When did structure become a bad thing?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
When did structure become a bad thing?
1698
Fri, 07-30-2004 - 8:19am
I am reading the thread about freewheeling nannies below and I hafta say, I just don't get this whole no structure thing. My kids have always thrived on structure. THey liked the predictablity of when things were going to happen. Sure, it has not been a problem to deviate, but what I am reading in some posts is that no structure at all seems to be looked on as optimal, while imposing structure to a child's life is viewed as bad parenting.

We used to live next door to a "no structure" family. The kids ran wild in the neighborhood, the mom never planned dinner so lord only knows if and when the kids ate. Sorry, I don't think that's a good way to live. My kids know we eat dinner at 6:30, so they have to be home.

I can see taht you wouldn't demand that an infant go to bed and wake up at precisely the same time, but is there ever a time to impose structure on a child? So lets say you are the freewheeling type and have always doen things whenever. What happens when you send your child to school where the bell rings at the same time every day?

As far as activities, I realize all kids are different, but when my kids were little, if we just did whatever, whenever, my kids woudl end up grumpy and overtired. My experience is that if say, we were at the beach and I say, oh heck, let's just stay later, the kids woudl be happy at first, but by the days end I would end up with whiny, overtired kids.

Maybe I'm just misinterpreting what I am reading, but I personally think structure is a good thing. When children are small, the structure includes naptimes, mealtimes, etc. As they get older it evolves into boundaries like "be home at 6 for dinner" or "you can't go into soemones house without telling me first". I couldn't imagine living without structure or boundaries for my kids.

Susan

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2004
Mon, 08-23-2004 - 9:20pm
There was no indication of that and since you flat out LIED when you accused texigan of "quoting from two separate posts" your credibility leaves a LOT to be desired right now. Why SHOULD anyone believe you, over texigan's logical, rational and based-entirely-on-the-rules-of-English-grammar interpretation of your post.

If you want people to understand what you're trying to say, you need to actually SAY what you're trying to say instead of jumping all over US because you can't be bothered to write coherently.

Karen

"A pocketknife is like a melody;
sharp in some places,
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2004
Mon, 08-23-2004 - 9:22pm
LOL....you need to watch L&O and CSI with a friend who works in forensics....there's NOTHING mentally stimulating about the bad science both shows broadcast :) My friend tells me that L&O is marginally better than CSI, but both are pretty horrid.

Karen

"A pocketknife is like a melody;
sharp in some places,
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-29-2004
Mon, 08-23-2004 - 10:06pm
Why are you angry? I am simply quoting the "discussion" you and I had last week on this very subject. The following is the question I asked you about your nanny and your answer:

Question: How can you guarantee your boys just get a half-hour of t.v. a day?

Answer: I can't 'guarantee' it.

http://messageboards.ivillage.com/iv-pssahwoh/?msg=13988.381.....and ?msg=13988.437

(Posts # 13988.381 and 13988.437)

You are setting yourself up for some serious disappointment if you think your nanny is doing everything you direct her to do in the way that you want her to do it. That is not trust, it's denial. I didn't invent the nanny cam. I didn't write Smokeythemom's post on this board. Nor did I write Lauren1063's post here either. The only way to guarantee that my children have the most enviable of infancies/toddlerhoods is by my staying with them. Then I guarantee that everyday (even weekdays) is rich, spent away from the tv and happily with other children at a lake, shopping, museums, aquariums, playgrounds, etc., rather than watching the nanny's favorite 24-hr Christian tv station or with a nanny who claims to be crowd-phobic (never did hear of that particular phobia) or with my sibling's stellar nanny (they paid her $23K) who took 'em everyday for a morning constitutional in summer and winter but was a closet alcoholic passed out on the couch one day. No thank you, Ma'am.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Mon, 08-23-2004 - 11:24pm
Eating what the kids don't finish is a recipe for disaster. Unless of course, you make that your entire meal, which I have been known to do as well - crust from one kid's pb & j, half of an apple the other one didn't finish, a few carrot sticks, and you've got yourself a lunch ; )
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-30-2003
Mon, 08-23-2004 - 11:25pm
Bawahahahahahaha! What a hoot! Thanks for the nonsense!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-30-2003
Mon, 08-23-2004 - 11:26pm
Why on earth do you think posting in this debate is bait unless it comes from your little group? Bawahahahaha. Nonsense!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-30-2003
Mon, 08-23-2004 - 11:29pm
Why does television have to be stimulating at all? Can't it just be pure fun? It is in our apt. We don't need it to be stimulating. It can be. It is at times. It isn't always. Good grief. Do people really think you have to eat flax seed & organic foods and only view stimulating tv if you are going to view anything at all? Get a grip!
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-19-2003
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 12:31am
Read the posts.

Tex's "stimulating" comment was in response to P&H's claim that "TV is great mental stimulation here."

No, TV doesn't *have* to be stimulating. But if you claim that it is, you'd better back it up.


Edited 8/24/2004 12:33 am ET ET by lukeslawmom

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 1:53am
actually, from what I understand, someone who stops smoking will have their lungs begin to heal over time. So again, not that different. I've certainly known people who have developed high blood pressure, diabetes, high cholesterol, from their diets, and still needed medication even when they finally changed what they were eating.


dk

Dj

"Now when I need help, I look in the mirror" ~Kanye West~

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 7:37am
The positive change in lung condition is very gradual and again, may be too late anyhow. I don't believe that absent excess weight/dietary problems, high blood pressure or cholesterol issues can be said to be caused by a previous dietary issue yet not reversible with diet. That is, if you don't have a weight problem (one of the indicators which I meant shows you are developing a dietary problem and need to address) high blood pressure or cholesterol ought not be considered related to your diet beyond when your diet changes - many people have high blood pressure or high cholesterol which develops over time which is genetic and unrelated to their diets. I agree that diabetes can be pushed too far to be recovered from with diet alone, but again, you get warning signs at which point things can be changed before a full diabetes develops.

In any event, I believe your insistence that she said that her diet was healthy for all is erroneous, and that you have repeated that misunderstanding so loudly and so for long that (1) you are now absolutely convinced she actually said it and (2) you have convinced others that she has. I did want to clear that up.

Pages