An irreverent, inclusive, alternative parenting community
Obedience
Many of you know I'm a speech-language pathologist and I work in early intervention. I provide therapy to infants and toddlers (ages birth-3) in their natural environment, which most often is the child's home. I have a family currently that is truly lovely; mom and playful and calm with the children, the kid I work with is funny and smart, etc. But they apparently belong to a Christian denomination of a more fundamental bent. There are lots of "children's Bible" type books, the parenting book in the bathroom is by James Dobson (gah!!!), and there is a lot of emphasis on strict manners with adults and on "obeying."
Manners are awesome. I tried very hard to teach both of my children good manners and I'm pretty sure, from things people have said, that as much as they make me want to kill them, with most people they are polite and well-mannered. But when they were just turning 3 I didn't expect them to phrase pretty much *every* "I want" sentence as "may i please have...... " and I have never used the word "obey' in my life.
I know this is a major cultural issue and I try to be very aware of cultural differences in my practices. But first of all, I just needed to vent that it squicks me out to hear someone use the word "obey" to another human being, even if that human being is a just-under-three year old. Can't we say "cooperate" or even "please do what I said?" I realize sometimes adults need to just lay down the law but "obey" implies a level of blind following that makes me uncomfortable. So of course I never use it, but I can't very well tell this mom not to use it.
Second, the "may i please" has some clinical implications, because this kid is very talkative and REALLY smart but he has severe articulation issues, so requiring him to use an even longer utterance than he would normally is not really what I would normally recommend. I've tried modeling and directly recommending shorter sentences, simply adding the word "please," etc but mom is pretty adamant about the "may I" construction.
So I guess this post is for 2 things: anyone else just as squicked by "obey?" and anyone encounter cultural differences in their work that they find hard to get around?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by wookie on -
Oh, there's definitely many, many things and places in which we can and should let our kids have some power in their otherwise rather powerless world. I don't bug my kids about what they wear as long as they have weather-appropriate gear at hand (and this has earned me stern lectures from our principal). I don't bug them too much about what they eat, but I don't buy sugary snacks, and I insist a little bit from every food group is eaten before you get to have 2nds of your favourite food (otherwise my youngest would eat cheerios all day, every day).
In an ideal world, it would be easy to have those times not overlap the times we need an immediate, unconditional response from our child to do what we just told them to do.
And we probably all have differing thresholds for acceptable/non-acceptable... standing in shopping carts, ripping branches off of trees in public parks, standing on railings, climbing on displays, these really make my blood boil but my SIL doesn't even bat an eye. To her, they're all "normal things any X-year old would do."
I guess why the "negotiation" aspect sets my warning bells off is because I see it used in my everyday life with some of the meanest, most ill-tempered, cruelest kids in the school and daycare. "Now Billy. When you kicked Jane in the stomach, it hurt her feelings. So you're not going to do that again, are you? No? Of course not! That's my boy!" ... this is with a neurotypical 10 year old. And we've had the (mis) fortune of watching that scene play out for 6 years now, repeatedly. If there has been a change in this child's behaviour, it is not visible to this observer.
So anyway... that's where I'm coming from. A little to the right of centre on this issue ;-)
-
Permalink Reply by ruth on -
wookie, I don't think you're necessarily more authoritarian than everyone else who commented, including me. It's not the expectation of compliance from one's kids that bugs me; although I do think picking one's battles with kids is key. It really is the word "obey" rather than the concept that freaks me out for some reason. I know that the only 2 families I've ever worked with in 5 1/2 years who explicitly said things like "you must obey" were Bible-based Christians. You just don't hear that many parents use that specific word; they say "do as I say" or "just do it" or "listen to your mother/father" if they're talking about the other parent, etc. That's why it felt like a cultural difference to me. And for some reason that particular thing bugs me more than most others.
