# overheard in a restaurant



## MadiMamacita (Jan 29, 2006)

Last night I went out to eat- we were sitting outside and a mom came out with her daughter.

The girl was crying ( I didn't see her but I think she was probably around 8) and the mom said "you decided to leave your dolly in the car, remember?" the girl said "Thats because I didn't want to lose her, I didn't know this place would be so boring!" and the mom repeated that she had chosen to leave her doll in the car, and that when you make a choice you have to live with it. The girl said "I didn't know there wouldn't be coloring stuff here! I'm so bored, I just want something to play with! You are talking with your friend and no one is talking to me and I'm bored!" and the mom said "Thats what happens when you go to adult restaurants. They don't always have coloring things. When you stop crying we can go back inside."

I didn't hear any more of the conversation and I don't know what they ended up doing, but I was interested in this because my LO is still so little, so I haven't really had to deal with a situation like that.

I think I would have let her get her doll from the car once I realized that there wasn't anything to color or anything for her to keep occupied. I think the argument that "thats what happens when you go to adult places" stinks because I doubt the little girl chose the place..
I'm not sure that the lesson of "you have to stick to your choices" is something I value. I think teaching problem solving skills is a better lesson.

So would you have gone to get the doll from the car? (I have no idea where the car was parked, if that makes a difference) or at least somehow brainstormed with her things to do until the food came?
Or do you think that kids should stick to the choices they make?


----------



## laohaire (Nov 2, 2005)

Yeah, I would have gotten the doll.

I've uttered the "you made this choice" line myself, but nothing like the situation you described.

I'm impressed with the child's cognitive and verbal abilities (unless she was like 8 - I was picturing age 3-5 maybe).


----------



## Ravensong13 (Sep 28, 2009)

I would get it, but that's just me. My dd is only 2.5, but I always make sure we have at least something ( a book, toy, crayons etc.) to bring with when we go out to eat. If it had been a case of the mom insisting that the girl bring her doll in and the girl refusing and the mother warning her she might get bored, I can see why she's saying the little girl has to live with the choice.


----------



## MadiMamacita (Jan 29, 2006)

I was also impressed with her abilities- thats why I imagined that she must have been around 8. her voice didn't sound like a really little kid either. but thats just a guess.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

I'd guess the girl was quite a bit younger, 8 seems quite a way above the crying for your doll because there are no crayons type of thing.

If she was younger, I'd probably get the doll, but if she really was around 8, no, I wouldn't.


----------



## CarrieMF (Mar 7, 2004)

no i wouldn't have gotten the doll, especially if this girl was 8.

you don't know the backstory. this girl could have been told that it woudl be boring, that it was not a kids restaurant, etc.

An 8yo is more than old enough to sit in a restaurant without having to have something to do/play with until food comes.


----------



## Attached2Elijah (Jun 27, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MadiMamacita* 
Last night I went out to eat- we were sitting outside and a mom came out with her daughter.

The girl was crying ( I didn't see her but I think she was probably around 8) and the mom said "you decided to leave your dolly in the car, remember?" the girl said "Thats because I didn't want to lose her, I didn't know this place would be so boring!" and the mom repeated that she had chosen to leave her doll in the car, and that when you make a choice you have to live with it. The girl said "I didn't know there wouldn't be coloring stuff here! I'm so bored, I just want something to play with! You are talking with your friend and no one is talking to me and I'm bored!" and the mom said "Thats what happens when you go to adult restaurants. They don't always have coloring things. When you stop crying we can go back inside."

I didn't hear any more of the conversation and I don't know what they ended up doing, but I was interested in this because my LO is still so little, so I haven't really had to deal with a situation like that.

I think I would have let her get her doll from the car once I realized that there wasn't anything to color or anything for her to keep occupied. I think the argument that "thats what happens when you go to adult places" stinks because I doubt the little girl chose the place..
I'm not sure that the lesson of "you have to stick to your choices" is something I value. I think teaching problem solving skills is a better lesson.

So would you have gone to get the doll from the car? (I have no idea where the car was parked, if that makes a difference) or at least somehow brainstormed with her things to do until the food came?
Or do you think that kids should stick to the choices they make?

Well, by the tone of the conversation, I am assuming Mom asked her more then once if she was sure she didn't want to bring her dolly in so she wouldn't be bored and even made her aware that it would not be fun. I am pretty sure I have had almost the same conversation with my son. Is it a big deal to get the doll? Probably not, but if she gave the child a choice several times before leaving the car, yeah I would make my kids deal with the choice made. If you give in to one request such as this, then the next time the child expects you to as well until it REALLY gets to be a pain in the butt. I actually agree with the mother completely and seems like she handled it pretty well. Sometimes children have to deal with adult situations and if mom gave her the choice to make it a little less boring before going in and the child chose to disregard that, then the consequences (being bored) should be learned... but that's just my opinion. I think it's okay for kids to be bored sometimes if they've been warned. (Heck, her mom may have even tried to talk her out of going to the restaurant all together. We don't know what the conversations were BEFOREHAND.)


----------



## karika (Nov 4, 2005)

with only such a small piece it is hard to Judge. Judgment is something I try to avoid, though I also fall into it still I am sure. Something you may not have considered. Perhaps the small child was given an option to stay home with dad or another caregiver and said they wanted to go to the adult place. Perhaps mother really didn't want her to make that choice again so she was purposely hoping the child would find it unpleasant so she could go to lunch with only adults next time. Perhaps they are really working on choices in their personal journey and the mother is using this as a valuable lesson about choices and life. Again, with only 1% of the information, we cannot know and judgment is useless IMO.


----------



## journeymom (Apr 2, 2002)

I think we all of us have to learn to cope. Eight years old is old enough to learn how to cope with an uncomfortable, boring situation without crying.

Though I handle that same situation differently with my son. I would have asked the server if there was any blank paper to be had, pulled a pen from my purse, and played hangman while chatting with my friends. Voila, everyone's happy!


----------



## Attached2Elijah (Jun 27, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *choli* 
I'd guess the girl was quite a bit younger, 8 seems quite a way above the crying for your doll because there are no crayons type of thing.

If she was younger, I'd probably get the doll, but if she really was around 8, no, I wouldn't.

I don't know... my almost 7 year old "spirited" son throws fits more akin to a 2 year old over stuff like this so 8 is definitely possible.


----------



## zebra15 (Oct 2, 2009)

IMO being 'bored' isnt a punishment. It sounds like the child was already given the opportunity to bring her toy with her and she chose to leave it in the car. As a mom I've made this decision with my son many times. Im sorry but Im not going back, and I've also made the decision that if you bring something you are responsible for it. Really at 8 yrs old dinner w.o crayons isn't that big of a deal, she was probably 5 or under and just had good verbal skills.


----------



## MadiMamacita (Jan 29, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *karika* 
with only such a small piece it is hard to Judge. Judgment is something I try to avoid, though I also fall into it still I am sure. Something you may not have considered. Perhaps the small child was given an option to stay home with dad or another caregiver and said they wanted to go to the adult place. Perhaps mother really didn't want her to make that choice again so she was purposely hoping the child would find it unpleasant so she could go to lunch with only adults next time. Perhaps they are really working on choices in their personal journey and the mother is using this as a valuable lesson about choices and life. Again, with only 1% of the information, we cannot know and judgment is useless IMO.

Thats why I didn't get involved or say something or some other busy-body type activity. I wasn't trying to be judgmental, I was just thinking about the situation and wondering how I would deal with it if it were me, since I only have a little guy and haven't approached that type of situation yet.

FWIW, the mom said "remeber when So-and-SO asked you if you wanted to bring your doll and you said no?"
so it didn't _sound_ like she had asked her repeatedly and reminded her that she would be bored otherwise. but like you say, I was only privvy to a few seconds of conversation so who knows.


----------



## Drummer's Wife (Jun 5, 2005)

My first instinct is to say I would get the doll, however, the fact that the girl was crying in the restaurant (at an older age?) may be why the mom held her to her earlier decision. I mean, if my kid threw a fit inside while we were trying to have a pleasant meal, their reward shouldn't be getting their way and going to the car to grab the toy. The mom removed her, b/c she was causing a scene. Yeah, since they were already disturbed and probably halfway to where the doll was - it would a quick enough fix to go get it. But especially with an older child (like over 5), I wonder if the mom was trying to teach he she can't act up in public just to get her way (especially since she declined to bring it in the first place).


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

I don't know about that specific situation as we're only hearing about a small part, but generally when my 8-year-old is bored and has something that will amuse her in the car, we run out and get it. No big deal.


----------



## bcblondie (Jun 9, 2009)

My first instinct was also to just go get the doll. The poor kid is bored. But I agree it's hard to say without more backstory. Maybe this is a constant problem, the girl is repeatedly asked if she wants to bring X toy to X place and she says no, and then when they get there she wants it, and mom has to go get it. Maybe she asked her several times before getting out of the car. And it sounds like it. So. I dunno. It really depends.


----------



## Vermillion (Mar 12, 2005)

Quote:

So would you have gone to get the doll from the car?
It depends on the circumstance&#8230; My son is 8, which I must say is kind of a stubborn age. They say that 7 is the age of reason but I think that passes by 8







Anyway, there have been times where he's been in a mood and would choose to leave something behind in the car, or at home, or whatever, KNOWING that he might not be entertained otherwise. In those cases, he made his choice with the knowledge that he might be bored he if continued to be stubborn, so he has to deal with that.

If he didn't know that there wouldn't be something to color or whatnot, and I didn't tell him of the possibility beforehand, I would definitely let him go back to the car to get something.

But that honestly doesn't happen much. It's usually the first situation where my son just wants to hold out and be stubborn (cut off his nose to spite his face) so I can easily see myself being "that mother" and telling him that he made his choice and now he needs to deal with it.

I can only speak for myself and my son though. I know how he is, and how he can be, and it isn't helpful to give in to him with things like this. It stinks when it happens, but it helps him to remember to make good decisions in the future.


----------



## princesstutu (Jul 17, 2007)

It doesn't matter to me how many times I ask my kid something. Getting a doll out the car is just not this big of a deal to me. I understand boredom very well and I really, really, really don't like being bored. If this had been me, I would have let the girl get her doll. It is just not that serious. I value my child and her feelings more than some arbitrary "you must learn to stick things out and learn to stick to your choices" thing. Even as adults, when we can remedy a situation and make it better for ourselves, we do. Why teach a child that it's not possible or ideal? Life is difficult enough without letting my kid cry over a doll. If the mother had been bored, would she have stayed there? Or would she have bought herself some alcohol to tame the boredom? Acting like a child has no options when adults have all the options is just unfair and unreasonable to me.

Okay, I'm getting into vent mode, so...blah.









Oh, and I was going to mention that if the girl was indeed 8 or so, she could go to the car herself and get the doll. Mom doesn't even need to be involved in that part.


----------



## nextcommercial (Nov 8, 2005)

I probably would have planned better.

But, I'm guessing the little girl could have stayed home with Daddy, and that mommy really wanted some alone/grownup time. I think Mommy was just as disappointed as the daughter was. The next time she says "I want to go too", mommy can remind her how bored she was the last time.

I'm not condoning that... but, I've done it with my daughter. Or, I'd try to convince her to do something, and she'd make the wrong choice, so I'd say "Well, you have to stick with this then, are you sure?". And, if she said "Yes", we'd stick to it. Even if she changed her mind later on.

My aunt had custody of her grand kids. When Amber was about seven, we went to a mall, where Amber demanded to carry her purse into the mall. My aunt said "OK, but you have to carry it, because I'm not going to carry it". Before we were even across the parking lot, Amber shoved it at my aunt and said "You carry it". So, My aunt carried it. I made a decision that day (and I was only about 15 yrs old) to always make my kids pick, and stick with it. I compromised on that when I had kids, but I do believe in that... to a point. I would have tried to plan the restaurant trip better, but if my child decided to leave her toys in the car, we'd live with that. She wont die of boredom.


----------



## GardenStream (Aug 21, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *zebra15* 
It sounds like the child was already given the opportunity to bring her toy with her and she chose to leave it in the car. As a mom I've made this decision with my son many times. Im sorry but Im not going back, and I've also made the decision that if you bring something you are responsible for it. Really at 8 yrs old dinner w.o crayons isn't that big of a deal, she was probably 5 or under and just had good verbal skills.

That's what I was thinking as well. This sounds like a conversation I would be having with my 4 year old.


----------



## velochic (May 13, 2002)

My dd is 8.

If we went somewhere that there *unexpectedly* was nothing for her to do... and I was visiting with a friend so she had NOBODY to interact with... then yes, we'd go back and get it.

If we went somewhere that we knew would not be anything and I warned her, then no.

If the friend was not there, then we'd find something to do to occupy each other and not go back for it.

My dd has never been a crier, though, so the crying would not be a situation I would be familiar with handling (even at 4 or 5) so I can't comment on that part of it. If she were crying, I'd immediately think she was getting sick and we'd get our food to go and leave. We've never had to do that, but, that's what I think I would probably do.

So... I guess without additional info, it's impossible to say.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

In my life as the mother of an 8yo, if "you decided to leave the doll" comes out of my mouth, it means that we've already discussed the situation and she had several chances to decide to bring her toy into the restaurant, and if "that's what adult restaurants are like" comes out of my mouth, it means that we've already discussed the situation and she was warned it would be boring and she had several chances to decide to stay home or go to a friend's.

So yeah, I'm projecting, but under the circumstances I would not have a whole lot of sympathy for her and would not be going to fetch the desired toy. I would have sympathy for other restaurant-goers and would give her a pencil and paper from my purse.

If we truly hadn't realized it would be so boring -- no kids' menus with crayons, long wait for food -- or the doll had been forgotten, I would go get it long before a meltdown.


----------



## cappuccinosmom (Dec 28, 2003)

Quote:

It sounds like the child was already given the opportunity to bring her toy with her and she chose to leave it in the car. As a mom I've made this decision with my son many times. Im sorry but Im not going back, and I've also made the decision that if you bring something you are responsible for it. Really at 8 yrs old dinner w.o crayons isn't that big of a deal, she was probably 5 or under and just had good verbal skills.
I agree.

Maybe I'm a horrible mom.







But my youngest went through a stage where he would change his mind about something 20 times in as many minutes, and if I let him get going on that route it would be a sure tantrum (and a mental breakdown for me). So the rule is, we talk about it, I give you the options, and you pick one. Period. The end. I'm not playing that game.

Could be the mom in the situation really is uncaring and mean. However, knowing that someone might overhear me saying something similiar, and not knowing any background on that family, I'd say it's best to reserve judgement.


----------



## MomSmoo (Oct 14, 2009)

I wouldn't have gotten the doll to reinforce that she made a decision to leave the doll in the car, however, with her verbal abilities, I sure as heck would be talking to her to entertain her and see what is going on with her. I mean school either just started or is starting... I can't imagine you can't come up with stuff to talk about.


----------



## happysmileylady (Feb 6, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
In my life as the mother of an 8yo, if "you decided to leave the doll" comes out of my mouth, it means that we've already discussed the situation and she had several chances to decide to bring her toy into the restaurant, and if "that's what adult restaurants are like" comes out of my mouth, it means that we've already discussed the situation and she was warned it would be boring and she had several chances to decide to stay home or go to a friend's.

So yeah, I'm projecting, but under the circumstances I would not have a whole lot of sympathy for her and would not be going to fetch the desired toy. I would have sympathy for other restaurant-goers and would give her a pencil and paper from my purse.

If we truly hadn't realized it would be so boring -- no kids' menus with crayons, long wait for food -- or the doll had been forgotten, I would go get it long before a meltdown.

This is exactly what I was thinking. Those two lines in particular make it seem to me that these things had been discussed prior to the trip and the child made a particular set of choices despite fair warning and being advised to the contrary.

The only thing that bugs me though is the girl's line "nobody is talking to me." I have a teen now, and when she was younger and I went out with my friends, we still included her as best we could. Or, I left her home regardless of whether she wanted to come or not. You don't bring a kid out to eat with you and totally ignore her.

One other thing though...I might have been inclined to just bring the doll in anyway. Just sneak it in my purse and then that way when the kid flips out it's already there.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

Is it a big deal for kids to change their minds? I saw someone said something about their kid changing his/her mind like 20 times over something, and I can definitely see getting irritated over something excessive like that, but my dd will sometimes say she wants to keep something in the car and then change her mind once, and I'll let her go back and get it. I sometimes change my mind about similar things and allow myself to get something I hadn't planned on bringing as well. Why is this a big deal?


----------



## Tway (Jul 1, 2010)

I would have brought stuff for my daughter to do, even if she did leave the dolly in the car. What kid wants to sit and listen to adults talking? The least the mother could do was plan a little something for her daughter to do while she went out with friends. I can remember going to the wallpaper store with my mom while she shopped for what seemed like HOURS. Good lord, I can still remember the sheer boredom.

On a related note, we went to a friend's place to swim on the weekend, and a 4-year-old in the pool was asking her mom--who was in the pool, too--to swim over and get her. The lifejacket she had on was too big and she was scared. And the mother said "ah, that's what you get in life. you have to figure this one out for yourself. people can't come and help you all the time." I mean, I get the lesson and all, but it seemed a bit harsh.

So I guess some mothers have different lesson barometres than others.


----------



## mom2reenie (Nov 14, 2006)

DD is 8 and I can totally see this happening. DD is a very emotional child and I can picture me explaining to her that I was going out to eat with a friend and if she was going to come she needed to bring something to entertain herself. I can then totally see her deciding at the restaurant that she didn't want to take her item in because she wanted to talk with us adults. If the conversation was boring, she would then want to go get item and because of unmet expectations, she would start crying. We'd then go out to the parking lot until she calmed down.

I would probably let her get the doll after she calmed down and we discussed why next time she needed to be better prepared. I also now she would tell me she was being ignored just because to her the conversation was boring--even if we did include her.

If I walked by the mom and daughter, I would have let out a huge sigh of relief, knowing I wasn't the only one


----------



## mammal_mama (Aug 27, 2006)

Well, if I had thought I wouldn't need something and left it in the car, and then decided I really needed it, I'd go out and get it. I wouldn't sit there telling myself, "I made the choice and now I have to live with it."

So I don't see why I wouldn't let an 8yo go get her doll from the car.


