Leashes?
Ross Clement
quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every second).
I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising parents
to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in every
shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
Cheers,
Ross-c
Angel Sparrow
Ross Clement wrote:
>
> Hi. I have a non-walking baby, but am thinking ahead. One thing that seems
> quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
> walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
> mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
> moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every second).
Leashes are a splendid idea and have been around for
centuries. Medieval children had "tending strings"
sewn into their clothing.
I will be ordering one for my 2 yo
this payday. (my old canvas one is shot)
> I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising parents
> to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in every
> shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
I haven't seen them in "every shop" The most recent place I saw
a quality set was One Step Ahead, a safety device catalogue.
(1-800-274-8440 or www.onestepahead.com)
Many people dislike leashes because they
"make the child into a dog."
More prefer strollers.
And in this time of small families,
and widely spaced kids, one seldom
sees a stroller-age and a leash age
child in the same family.
(we are an exception, and have debated on
a double stroller)
Right now, baby rides in a sling, and
toddler gets the stroller.
In a few months, this may change.
Angel
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ross-c
Roger et Daisy Déry
Ross Clement <cle...@westminster.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:3875...@ant.wmin.ac.uk...
> Hi. I have a non-walking baby, but am thinking ahead. One thing that seems
> quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
> walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
> mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
> moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every
second).
parents
> to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in every
> shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
>
>
> Ross-c
Well, I just frankly couldn't be bothered to hook my child up every time and
see potential problems such as tripping people, getting tangled and whatnot.
We made it very clear from an early age that she has to hold our hands, be
in our arms or stay where we can see her (this means in a small area without
any people where she can dance and twirl around to her heart's content) or
be in the stroller, shopping cart, etc. I've never had a single time where I
wished I had a leash. Just seems pointless.
Daisy
Marie
them and I never needed a leash either.
Marie
http://go.to/mommydowis
Roger et Daisy Déry wrote in message
<38766...@ecn.ab.ca>...
Tampamom
started out in the stroller, but if they wanted out in a crowded place (the
mall, a carnival etc) they knew that they would need to wear the leash.
Sometimes they would choose one and sometimes the other.
Marion----Tampamom to Louis(6) and Erica(2)
Angel Sparrow wrote in message <3876447D...@hotmail.com>...
>Angel here
>
>Ross Clement wrote:
>>
>> Hi. I have a non-walking baby, but am thinking ahead. One thing that
seems
>> quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
>> walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
>> mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
>> moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every
second).
>
>
>Leashes are a splendid idea and have been around for
>centuries. Medieval children had "tending strings"
>sewn into their clothing.
>I will be ordering one for my 2 yo
>this payday. (my old canvas one is shot)
>
>> I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising
parents
>> to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in
every
>> shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered
cruel?
>
>
LiteBrnEyes
I tried a leash exactly once. A girlfriend and I took our kids to the
zoo one day. It turned out that on this particular day a lot of school
children were running about the place... extremely crowded. And, of
course, my daughter (2 yo at the time) decided that she didn't wish to
be in the stroller that day. I was apprehensive about letting her walk
in such a wild crowd, so my girlfriend pulled a leash out of her bag. I
put it on her wrist, thinking "What a great idea!"
Pandemonium. That's all I can think. My daughter went nuts, pulling at
the leash, crying hysterically. If not for that, it would have been
almost funny when she ran 2 complete circles around me and completely
tangled us up.
I wouldn't recommend them. Waaaaay too much trouble.
Jeri
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
brett_...@agilent.com
> Hi Ross,
> I wouldn't recommend them. Waaaaay too much trouble.
Actually you didn't do a valid test so you have no idea how they'd really
work for you. First, you didn't give your daughter a chance (in a calm
environment) to get used to it. You just poped it on and expected she'd
accept it with no problem. Second, if she didn't want to hold your hand,
it's not likely she'd like the wrist version of the strap. Besides,
they're too easy for many kids to get out of (which sort of defeats the
whole purpose). The harness style are more secure and leave the child's
hands free.
A leash CAN work very well, if the child has been prepared for it's use,
if the parent knows how to make use of it, and if the style fits the
preferences of both kid and parents.
--
Brett Carver
(707) 577-4344
brett_...@agilent.com
Rosepetal
I don't think it's cruel so much as leashes are usually used for animals. I
would never use one even though it seems it would make things a lot easier
sometimes. My family suggested I get one. I told my dad the day our baby starts
barking is the day I put him on a leash.
He told me about a child he saw at the airport who had a leash on. The parents
took the leash off and immediately the child started running around like a wild
Indian. Now, I submit to you, that if a toddler or preschooler can learn to walk
within a couple feet of mom or dad *with* a leash on, then the same child can
also learn to the exercise same behavior *without* the leash on. It's just that
the time to teach it, and the length of time for the child to learn it, requires
infinitely more patience and consistency from the parent than just snapping on a
physical restraint does.
Shawn
http://www.geocities.com/heartland/forest/2468
Abecedarian Academy Homepreschool
Ross Clement wrote:
> Hi. I have a non-walking baby, but am thinking ahead. One thing that seems
> quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
> walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
> mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
> moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every second).
> I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising parents
> to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in every
> shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ross-c
hsamu...@hotmail.com
cle...@westminster.ac.uk (Ross Clement) wrote:
> Hi. I have a non-walking baby, but am thinking ahead. One thing that
seems
> quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
> walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I
don't
> mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the
odd
> moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every
second).
Good for you!
> I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising
parents
> to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in
every
> shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered
cruel?
I used one. My SIL was offended. Her child missed getting hit in a
parking lot by | | <- that much.
Yeah. People look at you funny. Tough. My child comes first.
Also easier to teach safe behavior. More freedom than handholding.
Let's start a trend. Safety for our kids.
Hannah
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Rosalie B.
>Hi. I have a non-walking baby, but am thinking ahead. One thing that seems
>quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
>walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
>mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
>moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every second).
>I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising parents
>to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in every
>shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
The answers that you have gotten here demonstrate why people don't do
it. Such as "when my child barks, then is when I'll put him on a
leash"
Your view is logical, but most people are more emotional about it -
seems to be some sort of revulsion. If you decide to use a leash you
may get some static from other people (strangers or your relatives) so
be prepared for this. I used a harness when my oldest was a toddler,
but after that I didn't really need it as I wasn't in a highly urban
environment. Also it is harder to do with two of them.
The type of child that it may work on is the type of child that is
very active but doesn't like to be touched or made to hold hands. Or
for a mother or caregiver (such as a grandmother) who is restricted in
mobility for some reason. And it should probably be tried out at
home, or out of the public eye so such a child becomes resigned to it
at least, otherwise you are going to have major embarrassing tantrums
in public. A child that is docile and walks holding the mom's hand
probably doesn't need it.
grandma Rosalie
Ross Clement
Thanks to everyone for the responses. A leash came packaged with a
pushchair we purchased, so we will give it a god.
: The answers that you have gotten here demonstrate why people don't do
: it. Such as "when my child barks, then is when I'll put him on a
: leash"
Personally I'd rather have my son look like he's being treated
"like a dog" rather than end up looking "like road kill". Recently a
student visited my office with one walking older toddler (about 4) and
twin walking younger toddlers (about 2). It obviously was very
difficult for her, and if I hadn't looked after the twins for her
at one point, the older child would probably have escaped. I remember
another case where I was at a bus stop and had to grab somebody's
toddler as he ran out into the (busy) road.
: Your view is logical, but most people are more emotional about it -
: seems to be some sort of revulsion. If you decide to use a leash you
: may get some static from other people (strangers or your relatives) so
: be prepared for this. I used a harness when my oldest was a toddler,
My de-facto mother in law was over today and she said that she used
a leash with my partner (one of twins).
: but after that I didn't really need it as I wasn't in a highly urban
I'm more worried about the safety of my child than the opinion of
passers by. While some people found the leash inconvenient, I see
no-one claiming that it's harming for the child to wear one, so we'll
at least give it a go.
: environment. Also it is harder to do with two of them.
:
: The type of child that it may work on is the type of child that is
: very active but doesn't like to be touched or made to hold hands. Or
: for a mother or caregiver (such as a grandmother) who is restricted in
: mobility for some reason. And it should probably be tried out at
: home, or out of the public eye so such a child becomes resigned to it
: at least, otherwise you are going to have major embarrassing tantrums
: in public. A child that is docile and walks holding the mom's hand
: probably doesn't need it.
Yes. As with some other people's experiences, I'll have to wait to
see exactly what happens with my own child. And, I'll remember to
try it out at home first.
Cheers,
Ross-c
Penny Gaines
> Ross Clement <cle...@westminster.ac.uk> wrote in message
> news:3875...@ant.wmin.ac.uk...
>> quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
>> walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
>> mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
>> moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every
> second).
>> I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising
> parents
>> to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in every
>> shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
> Well, I just frankly couldn't be bothered to hook my child up every time and
> see potential problems such as tripping people, getting tangled and whatnot.
> We made it very clear from an early age that she has to hold our hands, be
> in our arms or stay where we can see her (this means in a small area without
> any people where she can dance and twirl around to her heart's content) or
> be in the stroller, shopping cart, etc. I've never had a single time where I
> wished I had a leash. Just seems pointless.
I think a lot depends on where you are. If you have one child, who is
content to stay where you put it, then you probably don't need a harness.
If you have several children, and one of them is prone to running away,
then you may feel differently. And some children don't like to hold
hands, and some children feel the need to explore everywhere.
IME I haven't felt the need for a harness of that kind - but I drive
to my local pedestrianated shopping centre, and my children tend to
stay close to me anyway. If I lived somewhere with a busy road
going through the shopping centre (and I know towns like this) or
didn't have use of a car to get to the shops, I would probably want
one available.
To the original poster: you can't look at them the whole time, but
you can *listen*. You can listen to their talking and to their
footsteps.
Penny Gaines
Tim Calvert
>
>Hi. I have a non-walking baby, but am thinking ahead. One thing that seems
>quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
>walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
>mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
>moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every second).
>I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising parents
>to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in every
>shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
Just thought I'd de-lurk long enough to throw in my 2-cents-worth. We first
tried a halter-type leash on our daughter when she was 13-months. (She started
walking at 9 months, so by that time she was into running every chance she
got.) She's considerably shorter than I, so bending over far enough to hold her
hand is uncomfortable, to say the least. Also, at 13 months, I think it's
expecting a bit much of her to understand instructions to stay close and don't
run off.
Her first reaction was "What's this thing?" She examined it for about 30
seconds, then started walking around. She almost immediately tested the limits
of the leash, but she never put up a fuss when she was stopped by it. (We were
in a hospital waiting room at the time, and I was sitting down. So it gave her
a chance to get accustomed to wearing the thing before we actually went for a
walk with it.)
Now (at 15 months), after several uses, she gets excited when she sees it come
out and can't wait to get it on because she knows it means she gets to run
around instead of being carried (and at 25 lbs, that can get tiring) or put in
a stroller. She also reacts to tugs on the leash (to change direction, slow
down, or start moving) surprisingly well. I'm reminded strongly of walking a
horse with a halter and lead. Very similar. Except you can't pick the horse up
if it gets too unruly. :-)
And as for the reactions of others, we've had *no* negative reactions. The two
most common comments we've gotten are "Isn't that cute?" and "What a great
idea!" Almost everyone who sees her smiles. I've not noticed any unkind looks,
and I've been watching for them just to see if anyone would.
As for those who say you just don't need them, I'd rather err on the side of
caution than lose my daughter. But I strongly recommend the halter type rather
then the wrist type. It leaves your child's hands free for exploring and, as
others have mentioned, is not so easy to get out of. I don't know about them
being available everywhere, but I have seen them in Walmart.
--
Tim Calvert Email: cal...@marshall.edu
Lead Systems Programmer Phone: (304) 696-3210
Marshall University
Huntington, WV
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
JaKe
When my wife and went to our first child's doctor's appointment he
warned us about all the "you must have this product in order to give
peace of mind" stuff on the shelves for kids. I found his advise to be
wise and very skeptical. I think the leash is one of those products
selling you peace of mind for fears that would have never been brought
to your attention unless they put it there.
Why after thousands of years of parenting do we humiliate the child in
the name of "safety"?
Keep them on dogs who can't understand and teach/coach and walk with
your child who will try to do what you do and learn with time.
Peace,
JaKe
Hedgehog42
>We first
>tried a halter-type leash on our daughter when she was 13-months. (She
>started
>walking at 9 months, so by that time she was into running every chance she
>got.) She's considerably shorter than I, so bending over far enough to hold
>her
>hand is uncomfortable, to say the least.
And for her to hold her hand up above her head for that amount of time is
probably also pretty uncomfortable, too.
No wonder so many toddlers don't like holding hands with parents for long
periods of time!
Lori G.
Milwaukee, WI
Robyn Grunberg - Systems Engineer - Vic
I'll de-lurk too.When my wife and went to our first child's doctor's appointment he
warned us about all the "you must have this product in order to give
peace of mind" stuff on the shelves for kids. I found his advise to be
wise and very skeptical. I think the leash is one of those products
selling you peace of mind for fears that would have never been brought
to your attention unless they put it there.
I've decided to delurk as well ;-)
I never liked leases on kids, my mum used them on most of us in our extreme youth (I'm the oldest of 10 children) and I *always* hated watching her do it. I asked her why at one point, and her response was "To make sure you don't run off" which wasn't enough for me. There were enough of us to surround any small child and make sure they couldn't escape...
Then I discovered why.
My fourth child was a very early walker, she could walk well before she could reason or understand statements like "You must hold my hand". She was 9 months old. She also (to this day, in fact) has no idea of danger. She would run off in car parks, during a walk along the side of the road, just about anywhere. I lost her twice in one week, and that was when I was keeping a really close eye on her. She could move in a blink of an eye! In one instance she was hiding among the clothes at Target, and I didn't see her there. I walked off looking for her, we were finally reunited about 30 minutes later. After that I used the leash. I only used it until she could understand reasoning, at about 16 months or so.
So I agree with you, I don't think a parent is likely to need one. But in some instances, (early walker, challenging child, slow parent) it can be a complete life saver. I am *not* treating my child like a dog, I simply know that my child can outsmart me without it :-)
Regards,
Robyn
Why after thousands of years of parenting do we humiliate the child in
the name of "safety"?
Keep them on dogs who can't understand and teach/coach and walk with
your child who will try to do what you do and learn with time.
Peace,
JaKe
Tim Calvert wrote:
>
> In article <3875...@ant.wmin.ac.uk>, cle...@westminster.ac.uk says...
> >
> >Hi. I have a non-walking baby, but am thinking ahead. One thing that seems
> >quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
> >walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
> >mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
> >moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every second).
> >I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising parents
> >to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in every
> >shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
>
> Just thought I'd de-lurk long enough to throw in my 2-cents-worth. We first
> tried a halter-type leash on our daughter when she was 13-months. (She started
> walking at 9 months, so by that time she was into running every chance she
> got.) She's considerably shorter than I, so bending over far enough to hold her
-- =============================================================================== ,-_|\ Robyn Grunberg -- Systems Engineer / \ Sun Microsystems Australia email : robyn.g...@Aus.Sun.COM \_,-._/ Level 18, 60 Albert Rd Phone : +61 3 9679 6200 v South Melbourne, Vic 3205 Fax : +61 3 9696 0226 ===============================================================================
CATSAMIRI
because the "leash" didn't work on their particular child they declare it
unsuitable or even riduculous.
IN MY CASE, the "leash" was actually a fanny pack around her waist with about 3
feet of elastic with a loop for my wrist.. This way my daughter had a fun pack
she could actually put things in and it looked like my pack I had around my
waist. THis was a literally a life saver when we took a trip to Colorado when
she was 20 months old and when we would go to an amusement park.
Yes, we got some strange looks from some people, but I was surprised by the
support I got from other parents too.
"Leash" has such a negative connotation to it since it is normally used for
animals. But they serve a purpose. It may not be the answer to everyone's
problem. But children are different in every family and anyone with a VERY
active and curious child might view it as a solution and not a cruel device.
Some people who have children who are content to stay near their parents might
not need this. But, if you've ever had to look for a 2 year old in Sears,
during Christmas, and experience the fear only a parent of a missing child can
have, you might see it differently. All it takes is 2 seconds and a child can
disappear no matter how attentive you may think you are.
Its been a few years, but I think Walmart has the fanny pack "leash".
Good luck!
Cat
Mom to Miriam
>
>Hi. I have a non-walking baby, but am thinking ahead. One thing that seems
>quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
>walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
>mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
>moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every second).
>I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising parents
>to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in every
>shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
>
>Cheers,
>
>Ross-c
Corinna Esmeralda Schultz
I'm curious as to why no one has said anything about carrying the child.
Is it just me? My son started walking at 10 months or so, but I always
carried him around except when we walked across the street to visit or
to the mailbox or around the block (to give him practice walking, mostly).
I would never let a child that young walk freely in a store or anywhere
where he might possibly get hurt. Someone wrote about their kid running
off in a parking lot, I think. I would pick up my son from the carseat
and just carry him to the store or wherever.
I almost always used either a sling or backpack to carry him, since it is
a strain on the arms and back to just hold a child that heavy. But even
now, at 32 pounds, I put him in the backpack when we go to CostCo just
because it's so busy and chaotic. When we go to Target, he faithfully
follws me, or lets me hold his hand. Occasionally he'll even hold my
jacket if my arms are full.
He is very energetic in his play and definitely not a placid child, but
I think he's learned by now (25 months) that he's supposed to stay with
me, and that when we're on the sidewalk or in the street (including
parking lots) he's supposed to hold my hand, or I'll carry him.
I know that since he's my only child, that it's different from when there
are multiple children, but when the new baby comes (due in June), he'll
either use a stroller, get left at home with me husband, or he'll have
learned to walk holding my hand consistently without wanting to be picked
up. (The baby will be in the sling until he/she learns to walk well, as
I did with my son.) Sure it's tiring, but I thought he was heavy when
he was born (9.5 lbs), and I've been saying ever since "Boy you're heavy!".
I guess the constant weight lifting makes one stronger. :) (He did require
a lot of holding just around the house, too, btw. The sling and the
backpack were real sanity savers!)
I'm not intending to come across as agressive or anything, so please don't
take my writing that way. I don't write very subtly. :) I'm just curious
that no one seems to have done what I considered to be so natural.
-Corinna Schultz
Ross Clement
: I almost always used either a sling or backpack to carry him, since it is
: a strain on the arms and back to just hold a child that heavy. But even
: now, at 32 pounds, I put him in the backpack when we go to CostCo just
: because it's so busy and chaotic. When we go to Target, he faithfully
: follws me, or lets me hold his hand. Occasionally he'll even hold my
: jacket if my arms are full.
Hi. I'm the original questioner.
At present we go out with him quite often, and much prefer to use a sling
than to use his pram. He seems to prefer the sling too. We're planning
to use a backpack as well when he gets a bit bigger. However, we still want
him to be able to run around some of the time as well, hence the question
about the leash.
Cheers,
Ross-c
Kelly C Thome
: Some people who have children who are content to stay near their parents might
: not need this. But, if you've ever had to look for a 2 year old in Sears,
: during Christmas,
That would be me! My daughter Alicia is an extremely active child with an
admirable sense of independence... that is, until it comes time to keep
her near us. She apparently never read the chapter in her "How To Be A
Baby" manual that mentioned how keeping a parent in sight helps keep her
safe :) She does not like to ride in a stroller and hasn't since she
learned to walk (at 12 months). She's very vocal about this :) She will
hold a hand for a couple of minutes at best, then tries to run off.
Picking her up when she doesn't want to be confined causes crying,
kicking and other behaviors that make finishing whatever we came to the
store for difficult, to say the least. Selective deafness sets in whenever
we've tried to tell her to stay nearby.
During the holiday season she decided that playing hide-and-seek among the
clothing racks at Sears was fun, and that the racks on the other side of
the aisle were better. We ended up leaving the store because it was
impossible to buy the item we had come for while either holding a kicking,
screaming child or keeping up with the mobile one headed off to Housewares
:) .
We're trying a "hand-holder" now ("leash" has a negative connotation and
since we don't feel it's a negative approach we've chosen a more positive
phrase- I think it was Marie H. who mentioned this phrase?) and I think
it's going to be a success. Alicia gets to be down on the ground and has
*limited* freedom to move around. She always has the option of holding a
hand instead, or of being carried. We don't put her holder on and "forget"
about her, nor do we treat her like our dog- he doesn't get a choice about
where we go, has to heel when told to, and doesn't get carried when he
gets tired! I haven't noticed any really negative looks and I've heard at
least one "good idea!"
Just my $.02,
Kelly (Mom to Alicia, 6-18-98)
--
____________________________________________________________
Kelly C. Thome Ph.D. kth...@world.std.com
Department of Pathology phone: 617-732-5779
Brigham and Women's Hospital fax: 617-732-7449
Boston, MA 02115
____________________________________________________________
Jim
>I'm curious as to why no one has said anything about carrying the child.
>Is it just me?
. . .
>Someone wrote about their kid running
>off in a parking lot, I think. I would pick up my son from the carseat
>and just carry him to the store or wherever.
My own feeling is that using a leash in a parking lot in an effort to
avoid getting struck in more dangerous than the typical alternatives,
e.g., carrying, holding hands, shopping cart, etc.
>I'm not intending to come across as agressive or anything, so please don't
>take my writing that way. I don't write very subtly. :) I'm just curious
>that no one seems to have done what I considered to be so natural.
Oh, most do. We closely watch, set boundaries and let the kid
explore. I'll admit to simply not getting the leash concept. Either
you hook-em up to pay attention elsewhere - which is a mistake, imo or
you hook-em up and let them lead you around which seems, well, silly.
Again, imo.
I'm also concerned that the leash sends some type of signal to the
child that he really doesn't have to pay much attention to the outside
world as long as he's "hooked-up." (Or that the reverse is sent to
the parent.)
Now one of those electronic devices that goes off when the kid wanders
x feet away. . . that would be kewl.
--
Jim
Mark Cravatts
A dog requires about 5500 volts, AVA approved. A child learns with
as little as 3000 volts, APA approval pending. I'm actually working on a
GPS based system. Underground wires will no longer be necessary. A parent
simply specifies a boundary using a windows based program and downloads it
into the collar. Up to 5 programs can be stored that could contains the
boundaries of relatives, friends, and day-care provider facilities.
