DS came home very late - was I too harsh?

FranticFrummie

Tue, Jul 30 2019, 8:32 am

amother [ Firebrick ] wrote:

See we don’t have the full picture.

Maybe he had a huge lunch and a big snack at 4. Most kids eat snacks. And take water bottles.

The kids not going to starve and suffer. No reason to call social services.
Personally I wouldn’t do it.
But I don’t think it’s the catastrophe people are making it out to be.

Y'all are totally missing the point. Can't Believe It

OP does not need nutritional advice or meal planning.

The staying out late, the missing dinner, these are all symptoms. What is the cause of this disconnect? How do you create a more harmonious home with mutual respect?

OP needs help with parenting skills, and effective consequences that enforce boundaries and rules. This means open communication with DS, and agreement on how to handle things.

pause

Tue, Jul 30 2019, 9:05 am

FranticFrummie wrote:

Y'all are totally missing the point. Can't Believe It

Because he lost track of time! It's a symptom of a kid who gets so engrossed in playing that he forgets to check his watch. All OP needs to do is work out a system (such as watch with timer or she calls him in) that will enable a timely homecoming. No need to be punitive at all.

The thing is that in the situation in the OP, we don't know if he's unintentionally getting engrossed or intentionally ignoring his curfew.

Once you know the kid has tools at his disposal, and yet he is INTENTIONALLY ignoring them, then you can work with natural consequences to increase cooperation. If a kid is PURPOSELY staying out late and missing dinner time, not getting food is an appropriate consequence IMO. You don't get to stay out late playing, ignoring house rules, and then also getting a peanut butter sandwich or cereal and milk (which my kids would be totally ok with!) But anyone who doesn't agree with that can use other natural consequences such as not allowing the kid to go out the next day.

Flip Flops

Tue, Jul 30 2019, 10:11 am

amother [ Ginger ] wrote:

She's saying if it was the girl who spent all day talking and whispering and passing notes, it would make sense for her to go to the office. If it's the girl who sits and listens and pays attention and then ends up being the one sent out, there was very little point in the threat/punishment.

Thank you, exactly what I meant.

amother

Aqua

Tue, Jul 30 2019, 3:52 pm

amother [ OP ] wrote:

DS is 10 and loves his independence. We live in a relatively safe neighborhood and so I do let him ride his bike, go to the park with his friends, etc.

We have different basic safety rules, bike safety rules, crossing street rules, and others. He's very good about them and follows them carefully.

He knows he must be home at 6:15. dinner is at 6:45.
It has happened before, that he came home very late and I warned him. that if he comes home after dinner time he will not get any.

well it hasn't happened in a while but today he didn't come home until after 7:30.
I sent him straight to the shower and into bed.

He's crying and insisting that no supper doesn't mean no fruit or snacks , and he's starving , and he'll faint from hunger....[this part is just dramatics]

am I being too harsh?
and what's a better idea for a punishment if this happens again?

Seriously, not allowing him to eat is not a proper consequence for irresponsible behavior, it’s abuse.

creditcards

Tue, Jul 30 2019, 4:06 pm

amother [ Aqua ] wrote:

Seriously, not allowing him to eat is not a proper consequence for irresponsible behavior, it’s abuse.

I don't think it's abuse if it happened one time and he learned his lesson if in general everything else going on is emotionally healthy.

amother

Scarlet

Tue, Jul 30 2019, 4:16 pm

amother [ Ginger ] wrote:

Actually, the point would be that everyone is subject to the rules, which would be a very good thing.

SixOfWands

Tue, Jul 30 2019, 4:21 pm

amother [ Aqua ] wrote:

Seriously, not allowing him to eat is not a proper consequence for irresponsible behavior, it’s abuse.

If you think that forcing an otherwise healthy 10 year-old, who came home too late to eat dinner with his family (I guess he wasn't too hungry, or "starving" then), to miss a single meal is "abuse," then you don't know what "abuse" is.

She's not regularly withholding food. He's not a baby, or sick, or anything else.

Stop diminishing the meaning of real "abuse." Because when people like you start sticking labels like that on missing a single meal, it diminishes the urgency of real abuse -- like beating children, or starving them, or allowing them to live in filth.

As I keep saying, not every bad parenting decision is "abuse." Or all of our kids would be taken away from us.

amother

Jetblack

Tue, Jul 30 2019, 4:29 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

Like most things in life, abuse exists on a spectrum. Some things fall on the more extreme end of the spectrum, and some things can fall on the milder end of the abuse spectrum. But those milder abuses are still abuse. We don't need to accept and perpetuate abuse, just because it doesn't fall on the extreme end of the abuse spectrum.

And I do agree that witholding food from a hungry child is abuse.

amother

Tangerine

Tue, Jul 30 2019, 5:51 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

Stop gatekeeping abuse.

yo'ma

Wed, Jul 31 2019, 8:54 am

I agree that withholding food is never the proper punishment unless it's because they're abusing it. As far as being abuse to withhold food once, abuse it is not. I wasn't going to join this thread because I didn't have any input that others did not say, but I'm here because of what happened this morning with my 11ds.

I said that I'm not serving supper tonight because I planned on serving spaghetti and meatballs, but I couldn't find any chopped meat in the freezer and didn't feel like thinking of something else. (Don't think too much into that because A. I ended up finding and B. I don't have babies and anyone can make their own food) (I also don't buy my meat. My dh brings it home for us.) My ds said it's okay if we miss one supper. Nothing is going to happen. Smile

amother

Jetblack

Wed, Jul 31 2019, 10:30 am

yo'ma wrote:

Your example has nothing to do with what OP did. He was crying for food, and not only did she not allow him to eat dinner, she did not allow him to eat anything else. That is a huge difference from what you described- not cooking one night, and children being allowed to fend for themselves, with free reign to the kitchen, and children old enough to prepare their own food.

yo'ma

Thu, Aug 01 2019, 9:32 am

amother [ Jetblack ] wrote:

I understand that. I didn't realize he was crying and stuff, but I do understand drama queens. I have one. My point was it's not abuse. Not proper parenting, which the op now realizes, but not abuse. If it was a common occurrence, than that would be a different story.

And the part of being able to fend for themselves, I only wrote that so no one would think I was 'starving' my kids.

The op obviously didn't come back, but reiterating how it's abuse is very hurtful. She was already was unsure of herself.

amother

Jetblack

Thu, Aug 01 2019, 10:14 am

yo'ma wrote:

Just because an action is abusive, it doesn't mean she is an abuser. There is a difference. We can call a specific action abusive without labeling the mother and all of her parenting.

And a child who is very hungry and is being denied food (any food) and cries because of that is not being a drama queen. He is truly suffering because a basic need is not being met. He is hungry, he is in physical distress, and emotional distress. And because he is dependent on his mother for his basic needs, and she is witholding that from him. A very expected, normal response of a child to a situation like this