To think some people, especially in the past, don't see children as people with any autonomy?

[Lovebeingwithyou]

It was another thread that got me thinking.

But so many times I see on here and in real life grandparents who see their grandchildren as a do over of their own parenting. They want a turn with the baby/child, sometimes with no regard to what's best for the child.

Before anyone jumps on me I'm not saying this about all grandparents. Most are very loving and very supportive. Also I'm not just talking about grandparents, but also more dated styles of parenting too.

Things like expecting newborn babies to simply fall into a routine that suits the parents. They can't be hungry or have a full happy do why are they crying? No acknowledgment that this tiny human might just need to be near their mum or dad and need to be cuddled/fed on demand.

Forcing children to eat disgusting cold meals that they don't like and refusing to let them leave the table.

Not understanding that it's normal for toddlers and young children to sometimes have tantrums and that snacking/shouting and screaming back won't teach them anything.

I could give many more examples. Thankfully there is much more understanding of child development these days but I do still see hear of these sorts of ideas.

If you were living under rationing or remembered the great depression and children growing up malnourished, with rickets, dying at the next bout of diarrhoea because they were weak - you might insist children cleared their plates too.

Likewise if you grew up expecting kids to play out by themselves from age 6 or 7, negotiating all kinds of dangers, and there were fewer health and safety laws around things like unguarded water, roadworks without fencing etc - you might also be laying down the law to ensure a child knew what to do as it might be a life and death matter.

If you grew up at a time when most people left school at 12 or 14, books were hard to afford and what news you had came from papers not www, you might also be less clued up on child psychology.

People always and everywhere do their best as parents and draw on their own upbringings. They try to be kind but previously it was seen as doing a child a disservice to be too soft.

In places where attachment parenting is traditional, I'm pretty sure the child is not made the centre of attention - you might be with mother all day but you're expected to entertain yourself while she gets on with things. She's not sitting there singing wheels on the bus all day.

The cuddling newborns thing was from when germ theory was in mode early 20th century, scientists thought babies could be exposed through physical contact and that a regimented scientific routine was best. There's a good book called dream babies that goes through the history of childrearing trends. It's fascinating. And cyclical.

It's also easy to underestimate the role of Christianity. Previous generations saw childrearing as a battle for the soul of a child, to turn them towards good and away from evil. If you think eternal hell is the result of a child being raised wrong, you'll be quite strict!

These days we can't fathom how much Christianity used to influence everything.

Most of today's psychology-infused parenting has atheism as a prerequisite. We don't think in terms of good and evil any more.

Lots of the approaches people hold up as ‘too soft’ on here are actual just the correct ways to support kids with SEN.

Those kids and possibly most kids come out very badly when the moralistic parenting of good and bad child are applied. Most children do want to fit in with the family culture and be seen as ‘good’, and all of a child’s behaviour is communication. Trying to work out what is the child is trying to communicate are very important things I have learnt in my years of parenting. That doesn’t stop once they are no longer a baby and they can talk.

I do agree about repeatedly giving too much choice to kids though which I think is a mistake though. It is very well meant. But offering three different options of tea to a theee year old can be quite stressful to the child. I think it can create anxiety to be given a lot of options when they’re not sure of the right answer.

@Haroldwilson "It's also easy to underestimate the role of Christianity. Previous generations saw childrearing as a battle for the soul of a child,"

Pretty sure this wasn't a widely held view in the UK in the 1960s....

This 100%!

This seems like a good example of the middle ground that PP have been talking about. Your DS felt safe expressing his feelings (of pain, if maybe not boredom) and expressing his wishes (go home). You listened and acknowledged, made him feel heard. You didn't actually say yes because it wouldn't fit in with everyone else's plans. But you explained your reasoning so that he would understand. Sure enough he accepted your "no", sat quietly and didn't make a fuss.

In your MIL's world, where even asking to go home would be considered "bad behaviour", there might not have been such a good outcome.

I think this hits the nail on the head. Some people seem to think a child that is upset is not having a need met but just as often it's because they didn't get what they want.
Learning we can't always have what we want, when we want it, is essential for developing the resilience to deal with life's many disappointments.

The voice of sense.

I suppose a lot of the debate here is what is a need and what is a want. For example I don't think my kids need my constant attention and I'll sometimes tell them to go play while I'm doing some housework or cooking. Another parent might feel their child does need constant attention and will have to do the housework and food prep after bedtime so they can keep their kids occupied all day.

This - parents need to parent. Children need boundaries, and that doesn’t mean hitting them or anything like it.

No loved and cared for child will collapse into a traumatised heap if they are told to do/not do something.🙄

Absolutely agree.

Some parents - usually mothers - are now breaking themselves trying to do everything “right” for the child.

One today about a mother that lost her temper because her child will only sleep on her or with her present. Simply wouldn’t have happened 30 years ago - people wouldn’t have put up with it - didn’t have as good maternity leave for a start.

Not to mention it does the child no good all to pandered to to this extent. If (god forbid obviously) mum or primary carer was taken ill and had to go to hospital the baby would sleep at some point and slowly get used to it.

Far better to have the child/baby used to it in the first place.

As a baby I was looked after by another relative from 6 weeks as my mum had to go back to work.

This is the biggest load of nonsense I've heard in a while! Why exactly would ANYONE respect a person who felt the need to use violence to get their point across? Do you believe a husband should have the right to hit his wife too? What about if it's just a little slap? You know for her own benefit?

Have you ever clipped a child round the ear?

