In my profession, you see mostly the bad in life on a regular basis. People do not generally consult an attorney until their relationship is in shambles, some dispute that could not be handled amicable arises, or someone is facing criminal punishment for their misdeeds.
Through the years, I have represented many juveniles charged with crimes. Some of the crimes for which they are brought before the court seem to be so petty that I often wonder why they were not handled more like they were when I was a kid. If someone in my generation had busted out windows or defaced public property, the police did not involve the courts to deal with your misdeeds, they brought you home in a police car . . . knowing that your parents would provide the corrections necessary to rectify your misdeeds, including adequate punishment.
But does my generation parent the same way? According to this time.com article, today's kids are spoiled.
Even their children level the charge at the baby boomers: that members of history's most indulged generation are setting new records when it comes to indulging their kids. The indictment gathered force during the roaring '90s. A Time/CNN poll finds that 80% of people think kids today are more spoiled than kids of 10 or 15 years ago, and two-thirds of parents admit that their kids are spoiled. In New York City it's the Bat Mitzvah where 'N Sync was the band; in Houston it's a catered $20,000 pink-themed party for 50 seven-year-old girls who all wore mink coats, like their moms. In Morton Grove, Ill., it's grade school teachers handing out candy and yo-yos on Fridays to kids who actually managed to obey the rules that week. Go to the mall or a concert or a restaurant and you can find them in the wild, the kids who have never been told no, whose sense of power and entitlement leaves onlookers breathless, the sand-kicking, foot-stomping, arm-twisting, wheedling, whining despots whose parents presumably deserve the company of the monsters they, after all, created. [emphasis supplied]
Yes, been there, seen that, too many times. And if their parents were going to be the only ones tormented by that kid's behavior, I would believe they were adequately punished for raising their kids however they want to do so. But . . . these very same kids take those very same attitudes to school and into the social arena. We all have to deal with these children on a daily basis. In a few cases, we have to be afraid of them - very afraid.
The historians and psychologists have lots of theories about how we got here, but some perennial truths persist: every generation thinks the next one is too slack; every parent reinvents the job. Parenthood, like childhood, is a journey of discovery. You set off from your memories of being a kid, all the blessings, all the scars. You overreact, improvise and over time maybe learn what works; with luck you improve. It is characteristic of the baby boomers to imagine themselves the first to take this trip, to pack so many guidebooks to read along the way and to try to minimize any discomfort.
Am I the only one who thinks Dr. Benjamin Spock was on the wrong track? Beginning with the release of his book, Dr. Spock's Baby and Child Care, in 1946, the popular belief that it was wrong to spank children began to take roots. What does Dr. Spoke believe is the alternative?
Imagine that your six-year-old has taken a toy from a friend's house without asking. This form of stealing is not the sign of a future criminal career, but it is a sign that he has not yet learned an important lesson about property. When you tell your child that what he did was wrong, you would like him to feel a little sorry or a little guilty. These uncomfortable feelings can resurface, when needed, to remind him that stealing is wrong.Suppose instead that you give your child a spanking. Afterward, he is more likely to feel resentful and angry at you. In the future, when tempted, his only thought will be to avoid being caught. If the spanking is hard enough, he might also feel afraid of you. None of these feelings will help him, in the long run, be the kind of person you want him to be.
I suppose what irks me so much about anyone's book is that anything suggested is supposed to work universally for all. But, although this may be a revelation to many, we are all different, each and every one of us. I still think there were quite a few of us mischievious boys who got a good lesson from a butt busting. Some of us began to understand that the best way to not get more of the same was not to be caught doing something that deserved it, and the best way not to get caught was not to do it . . . even if we really wanted to do it. I am sure that others got nothing from it, except a sore spot to think about when they were seated.
I am going to go anecdotal for a spell. I once had primary responsibility for the care of two children, one a male and one a female, the male being almost exactly one year older than the female. This period of supervision lasted from the time that they were two & one respectively, until they were six & five. In my opinion, they were well-behaved children, but there were times that misbehavior became an issue that required action. Now, their personalities were very dissimilar. The boy was boisterous, active and curious; the girl was reserved, played quietly by herself, and very self-absorbed. (She had a bout with spinal meningitis as a baby, and was just beginning to recover her physical abilities at age one. Without physical therapy, she worked hard ot recover her strength, and by two surpassed most of her toddling contemporaries.) The punishment that worked for one of these children did not always work for the other.
