<p>I find these threads interesting because they bring out strongly-held views from different perspectives. Hopefully the OP (who asked for input) got some info that either reinforced or helped her re-assess her initial perspective. I think it also helps other parents …I enjoy hearing what others think, getting new ideas for my own parenting or finding that my own take is strengthened by being to withstand differing views.</p>
<p>workinprogress-- I really agree with what you said. Also, I have noticed, both with my own children and the parent’s of the adolescents I see, that parenting does not really develop as a theory so much as a relationship. I think one of the most suprising things to me was how much my KIDS changed me. I don’t really parent theoretically but in a relationship. I don’t even parent each of my kids exactly the same way, as that would not work. What I do try to do is to be present and to be consistent so that most of the suprises come from them and from their behavior. Particularly with adolescents, I’ve just noticed there’s really only room for one variable in the relationship, and the best I can do is to be stable. I see all sorts of relationships between parents and kids, and the most successful ones are consistent, regardless of what they are consistent about. ;)</p>
<p>That’s interesting. I have a somewhat different take. I apologize to my kids a lot (for things I do that, in retrospect were short-tempered, short-sighted or off). I’m open to changing things and giving them room to negotiate. I can see errors I’ve made w/my older son (being to directive, for instance, instead of leaving things up to him) which I try not to replicate w/my younger. </p>
<p>If my (8 year old!) daughter points out that something I’ve done or said that is (upon reflection) wrong or unfair, I’ll be open to changing. There are certain consistencies (be kind to others, be honest, load your plates in the dishwasher, etc.) but I think there’s nothing wrong with be human to your child, showing your flaws and letting them see you are open to growth – even if the valid suggestion re: change comes from them. </p>
<p>Definitely agree about the ‘workinprogress’ concept! But I wouldn’t be able to continue that work if I didn’t allow myself a few inconsistencies along the way!</p>
<p>I really agree with you there, Jolynne. Admitting mistakes and being flexible enough to change course teaches your children to do the same. Of course, you can have stable principles and values (which differ among families) but we all make mistakes in how we go about living up to them.</p>
<p>^^ Agree; I think you actually gain credibility as a parent if you admit you are human, have made errors, etc.</p>
<p>I don’t actually even see how admitting you are human and have made errors is at odds with consistent parenting. It’s a strange conversation, but I don’t even see we have a “different” take on things. Every parent makes mistakes and misunderstands. Consistent parenting is a good thing, but it is not even slightly at odds with anythng you’ve described. Consistently there, attentive, the kids know what to expect. There is no style at all that has a monopoly on this. If your kids know they can count on you to talk things through with them? They know this. If they know that they can negotiate, then they know this. If they know…it’s a matter of the kids understanding where they are in the relationship. It’s not even slightly about WHAT you are consistent with. Just that you are. Now, being consistently abusive is another thing, entirely…but even in the cases of abuse, what we see is that the less predictable the parent, the more damaging. End of story. I’m really not talking about parenting “style.” </p>
<p>But good luck to the OP. It sounds as if you and your D continue to have a solid relationship, if imperfect, as are they all.</p>
<p>I am not into parents constantly apologizing to kids all the time. I prefer to think things through before I execute. I also tend to think about rules for my kids a few years beforehand, not just when it’s happening. As an example, I told my girls when they were 10 years old that they couldn’t date until they were 15, not when they were asked out on a first date. Same with many other teenage rules(allowance, drinking, drugs, having friends over) I have implemented. My kids could never say they didn’t know. Now D2 did ask if she could got to a school formal dance when she was a few months shy of 15, and we decided to let her. </p>
<p>Every family is different. The reason I am stick in the mud about not going back on words is because I have always upheld my end of the bargain, and I do expect my kids to do the same. But in a family where it’s not explicitly spelled out and rules are a moving target, then you can’t blame your kids if they think every rule is negotiable.</p>
