Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow, ditto. There are so many things wrong with the OP answer. I can't imagine how a child can learn to make good decisions and treat people with kindness and respect having grown up in this household.
I will never give my child an explanation unless I want to. They will learn to listen and follow directions and know that what I say, goes. And that's the end of the story. So yes - in a sense - because I said so is always a perfectly reasonable answer. I am the parent. They are the child. What bills have they have paid in the household? What money have they ever spent buying their clothes? What jobs have they worked to put food on the table and into their mouths? Absolutely zero. So I owe them zero explanations on my reasons for telling them to do something. I'm the authoritarian. You don't question me. I question you. The problem with American children lies precisely with modern American parenting. These kids feel entitled to an explanation for every damn thing an authority figure tells them because that's what they grew up with. They demanded an answer and their parents gave it to them rather than laid down the law. That's why American kids are so freaking disrespectful and unruly now.
One thing you may need to realize is that when you set kids up to obey authority without questioning, you also set them up to be followers with their peers and not all peers are a good influence.
You also set them up to do as they are told with any authority figure and not all authority figures *should* be obeyed (think about the experiment where the college kids were to shock someone - the kids who questioned it were right and the others were just obeying orders).
As for what bills they have paid or what work they have done, well, that is pretty irrelevant. They did not ask to be born into your family, but they are part of it. Imo, certainly children should do what parents tell them to do most of the time, but explanations are a good thing so they can learn why they should do something. Parents need the middle ground - see this article on the four types of parents.
Note that neither the authoritarian, the permissive nor the uninvolved get good results. Authoritative parenting seems to be what is needed.
Quote:
Like authoritarian parents, those with an authoritative parenting style establish rules and guidelines that their children are expected to follow. However, this parenting style is much more democratic. Authoritative parents are responsive to their children and willing to listen to questions. When children fail to meet the expectations, these parents are more nurturing and forgiving rather than punishing.
One thing you may need to realize is that when you set kids up to obey authority without questioning, you also set them up to be followers with their peers and not all peers are a good influence.
You also set them up to do as they are told with any authority figure and not all authority figures *should* be obeyed (think about the experiment where the college kids were to shock someone - the kids who questioned it were right and the others were just obeying orders).
As for what bills they have paid or what work they have done, well, that is pretty irrelevant. They did not ask to be born into your family, but they are part of it. Imo, certainly children should do what parents tell them to do most of the time, but explanations are a good thing so they can learn why they should do something. Parents need the middle ground - see this article on the four types of parents.
Note that neither the authoritarian, the permissive nor the uninvolved get good results. Authoritative parenting seems to be what is needed.
I agree. Authority comes in a number of different ways. There are some authority figures that are good that you listen to and some that are bad that you don't. Not every authority figure should be listened to.
Just look a Jerry Sandusky.
I will never give my child an explanation unless I want to. They will learn to listen and follow directions and know that what I say, goes. And that's the end of the story. So yes - in a sense - because I said so is always a perfectly reasonable answer. I am the parent. They are the child. What bills have they have paid in the household? What money have they ever spent buying their clothes? What jobs have they worked to put food on the table and into their mouths? Absolutely zero. So I owe them zero explanations on my reasons for telling them to do something. I'm the authoritarian. You don't question me. I question you. The problem with American children lies precisely with modern American parenting. These kids feel entitled to an explanation for every damn thing an authority figure tells them because that's what they grew up with. They demanded an answer and their parents gave it to them rather than laid down the law. That's why American kids are so freaking disrespectful and unruly now.
I have 3 young boys.... would never think this way when talking with them. All it seems to do is to make them fear you, which I dont think is a very healthy relationship. Respect you is a good thing, but fearing you is not. That is not the way to earn respect.
If a child questions you, is it ever acceptable to use the quote "Because I said so"?
For example- a child ask you can he go to the movies with friends and you say "no" and the child says "why"
Do you explain? Or tell him, "because I said So"?
Personally, I believe that not giving a child a reasonable answer proves that you can't come up for a reasonable answer to give your child.
Children need to learn to ask questions,we're taught to respect authority figures , yet authority figures are those that you ask question to, so giving an answer such as "because I said so" is not being a great authority figure, more of a dictator, more than a guide.
Your thoughts?
It is almost always a reasonable answer, because it is typically used when a child asks an unreasonable question. "No, you can't put your fingers in the blender." "Why not, mommy?" "Because I said so."
"Yes, you must wash the dishes before you go outside to play."
"Why, mommy?"
"Because I said so."
"Please take those muddy shoes off before you traipse through the wall-to-wall-carpeted house."
"Why, mommy?"
"Because I said so."
In other words, the kid doesn't sincerely want an answer. The kid wants interaction, and is not concerned with the actual request made by mommy anyway. The kid just wants to play the "why" game. The mommy wants to reinforce that the request mommy is making, IS a priority, and "Because I said so" is a succinct way of doing that. It's a way of saying - "You are a child, and as such, haven't grown enough brain matter to comprehend future consequences of current behavior. I am an adult, and do have that necessary brain matter. And so, you need to accept that I might have a clue, and you might need to actually pay attention to it. To be specific to this situation, the carpet has a certain level of cleanliness in order to prevent mold, mildew, vermin, and bugs, which would be unsafe for you to live in. It also has a certain aesthetic, which is why I picked out that pattern and color in the first place. Bringing muddy shoes onto the carpeting would make it dirty, which would require me, or someone else, to clean it, and right now I'm busy making you and your father your supper, which is required at supper time, for reasons I haven't got time to explain at the moment."
When you're 4 years old, that last statement would get lost after the third word. A 4-year-old doesn't care about what mommy knows, and how little 4-year-old knows. A 4-year-old cares about purple, and the sound of her velcro shoes when she pulls the strips up, and cupcakes, and the smell of mommy when she gets a big hug. You can't reason with a 4-year-old, nor should you try. If you think you can, then you need to go back to Mommy School.
Most times a kid asks "why, mommy?" the kid is looking to play the why game. You answer that question, and they ask why, to the answer. You answer -that- question, and they ask why, to THAT answer. And so on and so forth. Which might be a fun game to play when you have nothing better to do. But chances are, if you're a mom, you have other things to do. Like making supper. Or helping your child with her homework. Or making sure her shoes are tied in a way that she won't trip over them. Or bringing Junior to the doctor's office, or ensuring that your daughter is facing FORWARD on her tricycle, and not turning her head to constantly ask you why.
And so "Because I said so" is a very reasonable answer. It can be repeated ad nauseum until the child is tired of asking why, with very little effort on the part of mom.
It is almost always a reasonable answer, because it is typically used when a child asks an unreasonable question. "No, you can't put your fingers in the blender." "Why not, mommy?" "Because I said so."
"Yes, you must wash the dishes before you go outside to play."
"Why, mommy?"
"Because I said so."
"Please take those muddy shoes off before you traipse through the wall-to-wall-carpeted house."
"Why, mommy?"
"Because I said so."
First, I haven't heard children ask the first question or any about doing a dangerous activity. Usually, they actually try to do the action and in that case they are probably very young. No 4 year old I know wants to put their fingers in the blender. They might want to play with matches and ask about that and in those cases, I would offer supervised opportunities to light a match.
As for the washing the dishes before going outside, you can give a reason first and then say because I said so if the child persists. "We always need to get our chores done first before we go outside, but we can make it a game or do it together." Depending on the age of the child, doing chores together is very helpful rather than just trying to make a child do the chore alone. For an older child, certainly, he must *work before he plays,* but if you have made this a rule, it is unlikely that he would ask *why?* Because I said so would be appropriate after giving an explanation *once* and that once could have been done long ago.
