to think that this was a very cruel mind game to play on an 8yo?

[Oneboredeveryminute]

Several DC in my DC's class had been invited back to a friend's for a special tea tonight.
One of these DC has been "acting up" at home recently (very unspecific).
This DC was told "I don't know if you deserve to go to the tea party - I haven't decided yet - and so I will tell you at the end of the school day."
Why on earth not tell the DC no/yes in the morning rather than keeping them in an unpleasant suspense throughout the day ? Obviously all the DC involved would be chatting away excitedly about it, and the unknowing DC would have had to be party to this, while not knowing if they would be included in the fun.
Just made me very sad for the child.
AIBU in thinking this is not a good parenting strategy?
(I know, I know I should MMOB, but this has really concerned me today - I do not plan on interfering.)

Actions=consequences.

At 8 they are well old enough to know the former leads to the latter.

Of course it's not mind games, it's learning that they have done wrong and that very probably there will be consequences. Then they won't(hopefully) do it again.

Do people seriously not read the OP's posts before commenting? The sanctions were not about future, changeable behaviour, they were about behaviour that was over. So why the F not tell the child "you have done XYZ, therefore you will not be going to the tea tonight"? Just torture imo.
And Cory, yes, it is very unfair on the others involved. Surely some other consequence without an impact on others is courteous?

I'm a great believer in consequences and fairly immediate consequences at that. I don't think it hurts for an 8 year old to have time to consider the potential outcome following their poor behaviour so I wouldn't necessarily describe the situation the OP describes as "mind games".

However, I think it is very unfair to punish uninvolved children for your own child's disobedience. I know I'd be seriously pissed off to have my dc's party/special tea disrupted and disappointment caused because of a sudden no-show on this basis.

It isn't rewarding bad behaviour by being considerate to others and allowing attendance at a party. But it is important to put some other sort of sanction in place (no television afterwards or straight to bed when you come home, say) so that there is a consequence for the original "acting-up".

Yes, I do read the OP.

Yes, I still think what I said I thought.

HTH.

Leaving naughty children to stew a bit is a well worn parenting strategy. Remember "just wait til your father gets home"?

Not that it makes it a nice thing to do to a child, being direct about the consequence is certainly fairer ... but it's not the worst parenting in the world in my opinion.

''Do people seriously not read the OP's posts before commenting? The sanctions were not about future, changeable behaviour, they were about behaviour that was over. So why the F not tell the child "you have done XYZ, therefore you will not be going to the tea tonight"? Just torture imo.
And Cory, yes, it is very unfair on the others involved. Surely some other consequence without an impact on others is courteous?''

Yes actually, I did read it. It's just we disagree with you and think your views are odd. Can't you seriously see beyond your own view? You sound a bit namby pamby tbh- ''oh dear, poor diddums has suffered all day for something they can't change...''. Well maybe they will think twice next time then!