----------



## childsplay (Sep 4, 2007)

I'd have gotten the doll.
I honestly couldn't imagine standing outside a restaurant trying to teach my kid a valueable life lesson while my dinner's inside growing cold.
Life's too short.


----------



## craft_media_hero (May 15, 2009)

I always make sure dd has something to occupy her, or we'll make a dolly out of the napkins or play "I Spy" or something.

I have definitely had the "you make choices and have to deal with the consequences" discussion lots of times w/ dd (more in reference to helping her understand a negative consequence to a decision--like how you spoke to your friend hurt her feelings, and now she's not sure she wants to play with you, etc), and I do think that's important for them to eventually "get", but if my kid were expressing her needs (for stimulation and an appropriate activity in an adult environment) that clearly, I would definitely take the problem solving route with her.

This makes me sad for that little girl. Maybe I'm just extra sensitive today, but it seems kind of extreme to time out a kid over wanting an activity . . .


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

I'm not sure what I'd do, but I'd probably go back and get the doll. It sounds as though the mom and her adult friend were ignoring the child, and I doubt the girl was expecting that. I'd have trouble just sitting at a restaurant waiting for my meal if nobody were talking to me, so I don't see why I should expect my 8 year old to be happy about it.

ETA: I didn't see anything in the OP that sounded like the girl had been talked to about the nature of the restaurant. She clearly didn't know, for example, that were wouldn't be any colouring materials.


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

i wouldn't have cared the age of the child, if they are bored they are bored and i would have got them the doll. but then i usually plan for there being nothing for them to do and bring note books and pens/pencils/crayons.
i try and look at it like this...if i left something in a car i didn't think i would need and discovered i needed it, i have the ability to go back and get it. an 8 year old doesn't. so yes, i would go and get the doll.
but that is how i roll. lol

h


----------



## cappuccinosmom (Dec 28, 2003)

Quote:

but my dd will sometimes say she wants to keep something in the car and then change her mind once, and I'll let her go back and get it. I sometimes change my mind about similar things and allow myself to get something I hadn't planned on bringing as well. Why is this a big deal?
One time, on occasion, no biggie. Of course it's not a big deal.

But we do not know the mother and child in question. Approaching it from my perspective, with a child who has taken it to extremes, I can totally envision saying the same thing. That's why I think that it's best not to judge it one way or the other, because we just don't know enough to make a judgement either way.


----------



## mimim (Nov 2, 2003)

I wouldn't ever walk into any restaurant with _nothing_ to entertain my kids. I bring crayons or books, etc.. If the child had chosen to leave their toy behind knowing that they would probably need something to entertain themselves, then I wouldn't go get it for them.


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

well, i still don't get it. i forget things, change my mind, make a different choice all the time. no one at all tells me i can or can't do it. so why is it my place to make some sort of arbitrary rule that once you make a choice you can't change your mind? because i am the big person and i am the one who needs to be in control all the time?
so the kid made a poor choice, BUT as a parent we actually control the consequences most of the time. so she leave a doll thinking she won't need it because A) she thinks they will have crayons to draw with. B) mom will talk to her... but instead neither thing happens, so i can either A) let her suffer and also suffer myself, OR B) i can go get the doll and maybe even ask the waitress for paper and a pen.
i would choose B every single time, and as a mother of 5 i do that often.

h


----------



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

The mom sounds like a great mom and that she handled it wonderfully. I don't agree with cutting other moms up like this because you can assume whatever you want but you have absolutely no idea what was actually going on.


----------



## cappuccinosmom (Dec 28, 2003)

Quote:

The mom sounds like a great mom and that she handled it wonderfully. I don't agree with cutting other moms up like this because you can assume whatever you want but you have absolutely no idea what was actually going on.










Absolutely. Just because we might handle something differently doesn't make it a Good Mom vs. Bad Mom issue.


----------



## princesstutu (Jul 17, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaofthree* 
well, i still don't get it. i forget things, change my mind, make a different choice all the time. no one at all tells me i can or can't do it. so why is it my place to make some sort of arbitrary rule that once you make a choice you can't change your mind? because i am the big person and i am the one who needs to be in control all the time?
so the kid made a poor choice, BUT as a parent we actually control the consequences most of the time. so she leave a doll thinking she won't need it because A) she thinks they will have crayons to draw with. B) mom will talk to her... but instead neither thing happens, so i can either A) let her suffer and also suffer myself, OR B) i can go get the doll and maybe even ask the waitress for paper and a pen.
i would choose B every single time, and as a mother of 5 i do that often.

h











I also don't understand why just because she's a kid, she has to suffer when if an adult leaves something in the car, the adult can go get it. All the rest is just justification for being unnecessarily rigid, IMO. The kid may or may not learn the lesson to bring her toy with her next time. She is more likely to learn the lesson that mom is ridiculously unyielding, tho. Often, we think we're teaching responsibility when really what we're teaching is how we value other things more than our kids' feelings.


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly* 
The mom sounds like a great mom and that she handled it wonderfully. I don't agree with cutting other moms up like this because you can assume whatever you want but you have absolutely no idea what was actually going on.

i am not judging the over heard mom, the OP asked what others thought of it. so i am assuming that is what everyone is doing. giving their opinion on a situation (it could have been any really, even a made up one for that matter).

i think the thing here is the confusion on what is a "natural" consequence vs a parent made one.
a natural one would be something like this... my dd forgets her laptop outside. no one sees it, it rains on it and the laptop is no longer functioning. the natural consequence of leaving the laptop in the rain is that it no longer works... NOW what we as the parents choose to do about that is not natural it is completely parent controlled. we could buy her a new one, say she has to buy it, we will help her buy one, she will never get another one because she can't care for them... whatever, but those are NOT natural.
NOW if she left her laptop in the car and then changed her mind and wanted it the natural consequence is that A.) she has to go out and get it OR B.) a parent needs to go out and get it.. to have it someone needs to go get it. IT is NOT natural for me to say you can't have it NOW because you decided earlier you didn't want it. i am making that consequence, it is not a naturally accouring thing. is it a bad thing? i don't know. to me it seems a bit harsh and controlling because if i wanted something i would just go get it. no one would stand there and tell me because i made that choice i couldn't change my mind and redo something. i think very few choices in life are unchangeable. we as parents almost always make that happen, not nature.

h


----------



## Norasmomma (Feb 26, 2008)

I have a 4 year old, who I could totally see doing this, in fact she's done this type of thing. Oh I want to go with mommy, no stay with daddy, no go with mommy, freak out and cry because she decides to stay with Daddy(and I leave). I'm sure when people hear me talk to her they think I'm a hard-butt mom, but after dealing with a spirited, precocious little girl I have my reasons.

Today she freaked because when I asked her what kind of milkshake she wanted she didn't respond, so I got her strawberry, then 4 miles down the road complains and whines. I gave her a choice, she didn't make one so I made it for her.

I think that depending on the situation the mom did what she felt was right.


----------



## lilyka (Nov 20, 2001)

me: Ava do you want to bring your bitty baby with you?
ava: no
me: are you sure? its going to be boring in there.
ava: i know
me: are you sure you don't want her? you brought her.
ava: I don't want her in there.
me: i am here to have an important chat with my friend. I expect you to entertain yourself.....

etc fast forward 20 minutes after endless interruptions upon finding out she is not the center of attention and we are the mom and daughter outside the restaurant. tears and all. She is 7 1/2.

and heck no. I would not have gotten the doll. And I may have fancied thoughts of sending her out to hang out with the aforementioned doll.


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

When my kids whine for something, we do *not* go get it. So if she had been complaining and whining about wanting it and being bored after initially telling me that she didn't want to bring it, she would just have to deal with being bored.


----------



## meemee (Mar 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *choli* 
If she was younger, I'd probably get the doll, but if she really was around 8, no, I wouldn't.

but i am talking about 'my' child. if i was in that situation.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaofthree* 
i think the thing here is the confusion on what is a "natural" consequence vs a parent made one... IT is NOT natural for me to say you can't have it NOW because you decided earlier you didn't want it. i am making that consequence, it is not a naturally accouring thing.

8yos (at least in my house) do not have keys to the car. If she left her toy in the car, it *is* a natural consequence that it stays in the car.


----------



## happysmileylady (Feb 6, 2009)

Quote:

I also don't understand why just because she's a kid, she has to suffer when if an adult leaves something in the car, the adult can go get it.
Because there are some things that we as parents are supposed to teach our children. In a situation like this, the child can learn that sometimes they have to deal with a situation where they CAN'T get what they forgot/made a wrong decision about. They can learn that sometimes they have to think ahead a little. They can learn that mom and dad are NOT there to satisfy their every desire and whim. They can learn how to deal with occasional boredom. And they can learn that sometimes the authority figure DOES know what she's talking about when she gives advice. Sometimes a child does "suffer" to learn a lesson. And I am not saying that any one of those is a VITALLY important lesson to teach, but they aren't wrong for a parent to teach either.

I dislike the "well we would't do that to an adult" arguements, because kids aren't adults. Sometimes they need different treatment, because they are kids. Because they have things they need to learn to become adults. Because it's our job as parents to teach them things. So we treat them differently than the adults that we expect to have already learned those things...and we still treat them differently than the adults who haven't learned them, because it's not our place to teach other adults. But as a parent, it IS my place to teach my child.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *meemee* 
but i am talking about 'my' child. if i was in that situation.

I should think that's what we all are talking about - what we would do if it's our child. I certainly wouldn't be getting the doll for some stranger's child...


----------



## Viola (Feb 1, 2002)

I'd have gotten the doll if I was just sitting outside, waiting for her to stop crying. And, honestly, my 11 year old might cry for her toy or her book or whatever, this sort of thing comes up all the time in my family. My main reason for not going to get the doll would be because I didn't want to get up and leave the table and go out to the car, but if I had to get up and go outside the restaurant anyway, I'd figure I might as well just get the doll.

But if I was inside and I didn't want to get up and leave my dinner in order to go get her doll, I wouldn't have, I would have found something else for her to do, or I'd have interacted with her more. It's not so much about making sure she follows through with her choice, for me it's more about the fact that if I've given a warning like, "if you want to leave your doll in the car, that's fine, but I'm not going to want to get up and leave my dinner to go and get it if you change your mind" then I probably have a reason that was important to me. I find my children are often not really respectful of that, they just really don't care how I feel and part of growing up is learning how to respect that their parents have needs also, and are not always willing to cater to every request.

My child wants me to go against my own desires because her need is important to her, and usually my children will escalate it until the negative aspect of doing something I didn't want to do is outweighed against the negative aspect of dealing with my child's behavior because she wants what she wants. So then it's a balancing act between my child's need and my own need. At that point I have to ask what my goal is and what is the best thing to do for both of us. If I feel like my child is complaining because she is truly sad and upset, I can talk to her about that and then agree to do what she wants or come up with a mutually beneficial compromise. But sometimes I feel like it's angry behavior because they know that acting out will change the dynamic in a way that is favorable to her, even if it's not to me.

I can see why the mother would do what she did and I think it could be a good thing. Maybe she wanted to go out with her friend and the child insisted on coming along, that she wouldn't be bored, so the mother decided to see how she would do and let her experience it for herself. Or maybe she really wanted her child to get to the point of realizing she wasn't going to get the doll and figure out another way to entertain herself, which would probably come after accepting the inevitability of the situation.

Personally, if I got into the restaurant and realized that leaving the doll in the car was a bad idea, and I thought that getting the doll would let me have some free time to talk to my friend, then I'd have gone right back out and gotten the doll. Or more likely, I'd have found a pen and paper in my purse and let her draw. Or I'd have handed her my iPhone and told her to play a game. I'm often not good at letting my children figure it out for themselves, I just want them to be quiet.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *happysmileylady* 
Because there are some things that we as parents are supposed to teach our children. In a situation like this, the child can learn that sometimes they have to deal with a situation where they CAN'T get what they forgot/made a wrong decision about. They can learn that sometimes they have to think ahead a little.

How can she think ahead about wanting a toy because there's nothing to colour, without knowing there's nothing to colour?

Quote:

They can learn that mom and dad are NOT there to satisfy their every desire and whim.
Is it really necessary to leave a child bored in a restaurant to teach that? There are multiple teachable moments on that front every day.

Quote:

They can learn how to deal with occasional boredom.
hmm...if I were at a restaurant with two people who were ignoring me, I'd probably leave. Since the girl didn't have that option, wanting her doll seems like a reasonable compromise.

Quote:

And they can learn that sometimes the authority figure DOES know what she's talking about when she gives advice.
My life background is not such that I'm inclined to teach my child this lesson at all. I want her to question "authority" figures...always.

Quote:

Sometimes a child does "suffer" to learn a lesson. And I am not saying that any one of those is a VITALLY important lesson to teach, but they aren't wrong for a parent to teach either.
A parent can certainly teach these lessons. I think I read a different OP than you did, though. We certainly interpreted the conversation between the mom and daughter very differently.


----------



## lach (Apr 17, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *happysmileylady* 
Because there are some things that we as parents are supposed to teach our children. In a situation like this, the child can learn that sometimes they have to deal with a situation where they CAN'T get what they forgot/made a wrong decision about. They can learn that sometimes they have to think ahead a little. They can learn that mom and dad are NOT there to satisfy their every desire and whim. They can learn how to deal with occasional boredom. And they can learn that sometimes the authority figure DOES know what she's talking about when she gives advice. Sometimes a child does "suffer" to learn a lesson. And I am not saying that any one of those is a VITALLY important lesson to teach, but they aren't wrong for a parent to teach either.

I dislike the "well we would't do that to an adult" arguements, because kids aren't adults. Sometimes they need different treatment, because they are kids. Because they have things they need to learn to become adults. Because it's our job as parents to teach them things. So we treat them differently than the adults that we expect to have already learned those things...and we still treat them differently than the adults who haven't learned them, because it's not our place to teach other adults. But as a parent, it IS my place to teach my child.

I agree.

And no, sometimes the adult can't go get it. If I'm in a restaurant alone with my kids, I can't run out to the car to get something. If I'm in an amusement park or a theater or a museum, often times you can't leave and come back in. When I leave my car, I have to think "okay, this is it. Is there anything I'll need that I don't have in my bag already? Am I forgetting anything?" I don't see how that's a natural thought that suddenly emerges: a lifetime of trial and error teaches you to be prepared.

An 8 year old who was warned that she would be bored, and is now bored, tried and erred and hopefully next time she'll think a little bit harder. A preschooler just doesn't have the cognitive ability to think ahead and plan for the future, even the immediate future. So yes, I would run out for my 3 year old. (Actually, if I asked my three year old and she said no, I'd say "how about we bring it anyway, just in case?" and stuff it in my bag before she can protest.) But an 8 year old is perfectly capable of planning ahead at that level, and I don't think it's unduly mean or inappropriate for her to have to live with a poor choice that led to a minor inconvenience.

And this is, at best, a minor inconvenience. And really not worth crying over. Being bored for 15 minutes is good for kids anyway. She should either learn to dissect whatever juicy gossip the grownups are talking about that they think is over her head, or make up fantastic stories in her head about the secret lives of the other diners. And you're never too old for an imaginary friends to have silent conversations with. Those sorts of things kept me quite occupied for many a boring adult event in my childhood. At the very least, nice restaurants have dinner rolls that she can munch on.


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
8yos (at least in my house) do not have keys to the car. If she left her toy in the car, it *is* a natural consequence that it stays in the car.

no it isn't a natural consequence, it is a parent made consequence... because YOU can go get it or give her the keys to go get it. it is OK that you would choose not to go get it to show her that when you make a choice you have to live with it, but it isn't natural at all that she can't have the doll, it is that you are choosing not to get it.

h


----------



## lach (Apr 17, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaofthree* 
no it isn't a natural consequence, it is a parent made consequence... because YOU can go get it or give her the keys to go get it. it is OK that you would choose not to go get it to show her that when you make a choice you have to live with it, but it isn't natural at all that she can't have the doll, it is that you are choosing not to get it.

h

I don't understand what you are saying. If someone decides for themselves not to bring something, how is it not a natural consequence that they don't have it? Actions have consequences, the action of not bringing the doll leads to the consequence of not having the doll. It was the child's decision, she made her choice, and the mother going out to get the doll would be interfering with that initial choice... not at all a consequence of that choice.


----------



## tracymom1 (May 7, 2008)

my









I would not bring my DS or DD (regardless of their age) to a restaurant and them ignore them. If I was with a friend who needed to have an important conversation, I would not have brought my child or I would have made dinner for the friend at my house so the child would not be bored while we were eating/talking.

I think it is really crappy to bring a child to a restaurant, expect them to behave like an adult and then not engage them conversation while waiting for the meal. We always played games at restaurants like "I Spy" or "20 questions" to pass the time.

I realize there may be some unavoidable situations, and in some cases parents may view a situation like that as a "learning experience" but I would rather have a peaceful and fun meal than turn it into a set-up for a tantrum.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaofthree* 
no it isn't a natural consequence, it is a parent made consequence... because YOU can go get it or give her the keys to go get it. it is OK that you would choose not to go get it to show her that when you make a choice you have to live with it, but it isn't natural at all that she can't have the doll, it is that you are choosing not to get it.

No. The doll staying where it is, in the car (because she does not have the keys), is natural. My going to get is not "natural". It is a deliberately chosen (or not) action.


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

i do not think in anyway it is my job to make my kids miserable just because i am big and they are little. and I TRULY believe that just because someone is littler then you or has less life experience then you, does not mean they need to be "taught a lesson" so they learn that life sucks and no one has their back. my job as their parent is to have their back.

if i needed something and was unable to get it... but dh was and he said nope, you must learn this lesson. and i came here and said my dh did this, people would think he was a beast... YET it is perfectly good parenting to do this to a child. is it to show them how to NOT treat people we care about?

as to the original question... even if you felt like you could not leave the place to go get the doll, and the child had thought they would have paper to draw on... maybe calling the wait staff and asking for paper and giving the child a pen to draw with.

but maybe i am biased as i was parented that way and felt like it sucked and all i learned was that MY needs and wants meant very little and my parents needs and wants meant alot.

h


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

1. That still doesn't mean it's not a natural consequence to not have something if you chose not to have that thing.

2. I would not consider my husband a beast if he didn't want to leave a meal with his friend to fetch something (that was not a lifesaving medicine or the like) for me.