Seriously, we were able to keep tabs on our three children without using
a leash. We did lose one though at the NJ shore :-( Fortunately he was
smart enough to walk back and wait by our car. I believe that he was about
5 years old at the time. And yes, I do remember the times when they refused
to be held, and at the same time wouldn't stay near us.
-Mark
Cissy . Thorpe
> >quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
> >walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
> >mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
> >moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every second).
> >I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising parents
> >to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in every
> >shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
> On 11 Jan 2000, Tim Calvert wrote:
<<snipped preliminary stuff>>
> Now (at 15 months), after several uses, she gets excited when she sees it come
> out and can't wait to get it on because she knows it means she gets to run
> around instead of being carried (and at 25 lbs, that can get tiring) or put in
> a stroller. She also reacts to tugs on the leash (to change direction, slow
> down, or start moving) surprisingly well. I'm reminded strongly of walking a
> horse with a halter and lead. Very similar. Except you can't pick the horse up
> if it gets too unruly. :-)
>
> And as for the reactions of others, we've had *no* negative reactions. The two
> most common comments we've gotten are "Isn't that cute?" and "What a great
> idea!" Almost everyone who sees her smiles. I've not noticed any unkind looks,
> and I've been watching for them just to see if anyone would.
>
> As for those who say you just don't need them, I'd rather err on the side of
> caution than lose my daughter. But I strongly recommend the halter type rather
> then the wrist type. It leaves your child's hands free for exploring and, as
> others have mentioned, is not so easy to get out of. I don't know about them
> being available everywhere, but I have seen them in Walmart.
Haveing the same 20-20 hindsight as most, I would opt for the harness, too.
We had a wrist leash for my first grandson and he was constantly tugging
on the limit with his arm in the air...it took him quite a while to get
used to it, and he would delight in tangling himself whenever he could.
Never needed one for his 2 sisters - sometimes I think that at 5 (nearly)
he STILL needs one.
Cissy
Laura Uerling
>
> I'll de-lurk too.
>
> When my wife and went to our first child's doctor's appointment he
> warned us about all the "you must have this product in order to give
> peace of mind" stuff on the shelves for kids. I found his advise to be
> wise and very skeptical. I think the leash is one of those products
> selling you peace of mind for fears that would have never been brought
> to your attention unless they put it there.
Gee, you're right! I would have *never* considered the possibility of my
toddler dashing into the street and getting hit by a car if the
World-wide Leash-selling Cabal hadn't brainwashed me!
>
> Why after thousands of years of parenting do we humiliate the child in
> the name of "safety"?
*Who* is getting humiliated? I use a leash occasionally with my 22 mo
son and he has absolutely no concept of humiliation. He gets frustrated
sometimes because he doesn't want to be restrained, but that includes
*any* restraint; holding hands, being held, in a stroller, a car seat,
etc.
So how, exactly, is being restrained by a leash inherently more
humiliating than being restrained in a stroller or high chair?
BTW, leashes and other restraints *have* been used on children for
thousands of years. I would be willing to bet that it was actually more
common in the past since mothers often had to work outside and needed
something to keep their toddlers from straying into danger.
> Keep them on dogs who can't understand and teach/coach and walk with
> your child who will try to do what you do and learn with time.
Ya know, this topic comes up every few months and inevitably there are
couple of posters who repeat the same two inane arguments. 1) Leashes
are 'icky' because they are also used for animals and 2) Parents who use
leashes are lazy and don't want to bother teaching their children how to
stay out of danger.
Congratulations, you hit them on your first try! I bet you're proud. If
you haven't yet figured out *why* they are inane arguments, re-read the
other posts in this thread, or let me know and I'll be happy to
enlighten you.
Laura Uerling
luer...@lynx.neu.edu
Lots0kids3
1) I am under 5 feet tall. Any child over the age of 1 quickly gets very heavy
for carrying *any* distance outside of the house.
2) I especially couldn't carry my toddler when I was greatly pregnant. I also
couldn't keep up with her should she decide to dash into the street or across a
driveway.
But I think you hit it on the head when you mention that your son is an only
child. If I had stopped with one, I would never have had to purchase a leash.
My toddler is now approaching 3 and we use the leash very rarely. She is
learning how to walk with her older sister, but I have to watch her like a
hawk. But back when she was 18 months I considered it foolish to let her loose
without some sort of restraint for her own good.
YMMV,
Ruthie, mom of 3
Corinna Schultz wrote:
>I'm curious as to why no one has said anything about carrying the child.
>Is it just me? My son started walking at 10 months or so, but I always
>carried him around except when we walked across the street to visit or
>to the mailbox or around the block (to give him practice walking, mostly).
>I would never let a child that young walk freely in a store or anywhere
>where he might possibly get hurt. Someone wrote about their kid running
>off in a parking lot, I think. I would pick up my son from the carseat
>and just carry him to the store or wherever.
>
>I almost always used either a sling or backpack to carry him, since it is
>a strain on the arms and back to just hold a child that heavy. But even
>now, at 32 pounds, I put him in the backpack when we go to CostCo just
>because it's so busy and chaotic. When we go to Target, he faithfully
>follws me, or lets me hold his hand. Occasionally he'll even hold my
>jacket if my arms are full.
>
>He is very energetic in his play and definitely not a placid child, but
>I think he's learned by now (25 months) that he's supposed to stay with
>me, and that when we're on the sidewalk or in the street (including
>parking lots) he's supposed to hold my hand, or I'll carry him.
>
>I know that since he's my only child, that it's different from when there
>are multiple children, but when the new baby comes (due in June), he'll
>either use a stroller, get left at home with me husband, or he'll have
>learned to walk holding my hand consistently without wanting to be picked
>up. (The baby will be in the sling until he/she learns to walk well, as
>I did with my son.) Sure it's tiring, but I thought he was heavy when
>he was born (9.5 lbs), and I've been saying ever since "Boy you're heavy!".
>I guess the constant weight lifting makes one stronger. :) (He did require
>a lot of holding just around the house, too, btw. The sling and the
>backpack were real sanity savers!)
>
>I'm not intending to come across as agressive or anything, so please don't
>take my writing that way. I don't write very subtly. :) I'm just curious
>that no one seems to have done what I considered to be so natural.
>
>-Corinna Schultz
JaKe
Hedgehog42
>> Laura Uerling wrote:
>>> JaKe wrote:
>> > When my wife and went to our first child's doctor's appointment he
>> > warned us about all the "you must have this product in order to give
>> > peace of mind" stuff on the shelves for kids. I found his advise to be
>> > wise and very skeptical. I think the leash is one of those products
>> > selling you peace of mind for fears that would have never been brought
>> > to your attention unless they put it there.
>>
>> Gee, you're right! I would have *never* considered the possibility of my
>> toddler dashing into the street and getting hit by a car if the
>> World-wide Leash-selling Cabal hadn't brainwashed me!
:) You know, different products evolve for different families' specific needs.
If your VCR is up high perhaps you don't need a VCR lock. Ours wasn't, and we
did (as we figured out after our toddler thought it would be great to "mail"
greeting cards in the "mailbox slot".
While I think your doctor's point was well-taken, I'd be willing to bet most
families who do use a leash don't get them as shower presents, but buy them
after it turns out there's a need for one. (child's temperament, a scare with
urban traffic, physical difficulty holding hands with or carrying the child, or
the ever-popular more-than-one-kid-to-watch problem.)
Laura's right -- various forms of leashes have been used for thousands of
years. I believe this is where the "tied to Mama's apron strings" saying comes
from. (and the criticism in such a saying is not for a mom's doing so, but for
failure to let go as the child became old enough to go without them safely.)
>> > Why after thousands of years of parenting do we humiliate the child in
>> > the name of "safety"?
>>
>> *Who* is getting humiliated? I use a leash occasionally with my 22 mo
>> son and he has absolutely no concept of humiliation. He gets frustrated
>> sometimes because he doesn't want to be restrained, but that includes
>> *any* restraint; holding hands, being held, in a stroller, a car seat,
>> etc.
>>
>> So how, exactly, is being restrained by a leash inherently more
>> humiliating than being restrained in a stroller or high chair?
Exactly. Leashes probably *can* be used to humiliate, but for that matter, so
can a stroller or a high chair, or even a parent's hand or arms, if the child
does not want to be restrained.
Lori G.
Milwaukee, WI
Jim
>Laura's right -- various forms of leashes have been used for thousands of
>years. I believe this is where the "tied to Mama's apron strings" saying comes
>from. (and the criticism in such a saying is not for a mom's doing so, but for
>failure to let go as the child became old enough to go without them safely.)
I've got to call you both on this. Not that it has any real relevance
to the merits of leash usage, but I just don't believe that; 1.)
various forms of leashes have been used for thousands of years, and,
2.) it's the basis for the phrase "tied to Mama's apron strings."
--
Jim
CAROLYN EVANS
>>shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
not cuel, just more what you would use for a
dog.
>
>Just thought I'd de-lurk long enough to throw in my 2-cents-worth. We first
>tried a halter-type leash on our daughter when she was 13-months. (She
started
>walking at 9 months, so by that time she was into running every chance she
>got.) She's considerably shorter than I, so bending over far enough to hold
her
>hand is uncomfortable, to say the least. Also, at 13 months, I think it's
>expecting a bit much of her to understand instructions to stay close and
don't
>run off.
>
>Her first reaction was "What's this thing?" She examined it for about 30
>seconds, then started walking around. She almost immediately tested the
limits
>of the leash, but she never put up a fuss when she was stopped by it. (We
were
>in a hospital waiting room at the time, and I was sitting down. So it gave
her
>a chance to get accustomed to wearing the thing before we actually went for
a
>walk with it.)
>
>Now (at 15 months), after several uses, she gets excited when she sees it
come
>out and can't wait to get it on because she knows it means she gets to run
>around instead of being carried (and at 25 lbs, that can get tiring) or put
in
>a stroller. She also reacts to tugs on the leash (to change direction, slow
>down, or start moving) surprisingly well. I'm reminded strongly of walking
a
>horse with a halter and lead. Very similar. Except you can't pick the horse
up
>if it gets too unruly. :-)
It also sounds just like leash training our DOG. He get excited if you take
down his leash, and knows not to go to far/pul too hard.
Our son is now three, but even when he was younger there was no need
for a LEASH! We were/are the adults, and therefore, the
reasoning/responsible ones. If I/we took him on a shopping trip, or
elsewhere, he stayed in the stroller until (IF) we determined it was safe to
let him down. I think leashes are a crutch for irresponsible parents. They
say "I'm too busy/lazy to watch my child, and really don't want to deal with
a screaming fit in public, so i'm unwilling to restrict their movement to a
stroller".
>
>And as for the reactions of others, we've had *no* negative reactions. The
two
>most common comments we've gotten are "Isn't that cute?" and "What a great
>idea!" Almost everyone who sees her smiles. I've not noticed any unkind
looks,
>and I've been watching for them just to see if anyone would.
Just because people are polite is no reason to assume you are doing the
right thing.
>As for those who say you just don't need them, I'd rather err on the side
of
>caution than lose my daughter. But I strongly recommend the halter type
rather
>then the wrist type. It leaves your child's hands free for exploring and,
as
>others have mentioned, is not so easy to get out of. I don't know about
them
>being available everywhere, but I have seen them in Walmart.
Treating your child like a dog is not necessary. Even at 15 months (and
earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog -- give
them the credit they deserve. Your child WILL understand, if you take the
time to explain, that getting down out of the stroller is a PRIVILEDGE, NOT
a right. And, they will learn that throwing a hissy fit in public will NOT
acheive their goals (IF you are consistant, and willing to hear a few at Wal
Mart, or where ever).
Bottom line...If you find it too much trouble/too much effort, now, to raise
your child to be reasoning and responsible...what does it say about how you
will raise them when they are 4, or 7, or 12.
Carolyn
Mary Ann Tuli
CAROLYN EVANS wrote:
> I think leashes are a crutch for irresponsible parents. They
> say "I'm too busy/lazy to watch my child, and really don't want to deal with
> a screaming fit in public, so i'm unwilling to restrict their movement to a
> stroller".
>
What is the difference between making the decision to harness your child
in
a stroller and harness your child in a leash?
Isn't using a leash more work than using a stroller? You are not
meant to drag the child around, but let them walk on their own
under your guidance.
> Bottom line...If you find it too much trouble/too much effort, now, to raise
> your child to be reasoning and responsible...what does it say about how you
> will raise them when they are 4, or 7, or 12.
Are you really saying that you parents that use leashes find it too
much trouble to raise their children?
Mary Ann
Jim
>What is the difference between making the decision to harness your child
>in a stroller and harness your child in a leash?
Strollers are meant to move your young child around easily while the
adult goes to do their thing. The harness in the stroller is meant to
prevent your child from falling out.
>Isn't using a leash more work than using a stroller? You are not
>meant to drag the child around, but let them walk on their own
>under your guidance.
Perhaps this hits on my uneasiness with child leashes. Even with a
pet, the leash is not to be used to pull the owner around or effect
his path. A properly trained pet will not strain at the leash or
wander off. Children are every bit as bright and "trainable" as any
pet.
This isn't to say leashes don't work. Certainly they keep your child
close by as intended and thousands hang on tightly while "walking"
their dogs. I'm just not convinced it's the best way. (Even owners
of well trained pets are usually required to leash up - more for the
comfort of others.) It simply falls under the YMMV m.k. category. . .
--
Jim
Rachel Boeckenhauer
:
: Our son is now three, but even when he was younger there was no need
: for a LEASH! We were/are the adults, and therefore, the
: reasoning/responsible ones. If I/we took him on a shopping trip, or
: elsewhere, he stayed in the stroller until (IF) we determined it was safe to
: say "I'm too busy/lazy to watch my child, and really don't want to deal with
: a screaming fit in public, so i'm unwilling to restrict their movement to a
: stroller".
Carolyn:
Not all children are this tolerant. My son is almost two, and while I have
ALWAYS strapped him into high chairs, strollers, shopping carts, etc. for
safety while he is in them, he is now old enough to wiggle out of most of
these straps if he wants down. And he is very energetic, so this happens
often. Mind you, I don't LET him run off -- I will let him down to walk when
he wants, and if he does not walk nicely, help push the shopping cart, etc.,
then he gets picked up and put back in the cart or carried. I don't have a
leash, but I have thought that he might be happier and feel less restrained
with this than being stuck in the cart. In particular, it can be very
difficult to keep him from running away while I have other things I need to
carry or am trying to pay for my purchases or whatever.
Also, note that this is not such a big deal when my husband and I are out
TOGETHER. I don't know if you are a stay-at-home-mom or not, but if you are
shopping ALONE with your kids very much, I think this would be of an issue.
: Treating your child like a dog is not necessary. Even at 15 months (and
: earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog -- give
: them the credit they deserve. Your child WILL understand, if you take the
: time to explain, that getting down out of the stroller is a PRIVILEDGE, NOT
: a right. And, they will learn that throwing a hissy fit in public will NOT
: acheive their goals (IF you are consistant, and willing to hear a few at Wal
: Mart, or where ever).
This sounds like what I thought of leashes BEFORE I had my child. I don't
give in to my child's every whim, even if that means having a hissy fit in
Walmart, but my child is very strong-willed and strong, and if he really,
really doesn't want to be in the stroller/shopping cart, I can not keep him
in it without *physically* hurting him, which I do not consider to be an
option. In these cases, I typically carry him (to keep him from running off)
and leave as quickly as possible. At times like this, I find myself thinking
that a leash really might be a good idea. I can particularly understand it
for someone who has more than one child and goes out alone with them often.
Also, a leash doesn't mean you don't have to WATCH your child -- you still
need to make sure they aren't getting into things (their hands are still
free, after all). It just means that they can't run off our of sight and/or
climb out of the shopping cart and fall on their head in the blink of an eye.
Sorry to be so long, but it really pushes my buttons when people assume that
all children will respond the same to the same treatment. (For the record, I
have been told many times how well behaved my son is for his age, even though
he is a VERY energetic child who wants to run off and explore EVERYTHING, so
I really wouldn't say that I am too busy or lazy to watch my child.)
Rachel
Tim Calvert
>
>When my wife and went to our first child's doctor's appointment he
>warned us about all the "you must have this product in order to give
>peace of mind" stuff on the shelves for kids. I found his advise to be
>wise and very skeptical. I think the leash is one of those products
>selling you peace of mind for fears that would have never been brought
>to your attention unless they put it there.
That's your opinion. Mine differs. I think leashes are one of those products
that some smart parent made for him-/her- self, was then copied by others who
liked the idea, and finally marketed by someone (possibly one of these original
users) because there seemed to be a market for them.
It has nothing to do with me recognizing the dangers of a child straying too
far from his/her parents. I don't need any product (or person) to tell me that.
>
>Why after thousands of years of parenting do we humiliate the child in
>the name of "safety"?
Humiliate? Before one can be humiliated, one must have a concept of what's
"normal" and believe that the situation under consideration is *not* "normal".
At 15 months, if my daughter has any concept at all of "normal" (which I doubt)
it would almost certainly be whatever her mother and I believe is normal. Since
we obviously don't think there's anything wrong with her being on a leash (or
we wouldn't use one), she won't either. Now when she's 5 or 6, maybe sooner,
that might not be true. But by that time, she'll also be more able to
comprehend explanations of why certain behavior is unacceptable and how she
should act under many different circumstances, and a leash will no longer be
necessary to help ensure her safety.
>
>Keep them on dogs who can't understand and teach/coach and walk with
>your child who will try to do what you do and learn with time.
I've seen dogs who were quite well-trained and able to follow their humans
around without the need for a leash. I wouldn't claim that indicates
understanding on the dogs' part. It indicates good training by the human.
Children, too, must be trained (teach/coach/train - it's all semantics), but it
takes time. They can't learn these things overnight. In the meantime, some
system must be in place to prevent the as-yet untrained child from suffering
some injury or getting lost or whatever. Some parents hold hands. I find that
hard on my back and I'm sure (as someone else said) it's also hard on my
daughter's arm. Some use strollers/shopping carts/etc or hold the child in
their arms. So do I, in some cases. But my daughter is much happier when she's
on her own two feet.
Tim Calvert
EVANS-...@prodigy.net says...
>
>
>
>>>shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
>
>
> not cuel, just more what you would use for a
>dog.
That is one opinion. Don't assume it's the only one that makes sense. (For that
matter, don't assume everyone agrees that it *does* make sense.)
>>down, or start moving) surprisingly well. I'm reminded strongly of walking
>a
>>horse with a halter and lead. Very similar. Except you can't pick the horse
>up
>>if it gets too unruly. :-)
>
>
>It also sounds just like leash training our DOG. He get excited if you take
>down his leash, and knows not to go to far/pul too hard.
Yes, it's very similar. So's the reason for doing it - to keep the trainee safe
until the training is complete - or at least far enough along that the leash is
no longer needed.
>
> Our son is now three, but even when he was younger there was no need
>for a LEASH!
My daughter is less than half the age of your son. I'm very hopeful that the
need for a leash will disappear long before she's three. In the meantime, I'd
rather err on the side of caution.
>We were/are the adults, and therefore, the
>reasoning/responsible ones. If I/we took him on a shopping trip, or
>elsewhere, he stayed in the stroller until (IF) we determined it was safe to
>let him down.
Likewise. But when we decide it's safe to let her down, we feel it's much safer
to have a leash on her. No parent, no matter how diligent, can keep their eyes
and attention on their child every second any more than you can keep your eyes
and attention fully on the road every second when you're driving. It doesn't
take long for a toddler to get into some serious trouble. How many times have
you heard (or read in the newspaper) a grieving parent say "I only turned my
back for a second." I, for one, don't want to be in the position of having to
say that.
>I think leashes are a crutch for irresponsible parents. They
>say "I'm too busy/lazy to watch my child, and really don't want to deal with
>a screaming fit in public, so i'm unwilling to restrict their movement to a
>stroller".
I think leashes are a safety net used by logical parents who recognize the
inevitability of children misbehaving, whether by willfully going against known
rules, or by innocently losing track of where they are while exploring this
great big world that they want to know more about.
>>
>>And as for the reactions of others, we've had *no* negative reactions. The
>two
>>most common comments we've gotten are "Isn't that cute?" and "What a great
>>idea!" Almost everyone who sees her smiles. I've not noticed any unkind
>looks,
>>and I've been watching for them just to see if anyone would.
>
>Just because people are polite is no reason to assume you are doing the
>right thing.
The reactions of strangers, polite or otherwise, *never* influence my opinion
of whether what I'm doing is right. I only mentioned that for the benefit of
the original poster because several earlier responses had warned against
negative reactions. I wouldn't want someone to forego doing something that
might keep their child safer just out of fear of disapproval.
>Treating your child like a dog is not necessary.
I do not treat my child like a dog. I do everything in my power (and within my
financial resources) to keep my daughter safe. A leash is an inexpensive safety
measure I can take until my daughter is better able to understand the dangers
of the world she lives in.
>Even at 15 months (and
>earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog -- give
>them the credit they deserve.
I think my child is very intelligent. But even the most intelligent
15-month-old can't understand all the dangers of getting too far from Mommy or
Daddy, no matter how often you tell them. They also might have a different
concept of what's "too far." And I don't believe she's ready yet for estimating
how far 6 feet is.
And even when a child is old enough to understand, they still can lose track of
where they are and where the dangers are if they're, for example, following
that interesting bug on the floor, or chasing that butterfly.
>Your child WILL understand, if you take the
>time to explain, that getting down out of the stroller is a PRIVILEDGE, NOT
>a right.
I'm sorry, but I don't believe the concepts of rights and privileges are within
the grasp of a 15-month-old.
>And, they will learn that throwing a hissy fit in public will NOT
>acheive their goals (IF you are consistant, and willing to hear a few at Wal
>Mart, or where ever).
Hey, she's learning that throwing a hissy fit *anywhere* (including at home)
won't get her what she wants. And she's picking up on that very quickly because
my wife and I have never given in to her fits (which she started a lot sooner
than I was expecting).
>
>Bottom line...If you find it too much trouble/too much effort, now, to raise
>your child to be reasoning and responsible...what does it say about how you
>will raise them when they are 4, or 7, or 12.
