# Comparing spouse relationships to parent/child relationships



## IdahoMom (Nov 8, 2005)

I don't get it.

Your spouse is an adult person, grown and raised, with experience and life-skills built in. In my marriage anyway, our relationship includes support but not guidance. We are a team on equal footing, because we both have experience to contribute.

Children are children! While we give them love and respect, being responsible parents also requires guidance and sometimes decision making on their behalf. I am their teacher and protector. We do believe in authority in our house, because until they get older and learn better, the kids will generally act more on their impulses and wants than toward what's best for them or for the household.

So when I often read the argument here along the lines of, "If I told my spouse we had to go to X or do Y and he didn't want to but I said we are anyway, that would be totally disrespectful. I'd never talk to my spouse like that." No, you probably wouldn't. Different relationship. Different ability to understand. Just totally different.

Am I missing something?


----------



## captain optimism (Jan 2, 2003)

I can't believe I'm wading in here after the philosophical debates of the last couple of days on this forum. Oh well.

I might be side-stepping your question, but I often feel like I have to be more respectful and more polite to my child than to my spouse, because I'm modelling behavior for my child. My spouse is already a grown up.

Having read Winnie the Pooh dozens of times now (!) I recall that Kanga is described as realizing that Tigger "needs kindness" as much as Roo. A childlike person needs more kindness.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

nak, but this is from Peggy O'Mara and might help:

Quote:

When I get confused about discipline, I think about what I would do in a similar situation with an adult friend. I would not slap my adult friend, for example, for spilling her drink. I would assume that she made an honest mistake. I would not punish my friend for acting immaturely in a group. Instead, I would try to understand and sympathize, would give her the benefit of the doubt, and would be eager to hear her side of the story. We give our friends a wide berth because we do not feel responsible for their behavior in the same way we do for our children's behavior. It requires a huge leap of faith to trust our children to their own destinies while we also guide them through ours. We love our children more than anyone else on earth, and we want to give them tools to be effective in the world. It makes sense to model compassion. It works.


----------



## savithny (Oct 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
nak, but this is from Peggy O'Mara and might help:

But again - if my best friend asked me for my iPod and then hit me when I didn't give it to her right away, I would not stay there while she hit me, saying "I understand that you're frustrated because you wish you had an iPod too."

Neither would I hit her back -- but I would not stand there taking abuse from her, I would not like it, and it would change the nature of our relationship. I would leave immediately, and depending on the nature of the physical attack, I might file charges.

If my husband and I were out at a street fair having fun, and he sat down on a bench and told me he was not leaving ever, and so what if I had a doctors appointment that I'd booked a month ago -- I would leave him there and go to my appointment.

The metaphor isn't universally applicable for many reasons, because children are not miniature adults.

That's not to say that they should not be treated with respect, politeness, kindness, love, compassion, and trust. But saying that we should model our treatment of our children on treatment of other adults is a flawed analogy.


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Quote:

When I get confused about discipline, I think about what I would do in a similar situation with an adult friend. I would not slap my adult friend, for example, for spilling her drink. I would assume that she made an honest mistake. I would not punish my friend for acting immaturely in a group. Instead, I would try to understand and sympathize, would give her the benefit of the doubt, and would be eager to hear her side of the story. We give our friends a wide berth because we do not feel responsible for their behavior in the same way we do for our children's behavior. It requires a huge leap of faith to trust our children to their own destinies while we also guide them through ours. We love our children more than anyone else on earth, and we want to give them tools to be effective in the world. It makes sense to model compassion. It works.

















Also, the golden rule for me doesn't just apply to my contemporaries. It applies to my child as well.


----------



## IdahoMom (Nov 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *savithny* 
But again - if my best friend asked me for my iPod and then hit me when I didn't give it to her right away, I would not stay there while she hit me, saying "I understand that you're frustrated because you wish you had an iPod too."

Neither would I hit her back -- but I would not stand there taking abuse from her, I would not like it, and it would change the nature of our relationship. I would leave immediately, and depending on the nature of the physical attack, I might file charges.

If my husband and I were out at a street fair having fun, and he sat down on a bench and told me he was not leaving ever, and so what if I had a doctors appointment that I'd booked a month ago -- I would leave him there and go to my appointment.

The metaphor isn't universally applicable for many reasons, because children are not miniature adults.

That's not to say that they should not be treated with respect, politeness, kindness, love, compassion, and trust. But saying that we should model our treatment of our children on treatment of other adults is a flawed analogy.


This is exactly it. Especially, "Children are not miniature adults."


----------



## Elvirnon (May 4, 2005)

Quote:

We give our friends a wide berth because we do not feel responsible for their behavior in the same way we do for our children's behavior.
I don't entirely agree with this. It's not untrue, but it's only one of many reasons why we don't apply the same rules to our friends as we do our children. Chief among them, for me, is that I can freely choose my friends, and choose the extent to which they're a part of my life. If one of them, let's say, spits in my face? I can almost guarantee you that they're never going to have the chance to do it again. Likewise if I can count on frequently listening to them whine at me about what I'm not doing for them. My children, not so. I have an obligation to stick with them, to teach them right from wrong, to basically do everything I can to ensure that they grow into responsible, secure, and happy adults. The responsibility we feel for our children vs. our friends is not some sort of delusion that we think up in order to justify imposing rules and limits on our children. Which, by the way, is not incompatible with modeling compassion.

I think that comparing the treatment of an adult friend to the treatment of one's minor child is, at best, a slippery slope. I wake up at 6:00 every morning to make breakfast and lunch for my kids, I buy them clothes, I tuck them in every night. I don't do any of those things for my friends; should I use that excuse to shrug off my parenting responsibilities?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not justifying spanking or abusive behavior. But the reason I don't hit my kids isn't because I wouldn't hit my husband or my best friend - it's because hitting people is wrong, period.


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IdahoMom* 
This is exactly it. Especially, "Children are not miniature adults."

How is someone being treated with dignity, respect, equality, unconditional love and given the benefit of the doubt treating them like a "miniature adult"?

I didn't know adults were the only ones deserving of those things. I don't base how I treat my child on how I treat adults.

I base my treatment of my child on how I strive to treat _human beings_, especially ones I care deeply about and respect as I do my daughter.


----------



## EvansMomma (Mar 7, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
How is someone being treated with dignity, respect, equality, unconditional love and given the benefit of the doubt treating them like a "miniature adult"?

I didn't know adults were the only ones deserving of those things. I don't base how I treat my child on how I treat adults.

I base my treatment of my child on how I strive to treat _human beings_, especially ones I care deeply about and respect as I do my daughter.

I agree with this.
I'm one of the ones who says things liek "I'd leave my husband if he physically assaulted ME, so why would I think that it's okay to do that to a child??"
And yes, children are not adults. But they are still HUMAN and deserve to be treated accordingly.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:

I would assume that she made an honest mistake.

Quote:

I would try to understand and sympathize, would give her the benefit of the doubt, and would be eager to hear her side of the story.
This is pretty close to how I strive to treat all people.

Sometimes, "Dude! What the F?!" flies out, though.


----------



## IdahoMom (Nov 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EvansMomma* 
I agree with this.
I'm one of the ones who says things liek "I'd leave my husband if he physically assaulted ME, so why would I think that it's okay to do that to a child??"
And yes, children are not adults. But they are still HUMAN and deserve to be treated accordingly.

No, the direct comparison would be leaving their child because they hit you. It's wrong for people to hit other people. I'd leave an adult for hitting me, but a child needs to be taught.


----------



## EvansMomma (Mar 7, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IdahoMom* 
No, the direct comparison would be leaving their child because they hit you. It's wrong for people to hit other people. I'd leave an adult for hitting me, but a child needs to be taught.

I think that's nitpicking.
Ok then how about this, why is it okay for my husband to hit my son to "teach him" something, but not okay for my husband to hit ME to "teach me" when I burn dinner? It's not. I am a human being, worthy of respect and dignity. So is my child. He's not a "miniature adult" but he IS a miniature human being and as such is deserving of the same respect that one would give to a grownup.

When I draw the comparison between my relationship with my husband, and our relationship to our son - it's in an effort to show that I am determined not to treat my child any less than I'd treat my husband. Or any other person for that matter.


----------



## savithny (Oct 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EvansMomma* 
I agree with this.
I'm one of the ones who says things liek "I'd leave my husband if he physically assaulted ME, so why would I think that it's okay to do that to a child??"
And yes, children are not adults. But they are still HUMAN and deserve to be treated accordingly.