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

it is not natural because someone CAN get the doll but they choose not to. which like i said is fine. if i left my wallet in the car, i could go get it... it isn't someplace i am unable to get it from (like if i left it on a plane that was now in new york). if i decide not to get it, that is a choice. you can, by all means, choose to NOT go get the doll. you can say to your kid that they can't have it because they didn't feel they would need it when they made that choice, but in the end it is a choice you can make as a parent to go get the doll. nothing is preventing that from happening. no flood that washed the car away, not fire that burned it up. it is completely available for someone to go get right at that moment, but they are choosing not too. so i guess the choice for the parent is... do i get the doll and have a child who will happily sit thru dinner and stay busy so i can talk to my friend and eat, OR do i teach them a lesson and have an unhappy child and then leave the restaurant and sit outside with them instead of sitting with my friend?

i agree with the PP who said they would have not taken the child if they were not going to visit with them. i have yet to take my kids to any place that wasn't kid friendly (as in has crayons and such). if my friend really needed to talk to me i would just go.

i guess we will have to agree to disagree on this... because if i asked my dh to please go out to the car and get my sweater because i didn't feel i needed it at the time we left the car, but now i did... i would be pissed that he didn't. MOSTLY because if he asked me i would go do it. to me it isn't a big deal to do things for my family, to help them out even if they made a "bad choice" (which honestly i still don't see leaving a doll in the car as a bad choice). but that is how we do it in our house. and YES i have left a restaurant to go get a stuff thing, a toy car, a book, whatever. it didn't bother me, and maybe that is why i am so shocked that it is even an issue with some people, that it is even a lesson to teach their kids. to me it is just part of parenting , heck part of being a human. we all forget things. no biggy. it becomes a biggy when we make it that way.


----------



## meemee (Mar 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *choli* 
I should think that's what we all are talking about - what we would do if it's our child. I certainly wouldn't be getting the doll for some stranger's child...

no i am talking about if this whole situation was happening in my situation.

dd and i have done many adult things where she has had to 'behave'. the reason i would not get her the doll is coz we have been thru many situations like that and she should know better by 8. like the lilyka conversation.

however if the child has not been made to understand _exactly_ what is expected out of her and she changes her mind then i would go get the doll for her.

i would not judge the mom because i dont know the back history.


----------



## happysmileylady (Feb 6, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
How can she think ahead about wanting a toy because there's nothing to colour, without knowing there's nothing to colour?

But again, we don't know the situation that occured before...it's entirely possible mom TOLD her there wasn't going to be anything to do.

Quote:

Is it really necessary to leave a child bored in a restaurant to teach that? There are multiple teachable moments on that front every day.
Necessary, perhaps, perhaps not, but that doesn't make the mom wrong if she did choose this particular teachable moment. It could be asked "is it necessary to use that moment" about ANY of the teachable moments that occur in a day.

Quote:

hmm...if I were at a restaurant with two people who were ignoring me, I'd probably leave. Since the girl didn't have that option, wanting her doll seems like a reasonable compromise.
Sometimes though, when you are bored, you CAN'T leave. Like in a class that you already know the stuff, but need to graduate. Like in a work meeting that addresses a whole other department but your boss wants you at. Sometimes life hands you boredom.

Quote:

My life background is not such that I'm inclined to teach my child this lesson at all. I want her to question "authority" figures...always.
A person who ALWAYS questions authority figures about ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING, especially if the authority figure has already been accepted as an authority figure, is going to have issues because of that. An example. My 9th grader is in soccer. She's the freshman goalie...the only one. She and the coaches have been working to train a backup. The second game of the season, the back up played 3/4 of the game, my dd, only a little over 15 minutes. My dd was devestated, convinced she was going to lose her place. The next day, after practice the head coach of the three teams called her aside and asked her to participate in the jv game this weekend. She didn't play much in the freshman game because if she is needed to play any substantial length of time this weekend, she needed that playing time available as IHSAA rules limit the total time a player can play on any team-varisty, jv or freshman. The freshman coach was not at liberty to divulge the information at the freshman game, in front of the other freshman players. In that case, "questioning authority" could very well have cost her the "promotion." I totally agree with questioning occasionally when something doesn't make sense. But sometimes your boss, your coach, your teacher, your parent DOES know what they are talking about and sometimes they can't explain the reasons and I think it's important to teach a child that there might be a minor occasion or two in life where they should probably trust that the person in authority might actually know what they are talking about. I think any parent that doesn't teach their child that sometimes mom and dad might just give the correct information is in for a VERY long road of parenting. I can't imagine not wanting my child to know that sometimes I do know what I am talking about.

Quote:

A parent can certainly teach these lessons. I think I read a different OP than you did, though. We certainly interpreted the conversation between the mom and daughter very differently.
Well, I am speaking in a more general sense, though I think these things can apply to the OP as well. These may or may not have been things the mother in the situation in the OP was trying to teach...we are only 3rd hand observers on the internet who know basically nothing about the real situation.


----------



## Marsupialmom (Sep 28, 2003)

I do not feel I have enough back story to say if I would or not. If the mom was being calm I would say there might be a very valid reason behind her decision that you have no clue about. We do not know how or if the child was truly being ignored.

Since I have had exchanges with my children like lilyka has described, yes I would have told her to live with her decision - because she is 8 not 2.


----------



## happysmileylady (Feb 6, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaofthree* 
i do not think in anyway it is my job to make my kids miserable just because i am big and they are little. and I TRULY believe that just because someone is littler then you or has less life experience then you, does not mean they need to be "taught a lesson" so they learn that life sucks and no one has their back. my job as their parent is to have their back.

if i needed something and was unable to get it... but dh was and he said nope, you must learn this lesson. and i came here and said my dh did this, people would think he was a beast... YET it is perfectly good parenting to do this to a child. is it to show them how to NOT treat people we care about?

as to the original question... even if you felt like you could not leave the place to go get the doll, and the child had thought they would have paper to draw on... maybe calling the wait staff and asking for paper and giving the child a pen to draw with.

but maybe i am biased as i was parented that way and felt like it sucked and all i learned was that MY needs and wants meant very little and my parents needs and wants meant alot.

h

But doing something like this-requiring that the child live with the decision she made-every once in a while isn't the same as doing it ALL the time. Every so often isn't going to teach teach the child that she's never important, but it will teach the child that every so often, they aren't the most important being there. And because we are only seeing a snippit, we don't know that the parent "makes their child miserable all the time " just to teach a lesson. And I certainly don't advocate forcing a child to be miserable all the time just for the sake of a lesson. I certainly don't advocate for parenting as a dictator. But I absolutely believe that on occasion, allowing a child to suffer the not so fun consequences of her decisions is going to be good for her.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaofthree* 
it is not natural because someone CAN get the doll but they choose not to.

Dolls do not come into restaurants by themselves. It is natural for the doll to remain where it was left.

It is artificial -- not wrong, but not natural -- for someone to go get the doll.

It is a perfect example of a natural consequence that the doll stays in the car.


----------



## mimim (Nov 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *happysmileylady* 
Because there are some things that we as parents are supposed to teach our children. In a situation like this, the child can learn that sometimes they have to deal with a situation where they CAN'T get what they forgot/made a wrong decision about. They can learn that sometimes they have to think ahead a little. They can learn that mom and dad are NOT there to satisfy their every desire and whim. They can learn how to deal with occasional boredom. And they can learn that sometimes the authority figure DOES know what she's talking about when she gives advice. Sometimes a child does "suffer" to learn a lesson. And I am not saying that any one of those is a VITALLY important lesson to teach, but they aren't wrong for a parent to teach either.

I dislike the "well we would't do that to an adult" arguements, because kids aren't adults. Sometimes they need different treatment, because they are kids. Because they have things they need to learn to become adults. Because it's our job as parents to teach them things. So we treat them differently than the adults that we expect to have already learned those things...and we still treat them differently than the adults who haven't learned them, because it's not our place to teach other adults. But as a parent, it IS my place to teach my child.


----------



## lach (Apr 17, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
Dolls do not come into restaurants by themselves. It is natural for the doll to remain where it was left.

It is artificial -- not wrong, but not natural -- for someone to go get the doll.

It is a perfect example of a natural consequence that the doll stays in the car.

I agree. I think that natural consequences is the best disciplinary teacher there is. However, I don't think "natural consequences" is the same as "natural disasters." I don't actively hope that my car catches on fire so that DD can learn a lesson about leaving things in it that she'd rather have.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Right. I don't believe "natural consequences" are the right answer for every situation: I'm not going to let my daughter experience the natural consequence of not wearing a seatbelt, and I'm not going to let my house experience the natural consequence of her trying to make chocolate chip pancakes all by herself.

But sometimes natural consequences are entirely appropriate, and IMO being bored because she chose not to bring a toy/book/whatever is one of these times.


----------



## treeoflife3 (Nov 14, 2008)

Instead of the doll, I'm more concerned with the child saying no one is talking to her.

In my opinion, if a child is given the CHOICE to come, then it should be assumed that the child will be included. If the mother just wanted grown up time, then either the child shouldn't have had the choice to come or the mom should have planned for a different time.

I think it is pretty crappy to have children along on something that isn't a necessity only to let them sit there ignored. There are threads all the time about ignoring infants and just letting them sit in seats rather than holding them or interacting with them in some way... why should an older child be any different? Boredom sucks. being left out sucks. Feeling alone in a crowded room is awful.

I would have not only let her get the doll before it escalated to crying, I also would have pulled out a pen and paper for her just like my mom and grandma always did for me and I would have included her in the conversation if she so desired.

I don't like sitting somewhere twiddling my thumbs while the people I am with ignore me and go on about things I can't be included with. Why would I treat my child that same way? Either child doesn't come because I need me time and it would be boring and unfair to her, or I would plan the outting based on a child being along.


----------



## lach (Apr 17, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marsupialmom* 
I do not feel I have enough back story to say if I would or not. If the mom was being calm I would say there might be a very valid reason behind her decision that you have no clue about. *We do not know how or if the child was truly being ignored.*

Since I have had exchanges with my children like lilyka has described, yes I would have told her to live with her decision - because she is 8 not 2.

What I bolded is a very good point. The 8 year old was already upset, and her claim of being "ignored" might very well have been QUITE different from a reasonable description of what had happened at the table. We already know that she is in an inappropriately emotional state: she was crying over being bored. Over a doll. At age eight. And I'm not judging the girl: 8 is a volatile age between little kid and pre-teen, and sometimes they act mature in ways that make your eyes bug out and sometimes they regress to the level of toddlers. That's just what kids around that age are like. But that's why it's also the age where they do need to learn to keep some of the over-emotional reactions about things that are just not that big a deal in check. They need to learn to manage life's little disappointments now (the exciting adventure in a grown up restaurant was not as interesting as she had expected) so that she can manage life's little disappointments later (not burst into tears in a meeting when her boss assigns a project to someone else).

And it sounds like the mother was working through that with the DD in the most appropriate manner: she took her outside to calm her down, was speaking to her calmly (not yelling or swearing or hitting), was talking her through the whole situation... outlining what had led them up to this point and what her expectations were from then on.

Obviously, it's impossible for us to know what had already happened, both before the restaurant and at the restaurant. But from what was outlined here, it all sounds like a normal, if annoying, parenting situation that was handled well. I'm sure the mother really didn't enjoy interrupting her meal to take her daughter outside, but she was handling it calmly and doing what needed to be done.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

If they truly were ignoring the child, I agree that it's wrong.

But -- and again, I'm speculating (as much as everyone else is ) -- sometimes kids feel like they're being ignored when they're not the center of attention. And there have been times when I've told my child "yes, you can come along, but I'm going to do [x] and that's the reason I'm going". If I had said "I need to meet with Mrs. Whomever to work out booths for the fall festival", then I would not *ignore* my daughter, but the conversation would center around booths for the fall festival and not the new Webkinz coming out next month. And she might FEEL ignored.

Quote:

There are threads all the time about ignoring infants and just letting them sit in seats rather than holding them or interacting with them in some way... why should an older child be any different?
Because an 8-year-old is different developmentally than an 8-week-old or an 8-month-old.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *happysmileylady* 
But again, we don't know the situation that occured before...it's entirely possible mom TOLD her there wasn't going to be anything to do.

I'm going by the conversation as reported in the OP. The girl told her mom that she didn't know there wouldn't be colouring.

Quote:

Sometimes though, when you are bored, you CAN'T leave. Like in a class that you already know the stuff, but need to graduate. Like in a work meeting that addresses a whole other department but your boss wants you at. Sometimes life hands you boredom.
Yes. It is going to happen. I still wouldn't put up with it in that particular situation. And, wanting to graduate or keep my job is _my_ choice. Lots of people do leave jobs due to boredom. We have that choice.

Quote:

A person who ALWAYS questions authority figures about ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING, especially if the authority figure has already been accepted as an authority figure, is going to have issues because of that. An example. My 9th grader is in soccer. She's the freshman goalie...the only one. She and the coaches have been working to train a backup. The second game of the season, the back up played 3/4 of the game, my dd, only a little over 15 minutes. My dd was devestated, convinced she was going to lose her place. The next day, after practice the head coach of the three teams called her aside and asked her to participate in the jv game this weekend. She didn't play much in the freshman game because if she is needed to play any substantial length of time this weekend, she needed that playing time available as IHSAA rules limit the total time a player can play on any team-varisty, jv or freshman. The freshman coach was not at liberty to divulge the information at the freshman game, in front of the other freshman players. In that case, "questioning authority" could very well have cost her the "promotion." I totally agree with questioning occasionally when something doesn't make sense. But sometimes your boss, your coach, your teacher, your parent DOES know what they are talking about and sometimes they can't explain the reasons and I think it's important to teach a child that there might be a minor occasion or two in life where they should probably trust that the person in authority might actually know what they are talking about. I think any parent that doesn't teach their child that sometimes mom and dad might just give the correct information is in for a VERY long road of parenting. I can't imagine not wanting my child to know that sometimes I do know what I am talking about.
Your dd has apparently _accepted_ the coach as an authority figure, which is a whole other ball of wax. In any case, not questioning authority can also cause a whole lot of problems.

I'm not sure what this particular aspect of things has to do with the OP, and what lesson about authority is available. I took it to mean that the mom in the OP can teach her dd that she knows what she's talking about when she tells her that she's going to be bored (I strongly disagree - I don't _know_ how my children will feel in any given circumstance, and I haven't _ever_ accepted an authority figure telling me how I will, do or should feel - nor should anybody), but there's no evidence in the OP that the mom ever mentioned it at all.

Quote:

Well, I am speaking in a more general sense, though I think these things can apply to the OP as well. These may or may not have been things the mother in the situation in the OP was trying to teach...we are only 3rd hand observers on the internet who know basically nothing about the real situation.
I can only discuss what I'd do in the situation, based on the OP. According to the OP, the girl didn't know there wouldn't be anything to do, and was being ignored by both adults who were present. There's nothing in the OP that suggests the girl was asked/told/reminded about taking her doll. _Based on the OP,_ there's really not much in the way of teachable moments about anything.

However, I don't know what I'd do, because I'm not in the habit of taking my kids to restaurants, then ignoring them while I chat with friends.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lach* 
What I bolded is a very good point. The 8 year old was already upset, and her claim of being "ignored" might very well have been QUITE different from a reasonable description of what had happened at the table. We already know that she is in an inappropriately emotional state: she was crying over being bored. Over a doll. At age eight.

We don't know any of that. We know that she was crying, but we don't know that it was because of boredom or the doll - it may have been _because_ she was being ignored. And, we also don't know that she's 8. The OP was guessing at her age. Honestly, I would have guessed younger than that, simply because nobody I know would use the term "dolly" when talking to a child of eight. Around here, that's more-or-less baby talk.



> But that's why it's also the age where they do need to learn to keep some of the over-emotional reactions about things that are just not that big a deal in check. They need to learn to manage life's little disappointments now (the exciting adventure in a grown up restaurant was not as interesting as she had expected)...
> 
> 
> > Interesting. I didn't see anywhere in the OP that the child knew she was going to an adult restaurant, or that she thought it would be an adventure. I'm not sure where you're getting any of that. I also take issue with other people deciding what's a big deal for someone else...even a child.
> ...


----------



## mammal_mama (Aug 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
1. That still doesn't mean it's not a natural consequence to not have something if you chose not to have that thing.

2. I would not consider my husband a beast if he didn't want to leave a meal with his friend to fetch something (that was not a lifesaving medicine or the like) for me.

Well, if my husband were in the middle of a meal with a friend, I'm actually empowered enough to get up and go get stuff for myself. I do it all the time. I *would* be ticked if I got up to get something from the car and he said, "No you don't. Sit back down; I asked you before we came in if you wanted it and you said no. Now you have to live with your choice."

Needless to say, I wouldn't be sitting back down, or standing in front of the restaurant crying while he calmly explained why I couldn't have my purse or whatever other inanimate object I'd left in the car which would be "artificial" for me to go out and get. And while he said, "As soon as you're done crying we'll go back inside."

I do realize that I don't know this mom or this child, so I can't judge her. I'm really just talking from the standpoint of what I feel is reasonable behavior for anyone who makes one choice and then changes her mind.

There are plenty of times when we change our minds but, because of circumstances, can't go back on our original decision. But why be artificial and pretend like a situation where the child actually could fix the situation is one of those unchangeable circumstances that she just has to "live with?"

What does that teach children about their power to correct a bad situation? I mean, if all their lives it's been drilled into them that once you make a bad decision you're just "stuck" and you have to live with it, how are we allowing them room for personal growth and change?









I guess some have the idea that if the "stuck" thing gets drilled into heads early enough, they'll be doing everything perfectly by adulthood and won't ever need to make a change, but that seems kind of unrealistic to me.


----------



## happysmileylady (Feb 6, 2009)

Quote:

I would be ticked if I got up to get something from the car and he said, "No you don't. Sit back down; I asked you before we came in if you wanted it and you said no. Now you have to live with your choice."
Of course you would be ticked. Because it's not your DH's job to teach you anything. It is however your job, as a the parent of your child, to teach your child things and as a result of that, you WILL say things to your child, and take actions with your child, that you never would with your spouse. Saying "I would never do that to an adult" or "I would be angry if an adult did that to me" isn't a valid arguement, because a child ISN'T an adult. Children and adults cannot and should not always be treated the same.


