homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Helicopter parents are harming their kids. Stop it! (Page 3)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Helicopter parents are harming their kids. Stop it!
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715

 - Posted      Profile for ExclamationMark   Email ExclamationMark   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Chorister, that is a standard safeguarding requirement for youth groups. We have parents of Guides (aged 10-14) dropping children off in the car park and sailing off elsewhere, without checking to see if the kids get in. Which when we take the Guides to other places could mean a 10 year old standing in a busy car park for 90 minutes in the dark. The car park next to a recreation ground where the older teenagers hang out together, some playing sport, some taking drugs and drinking.

It's a standard form.

Mind you. I'd have wished for a bit of helicopter parenting (or at least a bit of reasonable attention) a couple of days ago. I was driving past a church hall at around 4.30 where there was some kind of children's activity going on ..... a gate opens and a child (about 6 years old) bolts straight out across an 8 foot pavement and onto a busy road, no adult in sight at the gate. Fortunately I'd been slowed well below the usual and legal 30 mph but it still meant a sudden stop. A close one as the aged P (85) in the front seat acknowledged.

Helicopter parenting may be one extreme, laissez faire is another - which is why we have so many risk assessments around. It's a lurch from extreme to extreme

Change the circumstances slightly: I am not slowed, I am arriving earlier by the hall, I am not driving close to the middle of the road (parked car) by 2 feet from the kerb as prescribed by road conditions and the Highway Code. If I hit the child who will get the rap? Me and my nasty car. Not the parent, not the "responsible" person, not the failed gatekeeper: me.

It happened once before: driving past a school at less than 10 mph (you couldn't do any faster) and a child ran out between 2 parked cars right in front of me. I don't know how I stopped even at 1- mph but I did - cue mum to ring the Police. Cue Policeman about to book me until a parent comes up and tells Mr Plod that the parent was not in control of the child and that she'd seen me stop and start over a 50 yard stretch of road from a minor crossroads owing to cars parking/stopping on double yellows to let children out, people crossing roads etc. Speed beyond 10 mph was actually impossible. I rather suspect my job and career were saved by that honesty.

Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
quote:
Alogon: At the public university where I last worked, a decision was made some years back for all dormitories to be non-smoking. No exceptions. I thought that this decision was terribly discriminatory and unfair to sovereign, taxpaying citizens who chose to engage in a perfectly legal activity, and one unrelated to academic ability. Smoking has become politically incorrect, you know.
Smoking stinks the place out and, as Doc Tor has already pointed out, causes health problems for anyone forced to breathe in the smoke-laden air; serious problems if you're an asthmatic forced to share a room with a smoker.

But the real reason why most public buildings in the UK went smoke-free before it was a legal requirement is that they got a reduction in their fire insurance. Allowing smoking increases the risk of fire. Banning it reduces the overhead even before you factor in the reduced cleaning costs.

Do you believe in the free market or not? You can't have it both ways.

Fuck 'em. Anyone stupid enough to take up smoking in this day and age should deal with their idiocy before trying a college degree if they can't manage their addiction without prejudicing other people's health.

[Helicopter host rescues terminally awful UBB code]

[ 30. September 2015, 07:39: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Chorister

Completely Frocked
# 473

 - Posted      Profile for Chorister   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Mind you. I'd have wished for a bit of helicopter parenting (or at least a bit of reasonable attention) a couple of days ago.


I guess this whole thread hinges on where the balance is between overprotectiveness and neglect. I suspect that the grey area between the two is very wide. But we all recognise the extremes at both ends when they occur - and which both seem very wrong.

--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.

Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Here you are, another age anomaly, taken I admit deliberately to the point of absurdity. As of today it is illegal to smoke in a car in England and Wales with a person under 18 present.
So, 35 year old man with an 18 year old daughter can go out for a drive and puff away to their hearts' content. Man then meets and marries 17 year old girl. Man, daughter, and new wife then go out for drive. Man and daughter light up and they are committing an offence.

--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Here you are, another age anomaly, taken I admit deliberately to the point of absurdity. As of today it is illegal to smoke in a car in England and Wales with a person under 18 present.
So, 35 year old man with an 18 year old daughter can go out for a drive and puff away to their hearts' content. Man then meets and marries 17 year old girl. Man, daughter, and new wife then go out for drive. Man and daughter light up and they are committing an offence.

This can't be an unusual occurrence in jurisdictions where the legal drinking age is 21.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
So, 35 year old man with an 18 year old daughter can go out for a drive and puff away to their hearts' content. Man then meets and marries 17 year old girl. Man, daughter, and new wife then go out for drive. Man and daughter light up and they are committing an offence.

Do you think he has a bit of a problem in entering into relationships when either he or his partner are too young? (Do the maths!) [Devil]

Two points. It is illegal to smoke in a car if someone under 18 is present. So would it be illegal for a 17-year old, driving alone, to light up? (I haven't looked at the legislation to see how it is phrased).

The other issue is enforcement. If it is enforced at all, I guess it will only be when obviously much younger children are present.

Despite its anomalies, I welcome this legislation. I hated being in the car with my parents smoking.

[ 01. October 2015, 09:39: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]

Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
North East Quine

Curious beastie
# 13049

 - Posted      Profile for North East Quine   Email North East Quine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If a 35 year old man has an 18 year old daughter and a 17 year old wife, smoking in a car is the least of his problems.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
If a 35 year old man has an 18 year old daughter and a 17 year old wife, smoking in a car is the least of his problems.

A 17 year old wife and an 18 year old son could be even more of a problem. [Snigger]

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
North East Quine

Curious beastie
# 13049

 - Posted      Profile for North East Quine   Email North East Quine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To return to the infographic included in the OP, one of the symptoms / results of helicopter parenting it gives is: "Millenials are now the most protected and programmed generation in history who talk to their parents on average 8.8 times per week."

The "in history" is of course rubbish; in Victorian times it was usual for adult children to remain in the family home until marriage, handing their pay packets over to the parents. Presumably they spoke to their parents more than 8.8 times per week.

However, if there has been a recent increase in young adults talking to their parents, might this not simply reflect that modern communications make it easier to talk to anybody at a distance?

We get a lot of one-liner communications from our two at Uni. If you include texts / messages on FB, more than 8.8 per week, but this just reflects the ease of sending a text / message / phoning. My generation at Uni had to queue to use a payphone, and have a stack of coins ready to feed it.

It would be unusual for us not to get some form of communication every day from our two, both at Uni, but I think this simply reflects the ease of contact, rather than being symptomatic of "helicopter parenting."

It's a generational shift, rather than anything else.

Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Amorya

Ship's tame galoot
# 2652

 - Posted      Profile for Amorya   Email Amorya   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think there's two questions to ask to see if there is helicopter parenting going on:

  • If their offspring is in a sticky situation, do the parents give advice to said offspring, or do they try to get involved and solve the problem directly?
  • Do the parents keep tabs on their offspring, maybe through having an expectation that the child will keep them informed about what's going on in their life? What happens if they don't hear anything for a bit?

When I went off to uni, I tried to contact my parents very little during the first term. (Sadly I failed almost immediately when the student loans company messed up, and sent a document I needed to my home address rather than my uni address, so I had to phone my parents and get them to forward my post very urgently!)

But after that, I would ask for advice whenever I was confronted by a new situation. In my second year, I was renting a house for the first time, and an unscrupulous estate agent tried to take advantage of me. I went first to the students union advice and welfare service, but I also called my dad to ask his advice on what to do. He dispensed some helpful suggestions, and asked me to let him know how it went.

If he had offered to phone the estate agent on my behalf, it might have been approaching helicopter-ness. If he had insisted on it, it definitely would have been. If it turns out he already knew about my housing situation because he'd insisted on helping me choose where to live in my second year and wanted veto power over all the houses I looked at, that would have been absolutely terrible!

Luckily my dad had more sense than that [Smile]

Posts: 2383 | From: Coventry | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061

 - Posted      Profile for Brenda Clough   Author's homepage   Email Brenda Clough   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If my son (age 26) asks for advice or help I am prompt to reply. Sometimes not helpfully, but I always respond. I make a concerted effort not to offer unsolicited advice. But I would intervene if I felt an appalling error was being made (putting gasoline into a diesel engine, for example). Luckily he is a sensible young man and has mostly got past the age of horrific error. Also, certain areas I have decreed completely off limits. I will not advise on his love life or career choices. All mistakes made there are his own.

--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page

Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged
georgiaboy
Shipmate
# 11294

 - Posted      Profile for georgiaboy   Email georgiaboy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Through all of this I have been reflecting on 'How Times Have Changed,' and not always for the better.

