By coincidence both my Dad (in his Blog) and my Wife (in an e-mail) brought to my attention the issue of teenage control. Most people agree that children under 7 need to be relatively closely monitored and controlled by their parents if only for their own safety. Conversely most people (except for Jewish mothers) agree that adults over 27 do not need (to put it mildly) supervision from their parents.
So the question becomes at what point during that 20 year gap should we switch our relationship with our children from control freak to nonchalant interest:
So the question becomes at what point during that 20 year gap should we switch our relationship with our children from control freak to nonchalant interest:
- Mathematically that would come to 17 (27+7 / 2)
- Legally between 16 and 21 depending on the country and the subject
- Religiously would indicate 12-13 depending on the religion
- Physically between 15 and 19 according to your gender
- Educationally between 16 and 26 depending on your appetite for diplomas
- Financially never too soon!
Actually the more you try to maintain that control the more you are indicating to your child that either you do no believe in their abilities or that you do not trust them. That message will probably result in one of two outcomes:
- Your teenager will rebel against the arbitrary totalitarian authority (Star Wars Approach)
- Your teenager will remain dependent and incapable (Forrest Gump Approach)
Neither of these 2 films (both of them good by the way) should be your target for your child.
A better choice of model film would be Starbucks or Boyhood. But I'm open to other suggestions.
Long day today it's 23:50 so if I want to publish on the right day I need to cut short here. More on this subject in a future post.
This was a fasting day by the way. So no food, no ingredients just calorie free liquids
It's funny how your limit is just above the age of your eldest child. Also, I loved how you described the "nonchalant interest" part
ReplyDelete