Too much trouble? No. Unreasonable to expect immediate results? Yes. She'll
become a reasoning and responsible child with time. But right now, she's an
innocent child with no concept of danger. And until she develops the ability to
understand, I'll keep my safety net firmly in place, thank you.
Rhonda
I can completely relate to the part about not physically being able to put him in
a place where he does not want to be. That's tough.
Fortunately, my husband and I go *everywhere* together with our son. So one can
chase him (follow him while he explores) around while the other one gets the
things we are shopping for.
Have you read "raising your spirited child" ? It was recommended to me by many
people who have high spirited children. :) So far its pretty good, but I have not
finished it yet.
Rhonda
Rachel Boeckenhauer wrote:
> CAROLYN EVANS (EVANS-...@prodigy.net) wrote:
> :
> : Our son is now three, but even when he was younger there was no need
> : for a LEASH! We were/are the adults, and therefore, the
> : reasoning/responsible ones. If I/we took him on a shopping trip, or
> : elsewhere, he stayed in the stroller until (IF) we determined it was safe to
> : let him down. I think leashes are a crutch for irresponsible parents. They
> : say "I'm too busy/lazy to watch my child, and really don't want to deal with
> : a screaming fit in public, so i'm unwilling to restrict their movement to a
> : stroller".
>
> Carolyn:
> Not all children are this tolerant. My son is almost two, and while I have
> ALWAYS strapped him into high chairs, strollers, shopping carts, etc. for
> safety while he is in them, he is now old enough to wiggle out of most of
> these straps if he wants down. And he is very energetic, so this happens
> often. Mind you, I don't LET him run off -- I will let him down to walk when
> he wants, and if he does not walk nicely, help push the shopping cart, etc.,
> then he gets picked up and put back in the cart or carried. I don't have a
> leash, but I have thought that he might be happier and feel less restrained
> with this than being stuck in the cart. In particular, it can be very
> difficult to keep him from running away while I have other things I need to
> carry or am trying to pay for my purchases or whatever.
>
> Also, note that this is not such a big deal when my husband and I are out
> TOGETHER. I don't know if you are a stay-at-home-mom or not, but if you are
> shopping ALONE with your kids very much, I think this would be of an issue.
>
> : Treating your child like a dog is not necessary. Even at 15 months (and
> : earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog -- give
> : them the credit they deserve. Your child WILL understand, if you take the
> : time to explain, that getting down out of the stroller is a PRIVILEDGE, NOT
> : a right. And, they will learn that throwing a hissy fit in public will NOT
> : acheive their goals (IF you are consistant, and willing to hear a few at Wal
> : Mart, or where ever).
>
> This sounds like what I thought of leashes BEFORE I had my child. I don't
> give in to my child's every whim, even if that means having a hissy fit in
> Walmart, but my child is very strong-willed and strong, and if he really,
> really doesn't want to be in the stroller/shopping cart, I can not keep him
> in it without *physically* hurting him, which I do not consider to be an
> option. In these cases, I typically carry him (to keep him from running off)
> and leave as quickly as possible. At times like this, I find myself thinking
> that a leash really might be a good idea. I can particularly understand it
> for someone who has more than one child and goes out alone with them often.
>
> Also, a leash doesn't mean you don't have to WATCH your child -- you still
> need to make sure they aren't getting into things (their hands are still
> free, after all). It just means that they can't run off our of sight and/or
> climb out of the shopping cart and fall on their head in the blink of an eye.
>
> Sorry to be so long, but it really pushes my buttons when people assume that
> all children will respond the same to the same treatment. (For the record, I
> have been told many times how well behaved my son is for his age, even though
> he is a VERY energetic child who wants to run off and explore EVERYTHING, so
> I really wouldn't say that I am too busy or lazy to watch my child.)
>
> Rachel
--
Y2K? Because *one* K just isn't enough.
Rhonda
leash".. I thought they were ridiculous, to treat your child like an animal..
and have said many bad things about them-
but since he has been born, I have been singing a different tune.
I have never put my son on a leash, and personally, I would rather *not* but
I can completely understand why other people do.
My son would never go for it anyway, because I can't get him into a shirt
that he does not want to wear, let alone something as strapping as a
harness.. I prefer to have my husband with me, so one of us is always there
to watch him closely when he wants to go *exploring*..
Rhonda
Jim wrote:
--
Laura Uerling
> : Treating your child like a dog is not necessary. Even at 15 months (and
> : earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog -- give
> : them the credit they deserve. Your child WILL understand, if you take the
> : time to explain, that getting down out of the stroller is a PRIVILEDGE, NOT
> : a right. And, they will learn that throwing a hissy fit in public will NOT
> : acheive their goals (IF you are consistant, and willing to hear a few at Wal
> : Mart, or where ever).
>
> This sounds like what I thought of leashes BEFORE I had my child. I don't
> give in to my child's every whim, even if that means having a hissy fit in
> Walmart, but my child is very strong-willed and strong, and if he really,
> really doesn't want to be in the stroller/shopping cart, I can not keep him
> in it without *physically* hurting him, which I do not consider to be an
> option. In these cases, I typically carry him (to keep him from running off)
> and leave as quickly as possible. At times like this, I find myself thinking
> that a leash really might be a good idea. I can particularly understand it
> for someone who has more than one child and goes out alone with them often.
>
> Also, a leash doesn't mean you don't have to WATCH your child -- you still
> need to make sure they aren't getting into things (their hands are still
> free, after all). It just means that they can't run off our of sight and/or
> climb out of the shopping cart and fall on their head in the blink of an eye.
Agreed. This tired old "leash use=lazy parenting" argument is always
trotted out when the subject of leashes is brought up, and I find it
very irritating because it is so *illogical*! For this to be true, and
if leash users are uniformly parents that just don't want to bother
teaching their children safety rules, two things would have to be true.
First, the parents would have to use a leash all the time when a child
is on foot when out of the house. Absolutely not true, from my own
experience and from descriptions of other posters. Most parents use such
restraints only when there are particular safety concerns, like
negotiating a large crowd or when walking near a busy street.
Secondly, these parents would have to somehow completely overlook the
fact a time will come when the child will be too old for such a
restraint. Do they actually think we're planning on using a leash until
they're ready for college? In my experience, leash-using parents are
keenly aware that their children need to be taught safety rules, but
they prefer to take advantage of learning opportunities where mistakes
have less-than-dire consequences.
>
> Sorry to be so long, but it really pushes my buttons when people assume that
> all children will respond the same to the same treatment. (For the record, I
> have been told many times how well behaved my son is for his age, even though
> he is a VERY energetic child who wants to run off and explore EVERYTHING, so
> I really wouldn't say that I am too busy or lazy to watch my child.)
Thanks, Rachel, and again I agree. It also pushes my buttons when people
assume that everyone's *situations* are the same. Believe it or not,
Carolyn, not everyone has 2 kids, lives in a surburban setting, and
travels from the house to the car to the stroller at the mall.
Apologies to those who have heard this story before--I commute into
Boston by train with my 22 mo. son, as I did with my daughter who is now
5 1/2. I started using a leash with my daughter because when we're going
home we have to wait on a very crowded elevated train platform. (Back
Bay station, one of the busiest in the city) I use a stroller to get to
the station, and I have to fold up the stroller before we get on the
train. Folding the stroller takes two hands, which means I can't hold
his hand for about 30 seconds. As anyone who's had a toddler knows, 30
seconds is *plenty* of time for him to get away, get lost in the crowd,
or fall off the train platform.
I think this is a good example of a situation where the potential for
harm far outweighs any potential teaching value. Believe me, I have lots
of opportunities to teach him street safety that *don't* include the
risk of getting hit by a train. Funny thing is, once you accept that
there *are* situations where a leash makes sense, the other hoary old
argument against leashes, "you're treating your child like a dog" is
exposed for what it is...emotional claptrap.
Laura Uerling
luer...@lynx.neu.edu
Rachel Boeckenhauer
> Wow.. your son sounds just like mine!
Glad to know I'm not alone. :)
> I can completely relate to the part about not physically being able to put
> him in a place where he does not want to be. That's tough.
>
> Fortunately, my husband and I go *everywhere* together with our son. So
> one can chase him (follow him while he explores) around while the other one
> gets the things we are shopping for.
Well, until my son was about 18 mos., I was a SAH mom. Translation: I was
supposed to be working on my thesis, but he was too "spirited" for me to get
anything done. So now he is in preschool 3 days a week so I can work on my
thesis, but since we have 2 days at home, I often try to do grocery shopping
or some other shopping on those days to leave us more time as a family on the
weekend. Which means I shop with him alone alot.
When my husband and I are out together with him, usually hubby chases him
while I shop. Hubby gets annoyed with this, but I told him I make the
lists/sort the coupons, so that's just the way it is. Said child can get in
trouble VERY fast.
> Have you read "raising your spirited child" ? It was recommended to me by
> many people who have high spirited children. :) So far its pretty good, but
> I have not finished it yet.
No, I think I may have heard of it, though. Who wrote it? I'd be
interested. :)
Rachel
Lisa Bell
seems to understand that she must not go over the curb although she
loves to dart all over the place when we are out. She does require a
lot of supervision though (just so we are sure of her safety) and so I
always have either my husband or mother along when we are shopping so
one can watch/chase her while the other shops.
I don't have an inherent problem with leashes but somehow they seem
confining and as my daughter hates to be confined I am sure she will
fight a leash and become very frustrated. I also take her out for the
primary purpose of letting her work off steam and energy so I am
concerned that using a leash will limit that.
My mother wants to get one so that she can take my daughter out alone,
which worries her without one, though I suspect that making her wear
it (especially if she has to wear it with Granny but not with us) may
be more trouble than it is worth.
--Lisa Bell
cle...@westminster.ac.uk (Ross Clement) wrote:
>Hi. I have a non-walking baby, but am thinking ahead. One thing that seems
>quite logical to me is that toddlers, between the ages of starting to
>walk and developing a sense of safety, should be kept on a leash. I don't
>mean as a punishment, but just so that they cannot walk away in the odd
>moment when their parents aren't looking (and you can't look every second).
>I noted that the hospital where my son was born had a poster advising parents
>to use leashes. However, I've noted that while they are available in every
>shop, I almost never see children on a leash. Why? Is it considered cruel?
>
>Cheers,
>
>Ross-c
Rhonda
> Rhonda (51...@whoever.com) wrote:
>
> > Wow.. your son sounds just like mine!
>
> Glad to know I'm not alone. :)
Me TOO!!
> snip for space
>
>
> > Have you read "raising your spirited child" ? It was recommended to me by
> > many people who have high spirited children. :) So far its pretty good, but
> > I have not finished it yet.
>
> No, I think I may have heard of it, though. Who wrote it? I'd be
> interested. :)
>
Here is a link from amazon.com. Tell me, if this describes your child! I know
it describes mine!
http://www.caro.net/~joespa/amazon/books/kurcinka.htm
Raising Your Spirited Child : A Guide for Parents Whose Child Is More Intense,
Sensitive, Perceptive, Persistent, and Energetic
by Mary Sheedy Kurcinka
Review by: Sue Spataro sue...@caro.net
Is your child active twenty four hours a day,
seven days a week ?
Have you been pulling your hair out trying to
figure out to do for this child?
Is this attention deficit disorder?
Is it some other problem?
There are many children that are classified as "spirited" who fit the above
description.
Mary Sheedy Kurcinka's book "Raising the Spirited Child" has been a life saver
for many parents who didn't know how to help their more than active, intelligent
child. This is a smart and informative book that offers many options for the
parents of a spirited child, to get that child on the life path that he needs.
Spirited children are generally brighter than the average child, and require much
more wood to stoke their intellectual fire
Rhonda
>
> Rachel
Hedgehog42
>Before I had my son, I remember saying "I would *NEVER* put my kid on a
>leash".. I thought they were ridiculous, to treat your child like an animal..
>and have said many bad things about them-
>
>but since he has been born, I have been singing a different tune.
Yup. Always fun when your kids make you eat your pre-parenting pearls of
wisdom!
I remember meeting a pregnant couple when my infant daughter had a pacifier.
They were obviously put off by it, even though she was very young -- told us
*their* child certainly never would have one.
They were friends of friends -- and the mutual friends later told us that kid
never went anywhere w/o his pacifier. :)
> I prefer to have my husband with me, so one of us is always there
>to watch him closely when he wants to go *exploring*..
And probably the option most people would really prefer, if they could work it.
We often did this, too, with our first, when we were both working & had similar
schedules.
Lori G.
Milwaukee, WI
mgord...@my-deja.com
inner city. We lived in a older section with a lot of alleyways, filled
with creepy guys and drunks. To take the kids to the park or buy
groceries, I had to navigate busy streets. I usually had a baby in the
carriage, and a couple of kids by the hand.
When a two year old is feeling contrary or frisky and takes it into
their head to twist out of Mummy's grasp or let go of the carriage
handle and run after a squirrel or dash down an alleyway to see what is
there, it can be extremely dangerous. They can run like crazy and I
can't leave baby or preschooler to dash after them. As anyone who has
dealt with a spirited toddler knows, hollering at them to stop and come
back doesn't always work. Sometimes they think the whole thing is
pretty funny, given that they have no understanding of danger.
Yes, we work on walking nicely, staying with Mummy, not running away
suddenly, not heading down alley's where dangers lurk etc. but in the
meantime, while we are perfecting their behaviour, leashes worked very
well for us. No one was humiliated and they were SAFE which was the
point of the exercise.
Mary G.
Walk a mile in the moccasins before you make critical comments.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
mgord...@my-deja.com
you have a baby in the carriage, and a toddler and a preschooler on
foot, controlling their impulsive behaviour adequately is not that
simple.
Your choice can be stay home until everyone's behaviour is perfect, or
use leashes in certain situations. In my case, if I wanted to go
shopping or take them to the park in our inner city neighbourhood, I
didn't have many alternatives.
Safety ought to be the bottom line.
You should think more carefully before you make such unkind comments.
Not everyone has only one child at a time to deal with. Not everyone
lives in a great neighbourhood. Kids on foot can twist out of your
hands and dash off in a flash, and if you have a baby and another child
with you, you can't always dash off and catch them before they are
exposed to dangers - i.e. if the toddler lets go of the carriage and
takes off running, do I leave the baby and the preschooler so I can
sprint after him?
Mary G.
Mom of three, still using a leash on the youngest (now 2) when I need
to.
mgord...@my-deja.com
Penny Gaines
>>What is the difference between making the decision to harness your child
>>in a stroller and harness your child in a leash?
> Strollers are meant to move your young child around easily while the
> adult goes to do their thing. The harness in the stroller is meant to
> prevent your child from falling out.
[snip]
Or to paraphase: "Strollers are for children to rest in while
the adult tires themself, whilst doing their thing. Leashes
allow the child to get some exercise as well, so they won't be
full of energy when they get home."
If a child gets driven to the shops, then pushed round in a stroller
the whole time, they can easily have spent two or three hours
sitting down. I don't think that is particular healthy for them,
and it certainly doesn't do the parent any good, because by the
time they get home s/he may be completely worn out (esp if she is
pregnant), yet the child will be full of energy.
Penny Gaines
Hedgehog42
"Thousands" may well been overstating. I do recall reading of their use in the
last several hundred years in America and Europ, at least.
I read the apron strings reference in a newspaper or magazine language column
years ago. Such colorful phrases often originated as literal descriptions
("Pass with flying colors," "sleep tight,"), so it made sense to me -- how else
could a mother busy with countless chores (no microwaves or refrigerators) and
an environment that's a child-proofer's nightmare (open fires, sharp tools,
etc.) keep a curious toddler safe?
Brewer's Dictionary of Phase and Fable says the allusion is to tying naughty
young children to their mother's or nurse's apron strings."
http://www.bibliomania.com/Reference/PhraseAndFable/data/1227.html#tied
Lori G.
Milwaukee, WI
Jim
>Brewer's Dictionary of Phase and Fable says the allusion is to tying naughty
>young children to their mother's or nurse's apron strings."
> http://www.bibliomania.com/Reference/PhraseAndFable/data/1227.html#tied
"Allusion." If you're going to be this literal have fun with the
phrase: Tied-up; Married - two defs down ;-)
--
Jim
Rupa K. Bose
>
> Mary Ann Tuli <tu...@ebi.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >What is the difference between making the decision to harness your child
> >in a stroller and harness your child in a leash?
>
> This isn't to say leashes don't work. Certainly they keep your child
> close by as intended and thousands hang on tightly while "walking"
> their dogs. I'm just not convinced it's the best way. (Even owners
> of well trained pets are usually required to leash up - more for the
> comfort of others.) It simply falls under the YMMV m.k. category. . .
>
I'd agree. I never used a leash when mine were little, but I can't see
any problem with it. It does provide a combination of freedom and safety
that I'd have been happy to have when taking two of them out together,
especially in the US.
(The fact that leashes are used for dogs doesn't worry me either. It
keeps them safe and out of traffic, too.)
It's not a stroller-substitute though; the stroller is because the
little ones tire much more quickly than adults, and yet they're too
heavy to carry continuously. We used our strollers until the kids
physically outgrew them. By then, the strollers often held shopping, and
were pushed by the kids....
Rupa
Rupa K. Bose
>
Kids on foot can twist out of your
> hands and dash off in a flash, and if you have a baby and another child
> with you, you can't always dash off and catch them before they are
> exposed to dangers - i.e. if the toddler lets go of the carriage and
> takes off running, do I leave the baby and the preschooler so I can
> sprint after him?
In fact, there was just such a tragic accident here last year in which a
child was killed.
A mother was waiting to cross the road with her three kids: baby in the
stroller, toddler holding on to one side, pre-schooler on the other as
they had been taught. Quite suddenly and unpredictably, one of the kids
let go and ran into road, no one is quite sure why. Experts discussing
the accident afterward suggested, among other things, that a mom in such
a situation should use a leash.
Rupa
Rupa K. Bose
>
Funny thing is, once you accept that
> there *are* situations where a leash makes sense, the other hoary old
> argument against leashes, "you're treating your child like a dog" is
> exposed for what it is...emotional claptrap.
And unless you're being really mean to your dog...you feed it food that
is good for it, you give it a comfortable place to sleep, you play with
it and take it for walks, you keep it out of danger...I have to wonder
whether the people who use this argument have ever had a dog.
Rupa
Rupa K. Bose
Hindu rites, they actually do knot the clothing of the bride and groom
together as they walk round the sacred fire. It signifies the
marriage-knot. Of course it works more easily with flowing Indian
garments. I can't quite visualise tying the bride's train to the groom's
coat-tail.
Rupa
Andrea Gideon
> >to the merits of leash usage, but I just don't believe that; 1.)
> >various forms of leashes have been used for thousands of years, and,
> >2.) it's the basis for the phrase "tied to Mama's apron strings."
In most medieval homes there was a pole near the kitchen. The children were
then tied to the pole with some sort of leash that was long enough to allow
play, but would not allow them to get into the fireplace. If you would like
specific documentation on this I can get it. I have also been told that
several colonial digs have turned up the same sort of thing.
Andrea
Marion Baumgarten
Actually, in several Christian marriage ceremonies- the priest takes his
stole (long scarf thing) and wraps it around the bride and groom's hands
to symbolize the unity of the couple.
--
--
Marion Baumgarten <mari...@earthlink.net>
CAROLYN EVANS
Just so you know -- and (I'm assuming -- dangerous, I know! :) ) since
you're from the UK you guys may not have these/do this over there...There IS
a difference between the safety belt of the stroller (which keeps the child
from pitching out of the seat if you go down a curb) and a leash/harness.
A harness for a child is almost exactly like the contraption sold for dogs.
You buckle it on to the child, then attatch the leash.
It essentially allows parents to let the child wander around a store (within
a 6'-12' radius), while the parent is busy with something else (ie: not
paying attention to their child!). Although it DOES keep the child from
wandering off, it does NOT prevent them from picking things up, pulling
things off shelves, breaking things (by accident, of course), possibly
swallowing something either poisonous or of choking dimensions.
What it boils down to for me is this: either you're going to be responsible
for watching your own child, and safeguarding him/her, AND the store/other
people's things (in which case, there is no need for the child to be on a
leash), or you need to have some of your attention elsewhere (and when you
go shopping that is usually the case, and JUST FINE) so you have the child
strapped into the stroller, so they can get into a lot fewer things. In
either case, the adult needs to take responsibility.
Without the leash, and with proper supervision, the child learns not to
touch indiscriminatly, and to stay within sight (not to go to another
aisle). They do love to move around and explore, but if they are carefully
watched and learn that walking around in the store is a PRIVILEDGE that will
be taken away if they misbehave (they loose the priviledge, and are confined
to the stroller), they will quickly learn to behave. Most people I have
seen use the leash without a stroller, so if the child does misbehave, there
is no way to administer a "time-out" or restrict their movement, without
having to pick them up, which (depending on the weight of the child) can be
a severe pain for the parent.
No system is perfect. After 2 years of nary a problem (he's almost 3 1/2)
with our son walking around stores, (and he and I go to one store or another
nearly every day!) this year, the week before Christmas, he ran away from us
in the store (Target). My DH was with us, and the 2 of them were playing,
hiding around the aisle, chasing each other. Now our son knows Mommy
doesn't allow play like that in a store, but he can get away with it with
Daddy. Ten, around one corner he went...and was gone. DH looked for him a
second and called to me. (Now I used to do speech and debate, and have a
non-yelling voice that can be heard throughout an auditorium full of people
without mechanical amplification.) So I called to him, and (getting no
response) gave our son a 5 count. (We have been using a count up to 5 with
our son--speed of counting varies by situation--since before he could talk,
and he knows he's in BIG trouble if he's not back by the time it's
finished.) When we still had no response we alerted the store staff, who
called a "Code Yellow"
(If you do not know what that is...It all started with WalMart. There
was a child named Adam that was snatched a few years back, when he wandered
away from his Mother. The story on that varies it was at WlaMart/Sears/some
other store, he had just wandered away/was unattended for some time, he was
inside/outside the store. Whatever the actual story, the popular myth
became that he was snatched when his mother turned her back for a second at
a WalMart. So WalMart was the first to introduce this type of procedure.
