Where children really better behaved in the past or do people remember with rose tinted glasses?

[username5555]

This is inspired by a video online whereby a toddler was having a massive tantrum on a 8 hour flight.
A lot of the comments underneath basically were how terrible a parent the mother was and how in their day the child wouldn't have dared behave like that.
What is the alleged difference? What are we not doing that we did then? Or do people only remember the good parts and forget their children also behaved like that.
I personally as a mother of a toddler found the comments awful. I suspect the mother was not having the time of her life either.

I have heard more than one parent say they don't like to use the word 'no' to their child, as it has 'such negative connotations'.

Interesting to consider what bad behaviour mean and encompasses. Someone earlier mentioned that teenage crime and pregnancy and drinking in public is all down. These are all good to hear. Lots of people report bullying is down in most schools. Again good news.

Things we think about with older kids are different to younger kids, where it's more about behaviour in public, being annoying to others or being selfish and demanding. We don't tend to see these behaviours so much from older kids as they learn to moderate them or just their age calms them down in terms of things like running around and being noisy, plus they realise that gross rudeness to parents etc isn't usually socially acceptable. Teenagers however can be foul to adults or to other teenagers and I have seen parents put up with it and not pick them up on it. It's different dealing with teenagers without a doubt, but as before, consistency and clear boundaries counts for a lot and requires had work from parents and sometimes conflict, both of which some parents aren't really prepared to engage with.

The cane cooled the ardour of ill-behaved kids in the past.

I think overuse of the word "no" can make it ineffective.

The human brain doesnt process the negative... first thing we were taught with NLP ... if you want to convey a message it has to be positive. Or as positive as possible

Kids got away with more in the 80s and 90s.......I remember halloween etc the streets being no go zones and some atrocious behaviour.

There's more thoughtless, unfounded, deluded, clichéd, opinion mascarading as fact on this thread than I've read in a while...

Not by any means everyone, not even the majority, but a substantial enough minority of absolutely deluded or goady people, or simply those incapable of actually thinking through their claims about the hazy glory days of the perfect past and their extrapolations or inventiins about the present...

I expectations are greater. When I was little we didn't get taken out much as kids apart from toddler groups etc. an 8 hour flight would have been too expensive. Now we have more opportunities but they aren't always child friendly.

I’m aware this might come across as a bit controversial but it’s just my opinion.

Children are being brought up in households with 2 parents working full time.

They’re out of the house 7 - 6 weekdays and only at home weekends where parents (and I’m guilty of this myself) try to cram as much in to the time they have together. They don’t want to spend the little time they have together telling the children off. Children are taken on what would usually be ‘adult only’ outings to the pub or restaurants, theatre etc. ‘Disney’ parenting, to coin a MN phrase.

They’re spending there other ‘free time’ with child minders who have no emotional attachment or moral obligation to the childrens behaviour, and different rules/expectations.

When I was growing up mothers were at home, and although I don’t think it’s true in all cases, i think that there is a correlation.

If we're going for generalisations based on our own experience, my parents' favourite catch phrase (and that of many of their friends and my friends' parents) was "children are flexible".

Children are flexible was a licence for adults not to consider children except as a projection of their parents.

The 70s and 80s tendency to give kids a label ("the pretty one", "the naughty one", "the sensible one", "the clever one") and view them as one dimensional and expect them to be fine, because children are resilient and flexible, was far "lazier" than misguided helicopter parents who mess their kids up to a similar degree but in a different style by hovering over them constantly and agonising over every decision.

My parents meant well and made a lot of decisions about things that they decided were best for Children (wholemeal bread, moving out of town to a picturesque village with no other children, out of area schools...) but not for the individual human beings their children were.

They’re spending there other ‘free time’ with child minders who have no emotional attachment or moral obligation to the childrens behaviour, and different rules/expectations.

I'm a former childminder and certainly did have an emotional attachment to my mindees, I'm still in contact with nearly all of the parents and I felt a little swell of pride when I saw several of my former mindees in the Nativity play at my DCs school a few weeks ago. My behaviour expectations were similar to those of the school- we are kind, we are respectful, we listen - with clear consequences for misbehaviour.

CookingGood when were you growing up? Rates of women working have gone up of course, but even in the 1970s 50% of mothers worked. Children over 4 in the UK are out at school all day (which I think is a bit crazy, but that's a separate issue) so it's fairly irrelevant where their mothers are from 9am to 3:30pm at any rate.

