuse it. That's the problem I've got. Happens a lot with middle school teaching, too -- everyone knows "middle school is the worst age," but that expectation is used two different ways. One group says, "Well, they're going to be bad... so being only a little bad is actually pretty good, right?" and they excuse some of the bad behavior. The other group says, "We know the storm is coming, so let's tie everything down. We can't stop the storm from coming, but we can be sure we're prepared to fight it."

I also don't see why physical discipline is needed to enforce the idea that a child must obey an adult, as opposed to other forms of discipline.

And you're correct. I don't draw these artificial lines between physical and non-physical discipline methods. They are all different tools in the same box. They each have different proper uses. They are all equally prone to misuse. They can all be just as destructive when misused, too. I find it nearly impossible to discuss one form of discipline without discussing discipline in general.

I just believe that there are certain select circumstances in which corporal punishment is quite effective. I also believe that many people are unnecessarily alarmist about spanking/etc. I also believe that many "alternative punishments" are just as misused by uninformed parents -- like how a lot of folks still use "time outs" as punishment despite research that says it does not work (time outs are preparation for punishment, in some cases, not a replacement).

Okay, apology accepted. I'm glad to see that you're a more rational debater, since it seems almost every pro-spanker I debate with automatically assumes that anyone who's against spanking is against all discipline, which after a while becomes hugely annoying.

Similarly, I've met some anti-spanker folks who think that as soon as someone is "not anti-spanking" (or possibly "pro-spanking"), they must believe that spanking is the only form of punishment... or that there's no such thing as "good" or "bad" spanking, and automatically believe in all forms of spanking.

Assumptions are a necessary evil when making sense of the world, but just because we expect that they'll be made doesn't mean we shouldn't correct them when they occur (yee-haw, thematic tie-in).

 

[Dastardly]

My thoughts on other situations:
I don't plan to cater to every whim, but from what I've seen of women shouting at their upset toddlers to be quiet on the bus, I've decided I'll try to promote being more calm by saying "Shhh", and then hugging them or rocking them or something.

Mind that your child can "train" you, too -- if your child learns that making loud noise is the surest way to get hugs and rocking from you, they'll turn the tables on you...

 

[SidingWithTheEnemy]

[...]

No offense, but it's attitudes like that that get people killed. And then the handwaving of responsibility begins.
[...]
Making the world better is what drives people like Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Stalin and others.[...]

None taken, being compared to some of the more succesful dictators of the last century is quite pleasing, thank you!

But since I (that's me) have some personal interest and I want to hear out your ideas, please don't imply I'm going to wave these ideas around some parents.
To convince parents to change their methods, they have to ask about your opinion first and afterwards its not very likely they will change anything at all.
I'm positive that I won't change anyone's opinion here. I'm here to collect opinions. Asking around...
In fact I'm asking the Escapists around here, I want to know their opinion. I maybe agree on some, maybe not so on others.
So if your opinion is something like

How about we leave parenting to parents because they're the people who are actively involved, get down off our high horses build of hindsight and start sorting out the problems in our own lives?

it somehow conveys the meaning between "bugger off" and "I don't care" (maybe I'm wrong but that's how it appeared to me)
So if you are not interested in HOW to react in such situations (or if you are not interested in SHARING those ideas with me - for that matter) you maybe don't need to post here in the first place. You are still welcomed to do so, nonetheless and your feedback is appreciated. But don't imply things that don't happen. Nobody is giving high-horse-hindsight lectures to parents here (as far as I can tell).

Anyway, back on topic.
Most of you really had some great ideas. It's quite an interesting and controversial topic about physical violence to gain discipline. Honestly, I don't like physical violence - I'm not sure If I am able to prevent that with my kids. If they drive me crazy and I run out of other options, maybe I snap and spank them pleasurably. I can't say. I try to avoid that situation.
I prefer the psychological approach.

Take something positive away to scold or discipline.
Don't make it a timed event (good point there @Dastardly) kids measure time differently than adults.
Maintain everything you said in order to preserve your credibility as a parent.
Did I miss something important?

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

None taken, being compared to some of the more succesful dictators of the last century is quite pleasing, thank you!

No comparison was made. Any implication is simply that the best ideas often drive the most monstrous changes.

it somehow conveys the meaning between "bugger off" and "I don't care" (maybe I'm wrong but that's how it appeared to me)

I'm saying that trying to sit back and make judgement calls without reference to any of the other pertinent information - while in a calm atmosphere where we don't have to deal with our own emotions - is really rather insulting to the parents who have to deal with this sort of thing daily.

And no-one's got it right yet. Teenagers are a devious bunch at the best of times.

So if you are not interested in HOW to react in such situations (or if you are not interested in SHARING those ideas with me - for that matter) you maybe don't need to post here in the first place. You are still welcomed to do so, nonetheless and your feedback is appreciated. But don't imply things that don't happen. Nobody is giving high-horse-hindsight lectures to parents here (as far as I can tell).