For taking off muddy shoes, again, the rule would already have been learned, but if a child asked why, I would certainly say *because if you don't we will have a lot of cleaning to do,* before I said because I said so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonChick
In other words, the kid doesn't sincerely want an answer. The kid wants interaction, and is not concerned with the actual request made by mommy anyway. The kid just wants to play the "why" game. The mommy wants to reinforce that the request mommy is making, IS a priority, and "Because I said so" is a succinct way of doing that. It's a way of saying - "You are a child, and as such, haven't grown enough brain matter to comprehend future consequences of current behavior. I am an adult, and do have that necessary brain matter. And so, you need to accept that I might have a clue, and you might need to actually pay attention to it. To be specific to this situation, the carpet has a certain level of cleanliness in order to prevent mold, mildew, vermin, and bugs, which would be unsafe for you to live in. It also has a certain aesthetic, which is why I picked out that pattern and color in the first place. Bringing muddy shoes onto the carpeting would make it dirty, which would require me, or someone else, to clean it, and right now I'm busy making you and your father your supper, which is required at supper time, for reasons I haven't got time to explain at the moment."
When you're 4 years old, that last statement would get lost after the third word. A 4-year-old doesn't care about what mommy knows, and how little 4-year-old knows. A 4-year-old cares about purple, and the sound of her velcro shoes when she pulls the strips up, and cupcakes, and the smell of mommy when she gets a big hug. You can't reason with a 4-year-old, nor should you try. If you think you can, then you need to go back to Mommy School.
Most times a kid asks "why, mommy?" the kid is looking to play the why game. You answer that question, and they ask why, to the answer. You answer -that- question, and they ask why, to THAT answer. And so on and so forth. Which might be a fun game to play when you have nothing better to do. But chances are, if you're a mom, you have other things to do. Like making supper. Or helping your child with her homework. Or making sure her shoes are tied in a way that she won't trip over them. Or bringing Junior to the doctor's office, or ensuring that your daughter is facing FORWARD on her tricycle, and not turning her head to constantly ask you why.
And so "Because I said so" is a very reasonable answer. It can be repeated ad nauseum until the child is tired of asking why, with very little effort on the part of mom.
Your explanation above is simply too long. You should give explanations at the developmental level of the child. At 4, the first explanation is *because if you get mud on the carpet, we will have to clean it (and perhaps making him see that he would need to help with that cleaning). You certainly can reason with a 4 year old. It helps because the child is then practicing how to think.
I think you are seriously underestimating children. Sometimes, you are correct and they are asking why to play a game (not necessarily a bad thing as it involves having a social interaction with the adult), but sometimes, they really do want to know the reason for something.
Repeating anything ad nauseum even *because I said so* is not a good thing. Generally, it is better to give an explanation, then say the phrase once and then stop answering entirely. Repeating the phrase is still interacting and that encourages the child to continue his *whys.*
Wow! Interesting thread I just happened upon. I started multi-quoting, but realized I had to give up. I'll keep a few I thought were really good answers, that I agree with, and I few I want to respond to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momma_bear
Is it EVER an acceptable answer??? Of course it is. Is it what a parent should say most of the time? No.
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maciesmom
Typically parents use that answer when they've already explained the real answer ad nauseum but the child in question keeps responding "but why". It's not really an answer so much as an indication that the conversation is over with and the child in question would be wise to accept it if he or she understood what was good for him or her.
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibbiekat
There doesn't have to be a debate for there to be an explanation. For a 3 year old, an explanation teaches them that if they stick their finger in a outlet, they might get electrocuted. For a teen, an explanation might teach them that bad things can happen in "that" part of town in the middle of the night, or whatever. It seems like way more effective parenting than "because I said so."
The three year old might accept that explanation, though I doubt s/he knows what "electrocution" is. I'd more likely say "it's dangerous". The teen would proably tell you (well, this is what mine would have said to me anyway) some variation of "that won't happen to me; you think I can't take care of myself, yada, yada". It does take much longer than I would have ever thought for teens to think lke adults.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustJulia
Then don't ask "is it ever," because yes, occasionally it is.
I agree that children should be given a reason--most of the time, and if they ask. I don't think it is necessary for a parent to explain himself or herself every time, e.g. "Eat your vegetables, Matthew, because vegetables help you grow big and strong."
