Lately I seem to have come across a fair amount of parenting things, sometimes in seemingly surprising locations. I don't seek out parenting books or the like, and never have really (with the exception of The No-Cry Sleep Solution, by Elizabeth Pantley) Something I've noticed in some of these is the tendency to paint things in extremes. For example, I was skimming a book (a homeschooling book, incidentally, so I was a bit surprised to find this in it) that mentioned that you should train a baby to sleep through the night after 6 months, and then spoke of how you need to do this training and discipline because you shouldn't have a child to whom you never say "no". Leaving aside my views on sleep training, this seems a rather extreme jump in logic, doesn't it? Suggesting that not training your child in this way means that you never say "no" to your child isn't the logical deduction to make, in my opinion. I'm sure these extreme jumps can go the other way, too, so I'm not trying to just pick on one parenting style/philosophy.
Personally, though, I'll just keep doing what comes naturally, what works for my family, and not seek out what a parenting book says. And while I'm not homeschooling at the moment, I see no reason that continuing to be an attachment parent, something I follow instinctively and did prior to even knowing there was a label for this style of parenting, should impede educating my children.
10 April 2011
9 April 2011
Growing Up Fast
It seems that Kieran is suddenly so grown up. Sure, he still has the normal tantrums at times, but then he's also very helpful with things and is proving to be trustworthy when outside playing. Without me saying a word, he consistently comments that he needs to get up on the pavement if there's a car coming, and he tries to tell Charlotte to do the same (obviously I get Charlotte out of the way).
Today he tried to help me get rid of the nettles and weeds in the back garden. After a bit, he wanted to go out into the front to play with the neighbourhood kids, and so I told him that he could provided he stayed in front of our house. We live at the end of the street, there's very little traffic on it, and he's shown himself to be trustworthy about it. I therefore decided that he could be trusted to be out there without me for the 5 minutes or less it would take for me to finish in the garden. As it turned out, another mum was out there, so he wasn't unsupervised, but I hadn't known that. I'm not ready to just turn him out to play for extended periods of time without an adult present, but for that short time, I think he would've been fine.
His growing independence amazes me, really. He still needs reassurance from us at times, and, thankfully, still loves snuggling with us, but he's really growing up fast.
Today he tried to help me get rid of the nettles and weeds in the back garden. After a bit, he wanted to go out into the front to play with the neighbourhood kids, and so I told him that he could provided he stayed in front of our house. We live at the end of the street, there's very little traffic on it, and he's shown himself to be trustworthy about it. I therefore decided that he could be trusted to be out there without me for the 5 minutes or less it would take for me to finish in the garden. As it turned out, another mum was out there, so he wasn't unsupervised, but I hadn't known that. I'm not ready to just turn him out to play for extended periods of time without an adult present, but for that short time, I think he would've been fine.
His growing independence amazes me, really. He still needs reassurance from us at times, and, thankfully, still loves snuggling with us, but he's really growing up fast.
7 April 2011
Knitting Thursday
5 April 2011
Perfection
Perfection. That's what we're striving towards. In principle, this isn't a bad thing, but it can lead to undue stress when applied to parenting. Society doesn't help us here, since it seems that parenting books tell us that following certain systems will result in perfect children and a perfectly happy family, while others tell us that whatever we're doing is wrong and will ruin our children. Now, there are some things that have been shown to be damaging, like CIO, but I think there are multiple ways of parenting, and you must find what works for you.
Interestingly, I've also heard this as a criticism of Attachment Parenting, with some saying it places too much pressure on parents to be absolutely perfect. I can see how some may think that due to some proponents of AP insisting that all parents must do certain things in a certain way, but I don't think it's a fault of AP principles in general.
Another problem I see with striving to be the perfect parent by the standards of society is that I find those standards/ideals to be unrealistic. When people ask you if your baby is "good", they generally mean to ask if the baby sleeps well and doesn't cry much, thereby not disturbing the parent very much. Is that realistic? I don't think so. When asked if my children are good, I answer in the affirmative, but I don't expect that they won't disrupt my life. They're meant to disrupt my life, in my opinion.
