A World Without Rules...

We were watching Gullah Gullah Island last night and the theme was No Rules - the kids complained about having so many rules, and said they didn't want any anymore. The adults agreed to get rid of all the rules - no longer would the kids have to follow any rules at all. So the kids are quite predictably excited, saying, "This is gonna be GREAT!" and the parents look at each other knowingly, since the kids are obviously going to learn a lesson about "why we have rules."

The kids are now allowed to run in the house, stay up late, sleep downstairs, wear makeup, have brownies for dinner, eat as much candy as they want, have their pet in the house (Binyah Binyah, a giant polliwog.) And naturally... the kids eat too much candy and get sick to their stomachs, the girl wants to watch TV while the boys are trying to sleep, the kids won't share. They are sick, getting hurt, and fighting. Chaos. Mayhem. The very picture of ANARCHY!

The whole idea they were promoting was that without rules, being enforced by adults - authority figures who "know better" - no one would have any sense of when to stop eating, how to get along with others, or how to be safe. At the end of the show, the visiting boy says, "I'm calling my mother, I want to go home! I don't care how many chores I have to do, I want the rules back!" And then the parents swoop in with their gentle, "Now do you see why we have rules?" And they sing a song about how great rules are because they make sure we are healthy and safe and considerate of others.

These kids had always had these rules, and were suddenly released of them in one day. So they went overboard, and pushed their own boundaries... part of the process of finding out what their own personal limits ARE. And they got sick. And they got hurt. And they got into arguments. The obvious conclusion to me is that boy who ate too many jelly beans learned a valuable lesson about how many jelly beans he can handle in one sitting. The kids learned that if they are inconsiderate, their brother/friends will be angry or hurt. Eventually these children would find balance. I mean, if these kids are feeling this way they probably are trying to sneak cookies before dinner. And if rules are the only thing keeping the kids from fighting all the time, then they really aren't learning anything about getting along and loving one another and true consideration or compassion. It might "keep the peace" but it doesn't TEACH anything. The people writing the show obviously are totally blind to this, and felt really pleased about helping children to "understand why there are rules" - a concept that children don't have the experience to appreciate. When in fact its the adults' perspective that is narrow.

The lesson I learned from this Gullah Gullah episode? Children who are expected to follow "rules" and adult-imposed limitations do not develop any sense of judgment or internal control. They learn only to be considerate of one another because there will be some consequence. They do not learn to gauge safety effectively. They do not learn to set their own boundaries, to negotiate, to take others into consideration. They do not learn to be functioning adults in an autonomous, peaceful society.

And what does it say about society that we don't want them to?

Say it ain't so, Binyah Binyah. Say it ain't so

.

The Truth About Food

I watched the Truth About Food on Discovery Health channel last night. They do a series of informal experiments to test theories about food, as well as have experts comment. At any rate, one of the things they tested was how do kids react to food restrictions - for instance, rationing a "treat" food. They took a classroom of 5 yos, and had them taste test dried mango and raisins, and the kids rated them. It was pretty even between the two foods, they were equally liked by the children. Then the teacher said that when she blew the snack whistle, they could have as many mangoes as they wanted, but were *not to touch the raisins* until/unless she blew the "raisin whistle." The first day the children didn't seem to make too much of a fuss about the raisins, although it was clear they were looking forward to it. By the next day, they attacked the raisins. Each day they became more and more frantic to get to the raisins, to get their fill of them, to make sure no one else got more... by the 10th day they were knocking each other out of the way, shoveling them in by the handful... it was an amazing change in the dynamic from the first day. And when asked which they preferred, every one in the class said without hesitation, "Raisins!" Except one adorable little girl who said, "You know, I find I quite prefer the mangoes" and it was like she KNEW she was supposed to like the raisins better and was an anomaly. Dr Oz's conclusion was, Don't keep treats in the house, and then restrict them, because then you focus the child's attention on that food and make it something far more desirable than it might have been.

They did a couple other "kids and food" things, as well. One experiment showed that kids will NOT necessarily stop eating when they're full (the kids in the study weren't from CL families, which I'm sure has an effect)... BUT that was when someone else was doling out portions, and they concluded that *if you allow the child to serve themselves* they generally will get very close to the exact appropriate serving size.

Another one was the sugar-makes-kids-hyper idea, and of course that was shown to be a clear myth. Sugar may not be good for us, but it doesn't cause hyperactivity. The kids were calmer and more focused on the day they had tons of sugar (I mean, these kids were turned loose on sweets, and were putting sugar cubes in Sprite!) The way the experiment was set up in the show (and as I said, these were fairly informal - more for illustrative than scientific purposes)... the parents
thought the kids got non-sugar food at the first party, where they actually got as much sugar as they wanted, and the next day they thought they were getting the sugar when in reality they had only sugar-free food. So the parental expectation could have played in that outcome.

Also at the first (sugary) party they had arts and crafts and calmly led activities... at the second (sugar-free) party they had this magician guy who was REALLY exciting and enthusiastic, and by the time he got the kids all riled up they were falling down, running around, and throwing food. I think the implication was that the overstimulation had more to do with it than the sugar.

Just very interesting, some things are taken as "proven fact" - such as the sugar=hyperactivity connection - when in fact they are not proven at all. And yet the ideas persist.