If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
dkhedmo ) writes:
I am going to give the situation another chance, as the alternative would result in restraining the toddler every time ds1 wanted to work on something, which is often. Our space is very limited and to supervise both kids means ds1 at the kitchen table and a very exuberant toddler stuck in a high chair or gated off from 50% of the downstairs area. Ds1 knows that if I say I will take away things or privileges that I will do it and that he will have to put in some hard work to earn back lost items and priviledges over time. I don't think that's the only alternative. Other alternatives could be: restraining the toddler at times, but not necessarily every time the older one wants to do crafts; allowing crafts only when the toddler is sleeping; perhaps teaching the toddler to stay away from crafts; removing all other chairs from the kitchen table so the toddler can't reach the top of the table. There may be other alternatives. A combination of the last two might be workable, especially if you pay more attention than usual to the toddler at those times. I think the way you're talking about taking away privileges and earning them back is very much a punishment paradigm. That can be OK, but I believe it's better to use other methods than punishment if possible. I believe a parent may get away with using a certain amount of punishment but each bit of punishment tips the balance of the relationship in an unfortunate direction -- for example towards a child who will use punishment or defiance against the parent. Instead of framing it as a punishment, you could have taken away things like permanent markers with a non-punitive explanation along the lines that you feel you're forced to supervise their use to ensure that the furniture is safe, that you regret any inconvenience to the child, and that you expect that soon the child will have developed and demonstrated the level of responsibility that would allow use of markers unsupervised. You could then go on to point out recent examples of the child's rapid improvement in responsibility in other areas. by way of praising the child. With punishment, the parent's purpose is to cause the child inconvenience or suffering in order to teach the child something. With logical consequences, there is some other purpose, such as directly protecting the furniture. The child may interpret it as a punishment even if you don't think of it that way; but I think it's better to frame things as logical consequences if possible. If you model purposely doing things primarily to cause inconvenience, the child may do that back to you later. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
"Welches" ) writes:
"I wanted to take you to the park, but I'm going to have to clean this up instead. What a pity!" I think that's good because you're not making it sound like a punishment. So you don't get into reverberations of revenge going back and forth between parent and child (power struggle). If you feel genuine regret about missing the park (I would) and express it, then the child may feel you're on his/her side. Sometimes a child's actions such as writing on furniture may be expressions of revenge against the parent, or vague expressions of freedom, dignity and defiance that the child wouldn't feel were necessary if the child wasn't experiencing punishments from time to time. It's better to be in a mutually cooperative relationship. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
Chookie ) writes:
Does the exuberant toddler not like doing artwork? You could supervise them both together, at opposite ends of the table, with their own equipment. Excellent idea!! the toddler could have edible finger paint, for example. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
On Sat, 4 Feb 2006 08:19:21 -0500, "Sue"
wrote: "dragonlady" wrote in message When I had a 5 yo who liked doing art, and two toddlers who got into her stuff, the playpen got a real workout: Yes, I second the playpen. When I had multiple children of different ages is when I used the playpen the most. The older kids loved the playpen because they could play with their little pieces and/or the little ones could play and the older ones could do their thing. Saved my sanity a lot. I third that suggestion. My son used to play with all his toys that had little parts in the playpen and his sister could watch but not destroy his creations. -- Dorothy There is no sound, no cry in all the world that can be heard unless someone listens .. The Outer Limits |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
"Banty" wrote in message ... When my son was younger (in fact, until recently and he's 13) he was really into die-cast little cars (like Matchbox). We'd always put them carefully away into boxes with slots for them or my son would park them in rows to put them away. One evening, I had friends over, and he was playing cars with their daughter, and they had pretty much taken them *all* out. When it was time to go home, he and the girl started cleaning up (he had to initiate). My friend, her father, seeing this, thought he'd speed the process up and 'make it fun' by having the kids pitch the cars across the room into a toy box! She and her Dad were throwing them, with them smashing agaisnt each other, chipping paint, with my son crying and objecting, the puzzled Dad saying to my son "What's WRONG??". I intervened and said "oh, we'll take care of that" and later had to explain to my son that *this* time it didn't work out to have his friend help him clean up as usual but he should still have his friends help him clean up before they go home. If my child had something he really wanted to care for, I'd tell him he might want not want to take it out for the playdate. Matchbox cars are normally played with in a somewhat rough manner (I would assume, DS doesn't care for them). If the cars were to be played with gently, he should either keep them locked up or make plenty sure his friend (and everyone else) knew how carefully they should be handled before taking them out. I would assume the dad didn't know they weren't to be played with like a normal toy. And since you had a toybox, he thought naturally that's where they went. I would have explained to the dad why your son was so upset so that your son would be able to verbalize it next time. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
In article , toypup says...