The boy was eager to stay active, so spanking him did very little good. He just shook off the experience and went back to doing whatever it was he been doing. If given a simple spanking, he never would have understood the reason for the punishment. His punishment was initially standing in the corner. He hated it, fidgeted immensely and cried. He was required to stand in that corner until he was able to explain to me what it was that he was being punished for and why it was wrong to do that. However, after a period of time, I found that the same results could be achieved by using spanking as the punishment.
The little girl was seldom punished. When she was, it was usually because she got involved in her brother's hi-jinks. The first time she was put in the corner, she stood there for the longest period of time without making a peep. She had merely gone to sleep. But if she was throwing a tantrum, just the mere suggestion that she was going to get a spanking would shut her up almost immediately. I found, that if I acted too rashly, that it was possible to get carried away when spanking a child. I developed this scenario:
- Child's misdeed is discovered.
- "Kid, come here!"
- Kid complies.
- "Why did you do that?"
- "I don't know."
- "Did you know it was wrong?"
- Here you might get an affirmative or negative answer.
- "Well, when you do something wrong, I have to spank you, you know that, right? You also know that I do not like to have to spank you?"
- Crying, "Yes."
- "Let's talk about what you did, so that we can make sure you understand what it was that you did wrong and why you are not supposed to do things like that, OK?"
- Crying, "OK."
- Hereafter the discussion, not lecture, where the child and I would discuss the situation in adult terms.*
- After I was sure that the child had gotten some understanding of the nature of its wrong, "OK, you are going to get N licks for that, go get that belt."
- I wait as the child would take the longest trip of the day up the stairs and into my bedroom to retrieve the cloth dress belt that hung on the closet doorknob and return with it.
- I bend the child over my knee and whack that butt N times with that cloth belt.
Now to tell you the truth, that spanking probably had only a minimal degree of physical pain, if any. But the entire scenario was played again and again, and repeated mistakes were more uncommon than not. A good rounding slap across the bottom with a bare hand was utilized often to bring them quickly back to their senses when their minds began to stray toward thoughts of mischief.
I have never been a big believer in coddling toddlers. I believe in being in their lives like a drill sergeant: sneaky, prying and demanding absolute obedience. But I also believe that it is important that you leave a great amount of control over certain aspects of their lives as they show the ability to do so. I find that being dictatorial is less effective than allowing choices, just always making one choice so rationally better than the other choice that the child chooses the one you want it to choose, ie.,
You have a choice, you can either go clean up your room or you can go over there and sit in that corner until I tell you that you can get up. It is your choice, what do you want to do?
Sometimes the child would actually choose to sit in the corner, but not usually more than once, as making the wrong choice might mean an unknown long period of sitting in the corner as I cleaned that room and did several other chores. Also, until they have developed enough dta to begin to understand the relationships between like acts, I usually only punish a young child for something they have been specifically told not to do. It is kind of like a "one-bite" rule, you really do not think they would ever have the inclination to do anything like that until they do.
Someone might wonder now how you ensure the child would stay in the corner**, unobserved. Not doing so would be considered a "misdeed," and the child was well aware of the consequences of a misdeed. And the child would never be unobserved for long. I would insure that. Remember, I said I stay in their lives like an Army Drill Sergeant. I seldom let 10 minutes pass during any period in which I had supervision of a toddler that I have not made them aware of my presence and that I am always watching. It is actually not all that difficult to do.
But do not just watch them, interact with them. Praise them if they are doing something worthwhile. Answer their questions, truthfully, even the hard ones, to the best of your ability, and those you can't answer, assist them in locating their answer. I used to actually hate it when I would ask my own mother or father something and get an answer such as "because I said so." Even a young child does not buy that. Tell them why, you might be surprised at the reason yourself.
I do not have a Ph.D. in child psychology, and yet, almost universally, kids gravitate toward me in every setting. Me, a disciplinarian? Why? Because I am usually the one who they believe is truly interested in them, because I probably am. My weapon: common sense.