But if it was your child hitting you, and not your husband, would you leave them?

THAT is the correct direction of that analogy. We accept behavior of children that we would not accept of adults. But there are also things that we do and say to children, in teaching them how to handle situations, that we would not say to adults.


----------



## IdahoMom (Nov 8, 2005)

So what about when your child hits you because he's not happy with dinner? Do you react the same was as you would if your husband had?


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

IdahoMom, it sounds like you have the empathy without needing the analogy.

I think it helps some people, as the quote from Peggy Mara indicates. Sounds like the analogy isn't working for you.


----------



## savithny (Oct 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
How is someone being treated with dignity, respect, equality, unconditional love and given the benefit of the doubt treating them like a "miniature adult"?

I didn't know adults were the only ones deserving of those things. I don't base how I treat my child on how I treat adults.

I base my treatment of my child on how I strive to treat _human beings_, especially ones I care deeply about and respect as I do my daughter.

Everyone deserves respect.

But adults are held responsible for their actions at a societal level in a way chldren are not. And part of discipline is teaching them in a respectful but safe way how to handle those impluses that are forgiven small children but frowned on, condemned, or legilated against when adults do them.

We don't treat our children the same way we do adults. They get far more benefit of the doubt and leeway than adults do.


----------



## EvansMomma (Mar 7, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IdahoMom* 
So what about when your child hits you because he's not happy with dinner? Do you react the same was as you would if your husband had?

He wouldn't be hitting because he was abusive, he'd be hitting becuase he was frustrated I'd imagine.

I know hwat you're trying to say, but my point is that SOME people who draw the comparisons between adult/adult relationships and adult/child relationships - do so only to show that they wouldn't treat their children as lesser beings simply because they were children.

I see no harm in saying that I will respect my son as much as I respect any grownup in my life. And I don't think that because one says that, that it means they treat their children EXACTLY PRECISELY how they treat their spouse, ALL of the time. Or worse yet, that they treat their spouses like children...


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IdahoMom* 
In my marriage anyway, our relationship includes support but not guidance. We are a team on equal footing, because we both have experience to contribute.

My marriage includes tons of guidance. Stuff like, "Here, it goes in like this," (No, filthy pigs! That's not what I meant!!







More like if we're putting together a cabinet or something.).

Whispering, "Don't eat Sheila's crab dip!" at a pot luck.

Quietly pointing to the right fork at a fancy dinner.

The majority of my process of learning to ride a motorcycle was based on my husband's guidance.

The majority of his process of GD has been based on my guidance.

I don't think we're any less an equal team b/c of that sort of guidance. That's the sort of guidance (discipline) I do with my kids, too. Obviously, there's variations that account for different learning styles, vocabulary, life experiences, etc.--but by and large, it's just affording everyone the same benefit of the doubt and respect and offers of help or information or what-have-you.


----------



## peacelovingmama (Apr 28, 2006)

Comparing children to adult family members is an analogy. It is not meant to be exact, literal or precise but to illustrate that children are entitled to the same dignity and respect to which adults are entitled.

Just as female genital mutilation is not exactly the same as male genital mutilation, analogizing the 2 helps some people understand that the right to genital integrity transcends sex. To me, the adult/child analogy is useful in helping people understand that all people are entitled to certain things such as the right to live free from violence and the right to be treated with respect.

Of course, the analogy is not literal (analogies aren't) because children are generally more vulnerable and impressionable than adults and in my mind, that makes it even MORE important that we protect them from domestic violence and teach and guide them with compassion, respect and kindness and model the same.

Obviously, if my partner hit me I would not grab his hand and show him "gentle touch." Nor do I chop his food into tiny bits or bathe him in a bath riing.







But research and common sense show that adults are less likely to become violent if they aren't treated violently as children. More likely to develop into kind, loving adults if they are treated that way as children. THAT is the purpose of the analogy -- to illustrate the philosophy behind GD -- not to make absurd comparisons on a micro level.


----------



## EvansMomma (Mar 7, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *peacelovingmama* 
Comparing children to adult family members is an analogy. It is not meant to be exact, literal or precise but to illustrate that children are entitled to the same dignity and respect to which adults are entitled.

Just as female genital mutilation is not exactly the same as male genital mutilation, analogizing the 2 helps some people understand that the right to genital integrity transcends sex. To me, the adult/child analogy is useful in helping people understand that all people are entitled to certain things such as the right to live free from violence and the right to be treated with respect.

Of course, the analogy is not literal (analogies aren't) because children are generally more vulnerable and impressionable than adults and in my mind, that makes it even MORE important that we protect them from domestic violence and teach and guide them with compassion, respect and kindness and model the same.

Obviously, if my partner hit me I would not grab his hand and show him "gentle touch." Nor do I chop his food into tiny bits or bathe him in a bath riing.







But research and common sense show that adults are less likely to become violent if they aren't treated violently as children. More likely to develop into kind, loving adults if they are treated that way as children. THAT is the purpose of the analogy -- to illustrate the philosophy behind GD -- not to make absurd comparisons on a micro level.









:

And thanks for posting, I knew someone had the "kids are people too" in their siggy line, couldn't remember who it was though


----------



## alexsam (May 10, 2005)

I agree... with both.

See, for me, where the argument starts to unravel is: my husband KNOWS the rules. He knows the social rules that are expected of him, he has the full ability to see the results of his actions in both the short and long term, he has a fully mature sense of empathy and has learned the skills of patience, delayed gratification and can navigate the complexities of dealing with many people and many situations. He understands his own feelings and others. When he makes a decision regarding his behavior or his relationship to me, he does it with experience and understanding.

Children are developmentally unable to do some of these things at different times in their lives and aquiring all these skills takes practice, maturity, opportunity and, hopefully, a compasionate guide (a parent). For example, young children are genuinely unaware that if they act out in a group continually, they may loose friends, be left out because their companionship is unpleasant to others or difficult, etc. It does not mean that we don't have a responsibility to try and understand their feelings and act toward them with respect when they do something that is not what we expect, but it DOES mean that it is part of our responsibility to address these issues and impart our own understandings of the world and how to navigate it by providing appropriate behavioral expectations. These expectaions often stem from developing empathy- an elusive and difficult to master concept that is the basic foundation of all behavior issues, from manners to violence, and really is not something that comes without a braod range of experiences and reflections and it matures with age. It is something we all have the potential for, but many do not fully grasp.

On a slightly different note- I've been thinking a lot lately about the idea of a parent not interceeding with socially unacceptable behavior and why that really gets to me, and I think it is because the world will teach those lessons in a colder, crueler way than a parent. If a child hits someone- sure the lesson "don't hit" will probably come out of the situtation with the children regulating themselves. But instead of a parent setting a tone of safety and presenting other alternatives and a model of reconcilliation, it could go many other ways- bullying, ostricization, names, etc. As someone here at MDC said a while ago, we all think about "the villiage" raising our child, but we don't always like it when they do. A screaming child in a store who is not addressed by their parent may very well be addressed by a cantankerous "villager" who may not express their desire to shop without screaming in such kind words. To you and me, it may be very clear that if we go around knocking down the other childrens block towers, they won't want to play with us anymore. To a child, it is not always so clear- why they were rejected, what was expected or how to make amends. And the children who were wronged do not always have the ability to stand up for themselves and without adult intercession can quickly become victims. Adults can help with this. I don't think it is in the service of the child acting out to allow the world to teach them the hard way when some sensitive and loving words or actions from parents can do the same thing in a private way that preserves dignity and bolsters an honest relationship. The other thing that is a thorn is: as long as we are understanding OUR child who is acting out, its cool. But when our child is the one hit, spit on, gets toys taken, pushed, screamed at, shut out of the group, etc. then its not such an interesting experiment. We all have bumps in life and kids will have to face that, but no one wants to see their child on the recieving end of these things with any regularity, and if so, we expect that another parent would be able to empathize with us and our child and prevent our childs mistreatment. If not, then as far as I am concerned they have lost us as a friend and playmate. Too bad for everyone.

So- Peggy understanding and listening- Heck yeah. Parents stepping in to provide boundaries and guidance in a somewhat-unequal relationship to help their child learn the ropes- heck yeah to that too.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Yep--not exact and literal--exactly.

Think of the way we express love to our children v. our spouses. Very, very different on a physical level (I mean obviously, we kiss both and all, but you know....).