----------



## Honey693 (May 5, 2008)

I would have gotten it. It's pretty apparent the kid thought there would be coloring stuff to keep her entertained while the grown ups talked. I'm impressed she thought that far ahead. I can't imagine trying to teach my child a lesson while I was talking with friends and not interacting with her.


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

it is apparently perfectly ok and appropriate for an adult to change their mind, try and fix the situation and not be "taught a lesson" (arbitrary lesson) by another adult.. but it is our job as the parent to cause undo suffering and call any emotion we don't think is ok at that moment inappropriate. how can being upset about your situation (especially if you were just told to live with it) be inappropriate? seems pretty natural to me.
i am a bit surprised. i would have thought there would be a bigger level of compassion for the child. having 4 kids who have been 8, i see all the time that what i think they should know and what they actually know are two different things.

i would recommend the book "When Anger Hurts Your Kids" which really gets into what we as adults THINK our kids are doing to us and what is really going on, due to their level of understanding and developmental ability. it is a great book and has been really helpful to me in seeing what i expect of my kids might be more then they are capable of doing at a given age.
compassion shouldn't stop at 1 year or 2 or what have you. there isn't a magic age where all children suddenly get all things. heck i am still learning. i wouldn't expect more of my own kids then i expect of myself... and then i have to remember that they are much much younger then me.

h


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *happysmileylady* 
Of course you would be ticked. Because it's not your DH's job to teach you anything. It is however your job, as a the parent of your child, to teach your child things and as a result of that, you WILL say things to your child, and take actions with your child, that you never would with your spouse. Saying "I would never do that to an adult" or "I would be angry if an adult did that to me" isn't a valid arguement, because a child ISN'T an adult. Children and adults cannot and should not always be treated the same.

and because the child isn't an adult i would think there would be MORE compassion and understand not less. at what age do we start showing compassion to others? when do we get up and help out someone who made a "poor" choice and can't fix it themselves?
i guess this is where the things get weird to me. it is ok to help an adult BUT not ok to help a child... it is a teachable moment.
i think our biggest lesson to our children should be that they matter, their feeling matter and that we are there for them. to me purposefully not going out to get a doll to "teach them a lesson" seems a bit weird. like what are they learning here? you would hope it would be to never make a bad choice and if you do suck it up, even at 8. but my best guess is that they learn that mom can't be bothered with helping them.


----------



## Tigerchild (Dec 2, 2001)

Not to nitpick, but the OP did not see how the Bad Mama interacted with her child in the restaurant. She only overheard a portion of the conversation as they came OUT of the restaurant.

Now, maybe you guys have 8 year olds who NEVER EVER exaggerate, or perhaps I'm just Horrible Mama because mine does--but I'd take claims of "you didn't talk to me you just talked to your friend" well salted. Just today, I spent 2 hours straight drawing/crafting with MY 8 year old, and when I had to get up to prepare lunch (something I warned her about starting 30/15/10/5 minutes beforehand) she huffed at me that I NEVER spend time with her and I NEVER do anything she wants.

Sometimes I think that nobody can ever win. If the OP had posted that somebody allowed their 8 year old to cry and throw a fit at a restaurant this mom would still be getting bashed.

I can picture something like this happening with DD and I. I ask the kids to bring a book (generally not a toy, but only because most of their books can be much more easily replaced than a favorite doll or lego figure) with them in the car so if they don't feel like coloring they've got something to do. Sometimes they don't want to take their stuff in the restaurant, because being a Horrible Mama and all at 8, 7, and 7 I expect them to haul their book in and out themselves and keep track of it. We don't go back and forth to the car because we did do that for awhile and it sucked for me big time and I got tired of it, so just made a standing rule (besides, what they really wanted at that point was not what was in the car, but a walk--which is fine with me, they can walk back and forth to the restroom, or whatever).

That I do this now does not mean I was a Cruel or Stupid mama who did not bring toys/snacks/entertainment for them when they were littler--I certainly did. Now though, since all of my children are capable of keeping track of 1 or 2 of their own things, I do expect that of them. And if they were to throw a fit, they're not getting what they want handed to them. I would have packed up and *left* the restaurant--perhaps since her friend/other adult was there this mama could not.

Think about it though. I'm sure there are some saints amongst us who have such enlightened conversation with their older (or heck, even younger!) children that NEVER could be interpreted as anything other than wholesome sweetness and light no matter what the snippet is. Me? Not so much. Restaurants and public areas are generally where I'm at my worst, esp. if my kid is misbehaving or embarassing me, because *I* am overstimulated with a lot of noise and input. So I never assume how someone acts in a store or restaurant, esp. if they've got a grumpy kid, is their *best*.

That being said, I did look askance at other people and their big kids and behavior issues when I had littles. So maybe that's WHY I can relate to this mama a bit--I certainly got my comeuppance for those thoughts a few years later! It makes me scared to think anything at all of tween-teen/parent interactions, I don't need my butt kicked even more!


----------



## ssh (Aug 12, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaofthree* 
and because the child isn't an adult i would think there would be MORE compassion and understand not less. at what age do we start showing compassion to others? when do we get up and help out someone who made a "poor" choice and can't fix it themselves?
i guess this is where the things get weird to me. it is ok to help an adult BUT not ok to help a child... it is a teachable moment.
i think our biggest lesson to our children should be that they matter, their feeling matter and that we are there for them. to me purposefully not going out to get a doll to "teach them a lesson" seems a bit weird. like what are they learning here? you would hope it would be to never make a bad choice and if you do suck it up, even at 8. but my best guess is that they learn that mom can't be bothered with helping them.

I agree with this. I also feel that one of the biggest 'lessons' I need to teach my DD is that people she has relationships with should treat her respectfully and compassionately all the time. I want my DD to _expect_ and if needed demand that the people she chooses to have in her life treat her fairly. Ignoring some one at dinner isn't kind or respectful. Being inflexible if someone close to you has an emotional need isn't compassionate or respectful either.

We've gone to restaurants and other functions with my DHs coworkers and even they have never ignored our almost 5 year old DD.

Some people feel children should be treated less courteously than adults because they need to learn lessons about life. Well we choose to teach our DD how to be respectful and kind by being respectful and kind to her and others, not be lecturing her while modeling inconsideration or rudeness.

I would have gotten the doll before my DD got upset enough to cry about it. And I don't think the age matters much, but the child's behavior sounds closer to 5 than 8.


----------



## theatermom (Jun 5, 2006)

Without witnessing the situation myself, the only thing I can actively take issue with is the idea that we can't change our minds about things. Of course we can. And many times we should. Teaching her to be consistent without logical reasons leads to inflexibility. We don't need more mindless inflexibility in this world. According to the OP's account, the girl at first reasoned that it would better to leave the doll in the car to keep it safe (a very mature decision), counting on having something to do while in the restaurant. When the information that led to that decision was updated with new information, she changed her mind, deciding that the risk of taking the doll into the restaurant was worth the benefit of relieving her boredom. What's wrong with that? Let's say I decide not to ever do any vaccinations (for myself). Then, later on, I'm presented with the opportunity to visit a wonderful, interesting country where the chances of contracting yellow typhoid are fairly high. Would it be "wrong" or inconsistent of me to reconsider my original decision and choose to be vaccinated against YT? Or let's say I circumcize or vaccinate one child, operating on information available to me at that time, but get new information before the birth of child #2+ -- do the subsequent children have to live with my original choice because I already made a reasoned decision, or do they receive the benefit of my new reasoning? Many people *do* think this way, and I believe that it's partly a result of feeling like you can't change your mind once you've made a big decision. Sometimes you can't. If you buy the wrong house, it would be foolish to turn around and try to sell it right away. It would be more appropriate to wait 3 yrs (or until you'll at least break even), and then sell it if that's you need to do. If it was truly a problem to get the doll, it would have been more appropriate to say why -- The car is 3 blocks away and they're about to bring the food. Why don't we play a game instead? Or whatever. When you have a captive person (it's not always a child, sometimes we bring along adults who are dependent on us for whatever reason), we do have a certain amount of obligation to make sure that they're occupied. We don't expect guests in our homes to fully entertain themselves because it isn't their personal space, and because their happiness is important to us. Why would we expect a child in an adult restaurant to fully entertain herself, and then when she identifies a potential avenue for entertaining herself, tell her no?

I guess this particular part of it really hit a nerve with me. The emotional upset? It's developmentally appropriate. Even if she really was 8 (which is more than unclear at this point), she's a bored, hungry child out of her element for whatever reason. She didn't drive herself to the restaurant. She can't drive herself home or anywhere else. She can't even go to the car and get the doll on her own. She can't call a friend and chat while her mom chats with her own friend. Even if she chose to come to the restaurant, she can't undo that choice. So, why not let her undo the one choice she can? In this case, I really think the lessons being learned are 1) once you make a choice, even a carefully reasoned one, you can't change your mind even if more careful reasoning makes it clear that you should 2) as a mother, I care more about teaching you a (questionable) lesson and maintaining consistency than I do about having a pleasant dinner out with you (my daughter) and my friend 3) I care more about appearances and decorum than I do about your emotional state at this time.

All of this is based on the information provided. More information about the particular circumstances and relationships of the people involved might change my mind about the appropriateness of saying one thing or another, but in the end, the basic principles stand.


----------



## queenjane (May 17, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ssh* 
in her life treat her fairly. Ignoring some one at dinner isn't kind or respectful.

We don't know that the child was being ignored. We do know she said no one was talking to her. We don't know if that is true, or just the child's perception.

I have an 8 yr old, and i know that if we don't talk about Justin Bieber every five minutes at dinner, or if I don't allow her to constantly interrupt, or if she isnt the center of attention 100 percent of the time, she feels ignored.


----------



## Needle in the Hay (Sep 16, 2006)

I really doubt the kid was 8, but my son is 9 and he needs something to do at restaurants if we're going to be there awhile and if I plan to have a conversation with whoever else we're with. The girl in the OP made the very reasonable and responsible decision of leaving her doll in the car so she wouldn't have to worry about losing it, thinking she'd just color instead. This was good decision-making and it should be encouraged. Instead, she was punished for it.

There is no question that the girl was sitting there not being talked to because of course the mom and her friend were talking. That's why you have something for your kid to do so you can enjoy your meal out. This is just another example of making things harder than they need to be and then it makes it worse for everyone. I imagine myself as the friend in that situation thinking, here just give me the keys and I will go get the doll!


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cappuccinosmom* 
One time, on occasion, no biggie. Of course it's not a big deal.

But we do not know the mother and child in question. Approaching it from my perspective, with a child who has taken it to extremes, I can totally envision saying the same thing. That's why I think that it's best not to judge it one way or the other, because we just don't know enough to make a judgement either way.

I wasnt' talking about the oP there. What I said about the OP was:

Quote:

I don't know about that specific situation as we're only hearing about a small part, but generally when my 8-year-old is bored and has something that will amuse her in the car, we run out and get it. No big deal.
What I was talking about there was the idea that seems present in this thread that in general kids should be taught to not change their minds. I don't understand why that's a lesson that parents want to teach their kids.


----------



## One_Girl (Feb 8, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *queenjane* 
We don't know that the child was being ignored. We do know she said no one was talking to her. We don't know if that is true, or just the child's perception.

I have an 8 yr old, and i know that if we don't talk about Justin Bieber every five minutes at dinner, or if I don't allow her to constantly interrupt, or if she isnt the center of attention 100 percent of the time, she feels ignored.

My dd is 7 and is the same way. When I have a guest over she is obnoxious about wanting to be the center of attention the whole time. Luckily my brother is coming over more often and we are moving through this but it is a slow process. I am guessing that something more happened there and that the doll was being used as an excuse for the tantrum that led to the child being taken out of the restaurant.

I don't think it was a big deal that the mom didn't get the toy. It is probably something that she knew was coming when she didn't bring the doll inside in the first place at her age. I would also not want to reinforce the idea that you can be so naughty in a restaurant that you have to be taken outside then get a reward for it, especially if she hadn't asked about the doll before escalating to the point of needing to be taken outside. It doesn't sound like a mean conversation, it sounds like a gentle one where the mom was firmly talking her kid down after having to deal with an issue that led to her being taken outside. I don't think it is something to get judgmental about either. The mom didn't proceed to smack her after saying these things, she waited outside until the girl regained self-control. A lot of families wouldn't even have given the doll option in the first place and still would have expected their child to have their restaurant manners on.


----------



## Wild Lupine (Jul 22, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MadiMamacita* 
The girl said "I didn't know there wouldn't be coloring stuff here! I'm so bored, I just want something to play with! You are talking with your friend and no one is talking to me and I'm bored!" and the mom said "Thats what happens when you go to adult restaurants. They don't always have coloring things. When you stop crying we can go back inside."


Like other PP's I don't know the back story so it's hard to know what I'd do. However, I do know that if I went into a restaurant with two other people, I'd expect to be in conversation with them. If it turned out that they talked to one another and not me, I'd go back to the car and get a book. So in this changed situation (changed in the girl's mind) I'd let her go back to the car and get her doll.

If the girl was warned that the adults would be talking with one another only, and her mother highly recommended the girl bring something to do, and she continually refused, then no, I wouldn't let her go back.

On the other hand, if I really wanted to be in conversation with an adult friend while my daughter was there, and the conversation wasn't something that would interest my daughter, I'd make sure she had something to do so I could have that conversation. My adult conversation, my responsibility to make sure it works for everyone involved. So I'd have a back up plan, a book in my purse or something I thought DD would enjoy on hand. given the power differences between adults and children, I'm guessing the whole dinner with an adult friend arrangement was the adults' idea, not the child's, so I wouldn't expect the child to accommodate my wishes perfectly without some help from me.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamazee* 
What I was talking about there was the idea that seems present in this thread that in general kids should be taught to not change their minds. I don't understand why that's a lesson that parents want to teach their kids.

I guess the lesson I'd be trying to teach would be that other people may not be willing to accommodate mind-changing.

Again, under some circumstances, I'd be happy to get the doll.

Under others, it wouldn't be so much "you can't have the doll" as "right now I am not willing to leave the restaurant and walk down the block to fetch the doll". That may be semantics to some, but to me there's a difference between refusing a request out of meanness or spite and refusing a request that feels unreasonable -- and there are definitely circumstances where one person going out of her way to accommodate another person's changed mind may not be reasonable.


----------



## madskye (Feb 20, 2006)

Another wrinkle in the story--

Perhaps they were dropped off? So going back to get the doll is not an option.

Probably not, but that's happened to me too--where you HAD whatever it was but let it drive away and now 30 minutes later you wished you had taken xyz. But you can't do anything about it.


----------



## KaliShanti (Mar 23, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *CarrieMF* 
no i wouldn't have gotten the doll, especially if this girl was 8.

you don't know the backstory. this girl could have been told that it woudl be boring, that it was not a kids restaurant, etc.

An 8yo is more than old enough to sit in a restaurant without having to have something to do/play with until food comes.

Definitely.


----------



## theatermom (Jun 5, 2006)

Originally Posted by CarrieMF View Post
no i wouldn't have gotten the doll, especially if this girl was 8.

you don't know the backstory. this girl could have been told that it woudl be boring, that it was not a kids restaurant, etc.

An 8yo is more than old enough to sit in a restaurant without having to have something to do/play with until food comes.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KaliShanti* 
Definitely.

Awww, but see, one has to make so many assumptions to get to this. We don't know that she's 8. We don't know that she was told it was going to be boring. We don't even know that she was being all that annoying before this started. We don't know why she's out with her mom and a friend, or how much choice she had about being there. We're also assuming that just because a child of a certain age *should* be able to sit still *with nothing to do*, that this is ideal. And again, I really think the bigger issue here as I said in my previous post (given that we don't know ANY of the back story) is the parent's decision to make choices irrevocable without due cause.

It's funny, because my husband, and certainly his parents are highly practical people, discipline and teaching wise. They were the no nonsense kind of parents, and they have always expected adult like behavior from children past a certain age. They often say no before yes. However, they also treat children with a certain amount of respect, and I have never seen an occasion when they would sit at a table at a restaurant or anywhere else and expect a child to sit there with nothing to do -- even if said child left a toy in the car as part of a well reasoned decision. They would definitely be engaging with the child, and if necessary and possible, one of them would go to the car with the child. And these are old school folks.


----------



## NYMommy2007 (Jul 6, 2010)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Attached2Elijah* 
Well, by the tone of the conversation, I am assuming Mom asked her more then once if she was sure she didn't want to bring her dolly in so she wouldn't be bored and even made her aware that it would not be fun. I am pretty sure I have had almost the same conversation with my son. Is it a big deal to get the doll? Probably not, but if she gave the child a choice several times before leaving the car, yeah I would make my kids deal with the choice made. If you give in to one request such as this, then the next time the child expects you to as well until it REALLY gets to be a pain in the butt. I actually agree with the mother completely and seems like she handled it pretty well. Sometimes children have to deal with adult situations and if mom gave her the choice to make it a little less boring before going in and the child chose to disregard that, then the consequences (being bored) should be learned... but that's just my opinion. I think it's okay for kids to be bored sometimes if they've been warned. (Heck, her mom may have even tried to talk her out of going to the restaurant all together. We don't know what the conversations were BEFOREHAND.)

I completely agree with this.


----------



## childsplay (Sep 4, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
Dolls do not come into restaurants by themselves. It is natural for the doll to remain where it was left.

It is artificial -- not wrong, but not natural -- for someone to go get the doll.

It is a perfect example of a natural consequence that the doll stays in the car.


While it's great for kids to learn natural consequences I think there's really a time and a place. And a restaurant isn't it.
If the Mom and daughter were outside the restaurant having this issue then it's obvios that there was some sort of lead up that forced them outside. (kid throws a fit, cries, etc)
So rather than disrupt everyone around them, who are spending hard earned money for a meal out, not to mention ruining their own meal, why not skip the whole 'life lesson' nonsense and get the darn doll?

Why does everything always have to have a 'lesson' or natural consequence lesson attatched?
The fact that the mother was standing outside arguing with her daughter is absurd. Big whoop, she didn't think she'd want her doll, now she does, she's a kid, kids change their minds 50,000 times a day. Thats what kids do. We did it to our parents now our kids do it to us.

IMO, the mother should have brought the doll, along with a raft of other items to entertain the child. So as far as I'm concerned, she (the mother) failed to do her part in this outing, then took it out on the child by being unbending and hardnosed.

