Parenting - the generation game !

[Pupuce]

My mum and I had this big debate yesterday. She thinks we "30 something mums" feel that we have to be extra nice to our kids (and indulge them).... for example she thinks that 20 something mums (who usually are not (yet) career women) are far more "disciplinarian" (this is the wrong word actually but I hope you see what I mean). We (the 30's) feel guilty for working so hard and spoil our children because it's the right thing to do but are we thinking of the consequences.
For example, a lot of us would put our babies to bed quite late so taht we could see them whilst they might need to be in bed earlier.

She "sees" all my friends and cousins raising their babies with far too much attention to them, we potty train them later, we allow them to get off the table at any time during meals, we don't let them play bon their own (we keep fetching their toys and playing with them),....

Obviously I was raised in a more disciplined manner than I am raising my own 2 kids. I have very little to complain about my upbringing, in some respects I think my mum did a superb job () so I do wonder if she may be right.... in reaction to our mum's way of doing things we have become so "baby" oriented that we allow for a lot from them and may not be doing them a favour.

I am sure I will hear loads of different views... I am just asking myself what your views are.
And don't bash my mum.... she has her good side too

Pupuce, as a 30 something mum I feel I have more patience with dd, actually WANT to spend time playing etc (second childhood, maybe? )
but I'm also pretty strict (more than dh on eg not leaving table until finished, pretty rigid bedtimes unless poorly)..I think it depends more on personality than age. maybe I've inherited my parents' approach - they were pretty laid back on some things but firm on eg manners, speaking properly etc

Pupuce, this is an interesting debate. I had my daughter at twenty and my son at thirty and I have to say I am a much better parent in my thirties than I was in my early twenties. I was much more rigid in my early twenties, I am much more go-with-the-flow now. However, my children have very different personalities and I am in very different circumstances. I am still quite disciplined with both my children (in terms of bedtimes, manners, mealtimes, homework, etc.,) but do worry that this is potentially a generation in the making who are so cocooned by their 'perfect' parents that independence will be a very hard step to take. I recently sent my twelve year old daughter off alone to a Sunday afternoon rehearsal at school. The school is ten minutes away. She walks to and from school five days a week. She was returned by car by her friends parent who was noticably huffy and I could not help but think she thought I should have taken and collected her. (Anyway, I digress!)

Cate Blanchette was on women's hour recently and she made a comment about the thirty somethings being the therapy generation: we psychoanalyse everything including our own parents parenting skills and often conclude that the results of their (our parents) inadequacies are our own inadequacies. The result: we are so afraid of making mistakes we spend our lives trying to be the perfect parents, a goal utterly unachievable and thus we run ourselves ragged trying to achieve the impossible & we forget that making mistakes goes with the territory. I think this is an interesting argument and when I look around me I do see evidence of this.

message withdrawn

This is interesting. I'm 23 and so would be considered a young mum by many (dd is 12m). My friends with kids range in age from 26-35 and i can't see many age related differences. I think it's more to do with your background and circumstances. For example I've always been laid back about letting dd play by herself (finishing thesis when she was born), not bothered about certain "rules" laid down by HVs but at the same time was determined about bedtimes, not rocking to sleep etc.
I know I can't be a perfect mum but there are certain things I hope for,a polite, sociable, happy child. I work full time so I'm quite conscious of "doing things" such as swimming, park at the w/ends, but that's because I enjoy it. DH is in his mid-30s and isn't bothered about bedtimes etc, that said he moans like hell if she wakes up in the night when ill!

I'm 21 and Mum of 2 (1 and 3). I'm a full-time Mum and love spending time with my children. I was always very maternal and I beleive that if you have children their needs should come first as far as possible. My life revolves around the children and I aspire (to some degree...) to the "attachment parenting" theory, whereby the parenting takes it's cues from the children's needs (within certain boundaries, obviously). I think I'm much easier going than most of my older friends, and certainly more so than my own parents who were in their 30's. i think it depends on an awful lot of things - the parents' personalities, those of the children, outside influences... interesting debate, but I don't think you can possibly generalise to that degree.

I don't think it is an age thing more a sign of the times that parents are more relaxed. It just so happens that most mums (and dads) nowadays are in their 30s. I am sure there is an element of indulging a little because of work commitments. However I can also see the opposite side of the coin. For instance I have a working mum friend who is actually very organised and fairly strict with her kids. She has to be in order to get them up and out of the house in time to drop them off at nursery. Also the nursery itself is quite strict because they obviously don't have a one-one staff-child ratio. So the debate could be a stay-at-home mum vs working mums scenario.

However as jenny says there are a lot of factors involved. Personally as a mum in her 30s (not working) I am sure I am terribly inconsistent - sometimes strict, other times indulging .... in other words doing it all wrong perhaps!! However my boy seems happy enough.