It's just a notion about respect and treatment. Not a literal comparision of behavior and so on.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

OP, you're not the only one. I also dislike this analogy/way of thinking and find it very unhelpful.


----------



## peacelovingmama (Apr 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EvansMomma* 







:

And thanks for posting, I knew someone had the "kids are people too" in their siggy line, couldn't remember who it was though









My pleasure. And thanks for pointing out the "kids are people too" quote. I think that really sums it up concisely. The adult/child analogy exists to help people understand that children, like adults, are people too and regardless of the fact that they may require more guidance than some adults, they are entitled to be guided with the same respect and kindness.

After all, when we are teaching adults (differently abled, adult school, etc.) we don't condone violence and degradation. So why would we with young people?


----------



## dewlady (Jul 8, 2004)

I have always been really confused by this analogy as well...

Not just confused, but i feel that many AP type parents take it too far, and (I work at a progressive Free School model pre-school) a lot of parents make it a lot harder for the children to figure stuff out with each other by always treating them this way at home.

It is the extreme opposite I see and deal with...kids that have been raised with these ideals, but with it taken to a point where they become quite entitled and have a really hard time finding their way with the other children because they (especially when they are only or first children) feel that they are...well the only word i can think of is entitled.

I Don't think that this is the point of the analogy at all. I treat my own and all the children I work with with a lot of trust, benefit of the doubt, compassion, etc....

Some people take anything too far...but I don't see this just every now and then.


----------



## peacelovingmama (Apr 28, 2006)

Adding one more thought:

Another reason that I find the analogy helpful is because many of the arguments in favor of hitting children are the same ones that used to be used in favor of laws allowing men to hit their wives (back when it was legal) --hitting women was necessary to teach and guide them, because it was an "unequal" relationship, to maintain order in the family, etc. I know that not everyone prefers the domestic-violence comparison, but to me, it is on par with the FGM comparison -- not exact but helpful for certain purposes.


----------



## alexsam (May 10, 2005)

OK- then if the idea is "kids are people too" then, all right. But it is a bad analogy. Children are not "mini-adults" (or spouses) because they have certain developmental needs and in parents addressing those needs and having the life experience to make more informed decisions and acting on those in the best interests of the family (occasionally against the present wishes of the child) the parent-child relationship is "unequal". It is _not_ a friendship for many reasons. But the inherent inequality does not have to mean cruelty or lack of respect or dismissal of feelings. Parenting is so much _more_ than a friendship. Reducing it to that is a disservice to the child.

Hitting is an extreme example and being the MDC forum, I also think it is moot. No one is defending or advocating hitting of children. I think what we are really talking about here is treating children with the ways that we treat other adults- as equals in terms of needing respect and patience and empathy, or does it go further in that we would treat them in the way we would treat an adult in terms of how we respond to their behavior (as an equal instead of a guide).


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alexsam* 
Parents stepping in to provide boundaries and guidance in a somewhat-unequal relationship to help their child learn the ropes- heck yeah to that too.

Right....and I'm guessing that most adults are setting boundaries and providing guidance with other adults, too.


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *peacelovingmama* 
Comparing children to adult family members is an analogy. It is not meant to be exact, literal or precise but to illustrate that children are entitled to the same dignity and respect to which adults are entitled.

Just as female genital mutilation is not exactly the same as male genital mutilation, analogizing the 2 helps some people understand that the right to genital integrity transcends sex. To me, the adult/child analogy is useful in helping people understand that all people are entitled to certain things such as the right to live free from violence and the right to be treated with respect.

Of course, the analogy is not literal (analogies aren't) because children are generally more vulnerable and impressionable than adults and in my mind, that makes it even MORE important that we protect them from domestic violence and teach and guide them with compassion, respect and kindness and model the same.

Obviously, if my partner hit me I would not grab his hand and show him "gentle touch." Nor do I chop his food into tiny bits or bathe him in a bath riing.







But research and common sense show that adults are less likely to become violent if they aren't treated violently as children. More likely to develop into kind, loving adults if they are treated that way as children. THAT is the purpose of the analogy -- to illustrate the philosophy behind GD -- not to make absurd comparisons on a micro level.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *peacelovingmama* 
My pleasure. And thanks for pointing out the "kids are people too" quote. I think that really sums it up concisely. The adult/child analogy exists to help people understand that children, like adults, are people too and regardless of the fact that they may require more guidance than some adults, they are entitled to be guided with the same respect and kindness.

After all, when we are teaching adults (differently abled, adult school, etc.) we don't condone violence and degradation. So why would we with young people?


Quote:


Originally Posted by *peacelovingmama* 
Adding one more thought:

Another reason that I find the analogy helpful is because many of the arguments in favor of hitting children are the same ones that used to be used in favor of laws allowing men to hit their wives (back when it was legal) --hitting women was necessary to teach and guide them, because it was an "unequal" relationship, to maintain order in the family, etc. I know that not everyone prefers the domestic-violence comparison, but to me, it is on par with the FGM comparison -- not exact but helpful for certain purposes.









:

This analogy used to bug me too, when I took it as literal/exact. When I stepped back and looked at it from another perspective, it did begin to make sense to me. I do now think in these terms quite often, and it's helpful. For me the idea is not that I'll respond in exactly the same way to my children as I do to my partner/friends/other adults (nor is it that I won't provide guidance and boundaries), but that I will strive to treat my children with the same respect, kindness and compassion to which all human beings are entitled regardless of age. _I do think it's easy to treat children with less respect and compassion simply because they are children, and I think that's what this analogy points out._


----------



## macca (Jan 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Yep--not exact and literal--exactly.

Think of the way we express love to our children v. our spouses. Very, very different on a physical level (I mean obviously, we kiss both and all, but you know....).

It's just a notion about respect and treatment. Not a literal comparision of behavior and so on.









:

Only comparison I don't like is the spousal abuse one. "It's not okay for my husband to hit me, so how is it okay for me to hit my kids?" ... it's also not okay for my husband to put me in "time out" or take away my "privileges" - but many parents, even in the AP world, think these punishments are perfectly okay.


----------



## Thao (Nov 26, 2001)

I've never liked the analogy either. I think whether it is useful or not depends on the parent's personality. For me, I'm a pretty mellow person and respecting/having compassion comes naturally. I don't really need to be reminded to do that for children as well as adults. My challenge is be consistent and authoritative in teaching my daughter. And in that area I don't find the analogy helpful at all because, as other pp have pointed out, the parent-child relationship is NOT the same as any adult relationship. With adults, I simply draw a boundary and walk away from any person who is treating me badly. I can't do that with my daughter.


----------



## macca (Jan 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Thao* 
I've never liked the analogy either. I think whether it is useful or not depends on the parent's personality. For me, I'm a pretty mellow person and respecting/having compassion comes naturally. I don't really need to be reminded to do that for children as well as adults.

A lot of people do, though!


----------



## verde (Feb 11, 2007)

Interesting threat. There does seem to be a range in the responses -- some say it's only an analogy but others do seem to use it as some type of guiding principal. I've read the entire thread and I have to say that it doesn't work for me as a guiding principal and I don't find it to be the most useful analogy either. I totally support treating children with gentleness and respect but that does not mean I treat them just like adults. macca, a lot of people may need to be reminded to treat children with respect and compassion but on MDC they do not. You're preaching to the choir here.

Quote:

Children are not "mini-adults" (or spouses) because they have certain developmental needs and in parents addressing those needs and having the life experience to make more informed decisions and acting on those in the best interests of the family (occasionally against the present wishes of the child) the parent-child relationship is "unequal". It is not a friendship for many reasons. But the inherent inequality does not have to mean cruelty or lack of respect or dismissal of feelings. Parenting is so much more than a friendship. Reducing it to that is a disservice to the child.
I agree with this.

Quote:

And thanks for pointing out the "kids are people too" quote. I think that really sums it up concisely. The adult/child analogy exists to help people understand that children, like adults, are people too and regardless of the fact that they may require more guidance than some adults, they are entitled to be guided with the same respect and kindness.

After all, when we are teaching adults (differently abled, adult school, etc.) we don't condone violence and degradation. So why would we with young people?
Sure, kids are people too. I agree with that. I also agree with treating them with respect. But I do not think that you always have to treat them the SAME way as you treat adults. I don't see how treating them differently, by which I mean as children because they are children, is disrespectful and it's certainly a huge leap to conclude that if you treat them differently you automatically treat them with violence and degradation.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

I agree that the analogy doesn't work.

