I have plans of 'spoiling' my Children.
When people hear this, they give me curious glances as if there is something wrong with it.

I just want them to have everything they want.
No one would be allowed to beat, bully, shout at or hurt them. Do these make them bad people?

I think all of these define being a good mother.

Do you think differently? I want honest opinion please?

Can you define what you mean by 'spoiling'

I feel pampering is a better word as spoiling connotes rottenness

You want to give them everything they want or need

deols: I have plans of 'spoiling' my Children.
When people hear this, they give me curious glances as if there is something wrong with it.

I just want them to have everything they want.
No one would be allowed to beat, bully, shout at or hurt them. Do these make them bad people?

I think all of these define being a good mother.

Do you think differently? I want honest opinion please?

biolabee:
Can you define what you mean by 'spoiling'

I feel pampering is a better word as spoiling connotes rottenness

You want to give them everything they want or need

Pampering is an ok word. But I used spoiling to stress what I have in mind. You know, when you go to a luxury hotel/resort and they say things like, let us spoil you a little..

Siena: There's nothing wrong with indulging your children - up to a point. I think it's more about wanting them to have everything they need. Not want, else there's nowhere to draw the line.

You need to differentiate between "wants" and "needs".

I think the wants are subject to the environment they grow in.Would it be wrong to have what everyone else has?

someone was pointing out elsewhere, that a person who doesnt have the same type of father as another person, will feel bad whenever others are interacting with their own fathers, if their relationship with their dad isnt exactly the same as her or his own [ie the primary person being discussed].

my response was everybody is not the same, i see no reason why people should make themselves miserable simply because others dont have their identical family history and dynamics.

likewise, as per topic, if you are not committing armed robbery in order to keep up with the joneses, how you decide to raise your child is up to you.

most nlers here do not seem to have been taught the basics of home training, or maybe they were taught but it didnt sink in.

I think home training should be the primary asset given to a child regardless of the parents financial status.

deols:

Pampering is an ok word. But I used spoiling to stress what I have in mind. You know, when you go to a luxury hotel/resort and they say things like, let us spoil you a little..

Ok then.. It's your choice as a parent

Tpia on point!

tpia@:
someone was pointing out elsewhere, that a person who doesnt have the same type of father as another person, will feel bad whenever others are interacting with their own fathers, if their relationship with their dad isnt exactly the same as her or his own [ie the primary person being discussed].

my response was everybody is not the same, i see no reason why people should make themselves miserable simply because others dont have their identical family history and dynamics.

likewise, as per topic, if you are not committing armed robbery in order to keep up with the joneses, how you decide to raise your child is up to you.

most nlers here do not seem to have been taught the basics of home training, or maybe they were taught but it didnt sink in.

I think home training should be the primary asset given to a child regardless of the parents financial status.

Actually, there is no doubt about how important home training is and is not the matter of discourse here.

I am only asking of people's opinions on letting Children have their way.

^ its up to you what limits you want to set for your children.

there is no universal standard, so you should not set your time by other people's clocks.

you can give or deny them whatever you feel like, that's between you and them.

home training is paramount because that's where the difference is and that's a better legacy for the child.

"come and tell me what to do with my kids" is a sign of laziness and maybe deeper problems, imo. A woman should not be proud to say such in public, doesnt speak well.

tpia@:
someone was pointing out elsewhere, that a person who doesnt have the same type of father as another person, will feel bad whenever others are interacting with their own fathers, if their relationship with their dad isnt exactly the same as her or his own [ie the primary person being discussed].

my response was everybody is not the same, i see no reason why people should make themselves miserable simply because others dont have their identical family history and dynamics.

likewise, as per topic, if you are not committing armed robbery in order to keep up with the joneses, how you decide to raise your child is up to you.

most nlers here do not seem to have been taught the basics of home training, or maybe they were taught but it didnt sink in.

I think home training should be the primary asset given to a child regardless of the parents financial status.

So on point!
After spoiling them,be ready to dance to d beat when they start playing!