"Because I said so" can be an effective stop to a discussion that is turning into an argument or negotiation. It's not a smug answer, it's a way to say, "I said no, and that's the end of it." If the no is never going to turn into a yes, and the kid will not let it go, sometimes a parent has to cut the conversation. Reasonable discussion should always be allowed, though.
^^This (in bold). I have a daughter (now 25) who would try to negotiate anything, and just about everything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADVentive
I do make an effort to explain the reasons for things to my kids. I don't think I've ever said "Because I said so", though I have said "Because I don't want (you) to", which is maybe about the same thing...
Sort of like "I just don't like that word". I remember years ago, a friend was telling her child not to say "Dang it". She just didn't like that word. And that's OK.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SocalPitgal
I ask myself, "What is this teaching the child" I don't want to teach him that he is not worthy of an explanation. "It's getting dark", "We really can't afford it right now", "Your not old enough to see that movie"
Then anything after that would be deserving of "This is not up for debate"
"It won't be dark for another hour".
"Yes, we can afford it".
"Yes, I am old enough".
I have particular issues with telling kids something can't be afforded (unless you're talking about a huge expense) b/c I think that's an adult that doesn't need to be shared with the kid. I am talking about younger kids here, although even teens have difficulty really understanding finances. I also think a lot of peole use "we can't afford it" when the answer really is "because I said so".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleur66
I give an explanation some of the time, I don't feel one is necessary every time.
Sometimes the why part is complex, and I'd rather not share my whole rationale for saying no.
For instance, if one of my kids asks to have a friend sleepover, there are times I'll say no, without an explanation. Maybe it is because I'm tired, maybe it is because I don't feel like having that particular friend at our house for an extended time period.
It is almost always a reasonable answer, because it is typically used when a child asks an unreasonable question. "No, you can't put your fingers in the blender." "Why not, mommy?" "Because I said so."
"Yes, you must wash the dishes before you go outside to play."
"Why, mommy?"
"Because I said so."
"Please take those muddy shoes off before you traipse through the wall-to-wall-carpeted house."
"Why, mommy?"
"Because I said so."
In other words, the kid doesn't sincerely want an answer. The kid wants interaction, and is not concerned with the actual request made by mommy anyway. The kid just wants to play the "why" game. The mommy wants to reinforce that the request mommy is making, IS a priority, and "Because I said so" is a succinct way of doing that. It's a way of saying - "You are a child, and as such, haven't grown enough brain matter to comprehend future consequences of current behavior. I am an adult, and do have that necessary brain matter. And so, you need to accept that I might have a clue, and you might need to actually pay attention to it. To be specific to this situation, the carpet has a certain level of cleanliness in order to prevent mold, mildew, vermin, and bugs, which would be unsafe for you to live in. It also has a certain aesthetic, which is why I picked out that pattern and color in the first place. Bringing muddy shoes onto the carpeting would make it dirty, which would require me, or someone else, to clean it, and right now I'm busy making you and your father your supper, which is required at supper time, for reasons I haven't got time to explain at the moment."
When you're 4 years old, that last statement would get lost after the third word. A 4-year-old doesn't care about what mommy knows, and how little 4-year-old knows. A 4-year-old cares about purple, and the sound of her velcro shoes when she pulls the strips up, and cupcakes, and the smell of mommy when she gets a big hug. You can't reason with a 4-year-old, nor should you try. If you think you can, then you need to go back to Mommy School.
Most times a kid asks "why, mommy?" the kid is looking to play the why game. You answer that question, and they ask why, to the answer. You answer -that- question, and they ask why, to THAT answer. And so on and so forth. Which might be a fun game to play when you have nothing better to do. But chances are, if you're a mom, you have other things to do. Like making supper. Or helping your child with her homework. Or making sure her shoes are tied in a way that she won't trip over them. Or bringing Junior to the doctor's office, or ensuring that your daughter is facing FORWARD on her tricycle, and not turning her head to constantly ask you why.
And so "Because I said so" is a very reasonable answer. It can be repeated ad nauseum until the child is tired of asking why, with very little effort on the part of mom.