And from all of the posts on MDC, it is obvious that most of us do not interact with our children the way we do with our partners. We don't have these issues of rage and exhaustion that we do in relating with our partners (at least those of us in healthy, content relationships). It's simply not the same. I think Peggy's example works in regard to hittnig, but that's where it ends. And I think it's more helpful to say that we don't hit because it's wrong. I guess if you're talking to pro-spankers or trying to convert those using corporal punishment, it is helpful. But to those of us here trying to tease out our own philosophy and approach to raising our kids, it falls a little flat.


----------



## smeisnotapirate (Aug 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alexsam* 
Parenting is so much _more_ than a friendship. Reducing it to that is a disservice to the child.

I think marriage is much more than a friendship as well. Reducing it to that is a disservice to our spouses.

The point I'm trying to make is that you can't reduce any of these relationships. It's not fair, and it's a serious logical fallacy. The point is that with a child, the boundaries MUST be different, or it is neglect. I would NEVER leave my child to fend for themselves on a Friday night while I go out with the girls, but I'd never think twice about doing it with my husband.

The point people are trying to make is that most mainstream parents really DON'T make the connection between their children being people too. I said this to my mother once after she spanked my cousin, and she laughed in my face. Her exact words were: "Once that child shows me she can ACT like an adult, she'll be an adult." "So... you've never tripped in the house and accidentally broken something?" She rolled her eyes and walked away.









The sad truth is that some people don't get it, and THAT is why we use those comparisons. If they don't work for you, feel free not to use them, but they work for other people who have honestly never seen children as adults.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

I think everyone is just WAY overthinking this analogy, TBH.

The purposes of comparing your behavior toward a child versus your behavior toward an adult are:

1. In this culture, children are seen as 2nd or 3rd class citizens - not deserving of the same respect and integrity as (most) other human beings. It is seen as OK to hit them, yell at them, and generally treat them the way people treat their dogs (which is not OK in my book either). The analogy is meant to remind people in this sense that children have the same right to respect, trust, and good faith as anyone else.

2. The other purpose of the analogy is that also in this culture, we do not trust children. We don't trust them to explain what their reasons are - we don't trust them to understand the limitations of situations - and we don't trust them to understand why you can do X or Y if explained to them. This is true in some cases, but many parents have also found that if they work with their children as human beings, rather than "because mama says so", they are surprised by their children's ability to problem-solve and find win-win situations for everyone. I can attest to this ability even in very young children - my 3 year old and I talk through things a lot (I wish I was better at it, so I could do it more with him) and I end up with his cooperation rather than having to force him (he also learns problem solving, negotiation, and other skills which he'll find useful in life).

Analogies are :
"Similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar." - American Heritage Dictionary

An analogy does not mean the two are the same. It is meant to highlight the fact that some of the traits that we use when dealing with adults (the right not to be hit, the right not to be yelled at, the right not to be humiliated or demeaned, etc.) are rights that should also be applied to children, since THEY ARE HUMAN BEINGS AS WELL.


----------



## peacelovingmama (Apr 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *verde* 

Sure, kids are people too. I agree with that. I also agree with treating them with respect. But I do not think that you always have to treat them the SAME way as you treat adults. I don't see how treating them differently, by which I mean as children because they are children, is disrespectful and it's certainly a huge leap to conclude that if you treat them differently you automatically treat them with violence and degradation.

Personally, I don't conclude that if you treat adults and children differently, you automatically treat children with violence and degradation. As I explained, I use the analogy in limited contexts and I certainly do not think that adults and children should be treated alike in every situation (I gave the examples of feeding, bathing).

To me, it's not exact or precise and it's really only useful in limited contexts. Such as helping people understand that children, like adults, have a right to live free from violence and abuse. That is really the only context in which I use it.

I do see, from many of the posts, that the analogy does nothing for some people here. I get that. People here aren't viewing their kids as sub-human or somehow less entitled to be treated with respect. And that's why I love this place!

Again, it's kind of like the FGM analogy. I see it referred to in the circ forum but not to convince people there that boys are also entitled to genital integrity (people there already know that). It's to convince those who don't make that connection yet. Discussions I've seen in the circ forum are usually on a whole different level (as are discussions about guiding children here).

Unfortunately, our culture overall differs on this point (that children, like adults, deserve to be treated with respect and non-violence) and THAT is why I view the analogy as a useful teaching tool. And I have used it here on MDC before when people have posted here in defense of hitting children, as happens from time to time.

ETA: And I will add that the analogy has been most useful to me when I get people (again, not necessarily here) to consider that many of the arguments for hitting children used to be used to justify hitting women. I would like to see children protected by law and this analogy has been useful to me in supporting my arguments. I do see how it doesn't apply to many discussions (most maybe) here though.


----------



## mistymama (Oct 12, 2004)

To me, it simply means that my child deserves the same level of respect that I give to my adult partner. Not that it's in any way the same relationship.

I do fully expect my child to do the things I ask of him .. but I also keep in mind that he deserves just as much respect as an adult when I ask him to do those things. Sure, he's a child and sometimes has to be made to do things .. for example, he must sit in a booster seat and wear his seatbelt before we drive anywhere. But just because he's requried to do this, does not mean he's disprespected, shamed, etc ... just as I would not do those things to my partner.

Do I make my partner wear his seatbelt? No, different relationship. But I do give both my partner and son the same level of compassion and respect.

Does that make sense at all?


----------



## Adasmommy (Feb 26, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ShadowMom* 
I think everyone is just WAY overthinking this analogy, TBH.

Analogies are :
"Similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar." - American Heritage Dictionary

An analogy does not mean the two are the same. It is meant to highlight the fact that some of the traits that we use when dealing with adults (the right not to be hit, the right not to be yelled at, the right not to be humiliated or demeaned, etc.) are rights that should also be applied to children, since THEY ARE HUMAN BEINGS AS WELL.

I agree with ShadowMom. I like the analogy, but for me it is more like: "I treat my children like people I love."

I totally agree with OP that guidance and authority are important (it's a long thread, I think you said that







) so the analogy is helpful in reminding me that my daughter is a person and reacts to things as any person would react to similar provocation. She puts up with a lot: I schedule her life, take her on all my errands, etc. So I try to remind myself of all she puts up with, when I'm having trouble putting up with her









Seems like most people on this thread are in general parenting consensus. It's just a question of whether we like the analogy!


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EvansMomma* 
When I draw the comparison between my relationship with my husband, and our relationship to our son - it's in an effort to show that I am determined not to treat my child any less than I'd treat my husband. Or any other person for that matter.

Yeah that.

I like the analogy in that sometimes it points out the ridiculousness of some discipline ideas. That works for the harsh, and the super sweet passive too, sometimes.

I've noticed that I sometimes say things to ds in a way that I wouldn't speak to other people- my dp, friends, or other kids. I guess in that instance, it's more of a "would I say this to soandso" whether soandso is a kid or an adult, but...same basic point as far as reminding me to just be nice!


----------



## savithny (Oct 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy* 
I like the analogy in that sometimes it points out the ridiculousness of some discipline ideas. That works for the harsh, and the super sweet passive too, sometimes.


See, for pointing out the ridiculousness of hitting children, I think that asking someone 'How does hitting someone teach them to stop hitting?" probably is the more effective comparison.

I _get_ what defenders of the original quote are saying. However, maybe its the mathematician in me, but its hard to disregard the "but its not the same" issue. After all, "would you treat your husband that way" is often used in situations where my *immediate* response is "No, becuase he would never be *doing* that in the first place."

I'm not just a math person - I'm a serious literature geek and writer. I edit for a living. The analogy doesn't work, it seems, for a fairly decent percentage of readers. I'd suggest that it might not be the best comparison to use with "naive users," either - those who are new to GD and GD ideas.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Peggy O'Mara:

Quote:

As the parent of adult children, I can attest to the helpfulness of breastfeeding, co-sleeping, home schooling, discipline without punishment and other trusting choices. All of these choices are implicit in the egalitarian relationship that I hope to have with my children. They are my equals, my teachers and my beloved ones. I try to remember this when I interact with them.








:


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

I'm not sure, but I think the OP posted this in response to posts in other threads that took the turn to comparing responses to our children with our interactions with our spouses. Then someone quoted Peggy O'Mara and we got off track I think.

The quote doesn't bother me that much. But when we are discussing how someone should respond when a child spits at someone or acts aggressively, it makes no sense to me to compare it to how I would interact with my spouse. It's just not the same.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *savithny* 
The analogy doesn't work, it seems, for a fairly decent percentage of readers. I'd suggest that it might not be the best comparison to use with "naive users," either - those who are new to GD and GD ideas.

I have agree with everything you've had to say on this thread, savithny, but this part in particular. It seems that this analogy is meaningful for a sub-group of gd-ers, but not so helpful for the target audience. In fact, it seems to turn a lot of people off. So I avoid it.

It does bother me, however, that it is legal to hit your children and illegal to hit your spouse. I do sometimes question the logic of that. It seems that children need the protection from hitting more than adults, kwim?


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *swampangel* 

The quote doesn't bother me that much. But when we are discussing how someone should respond when a child spits at someone or acts aggressively, it makes no sense to me to compare it to how I would interact with my spouse. It's just not the same.

Yes. If we propose treating our kids like our spouses, by the same token we're saying we should let our spouses spit on us and kick us.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Jan Hunt:

Quote:

Just like adults, children feel most cooperative when treated with kindness, understanding, and faith in their inherent good intentions. No adult feels cooperative when treated in a threatening, angry way by a spouse, employer, or friend. In fact, we feel hurt and resentful when treated that way, and far from cooperating, we often resist or retaliate. Why then do we expect children to respond with good behavior when treated with anger, threats, or punishment?
Dang, I wish I could be so articulate! Me. talk. good.


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Me. talk. good.


























(collective you)

Sure you can't divorce your child if they spit in your face but I wonder... if your husband spit in your face would you order him to his room? Put him in a time out? Hit him? Take away his privileges?

You'd probably begin with, "Woah, what the heck was THAT about???"

Which is how I would start with my kid too probably.

In addition, your partner and yourself make an agreement when you get together (unspoken or not) where you both understand that you won't do things like, spit in each other's face.

My child made no such agreement with me







Not that I would think it was okay or that I wouldn't say something about it -- but I would relate to her like I would relate to anyone else I loved, taking into consideration that she didn't make the same agreement (or is even developmentally capable yet of doing so) to treat me with respect at all times. Also taking into consideration her ability to control her impulses and inability yet to articulate as clearly as she probably wants to.

So basically, treat her like I would treat a ridiculously drunk adult







Kidding.

Point is, as *selfish* as it may sound, I don't treat my child a certain way because of her or for her (though she gets a lot of the benefits). I do it because of my commitment to my God and agreement with myself. Her actions are in no way tied to my reactions. My reactions were decided long before I conceived her.

That is not to say I always succeed in remaining controlled, calm, disciplined in my reactions -- but I don't treat her or not treat her X, Y, or Z as a direct result of what she does or doesn't do, say, act. That would be reacting on an impulsive level and how can I expect to impart impulse control to someone who will soon learn that I don't have any myself?

So yeah, I treat her like I treat anyone else, or strive to treat everyone else I love deeply.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IdahoMom* 
*Comparing spouse relationships to parent/child relationships*
I don't get it.

Your spouse is an adult person, grown and raised, with experience and life-skills built in. In my marriage anyway, our relationship includes support but not guidance. We are a team on equal footing, because we both have experience to contribute.

Children are children! While we give them love and respect, being responsible parents also requires guidance and sometimes decision making on their behalf. I am their teacher and protector. We do believe in authority in our house, because until they get older and learn better, the kids will generally act more on their impulses and wants than toward what's best for them or for the household.

So when I often read the argument here along the lines of, "If I told my spouse we had to go to X or do Y and he didn't want to but I said we are anyway, that would be totally disrespectful. I'd never talk to my spouse like that." No, you probably wouldn't. Different relationship. Different ability to understand. Just totally different.

Am I missing something?


*I believe respect is treating people like they *want* to be treated.* So, yes. I strive to treat all people, regardless of age, gender, (dis)ability, religion, politics, etc. as they desire to be treated.

Pat


----------



## mommy2abigail (Aug 20, 2005)

Pat-














I'm SO gonna steal that little phrase.







What a perfect, simple, easy way to sum up how I am striving to parent.


----------



## 93085 (Oct 11, 2007)

Seriously, if my husband ever did any of the things my kids do to me, he'd be seeing a lot MORE of my wrath, not less. I wouldn't smack or verbally abuse anyone in my family, ever. But believe me, if DH ever spat in my face or said, "I hate you" to me, he'd be dealing with some serious withdrawal of affection for a LONG damn time. With my kids I'm over it in a matter of minutes.

So I'm toeing the line on this one. Yes, the parent/child relationship is different from a couple relationship, and so the way in which you deal with conflict is different as well (IMHO). But at least for me, that's not an excuse to get all hard-a$$ed with my kids--quite the opposite, in fact.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
















(collective you)

Sure you can't divorce your child if they spit in your face but I wonder... if your husband spit in your face would you order him to his room? Put him in a time out? Hit him? Take away his privileges?

You'd probably begin with, "Woah, what the heck was THAT about???"

Which is how I would start with my kid too probably.

The difference between these two examples (dh spitting or ds) is that dh wouldn't do it. Simple as that. If he did engage in that kind of behavior toward me, I wouldn't be married to him. This is where, to me, it makes no sense to compare the two relationships. They are not the same and my role in the two are not the same.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WuWei* 
*I believe respect is treating people like they *want* to be treated.* So, yes. I strive to treat all people, regardless of age, gender, (dis)ability, religion, politics, etc. as they desire to be treated.

Pat

ITA. We can all believe this and try to live up to this, but it doesn't mean that the way we interact with our children is the same way that we interact with our partners. Yes, I strive to be respectful of my children. When I falter, I apologize and try to do better. I totally think they are deserving of the utmost of respect from me. But I don't think the relationship is comparable to that of a partnership with an adult.

To me, it's kind of like when parents refer to themselves as "best friends" with their children. I'm sure there are cases where this works, but for the most part I think it becomes a boundary issue. The things that I share with my friends would not be appropriate to share with my children, regardless of their age.

Another example is how children feel about their parents having sex..."gross!" is the usual response from a teenager who realizes that "holy s**t...my parents do that?? No way!" Now, my friends would not respond this way. The relationship is inherently different.

I'm totally confused as to why this is even being debated.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jescafa* 
Seriously, if my husband ever did any of the things my kids do to me, he'd be seeing a lot MORE of my wrath, not less. I wouldn't smack or verbally abuse anyone in my family, ever. But believe me, if DH ever spat in my face or said, "I hate you" to me, he'd be dealing with some serious withdrawal of affection for a LONG damn time. With my kids I'm over it in a matter of minutes.

So I'm toeing the line on this one. Yes, the parent/child relationship is different from a couple relationship, and so the way in which you deal with conflict is different as well (IMHO). But at least for me, that's not an excuse to get all hard-a$$ed with my kids--quite the opposite, in fact.

Jessica, you snuck in before my post! I agree with what you're saying here. Seriously, I'm totally struck that the difference between the two is being debated here. I think where we're getting tripped up is on the issue of respect. I think we all agree that we respect our children and should treat them with dignity. I'm gonna go out on a limb and geuss that everyone on MDC is in agreement on this one.

I think what the OP brought up is when we're discussing a particular behavioral issue or discipline issue and someone compares an interaction with a child to that of an adult partner. It just doesn't cross over. Yes, I learn from my partner, I learn from my friends. But my role with my child is different than my role in my relationship with my dh.


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Of course the relationship with my child is different than the one with my partner, as my partner and I have a different relationship than me and my mother, as my mother has a different relationship with her lifelong friend...

The point in comparisons is not to say that we relate to everyone in our life in the exact same way with the exact set of nuances, history, expressions of affection....

Where the comparison is useful to me is in relation to how I treat dd when I am not *feeling* like treating her with the same respect I treat others. When the situations pop up that make it very tempting to think "I am her mama so she should be acting this or that way or I am going to impose a negative action because I am bigger and stronger".

It is also a valid comparison in my view when relating to autonomy, respect for physical boundaries, right to dissent, and right to bodily and emotional freedom.

In other words, many people will say, well, I would never force my partner into a car but it isn't my partner, it is MY child and they don't understand, so I *have* to force them into their car seat occasionally.

That is where the comparison is useful to me (or similar situations). I don't do anything *to* dd that I wouldn't to anyone else. I may do some things *for* her that I wouldn't choose or be required to do (like wipe her rear end







) but I don't do anything *to* her that I wouldn't do to an adult.

On that note, if my partner had a need to have his rear wiped (had been in a bad accident for instance), make no mistake I would be doing that too. That is what you do when you love someone.