Good thread. I think parents were a lot stricter in the past. I don't think this was necessarily a good thing.

The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect to elders and prefer chatter in place of exercise. (Socrates, 469-399 BC)

I grew up in the late 70s/early 80s. I could count on a closed fist how many of my friends mums went out to work. I myself was 14/15 when my mum went to work - I’m the oldest of 5 with the youngest being 12 years younger, and she only did because my dad was ill, so we still had a parent at home.

I work full time myself and my dc go to a childminder, so I’m not trying to be goady or have a sahm/wohm debate, but it just seems that one of the big differences between me and my friends, and my children and theirs, is that we all had a parent at home whilst I can’t think of anyone I know who doesn’t work full time, and I wondered if not having a parent around made a difference to children’s behaviour.

chilledteacher I agree with the point you're making, that people have been complaining about the youth/ parenting of today since time immemorial... But you haven't rtft have you? someone beat you to that quotation yesterday...

CookingGood sounds like you're the same age as me - my mother worked full time, told us she was doing so to set us a good example (didn't need to financially) but has since come up with other random reasons... She doesn't need a reason of course, but she's volunteered several, most of which I suspect she's thought of retrospectively, over the years. Most of my friends parents also worked. My mum was always stressed. She cooked dinner with her coat on while telling us off for being ungrateful. She read books about women with large numbers of kids and high flying professional or political careers, she believed she had to have/ do it all and was constantly trying to prove something. My dad only worked.

I thought she was very much of her time - Thatcher inspired.

I was mostly a Sahm Til my youngest was 4, though I was a childminder when I only had 1 DC, and taught evening classes after DH got home when I had more. I lived being a Sahm. My mum was incredibly condescending about it, although when she finally stopped asking me when I was going back to work she tried to pretend she respected what I was doing. I went back to work when youngest was 4 and I felt like a parasite home without a child (attitude probably internalised during my own childhood).

According to this BBC article there's been a big increase in working mothers of course, but in the mid 70s 50% of mothers worked:
www.bbc.com/news/business-43919090 so it was hardly unusual!

Some people have luck and their children don't have tantrums. Mine never did. Even my teenager at 14 is a nice girl still - talks to her parents even! It's in the genes, I was like that.
I am quite placid!

So I am not congratulating myself and nor should anyone else. Most children have tantrums.

sorry I haven't read the whole thread so this point may already have been made - everyone behaves worse in my opinion, certainly not just children. Nowadays it is not unusual when I go out to witness some kind of public altercation between strangers.

My eldest DC is almost 24. I was
As on my own with her as her father was in prison. It was just her and me, we lived near to my sister who had 2 older DC (10 and 8) who all adored her.

She never had a tantrum. Never. I'm not rose tinted, it was just the way she was. Happy, charry, easy going.

Ds came along 2 and a half years later and I always say he was sent to teach me a lesson for being so smug 🤣. Normal, active, boistrous boy.

DC 3, same temprament as DD. DC 4, similarly easy going.

DC 5. Autistic ( although not dx for 10 years). Difficult to parent although compliant.

Dc6, a doddle. Free range DC we call her.

Sorry mum not aunt!

80s child, We lived in fear of being smacked by the slipper, belt, hands, anything really. Of course we still acted up but it normally resulted in being smacked, pretty hard by mum who should have really known better as she was beaten badly as a child. She has the cheek to be shocked and talk badly about people who hits their kids now, how times have changed.

Many parents are indulgent because they have to work hard and don't get to spend enough time with their kids.

TO BE HONEST OUT PRIORITIES ARE FUCKED work Hard to buy nice 'stuff', do up the house and keep up with everybody else. Deep down WE know its all shit and if we worked less and spent more time with the kids and didn't aspire to the loft extension / car/ fancy holiday / new kitchen / tv in every room that would be the right choice but we go for the material / social aspiration shit and the kids suffer

Many parents are indulgent because they have to work hard and don't get to spend enough time with their kids

Yes!

hello!
My opinion is that children nowadays are taught that anything is acceptable. That´s why they tend to do more serious offences (e.g. stealing, fighting, etc.). Since European Court (I think) has decided that any kind of punishment (physical, even a spanking!) is unacceptable, a parent could theoretically get in trouble for spanking their kid. Even as a form of discipline! So, naturally, kids today do all sorts of things because the worst punishment that they will get is shouting and some kind of punishment (e.g. no mobile phone, no going out with friends, etc.)