# Why Is It Hypocrisy To Have Different Rules For Adults Than Children??



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

This may sound old-fashioned, and I hope not, b/c I don't think I am in most ways, but when I see posts that say this, I usually think, "what's so hypocritical?"

For example....this is something I have a bit of guilt about, but once in a while I have some McDonald's French Fries (guilty indulgence). Someone said to me once, "Oh, *YOU* have them, but you don't allow your son (he is not yet 2) to have them. How hypocritical of you!"

I felt, "No, he is a child, and I am an adult. If I choose to put crappy processed food w/ 0 nutrients in my body, then that's my choice. Meanwhile, he is thriving on his organic apples, veggie burgers, etc..." (By the way, I don't eat the french fries in front of him).

Also, he doesn't drink coffee or wine. I do. He doesn't get to watch violent movies. I just saw The Departed.

kwim??? I just don't feel that different rules for an adult automatically = hypocrisy.


----------



## marnie (Jul 13, 2004)

IMO the examples you laid out are not hypocritical. i can cross the street without holding someone's hand just fine, and have been able to do so for many years now. but my 3 year old doesn't have the same attention span i do and it's not as safe for her. i don't find that (or coffee, or french fries, etc.) to be hypocrisy.

on the other hand, i have issues with people who lie to their children and expect their children to be honest with them. "bending" rules of ethical conduct, IMO, can be hypocritical. but just doing things you don't permit your kids to do? not necessarily.


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *marnie* 
IMO the examples you laid out are not hypocritical. i can cross the street without holding someone's hand just fine, and have been able to do so for many years now. but my 3 year old doesn't have the same attention span i do and it's not as safe for her. i don't find that (or coffee, or french fries, etc.) to be hypocrisy.

on the other hand, i have issues with people who lie to their children and expect their children to be honest with them. "bending" rules of ethical conduct, IMO, can be hypocritical. but just doing things you don't permit your kids to do? not necessarily.

Marnie, I agree with you. But I have seen some people take this to the extremes.


----------



## nd_deadhead (Sep 22, 2005)

The holding hands across the street example is perfect.

Eating french fries and feding your child healthy food is not hypocritical. As an adult, you can make your own food choices (and suffer the consequences, if you make too many poor ones). As a parent, it is your job to help your child learn to make healthy food choices.

In our household, we try to have as many rules as possible apply to both grownups and adults. No one hits in our family. We all sit at the table until everyone is finished eating - no matter how badly I want to clear the table and clean up the kitchen, so I can go do something else. Everyone wears a seat belt and a bike helmet. No one uses profanity. We all knock on a door (and are granted admission) before entering someone's room. We all speak to each other politely.

If there are two sets of rules in the house - a strict one for kids and a lax one for parents - THAT would be hypocritical. A philosophy of "do as I say, not as I do" is hypocritical.

An occasional french fry when your child isn't even around? No way.


----------



## philomom (Sep 12, 2004)

Not sharing french fries is not nice. Just do without them if your child is dining with you. You should set a healthy example for your child anyway.


----------



## Thalia the Muse (Jun 22, 2006)

Quote:

(By the way, I don't eat the french fries in front of him).
In the original post.


----------



## Nicole77 (Oct 20, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nd_deadhead* 
The holding hands across the street example is perfect.

Eating french fries and feding your child healthy food is not hypocritical. As an adult, you can make your own food choices (and suffer the consequences, if you make too many poor ones). As a parent, it is your job to help your child learn to make healthy food choices.

In our household, we try to have as many rules as possible apply to both grownups and adults. No one hits in our family. We all sit at the table until everyone is finished eating - no matter how badly I want to clear the table and clean up the kitchen, so I can go do something else. Everyone wears a seat belt and a bike helmet. No one uses profanity. We all knock on a door (and are granted admission) before entering someone's room. We all speak to each other politely.

If there are two sets of rules in the house - a strict one for kids and a lax one for parents - THAT would be hypocritical. A philosophy of "do as I say, not as I do" is hypocritical.

An occasional french fry when your child isn't even around? No way.









: We _all_ have to be respectful to each other, big or small. However, we do not all have the same privileges (or the same responsibilities) and sometimes the answer to why you need to do something just is because I said so. Not often, but sometimes. I am the parent; it is my job to lead and guide sometimes.


----------



## snyderjoint (May 25, 2005)

I don't think that it's necessarily hypocritical, but I do believe that a parent's job is to guide a child to make good and healthy decisons early on. I'm going through this with my 3 year old nephew now. I don't believe my sister should do things that she does not permit my nephew to do, pretty much just because I think it's unfair. My sister doesn't allow her child to watch tv or eat junk food, however I think all things in moderation are ok. But then she watches tv herself, and she still eats junk food... among other things that I've seen my nephew not permitted to do. When I have my own children If I say they can't do something I belive the whole family should not be permitted to do it. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Krystal323 (May 14, 2004)

well. we have house rules. that sometimes get bent. if I'M going to bend them, i tell my kids why (i.e. we can eat in the living room tonite b/c i am exhausted and want to lay ont eh couch, we can make it a movie nite)....but i don't just arbitrarily do things in front of them that i tell them they can't do, b/c IMO that's a bit rude. hate to use this example (esp as a pagan







) but to me it's a matter of "don't lead them into temptation"--why dangle pretties in front of the kiddos then tell them "noooo not for YOU just me"??

and i totally see that you're not doing that









i eat my frenchfries too, but if I choose to do it in front of the kiddos, then I think it'd be kinda mean to not let them have ANY. so i eat them alone, or i get a small amount and we share.







to me, keeping unhealthy foods out of them isn't as important as modeling politeness and sharing. and of course while we're eating, i will probably mention how none of us should really eat this stuff cause it's not good for us!







and fwiw my kids pretty much hate french fries. they're 7 and 4.

just a sort-of-related story: once i was at a friend's house (very busy party-type thing goin on), and my kids were thirsty, so she told me to just get them something. WELL. my kids don't drink cow's milk, and there was only soda and cow's milk in the fridge. it never occurred to me that she would have 3 diff kinds of soda in her fridge and only allow her kids milk and water







she was appalled that I gave my kids soda at all, let alone allowed her kids to see mine drinking what hers weren't allowed. we had a fair-sized blowup about it, and I felt really bad!







but, do you think you'd relate more to me or to her in that situation??


----------



## jlpumkin (Oct 25, 2005)

I don't know if this is hypocritical or not but I think that what kids don't see won't hurt them. In our house we don't use foul language around our children. We expect them to have clean mouths. But when we are away from our kids or they are in bed we might have an occasion more colorful language is more appropriate. So fries that your child doesn't see isn't a problem for me. And since you mentioned your child's young age- I think that under 2, I not sure I would have shared even if we were together...

And I like the post about drinking wine... another excellent example I think of age appropriate behavior.


----------



## mamachandi (Sep 21, 2002)

I agree with the pp's~ but i would be careful about the food thing. My best friend has done the same thing (except with meat) ...she raises her kids vegetarian and her dh is a veg too. she has *meat* when not with them. her dh knows but not the kids. as they got older a relative (who was not fond of her) outed her to her kids and her oldest had a meltdown about it and felt very betrayed by her. her daughter is a very strict vegetarian and cried when she found out her mother had been doing this, all these years. So I'd be careful on that. would you be ok if your children found out you were eating the very food you had been telling them all along was bad? In other words the other things you do as an adult -they know about,mostly (not in all situations but will eventually when they grow up and will be ok with) `Hypocrisy aside,there is a trust issue there, that I think you may be overlooking. Gently, Chandi


----------



## Blue Dragonfly (Jun 19, 2005)

I think its hypocritical (and yes, occasionally I am a hypocrite).

Why shouldn't a three year old have the choice to put something crappy in their body? I don't think they "should" but I don't think I "should" either. I believe talking to your children about what is healthy and why, asking them how junk food makes them feel (both in the moment and afterwards) is more likely to produce a thinking, rational, questioning and self-reflective human being than not letting them make choices. How can they learn to make choices (between healthy and not) if all they are ever shown is what is healthy? Yes, they may develop a taste and preference for healthy food (which I would very much want to encourage) but that isn't learning to make a choice.

As for wine - lots of places children are given wine - very watered down or small amounts. Its only in North America where we consider wine to be only an adult thing (and look at all the binge drinking teenagers).

Some things - like the crossing the road, or other potentially immediately life threatening things - are not so negotiable - but I still think children should have a say. Maybe they don't want to cross the road right there. Maybe they should be offered the opportunity to run wild in a safe place.


----------



## lilyka (Nov 20, 2001)

i was just coming to say the exact same thing as the previous poster. Sure sometimes it is hypocritical. welcome to being my child (although for big things that i absolutely put my foot down, if it is a rule for them it is a rule for and I just have to change if I am not there already). They are free to call me on it when I am being a hypocrite. i am very open with them that i have bad habits and while I may not be able to kick them I am certainly not going to make it easy for them to adopt them. When they can afford to buy pop (for example) and pay the ensuing medical bills (when they can truly own all the consequences) they will be free to drink as much pop as they want. or whatever.

as for certain privileges I truly believe privileges and freedoms are things people have to earn (or should have to earn). So crossing the street etc not at all hypocritical. when they can they may but until then i get to call the shots for everyones safety. and I get to be in charge because I have proved my ability to cross the street safely.


----------



## Jessy1019 (Aug 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Blue Dragonfly* 
I think its hypocritical (and yes, occasionally I am a hypocrite).

Why shouldn't a three year old have the choice to put something crappy in their body? I don't think they "should" but I don't think I "should" either. I believe talking to your children about what is healthy and why, asking them how junk food makes them feel (both in the moment and afterwards) is more likely to produce a thinking, rational, questioning and self-reflective human being than not letting them make choices. How can they learn to make choices (between healthy and not) if all they are ever shown is what is healthy? Yes, they may develop a taste and preference for healthy food (which I would very much want to encourage) but that isn't learning to make a choice.

As for wine - lots of places children are given wine - very watered down or small amounts. Its only in North America where we consider wine to be only an adult thing (and look at all the binge drinking teenagers).

Some things - like the crossing the road, or other potentially immediately life threatening things - are not so negotiable - but I still think children should have a say. Maybe they don't want to cross the road right there. Maybe they should be offered the opportunity to run wild in a safe place.

We are mostly this way too . . . certain issues of life and death are non negotiable, but the kids can choose how they talk, what they eat, what they wear, what they watch, etc.


----------



## Rivka5 (Jul 13, 2005)

If I had the same rules for my child as I do for adults, then if she ever hit me I would cut off our relationship and not allow her near me again. If she were whiny and demanding and refused to let me have five minutes to myself all day long, I'd have some sharp words with her and then physically separate us. If she woke me up in the middle of the night, night after night, without being in any particular kind of crisis, I'd explain to her that I really needed my sleep and that she'd have to find some other way of keeping herself entertained and happy at night.

But she doesn't have the same capacities, judgment, or ability to accept responsibility that adults have, so I *don't* have the same rules for her as I do for adults. I cut her a heck of a lot more slack.


----------



## Ambrose (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Rivka5* 
But she doesn't have the same capacities, judgment, or ability to accept responsibility that adults have, so I *don't* have the same rules for her as I do for adults. I cut her a heck of a lot more slack.









:


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Blue Dragonfly* 
Why shouldn't a three year old have the choice to put something crappy in their body?

Because that 3 year old child does not have the frame of reference that you do about the choices he/she is making. Because their little brains are forming synapses and their little bodies need a completely different set of amino acids, vitamins, proteins, and minerals than adults do to complete the building process. Because after a certain age (18 or so), we are simply trying to not let our bodies break down, while before that we are trying to build up our bodies. Because a 3 year old isn't rational enough to understand that what they put in their bodies can affect them the rest of their lives. Because we are their parents, and it's our job to gently guide them to make decisions based on OUR frame of reference, while respecting their opinons. And because if children are capable of making their own decisions, we, as parents, are no longer a necessary part of life.


