AIBU to think challenging school rules can harm children’s resilience?

[Teenytinypineapple]

AIBU to think that many of those parents who push back against schools and their rules are completely oblivious to the damage they're doing to their children?

The children who do the best are those whose parents instill in them that they should conform. Yes, that will cause difficulties at times. Yes, there will be things they don't like. But that's life. That's how children develop resilience.

Whilst little Timmy and his Mommy are complaining about the school sending him home for wearing the wrong shoes, little Jimmy has learned to suck it up, wear the damn shoes, get his head down and realise it's up to him to make the most of his education.

Following rules because someone in authority told you to use exactly what Hitler relied on. That's the process by which normal people ended up doing horrific and unspeakable things.

The route to integrity is the ability to make moral choices for yourself, separate to what you are told.

Does there? I'm not sure there should be parental discretion - who are parents to know, really, and how far does their discretion go? It's ultimately not their job to choose the school rules that they do and don't like. When children are in school, they are the responsibility of the school. Look at the responses to this post - so many different takes on what people think is right / wrong / stupid. That's why it can't be at parents' discretion - there is no uniformity but the same rules apply to everyone (and there is frequently a reason that most parents would be wildly unaware of).

If there is a genuine concern about a rule, it should be raised in the proper fashion - that does not entail a child simply not following a rule because they don't agree with it.

As for identifying 'bad law'. We can't simply choose not to abide by a law we think is bad and expect change - we will be punished for a flouting if it's criminal or the Court would find against us if it's civil. If we want change, as with in schools, we follow the process to change the law - through the Courts (appeals process) and parliament. Until a law is changed, it remains law, regardless how much we disagree with it.

Parents should teach their children how to properly challenge a rule - that never includes blind disobedience.

We don't want a generation of children who use the same ethos in the big wide world that their parents have taught them apply to school rules - that they can simply pick and choose which ones to follow, based on whether or not they think it's a decent rule / law.

We want a generation which knows how to properly change the world for the better. Disobedience does not do that.

The Milgram Study is very far removed from the reality of a school which has proper legislative authority to create rules and punish where those rules are broken, as well as being regulated institutions. There's a whole host of legislation to properly challenge a school. That is the way to do it.

There is a thing called critical thinking that school (and parents) are also supposed to teach.

It's one thing if your child doesn't truly care about the rules and prefer to focus on his studies, but if they do then telling them to "suck it up" simply because it's the rule authority decided to implement it is a terrible example for a child.

Although, you're right, little Jimmy will be a perfect factory worker: resilient, never questioning their rights, and always doing as they're told 👌

I’m having this internal debate atm. My daughter has just joined year 7 and has had her first ever behaviour point for being 2 mins late to a lesson because she went to the toilet between lessons. The background context to this is that she had tried to go at break time but the queue was so long she was still waiting when the lesson started so didn’t go then, she then asked to go during the lesson and the teacher said she could, but she would be held back for 2 minutes after the lesson so she didn’t and carried on waiting until the lesson was over but then was 2 mins late to the next one anyway. When she walked into the lesson a bit flustered she was told off and given the behaviour point but I genuinely don’t understand what else she was expected to do! (I’m actually SLT myself but in special education so do find myself thinking so many of these rules are punitive and archaic).

And if you feel so strongly about a rule, gather together your colleagues and take it up with the headteacher / trust. I'd imagine it's somewhere in your employment contract that you will adhere to and ensure the following of by others the school's rules. You allowing certain students a free pass does nothing to help your colleagues who are trying to get them (or others) to adhere to the rules.

It's a thin end of the wedge type of scenario. Get the small stuff right and the big stuff is easier. Why do you think behaviour in public, private and grammar schools is generally so much better than in comprehensive schools? The rules can be much stricter but there's an expectation from parents and teachers alike that they will be followed.

Nonsense. These tight rules to keep them on the straight and narrow made my well-behaved DD2, who got high praise from teachers all through primary school for effort and attitude, feel like she'd done something wrong when she hadn't, and made her develop severe anxiety. Because she has been brought up with boundaries and consistency, but also a strong sense of fairness.

This.

Simple uniform forms are usually easy enough to follow

Exactly this. The amount of SLT time taken up handling parents who have allowed (or even encouraged) their child to break the rules is insane. And the outcome is always the same... The child was in the wrong, the rule is upheld and punishment ensues. Schools don't suddenly think "oh, Mrs Muggins doesn't think children should have to wear a dark coloured coat to school - she's probably right".

