Utterly disrespectful kids in public, what do you do?

[Blessedfamily]

I think just bringing back good, old-fashioned butt-kickings would help a lot. We should have a "he needed a butt-kicking" defense. It used to straighten up a LOT of attitudes.

 

For some reason, where I come from it's called a "good, old-fashioned, country butt-kicking". Haven't heard it used in decades, though.

[creekland]

I strongly disagree. Chastising a child, in public, can work and perhaps most importantly it can send a lesson to other children in the area that behavior such as this will not be tolerated.

 

Our reluctance to vocally correct children for behavior such as this is one of the reasons that children behave so badly. If a child did that to me he would be the target of much of my wrath as well as the parents. Unless I saw real contrition on the part of the parents for their child's behavior security would be involved.

 

Society needs all adults to stand up to poorly behaved children.

 

:iagree: And it has been my experience, both with and without the parents around (mostly without) that it works well. When people say nothing, society disintegrates. I suspect there are parents out there who thought it was cute to see junior bugging other people. If the parents had cared, they would have stopped it before it became a major issue.

 

We all want to - or at least need to - live in society. We need to teach our kids to be social beings (and spitting on others is definitely a no-no). If the parents won't act, I SURE WILL at all times short of a definite issue with the child that the parents are working on themselves. I don't care if other parents get offended. Stay at home and spit. I felt the same way when we saw youngsters destroying both school and national park property while the parents saw, but ignored, them. Let your kids destroy your house, not public property.

 

Granted, I never told the children their parents were being poor parents, I solely addressed the kids, but when the parents got mad at me, I simply told them (parents) that if they would parent their own children I wouldn't have to. What they were destroying belongs to all of us, it's not just theirs to destroy. I only saw the school parents again and they did keep junior in line afterward. Hopefully the national park parent did too. Hopefully the parent the OP met will actually BE the parent to the little spitter afterward. If no one says anything, change is unlikely.

[lionfamily1999]

I think just bringing back good, old-fashioned butt-kickings would help a lot. We should have a "he needed a butt-kicking" defense. It used to straighten up a LOT of attitudes.

:iagree:I remember hearing that all the time when I was younger (that kid just needs a good -notsoniceversionofbutt- kicking. I also remember parents that were willing to take that advice and act on it immediately.

 

 

(btw, helpful pmers) It's the first definition you sillies ;) YOUR definitions are number two :lol:

[SquirrellyMama]

Don't forget the poorly behaved adults. I think we should loudly chastise them, too.

 

Shame them into behaving better. :tongue_smilie:

 

I think there are plenty of adults who could use an "old-fashioned butt kicking" also.

[calandalsmom]

Shaming people (no matter their age) almost never positively affects their future behavior.

[Purpledaizy]

:iagree:

Shaming people (no matter their age) almost never positively affects their future behavior.

[Veronica in VA]

If the parents were sitting there I would say something to the parents, especially if it was a younger child. I'm not excusing the behavior, because I think it's awful, but it is possible the child has a problem - mentally or emotionally.

[LauraGB]

I didn't get to read all the responses yet (just many - I'm hiding in my room eating - I'm calling it a 'lunch break', so I don't have much time). So, if it's been said already, I apologize. What I would have done, and have done, is say very loudly to my own kids (so everyone could hear) something along the lines of "Good grief! Did you see that kid? If you ever spat on someone...oh my goodness! I don't know what I'd do, but boy, would you be in trouble! That's downright disgusting and rude and...(etc, you get the idea)".

 

Now if he spat on me, I would definitely be saying something directly to the parents, but in FYI form, making it sound like I *knew* they couldn't possibly have known their beloved child was behaving so inappropriately. ;)

[pqr]

Shaming people (no matter their age) almost never positively affects their future behavior.

 

 

It sounds nice but it simply is not true.