They call it a "Code Adam". The minute an emplyee is told of a missing
child, they have this code, with a description of the child announced over
the loudspeaker. EVERY employee then IMMEDIATELY stops what they're doing
to look for the child - WalMart's attitude is that they have no other job
until the child is found and the code cancelled. The security guards at the
entrances are to stop and query anyone leaving with a child matching the
description. At Target, and all other stores with similar policies, it
works much the same way. And, let me tell you, it is a great comfort in
that situation to know that so many people are helping to look!)
In our situation it worked. We knew they had found him 10 minutes (seemed
like an hour!) later when the code was cancelled. After we got done hugging
him and calming ourselves, I asked him whether he had heard me call for him
and count to 5. When he said he had, I asked him why he didn't come
back..."he said he didn't feel like it".
Now, I know that at his age, he probably "didn't feel like it" 'cuz it was
Daddy, and he thought he could get away with it, and then probably got lost
and couldn't find his way back. But he also needs to learn that there are
places where it is NEVER appopriate to do that, no matter who he is with, so
for now, and until the end of January he is restricted to the stroller.
Every time (and that's at least once in each store we go into, so he's
getting this message at least 4-5 times/week) he asks to get down from the
stroller he not only gets a "No" but I have HIM tell me WHY not. We have
made it very clear to him that the BIG problem was NOT that he went out of
our sight (although that is part of it), but that he CHOSE NOT TO COME BACK
when he heard us calling. And he mentions both of these reasons whenever I
ask him if HE knows WHY he is on restriction. I have great faith that, in
February, when he is off restriction, he will have learned his lesson.
(Although I will still be watching him like a hawk, and, now, so will his
Dad!)
If he'd always been on a leash, then, yes, he would not have had the
opportunity to run away like that, but he also would not be so WELL behaved
most of the time, or have had the very age-appropriate lessons in freedom
and responsibility. There are a lot more painful ways he could have learned
this lesson.
If you use the crutch of a leash...when do you stop using it and START
teaching your child that freedom of movement has responsibilities attatched?
....at 4? ...at 5? ...First grade? ...High School?
Carolyn
CAROLYN EVANS
Rachel Boeckenhauer wrote in message <85ku66$1ut$1...@joe.rice.edu>...
>Carolyn:
>Not all children are this tolerant.
Then they need to become that tolerant! The parent is in charge, and if the
answer is "No, you may NOT get down", then they need to learn to live with
that! And, the only way that will happen is if the parent toes the line and
does not give in to begging, cajoling, whining and pitching a hissy fit in
public.
My son is almost two, and while I have
>ALWAYS strapped him into high chairs, strollers, shopping carts, etc. for
>safety while he is in them, he is now old enough to wiggle out of most of
>these straps if he wants down. And he is very energetic, so this happens
>often. Mind you, I don't LET him run off -- I will let him down to walk
when
>he wants, and if he does not walk nicely, help push the shopping cart,
etc.,
>then he gets picked up and put back in the cart or carried.
EXACLTY my point!
>Also, note that this is not such a big deal when my husband and I are out
>TOGETHER. I don't know if you are a stay-at-home-mom or not, but if you
are
>shopping ALONE with your kids very much, I think this would be of an issue.
I do go shopping alone with him, almost every time, and (with one
significant exception - see my other post tonight) he is very well behaved
and knows what the rules are.
: Treating your child like a dog is not necessary. Even at 15 months (and
>: earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog --
give
>: them the credit they deserve. Your child WILL understand, if you take
the
>: time to explain, that getting down out of the stroller is a PRIVILEDGE,
NOT
>: a right. And, they will learn that throwing a hissy fit in public will
NOT
>: acheive their goals (IF you are consistant, and willing to hear a few at
Wal
>: Mart, or where ever).
>
>This sounds like what I thought of leashes BEFORE I had my child. I don't
>give in to my child's every whim, even if that means having a hissy fit in
>Walmart, but my child is very strong-willed and strong, and if he really,
>really doesn't want to be in the stroller/shopping cart, I can not keep him
>in it without *physically* hurting him, which I do not consider to be an
>option.
We have used several solutions to this situation, the best was that EVERY
time (and it only took a few) that he wiggled out of the belt he was put
back in it and told that if he did it again it would be a "store time-out".
(He always gets a warning!) This is where I hold his hands and don't let go
for a few minutes, (something he hates)! If that doesn't work, then we go
further, to time outs when we get home, or an immediate nap time, or to
loosing one or more of his favorite toys for a day. Leaving the store
immediately also works, since half the fun of being down is exploring the
store!
In these cases, I typically carry him (to keep him from running off)
>and leave as quickly as possible. At times like this, I find myself
thinking
>that a leash really might be a good idea. I can particularly understand it
>for someone who has more than one child and goes out alone with them often.
If the problem has not been nipped int he bud, and it sounds like it hasn't,
why not attatch the harness, not the leash, to the seat belt of the
stroller, and belt him in with that for a few minutes? I doubt that he
could wriggle out of THAT, and it would certainly be a strong deterrent to
misbehavior, if he knew he'd be getting a time-out he couldn't wriggle out
of!
>Also, a leash (...) means that they can't run off our of sight
yes...
>and/or
>climb out of the shopping cart and fall on their head in the blink of an
eye.
Sorry, a leash will not prevent this, that's what the seat belt of the cart
is for.
>Sorry to be so long, but it really pushes my buttons when people assume
that
>all children will respond the same to the same treatment. (For the record,
I
>have been told many times how well behaved my son is for his age, even
though
>he is a VERY energetic child who wants to run off and explore EVERYTHING,
so
>I really wouldn't say that I am too busy or lazy to watch my child.)
Neither would I, from the sound of it, but you freely admit that you do NOT
use a leash!
Carolyn
CAROLYN EVANS
Laura Uerling wrote in message <387E2854...@lynx.neu.edu>...
>Rachel Boeckenhauer wrote:
>First, the parents would have to use a leash all the time when a child
>is on foot when out of the house. Absolutely not true, from my own
>experience and from descriptions of other posters. Most parents use such
>restraints only when there are particular safety concerns, like
>negotiating a large crowd or when walking near a busy street.
I think we both over-generalize (since all but one parent I have ever seen
with a child on a leash is using it in a store-like setting)
And, when I speak of a "leash", I am referring to the 6"-12" variety, not
the 1'-2' tether that attatches the parent to child in a crowd, in case the
child's hand slips out of the parent's.
>In my experience, leash-using parents are
>keenly aware that their children need to be taught safety rules, but
>they prefer to take advantage of learning opportunities where mistakes
>have less-than-dire consequences.
Perhaps this is one way East Coast parents/customs differ from West Coast
(since we seem to have had diametrically opposite experiences.)
>> Sorry to be so long, but it really pushes my buttons when people assume
that
>> all children will respond the same to the same treatment. (For the
record, I
>> have been told many times how well behaved my son is for his age, even
though
>> he is a VERY energetic child who wants to run off and explore EVERYTHING,
so
>> I really wouldn't say that I am too busy or lazy to watch my child.)
I wouldn't either...and you HAVE said that you do NOT use a leash!
I have also been told that my son is very well behaved and a pleasure to be
around. And, trust me, my son is VERY energetic. (No matter how long and
continuously he has played during the day, he can be counted on to stay up
reading in bed, way past his 9pm bed time!)
>Thanks, Rachel, and again I agree. It also pushes my buttons when people
>assume that everyone's *situations* are the same. Believe it or not,
>Carolyn, not everyone has 2 kids, lives in a surburban setting, and
>travels from the house to the car to the stroller at the mall.
Frankly, I NEVER said you, or anyone else did, and...aren't YOU making the
assumption that THAT is what I do?
>Apologies to those who have heard this story before--I commute into
>Boston by train with my 22 mo. son, as I did with my daughter who is now
>5 1/2. I started using a leash with my daughter because when we're going
>home we have to wait on a very crowded elevated train platform. (Back
>Bay station, one of the busiest in the city) I use a stroller to get to
>the station, and I have to fold up the stroller before we get on the
>train. Folding the stroller takes two hands, which means I can't hold
>his hand for about 30 seconds. As anyone who's had a toddler knows, 30
>seconds is *plenty* of time for him to get away, get lost in the crowd,
>or fall off the train platform.
Frankly, in addition to my 3yr old, we are frequently running errands with
the 4 month old girl I take care of, and he DOES get down to walk, even in
parking lots, sidewalks, etc. Very often I, also, am in a situation where
I do not have a free hand to hold his. If we are walking in crowds he walks
in front of me, holding on to the stroller, if we are stopped, say to fold
up the stroller, then I always find SOMEthing stationary (post, car, my leg)
for him to hold on to. He knows there are consequences if he disobeys, and
he does not.
With spirited, highly intelligent children, there is an especially
imperative need for firm limits and consistancy from the parents, to go
along with the earlier age at which they can handle responsibility and
freedoms.
Again, it all comes back to the effort YOU are willing to put into it!
>Funny thing is, once you accept that
>there *are* situations where a leash makes sense,
...and I don't! (you might make a case for one of those 1' tethers,
perhaps - when the child is too young to keep hold of your hand, or stay put
for 30 seconds.)
>the other hoary old
>argument against leashes, "you're treating your child like a dog" is
>exposed for what it is...emotional claptrap.
Emotional only if you feel guilty about treating your child like a
dog...because that IS what you are doing. You put a dog on a leash when you
can't trust it to stay by/with you in a certain situations. That is what
you are doing to your child. My argument is that your child is MORE
intelligent than a dog, and deserves the respect FROM YOU that he/she IS.
Carolyn
CAROLYN EVANS
Rupa K. Bose wrote in message <38803E...@pacific.net.sg>...
>Laura Uerling wrote:
>And unless you're being really mean to your dog...you feed it food that
>is good for it, you give it a comfortable place to sleep, you play with
>it and take it for walks, you keep it out of danger...I have to wonder
>whether the people who use this argument have ever had a dog.
>
>Rupa
Actually, I have had dogs all my life, and we currently have a 4yr old, 75lb
black lab (a breed known for their intelligence!).
My son at 3 (and, at 2, and even at 1 1/2) is MORE intelligent that Toby,
has incredible comprehension of abstract concepts, and I treat him that way.
He is held to higher standards, and deserves (and gets) more respect and
freedom.
Carolyn
CAROLYN EVANS
Tim Calvert wrote in message <387e226f$1...@206.212.27.20>...
>In article <85kb4t$2048$2...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>,
>EVANS-...@prodigy.net says...
>But when we decide it's safe to let her down, we feel it's much safer
>to have a leash on her. No parent, no matter how diligent, can keep their
eyes
>and attention on their child every second any more than you can keep your
eyes
>and attention fully on the road every second when you're driving. It
doesn't
>take long for a toddler to get into some serious trouble.
That's very true...but the ONLY thing a leash REALLY prevents is the child
going farther away from you than the length of the lead. It does NOT
relieve you of the responsibility of watching the child EVERY SECOND. It
only takes that long for the child, not even at the end of their lead, to
grab something toxic, or too small and shove it in their mouth...then where
are you?
Yet most parents (and, from your response, obvously you do, too) think that
the lead allows then this freedom--to take their "eyes off the road" for a
second...
This is one of the reasons I feel that (most) parents who use a leash are to
some extent lazy, and trying to absolve themselves of some of the
responsibilities of letting a child roam "freely".
How many times have
>you heard (or read in the newspaper) a grieving parent say "I only turned
my
>back for a second." I, for one, don't want to be in the position of having
to
>say that.
>
>I think leashes are a safety net used by logical parents who recognize the
>inevitability of children misbehaving,
Assuming that is the case, then what do you do when the leashed child DOES
misbehave, touch something they've been told not to, break something, etc?
Carrying them consigns the parent to a sort of punishment, or may not be a
viable option (depending on how heavy the child is), so do you resort, then
to corporal punishment?
>I do not treat my child like a dog. I do everything in my power (and within
my
>financial resources) to keep my daughter safe. A leash is an inexpensive
safety
>measure I can take until my daughter is better able to understand the
dangers
>of the world she lives in.
Yes, and that is exactly what a dog owner is doing...so, whether YOU like
the connotation or not, you are treating your daughter just as I (or any
other dog owner) treat our canine companions.
>>Even at 15 months (and
>>earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog -- give
>>them the credit they deserve.
>
>I think my child is very intelligent. But even the most intelligent
>15-month-old can't understand all the dangers of getting too far from Mommy
or
>Daddy, no matter how often you tell them.
They don't HAVE to be able to list/understand the dangers (yes, please
explain to them!) they only have to learn that it is a "NO!"
>They also might have a different
>concept of what's "too far." And I don't believe she's ready yet for
estimating
>how far 6 feet is.
Neither to I, but I would bet that she can tell where the aisle you're in
ends! And, although I would not, and do not, expect my son to form a valid
conceptualization or make a value judgement about where "too far" is, he
does know to come back when Mommy says "you're getting 'too far'", or
"You're almost to where I can't see you" when we're in a situation where
there aren't aisles. We can do this because, when he was first getting
down, I never took my eyes completely off him.
>And even when a child is old enough to understand, they still can lose
track of
>where they are and where the dangers are if they're, for example, following
>that interesting bug on the floor, or chasing that butterfly.
Very true, but if that is the case, then you don't let them get down to
begin with.
>I'm sorry, but I don't believe the concepts of rights and privileges are
within
>the grasp of a 15-month-old.
You don't give your daughter enough credit. If she does not understand,
then you have not taken the time to teach her.
It is a very simple concept. I'm sure (at least I hope) that she
understands that she does not ALWAYS get EVERYTHING she wants. And I'm sure
(again, at least I hope) that she is disciplined for poor behavior and
rewarded for the good. That is all there is to the concepts of rights and
priviledges...all you have to do is use the terms with her. All you have to
do, next time she whines for something she's not going to get, like candy in
the check out line, explain to her that she isn't always going to get sweets
whenever she wants...that it's not a right. Now, getting her diaper changed
when it's dirty -- that's a right. Any time it's dirty, she gets changed.
Candy, on the other hand, is a priviledge...something you EARN. Maybe next
time, if she behaves well for the entire shopping trip, and has eaten a good
(lunch/dinner, etc. - my son knew the word protien at that age, so that is
what we used with him) then she will have earned the PRIVILEDGE of having
candy.
All you have to do, with almost any word or concept, is find a way of
breaking it down and applying it at a level that will make sense to the
child.
>Hey, she's learning that throwing a hissy fit *anywhere* (including at
home)
>won't get her what she wants. And she's picking up on that very quickly
because
>my wife and I have never given in to her fits
That's great!
>(which she started a lot sooner
>than I was expecting).
Are you kidding? Although COMPLETELY UN-intentional, our children begin
throwing fits at birth! They cry/scream/fuss for every need to be
fulfill -- and we (very rightly) pander to those needs, usually when they
throw the "fit". So is it any wonder that, as they mature and develop more
rational thinking, that they would begin to experiment with INTENTIONAL
crying/fits? That she's doing it "this early" is (IMHO) simply another sign
that you are under-estimating her intelligence!
>>Bottom line...If you find it too much trouble/too much effort, now, to
raise
>>your child to be reasoning and responsible...what does it say about how
you
>>will raise them when they are 4, or 7, or 12.
>
>Too much trouble? No. Unreasonable to expect immediate results? Yes.
Frankly, we can't really expect immediate results from adults!
>She'll
>become a reasoning and responsible child with time.
Sounds like she already IS developing those faculties, you're just not
seeing them because you're not looking.
>But right now, she's an
>innocent child with no concept of danger.
Again, she may not have an ADULT'S full conceptualization of danger...but
I'm sure she does understand on a rudimentary level.
>And until she develops the ability to
>understand,
She won't until YOU help her to!
Carolyn
CAROLYN EVANS
mgord...@my-deja.com wrote in message <85nh27$1da$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>Carolyn, clearly, you have not dealt with multiple small children. When
>you have a baby in the carriage, and a toddler and a preschooler on
>foot, controlling their impulsive behaviour adequately is not that
>simple.
Asumptions, assumptions! More than 70% of the time, when I am out of the
house it is with a 4 month old and a 3 yr old.
>Your choice can be stay home until everyone's behaviour is perfect, or
>use leashes in certain situations. In my case, if I wanted to go
>shopping or take them to the park in our inner city neighbourhood, I
>didn't have many alternatives.
Did I say we stay at home...on the contrary, I believe I said that we are
out of the house, in public, running errands (or such) almost every day of
the week. What I said was that I restricted my son to the STROLLER, and was
WILLING to go to the extreme of cutting off all errands to take him home if
he would not stop poor behavior.
>Safety ought to be the bottom line.
Did I say it shouldn't be?
>You should think more carefully before you make such unkind comments.
What did I say that was unkind?
>Not everyone has only one child at a time to deal with.
No, and I don't, either. But, unless you have twins/triplets/etc. You DO
have JUST ONE for at least 9 months...
If you are firm rules at home, and enforce the consistently, and expect
obedience (commensurate with age) THERE, it will lead to the same obedience
OUTSIDE the home.
>Not everyone
>lives in a great neighbourhood.
Very true...are you assuming that I DO...I certainly was not assuming the
reverse!
>Kids on foot can twist out of your
>hands and dash off in a flash, and if you have a baby and another child
>with you, you can't always dash off and catch them before they are
>exposed to dangers - i.e. if the toddler lets go of the carriage and
>takes off running, do I leave the baby and the preschooler so I can
>sprint after him?
Also valid, but I never said anything about a TETHER being a bad thing, just
a LEASH!
(In case you didn't catch my other post, a tether is similar to a leash, but
only about a foot in length, and is for the express purpose of keeping the
child close, in just such a situation (when you can't trust them, or they're
too young to hold hands consistently, and you can't put them in the
stroller, for one reason or the other.)
Carolyn
CAROLYN EVANS
Lisa Bell wrote in message <387e5ef6...@news.inter.net.il>...
>My mother wants to get one so that she can take my daughter out alone,
>which worries her without one, though I suspect that making her wear
>it (especially if she has to wear it with Granny but not with us) may
>be more trouble than it is worth.
>--Lisa Bell
It is really very simple. Start now introducing her to the idea. Just
explain to she that She must stay in the stroller when she's with Grandma.
If (When) she objects, explain WHY to her. That Grandma cannot chase after
her the way Mommy and Daddy do, so she can't be running so far ahead.
(Maybe you could tell her that GRANDMA needs HER help to not get lost...does
she think she can help Grandma that way?) If she were to get down and walk
with grandma, she would have to do so always holding on to the stroller or
to Grandma's hand. Does she think she can do that? Does she want to try.
She can practise with Mommy/Daddy.
Then, let her practice. EVERY time (when you're practicing), if she lets go
of the stroller, she needs to reach for your hand, and visa versa, if she
doesn't, you correct her, but ALWAYS taking the time to explain WHY, and
that the consequence of NOT doing it is that she ends up in the stroller, or
not getting to take walks alone with Grandma. Begin to practice with
Grandma. Do it until it is second nature for her.
See how it goes! Good luck! :)
Carolyn
Tampamom
CAROLYN EVANS wrote in message
<85s2r7$18ms$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>...
>
>It essentially allows parents to let the child wander around a store
(within
>a 6'-12' radius), while the parent is busy with something else (ie: not
>paying attention to their child!). Although it DOES keep the child from
>wandering off, it does NOT prevent them from picking things up, pulling
>things off shelves, breaking things (by accident, of course), possibly
>swallowing something either poisonous or of choking dimensions.
First of all, all "leash/harnesses" that I have seen, including the one I
use, have a length of approx. 2 feet (not 6'-12'). No, it is not meant to
prevent them from picking things up , etc...that's what parent supervision
is for. Just like when your child is "safely" strapped into a stroller or
shopping cart doesn't give you the ability to wander off looking at
something. What is does do is enable you to have your child within your
sight at all times...even if you want to look up another aisle.
>
>What it boils down to for me is this: either you're going to be responsible
>for watching your own child, and safeguarding him/her, AND the store/other
>people's things (in which case, there is no need for the child to be on a
>leash), or you need to have some of your attention elsewhere (and when you
>go shopping that is usually the case, and JUST FINE) so you have the child
>strapped into the stroller, so they can get into a lot fewer things. In
>either case, the adult needs to take responsibility.
A stroller is all well and good in certain stores, however, if you need to
try something on....strollers do not fit into dressing rooms. Nor can you
push a shopping cart AND a stroller at the same time. The harness allows
the child to walk with you (without their hand being held above their heads
in order to hold your hand) and then, if they get tired, you can put them
into the stroller or cart.
>
>Without the leash, and with proper supervision, the child learns not to
>touch indiscriminatly, and to stay within sight (not to go to another
>aisle). They do love to move around and explore, but if they are carefully
>watched and learn that walking around in the store is a PRIVILEDGE that
will
>be taken away if they misbehave (they loose the priviledge, and are
confined
>to the stroller), they will quickly learn to behave
My kids always seemed MORE prone to touch indiscriminately when they did not
have the harness on...just it's presence reminded them that Mom was right
there watching, while if they were without it, they tended to forget.
>No system is perfect. After 2 years of nary a problem (he's almost 3 1/2)
>with our son walking around stores, (and he and I go to one store or
another
>nearly every day!) this year, the week before Christmas, he ran away from
us
>in the store (Target). My DH was with us, and the 2 of them were playing,
>hiding around the aisle, chasing each other. Now our son knows Mommy
>doesn't allow play like that in a store, but he can get away with it with
>Daddy. Ten, around one corner he went...and was gone. DH looked for him a
>second and called to me. (Now I used to do speech and debate, and have a
>non-yelling voice that can be heard throughout an auditorium full of people
>without mechanical amplification.) So I called to him, and (getting no
>response) gave our son a 5 count. (We have been using a count up to 5 with
>our son--speed of counting varies by situation--since before he could talk,
>and he knows he's in BIG trouble if he's not back by the time it's
>finished.) When we still had no response we alerted the store staff, who
>called a "Code Yellow"
>If he'd always been on a leash, then, yes, he would not have had the
>opportunity to run away like that, but he also would not be so WELL behaved
>most of the time, or have had the very age-appropriate lessons in freedom
>and responsibility. There are a lot more painful ways he could have
learned
>this lesson.
>
>If you use the crutch of a leash...when do you stop using it and START
>teaching your child that freedom of movement has responsibilities
attatched?
>....at 4? ...at 5? ...First grade? ...High School?
>
>Carolyn
Yes, there ARE a lot more painful ways he could have learned a
lesson....being snatched by a pedophile comes to mind. Thank G-d I have
never had that fear...my kids have never disappeared in a store. And as for
when you stop using what you call a "crutch"...my DD is 2 1/2. I usually
only still use it at crowded places like county fairs and the like, though
it is still occasionally used in a store. I always get a shopping cart and
have her walk holding on to it. If she chooses not to stay next to me she
gets the choice of the cart or the leash...and SHE has often chosen the
leash, since it does still allow her some freedom. As my son (now 6 1/2)
grew I started using it less and less when I thought that he was old enough
to understand. We have a rule that started probably when he was about 4
that he could look at things and not be right by my side as long as he 1)
told me where he was going 2) stayed where I could see him and 3) ALWAYS
answer when I call him.
I'm sorry...my heart always stops when Wal Mart calls a Code Adam...I never
want my kid to be the reason it is called.
JMO
Marion----Tampamom to Louis(6) and Erica(2)
Charlotte Millington
it has been a replacement for watching a child.
However, in reading this thread, I have been thinking that a leash may
have its advantages:
Starting in August, I am going to have to do a lot of travel, like twice a
month. Brigitte and a nanny or my partner will come with me because I do
not feel Brigitte is ready to go from having a SAHM to a mom she sees
twice a month for one week at a time. Costs aside, airports are busy
places and while I know Brigitte is very good at holding my hand, ther is
always someone in a crowd who misses her and tries to walk between us.
When it takes us by surprise, we end up breaking our hold, but
reconnecting as soon as the person has passed. Brigitte will be four when
we begin our heavy travelling schedule, so she's old enough to walk and
rather big to carry for the distances from the check-in to the boarding
gates. In reading this thread, I can see the advantage of having a leash
and holding hands.
If someone cuts between us, Brigitte and I will still be linked. In the
rush of airports, getting separated can be too easy, no matter how
vigilant we both are. Besides, we get the entertainment factor of
watching the bozo who didn't watch where they were going get tangles in a
leash. <heh heh>
It's not a perfect answer, but given that work is about to take us to
twenty-four unknown, unexplored airports each year, the extra precaution
might be worth it. And when I think of a leash, I am thinking of a
wrist-to-wrist contraption. Losing Brigitte in a crowd here would be bad
enough. Losing her in a foreign airport, sometimes in another country,
would be terrifying!
Charlotte
Hedgehog42 (hedge...@aol.comno) wrote:
: LisaB...@yahoo.com (Lisa Bell) wrote:
: >I don't have an inherent problem with leashes but somehow they seem
: >confining and as my daughter hates to be confined I am sure she will
: >fight a leash and become very frustrated. I also take her out for the
: >primary purpose of letting her work off steam and energy so I am
: >concerned that using a leash will limit that.
: I can see why this might be of concern. OTOH, she may find a leash less
: confining and more comfortable than having to hold your hand for extended
: periods of time (if your streets are busy, for example). ,
: >My mother wants to get one so that she can take my daughter out alone,
: >which worries her without one, though I suspect that making her wear
: >it (especially if she has to wear it with Granny but not with us) may
: >be more trouble than it is worth.
: I think your mom's to be applauded for her very real concern for your
: daughter's safety. Too often, older people forget how quickly toddlers can
: move, or they overestimate the quickness of their own reflexes ("after all, I
: raised 6 children with never an accident) without taking into account pertinent
: changes from their own child-rearing time, such as more urban areas, smaller
: yards, faster traffic or other factors.
: Your daughter might not want the leash with you, but I hope you'll back your
: mom on her efforts. And you might be pleasantly surprised -- Grandma may just
: be able to work that special grandparent magic that gets amazing cooperation
: from a grandchild. :)
: Lori G.
: Milwaukee, WI
--
We haven't come a long way and don't call me baby.
http://www.victoria.tc.ca/~ye037
Visit the North American Childbirth Consumer Network Bulletin Board at
http://www.dreamwater.com/naccn/wwwboard/index.html.
Hedgehog42
Rosalie B.
>> Keep them on dogs who can't understand and teach/coach and walk with
>> your child who will try to do what you do and learn with time.
>
>Ya know, this topic comes up every few months and inevitably there are
>couple of posters who repeat the same two inane arguments. 1) Leashes
>are 'icky' because they are also used for animals and 2) Parents who use
>leashes are lazy and don't want to bother teaching their children how to
>stay out of danger.
Everyone has been calling these things leashes, but the one I used was
not a leash but a harness. I seem to remember pretending to be a
horse or pony while my mother was the driver. My mother also put
bells on my shoelaces, so I couldn't walk without making a noise.
Wonder if we called it a harness instead of a leash if it would be
more acceptable (treating the child like a horse instead of like a
dog).
I don't think the wrist attached restraints are very good because of
the stress on the shoulder (of the child).
One can not use the leash on the child in the same way it is used on a
dog in any case. Dogs have 4 feet instead of two and can't be pulled
off their feet as easily. Also dogs can't manipulate themselves free
of the restraint as easily, and usually don't even try. A leash is
attached to a dog around the neck, and the dog's neck muscles are very
strong. That's not how one would attach to a toddler. The only real
parallel to a dog leash is that there is a restraint/line between the
parent/handler and the child/dog.
grandma Rosalie
rkbose
CAROLYN EVANS wrote:
>
> Actually, I have had dogs all my life, and we currently have a 4yr old, 75lb
> black lab (a breed known for their intelligence!).
>
> My son at 3 (and, at 2, and even at 1 1/2) is MORE intelligent that Toby,
> has incredible comprehension of abstract concepts, and I treat him that way.
> He is held to higher standards, and deserves (and gets) more respect and
> freedom.
>
> Carolyn
I didn't realise Labs were supposed to be smart, the ones I've met were
sweet lovable idiots...
Yes, of course kids are more intelligent than dogs. But I don't like
relying on even a smart kid's impulse control to keep them safe. What
puts kids in danger is less a lack of intelligence than a lack of
experience. I don't consider leashes any more disrespectful than
carrying a toddler, or holding their hands while crossing streets.
Rupa
rkbose
CAROLYN EVANS wrote:
>
> Emotional only if you feel guilty about treating your child like a
> dog...because that IS what you are doing. You put a dog on a leash when you
> can't trust it to stay by/with you in a certain situations. That is what
> you are doing to your child. My argument is that your child is MORE
> intelligent than a dog, and deserves the respect FROM YOU that he/she IS.
>
> Carolyn
Well, I'd say I could have trusted my kids to stay by me 99% of the
time. If I'm took them out 350 days in the year, 2-3 times per day, this
raises the risk to a level which many people would not be really
comfortable with. At that, I didn't use leashes (or harnesses) but think
it would have been perfectly reasonable to have done so. I don't think
it's a matter of respect, it's a matter of age appropriate expectations,
external conditions, and the child's personality.
As I posted elsewhere, there's a mother somewhere in my city whose son
was the casuality of that 1%.
Rupa
rkbose
CAROLYN EVANS wrote:
.
>
> A harness for a child is almost exactly like the contraption sold for dogs.
> You buckle it on to the child, then attatch the leash.
>
> It essentially allows parents to let the child wander around a store (within
> a 6'-12' radius), while the parent is busy with something else
Actually I've never seen a leash that allows a kid to wander in a 6-12
foot radius. I'd imagine that serves very few of the purposes we've been
discussing. It certainly would not keep a child safe crossing the
street; nor would it -- as you point out -- keep a child safe from the
dangers in a supermarket.
All the leashes I've seen are what you seem to call 'tethers' -- short
leads that help to keep a child close to a parent, and especially
helpful when the parent needs hands free to attend to something else
(such as a stroller with baby). It's also handy for tall moms and dads
who can't hold their child's hand without bending over.
I now understand why you seem to be against these things. A 12 foot
'leash' in a public place would be pretty darned useless. About the only
thing I can imagine doing is using it to tie a toddler near a sandpit
while changing the baby's diapers or giving her a feed.
Rupa
Hedgehog42
>Just so you know -- and (I'm assuming -- dangerous, I know! :) ) since
>you're from the UK you guys may not have these/do this over there...There IS
>a difference between the safety belt of the stroller (which keeps the child
>from pitching out of the seat if you go down a curb) and a leash/harness.
>
>A harness for a child is almost exactly like the contraption sold for dogs.
>You buckle it on to the child, then attatch the leash.
>
>It essentially allows parents to let the child wander around a store (within
>a 6'-12' radius), while the parent is busy with something else (ie: not
>paying attention to their child!). Although it DOES keep the child from
>wandering off, it does NOT prevent them from picking things up, pulling
>things off shelves, breaking things (by accident, of course), possibly
>swallowing something either poisonous or of choking dimensions.
Six to twelve feet? This certainly is different from what I've used (and seen
available) in stores for use with children.
One Step Ahead and The Right Start both offer, online, harnesses that have
3-foot and 42-inch leads. I also recall using a wrist strap device with my
daughter that was about 2 to 3 feet long. These were the products I had always
thought of as leashes -- 6 to 12 feet would certainly not be of use in a crowd
situation, and not for safety walking along busy streets, either. (If you pull
such a leash on a toddler 12 feet away hard enough to stop her, you're likely
to yank her down and possibly have her strike her head on concrete.)
Of course, you still have watch them -- but you don't have to worry about the
sudden impulsive dash of a 17-month-old into traffic, either.
Come to think of it, I rarely see 6 to 12 feet leashes used when walking dogs,
either, unless they're the retractable kind, although this may vary in more
rural areas. Our Labrador had a 4-foot leash; and I believe the state parks
require short leashes -- not to protect your pet, but to protect others from
your pet.
Lori G.
Milwaukee, WI
chatty lisa
children would choose to wear the harness leash over riding
in the stroller. My son would even request the leash if I
ever forgot it, he just felt safer.
Two years ago we went to New York City with my 4year old
son and 7 year old daughter....they both wore harnesses all
day and never once complained. We all had a great time and
never worried about losing our children in the large crowds.
Think of your child and their safety...I would hate to
think I lost my child in a crowd and never saw them again
just because someone thought that it was cruel to put a
leash on a child. Believe me my children have never
thought it was cruel.
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful
Jim
>strong. That's not how one would attach to a toddler. The only real
>parallel to a dog leash is that there is a restraint/line between the
>parent/handler and the child/dog.
I've admitted to not understanding their use. Let me back up and ask,
How are they used?
Do you follow the child's lead? Tug the child along with you? Ignore
the child and assume they remain attached? Simply a way of holding
hands without actual physical contact with child?
I really just don't get it - which is admittedly my problem. I can
see them being somewhat useful if you're hiking the north rim and
can't otherwise restrain a young child or perhaps walking the streets
of Manhattan, but strolling through Wal-Mart? I just don't get it. .
.
--
Jim
Nor do I get why anyone else cares if a parent leashes up a child . .
.
Rosalie B.
>Rosalie B. <gmbe...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>strong. That's not how one would attach to a toddler. The only real
>>parallel to a dog leash is that there is a restraint/line between the
>>parent/handler and the child/dog.
>
>I've admitted to not understanding their use. Let me back up and ask,
>How are they used?
>
>Do you follow the child's lead? Tug the child along with you? Ignore
>the child and assume they remain attached? Simply a way of holding
>hands without actual physical contact with child?
The latter is what I used it for - in order to have contact with the
child at slightly beyond arms reach without holding their
hand/shoulder up in the air and yanking them along by it all the time.
You don't ignore the child. If you are walking along the sidewalk you
still have to negotiate verbally with the child about the speed and
direction - you can't drag a child along like you would with a dog.
You may allow the child to walk ahead of you and you follow (like
badly trained dogs sometimes do).
>
>I really just don't get it - which is admittedly my problem. I can
>see them being somewhat useful if you're hiking the north rim and
>can't otherwise restrain a young child or perhaps walking the streets
>of Manhattan, but strolling through Wal-Mart? I just don't get it. .
You wouldn't be walking the North Rim of the Grand Canyon on any
regular basis with a toddler. In Wal-Mart (specifically) you'd
probably have a cart [another thread :-)].
The places where you'd need it are much more benign looking - normal
city or suburban streets, maybe while out for a walk (for a walk's
sake) or somewhere like the zoo.
And also while shopping at a store where carts are not normally
supplied - such as clothing stores or shoe stores. The child isn't
going to want to sit in the stroller for long - the scenery gets
boring, but you don't want him to wander off.
grandma Rosalie
Burnette
as he hated riding in the stroller and his hands got tired being held up
in the air (so we could hold hands). His was attached to a belt and we
referred to it as his belt. He really did like the thing.
Anyway, I used it in places like the mall or fair that could get crowded
and we could get separated. I had to keep an eye on him as I didn't
want to clothesline anyone else. And no that never happened. As to who
followed whose lead, well, if there is something he wants to see, he
could let me know but if I said we were going to store X, then we went
there. I didn't haul him around like a disobedient puppy or anything.
It actually was good training for him learning how to stay with me. Now
that he's bigger we don't use it.
Lisa
Jim
>>Do you follow the child's lead? Tug the child along with you? Ignore
>>the child and assume they remain attached? Simply a way of holding
>>hands without actual physical contact with child?
>
>child at slightly beyond arms reach without holding their
>hand/shoulder up in the air and yanking them along by it all the time.
Used like this, and at only a 2 ft. length as others have posted, they
appear to make more sense - if it's your thing. Flexible hand holding
(although I'd miss the feel of my children's sometimes sticky little
fingers.)
The only time I've *ever* seen on was in an airport. I watched the
mom tug her almost 2 y.o. (on a 6 - 8 ft. tether) every few steps as
he was either interested in checking various object on the carpet or
getting a rise out of his mom. It looked, to me, ridiculous and
showed the child the only consequence of disobedience was additional
attention. Used as above is, imo, an entirely different approach.
--
Jim
rkbose
Jim wrote:
>
> I've admitted to not understanding their use. Let me back up and ask,
> How are they used?
>
> Do you follow the child's lead? Tug the child along with you? Ignore
> the child and assume they remain attached? Simply a way of holding
> hands without actual physical contact with child?
The ones I've seen are harnesses, in that the child wears a harness
round the chest and shoulders. Either two loops or a short lead is
attached, behind the child. This allows the child to run a little ahead
of the parents (or to the side, or behind) but essentially at little
over arm's length. It seems like a substitute for holding the child's
hand, but allows a little more freedom of movement. (I'd have
appreciated this; my kids used to hold my finger, and occasionally
rapidly change direction, remaining attached to the finger....) It also
allows the parent to have his/her hands free (slip the leash loop round
your wrist). And if the parent is tall and the child little, it may save
having to bend down -- or the child from having to carry its arm
uncomfortably high.
rupa
Kassandra
> >How are they used?
> >
> >Do you follow the child's lead? Tug the child along with you? Ignore
> >the child and assume they remain attached? Simply a way of holding
> >hands without actual physical contact with child?
>
I have never liked them but I may use one.. I plan to I think in the
future.. I mean I have a habit of strolling my kids or holding their hands
where ever we go and I can remember times when I had to let go of my kids to
sign a paper or hundreds of other things... you can teach your kid to stay
right beside you..But I have seen many slick moves by "bad guys" in this
world.. How much does it take to distract a frazzled mom while the "other
guy" grabs the kid and slips away? Ya, I'm being overly dramatic but I think
I would feel better if I knew that my baby would never "slip" away by
accident...
One of my daughters was just playing hide and seek in a clothing store and
we couldn't find her.. We thought she was gone... Only felt that way twice..
(once I some how missed or didn't see my little girl getting off the buss
and she walked home. I looked everywhere but there ...thought she was gone..
ever been there?)
I NEVER want to feel that way again..
Kassandra
CAROLYN EVANS
Tampamom wrote in message <85u3a2$e7d$1...@news.laserlink.net>...
>
>CAROLYN EVANS wrote in message
><85s2r7$18ms$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>...
>A stroller is all well and good in certain stores, however, if you need to
>try something on....strollers do not fit into dressing rooms.
I have never really had a problem with it, I just use the large, handicapped
ones -- all stores are required to have them, and in 3 years I have never
run into an actually handicapped person who needed to use it at the same
time, so I have never deprived someone.
>Nor can you
>push a shopping cart AND a stroller at the same time.
Well, in a pinch I have pushed the stroller and pulled the cart, but usually
I have been able to manage with the nice roomy basket of the stroller, and
the awning of it to lay large (but light) things on!
>JMO
>Marion----Tampamom to Louis(6) and Erica(2)
PLEASE -- NEVER use your child's name on the web, especially a kids
newsgroup, where a pedophile can easily see it! When you post I get your
email address, too. (And, unless you use a blind maildrop for the address
on your email account - as we do - your home is only a click away for a
half-way decent hacker!) For a short time I did telemarketing, and you
wouldn't belive how many people let their kids do the message machine
recording (which tells ANYONE that there is a child in the house), and/or
leave the names of everyone ("Hi! Jane, John, Jodi, Jimmy and Sandy aren't
here right now...") on the machine (which means that I, or anyone else, can
immediately establish a rapor with whomever answers the next time we call!
Think about it...as a telemarketer I had your last name...and it immediately
puts you on guard if I say "Hello, is this Mrs. Smith?" But, if I were able
to say "Hi, Jane! This is Carolyn, how are you?" your first reaction would
be to respond, while racking your brain to figure out where you know me
from. If your son answered, and I said..."Hey, Louis! How are you! Is
your Mommy home?" Would he still be wary, or would he think I was a friend,
and give me more intimate information?
Just a word of warning!
Tim Calvert
EVANS-...@prodigy.net says...
>
>
>Just so you know -- and (I'm assuming -- dangerous, I know! :) ) since
>you're from the UK you guys may not have these/do this over there...There IS
>a difference between the safety belt of the stroller (which keeps the child
>from pitching out of the seat if you go down a curb) and a leash/harness.
>
>A harness for a child is almost exactly like the contraption sold for dogs.
>You buckle it on to the child, then attatch the leash.
>
>It essentially allows parents to let the child wander around a store (within
>a 6'-12' radius), while the parent is busy with something else (ie: not
>paying attention to their child!). Although it DOES keep the child from
>wandering off, it does NOT prevent them from picking things up, pulling
>things off shelves, breaking things (by accident, of course), possibly
>swallowing something either poisonous or of choking dimensions.
I have to take exception to this description of leash use. While I don't doubt
it's accurate for some, this is not the only way in which leashes are used. I,
for one, never allow my daughter to walk in a store, with or without a leash. I
think that at 15 months, she's too young (and too energetic) to be on her own
two feet within easy reach of all those new and interesting things and still
too young to be expected to respond properly to my instructions not to bother
them. Yes, I know that's how she'll learn. But for now, I prefer to teach such
lessons in a more controlled environment, like at home or at the homes of
friends and relatives. (Also see below.)
However, I do put her on a leash when we are out in the mall (i.e. not in a
store). This allows her to run, which she always does as soon as her feet hit
the floor, and explore without the discomfort (to us both) of hand-holding. But
I still have control over where she goes and how fast she goes and can keep her
out of trouble and keep her from running into people or picking things up off
the floor. But I can only do these things if I'm paying close attention to her,
which I always do. I would *not* put her on the leash, then turn my back and
pay no attention to where she goes or what she does. To accuse all parents who
use a leash of being inattentive is most unreasonable.
My daughter is also learning during these romps through the mall. There are
lots of kiosks out in the mall with items she could get to, as well as many
stores which have some small display in the doorway and she often wants to get
her hands on them. I tell her no, and I reinforce the "no" by keeping a tight
hold on the leash so she can't get to it anyway. At her age (and stage of
language development), I believe this type of reinforcement is still necessary.
But I can also tell that she's getting better about minding the no's each time
we're out.
When I think she's ready to walk on her own in the more crowded and sometimes
chaotic environment of a store, I'll let her do it. I may use a leash, I may
not. Either way, I'll be paying close attention to what she's doing. I can
assure you, leash use is not equivalent to ignoring your child's actions, and
I'll thank you to stop saying it is.
--
Tim Calvert Email: cal...@marshall.edu
Lead Systems Programmer Phone: (304) 696-3210
Marshall University
Huntington, WV
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
Tampamom
CAROLYN EVANS wrote in message
>
>
>Frankly, in addition to my 3yr old, we are frequently running errands with
>the 4 month old girl I take care of, and he DOES get down to walk, even in
>parking lots, sidewalks, etc. Very often I, also, am in a situation where
>I do not have a free hand to hold his. If we are walking in crowds he
walks
>in front of me, holding on to the stroller, if we are stopped, say to fold
>up the stroller, then I always find SOMEthing stationary (post, car, my
leg)
>for him to hold on to. He knows there are consequences if he disobeys, and
>he does not.
Yes, and some of the natural consequenses of
disobedience are not ones I am willing to have my child experience (being
snatched by a pedophile, stepping off the curb and being hit by a speeding
taxi, touching many unsavory things in a public restroom while I am changing
a siblings diaper).
>With spirited, highly intelligent children, there is an especially
>imperative need for firm limits and consistancy from the parents, to go
>along with the earlier age at which they can handle responsibility and
>freedoms.
>
>Again, it all comes back to the effort YOU are willing to put into it!
>
. My argument is that your child is MORE
>intelligent than a dog, and deserves the respect FROM YOU that he/she IS.
>
>Carolyn
No one is questioning intelligence. But at 13 mos - 2 1/2
years, a child's impulse control is usually not yet fully developed, and a
tether allows them the freedom to walk on their own (that recent
accomplishment of which they are so proud) while keeping them safely nearby.
Tampamom
CAROLYN EVANS wrote in message
>Neither to I, but I would bet that she can tell where the aisle you're in
>ends! And, although I would not, and do not, expect my son to form a valid
>conceptualization or make a value judgement about where "too far" is, he
>does know to come back when Mommy says "you're getting 'too far'", or
>"You're almost to where I can't see you" when we're in a situation where
>there aren't aisles. We can do this because, when he was first getting
>down, I never took my eyes completely off him.
If you were really in a store to purchase something, you MUST
have taken your eyes off of him in order to take your item off of the shelf.
As far as I know, it is physically impossible to have one eye on the child
AND one eye on your reason for being in the store in the first place (except
if you were like MY mother, who had another set of eyes in the back of her
head!)
And the NATURAL consequence of misbehavior while on a
tether/leash is that the child loses the privilege of walking and must THEN
be put into the stroller/shopping cart.
