John Rosemond's Parenting Resolutions: Self Righteous and Kind of A Meanie?

[Achbek1]

Okay, this recent John Rosemond article for some reason ticked me off to no end. A lot of what he says does make sense, but I think his little tidbits of advice at times sound a bit draconian and like words coming from a self-righteous meanie who thinks that cruelty and denial is somehow "better" and that any kind of fun or entertainment is somehow shameful and evil.

Yeah, it's true that you don't want to spoil and over-indulge your children, but a little harmless fun once in a while is harmless and healthy. Being a battle axe of a parent to the other extreme will only harm your kids more in my opinion.

I'm re-posting the article here and adding my comments.

[I]Some parenting resolutions
by John Rosemond

Updated: January 10, 2011, 7:04 AM

Given that this is a new year, I’m proposing a number of parenting New Year’s resolutions for my readers to consider. The list is by no means comprehensive. It’s just a good beginning on what is probably a much-needed family revolution:

1.We will not throw expensive “event parties” for our children on their birthdays. Instead, we will confine all birthday celebrations to our family, including extended family. We will keep it uncomplicated: a special dinner of the birthday boy or girl’s favorite food, a cake, the obligatory song, and a few simple gifts, mostly clothing or other useful things.

Okay, Mr. Rosemond. So you are saying we are not allowed to let children have maybe a few friends over on their birthdays? We are not allowed to do a simple theme such as puppies or cowboys or butterflies, because that would be an "even" party and thus over-indulging? We are not allowed to give our children TOYS on their birthdays, just CLOTHES? Let me guess, Mr. Rosemond, you think that TOYS AND PLAY must be BAD or EVIL or sign of OVER INDULGENCE? Come on! Birthdays are meant to be celebrated and kids shouldn't have to just limit the event to Mod, Dad and Aunt Edna. And, for the record, TOYS HELP KIDS LEARNS AND ENCOURAGE SOCIAL PLAY for cryin' out loud. Man Mr. Rosemond, what did your parents do for your birthdays when you were a kid? Give you a plate of mashed potatoes and some socks? No wonder you felt compelled to go to school for psychology. Sounds like you had a lot to figure out yourself!

2.We will spend at least as much time helping our children develop good manners as we do helping them get good grades in school, which means we will cut back significantly on the time helping with the latter (in consideration of the fact that good manners, which are expressions of respect for others, will take one further in life than will good grades). Each week, we will work on one specific social courtesy, such as saying “excuse me” when you walk in front of someone. Taking two weeks off, that’s 50 courtesies a year!

Okay, Mr. Rosemond. I agree with you on this.

3.We will show our love for our neighbors by properly disciplining our children, insisting on proper behavior, and reprimanding immediately (even if that means in front of other people) when they behave otherwise, and on those occasions we will also insist they apologize appropriately.

Okay, Mr. Rosemond. I agree with you on this also .

4. If we have not already done so, we will assign a routine of daily chores to each of our children (at least those who have reached their third birthdays) and we will insist that said chores be done, and done properly, before they engage in recreation or relaxation.

Okay, agree also. .

5. When our children ask us for cell phones, we will tell them that they may have cell phones when they are able to pay for them as well as the monthly bills.

Fair enough. But sometimes an emergency cell phone is necessary if the child needs to be picked up or is stuck somewhere nad no public phones are available. But I suspect Mr. Rosemond that you see cell phones as frivolous and shameful "toys" rather than a sometimes necessary tool for communication.

The rest later.

[shortstuff]

Okay, this recent John Rosemond article for some reason ticked me off to no end. A lot of what he says does make sense, but I think his little tidbits of advice at times sound a bit draconian and like words coming from a self-righteous meanie who thinks that cruelty and denial is somehow "better" and that any kind of fun or entertainment is somehow shameful and evil.

Yeah, it's true that you don't want to spoil and over-indulge your children, but a little harmless fun once in a while is harmless and healthy. Being a battle axe of a parent to the other extreme will only harm your kids more in my opinion.

I'm re-posting the article here and adding my comments.

[I]Some parenting resolutions
by John Rosemond

Updated: January 10, 2011, 7:04 AM

Given that this is a new year, I’m proposing a number of parenting New Year’s resolutions for my readers to consider. The list is by no means comprehensive. It’s just a good beginning on what is probably a much-needed family revolution:

1.We will not throw expensive “event parties” for our children on their birthdays. Instead, we will confine all birthday celebrations to our family, including extended family. We will keep it uncomplicated: a special dinner of the birthday boy or girl’s favorite food, a cake, the obligatory song, and a few simple gifts, mostly clothing or other useful things.

