Friday, November 3

Trying to avoid raising trouble

Now I'm not at this stage yet and don't intend on being so for some time but as it doesn't harm to be prepared, I've been mulling over what methodology I will evetually utilise when child rearing. as with everything I have to have a direction and a philosophy to guide me through so I have to get pinned which one I will be following.

I've narrowed it down to three types/theories/techniques - whatever you want to call them. I'll sketch them out for you and what I see as their respective strength and weaknesses and maybe I can get some feedback and input and then MAYBE I can finally make my mind up on which path I'm going to take.

OK. Starting chronologically, because that makes sense, is the traditional rearing technique, the 'Mary Poppins technique'. Think ITV's Supernanny and in extreme cases, Margaret Thatcher on a good day. This technique sees children as having and positively WANTING, strict boundaries in their life and has lots of parent-decreed rules that are not up for questioning and must be unequivocally obeyed. It supposes a hierarchy in the family with parents at the top and children at a lower level - perhaps the more liberal practitioners of this conservative technique will allow that, the older you get, the higher up on the scale you climb. Children, says the Mary Poppins technique, should not be treated like little adults, they are children and unlike adults, will actually harm themselves if left with too much freedom. They need boundaries so they can navigate their way more easily through the world in the difficult early years. It would be a household where bed-times were adhered to, kids would help with household chores, smacking might be used and kids would be punished for activities such as swearing, chewing gum, not eating their food, talking back etc. T.V is probably restricted and board-games and imaginary activities games encouraged.

Then there is the currently very much in vogue live and let live theory. I call this the hopeful gardener technique as essentially the adult steps back and allows the child to develop with as little interference as possible - and waits to see what happens. The adult has liberal views and probably believes the government should have as little influence in his life as possible. His viewpoint on child-rearing is a reflection of this distrust of state-power. He wants the child to find their own path, to learn from life itself through trial and error because this will make the child a stronger, more insightful, more independent and a well-rounded person. You can tell the child of a hopeful gardener if you see a child in Safeways wearing a princess outfit. That morning the child decided that being a princess was how he/she wished to express themselves. The liberal parent would of course encourage this and allow the child to become a princess so the child could learn from the experience. They might learn about society's response to non-conventional garb, or that it is better to be warm than pretty etc, or that they like dressing up and want to be an actress/transvestite. Children in the hopeful gardener house are on a parr with the adults, they are equal because all human beings ARE equal where you are an eight-year old human being or an eighty-year old. The child of a hopeful gardener is far more talkative and opinionated than the child of a Mary Poppin's practitioner as the hopeful gardener child is asked how they feel a lot and what they think and are allowed a voice in making decisions from what flavour crisps to buy to where they should go on holiday that year.

Finally, there is the nature's-guide technique. This is a newcomer to the child-rearing scene and is growing in popularity thanks to subscribers such as Gwyneth Paltrow and Britney Spears. It looks to the natural world for inspiration, and particularly to large mammals as our closet natural cousins and mimics the mother-child relationship especially found in nature. Nature's-guide practitioners believe that mankind has fallen from the path that we were born to and evolved from to our damage. It believes we have become distracted by technology, material objects and a confliction society. It looks for a return to a more simple, calm and comforting relationship between human being and believe that like in nature, children should be bonded physically to their mothers until the child chooses to leave or the mother's milk dries up. Nature's-guide parents strongly believe that a person can only succeed in creating strong and healthy friendships and relationships in adulthood if the first relationship they experience in life sets the standard as strong, secure and unshakeable. You can tell the child of a nature's-guide parent because they are often sat in the driver's seat of a 4x4 on a main road in their quest to maintain physical contact with the mother-person. Nature's-guide children also wear no nappies as these are the product of a modern, technological society creating obstacles between mankind and the earth. Apes have no need for nappies so nor do nature's-child, the ever present mother simply hovers the child over the nearest flower bed and returns nature to nature.

So which one do I choose? The Mary Poppins child is surely the child I would happily introduce my friends to, it is only the Mary Poppins child who could safely be taken to a restaurant, use a knife and fork and sit quietly, not disturbing other diners and not running around screaming and pulling faces. The hopeful gardener child, on the other hand, might have decided that that day they wanted to test missiling food onto the neighbouring table and often 'talking through' it and trying to persuade the gardener-child to stop, doesn't work. They are used to having their own way.