>It is a very simple concept. I'm sure (at least I hope) that she
>understands that she does not ALWAYS get EVERYTHING she wants. And I'm
sure
>(again, at least I hope) that she is disciplined for poor behavior and
>rewarded for the good. That is all there is to the concepts of rights and
>priviledges...all you have to do is use the terms with her. All you have
to
>do, next time she whines for something she's not going to get, like candy
in
>the check out line, explain to her that she isn't always going to get
sweets
>whenever she wants...that it's not a right. Now, getting her diaper
changed
>when it's dirty -- that's a right. Any time it's dirty, she gets changed.
>Candy, on the other hand, is a priviledge...something you EARN. Maybe next
>time, if she behaves well for the entire shopping trip, and has eaten a
good
>(lunch/dinner, etc. - my son knew the word protien at that age, so that is
>what we used with him) then she will have earned the PRIVILEDGE of having
>candy.
I don't think anyone here has been talking about things
like whining for candy. Personally, my son didn't discover candy until he
was 4 and still eats very little - he certainly doesn't request it in
stores. My daughter is 2 1/2 and has yet to have any. I don't forbid it,
it just isn't an option . . Shopping carts are fine except when the
strapped in child reaches behind and continually throws out the items you
just put in, just to see what happens. Strollers are fine too, but you
can't load them with groceries. Believe me, I have left restaurants,
grocery stores and other stores because of tantrums. That isn't the issue
either. Safety is the issue, period.
In another post you mentioned that you had a 3 year old and
sometimes a 4 month old. Well that's easy...the 4 month old is not walking.
I'll tell you an incident that happened to me. I was at a park that has a
pier going out onto the lake. Louis was 5 1/2 and Erica was 18 months. I
had her on the leash because we were on the pier (Louis wanted to feed the
ducks). Well it is a good thing she WAS on the leash because Louis fell
into the lake and I had to lay down on the pier, reach my hand down and fish
him out of the cold water. With the leash I was able to have her sit down
next to me, put the leash under my body so she couldn't stray and then get
him out. If I had just been holding her hand, I would have had to let it
go to fish him out, leaving the possibility of HER falling in.
Marion-----Tampamom to Louis (6) and Erica(2)
Hedgehog42
>I've admitted to not understanding their use. Let me back up and ask,
>How are they used?
>
>Do you follow the child's lead? Tug the child along with you? Ignore
>the child and assume they remain attached? Simply a way of holding
>hands without actual physical contact with child?
Mostly the last, for us. I *like* holding hands with my kids, but couldn't
always do it easily or comfortably. If I was pushing a heavy stroller, for
instance, or carrying a large package (or infant in his carseat) through a busy
parking lot to the car. Or sometimes it became physically uncomfortable for one
of us -- their arm got tired, or their hand sweaty. (Or I lost my glove and
wanted to put my hand in my coat pocket!)
We stopped using leashes (or tethers, or harnesses or whatever) by the time the
kids hit 3, but before that found them useful in airports, in malls, at fairs,
exhibitions or festivals, at crowded fireworks displays and at Disney World.
Not shoulder-to-shoulder crowds, but generally in cases where there were a lot
of people, there was a lot to see, our hands might literally be full (carrying
picnic supplies, perhaps), or other occasions where toddler impulse control was
likely to be severely tested with potentially disastrous results. It was
especially useful with my 2 YO when I had a baby and no double stroller.
We used a backpack a fair amount of the time, as well, but sometimes the kid
really needed to stretch his legs.
Our harness/leash was also helpful because it could double as a restraint in a
shopping cart or a restaurant highchair. (too often, we'd find the restraints
on them missing or broken).
>I really just don't get it - which is admittedly my problem. I can
>see them being somewhat useful if you're hiking the north rim and
>can't otherwise restrain a young child or perhaps walking the streets
>of Manhattan, but strolling through Wal-Mart? I just don't get it. .
I don't think we ever used it in a store, except as the restraint in the
aforementioned shopping cart. But it was definitely a plus when the toddler
wanted to hike state park trails like the rest of the family, instead of being
backpacked, and the older sibs required brief but focused spans of parental
attention (scraped knee, ID a flower or bug, etc).
>Nor do I get why anyone else cares if a parent leashes up a child . ..
Ditto.
Lori G.
Milwaukee, WI
Laura Uerling
>
> Laura Uerling wrote in message <387E2854...@lynx.neu.edu>...
> >Rachel Boeckenhauer wrote:
> >First, the parents would have to use a leash all the time when a child
> >is on foot when out of the house. Absolutely not true, from my own
> >experience and from descriptions of other posters. Most parents use such
> >restraints only when there are particular safety concerns, like
> >negotiating a large crowd or when walking near a busy street.
>
> I think we both over-generalize (since all but one parent I have ever seen
> with a child on a leash is using it in a store-like setting)
I don't see anything wrong with that, since stores and malls can fall
into the 'large crowd' category. I prefer to use a stroller when
shopping myself, but if someone prefers a harness, hey, that's their
choice.
> And, when I speak of a "leash", I am referring to the 6"-12" variety, not
> the 1'-2' tether that attatches the parent to child in a crowd, in case the
> child's hand slips out of the parent's.
Well, I've *never* seen that long a lead on a harness designed for a
child, I'd say that 2-3 feet is most common. Are you saying that using a
harness with a short lead is *not* treating your child like a dog?
What's the cut-off? 4 feet? 5 feet?
> >In my experience, leash-using parents are
> >keenly aware that their children need to be taught safety rules, but
> >they prefer to take advantage of learning opportunities where mistakes
> >have less-than-dire consequences.
>
> Perhaps this is one way East Coast parents/customs differ from West Coast
> (since we seem to have had diametrically opposite experiences.)
So you think that West Coast parents plan on using leashes until the
child is in college? It would be a clueless parent indeed who thought
that using a leash replaces street and crowd safety. Of course, being
clueless is *not* exclusive to leash-using parents.
> >> Sorry to be so long, but it really pushes my buttons when people assume that
> >> all children will respond the same to the same treatment. (For the record, I
> >> have been told many times how well behaved my son is for his age, even though
> >> he is a VERY energetic child who wants to run off and explore EVERYTHING, so
> >> I really wouldn't say that I am too busy or lazy to watch my child.)
>
> I wouldn't either...and you HAVE said that you do NOT use a leash!
>
> I have also been told that my son is very well behaved and a pleasure to be
> around. And, trust me, my son is VERY energetic. (No matter how long and
> continuously he has played during the day, he can be counted on to stay up
> reading in bed, way past his 9pm bed time!)
>
> >Thanks, Rachel, and again I agree. It also pushes my buttons when people
> >assume that everyone's *situations* are the same. Believe it or not,
> >Carolyn, not everyone has 2 kids, lives in a surburban setting, and
> >travels from the house to the car to the stroller at the mall.
>
> Frankly, I NEVER said you, or anyone else did, and...aren't YOU making the
> assumption that THAT is what I do?
I don't know what you do, but your diatribe against leashes does suggest
that you cannot conceive of a situation where a leash/harness is the
best option to insure a child's safety. Do I chalk that up to lack of
imagination, lack of experience, or narrow-mindedness?
> >Apologies to those who have heard this story before--I commute into
> >Boston by train with my 22 mo. son, as I did with my daughter who is now
> >5 1/2. I started using a leash with my daughter because when we're going
> >home we have to wait on a very crowded elevated train platform. (Back
> >Bay station, one of the busiest in the city) I use a stroller to get to
> >the station, and I have to fold up the stroller before we get on the
> >train. Folding the stroller takes two hands, which means I can't hold
> >his hand for about 30 seconds. As anyone who's had a toddler knows, 30
> >seconds is *plenty* of time for him to get away, get lost in the crowd,
> >or fall off the train platform.
>
> Frankly, in addition to my 3yr old, we are frequently running errands with
> the 4 month old girl I take care of, and he DOES get down to walk, even in
> parking lots, sidewalks, etc. Very often I, also, am in a situation where
> I do not have a free hand to hold his. If we are walking in crowds he walks
> in front of me, holding on to the stroller, if we are stopped, say to fold
> up the stroller, then I always find SOMEthing stationary (post, car, my leg)
> for him to hold on to. He knows there are consequences if he disobeys, and
> he does not.
I started using the harness with my kids at 18 mos, not 3 years, and by
three I was no longer using it with my daughter. There's a HUGE
difference between 18 mos and 3...my kids are smart, but at that age
they have *very* limited impulse control. Are you saying your son has
*never*, *ever* disobeyed? One of the reasons that I use the harness on
the train platform is that even *one* 'dash-off' incident could be
disastrous.
> With spirited, highly intelligent children, there is an especially
> imperative need for firm limits and consistancy from the parents, to go
> along with the earlier age at which they can handle responsibility and
> freedoms.
>
> Again, it all comes back to the effort YOU are willing to put into it!
With the greatest possible respect, UP YOURS! I'm sorry, but I find your
emphasis on *controlling* your kids to be a little alarming. My daughter
did learn, and my son will learn about safety without punishing every
misstep. Ya see, by using a harness in especially dangerous situations,
I can teach them about safety in a less risky setting and as it is
developmentally appropriate.
> >Funny thing is, once you accept that
> >there *are* situations where a leash makes sense,
> ...and I don't! (you might make a case for one of those 1' tethers,
> perhaps - when the child is too young to keep hold of your hand, or stay put
> for 30 seconds.)
Which, as I thought I made clear, is *exactly* when I use it! So, am I
now excused from 'treating children like dogs'? Why don't you post your
rules as to what constitues 'respectful' and 'disrespectful' leash-using
so we can make sure we are all parenting up to your standards.
> >the other hoary old
> >argument against leashes, "you're treating your child like a dog" is
> >exposed for what it is...emotional claptrap.
>
> Emotional only if you feel guilty about treating your child like a
> dog...because that IS what you are doing. You put a dog on a leash when you
> can't trust it to stay by/with you in a certain situations. That is what
> you are doing to your child. My argument is that your child is MORE
> intelligent than a dog, and deserves the respect FROM YOU that he/she IS.
{snort} Guilty, huh? The only thing I'm 'guilty' of is once again
responding to the same inane, hysterical arguments on this subject. What
I 'respect' is my toddler's inherent need to explore, and that he cannot
yet be expected to always remember to stay with mom. The fact that you
associate using a value-neutral safety device like a harness with lack
of respect and inadequate 'control' is *your* problem, not mine.
Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.
Laura Uerling
luer...@lynx.neu.edu
Rachel Boeckenhauer
:
: Just so you know -- and (I'm assuming -- dangerous, I know! :) ) since
: you're from the UK you guys may not have these/do this over there...There IS
: a difference between the safety belt of the stroller (which keeps the child
: from pitching out of the seat if you go down a curb) and a leash/harness.
:
: A harness for a child is almost exactly like the contraption sold for dogs.
: You buckle it on to the child, then attatch the leash.
:
: It essentially allows parents to let the child wander around a store (within
: a 6'-12' radius), while the parent is busy with something else (ie: not
: paying attention to their child!). Although it DOES keep the child from
: wandering off, it does NOT prevent them from picking things up, pulling
: things off shelves, breaking things (by accident, of course), possibly
: swallowing something either poisonous or of choking dimensions.
For the record, I have never seen a leash for a child this long. Also, so
far, the only thing which you have said that is different about the leash
than the safety belt of a stroller is that the leash is like what is used for
dogs. The stroller also (a) keeps the child from wandering off (if they
don't climb out), (b) does not prevent the child from pulling things off
shelves, breaking things, etc. (unless your stores have MUCH wider aisles
than I am used to.
: What it boils down to for me is this: either you're going to be responsible
: for watching your own child, and safeguarding him/her, AND the store/other
: people's things (in which case, there is no need for the child to be on a
: leash), or you need to have some of your attention elsewhere (and when you
: go shopping that is usually the case, and JUST FINE) so you have the child
: strapped into the stroller, so they can get into a lot fewer things. In
: either case, the adult needs to take responsibility.
So you think that your child cannot get into trouble strapped into the
stroller (or cart)? Indeed, I would find it even more necessary to pay
attention to my child in one of these, as he can physically harm himself when
he climbs out of one. Not to mention that he can drop glass jars of pickles
and the like off a shelves from a higher height this way. (No, he has never
managed to do this, but I have caught him in the nick of time a couple
times, all while strapped into a cart.)
: Without the leash, and with proper supervision, the child learns not to
: touch indiscriminatly, and to stay within sight (not to go to another
: aisle). They do love to move around and explore, but if they are carefully
: watched and learn that walking around in the store is a PRIVILEDGE that will
: be taken away if they misbehave (they loose the priviledge, and are confined
: to the stroller), they will quickly learn to behave. Most people I have
: seen use the leash without a stroller, so if the child does misbehave, there
: is no way to administer a "time-out" or restrict their movement, without
: having to pick them up, which (depending on the weight of the child) can be
: a severe pain for the parent.
I fail to see why one could not teach their child proper behavior in this way
(i.e. not to touch everything), while using a leash to prevent the child from
running off, either b/c said child is too young to have really learned this
yet, or b/c the particular situation is too dangerous to take a chance, even
for a normally well-behaved child. If my child is normally well-behaved, I
could have my child walking with me, whether on a leash or not, and see out
of my peripheral vision if they are doing something unacceptable. The only
difference is, with a leash, they cannot run off. As you have stated
yourself, even a normally VERY well-behaved child may run off when you don't
expect them to. (Story deleted for brevity here.) What if you were alone
with a baby and TWO toddlers, and one of the toddlers ran off? What do you
do then? And remember, even normally very well-behaved children may do this
on occasion. Do you just hope you aren't next to a busy street when this
happens?
: If he'd always been on a leash, then, yes, he would not have had the
: opportunity to run away like that, but he also would not be so WELL behaved
: most of the time, or have had the very age-appropriate lessons in freedom
: and responsibility. There are a lot more painful ways he could have learned
: this lesson.
I do not understand why your child would necessarily be any less well behaved
if you had used a leash at some point in his life. You are suggesting here
that it is impossible to use a leash and teach your child responsibility,
which I certainly don't believe is true. I do not know what MOST people who
use leashes do, as I have honestly seen very few, but even if MOST people do
not use them responsibly, that certainly does not mean it is impossible.
Indeed, MOST people that I see put their children in shopping carts,
strollers, and high chairs w/o fastening the seat belt, and tend to look away
from them while doing their shopping, thus putting their child in a
precarious position. That doesn't mean that they can't be used safely, by
making sure you DO fasten your child in AND keeping your child within your
field of vision at all times.
: If you use the crutch of a leash...when do you stop using it and START
: teaching your child that freedom of movement has responsibilities attatched?
And what about when you use the crutch of a stroller? (Yes, I use a
stroller, but unless my child is sleepy, it is more likely to contain
packages.) I would think that your child is learning more about
responsibility, such as what they are and aren't allowed to touch, by being
on a leash than in a stroller. I have yet to figure out why you think a
leash is such a bad thing, while a stroller is simply a standard thing
parents use. You have to watch your child in a stroller every second as
well, or they can get at things and/or climb out (and get at even more
things). Would you mind using strollers for children if they were something
that people also used for dogs? I really don't see any real difference,
other than the fact that we happen to use leashes for dogs.
Rachel
Rachel Boeckenhauer
wish to respond to a couple of issues here:
CAROLYN EVANS (EVANS-...@prodigy.net) wrote:
:
: Rachel Boeckenhauer wrote in message <85ku66$1ut$1...@joe.rice.edu>...
:
: >: Treating your child like a dog is not necessary. Even at 15 months (and
: >: earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog --
: >: give them the credit they deserve. Your child WILL understand, if you
: >: take the time to explain, that getting down out of the stroller is a
: >: PRIVILEDGE, NOT a right. And, they will learn that throwing a hissy fit
: >: in public will NOT acheive their goals (IF you are consistant, and
: >: willing to hear a few at WalMart, or where ever).
:
: >This sounds like what I thought of leashes BEFORE I had my child. I don't
: >give in to my child's every whim, even if that means having a hissy fit in
: >Walmart, but my child is very strong-willed and strong, and if he really,
: >really doesn't want to be in the stroller/shopping cart, I can not keep him
: >in it without *physically* hurting him, which I do not consider to be an
: >option.
:
: We have used several solutions to this situation, the best was that EVERY
: time (and it only took a few) that he wiggled out of the belt he was put
: back in it and told that if he did it again it would be a "store time-out".
: (He always gets a warning!) This is where I hold his hands and don't let go
: for a few minutes, (something he hates)! If that doesn't work, then we go
: further, to time outs when we get home, or an immediate nap time, or to
: loosing one or more of his favorite toys for a day. Leaving the store
: immediately also works, since half the fun of being down is exploring the
: store!
Actually, the consistent reward/discipline method you are advocating to teach
your child right from wrong is very similar to how one trains a dog. The
only difference is that the dog never really understands why, whereas a child
will eventually learn why they are supposed to do/not do certain things. But
for a toddler, what they really understand is "when I do A, B happens". I
really don't believe that a 15 month old understands priveleges vs. rights
beyond that (and everything I have read suggests this also), but that is
enough to begin molding their behavior -- they will learn the reasoning
later. I fail to understand why using something for your child is bad just
because it happens to be something you use with a dog.
Also, as I said before, not all children are the same. Some children are
much more content to ride in the stroller/shopping cart than others. Mine is
on occasion, but more often not. I am glad that your child is so well
behaved, but even with very consistent rewards/punishments, some children
simply take longer to learn than others. It has little to do with
intelligence -- indeed, it is often (although certainly not always!) more
intelligent children who are more "trouble", b/c they are so anxious to
explore everything. I feel that my child's extra energy is actually quite a
wonderful thing, and I am glad he is so anxious to explore the world. It can
be quite exhausting for me, however!
: >Also, a leash (...) means that they can't run off our of sight
: yes...
: >and/or climb out of the shopping cart and fall on their head in the blink
: > of an eye.
:
: Sorry, a leash will not prevent this, that's what the seat belt of the cart
: is for.
Please note that I said above that I have *always* buckled my son into
shopping carts -- I see many people who don't, but I will look through
however many shopping carts it takes to find one that works (way too many
sometimes). While my son will sometimes sit quite happily in the cart, if he
wants out, he can EASILY get out of this. Likewise with stroller seat belts.
I actually went so far as to hunt down a "shopping cart seat belt" thingy
that I could take with me to attach my son to the cart which he couldn't
wiggle out of. (Like a belt you put around the child's waist which buckles
in the back and has about a 3 inch length which you then hook to the cart --
MUCH safer than the seat belts on the silly things, half of which seem to be
installed incorrectly. Unfortunately, he has outgrown this one.) My point
being, you have to watch a child constantly whether they are walking alone,
on a leash, in a stroller, or in a cart. But if you are shopping, you will
undoubtedly look away from your child for a second from time to time, or have
them only in your peripheral vision, at least.
And yes, having my child on a leash instead of in the shopping cart will
certainly keep them from falling from a shopping cart, although I really
don't have to watch him any more or less either way.
: >Sorry to be so long, but it really pushes my buttons when people assume
: >that all children will respond the same to the same treatment. (For the
: >record, I have been told many times how well behaved my son is for his
: >age, even though he is a VERY energetic child who wants to run off and
: >explore EVERYTHING, so I really wouldn't say that I am too busy or lazy
: >to watch my child.)
:
: Neither would I, from the sound of it, but you freely admit that you do NOT
: use a leash!
I also have never used a playpen, baby gates, or an exersaucer for my child,
but that doesn't mean that I don't see the use of them, and indeed see why
people in certain situations might find them indispensible. Almost anything
can be abused, including strollers, but that doesn't negate their usefulness
in certain situations.
And at times I think I should use a leash, partially b/c my child HATES to
walk holding your hand for any length of time (I guess I wouldn't like having
to walk with my arm up in the air either, come to think of it). So why would
making both of us more comfortable be such a bad thing?
Rachel
Mouse
CAROLYN EVANS <EVANS-...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:85s45v$54na$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com...> >Carolyn:
> >Not all children are this tolerant.
>
> Then they need to become that tolerant! The parent is in charge, and if
the
> answer is "No, you may NOT get down", then they need to learn to live with
> that! And, the only way that will happen is if the parent toes the line
and
> does not give in to begging, cajoling, whining and pitching a hissy fit in
> public.
>
That does not always work. My daughter is 2 and VEY strong willed, most of
the time I havesimply left the store when she hasn't stayed with me, but
this doesn't work when I am standing in line to pay bills or something. My
mother bought me a harnass for her, it has been a lifesaver a couple of
times. She almost walked away with a stranger after running away from me
because I couldn't pick her up ( I have my hands full with a bag of diapers,
and clothes for her). She was wearing the harnass, and a store clerk
grabbed her by it. I don't use the leash part, just the harnass, I would
rather have to grab her by that than risk an injuring to her arm or
shoulder.
> My son is almost two, and while I have
> >ALWAYS strapped him into high chairs, strollers, shopping carts, etc. for
> >safety while he is in them, he is now old enough to wiggle out of most of
> >these straps if he wants down. And he is very energetic, so this happens
> >often. Mind you, I don't LET him run off -- I will let him down to walk
> when
> >he wants, and if he does not walk nicely, help push the shopping cart,
> etc.,
> >then he gets picked up and put back in the cart or carried.
>
> EXACLTY my point!
>
> >Also, note that this is not such a big deal when my husband and I are out
> >TOGETHER. I don't know if you are a stay-at-home-mom or not, but if you
> are
> >shopping ALONE with your kids very much, I think this would be of an
issue.
>
>
> I do go shopping alone with him, almost every time, and (with one
> significant exception - see my other post tonight) he is very well behaved
> and knows what the rules are.
>
> : Treating your child like a dog is not necessary. Even at 15 months (and
> >: earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog --
> give
> >: them the credit they deserve. Your child WILL understand, if you take
> the
> >: time to explain, that getting down out of the stroller is a PRIVILEDGE,
> NOT
> >: a right. And, they will learn that throwing a hissy fit in public will
> NOT
> >: acheive their goals (IF you are consistant, and willing to hear a few
at
> Wal
> >: Mart, or where ever).
> >
> >This sounds like what I thought of leashes BEFORE I had my child. I
don't
> >give in to my child's every whim, even if that means having a hissy fit
in
> >Walmart, but my child is very strong-willed and strong, and if he really,
> >really doesn't want to be in the stroller/shopping cart, I can not keep
him
> >in it without *physically* hurting him, which I do not consider to be an
> >option.