So yeah, the comparison ounce for ounce isn't equal on *every* level (you don't passionately kiss your child for instance), but on the bigger scale of respect, kindness, and rights as an individual I think it is a very valid comparison.

The thought that, "but they aren't my partner, they are my CHILD" puts me in mind of the thought that children are still property. Cherished property, but property all the same.


----------



## Kat_shoshin (Feb 16, 2007)

I expect my DH to act like an adult. I expect DS to act like a baby.

When DH doesn't want to go in the car to his parents, he can choose to either grumble about it or sit there quietly.

When DS doesn't want to get in the car seat, I empathize with him - and know that he will be happy once he sees that we arrived to his grandparents - and cram him in and try to distract and sing and all that.


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Hm....

It isn't (for me) about what I expect of others it is about what I expect of myself.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Bingo!


----------



## allgirls (Apr 16, 2004)

When I think of GD the first and most important thing that comes to my mind is "is this age appropriate behaviour?" and the second I think is "is this situation appropriate behaviour?"

So my interpretation of the situtation would be different if my 2 year old spit at me, or my 13 year old or my 17 year old or my dh. How I handle the situation would definitely be different.

BUT I would strive to treat them all with respect and honour them as human beings.

The ones who did not understand what they were doing would be treated much better/differently in this situation than those who are old enough to know.

Also the consequences of this behaviour would be different for those who are able to handle them and understand them.

So while you treat them differently, you respect them the same taking into account their age and life experience.

So the analogy works for me because it's not about treating them "exactly the same" It's about treating them with the same respect while taking into account their life experience and age.

gotta go..baby calling
Carolyn


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
Hm....

It isn't (for me) about what I expect of others it is about what I expect of myself.

This is what I choose to model for our son. I can only control myself.

Pat


----------



## allgirls (Apr 16, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WuWei* 
This is what I choose to model for our son. I can only control myself.

Pat


ditto this


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

I'm not sure how to articulate my position. I agree with treating children like we would treat our partners on one level, and I disagree with it on another level.

I agree with it on the level of human respect, is the best I can say. For too long children have been treated like lesser people, they have been beaten, neglected, told to be 'seen and not heard,' fed on a schedule not of their own choosing, their cries ignored at night, adults have taken out their stress on children because children have no recourse like adults do. Children are very vulnerable and we have been taught, as part of our socialization, that treating them with less than human dignity is acceptable.

I think the comparison to other adults who we love is a very valid one and one that can really help us highlight where we carry that learning that it is okay to disrespect and harm children.

However, on another level, obviously they are not miniature adults, and the nature of the relationship we have with them is different. I'm not sure how to name this level... roles? Power dynamic? I like the ipod example, that yeah if my friend hit me because she wanted my ipod I wouldn't respond with a sing song message about how I understand her needs. That would be the end of our friendship. Obviously we need to have different expectations of children, and we need to continue to engage with them when they behave in ways we would never expect or tolerate from adults. But that doesn't mean we have to tolerate crappy, disrespectful behaviour from children either.

So, for me, that means there is false understanding in CL or other styles that include a pretense that the power dynamic and roles between parents and children are equal or like those between adults. I set boundaries with my child that relate to health/safety, damage, and sanity (mine, theirs and others'). And I do use consequences to enforce those boundaries where required. I think we also use consequences with adults, but the consequence might be something like 'You've hit me over my freaking ipod. I'm never speaking to you again and if you come near me I'm getting a restraining order.'

Consequences with children look quite different than that because they are still learning, but I think happy happy sing song and zero consequences are not realistic expectations when engaging with anybody in this world. The fact is we all have boundaries, we all are entitled to boundaries, and in parenting we need to have boundaries to protect not only ourselves, but our children. Some call that control, or say we are overstepping our bounds, etc in the name of GD, but I think it is just basic good parenting.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

delete


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Is requiring something of a child inherently disrespectful?
Is imposing a consequence inherently disrespectful?


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 
Is requiring something of a child inherently disrespectful?
Is imposing a consequence inherently disrespectful?

Nope.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

I don't think so......perhaps depends what "imposing a consequence" means, for me personally.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
The thought that, "but they aren't my partner, they are my CHILD" puts me in mind of the thought that children are still property.

It puts me in the frame of mine that dc is my responsibility, and that greatly influences my interactions with her.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I don't think so......perhaps depends what "imposing a consequence" means, for me personally.

Right....it surely could be disrespectful....but I don't believe it is inherently so. Can be done respectfully imo.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Right. And if my kid broke some fragile things I left out, and I decided that it would be better to put those things away for a while........then, I guess I am "imposing a consequence." But, it's not in a punitive, now-you'll-be-sorry-b/c-I'm-taking-this-away-from-you kind of way.

And like if my husband did spit in my face, I probably would have some lingering trust/intimacy/lack of kind feelings kind of stuff going on which might result in not caring for intimate, physical acts. But that's not the same as, "Welp. No nookie for you, then!"

baby....gotta run...


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

I think imposing consequence on someone else is inherently disrespectful if that is your goal... to impose a consequence.

If by respecting your own boundaries, a person feels as though it is a consequence, that to me is not inherently respectful.

In other words, pretend my dd hits me. Now, if she wanted to continue hitting me, I would move away from her. This is respecting my own boundaries. Because she wants to continue being physical and I have prevented her from doing that -- as a residual affect of enforcing personal boundaries, (not being able to continue to express her anger physically on me) can sometimes *feel* like a consequence. However, putting her in her room and telling her she can't come out for X amount of minutes -- is disrespectful imo.

Both results mean she isn't hitting me, but I think it is disrespectful to impose force on another human being. It is the difference between, "I am protecting myself from being imposed upon physically" and "I will impose myself on you to show you not to impose upon me". Doesn't make sense to me.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Good point, CC.


----------



## savithny (Oct 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
In other words, pretend my dd hits me. Now, if she wanted to continue hitting me, I would move away from her. This is respecting my own boundaries. Because she wants to continue being physical and I have prevented her from doing that -- as a residual affect of enforcing personal boundaries, (not being able to continue to express her anger physically on me) can sometimes *feel* like a consequence. However, putting her in her room and telling her she can't come out for X amount of minutes -- is disrespectful imo.

Both results mean she isn't hitting me, but I think it is disrespectful to impose force on another human being. It is the difference between, "I am protecting myself from being imposed upon physically" and "I will impose myself on you to show you not to impose upon me". Doesn't make sense to me.

But now move the target of your DD's attack off you - to someone else. A smaller child, say?

I, personally, am willing to impose upon my child to protect others. If my kids are getting into it, I will get between them (if necessary) and physically move one or the other *before* we start the talking out. If my immediate "Do not hit your brother" does not cause a cessation of physical hostilities, I'm not going to let her get more blows in while we talk about how hitting hurts.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

I'm going to amend my previous blanket objection to this analogy and say that I think it MIGHT be useful when discussing the issue of hitting with someone who believes in hitting children. Maybe.


----------



## prothyraia (Feb 12, 2007)

I think that comparing our relationship with our children to our relationship with our partners isn't about saying that we should treat the two exactly the same way. Like others have said, it's about saying that children deserve the same degree of *respect* as adults.

What it *does* remind me is that I should treat my son the way I would want to be treated- *if I was in the same situation*. An adult isn't GOING to be in the same situation as a child, most likely.

If I was small, and couldn't talk very well, and was very frustrated, and hit my mother with a book because I wanted her to read it to me and didn't know how else to make that happen, I would want her to: 1. Prevent me from hurting her 2. Figure out what I really wanted, 3. Show me how to get what I wanted in an acceptable manner.

If I, as a large, verbal adult capable of dealing with my frustrations, hit my partner with a book, I would not expect him to respond to me with gentle guidance.

It's not "treat your children the same way you treat your partner", it's more like "treat your children the same way you would treat your partner if he/she had a head injury that temporarily interfered with their ability to verbalize, move, and behave in a socially appropriate manner".


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *prothyraia* 
What it *does* remind me is that I should treat my son the way I would want to be treated- *if I was in the same situation*. An adult isn't GOING to be in the same situation as a child, most likely.

If I was small, and couldn't talk very well, and was very frustrated, and hit my mother with a book because I wanted her to read it to me and didn't know how else to make that happen, I would want her to: 1. Prevent me from hurting her 2. Figure out what I really wanted, 3. Show me how to get what I wanted in an acceptable manner.









