Strollerderby

Do We Protect Our Kids Too Much From Life?

Posted by Karen Murphy

athenaWhen we first become parents and look for the first time into that tiny face that made us so, that tiny face that's filled with complete trust and vulnerability, we silently vow to love and protect that face as long as there's breath in our bodies. I know we do this. We are hardwired to protect our progeny, not simply for perpetuation of the species, but out of love for that tiny being who lies trustingly in our arms, completely relaxed and open. How could we not endeavor to keep that tiny person from harm as far as we are able?

Problem is, kids also grow up and we have to move from Absolute Protector of the lion cubs to Guidance Counselor/Cheerleader in only a few years. And it's hard to know when to make tha shift, or how, or about what. Especially when it's about stuff that we're not all that comfortable with, like death.

I read this bloggy-essay bit about kids and cats and letting go, and part of me wanted to get all judgy and say, Hey! Let your kids see life, whydoncha! But it's not always that easy, is it? There's this Inner Lioness that kicks in and wants, in some ways, for our kids to always live in a happy bubble land of rainbows and unicorns and never experience any bad stuff, never suffer disappointment or grief or sadness.

But by shielding our kids from that bad stuff, we're also setting them up for a huge shock when one day we can't shield them any longer. It's better, I think, to let kids see what life is, to be matter-of-fact about it, and better still, to let them see YOUR emotion about something, than to think you can somehow hide life from them.

In times past, there was less separation between kids and adults. Kids grew up fast because they had to: they helped with the farm or family business as soon as they were able, or helped in the home. They saw life and they saw death. They were closer to the life that was lived because there was less ability to separate them from it: everybody slept in the same room, for instance, so if there was sex the kids were privy to it. If there was birth, or death, the kids were privy to it.

Not that I'm advocating we go back to that level of privacy (though my 4-year old sleeps in the same room with me now), but I am rethinking some of my own shielding tendencies. This came up on a discussion list I'm part of recently, relating to book choices for kids. We all grew up with reading freedom and access to gory stuff like fairy tales and whatnot, so why the need to "protect" our own kids from what we loved as children and what helped make us what we are now?

So I am backing away from those tendencies and letting my kids see stuff I wouldn't have in the past, adjusted to levels that seem right for them. Otherwise they're in for a rude awakening one day.

Related on Babble: The Over Parenting Crisis

Photo: cgfocus.com
 


+ DIGG + STUMBLE

Comments

 

Bee said:

Back in days of yore, to add to the less separation, there was also more an age spectrum in the family.  Parent's had kids young, and had them in number.  Such a wide range of ages in a single family may have muted concerns about when was the right age to let go as one child's life blurred into the next.

... or perhaps parents then were just as paranoid as me, but didn't have a blog to tell it too.

December 8, 2007 2:23 PM

in

GROUP BLOGS

  • Strollerderby

    The smartest, funniest, most exhaustive parenting blog in the blogosphere.
  • Droolicious

    Modern design for modern parents.
  • FameCrawler

    Your daily baby celebrity fix.
back to blog homepage