to think some people on here have no idea what 16-18 year olds are actually like?

[Twile]

I’ve noticed that some posters on here seem to have no idea what parenting an older teenager is actually like.

Someone will post about their 16-18 year old being completely out of control - staying out all night, drinking, vaping, refusing school or college, being verbally abusive, getting involved with unsuitable partners or simply refusing to follow any rules.

Without fail, there are replies saying things like:

“Just stop them going.”
“Take their phone off them.”
“Ground them.”
“You’re the parent - just say no.”
“I’d never allow that”

It makes me wonder whether these people have actually parented an older teen.

A 16-18-year-old is not the same as a 10-year-old. They’re often physically bigger than you, legally have increasing autonomy, can leave the house if they choose, earn their own money and in many cases simply refuse to comply. You can’t physically force them to stay indoors, attend college, end a relationship or make sensible choices. And nor should you.

Of course boundaries still matter, and parenting doesn’t stop at 16. But the strategies change. You’re often relying on influence rather than control, and sometimes you’re choosing the least bad option rather than the ideal one.

Yes I don’t know why they comment tbh. It’s like they have had a baby and they are suddenly experts. Er hello…the baby period is the easiest darling!

I knew you didn’t read it properly.

You are presenting speculation as though it were contained in the data.
The figures identify nationality, but they do not tell us that those convicted were “mostly young men on temporary visas”, that they had no family in Britain, how long they had lived here, or whether they lacked “community enforcement”. In fact, researchers specifically warn that reliable conviction data by immigration status and duration of residence does not exist.

The figures are also sentencing occasions, not necessarily 100 separate offenders, and the increase was from 28 to 100 during a period of exceptionally high Indian migration. That may still be concerning but it cannot establish your preferred explanation for it.

Nor do the educational attainment and overall crime figures of British Indians prove that “strict Indian parenting” works. Those outcomes may reflect numerous factors, including selective migration, education, socioeconomic circumstances, age profile and immigration route. You cannot attribute every positive outcome to parenting, then detach every negative outcome by declaring that those Indians belong to a different category.

The “community enforcement” argument rather undermines the original claim. If supposedly well-raised men behave appropriately only while parents, relatives and the wider community are watching them, but commit sexual offences once that surveillance is removed, that is not evidence that strict parenting successfully taught them respect or self-control. It suggests compliance enforced by fear of consequences rather than values that were genuinely internalised.

Yes, Indian nationals and British Indians are not identical populations. But that distinction does not magically prove that positive British-Indian outcomes come from superior parenting while the negative conduct of Indian nationals has nothing whatsoever to do with the culture or upbringing they came from. That is simply selecting whichever categorisation protects the conclusion you had already decided upon.

Only if you equate school refusal, trouble making and being a general pain in the arse as being academically stupid.

He’s not - hence the Oxford degree and the App he developed. I suspect he would have excelled whether he turned up at all or not

By the time he decided it was worth putting in some effort re attendance and the other stuff calmed down I wasn’t doing anything noticeably different.

Wow… that is one incredible 16 year old. Refused school, caused his parents monumental stress, and then pulled it all together for GCSEs and now at Oxford!

it's because he wasn't given screens when he was little.

According to MN it makes all the difference 😂

I'm not saying families were like mine growing up .

But if posters are asking for help - people with reponse with what they know - and you sort though and figure out what might help in your situation. People can't know every individual situation.

I said earlier in thread I've rarely been surpsied by which kids have gone off rails - my DC peers - its usually obvious ones who pre teen don't listen or respect the parents.

Obviously there parents that won't apply to - some posting on here. But my DC did have serious issues are ND and yet we got through the teen years working with them - trying things and yes talking to other parents as we did when they were young kids - to see if they had tips that might be worth trying and judging which to try.

Also I'm not sure best advice has always comes from parents with teens as I've some good advice form teachers and people who work with these age groups. Also if your teen are out of control why would anyone take advice from you unless they actually knew you in RL and it wasn't parenting- few years past the crisis points as some posters are on here their advice is golden - what helped what didn't.