----------



## Nicole77 (Oct 20, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *velochic* 
Because that 3 year old child does not have the frame of reference that you do about the choices he/she is making. Because their little brains are forming synapses and their little bodies need a completely different set of amino acids, vitamins, proteins, and minerals than adults do to complete the building process. Because after a certain age (18 or so), we are simply trying to not let our bodies break down, while before that we are trying to build up our bodies. Because a 3 year old isn't rational enough to understand that what they put in their bodies can affect them the rest of their lives. Because we are their parents, and it's our job to gently guide them to make decisions based on OUR frame of reference, while respecting their opinons. And because if children are capable of making their own decisions, we, as parents, are no longer a necessary part of life.

Yes, exactly.


----------



## Amris (Feb 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *velochic* 
Because that 3 year old child does not have the frame of reference that you do about the choices he/she is making. Because their little brains are forming synapses and their little bodies need a completely different set of amino acids, vitamins, proteins, and minerals than adults do to complete the building process. Because after a certain age (18 or so), we are simply trying to not let our bodies break down, while before that we are trying to build up our bodies. Because a 3 year old isn't rational enough to understand that what they put in their bodies can affect them the rest of their lives. Because we are their parents, and it's our job to gently guide them to make decisions based on OUR frame of reference, while respecting their opinons. And because if children are capable of making their own decisions, we, as parents, are no longer a necessary part of life.









:
I would also like to point out that children are very much more "in the now" than adults are, and don't understand very well the idea of long-term consequences. All they know is, "does it feel/taste good NOW?" or does it NOT feel/taste good NOW? The larger concept of, "Yes, it may feel good now, but it'll make you fat in a month" is not something that they can conceptualize.

Heck, I remember clearly thinking, as a kid, that I would NEVER be 18, EVER, because 10 years was eternity. As for being 30, well.... that simply was an obvious unreality, because that was even further away than eternity!

So their cognizance of certain things is not sufficient to allow them to make truly informed decisions.


----------



## Mama Poot (Jun 12, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *philomom* 
Not sharing french fries is not nice. Just do without them if your child is dining with you. You should set a healthy example for your child anyway.

I'm really sorry here but are you effing serious? Sorry but I really disagree here. No, I don't allow my toddler to eat junk food and he eats 100 times better than I do, but if we're going out to eat, I'm going to order whatever I please and if it includes something that isn't kid-friendly then so be it. I am the adult, he is the child, and that is how life works. If I want a beer with my fries, I'll order it. But I'm not gonna give him alcohol out of fear of looking like a hypocrite. I really don't feel adults should have to give up mundane things like fries just to appear to be setting a better example for your children. Shooting heroin in front of your kids will mess them up- eating Mickey D's in front of them? Meh.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

I think whether or not it is hypocrisy depends on the reason for the difference. I think distinctions based on ability are fine--my 4 yr old does not have the ability to stay home alone safely. My baby does not have the ability to eat solid foods safely. My 7 yr old does not have the ability to drive a car safely. My toddler does not have the ability to metabolize alcohol safely. These are simple matters of ability. But on matters of ethics or morality or values, I think different standards are hypocritical. I know several parents who have "no profanity" or "no lying" or "no miniskirts" types of rules for their kids, while they themselves do these things. That, I believe, is hypocritical. With food, I think it's a grey area, depending on the age of the child. I don't think a parent eating fries but not allowing her 2 yr old to do so is necessarily hypocritical, but with a 12 yr old, I think it probably would be. I'm not sure.


----------



## tatangel19 (Sep 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mama Poot* 
I'm really sorry here but are you effing serious? Sorry but I really disagree here. No, I don't allow my toddler to eat junk food and he eats 100 times better than I do, but if we're going out to eat, I'm going to order whatever I please and if it includes something that isn't kid-friendly then so be it. I am the adult, he is the child, and that is how life works. If I want a beer with my fries, I'll order it. But I'm not gonna give him alcohol out of fear of looking like a hypocrite. I really don't feel adults should have to give up mundane things like fries just to appear to be setting a better example for your children. Shooting heroin in front of your kids will mess them up- eating Mickey D's in front of them? Meh.









I am inclined to agree with Mama Poot. If I, as the adult, am charged with raising my children to be reponsible adults then IMO one of the first things they need to learn is you can't have everything you want, when you want it, just because you want it. I don't think having adult priveleges makes you a hypocrite, but judging by the uproar over french fries, this is about a much greater issue to a lot of people. The ''I want it, you have it'' mentality is what starts global conflicts, and while I am not going to deny my kids something''just because'' if I feel it is best for them not to have something, I simply won't give it to them! That's why I am the parent, to make these decisions. Eat your french fries in peace. A minor indulgence does'nt make you hypocritical, it makes you human, and I know it is much easier for me, at least, to look up to and trust someone who is human, and approachable, than someone who appears to have no flaws, YKWIM?







:


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *velochic* 
Because that 3 year old child does not have the frame of reference that you do about the choices he/she is making. Because their little brains are forming synapses and their little bodies need a completely different set of amino acids, vitamins, proteins, and minerals than adults do to complete the building process. Because after a certain age (18 or so), we are simply trying to not let our bodies break down, while before that we are trying to build up our bodies. Because a 3 year old isn't rational enough to understand that what they put in their bodies can affect them the rest of their lives. Because we are their parents, and it's our job to gently guide them to make decisions based on OUR frame of reference, while respecting their opinons. And because if children are capable of making their own decisions, we, as parents, are no longer a necessary part of life.

Thank you. You said this very well. I'm surprised there are people that think this way (that a child should have and is capable of the same choices an adult is). Seriously, that blows my mind. I am all about choices and empowering my child, but really, what is the point of me being a parent if I give him no boundaries????


----------



## MillingNome (Nov 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Rivka5* 
But she doesn't have the same capacities, judgment, or ability to accept responsibility that adults have, so I *don't* have the same rules for her as I do for adults. I cut her a heck of a lot more slack.









:

And as they do get older, I loosen the reigns. But til then







not that I am that hard on them!


----------



## MommytoTwo (Jun 20, 2004)

Not hypocritical. As an adult you can make whatever choices you want for yourself. As a parent you do the best for your child even if that isnt what you always do for yourself. There is a difference between adults and children.

Quote:

what is the point of me being a parent if I give him no boundaries????
Ditto


----------



## GuildJenn (Jan 10, 2007)

It's a really interesting question. I don't believe in all the same rules obviously, for reasons mentioned above.

However, when it comes to food I basically believe that if my child can't have it, then it shouldn't be eaten in front of him/her. (I know the OP doesn't do that.) So we're not talking about a difference in philosophies about rules in general, just about that specific rule.

I personally believe that sharing food is a central experience of human beings and human nature, and that although some things should be consumed in moderation (and sometimes adults need to police that) that what I _value_ about eating as a social activity is that it is shared. And I do think that for the same reason that a child might eat a whole box of cookies (not having the capacity to think ahead), he or she might feel waaaaay more left out not getting a french fry than it would seem on a logical, adult level.

So although I might only allow my child one french fry, if I were having some, I would allow him that taste. I'd also allow/expect him to have one taste of brussel sprouts too.  My son's 19 months old but this is how he's been introduced to everything in our diet, pretty much, except peanuts and other choking things, and lunch meats and that sort of thing (which we just eliminated from our diet too).

In other words I might limit quantities of certain foods, but I wouldn't limit them completely. And once in a while I might not even do that. I'm not totally sure yet. For me I think the social nature of food and my desire to include my son in all the wonderful cuisines we try out trumps any damage done by a single fry, a very small piece of chocolate, etc. And really I should exercise moderation for these things too!









We don't drink pop, so that's not an issue, but that's probably my hot button - I would be glad if my son never ever drank pop, but he'll come across it some day. I think we'll treat it like dessert at that point.

For wine and coffee I'm more strict, but I think once he's 8 or 9 a *very* small taste might be ok then.


----------



## Amris (Feb 27, 2006)

I don't think eating junk food in front of a child is appropriate. It teaches then several things that they're better off not learning.

One should never forget, as one eats french fries in front of their child/ren or smokes or drinks in front of their child/ren.... there's no one in the whole entire world that your child wants to be JUST LIKE, more than you.

http://www.harrychapin.com/music/cats.shtml


----------



## wemoon (Aug 31, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *karina5* 

kwim??? I just don't feel that different rules for an adult automatically = hypocrisy.

I agree. Young children do not have the cognitive development to be able to make sound decisions. I would never do something like eat ice cream in front of my kids if I just told them no, but I might eat some after they are in bed. I don't think that is being a hypocrite and I wouldn't feel bad about doing it.


----------



## sephy26946 (Mar 30, 2007)

Why does he not get meat burgers? A kid needs protein. And I think that rules should change the older you get.


----------



## podalyria (Mar 28, 2007)

interesting topic.
Children (incl babies, toddlers) learn by example, the mimic the behaviour of their caregivers. They think we are wonderful and everything we do is good. So what kind of confused message are we giving them by eating something but denying it to them? I certainly don't think we should keep unhealthy food in the home or offer it to our children, but if you are eating it and enjoying it then share the fun! I wanted to keep Ds pure and not allow a single morsel of anything evil like crisps, fries, sweets, ice-cream,chocolate etc to cross his lips. I soon realised this was impossible with MIL, aunts offering the above when we visited.







: It wasn't worth all the injured feelings to deny, deny, deny. Now if Ds asks for something we are eating or drinking he can have a small piece. He is allowed watered down wine and beer too.
Eating and feeding our children is such an emotive issue, considering the long term effects of eating junk food (obesity, shortened life-span, diabetes, heart disease). It's almost on a par with smoking in front of your child.
How depressing.
We set boundaries and limits by imposing them on ourselves first. If we are not principled how is our child going to be?


----------



## Amris (Feb 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sephy26946* 
Why does he not get meat burgers? A kid needs protein. And I think that rules should change the older you get.

This statement is very ignorant of how human bodies work.

One could never, ever eat a single piece of meat, EVER, and be perfectly fine. All you need is amino acids. These are what we synthesize into protien.

Indeed, it is much less efficient to eat protien from meat than to simply eat amino acids, because now you must create larger amounts of enzymes and take much longer to digest. One must completely break down protien in order to create amino acids out of it, whereas amino acids are already in their broken down state in such things as vegetables, fruits, nuts, and seeds. Also, meat is not broken down very efficiently, and produces more waste.

If you also eat those fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds raw, you will have to produce even fewer enzymes, which means your body becomes even more efficient.

Add some probiotics, and you become a digestive powerhouse.

Here's someone who can explain it far better than I can.


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *podalyria* 
iNow if Ds asks for something we are eating or drinking he can have a small piece. He is allowed watered down wine and beer too.


Wait a minute... you give your 1.5 year old watered down wine and beer!!!?!!!! I agree that it's a parents decision when they are older, but what in the name of mike are you doing giving a BABY wine and beer? That is the most absurd thing I have EVER heard.







: You condemn smoking in front of a child, but you'll give a baby alcohol. I'm sorry but that is just... I am honestly dumbstruck by that.

ETA: I calculated the age based on the signature. I hope to g*d I've done my calculations wrong.


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sephy26946* 
Why does he not get meat burgers? A kid needs protein. And I think that rules should change the older you get.

I think you are referring to me, since in my OP I said he eats things such as apples and veggie burgers.

Obviously, this is not the entirety of his food consumption. Trust me, the child is getting his protein. (Also, a little off topic, but you don't need to eat meat to get protein. I thought that was common knowledge).


----------



## Krystal323 (May 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *velochic* 
Wait a minute... you give your 1.5 year old watered down wine and beer!!!?!!!! I agree that it's a parents decision when they are older, but what in the name of mike are you doing giving a BABY wine and beer? That is the most absurd thing I have EVER heard.