So I wonder, did the kid eventually get to eat? Did they end up leaving? Did they go back in? Did she cry for the next hour while the adults ate? Was she miserable and not enjoy her meal?
Whatever happened next I'm sure wasn't much fun for anyone involved but could have been very easily remedied.


----------



## queenjane (May 17, 2004)

Its a nice bonus when a restaurant has crayons or something for the kids. But frankly i dont expect my child to be entertained when we go out to eat.









I have two 2 yr olds, and 8 yr old, and sometimes my 13 yr old with me...and we go out to eat at least weekly and sometimes three or four times a week. I almost never bring "something for them to do"...when my sons were a bit younger, yes, i might bring a toy but usually not.

I guess it might be boring for an older child to sit there while two adults are talking. But frankly, i DO think there is value in that, something for the child to listen and learn. And she can (as someone else mentioned) use her imagination to make up stories in her head about other patrons, or whatever else. Did she try to talk to the adults and they admonished her to "be quiet!" or did she just feel that most of the conversation wasnt interesting to her? We'll never know of course.

Also...seems like playing with a doll might be a little distracting, moreso than coloring or a book (but i'm new to the mom of girls thing so maybe i'm not picturing what playing with a doll looks like).

And when we are talking about needing something to occupy their time...do you just mean while waiting for food? (Which shouldnt be THAT long right? not too long for a child older than three or so to tolerate not having a toy to play with?) Because i would like to think that once the food comes, the child WILL have something to do? (Eat...) Obviously if the adults are sitting there for an endless amount of time after the meal is done, i see that being tedious, but again we dont know exactly what happened. Do we know the mom didnt offer paper and pen or a cell phone to play with or some other alternative? I suspect that the could be a pattern with the girl (saying she wont bring something then changing her mind), and the mom could have handled it differently (by bringing the doll just in case, though some kids would be upset by that as well) or she could have decided she is sick of the treks back to the car, so she's drawing a line.

I guess its a sore spot for me, because i've recently adopted a child with emotional issues and i imagine strangers think i'm awfully mean to her in public (such as when i dont let her chat up cashiers or when i dont acknowledge her begging for toys in stores, etc) heck i think my own family probably thinks i'm just so hard on her. But if people arent living my life they dont understand. My experience with *my* daughter is that if i give in even once, it makes it sooo much worse the next time. So i almost always say "no" to everything. That is NOT how i'm used to parenting but it is what it is. And now i'm way less judgemental of other parents i see in public because i realize i just may not have the full picture of what they are dealing with.

With my older son, when he was younger, i'd probably go back to the car. With my daughter, no i likely would not.

I also want to add...someone mentioned if they went to a restaurant and got ignored by the people they were there with, they'd go get a book and read it. That just seems so...rude to me. If they were PURPOSELY ignoring you..like, you'd contribute and they wouldnt look at you, or seemed to be mad at you, i could see getting up and leaving. But then i wouldnt want to be friends with those people. BUT if i was in a position where i had to..i dunno...go out to lunch with two people discussing something i knew nothing about, i would just listen quietly, maybe zone off a bit in my head...why would that bother me? Why would i feel like i needed to have attention and be entertained? I get that kids are different developmentally (which is why i dont see that its very useful to compare it to a husband not getting something for you or a friend ignoring you. My child has to do alot of things that might not be interesting to her, like go to the store or run errands or clean the house. And while i dont try to intentionally make these situations drudgery for her, I also dont necessarily feel she should expect to find all situations entertaining.

When i was a kid we went out to eat alot and rarely did i bring toys. I just listened in to the conversation. Maybe thats where i developed a love of gossip.


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

Quote:

While it's great for kids to learn natural consequences I think there's really a time and a place. And a restaurant isn't it
Then where is the place? I really believe that our children are as well behaved as they are because we've expected it from them in every setting.


----------



## childsplay (Sep 4, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phathui5* 
Then where is the place? I really believe that our children are as well behaved as they are because we've expected it from them in every setting.

Yes but like I said, there had to have been some lead up scene to the mother taking the child out of the restaurant. Why put the other diners, not to mention herself, her DD and whoever else she was with through a tantrum/crying fit/ prolonged whining/etc ? Especially when the mother could pop out, grab the doll (and whatever else she might have stowed away in the car) at the first hint of a public display of tantrum, come back in, say "here's dolly, next time let's bring her with us just in case!"
So no, a public restaurant, IMO is not the place to be teaching your child about natural consequences.
(Natural consequences to me are more along the lines of "oh look DS you went and ate the last cookie, I guess you won't be getting one in your lunchbox tomorrow" or " DS, you're the one who stayed up on the phone until midnight with your g/f, I know your tired but you have to get up for school anyway, next time plan your evening a bit better")

She could have just got the doll and had a chat with her DD about thinking and planning ahead after they got home? The kid would have been calm, fed and ready to listen.

Really, I think the only thing the child would have gotten out of her mom not getting the doll, pitching a fit, being taken outside (probably within sight of the car) are thoughts along the lines of "I hate this" "I'm so bored" "Mom is so mean" "Why wont she just listen to me?" Heck, I would have thought she was mean, or trying to prove a point, or trying to show off if I'd witnessed it. I mean, what's wrong with bending a little?

I cannot for the life of me imagine a child walking away saying to herself "oh well, next time I'll remember my doll" and proceeding to sit down calmly and eat. Maybe there are kids like that who will be grateful to the lesson taught and learned but I've never met any.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cappuccinosmom* 
I agree.

Maybe I'm a horrible mom.







But my youngest went through a stage where he would change his mind about something 20 times in as many minutes, and if I let him get going on that route it would be a sure tantrum (and a mental breakdown for me). So the rule is, we talk about it, I give you the options, and you pick one. Period. The end. I'm not playing that game.

Could be the mom in the situation really is uncaring and mean. However, knowing that someone might overhear me saying something similiar, and not knowing any background on that family, I'd say it's best to reserve judgement.

My thoughts, too. It's hard to say, but there are times even when it's easy to do something, I don't do it precisely because I'm not going to open up that can of worms. It might *seem* easy... but then it might turn into a ridiculous hullabaloo and I will regret it for the next 30 minutes. She's eight, I hope by the time my kid is eight she can go out there herself and get it.


----------



## happysmileylady (Feb 6, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *childsplay* 
Yes but like I said, there had to have been some lead up scene to the mother taking the child out of the restaurant. Why put the other diners, not to mention herself, her DD and whoever else she was with through a tantrum/crying fit/ prolonged whining/etc ? Especially when the mother could pop out, grab the doll (and whatever else she might have stowed away in the car) at the first hint of a public display of tantrum, come back in, say "here's dolly, next time let's bring her with us just in case!"
So no, a public restaurant, IMO is not the place to be teaching your child about natural consequences.

Because it's my job as a parent to parent my child REGARDLESS of what other people think of it. And because if I am going to go out to eat regularly, my child needs to learn that discipline still occurs in restaraunts also.

Quote:

Really, I think the only thing the child would have gotten out of her mom not getting the doll, pitching a fit, being taken outside (probably within sight of the car) are thoughts along the lines of "I hate this" "I'm so bored" "Mom is so mean" "Why wont she just listen to me?" Heck, I would have thought she was mean, or trying to prove a point, or trying to show off if I'd witnessed it. I mean, what's wrong with bending a little?

I cannot for the life of me imagine a child walking away saying to herself "oh well, next time I'll remember my doll" and proceeding to sit down calmly and eat. Maybe there are kids like that who will be grateful to the lesson taught and learned but I've never met any.
Well, yeah, the child probably IS thinking all that. My teen said virtually the same thing to me (along with some "you don't really care about me or my grades anyway" sprinkled in there for good measure) last night, when after having been reminded at "normal" hours to get the dishes done (her chore) she ended up in the kitchen doing them at 11pm and was trying to convince me that it was too late to do the dishes and if she didn't get enough sleep, she was going to fail Geometry (btw, no tests or anything today to fail and homework was already done.)

But, while I am sure that this child didn't walk away THIS time going "next time I will remember," the next time this comes around, the child is much much more likely to think "last time sucked, I am going to bring my doll in this time." Just like my teen is more likely to remember to do the dishes at a reasonable hour tonight.


----------



## queenjane (May 17, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *childsplay* 
Yes but like I said, there had to have been some lead up scene to the mother taking the child out of the restaurant. Why put the other diners, not to mention herself, her DD and whoever else she was with through a tantrum/crying fit/ prolonged whining/etc ? Especially when the mother could pop out, grab the doll (and whatever else she might have stowed away in the car) at the first hint of a public display of tantrum, come back in, say "here's dolly, next time let's bring her with us just in case!"
So no, a public restaurant, IMO is not the place to be teaching your child about natural consequences.

I handle my 2 yr olds a bit differently because they arent quite at an age to understand "no you cant have that now" (they are getting there)...so generally if there is an easy way to keep them from melting down, i tend to do that thing.

However, with my 8 yr old? I do not give in to tantrums. If we have to go outside of a public place to spare patrons having to listen to her, we'll do that, but reward her tantrum with giving in? Nope. That is the surest way to give her the msg that is how she gets what she wants. In fact, many kids tantrum in public because they KNOW mom will give in to avoid upsetting the public or out of embarrassment.

I do make a distinction between being genuinely upset about something and throwing a fit/whining/etc. I can tell the difference with my kids.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *childsplay* 
Yes but like I said, there had to have been some lead up scene to the mother taking the child out of the restaurant. Why put the other diners, not to mention herself, her DD and whoever else she was with through a tantrum/crying fit/ prolonged whining/etc ? Especially when the mother could pop out, grab the doll (and whatever else she might have stowed away in the car) at the first hint of a public display of tantrum, come back in, say "here's dolly, next time let's bring her with us just in case!"

Quite possibly because the mother knows her daughter, and what brought the behaviour on, and knows that the doll is just an excuse for a tantrum and that it would make absolutely no difference to her DD's determination to have a tantrum whether the doll was retrieved or not.

I certainly was able to tell when that sort of situation arose with my DDs when they were younger.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

For a typically developing 8yo, no, I don't think it's my job to bring a "raft of toys" to entertain her in a restaurant.

I would allow her to bring one small and quiet item. If she chose not to, then as I wrote above, out of courtesy to her and the other diners, I would give her a pen and paper from my purse. I'd probably also ask the server for some crackers if the meltdown was due in part to hunger.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *queenjane* 
I have two 2 yr olds, and 8 yr old, and sometimes my 13 yr old with me...and we go out to eat at least weekly and sometimes three or four times a week. I almost never bring "something for them to do"...when my sons were a bit younger, yes, i might bring a toy but usually not.

I'll admit to being impressed. I can't imagine going out to eat that often, and definitely not with two 2 year olds in tow! I'd be exhausted. When we do eat out, it's always at family restaurants, and they all have colouring sheets/menus/placemats, so it's never occurred to me to bring anything else along.

Quote:

I guess it might be boring for an older child to sit there while two adults are talking. But frankly, i DO think there is value in that, something for the child to listen and learn. And she can (as someone else mentioned) use her imagination to make up stories in her head about other patrons, or whatever else. Did she try to talk to the adults and they admonished her to "be quiet!" or did she just feel that most of the conversation wasnt interesting to her? We'll never know of course.
This is the thing. We don't know. All we know is that child said to her mom that the two adults were ignoring her, and her mom's response to that was, "that's what happens at adult restaurants". I'm not going to make up a back story or assume that child was nagging, child wasn't really being ignored, child was warned, etc. etc. in stating how I'd respond to _what the OP witnessed_. Sure, with the back story, I may change my mind. Or, I may feel even more strongly that I'd get the doll. I just don't see the point in making up back story to come to a conclusion. I don't really see the value in leaving her out of the conversation, either.

Quote:

Also...seems like playing with a doll might be a little distracting, moreso than coloring or a book (but i'm new to the mom of girls thing so maybe i'm not picturing what playing with a doll looks like).
DD1 is probably less distracting when playing with a doll than when colouring. It really depends on the child, ime.

Quote:

And when we are talking about needing something to occupy their time...do you just mean while waiting for food? (Which shouldnt be THAT long right? not too long for a child older than three or so to tolerate not having a toy to play with?)
I assumed this was about the period while waiting for the meal. I'm not sure why you'd say it shouldn't be that long, though. I've had some pretty long waits in restaurants.

Quote:

Because i would like to think that once the food comes, the child WILL have something to do? (Eat...) Obviously if the adults are sitting there for an endless amount of time after the meal is done, i see that being tedious, but again we dont know exactly what happened. Do we know the mom didnt offer paper and pen or a cell phone to play with or some other alternative? I suspect that the could be a pattern with the girl (saying she wont bring something then changing her mind), and the mom could have handled it differently (by bringing the doll just in case, though some kids would be upset by that as well) or she could have decided she is sick of the treks back to the car, so she's drawing a line.
And, again, this is the "the back story could be such-and-such". We're not talking about the endless possible back stories. We're talking about the specific conversation the OP witnessed. That conversation didn't contain anything that indicated that it's a pattern, that the child had been warned, that the child had been offered something else to do, that the child wasn't being ignored, etc. etc. If those things were the case, then that would affect tha answer, but there's no reason to assume any of those things, based on what OP heard.

Quote:

I also want to add...someone mentioned if they went to a restaurant and got ignored by the people they were there with, they'd go get a book and read it. That just seems so...rude to me. If they were PURPOSELY ignoring you..like, you'd contribute and they wouldnt look at you, or seemed to be mad at you, i could see getting up and leaving. But then i wouldnt want to be friends with those people. BUT if i was in a position where i had to..i dunno...go out to lunch with two people discussing something i knew nothing about, i would just listen quietly, maybe zone off a bit in my head...why would that bother me? Why would i feel like i needed to have attention and be entertained?
Some people don't really like to sit and zone off in their heads (personally, I do, but that's me). But, in any case, if one is supposedly at lunch as part of a group and isn't part of the conversation, it's not a very pleasant feeling. If someone I was with where zoning out, I'd feel that they were bored by my company. If they picked up a book, I'd realize I was being rude. In any case, I don't see how reading a book is any more or less rude than just zoning out when one supposedly had dining companions.

Quote:

When i was a kid we went out to eat alot and rarely did i bring toys. I just listened in to the conversation. Maybe thats where i developed a love of gossip.








We didn't go out to eat a lot when I was a kid, because we couldn't afford it. But, we did go out - maybe once a month or thereabouts, I think. We didn't bring toys, but we also didn't just listen to the conversation. We participated. If someone _wants_ to just sit and listen, that's one thing. But, requiring a dining companion, of any age, to sit and listen to a conversation, without participating in it, is rude.


----------



## queenjane (May 17, 2004)

Quote:

I can't imagine going out to eat that often, and definitely not with two 2 year olds in tow! I'd be exhausted. When we do eat out, it's always at family restaurants, and they all have colouring sheets/menus/placemats, so it's never occurred to me to bring anything else along.
Well we almost always go to buffets, so we can get the boys' food first and they are mostly ok. And we dont linger after the meals over. (Long gone are the days of my brother and me sitting for a half hour after a meal just chatting...nope, he's lucky if we let him finish.







) But, i never found toys to be helpful, the ones that might keep them occupied are rather loud electronic things, and other ones would probably just get thrown across the room. So, i tend to bribe them with things like a bowlful of candy from the ice cream bar or a slurpee from the drink bar which buys me some time.

Its the eight yr old who is often talking too loudly, making a mess, eating with her hands, or not sitting in her seat. Go figure (she is WAAAAY more work than my "twins"!)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
But, requiring a dining companion, of any age, to sit and listen to a conversation, without participating in it, is rude.

I guess i dont see where there is proof that the child was required to sit and not talk.

My dd recently said she feels ignored when we go out to eat (usually my brother is with us, i sit across from my brother, she sits across from the boys)...she said "i want everyone to be able to have a conversation"...well i dont really know what she wants. My brother and i talk, probably about stuff she couldnt care less about. We may ask her questions every now and again "Oh is that steak good?" or "did you have fun at the park yesterday?" or whatever...but then go back to our conversation. Often, she will interrupt midsentence wanting to tell a joke that doesnt make sense, or talk about justin bieber or something, which is fine (well not to interrupt, we're working on that)...but for my child, due to some of her special needs, she really does feel ignored if the attention isnt *totally* on her...and there isnt much i can do about that other than help her learn that she cannot monopolize the attention of others. I'm not sure how else to "include" her in the conversation.

My son, on the other hand, was a very good conversationalist, seemed genuinely interested in whatever "adult" conversation we were having, could contribute to the talk in an on-topic relavent way (yes even at 8 yrs old)...he might be considered "gifted" though i'd say he was a pretty typical unschooled kid. I dunno. Maybe i'm just so burnt out parenting my new daughter with all her little issues that i'm jaded...certainly if you would have asked me this question years ago, i would have said "oh just go get the doll!" but now, not so much.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *queenjane* 
Well we almost always go to buffets, so we can get the boys' food first and they are mostly ok. And we dont linger after the meals over. (Long gone are the days of my brother and me sitting for a half hour after a meal just chatting...nope, he's lucky if we let him finish.







) But, i never found toys to be helpful, the ones that might keep them occupied are rather loud electronic things, and other ones would probably just get thrown across the room. So, i tend to bribe them with things like a bowlful of candy from the ice cream bar or a slurpee from the drink bar which buys me some time.

A buffet would definitely be an improvement. I've also noticed more servers are offering to bring the children's food first. That helps, too.

Quote:

Its the eight yr old who is often talking too loudly, making a mess, eating with her hands, or not sitting in her seat. Go figure (she is WAAAAY more work than my "twins"!)
Kids are weird that way. My sister used to say dd1 was more work than her twins, too (they're only three weeks younger than dd1). That has changed since, though. DD1 has settled down, and the twins...haven't.

Quote:

I guess i dont see where there is proof that the child was required to sit and not talk.

My dd recently said she feels ignored when we go out to eat (usually my brother is with us, i sit across from my brother, she sits across from the boys)...she said "i want everyone to be able to have a conversation"...well i dont really know what she wants. My brother and i talk, probably about stuff she couldnt care less about. We may ask her questions every now and again "Oh is that steak good?" or "did you have fun at the park yesterday?" or whatever...but then go back to our conversation. Often, she will interrupt midsentence wanting to tell a joke that doesnt make sense, or talk about justin bieber or something, which is fine (well not to interrupt, we're working on that)...but for my child, due to some of her special needs, she really does feel ignored if the attention isnt *totally* on her...and there isnt much i can do about that other than help her learn that she cannot monopolize the attention of others. I'm not sure how else to "include" her in the conversation.