This stress on being a perfect parent also seems to ignore the fact that, no matter how many books or websites we've read, we're new at this. Even if it's our second or later child, we've never had that child before, and so we're still new at this. No child is exactly like another, and what works for one might not work with another. Therefore, even if you think you've figured out one child completely (which I don't imagine to be the case, seeing as people change and aren't robots), that person can't say they therefore have all children figured out. The bottom line is that we're going to make mistakes, and that's OK. We shouldn't place unrealistic standards upon ourselves. We're striving to be perfect, but it's a journey, and one for which we need God's grace.
Interestingly, I've also heard this as a criticism of Attachment Parenting, with some saying it places too much pressure on parents to be absolutely perfect. I can see how some may think that due to some proponents of AP insisting that all parents must do certain things in a certain way, but I don't think it's a fault of AP principles in general.
Another problem I see with striving to be the perfect parent by the standards of society is that I find those standards/ideals to be unrealistic. When people ask you if your baby is "good", they generally mean to ask if the baby sleeps well and doesn't cry much, thereby not disturbing the parent very much. Is that realistic? I don't think so. When asked if my children are good, I answer in the affirmative, but I don't expect that they won't disrupt my life. They're meant to disrupt my life, in my opinion.
This stress on being a perfect parent also seems to ignore the fact that, no matter how many books or websites we've read, we're new at this. Even if it's our second or later child, we've never had that child before, and so we're still new at this. No child is exactly like another, and what works for one might not work with another. Therefore, even if you think you've figured out one child completely (which I don't imagine to be the case, seeing as people change and aren't robots), that person can't say they therefore have all children figured out. The bottom line is that we're going to make mistakes, and that's OK. We shouldn't place unrealistic standards upon ourselves. We're striving to be perfect, but it's a journey, and one for which we need God's grace.
4 April 2011
Book Nook
2 April 2011
Us vs. Them
Recently I was talking about the Pearls with their To Train Up a Child book. This is a subject I cannot usually talk about without getting very angry, but I'll try not to rant too much (full disclosure - I've only read the first chapter, I was angry enough after reading that to not read the rest).
As I was thinking about it, though, it struck me that, if you strip away all the advice they give, it seems based on a faulty premise in and of itself. It seems to pit parents against their children. This is made obvious in talking about how you must train children to obey immediately, and praising situations where children aren't seen or heard at all.
A similar trend can be found in what I've read of the Ezzo's work (they are the authors of On Becoming Babywise). They advise parents to have "couch time" with each other to show the child that the primary relationship in the family is the spousal relationship, and not the parent-child relationship. Again, this is pitting parent against child and vice versa, it seems.
I truly don't understand the "us vs them" mentality, though I have heard it in other places as well (such as when people tell you not to co-sleep because it might ruin your marriage). I see this as creating conflict that isn't necessarily there. Yes, children disrupt our lives, but not in a bad way. The family must adapt with each new child, as the dynamic changes each time, but it doesn't pit the parents against the children. At least that shouldn't be the case, I don't think.
I can understand, though, that if one accepts the premise that it is "us vs them", one would perhaps be more inclined to buy into the Pearl's and Ezzo's other statements regarding training children. I know that ranting about them doesn't change anything, but maybe that's also because those of us who aren't thrilled with their parenting philosophies aren't getting to key assumption in the matter. Maybe we need first to discuss that it isn't "us vs them". I don't know, to be honest, but I wanted to get some thoughts/observations written.
As I was thinking about it, though, it struck me that, if you strip away all the advice they give, it seems based on a faulty premise in and of itself. It seems to pit parents against their children. This is made obvious in talking about how you must train children to obey immediately, and praising situations where children aren't seen or heard at all.
A similar trend can be found in what I've read of the Ezzo's work (they are the authors of On Becoming Babywise). They advise parents to have "couch time" with each other to show the child that the primary relationship in the family is the spousal relationship, and not the parent-child relationship. Again, this is pitting parent against child and vice versa, it seems.
I truly don't understand the "us vs them" mentality, though I have heard it in other places as well (such as when people tell you not to co-sleep because it might ruin your marriage). I see this as creating conflict that isn't necessarily there. Yes, children disrupt our lives, but not in a bad way. The family must adapt with each new child, as the dynamic changes each time, but it doesn't pit the parents against the children. At least that shouldn't be the case, I don't think.