 

When an individual did not stand for the national anthem, at a recent event, I loudly commented on his behavior and he sheepishly stood, hand over heart. At a following event he required no admonition. RESULT - improved bahavior

 

Publishing the pictures of johns, in the local papers, has had an impact on the number of individuals who use that type of service. RESULT - improved bahavior

 

Peer and societal pressure certainly has an impact on behavior. It is our unwillingness to openly demand better behavior and a modern day weakness that results in a propensity to look the other way when people act badly that has resulted in open displays of rudeness and other bahavior that we see today.

 

We all accept that peer presure is a very real modifier of behavior. Frequently this is pressure to bahave in the negative, but it need not be so. Society and peers can modify bahavior to the positive just as effectively if we have the moral courage to do so.

 

Throw garbage and I will openly tell you to pick it up. I will shame you and generally I will be effective.

 

Cut in line and I will openly challenge you, I will shame you and I have never had anyone fail to then move to the end of the line.

 

From what basis do you draw the conclusion that this is not effective?

[AuntPol]

It would really depend on my mood. If I were already in a bad mood, I would probably go spit on the parent (which of course is not a good thing LOL).

[Penelope]

It sounds nice but it simply is not true.

 

When an individual did not stand for the national anthem, at a recent event, I loudly commented on his behavior and he sheepishly stood, hand over heart. At a following event he required no admonition. RESULT - improved bahavior

 

 

Throw garbage and I will openly tell you to pick it up. I will shame you and generally I will be effective.

 

Cut in line and I will openly challenge you, I will shame you and I have never had anyone fail to then move to the end of the line.

 

From what basis do you draw the conclusion that this is not effective?

 

Wow.

 

I agree these things are annoying but calling people out all the time isn't the best way to win people over to your way of thinking.

Edited May 11, 2010 by Penelope

[creekland]

Shaming people (no matter their age) almost never positively affects their future behavior.

 

Wow, this is absolutely not true - not in real life anyway. It might not break habits (nor should it be used for that), but it sure can change basic behavior (like, say, spitting on people). It's a form of peer pressure that changes how many people behave - for good or for bad.

[pqr]

Wow.

 

I agree these things are annoying but calling people out all the time isn't the best way to win people over to your way of thinking.

 

So you allow people to cut in line?

 

If you do not challenge someone who will?

[Danestress]

if the child has a special need and is behaving this way without having the full ability to choose how he behaves (I don't know how to phrase that, but I leave open the possibility that he might have some ability or might not or whatever) why would the parents put him in this position? Surely they know that a really bad scene could erupt of he's spitting on people.

 

I respect that many of you feel like the victim should address the parents and not the child. And maybe that's right, though I have to admit that if spit on, my level of concern for the parent's preference would be zero. But the world is full of people who are jerks and who lack self control and who would definitely start screaming at this child. Why on earth would the parents place a child in that situation?

[Jugglin'5]

I think just bringing back good, old-fashioned butt-kickings would help a lot. We should have a "he needed a butt-kicking" defense. It used to straighten up a LOT of attitudes.

 

:iagree::lol:

[Penelope]

So you allow people to cut in line?

 

If you do not challenge someone who will?

 

Sometimes, yes. I think the person who cuts in line is the one that looks foolish and everyone knows it. I don't feel a need to be the line police.

 

Now if I am standing in line at the pharmacy with my sick kid waiting for the medicine, I'm going to say something.

 

I'm assuming you are a lovely person who is assertive in certain situations, but the posts come across as looking for someone to do something wrong so you can call them out on it.

 

Like the person not standing up for the national anthem. I think the person loudly commenting on it looks just as socially inappropriate as the person doing it. :confused: Exactly how does someone sitting down affect you? And how does your commenting on it and the person being shamed into standing, make the world a better place?

[Jugglin'5]

Shaming people (no matter their age) almost never positively affects their future behavior.

 

It certainly affected mine. I can still vividly recall certain instances where my teacher called me out, and I did NOT repeat those particular offenses.