My son, on the other hand, was a very good conversationalist, seemed genuinely interested in whatever "adult" conversation we were having, could contribute to the talk in an on-topic relavent way (yes even at 8 yrs old)...he might be considered "gifted" though i'd say he was a pretty typical unschooled kid. I dunno. Maybe i'm just so burnt out parenting my new daughter with all her little issues that i'm jaded...certainly if you would have asked me this question years ago, i would have said "oh just go get the doll!" but now, not so much.
I guess the thing for me is that there's no proof either way. But, there's been a lot of jumping to the conclusion (not just by you) that she wasn't really being ignored, or that she'd been warned it would be boring, or whatever. All those things _might_ be true. But, why base what we'd do in the situation in the OP on what we think might have happened running up to it? I'm making my assessment of how I'd respond, based solely on what we know from the conversation (the girl left her doll in the car to keep it safe, thought there would be colouring, which there wasn't, and whe wass bored by being ignored and having nothing to do). And, honestly, if my dd told me that I was talking to my firend and ignoring her, I'd respond with something more like, "I'm sorry you feel that way, but we're not ignoring you", not with, "well, that's what happens in adult restaurants".


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Okay, what we know for sure is that the doll is in the car and she feels bored. We don't actually know that she IS being ignored: we know she thinks she's being ignored.

Again, I really feel that the expectations for a typically developing 8yo are different than for a toddler. I am not an especially strict parent, but I do expect my 8yo not to throw a fit if she forgot something and to be patient when other people are talking.

Of course it's possible that her mother and her friend were being rude and actually ignoring her. I just find it more likely that she FELT ignored because the conversation wasn't all.about.her. That's pretty typical of 8yos, IMO/IME.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
Okay, what we know for sure is that the doll is in the car and she feels bored. We don't actually know that she IS being ignored: we know she thinks she's being ignored.

Again, I really feel that the expectations for a typically developing 8yo are different than for a toddler. I am not an especially strict parent, but I do expect my 8yo not to throw a fit if she forgot something and to be patient when other people are talking.

Of course it's possible that her mother and her friend were being rude and actually ignoring her. I just find it more likely that she FELT ignored because the conversation wasn't all.about.her. That's pretty typical of 8yos, IMO/IME.

Have to agree that is IS very typical of that age. I generally kept my nights out with friends child free when my DDs were at that stage.


----------



## NiteNicole (May 19, 2003)

Am I really going to be expected to entertain an EIGHT year old in a restaurant? Well that is not what I wanted to hear.

I'm working with my four year old on understanding that sometimes you're just going to be bored - and you're going to have to sit still and suck it up anyway. She's just so wiggly and she thinks she should be entertained every minute of the day - and that I should do the entertaining. I'm not a huge fan of this trait. I also don't think it's reasonable to expect that you're always going to have everything you want, everywhere you go. At some point, I want to stop having to carry toys or books or crayons every time I leave my house (or in the case of most four year old's I know, DVDs and iPods) and sometimes, you can't indulge your every impulse to sing, dance, and wiggle. I don't expect this is something she's going to master in the next day or so, but I think it's worth working on.

As to the situation in the OP, since we can't KNOW the whole story - it sounds to me like the child was warned that this wasn't going to be interesting or fun because Mom was there to visit with a friend and it was a grown up restaurant. She was asked if she wanted to bring the doll and refused so - oh well. It's one meal. Eventually a kid should be able to make it through ONE meal without entertainment. Because it's hard to know if the child was actually crying OVER THE DOLL or if the doll was just the excuse, I can't say if I would go back and get it. I do draw some limits - and we're talking about my four year old. If the car is right outside, maybe. If the car is down the block? No. If the doll was the actual reason for the crying...maybe. If the doll was the excuse and the crying and ill-temper was going to happen anyway, no.


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Attached2Elijah* 
I don't know... my almost 7 year old "spirited" son throws fits more akin to a 2 year old over stuff like this so 8 is definitely possible.

This is my life right now. Except I have the opposite problem in that my DD wants to bring PILES of stuff everywhere. I repeatedly tell her she won't need it. At first I used to suggest but as she's gotten older she's wanted to carry more and more things and I've just started to tell her NO - you can't bring that, you won't need it. For school the other day it was an "expanded" backpack, plus lunch bag, plus 2 purses AND a lightweight shopping bag. (Dh took her to school).

I'm sure the mom was doing the best she could for her daughter. Some lessons are hard to learn. Some children need to learn things in different ways.


----------



## neetling (Jan 24, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chickabiddy* 
I guess the lesson I'd be trying to teach would be that other people may not be willing to accommodate mind-changing.

Again, under some circumstances, I'd be happy to get the doll.

Under others, it wouldn't be so much "you can't have the doll" as "right now I am not willing to leave the restaurant and walk down the block to fetch the doll". That may be semantics to some, but to me there's a difference between refusing a request out of meanness or spite and refusing a request that feels unreasonable -- and there are definitely circumstances where one person going out of her way to accommodate another person's changed mind may not be reasonable.

this is how I feel. If the car was parked right outside, I'd have no issue getting the doll or whatever. If we had to go far away, or the weather was nasty or my food had just come or whatever, I'd be much much less inclined.


----------



## Sierra (Nov 19, 2001)

I am soooooo with all the mamas on here who are basically saying that even if someone does something differently than you, it doesn't make it a "bad parental choice."

What we do as parents varies on our own family values, our children's personalities and tendencies, our own personalities and tendencies, our family dynamics, and general moods and experiences on that day or week. That's going to be different for everyone.

In fact, not only is it different for different people, but it will be different at different times. For example, it may be one way between you and your 8 year old until you end up having another baby, and then it may change. It may be one way one week because you've had a smooth ride for a while as a family, and different another week when things are rougher.

I can imagine times when I might get the doll. But I can also imagine plenty of times when I would not get the doll. Not only can I imagine situations in which I might have this conversation with either one of my kids, but I could imagine having it with them now (at ages 4 and 5), and not just at age 8.

On a good day, if I was having that conversation, I might have a conversation with my child in which I help her problem-solve (other ways she might keep herself entertained, etc.). I would also be very empathetic and compassionate even if I had decided I wasn't going to get the doll and had to be firm about my choice regarding *my own behavior.*

On a bad day, I might not stop to think that it would be nice to help her problem-solve, and I might be more firm than empathetic and compassionate.

I started writing up a long post here, but it was repetative with many previous responses. I do, however, want to say that one of my family values is creativity (which means nurturing creativity...which means my job description as a parent does not include being an entertainer...yes, I play with and at times entertain my kids, but I don't consider it a failure to do my job that there are times when I say to my kids that they are responsible for their own entertainment). I feel the same way about my spouse, who on plenty of occassions has had to sit through boring experiences for me as I have for her. There are plenty of dinner parties I have gone to with her that haven't really been "up my alley." Oh well. It's not anyone's job to keep my mind entertained but me, and frankly, I am much better rounded because I teach myself to be mentally stimulated by things that are not naturally interesting to me...just because sports are not my thing doesn't mean that I can't become a more creative and interesting person by sitting through a conversation about them.

Second, I think those of you who are saying we can't assume that the child wasn't being ignored are making assumptions themselves. You have to *assume* that the child had spoken and been shushed to believe that she was being ignored. That seems a big assumption, especially given the way her mom was talking her through the decision not to get the doll for her.


----------



## mammal_mama (Aug 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EdnaMarie* 
She's eight, I hope by the time my kid is eight she can go out there herself and get it.

This is the same thing I've been thinking. I don't see why the options are getting framed as: _either_ the parent has her conversation disrupted and gets up and goes out to get the doll -- _or_ the child is taught a lesson about how natural law dictates that things that are left in the car have to stay in the car.

Eight is certainly old enough to go unlock the car and get your doll yourself. Of course, don't you know, there are all kind of creepy people just _lurking_ outside restaurants and waiting for bored 8yo's to come out alone to get their dolls so they can kidnap the child and steal the car all in one fell swoop







...

But that's a subject for another thread.


----------



## Forthwith (Aug 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
This is the same thing I've been thinking. I don't see why the options are getting framed as: _either_ the parent has her conversation disrupted and gets up and goes out to get the doll -- _or_ the child is taught a lesson about how natural law dictates that things that are left in the car have to stay in the car.

Eight is certainly old enough to go unlock the car and get your doll yourself. Of course, don't you know, there are all kind of creepy people just _lurking_ outside restaurants and waiting for bored 8yo's to come out alone to get their dolls so they can kidnap the child and steal the car all in one fell swoop







...

But that's a subject for another thread.

I think it really depends on where the car is parked. A lot of people seem to be assuming that the car is relatively nearby, but it could just as easily be a 10-15 minute walk away. I don't think I'd comfortable sending an 8 year-old out on a 20-30 minute errand in an area of town she is probably not familiar with.

For that matter, they could have been dropped off and the car was half-way across the city.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

With respect to several of the recent posts...

1) We don't know that the girl is 8. That was the OP's guess, based solely on her verbal skills.

2) Could those of you who think it sounds as though the child was warned explain where you're getting that? I've seen it over and over in this thred, but I'm not seeing where it's coming from. I don't see anything to suggest that in the OP.

3) It's possible the child wasn't being ignored. But, again, I'm wondering where people are getting that from what was posted. The mom's response sounded to me as though she knew she was ignoring the girl, and the girl was going to have to accept that.

I just keep feeling as though I read a different OP than many posters here.

FWIW, even based on the way it seems to me it went down, I don't think the mom is a "bad mom". I just wouldn't make the same decision.


----------



## Wild Lupine (Jul 22, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *queenjane* 
I also want to add...someone mentioned if they went to a restaurant and got ignored by the people they were there with, they'd go get a book and read it. That just seems so...rude to me. If they were PURPOSELY ignoring you..like, you'd contribute and they wouldnt look at you, or seemed to be mad at you, i could see getting up and leaving.

That was me and I'll clarify myself. I was speaking in hyperbole which didn't get my point across at all! What I meant was that sometimes there can be different 'rules' for adults and children. Like when three adults go out to a restaurant together it's assumed that they'll all be engaged in conversation. Sure sometimes two people will go off on a tangent and the third won't be interested or have much to contribute. But generally, all three adults are welcome, even expected, to talk with one another.

Sometimes though, children are expected to sit quietly while two adults talk. Sometimes this can last a long time, depending upon the adult's sensitivity to the child. I don't think this is very respectful to the child, who is basically a captive audience at that point in a restaurant where they have no place else to go. Of course we have no idea if that's what happened in this scenario; the mom and her friend might have spent a lot of time engaging with the girl. Or they might have expected her to be completely quiet while they caught up with one another; it's impossible to know.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Wild Lupine* 
Sometimes though, children are expected to sit quietly while two adults talk. Sometimes this can last a long time, depending upon the adult's sensitivity to the child. I don't think this is very respectful to the child, who is basically a captive audience at that point in a restaurant where they have no place else to go.

My BFF and I joke about having vivid childhood memories of thinking, "Noooo!! Please don't order a refill on your coffee!!!" when we were out at dinner with our moms and their friends.







The excruciatingly sloooooowwww sipping of coffee ... arrrgghhh! Of course, now I'm the one who loves to sip and chat forever after a meal, but I don't let the kids come with me when I know it'll be one of those nights.


----------



## One_Girl (Feb 8, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
With respect to several of the recent posts...

1) We don't know that the girl is 8. That was the OP's guess, based solely on her verbal skills.

2) Could those of you who think it sounds as though the child was warned explain where you're getting that? I've seen it over and over in this thred, but I'm not seeing where it's coming from. I don't see anything to suggest that in the OP.

3) It's possible the child wasn't being ignored. But, again, I'm wondering where people are getting that from what was posted. The mom's response sounded to me as though she knew she was ignoring the girl, and the girl was going to have to accept that.

I just keep feeling as though I read a different OP than many posters here.

FWIW, even based on the way it seems to me it went down, I don't think the mom is a "bad mom". I just wouldn't make the same decision.

I think we are all reading a lot into this situation based on how we interact when talking to our older children in ways similar to this mom. The tone reads like something I would do with my dd and I know that I give her many many warnings (probably too many before acting). The mom also doesn't let herself get side tracked by the conversation about going back inside by talking about ignoring. I don't think that means she was ignoring the child though. If we are discussing an issue I try not to get sidetracked with my dd because it fuels an argument instead of finding a way to wrap up the situation. That doesn't mean she is being ignored, it just means that we are talking about one thing and I am not willing to fight about five other things just because my dd is feeling like arguing. I can't imagine what a child could do to have to go outside. It would have to be very bad for me to bring dd outside and since there wasn't yelling mentioned I would imagine that the mom was calm and laid back along the same lines. I know that I would probably not be that laid back and I would definitely not be in the fetching mood if I had to bring my dd outside at her age.

I think that each of us will interpret this differently based on how we handle things, how old our children are, how our children behave in general during discussions and when they aren't the center of attention 100% of the time (just 90%), and how we were raised. We don't have a big glimpse of what happened so we can only assume things based on how we interpret the conversation.


----------



## kriket (Nov 25, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *limabean* 
My BFF and I joke about having vivid childhood memories of thinking, "Noooo!! Please don't order a refill on your coffee!!!" when we were out at dinner with our moms and their friends.








The excruciatingly sloooooowwww sipping of coffee ... arrrgghhh! Of course, now I'm the one who loves to sip and chat forever after a meal, but I don't let the kids come with me when I know it'll be one of those nights.

















I can remember this as a kid too. Trying to will my Dad's hand AWAY from the rolls, thinking to myself "You can't possible want *another* roll, we just had dinner and dessert, and have been here an eternity."
Now my dad lives in South Dakota, and I live in Ohio, and I wish there were more rolls









I tend to agree based on only my own childhood, an 8 year old should be able to sit until food comes. Someone has a pen to drawn on a placemat. There is a straw wrapper that needs rolled and unrolled, a lemon that needs its seeds poked out, splenda that needs liberated, possible onto the lemon. There are a million things to do at a boring table. What ever happened to imagination?


----------



## theatermom (Jun 5, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kriket* 
I tend to agree based on only my own childhood, an 8 year old should be able to sit until food comes. Someone has a pen to drawn on a placemat. There is a straw wrapper that needs rolled and unrolled, a lemon that needs its seeds poked out, splenda that needs liberated, possible onto the lemon. There are a million things to do at a boring table. What ever happened to imagination?

At an "adult restaurant", most children are discouraged from doing these things. Sometimes there really isn't anything to do at a boring table except talk. I think it's funny that so many say that an 8 year old (and again, this child may be as young as 5, we don't know) should be entertaining _herself_ when the adults aren't entertaining themselves -- they're entertaining _each other_. Most people don't like to eat out by themselves or go to the movies by themselves, but we expect children to sit quietly at tables for long periods of time, listening to adults talk on and on about things they either don't understand or don't care about, and entertain themselves with nothing.









I also think it's worth pointing out again that the girl didn't leave her doll in the car because she was being obnoxious -- she left it in the car because she didn't want to lose it. She thought there would be coloring, and so made what she thought was an informed decision. She just doesn't come across (with the info available) as a whiney brat. When my children make an effort to make informed decisions and act responsibly, I try to reward that, and if I can't, I at least try to give them a better reason than "sometimes we can't change our minds". BTW, we often encourage the boys to leave prized items in the car in order to not lose them, and they often choose to do so on their own for the same reason. It's a responsible decision, and one that I don't think should be punished with "natural" consequences unless it's awfully unhandy to fix. Even then, the child should at least be told the real reason.


----------



## lach (Apr 17, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ellien C* 
This is my life right now. Except I have the opposite problem in that my DD wants to bring PILES of stuff everywhere. I repeatedly tell her she won't need it. At first I used to suggest but as she's gotten older she's wanted to carry more and more things and I've just started to tell her NO - you can't bring that, you won't need it. For school the other day it was an "expanded" backpack, plus lunch bag, plus 2 purses AND a lightweight shopping bag. (Dh took her to school).

I'm sure the mom was doing the best she could for her daughter. Some lessons are hard to learn. Some children need to learn things in different ways.

LOL, I used to build the best towers out of those little cream cups! Not just stacks or pyramids: mine were super complex!


----------



## mammal_mama (Aug 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kelmendi* 
I think it really depends on where the car is parked.

That's a good point. Even though I live in an urban area, it's not so crowded that we have to park several blocks away when we go out to eat. We usually just park in the parking lot. So I wasn't quite envisioning a long walk.

As far as them being dropped off and the car not even being accessible -- it seems unlikely that an 8yo would be so irrational as to try to go get the doll if she knew it was miles and miles away. Even my 5yo would understand that sort of situation.









It seems possible that, as nextcommercial mentioned, the daughter might have had the option of staying home with Dad but just begged and begged to go, even after Mom explained that it was going to be boring adult conversation at a boring adult restaurant.

At that point maybe Mom just felt like giving her dd a super-strong dose of experiencing an adult lunch date, so as to maybe get her to be more agreeable to staying home with Dad the next time Mom wanted to have some adult time.

If this is the case, it certainly doesn't make her a bad mom or anything, but it just doesn't seem like the best way of handling it. But then, I'm not sure if my way has always been the "right" way either, LOL -- it's just the easy way.

When I've occasionally wanted to go out and do something adult, dh has often done something super fun with the girls ... i.e. they have dropped me off at a talk at a coffee shop while they've gone right up the street to eat and play at a McDonald's Playplace.









Maybe it's not "teaching" them anything -- but it's reinforcing the idea for me that when things are hard, it's not necessarily because they "have" to be hard. We can often find an easy solution with a little ingenuity.


----------



## OkiMom (Nov 21, 2007)

Personally I have a no toy in the restruant rule because I KNOW my girls would end up getting their favorite toy in the middle of their dinner (or mine) and then have a crying fit when it has to be put in the wash. However, I do carry a small coloring book and pack of crayons in my purse where ever I go so if its boring for them then they can color.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *limabean* 
My BFF and I joke about having vivid childhood memories of thinking, "Noooo!! Please don't order a refill on your coffee!!!" when we were out at dinner with our moms and their friends.