>
> We have used several solutions to this situation, the best was that EVERY
> time (and it only took a few) that he wiggled out of the belt he was put
> back in it and told that if he did it again it would be a "store
time-out".
> (He always gets a warning!) This is where I hold his hands and don't let
go
> for a few minutes, (something he hates)! If that doesn't work, then we go
> further, to time outs when we get home, or an immediate nap time, or to
> loosing one or more of his favorite toys for a day. Leaving the store
> immediately also works, since half the fun of being down is exploring the
> store!
> In these cases, I typically carry him (to keep him from running off)
> >and leave as quickly as possible. At times like this, I find myself
> thinking
> >that a leash really might be a good idea. I can particularly understand
it
> >for someone who has more than one child and goes out alone with them
often.
>
> If the problem has not been nipped int he bud, and it sounds like it
hasn't,
> why not attatch the harness, not the leash, to the seat belt of the
> stroller, and belt him in with that for a few minutes? I doubt that he
> could wriggle out of THAT, and it would certainly be a strong deterrent to
> misbehavior, if he knew he'd be getting a time-out he couldn't wriggle out
> of!
>
> >Also, a leash (...) means that they can't run off our of sight
> yes...
> >and/or
> >climb out of the shopping cart and fall on their head in the blink of an
> eye.
>
>
> Sorry, a leash will not prevent this, that's what the seat belt of the
cart
> is for.
>
Well I don't know about the stores in your area, but at the Walmart near my
house most of the seat belts in the carts are broken or missing. I use the
harnass to secure her in the cart, if I didn't she would climb out and fall.
> >Sorry to be so long, but it really pushes my buttons when people assume
> that
> >all children will respond the same to the same treatment. (For the
record,
> I
> >have been told many times how well behaved my son is for his age, even
> though
> >he is a VERY energetic child who wants to run off and explore EVERYTHING,
> so
> >I really wouldn't say that I am too busy or lazy to watch my child.)
>
> Neither would I, from the sound of it, but you freely admit that you do
NOT
> use a leash!
>
> Carolyn
>
>
Mouse
>
>
> Tim Calvert wrote in message <387e226f$1...@206.212.27.20>...
> >In article <85kb4t$2048$2...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>,
> >EVANS-...@prodigy.net says...
> >But when we decide it's safe to let her down, we feel it's much safer
> >to have a leash on her. No parent, no matter how diligent, can keep their
> eyes
> >and attention on their child every second any more than you can keep your
> eyes
> >and attention fully on the road every second when you're driving. It
> doesn't
> >take long for a toddler to get into some serious trouble.
>
> That's very true...but the ONLY thing a leash REALLY prevents is the child
> going farther away from you than the length of the lead. It does NOT
> relieve you of the responsibility of watching the child EVERY SECOND. It
> only takes that long for the child, not even at the end of their lead, to
> grab something toxic, or too small and shove it in their mouth...then
where
> are you?
>
> Yet most parents (and, from your response, obvously you do, too) think
that
> the lead allows then this freedom--to take their "eyes off the road" for a
> second...
>
> This is one of the reasons I feel that (most) parents who use a leash are
to
> some extent lazy, and trying to absolve themselves of some of the
> responsibilities of letting a child roam "freely".
>
> How many times have
> >you heard (or read in the newspaper) a grieving parent say "I only turned
> my
> >back for a second." I, for one, don't want to be in the position of
having
> to
> >say that.
> >
> >I think leashes are a safety net used by logical parents who recognize
the
> >inevitability of children misbehaving,
>
> Assuming that is the case, then what do you do when the leashed child DOES
> misbehave, touch something they've been told not to, break something, etc?
> Carrying them consigns the parent to a sort of punishment, or may not be a
> viable option (depending on how heavy the child is), so do you resort,
then
> to corporal punishment?
> >I do not treat my child like a dog. I do everything in my power (and
within
> my
> >financial resources) to keep my daughter safe. A leash is an inexpensive
> safety
> >measure I can take until my daughter is better able to understand the
> dangers
> >of the world she lives in.
>
>
> Yes, and that is exactly what a dog owner is doing...so, whether YOU like
> the connotation or not, you are treating your daughter just as I (or any
> other dog owner) treat our canine companions.
>
Sorry but you are wrong there. I have a dog, who I don't have to have on a
leash. She is trained to stay beside my daughter at all times when outside
the house. I don't want to "train" my daughter the same way I train the
dog. I use a leash when nessesary, because if I am not in a store I don't
have a cart to put her in and she is too tall for strollers. What would you
have me do???????? I can't carry her all the time, how can she get any
outdoor exercise if I carry her???? I only use the leash part of her
harnass when we go to the zoo or the museum or the park. These places do
have carts but could be dangerous if she got away from me.
>
>
> >>Even at 15 months (and
> >>earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog --
give
> >>them the credit they deserve.
> >
> >I think my child is very intelligent. But even the most intelligent
> >15-month-old can't understand all the dangers of getting too far from
Mommy
> or
> >Daddy, no matter how often you tell them.
>
> They don't HAVE to be able to list/understand the dangers (yes, please
> explain to them!) they only have to learn that it is a "NO!"
>
> >They also might have a different
> >concept of what's "too far." And I don't believe she's ready yet for
> estimating
> >how far 6 feet is.
>
> Neither to I, but I would bet that she can tell where the aisle you're in
> ends! And, although I would not, and do not, expect my son to form a
valid
> conceptualization or make a value judgement about where "too far" is, he
> does know to come back when Mommy says "you're getting 'too far'", or
> "You're almost to where I can't see you" when we're in a situation where
> there aren't aisles. We can do this because, when he was first getting
> down, I never took my eyes completely off him.
>
> >And even when a child is old enough to understand, they still can lose
> track of
> >where they are and where the dangers are if they're, for example,
following
> >that interesting bug on the floor, or chasing that butterfly.
>
> Very true, but if that is the case, then you don't let them get down to
> begin with.
>
Like I said above, leting her down is not an issue for me except in stores,
which she does not get to walk in because I don't want to run the risk of
her getting lost or taken. I get a cart unless I am just running in to get
diapers or something, then she walks, with me holding very firmly on to her
hand.
> >I'm sorry, but I don't believe the concepts of rights and privileges are
> within
> >the grasp of a 15-month-old.
>
>
> You don't give your daughter enough credit. If she does not understand,
> then you have not taken the time to teach her.
>
> It is a very simple concept. I'm sure (at least I hope) that she
> understands that she does not ALWAYS get EVERYTHING she wants. And I'm
sure
> (again, at least I hope) that she is disciplined for poor behavior and
> rewarded for the good. That is all there is to the concepts of rights and
> priviledges...all you have to do is use the terms with her. All you have
to
> do, next time she whines for something she's not going to get, like candy
in
> the check out line, explain to her that she isn't always going to get
sweets
> whenever she wants...that it's not a right. Now, getting her diaper
changed
> when it's dirty -- that's a right. Any time it's dirty, she gets changed.
> Candy, on the other hand, is a priviledge...something you EARN. Maybe
next
> time, if she behaves well for the entire shopping trip, and has eaten a
good
> (lunch/dinner, etc. - my son knew the word protien at that age, so that is
> what we used with him) then she will have earned the PRIVILEDGE of having
> candy.
>
> All you have to do, with almost any word or concept, is find a way of
> breaking it down and applying it at a level that will make sense to the
> child.
>
> >Hey, she's learning that throwing a hissy fit *anywhere* (including at
> home)
> >won't get her what she wants. And she's picking up on that very quickly
> because
> >my wife and I have never given in to her fits
>
> That's great!
>
> >(which she started a lot sooner
> >than I was expecting).
>
> Are you kidding? Although COMPLETELY UN-intentional, our children begin
> throwing fits at birth! They cry/scream/fuss for every need to be
> fulfill -- and we (very rightly) pander to those needs, usually when they
> throw the "fit". So is it any wonder that, as they mature and develop
more
> rational thinking, that they would begin to experiment with INTENTIONAL
> crying/fits? That she's doing it "this early" is (IMHO) simply another
sign
> that you are under-estimating her intelligence!
>
> >>Bottom line...If you find it too much trouble/too much effort, now, to
> raise
> >>your child to be reasoning and responsible...what does it say about how
> you
> >>will raise them when they are 4, or 7, or 12.
> >
> >Too much trouble? No. Unreasonable to expect immediate results? Yes.
> Frankly, we can't really expect immediate results from adults!
>
> >She'll
> >become a reasoning and responsible child with time.
>
> Sounds like she already IS developing those faculties, you're just not
> seeing them because you're not looking.
>
> >But right now, she's an
> >innocent child with no concept of danger.
>
> Again, she may not have an ADULT'S full conceptualization of danger...but
> I'm sure she does understand on a rudimentary level.
>
> >And until she develops the ability to
> >understand,
> She won't until YOU help her to!
>
>
> Carolyn
I have a question for you Carolyn, how many children do you have??? Did you
or do you ever have to take them somewhere alone??? How old where your kids
when you started letting them walk for themselves instead of putting them in
carts or strollers??
>
>
>
Mouse
>
>
> mgord...@my-deja.com wrote in message <85nh27$1da$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
> >Carolyn, clearly, you have not dealt with multiple small children. When
> >you have a baby in the carriage, and a toddler and a preschooler on
> >foot, controlling their impulsive behaviour adequately is not that
> >simple.
>
>
> Asumptions, assumptions! More than 70% of the time, when I am out of the
> house it is with a 4 month old and a 3 yr old.
>
> >Your choice can be stay home until everyone's behaviour is perfect, or
> >use leashes in certain situations. In my case, if I wanted to go
> >shopping or take them to the park in our inner city neighbourhood, I
> >didn't have many alternatives.
>
>
> Did I say we stay at home...on the contrary, I believe I said that we are
> out of the house, in public, running errands (or such) almost every day of
> the week. What I said was that I restricted my son to the STROLLER, and
was
> WILLING to go to the extreme of cutting off all errands to take him home
if
> he would not stop poor behavior.
>
> >Safety ought to be the bottom line.
>
>
> Did I say it shouldn't be?
>
> >You should think more carefully before you make such unkind comments.
>
> What did I say that was unkind?
>
> >Not everyone has only one child at a time to deal with.
>
> No, and I don't, either. But, unless you have twins/triplets/etc. You DO
> have JUST ONE for at least 9 months...
>
> If you are firm rules at home, and enforce the consistently, and expect
> obedience (commensurate with age) THERE, it will lead to the same
obedience
> OUTSIDE the home.
> >Not everyone
> >lives in a great neighbourhood.
>
> Very true...are you assuming that I DO...I certainly was not assuming the
> reverse!
>
> >Kids on foot can twist out of your
> >hands and dash off in a flash, and if you have a baby and another child
> >with you, you can't always dash off and catch them before they are
> >exposed to dangers - i.e. if the toddler lets go of the carriage and
> >takes off running, do I leave the baby and the preschooler so I can
> >sprint after him?
>
> Also valid, but I never said anything about a TETHER being a bad thing,
just
> a LEASH!
> (In case you didn't catch my other post, a tether is similar to a leash,
but
> only about a foot in length, and is for the express purpose of keeping the
> child close, in just such a situation (when you can't trust them, or
they're
> too young to hold hands consistently, and you can't put them in the
> stroller, for one reason or the other.)
>
Well where I live the only thing you can buy it a harnass and leash. The
leash is about 2 feet long. It is not called a tether. I use a tether for
my dog when we do to the cabin because it doesn't have a fence. It has a
long spike you put in the ground and a nylon rope you attach to the dog. I
would never ues a TETHER on you daughter!!! That would be cruel.
Remember something Carolyn, not everyone her is from the same country or
contintent for that matter. We may use different words for the same thing.
What you call a tether is what I call a leash. To me a tether is something
you use for a dog if you don't have a fence.
Mouse
>
> Carolyn
>
>
.
> just
> > a LEASH!
> > (In case you didn't catch my other post, a tether is similar to a leash,
> but
> > only about a foot in length, and is for the express purpose of keeping
the
> > child close, in just such a situation (when you can't trust them, or
> they're
> > too young to hold hands consistently, and you can't put them in the
> > stroller, for one reason or the other.)
> >
> Well where I live the only thing you can buy it a harnass and leash. The
> leash is about 2 feet long. It is not called a tether. I use a tether
for
> my dog when we do to the cabin because it doesn't have a fence. It has a
> long spike you put in the ground and a nylon rope you attach to the dog.
I
> would never ues a TETHER on you daughter!!! That would be cruel.
>
> Remember something Carolyn, not everyone her is from the same country or
> contintent for that matter. We may use different words for the same
thing.
> What you call a tether is what I call a leash. To me a tether is
something
> you use for a dog if you don't have a fence.
Yep, a tether is to restrict to around a fixed spot, a leash is to lead and
keep within a certain distance. Just check any dictionary: I do not expect
differences between countries.
George Antony
--------------------
If mailing me, please add .AU to end of return address
Sorry about the hassle, this is to reduce my spam intake
Marie
Mouse wrote in message ...
I'm not Carolyn but I'll answer your questions. And I
don't believe in using a leash lol.
>I have a question for you Carolyn, how many children
do you have???
I have 2 kids who are 17 months apart.
Did you
>or do you ever have to take them somewhere alone???
I have always taken them out alone. Most of the time by
choice, not because I had to. I still do take them out
every Friday to the mall and out to eat lunch.
How old where your kids
>when you started letting them walk for themselves
instead of putting them in
>carts or strollers??
When they learned how to walk is when I started letting
them walk. I never used strollers. I held my oldest
child even while I was pregnant.
I guess I am what you call strong-willed. I prefer
doing things the "hard" way. (seems like that's what
people think it is)
I have always enjoyed taking my girls out, from the
time they are a few weeks old. I've never had a problem
with them. Never seen the point of using a leash. The
thought of it disgusts me actually. My daughters hold
my hand and somehow they have learned not to run away.
I was in McD's once and saw a woman with twins who were
bigger than my then-4 year old and had them on leashes.
That was an awful sight to see. Inside a store, on
leashes! She kept their leashes on them the whole time
they were eating and the way out to the car. It was
weird.
I don't know why I can't stand them. I guess since I
have somehow taught my kids not to run away and can
handle them both alone, I don't understand why other
parents can't do this also. But I realize every
situation is different. Some parents may have health
problems keeping them from being able to handle their
children in public. If that was my case, I'd not go out
in public with the children or without someone to help
me.
Marie
http://go.to/mommydowis
Mouse
Marie <mommy...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nvdh4.14641$pb2.1...@tw11.nn.bcandid.com...
>
> Mouse wrote in message ...
>
>
>
> I'm not Carolyn but I'll answer your questions. And I
> don't believe in using a leash lol.
>
> do you have???
>
>
> >or do you ever have to take them somewhere alone???
>
> choice, not because I had to. I still do take them out
> every Friday to the mall and out to eat lunch.
>
> >when you started letting them walk for themselves
> instead of putting them in
> >carts or strollers??
>
I only use the leash part at the zoo and the museum to keep her for going
too close to the cages and to keep her from crawling into the displays where
I might not be able to reach her. I put the harnass part on her at the mall
because for me it is easier to grab if she takes off on me. I would rather
grab that than her arm, I wouldn't want to accidentaly hurt her or
something.
Tim Calvert
says...
>
> .
> .
> .
>and clothes for her). She was wearing the harnass, and a store clerk
>grabbed her by it. I don't use the leash part, just the harnass, I would
>rather have to grab her by that than risk an injuring to her arm or
>shoulder.
Just to be a bit of a nit-picker, if you have the leash attached to the halter,
pulling on the leash will do no harm to her arm or shoulder. It will be the
same as pulling on the halter. And it also allows you to always be holding it
and have no need to suddenly grab her.
Jim
wrote:
>che...@videon.wave.ca says...
>> My mother bought me a harnass for her, it has been a lifesaver
>> a couple of times. She almost walked away with a stranger
>> after running away from me
. . . .
>> She was wearing the harnass, and a store clerk
>>grabbed her by it. I don't use the leash part, just the harnass, I would
>>rather have to grab her by that than risk an injuring to her arm or
>>shoulder.
>
>Just to be a bit of a nit-picker, if you have the leash attached to the halter,
>pulling on the leash will do no harm to her arm or shoulder. It will be the
>same as pulling on the halter. And it also allows you to always be holding it
>and have no need to suddenly grab her.
I guess not being able to stop a child w/o removing an arm should be
added to the list of potential pros. Offset of course by the
increased ease of strange abduction due to the fact the child now
comes with "handles."
Perhaps the fact that leashes have been used for "thousands of years"
can be proven by the lack of massive archeological finds of one armed
children.
--
Jim
clearly bored. . . .
Tim Calvert
ji...@nospam.ix.netcom.com says...
>
>I guess not being able to stop a child w/o removing an arm should be
>added to the list of potential pros. Offset of course by the
>increased ease of strange abduction due to the fact the child now
>comes with "handles."
I'm not sure this was meant as a serious response, but just in case it was....
How do you figure having a leash/halter increases the ease of abductions?
Children already have plenty of "handles" - arms, belts, whatever. And if
you're using a leash (a) the child shouldn't be far enough away from you to be
abducted or (b) if someone grabs the child, you'll know it immediately.
Tim Calvert
horrible and I sometimes think we don't receive half the messages that are
actually being posted. I didn't know about the below response to my previous
message until I saw it quoted in the message I've responded to here. (And
before someone suggests deja.com, I tried that and it didn't have any more
messages on it than my server has.)
In article <rG6h4.2118$9d6....@typhoon.mbnet.mb.ca>, che...@videon.wave.ca
says...
>
>
>CAROLYN EVANS <EVANS-...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>news:85s9bd$2ci4$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>
>> That's very true...but the ONLY thing a leash REALLY prevents is the child
>> going farther away from you than the length of the lead. It does NOT
>> relieve you of the responsibility of watching the child EVERY SECOND. It
>> only takes that long for the child, not even at the end of their lead, to
>> grab something toxic, or too small and shove it in their mouth...then
>where
>> are you?
I really don't understand this argument. You seem to be implying that using a
leash makes it more likely that a child will get into trouble. Oh, that's
right. You equate leash use with inattentiveness on the part of the parent.
Whether using a leash or a stroller or just holding your child's hand, you have
the same "responsibility of watching the child EVERY SECOND." No, a leash by
itself will not keep a child out of trouble any more than using a stroller
will. But having the leash AND paying attention to the child makes it easier
than just having the child walk along with you, whether you're holding hands or
not. A child can twist out of your hand quite easily, if they really want to.
>>
>> Yet most parents (and, from your response, obvously you do, too) think
>that
>> the lead allows then this freedom--to take their "eyes off the road" for a
>> second...
>>
No, I didn't say it allows the parents any such freedom. I said it helps the
parent keep the child from running off or getting hurt during the inevitable
lapses in attention. NO parent, no matter how diligent, can watch a child every
second. If you claim otherwise, you're deceiving yourself.
>> This is one of the reasons I feel that (most) parents who use a leash are
>to
>> some extent lazy, and trying to absolve themselves of some of the
>> responsibilities of letting a child roam "freely".
>>
Because you apparently don't believe that a repsonsible parent would ever use a
leash - which is an insult to those of us who do.
I said in my previous post:
>> >I think leashes are a safety net used by logical parents who recognize
>the
>> >inevitability of children misbehaving,
>>
>> Assuming that is the case, then what do you do when the leashed child DOES
>> misbehave, touch something they've been told not to, break something, etc?
>> Carrying them consigns the parent to a sort of punishment, or may not be a
>> viable option (depending on how heavy the child is), so do you resort,
>then
>> to corporal punishment?
First, no, I don't resort to corporal punishment. But beyond that, the response
would depend entirely on the situation, on the child, and on the parent. What
do you do if your child misbehaves while he's walking with you, assuming you
don't also have the stroller around. Or do you never go anywhere without the
stroller? If you use the stroller as your punishment, wouldn't that cause the
child to eventually equate "stroller" with "punishment" and never want to get
in the stoller again? Or perhaps you don't see that as a problem.
Next, just because I'm using the leash, doesn't mean I don't also have the
stroller at hand. And if I don't have the stroller, I'd be carrying my daughter
to begin with, so if I put her down to let her run around a bit on the leash,
and she misbehaves, forcing me to pick her up again, I haven't lost anything.
However, so far, my daughter has never had the opportunity to misbehave to the
point of requiring any punishment. If she starts to touch something she
shouldn't or go somewhere she shouldn't, I stop her - *because I'm paying close
attention to what she's doing*. ("Watching her like a hawk" is a phrase that
comes to mind.)
>> >I do not treat my child like a dog. I do everything in my power (and
>within
>> my
>> >financial resources) to keep my daughter safe. A leash is an inexpensive
>> safety
>> >measure I can take until my daughter is better able to understand the
>> dangers
>> >of the world she lives in.
>>
>>
>> Yes, and that is exactly what a dog owner is doing...so, whether YOU like
>> the connotation or not, you are treating your daughter just as I (or any
>> other dog owner) treat our canine companions.
>>
Using a leash to keep my daughter out of trouble is no different than holding
her hand to keep her out of trouble - except that it's more comfortable for us
both and allows her to explore a little more freely. The connotation of
"treating her like a dog" is entirely in your mind.
>> They don't HAVE to be able to list/understand the dangers (yes, please
>> explain to them!) they only have to learn that it is a "NO!"
>>
Correct. And while she's learning what those NO's are, the leash keeps her from
running into something new that she hasn't seen before. And right now, there's
a lot more that she hasn't seen than she has.
>> >They also might have a different
>> >concept of what's "too far." And I don't believe she's ready yet for
>> estimating
>> >how far 6 feet is.
>>
>> Neither to I, but I would bet that she can tell where the aisle you're in
>> ends! And, although I would not, and do not, expect my son to form a
>valid
>> conceptualization or make a value judgement about where "too far" is, he
>> does know to come back when Mommy says "you're getting 'too far'", or
>> "You're almost to where I can't see you" when we're in a situation where
>> there aren't aisles. We can do this because, when he was first getting
>> down, I never took my eyes completely off him.
>>
I'm not so sure my daughter would even understand "You're getting too far."
