erp: I lived in dread that the [Mother's Day] plants would die before the kids forgot about them and often replenished those that didn't make it.Well as it happens, Lileks, a definite younger setter, spoke on this very subject this morning (5/13/08).
monix: I bet you could fill a book with the tricks you did to keep the children from being disappointed. I lost count of the number of gerbils we secretly replaced when the pets died or escaped.
erp: My kids tell it like it is and their kids, being perfect, don't seem to take things to heart. Maybe we made it harder for them when they grew up and learned the real world doesn't replace their gerbils or their tomato plants.
Just asking?
Be interesting to hear from the younger set on this issue.
Catastrophe! (G)Nat dropped her Nintendo and it broke.Since it was an accident, I think the ramifications are too harsh. If this had happened to our six year old, we would have been in the car purchasing a replacement ASAP, nor would we have expected the child to pay for it out of her savings.
Good news! (G)Nat dropped her Nintendo and it broke. This is a teachable moment, in which she learned an important lesson: don’t drop your Nintendo, or it will break. Also, a replacement is not immediately forthcoming. The world doesn’t work that way. Well, her world doesn’t work that way. I will not let her use savings to ut (sic) a new one, because she has no concept of money; I have told her she can wait three months, which is a mean cruel ETERNITY, but: she can hasten the day by spending Nintendo time on other things, such as reading and art. The more she does that, the faster Replacement Day comes.
Saying
would be enough.
Also, and this really irks me, reading and art are fun things kids naturally like to do, so why link doing them to working off punishment for breaking a Nintendo.
If it's okay for the child to use her savings to pay for a new one three months hence, why isn't okay to use her savings to buy a new one immediately? Learn a lesson? We all know that if we drop something, it may break. The lesson learned here is, daddy's in a grouchy mood.
Are we, monix and I, just too soft-hearted/headed?
12 comments:
Yup, y'all are too soft hearted. That's why there are mommies AND daddies...
Bret, we were too soft-hearted when we were mommies and daddies too.
I'm with you, e. Exactly what lesson was being taught? A six year old might be shown how to take better care of her things but only a much older child could follow that rambling lesson and understand the timescale.
m. We agree, but are we right?
Well, I would ask why a 6 year old has a Nintendo. I didn't let my kids have one when they were that age in no small part because of the breakage / loss issue. Heck, our 11 year old has breakage / loss issues with his Nintendo.
I am soft hearted too. When Boy 2 was 6, he had a stuffed shark that was his boon companion, until the dog spent the night playing with it. Luckily, Boy 2 would frequently misplace the shark, so we told him it was lost, but would turn up, while I frantically called up the place we got it and had them ship me a new one, which we later "found".
Well, my kids didn't even have TV when they were six, so Nintendo wouldn't have been an issue. But the attitude displayed by the parent in the story could apply to the tomato plant, gerbil or toy shark. Should we soften life's blows for our children until they are old enough to understand disappointment? I suppose we all have different ideas of the age children can/should take responsibility and erp and I thought this particular mum was harsh.
monix,
"this particular mum" (Lileks) is actually a dad.
I think learning to deal with disappointment and rebound from it is best taught as early as possible. The younger the child, the shorter the attention span, and the quicker the natural rebound from adversity. I'm not saying that one should introduce extra adversity, but on those infrequent times when it happens in this modern and very, very cushy world, we ought not be overly protective.
My specific response would've been, "Oops, you dropped your toy, it broke, big deal, be sad for a bit, move on, find something else to play with or go read a book or something." I probably would've thrown in a hug or two as well.
As far as replacing it goes, assuming the child requested that, my response would've been, "I'm sure there'll be new toys in your future, but no, we're not going to rush out and replace this one anytime soon."
I have two daughters, 8 & 11, and they've broken toys and those were my responses. The outcome is that they've learned to be reasonably careful with things, but if they break, wear out, or get lost, they get over it quickly and move on.
I think that's a good thing.
P.S. I do agree that Lilek's response was overly rambling and hard to follow, especially relative to my response above. The moment teaches by itself with no complications from adults: (a) if you drop things they break; (b) you'll get over it and life will go on just fine.
P.P.S. "Boon companions" like stuffed sharks which are singular objects of love, affection, and comfort fall into a much different category than a toy and I think that more extraordinary measures to comfort the child or replace the object of comfort are warranted.
Bret, I agree with all you say in these latest comments. There is a huge difference between what you call 'boon companions' and other toys and most parents would treat them accordingly, I imagine.
What bothered me in e's story of the parent (sorry for the gender error!)was the reasons he gave for the punishment he imposed. It was illogical and sending out the wrong messages but I suppose it satisfied his adult sense of justice.
All good points, however, my problem was that the reaction to a kid breaking a toy was inappropriate. If she was fooling around with something she shouldn't have been touching like a favorite vase then the reaction might have been merited and if she had been told that things break and they'd see about replacing it sometime, that might have been disappointing, but telling her the toy could be replaced, but not for three months and then would come out of her savings. Harsh and punitive.
I don't like the notion of a child's own money (savings) which can be used to purchase things mom and dad won't get for them. If we approved of and could afford what they wanted, they got it. If we didn't approve, it didn't matter if they could get their hands on money from another source and gifts for birthdays and other special occasions from grandparents and others were always pre-approved. The system worked fine. They got their "savings" on their 18th birthday and were quite delighted about it.
Computers were well in the future when my kids were small and television viewing was limited one program, Star Trek, which we all watched together. In fact, we got a color TV just for that purpose.
erp wrote: "I don't like the notion of a child's own money (savings) which can be used to purchase things mom and dad won't get for them.."
I can't tell you how many times the daughters have said something like, "I really want X. Could you buy it for me?" My response is often, "I'm not going to buy that for you, but I wouldn't mind if you bought it for yourself with your own money." They're response is often, "Well, in that case, no, I guess I don't want it after all."
So, they only want X if they don't have to pay for it. Hmmmm. I have no problem having them make the tradeoffs between the things they might want now and in the future. Of course they want everything if it's free. Me too!
Post a Comment