I'd give my child an answer if he ask me why he can't put his fingers in the blender, only if he is at the age where he doesn't know any better. Kids need to know that it's dangerous and you could get hurt or get a "bo,bo".
The carpet explanation is not needed, I agree. It's pretty self explanatory. I'd just ignore the child.
It is almost always a reasonable answer, because it is typically used when a child asks an unreasonable question. "No, you can't put your fingers in the blender." "Why not, mommy?" "Because I said so."
"Yes, you must wash the dishes before you go outside to play."
"Why, mommy?"
"Because I said so."
"Please take those muddy shoes off before you traipse through the wall-to-wall-carpeted house."
"Why, mommy?"
"Because I said so."
In other words, the kid doesn't sincerely want an answer. The kid wants interaction, and is not concerned with the actual request made by mommy anyway. The kid just wants to play the "why" game. The mommy wants to reinforce that the request mommy is making, IS a priority, and "Because I said so" is a succinct way of doing that. It's a way of saying - "You are a child, and as such, haven't grown enough brain matter to comprehend future consequences of current behavior. I am an adult, and do have that necessary brain matter. And so, you need to accept that I might have a clue, and you might need to actually pay attention to it. To be specific to this situation, the carpet has a certain level of cleanliness in order to prevent mold, mildew, vermin, and bugs, which would be unsafe for you to live in. It also has a certain aesthetic, which is why I picked out that pattern and color in the first place. Bringing muddy shoes onto the carpeting would make it dirty, which would require me, or someone else, to clean it, and right now I'm busy making you and your father your supper, which is required at supper time, for reasons I haven't got time to explain at the moment."
When you're 4 years old, that last statement would get lost after the third word. A 4-year-old doesn't care about what mommy knows, and how little 4-year-old knows. A 4-year-old cares about purple, and the sound of her velcro shoes when she pulls the strips up, and cupcakes, and the smell of mommy when she gets a big hug. You can't reason with a 4-year-old, nor should you try. If you think you can, then you need to go back to Mommy School.
Most times a kid asks "why, mommy?" the kid is looking to play the why game. You answer that question, and they ask why, to the answer. You answer -that- question, and they ask why, to THAT answer. And so on and so forth. Which might be a fun game to play when you have nothing better to do. But chances are, if you're a mom, you have other things to do. Like making supper. Or helping your child with her homework. Or making sure her shoes are tied in a way that she won't trip over them. Or bringing Junior to the doctor's office, or ensuring that your daughter is facing FORWARD on her tricycle, and not turning her head to constantly ask you why.
And so "Because I said so" is a very reasonable answer. It can be repeated ad nauseum until the child is tired of asking why, with very little effort on the part of mom.
Spot on.
I loe the high faluting child rearing theories. They always make me smile. The response above is from the trenches. The place where theory meets reality - and fizzles.
As for the washing the dishes before going outside, you can give a reason first and then say because I said so if the child persists. "We always need to get our chores done first before we go outside, but we can make it a game or do it together." Depending on the age of the child, doing chores together is very helpful rather than just trying to make a child do the chore alone.
I've never understood the use of "we" when talking to a child.
"If you want to go outside, do your chores." Plain. Simple. To the point. There is no "we" doing the chores. (At least there wasn't in my house.) No games. No doing it together. Games were Monopoly. Doing it together was eating supper and watching TV and going on vacation. That's together. Chores? Solo flying. From a very young age they knew that life involved actual work. Because someday they were going to have a boss that was not named Mom or Dad.
There's a scene in the movie "The Blind Spot" where Sandra Bullock's character is driving her son in her very nice BMW. The kid has his feet up on the dashboard. She says to him, "Get your feet off my dash!!"
I love that scene.
(You want to put your feet up on the dash, Junior? Work hard and save your coins. You can do whatever you like in your car when you are making the payments. "We" do not own the car and I don't need or want dirty footprints on my glovebox .)
Last edited by DewDropInn; 09-28-2012 at 09:00 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"We" do not own the car and I don't need or want dirty footprints on my glovebox .)