-
Permalink Reply by hermit crab on -
Cannot stop thinking about this when I see this thread:
-
Permalink Reply by bap2 on
-
I don't want to threadjack this, but I have been thinking of commenting since it began. I think Ruth is right in that there are many terms these days that are hijacked by conservative Christians. My workplace is gradually becoming a haven for Pentecostals. When you say something like, "That woman has such grace." They ask if it means she has accepted the holy spirt. No, I mean she has grace. "Grace or grace?" Auuugh!
My OB moved to Africa during my pregnancy and I was assigned to the new partner. He is a Reformed (which is another loaded word) Calvinist with 7 (now going to be 8) kids. We were discussing baby names, and I guess all of my name choices were loaded code-words of "I'm like you." He asked if I wanted birth control after birth. I thought they saw in my chart that hormonal stuff makes me go wonky with migraine so I said no and further fueled his fire. So his language totally changed. When it became apparent that we were like two ships passing in the night, he said, "Are you a legalist?" What? I had go to look all this stuff up. He was highly disappointed. I eventually found his wife's blog, where she discusses her disgust for his "worldly" patients and I was extremely hurt. Though I still read it constantly because I'm aghast that they adopted a bunch of kids and then one by one sent them back to Africa because they were struck with the devil or something.
Anyways, I would be excited to see any information anyone has on those studies that say non-compliant kids turn out ok. Our house is a nightmare right now. Why is everything up for discussion? Why does he try to negotiate every little thing, from one pea on his plate to actually getting in the car to go to school? What have we done to deserve this? We took away the TV last week, what a WONDERFUL idea for our family. Negotiations and shitty behavior are down 99%!
However, I still read that doctor's wife's blog. Plus she links to a bunch of other fundamentalist barefoot-pregnant-in-the-kitchen blogs and I am amazed at how their children DO OBEY. They all look so happy! and perfect! Every day is a delight with them, they do stuff, and they take pictures and their kids are sitting still and smiling! It makes me think I'm doing something wrong. It makes me ruminate on maybe I should quit my job, pop out a few more kids and just "submit" to my husband's ever whim (not that he has any, he thinks I'm damaging myself by reading these). Perhaps if I just took the thinking out of life and just "obeyed" I would be so much happier like they are.
-
Permalink Reply by wookie on
-
I'm sorry bap, but I read the last paragraph and am overwhelmed with the urge to shout "Can I get an A-MEN!"
Sorry. Seriously. I don't know what came over me.
2 thoughts.
1) It's a blog. They probably aren't going to post the 5pm witching hour melt downs and kids puking down the hot air vent and hitting their brothers with chairs. Even though those things probably do happen. Like the typical researchers bias, bloggers really only ever post evidence of what they want their life to be like.
2) Homes where one parent can afford* to do nothing but stay home and cook and clean and caregive... um, yeah, that's going to (where it is affordable) probably work out nicely for them. Who wouldn't love the stability and comfort of coming home to a clean house, with food cooking and someone there to fetch my pipe and slippers so that I can have a nice before dinner drink while my shining children are lovingly spoonfed and whisked away to tantrum free bedtimes ... er hang on, I'm satirizing here. It's a lovely, thought-free existence! You don't need to think when someone is taking such good care of you!
*Afford - mentally, emotionally and financially... I might be able to figure out how to finanically afford to stay home but I sure as hell can't afford it mentally or emotionally. Thought free and dependant = my idea of hell.
I can count the number of single income families I know on one hand. I don't know any who are shiny happy all the time, although a couple try hard to appear that way.
-
-
Oh wookie, you're so logical. I wish I had a little wookie on my shoulder to help me reason through my day:).
My neighbor is like that. She's perfect in every way. Her little girls play quietly for hours every day and she can get her house in tip-top condition (whereas I'm typing this with one hand--the other is in a teething baby's mouth). I could enumerate so much more (sleeping, eating, getting along--it's all perfect) and it makes me feel like crap on a near daily basis. Our husbands have become friends, so the differences become even more glaring. Maybe I need to make another post. I haven't had a OS Therapy session in a while, I desperately need it.
