What do you think?

[misty]

I actually disagree that stopping a meltdown is important.

It is when you have four young children, and one sets of the next. One meltdown with one child can mean an absolute impossibility of moving on from that point with any of them. I don't have the luxury of being able to induldge a temper tantrum, one meltdown can literally impact how the rest of the day goes. Especially if they think they are going to get away with behaving like that, then they try it again at other even less convienitent times and places.

How is a child to learn to control themselves emotionally if they don't ever explore all of their emotions?

Just because you may intervene and avoid a meltdown occaisionally doesn't mean they don't get to experience or explore their emotions?!?!? My children have enough meltdowns at home, why on earth wouldn't I want to avoid it when possible. Even when trying to avoid such, the odds of doing so aren't always in your favour. But to suggest that a parent attempting to avoid a 'meltdown' with their child might somehow be stunting their emotional development is a bit rich.

It isn't easy to watch them kick and scream, but as long as they aren't hurting themselves, then I think they can go for it.

Personally, I actually don't have any emotional issues with watching them scream and carry on - it would be much easier for me just to let them go on a meltdown, but who does that serve? They don't feel better because of it, they don't learn how to handle their emotions by having a meltdown, they don't learn to respect others, they don't manage to express what they are actually upset about. I don't see any way in which a child reaching meltdown point actually serves anybody.

I have no problem ignoring that behaviour until they have calmed down enough to talk to, as I know that when they calm down I can then talk with / deal with the issues leading up to that point - no point letting that get under your skin. BUT I do have other issues with them thinking it is an acceptable way of behaving or expressing themselves and so I will remove them from others, or whatever set them off - this may involve strapping them in the pram or into a carseat or putting them in a quiet spot away from others. After they calm down I will express to them my disappointment in that kind of behaviour and how they are to use their words to express their emotions, and not behave like that. I don't tolerate 'kicking' or lashing out physically at all - it is NOT an appropriate method of expressing emotion or frustration under ANY circumstances with my children.

I certainly don't judge a parent who's watching a child losing it as being any less a parent - it's just your child going through the developmental stage of not being able to completely control their emotions. It would be the same as judging the parent whose little one can't climb to the top of the slide or trips over. They'll learn, at their own pace.

I don't either. Kids have meltdowns. Even the best of them. I usually feel nothing but compassion for the parent. But I also wouldn't judge a parent who steps in early to avoid a meltdown.

It is our job as their parents to help guide them and teach them how to control those emotions in socially acceptable ways. My kids are very good at expressing their emotions, but if they do it in a manner that is not appropriate, is disrespectful of others, is disruptive of others, then no it is not OK. Yes, meltdowns happen, no I don't blame a young child for not always being able to control or reign in their emotions or behaviours, but yes, I will step in until they are at a point where they are able to control themselves.

Outdoors in a playground and at home, I don't see the need to control them physically or emotionally. Even a shopping centre, play centre, at a friends' house is also probably acceptable. At church, or sitting at a restaurant or cafe, no, same as not letting them bounce around physically. Those are places to learn to be quiet and not make everyone else uncomfortable.

Other kids using a playground, people in a shopping center etc, deserve to be able to enjoy it too. If my kid is acting in any manner (or is about to act in any manner) that will disrupt others use of public spaces, then it is my responsibilty as a parent to step in and reign my kids in. Kids thrive on consistency. If you let them behave one way, one time and then expect them to behave another way another time, it gets confusing and is not fair on the child. My kids have higher expectations of their behaviours in places in church and resturants, yes. But those expectations, whilst loosened, do not entirely disappear when in a play area. In my house, they also have similar, but even more relaxed expectations - but they do still need to be aware of others in the house and respectful of others needs for personal space (that is a nessecity as we have a family of six in a tiny 3 bedroom house).

So if anyone is worried about what someone else will say if their child has a meltdown, I say ignore everyone else.

I absolutely agree. It is my philosophy on everything in regards to parenting. I don't care what anyone thinks of the way I parent, I don't believe anyone should care about what others think in ther 'keyhole judgement' moments. I have friends who parent very differently to me, its a non-issue. I don't intervene in my kids having a meltdown because I am worried about what others think of my parenting; I intervene because I believe it is the best thing to do for my children, and because I feel that I have a civic responsibilty to ensure that myself and my kids don't imping on others rights to public and personal space.

(I should add, I also wouldn't stay if I thought my child was overtired, hungry, or just past being able to enjoy themselves and needed to go home. I'm talking about a meltdown because of frustration or feeling overwhelmed, not due to factors you can help them with.)

Little bit confused with this bit, because I believe that you can help them with all factors leading to a meltdown, I also think that you not be successful aot of the time. But in my experience my kids only ever reach meltdown point if there are other things going on such as hunger, tiredness, etc.


****I am not specifically having a go at you, I just disagree with what you have said and wanted to address each of the issues properly*****

[Heaven]

I actually agree with Jennifer here.

My kids are basically free to do and feel how they want. I have three basic rules- no hurting yourself, no hurting anybody else, and no damaging property. Other than that I want them to explore their world without constraints and feel how they want and express that however they feel they need to. And I feel like my job is to 'hold the space' for them. By that I mean, being a constant presence and helping them to feel contained/supported/safe, etc. Not really controlling and directing, but more supporting when they need help.