[lionfamily1999]

Wow.

 

I agree these things are annoying but calling people out all the time isn't the best way to win people over to your way of thinking.

I don't think the intent is to win them, so much as guilt/shame/embarass them. You may get more flies with honey than with vinegar, but who wants flies hanging around anyway?

So you allow people to cut in line?

 

If you do not challenge someone who will?

I think this is more for dealing with bullies than kids, though. Children whose parents allow them to act like savage beasts need someone to shame their parents into better behavior... imo, of course ;)

[calandalsmom]

It certainly affected mine. I can still vividly recall certain instances where my teacher called me out' date=' and I did NOT repeat those particular offenses.[/quote']

 

Ok, if you like shame, by all means. Have at it.

 

http://www.nospank.net/grille3.htm

 

http://www.angriesout.com/teach8.htm

 

http://life.familyeducation.com/behavior-modification/communication/29457.html

 

That last one will probably be best received by those who think shame is a good tool. I think it soft pedals the issue and I completely disagree that it is rare for people to go too far.

[pqr]

Sometimes, yes. I think the person who cuts in line is the one that looks foolish and everyone knows it. I don't feel a need to be the line police.

 

 

I'm assuming you are a lovely person who is assertive in certain situations, but the posts come across as looking for someone to do something wrong so you can call them out on it.

 

Like the person not standing up for the national anthem. I think the person loudly commenting on it looks just as socially inappropriate as the person doing it. :confused: Exactly how does someone sitting down affect you? And how does your commenting on it and the person being shamed into standing, make the world a better place?

 

The problem is that if people do not stop poor behavior such as line cutting then eventually everybody does it and life simply becomes more difficult. Eastern Europe comes to mind where, other than lines waiting for the bus where someone will crack your head if you try to cut, there is no such thing as an orderly line. People cut to the front in stores, movie theaters etc. When asked about it the reply is "everybody does it so waiting in line means you never get to the front." They may look stupid, but they are ahead of you. I am not the line police but I will not stand for someone cutting as it means that everybody needs to wait a little longer because someone else was inconsiderate.

 

As to the National Anthem, I am a LEGAL immigrant and love this nation with all my being (as I would hope all Americans do). Because I am an immigrant I am perhaps just a little more sensitive to things like this than those who have enjoyed freedom all their lives. I also grew up in a family where love of country was right up there with love of family and of God. We can argue about the Constitutional right not to stand for the Anthem, and you would be right. One does not have to stand for the Anthem......but....... not standing for our Anthem (while one is free not to do so) is disrespectful to this nation, it is disrespectful to those who served to ensure our freedom and just as I would not put up with someone being disrespectful to my wife I do not deal well with people being disrespectful to our nation. If in challenging those who are disrespectful to this nation I am being "socially inappropriate," so be it.

 

The same mentality that would not challenge someone who sits during the Anthem is that which tells children IN THE US to remove US flag shirts on 5 May because it may offend US schoolchildren whose loyalty appears to be more towards Mexico than the US. I would argue that the US would be a better place if we all honored our nation and its flag and that standing for the Anthem is part of that.

 

I appreciate the lovely person comment, and I do try to be gentle and help others, I do not look for trouble but I never run from it either.

[pqr]

Ok, if you like shame, by all means. Have at it.

 

No one said that they like shame, simply that it was effective.

 

As to the psycho-babble....the one question they can not answer is why, since they began telling parents how to raise children, the behavior of chilren in society seems to be getting worse. Even so the link did have the following passage "Shame can have a healthy role for those who are old enough to be fully responsible for their actions. For instance, teenage or adult offenders cannot be rehabilitated unless they feel genuine shame for their offences".

[SproutMamaK]

My opinion is that sometimes, people behave shamefully. It is not the fault of the person working to change the situation that they feel ashamed of their behaviour. If you behave shamefully, it's your own fault if you feel ashamed - because you SHOULD.