"Banty" wrote in message ... When my son was younger (in fact, until recently and he's 13) he was really into die-cast little cars (like Matchbox). We'd always put them carefully away into boxes with slots for them or my son would park them in rows to put them away. One evening, I had friends over, and he was playing cars with their daughter, and they had pretty much taken them *all* out. When it was time to go home, he and the girl started cleaning up (he had to initiate). My friend, her father, seeing this, thought he'd speed the process up and 'make it fun' by having the kids pitch the cars across the room into a toy box! She and her Dad were throwing them, with them smashing agaisnt each other, chipping paint, with my son crying and objecting, the puzzled Dad saying to my son "What's WRONG??". I intervened and said "oh, we'll take care of that" and later had to explain to my son that *this* time it didn't work out to have his friend help him clean up as usual but he should still have his friends help him clean up before they go home. If my child had something he really wanted to care for, I'd tell him he might want not want to take it out for the playdate. Matchbox cars are normally played with in a somewhat rough manner (I would assume, DS doesn't care for them). If the cars were to be played with gently, he should either keep them locked up or make plenty sure his friend (and everyone else) knew how carefully they should be handled before taking them out. I would assume the dad didn't know they weren't to be played with like a normal toy. And since you had a toybox, he thought naturally that's where they went. I would have explained to the dad why your son was so upset so that your son would be able to verbalize it next time. The problem is - how could we have anticipated that they'd be thrown across the room?? (That's not playing like a normal toy IMO.) Perhaps some kids like to throw their cars around, that's not how my son's way of playing, and that's not how he and the girl were playing. And the toy box was full of the larger, bulky toys (a large toy box isn't much good for zillions of little cars), I don't think it's so obvious that some toy box across the room would be where these go, let alone that they be thrown across the room to it (that was the Dad's idea of how to make cleanup fun...) The thing is - why would it be assumed that kids would play roughly with something like that? Which things could we know that *other* kids would play roughly with? *Can* a kid have treasured things like those Easter eggs on display? Or is everything of interest and value to be hidden away. That's nuts. Why is the onus on the *nondestructive* use to have to be proactively protective, rather than on the rough usage be assumed? It's it better to teach that things be treated well, and the category of things that can be treated very roughly is few, and never what is others', unless that's what the others are doing? I think so. It makes for a kid who will engage decently with the rest of the world as he grows up. Banty |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
"Banty" wrote in message ... In article , toypup says... If my child had something he really wanted to care for, I'd tell him he might want not want to take it out for the playdate The problem is - how could we have anticipated that they'd be thrown across the room?? (That's not playing like a normal toy IMO.) They might not normally be thrown across the room, but it's quite normal to crash them into each other. I don't think you could have anticipated what happened, but I think that after it happened once, you likely put some kind of protection into place to make sure it never happened again. FWIW, I do think the dad should have asked where the cars went before putting them away. And I personally would *never* have thrown a hard toy across the room (stuffed animals or soft balls maybe). And he *certainly* should have stopped immediately when your son got upset. So, yeah, he was really being clueless. Bizby |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
"Banty" wrote in message ... The problem is - how could we have anticipated that they'd be thrown across the room?? (That's not playing like a normal toy IMO.) Perhaps some kids like to throw their cars around, that's not how my son's way of playing, and that's not how he and the girl were playing. And the toy box was full of the larger, bulky toys (a large toy box isn't much good for zillions of little cars), I don't think it's so obvious that some toy box across the room would be where these go, let alone that they be thrown across the room to it (that was the Dad's idea of how to make cleanup fun...) I think it must have been obvious to the dad that the toys belonged in the toybox. It didn't sound like he was being malicious and wanted to destroy your son's toys. The thing is - why would it be assumed that kids would play roughly with something like that? Maybe you didn't assume they did because yours doesn't play like that. My DS doesn't play with cars, but when I think of Matchbox cars, I think of burying them in