"come and tell me what to do with my kids" is a sign of laziness and maybe deeper problems, imo. A woman should not be proud to say such in public, doesnt speak well.

You are now going overboard and is the problem with you.

I get the point of saying home training is what matters as limiting the needs of others haven't proven to create better people.

yellowpawpaw:
So on point!
After spoiling them,be ready to dance to d beat when they start playing!

can you expatiate ?.

and btw, I was also talking about beating, shouting at, etc.

has the sparing of the rod really spoilt the Child?

deols: I have plans of 'spoiling' my Children.
When people hear this, they give me curious glances as if there is something wrong with it.

I just want them to have everything they want.
No one would be allowed to beat, bully, shout at or hurt them. Do these make them bad people?

I think all of these define being a good mother.

Do you think differently? I want honest opinion please?

Very dangerous . Then they will grow up to be selfish adults who can't take no for an answer and think they must have everything they want.

tpia on super point!!

Morayo747: Very dangerous . Then they will grow up to be selfish adults who can't take no for an answer and think they must have everything they want.

actually, I am more interested in this view point.

Is there a way of instilling the 'dont be selfish' attitude even when they have what they want?

something like, what you have is a priviledge. Not everyone has it. You should be thankful for it. You should appreciate your parents for it and you should work hard if you want to continue to have it so good.

Even when Tpia is making sense, I cant help but laugh at her post.

She is so MUSIWAic

deols:

actually, I am more interested in this view point.

Is there a way of instilling the 'dont be selfish' attitude even when they have what they want?

something like, what you have is a priviledge. Not everyone has it. You should be thankful for it. You should appreciate your parents for it and you should work hard if you want to continue to have it so good.

We are human beings and naturally selfish. Except a child is molded, or trained, they will grow up to be selfish. I doubt there is a way to instill discipline while letting a child ALWAYS have their way. E.g naturally no child wants to do any house chore, allowing the child to have his/her way means no house chores.........

Also children are human beings and children, most of their wants have no sensible basis, e.g a child is bored in the store may suddenly want a toy which is a replica of one he/she already owns. A teenage girl may want an ugly shoe which she personally doesn't like but wants it because the most popular girls in sch has it. for this scenarios, letting the child has his/her way means letting them have it anyway despite ..........

Also children always test boundaries, if none is set, they will keep pushing until they ask you for the moon. Do you have the moon to give?

yellowpawpaw:
So on point!
After spoiling them,be ready to dance to d beat when they start playing!

Can you define ' Spoil ' in context of this discussion??

Want and Need .... what if you provide both? Hence OP 's question Does that make them BAD??

jokepearl:

We are human beings and naturally selfish. Except a child is molded, or trained, they will grow up to be selfish. I doubt there is a way to instill discipline while letting a child ALWAYS have their way. E.g naturally no child wants to do any house chore, allowing the child to have his/her way means no house chores.........

Also children are human beings and children, most of their wants have no sensible basis, e.g a child is bored in the store may suddenly want a toy which is a replica of one he/she already owns. A teenage girl may want an ugly shoe which she personally doesn't like but wants it because the most popular girls in sch has it. for this scenarios, letting the child has his/her way means letting them have it anyway despite ..........

Also children always test boundaries, if none is set, they will keep pushing until they ask you for the moon. Do you have the moon to give?

hmmn. This makes sense.

I see a kid who has a bank account. Beyond which he can not spend.

There is a boundary with financial management being taught early on.

But then, age will have a role to play.

jidegirl12:

Can you define ' Spoil ' in context of this discussion??

Want and Need .... what if you provide both? Hence OP 's question Does that make them BAD??

Abi. Some people fail to see the question being asked. They have their own ideas or agenda to propagate.

Thanks for hammering it.

deols:

Abi. Some people fail to see the question being asked. They have their own ideas or agenda to propagate.

Thanks for hammering it.

