Parenting

[shiner]

The typical "old world" parent won't let his child ride a bike to prevent him from falling and

hurting himself. The typical American/Western parent will encourage his child to ride a bike

so that he can fall and learn how to get up. The typical "old world" parent thinks he is the

best parent in the world for being so caring and not allowing his child face any sort of risk,

danger, and an opportunity to learn from his own mistakes. When you point out to the

"old world" parent that a more American/Western approach might help the kid on the long

run, the typical reply is "So you want my kid to become a druggie. Look at all these Americans"

(as if sheltering the kid will guarantee him success and there are only two extremes).

 

What do ya'll think? How does the bicycle analogy apply to Armenians? And most importantly

do ya'll notice a difference between the two approaches and where do you stand?

[Stormig]

I admire the Greeks the most, Harut. They said, "Moderation."

The way it applies to today's world is, "Know what you are doing."

Give the individual responsibility over what they do.

I have never been told to be nice. Therefore, I have never felt the need to run away from home. I don't get drunk, because I do drink (and overdo it sometimes but never lose myself).

 

I recently watched a movie, but I couldn't catch its title. All the specifics I can remember is that the main character was a girl by the name of Lux Lisbon, and she had two or three other sisters in a very conservative American family. The story is about this boy who likes her and, to ask her out, goes up to her father, who is a math teacher in their school. Says he wants to take her out to this party and in fact he would love to bring his friends to take out the other sisters as well. Father says he has to confer with the ma'am. And so they allow this but put a curb - back home no later than such and such a time, and that the boys drive carefully. Well, Lux and boy are chosen king and queen of the night, and all that gets the heat up and they end up spending the night out in the stadium while the sisters and their beaus wait for them in the car and then just leave when it's getting late. Boy leaves Lux alone in the stadium in the waking hours of the morning (bad) and Lux goes home alone to find parents still up. All the girls are put under such tight "security," that they don't go to school for two weeks, Luxy is made to burn her records by the mom, and eventually they get so sick and tired of being at home all the time that they all silently commit suicide. The parents decide to leave the house and the mother is interviewed as, "I don't know why our daughters did what they did. There was so much love in this house."

OK, that was an extreme example.

 

Point is, people gotta quit fibbing, not only with their kids but also with others around them. Happiness, goodness, and success should be above conditioning oneself to physical constraints. Physical - because there can be no other.

[Sip]

dl, I used to be somewhat against this "sheltering" attitudes ... until I saw what happens when kids end up being loose and expected to discover and learn on their own.

 

My attitude right now is that kids need strict boundaries but should be allowed to be free within those boundaries. As they grow, the parents should expand the boundaries. For each kid, and each environment, this will be different of course.

 

If the child crosses those boundaries, there should be a punishment. Something well defined, strictly enforced, but not too harsh. Repeated offenses should result in harshening punishments.

 

On a related note, I believe it is wrong when parents try to be "friends" with their kids. I have seen it around me and I don't think it works well at all. Parents should be parents ... no more, no less. This means that they should take a authoritative stance, but at the same time be caring, nurturing, attentive, and supportive.

 

Main point I am trying to make is clearly neither extreme is healthy. Exactly where the balance is, is very hard to define in my opinion and highly depends on the situation, environment, and personalities of the child and the parent.

[hyebruin]

Sip jan

 

Wow, I am impressed! You'll be a very good father someday! Wow! Honestly, I didn't expect all that! ~~~always hiding behind those smilies~~~ well, you're out now, and we still like you

[shiner]

Sip,

Well said about boundaries and most importantly EXPANDING those boundaries as the kids grow up. Otherwise the kid reaches adulthood having lived within boundaries set for a little kid all his life. This can't be good. If anything it makes him more likely to screw up once he finds a little bit of freedom, since he would not have a realistic sense of what this harsh world is like.

 

[ February 28, 2003, 09:14 AM: Message edited by: dl ]

[Varduhi]

Wow seaphan I never thought you were able to think this way (no offense, this is a complement ) I totally agree that Parents should be parents ... no more, no less.

[Harut]

parenting. very interesting and important issue. i'd like our more experienced members to express their thoughts on this.

 

what i can say is this.

i too always thought that the way to be is the traditional secure way. that is a two-page list of "don'ts" and two-line "dos": study hard, be good.

 

but now i see that more successful are those who never followed those guidlines. and i admire them.

so why don't more parents let their kids loose?

because there is a catch to it. that is, out of those who don't follow the guidlines very few make it through.

 

but then, as the Russian saying goes: "who doesn't take the risk, he doesn't drink the champange".

[Accelerated]

A parent can be a parent and a 'friend' at the same time. Being a parent will only get you so far in 'bonding' with your child. Friendship allows for a much more closer relationship, and as long as the child expresses the due respect (to the parent as a parent), I believe this is the ideal scenario.