: You condemn smoking in front of a child, but you'll give a baby alcohol. I'm sorry but that is just... I am honestly dumbstruck by that.

ETA: I calculated the age based on the signature. I hope to g*d I've done my calculations wrong.

I had to do a doubletake there too. I'm reeely hoping she means like a single drop on the tongue or something, tho I still don't know why a parent can't just put the kiddos to bed before they have a drink....umm...









good thread BTW







:


----------



## podalyria (Mar 28, 2007)

Yes I put a *drop* of wine into a little glass of water and let him have that. I'm well aware of the effect of alcohol on the human body and that there are babies who present with liver disease due to mothers putting alcohol in their night-time bottles. A taste every now and then is going to do NO harm.


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *podalyria* 
Yes I put a *drop* of wine into a little glass of water and let him have that. I'm well aware of the effect of alcohol on the human body and that there are babies who present with liver disease due to mothers putting alcohol in their night-time bottles. A taste every now and then is going to do NO harm.

Why? Why does a one and a half year old need to taste wine and beer?


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *podalyria* 
Yes I put a *drop* of wine into a little glass of water and let him have that. I'm well aware of the effect of alcohol on the human body and that there are babies who present with liver disease due to mothers putting alcohol in their night-time bottles. A taste every now and then is going to do NO harm.

A taste will do them no harm....okay, I'll concede that that may be the case.
But WHY???

I just don't see why a person would do this? Harmful or not, I fail to see how this could be - even just a little bit - a positive thing?

Could you please explain? I'm trying really hard to be open-minded about this and have a better understanding......


----------



## podalyria (Mar 28, 2007)

Gosh, I didn't know this was such an issue.
Why taste? Why not taste? He is learning about everything around him, so curious and active and wanting to do everything we do. We feel he should be given the chance to satisfy his curiosity whenever possible, provided it is a positive learning experience that will not harm him or anyone else. From handling sharp objects, climbing heights, playing my violin, splashing in the sea, dragging around the gardening tools, trying to start the car to tasting all sorts of food - pickles, sushi, liquorice, chocolate, wine, caviar - he is learning and growing and becoming confidant in his ability to handle most situations. For now it is all supervised, but all too soon he will be old enough to go it alone and I think by allowing him freedom to explore now we are laying the groundwork for him to be a safe and responsible adult.

A bit long-winded but maybe you get the idea. Thanks for trying to be open -minded.


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

There isn't anything to be open-minded about. You are giving AN 18 MONTH OLD BABY ALCOHOL!







Have you even considered that such things need the frame of reference of an adult? Children have these tiny little bodies and feel the effects of things long before we do as larger adults. A few drops might make a baby tipsy and then they don't know how to adjust their perspective to account for that. They might try things that they normally wouldn't. Alcohol is a DRUG and there is no way to predict how a child, especially at that age, might react to it. My mother, who is all but a teetotaler, would get drunk on a drink. Other people can hold their liquor. The fact is, you can't predict how they would react.

Moreover, the health effects. My nephew was diagnosed with Congenital Hepatic Fibrosis when he was 5. That is a serious liver disease. If his mother had given him alcohol at 1.5 years old... even a few drops, it would mean the difference between life or death. Thank goodness she had the common sense to not give alcohol to him.

I am just beyond flabbergasted. It's not about open mindedness, it's about common sense.


----------



## polka hop (Dec 23, 2003)

*


----------



## Benji'sMom (Sep 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *podalyria* 
Yes I put a *drop* of wine into a little glass of water and let him have that. I'm well aware of the effect of alcohol on the human body and that there are babies who present with liver disease due to mothers putting alcohol in their night-time bottles. A taste every now and then is going to do NO harm.

But one drop of wine in a glass of water is not even enough to taste, or sure doesn't sound like it to me, so what is the point? Maybe you just want to shock everybody by saying your baby "drinks" wine, when really it's so very miniscule that there is really no difference from plain water? I mean, he's not really having a new life experience or any kind of learning experience if he doesn't even realize that it's different from ordinary water.


----------



## Amris (Feb 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Benji'sMom* 
But one drop of wine in a glass of water is not even enough to taste, or sure doesn't sound like it to me, so what is the point? Maybe you just want to shock everybody by saying your baby "drinks" wine, when really it's so very miniscule that there is really no difference from plain water? I mean, he's not really having a new life experience or any kind of learning experience if he doesn't even realize that it's different from ordinary water.

Maybe it's about him acting "grown up"? A lot of children will simply accept the water with a drop of wine, believing they're drinking the same thing as mom and dad, and be content with that feeling of being grown up.


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Couple thoughts re: giving alcohol to 1 and half year old:

1. I still don't get it. Like someone said, what is the point if it is so watered down? And if it's not watered down enough, well that's just wrong.

2. If a child is wanting to act "grown-up" I can understand that, but again, we're talking about a child who is one and a half....

3. I don't have a big issue w/ older kids having a tiny bit of alcohol, as they do in parts of Europe for example. So I don't think I'm being crazy uptight.

4. The more I read this thread and the more I think about it, it's okay for adults and children to have different rules at times. I really am baffled that there are those that think otherwise, and truly don't see why it's wrong for this to be the case.


----------



## polka hop (Dec 23, 2003)

*


----------



## Literate (Jan 4, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *podalyria* 
...From handling sharp objects, climbing heights, playing my violin, splashing in the sea, dragging around the gardening tools, trying to start the car to tasting all sorts of food ...

Not to turn this into a pile-on, but I think teaching your 1.5 yr old how to start a car is much more likely to kill him than anything else on this list, including the tiny amounts of alcohol. More kids get locked in the family car's trunk, get run over accidentally by putting the car in gear while playing around, etc. than you can possibly imagine.


----------



## TabbyK (Jan 14, 2007)

I think it's fine to have different, age and safety appropriate rules for children and adults. A great battle we've been fighting at our house lately involves our 4 1/2 yr old son. DH and I tend to stay up late at night, and DS would like to as well. DH and I don't need the 10 hrs of sleep each night that DS does. If we allowed him to stay up til all hours every night it would be detrimental to his health among other things. However, were DH and I to go to bed at the same time as DS, we'd never have time together, the house would be a wreck and we'd end up staring at the ceiling for a few hours every night!

K.


----------



## RoundAbout (Aug 3, 2006)

Exactly! Children have different requirements than adults, and a different ability to self-regulate. I don't get why meeting/enforcing those needs is hypocrisy







I think that its good parenting.

And count me among the people who just doesn't get the point of giving a droplet of wine to an 18 month old. I mean my 4 month old is really, really curious about the juice I'm drinking, and I'm sure he would love a taste, but his body just isn't ready for anything but breastmilk yet. I don't know where to draw the line with alcohol, but I probably wouldn't object to a 5+ year old having a chance to taste.


----------



## Blue Dragonfly (Jun 19, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *podalyria* 
interesting topic.
Children (incl babies, toddlers) learn by example, the mimic the behaviour of their caregivers. They think we are wonderful and everything we do is good. So what kind of confused message are we giving them by eating something but denying it to them? I certainly don't think we should keep unhealthy food in the home or offer it to our children, but if you are eating it and enjoying it then share the fun! I wanted to keep Ds pure and not allow a single morsel of anything evil like crisps, fries, sweets, ice-cream,chocolate etc to cross his lips. I soon realised this was impossible with MIL, aunts offering the above when we visited.







: It wasn't worth all the injured feelings to deny, deny, deny. Now if Ds asks for something we are eating or drinking he can have a small piece. He is allowed watered down wine and beer too.
Eating and feeding our children is such an emotive issue, considering the long term effects of eating junk food (obesity, shortened life-span, diabetes, heart disease). It's almost on a par with smoking in front of your child.
How depressing.
We set boundaries and limits by imposing them on ourselves first. If we are not principled how is our child going to be?

That is what I was trying to say.

I think turning anything into a forbidden fruit is likely to cause children to not be able to self regulate once they do have access to it.

I don't let my child eat until he gets sick on something, but I do let him have pretty much whatever I have. But he's much smaller, and he gets much less. I can't say I've let my child have alcohol, but I'm not opposed to the idea.


----------



## Blue Dragonfly (Jun 19, 2005)

For those of you who believe that children do not have the same ability to self regulate as adults, when do you think they start?

Personally, I think it is more a matter of personality than age, but I'm curious how you would go about teaching that.


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Blue Dragonfly* 
For those of you who believe that children do not have the same ability to self regulate as adults, when do you think they start?

Personally, I think it is more a matter of personality than age, but I'm curious how you would go about teaching that.

Like walking, or talking, it's something that they gradually learn when their brain synapses have made that connection. That means it's going to be different for every child. Most researchers believe that children's brains reach the maturity to begin to self-regulate around the age of 8 or so. They've matured and gathered enough empirical data from their daily lives to put things into context to make their decisions. But like walking and talking, it's an ongoing learning process. And like everything else, there are those that are late to the game and those that are early. I have a niece that is 25 and she doesn't seem to have ever developed that ability to self-regulate.


----------



## wemoon (Aug 31, 2002)

It would probably be more beneficial to just allow a real sip of wine/beer whatever than to water it down. Both of my kids (much older than a year and half!) have tried beer and both decided they didn't like it and didn't want to drink anymore of it. Watering it down makes it taste just like water, thus making a child want more of it, when in reality, they wouldn't like it if they just had the real deal.


----------



## polka hop (Dec 23, 2003)

*


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Blue Dragonfly* 
For those of you who believe that children do not have the same ability to self regulate as adults, when do you think they start?

Personally, I think it is more a matter of personality than age, but I'm curious how you would go about teaching that.

Well I would say it's a gradual process. It's not like, BOOM, HERE I AM, ABLE TO SELF-REGULATE!

And since it doesn't happen in a snap instance, children look to adults, especially their parents, for guidance and direction and in self-regulating.

But isn't it common sense that they don't have the same ability as adults? If that was the case, then I would just leave my 2 year old home alone so DH and I could go on a date. And I'll just let him play in the front yard and figure out on his own that cars are dangerous and could kill him.

Sorry....not trying to be overly sarcastic here but I find a statement about "children having the same ability as adults to self regulate" fairly ridiculous.


----------



## mommy2abigail (Aug 20, 2005)

I've let dd (2) sip my wine once.







:







: I never drink wine because I dont like it, but my neighbors got some really nice wine they wanted me to try, so they brought out a little cup of it. DD asked for some, so I gave her water, but she wanted to "Try mommys?" so I let her. She made such a face!!! And she didn't ask for more. But then again, wine is not a regular thing with us, maybe (MAYBE) 2x a year. And where we are from, it's not a big deal. Kids have a glass of wine with dinnner starting at about 8 or 9.
I do believe there MUST be a seperate set of rules for kids and adults. Infants and toddlers do not have the ability to reason, predict long term consequences, and look at something from other people's POV. Some adults lack those abilities as well, but I digress.







And on the flip side, we MUST make more exceptions for children than adults. They are still learning, and if an adult did some of the things my dd does to me, I might get really mad and react much differently than I do with dd. DD thinks it's funny to pull 3829 books off my bookshelf. If dh thought that was funny, and I had to clean up after him 10 times a day, well, we might not be dh and dw! (JK!) But you get the picture. And yes, I do have ice cream after dd goes to bed...


----------



## primjillie (May 4, 2004)

I'm still sort of blown away by the baby drinking wine and beer and starting the car, I'm not sure what to say............only that it isn't a bad thing to say no to your children once in a while. It is bound to happen sometime, and I feel children trust their parents to do what is best for them, even if they don't like it. That's our job. My grandson is about the same age as the posters, and I can't imagine doing those things with him (beer, wine, car, etc.). We don't even give him sips of soda!


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Well, I do think it is hypocritical to have different "rules" for parents and kids. But my definition of "rules" is probably much different than the majority opinion.