The sense of entitlement is ridiculous and the sad thing is that parents are completely unaware that they are disadvantaging their children. Those who do best in school are not those who take the view they should be unilaterally allowed to choose which rules to follow and which they can flout.

Most British thread ever 😂

extolling the virtues of rules around sock colours is a very British 'thing'. This is not universal.

Yes, every single one.

Have you not looked at the votes?

It's a thin end of the wedge type of scenario. Get the small stuff right and the big stuff is easier. Why do you think behaviour in public, private and grammar schools is generally so much better than in comprehensive schools?

Surely this must be satire. It's not worth engaging seriously with this sort of oversimplified stuff.

You seem very committed to the idea that any person or institution in a position of authority is automatically right, however extreme or irrational. I just don't agree and I don't think think its a good basis for a healthy society.

The references to genocide upthread seem hysterical in relation to school rules at first glance but there is an important point buried in there which you seem not to be grasping: not all rules are automatically right just because they are there. Not all decision-makers are making rules in good faith or rationally, and there has to be scope for dissent and challenge in any society.

I completely agree in principle that school rules are established by professional educators who in most cases are making them in good faith and with evidence based intentions. I don't think they should be broken without good reason. But any system which exercises authority over people, whether a school, a government or a company, is fallible and children shouldn't be shielded from this.

I do want my child to understand that the rules exist for good reasons and she must follow them unless there are very strong grounds not to. I don't want her to feel that school rules are an a la carte option.

Of course challenges should take place through proper channels as opposed to just opting out of things unilaterally. Sometimes, though, dissent isn't tolerated and there's no obvious mechanism to challenge it. Schools don't make it easy for children to rationally challenge authority (sometimes for good reason). So parents do sometimes have to sparingly exercise their authority.

I don't want to raise a human being who feels she can pick and choose which rules to follow according to her whims, so in 99% of cases I will tell her to follow the rules. But I don't want to raise a human being who blindly does anything she's told to do without considering whether its the right thing to do.

Laws (i.e. rules of the land) were introduced following WWII to help ensure a future tyrant couldn't do what Hitler did. We all must follow those for the food of everyone. Those unilaterally picking and choosing which ones to follow are the troublesome ones.

I don't know much of German legislation from pre-WWII but I would hazard a guess the crime of murder existed. Hitler chose to disobey that law because he didn't respect it - he thought his opinion (that Jews should be exterminated) was more important than abiding by the laws of his country. His actions are actually a prime example of what happens when someone believes they are above the rules and it's at their discretion whether or not to follow them.

It is a terrible example to think that the Timmy's of the world, who disobey school rules, are the food guys and not the potential Hitlers.

You are not respecting OP’s authority! You will come to a sticky end mark my words…

Why should a child be given detention for wearing a coat in the corridor or not wearing a blazer?
The punishment is not directed directly at the not wearing a piece of clothing. The punishment is to try to teach children that establishments have rules in place for social cohesion. When people start challenge them with rebellion, chaos results. It's learning about social adaptation. It has nothing to do with lacking critical thinking. You can do both.

Sadly, these concepts go over the head of many parents. They can't think beyond ' it's stupid to force you to wear a piece of clothing so do what you want'.

What this is teaching is that people with no experience or training in one area know better than those who do and sadly, that's how society is going. Parents know better than educational professionals. MN posters know better than legal experts. Jo public knows better than doctors with high intelligence and many years of training than average Jo.

We are teaching our kids to believe they know better than professionals just because they don't like to be told what to do. Professionals find themselves spending more time justifying themselves than doing what they were trained for.

This does NOT mean you never challenge any professional. You do it after research and by bringing up intelligent arguments. Not 'but it's stupid, but my auntie had this procedure, but my neighbour won her divorce etc...' which sadly is what it usually comes down to.

Getting Eric Cartman vibes here.

And to add, this attitude is having the exact opposite effect to what we want our kids to do: ask questions to better learn and become experts themselves. Experts with different views that evolve with time, but are based on learning not on ' I don't know why that rule is in place, I have no interest in learning why it might be in place, I think it's stupid, I don't like it and I know better, so I won't abide to it'.