[calandalsmom]

No one said that they like shame, simply that it was effective.

 

As to the psycho-babble....the one question they can not answer is why, since they began telling parents how to raise children, the behavior of chilren in society seems to be getting worse. Even so the link did have the following passage "Shame can have a healthy role for those who are old enough to be fully responsible for their actions. For instance, teenage or adult offenders cannot be rehabilitated unless they feel genuine shame for their offences".

You can be rehabilitated without shame, but NOT without remorse.

 

I dont think the facts bear out the assertion that children behave worse today than ever before, though every generation loves to assert this, as if the days of their youth were so halcyon and idyllic. Like the Fabulous '50s when black people weren't allowed to drink from the same water fountains but at least the boys all tucked in their shirts and girls didn't smoke on the street.

[AuntPol]

I. Like the Fabulous '50s when black people weren't allowed to drink from the same water fountains but at least the boys all tucked in their shirts and girls didn't smoke on the street.

 

I hate comments like this. It seems to imply that if parents actually started parenting their children again, then we will bring back archaic laws. One has nothing to do with the other. You can like the fact that children were more respectful in another era without liking every single action that happened in that era.

 

That said, I grew up in the seventies and I don't think we were better behaved over all but just knew better out to act when we were around adults. We roamed free and thus didn't have parents anywhere around to correct us most of the time but when they were, we were little Eddie Haskells.

[calandalsmom]

I hate comments like this. It seems to imply that if parents actually started parenting their children again, then we will bring back archaic laws. One has nothing to do with the other. You can like the fact that children were more respectful in another era without liking every single action that happened in that era.

 

That said, I grew up in the seventies and I don't think we were better behaved over all but just knew better out to act when we were around adults. We roamed free and thus didn't have parents anywhere around to correct us most of the time but when they were, we were little Eddie Haskells.

 

I don't think people have stopped parenting. I think people are people no matter the decade. There were crummy parents in Jesus' time and there are crummy parents today. I doubt the ratio of reasonable responsible people has altered much over time.

[Mejane]

That said, I grew up in the seventies and I don't think we were better behaved over all but just knew better out to act when we were around adults. We roamed free and thus didn't have parents anywhere around to correct us most of the time but when they were, we were little Eddie Haskells.

 

Our parents might not have been around, but someone who knew us invariably was. We never did anything in our small town that didn't get back to our parents (and grandparents) in about five minutes flat; often the news beat us home. Just knowing that was enough to keep us well-behaved.

[Mrs Mungo]

Penelope, forgive me, I'm re-ordering your post a bit to make it easier on myself.

 

Like the person not standing up for the national anthem. I think the person loudly commenting on it looks just as socially inappropriate as the person doing it. :confused: Exactly how does someone sitting down affect you? And how does your commenting on it and the person being shamed into standing, make the world a better place?

 

In the military community, at military ceremonies, etc it affects *everyone* because the ceremony/event sometimes will not carry forth until everyone is standing. We experienced this, for example, at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. A young man refused to stand and the ceremony was at a standstill until fellow civilians applied enough pressure that he left.

 

Sometimes, yes. I think the person who cuts in line is the one that looks foolish and everyone knows it. I don't feel a need to be the line police.

 

The problem is that if people do not stop poor behavior such as line cutting then eventually everybody does it and life simply becomes more difficult. Eastern Europe comes to mind where, other than lines waiting for the bus where someone will crack your head if you try to cut, there is no such thing as an orderly line. People cut to the front in stores, movie theaters etc. When asked about it the reply is "everybody does it so waiting in line means you never get to the front." They may look stupid, but they are ahead of you. I am not the line police but I will not stand for someone cutting as it means that everybody needs to wait a little longer because someone else was inconsiderate.

 

I was going to say that Penelope has clearly never lived in Europe. GAH, in some areas of Europe people cannot and will not stand in line! It's so incredibly rude!!! it drove me insaaaaaane.