If I order french fries, I have to be willing to share them. French fries are not good for me so I eat them very occasionally. Eating out is not healthy either. When we do, dd is free to order whatever she wants. We are not eating out to have a health lesson. Ironically , she usually chooses healthy options as that is what she is used to eating. She is a creature of habit.....

I do allow my dd to have a sip of beer or wine. If she was really interested, I would be happy to offer her diluted wine. Dd was not interested in sips at 1.5 yo. Had she been, I would have allowed it. We talk all about what alcohol is, why it is legally only for adults, what it does to small (and big) bodies. Dd understands this and has no desire to overdo it. If she were hell-bent on having large quantities of alcohol, I would of course step in, just like if she wanted to throw heself in front of a car....a life or death situation. But I do believe that dd has the ability to understand cause and effect. In 3.5 years now, we have simply not run into this problem although dh drinks beer nightly and I am known to have beer or wine pretty frequently myself.

I also think it is fine to show youngsters how to start a car, use a knife, etc...... I mean, they see it all of the time. I am pretty sure most 2+ yo's could start a car just from observing it. Helping them explore it while explaining why it is dangerous to do it unsupervised is far better than a child trying it themselves unsupervised because their parents would not help them explore it. Different philosophies I guess.

I get uncomfortable any time I feel the "she's the kid, I am the adult" attitude creep in when deciding who gets to do and eat what. I do think it is hypocritical to say I can eat the french fries but dd cannot. What does that teach? Of course there are things that she cannot yet do because she is too young/small/etc...... But barring things that will land her or others in the ER, there are no rules that differ from child to kid in our family.


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

I am assuming that those of you who think that very young children who are allowed a sip or two of alcohol would be fine to let your children also take a drag or two from a cigarette. No difference as far as I can tell.


----------



## Momma Aimee (Jul 8, 2003)

i didn';t read all the posts

but to the OP

I do not see anything wrong with having differnt rules, within reason, for adults vs kids,a nd even differnt aged kids....... i think it is reasonable and realistic.

DH like a rum drink at night -- he doesn't share with DS -- who loves to share with daddy --

i too like to teate myself to fries once a while, DS has neve had them.

DS has a bedtime -- and all the DC will untill high school, all the kids will have cerfews and rules .... I don't have a bedtime....

I use a knife at dinner -- DC will not get a real knife for years (7?)......

I watch TV that DC can't watch.

and my 7 yo newphen when he is 10 and DS is 4 will be allowed to do things DS is not allowed to do (have a real kinfe at dinner, ride his bike out of the driveway, cross the street).....

I am an adult -- if i make a poor choice for myself (eat too much junk) then i deal with it. self control (say going to bed on one's own cuz you are tired NOT eating the wheole cake) is a learned sklill. as is the ablity to accept and deal with the natural consequwence of not self-controling (tummy ache from too much candy, tired from staying up all ngiht).... as parents we have to allow our children to wade into this process -- not jump in with both feet.

that is why rules grow and change as the child grows and changes. and it is not an baby vs adult.... it is a process of grwoing and changing......

AImee


----------



## 2tadpoles (Aug 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *velochic* 
I am assuming that those of you who think that very young children who are allowed a sip or two of alcohol would be fine to let your children also take a drag or two from a cigarette. No difference as far as I can tell.

My kids had sips of beer or wine when they were young. Not as babies/toddlers, but probably from age 5 and up. We're not big drinkers, so it was very occasional. This past New Year's Eve, they each had a small glass of champagne, as well.

I do see it as very different than smoking. For one thing, my kids have gotten loopy on cold medication, but just became mildly relaxed from the champagne. Secondly, beer and wine do have some positive effects on the body, whereas cigarettes do not. Can it make you sick? Of course it can. Can it kill you? Yep. So can riding in a car, which we do almost every day. I think that a very small serving of beer or wine is probably better for your body than a 20 oz. Mountain Dew.

I think the American "prohibition" mentality when it comes to alcoholic beverages is part of the reason things like this happen.


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

I am not saying that I think there is anything wrong with what you have chosen. I am just explaining how we chose to do things and how/why it is not aproblem.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aimee21972* 
i didn';t read all the posts

but to the OP

I do not see anything wrong with having differnt rules, within reason, for adults vs kids,a nd even differnt aged kids....... i think it is reasonable and realistic.

DH like a rum drink at night -- he doesn't share with DS -- who loves to share with daddy --

We would allow a sip. If it became a bigger problem we would either try to find a less harmful way to get dd what she wants or we would quit drinking it in front of her and reserve it for when she is not there or asleep. She has had sips of our stuff and we have explained that it is for adults and why. That has been the end of it. She does occasionall ask for a sip if it is something new, but other than that she understands why it is not for her.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aimee21972* 

DS has a bedtime -- and all the DC will untill high school, all the kids will have cerfews and rules .... I don't have a bedtime....


Dd does not have a bedtime. She decides when to go to sleep. It is usually about the same time every night, but does sometimes vary. She gets plenty of sleep and it has not been a problem.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aimee21972* 

I use a knife at dinner -- DC will not get a real knife for years (7?)......


Dd is 3.5 yo and has been using a knife with dinner for about 6 months. She started using a knife while working in the kitchen with me (heavily supervised) at age 2 when she expressed an interest. A dinner knife cannot do much harm IMO. She has not once hurt herself. Me, OTOH....... I did not have much interest in learning to use a knife as a small child. I was happy to have my parents cut my food for me. Dd's ability to use a knife well and safely already exceeds my abilities when I was twice her age.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aimee21972* 

I watch TV that DC can't watch.

and my 7 yo newphen when he is 10 and DS is 4 will be allowed to do things DS is not allowed to do (have a real kinfe at dinner, ride his bike out of the driveway, cross the street).....


We allow dd to make her own viewing choices. We do not have cable (not enough $) but we do have netfix. We obviously do not encourage her to watch scary movies but she has deicded to one more than one occasion. She has quickly learned her limits. She asks us to pause the movie during scary parts (of Harry Potter for example) and she leaves to room or we skip that part. I think she is actually better at gauging her viewing limits than I am.

And I do think that crossing the road alone at 2 or 3 would be a very bad parenting decision. However, my dd knows roads are dangerous and is not even remotely comfortable attempting to cross the road alone. She knows that we will help her cross the road any time she wants to cross it. But this is where my definition of "rules" differs from what i think the idea of this thread is. It is not a "rule" that i can cross the road and she cannot. She just needs to ask for help, and I do not.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aimee21972* 

I am an adult -- if i make a poor choice for myself (eat too much junk) then i deal with it. self control (say going to bed on one's own cuz you are tired NOT eating the wheole cake) is a learned sklill. as is the ablity to accept and deal with the natural consequwence of not self-controling (tummy ache from too much candy, tired from staying up all ngiht).... as parents we have to allow our children to wade into this process -- not jump in with both feet.

that is why rules grow and change as the child grows and changes. and it is not an baby vs adult.... it is a process of grwoing and changing......

AImee

I do not think my dd has any less ability to learn from natural consequences than I do. She trusts our advice but still might want to test it out. I do not see a tummy ache or a tired day as a big deal. Unless we are talking ER, I am usually cool to let her test her own boundaries. And sometimes my advice is wrong. Too many grapes does not seem to upset dd's tummy and she discovered that she needs far less sleep than I thought she did


----------



## Momma Aimee (Jul 8, 2003)

Quote:

Dd does not have a bedtime. She decides when to go to sleep. It is usually about the same time every night, but does sometimes vary. She gets plenty of sleep and it has not been a problem.
DS will not give in on his own -- we have tried only to have a meling down screaming tot .....

I am glad that works for your family.

I kinda liked the rules when i was growing up -- it meant something when i was old enough (read responible enought ) to do X Y or Z ---

Aimee


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2tadpoles* 
I think the American "prohibition" mentality when it comes to alcoholic beverages is part of the reason things like this happen.

For me, it has nothing to do with "American Prohibition". I've lived and traveled for the past 15 years in Western Europe. Dh is European. It's a decision based on common sense... culture doesn't play one bit into it.

Dh's sister and cousins feel the same way as we do. They haven't immigrated like dh. Quit using culture as an excuse. It's a personal choice.


----------



## 2tadpoles (Aug 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *velochic* 
For me, it has nothing to do with "American Prohibition". I've lived and traveled for the past 15 years in Western Europe. Dh is European.

Your point? The world is far larger than the USA and Western Europe.

Quote:

It's a decision based on common sense... culture doesn't play one bit into it.
Opinion are not facts. And what qualifies as "common sense" is something everyone disagrees on from time to time.

Quote:

Dh's sister and cousins feel the same way as we do. They haven't immigrated like dh. Quit using culture as an excuse.
Who are you to tell me what to do?

So you have people in your life who share your opinions. We all do. Big whoop.


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2tadpoles* 
Your point? The world is far larger than the USA and Western Europe.

Opinion are not facts. And what qualifies as "common sense" is something everyone disagrees on from time to time.

Who are you to tell me what to do?

So you have people in your life who share your opinions. We all do. Big whoop.

Of course the world is larger. What I'm saying is that you shouldn't say it's an American affectation. It's not. Many people from many countries also find it foolish to introduce young children to dangerous things before they are capable of processing what they are doing. You have a right to your opinion, I have a right to mine. It's not because of where I was born, but the values with which I was raised.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *velochic* 
For me, it has nothing to do with "American Prohibition". I've lived and traveled for the past 15 years in Western Europe. Dh is European. It's a decision based on common sense... culture doesn't play one bit into it.

Dh's sister and cousins feel the same way as we do. They haven't immigrated like dh. Quit using culture as an excuse. It's a personal choice.

Culture as an excuse for what? Disagreeing with you?

Yes, it's a personal choice, and one that does not need to be excused to you or anyone else.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2tadpoles* 
I think that a very small serving of beer or wine is probably better for your body than a 20 oz. Mountain Dew.

I think the American "prohibition" mentality when it comes to alcoholic beverages is part of the reason things like this happen.

No kidding. I would be way happier with my kid drinking a glass of wine than a coke or other soda.


----------



## 2tadpoles (Aug 8, 2004)

Just thought I'd add this in....

Quote:

Rhode Island General Laws

TITLE 3
Alcoholic Beverages
CHAPTER 3-8
Regulation of Sales
SECTION 3-8-11.1

§ 3-8-11.1 Furnishing or procurement of alcoholic beverages for underage persons. - (a) As used in this section: (1) "furnish" means to provide with, supply, give or purchase; (2) "procure" means to get possession of, obtain by particular care and effort; and (3) "permit" means to give permission for, approval of, possession or consumption of an alcoholic beverage by any form of conduct, that would cause a reasonable person to believe that permission or approval has been given.

(b) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c) of this section it is unlawful for any person twenty-one (21) years of age or older: (1) to purchase from any licensee or any employee of a licensee any alcoholic beverage for the sale, delivery, service of or giving away to, any person who has not reached his or her twenty-first (21st) birthday; (2) to purchase from any licensee or any employee of any licensee any alcoholic beverage with the intent to cause or permit said alcoholic beverage to be sold, or given to any person who has not reached his or her twenty-first (21st) birthday; (3) to knowingly furnish any alcoholic beverage for the sale, delivery, service of or giving to any person who has not reached his or her twenty-first (21st) birthday; (4) to procure alcoholic beverages for the sale, delivery, service of or giving to any person who has not reached his or her twenty-first (21st) birthday; or (5) to otherwise permit the consumption of alcohol by underaged persons in his or her residence.

_(c) This section does not apply to use, consumption or possession of alcoholic beverages by a minor for religious purposes; *or to a parent or legal guardian procuring or furnishing alcohol to, or permitting the consumption of alcohol by, his or her minor child or ward.*_

(d) Any adult person who violates this section will be subject to the penalties provided in § 3-8-11.2.
I realize that just because something is legal doesn't necessarily make it a good idea. However, it obviously shows that it's not all that uncommon, especially within certain ethnic and _cultural_ communities.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

DH and I go around with this one all the time. I drink soda in front of my children, and I will not let them have a sip. DH says its a "double standard" - and I say *exactly*. Since when did children have all the privileges or responsibilities of an adult? Ther are certainly double standards!!


