Is it better to shelter from or expose your children to evil?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jump4Joy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A child growing up in Syria, Nigeria, or other parts of the impoverished and war-torn third world wishes that the biggest evil he had to witness was his parents arguing. Assuming his parents haven’t been killed in a war or are dead from starvation or a commonly treated disease, that is.

Same goes even here in the US, a little girl growing up in Chicago’s Austin neighborhood has probably heard more gunshots than ice cream trucks in her neighborhood. Actually, she’d be at quite an advantage if her parents were arguing, because that would mean that they were actually together and she knew who both of them were.

So the perspective of evil and one’s sensitivity to it certainly depend on one’s environment.
 
I think it is better to be settled to be protect them from evil since no human actions are perfect in the end the child will know about evil and then you can explain it to them. But to be decisive about introducing them to evil or not caring about its exposure to the kids so they can become immune to it is wrong imho.
 
I think it depends on the maturity of your kids.
Kids need gradual exposure to real life situations.
Parents should set an ideal example for kids if possible. Hence having a mature disagreement in front of your kids, ok. Having an argument in the sense that hostile words are exchanged? Totally unnecessary and harmful. Why would you normalise such behavior. If you want to expose your kids to arguments then expose them to somebody else parents arguing or on tv or whatever and tell them that there is a better way to settle disputes than arguing.

So my short answer is no. Do not “argue” (assuming my definition) in front of your kids. But do not shelter them from argument either because they need to learn how to argue and how not to argue. Usually playing with other kids will teach them.
 
Last edited:
Children in their formative years need strength and compassion as you know. For this reason, I think it is best for parents to have heated discussions alone. My parents fought like cats and dogs all the time, and it was horrible for me.

As far as managing expectations about good and evil, far better to explain these evils without having to expose them to evils. Life has other plans sometimes, though, as when the kids are exposed to something when it is beyond your control.
 
Arguing is now a sin? My wife and I argued in front of our children often. We didnt get angry or yell at each other. We didnt even yell at each other in another room. I doubt my wife and I have raised our voices to each other more than 5 times in our marriage. But we have argued a lot.

To answer this question we need to define what is evil?
 
It can help to have distinct roles so that there are fewer arguments. Also, if one submits to the other most of the time, it’s better. In other words, it’s good to have a boss. Hierarchies are good. That’s why in a plane, there’s a pilot and a co-pilot. I don’t think it’s good to have too many arguments.

That said, I think it’s good for kids to learn how to be assertive, and how to listen pro-actively, how to paraphrase what the other person said, and how to give in once in a while. It’s good to know how to deal with conflict. But it might be better if those lessons occur less at home, and more when you’re dealing with the help. 😉
 
I don’t think it is good for one to always submit to another. The other person is being bossy and thinks everything should go their way. I used to be friends with someone who always had to have her way and to avoid arguing I would let her. IT WAS NOT HEALTHY.
 
One person will learn they do not need to compromise. To avoid arguing you must do things their way. That sounds unhealthy honestly. Bordering on controlling, intimidating, etc.
 
A little bit of controlling is a good thing. In my view, the kids feel safer when they know who’s in charge on a given point. If it’s a matter to do with scheduling, Mom’s in charge etc… If it’s to do with whether you go for a vaccination or not, Dad’s in charge. But you can live any way you like. Personally, I can be either the boss or the non-boss but it depends on with whom I’m dealing.
 
Actually, kids feel safer when they can safely express concerns, preferences, or needs without the irrational fear that causing an argument is “sinful”. There is no sin in arguing. There is no sin in telling someone that what they are saying, doing, or planning to do is causing a problem or bothering someone. Arguing is simply stating your case for what you want. Children should see examples of how to do this respectfully. Now if the subject of your argument is not appropriate for children to hear, then by all means, move it out of earshot.
 
Arguing between parents in earshot of children only becomes an issue when it is abusive. This can be because the parents are being abusive to each other or because the nature of the argument abuses the child’s right to innocence or safety.

Examples:

Who is going to go buy the cookies- good
That Keebler is eeeeeevil and going to kill us all- bad

What is going to be repaired next on the house- good
If you should choose foreclosure or a motorcycle- bad

Anything about sex, illicit drugs, drinking, etc. -bad
 
I think there should be a balance. Not one person should have full authority over the other or how the family runs. Compromise should happen on both parties.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top