Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You and your SIL have different parenting approaches. I agree with yours vs. hers. But many people are ok with hers. I would just tell her that you are not ok with her physically disciplining your daughter, and that if your daughter is not listening to her, she should call you to come back to address.
So kid won’t get out of pool and SIL should call OP to come over? Letting the kid stay in the pool while all that happens and rewarding the behavior?
No. People who hit kids don’t have real parenting strategies outside violence so OP’s kid can’t be alone with SIL again. You don’t have to announce it or anything dramatic - just make it so.
Just out if curiosity, what is the correct parenting strategy to implement when one’s niece refuses to get out of the pool?
My nephew pulled this shit on me at the beach one time. I quietly decided to never watch him again without a parent present. I don't think there is a discipline strategy per se. I don't hit my kids, and I would NEVER hit a child that isn't mine.
But that doesn’t answer the immediate question of how do you get them out of the pool?
You’re talking about (perfectly reasonable) consequences at the conclusion of the incident. This is a problem with almost all parenting advice- it’s a list of what not to do, or what to do after the fact. Rarely are there reasonable strategies for DURING a problem…
You can probably find this advice in thousands of places. You express understanding to the six year old, "I see you are upset. It is hard to stop doing something when you are having fun." You offer comfort and redirect. Hopefully you have let them know "Ok, ten more minutes, five more minutes, one more minutes." This advice is not hard to come by.
This is exactly what I see weak, ineffective parents doing constantly. There’s no actual discipline, just a self-absorbed inventory of feelings that accomplishes nothing. And I say this as someone who has never hit my kids and never would.
If the kid won’t get out of the pool, you need to physically remove them from the pool. If that means picking them up and carrying them out while they scream, so be it.
This is how you parent with empathy and boundaries. It’s not weak and you don’t need to discipline a six year old who is having a hard time with a big transition.
If you have a six year old who finds exiting a pool to be a “big transition” you’re not an effective parent.
Importantly, you don’t actually explain how to get the unwilling kid out of the pool. You use a lot of buzzwords, but you never tell us how to get the job done.
DP, but when I’m transitioning my kids I make sure to give at least one, maybe two, countdowns ahead of time. I also explain what we will be doing next. For instance “we’re going to get out of the pool in 10 minutes and then we will towel off and have sandwiches for lunch.”Sometimes I’ll also give an option like “do you want PBJ or turkey sandwich for lunch,” so that they are part of the planning.
If they protest when it’s time to get out, I explain that if they won’t listen then we won’t be doing this activity again in the future. I ask them to make a choice whether to continue crying/no longer be invited to the pool or to cooperate/get to come back. If they dilly dally on the choice then I do my stern count down. “You need to decide in 3 … 2 … “ (luckily this works on my kids and they fall in line when they realize I’m serious).
If it were someone else’s child and I really just wanted them out of the pool (i.e. it’s not my responsibility to set long term disciplinary standards), then if the above didn’t work, I’d bribe them with a popsicle or something, then make a decision not to have them over without a parent again. If it escalates beyond that then I’d let them know I’m calling their parent.
But under no circumstances would I hit my child or someone else’s. My children listen to me because I treat them respectfully, not because they are scared of me.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’d tell SIL and her husband point blank period that you are not OK with any kind of physical discipline, whatsoever, and if that’s a problem, no unsupervised visits.
Oh no! Don’t threaten SIL to no longer have the privilege of babysitting OP’s kids for free!
Why is free babysitting for family/freinds seen as such an imposition? I never mind babysitting for relatives kids.
It’s not an imposition when your family/friends don’t act like entitled @$$holes. OP is DEFINITELY imposing on SIL.
And anyone seriously calling three swats on the leg assault should avoid interacting with other people because they are deeply unhinged and have lost ALL sense of perspective.
So if you had a conflict at the grocery store and the other person gave you three swats on the leg to resolve it, it wouldn't be assault?
DP - Am I in charge of supervising that person or not? Can't think go many situations where that person would be in my care and expected to mind me.
So my supervisor can hit me?
Can your supervisor lock you in your room to punish you? Can your supervisor send you to bed without your supper?