Okay, Mr. Rosemond. So you are saying we are not allowed to let children have maybe a few friends over on their birthdays? We are not allowed to do a simple theme such as puppies or cowboys or butterflies, because that would be an "even" party and thus over-indulging? We are not allowed to give our children TOYS on their birthdays, just CLOTHES? Let me guess, Mr. Rosemond, you think that TOYS AND PLAY must be BAD or EVIL or sign of OVER INDULGENCE? Come on! Birthdays are meant to be celebrated and kids shouldn't have to just limit the event to Mod, Dad and Aunt Edna. And, for the record, TOYS HELP KIDS LEARNS AND ENCOURAGE SOCIAL PLAY for cryin' out loud. Man Mr. Rosemond, what did your parents do for your birthdays when you were a kid? Give you a plate of mashed potatoes and some socks? No wonder you felt compelled to go to school for psychology. Sounds like you had a lot to figure out yourself!

2.We will spend at least as much time helping our children develop good manners as we do helping them get good grades in school, which means we will cut back significantly on the time helping with the latter (in consideration of the fact that good manners, which are expressions of respect for others, will take one further in life than will good grades). Each week, we will work on one specific social courtesy, such as saying “excuse me” when you walk in front of someone. Taking two weeks off, that’s 50 courtesies a year!

Okay, Mr. Rosemond. I agree with you on this.

3.We will show our love for our neighbors by properly disciplining our children, insisting on proper behavior, and reprimanding immediately (even if that means in front of other people) when they behave otherwise, and on those occasions we will also insist they apologize appropriately.

Okay, Mr. Rosemond. I agree with you on this also .

4. If we have not already done so, we will assign a routine of daily chores to each of our children (at least those who have reached their third birthdays) and we will insist that said chores be done, and done properly, before they engage in recreation or relaxation.

Okay, agree also. .

5. When our children ask us for cell phones, we will tell them that they may have cell phones when they are able to pay for them as well as the monthly bills.

Fair enough. But sometimes an emergency cell phone is necessary if the child needs to be picked up or is stuck somewhere nad no public phones are available. But I suspect Mr. Rosemond that you see cell phones as frivolous and shameful "toys" rather than a sometimes necessary tool for communication.

The rest later.

He is on target and I agree with his "New Year's Resolution" on how parenting should get down to basics. These outlandish parties parents are having for their children is ridiculous. What will they want when it is the "sweet 16" party? A cruise to the islands? Cell phones should not be given to children at such a young age....are you kidding me? Children should learn how to pick up and clean their rooms and have chores. Children should be expected to do well in school and to respect their adults!

Our children are spoiled because "we" did this to them.

[Achbek1]

6. When our children complain that they are the only kids who don’t have cell phones (and do chores), we will tell them that learning how to be different is character-building.

Okay, fine. But maybe some of those other kids have them for emergency situations and not as over indulgent "toys."

7. Our children will not be able to order customized meals unless we take them to a restaurant. At home, they will eat what we are eating, and they will sit at the table until they are finished. We will do this so that when they are invited to eat at someone else’s home, they will be the best of guests.

Fair enugh.

8.We will surely bond with our children, but we will not bond with them in the marital bed, nor will we bond with them in their beds.

Okay, so we are not allowed to sit next to our children in their own beds and read them a story? Hmm, you must find that sick or perverted in some way, right? And if our child is sick he or she cannot come lie down next to us in our bed? Mr. Rosemond, it sounds like you have some strange and unresolved, possibly Freudian, issues. I see some sex hangups here. It is because you say "marital bed" and that connotes coitus and such. Come on, get over it. The "marital" bed is simply another piece of furniture in the house. If we sit or lie on it at any time with random members of the family for purposes other than sex, so be it. If you got over your hangups of sex occasionally happening there.

9. In keeping with number 8, we will put our marriage first and our children second . . . for their sake as well as ours. They will revolve around us; thus, they will not grow up thinking the world revolves around them.

Okay, wait a minute. I have an issue with the "our marriage first and our children second." I think we should LOVE OUR CHILDREN AND OUR SPOUSES EQUALLY. Shouldn't that be the way? Saying that children should just be secondary members of the family, with our spouse taking precedence seems kinda mean, off balance and kinda sick. Are you so afraid of accidentally overindulging children that if you dare to love them too much you are somehow creating some sick and off balance family dynamic? Children should be held in lower priority than the spouse, please! And again, I see some more sexual hangups Mr. Rosemond. Did your father push your mother around? Sure sounds like it. Who says you cannot love your spouse and your children with the same amount of unending love?

10. If I am a single parent, I will take good care of myself for my sake as well as my children’s.I will have an active, adults-only, social life. I will take plenty of personal time to simply relax and do those things I like to do. I will do all of that so that my children will not ever think the world revolves around them.

Yeah, because of for Pete's sake you show your children any love or emotion or dare to give them attention and/or gifts you are somehow making your children think "the world revolves around them."