I would agree that it's more a personality/circumstances thing than an age thing. Like Jenny2998, I'm also 21 but my views are quite different to hers. I'm not saying her views are wrong of course, but I work full time and enjoy it. I must admit I'm not the most maternal person in the world, but this doesn't stop me loving dd any less.
DD is only 11 months old so I can't really comment on discipline issues. But I imagine when she's older I'll be fairly laid back but makes sure she knows right from wrong and learns to respect other people.

My mum also sayd (to fuel the debate) that 20 something are in better physical shape and recover faster from labour ???? Do you agree ? I don't think so as I recovered very quickly from labour 2 - I am in my thirties.

I guess it depends a bit on age and also how fit you were before hand. I was in the gym 8 weeks after the birth and 11 months on I'm pretty much back to my previous weight. Unfortunately I now have saggy skin on my tummy (despite having strong abs)and big sticky out ribs, neither of which I can do anything about
Crumbs is that the time? I'm off to bed - night night!

Pupuce - depends on how you look after yourself physically. I was very fit with my first birth, went swimming several times a week and dancing too. I think I feel a little stiffer this time round (3 years on) but otherwise I am healthy. I am in fact more fit than my stepdaughter who is 10 years younger (aged 26). We know that sportspeople can perform well right into their 30s so childbirth can be the same. If nature allows us to conceive right into our 40s then we should manage the labour and everything aferwards.

I have to say that I find motherhood exhausting & I do wonder if it is my age - I am coming up to 44 with a one year old.

I am overweight (about one & a half stone) but for most of my adult years have always been this weight - so can't blame the pregnancy.

I am reasonably active - swimming & aerobics once a week plus a four mile walk most days. I don't go out to work but have various voluntary jobs but still get absolutely exhausted most days - much more so than the younger mums I meet.

Getting around after birth may be easier if you're younger but surely pre-pregnancy fitness/weight gain are more important. I walked a 2.5 mile round trip to town when dd was 2 days old and as I only put on about 16lbs when I was pregnant I was back in my normal clothes within a week. I think that probably was because I was quite fit before I got pregnant, exercised through the pregnancy and didn't breast-feed.

As for energy, I work f/t and I'm no less exhausted than my older friends, think that's the job rather than dd though!

hrw - well done for being in your old clothes within a week but I a not sure I understand your statement : and didn't breast-feed.
Are you saying that because you didn't bf you feel that you lost weight faster?
Do you mind telling me if I understood you correctly or maybe explain further ?
Thanks

No I meant that I was able to get out and about quickly because I didn't breast-feed. I'm sure people will say that they got out equally quickly when breast-feeding, but from the experiences of friends who were breast-feeding and 1st time mums staying in until they cracked the feeding thing seems to have been the norm.

I think I lost the weight simply because I was lucky enough not to put much on. TBH I'm not convinced by the BF and lose weight hypothesis, it may help womb reduction but I think post-natal weight loss is a lot more complicated.

Sorry, grammar is a bit slapdash when posting as I'm trying to work at the same time, therefore things may be a bit hard to follow!

I don't know if it's age related but i have found that having waited until 30 to have a baby (because we wanted to sort out our lives first), I tend to arrange my life our dd's needs more than trying to adjust her to mine.

I've noticed the opposite in very young mums (especially when the pregnancy wasn't planned...they seem to be a lot more matter of fact about the whole baby business), at least in the few ones I know personally.

Maybe it's because we put off having a baby for long and then I was told I'd have problems getting pregnant (but I didn't), but I feel like I have to enjoy every second of dd's babyhood (and because I'm going to work soon). Somehow it does not feel right to leave her play on her own, even if it's just 10 minutes reading the paper. (I do these things when she's asleep)
I don't know..but I've read hundreds of books and magazines and went to all the prenatal courses available, while dh's cousin (got preg at 21) was planning to go ona camping holiday a couple of weeks before her due date...
As Bundle said, I also feel I have a lot more patience now than I'd have had at 20.

This is not to say that 20yo are not good parents, far from it, but they look a lot more relaxed, I'm not a paranoid mother but I am very conscious about trying to raise dd in the best way possible so that she grows happy and confident and has the best possible chance in life, I feel that younger parents just do it, without being so self-conscious about it, they probably make the same choices as I do, but spend a third of the time thinking about it...
(I'm sure I'd have been the same at 20)

Chiara71, I know i'm a lot more matter of fact than some of my friends who had 1st babies later in life but i think that this is because I'be been around kids more. my mum had her last baby at 47 so dd has an aunt 8m older than her! Also I looked after my brother (now 6.5) as a sort of nanny. For example took him to Greece when he was 3 and I was 20.

Friends with more than one child have also commented that they aren't so intense second time around simply because they haven't got time to worry so much. DD does tend to fit in with us but that was a joint decision and DH is mid-30s so again I'm not sure that's simply because I'm a younger mum. We do things with dd that are for her enjoyment, park, soft-play etc. but we also take her shopping,restaurants too.

Anyway, it's after 3pm on a Friday, so I'm off. Academia does have its benefits!