(Do you hear how stupid you sound?)
Hmmmm. So what are the parameters for who can use violence against someone over whom they have authority? Ok for teachers to hit kids? What about camp counselors? Any adult? Any babysitter? Where EXACTLY is your line?
I see you have at least abandoned your dumbass attempt at conflating adult interactions with parent-child interactions.
I would not want anyone else to spank my child, for the record. But if an aunt or grandmother did, we’d have a talk about my parenting preferences. I wouldn’t accuse them of being abusive, violent, or of having committed assault. Because I’m not an insane drama llama.
I am not the PP you were arguing with. My question about your EXACT line was my entry into that conversation. So your line is you but it’s fuzzy with other family? This is what you want to teach your children? That the people who are supposed to love and protect them have the right to hit them?
There is no EXACT line and the fact that you think there is (or should be) is emblematic of many of the current problems in our society.
For a fun, admittedly ridiculous example, let’s say your kid was drowning in the ocean and thrashing so much that Uncle couldn’t save them without punching them (to subdue them - it’s been known to happen). Did Uncle ABUSE your child, or did Uncle hit your child BECAUSE he loves them and BECAUSE he is protecting them?
I’m truly sorry that you are unable to understand context or grasp nuance, but I also assume your black and white thinking extends to most if not all aspects of your life. This type of rigidity is actually a problem, both for you personally and also for our society. This type of thinking is why we end up with pregnant women dying in hospitals (because abortion ALWAYS wrong!).
You just keep coming up with bizarre scenarios where hurting a child is the only way to intervene to save their life. I think you are just so into hurting children intentionally that you want to divert attention from the fact that we are talking about excusing violence against children that is intentional.
DP. You seem to be stuck on the notion that it's the end of the world to put a finger on a child. Context matters. There are different circumstances. In the end, it's best for everyone to look after their own child and discipline them as you wish. Imagine the drama if your child drowns when in SIL care because they refused to come out, swam into the deep end and chocked while crying. At least SIL could say she didn't touch the child.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You and your SIL have different parenting approaches. I agree with yours vs. hers. But many people are ok with hers. I would just tell her that you are not ok with her physically disciplining your daughter, and that if your daughter is not listening to her, she should call you to come back to address.
So kid won’t get out of pool and SIL should call OP to come over? Letting the kid stay in the pool while all that happens and rewarding the behavior?
No. People who hit kids don’t have real parenting strategies outside violence so OP’s kid can’t be alone with SIL again. You don’t have to announce it or anything dramatic - just make it so.
Just out if curiosity, what is the correct parenting strategy to implement when one’s niece refuses to get out of the pool?
My nephew pulled this shit on me at the beach one time. I quietly decided to never watch him again without a parent present. I don't think there is a discipline strategy per se. I don't hit my kids, and I would NEVER hit a child that isn't mine.
But that doesn’t answer the immediate question of how do you get them out of the pool?
You’re talking about (perfectly reasonable) consequences at the conclusion of the incident. This is a problem with almost all parenting advice- it’s a list of what not to do, or what to do after the fact. Rarely are there reasonable strategies for DURING a problem…
You can probably find this advice in thousands of places. You express understanding to the six year old, "I see you are upset. It is hard to stop doing something when you are having fun." You offer comfort and redirect. Hopefully you have let them know "Ok, ten more minutes, five more minutes, one more minutes." This advice is not hard to come by.
This is exactly what I see weak, ineffective parents doing constantly. There’s no actual discipline, just a self-absorbed inventory of feelings that accomplishes nothing. And I say this as someone who has never hit my kids and never would.
If the kid won’t get out of the pool, you need to physically remove them from the pool. If that means picking them up and carrying them out while they scream, so be it.
This is how you parent with empathy and boundaries. It’s not weak and you don’t need to discipline a six year old who is having a hard time with a big transition.
If you have a six year old who finds exiting a pool to be a “big transition” you’re not an effective parent.