On the other hand I AM a liberal and I do not believe in authoritarian rule. Philosophically the Mary Poppins technique presents real issues but practically, so does the hopeful gardeners. So what about the nature's-guide? I do actually gravitate to this one. It would be arrogant I think of our race to assume that we have developed a better technique of child-rearing than centuries of evolution has spawned. It seems perfectly obvious and logical that the first relationship experienced by human sets the standard for their future life. Sociologist have demonstrated this time and again. But then, do I really want to have a baby dangling off my now-stretched tits for five years and do I really want to allow my home to become a happy shit-house?

Alternative and advice welcome.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

I adore your blog Natalie! I'd like to keep my own but I'm even more outspoken than you are and I would lose all my friends and alienate my partner within a very short space of time if I did.

I have a beautiful girl of seven and the best advice I can give you is to feel your way - and be honest about what sort of person you really are.

Like you I saw myself as a liberal when I was younger. But the truth is I like doing things in my own way. How old are you by the way? You sound as if you might be in your early twenties or late forties? I can't decide!

Anyway my partner wouldn't like to hear this but I wear the trousers in our home and he tends to do more of 'the hopeful gardening' - and his way never gets good results. It's awful to admit but I tend just pay him lip service and ignore his silly attempts at trendy parenting.

You're a natural Mary Poppins or Margaret Thatcher! And actually what's wrong with that? Mrs T is the greatest leader we have ever had and this country wouldn't be in the frightful mess it is if she was still our leader.

Good luck when you reach 'the stage' - Helena x

Natalie said...

Thanks for the vote of encouragement Helena, I'm glad you are enjoying the blog. i enjoy writing it and never know just what I am going to say or what affectation I will take until i start writing - it's very amusing. I have already reached the stage of alienating people so perhaps you are wise to tread carefully with these blogs.

I often can't decide how old I am. Most of the time I still feel nineteen and I act like it as often as possible - I think it is good for the soul. But as you have noticed, I can be a bit too serious at times which is more of a mark of a mature-type person. I'm actually late-twenties.

I don't agree that Mrs T is the greatest leader we have ever had - as an ex-liberal do you not shiver to hear yourself say these words? :). Has to be Churchill doesn't it?

I believe it is fantastic we have had a female PM and now it seems incomprehensible to think we might have a female leader but we have actually already done it and I often have to remind myself of that. I'm not sure whether I should be supporting Hilary merely on the basis that it is about time America joined the 21st century and had a female leader but she scares me.... she clearly has dictatorial tendencies and I think could put Maggie to shame if given a chance.

I suspect i will end up being a Mary Poppins in the early years, regressing to a hopeful gardener from the time the kid is about 9 and onwards. I will allow the kid to drink wine though from about the age of five aka. le francais - watered down and on family meals etc. I want my kid to avoid the British binge-drinking/booze obsession phenomenon and have my child have a balanced relationship with booze.

Anonymous said...

hey nat,defo go with mary poppins and maybe the gardener when older like you say, dont give them to much freedom cos they will turn out to be little shits. in fact the nursery i worked in the majority of them were little shits, but they spent 8 am - 6pm in a nursery before the age of three, so can you blame them,they must have been confused who their family were.

england lacks family values, its sad and gimpy to spend time with the rents, other european countries dont suffer this on such a greater scale.you'll be fine, you'll be fair and you'll be family orientated. and you'll have me to hand , when they are making you go mental and bullying you and making you cry, yes believe me they do it!!!

Anonymous said...

I have to agree with anon. in that too much freedom results in them turning out to be little shits (if there is no strict guide to their life and are permitted to do what they like, how are they to learn respect for others?), and that England is severely lacking family values. It is hard to identify exactly why, but the Spanish, I can safely say from experience, do not suffer like this. It is perfectly normal to see 3 generations of a family going out to eat together, to the beach, shops, the park, wherever, even with teenagers, who in the UK are embarassed to even admit that they have parents. This seems to me to be the principal cause of the yob/hoodie mentality teenagers suffer in the UK at the moment, and I reckon that if you can avoid your kids ending up like that, in todays society, you are doing a great job as a parent.