I entered uni (at age 17) in 1957. It was a large, private school approx 500 miles from my home. It was in a large metropolitan area -- my home town had a pop. of 2000. All first-year students were assigned to double-room dormitories -- no choosing of roommates; they were assigned. Bathroom down the hall. No fridge or cooking facilities. Second year one could move to fraternity/sorority house if one was pledged and there was room available. First-years couldn't have cars; second-years could, but they had to be parked at the football stadium (quite a distance away). Meals had to be taken in uni dining rooms, and if you skipped a meal you were charged for it anyway. In fact, you had already paid for it with your tuition at the beginning of the term.

On the plus side, we had (gasp!) maid service! Rooms cleaned and beds made daily.

It was quite a shock when I took my son to uni and saw the condition of his 'suite' shared with 5 others (3 micro-rooms with a common bath).

My parents didn't helicopter, though I was their only child. They dropped me at the dorm, my dad helped me unload the car, and they left. They stayed in town for a few days, and we had church and Sunday dinner together, and that was it.

I likewise didn't helicopter. And no umbilical phoning, either.

Things seem to have worked out well in both generations.

--------------------
You can't retire from a calling.

Posts: 1675 | From: saint meinrad, IN | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
georgiaboy
Shipmate
# 11294

 - Posted      Profile for georgiaboy   Email georgiaboy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Through all of this I have been reflecting on 'How Times Have Changed,' and not always for the better.

I entered uni (at age 17) in 1957. It was a large, private school approx 500 miles from my home. It was in a large metropolitan area -- my home town had a pop. of 2000. All first-year students were assigned to double-room dormitories -- no choosing of roommates; they were assigned. Bathroom down the hall. No fridge or cooking facilities. Second year one could move to fraternity/sorority house if one was pledged and there was room available. First-years couldn't have cars; second-years could, but they had to be parked at the football stadium (quite a distance away). Meals had to be taken in uni dining rooms, and if you skipped a meal you were charged for it anyway. In fact, you had already paid for it with your tuition at the beginning of the term.

On the plus side, we had (gasp!) maid service! Rooms cleaned and beds made daily.

It was quite a shock when I took my son to uni and saw the condition of his 'suite' shared with 5 others (3 micro-rooms with a common bath).

My parents didn't helicopter, though I was their only child. They dropped me at the dorm, my dad helped me unload the car, and they left. They stayed in town for a few days, and we had church and Sunday dinner together, and that was it.

I likewise didn't helicopter. And no umbilical phoning, either.

Things seem to have worked out well in both generations.

--------------------
You can't retire from a calling.

Posts: 1675 | From: saint meinrad, IN | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
So, 35 year old man with an 18 year old daughter can go out for a drive and puff away to their hearts' content. Man then meets and marries 17 year old girl. Man, daughter, and new wife then go out for drive. Man and daughter light up and they are committing an offence.

Do you think he has a bit of a problem in entering into relationships when either he or his partner are too young? (Do the maths!) [Devil]

Two points. It is illegal to smoke in a car if someone under 18 is present. So would it be illegal for a 17-year old, driving alone, to light up? (I haven't looked at the legislation to see how it is phrased).

The other issue is enforcement. If it is enforced at all, I guess it will only be when obviously much younger children are present.

Despite its anomalies, I welcome this legislation. I hated being in the car with my parents smoking.

Is it actually l;egal for a 17 year old to smoke at all? I don't know. Certainly the age for buying cigarettes was put up from 16 a few years ago- at about the same time as the age of consent for gay sex was lowered from 18 to 16. So, as I use to joke to my students when getting them to think about what 'adult' means,now you can have gay sex at 16 but you can't light up afterwards.

--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Chorister

Completely Frocked
# 473

 - Posted      Profile for Chorister   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It actually makes sense to me that there are different consents for different ages. It means that teenagers can get used to being adults in gradual stages rather than suddenly all at once.

By contrast, I find it terrifying when children who have been mollycoddled by their parents right up to the age of 18, suddenly let them backpack around the world in their gap year! Surely it is better to introduce independence gradually from 11 onwards, so that they are fully independent by age 18?

--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.

Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh yes, I agree.

--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Curiosity killed ...

Ship's Mug
# 11770

 - Posted      Profile for Curiosity killed ...   Email Curiosity killed ...   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There is no legal age for smoking, there is only a legal age for purchase of tobacco (now 18). The police will take cigarettes off teenagers under 18 if they caught smoking on the street, although the teenagers will probably have to catch PC Plod's eye for another reason.

I stood behind a mother and her teenaged twins all smoking in the queue for the London Dungeon a few years back. She was moaning that the cash desk weren't letting her buy children's tickets for the teenagers, who were only 13! I refrained from making any of several rejoinders to that one.

--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat

Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools