Parenting Philosophy

modified, retooled, and restyled repost

I think that two common mistakes American parents make are giving up too soon, (deciding a method doesn't work within a few days, when it might take weeks of consistency to see good fruit), and picking some method or idea as THE ONE RIGHT WAY, particularly when that approach may be one that is not founded in time tested and/or universally applicable principles.

For me, of course, my first criteria is that any approach to parenting must be at least compatible with scripture, and more accurately, rooted in scripture. But I also have another quick litmus test for any parenting idea I hear that even my unbelieving friends can share. That is "If this idea isn't practical and doable by any parent in any time and circumstance, then it's not really universal and therefore can't be really THE ONE RIGHT WAY or NECESSARY."

Here are some examples:
Co-sleeping: Some people like to sleep with their babies and some don't, and this is not a judgment on either camp. However the camp that says it's WRONG to let the little ones sleep with their parents- that camp is wrong. I know this because it is neither practiced nor practical in ever so many cultures and times; therefore, it is not universal. I don't mean that it's wrong to have a separate sleeping space for your baby. I just mean it's wrong to tell other people that it's harmful or bad or in any way unacceptable for babies to sleep with their parents. Since it's not applicable across time and culture, it's not the approach. There may be individual circumstances and situations where it is the right approach, but nobody should be making a blanket claim that a parenting practice found in many cultures for millenia is wrong.

On the flip side, the Equuschick tells me that a book she read recently made the breath-takingly illogical argument that cultures that do not practice co-sleeping have higher suicide rates than those that do, ergo, failure to co-sleep was to put your baby at risk for mental illness. This is ridiculous.

Behavior Modification: Stickers, charts, and gimmicky prizes- okay, these are cute and fun and I've used them for brief, short training on skills like bedmaking, getting in the van and buckling up when it is time to go, or encouraging piano practice. But as an over all discipline and training and teaching method for really important things- nyet. Could hunter/gatherer families work with charts and little prizes? A laplander living in a yurt hundreds of miles from a store? Can a family with barely enough money for food and rent do this? Can a Rain Forest tribe never before discovered by Europeans do this? No. Ergo- while one may find some use and benefit from this sort of thing, one who cannot use such an approach or doesn't like it should not be seen as a failure, especially since there are downsides to it, as well. When your child begins to look at those cheap prizes with a jaded eye and wishes to make a cost assessment analysis as to whether the reward or the disobedience is worth more to him, then you know this method has failed. When it encourages materialism, it should be eschewed. I have found natural rewards and consequences more effective (if we finish this in time, then we have time for that. If you don't practice the piano, you have to pay me back for your lessons).

Date Nights- I know this is a hot button for some, but I really must include it. We have heard preachers at church presume to preach from the pulpit that the parents really need to be willing to hire a sitter for the baby and go out for several hours once a week. That's just foolish. A babysitter and a few hours at a restaurant- these things are not needs. What is a need is for mother and father to continue to spend some alone time together and to talk together. But that need can be met without a sitter and without a restaurant. We know this because all kinds of people in all kinds of times and places have never had access to a sitter, and do not even know what 'dinner and a movie' is.
Furthermore, and I say this without any intention to engage in the breast vs bottle debate, the facts are that formula has only been around for about a hundred years. Any 'parenting tip' requiring the mother to put artificial baby milk in an external container with a plastic nipple on it and leave her baby with somebody else is a tip that has extremely limited applicability, and therefore, while it might be something that a 21st century mother could do and might want to do for reasons that are none of my business, it's not something anybody should ever suggest every mother ought to do.

Letting the baby cry it out, never letting the baby cry it out.
This whole baby crying scene- some people advocate 'letting the baby cry it out.' I never do that, and I think it's a really bad idea. I don't think it's universal, either, as in some places mommies who let their babies cry it out are mommies attracting wild animals to a carry out lunch, or mommies who are inviting the attention of enemies of some other sort. When my babies cried, I picked them up, and I do not consider this spoiling them. They have little other means of communication and I do not think it's fair to blame them for using the primary method they have.

On the other extreme are the people who advocate never, ever, letting a baby cry, who will neglect personal hygiene or pull a baby out of the carseat in a moving vehicle just so as to avoid letting the baby cry. If I was in the midst of showering and my baby began to cry, I hurried up my shower, got dressed and got my baby as fast as I could. I've known one or two mother who would race, shampoo streaming into their eyes, dripping and undressed, to pick up their babies so they would not cry for one second. Others would pull over in a vehicle instantly- and one would take her baby out of a carseat while the car was moving- just so the baby would not cry. I hate for the baby to cry, but I'm willing to wait to get to a safe spot to pull over and take the child out.
Bottom line- If possible, I pick up my babies when they cry. I don't manufacture excuses for my babies to cry, and I don't kill myself or risk their lives trying to prevent them from crying when they begin to cry while I am in the midst of something it would be best to finish, either.

Separate bedrooms for the children- there are reasons why this is a nice, pleasant thing to do for your children if you have the space and money. Since moving into this house, all the children have their own bedrooms, so we are not opposed to giving kids their own bedrooms. We are opposed to the idea that this is a requirement. Impossible. Millions of generations have grown up sharing their sleeping space with other family members without dying or even being injured from the practice. Therefore, it is a not a need. It is a want. It may be high up on the cultural want list for some of us, but it remains a want, not a requirement of good parenting. In fact, there are also very good reasons for not giving kids their own bedrooms.

There are so many methods and philosophies about parenting these days, and plenty of them contain useful, attractive ideas that I personally like very, very much. But liking a particular approach is not the same thing as seeing it as a requirement for good parenting. Young parents can be so confused by all the conflicting information and approaches. I found this litmus test really simplified things for me. But of course, my litmus test itself is one of those things that is a preference, not a requirement.

Pin It

Pin It