The excruciatingly sloooooowwww sipping of coffee ... arrrgghhh! Of course, now I'm the one who loves to sip and chat forever after a meal, but I don't let the kids come with me when I know it'll be one of those nights.



















So glad my mom didn't bring us out. Of course, those were the days when you could leave a two year old, a five year old, an eight year old and a ten year old at home and the eight and ten would babysit the little ones. So they could have a girls' night out without bringing the kids OR spending their entire monthly food budget on childcare.


----------



## Forthwith (Aug 6, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
With respect to several of the recent posts...

3) It's possible the child wasn't being ignored. But, again, I'm wondering where people are getting that from what was posted. *The mom's response sounded to me as though she knew she was ignoring the girl, and the girl was going to have to accept that.*

I didn't get that from her response at all.

Girl: "I didn't know there wouldn't be coloring stuff here! I'm so bored, I just want something to play with! You are talking with your friend and no one is talking to me and I'm bored!"

Mom: "Thats what happens when you go to adult restaurants. They don't always have coloring things. When you stop crying we can go back inside."

The mom isn't saying that getting ignored is what happens in adult restaurants, she's saying that there are no colouring books in adult restaurants. It looks to me like the mother is trying to avoid being sidetracked.


----------



## MJB (Nov 28, 2009)

I have a child about that age, and I wouldn't have gone to the car. Sounds like the mother was being perfectly calm and reasonable. Honestly, if he couldn't behave in the restaurant, there'd be more consequences than just boredom. I expect that I might have to step outside with a toddler; if either of my school-aged boys had to be taken outside, I'd be very angry.
I often have to tell my middle child that XYZ was his choice. He'd change his mind all the time if I let him and honestly, you have to learn to make and live with choices. And if he whines about it? No way in heck is he getting whatever he wants.
I really doubt they were ignoring the girl. The conversation wasn't interesting enough to her, sure, but that is life. In groups, sometimes the topic of conversation isn't about us or our interests. I wouldn't get up and leave a restaurant if my friends were discussing football or something.
My kids are used to dining out and most restaurants we enjoy don't have crayons. They love it. Sounds like this girl just needs a little more practice.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MJB* 
I have a child about that age, and I wouldn't have gone to the car.

About what age?

Quote:

I really doubt they were ignoring the girl.
Based on what? The only thing we know is that the girl thought she was being ignored, and multiple people have said, "I doubt she was being ignored". I don't get why. If you've never seen a parent ignore a child in a restaurant, I'm very happy for you, but I've seen it enough times to know it definitely happens. Why assume that it wasn't happening this time?

Quote:

The conversation wasn't interesting enough to her, sure, but that is life. In groups, sometimes the topic of conversation isn't about us or our interests. I wouldn't get up and leave a restaurant if my friends were discussing football or something.
I wouldn't, either. I've been well socialized enough to know that it would be considered really rude to do so. However, if my friends were consistently inviting me out and then discussing things they knew wouldn't interest me, I'd stop going. Going out to eat with people is a social activity. Sitting around listening to people going on and on about stuff that bores me to tears? Not so much.

Quote:

My kids are used to dining out and most restaurants we enjoy don't have crayons. They love it. Sounds like this girl just needs a little more practice.
Would they love it if it were just one of them, and they were being ignored? My kids do okay in non-family restaurants, even though we very rarely go to them...but my kids have each other to talk to, even if there is an adult conversation going on around them. It's a lot different when it's just the one child, sitting there by herself.

I guess I'm still not getting why people are assuming she wasn't being ignored. The mom didn't specifically say "you get ignored in adult restaurants", no. She specifically mentioned the colouring. That doesn't actually mean she was trying to avoid getting sidetracked. (And, frankly, if my child felt that I was ignoring her, that would be my priority, not "you chose to leave your dolly in the car".) The girl said her mom was ignoring her. The mom didn't deny it. A significant number of replies have included "I doubt she was really being ignored", with absolutely no evidence to support that. It really just confuses me.


----------



## NiteNicole (May 19, 2003)

Even if she was being "ignored"...it's one meal. I have had to go to dinner with my husband for work stuff. Not a whole lot was interesting to me, or inclusive of me. I didn't whip out my iphone and start playing or whine because I left my book in the car, I sat and ate and generally waited for it to be over. BOooooOOOOooOOOring. I wasn't deliberately shut out, but there were things that other people wanted to/needed to talk about that had zilch to do with me. No big. One meal. Yes, I'm an adult but it happens. Life is not always entertaining.

Certainly when I was a kid, there were times (like CHURCH which, if memory serves, went on for five and a half days every Sunday) that it might not be all that interesting but sitting still and being quiet was still required.

It's one meal. I can't imagine a rational adult actually IGNORING a child (as in, here is the invisible wall and I'm pretending you're on the other side of it), but I can imagine two adults want to talk and their conversation doesn't necessarily include an 80-ish year old. I can also understand the expectation that the 8-ish year old can just suck it up for one meal.


----------



## theatermom (Jun 5, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
I guess I'm still not getting why people are assuming she wasn't being ignored. The mom didn't specifically say "you get ignored in adult restaurants", no. She specifically mentioned the colouring. That doesn't actually mean she was trying to avoid getting sidetracked. (And, frankly, if my child felt that I was ignoring her, that would be my priority, not "you chose to leave your dolly in the car".) The girl said her mom was ignoring her. The mom didn't deny it. A significant number of replies have included "I doubt she was really being ignored", with absolutely no evidence to support that. It really just confuses me.

THIS! I don't understand why everyone is assuming that she's 8, assuming that she wasn't being ignored, assuming that she should be fully responsible for entertaining herself when the adults are entertaining each other, and assuming that no exceptions should be made for getting something to entertain her just because she needs to "learn" a "valuable" lesson and suck it up. I'm also hating the vibe of it being okay to take people along for dinner who you don't intend to include in the conversation. This is the "children should be seen and not heard" rule, and frankly, I find it demeaning to all concerned. If you're going to take a child to an "adult" restaurant, you do have a responsibility to help her help herself, and it goes beyond encouraging her to take her doll into the restaurant and then telling her "I told you so" when she has compelling reasons to change her mind. It doesn't matter whether or not you had choice in bringing her (and frankly, there's always a choice).


----------



## Sierra (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
I guess I'm still not getting why people are assuming she wasn't being ignored. The mom didn't specifically say "you get ignored in adult restaurants", no. She specifically mentioned the colouring. That doesn't actually mean she was trying to avoid getting sidetracked.

I'm not going to say whether she was ignored. That's impossible for any of us to know. But I tend to find it very plausible that she was not being ignored. The reasons for this are:

1. In my mind, ignoring someone means that if they speak, you don't listen or respond to them. I have never seen that happen in a restaurant between a kid and parent. I have seen adults very engaged in conversation with one another (and it sounds like this mom told her child ahead of time that this was what it was going to be like and that the child chose to come even though she could have stayed home with someone or gone to a babysitter or something), while the kids aren't participating actively, but that's not the same as ignoring (in my mind).

In restaurants, I've never seen a child shushed or a parent just go on talking over the child or something when a kid speaks. I don't think its that common, especially with a parent who seems to otherwise be very reasonably talking to her child about the child's situation later on. When I was a kid, we bounced in and out of adult conversations. Because we were socialized to be conversationalists, that was what was expected. Often we would just listen, but occassionally we would jump in. *I don't feel that we were being ignored in either scenario*. Rather, we were being socialized/taught to develop our interests in the adult world and to be able to hold conversations with adults about both things of greater and lesser interest to us. We were being socialized/taught by the provision of opportunity and the refusal of my parents to see being our entertainers as part of their job description. This is not the same as ignoring, though I can easily see how an emotional eight year old in a moment of frustration might take that position.

2. The mom really sounds like she was keeping a focus in the conversation. She is repeating herself/being very focused on the issue at hand, no matter what her kid says. It sounds like conversations I have had in which I was trying not to be sidetracked. In my personal experiences, not responding to claims like that is not an admission of guilt. It is an avoidance of an unecessary power struggle. I read it that way because it fits most closely with my own experiences. You clearly have different experiences informing your own conclusions.

I guess also, if the child was really being ignored, I still don't see that the parent necessarily has to suddenly focus on that. I can understand why some folks may feel that way, and I might even as a parent realize my child reasonably felt ignored and then try to make ammends...but then again...the parent made it clear that the child had a choice to come or not come to the restaurant (so I am assuming she had the option to stay home with another parent or with a sitter), and that the parent had emphasized in advance that this was an *adult* restaurant and that she would be meeting with another adult to talk with that adult.

My kids know that after church during "coffee hour" I (who work in ministry) need to mingle/do work/talk with people/etc. They know in advance that I am not going to be able to pay much attention to them. Sometimes my dw will give them the option to stay or for her to take them home. They know if they choose to stay that they won't get my undivided attention. They also know that once we all get home they will get 100% of my attention. So when they have chosen to stay, and then come and interupt my conversations every two minutes, I do get firm with them. If they say, "But you are ignoring us!" I am not going to suddenly make that my focus. No, I am going to say, "You had the choice to go home and wait until I could give you my undivided attention. You chose to stay, which means that you will be sharing me for another hour."

I can see a similar situation resulting from me deciding to go out to eat with a friend. My child might request to go, and I might think, "I can live with that, and my kid is old enough to come along without being entertained." And then I might say, "Kido, I am going out to eat with ______. She and I really want to talk about ______. This isn't a kid's restaurant, and I am not going to provide you with entertainment. Do you think you can manage?" And my kid might say, "Yes, I think I can do that." Then we meet up with my friend, and as we are getting out of the car, friend says to my kid, "Do you want to bring your doll in? You might get bored." And my kid might say, "No."

Now (since it has come up a few times on this thread) with this kind of thing, I don't make it my practice to go, "Are you sure? Are you really, really sure? Think about this carefully." I think that is patronizing, and my kids know that when I ask them a question I want them to give me a thoughtful answer. I trust that they will, and I communicate this trust and confidence in their decision-making by a cheerful, "Okay!" If I then shut the car door, and my kid goes, "Oh, wait...I change my mind," that is usually cool with me. Sometimes it takes me a while to process information, and I change my mind after an initial decision. But let's say that doesn't happen. I'm not going to stand there trying to convince my child to change his or her mind by saying, "Are you sure you are sure?" That's not how I roll.

Okay, so when we get into the restaurant, my kid is welcome to jump in to converse with myself and my friend, but I am not going to sit there trying to think of ways to keep her entertained because she said she wanted to come but knew that was conditional on (1) me being able to have a conversation with my friend, and (2) her keeping herself entertained.

So there are several ways this might go. One way is that my kid does great and everything goes as planned. Another way is that my kid decides it really _is_ boring. This might be because she had gone in thinking that there were going to be crayons, and there aren't, or whatever. But whatever reason, that doesn't make my filling my child's desires a sudden top priority. My kid knew this trip out to eat wasn't about her from the get go. I told her ahead of time where I was going and what I was going to do, and then she had options along the way about whether to participate and whether to bring something in to keep herself entertained. My family values include creativity, and my kids are resourceful. I expect them to keep themselves entertained in a variety of ways, many of which are perfectly appropriate for an adult restaurant.

Now someone mentioned that refusing to get the doll for the bored daughter teaches the daughter to be inflexible. I disagree. I think by enabling the child's belief that only one thing could save her from boredom teaches the daughter to be inflexible. It is by giving her the message that I trust her ability to keep herself entertained with or without her doll that I teach her a flexibility of the mind. Counter-intuitive, but I firmly believe it to be the case.

In any case, let's say my daughter says, "I'm bored. I want my doll." Well, I don't get to control my daughter's behavior. She had a choice, and she made it. Her choice was to leave the doll in the car. The natural consequence of the choice is that her doll is in the car. That's not parent imposed.

The only thing I can control is my own behavior. So when someone asks me to get something for them (and because I think most folks try to be reasonable most of the time...I am choosing to believe this mom had some reason she didn't send the girl to the car...either the girl was younger than thought by the OP or the car was further or whatever), I get to decide whether to do it. There are times I might decide to do it. Let's say we ordered only a minute or two ago, I know it's going to be a long wait, my friend and I are just warming up to our conversation, and I know from experience that when my child says she wants her doll, that's what she really wants and that she will then entertain herself with it. Yeah, no problem, I will get the doll.

On the other hand, let's say I know that the food should arrive at the table in another five or maybe even ten minutes (any time period I know my child can handle without her doll), my friend and I are really into our conversation, and I know from experience that my child is likely to get her doll, and then want something else two minutes later, and then something else two minutes after that, and that I am about to spiral into making the whole restaurant experience about her and not about a balance of needs, then no, I wouldn't get the doll. I'd say to her, "I know you can last another ten minutes. Hang in there kido!"

If then she spiraled into a fit, crying etc., if my child was over the age of 3 or 4, I wouldn't reward the fit by getting the doll. By that age, kids are smart. They put it together. Throw a fit=get whatever I want. I made that mistake with one of my kids. No way will I make the same mistake again. It leads to lots of trouble over the long haul. Plus, as someone here already astutely noted, most of us as parents can tell the difference in our own children when they are throwing a fit to get their way and when they are _truly_ upset about something. We respond accordingly. I would be very reluctant to question another parent's judgement in this regard.

I can choose to intervene or not intervene in the natural consequence, but that doesn't change whether it is a natural consequence. Children can be saved from most of the natural consequences of their choices and behavior, but that doesn't mean that a parent is imposing a logical consequence (which also can have value) by chosing not to intervene. It just means the parent is stepping back and letting the natural consequence be experienced by the child. The idea that if a parent can intervene and choses not to, it is a parent-imposed consequence is really a twisted perception of what a natural consequence it is.

Now since some people are saying, "hey, would you treat an adult this way?" I would say, if I leave for work and realize I forgot my lunch, not having my lunch is the natural consequence of my action. So then I might call dw to see if she'll intervene. She might say, "No problem. I am available and can run it over to you." If so, great! But she also can make the valid choice to say, "Honey, I have the kids' doctor appointments, and then we have playgroup, and I just don't think I am going to have the time." There might be any number of contributing factors to which way she'll lean, not only including her schedule on that day and what else she is engaged in, but also whether she feels she is enabling me by bringing me my lunch (do I call her like this almost every other day?), and what other options she thinks I have. If she says yes, I am glad. If she says no, I can count on her to say it with compassion and empathy because she's very kind and loving. I might feel a little put-out anyway, but I also know I was the person responsible for my lunch. So I buck up, and I get resourceful. I see what there is up for grabs in the fridge, I grab something to eat if I have a few bucks, I decide to come home a little early and skip lunch, or I decide to live with the hunger. Or whatever. But I take responsibility and I experience the natural consequences of my actions. That's the way it works in my family.

Sadly, this is a lesson I had to learn as an adult. One of my parents always said, "The world is hard enough. Let's do everything we can to make it easier on each other." Which sounds great, right? Well. It is and it isn't. My mom would rescue me from all kinds of choices. Forget my lunch? No problem, if she can't bring it to me, she'll call a friend and ask the friend to bring it to me. If her friend can't bring it, she'll figure out a way to leave work and get it to me even if it puts her job at risk and makes her resentful and angry. It wasn't until adulthood that I realized that the world didn't revolve around me, and that not all my wants were needs, and that not everyone was as forgiving as my mom, and that I wasn't always going to have people to rescue me. (And paradoxically, I also needed to learn that _I_ didn't have to be a doormat when it came to other people either and that I didn't have to bear the burden of everyone else's unfortunate choices). It's a MUCH harder lesson, with MUCH bigger consequences when you are an adult than when you are a kid. I'm just glad (and lucky) I survived. Personally, having lived through it as an adult, I want my kids to have a chance to learn that particular lesson as kids when there is less to lose.

By the way, on a more positive note about things I learned in my childhood, my mother used to tell myself and my siblings -- when we would whine to her about being bored -- "only boring people get bored." She was right. Interesting people choose to be interested in the world around them.


----------



## BunnySlippers (Oct 30, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MadiMamacita* 
I was also impressed with her abilities- thats why I imagined that she must have been around 8. her voice didn't sound like a really little kid either. but thats just a guess.

Iam impressed with the girls vocab and arguing abilities








I would have gone to the car to get the doll for my 8yr old. I wouldn't have waited for her to start crying either (if she was the crying type- mostly she just starts sighing and moaning when she is not impressed







)


----------



## Wild Lupine (Jul 22, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 

I guess I'm still not getting why people are assuming she wasn't being ignored. The mom didn't specifically say "you get ignored in adult restaurants", no. She specifically mentioned the colouring. That doesn't actually mean she was trying to avoid getting sidetracked. (And, frankly, if my child felt that I was ignoring her, that would be my priority, not "you chose to leave your dolly in the car".) The girl said her mom was ignoring her. The mom didn't deny it. A significant number of replies have included "I doubt she was really being ignored", with absolutely no evidence to support that. It really just confuses me.

I agree with this. We cannot know if she was being ignored.

I'm also surprised at the assumption I've read that the girl threw a tantrum while waiting a short time for her food. We have no idea how long they had been there, whether or not they had already eaten, how long the girl had been patient and polite before this incident happened. Two minutes? Two hours? We can't know.

Based on the description she doesn't sound like a girl melting down, just one who is upset. She's crying but able to articulate herself clearly; that's being upset, not tantruming. It concerns me to read assumptions about why she's crying that are dismissive of her experience when we have no idea what actually went on beforehand. It seems the opposite of GD to make assumptions about why she was crying, especially when those assumptions cast her in such a negative light.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sierra* 
1. In my mind, ignoring someone means that if they speak, you don't listen or respond to them. I have never seen that happen in a restaurant between a kid and parent.

I have, on more than one occasion. I'm actually surprised to hear someone say they haven't seen it, to be honest. I'm sure this is a factor.

Quote:

I have seen adults very engaged in conversation with one another (and it sounds like this mom told her child ahead of time that this was what it was going to be like and that the child chose to come even though she could have stayed home with someone or gone to a babysitter or something), while the kids aren't participating actively, but that's not the same as ignoring (in my mind).
I don't get that at all. How does it sound that way?