----------



## GuildJenn (Jan 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *velochic* 
I am assuming that those of you who think that very young children who are allowed a sip or two of alcohol would be fine to let your children also take a drag or two from a cigarette. No difference as far as I can tell.

Well I don't let my son have either, but I do see big differences between them, and differences between them and the occasional deep-fried potato (french fries).

French fries are not healthy if consumed to excess or in place of other healthier things, and there might be some concern about the effects of temperature and cooking oil in their preparation, although the science on that is still fairly out.

I think fries have gotten their bad rap because people have consumed them to excess and instead of other things, and also because restaurants and food companies have encouraged us to see them as the "usual side dish" rather than something eaten in moderation. But potatoes have been a staple of various peasant diets and some small amounts of oil are fine and really the combination is not, in my opinion, a scourge.

To me (and I realize this goes against the usual American thinking) wine is actually a fairly natural product that also contains alcohol. Because of the alcohol it's good to limit its consumption and not overindulge, but I see it first as social/cultural delicacy sort of beverage and secondly as a drug. When I drink wine it's a glass to be enjoyed for its complex flavours and as a part of the ritual of a fine meal, and I enjoy the warmth that the alcohol brings to it too. But I don't drink wine to get drunk, and I don't like to drink it to the point where I feel that way. (I'd probably drink gin to get drunk, if I did that sort of thing.)

I also think that yes, there are negative health effects to alcohol, especially in large quantities (of course you can go to an extreme and point out that too much water can kill you too) but most of these come from real overuse and not from a glass once or twice a week.

I sort of class it in my mind with things like honey and sugar cane - you don't really want to be having a lot of these things but it's not a manufactured product designed solely for the high.

Cigarettes I see as much more manufactured and containing a variety of substances that are worse than any social value it has (or may once have had; I don't think the post-dinner or post-sex cigarette without the addiction really exists any more, at least not outside say Quebec and France). I don't have family rituals that include them. And I tend to think that the health risks, not just cancer rates but effects on blood pressure and things, outweigh the rest.

So... I guess I got rambly but I really do see them as different things. It is really interesting how cultural these things are!


----------



## 2tadpoles (Aug 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *velochic* 
It's not because of where I was born, but the values with which I was raised.

So which of your values concern the consumption of alcohol by minors? Is it because you think alcoholic drinks are unhealthy? So are many other things. Is it because they're mind-altering? Hell, I get a buzz off of Motrin. Is it a legality issue? As you can see, the laws vary from place to place.

I value informed decision-making. I'd rather my 15yo have a glass of wine in my home, supervised, so that he can see/feel what the effects are at a low level, than to go out with his friends at 17 or 18 and get sh*tf*ced in the woods because he doesn't know what his limit is.


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

DANG People! What has happened to my thread?? I was trying to bring up a general question about how is it bad for kids to have some rules that adults might not have, and people are focusing on french fries and wine!!!!








:

Yes, I guess that's what can happen to a thread....but I am still not seeing good reason for kids to not have some rules that may not apply to adults.

Can we get back on topic? Pretty please?


----------



## Momma Aimee (Jul 8, 2003)

Quote:

DH says its a "double standard" - and I say *exactly*. Since when did children have all the privileges or responsibilities of an adult? Ther are certainly double standards!!
yep

and I add "Someday he will be the daddy and can have stuff the baby can't" call it a rite of passage or whatever.


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *choli* 
Culture as an excuse for what? Disagreeing with you?

Yes, it's a personal choice, and one that does not need to be excused to you or anyone else.

No, culture as an excuse for giving a baby alcohol. It isn't a product of a cultural upbringing, which is what tadpole was saying. She said that it's the American "prohibition" attitude that keeps parents in the US from giving their kids alcohol... and it's not, IMHO. It's an individual family's choice no matter where they live. It's also a person's right to feel that giving alcohol to an 18 month old is dangerous. I've never said or implied that people need to excuse anything to me. (Gang mentality can be so fun, can't it, when you can't find a valid argument?) But if I disagree and you can't convince me otherwise, I have the right to maintain my original opinion. You can be as belligerent as you want to be, but it doesn't change the fact that there are people who consider giving a baby alcohol dangerous. Why would I even care what you do. I don't know you! If you want to give your baby alcohol, it's your prerogative. I'm here to express and defend my opinion in a civil manner.


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2tadpoles* 
So which of your values concern the consumption of alcohol by minors? Is it because you think alcoholic drinks are unhealthy? So are many other things. Is it because they're mind-altering? Hell, I get a buzz off of Motrin. Is it a legality issue? As you can see, the laws vary from place to place.

I value informed decision-making. I'd rather my 15yo have a glass of wine in my home, supervised, so that he can see/feel what the effects are at a low level, than to go out with his friends at 17 or 18 and get sh*tf*ced in the woods because he doesn't know what his limit is.


We were never talking about 15 year olds consuming alcohol. We were talking about an 18 month old consuming alcohol!

Go back and read my posts. No, I don't think alcohol is unhealthy. A child's body is developing and growing. It needs different nutrients than an adult. Their brains are forming synapses and their muscles, bones, and organs are growing to support them the rest of their lives. As adults, we are decaying. Our job is to have a lifestyle to slow down the decay. So, a child's body is building up and an adult's body is breaking down. What we put into our bodies makes a difference at different stages of our live. So as an adult, an occasional glass of wine actually HELPS us. Our brains are done growing. For a child, whose brain (and dendrites, which are the actual parts of the brain that are affected by alcohol) is still developing, it probably isn't healthy. Same for fats, same for caffeine, same for proteins, etc. What may be okay for us to consume as an adult might not cause our bodies to break down any faster, but what a child consumes may cause them to not develop properly.

That all being said, I don't eat anything that I wouldn't give to dd. I do drink wine and diet soda, and no, she's not allowed to have it. I also have sex, drive, cross the street unaided, watch CSI, go outside alone, eat sushi and rare beef, and mow the lawn... all of which she is also not allowed to do.


----------



## polka hop (Dec 23, 2003)

*


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *polka hop* 
Sure! Ibuprofen, caffeine, alcohol, tobacco, Peruvian flake cocaine... all pretty much the same, as far as I'm concerned!









Ok, seriously? You can't discern the difference between a well known carcinogen and a sip of wine? I bet you can, but a setting up a straw man is somewhat more entertaining.

Well, that's my point... where do you draw the line? I guess it's at smoking cigarettes, according to your opinon. What is the line for others? Eating french fries, eating meat (vegetarians would probably have a strong opinion about the health affects of eating meat), drinking alcohol, smoking (where in some countries it's still considered... and was for many years in the US... to be healthy), taking man-made drugs instead of homeopathics?

My point is that, as adults, we have to consider the fact that perhaps what we do (an occasional cigarette is probably not going to kill you) isn't appropriate for children. For each family that's different.

I'm not trying to stir things up... I'm saying to each his own. For us... a baby drinking alcohol is not something we condone.


----------



## Amris (Feb 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *polka hop* 
Sure! Ibuprofen, caffeine, alcohol, tobacco, Peruvian flake cocaine... all pretty much the same, as far as I'm concerned!









Ok, seriously? You can't discern the difference between a well known carcinogen and a sip of wine? I bet you can, but a setting up a straw man is somewhat more entertaining.

I try to avoid giving my child any form of mind-altering drugs, which all of those are except for ibuprofen.

Just my personal choice, though.

On the other hand, I also choose to set a good example of how people should live even as adults. I do not partake of mind-altering drugs, so there is, for me, no double standard.

I'm extremely well aware of the fact that every second of every day, I am teaching by example, how adults should live.

"I want to be just like you when I grow up."

I want my daughter to be just like me, too. Because I'm a person who leads the healthy life that I would WANT for my child.

I don't want to be telling my child, "Don't grow up to be like me."

So I don't do things that invite her to grow up to be someone who uses mind altering substances, who abuses their body, etc.

As a body builder, I do know the effect of "just a little bit" of alcohol on the body. It is NOT a healthy pursuit. It DOES have a negative effect on one's health.

Our children want to grow up to be like us. That's the truth of how children are. Whether you give them addictive and mind-altering substances or not... if you indulge in these sorts of things yourself and they know about it, they are thinking on AT LEAST an unconscious level, "I want to be just like mom and dad."

And they will... for better or for worse. With any luck, one day my child will be just like me and be healthy, rather than be just like the rest of hte people in our family who have eaten themselves into obesity, or smoked themselves into emphazema.. etc.


----------



## JustJamie (Apr 24, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yooper* 
A dinner knife cannot do much harm IMO.

FWIW, my brother cut his hand with a table knife, so deeply that he needed stitches. He was 7.

My daughter has different rules than I do, because she has different needs than I do. She goes to bed at 7, I go to bed at 10. Not because I need less sleep, but because I need some alone-time with my DH.

She eats healthier than I do. She's guaranteed 3 meals a day, I usually only eat dinner, and maybe snack on her leftovers if she hasn't upended her juice onto her plate.

I wouldn't give her alcohol, primarily because we choose not to have alcohol in our home or our lives.

Rules are designed to create limits and boundaries, like a fence, allowing the child the freedom to explore in a safe environment. As the child grows, the rules change. Naturally, an adult's rules will be less stringent than a child's rules, because the adult has (presumably) learned to establish internal boundaries to replace the external.

Just as the adult has more freedoms, the adult also has more responsiblities. My daughter doesn't pick out her own clothes - but she also doesn't have to do her own laundry. She doesn't choose what she eats, but neither does she have to buy the food, prepare the food, and clean up afterwards.


----------



## Momma Aimee (Jul 8, 2003)

Quote:

Rules are designed to create limits and boundaries, like a fence, allowing the child the freedom to explore in a safe environment. As the child grows, the rules change. Naturally, an adult's rules will be less stringent than a child's rules, because the adult has (presumably) learned to establish internal boundaries to replace the external.
*
well put*

Also -- IMO -- there is a natrual progrssion of things -- as you say -- a fence getting bigger -- and it is only fair IMO -- that my 7 DN get to do more (and have more responiblites) than my 4 DN or my 16.5 month son...... and I do more than any of them (but have more responiblities too







).

AImee


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JustJamie* 
FWIW, my brother cut his hand with a table knife, so deeply that he needed stitches. He was 7.

I had a friend in the second grade that needed stitches after puncturing herself with a pencil. Should we ban pencils? Do not get me started on scissors.....

It is my belief that helping my child explore these things when she is interested and still OK with close supervision can only be a good thing. Besides, I like the help cutting stuff in the kitchen


----------



## polka hop (Dec 23, 2003)

*


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yooper* 
I had a friend in the second grade that needed stitches after puncturing herself with a pencil. Should we ban pencils? Do not get me started on scissors.....

It is my belief that helping my child explore these things when she is interested and still OK with close supervision can only be a good thing. Besides, I like the help cutting stuff in the kitchen









Yes, I think we cal all agree that many things can be dangerous. But I'm asking back to the basic question of my OP, since we've got a bit of a tangent going....why/how is it harmful to a child to have some rules, some boundaries, and some guidelines.

Clearly we all agree (I think) that a child is not the same as an adult so how is it "unfair" to a child to give them a slightly different set of rules, and how would that be hypocritical??

I'm still not seeing an answer....


----------



## Crisstiana (Jan 18, 2007)

I have no problem setting rules that prevent my children (or my nieces or nephew) for engaging in certain activities that my husband and I are free to pursue. Is this hypocrisy? I don't think so.

