Not sure that necessitates you being less playful - just back your wife up so that you come across as a team, rather than two individuals who can be played off as each other?
It's not a bad thing that your child has found a friend in you.
> It's not a bad thing that your child has found a friend in you.
I don't think children need us as their friends - they have plenty of these all over the place. Plus, friendship and authority don't mix. The way I see that kids need us to be their guides and that's quite a bit different.
I think this aspect comes down to parental discretion. In my own experience, my father had a lot more influence over my actions once we interacted as equals, whereas when he tried to exert his authority as a parent, I tended to pull strongly in the opposite direction.
Anecdotally, if I'd thought of my parents as friends, I perhaps would have been more inclined to tell them that I was being abused as a child.
I (personally) would rather blur the lines between friendship and authority and have my children trust me completely, than risk alienating them when they need me the most.
A child, especially one in the teen/pre-teen range, will be far more open with a friend than an authority figure. Even if you want the parents to clearly be the authority figure, there needs to be a mature adult friend figure to be there to be told the things that the parents should be but would otherwise not be told about (after which the friend can either tell the parents or push the child to tell the parents).
"I don't think children need us as their friends - they have plenty of these all over the place."
It's not a binary choice: friend or parent. Parenting is situational. Sometimes kids need you to empathize as a friend would. Sometimes they need you to "lay down the law". For example, kids often have a hard time recognizing when they're over-tired. In that situation, you need to just put them to bed with no drawn out reasoning. The next morning they feel better and don't begrudge that you took away their choice.
"friendship and authority don't mix"
In a mature relationship, they certainly can. I'm in that situation with both my boss and my martial arts instructor. I'm friends with both. But, inside the office and studio respectively, I respect that they have responsibilities beyond just me. So, I don't let a disagreement get to the point in which they need to remind me of their authority. If I ever let it get to that point, I'm not being a particularly good friend.
"The way I see that kids need us to be their guides and that's quite a bit different."
Being a guide is certainly part of parenting. Parenting is probably the most multi-faceted relationship you'll ever have.
Being a really good parent (in my view) is all about mixing authority and friendship/trust/empathy.
Kids have a lot of interesting ideas that (for various reasons) they can't act out, and sometimes you're the one preventing them. If it sucks (e.g., my daughter wants to pick every flower she sees... I have to stop her, because these are flowers other people bought & tend, to make their homes look nice), then I show her sympathy rather than anger. I still have to stop her from picking them -- it's part of my job as a parent, to keep my child's behavior from harming others -- but I tell her that in so many words. "I'm your dad, so this is part of my job, to stop you from doing things that will make other people really sad... but I'm sorry, it would be cool to bring all these flowers home!". And (because I'm sympathizing) I can think to go looking for wildflowers, or pick our own flowers. We're in the same boat -- there are also lots of things I want that I can't do, and I point them out when I can.
I don't ever say "because I said so" -- that's something I don't want to teach them. I have to have a reason, and if I can't come up with one, then I re-think what I'm asking them to do (or not do). Okay, so we're running around out in a field, and it seems kinda wrong to me for you to take off all your clothes; but honestly we'd see anyone coming a mile away, so if you can get dressed again lightning-fast if someone comes... then go for it. And remember if the lightning-fast thing doesn't work, then next time I'm going to say it's a bad idea.
There really seem to be a lot of parents who think they need to "discipline" their children, need to keep punishing them (often more & more severely) until the child learns to stop fighting back, stop challenging their authority, and will do what they're told. This is a painfully short-sighted view of parenting.
Think about it -- if my daughter doesn't pick flowers, ever, because she just knows I'll get mad, what has she learned? Nothing, just "here's another thing that makes Daddy mad" -- and optionally "if I keep picking flowers, Daddy keeps getting angrier until he stops taking me on walks, or he slaps my hand", or however else I escalated my reaction until it finally "worked". I might be more or less smart about how I enforce my authority over her, but all I'm thinking about in that case is "how can I force this child to do X" -- empathy is nowhere in sight, and it's just a struggle between us... which is going to carry over into our other interactions as well.
If I'm empathizing with her (and cheering her up, since neither of us can pick these flowers), the short-term end result is identical (flowers are not picked), but long-term is much better. She learns a bit more about the restrictions of living in a world with lots of other people in it (and can learn to apply the reasons for not picking other people's flowers to other situations), she's a bit closer to me (esp. if I managed to cheer her up successfully), and she's a bit further on her way to being a responsible, thoughtful adult.
There are a lot of ways in which being a good parent is like being a really good tour guide, much more than being a policeman/judge.
[note: this is a long rant answering a little comment! sorry about that... this is a topic I feel strongly about.]
My wife thinks this is what we should do (I'm not the OP). But it doesn't make sense to me. It would imply that whoever says something first is right.
Why can't parents disagree sometimes? Might be a valuable lesson for kids, too. And perhaps less scary, too. Maybe it's nice to have somebody to turn to, and not just one parent unit?
> It would imply that whoever says something first is right.
On the other hand, it's wrong for the child to play her parents of each other. If mom says 'no', it's not OK to go ask dad.
If Mom gave a different answer than Dad would have, Dad should discuss it with Mom if it's important, perhaps in private. But it's also OK for kids see parents disagree and work things out in a healthy way. Then Mom can change her own 'no' to a 'yes' later and retain her authority (and get to be reasonable and nice).
