Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (94258)	1/21/2005 2:40:45 PM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Oh, okay. So I will now answer your post. I don't think you understand the concept of parenting by natural consequences, or you would not have said this: Whatever the natural consequences are for an 8 year old staying up late, they are not likely to effectively guide the behavior of an 8 year old to a more healthy routine. Natural consequences means that the child directly experiences the results of his or her bad/irresponsible behavior. It does not mean that a child who stays up too late will be tired the next morning. A good parent provides enough structure so that eight-year-olds are not staying up late, and 8-year-old children should not be deciding when they go to bed. A better example of natural consequences is, for example, when a child forgets to take her lunch to school, she will have to scrounge food from someone else or go hungry. This teaches responsibility. It is a lot easier for the parent to run to school with the lunch (I did this when my child was in kindergarten, but not later when she should have been more responsible) but that teaches nothing. My daughter is not a child anymore, but this is also a good example. She decided to move into an apartment with a roommate, thinking she could have total freedom and lots of fun, work parttime and also stay in college. She did write a budget, but had absolutely no understanding of how much money just disappears as things come up when you are living a real adult life, and so she does not have enough money to get by. The first month she moved out I bought some groceries for her a couple of times because it was fun for me to do that and I could not bear to think of her not having healthy food to eat. Then I noticed that she was going to Starbucks for coffee drinks and drinking cocktails in bars with her friends. So I realized that she would have to suffer the natural consequences of her choices--that I was doing her no favors by subsidizing her financially. Now she will not be able to afford groceries unless she makes better choices with her very limited funds. Hopefully she will learn how to manage her money! I do not agree with this statement you made: "The most effective natural consequence for a child's behavior it the approval/disapproval of their parent. Doesn't work to well for you non-judgemental types." First of all, being a liberal politically has nothing at all to do with being an inconsistent parent, or one lacking in good judgment. You are confusing different concepts. Secondly, children whose primary guide is parental approval/disapproval are not developing their own internal moral code. What happens when the parents are not around? And who says that the parents are approving/disapproving appropriately. Children need to be taught a consistent moral code so they internalize it, and can act appropriately whether someone is approving of them or not. I have no idea why you think I have no first-hand experience with children. Do you think liberals are not parents? I was so interested in becoming a good and consistent parent that I minored in child development, in fact.