For example, we have an unspoken rule in our household: "Everyone with bowel and bladder control is expected to use the toilet when they have to go to the bathroom". It's never been discussed, but it's key to the quality of life here. My 6-month old twins have no control, so it is diapers for them. Another rule: "Only those people who can appreciate how hot a stove can get and could be relied upon to put out a kitchen fire are allowed to use it". Tough luck, babies. And tough luck to my nieces and nephew when they were younger. As for alcohol: "Only those people who can fully grasp the negative consequences of alchohol use (physically, socially, developmentally, etc) and will be accountable for their actions (to the law, the in-laws, the grandparents, etc) are allowed to consume alcohol and such consumption must be moderate". Sorry, teenage nieces, but I would be held responsible by your parents and grandparents - it's been proven that they know where I live and how to make my life a holy heck - so no alcohol for you while you are here (which is easy to enforce as all we have is banana liquor for making desserts...and not even a reckless teenager would willingly consume an entire glass of banana liquor).

Some rules prevent certain folks for doing certain things. That's fine with me. And if they are not fine with that, that is fine with me too.


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *karina5* 
Yes, I think we cal all agree that many things can be dangerous. But I'm asking back to the basic question of my OP, since we've got a bit of a tangent going....why/how is it harmful to a child to have some rules, some boundaries, and some guidelines.

Clearly we all agree (I think) that a child is not the same as an adult so how is it "unfair" to a child to give them a slightly different set of rules, and how would that be hypocritical??

I'm still not seeing an answer....

Well, I do think it is hypocritical for adults to have different "rule". Boundaries based on size, maturity, health, safety, etc are different. My dd does have boundaries. She knows she can not walk out of the house and down to the store alone. However, she *can* ask me to walk with her, let her make the decisions of what route and when to cross, all with me there as a back-up if needed. Or some other variation of that theme that gets her what she wants yet still keeps her safe. There is no "rule" that she cannot go to the store, just like there is no "rule" that I cannot go. That is a safety issue and I think we can all agree that different parents are going to have different thresholds for where that boundary line needs to be made.

What I see here that i do think is hypocritical is eating french fries in front of your kids and saying it is only a "rule" that they cannot have it while it is not a "rule" for the adults. If it is not a safety or serious health (like allergies or, depending on your opinions on alcohol, etc....), I think it is pretty unfair to ask kids to do as you say and not what you do. It is hypocritcal to say it is "unhealthy" to the kids but not also acknowledge that it is unhealthy for the adults.

Getting beyond that into things like sleep times and hygiene is difficult since most parents believe children are incapable of making these decisions themselves. i am not one of those people and therefore feel it would be hypocritic for me to impose rules around my child's body that differ from mine. But we will not get concensus on this board on that matter because of very basic philosophical differences. Going back to the table knife. I feel my dd IS capable of learning how to use one safely and some others feel that children are NOT capable of that until varying ages. Rules come from those philosophies which is why some people are going to say it is hypocracy and others will say it is not.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *karina5* 
DANG People! What has happened to my thread?? I was trying to bring up a general question about how is it bad for kids to have some rules that adults might not have, and people are focusing on french fries and wine!!!!

I liked your original question - it was interesting. I'm sorry it has been highjacked.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I drink Mt. Dew, and I will tell anyone that it is unhealthy. And I do not let my children drink soda. The difference is I am at an age to fully understand the consquences of my actions - my children are not.

I need to quit though -I've reformed 95% of my diet, but I'm hanging onto my Dew. My mother drank Pepsi ever since I can remember and despite never being allowed to drink soda as a child, I drink it as an adult. I don't really feel I can blame my choice to drink soda on my mom though, since I started the habit in college.


----------



## nina_yyc (Nov 5, 2006)

I think the most important thing with food and alchohol is to get the BIG PICTURE right. Food is not merely a health issue, it should also be a social and cultural issue. It's not the single french fry that's making America fat, it's the mentality of eating 'on-the-go,' meals from a box and drive-thru that's making America fat. Now I'm not saying go home and make your baby southern fried chicken...obviously WHAT you eat is important, but the parent's attitude and approaches toward food are equally important and often left out of the debate.

Hypocrisy gets a bad rap. Sometimes your beliefs are ahead of your behavior. If you discredit everyone and everything that appears hyprocritical (i.e. Al Gore lives in a mansion so I'm not going to take An Inconvenient Truth seriously) you will find yourself doing nothing and believing in nothing to avoid being characterized as a hypocrite.

I'm not saying "lie to your children but teach them not to lie" - obviously you're undermining your own message. However, teaching ideals that you can't always live up to yourself...still worthwhile.

My child will have different rules than I do. We plan to limit TV. Right now her limit is none. We've all read the research about babies' brains and TV. I used to work in the TV industry. Is this hypocritical? Sure. Am I going to risk my baby's brain development? No way.


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

_Yooper, You said, "Boundaries based on size, maturity, health, safety, etc are different." (Ya know, I can't do the darn Quote thing and have it work for just a partial quote)..._

***************
Anyway, this does not seem to be any different. Call it a "boundary" or call it a "rule." Having the "boundary" be based on size, maturity, etc... means that you are taking into consideration that a child DOES have less maturity....

So, my point is, you can call it what you want, but you still have "rules" (aka boundaries) based on what a child can do.

Now......here's what I don't get. Why would that be a bad thing?


----------



## Blue Dragonfly (Jun 19, 2005)

Perhaps it is the word "rules" that I have an issue with. I think of rules as - if you break them, you will be punished. I am more comfortable with boundaries. Boundaries seem like more of a natural consequence of our abilities and behaviours.

For example. 1000 years ago, I think it would be pretty safe to say that people believed it was a rule that you couldn't fly to the moon. As we've evolved we now have the technology to do so. Now there are boundaries that make it unlikely that you can fly to the moon. (Because you don't have the training, the skills, the $ etc.)

I would parallel this with rules and boundaries for children. Rules are something that there is no way you can do, and boundaries are something you're not able to do because of a set of circumstances.

(My grammar is all wacky in this, but I think you'll know what I mean).


----------



## Blue Dragonfly (Jun 19, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
My mother drank Pepsi ever since I can remember and despite never being allowed to drink soda as a child, I drink it as an adult. I don't really feel I can blame my choice to drink soda on my mom though, since I started the habit in college.

See, this is the place I come from. I had rules and "do as I say" rules. I went wild in my 20s with food, and to a certain extent, alcohol. It took me until I was 30 to be able to self-regulate my diet.

I am hoping that by letting my child have chocolate (or french fries etc.), and discussing its effects on his body - does it make you excited, give you a stomach ache, a head ache? - that he will know and be able to make his own choices about what is good for his body.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

That sounds like a good plan BD. DD is under 3, so I don't think she is old enough to understand that the reason she's still awake at 11:30 pm is because she was stealing sips of mommy's soda! But eventually I do want her to have the ability to self regulate.

Soda is a feel good for me. I know that it is a "soothie" for me, and I have yet to find an adequate replacement. I enjoy the entire experience of having a soda. I can have that experience in the midst of a stressful situation. I've done EFT - but tapping on my head is not nearly as fun as a soda. Mom would say I should pray - but praying is not nearly as fun as a soda. I don't know the answer, but I'm at least working on limiting my intake. That's better than nothing!


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

LOL that the word "rules" might be what people have a problem with.

















I just don't believe in pussyfooting around with wording like that.

And....fwiw....I don't think ALL rules are "bad."


----------



## Momma Aimee (Jul 8, 2003)

Quote:

So, my point is, you can call it what you want, but you still have "rules" (aka boundaries) based on what a child can do.

Now......here's what I don't get. Why would that be a bad thing?
It is not.

it allows the child to grow and progress -- earning bigger boundaires as they can handle them -- in a natural and even way. so teh child feels safe and is mostly safe.

the bounds, or rules, fit their responiblity level, their ablity level and their personal maturity level --- i do not like things based only on age, i believe in Min age -- but not that things are automatice at that age. My son will NOT drive before 16, however he may not drive at 16 either based on him.....

Aimee


----------



## TabbyK (Jan 14, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yooper* 
I do allow my dd to have a sip of beer or wine. If she was really interested, I would be happy to offer her diluted wine. Dd was not interested in sips at 1.5 yo. Had she been, I would have allowed it. We talk all about what alcohol is, why it is legally only for adults, what it does to small (and big) bodies.

Am I reading this correctly? Do you really give your child alcohol and then tell her that you're willingly breaking the law by doing so? I understand some people don't care for "rules", but isn't that teaching your child it's ok to break the law?

K.


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *karina5* 
LOL that the word "rules" might be what people have a problem with.

















I just don't believe in pussyfooting around with wording like that.

And....fwiw....I don't think ALL rules are "bad."


OK, let me reword. I do believe that we have "limitations" that vary from person to person and are not *imposed* by others. They are the rules of nature. Like I have some limitations. I get sick when I drink a whole bottle of wine, I feel best when I have 10 hours of sleep, and I am highly suseptable to cavities if I do not brush. I also have some limitations in common with my dd. we would probably hurt ourselves badly or even die if we jumped off the roof, we can not fly under our own power, and we cannot fit into a shoebox no matter how hard we try. None of those are imposed by another person. My dd has some limitations that I do not share with her. She does not know all of the rules about road safety, she has trouble using scissors, and she melts down after eating too much sugar. She can still cross the road and use scissors (with help) and she can still eat sugar knowing sull well what the consequenses will be. I do not impose "rules" but there are inherant limitations.

So yes, I do think it is hypocritical, and therefore something I would not want to do to munch on french fries in front of my dd then tell her it is a "rule" that she cannot have any.


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TabbyK* 
Am I reading this correctly? Do you really give your child alcohol and then tell her that you're willingly breaking the law by doing so? I understand some people don't care for "rules", but isn't that teaching your child it's ok to break the law?

K.


Well, I do not really have a problem with breaking the law in some cases. And I have no problem explaining my opinion on the matter with dd. Of course, I would also explain the potential consequences of breaking the law.

But that is a moot point since the law, in my state anyway, allows parents to give their children alcohol.


----------



## LoveBeads (Jul 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *karina5* 
This may sound old-fashioned, and I hope not, b/c I don't think I am in most ways, but when I see posts that say this, I usually think, "what's so hypocritical?"

For example....this is something I have a bit of guilt about, but once in a while I have some McDonald's French Fries (guilty indulgence). Someone said to me once, "Oh, *YOU* have them, but you don't allow your son (he is not yet 2) to have them. How hypocritical of you!"

I felt, "No, he is a child, and I am an adult. If I choose to put crappy processed food w/ 0 nutrients in my body, then that's my choice. Meanwhile, he is thriving on his organic apples, veggie burgers, etc..." (By the way, I don't eat the french fries in front of him).

Also, he doesn't drink coffee or wine. I do. He doesn't get to watch violent movies. I just saw The Departed.

kwim??? I just don't feel that different rules for an adult automatically = hypocrisy.

I'm quoting because I'm trying to remember the original question.

IMO it is absolutely hypocritical to tell a child that they can't have french fries when you eat them if the reasoning is that they are unhealthy (which presumably it is). I wouldn't call it hypocritical to eat french fries and deny them to your child if he/she was deathly allergic to potatoes.

Just because you are able to make the distinction between healthy and unhealthy and your child is not doesn't change the fact that you are deciding that a universally unhealthy thing is okay for you to eat and not your child. To me, that is hypocrisy. If something is unhealthy and shouldn't be eaten then it shouldn't be eaten by anybody.

Now, I will say that I do eat french fries and I do not eat them in front of my children. I will also say that it is completely hypocritical of me to do so.


----------



## primjillie (May 4, 2004)

I have noticed that a lot of people don't like to impose "rules" on their children, because it is like saying "no". I have no problem with either, because I firmly believe little ones need and want our protection and guidance and that includes "rules" and "no"s. They trust us to do so, and if we don't, we are letting them down. They are not ready to make all the decisions that adults are, no matter how we want to believe it. It may sound silly, but if children were emotionally, mentally and physically equiped to be "equal" (don't like that word, but can't think of another one at this moment) with adults, they would be born as adults, not helpless babies that don't really mature fully until 18 or so. Biologically, I believe there is a reason babies are born to adults rather than hatched in the woods and left to fend for themselves.


