Telling your children who they can play with

[tiepolo]

I believe I recently heard on a recent show it said that Stef doesn't let his daughter play with kids who are smacked/come from abusive homes. Poses the question shouldn't children be able to decide who they want as friends, and isn't it cruel to deprive the allegedly abused child of the solace of a well-adjusted playmate? 

[Songbirdo]

The reasoning was akin to letting your child hang around other children that have the flu (only worse).

 

Is it cruel to deprive the allegedly flu-sick child of playing with a healthy one?

[RyanT]

Well by the same token mate shouldn't children be able to decide what they want as toys, even if that includes playing in you toolbox?

 

Your second premise I just can’t follow.

 

I certainly I got a lot on this topic from the show, ‘The Dangers of Unschooling’

 

[InquisitorM]

I believe I recently heard on a recent show it said that Stef doesn't let his daughter play with kids who are smacked/come from abusive homes. Poses the question shouldn't children be able to decide who they want as friends, and isn't it cruel to deprive the allegedly abused child of the solace of a well-adjusted playmate? 

 

Yes and no. It is not wrong to limit the children that a parent's child comes into contact with any more than it is wrong to limit the number of boiling pots of water a child has the possibility of experiencing. The only time there can be a 'wrong' is when force is used to prevent the contact in a very immediate setting. Just like the boiling pot, the lion's share of prevention comes through preparation – and problems are indicative of a lack thereof. Where more immediate problems might crop up, a child who has properly attached to a guardian they can trust will not need to be forced, as they will generally choose to follow the desires of that guardian, even if, as Stef suggests, some degree of bribery is required.

 

As for the well-being of the abused child, any position that advocates the necessity of grating it access to said well-adjusted child is, by definition, in violation of property rights. You cannot make up for the emotional warping of one child by acting against good philosophical principles. Otherwise you'd have to be in favour of the minimum wage, etc.

[JamesP]

I thought Stef put this very clearly. You would not let your child play with somebody who has tuberculosis, for example. It's the same thing with a toxic personality.

 

If you are going to raise this as a question, addressing this analogy is pretty important.

[J-William]

Frankly a messed up child needs the solace of a well trained therapist and years of help before they are not dangerous. Stefan commonly points out when one parent leaves the children with an abuser the flawed logic that the adults couldn't handle the abusive partner but they think a child can handle that abusive partner.

Well it is often the case that trained professionals cannot handle abused children so why would you think that a child could handle an abused child better than trained professionals?

 

 

I thought Stef put this very clearly. You would not let your child play with somebody who has tuberculosis, for example. It's the same thing with a toxic personality.If you are going to raise this as a question, addressing this analogy is pretty important.

 

I think that addressing that analogy would be helpful, and I've got a boatload more analogies for you.

 

I'm also pretty sure that I'm not letting my child play with knives or HIV contaminated drug needles or broken glass or rabid dogs…

 

Damaged and broken children are just one of many dangerous things in the world that you shouldn't let your child play with. Life is hard and it is especially hard if you're growing up with abusive caretakers, but that doesn't make it okay for me to let my child be put in a dangerous situation. And don't get me wrong playing with an abused child is dangerous. Because even if they aren't violent or abusive they can infect your child with their way of being and coping with their environment.

[LanceD]

Being a peaceful parent doesn't mean letting your kid do whatever they want.

 

It means never using arbitrary authority to enforce your will upon the child.

 

So this often leads to children being allowed to do the things they want. However it is your responsibility as a parent to use your wisdom and better judgement to ensure your children are safe, and this often means keeping them away from particular people. 

 

Real Life Example:

 

We had met a family through the home schooling coop we participate in. We liked the parents and our son liked their two boys. They seemed pretty okay as people so we spent some time together here and there. One day we found out that one of the boys had stuffed one of their cats in the clothes dryer and turned it on, killing the cat. Then we learned that a few years back the other boy had drowned a kitten. This information was highly troubling and we decided our son should not be exposed to children exhibiting such dangerous behavior. When our son asked us to hang out with them we told him that we weren't going to do that anymore and then explained why. He didn't exactly understand the implications of the behavior but he understands that hurting animals is bad and trusts in our judgement when we tell him we are making a decision for his best interest.

[SueBee]

After reading your post above, LanceD, I was wondering ...Did you uncover if that behavior had a cause, or based on your experience of this family, and the subsequent discovery, did it seem like the boys' behaviour with regard to the kittens was somehow spontaneous?

[LanceD]

It's difficult to tell. Our relationship with these people was not close, we were still in the phase where we get to know people before allowing more contact.

 

From our perspective they appeared to not be all that different from my wife and I. They claimed to be authoritarian parents making the move towards more peaceful parenting. The one glaring difference is they are extremely religious.

 

Really it's impossible for me to figure the cause. Though I see a real lack of parental bond as an issue.

 

As we have been around them since, in large group settings where we just see them around not directly interacting, it's become easier to see how poorly behaved d dysfunctional the boys are.

 

They exhibit a real lack of bond with their parents. With my son if I ask him to do something or not do something he generally goes along with it because I've built up credibility with him through long explanations and conversations. These other boys just out right reject the things their parents say.

 

When we first came into contact with them we were too inexperienced to pick their problems out sooner. However we've learned a lot, mostly just through seeing how our son has adjusted to peaceful parenting.

[Ashton]

Being a peaceful parent doesn't mean letting your kid do whatever they want.