 

I don't think people have stopped parenting. I think people are people no matter the decade. There were crummy parents in Jesus' time and there are crummy parents today. I doubt the ratio of reasonable responsible people has altered much over time.

 

I agree and disagree. Is the ratio of good to crummy parents the same? I don't know. Even if it is the same, we certainly have more direct experience with crummy parents because of the way that we live.

[Purpledaizy]

You can be rehabilitated without shame, but NOT without remorse.

 

I dont think the facts bear out the assertion that children behave worse today than ever before, though every generation loves to assert this, as if the days of their youth were so halcyon and idyllic. Like the Fabulous '50s when black people weren't allowed to drink from the same water fountains but at least the boys all tucked in their shirts and girls didn't smoke on the street.

:iagree:

 

Although shaming often gets a quick result, it is an extrinsic motivator and does little to change long-term behavior.

[Jugglin'5]

:iagree:

 

Although shaming often gets a quick result, it is an extrinsic motivator and does little to change long-term behavior.

 

Ah, but if I am being spit on in public by an unruly child, what I care about are quick results. I don't really have any control over his long-term behavior.

[Mrs Mungo]

Ah' date=' but if I am being spit on in public by an unruly child, what I care about are quick results. I don't really have any control over his long-term behavior.[/quote']

 

Exactly.

[Purpledaizy]

Ah' date=' but if I am being spit on in public by an unruly child, what I care about are quick results. I don't really have any control over his long-term behavior.[/quote']

 

I disagree, every interaction we have from birth forward has an effect. My interaction with this child, no matter how brief, will become a part of his larger experience.

[pqr]

I disagree, every interaction we have from birth forward has an effect. My interaction with this child, no matter how brief, will become a part of his larger experience.

 

 

Then we agree, let us help the child because a little shame and a scare may prevent him repeating this type of bahavior when he gets into his late teens where such behavior can result in extremely negative and harmful consequences.

 

Scare the child early before someone hurts him badly at a later age.

[Purpledaizy]

I do agree lets help the child. I strongly and fundamentally disagree with shame as a method to modify behavior.

[IsabelC]

:iagree:

 

Although shaming often gets a quick result, it is an extrinsic motivator and does little to change long-term behavior.

 

 

Yes.

 

In the example of standing for the Anthem, what has changed about the child? Does he suddenly feel more patriotic, more respectful? Or is he making an empty show of complying because he wants to avoid being shamed again? Which outcome would you prefer? Sure, if a person is nothing but a set of behaviors, then yes the shaming led to an improvement. But if you believe that a person is more than his behavior, then you want to influence the way he thinks and feels, not just the way he acts. And you need to know why he is acting that way. What if you shamed a person for failing to stand and then found out later that the person had a medical condition that precluded him standing? (not the case in this instance, but an example of reasons for actions).

 

 

Shame also encourages self centredness. It makes everything about what the miscreant is like. If we talk about what the behavior is like for others, we encourage the person to think about others "I choose not to do this because it hurts others / hurts people's feelings" instead of "I better not do this because somebody will make me feel bad if I do".

Edited May 12, 2010 by Hotdrink

[pqr]

I do agree lets help the child. I strongly and fundamentally disagree with shame as a method to modify behavior.

 

 

Then he will learn at a later age when someone else knocks some sense into him, hopefully it is only a bloody nose.

[IsabelC]

I don't ever want my kids to learn that assaulting somebody is a legitimate way to solve a problem. If anyone 'knocks sense into' my kids, they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.:glare:

 

(Although I have no intention of letting them spit on people either. It is possible to treat children respectfully and teach them to treat others respectfully. The whole idea of kids running wild unless they are physically or emotionally hurt to keep them in line is a false dichotomy.)

 

Now I will probably get cybersmacked. Gotta work harder on avoiding threads that don't directly relate to my home schooling...