I don't think it is so much about learning resilience. I think it is more about learning about priorities and what is worth getting worked about. The amount of energy that parents waste on school uniform rules and fairness of detentions is a bit depressing when there are clearly bigger issues. Maybe it is displacement anxiety because they know their child's schooling isn't going so well and that is the bit they feel they have some say in.

I can understand why you'd feel your daughter was perhaps treated harshly.

Unfortunately, there are times when applying the rules does seem harsh on those students who are genuinely very well behaved and have perfectly reasonable reasons for having contravened a rule. The difficulty for a teacher is that the rule exists for a reason and many of the children flouting it will not be doing so in the same circumstances. A teacher cannot pick and choose which children to apply the rule / punishment to - that would create disparity and a whole lot of bad feeling.

There are times we all fall foul of a rule (not necessarily deliberately) but there is something to be learned from understanding that, even though there was no bad consequence from us doing so, we still broke the rule and we can then face the consequences. It is how a society remains cohesive and understanding as such teaches resilience.

If I was you, I'd explain to your daughter why schools have such a rule in place and how the teacher could not choose to not apply it to her because that would not be fair to other students. Your daughter could write a letter to the teacher apologising for being late and setting out the reasons why it happened, finishing with a question to the teacher as to what she could / should do in the same situation, in future, to avoid being in trouble. If the teacher does not engage, I would then forward a copy to the head of year with emphasis on the question - it's looking to a resolution.

Another thing I remember from primary school (infants) was the “rule” that children must never, ever do anything without being told, even if it was obvious we’d be told to do it in the next minute “I didn’t say start packing away, did I?”. Children used to get in big trouble for this.

On one occasion, when we were 5 or 6 years old, the deputy head took us for a handwriting lesson, and wrote “kitten” on the board. She then did a slow walk around the classroom, throwing children’s exercise books on the floor. She then made them (more than half the class) pick them up, stand at the front of the class, and hold them up. Their crime? They had written the word “kitten”, without being told. After berating them for minutes (how much time was wasted on this?), she made them sit down, and said in a kind voice “now write the word ‘kitten’”. Our usual teacher sounded shocked when she heard about books being thrown on the floor.

This was not a one-off. Scenes like that happened a lot. I wonder what it taught us about thinking for ourselves? Ironically, there was this dialogue from the same teacher:
Child: Jonathan told me to do it.
Teacher: If Jonathan told you to put your hand in the fire, would you do it?

Another teacher had a vendetta against “silly questions”, and used to name and shame children who asked them.

I think you’ve lost credibility because you’re comparing a philosophical point to vaping in the toilets? Utterly bizarre.

But it is absolutely true. To think otherwise is to miss some of the very basic approaches to parenting.

I have a 4 year old. He has never really been naughty. He's had the small stuff instilled in him with reasoning from the start, along with the lesson that, sometimes, we just have to do things we don't like. If we feel strongly about something, we can raise it. We don't break the rules first, we talk about it calmly and in a rational way. We've now had plenty of conversations whereby he has explained why he thinks something should be done differently and, where that causes no issue, we've then allowed the rule (or its application) to be changed.

That's how you do it.

He's one of only two children in his school class to have been recognised for following all the rules, on every occasion, since starting school. His name has also spread around like wildfire because of his ability to converse, reason and rationalise which (crazily) is beyond that of children many, many years older than him.

He'll change the world for the better because he'll understand how to do it.

Its always been the law but trying to get schools in Scotland to follow it is another issue that has resulted in multiple crt cases where the schools and/or education department (council ones) have lost. The problem is we are having to sue each school/council individually we are waiting for my sons new build school to respond to a letter before action because none of the toilet facilities meet legal requirements for single sex or unisex facilities nor do they conform to the schools premises act (Scotland) rules.
The really annoying thing is we warned them at planning stage and have been asking them to sort this from the moment we saw the plans for the school yet were ignored for years and now it looks like we will have to go to crt to get them to adhere to the law

This is a brilliant illustration of the point.

When children witness vindictive, punitive or totally unfair behaviour by teachers at school they will recognise emotionally that something isn’t right. I don’t want those instincts to be dulled.

This scenario perfectly encapsulates what is wrong with the “authority by any means necessary” principle.

If following the rules means “never exercising any agency over yourself or thinking for yourself without explicit permission to do so by a teacher,” then no thanks I don’t want her submitting to that kind of authority.

I don’t want her growing up thinking she can never act with autonomy. Think about the implications of that for personal relationships, for their role as citizens, voters, employees and consumers. No thanks.