Though I did the same when I was posting about my ND kids when young- not all advice worked or was every going to be tried - but we used some of it and no-one was in our exact situation.

I did have some sympathy with there being a lot of bad advice round teens year especially 16-18 when I was stepping back but honestly you seem to want to argue there nothing to be done all teens go off rails all for no apparent reason and no-one should every offer advice - personally I found some teen advice on here useful so disagree.

But why would they want to hear that? If something has gone wrong for your DC, the very last thing you'd want to hear would be, "Oh, you should have done XYZ when they were younger, then you wouldn't be in this pickle. Just like I'm doing now with my young DC! Don't you wish you'd been more like me? HTH!"

You've used the disparaging term "pity party" - but I'd phrase it another way, and say there's nothing wrong with seeking mutual support from people in the same boat.

Like I said only if you believe acting out and being academically smart are mutually exclusive. They’re not.

I mean I’m sure it makes the other middle class, hard working professional, fee paying school sending, reading to every night, knew all their friends, took them to piano lesson, always cooked from scratch mums, more secure to imagine the only way for their DC to behave badly is if they’re poor with no opportunities and sub standard parenting but that’s not the case 🤷‍♀️

But there will be LOADS of very bright 16 year olds school refusing and causing their folks unbearable stress - likes yours but they don’t manage to undergo a monumental shift and pull it all together to smash their GCSEs and now at Oxford

This is actually a not uncommon trajectory amongst autistic or adhd teens.

my dc went to Newcastle to do physics. She had a period of school refusal in her younger years - and got a scholarship to her sixth form,

many of the people on her physics degree had autism and had had a fairly rocky relationship with mainstream education, with periods of being out of school or homeschooled.

Judgey pants a bit tight here.

I mean the data shows that those classed as "British Indian" have lower arrest rates and high attainment rates. I'm happy that my parents disciplined me. I wasn't one of those teens who went and got blackout drunk in fields. The physical disciplining ended when I was in year 5. In secondary yes they were strict with me about school and grades and that ensured I got excellent GCSEs and A-levels.

I don't know and haven't seen much about Indian gangs. I've read about Pakistani gangs. If someone is in a gang, being a shit by selling drugs and stabbing people..... Maybe they ought to be disciplined physically? Hushed tones and "you shouldn't be doing that" won't really get anywhere right?

But it doesn't stop some from commenting -I think that's the difference.

OP, I absolutely agree.

Are you advocating for whipping criminals?

You are taking several completely different things such as ethnicity, arrest rates, academic attainment, your own upbringing and gang violence and pretending they all prove “strict Indian parenting works”. They do not.

Lower arrest rates among British Indians do not establish that physical punishment caused those outcomes. Arrest rates are influenced by age profile, poverty, policing, neighbourhood, migration history, family structure and countless other factors. High attainment is also linked to parental expectations, selection effects, education, income, community norms and individual motivation. You cannot isolate hitting as the magic ingredient simply because it happened in your childhood.

Your personal experience is not evidence for an entire parenting model either. You did well academically and did not get drunk in fields. Fine. Plenty of people achieved the same without being physically disciplined, and plenty of people who were hit still became secretive, reckless, violent or deeply unhappy. “It happened to me and I turned out fine” is not proof that it was necessary, effective or harmless.

Your gang argument is even weaker. Someone selling drugs or stabbing people is already demonstrating that violence and intimidation are normal tools to get what they want. The idea that the cure is more violence from an authority figure is absurd. Physical punishment may force short-term compliance when the punisher is present, but it does not teach empathy, self-control, moral reasoning or respect for other people. It teaches that the stronger person is entitled to hurt the weaker one.

Nobody is suggesting “hushed tones” are the only alternative. Effective discipline can include firm boundaries, consequences, supervision, removal of privileges, restitution and criminal justice where appropriate. There is a vast space between whispering “please don’t” and physically attacking someone.