Edited May 12, 2010 by Hotdrink

[pqr]

I don't ever want my kids to learn that assaulting somebody is a legitimate way to solve a problem. If anyone 'knocks sense into' my kids, they will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.:glare:

 

(Although I have no intention of letting them spit on people either. It is possible to treat children respectfully and teach them to treat others respectfully. The whole idea of kids running wild unless they are physically or emotionally hurt to keep them in line is a false dichotomy.)

 

 

You may say what you like. The fact is that when a boy is in his teens if he spits at another boy there is a very good chance that the other boy will retaliate. I would have, and I have a very good right hook.

 

The final outcome, be it the law or anything else will not fix a broken nose or knocked out teeth. As parents it is our responsibility to ensure not only that our children behave well but that they know the possible consequences for bad behavior.

 

I would be mortified were my son to behave like the boy in the OP and if someone shamed him because of such behavior I would be appreciative. Why... because obviously I was failing somewhere and perhaps that other adult saved my boy's teeth.

 

This is reality in the big world not some esoteric discussion on the pros and cons of a tongue lashing to a miscreant. The alledged harm of a "shaming" (something that I really do not accept unless it is continual and at a very high level) is generally far less than other realistic possible consequences.

[Purpledaizy]

Yes.

 

In the example of standing for the Anthem, what has changed about the child? Does he suddenly feel more patriotic, more respectful? Or is he making an empty show of complying because he wants to avoid being shamed again? Which outcome would you prefer? Sure, if a person is nothing but a set of behaviors, then yes the shaming led to an improvement. But if you believe that a person is more than his behavior, then you want to influence the way he thinks and feels, not just the way he acts. And you need to know why he is acting that way. What if you shamed a person for failing to stand and then found out later that the person had a medical condition that precluded him standing? (not the case in this instance, but an example of reasons for actions).

 

 

Shame also encourages self centredness. It makes everything about what the miscreant is like. If we talk about what the behavior is like for others, we encourage the person to think about others "I choose not to do this because it hurts others / hurts people's feelings" instead of "I better not do this because somebody will make me feel bad if I do".

 

^^

 

Well put.

 

Then he will learn at a later age when someone else knocks some sense into him, hopefully it is only a bloody nose.

 

This makes very little sense to me. My job as a parent, and someone who loves/cares for all children, is to model appropriate behavior. Shame will not teach. Sense cannot be knocked into someone. Violence does not educate.

[JennifersLost]

1. Most of us who believe in consequences and the occasional raised voice or swat on the butt didn't start out that way - we, too, had rosy ideas of how a truly loved and guided child would simply learn to behave themselves. Then we got sick of dealing with the consequences of our inaction. Or our children got banned from the local playgroup. And we smartened up. Our children shouldn't suffer because we're too spineless to call them on it when they misbehave.

 

2. I've known many parents who never used a raised voice or a consequence which might imply shame. Lots of them were/are my friends. Several of those "gently raised" kids started drinking at 13, selling drugs at 14 and having sex at 14 (because heaven knows we shouldn't tell kids not to have sex, should we? That implies sex is shameful!) Some got kicked out of school. One still solves every problem with her mother by screaming until she gets her way.

 

I am very thankful we moved away from that group of people five years ago. I still love those parents very much and it would have been extremely awkward when I had to insist our children no longer spend any time together. Every one of them still doesn't understand how their children turned out this way....and why mine didn't.

 

3. The number one thing that bugs me about the "no raised voice" crowd is how it puts a child on a pedestal above all adults...above all other human beings. Why is a child more important than an adult? Why is your child's right to be obnoxious more important than my right to have peace, quiet or safety? Why is your child's feelings more important than MY feelings?

 

Because if I get spit on, it hurts my feelings.

 

Where oh where did the common sense go in this world? You don't have to beat a kid - just tell him or her to stop it! How on earth is that detrimental?

[pqr]

^^

 

Violence does not educate.

 

...but it modifies behavior.