But, yes, first-to-answer is a silly way to make decisions.
I've set the expectation for my kids that my answer will be "no" if they've already asked Mom (this also helps out an end to the "go ask your father" redirect. If they ask me after Mom had already said "no", but hide the fact theyasked her already, then even if I say "yes" but later find out they played us, the answer becomes an absolute "no" also carries an additional "no" that would have otherwise been "yes" for future questions.
IMO it's not about avoiding disagreement - I think that modelling appropriate 'conflict' resolution is important for kids - but rather making sure that kids DON'T learn that the easy way to get a 'yes' is to ask the other parent.
fishnchips|10 years ago
I don't think children need us as their friends - they have plenty of these all over the place. Plus, friendship and authority don't mix. The way I see that kids need us to be their guides and that's quite a bit different.
notduncansmith|10 years ago
Jem|10 years ago
I (personally) would rather blur the lines between friendship and authority and have my children trust me completely, than risk alienating them when they need me the most.
Lawtonfogle|10 years ago
mattlutze|10 years ago
bpyne|10 years ago
It's not a binary choice: friend or parent. Parenting is situational. Sometimes kids need you to empathize as a friend would. Sometimes they need you to "lay down the law". For example, kids often have a hard time recognizing when they're over-tired. In that situation, you need to just put them to bed with no drawn out reasoning. The next morning they feel better and don't begrudge that you took away their choice.
"friendship and authority don't mix"
In a mature relationship, they certainly can. I'm in that situation with both my boss and my martial arts instructor. I'm friends with both. But, inside the office and studio respectively, I respect that they have responsibilities beyond just me. So, I don't let a disagreement get to the point in which they need to remind me of their authority. If I ever let it get to that point, I'm not being a particularly good friend.
"The way I see that kids need us to be their guides and that's quite a bit different."
Being a guide is certainly part of parenting. Parenting is probably the most multi-faceted relationship you'll ever have.
jtheory|10 years ago
Kids have a lot of interesting ideas that (for various reasons) they can't act out, and sometimes you're the one preventing them. If it sucks (e.g., my daughter wants to pick every flower she sees... I have to stop her, because these are flowers other people bought & tend, to make their homes look nice), then I show her sympathy rather than anger. I still have to stop her from picking them -- it's part of my job as a parent, to keep my child's behavior from harming others -- but I tell her that in so many words. "I'm your dad, so this is part of my job, to stop you from doing things that will make other people really sad... but I'm sorry, it would be cool to bring all these flowers home!". And (because I'm sympathizing) I can think to go looking for wildflowers, or pick our own flowers. We're in the same boat -- there are also lots of things I want that I can't do, and I point them out when I can.
I don't ever say "because I said so" -- that's something I don't want to teach them. I have to have a reason, and if I can't come up with one, then I re-think what I'm asking them to do (or not do). Okay, so we're running around out in a field, and it seems kinda wrong to me for you to take off all your clothes; but honestly we'd see anyone coming a mile away, so if you can get dressed again lightning-fast if someone comes... then go for it. And remember if the lightning-fast thing doesn't work, then next time I'm going to say it's a bad idea.
There really seem to be a lot of parents who think they need to "discipline" their children, need to keep punishing them (often more & more severely) until the child learns to stop fighting back, stop challenging their authority, and will do what they're told. This is a painfully short-sighted view of parenting.
Think about it -- if my daughter doesn't pick flowers, ever, because she just knows I'll get mad, what has she learned? Nothing, just "here's another thing that makes Daddy mad" -- and optionally "if I keep picking flowers, Daddy keeps getting angrier until he stops taking me on walks, or he slaps my hand", or however else I escalated my reaction until it finally "worked". I might be more or less smart about how I enforce my authority over her, but all I'm thinking about in that case is "how can I force this child to do X" -- empathy is nowhere in sight, and it's just a struggle between us... which is going to carry over into our other interactions as well.
If I'm empathizing with her (and cheering her up, since neither of us can pick these flowers), the short-term end result is identical (flowers are not picked), but long-term is much better. She learns a bit more about the restrictions of living in a world with lots of other people in it (and can learn to apply the reasons for not picking other people's flowers to other situations), she's a bit closer to me (esp. if I managed to cheer her up successfully), and she's a bit further on her way to being a responsible, thoughtful adult.
There are a lot of ways in which being a good parent is like being a really good tour guide, much more than being a policeman/judge.
[note: this is a long rant answering a little comment! sorry about that... this is a topic I feel strongly about.]
facepalm|10 years ago
Why can't parents disagree sometimes? Might be a valuable lesson for kids, too. And perhaps less scary, too. Maybe it's nice to have somebody to turn to, and not just one parent unit?
humanrebar|10 years ago
On the other hand, it's wrong for the child to play her parents of each other. If mom says 'no', it's not OK to go ask dad.
If Mom gave a different answer than Dad would have, Dad should discuss it with Mom if it's important, perhaps in private. But it's also OK for kids see parents disagree and work things out in a healthy way. Then Mom can change her own 'no' to a 'yes' later and retain her authority (and get to be reasonable and nice).
But, yes, first-to-answer is a silly way to make decisions.
mrexroad|10 years ago
Jem|10 years ago