So for example, when they are starting to get out of control I wouldn't actually stop them, I would just check if they're ok (by asking, or maybe just moving closer and observing). I know my DD1 can get over excited sometimes when playing with other kids. She is just having lots of fun and enjoying playing with others but she gets so excited and overstimulated and I can tell when it's getting a bit much when I hear her yelling and screaming and being extra silly. Sometimes this does lead to a meltdown, when it all just gets too much and her emotions are overwhelming her. And then I step in and help her to calm down. And I believe by letting her get to that point and then helping her calm down I am giving her practice in calming herself and learning how to regulate her own emotions. I don't punish her for a tantrum/meltdown because in my view it's just that she's feeling an emotion that's too big for her and I need to help her with it. And I don't avoid it either, because it's ok with me for her to explore her emotions and her limits.

Anyway, that's just my opinion. And how I try to do it. Sometimes of course I fail, but this is what I aim for I hope that made sense.

[Arcadia]

I'm on the fence with the 'step in and stop a meltdown' scenario. My dd is not particularly active, but can be highly strung and she gets herself very worked up at times (which easily escalates). I don't see the point of letting her reach crisis point. I think it is important to help give her strategies to calm herself down so she doesn't get beyond reason. Why would I want her to have a bad time? Because that's what a meltdown generally means for her.

At the park I have never had to step in and redirect dd's behavior, because she is pretty happy to watch other kids, rather than bounce around etc, but I don't like it when a kid is being aggressive in her face. And if she was being aggssive to another kid I would step in.

I think parks are for the enjoyment of everyone, so if dd is acting in a way that compromises another child then yes, I will step in.

I think children should be free to express themselves and explore the limits of their emotions, but I also think I have a duty to help show dd how to manage these emotions too. Why let her work it out all by herself if I can help her? I help her sleep, eat, get dressed, overcome disappointment etc, and I think teaching a child how to calm themselves is important.

Yes there is a fine line between helping a child and controlling a child, but I think we can all balance that ourselves.

[Jennifer13]

Misty, by my last para I meant that if I have taken her into a park without having taken care of some of her physical needs (hungry, tired, etc) then I should do something about that and not just let her lose it.

Four kids in a tight space would be tricky! On that I cannot comment. But Shanti was talking about a one parent-one child scenario and that I think leaves a lot more flexibility.

[misty]

Honestly, I really wouldn't know about one on one parenting. I could speculate, but I really have no idea what it is like or if things might be different for my parenting values. I don't think so; but then, I thought alot of different things before I had kids as compared to afterwards.

None of my kids ever reach meltdown point unless they are overtired, hungry, sick or frustrated by an inability to communicate (particularly the 2yr old). They may get upset and cranky when they are none of those things, but they never reach melting point then. Maybe other kids are different? But in my experience that is true for most kids.

Although I do know a couple of kids (neices and nephews) who will have a meltdown / temper tantrum excessively, because they know their parents will give in to them if they keep up the pressure...

[Jennifer13]

Yeah, I think rushing to your child when they lose it and try to placate them as quickly as possible can set up a pattern.

[misty]

Jennifer - I know it's OT, but I love your profile pic, very cute. Is that a wrap? Or a SSC?

[Shanti]

I can see your side Misty as well I think the more kids you have the more balance needed with it all!
It's easier to watch 1 or 2 kids than watching 4.

I parent a lot the same way as you Heaven. Sometimes it's more difficult when other parents are around and I am distracted by their conversations and not fully present with my kids. I find that hard. I much prefer visiting parks on my own with my kid lets therefore I am fully able to be present for them and ensure they have me close by for when they need me, ie a kid giving them a hard time or my DD1 getting a bit over excited too at times and not reading the other child's signals that they have had enough play.

[Jennifer13]

Jennifer - I know it's OT, but I love your profile pic, very cute. Is that a wrap? Or a SSC?

It's an Oscha sz 2 in red sahara, in a ruck sack back carry. DD2 loves it on my back! I love this pic too. Thanks!

Anyway, back to it...

[Jessiebean]

I can see your side Misty as well I think the more kids you have the more balance needed with it all!
It's easier to watch 1 or 2 kids than watching 4.

I parent a lot the same way as you Heaven. Sometimes it's more difficult when other parents are around and I am distracted by their conversations and not fully present with my kids. I find that hard. I much prefer visiting parks on my own with my kid lets therefore I am fully able to be present for them and ensure they have me close by for when they need me, ie a kid giving them a hard time or my DD1 getting a bit over excited too at times and not reading the other child's signals that they have had enough play.

It is interesting to read this because I do find that not being fully present in parks with my boys is when things go wrong in regards to meltdowns etc and can make things much more stressful. I am still learning my way with my boys having only just come to the realisation that they are "not like other children" to some extent as they are highly spirited intense little people and finding how to parent them and not some theoretical child is complicated as standard tactics and approaches have limited success. I would have to let mine be dinosaurs as long as they weren't hurting anyone or intruding on anyone else's enjoyment of the park. Trying to control them just causes conflict and we all get stressed.

[Shanti]

I agree jessiebean I too have a highly spirited child ((3yrs) who needs to be loud, expressing herself in a very energetic way, acting like a dinosaur etc, that is 'her' way that she expresses herself and gets it out of her system.
Yes she can be loud but yes that is just how some kids are. My DD1 is not a quite child, she's a chatterbox and extremely Confident which I wouldn't change for the world

I also agree that sometimes trying too hard to control your child can make things worse.