You are also being highly selective. When British Indians perform well, you credit “Indian parenting”. When Indians appear in negative statistics, you separate them into a different category. When Pakistani offenders are discussed however you are perfectly happy to generalise culturally. That is not a consistent argument. It is choosing whichever ethnic label supports the conclusion you already wanted.

Strictness may have contributed to your grades. That still does not prove that physical punishment created your success, that it is safe for other children or that violence is an intelligent response to serious criminal behaviour.

But this isnt whats being talked about with different parenting, is it?
All the pat themselves on the back parents think its because they were stricter, but there are so many types of situations where that doesnt work - mental health, eating disorder, ND etc.
Sometimes those who think they are better parents were simply fortunate enough to have not come across those situations.

She advocates for physical violence against children. The fear didn’t stop her trying alcohol.

How do you know they weren't beaten by their parents and primary schools, just as you were?

It could well be what fucked them up and turned them into violent thugs.

I agree with that.
I think those with compliant children can advise parents of defiant children differently! Similar for three year olds (my stage!) parents with easier kids can blame parents who’s kids don’t listen. But all my friends with 3+ kids are sure a kid’s personality plays a huge part

I know she's all for hitting children, which pretty much voids everything she's got to say on the matter, but it reads there as if she's also all for lashing criminals. I just want to clarify.

Well she's all for corporal punishment for primary school children, so I don't imagine she'd have a problem with lashing criminals either.

Depends on the teen. My older teenagers never did any of the stuff you mention. I raised them to be polite, they always let me know what time they will be home and never got into trouble. Yes we have disagreements as I raised them to have minds of their own but they have never treated me like you described and they have never raised their voice to me .

@TheresMillionsOfGeoffreys
"Well yes... of course!? Just like some posters have no experience of driving an electric car or going to Germany. Not sure it really needs a whole thread dedicated to pointing this out, does it?"

You've spectacularly missed the point of this thread. The OP is saying that people who don't have teenage children (let alone difficult ones) frequently comment on how to parent them. Which is exactly the equivalent of giving travel advice for Germany when you've never set foot in the place, or how to drive an electric car when you know nothing about them. At best you can only give anecdotal advice but many of these posters speak with such dogmatic authority. So yes, it is a subject perfectly worthy of a thread.

That is your experience of your teenagers but it does not follow that parents whose teenagers behave differently failed to raise them to be polite or respectful.

Teenagers have different temperaments, vulnerabilities, peer groups, relationships, mental-health difficulties and levels of impulsivity. Two children raised in the same home can behave completely differently. Parenting matters but it is not a machine where you insert good values and are guaranteed a calm, compliant teenager.

You also cannot really know that your parenting “caused” the outcome simply because your children behaved well. They may naturally be cautious, conscientious or conflict-avoidant. Another equally thoughtful parent may have a teenager who drinks, lies, shouts or takes serious risks despite years of firm and loving parenting.

Never raising their voices is not necessarily the ultimate proof of healthy parenting. Respect is important, but teenagers should also feel able to disagree, express anger and challenge their parents without fearing that doing so makes them “badly raised”.

So yes, it depends on the teenager which is why your experience cannot be used to judge parents dealing with far more complex behaviour. You have described the children you happened to have not established a universal formula for raising teenagers.

The thing is most teens won't go off the rails.

So if you have always had very clear rules and boundaries you might assume that it's that structure which made them not go off the rails.

And if you've always had a very close relationship with your child and talked to them about stuff and been more flexible on rules you might assume that it's this closeness and flexibility which has made them not go off the rails.

And if you've been very strict and hit your kids you might assume it's that which made them not go off the rails.

But in reality it's probably just luck. Adolescence is a hell of a drug and for some kids it just seems to cause a bit of an explosion. Mostly it's a blip and they come back, but I don't think there is a magical parenting style which can 100% reliably prevent it from ever happening at all.