11. We/I will put our/my children to bed early so that we/I can end each day reconnecting as a couple or relaxing as a single.

Oh, yep. Must mean "having maritals" again. Can a couple relax in a non sexual way?

12.We will eat as a family around our own table at least six nights a week.

In THIS ECONOMY Mr. Rosemond that is not always possible. Yes, you DO have a very outdated and patriarchal view of family life, don't you? What about the few nights a week where a spouse works? I do agree that dinner as a family is important though, but maybe four nights a week is more realistic.

13.We will keep after-school activities to a minimum, and only let them enroll in activities that do not prevent us from delivering on number 11.

Let me guess. "Delivering on number 11" must be code for "having maritals." Almost sounds like you resent children because their need for attention and love gets in the way of your "having maritals." AND activities are good for kids.

14. Instead of buying our children expensive things, we will help them develop hobbies and take them to museums and on trips.

Oh yes, "toys are evil" again. But yes museums and such are very nice too.

15.We will do all of the above so that when they grow up, they will have wonderful memories of their childhoods and raise our grandchildren in a manner that honors us.

Really? REALLY? If we did things your way the children will have "wonderful memories of their childhoods?" They memories would be of:

• Birthday parties with NO FRIENDS and NO TOYS. Just dinner and socks.
  
• Being stranded somewhere and unable to reach mom or dad because no phone is around and we don't have an emergency cell phone.
  
• Mom and Dad denying sitting next to them in bed to read them stories.
  
• Mom and Dad not allowing them to snuggle with them in their bed after the child has a nightmare, because of the archaic and somewhat pervy idea that the parents' bed is for "maritals only."
  
• Not being allowed to take an extra dance class or play sports because it would take away time from Mom and Dad being allowed to "have maritals."
  
• Being treated like SECOND CLASS members of the family because Dad thinks Mom is MORE IMPORTANT THAN US and vice versa.

Sounds like a really "happy childhood" to me!


Family psychologist John Rosemond answers parents’ questions on his website at www.rosemond.com .

[Save Us]

He is on target and I agree with his "New Year's Resolution" on how parenting should get down to basics. These outlandish parties parents are having for their children is ridiculous. What will they want when it is the "sweet 16" party? A cruise to the islands? Cell phones should not be given to children at such a young age....are you kidding me? Children should learn how to pick up and clean their rooms and have chores. Children should be expected to do well in school and to respect their adults!

Our children are spoiled because "we" did this to them.

It's called child worship.

[Achbek1]

It's called child worship.

Yes, there are nutty parents who DO overindulge their kids and go the way of "child worship" and such.

But I posted this because I think that JOHN ROSEMOND is the OTHER EXTREME.

He's the one who thinks, again, that any tiny bit of love or adoration or gift giving, etc. instantly translates as "child worship."

It doesn't.

Kids need love and attention, for cryin' out loud. No, they don't need to be coddled and "worshipped," but they do need love.

If the crazy parents practice "child worship" I think that Mr. Rosemond practices the other extreme: "child hatred."

[Save Us]

Yes, there are nutty parents who DO overindulge their kids and go the way of "child worship" and such.

But I posted this because I think that JOHN ROSEMOND is the OTHER EXTREME.

He's the one who thinks, again, that any tiny bit of love or adoration or gift giving, etc. instantly translates as "child worship."

It doesn't.

Kids need love and attention, for cryin' out loud. No, they don't need to be coddled and "worshipped," but they do need love.

If the crazy parents practice "child worship" I think that Mr. Rosemond practices the other extreme: "child hatred."

He has some good points about half of which you agreed with. I think the term a parent needs to be familiar with is balance. This is the day and age where most parents tend to be a bit helicopterish.

I agree that some of his points are well,,, not very loving or parental.

[shortstuff]

Yes, there are nutty parents who DO overindulge their kids and go the way of "child worship" and such.

But I posted this because I think that JOHN ROSEMOND is the OTHER EXTREME.

He's the one who thinks, again, that any tiny bit of love or adoration or gift giving, etc. instantly translates as "child worship."

It doesn't.

Kids need love and attention, for cryin' out loud. No, they don't need to be coddled and "worshipped," but they do need love.

If the crazy parents practice "child worship" I think that Mr. Rosemond practices the other extreme: "child hatred."

I think you took his exerpts to the max. I do not agree with all of them and things have a happy medium. Children are too involved in activities to focus on their school work. Families should go back to having dinners at least a couple times a week if they can manage. I think we are buying our children too many expensive toys and electronics, agree they should get involved in the simplistic way of entertainment like going outdoors and riding bikes and playing kickball and jump rope.

I feel the world DOES not revolve around them. I saw a shirt a teenager was wearing that said, "The world revolves around me..."

