Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Maybe it is through working with children and families and being in a situation where there often isn't chance to find the parents (who should be supervising their children) before asking children to stop behaviour which could be dangerous to others in the area.


I think that if there isn't a parent/carer around to speak to regarding the behaviour of the child, then a polite word to the child pointing out that deliberately spraying a baby full in the face with a water cannon is appropriate... I mean, we're all agreed that that isn't acceptable behaviour aren't we?? Something more minor obv wouldn't need such urgent attention, but think this situation justified it.


Obviously if the parent/carer is around then yes, they should be approached first, but am sure that a "Stop that" or similar would escape my lips (and possibly get the parents attention).


I'm surprised that no one so far has considered the affect that this father having a go at Fuschia could have on the child and how this could lead to them not caring about the effect their behaviour could have on others as if anyone complains their dad would have a go at them back thus allowing the child to (possibly) get away with anything they like.

Cuppatea, my very next post stated that walloping was clearly not acceptable. My phone screen does weird things and halved the original post. And, yes, drenching the baby certainly was an assault for your info.


Otta, the chance of SW really agreeing with me is very low. I am reading heavy irony into her post.


SW, are you genuinely agreeing with me? I might fall off my chair, if so.



It boils down to basics. I am fundamentally traditional in my views about bringing up children and I expect adults to discipline them and control them as part of nurturing them and loving them to the ends of the earth. I see the "consistently saying no" thing as an unpleasant parent duty. I would much much rather eg supply them with an extra piece of cake for example and see their smiles. But parents haveto set boundaries and say no, in my view. If parents are failing in this - errrr see every stratum of British society for more details - then other parents have to step in to protect their children.


That's where Im coming from.


Incidentally a child who takes pleasure in drenching a baby is a completely different and much nastier child than one who drenches his or her older sister, for example.

Otta, I thought about your post. I see where you are coming from but I guess my starting point is that there is a victim and a perpetrator here and I don't entirely see why the "victim" should be further inconvenienced by you preferred way of dealing with the "perpetrator". Can you see what I mean?


It is equally possible that, in some cases, the mother of a child who is hit will have a preferred way of telling off the "hitter" to reinforce what she has been teaching her children about the unacceptability of violence.


So, on balance, if your child transgreses, it is starting to look very precious, at the very least,to complain about how other parents reprimand your child.

I take your point, but I guess the whole problem with this is that we are talking about each individual's own children.


I can see the value in doing things both ways, but unless you know a parent is from the same school of thought as you, you always run the risk of upsetting a stranger, and possibly getting a piece if their mind, if they have an aggressive disposition.


At the end of the day, I just can't believe a little girl actually thought to herself "that woman just glared at me, I'll show hee, I'll aim right at the small baby's head, because that will do the most damage".

Fuschia Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But my main point really was about the father ...

> Surely it's instinctive to apologise on behalf of

> your child if they hurt or uOset a much smaller

> child



Maybe he would have if he was approached first. I'm not saying what you did was wrong but it's not uncommon for people to instinctively defend their child/family to strangers, although it doesn't mean they are not reprimanded in private. The father swearing at you, esp in front of children, is not acceptable.

Fuschia Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta, I doubt she did

>

> But at the age of 7 or so I think she would

> realise it was an unkind thing to do

>

> But my main point really was about the father ...

> Surely it's instinctive to apologise on behalf of

> your child if they hurt or uOset a much smaller

> child



I just suppose with human nature as it is, we could all act more appropriately with hindsight.

Yesterday, after a long stressful day, I threw a plate of food onto the floor in a temper. Now I am 37!

And hypocritically I often expect my children to be able to contain their rage.....it's unreasonable when I am incapable of keeping a lid on my own. At age 7 she probably knew afterwards it was an unkind thing to do, but it is also possible that it was spontaneous, inappropriate behaviour. The pre-meditated angle on it is from an adult perspective and not a child's. For example, could you really have controlled your initial glare? I very much doubt it, for the same reasons - emotions often come first, particularly when it's our own child who has been wronged.


New Mother: "It boils down to basics. I am fundamentally traditional in my views about bringing up children and I expect adults to discipline them and control them as part of nurturing them and loving them to the ends of the earth. I see the "consistently saying no" thing as an unpleasant parent duty. I would much much rather eg supply them with an extra piece of cake for example and see their smiles. But parents haveto set boundaries and say no, in my view. If parents are failing in this - errrr see every stratum of British society for more details - then other parents have to step in to protect their children."


What proof do you have the everything wrong about "British Society" is down to parents' lack of boundaries. From what I can see around authoritarian style parenting is the norm. Personally I think that discipline and control are sure ways of teaching kids to become self-centred and angry. It doesn't necessarily create kind, happy people. In my experience (which, granted, is limited to my own challenging kids and how I was parented)'working with' approach is more effective than a 'doing to' one. I don't imagine for one minute I am going to convince you, but personally I would rather not believe the hype and panic about raising 'disaffected youths'. Controlling people makes them controlling too.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Just wanted to let you all know that Dulwich Antiques is serving free takeaway coffee (Old Spike), tea and hot chocolate all day every Sunday. We’re open today till 5pm.  Dulwich Antiques, 3 Upland Road. Hopefully see you there! Rachel & Conrad 
    • But is it the Village councillors who are maintaining the board, or someone else? When the boards in East Dulwich were installed, it wasn't the councillors who kept the information up to date, it was Monica from Health Matters, who was greatly involved in various  community matters (eg the building of the community garden at what was then Dulwich Hospital). I can't remember if it was her who initiated the installation of the boards in the first place. She no longer lives in East Dulwich, and nobody else appears to be willing to liaise with the councillors and community related organisations  to take this on for the various East Dulwich boards.  It would hardly take much effort. Basic information doesn't frequently change (and no, I'm not volunteering. I am overstretched as it is). It's all very well to  get a physical  community notice board spruced up, but not much use if it then isn't being used for its intended purpose. And I can't see that it is part of a councillor's job to update notice boards which they didn't initiate in the first place. I'm sure they have more than enough to do.  The notice boards serve (or did do) a useful service, but all the information which could be put on them is surely available elsewhere. (Unless it is bringing to people's attention things which are of use/interest to them and they weren't aware they needed/would like, or didn't know how else to find the information). ETA: Oh. I've just read the beginning of this thread. I'd forgotten how it started. It's gone well off topic, hasn't it. Probably just as well, reading the OP.
    • The board in the Village (just near the pub) is in pristine condition, full of council-related information (though someone had stuck a flyer on the glass, now removed). Maybe the councillors there actually CBA to make use of a facility that took time, effort and taxpayers’ money to instal?  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...