"Didn't do me/my DC any harm..."

[herewegoagainn]

Does this statement drive anyone else mad?

I find it's usually rolled out when observing someone generally following current health and/or parenting guidelines. I'd love to respond - how do you know?

I'd never dream of blaming someone's health or relationship problems on their own choice of actions because I understand there's so many factors involved but why criticise someone for trying to avoid them by following professional advice?

It makes me so angry
Particularly since the context is usually to do with things that have been studied and proven to cause psychological damage eg leaving a baby to cry or smacking children

I just think unless abusive you should respect the wishes and decisions of parents for their children and know when your opinion is not wanted.

Yes, that's the key - when it's unsolicited

Ie if you are quietly getting on with your thing and someone comes along and scoffs at it

My dad keeps saying thing when asking why I won't let my 2yo DS ride in the car facing forward. I keep insisting he stays rear facing until 4 but dad keeps telling me I'm being unreasonable and that "it never did you any harm"

I agree too. I remember doing car journeys in the boot when there were too many of us- yes I didn't die so didn't do me any harm but it doesn't make it safe.

Yes but @SnuggyBuggy some things that nowadays would be considered abusive were once commonplace such as belting children, leaving them to cry at the end of the garden, no car seats, smoking around children... I'd like to think that most people nowadays would not only speak up to the parents concerned but would also report them for abuse.

I had this exact conversation with DM last night... she was insisting I give fussy DS (6months) Calpol to send him to sleep. Then she said she used to give me travel sickness medication to send me and DB to sleep when we were younger. When I challenged her she said 'oh times have changed, didn't do you any harm'

I actually really respect my parents and in laws because I know they have been at some of the modern recommendations for babies but have refrained from nagging me to ignore them.

Oh god yes, me too.

Particularly when it's friends whose kid is currently suffering mental health meltdown and I really can't say "Um ... define 'no harm'" but I really really want to.

Stephen Fry has a bit in his autobiography where he says something like "I went to boarding school aged seven and I turned out fine!" And I'm like, Stephen, you're a national treasure, but you also have very well-publicised lifelong mental health issues, you've attempted suicide, you were expelled from school, you were in prison when you were seventeen. Like, I'm not saying this all happened because you went to boarding school, because clearly that's not a universal experience, but equally, maybe you're using "fine" a little loosely here.

By this logic we should all be raising our kids as primitively as possible. Being born on dirt floors in caves never did (some of) our ancestors any harm, so why change things? (Let's conveniently forget about all those it did harm, but hey, "never did me any harm"...)

I too hate this argument as to why we should ignore current advice :)

Yes, that and "mummy knows best." Or "happy mum happy baby" to excuse the most stupid things.

YANBU. The thing is we don't actually know this. As a hypothetical, someone like me with IBS could say "I was weaned onto solids at 7 weeks, never did me any harm" - but it's not like your body emails you when you have an illness outlining the cause - I just don't think to connect early weaning with IBS (FYI - not saying early weaning does cause IBS, it's a hypothetical example). So unless you are 100% healthy in every area you cannot say that X and Y didn't cause you harm.

Particularly when it's friends whose kid is currently suffering mental health meltdown and I really can't say "Um ... define 'no harm'" but I really really want to.

Absolutely. My parents are very keen on saying 'you turned out fine', but actually me and my siblings all have mental health issues, so no, 'fine' is not the word I'd use.

It is a logical fallacy called "Survivor's Bias"

Those that it DID do harm to didn't survive to say it. Plenty of children survived no seat belts, living without vaccines, living in led paint houses etc. But that doesn't mean that there weren't many, many children that did die from car accidents/ polio/ led poisoning etc. It is just that they are not here to talk about the hazards.

@GunpowderGelatine - funnily enough it's a similar example that's inspired my post. The offending sentence speaker has a DS with a digestive condition. The early weaning might be a factor, I think it's unlikely, but it's surprising the irony is missed!

I think one of the problems is that those of us who have been around a long time have seen 'current' official advice change so many times, that to some extent we have ceased to take it seriously

I'm always suspicious of parents that seem over eager to declare that a controversial aspect of their parenting caused their DC "no harm". No parent has a perfect understanding of how their decisions and choices impact their children and I often suspect that their DC may have a different opinion on things.

Conversely though I do sometimes notice the opposite, where the DC is desperate to point the finger at a perceived failure in their upbringing to explain why they have gone on to have a whole host of problems or a lack of success. Whilst I have sympathy regarding their imperfect childhoods, sometimes I do wonder if it's fair to attribute the blame on the parents when they were acting in good faith and doing their best. Obviously I'm not talking about abusive situations, but just those where the parenting could have been better and unwise choices were made.

Haha this is regularly spouted out by my family. I just respond with "who said anything about any harm? You did things your way, i choose to do things this way. I'm not asking for your permission"

My dad used to say this a LOT, unsolicited, about basically every parenting decision I made.

One day I had enough and when he said "oh you're just being cruel not letting (DS, aged 1) have juice. Always insisting on water! You had juice and it never did you any harm!" I replied with "I won't drink plain water, I have a sweet tooth, many fillings, and I'm overweight... define 'no harm' please!"

He hasn't said it since

@EthelHornsby yes, I can understand that, and on many subjects there should be an allowance for common sense too.

That said, advice has moved with greater knowledge so it's sensible to generally follow it. I'd not be one to preach about it unprovoked but don't understand why some people find it so inherently ridiculous!

proven to cause psychological damage eg leaving a baby to cry or smacking children

Also annoying to see people claim things are scientifically proven when they haven’t!

Those things on Facebook annoy me, saying things like children brought up in the 70’s didn’t wear seatbelts, didn’t have bike helmets, had swings and slides built over concrete and used to roam about the town alone aged 6 or whatever, but we all turned out fine, implying that today’s parents are over-cautious.

Plenty of children wearing no seatbelt didn’t turn out fine at all, actually.

@EthelHornsby I also respect that with many things experience can add context, so I do value the opinion (and sometimes reassurance) of those who've seen advice come and go when asked - it's just the scoffing/unsolicited element I find frustrating

I knew this would mostly be about weaning. I have a dear friend who insisted on weaning at 3 months. The child has a massive allergy. I'm not a doc I can't diagnose but still...

Yes, I think it baffling when people don’t seem to grasp that not everyone has had the had experiences of life as they have!