----------



## UptownZoo (May 11, 2003)

Holy hijack, Batman! Yowza.







:

To the OP, I can't answer the question at all because it's insanely confusing to me, too. There is no way rules and expectations are the same for kids and adults in our family! The rules among the children aren't even the same.

Furthermore, some of the rules for our children exist _for no other reason except the convenience of the adults_ in the house. For instance, if you're not old enough to vote, you have to be in your bed by 8:30 pm. DD11 and DS13 can read and listen to music on their headphones as long as they like, but still they must be in bed. They don't need to be there (DD especially could get by just fine if she went to bed at 10:00), but we need them to be there. DH and I need some time to be married adults. DH, my sister (who lives with us), and I go to bed when we get tired, whether that happens at 8 pm or 3 am. No, my kids don't like it. They're offended that they don't get to go to bed whenever they want, and I wish they could understand it and therefore accept it, but IME parenting just doesn't work that way some of the time.

Adults in our house can eat or drink whatever we want in the living room. Kids must keep all food and drinks, except water in a covered container, in the kitchen. When they are as good as me at getting spaghetti out of the carpet, they'll be allowed to eat in the living room, too.

What else? Lots of things, I know. We eat things they can't, watch things they're not allowed to see, read books that they can't, go places they're not allowed to go, have conversations we won't let them participate in, etc., etc., etc...

Of course it's not all draconian. My older kids have earned many privileges in the past few years, though they will always have to tell me exactly where they are going, and with whom, even though I can go wherever I want without giving notice to anyone. It's not hypocritical; it's parenting.

This isn't always a popular position here, but we really believe in firm, consistent, loving discipline. I believe it is my job to set a good example for my children; I do not believe that I need to make my kids feel like everything is fair.


----------



## primjillie (May 4, 2004)

Uptownzoo ~ what a breath of fresh air to read your post! All I have to say is "ditto"!


----------



## Momma Aimee (Jul 8, 2003)

uptownzoo -- wow i wish i wrote that. My thought excately --

Quote:

I believe it is my job to set a good example for my children; I do not believe that I need to make my kids feel like everything is fair.
I would add fair does NOT = the same.









AImee


----------



## nina_yyc (Nov 5, 2006)

Quote:

Now, I will say that I do eat french fries and I do not eat them in front of my children. I will also say that it is completely hypocritical of me to do so.
Exactly. Just because it is hypocritical doesn't mean it's wrong.


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LoveBeads* 
I'm quoting because I'm trying to remember the original question.

IMO it is absolutely hypocritical to tell a child that they can't have french fries when you eat them if the reasoning is that they are unhealthy (which presumably it is). I wouldn't call it hypocritical to eat french fries and deny them to your child if he/she was deathly allergic to potatoes.

Just because you are able to make the distinction between healthy and unhealthy and your child is not doesn't change the fact that you are deciding that a universally unhealthy thing is okay for you to eat and not your child. To me, that is hypocrisy. If something is unhealthy and shouldn't be eaten then it shouldn't be eaten by anybody.

Now, I will say that I do eat french fries and I do not eat them in front of my children. I will also say that it is completely hypocritical of me to do so.

Ummmm, did you see that I didn't eat them in front of my child, so he has no idea he's being "denied" them.

And I said this before, and I'll say it again right now....this isn't about just french fries (or watered down wine). I was trying to get across the issue that all things might not be appropriate for children as they are for adults, and having boundaries (rules, limitations....whatever you want to call them) may not be a bad thing.

And as I also said, whatever you want to call them (limitations, boundaries, rules, etc...), it seems that most people agree that b/c of a child's small and developing body, and cognitive understandings, we all seem to somewhat agree on this......

*sigh* I feel like this post has really been taken out of context, and people are focusing on weird things like watered down wine and/or french fries.


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Uptownzoo, I love your post!!!

I also agree w/ the person who said that some people might not be liking the idea of saying "No" to a child.

Hmmmmmmm. That's interesting. Wondering if Yooper and some of the others that have not been a fan of the word "rules" feel that way (that they don't tell their child, No, ever).


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aimee21972* 
uptownzoo -- wow i wish i wrote that. My thought excately --

I would add fair does NOT = the same.









AImee

I agree with this as well!!!! (This is also a case of LIFE, as it applies everywhere).


----------



## Momma Aimee (Jul 8, 2003)

I guess for me

differnt rule -- we do call them rules i think it makes it easier ont he child in teh rest of the world when they encounter RULES at teh skate park, the discovery center or school -- but you can call them limits or bounds or whatever....... for kids vs adults, and for diffent kids based on age / matuity / ablity to me is not hypocicy

there is an inherent pawer / ablity differnce int eh adult vs chile or 10 yo vs 4 yo....

to me hypcicy implies an equality -- then having differnt standards. that is the rules SHOULD be the samel; but they are not.... the husband who can go out with buddies and have a beer but the wife can, the ministry how preached anti-gay messages and then has a gay lover......

it is not IMO reasonable for things to be the same between me and a 3 or 4 or 14 yo -- so if we have differnt bounds, or perks, or responiblities that is to be expected....... not for DH and I = I expect things to be equal.

I have made a real effort in my life with my forster kids, with the kids at teh shelter wher ei worked and with all my neices and newphews never to say "do as i say not as i do" and i do know that my example speaks lower than my words. BUT that doesn't mean there are not difference -- and thus differnt things we can or can't do and so on.

AImee


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *karina5* 
Uptownzoo, I love your post!!!

I also agree w/ the person who said that some people might not be liking the idea of saying "No" to a child.

Hmmmmmmm. That's interesting. Wondering if Yooper and some of the others that have not been a fan of the word "rules" feel that way (that they don't tell their child, No, ever).

I have no porblem with the word no. I use it often. Mostly when it is in regards to whether or not I will do things or allow things to be done to me. People say no to me too. I do not aim to avoid the word no. I do aim to take my dd's requests and needs as seriously as I do my own, dh's, and any other person that I care about. I do not believe in setting "rules" that have no purpose other than to make my life easier or to impose my ideals on another. I *do* stop dd and try to help her dd find another way if she is about to do something that will come up against a non-parent-imposed limitation like jumping off the roof (I did not make the rules of gravity) or getting run over by a car (rules of physics). We do not have rules about food, bedtime, friends, TV, teeth, bathing, toys, sharing, etc...... I am especially wary of rules that focus on bodily functions like sleeping and eating. Dd is just as, if not more, capable of knowing her own bodily limitations and needs than any adult I know. Does that mean I do not remind her? No, of course not. If she is about to reach for another brownie, I might remind her about the yucky feeling she got last time she ate one too many. It is still up to her. She cannot tell time. At around 8pm each night I ask her if she is ready for bed. 90% of the time the answer is yes. When it is not, she stays up. I might ask her again in an hour if she does not take the initiative herself. If she appears tired or we have a big day the next day, I will bring that up. But it is still up to her. Dd made it clear at birth that no one can "make" her fall asleep anyway. She even understands that mommy and daddy like time alone, usually to watch movies that scare her, and she has no problem "reading" or listening to books on tape in her room if she is not tired as the night hour creeps later. Because we have not made rules about these things, she is not only very good at listening to her own body, but she is also more than happy to help *us* get what we want just as we do for her.

We do have some family rules that we all agree on. We can eat in the living room, but we must lay a towel on the couch. This applies to all of us. There are some foods none of us are allowed to eat in the living room, like blueberry cobbler. Dd came up with the cobbler rule after she witnessed dh almost stain the couch. We discuss "rules" that make our house run smoothly and they are for everyone. We all agree on them. If someone does not or comes to a point where they do not, we discuss and change as necessary. None of them are set is stone, no one has trumping power, and they are living documents.

I am out in the real world. Most friends and family have rules for their kids. Some operate more like we do. Some of our friends have rules in their house that we do not have in ours. Dd (and the rest of us) have no problem adhereing to the rules of other's when visiting thier house. I would not say anyone is "right". I am also not going to say hypocricy is "wrong". But for my family, parent-imposed rules do not work for us. Our house is far from chaos. Dd feels loved and secure (as far as I can tell). She is very "well-behaved" as is dh and I. Despite not having any rules she brushes her teeth most nights, is well rested, eats far healthier than most kids I come in contact with, says please and thank you most of the time, and everything else people keep telling me she will never do unless I "make" her.


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Thanks for clarifying Yooper. Sounds like your DD has a really good head on her shoulders.

It's interesting....my DH was raised the same way as your DD, and as he says now, "My parents were not doing me any favors" (by not having any rules).

Glad that works for your family, and that you have a daughter that it works for, too.


----------



## Momma Aimee (Jul 8, 2003)

Quote:

Glad that works for your family, and that you have a daughter that it works for, too.
i think thast might be key -- that it works for her DD personlity.

My son, for example, would never "put him self to bed" or even lay him self down.. he goes and goes -- pushing himself harder and getting crankier -- we used to think he was too young for an imposed bedtime and tried to "let him take the lead" we ended up at 2 and 3 am tooooo many nights with a over-tired, melting down child who could took forever to be settled and gotten to sleep. whereas if i take himt o bed at 7, by 8 he is out and all is well, even if at 7 he doesn't "Seem" ready and i am sure when he has words he will say he is not. I am the momma and I know.







However one of my dearest freinds has a boy 3 months older than mine -- who goes up stairs and gos to bed, nightor nap, when he feels like it.







he loves his toddler bed as he no longer has to wait for someone.









Quote:

It's interesting....my DH was raised the same way as your DD, and as he says now, "My parents were not doing me any favors" (by not having any rules).
I tend to agree there -- my dear freind since gradschool had a great mom, very loveing, but much more in to "consencual liveing, we are all equal people, we are freinds, we can all agree, i will not impose my will jsut cuz i am bigger..." and while we all thought that was awsome in junior high and high school -- Sis admits it didn't help her...Sis had a real problem when faced with authority (school, police, work) and had a lot of trouble learning self-disciplen (for school work and so on) and credits my authoritain oparents with giving her that gift







. I love Grandma M and she has "grown up" a lot herself and is not like she was in the 8-'s any more, which is think wills erve all the grand kids (mine and Sis') well. I know that Sis with her two and one on the way, intentially makes different decisions thatn her mom did becuse of the hard time she had from 15 to 25 because of the way M rasied her. Her little sister H is still struggling at 29......

I think it has to do with personality -- maybe?

AImee


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

I will not pretend to have a clue as to what is best for others. I am just answering the question "is it hypocrisy to have different rules for adults than children". I do think so and I aim to avoid it. It is pretty clear that most parents, here and elsewhere might agree that it is hypocritical but feel it has value anyway. Or that it is even necessary. That is cool with me. I just happen to disagree and have stated why.

I was raised in a mostly consensual family and "turned out" just fine....I think







However, that is not why we do things the way we do. My sister was raised in the same home and also turned out "just fine" but vastly different than me in many many ways. My dh was raised in a very authoritatarian and is like me in many ways and also "just fine". I have talked to people that I respect very much who were raised in AWFUL homes and I have talked to people that I do not care to ever be around that seem to have been raised in very "respectful" homes. It is all antedotal IMO. I do not believe you can parent empathy or resposibility into a child. You can "make" them be/do those things with rules. But only until a certain age. Perhaps 18 when they move out. Maybe 12 when they get too big to feel like they have to listen to you. Depends on the kid and adults. We are choosing to make that age now so that dd has the opportunity to learn how to make these decisions when she still has a vast network of support.

By nature, I am a very controlling person. I figured out pretty early in dd's life that if I were to have the attitude that I am the boss and I know best, we would all be miserable. I had to change the way I look at people, including small people. Luckily I had a pretty good reference point from my own childhood to draw from. I knew first hand that taking the control out of the relationship would not guarentee a "spoiled" person that cannot function "properly" as an adult.