<p>It is always much easier to give in then to stand ground. There were many times I would have rather said yes then to be the bad person. D2 did not get to go to her birthday party given by her friends because she was grounded for something she knew she shouldn’t have done. I was just as sad as she was.</p>
<p>There is a difference between thinking ‘every rule is negotiable’ and a parent admitting that they have reconsidered a specific earlier stance and are now open to discussion, without the child’s initiation.</p>
<p>“There is a difference between thinking every rule is negotiable and a parent admitting that they have reconsidered a specific earlier stance and are now open to discussion, without the child’s initiation.”</p>
<p>I agree completely. I’ve done this myself for various reasons…in both directions, actually. At one point I had a certain GPA requirement for allowance. When it became clear to me that one of my children was working very hard but wasn’t going to be able to meet this requirement, just because she was a different kind of student, I removed the requirement for her. I felt like I was putting her under too much pressure. (This is just a small example.)</p>
<p>But, when I talk about consistency, I’m really not talking about style. I think there is a great deal of pressure on parents, too much, actually, to get things right. But we parent a certain child in a certain set of circumstances, and so one person’s “style” simply won’t always work with every child, which is why it is good to know there are many styles of parenting. Some kids are really discussion oriented and some won’t tell you a thing. YOu have to parent each of these kids differently. There’s no one style that will work well for every kid and parent.</p>
<p>But, each parent can arrive at a consistent way to parent each individual kid. That’s all.</p>
<p>Seems we all agree on the essentials! :-)</p>
<p>oldfort–interesting idea re: planning years ahead. I’ve thought of that, but not precisely the specifics in some areas, such as what age to allow to date. That’s a good one to think about w/my (quite social) 8 year old! I’d hoped to require only ‘group activities’ until she was 16, but maybe worth talking thru w/husband a few years before. Although, her big brother (in college) says no dating until she’s 30. :-)</p>
<p>It’s great to hear other parents’ ideas/approaches…</p>
<p>JS - her big brother is right. If it’s up to my H it would be 30 too. D2 did tell me when she was 13, “All good guys will be taken by the time I am 15.” I told her if that’s her best argument…</p>
<p>Jolynne - I was a much better mother because I had practice with a step-daughter who was nine years older than my D. I love my step-daughter very much and we are extremely close, but because she had a great mom, I was just available for back-up parenting to reinforce or sometimes offer a stricter point of view. Actually, I think her mom had a MUCH easier time, because DH and I would always take position with D when she would complain (which really wasn’t often) that she was lucky she wasn’t living with us all the time, because our rules would be tighter. Back in the dark ages, when D was a teen the issue was being on the phone - we’re talking land line - way too long. It was a constant battle with her mom and DH finally said she could only talk from 3 - 7 each day. Well, you would have thought he severed her ears. Now, I don’t think that was adhered to in her home by her mom, but the point D took from it was that she was lucky she had her mom and she was far more cooperative and respectful with her. </p>
<p>Because I had some practice I was able to foresee problems and talk about situations well in advance. Because DD knew our feelings about having a car, or dating, etc., she entered the teen years knowing what she was up against. In fact, to this day, our younger daughter will quote something we said ten or fifteen years ago and think that’s what we would do today. It’s kinda funny, but sometimes her compromise offer to what she thinks we would say is sometimes stricter than what we would have demanded.</p>
<p>This has been a very interesting thread. One of my kids has proposed coming back to the US while on a semester abroad in order to participate in a weekend-long activity. The airfare is non-trivial; this thread has given me some ideas on how we might approach this issue (as opposed to the “WTH are you thinking?” knee-jerk response).</p>
<p>Wife and i did the “plan ahead rules” as best a we could too. For example, we always kept door wide open when we have visitors; so he did too. If boys must visit S at age 8 with door completely open, then girl visitors at 17 with door open didn’t catch S as a sudden change.