:


----------



## prothyraia (Feb 12, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *savithny* 
I, personally, am willing to impose upon my child to protect others. If my kids are getting into it, I will get between them (if necessary) and physically move one or the other *before* we start the talking out. If my immediate "Do not hit your brother" does not cause a cessation of physical hostilities, I'm not going to let her get more blows in while we talk about how hitting hurts.

Absolutely. When my son grows up to be a man, I would hope he would intervene, even physically, in order to protect someone smaller than he is. I think refraining from exercising your ability to stop violence is not a lesson I want to teach my children.

Now, to compare this to an adult situation







- If I was completely out of control and about to hit my son, I would *want* my partner to physically prevent me from doing so. In fact, I would expect him to do so, and him intervening would make ME feel safer. If I was a little child incapable of handling my frustration and started beating up on my sister, whom I love, I imagine that my mother not stepping in and preventing it wouldn't make me feel very good either. Not to mention how my sister would feel.


----------



## moondiapers (Apr 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IdahoMom* 
So what about when your child hits you because he's not happy with dinner? Do you react the same was as you would if your husband had?

If my husband somehow became damaged or disabled and had the mental capacity of a child....I wouldn't treat him with any less respect than I do now, even if he hit me. And I wouldn't leave him for hitting me in that situation either.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
However, putting her in her room and telling her she can't come out for X amount of minutes -- is disrespectful imo.

Is it disrespectful if it helps the child?

What if consequences, such as a parent-determined "time out", gives a child a break they really need and were unwilling/unable to take on their own? (but after the time out, they are more relaxed).

How about if a clear limit/consequence helps a child make better choices, and thus have happier relationships with friends and loved ones?

How about if a clear limit/consequence helps the child feel more secure/less anxious, and thus a happier child?

I ask because I have this child, lol. I am confident in our parenting choices right now (because I have seen a great improvement in dd's affect and our relationship since this shift to more structured discipline), so I am not seeking approval. You can disagree, and I won't be offended or upset. But philosophically speaking, is it really disrespectful to the child if it helps them to be a happy, better adjusted person?


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
In other words, pretend my dd hits me. Now, if she wanted to continue hitting me, I would move away from her. This is respecting my own boundaries. Because she wants to continue being physical and I have prevented her from doing that -- as a residual affect of enforcing personal boundaries, (not being able to continue to express her anger physically on me) can sometimes *feel* like a consequence. However, putting her in her room and telling her she can't come out for X amount of minutes -- is disrespectful imo.

Both results mean she isn't hitting me, but I think it is disrespectful to impose force on another human being. It is the difference between, "I am protecting myself from being imposed upon physically" and "I will impose myself on you to show you not to impose upon me". Doesn't make sense to me.

I am very curious how you do this. I don't have a child who has done this to me, but have several friends who have had kids that hit them repeatedly. I'm wondering how you move yourself away without her following you? How do you move yourself away from your child to stop her from hitting? I'm asking this with absolute interest in how this is done...I'd like to suggest it to friends, but I always here that "he just follows me."

Quote:


Originally Posted by *savithny* 
But now move the target of your DD's attack off you - to someone else. A smaller child, say?

I know you're not asking me, but I'm really curious about this as well. It's one thing to handle it a certain way at home, but quite another when aggression is directed toward another child. How do you handle this without imposing consequences or your power onto your child?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 
I ask because I have this child, lol. I am confident in our parenting choices right now (because I have seen a great improvement in dd's affect and our relationship since this shift to more structured discipline), so I am not seeking approval. You can disagree, and I won't be offended or upset. But philosophically speaking, is it really disrespectful to the child if it helps them to be a happy, better adjusted person?

Good for you! I know a lot of kids who thrive on structure. And, IMO, it's absolutely not disrespectful...it's quite the opposite.


----------



## dewlady (Jul 8, 2004)

I find it to be just as unacceptable to my personal boundaries
to have to move my own body in my own house to get away from a child who is hitting me. I don't put my child in the room and say, "You have to stay here for X amount of time,"
I just put it back into their own hands and say (most often without physically moving them at all), "I need you to go away from me until you decide to talk to me in a way that doesn't hurt! You can come back when you can ask me for what you want with words!" That way, I am not the one having to stop what I am doing, since I am not the one hitting, I don't think I should be the one inconvenienced. If it means physically moving them into another room, I will do that, again with out any arbitrary time limit.

Respect is really important to me, just as my children deserve my respect, I deserve theirs.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Quote:

I am very curious how you do this. I don't have a child who has done this to me, but have several friends who have had kids that hit them repeatedly. I'm wondering how you move yourself away without her following you? How do you move yourself away from your child to stop her from hitting?
I'm always confused by this, too. My DD occasionally hits. If I simply move away, more often than not, she indeed follows me to hit or kick me more. What then? (DD is very persistent in all things, but her hitting issues are actually pretty minor, IMO--she doesn't do it often or hard. So don't picture a raging, OOC aggressor child here.)

Some have suggested that I put myself in a room away from her with the door closed. I have done this. I have also put her in her room with the door closed. I feel it's safer for her to be in her room, which is completely childproofed. I don't think it's emotionally different for her either way--either way, she is separated from me.

We don't do a conventional time-out, really. She can come out when she can agree that she's ready to stop using hurting touches. Sometimes this takes 30 seconds. Sometimes it takes 10 minutes. She really will say, "No, I'm not ready to stop yet!" sometimes, too, when enraged.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

OT: moondiapers. I clicked on your link. Thanks.

Peace,
Pat


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WuWei* 
OT: moondiapers. I clicked on your link. Thanks.

Peace,
Pat

OT Pat, awesome book (The Four Agreements which is what the link references). I highly recommend it.

Back to regularly scheduled discussion


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Hi Cap't Crunchy...I noticed that you didn't respond to the question about removing yourself from your child if they hit. I'm honestly really curious about this because I know several friends who have tried this only to have their children follow them around the house trying to hit them. I hope my post didn't come across as snarky...I am honestly very curious how that plays out.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

swampangel, I don't believe that a couple paragraphs will answer your question satisfactorily. Therefore, I bumped several threads about this issue:

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=723411
http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=452773
http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=402818

HTH, Pat


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Oh if my child ran around the house assaulting me?

Sorry I didn't answer, it has honestly never happened. The few times I have had to "protect my body" (that is what we say, that I am getting up to protect my body) she has gotten upset because she wants me to stay next to her, or with her, or whatever. I tell her simply, kindly, but honestly that I would love to sit with her but I have a need to be touched gently. We have never had issues with this. Sometimes she might say, "but I am mad and sad and I want to hit you" and I validate, "I hear you are mad and sad and you want to hit me but I have a need to be touched gently and you cannot hurt my body" then offer her something else to do... "but you can hit play dough/a pillow/ stomp the floor" etc...

I don't know about your or anyone else's friends or experiences. I have never left the room even.

I suppose if she did chase me around the house trying to hit me, I would go into another room and not close the door, but close it enough between us so she couldn't hit me, and explain to her that I deserve to be safe in my body, that I will talk, read, sing (whatever) or she can hit, kick, punch whatever (that is not me or an animal or breakable) or whatever. I would empathize, validate, all that -- but that I have a need for my body to be safe from physical pain. That is just something that has ever happened though (her following me to continue hitting).

Our hitting phase passed by pretty uneventfully and only flares up once in a great while thankfully.

(eta: my answer is based on the thought of dd following me around the house beating the [email protected] out of me, which I could never foresee happening).


----------



## woobysma (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
I think the comparison to other adults who we love is a very valid one and one that can really help us highlight where we carry that learning that it is okay to disrespect and harm children.

However, on another level, obviously they are not miniature adults, and the nature of the relationship we have with them is different. I'm not sure how to name this level... roles? Power dynamic? I like the ipod example, that yeah if my friend hit me because she wanted my ipod I wouldn't respond with a sing song message about how I understand her needs. That would be the end of our friendship. Obviously we need to have different expectations of children, and we need to continue to engage with them when they behave in ways we would never expect or tolerate from adults. But that doesn't mean we have to tolerate crappy, disrespectful behaviour from children either.

So, for me, that means there is false understanding in CL or other styles that include a pretense that the power dynamic and roles between parents and children are equal or like those between adults. I set boundaries with my child that relate to health/safety, damage, and sanity (mine, theirs and others'). And I do use consequences to enforce those boundaries where required. I think we also use consequences with adults, but the consequence might be something like 'You've hit me over my freaking ipod. I'm never speaking to you again and if you come near me I'm getting a restraining order.'