Perhaps I should include a little more information. My daughter is growing up
in a bi-lingual household. (My wife is Indonesian.) Because my wife is home
with her all day, she's learning Indonesian a little faster than she's learning
English. Bi-lingual children tend to start talking later. Their vocabulary is
about the same as other children their age, but some of their words are in one
language and some in the other. So simple commands that a 15-month-old,
single-language child would understand might be too complex for a bi-lingual
child the same age.
This goes along with the previously-mentioned (by several posters) concept of
"not all children are the same." It's also why I don't think my daughter is
ready yet for explanations of "rights and privileges" (with or without those
actual terms) while another her age might be.
>> >And even when a child is old enough to understand, they still can lose
>> track of
>> >where they are and where the dangers are if they're, for example,
>following
>> >that interesting bug on the floor, or chasing that butterfly.
>>
>> Very true, but if that is the case, then you don't let them get down to
>> begin with.
>>
But if you let them down on a leash, then they can explore and get the lessons
they need to *learn* to be more attentive. And are you claiming that your
3-year-old *never* loses track of where he is and gets a little too far away? I
hope not, because your story in another post about losing him in Target proves
that is not true. Not that I intend or expect to be using a leash when my
daughter is 3. But she's not even close.
>> >I'm sorry, but I don't believe the concepts of rights and privileges are
>> within
>> >the grasp of a 15-month-old.
>>
>>
>> You don't give your daughter enough credit. If she does not understand,
>> then you have not taken the time to teach her.
>>
See previous paragraph discussing bi-lingual children.
>> It is a very simple concept. I'm sure (at least I hope) that she
>> understands that she does not ALWAYS get EVERYTHING she wants. And I'm
Yes, I believe she does understand that she doesn't always get what she wants.
Her whining for things generally stop when I point to what she's wanting and
say "This? No, you can't have this right now." (With or without an accompanying
explanation of why.) But I don't think that directly relates to understanding
what's a right and what's a privilege.
And I have no idea how it relates to your obvious disdain for using a leash.
>> >Hey, she's learning that throwing a hissy fit *anywhere* (including at
>> home)
>> >won't get her what she wants. And she's picking up on that very quickly
>> because
>> >my wife and I have never given in to her fits
>>
>> That's great!
>>
>> >(which she started a lot sooner
>> >than I was expecting).
>>
>> Are you kidding? Although COMPLETELY UN-intentional, our children begin
>> throwing fits at birth! They cry/scream/fuss for every need to be
>> fulfill -- and we (very rightly) pander to those needs, usually when they
I think you and I differ on our definition of "throwing a fit". I don't
consider crying because she has some need (and for at least the first few
months, there's really not much difference between wants and needs) the same as
consciously throwing herself on the ground, kicking and screaming, because I
wouldn't pick her up when she wanted me to.
>> throw the "fit". So is it any wonder that, as they mature and develop
>more
>> rational thinking, that they would begin to experiment with INTENTIONAL
>> crying/fits? That she's doing it "this early" is (IMHO) simply another
>sign
>> that you are under-estimating her intelligence!
>>
I don't consider it "early" at 15 months. I was pretty surprised when she did
it at somewhere around 10 months. Perhaps I was mistaken. I don't consider that
under-estimating her intelligence, but rather the result of my inexperience at
dealing with children.
>> >>Bottom line...If you find it too much trouble/too much effort, now, to
>> raise
>> >>your child to be reasoning and responsible...what does it say about how
>> you
>> >>will raise them when they are 4, or 7, or 12.
>> >
>> >Too much trouble? No. Unreasonable to expect immediate results? Yes.
>> Frankly, we can't really expect immediate results from adults!
So why is it wrong of me to protect my child as much as possible until she
*does* learn?
>>
>> >She'll
>> >become a reasoning and responsible child with time.
>>
>> Sounds like she already IS developing those faculties, you're just not
>> seeing them because you're not looking.
>>
Developing, yes. But they're not fully developed yet. And why should I not take
extra precautions to keep her safe until they are?
>> >But right now, she's an
>> >innocent child with no concept of danger.
>>
>> Again, she may not have an ADULT'S full conceptualization of danger...but
>> I'm sure she does understand on a rudimentary level.
>>
I'm not so sure I agree with that. Unless she's experienced the consequences of
some dangerous act, how can she know it's dangerous? No matter how many times
you may tell a young child (as in 15 months or so) not to do something because
it's dangerous, they can't really understand it fully until they've dealt with
the consequences. I've lost count of how many times she's bent over to pick
something up when she was standing too close to a table and bumped her head on
the table. But even with those experiences to teach her, she still does it. She
did it just last night, in fact. I realize that's a relatively minor danger,
but it's obviously an experience she doesn't like (since she cries every time
it happens), but she still keeps doing it, which shows that she's not yet able
to fully relate an act to a consequence.
And I'd rather she not experience any more of those consequences than
necessary.
>> >And until she develops the ability to
>> >understand,
>> She won't until YOU help her to!
>>
And you assume that because I use a leash, I'm obviously not doing that, right?
This prejudice against such a simple thing is difficult to reason with. I keep
trying, but it doesn't seem to do much good.
>I have a question for you Carolyn, how many children do you have??? Did you
>or do you ever have to take them somewhere alone??? How old where your kids
>when you started letting them walk for themselves instead of putting them in
>carts or strollers??
Just for the record, I don't think the number of children really has anything
to do with it. Using a leash is just a simple way of improving my child's
safety.
Carolyn, I believe, also doesn't think the number of children has anything to
do with it. She thinks it's wrong to use a leash. Period. No exceptions.
Jim
>I'm not sure this was meant as a serious response, but just in case it was....
>
>How do you figure having a leash/halter increases the ease of abductions?
>Children already have plenty of "handles" - arms, belts, whatever. And if
Apparently not enough to allow a store clerk to stop a child and save
a life ;-)
>you're using a leash (a) the child shouldn't be far enough away from you to be
>abducted or (b) if someone grabs the child, you'll know it immediately.
Unless they carry leash cutters in their back pockets. That's why I
recommend the krypton leashes. Guaranteed to stop abductors leash
cutters or free child replacement. Except in NY city if you read the
fine print.
--
Jim
(Bike lock manufacture's sometimes exempt NYC from their replacement
guarantee's. . . .)
mull...@ex-pressnet.com
stroller for up to three hours to be far more "crule and unusual" than
allowing him or her the freedom of a leash
Barb
On Sun, 16 Jan 2000 01:46:37 -0000, "CAROLYN EVANS"
<EVANS-...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>
>Rachel Boeckenhauer wrote in message <85ku66$1ut$1...@joe.rice.edu>...
>>Carolyn:
>>Not all children are this tolerant.
>
>Then they need to become that tolerant! The parent is in charge, and if the
>answer is "No, you may NOT get down", then they need to learn to live with
>that! And, the only way that will happen is if the parent toes the line and
>does not give in to begging, cajoling, whining and pitching a hissy fit in
>public.
>
>My son is almost two, and while I have
>>ALWAYS strapped him into high chairs, strollers, shopping carts, etc. for
>>safety while he is in them, he is now old enough to wiggle out of most of
>>these straps if he wants down. And he is very energetic, so this happens
>>often. Mind you, I don't LET him run off -- I will let him down to walk
>when
>>he wants, and if he does not walk nicely, help push the shopping cart,
>etc.,
>>then he gets picked up and put back in the cart or carried.
>
>EXACLTY my point!
>
>>Also, note that this is not such a big deal when my husband and I are out
>>TOGETHER. I don't know if you are a stay-at-home-mom or not, but if you
>are
>>shopping ALONE with your kids very much, I think this would be of an issue.
>
>
>I do go shopping alone with him, almost every time, and (with one
>significant exception - see my other post tonight) he is very well behaved
>and knows what the rules are.
>
>: Treating your child like a dog is not necessary. Even at 15 months (and
>>: earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog --
mull...@ex-pressnet.com
a leash (at that time we were in eyrope and they werent as popular
here),...but then I also said I would "nevr" say.."because I said so
(or because Im the mom..)" however, then I had a middle schooler and
the second never also went out the window
I considered my leash/harness a godsend. Neither of my children were
sitters. If we went out in a stroller, after an hour at most, they
were cranky and fussy. The leash allowed them to exercise their legs,
and be naturally curious, but still be near mom and dad. We live in
places where we do a LOT of walking and quite frankly, holding hands
can become uncomfortable. My leaning down, the poor kid walking with
her arm up over her had, and in the hot weater all that sweat. I took
her to fairs, downtown at the mall in dc, zoos and literally tons of
places. she could walk, and explore, but still be safe. Although I
rarely took my attentionfrom her, any kind of pressure at all on th
eleash also brought me to attention in therms of "stranger danger". I
never, in all the time she was on the leash, had a panic attack.
If you live in a more country environment, or you have a child that
will sit in a stroller for long periods of time you may not have this
problem. In our area, also, there are lots of non-stroller museums
and sighseeing places, and when my kids got passed the backpack, the
leash was super duper
Barb
On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 10:57:48 -0800, Rhonda <51...@whoever.com> wrote:
>Before I had my son, I remember saying "I would *NEVER* put my kid on a
>leash".. I thought they were ridiculous, to treat your child like an animal..
>and have said many bad things about them-
>
>but since he has been born, I have been singing a different tune.
>
>I have never put my son on a leash, and personally, I would rather *not* but
>I can completely understand why other people do.
>
>My son would never go for it anyway, because I can't get him into a shirt
>that he does not want to wear, let alone something as strapping as a
>harness.. I prefer to have my husband with me, so one of us is always there
>to watch him closely when he wants to go *exploring*..
>
>Rhonda
>
>
>Jim wrote:
>
>> Mary Ann Tuli <tu...@ebi.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >What is the difference between making the decision to harness your child
>> >in a stroller and harness your child in a leash?
>>
>> Strollers are meant to move your young child around easily while the
>> adult goes to do their thing. The harness in the stroller is meant to
>> prevent your child from falling out.
>>
>> >Isn't using a leash more work than using a stroller? You are not
>> >meant to drag the child around, but let them walk on their own
>> >under your guidance.
>>
>> Perhaps this hits on my uneasiness with child leashes. Even with a
>> pet, the leash is not to be used to pull the owner around or effect
>> his path. A properly trained pet will not strain at the leash or
>> wander off. Children are every bit as bright and "trainable" as any
>> pet.
>>
>> This isn't to say leashes don't work. Certainly they keep your child
>> close by as intended and thousands hang on tightly while "walking"
>> their dogs. I'm just not convinced it's the best way. (Even owners
>> of well trained pets are usually required to leash up - more for the
>> comfort of others.) It simply falls under the YMMV m.k. category. . .
>>
>> --
>> Jim
>
>--
>Y2K? Because *one* K just isn't enough.
>
>
mull...@ex-pressnet.com
Actually with a harness tyle leash that is attached to my wrish, the
risk of abduction decreases, as mentioned in an earlier post..the guy
isnt gonna get my child without draggin me along. You cant just
"unhook" without my feeling immediate pressure, and the time it would
take is too long. My child runs a higher risk of abduction by walking
and letting loose of my hand for two seconds, or sitting in a stroller
whie I peruse aisles
Barb
On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 13:21:13 -0500, Jim <ji...@nospam.ix.netcom.com>
wrote:
>On 19 Jan 2000 13:26:18 -0500, cal...@marshall.edu (Tim Calvert)
>wrote:
>
>>che...@videon.wave.ca says...
>>> My mother bought me a harnass for her, it has been a lifesaver
>>> a couple of times. She almost walked away with a stranger
>>> after running away from me
>. . . .
>>> She was wearing the harnass, and a store clerk
>>>grabbed her by it. I don't use the leash part, just the harnass, I would
>>>rather have to grab her by that than risk an injuring to her arm or
>>>shoulder.
>>
>>Just to be a bit of a nit-picker, if you have the leash attached to the halter,
>>pulling on the leash will do no harm to her arm or shoulder. It will be the
>>same as pulling on the halter. And it also allows you to always be holding it
>>and have no need to suddenly grab her.
>
>I guess not being able to stop a child w/o removing an arm should be
>added to the list of potential pros. Offset of course by the
>increased ease of strange abduction due to the fact the child now
>comes with "handles."
>
mull...@ex-pressnet.com
attention to my child as when we hold hands. I consider the primary
advantage to be to the child, not to the parent. If gives my child a
feeling of control, freedom and excercise (I agree one hundred percent
with whoever posted earlier..its a sin to walk all day long, have had
the child sitting, go home and be pooped, and theyre ready to do the
mile).. We do ALOT of walking and exploring, I am not just taling
about chores here, and in this way my child has some freedom, but I am
still inc control. Plus which, after sticking an arm overhead for
half an hour, my kids were stressed o ut at the amount of walking.
As far as the touching issue, my children know the rules. If they dont
follow them, then the next time we have a fun outing or go to the
store (which they like) they will have to stay with a sitter or the
parent staying home, depending on the issue. This issue is totally
irrelevant in my opinion from the stroller issue, because kids in
strollers and carts should have been taught not to touch as well.
of course I dont take my kids into china shops as a rule, I go
bymyself
Barb
On Sun, 16 Jan 2000 03:14:49 -0000, "CAROLYN EVANS"
<EVANS-...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>
>Tim Calvert wrote in message <387e226f$1...@206.212.27.20>...
>>In article <85kb4t$2048$2...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>,
>>EVANS-...@prodigy.net says...
>>But when we decide it's safe to let her down, we feel it's much safer
>>to have a leash on her. No parent, no matter how diligent, can keep their
>eyes
>>and attention on their child every second any more than you can keep your
>eyes
>>and attention fully on the road every second when you're driving. It
>doesn't
>>take long for a toddler to get into some serious trouble.
>
>That's very true...but the ONLY thing a leash REALLY prevents is the child
>going farther away from you than the length of the lead. It does NOT
>relieve you of the responsibility of watching the child EVERY SECOND. It
>only takes that long for the child, not even at the end of their lead, to
>grab something toxic, or too small and shove it in their mouth...then where
>are you?
>
>Yet most parents (and, from your response, obvously you do, too) think that
>the lead allows then this freedom--to take their "eyes off the road" for a
>second...
>
>This is one of the reasons I feel that (most) parents who use a leash are to
>some extent lazy, and trying to absolve themselves of some of the
>responsibilities of letting a child roam "freely".
>
>How many times have
>>you heard (or read in the newspaper) a grieving parent say "I only turned
>my
>>back for a second." I, for one, don't want to be in the position of having
>to
>>say that.
>>
>>I think leashes are a safety net used by logical parents who recognize the
>>inevitability of children misbehaving,
>
>Assuming that is the case, then what do you do when the leashed child DOES
>misbehave, touch something they've been told not to, break something, etc?
>Carrying them consigns the parent to a sort of punishment, or may not be a
>viable option (depending on how heavy the child is), so do you resort, then
>to corporal punishment?
>>I do not treat my child like a dog. I do everything in my power (and within
>my
>>financial resources) to keep my daughter safe. A leash is an inexpensive
>safety
>>measure I can take until my daughter is better able to understand the
>dangers
>>of the world she lives in.
>
>
>Yes, and that is exactly what a dog owner is doing...so, whether YOU like
>the connotation or not, you are treating your daughter just as I (or any
>other dog owner) treat our canine companions.
>
>
>
>>>Even at 15 months (and
>>>earlier) your child is more intelligent than even the smartest dog -- give
>>>them the credit they deserve.
>>
>>I think my child is very intelligent. But even the most intelligent
>>15-month-old can't understand all the dangers of getting too far from Mommy
>or
>>Daddy, no matter how often you tell them.
>
>They don't HAVE to be able to list/understand the dangers (yes, please
>explain to them!) they only have to learn that it is a "NO!"
>
>>They also might have a different
>>concept of what's "too far." And I don't believe she's ready yet for
>estimating
>>how far 6 feet is.
>
>Neither to I, but I would bet that she can tell where the aisle you're in
>ends! And, although I would not, and do not, expect my son to form a valid
>conceptualization or make a value judgement about where "too far" is, he
>does know to come back when Mommy says "you're getting 'too far'", or
>"You're almost to where I can't see you" when we're in a situation where
>there aren't aisles. We can do this because, when he was first getting
>down, I never took my eyes completely off him.
>
>>And even when a child is old enough to understand, they still can lose
>track of
>>where they are and where the dangers are if they're, for example, following
>>that interesting bug on the floor, or chasing that butterfly.
>
>Very true, but if that is the case, then you don't let them get down to
>begin with.
>
>>I'm sorry, but I don't believe the concepts of rights and privileges are
>within
>>the grasp of a 15-month-old.
>
>
>You don't give your daughter enough credit. If she does not understand,
>then you have not taken the time to teach her.
>
>It is a very simple concept. I'm sure (at least I hope) that she
>understands that she does not ALWAYS get EVERYTHING she wants. And I'm sure
>(again, at least I hope) that she is disciplined for poor behavior and
>rewarded for the good. That is all there is to the concepts of rights and
>priviledges...all you have to do is use the terms with her. All you have to
>do, next time she whines for something she's not going to get, like candy in
>the check out line, explain to her that she isn't always going to get sweets
>whenever she wants...that it's not a right. Now, getting her diaper changed
>when it's dirty -- that's a right. Any time it's dirty, she gets changed.
>Candy, on the other hand, is a priviledge...something you EARN. Maybe next
>time, if she behaves well for the entire shopping trip, and has eaten a good
>(lunch/dinner, etc. - my son knew the word protien at that age, so that is
>what we used with him) then she will have earned the PRIVILEDGE of having
>candy.
>
>All you have to do, with almost any word or concept, is find a way of
>breaking it down and applying it at a level that will make sense to the
>child.
>
>>Hey, she's learning that throwing a hissy fit *anywhere* (including at
>home)
>>won't get her what she wants. And she's picking up on that very quickly
>because
>>my wife and I have never given in to her fits
>
>That's great!
>
>>(which she started a lot sooner
>>than I was expecting).
>
>Are you kidding? Although COMPLETELY UN-intentional, our children begin
>throwing fits at birth! They cry/scream/fuss for every need to be
>fulfill -- and we (very rightly) pander to those needs, usually when they
>throw the "fit". So is it any wonder that, as they mature and develop more
>rational thinking, that they would begin to experiment with INTENTIONAL
>crying/fits? That she's doing it "this early" is (IMHO) simply another sign
>that you are under-estimating her intelligence!
>
>>>Bottom line...If you find it too much trouble/too much effort, now, to
>raise
>>>your child to be reasoning and responsible...what does it say about how
>you
>>>will raise them when they are 4, or 7, or 12.
>>
>>Too much trouble? No. Unreasonable to expect immediate results? Yes.
>Frankly, we can't really expect immediate results from adults!
>
>>She'll
>>become a reasoning and responsible child with time.
>
>Sounds like she already IS developing those faculties, you're just not
>seeing them because you're not looking.
>
>>But right now, she's an
>>innocent child with no concept of danger.
>
>Again, she may not have an ADULT'S full conceptualization of danger...but
>I'm sure she does understand on a rudimentary level.
>
>>And until she develops the ability to
>>understand,
>She won't until YOU help her to!
>
>
>
>Carolyn
>
>
mull...@ex-pressnet.com
all
Secondly, I dont use it for costco and target, I do it mainly for long
outings such as to the zoo, the craft fair, and other things,
Thirdly, carrying the child again defeats the goal of letting the
child get ecercise. If I carried my child for three or four hours, at
the end of the day I would be pooped and he would be energized. I
believe children should get as much walking as possible, and this is
the way we do it
Barb
On 12 Jan 2000 06:45:47 GMT, c...@ugcs.caltech.edu (Corinna Esmeralda
Schultz) wrote:
>
>I'm curious as to why no one has said anything about carrying the child.
>Is it just me? My son started walking at 10 months or so, but I always
>carried him around except when we walked across the street to visit or
>to the mailbox or around the block (to give him practice walking, mostly).
>I would never let a child that young walk freely in a store or anywhere
>where he might possibly get hurt. Someone wrote about their kid running
>off in a parking lot, I think. I would pick up my son from the carseat
>and just carry him to the store or wherever.
>
>I almost always used either a sling or backpack to carry him, since it is
>a strain on the arms and back to just hold a child that heavy. But even
>now, at 32 pounds, I put him in the backpack when we go to CostCo just
>because it's so busy and chaotic. When we go to Target, he faithfully
>follws me, or lets me hold his hand. Occasionally he'll even hold my
>jacket if my arms are full.
>
>He is very energetic in his play and definitely not a placid child, but
>I think he's learned by now (25 months) that he's supposed to stay with
>me, and that when we're on the sidewalk or in the street (including
>parking lots) he's supposed to hold my hand, or I'll carry him.
>
>I know that since he's my only child, that it's different from when there
>are multiple children, but when the new baby comes (due in June), he'll
>either use a stroller, get left at home with me husband, or he'll have
>learned to walk holding my hand consistently without wanting to be picked
>up. (The baby will be in the sling until he/she learns to walk well, as
>I did with my son.) Sure it's tiring, but I thought he was heavy when
>he was born (9.5 lbs), and I've been saying ever since "Boy you're heavy!".
>I guess the constant weight lifting makes one stronger. :) (He did require
>a lot of holding just around the house, too, btw. The sling and the
>backpack were real sanity savers!)
>
>I'm not intending to come across as agressive or anything, so please don't
>take my writing that way. I don't write very subtly. :) I'm just curious
>that no one seems to have done what I considered to be so natural.
>
>-Corinna Schultz
Tim Calvert
ji...@nospam.ix.netcom.com says...
>
>cal...@marshall.edu (Tim Calvert) wrote:
>
>>I'm not sure this was meant as a serious response, but just in case it
was....
>>
>>How do you figure having a leash/halter increases the ease of abductions?
>>Children already have plenty of "handles" - arms, belts, whatever. And if
>
>Apparently not enough to allow a store clerk to stop a child and save
>a life ;-)
>
>>you're using a leash (a) the child shouldn't be far enough away from you to
be
>>abducted or (b) if someone grabs the child, you'll know it immediately.
>
>Unless they carry leash cutters in their back pockets. That's why I
>recommend the krypton leashes. Guaranteed to stop abductors leash
>cutters or free child replacement. Except in NY city if you read the
>fine print.
Ah. I get it. It's a joke. :-) It's not always easy to tell. After all, if
someone can seriously say using a leash automatically means the parents aren't
paying any attention to the child......