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: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 7:46am
Yes, it can be fun. I was debating a post that infered that it was always stimulating.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 8:01am
Another easy one. She's angry because your post was insulting, and even someone else who would also rather be home "24/7" with her kid than work and have a nanny can see that.

Your own quote shows she's not in denial at all. She admitted she can't "guarantee" every detail of what's going on. (That does not mean that the nanny is virtually certain to be letting them sit in front of the tube as you implied she was - for one thing, that's a particularly easy one to detect). She's comfortable with that level of certainty based on her experience with this nanny which has taken place over a period of years. You're in for some serious disappointment if you think that your opinion of what is likely occurring in Felicia's home is more convincing to anyone here than Felicia's actual experience of this woman's care of her children.

"The only way to guarantee that my children have the most enviable of infancies/toddlerhoods is by my staying with them." Well that's certainly debatable, especially since you don't think it's even remotely possible, based on your own experience, that someone would actually be able to manage children without a television.


Edited 8/24/2004 8:34 am ET ET by cocoapop

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2004
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 8:08am
ooooooohhhhhhh! Renco's Pocket FlameFisherman. My favorite! Stale bait, tho....still.

Karen

"A pocketknife is like a melody;
sharp in some places,
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 8:10am
Add ER and any law show I've ever seen to that list.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2004
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 8:12am
I don't. Nice strawman, tho. Make it yourself?

Karen

"A pocketknife is like a melody;
sharp in some places,
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 8:22am

LTB - can you guarantee that your DH is not screwing his secretary?

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 8:23am
That's a good one! can I use that sometime?~Lisa
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 8:25am
I tried to send you an email through Ivillage the other day - did you get it? If not, is there a way I can get your address or have someone forward you mine?
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 8:25am
Thanks for the eloquent defense.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

Avatar for laurenmom2boys
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 08-24-2004 - 8:29am
No, I did not "jump all over" you because you apologized. I was aggravated that you jumped all over me when I tried to explain why I felt the way I did when I posted to you about when people make comments about overweight people they're not just talking about health but appearance as well. You were annoyed with me because you had "aplogized ALREADY." I hadn't responded to that apology because I didn't feel it was genuine, especially since I read it after your post about the "widdle posters" with the "LOL" emoticon. Then you accused me of saying that *only* heavy people have issues with their appearance when I said no such thing. I said *most* discrimination about weight occurs when people are OVERWEIGHT. Then you cry foul when I mentioned that you were "maintaining" your weight (from something YOU WROTE) and you jumped all over me about having had lost 35 pounds WHICH YOU HADN'T MENTIONED BEFORE.

You know, I've tried to stay quiet with all this crap being posted on both sides, but I'm sick and tired of the revisionist history that's been going around. Both sides are wrong. So why not re-read Kathyatps' post about remembering there are feelings behind the screen names.

---------

Edited to fix a typo.


Edited 8/24/2004 8:48 am ET ET by laurenmom2boys

Pages