<p>“I’ve never seen any parent on here come out and publicly identify themselves and their kids, and expose their kids’ mishaps.”</p>
<p>My point about the net and forums is they allow some people to post things they would never actually do, if they had to identify themselves. Some postings are just pure fantasy, because in their real lives they would never ever do or say some of the things the internet allows. Mainly because they can’t hide or back up their statements. </p>
<p>That is why sometimes I ask for an honest answer, one they would state if everybody knew their name and could see their face and in front of their children. For some, the real answer would be quite different than the internet answer.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is why I picked a username that’s easily mappable to my real-life identity. I don’t want to fall into the trap of exercising bad judgment because of the cloak of anonymity, especially since people are often more traceable than they think.</p>
<p>I agree with pretty much everything Opie has said on this thread (and given what I’ve seen of Opie’s postings in the past, I have to laugh at the idea that anyone would think he’s a softie parent). Taking the car away? Yes, absolutely right. The public spectacle? No good. To me, the fact that it got a positive reaction from the public doesn’t make it right, it just reflects poorly on the public.</p>
<p>"and given what I’ve seen of Opie’s postings in the past, I have to laugh at the idea that anyone would think he’s a softie parent). "</p>
<p>ERRR. Ahhh…thanks? 
</p>
<p>I’ll stop laughing in a couple minutes…:)</p>
<p>So, why did she put the ad in such a manner? Well, if her motivation was to teach her son a lesson, that could have been accomplished by merely taking the car away for a while or if she wanted to sell it, then that. The wording humiliates him publicly. But let’s say she didn’t intend to humiliate him publicly (not sure how she thought that would be avoided but let’s just say), then what other reason to do it this way? Well, she could claim it was a public service type thing to warn other kids. Like she says, certain people want her to keep the ad in now as a way to teach others what can happen, etc. However, if THAT was her intention, that too could have been accomplished another way. She could have insisted that in order to earn driving privileges back, that her son do some sort of community service that involves public service announcements or talking to youth about drinking and driving (like maybe some activities through Mothers Against Drunk Drivers or groups of that sort). In either scenario, she had ways to teach her son a lesson without public humiliation and she also had ways to teach other youth what can happen by having her son get involved in community service efforts with groups teaching about drinking and driving. One really has to wonder why she went to this length to put in such an ad that identifies her son publicly, why she keeps the ad in, why she agreed to talk to news stations, etc. Many parents have the same objectives as she does but would never have taken the actions she chose to take.</p>
<p>It’s been interesting to me to read all these posts and see just how differently this event is seen. For example - I would think mandating that her son prostrate himself before the community in the form of directed community service would be a MUCH bigger deal than an ad in the paper. There also seems to be much speculation as to motive - one including what at least I perceive as a slam on her presumed profession.</p>
<p>But if the mom’s motivation was to teach other kids what can happen (she said she is leaving the ad up for related reasons due to the messages it promotes about driving/drinking), then her son could be required to get involved in community service that emphasizes don’t drink and drive messages. How is that a big deal? That doesn’t involve humiliation. Nobody has to know why he is volunteering to help out with such an activity or campaign. Anyone can volunteer for those groups. So, if she cared about others learning the message, that was one way. I wouldn’t have done that myself but my point was that the mom had alternatives for either: 1) teach son a lesson…could take car away and driving privileges and 2) get out a public message about drinking and driving and responsibility…by getting involved in service groups with that aim…either herself or require her son to do so. In both scenarios, her aim is achieved. In both scenarios, it is private that her son broke her rule and got a consequence for it. There is no public shame, attention, or humiliation.</p>
<p>What do you see as her possible motive? And given whatever that was, do you think there was a way to achieve it without the world knowing of her son’s indiscretions?</p>
<p>Thing is - none of us really knows what the motivations were. We don’t know the contents of the messages passed onto her by various people. We don’t know the dialog between this mother and child. And yet, I get a sense that some would be more than willing to hang a poster with a picture of this woman and the words “Worst Mother Ever” under it, despite such an incredible lack of knowledge. That’s what I find so interesting - or as a former poster would say - illuminating.</p>
<p>I don’t think she is the worst mother ever, or even close. I don’t know her motivations. In discussing possible ones that may exist, I suggested alternative ways to achieve those ends without public humiliation for the son. </p>
<p>I am sure she is a loving mother who was trying to bring her son up right. I disagree with the choices she made in dealing with her son’s transgression. That doesn’t make her the worst mom. It simply means disagreeing with her actions on this matter. While her ad may have seemed funny, it was at the son’s expense in the end. I wonder now, with all the national attention, if she is still glad she did it or has any regrets.</p>
<p>One more thing…I think there is a difference between meating out consequences and punishing. This kid deserved a consequence related to his transgression. Loss of driving privileges is a consequece. But he not only got the consequence he earned, but he got punished publicly as well. Hanging him out for all to see was a punishment. Teaching him a lesson about driving rules was accomplished by giving the loss of driving privileges consequence. Public humiliation was accomplished by punishing him in a public fashion.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>:confused:</p>
<p>Let me ask this - to what degree was the publicity generated by the ad foreseeable?</p>
<p>I agree that she may not have known her actions would garner this degree of publicity. </p>
<p>However, she chose to be public about her son’s consequence, which I believe is the issue being discussed as most parents agree he deserved a consequence, but simply in private. She could not have known about the media onslaught, nope. But she had to realize some might trace the ad back to her kid given the phone number, for example. Then, apparently a local news source contacted her for an interview. She could have chosen to decline that if she didn’t want undue attention given to her son in a public forum. When national news called, she could have also declined. I have had folks contact me about being interviewed in the news and I have chosen to decline many times. Sometimes I am willing. I weigh the situation. So, she could not have known the publicity that would be generated but she surely has played into it now that it has. She has gone on national TV. She has chosen to keep the ad up, etc. She has allowed her son’s name to be associated with the ad and she didn’t have to do that.</p>
<p>“I get a sense that some would be more than willing to hang a poster with a picture of this woman and the words “Worst Mother Ever” under it, despite such an incredible lack of knowledge”</p>
<p>Not at all, you’ve missed an observation here… It’s not that she’s the “worst mother ever” it’s more the “hey! hey! look at me! I’m parenting!” as the hofer steve largent used to say about touchdown celebrations… “act like you’ve done it before and you’ll do it again.” </p>
<p>It’s like the neighbor kid on his bike yelling to his friends “look what I can do”… then you hear a crash, he’s sprawled out on the road and crying… nice trick… </p>
<p>Just a different philosophy… punish privately, praise publically. I did it as a coach, parent and in business…</p>
<p>So - Opie - you see this as a publicity stunt, primarily?</p>
<p>“you see this as a publicity stunt, primarily?”</p>
<p>I think it is a parent unsure or lacking confidence in her parenting skills. As such she needs confirmation elsewhere. “tell me I’m a good parent” and she’s gotten that from some and it’s snowballed a bit. </p>
<p>This may be slightly different than what you may think I’m saying.</p>