the sand, crashing them together, etc. That is my expectation of normal use for those cars. I'm sure a thousand people will now chime in that their kids don't play like that, but that is my expectation. Which things could we know that *other* kids would play roughly with? *Can* a kid have treasured things like those Easter eggs on display? Or is everything of interest and value to be hidden away. That's nuts. Why is the onus on the *nondestructive* use to have to be proactively protective, rather than on the rough usage be assumed? Because, as you have found, not every child is as well-trained or gentle as yours. If there is something that is of value, then it should be protected when others are over or else suffer the consequences. Now, I don't think it's right that other kids might be more destructive, but such is life. Knowing that other children may be more destructive, the toys should be hidden away when child guests arrive, unless you know the children and know they are gentle. It's it better to teach that things be treated well, and the category of things that can be treated very roughly is few, and never what is others', unless that's what the others are doing? I think so. It makes for a kid who will engage decently with the rest of the world as he grows up. True, but you can't teach this to other children, only your own. Therefore, if other children will be around who are more destructive, the your child needs to protect his things or risk having them destroyed or don't invite the destructive children. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
toto wrote: When my ds was 3, he had a collection of blown easter eggs that we had decorated. He was extremely careful with them as they were very delicate. He kept them for around 2 years. Then one day, he had a friend come over (they were around 5 by then) and he showed his friend the collection. This friend threw them and stomped on them and destroyed them all. My son was very upset. The friend's parents didn't think much of it as after all they were just *easter eggs.* Ds never invited this boy home after that though they still played at school and were friends there. If they were that important to you or your son, they shoud never have been brought out in the first place. It's a no-brainer. OTOH, my own dd had some destructive behavior at 3 when she went to play with her friend (the boy's sister, btw). The problem at this age though was a lack of supervision. The girl's dad had a broken leg and let the two 3 year olds play upstairs in the bedroom. He didn't hear them pillow fighting. One of the pillows broke and started shedding feathers all over and the girls thought it was such fun that they took the feathers out of a second pillow and were throwing them all over. I really didn't consider that dd's fault or her friend's fault though as they were 3, not 5 and both girls were involved in the playing. And next time they'll find some extension cords, sharp objects or guns to play with. Great friends you have, there, and great judgement, too. -L. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
kids and their furniture?
On 4 Feb 2006 23:51:46 -0800, "-L." wrote:
toto wrote: When my ds was 3, he had a collection of blown easter eggs that we had decorated. He was extremely careful with them as they were very delicate. He kept them for around 2 years. Then one day, he had a friend come over (they were around 5 by then) and he showed his friend the collection. This friend threw them and stomped on them and destroyed them all. My son was very upset. The friend's parents didn't think much of it as after all they were just *easter eggs.* Ds never invited this boy home after that though they still played at school and were friends there. If they were that important to you or your son, they shoud never have been brought out in the first place. It's a no-brainer. He was 5, he wanted to show his friend his collection. Why would he expect a friend to destroy anything that was his. OTOH, my own dd had some destructive behavior at 3 when she went to play with her friend (the boy's sister, btw). The problem at this age though was a lack of supervision. The girl's dad had a broken leg and let the two 3 year olds play upstairs in the bedroom. He didn't hear them pillow fighting. One of the pillows broke and started shedding feathers all over and the girls thought it was such fun that they took the feathers out of a second pillow and were throwing them all over. I really didn't consider that dd's fault or her friend's fault though as they were 3, not 5 and both girls were involved in the playing. And next time they'll find some extension cords, sharp objects or guns to play with. Great friends you have, there, and great judgement, too. The house was reasonably child-proofed. The dad did use poor judgement and his wife was pretty upset with him, but then you would never make such a mistake as you are the perfect mom... NOT -L. -- Dorothy There is no sound, no cry in all the world that can be heard unless someone listens .. The Outer Limits |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|