----------



## Amris (Feb 27, 2006)

My 5 month old doesn't want to be held when she's going to sleep (well, more now than before).

At one point, I was distraught. I feel so bad putting her down and letting her fuss. But if I continue to hold her, she escalates to all-out screaming.

It breaks my heart either way. But in one case, she fusses for a while then she's out. In the other case, it ends up being traumatic for both of us.

So, as an attached parent, what was I to do?

It was some lovely mammas here who reminded me that attachment parenting is about figuring out what works for THE INDIVIDUAL child. If your child can and will put themselves to bed on time, I think you can let them. Why give them directions when they don't need it?

But if your child will not do so... someone has to, for their own good.

So I think that for the most part, whether you raise your child this way, or that way, or the other way should be first determined by working with your individual's personality and personal needs.

If your child will willingly eat chocolate til they puke, maybe buying them all the chocolate they ask for, every time they ask for it, is not the best idea for them and you?

If your child will have one piece of chocolate and then put the rest away until another time, then it's not really a big deal to buy them a bag/box of chocolates and let them keep it somewhere.

As adults, I think that we must show good examples. I think that we must also remember that every child is an individual, and what works for one, doesn't for another.

It's important to remember, too, that if you have siblings, each of them has to understand, "Well, your sister gets to keep the box because she self-regulates. I have to keep yours, because you choose not to do that. Which is okay, and i'm not punishing you, I am simply trying to help you learn self-regulation."

People can change. Once understanding that the price of pigging out is that you don't get to keep your chocolates in your room, the child may well stop doing so. Or they may not. If they don't, do you simply allow them to make themselves sick repeatedly in order to "keep the peace"?

I personally, would not.


----------



## LoveBeads (Jul 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *karina5* 
Ummmm, did you see that I didn't eat them in front of my child, so he has no idea he's being "denied" them.

And I said this before, and I'll say it again right now....this isn't about just french fries (or watered down wine). I was trying to get across the issue that all things might not be appropriate for children as they are for adults, and having boundaries (rules, limitations....whatever you want to call them) may not be a bad thing.

And as I also said, whatever you want to call them (limitations, boundaries, rules, etc...), it seems that most people agree that b/c of a child's small and developing body, and cognitive understandings, we all seem to somewhat agree on this......

*sigh* I feel like this post has really been taken out of context, and people are focusing on weird things like watered down wine and/or french fries.


Ummmmmm....yeah I did see that you didn't eat them in front of him. And did you see that I didn't make a distinction between whether you eat them in front of him or not? Frankly, I don't think it makes a difference just as it doesn't matter if I tell my child not to smoke and I don't smoke in front of her yet I smoke in the closet. Unhealthy for one is unhealthy for another and I don't practice "do as I say, not as I do" and I don't distinguish whether it is done in their presence or not.

But I also pointed out that even though I find it hypocritical, I do it myself!

I don't know why you are frustrated - you asked a question and you got differing opinions. I don't think I took it off topic at all and I'm certainly not condemning what you do since I do it myself. But I do consider it hypocritical nonetheless.


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Gotcha Lovebeads. Yes, I was being sensitive as a few people seemed to have thought that here I am munching down french fries in front of my child just to tease him or something.....









And, I do welcome other opinions, so that's not the issue. But yes, it was a little frustrating to have so many people talking about wine, lol. As I stated, this is a message board so it will happen, I just was trying to understand where others were coming from.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.


----------



## LoveBeads (Jul 8, 2002)

No problem Karina.


----------



## UptownZoo (May 11, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yooper* 
I am out in the real world. Most friends and family have rules for their kids. Some operate more like we do. Some of our friends have rules in their house that we do not have in ours. Dd (and the rest of us) have no problem adhereing to the rules of other's when visiting thier house. I would not say anyone is "right". I am also not going to say hypocricy is "wrong". But for my family, parent-imposed rules do not work for us.

See, now this I can totally get down with. What is it about child-rearing, and mothering in particular, that makes so many people think that it's OK to preach and judge and label this behavior "hypocrisy" and that behavior "abusive" (and I've seen some wild stuff called abuse, like putting a 4 year old in preschool 2 mornings a week!














and this mom asks that mom, "How could you? Don't you even _love_ your child?"

Really, I love love love to debate this stuff. I find it fascinating and informative. I love to get that window into other people's lives, because let's face it, the people I associate with in real life live very much like we do. But I'm baffled by the mean-spiritedness that comes into so much of it. We chose to vax our kids, but I don't go around telling everyone who doesn't that they're neglecting their children! I presume that, if you declined to vax, that you read all the stuff and did your own risk/benefit analysis and came to a different conclusion than we did. Is there room for discussion and debate, even heated? Of course. Do I get to call you names? Absolutely not. Not even on the web, where people can't see my face and don't know who I am.

OK, I know this is kind of OT, but I don't think it really is, because "hypocritical" is itself such a loaded word. I'm increasingly frustrated by communication online because of these issues (and I recently spent hours catching up on Kathy Sierra's frightening situation, far worse than anything I've ever experienced), but IME it's the very worst among mothers. Why in the world would that be?








I'd could go on and on, but maybe this rant is more appropriate to my blog.

Peace


----------



## LolaK (Jan 8, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Rivka5* 
If I had the same rules for my child as I do for adults, then if she ever hit me I would cut off our relationship and not allow her near me again. If she were whiny and demanding and refused to let me have five minutes to myself all day long, I'd have some sharp words with her and then physically separate us. If she woke me up in the middle of the night, night after night, without being in any particular kind of crisis, I'd explain to her that I really needed my sleep and that she'd have to find some other way of keeping herself entertained and happy at night.

But she doesn't have the same capacities, judgment, or ability to accept responsibility that adults have, so I *don't* have the same rules for her as I do for adults. I cut her a heck of a lot more slack.

Thank you so much for bringing sense to this thread.


----------



## karina5 (Apr 15, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LolaK* 
Thank you so much for bringing sense to this thread.

Huh? Are you saying that other posts had no sense?? I'm confused by this.


----------



## Momma Aimee (Jul 8, 2003)

Quote:

Thank you so much for bringing sense to this thread.
I agree what a great post that illustarted adults and children are so differnt we have to have different rules (quote) for them in our lives.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rivka5
If I had the same rules for my child as I do for adults, then if she ever hit me I would cut off our relationship and not allow her near me again. If she were whiny and demanding and refused to let me have five minutes to myself all day long, I'd have some sharp words with her and then physically separate us. If she woke me up in the middle of the night, night after night, without being in any particular kind of crisis, I'd explain to her that I really needed my sleep and that she'd have to find some other way of keeping herself entertained and happy at night.

But she doesn't have the same capacities, judgment, or ability to accept responsibility that adults have, so I *don't* have the same rules for her as I do for adults. I cut her a heck of a lot more slack.
There are times -- like this very second -- when i would love to tell my 16 mnth old son to go away and let me sleep, and if it was DH pulling on me I would.

It would be nice to let him loose int eh kitchen to fend for himself -- again -- if it was DH I would.

Kids and adults do not have the same ablities, thus they can not handle the same rules -- i thinkk it is gradn that SOME kids can -- thus they need assitance on when and what to eat, when to go to bed, no soda at 6 months no matter how sweet it is and good it taests, knifes are not to be touched and so on.......


----------



## lab (Jun 11, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *uptownzoo* 
See, now this I can totally get down with. What is it about child-rearing, and mothering in particular, that makes so many people think that it's OK to preach and judge and label this behavior "hypocrisy" and that behavior "abusive" (and I've seen some wild stuff called abuse, like putting a 4 year old in preschool 2 mornings a week!














and this mom asks that mom, "How could you? Don't you even _love_ your child?"

Really, I love love love to debate this stuff. I find it fascinating and informative. I love to get that window into other people's lives, because let's face it, the people I associate with in real life live very much like we do. But I'm baffled by the mean-spiritedness that comes into so much of it. We chose to vax our kids, but I don't go around telling everyone who doesn't that they're neglecting their children! I presume that, if you declined to vax, that you read all the stuff and did your own risk/benefit analysis and came to a different conclusion than we did. Is there room for discussion and debate, even heated? Of course. Do I get to call you names? Absolutely not. Not even on the web, where people can't see my face and don't know who I am.

OK, I know this is kind of OT, but I don't think it really is, because "hypocritical" is itself such a loaded word. I'm increasingly frustrated by communication online because of these issues (and I recently spent hours catching up on Kathy Sierra's frightening situation, far worse than anything I've ever experienced), but IME it's the very worst among mothers. Why in the world would that be?








I'd could go on and on, but maybe this rant is more appropriate to my blog.

Peace

hhhhhoooooo....... I really like this post.

I really liked your first post!

I have a 13 year old son and an 11 year old daughter (and a smaller son who is 9 - but yours is only 4 so I should stop)..

Anyway. I'm going to totally start stalking you on MDC now! Coolness!


----------



## siennasmom (Mar 14, 2006)

My DD is 3, and I feel like boundaries or rules or whatever you call them make her feel safer. If I left everything up to her to decide, I'm sure it would overwhelm her. Plus, what's the fun of growing up if you already get to do whatever you want when you're three?


----------



## Azuralea (Jan 29, 2007)

My DS definitely has different rules than we do, and I have no problem with that. I think that's part of good parenting.

I wouldn't eat french fries in front of him without offering, because I think that's rude, but as I consider them very unhealthy, I don't eat them myself, either. We do not necessarily eat the same things as him, but he is always welcome to a bite of what we're eating.

However, drinks are an entirely different matter. Wine is for grownups, and he knows that. He knows there are drinks he can't have, and is okay with it.

I'd never, ever, ever offer a young child alcohol for the simple reason that it is a complete health hazard to young kids. A child who got into a bottle of wine and drank too much could die or suffer serious injury from alcohol poisoning. I would never want to make it remotely attractive to young children. Kids die from alcohol poisoning. I mean, I wouldn't let him drink dangerous chemicals, either. Why is alcohol different?







:

Older teens, fine, but never young kids. I would not want to set up that positive association.


----------



## UptownZoo (May 11, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lab* 
hhhhhoooooo....... I really like this post.

I really liked your first post!

I have a 13 year old son and an 11 year old daughter (and a smaller son who is 9 - but yours is only 4 so I should stop)..

Anyway. I'm going to totally start stalking you on MDC now! Coolness!









: Awww, shucks!

If you follow me around, you'll find that I post heated, lengthy diatribes under the influence of narcotic pain killers.







I'm awaiting my second surgery for crippling endometriosis pain, and something about spending so much time stapled to my couch makes me even more opinionated than I am in normal life! Today, I am pondering the verrry important question: is it the couch, the pain, or the narcotics that make me so verbose?









Oh, and I have a 9 year old, too! My SS9 lives with us half of the time.


----------



## Lady Lilya (Jan 27, 2007)

My parents' method was similar to the one Yooper explains. It worked great on me, but not at all on my sister. Later on in life, when I asked my father why he didn't make rules, he said he wanted her to learn to manage herself. I really think it was too bad for my sister that my parents couldn't re-evaluate their technique at some point. They just assumed that if it worked well on me, the technique was great, and it was just that my sister had issues.


----------



## Momma Aimee (Jul 8, 2003)

Quote:

I really think it was too bad for my sister that my parents couldn't re-evaluate their technique at some point
i think that maybe the most imporant aspect of child-rearing in a nutshell.

to see what wroks with each indivdual child..... and treat them differently as they each need.










Aimee


----------



## Lady Lilya (Jan 27, 2007)

Absolutely.

As I begin my time as a SAHM, my goal is to make choices that stem from awareness and consciousness. I don't want to do things without thinking. I definitely do not want to find myself just reacting to behaviors and circumstances. I want to evaluate and, keeping an eye on the goal, determine a decent course of action. I don't think my parents were very thoughtful parents. They just did without thinking, and looking back I feel like my sister's needs were neglected because they were simply unaware that she was not being satisfied.


----------