Consequences with children look quite different than that because they are still learning, but I think happy happy sing song and zero consequences are not realistic expectations when engaging with anybody in this world. The fact is we all have boundaries, we all are entitled to boundaries, and in parenting we need to have boundaries to protect not only ourselves, but our children. Some call that control, or say we are overstepping our bounds, etc in the name of GD, but I think it is just basic good parenting.

ITA, Thismama!

Personally, I think the "golden rule" is a good guide to any relationship. But I also see my role as mom as being different than my role as wife or friend. There are over-laps, sure, but there are some pretty major differences, too.

I've used these kinds of analogies with DP when talking about our reaction to the kids sometimes. He has some hang-ups about manipulation: as in he jumps to the conclusion that they are trying to "get one over on us" pretty quick, which bugs me. It's been one of our issues around bedtime. How many times can they call you back to the bedroom for water and one more hug or whatever before it becomes time to say "enough is enough, now go to sleep"?
Well, the other night, he wasn't feeling well and went to bed. I had homework to do and was working at the computer when he came in and asked me if I could scratch his back for a while so he could fall asleep









Life is ironic sometimes. You better believe I pulled out the "I want you to remember this the next time DS wants a back rub" line









In that case, I think the analogy was perfect. In a lot of other cases, I think it doesn't fit as well.
If DP loses a client because he was too busy watching TV to go to work, I'm not going to take away his TV for a week. It's not my role as wife/friend to impose consequences like that. DP's an adult, which means he's responsible for his own schedule and the consequences of his actions.
If DS1 tells me he didn't have any homework and plays video games instead of finishing something for school, I see it as part of my role to impose changes to make sure that doesn't happen again (like getting rid of video games or meeting with his teacher and giving him more work to make up for the missed assignment).


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

I believe that even those who are supporting the analogy believe that there are differences in the roles. I think the OP is now MIA (







) but I think she was referring to the comparison to our relationship with our partners when talking about discipline issues.

There was another thread where the question came up, "what if your dh did...." and I think that's where this thread got started. I agree that those kind of examples (comparing to the relationship between partners) is not helpful when we're talking about a discipline issue with our kids. It's not the same. Now if it were a matter of hitting or something, but seriously how likely is that on MDC??


----------



## woobysma (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *swampangel* 
I believe that even those who are supporting the analogy believe that there are differences in the roles. I think the OP is now MIA (







) but I think she was referring to the comparison to our relationship with our partners when talking about discipline issues.

There was another thread where the question came up, "what if your dh did...." and I think that's where this thread got started. I agree that those kind of examples (comparing to the relationship between partners) is not helpful when we're talking about a discipline issue with our kids. It's not the same. Now if it were a matter of hitting or something, but seriously how likely is that on MDC??









OK, I get that.
Re: discipline, I think the analogies fall totally flat.
In the case of disresectful speach or actions (like insults or hitting), I guess I see _some_ similarities, but I *expect* better behavior from DP than I do from the kids, so my reactions are harsher with DP, I guess. On the reverse end, it's all equal. I don't belittle or hit the kids, just like I don't do that with DP.

I guess, for me, it comes down to what kind of men I want my boys to grow to be. Right now, they may slip and speak to me in a disrespectful manner sometimes, but I parent in a way that (I hope) leads them to not act like that as grown men. DP, on the other hand, IS a grown man and I expect him to act as such.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy* 
I suppose if she did chase me around the house trying to hit me, I would go into another room and not close the door, but close it enough between us so she couldn't hit me, and explain to her that I deserve to be safe in my body, that I will talk, read, sing (whatever) or she can hit, kick, punch whatever (that is not me or an animal or breakable) or whatever. I would empathize, validate, all that -- but that I have a need for my body to be safe from physical pain. That is just something that has ever happened though (her following me to continue hitting).

Our hitting phase passed by pretty uneventfully and only flares up once in a great while thankfully.

(eta: my answer is based on the thought of dd following me around the house beating the [email protected] out of me, which I could never foresee happening).

Well, we had this problem, off and on, for years (beginning at age 3, thru age 6). Whenever dd gets into a hitting phase, it includes following me and escalating when I try to move away.

Yes, going behind a door is the most logical thing to do...and most of us with this problem have done that. The problem is that it only works to give me a break to regroup--because it *infuriates* dd and makes her behavior even worse in the moment. But it gives me a chance to regroup and breathe (as much as you can with someone trying to beat down the door), and be ready to try again with dd. Often, I just sunk down to the floor and cried.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 
Well, we had this problem, off and on, for years (beginning at age 3, thru age 6). Whenever dd gets into a hitting phase, it includes following me and escalating when I try to move away.

Yes, going behind a door is the most logical thing to do...and most of us with this problem have done that. The problem is that it only works to give me a break to regroup--because it *infuriates* dd and makes her behavior even worse in the moment. But it gives me a chance to regroup and breathe (as much as you can with someone trying to beat down the door), and be ready to try again with dd. Often, I just sunk down to the floor and cried.

That is the situation with my DS too. If I am on the verge of screaming at him or being unable to control myself, I will lock myself in another room for a few moments while DS freaked totally out.

The only thing I found that works, actually, for his hitting, was that I will pick him up and hold him and comfort him. It sounds counterintuitive, but I tried everything else - walking away, firmly saying, "we don't hit", etc. I think normal tactics don't work for children who hit out when they are hurt. So holding him is the only thing that helps (and I admit, sometimes when he starts wailing on me the LAST thing I want to do is comfort him and sometimes I just run away for a moment and that just seems to escalate it because he feels worse and acts out more).

He has gotten a lot better although recently he has started doing it again. But, honestly, with all that he is going through right now that is the least of my worries (long story).


----------



## IdahoMom (Nov 8, 2005)

I'm not really MIA, I'm watching. Everything I might have had to say has pretty much been said, and I understand the "other side". I don't necessarily agree, but I understand.


----------



## janhunt (Mar 3, 2002)

A friend told me about this discussion because I have an article describing what would happen if adults treated each other the way so many parents in our society treat their kids:

The Parenting Golden Rule
http://www.naturalchild.org/jan_hunt/goldenrule.html

Interestingly, this is the one article of mine that has brought the most positive feedback from dads. I'm not sure if it's because it uses humor, or because men can relate better to a spousal comparison. But lots of moms have told me that this was the article that finally helped their partner to "get it" that children are human beings who deserve to be treated like human beings. I love feedback like that!

Jan


----------



## Janelovesmax (Feb 17, 2006)

I know this is completely OT, but I just want to thank all the moms on gentle discipline forum, especially the ones who always participate in these type of threads. I learn soooo much from all your opinions, learning from both sides of argument and I love it and I lurke here all the time.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

We were just saying that if Jan Hunt, herself or Peggy O'Mara, were to post here, they'd be considered "extremists". Glad to see you post here on the Gentle Discipline forum.







:

I especially like the foreword to your book *The Natural Child: Parenting from the Heart,* which Peggy wrote. http://www.naturalchild.org/book/foreword.html

I sure hope that you'll chime in and share your wisdom whenever you have time!

Pat


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *janhunt* 
....children are human beings who deserve to be treated like human beings.











Quote:


Originally Posted by *WuWei* 
We were just saying that if Jan Hunt, herself or Peggy O'Mara, were to post here, they'd be considered "extremists". Glad to see you post here on the Gentle Discipline forum.







:

I sure hope that you'll chime in and share your wisdom whenever you have time!

Yep! Please pop in whenever you can!

Your site and your articles are a godsend!


----------



## peacelovingmama (Apr 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *janhunt* 
A friend told me about this discussion because I have an article describing what would happen if adults treated each other the way so many parents in our society treat their kids:

The Parenting Golden Rule
http://www.naturalchild.org/jan_hunt/goldenrule.html

Interestingly, this is the one article of mine that has brought the most positive feedback from dads. I'm not sure if it's because it uses humor, or because men can relate better to a spousal comparison. But lots of moms have told me that this was the article that finally helped their partner to "get it" that children are human beings who deserve to be treated like human beings. I love feedback like that!

Jan

Thank you for posting this! I really like the article. Especially this: "Treat your child as you would like to be treated if you were in the same position."

And I think it really addresses the core purpose of the analogy. Not to somehow insinuate that children are miniature adults, but to emphasize that all people deserve respectful treatment and that people of ALL ages generally will mirror the treatment they receive. Awesome article!







I love your site too.


----------