Quote:

In restaurants, I've never seen a child shushed or a parent just go on talking over the child or something when a kid speaks. I don't think its that common, especially with a parent who seems to otherwise be very reasonably talking to her child about the child's situation later on.
I have seen it, so we're obviously coming from different places on this. I also don't think the mom was necessarily "very reasonably" talking to her child. There's more to being reasonable than simply being calm.

Quote:

When I was a kid, we bounced in and out of adult conversations. Because we were socialized to be conversationalists, that was what was expected. Often we would just listen, but occassionally we would jump in. *I don't feel that we were being ignored in either scenario*. Rather, we were being socialized/taught to develop our interests in the adult world and to be able to hold conversations with adults about both things of greater and lesser interest to us. We were being socialized/taught by the provision of opportunity and the refusal of my parents to see being our entertainers as part of their job description. This is not the same as ignoring, though I can easily see how an emotional eight year old in a moment of frustration might take that position.
But, we have no idea if that's what was happening. I do agree that neither of those scenarios constitute ignoring a child. (I do think inviting someone out to dine, whether a child or another adult, and then deliberately discussing things you know they have zero interest in is unbelievably rude, although I have no idea if that happened here.) I also note that you say "we". Did you have someone else you could talk to, if the adult conversation was completely over your head and/olr uninteresting?

Quote:

s...but then again...the parent made it clear that the child had a choice to come or not come to the restaurant (so I am assuming she had the option to stay home with another parent or with a sitter), and that the parent had emphasized in advance that this was an *adult* restaurant and that she would be meeting with another adult to talk with that adult.
umm...what? I missed all this. Which post is it in? I thought the whole conversation the OP heard was in the OP, and there was nothing about this at all.

Quote:

My kids know that after church during "coffee hour" I (who work in ministry) need to mingle/do work/talk with people/etc. They know in advance that I am not going to be able to pay much attention to them. Sometimes my dw will give them the option to stay or for her to take them home. They know if they choose to stay that they won't get my undivided attention. They also know that once we all get home they will get 100% of my attention. So when they have chosen to stay, and then come and interupt my conversations every two minutes, I do get firm with them. If they say, "But you are ignoring us!" I am not going to suddenly make that my focus. No, I am going to say, "You had the choice to go home and wait until I could give you my undivided attention. You chose to stay, which means that you will be sharing me for another hour."
This all makes perfect sense, and I'd do the same thing (depending to some degree on age, of course). But, it has nothing to do with the OP.

Quote:

I can see a similar situation resulting from me deciding to go out to eat with a friend. My child might request to go, and I might think, "I can live with that, and my kid is old enough to come along without being entertained." And then I might say, "Kido, I am going out to eat with ______. She and I really want to talk about ______. This isn't a kid's restaurant, and I am not going to provide you with entertainment. Do you think you can manage?" And my kid might say, "Yes, I think I can do that." Then we meet up with my friend, and as we are getting out of the car, friend says to my kid, "Do you want to bring your doll in? You might get bored." And my kid might say, "No."
Sure. This could all happen. But, I saw no evidence of this in the OP.

Quote:

Okay, so when we get into the restaurant, my kid is welcome to jump in to converse with myself and my friend, but I am not going to sit there trying to think of ways to keep her entertained because she said she wanted to come but knew that was conditional on (1) me being able to have a conversation with my friend, and (2) her keeping herself entertained.
There was nothing whatsoever in the OP to suggest/indicate that the child knew anything was conditional on either of these things. The fact that she said she thought there would be colouring suggests pretty strongly that she had no idea she'd be expected to entertain herself in some other way while her mom talked to someone else.

Quote:

My kid knew this trip out to eat wasn't about her from the get go. I told her ahead of time where I was going and what I was going to do, and then she had options along the way about whether to participate and whether to bring something in to keep herself entertained.
That's all great. But, this is about the kid in the OP, and there is nothing to say her mom told her _any_ of that.

Quote:

So when someone asks me to get something for them (and because I think most folks try to be reasonable most of the time...I am choosing to believe this mom had some reason she didn't send the girl to the car...
Okay, so we're working from very different base assumptions right out the chute. In 42 years, I've never seen anyting to indicate that "most folks try to be reasonable most of the time".

Quote:

If then she spiraled into a fit, crying etc., if my child was over the age of 3 or 4, I wouldn't reward the fit by getting the doll. By that age, kids are smart. They put it together. Throw a fit=get whatever I want. I made that mistake with one of my kids. No way will I make the same mistake again. It leads to lots of trouble over the long haul.
I made that "mistake" with ds1. I have no problems with him on that front, and never have. I never made that mistake with dd1, and we've had issues with volatility, meltdowns and fits her whole life. Some of it really depends on the kid.

Quote:

By the way, on a more positive note about things I learned in my childhood, my mother used to tell myself and my siblings -- when we would whine to her about being bored -- "only boring people get bored." She was right. Interesting people choose to be interested in the world around them.
I know lots of boring people who are never bored (eg. me), and interesting people who are sometimes bored, so I don't really agree with this. That said, I don't have much patience with "I'm bored", in general, either. There are a myriad of ways to amuse and entertain oneself.


----------



## kriket (Nov 25, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *theatermom* 
At an "adult restaurant", most children are discouraged from doing these things. Sometimes there really isn't anything to do at a boring table except talk. I think it's funny that so many say that an 8 year old (and again, this child may be as young as 5, we don't know) should be entertaining _herself_ when the adults aren't entertaining themselves -- they're entertaining _each other_. Most people don't like to eat out by themselves or go to the movies by themselves, but we expect children to sit quietly at tables for long periods of time, listening to adults talk on and on about things they either don't understand or don't care about, and entertain themselves with nothing.









Discouraged from rolling a straw wrapper? If the restaurant was that "adult" there is probably a dress code and children should have been there anyway. Being bored IS a skill that kids learn. You can't say that you've never been out at a restaurant bored out of your gourd and just had to sit there. I can think of 2 weddings, a business lunch and a very awkward baptism dinner off the top of my head.

There is a lot of speculation in this thread, but based on solely the info given, assuming the child was 8, or at least as articulate as PP mentioned, she should have been able to sit quietly.


----------



## Sierra (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
I have, on more than one occasion. I'm actually surprised to hear someone say they haven't seen it, to be honest. I'm sure this is a factor.

Yeah, I really haven't. I've lived in one country (the U.S.) my whole life, but I have lived in the northwest, the southwest, and the northeast...in a number of different states, regions, cities, and towns. Like I said, I've heard adults be really engaged with each other while kids were present, but when kids have spoken up, I've never heard anyone shushed or talked over. Actually, as a general rule, I've noticed in restaurants parents seem really willing to engage with their kids...no one wants fussy children in a restaurant.

Quote:

I don't get that at all. How does it sound that way?
When the mom says, "Thats what happens when you go to adult restaurants," to me, there is an implication of choice. Why would someone say something like this if the child had no choice to go? It just doesn't make any sense to me otherwise.

So if a child made the choice to go, and the adult is holding her accountable to the impact of that choice, it seems logical to assume that there was some conversation ahead of time about the choice.

Either of us have to make assumptions to make sense of the story. I am making the assumption that seems most logical to me. It also matches with my experience, i.e. times when I've said stuff like the mom in the OP.

Quote:

I have seen it, so we're obviously coming from different places on this. I also don't think the mom was necessarily "very reasonably" talking to her child. There's more to being reasonable than simply being calm.
Sure. Some other characteristics of reasonability I think may be on display here include the use of reason or a step-by-step explanation of logic in decisions being made, the desire to help the child make sense of her experiences, and possibly the desire to avoid getting into another argument (about whether the child was being ignored)...depending on how you read it.

Quote:

But, we have no idea if that's what was happening. I do agree that neither of those scenarios constitute ignoring a child. (I do think inviting someone out to dine, whether a child or another adult, and then deliberately discussing things you know they have zero interest in is unbelievably rude, although I have no idea if that happened here.)
Again, the only way I can make sense of what the mother said regarding "that's what happens when you go to adult restaurants" is to presume the child had a choice.

Quote:

I also note that you say "we". Did you have someone else you could talk to, if the adult conversation was completely over your head and/olr uninteresting?
I grew up in a semi-large family, so yes, I usually did. But not always. Sometimes my mom would take me with her to a friend's house or whatever. (I also remember my dad taking me to a class or two at a very young age...he was a student for many of my youngest years...I couldn't have been more than five years old. Talk about being taught to be resourceful with your own mind! Try going to a math class with your dad at four years old. My dad never talked down to us, that is for sure! He's also the guy who, when I asked what books he read to me as a child, said, "Oh, that's a hard question. I just read you whatever I was reading." And what he meant was literally, if he was reading _War and Peace_, he was reading it outloud to us LOL. My point being that I am coming from a place of putting a high premium on inner creativity and kids rising to the expectations of adults.)

Quote:

umm...what? I missed all this. Which post is it in? I thought the whole conversation the OP heard was in the OP, and there was nothing about this at all.
It's the way the parent is holding the child accountable for certain peices of information. If I am holding my child accountable for something, it is because it is something about which they had knowledge when they made their choices.

You can assume the child didn't have that information, but then the story doesn't make any sense. Why would the parent hold the child accountable for a choice to come to the restaurant if she had no choice? Why would the parent hold the child accountable for the fact that an adult restaurant is different than a child-friendly restaurant if the child didn't know that when she made her choice to come or the choice about her doll?

Again, I'm not the only one making assumptions here. You are as well.

Quote:

This all makes perfect sense, and I'd do the same thing (depending to some degree on age, of course). But, it has nothing to do with the OP.
I obviously disagree, or I wouldn't have posted it. The OP asked, "So would you have gone to get the doll from the car? (I have no idea where the car was parked, if that makes a difference) or at least somehow brainstormed with her things to do until the food came? Or do you think that kids should stick to the choices they make?"

I am answering partially by providing an example in which I hold my children accountable for the impact of the choices they make. The scenarios seem alike enough that my example is particularly relevant.

Now, as I have said in a previous post, on my good days, at the same time I would help my children problem-solve/brainstorm -- even while sticking with a choice my children made earlier -- but some days I don't, and my kids know that they are responsible for being resourceful either way.

Quote:

Sure. This could all happen. But, I saw no evidence of this in the OP.
We obviously read the OP with the filter of our own life experiences, and my experiences are clearly different than yours. I saw evidence in the way the child was held accountable to pieces of information in the OP that she likely had prior knowledge of that information. If your "read" of the story, which also is presumptive in its own way, is correct -- that the child had no idea what she was walking into and/or she had no choice to go to the restaurant -- is correct, than yeah, I would agree with you on most accounts.

But the only evidence I see of that in the OP is that the child says she didn't know there wouldn't be any crayons. Which says to me that maybe the child knew it was an adult restaurant, but didn't realize that meant there weren't crayons. Just because she didn't realize there weren't crayons didn't mean her mom didn't tell her that this was an adult restaurant. So the mom then helps the child make sense of that: "Thats what happens when you go to adult restaurants. They don't always have coloring things."

Quote:

There was nothing whatsoever in the OP to suggest/indicate that the child knew anything was conditional on either of these things. The fact that she said she thought there would be colouring suggests pretty strongly that she had no idea she'd be expected to entertain herself in some other way while her mom talked to someone else.
As I said, perhaps the child didn't have the life experience to understand that when mom says she is going to an adult restaurant, she means a restaurant that may not have coloring (or maybe mom didn't tell her she was going to an adult restaurant, but again, then the dialogue doesn't make sense to me, so I am not choosing that assumption).

That said, if my kids choose to go with me to an adult restaurant where I am going to be engaging (not necessarily exclusively...but given the context of an _adult restaurant_, I am going to assume heavily) in conversations with other adults, in my family my kids know they are expected to be resourceful whatever the particular experiences of the restaurant. Sometimes I talk them through this, sometimes I don't. But in *my* family, if no coloring sheets show up, whether or not you expected them, you roll with the punches. It sounds like maybe this mom also expects her child to roll with the punches.

Quote:

That's all great. But, this is about the kid in the OP, and there is nothing to say her mom told her _any_ of that.
Again, I think its implied by the way she is being held accountable. I think it is implied through the signs that she was given the option of whether or not to bring in her dolly. I think it is implied by the signs that she had a choice of whether or not to go to the restraunt at all.

Quote:

Okay, so we're working from very different base assumptions right out the chute. In 42 years, I've never seen anyting to indicate that "most folks try to be reasonable most of the time".
Well, you and I have different life experiences. I think people do try to be reasonable. I think sometimes the reasoning gets screwy based on the presumptions people make in their heads, or the way other people's experiences add up, but even living in a city with a bad reputation, 99% of my day is spent around people who are trying to make reasonable choices from their understandings, flawed as their understandings may be.

Seriously, think of the last time you were at a convienence store. Think of all the people in there, and the things they were doing. Think of the last time you were at a doctor's appointment and all the people in the waiting room with you. Think of the last time you were with your kid at the park. Now people might have made different choices than you, maybe vastly different, but in general, I think if most of us really reflected on our day to day experiences, we can see evidence all around us that people are trying to make sense of their experiences and make choices that stem from the sense they make of things. That's the epitome of reasonable.

You can chose to make assumptions that set this mom up as a "bad mom" who was being completely unreasonable and holding her child accountable to a decision the child made based on incomplete information, at the expense of the child's well-being and happiness. Or you can ask, "under what circumstances would this kind of conversation make sense?" and follow the logic the other way. You've made your choice and I've made mine.

Quote:

I made that "mistake" with ds1. I have no problems with him on that front, and never have. I never made that mistake with dd1, and we've had issues with volatility, meltdowns and fits her whole life. Some of it really depends on the kid.
I've had plenty of experience as a parent. My current two are 4 and 5 but I've also been a foster parent for a number of years and my oldest is now in his twenties. I am well aware that every kid is different. But, there is a big difference between my dd's version of volatility, meltdowns, and fits, and my ds' manipulation. With ds, it is clear that he is acting out of things he learned early on. Now we have to work hard to unteach the things we unintentionally taught him early on.

Quote:

I know lots of boring people who are never bored (eg. me), and interesting people who are sometimes bored, so I don't really agree with this.
Not me. Like I said, the people I know who are interesting all are interested in the world around them.

Quote:

That said, I don't have much patience with "I'm bored", in general, either. There are a myriad of ways to amuse and entertain oneself.
On that we can agree, and on the rest we'll have to agree to disagree.


----------



## theatermom (Jun 5, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kriket* 
Discouraged from rolling a straw wrapper? If the restaurant was that "adult" there is probably a dress code and children should have been there anyway. Being bored IS a skill that kids learn. You can't say that you've never been out at a restaurant bored out of your gourd and just had to sit there. I can think of 2 weddings, a business lunch and a very awkward baptism dinner off the top of my head.

There is a lot of speculation in this thread, but based on solely the info given, assuming the child was 8, or at least as articulate as PP mentioned, she should have been able to sit quietly.

Discouraged from making a mess on the table with Splenda and lemons. And really, how engaging is rolling and unrolling a straw wrapper? Seems like it might keep a simple minded child going for awhile, but a more intelligent being is going to get bored with it fairly quickly.

Why should she *have* to sit quietly? And who says she wasn't? FWIW, my oldest and 2nd oldest sons were extremely articulate from an early age, and frankly sounded like they were 8 when they 4.5 or 5. They had a friend, a girl, who was even more articulate than they were. Energy level, frustration tolerance, reasoning skills, and articulation are all separate issues, and a person can score highly in one area and much lower in another. The combination makes a particular child a certain way at a certain time, and we don't know what this child should or should not have been able to do.

Just because there are boring, icky, annoying situations in life doesn't mean we have to unnecessarily burden people with them. Even if she was 8, so what? If she were 14/15/16, maybe. I think people on this thread REALLY value their quiet dinners out (sans paying for child care).









I really think we're confusing the current trend of entertaining children endlessly with the common courtesy of including everyone at a table in a meaningful way.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

I have an 8-year-old, and she'd generally have no trouble sitting quietly at an adult restaurant while a conversation between adults was happening. But everyone has off days, and I'd still go out and get her a doll from the car if she were having trouble and was bored. And when my dh was stuck waiting at a waiting room and couldn't leave and was bored, I ran out to the car and grabbed a newspaper he wanted to read. Again, I have no idea about the specifics of the event witnessed in the OP, so I'm not talking specifically about that, but just the idea in general that kids should be expected to consistently handle themselves in boring situations, or that they need to be taught not to change their minds, and that kind of thing. I don't think that kids learn bad lessons when their parents let them change their minds or help them when they're bored.


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

I don't think kids learn bad lessons when their parents help them either.

And there would be plenty of situations where I would go get the toy from the car or let her go get it.

There are also plenty where I wouldn't: my friend was in the middle of telling me something important, the car is down the block and the weather isn't nice, the food is about to be served, etc.

IMO the lesson is not "you can't change your mind, ever" but "your changed mind is not necessarily everybody's highest priority". And I think that's an appropriate lesson for an 8yo.


----------



## berry987 (Apr 23, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *childsplay* 
Yes but like I said, there had to have been some lead up scene to the mother taking the child out of the restaurant. Why put the other diners, not to mention herself, her DD and whoever else she was with through a tantrum/crying fit/ prolonged whining/etc ? Especially when the mother could pop out, grab the doll (and whatever else she might have stowed away in the car) at the first hint of a public display of tantrum, come back in, say "here's dolly, next time let's bring her with us just in case!"
So no, a public restaurant, IMO is not the place to be teaching your child about natural consequences.

Totally disagree. That's like saying a mom with a kid in a grocery store should just buy him the candy at the first hint of a tantrum because they are in a public place. And if the girl was actually 8 years old, then a "tantrum" would be even more unacceptable.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

nm...I can't seem to get anything across clearly to anybody today.


----------



## 4evermom (Feb 3, 2005)

My 9yo ds would absolutely have a hard time in a restaurant if no one was engaging him in conversation. Not all kids are created with the same capacity for entertaining themselves while sitting still in a foreign environment devoid of things they are allowed to touch, lol. Not only would I have gone back for his dolly equivalent (um, nintendo ds) but I'd probably have something else interesting in my bag. And I certainly wouldn't bring him to a restaurant if I expected to have an exclusive conversation (or just a chatty catch up conversation) with a friend. Some kids enjoying eating at restaurants and listening in on adult conversation. My ds would probably have a better time at the dentist.


----------

