- The parent that isn’t protecting the child against danger in any way
- The parent that is overprotective
The first group lets their child play outside, on the streets, without any supervision or guidance. I’ve seen this happen – the 3 year old running towards the highway; the 5 year old alone in the streets at night, in the dark; the 4 year old playing in the lake on a sunny day while mom is all consumed by her book and sun bathing, not paying any attention to her child heading towards deeper water.
Just some of the many examples.
It’s obvious this is not correct custodianship of a child. The child has no clue yet of the dangers of traffic, or deep water or pedophiles – the adult is the one to set boundaries and/or constant supervision in these situations.
Especially when the child is very young, constant supervision is necessary when playing outside. And I mean supervision, not constantly intervene – but just be there to intervene when there is real actual danger. Be there but do not participate all the time: let the child find his way and investigate his surroundings by itself.
Inside the home, presumed the parent has taking all precautionary measures (like placing the poisonousness household things out of reach) the child needs less protection.
Setting boundaries is not about installing fear. Explain the child the danger in a calm voice, show him by actually pointing out the physical objects, do not just use words, but include the physical objects.
The second group, the overprotective parents, well, let’s see with an example:
The child is enjoying himself biking on the pavement. There is a small object on his path, and the child bumps into it and he falls with his bike. He is upset because of the unexpected accident and his knee hurts – so he expresses himself by crying. The parent hurries to the child and is all ‘oh my, how terrible!‘ and blames the pavement, the object, the biking, other children - makes a big fuss; taking the child immediately out of the situation inside the house.
In reaction to his parent’s behavior the child starts to cry even louder and feels very sorry for himself.
In this situation
- He is taught that when he hurts himself he is entitled to feel sorry for himself and blame the circumstances. Within this the child is shown he is not responsible for what he experiences – while he is of course. It is a simple 1+1=2 situation: you bump into an object –> you fall –> you hurt (you cry for a moment). Period. That’s reality. Basic Common Sense. The law of physicality.
Do not create and attach emotions like fear, pity, anger etc to the event. Do not transfer your fear of dangers in the reality of earth to the child. It is just that: he falls, he hurts, he cries for a moment.
The child simply learns: when there is an object I go around it with my bike. - He is taught he is special: something like this should not happen to him – by the parent making such a fuss about it and immediately taking him out of the situation into the home. The child is not special: he simply experienced the law of physicality like everybody does – when you fall on the pavement, you hurt yourself. Denying your child the opportunity to deal with the situation in common sense is actually quite abusive towards the child: it will start to experience the world more and more through his mind – instead of through what is actually here: the physical. The mind is abusive – always – to oneself and to others.
Recommended Read:
The Nutritional Value of ComfortIf I was a parent by Markus Modin
Recommended Watch:
The Sins of the Mothers
Family and its Abuse
Is it Child Abuse to force a child to Pray?
Why Children as Adults end up totally Disliking their Parents
children, Desteni, education, Family Construct, guidelines to Equality, how to, know how, nurture, parent, parent(ing), parenting, protection, raising, rearing, research, upbringing, adults, common sense