[Achbek1]

Here's an interesting article about John Rosemond written by another psychologist, Allan Bloom. http://www.allanbloom.com/articles/J...nd-Article.pdf

"I still can’t bring myself to swallow the John Rosemond
point of view; I am not only concerned about kids’ behavior. I worry about their feelings
too; stuff like whether they are happy and secure affects me. Do kids go around full of
rage and hatred? Will they develop the capacity to care and love? Those kinds of details.
And I don’t get it: If parents are interested in spending just 30 minutes a day with their
kids, why did they have them in the first place? You wouldn’t spend just 30 minutes a
day with a dog you bought at the flea market."

"He worries about parents making sure
they never ever feel “controlled” or “manipulated” by their kids. And John doesn’t care
how controlled and manipulated kids feel by the grown-ups in their world. He doesn’t
care how much our kids might hate us for pushing them around or neglecting them. He
doesn’t worry either about whether parents or professionals put him down or complain
about his parent-as-thug mentality. He likes it when people criticize him. In fact he
boasts about it in his columns."

[shortstuff]

It goes back to the question, who is the adult and who is the child?

The world is so abstract and complicated and our children depend on us to make "home" life simple with boundries. Discipline is simplistic--rewards vs consequences. I'm from the old school and I raised my kids that way. They are productive respectful adults as well as wonderful parents.

[Achbek1]

Child: "Mommy can I snuggle with you and Daddy on the bed?"

Father, with beard and a pitcfork: "No you shameful child! The bed is where Mommy and I have our maritals! You shall not defile it with your shameful child ways! Now get along now, if I talk to you any longer I shall be overindulging you! And you are not as important to me as your mother is!"

[Save Us]

Child: "Mommy can I snuggle with you and Daddy on the bed?"

Father, with beard and a pitcfork: "No you shameful child! The bed is where Mommy and I have our maritals! You shall not defile it with your shameful child ways! Now get along now, if I talk to you any longer I shall be overindulging you! And you are not as important to me as your mother is!"

Yeah that one is wrong.

You mean there is such a thing as quality time without the sex?

[nogods]

Rosemond has some good ideas about parenting. I've used lots of his stuff raising my 4 kids. Some of it wans't applicable because for the majority of that time I was a single parent with sole custody.

However, he loses credibility when he starts writing rules instead of suggestions to solve issues.

You parent with your heart, not a rule book.

We aren't raising dogs, we are raising human beings. Rosemond sometimes forgets the difference and spouts as if his kids were in a kennel.

Also, abstinence doesn't teach self control. Parents who are wealthy enough to provide their children with large birthday parties and cell phones can nevertheless still teach their children desirable characteristics and values.

Rosemond thinks wealth will corrupt a child because he can't figure out how to deal with it. So his only solution is deny and abstain.

Wealthy parents need to teach their children how to deal with wealth even more so because they'll probably end up being wealthy adults as well. Abstinence teaches them nothing and doesn't prepare them to deal with the world of their future. They end up being irresponsible adults because their parents took Rosemond's "high the money" advice.

[nickelcityhomes]

I decided to write my own book on parenting. Here are my rules...

1 - People who write books on parenting are too self-important to actually parent.
2 - I don't need someone else's advice on raising my kids.
3 - See rule #1.

I accept payment via paypal for this ground-breaking advice. Please send $39 to massage my ego and encourage additional asshat opinions which will have no benefit to anyone except me.

Thank You.

[shortstuff]

I decided to write my own book on parenting. Here are my rules...

1 - People who write books on parenting are too self-important to actually parent.
2 - I don't need someone else's advice on raising my kids.
3 - See rule #1.

I accept payment via paypal for this ground-breaking advice. Please send $39 to massage my ego and encourage additional asshat opinions which will have no benefit to anyone except me.

Thank You.

I like your rules nickel.

[Achbek1]

Rosemond has some good ideas about parenting. I've used lots of his stuff raising my 4 kids. Some of it wans't applicable because for the majority of that time I was a single parent with sole custody.

However, he loses credibility when he starts writing rules instead of suggestions to solve issues.

You parent with your heart, not a rule book.

We aren't raising dogs, we are raising human beings. Rosemond sometimes forgets the difference and spouts as if his kids were in a kennel.

Also, abstinence doesn't teach self control. Parents who are wealthy enough to provide their children with large birthday parties and cell phones can nevertheless still teach their children desirable characteristics and values.

Rosemond thinks wealth will corrupt a child because he can't figure out how to deal with it. So his only solution is deny and abstain.

Wealthy parents need to teach their children how to deal with wealth even more so because they'll probably end up being wealthy adults as well. Abstinence teaches them nothing and doesn't prepare them to deal with the world of their future. They end up being irresponsible adults because their parents took Rosemond's "high the money" advice.

Good points.