 

I think this applys to every form of parenting style.

 

Its also the fudimental reason why i dislike unschooling. Its far to dangerous in my opinion.

[LanceD]

I think this applys to every form of parenting style.Its also the fudimental reason why i dislike unschooling. Its far to dangerous in my opinion.

Explain the position and please tell me what you think unschooling is.

[Ashton]

Explain the position and please tell me what you think unschooling is.

To me Unschooling is an educational method and philosophy that rejects compulsory school as a primary means for learning. And to me, all i am seeing is a reason for people not to parent their children. From the caller posted above, to multiple instances on my wifes facebook feed from parents who are doing 'Unschooling' and having the callers exact problem.

 

I just see it as a 'I want to be different' scream for help.

 

There is always exceptions to this rule and i'm sure the people who are posting here are doing amazing jobs, but from my experience, this is the case.

[LanceD]

To me Unschooling is an educational method and philosophy that rejects compulsory school as a primary means for learning.And to me, all i am seeing is a reason for people not to parent their children. From the caller posted above, to multiple instances on my wifes facebook feed from parents who are doing 'Unschooling' and having the callers exact problem.I just see it as a 'I want to be different' scream for help.There is always exceptions to this rule and i'm sure the people who are posting here are doing amazing jobs, but from my experience, this is the case.

Exceptions to a rule? You mean exceptions to your anecdotal experience. Any parent willing to investigate unschooling and buck societal trends in the interest of their children is already displaying far more care for their children then any parent that just follows the patterns of the past and crams their child in the local public school. You are making generalizations where there is not a trend to generalize. Also why wouldn't you want to be different?When society is just pumping out sociopaths, numerous adults with mental illness, drug dependencies, adults reliant of violent heirarchy and collectivist movements like nationalism, feminism, class warfare etc. Why would you not want to do anything you possibly can to be different?!Society is a wreck and there is a pile of reasons why parents who actually want to do right by there kids would be crying for help and just trying anything they can to be different, but this is no judgment on them.

[Ashton]

Exceptions to a rule?

Yes, parents who practice unschooling correctly.

Any parent willing to investigate unschooling and buck societal trends in the interest of their children is already displaying far more care for their children then any parent that just follows the patterns of the past and crams their child in the local public school.

Who is generalilizing now? Not all public schools are terrible and bucking social trends doesnt make you a better parent if the social trends are not beneficial to the child.

Also why wouldn't you want to be different?

I never said being different was wrong, but being different because you want to make a point or stand out from the crowd is wrong. Because then you dont fully believe in what your practicing.

When society is just pumping out sociopaths, numerous adults with mental illness, drug dependencies, adults reliant of violent heirarchy and collectivist movements like nationalism, feminism, class warfare etc. Why would you not want to do anything you possibly can to be different?!

Another generalisation. Stef isn't any of the above, yet he is a product of pre modern / modern society.

Society is a wreck and there is a pile of reasons why parents who actually want to do right by there kids would be crying for help and just trying anything they can to be different, but this is no judgment on them.

And another generalisation.You seem to be getting extremely defencive and emotional about this issue. If you'd like to continue without bringing them into this, i'd be more then happy to carry on this discussion.

[LanceD]

Yes, parents who practice unschooling correctly.Who is generalilizing now? Not all public schools are terrible and bucking social trends doesnt make you a better parent if the social trends are not beneficial to the child.I never said being different was wrong, but being different because you want to make a point or stand out from the crowd is wrong. Because then you dont fully believe in what your practicing.Another generalisation. Stef isn't any of the above, yet he is a product of pre modern / modern society.And another generalisation.You seem to be getting extremely defencive and emotional about this issue. If you'd like to continue without bringing them into this, i'd be more then happy to carry on this discussion.

Bucking the trend of forcing your children into coercion based public schools full of people and influences you have no control over is good, unless your only other option is somehow more dangerous for the child.Public schools, at least here in the US which are the only schools I would speak of, are all based on the same coercive violence. So they can be judged bad as a whole. Some may be less bad then the rest but they are all built upon the same principles. You made a non argument based on anecdotal evidence that I have no way to directly deal with.So yes you got a bunch of generalizations.

[Ashton]

Bucking the trend of forcing your children into coercion based public schools full of people and influences you have no control over is good, unless your only other option is somehow more dangerous for the child.Public schools, at least here in the US which are the only schools I would speak of, are all based on the same coercive violence. So they can be judged bad as a whole. Some may be less bad then the rest but they are all built upon the same principles.You made a non argument based on anecdotal evidence that I have no way to directly deal with.So yes you got a bunch of generalizations.

I'm not going to derail this thread anymore then i have. Take care

[J. D. Stembal]

Stefan related a story about his daughter who was being harassed by another child in a park. He was present and supervising her but his daughter correctly identified the other child as an abuser and told her to leave. If the children are raised peacefully, they won't want to be around the sociopaths in training. If you put them in public school, they never have a choice to avoid children, hence the endless parade of sociopaths we all had to manage in public school before worrying about learning.

 

Anyone who claims that not all public schooling is bad doesn't understand voluntarism, and is missing the point of peaceful parenting.

[june]

I thought Stef put this very clearly. You would not let your child play with somebody who has tuberculosis, for example. It's the same thing with a toxic personality.If you are going to raise this as a question, addressing this analogy is pretty important.

if your child voluntary chose to interact with such persons, would you use force to stop them?