or are UP parents really nuts?

[FunnysInTheGarden]

I mean talk about making all your lives difficult....

Am ready BTW for the UP parents cries of dissent [cgrin]

am finding this all really interesting. I'd heard about UP but not read into it at all and have to admit that the naughty step is a bit of a godsend in our house (I probably threaten it every three of four days and DS who's 2.5 actually has to sit on it maybe once every 10days to 2 weeks, I always give him 2 chances rather than one)

But this thread has made me question when I threaten him with the naughty step just because I don't want him to do something rather than treating some things differently (eg today he wanted to stomp in a puddle, I just told him no then when he did it twice after being told no I said if he did it again he'd go on the naughty step, he didn't do it again but I know the reaon I didn't want him to was because I couldn't be arsed to clean him up, whereas sometimes I don't mind that at all so can see it can be confusing just to be black and white "Mummy says no")

I do most of the time explain why he shouldn't do something, whether or not he is threatened with the naughty step or not. Today he dropped a handful of dirt over my friend's baby, she was dealing with her daughter so I scooped the baby up to make sure he was ok while telling my son why it was bad - I did use the word "naughty" but looking back he didn't do it to be naughty (baby was in a carrier I don't think DS realised he was there) and maybe should have used different language. If he'd intentionally thrown dirt in the baby's face I definately would ahve told him off though...

I hadn't heard of UP either, but I did try and use some of the techniques when bringing up my children. Although totally understandable, it doesn't really seem fair to not let children play because of the mess it will create - and jumping in a puddle is playing.

I have also seen children being told off and called naughty when they have broken something by accident. And on here OP's have posted about disobedient children when as others have pointed out, the expectations are maybe too high. e.g. the 11 year old told to pack for a residential trip, but who wasn't doing it. Posters pointed out that the instruction was too vague and he probably didn't know what to pack.

I'm sure I am as guilty as anyone - but sometimes as children get older, because they look and sound like they are nearly grown up, it can be easy to forget that they haven't yet learnt things that might seem common sense to us.

Actually just remembered at supermarket getting annoyed with my 12/13 ? year old daughter because of how she packed the groceries e.g. eggs at the bottom. She was annoyed because she was doing her best and didn't realise that she had packed some of the food "wrongly".

I'm wondering now if UPs are UPing because they are trying to counter more authoritarian natural tendencies that they have, or they associate with people who are more authoritarian and are trying to counter that?

I dont UP (you may have gathered ) and I say this because whilst I am strict about manners and being kind and fair etc I'm pretty laid back about most other stuff. Using the examples in the last 2 posts- I wouldn't curb play because of the mess it would create, I positively encourage jumping in puddles- kids are suppossed to be mucky (always have spare clothes in my bag). I would also not reprimand my kids for making a mistake or having an accident

See, it's not that I don't think a 6 year old should just be allowed to continue playing. It's about how you teach them that mealtimes, especially at others houses, are a social time where people are expected to sit down together. As everyone's pointed out, a lot of children are sometimes disobedient and what differs is how the parent deals with it. I personally would not see carrying a child kicking and screaming to the table an effective way of teaching them. As I said, i'd have said 'fine, come when you're ready, but no more food until next meal'. Then i'd have led by example. Sitting, chatting, ignoring said child if he didn't join in. This child is then learning a more effective lesson imo than being co-erced. In the unlikely event that the child didn't then join in, i'd have a stern chat about manners etc maybe later that evening, and highlight why these things are socially important.

Lesley33 - this is what I was getting at earlier. And for uus, grandparents are much more laid back and wouldn't have been affronted at all!

Bejeezus - maybe some people, but I am (kind of) uping because it feels right. I'd rather bring up a child sensitive to others feelings because they understand what that means, not because they've been made to be.

I agree that carrying a child screaming and kicking to a meal is not a good idea. But tbh as long as there isn't SEN issues involved, a parent should be able to get a 6 year old to a table with a stern look and a short instruction to come to the table now as the food is ready to eat.

If GP's or whoever else is there wouldn't be bothered if child came to table then or in 5 minutes time, then I might have dealt with it differently. But GP obviously was not happy with child not coming to table straight away.

I wouldn't care if child ate or not as long as they joined us at table.

I agree child needs to understand why - developing empathy is crucial. But sometimes it isn't appropriate to have long conversations to explain your reasoning. I have 4 children close in age - grown up now. But although I tried to explain reasoning, it wasn't always practical to explain to 1 in detail when I also had other 3 to look after.

So sometimes they just had to do what I was asking them to do.

I think my children are growing up to be remarkably sensitive to others feelings
followed by < preparing to be further flamed emoticon>
I put this down, at least partly, to all the talk, especially about everyone's feelings.