I can understand, though, that if one accepts the premise that it is "us vs them", one would perhaps be more inclined to buy into the Pearl's and Ezzo's other statements regarding training children. I know that ranting about them doesn't change anything, but maybe that's also because those of us who aren't thrilled with their parenting philosophies aren't getting to key assumption in the matter. Maybe we need first to discuss that it isn't "us vs them". I don't know, to be honest, but I wanted to get some thoughts/observations written.
Amazing Grace
I just wanted to jot down some thoughts I've been having during this Lent, and about how wonderful our God is.
During Lent this year, I've been trying to make it to Stations of the Cross on Friday evenings (I missed it last week, but have made the other ones). Last night I even made it there without a child in tow, so I didn't have to chase after Charlotte whilst attempting to meditate on Christ's Passion. This meant that I got to concentrate more last night, which was wonderful. When we got to the station where Jesus is nailed to the cross, I happened to look down at my left hand. It's very slight, hardly noticeable now, but I have a scar in the middle of the back of my left hand. It's from an IV I had last year for antibiotics because of an infection, and it was placed there on Maundy Thursday and removed on Holy Saturday. It's no stigmata, but it serves to remind me of Jesus' sacrifice, and I thank God for that reminder and that connection.
The IV is related to another grace received around that time. I'd asked God for the grace to receive the Eucharist the day I went into labour & gave birth. I'd been making a point of going to daily Mass during the last bit of my pregnancy (I try to go anyway, but I really made sure I went then). I went to Mass on Friday, 26 March. I awoke just after midnight on Saturday, 27 March, to find myself in labour. My husband took Kieran to Mass that morning, and Fr David sent the Eucharist back to me, so God granted me that grace.
Another thing I've been doing during this Lent is to pray the Anima Christi morning and night. I have it memorised now, so the words often come to me during the day, especially if I'm in the Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. It's a beautiful prayer.
Soul of Christ, sanctify me.
Body of Christ, save me.
Blood of Christ, inebriate me.
Water from the side of Christ, wash me.
Passion of Christ, strengthen me.
O Good Jesus, hear me.
Within Thy wounds hide me.
Suffer me not to be separated from thee.
From the malignant enemy defend me.
In the hour of my death call me.
And bid me come unto Thee,
That with all Thy saints,
I may praise thee
Forever and ever.
Amen.
During Lent this year, I've been trying to make it to Stations of the Cross on Friday evenings (I missed it last week, but have made the other ones). Last night I even made it there without a child in tow, so I didn't have to chase after Charlotte whilst attempting to meditate on Christ's Passion. This meant that I got to concentrate more last night, which was wonderful. When we got to the station where Jesus is nailed to the cross, I happened to look down at my left hand. It's very slight, hardly noticeable now, but I have a scar in the middle of the back of my left hand. It's from an IV I had last year for antibiotics because of an infection, and it was placed there on Maundy Thursday and removed on Holy Saturday. It's no stigmata, but it serves to remind me of Jesus' sacrifice, and I thank God for that reminder and that connection.
The IV is related to another grace received around that time. I'd asked God for the grace to receive the Eucharist the day I went into labour & gave birth. I'd been making a point of going to daily Mass during the last bit of my pregnancy (I try to go anyway, but I really made sure I went then). I went to Mass on Friday, 26 March. I awoke just after midnight on Saturday, 27 March, to find myself in labour. My husband took Kieran to Mass that morning, and Fr David sent the Eucharist back to me, so God granted me that grace.
Another thing I've been doing during this Lent is to pray the Anima Christi morning and night. I have it memorised now, so the words often come to me during the day, especially if I'm in the Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. It's a beautiful prayer.
Soul of Christ, sanctify me.
Body of Christ, save me.
Blood of Christ, inebriate me.
Water from the side of Christ, wash me.
Passion of Christ, strengthen me.
O Good Jesus, hear me.
Within Thy wounds hide me.
Suffer me not to be separated from thee.
From the malignant enemy defend me.
In the hour of my death call me.
And bid me come unto Thee,
That with all Thy saints,
I may praise thee
Forever and ever.
Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)