The absolute stupidest saying that was ever stated is "children should be seen and not heard." I do not believe this. They do need to learn not to butt into adult conversations, but they need, also, the freedom to express themselves. Children are one thing: "humans moving toward maturity." They are individuals and cannot be grouped into a huge class where what works for one, works for all.
Is there such a thing as a "bad seed?" Sure. It is readily apparent to all of us that know that large normal local family with the one rebellious black sheep member. I also believe that you can likely identify the "bad seed" during toddler years. The antisocial tendencies are already apparent, if you choose to observe them.
Why is their such an incidence of adolescents and teenager who do things like this:
[T]he 1997 murder of a mother, father, young daughter, and the severe wounding of their baby boy, and the conviction of six Kentucky teens for the heinous crimes. . . . [from blogcritics.org article by Eric Olsen reviewing a documentary, Six, by Kentucky Psychologist, by Dr. Helen Smith. Another blogcritics.org contributor, Dawn Olsen [do I suspect some relationship there?] interviewed Dr. Smith and gets the attribution.
or
13 people were murdered and 23 wounded at a place considered safe, Columbine . . . . [full story]
or
[H]e launched a deadly attack that left two Pearl High School students dead and seven others injured. If convicted of killing his mother, Woodham could get life in prison. That is also the maximum sentence he could get if convicted of the school shootings . [full story]
Dr. Smith established blame with everyone for having failed the six teenagers from Kentucky.
"We will always have parents in our society who cannot or will not take responsibility for their children. Of course, we saw some poor parenting with all of these kids but some of the parents were mentally ill themselves. With little help available, they struggled as best they could. Madonna Wallen was diagnosed herself with bipolar illness. The schools simply ignored the kid's problems or overlooked them."At one point when Natasha reached out for help from the principal, he called her a freak. This only left her feeling more vulnerable and like there was no authority or adult in charge to help her or guide her in life. Her mother could not do it and now the school would not help. At one point when her mother tried to kill herself, Natasha went to school and told her teachers what was happening. They ignored her. The community did not accept the kids, as they were different and had little money.
"Certainly, the mental health systems did not help. The hospital that took Natasha Cornett knew she was dangerous but released her anyway. This is a daily occurrence. Medicaid, which is federally funded, will not pay for people who have mental illness to stay in the hospital. This leaves the burden on the states. Medicaid does pay if the person is placed out in the community, so the state lets them out.
"However, 'community' help has never really materialized. There was no one following up with Natasha and her mother after the hospital. She was assigned a psychiatrist who told Natasha (at age 14) to call her when she felt she needed to come in. Again, the authorities did not take charge and Natasha was left to her own devices.
"Law enforcement contributes indirectly to these problems by not providing proper monitoring of problem kids. Natasha had been on probation for writing forged checks at 13, but they never even sent anyone to talk with her or to supervise her. This lax supervision leaves kids with the feeling that they can get away with anything.
"Finally, Jason Bryant's father knew that Jason was leaving with a group of dangerous kids. He called the police and informed them that Jason was on probation and they needed to pick him up. The state police never even bothered to put the information out over the wire so that the trooper who stopped them for speeding could have been alerted. Of course, this trooper was afraid of the kids and did not ask questions or do anything.
See, I am right! No one was listening. Why do they always wait to long to listen to the children and learn who they are?
*My father used to ask me how I expected a one year old child to understand me when I spoke to them like an adult. I told him that if they had not understood me the first time, sometimes they understood the second time, or sometimes they did not understand until the fifth time, but everytime they did the same thing, they got the same speech. Kids understand much more than a lot of people give them credit for understanding.
**I was once entrusted with the care of a two-year-old who could sustain a screeching tantrum for very long periods of time. When he would begin one of these, I would put his chair in the corner and sit him in it, with the instructions that he would be required to sit there until he stopped the needless noise. He would get up, and I would sit him back in the chair. We played this game for 1 and a half hours the first night, about an hour the second night, 30 minutes the third night, 15 minutes the fourth night, and by the fifth night, just my action in retrieving the chair to put into the corner shut him right up. It does sometimes take a little effort to instill into children the belief that they do what they are told to do.
These are the causes of why are children are in trouble: