Running to mommy

[Existing Alternatives]

When I was growing up, “running to mommy” (i.e. complain, rat, etc.) was perhaps the deadliest of the sins on the playground. As a parent, I do recognize that there is room for a reference to authorities in children’s interactions. For example, if a 15 year old bully harasses a bunch of 5 year olds – that should clearly result in a call for parents. However, I feel that a lot of times kids should be left to themselves to figure out their differences. And, hopefully learn to figure them out. I don’t want to have my 20 year old kid to expect me to solve his a-hole boss problems. My struggle is, where I draw that line. Are there any clear guideposts?

[dsayers]

A strong parent-child bond is the greatest defense against being victimized. Abusers isolate their victims in order to reduce the chance they can escape the abuse. To malign "running to mommy" is to attempt to cut off an escape route.

 

Parents voluntarily create an obligation to their children to protect and provide for them until such a time that they can do this for themselves. Part of that protection is not exposing their children to abusers. I mention this since this is your second thread in as many days that you're implying that you have a child that other children have targeted as primed for victimization. This is the sort of thing that is far easier to prevent than it is to cure.

[RyanT]

I'm not yet a parent myself but certainly remember growing up, public school was pretty brutal...especially between 5-11,

can seriously can only remember having 2 fights at secondary school, but primary and junior it was like a weekly occurrence, we really used to kick the shit out of each other.....  

 

So my experience was kids left to figure out their differences pretty much slide into a Lord of the Flies type situation.

 

Certainly I think wherever there's violence involved the only lessons to be learned are bad ones,

so that'd defiantly be somewhere I'd draw the line.

[Existing Alternatives]

Parents voluntarily create an obligation to their children to protect and provide for them until such a time that they can do this for themselves. Part of that protection is not exposing their children to abusers. I mention this since this is your second thread in as many days that you're implying that you have a child that other children have targeted as primed for victimization. This is the sort of thing that is far easier to prevent than it is to cure.

 

I appreciate your concern. The reason for multiple questions is that new thoughts come to mind as I process this. I don't think he is primed or targeted yet, but at the same time I do want to pre-empt his possible victimization. 

 

The question that I struggle here is when is "such time", or how do you determine such time...

[villagewisdom]

I think you are missing the point about why a child is the victim of bullying. It is the lack of parental bond that even allows that to happen. If your child has a deep bond with you, there will be no "radar" for the bullies to pick up on. Stef has mentioned this often. Your child would never be in this situation if the bond exists. 

 

Additionally, the fact that you are preparing for your child getting in a situation where they might have to make a choice about whether to "run to mommy" or not has interesting implications. You are apparently planning for the event to occur. Therefore, I must assume that you are also taking steps to make sure your plan is fulfilled. Based on my above statement, if you have a bond with your child, you would need to break it to ensure success. 

 

An even worse idea that I am getting from the way your question is stated is that you used having an altercation which resulted in a threat (i.e. run to mommy and you will be further ostracized)  and "working out differences" as the same thing. 

 

And finally, you are looking to "draw the line" between parental authority and teaching your child to be independent. I believe, therein lies the root of your problem. What books have you read? How are you educating yourself as a peaceful parent? Not spanking is a great start. But what are you replacing that with? I suggest a call in to the show and a chat with Stef to get some clarity on this. Your child's future is at stake. 

[Existing Alternatives]

I think you are missing the point about why a child is the victim of bullying. It is the lack of parental bond that even allows that to happen. If your child has a deep bond with you, there will be no "radar" for the bullies to pick up on. Stef has mentioned this often. Your child would never be in this situation if the bond exists. 

 

Additionally, the fact that you are preparing for your child getting in a situation where they might have to make a choice about whether to "run to mommy" or not has interesting implications. You are apparently planning for the event to occur. Therefore, I must assume that you are also taking steps to make sure your plan is fulfilled. Based on my above statement, if you have a bond with your child, you would need to break it to ensure success. 

 

This question actually comes from a recent interview Stefan did with Adam Kokesh. In which Adam issued a challenge, that peaceful parenting may end up in “weakening” the children (I am para-phrasing). But it struck me as a real possibility that a peaceful child may end up unprepared to deal with the horrors of the real world. Bullies come in all shapes and forms and are as destructive at the age of 5 as at 50. It feels like we are missing an opportunity to “toughen” them up somehow.

 

And finally, you are looking to "draw the line" between parental authority and teaching your child to be independent. I believe, therein lies the root of your problem. 

 

Not sure if that is the same thing, but I am trying to “draw the line” between parental interference (not authority) and child’s independence (i.e. absence of interference).

[AMR]

This question actually comes from a recent interview Stefan did with Adam Kokesh. In which Adam issued a challenge, that peaceful parenting may end up in “weakening” the children (I am para-phrasing). But it struck me as a real possibility that a peaceful child may end up unprepared to deal with the horrors of the real world. Bullies come in all shapes and forms and are as destructive at the age of 5 as at 50. It feels like we are missing an opportunity to “toughen” them up somehow.

 

 

Not sure if that is the same thing, but I am trying to “draw the line” between parental interference (not authority) and child’s independence (i.e. absence of interference).

 

 Peaceful parenting is trying to change how people interact!! Yes, your kid will be different and not have passive aggressive fake friends. They won't take shit from their asshole bosses. You don't need to show them how mean people are, they will find out how fucked up the real world is. If you do toughen them up they will either, treat you like the bad person you are or confuse bad people for loved ones.

 

But as for actively interfering, as long as they are not considered adults you will be responsible for helping get them out of situations that are harmful. 

[dsayers]

It feels like we are missing an opportunity to “toughen” them up somehow.

 

A child who has a strong bond with their parent is emotionally "tougher" than a child without. If the child with a strong bond is taught rational though and win-win negotiation skills, they will become stronger as they seek out bonds with others and avoid people who would compromise what strength they have (abusers).

 

As for when is the time, this is something only your child could signal to you. It's going to depend upon how protected, nurtured, and treated like a human being they are by you. Based on your other thread, it's very good that he felt he could talk to you about it. Even better if your interaction with him at that point could in no way be interpreted by him as you being unavailable or uninterested.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that not allowing him to "run to mommy" would actually compromise his strength, not develop it.

[villagewisdom]

This question actually comes from a recent interview Stefan did with Adam Kokesh. In which Adam issued a challenge, that peaceful parenting may end up in “weakening” the children (I am para-phrasing). But it struck me as a real possibility that a peaceful child may end up unprepared to deal with the horrors of the real world. Bullies come in all shapes and forms and are as destructive at the age of 5 as at 50. It feels like we are missing an opportunity to “toughen” them up somehow.

 

 

Not sure if that is the same thing, but I am trying to “draw the line” between parental interference (not authority) and child’s independence (i.e. absence of interference).

 

Adam Kokesh -- really? I had no idea he was an authority on parenting. Did he mention studies supporting his position? I would be interested in looking at them as this seems contradictory to current evidence. I'll have to look up that video. 

[Existing Alternatives]

I'm not yet a parent myself but certainly remember growing up, public school was pretty brutal...especially between 5-11,

can seriously can only remember having 2 fights at secondary school, but primary and junior it was like a weekly occurrence, we really used to kick the shit out of each other.....  

 

So my experience was kids left to figure out their differences pretty much slide into a Lord of the Flies type situation.

 

Certainly I think wherever there's violence involved the only lessons to be learned are bad ones,

so that'd defiantly be somewhere I'd draw the line.

 

This makes sense, so the criteria for interference is more along the lines of age and whether or not violence is present, right. So, which age are you thinking? And also, at some point kids will be able to defend themselves against violence as well. For example, if a 15-year old is assaulted by another 15-yo and is more than capable to defend himself, should the parents interfere?

 Peaceful parenting is trying to change how people interact!! Yes, your kid will be different and not have passive aggressive fake friends. They won't take shit from their asshole bosses. You don't need to show them how mean people are, they will find out how fucked up the real world is. If you do toughen them up they will either, treat you like the bad person you are or confuse bad people for loved ones.

 

But as for actively interfering, as long as they are not considered adults you will be responsible for helping get them out of situations that are harmful. 

 

I hear your point on friends and bosses, but what about other people who come to one's life uninvited, such as bullies?

Also, could there be ways to toughen them up without being an a-hole yourself?

A child who has a strong bond with their parent is emotionally "tougher" than a child without. If the child with a strong bond is taught rational though and win-win negotiation skills, they will become stronger as they seek out bonds with others and avoid people who would compromise what strength they have (abusers).

 

As for when is the time, this is something only your child could signal to you. It's going to depend upon how protected, nurtured, and treated like a human being they are by you. Based on your other thread, it's very good that he felt he could talk to you about it. Even better if your interaction with him at that point could in no way be interpreted by him as you being unavailable or uninterested.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that not allowing him to "run to mommy" would actually compromise his strength, not develop it.

 

Once again, your input is appreciated. I guess, I just don't know what that signal would be. 

As far as allowing to run to mommy - I agree the communication channels should always be open, but at some point the child should be encouraged to resolve their own problems and not rely on parents even for the most trivial of problems. And this problems could range from one kid accidentally stepping on another's foot to clear bully situations... 

Adam Kokesh -- really? I had no idea he was an authority on parenting. Did he mention studies supporting his position? I would be interested in looking at them as this seems contradictory to current evidence. I'll have to look up that video. 

 

December 2013 FDR22561

 

He definitely is not. To be fair, it was more of a smart-ass off-the-cuff remark that did not really go anywhere. But somehow it clicked with me and is really gnawing on my mind. 

[dsayers]

at some point the child should be encouraged to resolve their own problems and not rely on parents even for the most trivial of problems.

 

I don't know if I agree with the should. However if you are the parent, then this is entirely up to you. Obviously it is your job to protect the child, but that doesn't mean you cannot have discussions with them. If you model for them that you are equals and negotiate with them, then they will not tolerate somebody subjugating them. If it is a new experience for them, and they come to you, then you can discuss with them how to handle a situation. When they are comfortable doing so, then they will tend to take the initiative for problem solving on their own. And if the discussions you have are rational and encourage rational thought, you won't even have to worry that their problem solving would be inappropriate such as punching somebody in the face for saying an unkind word.

[villagewisdom]

This thread is actually disturbing to me. A question was asked. And when Existing Alternatives replies, multiple lines are quoted. However, the answer that was given by multiple persons regarding bonding has been ignored at least three times perhaps more as Existing Alternatives started a previous thread on a similar topic where the same answer was given there. And now there is a response that the question actually arises from a "smart-ass" remark by Adam Kokesh that sticks with him. 

 

Anyone can say they are peaceful parenting on a board like this one. But I truly do not see that in this post except that the words were typed. Everything that came after is a testimony that peaceful parenting is not being practiced. I will restate that peaceful parenting is more than not spanking, It requires gathering information and re-educating yourself via books, seminars, classes, etc put together by people who have expertise in the subject. 

 

Existing Alternatives, I have not seen you post any evidence that you are peaceful parenting. There are multiple books, websites and blogs that have information on peaceful parenting and how to deal with your question. You haven't mentioned anything you've gotten from them. But you choose to follow a nagging thought generated by someone you admit is not even known in the field and try to include his "smart-ass off-the-cuff remark" in your "peaceful parenting". I applaud your desire and call you out on putting it into practice. You have another thread where your child felt misunderstood and how to deal with it. Now you are over here chasing down how and when you can stop supporting him. 

 

I apologize in advance if this offends anyone. I simply cannot sit back and say "oh how great thou art" because someone typed the words "I'm on board with peaceful parenting."