Are there any absoute rights and wrongs in parenting?

[seeker]

Apart from bottom line safety issues?

I have been thinking about this because I consider myself by nature a relativist, and the mumsnet consensus is to end most discussions with something like "each to their own".

But I was on a thread recently when I felt very strongly that someone's viewpoint was just wrong. Not a different point of view, but wrong. And I said so - expecting to be flamed - but somewhat to my chagrin I was reminded of my insignificance by being ignored!

So, are there any parenting issues that people feel are absolutely right or wrong - or is everything except basic safety things like car seats and smoking over babies heads and not leaving your valium open in the cot a matter of opinion?

OK, this is a test for me then, MMJ...

I respect and admire you very much. But
I don't think it's okay to hurt children. I think it cannot but teach them that control of a situation can be achieved by violence/being stronger than the other person. I think it is emotionally humiliating and a betrayal of trust. Your job is to ensure that they are not hurt.

I understand it at end of tether, or when terrified. Don't understand it in cold blood.

I admit I am surprised, not that you are admitting it, but that you are doing so apparently without self-criticism.

And I don't think any of us can say whether certain of our behaviours have damaged our children until many years hence.

Oh I take that last bit back actually. They do when you are dealing with negligent parenting, like WWW said ages ago, when the parent is outside the law.

Onebat - didn't she say she'd done it when they'd done something dangerous and she was frightened?

I hit out at ds1 in anger and frustration, in the past. It's a mistake, you apologise and move on. It's not a parenting strategy and far from desirable but I don't wear a hair shirt for it.

yes, mmj did say that, but without the apologize and move on bit. I thought there was a more 'and it's never done them any harm' tone to mmj's post, but I may be utterly wrong.

Given the nature of the thread - should we be standing up for what we believe more? - I suspect mmj was probably expecting that from me?

I hate smacking too and am full of admiration for OBM's bravery in standing up to the bully in the shop, but I don't know whether it's an absolute. I'd like to say that it is but I'm just not sure.

I absolutely agree that "it cannot but teach them that control of a situation can be achieved by violence/being stronger than the other person." I hate this idea, but it is widely accepted in certain contexts. What else is war, just or unjust, for example?

There are a lots of aspects of parenting which are personal absolutes for me, but which I could not comfortably impose on others. Yesterday for example, I heard a mother telling her child off after having been poked in the eye: "if someone pokes you, you poke them right back, you don't stand there crying". I find this repulsive and upsetting, but at the same time am aware that she thought this advice was the best way of protecting her child.

I don't know is my unhelpful answer to the OP. Would agree that being benign and consistent are pretty fundamental, but what this actually means in practice is a different matter.

yes mmj I think my instincts would have been to slap, and my outrage and anger would also have pushed me in that direction, but I believe that I would have been able to overcome them at the time. (Hope I would with an adult too)

And in analyzing it after the event, even if I hadn't managed not to slap, I think I would have been very ashamed of myself. She's a child, not able to control self, you are adult, blah blah blah.

Sorry, I do know that sounds priggish, but that's my position.

dire consequences, yes, but not pain.

But - I know where you are coming from mmj. And my point about 'understand in anger/panic' was trying to show that I see the difference betweeen losing control temporarily (I do it every other day, don't hit, but do use words to hurt)then feeling bad but not obliged to report self to social services - and habitual smacking as discipline.

mmj I would have been outraged if my 11-year-old spat in my face but I wouldn't slap her. There would be severe non-physical consequences of some kind though.

I suppose the question is, did the slap restrain the 11-year-old or did it just leave the mum remorseful and apologetic, therefore handing 'power' back to the 11-year-old as she became a 'victim.' I'm not sure it's even an effective answer to slap her.

though actually I feel I am backing into moral relativism here...

SEEEEEEEKER!

Hmm. Not sure about absolutes. There are so many variables aren't there? The consequences of an interaction depend on both people involved, and the relationship between them.

I think that for each relationship there probably are absolutes. There are things that I could never do my my ds without really hurting him. They are not always the same for my dd. Not generalisable.

Does that make any sense at all?

Yes FallenMadonna. I think that was what I was trying to say, sort of.

I think the only right thing to do as a parent is whatever your instincts tell you to do. They are your children, no-one will know or understand them like you do, so by al means listen to other peoples ideas, but in the end - do what's best for you and your child.

Agreed. (though bagsy hitting not included)

argh. I am tying myself up in knots and MUST WORK.

I don't understand smacking at all. What's the point? As punishment, it is pretty ineffective- they may not do it again out of fear but they heven't learnt anything have they?
Punishment in itself is a strange one-isn't it more about teaching them to think independently?

I totally disagree with that statement i think smacking does have a small place and i was smacked as a child and i have turned out great and someone else said that smacking is wrong and law agrees. What a load of crap, the says that you must not leave a mark on the child not that it's wrong, frankly i don't care what the law says they are my children and if i think they need a smack then they will get 1. We do have other punishments along side this but at times a smack can work wonders. What is more damaging to a child is parents that do not disapline ther children and then we get this culture where the children rule and basically do as they please, i mean back in the day when smacking was accepted and used by lots of parents we didn't have a lot of the problems we have today with yobs that have no regard for others!! My children do have respect for me, dh and others. Also put downs and telling children they are stupid is far more damaging to a child than a smack on the bottom, hand or leg-never around the head or anywhere else!! And i have been told by school that all my children well behaved(not angels) and very confident children so i do think there is a case to be made for smacking and i believe it valid and it's because of this stupid law that parents are now afraid to exercise there right to disapline there children!!

BITCAT-Please tell me this a wind up.
Don't you realise much of the anti social behaviour of today is because of dysfunctional/ abusive homes? Not because they didn't get smacked as children.
I don't see my choices as eother smacking or criticising, so that arguments invalid.
A smack works wonders? Give me a break

who does it work wonders for, though, BITCAT?

Well it worked for me as a kid and it's working for my kids so i don't see a reason for stopping. I know 1 mother in particular who says she wishs she'd have smacked her kids when little and she has huge problems with her teenagers and what do you do if you've tried all other options, do you give up and not bother!! I'm sick of self righeous parents preaching about wrong to smack and all children are different some may not need smacking mine def do and i know lots of parents that do!! And i also don't think it's anyones place to approach a parent that has smacked there child, it's nothing to do with you and you should butt out, as long as the child isn't being beaten senseless..it's not your child and anyone said anything to me they would get a not such nice answer!! Yes some off it is dysfunctional homes and violence but i don't see smacking as violence, i love my children and i am not beating them. The violence i'm talking about is domestic violence and dysfunctional yes i'm talking about the young mums that think it's funny to have children and not give a monkeys, and they do not have a clue how to disapline a child and they run a muck!! No fathers around nowadays doesn't help!!I'm not talking about the kind of smacking everytime they are naughty it's if something is severe, ie biting, hitting brothers or sisters and actually they don't bite anymore because they know that if they bite, they are going to get biten back and they realise it hurts!! So yes it works for me!!!

I think it's a bit of a leap to associate society's problems with smacking (hard enough to mark) being banned.
You ask "what do you do if you've tried all other options, do you give up and not bother"
What if smacking doesn't work? WHat then?

Oh, and I said early on that I thought telling children they were stupid etc was an absolute wrong. Some people came on and ssaid they've done it in the past, or they have what could be considered humiliating (by others) nicknames for their DCs. I suppose what I should have said was that IMO doing something regularly to humiliate / belittle your child is wrong. For example, telling them they'll never do anything good, never amount to anything. Not calling them stupid once in a while, or calling them Silly Billy as an affectionate term