 

As a HSer one of the problems that I see in many HSed children is how to deal with the unpleasant aspects of society. We frequently shield our children from this. By the time I was my son's age I had been in at least a dozen playground fights, I knew the results of pushing someone's buttons, I knew how to defend myself and I knew when a situation was likely to turn. My son does not know as much as I did and this can present a problem.

 

Actually on second thought.....violence does educate. Spit at a boy and he punches you in the nose....you will soon LEARN not to spit at people.

Edited May 12, 2010 by pqr

[Barb_]

Nevermind. Jennifer said it better.

Edited May 12, 2010 by Barb F. PA in AZ

[Barb_]

Yes.

 

In the example of standing for the Anthem, what has changed about the child? Does he suddenly feel more patriotic, more respectful? Or is he making an empty show of complying because he wants to avoid being shamed again? Which outcome would you prefer? Sure, if a person is nothing but a set of behaviors, then yes the shaming led to an improvement.

 

It doesn't really matter what the child feels in this case. He doesn't have to like to stand, he just has to do what is appropriate for that place and time or he must leave. How bad does someone's behavior have to be before it's okay to enforce the social code? What if a 12yo pees in a public park out in the open, in the middle of the garden? A 9yo loudly launching F-bombs in front of your kids and his parents? Where does it stop? I really don't care about changing the kids' minds in those examples, just their behavior.

 

Shame also encourages self centredness. It makes everything about what the miscreant is like. If we talk about what the behavior is like for others, we encourage the person to think about others "I choose not to do this because it hurts others / hurts people's feelings" instead of "I better not do this because somebody will make me feel bad if I do".

 

On the contrary, the child is already completely self-centered and without conscience. Shaming him won't likely suddenly infuse him with remorse, I agree, but others will look at you with gratitude for standing up to the bully. Because that is exactly what he is...a bully who is testing to see how far he can go before he's called out. It's a game.

 

Barb

[elizabeth]

1. Most of us who believe in consequences and the occasional raised voice or swat on the butt didn't start out that way - we, too, had rosy ideas of how a truly loved and guided child would simply learn to behave themselves. Then we got sick of dealing with the consequences of our inaction. Or our children got banned from the local playgroup. And we smartened up. Our children shouldn't suffer because we're too spineless to call them on it when they misbehave.

 

2. I've known many parents who never used a raised voice or a consequence which might imply shame. Lots of them were/are my friends. Several of those "gently raised" kids started drinking at 13, selling drugs at 14 and having sex at 14 (because heaven knows we shouldn't tell kids not to have sex, should we? That implies sex is shameful!) Some got kicked out of school. One still solves every problem with her mother by screaming until she gets her way.

 

I am very thankful we moved away from that group of people five years ago. I still love those parents very much and it would have been extremely awkward when I had to insist our children no longer spend any time together. Every one of them still doesn't understand how their children turned out this way....and why mine didn't.

 

3. The number one thing that bugs me about the "no raised voice" crowd is how it puts a child on a pedestal above all adults...above all other human beings. Why is a child more important than an adult? Why is your child's right to be obnoxious more important than my right to have peace, quiet or safety? Why is your child's feelings more important than MY feelings?

 

Because if I get spit on, it hurts my feelings.

 

Where oh where did the common sense go in this world? You don't have to beat a kid - just tell him or her to stop it! How on earth is that detrimental?

 

Have I told you lately how much I absolutely miss reading your posts. Once again, you stated perfectly what I believe far better than I could have. You rule and where have you been????

[ConnieB]

I am talking REDICULOUSLY disrespectful kids. We were walking through the mall yesterday, and this kid kept spitting on people. His parents saw and didnt say anything. So me being the person I am, HAD to say something when he spit on me.

 

I looked at him, and told him how disgusting it was to spit on people, told him even if his parents didnt care to take the time to correct his behavior I did because I refuse to allow MY KIDS to learn such behavior. Then the mother promptly loooks at me and say DONT YOU TALK TO MY SON LIKE THAT. So, I said to her If you would stop your son from spitting on people like they were peices of trash, I wouldnt have to (2 or 3 people watching-- I got a few thats rights after that!)