-
Permalink Reply by mcglory13 on -
Another thing, I live in a community where everybody has perfectly obedient families with lovely teeth and shiny blond hair. They all listen to their father on everything. This is because they routinely toss the children who don't fit their standards out. If you are gay, or get pregnant before being married, or don't believe in God, your family simply never talks to you ever again. So yeah, the ones left look perfect.
-
Permalink Reply by The Oracle on -
Sorry? It sounds like you just implied that stay-at-home parents are "thought-free." ???
wookie said:*Afford - mentally, emotionally and financially... I might be able to figure out how to finanically afford to stay home but I sure as hell can't afford it mentally or emotionally. Thought free and dependant = my idea of hell.
-
Permalink Reply by kommishoner on -
I read it as part of wookie's satirizing - that homes where one parent can "afford" to stay home sometimes try to look like the Cleavers, but almost zero actually are that way, whether they fake it or not. But I could be misreading. ;)
Speaking generally, I think a more interesting question is the notion of what sort of work/family division people can afford - there's so much that goes into that decision, in terms of what amount of money a family decides can meet their needs, whether they're priced out of local daycare or are okay with the cost/benefit analysis (i.e. is daycare priced such that the working parent is just working to pay daycare), whether they've got other needs that make staying home make more sense, etc. Regardless of whether one person stays home or not, the families it sounds like we're talking about seem more perfect because they sort of ... exude perfection and/or hide the not-perfect stuff, not because one parent stays home. I've seen plenty of families with two working parents that seem similarly perfect (and make me feel similarly insecure).
The Oracle said:Sorry? It sounds like you just implied that stay-at-home parents are "thought-free." ???
wookie said:*Afford - mentally, emotionally and financially... I might be able to figure out how to finanically afford to stay home but I sure as hell can't afford it mentally or emotionally. Thought free and dependant = my idea of hell.
-
Permalink Reply by hermit crab on
-
Eh, I've seen plenty of outwardly "perfect" families that were seething pots of nasty if you looked up close. The only right way is yours. (Guess which side of the obedience/independent-thinking dichotomy I fall down on?)
I think the obedience for safety's sake and the obedience for the sake of respecting authority are really different things. If you're trying to get kids to obey an instruction to ensure they or someone else is safe, then you're really only trying to establish temporary obedience, just until their brains come on line enough for them to be able to consistently assess the relationship between their behavior and safety. (So, until around 25 I think?) If you're trying to get them to obey because your tradition requires deference to older decision-makers, then you're asking them to substitute other people's opinion for their own as a more permanent thing. In the mode of permanent obedience you're not appealing to a principle (don't kick other people because it's unsafe for them) but to personal authority (don't kick people because I said so) - you're supplanting rather than supporting rational development.
I'm sure it's not a really prominent distinction with really young kids but I think the temporary obedience model is one that aims to end itself as quickly as possible, so as soon as kids can make good decisions they're asked to do so. The permanent obedience model has a "while you're under my roof" duration, so kids go from no expectation of good decision-making to 100% responsibility for themselves. I'm sure obedience-oriented parents expect them just to continue in the same pattern they were raised in but for those who don't, that's a pretty abrupt and alienated process of learning critical thinking skills.
-
Permalink Reply by ruth on
-
Oracle, I don't want to speak for wookie but I also think she was being facetious, in part, and also maybe referring to the fact that for some parents, staying at home isn't a good fit. maybe she wasn't. In my case that was ABSOLUTELY true. I'm not self-motivating, at all, so being a full-time at home parent was just horrible for my mental health. But I know many SAHMs who are awesome at it.
and as kommish also said, families with two working parents can also be quite good at looking outwardly perfect and being "seething pots of nasty." (thanks hermit crab!)
-
Permalink Reply by The Oracle on
-
Okay, and thanks all. I didn't read it like that but I could be a tiny bit sensitive about SAHM stereotypes and the idea that one income = cushy existence. It was a little hard to tell where the reflection ended and the satirizing began. But maybe that was the wine.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2013 Created by Offsprunger.
Powered by