Importantly, you don’t actually explain how to get the unwilling kid out of the pool. You use a lot of buzzwords, but you never tell us how to get the job done.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You don’t like what SIL did so it’s fully in your court to make sure it doesn’t happen again by simply being responsible for your own child in her presence. You could also have a conversation with your six-year-old to tell her that you don’t condone that type of discipline and you will make sure it doesn’t happen again to her.
That said, if it were my child, in my explanation, I would say that Auntie reacted that way in frustration as a direct result of Child’s behavior. I’d make clear that not listening to adults, especially in safety situations such as around water, is wrong.
Big learning moment for all of you!
Absolutely not. The only one responsible for violence against a child is the one being violent. The child did not make her aunt hit her. That is Abuse 101. JFC.
Also, I am sick of people calling this a safety situation. The kid was out of the pool and crying about going inside, so pissed off aunt hit her. Also, the idea that striking a child in the water would be some kind of safety move is stupid.
Anonymous wrote:You don’t like what SIL did so it’s fully in your court to make sure it doesn’t happen again by simply being responsible for your own child in her presence. You could also have a conversation with your six-year-old to tell her that you don’t condone that type of discipline and you will make sure it doesn’t happen again to her.
That said, if it were my child, in my explanation, I would say that Auntie reacted that way in frustration as a direct result of Child’s behavior. I’d make clear that not listening to adults, especially in safety situations such as around water, is wrong.
Big learning moment for all of you!
Anonymous wrote:I would talk to SIL but also never leave my child with her again.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous
So, kids spend the day with my brother and SIL, and when they come back, I learn from my 6-year-old daughter that my SIL spanked her on the upper leg three times. She was crying and didn’t want to come back inside after swimming in the pool, and when she made it difficult, that’s when my SIL spanked her.
I asked my SIL about it, and she said it’s no big deal.
Now I’m feeling really unsure. I also don’t know if I’m overreacting.
How would you handle this? Would you address it or let it go?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous
So, kids spend the day with my brother and SIL, and when they come back, I learn from my 6-year-old daughter that my SIL spanked her on the upper leg three times. She was crying and didn’t want to come back inside after swimming in the pool, and when she made it difficult, that’s when my SIL spanked her.
I asked my SIL about it, and she said it’s no big deal.
Now I’m feeling really unsure. I also don’t know if I’m overreacting.
How would you handle this? Would you address it or let it go?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’d tell SIL and her husband point blank period that you are not OK with any kind of physical discipline, whatsoever, and if that’s a problem, no unsupervised visits.
Oh no! Don’t threaten SIL to no longer have the privilege of babysitting OP’s kids for free!
Why is free babysitting for family/freinds seen as such an imposition? I never mind babysitting for relatives kids.
It’s not an imposition when your family/friends don’t act like entitled @$$holes. OP is DEFINITELY imposing on SIL.
And anyone seriously calling three swats on the leg assault should avoid interacting with other people because they are deeply unhinged and have lost ALL sense of perspective.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’d tell SIL and her husband point blank period that you are not OK with any kind of physical discipline, whatsoever, and if that’s a problem, no unsupervised visits.
Oh no! Don’t threaten SIL to no longer have the privilege of babysitting OP’s kids for free!
Why is free babysitting for family/freinds seen as such an imposition? I never mind babysitting for relatives kids.
It’s not an imposition when your family/friends don’t act like entitled @$$holes. OP is DEFINITELY imposing on SIL.
And anyone seriously calling three swats on the leg assault should avoid interacting with other people because they are deeply unhinged and have lost ALL sense of perspective.
So if you had a conflict at the grocery store and the other person gave you three swats on the leg to resolve it, it wouldn't be assault?
DP - Am I in charge of supervising that person or not? Can't think go many situations where that person would be in my care and expected to mind me.
So my supervisor can hit me?
Can your supervisor lock you in your room to punish you? Can your supervisor send you to bed without your supper?
(Do you hear how stupid you sound?)
Hmmmm. So what are the parameters for who can use violence against someone over whom they have authority? Ok for teachers to hit kids? What about camp counselors? Any adult? Any babysitter? Where EXACTLY is your line?
I see you have at least abandoned your dumbass attempt at conflating adult interactions with parent-child interactions.