 

So how do YOU handle disrespectful kids? I am not usually like that, But to get a loogie hacked on you?? Just not right!

 

 

Hmmm, wasn't there a case where they arrested some guy for hocking a loogie....I think he was HIV but still, bodily fluids and all that, ewww.

 

I'd have done exactly what you did and told the parents what for too...then I'd have proceeded to find a mall security cop and made him do something. The sad part is that the parents are probably posting on their facebook about the rude lunatic lady who yelled at their precious baby for "no reason".

[Barb_]

^^

 

Well put.

 

 

 

This makes very little sense to me. My job as a parent, and someone who loves/cares for all children, is to model appropriate behavior. Shame will not teach. Sense cannot be knocked into someone. Violence does not educate.

 

I think you are confusing the point. She isn't advocating bloodying your own child's nose. If you are modeling appropriate behavior, then you are doing your job as a parent. What of those who are not? If strangers don't stand up to the obnoxious behavior of someone's offspring when they will not, those children will grow up into even bigger jacka$$es who will be begging for someone bigger to punch them in the nose. 17yo boys aren't much into modeling appropriate behavior. I think that's all she's trying to say. No one is arguing for shame and violence as a tool for understanding and molding a child close to you. This is a discussion of public defense tactics against rude adults,bratty stranger kids, and budding sociopaths.

 

Barb

[HRAAB]

There's feeling shame for things over which you have no control (poverty, learning disabilities and such), and then there's feeling shame over your own bad behavior. No one should ever have to feel shame for having less, but, imo, feeling shame for the behavior described in the OP is good. It shows the person has a conscience. If someone doesn't feel any shame over acting in such disgusting manner in public, perhaps they need some help to acquire some healthy shame.

 

Bad and anti-social behavior, such as spitting on people in the mall, should be embarrassing.

[Purpledaizy]

No, I understood the point. My point being that, regardless of whether or not a child is "close" to me does not abdicate my responsibility to model appropriate behavior. Just because the child is not *mine* doesn't lower the standards by which *I* treat them. I don't shame mine, yours, or anyone elses. I believe there are better methods. I did offer my opinion on what I my response would be in this situation and it could hardly be misconstrued as not standing up...

 

Shaming makes the shamer feel better and little more.

Edited May 12, 2010 by Purpledaizy
clarification

[Purpledaizy]

There's feeling shame for things over which you have no control (poverty, learning disabilities and such), and then there's feeling shame over your own bad behavior. No one should ever have to feel shame for having less, but, imo, feeling shame for the behavior described in the OP is good. It shows the person has a conscience. If someone doesn't feel any shame over acting in such disgusting manner in public, perhaps they need some help to acquire some healthy shame.

 

Bad and anti-social behavior, such as spitting on people in the mall, should be embarrassing.

:hurray:

Yes! I agree with you. However, this is guilt. Feeling guilt when you have done something wrong is good. Guilt comes from within. Shame is inflicted and does not produce the same result.

Edited May 12, 2010 by Purpledaizy
added a smiley

[Cindyg]

In all seriousness, this is a kid who is not likely to live a long life. Some of you are offended at the OP's choice of words; but when this kid is a teenager, if he spits on the wrong person, he's going to get knocked up side the head. Or knifed.

[EthiopianFood]

3. The number one thing that bugs me about the "no raised voice" crowd is how it puts a child on a pedestal above all adults...above all other human beings. Why is a child more important than an adult? Why is your child's right to be obnoxious more important than my right to have peace, quiet or safety? Why is your child's feelings more important than MY feelings?

 

I think I agree with you (I FEEL like I do, anyway :tongue_smilie:), but why does that mean you have to yell? What does raising your voice have to do with enforcing rules?