I'm far more interested in preserving the idea that parents, on the whole, do a damn good and thankless job (I'm not one) - and people sitting in judgement of them is exceptionally rude.

Did I miss something important?

One HUGE point. Your teenager will be reading this as well. And if they're smart, work out a way around anything you agree on.

Saying "I will never harm my child" is OK in theory, but saying "I'll never lash out anytime over 18 years, no matter how hard I am pushed by someone who knows every last little button I have" always fails in practice.

BEFORE you look into the social implications of violence and non-violence in different countries.

 

[JoJo]

I just believe that there are certain select circumstances in which corporal punishment is quite effective. I also believe that many people are unnecessarily alarmist about spanking/etc. I also believe that many "alternative punishments" are just as misused by uninformed parents -- like how a lot of folks still use "time outs" as punishment despite research that says it does not work (time outs are preparation for punishment, in some cases, not a replacement).

To be honest I think on most of this we're just going to have to agree to disagree, since neither of us are going to be persuaded. However this part interests me, could you please link the research saying that time outs don't work, since in my experience they have been effective.

 

[SidingWithTheEnemy]

-snip-

What a pity. A really am fond of my dictatorship aspiration.

I have to agree with you that most teenagers are devious bunch at the best of times (well at least sometimes)
They mostly know you (or in their case their parent) oh so very very well. They know which buttons to press and which better left alone - and in some families they are the ones in charge.

Being aware of this (as a parent) helps preemtivly avoid some rather awkward situations but it involves a lot of work for the parents.

[hr]

Anyway, here is my plan and I hope this topic is still interesting enough that I get some opinions out of the Escapists out there.

To make writing easier let's says our teenagers is a "she" and has some similar character traits of the father (in this hypothetical case me)

So, she will like videogames, internet that sort of thing. That's nasty but nice for the parents.
Okay, one could easily deny her access to it. Take away her mobile phone or something, change PC password, lock away the console.
But that's not my style, well not entirely my style.

I would go to the nearest game rental buisness and assuming I know my daughter well enough I rent the worst game that E.A. has to offer at the moment. A game that s*cks *ss, a crappy game that she can't play very well.

Than I force her to play it. She has to finish it before she can give it back, if she needs more time to finish the game (because it's soo bad) she has to pay the price herself for returning the game later. (I simply deduct it from her pocket money)

If she has a really bad temper I might ridicule her while playing and filming the event.
I will tell here that If she does misbehaving again I will upload the ridculous video where she fails playing the game on youtube and viral it on facebook to all her friends.

While she will be disgusted by my reaction she has learned some very important lessons of life.
Can you guess them?

Spoiler: Have a peek!

=> She will understand that EA is the root of all evil (No pun intended @The_root_of_all_evil )
=> She will understand the value and importance of virtual privacy concerning facebook, youtube and such
=> She will value good games and understand what bad games are and why they are bad
=> She will never dare to cross me again. EVER. (Probably)

 

[SilentCom]

Spoiler: This be the word

They fuck you up, your mum and dad.
They may not mean to, but they do.
They fill you with the faults they had
And add some extra, just for you.

But they were fucked up in their turn
By fools in old-style hats and coats,
Who half the time were soppy-stern
And half at one another's throats.

Man hands on misery to man.
It deepens like a coastal shelf.
Get out as early as you can,
And don't have any kids yourself.

Phillip Larkins

Thought it was vaguely appropriate.

OT: It all depends on the age of the teenager, I'd say if they're 17+ I'd be ok with them going to parties, as long as they're acting responsibly. If they're younger than that, then they would have no allowance and a list of several chores to complete, and rewards for when they behave well. Parenting just seems like a mix of negative & positive reinforcement, on a really annoying creature which you can't escape from.

This is basically like the old phrase "The sins of the father are the sins of the son", I'm not sure where it came from (bible maybe?) but yes I would have to agree. Parents do have a tremendous impact on their children, although children are also influenced by other sources such as friends and the media.


OT: In my opinion, good parenting requires certain rules or boundaries to be made but at the same time encouragement should be given to the child so that they may pursue their passions.

 

[SidingWithTheEnemy]

[...]

This is basically like the old phrase "The sins of the father are the sins of the son", I'm not sure where it came from (bible maybe?) but yes I would have to agree. Parents do have a tremendous impact on their children, although children are also influenced by other sources such as friends and the media.


OT: In my opinion, good parenting requires certain rules or boundaries to be made but at the same time encouragement should be given to the child so that they may pursue their passions.

The parents usually have an influence what kind of friends are apropriate to their children (at least to some degree) They decide in which neighborhood they live in. They have some possiblities to chose the school.
The burden of responsability for parents is crushing to put it simply and that's why probably anyone fails somewhere at some point.