We also never used the “not until you’re 18…” for something we didn’t like. We always said “when you’re a self-supporting adult” instead. That future argument was too predictable- Kid wants X, parent says No!, Kid responds “you said not until I was 18, now I’m 18” Oops. Hard for a parent to get out of that one! We demonstrated to S early- our privileges as parents and adults were not because we were over 18, but that we are self supporting adults in our home. Funny, but now in his 2nd apt, he has instituted a no smoking in the apt rule, and his guests must step outside. Now he understands he can make the rules in his own place because it is his own place(we never had that rule here) I also gave him thorough discussion at 17, about the few freedoms he’d get(by law) and MANY freedoms we parents (by law)get when he turned 18. We avoided the “I’m 18, I’m a man now” argument, because he knew well in advance that one day older does not make a boy a man; and being treated as a man in our household would mean having obligations like a man. NOT to say we still called him a child; please don’t misunderstand. Just so say that earlier than some (like me) he knew with adulthood came privileges AND responsibilities. He could do more at 18 of course, but we avoided that common argument. Example- can’t stay out all night? Hey, S, I’m 45 yrs old, I can’t stay out all night either! Helped to show him some rules not dependent on age, but on responsibilities to others.</p>
<p>I totally love the “when you’re a self-supporting adult” concept.</p>
<p>I actually picked that differentiation (instead of ‘when you are 18’) here on CC, shortly before son turned 18. In the nick of time! It makes a lot of sense, and doesn’t give kids the feeling that the gate is wide open at 18, while they still aren’t earning their way in the world. When son tried a few ‘now that I’m 18…’ things…we were able to use that phrase.</p>
<p>I have the same concern that some others have expressed. If the kid has been led to believe that the money she makes is hers to do with what she pleases, then the mom should not pick and choose what she can spend it on, as long as it’s legal. If her D had been spending $5 a day on Starbucks without Mom’s interference and then decided to put that $5 a day away for a tattoo, how does it then become taboo? The fly in the ointment here is that the D knew how the mom felt about tattoos and she got another one anyway. It seems clear that it was about the tattoo, not the money, since the money was being spent anyway and only became an issue when the tattoo was involved. </p>
<p>I guess the lesson to the rest of us is that if, while we are supporting our kids in others ways, we expect our kids to spend the money they make the way we see fit, that is something they need to know from the beginning. If there is going to be control over the spending money, then perhaps the kid should send the paycheck to mom and get an allowance in return or present a monthly expense account. Then you will also have to tell the kid not to save the allowance for something you don’t approve of, so it starts to look a lot more like a control issue than a money issue. It gets complicated.</p>
<p>“One of my kids has proposed coming back to the US while on a semester abroad in order to participate in a weekend-long activity. The airfare is non-trivial; this thread has given me some ideas on how we might approach this issue”</p>
<p>My approach on this kind of question – whether it’s my money or my parents’ – has always been: “Will spending this money give me happy memories to treasure when I’m in the nursing home?” If I can see myself and my friends laughing about the trip when we’re old and gray, then it’s worth the money.</p>
<p>I agree with cartera 100%. If it had been true she could spend on anything she wanted then to yank funding now would be unfair. Of course, as we know from the Op this wasn’t the case. The student wasn’t permitted to spend on anything she wanted. As far as we know there was only 1 restriction. And as pointed out in Cartera’s paragraph 2, this student did know, well in advance what the expectations were, and agreed to them.</p>
<p>Might the purchase of a $1000 purse(previous comparisons) generated the same reaction? Well, one can only guess, because that isn’t what happened. But my guess is that in this case parent would continue funding(because student had not broken the 1 rule) but would have given a strict warning about frivolous spending. In the purse example, it would not be fair to yank funding because that wasn’t the condition.</p>
<p>Well, then, younghoss, you agree w/this from cartera, also?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would agree w/that. ^ :-)</p>
<p>Hanna–I like that assessment/question! Really good analysis, that we (actually I) don’t always make. I’ve gone away on a weekend trip w/friends recently that I hesitated on (too expensive) but ended up going & having the most fabulous time! Like you said, great memories that can’t be replaced.</p>
<p>It will surprise you, Jolynne, but yes. What you partially quoted was part of a hypothetical premise Cartera presented. But let’s don’t overlook 2 important parts that preceeded the part you quoted. Part 1, Cartera said “if, while we are supporting our kids in others ways, we expect our kids to spend the money they make the way we see fit, that is something they need to know from the beginning”. That part wasn’t theoretical; it is undisputed the student did know from the beginning that she had one restriction, no add’l tatts while parent funding. Then, part 2, Cartera’s premise presented an alternative, theoretical scenario using “if” and “perhaps” about sending all $ to parent then giving student an allowance.- The part you quoted was what to do if a parent was paying a student an allowance. So if the kid is getting an allowance, “…then you will also have to tell the kid not to save the allowance.” If such a hypothetical premise actually came into play, sending all $ to parent etc., then I would probably agree it was more control than strictly financial. But Cartera’s premise was a “what if” premise and was not the actual arrangement.</p>
<p>I’ll say one thing Jolynne, I am so pleased- you really keep me thinking!</p>