This thread has truly brought out all the child haters. It's interesting.

A 'clip round the ear', is just a way of downplaying a whack round the head. 'Smacking' is simply a way of downplaying hitting. You are hitting and being violent to a defenceless small person.

Children should have autonomy. People have used extreme examples such as tooth brushing, or taking medication.

But children should have autonomy when is comes to not being forced to hug and kiss relatives when they don't want to. They should have the right not to be hit. To decline food if they are t hungry or don't like it. The right to be cuddled and comforted.

We haven't been in rationing for a long time, several decades. Food can be refrigerated and reheated later to save waste. There is no reason and hasn't been for a long time to force children to clear their plate.

None. Parental behaviour was absolutely normal and expected and of its time. You have to remember that we 50s and 60s babies had parents who had come through rationing etc and resources and interesting food was scarce to unknown. To waste food was seen as unacceptable. As children we ate 99% of what was in front of us. There were no options. My sister, brother and I eat just about anything.
There were behaviours that weren't great. We recognised that and moved on, doing things in a different way with our own children.
I get a bit fed up with 'life in the past was awful'. It wasn't.

@Sharptonguedwoman you say you eat anything. I'm sure that is correct for you.

But a lot of people I know who are age 60-70+ certainly will not eat anything and are in fact incredibly fussy eaters. A common one being won't eat anything 'foreign'.

You say that the past was t awful. Not for you maybe. It was for a lot of people. It was awful for my parents. It was awful for many immigrants.

The "I eat anything" line is often trotted out as a reflection of how you were brought up. It's utter bollox tbh.

My parents and in laws are very fussy, so were my grandparents and his grandparents.

I was a fussy child but mostly grew out of it, dh was a fussy child and now eats absolutely anything. One of my dc will eat anything, the other was very fussy, but mostly grew out of it.

My siblings aren't fussy but my husband's sister is, despite them being a year apart in age.

I know fussy/nom fussy eaters of all ages and upbringings.

It's nothing to do with how you're brought up. It's just the way you are.

I get fed up of people assuming their own experience is universal. I have a parent of a similar age who is a very fussy eater and also has problems with her emotions, was emotionally unavailable to us as kids, short tempered, rarely comforted us when we were upset as it was just a case of ‘get on with it’ - that’s how she was raised and her bad parenting passed on.

She can’t see that she has these issues or have any insight into why, but I can. I’m not saying everyone has these same problems, your childhood might have been good for all I know, not everyone’s was, just like now. Even now, she will say things such as ‘there’s too much namby pamby parents around now, a slap never did me any harm!’ But it very clearly did, as it did me when she thought it was normal to pass that on to us. Some things that were acceptable then were very damaging.

It annoys me when people can’t see there is a middle ground between extremes.

I think that's fair tbh. But I am surprised at fussy eaters in the 60-70 bracket. I would have said it was more common in an older age group. My friend's father, 'rice is for puddings' . Of course life was difficult for some people and the situation for immigrants was dreadful. I thought the original post was about parenting though?

Maybe we all have issues- I don't know. All I meant was that the view of the writer seemed to be that the past and associated behaviours were awful. I just meant that in general parenting terms, for people I knew, it wasn't a hellish landscape. Perhaps I was lucky. I do know that my mother's grey mince was a huge incentive to learn to cook.

I don't at all want to be back in the 1950s, with the misogyny and homophobia and limited outlook for women.

There needs to be a balance. Yes children's needs and wishes are important. But I do feel a lot of parents now are scared to say no to their kids and that's equally worrying.

I wonder if the posters who say children’s needs should come secondary to adults’ needs were raised having their needs not met and always secondary to the adults around them.

For sure I’ve witnessed this in the older generations around my DC and around other extended kids in the family, that they get very triggered by children who are allowed to say ‘no’ or who are allowed to give an opinion and make their own decisions.

Parenting will never be perfect because every single child is different. Each generation faces a different set of challenges and new advice. Each family make up faces different challenges.

There are things going on today that the children of today probably won't thank their parents for. Probably too much screen time, over scheduling, not enough freedom. Processed foods is a big one too that I think will come back to bite us.

It's only once your children have grown up that you can reflect.

But I wouldn't be listening to anyone who berated me for letting my child in my bed or fussy eating or not toilet training at the right time.

Because imo most of these things don't matter long term or make any difference.

Again I think this is a case of needs vs wants.

I would say as a child my needs were met. I was fed, clothed, loved and cared for. I also didn’t come first in absolutely every situation.

Both my parents worked full time and in the holidays I sometimes had to come to work with my mum and sit quietly and read (understanding workplace !). School holidays were not just for taking me out for treats and fun times.

We went on holidays geared to adults and I had to learn how to behave in proper restaurants. But my parents also made time to take me to child friendly activities while on holiday. My mum certainly would never ever have gone to butlins or one of those massive resorts with water slides, inflatables and pools for just for children. She liked her peace and quiet too much.

I had to sit and not interrupt when adults were talking. I had to go to bed and go to sleep when I was told. I had to be respectful - of my parents and other people. Certainly no being noisy or running in hotels.

I wasn’t allowed to scream and run around in a restaurant cafe or supermarket. I would have been taken straight home.

Ofcourse I had choices and input but I was still the child so the ultimately decisions were not mine to make - and rightly so. As I got older I was given more responsibility and freedom.

In some ways I agree

But in other ways children need to learn boundaries and social skills so allowing them to do what they want when they want isn't acceptable either