I would not want anyone else to spank my child, for the record. But if an aunt or grandmother did, we’d have a talk about my parenting preferences. I wouldn’t accuse them of being abusive, violent, or of having committed assault. Because I’m not an insane drama llama.
I am not the PP you were arguing with. My question about your EXACT line was my entry into that conversation. So your line is you but it’s fuzzy with other family? This is what you want to teach your children? That the people who are supposed to love and protect them have the right to hit them?
There is no EXACT line and the fact that you think there is (or should be) is emblematic of many of the current problems in our society.
For a fun, admittedly ridiculous example, let’s say your kid was drowning in the ocean and thrashing so much that Uncle couldn’t save them without punching them (to subdue them - it’s been known to happen). Did Uncle ABUSE your child, or did Uncle hit your child BECAUSE he loves them and BECAUSE he is protecting them?
I’m truly sorry that you are unable to understand context or grasp nuance, but I also assume your black and white thinking extends to most if not all aspects of your life. This type of rigidity is actually a problem, both for you personally and also for our society. This type of thinking is why we end up with pregnant women dying in hospitals (because abortion ALWAYS wrong!).
You just keep coming up with bizarre scenarios where hurting a child is the only way to intervene to save their life. I think you are just so into hurting children intentionally that you want to divert attention from the fact that we are talking about excusing violence against children that is intentional.
That’s literally the first such scenario that’s been put forth. You’re not exactly the shiniest apple, are you?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’d tell SIL and her husband point blank period that you are not OK with any kind of physical discipline, whatsoever, and if that’s a problem, no unsupervised visits.
Oh no! Don’t threaten SIL to no longer have the privilege of babysitting OP’s kids for free!
Why is free babysitting for family/freinds seen as such an imposition? I never mind babysitting for relatives kids.
It’s not an imposition when your family/friends don’t act like entitled @$$holes. OP is DEFINITELY imposing on SIL.
And anyone seriously calling three swats on the leg assault should avoid interacting with other people because they are deeply unhinged and have lost ALL sense of perspective.
So if you had a conflict at the grocery store and the other person gave you three swats on the leg to resolve it, it wouldn't be assault?
DP - Am I in charge of supervising that person or not? Can't think go many situations where that person would be in my care and expected to mind me.
So my supervisor can hit me?
Can your supervisor lock you in your room to punish you? Can your supervisor send you to bed without your supper?
(Do you hear how stupid you sound?)
Hmmmm. So what are the parameters for who can use violence against someone over whom they have authority? Ok for teachers to hit kids? What about camp counselors? Any adult? Any babysitter? Where EXACTLY is your line?
I see you have at least abandoned your dumbass attempt at conflating adult interactions with parent-child interactions.
I would not want anyone else to spank my child, for the record. But if an aunt or grandmother did, we’d have a talk about my parenting preferences. I wouldn’t accuse them of being abusive, violent, or of having committed assault. Because I’m not an insane drama llama.
I am not the PP you were arguing with. My question about your EXACT line was my entry into that conversation. So your line is you but it’s fuzzy with other family? This is what you want to teach your children? That the people who are supposed to love and protect them have the right to hit them?
There is no EXACT line and the fact that you think there is (or should be) is emblematic of many of the current problems in our society.
For a fun, admittedly ridiculous example, let’s say your kid was drowning in the ocean and thrashing so much that Uncle couldn’t save them without punching them (to subdue them - it’s been known to happen). Did Uncle ABUSE your child, or did Uncle hit your child BECAUSE he loves them and BECAUSE he is protecting them?
I’m truly sorry that you are unable to understand context or grasp nuance, but I also assume your black and white thinking extends to most if not all aspects of your life. This type of rigidity is actually a problem, both for you personally and also for our society. This type of thinking is why we end up with pregnant women dying in hospitals (because abortion ALWAYS wrong!).
You just keep coming up with bizarre scenarios where hurting a child is the only way to intervene to save their life. I think you are just so into hurting children intentionally that you want to divert attention from the fact that we are talking about excusing violence against children that is intentional.