AIBU To pin child’s wrists to their side

I probably would have stood up with my plate to protect it from the grass and say no stop that so I can sit down again and eat. Yes the parents should have stopped it immediately but standing up makes a clear statement that you are being disturbed and are unhappy : without the potentially risky step of touching them (risky only in the sense that other parents may irrationally overreact)

Probably walk away whilst not being happy with my decision.

So what would you do if you were in the OPs situation?

Me neither, but that's the difference between reasonable parents and parents who think their kids can do no wrong.

Years ago I was kneeling at the front garden kerb, weeding. Three small brothers (about 4, 6 ans 8) were playing on bikes in the street, they had a bit of a conflab, obviously deciding which one of them would run their bike into me as I was kneeling down. I saw one of them coming out of the corner of my eye, managed to spin round in time and caught his handlebars, complete with hands, and held him there whilst I gave him a good talking to, he was almost crying, his brothers had made themselves scarce.

I did expect the parents to come barging up, they didn't.
But those three kids grew up respecting me, being polite when they saw me, whilst unfortunately they were not as well behaved to some other neighbours.

Thinking about it my reluctance to lay hands on a child is entirely for selfish reasons and cowardice, in this case not wanting the potential backlash. It's not because I think it's the wrong thing to do to the child. It's not like slapping them.

I think we're doing a massive disservice to young people with the way adults feel they have to be the one to stop and walk away and let children carry on with bad behaviour. That level of tolerance isn't sustainable and I've often felt sorry for some of these pandered badly behaved young people because they must be heading for so much disappointment as adults.

Yes absolutely the parent/child are in the wrong here but what’s that saying about two wrongs, I forget.

You talk of touching as if it's an inappropriate kind of touching. Stopping bad behaviour by holding a child's arms is not inappropriate. I'd have no problem someone else doing it to mine if they were behaving like brats & I wasn't there

Children pulling up lumps of grass and soil and throwing them at an adult is the thing that's weird.

And what's really weird is the parent who doesn't immediately discipline the child for such bad behaviour.

There are other words that might better substitute for "weird."

Touching other people's children is weird....

That poster is saying you could ask the mum rather than touch the child, not leave the space rather than touch the child.

I wouldn’t have touched the child but I wouldn’t have left either, I’d sooner have shouted at the mum if I had to.

So you do think we should allow small children to drive us out of public spaces rather than touch them. That is so weird.

I would have expected her to say to the mother get him to stop. Or very firmly tell him to stop. But touching someone's child crosses a line I'm afraid unless it's for their immediate safety.

I have read through some of your remarks on here. For what it's worth, I agree with what you say...but in life (especially in the MN world) there will always be a faux outrage seeker waiting for something to get all upset about.
Pity, because it detracts from the actual topic.

In the circumstances described here, do you really think the parent in question would be right in 'borderline calling the police'?

Parents who don't parent are the big problem here....not the person who prevents a child from being a social nightmare.

Sorry to take this thread off track but I don't get how you can make up your own rules for what words can be used and expect everyone else to go along with it. People use the word technically all the time in an informal way. It's fine if you don't want to do so yourself but it's not something that anyone can technically (sorry couldn't help myself) police in others.

It's because words have meaning. There are lots of ways in which a word can be used incorrectly without really affecting the message that the poster is trying to give, but if incorrect use gives a false impression then that can cause problems.

Nobody is 'outraged', they're just trying to:
a. correct the impression you have given that you have some expertise in these matters, so your opinion carries some weight and can be relied upon
b. make you aware of the meaning of the word and the implication that comes when you use it

I think 'a' has been achieved and 'b' is overambitious as a goal

If I was the other parent I wouldn't have minded. It's teaching the kid a lesson in body autonomy and consent. If it was me and I could see the person was not wanting to play a game my child was trying to initiate I would have taken her away from the situation or redirected her to another game but you can't really tell another parent how to parent 'better' - you can only do what is in your control and that's to clearly show you didn't want to play as you did.

Technically may be used in the context you describe by people with expertise in a subject.
Technically is also used by someone like myself and probably reflects the type of education I had. Possibly it also has something to do with the generation I am and how I express myself.
You might think it sounds silly. Tbh I dont particularly admire the way a lot of pp on MN express themselves but I defend their right to express themselves as they think fit.

I can only think posters such as yourself have some agenda by presenting yourselves as so outraged by the use of a word. I gave an opinion and have made it very clear I have no legal expertise other than general lay persons knowledge of the law. If anyone disagrees with my opinion they are perfectly entitled to do so. But the outrage over the use of a perfectly unremarkable word is farcical and criticism of my writing style uncalled for.

People use the word technically all the time. A Jaffa cake is technically a cake but is normally found in the biscuit aisle. I don't need a food science degree to say that sentence.

Technically is a figure of speech that people who have expertise on the subject they are given their opinion on use.

Maybe you didn’t realise that, it sounds very silly when a person uses it when they are speaking as a random person without expertise.

It sounds to me like you were calm compared to how I would have reacted!

I could have imagined my son trying to act like this but I would not have reacted as the mother did! I could take my daughter anywhere. My son would try to push boundaries but there were always consequences. If he’d attempted that a second time, we would have packed up and gone home.

The mum’s lack of parenting is the issue here. I work with children (have done for over twenty years) and am looking for a different career. I love children but the last five years I’ve seen too many parents who just don’t attempt to parent and there’s too many badly behaved children as a result. (There’s obviously a lot more lovely children whose parents are great.)

I was teaching recently, a child hit another child (completely unprovoked) so hard it left marks. It all happened in a spilt second. When I informed the mum of the the child who hit out, she said, “Oh no. He’s clearly being influenced by others who he hangs around with,” and gave him a doughnut to make him feel better about being told off! I couldn’t believe it.

Given that his parents didn’t stop him I would say it fine. Perhaps better to directly ask the parents to stop him but in the moment I don’t think you did anything wrong. You didn’t hurt him.

You really want to live in a world where adults have to run away from badly behaved brats?

Actually we already do. There are regular reports of older adults being assaulted by delinquent teens and preteens in some of the city parks. I had no idea this was considered reasonable or desirable.

It was in a social environment not a professional one.

What I'm taking from all of this though is don't risk touching them, shout at them instead. Which will upset any child far more but so be it.

Same, and legally in terms of managing challenging behaviour we have to be the ‘least restrictive’ these days. I have to be trained in restraint at work (although it’s not even called thar anymore as it’s really a last resort). As a few have said you only put hands on someone if there is a significant risk of harm which throwing grass isn’t. I know it’s not the same but as an example a teacher would be in potential trouble if they held a child’s arms in this scenario.
Very annoying situation all the same.