Crying more than the bereaved is some peoples main duty on this forum, who doesn't know Not to keep up with the joneses and it's consequences

Simple queshion = Answer and take a walk to the left! SMH

deols: I just want them to have everything they want.

Bad idea. They will eventually have to leave you someday and live in the real world on their own. In the real world, do people get everything they want? How will they cope with the realities of life when they have been coddled for the first couple of decades of their life? How will they suddenly start adjusting when they have had no practice learning survival/coping skills? The fact that one can afford the world doesn't mean you should say yes to everything. It is good to say no sometimes even if you can afford it. Giving them 'everything they want' also means you may have to adjust your life to fit their every want. Are you really ready to be your children's puppet?

To me there is a difference in saying you want to give them the finer things in life (the best things) vs you want to give them everything they want. Did you mean the former?

deols: No one would be allowed to beat, bully, shout at or hurt them. Do these make them bad people?

Nothing wrong with this. There are many (and better/more effective) ways to discipline a child without beating, shouting at or bullying them. Just be sure to discipline.

Is the op and mamajhyde the same persin

ileobatojo:

Bad idea. They will eventually have to leave you someday and live in the real world on their own. In the real world, do people get everything they want? How will they cope with the realities of life when they have been coddled for the first couple of decades of their life? How will they suddenly start adjusting when they have had no practice learning survival/coping skills? The fact that one can afford the world doesn't mean you should say yes to everything. It is good to say no even if you can afford it. Giving them 'everything they want' also means you may have to adjust your life to fit their every want. Are you really ready to be your children's puppet?

To me there is a difference in saying you want to give them the finer things in life (the best things) vs you want to give them everything they want. Did you mean the former?



Nothing wrong with this. There are many (and better/more effective) ways to discipline a child without beating, shouting at or bullying them. Just be sure to discipline.

I mean the former, actually.

Deliberately saying No doesnt have to be the way they see the other side of life IMHO. there are other ways like not making the perfect grade or not winning a football competition

biolabee: Is the op and mamajhyde the same persin

are you a learner?

deols:

I mean the former, actually.

Deliberately saying No doesnt have to be the way they see the other side of life IMHO. there are other ways like not making the perfect grade or not winning a football competition

I see, so basically, everytime your kids ask for something and you can afford it/you can do it, you plan to say yes? That is more in support of the latter scenario than the former to me.

Ultimately, it's your choice to do this. But the answer to your question is that it's a bad idea.

Maybe you are

A simple no would have sufficed

deols:

are you a learner?

I will also add that by giving them everything they want, apart from teaching them coping skills, you would also be eliminating a huge block of discipline techniques that should be applied to children. No beating and yelling (which I'm completely fine with) + no utilization of natural consequences (cause and effect) + no utilization of taking away privileges + no utilization of negative re-inforcement; does not leave you with a lot to work with in terms of discipline techniques.

biolabee: Maybe you are

A simple no would have sufficed

biolabee: Is the op and mamajhyde the same persin

This is Assassination of character part 2 what'd y'all want from me??

ileobatojo: I will also add that by giving them everything they want, apart from teaching them coping skills, you would also be eliminating a huge block of discipline techniques that should be applied to children. No beating and yelling (which I'm completely fine with) + no utilization of natural consequences (cause and effect) + no utilization of taking away privileges + no utilization of negative re-inforcement; does not leave you with a lot to work with in terms of discipline techniques.

Without the above, discpline will be verrrry hard.
E.g. No Disneyland if your grades dont improve.It just gives an incentive to want to work harder or a consequence if the work is not put in.Does not take away the fact that you can afford Disneyland either way.

ileobatojo:

I see, so basically, everytime your kids ask for something and you can afford it/you can do it, you plan to say yes? That is more in support of the latter scenario than the former to me.

Ultimately, it's your choice to do this. But the answer to your question is that it's a bad idea.

Actually, this is just like the stares I was talking about.


I am not trying to change your opinion of it but trying to understand what makes it a bad idea.


Yes. My plan was to give all I can afford but now with a little modification of boundaries in budgetary terms.